jump to navigation

Bishop Gracida: “Chaos looms on the horizon if episcopal conferences are given doctrinal power” December 5, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disconcerting, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, scandals, secularism, shocking, the return.
comments closed

In the second of my posts examining the recent Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Guadium, I will look at another aspect where Pope Francis appears to be taking a rather radical turn away from the policies of even his immediate predecessors (let alone his distant ones) – so called “collegiality.”  I will use a recent column by Sandro Magister as a starting point to introduce some of my own thoughts.  The only thought Bishop Gracida had on this matter is what I included in the lede. Magister (I add comments, emphasis in original):

In the voluminous apostolic exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium”  made public one week ago, Pope Francis has made it known that he wants to distinguish himself on at least two points from the popes who preceded him.

The first of these points is also the one that has had the greatest impact in the media. And it concerns both the exercise of the primacy of the pope and the powers of the episcopal conferences…….

1. ON THE PAPACY AND THE NATIONAL CHURCHES

On the role of the pope, Jorge Mario Bergoglio credits John Paul II with having paved the way to a new form of the exercise of primacy.  But he laments that “we have made little progress in this regard” and promises that he intends to proceed with greater vigor  toward a form of papacy “more faithful to the meaning which Jesus Christ wished to give it and to the present needs of evangelization.”  [This statement by Pope Francis is a strong – one might even say searing – indictment of his hundreds of predecessors. He is claiming they did not act with the Will of Christ in creating the papal-centric mode of governing the Church, something many early Church Fathers I think would find rather surprising.]

But more than on the role of the pope – where Francis remains vague and has so far operated by making most decisions himself – it is on the powers of the episcopal conferences that “Evangelii Gaudium” heralds a major transition.

The pope writes in paragraph 32 of the document:

“The Second Vatican Council stated that, like the ancient patriarchal Churches, episcopal conferences are in a position ‘to contribute in many and fruitful ways to the concrete realization of the collegial spirit.’  [That’s odd, because the “ancient patriarchal churches” were made up of individual sees headed by individual bishops.  Dozens or hundreds of bishops did not band together into pseudo-democratic highly bureaucratic organizations founded more on structures of modern government than any type of Church governance.] Yet this desire has not been fully realized, since a juridical status of episcopal conferences which would see them as subjects of specific attributions, including genuine doctrinal authority, has not yet been sufficiently elaborated. Excessive centralization, rather than proving helpful, complicates the Church’s life and her missionary outreach.”  [Interesting. Your two immediate predecessors, Holiness, thought rather differently on the matter, as we will see below.]

In a footnote, Francis refers to a 1998 motu proprio of John Paul II, concerning precisely “the theological and juridical nature of the episcopal conferences”:

> Apostolos Suos

But if one reads that document, one discovers that it attributes to the national episcopal conferences a function that is exclusively practical, cooperative, of a simple intermediate auxiliary body between the college of all the world’s bishops together with the pope on the one hand – the only “collegiality” declared to have a theological foundation – and the individual bishop with authority over his diocese on the other.  [And that’s true.  For 40 years, orthodox Catholics have been trying to explain the strange role played by episcopal conferences in just those terms, as being entirely unsupported by Tradition and Doctrine and being, essentially, novelties of a practical nature stood up by the Council.  Heretofore, there has been absolutely NO doctrinal foundation for giving conferences run almost entirely by progressive bureaucrats (many of whom have spent time at Planned Barrenhood and other far left NGOs) any role in Doctrine.  For reasons why, look to Blessed Pope John Paul II’s words below]

Above all, the motu proprio “Apostolos Suos” strongly limits that “authentic doctrinal authority” which Pope Francis says he wants to grant to the episcopal conferences. It prescribes that if doctrinal declarations really need to be issued, this must be done with unanimous approval and in communion with the pope and the whole Church, or at least “by a substantial majority” after review and authorization by the Holy See. [I wish it did not have that caveat.  In practice, the conferences have served often as bullies to prevent orthodox prelates from speaking out or taking action.  But, in their defense, they have also checked a few of the excesses of progressive bishops.]

One danger warned against in the motu proprio “Apostolos Suos” is that the episcopal conferences might release doctrinal declarations in contrast with each other and with the universal magisterium of the Church.  [Gee, ya think?!?  Anyone ever hear of the “Winnipeg Statement,” which rejected constant Church Dogma on contraception?  Individual conferences somehow get to pretend to define Doctrine (and I think their acts will never go beyond that, pretensions unsupported by the preconciliar Magisterium) and unleash potential doctrinal chaos.]

Another risk that it intends to prevent is the creation of separation and antagonism between individual national Churches and Rome, as happened in the past in France with “Gallicanism” and as takes place among the Orthodox with some of the autocephalous national Churches.  [Precisely.  As I said in a post some time ago, the Orthodox are more at war with themselves than with anyone else.  They have been trying to arrange a “pan-Orthodox” council for nearly 1000 years, and are no closer to having one today than they were 200 years ago, largely due to issues of national precedence and which national Church would get to declare to itself the “primacy.”]

That motu proprio bears the signature of John Paul II, but it owes its framework to the one who was his highly trusted prefect of doctrine, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

And Ratzinger – as was known – had long been very critical of the superpowers that some episcopal conferences had attributed to themselves, especially in certain countries, including his native Germany.

In his bombshell interview of 1985, published with the title “The Ratzinger Report,” he had resolutely opposed the idea that the Catholic Church should become “a kind of federation of national Churches.”

Instead of a “decisive new emphasis on the role of the bishops” as desired by Vatican Council II, the national episcopal conferences – he accused – have “smothered” the bishops with their weighty bureaucratic structures. [Well…….that’s because they have.  If you want to know why Nancy Pelosi gets to commit sacrilege daily receiving the Blessed Sacrament, look no further than the USCCB.]

And again:

“It seems wonderful always to decide together,” but “the truth cannot be created through ballots,” both because “the group spirit and perhaps even the wish for a quiet, peaceful life or conformism lead the majority to accept the positions of active minorities bent upon pursuing clear goals” and because “the search for agreement between the different tendencies and the effort at mediation often yield flattened documents in which decisive positions (where they might be necessary) are weakened.”  [Great points.  Even more, there is a tendency in such democratic and bureaucratic organizations to be completely dominated by worldly concerns, to seek to always placate and mollify the demands of the world (esp. the press), and to lose sight of the supernatural.  Any one of which is a profound reason NOT to give them any supposed doctrinal authority, which I still think would be illusory, at best.  JPII said in Apostolos Suos that national conferences could not decide Doctrine on a plane with the Holy See because they weren’t constituted by God to do so! They don’t have the charism of infallibility!  This will lead to unprecedented chaos and, very shortly, disaster.]

John Paul II and Benedict XVI after him judged the average quality of the world’s bishops and of most episcopal conferences to be modest. [Boy, they were being generous!  I would judge them as……something else!]  And they acted accordingly. Making themselves the leader and model and in some cases – as in Italy – resolutely intervening to change the leadership and marching orders.

With Francis, the episcopal conferences could instead see a recognition of greater autonomy. With the foreseeable repercussions exemplified recently by Germany, where prominent bishops and cardinals have been clashing publicly over the most varied questions, from the criteria of diocesan administration to communion for the divorced and remarried, in this latter case anticipating and forcing solutions on which the double synod of bishops of 2014 and 2015 has been called to debate and decide.

————End Quote————

The modernists, of course, love the idea of collegiality, the better to introduce still more chaos and confusion into the Doctrine of the Faith.  Modernists are seeking a path to continue their revolution with a seal of episcopal doctrinal approbation.  That is why they have been pushing for this collegiality for over a century.  It has always been one of their prime goals to “democratize” the Church, because they know with people being as fallen and tending towards sin as they are, the majority will happily revel in sin and error and call it virtue and truth.  Such would confirm the modernists in their positions of wealth and authority for decades to come, which is what I think much of this comes down to.  Power.  The Council unleashed a revolution that was all about grabbing power for what had before that time been a small, disaffected, and rightly persecuted clique.

Look, the matter is simple.  Individual bishops, and even groups of bishops in conference, have NO special charism to define doctrine.  They do not have the special protection of the Holy Spirit afforded the Pope when making definitions of a dogmatic nature.  They can err with wild abandon.  Almost ALL the major heresies came from bishops!

Lord, please deliver us from collegiality!  Pray and fast like mad for the Pope, he hasn’t DONE anything yet, he can still change his mind!  We have almost a year!  Storm Heaven!

 

Another sign of the Apocalypse……DogTV December 5, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, foolishness, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, manhood, priests, Sacraments, silliness, Society.
comments closed

Crikey.  There has apparently been a new TV network started up specifically……..for dogs.  Given that operating a TV is beyond most dogs I know, I suppose they intend the owners to watch.   And given that the income most dogs earn is rather limited, what with their sleeping 20 hours a day, I am guessing the advertisements will be directed at humans, too.  Does a TV channel that sports videos of dogs playing in a yard sound enticing to you?  Here is some of what they’re offering:

Yes, they have “episodes” focused on dog relaxation!  They lay around 22 hours a day!  How much more relaxed do you want them?!?  Comatose?!

From what I understand, dogs don’t see 2-D images very well.  They don’t process visual stimuli like we do.  This seems like something primarily to appeal to goofy new age humans.

Here is supposedly a “stimulating” program:

Sheesh.  Boy, I can’t wait to chill out and watch 3 hours of that………..

Well, good luck with all that.  Maybe it will appeal to the WASPs………

If the bow wow stuff has you discombobulated, here’s a great change of pace, a First Communion Mass offered by friend of this blog Fr. Michael Rodriguez.  A whole bunch of West Texas at the start.  Actually, this is a most interesting production, with many interesting camera angles.  You don’t often get a glimpse of a priest with an altar cam!

Awww…..you had me at Asperges Me

Some moving quotes from Martin Mosebach’s The Heresy of Formlessness December 5, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the return.
comments closed

I’ve been reading Martin Mosebach’s The Heresy of Formlessness. The Ignatius Press version, from which Fr. Fessio personally removed some of the more provocative bits. He didn’t want it to be “too controversial.”  Whatever.  There is still plenty of gold.  I quote some random bits below, particularly pithy or effective quotes that I thought made important points.  I hope you enjoy them.  The book is a must read, even in its somewhat truncated and neutered Ignatius version. I do add some comments.

Quote 1:

……the reformers of the Mass, preoccupied with their notion of early Christianity, were intent only on impoverishing and curtailing; they were actually pursuing a late Catholic puritanism rather than drawing on the wealth of forms of worship of the first millenium.  [Indeed, if the reformers were so set on slavishly returning to early Christian practice, why aren’t women and men segregated at the Mass, as they were for the first several hundred years of Church history?  Why don’t we have the severe penances and public Confession?  For that matter, why is the Mass not in Latin?  The Mass was never offered in Old English or one of the hundreds of Germanic languages.  In point of fact, the “return to early Church practice” was simply an excuse to impose the revolution.]

Quote 2:

…..a low Mass in the traditional Rite, read silently in a garage, is more solemn than the biggest Novus Ordo church-concert with spiritual trimmings…….if there is ever to be significant religious art again, this art will come from the “old” Liturgy, which expresses the sacred. [The first part might be debatable. I tend to agree, but it’s an arguable point.  I don’t think any argument can be made against the latter.]

Quote 3:

The Mass is not some basic core activity to which various decorations can be added [or taken away] , according to opportunity, in order to height the participant’s awareness.  The rites “contain nothing unnecessary or superfluous.”  [The Council of Trent solemnly declared that the Mass contained nothing unnecessary.  But Vatican II called for the removal of pointless accretions and “useless repetitions.]  Who would dare to pretend to find “unnecessary or superfluous things in a great fresco or a great poem?……..At all times there have been people who have made themselves ridiculous by trying to eliminate the “mistakes” in masterpieces, applying their half-baked scholarship to Michelangelo’s frescos and Shakespeare’s tragedies. Great works have a soul: we can feel it, alive and radiant, even where its body has been damaged.

The Liturgy must be regarded with at least as much respect as a profane masterpiece of this kind.  Respect opens our eyes. Often enough, even in the case of a profane work of art, if we study conscientiously and ponder the detail, especially the apparently superfluous detail, we find that the offending element comes unexpectedly to life; in the end it sometimes happens that we come to see it as a special quality of the work.   This is always the case of the rites of the Sacred Liturgy. There is nothing in them that, given intensive contemplation, does not show itself to be absolutely saturated with spiritual power.  [I agree wholeheartedly, and would add, that those older folks who tell us how very, very glad they were when the Novus Ordo was put in place and they finally got rid of that terrible old Latin Mass never understood the Mass.  They don’t understand it now.  Well prior to the Council, a sense had permeated many in the Church that the Mass was old fashioned and out of date.  They didn’t understand what was going on.  This is a damning indictment of the priests and bishops of the pre-conciliar era, that so many people apparently never came to appreciate the Mass in all its glory. But then again, that bad catechesis and priestly formation was at least in part a result of the growing modernist influence in the Catholic seminary and university, thoroughly laced with a good deal of hostility towards the Mass.  In the end, the modernists are at least partly responsible for everything, although there was a good deal of just plain ol’ apathy around, too, I think.]

Quote 4:

The [preconciliar]  liturgy became a rich image with a welter of tiny details, greater than the sum of its parts; thus it must be contemplated and can never be entirely understood.  [Yes!  And in order to make the Mass “understandable,” it had to be so dumbed down and stripped of content that it became a banality.]

Quote 5, on why the Consecration should take place “secretly,” obscured by the priest, or, in the Byzantine Liturgies, behind the ikonostasis:

The hermetic aspect, the aspect of rapture, that surrounds the Consecration in the “old” Latin Liturgy represents nothing other than the Holy Sepulcher, shut with a stone, in which the God-man awoke from death. This even had the whole cosmos for a witness, but no living man saw it. Something that, in the Liturgy, seems to be a later accretion, an accompaniment found in Byzantine basilicas and Gothic cathedrals, thus proves to be intimately connected with the core of salvation history.  Christian liturgy is a withing beneath the Cross and outside the grave.   This is another image the liturgical reform has tried to erase.  [Why?  Why can there be no mystery in the Mass?  Why must everything be conducted like a crass commercial display?  In fact, the hiding of the Consecration is about as ancient a liturgical act as one can find.  Ever since the Christians built churches, the Consecration was especially set apart.  But modernists didn’t like that, because the vast majority of them DON’T BELIEVE IN THE REAL PRESENCE. To even hint at the Real Presence is hateful to them.]

————End Quotes————-

That’s enough for one day. If you like, maybe some more, later.

 

 

 

 

 

“The whole world needs to do the same to all christians, muslims, and jews…..” December 5, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, disaster, Ecumenism, fun, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, horror, persecution, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

….said the surely diabolically-influenced neo-pagan atheist in the comments to the Youtube video of crazed pro-abort feminist gomorrists attacking Catholics in San Juan, Argentina.

I know the video below has made the rounds, but when I finally got around to watching it, and saw that comment, I thought I’d go ahead and do a post.

I had intended to link to the version where I found the comment, but I cannot. While there is nothing even remotely scintillating in the acts of perversion and self-degradation contained therein, some of these acts reach levels of wretchedness and explicitness I simply cannot allow on the blog.  So, I’ve posted the sanitized version from LifeSite below

Long after you are dead and reduced to moldering dust, ladies, the Church will remain.  In fact, She will remain forever.

This is the world today.  This is what Vatican II calls us to embrace, to find all that glorious worldly wisdom to teach the Church a thing or 200?

These attacks are increasingly brutal. These women were much more aggressive than last year.  What is funny, should any of the men have lashed out – and thank God they didn’t – the women would have been the first scream “victim.”  Having spray paint liberally applied to the eyes could cause permanent blindness.

But, you know, the more these women assaulted the men, and the less the men responded, the greater the victory for the men became.  Even in the eyes of fallen world totally bereft of supernatural sense, the calm, defiant prayer of the men has elicited overwhelming sympathy.  But in the supernatural sense, the victory is all the greater, in fact total: the torrents of Grace these men received was enormous.  Even in apparent “defeat” – which this wasn’t – the Christian triumphs. In fact, the greater the “defeat,” the greater the triumph, provided we cooperate with Grace.

In contrast, the enormous sins committed by these women, and the damage wrought on their eternal souls, are incalculable.  I pray for their conversion, but as  Aquinas and certain other Saints have said, those lost in sins of intellectual pride are the most resistant to conversion of all.  Hence the reason so few manifest heretics ever converted.  Worse, these women have not only developed titanic levels of intellectual pride, but they have also fallen into the gravest sexual depravities.  Combined…….I pray for a miracle.

For the second year in a row, where on earth are the police?  Is this some game they play in Latin America, give the leftists a free pass for a big, destructive event, then pretend to lay down the law afterward?  What good will hundreds of cops around the Cathedral do the night AFTER the big event?  Who pays off who?  The police were quoted as saying they couldn’t do anything because the radicals were women.  Please.  If they had been going after a government office, you can be assured the police would have intervened.  We know whose side they’re on.

I was at a class the other night, and we talked about the culture.  I think agreement was pretty much unanimous of the 80 or so there – we’re headed for a wicked persecution.  Our virtue will be tried as we cannot believe. It will be so tempting to lash out at those attacking us, but for the most part we are going to have to submit.

But such submission provided the blood that watered an Empire and gave the Church the Grace to overcome it.  That’s the mind-blowing thing about Christianity, no matter how badly we lose, we always win.

What a heroic display of manhood!  What virtue!  God bless these men!