jump to navigation

The Synod was lost years, decades ago October 20, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
trackback

Just to be clear, while I follow and report on the Synod with great interest as it is by far the most pressing event in the Church today, I do not sit here in great fear wondering how the Synod will turn out.  I hope my posts have revealed that I fully expect the “Synod,” or Francis speaking in the name of the Synod, to do whatever it is they have planned to do all along.  The 2014 Synod was rigged to achieve a certain result, and this one, even more so.  It’s actually laughable. The only benefit for us trying to be faithful is for the hard, concrete evidence of erroneous, heretical positions held by a good number of prelates, especially those who count as Pope Francis’ favorite.

But in reality, the “Synod” was lost long before Pope Francis came to office. It has been lost by those conservativish prelates who have failed in their duty for decades.  As I’ve noted in several recent posts, the bishops, having failed to even attempt to teach Catholic Doctrine for many, many years, now express dismay that it seems few Catholics accept that Doctrine.  This is a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy, which even the most avowedly conservative bishops have helped create by failing to take the lumps that would come from boldly proclaiming the Truth in season and out of season.

Boniface at Unam Sanctam Catholicam provides us with a handy, if admittedly incomplete, list of episcopal failures with regard to fulfilling even their most basic duties as shepherds, which made this point to which we come in the Church in the Year of Our Lord 2015 essentially inevitable (my emphasis and comments):

How could conservatives have conceivably “fought back” more than they did? It is interesting to read Pope St. Pius X’s Pascendi with this in mind. Pascendi, of course, was the famous encyclical which exposed and condemned Modernism. But Pius X was not content to simply speak the truth; he put his convictions into practice by taking positive action against Modernism. Pascendi decrees that Modernists be deposed from teaching positions. If they are clerics, their bishops are to place them in the most obscure of offices where they can cause little trouble. Their books are to be censured. The Oath Against Modernism is instituted. Anti-Modernists are promoted while it is made known that no Modernist has any future possibility of promotion (if only that had remained true!). SO vigorous was his assault that the Modernists and progressives complained about his heavy hand. [In fact, Pope St. Pius X removed several modernist-friendly bishops from the episcopate and forced a number of priests out for their heresy]

In short, Pius X never thought merely stating the truth was sufficient; he needed to use the power at his disposal to see it pushed through.

What could conservative bishops do, or have done, that they have not?

  • Vigorously punish heresy in their own dioceses. Keep strict watch on the activities of certain priests and suspend, dismiss or defrock those who clearly dissent from Church teaching. [Oh, but he’ll have a rebellion!  And if…..so what?  Better to clean out the heretics now than let them work their ill for decades unchecked]
  • Preach the truth boldly, including explicit condemnations of particular groups or ideologies, even condemning heterodox teachers or priests by name when necessary. Go beyond the typical non-offensive, wishy-washy bishop-speak.
  • Use the resources of a diocese to publish actual informative and instructional materials, not the sort of nonsense most dioceses put out.
  • Actually issue liturgical directives to promote tradition. The contemporary Church documents offer considerable leeway in how liturgy can be done; the upside of this is that the bishop is given the final call on all of these options. A bishop could easily say, “No guitars and drums at any diocesan Mass”, or mandate sacred chant, or compel every parish to offer at least a monthly Traditional Latin Mass. Novus Ordo Masses must at least incorporate Latin and be said ad orientam. 
  • Dismiss lay persons or members of subversive religious orders from their diocesan committees. [I am glad to see the dread effect of the SSND is finally starting to relax a bit in this diocese, not through episcopal action but through natural means]
  • Actually use the tool of excommunication against dissident theologians and dissenting Catholic politicians.
  • Use resources of the diocese for meaningful ( I stress meaningful) social activism. Example: One priest told me there used to be a scummy motel near his parish that was frequented by prostitutes. He raised some money, bought the motel, and had it torn down. What if the millions raised by our diocesan appeals were used for such uses? [How about a bishop exhorting souls to oppose moral evils in their diocese?  Strip clubs, porn houses, abortuaries, etc]
  • Organize at the regional level and use their weight to push through appointments within the USCCB or elsewhere that were favorable to them while simultaneously using their influence to keep out liberal appointments.
  • Host guest-speakers friendly to tradition and forbid those who are not. [Oh, that would just crush the church ladies who run Collin County Catholic Churches Association]
  • Forbid Catholic schools and hospitals from engaging in activities harmful to the Catholic faith and actually back up these directives with the appropriate force.
  • Fire all Catholic school teachers who are in immoral relationships. [Fire all Catholic school teachers who hold heretical views]
  • Actually celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass and require all seminarians to know it and be comfortable with Latin. [I pray for this daily]
  • Publicly censure books and films hostile or dangerous to the Catholic faith. [Contra the crap recommendations that come out of the USCCB – which is a huge problem in itself.]
  • Mandate traditional arrangements in the architecture of sanctuaries and churches; stipulate that no parish has the right to undertake any renovations unless personally approved by him.
  • Promote priests who cooperate with this agenda and punish those who don’t.
  • In short, never, never miss an opportunity to promote tradition and actively punish and repress liberalism. Speak the truth boldly but also use the weight of the office to silence, retard, dismiss or dispirit the liberal opposition.

