Epochal History: Faithful Deliver Charge of Heresy against Francis, Bishop of Rome

Epochal History: Faithful Deliver Charge of Heresy against Francis, Bishop of Rome

September 25, 2017
Posted by Tantumblogo

I’m sure all readers are already well aware of the unprecedented submittal to Pope Francis of a letter of Filial Correction against heresy from several dozen people, clerical and lay, this past weekend. I say the letter is unprecedented, because while, once, in the long history of the Church, a living pope has been formally corrected by his subordinates on a matter related to faith or morals, that was on one, very specific, and rather detailed, matter. The correction of John XXII (and thus it was 645 years before that name was taken by a sovereign pontiff again, and isn’t THAT revealing) had to deal with whether the saints in Heaven partake of the Beatific Vision at death, or only at the last judgment (John XXII erroneously believed the latter). This was not heavy, vital to the every day life of the Church kind of stuff.

No, the matter with Francis is entirely different. He is accused of promoting errors which, if allowed to stand and metastasize as they inevitably must, will, with shocking speed, result in the destruction of the entire moral edifice of the Faith. Francis intends a revolution so radical that, as his closest allies contend, no roll back will be possible. He intends to change how the Church believes and practices, root and branch. That some people still do not see this, still refuse to see this, shows just how deeply the papalotry has become.

Several specific errors were challenged in the letter called Correctio Filialis. I will not go into those in detail, but they all revolve around the entirely novel, and erroneous, contentions put forward in Amoris Laetitia that people in the manifest state of mortal sin through adultery (aka attempted bigamy) may receive the Blessed Sacrament as if they were in the state of grace. That this destructive proposition is Francis’ intent with the document is amply supported by his direct intervention with two episcopal conferences -those of Argentina and Malta – directing them, when asked whether to implement Amoris Laetitia (AL) in line with the constant belief and practice of the Faith – that is, to continue denying the Blessed Sacrament to public adulterers – or to allow these adulterers to receive, as they read AL to mean, Francis both times answered that the adulterers were to be allowed to receive. Thus Henry VIII becomes a “saint” in the new church of Francis?

The authors of the correction further note that Francis, in AL and in many other regards, appears to operate under the influence of two condemned heresies – modernism and Lutheranism. This is, from all the available evidence, an extremely difficult accusation for Francis to disprove, as are the detailed points of accusation regarding AL.

So, Francis has chosen to respond as he usually does to those questioning his authority and his doctrinal integrity, with personal silence (for over a month since the letter was first delivered) and an orchestrated campaign of character assassination by his allies, within and without the Church, against his “enemies” (enemies who are striving with great might to inspire him to convert and, almost certainly, save his soul). However, that campaign is being conducted, thus far, almost entirely by “inside baseball” publications, websites, and social media networks. The leftist state media have chosen to almost wholly embargo this massively important development, the first time a reigning Bishop of Rome has been formally accused of error amounting to heresy in nearly 700 years (actually, that was the case until just an hour or two ago, when a rash of articles appeared). Time will tell how this will play out, but, so far, the media is largely presenting this correction as coming from a kooky fringe, invoking quotes from the usual sources, but never, in the slightest, actually attempting to argue against what the letter of correction actually claims.

A further note regarding the letter of correction: it is claimed that no (save one) bishops or cardinals signed the letter of correction because they were not asked. That would be a fine and possibly sensible response, but why, then, did Bishop Fellay sign? He was invited to sign, but no others were? The first line of attack by the leftists against this correction is that it comes from a tiny element with no influence in the Church and no support from any bishops or cardinals – to this absence may lessen its influence. Similarly interesting – one might say concerning, even frustrating – to me, was the fact that no priests of the Fraternity of St. Peter signed. I know that this is an extremely difficult issue for the, the Fraternity’s very founding was based at least in part on a perceived need to be “more” obedient or submissive to the Holy See than those in the SSPX, but I also know there are a number of priests in the SSPX who are as aghast at and opposed to the errors emanating from this pontificate as anyone. Perhaps no one in the FSSP was asked, then, either. Some diocesan priests were, as were a number of theologians. Good on you, Philip Blosser. I pray this doesn’t cost you your job at Sacred Heart seminary in Detroit.

I pray we will see many more signatories in the days to come (In fact, we have. The wonderful Bishop Emeritus Rene Gracida of Corpus Christi has signed. This is a great credit to this steadfast bishop and friend of Tradition, but it does also indicate that, while bishops perhaps were not asked in advance to sign the Correctio, basically none so far have volunteered to do so). I know of at least one wonderful, traditional priest who has submitted his name for inclusion. I pray some bishops do wind up signing, but I’m sure the vast majority will sit tight and see which way the wind blows. True heirs of St. Paul. Not.

The question is being asked by some: is this a big deal? Will this have any real effect? The answer to the former is, yes, it is a YUGE deal for all kinds of reasons. It is huge historically. It is huge doctrinally and ecclesiastically. It is hugely significant as a sign of formal, PUBLIC resistance to the revolutionary leftist agenda in the Church, something that was notably absent during the first outbreak of full-on revolution in the period 1958-78. Thousands of people attempted private interventions with Pope Paul VI, and hundreds or thousands have done so with Francis, but these private interventions have had no effect. Cardinals have publicly questioned the pope’s doctrine – the next step was for a group of laity to do so in an even more detailed manner. If there is no adequate response or change in behavior, the step after this is, given Francis’ response to the Dubia and his seeming total resistance to the effect of prayer and sacrifice on the part of so many, for cardinals to move from question to accusation (probably using this Correctio Filialis for support), and from accusation to judgment. I am certain Cardinal Burke is striving to find collaborators in this process right now, and I pray he has the health and faith to continue on with formal opposition to Francischurch. To the extent he succeeds or fails will determine whether this interim step of filial correction will have any real effect on the life of the Church.

And that, I think, will very much depend on priests but, particularly, bishops and cardinals to be willing to man up and add their name to the Correctio. However, recent history, where over a thousand priests worldwide publicly proclaimed that they would not administer the Blessed Sacrament in accordance with Amoral Laetitia had no apparent effect on Francis, does not make me sanguine at the possibilities. Furthermore, I doubt a single further American bishop signs, and I will be surprised if more than a handful worldwide do. Perhaps there will be several hundred priests sign, but that is unlikely to have much effect.

It is opposition from bishops that is most key. We’re 4 1/2 years into this pontificate, with Francis’ appointments growing always in numbers, and there has yet to have been any significant public opposition from the episcopate to Francis and his revolution. Even privately, during the sin-nods, opposition was wholly insufficient (it should have been practically unanimous). I am not certain what we as laity can do to inspire bishops to start defending the Faith (for some, for the first time in their lives) beyond always trying to increase prayer and sacrifice. I’m all for cutting off funds in a very public and concerted way, but tying cutting off the local bishop to lack of opposition to Francis would be a really far stretch for a lot of people.

There are some easy things you can do, right now, to witness to your own appreciation of the Faith, to indicate your solidarity with the Correctio, and to hopefully inspire more priests and some bishops to do the same: you can sign the petition supporting the Correctio here. You can follow who has signed the letter at this site here.

Beyond that, I think far more Catholics need to start publicly voicing their opposition to Francis and his pontificate. Refusing to give to Peter’s Pence is one thing, but getting active on social media or out in the real world with activities to support and defend the Faith while politely noting opposition to the revolutionary direction emanating from Rome is something more people should consider getting behind – and I don’t mean just leaving comments on blogs like this one. Heck, start your own. Send a polite letter to your bishop. Ask your priest to unequivocally address this crisis – at our local parish, little has been said of late, sadly.

Make your own suggestions in the comments. I have spent much of the afternoon on this post and I’m out of time. Man do I love Bishop Gracida, though. Since our local ordinaries have never seen fit to offer Confirmation at our TLM parish, maybe we should extend an invitation to Bishop Gracida? I have no idea if he would come, but he’s a rock and deserves our support, prayers, and love, as do all those who are willing to take the most uncomfortable step, for any Catholic, of accusing their very father, their spiritual father, of error amounting to the horror of heresy. What a tragic time we live in.

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2017/09/25/epochal-history-faithful-deliver-charge-of-heresy-against-francis-bishop-of-rome/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

Leave a Reply