Preaching The Collapse
We are told that only 35% of US Catholics consider very important to pass their faith to their children.
Well I never…
Let us why this is, however, what the Vatican II Church herself goes preaching.
First: proselytism is bad, remember? This comes from Fat Clown himself. Who are US Catholics to judge him?
Second: how many couples who are raising children are, in fact, of mixed faith? If the parents have decided that there should be two truths, which are both OK, why would they change their mind when educating their children to the faith? Tell me again: how many homilies in the matter have you heard in the last 10 years?
Third: eee-cuuu-men-ism!!! We “promote” the “dialogue” and we “meet” the “other”. We have a pope (small p) celebrating Luther. We are, therefore, told, from the fat guy at the very top, that we shouldn’t be “rigid” about these things. Guess what? We won’t be.
Fourth: inter religious stuff! If even being a Muslim or a Jew isn’t a big deal, as apparently Jesus, dying on the cross, has canonised everyone who does not attend a Latin Mass, how can it be of any noticeable importance if one happens to be Catholic or not?
Fifth: the “abolition” of damnation. If an “eternal punishment” is outside of the “logic of the Gospel”, as, again, Fat Clown himself writes, why would anyone have any big interest in religion – any religion – at all? Eat, drink, fornicate, abort, and be merry! You’ll make it in the end, “everyone at his own pace”. If that’s not inclusive, I don’t know what is!
Sixth: inclusion. If being “accepting” of the other is very important, as so many prelates tell us: would it not be better to raise your child outside of a famously non-inclusive religion? One that will put Little Johnny in a difficult position with his “gay”, “non-binary” and even “transitioning” friends? Plus, will he not risk persecution at work, or the loss of opportunities?
I could go on, but I think you get the gist: the collapse of church attendance is preached the V II Church herself. The (very moderately) “faithful” are merely receiving the message that the Church has been relentlessly broadcasting from the pulpit, the newspapers and the magazines, the radio and the TV, even from papal airplanes!
You reap what you sow.
You sow unbelief, you reap Francis and his bunch of happy bastards.
Posted on February 15, 2023, in Bad Shepherds, Catholicism, Dissent, Traditional Catholicism and tagged Conservative Catholic, conservative catholicism, Ecumenism, inter religious dialogue. Bookmark the permalink. 11 Comments.
But why is proselytism “bad”? Because for far too long, proselytism has been associated with political agendas, not religious ones. That’s what happens when you have state churches, Catholic or Protestant (the Eastern Orthodox never did any massive exploration as Catholic and Protestant countries did). An “established” state church relies on state patronage and privilege to survive. Consequently, it identifies with the state and its elite more than it does with Christ.
What Vatican II did was throw the baby out with the bathwater. Christ told His disciples to make disciples of all nations. People generally react to an extreme not with moderation, but with the equal and opposite extreme. If proselytism became affiliated with political agendas, then proselytism itself is “bad,” Christ’s command notwithstanding.
A State Church is the state the Church says should be strived for. Abusus non tollit usus.
“A State Church is the state the Church says should be strived for. Abusus non tollit usus.”
If true, then it proves what I’ve long said. The Catholic Church long ago sacrificed its petrine patrimony on the altar of power and political influence — and its attendant evils: absorption with wealth and secular prestige, intellectual fashion and institutional arrogance. That is de facto idolatry. That also sentences the Church to spiritual self-emasculation. Just look at the Church of England.
For all intents and purposes, the Church under Francis has become the state church of “woke” NGOs and big-money contributors. How else do you explain Francis’ obsession with environmental sustainability and economic redistribution?
Not for nothing did Lord Acton write, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” after witnessing Vatican I.
It is true, this is why, when I was born, Italy, Spain, France and many other Countries had a state religion: Catholicism.
This is a comment from John Zmirak, a Traditionalist writer, from his Facebook page:
“The Irish Republic’s grant of vast powers to the Church did it great harm, as we’re seeing today. Make the Church rich and powerful, and you end up with cardinals like Ted McCarrick. Let it be apostolic and hungry, and you get St. John Neumann.”
Abusus not tollit usum, again.
Zmirak is American. He clearly has difficulties in adjusting to Catholic thinking.
The Church has been rich and powerful, all over Southern Europe, for many Centuries. She has created and consolidated a society infinitely more Catholic than what we have today.
“The Church has been rich and powerful, all over Southern Europe, for many Centuries. She has created and consolidated a society infinitely more Catholic than what we have today.”
So how do you explain the fact that in Ireland, Italy, Spain, France and Croatia (for starters), the Church has minimal, if any, influence?
Also, how do you explain the fact that, according to the Book of Acts, the Church was far more powerful without access to secular power and wealth? How do you explain the fact that the Holy Spirit was far better able to do His work than when the Church had the kind of power you seem to relish?
Vatican II. Loss of faith. Insisting in not wanting to be the State Religion anymore. I am not joking. Look it up.
The Church was way more powerful when she had the power. For heaven’s sake, learn your history and stop provoking me.
Why is asking you questions provocative? Simply because we disagree?
One more point: If the Church needs political power to thrive, let alone survive, then it has effectively sold its soul. Francis is aligning the Church with globalist NGOs (which have a secular, materialist, utopian worldview) precisely for that reason.
Remember, the Church grew exponentially in the first couple of centuries when it experienced intense, murderous persecution and had no access to political power. That, too, is history, as recorded in the New Testament. Only God can explain that growth.
No. Because, instead of informing yourself about what the Church teaches, you keep espousing a point that smells of Americanism.