More on the Papal Correction

What do you think Leo XIII meant when he wrote, in the exorcism prayer he composed after his alleged vision of St. Michael: “In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered”? Are you familiar with this passage?

Yes, I discovered it right after Amoris Laetitia came out, and it surprised me very much because, frightening as it was, it seemed to be a perfect picture of the situation. I think no fictional writer could have imagined this and it’s a true prophecy which is unfolding now. No one could have imagined that this prophecy would really come true (at some moment that paragraph was thought so incredible that it was even deleted from the St. Michael Prayer in official texts), but I think what Leo XIII was describing is coming true.

It is important to add that this is not a moral judgment about the Pope. I think the Pope and his counsellors — for example Fr. Spadaro, whom I got to know when I was a young student in Rome — are in fact good people. I believe they are well intentioned. Pope Francis is charismatic and has many human and Christian virtues, so of course many people tend to believe him. But this is precisely what creates more confusion and so behind all of this there is a truly diabolical trick.

Excerpt from interview with Prof. Claudio Pierantoni, one of the lay scholars who helped shape the filial correction.

Advertisements

Posted on September 30, 2017, in Christianity and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 13 Comments.

  1. This post and the referred interview helped to know more about the campaign for the filial correction.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hello jn. I tried to add a comment on your blog but it disappeared into a black hole. I was just saying that the key issue for me is the statement: “Sarah no longer deliberately chooses to have sex with Mohammed, but submits reluctantly to his advances for the sake of the good of her children.” In my eyes, she is still deliberately choosing to have sex with M. She may no longer be entirely willing but she is allowing it to happen rather than taking steps to prevent it. We can all understand why she is doing so but that doesn’t change the fact that she is choosing adultery. Until she has found a way to remove herself from that situation – either by waiting until M changes his mind, or by leaving him – then Communion for her is potentially sacrilegious and scandalous, and should therefore be avoided.

      Like

      • Thanks for your comment, Sarah.
        Between a ´deliberate choice to have sex´ and ´no longer entirely willing´ >> there is an incongruity.
        Besides, strictly speaking, it is not even ´no longer entirely willing´ – it is ´no longer willing´. (M forces himself on her and if she were to take steps to prevent it, she fears consequences for the children, i.e., a messy divorce can result in the children losing out on having one parent at home – and depending on how a civil court rules, this can be either the mother or the father).
        Between ´allowing it to happen´ and ´choosing adultery´, there is a distance. Taking note of the CCC references, the question is – does it amount not only to a mortal sin but also a sin so grave that even absolution cannot be given?
        Not sure if you read the second post regarding the case for absolution – since that builds up a case for absolution.

        Like

      • Sorry jn, I have to disagree. By choosing to stay, Sarah is choosing adultery. She knows that she will be forced to have sex but she is willing to undergo that because she thinks that she is protecting her children. I think you are getting bogged down in the traps of situational ethics. Sometimes God’s law is black and white.

        Like

  2. If it were held that because of the situation (i.e., threat of divorce and consequent harm to welfare of children), it is ok for Sarah to have sex, – *that* would be situational ethics.

    But that is not the case here.

    ´By choosing to stay, Sarah is choosing adultery´.
    That´s a stretch. Why not hold that she is choosing rape?
    In reality, she chooses neither.
    Reluctant submission cannot be equated with deliberate choice.

    Like

    • Hi jn, I couldn’t get your YouTube link to work.
      So are you saying that the following is untrue:
      If you know in advance that X will happen if you do Y, and you choose to do Y then you are also implicitly choosing X?

      Like

    • Sorry, I got your video to work now, thank you. Okay, so Sarah is not necessarily committing a mortal sin – by saying that she is choosing adultery I suppose I was implying that she was. However, subjectively, she is in an adulterous relationship. We can’t judge the state of anyone’s soul (and we only have her word that she is not consenting). To approach Communion when one appears to others to be in an adulterous relationship is scandalous (and if Sarah is lying about consent then it is also potentially sacrilegious).

      Like

      • ´However, subjectively, she is in an adulterous relationship.´

        I guess you meant *objectively* she is in an adulterous relationship.
        Yes, *objectively* she is in an adulterous relationship, but subjectively she cannot be held guilty of mortal sin.

        ´We can’t judge the state of anyone’s soul (and we only have her word that she is not consenting).´
        Well everything said in the confessional is only on the penitent´s word – and a confessor does take every penitent in good faith.

        ´To approach Communion when one appears to others to be in an adulterous relationship is scandalous (and if Sarah is lying about consent then it is also potentially sacrilegious).´
        Lying about consent would not be ´potentially´ sacrilegious. It is gravely sacrilegious and another mortal sin!
        But confessors take in good faith the word of every penitent who approaches the confessional.
        Considering the facts of the Sarah case, the possibility of grant of absolution is opened up.
        To avoid scandal, as made clear in the blog post, Communion may be given only privately.

        Like

      • Sorry, I wasn’t writing precisely enough. I did mean subjectively because I was trying to stress that Sarah appears to outsiders to be committing adultery even though she may not objectively be doing so.

        I don’t think I can usefully argue the point any more. The Catholic Church has always taught that you can’t do something bad in order to achieve a good end, and it also teaches that doing the right thing may have difficult (even fatal) consequences. The priest should be persuading Sarah to leave this relationship. By staying she is exposing herself to physical harm and the whole family to moral harm.

        Like

  3. ´The Catholic Church has always taught that you can’t do something bad in order to achieve a good end.´
    Of course. If the priest were to tell Sarah, for the sake of the children, it is ok for you to engage in adultery, then that would be telling her to ´do bad in order to achieve a good end.´
    But as is clear from the Sarah case, the pastor respects Sarah´s conscientious decision, – which is only to live as sister and brother with Mohammed, and not to engage in adultery with him.

    Our perceptions on the issue are different. I guess we have to agree to disagree on this issue.
    My point is that Amoris Laetitia can and should be read in an orthodox manner and that what is presented in the Sarah case does not conflict with Sacred Scripture or Sacred Tradition.

    God bless!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you for keeping this discussion civilised. These things so often get acrimonious. You’ve helped me to understand your position. I can see where you’re coming from, and I respect your motives. May God bless you also. I will keep you in my prayers.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: