De Omnibus Dubitandum Est.

There have been some interesting developments in the discussion on Vatican II  over the last few days. Father Weinandy's latest response, posted in Catholic World Report here , takes a more personal turn - which I find more than a little disappointing. He does, however make some important points about Vatican II: Vatican II is not, to use the archbishop’s term, a “container-council” into which false doctrine was poured. What counts is what the Council taught, though one has to take into account, as the Council itself did, of the magisterial authority of each of it documents. As Dogmatic Constitutions, Lumen Gentium and Dei Verbum have much greater magisterial authority than those documents that are titled Decrees and Declarations. Even worse, because the archbishop sees Vatican II as a “container-council” into which heretical elements were smuggled, he designates it “a devil council.” If such was and still is the case, then we would have to admit that Ecumenical Councils do not ...

There's a bit of a public battle raging at the moment within the public Church about Vatican II. Whatever side of the discussion you are on, it seems clear that the Second Vatican Council did not achieve what it set out to achieve. The confusion is not surprising at all and it seems to me to be a direct result of this papacy. Pope Francis tenure in the Holy See is marked by confusion and obfuscation , verbose, wordy documents that most people won't read and that baffle those of us who do bother to read them, a quagmire of corruption &  cover-up , strange pronouncements & accords , loaded synods . Recently I have seen numerous comments which recall the virtual Catholic world under Pope Benedict XVI - a world full of unity and hope where excited bloggers proliferated, engaging in a profusion of catechetical discussions and explanations, revelling in confidence at the splendour and rigour of Catholic doctrine. Today this is but a memory. There's constant sniping on-...

George Neumayr, author of The Political Pope and the man who famously confronted a gaggle of American Cardinals in Rome , makes an important point in The American Spectator while commenting on Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò's latest intervention. He reminds us that, although Cardinal Sandri has been chosen by the Pope to be "pilot of the next conclave secundum Franciscum " (a scandalous choice, given he is utterly compromised, having played a role in covering up the monstrous misdeeds of Marcial Maciel, the Legion of Christ founder) Pope Francis has already put another Maciel acoylyte in a position of power and influence for the next conclave: Cardinal Kevin Farrell. Farrell was promoted to camerlengo at the same time that his mentor Theodore McCarrick was defrocked. Farrell, the head of the Vatican’s office of Laity, Life and Family, was consecrated as a bishop by McCarrick in 2001 after McCarrick was installed as Archbishop of Washington. Farrell was a clos...

I was away last week at a gathering of prominent Catholics worried about what is going on in the Church. Part of the discussion was about the commonality of bad practise among bishops. This can be observed across the global Church but the specific discussion revolved around the dynamics in the UK and the USA. Since starting my blog I have noticed 1. They don't want us to know what's going on. 2. They do not feel accountable to us who fund their activities. 3. They absolutely have no regard for the Catholic faith whatsoever. The majority of us simply are unaware of what is going on and how bad it is. Blissfully unaware. Those of us who are publicly critical are sometimes criticised by good lay people and clergy who perhaps find it almost impossible to believe the pope, a bishop, a priest or religious could abuse the trust we put in them and mislead us with regard to the faith -- let alone money or sexual abuse. Either that or they prefer to maintain the status quo. ...

American Monsignor Anthony Figueiredo, a priest of Newark, N.J., who was ordained by McCarrick in 1994, served as his personal secretary from September 1994 to June 1995, and later acted as a go-between and personal aide during McCarrick’s multiple visits to Rome over a 19-year period has published c orrespondence which confirms that restrictions on laicised Cardinal & political manipulator Theodore McCarrick were imposed by the Vatican in 2008 as previously revealed by Archbishop Vigano . In the released correspondence, McCarrick also claims that Cardinal Donald Wuerl, then the Archbishop of Washington, was aware of them and involved in conversations about their implementation. Pope Francis said that “about McCarrick I knew nothing, obviously, nothing, nothing.” https://t.co/hpMZcduptH — Ines San Martin (@inesanma) May 28, 2019 McCarrick actually asserts that the Vatican wanted to “avoid publicity” and thus kept the restrictions confidential. The correspondence furthe...

When you weigh up the debate surrounding former nuncio and abuse whistle-blower Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, you quickly recognise his submissions as deeply Catholic. The retired nuncio has penned an open letter to the disgraced former Archbishop of Washington Theodore McCarrick, suggesting a public act of repentance would bring “healing to a gravely wounded and suffering Church.” Viganò asks McCarrick to publicly repent of his alleged “crimes against minors and abuses against seminarians,” saying “time is running out” and that his “eternal salvation is at stake.” Writing to the former archbishop of Washington D.C. on Jan. 13, the feast of the Baptism of the Lord, Archbishop Viganò said “no matter what decision the supreme authority of the Church takes in your case, what really matters, and what has saddened those who love you and pray for you, is the fact that throughout these months you haven’t given any sign of repentance.” Archbishop Viganò said he was “among those who are p...

Marco Tosatti carries a new letter from Archbishop Viganò today.  The letter addresses all of Ouellet's points and directly refutes his claim that there were no official sanctions on Cardinal McCarrick: There is one point on which I must absolutely refute what Cardinal Ouellet wrote. The Cardinal states that the Holy See was only aware of “rumors,” which were not enough to justify disciplinary measures against McCarrick. I affirm to the contrary that the Holy See was aware of a variety of concrete facts, and is in possession of documentary proof, and that the responsible persons nevertheless chose not to intervene or were prevented from doing so. Compensation by the Archdiocese of Newark and the Diocese of Metuchen to the victims of McCarrick’s sexual abuse, the letters of Fr. Ramsey, of the nuncios Montalvo in 2000 and Sambi in 2006, of Dr. Sipe in 2008, my two notes to the superiors of the Secretariat of State who described in detail the concrete allegations against McC...

Brendan Michael Dougherty has written a piece on National Review entitled The Case Against Pope Francis . I am always surprised when this is sent to me by so many priests at how quiet they all are publicly about this papacy, but when you look at the sickening fawning of the Catholic Bishops of England & Wales on display in their recent ad limina statement, perhaps you can understand why: As we spoke with Pope Francis we realised, more and more, that he simply radiates this joy and peace. He is indeed gifted with a unique grace of the Holy Spirit of God. Even in this time of turmoil, the Holy Father is so clearly rooted in God and blessed by God. His peace is secure. His life is serene. We know, because he showed us his heart. It is the heart of a loving father. This dreadful overwrought style is increasingly common when bishops speak of Pope Francis (just read Cardinal Ouellet's open letter to Archbishop Viganò), like some desperate over-compensation for what is happe...