Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: 2Vermont on November 26, 2013, 11:40:52 AM
-
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/apost_exhortations/docuмents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium_en.html#Ecuмenical_dialogue
It's long. Should provide fascinating insight I'm sure.
-
"In some people we see an ostentatious preoccupation for the liturgy, for doctrine and for the Church’s prestige, but without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact on God’s faithful people and the concrete needs of the present time. In this way, the life of the Church turns into a museum piece or something which is the property of a select few."
-
"Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”,[199] and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”
-
And another excerpt:
"The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity."
-
This docuмent is filled with modernist garbage, heresies and attacks on traditionalists. It's out for all to see now and nobody can deny it anymore.
Look at this:
"In her ongoing discernment, the Church can also come to see that certain customs not directly connected to the heart of the Gospel, even some which have deep historical roots, are no longer properly understood and appreciated. Some of these customs may be beautiful, but they no longer serve as means of communicating the Gospel. We should not be afraid to re-examine them. At the same time, the Church has rules or precepts which may have been quite effective in their time, but no longer have the same usefulness for directing and shaping people’s lives."
"It is also true that at times greater emphasis is placed on the outward expressions and traditions of some groups, or on alleged private revelations which would replace all else, than on the impulse of Christian piety. There is a kind of Christianity made up of devotions reflecting an individual and sentimental faith life which does not in fact correspond to authentic “popular piety””
Might one of those "groups" he mentions be the SSPX?
Pray, people, that he converts to the One, True Faith of all time. Archbishop Lefebvre would be rolling in his grave looking at this pontificate. As time goes along, it becomes so much more obvious that what Our Lady of LaSalette said is true. Rome has lost the Faith. It's been lost.
"Interreligious dialogue is a necessary condition for peace in the world, and so it is a duty for Christians as well as other religious communities."
No, Holy Father, it is NOT a duty. It is YOUR duty to make sure that souls are saved and the world converts to the One, True Church. YOU allow them to wallow in their false religions and YOU pat them on the back and even worship with them. YOU will be held accountable for this. To whom much has been given much will be required. You've been given the greatest office on Heaven and Earth, that of Vicar of Christ. One day, you will have to wake up. YOU have to convert and likewise convert others, not to the sentimentality you preach but to the True Church.
-
And another excerpt:
"The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity."
If Francis is means to imply "traditionalists" in this paragraph, there are many things that are incorrect. Without getting into his misunderstanding or misuse of the heresy of the Pelagians, his use of the term "anthropocentric immanentism" is the very thing that defines a modernist, not one who holds to the Catholic faith. A man centered religion based on emotions, experience and knowledge that comes from within is the opposite of what traditional Catholics practice.
I have heard hundreds of sermons in person and know of traditional groups that have them aired online. The priests are reaching thousands of souls preaching the Gospel. I have personal knowledge of true Catholic groups and individual Catholics trying to convert souls by teaching the traditional catechism and doing spiritual and corporeal works of mercy as often as they are able and in fact, many make it their mission in life. How many of you have the same story?
And just what message is the New Church evangelizing? "Luv?"
-
Just so you all know I sooo did not read this all yet. I got the excerpts from another site. I thought it would be a good way to get the ball rolling......
-
I skipped to the end and saw this (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25102720) and figured it's all I really needed to see:
I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians—
Did he sign it "666", too? :facepalm: Maybe this is TOO easy. He had a tweet today asking for suggestions how to pope better. For real. The responses are a bit humourous but mostly foul. So no link. I fear he got the response he wanted.
-
Fr. Kramer had an interesting take on GE n. 247:
(http://i.imgur.com/zmZbQKq.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/nRbS8qE.png)
Wow, Frank really went 180º from +Jesus with that the Jєωs' "covenant with God has never been revoked" comment. Got to give credit where it's due: Frank is DEFINITELY a new kind of Peter. Like, the opposite kind.
Maybe I should read the thing after all, except I'm just so sure the Vatican will announce their error in transcribing the entire encyclical soon enough. See, they probably gave the atheist the job to type it out from Frank's brain waves, and Scalfari's brain wave detector was probably on the blink, so he just remembered as best he could. And messed up. Again.
Those derned atheists!
-
"Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”,[199] and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”
That's overtly heretical. Of course, a lot of Traditional Catholics believe this also.
I hereby resign as the defense attorney for Francis.
I've said OVER and OVER again that THE heresy of Vatican II is the denial of EENS, and yet most Traditional Catholics barely think any differently than the V2 modernists on the subject.
-
And another excerpt:
"The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism ...
He just said that you can be saved by following the natural lights of conscience, without supernatural faith and charity. If that isn't Pelagianism, then nothing is.
-
No, Holy Father, it is NOT a duty.
To quote my dad, "He is neither holy nor a father." (said with thick Hungarian accent)
-
I've said OVER and OVER again that THE heresy of Vatican II is the denial of EENS, and yet most Traditional Catholics barely think any differently than the V2 modernists on the subject.
Most traditionalists say they believe in EENS while most V2 modernists admit they don't believe in EENS.
-
Most Traditionalists SAY they believe in EENS, with SAY being the operative word.
At the end of the day, however, they interpret EENS the same way Bergoglio does and in this they share the same heresy that's at the root of all the Vatican II errors.
They claim that non-Christians can be saved by following the lights of their consciences. Archbishop Lefebvre, alas, proclaimed this same heresy in his "Against the Heresies".
This is THE heresy of Antichrist. St. John refers to Antichrist as "dissolving Christ". So now Christ is present everywhere in almost a pantheistic way, whereas only Catholics used to be members of Christ. Catholic Church used to be synonymous with the Christ's Body. Now Christ is dissolved and diffused among all "people of good will" everywhere.
Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist. We're there.
Most Traditionalists refuse to see this and are more concerned with whether you kneel or stand during certain parts of the Mass than with this CORE HERESY of our day. There's outrage when SSPX wants to have people stand during the Sanctus. They're more interested in how Bergoglio wore a clown nose or allowed tango at a mass than in the real heresy. They're more interested in the proper dimensions of the lavabo cloth.
-
"Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”,[199] and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”
What is the difference between this and the baptism of desire?
-
And another excerpt:
"The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity."
St John of the Cross wrote about this situation in "The Dark Night of the Soul."
-
"It is also true that at times greater emphasis is placed on the outward expressions and traditions of some groups, or on alleged private revelations which would replace all else, than on the impulse of Christian piety. There is a kind of Christianity made up of devotions reflecting an individual and sentimental faith life which does not in fact correspond to authentic “popular piety””
Might one of those "groups" he mentions be the SSPX?
Might one of these groups be Medjugorje?
-
"Interreligious dialogue is a necessary condition for peace in the world, and so it is a duty for Christians as well as other religious communities."
No, Holy Father, it is NOT a duty. It is YOUR duty to make sure that souls are saved and the world converts to the One, True Church. YOU allow them to wallow in their false religions and YOU pat them on the back and even worship with them. YOU will be held accountable for this. To whom much has been given much will be required. You've been given the greatest office on Heaven and Earth, that of Vicar of Christ. One day, you will have to wake up. YOU have to convert and likewise convert others, not to the sentimentality you preach but to the True Church.
How do you propose that we make sure that souls are saved and the world converts to the one true Church if we don't engage them in some sort of dialogue?
-
I skipped to the end and saw this (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25102720) and figured it's all I really needed to see:
I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians—
Did he sign it "666", too? :facepalm: Maybe this is TOO easy. He had a tweet today asking for suggestions how to pope better. For real. The responses are a bit humourous but mostly foul. So no link. I fear he got the response he wanted.
Maybe if they could be authentically practicing politicians?
-
And another excerpt:
"The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism ...
He just said that you can be saved by following the natural lights of conscience, without supernatural faith and charity. If that isn't Pelagianism, then nothing is.
Both St John of the Cross and Theresa of Avila write about the self absorbed and how it is an impediment to holiness.
-
"Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”,[199] and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”
From the Letter of Paul to the Romans Chapter 2;
11 There is no partiality with God. 12 All who sin outside the law will also perish without reference to it, and all who sin under the law will be judged in accordance with it. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified. 14 For when the Gentiles who do not have the law by nature observe the prescriptions of the law, they are a law for themselves even though they do not have the law. 15
They show that the demands of the law are written in their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even defend them 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge people's hidden works through Christ Jesus.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PYQ.HTM
-
The ending to Evangeliis Gaudium has this prayer to the Holy Virgin;
Mary, Virgin and Mother,
you who, moved by the Holy Spirit,
welcomed the word of life
in the depths of your humble faith:
as you gave yourself completely to the Eternal One,
help us to say our own “yes”
to the urgent call, as pressing as ever,
to proclaim the good news of Jesus.
Filled with Christ’s presence,
you brought joy to John the Baptist,
making him exult in the womb of his mother.
Brimming over with joy,
you sang of the great things done by God.
Standing at the foot of the cross
with unyielding faith,
you received the joyful comfort of the resurrection,
and joined the disciples in awaiting the Spirit
so that the evangelizing Church might be born.
Obtain for us now a new ardour born of the resurrection,
that we may bring to all the Gospel of life
which triumphs over death.
Give us a holy courage to seek new paths,
that the gift of unfading beauty
may reach every man and woman.
Virgin of listening and contemplation,
Mother of love, Bride of the eternal wedding feast,
pray for the Church, whose pure icon you are,
that she may never be closed in on herself
or lose her passion for establishing God’s kingdom
Star of the new evangelisation,
help us to bear radiant witness to communion,
service, ardent and generous faith,
justice and love of the poor,
that the joy of the Gospel
may reach to the ends of the earth,
illuminating even the fringes of our world.
Mother of the living Gospel,
wellspring of happiness for God’s little ones,
pray for us.
Amen. Alleluia!
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/apost_exhortations/docuмents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium_en.html
-
"Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”,[199] and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”
What is the difference between this and the baptism of desire?
Depends on how you define "Baptism of Desire". If you define it the way Church Doctors like St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus did, then there's a huge difference between Bergoglio's statement and BoD.
-
"Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”,[199] and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”
What is the difference between this and the baptism of desire?
Depends on how you define "Baptism of Desire". If you define it the way Church Doctors like St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus did, then there's a huge difference between Bergoglio's statement and BoD.
And at the very least Francis doesn't seem to be speaking in rare exceptions. He seems to be speaking as if this happens on a fairly regular basis. I mean, aren't most people in general "faithful to their own consciences"? And wouldn't it also be true that most people's consciences are pretty poorly formed?
-
"Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”,[199] and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”
What is the difference between this and the baptism of desire?
Depends on how you define "Baptism of Desire". If you define it the way Church Doctors like St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus did, then there's a huge difference between Bergoglio's statement and BoD.
And at the very least Francis doesn't seem to be speaking in rare exceptions. He seems to be speaking as if this happens on a fairly regular basis. I mean, aren't most people in general "faithful to their own consciences"? And wouldn't it also be true that most people's consciences are pretty poorly formed?
This is something the SSPX complains about the conciliar church, that they "He seems to be speaking as if this happens on a fairly regular basis".
However, that observation is ridiculous since once you open the door to such a belief, as the SSPX has done, there are no limits, you can't just limit it to say it is rare. How do they know that it's rare? It's the same as Bill Clinton saying that he tried marijuana, but he didn't inhale it. Ridiculouis!
There is no difference between what Pope Francis said and what Bishop Fellay (and the SSPX seminaries teach):
Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5.)