We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.
Thank you! I have been trying to write something along these lines.....but you did it beautifully.
Molly Klein & Evangeline - I agree with you.
I personally feel a lot of emotions in above declaration, possibly some anger which could be avoided.
But this declaration its far more true than for example Card. Burke nice 'Amoris L. is not a magisterium, is not official, is a Francis private thoughts ..' & similar ... prevarications.
Yes Yes, No No, even if some emotions are involved.
When I read some St John the Baptists words, I find there a lot emotions, 'good anger'.
Is it not time for action rather than words? So far all the petitions, letters (private & public) by priests, academics & individual faithful Catholics have been disgustingly ignored & thrown on the rubbish heap. Those Cardinals/Bishops that showed some leadership at the outset have been put in the freezer. Their faith has been found wanting, so there is no-one at the highest level to come forward & start a counter-revolution. Cardinal Burke has already eschewed the idea!
I personally would be much more interested in a public campaign via the media (tv,radio,national newspapers throughout the world) & visible protesters outside the Vatican & PF's plush hotel, to pursue this NWO religion & government. Something akin to what ANF does in sending counter-protesters to pray outside abortion clinics & black mass venues. It will take cash but it would be money well spent.
While the hearts of these men are for Tradition Catholicism to be restored (which we all pray for) this is not going to be sufficient and will not entice those lukewarm & un-catechised Catholics it is so necessary to get on board.
Especially one which cost 10 Million Euros to convert for your own private use when you had perfectly adequate apartments in the apostolic palace already!!! Hence the moniker: "Franky Two Flats" ("Flat" is English for "Apartment" ;) )
For my next remodel, I'm going to be really "humble" and only spend 9 million euros! :)
And a sumptuous one at that.
That's it exactly. Thank you. I have to laugh at the idea of a "respectful critique" of 5,233 papal errors against the faith, including the new Handy Dandy Adultery Facilitator.
"Regarding Error No. 4,694, Your Holiness, may I respectfully point out that you have contradicted the teaching of your predecessors on this point as well? We beg you to clarify your position."
This pontificate is a continuous mockery of the Magisterium and an unprecedented abuse of the papal office by a Pope who literally said: "It's very entertaining to be Pope."
God help us. Passion must indeed come into play. If Francis had reigned in medieval times, the faithful would probably be marching on the Apostolic Palace with burning torches, demanding a new conclave.
Steve, I would be very careful. The comment thread here is far too long for me, but as someone who has donated money to 1P5 in the past - seeing Chris Ferrara needing to defend The Remnant has instantly closed my wallet to this site. It will take a lot for me to ever consider donating again. It's just the reality of your decision.
Thanks for your support in the past, Nate. But do I really strike you as a sellout? That I just change what I say based purely on the financial repercussions?
I stated what I believe to be a valid (and fairly mild) criticism in the context of a discussion that included questions about what the most effective way to approach this issue. You're free to disagree. It's my own opinion, based on my impressions and on feedback I've received from others. Whether or not you (or anyone) chooses not to consider donating, or even to continue reading, based on something I say, is, of course, entirely up to you.
But I'd like to believe you'd lose whatever respect you have left for me if I jumped every time a donor snapped their fingers. That is a slippery slope away from truth.
I was under the impression that we were all on the same side, fighting the same enemies, even if we had some disagreements about the most effective approach. I hope I wasn't wrong.
You're not wrong, as far as I'm concerned. And my own donations to 1P5, while probably not even noticeable in the scheme of things, will be increased.
Very generous of you, can you cover mine as well?
Love that phrase, "...emasculation of communication." The enemies in the Church and the world at large are quite expert at a hypnotic type of speaking/writing. It is filled with politically correct, feminine turns of phrase that remind me of the Green Witch in Lewis' "The Silver Chair". The Witch is attempting to keep the newly-awakened prince from escaping. She uses soothing tones, false logic and so on. It takes the homely and honest Marsh Wiggle, Puddleglum, to stamp out the hypnotic techniques and speak the truth.
I read the joint accusation and did not think it was improper in any way. It was robust and masculine. Of course it would bring down condemnations from a world schooled in politically correct double speak.
The love of many has grown cold, I fear.
Yep, good old Puddleglum. Excellent analogy.
Thanks. Lewis brought me to Christ. The Church Fathers brought me to the Church. I hope that Catholics who strive to live an authentic Catholicism do understand how strong the spirit of division is just now. We cannot afford to "muff the signs" (to quote Lewis again).
Sadly, a spirit of division, bickering, one-upmanship and downright unpleasantness is apparent online within the 'Traditional' community as well. Puddleglum, of course, anticipated this as well ""...Won't do to quarrel, you know. At any rate, don't begin it too soon.
I know these expeditions usually end that way: knifing one another, I
shouldn't wonder, before all's done. But the longer we can keep off it-""
Let us all pray that we bear with each other's opinions, frayed tempers and irritating behaviour and treat each other with respect and charity. PLEASE! The Devil loves division.
I hear ya regarding the bickering. I attempted to write a clarifying message in response to your comment at the Remnant site, but the moderator will not permit it, nor is he/she permitting my important follow-up to his use of a Psalm or Saint's message that is erroneous. Perhaps versions of my responses will be accepted here since they are written in good faith regarding an important theological understanding. Keep in mind that I favor the vast majority of what is set forth in the letter to Pope Francis.
Here is what I wrote to you (slightly edited due to the context of responding here) that the moderator won't allow:
Actually, Heloisa, it is not true what the moderator writes about being nothing. Also, my concern/point is not based on how the statement reads, but the faulty theology behind it. See my follow-up post to the Remnant moderator (below) that explains this further. The notion of being nothing both metaphysically and morally is just wrong, and it violates a basic Catholic understanding of God and His creation.
The Remnant Moderator writes the following in response to sound theological concerns raised about claiming to be nothing as is done in the letter to Pope Francis:
'Lord, I am nothing, I can do nothing, I am worth nothing, I know nothing, I have nothing! I am nothing, and You are everything.'
My response that sets forth sound Catholic teaching is as follows:
This quote or paraphrase used by you appears to be out of context and/or a very poor translation. The version of the Bible that is used needs to be identified, and where this precise quote comes from (if it is from Psalm 16, it's way off the mark) also needs to be set forth. Also note how this phraseology lines up with some erroneous Protestant theology concerning original sin, grace, and good works, which is most unfortunate. If it comes from another source, this should also be identified, and note that even if a Saint said it, it is still erroneous.
"You are everything" also doesn't make much sense unless we want to see God as some Hindus and others do, and basically annihilate everything else that exists apart from God. And from a moral perspective, we are taught that we can do good things with God's assistance, which would not be possible unless we are at least a little something to be able to humbly cooperate with God's grace.
One does not express true humility by declaring oneself to lack the existence and moral standing as a child of God which are both gifts from God.
Also in the "scheme of things," did our Lord and Savior die and rise again from the dead for a bunch of moral nothings? Or does He see us as something (metaphysically and morally), and if so, who are we to contradict Him by a false statement of humility that denies the value of God's creation of humans?
The good writers of the letter make reference to the Angelic Doctor. I hope they will consider some of his very important teachings on metaphysics to correct their faulty and non-Catholic claims about being nothing both metaphysically and morally, and also refrain from making similar mistakes in the future.
But if the authors continue to wrongly insist that they are "nothing in the scheme of things" despite Catholic teaching to the contrary, then they forfeit any standing to say anything. Why listen to "nothing in the scheme of things" who are endeavoring to advise a Pope that he is screwing up in the "scheme of things"? What could they possibly know about the "scheme of things" if they are mere nothings in that "scheme"?
I probably read it before it was deleted. I have no (really NO theological training etc) so we come at this from different angles but I felt the same in my own way. I had been going to reply to the moderator 'We are the Church aren't we?' but I got sidetracked and further down, I wrote
'This is true - but docent has a point because it does read more like a
bit of sarcasm than humility (we realize we are nothing compared to you
Holy Father) . Humility is something I feel is never well expressed in
writing by anyone - unless it is written to God. Perhaps prefacing the
letter with the quote would be more effective for showing humility
before GOD. Just a suggestion because I can imagine the comments and
smirks if any of Francis' acolytes actually reads it. Pax'
We are, of course, also the laity whose duty it is to point out to superiors when they are 'outside' the Faith.
As far as moderation on the Remnant is concerned, see my post to Ana below. Not everything is rosy in the State of Denmark so to speak ;-))
The way I understand your point - and I have not read the moderator's quote and comment. I would probably assume he/she was thinking in conformity with Catholic teaching on the metaphysical understanding of human nature. That we are real. That we each have a unique identity as persons, as mind, body and spiritual soul, destined to live forever with God or as the damned.
This in opposition to depth psychology which denies ontological being. As well as Hinduism, with it's skewered metaphysics, which I must confess I know little about.
My Catholic understanding of "we are nothing" which includes the above is that God created us and the universe from "no-thing", that we belong to God, that we return to God, that our breath is only possible with His sustaining grace. And it should go without saying that without God like today's west returning to paganism, that things go from bad to worse very quickly.
The problem with the moderator you mention is that he/she was not thinking in conformity with Catholic teaching on the metaphysical understanding of human nature, and the same holds true for the authors of the letter and anybody else who maintains the "we are nothing" stance both metaphysically and morally.
God did indeed create all out of nothing, and He gave humans a special purpose and grace as His children. As such, we are not metaphysically nothing, and we are not moral nothings even poetically.
Yes, I will pray for true love among the brethren. On a side note, I feel the need for a good cleansing reading of Lewis. His Space Trilogy is calling. I think That Hideous Strength is especially suggestive of our political and academic culture right now. We could certainly use a Dr. Ransom and Merlin right now.
Yes! Terrifying to contemplate the spiritual corruption.
Truth will not contradict truth; double speak serves to undermine truth.
Whatever happened to "Let him be anathema", anyway? The CCC is guilty of this, talk talk talk.
"Yet, almost without exception, the conservative members of the hierarchy observe a politic silence while the liberals exult publicly over their triumph thanks to you."
That is an unfortunate choice of words as it confuses their own complaint with a political philosophy.
They should have said: "Yet, almost without exception, the faithful members of the hierarchy observe a public political silence while the unfaithful exult publicly over their temporary triumph thanks to you."
One gets the impression that they are writing with anger, never a good idea as it garbles the message. I may agree with the majority of their complaints and could add to them, yet I am already leery of any good outcome if they continue to employ the same kind of argumentation and language.
I think most people get the point that "conservative" and "liberal" are not used in any merely political sense but only analogously. "Faithful" versus "unfaithful" wrongly implies a simple binary between the wholly orthodox and the heretical, which does not reflect the actual confused state of the Church today.
Nor is it necessary to spell out that the liberals are enjoying a "temporary" victory. There will be no "permanent" victories in this crisis, nor have there been in any another of the Church's past crises, as the document as a whole makes clear, especially in the conclusion.
In the sentence I quoted there is no impression that the terms were analogously used, they are simple statements of a political disposition. In no way does unfaithful/faithful or orthodox/heterodox boil down to a 'simple binary (and somehow conservative/liberal do not...) one doesn't need to be unfaithful in everyway to be unfaithful and the majority of heretics are not heretical in everyway, they are so in one or two aspects of the Faith. The language of Faithful and Unfaithful, Orthodox and Heterodox is the Language of the Church from time immemorial, for you to oppose them is strange indeed, it appears that you are merely defending something which you shouldn't.
And with that thought, never mind I can see that you are in defense mode so anything I say is pointless. Do know that I most probably support the majority of your concerns and am not an enemy, but that doesn't mean that I need to embrace folly. Your liber has already begun poorly, including the style or lack off with which it is written. At the very least, please employ a more competent author to edit the work prior to publishing it.
I see you are one of those catty critics who spends too much time on line, if we are to assume "Fr. RP" signifies your vocation. As you are in attack mode anything I say is pointless. Nor do I see a high level competence in your own prose.
I love your friendly fire! I shall call you "Father Friendly Fire Ferrara"!
May your friends never tire of dialoguing with you!
When love fails, the answer is more love!
Likewise, when dialogue fails, the answer is…more dialogue!
Have you shaved since I saw you last? https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
Never claimed to have a high level of competence as an author (which is why I have any work that is going to be published edited) I am not in attack mode, I was in helpful critical analysis mode now I am preparing to enter into ignoring this thread and entering into prayer.
Father I am sorry you receive attacks and offensive attitudes on conservative sites. Please do not desert us. What you write always sounds calm and measured to me. You have many friends so please continue to be among the few Priests who are prepared to share their calm logic informed by Catholic teaching. We so need to hear these voices today! God bless you!
You, sir, are as thin-skinned as any traditionalist I've ever seen on-line.
Funny how extremists on the right share certain characteristics with those on the left; i.e. the tendency to project onto others the exact behavior of which they are guilty themselves.
Thanks for identifying your role at The Remnant. I'll be certain to avoid your screeching there.
Your proclivity for alienating those who are most likely t become your friends and allies is unnerving. Self-sabotage is typically an entrenched life pattern, the attachment to which is so deeply rooted that serious work in therapy is required to achieve success in extricating oneself from it.
Frankly, I don't know what the prospects are for an entire community which seems to be stuck in it together. Perhaps the biological solution we've been awaiting to clean out the progressive cabals in the Church may well provide the only feasible way to free us from those whose anger makes them unfit to lead the effort to reclaim the Church.
Fr, you sound quite a bit angry! just another different opinion. Easy..
Any idea what it would take to get "La Republica" to serialize this? Its probably the only way that the guy who needs to read it would actually get to read it.
Translate it into Italian and send it via Priority Mail International to "La Republica" AND the Vatican.
A very good idea. We will work on that.
Happy to oblige. 😊 I would also add in "signature required" so they can't say that it got "lost" like the condemnation of Communism got "post" at VII (cf. Rhine Flows Into The Tiber).
Maybe taking out one page advertisements in all major USA & European newspapers would get most peoples attention plus bill-borads all around Rome & Lund. When they take them down just erect more and so on. Probably more effective, if it could be organised. I'm sure Veri Catholici would oblige for the Rome arrangements.
Radio would be another outlet to consider.
Dr. Ferrara, I was of the understanding that Conservative was defined somewhere along the lines of 'Liberalism in slow motion' or perhaps 'Bending the iron softly.'
My being a regular slob, I really don't know what it means.
That's quite true. Today we see in the Church a dilution of the meaning of "conservative" paralleling its dilution in the realm of politics. A truly conservative Catholic would be a Pope on the order of Saint Pius X. Today a "conservative" hierarch would be considered a Modernist by Pius. Hence the emergence of the term "traditionalist" following Vatican II. The very existence of that term indicates an unprecedented change in the Church.
I found the three-part series incredibly brave, cogent and absolutely necessary in the context of this almost unimaginable crisis in the Church. Congratulations to these three for putting in writing what the true remnant of the Church really thinks about this heretic pope. Perhaps these three being the first to take such a strong a public stand makes others embarrassed or defensive about their not having done so. And by the way, as a former newspaper editor and mass communication professor, the series was very well written.
Thank for your answer, sir.
Looking at this from the outside, there may very well be repercussions; that the Tradition-minded will be maligned with greater force than before. And yet, this is Truth. It is one of the reasons I come here to 1P5 daily. An article at NCR headlined with- "Pope Francis: The World has a thirst for Peace." No. The world is thirsting for Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity and His Church, here on earth. They are thirsting for the Truth... the Way, the Truth, and the Life! They are thirsting for a most tender and vigilant Blessed Mother who will love and mediate for, shield and console, fight for and protect us as she helps us climb the ladder of the Sacraments, which Our Holy Mother Church administers, through the merits of Jesus Christ. Perhaps they are not calculating rightly, not strategizing enough- but they are yelling as loud as they can that Truth is really ALL that matters, and He is Christ the King! (These shouts of triumph are as so many little pinpricks of light in the darkness to so many. Prelates may not listen, and Rome may definitely turn a deaf ear, but I am edified and strengthened because of their open defense of the Truth.)