Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Roberto de Mattei: Franciscans of the Immaculata Models in Situation of Liturgical, Theological and Moral Anarchy

(Rome) The measures against the Franciscans of the Immaculate have caused trouble and lively discussions. Katholisches.info is publishing a discussion contribution. The first will be the well-known historian Roberto de Mattei. The March for Life , which was took place with 40,000 participants in Rome in May is largely due to his initiative. On the march, numerous Franciscans of the Immaculate participated, an Order with an apostolate which also includes particularly the defense of unborn life.

The "Causa" Franciscans of the Immaculate

by Roberto de Mattei

The "case" of the Franciscans of the Immaculata is a very serious episode, which is intended to have an effect in the Church that is maybe not anticipated by those who have set about to act imprudently.

The Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life (better known as the Congregation for Religious) by  Rodriguez Carballo OFM has overthrown the General Superior of the Franciscans of the Immaculata, and have handed over leadership to an "Apostolic Commissioner," Father Fidenzio Volpi, Capuchin, with its decree of the 11th of July, 2013, signed by Cardinal Prefect Joao Braz de Aviz and Archbishop Jose Rodriguez Carballo.

In order to "cement" the decree, said Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, it received the approbation ex auditu from Pope Francis, to which the brothers have taken every opportunity to appeal to the Apostolic Signatura. [++Burke] The reasons for this condemnation which has its origin in the instigation of a group of dissident brothers to the religious congregation, remains mysterious. According to the decree from the Congregation and the letter of the new Commissioner of the Franciscans, the only charges appear to be a lack of sentire cum Ecclesia and an excessive attachment to the Traditional Roman Rite.

Injustice Against Franciscans of the Immaculate -- Order Surrendered to Progressive Minority

In reality we are faced with a manifest injustice which is being done to the Franciscans of the Immaculate. The Religious Institute founded by Father Stefano Maria Manelli and Father Gabriele Maria Pellettieri is one of the most flourishing that has been established in the Church, both because of the number of vocations and the authenticity of the spiritual life as well as because of the fidelity to doctrine and to Rome. In the situation of liturgical, theological and moral anarchy in which we find ourselves today, the Franciscans of the Immaculate should serve as a model for religious life. The Pope often refers to the need for a simpler and more spartan religious life.

The Franciscans of the Immaculate distinguish themselves just by the rigor and evangelical poverty in which they live, by their Franciscan charism since its inception. Instead of this, the Congregation of Religious is directing in the name of the Pope, to transfer the General Government of management to a minority of rebellious, progressive brothers, to which the neo-Commissioner will rely upon to "normalize" the Order, or in other words, to lead it into that disaster which it has so far escaped, thanks to its loyalty to Church order and the Magisterium.

Cardinal Aviz: Harshness Against Faithful Franciscans - Understanding Heretical Religious Women

But today the bad is rewarded and the good is punished. It is not surprising that it is the same Cardinal, who is taking action against the Franciscans of the Immaculata with an iron fist, who at the same time pleads understanding and dialogue for the heretical and schismatic American Women Religious. Those nuns preach and practice the gender ideology and therefore naturally a dialog must be maintained with them. The Franciscans of the Immaculate preach and practice chastity, penance, and therefore there should be no sympathy for them. This is the sad conclusion which must force itself upon a sober observer.

One of the charges is to be very attached the traditional Mass. But the accusation is just an excuse, because the Franciscans of the Immaculate namely, as the saying goes, are "bi-ritual", that is, they celebrate both the New and the Old Mass, as permitted them by applicable ecclesiastical laws. Given an unjust command, there are some, as you can imagine, who won't refrain from celebrating the traditional Mass, and they do well at this point to resist, because it is not a gesture of rebellion but of obedience. The indults and privileges in favor of the traditional Mass were not abolished and have greater legal force than the decree of a Congregation and even the intentions of a Pope, if they do not find expression in a definite act.

Cardinal Braz de Aviz seems to ignore the existence of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum of 7 July 2007, its implementing provisions of the instruction Universae Ecclesiae of 30 April 2011 and which is connected to the CDF Commission Ecclesia Dei entering into their areas of competence by the Congregation of Religious.

Tradition is Increasing in Strength: the Main Reason for Hostility

What is the intention of the highest ecclesiastical authority? Abolish Ecclesia Dei and eliminate the Motu proprio of Benedict XVI.? Then can you say it openly, so that the appropriate conclusions can be drawn. And if it is not so, why will a decree be adopted, which is for the Catholic world, which refers to the tradition of the Church, and is only unnecessarily provocative? This world is in a period of great expansion, especially among the youth, and this is perhaps the main cause for the hostility that is beating upon her today.

And finally, the decree constitutes an abuse of power not only against the Franciscans of the Immaculate and those who are wrongly referred to as Traditionalists, but against every Catholic. Namely, it represents a worrying symptom that loss of legal certainty, which is takes place today within the Church.

The Church is a visible society in which the "force of law and the law" applies (Pius XII., In his speech Dans notre souhait 15 July, 1950). The law defines right and wrong and, as the canonists say, "must be justified in the potestas of the Church, and that is the very being of the Church requires that determines the purposes and limits the scope of action of the hierarchy. Not every act of holy shepherds is, simply because it comes from them, correct. "(Carlos J. Errazuriz, Il diritto e la giustizia nella Chiesa, Giuffré, Milano 2008, p 157).

If the legal certainty is lost, the arbitrariness and the will of the stronger gains the upper hand. So it often happens in society, it can also be done in the church, when the human dimension penetrates in it against the supernatural. But if there is no legal certainty, there is no safe rule of conduct. Everything is left to the discretion of the individual or groups of power and the force with which these lobbies are able to impose their will. Separate from the legal force of presumption and arrogance.

Summorum Pontificum has Greater Legal force Than the Decree of a Congregation

The Church, the mystical body of Christ, is a legal device that is based on the divine law, the trustees and not the creator or men, are the men of the Church. The Church is not Soviet, but a building donated by Jesus Christ, in which the power of the pope and the bishops is exercised in accordance with the traditional laws and forms, all rooted in divine revelation. Today we speak of a more equal and democratic Church, but the power is often exercised in violation of the laws and customs of thousands of years in a very selfish way. If universal laws of the Church exist, such as the Bull of St. Pius V, Quo Primum (1570) and the Motu proprio of Benedict XVI. Summorum Pontificum, there is, in order to change them, a legal act of the same rank is necessary. You can not just look at an older law as waived, except with expressed abrogating document of equivalent scope.

Appeal to Francis: Undo Measures - Dramatic hour, New Storms Are Coming On

To defend justice and truth in the Church, we rely on the voices of jurists, among which there are also some eminent Cardinals,who have ordained Franciscans of the Immaculate to the priesthood in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, and know their exemplary life and their apostolic zeal. We appeal especially to Pope Francis, that he may withdraw the action against the Franciscans of the Immaculate and for their lawful use of the Old Roman Rite.

Whatever decision should ever be made, we can not deny that the hour, in the Church lives today, is dramatic. New storms are on the horizon, and these storms will certainly not be conjured up by neither the Brothers or the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate Conception. The love of the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church has always driven and drives us to take their defense. The Mother of God, Virgo Fidelis, will show the right way to the conscience of every individual in this difficult situation.

Text: Corrispondenza Romana

translation: Giuseppe Nardi

Image: Corrispondenza Romana

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

AMGD

75 comments:

  1. "Summorum Pontificum has Greater Legal force Than the Decree of a Congregation"

    Very true

    ReplyDelete
  2. Clear, perspicuous, reasoned analysis of the matter in accordance with Church teaching. Why are so few not intimidated into eschewing reason and doing mental gymnastics to conform to the propaganda and the suppression of truth?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I regret to find the tone of this article quite disturbing. It seems to me that Mr. de Mattei's effort seems to come close to taking liberties and making charges that he really shouldn't make.
    Essentially, this argument seems to declare that we ought to be very suspicious of the correction being given to these Franciscans because..because he and others have stiff suspicions about the views of the persons in charge of making decisions.

    Mr. de Mattei wishes to insist that only a minority of people within this particular order have been having difficulty. Unfortunately, I understand that this correction only comes about after a yearlong investigation by the Vatican, an investigation that began while everyone expected that Pope Benedict would be Pope for some time to come. It would seem then, that this correction might well have come about regardless.
    Regrettably, I've seen the attitude presented before: Pope Someone gave us Document X some time in the past, therefore we have a right to refuse to follow the direction of the Curia now.
    I must remind you that neither Pope Francis nor others have overturned Summorum Pontificum. I understand this action to be aimed mostly at healing a serious division within this particular order of Franciscans, not a beginning of a long assault on the traditional Mass.

    For all that I have come to prefer the more reverent attitude of the Extraordinary Form, I must remind others that we still must be united in faith. If a large number have been pursuing the Extraordinary Form in an abusive manner, even one that subtlely contradicts the intent of Summorum Pontificum, then the Curia DOES have the authority to act.

    I'd like to see the various "dialogues" taking place brought to a close and something of an ultimatum given to the perpetrators to, but that's not what the leadership has chosen. I'm not fond of their approach either, but I'm not sitting in the hot seat, so to speak.

    Let the Curia and the Pope do their jobs. Let's not make things more difficult by being willfully disobedient.
    We don't need a 2nd SSPX.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope your idiocy is not intentional.

      Delete
    2. From Remnant columnist Sisco: "If we consider the history of rational creation from the beginning of time, a repeated pattern emerges: over and over again, we see a great apostasy that begins at the top.

      At the beginning of time, God created the nine choirs of angels, in hierarchical order, with Lucifer as the head. St. Thomas explains that the higher angels possess a more powerful intellect and a greater knowledge than the lower, and that the higher angels enlighten those beneath them. (1) Therefore Lucifer – the chief angel - was not only the highest in hierarchical order, but was also the angel with the greatest intellect, and the one responsible for enlightening and governing the others.

      As we know, this magnificent angel – the greatest creature God had created up to that time – disobeyed God and fell into apostasy, and in so doing brought one third of the other angels with him. The angels who thought to themselves, “we would rather be wrong with Lucifer than right without him”, got their wish and became demons, while those who remained faithful to God, in spite of the apostasy of their divinely appointed leader, were immediately confirmed in grace and now reign with God in heaven."

      @John It is obvious whom you serve at this time if you prefer to be wrong with a leader who is not faithful to God. When you find holiness and fidelity to God in others to be distasteful to yourself, then you must know that it is the devil whom you serve. Stop that.

      Delete
    3. "If a large number have been pursuing the Extraordinary Form in an abusive manner..."

      What does this mean? How does one pursue the Extraordinary Form (SIC) in an abusive manner?

      Delete
    4. I suppose demons think it's abusive.

      Delete
    5. John:

      I have read carefully what you have said. The relevant issue, however, has been left unaddressed by you, namely: this order directly contradicts that portion of Summorum which states clearly that no permission is required to say the Ancient Rite Mass. In other word, any priest can say this Rite any time, in any place and need not run to the local Ordinary for permission to do so. This order contradicts that clearly.

      As Mr de Mattei says this unjust action is going to bring on more storms in the Church.

      Delete
    6. "We don't need a 2nd SSPX."

      Actually, we could use a second, third, fourth, fifth...

      Delete
    7. And I usually stop listening when I hear 'extraordinary form.' That usually means somebody doesn't know much of anything about the actual traditionalist movement, as distinguished from CAF-style conservatives who attend a Mass while not being against the New Mass or acknowledging the wrongness of any of the disastrous and scandalous things the last several Pontiffs have done (Assisi I-II et al).

      I'm not saying this to insult you, but simply trying to draw a distinction where the terminology has become muddied as of late. God bless you.

      Delete
    8. That should be 'Asissi I-III' (or did they do four by now?). Typo there.

      Delete
  4. On the contrary, what we don't need are more LCWRs.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think it's a mistake for the Franciscans of the Immaculate or anyone else who supports them to appeal to this Pope. He has shown where his sympathy lies by approving this unjust condemnation. He has no sense of the sacred liturgy or Catholic tradition. Just look at the way he dresses, his Masses in Brazil, his "offering" to the Blessed Virgin at St.Mary Major upon his return from Brazil, and his speeches.
    Most people thought that the late un-great Paul VI was a progressive. Paul VI is nothing compared to this guy.
    The only good thing about Pope Francis is that he's old. Hopefully that will work in favor of the Catholic Church...if you get my meaning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Grace comes from obedience. The FI must be obedient to the Holy Father, even if this has been an unjust decision wrought by some dissenters to the founders.

      I understand the main dissenter had written a book with negative things about the founder and the trend to the TLM. It has not been published. Oh, that he who has a blog and is public with his disobedience would have just left the order but, no, he wanted it HIS way. Well, he got his way.

      Delete
  6. So basically, what De Mattei is trying to tell the Friars,(in that last sentence, in so many words,) is that they should not listen to the Holy Father, but instead follow their own conscience.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think conscience was ever used. Maybe you should try reading the article?

      Delete
    2. I thought that I did read the article. I thought that the last sentence said, "The Mother of God, Virgo Fidelis, will show the right way to the conscience of every individual in this difficult situation." Isn't that what the article says?
      It seems to me that the Holy Father is showing them the right way, but De Mattei is telling the Friars, cunningly, to follow their own conscience. Not good.

      Delete
    3. That applies also to the people making the bad decision and violating the existing law of the Church, which includes the very small number of complainers who've precipitated the problem in the first place.

      It in no way is used in the sense the LCWR nuns and other dissidents in good standing with the Church use it.

      Delete
    4. And the error was one of translation and has been corrected thanks for that anyway.

      Delete
  7. De Mattei makes a point that can't be repeated enough, that the modern popes do not respect the law. Paul VI abused the law by giving the impression that the TLM was abrogated when it wasn't. Causing persecution of traditional priests and Catholics unto this day. Even after Benedict XVI clarified the matter we are still given the impression that the TLM is somehow not appropriate and wrong and only allowable by way of exception.
    This also holds true for the teachings on ecumenism, religious liberty and all the other problems with V2. The Popes have contradicted the past teachings without basing their new doctrine on legal documents of equal or greater value. Thus the faithful look for clarity and find it only in tradition, and yet this 'pastoral council' is somehow given more weight.
    It just doesn't make sense and shows both a diabolical disorientation in the Church and the need for a clarification of V2 and a new syllabus of modern errors.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "It seems to me that the Holy Father is showing them the right way, but De Mattei is telling the Friars, cunningly, to follow their own conscience. Not good."

    This is dangerous thinking. The Pope (and thru him the Cong. for Religious), is destroying one of the only religious Orders in the entire Church that is substantially growing year after year. And by that I don't mean posting a growth of 5-10 members a year like afew Vatican II Orders have done (shown in the Annuario Pontificio 2013). I mean posting growth like 50-60 new members per year, and opening anywhere between 2-10 new foundations. The Franciscans of the Immaculate are one of a tiny handful which have that success year after year.
    I have to laugh when some Vatican II liberal Orders of nuns (and male religious too), post on their websites pictures of 1 candidate professing vows (the first they have had in years). They are triumphant. But the FFI and the Sisters have 18-25 professions every year. Some liberal Orders have not had a single profession in 40 years!! So who is right, and who is wrong?
    If the FFI is forced to use the Novus Ordo, but can celebrate it ad orientam in Latin and with Chant, then that would not be too bad. However, if they are forced to celebrate Mass with the protestant tables etc., I would hope there is a mass exodus of FFI to the SSPX!! They would be a great blessing to the SSPX.
    By the state of the Roman Catholic Church over the last 50 years, it is obvious that the Vatican II Reforms, and the Vatican II Popes have been wrong in most of what they have done. Must we blindly follow them....and now a man like Francis...into a complete break with Catholic tradition (and even teaching?), or can courageous groups like the SSPX (and any FFI who join them), stand up and say in good conscience "You are wrong....we will not obey."
    Some will say that is protestant thinking. Martin Luther used similar words in his break from the Catholic Church, but the difference was that he was breaking from the venerable Catholic heritage and teachings of all time to follow his own ideas.
    On the other hand, the SSPX (and any FFI who follow) are saying those words to stand up for the ancient and venerable timeless teachings and traditions of the Church against those who would undermine and destroy it for their own Vatican II agenda. If this includes the Pope...then so be it. The SSPX and any FFI are in the right. They are following their conscience to save the Church, not obeying to lend a hand in destroying it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If you aren't like the late Archbishop Lefebvre who followed the traditions always taught before Vatican II and who never said the Novus ordo one time so he didn't compromise then you will have chaos. There is chaos and confusion in the New Church of Vatican II but for those who follow the traditions always taught there is no chaos or confusion. We know our faith!

    ReplyDelete
  10. With all do respect for Mr de Mattei, the former Minister General of the OFMs, Fr. Rodriguez Carballo, could not have been overthrown as the General Superior of the Franciscans of the Immaculate because he never was. Here's his erroneous quote (from the second paragraph):

    "The Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life (better known as the Congregation for Religious) overthrew Rodriguez Carballo OFM, the General Superior of the Franciscans of the Immaculata, and have handed over leadership to an "Apostolic Commissioner," Father Fidenzio Volpi, Capuchin, with its decree of the 11th of July, 2013, signed by Cardinal Prefect Joao Braz de Aviz and Archbishop Jose Rodriguez Carballo."

    It was actually Fr. Stefano Maria Manelli and his entire General Council (including the co-founder) who were overthrown.

    Be that as it may, the way of St. Francis is the way of obedience: http://absoluteprimacyofchrist.org/pope-francis-franciscans-of-the-immaculate-vetus-ordo/

    ReplyDelete
  11. The Almighty does not let the faithful struggle in darkness about simple, straightforward things, like the level of docility owed to a Pope.

    This current Pope, while a Bishop, actively participated in a Hanukkah service, and also attended an interfaith meeting with jews in which one of the jewish speakers mentioned that the jews still wait for their "messiah". I am aware of no report in which Bergoglio corrected the jewish speaker about his wait being in vain so by his silence one can conclude that Bergoglio assents to this position!

    Church teaching on the former action is clear - by participating in jewish worship services he (1) scandalized the faithful; (2) committed a mortal sin; and (3) committed an act of apostasy whereby if Church discipline was still strict he should have been removed from office. In view of these "bright light" violations of Church and Divine law of which he has not publicly recanted it seems that it would be foolish to be blindly docile to this Pope, Instead, we can thank the Almighty for providing us with bright markers about when to have our guard up so to speak.

    If one is confused, compare the pictures of Bergoglio lighting the menorah where he evidences the most serene, worshipful expression he can manage, and the placing of the t-shirt and beach ball on the tabernacle in St. Mary Major. He either is wicked, or is totally clueless about how his actions will be perceived, In either case, we need to have our guard up.

    Regarding the TLM, the faithful should confront the liberal progressives with Trent arguments about the licity of the NO mass. Canon 13 of session VII of Trent anathematizes the changing of the rites by ANY pastor and Cardinal Torquemada opined at the time that it would be a schismatic act to change the rites. Although the Pope is supreme legislator he is bound by tradition, How are the VII Popes not bound by Trent? Have it out with the progressives in the open make them defend their actions in view of Divine Law. Doesn't current canon law allow the faithful to challenge the hierarchy now? Why doesn't the FI do exactly that and challenge the licity of the NO mass?

    At the heart of the matter the faithful have to realize that there can be no unity with two rites. The mass is our ultimate form of prayer, How can those who attend the TLM because of the high degree of reverence it accords the Almighty be in union with those who attend the NO who are barely even aware that mass should be reverent?

    ReplyDelete
  12. I would not say that the 'internal dissidents' are progressive. They did mutiny against the founder however.

    And the Order knows the graces that come from obedience even in the face of injustice.

    God's will be done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What about credulity and false obedience?

      Delete
  13. It. Is now obvious that for all the learning and intelligence of the author, he really has no idea about the true nature of the Church.

    May God have mercy on you for trying to incite rebellion against the Holy Father.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's such a trenchant observation. You must be some kind of wise guy.

      Delete
    2. Of course, he is not inciting rebellion against the Pope. It is because he understands the true nature of the Church, presumably, that he recognises a Pope can say or do things which are objectively not in accordance with the doctrine of the Church, as certain popes have done in history, an uncontentious fact. He is acting in accordance with his God-given reason, in carrying out an honest analysis - in true Catholic tradition, and in service of the Church. Why would what would be reasonably found to be morally wrong before the election of Pope Francis be any different afterwards?

      Delete
    3. A wise guy? Not even sure what that means.
      Lynda, an objective moral truth is unchangeable, but that is not what we are talking about here. Rather it is a matter of not only obedience, but filial confidence in the successor of st Peter.

      If I had.to make a decision whether to follow a papal directive, or the opinion of the most eminent historian, the option is clear.

      This is not a matter of immaturity in faith, but a matter of recognising the hand of God.

      I can assure you that I have intimate knowledge of the situation with the FI, much more so than the author of the above article, and consequently I know that his understanding of the issue is limited at best.

      May our good Lord enlighten all of us, so that we may he the saints that He wishes us to be.

      Pax et Bonum

      Delete
    4. I have intimate knowledge of how these BS snow jobs work, and I suspect you do too, which is why you're ignoring the very salient features of this ecclesiastical farce on the part of senior clergy who are completely indifferent to Tradition, or the force of Church legislation.

      Delete
    5. The idea that obedience to whatever a Pope does is incumbent upon all is not part of Catholic Tradition and it most certainly is not the case that the hand of God is to be found in every decision taken by the Pope.

      That is Papolatry with a rocket pack and completely contrary to Tradition.

      And "The Rock" is one who dares correct others as to their knowledge of the Faith?

      Delete
  14. Just one question, is the pope bound by positive ecclesial law? ( this is somewhat a rhetorical question)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is your opinion on Bergoglio actively participating in jewish worship services on several occasions and the advisability of the Cardinals elevating him to the papacy in view of these public and notorious actions? My question isn't rhetorical but I guess you won't answer it anyways.

      Delete
    2. LOL, the Austrian Canons of Linz thought so and staged a massive campaign of venom and slander against Msgr. Wagner.

      Nobody talks about that.

      Yes, Anon, silence from these Neocons.

      Delete
    3. Neo-con? I have never been called that before!
      I would ask you totry and refrain from the ad hominum arguments, and try to stick to the topic at hand.

      I would also point out to you that the charism of the bishop of Rome flows from his office . Why must we always try to disregard a popes actions by his alleged errors of his pre-pope times.

      It seems to me, that some will never be content unless they themselves become pope.

      United in prayer

      Delete
    4. hey Rock, Anon back sorry to bother you with nasty questions but I guessed correctly you wouldn't offer your opinion about Bergoglio's participation in jewish worship services. He was photographed lighting a candle at a Hanukkah service and he also recounts how he participated in a rosh hashanah service as well in one of his books so these aren't "alleged" actions. Do you believe his participation in them was mortally sinful? Do you consider them an act of apostasy as the church always viewed such actions? Just wonderin'

      Delete
    5. I am tempted to.write an essay in response, but I really don't have the time.

      I would ask one last question. What are the consequences of your train of thought?

      I only.see this mentality as leading to a very denial of the papalcy itself...

      I don't know why card. Bergoglio participated as he did, but I do know that he is Pope now, and therefore deserving of our respect and filial docility.

      I am very sorry if you disagree with this type of thinking, but it has always been the way of the saints (eg. St Alphonsus, St Catherine of Sienna, etc)

      Delete
    6. When a Pope acts in contradiction to all of the Popes who preceded him it is not enough to say he is above Canon Law - which he is - for while he is above Canon Law he is not a dictator; he is the servant of servants.

      Our Pope is a liberal lunatic who, routinely, contradicts his own self (often within the same paragraph of a speech) and I pray that his reign will be as brief as possible if that prayer be in accord with the will of God.

      Those attacking the expertise sand knowledge of Prof Mattei are a joke. His Bona fides are as well-known as they are well-established.

      Delete
    7. Hey Rock Anon back to finish up this line of thought in an effort to edify you.

      Pope Paul IV issued Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio in 1559 "as a codification or explicitation of the ancient Catholic law that only a genuine Catholic can be elected pope, to the exclusion of those who have fallen into some heresy, apostasy or schism. It indicates that the laity may reject the heretic as an antipope 'at any time', that is, without any declaration from the Church and even if he is accepted as pope by all. Brief extracts are as follows.

      'If ever at any time it shall appear that ... even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy ... the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless; it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation ... [Everyone] shall be permitted at any time to withdraw with impunity from obedience and devotion to those thus promoted or elevated and to avoid them as warlocks, heathens, publicans, and heresiarchs.'"

      So according to this Papal Bull, if Bergoglio did commit an act of apostasy by participating in jewish worship services he isn't Pope and may command no obedience at all since he isn't even in the Church! The fault for all of this lies with the cowardice of orthodox prelates who have never challenged apostates, heretics and modernists for their heteropraxy. Thus, individuals like you are vulnerable to being led astray by simplistic applications of Church law, like "the Pope is above canon law"; "the Pope is supreme legislator"; "Catholics owe filial obedience to the Pope" etc.

      Delete
  15. I read this story and related stories about this group of Franciscans of Imma, who claim to be loyal to the Pope but are putting up the battle armor because they are under the papal microscope,endorsed by Pope Francis and Benedict 16. The investigation was first begun under Benedict 16. The blogs and this story seem to want to blame it on Francis. What Pope is it they pledge loyalty if not the current pope- Pope Francis I and Benedict 16 before him? -Dave

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There have been several such jury rigged type fiascos like this that come to mind, including Father Rodriguez in Texas, Father Guarnizo in D.C., Father Demet in Arkansas, and a priest in Thiberville whose rainbow buddy Bishop shut down a very successful ministry because of a few complaints.

      It was the same case in the scandal-Diocese of Linz. There are several others and this is just one more being added to a growing list of arbitrary exercises of power by insecure and incompetent leaders who want Tradition to go away.

      Delete
    2. I would not blame this on Pope Francis, although I think a different outcome might have come under Benedict. The current papacy will only tolerate the TLM at best and those in high places may be less than tolerant. There is that whole generation of priests, and many bishops, who came through formation such that they have an aversion to the TLM and 'pre-conciliar' traditions. They are not going to change; it will require the biological solution.

      But this order was attracting young traditional people all over the world. They want stability and reverence and a total self giving. The sisters don't want to wear pantsuits, live in an apartment and have a cushy job. They want to be Brides of Christ and the TLM is the liturgy that fills their humble souls. For example.

      Delete
  16. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  20. If you can't see the double standard here between the way the LCWR and the FI is treated, I don't care about your opinions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No double standard . Totally different situations.
      I am genuinely and humbly willing to try to explain the difference , but I have the impression that you are maybe not really interested.

      I will resort to prayer for us all.

      Delete
    2. the Rock:

      What many here are trying to convey to you is that you are confusing infallibility with impeccability (an error, oddly enough, shared both by papolaters and sede vecantists). The Holy Father is infaliible when he speaks Ex Cathedra on a matter of faith or morals only. He is not infallible when he speaks of the weather or makes certain prudential judgments. In the case in question the Pope apparently made a prudential judgment that is unfortunate, and deMattei and others are respectfully pointing that out to him.

      We are duty bound to give Papal remarks consideration and all due respect but we are not duty bound to ignore obvious problems or contradictions in Papal utterances and actions. We are entitled to use our God-given reason after all. The Pope is not impeccable and is quite capable of making serious mistakes when he is not speaking on matters if faith and/or morals, and speaking Ex Cathedra.

      Too many Catholics confuse impeccability and infallibility. Once we understand the difference we realize that we can be loyal Catholics even while taking exception to certain remarks and actions of the Supreme Pontiff.

      Delete
  21. My opinions (in brackets) of Dr Roberto De Mattei's opinion piece: PART 1
    (Rome) The measures (interventions by Holy Mother Church) against (harsh) the Franciscans of the Immaculate have caused trouble (trouble may indicate mere difficulty or more seriously, problems, relative to an individual’s stance on a particular issue, not necessarily common to all) and lively discussions. (Any discussion is, as any other form of communication is, a manifestation of an individual’s thoughts and intentions). Katholisches.info is publishing a discussion contribution. The first will be the well-known historian Roberto de Mattei. The March for Life , which was took place with 40,000 participants in Rome in May is largely due to his initiative. On the march, numerous Franciscans of the Immaculate participated, an Order with an apostolate which also includes particularly the defense of unborn life.(Especially in the USA)

    The "Causa" Franciscans of the Immaculate

    by Roberto de Mattei

    The "case" of the Franciscans of the Immaculata is a very serious episode, which is intended (what exactly are the intentions)to have an effect in the Church that is maybe not anticipated (then such effects can’t be intended) by those (who?) who have set about to act imprudently.(Judgment now passed. If talking about the Church, then a year-long visitation, requesting the manifestation of conscience of all solemnly professed friars, and subsequent decisions made by the Vicar of Christ, in consultation with the body dealing constantly with relevant matters, could not be called imprudent. If talking about individual religious having recourse to the Holy See, a fundamental right and at times obligation, then prudence is clearly indicated by the seeking of counsel from those more experienced).

    The Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life (better known as the Congregation for Religious) by Rodriguez Carballo OFM has overthrown (replaced) the General Superior (and General Council) of the Franciscans of the Immaculata, and have handed over leadership to an "Apostolic Commissioner," Father Fidenzio Volpi, Capuchin, with its decree of the 11th of July, 2013, signed by Cardinal Prefect Joao Braz de Aviz and Archbishop Jose Rodriguez Carballo. (under the authority of the Vicar of Christ).

    In order to "cement" the decree, said Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, it received the approbation ex auditu from Pope Francis, to which the brothers (who and how many) have taken every opportunity to appeal to the Apostolic Signatura. [++Burke] The reasons for this condemnation (the intervention by the Church is not a condemnation) which has its origin in the instigation of a group of dissident (Judgment passed) brothers to the religious congregation, remains mysterious (not so mysterious to Roberto who knows of its origin in the instigation of a group of dissident brothers.) According to the decree from the Congregation and the letter of the new Commissioner of the Franciscans, the only charges appear to be a lack of sentire cum Ecclesia (which IS a very serious charge) and an excessive attachment (read dis-ordinate as per traditional spiritual theology) to the Traditional Roman Rite.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "as per traditional spiritual theology"...how can anyone one have a dis-ordinate attachment to the Mass of the ages?

      Delete
  22. What about the other so-called catholic groups that dont have the sentire cum ecclesia?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe there members are not concerned enough to ask the Holy See for help.

      Delete
    2. Is ordering religous to only celebrate the novus ordo help?

      Delete
    3. That is the beauty of the divine institution of the Church. We don't always know what is best for us, and clearly someone has to have the last word...so our Lord gave us the pope.

      This may seem simplictic to some, but it seem to me that this is in the proper spirit of the gospel.

      Delete
    4. Yeah, the New Springrime has been a wonderful boon for the Church!

      Delete
    5. St. Pius V knew what was best for us and issued Quo Primum and anathematized attempts to change the rites of the Church in Canon 13 of Session 7 of the Council of Trent. These actions were done to preserve the unity of the Church. What foresight St. Pius V had - all we have to do to realize that is to see how much division in the Church and destruction of the faith the new rite has caused.

      Well, I'm not quite accurate in the above. According to Cardinal Torquemada the institution of new rites would be a schismatic act on the part of whoever did it. So according to him the devotees of the NO aren't even in the Church! I promise to pray for you that you repent of your sin against charity by obstinately supporting the schismatic NO rite!

      Delete
  23. My opinions (in brackets) of Dr Roberto De Mattei's opinion piece: PART 2

    Injustice Against Franciscans of the Immaculate -- Order Surrendered to Progressive Minority (in what way is the ‘minority’, the 80% of friars who appreciate the intervention of the Church and the vast majority of friars not in favor of adopting exclusively the Extraordinary Form, progressive? Progressive was never a charge leveled at the FI when the Extraordinary Form was never celebrated).

    In reality we are faced with a manifest injustice which is being done to the Franciscans of the Immaculate. The Religious Institute founded by Father Stefano Maria Manelli and Father Gabriele Maria Pellettieri is one of the most flourishing that has been established in the Church, both because of the number of vocations and the authenticity of the spiritual life as well as because of the fidelity to doctrine and to Rome (including Pope Francis?). In the situation of liturgical, theological and moral anarchy (anarchy indicates rebellion to legitimate authority which members of the FI will doubtfully display… cf. Official statement by the Founder of the FFI Fr. Stefano M Manelli) in which we find ourselves today, the Franciscans of the Immaculate should serve (and hopefully will continue to serve) as a model for religious life. The Pope often refers to the need for a simpler and more spartan religious life.

    The Franciscans of the Immaculate distinguish themselves just by the rigor and evangelical poverty in which they live, by their Franciscan charism since its inception. Instead of this, the Congregation of Religious is directing in the name of the Pope, to transfer the General Government of management to a minority of rebellious (as indicated by rebellion against the Vicar of Christ?), progressive (again in what way are the FI progressive?) brothers, to which the neo-Commissioner (Neo? As in Neo-catholic?) will rely upon to "normalize" the Order, or in other words, to lead it into that disaster which it has so far escaped, thanks to its loyalty to Church order and the Magisterium. (Are said rebellious progressive brothers going to be disloyal to Church order and the Magisterium?)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems you are putting words (and not gramatically correct) in to the mouth of a well respected Historian and Scholar...this all seems a bit like the style of someone who cant write their own thoughts, but must attack others.

      Delete
    2. Oh ad hominem, where would we be without you.

      I am afraid that I can't take.this discussion any longer.

      May God lead.us all to love Him and His Church with the same intensity and right understanding .

      Delete
    3. Thanks for trying to add smoke and confusion, bye.

      Delete
    4. Dear Rock, sentiments I agree with entirly.
      Tancred...the rock's smoke is the incense you should crave for.

      Delete
    5. There is some articles writing that Fr. Bruno said something about 80% did not like the direction of the founders. But then from someone in the order I have learned that Father Bruno never said any such thing to any one. It was made up somewhere.

      A small group of dissenters have done this. They should have left the order rather than seek to bring it down and destroy it.

      Delete
  24. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "It is not surprising that it is the same Cardinal, who is taking action against the Franciscans of the Immaculata with an iron fist (harsh)"...YES that's because it is Harsh.

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous, "iron fist" is a harsh expression given we are talking about a decree of the Church. It seems now I am not permitted to contribute to the discussion on this blog as my comments are being removed by the admin. I had hoped to present my opinions given that I have known many of the FI over the years in Italy.

      Delete
  25. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Comments gone...wordsasweknewthemthen...no place for discussion here freddy...your'e better off talking to the Mormons down town in Norwich

      Delete
    2. I'm really not interested in attempting at answering people's questions only to have them ignored, while some commenter makes unprofitable and emotional appeals for some kind of false obedience.

      No thanks.

      Delete
    3. Tancred, how can you answer questions if the questions are not allowed to be asked?

      Delete
    4. None of you who are windging about our Catholic duty to object to injustices have done anything but offer emotional arguments, and when something that was as incoherent as what I just saw appears, I just have to delete it.

      If you guys can do more than threaten, make your pious sentiments known and so on, be my guest.

      Delete
  26. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...