Duh, Part Deux
by Thomas A. Droleskey
One can almost always count of the conciliar revolutionaries parodying themselves rather continuously. Despite all of the denials from the organs of the counterfeit church of conciliarism that the overtures made in the name of false ecumenism do not represent acts of indifferentism and that the forbidden practice of inter-religious "prayer services" are not exercises in syncretism, the very words and actions of the conciliar revolutionaries contradict these gratuitous, positivistic denials time and time again. We must remember, of course, that paradox and contradiction are part and parcel of the whole gestalt, if you will, of the New Theology, which is why the conciliar revolutionaries are almost incapable of seeing their multiple contradictions.
As noted on this site three months ago, New Oxford Review, whose editors reject sedevacantism, had a very frank and honest assessment of the contradictions inherent in the writings of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI:
In Cardinal Ratzinger’s Values in a Time of Upheaval, he muddies up his phrase [the dictatorship of relativism]; indeed, he reverses his position. He says, “The modem concept of democracy seems indissolubly linked to that of relativism.” Well, well! But then he backtracks: “This means that a basic element of truth, namely, ethical truth, is indispensable to democracy.” But then he backtracks again: “We do not want the State to impose one particular idea of the good on us. ... Truth is controversial, and the attempt to impose on all persons what one part of the citizenry holds to be true looks like enslavement of people’s consciences.” And he says this on the same page!
Yes, we know: Some of our readers feel that the Pope is above all criticism; he cannot make a mistake, even in his previous writings. But what he has written here is contradictory and inscrutable.
Ratzinger says, “The relativists ...[are] flirting with totalitarianism even though they seek to establish the primacy of freedom ...” Huh?
So, what is he saying? “The State is not itself the source of truth and morality.... Accordingly, the State must receive from outside itself the essential measure of knowledge and truth with regard to that which is good. ... The Church remains outside’ the State. ... The Church must exert itself with all its vigor so that in it there may shine forth moral truth ...”
Then he says, “Conscience is the highest norm [italics in original] and ... and one must follow it even against authority. When authority - in this case the Church’s Magisterium - speaks on matters of morality, it supplies the material that helps the conscience form its own judgment, but ultimately it is only conscience that has the last word.” A Contradictory Definition of Relativism (See also: Cardinal Ratzinger's Subjectivism.)
That is, it is a vain exercise to seek to find clarity of though in the mind of a man who rejects Scholasticism, the official philosophy of the Catholic Church, and who does not realize how many times he contradicts himself and presents the Faith, which is something sure and clear, in the form of one paradox after another.
Pope Saint Pius X noted the contradictory--or "double-minded"--nature of the Modernist in Pascendi Dominic Gregis, September 8, 1907:
This will appear more clearly to anybody who studies the conduct of Modernists, which is in perfect harmony with their teachings. In their writings and addresses they seem not unfrequently to advocate doctrines which are contrary one to the other, so that one would be disposed to regard their attitude as double and doubtful. But this is done deliberately and advisedly, and the reason of it is to be found in their opinion as to the mutual separation of science and faith. Thus in their books one finds some things which might well be approved by a Catholic, but on turning over the page one is confronted by other things which might well have been dictated by a rationalist. When they write history they make no mention of the divinity of Christ, but when they are in the pulpit they profess it clearly; again, when they are dealing with history they take no account of the Fathers and the Councils, but when they catechize the people, they cite them respectfully. In the same way they draw their distinctions between exegesis which is theological and pastoral and exegesis which is scientific and historical. So, too, when they treat of philosophy, history, and criticism, acting on the principle that science in no way depends upon faith, they feel no especial horror in treading in the footsteps of Luther and are wont to display a manifold contempt for Catholic doctrines, for the Holy Fathers, for the Ecumenical Councils, for the ecclesiastical magisterium; and should they be taken to task for this, they complain that they are being deprived of their liberty. Lastly, maintaining the theory that faith must be subject to science, they continuously and openly rebuke the Church on the ground that she resolutely refuses to submit and accommodate her dogmas to the opinions of philosophy; while they, on their side, having for this purpose blotted out the old theology, endeavor to introduce a new theology which shall support the aberrations of philosophers.
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI displays his complete contempt for the magisterium of the Catholic Church by speaking in ways that demonstrate his apostate mind and heart. He thinks of nothing to contradict true popes while he contradicts his own conciliar church's denials that anything of substance has ever been contradicted.
Consider this Associated Press news report, which was forwarded to me by Mr. James Bendell, who does not accept sedevacantism, on Saturday, July 12, 2008:
ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (AP) - Pope Benedict XVI said Saturday that he is
praying there will not be any more rifts in the Anglican community
following the recent Church of England decision on women bishops.
Answering questions from journalists aboard his flight to Australia,
Benedict touched briefly on the turmoil in the Anglican church.
"I am praying so that there are no more schisms and fractures" within
the Anglican community, Benedict said.
On Monday, the Church of England's ruling body voted its support for women to become bishops. That stance risks causing further division among Anglicans, since traditionalists are opposed to that idea.
The Episcopal Church, the Anglican body in the U.S., is led by a woman, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.
The Anglican Communion, a 77 million-member family of churches that trace their roots to the Church of England, also is wrestling with other contentious issues _ gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex marriages.
Benedict said he did not want to "interfere" in the debate.
Still, the Vatican on Tuesday said the decision by the Church of England to allow women to become bishops will be an obstacle to its reconciliation with the Roman Catholic Church. The Vatican does not permit the ordination of women.
Anglicans split from Rome more than four centuries ago, when English King Henry VIII bolted in 1534 after papal refusal to grant him a marriage annulment.
Catholics and Anglicans have been engaged in talks to overcome theological divisions. (http://www.wtop.com/?nid=105&sid=1439141.)
This is the text of Benedict/Ratzinger's response as found on the Vatican website:
My essential contribution can only be prayer and with my prayers I shall be very close to the Anglican Bishops meeting at the Lambeth Conference. We cannot and must not intervene immediately in their discussions, we respect their responsibilities and what we desire is that new divisions or ruptures may be avoided and a responsible solution found in keeping with our time and also with fidelity to the Gospel. These two things must go hand in hand. Christianity is always contemporary and lives in this world, in a certain period, but it makes Jesus Christ's message present in this period and therefore makes a true contribution to this time only by being faithful in a way that is mature and creative but faithful to Christ's message. Let us hope, and I am personally praying, that together they may find the path of the Gospel in our day. This is my hope for the Archbishop of Canterbury: that the Anglican Communion in communion with the Gospel of Christ and of the Word of the Lord may find responses to the current challenges. ( Interview of Ratzinger/Benedict during the flight to Australia.)
Praying that there are no more "divisions or ruptures" within the Anglican community? Duh, what kind of "prayer" is this for a "pope" to offer? The Anglican"church" has no right to exist. It is a false religion. Ah, the new ecclesiology of "ecclesial communion" teaches us that Protestant "ecclesial communities" have "partial communion" with the Catholic Church, a falsehood that has been dissected very well by His Excellency Bishop Donald A. Sanborn and Father Anthony Cekada, among others (see Bishop Sanborn's The New Ecclesiology: An Overview,
The New Ecclesiology: Documentation,
Ratzinger's Subsistent Error,
Communion: Ratzingers's Ecumenical One-World Church,
Ratzinger's Dominus Jesus: A Critical Analysis and Father Cekada's Ratzinger’s Frankenchurch Heresy sermon from July 15, 2007, fifty-two weeks ago yesterday).
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, has told us, however, that the "structures" and "traditions" of Protestant "ecclesial communities" should be maintained as ways are found to exercise the "Petrine ministry" in a manner evocative of the spirit that he alleges, falsely, it should be noted, of Papal Primacy that existed in the First Millennium. Joseph Ratzinger's respect for the "structures" and "traditions" of these false religions has been demonstrated many times both before and after his "elevation" on April 19, 2005:
As regards Protestantism, the maximum demand of the Catholic Church would be that the Protestant ecclesiological ministers be regarded as totally invalid and that Protestants be converted to Catholicism; the maximum demand of Protestants, on the other hand, would be that the Catholic Church accept, along with the unconditional acknowledgement of all Protestant ministries, the Protestant concept of ministry and their understanding of the Church and thus, in practice, renounce the apostolic and sacramental structure of the Church, which would mean, in practice, the conversion of Catholics to Protestantism and their acceptance of a multiplicity of distinct community structures as the historical form of the Church. While the first three maximum demands are today rather unanimously rejected by Christian consciousness, the fourth exercises a kind of fascination for it – as it were, a certain conclusiveness that makes it appear to be the real solution to the problem. This is all the more true since there is joined to it the expectation that a Parliament of Churches, a "truly ecumenical council’, could then harmonize this pluralism and promote a Christian unity of action. That no real union would result from this, but that its very impossibility would become a single common dogma, should convince anyone who examines the suggestion closely that such a way would not bring Church unity but only a final renunciation of it. As a result, none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity.
As a result, none of the maximum solutions offers any real hope of unity. In any event, church unity is not a political problem that can be solved by means of compromise or the weighing of what is regarded as possible or acceptable. What is at stake here is unity of belief, that is, the question of truth, which cannot be the object of political maneuvering. As long as and to the extent that the maximum solution must be regarded as a requirement of truth itself, just so long and to just that extent there will be no other recourse than simply to strive to convert one's partner in the debate. In other words, the claim of truth ought not to be raised where there is not a compelling and indisputable reason for doing so. We may not interpret as truth that which is, in reality, a historical development with a more or less close relationship to truth. Whenever, then, the weight of truth and its incontrovertibility are involved, they must be met by a corresponding sincerity that avoids laying claim to truth prematurely and is ready to search for the inner fullness of truth with the eyes of love. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 197-198.)
This one passage from Principles of Catholic Theology illustrates Ratzinger's rejection of demanding the unconditional conversion of Protestants to the true Faith, disparaged as a "maximum demand," and his rejection, once again, of the nature of dogmatic truth, the expression of which he sees in terms of an "historical development with a more or less close relationship to truth." No one can find any Father of the Catholic Church who wrote in such a relativistic, positivistic manner. "Close relationship" with truth? No one who is possessed of the sensus Catholicus can justify such a notion as having even a distant "relationship" with the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church for its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.
Nor is it the case that anyone possessed of the sensus Catholicus can justify Ratzinger/Benedict's rejection of the "ecumenism of the return," which forthright rejection was stated very clearly in Cologne, Germany, during the last assembly of Dr. Moreau's Island of Lost Souls known as World Youth Day back in 2005:
We all know there are numerous models of unity and you know that the Catholic Church also has as her goal the full visible unity of the disciples of Christ, as defined by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council in its various Documents (cf. Lumen Gentium, nn. 8, 13; Unitatis Redintegratio, nn. 2, 4, etc.). This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (cf. Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 4); the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world.
On the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one's own faith history. Absolutely not!
It does not mean uniformity in all expressions of theology and spirituality, in liturgical forms and in discipline. Unity in multiplicity, and multiplicity in unity: in my Homily for the Solemnity of Sts Peter and Paul on 29 June last, I insisted that full unity and true catholicity in the original sense of the word go together. As a necessary condition for the achievement of this coexistence, the commitment to unity must be constantly purified and renewed; it must constantly grow and mature. (Benedict XVI, Ecumenical meeting at the Archbishopric of Cologne English, August 19, 2005.)
For Ratzinger/Benedict to be correct, you see, then the following exhortations, made, respectively, by Pope Pius IX and Pope Pius XI, for Protestants and others to return to the true Church, had to be two examples of "historical developments with a more or less close relationship to the truth" rather than the consistent expression of the immutable truth of the Catholic Church:
It is for this reason that so many who do not share “the communion and the truth of the Catholic Church” must make use of the occasion of the Council, by the means of the Catholic Church, which received in Her bosom their ancestors, proposes [further] demonstration of profound unity and of firm vital force; hear the requirements [demands] of her heart, they must engage themselves to leave this state that does not guarantee for them the security of salvation. She does not hesitate to raise to the Lord of mercy most fervent prayers to tear down of the walls of division, to dissipate the haze of errors, and lead them back within holy Mother Church, where their Ancestors found salutary pastures of life; where, in an exclusive way, is conserved and transmitted whole the doctrine of Jesus Christ and wherein is dispensed the mysteries of heavenly grace.
It is therefore by force of the right of Our supreme Apostolic ministry, entrusted to us by the same Christ the Lord, which, having to carry out with [supreme] participation all the duties of the good Shepherd and to follow and embrace with paternal love all the men of the world, we send this Letter of Ours to all the Christians from whom We are separated, with which we exhort them warmly and beseech them with insistence to hasten to return to the one fold of Christ; we desire in fact from the depths of the heart their salvation in Christ Jesus, and we fear having to render an account one day to Him, Our Judge, if, through some possibility, we have not pointed out and prepared the way for them to attain eternal salvation. In all Our prayers and supplications, with thankfulness, day and night we never omit to ask for them, with humble insistence, from the eternal Shepherd of souls the abundance of goods and heavenly graces. And since, if also, we fulfill in the earth the office of vicar, with all our heart we await with open arms the return of the wayward sons to the Catholic Church, in order to receive them with infinite fondness into the house of the Heavenly Father and to enrich them with its inexhaustible treasures. By our greatest wish for the return to the truth and the communion with the Catholic Church, upon which depends not only the salvation of all of them, but above all also of the whole Christian society: the entire world in fact cannot enjoy true peace if it is not of one fold and one shepherd. (Pope Pius IX, Iam Vos Omnes, September 13, 1868.)
