EVERYONE needs to read this, slowly and carefully and to the end: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2018/01/card...ers-correcting-contradictory-papal-teachings/ Card. Müller on authority of Popes, possibility of others correcting contradictory papal teachings Posted on 16 January 2018 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf Back in December, First Things published a piece by the former Prefect of the CDF, Gerard Ludwig Card. Müller on the sacrament of penance. His observations on objective sin and subjective guilt, about knowledge, etc., are germane to a whole raft of questions being raised today, from the admission of the civilly remarried to Communion (some claim that with Amoris laetitia this is now permitted), to the celebration of funerals of manifest sinners (I wrote about that today in another post). Today I see a new piece by Card. Müller in First Things about the Pope’s authority and teaching. How do the pope’s Magisterium and the Tradition of the Church relate? When he interprets the words of Jesus, must the pope be in continuity with the Tradition and the previous Magisterium, including that of the most recent popes? Or is it rather the Church’s Tradition that has to be reinterpreted in the light of the pope’s new words? What if there are contradictions? Really good questions. Several Cardinals respectfully offered questions in this vein to the Pope about how certain aspects of Amoris laetitia seem to contradiction earlier, crystal clear teachings of Pope St. John Paul II. Read the whole thing, but here is the last part… […] What has been said above refers to the teaching of the Church, but also to the administration of her means of grace in the sacraments. In its Decree on Holy Communion, the Council of Trent declares that the Church has the power to determine or modify the external rites of the sacraments. [For example, after the Council a new form of the sacrament of Confirmation was introduced.] At the same time, the Council denies that the Church has the right or ability to interfere with the essence of the sacraments, insisting that “their substance is preserved.” [For example, the Church cannot say that rice cakes and sake can be used for the Eucharist. No Pope can change that.] When the Council of Trent defines that there are three acts of the penitent that form part of the sacrament of penance (repentance with the resolve not to sin again, confession, and satisfaction), then the popes and bishops of subsequent ages, too, are bound by this declaration. [NB] They are not [NOT] free to grant sacramental absolution for sins, or to authorize their priests to do so, when penitents do not actually show signs of repentance or where they explicitly reject the resolve not to sin again. [No expression of sorrow for sin committed, no expression of firm purposes of amendment… no absolution. It must not be given.] No human being can undo the inner contradiction between the effect of the sacrament—that is, the new communion of life with Christ in faith, hope, and love—and the penitent’s inadequate disposition. Not even the pope or a council can do so, because they lack the authority, nor could they ever receive such authority, because God never asks human beings to do something that is both self-contradictory and contrary to God himself. [Those who do not have a firm purpose of amendment of their lives cannot be validly absolved and, hence, cannot be admitted to the Eucharist, which is to be received when the communicant knows she is not in the state of grace, and the minister must not administer when there is a PUBLIC manifestation of sin and probability of scandal.] One must keep in mind that doctrinal statements have varying degrees of authority. They require varying degrees of consent, as expressed by the so-called “theological notes.” The acceptance of a teaching with “divine and Catholic faith” is required only for dogmatic definitions. [The controversial bits of Amoris are no where near that level. Nor are innovative interpretations of those controversial bits.] It is also clear that the pope or bishops must never ask anyone to act or teach against the natural moral law. The obedience of the faithful toward their ecclesial superiors is therefore no absolute obedience, and the superior cannot demand absolute obedience, because both the superior and those entrusted to his or her authority are brothers and sisters of the same Father, and they are disciples of the same Master. Therefore, it is harder to teach than to learn, because teaching is associated with a greater responsibility before God. The affirmation “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29) has its validity also and especially in the Church. Against the principle of absolute obedience prevailing in the Prussian military state, the German bishops insisted before Bismarck: “It is certainly not the Catholic Church that has embraced the immoral and despotic principle that the command of a superior frees one unconditionally from all personal responsibility.” [Earlier, Müller had introduced his topic with a review of Bismark and the Kulturkampf and the reaction to the Church’s teaching about papal infallibility.] [NB] When private opinions or spiritual and moral limitations enter into the exercise of ecclesiastical authority, then sober and objective criticism as well as personal correction are called for, especially from the brothers in the episcopal office. Thomas Aquinas will not be suspected of relativizing Petrine primacy and the virtue of obedience. All the more elucidating is the way in which he interprets the incident in Antioch, culminating in Paul’s public correction of Peter (Gal 2:11). According to Aquinas, the event teaches us that under certain circumstances an apostle may have the right and even the duty to correct another apostle in a fraternal way, that even an inferior may have the right and duty to criticize the superior (cf. Commentary on Galatians, Chap. II, lecture 3). This does not mean that one may reduce the magisterium to a private opinion, so as to dispense oneself from the binding power of the authentic and defined teaching of the Church (cf. Lumen Gentium 37). It only means that one must understand well the precise meaning of authority in the Church in general and the role of Peter’s ministry in particular. This is especially true when the conflict does not arise between the pope’s teaching and one’s own vision, [HERE IT IS…] but between the pope’s teaching and a teaching of previous popes that is in accordance with the uninterrupted tradition of the Church. [That’s it. There is a seeming conflict between what Pope Francis taught in Amoris and what St. John Paul taught in Familiaris consortio, 84, Reconciliatio et paenitentia, 34, Sacramentum caritatis, 29, and Veritatis splendor, 56, 79 and 81, etc.] As Pope Benedict XVI explained during the Mass on the occasion of his taking possession of the Chair of the Bishop of Rome on 7 May 2005, “The power that Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve. The power of teaching in the Church involves a commitment to the service of obedience to the faith.” He continues, “The pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law. On the contrary: The pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism.” Thus, Card. Müller.
This information is clear and should have been clear to those who have paid attention to what the Church teaches, however, Pope Francis relies on the fact that there is so few minds left in the church that know and worse yet, most in the Church could care less about 'unchanging' truths of God. The pope is not a fool in one thing, and that is he knows the mood of the overwhelming clergy and once faithful laity. He doesn't care what Holy Mother Church has taught, its all about situation ethics, the fundamental option and proportionalism. Father John Hardon spoke on this 30 years ago, which I have on cassette tape from one of his lectures on retreat. Pray, pray, pray.
Conservatives Upset With Papal Plane Wedding LIMA, Peru (AP) — The honeymoon, as it were, is apparently over. A day after Pope Francis grabbed headlines by pronouncing two flight attendants man and wife while flying 36,000 feet over Chile, the conservative Catholic commentariat on Friday questioned the legitimacy of the impromptu sacrament and warned it could cheapen the church’s marriage preparation down the line. “Do you know what’s a ‘marriage’ ripe for annulment?” tweeted the traditionalist blog Rorate Caeli. “One celebrated apparently on a whim in an airplane whose celebrant cannot even be sure if parties are validly baptized.” ...... As the happy couple told journalists after the fact — and after serving breakfast — they had hoped to just get a blessing from the pope. They told him that they had been married civilly in 2010, but that their plans for a church wedding fell through when an earthquake hit. As Ciuffardi told it, the pope proposed that he marry the couple right there, in part to motivate other couples to contract a church wedding at a time when more and more couples are merely cohabitating. “He told me it’s historic, that there has never before been a pope who married someone aboard a plane,” Ciuffardi told reporters from the back galley. MORE: https://apnews.com/a47ec7b367a74b5f...nservatives-question-pope's-airborne-nuptials
There they go again those wicked old Pharisees giving poor Pope Francis a what have ye again. Those legalistic old grumps, with their constant questions.,questions, questions.
http://www.fatimaperspectives.com/oc/perspective1142.asp Why Do They Hate Trump? The Answer from a Fatima Perspective. by Christopher A. Ferrara January 18, 2017 From this Fatima perspective, which is to say the Catholic perspective, it is no mystery why all the powers that be, led by the jabbering jackals of the mass media, have combined in a desperate and quite unprecedented attempt to find a way — any way — to oust a duly elected President from office in what would amount to the first coup d’état in the history of the American republic. (I will not discuss here the veritable coup d’état by which the Continental Congress morphed into a centralized federal government behind closed doors in Philadelphia.) Donald Trump’s personality, his penchant for crass rhetoric, his alleged sexual misconduct many years ago — his whatever — have nothing to do with the hatred he elicits from what I call the World Oligarchic Complex (WOC), which had assumed as a given the election of Hillary Clinton and the final trump of radical evil in politics. The reason the WOC labors to destroy Trump is very simple: his policies. The WOC recognizes that Trump, with all his faults, represents significant opposition to a diabolic worldwide regime marked by the unholy trinity of contraception, abortion and sodomy. For example, as Life Site News summarizes, since his election Trump has: reinstated the Mexico City Policy, which bans US foreign aid subsidy for abortions in other countries; “has signed a law allowing states to defund Planned Parenthood; “appointed a number of strong pro-life advocates to key Administration positions; “ended Obama's HHS contraception and abortion pill mandate requiring employers to violate their consciences; “pulled the U.S. out of a pro-abortion, pro-LGBT United Nations agency, UNESCO; “declared November 2017 National Adoption Month [and said] ‘no child in America – born or unborn – is unwanted or unloved’; “has slammed forced abortion and infanticide in North Korea, appointed conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch to the U.S. Supreme Court, and actively supported defunding abortion business Planned Parenthood.” Then there is his ban on the recruitment of “transgender” persons in the military and his reversal of the insane Obama-era “instruction” (completely without the force of law) that schools allow “transgender children” to use the bathrooms of the opposite sex. Also, rather sensationally, Trump has appointed a family man with three children to replace as US Ambassador to Spain, a “pro-LGBT openly gay man ‘married’ to a man”, signaling that he has abandoned “Obama’s plans to ‘impose the LGBT agenda in the world through diplomatic pressures.’” And now the White House has announced that Trump will be “the first sitting president to address the March for Life from the White House live via satellite” for the stated reason that “The President is committed to protecting the life of the unborn and he is excited to be part of this historic event.” As Life Site notes, Trump has even gone so far as to call out the “fake news media” for “giving extensive coverage to a pro-abortion march but not to the March for Life, the largest pro-life event in the world.” Trump, whose wife has revealed herself to be a Catholic to the horror of the Washington Post, has even dared to give a Christmas Message in which he referred to “the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” and noted that “The Christmas story begins 2000 years ago with a mother, a father, their baby son, and the most extraordinary gift of all, the gift of God’s love for all of humanity.” (I make no comment here on Melania Trump’s standing with the Church or the state of Trump’s soul. Suffice it to note that God has not refrained from using morally compromised rulers as instruments for good, ultimately bringing about their repentance and conversion. King David, a murderer and an adulterer, is the foremost Scriptural example.) A simple thought experiment confirms the point I am making: Imagine that Trump had done none of these things but rather had revealed himself to be a promoter or at least a non-opponent of contraception, abortion and sodomy in the manner of a typical liberal Republican. Would the WOC now be marshaling all its forces to destroy him? The question answers itself. In short, Trump — in spite of his own background — represents a most unexpected impediment to the final triumph of radical evil in America and throughout the Western world. Clearly, Trump has to go. Thus, the WOC pursues his downfall with all the ferocity of an agitated swarm of killer bees whose hive has been disturbed by an intruder. I am reminded of Pius XII’s warning inEvangelii Praecones: “Venerable Brethren, you are well aware that almost the whole human race is today allowing itself to be driven into two opposing camps, for Christ or against Christ. The human race is involved today in a supreme crisis, which will issue in its salvation by Christ, or in its dire destruction.” Such indeed is the Message that the Virgin Mother of God conveyed at Fatima — a Message to which the generality of Catholic churchmen today have turned a deaf ear, with even Pope Francis and the Vatican lining up against Trump’s sensible immigration policies. Truly it is a mystery of iniquity and a harbinger of a dramatic resolution to come, when the Lord of History infallibly executes His divine Will in the manner Our Lady of Fatima has promised.
Brian, Thank you for posting this. Who can argue with this assessment? Imho, Christopher Ferrara states perfectly what we are witnessing in regards to President Trump, the USA and even the world. In summary, "For Christ or against Christ"!
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2281283 Catholic exorcist, Fr. Chad Ripperger, warns about Pizzagate and occult activities of the elite (pizzagate) submitted 1 month ago by Gilderoy RELEVANCE TO PIZZAGATE The fact that a well known Catholic priest in good standing is publicly confirming in a series of videos the existence of elite pedophile in high levels of government and in the Church, is an extraordinary event and vindicates our struggle to bring this information to the public. As a Catholic I can attest that it is unprecedented for a Catholic priest to speak publicly about issues like this. There is no other priest I know who would be brave enough, and maybe even informed enough to talk about US politicians engaging in pedophilia and occult activities. FR. RIPPERGER DISCUSSES PEDOPHILIA IN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE CHURCH Last week, Fr. Chad Ripperger, a well known exorcist and traditional Catholic priest, gave a series of (very well illustrated) video lectures on the prophecies of Our Lady regarding our times. In Part I, he discusses the Podesta emails. His experiences as an exorcist have led him to do his own research on the subject of the globalist pedophile elite. His consultations with other exorcists have confirmed his conclusions that we are in the midst of a cosmic battle between good and evil, and the Satanic forces are extraordinarily strong and resistant to the Church's rite of exorcism and prayers. Some of the subjects he mentions: Draining the Swamp: ( -10:34) "You talk about draining the swamp---what does that even mean? When you drain a swamp, it gets to stinking real bad when you first start the draining process, and we're in that phase right now." 37:01 "If you were paying attention, not to the news media, but to what was going on during the election, Comey's declaration that we have to investigate Hillary was a smokescreen, and it was a smokescreen to keep people off of the last stage of the Wikileaks, because in the last stage of the Wikileaks, two things come out which we already know. The first is that the worldwide elite, whom we already know, the Clintons and John Podesta, who was Hillary's campaign manager, were involved in pedophilia. It's right in the emails. You can read it right out of the emails yourself. I'm not making this stuff up." "Second of all, Hillary Clinton was involved in the occult, and that's what they didn't want coming out." He goes on to mention the growing trend of pedophilia in the US govt, as detailed in The Franklin Scandal by Nick Bryant YouTubewhich describes the presence of call boys at the Bush White House and how heads of state went to the Epstein's Island in the Caribbean. Fr. Chad talks about how many politicians and heads of state are involved in occult worship at Bohemian's Grove which is overt Moloch worship. This was revealed for the whole world to see at the Gotthard Tunnel opening ceremony in Switzerland last summer. Fr. Chad said he has to deal with this stuff because he is an exorcist and gets "all this garbage coming at him all the time so he's had to make some sense of it. Other exorcists have helped him to get a sense of it. PEDOPHILE CLERGY IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH Fr. Chad then discusses the problem of pedophile clergy. The percentage of pedophiles in the clergy (from three different university studies, all of which concur) is about 1.25% of the clergy. He says the real mistake and scandal wasn't the fact that some priests are pedophiles, even though the damage they did was incalculable---the problem is how the bishops handled it. That was where the real scandal was. There was one diocese---which he doesn't name---which has never been sued. (Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska) because there were two instances of pedophilia that the bishop found out about, and he immediately laicized the priests when he found out the allegations were in fact true, and he went to the families and said, "Let's make this right. We'll do whatever we can to make this right." (I can confirm that I've heard the same claims many times from many multiple sources. Bishop Bruskewitz reportedly kept a shotgun in his pickup truck which he said he wouldn't hesitate to use on a child molester priest if he ever caught one in his diocese.) The reason the Church was being sued was because the bishops were shuffling these guys around and not taking responsibility and dealing with the problem. The next statistic is that of the general population which is that 2.75% of the general population are pedophiles so the number of priests who are pedophiles is less than half of the general population. Of professionals, such as doctors, lawyers, 8% have a problem with pedophilia---6X the percentage of Catholic priests. Of high school teachers, the percentage is 10%. RISE OF SATANISM At -14:22 Father Chad starts talking about the rise in Satanism and the unprecedented resilience of the demons to the rite of exorcism and the prayers. Older exorcists have told him that up until the mid-1960's the cases of demonic possession would be resolved in about a day to two days. The average case now takes between 10 months and 2 years to break. Our Lady of La Salette (-4:47) prophesied in 1846 that "all the civil govts would have a plan which will be to abolish and do away with every religious principle, to make way for materialism, atheism, occultism and vices of all kinds." Our Lady of Akita in Japanpredicted in 1973 a great chastisement on mankind. Today we pooh-pooh this, but if you act badly, God has to punish you because He loves you and wants you to get your act together. Our Lady of Akita said the chastisement will be greater than the Deluge, and fire will fall from the sky. A great part of humanity will perish and the living will envy the dead. Fr. Chad: "What this all means in the political sphere is that there is a gargantuan battle for the truth. Some say this is just a battle of ideas, but what it really is, is this: for the longest time we were being told that by people that it was really a difference in ideas and an intellectual fight. I think that may be true for some people, but I've come to the conclusion that was just the facade for the evil people to push the process in the battle between good and evil. We're in the midst---politically, in the Church, in families---if we're not in the middle of a battle between good and evil. This is not a battle between ideas anymore. What the outcome will be is largely dependent upon us and our prayers and sacrifices to turn things around." CONCLUSION Take it for whatever it's worth to you, but this is sign that the Pizzagate claims are going mainstream, and it is a promising sign that we have reputable Catholic exorcists verifying our research.
I think there’s more going on around us in the spiritual realm, of battles between God’s army and the fallen angels, by orders of magnitude, than any of us could humanly imagine. Or could persevere if we realized just how bad it is. In His mercy, God hides this reality from us, though at times we get glimpses.
Awesome read Brian thanks for posting it. Father Ripperger is one of my favorite Priests in that his no nonsense approach to the mysteries of the Faith and the workings of Satan in our world are invaluable IMO. There are a great deal of his talks available as well for download and viewing online. https://sentrad.org/multimedia/
I think that if we truly wish to see this we can and God will reveal it for our benefit. In part because these people who are involved with it love to display it to us everyday. They do this in ways in which we do not understand it but it can be quite blatant at times. This says nothing of the more common forms of it we see all day but have no idea what it represents. Symbolism means a great deal to these people. They believe that they cast webs of spells with it that ensnares us. The Rothschilds. View attachment 7350 The Vanderbuilt family, including Anderson Cooper as a child. View attachment 7351
In case you missed it, this is one of Fr Ripperger's videos that should be viewed by everyone who posts on this thread in particular:
Excellent video, although my suspicion is that you are insinuating that it only applies to everyone else on this forum, but not yourself. Beware, David, that you haven't got sand in your eyes. Regarding Father Ripperger's advice about not bringing all scandal out into the light, what is your opinion of Pope Francis' very out-in-the-open dismissal of the accusations of those sexually abused by that priest mutually convicted by both the Chilean courts and the Vatican?
As I said, I believe everyone who posts on the thread should listen to this video. Then each of us needs to reflect on whether we are guilty of the sins which Fr Ripperger highlights within it. As for the Pope's words in defence of Bishop Barros who is accused of turning a blind eye to the activities of Fr Karadima who has been found guilty of abuse, bishop Barros has not been found guilty of anything and clearly Pope Francis believes he is not guilty of what he has been accused. So, once again, I am impressed by Pope Francis' honesty and openness.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!! David just come flat out and say it Everyone knows what you mean. You know what you mean. You just never say it clearly. It is not wrong to have an opinion. I am not upset at you. I don't think DeGaulle is upset at you, but I think what many find very difficult (and exasperating) is that you dance around things without ever actually saying things clearly. Peace
Praetorian, MY opinion on whether people sin when they post their views is of no importance! But God's opinion IS important! By posting the video, I am encouraging people to listen to God within them when they post about Pope Francis (and others!).
Do you believe that Pope Francis was correct to use his personal papal authority to publicly accuse the accusers of calumny? Ought he not have been more circumspect and discrete? Do you consider there is a possibility that the Pope may have committed the same error that he ascribes those he has accused? At least Father Ripperger has made it quite clear that a Pope may well be guilty of sin and error and thus of causing scandal, even the present one. If one reads the moral theological teaching about such scandals, one will find that it is an imperative upon those of the appropriate authority and qualifications to impose a fraternal correction. That's where Cardinal Burke and his colleagues come in. Bishop Barros has not been 'found guilty' of anything. Hundreds of bishops, perhaps thousands over the last number of decades, have facilitated and covered up paedophile priests. This generally did not seem to lead to their being 'found guilty' of any worldly crime. It would appear from your defense of both Pope Francis' comment and of Bishop Barros that everything in the garden must be rosy with all these facilitating bishops. You also, in passing, seem to be attributing omniscience to Pope Francis, along with his many other powers. He just 'knows' these accusers are liars and can thus damn them to the world from the heights of his authority. Such mercy.
