Civil war in the Catholic Church, as Team Francis alienates the entire African continent.

I am surprised this Italian priests has been excommunicated by his bishop so fast and Cardinal Vigano, who has used similar if not stronger words against the Pope, has not. I am equally surprised so many German priests that have publicly promoted the sin of sodomy by endorsing gay blessings, gay marriage etc, have not been excommunicated, neither their bishops.

 

Aren't these blessings supposed to be done discreetly? The people defending this innovation say that the blessings should come from a spontaneous request and are interpreting that to mean that it can't be a formal, pre-arranged event. If that's the case, wouldn't very few parishioners know about it? The defenders also said that the document was addressed to priests, implying that it's not the laity's place to discuss it. If they're right, isn't the priest who makes an announcement at Mass that he will be doing these blessings contravening that interpretation?

 

There's no point getting upset about it. Amoris Laetitia was the time to speak out, and we saw how few theologians or Bishops were willing to raise their heads above the parapet. We also saw how many sat back and watched the persecution of those who did speak up. Amoros Laetitia was the testing ground for this.

We'll just have to accept that these non-liturgical, non-sacramental blessings will become more common and more open, leading to the next step of non-sacramental and non-liturgical blessings of the union as well as the persons in the union. Once that becomes commonplace, the next stage will be formal, liturgical ceremonies that will be permitted provided we don't call it marriage. Full sacramental marriage ceremonies will be the final stage and that's when what Fulton Sheen described as the ape of the Church will break away from the true Church because no Pope can permit it. God will protect the Church but those who remain faithful are likely to be in the minority.

The camel's nose is well and truly under the tent. We are required to pray and remain faithful. Any Bishops or priests who choose to lead people down the wide road will answer to God.

 

It's so much easier in life just to go ahead with things, even things that make you spit blood. People think, well if the Pope says it's alright and my Bishop says it's alright and my Pastor says it's alright and most people in my Parish think it's alright.,well then.

But another thing is that it won't just stop here. We saw. what happened in the Protestant sects when they bought into this Satanic nonsense.

I will probably not make a big fuss, just vote with my feet and walk away if it comes down to it. If I get a chance to say something before leaving I will, to help others.

But sooner or later it will come, there's just no avoiding it, this filth is everywhere now.

 

Actions speak louder than words. Sodomy is the action they engage in.

 

We might have to choose not to talk, but let's not walk.

 

What a mess we are in!!

 

According to Father Hunwicke, Byzantine Rite Catholics, at the very least Ukrainian ones, are not under the jurisdiction of this sodomy document. Is there a way for a Latin Rite Catholic in the West to become a Byzantine Rite one?

 

Without Justice, why Mercy?

 

There is the most beautiful description of this in Scripture:

Psalm 85:10

Mercy and truth have met together. Grim justice and peace have kissed!

 

Given that the document written by Fernandez (which is already naturally heterodox) does not allow liturgical blessings for sodomy, I wonder if some liberals will take advantage of moments of worship outside of the liturgy (as do many members of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal ) to impose their abominations in the holy place.

 

Eric Salmond is very good, I love to listen to him.
He remains calm , charitable and objective. Also the Catholic Esquire.

All this is like a nightmare, but all we have to do is follow our conscience and the True Teachings of the Church.

All the same it is appalling what is happening.

 

Ukrainian Catholics have rejected Tucho Fernandez's gay blessings, both those of the Latin rite and those of the Byzantine rite.

Latin rite: https://rkc.org.ua/blog/2023/12/19/yepyskopat-ukrayiny-nemaye-blagoslovennya-na-zhyttya-u-grisi/

Bizantine rite: https://ugcc.ua/data/komunikat-shch...ro-dushpastyrske-znachennya-blagosloven-4124/​

One of my grandmothers couldn't read, but I'm sure she knew that this sacrilege had absolutely no jurisdiction in any part of the Catholic world.

 

People are rightly concerned about schism. My point is that if we all went to the peripheries of joining the Ukrainian Rite, we would avoid the jurisdiction of the sodomy diktat without being in schism. We would remain members of Christ's Holy, Apostolic Church, but simply outside the Roman Rite.

 

You know the Eastern Rite is not part of our own culture, it would be foreign to our culture. A bit like trying to bring up a kitten in a litter of puppies. It would make much more sense to go to The Traditional Mass with good Traditional priests.

Which I intend to do if the ***t hits the fan. I already go to the old rite a lot of times during the week anyway.

 

Our Bishops in Canada have basically issued a "nothing to see here" statement. The CBC interviewed James Martin SJ on the day FS came out.
A snippet:
(Question): You've done blessings of other things before. Rings, for example. Is that right?

(Answer): "The irony is, as a Catholic priest, you can bless all sorts of things. You can bless dogs, you can bless sheds, you can bless schools, you can bless factories. But up until now, you couldn't bless same-sex couples, which really struck people as really unjust.

And now you can. So it's really wonderful to be able to do it publicly and not have to worry about skulking around in the shadows."

This comparing of human beings made in the image and likeness of God, sinners as we all are, to dogs or sheds, etc is absolutely the worst of the sophistry I've seen so far. And it does make me angry.....

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/same-sex-blessings-reverend-1.7063051

 

Your understanding of schism is overly-simplistic according to the Moral Theology of Callan and McHugh.

1373. Schism, like heresy, may be either formal or material (see 828). (a) Formal schism is that described above, in which one wishes to separate oneself from the unity of the Church, and is in culpable revolt. It is a mortal sin. (b) Material schism is that in which one is in fact separated from the unity of the Church, but is in good faith. An example is the Great Schism of the West (1378-1417), when there were rival claimants for the Papacy, and invincible ignorance among the people as to who was the true head. This kind of schism is not a mortal sin.
​

On the one hand, if Father Ramon Guidetti believes in "good faith" that Bergoglio is a "usurper" of the Chair of Peter, but he is incorrect in that assessment, he would be in "material schism," not "formal schism." Fr. Guidetti would not be guilty of mortal sin.

On the other hand, if Father Ramon Guidetti believes in "good faith" that Bergoglio is a "usurper" of the Chair of Peter, and he is correct in that assessment, he would remain a member of the True Catholic Church, while those who commune with the "usurper" would be in "material schism" from those in the True Catholic Church. In that case Fr. Guidetti is a saint.

 

The Eastern Rite might be different to what was once our culture, but it's certainly more familiar and less foreign to me than one that blesses sodomy. Eastern Catholics are still Catholic. That's all I need to be. Unfortunately, it is not practicable for me to attend a Latin Mass, as I would have to travel for hours to reach one. As a Catholic member of the Eastern Rite, would it not be legitimate for me to attend a local Catholic Novus Ordo Mass in order to fulfill my obligations, while remaining a member of a Catholic Rite that rejected blessing sodomy? Admittedly, I'd certainly have to abstain from the inevitable rounds of applause that would accompany such 'blessings' and perhaps even walk out. I'm not trying to be awkward, but trying to find some way of insulating myself from these perversions in an Ireland that is likely to offer me few alternatives.

 

I see Martin's errors differently. Dogs and inanimate objects, humble as they are compared to sinful men, are incapable of sin. Either way, you are absolutely right to be angry.

 

So tell me, what is my understanding of schism?
And what leads you to assume such?

It does not necessarily follow that if he is correct, that he is "a saint".