Rorate Caeli

"There is something very un-Catholic about this"

From Patrick Archbold at Creative Minority - we share his assessment completely.

It has been a wild ride since the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI and the election of Pope Francis.

Several times already, after making some commentary, I have been accused of 'attacking' the Pope. This has risen to a new level with my post on liturgy and humility in response to the asinine and divisive comments of Cardinal Mahony.

But here is the interesting thing. Many of the lines that I tweeted were things I wrote months ago for a possible post on liturgy but never published. When I wrote them, they would have seemed obvious and boring and 100% in line with Catholic thinking and the Pope.

But since I published them them this week, the are perceived by some as beyond the pale and an outlandish attack on the Pope. Same lines. Different month.

There is something very un-Catholic about that, Catholic in the universal and timeless sense. How can my comments seems like boring and obvious orthodoxy one month and an attack the next.

Something is profoundly wrong when the winds of change can blow so swiftly through an immutable institution of God's own making.

Suffice it to say, if my comments seem like orthodoxy one month and an attack on the Pope the next, what is clear is I am not the problem.

25 comments:

Cesare said...

There is something so surreal and troubling about the events of these past five weeks, but for me it's of such an untangible nature that I can't even find the words to describe it.

John said...

A question that has always been hard for me, is to understand how most people can be "responsible" for their salvation. How can the average person, who is so simple in his mind and a true follower (mindlessly following what he has in front of him), one day be held responsible for his actions? How can he watch out for the false shepherd, as we are admonished? I still don't have an answer for it, except "Grace", which leaves me very unsatisfied.

Benedict Carter said...

Good point well made.

The modern Church is now wholly subservient to fashion, to political lines, to the division between antagonistic theological visions which have rent, and are rending anew, the Bride of Christ in pieces.

Hence a new Pope, a new fashion, a new political line, a new theology.

Division, a lack of unity, is one of the sure signs of demonic activity. Bishop Fulton Sheen was brilliant on this (look on Youtube for "Fulton Sheen, devil").

Most Catholics, even "conservative", have jumped on the bandwagon and seem to be commenting in some sort of trance (entirely media-produced) "Humble, humble", as if past Popes, the old Church, was constructed by the rich for the rich. It's a disgusting spectacle.

This Pope now worries me a great deal. His coldness on being introduced to the Church in such a perfunctory manner by the Protodeacon was almost palpable.

Benedict's disastrous abdication may well presage the final stage of the Modernist Revolution, which is the overturning of the Church's moral teaching. If this happens, and the Church no longer teaches the Ten Commandments in their entirety and integrity, then God's punishment will be very close indeed.

I know Garabandal has not been approved, but neither has it been condemned. Garabandal's message must, if it is true, take place in our lifetimes.

May it come quickly.

Benedict Carter said...

John:

Grace opens the eyes of the soul and informs the heart about what is real and what is false. Pray and regularly receive the Sacraments. The rest is silence and listening. The poorest, least educated soul can do that.

BONIFACE said...

One thing comes to mind:

"We are at war with East Asia. We have always been at war with East Asia."

The about-face and complete shift in opinion and sensibility has been profoundly disturbing. It is as if the pontificate of Benedict XVI never happened.

Gladius said...

(From Catholic-SacredArt.com)

We are living in a time of the great crisis of Faith and morals as prophesied by Our Lady. The confusion is of such magnitude that it is not only subverting the temporal sphere, but also penetrates the walls of the Church itself. Indeed, as Our Lady prophesied, the corruption of customs has become general and the precious light of Faith almost extinct. Yet the message of Our Lady of Good Success ends with a note of great hope: When everything will seem lost and paralyzed, that will be "the happy beginning of the complete restoration. This will mark the arrival of my hour, when I, in a marvelous way, will dethrone the proud and cursed Satan, trampling him under my feet and fettering him in the infernal abyss." It is the promise echoed by Our Lady again at Fatima in 1917: "In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph."

poeta said...

Perhaps we can at least hope this "Pope of the poor" will not share the aristocratic Papa Montini's disregard for the message of the three shepherd children.

Kathleen said...

Garabandal has been condemned, on multiple occassions, in writing, by the local ordinary -- i.e. that authority on matters of this nature.

See this for transcripts of the condemnations etc:

http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/Garabandal2.html

rosa said...

Pope Montini was not aristocratic, both by birth - he came from a middle class fnamily, thogh enough rich - and by attitude. a true aristocratic would have not disregarded the three shepherd children.
Rosa, Italy

Anonymous said...

I am told by some friends who met him, that, Pope Benedict XVI WALKED to his office prior to his election as Pope. Does this make him more humble than our new Pope who took the bus ? Is there anything virtuous about taking the bus or cooking your own meals; maybe you like cooking and enjoy a bus ride ? I don't know. But why didn't the papers report Benedict walking to work when he was elected; was he not a humble Pope ?

Benedict Carter said...

Kathleen:

Your assertion is entirely false.

The local Ordinary has NEVER condemned the apparition, nor has he approved it.

The Bishop at the time and after the apparitions is on record as saying he now believes it.

The current Bishop has very recently called for funds to be raised so that the village church can be restored as it is in bad condition. He is also on record as saying that there is nothing whatever about Garabandal that contravenes the Faith at all.

If the Church has not pronounced on Garabandal, it is no doubt because the nature of the messages given (the Warning, the Miracle and the Chastisement) are so exact that it is simpler just to wait and see. As Conchita will give eight days' warning of the date of the first of these three, and that she is already in her late fifties or sixties, if it is going to happen, it will happen soon.

Proof of the pudding and all that.

Kathleen said...

Dear Benedict Carter,

I did not expect that the information I posted would alter your position on Garabandal.

I posted it for readers that they may have the information necessary to reach an informed conclusion.

To avoid any further derailment, I will conclude on the topic with this for those that have questions.

Photo copies of the condemnations can be found here:

http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/GarabandalDocs.html

Additional investigation here:

http://www.unitypublishing.com/Apparitions/Garabandal2.html

Ivan K said...

How many poor people were fed when the Holy Father declined to wear the mozzetta?

matercula said...

All these sentiments are remarkable...

I commented on my concerns about the liturgy under the present pope and was accused of 'not praying for him !'

Ivan K writes "How many poor people were fed when the Holy Father declined to wear the mozzetta?"

Precisely my point !

Benedict Carter said...

Hi Kathleen;

Interview with the Bishop of Santander on the Garabandal apparitions:

Q. Have the Garabandal apparitions ever been condemned by the church?

A. No. The previous bishops did not admit that the apparitions were supernatural but to condemn them, no, that word had never been used.

Q. When did you reopen the study of the apparitions and who did the study, how was it conducted and when was it concluded?

A. It was finished in April of 1991 during a reunion we held in Madrid but it was not opened on a specific date. It was opened six years earlier, taking notes of the circumstances here and there. In the beginning, we were going little by little so it took about six or seven years before the study was concluded. Until then I had gone by what the other bishops had done. They had said no. But then it seemed to me that I should personally do something myself. I needed to do a personal investigation because the responsibility demands this of oneself so I had to do something about it and because I thought it was something serious that had happened in Garabandal. It seemed to me that because it was so serious, I had to find out for myself exactly what happened in Garabandal.

Q. What has become of the results?

A. The results were brought to The Holy See, to The Sacred Congregation for The Doctrine of The Faith. That is where you have to take things like this so that is where the documents are. They were given to Cardinal Ratzinger.

Q. Were the Garabandal Messages found to be theologically correct and in accordance to the teachings of the Catholic Church?

A. I think yes. Theologically correct, yes. But one of the details bothers me like the one: "Many bishops and cardinals are walking the path of perdition" it seems to me to be a bit severe. The Messages do not say anything that is against the doctrine of the church.

We shall see!

Gregorian Mass said...

Introducing a rich against the poor mentality found way to often in Latin American countries is going to put off a great many Catholics who do not experience this great divide between the classes. Whether they are black shoes or red they will have to be paid for, or else they are donated. Refusing the symbols associated with the Papacy to reflect a theology of social justice and solidarity with the poor allows for liturgical style to be dragged into the class divides that exist in some parts of the world. This is wrong and not humble. You can respect the office of the Pope to which you have been elected and still wear red shoes and be welcomed into the slums to do good works. They change nothing of a Pontificates main focus. All these choices do is offend one wing of the Church. Rich or poor, people are accustomed to seeing the Pope look a certain way and would not refuse his charity or help because of it. Allowing style to become a weapon in between factions is simply wrong. Offending sensibilites is wrong, Using a cape, stole or shoe color to send messages is wrong. This Papacy is not off to a good start. And to anyone who thinks these concerns are viscous or unwarranted I suggest you read how viscous the Progressive side of the Church was when Pope Benedict did things that they did not approve of. Take a look at both sides. This is precisely the reason why Pope Francis should not have played into it. Ivan K has it correct....

BB said...

Friend John, I strongly recommend this book: In Silence With God, by Benedict Baur. It's of course pre-Conciliar.

Matthew Rose said...

Goodness, NeoCatholics switch directions faster than the wind, it seems!

schmenz said...

So far, it seems that this Papacy is a re-play of that terrible 1968 movie, "The Shoes of the Fisherman". Those who have seen the movie will understand.

Dymphna said...

I've always thought that Benedict was just a blip, a moment of peace but an abberation and that everything in his reign would be undone by the next pope. After reading the comments on Fr Z I've also concluded that a lot of people who claimed to be conservative or traditional weren't but were just pretending because it was fashionable.

Lynda said...

It is very disturbing.

Matt said...

Archbold is correct. Describing what IS is the truth. Calling it anything else is a lie. Call things what they are. Right is right and wrong is wrong. If the Holy Father's prudential behavior is wrong, then it's wrong. Period.

Something to keep an eye on, too, is who's having the conniption fit. More than likely it's the liberals. Not one word of support was said when Benedict was being chided and castigated for his theological stance on various matters, or when the Novus Ordo was updated with more sacral language and demeanor. Oh, but let this present Pope fly out of the starting gate flinging liberal symbolisms and coded gestures everywhere posing a threat to Sacred Tradition, and all of a sudden the libs are cheering and celebrating and getting mad at anyone who speaks contrarily. They know whom the Cardinals elected and they know one of their own when they see him.

Odd how the Traditionalists are continually being epitheted with wanting to turn back the clock, yet the liberal/modernists can't seem to pull their rear-ends out the 1970s.

Melancholio said...

Friend Dymphna, it sadly appears that your words are correct!

David said...

After reading the comments on Fr Z I've also concluded that a lot of people who claimed to be conservative or traditional weren't but were just pretending because it was fashionable.

Fr Z. seems to be a weathercock, blowing with the winds of ecclesiastical power. Indeed, his recent repeated statements concerning the SSPX indicate a mentality that is obsessed with the dynamics of power, servile towards those who possess it and sadistic towards those who do not:

The entire SSPX should gather in St. Peter’s Square, crawl on hands and knees to the Apostolic Palace and beg the new Pope to allow them to kiss his foot, knee and hand and promise obedience.

This is one of the most disgusting things that I have ever read from a Catholic priest. FWIW I do not attend an SSPX chapel, since I have serious concerns about the question of jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the utter lack of charity and the sadistic fantasy spouted by Fr Z. is repugnant.

Long-Skirts said...

David said:

"...seems to be a weathercock, blowing with the winds of ecclesiastical power. Indeed, his recent repeated statements concerning the SSPX indicate a mentality that is obsessed with the dynamics of power, servile towards those who possess it and sadistic towards those who do not:"

THE
BRAG

There is a Rock
Upon we’re built
That evil men
Will sometimes tilt

And though they vex us
To the hilt
We never leave
Reject or jilt

We daily kneel
In His Blood spilt
To weigh down Rock
Of golden-gilt

And as they sink
In their sin’s silt
As though He built
On one lone stilt

Upon this Rock
His Voice, love’s-lilt
We stand our ground –
Do what Thou wilt!