+
JMJ
First, wishing you a belated Merry Christmas and a Happy and HOLY New Year!
As usual, what follows is articles that caught my eye with some of my thoughts on what, in my opinion, it all means.
P^3
Crisis of the Catholic Church Fiducia Supplicans
While the fury over this latest action of Pope Francis the First is ongoing, it remains to be seen whether it results in any lasting sentiments. For example, if Pope Francis were to experience a sudden death, some within the hierarchy may see it as Divine Intervention and move the needle back in the right direction.
Only, the problem is that Pope Francis the First has placed his mark on the College of Cardinals ... so something would have to either change their minds or something would have to dramatically changed the composition of the College of Cardinals.
An Act of God would make things much simpler, but there is no guarantee of that, we may have to muddle our way through and gain further merit and grace by doing so. :-)
-
2023: The Fiducia Fiasco, Synodality, Fr Rupnik, and more - YouTube
A Clarification That Obfuscates - Crisis Magazine
What the LGBT-World and TLM-World Have In Common – Padre Peregrino
RORATE CÆLI: "This document damages the communion of the Church, for such blessings directly and seriously contradict Divine Revelation": Strongest and clearest episcopal reaction yet from +Rafael Escudero López-Brea
Some traditionalist bishops revolt after Vatican allows ‘blessing’ same-sex couples – Baptist News Global
Criticism of Fiducia Supplicans: Confusion or spoiled milk? - Where Peter Is
DDF clarifies ‘Fiducia supplicans’ after ‘understandable’ bishops’ reactions
RORATE CÆLI: Africa Parts Ways: Collective Rejection of Fiducia Supplicans by all Catholic Churches in Africa (Full Document)
Fiducia Supplicans: Cardinal Sarah’s Strong Reaction | FSSPX News
LES FEMMES - THE TRUTH: "Out of Africa I have Called My Son!" The African Bishops Resist Francis and His Same-Sex Blessings!
RORATE CÆLI: Ecclesiastical Province of Rennes, France: no blessings for homosexual or irregular couples, but only for individuals
RORATE CÆLI: Tucho Fernandez Pours Gasoline on an Ecclesial Crisis of His Own Creation: Full Text of the Desperate Vatican Press Release
Pope defends same-sex blessings declaration, says it is misunderstood | Reuters
Crisis of The Catholic Church
- Obviously this is closely linked to the above. The key element here is to see how the Successors of the Apostles treat the Traditional Catholics in their Dioceses.
- This will 'tell' us who is:
- A. Aligned with Traditional Catholicism (i.e. Catholicism)
- B. Aligned with the Pope's wishes (a little harder to discern who will support a resurgence of Traditional Catholicism).
- C. Misaligned with Traditional Catholicism (ie.Catholicism)
- Each condemnation helps to refine our understanding of where each prelate stands vis-a-vis Church Teaching and this Crisis.
- In other words are they part of the SOLUTION or part of the PROBLEM. ;-)
- LMS Chairman: Non-Catholics supporting the Traditional Mass
- The Eponymous Flower: “Whoever Doesn’t Have a Good Relationship With Pope Francis, Isn’t Catholic “
- My Advice? Step Down - Crisis Magazine
- RORATE CÆLI: Parish Priest Criticizes Francis in Homily- And Receives Sustained Applause from His Flock, and is Excommunicated
- The Papal-Coronation Oath – Padre Peregrino
- Vatican asks US bishops to hold new rounds of Synod on Synodality listening sessions | America Magazine
- Babies from Bone Marrow | Discover Magazine
- The Post-Conciliar Era: The Church and the rise of traditionalism - Where Peter Is
- Credo is a weaponized response to Vatican II and the CCC – Catholic World Report
- New book offers Catholic response to arguments, attacks from Orthodoxy – Catholic World Report
SSPX
- As a result of Vos' letter, I dropped a bunch of references into this link.
- The videos' description is intriguing:
In this new episode of WPI Perspectives, I speak with Laura Vander Vos, host of the @mrshappycatholic YouTube channel and founder of Trad Recovery, an online support group and resource center for those who have left Catholic Traditionalism for the wider Catholic Church. On her YouTube channel, Laura invites former traditionalists of all stripes (having left groups such as the SSPX, sedevacantist, and Ecclesia Dei communities) to discuss their experiences in traditionalism, their decision to leave the movement, and their experiences since leaving.
We discuss the traditionalist mentality and the dynamics of traditionalist groups, including abuse, trauma, and cult-like tendencies that many have reported, and the courage it takes to leave the traditionalist world.- The video is an hour long and frankly, my time is too precious to watch it all ... so I'm going to look at her website to look for the premise.
- Vos' website can be found here: https://www.tradrecovery.com/
- So ... here goes some thoughts as I perused the "TradRecovery" website:
Historical research has often proven to be the death knell for many traditionalist positions. Perusing some recent notes from SSPX high school and looking through some SSPX pamphlets, I was reminded of their position that Vatican II was "only pastoral" and therefore "not binding." Old notes said that councils are only called to address the dominant heresy or error of the time. A quote from one of the SSPX's pamphlets:
The author (not Vos but Andy M) delves into the straw-man argument. What he really should be assessing is the latest expression of what the SSPX is willing to accept with respects to the Second Vatican Council - namely 2012 Doctrinal Preamble (link).- Suffice to say that that Second Vatican Council did not issue any new Infallible Declarations that are binding on the faithful to believe with . There are obviously doctrines put forth and that leads to the whole discussion on what the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council actually meant to convey with the ambiguous documents and declarations.
- There is another article that discusses Communion with the Church. Well we know that Communion exists in some manner - the SSPX isn't schismatic ... Communion exists and, IMO, the barrier is organizational. There is no Canonical Solution. So the question really comes down to is the SSPX correct in calling a spade a spade (link).
- Also, lets remember that all this started because the SSPX refused to celebrate the New Mass and the continued to believe the Dogmas of the Catholic Church.
- The question really is this: Is the Catholic Church in a Crisis, be it doctrinal or organizational. The Pontificate of Pope Francis is a good proof of the crisis - especially the latest documents on Blessing of Same-Sex couples and Communion for Civily Divorced and Remarried.
- Last point is that just because people leave the SSPX or others doesn't mean that there isn't a crisis and that the persecution of the SSPX and traditionalists is justified.
- Ok one more point ... if there is a crisis ... surrendering to it doesn't fix it. A laity, we have a right to the Truths of the Church, it isn't a privilege. The hierarchy is negligent in its duties and that is the real reason for the Crisis.
- Letters 1976 | Paul VI
- SSPXAsia.com:
- Transcript Released: 1976 Meeting of Pope Paul VI and Abp. Lefebvre - A Commentary - District of the USA
- The Audience with Pope Paul VI
- The Remnant Newspaper - FOR THE FIRST TIME ONLINE: Archbishop Lefebvre’s Prophetic Address to The Remnant, 1976
- Pope Paul VI's Letter to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (October 11, 1976) // Word on Fire
- https://www.ncregister.com/blog/what-are-dogma-doctrine-and-theology
- Recovery from Traditionalism with Laura Vander Vos - Where Peter Is
SSPX - Conditions for an Agreement
- So ... this is a recent post on a discussion on the "Resistance" forum CathInfo. The only issue is that it takes words uttered in a conference out of context of what the Archbishop was actually willing to accept in ... wait for it ... 1988. See ReBlog: Doctrinal Preamble April 15, 2012 vs Protocol 1988 (Updated with Text of Nota Praevia) (link).
- I know the argument that the Archbishop reject the protocol, but he also said that there was nothing wrong with the protocol - otherwise he would not have signed it. So ... there.
- The ignorance of the truth is no excuse. Oh Well ... the "Resistance" continues to follow the path of the Dwarves from The Last Battle.
- Archbishop Lefebvre Conditions for an Agreement, 1984 - SSPX Resistance News - Catholic Info
Covid SARS-CoV-2
So this will be fun.
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is burning out. Although, I know people still getting sick from the virus and describing it as the worst virus they've ever had. Think about this for a bit, it isn't the early versions that had a higher fatality rate.
Ok, so I know the argument that it was 'just the elderly ' that were vulnerable to the disease so we don't need to do anything.
The thing is that it wasn't the first pandemic - The Spanish Influenza was pretty nasty and the lessons learned from that Pandemic and later outbreaks informed the decision of lock-downs etc.
Before you try to burn this blog down to the ground.
There were definite mistakes made in handling the Pandemic and there were people who took advantage of it to advance their agendas.
Neither changes the facts of what it is a dangerous virus that had a significant case fatality rate and that the quality of care had a significant impact on the mortality rates. Simple things such as ventilation and oxygen had a major impact on outcomes.
I know the argument that the CFR doesn't tell the whole story because we don't know how many people were actually infected i.e. infection fatality rate ... well the science of statistics helps us to understand the impact and this article in the Lancet provides some insights (link) - table below.
I have pulled the numbers in a spreadsheet and the average IFR is for ages from 1 to 100 years is 5.4%. Obviously the older you get, the worse your chances and things get pretty twitchy after 55 years of age as the IFR hits 0.62%. After sixty, your chances (where ever the stats originate) are 1% ... in others words 1 in 100 people infected at that age die.
I know some people will think this isn't a big deal ... at least from the attitudes I've read online during the Pandemic.
Well its significantly higher than your chance of death from a car accident.
Then there was the comment made by a millenial that COVID-19 was a Boomer Remover.
Just remember that 'Stats' are impartial - it's just a matter of time before your number comes up. :-)
| IFR and 95% uncertainty interval | |
|---|---|
| 1 year | 0·0054% (0·0021–0·0114) |
| 2 years | 0·0040% (0·0020–0·0070) |
| 3 years | 0·0032% (0·0019–0·0051) |
| 4 years | 0·0027% (0·0018–0·0043) |
| 5 years | 0·0024% (0·0017–0·0039) |
| 6 years | 0·0023% (0·0016–0·0038) |
| 7 years | 0·0023% (0·0015–0·0039) |
| 8 years | 0·0023% (0·0015–0·0042) |
| 9 years | 0·0025% (0·0016–0·0046) |
| 10 years | 0·0028% (0·0018–0·0050) |
| 11 years | 0·0031% (0·0021–0·0056) |
| 12 years | 0·0036% (0·0024–0·0063) |
| 13 years | 0·0042% (0·0028–0·0073) |
| 14 years | 0·0050% (0·0034–0·0084) |
| 15 years | 0·0060% (0·0041–0·0097) |
| 16 years | 0·0071% (0·0050–0·0113) |
| 17 years | 0·0085% (0·0060–0·0134) |
| 18 years | 0·0100% (0·0071–0·0157) |
| 19 years | 0·0118% (0·0084–0·0183) |
| 20 years | 0·0138% (0·0098–0·0214) |
| 21 years | 0·0162% (0·0114–0·0250) |
| 22 years | 0·0188% (0·0133–0·0292) |
| 23 years | 0·0219% (0·0153–0·0335) |
| 24 years | 0·0254% (0·0178–0·0385) |
| 25 years | 0·0293% (0·0207–0·0441) |
| 26 years | 0·0337% (0·0241–0·0504) |
| 27 years | 0·0386% (0·0280–0·0575) |
| 28 years | 0·0442% (0·0324–0·0658) |
| 29 years | 0·0504% (0·0372–0·0757) |
| 30 years | 0·0573% (0·0418–0·0870) |
| 31 years | 0·0650% (0·0469–0·0983) |
| 32 years | 0·0735% (0·0526–0·1108) |
| 33 years | 0·0829% (0·0590–0·1246) |
| 34 years | 0·0932% (0·0663–0·1398) |
| 35 years | 0·1046% (0·0747–0·1564) |
| 36 years | 0·1171% (0·0842–0·1746) |
| 37 years | 0·1307% (0·0950–0·1944) |
| 38 years | 0·1455% (0·1070–0·2161) |
| 39 years | 0·1616% (0·1197–0·2420) |
| 40 years | 0·1789% (0·1319–0·2706) |
| 41 years | 0·1976% (0·1440–0·3038) |
| 42 years | 0·2177% (0·1575–0·3397) |
| 43 years | 0·2391% (0·1714–0·3731) |
| 44 years | 0·2620% (0·1861–0·4122) |
| 45 years | 0·2863% (0·2016–0·4540) |
| 46 years | 0·3119% (0·2176–0·4980) |
| 47 years | 0·3389% (0·2350–0·5437) |
| 48 years | 0·3672% (0·2541–0·5906) |
| 49 years | 0·3968% (0·2748–0·6380) |
| 50 years | 0·4278% (0·2958–0·6858) |
| 51 years | 0·4606% (0·3180–0·7346) |
| 52 years | 0·4958% (0·3430–0·7855) |
| 53 years | 0·5342% (0·3720–0·8398) |
| 54 years | 0·5766% (0·4028–0·8992) |
| 55 years | 0·6242% (0·4358–0·9715) |
| 56 years | 0·6785% (0·4736–1·0602) |
| 57 years | 0·7413% (0·5181–1·1621) |
| 58 years | 0·8149% (0·5698–1·2796) |
| 59 years | 0·9022% (0·6304–1·4162) |
| 60 years | 1·0035% (0·7002–1·5727) |
| 61 years | 1·1162% (0·7776–1·7462) |
| 62 years | 1·2413% (0·8635–1·9438) |
| 63 years | 1·3803% (0·9588–2·1644) |
| 64 years | 1·5346% (1·0645–2·4094) |
| 65 years | 1·7058% (1·1817–2·6813) |
| 66 years | 1·8957% (1·3117–2·9830) |
| 67 years | 2·1064% (1·4557–3·3175) |
| 68 years | 2·3399% (1·6154–3·6881) |
| 69 years | 2·5986% (1·7928–4·0983) |
| 70 years | 2·8851% (1·9893–4·5519) |
| 71 years | 3·2022% (2·2069–5·0532) |
| 72 years | 3·5527% (2·4476–5·6064) |
| 73 years | 3·9402% (2·7139–6·2162) |
| 74 years | 4·3679% (3·0083–6·8875) |
| 75 years | 4·8397% (3·3336–7·6254) |
| 76 years | 5·3597% (3·6926–8·4353) |
| 77 years | 5·9320% (4·0887–9·3240) |
| 78 years | 6·5612% (4·5253–10·2959) |
| 79 years | 7·2520% (5·0061–11·3392) |
| 80 years | 8·0093% (5·5339–12·4411) |
| 81 years | 8·8381% (6·1140–13·6344) |
| 82 years | 9·7437% (6·7643–14·9249) |
| 83 years | 10·7311% (7·4783–16·3145) |
| 84 years | 11·8054% (8·2609–17·8063) |
| 85 years | 12·9717% (9·1175–19·4030) |
| 86 years | 14·2346% (10·0530–21·1061) |
| 87 years | 15·5984% (11·0729–22·9162) |
| 88 years | 17·0669% (12·1823–24·8326) |
| 89 years | 18·6431% (13·3860–26·8535) |
| 90 years | 20·3292% (14·6888–28·9754) |
| 91 years | 22·1263% (16·0949–31·1935) |
| 92 years | 24·0344% (17·6000–33·5013) |
| 93 years | 26·0519% (19·1384–35·8908) |
| 94 years | 28·1760% (20·7725–38·3524) |
| 95 years | 30·4021% (22·4676–40·8752) |
| 96 years | 32·7239% (24·2367–43·4272) |
| 97 years | 35·1335% (26·0981–46·0137) |
| 98 years | 37·6213% (28·0497–48·6219) |
| 99 years | 40·1762% (30·0877–51·2376) |
| 100 years | 42·7856% (32·2380–53·8466) |
- COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer
- Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) - Canada.ca
- COVID-19 wastewater monitoring dashboard — Canada.ca
- COVID-19 #CoronaVirus Infographic Datapack — Information is Beautiful
- COVID-19 #CoronaVirus Infographic Datapack — Information is Beautiful
- COVID-19 #CoronaVirus Infographic Datapack — Information is Beautiful
- Data — Information is Beautiful
- Does ivermectin have a place in the treatment of mild Covid-19? - PMC
- Search - Our World in Data
- Infographic: The History of Pandemics, by Death Toll
- Coronavirus Graphs: Worldwide Cases and Deaths - Worldometer
- Infographic: The History of Pandemics, by Death Toll
- Case fatality rate | Definition, Example, Equation, & Facts | Britannica
- Mortality Risk of COVID-19 - Our World in Data
- Basic Statistics: About Incidence, Prevalence, Morbidity, and Mortality - Statistics Teaching Tools - New York State Department of Health
- Mortality Risk of COVID-19 - Our World in Data
- The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data | medRxiv
- The MicrobeScope – Infectious Diseases in Context — Information is Beautiful
- Global case fatality rate from COVID‐19 has decreased by 96.8% during 2.5 years of the pandemic - PMC
- Case fatality rate of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis - PMC
Misc
- I just thought this was humourous.
'You want us to enforce the law?' The thoughts of the Toronto police | National Post
Comments
Post a Comment