You've hit the nail on the head. A lot of what's coming from the current powers in the Church are precariously close to New Age beliefs which were addressed in the document "Jesus Christ the Bearer of the Water of Life" available on the Vatican website: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...s/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html In the following extract from the document, which of the two definitions of truth is close to the Cardinal's? Do we invent truth or do we embrace it? New Age truth is about good vibrations, cosmic correspondences, harmony and ecstasy, in general pleasant experiences. It is a matter of finding one's own truth in accordance with the feel- good factor. Evaluating religion and ethical questions is obviously relative to one's own feelings and experiences. Jesus Christ is presented in Christian teaching as “The Way, the Truth and the Life” (Jn 14.6). His followers are asked to open their whole lives to him and to his values, in other words to an objective set of requirements which are part of an objective reality ultimately knowable by all. Cardinal Poupard, in his introduction to to the above document in 2003: "Furthermore, it is also worth noting the fact that for a long time now one finds a vibrant interest for esoteric religion amongst certain Masonic circles that aspire to a universal religion". http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...erelg_doc_20030203_press-conf-new-age_en.html And in 2004, Cardinal Poupard said this: https://zenit.org/articles/liberalism-and-relativism-seen-as-fueling-secularism/ “Secularism is a trend that stems from liberalism,” Cardinal Poupard continued. “It is an evil side effect and demands correction. We can be confident because secularism will never exclude religion from the world, for the simple fact that each and every man is fundamentally religious. “But it includes emotionalism and individualism among its defining values, as they are exemplified in the New Age of cultural abandonment and privatized religion and consequent reduction of the pursuit of the transcendental to mere technological progress and the feeling of well-being. And these have devastating effects on Europe.” “Secularism also means relativism as it entails a denial of the Truth. This ideology has led to indifference and unbelief,” the cardinal lamented. He continued: “It is an attitude that has led to the so-called designer dogma and stand-off between Spain’s Socialist government and the Catholic bishops concerning questions related to the value of life, solidarity and the family, and brings with it the evils of abortion, and the pointless civil marriage of homosexuals.” Cardinal Cupich reminds me of those politicians who,while claiming to be defenders of Christian family values, are the very ones who enact anti-family and anti-Christian legislation. How the Church's approach to Truth has changed in a very short time.
The Pope on Amoris laetitia’s comments: respectable but wrong On the last issue of Civiltà Cattolica, Francis’ conversation with the Jesuits in Colombia: it must be read from top to bottom, its morality is Thomistic Pubblicato il 28/09/2017 IACOPO SCARAMUZZI VATICAN INSIDER “I’ll use this question to say something else that I believe should be said out of justice, and also out of charity…”. Pope Francis addressed the criticism of his apostolic exhortation on the family,”Amoris laetitia”, during a confidential conversation that took place on his recent trip to Colombia (6-11 September) and now published in La Civiltà Cattolica. In Colombia, Francis, as in every international trip, met with the local Jesuits and, after answering a question on his expectations from philosophical reflection, Jorge Mario Bergoglio spoke of Amoris laetitita - a document that raised among other things the doubts (dubia, in Latin) of four cardinals, two of which passed away in recent times, on the theme of communion with remarried divorcees. “I hear many comments – they are respectable for they come from children of God, but wrong – concerning the post-synod apostolic exhortation. To understand Amoris Laetitia you need to read it from the start to the end. Beginning with the first chapter, and to continue to the second and then on … and reflect. And read what was said in the Synod.” A second thing: some maintain that there is no Catholic morality underlying Amoris Laetitia, or at least, no sure morality. I want to repeat clearly that the morality of Amoris Laetitia is Thomist, the morality of the great Thomas. You can speak of it with a great theologian, one of the best today and one of the most mature, Cardinal Schönborn. I want to say this so that you can help those who believe that morality is purely casuistic. Help them understand that the great Thomas possesses the greatest richness, which is still able to inspire us today. But on your knees, always on your knees…” The Pope had just said that theology and philosophy must not have “a laboratory reflection. We’ve seen what damage occurred when the great and brilliant Thomist scholastics deteriorated, falling down, down, down to a manualistic scholasticism without life, mere ideas that transformed into a casuistic pastoral approach.” For Pope Francis, “Benedict XVI spoke of truth as an encounter, that is to say no longer a classification, but a road. Always in dialogue with reality, for you cannot do philosophy with a logarithmic table. Besides, nobody uses them anymore. The same is true for theology, but this does not mean to corrupt theology, depriving it of its purity. Quite the opposite. The theology of Jesus was the most real thing of all; it began with reality and rose up to the Father. It began with a seed, a parable, a fact… and explained them.” http://www.lastampa.it/2017/09/28/v...-but-wrong-fOM9GtHBSyp83Be3St2EVN/pagina.html
David, Thank you for this. It is now clear to me that there is no hope of dialogue between the Pope and the dissenters of Amoris Laetitia. Here, Pope Francis is clear in a way that precludes reconsideration. The Pope believes the dissenters are irretrievably wrong! Only the Two Hearts can save us from schism! Safe in the Refuge of the Immaculate Heart!
I believe you are correct, Mario. There is no chance of any reconsideration. But I disagree about the schism. There will be no schism over this matter at least.
David, Perhaps my choice of the word, schism, is too strong. What is a man such as Cardinal Burke to do? I would think that this clear statement by the Pope will prompt Burke to publish his Correction because he believes the very unity and continuity of the Deposit of Faith is at stake. Only if a sizable number of Cardinals are willing to join Cardinal Burke, will Francis ever consider responding. If Burke is isolated and those Catholics who have looked to him with hope are isolated with him, there are only two possibilities: outright schism, or a period of restrained rebellion with hopes on reversal in the next conclave. But to bring any sense of closure to the issue, the next conclave would have to publicly declare that Francis was or was not a heretic. Just my opinion. Safe in the Barque of Peter!
David, I pray and hope that you are right about there being no schism. Schism is a horrible thing and I am sure that Christ wishes there to be only one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic body serving as His Bride on Earth. I fear though that you are very much misinterpreting events. There currently exists inside the Church two very separate viewpoints, not only on the issue of people in active adultery receiving Holy Communion, but on the nature of the Church herself, morality, truth, and a whole host of issues. These issues have been brought to a head by the current crisis in the Church. The concerns of serious faithful Catholics need to be addressed clearly, thoroughly and quickly or else there is a very real danger of schism as prelates in the know have stated many times. This is a very sad time. Let us all pray that the silent schism that already exists does not concretize.
Cardinal Burke will continue to be opposed... anyone who works for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be fought and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue, however, Our Lady has already crushed its head.
Even in the height of the Arian crisis, which lasted for decades, schism was avoided. Also, even after the final victory of Saint Athanasius, considerable pockets of Arianism remained, notably in Spain and North Africa (areas which eventually fell with little resistance to the Mohammedan hordes). Now, we face an upsurge of a reinvigorated Gnosticism, with the initiated declaring to their followers that they have an esoteric 'knowledge' that supersedes the Gospels-nothing really new here. Will history repeat itself, with true Catholicism eventually reviving in certain places, but with the weakened ones who have fallen for this new Gnosticism perhaps succumbing to atheistic secularism or even Mohammedanism? I'd love to know who all these active homosexuals are that are unaware that sodomy is a grave sin. Where have they been hiding? Maybe this ignorance is the reason for the 'pride' they never fail to let us know they feel?
The Church does not become, "very small, but very holy" as Cardinal Ratzinger foretold without a schism. One must prepare for this time, so that you will remain in the Will of God. How many prophecies have to speak of this, before we realize it is already upon us? Fatima, Akita, LaSallette and numerous current alleged prophecy all foretell of this battle between truth and changing truth. For me the only thing that will matter is staying with the unchanging truth's of scripture and doctrine. Yes, this makes me "rigid" "legalistic" blaa blaa blaa. Name calling doesn't bother me the least bit. Our Lord warned us of these times and we have been chosen to live in them. Stand tall and praise God that we may be found worthy to suffer for his truth. As far as Pope Francis or any other clergy go, if they bring another truth other than what has been handed on them let them justify it with scripture and 2000 years of magisterial teachings on what they propose. If they cannot do this, then it is they who are opposed to the truth, not I. It is that simple for me. Pray, pray, pray.
DeGaulle, I don't know that much about the Arian crisis but I found the following https://www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/HERESY3.TXT This article is especially interesting because a Frankish general "named" Clovis is mentioned which reminds me of at least 2 of the prophecies about the Great Monarch being a Frankish King. In any case, I think many people have wondered if we are seeing history repeat itself now, as you have mentioned. If this is true or not I have no idea but I wonder because of all of the forms of communication that exist today in comparison to the time of the Arian crisis what differences do you think we may expect to witness? If we do experience a divine intervention, as many people think that we may, I suppose that would be a huge difference. If there is no divine intervention then I wonder if because of our ability to communicate with people on a worldwide level much more easily now if we could possibly witness a resolution much sooner. I suppose my mind is wandering a little bit but I pray that although it appears that Pope Francis is continuing to be obstinate in relation to the concerns about AL, that there will be enough of "a movement" for him to change his mind.
I would respectfully disagree with this point. Schism is a horrible thing, for it means one portion has cut itself off from the living tree which is the Church. There are other ways for the Church to regain its faithfulness than schism. Even if it does become small and few in number.
More BS. Looks like a "confidential conversation" is the new polite term for backbiting. How convenient for the "confidence" to be leaked in the Argentinian supposedly Catholic paper edited by a Presbyterian. Under this papacy, Christ's Vicar has informed us via his atheist friend that Communion would be available to anyone who asked. That the atheist doesn't take copious notes or use a tape recorder for his interviews gave the Pope the cover of plausible deniability and gave the ultra-montanists the "media spin" excuse. Now we have a second hand report from a news outlet edited by a follower of the original Reformers telling us that the Pope told a group of Jesuits that people who fear he is incorporating Luther's beliefs into Christ's Church are inferior to his personal favourite Cardinal "it is possible to be a Freemason and fully Catholic" Schonborn who not only had been dishing out Communion to adulterers long before the Synod or AL, but had blessed homosexual couples at a St. Valentine's day ceremony in Vienna Cathedral. The timing of this report is very telling. This is snake in the grass stuff, unworthy of any Bishop never mind the Pope.
Is it possible for a true, underground, Church to co-exist within a broader heretic one? It may well be. It almost seems to be the case already.
This is what happened during St. Athanasius' time I believe. The followers of St. Athanasius wouldn't even use the same bath houses as the heretical Arians for fear of being "contaminated". This might be going a bit far, but what happened during that crisis shows that there is some precedent for radical errors being allowed to persist with large followings in the Church. At least for a time. In the end they are always wiped away.
That comment from David has to be a wind up. Can you give any specific examples of the Thomistic nature of this document?
