Skip to main content

Disobeying the Pope and Sins of Omission - Michael Voris' Latest Thoughts

+
JMJ

Church Militant TV just issued another vortex on the topic of obedience to the Pope, when it is really




Michael Voris has another vortex out and touches on the topic of criticizing the Pope publicly.

His rationale has two foundations:

  1. Criticizing the Pope publicly results in driving many 'confused Catholics' into schismatic or near-schismatic (SSPX) groups.
  2. It is useless to criticize the Pope as it is the Bishops who are the ones who are really the problem.
I disagree with Michael on the principle that it is not right to publicly criticize the Pope.  In practice, the criticism must be delivered with respect for his office and charity for the souls - the Pope's first as well as the rest of the Church. 

Even the Pope said he accepted the criticisms of the late journalist (name escapes me) and he accepted them because he knew these criticisms came from love.

So criticising or complaining about the Pope's actions do not necessarily translate into an attack upon the person of the Pope.  

For example, I can definitely criticize St. Pope John Paul II's decision to kiss a koran that was presented to him.  This is a sinful act against the first commandment and no one should imitate the Pope in this matter.

I also would like to note that Pope Francis' orders being disobeyed by the bishops were curiously absent.  I suspect that there aren't any orders to disobey since the Pope himself is acting in accord with the bishops.  

But I digress.

The reason why anyone should criticize the Pope is in order to remove the confusion about Church Teaching/Doctrine that the Pope is himself creating. 

The koran kissing is a good example, but there are many examples of Pontifical actions that are causing scandal and causing people to leave the Church of Christ because of the confusion. Far more leave the Church altogether than the few thousands that take refuge in the SSPX and even the sedevacantist organizations.

And they are leaving in droves.

To not say something can be a sin of omission and as such when the Pope does something scandalous, those in positions of authority need to assert the elements of the True Faith - within their realm of authority.  

Michael point about the local bishops is right - to a point however his aerial vs ground assault analogy is completely off base.

Why?

Because this crisis of the Church will not end until the Pope is strong enough to take a stand on Catholic Teaching.  This is true from a doctrinal point of view and true from a cultural point of view.

Any gains made at the diocesan level can be erased as quickly as a new bishop can be installed.


Those who have a wider influence have an obligation to make use of that  influence for the service of the Church. If it is required to point out, with respect, to the Pope that he is damaging the Mystical Body of Christ - then so be it.

I would not want to stand before my just judge and say: But he was the Pope.

Everyone of the abuses sickening the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church was approved by a Pope.

Following Michael's logic we should hunker down and listen to them and obey.

But the cognitive dissonance would tear us apart.

Until next time ...

P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too thin

Communique about Avrille Dominicans - SSPX.org

+ JMJ Having completed the review of the 'Avrille' perspective, this communique from the French District Superior is perfectly timed. I believe that the 'resistance' has lost rationality and further argumentation simply results in their holding on to their false ideal all the more firmly. Pray much ... First, for them to acquiesce to the grace of humility in order to obtain a clear perspective on the principles involved. Second, that we may remain faithful to the Church, and Her Dogmas, Doctrines and Principles. Lest we become that which against we strove ... P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org

Cathinfo and the 'resistance' perspective (updated with response to comment)

+ JMJ Matthew, the owner of Cathinfo - a resistance forum has posted a response to a person that indicated his reasons for continuing to go to the SSPX.

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

 + JMJ   Amidst the shadows cast by the publication of Traditionis Custodes, I am working on a map of the 'resistance' splinters to put their reaction in contrast with that of the SSPX.  In the midst of this, I just came across Fr. Burfitt letter on the attempted consecration. Breaking it down (see below)  items 2 and 3 are key.  Just as the consecrating bishop is 'doubtful', even if he hadn't muffed the first attempt, Fr. Pfeiffer remain doubtful and therefore this impacts those men is attempts to 'ordain'. There were rumours that Fr. Pfeiffer was seeking episcopal consecration for years as he cast about for various bishops (also doubtful) to help him achieve this goal. I wonder how he convinced the 'doubtful' bishop to provide (twice) the doubtful consecration. What a mess!  This creates a danger to the souls of his followers and wonder where it will end. Will he go full sede and have himself 'elected' pontiff as others have done before him

Yes Sally, Pope Francis IS the Pope and is in great need of our prayers!

+ JMJ The Church of Christ is Apostolic and this is also a 'Mark' of the Church. Specifically it means: The true Church is also to be recognised from her origin, which can be traced back under the law of grace to the Apostles; for her doctrine is the truth not recently given, nor now first heard of, but delivered of old by the Apostles, and disseminated throughout the entire world. ... That all, therefore, might know which was the Catholic Church, the Fathers, guided by the Spirit of God, added to the Creed the word Apostolic. For the Holy Ghost, who presides over the Church, governs her by no other ministers than those of Apostolic succession.  ( Tradicat: Marks of the Church Apostolic - Catechism of Trent ) The consequence of this is Dogma is that if there are no longer any Bishops, then the promise of Our Lord Jesus Christ that the Church would stand to the end of the world, was false. A secondary consequence of this would be the eradication of the priesthoo