Daily Archives: May 22, 2013
Someone tweeted me the question whether I believe that V II was not the work of the Holy Spirit. The tweet was possibly a joke, as anyone who takes two minutes to read my blog cannot really have many doubts where I stand. Still, we must confront the tragic reality that as I write this there are people out there who in fact believe the Holy Ghost, instead of Satan, was the source of inspiration for the entire matter.
So let us think for a moment what the logical consequence of this thinking is. If the Holy Ghost inspired V II, it follows that the Holy Ghost has changed his mind very radically about the way to say Mass, thinking on second thoughts that the injection of Calvinist elements and the removal of Catholic elements from the Mass is just the ticket. Following, we must also agree the Holy Ghost desired that theologians censored by the Church only a few years before may now be called to redefine what Catholic theology is, even trying, as they almost successfully did, to demolish Papal authority or – as, if memory serves, Rahner tried, inter alia, to do – to steer the Church towards embracing the Protestant tenet of sola fide.
Further, the Holy Ghost must in this perspective have wanted the most spectacular exercise in muddling of Church teaching ever attempted in two thousand years – involving key aspects of the Church, like religious freedom – with the explosion of duplicity and doublespeak – and the utter abandonment of clear theological language and Thomist thinking – found pretty much everywhere in the conciliar documents.
But this is not all. The biggest crisis of vocations ever experienced, and a significant percentage of the clergy leaving the habit, must also have been wanted by the Holy Ghost, because if the Holy Ghost wills a revolutionary council he must perforce will its consequences. From this follows, with elegant inevitability, that the Holy Ghost also willed (as opposed to: allowed) the huge loss of grip of the Church in Catholic countries, and Catholics all over the West starting to divorce, contracept and abort in a manner not really distinguishable from the ways of non-Catholics.
I could go on for very long, but I will keep it short. In short, the idea of these people is that the Holy Ghost both changes his mind and starts doing things in a catastrophically wrong way.
If you ask me, in order to believe such a huge load of rubbish one must be equipped with either a very low intelligence, or a robust dose of disingenuousness, or a substantial emotional investment blinding him to the obvious error of his ways. I’d say the first kind is rather spread among the less gifted pew sitters; the second is the preserve of those desiring to do away with hell and all the unpleasant teachings, and the third is the main trait of most of the clergy, starting from the Popes – all of them, almost certainly; though we do not know what Pope Luciani would have done with V II behind the usual words – and ending with the stupid priest wishing “a bigger role for women with the new Papacy” about whom yours truly has reported.
To all of them is common a good dose of denial. To see so many Western countries introduce a parody of marriage whilst church attendance plummets to very low levels and still think that this is nothing to do with the Church’s surrender to the desire of popularity and harmony proves that it is the desire not to see that blinds them, and makes them think V II may have something to do with the Holy Ghost rather than being an open attack to Him.
In the meantime, we experience a new generation of Catholics: those whose sons are generally indifferent and whose nephews don’t get baptised. I wonder when this has happened last. I actually wonder whether it has ever happened in the first place.
Two generations after V II, we are seeing post-Christianity at work. To say this immense work of demolition of Christian societies all over the West is merely a problem of implementation has the same content of intelligence and logic as to maintain Communism was good, but unfortunately its implementation was lacking.
Look at this video with attention, and you will realise something is going on here.
The Pope approaches some people on wheelchairs. As he prepares to greet and give a blessing to one of them, the priest accompanying him whispers to the Pope something. Note the conversation is of some importance, that is: the priest thought something had to be said; also it is clearly confidential, not the kind of “Mr soandso travelled from Xyz to see you and brings you the greetings of all his family at home” communication.
The Holy Father listens seriously, and then performs on the man a blessing that one would consider rather lengthy, not stopping when the man starts to behave very strangely instead of interrupting and asking the man if he is all right.
Rorate Caeli now has the news Father Amorth has in the meantime performed an exorcism on the man, and found him possessed.
Granted, I wasn't there. But if we take together the video and Father Amorth's words, my limited intelligence has little doubts as to what has probably happened.
A man in suspicion of being possessed is brought to Rome so that a rite of exorcism be performed on him, if found necessary. He gets the opportunity of a papal blessing (camera and wheelchair: an irresistible combination with this Pope). When the Pontiff approaches, the priest says to him something on the lines of: “strange things happenings with this chap, Holiness; he will be seen by an exorcist soon”. The Holy Father then gives this man a lengthy blessing, containing some exorcism formula (many of those in Catholic prayers), with the reaction you can observe.
An unusual occurrence (possessed men are not found at every corner), but nothing extraordinary, really.
We know some people are possessed, because we are Christians and know it from the Gospel. We also know the Church trains a number of exorcists not out of desire to play Hollywood, but because there is a need for them. Thirdly, we know that Father Amorth found the man to be possessed. Fourthly, it would be strange that a possessed man may receive a blessing and mini exorcism from a Pope without showing any reaction whatsoever, and actually it would possibly say more about the Pope than about the man.
As far as I know, every priest can, in theory, give it a try when in the presence of a possessed man, though the Church wants such a rite to be performed by ad hoc trained priests. If a priest can, than the more so a bishop, who has the fullness of holy orders.
Therefore, it seems to me that nothing extraordinary has happened, at least for us Catholics who are informed about demonic possession and exorcism already.