Jesus was troubled in his spirit, and testified, “Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” 22The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he spoke. 23One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was reclining at table at Jesus' side,5 24so Simon Peter motioned to him to ask Jesus6 of whom he was speaking. 25So that disciple, leaning back against Jesus, said to him, “Lord, who is it?” 26Jesus answered, “It is he to whom I will give this morsel of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. 27Then after he had taken the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly."
Here we see our Lord allow evil so His glory may be revealed - are we not also now seeing many Catholics confronted with stark abandonment such they too cannot deny the fruits from this rotten tree. And by those who align with it.
A la the covid years much is being revealed to those w eyes to see.
Support a parish and pastor who reject this new betrayal with an immediate goal of survival, in time maybe quickly the disorder in this edict will become clear.
May the Lord's Peace and Joy rest with you Prof Farrow and your supporters over this Holiday Christmas Season.
The declaration of the Disastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (yes, Disastery) promised no clarifications. Today, in a five page press release, its prefect provided none, except that an informal blessing should be 15 seconds or less. Wickedly funny, that. I expect he knows of places (as I do) where the whole Mass is said in about 15 seconds.
But to illustrate the non-clarifying clarification, I offer his own illustration of a 'spontaneous' blessing: “Lord, look at these children of yours, grant them health, work, peace, and mutual help. Free them from everything that contradicts your Gospel and allow them to live according to your will. Amen.” The first part sounds a lot like the sort of blessing a married couple might seek. The latter part can be read with fr James Martin as easily as with Cardinal Müller.
From Rod Dreher, at the end of a long but fascinating post: "Do you see now why blessing same-sex couples is symbolically so important, and why whatever rhetorical finesse the Vatican puts on it (e.g., “the Church isn’t actually changing its teaching”) is effectively meaningless? Rome can make whatever theological distinctions it wants to on paper, but the image of a same-sex couple standing in front of the altar, receiving the blessing of a priest, conveys a deeper symbolic truth. If this practice becomes normalized, within a few years, most Catholics will not understand why their Church won’t allow gays and lesbians to marry. You cannot convince me that the “here comes everybody, no matter what” approach to the Eucharist over the last fifty years has nothing to do with the fact that only a minority of American Catholics believe in the Real Presence." https://roddreher.substack.com/p/st-petroc-returns-to-devonshire
"You cannot convince me that the “here comes everybody, no matter what” approach to the Eucharist over the last fifty years has nothing to do with the fact that only a minority of American Catholics believe in the Real Presence."
Yes! And more broadly, a generalized loss of the sense of God. How ironic that Pope St Pius X was the one who unwittingly wheeled that trojan horse (the banalization of frequent communion) into the Church. Fiducia supplicans is deeply rooted in the Church's current "come one, come all" official theology of Holy/Sacrilegious Communion.
The end being to make blessings meaningless, the cancelation of the religious significance. The goal being the making of a new religion a new world religion made in the image of man, without God.
What I find interesting is Hegelian philosophy is the favourite of Pope Francis. The very same philosophy seems to be part and parcel of Woke ideology. It is the “constant evolution” redefining concept. The idea that one must identity to evolve into a advanced or more “authentic” human or person. CRT has done a great job of convincing society and university establishments of this. By deposing biblical identity for woke identity people are believing that we are on the cusp of some nouveau era of “being and doing anything”. Where in reality as scripture states: “there is nothing new under the sun” Ecclesiastes 1:9
And what is to stop the state in Canada from persecuting and throwing priests in jail for refusing to bless homosexual "couples?" Now that the pope has said it's O.K., the state will say "the pope said." This happened with the vaccine mandates when certain universities, for example, would not give religious exemptions: the reason being from one particular university, I know of, was that the pope had told everyone to get the Covid 19 vaccine; Catholics who said they didn't want to use the vaccine because its development used aborted baby tissue, had no grounds to stand on.
Pope Francis' Declaration is double speak. Priests who understand what this is really about, an attack on marriage and the family, an endorsement of sexual depravity, an effort to break down the mind's understanding of what is right and wrong, will not bless adulterous couples, nor homosexual couples.
You make a good point: This pope, if he thinks about the ramifications, whether for the priests or for the faithful, is not thinking as a pope ought to think. In the present case, however, since the declaration insists that blessings must be of the 'spontaneous' and not the liturgical kind, and that they do not entail approval or disapproval of relationships and behaviour, the legal ramifications are few if any. Moreover, how exactly one is to 'implement' a call for 'spontaneity' is a bit of a puzzle!
He seems to be daring "theologians and canonists" at least; thus Roberto de Mattei at https://www.patreon.com/posts/95217084. Personally, I thought (and said to some fellow theologians) that he was doing so the moment he appointed Fernandez.
Catholics critical of Francis on ssm nevertheless still can't release their clutch of president warp speed, whose "prolife" pose was countersigned by the avowal of obergefell as "settled law". *Despite* the gop platform giving him every basis to stick to omow.
Speak for yourself. This Catholic once supported that man but [1] his public embrace of the sodomite banner and [2] his refusal to drop support for worthless and dangerous fake vaccines convinced me to vote for him only as the lesser of two evils and, even then, sans lui
donner encore de l'argent. Unlike most in the Democrat Party and too many in the GOP, most of Trump's supporters do know how to change their minds on the basis of experience.
Jesus was troubled in his spirit, and testified, “Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” 22The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he spoke. 23One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was reclining at table at Jesus' side,5 24so Simon Peter motioned to him to ask Jesus6 of whom he was speaking. 25So that disciple, leaning back against Jesus, said to him, “Lord, who is it?” 26Jesus answered, “It is he to whom I will give this morsel of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. 27Then after he had taken the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly."
Here we see our Lord allow evil so His glory may be revealed - are we not also now seeing many Catholics confronted with stark abandonment such they too cannot deny the fruits from this rotten tree. And by those who align with it.
A la the covid years much is being revealed to those w eyes to see.
Support a parish and pastor who reject this new betrayal with an immediate goal of survival, in time maybe quickly the disorder in this edict will become clear.
May the Lord's Peace and Joy rest with you Prof Farrow and your supporters over this Holiday Christmas Season.
DT
The declaration of the Disastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (yes, Disastery) promised no clarifications. Today, in a five page press release, its prefect provided none, except that an informal blessing should be 15 seconds or less. Wickedly funny, that. I expect he knows of places (as I do) where the whole Mass is said in about 15 seconds.
But to illustrate the non-clarifying clarification, I offer his own illustration of a 'spontaneous' blessing: “Lord, look at these children of yours, grant them health, work, peace, and mutual help. Free them from everything that contradicts your Gospel and allow them to live according to your will. Amen.” The first part sounds a lot like the sort of blessing a married couple might seek. The latter part can be read with fr James Martin as easily as with Cardinal Müller.
From Rod Dreher, at the end of a long but fascinating post: "Do you see now why blessing same-sex couples is symbolically so important, and why whatever rhetorical finesse the Vatican puts on it (e.g., “the Church isn’t actually changing its teaching”) is effectively meaningless? Rome can make whatever theological distinctions it wants to on paper, but the image of a same-sex couple standing in front of the altar, receiving the blessing of a priest, conveys a deeper symbolic truth. If this practice becomes normalized, within a few years, most Catholics will not understand why their Church won’t allow gays and lesbians to marry. You cannot convince me that the “here comes everybody, no matter what” approach to the Eucharist over the last fifty years has nothing to do with the fact that only a minority of American Catholics believe in the Real Presence." https://roddreher.substack.com/p/st-petroc-returns-to-devonshire
A critical analysis of the press release is supplied by John Finnis, Robert George, and fr Peter Ryan at https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2024/01/the-church-sows-more-confusion-about-same-sex-blessings
"You cannot convince me that the “here comes everybody, no matter what” approach to the Eucharist over the last fifty years has nothing to do with the fact that only a minority of American Catholics believe in the Real Presence."
Yes! And more broadly, a generalized loss of the sense of God. How ironic that Pope St Pius X was the one who unwittingly wheeled that trojan horse (the banalization of frequent communion) into the Church. Fiducia supplicans is deeply rooted in the Church's current "come one, come all" official theology of Holy/Sacrilegious Communion.
The end being to make blessings meaningless, the cancelation of the religious significance. The goal being the making of a new religion a new world religion made in the image of man, without God.
What I find interesting is Hegelian philosophy is the favourite of Pope Francis. The very same philosophy seems to be part and parcel of Woke ideology. It is the “constant evolution” redefining concept. The idea that one must identity to evolve into a advanced or more “authentic” human or person. CRT has done a great job of convincing society and university establishments of this. By deposing biblical identity for woke identity people are believing that we are on the cusp of some nouveau era of “being and doing anything”. Where in reality as scripture states: “there is nothing new under the sun” Ecclesiastes 1:9
Thank you, Dr. Farrow, for this article. Pope Francis has put priests in a horrible position: they are the ones on the ground who have to deal with this fallout from the Declaration, and stand up to the tyranny. Archbishop Michael Miller of Vancouver says his diocese will be looking at how to implement the declaration! See: https://bccatholic.ca/news/catholic-van/same-sex-blessings-are-about-welcoming-not-changing-church-teaching-bishops-say
And what is to stop the state in Canada from persecuting and throwing priests in jail for refusing to bless homosexual "couples?" Now that the pope has said it's O.K., the state will say "the pope said." This happened with the vaccine mandates when certain universities, for example, would not give religious exemptions: the reason being from one particular university, I know of, was that the pope had told everyone to get the Covid 19 vaccine; Catholics who said they didn't want to use the vaccine because its development used aborted baby tissue, had no grounds to stand on.
Pope Francis' Declaration is double speak. Priests who understand what this is really about, an attack on marriage and the family, an endorsement of sexual depravity, an effort to break down the mind's understanding of what is right and wrong, will not bless adulterous couples, nor homosexual couples.
You make a good point: This pope, if he thinks about the ramifications, whether for the priests or for the faithful, is not thinking as a pope ought to think. In the present case, however, since the declaration insists that blessings must be of the 'spontaneous' and not the liturgical kind, and that they do not entail approval or disapproval of relationships and behaviour, the legal ramifications are few if any. Moreover, how exactly one is to 'implement' a call for 'spontaneity' is a bit of a puzzle!
Another very thoughtful essay. It seems almost as if the Pope is daring God to act with Fiducia Supplicans.
He seems to be daring "theologians and canonists" at least; thus Roberto de Mattei at https://www.patreon.com/posts/95217084. Personally, I thought (and said to some fellow theologians) that he was doing so the moment he appointed Fernandez.
We are living through a crucible together!
Pure Evil
Catholics critical of Francis on ssm nevertheless still can't release their clutch of president warp speed, whose "prolife" pose was countersigned by the avowal of obergefell as "settled law". *Despite* the gop platform giving him every basis to stick to omow.
Speak for yourself. This Catholic once supported that man but [1] his public embrace of the sodomite banner and [2] his refusal to drop support for worthless and dangerous fake vaccines convinced me to vote for him only as the lesser of two evils and, even then, sans lui
donner encore de l'argent. Unlike most in the Democrat Party and too many in the GOP, most of Trump's supporters do know how to change their minds on the basis of experience.
Based on your premises, I do seem to be speaking for you.