Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: Matto on September 21, 2021, 04:56:12 PM
-
https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=52296## (https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=52296##)
Says Francis
Pope rips EWTN ‘work of the devil’
September 21, 2021
Pope Francis has lashed out at the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), saying: “They are the work of the devil.”
During a meeting with Jesuits in Slovakia, the Pontiff spoke of “a large Catholic television channel that has no hesitation in continually speaking ill of the Pope.” Although he did not name the network, the reference clearly was to EWTN. “I personally deserve attacks and insults because I am a sinner,” the Pontiff said; “but the Church does not deserve them.”
Pope Francis said that he had “said this to some of them”—apparently indicating that he had lodged complaints with some representatives of the American television network. His public remarks could put more pressure on EWTN, a network that has built up a large international following in part because of its willingness to tackle controversial issues.
The Pope’s question-and-answer session with Jesuits occurred on September 12, during his visit to Slovakia. A full transcript of the session was released on September 21.
During the same session, Pope Francis also expressed impatience with priests who “make nasty comments about me,” complaining that “they make judgments without entering into a real dialogue.”
Evidently linking such criticism to support for the Tridentine liturgy, the Pope went on to speak of “the decision to stop the automatism of the ancient rite.” He said that when young priests seek permission to celebrate the Latin Mass, it is “a phenomenon that indicates we are going backward.”
Earlier in the exchange, Pope Francis had spoken out against a tendency to “look back to the past: to seek security.” He said: “This is the evil of this moment—namely, to seek the path in rigidity and clericalism, which are two perversions.”
“It frightens us to accompany people with sɛҳuąƖ diversity,” the Pope told the Jesuit group. He urged them to “go forward in pastoral experiences.”
Also during the meeting, the Pope said:
- After his July intestinal surgery, he is “still alive, even though some people wanted me to die.” He remarked that some cardinals were preparing for a conclave, believing his condition was grave.
- He recommends the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius particularly to Jesuits suffering from a lack of fervor.
- Ideologies have “a diabolical appeal,” and gender ideology in particular is “dangerous.” However the Pope cautioned against making abstract judgments rather than considering individuals. “If there is a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ couple, we can do pastoral work with them, move forward in our encounter with Christ.”
- The Western world must welcome migrants and help them to become members of their host society. “Leaving migrants without integration is leaving them in misery; it is equivalent to not welcoming them.”
-
(https://i.imgur.com/qmJuQ2M.gif)
-
“I personally deserve attacks and insults because I am a sinner,” the Pontiff said, “but the Church does not deserve them.”
Considering he isn't part of the Church, this doesn't apply.
-
Could he have been talking about Church Militant instead?
It's not a "TV network" per se, but Michael Voris is a professional television producer, he does a lot of video content on a daily basis, and if he could, I'm sure he'd put a 24/7 OTT channel out there for viewing on TV and not just on a device. He had a Roku channel until they 86'ed him. Even though I'm not 100% with Michael on everything, when he was on Roku, some evenings I'd just sit there with my clicker, imbibing videos like taking crack hits.
Compared to CM, EWTN is like a video version of The Liguorian or Catholic Digest, nice little anodyne publications that don't soil Grandma's lace coffee table cover, Catholic equivalents of Reader's Digest or what we used to call "the Grit Paper".
(But RD could be edgy even "back in the day". When I was a lad, I read their condensation of a book about the Kent State riots --- I read incessantly, as I do to this day --- and when they quoted one of the students as saying "m----- f-----", I thought "Marxists?", "fascists?". I commented to a friend once that I knew what a Marxist or a fascist was, before I knew what a "motherf----r" was! We didn't use such language in our house. A childhood equally precocious and sheltered, I guess.)
-
I don’t have any particular liking for EWTN, but to say it’s demonic is a little strong, no? It’s aired a few decent shows over the years.
-
Is this real? It reads like a satire.
I have in fact mentioned that EWTN, which used to never say a bad word about Bergoglio ... has been ripping him to shreds lately over the promotion / condoning of sodomy, over Amoris Laetiti, over promotion of the jab, etc. Nevertheless, they have not gone after him over the Pachamama ... because that would lead to criticism of the "Saint" John Paul II, so they won't go there. Patrick Coffin actually came a hair's breadth away from coming out as a sedevacantist on his show.
Yes, when I make my necessary errands, I'll flip on EWTN radio ... just to hear what they're up to. On most issues, they're relatively orthodox ... but slide off the edge when it comes to (as per usual) religious indifferentism, Catholic ecclesiology, Catholic soteriology, and Catholic sacramental theology. But then even Traditional Catholics stumble on these issues. They tend to be religious indifferentists just like Wojtyla. That's why I'm a believer that Wojtyla did more harm to the Church than Bergoglio has. While Bergoglio only appeals to the radicals who have no faith to begin with, Wojtyla has poisoned Catholics of (otherwise) good will.
NO POPE has done more harm to the Church than one Karol Wojtyla ... period. Because he presented himself as an ultra-conservative on MORAL issues, his promotion of religious indifferentism was imbibed by the entire conservative wing of the Conciliar Church. Similarly, Ratzinger presented himself as a Traditionalist.
But Bergoglio is over the top, and he's waking people up ... to the point that the likes of Taylor Marshall has extrapolated backwards from the Pachamama to criticize Wojtyla's religious indifferentism. I never thought I would see the day.
-
NO POPE has done more harm to the Church than one Karol Wojtyla ... period. Because he presented himself as an ultra-conservative on MORAL issues, his promotion of religious indifferentism was imbibed by the entire conservative wing of the Conciliar Church. Similarly, Ratzinger presented himself as a Traditionalist.
I disagree, Pope Pius XII is my choice as the worst pope in history. When it comes to Catholic ecclesiology and his encyclical Humani Generis that allows 'discussion' on Adam's body coming from 'pre-existing living matter' that was because he was a Big Bang evolutionist who tried to convince all that the Big Bang was God's creative act billions of years ago. Here is his speech:
‘44. It is undeniable that when a mind enlightened and enriched with modern scientific knowledge weighs this problem calmly, it feels drawn to break through the circle of completely independent or autochthonous matter, whether uncreated or self-created, and to ascend to a creating Spirit. With the same clear and critical look with which it examines and passes judgment on facts, it perceives and recognizes the work of creative omnipotence, whose power, set in motion by the mighty “Fiat” pronounced billions of years ago by the Creating Spirit, spread out over the universe, calling into existence with a gesture of generous love matter bursting with energy. In fact, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial “Fiat lux” uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies.’ On the other hand, how different and much more faithful a reflection of limitless visions is the language of an outstanding modern scientist, Sir Edmund Whittaker, member of the Pontifical Academy of Science, when he speaks of the above-mentioned inquiries into the age of the world: “These different calculations point to the conclusion that there was a time, some nine or ten billion years ago, prior to which the cosmos, if it existed, existed in a form totally different from anything we know, and this form constitutes the very last limit of science. We refer to it not improperly as creation. It provides a unifying background, suggested by geological evidence, for that explanation of the world according to which every organism existing on the Earth had a beginning in time. Were this conclusion to be confirmed by future research, it might well be considered as the most outstanding discovery of our times, since it represents a fundamental change in the scientific conception of the universe, similar to the one brought about four centuries ago by Copernicus.” It has, besides, followed the course and the direction of cosmic developments, and, just as it was able to get a glimpse of the term toward which these developments were inexorably leading, so also has it pointed to their beginning in time some five billion years ago. Thus, with that concreteness which is characteristic of physical proofs, it has confirmed the contingency of the universe and also the well-founded deduction as to the epoch when the cosmos came forth from the hands of the Creator.’--- Pope Pius XII, 1951.
There is no coincidence in that Vatican II showed how many modernists were allowed flourish in Pius XII pontificate. As regards Biblical alterations, well his 1943 encyclical on the Bible let the fox out into the chicken house.
‘There were glimmers of hope during the anti-modernist decades. Catholic scholars in German universities and the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome (founded in 1909) continued to pursue solid scholarship, principally in philosophy and archaeology. Of special significance is the work of Augustine Bea, S.J. (1881-1968) who became best known as a leader in ecuмenism at Vatican II… Bea had an immense impact on the composition and publication of Divino Afflante Spiritu.’ --- America: the Jesuit Review, Sept, 1993
'This freeze endured until in 1943 Pius XII’s great encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu reopened the door to the use of modern methods of Biblical study and established scholarship in the scientific investigation of the Scriptures. The Pontifical Biblical Commission was quick to follow this initiative with a letter to Cardinal Suhard, Archbishop of Paris… taking this as an encouragement to revisit areas which had been blocked off by earlier decisions… stressing that in the context of the times it would have been unwise to teach a particular doctrine, but not that a particular doctrine was untrue or incorrect …No responsible Biblical scholar would today agree with any of these directives of the Biblical Commission.’ -- Henry Wansbrough OSB (current member of the PBC: The Centenary of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Ampleforth Journal, autumn 2003.
The ‘freeze’ referred to above, was of course that brought about by Benedict XV’s Spiritus Paraclitus and Pius X’s Pascendi. But, as Wansbrough says, after Divino Afflante Spiritu, one could once again subject the Bible to modern scientific and historical reinterpretations if new findings of science required,
-
Is this real? It reads like a satire.
I have in fact mentioned that EWTN, which used to never say a bad word about Bergoglio ... has been ripping him to shreds lately over the promotion / condoning of sodomy, over Amoris Laetiti, over promotion of the jab, etc. Nevertheless, they have not gone after him over the Pachamama ... because that would lead to criticism of the "Saint" John Paul II, so they won't go there. Patrick Coffin actually came a hair's breadth away from coming out as a sedevacantist on his show.
Yes, when I make my necessary errands, I'll flip on EWTN radio ... just to hear what they're up to. On most issues, they're relatively orthodox ... but slide off the edge when it comes to (as per usual) religious indifferentism, Catholic ecclesiology, Catholic soteriology, and Catholic sacramental theology. But then even Traditional Catholics stumble on these issues. They tend to be religious indifferentists just like Wojtyla. That's why I'm a believer that Wojtyla did more harm to the Church than Bergoglio has. While Bergoglio only appeals to the radicals who have no faith to begin with, Wojtyla has poisoned Catholics of (otherwise) good will.
NO POPE has done more harm to the Church than one Karol Wojtyla ... period. Because he presented himself as an ultra-conservative on MORAL issues, his promotion of religious indifferentism was imbibed by the entire conservative wing of the Conciliar Church. Similarly, Ratzinger presented himself as a Traditionalist.
But Bergoglio is over the top, and he's waking people up ... to the point that the likes of Taylor Marshall has extrapolated backwards from the Pachamama to criticize Wojtyla's religious indifferentism. I never thought I would see the day.
It's no satire. It's from catholicculture.org . I think the author either just came to the conclusion that it was EWTN, or didn't think of the possibility that Francis could have been referring instead to Church Militant. Those are the only two choices that make any sense. Other Catholic TV "networks" are so small that nobody's ever heard of them before.
I think that Francis's comments have to be clearly referring to Church Militant. Love them or hate them, Michael and Milo have more media chops than anyone at EWTN.
-
I disagree, Pope Pius XII is my choice as the worst pope in history. When it comes to Catholic ecclesiology and his encyclical Humani Generis that allows 'discussion' on Adam's body coming from 'pre-existing living matter' that was because he was a Big Bang evolutionist who tried to convince all that the Big Bang was God's creative act billions of years ago. Here is his speech:
‘44. It is undeniable that when a mind enlightened and enriched with modern scientific knowledge weighs this problem calmly, it feels drawn to break through the circle of completely independent or autochthonous matter, whether uncreated or self-created, and to ascend to a creating Spirit. With the same clear and critical look with which it examines and passes judgment on facts, it perceives and recognizes the work of creative omnipotence, whose power, set in motion by the mighty “Fiat” pronounced billions of years ago by the Creating Spirit, spread out over the universe, calling into existence with a gesture of generous love matter bursting with energy. In fact, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial “Fiat lux” uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies.’ On the other hand, how different and much more faithful a reflection of limitless visions is the language of an outstanding modern scientist, Sir Edmund Whittaker, member of the Pontifical Academy of Science, when he speaks of the above-mentioned inquiries into the age of the world: “These different calculations point to the conclusion that there was a time, some nine or ten billion years ago, prior to which the cosmos, if it existed, existed in a form totally different from anything we know, and this form constitutes the very last limit of science. We refer to it not improperly as creation. It provides a unifying background, suggested by geological evidence, for that explanation of the world according to which every organism existing on the Earth had a beginning in time. Were this conclusion to be confirmed by future research, it might well be considered as the most outstanding discovery of our times, since it represents a fundamental change in the scientific conception of the universe, similar to the one brought about four centuries ago by Copernicus.” It has, besides, followed the course and the direction of cosmic developments, and, just as it was able to get a glimpse of the term toward which these developments were inexorably leading, so also has it pointed to their beginning in time some five billion years ago. Thus, with that concreteness which is characteristic of physical proofs, it has confirmed the contingency of the universe and also the well-founded deduction as to the epoch when the cosmos came forth from the hands of the Creator.’--- Pope Pius XII, 1951.
There is no coincidence in that Vatican II showed how many modernists were allowed flourish in Pius XII pontificate. As regards Biblical alterations, well his 1943 encyclical on the Bible let the fox out into the chicken house.
‘There were glimmers of hope during the anti-modernist decades. Catholic scholars in German universities and the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome (founded in 1909) continued to pursue solid scholarship, principally in philosophy and archaeology. Of special significance is the work of Augustine Bea, S.J. (1881-1968) who became best known as a leader in ecuмenism at Vatican II… Bea had an immense impact on the composition and publication of Divino Afflante Spiritu.’ --- America: the Jesuit Review, Sept, 1993
'This freeze endured until in 1943 Pius XII’s great encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu reopened the door to the use of modern methods of Biblical study and established scholarship in the scientific investigation of the Scriptures. The Pontifical Biblical Commission was quick to follow this initiative with a letter to Cardinal Suhard, Archbishop of Paris… taking this as an encouragement to revisit areas which had been blocked off by earlier decisions… stressing that in the context of the times it would have been unwise to teach a particular doctrine, but not that a particular doctrine was untrue or incorrect …No responsible Biblical scholar would today agree with any of these directives of the Biblical Commission.’ -- Henry Wansbrough OSB (current member of the PBC: The Centenary of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Ampleforth Journal, autumn 2003.
The ‘freeze’ referred to above, was of course that brought about by Benedict XV’s Spiritus Paraclitus and Pius X’s Pascendi. But, as Wansbrough says, after Divino Afflante Spiritu, one could once again subject the Bible to modern scientific and historical reinterpretations if new findings of science required,
Aye’ Cassini man... you have broached neo-trad heresy! 🕺
How dare you attack Pope Pius XII... have you gone crazy man?
I think you and Lads are both wrong.
The worst Pope ever had to be... the little demonic homo-jew Montini 🤷🏻♂️
-
Aye’ Cassini man... you have broached neo-trad heresy! 🕺
How dare you attack Pope Pius XII... have you gone crazy man?
I think you and Lads are both wrong.
The worst Pope ever had to be... the little demonic homo-jew Montini 🤷🏻♂️
If Montini was a pope at all.
-
Aye’ Cassini man... you have broached neo-trad heresy! 🕺
How dare you attack Pope Pius XII... have you gone crazy man?
I think you and Lads are both wrong.
The worst Pope ever had to be... the little demonic homo-jew Montini 🤷🏻♂️
Despite my sarcasm,
I think you’re right about Pacelli.
His hallmark on the Church crisis was “opening the Church doors” to the rats & vermin.
My impression is that he didn’t write these evolutionary & “Big Bang” tracts by himself, but was assisted by some group. Likely zionist friends encouraged him.
Pope Pius XII was always sympathetic to his kindred Jєωιѕн brothers.
-
*yawn* Wake me up when the Dimonds are on NPR or public access.
-
I disagree, Pope Pius XII is my choice as the worst pope in history. When it comes to Catholic ecclesiology and his encyclical Humani Generis that allows 'discussion' on Adam's body coming from 'pre-existing living matter' that was because he was a Big Bang evolutionist who tried to convince all that the Big Bang was God's creative act billions of years ago. Here is his speech:
I may have to agree with you ... given the premise that those after him weren't actually popes. :laugh1:
Pius XII was the watershed pope that led directly to Vatican II:
1) opened the door to evolution
2) opened the door to the use of NFP as Catholic contraception
3) started the liturgical experimentations (appointing Bugnini)
4) held the first preliminary ecuмenical conferences
5) allowed Cardinal Cushing, a heretic, to win out over Father Feeney
6) during his lengthy reign, appointed nearly every bishop who would bring us the glories of Vatican II
I know there are some that I'm forgetting. But Vatican II could not have happened without Pius XII.
There's the caveat, of course, that he never actually TAUGHT evolution, and was clearly opining at an allocution regarding NFP, and was probably manipulated a lot with regard to all of the other issues. In other words, no, he was not an anti-Pope. Some people say he was basically half-dead during the last few years of his reign (being poisoned perhaps by someone).
Yes, there's no way to save Sacred Scripture when saying it's possible that Adam had been created from "LIVING" matter, since Scripture clearly states that Adam was created from [the clay of] the earth.
-
“I personally deserve attacks and insults because I am a sinner,” the Pontiff said, “but the Church does not deserve them.”
Considering he isn't part of the Church, this doesn't apply.
This pope thinks he IS the Church.::)
-
I may have to agree with you ... given the premise that those after him weren't actually popes. :laugh1:
Pius XII was the watershed pope that led directly to Vatican II:
1) opened the door to evolution
2) opened the door to the use of NFP as Catholic contraception
3) started the liturgical experimentations (appointing Bugnini)
4) held the first preliminary ecuмenical conferences
5) allowed Cardinal Cushing, a heretic, to win out over Father Feeney
6) during his lengthy reign, appointed nearly every bishop who would bring us the glories of Vatican II
I know there are some that I'm forgetting. But Vatican II could not have happened without Pius XII.
There's the caveat, of course, that he never actually TAUGHT evolution, and was clearly opining at an allocution regarding NFP, and was probably manipulated a lot with regard to all of the other issues. In other words, no, he was not an anti-Pope. Some people say he was basically half-dead during the last few years of his reign (being poisoned perhaps by someone).
Yes, there's no way to save Sacred Scripture when saying it's possible that Adam had been created from "LIVING" matter, since Scripture clearly states that Adam was created from [the clay of] the earth.
7) Taught BOD publicly in a speech
8) Endorsed and promoted Lemaitre and his theory of the "Big Bang" https://inters.org/pius-xii-lemaitre (https://inters.org/pius-xii-lemaitre)
9) He also personally believed in it which anyone can verify by his words (Link to a PDF of all speeches to the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences)
(http://www.pas.va/content/dam/accademia/pdf/sv100.pdf)10) Barred "private individuals even though they be clerics" from regulating "external practices" like the liturgy, so this is a blow to those who refuse to practice the Holy Week Reforms, observe the feast day of St. Joseph the Worker or the suppression of the Solemnity of Saint Joseph, Spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary. (Mediator Dei #58)
Curiously enough the Dimonds write that he "will probably be condemned an antipope in the future." Thus in many ways ending up in some form of R&R.