jump to navigation

Priest Explains the Problem of Amoris Laetitia and Francis in Detail March 10, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Latin Mass, Revolution, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership.
trackback

While much of what the priest in the sermons below presents is somewhat old news to any who have been following developments in this pontificate with any closeness, it is still extremely handy to have it all gone over in detail and explained just exactly how pernicious, destructive, and even blasphemous Francis’ efforts to wholly remake (as in destroy) the moral edifice of the Church are.

It is also very edifying to know there are priests out there – I certainly won’t ID him, but non-SSPX, traditional priests – who are calling a spade a spade and demonstrating clearly that, given the choice between “the pope and Jesus Christ,” this priest, at least, intends to side firmly with Jesus Christ.

There is much good formation here.  Both sermons are well worth your time and constitute elements of a 6 part sermon that has all been uploaded to the Sensus Fidelium channel on Youtube.

Sermon one reviews the travesty that is Amoris Laetitia, and the clear “interpretations” Francis has given to bishops in Argentina, Malta, and other locales, which clearly demonstrate the revolutionary intent of this unprecedented encyclical.  There are many clear judgments and hard-hitting phrases that we most certainly need to be hearing from our priests:

The second sermon deals with the reaction to Amoris Laetitia in the form of the dubia submitted by 4 cardinals asking very pointed and clear questions of Francis.  As is already widely known, Francis has chosen to simply ignore this dubia.  One hopes eventually the cardinals will then take the issue to the next level, which is to publicly examine Francis’ works in the light of Tradition, but we shall have to see:

I disagree slightly with this excellent priest in one area, that is in referring to this as a “real Henry VIII moment in the Church.”  Elsewhere, he says more correctly, to my mind, that the Church has never, ever, in her entire recorded history had a pontiff make such direct, destructive attacks on the Doctrine of the Faith.

We are in a completely unprecedented situation.  This post-modernist crisis is the worst the Church has ever seen for the completeness of the embrace of error and the tiny scope of the remnant faithful, but Francis has taken it to an entirely new and different level.

But while Henry VIII was certainly a lout, a glutton, a destroyer of religion, and a persecutor of the Church, he was, after all, a layman.  He started the process of destruction of the Faith in one country and was rightly excommunicated for his crimes, but what we have in Francis is something entirely different.  Here it is an attack from within, from the highest office in the Church, the man given such enormous torrents of Grace to correspond faithfully to the tenets of his office and the Doctrine of the Faith that his heart must be as hard as diamond to be executing the plan he is so obviously carrying out.  Not only is the scope of destruction Francis can achieve infinitely larger than anything Henry VIII could have done, but after decades of neglect and collapse the forces of orthodoxy and resistance are so much smaller than they have been at probably any other time in the history of the Church.

To me, Francis’ destructive potential is greater than Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, Luther, Calvin, Melanchthon, Zwinglii, and all the rest combined, because he presents himself as not only within the House of God but as its head!  Catholics will for decades to come be fighting off arguments from protestants, atheists, etc., based on the errors that Francis has introduced.  Even worse is the aid, comfort, and intellectual armament being conferred on those modernists within the Church.  Now we shall be forever quoting pope against pope in trying to defend the Faith.

And we haven’t even begun to see this play out.  Francis will be gone in a few years, more than likely, but what will follow in his wake?  Even if that next pope is not as radical as Francis, will he roll back any of the revolutionary changes already under way?  Or will he allow them to persist and continue to rot the Church from within, as the appeasement of the use of contraception did to the Church during the 70s, 80s, 90s, etc?

The only way forward for the Church, then, is for some future pope to deliberately refute the errors abounding today and anathematize the current resident of the Vatican Doma Sancta Martha.  We have got to pray that such a future pope, with enough backbone and love of Christ to do so, emerges.

On a lighter note, is not this priest a most effective, practiced speaker?  Few other priests use so much inflection, emotion, and vary their meter as much as this one does.

