jump to navigation

+Brandmuller blasts indifference in episcopate, but he (and we) face an incredible struggle- UPDATED July 21, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the return, the struggle for the Church.

Reader “Camper” sent me a link to this article on LifeSiteNews, which translates an op-ed written by Cardinal Brandmuller in Germany recently.  Brandmuller’s editorial is one of the most thorough, damning condemnations of the state of the Church and the blithe indifference of the episcopate in the midst of collapse I’ve read in some time – at least from a leading figure of the Church.  His analysis of the Church stands in near total contrast to the runaway giddiness of the aging, declining progressive faction, which, according to a new post at Rorate (quoting a National Geographic article on the Pope), now believe that all their cherished, long-frustrated hopes and dreams of remaking the Church in their own fallen image are about to be fulfilled.

I don’t think it any exaggeration to say that the Church stands at a great crossroads, which may well dictate the path she takes for the next 50-100 years: more modernist embrace of the world and doctrinal indifference, leading to further collapse, or the start, one may hope, of a return to sanity.

First, Cardinal Brandmuller:

The cardinal sees in certain circles in the Church almost a “perverse lust for self-destruction,” for example, “by undermining the procreation of life in different ways and in putting into question the natural sexual identity of man and woman.” [I’d say, dead on.  Of course, as St. Pius X made very clear, modernism is the death of faith.  That modernist beliefs would lead to a cultural death spiral through mass refusal of openness to life is hardly surprising.]

Cardinal Brandmueller describes the danger of adapting to “political correctness,” admitting that violating it entails “risking execution by the Media.” [The media is dominated by progressives, who have always hated the Church!  Even 150 years ago Blessed Pius IX recognized in the media an inveterate hostility to the Faith and the good of souls.  This tendency has only grown since then.  Trying to please the media is a sure path towards destruction.]

He decries the “dynamic of silence into which the majority” of bishops have slipped “and thus silently watch the execution.”  No one can claim “such conduct is worthy of a Christian,” he adds, “especially when dealing with fundamental questions concerning the teaching of Faith and Morals of the Gospel of Christ.”

“For what purpose did we receive the Sacrament of Confirmation?” he asks. “And, did not the bishops at their consecration promise that they would proclaim faithfully the Gospel of Christ and would preserve, pure and entire, the Deposit of the Faith according to the Tradition as held by the Church, always and everywhere?” [One must wonder how often this promise was not made in good faith. Judging from the behavior of the large majority of bishops over the past 50 years, it would seem, far, far too often.  The thing is, apparently many bishops are convinced –  or pretend to be convinced – that the practice of the Church can be radically changed while Doctrine is left supposedly untouched.  This is impossible, and reveals a revolutionary mindset (one that apparently thinks the faithful and even many good priests are none too bright) intent on trying to “sneak” changes to doctrine through the backdoor.  We’ve seen the game plan laid out by Vatican favorite Fr. Tom Rosica – doctrine will be changed by changing Church-wide practice, first, and then once those changes have been implemented and practiced for a long time, maybe many decades, “doctrine will be changed” to catch up.  Talk about a death wish, that’s it, right there, the death of the Church, a la episcopalianism.]

The cardinal calls for a “de-secularization” of the Church, meaning a form of thinking which does not follow earthly principles and calculations but “follows the Truth of the Faith.”  Instead of “preaching ‘Christianity light,’” he said, “we should have the courage to demand a program which is in firm contrast to the societal mainstream of today and lives out fully” the commandments. [I agree, but those who believe as we do are apparently in the distinct minority.]

“The Church can and must proclaim the Natural Moral Law which has been perfected by the Gospels and which is understandable for the man of good will,” he says. “Thereby, the Church should not allow herself to be deflected by the [growing] resistance against her message.” [I agree again.  But apparently, not enough even in the episcopate do.  They seem to fear the world more than God.  They seem to believe, in spite of the mountainous evidence of the past 50 years, that the problem is that the Church has not changed enough to please the world and her master, and must bow down to both still more.  They are apparently totally blind to the effects of their own Doctrine either in the Church, or in the sects which have followed a similar path.  The only people rejoicing over this latest push for the revolution are the Pope’s evangelical buddies, who will pick up scads of disaffected Catholics, and more importantly, their money.]

Now, what we are up against, once again via Rorate, quoting sources ostensibly close to Pope Francis.  All of this is hearsay, but given its consistency with so much of what we’ve been able to observe over the past 2 years, I certainly would not discount it out of hand:

Similarly, Saracco, the Pentecostal pastor, discussed with the pope the possibility of removing celibacy as a requirement for priests. “If he can survive the pressures of the church today and the results of the Synod on the Family in October,” he says, “I think after that he will be ready to talk about celibacy.” When I ask if the pope had told him this or if he was relying on intuition, Saracco smiles slyly and says, “It’s more than intuition.”

This would appear to be the pope’s mission: to ignite a revolution inside the Vatican and beyond its walls, without overturning a host of long-held precepts. “He won’t change doctrine,” insists de la Serna, his Argentine friend. “What he will do is return the church to its true doctrine—the one it has forgotten, the one that puts man back in the center.[Do you see the lie?!? “He won’t change doctrine,” but will “return the Church to its true doctrine!”  So what you are calling for is……a change in Doctrine!  Also note the revolutionary, anthropocentric viewpoint, the quintessence of the post-conciliar mentality – “man is the center of the Church.”] For too long, the church put sin

 in the center. By putting the suffering of man, and his relationship with God, back in the center, these harsh attitudes toward homosexuality, divorce, and other things will start to change.”

You get the juxtaposition, right: the Church’s very loving approach toward souls – please don’t sin for your own good, for the sake of your eternal soul! – is now a “harsh attitude.”  This is modernism 101, pure and clear.  Just as after VII, the this revolutionary cabal – speaking of Pope Francis as one of their own, I pray they are wrong – plans to advance their worldly revolution while pretending Doctrine is unchanged.  It’s untenable and laughable, and will only harm souls, but it provides them with the kind of cover they need to keep many Catholics from seeing reality.  This is the kind of fig leaf that those often derided as “neo-Catholics” or “neo-conservatives” cling to as they argue that “doctrine hasn’t changed.”  That makes recognizing and exploding these kinds of claims all the more important.

Another important point, made by a commenter: just where in the Church is there any focus on sin?  What a laugh!  In most places sin is virtually never mentioned, and even if it rarely is, it is generally fake “corporate sins” like capitalism and not loving mother Gaia enough.  There is a repository of condemnation of sin, however, and this is most important: IT IS IN THE DOCTRINE! Only in doctrine is sin generally firmly condemned in the Church today.  That makes clear what they are really going after: doctrinal change, made first by stealth, and then, once they feel strong/bold enough, to try to change it formally.

It is amazing that anyone could claim that the Church has not put man’s relationship with God at the center of her focus.  I’d say the only time that has been true has been in the last 50 years, when man’s relationship with God has often been a sideshow to far more earthly concerns.  You know, things like environmentalism, progressive activism, funding abortion and contraception through Catholic charities, etc., etc.  That is, the same old same old which has veritably brought the Church to her knees.  Like all good progressives, those quoted above look at the failure of their program and can only exclaim: it’s because we didn’t go far enough!  We didn’t cave enough on core doctrine!  Once we jettison that last, final bit of doctrine – say, the Divinity of Christ, or the Resurrection (don’t laugh, look at the Unitarians and other more liberal “mainline” sects) – then the souls will just come pouring in.

The real religion of Katholycs is leftism…….they simply adopt a Catholic patina as they march through one more institution.




1. Mitchell H - July 21, 2015

Between you and me, I’d like to know just how many churches in this country actually preach sin. If that’s all Catholics are hearing – where are they hearing it from? Not most parishes, that’s for sure.

And by the way, prayers are of course offered to you and yours.

Tantumblogo - July 21, 2015

Thank you!

On your main point, yes, that’s very revealing. When they say “the focus has been on sin,” they surely don’t mean in the pastoral approach of the vast majority of the Church over the past several decades, they mean the doctrine. It is only the doctrine that remains as a rebuke against a culture gone wholly immoral. Think I’ll update the post, thanks.

2. Woody - July 21, 2015

Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. How many times in the past have we, the laity, been deceived with regard to Church teachings? I stumbled upon a comment in a blog last week which stated that there was a commission of cardinals in 1986 put together to determine if the TLM was abrogated by Paul VI. The findings of this commission of nine cardinals, one of which was Cardinal Ratzinger, was that it was not abrogated and further, that any priest could say the Mass without authority of his bishop. The pope who asked for the commission, John Paul II, was willing to promulgate the findings but some episcopal conferences found out about it and pleaded for the pope not to make such an announcement because it would cause a great controversy with the laity. As a result, Pope JPII abstained from signing the decree and kept the commission and its findings secret. Why would this particular pope and these cardinals keep secret such a truth about the TLM? Maybe I’m the last one to find out about this matter but it really pisses me off considering the priests involved.

Tantumblogo - July 21, 2015

Yes I knew of this. Yes Summorum Pontficum only “announced,” or codified, what was already known. The ancient Rite could not be abrogated, especially after Quo Primum and Saint Pius V in 1570 saying “THIS IS THE OFFICIAL AND APPROVED FORM OF THE ROMAN RITE TO WHICH NO CHANGES CAN BE MADE, EVER, ON PAIN OF SIN/EXCOMMUNICATION.” Sorry to shout, but that how would you abrogate that, without turning a Saint and hence Christ into a liar. Some Trads see in this declaration of PSPV firm evidence that the NO is invalid. I’m not the one to make that call, but it is certainly disconcerting.

3. Anne - July 22, 2015

I just read a very interesting interview with Austrian philosopher Thomas Stark. The article is about Cardinal Walter Kasper and Mr. Stark basically determines, through his research, that Cardinal Kasper is a Modernist. Of course we all know that, but there is one line I find appropriate to what you have stated in this post.

Stark says, “They(Kasper, et al) say, ‘We cannot change doctrine, but we must change the pastoral application of doctrine or the practice,’ which is contradictory, because you can’t change practice without altering doctrine, because practice follows directly from doctrine. So this is pure fantasy. For anyone who thinks on this for a moment, it becomes clear that it simply can’t be done. You have to change doctrine in order to change the moral teaching.”

It is a great interview and worth reading. It is at NCRegister. Here is a link:
Thank you for all you do and staying strong! I will pray for your special, unborn child.
God bless!

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: