By the Numbers and by God's Book: Cardinal Ratzinger is Just Dead Wrong

The spectacle of Pope John Paul II and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger heaping praise upon the “great fruits” of the pontificate of Pope Paul VI and the Second Vatican Council calls to mind the efforts of the late Soviet dictator Leonid Brezhnev and his chief ideologist, the equally late Mikhail Suslov, to praise past Soviet leaders and to emphasize that the Bolshevik Revolution was charting the path successfully to the dawn of the New Socialist Man.

Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, was quoted recently as saying that the “springtime of the Church” is a reality, but that it does not depend upon numbers. He has said on other occasions that we are experiencing a “qualitative” renewal engendered by the Second Vatican Council, the “fruits” of which were again praised by Pope John Paul II on the occasion of the twenty-sixth anniversary of the death of Pope Paul VI on the feast of the Transfiguration.

Let us try to figure this out. We are in the springtime of the Church because octogenarian revolutionaries say that we are despite all empirical evidence to the contrary. In other words, revolutionaries responsible for laying waste Christ’s vineyard by fomenting an unprecedented revolt against her authentic patrimony can make positivist statements that must be accepted at face value as being true without any hint of criticism. My word, if a priest were to criticize such self-serving positivist statements he might find that his bishop would have canonical grounds to suspend him for disloyalty to the Pope and to the magnificent work done by the Second Vatican Council to “restore” and to “renew” the Church.

Unfortunately for the Holy Father and for Cardinal Ratzinger, God has revealed to us that he does care very much about numbers.

“After these things Jesus went over the sea of Galilee, which is that of Tiberias. And a great multitude followed Him, because they saw the miracles which He did on them that were diseased.

“Jesus therefore went up into a mountain, and there he sat with His disciples. Now the pasch, the festival day of the Jews, was near at hand. When Jesus therefore had lifted up His eyes, and seen that a very great multitude cometh to Him, He said to Philip: ‘Whence shall we buy bread that these may eat?’ And this He said to try him; for He himself knew what He would do.

“Philip answered him: ‘Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one may take a little.’

“One of His disciples, Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, saith to him: ‘There is a boy here that hath five barley loaves, and two fishes; but what are these among so many?’

“Then Jesus said: ‘Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand.” (Jn. 6:1-10)

Yes, a number: five thousand. God cares about numbers. The miracle of the feeding of the five thousand is in each of the four Gospels (Mt. 14:13-21; Mk. 6:41-44; Lk. 9:12-16).

Saint John records the exact number of fish, a simile for souls, as Our Lord manifested Himself to the Eleven after His Resurrection:

“Jesus saith to them: ‘Bring hither of the fishes which you have now caught.’ Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land, full of great fishes, one hundred and fifty-three. And although there were so many, the net was not broken.” (Jn. 21:10-11)

Consider the account of the conversion of men on Pentecost Sunday following the first Papal address in the history of the Church:

“But Peter said to them: ‘Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.’

“And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: ‘Save yourselves from this perverse generation.’

“They therefore that received his word, were baptized; and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:38-41)

Three thousand souls. God cares about numbers. Otherwise, you see, His book, the Bible, would not be full of numbers. The examples from the Old Testament are just too numerous to review in this brief reflection. God made the world in six days, resting on the seventh. Noah spent forty days and forty nights in the ark. The Hebrews were enslaved to the Egyptians for 440 years. The Jews spent forty years wandering in the desert. The thousands slain by Saul, the tens of thousands slain by David. And one of the books of the Pentateuch happens to be called The Book of Numbers. Yes, numbers are important to God.

The tradition of the Church teaches us that God cares about numbers, which are indeed something of an indicator of the health of the Church Militant here on earth. Over 10,000 people who had gone over to the Albigensians came back to the Faith after Saint Dominic was given the Rosary by Our Lady. Saint Peter Claver baptized over 300,000 people in his lifetime. Saint Francis Xavier destroyed over 40,000 pagan idols (many of which have made their way into Papal events these days) baptized over 3,000,0000 people. That’s right, three million, And, quite importantly, over nine million indigenous peoples of the Americas were converted to the true Faith in a short space of time following Our Lady’s apparition to Saint Juan Diego at Guadalupe on December 9, 1531, almost person for the person the number of people lost to the Church in Europe as a result of the Protestant Revolt.

Thus, Cardinal Ratzinger’s assertions about a “qualitative” renewal of the Church are now and have always been an exercise in spin doctoring that flies in the face of God’s Word and of the authentic patrimony of the Catholic Church. The wreckage caused by the Second Vatican Council and the Novus Ordo Missae is vast. The decline in the numbers of Catholic attending Mass, of those who believe in the articles contained in the Deposit of Faith, of the numbers of priests and consecrated religious has not occurred because the Church has been preaching forcefully unpopular truths and seeking to gain converts to the Faith. This decline in numbers has occurred precisely because the Church has abandoned her authentic patrimony, expressed her contempt for the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, and treated actual schismatics and heretics and pagans and infidels with great solicitude while those who have held to the Faith our fathers have been dealt heavy and severe blows.

Those in ecclesiastical authority should not be concerned if the Church were abandoned by all but one person other than the Pope himself if all had abandoned her as a result of her fidelity to her tradition. Most of those who had followed Our Lord prior to the Eucharistic discourse left Him when He said that they would not have any life in them unless they ate of His Body and drank of His Blood. Turning to the Apostles, Our Lord asked:

“And Simon Peter answered Him: ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have known, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.’” (Jn. 6:68-70)

No, it would not matter if our numbers were few because of fidelity of all that is contained in the Deposit of Faith and in the Church’s tradition. Our numbers are few, though, because the Church herself has chased her sons and daughters away and refuses to convert those outside of her, an actual abandonment of the commission Our Lord gave to the Eleven before He ascended to the Father’s right hand in glory on Ascension Thursday.

While Cardinal Ratzinger believes that the small numbers signified by the “springtime of the Church” will be able to effect change in the manner that Lenin’s minority of followers did in Russia, the analogy is false. Our numbers are small at present precisely because of the Vatican’s own revolutionary policies against the Church’s entire patrimony. Imagine what our numbers would look like if the Church had not abandoned her patrimony and forced a synthetic liturgy upon Latin Rite Catholics. The story of the Church and of the world would be quite different.

Our Lord had something to say about those who refuse to bear fruit for the sake of the Kingdom:

“He also spoke this parable: “A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it, and found none. And he said to the dresser of the vineyard: “Behold, for these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and I find none. Cut it down therefore: why cumbereth it to the ground?” But he answer, said to him: “Lord, let it alone this year also, until I dig about it, and dung it. And if happily it bear fruit: but if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.”’” (Lk. 13:6-9)

It is time for Vatican officials to recognize that the Second Vatican Council and its aftermath has borne nothing but rotten fruit for the Catholic Church and thus for souls. Our Lord wants everyone on the face of the earth to be a member of the Catholic Church so that they will have access to the supernatural helps He has entrusted to her for their sanctification and salvation. The loss of numbers in the wake of the Second Vatican Council is not an indication of the “springtime of the Church.” It is an indication of an apostasy that must be rooted out in the manner of the barren fig tree.

I make no judgment on whether Pascendi is in communion with the Universal Church, visible or invisible. I have a hard time reconciling his belief that one must be visibly connected with the visible Church in order to obtain salvation with the clear teachings of St. Paul and Pio Nono, that there MIGHT be instances when those outside the visible Church might be saved through invisible bonds therewith. I have no connection with Steubenville, although I see no relevance one way or another. I suppose you are trying to perpetrate a slur on what would appear to be a perfectly orthodox Catholic institution, demonstrating once again that so-called "traditionalists" appear intent on attacking orthodox Catholics rather than the much larger group of "Catholic" universities infected with dissident modernist ideas.

I have a hard time reconciling his belief that one must be visibly connected with the visible Church in order to obtain salvation with the clear teachings of St. Paul and Pio Nono, that there MIGHT be instances when those outside the visible Church might be saved through invisible bonds therewith.

<I am certaing that Pascendi has no problems with the "rightly interpreted" statements of Pio Nono and St. Paul. Ultimately, you can speculate until hog heaven about one's "visible" or "invisible" connection the Church. Pio Nono also said in Pascendi that we may not maintain "good hope" for the eternal salvation of all those who die outside the visible structure of the Church. So balance Pio Nono's "implicit desire" statements with that. Also, Cardinal Manning has a great article available from Catholic Family News that rightly interprets "visible and invisible ignorance." I would highly recommend reading it as it addresses the very misinterpretations of this promulgated widely in today's Church.

I have no connection with Steubenville, although I see no relevance one way or another.

<I merely asked a question.

I suppose you are trying to perpetrate a slur on what would appear to be a perfectly orthodox Catholic institution, demonstrating once again that so-called "traditionalists" appear intent on attacking orthodox Catholics rather than the much larger group of "Catholic" universities infected with dissident modernist ideas.

<Nope. Wasn't going to do any of that. And don't worry, I will not "suppose you are trying to perpetrate a slur what would appear to be a perfecly orthodox Catholic..." by railing against Pascendi all of the time--merely based upon the fact you supposed something to be that was not true. I was not going to make any such slur.

In fact, if Catholic universities are infected by modernism (I'm certain EVEN your beloved Steubenville has modernist infestations), this would not be a "slur" to point them out. In any event, since you made the accusation, I thought I would clarify for you.

Pascendi, thanks for the catch on "one mortal sin sends one to HELL," not heaven as I miswrote.

Unam... Care to address any of the substance below? Any of it?

So now you want to play games with what the "Church" is, right. Want to talk about "is" and "subsists"? One thing I find quite interesting is that the documents of Vatican II speak much about "the pilgrim Church" and the "People of God," but not at all (although there are allusions to it in one of the documents;perhaps Lumen Gentium) the Church Suffering and the Church Triumphant. All Vatican II talks about is the current Church Militant, without of course ever using that offensive word. Next, we have to get into the minuscule dissection of those "imperfectly united" to the Catholic Church through Baptism. Are they part of the Catholic Church and the Mystical Body of Christ? What if they consciously reject doctrines of the Faith and want nothing whatsoever to do with submission to their Catholic Bishop or the Pope? Then, are they still somehow "imperfectly connected"? They have no Sacrament of Penance. This stuff is just crazy. They have changed the entire vocabulary and have based their theology on reinterpreting firm Catholic doctrine and dogma, with a false "postivistic" psychology. One drop of cyanide in a full glass of milk KILLS the person who drinks it. Parts of people who are "imperfectly in communion" with the Church will not go to heaven while other parts of them go to hell. It takes ONE mortal sin, unconfessed, to send a person to heaven.

So now you want to play games with what the "Church" is, right.

No. I am merely trying to reconcile "Extra Ecclesiam" with St. Paul and Pio Nono, as they are all part of Sacred Tradition as expounded by the Magisterium.

Want to talk about "is" and "subsists"?

Not particularly. The fullness of truth does subsist in the Catholic Church on earth. That language is perfectly appropriate. The Church of Christ contains not only the visible Church militant on earth, but the Church Suffering and Church triumphant as well.

One thing I find quite interesting is that the documents of Vatican II speak much about "the pilgrim Church" and the "People of God," but not at all (although there are allusions to it in one of the documents;perhaps Lumen Gentium) the Church Suffering and the Church Triumphant.

So what? Stating certain models of the Church does not mean that other models are not valid.

All Vatican II talks about is the current Church Militant, without of course ever using that offensive word. Next, we have to get into the minuscule dissection of those "imperfectly united" to the Catholic Church through Baptism. Are they part of the Catholic Church and the Mystical Body of Christ?

How the heck to do I know? I can't read people's consciences. The point is they may be, if they follow the law of God in their heart, but the only sure route to salvation is the visible Catholic Church and her sacraments.

What if they consciously reject doctrines of the Faith and want nothing whatsoever to do with submission to their Catholic Bishop or the Pope?

If they reject the Church knowing that she teaches the truths, clearly not. Otherwise it might be dependent once again on conscience, good faith and invincible ignorance type issues, and in the end, only God can know as regards specific individuals.

Then, are they still somehow "imperfectly connected"? They have no Sacrament of Penance. This stuff is just crazy.

Please take it up with St. Paul in Romans. They have changed the entire vocabulary and have based their theology on reinterpreting firm Catholic doctrine and dogma, with a false "postivistic" psychology.

Nothing is changed, but rather our tools for analysis are enriched by adding additional (not competing) models of the Church. Obviously we are dealing ultimately with a supernatural reality, and words like the "Mystical Body" and "Bride of Christ", while of course true descriptions, do not exhaust the possibilities of human language in describing the reality.

One drop of cyanide in a full glass of milk KILLS the person who drinks it. Parts of people who are "imperfectly in communion" with the Church will not go to heaven while other parts of them go to hell. It takes ONE mortal sin, unconfessed, to send a person to heaven.

One of the element of moral sin is that one knows an act is a mortal sin. Of course what you say is certainly true within the visible Church. We cannot say to much how it works outside the visible Church, as there are not the sure paths of the sacraments to guide anyone. St. Paul and Pus IX are both very tentative in their teaching in this area, and what exactly does it mean to follow the law of God written in one's heart? Only God can answer that clearly. This is why the Church must be missionaries and bring as many souls as possible to the true path to salvation marked out by Christ through His establishment of the visible Church.

"I am merely trying to reconcile "Extra Ecclesiam" with St. Paul and Pio Nono, as they are all part of Sacred Tradition as expounded by the Magisterium."

<I understand. But why does a DOGMA have to be reconciled. While it does not stand on its own and is part of the hierarchy of truths, it is still true as it stands by itself: the three infallible pronouncements are TRUE. We cannot make them mean the opposite of what they say.

"Not particularly."

<Pope Pius XII, in Mystici Corporis, said "is." He identified the Mystical Body of Christ exclusively with the Roman Catholic Church. Then, at the advise of a Lutheran Bishop, at Vatican II they change it to "subsists." Ratzinger says Pius XII said "is" but certainly did not mean it. Then, he explains how "subsists" is more definite and specific than "is."

"So what? Stating certain models of the Church does not mean that other models are not valid."

<I have no problem with this either. It is simply that since Vatican II, the only "model" one hears about is "The Church as sign and sacrament" or "the People of God" or "the Pilgrim Church." My point is that in the documents of Vatican II, other than one reference, the Church suffering and Church triumphant are not included in "the People of God" or "the Pilgrim Church." Doesn't this give an incomplete understanding to people about the true nature of the Church?

"How the heck to do I know? I can't read people's consciences. The point is they may be, if they follow the law of God in their heart, but the only sure route to salvation is the visible Catholic Church and her sacraments."

<OK. Now we are getting somewhere. Individuals might be "implicitly" "imperfectly united" with the Church, BUT the Protestant denominations that practice their heretical doctrines ARE NOT. There is a difference between the sects themselves and the individuals who frequent those sects.

<I have no problem with the content of the rest of your answers. However, why are we focusing on just St. Paul? There are various other interpretations regarding salvation that Catholics can draw from reading Sacred Scripture, the whole of it. However, this is why we rely upon the magisterium to pronounce authoritatively (as in the 3 dogmatic, infallible pronouncements) what the whole of the interpretation means.

Also, most people have a wrong view of "invincible ignorance." It neither saves nor condemns. The Cardinal Manning article is worth a read.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.