Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Why Do So Many Converts Reject Pope Francis?

In the same way I don't visit porn sites, racist sites, etc., I now stay away from almost all "Catholic" web sites.  These sites do nothing to build my spirituality and bring me closer to God.  They literally poison my mind and destroy the presence of the Holy Spirit by driving out the Spirit of love, mercy and compassion and replacing it with a spirit of accusation, condemnation and hate. 

An amazing aspect of these sites is that they are basically clones of one another, writing about the same subjects from the same point of view with no original thought.  As I have stated previously, it is almost like they were all written by the same person.  There is certainly no doubt that they are all driven by the same spirit.

I don't think these "catholic" bloggers actually consult each other, and yet they all manage to come to the same conclusion:  the Catholic Church is dying and Pope Francis and his "henchman" bishops are actively participating in that destruction.

These bloggers and those who follow them believe they are the only true Catholics left on earth, and it is they who will save the Church and, by extension, the world.  We have not seen this much rebellion and rejection of authority in the Church since the Reformation.

Just how did these bloggers end up with their decidedly non-Catholic world view?  How have they become so confident in their own sanctity and their right to label all others, including the Vicar of Christ, as evil?  Why is it happening now?

One common factor among these self-righteous bloggers is that many, although not all, are Protestant converts.  Here are just a few prominent converts who have publicly rejected Pope Francis:  John Zuhlsdorf, Dwight Longenecker, George Rutler, Taylor Marshall, John Hunwicke, Steve Ray, Scott Hahn, Mary Ann Kreitzer.  There are many more.

UPDATE:  Mary Ann Kreitzer is a cradle Catholic, not a convert, and I apologize to her for this mistake.  However, Mary Ann criticizes and condemns Pope Francis on a regular basis on her blog, even questing the validity of his papacy, and suggesting that Pope Benedict XVI may still be the legitimate pope.  Mary Ann has never supported Pope Francis in any way. 

In reading the stories of their conversions, it is interesting to note that their attraction to the Catholic Church did not arise from an awareness of their personal sin but from dissatisfaction with their Protestant churches.  They were basically in a good spot with God, but they were not getting what they felt they needed or wanted from their churches.  Their conversions were of the intellect and not of the spirit.  Not one of them has a  "road to Damascus" story.

By this, I mean not one of them had a moment of clarity about their own sinfulness and need for the mercy, compassion and forgiveness of Jesus Christ.   This was not the driving force in their lives in any sense.  Their stories are all about identifying the "right" Church.

A good example of this is from Steve Ray [HERE] on his attraction to the Catholic Church:
I was born and raised an Evangelical Protestant. My parents were inspired by Billy Graham, and I grew up in that warm environment. I considered myself a Bible teacher. I became Catholic not necessarily because I saw anything beautiful in the Catholic Church at first, but when I was 39, I began to see three problems with Protestantism: 1) What was worship? 2) What is the authority that binds Christians? (We thought this was the Bible alone, but that would never work.) 3) How many Churches did Jesus start? (There was only one, per Matthew 16:18 and John 17.) We spent a lot of time contemplating these questions. Then, a good friend of mine, Al Kresta, converted to Catholicism in 1993. Al and I have been best friends since 1983. We home-schooled our kids and studied the Bible together. My wife and I told him that was the stupidest thing we ever heard — why would someone become Catholic? We started studying the Church Fathers to prove Al wrong, but instead, the Church Fathers kept proving the Catholic Church right! A year later, we became Catholic.
That, my friends, is NOT a story of conversion.  Steve Ray did not change in his attitude towards God in any way.  There was no conversion of the soul.  Steve Ray merely changed his registration from Protestant to Catholic. 

John Zuhlsdorf's conversion, according to Wikipedia, is even more shallow:
He says his conversion to Catholicism was set into motion after hearing a piece of sacred polyphony on the radio. He felt called to serve as a priest and eventually was ordained a priest in Rome by Pope John Paul II on May 26, 1991.
Contrast this with the story of the conversion of St. Augustine:
Some time in the year 386, Augustine and his friend Alypius were spending time in Milan. While outdoors, Augustine heard the voice of a child singing a song, the words of which were, "Pick it up and read it. Pick it up and read it." He thought at first that the song was related to some kind of children's game, but could not remember ever having heard such a song before.
Then, realizing that this song might be a command from God to open and read the Scriptures, he located a Bible, picked it up, opened it and read the first passage he saw. It was from the Letter of Paul to the Romans. Augustine read:
Not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual excess and lust, not in quarreling and jealousy. Rather, put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the desires of the flesh. --Romans 13: 13-14
Reading this scripture, Augustine felt as if his heart were flooded with light. He turned totally from his life of sin. He was Baptized by Ambrose during the Easter Vigil April 24, 387. His friend Alypius and his son Adeodatus were Baptized at the same time.
Another story of true conversion is one given to us by Jesus Christ of the publican standing before God, ashamed to even raise his head.


None of the contemporary "converts" listed above displays the humble spirit of the publican.  They all stand with the Pharisee.  In fact, they pat themselves on the back on their ability to identify the "right" Church.

And just as they felt free to reject the authority of their Protestant churches, they feel that same freedom to reject the authority of the Catholic Magisterium, i.e., Pope Francis and the bishops.

This same spirit of self righteousness and rebellion is seen among cradle Catholic bloggers as well.  These bloggers never discuss their own sinfulness and need for God.  There is never any emphasis on mercy, compassion and forgiveness.  These sites name their enemies and denounce them with a ferocity worthy of any Pharisee denouncing Jesus Christ.

A good example of this is our old friend, Michael Voris.  Voris hid his sinful homosexual life for as long as he could, feeling it was a "private" matter.  During all that time, instead of showing compassion for others trapped in that same lifestyle, he condemned them to hell, showing no mercy whatseover.  Even now after he has been "outed", he continues to condemn without mercy.

This spirit of self righteousness and condemnation is the spirit of Protestantism.  It is completely antithetical to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Never once did Our Lord condemn sinners.  Jesus Christ always showed mercy, compassion and forgiveness.

Our Lord refused to condemn a woman who was caught in the actual act of adultery.  He did not even condemn the criminal on the cross who taunted him.  At the same time, he immediately forgave the criminal who merely said, "Remember me when you come into your Kingdom."

The spirit of rebellion and rejection of authority exhibited by these "catholic" bloggers is the same spirit which infected the ancient Israelites when they went to the Prophet Samuel and asked for a human king.  As The Lord told Samuel, "it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king." (I Sam 8:7).

This was echoed by Jesus Christ when He told the apostles, "Anyone who accepts your message is also accepting me. And anyone who rejects you is rejecting me. And anyone who rejects me is rejecting God, who sent me." (Luke 10:16).

Those More Catholic Than the Pope hate Pope Francis because he preaches a message of mercy and forgiveness of sinners.  Look at their arguments.  They are angry because the Pope wants to extend mercy to divorced and remarried, to homosexuals, to non Catholics, to Islamic refugees, etc. etc.  They claim that the mercy of Pope Francis is really a disguise for his endorsement of sin, and that therefore he is really a child of the devil, an evil heretic who must be resisted.

Sounds a whole lot like the condemnation leveled against Jesus Christ by the Pharisees of His time.

Those More Catholic Than the Pope deal in a world of black and white.  Either you are righteous like they are and are going to heaven, or you are a sinner headed to hell.  They feel their job is to tell people they are sinners, and then it is up to the people to "get right" with God or go to hell.

Francis says we must meet people where they are and walk with them on the path to salvation.  This message is completely rejected by the Protestant converts and far too many cradle Catholics who think like Protestants.  I can't judge their hearts, but their actions are not Catholic,  They are Protestants in every sense of the word, right down to their rejection of the Papacy.

What are the signs of true conversion?  It is much more than changing your religious affiliation and registering as a member of a Catholic parish.

A true convert is one who realizes that he cannot take credit for "finding" God.  God is the one who sought out and found him.  His repentance does not come from himself but is a gift from God.

A true convert realizes that he has nothing to give God, but that everything he has comes from God.

A true convert is not drawn to the Church because it looks spiritual.  A true convert is not converted to the physical trappings of the Church, whether it is the "right" architecture, the size of the altar, the quality of the music, the kind of vestments worn by the priest, the use of Latin, or which direction the priest is facing.

A true convert is drawn to the Catholic Church because Jesus Christ is in the tabernacle.  Jesus Christ is present in the Holy Eucharist.  Jesus Christ is present in the confessional.  Jesus Christ with His Mother, His angels and His saints are present at the Holy Mass.

A true convert realizes that the Holy Spirit is working in the Church whether we understand it or not, and that faith does not depend on how much we do or do not understand.

A true follower of Jesus Christ is one who deeply and profoundly recognizes his own sinfulness and his complete and total need for the mercy and forgiveness of Jesus Christ.  A true convert realizes that he deserves hell and it is only through the love of God that he can escape hell.

In short, a true convert is a sinner in need of forgiveness.

All saints speak of their own sinfulness.  Even St. Therese of Lisieux, who never committed even one mortal sin in her 24 years on earth, felt the great heaviness of her sin and the great mercy of Jesus Christ:
Like the publican, I felt I was a great sinner. I found God to be so merciful! I found it so touching to address oneself to the whole heavenly court to obtain God’s pardon through its intercession. Ah! I could hardly keep from crying, and when the Sacred Host touched my lips, I was really moved.
One who has truly experienced the mercy and forgiveness of Jesus Christ will never stand in judgment of others.  A true convert will realize that he is no better than the one he is judging.  Pope Francis showed this understanding when, asked who Jorge Bergoglio is, he replied, "I am a sinner."

Unless and until we can identify as a sinner in need of forgiveness, we will never be true converts. 

I hope and pray that the "catholic" blogosphere will experience true conversion and stop pushing their false version of Catholicism.


62 comments:

  1. Catholic in Brooklyn, hold your nose and check out the following URL:

    https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-stay-stand-and-fight

    What do you have to say about Michael Voris's claim that ChurchMilitant.com is the most commented-on Catholic website on the planet?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is probably true. But that doesn’t justify his attacks on the Church. It means he is misleading a lot of people and will have a lot to answer for on his day of judgment.

      Delete
  2. Catholic in Brooklyn, go to the following URL:

    http://www.outlookoklahoma.com/archives/m.blog/27/from-fame-to-faith

    What do you have to say about the subject of the article?

    ReplyDelete
  3. CIB, it's interesting that you posted this as I have been thinking the same thing for quite a while. They have never let go of their protestant upbringing. The right coined the term "Cafeteria Catholic" and they are doing the same thing. Picking and choosing what they have to believe and who they have to listen to. I never heard anyone on the left (probably a few exceptions) have such a disrespect for the papacy. They seem to think that can they decide what is and isn't magisterial teaching. I loved that you posted conversion stories. They say a lot! They like to throw around that Satan has entered the church. Guess what, they are right, and they are his minions. They are causing most of the internal problems. They do a good job of talking the talk but not walking the walk. One of the guys you mentioned, I forget which one, suggest the papacy be symbol with no power. Do I hear protestant heretic. I think we also have to make the differentiation that most of these people are of the evangelical ilk and not mainline. When they don't like something they just start a new church. In the town I live in that happened about 20 years ago. A group didn't like that the pastor was doing and started their own place. Evangelicals are good at that. Also, when someone coverts they should NOT be allowed to enter a seminary for at least tens years after they convert. These guys have been more of a problem. There are two in our diocese now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was Longenecker who said the papacy should be no more than a symbol.

      You make some very good points, especially about converts being able to enter seminary. These “converts” are making it pretty clear that all they have done is change Church membership. They have not converted to Catholicism. And they are doing tremendous damage to the faithful. Interesting that these are the same people who support the Republicans and Trump, just like the Evangelicals.

      Delete
  4. My response is far to long for your comments area. I have written my own blog post in response.
    https://connecticutcatholiccorner.blogspot.com/2018/11/connecticut-catholic-blogger-vs-new.html

    ReplyDelete
  5. https://www.hprweb.com/2012/01/what-is-moral-conscience/

    Maybe, due to a faulty understanding of conscience, they misjudge the pope as a heretic rather than radical Christian. While not in the typical examination of conscience, refugees, poor immigrants, economical inequality--these can be deduced by the moral law and Church teaching.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rarely do I see someone have the wrong end of the stick more than I do here. The problem converts are identifying is not "a message of mercy and forgiveness of sinners" it is a shift to the forgiveness of sin itself. It may read as if it's the same thing but it absolutely is not. We've moved from the sinner being forgiven to the sin not being something for which one must be forgiven, and woe to those who call evil good and good evil. It's "go and sin no more", not "go and sin some more". It's not an acceptance of sinners, it's the acceptance of sin. This isn't AA meeting in the parish hall where people who know they have a problem attempt to turn their lives around, this is having a pride parade in lieu of a procession.

    Look, we get it, cradles hate that converts even exist. Twenty-one years of Catholicism has taught me that there's nothing more distasteful to a cradle Catholic than someone who came to the Faith later in life. Older brothers, the prodigals have returned and your total opposition to our presence in the vineyard has not gone unnoticed. Heaven knows you all won't stop reminding us that we lived in error for years. It's not something we really need to be reminded about, two decades into my life as a Catholic it's something I still remind myself regularly. But as I wrote, Heaven knows so good luck with that.

    Beyond that, I have never seen a more confused understanding of the conversion process than what I'm reading here. You don't just have it wrong, it reads more like willful ignorance to the point of propaganda. The idea that converts aren't horribly aware of their own sinfulness isn't just insulting it's a damnable lie. Are you totally unfamiliar with the vile doctrine of total depravity upon which protestantism rests and feeds? That you would focus on a single trigger that sparked a conversion (and deride it!) while ignoring that conversions are usually decades long processes says entirely too much about what you're trying to accomplish. To be blunt it looks like you're telling converts to shut up because your conscience is killing you.

    Be careful of what you lay at the feet of converts or someone might remind you that the pray, pay and obey mindset of cradles has led us precisely to the point we now find ourselves: the Church on the edge of financial bankruptcy with a laity who are not only uncatechized but who are being physically and spiritually abused by an out of control clergy.

    I wanted to make certain I wasn't grabbing the wrong end of the stick myself since I'm not familiar with your blog, good grief and wow. Giving aid and comfort to the enemy is a foundation of treason and what you're running here is practically satan's soup kitchen. The devil's BnB one might say, as indeed I just have. So no, just no, you're not just wrong here, it looks like you're wrong on purpose with an agenda that doesn't have much to do with reality.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wow. There's no "judging" going on here! LOL!

    From one paragraph in a Wikipedia article you conclude and decree that a Catholic priest has never repented of his sins!

    If you think any pope has the authority to give people permission to ignore the Sixth Commandment, you are not a Catholic, in Brooklyn or anywhere else.

    Bergoglio is not pope, anyway, so your Super-duper-ultra-montanism is misplaced.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What world do we live in where a person who supports the Pope is accused of being a traitor to the Catholic Church?

      Delete
    2. What kind of world? A world where the putative "pope" is a traitor to the Catholic Church.

      There may be a religion where the leader can contradict the the teaching of 265 of his predecessors, and the religion's scriptures, and its periodic "councils," but it isn't Catholicism.

      The notion that "Catholicism" means "support and follow the pope, without question" is barbaric and preposterous. If this is what you believe, then having a "Catholic" blog is a grave sin.

      Delete
    3. Yes !
      It would be a good idea to study the history of the Papacy before casting aspersions on other Catholic bloggers.
      Read Mrs Engel's "The Rite of Sodomy" before preaching about questioning the authority of Bishops . Her book called 'The McHugh Chronicles"is also excellent .I can attest to it's veracity because I lived it.
      As Catholics we were never taught to leave our common sense and Catholic education behind and follow everything and every cleric blindly.
      There are far too many victims of sexual abuse and their parents who will tell you to their lifelong regret they have done this.

      Delete
  8. Well, there is papal primacy. So Catholics kind of have to support the pope's decisions in Church governance without question. Also to say that conscience requires you to resist the pope makes no sense either.

    I do not see the pope working against the sixth commandment; just like John Paul II allowed schismatics to take communion in limited cases or Paul VI to give us the Novus Ordo. The pope has powers both to bind and loose. Does Christ not speak to us through His Church? It is absurd to pit the 2 against each other.

    If he's not pope, which bishop has the final say in binding the faithful? My understanding of this issue that you obey whichever Bishop who shares your judgment of Church teaching. And if he doesn't, cast him off as a modernist and find some other bishop. The only problem is that this is not Catholic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Papal Primacy means the Bishop of Rome exercises governance among the bishops and in the Church. Papal Primacy does NOT mean that the pope can contradict Scripture, or solemn definitions of his predecessors, valid councils, etc.

      No one has the authority to declare that people who are obstinately persisting in manifest grave sin may receive Communion. Every time a priest or bishop allows this to happen, the priest or bishop commits a mortal sin.

      You keep finding various ways to say the same thing: The Church has no teaching; the Church is subject to no divine or natural law; the pope is totally unbound by any prior teaching, and prior law.

      That's your position. I.e., the pope is unleashed by ANYTHING. This is an abominable distortion, having nothing to do with Catholicism.

      Delete
    2. I tried to post here but here goes:

      My understanding is that discipline is not dogma. Whether objective sinners, like objective schismatics, can receive communion in limited cases after discernment--this is discipline. If his successor changes this it would not be a change in dogma.

      Frankly, the idea that you have to prune through the Church's official policies and teachings to remove heresy and errors sounds bizarre, almost Protestant. This is because it is indefecible.

      Delete
  9. Mary I looked around your blog to search for an email but did not see one.
    Just wanted to give you a heads up about your Disgus page.

    I noticed after you left several comments on my blog yesterday that your Disgus profile page had an unusual description I am guessing you didn't put there.

    It reads: "hоt sехy wоmеn brightеn up yоur lоnеlinеss аnd surrоund yоu аffесtiоn аnd lоvе hеrе."

    Link: https://disqus.com/by/disqus_9AIByDSPho/

    I think you might have gotten hacked. When you originally left your comments it was under the name "Mary", but now it is merely under your Disgus identity @disqus_9AIByDSPho. Weird.

    Just wanted to give you the heads up. God bless and thank you for your comments on my blog- I hope we both have a better understanding of each others points of view.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for letting me know, Julie. I will delete and make a new profile. Lot of haters out there. And these are people who call themselves “”faithful Catholics”

      Delete
    2. I don't think playing the stunned ingenue does you any favors, primarily because it's so unbelievable. It screams of dissembling when taken in context with your blog posts. And "haters", really? You've broadsided the majority of Catholics who are actually in the pews at daily Mass while allowing a comment that directly calls them satan's minions to stand unchallenged. You "fat shamed" Fr Z calling it a lame attempt at humor and then defended it as returning like for like. That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works and your own writings give a clear indication that you're well aware of that.

      Delete
    3. Are you the "faithful Catholic" who hacked into my profile?

      Delete
  10. This is in response to your comment at my blog. I haven't read this post. I don't "reject the pope," Mary. I pray for him every day. I do reject some of his words and actions that undermine doctrine. Do you not condemn his returning McCarrick to active ministry, a man who molested minors and used his authority to abuse seminarians? And many, including canon lawyers are questioning his legitimacy. I don't have the authority or the ability to decide one way or another so I simply keep the faith. But I will not be silent when he advances the homosexual agenda with men like Fr. Martin and Cardinal Cupich. Frankly, I wonder what you would have done during the Arian heresy -- condemned St. Athanasius I suspect and applauded his excommunication.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary Ann - we both love Our Lord and His Church. Why are we at such odds with each other?

      You have written many terrible comments about Pope Francis on your blog. You question the validity of his papacy, saying you don't know if he is the Pope or if Benedict XVI is the legitimate pope. You subscribe to such hateful vile blogs as Ann Barnhardt and Mundabor.

      As a cradle Catholic, do you believe in the infallibility of the Pope? And please don't give me the "only ex cathedra" line. This is what Lumen Gentium #25 says:

      "Among the principal duties of bishops the preaching of the Gospel occupies an eminent place.(39*) For bishops are preachers of the faith, who lead new disciples to Christ, and they are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach to the people committed to them the faith they must believe and put into practice, and by the light of the Holy Spirit illustrate that faith. They bring forth from the treasury of Revelation new things and old,(164) making it bear fruit and vigilantly warding off any errors that threaten their flock.(165) Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking."

      You show absolutely no reverence or "submission of mind" to anything that Pope Francis says or does. You oppose him in every way possible. You are in violation of this sacred teaching of Holy Mother Church.

      Of course I condemn McCarrick's actions. You will find that on my blog. But that has nothing to do with Pope Francis. Francis is the only one who ever did anything about McCarrick. Pope St John Paul II promoted McCarrick twice, and Benedict gave him a private request to keep a low profile, which was not enforced even by Benedict himself.

      As far as individual priests and bishops are concerned such as Martin and Cupich, that is your individual opinion. It is your opinion that they are "heretics." They are in good standing in the Church. You are free to reject them, but the fact that I do not share your opinion does not make me a bad Catholic.

      However, your rejection of the Vicar of Christ definitely puts you in peril.

      Delete
    2. I believe the question many laity and clergy are looking at is IF Francis is an antipope or not. There is serious questions about this right now.
      If one rejects an anti-pope they are being faithful- not in peril.

      Delete
  11. Be careful of papolatry (pope idolatry). A pope is still human. If he dies in unrepented mortal sin, he would go to hell just like any of us. There have been bad popes in the history of the Catholic Church who have committed murder, adultery, etc. Look them up. If someone speaks something contrary to those teachings even if he may be pope, we are not obliged to obey him. Even saints have said so. Our faithfulness and loyalty should be with Jesus and His teachings above all. By the way, if you didn't already know:

    The Holy Spirit Does Not Choose the Pope
    By Dr. Jared Staudt

    It’s amazing how many times I’ve heard from fellow Catholics that they think that God directly chooses the pope. Just yesterday someone said that they refused to criticize the pope because he was given to the Church by the Holy Spirit. The Church does not teach that position. According to the laws of the Church, the Cardinals choose the pope while praying for the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

    If you don’t believe me, just listen to a previous pope, Benedict XVI. While still Cardinal Ratzinger, he was asked by Bavarian television in 1997 if the Holy Spirit is responsible for the election of a pope. His answer:

    “I would not say so, in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the Pope. . . . I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit’s role should be understood in a much more elastic sense, not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote. Probably the only assurance he offers is that the thing cannot be totally ruined. . . . There are too many contrary instances of popes the Holy Spirit obviously would not have picked!”

    Would we really want to ascribe all of the bad popes of history to the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit still guides corrupt popes, particularly by preserving them from teaching authoritatively something false in regards to faith and morals.

    More here:
    thosecatholicmen.com/articles/the-holy-spirit-does-not-choose-the-pope/

    ReplyDelete
  12. On the other hand, some knowledgeable people (including a bishop) have done some research and say that Pope Francis is not our real pope -- Pope Benedict XVI still is and Pope Francis was not canonically elected. They've even mentioned some evidence. Whatever it is, I hope the truth comes out. Interestingly, there's a St. Francis of Assisi prophecy related to this true/fake pope, two popes situation:

    Act bravely, my Brethren; take courage, and trust in the Lord. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase.

    The devils will have unusual power, the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour to draw many into error and death.

    Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it.

    There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God.

    Then our Rule and manner of life will be violently opposed by some, and terrible trials will come upon us. Those who are found faithful will receive the crown of life; but woe to those who, trusting solely in their Order, shall fall into tepidity, for they will not be able to support the temptations permitted for the proving of the elect.

    Those who preserve their fervour and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the earth. But the Lord will be the refuge of the afflicted, and will save all who trust in Him. And in order to be like their Head [Jesus Christ], these, the elect, will act with confidence, and by their death will purchase for themselves eternal life; choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish [physically] rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy.

    Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.

    (Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi [London: R. Washbourne, 1882], pp. 248-250)

    ReplyDelete
  13. The messages of the Blessed Virgin Mary like through approved apparitions at Fatima, Akita and La Salette have also mentioned apostasy and corruption in the church.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Amazing a pope resigns and since there are those who dislike the new pope now question if he is the real pope. The biggest problem in the church today is that most people do not understand Francis. He does not come from the European/American culture but a South American culture which is much different than out own. Francis is hard to understand because he doesn't fit our Euro/American was of doing and thinking. Even his formation as a Jesuit is different. I would strongly suggest before making any more comments you all read Massimo Borgehsi book "The Mind of Pope Francis". After having read about half of it I am beginning to understand his approach to things better but still have trouble wrapping my Euro/American mind around it. Since before the the council there has been a small faction within the church which back then tried to stop if from even taking place and now are trying to have it condemned. A big flag went up for me when Longenecker has come out publicly and said the pope should only be a symbolic head. That's heresy period. They have also done there best to condemn AL. No where in it does Francis deny and in fact supports the teaching go the church. Like a lot of protestants they like to proof text and construct a meaning without understanding the entire text. This happens a lot with scripture and now they are extending it to other church writings. Fortunately we have been blessed by many many wonderful protestant converts who are not tearing the church apart. This makes me think of the aftermath of Vatican I. When what became the Old Catholic Church split from Rome because of the infallibility teaching. Where are they now? Just a blip on the map. And so in years to come these folks will also be nothing but a blip on the map.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Please oh please, Catholic in Brooklyn, you have no window into the souls of converts. You judge them mercilessly because they oppose what they see as disastrous actions by Pope Francis. You should focus solely on their critiques--whether they have substance or not. You might start with Archbishop Vigano, and Cardinal Zen. Those you condemn in your own pious way are reacting to real events, real problems that exist in the Church. Calling this hate speech is to ignore the substance of their grievances. It's what a LBGT person might say to someone defending the Christian view of marriage. Stop it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sir, if you were Catholic, you would know that no human being has the right to judge the Pope. He receives his authority from the Holy Spirit and only the Holy Spirit can judge him.

      I hope someday that you truly convert and realize that the Catholic Church is not just another Protestant Church. It is the Mystical Body of Christ, unlike any other organization on earth, and therefore cannot be treated like any other Church. We as laity cannot stand in judgment of the Magisterium.

      Delete
    2. Catholic in Brooklyn, I stand by my words. Pope Francis is judged by his actions, which speak louder than any words, mine or yours. And his actions can be rightfully criticized by anyone with sufficient competence to do so. So tell me where does the Church teach that the pope's actions cannot be criticized, especially when done so by people who ostensibly know more about matters than he does?

      Delete
    3. Have you ever read the encyclical by Pope Leo XIII entitled, “Satis Cognitim”? Pope Leo wrote this:

      “Union with the Roman See of Peter is to him always the public criterion of a Catholic. . . . In the same way Maximus the Abbot teaches that obedience to the Roman Pontiff is the proof of the true faith and of legitimate communion. Therefore if a man does not want to be, or to be called, a heretic, let him not strive to please this or that man...but let him hasten before all things to be in communion with the Roman See. If he be in communion with it, he should be acknowledged by all and everywhere as faithful and orthodox. He speaks in vain who tries to persuade me of the orthodoxy of those who, like himself, refuse obedience to his Holiness the Pope of the most holy Church of Rome: that is to the Apostolic See.”

      Pope Leo wrote that just as the gates of Hell cannot prevail against the Church, the gate of Hell cannot prevail against the Papacy. From Leo XIII:

      “The words - and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it - proclaim and establish the authority of which we speak. "What is the it?" (writes Origen). "Is it the rock upon which Christ builds the Church or the Church? The expression indeed is ambiguous, as if the rock and the Church were one and the same. I indeed think that this is so, and that neither against the rock upon which Christ builds His Church nor against the Church shall the gates of Hell prevail" (Origenes, Comment. in Matt., tom. xii., n. ii)”

      Pope Leo said that Peter can never mislead the Church, guaranteed by Jesus Christ:

      “And since all Christians must be closely united in the communion of one immutable faith, Christ the Lord, in virtue of His prayers, obtained for Peter that in the fulfilment of his office he should never fall away from the faith. "But I have asked for thee that thy faith fail not" (Luke xxii., 32), and He furthermore commanded him to impart light and strength to his brethren as often as the need should arise: "Confirm thy brethren" (Ibid.). He willed then that he whom He had designated as the foundation of the Church should be the defence of its faith.”

      Unless you are in communion with Peter, you are not Catholic.

      The papacy has been guaranteed the protection of the Holy Spirit. I, therefore, will continue to listen to Pope Francis and not some lay men who think they are more Catholic than the Pope.

      And the amazing thing is, I will be called a heretic because I refuse to call the Pope a heretic. The world is truly upside down,

      Do you believe that Pope Leo XIII is guilty of Ultramontanism?

      Quotes of Pope Leo taken from encyclical, “Satis Cognitum.

      http://w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_29061896_satis-cognitum.html

      Delete
    4. I think the point you are missing is that SOME Catholics believe Benedict is the valid pope and Francis is an antipope. IF that is the case then no one has any right to say who is and who isn't Catholic because they reject Francis. This has occurred before when the Church has had antipopes. The laity, based on their understanding had to try to figure out who the real pope was to the best of their abilities. History repeating its self.

      Delete

    5. Julie, Benedict has made it very clear that he resigned of his own free will. He pledged support to his successor at that time, and has even appeared in public with Pope Francis showing his complete support. Those who want to believe Benedict is still pope are grasping at straws and showing their rebellion against the authority of the Church.

      There can only be an anti pope when two or more men claim to be the pope. Right now Francis is the only one declaring that he is pope. You are making your own history.

      Delete
  16. It's sad that this minority of converts makes it difficult for all the great folks who have joined the church. They need to read Cardinal Mueller's and Bishops Schneider's interview on La Stampa. They are getting fed up with these people.

    ReplyDelete
  17. My position is that the pope is changing discipline, not dogma, which he Church teaches he can.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your position is heretical, because the discipline in question is directly connected with dogma. The proposition that people obstinately persisting in grave sin may receive communion is heretical.

      Delete
  18. I take it that you believe Saint John Paul II is in hell for his new code of canon law, since some things touch dogma?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hmmm. No answer to that one. I think you may have proven your point.

      Delete
    2. Your mind is darkendd by demons. There is no other possible explanation for such stupidity.

      Did I say that ALL disciplines are evil because they are RELATED to dogma? Of course I didn't.

      Allowing obstinate public sinners to receive Communion is a negation of discipline and it CONTRADICTS dogma.

      Delete
    3. You certainly don’t need the Church because you have all the answers. Sadly, I do not know everything like you do, so I depend on the Magisterium as it is guided by the Holy Spirit.

      Delete
    4. Well, the 1983 code of Canon Law permits Orthodox Christian to receive holy communion even though schism is an objective sin. If Pope John Paul II did this and it is acceptable, why can’t Pope Francis similarly distinguish between mortal sin and objective sin? What would you have done when Pope Peter accommodated gentiles by dispensing with the Mosaic law? Either the pope speaks for God or all Catholics, if not Christians, are continuously violating the laws of God. And if God disagrees with the pope, why isn’t he smiting him.? It gives the appearance that whatever the pope is binding and loosing in His Church is bound or loosened in heaven. Why would God let the pope lead His Church into hell? Have the gates of hell overrun the Church built on Peter?

      Delete
  19. "The papacy has been guaranteed the protection of the Holy Spirit. I, therefore, will continue to listen to Pope Francis and not some lay men who think they are more Catholic than the Pope." Sorry Catholic in Brooklyn, I was not thinking of laymen, but Archbishop Vigano and Cardinal Zen, first and foremost. They and other clerics of very high standing have called some of the pope's actions disastrous. If you have done any reading you will know about which they speak. The guarantee of infallibility cannot be applied to his actions in the political sphere, or when he gives opinions on economic or social matters, where others may have far deeper insight than he; or even his ecclesiastical machinations, of which there are many and the subject of very much debate among fellow bishops. It is such actions, more than anything else, that are not in the sphere of infallibility. And thus when Pope Francis receives criticism for actions deemed harmful for souls by fellow clerics, and fails to respond to his critics, then he is rightfully rebuked.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Viganò is no longer in communion with the Pope and therefore no longer in union with Christ and His Church. From the same encyclical by Pope Leo XIII:

      “From this it must be clearly understood that Bishops are deprived of the right and power of ruling, if they deliberately secede from Peter and his successors; because, by this secession, they are separated from the foundation on which the whole edifice must rest. They are therefore outside the edifice itself; and for this very reason they are separated from the fold, whose leader is the Chief Pastor; they are exiled from the Kingdom, the keys of which were given by Christ to Peter alone.”

      I don’t know anything about Cardinal Zen, but if he has broken ranks with the Pope, he is no longer in communion with the Church and has no authority.

      As Catholics, we are obligated to listen to and give reverence to the Holy Father. From Lumen Gentium, as I quoted above:

      Among the principal duties of bishops the preaching of the Gospel occupies an eminent place.(39*) For bishops are preachers of the faith, who lead new disciples to Christ, and they are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach to the people committed to them the faith they must believe and put into practice, and by the light of the Holy Spirit illustrate that faith. They bring forth from the treasury of Revelation new things and old,(164) making it bear fruit and vigilantly warding off any errors that threaten their flock.(165) Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking."

      The Catholic Church is not like Protestant churches. We cannot judge the Magisterium and we can never stand in judgment of the Holy Father. Your attitudes and beliefs are not Catholic.

      Delete
  20. My oh my, I think Archbishop Vigano is the Pope's one true friend, for he spoke the truth about corruption in Rome and abroad possibly at the cost of his life, and for the defense of his soul. Francis should be grateful that there is someone who is not afraid to speak the truth to him. We already have seen some terrible results of Francis' concordat with Beijing. He has thrown the underground Church under the bus, according to Cardinal Zen, who is far more in the know than Pope Francis. Xi Jinping's rule is more autocratic by the day. He will not brook any opposition from the churches. Francis has made sure he will have a nice docile Patriotic Association. No Catholic in Brooklyn-- if the pope acts badly, and he would not be the first-- the best way to show him reverence is to be a true friend and correct him, as Vigano has. Men like Fr. Tom Rosica are no friend of Francis when they applaud him with words like this: “With the advent of this first Jesuit pope, it is openly ruled by an individual rather than by the authority of Scripture alone or even its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture” and who “breaks Catholic traditions whenever he wants”. I seriously doubt Lumen Gentium ever contemplated such a man, whom some cast as the dictator pope. Depending on whom you read, that seems a fit characterization. But I will leave that judgment to others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your Protestant judgment and point of view, but I think I will stick with the Catholic Church.

      Delete
  21. This article is spot on. By the way, put most of these people in a social media atmosphere 40 years ago and they would be calling Pope Saint John XXIII a heretic. Fundamentally, their error is the error of Luther. Preferring their own understanding of Tradition and Scripture to that of the Church. I also have quoted the "I knew you not" Scripture to them. They should take heed since, by definition, Our Lord could not have been talking about Atheists, Agnostics, Jews, Muslims, etc. in that passage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A lot of them still denounce John XXIII even tho he is a canonized saint. They now claim that declaring saints is not an infallible act on the part of the pope, It is all part of their view that the pope has no special protection under the Holy Spirit and can be criticized and thrown out of office like a politician.

      It is their view that if you support Pope Francis, you are a heretic.

      We have fallen through the looking glass.

      Delete
  22. Willard, what you say is most definitely not true. Pope John XXIII was thoroughly orthodox and by all accounts a great man of grace. It was only later, long after his death, that Pope Paul VI declared the smoke of Satan had entered the Church, June 29, 1972. You're sloppy in your characterizations, just as Catholic in Brooklyn. Pity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am glad you feel the way you do, but many “faithful Catholics” vehemently disagree. Look at the article:

      https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/1752-about-that-canonization-of-john-xxiii-just-a-minute-now

      “With Francis now abandoning the solemn process for canonization seemingly at will, and with beatification—never infallible to begin with—now clearly the plaything of the ideologues Francis has let loose upon the Church, prudence, not blind faith, is indicated. For the saint factory put into operation by John Paul II now appears to be operating without a safety manual or even a minimal safety inspection. The common opinion of theologians respecting canonization may well have to be revisited in these unprecedented circumstances, as the Church herself has never declared infallibly that the act of canonization is absolutely immune from error regardless of how it is done.”

      As one Vatican observer put it concerning Francis’s canonization of John XXIII: “He wanted to make someone he really likes a saint.” That’s about the size of it. And so it goes with the ever-more-alarming rise of what Antonio Socci has so rightly termed “Bergoglianism.”

      And this one:

      https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/1944-patron-saints-of-freemasonry-and-vatican-ii

      “There were always a lot of wild theories back in the day that John XXIII was a Freemason.”

      There are tons more iff you are interested.

      Delete
  23. Well my association with Freemasons is reduced to a single incident in the late 70s when I met one whose hatred of the Catholic Church was visceral. I was quite shocked by what he said and how he said it. During WWII, he was a bombardier and his one regret is that he was never able to fly over the Vatican and reduce it to rubble. I would not give any credence to Pope John belonging to the same lamentable collection of virulent anti-Catholics, if this man was in any way representative of Freemasonry's attitude toward the Church at the time. I am glad we agree on this matter. By the way, I pray for Pope Francis earnestly, whatever my very strong misgivings over his papacy. And I believe God also strongly urges me to do this. If my statements on Francis seem to you over the top, may I say that I am a victim of clerical sexual abuse. That fact alone makes Vigano my hero, and the fact that I see him as the Pope's one true friend, as I have stated earlier, and a sycophant like Rosica his true enemy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sorry to hear about your past trauma. And I give you great credit for staying true to the Catholic Church despite your experiences. Truly that is the Grace of God.

      But please don’t look at Viganò as your hero. He has never done anything to help the victims of abuse. He is only getting on the band wagon now because it promotes the cause of destroying Pope Francis. Of course it will only end up destroying Viganò himself and all who support him.

      Membership in Freemasonry is an automatic excommunication from the Catholic Church. 33rd Degree Masons literally pledge their lives to the devil. It is quite literally a satanic organization. That is why it is so evil to accuse St John XXIII or anyone else of being a Freemason without absolute proof.

      I think it is a great thing that you pray daily for the Holy Father. He always asks for our prayers. As he said, he is a sinner and struggles just like all the rest of us do. He prays 3 rosaries every day, spends two hours in prayer every morning, and an hour in adoration every night. But he needs all of our prayers as well.

      Delete
  24. The 'catholicinbrooklyn' blogger is on the right track. He is right in quoting from the Second Vatican Council on the authority of the Pope in Holy Church. There is no reasonable doubt that Francis is the authentic Pope. We are not living in the time of the Great Schism in the Late Middle Ages when half of Europe thought one chap was Pope, the other half another. No, now the whole body of our Bishops acknowledge Francis as Pope. I have yet to assist at a Catholic Mass where 'Francis our Pope' is not prayed for. I am a former Protestant who has had a mostly intellectual conversion--though God Himself led me to Holy Church. Yet, I realise that there are both converts from Protestantism & cradle Catholics, alike, who have become arch-critics of the Pope. I began to jump on the same 'band-wagon' before I realised that it was going in a bad direction. Schism & the spirit of Schism are not the answer. I appreciate the efforts of this blogger to set the record straight, and to give a fair interpretation of our Holy Father in Rome, Christ's Vicar on earth. Perhaps he is difficult for some to understand. But, some members of the Catholic Press are too quick to rashly judge. Perhaps they do this to create controversy. No doubt this sells papers, or, generates interest & excitement in other forms of media. Meanwhile, many aspects of the earthly Church's life, and that of society, suffers as a result.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I love this post. Thank you so much. I too began to be led by the wrong spirit reading Catholic bloggers on the internet, especially in relation to Pope Francis. You can misinterpret anything if your looking to do it. I was very upset but now I have peace. I needed to change and to understand that I don't have all the answers, we're all sinners, Jesus asked us to make disciples of all the nations....welcome people into the church...they belong first and then they will change behaviours because of an encounter with Christ....they don't have to behave a certain way first before they can belong...I love that Pope Francis is reaching out to those who are marginalised...God is love...

    ReplyDelete
  26. I think Dr. Taylor Marshall, Michael Voris, et al, have been soundly vindicated re the Amazon Synod.

    Thanks for providing me with a list of Catholic theologians I can trust to not "Popesplain" at the expense of Church doctrine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Check out the following URL:

      https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2019/12/radical-catholic-reactionaries-people-organizations-websites.html

      Delete
    2. Unknown, these people reject the Pope. They are not Catholic, and neither are you if you reject the Pope.

      Delete
    3. No offense, Catholic in Brooklyn, but check out the following URL:

      https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2019/12/radical-catholic-reactionaries-people-organizations-websites.html

      Delete
    4. Armstrong is wrong. As Cardinal Sarah said, if you oppose the pope, you are out of the Church. Marshall, Voris, et al have rejected the pope and therefore they are no longer Catholic.

      Delete
    5. Well, Catholic in Brooklyn, do Michael Voris and Taylor Marshall reject the pope's AUTHORITY?

      Delete
    6. They condemn everything the Pope says and does. Their heroes are everyone who stands in opposition to the Pope. The are in active resistance to Pope Francis. So what if they recognize the validity of the papacy. In fact, that makes it worse because they know he is the Vicar of Christ and yet they still resist him.

      They have separated themselves from the Church.

      Delete
  27. To reject the authority of one's Protestant church--if one is a Protestant--in favour of the real authority of the Catholic Church--can bring one sincerely into the Catholic Church. St John Henry Newman was very much an intellectual convert, as were a great many others who stayed humbly within their new Catholic home. Unfortunately, though, intellectual pride, and its sibling, spiritual pride, still exist in the world, even as they did when Our Lord was here prior to His Ascension. Perhaps it's very American to rebel against authority. Though it's true that the King of England rebelled against Holy Church earlier, most in that realm didn't dare rebel. Yet he, along with Luther, and the rest, 'got the ball rolling'--a 'ball' which turned out to be a 'bomb'. I, too, am an intellectual convert, along with others I know. Yet, some of us find ourselves going 'back to the box' for confession many times, which, we hope, humbles us a little. Those with the 'spirit of Schism', on the other hand, may--as do those in the 'spirit of Heresy'--make their own ideas their 'final authority', in effect, committing idolatry. Some in the 'spirit of Schism' are, I think, guilty, also, of the sin of 'rash-judgement'--a sin against charity when it is directed toward anyone, but which becomes more grave when directed against our Holy Father, the Successor of St Peter, the Pope of Rome. Even if such 'rash-judgement' were a venial sin, if it leads to grave sins, such as Schism, it can be fatal to one's spiritual life. We must pray for our poor brethren that suffer from such disease of soul. We may also need to study the Ecumenical Councils--especially the First & Second Vatican Councils--the Code of Canon Law, & other relevant Church documents--concerning Papal Authority in order that we might, by God's grace, help ourselves, and others, to avoid these pitfalls.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts  0