jump to navigation

It was in South America that the Pontificate of Pope Francis was clearly revealed…… July 13, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, Papa, pr stunts, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, SOD, Spiritual Warfare, the return, the struggle for the Church.
trackback

………and it was an image that shocked faithful souls and scandalized Christians worldwide:

download (14)

He did not say “This is not right,” but “I did not know that.”

While a picture may be worth a thousand (or more) words, and while some are calling this the defining image of this papacy, the words themselves were often at least as troubling, if not more so:

“A faith which does not draw us into solidarity [Or, a faith which doesn’t help the poor in slums directly, but there is a strong political connotation]  is a faith which is dead or a lie. ‘I am very Catholic. I am very Catholic. I go to Church every Sunday.’ But tell me, mister, madame, what happens in Bañado Norte? ‘Oh, I don’t know. I know that there are people there, but I don’t know.’ More than going to Mass on Sundays, if you do not have a heart of solidarity, if you know not know what happens to your people, your faith is weak or it is sick or it is dead. It is a faith without Christ. Faith without solidarity is a faith without Christ, a faith without God, a faith without fraternity.”

OK, so even those very few Catholics who make it to Mass every Sunday religiously stink if they are not running a soup kitchen in the poorest slums of the world.  Gotcha.

But on the other hand:

Pope Francis called for a more welcoming Catholic church, open even to those don’t accept its teachings, as he preached at a large open-air Mass on the last day of a weeklong South American tour.

Speaking to hundreds of thousands of people at a military air base on the outskirts of Paraguay’s capital city on Sunday, the pontiff taught a lesson in how the church should—and shouldn’t—attempt to spread the Gospel.

He called for “welcoming those who do not think as we do, who do not have faith or who have lost it, at times through our own fault. Welcoming the persecuted, the unemployed. Welcoming the different cultures, with which this land is so richly blessed. Welcoming sinners.”

Which, the Church has always done these things, so nice straw man.  But the dichotomy is stark: faithful Catholics, unless they engage in approved, politically-loaded activity (the slum Pope Francis mentioned is one where people have squatted on private property for years, creating a very divisive political and social issue), are woefully deficient. But those who persist in rejecting Church Doctrine and even violently attacking the Church must be welcomed.  I see.  And we must be prepared to endure grave, soul-wrenching scandal and immorality in the hope that Christ might somehow sanctify it.

11204435_809478699173009_1953912015021680069_n (1)

More:

“You do not convince people with arguments, strategies or tactics. You convince them by learning how to welcome them,” he said on Sunday. “For that, it is necessary to keep doors open, above all the doors to the heart.”

And on a certain level, I agree.  But when has the Church shut her doors, unless by shutting them you mean preaching the Truth of Jesus Christ?

But on another level, is this not precisely the strategy of the “new evangelization” of the past 50 years?  Has any pastoral program in the Church’s history failed more spectacularly than just this approach, driving those seeking real spiritual sustenance from the worldly, secularist desert they find in the Church and into the sects, and failing to convince anyone that the Church provides a unique, soul-saving sanctuary for them?  But as with all sacred left-wing shibboleths, the answer, as always, is that the revolution did not go far enough, and if we can only be “pure”enough, “sanctified” enough in left-wing ideologies then we can usher in that so-longed for new man-made utopia?

We’ve been trying mercy, mercy, mercy with no rigor whatsoever for 50 years…..when will we ever get around to sharing those “hard truths” with all these scads of new converts our worldly mercy is supposed to be attracting?

And we had the sad spectacle of the Church apologizing for the conversion of the Latin American countries.  While it is true that slavery and repression abounded during the Spanish and Portuguese conquest and administration of these territories, it is also true that the conquered cultures practiced wicked, satanic religions involving mass human sacrifice and literal rivers of blood flowing in their capitals and principle cities.  Pope Benedict XVI was quite right when he said that the suffering endured by these native peoples was far exceeded by the Grace they gained through the Church’s conversion efforts.  While Francis did note that “thousands of priests” opposed the destructive tactics of the colonial regimes, he failed to make clear that the Church had nothing to do with that repression and did a very great deal to oppose slavery and other evils.  In the present context, however, the apology is being taken by enemies of the Church, including far-left leaders of “indigenous groups,” as a tacit admission that the actual Christianization of Latin America was evil and wrong and should not have been done. Some are already demanding the Church turn over properties as reparations to them, for the “evil” of destroying the temples of their diabolical religions.  Context is everything, and in this case, more fuel has now been added to a roaring anti-Catholic fire in the formerly most Catholic region of the world.

And we have Cuba and the US to look forward to, now!

Am I being unreasonable, unfair?  Am I only looking on the dark side?  This past week has been to me incredibly revealing. On his home turf, Pope Francis felt more comfortable being fully himself.  What he has said and done in terms of embracing numerous left wing shibboleths and undermining much Catholic belief has been beyond extraordinary: I have to say it’s unprecedented in the modern era, at least, if not in the entire history of the Church. This man’s vision of the Faith is one that is quite radical and much detached from virtually every one of his predecessors.

But it is also consistent.  It is consistent in that Pope Francis seems to really believe that Doctrine/Dogma – Sacred Truth – can be set aside in pursuit of some “higher goal.” What could possibly be higher than the Truth which is vital for salvation, I have no idea.

He often speaks of Doctrine as “well, of course the Church believes/teaches X, and I am a ‘loyal son of the Church so I believe that, too,’ but we have these people that don’t accept that doctrine so shouldn’t the Church in mercy set aside X so that these people will face one less obstacle to the Faith?”  And since there are scores if not hundreds of elements of Doctrine that so offend, he seems prepared to set a very great deal aside in the hopes of attracting people to the Church.   The problem as I’ve noted above is that this has been, quite nearly universally, the practical program the Church has followed for over 50 years now, and it has been proved a truly unprecedented failure.  The supposition seems to be that making it the practical reality of the Church wasn’t enough (one more big push for “utopia”), and so we must now try to formalize these things in “pastoral applications” that has the great likelihood (I would say certainty) of emptying the Church of her entire moral edifice.

So…….we have that to look forward to, too.

Folks, I am at a loss as to how to respond.  This Pope is a rock star and he just received the adulation of literally millions in Latin America. Protests from the few faithful are unlikely to move him.  I am all about taking concrete action but at this point about all I can recommend is prayer and penance.  We’re down to miracles at this point.

 

Comments

1. Obsever - July 13, 2015

The Vatican spin doctors are attempting to make out the ‘art work’ gift was sprung on Frankie without his prior knowledge by El Presidente Morales. Really! All gifts and presentations in a diplomatic environment are always subject to approval by both the giver and receiver, so there is no ‘excuse’ whatsoever. Frankie quite clearly enjoyed the bizarre and surreal quality of the photo-op.
We need to brace ourselves, there are sure to be plenty more like this in store.

2. Tim Thunell - July 13, 2015

I agree, prayer and penance. This is not fixable from a human standpoint. Only direct, Divine intervention(it won’t be pleasant) can stop this runaway train. Hunker down, it’s only just getting started.

Baseballmom - July 13, 2015

Amen. This is getting beyond the surreal…. At least it has me praying more….

3. Murray - July 13, 2015
4. MFG - July 13, 2015

Perhaps the first action after prayer and penance is not spend the ink or effort reporting on these things? They takeaway from our efforts to promote the traditional teachings and the TLM.

The Holy Father sadly is product of goofy Jesuit formation of the 1960s. He will say and do goofy things that are from this sad era. We know this, so why bother paying attention?

Tantumblogo - July 13, 2015

These matters have been plastered on every possible website and most newspapers and magazines around the world! I saw coverage as varied as UCANews (Filipino center-left Catholic pub), Indian Network News (Canada), NPR, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, Telegraph, Le Monde, every conceivable South American newspaper and the Christian Science Monitor! I don’t think my tiny blog is doing much to increase knowledge of these events, save perhaps from those trying very hard to avoid anything related to the papacy.

Is that what being a faithful Catholic has sunk to, trying like mad to avoid any coverage of the Pope for fear of scandal? That’s a terrible condemnation in its own right.

On the other hand, there are folks who see these things and are gravely scandalized but also confused and uncertain how to respond. So I try to help clarify a bit, the answer is not pretending there is no pope but given the omnipresence of the coverage I don’t think the head in the sand routine is going to be viable long term, either. And there are plainly a great many apologists out there (they were really, really busy last week) who are trying to pretend none of this means anything or that it’s actually a good thing! Last week they announced how bravely the Sovereign Pontiff had rejected this communist memento from Evo Morales. Now that is no longer tenable, so they pretend something else.

There are several factors at play. You may be so solid in your faith that you’re better off not knowing about these things. They may only cause you pain and scandal. Understood. But there are a lot of other folks who may not be so clear on what the Church believes or what it means to have a Pope, who, as one local priest puts it, has gone crazy. They have a right to know that X is OK but Y and Z are novel and not requiring cooperation/assent from faithful Catholics. I think generally folks benefit from more knowledge, not less, but when things are so spectacularly widely covered as these items were (goodness, look at Pewsitter, there are scores of articles on this visit to South America there alone!), I think some counter-commentary from a source that is (I pray) in union with the Church and not given over to sede vacantism or anything else is prudent and hopefully helpful.

I am trying to back off papal coverage. This last week however was full of spectacular developments that merited at least a modicum of analysis. I don’t think I have gone over the top in being inordinately focused on this papacy, but this was really big, newsworthy stuff. The vast majority of readers knew of these events, anyways, they may as well get some commentary that, I hope, helps them put it in perspective.

My apologies for any offense caused. Your comments mean a great deal and I WILL take them into account.

5. camper - July 13, 2015

Dear Tantum,
You’re at a loss to respond, so support the movement to depose HH! Pretty simple: HE’S A MATERIAL HERETIC.

Joan - July 13, 2015

Before advocating the pope step down or be forced to, for heresy or insanity whichever came first, let’s ask this:

Why was this pope elected at this time in history?
Which cardinals promoted and pushed his election?
What were their goals in doing so?
Why did the rest go along?
Has this group grown or lost power in 2 years?
Why did the frontrunner stand up and beg them to vote for Bergoglio instead of himself?
If Sede, who would be elected next?
Could we end up worse than we are now?

Tantumblogo - July 13, 2015

I’m with you. Plus, I’m just not quite sure enough of my invincible rightness that I can make this call. I’m conflicted with what I do already. Perhaps I should take MFG’s recommendation and desist, but I doubt of my strength.

No, I won’t call for the Pope to step down, even if he would hear my voice, or the voice of 500,000 doing so, but he won’t. He is beloved of millions and just got a rapt reception from that many in South America, he’d just write us off as a bunch of Rosary counting Promethean neo-Pelagians.

TG - July 14, 2015

I didn’t think the laity have the right to tell a pope to step down. Isn’t this a task for bishops?

Tantumblogo - July 14, 2015

We don’t. There is really no mechanism for this. Maybe a college of cardinals, but the pope could try to resist, and then we’d have a situation like the Great Western Schism with more than one declared Pope.

In a hierarchical Church, there are not many options for extreme problems at the highest level.

Tim Thunell - July 14, 2015

What movement? Please direct us to the official movement. Who is leading it? What are its methods? Also, even if you are correct who of us peons has the power or influence to depose him? Your suggestion of joining the “movement” raises many questions.

6. gc5341 - July 13, 2015

What strange times we live in! The very day the Pope was given a blasphemous gift I was reading about the Holy Face devotion in the mid nineteenth century when communism was in its infancy. Christ reveals to Sr Mary St Peter that the crimes which outrage him the most in His sacraments proceed from secret societies. Our Lord indicated them under the general title of communists as being the greatest enemies of the Church. He commanded Sister to make war upon them. Sister understood Our Lord telling her communists to be for the most part born in the Church of which they now declare themselves ememies. Our Lord said communists committed the crime of Judas. After reading that I understand how gravely wrong it was for Pope Francis to fail to condemn the grotesque and evil “gift” putting Christ’s Holy and Sacred body on the vile Communist symbol of hammer and sickle. Pray for Pope Francis. Pray the Pope has a change of heart.

Tantumblogo - July 13, 2015

I do so pray. It is an odd feeling to pray for that, but there it is, nonetheless.

Baseballmom - July 14, 2015

It is odd… Ending my Morning Offering “and in particular, for the conversion of the Holy Father.” But, it is what I pray, every day.

7. Magdalene - July 14, 2015

How do you think an anti-pope would act? Would he have the adulation of the world? Would he be a darling of those who hate what the Church teaches? Would he surround himself with heretics and others who speak opposite of Church teaching? Would he denigrate and criticize faithful Catholics? Just asking.

I dread the media coverage of the trip to the US….but it is NOT just spin. One can read word for word of what comes from the mouth of this pope on Zenit and other sources and see for oneself.

Branch - July 14, 2015

Great questions. Cardinal Biffi, who died this weekend, described the Anti-Christ as “pacifist, ecologist & ecumenist”.

Baseballmom - July 14, 2015

Oh my dear Lord! Just read this from an old Catholic Culture article (15 years ago or so)
“A cardinal, the Times of London has suggested is a possible successor to John Paul II as Pope, has warned that the Antichrist may already be among us — but not seem evil to many. Rather, this “fascinating personality” (fascinating in the sense of mesmerizing) may be seen by many as a great humanitarian because of his support for things like vegetarianism, pacifism and the protection of the environment.”

TG - July 14, 2015

I thought the Anti-Christ would be a political leader. The false prophet would be a religious leader. I’ve wondered if the False Prophet would be a Pope. That’s what the Protestants believe.

Murray - July 14, 2015

True ecumenical reconciliation!

Tantumblogo - July 14, 2015

The man of sin is not necessarily the antichrist. Much of this is speculative. There is thought to be a precursor in the Church who will make the antichrist possible. Pope Saint Pius X feared the “man of sin” (it could be more than one, or even be representative of an entire movement) was abroad in his day, 100 years ago. He feared modernism was the manifestation of this man of sin. But I am not an expert in eschatology, per se. I’ve read some on it. As I said, much of this is speculative or not necessarily hard Doctrine.

8. Guest - July 14, 2015

I am not white. I cannot understand how people protest the Christianization of pagan countries. Evil is institutional in pagan countries. For example, sati wasn’t abolished until the British came to India. When I read what the ancient world was like I can definitely believe it because of corruption, lack of human rights and cultural thugery in countries that haven’t been fully Christianized.

9. RC - July 14, 2015

I personally think we area going headlong into something big, I think Bishop Fellay was right when he said we are headed for major events.

If you would have told me 3 years ago during Benedict’s reign that someone like Francis was going to come after him, I would have thought you were crazy. I expected someone even more traditional than Benedict, that’s where it seemed like the Church was headed. Now look where we are.

I personally think that Francis is the ultimate punishment from God for our actions, the last 50 years in general and the last 2 years in particular. Think of all the millions and millions of souls that have been lost to Hell, and the even more millions who have left the Church, and the now more that the pope is scandalizing, what could this be other than divine punishment?

I think we are culminating to the fulfillment of one or more prophesies. Think of Fatima/Akita and God sending a chastisement. Have men bettered themselves? Has the world gotten better? No and no, and we now have a pope who scandalizes millions.

I’ve been wondering lately if the secret sect that Anne Catherine Emmerick talks about in her prophesies is actually Marxism/Communism? Reading her prophesies in hindsight over the last 2 years is extremely revealing. If you have not read them, do so

Baseballmom - July 14, 2015

Here is a bit of her prophesy:
In those days, Faith will fall very low, and it will be preserved in some places only, in a few cottages and in a few families which God has protected from disasters and wars.”

“I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church. They were building a great, strange, and extravagant Church. Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description. Such was to be the new Church…”

“I heard that Lucifer (if I am not mistaken) will be freed again for awhile
fifty or sixty years before the year 2,000 AD.”

10. LaGallina - July 14, 2015

In the most recent issue of The Remnant (June 15/ June 30, 2015 Volume 48) Michael Matt’s editorial is entitled “Declaration of War.” The following is from my print edition (I don’t know if this can be found online other than on the E-edition.)

“…the fight for the soul of the Catholic Church is now a matter of life and death. The war is on, and so no more politics; no more pulling back; no more pulling punches. Our Church is in the hands of the modern equivalent of the Arians, and the time has come to formally declare war against those who have breached the walls of the fort, as well as those who betrayed it in the first place.”

I, for one, stand behind Mr. Matt. We must declare war against “those who have breached the walls.” This is not just a “goofy” Jesuit pope trying to appease the enemy. This pope is promoting Communism!! He IS the enemy. I believe that we must oppose him from now on for the sake of Holy Mother Church and the millions of souls that are being lost due to this false Catholic teaching.

When the Holy Land was occupied by the enemy, Catholics in great numbers fought for it. Now the Catholic Church has been occupied by the enemy. Maybe we can’t literally take up arms and fight, but we can verbally oppose the false teachings of this enemy in the Vatican. We must fight against Francis the First and fight FOR Our King who is being viciously attacked by those who are supposed to be “in persona Christi.” If that is not betrayal I don’t know what is.

Also, John Vennari’s Catholic Family News (July 2015) runs a piece by Robert J. Siscoe called “Deposing a Heretical Pope, Part I.” Clearly many of us are beyond being “deeply concerned” as we have been for two years or more. (Or many decades as in the cases of Mr. Matt and Mr. Vennari.) Clearly we are not just dealing with a “bad pope.”

We can sit around and weep all day for the wickedness taking place in Rome. Or we can pray and boldly proclaim the Truth. We MUST boldly proclaim the truth at this juncture in history. I think the vast majority of readers of this blog have bent over backwards to give this pope the benefit of the doubt. But the time for making excuses for him is over. He is trying to overthrow Christ the King!

No, we are not saints. We are not Church leaders. But we are the Church and it is our duty to defend Her, even if our leaders won’t.

11. St. Anibale - July 14, 2015

I have not seen anything by Mike Voris in a long while. Has he weighed in yet on the Pope kissing the Koran…sorry…I mean the
Pope gushing over Our Lord crucified on a hammer and sickle?

I do not envy the apologists for Papal novelties in the job before them. It reminds me of those guys in the parade following the mounted Sheriff’s posse with push-brooms and shovels.

Baseballmom - July 15, 2015

MV “sort of” weighed in this morning…. Talking about “Rome” not being clear….

12. ThatCatholicHistorian (E.J.) - July 14, 2015

This was very odd. From all the weird medallions to the blasphemous “crucifix”. If Pope Francis is supposed to be this humble “Franciscan-like” guy why did he not decline the medallions being placed on him? I am dumb-founded. The neo-Catholics will brush this off as nothing. I am sure Jimmy Akin will have an article that will tell us all what “it really means”. Smh.

13. TG - July 14, 2015

EWTN reported that the Pope said it was not right. This was the repeat World Over from last Thursday. Tantum, what were the words in Spanish that he said? If it had been my dad, he would have thrown that thing at him.

Tantumblogo - July 14, 2015

It is difficult to make out the sound. But some people have improved the speech levels and he said this:

No sabia eso (I did not know that.)

He did not say:

Eso no esta bien. (That is not right.)

All this is moot now, as the Pope himself confirmed on his flight back from South America that he was “honored” to receive the commufix and was not offended by it. He also referred to his being unsure what was being presented, which goes along with “I did not know that” it was an artifact of that Jesuit liberation theology priest he was honoring.

It’s very clear at this point, Pope Francis was not put off at all by this presentation, which, under normal diplomatic protocol, was agreed to well in advance.

14. Thomas R - July 14, 2015

Bergoglio in not a pope, but an anti-pope. He is an apostate. A non-Catholic cannot be the pope.

Tantumblogo - July 14, 2015

Makes an interesting commentary on the efficacy of attempted papal abdication, does it not? There is a theory floating around out there that PF is proof that Benedict is still Pope, whether he wants to be or not. I don’t know how well developed it is.

Baseballmom - July 14, 2015

That was the point I was making a few weeks back. IF PF errs in matters of Faith and Morals and IF Benedict is still living, THEN is that proof that the abdication was inavalid?

Tantumblogo - July 14, 2015

I was echoing your point. It’s a good one. I have no answer for you. I don’t think anyone really does.

15. TG - July 15, 2015

I was reading Father Z’s blog on this hideous cross. I don’t know about him but his readers are a lot of Pollyanna’s. I’m struggling right now with my faith because some readers at other blogs bring good points about the papacy. One said we Catholics place too much emphasis on the institution of the church instead of on Christ. It does seem like that especially about this pope. So many articles about him every where. I don’t recall everyone hanging on to every word Benedict said. Was it this way when John Paul II was Pope? (I wasn’t practicing then so I wouldn’t know.) I’m trying to find a book that would have the history of the church. I can’t see the apostles and early bishops acting all pompous and calling themselves “princes”.

Tantumblogo - July 15, 2015

They didn’t. I’m not sure there are many Cardinals who do so, either. Certainly not publicly. It’s a term that developed back in the Baroque period that maybe is unfortunate and shouldn’t be used. I use it to make a point: these men are entrusted with the 2nd greatest level of authority possible in the Church and yet so many fail to exercise that authority with any responsibility.

I disagree that we focus “too much” on the Church. However, I do agree, and have written about quite extensively, that after Vatican I an aura of near- (if not outright) idolatry enveloped the papacy and the very narrow limits of infallibility were expanded to “the pope can do no wrong.” Or practically so. That worked OK, even though disordered, for most of a century so long as we had good popes. But once we started having less than really good popes the problems with this mentality rapidly became evident. VII happened because it was felt it was the will of two popes to greatly change the Church’s orientation. The revolution continued because Popes seemed to endorse it. Even though Doctrine was never changed, mere sentiment that the various popes wanted this or that helped drive the Church to unprecedented departure from the pre-conciliar practice of the Faith. And now with the current pontiff we see this situation rapidly approaching its conclusion, and it don’t look very good.

This is too much to go over in a comment but basically hyper-montanism is the root cause of all this departure from the Faith as always believed and practiced. The large majority of nominally faithful Catholics have convinced themselves that the Faith is whatever the reigning pontiff says it is. And that has proven a recipe for disaster.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: