Thursday, February 5, 2015

"The Church Has Betrayed John Paul II"

Archbishop Henryk Hoser:  "The Church Has Betrayed
Pope John Paul II."
(Warsaw) This is what Archbishop Henryk Hoser Archbishop, Bishop of Warsaw-Praga,  said about the Magisterium of the Polish Pope on the family. The reason for the sharp criticism is the upcoming Synod of Bishops on the family in October 2015.
"I'll say it brutally.. The church has betrayed John Paul II." With these words, Archbishop Hoser recently caused a stir. "Not the Church as the Bride of Christ, not the Church of our creed, for John Paul II. was its expression, the authentic voice of the Church, but the pastoral practice is what has betrayed John Paul II.,"  said the Polish archbishop in an interview with the Polish news agency KAI.
The focus of the interview was the family and the upcoming Synod of Bishops on the Family in autumn. They will be there, said the Archbishop, to talk about the breakdown of the family, about the patchwork family, about the indissolubility of marriage, but it will also be those who demand the admission of the divorced and remarried to Communion.
Archbishop Hoser said the fact that the position representative of Cardinal Kasper started from   a "false premise", because it would be "calls  for God's mercy without justice".  In real life, it would be necessary "that marriage and family life guaranteed justice." The Bishop of Warsaw recalled the words of John the Baptist to Herod: "You had no right to take your brother's wife to wife" (Mk 6:18). What was important is "a need for justice," said Archbishop Hoser referring to Pope John Paul II., who had said that love seeks out "justice with God".
The Bishop of Warsaw called on Catholics to read the Apostolic Letter of Pope John Paul II. Familiaris Consortio about the family.
Hoser was   the diocesan Bishop of Warsaw-Praga before his appointment as a Curial Archbishop in Rome. The rank and dignity of archbishop he kept ad personam keep after his appointment.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
image: Corrispondenza Romana
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG







38 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Papież uwielbienie jest grzechem.

      Delete
  2. Ancient Romans called it damnatio memoriae, it's worth even for Benedict XVI, sic transit gloria mundi.....'till the Master will come.

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

    ReplyDelete
  4. Our seminaries became homosexual havens under JP2's watch.

    Chi ha tradito chi?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of those forest:tree things.

      Delete
    2. I agree.Check out Monsignor Michael Ledwith who held a senior position in Maynooth Seminary Ireland 1980s/1990s a rampant homosexual.

      Delete
    3. Just how did you come that conclusion, or should I say accusation?

      Delete
  5. More to the point, "the Church" has betrayed Christ, and all the Faithful, who look to the papacy, the episcopate and the presbyterate for ministry to aid our salvation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So you're saying we shouldn't call him "The Great"?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm glad the Archbishop mentioned St. John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, something fellow critics never seem to bring up.

    What's up with Novus Ordo Catholics? They're constantly saying "Francis is betraying John Paul II" but that's it - no mention of the condemnations by Jesus Christ, St. John the Baptist, St. Paul, Council of Trent et. al.

    Did the Church start in 1962? Is John Paul II the only Doctor of the Church? Is Vatican II the only council ever held by the Church?

    This synod on the family is a losing battle for Novus Ordo conservatives. John Paul II is not a rock, he's not even sand, he's quick sand. John Paul II (and Benedict XVI) elevated almost every bishop and cardinal in the Church, the same people like Kasper and Francis who are anti-family. John Paul II allowed girl altar boys, Communion in the hand in almost every country (except Poland), allowed topless women inside Church (veils are extinct), allowed immodest dress to overrun the Church and a host of other horrors that led to the Synod on the Family becoming a reality.

    John Paul II is the same pope who "excommunicated" Abp. Lefebvre, in that same time period John Paul II was protecting homosexual pedophiles like Marcial Maciel who were bringing in millions of dollars to the Church, John Paul II allowed and even elevated heretical bishops, priests and theologians to overrun dioceses. John Paul II effectively excommunicated pre-1962 Catholicism and threw his support behind homosexual pedophiles and heretics - by their fruits you shall know them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. How many times do you need to be instructed that JPII did not protect Maciel et al. They were being protected by members of the Curia. Then-Cardinal Ratzinger was trying to root them out.

    "Pre-1962 Catholicism" had its share of heretics and questionable bishops. The current pot has been boiling since the French Revolution, and even the Reformation, it's just that you see the spillover now. Instead of worrying about chapel veils, you had best worry about whether your soul is ready for the coming persecutions, as I do mine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gotcha, I agree, the church was late in the struggle against modernism, even Rerum novarum was issued too late, after the Enlightenment and French revolution, the church began to lose her battle with the new world and now there's nothing to be said or done, the Lord will say the last word, non praevalebunt, spe salvi facti sumus. God bless+

      Delete
    2. Tartar,

      You're being presumptuous. I'm a Slav, I don't need to be talked down to by someone who still hasn't experience real persecution in his life.

      By pre-1962 Catholicism I mean the Catholic Church from 33AD to 1962AD. After Vatican II the Church changed both dogma and liturgy. Cardinal Ratzinger even said that Gaudium et Spes is the counter-syllabus of errors and that St. Pius X condemnation of modernism is no longer relevant. The Novus Ordo Mass is not Catholic in essence, in its purest and most reverent form it's a near copy of Calvinist and Jansenist liturgical theology.

      John Paul II was ultimately responsible for short-circuiting the investigation of Fr. Marcial Maciel Degollado. He refused to investigate the accusations against Cardinal Hans Hermann Groër of Vienna. He promoted the careers of some of the bishops and cardinals who intentionally inflicted horrendous damage on victims and expended vast amounts of donated money to stonewall the process of justice, e.g., Cardinals Bernard Law, Roger Mahony and George Pell, to name but a few. Perhaps the most egregious nonaction was completely ignoring the pleas of thousands of victims, many of whom wrote directly to him. Victims and victims' groups bombarded the Vatican with letters and requested audiences or at least recognition by the pope, especially at the World Youth Day celebrations. Not only were their requests ignored, but not one ever even received an acknowledgement of the receipt of their communication.

      Delete
    3. Ironically your name is "Tartar" yet, unlike a Muslim, you dismiss chapel veils as being unimportant when they have a cosmic importance in the Catholic Church. I'll be charitable and assume that you are ignorant of the importance of veiling. I strongly recommend you read the following article:

      http://www.chastitysf.com/q_veil.htm

      Delete
    4. If the Church has changed dogma, there's not much point in being Catholic, or commenting here as you do.

      Delete
    5. St. Paul said women must wear veils in Church. That is good enough for me. I can't enforce the dictum. Bishops must, or at least pastors with the positive support of the local bishop. With all the problems facing the Church, they put it low on their list of priorities, and they don't want to face the reaction such a stricture would cause.

      To the anonymous Slav, I did not talk down to you, but I could have been charitable in my language, I am not your instructor. Please forgive me. Now tell me, what is the point you trying to make that is relevant to the news article? The Polish bishop is pointing out that the Church hasn't obeyed Christ's vicar, by extension, Christ, thus the betrayal, and you bring out a laundry list of the grossest mortal sins committed by bishops and their minions who didn't obey Christ or his vicar.

      And I am curious: what persecution have you suffered?

      Delete
    6. My oh my, such charity I have never heard.

      Delete
  9. By betrayal is meant the bishops that JPII and BXVI anointed in the understanding that they would be faithful to Tradition, and obviously weren't. And wasn't it up to these bishops to make sure churchgoers dress properly, encourage reverence at Mass, etc. etc? Definitely JPII and BXVI could have made more exhaustive searches for men better qualified to be bishops, but there is only so much a man can do. He has to rely on the advice, loyalty, and good will of others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obsessive people want to see what they want.

      Delete
    2. JPII consented through his silence. Not once did he openly tell people to dress modestly when he had the opportunity (e.g. WYD). Not once did JPII say women must cover their heads in Church, on the contrary, JPII removed the canonical punishment for being topless in Church through the 1983 Code of Canon Law. JPII allowed girl altar boys and personally distributed Communion on the hand. JPII participated in some of the most irreverent Masses ever said by a priest, let alone a pope (WYD, Voodoo, Aztec, etc.).

      There's documentation from the 1980's showing that the Vatican already knew the enormity of the pedophilia scandal, this is common knowledge and shouldn't be a shock to anyone. John Paul II could have disciplined bishops but he didn't.

      Why were bishops who openly and publicly challenged the Church on contraception not disciplined? You can be naive all you want but to say John Paul II "couldn't do anything" is false by the very fact that he excommunicated Abp. Lefebvre. John Paul II was also very stubborn and often went against the advice of his close advisers (e.g. apologizing for the crusades, Assisi meetings).

      If you have the time, check out this book by Fr. Villa.
      http://padrepioandchiesaviva.com/uploads/Chiesa_viva_430_S_en_tip-web.pdf

      Delete
    3. I don't think I even implied that the Pope "couldn't do anything." I'll agree that JPII was lax with the bishops, but again, look at it from his point of view: many of the new bishops he was appointing, based on recommendations from other supposedly responsible bishops, came up croppers. Curia officials were hiding information from him, some reportedly because they were on the take with Maciel money; we can assume others. Cdl. Ratzinger was able to devote more time to the problem, and he couldn't corral it. Msgr. Lefebvre was in good standing until his unauthorized ordination of bishops; had a lefty done that, he'd have been excommunicated as well. (Didn't BXVI excommunicate some Chinese bishops for unauthorized ordinations to the episcopacy?) The causes the excommunication are only a handful, you can't excommunicate everyone, my friend. BTW, I recall JPII "exiling" a loonie left bishop by assigning him to a titular see in a North African Moslem country.

      Exactly, what punishment would you have proposed for the defiance of the bishops who supported abortion and contraceptive devices and pills? First of all, which bishop openly supported such? I recall a lot of constructive support evidence through waffling, mealy-mouthed denunciation, support through the CCHD for the wrong groups, not disciplining priests & nuns for supporting such, etc., but I recall no bishop openly saying abortion is OK/contraception is OK. These bishops did not procure abortions, but they didn't discourage them. What should the punishment have been? What Church law should have been cited for the prosecution of these bishops?

      Delete
  10. They don't need him anymore. http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1314-neo-catholic-amnesia-john-paul-the-great-goes-into-the-memory-hole

    ReplyDelete
  11. The only person Catholics need to worry about betraying is Jesus Christ .

    ReplyDelete
  12. Pope Francis is destroying so much! Oh God please save us from this tyrannical pope!

    ReplyDelete
  13. JP2 appointed Kasper & Bergoglio. Name one bishop who voted w/the majority at the synod who wasn't appointed by him? Moreover what about the pedophile scandals and the homosexual seminaries?

    Did this archbishop state that JP2 betrayed Poland?

    http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/328518/news/world/poland-s-catholic-church-apologizes-as-pedophile-scandal-spreads

    Modernists say one thing one day and another thing another day; they send out their men to say one thing here and one thing there. Anyone who continues to go along is as responsible as they are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Remember too the upside down cross chair he sat in (and no it was not St. Peter's cross) and all the pagan voodoo ceremonies he participated in. JPII was an antichrist, as are those who canonized him.

      Delete
  14. Wait, so how do you "betray" a guy who put a buddha idol on top of a tabernacle and had a topless woman do a reading at a "mass"?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Regarding Pope Francis, I don't think he will be Pope much longer....certainly not in two years. There must be many Cardinals in Rome who know something about him health wise that we don't, because I read an article which stated that large groups of the "good" Cardinals are positioning themselves and organizing "pre-conclave" meetings. The article also stated that very many Cardinals who voted for Bergoglio in 2013 didn't know him at all, and are now very sorry they cast their vote for him. That doesn't say much for Bergoglio....or the Cardinals.
    But for there to be a "pre-conclave" mood in Rome, which apparently there is, maybe Pope Francis is not well, and won't be around for long.
    Even he said last year that he would be dead in 2-3 years. NOw it's down to 1-2.........if that long.
    I think he knows something we don't.........and so do many Cardinals.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If he doesn't Consecrate Russia soon, a lot of us may not be around in 2 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If who doesn't? :) There are two you know. Seriously though when I read about the "Venerable Old Man of Lazio" that sure doesn't sound like Francis, sound more in fact like Pope Benedict. I believe it's the "venerable old man of Lazio" that makes the consecration.

      Delete
    2. Lol. This nonsense again. No magic formula of a pope saying "I consecrate Russia" will amount to anything. And I dare say that Russia is more consecrated than the Vatican. Pope Francis says "Who am I to judge?" but Putin has no trouble judging. Maybe we need Putin to consecrate the Pope!

      Delete
  17. JP2 Was one of thee most blasphemous apostate anti popes in history.Is this fella in denial or just thick in the head?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anyone who would say something like that knows nothing of history.

      Delete
    2. In all due respect any man that calls Christmas 'the feast of man', kisses a quran, and prays for Islam is an apostate.

      Delete
    3. Agreed. Considering the Borgia popes and other bad ones. Tancred you don't think "one of the most" is accurate?

      Delete
    4. Perhaps +Francis is the one prophesied as the destroyer.

      Delete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...