Browse By

All hands, brace for impact!


We’ve done everything possible to prepare. You know your jobs and we’re the meanest baddasses in the galaxy. If everybody stays calm and does their job, we’re all going to be OK.

The embargo is up at noon our time, which means y’all are going to be waking up to some very unpleasant news. Sorry, but the initial responses I’ve had from the unfortunate victims who spent the night actually reading the wretched thing range from “appalling” to “direct and immediate danger to souls.”

One of my correspondents said that he is “shocked” at how “direct” he has been about the clearing of the path for Kasper’s “immoral praxis.”

From another, “The modernistic principles that imbue this document need to be mercilessly attacked.”

Ann has given us the paragraph numbers to look up: 186, 79, 302, 303 and 311, that she says are the heart of darkness.

We can’t give you quotes until the journalist embargo is up, but here’s a little forewarning. It seems to be giving the green light for the whole Church for the kind of “situational ethics,” that has been at the heart of the liberal paradigm since the 60s, and that John Paul II resisted so strenuously in his younger days. This means that it is, at last, the total paradigm shift that the Kasperites have been working for all these long years since 1965.

But you know by now what we’re looking at. We have done our best to warn everyone, and to prepare our minds and souls for this disastrous eventuality.

I add for the moment, only the reminder:

The pope is not the Faith
The pope does not give us the Faith
The Faith comes from God, from the ground of being, the source and foundation of all reality
Only the Real counts

Moreover,
The pope can be a heretic and still be the pope.

Don’t freak out. Don’t freak out. DO. NOT. FREAK. OUT.

~

4 thoughts on “All hands, brace for impact!”

  1. Marie Van Gompel Alsbergas says:

    I love the ST analogy! We definitely seem to be having “Saucer Sep” Anxiety!

  2. Hilary White says:

    I have a friend who has an official Important Degree all about infallibility. He has given me the following. We will be talking about this more, since I get the feeling this won’t be the last time we hear it..

    My friend writes:
    It’s OK to feel angry and confused.

    The
    papacy is like other institutions in the Church — occupied by men.
    When the Pope is good, it makes being faithful very easy. When he is
    bad, it is very difficult.

    You can use an analogy
    with the family. When we look at what a husband and a father should be,
    it is very easy for the wife to love and honour him as the head of the
    family, and as her strength and support. It is easy for the children to
    revere and obey him.

    But when the father is lazy
    and irresponsible, or worse, abusive, it is much harder to see God’s
    role for him. It doesn’t change what fatherhood *is* — but it might
    change how we relate to him.

    Now, the papacy is
    special, and the Pope has a role in the Church no matter how wicked he
    is. But how we relate to him depends on whether he is good or evil…

  3. Hilary White says:

    An Apostolic Exhortation isn’t a definition of doctrine. Infallibility is extremely restrictive, and emphatically does not include statements that are objectively contrary to the perennial teaching of the Church.

    This is what I mean by “remain calm”. And I would add, “Learn everything you can about what the Church really does teach,” particularly about the nature of the papacy and the places it can and cannot go.

  4. John says:

    Hillary, I’m so dang confused with how this conforms with Vatican I teaching on the Papacy:

    6. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might,
    by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might
    religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by
    the apostles. Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers
    and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that
    this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the
    divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: “I have prayed
    for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your
    brethren.”[60]

    7. This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter
    and his successors in this See so that they might discharge their exalted office for the
    salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from
    the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine.
    Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole Church is preserved in unity, and,
    resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.

    How can we understand this anymore? Even you said “Novusordism isn’t Catholicism.” This document is pushing me to the brink and either Vatican I was wrong, the pre-Vatican II popes about the necessity of encyclicals is wrong, when Popes have said the Church cannot give poison and now this?

    Either all of those popes and Vatican I are wrong or there is something I’m missing. If so I want to know “what” it is. Can someone fill me in? I guess saying I’m having a bad day is an understatement.

Comments are closed.