"Then he said, 'Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak again but this once. Suppose ten are found there.' He answered, 'For the sake of ten I will not destroy it'".
Bishop Schneider has spoken up, unambiguously, about PF's disreputable descent into Indifferentism.
Could it be that nine more bishops might now follow his lead? So as to make up the ten bishops for the sake of whom the Almighty might in gracious Mercy lay aside his destruction of the Episcopate?
To adopt again the terminology of Blessed John Henry Newman: one man has reversed the Suspense of the Church's teaching Office. Might the example of just this one, a mere Auxiliary Bishop from the Peripheries, precipitate an avalanche of orthodoxy among the soi-disant Successors of the Apostles?
What will it take to induce these timorous men to rediscover their inner Parrhesia?
9 February 2019
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Mueller has spoken up.....8 to go.
This one auxiliary bishop has done so much to counter-act the strange, ambiguous and heterodox statements that so many bishops have no shame in making in this Conciliar era. Hopefully other bishops (ideally nine) join him and publicly share in his most recent words, 'The Gift of Filial Adoption.' God bless and keep him.
Fächer, are you aware of the "Manifesto of Catholic teaching" that Cardinal Müller published today?
So, eight to go...
Bishop Schneider leaps right to the top of the endangered ecclesiastical species list because one fears that Francis might desire do to him what Dr. Walter J. Palmer did to Cecil the Lion.
But, one must cut Pope Francis some slack for his is aught but the spiritual son of Pope Paul VI who is actualising the same sort of political praxis as did the Pope he most admires.
Pope Paul VI in Manhattan at the U.N.
We would even venture to say that it is the reflection of the plan of God - a transcendent plan full of love - for the progress of human society on earth, a reflection in which we can see the Gospel message turning from something heavenly to something earthly. Here we seem to hear an echo of the voice of our predecessors, and especially of Pope John XXIII, whose message in Pacem in Terris met with such an honored and significant response among you.
What you are proclaiming here are the basic rights and duties of man, his dignity, his liberty and above all his religious liberty...
So this gang of dog-eating dictators, animists, barbarians, nitwits, lunatics, killers, and querulous cretins represent the hope of mankind?
Well, yes, if the hope is to concretise Masonic principles in which all men are good and have a fundamental right and liberty to worship the God of their choice as they desire to worship Him.
But, such praise for the UN. Have men forgotten than to realise his dreams, FDR had to willingly agree to the enslavement of millions of Christians to Communism so "Uncle Joe" would agree to its creation?
In payment to Stalin (He is responsible for far more deaths than was Hitler) to agree with the insanity of the United Nations (with the commies getting veto power in the Security Council) FDR turned over Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia and as much of Germany as he could and the Christians living in those states were subjected to Godless Communism rule for the rest of their (and their children’s) lives.
The nearly endlessly embarrassing praxis of the modern papacy (to serve the world, not God) had been a wonder to behold and the insane Vatican Two idea that the Church would by improved by refusing to practice 1/3 of its threefold power of Government, the Coercitive power, (while retaining its Legislative and Judicial power ) is an idea so inane that only the New Theology would embrace it.
That was supposed to mean "father" ... Darn autocorrect!
I wish you would speak more respectfully of a Pope and Saint of the Holy Catholic Church...
Recently I have read an article about pathological lying or pseudologia fantastica (I do not know why Anglophone shrinks do not write phantastica). The abbreviation used in the article was PF. What a coincidence!
Maybe I am obtuse, but I cannot detect anything disrespectful in the comment about St. Pope Paul VI. Perhaps whatever it is that I have missed could be pointed out to me?
We have entered the "age to come" foretold by Jesus in Mark 10:30.
Post a Comment