Maybe this will help David. St Thomas Aquinas wrote very extensively on obedience in his Summa. Here is just a tiny part. The rest is available at the link: "On the contrary, It is written (Acts 5:29): "We ought to obey God rather than men." Now sometimes the things commanded by a superior are against God. Therefore superiors are not to be obeyed in all things." http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3104.htm
http://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/673...pope-on-issue-of-communion-for-the-remarried- 'Great drama' continues as Vatican legal chief defends Pope on issue of communion for the remarried Headlines > 'Great drama' continues as Vatican legal chief defends Pope on issue of communion for the remarried 15 February 2017 | by Christopher Lamb in Rome Coccopalmerio booklet launched day after Francis' cardinal advisory body pledged 'full support' for Pope It was a Kafkaesque press conference. Journalists had been invited to the launch of a booklet by top Church lawyer Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio on Pope Francis’ family life document. The word in Rome was that this would be the Vatican’s response to the “dubia" - the queries submitted by four cardinals to the Pope demanding clarification on whether remarried divorcees can receive communion. But the cardinal was nowhere to be seen when reporters arrived at the launch of the 51-page booklet on “Amoris Laetitia”. The text, reporters were told, was not the Vatican’s response to the dubia nor was it an official document of the Holy See’s legal office. It was, however, released by the Vatican’s official publishers and presented in the offices of Vatican Radio by Rome-based professor Father Maurizio Gronchi, and veteran Vaticanista Orazio La Rocca. Cardinal Coccopalmerio could not attend, we were informed, because of a diary clash and needed to be at a meeting at the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. That’s the department that assess candidates for sainthood, which requires poring over evidence over whether miracles have taken place. Right now the Church needs a miracle to end the in-fighting over the Pope’s text on family life while in Rome tensions are riding high with posters against Francis appearing and a spoof Vatican newspaper page mocking him. Cardinals are now stepping in to defend the Pope. The important point of Coccopalmerio’s book is that it supports Francis’ moves to allow those in second marriages to receive communion. But others, including cardinals and bishops, argue such a move undermines Church teaching on marriage because second unions are adulterous. Nevertheless, the cardinal’s booklet states clearly that remarried divorcees can be admitted to the sacraments if they cannot change their situation and have had children with their second spouse. His view counts for something given his job in the Vatican is to interpret the laws of the Church. His booklet was launched the day after Francis' nine-member cardinal advisory body pledged their “full support” for the Pope and, importantly, “his magisterium” in other words Francis' teaching authority. The fact the Pope’s kitchen cabinet felt the need to issue such a statement says much about the pressure he is coming under at the moment. “We didn’t want to make a great drama but it was the time to repeat from our group that we are supporting the Pope,” Cardinal Reinhard Marx, a member of the council of cardinals said today. “We have discussions in the church, it is normal. There are discussions and tensions and it has always been like this.” He added, however, that at this time it was important for Catholics to show “loyalty” to the Pope. Vatican sources say that cardinals are keen to pledge their support for the Pope as some regret leaving Benedict XVI isolated as his papacy came under sustained attack. The problem is that bishops cannot agree on the central point of dispute over whether communion can be given to divorcees. On the one hand Argentina, Malta and Germany say “yes”, while in Poland, the United States and in Canada voices are saying “no.” Many are saying nothing and waiting for the dust to settle. This week the Pope said there are “cracks” between bishops and priests, something which if left untreated can lead to bigger problems. The genie of Catholic division is now out of the bottle.
http://www.modbee.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/article132643944.html Gene Craig: Columnist should take note that ‘Pope’ Francis is violating Jesus’ teachings Re “How Pope can cleanse the Catholic Church” (Page 9A, Feb. 11): The opinion column by Emma-Kate Symons was an attack on Catholic values while writing as if she were defending compassion. She used all of the popular attack words, “Breitbart,” “Stephen Bannon,” “extremist forces,” “white Christian dominance,” “secretive society,” “migrant-phobic,” “Putin,” and on and on. The part that caught my eye was about Pope Francis granting communion for divorcees. In truth, he appears to be granting communion for remarried divorcees – which flies in the face of Catholic teaching and sacred scripture. Clearly, Christ stated putting away a spouse and marrying another commits adultery (Mark 10:11, 12). Adultery puts one outside the church and not free to receive church sacraments. How this columnist can write against Jesus’ teachings and how “Pope” Francis can violate Christ’s teaching is just plain wrong. This column, under the guise of charity, proved to be hateful, spiteful and totally in error. St. Pope Pius V let the country of England apostatize rather than validate Henry VIII’s multiple marriages. Francis and Emma-Kate should read church history and understand that church teaching is to help us get to heaven, not lead us to hell.
Absolutely right. Bottom line, there are truly many spirits at work in the church today. There is only one Holy Spirit of the One God. All the other Spirits who manifest a new doctrine are not of God, but the Evil One. Only a madman would assume that Saint Pope John Paul was led by a bad spirit when he declared it is impossible to allow divorce and remarried communion.
He didn't show up for the launch of his own book. Did the cock crow in the Vatican? “We didn’t want to make a great drama but it was the time to repeat from our group that we are supporting the Pope,” Cardinal Reinhard Marx, a member of the council of cardinals said today. “We have discussions in the church, it is normal. There are discussions and tensions and it has always been like this.” He added, however, that at this time it was important for Catholics to show “loyalty” to the Pope. Vatican sources say that cardinals are keen to pledge their support for the Pope as some regret leaving Benedict XVI isolated as his papacy came under sustained attack." Regret? Will the regret lead them to tell us which of them was the source of the "Pope's Rottweiler" label? Maybe they can leak it to the same secular press since they are all in lockstep. Atheists are the biggest cheerleaders of this papacy. That in itself should give the Cardinals pause for thought. But they're loving it.
My loyalty will be with Saint Pope John Paul's explicit teaching that it is impossible for the divorce and remarried to receive Communion, not Pope Francis' ambiguous teaching (that he won't even qualify) that the divorced and remarried can receive Communion.
I had a long visit with my spiritual director last night. He felt that maybe the Cardinal/author didn't show up because he was ashamed of what he had written and was coerced into writing it.
http://www.fatimaperspectives.com/fe/perspective946.asp Washington Post to Francis: Put down the revolt of those Catholic peasants! by Christopher A. Ferrara February 14, 2017 With each passing day it becomes more apparent that Antonio Socci was not exaggerating when he wrote that with the unexpected defeat of Hillary Clinton by Donald J. Trump — a rude shock that has driven the worldwide liberal establishment to the brink of collective insanity — none other than Pope Francis has become “the only point of reference for the international Left, deprived of a leader…” Whoever doubts it need only consult a revealing editorial in the Washington Post, one of the most prominent organs of international Leftist opinion. Under the telling editorial category “Global Opinions,” one Emma-Kate Symons provides a roadmap for “How Pope Francis can cleanse the far-right rot from the Catholic Church.” Symons sees a vast right-wing conspiracy between the White House staff, led by Stephen K. Bannon, and those seditious, diehard traditional Catholics, led by the nefarious Cardinal Burke, who together are “undermining Francis’s reformist, compassionate papacy, and gospel teaching as it applies to refugees and Muslims” and seek to “legitimize extremist forces that want to bring down Western liberal democracy, Stephen K. Bannon-style.” Translation: Cardinal Burke is defending Catholic orthodoxy while the White House is pursuing a pro-life, anti-open borders program. They must be stopped, Symons frets. Symons thinks she has found the Catholic nexus of the conspiracy to resist Francis as he helps to bring on the final triumph of the liberal zeitgeist over the backward Church, thus ushering in the End of History. She points the finger at a “Vatican operation” known as Dignitatis Humanae, or the Institute for Human Dignity, a rather bland think tank founded back in 2008, when it was located in the European Parliament building. Symons decries the fact that the Institute’s current advisory board (which in organizations of this type usually have a merely titular function) “includes two of the four cardinals openly challenging Francis on marriage and sexuality…” How dare those cardinals oppose Francis as he labors to accommodate Symons and the rest of world opinion by overthrowing the teaching of John Paul II and all of Tradition on the impossibility of Holy Communion for public adulterers! Symons warns that the Institute has featured on its website an address at the Vatican by Stephen Bannon, given last November, in which, among other things — oh the horror! — he dared to state that at the beginning of the 21st century there is “a crisis both of our church, a crisis of our faith, a crisis of the West, a crisis of capitalism.” Clearly, Bannon must be some kind of lunatic, along with Pope Benedict XVI, another dangerous subversive, who said this back in 2010: “[O]ur world is at the same time troubled by the sense that moral consensus is collapsing, consensus without which juridical and political structures cannot function. Consequently the forces mobilized for the defence of such structures seem doomed to failure…. “This fundamental consensus derived from the Christian heritage is at risk wherever its place, the place of moral reasoning, is taken by the purely instrumental rationality of which I spoke earlier. In reality, this makes reason blind to what is essential. To resist this eclipse of reason and to preserve its capacity for seeing the essential, for seeing God and man, for seeing what is good and what is true, is the common interest that must unite all people of good will. The very future of the world is at stake.” Good thing Benedict was forced into retirement so that Francis could take his place! Symons further warns that “the institute’s top office-bearers, Burke and his henchman, the media-savvy Breitbart contributor Benjamin Harnwell, are also encouraging Benito Mussolini fan Matteo Salvini, of Italy’s Northern League, and Muslim-baiting far-right Catholic poster girl Marion Le Pen, the National Front ‘rising star’ niece of party leader Marine Le Pen in France.” Harnwell writes for EWTN’s National Catholic Register, so one might not be inclined to review him as any sort of dangerous extremist. But how can one deny this if, as Symons writes, he is a “henchman.” Henchmen are always evil, are they not? Then too, Burke “encouraged” Matteo Salvini. One might ask: what is the evidence that Salvini is a fan of Mussolini? Here it is: some people at his rallies have been seen waving photographs of the late dictator and he has worn black shirts! And like any crypto-Fascist, Salvini is very critical of the European Union — along with all those neo-Fascists in England, who voted to leave it! And what about that “Muslim-baiting far-right Catholic poster girl Marion Le Pen, [of] the National Front”? The danger here is that the people of France, weary of the endless disaster of unrestricted Muslim immigration and related mass murders, now appear poised to elect her as President of the Republic. That would bring millions of people into the orbit of the dastardly Burke-Bannon-Catholic conspiracy — just like Trump’s election did. Symons alerts Francis to the dire threat Burke poses as he “tries to run an insurgency and rebukes the pope for his doctrinal ‘ambiguities,’ with the backing of thousands of priests…” Cardinals, thousands of priests, and who knows how many members of the faithful are kicking against the goad of what Cardinal Kasper has called “Pope Francis’ Revolution of Tenderness and Love.” What is going on here? The peasants are rising against tenderness and love! Symons has a plan, however: “Francis could seize the agenda. In time-honored papal tradition, he could write an encyclical on the burning questions of populism and nationalism, with specific reference to migrants, Muslims and Jews, so priests including Burke know they are in breach of church teaching when they try to act as power brokers for the international extreme right.” Such painful naiveté. As if a Pope could wave his magic papal wand and force Catholics to believe what Symons believes about such issues as populism, nationalism, migrants and Muslims by simply publishing an encyclical and demanding: “You must believe this!” Francis must crush this rising peasants’ revolt before it is too late, Symons cautions. For “f the pope doesn’t put the reactionary elements such as Burke and his cronies back in their place, they could force a real schism during his papacy and leave the church open to justifiable accusations it failed to stand up to enablers of extremism and neo-fascism within its ranks.” Curiously, the Institute’s website (www.dignitatishumanae.com) seems to have disappeared following the appearance of Symons’ editorial, although its Facebook page is still accessible. Symons was able to link to it only days ago (February 9) when her editorial appeared. Has the Vatican, taking Symons’s advice, already made a move against the Institute or has that really rather tame organization shut itself down for fear of reprisal from the Bergoglian apparatus? It would be easy enough to dismiss Symons’ little screed as a joke. But there is a deadly serious element to her laughable contentions: they illustrate how Francis has been instrumentalized by the Church’s enemies in order to crush all Catholic opposition to the consolidation of a unipolar world order. His role — wittingly or unwittingly — will be to assist the global “deep state,” which cares nothing about anything so trivial as Catholicism or the election of a President of the United States. To complete the assigned task, Francis must insure the permanent marginalization of the traditional Catholic proletariat and a purge of its radical leaders, above all Burke, so that the civil authorities will have a clear path to treating them as dangerous and even criminal radicals. Con't
Con't We are witnessing, to the extent humanly possible, an attempted merger of the Catholic Church with a worldwide secular hegemon — an outcome now principally impeded only by the Trump administration, the populist movements of Europe, and traditional Catholics within the Church who are resisting what would be her terminal liberalization under a wayward Roman Pontiff beloved by all the worldly powers. Never has the world witnessed such a destructive affinity between political and ecclesiastical power at the highest levels. One can only see here yet another aspect of what the Third Secret of Fatima foretells, which Benedict XVI revealed in part during his pilgrimage to Fatima some seven years ago: “realities involving the future of the Church, which are gradually taking shape and becoming evident.” May the Blessed Virgin obtain the protection of the Church and the rescue of the world from the designs of those who would enslave both — with the unprecedented assistance of a Roman Pontiff. And may the Church be blessed with a Pope who, instead of being the instrument of worldly powers, will be the instrument of the world’s conversion to Christ through the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary — too long delayed by Church leaders who think themselves wiser than Mary, Seat of Wisdom.
Then I would suggest you find a new spiritual director, Brian! Maybe he is responsible for some of your misguided views... But thank you for this article from Christopher Lamb. It gives a good view of the situation in the Vatican regarding the Cardinal's excellent booklet.
FOR THOSE WHO HAVE EARS TO HEAR< OUR BLESSED MOTHER IS STILL PLEADING TO US Pedro Regis messages form the Blessed Mother 4427 - Message of Our Lady Queen of Peace, February 10, 2017 Dear children, testify to Jesus before men and you will be great in the Eyes of the Father. The day will come when many who are fervent in faith will be deceived and led into error. False teachings will lead men to doubt dogmas and there will be a great crisis of faith. Many chosen to defend the truth will act like Pilate: they will see the injustices practised against My Son Jesus and, for fear of losing what passes, they will wash their hands. The traitors to faith will unite and change many truths. I suffer for what comes to you. Bend your knees in prayer. This is the time of sorrows for the righteous. Love and defend the truth. Do not forget the lessons of the past, for they will be what enables you to walk in the truth. Courage. Stay with Jesus. Always seek Him in the Eucharist and let yourselves be led by Him through His Gospel. Go forward on the way that I have pointed out to you. This is the message I give you today in the name of the Most Holy Trinity. Thank you for having allowed Me to gather you here once more. I bless you, in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. Be at peace. 4428 - Message of Our Lady Queen of Peace, February 11, 2017 Dear children, I am your Sorrowful Mother. I suffer because of your sufferings and I ask you to keep the flame of your faith alight. After the cross will come the victory. In the Great Spiritual Battle, Victory will be for the Lord and His Chosen Ones. Do not stray from the truth. Encourage one another and assume your true role as Christians. I have come from Heaven to help you, but I cannot force you. Listen to Me. Be meek towards My Appeals. Do not let yourselves be deceived by the devil's innovations. Be of the Lord. Be faithful to the True Magisterium of the Church of My Jesus. Those who remain faithful will receive a great reward from the Lord. Courage. I need each of you. There will be a great war and the faithful soldiers will fight in defense of the truth. Bend your knees in prayer. I will pray to My Jesus for you. Go forward without fear. This is the message I give you today in the name of the Most Holy Trinity. Thank you for having allowed Me to gather you here once more. I bless you, in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. Be at peace.
How dare you?!? I suggest you find a new forum! This man is a mystic who foretold events in my life and helped me survive them spiritually. The last few years were very difficult, but I’ve been able to work through it all. Then late last year I told my spiritual director about this, because I was frustrated that I didn’t always bear these crosses magnanimously, and the burden was often shared unbeknownst by my wife and children, which just didn’t seem “fair.” He simply looked at me, asked me why I had not told him before (because I never should have done anything so terribly naïve without his advice, and it would have made events in my life over the last couple years far more comprehensible to him) and simply said to expect something very serious, and very soon. I'll take his clear judgment and guidance over the misguided nonsense you spew forth here any day.
Wow, that's a completely different take than I had. I was thinking that it was such a positive and charitable viewpoint of the spiritual director to take -that perhaps the cardinal/author was penitent . This thought actually gives me peace
There can be no division of opinion on Sacred Tradition and the words of Christ on the Sacrament of marriage. Clear as spring water. The fact that anyone can suggest there can be a division of opinion in the Church about this shows how far down this wide road prelates and priests and lay people have traveled. The Vicar of Christ does not have the power to contravene Sacred tradition or the words of Christ. One thinks of Paul's warnings about Angels of light.
Brian this sounds so much like my confessor--a very holy priest, who soberly and with sorrow said in effect much the same thing but said God was allowing it as a purification and to pray hard.
WARNING yet another Heresy continues form the popes friends. I wonder how many of the current pope supporters, if any, on MOG would have a problem with women priests on another doctrine clearly defined by Saint Pope John Paul? Cardinal Coccopalmerio's book is only the latest example of Catholic teaching being questioned A few weeks ago, the Jesuit journal La Civiltà Cattolica published a startling article on women priests. Its arguments were familiar: the author, deputy editor Fr Giancarlo Pani, asked readers to consider whether an all-male priesthood might perhaps be outdated. “There is unease,” Fr Pani wrote, “among those who fail to understand how the exclusion of woman from the Church’s ministry can coexist with the affirmation and appreciation of her equal dignity.” What is startling is that this appeared in a journal edited by one of the Pope’s closest advisers, Fr Antonio Spadaro; a journal very close to the Holy See – every page is vetted by the Vatican – which the Pope recently praised. It suggests that the Church, even at its highest levels, is now entering a full-blown civil war over doctrine. There was a further example yesterday, when Vatican Radio promoted a new book by Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, the president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts. more........ http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/com...-now-in-a-full-blown-civil-war-over-doctrine/
Hope there's room in Guam... http://www.onepeterfive.com/italian-cardinal-defends-traditional-catholic-teaching-marriage/ Italian Cardinal Defends Traditional Catholic Teaching on Marriage Maike Hickson February 16, 2017 0 Comments On 15 February, the Italian journal Il Timone published an article written by Cardinal Camillo Ruini – former Vicar General of the Diocese of Rome – in which he defends the traditional Catholic teaching on marriage according to which the “remarried” divorcees may not receive the Sacraments if they do not live as brother and sister. This article had been first published in 2014 (as Dr. Sandro... Read More
https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/...-and-conjugal-relations-differ-categorically/ ‘Sexual relations’ and ‘conjugal relations’ differ categorically Among the fault lines revealed by the ecclesiastical earthquakes erupting after Pope Francis’ Amoris laetitia, we can see, I suggest, how some high-ranking ecclesiastics seem inadequately to understand the differences between “sexual relations” and “conjugal relations”. Most any man and any woman can have sexual relations, of course, but only spouses can have conjugal relations. While physically the actions are the same, the differences between a non-married couple engaging in sexual relations and a married couple engaging in conjugal relations are numerous in the natural order (emotionally, psychologically, even legally); if engaged in between Christians, those differences become categorical (sacramentally, spiritually, and even canonically). I flagged this confusing of “sexual relations” with “conjugal relations” in my comments on the Maltese Disaster noting that Bps. Scicluna & Grech had carelessly spoken of non-married couples exercising a conjugal virtue (Criteria, # 9). But they were not the first, nor are they the only, prelates to disregard the crucial distinctions applicable here. Amoris itself confuses “sexual relations” and “conjugal relations” by invoking, in its controversial footnote 329, the Second Vatican Council’s reminder to married persons not to “separate” for too long a time (see Gaudium et spes 51, which speaks exclusively in terms of spouses and conjugal relations) as if it were a warning against non-married couples discontinuing their sexual relations! From a purely scholarly point of view, Amoris’ invocation of advice to married couples about safeguarding their rights as if it were a disincentive to non-married couples to cease usurping rights that are not theirs, is inexcusable, but—and this is crucial—footnote 329 is, as far I have seen, the only time that Amoris makes this fundamental error in categories. As such, and notwithstanding that footnote 329 should be repudiated, it could be excused as a one-time misstatement in an otherwise very lengthy document. That is, until others, the Maltese in a document published in L’Ossevatore Romano as above, and now Cdl. Coccopalmerio in a book published by Libreria Editrice Vaticana consciously repeat that confusion by saying about Amoris fn 329 that it presents “a suggestion given by the Council for matrimonial situations, in other words for legitimate unions, but was applied by [Amoris] to the case of unions that are, at least objectively, not legitimate. I believe, however, that such a difference is not relevant for the correctness of the aforesaid application” (Coccopalmerio, p. 24, my trans.). Dare I say “obviously”—the categorical confusion between mere “sexual relations” and spousal “conjugal relations” made in Amoris fn 329 when it misapplied Conciliar advice for married persons to non-married persons, by taking advantage of a wider disinterest in and/or ineptitude for theo-canonical precision among many ecclesiastical figures, is now spreading from the debate over admitting divorced-and-remarried Catholics to holy Communion, as important as that is, to questions of the moral liceity of sexual acts between married vs. non-married persons, the basic ability of all the faithful to resist sinful temptations, and one’s eligibility for valid reception of Penance, among various other things. Dare I say “obviously”—this confusion must cease.
Water of a ducks back Brian. I called David out well over a year ago. He's only gotten worse. I'd say he should take some time out and reflect on the erroneous and dangerous understanding of conscience that he is pedalling here. Those who push the justifying power of the subjective conscience are very far indeed from Catholic thought and tradition.
What next? Current headline on Drudge: Pope Francis Is Warned Against Betraying China's Underground Church Cardinal Joseph Zen, the retired Bishop of Hong Kong, has warned the Vatican against forging an agreement with the Chinese government that would grant it significant power over the Catholic Church in the country. Cardinal Zen has stated that he would consider any such deal a "betrayal" by the Holy See of the underground Catholic faithful in China. It is estimated that millions of Catholics in China are forced to worship underground as they refuse to register with the state's official Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association (CPA). These "underground" Catholics recognize the authority of the Holy See and opt to worship clandestinely due to the risk of harassment from authorities. The communist-approved Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association operates under the supervision of the central government and the activities of its clerics are strictly monitored. http://www.christianpost.com/news/pope-warned-against-betraying-chinas-underground-church-175723/
