Replies

I am perfectly loyal to Sacred Tradition, and I don't think that piling on with slander and falsehoods against the Holy Father constitutes defending Sacred Tradition. As I have told you a thousand times at least, Sacred Tradition consists of the deposit of faith, i.e., doctrines on faith and morals that have been taught always and everywhere by the magisterium as handed down from the apostles and interpreted and applied by their successors (the ordinary and universal magisterium), as well as dogmatic definitions on faith and morals of Popes and Ecumenical Councils. Not every teaching of the ordinary magisterium and not every disciplinary or liturgical rule is is part of Sacred Tradition and hence irreformable. Whether to withold communion in a particular instance may or may not be wise, but it is a disciplinary rule and hardly part of the ordinary and universal magisterium. As usual, you define everything as Sacred Tradition, including much that isn't, and therefore the Pope never meets your infallible standard. He therefore will never meet your subjective infallible standards and will always be the butt of your everlasting criticism. I honestly don't think you have any faith in Christ or His promises, or otherwise you would not preach such total and unmitigated hatred against the Successor of Peter, whom Christ promised would be the rock of the Church around which we must rally. You don't believe in or trust in God and have a purely human conception of the Church.

Okay, you've charged me with telling falsehoods. But nothing I charge is untrue. I said JPII did nothing to protect the deposit of faith--which is the first duty of any pope. Is not belief in the Resurrection and the Real Presence part of the deposit of faith? Am I claiming these are disciplinary matters? Not at all. These are among the rock-bottom essential truths of the Catholic faith. But it is a fact that two-thirds of all Catholics no longer believe in these dogmas, that belief in these truths have been steadily eroding due to the wretched state of catechesis and the abysmal state of the Novus Ordo liturgy.

I ask you--has the Pontiff repremanded bishops who teach heretical doctrines and fail to improve catechesis? Has he bothered to read the statistics on the the ignorance of the young regarding the faith? The rest of us have--and have been waiting for some action. Yet nothing ever happens. He did mention in passing through one of his congregations, for instance, that not kneeling to receive Communion might further undermine belief in the Mystery of the Real Presence--but then he allowed the American bishops to do their Protestant thing anyhow. Apparently the matter was deemed not important enough to risk crossing swords with the bishops. But how is this protecting the faith or Sacred Tradition? Catechesis continues in a shambles. Why? Is it less important than praying with Buddhists? Likewise the liturgy. Likewise respect for Sacred Tradition generally. Countless hours are lavished preparing for the new stuff--Youth rallies, for example, or ecumenical dialoguing which go on endlessly and pointlessly--but the Pope does not assure that the young are learning the fundamentals of the Catholic faith! The faithful who care about such things--and they are the remnant few--often must travel long miles on Sundays to find churches or chapels that preach authentic Catholic doctrine. It's a constant effort to find orthodoxy. Thus it is that parents must struggle against impossible odds to pass-on intact the Catholic faith to their children.

In short, I haven't lied--I've just pointed out the truth--which to you is too threatening to consider. You make the bizarre claim that by criticizing the pope, I am showing a lack of faith in the promises of Christ. This is ridiculous. Peter was to be the rock--but not the faith itself, nor the Church itself. In fact, as if to show how this would actually work out--Peter ended up betraying Christ three times after that very prophesy. He had to repent before he could effectively guide his Church. JPII also needs to repent--but there are no signs of his doing this whatsoever. Instead he shows every sign of not understanding the reasons for the present crisis--which is at bottom a failure of faith. His Church, on the contrary, is sick and getting sicker. Much of it is dying--and he hasn't a clue what the problem really is.