Are You Driven By Faith Or Ideology?

Christianity, before being a moral or an ethic, is the event of love, it is the acceptance of the Person of Jesus.

Pope Benedict XVI

I love the Traditional Latin Mass, which in many circles defines me as a "Traditionalist."  I think of myself as just Catholic, but it seems that in our world today we must have precise labels for each other or we don't know how to relate.

Because I attend the TLM, I also interact with many other "Traditionalists." Lately, especially since the election of Pope Francis, I have felt more and more estranged from many of my fellow "Trads". Like many of them, I use to be big into Vatican II bashing (Vatican II is the "root of all evil"), bishop bashing and even a little Pope bashing now and then, as past posts on this blog will show. However, I have come to realize that that I do not and cannot see the whole picture and it is not my job to sit in public criticism of the hierarchy of the Church.

As a result of my changed attitudes, I am now being shunned by those with whom I once agreed. At a recent all night prayer vigil which we spent before the exposed Blessed Sacrament, one woman, whom I thought was my friend, quite literally turned her back on me after I made it clear that I did not agree with her harsh criticism of the bishops and Pope Francis. How does one spend all night in adoration before the Blessed Sacrament, and then shun people?

Credit:  www.centerforinquiry.net 

There is another man I know who tells me he goes to Mass twice a day, to adoration several times a week, and spends many hours outside of abortion clinics, and yet also tells me that his "Catholicity" tells him he has to reject Pope Francis and most bishops, most especially Cardinal Dolan. This man has also begun to shun me. How does one engage in all these devout Catholic practices, and yet remain so hard of heart?

This has really puzzled me. How does one profess a deep love for our Lord, and at the same time profess a "my way or the highway" attitude exhibited by so many Traditional Catholics? This can be seen quite clearly on Traditional Catholic blogs, which I have highlighted in past posts.

Pope Francis gave me some answers to my questions in a recent sermon in which he discussed the difference between "faith" and "ideology." Father Z says we need to read Pope Francis through Pope Benedict XVI. This is one time when I think this will be extremely helpful.

Pope Benedict XVI gave us an excellent definition of faith, which can be found here :

Faith, in fact, is an encounter with God who speaks and works in history and converts our daily life, transforming within us mentalities, value judgments, decisions and practical actions. Faith is not an illusion, a flight of fancy, a refuge or sentimentalism; rather it is total involvement in the whole of life and is the proclamation of the Gospel, the Good News that can set the whole of the person free.

Pope Francis warns us that if we are not careful, this life giving faith, infused into by the Holy Spirit, can be transformed into a deadly ideology, which does not come from God but from our own fallen nature:

“The faith passes, so to speak, through a distiller and becomes ideology. And ideology does not beckon [people]. In ideologies there is not Jesus: in his tenderness, his love, his meekness. And ideologies are rigid, always. Of every sign: rigid. And when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought… For this reason Jesus said to them: ‘You have taken away the key of knowledge.’ The knowledge of Jesus is transformed into an ideological and also moralistic knowledge, because these close the door with many requirements.”

I have to say, very sadly, that this is what I am witnessing in many who call themselves Traditional Catholics. As stated by Pope Francis, I do not see the "tenderness, love and meekness" of Jesus Christ. Instead, I see, as Pope Francis says, that they are very rigid and unbending, very sure and unquestioning of themselves.  What is the result of this?

“The faith becomes ideology and ideology frightens. Ideology chases away the people. It creates distances between people and it distances the Church from the people. But it is a serious illness, this ideology in Christians. It is an illness, but it is not new, eh? Already the Apostle John, in his first Letter, spoke of this. Christians who lose the faith and prefer the ideologies. His attitude is: be rigid, moralistic, ethical, but without kindness. This can be the question, no? But why is it that a Christian can become like this? Just one thing: this Christian does not pray. And if there is no prayer, you always close the door.”

But how does the life giving faith we receive from Holy Spirit change into a toxic ideology which creates division and drives people away?  From Pope Francis:

“When a Christian does not pray, this happens. And his witness is an arrogant witness.” He who does not pray is “arrogant, is proud, is sure of himself. He is not humble. He seeks his own advancement.” Instead, he said, “when a Christian prays, he is not far from the faith; he speaks with Jesus.”  

Pope Benedict XVI said the same thing using different words:

Many people today have a limited idea of the Christian faith, because they identify it with a mere system of beliefs and values [this is ideology that Pope Francis speaks of] rather than with the truth of a God who revealed himself in history, anxious to communicate with human beings in a tête-à-tête, in a relationship of love with them [this is the faith we receive only through prayer, as Pope Francis said]. In fact, at the root of every doctrine or value is the event of the encounter between man and God in Jesus Christ. Christianity, before being a moral or an ethic, is the event of love, it is the acceptance of the Person of Jesus. For this reason the Christian and Christian communities must first look and make others look to Christ, the true Way that leads to God.  [Our relationship with God can only be grounded with prayer]

But the Traditionalists I know do pray. Many of them faithfully say the Rosary and other devotions. They express a very devout and reverent attitude towards our Lord, as I have shown in the two examples I have given. What is missing?

And, the Pope said, “I say to pray, I do not say to say prayers, because these teachers of the law said many prayers” in order to be seen. Jesus, instead, says: “when you pray, go into your room and pray to the Father in secret, heart to heart.” The pope continued: “IT IS ONE THING TO PRAY, AND ANOTHER THING TO SAY PRAYERS.”

So the Pope is saying that just mouthing words to our Lord does not in itself constitute praying.  Our prayers must come from our heart in order to transform us and make us more like Our Lord, filling us with love for other human beings.  As Pope Benedict XVI would say, our prayers must be an encounter with God.  That cannot happen if we let our own ideology stand in the way.  Pope Francis reminds us here that the Pharisees in Jesus' time said many prayers, and yet they were filled with pride and hatred.

This sermon by Pope Francis, like almost everything the Holy Father says and does, had many "Traditional Catholics" criticizing and decrying His Holiness yet again.  Father Z mentioned this sermon on his blog but shed no light on it whatsoever, instead writing:  "The Pope’s language about ideology is so vague that I can’t for the life of me make out who or what he is talking about. It could be that he has a first name and a last name in mind, but I have no idea who she might be."

I personally don't find the Pope's language to be vague at all.   I say with all sincerity that it is possible that I'm just not smart enough to see the "vagueness" in the Pope's words.  On the contrary, these words of Pope Francis have actually helped bring much clarity to my life.

If Father Z is interested in seeing a shining example of the "ideology" which the Pope speaks of, he should take a look at a video produced by Remnant Newspaper and the Remnant Forum, a Traditionalist Catholic group. In this video, Michael Matt and Christopher Ferrara discuss and criticize this sermon given by Pope Francis.  You can go here to watch the entire video. This video is an excellent example of the Pope's words, "when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought… For this reason Jesus said to them: ‘You have taken away the key of knowledge.’ The knowledge of Jesus is transformed into an ideological and also moralistic knowledge, because these close the door with many requirements."

Michael Matt starts out with a very negative statement, "Is this another sort of papal bombshell in the making?"  Chris Ferrara laughs and shakes his head and says, "One of many.  I mean, the ground is littered with craters from the bombs that have been dropping from the mouth of this Pope."  Ferrara goes on to say that the Pope's statements are a "false disjunction that is typical of modernist thought as if there is a dichotomy between saying and praying prayers."  Well, yes actually, there is a huge difference between "saying" and "praying" prayers,  and Chris Ferrara, who holds himself out to be a very learned Catholic, should know that.

Michael Matt responds by saying, "Am I being paranoid?  When I read this today, it struck me once again, since Tradition minded Catholics are among the few who are still saying rosaries. . . is this another, just another sort of brush off against the Traditionalists on the part of Pope Francis?"  I am really amazed that neither Michael Matt nor Chris Ferrara seem to be aware that our Holy Father prays three rosaries every day. He has led public rosaries several times since being elected Pope, the latest being on the day of prayer and fasting on September 7 which he called in regard to the war in Syria. On August 15, the Feast of the Assumption, Pope Francis said the following:

“Mary joins us, she fights at our side. She supports Christians in the fight against the forces of evil. Especially through prayer, through the rosary. Hear me out, the rosary... Do you pray the Rosary each day? I don't know, are you sure? There we go!”

Pope Francis publicly praying the Rosary

Read the entire article on this sermon here. This is only one of many statements by Pope Francis in promoting the Rosary. But you wouldn't know this from listening to Michael Matt and Chris Ferrara. They have no qualms in falsely accusing the Pope of bashing the Rosary. 

Chris Ferrara actually made a very astute statement in the following: "Obviously, if one recites the Rosary in the manner of a machine gun, a completely rote manner without meditating on the mysteries, then one is not really praying. If that all is that Pope Francis means, that is completely unobjectionable."

In light of the Pope's constant promotion of the Rosary, what else could he mean? Yet, Ferrara and Matt just go right past this. Ferrara puts words in the Pope's mouth when he says: "The idea that saying prayers without actually having a spiritual consolation or actively meditating and seeking communion with God is in itself an ideological activity that should be rejected by Catholics. This is just bad pastoral advice."   Ferrara is drawing this false conclusion from the Pope's statement that we should go to our room and pray to the Father in secret, which is a quote from Our Lord found in Matthew 6:6.

In actuality, this is a complete misrepresentation of the words of Pope Francis (and Jesus Christ). The Pope never said anything about "spiritual consolation." Many saints, if not most, went through long periods in their lives when there was no spiritual consolation. That can actually be a sign of great holiness, as we saw with Blessed Mother Teresa, who spent 50 years in the Dark Night. Pope Francis is obviously talking about the need for prayers to be more than just words, empty gestures and motions. Shouldn't that always be our goal? Why would anyone criticize this statement? Yet, that is just what Ferrara and Matt do. Ferrara actually accuses Pope Francis of "anti-pastoral naivety." Ferrara falsely accuses Pope Francis of saying that our prayers mean nothing unless we achieve the "unitive state". Michael Matt chimes in and says, "there is a certain Protestant flavor to it. I'm not saying that is what was intended, but there is a certain Protestant flavor."

Matt then goes on to state that Pope Francis is "giving the impression" that he "doesn't care" for the rosary, "and that repetitive prayer is useless or that memorized praying is not praying at all."  Ferrara responds with, "Yea, where is the vaunted sympathy for the sinner and weak of heart?"  He then says, "This is part of a pattern.  It seems there is an inescapable pattern of a total lack of sympathy for Catholics of Traditional orientation."  He then goes on to recite a litany of statements Pope Francis made that are supposedly attacking Traditional Catholics.  He carries this argument to an extreme by saying that criticism of Traditionals means that the Pope is actually attacking all traditions in the Church and is ready to throw it all away.  

Traditionalists have to stop playing the victim. All this does is drive people away from them, just as Pope Francis warned in his sermon. Instead of immediately coming up with counter-arguments and criticisms to everything the Pope says, they would do much better to humbly and prayerfully meditate on the words of the Vicar of Christ to determine if these words have any relevancy in their lives. Humility is the key to everything.

Ferrara and Michael Matt continue to discuss the Pope's sermon using a totally false premise by continuing to attribute ideas to the Pope which he never conveyed in any way. Michael Matt says, "If memorized prayers are somehow problematic [something the Pope never said], what do you do with all the indulgenced prayers?" Ferrara says this shows the "cruel school master", again accusing the Pope of not caring about people. This is a pure straw man argument because the Pope has never at any time said we should not use the memorized prayers of the Church.

Ferrara then says "I'm sorry if I sound acerbic and sarcastic, but I've had enough of this!!"  Yes, Mr. Ferrara, you sound very strident, and that is not going to draw anyone to Christ, exactly what Pope Francis was warning against.  

Michael Matt, later in the video, says, "What is going on?  I don't want to believe that the Holy Father is intending to say these things and I want the spin.  I want the good, favorable positive spin, but he keeps saying things that are getting increasingly difficult to spin in a Catholic direction. What in the world is going on?"

Ferrara once again accuses Pope Francis of being sympathetic to modernists and wanting to destroy everything in the Church that is not in line with the evil Vatican II.  Here are two men who hold themselves out to be good, loyal Catholics but yet are warning other Catholics against this "liberal, modernist" Pope who is seemingly out to destroy the Church.    

Towards the end of the video Michael Matt laments, "I look to Pope Francis and I don't see any clarity.  In fact, I'm finding more confusion looking to Rome right now, and I know I'm not alone in that."  Ferrara responds by saying that he loves the Church and reveres the Pope and the office that he occupies.  He said he was hopeful when Pope Francis was elected.  "I don't enjoy sitting here doing a postmortem on the latest papal statements that make the Church and us look ridiculous, which they do."  He says he wants The Remnant to be a "papal loyalist newspaper" as he says they were under Pope Benedict XVI, basically conceding that they are not loyal to Pope Francis.  

Ferrara says that he now has a "queasy feeling":  "we haven't been to this place yet in the post conciliar epic.  This is a new destination on the train ride to disaster."  Matt responds, "I think I'm going to let that be the last word because that pretty much sums it up.  I don't know what to say to people other than to agree with you absolutely this is terrifying."  Ferrara tells us that "the enemy is inside the household of the faith and is running through all the rooms of the house right now." 

How does this type of thinking happen?  How do supposedly loyal, devout Catholics come to see the Holy Father as the enemy of the Church? As Pope Francis, said, they are a "disciple of their ideology", and they will attack and destroy anything that threatens their ideology, even if it includes the Holy Father himself. Nowhere in this 27 minute video is there even a hint of humility, of questioning themselves and where they are going with their often blatantly false accusations and misrepresentations of the Pope's words. 

I am not questioning the sincerity of these two men or even of those who feel they are justified in shunning me. My prayer is that they will truly pray as Pope Francis has exhorted us to do and get beyond their ideology, which is destroying them. We must remember that Satan can appear as an angel of light, and his greatest trick with believers is to make us believe that we are right and everyone else, especially Church hierarchy, is wrong. This is the genesis of all heresy. As the Apostle Paul warned us in I Cor. 10:12, "Let he who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall."

It seems that no one is more sure of their "firm footing"' than Traditionalists, and therefore, no one should be questioning themselves on a regular basis more than Traditionalists. We need to constantly be asking ourselves and asking God to reveal to us whether we are truly following the lead of the Holy Spirit, or blindly following an ideology born of our pride and our fallen nature.

The Real Deal: A Saint From Hollywood

Sister Antonia Brenner

I have never heard of this nun until today when I read her obituary.  Her life sounds like that of the saints from hundreds of years ago.  I pray for her soul and I pray to her, asking her to guide us and help us walk in the way of love she so beautifully exemplified.  So many of us are caught up in the politics of the Church, accusing each other of being bad Catholics, and often forgetting about what it means to live a life of service to God and men.  Sister Antonia Brenner shows us what it truly means to be Catholic and to imitate Our Lord.

This is from The Los Angeles Times:

Sister Antonia Brenner dies at 86; nun moved into Tijuana prison to tend to inmates

Guards and inmates in La Mesa penitentiary referred to Brenner as the prison angel. In the cellblocks she was known as 'Mama.'

By Richard Marosi

October 17, 2013, 6:51 p.m.

Sister Antonia Brenner, a Beverly Hills-raised mother of seven who became a Roman Catholic nun and moved into a notorious Tijuana prison where she spent more than three decades mending broken lives, easing tensions and dispensing everything from toothbrushes to bail money, has died. She was 86.

Brenner, who had been in declining health, died Thursday of natural causes at the home of her religious order in Tijuana where her fellow sisters had cared for her in her final days, said Christina Brenner, her daughter-in-law.

She was born Mary Clarke in Los Angeles on Dec. 1, 1926, to Irish immigrant parents. Her father grew wealthy running an office supply business, and the family counted Hollywood stars such as Cary Grant among their neighbors. She married and raised four daughters and three sons, all the while becoming deeply involved in charity work.

In 1977, after her children were grown and two marriages had ended in divorce — a source of sadness that she rarely talked about — Brenner gave away her expensive clothes and belongings, left her Ventura apartment and moved to La Mesa penitentiary. She had delivered donations in the past to the prison, each visit filling her with compassion.

"Something happened to me when I saw men behind bars. … When I left, I thought a lot about the men. When it was cold, I wondered if the men were warm; when it was raining, if they had shelter," Brenner told The Times in a 1982 interview. "I wondered if they had medicine and how their families were doing. …You know, when I returned to the prison to live, I felt as if I'd come home."

Small of stature, with blue eyes peeking out from under her traditional black–and-white habit, Brenner cut a strikingly serene presence in the overcrowded prison of 8,000. She lived as any other inmate, sleeping in a 10-by-10-foot cell, eating the same food and lining up for morning roll call.

She would walk freely among thieves and drug traffickers and murderers, smiling, touching cheeks and offering prayers. Many were violent men with desperate needs. She kept extra toilet paper in her cell, arranged for medical treatment, attended funerals.

Guards and inmates alike started referring to her as the prison angel. In the cellblocks she was known simply as "Mama." "There isn't anyone who hasn't heard my lecture on victims," she said in a 2002 Times story. "They have to accept that they're wrong. They have to see the consequences. They have to feel the agony. ... But I do love them dearly."

When prayers didn't work, she took matters into her own hands. On more than a few occasions she broke up fights and quelled brewing riots. Sometimes her presence wasn't enough. In 2008, police opened fire on rioting inmates, killing more than 20. Brenner said she was in the cellblock at the time, but someone had locked the doors to the courtyard where the shooting occurred.

"I didn't know what was happening. That people were being killed," she said in an interview after the siege ended. "I was thinking, all over the world little children have to hear the sounds of guns. It's such a terrible sound."

Brenner was an energetic fundraiser who often visited Southern California to collect food and supplies. Few people said no, though sometimes she didn't leave them much choice.
Father Joe Carroll, who for many years ran the St. Vincent de Paul Village in San Diego, jokingly took to calling Brenner a "thief" for regularly clearing out his charity of donations.
"If I told her she couldn't have it, she'd just be smiling and giggling at me and putting it into her car and leaving," Carroll said in the 2010 documentary "La Mama: An American Nun's Life in a Mexican Prison."

A revered figure in Tijuana, where she counted police chiefs and politicians among her friends, Brenner was honored with the naming of a street after her outside the prison. In the late 1990s, she established her own religious order, the Eudist Servants of the Eleventh Hour. Tijuana Archbishop Rafael Romo said she possessed the qualities of a saint and said her death was a "terrible loss" for the city, the Tijuana newspaper Frontera reported.

Brenner often visited her family in Southern California, where she would regale her more than 45 grandchildren and great-grandchildren with stories about her charity work. "She was a tiny woman with a little fire and a lot of passion," Christina Brenner said. "We called her the Eveready battery. She wouldn't stop. She was always going."

She is also survived by her seven children, James, Kathleen, Theresa, Carol, Tom, Elizabeth and Anthony.

"You walk in her presence and you know you're in a different world," Carroll said. "Rhyme, reason — you can't rationalize why she did it. She has that one-on-one relationship with God."

Michael Voris Has Jumped The Shark

I was once a loyal follower of Michael Voris. At that time I saw the Catholic Church as being in a state of chaos.  It seemed that many Catholics were hardly even aware or caring about the teachings of the Church. I saw priests and bishops who didn't seem to teach the truths of the Church anymore. Along came Michael Voris, excoriating them all with no holds barred. Bring it on!!! Voris came up with what I perceived to be the perfect label to describe the contemporary Catholic Church, the "Church of Nice", where everyone is always "nice", but there is no real preaching of the truth because they don't want to offend anyone.  According to the Gospel of Michael Voris, fear of offending people should never be the guiding force in our lives. We are the Church Militant, and that means we need to be spiritual warriors, fighting for the Truth of the Gospel, basically burning and slashing our way through the world.

After doing a total consecration of my life to the Blessed Mother, my perceptions and attitudes began to change, and I came to realize that Michael Voris did not have it completely right.  I have come to realize that our job as lay people is not, contrary to the Gospel of Voris, to right every wrong in the Church or society.  Our job is to right all the wrongs in ourselves, to be as brutally honest and uncompromising with ourselves as we can be.

Michael Voris often shows himself holding a sword, symbolizing that he is part of the Army of God and the Church Militant.  As he said in a Vortex from January 3, 2013:  "[The Church's] role is to fight .. its charter to attack and tear down the kingdom of Satan .. the empire of lies and falsehood and heresies that so dominate the world today .. in short .. the mission of the Church and Her member is to slay dragons."

Venerable Fulton Sheen, for whom Michael Voris claims a deep devotion, had a different take on this. He also spoke about the sword and war, but he said the sword needs to be pointed inward, not outward, and that the war is not with others, but with ourselves. The following is a quote from Bishop Sheen from a retreat he gave on St. Therese of Liseux:

We are fond of talking peace today, but all we mean by peace is lack of disturbance. Our Lord said, "I came not to bring peace." God HATES PEACE in those who are destined for war! And we are destined for war, spiritual war. We've forgotten that we're in a combat. We are in genuine combat. When our first parents were driven out of the garden of Paradise, God stationed an angel with a flaming sword, a two-edged sword that turned this way and that. Why? To keep our first parents from going back to eat of the Tree of Life and thus immortalize their evil. And the only way we can ever get back again into paradise is by having that sword run into us. It's flaming because it's love. It's two-edged because it cuts, and it penetrates. It's not the sword that's thrust outward to hack off the ear of the servant of the high priest as Peter did. It's the sword that's thrust inward to cut out all of our seven pallbearers of the soul, the pride and covetousness, lust, anger, envy, gluttony, and sloth.

In one of the recent interviews given by Pope Francis, he was asked, "Who is Jorge Mario Bergoglio?"  His reply: "I am a sinner. This is the most accurate definition. It is not a figure of speech, a literary genre. I am a sinner."  We must all come to the same personal realization in our own lives.  We must turn the sword of God upon ourselves.    

As far as calling out other people as sinners, I refer to the words of our Lord:  "You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye."  (Matt. 7:5).  Does this mean never denouncing the evils in society? Absolutely not. I regularly pray in front of abortion clinics and I will continue to do so as long as I am able. I have written many times on this blog about the many evils in our world and will continue to do so. Again, quoting Bishop Sheen (from his 1932 book, Moods and Truths):

Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to principles. Intolerance applies only to principles, but never to persons. We must be tolerant to persons because they are human; we must be intolerant about principles because they are divine. We must be tolerant to the erring, because ignorance may have led them astray; but we must be intolerant to the error, because Truth is not our making, but God's. And hence the Church in her history, due reparation made, has always welcomed the heretic back into the treasury of her souls, but never his heresy into the treasury of her wisdom.

Denouncing evil is far different from setting myself up as judge and juror over other individuals. Yet I fear that is exactly what Michael Voris and many like him have done.   Although Michael Voris often talks about the evils in society, he reserves his harshest judgment for the hierarchy of the Church, often calling them "cowards" and worse.

In a recent Vortex episode released on September 11 and entitled, "Self Destruction", Voris quoted Pope Paul VI (not someone he normally lauds) in which the Pope said. "It is as if the Church were destroying herself."  This is from a speech given on December 7, 1968 by Pope Paul VI to Members of the Seminary Lombardo.  It is important to realize that this is a few months after the release of Humanae Vitae, in which many in the Church basically revolted against the Pope.   In my own opinion, the rejection of Humanae Vitae is the reason we have seen so much upheaval and chaos not only in the Church, but in the entire world.  You can read my post on this here.  

However, Michael Voris uses Pope Paul VI's statement as an indictment against Church leadership, as seen in this excerpt from the aforementioned Vortex episode:

Some are naïve yes. They don’t have the constitution of real men to stand up and call out what needs to be called out. So they profit, interiorly – in their own weak and damaged psyches by remaining in place where they perceive themselves to be popular and well liked.

Others refuse to see the damage because to do so would mean effectively the end of their clerical careers and advancement. They are perhaps aware in a dim fashion of the murder of the faith going on, but like their counterpart priests in the parable of the good Samaritan, they just cross over lanes on the road and walk on by the victim. So they too profit.

Then there are the real conspirators. These people HATE Christ and HATE the Church – they hate what She preaches, what she stands for and they are determined to destroy her from within.

You must understand, Michael Voris is not talking about those enemies who openly profess their hatred for the Catholic Church. He is talking about our ordained priests and bishops, the ones for whom we should be praying every day. In the very next sentence, he says they are "following in the line of apostolic succession from Judas." Michael Voris, who professes his love for the Catholic Church, makes his living by openly and unhesitatingly condemning, in the harshest of tones, the hierarchy of the Church he says he loves. He compares them to Judas, the one who betrayed Jesus Christ. I wonder if Voris realizes that although Our Lord was intimately aware of Judas' true intentions, he never once openly criticized or condemned him.

This is what St. Thomas said in the Summa Theologica regarding correction of prelates (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 4):

A subject is not competent to administer to his prelate the correction which is an act of justice through the coercive nature of punishment: but the fraternal correction which is an act of charity is within the competency of everyone in respect of any person towards whom he is bound by charity, provided there be something in that person which requires correction.

Now an act which proceeds from a habit or power extends to whatever is contained under the object of that power or habit: thus vision extends to all things comprised in the object of sight. Since, however, a virtuous act needs to be moderated by due circumstances, it follows that when a subject corrects his prelate, he ought to do so in a becoming manner, not with impudence and harshness, but with gentleness and respect. Hence the Apostle says (1 Timothy 5:1): "An ancient man rebuke not, but entreat him as a father." Wherefore Dionysius finds fault with the monk Demophilus (Ep. viii), for rebuking a priest with insolence, by striking and turning him out of the church.

All would have to agree that "gentleness and respect" are not hallmarks of Michael Voris when it comes to the bishops. Would Dionysius strike Michael Voris and turn him out of the Church?

Many use the example of the Apostle Paul correcting St. Peter to justify public and harsh criticism of the Church hierarchy. St. Thomas Aquinas tells us that:

Paul would not have withstood Peter then, unless he were in some way his equal as regards the defense of the faith. But one who is not an equal can reprove privately and respectfully.

Michael Voris does not reprove the elders of the Church either privately or respectfully.  It may not be his intention - only God can judge his soul - but Voris is sowing discord among the Church and encouraging the brethren to rebel against those whom God has put in charge of their souls.  

Is there ever a time when a prelate needs a public rebuke?  St. Thomas tell us this:

It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly. Hence Paul, who was Peter's subject, rebuked him in public, on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning faith, and, as the gloss of Augustine says on Galatians 2:11, "Peter gave an example to superiors, that if at any time they should happen to stray from the straight path, they should not disdain to be reproved by their subjects."

Public rebuke, according to St. Thomas, is to be used only in times of "imminent danger" and "if the faith were endangered."  It is not to be used as a general rebuke on a daily basis, as Michael Voris does.  And again, it should be done "not with impudence and harshness, but with gentleness and respect."

I believe Michael Voris finally "jumped the shark" when he did a Vortex episode entitled, "The New Tone", released on September 25.  In this Vortex, Voris talks about the reaction to the interview Pope Francis did with La Civiltà Cattolica.  Voris starts out with his usual harsh rhetoric:

Lots of cowardly clerics are most delighted at the Pope’s interview because they feel and are even saying .. in so many words .. that they are now off the hook.

Voris then does something that, as far as I know, he has never done before.  He slams the Holy Father:

Unlike John Paul and Benedict .. who many of them just ignored when it came to stressing the importance of defeating these evils .. now they finally have a Pope who they can interpret to mean .. “Phew, glad we don’t have to mention those things anymore” as if they had ever in reality lifted one blessed finger to preach against these evils in the first place.

This statement is subtle, but it become much harsher as he goes along.  Voris then wonders aloud "exactly when and where was this 'obsession' on the part of Church leaders and her clergy on preaching about for example contraception, that so many church leaders are all rushing to the barricades now to foreswear."  I have heard this argument from many conservatives in the Church - we never hear these things from the pulpit anyway, so what is the Pope talking about?  I totally agree that we have not heard these matters discussed from the pulpit as we should.  And that has been harmful to the Church.

But this is a canard, because that is not what the Holy Father was speaking of.  Pope Francis was talking about how to reach out to those outside of the Church, and he was telling us not to keep hitting them over the head with things like abortion and homosexuality, but to reach out to them first and foremost with love and compassion, just as our Lord did.  Our Lord never told sinners how horrible they were.  The only sinners Jesus Christ ever publicly denounced were the Pharisees, and he accused them of hypocrisy. Does that mean there are no other sins? Of course it doesn't mean that. But it does mean that in reaching out to the spiritually wounded, we first of all have to address their wounds, not stand in judgment and pridefully look down upon them.

Remember, our Lord told the religious leaders that "tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the kingdom of God before you." Pride is the sin of Satan. Hypocrisy is the direct result of spiritual pride, and no sin - not sodomy, abortion, murder or any other sin - is worse than pride because pride says we know better than God.

What Voris calls a "new tone" is the same "tone" used by Jesus Christ when He walked this earth 2000 years ago. It is a tone of love and compassion. Christ's way was to first heal people and only then did He tell them "Go and sin no more." You don't hit someone when they're down. As the Holy Father told us in his next interview, "They have been crushed by the present. You tell me: can you live crushed under the weight of the present?" We first must lift the heavy weight that is literally crushing people, and then we can begin to talk about the sin in their lives.

However,  Voris sees nothing but evil resulting from this "new tone":

The churches are emptying out and closing and yet Church leaders are positively giddy about now being able to stop talking about the sins that send souls to Hell and start speaking with a “new tone”.

Again – how will the new tone, be anything different from the old current tone?

When Jane Fonda and Chris Rock are cheering on you and your new tone, you better watch out.

They aren’t cheering you on because they have suddenly had a Damascus moment and are agreeing with you. They are cheering you on because they hope or actually think that YOU now agree with THEM .. or at the very least can now be persuaded to come over to their side.

Voris doesn't even consider the fact that people like Jane Fonda and Chris Rock are actually now listening to the Pope, which is a huge step.  What caught the attention of the thief on the cross being crucified next to Our Lord?  Dismas had first joined in with the insults from the other thief.  But as Dismas watched Christ and saw that there was no condemnation coming from Jesus, but only love and forgiveness, it affected him so greatly that he was saved right then and there.  Will the world come to a Church that only offers it condemnation, or will they respond to love and acceptance of them as human beings?  Our Lord gave us the answer to that when He walked the earth.

This is what Voris sees:

They aren’t saying thank you for showing us the light so that we can now convert to the truth.

They aren’t saying thank you for bringing us to the realization of the paschal mystery and our path to salvation.

They aren’t saying thank you for bringing to them the light of revelation and the glorious mysteries of the Catholic Church.

They are saying thank you for giving them the moral license to now fire back at pro-lifers and faithful Catholics who have spent decades in front of the abortion chambers praying for the killing to end.

Only one of the two thieves repented and was forgiven.  Not everyone responds to the saving mercy of Jesus Christ.  So yes, there have been and will continue to be those who are trying to say that this Pope doesn't care about issues such as abortion and homosexuality, and they will use the Pope's words as weapons against Catholics. But there are also others who are saying thank you for trying to understand me, thank you for not condemning me. They are sensing a true love and acceptance, just as the sinners in Christ's time did, and they will be much more open to hearing the true Gospel than they have ever been before. An excellent example of this was an editorial in The New York Times, which I wrote about here.

Voris then makes a statement with which I could not agree more:

The issue is about saving souls. Every action done, every word uttered must be measured against this standard.

This is exactly right.  It all comes down to saving souls.  How do the words of Michael Voris stand up against this measure?

From Voris:

Will this encourage Jane Fonda to REPENT and become an authentic Catholic? Will she hang up her weapons of mass contraception and renounce a lifetime strategy of global population reduction through abortion and contraception?

Just what part of the “good news” has she suddenly embraced, so much so that she is praising the Vicar of Christ on earth? Same types of questions for Chris Rock and all the other cultural elitists who have lived against and even actively fought against the truth with every fiber of their beings for most of the lives.

Michael Voris, do you think your method of accusing and attacking them will bring them to Christ? Doesn't seem to have worked so far, and there is no evidence it ever will. But Pope Francis, following in the footsteps of Our Lord, has gotten their attention. They are listening to him, just as sinners listened to our Lord. That is HUGE and should not be dismissed.

The following statement is where I feel that Voris has finally jumped the shark.  He is now not only attacking the bishops as he has always done, he is going after the Holy Father as well:

But at the end of the day .. the Church is Christ’s. Not the pope’s .. not the bishops or any other cowardly clerics.

In the above statement, Voris is saying that we don't need to listen to the bishop or even the Pope.  Voris is including Pope Francis with the "cowardly clerics." Voris is right when he says the Church is Christ's. And no, the Pope did not speak ex cathedra in these interviews. But does that mean we can just dismiss these words as if they were never said and go right on as we always have with no reflection? The Pope is not just another politician, he is not just another man. He is the Vicar of Christ, the actual human representative of Christ on earth. Whenever he says anything, be it ex cathedra or not, it is important that we listen to him and reflect on the meaning of his words. We should never dismiss the Pope because he says something that doesn't fit in with our way of thinking. Maybe, just maybe, there is something we need to learn.

This is how Michael Voris ended this Vortex episode:

She is His Bride .. and He will not suffer forever Her mourning in the marketplace and desecration of Her altars and confessionals.

He is allowing this scourge of contradiction and humiliation .. of being mocked and laughed to scorn by Her enemies .. to bring about salvation for some souls .. some where at some time.

In the meantime .. amidst all the verbal and emotional stoning going on .. stand fast –while the faith is full of mystery, it is also quite simple.

Loving God means more than just feeling a certain way. He Himself has told us what it means – if you love me, you will keep my commandments.

Yes, Michael Voris, Our Lord did say that if we love Him we will keep his commandments.  He also said the two most important commandments are to love God with our whole mind and heart, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.  Is a barrage of constant condemnation a way of loving our neighbor, or is it more loving to reach out to them on a level they can understand as our Lord did?  Jesus never condemned sinners, and yet during His physical lifetime, He saved more sinners than we will ever know.

As I have pointed out elsewhere, Our Holy Mother gave us the example of how to react to things we don't understand. Most of the time she did not understand the events in her life or the words or actions of her Son. Did she sit in criticism? Did she protest and say, you know, there really is a better way of doing things. Why can't you wait until I'm married before I become pregnant? Why don't you allow me to give birth at home where it is more comfortable? Why do I have to flee to Egypt when you could just stop Herod from killing the babies? Why do you answer me so harshly when I ask you to help out at the wedding when the wine runs out?

The world is in a terrible state. Billions of souls are at stake. Obviously whatever we have been doing up to this point hasn't been effective enough. Do we follow the example of people like Michael Voris and attack other Catholics, including our bishops and even our Holy Father? Our Lord warned us that "Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand." (Matt. 12:25). Do we continue to listen to those who are dividing us against one another?

Or could it just possibly be that the Holy Spirit is trying to point us in a new direction? Are we so prideful that we can't listen to the Vicar of Christ on earth and ponder his words as our Holy Mother showed us?

I am not questioning the sincerity of Michael Voris and his followers and all who think like them. I was one of them not that long ago. But think about it: is " trapping and exposing lies and falsehoods" what the Gospel is about? "Gospel" literally means "good news." Lies and falsehoods are not good news.

It is our job as the recipients of God's forgiveness and mercy to bring that same forgiveness and mercy to the rest of the world. That is what our Holy Father is trying to tell us. Is it merciful to expect a man with crippled legs to walk? Is pointing at him and telling him that he has useless legs going to convince him that we have the answers he is looking for?

Or is the answer to make ourselves available to the saving and transforming Grace of Christ into our lives, allow that flaming sword of the Holy Spirit to cut away all in us that is opposed to God, and then draw people to us when they see us living a life of grace?

The Little Flower gave us these words which we would do well to contemplate:

O Jesus, my whole strength lies in prayer and sacrifice; these are my invincible weapons, and experience has taught me that the heart is won by them rather than by words.

A Traditionalist Defends Pope Francis

Jesus Christ said the identifying sign of his followers would be that they would love one another.  "By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."  (John 13:35) If that is the case, then I would suggest the many of those who run Catholic blogs and websites do some real soul searching because you are not displaying a whole lot of loving at the present moment, especially when it comes to our Holy Father, Pope Francis.

The Catholic blogosphere has lit up with rants and raves against Pope Francis in light of his two recent interviews. There have been those who have written favorably of the Holy Father, but I would estimate that they are outnumbered by about 50 to 1. Many have gone right up to the edge of accusing Pope Francis of being a heretic.

Pewsitter.com has gone out of its way in gathering together many of the posts by Catholic bloggers who are on a rant about the Pope. From a blog called "Harvesting the Fruit of Vatican II" (I don't think this particular blogger likes Vatican II):

Having absorbed the bitter reality of yet another revealing papal interview, one that somehow managed to offend Catholic sensibilities even more than the last, all but the most detached among us are now struggling to come to terms with what the future holds under a Bergoglio papacy.

Let’s be honest; modernist popes aren’t exactly the exception to the rule in this post-conciliar age. Hell, we’re even gearing up for their canonization!

So why then are Catholics today reeling in what appears to be an unprecedented way?

Simply put, because they should be.

