FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: The sad pass we have come to
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
I just read one of Poche's Francis fanboy posts, and it got me thinking what a difference five years has made for Trads, and orthodox Catholics in general.

Just a few years ago, I was 'censured' on FishEaters for referring to John Paul II as 'John Paul the Small' in reaction to all the 'John Paul the Great' bollocks I was seeing on the Catholic net. 

Now, we are faced with a Pope who makes John Paul seem like he was rigidly orthodox. We are faced with a Pope who condones Holy Communion for adulterers, has implicitly approved of heretics receiving Holy Communion, who says that fornication may bring the same graces as sacramental marriage, that has set up a commision to 're-examine' Humanae vitae, has essentially said that if you don't buy the 'man made global warming' fraud you're not Catholic, and that whatever he says is part of the Magisterium. And, he has now, flatly stated, and has inserted in the Catechism, an opinion that denies Scripture, the Fathers, the Magisterium, and every Pope that has written on the subject of capital punishment. It has become glaringly obvious that he is, at least, a material heretic.

A few months ago, on another, non-Catholic forum I posted my apologies to the shade of John Paul for saying that he would go down as the worst Pope in history. He has been far outstripped for the opprobrium of that title by the current Pontiff. And, yes, Francis is Pope as much as it pains me to say it. Sedevacantism is a dead end, and I refuse to go there.

My fervent prayer is that God will send us, soon, a Catholic Pope to start repairing the carnage wrought.

How long, O Lord, how long?! Lord, save Thy Church!!!
(08-04-2018, 03:14 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]I just read one of Poche's Francis fanboy posts, and it got me thinking what a difference five years has made for Trads, and orthodox Catholics in general.

Just a few years ago, I was 'censured' on FishEaters for referring to John Paul II as 'John Paul the Small' in reaction to all the 'John Paul the Great' bollocks I was seeing on the Catholic net. 

Now, we are faced with a Pope who makes John Paul seem like he was rigidly orthodox. We are faced with a Pope who condones Holy Communion for adulterers, has implicitly approved of heretics receiving Holy Communion, who says that fornication may bring the same graces as sacramental marriage, that has set up a commision to 're-examine' Humanae vitae, has essentially said that if you don't buy the 'man made global warming' fraud you're not Catholic, and that whatever he says is part of the Magisterium. And, he has now, flatly stated, and has inserted in the Catechism, an opinion that denies Scripture, the Fathers, the Magisterium, and every Pope that has written on the subject of capital punishment. It has become glaringly obvious that he is, at least, a material heretic.

A few months ago, on another, non-Catholic forum I posted my apologies to the shade of John Paul for saying that he would go down as the worst Pope in history. He has been far outstripped for the opprobrium of that title by the current Pontiff. And, yes, Francis is Pope as much as it pains me to say it. Sedevacantism is a dead end, and I refuse to go there.

My fervent prayer is that God will send us, soon, a Catholic Pope to start repairing the carnage wrought.

How long, O Lord, how long?! Lord, save Thy Church!!!

Hang in there Jovan, God is in control!

If you read the Apocolypse of John by Rev Berry, which has both an Imprimater and Nihil Obstat, it describes a situation that looks like this in the Church. Also, if you follow approved apparations Our Lady of Good Success, La Salelette and Akita all described a situation just like this in the Church. We know this, an hpefully a sitaution not much more than this is supposed to happen. Probably Fatima too in the entire third secret! afraidsmiley

Was watching a video on youtube last night and somebody asked an exorcist why God was allowing things in the Church to get so bad, the response was very uplifting and insightful. The response was, and I am paraphrasing, to show Our Lady's triumph to be so much more majestic when it occurs.
Jovan, what do you think about the idea that Benedict is still pope?  I have not paid much attention to the details of his resignation, but someone suggested to me that he was under the impression that he was resigning the active papacy, which Francis holds, but maintains a contemplative papacy.  They were making the argument that, even if the rumors of resignation under duress are untrue, that the idea of a dual papacy is also untrue, and so being able to hold the idea that he could resign in part would make the entire resignation invalid, thus Benedict would still be Pope.  I know this is diving into conspiracy, and the sceptical side of me says that, as educated as Benedict is, it's unlikely he would hold such an opinion if there is no basis for it.  But, as you mentioned, its painfully obvious that Francis is at least materially a heretic.  Do you think there is any merit to this idea about Benedict?
Melkite I’ve played around with that idea myself. After all previous Pope(s?) who resigned were not Pope “Emeritus” they went back to their presbyterian name. The fact that Benedict is Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is definitely a first as far as I’m aware and i wouldn’t be surprised to see a future orthodox Pope declare Francis’ papacy null and void.
The way I see it. We simply don't have any authority to say that Francis isn't the Pope. Until some Pope in the future declares him an anti-pope we have no choice but to accept it. In any case, I pray for him and hope that the next pope will be better.
A priest friend of mine who is vice rector of the seminary where I teach said that we have to accept with "religious submission of the will" anything that the Holy Father proposes for belief. But on this particular matter in regard to the death penalty and the Catechism, I'm not sure that things are so simple. 

No previous pope every argued that the death penalty is in principle immoral. Pope St. John Paul II may have believed that the death penalty is practically unnecessary, but he still affirmed, in principle, the right fo the state execute some criminals. 

Now we have a pope who positively asserts that the death penalty attacks the dignity of the person, and for this reason is contrary to the moral law. 

Clearly these are contradictory theories, and there are no forms of mental gymnastics that can make it otherwise. So to which teaching am I to submit with "religious submission of the will." And if I am to submit to different teachings under different Popes, what does that mean for the moral law and unchanging tradition of the Church? 

I'm sorry, but conscience can only accept the 2000 year old teaching of the Church, the consistent position of the magisterium and all of the Popes prior to Francis, and the consistent testimony of the natural law. 

What Pope Francis has does is beyond disturbing and divisive. He continually walks the Church closer and closer to schism and this really frightens me.

Thankfully, I teach philosophy, not theology, and I will not have to engage this controversy in class. I can always pass on the conversation and tell the students that they should discuss this with their theology professors. But I certainly empathize with those theologians. What are they to do?
Pope Francis is the Pope.

I think for everyone’s spiritual (and mental) health, it’s best to stop analyzing the papacy.  Just remember that Christ is in charge of the Church, and that we’ll be judged on the basis of how much we have LOVED/been charitable, NOT on our little theories about the papacy.
(08-04-2018, 07:55 PM)FultonFan Wrote: [ -> ]Pope Francis is the Pope.

I don't know why that's even being mentioned in this thread. I stated clearly in the OP that Francis is Pope, that I'm not a sedevacantist and have no intention of becoming one.
(08-04-2018, 08:14 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-04-2018, 07:55 PM)FultonFan Wrote: [ -> ]Pope Francis is the Pope.

I don't know why that's even being mentioned in this thread. I stated clearly in the OP that Francis is Pope, that I'm not a sedevacantist and have no intention of becoming one.

I only mentioned it because others were talking about it.
(08-04-2018, 08:39 PM)FultonFan Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-04-2018, 08:14 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-04-2018, 07:55 PM)FultonFan Wrote: [ -> ]Pope Francis is the Pope.

I don't know why that's even being mentioned in this thread. I stated clearly in the OP that Francis is Pope, that I'm not a sedevacantist and have no intention of becoming one.

I only mentioned it because others were talking about it.

Oh, I know, but I've answered the questions (I hope) in full, as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately, after typing, with one finger, a lengthy answer to Melkite's question, full of history, I seem to have lost it! I may retype it later.
Pages: 1 2