(1) Bergoglians urge upon us Amoris laetitia under the pretext that, with a culinary dash of Newman's Development stirred into the pot and with a large dollop of subjective guilt reduced from Mortal to Venial ('Here's some I did earlier'), we can cook Communion for Adulterers?NO! until it is nicely tenderised into Communion for Adulterers?YES!. And, of course, this lays the way open for homosexuals, polygamists, paedophiles, polyamorists, therogamists, batrachophiles, and all the other categories that the Graf von Schoenborn and Fr Rosica may or may not have on their lists. ... I've got a little list ... OK, Ko-ko (is there a Cardinal Ko-ko? In today's Gilbert-and-Sullivan Vatican, there jolly well should be). Splendid. And all the basic work, all the heavy lifting, has already been done by Tucho in between 'supermystic' kisses (is there a Tucho in Gilbert and Sullivan?). What more could ...
But this particular sleight of hand will not avail (as far a I can see) when these same Magisterial Minds turn their attention to the next nut that needs to be cracked: the priestly Ordination of Women. Can anybody suggest how (again with appropriate assistance from Development and with their usual claims about the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit) they will chart their journey from Womenpriests?NO! to Womenpriests?YES!? In other words, what conjuring tricks, accompanied by the Graf's sad but winning smile and Rosica's air of patient condescension, will enable the Bergoglians to argue that the Ordination of Women is merely a natural and inevitable development springing fully-formed from the head of Ordinatio sacerdotalis?
(2) When Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman was faced by the protoBergoglian campaign at Vatican I to formulate the Petrine Primacy in a superhyperueberpapalist way, he characterised his contemporary Ultras as "An aggressive and insolent Faction". Perhaps we should resurrect this beautifully expressive phrase to describe our own dear and much-loved Ultras. And, 'for short', we could refer to them simply as "the Faction".
One should never stray too far from Dr Newman.
27 February 2018
Does your kitchen have Newman on the spice rack?
Posted by Fr John Hunwicke at 10:32
Labels: Amoris Laetitia, Newman, Ordination of women, paedophilia
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I certainly hope you are not leaving out the coprophagists!
Father, you ask by what principle principled positions of the past can be overturned. In one word: pastoralism. In a few more, this is the V2 word that overturns all, it's the New Paradigm that changes our vision of all--like the category of the mind that Kant forgot to name. Brave Neo-Kantian world, where anything goes. It's all in the noumenal paradigm with no anchor sunk in reality. Mind over matter.
It's not a firm foundation, of course, but if the communion for adulterers interpretation of Amoris Laetitia is accepted, and defended by the episcopate, along with the principle that no develops into yes, that what one Pope happens to say 25 years ago (never mind the rest of the history of the Church, does it even matter?) can and should be negated, then logically I don't see any element lacking to develop no womenpriests into yes womenpriests -- except, perhaps, a convenient pretext.
The path to the Ordination of Women portrayed as a Newman-like organic development is not hard to trace out. First, admit the ordination of married men, first on an ad experimentum, then on a wider basis. Next, suggest that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was not an infallible, irreformable statement, but a disciplinary statement particular to a certain time and place (the benighted 1990s). Then, institute women deaconnesses. After a few years of that, suggest that it is unfair to have a two-speed diaconate and ordain the women deaconesses as deacons. Up until this point, this can all be portrayed as ecumenically consistent with Orthodoxy as well. Somewhere along the line, a few women serving in high positions in Vatican dicasteries could be named as cardinals. (After all, if women can now be deacons, there is ample historical precedent for cardinals with lay or diaconal status.) After 10-15 years with married priests, women deacons, women cardinals, and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis confined to the rubbish bin where the church keeps Unam Sanctum and the Syllabus of Errors, it would seem the natural, organic, developmental step to start ordaining women as priests. Actually, most of the steps on this path up to the ordination of women priests itself strike me as far less theologically controversial than the admission of divorced and civilly remarried persons to Holy Communion.
ABS is in receipt of an email from Professor Herman NuDix of Continuity College in Rome who takes-up the captious question of Ordaining women:
ABS, don’t fear the surprises of The Holy Spirit in her desire to have man pass this latest test of whether or not the Church will continue its misogynistic medieval errors.
We have the teachings of Pope Saint John Paul II that can help us spiritually slice through this Gordian knot.
Recall that in his “Theology of the Body,: he taught:
That is manifested above all in that stage in which man ('adam) is definitively created as male and female (‘is-‘issah)...Perhaps, therefore, the analogy of sleep indicates here not so much a passing from consciousness to subconsciousness, as a specific return to non-being (sleep contains an element of annihilation of man's conscious existence), that is, to the moment preceding the creation, in order that, through God's creative initiative, solitary "man" may emerge from it again in his double unity as male and female.(3)…In this way, the circle of the solitude of the man-person is broken, because the first "man" awakens from his sleep as "male and female."
In the mystery of creation—on the basis of the original and constituent "solitude" of his being—man was endowed with a deep unity between what is, humanly and through the body, male in him and what is, equally humanly and through the body, female in him...
Man's subjectivity is already emphasized through this. It finds a further expression when the Lord God "formed out of the ground every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to man to see what he would call them" (Gn 2:19). In this way, therefore, the first meaning of man's original solitude is defined on the basis of a specific test or examination which man undergoes before God (and in a certain way also before himself). By means of this test, man becomes aware of his own superiority, that is, that he cannot be considered on the same footing as any other species of living beings on the earth.
So, ABS, spare me the “Saying that man is both male and female sounds Kabbalistic," but, rather, consider that like Adam, we are presented with a test that will reveal to us our own nature.
Because man was created male and female, he must stop being so mean and embrace the liberating truth that a woman can be a priest just like a man can be and do it much better because compassion and mercy.
Father-- but perhaps you're already aware of this-- you will find that @bruvvereccles provided, the other day, new lyrics to Ko-Ko's 'little list' on his blog, ecclesandbosco.blogspot.com.
And how should we address a woman Cardinal?
Da-dum -- wait for it...
Father, they will not need to use the tactic you describe. They will argue from sheer necessity.
Start with a country where there are no vocations (and don't ask why) and settle for 'married-priests' then segue nicely into not enough of those, so let's tap that seemingly limitless resource: Women! How's about Brazil for starters?
I, too, lament the new Reform of Amoris Laetitia. However, as you noted, the issue is not in denying an essential Christian article of faith. Rather, it is in the imprudent (bat crazy) idea that we can calculate someone in the venial boundary even when they persist willfully in grave contraventions of God's holy will (i.e. Adultery, Homosexuality, etc,etc). You will notice the clever keeping of orthodox doctrine within the orange cones, while at the same time effecting a pastoral agenda which practically undermines orthodoxy.
In other words, AL is the perfect recipe for an authentic departure from Tradition while keeping the documents affirmed.
I don't think this will war can be won by repeating that AL denies the doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage, nor that persons must worthily present themselves for the Chalice of Salvation (e.g. free from mortal sin). AL affirms all of this quite repeatedly.
I am not qualified to come up with the solution, but I know what is not the solution.
You will find the roots of all the Bergoglians' lies about Communion in the lies of Cardinal Wuerl in his various statements rationalizing Communion for pro-aborts. Including the lie that subjective guilt must be considered. Canon 915 has never been predicated on an assessment of subjective guilt.
Cardinal Wuerl will someday be recognized by historians for his hatred of the Catholic Church, the Eucharist, and the moral law.
Point taken, ABS.
Speaking of things spicey, Sandro Magister's blog today includes some spicey comments from a Benedictine professor of theology in Rome: That Argentine Babel Which Is Driving the Whole Church into Confusion.
Having read it, however, it seems to me that rather than merely into "confusion," one might legitimately argue that the Church is being driven into something quite other than Christian faith.
Which, Mr. Wauck, has been the plan all along: Lead the faithful into a new religion---and therefore into disobedience of Christ and the traditional Magisterium---by performing the whole smoke and mirrors fraud in the name of obedience. How right Newman was when he, being in the minority of the Inopportunists at Vatican I, opposed the definition of papal infallibility---not because he did not believe that the Holy Father could not teach the Church faith and morals infallibly in a solemn, precise way on very limited occasions and for the good of souls and the victory of Truth (he believed this firmly, as do all good Catholics). But because, I believe, he foresaw the great danger of papolatry (a woeful and widespread corruption today) emanating from the doctrine of infallibility and the ancillary dangers of creating a mindset which deludes the Faithful into thinking the pope is inerrant in all he says and does. That has been the great instrument of the Modernists since the Council, at least: finally they have their man in place and the Catholic impulse towards obedience can be used to destroy that very faith. Simply diabolical.
"...one might legitimately argue that the Church is being driven into something quite other than Christian faith."
When I read things like this I suddenly feel I understand what Chesterton felt when he heard F.E. Smith refered to the Welsh Church Act of 1914 as "a bill that has shocked the conscience of every Christian community in Europe."
Post a Comment