Catholic world Report and First Things promoting error: Ecumenism without truth

So I am again going to point out another false attempt by the modernists (condemned by pontiffs like Leo XIII, Pius X, Pius XII specifically) to create unity for unities sake and all in the spirit of Vatican II, saying the documents allow this but doesnt quote anything and appeals to revolutionary ideas and novelties to condone their standing and opinions on the matter.  Enjoy! [My comments]

CWR: Most Catholics probably envision future unity between the Orthodox Churches and the Catholic Church as a re-installment of one world Church organization with the pope of Rome at the top of the governing pyramid. A look at history shows that such a model never existed, so what could Orthodox-Catholic communion actually look like if it were achieved? A renewal of Eucharistic communion? The possibility of an eighth ecumenical council? A resolution for the dating of Pascha/Easter?

[Considering that Peter was the earthly head of the church with the Keys to loose and bind the heavens and the Earth and acted on this commission throughout scripture and the sacred history of the Church, yeah I do expect that there is a singular head, a visible sign of unity which Peter is.  To say that such a model never existed where the Bishop of Rome didn’t in fact hold primacy over all the other Bishops is to blatantly disregard history, one need only read Clement, Leo and the Early councils and Popes and see that Popes where not merely first among equals, but the rock of the faith.  The difference rests in the application of the office not in the actual understanding of the office, that is solemly defined by Vatican One under infallible decree, to deny that Peter is the visable head of the church is not merely to be sismatic, but to be heretical because as Catholics we must profess all the decrees handed down.  The Orthodox might claim it wasn’t solemnly proclaimed when they split so they might say they are only systematic, but denying truth is to be in error, thus hertetical.  Heaven knows what we don’t need now is another ecumenical council when the vaugness, and yes Mr. Mira the Vatican II documents are vague if they weren’t they wouldn’t require a strict hermanutic of continuity (see trent and Vatican I documents then compare).  The dating of the Pascal feast is another issue, see the link below for information on this: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05228a.htm]

Taft: What it would look like is not a “reunion” with them “returning to Rome,” to which they never belonged anyway [considering that there is One Church with Peter as its head, and this is clearly seen in scripture and in the History of the Church from the beginning this is a false statement] ; nor us being incorporated by them, since we are all ancient apostolic “Sister Churches” with a valid episcopate and priesthood and the full panoply of sacraments needed to minister salvation to our respective faithful [Hmmm so having valid episcopates and sacraments is the only thing needed to be in the church; wow I guess we should tell the Polish National Church and the Old Catholic Church they really never left since they have valid sacraments], as is proclaimed in the renewed Catholic ecclesiology since Vatican II [where does Vatican II call for a new ecclesiology?  And where does Vatican II state that it is to be held by the faithful as de fide?  This is more spirit of Vatican II garbage where the power play is to create a situation where the pontiff is merely a symbol, but not different then anyother Bishop in substance, thereby denying Vatican I.  Pope Paul VI is said to have been made aware of this collegial power grab and quashed it, feeling deeply saddened by the actions of the other Bishops] and enshrined in numerous papal documents from Paul VI on [so disregard anything before Paul VI, even if it is infallible teaching.  I mean really! First things what are you?  CWR what are you?  Modernists giving lip service to a hermanutic of continuity, but practicing the hermanutic of rupture], as well as in the wonderful Catechism of the Catholic Church. [But not the Catechism of Trent, because that’s not friendly enough] So we just need to restore our [our, wait we broke communion with them?  I don’t seem to remember this, we have Peter they don’t.  They continue to fall into error allowing divorce, contraception and other innovations from the top of their episcapates, but we need to be in communion with those perpetuating error? Please] broken communion and the rest of the problems you mention can be addressed one by one and resolved by common accord.

. . .

CWR: How could the papal claims of Rome be modified in a way that would be both acceptable to the Orthodox Churches and faithful to the tradition of the Catholic Church? Do you think the jurisdiction issue really is a hang-up for the Orthodox since they also practice cross-jurisdiction throughout Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, and East Asia?

Taft: The new Catholic “Sister Churches” ecclesiology describes not only how the Catholic Church views the Orthodox Churches. It also represents a startling revolution [Yippie a novelty, spirit of Vatican II!  Lord please when will the modernists be exiled from the Holy Church.  He is admitting a Heremantic of Rupture here!  Wake up people and see shes under attack by those within!] in how the Catholic Church views itself: we are no longer the only kid on the block [so we are not the one true faith in which the gates of Hell would not prevail?  Again these “sister churches” as he likes to call them are all ok with error.  We are literally the only kid on the block that has upheld truth in the face of mounting evil.  Playing semantic games like the whole church or the only kid on the block is creating a new novelty against the faith and denies the no salvation outside the Church dogma, and yes I know the nuance but still they will only be saved by the one church not being a sister church which is confusing the structure of the early Christians before the great schism], the whole Church of Christ, but one Sister Church among others. Previously, the Catholic Church saw itself as the original one and only true Church of Christ from which all other Christians had separated for one reason or another in the course of history, and Catholics held, simplistically, that the solution to divided Christendom consisted in all other Christians returning to Rome’s maternal bosom [And where in Vatican II does it deny this fact?  I will admit that Bishops have become cowardly especially with the Russian Orthodox playing semantic games that they would protestalatize, but how is this actually church teaching?  Writing a treaty is not a teaching, but an indult, to not act on truth, but not to deny it either].

Vatican II, with an assist from those Council Fathers with a less naïve Disney-World view of their own Church’s past, managed to put aside this historically ludicrous, self-centered, self-congratulatory perception of reality [This is such a stink bomb its incomprehensible that CWR and First things are making these statements public when they will cause confusion and scandle.  Again where is this idea in Vatican II?  Saying that the fullness of Truth subsists in the Catholic Church necessarily means that all other bodies are lacking to some degree or another and must come into communion with the fullness]. In doing so they had a strong assist from the Council Fathers of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church whose concrete experience of the realities of the Christian East made them spokesmen and defenders of that reality [Where?  Where is this novelty introduced and does it even carry with it a de fide statement?  Vatican II is a valid ecumenical council and where it restates Catholic truth it is indeed infallible, but where novelties are introduced without a statement defining it to be held by all the faithful as can be seen in previous councils then it is a matter of being ambiguous and not actual de fide teaching. Such statements require a heremanutic of continuity to be in line with the whole tradition of the Church].

In this context I would recommend the excellent new book by Robert Louis Wilken, The First Thousand Years: A Global History of Christianity (New Haven & London: Yale U. Press 2012). Professor Wilken, a convert to Catholicism who is a recognized expert on Early Christianity and its history and literature, shows that Early Christianity developed not out of some Roman cradle but as a federation of local Churches, Western and Eastern, each one under the authority of a chief hierarch who would come to be called Archbishop, Pope, Patriarch, or Catholicos, each with its own independent governing synod and polity, all of them initially in communion with one another until the vicissitudes of history led to lasting divisions. [The Clement letter itself denies this possibility, just because a professor writes a book doesn’t make it correct].

+JMJ+

Erin Burnett and the promotion of Confusion

A response to Erin Burnett

So I have heard from a friend that the media is out there saying stupid things, big surprise. Here is my line by line take on what was said: [My comments in [Red with brackets]

BURNETT: Our second story, OUTFRONT, breaking the rules. He's only a little more than 24 hours into his papacy, but already Pope Francis is splitting with tradition. [Shes already showing that she paid zero attention to Pope Benedict, her idea of splitting is a hermanutic of rupture, which all libs take in attempting to confuse people] This morning, he did something amazing. He turned away the official Vatican limo when it came to pick him up instead he got in an unmarked sedan to get to the basilica dedicated to the Virgin Mary. [How is taking a limo a tradition?  Seems more like a security thing.  Now if Benedict had been carried on Sedia Gestatoria to every church he went to  them maybe you could draw a reference, but really this is creating a false impression of what is meant by tradition in the first]

That is a significant thing for a pope. Then he had his driver go back to the residence where he had been staying so he can pick up his own luggage and also pick up the tab. Even though it wasn't necessary, according to the Vatican, the newly elected pontiff wanted to set a good example of what priests and bishops should do. [Got it.  When you use something you must pay for it.  Please Erin when Mr. Obama goes on vacation or on another golf outing do us a favor and tell him to pay for it]



OUTFRONT tonight in Rome, our Vatican expert and contributor, Raymond Arroyo [EWTN: World Over Live host], and also the news director of Catholic Television Network. Now Raymond, take me through the rest of Pope Francis' first day. I know we were all learning so much about this man.

RAYMOND ARROYO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: We are, indeed. You know, I spoke to some security officials at the Vatican. They say he has been escaping us all day long. He does his own thing, Erin. I had a friend of mine who is monsignor. He walked into the house where all the cardinals were living and where the pope is now residing while they renovate the papal palace, and he came down the elevator himself. He walked out, no entourage, no secretaries. He greeted the man by name and embraced him.

They talked a little bit. He said it was very easy and so he's kind of setting his own path here. And as pope, he can do that. And let me tell you, in the days ahead, he's going to have to set his own path. It will take that to fix what ails the Vatican at this moment.

BURNETT: And we've heard a lot of amazing things about his generosity, how humble he is [Something about humitity is that most people think humility has to do with material possessions or letting people run over you, if so they need read the magnificat], you know, washing the feet of men who had AIDS. But he also faced some challenges as the leader of the Jesuits in Argentina.

Today we're learning about some serious questions about what he knew and what he did or didn't do when military junta in the 1970s murdered up to 30,000 people. People say he turned away from priests at that time. Is this going to be something that could become a bigger problem, Raymond?

ARROYO: Pope Francis, then Cardinal Bergoglio, he wanted to reform his order, the Jesuits. They were leaning toward liberation theology. He didn't like what was happening. He told some of the Jesuits, look, I separate your politics from your prayer.

Pray more, do less politics, they didn't like that. They fought back. Many of them started this canard, this story and floated it that he was involved in the kidnappings. And he was ostracized and sent to the north of Argentina. He was exiled.

It was only John Paul II that brought him back, named him an archbishop and later a cardinal. Here he is. It's interesting during the homily today, he pointed out in the scriptures there was a line about the stone that the builders rejected have become the corner stone.

That really could be the motto for this man's life. He is now the corner stone of this church. You can see it behind me and it is very interesting. He's been through the blades before, Erin.

And I don't think he's afraid of bringing reform to the fore and following through to the end even if it costs him personally. As you said, he's a simple man of faith. We'll see what happens.

BURNETT: All right, Raymond, thank you very much.

Well, as Raymond mentioned, Pope Francis is already making it clear that his tenure is going to be different from his predecessors. [Heremantic of Rupture is what she means] But will he budge on the sensitive issue of allowing women a bigger role in the church? [Why you no understand no ability to do so!]

David Mattingly talked to one woman who is risking everything to become a [faux] priest knowing that her Catholic Church will disown her when she is ordained [an ordination is not possible without a Bishop to boot, second simulating an ordination is not anything other than playing dress up, mocking Holy Mother Church]. David is OUTFRONT on the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): His first step into public view was greeted by cheers from the faithful. But at that moment, Pope Francis also moved one step closer to a confrontation with this woman. [Cause she’s the center of the world]

(on camera): Did this calling come from God? [Lets see the subjectivism to come]

CHRISTINE HAIDER, STUDENT, PACIFIC COLLEGE OF RELIGION: I believe that it did, yes. [and who is discerning this again, the church or her?  After all Christ says you did not choose me I chose you.  He also says to his Apostoles the bishops of his day, he who hears you hears me, he who rejects you rejects me and the one who sent me.]

MATTINGLY: How did God speak to you? Do you remember? 

HAIDER: I think it was peacefulness and it's not an urgency. [maybe you misunderstood that she should be a nun?  What makes her think Priest?] It's just a peaceful knowing this is what I'm supposed to do. [Relativism on display]

MATTINGLY (voice-over): Christine Haider is part of a small, but rebellious movement [I seem to remember another rebeliious being] risking ex-communication. [Reminder they see this as a political thing, they don’t understand that excommication is meant to lead the soul back because they are doing something wrong in regards to church teaching] She is out to break Roman Catholic Church tradition by becoming an ordained priest. [Again cant be ordained, all they can do is simulate the action, and that in itself is a mortal sin]

(on camera): The church would not see you as a Catholic priest. [wouldn’t it be priestess?  ;-P  ]

HAIDER: I don't believe that clerics are qualified to make that decision on their own. I believe that that is God's decision. [I would like to see her keys, her commission to feed the flock and tend it, and so forth before she makes the comment]

MATTINGLY (voice-over): The Roman Catholic Women Priest Organization says there are nearly 100 women around the world shunned [oh dear] by the hierarchy because they have become priests [but they haven’t] through ceremonies not sanctioned by the Vatican.

The emergence of Pope Francis does signal and era of change in the Catholic Church [Hermanutic of Rupture], the first pope from the Jesuit order [Validity not questioned], the first modern day pope not from Europe [should tell you immediately that its not a rupture]. But he is also known as a conservative voice, embracing the church's traditional values. [Boo, Booer! :-P  ]

(on camera): Is this a moment of encouragement for you?

HAIDER: Yes, I feel it's too soon to say. I do definitely agree that there are a lot of firsts in this appointment and I think that that means that it might be a good time for more firsts. [Misunderstanding that something being a first in ethnic or order terms means the dogma door is open]


MATTINGLY (voice-over): Christine Haider is expecting a lot from the new pope. Not just a woman, she is also married. For now, she is studying for the priesthood but at a Protestant seminary. [thanks for getting their hopes up protestants] She is a few years away from becoming ordained [again faulty idea]. Scholars [why would you ask a scholar, why not a priest in good standing or a Bishop] say such fundamental change seems unlikely when three out of four women priests are in the United States [Not only is it unlikely, but impossible, are these scholars at the protestant college?].

REVEREND TOM RAUSCH, PROFESSOR OF CATHOLIC THEOLOGY, LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY [Oh hears the supposed response, lets go to the liberal Jesuit university]: I don't think the ordination of women is on the top of the list of the priorities [Father why would you even say its on a list?] that the cardinals are facing right now at the Vatican. It's a very important issue in the United States, but Catholics in the United States constitute 6 percent of global Catholicism. [Got that 6% not even 99% dictate to the church what Christs teaching is]

MATTINGLY (on camera): The church for its part has been very clear on where it stands on this issue. [Rome has spoken, the case is closed, now get down to living the faith]  As recently as 2010, the Vatican declared that women becoming priests is a grave crime against church law. [This sounds conflated for a reason.  Got it its against church law, the law made by man, not God that’s why its ok to go against] Defiance like this doesn't come without a price. [Im thinking of what the price should be….if only ;-P  ]

(voice-over): Ex-communication means Haider would not be allowed to take communion in the Catholic Church, [not just the blessed sacrament, but any sacraments] denied the ritual [person] central to the Christian faith.

HAIDER: And being denied communion at a Catholic Church would break my heart. [Im sure it would that’s why you continue in your error, Right?]

MATTINGLY: But it's a risk she is willing to take [to place yourself outside the church is to condemn yourself to hell, she must misunderstand this…wait she probably went to “Catholic” school her whole life, so scratch that], a broken heart for the chance of breaking through. [to the pits of eternal perdition] David Mattingly, CNN, Berkeley, California.

+JMJ+