Cardinal Marx And The Cult Of The Papidians.

Not so fast, fatty...

Not so fast, fatty…

From OnePeterFive, a very interesting blog post about the past and present declarations of the aptly named Cardinal Marx.

I invite you to follow the link and read the story there.

I will here limit myself to focusing on one particular phrase, and examine the possible implications as I can see them from here. Emphases mine. 

“We must try to remain together,” he said. “The Church is the only institution in the world that can reach unanimous agreement. Thank God we have the pope.We bishops do not have to decide. Church unity is not in danger. And once the pope has decided, we will abide by his decision.

So the man is saying that in the end the bishops (and by extension, the faithful) have nothing to say or worry about. There is a Pope. He will make a decision. We will abide by it. Because unity. 

Wow, vow.

Not so fast, Your Disgrace.

We aren’t a cult of “Papidians”. If the man tells us to commit spiritual suicide, we do not follow him. The Pope himself is bound by the Truth, and has the right to be heard – or the more so: obeyed – only when what he says is not in contrast with what the Church has always said, and what she commands him to defend at the cost of his life. 

In Cardinal Heretic’s mind all depends on the man; and what the man decides, we must follow. This is 100% Fuehrerprinzip. Catholics think differently. And frankly, I thought this darn Fuehrerprinzip had already caused enough damage in Germany. 

Now, why does Fatty say such a thing? I can imagine only three scenarios: 

  1. He has insider info that Francis will stage a golpe during of after the Synod. He is paving the way for the Golpe and selling the notion that whatever the man says, we must follow. 
  2. He has realised he cannot lead the Germans to a “German way”, and cannot follow up on the threat of having their own cake baked by them, all for them, after the Synod. Therefore, he is preparing the emergency exit that protects him from the rage of his adulterous and perverted followers: we have tried, you see, but it was a non-starter. It would have plunged the Church into chaos. Sorry, no can do. 
  3. Francis has told Marx and Kasper to stay quiet, because he will set things right at the end of after the synod. And he is lying to them. 

I find the first scenario improbable, but not impossible. Marx is the head of the German Bishops’ Conference. If Francis has decided to whisper something in the head of one or two, it’s Kasper and him. However, Francis would be stupid – and probably suicidal – to ignore the warning signals coming from pretty much everywhere. If Francis wants a golpe, he can try to stage it without a synod, every day he feels like it. He has not done it not because he has no instruments to do it, but exactly because he fears what would happen afterwards. If anything, this and last year’s synods both make it more difficult for him to make any move in that direction. It is difficult to think that even a stubborn, thick pope may ignore the message that is being shouted in his ears to such an extent.

The second scenario is, I think, the most probable. The Cermans have leaned so much out of the window that if things go wrong for them – which is the most probable outcome – they must now let the big schism follow the bold words. Will they have the guts to do it? I doubt. How will they justify their caving in? With the unity of the church, and the necessity to follow the Pope. Because unity. 

The third scenario is also possible, as it presumes that Francis is a lying, scheming Jesuit, which he is. However, I can’t imagine Marx and Kasper do not know it. Therefore, they would heavily discount any such promise from the man and avoid any public declaration that builds on such a promise.

Mind, though, that scenario 3 is not incompatible with scenario 2, which makes Marx’s statement doubly understandable: Francis promises, and Marx does not believe a word of what he said. Therefore, he releases the statement above.

If Francis delivers, he has paved the ground. He Francis does not deliver, he has paved the ground, too.

Not quite stupid, Your Disgrace …


Posted on October 9, 2015, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 4 Comments.

  1. So where was this relentless deference to the Fuehrerprinzip when Summorum Pontificum was issued?

  2. This is 100% Fuehrerprinzip. Catholics think differently.

    You’re right about the first sentence, but not the second. The blind acceptance of JPII’s arbitrary, abolitionist revisionism on capital punishment is the perfect example of Fuerherprinzip in action, especially by the bishops and those responsible for teaching doctrine and ethics.

    I commend the following to your attention:

    (link cancelled)

    • You are wrong on several counts. JP II did not introduce a new teaching, though he tried to water down the existing one. Sound catholics all over the planet have refused the novelty (many years later, you and I are clear examples). Factual errors do not constitute what catholics believe, as seen in the case of contraception.
      Link cancelled, as I cancel all links whose content is not described and I do not implicitly trust.

%d bloggers like this: