I'm not attempting to diagnose anything, That would be futile. I'm trying to focus on what Jesus told us to do.
I agree. But how about answering my point. I don't think Malta or Argentina are actually allowing routine communion for the divorced and remarried. My own parish is,though, because the divorced and living in sin are just joining the communion queue anyway. We need to deal with that, not point fingers at nations. I think we are all in the same boat here: there is confusion. My thesis is: let's stop aligning with the confused and stand with truth.
I didn't adopt the name "Bella" for nothing. We actually are in a war. and, much as I love discussion, MOG members, I am done now. I am exhausted actually. Off to bed. I wish you all a blessed night and Sabbath. X.
What point have I failed to answer? Tell me and I promise I'll do my best. The only authorities I have regarding the policies of Argentina and Malta are their respective bishops' conferences. Perhaps you might share with us the authority you rely on for what you 'think'? You do comprehend the difference between people sinning and people sinning with the complicity of elements of the Church? You surely realise that it is impossible for the Church to stop people sinning, but not difficult at all for Her to remain non-complicit with sinners, as She did for two millenia until the day before yesterday? The Catholic Church, last I heard, was a catholic one, unlike the Anglican or Orthodox ones. What happens in South America, or China, or New Zealand, or wherever you care to mention, affects everyone else, fairly equally. [Oops, past your bed-time. God bless].
No. Nothing the historical “bad popes” ever did compares to denying the truths of the Faith for which this pope is guilty, or profaning the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist by inviting unrepentant grave sinners to the Eucharist. Take your head out of the sand.
Well , I suppose Bella is away to bed so I will not be answering her directly. But I do take her main point , which seems to be is there any point in asking questions about the Pope? After all what difference does it make ? We are only lay people and nothing we can say or do will make much difference right or wrong. Isn;t it better just on the forum to concentrate on spiritual matters and to leave the Pope to do whatever he is doing? Or why bother? I think all of us must find our own personal answer to this question. My own is this. I came from the perspective of a converted Atheist. Anyway I am the kind of person who hates bullshit (pardon the language). I have a great love for the truth. For using my reason. I promised myself after my conversion I would not give up on this love of the truth and using my mind. That's one of the reasons I love the Church process of Discernment. Because discernment is basically a filtering down to the truth. I am afraid I find Pope Francis and the current Vatican establishment are just full to the brim of bull shit. I hate this stuff. I always have and when I see it I always love to burst the balloon. Maybe I should just ignore it all and let it sail on by. But I can't. I just have to keep on bursting that balloon. If you look at the life of Jesus He was constantly burst balloons like this, so I guess I'm in good company. I guess I might well let it go but I can't. Bullshit drives me crazy.
In other news... https://www.circa.com/story/2018/04/07/world/vatican-arrests-diplomat-accused-of-viewing-child-porn Vatican arrests diplomat accused of viewing child porn By ASSOCIATED PRESS 2 Hours Ago The Vatican on Saturday arrested a diplomat recalled from Washington last year amid investigations in the United States, Canada and the Vatican for possession of child pornography. A Vatican statement said that Monsignor Carlo Capella was being held in gendarmerie barracks inside the Vatican, and that his arrest follows a Vatican investigation. Police in Windsor, Ontario, said Capella allegedly uploaded child porn from a social networking site while visiting a place of worship from over the 2016 Christmas holiday. In the statement, Windsor police accused Capella of accessing, possessing and distributing child pornography. The Vatican recalled Capella, the No. 4 in its Washington embassy, after the U.S. State Department notified it on Aug. 21 of a "possible violation of laws relating to child pornography images" by one of its diplomats in Washington. Capella was a high-ranking priest in the Vatican's diplomatic corps. He served on the Italy desk in the Vatican's secretariat of state and was part of the official delegation that negotiated a tax treaty with Italy before being posted to the U.S. embassy last year.
He is the Way, the Truth and the Life. I do think we need to ask questions. It is possible now, even likely, that many people are going to assume there is no Hell. Oh, there's annihilation, but I think it is subjectively almost impossible to contemplate that-how does one imagine Being without one's self-the Immortality of the Soul seems to fit neatly with this philosophical conundrum. Anyway, annihilation will be consigned to the Hitler/Stalin departments and many will jettison whatever residual fear of God remains. Such decisions are likely to affect us all, and maybe very deeply. I worry my loved ones will be affected. Sadly, I have felt compelled to disparage the Pope in our household, in order to weaken the effect of his authority, the intention being to reduce the likelihood of his antinomian statements proving convincing. I can't be certain, but I have an inkling that the tactic has worked. We don't have to lie, just espouse the facts as a counter to the playing to the camera. I had my 'atheist' phase, but it was mostly an immature teenage period, without conviction. However, I did have a very upsetting night, when I was fourteen. It was the day Mao Tse Tung died, and I'm sure, now that I recollect, the demons were out and about all over the world. I had just read a Robert Silverberg novel with existential issues I wasn't, at that tender age, able to intellectually or spiritually cope with. Anyway, my child's faith completely died that bleak night. Very upsetting. A void for a while. Then I got interested in girls, Guinness and playing hurling, and reconstructed my life in the direction of that aforementioned teenage 'atheist' phase. But, thank God, there was always a little voice doubting doubt. Eventually, in my mid-twenties, I read some Graeme Green-his early novels are quite orthodox and commendably profound. That brought me on a little. Then I discovered that Belfast Protestant, C S Lewis-that brought me on a lot. If a Prod can be a saint, they have one. I can't say I became a proper Catholic until I read 'Hell and Other Destinations', by Piers Paul Read. That did the trick. PF could do with reading it. All of Read is, etymologically enough, worth reading. Enough raving.
One gets so cynical (I wonder why). Unfortunately, my first reaction to the recall is that it was to protect the deviant from US law. I expect lots of mercy and a sideways promotion. Personally, I'd emasculate him without local anaesthetic. I suppose he'd be aCapella then!
While it is true that us lay people asking questions about the Pope doesn't make a "difference" as far as changing things in Rome and elsewhere, our discussion here does serve at least one good purpose: our psychological and spiritual well-being, as others have pointed out.
I remember that I went through some phases of grappling with the changes being proposed by the Vatican hierarchy. First I wanted to discuss these issues with other Catholics. I wanted to read or hear what other Catholics were thinking about these changes. Also I wanted to read and reread scripture, the catechism and private revelation to discern what end times may mean. The first phase is time when a person who is discerning is most vocal because they are trying to discern and it is quite painful because you feel unsure. Here is the media and the local parish and it seems like everybody cheerleading these huge changes. Then the next phase is acceptance. You accept the battle that you are in and make resolutions about how you can help spiritually. This phase is less vocal because you have now accepted what was once so painful to even contemplate. Then the next phase seems to be acceptance of God's will and all that it will entail.
First you have to determine what is God's will and whether God changes, thereby changing His will and how often and to what extend God and His will are going to change in the future, eventually turning the unchangeable God into either an exaggerated caricature or a fading image of Himself. Padraig posted a video of a Raymond Arroyo interview with Ross Douthat. I have just watched a more in-depth interview with Ross Douthat and can't recommend it highly enough to everyone on the forum who questions how we got to the situation we are facing today and where the current changes are leading us. An hour long interview, some folk might not have the time to watch all of it. If you are pushed for time, I urge you to watch the final 15 minutes or so:
Final declaration of Rome Conference on Confusion in the Church Diane Montagna Follow Diane Sat Apr 7, 2018 - 12:41 pm EST amoris laetitia , catholic , filial correction https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/declaration-text Shutterstock.com “Therefore we testify and confess…” Final declaration of the conference ‘Catholic Church, where are you going?’ Rome, April 7, 2018 Due to contradictory interpretations of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia, growing discontent and confusion are spreading among the faithful throughout the world. The urgent request for a clarification submitted to the Holy Father by approximately one million faithful, more than 250 scholars and several cardinals, has received no response. Amidst the grave danger to the faith and unity of the Church that has arisen, we baptized and confirmed members of the People of God are called to reaffirm our Catholic faith. The Second Vatican Council authorizes us and encourages us to do so, stating in Lumen Gentium, n. 33: “Thus every layman, in virtue of the very gifts bestowed upon him, is at the same time a witness and a living instrument of the mission of the Church itself 'according to the measure of Christ's bestowal' (Eph. 4:7).” Blessed John Henry Newman also encourages us to do so. In his prophetic essay “On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine” (1859), he spoke of the importance of the laity bearing witness to the faith. Therefore, in accordance with the authentic tradition of the Church, we testify and confess that: 1) A ratified and consummated marriage between two baptized persons can be dissolved only by death. 2) Therefore, Christians united by a valid marriage who join themselves to another person while their spouse is still alive commit the grave sin of adultery. 3) We are convinced that there exist absolute moral commandments which oblige always and without exception. 4) We are also convinced that no subjective judgment of conscience can make an intrinsically evil act good and licit. 5) We are convinced that judgment about the possibility of administering sacramental absolution is not based on the imputability of the sin committed, but on the penitent’s intention to abandon a way of life that is contrary to the divine commandments. 6) We are convinced that persons who are divorced and civilly remarried, and who are unwilling to live in continence, are living in a situation that is objectively contrary to the law of God, and therefore cannot receive Eucharistic Communion. Our Lord Jesus Christ says: “If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free” (Jn 8: 31-32). With this confidence we confess our faith before the supreme pastor and teacher of the Church and before the bishops, and we ask them to confirm us in the faith. Cardinal Brandmüller warns Catholics not to heed ‘majority’ but ‘minority who truly live the faith’ Bishop Schneider: The Pope is not the “owner” of truth but its “servant and vicar” (FULL TEXT)
As it pertains to our current Pope, nothing in history can compare to what he is doing in this sense. In our era, we have the most comprehensive and exhaustive references and resources of the faith the church has every had. We have had three Catholic Catechism's since the council of Trent. We have dozen's of papal encyclical's and numerous other holy writings from saints, theologians, scholars, holy priests, bishops and cardinals, which have clearly defined the unchanging teachings of the Catholic Church that Jesus himself instituted on Pentecost. Now we come to Pope Francis. A pope who has had many personal and clerical challenges throughout his priesthood. At one time seeing a psychologist for issues. He had issues within his own Jesuit order and since his election to the papacy we have heard from his own writings and words many teachings/beliefs at odds with what has always been taught within Christ's Church. This makes his papacy quite different than past bad popes who did not have the volumes of church writings that I have mentioned. The people in the times of most of the bad popes were illiterate. They did not have the study books/references that we have at our finger tips to know with absolute clarity what holy mother church has always taught. I think Pope Francis underestimated this truth. I think he thought that the majority of clergy and laity have been so dumb'd down in the faith with 50 years of experiments, bad homilies, inclusive language, situation ethics, the fundamental option and proportionalism that he assumed the few "Pharisee's, legalistic's, rigid faithful were so small he could get away with his doctrinal changes. After all he cleared out the orthodox hierarchy out of the Vatican and replaced them with like minded heads of departments. This is what makes our current pope more culpable then bad popes in the past. They did not have all the references that the Church has today to rudder the ship straight. Let us pray for our pope tomorrow, to the Divine Mercy of Jesus that he see his way's that are not in communion with God's absolute truths and seek forgiveness and mercy before it is to late. Jesus I Trust in You.
Cardinal Raymond Burke speaking at Rome conference on confusion in the Church and the limits of papal authority, April 7, 2018. (Edward Pentin photo) Apr. 7, 2018 http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edwa...al-authority-derives-from-obedience-to-christ Cardinal Burke: Papal Authority Derives From Obedience to Christ In a speech at a conference in Rome addressing confusion in the Church, the American cardinal outlined the limits of papal power, and pays to tribute to Cardinal Joachim Meisner who ‘tirelessly’ presented Christ’s teaching. Edward Pentin Cardinal Raymond Burke has stressed that popes must safeguard and promote Church unity, and that if a Roman Pontiff fails to act in conformity with Divine Revelation, Sacred Scripture and Tradition, he “must be rejected by the faithful.” In a talk given today in Rome on the current state of doctrinal confusion in the Church, the patron of the Order of Malta warned that any expression of doctrine or practice by a Roman Pontiff must be an “authentic exercise” of the Petrine ministry. He explained in a speech on The limits of papal authority in the doctrine of the Church that plenitudo potestatis — the fullness of power given to a pope — does not mean that a pope’s authority is “magical, but derives from his obedience to the Lord.” The canonist and prefect emeritus of the Apostolic Signatura made the comments in light of growing concern that Pope Francis is leading the Church in a totalitarian and even lawless direction, not in continuity with the Church’s teaching and Tradition. The cardinal, however, did not specifically mention the Holy Father during his talk. Drawing on the teaching of 13th century canonist Cardinal Enrico da Susa (‘Hostiensis’) and the writings of English Professor John A. Watt, the American cardinal focused primarily on a pope’s absoluta potestas (absolute power) which, he said, is different from that defined by Machiavelli or totalitarian dictators in that it is used to “remedy defects” in existing law arising from “non-compliance” or because existing law was “inadequate to meet particular circumstances.” He added the “fullness of power” does not mean authority over the Church’s Magisterium, but rather as a “necessity” of governance “in full fidelity” to the Church’s Magisterium. As such, Cardinal Burke continued, it is only to be used “with great caution” and as a power for “building, not for destruction.” The Pope’s absoluta potestas, the cardinal added, is given by “Christ himself” and so can “only be exercised in obedience to Christ.” A pope could dispense with the law or interpret it, he said, but only so that it helps the law to serve its “proper purpose, never to subvert it.” He pointed out that any act of a pope considered “heretical or sinful” or that could “favor heresy or sin, undermined the foundations of society and was therefore null and void.” It was well understood, the cardinal explained, that the fullness of power given to a pope did not allow him to “act against the Apostolic Faith” but was a power he should use “sparingly and with the greatest prudence.” Quoting Watt, the cardinal said the exercise of plenitudo potestatis was meant to serve souls and the unity of the Church, not the personal interests of individuals. “If the Pope acted in this way sine causa [without cause] or arbitrarily, he would put his salvation at risk.” Cardinal Burke, one of the four cardinals to sign the dubia asking the Pope to clarify parts of his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, criticized Pope Francis earlier this week for “refusing to clarify” the Church’s doctrine and discipline and for “increasing confusion” on the “most fundamental and important issues.” In an interview with the Italian daily La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, Cardinal Burke singled out reports that Francis allegedly told Italian atheist Eugenio Scalfari that hell did not exist. Such remarks, Cardinal Burke said, “were a profound scandal,” “went beyond what is tolerable,” and the Vatican’s response was “highly inadequate.” In his speech on Saturday, Cardinal Burke went on to explained how abuses of the fullness of power could be corrected. Hostiensis made it clear the Pope should be “warned of the error of his actions, even publicly” and that the College of Cardinals “should act as a de facto check against papal error.” But Hostiensis did not offer a “binding remedy,” the cardinal added. Instead, he argued that if, according to a well formed conscience, a member of the faithful believes a papal act of exercising the fullness of power is “sinful” then “the Pope must be disobeyed out of duty and the consequences of that disobedience suffered with Christian patience.” Seeing as, according to canon law, the Pope cannot be judged, the cardinal explained that the correction of a pope would take the form of two phases, based on Christ’s teaching in Matt. 18:15-17 of how to issue a fraternal correction and canonical tradition. This would therefore mean directly correcting the Roman Pontiff of the “presumed error,” and then if he continued to err, making a “public declaration.” Cardinal Burke referred to Canon 212 which, although advocating Christian obedience, also says the faithful have the “right and duty” to make their concerns about the good of the Church known to clergy. He also drew on a 1996 symposium held by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on “The Primacy of the Successor of Peter" which stressed that the ministry of the Roman Pontiff is a service of unity with each particular Church, making it “substantially different” to secular government. The Roman Pontiff carries out his office as a service that is “in obedience to Christ,” the CDF document said, in this sense, as servus servorum (servant of the servants). “The Successor of Peter is the rock that, against arbitrariness and conformism, guarantees a rigorous fidelity to the Word of God,” Cardinal Burke said. “The fullness of the power of the Roman Pontiff can only be rightly understood and exercised as obedience to the grace of Christ, Head and Shepherd of the flock of every time and in every place.” Referring to various canons, the cardinals said the Pope must exercise his power “in communion with the whole Church” and “respect the deposit of faith,” but he cannot “act in contrast with the faith.” He must “respect each and all of the Sacraments, cannot suppress or add anything that goes against the substance of the Sacraments” and finally must share the exercise of “full and supreme power” with the College of Bishops. He also said it is “important to note” that the fullness of power of the Roman Pontiff is “not merely honorary but substantial” in that it involves the “universal responsibility of safeguarding the rule of faith (regula fidei) and the rule of law (regula iuris).” He also stressed that according to canon law, although the Pope has supreme power even higher than an ecumenical council, this power is not exercised when he “acts as a private person or simple member of the faithful.” Re-emphasizing the extent and reach of papal power — which includes the ability to define doctrines and condemn errors, to promulgate and repeal laws, to act as judge in all matters of faith, to decree and impose penalties, to appoint and remove pastors if necessary — the cardinal said that “since this power comes from God Himself, it is limited by natural law and divine law.” “Therefore, any expression of doctrine or practice that is not in conformity with Divine Revelation, contained in the Sacred Scriptures and in the Tradition of the Church, cannot be an authentic exercise of the Apostolic or Petrine ministry and must be rejected by the faithful,” Cardinal Burke said. He quoted St. Paul letter to the Galatians: “I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by the grace of Christ for a different gospel (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!” He closed with words of Gratian in his Decretals, the 12th century canonical text, which stated: “Let no mortal being have the audacity to reprimand a Pope on account of his faults, for he whose duty it is to judge all other men cannot be judged by anybody, unless he should be called to task for having deviated from the faith.” Tribute to Cardinal Meisner Cardinal Burke said a few words at the beginning of his talk to honor the memory of Cardinal Joachim Meisner, one of the four “dubia cardinals” who died last year. He said the archbishop emeritus of Cologne, Germany, was “completely united” with the other three cardinals and considered it his “first duty” to “tirelessly present the teaching of Christ.” He remembered in particular comments Cardinal Meisner made after listening to Cardinal Walter Kasper’s present his proposal in 2014 on how some remarried divorcees not living in sexual continence could receive Holy Communion. “All this will end in a schism,” Cardinal Meisner predicted, and Cardinal Burke recalled how Meisner then did “everything possible to defend Christ’s word on marriage.” But although “clearly and deeply concerned about the present state of the Church,” he also remembered how Cardinal Meisner “did not fail to express all his trust in the Lord, who will not fail to sustain His Mystical Body in the truth of faith.”
Thank you Carol So there it is. Cardinal Burke letting us know the Formal Correction is still in progress. In fact depending upon what Cardinal Burke means by "public declaration" it might mean much more than a mere correction.
What are the chances of a Church Council being convened? Only a Pope has the authority to convene a Council but isn't there something about an irregular Council if the Pope is suspected of spreading heresy? Considering how reticent the Bishops are to say anything at all about the current situation, I don't fancy the chances of many Bishops turning up at an irregular Council. Maybe there is pressure behind the scenes for the Pope to convene a Council. That might explain the extraordinary statements by Cardinal Schonborn about a Council authorising the ordination of women priests and bishops. He could be trying to scare some Bishops away from looking for the Pope to convene a Council. Hard to tell the motives of our hierarchy these days.
