Dissecting the “New Paradigm” of Pope Francis

This is very relevant to the modern crisis

Erick Ybarra

20151006cnsph358 Cardinal Wuerl and Cardinal Schonborn as they leave the opening session of the Synod of Bishops on the family at the Vatican Oct. 5, 2015 (CNS/Paul Haring)

Dr. Eduardo Echeverria, Professor of Philosophy and Systematic Theology at Sacred Heart Major Seminary, in his recent article entitled “History, unchanging Truth, and Vatican II” at the Catholic World Report, takes on a difficult task  in attempting to relate together the absolute truth of Christian revelation and its transmission through the medium of changeable and historically-conditioned human expressions (i.e. doctrinal formulations within a certain social and historical context). Dr. Ed puts his finger on the right target by situating the veracity of the 2nd Vatican Council, at least partly, on whether we can maintain the enduring validity of the doctrinal content of the Church’s past doctrinal formulations while at the same time acknowledging the changeability in their contextualized framing.

View original post 5,125 more words

Liberal Masterminds


Batman_villains_The_Penguin_The_Riddler_The_Joker_1967

Have you grown frustrated with the fact that, since the 1960s, the traditional Catholic faith has been very difficult to make clear to liberals that their positions are at odds with the long-standing Tradition of the Church? This is because they are not stupid. They are clever as can be. Notice when Amoris Laetitia hit the public, there has since been all sorts of intellectual defenses as to how it just makes it in, even by a millimeter, to the field goal of Catholic orthodoxy? Notice how when the Universal Catechism paragraph 2267 was revised by Pope Francis, the Catholic Answers kitchen was able to cook up a quick and easy explanation as to how it just falls within, albeit with some difficult explanation and esoteric distinctions, the orange cones of orthodoxy? Continue reading

What to Think of “Saint” John Paul II in light of Assisi 1986

John_Paul_II_Medal_of_Freedom_2004

St. John Paul II

 

A reader, in consequence to reading my last article on Assisi 1986, made the following comment to me (see italic below), and I responded in four points further below.

“I get that Honorius was a heretic, and was still the Pope, and that doesn’t break Catholicism. But Honorious was also condemned as a heretic. What if he had been canonized as a saint instead? What would you make of that?

John Paul II was *manifestly* heterodox by the standards of Pre Vatican II Catholicism. Pius X and Pius XI would have totally considered him a modernist for interfaith worship. You can’t for a second convince me that isn’t the case.

And yet, Francis has *canonized him as a saint*. And not just him, but John XXIII and Paul VI as well.

The ‘trads way out’ here seems to be, in essence, ‘Well, but canonizations aren’t infallible, or even if they are, they only mean a person is in heaven and a person can do all kinds of horrible things and still be in heaven.’  Yet Pius XI taught that saints are ‘an example for every class and profession.’

How has the ordinary magisterium not basically rubber stamped error at this point, by canonizing all the popes of Post Vatican II?” Continue reading

The “Spirit of Assisi” Must Be Burned

Eustache_Le_Sueur_-_The_Preaching_of_St_Paul_at_Ephesus_-_WGA12613

Pagan converts burning their Magic books as a result of St. Paul’s preaching in Ephesus

Many Catholics have been distraught by the radical departure from the basic and elementary message of the Catholic faith which, for 2,000 years, has always presented itself as the single Truth by which mankind will find salvation. Why is it that one of the globe’s most popular Catholic evangelists, Bishop Robert Barron, can go live on television and openly promote the idea that if a practicing Jewish non-believer in Christ, Ben Shapiro, were to simply follow his conscience, albeit under the auspices of God’s grace in Christ, he can escape the judgment of God and be saved in the last Day? Why is it that, when given the chance to clarify  this (click here, Q&A begin @ minute 28:00), he shows no remorse for it, but rather persists in defending himself regardless of his promotion of indifferentism? Of course, Bishop Barron attempts to get this mess within the orange cones of Catholic orthodoxy by suggesting that the 2nd Vatican Council spoke to the possibility of attaining to salvation outside the confines of the Catholic Church and her physical sacraments. I’ve already written extensively (see here, here, and here) on why Barron’s public presentation still comes far from faithfully communicating the teaching of the Church even with the grant of said exceptional possibility. Continue reading