I think it's obvious where that particular blogger is going.

Pewsitter also linked to a Catholic blogger by the name of Steven Skojec who titles his post, "It Doesn’t Take a Rigorist: Why All Catholics Should Be Concerned About Pope Francis."  It doesn't take a genius to guess what that post will say.

Pewsitter also linked to a gem by a blog called "Mundabor's Blog" in a post entitled, "Letter To A Proddie Friend":

You read now everywhere about the scandal caused by the disgraceful Pope Woodstock, and perhaps you think the man’s antics expose the intrinsic weakness of the Church. Perhaps you even think – in your lack of proper knowledge of Catholicism – that Francis may change the tenets of what you call the Roman (meaning by that the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic) Church.

Dear friend, you couldn’t be more wrong. Allow me to explain to you why.

The Pope doesn’t own the Church. He isn’t her CEO, either. He is merely the custodian and the caretaker of the enormous edifice entrusted to him; an edifice he has the duty to transmit, intact and properly maintained, to the next custodian.

The caretaker of a huge palace cannot decide that a wing should now be demolished, and a new one built in its place. He cannot add, or take away, anything from the real estate entrusted to him. His job is to care that everything looks good, everything works properly, the walls remain solid, the garden is properly maintained, and so on.

Granted, the caretaker could be a lazy man. Or he could be corrupted, and steal the money meant for the maintenance. The palace will, at some point, look shabby. The light bulbs will not work, the doors will start to squeak, mildew will appear in the basement, and the gardens will be a proper mess.

In extreme cases – like, well, now – the caretaker will be a kind of socialist hothead, a Che Guevara fan not only uncaring, but outright resentful of the splendour of the palace; a splendour that he considers offensive to the poor outside, living in their small cottages. Don’t ask me why he applied for the job of caretaker, or why no one tells him the poor living in the college love the palace and its splendour, and know that the Palace embraces and makes place for all the good villagers. This letter is not about these issues.

The socialist hothead caretaker will, then, do his work as… badly as he can. The palace will look miserable when seen from the road, and its state of disrepair will be evident to the blind. The caretaker will, in the meantime, go around in the village, boasting that he has brought the palace nearer to the people and clearly implying if he could he would knock down the whole thing and build a sanitised favela instead, where everyone can do pretty much whatever he pleases provided he loves.

This post is dripping in disrespect for the Holy Father, not even trying to understand what he was saying.  Just total condemnation.

Then there is "Ches" who does a blog called, "The Sensible Bond."  He has actually done a few posts about Pope Francis, all involving a large amount of hand wringing, with statements such as the following, which do nothing to add clarity but only to turn people against the Holy Father:

The most visible wreckage of what has just happened lies in the confusion, disillusion and demoralization of faithful men and women - small ones and those at the very top of the Church's life - whose battles against the culture of death or with the perversity of post Vatican II liberal Catholicism was travestied by Francis's radically ahistorical portrayal of the Church as doctrinally obsessive, imbalanced and small minded.

Father Z has tried his best to point out to his mostly Traditional Catholic readers what he feels is positive about the Pope's remarks.  But he does so with statements such as this:  "Sigh… are we going to have to do this everyday? Is this now my fate?"

There are dozens, maybe hundreds, maybe thousands more blog posts like these out there, but they all say basically the same thing.   The Pope has gone off the rails and doesn't even sound Catholic anymore.

But there was one blogger in particular who really intrigued me.  His blog is called ebougis.wordpress.com, and entitled, "FideCogitActio:omnis per gratium."  He entitled his post, "Catholic Is As Catholic Does", which I guess is a take on the Forrest Gump statement, "Stupid is as stupid does", a subtle message to be sure. His name is Elliott Bougis.  I will call him "Fide" from the title of his blog, fide, I assume, being a shortened version of fidelius, which of course means "faithful". I have no doubt Fide sees himself as a faithful Catholic.  But I believe he needs to rethink his position on Pope Francis, as I will show.

Fide starts out with a couple of quotes, one from Pope St. Pius X condemning modernism, and the other from Cardinal Ratzinger telling us that popes need to be able to take criticism.  Fide has set the stage for what is coming.  He tells us that he does pray for the pope, but that his prayer life "is pretty forced and bleary-eyed these days. I'm fortunate enough to attend a parish that has, so far, been free from the spreading 'Francinsanity.' "  Francinsanity?  Hmmm.  We haven't even started the post yet and already he is being disrespectful.

But we'll keep going.

Fide next tells us:

I admire his warmth and vigor as a “people guy”. I value the softening of hearts that is reported to have happened in some quarters in response to his presence. That’s all good and very good! Praise God!

So, if you’re not interested in reading what follow, maybe I can sum it all up like this and spare you the trouble:

I’m having as hard a time adjusting to Pope Francis’s doctrinal voice as I think many had adapting to Benedict XVI’s pastoral awkwardness.

Okay, I can accept this.  Many Catholics operate from a certain paradigm, and the Pope is saying things that do not seem to fit into their paradigms.  So I can understand having problems with some of the Holy Father's statements.

From Fide:

I realize that Pope Benedict said things very much in keeping with some of Francis’s recent head-scratchers, but he always made a distinct effort to speak as carefully as was necessary in virtue of his office. By contrast, I, along with others, can’t shake, and can’t simply abide, Pope Francis’s almost willful obscurity on key matters, since his basic approach is that the details don’t matter as long as people feel loved and the Church looks more “attractive.”

A turnstyle jumper

I have a little different take on that. Bear with me while I explain. New York City had an extremely high crime rate back in the crack cocaine days of the 1980's and into the 1990's. At one point, our murder rate was over 2000 people a year. Neighborhoods were in shambles and people were afraid to walk the streets. Rudolph Giuliani was elected mayor in 1992, and his crime fighting style was to go after "little" crimes like subway turnstyle jumpers. What? People are being gunned down in the street and you're going after people who jump the turnstyles? (Sound anything like "millions of babies are being aborted and you're worried about unemployment?") Well, it turned out that many of those jumpers were also big time criminals. The cops couldn't catch them in the big crimes, but were able to catch them in the "little things" and get them off the street that way. The theory is, take care of the "little problems" and the big problems will take care of themselves. This tactic drove crime down drastically in New York City, and NYC is now the safest big city in the United States.

It seems to me that this is exactly what Pope Francis is doing on a spiritual level. There is no "willful obscuring" going on with Pope Francis. Do you really believe that Pope Francis has no concern about the Culture of Death? He has condemned such things as abortion and same sex marriage many times. But let's face it, the world has not and will not listen to the church on these matters. Abortion and same sex marriage are now accepted worldwide. Even Ireland, once the most Catholic country in the world, has legalized abortion.

So Pope Francis is concentrating on "little" things (which really aren't little at all) like "unemployment among the youth" and "loneliness among the elderly" because these are issues upon which everyone can agree. Lots of Catholics seemed to get very upset at these remarks, but the world at large nodded their head in agreement to these words:  "The old need care and companionship; the young need work and hope but have neither one nor the other, and the problem is they don't even look for them any more. They have been crushed by the present. You tell me: can you live crushed under the weight of the present?"  Because many in the world connected with these words, the Catholic blogosphere pointed to that as proof that the Pope had completely lost it.

The reason Catholics and other people of faith care about issues such as abortion is because we have hope, which we receive from our faith. This hope helps us see the value of life. Pope Francis pointed to two issues which not only destroy hope but actually engender hopelessness and despair in people. When people see only bleakness in the future, why should they care about anything else? Nothing makes sense. What difference does it make if babies are being killed and families are being destroyed? It's all hopeless. As Pope Francis says, "they have been crushed by the present." If a person is being crushed under a rock, do you think he is going to care about anything else? But if we can give people a sense of hope and help them discover the true value and dignity of life, then they too will start to care about the "big" issues. Only then will things start to change.

Back to Fide and his blog post.  Fide tells us that he is actually doing Pope Francis a favor by being critical of him because:

The intransigent feeling I have about Francis comes from Luke 6:26, “Woe to you, when all men speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets.” Thus, the hand-wringing by many of his conservative brethren is, in a very real way, saving Pope Francis from the “woe” of being liked by the world for bearing a corpseless Cross.  [The "corpseless Cross" attack is going too far and is a very unfair and untrue attack on His Holiness. Pope Francis has never backed down from the Suffering Christ.  See below]  I express my “extreme” disasppointment [sic] with Pope Francis on some matters precisely because I esteem him as the Pope.

Huh?? I'm afraid this statement shows Fide's confused state of mind. Beating someone up is doing them a favor? Especially when that someone is the Vicar of Christ?  As far as the "corpseless Cross" comment, here is what Pope Francis said about the Cross on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (from Vatican Radio):

At the Mass for the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, Pope Francis said the mystery of the Cross is a great mystery for mankind, a mystery that can only be approached in prayer and in tears.

In his homily, the Pope said that it is in the mystery of the Cross that we find the story of mankind and the story of God, synthesised by the Fathers of the Church in the comparison between the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, in Paradise, and the tree of the Cross:

“The one tree [tree of knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden] has wrought so much evil, the other tree [the tree of the Cross upon which Our Lord hung] has brought us to salvation, to health. This is the course of the humanity’s story: a journey to find Jesus Christ the Redeemer, who gives His life for love. God, in fact, has not sent the Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. This tree of the Cross save us, all of us, from the consequences of that other tree, where self-sufficiency, arrogance, the pride of us wanting to know all things according to our own mentality, according to our own criteria, and also according to that presumption of being and becoming the only judges of the world  This is the story of mankind: from one tree to the other.”

Hmmm.  "Self-sufficiency, arrogance, the pride of us wanting to know all things according to our own mentality, according to our own criteria, and also according to that presumption of being and becoming the only judges of the world." Now why would His Holiness use these words?

Back to Fide.  He admits he has gone against I Tim. 5:1 which says not to rebuke an elder but exhort him as a father, and I Thes. 5, which says to respect those who labor among you.

I admit that I have erred against the above counsels by excessive sarcasm here and there, and that I need to trust as much as I can in God’s redemptive power over the power of scandal and compromise.

Well, I’m trying.

So, without further ado…

Fide then tells us that he is a Catholic convert, but not a Traditionalist.  He actually sees some benefits of the Second Vatican Council (some benefits?) and doesn't have a "strong hankering for the Tridentine Rite."  So this seems to be his way of saying he is not an "extremist."   (BTW, I love the Traditional Mass and all things traditional Catholic and I have very little problem with Vatican II.  And no, that is not a contradiction.)  But he says that "As a convert, though, I am extremely sensitive to the distinctive realities of being Catholic."  He wants Catholics to be Catholic and not try to be anything else just to please the world. That is why he is upset with Pope Francis' statement that "there is no Catholic God." Fide ties himself up into knots over this. He tells us in a very confusing statement, "If, then, there is no Catholic God, and if God is the One who calls the Church into being, then there can be no Catholic Church as, precisely, that communion called by the God known in Catholic teaching."

Fide, you wrote this:

Indeed, I have no recollection of a Pope, much less any Catholic priest or orthodox theologian, ever saying, "there is no Catholic God," full stop. This is yet another case of the Pope resorting to needlessly abstruse and scandalous phrases when just a few extra words would have clarified his point. HELP! WHAT AM I MISSING? In what follows, I want my analysis to be shown to be faulty, based on translation problems, dogmatic teachings, etc.

What are you missing?  Read on if you really want your "analysis to be shown to be faulty."  It is actually quite faulty.

The Catholic Church's teachings are a direct reflection of God, and that cannot be said about any other religion in the world. But does reflecting God in our teachings make God Catholic?

The Catholic Church was
born from the side of
Jesus Christ

I don't know how much Church history you have studied, Fide, but it is obvious from your post that you are very intelligent, so I'm sure you know that the Church was founded in 33 A.D., at the time that the spear was thrust into Christ's side and blood and water gushed out. There was no Catholic Church prior to that time. If God was Catholic, He would have to be a convert like you. Up to that time, God was working through the Israelites, which is why He came to us as a Jew. Does that mean God was a Jew? Of course not. Jesus was a Jew in his human form, but was his Divine nature Jewish? Obviously not. God predated the Jews and the Israelite nation. He predated the Catholic Church. He existed before time itself!!!! God always was and always will be, no beginning and no end. We as human beings have a beginning and the Catholic Church also had a beginning, meaning there was a time when the Church did not exist.

No, Fide, God is not human and God is not Catholic. God is not subject to the rules and regulations of the Catholic Church. Unlike we sinful human beings, God does not need the church in order to exist.  Also, God is not subject to the Pope's authority to which we Catholics are subject (no Pope, no Church).

The reason for founding the Catholic Church is the same reason for the building of Noah's ark. Noah, on the orders of God, built his ark to physically save mankind from the flood. But commanding the building of the ark didn't make God an ark. The ark was distinct and separate from God. Jesus built the Catholic Church to spiritually save mankind from eternal damnation.  We must become Catholics because it is the only way to inherit eternal life with our Creator. But our Creator exists above and apart from the Church. He does not need the Church to inherit eternal life. He founded and built the Church, but that does not make Him Catholic.  His identity is independent from the Catholic Church.

God created Catholicism to save us, but He is much bigger than the Catholic Church, just as He was much bigger than Noah's ark.  He is bigger than the universe, bigger than our finite minds can ever grasp.

You jumped to some pretty startling conclusions because you are trying to reduce God to your level.

For all you fans of “context” these days [context has nothing to do with it], keep in mind that the run up the Pope’s denial of the Catholic God is that he asks Scalfari the following question: “I am asking what you think is the essence of the world, indeed the universe.” Scalfari answers, “I believe in Being, that is in the tissue from which forms, bodies arise,” whereupon Francis, not, mind you, having been asked about religious pluralism or Catholic chauvinism, but as from the bottom of his heart, says, “And I believe in God, not in a Catholic God, there is no Catholic God, there is God and I believe in Jesus Christ, his incarnation.”

The mind reels.

Fide, your mind should not "reel" at this statement from the Holy Father. It does make perfect sense. God is far, far beyond the Catholic Church. God cannot be contained by anything, not even by His own Church. By the way, I do know of at least one other priest who said God is not Catholic: Father Benedict Groeschel. Take a look at the following video from EWTN (less than a minute).  Hopefully, with the explanation I just gave you it will make sense and not send your mind "reeling":



You also wrote this, Fide:

The key here is that Pope Francis explicitly pits a “Catholic God” against “God” per se, and thus implies that we must choose between them: “Are you with me for God, or are you with the restorationists for a Catholic God?” [The Pope nowhere says or implies this]  In Francis’s eschatology, when we finally see God as He is, it will turn out all those Catholic-God features were just accessories, concessions, illusions, and mere metaphors–Praise God, turns out God’s not Catholic, after all! [Again, you are attributing ideas to Pope Francis that he nowhere conveyed] For whatever reason, Francis favors a God of whom the distinctively Catholic theology (theory?) of God is at best only contingently and partially applicable, for if it were wholly and essentially true of God, then God would by his very nature be a “Catholic God.”

Think about it: by saying that he does not believe in the Catholic God, the Pope is saying that he does not believe in the God of Catholicism.

You probably aren't aware of this, but shortly after Pope Francis was elected, he gave a sermon on April 23 in which he said the following (you can read the entire sermon here):

And so the Church was a Mother, the Mother of more children, of many children. It became more and more of a Mother. A Mother who gives us the faith, a Mother who gives us an identity. But the Christian identity is not an identity card: Christian identity is belonging to the Church, because all of these belonged to the Church, the Mother Church. Because it is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church. The great Paul VI said: "Wanting to live with Jesus without the Church, following Jesus outside of the Church, loving Jesus without the Church is an absurd dichotomy." And the Mother Church that gives us Jesus gives us our identity that is not only a seal, it is a belonging. Identity means belonging. This belonging to the Church is beautiful.

Do you think Pope Francis is contradicting himself by saying on the one hand that Christ cannot be found outside the Church, and then saying he does not believe in a "Catholic" God? There is no contradiction here. Who and what is God? Jesus told us He is "the Way, the Truth and the Life" in John 14:6. I John 4:8 tells us, "God is Love." None of these verses say "God is Catholic."

Noah's Ark

What makes us human beings Catholic? How do we identify as Catholics? Why do we need to be Catholics? The reason for Catholicism, as stated above, is the same reason as for the construction of Noah's ark. It is to save mankind. Those who were not in Noah's ark perished, and those who are not a part of the Catholic Church (and that doesn't mean just being on a parish membership role, which actually means nothing in the long run) will perish spiritually. Yes, the Catholic Church proceeds from God and leads us to God, but unlike us, God does not need saving. So why does God need to be Catholic? He doesn't. God didn't need to be saved in Noah's ark, and He doesn't need the Catholic Church to survive, either. God is infinitely bigger than the Church. 

To say God's identity is wrapped up in Catholicism or any other belief is to limit Him to the level of sinful human beings. Do you now understand the faultiness of your statement: "by saying that he does not believe in the Catholic God, the Pope is saying that he does not believe in the God of Catholicism"? A "Catholic God" and the "God of Catholicism" are two different things. To conflate the two as one is to completely miss the meaning of Pope Francis' statement.

Fide then goes beyond the Pope's statement about a Catholic God:

The above analysis concerns only one of the Pope’s statements lately that have unsettled many in the flock. As lengthy as my analysis might have seemed, it’s actually just indicative of the more fundamental worry I have with Pope Francis: he often seems oblivious to, or even to disdainful of, the fact that he is never not speaking on behalf of the Church. [This is your emphasis, Fide].

Which is where what I’ll call the Papal Categorical Imperative comes into the picture:

In light of his duty always to form consciences according to the truth, every word the Pope utters, regardless of the anterior context, and regardless of the interlocutor–but especially when it’s uttered from a global platform–is to be judged based on whether the Church itself could and should consistently speak in the same manner.  [Again, Fide, this is your emphasis]

I mean no disrespect, but the hubris contained in this statement is breathtaking. Do you realize that what you are actually saying is that if the Pope won't agree with you, then he had better just shut up. Do you honestly believe that you know better than the one specifically chosen and led by the Holy Spirit? Or do you believe Pope Francis is a false pope. You can't have it both ways. You either believe Pope Francis is the Vicar of Christ or he is an imposter.  And if you believe he is the Vicar of Christ, then as a Catholic, you owe him respect and allegiance, no matter what your personal feelings are.

Our greatest role model is our Blessed Mother., and certainly no one ever showed as much allegiance and loyalty as she did.  She was often perplexed by the words and actions of her Son and by the events in her life. But never once did she speak out against Jesus or His Father, never once did she question events and circumstances that seemed to make no sense. For example, Christ was lost for three days, nowhere to be found. After being sick with worry, she and Joseph finally found Jesus in the Temple. Mary asked him why he had worried her so. He did not give her an answer except to say He had to be about his Father's business. The scriptures tell us she did not understand this, but she "kept it in her heart."

In 2013, when so many of us have access to the Internet and a public voice, we don't keep anything in our hearts.  We forget the Pope is the Vicar of Christ - Christ's literal representative on earth, answerable only to Christ Himself (which also makes him subject to a much harsher judgment than any of the rest of us will face).  We look at the Pope as just another political figure, and when he doesn't meet our expectations, we feel completely justified in hammering him.  We never stop to think that it may just be possible that we have an incomplete understanding, or that it is possible we don't have the clear picture that the Holy Father has.   We just know he doesn't agree with our thinking and therefore, he must be wrong and he better shut up.

I can only wonder what would happen if Christ walked the earth now and said for the first time to His followers, "You must eat my body and drink my blood or you have no life in you."  What if we saw Christ consorting with prostitutes and the lowest of society.  What if we saw Christ going against the important religious rules of our time, such as picking food on the Sabbath and not washing His hands as commanded in the Law!   We would be no different than the Pharisees.  The blogosphere would light up with condemnation, telling us that this is a mad man.

When I first read the headlines about the interviews with the Pope, I admit to being concerned. The Pope says abortion and same sex marriage aren't important issues? The Pope says all we need to do is follow our own conscience? How can this be? Then I took the time to read the interviews, and was both enlightened and delighted at the message of love and compassion from the Holy Father. I saw the words of a man who truly loves humanity and wants, above all else, to save as many souls as he can. In other words, I saw Christ in Pope Francis.

No, I'm not some soft hearted liberal. I'm about as conservative and traditional as any Catholic you will find. I listen to and read Venerable Fulton Sheen all the time (so much so that I'm beginning to feel like he is a personal friend). My iPad is filled with traditional Catholic prayers and devotions and spiritual reading from 100 years and more ago (right now I'm reading a book by Fr. William Frederick Faber about the Sorrows of Mary). As stated, I love the Traditional Mass. I wouldn't receive communion in the hand for any amount of money or even if my life depended on it. I go to confession frequently and pray the Rosary every day. I'm not stating any of this to impress people, but to let you know that I love the Catholic Church - the traditional Catholic Church - and I love Pope Francis. The two, despite all of the ranting and raving on the Internet, are not only not exclusive, they are very much inclusive.

For all of you who think Pope Francis is a left wing liberal out to do away with the clear teaching of the Church, remember that he says 15 mysteries of the Rosary every day and spends an hour every day in Eucharistic Adoration.  Pope Francis is one of the busiest people in the world, and yet he still manages to do this.  How many of us can say we do as much?  Pope Francis obviously has a deep love for our Lord, for his Church and for people in general.  He is the Vicar of Christ.  We need to listen to him, and like our Blessed Mother, when we don't understand something, we need to keep it in our hearts and ask for the understanding, not announce to the world that Our Holy Father is a crazed lunatic. When it comes to doubt, the first one to doubt is always ourselves.  

Fide ended his blog with this (after sarcastically renaming the Holy Father, "Pope Guido"):

And so I write.

And write.

And keep writing.

But do I defect? Do I renounce the Pope as a heretic?

I do not. I remain Catholic. For that is what being Catholic means: to abide with Christ as revealed in the Scriptures, the Tradition, the Liturgy, the Magisterium, and the brethren even in spite of many headdesks [head aches??] that “the world’s parish priest”, or any other of the brethren, may induce in me. Despair is not an option, but groaning out loud certainly is. (Scroll back up to see the first papal intention for this month.)

When you decide you need to "groan out loud," first remember who the accuser of the brethren is. Make sure you're not aligning yourself with him.

The Church has no other meaning and finality than to witness to Jesus. May we not forget this.
— Pope Francis (@Pontifex) September 23, 2013