FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: The last few years, better, worse, the same now?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Occasionally I do an online search and wind up reading a blog or site with now-old "news" from a page that is a few years old.

I saw this fight on Fr. Z's blog in which I got my first booting from his site.  The subject was the "5 conditions" presented to the SSPX for immediate approval and to start the process for formal adhesion in the the Church (whatever that means)  http://wdtprs.com/blog/2008/06/the-holy-...-the-sspx/

I found the whole thing insulting back then to the SSPX and it exposed a small-mindedness on the part of the heirarchy in that it dealt with nothing of the faith and everything about diplomatic courtesies and implicit guilt on the part of the SSPX. 

It's almost 2 years later and I was thinking about whether things are actually better or worse or have they stayed the same? 

I'm thinking that while tradition-friendly priests have a little more boldness and you can get a good number of the externals of tradition a little bit easier, we still haven't had the main ingredient needed for things to get better.  A real condemnation of liberal errors. 

Comparing those old threads to more recent ones, we see The Church nowadays, in general bearing down, promising to deal with the sex-abuse scandal.  Cowtowing to the secular press, promising action, making select condemnations.  (Just not the politically incorrect condemnations that speak to the root of the problem.)

How fast they are in some cases, like the abuse of young men and boys by gay priests, even though they are accused of being so slow.  I began to think about the comparison to how Our Lord has been treated and is still treated in our churches.  How doctrine is abused, sin is often treated like laundry at best, something to clean up in confession since it can't be avoided, but nothing to give a second thought about really.  The perfecting of the soul, the intimacy with God and the participation in the Church with the Church Suffering and Triumphant is forgotten. 

Rome in its various offices from the Pope to the Janitor,  never takes actions, never apologizes, never condemns the abuse of Our Lord.    Instead what we see consistently is excuse-making for the Popes by neo-Catholics then and now. 

With the Liturgy, we're told now that the Pope is teaching by example with his Liturgy.  That's supposed to stop the abuse?  What if he decided to handle the sex-abuse scandal in the same way?  "I'm not molesting any young men or boys, so that should be a signal to the rest of the clergy to stop as well."  How would that go over with the secular media or the people in the pews? 

It seems legitimate complaints and real scandals will be tolerated by the laiety,  and those that don't and complain can be ignored by the Hierarchy with disdain and impunity.

But unfair criticisms and overblown and incorrectly defined scandals by anyone other than Catholics is met with strong resistance and we are even engaged in defending the very men and the structure that does far worse to Our Lord on a daily basis.  I wonder what that says about all of us as dupes and our faith?  We spring into action to defend our Pope against unfair charges by infidels or "bad Catholics" and yet we placidly and patiently wait and hope once again for the Pope to complete his secret "plans" to restore the Church.  And Our Lord continues to be abused day in and day out while we're being patient.  I remember reading about JPII's "got a plan" in the 23rd year of his papacy.  The wishful thinking!

I get the impression that on the grander scale of things, despite a few points of light in individual dioceses that act like oasises for some trad Catholics to eek out just enough devotion to keep them going,  nothing has been done to actually take on the problems in the Church at their root.  We've only seen a few gratuitous cosmetic options presented to us. 

It will truly take a miracle I think, to get ourselves through this with our souls and sanity intact.  If the consecration of Russia happens soon, I hope Our Lady will obtain the graces with all due haste and rescue us.  I don't think any human, even a miracle worker of a Pope can put an end to this mess, slowly or quickly.  I think only Our Lady or Our Lord Himself can do it directly. 

Are you in the US? If so, how can you ask, esp with the despot in office, or considering the current occupent, is it orfice?
As catholics and humans we are taught at an early age to be honest about our mistakes and shortcomings. To apologize and learn from our mistakes and to do penance for our mistakes.

IMHO I just feel that this is also true for all those involved in leading the way of the church.  Speaking specifically about the Sex scandal.  Isn't it better to admitt what actually happened. To deal with it head on.  And to take the heat from it and in essence be able to move past it?  I don't know all the details of all the incidents. But looking at the overall picture this is just the impression I get from it.

I am also just a simple human being. And being so its also true that we must have Faith in the way others that "must" know better, are dealing with the issues. My faith tells me that, but my better thinking tells me otherwise.  Just Sain.... :)
(04-07-2010, 01:21 AM)In nomine Patris Wrote: [ -> ]Are you in the US? If so, how can you ask, esp with the despot in office, or considering the current occupent, is it orfice?

I'm not sure what you'r referring to:  Obama?  What does he have to do with this thread?  Are you calling Pope Benedict a despot? 
We need to recognize that the recent couple centuries of unprecedented material advance hasn't changed the nature of human beings or the only two choices they will ever make, that matter: heaven or hell.

We've been seeing the hierarchy capitulate in various ways to the spirit of the world, various capitulations that were neither called for nor advantageous, and we've seen the false charity of coddling the overwhelmingly sodomitical monsters of abuse (at the behest of the witchdoctors of modern psychology)  and when all's said and done, the blame falls on the same things, instutitions and kinds of personages who were bastions of moral uprightness in the years before John XXIII declared his aggiornamento.

We hear the masonic George Weigel invoke the ancient codeword slurs like "sclerotic" to criticize the Vatican when it's actually an ideology that informs this problem, not the historical legacy of the Church, its judicial system or the essence of the Church Herself.  The problem is with certain men and their mistaken ideologies.

We've seen Benedict XVI repeatedly call for an increase of piety, of penance and we'll see a lot more of that.   

I've been personally calling for an increase of personal holiness on the part of Bishops for years, because when they open their mouth with their slick corporate lingo, no one believes them.

St. Josemaria Escriva would whip himself till the blood ran down the walls, as did our own local ordinary back in the 50s.  These are great men in the modern age, whether you agree with their witness or not (our local ordinary was somewhat liberal himself) And St. Thomas Becket once walked 20 miles unshod to Centerbury when he was declared Archbishop of Canterbury to the acclamation of the crowds.  And while there may have been grumblers against him, his own staff, who thought he was foolish for attackiing the King and his barons, who after all, who was  defendiing a man who carried out a capital sentence against a priest who'd debauched and raped a young girl (probably younger than 15), but there were still others who saw the importance of what he did in defending the honor of the Church in every way, so much as was accomplished by other great prelates like  Cardinals Mindszenty and  Stepanic.

Who will be the next great lights in the coming years?  Mark my words.  Benedict's reforms will be yielding fruit 100 years from now, while liberalism will fade away like a successfully treated cancer. (which will probably return again some day to trouble the Church again)

<<
Rome in its various offices from the Pope to the Janitor,  never takes actions, never apologizes, never condemns the abuse of Our Lord.
>>

The pharisee condemned out Lord himself, because they made themselves the judges, and believed that He abuses the Law. The Magisterium has the binding and losing power, not any laypeople, priest, even individual bishop, outside of his diocese.
(04-07-2010, 01:12 PM)glgas Wrote: [ -> ]<<
Rome in its various offices from the Pope to the Janitor,  never takes actions, never apologizes, never condemns the abuse of Our Lord.
>>

The pharisee condemned out Lord himself, because they made themselves the judges, and believed that He abuses the Law. The Magisterium has the binding and losing power, not any laypeople, priest, even individual bishop, outside of his diocese.

Actually, they were the judges.  And Our Lord passed judgement on them as an individual, he didn't say, "Because I'm God."  It was only after He'd been going back and forth with them that He revealed HIs status above theirs.  Had a normal man spoken the same words as Our Lord, they would have been just as true.

What good is a Magisterium when the Pope will not invoke it to condemn the errors of the day?  A silent Magisterium is useless.

Augustine Baker:

"We hear the masonic George Weigel invoke the ancient codeword slurs like "sclerotic" to criticize the Vatican when it's actually an ideology that informs this problem, not the historical legacy of the Church, its judicial system or the essence of the Church Herself.  The problem is with certain men and their mistaken ideologies."

You continue your calumny against Weigel.  Weigel *never* condemned "the historical legacy of the Church, its judicial system or the essence of the Church Herself."  To say that he did is either to misinterpret him or to lie.  The "sclerotic institutional culture" he referred to included "their mistaken ideologies," like not dropping the boom hard on culpable individuals.  Please, STOP calling him masonic.  You have no evidence of this.  He is a neocon, and a putz, but there is no evidence he's a Mason.  It is a *big* accusation, and a calumny. 
(04-07-2010, 11:22 PM)Bonifacius Wrote: [ -> ]Augustine Baker:

"We hear the masonic George Weigel invoke the ancient codeword slurs like "sclerotic" to criticize the Vatican when it's actually an ideology that informs this problem, not the historical legacy of the Church, its judicial system or the essence of the Church Herself.  The problem is with certain men and their mistaken ideologies."

You continue your calumny against Weigel.  Weigel *never* condemned "the historical legacy of the Church, its judicial system or the essence of the Church Herself."  To say that he did is either to misinterpret him or to lie.  The "sclerotic institutional culture" he referred to included "their mistaken ideologies," like not dropping the boom hard on culpable individuals.  Please, STOP calling him masonic.  You have no evidence of this.  He is a neocon, and a putz, but there is no evidence he's a Mason.  It is a *big* accusation, and a calumny. 

Stop putting words in my mouth you keystone cretin.
I think the last few years have had better externals under the current Pontiff but they are all things that can be pushed away. What I am talking about is things like his getting rid of that sick bent cross the Popes lately have carried and getting a real cross, traditional vestments worn by the Pope, making people kneel to receive communion when receiving from him, the new missal thats coming out are all improvements but all it takes is a new Pope to do away with all those things there really hasnt been anything lasting except maybe the MP.
Pages: 1 2