The Vatican II Revolution Reexamined

 By David Martin

While the gale force of the post-conciliar tempest continues to uproot the Faith, dislodge morals, blow apart revered traditions, topple the Church's edifice, and spread doctrinal debris throughout the Church, there are those who insist that the problem today isn’t due to Vatican II but to a “misinterpretation” of the Council.

Unfortunately, misinterpretation had nothing to do with this, for this revolution was the result of years of careful planning. We might see the conciliar documents as the blueprint for this plan. The ambiguities, omissions, and outright errors in the documents were deliberately calculated by progressivist theologians and bishops who intended to exploit these errors in the text after the Council closed.

If we have lay people today assuming priestly functions as “Eucharistic ministers,” it’s because Vatican II defines the laity as a “common priesthood.” (LG 10) If the Church today ecumenically dignifies other religions, it’s because Vatican II says that “Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation.” (UR-3) Clearly, there was a plan for change in the works.

Things Never Seen Nor Heard From the Chair of Peter in All of History

September 8, 2014  | Communication to the Editor

(Rome) From recent events, the Catholic Blog "Chiesa e Postconcilio" is concerned (and post-conciliar Church) with idiosyncratic renditions of Scripture and its interpretation by Pope Francis. Subsequently, the translation:

Things Never Heard or Seen from the Chair of Peter

From the guest house Sanctae Martæ in the Vatican, which can hardly be described as the seat of the Holy See, Pope Francis will sound off again after the summer break  not only with Manichaean and ambiguous judgments without adequate explanatory depth, with which Catholics are divided into two groups, but also daring personal interpretations of Scripture. The person responsible in the Vatican has resumed the proliferation of "morning meditations"  on the website of the Vatican, including highlighting false allegations.

The most recent example is attributed to Pope Francis Saint Paul: "I must indeed boast of my sins." Prince of the Apostles "boasts" of his sins? One is amazed and shakes his head in disbelief. Of course this can only be done, by one who at least has a certain capacity for church teaching and some familiarity with the Scriptures.

Incorrect Rendition of the Apostle Paul

St. Paul speaks in the 12th chapter of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians in no way of sin, but of his "weakness". In the NASB it says: "(...) On behalf of such a man I will boast; but on my own behalf I will not boast, except in regard to my weaknesses." (2 Corinthians 12.5). The Greek word used by the apostle, is ἀσθένεια (astheneia), which means simply "weakness" and not "sin".

In addition, Prince of the Apostles at this point explains very well what his "weakness" is: "He [the Lord] replied to me: My grace is sufficient for thee; for you, for power in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore, I affirm my weaknesses, insults and hardships, persecutions, and fears which I stand for Christ; For when I am weak, then I am strong." (2 Corinthians 12.9 to 10). The weakness the apostle speaks of, are the physical and mental suffering, which he enumerates, but not the sin.

At this point the eschatological paradigm shift resulting from the  quote incorrectly reproduced by Pope Francis need not be gone into. Just this: "O happy fault", the felix culpa of the Exultet is not what's meant.

Who Prevents Retransmission of Erroneous Pope's Statements?

The "liberal" interpretation of the Gospel by the Pope has something grotesque in it and you want a little bashful concern about the wide veil of silence. Were it only not for the media dissemination, making giving the Pope's words their significance. And were it not for the absence or better, the silence of those who fulfill their responsibilities and should have the courage to rectify what should be corrected. Instead, the improvised words of the Argentine Pope in the Vatican,  are disseminated without censorship  and stylized by compliant  Vaticanists into "pearls".

The above example is not an isolated incident, but one of a lengthening series of offensive Bible "interpretations". But where are the priests, the bishops, the cardinals who will raise their voices against it and at least prevent the proliferation half-baked blurbs ? Instead, is there not even the murmur of a contradiction? Is there so little faith, even of church leaders, in the power of words, that they consider false ideas as well as false gestures empty of consequences?

Death Rune and John Lennon's world "Without Religion"

Just as no one in the Vatican raised an objection when "the pope wanted emphatically" an Interreligious football match for peace, although the program was known in advance and announced that before the kickoff, the daringly clothed Argentine singer Martina Stoessel with a dubious Death Rune on her stomach (commonly known as "peace sign"), sang the song Imagine  published in 1971  by John Lennon:

Imagine there's no heaven / It's easy if you try / No hell below us / About us only sky / Imagine all the people / living for today  / Imagine there's no countries / It's easy if you try / Nothing to kill or die for  / and no religion too / Imagine all the people  / living life in peace.

Cohorts of "Normalists"  have certainly prepared detailed explanations for it at hand. Perhaps: "It was just a football game ..." The song Imagine follows from minute 4:40 in the video. Friends and I have followed  Riscossa Christiana's call and instead of watching the football game,  prayed for  persecuted brothers and sisters in the Middle East.

Edit: we also noticed someone waving the rainbow flag in the audience.  Coincidence?  

Yes or No? Pope Francis is Causing Headaches.

(Rome) Should we condemn someone,  evaluate or judge someone? Yes or No? Pope Francis is causing, and not for the first time, a headache with his statements. Some papal statements appear even contradictory for the inexperienced observer.

Sometimes a statement saying the exact opposite of another or at least  gives  the impression of internal inconsistency or ambiguity.The problem is not small, because the Vatican is silent on which to provide instead of a clarifying and explanatory interpretation. At the recent "headache" that Pope Francis prepares, draws the Vatican expert Sandro Magister's attention.

.

Judgments: Yes or No?

Sandro Magister

In less than two days Pope Francis  uttered a first  harrowing condemnation, which became the headline on the front pages of all the newspapers, and then the  whole his morning sermons in Santa Marta was used to exhort the Christians to never judge and condemn anyone, but always to be only a defender and advocate for others.

The judgment,, better the condemnation, he pronounced  on June 21 against the Calabrian mafia `ndrangheta. His words were: "If you're not worshiping the Lord God worship, you become a worshiper of evil, as there are those who live by  bad reputations and violence ... The `Ndrangheta's  worship of evil and contempt for the common good. This evil is to fight to remove, you must tell him no ... Those who go in their lives this way of evil, as the Mafiosi, are not in communion with God! They are excommunicated "

The  chroniclers reported that the 200,000 in attendance broke out at this point in a rousing applause. A round of applause, followed by an even bigger worldwide applause from the media.

But the fact is that Pope Francis is laughably giving equally general consent whenever he says not to make judgments, from that memorable "Who am I to judge?", which is probably the most widely cited and acclaimed worldwide message of this pontificate.

This leads to a headache. Francis is a Pope, who judges, evaluates, acquits, demands, apprehends. At the same time he preaches incessantly, that one should never judge, neither accuse nor condemn.
Whoever judges is "always wrong," he said in his sermon on 23 June in Santa Marta. He errs, the Pope continued, "because he puts himself in the place of God, who is the only judge." He claimed "the authority to judge everything: people, life, everything." And "Judging with the ability," he said he has also to have the ability to "condemn".

With the excommunication of the Mafiosi, two days earlier, everything sounded quite different. Monsignor Nunzio Galantino, Bishop of Cassano all'Jonio and favorite of Pope Francis who was made the Secretary of the Italian Bishops' Conference, translated the words of the Pope: "The excommunication means that the mafia life is locked from the Church. You have chosen evil over a system of life. And when that happens, you're out of the community. You can not receive the sacraments, not baptism or sponsor confirmation, can not belong to a patronage committee, nothing. It's not your community. And it does not matter that you have the image of the Mother of God or a family altar or the Bible in the rat hole where you hide: that means absolutely nothing."

Do not judge, no way! However, there is a caveat: If the affected mafioso is hiding in a "rat hole", which is a sign that he is volatile and has been condemned by earthly justice, while if he is not convicted, it is not so easy for the Church to condemn him.

Even harder it is, the condemnations of the Pope against the mafiosi to bring "corrupt" and all the others over which he imposes the judgment every day with uninterrupted calls, never to judge anyone. These statements astonish the more so since they come from a successor of Peter, to whom the keys were entrusted to bind and to loose and everything he binds on earth and triggers will be bound and loosed in heaven. A supremacy which he holds over the whole Church.

To be precise, Pope Francis added on June 23 in Santa Marta that "the only one who judges is God and those to whom God gives the power to do it." But he did not say who they are, which is why the rate went down. The mystery continues.

Introduction / Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Picture: Settimo Cielo

Clarity and Truth -- the Main Therapy Against Old Liberalism

Father Wolfgang Ockenfels:  The dominant psychologizing tone within the Church , the stilted emotional forms, and the vague double meanings are  becoming a great nuisance  -- and leading to a crisis of ecclesiastical credibility.

 (kreuz.net)The Pope encountered a "seemingly demoralized and confused" society in his Germany visit. 
He deems it "urgently in need of orientation".


The Domincan, Father Wolfgang Ockenfels (64) explained on the 22nd of September in the midst of Benedict XVIs visit to Germany.

The article appeared in the polemical Berlin weekly 'Junge Freiheit'.

Father Ockenfels is a publicist.  He teaches Christian Social Ethics in the Theological Faculty in Trier.

The Old Liberals turn in Dialogue in a Circle

Father Ockenfels sees clearly: "The Church in Germany is suffering from an anti-Roman virus, they are occupied with tormenting themselves and turn within a circle  in "dialogue".

What is also meager for him is the achievement of the highly celebrated ecumenism:

"Some protestant church leaders increasingly withdraw from addressing bio-ethical questions and distance themselves even from the basic goal of ecumenism itself."

Collective Defamation

Father Ockenfels even sees through the abuse-hoax.

The Catholic Church has been "collectively discredited" through a few "deplorable" individual cases":

"They were, in abuse cases that are chalked up to them alone, put in a kind of vice, that they hardly dare to speak on moral subjects and social teaching any more."

The Dominican fools himself: Over eighty percent of the cases brought into view were not pedophilic, rather homosexual in nature.

Ecumenical Degeneration

Father Ockenfels makes an interesting observation:

"Although the Evangelical communities have the same problems as the Catholics, who have been run through the crossfire by the mass media, have lifted hardly a finger, to reject the anti-Catholic smear campaign."

This state of affairs also looks to him as "not putting a very good light on ecumenical solidarity."

For him, it is much more a sign of ecumenical degeneration.

One doesn't know, where one is

The priest is certain that internal-Church debates have sharpened in the last years.

He hopes that the higher clergy will learn, "to speak in clear text."

Because: "The dominant psychologizing tone within the Church , the stilted emotional forms, and the vague double meanings are; becoming a great nuisance; -- and leading to a crisis of ecclesiastical credibility."

And: "One hardly doesn't know any more in Germany, who one is."

As in politics, one ducks from clear decisions.

Ambiguity is frustrating

In times of crisis many long for clarity and truth, Father analyzed:

"Ambiguity doesn't convince, rather, it disorients and frustrates."

Because: "We live, also socially and politically, in times of decision: Either -- or."

It is not possible to be simultaneously Catholic, Protestant or even Muslim.

Father Ockenfels expects of the Bishops, that they clearly manifest themselves -- "as opposed to all of the opportunists, who always hope for advantages, when they position themselves as anti-Roman."

Learning from Necessity

Financial wealth, institutional strengthening and public privileges can - as the Father insists - not hide, "the spiritual misery that spreads out behind magnificent church facades."

He sees a remedy in the spreading of Church horizons: "The view of the world church exempt from pettiness and selfishness."

Ockenfels Father stressed that the threats are growing worldwide.

From these times of trial and defense of the faith, he hopes that perhaps this necessity, will teach the faithful to pray and again exhorts them to courageous public witness for the Faith.

Link to original...