 |
| If His Holiness tells you his shoes are red, it is okay to say they are black |
~ St Ignatius of Loyola
Rorate reports that during the astonishing - extraordinary - meeting between the Holy Father and the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, that His Holiness is said to have quoted St Ignatius of Loyola with the above statement and attributed it to the current occupant of the Chair of Peter. Now is, then, a good time to remind ourselves that there are very particular circumstances in which a Pope's statement is infallible and that no guarantee of infallibility was given to the founder of the Jesuits. We are perfectly entitled to believe that black is indeed black and that white is indeed white and that anyone who says any differently is deceiving you, since he can see and knows that black is black and that white is, indeed, white. So if a Pope tells you that the Resurrection of Christ was a physical, historical reality white is indeed white, but if a Pope tells you that the Resurrection of Christ was not a physical, historical reality, white is still white, not black.
Saints, no matter how holy, can say things that are regrettable when read in the light of a particular period in the Church's history.
It is also worth reminding ourselves, as far as I know, that no actual Pope in history has spoken of himself and his role in such a way as this, presumably because while those under obedience to the Pope are entitled to say outlandish things about the virtue and value of holy obedience to the hierarchy, for a Supreme Pontiff himself to say it could produce unnecessary and damaging suspicion among those under his care that he feels fit to abuse the authority placed into his mortal hands and corrupt the Office of the Papacy itself.
For a Pope to say this could give rise to opinion forming among the Faithful that the occupant of the chair of Peter is putting forward a view that is the very opposite of humility. The overwhelming majority of Popes have seen their roles in terms of safeguarding that which has been passed down to them and to teach the Faith, to strengthen the brethren and Shepherd the Faithful under their care, rather than in terms of altering reality. Apparently, according to Michael Jackson RIP, such things as black and white matter not anyway...
...but then he's not the Pope. His Holiness is also reported to have said to the Franciscans of the Immaculate that "the Pope is the guarantor of orthodoxy" but it seems odd that Pope Francis has had very few positive words to say, if any, of 'orthodoxy', until the day that he is confronted by a group of depressed, perhaps abjectly so, Franciscans dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and to their seraphic father St Francis, who have been placed under strict and severe penalties that deny them the right to celebrate the Mass given legal protection in the whole Universal Church by this Pope's predecessor, Benedict XVI. In this sense, Francis has, to use the expression of St Ignatius, made what is white, black, but that does not stop making the Traditional Latin Mass dependent on permission given by the relevant authority in Rome anything else but illegal and unjust.
I am pleased that His Holiness has affirmed that torture is a mortal sin and I look forward to His Holiness teaching us the other sins which fall into the category of sins that bring death to the soul.
I do personally wish that Popes would cease making statements upon United Nations 'International Days' because unless some strange agreement has been made the Vatican and the UN, the UN has absolutely nothing to do with the Bride of Christ. The UN have made it very clear that they believe the Church's position on abortion and homosexuality is, in Pope Francis's words, a 'mortal sin'. Perhaps His Holiness was really talking about abortion.
It is also worth reminding ourselves, as far as I know, that no actual Pope in history has spoken of himself and his role in such a way as this, presumably because while those under obedience to the Pope are entitled to say outlandish things about the virtue and value of holy obedience to the hierarchy, for a Supreme Pontiff himself to say it could produce unnecessary and damaging suspicion among those under his care that he feels fit to abuse the authority placed into his mortal hands and corrupt the Office of the Papacy itself.
For a Pope to say this could give rise to opinion forming among the Faithful that the occupant of the chair of Peter is putting forward a view that is the very opposite of humility. The overwhelming majority of Popes have seen their roles in terms of safeguarding that which has been passed down to them and to teach the Faith, to strengthen the brethren and Shepherd the Faithful under their care, rather than in terms of altering reality. Apparently, according to Michael Jackson RIP, such things as black and white matter not anyway...
...but then he's not the Pope. His Holiness is also reported to have said to the Franciscans of the Immaculate that "the Pope is the guarantor of orthodoxy" but it seems odd that Pope Francis has had very few positive words to say, if any, of 'orthodoxy', until the day that he is confronted by a group of depressed, perhaps abjectly so, Franciscans dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and to their seraphic father St Francis, who have been placed under strict and severe penalties that deny them the right to celebrate the Mass given legal protection in the whole Universal Church by this Pope's predecessor, Benedict XVI. In this sense, Francis has, to use the expression of St Ignatius, made what is white, black, but that does not stop making the Traditional Latin Mass dependent on permission given by the relevant authority in Rome anything else but illegal and unjust.
 |
| The Birthday of St John the Baptist |
I do personally wish that Popes would cease making statements upon United Nations 'International Days' because unless some strange agreement has been made the Vatican and the UN, the UN has absolutely nothing to do with the Bride of Christ. The UN have made it very clear that they believe the Church's position on abortion and homosexuality is, in Pope Francis's words, a 'mortal sin'. Perhaps His Holiness was really talking about abortion.
Happy Feast of the Birthday of St John the Baptist. Pray for the Franciscans of the Immaculate and pray for Pope Francis that he will govern the Church with equity, justice and prudence and that His Holiness will govern the Church in a true spirit of humble service, rather than give the impression that he is in favour of governing the Church in the style of a Renaissance prince. There is nothing on this story on Rome Reports. Presumably, for the Holy Father, this is not good publicity.
18 comments:
St Ignatius's directive is one of obedience, loyalty and fidelity to Peter.
It's hyperbolic to express a point.
But for a Pontiff to say it about himself?!!!
That's on a level with Blackadder II's Queenie saying 'who's queen?!!'
You know that bit in King Lear where Regan & Cornwall are blinding Gloucester and the soldier sayd he must protest and gets quickly despatched in the process?
I wonder what exactly will happen to the lone Friar who dared to ask the Pontiff where are our accusers and where are our leaders?
'Successor of St.Peter' interprets Vatican Council II with irrationality : magisterium still makes a factual error
Pope Francis has recommended the interpretation of Vatican Council II according to Archbishop Agostino Marchetto who uses the visible dead inference.
The deceased saved with 'a ray of the Truth'(NA 2) are supposed to be visible-in-the-flesh exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So the traditional ecclesiology, is rejected. It is ideological for the pope.It is 'triumphalism'. This is the pro-Left, masonic term.
In his last meeting with some of the Franciscans of the Immaculate on June 10 ( without the founder Fr.Stefano Mannelli and most of the Friars), the pope indicated that the Franciscans of the Immaculate seminary is to remain closed. The seminary was not accepting Vatican Council II with the visible-dead inference. It rejected the heretical version of Vatican Council II, the one with the false premise.The inference produces an irrational, non traditional conclusion.This is the version of Vatican Council II approved by the 'orthodoxy of the successor of St.Peter' .It is also approved by the Jewish Left rabbis.
It may be mentioned that during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII it was assumed that the baptism of desire/ implicit desire referred to cases, visible in the flesh.Then it was inferred that these visible-deceased were exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is a factual error. We cannot see the dead.So how can they be exceptions? Yet this error is inferred in the text of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
Pope Francis is using this factual error in the interpretation of Vatican Council II. It is a break with the past and is appreciated by the political Left whom the pope supports.It is also considered ideologically correct.It is a permit to offer the Traditional Latin Mass for a Catholic priest during this pontificate.It is the denial of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This traditional version of extra ecclesiam nulla salus resulted in Fr.Leonard Feeney being maligned and excommunicated by the Holy Office, and the Archbishop and Jesuits of Boston. Since this former Jesuit priest had to tell a lie.He did not.He was expected to say, that he knew of known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma on salvation.
-Lionel Andrades
http://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1239-pope-meets-franciscans-of-the-immaculate-seminary-to-remain-closed
The flagrant, vicious persecution of the Franciscan Friars and Sisters of the Immaculate is horrific - a diabolic injustice crying out to heaven. And yet, the bishops, cardinals, others with authority, influence or public voice say nothing!!! The trial that we are enduring because of those in control in His Holy Church constantly working against Him, His Church, all souls is truly unbearable. We pray in reparation and for grace to endure and remain true to the Deposit of Faith and to the Natural Moral Law. Let us offer our completely-unacknowledged suffering for Him, to Him. Our suffering is because of our love for God and His Commandments. Pray we never succumb to the extreme pressure to pretend that great offence to God and His Church is not being continuously given by many/most of the leaders in the Church. Pray that we do not join in and admire the beautiful garments of the naked Emperor.
But Torture isn't a mortal sin - torture is intrinsically morally disordered and NORMATIVELY gravely sinful and mortal.
One may not commit evil so that good may result but an intrinsic moral disorder does not ALWAYS axiomatically lead to a grave evil
- just normatively [e.g. I may allow myself to endure a homosexual rape if the alternative is murder]
The ONLY occasion it would be permissible is when in the extreme direct grave moral dilemma of the only alternative is an allowing a grave objective evil to occur. Then proportionate recourse to violence which is neither extreme nor permanent and has estimably guaranteed efficacy AND simultaneously prevents the actuation of the torture victim's [i.e. one's neighbour's] co-operation in that grave evil.
e.g. the ticking bomb scenario - by torturing the bomber one not merely attempts to prevent their murdering many innocent lives - one might also prevent their being a murderer and a suicide.
The threat must be immediate & direct and grave and lethal - any other form of torture would not meet these criteria and would thus become a grave transgression of the fifth commandment and potentially automatic excommunication if any harm was permanent [as this would come under a lesser form of non-lethal judicial 'murder']
If I kill a direct immediate lethal unjust aggressor in self defence I also prevent them being a murderer; as I would If I actuated a just war against a lethal unjust aggressor.
Torture is almost always mortally sinful - but it is not objectively a mortla sin.
From the photo op picture one can see a leading dissenter from the founders who proudly maintains his position. And he has the support of the pope. There is no recourse for the pope is extremely authoritarian who can call black, white and expect people to agree. Sure the emperor is wearing clothes...
The option remains to obey a new governance or leave, the brave friar who asked the question of the pope is probably the one who left the next day.
And who says that the seminary was "against Vatican 2"? That has never been shown nor is there any indication at all on the seminary website. That is another straw accusation . Indeed one sees that the Order was a post conciliar one that supported the pope.
But even if the pope knows "the other side"' would it make a difference? Is there not somewhere a very long list of names against those who wish to uphold the faith of their fathers that the pope has said?
Wasn't it Pope Pius IX that thundered, "I AM tradition!"?
Willard Money, yes I believe that expression is usually attributed to Pio Nono. However, if it is true that he said it, then it is merely proof that pre-conciliar Popes had the capacity to be as full of manure as the present one.
It's also supremely ironic that a man who extols synodality and collegiality ad nauseam is now uttering things close to "L'etat c'est moi."
@willard and deacon augustine: But what does a pre-concilliar pope mean if he says, 'I am tradition?' And what does a post-concilliar pope mean if he says, 'I am orthodoxy?'
All cats look black in the dark!
June 25, 2014
Fr.Fehlner has to accept the Batman-Version of Vatican Council II : Franciscans of the Immaculate are still receiving threats on doctrine
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/06/frfehlner-has-to-accept-batman-version.html#links
The Pope is required to be the upholder and indemnified of the Deposit of Faith, the Sacred Tradition of the Holy Church. That does not mean a particular pope will do his sacred duty.
This cunning attempted twisting of St. Ignatius words puts me in mind of something The Bard wrote:
“The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul producing holy witness
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart.
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!”
― William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice
Here's one for you, Bones.
"Black is Black" - Los Bravos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVWNZPOUhO8&feature=kp
If a wall is white but the Church tells me it is black then I am not obliged to follow the Church as that is not a matter of Faith or Morals. I might refer them to Specsavers. Presumably both St Ignatius and Pope Francis were speaking metaphorically but to what exactly were they referring?
I suppose the obedience required of religious extends further than just matters of Faith and Morals so that they have to accept a statement such as "It would be better if you attended that university rather than another" even though the religious disagreed with the statement as to what is better. But in the case of the FFI we are left in the dark as to what the Pope is referring to.
The article in La Stampa does not come across as particularly objective.
I fear that what the Pope probably meant was: 'Let's have a good look all round the room at everyone here, OK? Now, hands up which of us here is Pope? Eh? Eh? Hehe.'
Pope "I Won" the First, in other words.
After watching this video from Fr. Paul Kramer (Latin Mass priest in good standing)---truly I wonder if Francis is the pope at all. When Fr. Kramer says Mass, he says "Benedict" instead of Francis.
Seattle Kimmy
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hmGx5DkTr4o
Post a Comment