Whittling Away At The Last Catholic Bastion
by Thomas A. Droleskey
As we have completed a very long drive prior to my neurological visit today, necessity compels the writing of a a very, very short article, prompted not by anything Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has said in the past few days but by an article in The New York Times on Sunday, February 17, 2013, that provided a very facile review of the doctrine of Papal Infallibility in light of what happens to the words of a man who is believed to have resigned from the papacy. The article posed the question as to who a man could be infallible at one moment and then not the next.
The question posed in The New York Times article is, in reality, purely academic as none of the conciliar "popes" have been true and legitimate Successors of Saint Peter. Far from having possessed infallibility in their respective tenures as usurpers of the Papal Throne, Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII, Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, Albino Luciani/John Paul I, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI have been propagators of one heresy and falsehood after another, blaspheming the true God of Divine Revelation gravely while they have driven out untold millions of Catholics into the waiting arms of various Protestant and sects or simply rank unbelief. In a theoretical sense, of course, the answer to question as to the infallibility of a resigned pontiff is simple. A true Successor of Saint Peter who resigns voluntarily no longer exercises the visible headship of the true Church of Christ on earth and, as such, is no longer the chief teacher and ultimate spiritual governor of every human being on the face of this earth and the master of civil leaders in all that pertains to the good of souls.
The article in The New York Times did, however, discuss the widely held belief among conciliar theologians that Ratzinger/Benedict's resignation is meant to serve as something as a precedent so as to more or less bind his "successors" into doing so. Indeed, the following was written on this site a few days ago:
Moreover, as noted two days ago in Mister Asteroid Is Looking Pretty Good Right About Now,
Ratzinger/Benedict's resignation sets what will be considered as a
mandatory precedent for all future executive directors of the Occupy
Vatican Movement. And if God does not intervene to put an end the
chastisement represented by the apostasies, blasphemies and sacrileges
of conciliarism, the "papal" resignation might even lead to calls for
"papal" "term limits" and for "re-election" by the conciliar college of
colleges over four or eight years. After all, wouldn't this be in line
with the "episcopal collegiality" that false "pontiff" praised yesterday
as he termed this deviation from the Holy Faith to be an essential part
of his new ecclesiology? (Living In Fantasyland To The Very End, part one.)
Ratzinger/Benedict has long desired to "reform" what he refers to as the "Petrine ministry" along the lines of how he believes the papacy functioned in the First Millennium. He wrote the following in Principles of Catholic Theology thirty-one years ago now:
After all, Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, in the same bull in which
he excommunicated the Patriarch Michael Cerularius and thus inaugurated
the schism between East and West, designated the Emperor and the people
of Constantinople as "very Christian and orthodox", although their
concept of the Roman primary was certainly far less different from that
of Cerularius than from that, let us say, of the First Vatican Council. In
other words, Rome must not require more from the East with respect to
the doctrine of primacy than had been formulated and was lived in the
first millennium. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 198-199)
Perhaps inspired by his handpicked prefect of the so-called Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II became the first conciliar "pope" to speak of a "rethinking" of the "Petrine Ministry" after over twenty years of little "papal" acts that whittled away at the notion of the papacy as a monarchy (the taking off the Papal Tiara by Montini/Paul VI, who also genuflected before Athenagoras, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople; "episcopal collegiality" as envisioned by the "Second" Vatican Council and practiced by the conciliar "popes;" Luciani/John Paul I's "installation" service as opposed to a coronation; endless acts of "papal" inferiority when visiting Talmudic synagogues and Mohammedan mosques and Protestant churches; Ratzinger/Benedict's removal of the tiara from his "papal" coat of arms, replacing it with a mitre). Wojtyla/John Paul II wrote the following in Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995, a heretical document that is the antithesis of Pope Pius XI's Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928:
Whatever relates to the unity of all Christian
communities clearly forms part of the concerns of the primacy. As Bishop
of Rome I am fully aware, as I have reaffirmed in the present
Encyclical Letter, that Christ ardently desires the full and visible
communion of all those Communities in which, by virtue of God's
faithfulness, his Spirit dwells. I am convinced that I have a particular
responsibility in this regard, above all in acknowledging the
ecumenical aspirations of the majority of the Christian Communities and
in heeding the request made of me to find a way of exercising the
primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its
mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation. For a whole millennium
Christians were united in "a brotherly fraternal communion of faith and
sacramental life ... If disagreements in belief and discipline arose
among them, the Roman See acted by common consent as moderator".
In this way the primacy exercised its
office of unity. When addressing the Ecumenical Patriarch His Holiness
Dimitrios I, I acknowledged my awareness that "for a great variety of
reasons, and against the will of all concerned, what should have been a
service sometimes manifested itself in a very different light. But ...
it is out of a desire to obey the will of Christ truly that I recognize
that as Bishop of Rome I am called to exercise that ministry ... I
insistently pray the Holy Spirit to shine his light upon us,
enlightening all the Pastors and theologians of our Churches, that we
may seek—together, of course—the forms in which this ministry may
accomplish a service of love recognized by all concerned".
This is an immense task, which we cannot
refuse and which I cannot carry out by myself. Could not the real but
imperfect communion existing between us persuade Church leaders and
their theologians to engage with me in a patient and fraternal dialogue
on this subject, a dialogue in which, leaving useless controversies
behind, we could listen to one another, keeping before us only the will
of Christ for his Church and allowing ourselves to be deeply moved by
his plea "that they may all be one ... so that the world may believe
that you have sent me" (Jn 17:21)? (Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995.)
Leaving aside all of the references to "imperfect communion" that have been discussed on this site before and was assessed years ago by Bishop Donald Sanborn in Communion: Ratzingers's Ecumenical One-World Church, none can see a close connection between Wojtyla/John Paul II's revisionist history about how the papacy functioned in the First Millennium and that of the then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Cardinal" Ratzinger.
This revisionist history and heretical view of Papal Primary was also reiterated by the "unofficial" Ravenna Document on October 13, 2007, a document that has been cited by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on numerous occasions in the past nearly eight years (so much for the "unofficial" part, huh?):
It remains for the question
of the role of the bishop of Rome in the communion of all the Churches
to be studied in greater depth. What is the specific function of the
bishop of the “first see” in an ecclesiology of koinonia and in view of
what we have said on conciliarity and authority in the present text? How
should the teaching of the first and second Vatican councils on the
universal primacy be understood and lived in the light of the ecclesial
practice of the first millennium? These are crucial questions for our
dialogue and for our hopes of restoring full communion between us.
We, the members of the Joint International
Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic
Church and the Orthodox Church, are convinced that the above statement
on ecclesial communion, conciliarity and authority represents positive
and significant progress in our dialogue, and that it provides a firm
basis for future discussion of the question of primacy at the universal
level in the Church. We are conscious that many difficult questions
remain to be clarified, but we hope that, sustained by the prayer of
Jesus “That they may all be one … so that the world may believe” (Jn 17,
21), and in obedience to the Holy Spirit, we can build upon the
agreement already reached. Reaffirming and confessing “one Lord, one
faith, one baptism” (Eph 4, 5), we give glory to God the Holy Trinity,
Father, Son and Holy Spirit, who has gathered us together. (The Ravenna Document)
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI put his "papal" seal of approval on The Ravenna Document just forty-one days after its issuance on the ninetieth anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal:
This year we thank God in particular for the
meeting of the Joint Commission which took place in Ravenna, a city
whose monuments speak eloquently of the ancient Byzantine heritage
handed down to us from the undivided Church of the first millennium. May
the splendour of those mosaics inspire all the members of the Joint
Commission to pursue their important task with renewed determination, in
fidelity to the Gospel and to Tradition, ever alert to the promptings
of the Holy Spirit in the Church today.
While the meeting in Ravenna was not without its
difficulties, I pray earnestly that these may soon be clarified and
resolved, so that there may be full participation in the Eleventh
Plenary Session and in subsequent initiatives aimed at continuing the
theological dialogue in mutual charity and understanding. Indeed, our
work towards unity is according to the will of Christ our Lord. In these
early years of the third millennium, our efforts are all the more
urgent because of the many challenges facing all Christians, to which we
need to respond with a united voice and with conviction. (Letter
to His Holiness Bartholomaios I, Archbishop of Constantinople,
Ecumenical Patriarch, on the occasion of the feast of St.
Andrew,November 23, 2007.)
So much for the "unofficial" nature of The Ravenna Document.
Walter "Cardinal" Kasper, then the president of the "Pontifical" Council for Promoting Christian Unity, had mouthed the same Modernism in 2002 when he assembled an assembly of the members of the schismatic and heretical Anglican sect in the United Kingdom on May 24, 2003:
It was Pope John Paul II who opened the door to future discussion on this subject. In his encyclical Ut Unum Sint (1995) he extended an invitation to a fraternal dialogue on how
to exercise the Petrine ministry in a way that is more acceptable to
non-Catholic Christians. It was a source of pleasure for us that among
others the Anglican community officially responded to this invitation.
The Pontifical Council for Christian Unity gathered the many responses,
analyzed the data, and sent its conclusions to the churches that had
responded. We hope in this way to have initiated a second phase of a
dialogue that will be decisive for the future of the ecumenical approach.
Nobody could reasonably expect that we could from
the outset reach a phase of consensus; but what we have reached is not
negligible. It has become evident that a new atmosphere and a new
climate exist. In our globalized world situation the biblical
testimonies on Peter and the Petrine tradition of Rome are read
with new eyes because in this new context the question of a ministry of
universal unity, a common reference point and a common voice of the
universal church, becomes urgent. Old polemical formulas stand at odds
with this urgency; fraternal relations have become the norm. Extensive research has been undertaken that has highlighted the
different traditions between East and West already in the first
millennium, and has traced the development in understanding and in
practice of the Petrine ministry throughout the centuries. As
well, the historical conditionality of the dogma of the First Vatican
Council (1869-70), which must be distinguished from its remaining
obligatory content, has become clear. This historical development did
not come to an end with the two Vatican Councils, but goes on, and so
also in the future the Petrine ministry has to be exercised in line with
the changing needs of the Church.
These insights have led to a re-interpretation of the dogma of the Roman primacy.
This does not at all mean that there are still not enormous problems in
terms of what such a ministry of unity should look like, how it should
be administered, whether and to what degree it should have jurisdiction
and whether under certain circumstances it could make infallible
statements in order to guarantee the unity of the Church and at the same
time the legitimate plurality of local churches. But there is at least a
wide consensus about the common central problem, which all churches
have to solve: how the three dimensions, highlighted already by the Lima
documents on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (1982), namely unity
through primacy, collegiality through synodality, and communality of all
the faithful and their spiritual gifts, can be brought into a
convincing synthesis. (A Vision of Christian Unity for the Next Generation.)
One way to effect this "reinterpretation" is to "demythologize" what most people think is the papacy today by an act of "papal" resignation.
As has been noted on this site in the past, however, the Ratzinger-Wojtyla-Kasper contention about how the papacy functioned in the First Millennium in false.
Pope Leo XII explained this very succinctly in Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, June 29, 1894:
First of all, then, We cast an
affectionate look upon the East, from whence in the beginning came forth
the salvation of the world. Yes, and the yearning desire of Our heart
bids us conceive and hope that the day is not far distant when the
Eastern Churches, so illustrious in their ancient faith and glorious
past, will return to the fold they have abandoned. We hope it all the
more, that the distance separating them from Us is not so great: nay,
with some few exceptions, we agree so entirely on other heads that, in
defense of the Catholic Faith, we often have recourse to reasons and
testimony borrowed from the teaching, the Rites, and Customs of the
The Principal subject of contention is the Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. But
let them look back to the early years of their existence, let them
consider the sentiments entertained by their forefathers, and examine
what the oldest Traditions testify, and it will, indeed, become evident
to them that Christ's Divine Utterance, Thou art Peter, and upon this
rock I will build My Church, has undoubtedly been realized in the Roman
Pontiffs. Many of these latter in the first gates of the Church were
chosen from the East, and foremost among them Anacletus, Evaristus,
Anicetus, Eleutherius, Zosimus, and Agatho; and of these a
great number, after Governing the Church in Wisdom and Sanctity,
Consecrated their Ministry with the shedding of their blood. The time,
the reasons, the promoters of the unfortunate division, are well known. Before the day when man separated what God had joined together,
the name of the Apostolic See was held in Reverence by all the nations
of the Christian world: and the East, like the West, agreed without
hesitation in its obedience to the Pontiff of Rome, as the Legitimate
Successor of St. Peter, and, therefore, the Vicar of Christ here on
And, accordingly, if we refer to the beginning of
the dissension, we shall see that Photius himself was careful to send
his advocates to Rome on the matters that concerned him; and Pope
Nicholas I sent his Legates to Constantinople from the Eternal City,
without the slightest opposition, "in order to examine the case of
Ignatius the Patriarch with all diligence, and to bring back to the
Apostolic See a full and accurate report"; so that the history of the
whole negotiation is a manifest Confirmation of the Primacy of the Roman
See with which the dissension then began. Finally, in two great
Councils, the second of Lyons and that of Florence, Latins and Greeks,
as is notorious, easily agreed, and all unanimously proclaimed as Dogma
the Supreme Power of the Roman Pontiffs.
We have recalled those things intentionally, for
they constitute an invitation to peace and reconciliation; and with all
the more reason that in Our own days it would seem as if there were a
more conciliatory spirit towards Catholics on the part of the Eastern
Churches, and even some degree of kindly feeling. To mention an
instance, those sentiments were lately made manifest when some of Our
faithful travelled to the East on a Holy Enterprise, and received so
many proofs of courtesy and good-will.
Therefore, Our mouth is open to
you, to you all of Greek or other Oriental Rites who are separated from
the Catholic Church, We earnestly desire that each and every one of you
should meditate upon the words, so full of gravity and love, addressed
by Bessarion to your forefathers: "What answer shall we give to God when
He comes to ask why we have separated from our Brethren: to Him Who, to
unite us and bring us into One Fold, came down from Heaven, was
Incarnate, and was Crucified? What will our defense be in the eyes of
posterity? Oh, my Venerable Fathers, we must not suffer this to be, we
must not entertain this thought, we must not thus so ill provide for
ourselves and for our Brethren."
Weigh carefully in your minds and before God the nature of Our
request. It is not for any human motive, but impelled by Divine Charity
and a desire for the salvation of all, that We advise the
reconciliation and union with the Church of Rome; and We mean a perfect
and complete union, such as could not subsist in any way if nothing else
was brought about but a certain kind of agreement in the Tenets of
Belief and an intercourse of Fraternal love. The True Union between
Christians is that which Jesus Christ, the Author of the Church,
instituted and desired, and which consists in a Unity of Faith and Unity
Nor is there any reason for you to fear on that account that We
or any of Our Successors will ever diminish your rights, the privileges
of your Patriarchs, or the established Ritual of any one of your
Churches. It has been and always will be the intent and Tradition of
the Apostolic See, to make a large allowance, in all that is right and
good, for the primitive Traditions and special customs of every nation.
On the contrary, if you re-establish Union with Us, you will see how,
by God's bounty, the glory and dignity of your Churches will be
remarkably increased. May God, then, in His goodness, hear the Prayer
that you yourselves address to Him: "Make the schisms of the Churches
cease," and "Assemble those who are dispersed, bring back those who err,
and unite them to Thy Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church." May you
thus return to that one Holy Faith which has been handed down both to Us
and to you from time immemorial; which your forefathers preserved
untainted, and which was enhanced by the rival splendor of the Virtues,
the great genius, and the sublime learning of St. Athanasius and St.
Basil, St. Gregory of Nazianzum and St. John Chrysostom, the two Saints
who bore the name of Cyril, and so many other great men whose glory
belongs as a common inheritance to the East and to the West. (See also
the excellent discussion of the the history of what led up to the Greek
Schism that is contained in Fathers Francisco and Dominic Radecki's Tumultuous Times.)
Hegelian revisionists must deny history and Catholic doctrine both at
the same time in an effort to build yet another story to the One World
Yes, the conciliar "popes" have been whittling away at the last great Catholic bastion that they have sought to raze, a supposedly "triumphalistic" notion of Papal Primacy that does not correspond to the conciliar "orientation" in the direction of collegiality and service as opposed to monarchy and rule.
Pope Saint Pius X warned us about such men in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907:
It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From
all that has preceded, it is abundantly clear how great and how eager
is the passion of such men for innovation. In all Catholicism there is
absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to
be reformed, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They
wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of
philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men
to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the
times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology:
rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and
positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for
history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods
and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to
be harmonized with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are
to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the
capacity of the people. Regarding worship, they say, the number of
external devotions is to be reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent
their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of
symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head. They cry out
that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its
branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments
They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into
harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards
democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be
given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and
authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized The
Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must
be likewise modified The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of
conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside
political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to
penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they
adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are
more important than the passive, and are to be more encouraged in
practice. They ask that the clergy should return to their
primitive humility and poverty, and that in their ideas and action they
should admit the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, gladly
listening to the teaching of their Protestant masters, would desire the
suppression of the celibacy of the clergy. What is there left in the
Church which is not to be reformed by them and according to their
principles? (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907, No. 38)
His "papal" resignation proves once again that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is truly an Anti-Saint Peter and an Anti-Pope Pius X. He is really a figure of Antichrist as Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ does not reign over us "collegially" and "democratically." He reigns over us monarchically as Our King and Judge. Any true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter understands this. That the conciliar "popes" reject it is yet just another sign that they are apostates and committed agents of the adversary, deceiving Catholics and non-Catholics alike that almost every aspect of the Catholic Faith is negotiable except, of course, conciliarism itself and its commitment to the Talmudic agenda.
In the midst of the incredible events unfolding before our very eyes, we must, as always, have recourse to Our Lady as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit and as we keep her company in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and in our time in fervent prayer before her Divine Son's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament if it is all possible to do so in this time of apostasy and betrayal. We must flee from conciliarism and everything to do with it once and for all.
While each person must come to recognize this for himself (it took me long enough to do so; I defended the indefensible for far too long!), we must nevertheless embrace the truth once we do come to recognize and accept it without caring for one moment what anyone else may think about us as we make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. We must pray more, sacrifice more and be willing to suffer more for the cause of the truth, especially during this season of Lent.
We can never grow accustomed to apostasies that can never become acceptable with the passage of time. We can never grow accustomed to offenses given to God by the conciliar "popes" and their conciliar "bishops." We must never accept them quietly.
We must cleave to the Catholic Church, not to the counterfeit church of conciliarism, as we attempt to plant the seeds for the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary as we seek to live more and more penitentially, making reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our own many sins and for those of the whole word.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints