jump to navigation

They are going for the Doctrine November 6, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, SOD, Spiritual Warfare.

In the wake of the Synod (“a work of darkness”), I had a fairly extensive offline discussion with a certain reader on whether the intervention of the more orthodox Synod Fathers really represented a setback to the modernist agenda, or whether it was all more or less part of the plan.  Sure, this commenter said, they may have liked to have gotten more at the Synod, they may have preferred to have the mid-term “relatio” approved, but they also counted on opposition and were supremely happy to achieve what they did, which was, in the words of Bishop Athanasius Schneider:

The interim report (Relatio post disceptationem) was clearly a prefabricated text with no reference to the actual statements of the Synod fathers. In the sections on homosexuality, sexuality and “divorced and remarried” with their admittance to the sacraments the text represents a radical neo-pagan ideology. This is the first time in Church history that such a heterodox text was actually published as a document of an official meeting of Catholic bishops under the guidance of a pope, even though the text only had a preliminary character.

For a while, I thought the commenter being overly negative, that the opposition that had emerged was an impressive indication that this Church-destroying agenda could be blocked, but that was because, at that time, I was under the mistaken impression that roughly 62% of the Synod members had voted against the Relatio, rather than the other way around.  In fact, the 2/3 majority to impose these disastrous “pastoral” practices was very nearly obtained.  So much for mass opposition to this agenda.  Yes, this was a somewhat hand-picked group of bishops, but still…….we now know probably at least half the bishops of the Catholic Church no longer have the Catholic Faith.

As the weeks have gone by since the closing of the Synod, I tend to side much more with the commenter’s view, that the Synod was very nearly a total success for the modernists and the setback at the end, if not planned/programmed in advance, certainly did not surprise or overly concern them.   Kasper the Klown Kardinal’s replacement as point man for the revolution, Cardinal Marx of Germany (of course), had these comments regarding the conclusion of the Synod:

Anyone who comes to that conclusion has not had their eye on what has been going on in our church over the past one and a half years,” Marx said. “Up to now, these two issues have been absolutely non-negotiable. Although they had failed to get the two-thirds majority, the majority of the synod fathers had nevertheless voted in their favor.

“They are still part of the text,” Marx continued. “I especially asked the pope about that, and the pope said he wanted all the points published together with all the voting results. He wanted everyone in the church to see where we stood. No, this pope has pushed the doors open and the voting results at the end of the synod will not change that.”

“The doors are open — wider than they have ever been since the Second Vatican Council. The synod debates were just a starting point. Francis wants to get things moving, to push processes forward. The real work is about to begin…….

I must also remind, that both Cardinal Kasper and Cardinal Marx were claiming, in the aftermath of the Synod when perhaps they were so giddy with success to guard their words, that Synodal documents would in future change doctrine, and that had been the goal all along.  Some may say “that’s impossible,” but such attempts have certainly been made many times in the past.  Another report by Rorate indicates where the Argentine mood seems to be on the subject:

“Were they expecting the resistance of the conservatives during the Synod?” “Yes, of course it was expected,” he answers. “It will be hard. The problem is that those who advise the Pope are doing things wrongly. They will move towards a change in the pastoral practice, leaving doctrine as it is. And what must be done is to change doctrine because, if it is not changed, in three hundred or four hundred years they could move everything backwards.”

Who speaks now is a priest with regular, or rather, daily, contact with the Holy Father. “The last thing he told me before I came was to pray so that he can effect profound and definitive changes in the Church in such a way that they can never again be modified.”

My correspondent likened the actions of the revolutionaries to that of a mechanical wratchet, once set, they only move forward in one direction, and once they achieve the next step advance, they never go back.  Unless deliberately broken, but who has the muscle for that?

Another salient phenomenon associated with all this is that as the revolutionaries move their ratchet forward again and again, most people in the Church gradually become accustomed to the new levels or rhetoric and practice.  None of us are immune to that, and even Catholics most solidly grounded in great catechesis have to check themselves to insure they are not being pulled along by the always heterodox, definitely modernist drift.  As this drift advances, we rapidly seque from alleged “pastoral” changes to things that actually do at least try to move Doctrine.  And how many Catholics are certain enough of what the Doctrine of the Church is anyway, to resist that advance, even if they wanted to?  Not many.

They are coming, most assuredly, for the Doctrine.  By advancing in slow stages (and even giving the appearance of having suffered “setbacks”), they can so change the intellectual landscape in their favor that people can be led to believe that the changes are not, in fact, happening, or simply not that important. But they will be of the utmost importance, just as the mid-term Relatio was of the utmost importance.  It’s failure to pass with a 2/3 majority at the first part of the Synod still left the modernists with 95% of their goal achieved, for the first time in the history of the Church an official Church document states that sodomites have “gifts” and that it would be merciful to permit adulterers to commit the gravest of sacrileges.

The main point is that, you cannot magically separate doctrine and practice.  A change in practice with respect to settled doctrine necessarily means a change to that Doctrine, as Cardinal Burke notes below:

“Today we act, as if we are creating the church out of nothing.”
The mid-term report of the Synod was for Burke “one of the saddest documents that I could imagine ever coming from the Church”: “Many of us were horrified with this idea that was presented in the report, that there could somehow be good elements in mortally sinful acts. This is impossible.”
Furthermore Cardinal Burke criticised a breakup between doctrine and discipline: “One of the most insidious ideas in the presentation of Cardinal Kasper and the discussions of the Synod is that: ‘Yes we uphold the doctrine of the Church with regard of the indissolubility of marriage.’ Even saying: ‘Who would question the doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage? We are talking about a matter of discipline.’ In other words: Marriage is indissoluble, we believe this. But in certain cases, where a person is married before God, but that marriage has in some way or another failed (without any comment about whose fault it is), but that person has knowingly and willingly attempted to another marriage and his living with someone who is not his or her husband and wife. In some of those cases we don’t uphold the indissolubility of marriage. We admit persons to the sacrament of confession and to holy communion.’”
This idea – Cardinal Burke pointed out – “must be a denial of the indissolubility of marriage”: “When one goes to confession for example and confesses a sin, one has a firm purpose of amendment or otherwise you can’t validly confess. How can a person, who is living in an adulterous union confess that – when he or she has the intention of remaining in that situation? These are simple facts.”
They are coming for the Doctrine. In the minds of millions, the Doctrine of the Faith regarding sodomy, adultery, attempted bigamy, etc., have already been changed by the widely publicized mid-term “relatio.”  Even while they pretend to leave doctrine alone, they are seeking to change it.  Changing how doctrine is applied in practice is the same thing as changing the doctrine, any arguments to the contrary are just modernist double talk of the same kind Cardinal Burke exploded above.
They are coming for the Doctrine.  1600+ years ago, when noxious Arian heresies were proposed to a group of bishops, they bishops didn’t just politely sit their awaiting their turn to vote, they did not wait for a mid-term report to be released, they went on the attack, to the extent of St. Nicholas breaking Arius’ jaw.  They would not listen to the heresies (as Saint John advised), pandemonium broke out in the hall (in the presence of the Emperor of all the civilized world), and the orthodox bishops stormed out.  I pray our bishops get some of the zeal the early Fathers had.
They are going to need it.


1. TG - November 6, 2014

Very alarming. (You and I go to a lot of the same sites because I read it the other day.) Did you ever read the story about how Arius died? St. Alexander actually prayed – Lord either take him or me because he is going to ruin your church. At that moment, Arius had to go to the restroom and died a horrible death.

Baseballmom - November 6, 2014

What was alarming to me was that 118 members of the sin-nod voted FOR the heretical paragraphs. 118 Judases at the Sin-nod. I have been praying the chaplet that Cardinal Burke encouraged faithful Catholics to pray… “ARISE OH LORD LET YOUR ENEMIES BE SCATTERED! LET THEM THAT HATE THEE FLY BEFORE YOUR FACE!” And that would be ALL His enemies… From the top down….

2. Woody - November 6, 2014

Do we know the truth about how this all came about? Are we aware of what was done in the 60’s to produce what is called the Novus Ordo Mass? Since the closing of VII, have the Catholic laity been lied to by priests, bishops, cardinals and maybe even popes regarding the Traditional Latin Mass? And yet it all still goes on! We are certainly sheep. We just follow along, just like our parents did back in the 60’s. EXCEPT, our parents didn’t have the information we have today. We KNOW what went on and why. We have read the books. And we still must be polite in what we say and do. Don’t be rude to the hierarchy. We are told, or ORDERED, to play nice. Well, nothing will change until WE STOP being nice and go out and tell the hierarchy we will not take it anymore. GIVE ME BACK THE TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC CHURCH WITH ALL THE PROBLEMS AND ARCHAIC MANNERISMS IT HAD. Take your Novus Ordo Church and have all the fun with modernism you want. I’m sticking with Tradition. Don’t like it? I’m ready to fight you for it. And it won’t be pretty.

3. MFG - November 6, 2014

Having worked for a member of congress before, the Synod strategy is eerily similar to what liberals do in government. They propose outlandish legislation to warm people up to the idea, then they push for it in years to come. They usually succeed.

Those conservatives/faithful Catholics who are claiming victory in the synod should realize the campaign hasn’t ended. The battle for the next synod is underway and the heterodox folks have a head start.

4. c matt - November 6, 2014

A lot of folks have been feeding mis-information, crowing about how the “Fathers of the Synod” beat this back – but failed to point out that over half voted for it. If not for the need of a 2/3s majority, it would have passed.

This is nothing but a few lost yards on a long drive to the end-zone for them. And as I said before, the main goal was to at least make thinkable what was unthinkable.

5. steve - November 6, 2014

Bishop Anthanasius Schneider, in June 2014 A.D., declared that Pope Francis has always expressed “very beautiful Catholic doctrine”.

On October 25, 2014 A.D., Pope Francis received in audience 7,500 members of the Apostolic Movement of Schoenstatt, an international Marian movement.

During said audience, Pope Francis defended and promoted strongly the Church’s traditional teachings on family and marriage.

Rome will host later this month the Humanum Conference on the family and marriage.

Helen Alvare, a key participant at said conference, just declared that Pope Francis “is gorgeously Catholic on marriage, period”.

Pope Francis has labeled himself a “son of the Church”.

Modernists may “come for the Doctrine”…but Pope Francis will not permit them to seize the Doctrine.

Pope Francis will defend and promote the Doctrine.

Woody - November 6, 2014

Do you really think that the archbishop from Argentina suddenly had an epiphany upon becoming pope? His theology is the same as it was while he was in Argentina. Change doctrine? There are more ways than one to skin a cat, my friend. He doesn’t need to “change doctrine.” Yet. But how about we change how we do things? No? For mercy’s sake. Yes? Go along with him. Just watch out for your soul.

TG - November 6, 2014

White man speak with two tongues.

Baseballmom - November 6, 2014

If this is the case then WHY did he insist that the heretical paragraphs be left in the final document? As LifeSite News reported yesterday:

“Reflecting on the recently-closed Extraordinary Synod of Bishops in Rome, Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Kazakhstan said the controversial midterm report produced was steeped in “radical neo-pagan ideology,” “heterodox” views, and an “agenda reflect[ing] the corrupt and pagan main stream morality of our time.”

Why would the pope allow “radical neo-pagan ideology” to remain in the final document? I understand that it did not get the 2/3rds majority required to “pass”, and that it is therefore not “official” – yet, he insisted that it remain in the document. Why?

Tantumblogo - November 6, 2014

Well as I have said, if on one out of every 10 or 30 or 50 posts on this site, I posted some really heretical stuff, how long would people look on me as any kind of a reliable Catholic commentator? Or what if only one out of every 200 posts was porn? Would folks feel that they could still come and read the other 199?

Of course not. And that’s the problem, sure Pope Francis says some things that are fine much of the time, maybe most of the time, but he is also publicly moving the Church in an unprecedented direction. Unless one wants to subscribe to the theory that he is really just trying to let the Holy Spirit “guide” the Church, but then why contradict the will of the Synod Fathers and insist that the damaging parts of the Relatio voted down by the Synod be included in the final document?

Yes we should certainly always try to explain anything related to the Pope in the most charitable terms possible, but this charity does not demand that we be blind or try to pretend that these orthodox statements have the same impact as the more troubling ones, because they simply don’t. The Synod had 1,000,000 times more impact than the statement to the Schoenstatt group. That may not be fair, but it does seem to be something Pope Francis is very aware of.

At this point I am doubtful any of this is accidental, or that others are conducting a dangerous agenda in the Pope’s name but somehow against his will. The evidence is just too overwhelming that Pope Francis wants to move the Church into completely new territory.

Anyway that’s my opinion and it’s worth what you paid for it.

Baseballmom - November 7, 2014

Exactly! And I could make you a fine meal, a gourmet delight, with all the best ingredients…. And sprinkle only the tiniest bit of arsenic in it…. Would anyone have that????? No!!!! All the “sound statements” are fine, but the poison of his silence is quite deadly.

6. Magdalen - November 6, 2014


I do not have confidence that the pope will uphold the doctrines of the Church. Rather, he surrounds himself with men who are itching for change in doctrine. His interviews with the atheist are being published by the Vatican. The pope throws out a bone of truth here and there but refuses to clarify heretical things; hard to pin the heresy on him you see. And as the pope continues on this path, to whom shall we go???

Tantumblogo - November 6, 2014

“And as the pope continues on this path, to whom shall we go???”

From 1978-2013, faithful Catholics could console themselves that while there was apostasy run amok in the Church, it at least appeared that the Holy Pontiffs were fairly orthodox, not disregarding some very serious problems especially with the pontificate of Saint John Paul II. But now we do not have even that consolation, we have to look to individual bishops and even among the very best like +Burke and +Schneider, I do not know that we have a true Athanasius or Borremeo in the bunch. We are really in unprecedented times. Never has the entire Church from top to bottom attempted schism with itself. A formal schism at this point would really only solidify the reality that has existed since VII.

I’m like you, I don’t know where to go, save into the past, the safe past, where Truth was extolled and because it is past it cannot change. Retreat into Tradition, find consolation in the popes of old, the Saints, the Fathers……..that’s all I can recommend.

We are in for a very rough ride. I heard a priest liken the situation we are in to being on a ship tossed at sea in a terrible storm, and looking up and seeing the captain and officers not trying to hold the ship steady against the storm, but having a big fistfight into the wheelhouse. But I think the situation is more dire than that, the captain and crew have gone insane, in the midst of the storm they are taking axes to the engine, steering the ship abreast the waves, opening the sea cocks, and in general trying the sink the ship.

The priest’s point was that it’s better to be in the ship, even with the crew fighting, than to be in the ocean. But my point is that the behavior of the captain and crew is such that the point may be academic within a very short time.

Mitchell H. - November 6, 2014

Well said, and I think this gets to the root of the problem. Where does one go?

If I can use a political analogy for a moment: the only sure way for a third-party movement to succeed (such as the formation of the GOP in the 1850s) is to have established members of an established party defect to it. A conservative political party in the 1970s would have had a chance of success only if someone with the stature of a Ronald Reagan had joined it.

If there is a formal schism in the Church, what would it look like? I’d assume most people would look to the SSPX, which has already established itself with a structure, but to my way of thinking this would remain an unthinkable alternative for many unless someone of prominence joined it. Are there any Cardinals, Bishops, well-known priests likely to do that? And would the SSPX itself insist that they were still loyal to Rome (forcing Rome to kick them out), would they become sede vacantist, would there be an anti-pope?

Is it possible that there would be no formal schism, that orthodox Catholics would instead look to the Orthodox (with Francis’ actions putting somewhat asunder the idea of papal infallibility)? Would we see the separation not in the formation of a rival group, but in defections from the Church? Or would orthodox Catholics simply carve out places of their own, in parishes such as Mater Dei, where they continue to consult the Fathers and traditional teachings, and ignore what is going on in Rome? Would they, in fact, be allowed to do that? And if they were persecuted – if, for example, the FSSP were forced out, would they turn to the SSPX?

I’m concerned about this, naturally – I don’t knock myself out worrying about it, but I’m concerned – and, since I have the sensibilities and curiosity of a novelist, I try to imagine what this future would look like. Would the opposition, whether it be the SSPX or another group, ever become a serious rival to Rome? Could we conceivably come to the point where there were two popes, much as there are two or three heavyweight champions? Much of this may be rhetorical, but I wonder if anyone really has any serious speculation as to what this possible future would look like?

Tantumblogo - November 6, 2014

I’ve thought about it. So much would depend on the particular circumstances. I try to think about it less and less! It’s very disturbing territory, for certain.

But I get what you’re saying. I’m not sure if the SSPX is the redoubt we’re looking for, though, decades of being in an irregular situation have caused some serious problems to arise there (and others have been there since 1988, at least). There is no “perfect” solution.

Of course, some of our priests have advised us to stock up on Communion Wine and Hosts in case we have to receive Mass at home. It is not beyond the realm of possibility.

7. Pseudodionysius - November 6, 2014

Be kind to our SSPX friends, because very, very soon we may need them if they [the stark raving mad hierarchy] start axing the engine and opening the sea cocks.

Coming soon to a local cave Mass near you…

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: