that was my immediate thought. If you aren't praying for him, and instead just happy, then you need to take a look at yourself. Of course you can be happy about this (justice, a possible means for his healing, etc) but you shouldn't be happy at another's misfortune.
Agree completely, if you're Catholic and happy about this you need to have a serious look in the mirror. It's an extremely sad and, frankly, dangerous situation for the church.
Vigano needs not to repent of anything, You obviously do not understand the Freemasons at the top destroying our church from within. The only one who needs to repent is Pope Francis and his group of Cardinals that he has put in place to run the church, THE GAY MAFIA is controlling the church that Jesus Christ so horrifically died for. WOE to those for GODS wrath is coming upon them
He most assuredly does. He doesn't have to like Pope Francis or his policies. He can think them gravely harmful. But to break communion with him is the sin of schism by definition.
Furthermore, he seems to have embraced the usual sedevacantist package, that there haven't been valid Popes since Pius XII, which is probably heretical as well, as it amounts to saying that Christ's promises have failed.
I agree with Garth. I have chosen to endure the pontificate of Francis, a deeply flawed Pope, because I choose Christ! Francis is the Holy Father, please pray for him. Ask for the mercy that you too will seek. And pray that our next Pope will not be worse. Pope Francis is far better than many others who have held the office.
AA-1025 and the Bella Dodd Movement in the Church. Wolves in Sheeps Clothing, I pray daily for the conversion of all these lost souls who think they can take down the one and only church.
You're aware that AA-1025 is a work of fiction, right? And whatever Bella Dodd did or didn't do in the 1930s, are you seriously expecting us to believe that a large number of priests and bishops today are Communist?
The overwhelming majority of Catholics think that Francis is the Pope, including the conservative and traditionalist contingents who really wish he wasn't (like Dr. Kwasniewski) and would much prefer Archbishop Schneider or (if he were alive) Lefebvre. The SSPX wrote in opposition to Archbishop Vigano's sedevacantism. The arguments for sedevacantism (or Benevacantism) are simply bad arguments.
Archbishop Schneider and / or Cardinal Sarah would be the best Pope our church could ever have, Men of strong tradition and not afraid to speak it, live it and deal with the corrupt
1972 Yves Dupont published the TRUE story of the Seminary Student 1025 of the infiltration of Communism in the Catholic Church, and you see the results today
You forgot about the actual Mafia. I know garbage collection and gambling, prostitution and extortion rackets are far less glamorous than rainbows and *choice word used by spicy Pope Francis inserted here* but they’ve actually killed holy priests and made life immensely difficult for the Church… just ask Ed. Or google the long Mafia associated laundering through the Vatican Bank…
And what are you personally doing to cooperate with Jesus to save souls, their souls,.from HELL? Do you know what I would be doing in your place? I would be prostrate on the floor before a tabernacle begging God to tell me what to do.
Then He would most likely tell me to get up, dry my tears, go home, take care of my children, and stop trying to figure out what to do about situations that are "above my pay grade". I know this because even if I am only mildly upset in my own home about only one person who has gone astray, He will kindly tell me (but only if I listen) to get off the internet for the day and go take a shower. I suggest also a devotion (if you do not already have one) to one's own guardian angel. I, however, am going to take a shower and get off the internet for the day.
Bridget, personally I spend hours and hours a week before Our Beloved Lord in Adoration praying and have for 23years as a convert. Please go and read the book AA-1025 and study the Bella Dodd Movement and you will learn the truth. God has blessed me with many great gifts of the Holy Spirit . Our church is in grave danger and Satan has entered it many years ago The Gay Mafia are in control
If it was written by a Saint, a Blessed, a Venerable, or a Servant of God, then I will set aside time to read it but right now I'm three days behind in the homework for ancient Greek so even then it would have to "take a number" as they say. Bella Dodd sounds familiar but am I thinking the right thing? A young adult fiction series with a vampire and a girl who want to date? I did not hear good things about it from other parents and it's not in my house. I must be thinking of the wrong thing because you said mafia not vampires.
Fr Mitch of EWTN did a show on who she is an the infiltration of Freemansons in our church. AA-1025 Book is based on the true story of the 1972 Yves Dupont book of the Seminary student 1025 which is a true story of the Communist infiltration into the Catholic church and what it has done to this day. Who cares about Greek right now
The 4th of July, in Bill Pullman's voice: "the 4th of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day when the world declared in one voice:" Schism!!
Simple: if you say the pope is not the pope, you are not in communion with the pope. And if you are not in communion with the pope, you are not in communion with the church. The Vatican is doing nothing more than fromally granting him what he desired.
Wrong, Tradition has shown over the years the great true Apostles standing up against false Popes. Many Bishops have done this throughout church history
I think it would be one of the smaller, Russian-aligned Orthodox ones. Putin doesn’t like loose cannons (he’s got enough of those) and he’d happily have this guy cause chaos in the Russian Orthodox confederation of influence to keep them under control.
Another, sadder, and more ridiculous solution... The Russians have already toyed with the idea of a "Western Orthodox" church. Suppose they decide to put Vigano in charge of that? I don't think they would go so far as to make him pseudo-Bishop of Rome (it would burn bridges with the Vatican utterly, not to mention make Vigano technically outrank Kirill) but something lesser they could control.
To be clear, I think there's basically no chance of this happening. Just wanted to get it off my chest.
Will they want him? He's plainly a loose cannon. Maybe the Russians would. If he does join them, I'll bet that he starts denouncing them within a couple years too. I've met people like this - no Church will ever satisfy them.
Upon more reflection, the Orthodox route is probably the most sensible choice, so probably one he won't choose. And I'm skeptical that he could tolerate any of the "independent" Catholic "Churches" for long. I sincerely hope he doesn't decide to start his own!
Many of the ideas adopted by Vatican II were first proposed by theologians who were silenced or condemned by various church authorities in preceding decades. Many of these previously condemned theologians were invited to attend the Council by individual bishops as periti, theological experts to assist those individual bishops in understanding the issues being discussed in the Council.
This group of theologians ended up having enormous influence, not the least because the American bishops sponsored a free nightly cocktail party where many non-American bishops had long conversations with these periti.
Bottom Line: Anyone can criticize the Pope and the church. many of them are incorrect. Some of them who are right may suffer considerably, but their ideas may eventually prevail.
the corrupt Bishops of Germany and many other countries disobeyed the Vatican 11 rules, took the railing out at the altar, nuns took off their habits, Priest turned to the people and the list goes on and on.
I've now watched the video. Not quite! A council can't judge the Pope, only recognize that he has in fact lost office. Given that such a council would have to be called *by* the Pope, I don't see it happening.
It may be necessary for the "progressive" elements in the Church, held at bay in Vatican II and during the reigns of JPII and Benedict XVI, to finally ascend to power. God help us, and God forgive them and us of our sins.
The good news is the biological solution. The "progressive element" is getting pretty long in the tooth. I think they're getting increasingly desperate, actually.
The early ecumenical councils were called by the emperors not the popes, so it may still be possible to have a council called without the Pope's initiative.
They were called by emperors but confirmed by Popes afterward. It's firmly established there can't be an ecumenical council without at minimum the Pope's approval.
“They too are in communion with us,” he said. “Let us consider, dear brothers and sisters, that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature; only the manner of being together with one another then changes, but nothing and no one can break this bond.”
Pope Francis then raised an objection from a hypothetical speaker: “let’s think about those who have denied the faith, who are apostates, who are the persecutors of the Church, who have denied their baptism: Are these also at home?”
The pope responded: “Yes, these too. All of them. The blasphemers, all of them. We are brothers. This is the communion of saints. The communion of saints holds together the community of believers on earth and in heaven, and on earth: the saints, the sinners, all.”
Sure he is. Like all the other schismatics and heretics - oops, separated brethren - and all the baptised. But there's communion, and Communion.
Pope Francis is a pain in the ass, tbh, God bless him, and he's caused a lot of trouble. But the same can be said of a LOT of his predecessors, all of whom were still legitimate popes. Some of them make Francis look like St Pius X.
Vatican II was, and is, and always will be a lawfully constituted council of the Church. It was weaponised by the people Vigano complains about, but Pope John Paul II absolutely fought back against this. He was AT the Council, and knew what was supposed to happen. So was Benedict XVI.
Are we supposed to believe that two of the holiest, smartest, wisest, and most shrewd men of the 20th century Church would have willingly taken part in a false Council, and upheld its teachings so vigorously? I can't go there.
But I can easily believe that one man can be reeling from PTSD and vicarious trauma from his years in God's kitchen. And I can believe that he - rather like the protagonist in 'The Wall' - has come out the other side of his own internal agony as a sort of will-to-power cult leader who glorifies in extreme rhetoric and fawns over those with greater strength than him.
The evil doers at the Top of our church are destroying it from within, Father Frank Pavone, Fr Altman, Bishop Strickland. The Traditional Latin Mass, wake up FOOLS, and look at what is happening to the strong true followers of the Christ, The real Apostles of Christ
Donna, there have ALWAYS been evil men in the Church, from Judas Iscariot onwards. God knows exactly what is going on in His own Church. He alone knows the full measure of good and evil in anyone's heart, including yours and mine.
But he also gave us free will, and He prizes this so much - because He doesn't want slaves; he wants us to love Him very much.
So He's allowing these difficulties in His Church, just as He always has. Either you believe He's in charge, and knows what's best, or you don't.
So what can we do? The best thing is to try to be holy ourselves. It's actually all that God asks of us. That means prayer, Adoration, worthy Holy Communions, and showing forth in your own life the virtues of the Holy Spirit - peace, patience, joy, self control, and so on.
This last bit is hugely important. I know a lot of sour and angry but very churchy Catholics, and quite frankly they put me off. I wasted a lot of years being one of them myself.
We will save the world not by obsessing about people who we don't know and can't control. We'll save it with personal holiness. Church politics is an interesting hobby, but it's best not to try to make it a means of salvation.
Wow Donna!!! Fr. Frank Pavone? Seriously? And Fr. Altman might be a good man who had great difficulty living up to the toughest of the priestly promises-obedience.
Nope. Altman's a grifter. There were financial shenanigans involved throughout the story, including a lot of money that went missing from his previous parish during his tenure there.
So, when one has grave misgivings due to the ambiguous, present Pope and the sacrilegious fallout easily traced to the Second Vatican Council, what does it really mean to be in communion?
Is it morally right to compel a spouse to maintain conjugal relations with an adulterer?
No. The best thing - if you're not interested in growing closer to God through prayer, sacrifices, mortification and the sacraments - is to read a lot more Church history, from more sources.
You'll either despair completely, or you'll realise that the Church is divinely founded and maintained, because no merely human institution could have lasted five minutes with a track record like ours.
If I were you, I'd focus on becoming a saint. That's really what the Church needs, and you'll find that the people around you will start to like you a great deal more.
The institutional church has always, always been well larded with bad people. Don't confuse this with the Body of Christ.
It's usually best also not to establish oneself as judge, jury, and executioner. Otherwise you'll quickly end up in the Church of Jesus Christ of You and I But I'm Not Entirely Sure About You.
I used to have a lively interest in the worst sort of Church politics, until I realised that it was taking me away from God, and what God had actually asked of me, which was to love Him, trust Him, rejoice always, and let my tolerance be evident to all.
I'm still working on this, and I find it's a 24/7 job that leaves me little time to worry about things in the Church that I can't change.
I'm also much happier about other people having the last word, which has come as a considerable relief.
In this particular case, I am more scandalized by Francis than Viganò. Fortunately, there is a wealth of Patristics to read and the Liturgy of the Hours for inspiration and worship. I don’t even care to watch the slo-motion train wreck of this pontificate. I’m fairly disgusted at Francis’ provocations and punitive style.
Acknowledge that he is the duly elected Pope. If he ever says anything ex cathedra, acknowledge the authority of that. If he ever manages to say something by Ordinary Magisterium that is both in accord with Scripture and Tradition, and is stated clearly, acknowledge the authority of that.
It is morally right to tell a spouse not to remarry after they discover their spouse's adultery. And also to tell them that that person is still their spouse. And also to tell them to pray for their spouse. One might call those things a moral obligation.
Sure, Francis is the Pope. He’s just the most equivocating Pope in quite a while. I guess we were overdue for a papal lemon. It’s important not to degrade Catholic doctrine and practice by separating faith and reason.
In case my analogy was unclear, I say that a well-catechized, faithful Catholic is not obligated to assent to unorthodox nonsense any more than a faithful spouse is obligated to accept his or her philandering spouse back into the bedroom. That kind of communion and intimacy can only resume when both are committed to fidelity.
Yes, the higher levels of a relationship are pretty much impossible if both parties are not committed to obeying God and actually do so successfully. It's the case in friendship as well, you can't progress much beyond the superficial unless both people have true, God-oriented charity for each other.
You asked what it meant to be in communion with the present Pope. I don't think anything I said was necessary involved the analog of intimacy or trust in his ability to communicate orthodox doctrine clearly without the protection of the Holy Spirit. Building on your analogy, if you have an adulterous spouse, your obligations to that marriage include praying for him/her and not committing adultery yourself.
I wonder whether the participants in Vatican I might have been wise to deny themselves the satisfaction of giving in to the temptation to declare papal infallibility. The history of that is probably a fascinating read.
I don't think infallibility is really the problem. It's been a few Popes since that was employed, and Vatican 1 did a pretty good job at specifying the limitations.
The papal primacy outlined in Vatican 1 isn't problematic in that it was declared (since it is kinda true), but in that the limitations weren't particularly well specified. There've been some documents since that have tried to outline parts of those limitations, but it's piecemeal, and also less authoritative than an ecumenical council. It's what's missing that has caused the problems with ultramontanism. St. Thomas Aquinas was more careful.
Legally correct, no doubt, but it appears somewhat flawed from a “regime” in the Vatican that doesn’t seem perturbed by those like Fr Martin, Rupnik and the German bishops, who also have strained the communion of the Church.
All I can say, is be careful what you wish for; it might just be granted and it’s actually not so great.
For those tempted to matryise (a word I just made up) Vigano, remember that the difference between a martyr and a masochist: martyrs embrace the suffering thats coming they cannot prevent. Masochists seek out suffering in order to achieve some kind of status, to the point of self destruction.
It’s an important check for me when I’m tempted by the chaos of motherhood to all littles in a tiny house with late pregnancy aches and pains.
It's less about what I know about how someone else feels, and more about what a behaviour looks like... we're all capable of inflicting unnecessary suffering on ourselves for all kinds of reasons, some understandable and some just stupid. I just think it's important to remember that not everyone who claims martyrdom is actually a martyr.
Is anyone surprised by this verdict? I certainly am not.
Let us pray for his repentance. I will also ask St. Dymphna to pray for him.
Good call. We should pray for his reconciliation with the Holy Father and the Church, and for any needed mental healing.
that was my immediate thought. If you aren't praying for him, and instead just happy, then you need to take a look at yourself. Of course you can be happy about this (justice, a possible means for his healing, etc) but you shouldn't be happy at another's misfortune.
Agree completely, if you're Catholic and happy about this you need to have a serious look in the mirror. It's an extremely sad and, frankly, dangerous situation for the church.
Many people involved in this case will benefit from St. Dymphna's intercession.
Vigano needs not to repent of anything, You obviously do not understand the Freemasons at the top destroying our church from within. The only one who needs to repent is Pope Francis and his group of Cardinals that he has put in place to run the church, THE GAY MAFIA is controlling the church that Jesus Christ so horrifically died for. WOE to those for GODS wrath is coming upon them
He most assuredly does. He doesn't have to like Pope Francis or his policies. He can think them gravely harmful. But to break communion with him is the sin of schism by definition.
Furthermore, he seems to have embraced the usual sedevacantist package, that there haven't been valid Popes since Pius XII, which is probably heretical as well, as it amounts to saying that Christ's promises have failed.
Sorry Garth, you are misled from the truth as most of the liberal Catholics today are.
I agree with Garth. I have chosen to endure the pontificate of Francis, a deeply flawed Pope, because I choose Christ! Francis is the Holy Father, please pray for him. Ask for the mercy that you too will seek. And pray that our next Pope will not be worse. Pope Francis is far better than many others who have held the office.
To quote the OG Pope, "To whom shall we go?"
AA-1025 and the Bella Dodd Movement in the Church. Wolves in Sheeps Clothing, I pray daily for the conversion of all these lost souls who think they can take down the one and only church.
You're aware that AA-1025 is a work of fiction, right? And whatever Bella Dodd did or didn't do in the 1930s, are you seriously expecting us to believe that a large number of priests and bishops today are Communist?
The overwhelming majority of Catholics think that Francis is the Pope, including the conservative and traditionalist contingents who really wish he wasn't (like Dr. Kwasniewski) and would much prefer Archbishop Schneider or (if he were alive) Lefebvre. The SSPX wrote in opposition to Archbishop Vigano's sedevacantism. The arguments for sedevacantism (or Benevacantism) are simply bad arguments.
Archbishop Schneider and / or Cardinal Sarah would be the best Pope our church could ever have, Men of strong tradition and not afraid to speak it, live it and deal with the corrupt
And neither of them are sedevacantists.
What is gratuitously asserted may be gratuitously denied, and I do deny it. Why should I believe you over, say, the college of bishops?
Most of the College of Bishops sadly are corrupt read the AA-1025 book and study the Movement of BELLA DODD
A well-known forgery.
1972 Yves Dupont published the TRUE story of the Seminary Student 1025 of the infiltration of Communism in the Catholic Church, and you see the results today
You forgot about the actual Mafia. I know garbage collection and gambling, prostitution and extortion rackets are far less glamorous than rainbows and *choice word used by spicy Pope Francis inserted here* but they’ve actually killed holy priests and made life immensely difficult for the Church… just ask Ed. Or google the long Mafia associated laundering through the Vatican Bank…
> WOE to those for GODS wrath is coming upon them
And what are you personally doing to cooperate with Jesus to save souls, their souls,.from HELL? Do you know what I would be doing in your place? I would be prostrate on the floor before a tabernacle begging God to tell me what to do.
Then He would most likely tell me to get up, dry my tears, go home, take care of my children, and stop trying to figure out what to do about situations that are "above my pay grade". I know this because even if I am only mildly upset in my own home about only one person who has gone astray, He will kindly tell me (but only if I listen) to get off the internet for the day and go take a shower. I suggest also a devotion (if you do not already have one) to one's own guardian angel. I, however, am going to take a shower and get off the internet for the day.
Bridget, personally I spend hours and hours a week before Our Beloved Lord in Adoration praying and have for 23years as a convert. Please go and read the book AA-1025 and study the Bella Dodd Movement and you will learn the truth. God has blessed me with many great gifts of the Holy Spirit . Our church is in grave danger and Satan has entered it many years ago The Gay Mafia are in control
If it was written by a Saint, a Blessed, a Venerable, or a Servant of God, then I will set aside time to read it but right now I'm three days behind in the homework for ancient Greek so even then it would have to "take a number" as they say. Bella Dodd sounds familiar but am I thinking the right thing? A young adult fiction series with a vampire and a girl who want to date? I did not hear good things about it from other parents and it's not in my house. I must be thinking of the wrong thing because you said mafia not vampires.
Fr Mitch of EWTN did a show on who she is an the infiltration of Freemansons in our church. AA-1025 Book is based on the true story of the 1972 Yves Dupont book of the Seminary student 1025 which is a true story of the Communist infiltration into the Catholic church and what it has done to this day. Who cares about Greek right now
> Who cares about Greek right now
People who are in love with someone do crazy things; I think this is pretty well established.
You may want to watch Jimmy Akins video on this subject. His research may change your mind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRVA3iidyrg&t=5569s
You will learn in this video that even the author did not claim it was true.
It is comming upon us all.
Dear Bridget,
Perhaps it is us that need to repent first?
Regards,
Terry
The 4th of July, in Bill Pullman's voice: "the 4th of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day when the world declared in one voice:" Schism!!
Simple: if you say the pope is not the pope, you are not in communion with the pope. And if you are not in communion with the pope, you are not in communion with the church. The Vatican is doing nothing more than fromally granting him what he desired.
Wrong, Tradition has shown over the years the great true Apostles standing up against false Popes. Many Bishops have done this throughout church history
Wrong. They have defended true popes against false popes. Vigano claims no true pope.
and maybe he is correct. Benedict was being poisoned and I know that for a fact. He was forced out by the corrupt at the top level
Oh Donna, you don’t know that for a fact. It’s some trash you read on the internet.
No actually I did not read it on the internet.
You actually saw him being poisoned? If not you don't know it at all.
Is it just me or has he been paving his own road to go Orthodox?
And the smart money is on the Russian Orthodox Church.
I think it would be one of the smaller, Russian-aligned Orthodox ones. Putin doesn’t like loose cannons (he’s got enough of those) and he’d happily have this guy cause chaos in the Russian Orthodox confederation of influence to keep them under control.
Another, sadder, and more ridiculous solution... The Russians have already toyed with the idea of a "Western Orthodox" church. Suppose they decide to put Vigano in charge of that? I don't think they would go so far as to make him pseudo-Bishop of Rome (it would burn bridges with the Vatican utterly, not to mention make Vigano technically outrank Kirill) but something lesser they could control.
To be clear, I think there's basically no chance of this happening. Just wanted to get it off my chest.
Maronite
Will they want him? He's plainly a loose cannon. Maybe the Russians would. If he does join them, I'll bet that he starts denouncing them within a couple years too. I've met people like this - no Church will ever satisfy them.
Upon more reflection, the Orthodox route is probably the most sensible choice, so probably one he won't choose. And I'm skeptical that he could tolerate any of the "independent" Catholic "Churches" for long. I sincerely hope he doesn't decide to start his own!
Saint Athanasius , pray for us!
Christine Niles has a very good video on why Archbishop Vigano is wrong to think that Francis is not the Pope.
Could that involve being elected in Rome by the College of Cardinals?
More of analysis of who has authority under canon law to correct the Pope or determine him guilty of heresy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeBDbW5kr2I
I assume the answer is 'nobody' The first See is judged by no-one.
Christine Niles says that a council or a subsequent pope can judge the Pope.
Many of the ideas adopted by Vatican II were first proposed by theologians who were silenced or condemned by various church authorities in preceding decades. Many of these previously condemned theologians were invited to attend the Council by individual bishops as periti, theological experts to assist those individual bishops in understanding the issues being discussed in the Council.
This group of theologians ended up having enormous influence, not the least because the American bishops sponsored a free nightly cocktail party where many non-American bishops had long conversations with these periti.
Bottom Line: Anyone can criticize the Pope and the church. many of them are incorrect. Some of them who are right may suffer considerably, but their ideas may eventually prevail.
the corrupt Bishops of Germany and many other countries disobeyed the Vatican 11 rules, took the railing out at the altar, nuns took off their habits, Priest turned to the people and the list goes on and on.
I've now watched the video. Not quite! A council can't judge the Pope, only recognize that he has in fact lost office. Given that such a council would have to be called *by* the Pope, I don't see it happening.
It may be necessary for the "progressive" elements in the Church, held at bay in Vatican II and during the reigns of JPII and Benedict XVI, to finally ascend to power. God help us, and God forgive them and us of our sins.
The good news is the biological solution. The "progressive element" is getting pretty long in the tooth. I think they're getting increasingly desperate, actually.
The early ecumenical councils were called by the emperors not the popes, so it may still be possible to have a council called without the Pope's initiative.
They were called by emperors but confirmed by Popes afterward. It's firmly established there can't be an ecumenical council without at minimum the Pope's approval.
Even if the emperor has to imprison the Pope to get it.
lol!!!!!!
Some breaking good news for Vigano -- Trump has announced he will give him a pardon. :)
Is he still part of the communion of saints and the community of believers?
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/amp/news/250289/what-did-pope-francis-say-about-sinners-baptism-and-the-communion-of-saints
“They too are in communion with us,” he said. “Let us consider, dear brothers and sisters, that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature; only the manner of being together with one another then changes, but nothing and no one can break this bond.”
Pope Francis then raised an objection from a hypothetical speaker: “let’s think about those who have denied the faith, who are apostates, who are the persecutors of the Church, who have denied their baptism: Are these also at home?”
The pope responded: “Yes, these too. All of them. The blasphemers, all of them. We are brothers. This is the communion of saints. The communion of saints holds together the community of believers on earth and in heaven, and on earth: the saints, the sinners, all.”
Sure he is. Like all the other schismatics and heretics - oops, separated brethren - and all the baptised. But there's communion, and Communion.
Pope Francis is a pain in the ass, tbh, God bless him, and he's caused a lot of trouble. But the same can be said of a LOT of his predecessors, all of whom were still legitimate popes. Some of them make Francis look like St Pius X.
Vatican II was, and is, and always will be a lawfully constituted council of the Church. It was weaponised by the people Vigano complains about, but Pope John Paul II absolutely fought back against this. He was AT the Council, and knew what was supposed to happen. So was Benedict XVI.
Are we supposed to believe that two of the holiest, smartest, wisest, and most shrewd men of the 20th century Church would have willingly taken part in a false Council, and upheld its teachings so vigorously? I can't go there.
But I can easily believe that one man can be reeling from PTSD and vicarious trauma from his years in God's kitchen. And I can believe that he - rather like the protagonist in 'The Wall' - has come out the other side of his own internal agony as a sort of will-to-power cult leader who glorifies in extreme rhetoric and fawns over those with greater strength than him.
Thanks for your comments. I appreciate your perspective.
The evil doers at the Top of our church are destroying it from within, Father Frank Pavone, Fr Altman, Bishop Strickland. The Traditional Latin Mass, wake up FOOLS, and look at what is happening to the strong true followers of the Christ, The real Apostles of Christ
Read the Sermon on the Mount lately? In particular, Matthew 5:22?
Donna, there have ALWAYS been evil men in the Church, from Judas Iscariot onwards. God knows exactly what is going on in His own Church. He alone knows the full measure of good and evil in anyone's heart, including yours and mine.
But he also gave us free will, and He prizes this so much - because He doesn't want slaves; he wants us to love Him very much.
So He's allowing these difficulties in His Church, just as He always has. Either you believe He's in charge, and knows what's best, or you don't.
So what can we do? The best thing is to try to be holy ourselves. It's actually all that God asks of us. That means prayer, Adoration, worthy Holy Communions, and showing forth in your own life the virtues of the Holy Spirit - peace, patience, joy, self control, and so on.
This last bit is hugely important. I know a lot of sour and angry but very churchy Catholics, and quite frankly they put me off. I wasted a lot of years being one of them myself.
We will save the world not by obsessing about people who we don't know and can't control. We'll save it with personal holiness. Church politics is an interesting hobby, but it's best not to try to make it a means of salvation.
Wow Donna!!! Fr. Frank Pavone? Seriously? And Fr. Altman might be a good man who had great difficulty living up to the toughest of the priestly promises-obedience.
Nope. Altman's a grifter. There were financial shenanigans involved throughout the story, including a lot of money that went missing from his previous parish during his tenure there.
I suspect Pavone also developed a love of money along the way.
Church history if you study it has proven we have had many false popes put in place. SO dont be fooled by false popes
Is God actually in charge of His own Church, or not?
What do you think? What do you believe?
Benedict was the real POPE to begin with
So, when one has grave misgivings due to the ambiguous, present Pope and the sacrilegious fallout easily traced to the Second Vatican Council, what does it really mean to be in communion?
Is it morally right to compel a spouse to maintain conjugal relations with an adulterer?
No. The best thing - if you're not interested in growing closer to God through prayer, sacrifices, mortification and the sacraments - is to read a lot more Church history, from more sources.
You'll either despair completely, or you'll realise that the Church is divinely founded and maintained, because no merely human institution could have lasted five minutes with a track record like ours.
If I were you, I'd focus on becoming a saint. That's really what the Church needs, and you'll find that the people around you will start to like you a great deal more.
But hey, what do I know.
Well, there certainly were periods of Church history when focusing on becoming a saint meant standing apart from the corrupt institutional church.
The institutional church has always, always been well larded with bad people. Don't confuse this with the Body of Christ.