I would certainly add some more: be like Bruskewitz and don’t give the USCCB the time of day.  So many bishops abrogate huge swaths of their duty under the mistaken notion that the bureaucrats at the USCCB (like the film reviewers) are somehow covering for them. That is one major reason why the doctrine never gets taught, standards are never enforced, and heretics/problematic speakers get a free hand.  Most every bishop shirks his own duty, while counting on some other bishop to be doing it.  So long as a speaker has one of those “sainted” letters from a bishop saying they are “approved,” they are golden, they can speak anywhere no matter how noxious and anti-Catholic their beliefs.  But without one, you are forbidden to speak anywhere on Church property. Thus, Michael Voris and Chris Ferrara cannot speak on parish grounds, but Ron Rolheiser can.

The main point is this: conservative bishops experiencing angst over the Synod are really being hoist on their own petards. They have, almost to a man, failed to properly enforce ecclesiastical and doctrinal discipline and while perhaps personally (relatively) orthodox themselves, have done very little to help stem the overall collapse.  There have been only a tiny handful of bishops in this nation since the 60s who have implemented even half of the above. But those few who have developed some of the strongest dioceses in the nation.  Of course, some of those have now been run off under specious accusations of tolerating abuse, even while known felons and unindicted co-conspirators in purple continue to hold their offices.

We didn’t get here by accident.  Yes, the cards have been stacked against them, yes, the press would scream, yes, people would walk out, yes, they’d have a big mess on their hands, but all that is just part and parcel of being a CATHOLIC BISHOP!  Far too few have been, and now we have idiots in sees who say the Church just has to get rid of this Jesus Christ guy, he’s too off-putting and upsetting to “progress.”

As I said in a previous post, where we are at today is the culmination of decades, even centuries of deliberate planning and effort.  With regard to the intra-Church conspiracy, it’s certainly been around for at least 100-120 years or so.  It has been in a dominant position for 50.  But it did not have to happen!  Men make history, not impersonal forces, and enough good men doing their duty could have certainly changed things.

But the crisis of the Church is a crisis of bishops (and now popes).  That’s why what is coming appears to be so unstoppable.

I always keep hope for divine intervention, however.

Comments

1. Dismas - October 20, 2015

Agree totally. This is a logical point on a continuum. The synod differs from the Assisi prayer meetings or Koran-kissing in quantity and breadth, not in quality.

2. TE - October 20, 2015

All of the above and divine intervention. St. Joseph is the universal patron of the Church and we need his intercession.

3. L. Chapman - October 21, 2015

Let’s face it, even our orthodox cardinals and bishops are a bunch of ninnies. Yes, we need to pray and do penance and pray to St. Joseph, etc., but somebody needs to stop kow-towing to the papacy and not only make nice speeches, but chastise plainly, as did St. Catherine and St. Hildegarde, over and over again. That way followers can align themselves. And we’ve got to stop supporting this heretical church financially. All we are doing is being crybabies.

4. Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas - October 21, 2015

Very clearly stated. Oh, how we do not want to see what we clearly see. This IS an inevitable point an a logical continuum, considering the intentions and qualities of the actors involved.

5. c matt - October 21, 2015

Yes, even the “good” post conciliar popes were naive at best, believing that reasoned discourse and truth would win out over conniving heresy; heresy needs to be crushed per stirpes, not given the light of day or a molecule of oxygen. They were lax (perhaps out of misguided mercy or kindness) when they needed to be ruthless.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: