Posted on 12/06/2016 7:00:25 PM PST by NKP_Vet
Prof. Roberto de Mattei, the acclaimed Church historian, has warned that Pope Francis' decision not to respond to the four cardinals' dubia has plunged the Church into a civil war. Catholics now have to choose what side will to take in the "civil war", which Prof. de Mattei frames in terms of taking a stand for fidelity or siding with infidelity. Prof. de Mattei gave his stark assessment of the crisis in an exclusive interview with Lifesite news. Prof de Mattei is a professor at the European University of Rome and the president of the Lepanto Foundation. He told Lifesite News, "It is important to comprehend that today there is a clear choice between fidelity to the Church, to the perennial Magisterium, or infidelity, which means errors, heresy, and apostasy."
Prof. de Mattei stood behind the assessment made by the four cardinals about the state of the Church in the wake of the Holy Father's publication of Amoris Laetitia. Cardinal Burke and the others explained in their dubia, "We have noted a grave disorientation and great confusion of many faithful regarding extremely important matters for the life of the Church. We have noted that even within the episcopal college there are contrasting interpretations of Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia. Prof. Roberto de Mattie concurs with the cardinals' conclusion that Amoris Laetitia is causing "tremendous confusion inside the Church" due to the pope's ambiguous moral teaching, resulting in "division" and "fragmentation" among bishops, priests, and the faithful.
The professor expressed approval of the cardinals' action in submitting the five dubium [doubts] placing the blame for the subsequent confusion and conflict at the door of the Holy Father:
The cause of this confusion, the author of this confusion is not the four cardinals, of course. I think that the main author of the confusion is Pope Francis, because it is since his pontificate that things go so rapidly, so fast. It seems sometimes that he likes to create this confusion. The cardinals acted in a perfect way from a canonical point of view. I consider it very grave the fact that the Pope, who is the supreme head of the congregation, didn't want to answer. This is already an answer, in fact.
Prof. de Mattei also supported Cardinal Burke's determination to issue a formal declaration of serious error if Pope Francis did not repond to their dubium:
The importance of this initiative is not only to warn the Pope about the errors found in Amoris Laetitia, but also to warn the faithful, to inform the faithful, because among the faithful there is confusion but there is also ignorance. And I think that we have the duty to make the faithful aware of the gravity of this situation.
The professor of Church history concludes that the crisis is so serious that it is no longer possible for Catholics to remain neutral in the civil war provoked by Amoris Laetitia:
This situation is so grave that a neutral position is no longer possible. Today we are in a war, a religious civil war, unfortunately. I don't like this war, but we are engaged in it against our will. We have not created the situation, but this situation obliges everyone to pursue a clear position. And for this, I think we have to thank the four cardinals for their courage and to push them to continue their action and their witness.
Prof. Robert Spaemann, leading German Catholic philosopher, friend and contemporary of Pope Benedict XVI, has also expressed alarm that Pope Francis has brought the "supreme Magisterium" into disrepute by his refusal to respond to the cardinals' dubia. Prof. Spaemann, professor emeritus of the Ludwig-Maximilian University of Munich, expressed his concern in an interview with Nuova Bussola Quotidiana.
Prof. Robert Spaemann expressed support for the cardinals' dubia and their decision to make their initiative public once the Holy Father refused to answer:
With the dubia, the Cardinals take on their proper duty to support with their council - insofar as they are 'senators' - the Church in the person of the Holy Father. It's regrettable that only four cardinals have taken the initiative in this matter. The four Cardinals have chosen the right path. The Pope was the first recipient of dubia, though I think the text was also passed to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It was not written as an "open letter", but was sent directly to the Holy Father. It was only made public later, after the Pope refused to answer.
The professor also expressed great concern about the damage done to the "supreme Magisterium" by Pope Francis's silence:
The Pope's refusal to answer the appeal of the four Cardinals fills me with great worry since, in a certain way, the supreme Magisterium in this case is being debased. The Pope clearly has a deep aversion to these decisions in which a 'yes' or 'no' is required.
The professor of philosophy countered the pope's refusal to give 'yes' or 'no' answer with the example of Christ, the Lord of the Church, who often presented his disciples with decisions of this kind. In the specific question regarding adultery, Jesus 'shocks' the apostles with the simplicity and clarity of his doctrine.
Comment
Sacred Scripture makes it very clear how the faithful should respond if someone attempts to teach a "new gospel" instead of the Gospel handed on to us from the Apostles:
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel-- not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1: 6-9).
This strong response against those seeking to "pervert the Gospel" was solemnly defined by Vatican I in terms of being the right and the duty of the Church to proscribe "opinions that are known to be opposed to the doctrine of the faith". (Dei Filius, chap. 4).
Clearly, all the faithful have the right and the duty to question those bishops and priests who interpret Amoris Laetitia in ways that are contrary to Our Lord's doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage and the sin of adultery and fornication.
What seems obvious to you may not be what they want to convey.
Whatever they’re trying to “convey”, it clearly isn’t in support of his heretical policies. They are making a stand against him. You’d have to be blind to take this any other way.
And yet, I don't think they would ever say they are "against" him.
Actions speak louder than words. When was the last time a Pope has been challenged in this manner?
Whenever that was, did they say “against him”?
And the Sixth Commandment is merely an ideal.
Are you intentionally denying Catholic ecclesiology? Or do you just not understand it?
Taking refuge in tedious word parsing is weak and unpersuasive. Though some are still loathe to admit it, Bergoglio has manifestly crossed the line. The emperor has no clothes.
They don’t need to. The whole concept of a “dubia” is, literally, casting “doubt” on the orthodoxy of a teaching or policy. For Cardinals to cast doubt on some policy or pronouncement of the Pope is to imply that he has said or done something that they doubt is in accordance with the Deposit of Faith.
The correct answers to the Five Questions are: no, yes, yes, yes, yes.
When a HIERARCH (including the Pope) obstinately affirms the wrong answer to any of the questions, he lapses into heresy.
To refuse to answer the questions is to reveal complete intellectual dishonesty.
Any literate Catholic can be certain that where Bergoglio differs from all previous Popes, Bergoglio has lapsed into heresy.
It is preposterous to say that a lay Catholic who, in good conscience, reaches the wrong answers will be guilty of heresy, schism, and excommunication.
It is doubly preposterous to say that it is possible for a Catholic who adheres to the teaching of Christ (i.e., answers the Five Questions with no, yes, yes, yes, yes) could be guilty of heresy or schism, or incurs excommunication.
“The supreme Magisterium in this case is being debased.” Yes, sir. Pope Francis does not understand that the Magisterium has divine assistance and his attempts to dent, scratch and repaint the Magisterium are useless. The original, shiny and straight M. always bounces back.
It has deeper implications. Are those living in the state of mortal sin eligible to receive communion? (Paul warned about this)
But the real question is back story: It implies sexual sin is not really sin, and it suggest communion is not the Holy Body and Blood of Jess, but a feel good symbol for anyone who wants it.
and it goes even deeper to the idea that morality is relative: Is there right and wrong, good and evil, or is everything “Grey”... the bishops asked him to clarify this problem.
The Catholic religion long ago perverted the Gospel by teaching we are justified before God by our faith AND our works. Issues concerning who can or cannot receive the Catholic Eucharist and when they can do so is NOT the "Gospel". The gospel is the GOOD NEWS that Jesus Christ died to save us from our sins and that it is by grace THROUGH faith that we are made righteous and have eternal life.
Martin Luther's dubia with the Catholic Magesterium and the Pope WERE actually about the Gospel and how the selling and granting of indulgences were abused to the detriment of the truth. For that, he was excommunicated and a death warrant was placed on head. How times have changed!
What is faith? Faith is upholding your end of God’s Covenant. It’s not mouthing the words “I accept Jesus as my personal Lord and Savior!” Faith is accepting it in thought, word, and deed. Remember that not everyone who says “Lord, Lord!” will enter the kingdom of God. There’s a wealth of meaning in that verse.
Billy Graham had all his children baptised as small infants. Why do you think he did that?
“The Catholic religion long ago perverted the Gospel by teaching we are justified before God by our faith AND our works.”
James cares to defer with you. Which is the reason Luther despised the writings of James. Didn’t fit in with his narrative. After all Luther knew Jesus personally and James never met him.
Faith is trust, confidence, dependence on, resting in, believing and receiving the grace of God that saves us not based on our own righteousness or the deeds we perform but because of His mercy. In Hebrews 11:1, faith is: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Ephesians 2:8,9 says, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Finally, faith is believing God that what He has promised, He WILL do. And genuine faith is revealed by how we live our lives - our walk, our talk, our holiness in Christ. Our works do NOT save us, they show that we are saved AND God alone sees the heart.
A life long humanitarian who do commits murder is still a murderer and needs to pay a penalty for that crime. Works are a fruit of the spirit a sign that God showed mercy to you and you now live forever under grace. If one can lose grace then the work on the cross was pointless and we still are under the old sacrificial system.
To the contrary, faith is more succinctly defined as obedience. Believing what Christ instructs us to believe in the New Covenant. Obeying the strictures He laid down for us to follow. He ordered us to eschew sin and peform good works. The faithful heed His instruction.
John 3:36 “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him.”
One-time acceptance of Christ isn’t faith. You don’t go on autopilot doing nothing but good works for the rest of your life after accepting Christ.You must accept Him anew everyday with your obedience. It’s not mere expression of belief in God or Jesus-—it’s acceptance of the life God wishes you to lead. Never forget that Satan believes in the existence of God, knows firsthand the truth of Christ’s words. And yet he is faithless. Obedience are not merely the byproduct of faith. it is integral to it. If you have no obedience, you have no faith.
Hilary White had a good editorial on the significance of this festering post VC II boil that has been exposed to the light of day by Bergolio and lanced by the Four Cardinals. It is a very exciting time in the history of the Church and the world. As I was driving across the desert with the cruise control set at 80MPH today it became clear to me that we are beginning to see the long prayed for Triumph of the Immaculata over the losers who have been running a show for the last 100 years. It is similar in timing to the defense of Breed’s/Bunker Hill where the order was given to “not shoot until you see the whites of their eyes”. The lies, grand deceptions, and snares of Lucifer are crashing down all around us. It is wonderful to behold.
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.