Posted on 03/10/2015 4:31:30 PM PDT by BlatherNaut
Editor’s Note: There has been a tendency among some recent critics of The Remnant to confuse our editorial concern over the troubling pontificate of Pope Francis with expressions of indignation over mere personal effrontery. Nothing could be further from the truth. When we note the fact that the Holy Father, for example, appears to be “scolding” traditional Catholics on something of a regular basis, we are not particularly concerned about his less-than-favorable opinion of us as individuals. We are a remnant, after all, whose stock-in-trade is opinion which tends to struggle against the current.
An attack on traditionalists by the Holy Father does, however, suggest an attack on Tradition itself, on 2000 years of liturgical heritage and the established moral order of Holy Mother Church—the defense of which, no matter how inadequate, is what makes a Catholic a traditionalist.
What is so troubling for many of us is this idea that if Pope Francis is correct in administering these scoldings of Tradition, and if he is right in attempting to establish a new orientation for the Church and the papacy, then it would seem to stand to reason that the Church historically and traditionally was wrong or at least seriously mistaken in both her praxis and teaching for a very long time. By his own admission, Francis is trying to move the Church out of the darkness of her old ways and into the light of modernity. For nearly 2000 years of Church history, no pope ever spoke of such an idea other than to condemn it as patently false.
It is difficult for non-Modernists to reconcile novelty with established Tradition, and so we hope and pray we are dead wrong about Pope Francis, and that we are grossly misunderstanding his agenda. Please, God, let it be so! But this is not about us, so-called “traditionalists” taking umbrage with a perceived insult from the pope. We’re used to the catacombs, and we’ve grown up with the scoldings of post-conciliar Holy Fathers ringing in our ears. But in the dire situation that appears to confront the Church now, as is here intimated by Father Anonymous, we fear that the pontificate of Pope Francis may be setting up to take things to a whole new level, a level no Catholic in history ever imagined possible.
Our fear, then, is for the Church we revere above all else as well as for the hopeless world in which our children will grow up, robbed as it may well be of the moral authority of Holy Mother Church. What will happen to them in the winds that will blow then?
Father Anonymous is not a traditionalist, by the way; he offers the New Mass but, like us, is more than merely apprehensive over the direction in which Francis appears to be taking the Church. If Father’s apprehension makes him a traditionalist, so be it and may God help us all. Pray for Pope Francis and pray that The Remnant's concerns about the present pontificate eventually prove to have been wildly exaggerated. MJM
Editor, The Remnant: I’m reassured to read your articles taking Pope Francis to task for his many attacks on faithful Catholics, while at the same time endorsing the immoral behavior of others.
I am a priest and have been for twenty-five years. I’ve never experienced such a spiritual upheaval in all those years, and, believe me, I have seen what I thought was the worst the Catholic Church had to offer.
Pope Francis’ behavior and his continued off-the-cuff remarks have left me feeling demoralized. I have never experienced such ill-will coming from the Holy See. The confusion the Pope’s remarks is causing among the faithful to whom I minister, and the way his actions are emboldening an already anti-Catholic culture seem to me to have something of the sinister about it. When I look into Pope Francis’ eyes I do not see love and compassion, I see vainglory and cunning.
Now we face the possibility of catastrophe when the Synod reconvenes in Rome this fall. My own archbishop sent out requests for input from parishioners about issues of marriage and family. The questions asked of my parishioners seem leading, as if he’s looking for particular responses to suit a predetermined outcome. I fear, in a way I’ve never feared before, that we’re facing serious doctrinal changes. Although Pope Francis continues to insist that these would only be discipline changes and not doctrinal, my gut tells me that he’s being disingenuous.
All over the world we’re seeing cardinals, archbishops and bishops affirming behaviors which are unequivocally condemned by Popes and Councils in previous centuries. As I listen and watch these events, in my mind, over and over, I hear the phrase, “the smoke of Satan has entered the sanctuary.” Could it be that all that is happening is truly the work of Satan? I’m not ready to affirm that it is, but in my heart I fear that it may be true. If it is then it may also be true that many members of our hierarchy do not belong to Christ.
I’ve had conversations with priest friends about all of this. We are all fearful for what is to come. None of us feels as if we’re standing on doctrinally solid grounds any longer. We all cringe every time Pope Francis steps in front of a group of journalists. What will he say next? How will he berate those who are faithfully serving Christ? How will he beat up on us this time?
One of my priest friends asked me during a conversation what I would do if the Church does formally approve what it previously formally condemned. I had to confess in all honesty that I’d probably have to leave priestly ministry. He admitted that he’d probably have no choice but to do the same.
My deepest fear is that if Pope Francis continues to push the Church toward heresy that we may experience a war among the faithful that would make Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s opposition after Vatican II appear like a simple objection!
I know you’ll understand why I’m not signing my name to this email.
May God preserve His Holy Church from the forces, visible and invisible, within and without, who seek to destroy it. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners!
Father Anonymous
There is a clear correlation between the words, actions and facial expressions of Pope Francis. Isn't implying that the anonymous priest is spiteful rather judgmental?
And if some refuse to remain silent in the face of his heretical maunderings and dare to "Remain in the Truth of Christ" and to encourage others to do so, papal henchmen will simply make the magisterial teachings "disappear" from the Vatican mailboxes. Only wishful thinking could spin such corruption into something Holy Spirit-inspired.
Praying for it too.
"... the discussion about his eyes only trivializes the discussion. It also makes it look like we're so spiteful we're willing to carp about anything: his yerba mate, the way he ties his shoes."
It makes it look like "we're" spiteful. Not the anonymous priest.
The anonymous priest was the first to mention the eyes, so that’s a fair question.
"Synodgate" --- the theft of the "Five Cardinals" books back in October --- is a felony in every country (including the Vatican City State), and when Kathnet (German) broke the news, bishops were infuriated. Good. Nail, meet hammer; crime, meet moral outrage.
Obviously, I'm not saying that this corruption was "something Holy Spirit-inspired." Nobody could reasonably take my words that way.
Think of Cardinal Kasper's unguarded remark to Edward Pentin that the faithfully orthodox African Bishops needn't thinking of telling the rest of us what to do. Think of how the thugs--- like Baldisseri ---- have, by their bullying boldness, taken off their smiley-face masks themselves. It's this, the self-exposure of the perps as thieves, liars and racists, which is a work of the Holy Spirit.
It'll only get worse, but now the whole world is watching. I'm saying the African episcopate is going to ride in, guns blazing, and save the day.
Oremus, fratres.
From your keyboard to God's monitor.
Conservative Anglicans thought that for 20 years.
They were wrong.
Yet, Francis has disciplined neither Kasper nor Baldisseri to date; as a matter of fact, he holds both in high regard. "Theology on the knees"!
They can't come riding in if only one is invited to the SinNod.
OK, “he” and his allies. They’re no without allies, networks, resources.
Think that if it makes you feel better, but there's no indication that this is going to happen. Orthodox prelates have been marginalized, and we saw at the synod that the Pope feels no obligation to follow the rules that he himself has established. Why would anyone trust this man, or believe that he would permit African prelates to undermine his corrupt goals?
Key African prelate backs Communion for divorced, remarried
http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2015/02/11/key-african-prelate-backs-communion-for-divorced-remarried/
Sorry, but that makes no sense.
???
As I read it, this scenario was offered as an example by Abp Palmer-Buckle: a polygamous man's wife #3 has lived with him and raised children with him for 35 years. Do we say she has to quit the marriage and break up the family in order to be received into the sacraments of the Catholic Church?
My response: it seems to me that if the man intended to set up a polygamous household from the git-go, none of his "marriages" were valid because of his polygamous intent. Therefore there is no objective Sacramental bond with any of the wives.
A Marriage Tribunal shouldsay that all these "marriages" were null --- no bond.
In that case,the husband --- if he's baptized --- needs to marry one of them, legitimately, via the Sacrament of Matrimony, and stop having sexual relations with the other two.
The sin is not living in a household together. The sin is having sexual intercourse with a person you are not married to.
Why wouldn't Abp Palmer-Buckle say the solution is faithful monogamous Matrimony, "forsaking all others," rather than giving Communion to wife #3 while she's still in a polygamous union?
If the Catholic Church, in effect, approves (or tacitly tolerates) polygamy, it basically destroys Matrimony.
If Abp Palmer-Buckle were a student in my RCIA class, I would make this very clear to him.
Implying that commenters who discuss Francis’ non-verbal signals “look spiteful” automatically implies that the source of the original comment (the priest quoted in post #1) “looks spiteful” as well.
Synod packing. Confirmed by Francis to vote in concert with his hand-picked Kasper cabal.
"...In late January, Francis confirmed the election of Palmer-Buckle by his fellow bishops in Ghana as a participant in the Synod of Bishops, set to assemble at the Vatican Oct. 4-25.
When it does, Palmer-Buckle says he’ll be disposed to cast a “yes” vote on the proposal of German Cardinal Walter Kasper to allow Catholics who divorce and remarry outside the Church to return to Communion under certain circumstances..."
http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2015/02/11/key-african-prelate-backs-communion-for-divorced-remarried/
Your assumptions are like one of my old sweaters: stretched way too far to cover too much. :o/
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.