It's usually best also not to establish oneself as judge, jury, and executioner. Otherwise you'll quickly end up in the Church of Jesus Christ of You and I But I'm Not Entirely Sure About You.
I used to have a lively interest in the worst sort of Church politics, until I realised that it was taking me away from God, and what God had actually asked of me, which was to love Him, trust Him, rejoice always, and let my tolerance be evident to all.
I'm still working on this, and I find it's a 24/7 job that leaves me little time to worry about things in the Church that I can't change.
I'm also much happier about other people having the last word, which has come as a considerable relief.
In this particular case, I am more scandalized by Francis than Viganò. Fortunately, there is a wealth of Patristics to read and the Liturgy of the Hours for inspiration and worship. I don’t even care to watch the slo-motion train wreck of this pontificate. I’m fairly disgusted at Francis’ provocations and punitive style.
Acknowledge that he is the duly elected Pope. If he ever says anything ex cathedra, acknowledge the authority of that. If he ever manages to say something by Ordinary Magisterium that is both in accord with Scripture and Tradition, and is stated clearly, acknowledge the authority of that.
It is morally right to tell a spouse not to remarry after they discover their spouse's adultery. And also to tell them that that person is still their spouse. And also to tell them to pray for their spouse. One might call those things a moral obligation.
Sure, Francis is the Pope. He’s just the most equivocating Pope in quite a while. I guess we were overdue for a papal lemon. It’s important not to degrade Catholic doctrine and practice by separating faith and reason.
In case my analogy was unclear, I say that a well-catechized, faithful Catholic is not obligated to assent to unorthodox nonsense any more than a faithful spouse is obligated to accept his or her philandering spouse back into the bedroom. That kind of communion and intimacy can only resume when both are committed to fidelity.
Yes, the higher levels of a relationship are pretty much impossible if both parties are not committed to obeying God and actually do so successfully. It's the case in friendship as well, you can't progress much beyond the superficial unless both people have true, God-oriented charity for each other.
You asked what it meant to be in communion with the present Pope. I don't think anything I said was necessary involved the analog of intimacy or trust in his ability to communicate orthodox doctrine clearly without the protection of the Holy Spirit. Building on your analogy, if you have an adulterous spouse, your obligations to that marriage include praying for him/her and not committing adultery yourself.
I pray for Francis every day.
I have no illusions of being anything other than a lifelong penitent.
Sounds like you're better at this than I am.
Your sincere and civil comments are much appreciated, ALT.
I wonder whether the participants in Vatican I might have been wise to deny themselves the satisfaction of giving in to the temptation to declare papal infallibility. The history of that is probably a fascinating read.
I don't think infallibility is really the problem. It's been a few Popes since that was employed, and Vatican 1 did a pretty good job at specifying the limitations.
The papal primacy outlined in Vatican 1 isn't problematic in that it was declared (since it is kinda true), but in that the limitations weren't particularly well specified. There've been some documents since that have tried to outline parts of those limitations, but it's piecemeal, and also less authoritative than an ecumenical council. It's what's missing that has caused the problems with ultramontanism. St. Thomas Aquinas was more careful.
Legally correct, no doubt, but it appears somewhat flawed from a “regime” in the Vatican that doesn’t seem perturbed by those like Fr Martin, Rupnik and the German bishops, who also have strained the communion of the Church.
All I can say, is be careful what you wish for; it might just be granted and it’s actually not so great.
For those tempted to matryise (a word I just made up) Vigano, remember that the difference between a martyr and a masochist: martyrs embrace the suffering thats coming they cannot prevent. Masochists seek out suffering in order to achieve some kind of status, to the point of self destruction.
It’s an important check for me when I’m tempted by the chaos of motherhood to all littles in a tiny house with late pregnancy aches and pains.
I think I might hesitate to state categorically that I knew what someone else is feeling, or why he behaved as he did.
It's less about what I know about how someone else feels, and more about what a behaviour looks like... we're all capable of inflicting unnecessary suffering on ourselves for all kinds of reasons, some understandable and some just stupid. I just think it's important to remember that not everyone who claims martyrdom is actually a martyr.
This man is mentally ill! Should he not have ALL his faculties removed!