This I saw recently in an ultrapapalist website:
"Pope Francis has said that we are currently in a change of epochs or eras and not just experiencing a period of change. It is a time of a colossal paradigm shift. One stone will not be left upon another. Many of the sacred institutions and unique religious symbols that Catholics have clung to and defended for so long -- even for ceturies -- may no longer be left standing in this change of epochs. Those that are not essential will need to be changed or discarded. Francis is trying to discern how and to what extent we need to do this. But he is facing resistance. Some of this is being manifested through attacks against his integrity as a disciple and faith leader."
I pass over (praetereo!) the snide nastinesses ("clung to" etc.); if there has been a change of eras, one of its most striking features has been the triumph of a culture of snide nastiness on the lips of the Pontiff and his cronies.
I just want to know where this model of the papacy ... the Pontiff as the Mighty Changer of Epochs ... the Great Caster Down of Stones ... the August Discerner of Discardable Dogmas ... Colossal Shifter of Paradigms ... is to be found in, or can be justified from, the teachings of Vatican I (or Vatican II) upon the Petrine Ministry.
It is certainly not to be found in the teaching of the most recent significant theologian to be canonised, S John Henry Newman, Patron of the Jurisdiction to which I have the honour to belong. He saw the Roman Church as a remora, obstacle, against innovation. Earlier writers, earlier popes, earlier councils, took the same view.
PF thinks he is 'ecumenical', because he kisses oriental hierarchs with beards and swedish episcopussies without them. Does he seriously think that, if he explained frankly to his supposed chums the (claimed) extent of his personal power to refashion the Christian Faith at will, they would react with anything other than horrified alarm?
I subscribed formally to the teaching of Vatican I some sixty years ago, on 28 April 1959, when I signed up to the Catholic League. I have no intention of falling away now from this divinely-imparted Faith. I repudiate ex animo any concept of the Papacy which could afford plausibility to the passage I have quoted above.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
"Episcopussies."
My keyboard needs to be replaced from my coffee!
Touché!
Perhaps Pope Francis has been sent by God to ensure Catholics infected by the Spirit of Vatican I take a look at what the Council actually said about the papacy. Newman who had dreaded an interpretation inspired by such as Faber, Ward or Manning found it quite acceptable.
What a rather depressing quote, one can hardly believe that the writer of this is in the same Church as you or me.
If one were to substitute Mao or Stalin for Pope Francis in your quote above, it would be credible and, as we have discovered in recent years, accurate...
To attribute such things to a Pope, or any human being, is a sign of mental instability and if a Pope were to think that of himself, utter madness. It is reminiscent of immature individuals swooning over the celebrity du jour. Think: Cliff Richards, the Beatles or Elvis Presley.
Hardly the utterance of a mens sana.
And..you are 1000000% correct!
If you break the statement down into its constituent parts and read it without reference to the previously asserted views of the author, there are at least several elements that are not quit as troubling. Or at least not as heretical.
Taking the general statement about change ("we are currently in a change of epochs or eras and not just experiencing a period of change") as an empirical observation and not a normative statement, it could be a true statement. First, there is a possible world in which exterior forces might cause an epochal change in the life of the Church, even one necessitating alteration of customs and rituals.
Second, it could be argued that this is our world, to an extent, because, for instance, the venality of the episcopacy has become so extensive that institutions under its control need (or will have forced upon them) extensive alterations.
In that case, it would be the proper job of the papacy to assess and manage those situations and lead the Church through them. Think Lord of the World.
Of course, then there's what the author actually intended, which appears to have been something entirely different.
"Some of this is being manifested through attacks against his integrity as a disciple and faith leader."
This last line is the one that bothers me the most. No longer is the Pope the Vicar of Christ but a "faith leader" of one of the many faiths (supposedly) willed by God.
It also reminds me of Prince Charles statement that he wants to be "defender of the faiths".
Regarding his integrity as a disciple I am not able to think of his first appearance on the loggia without calling to mind Luke 22:3.
Think Lord of the World.
I recall PF saying at some point that this is his favorite book. Sadly, it does not seem at all clear that HH understands that Julian Felsenburgh is the villain, not the hero.
The Ultramontanist heresy.
Melkite Patriarch Gregory II Youssef was right.
"...this change of epochs" will not take place according to Bergoglio's secular ideas, but according to God's plans.
To rule his Church, Jesus established his vicar in the person of Saint Peter the Apostle and his successors. The last in this succession, Benedict XVI, pontifex maximus, or high priest, sentenced the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ to death. He did the will of God the Son himself, because his mystical Bride took on the features of the repulsive Great Harlot. He [B16] began with himself, the visible head of the Militant Church: he broke it in two parts! This broken head cannot be glued back and therefore the last decision of the last pope is irrevocable. When will the Mystical Body die? At the same time when the daily Sacrifice of the altar ceases! Pontifex Maximus, Benedict XVI (Joseph by birth), repeated exactly the act of high priest Caiaphas (Joseph by birth), only this time this One Man is not Jesus Christ in his own person, but his Mystical Body. For what purpose did God the Son, through his vicar, the pope, pass judgment on himself? In order to “… gather dispersed children of God into one.” Where will He gather them? In the God’s Kingdom on earth under the scepter of Paraclete! The awaited era of God the Holy Spirit will come true.
As a Catholic, do you miss animal sacrifices on the altar of the Jerusalem Temple? Do you think those elect to the Kingdom of God will regret any of the sacred rites of the Militant Church? In the history of salvation, God with every epochal change brings man to a higher level of spiritual life!
From the „Book of Heaven”: V12 – 1.29.19 – "My beloved daughter, Luisa [Piccarreta], I Want to Let you know the Order of my Providence. Every two thousand years I have RENEWED the world.
In the first two thousand years I RENEWED it with the Deluge; in the second two thousand I
RENEWED it with My Coming upon earth when I Manifested My Humanity, from which, as if
from many fissures, My Divinity Shone Forth. The Good ones and the very Saints of the
following two thousand years have lived from the Fruits of My Humanity and, in drops, they
have enjoyed My Divinity. Now we are around the third two thousand years, and there will
be a THIRD RENEWAL. This is the Reason for the general confusion: it is nothing other than
the Preparation of the THIRD RENEWAL. If in the second RENEWAL I Manifested What My
Humanity Did and Suffered, and very little of What My Divinity was Operating, now, in this
THIRD RENEWAL, after the earth will be purged and a great part of the current generation
destroyed, I will be even More Generous with creatures, and I will Accomplish the RENEWAL
by Manifesting What My Divinity Did Within My Humanity; How My Divine Will Acted with
My human will; How Everything Remained Linked Within Me; How I Did and Redid
Everything, and How even each thought of each creature was Redone by Me, and Sealed with
My Divine Volition.”
Great article. Very intelligent Witty.
Post a Comment