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?

What to make of this?

What we have today is (1) an asserted continuity with a (2) practical dissolution of the acclaimed continuity. I don’t wish to be so explicit, but it is akin to the masterminds who could rob from an international bank in a way that all the means are technically legal. They work the system, abide by all the legal strictures, never cross paths with a technically illegal action, and then leave with $400,000,000 to be deposited into banks in the Cayman Islands.

I am only here to say that this sort of crime may not be the prelates of the Church endorsing formal heresy, but gross acts of immorality in the realm of prudence for the sake of their god (i.e. their belly, or what have you). I say that formal heresy is not being committed for 2 reasons. For one, these liberal masterminds show a tremendous amount of awareness of the bull-dogmatic boundaries of dogmatic Catholic tradition, and work around it like grease on roller coaster tracks. This shows that they know their boundaries, and work slavishly hard to abide by their constitutions, regardless of how ambiguous they end up being. Secondly, the know that an outright denial of the dogmatic Catholic tradition would bring in far too much turmoil from the traditionalists.

The other possibility is that these persons are possessed of a tremendous lack of wisdom and prudence. In that case, culpability may be lesser than the example I’m given. I’d like to give the best benefit of doubt, and so, particularly with the current Pope, I think his issue lies more on the fact that he wants to stretch the unchangeable boundaries to consider the complex circumstances (I’d like to go further, but I’m obliged to keep my  place).

On the relevant matter of the Assisi Prayer meetings in 1986, I say the following. None of the bishops under St John Paul II (who I don’t wish to characterize as a liberal mastermind)  had the fortitude to pull something like what C’ple 553 did to Vigilius, and thus the current state of Catholicism suffers from both a Papalist and a Conciliarist decay. Not even the old Conciliarists have a blue-print of reform for orthodoxy, since the consensus of the current Episcopate is near heretical. I sense that some Catholics, out of fear for the Papal centralism in the deviant Bergoglio, are wanting to shift over the Conciliarist principles. However, we don’t want that just as much as we don’t want Bergoglio, for the reasons I’ve stated.

There is, of course, Sede-Vacantism. But I’d have to say that I would first consider the Protestant narrative before I venture that way.

6 thoughts on “Liberal Masterminds

  1. Erick,

    I agree with your assessment of the continuity as a de jure reality, and yet a de facto non-reality. We see this as Vatican II and conciliar documents simply ignore the prior magisterium documents on the same subject. They simply assert a “contunuity” without actually explaining how this is possible where bare contradictions arise. It would seem to me that given this, the only conclusion is that evil men have taken over the magisterium, but because the magisterium itself is holy and infallible, they have been unable to actually change doctrine but have to resort to this cloak and dagger technique. This does not disturb me since the corruption of faith and morals is nothing new to the Papacy or the episcopate. Nevertheless the crisis is of such a breadth as to be the worst of its kind.

  2. You said:

    ‘But I’d have to say that I would first consider the Protestant narrative before I venture that way.’

    NEWSFLASH!

    You already are a Protestant! A pagan Roman heretic to be specific, since you accept all the abominable novelties of Lucifer’s synod such as: Illumination in Buddhism, religious indifferentism, collegiality, schismatics are part of the Church, Muslims worship the Catholic God, religious liberty etc…

    The Holy Vatican council anathematized VII before it was even announced.

    Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Sess. 4, Chap. 3, Ex Cathedra: “Furthermore We teach and declare that the Roman Church, by the disposition of the Lord, holds the sovereignty of ordinary power over all others…This is the doctrine of Catholic truth from which no one can deviate and keep his faith and salvation.”

    Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council I, Sess. 4, Chap. 3, Canon, Ex Cathedra: “If anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which pertain to the discipline and government of the Church spread over the whole world; or, that he possesses only the more important parts, but not the whole plenitude of this supreme power… let him be anathema.” (DNZ. 1831)

    All the anti-popes of the counter-church teach that the schismatics are part of the Church, thereby receiving the full anathema from the Holy Vatican council.

    The one world religion to which you belong to has a new “mass” a new “code of canon law” a new “catechism” because it’s a new religion, full of sodomites, heretics and pedophiles.

    Wake up Erick!

    • Actually, Tobit, you may be just as much a Protestant. Here’s why in points:

      (1) Your quoting Pope Pius IX as the Supreme Vicar of Christ on earth to refute the “new” Vatican-II heretical schismatic Church, and yet it was this very Pope who made a chink in the chain, by your standards, to the fixed-locked-inflexible doctrine of “extra ecclesia nulla salus” when he said that it was possible for even pagans to be recipients of eternal redemption in Christ Jesus.

      (2) You cite Pius IX again to speak about the universal, ordinary, direct, and immediate jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff over the whole society of baptized Christians, and yet you won’t submit to his teaching summarized in (1) , nor do you submit to the Pontiff who sits upon the Papal throne today, His Holiness Pope Francis. If Pius IX is also an anti-Pope, which Pope does your Protestantized-Pope radar bring you back to as the last legitimate Pope of Rome?

      (3) You complain about the new Canon Law (1983), which supplanted the (1917) Code. If this was such a problem for you, why don’t you go back to the whole revision of Canon Law done under Pope Gregory VII, Innocent III, and Gratian’s Decretum?

      In other words, either you are a Protestant or part of the separated Eastern churches in mentality, or you are merely confused about it. Your comment suggests the latter.

      • you said:

        “(1) Your quoting Pope Pius IX as the Supreme Vicar of Christ on earth to refute the “new” Vatican-II heretical schismatic Church, and yet it was this very Pope who made a chink in the chain, by your standards, to the fixed-locked-inflexible doctrine of “extra ecclesia nulla salus” when he said that it was possible for even pagans to be recipients of eternal redemption in Christ Jesus.”

        Diversion from the issue and all the heresies and new religion of the Harlot of Babylon. You comparing Pope Pius IX to the the anti-popes is a abomination and not remotely equivalent. Even if Pope Pius IX had taught that the invincibly ignorant could be saved on these two occasions, it wouldn’t mean that such a position is true, because they were fallible documents which could have contained error. No pope can change or contradict dogma. Pope Honorius, who reigned in the 7th century, was, in fact, later condemned for propagating heresy, though not in his solemn capacity teaching to the universal Church. Thus, no one, not even a pope, can change the dogma that no one who dies outside the Catholic Church, ignorant or not, can be saved. Here are some more quotes on ignorance.

        It’s also interesting how you jump immediately to Pope Pius IX with the invincible ignorance garbage because you clearly have no response to the one world religion that you belong to.

        Pope Benedict XV, Humani Generis Redemptionem (#14), June 15, 1917: “…’Ignorance is the mother of all errors,’ as the Fourth Lateran Council so truthfully observes.”

        You said: “You cite Pius IX again to speak about the universal, ordinary, direct, and immediate jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff over the whole society of baptized Christians, and yet you won’t submit to his teaching summarized in (1) , nor do you submit to the Pontiff who sits upon the Papal throne today, His Holiness Pope Francis. If Pius IX is also an anti-Pope, which Pope does your Protestantized-Pope radar bring you back to as the last legitimate Pope of Rome?”

        True Catholics [SV] reject an anti-pope and defend the Papacy more than anyone! Were the Catholics and saints who rejected the anti-popes during the great western schism heretics? You’re also bearing false witness against me, Pope Pius IX was a true pope. NOT a modernist heretic, matter fact Pius IX condemns your religion:

        Pope Pius IX: “Also perverse is that shocking theory that it makes no difference to which religion one belongs, a theory greatly at variance even with reason. By means of this theory, those crafty men remove all distinction between virtue and vice, truth and error, honorable and vile action. They pretend that men can gain eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there could ever be any sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial.” [Qui Pluribus #15, Nov. 9, 1846]

        The Bible [Which is a Catholic book] and the Catholic Church condemns the Vatican II sect. The fact that you mention Pope Pius IX as an anti-pope simply because of a few erroneous statements shows you have no idea what you’re talking about.

        You said: “(3) You complain about the new Canon Law (1983), which supplanted the (1917) Code. If this was such a problem for you, why don’t you go back to the whole revision of Canon Law done under Pope Gregory VII, Innocent III, and Gratian’s Decretum?”

        I was trying to illustrate how everything is new, furthermore the 1917 CCL says Masons are excommunicated, the 1983 doesn’t! Maybe it’s because they wrote it Erick???

        “In other words, either you are a Protestant or part of the separated Eastern churches in mentality, or you are merely confused about it. Your comment suggests the latter.”

        Bearing false witness again, Protestants are heretics and so are the demonic schismatics. What Dogma am i denying Erick? If you accept Lucifer’s synod, then you automatically reject Lateran IV, Lyons I and II Florence etc…

        Your sect even agrees with the Lutherans on Justification and says the infallible canons of Trent no longer apply. This is inexcusable, for a man like yourself to have read dozens of books on the older sister of Protestantism and not know what is going on in the Church and what happened to the Church!

        Your religion even celebrates the anniversary of the Protestant revolution and issues stamps of the satanic heresiarch Luther!

        I think you’re in denial Erick.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s