Pope John Lennon – If I Condemned Islamist Violence, I’d Have to Condemn Catholic Violence August 1, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, different religion, Ecumenism, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, huh?, Society, SSPX, Tradition.
This is after he exhorted World Youth Day goers – which one commenter who attended one in the past likened to a Catholic orgy – to be a “A humanity that rejects hatred between people, one that refuses to see borders as barriers.” Imagine there’s no countries…..and no religion too. Groovy. Right on. Make love, not war. Peace Now. Leave your first wife for a Japanese freak and break up the most overrated I mean greatest rock n’ pop band ever.
More substantially, Francis emoted, when pressed, that he did not criticize islam as the source of the hatred that led to a Catholic priest being beheaded, because, if he did that, he’d have to criticize Catholic violence, too, because sometimes baptized Catholic steal or do other bad things:
“I don’t think it is right to equate Islam with violence,” he told journalists during his return from a trip to Poland [on July 31].Pope Francis defended his decision not to name Islam when condemning the brutal jihadist murder of a Catholic priest in France in the latest of a string of recent attacks in Europe claimed by Islamic State (or Isil).“In almost every religion there is always a small group of fundamentalists. We have them too,” he said.“If I have to talk about Islamic violence I have to talk about Christian violence. Every day in the newspapers I see violence in Italy, someone kills his girlfriend, another kills his mother in law, and these are baptised Catholics.” [Source] [Does it even have to be said how dumb and false this comparison is? It literally makes no sense, it’s comparing apples to Chevrolets. I’m surprised he didn’t mention the Crusades]
Remember, he also attributed attacks like the one last week to things like poverty, lack of jobs and opportunity, and frustration at current political events. That is to say, wholly materialist reasons – which, at least, would be consistent.
So this is the man who is going to “regularize” the SSPX? I’m having a hard time getting excited over Msgr. Pozzo’s interview, he’s said the same thing many times before. Way back in 2012/3 we were told that an agreement was just seconds from being signed, and then the whole thing suddenly exploded. He admits doctrinal issues remain. Well, the entire SSPX “situation” has hinged on doctrine all along, hasn’t it? So what exactly has changed? Sure, Bishop Fellay seems to think that a personal prelature could work for the Society, but he’s said that for years, too. Some people claiming inside knowledge – like the link – seem to firmly believe it’s different this time, but have offered little firm evidence.
As for my opinion, should it be true, I’m of two minds. Predominately, I want the SSPX to be fully regular and to be able to continue their present work without the nagging doubts of canonical irregularity hampering the good they do, which is not inconsiderable. At the same time, I have a nagging voice that tells me to fear regularization with the current conditions in Rome, especially under this Pope. The example of the traditional Catholics of Campos is something to bear in mind. And the dangers spread far beyond the SSPX – there is no question the FSSP and other Ecclesia Dei groups exist in “full regularity” because of the pressure the SSPX exerts on the Church. Should that pressure go away, will the Ecclesia Dei groups be persecuted, or forced into moral conundrums?
Nevertheless, if the situation is ever going to be resolved, it’s going to take a huge leap of Faith by all involved. Surely there are long, sharp knives waiting for an “exposed” Society to be made vulnerable to them, but we have to trust in Our Savior and His promises. May God’s will be done.