Tag Archives: Full Modernist

Did the Modernists just get a nasty surprise?

8 APRIL UPDATE – It would appear that the answer posed in this article’s title may well be “no.”  We’re hearing now that Pope Francis** is setting in motion yet another “commission” to study the question of female deacons.  The good news from the Vatican just never ends, does it?  Who knows where this will go, but in the meantime it seems purposely designed to keep the “churn” and general rate of chaos high among the Faithful.  The Trads are getting their chains yanked, regular Novie Catholics are getting their chains yanked, and maybe even the Modernists are getting their chain yanked.  What is the purpose of all this?  Seems like classic Peronista tactics, which I guess shouldn’t be surprising this many years into this pontificate.  

We simply must keep praying for our Church, for our Pope (whether or not he considers himself the Vicar of Christ) and that Our Lady will soon clean house in this troubled, chaotic and pretty messed up human component of the Body of Christ.

Oremus!


** Formerly known by the very accurate title “Vicar of Christ.”  You may have heard that this august title has fallen out of favor with the former Cdl. Bergolio.  The term has been relegated to a historical footnote in the current edition of the Vatican Yearbook.

Original (prematurely optimistic) article:

Today–12 February 2020–is the day the much anticipated/dreaded Papal document on the Amazon Synod came out.  We were all bracing for the worst sort of news when it came to married priests and lady jungle deaconesses, but instead the document says something rather different.

Here is the text of tweet made by EWTN’s Raymond  Arroyo:

The Pope’s final Amazon document is a shock and a wakeup call to progressives who have sought “revolutionary” change in the Church. Pope Francis has reaffirmed the tradition of ordaining celibate men, and ruled out ordaining women. Expect a ferocious response.

Does that mean we’re out of the woods?  Probably not.  As many online commentators–each with much deeper thought processes and way larger numbers of followers–have been warning, the whole idea of adding married priests and/or female deacons into the post-Vatican II Church was never the objective.  Rather, the goal was to move the Catholic Church in ever closer alignment with the secularist goals of the UN and the likes of Jeffery Sachs, George Soros, and of course little Greta.  The climate and environment are the real threats to mankind, and globalism is the only solution.  The salvation of our souls and the methodologies used to obtain said salvation is a back-burner issue.  And I’m afraid that while the current (and let us not forget temporary) leadership in Rome works ever harder to make the Church the UN’s favorite NGO, the issues of married priests, lady deacons, and eventually full-on priestesses is far from settled.

Still, isn’t it delightful to think how disappointed all the Modernists are at this moment? All of the coquettish hinting that the door was open for massive new changes and innovations to the priesthood.  Oh, how they must have been anticipating it!

This pope is a master of weaponized ambiguity, and no mistake.  Most of that ambiguity has worked to the advantage of the Modernists (think Amoris Laetitia).  Each odd little statement he makes at an audience or airplane presser is like a little hand grenade of weaponized ambiguity tossed into the foxholes of Faithful Catholics with devastating effect.  You “progressive” theologians, priests, bishops and laity have loved lobbing those grenades at us.  But every now and again, one of those ambiguous hand grenades might just blow up in your own face.

 

 

 

Have the Bishops gone “Full Modernist”???

Take a close look at this “O-Antiphon” tweet by the USCCB from Wednesday, 18 December.  Do you see any symbology which looks a little…well…Masonic?

And, yes, I do know that the eye within the triangle, the “All-Seeing Eye of God” has a Catholic history.  You can see it displayed in the artwork of old churches and manuscripts.  But for the last several hundred years, it has been co-opted by the Lodge as a distinctly Masonic symbol.  As such, it has gained a fair degree of toxicity. It’s no different than the rainbow.  What was once thought of as the universal sign of God’s pledge never again to destroy the world with water, it has now become the universal sign of something rather different, hasn’t it?  So it is with this symbol.

The question begs itself:  was this simply a slip-up by the poor seminarian whose collateral duty it is to pretend he’s tweeting on behalf of all the bishops in the USCCB?  Or was the symbology fully understood ahead of time.

Has the USCCB, in fact, gone “full Modernist?”