Advertisements

Comments

1. docmx001 - March 10, 2017

This is what I’ve been saying all along. The only solution is for this entire pontificate to be expunged, or to be declared null from its inception. Nuked from orbit, so to speak. It’s the only way to be sure.

2. David - March 10, 2017

Bishop Lopes has a good pastoral letter titled A Pledged Troth. It is short and worth reading, and can be found online. It was released in mid January 2017, without a huge amount of press.

Bishop Lopes is the Bishop for the Ordinariate for the Chair of St. Peter, and many former Episcopalians crossed the Tiber in part to support “traditional marriage.”

3. Matt: Don’t Give Up, Fight for the Church! | A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics - March 10, 2017

[…] really like this video from Michael Matt.  It makes a very good corollary to the two videos in the post below.  Sort of like diagnosis, and treatment […]

4. Richard Malcolm - March 10, 2017

I thin the closest we’ve come to this – Paul VI aside, of course – is Pope Honorius, whose aiding and abetting of the Monethelite heresy got him formally (and rightly) condemned by two of his successors and the Third Council of Constantinople.

But the unprecedented speed and reach of modern communications alone makes for even greater damage that could be done by Francis, even setting aside the substance of what he has said and done.

It makes evangelizing for the faith a lot more difficult.

Tantumblogo - March 10, 2017

That last sentence is completely correct if not a substantial understatement. I’ve had libs throw Francis quotes in my face as to why my beliefs regarding Catholicism are all wrong. Sure I can shoot those down but didn’t make any headway convincing them.

Richard Malcolm - March 10, 2017

Right.

It’s been brought home to me because I am a confirmation sponsor to a friend of mine. And, you know, the darnedest questions keep coming up, because he’s actually paying attention to what Il Papa is saying on a fairly regular basis.

5. Beatrice - March 10, 2017

As a radio talk show host says: “let not your hearts be troubled”
Our Lady of Good Success predicted this disaster that Bergolio is causing, promising that when it SEEMS that the end has come for Her Son’s One, true Church, the promised triumph of Her crushing the serpent will occur.
Let us pray that Her triumph is near!

6. Eoin Suibhne - March 11, 2017

Yes, the content and presentation of these sermons are excellent, indeed. May God bless this priest for his obvious desire to properly shepherd his flock.

Since I am not a member of his flock, and I cannot ask him, allow me ask you fellow pewsitters/men-on-the-street here: Just how far do we think Father is going when he cautions us not to “judge” Pope Francis? Let me elaborate.

My teenage children know the kinds of things that Pope Francis is saying about marriage and in general about the orthodox/traditional understanding of the faith. They know that what he is saying contradicts Church teaching (as this priest has ably pointed out). When they ask me, “Is Pope Francis a heretic?,” would he rebuke me were I to say (as I have said), “Well, kids, he is saying heretical things, and it’s pretty clear that he’s doubling down on all of it. So, it sure seems to me like he is.” (If it walks like a dog, smells like a dog…)

I’m aware of the canonical distinctions between formal and material heresy. I’m aware that we should give every possible benefit of the doubt to a pope. But when I listen to sermons like this, which lead right up to the very edge, and then conclude with, “But don’t go there,” I feel confused and frustrated. Is the crux simply that we’re talking about the pope here?

I’m not invested in declaring publicly (like several well-known Trad bloggers have) that Francis is a heretic, anti-pope, etc. I just want to give my children the proper guidance.

Pax et bonum.

7. Baseballmomof8 - March 12, 2017

TB, thanks for posting these. I listened to both while driving to visit kids and grands… I need a qualified priest or other knowledgeable Catholic to answer a question that came to me as I listened: When I tell folks that I believe the Francis elevation was invalid and I believe Benedict’s resignation was not accepted by his Boss, am I committing a mortal sin? It seems this priest believe that I am, and I surely do not want to do that. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

Mark Docherty - March 12, 2017

It can’t be mortal sin if lacking Full Knowledge, and there is certainly evidence to support your belief.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: