CathInfo.com

From the NOW article:
Passage he's referring to contains no heresies, so not sure what he's talking about.  Maybe that's why he left it at being "difficult to count".  Well, I counted zero.

Thank you, Lad. I don’t feel so alone anymore! LOL!!!!

In the current stampede to publicize the crimes of Bergoglio et. al. - objectively a noble work indeed - some poor anchoritic desert slob (and maybe even a Saint?) is being mud-racked to bits - for no good reason.

Perhaps the grinders of the lions are forgetting a solid, oft-demonstrated, and golden principle: The Vatican II scuм co-opt even the words of Sacred Scripture, and try to make them ring with their own falsity.

What has become of Isaac in this sirocco? Certainly folk are making of him a dervish, a dust devil of epic heresiarchal proportions. Really?

My reading of the “catastrophe” is that it’s more of the same infelicitous Vatican II nonsense, and that it has nothing to do with Isaac the Syrian. Why then are we being summoned to convene an inquisition against this man, or to call a crusade to “clown him with many clowns?” It ain’t about Isaac.

Vatican II is the clown of many clowns.

As far as Isaac is concerned, the Catholic Encyclopedia saith:

“Towards the end of his life he passed under a cloud as his Nestorian orthodoxy became suspected. He was author of three theses, which found but little acceptance amongst Nestorians. Daniel Bar Tubanita, Bishop of Beth Garmai (some 100 miles south-east of Mossul), took umbrage at his teaching and became his ardent opponent. The precise contents of these theses are not known, but they were of too Catholic a character to be compatible with Nestorian heresy. From an extant prayer of his, addressed to Christ it is certainly difficult to realize that its author was a Nestorian. Eager to claim so great a writer, the monophysites falsified his biography, placing his life at the beginning of the seventh century, making him a monk of the Jacobite monastery of Mar Mattai, and stating that he retired to the desert of Scete in Egypt. Since the discovery of Ishodenah's "Book of Chastity" by Chabot in 1895 the above details of Isaac's life are beyond doubt, and all earlier accounts must be corrected accordingly. Isaac was a fruitful ascetical writer and his works were for centuries the main food of Syrian piety ……. Isaac's writings possess passages of singular beauty and elevation, and remind the reader of Thomas à Kempis.”

With regard to the controversial passage, the anti-Vatican cited Homily 74. No, it’s Homily 71. I do have to thank Mario Derksen for helping me find the confounded thing. Were it not for him, I would have given up the search. Thank you, Derksen!

Here is a discussion of the now infamous passage during the study group on Isaac conducted by Fr. Abernethy. It took place in February 2020, long before anyone might want to guard his speech.

Discussion of Homily 71, begins at minute 32:50; the infamous passage at 46:25:

https://philokalia.podbean.com/e/the-ascetical-homilies-of-saint-isaac-the-syrian-homily-seventy-part-ii-and-homily-seventy-one-part-i/

As anyone can see, this is a discussion centered entirely on the spiritual life. Father notes the surprising aspect of Isaac’s definition of purity of heart, and goes on to discuss its application.

The Vatican II sect worships reptiles. That’s why they especially love South American idolatry. They found a passage in some relatively obscure yet prolific desert father that made them salivate wildly. They co-opted him. All the more reason to give him the benefit of the doubt. 

One final principle to keep in mind. If we are looking for a consistently presented doctrine, we must study the entire body of work. We do not pull one paragraph out of thousands and thousands of words, in order to distill the essence of a corpus of instruction. If you look at the entire canon of Isaac, then perhaps you will find that he believes in the spiritual combat as much as any desert father, and does not advocate “sympathy with the devil.” That we could - in knee-jerk fashion - accuse him of such a thing, simply because of this newest Vatican II outrage, actually makes us clowns.

Yeah, as I said, one has to understand the context.  

And the context of this deployment of Isaac the Syrian is the satanic Vatican II anti-church disseminating it's foul sputum. The devil quoted Scripture, out of its proper context, to our Lord Jesus Christ in the desert; and our Incarnate God put things back into their proper perspective. 

I think that Fr. Abernethy made a good beginning of keeping Isaac's words in their proper context, and of challenging our puny hearts to expand their contracted notions of "Deus Caritas Est."  

Lad saith: Now, the problem with Jorge et al. is that they've co-opted this mystical and theological perspective and translated in the practical order to mean, "Hey, no problem, sodomites, God loves you as if you were straight."

That is in fact not love but hatred.

Thou hast spoken well.

Pax!