Skip to main content

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

Image
By
+
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

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Count Capponi - RIP

By
+ JMJ I had heard of Count Capponi over the years and was happy to hear a voice crying in the wilderness. I suspect that his conscience was clearer than many. This part of the article caught my attention: Capponi defended the right of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to continue his work without the label “schismatic,” which term Capponi rejected, saying: “You cannot apply the standards of the new code of canon law and the mentality of the old code. According to the new code, Lefebvre could do what he did with a Catholic intention, and he did what he did in ‘sincerity’ and invoked the ‘state of emergency’ argument, which the new code permits. You might not like the new code, but it’s what governs the Church.” I know a few people who tried to stir up a fuss when the SSPX cited the New Code in one of the documents with Rome.  Yet, the truth is what it is --- the New Code was promulgated by a reigning Pope and flawed as it is ... there are some benefits to its liberality. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

By
+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized ma...
Post a Comment
Read more

Those who return to the past are not outside the Church - Rorate Caeli

By
+ JMJ I had been thinking about putting together a post explaining some of the history of how the SSPX has arrived at its current position. Now I see that Rorate has posted a translated editorial that shows the roots of the SSPX principles. In reading these words, I see patterns and themes that were put forward by Archbishop Lefebvre decades ago. Perhaps his sight was clearer than most. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

By
 + 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...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX Transfers

By
+ JMJ Eponymous flow posted the following list of transfers etc. Source: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2020/04/castling-of-leadership-at-sspx.html The departures Bishop Bernard Fellay, the third Superior General until 2018, leaves the General House in Menzingen and moves to the Seminary of St. Thomas Aquinas in the USA. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, suffering from ill health, is being referred to the Seminary of St. Pius X in Ecene as a retreat. Fr. Christian Thouvenot, until now Secretary General of the General House, becomes a professor at the seminary in Ecene. Fr. Franz Schmidberger, until now Rector at the Seminary of the Heart of Jesus in Zaitzkofen, moves to the district of Germany. Fr. Jürgen Wegner, until now district superior of the DISTRICT USA, moves to the district of Austria. Fr. Philippe Brunet, until now Superior of the Autonomous House of Spain-Portugal, becomes professor at the Seminary U.L.F. and co-saviour of La Reja in...
2 comments
Read more