So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. . . .
Let, therefore, the separated children draw nigh to the Apostolic See, set up in the City which Peter and Paul, the Princes of the Apostles, consecrated by their blood; to that See, We repeat, which is "the root and womb whence the Church of God springs," not with the intention and the hope that "the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" will cast aside the integrity of the faith and tolerate their errors, but, on the contrary, that they themselves submit to its teaching and government. Would that it were Our happy lot to do that which so many of Our predecessors could not, to embrace with fatherly affection those children, whose unhappy separation from Us We now bewail. Would that God our Savior, "Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth," would hear us when We humbly beg that He would deign to recall all who stray to the unity of the Church! In this most important undertaking We ask and wish that others should ask the prayers of Blessed Mary the Virgin, Mother of divine grace, victorious over all heresies and Help of Christians, that She may implore for Us the speedy coming of the much hoped-for day, when all men shall hear the voice of Her divine Son, and shall be "careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
Oh, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI will accept those Anglo-Catholics in the Anglican "church" who might desire to leave their false church and being, no matter how unwittingly, the members of another false church, the counterfeit church of conciliarism, which they believe to be the Catholic Church. Such "conversions," however, will be accepted only because it is the choice of those Anglo-Catholics to find a more more agreeable ecclesiastical situation, not because the conciliar authorities believe that there is any urgent necessity for all Anglicans to convert en masse to the Catholic Church before they die. If the conciliar authorities possessed such a belief, of course, then Ratzinger/Benedict would not be praying for "no more schisms and fractures within the Anglican community." He believes the Anglicans are just where they are, placing himself in direct contradistinction to Pope Pius IX, who exhorted Protestants with insistency to "leave this state that does not guarantee for them the security of salvation."
As noted two days ago in Any Day Now, the Anglicans who might convert to the "counterfeit church of conciliarism" will be doing so reluctantly after having tried to work "within the structures" of their own false "church," not because they are convinced that the Catholic Church is the one and only true Church founded by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope. The current crop of "High Anglicans" is not seeking to imitate the late Father Frederick Faber or the late John Henry Cardinal Newman or the late Henry Edward Cardinal Manning or the late Gilbert Keith Chesterton, each of whom converted because they were convinced that the Catholic Church was the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation. The current crop of "High Anglicans" is simply seeking a refuge from "liberal" Anglicanism without realizing that "liberal" Anglicanism is but the logical result of Anglicanism. And these "High Anglicans" will find upon "converting" to the counterfeit church of conciliarism that they have merely transferred allegiances from one part of the One World Church to another.
The aforementioned Mr. James Bendell, an attorney based in the State of Washington, responded to the absurdity of Ratzinger/Benedict's comments quoted above with one of his typically superb parodies:
Later in the day, the Pope reflected on the similarly tragic breakup of
the comedy team of Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis, as well as the often
fractious relationship between the Three Stooges.
This is nothing other than "duh, part deux!"
We must continue to pray our Rosaries of reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as Our Lady requested in the Cova da Iria in Fatima, offering whatever merits we earn for their prayerful recitation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, saying frequently,
"O Jesus, it is for love of You, for the conversion of sinners, and in reparation for the sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary," as Our Lady herself requested of Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos Santos ninety-one years ago yesterday, July 13, 1917.
Sure, the conciliarists have many sins for which to make reparation? So do we, right? Believe me, the recordings of the Sunday sermons of Saint Alphonsus de Liguori that I have been doing in the past few days have reminded me of the huge, huge debt that I owe God for my own past sins. God's ineffable Mercy keeps us alive long enough so that we might make reparation for our sins here on the face of this earth as members of the Church Militant. May it thus be our privilege to pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit and to offer up our voluntary penances and mortifications and self-denials as endure whatever sufferings and trials and rejections and calumnies and humiliations that God sends us as coming from His very hand and fashioned for us perfectly from all eternity to be the means by which we can give Him honor and glory as we make reparation to His Most Sacred Heart through His Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. We might be able to plant a few seeds for the conversion of the conciliar revolutionaries themselves if we really have confidence in the promises of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and in Heaven's Peace Plan that is devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
We have work to do as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. What are we waiting for?
Viva Cristo Rey!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.