The Poisonous Fruits of the Council Continue to Ripen

September 11, 2019
Source: fsspx.news

The post-conciliar period saw an explosion of disorders of all kinds: abandonment of sound theology in favor of multiple deviations, such as the theology of liberation, poisoned reforms both liturgical and disciplinary, abandonment of clerical or religious life, demands from the people of God for structural reform of the Church.

Then, there was a period of consolidation of the conciliar achievements, especially under the pontificate of John Paul II, and the progress of the modernist theses, notably as to ecclesiology, religious freedom, ecumenism, sacramental practice, the destruction of morality, all while giving the impression of a certain restoration of order. But the poison continued to act.

With the current pontificacy, we are returning to an externally more active period, which is in fact only the continuation of the previous ones. But the advances are more perceptible, favored by the very attitude of Francis who encouraging them, when he is not causing them. Thus, in the nauseating wake of the preparation for the Synod on the Amazon, demands that were believed to have been put aside have resurfaced—unsurprisingly. Here are some documented examples.

The Women’s Church in Chile

The website of the Episcopal Conference of Chile reports on the meeting of a feminist association. This third meeting of this movement called “Women (are) the Church” (Mujeres Iglesia) brought together a hundred participants on August 31 and September 1 in the city of Concepción. Some of their demands are revealing.

First, there is the demand for recognition of a feminine aspect in the Holy Spirit, under the fallacious pretext that the term spirit in the Old Testament is signified by a feminine word: Ruah, which can be found, for instance, in Genesis. But even if some Fathers see there an allusion to the Holy Spirit, it is not concerning the third Person of the Holy Trinity in the literal sense.

Then they claim that God is no longer seen only as “Father.” He can be called “Mother” in all propriety and we should develop inclusive—or neutral—language in all liturgical spaces. Because it is a matter of refusing a “patriarchal theology,” which is fixed on a unilateral view of things. This is why we must develop “new symbolic languages,” without settling for the masculinization of the terms employed.

From there, our feminist theologians turn to more direct demands on the place of women in the Church. They want to “actively participate in the Eucharist,” and let women be able to preside over all liturgies—even to be…bishops? They want to assume “leading roles, and no longer secondary roles.” Some see themselves as cardinals.

Finally, they want the development of a feminist theology, feminist retreats, to increase their standing, to change the stereotypical models of women who are imposed on them, especially the Blessed Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalene. It is true that there is nothing in common between the holy women and these lost Pasionarias[1].

The Synodal Road in Germany 

Last March, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Munich and Freising and President of the German Bishops’ Conference, and influential member of C6, announced “a binding synodal process” of the Church in Germany to address the “key issues” raised by the “clerical abuse” crisis. The bishops, priests and the ZdK will take part.

These issues have already been debated in forums led by the Committee. Their titles are evocative: “Power, participation and separation of powers,” “Sexual morality,” “Forms of Priestly Life,” and “Women in the services and institutions of the Church.”

The ZdK has agreed to participate in the synodal assembly on condition that the German bishops make the commitment to make synodal resolutions binding. But to what are these laymen wanting to compel the Church in Germany? They do not hide it: “the admission of civilly remarried divorcees to Holy Communion, the acceptance of all forms of cohabitation, the blessing of same-sex couples, and the re-examination of the teaching of the Church on contraception.”

Recall that the ZdK is already famous for its progressive positions, e.g., its opposition to Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanæ vitæ condemning contraception. The self-destruction of the Church in Germany will therefore gain a new lease on life.

Catholic Youth from Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and South Tyrol

Many youth movements from these three Germanic countries and the Tyrol region of Italy gathered for a few days in Innsbruck to analyze the results and progress made since the Youth Synod held in Rome in October 2018. The final declaration issued on Sunday, September 8, asks that they watch out for “unjust structures inside and outside the church.”

According to this statement, discrimination against women is always topical. This is why “the Church must not oppose the vocation of women to the priesthood by refusing them the sacrament of Orders.” The “youth” criticize the gender inequality practiced by the Church, and believe that a great step forward is necessary.

This appalling document is nothing but the logical outcome of the Synod on Youth, where the organizers have not stopped pounding the theme that the latter should teach the Church, which should start listening to them. These unfortunate idiots are less culpable than those who have created this profound reversal of the hierarchical structure of the Church. When pastors no longer teach, the flock scatters.

Another Revolution

A parallel between the evolution of the French revolution and the conciliar revolution is needed to show how the facts are linked together. Louis XVI summoned the States-General, who had opened Pandora’s box. Then came the revolution with its bloody excesses and deliberate destruction of the old order. Bonaparte restored order, but it was the revolutionary order that he systematically organized. After his fall, the Restoration gave the illusion of a return to the old order, but it ended with the July Revolution of 1830.

After John XXIII convened the Second Vatican Council, Paul VI led the revolution by launching reforms during a period of tremendous upheaval. John Paul II was the Napoleon of the Council, organizing it in the legislative texts and in an ecumenical praxis. Benedict XVI made believe in a restoration, which only continued the Council by some other means. And we are now back to revolutionary upheavals, of a Council eager to show all its poisoned fruits.

[1] “Passion flowers” in English. Reference is to Dolores Ibárruri, the “Pasionaria,” a communist leader in Spain during the Spanish civil war. Her slogan was “¡No Pasarán!” (they shall not pass!) uttered during the Battle of Madrid.