4 October 2017

Tucho has said it already

In his Cuddesdon lecture on the current crisis in the Roman Magisterium, the full text of which, sadly, is not available, Fr Aidan Nichols justly oberved that the moral 'teaching' of Amoris laetitia, if not corrected, will "increasingly be regarded as at the very least an acceptable theological opinion. And that will do more damage than can easily be repaired".

In fact, the currently dominant tendenz has made no secret that this is precisely the plan: a plot to poison the very wells of magisterial teaching. As Archbishop Fernandez has publicly put it, "There's no turning back. If and when Francis is no longer pope, his legacy will remain strong. For example, the pope is convinced that the things he has already written or said cannot be condemned as an error. Therefore in the future anybody can repeat those things without being sanctioned".

There have been heretical popes in the past, but I doubt if there has often been a pope who (according to one of his closest collaborators and admirers) has cunningly plotted to enable heterodox teaching to erupt and flourish  under his successor(s); and thus to undermine in advance the teaching of future popes. Strangling renascent orthodoxy before it has the chance to be born, if you will forgive my descent into rhetoric.

Did even Pope Honorius I dare to attempt that?

By the way ...

... Dr Geoffrey Kirk, who, in his pre-Ordinariate days, was Vicar of Lewisham, writes a superb and witty blog which may not be as well known among Traditionalist Catholics as it deserves to be.  He does a very good line in revealing, via leaked letters from Mr Undersecretary Screwtape, how this pontificate is being plotted and choreographed in the Pandaemonium Club. It is must-be reading. GKIRKUK.

Readers who do not know who Screwtape is should get equipped with the writings of Professor C S Lewis, one of the Anglican greats whom we, at the behest of our dear Pope Ratzinger, brought with us in our luggage as we entered into Full Communion with the See of S Peter. Another of Oxford's gifts to the Catholic Church!


RichardT said...

"the pope is convinced that the things he has already written or said cannot be condemned as an error"

Except that some of Francis' followers do not seem to pay real respect to the writings of previous Popes, so we can follow their example when it comes to his own pronouncements.

Jeremy said...

Surely no Pope can bind his successors to repeat (his) error or heterodox teachings since he should never have gone down that path to begin with. Quite mindboggling.

TomG said...

A de facto schism is inevitable.

Karen said...

Why can it not be condemned as error when it is obviously error when it was pronounced? I don't understand this at all!

Belfry Bat said...

RichardT, Jeremy, I think ye miss an important point: the Enemy does not want us to Parrhesically speak or think or understand even a Consistent Single Error. He wants us, Pharisaically, to be unable to think or speak consistently, and so unable to have a consistent faith to live and enact. When we can think consistently and firmly, we can discover our errors and then correct them! So, the Enemy does not want us to be clearly decided in favour of any error. The whole idea is that persistent noise one way and the other leaves the "patient" in perpetual doubt about propositions, the very possibility of propositions, of decisiveness in action, of being Good, of even the possibility that God Is Good and so forth. Indeed you will find that Screwtape applies this very principle of deliberate confusion even to single words, such as "charity" and "christian". It would even be too kind to suggest that the Enemy wants us in chaos (though chaos would do): rather, he wants us reduced to spiritual mush.

Liam Ronan said...

Here is the full web address referenced in Father's piece (above).


RodH said...

I think it is reasonable for Touch-Oh! to suggest future Popes will be bound by this New Magesterium.

To make my point, reflect on how the common teaching of the following topics has changed over the last 5 decades or so:

EENS, homosexuals, indissolubility of marriage, suicide, Limbo, presumption of God's mercy, adultery, "remarriage", just war, contraception, Real Presence, responsibility of the prelature/Pope to defend the faith, religious indifferentism, Islam, Protestantism, Luther, Communism, death penalty, relationship of husband and wife in marriage, unity of the Faith/"synodalism", inerrancy of Scripture, etc.

In fact, Father, there has been a creeping establishment of a Neo-Magesterium for many decades. It got quite a boost from ambiguous language of Vatican 2. The ambiguities were then subsequently interpreted in heterodox ways. Then more and more heaped on until today we have diverse teaching all over the world. Heresy now falls under the sobriquet of
"Church teaching" in many places with NOBODY to shut it down.

On top of this layer the new paradigm given the Church by Pope John XXIII who in his opening address to V2 told the world the Church would no longer condemn the bad but only affirm the good.

So we now have a culture in the Church whereby priests are formed to "do good" but not to aggressively combat evil. Names are never named. Heretics are not called out for being heretics. The old way, the way of Christ, the Apostles, the Fathers and the Church until V2 has been almost forgotten, and worse yet, is seen today as "uncharitable", as an evil in and of itself. If anyone doubts this, just condemn homosexuals using the language of the Church prior to Vatican 2. Describe Islam in the terms used before Vatican 2. Call for the conversion of the Jews as the Church did before Vatican 2. Give a full-throated slapdown to Martin Luther himself. Await the repercussions.

So I can very easily see future Popes being {self-}restrained by the errors of Bergoglio. In fact, it would be nothing new. Only possibly in degree, but not in essence of what we have seen for decades.

The Church desperately needs a truly Catholic Pope who will 1} act according to the full extent of his authority 2} re-introduce discipline and place under the interdict regions, and under the pain of excommunication and laicization many individuals.

ALL without regard for place, money, status and power of the Church.

Indeed, to borrow a term from Bergoglio himself, we need a true man of God in the papacy who is not afraid to lift up the "Church of the poor", for certainly many wealthy dioceses and even regions will resist and no doubt leave, calling themselves the "true church' just as the Protestants did.

I say let them go and pray for a Prodigal return. And let us get back to the work of brazenly and unapologeticaly bringing the Catholic faith to a lost and dying world.

PM said...

A Roman legal adage much quoted by medieval canonists is surely relevant here: 'Par in parem imperium non habet.'

Sadie Vacantist said...

What is forgotten is that there exists a 'liberal' or better still generous application of the existing annulment process. The Pope has indicated that as many as "fifty per cent" of marriages are invalid. Few would dispute his observation. There thus exists the potential to annul the majority of Catholic marriages. On top of which AL suspends the application of Our Lord's own words on the subject. I predict therefore that Pope Francis V in 2117 will simply annul Vatican II. It was nothing more than a shotgun ceremony hosted in an occupied and heavily indebted country. Some of the council's main protagonists came from another occupied country whose capital city had hosted the raping of 100,000 women less than twenty years before. A future canon lawyer will annul this council in less than ten minutes.

marystefaniem said...

Bishop Fernandez says "IF and when Francis is no longer pope..." IF? Does he think the pope is now immortal?

Boko Fittleworth said...

"Without being sanctioned" It's all about power with these folks.