Almost Always  At Odds With Themselves

by Thomas A. Droleskey

As has been noted on this site quite a lot in the past four years, paradox and contradiction are of the essence of the the Modernist mindset of those who control the counterfeit church of conciliarism. I have explained in the past how Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's penchant for self-contradiction is evident even to some sedeplenists (that is, those who believe that the papal seat is held legitimately at this time by Benedict XVI):

In Cardinal Ratzinger’s Values in a Time of Upheaval, he muddies up his phrase [the dictatorship of relativism]; indeed, he reverses his position. He says, “The modem concept of democracy seems indissolubly linked to that of relativism.” Well, well! But then he backtracks: “This means that a basic element of truth, namely, ethical truth, is indispensable to democracy.” But then he backtracks again: “We do not want the State to impose one particular idea of the good on us. ... Truth is controversial, and the attempt to impose on all persons what one part of the citizenry holds to be true looks like enslavement of people’s consciences.” And he says this on the same page!

Yes, we know: Some of our readers feel that the Pope is above all criticism; he cannot make a mistake, even in his previous writings. But what he has written here is contradictory and inscrutable.

Ratzinger says, “The relativists ...[are] flirting with totalitarianism even though they seek to establish the primacy of freedom ...” Huh?

So, what is he saying? “The State is not itself the source of truth and morality.... Accordingly, the State must receive from outside itself the essential measure of knowledge and truth with regard to that which is good. ... The Church remains outside’ the State. ... The Church must exert itself with all its vigor so that in it there may shine forth moral truth ...”

Then he says, “Conscience is the highest norm [italics in original] and ... and one must follow it even against authority. When authority - in this case the Church’s Magisterium - speaks on matters of morality, it supplies the material that helps the conscience form its own judgment, but ultimately it is only conscience that has the last word.”

So the Church’s Magisterium will not “exert itself with all its vigor,” because “conscience has the last word.” Indeed, Ratzinger says that “one must follow the erring conscience.” Does the Church support relativism too? Pope John Paul II said in his Encyclical Veritatis Splendor, “Conscience is not an infallible judge” (n. 62; italics in original).

What happened to a rightly formed conscience? The Catechism says, “Personal conscience and reason should not be set in opposition to the moral law or the Magisterium of the Church” (n. 2039), and “One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience” (n. 1793). (A Contradictory Definition of Relativism. See also: Cardinal Ratzinger's Subjectivism.)

 

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI does not realize that he contradicts himself almost incessantly. He has, for instance, explained in different allocutions and addresses that "the" key to world peace is "religious liberty" and that "the" key to world peace is "coexistence" among religions and that "the" key to world peace is to "respect creation" and that "the" key to world peace is to reject the "dictatorship of relativism." There are, however, few things more relativistic and self-contradictory than Ratzinger/Benedict's own "New Theology," which is premised upon the belief that truth can contain within itself the seeds of its own internal contradictions, something that was believed by the false "pontiff's own mentor, the late Father Hans Urs von Balthasar (see The Inflated Reputation of Hans Urs von Balthasar). 

At the root of Ratzinger/Benedict's is his rejection of the Scholasticism of Saint Thomas Aquinas, which is founded on clarity of thought and logic. Ratzinger himself has told us in his own autobiography that he found the writing of the Angelic Doctor to be too "crystal clear" for his own liking. This says a lot about the conciliarist mindset as those who reject the method of one of the greatest sons of Saint Dominic de Guzman, O.P., Saint Thomas Aquinas, are never free from the suspicion of error and heresy, something that Pope Leo XIII made clear in Aeterni Patris, August 4, 1879:

But, furthermore, Our predecessors in the Roman pontificate have celebrated the wisdom of Thomas Aquinas by exceptional tributes of praise and the most ample testimonials. Clement VI in the bull 'In Ordine;' Nicholas V in his brief to the friars of the Order of Preachers, 1451; Benedict XIII in the bull 'Pretiosus,' and others bear witness that the universal Church borrows luster from his admirable teaching; while St. Pius V declares in the bull 'Mirabilis' that heresies, confounded and convicted by the same teaching, were dissipated, and the whole world daily freed from fatal errors; others, such as Clement XII in the bull 'Verbo Dei,' affirm that most fruitful blessings have spread abroad from his writings over the whole Church, and that he is worthy of the honor which is bestowed on the greatest Doctors of the Church, on Gregory and Ambrose, Augustine and Jerome; while others have not hesitated to propose St. Thomas for the exemplar and master of the universities and great centers of learning whom they may follow with unfaltering feet. On which point the words of Blessed Urban V to the University of Toulouse are worthy of recall: 'It is our will, which We hereby enjoin upon you, that ye follow the teaching of Blessed Thomas as the true and Catholic doctrine and that ye labor with all your force to profit by the same.' Innocent XII, followed the example of Urban in the case of the University of Louvain, in the letter in the form of a brief addressed to that university on February 6, 1694, and Benedict XIV in the letter in the form of a brief addressed on August 26, 1752, to the Dionysian College in Granada; while to these judgments of great Pontiffs on Thomas Aquinas comes the crowning testimony of Innocent VI: 'is teaching above that of others, the canonical writings alone excepted, enjoys such a precision of language, an order of matters, a truth of conclusions, that those who hold to it are never found swerving from the path of truth, and he who dare assail it will always be suspected of error.'

The ecumenical councils, also, where blossoms the flower of all earthly wisdom, have always been careful to hold Thomas Aquinas in singular honor. In the Councils of Lyons, Vienna, Florence, and the Vatican one might almost say that Thomas took part and presided over the deliberations and decrees of the Fathers, contending against the errors of the Greeks, of heretics and rationalists, with invincible force and with the happiest results. But the chief and special glory of Thomas, one which he has shared with none of the Catholic Doctors, is that the Fathers of Trent made it part of the order of conclave to lay upon the altar, together with sacred Scripture and the decrees of the supreme Pontiffs, the 'Summa' of Thomas Aquinas, whence to seek counsel, reason, and inspiration.

A last triumph was reserved for this incomparable man -- namely, to compel the homage, praise, and admiration of even the very enemies of the Catholic name. For it has come to light that there were not lacking among the leaders of heretical sects some who openly declared that, if the teaching of Thomas Aquinas were only taken away, they could easily battle with all Catholic teachers, gain the victory, and abolish the Church. A vain hope, indeed, but no vain testimony. (Pope Leo XIII, Aeterni Patris, August 4, 1879.)

 

It is no wonder, therefore, that confusion and chaos reign supreme throughout the counterfeit church of concilairism as "conservative" conciliarists are sometimes very much at odds with "progressive" conciliarists as to whose interpretation of the "Second" Vatican Council is legitimate (see Contradictors Contradicting Each Other as They Contradict the Faith). Open warfare has broken out between a few "conservative" "bishops" in the United States of America and their more "progressive" confreres over whether to distribute what purports to be Holy Communion to Catholic pro-aborts in public life. The conciliar Vatican, far from siding with the "conservative" "bishops," has taken a middle course in most instances, going so far as to accept the resignation of the conciliar "bishop" of Scranton, Pennsylvania, Joseph Martino, because he was too outspoken in his opposition against pro-abortion Catholic politicians, including the Vice President of the United States of America, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. (Spotlight On The Ordinary).

There is also much confusion in conciliar circles concerning the false apparitions in Medjugorje, Bosnia-Herzegovina. Conciliar officials in the Vatican have discouraged "official" pilgrimages to Medjugorje, where Our Lady is said to have been appearing every day since 1981 to seers who have become ver wealthy as a result of their false claims, while at the same time providing assurances that those who do go there "unofficially" must have their pastoral needs met.

This is so typical of the double-mindedness associated with Modernism, a double-mindedness that finds it impossible to take a clear, decisive stand against something that is clear not of God. It is not an exercise in cynicism to state that about the only thing that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has taken and maintained a clear, decisive stand is his condemnation of Bishop Richard Williamson's view on the nature and extent of the crimes committed by the agents of Adolf Hitler's Third Reich, which is one of the reasons that the false "pontiff" will be making his way in but twelve days to the Talmudic synagogue in Rome as he assures the adherents of this false religion of his felicitations without, of course, inviting them to convert with urgency to the true Faith, outside of which there is no salvation.

The double-mindedness of the conciliar authorities with respect to the false apparitions in Medjugorje that have been promoted principally, although not entirely exclusively, by the disciples of conciliar Pentecostalism (known in conciliar circles as the "Catholic Charismatic Renewal") has engendered not a few conflicts between the conciliar authorities in Bosnia-Herzegovina and those in other parts of the world. A new conflict has arisen as a result of a recent visit, made during Christmastide, by the conciliar primate of Vienna, Christoph "Cardinal" Schonborn, whose conciliarism has been profiled any number of times on this site in recent years (see Wild Card or Mirror Image?, Any Day Now, They Continue to Caricature Themselves, Unbent and Unaware, Meltdown, "Thumbs Up" From a Communist for an Apostate, Negotiating To Become An Apostate, and Apostasy Is His Field), to Medjugorje that was termed "private" in nature. While on his "private" visit, however, Christoph Schonborn, a protege of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who is said to be opposed to the legitimacy of the "apparitions" in Medjugorje, conducted the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo worship service publicly and also gave an interview in which he praised the "good fruit" associated with the "apparitions," thus angering the conciliar "bishop" of Mostar-Duvno in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Ratko Peric. An old-fashioned Pier 6 donnybrook has now broken out between Schonborn and Peric:

Medjugorje, Bosnia, Jan 4, 2010 / 06:58 pm (CNA).- Most Rev. Ratko Peric, the Bishop of Mostar-Duvno in Bosnia-Herzegovina, released a statement in which he criticizes Vienna, Austria’s Cardinal Christoph Schönborn for making a highly publicized “personal visit” to the region in which Mary is said to have been appearing since 1981.

In his statement, released on January 2, Bishop Peric noted that it was his “duty, as diocesan bishop, to provide information to the faithful” regarding the nature of the apparitions, the divide they have caused in his diocese and the official position of the Church on the anomaly.

The apparitions have not been officially recognized by the Church.

Peric’s statement explained that due to the ongoing apparitions and the ensuing debate, his diocese now unwillingly hosts a number of “new communities and associations of the faithful who, in disobedience, live at Medjugorje.” These communities, he said, “may become encouraged in their ecclesial disobedience because of the cardinal’s visit.”

The statement also called into question a November 13, 2009 statement from Vienna’s Kath.net claiming that during Schönborn’s visit, “there will also be a meeting with the local bishop and the critics of Medjugorje.” However, as of the release of the bishop’s statement, the Diocese of Mostar had received no official communication from Schönborn’s office of the cardinal’s intent to visit the shrine. This lack of notification, Peric said, displays the lack of a “certain ecclesial courtesy” among prelates who are want to inform their brother bishops when one is about to visit the other’s diocese.

The bishop concluded that Schönborn’s visit, especially his actions and statements, “have added to the current suffering of the local church.”

Bishop Peric’s complete statement is as follows:

On the occasion of the visit of Cardinal Schönborn to Medjugorje

Since the media have announced, and been present during the visit and the public presence of Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna, to Medjugorje, which has thus sparked a wrong impression that the Cardinal, by his presence, has recognized the authenticity of the “apparitions” of Medjugorje, I regard it to be my duty, as diocesan bishop, to provide some information to the faithful, noting that I have already sent a personal letter of similar content to the cardinal.

1. Before we begin, some media have propagated the news story that, on Sept. 15, 2009, at the Cathedral of St. Stephen in Vienna a meeting took place, at which his eminence Cardinal Schönborn was present during which Marija Pavlovíc-Lunetti, the daily “visionary” who has allegedly witnessed the daily “apparitions” of June 1981, spoke of how the “apparitions had influenced the changing of her life. On that occasion, the Cardinal, responded in a speech: “ It is a great gift that the Mother of God wants to be so close to her children! She has demonstrated this in so many places in the world. And she has been demonstrating this in a very special manner at Medjugorje for years and years.”

2. Then, on Nov 13, 2009, Kath.net of Vienna announced: “The Archbishop of Vienna will visit the well-known Marian shrine at the end of the year, including the parish and the Cenacle Community. There will also be a meeting with the local bishop and the critics of Medjugorje.” The curia of this diocese was not informed by the office of the archbishop nor by the Medjugorje parish office of the Cardinal’s visit.

3. On Nov 16, 2009,the Catholic News Agency published the news story: “Cardinal Christoph Schönborn will visit Medjugorje, the small town in Bosnia-Herzegovina where six young people have allegedly been witnesses of apparitions from the Virgin Mary. But according to the Archdiocese of Vienna, the trip is 'completely private' and does not imply a statement from the cardinal on the veracity of the apparitions. It was supposed to be a completely private visit, it was not supposed to go out to the Internet,' said Fr. Johannes Fürnkranz, personal secretary to the Archbishop of Vienna.”

4. On December 29, 2009, Cardinal Schönborn arrived in Medjugorje. The media accompanied him the next day and on others as well. According to the news, he delivered a speech at the church of St. James the Apostle that highlighted the mercy of God the Father. In that speech, he said: “Who could put these things in motion? Who could invent them? A man? No, this is not the work of a human being.”

On December 31, 2009, journalists transmitted: “While some were expecting that the Cardinal’s visit to Medjugorje would be private, he has nevertheless surprised the locals by being very visible. He has spent time celebrating Mass at the Church of St. James the Apostle, walking up the hill where the apparitions occur with the visionary Marija Lunetti, praying in the silence of Adoration, and perhaps the most significant thing, delivering a speech at the parish church in the company of the Franciscans.”

1. In all of this, I have to admit that, as diocesan bishop of the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno, I have remained very surprised. I understand that a cardinal of the Holy Roman Church enjoys the faculty to confess and preach the gospel in all the Catholic Church. But when it comes to public appearances outside of his own diocese, there is, among us bishops, a certain ecclesial courtesy: the bishop or the cardinal who is planning on coming to another diocese and appearing publicly, announces himself to the local bishop first, something suggested by ecclesial prudence. I believe that such ecclesial prudence, and such a rule, deserved to be applied especially in this case.

2. I am surprised that the office of Cardinal Schönborn has not, to the day of the publication of this statement, contacted us. I suppose that the Cardinal is aware of the Church’s position regarding Medjugorje, a position based on the investigations and conclusions according to which it is not possible to say, “The apparitions or revelations are supernatural.” His visit to the Cenacle Community, that is to say, to Sister Elvira, who obiter dicendo, as a religious does not have the permission to live or work in this diocesan territory, could be interpreted as a support for her. It can not only be interpreted as support to her, but also to the conspicuous number of new communities and associations of the faithful who live in Medjugorje in disobedience, and may read an encouragement to their ecclesial disobedience into the Cardinal’s visit.

3. As bishop of the diocese, I will highlight and repeat some painful facts:

 

• First of all, I highlight the painful “Herzegonvinian case” of the parishes which are linked to the “Medjugorje phenomenon:” from the beginning, some Franciscans, who were then in disobedience, have decisively taken the side of the figure of Medjugorje, accusing the then-diocesan bishop of causing the local crisis. One of them has since left the order and the priesthood.

• In the territory of the diocese, we now have nine ex-Franciscans who were dismissed by the superiors of the Order of Friars Minor. The Holy See has confirmed such their dismissal. Despite being suspended a divinis, they operate in the usurped parishes as legal priests. While the alleged figure of Medjugorje responds to the most frivolous questions of the curious, we have never heard a word against the grave abuses that are damaging the unity of this local church.

• We have had a tragic experience in 2001: A few Franciscans, some of whom had already been dismissed by their order, and some others who had not yet been dismissed, invited an “old-Catholic” (a small European schismatic community) deacon who introduced himself as an “archbishop” who “confirmed” more than 700 young people in the usurped parishes. All of this occurred invalidly and sacrilegiously. He also celebrated the Mass invalidly as a deacon in some parishes. The apparition of Medjugorje doesn’t even mention this abuse of the Sacrament of the Holy Spirit and the Holy Eucharist!

• We have also had another sad episode: Two of these priests have gone to an “old-Catholic” bishop in Switzerland requesting to be ordained bishops and to separate themselves from Mostar and from Rome in order to create a formal schism. This is something the “old-Catholic” bishop has declined to do.

• We also have had problems with the presence of two particularly charismatic promoters of the “Medjugorje phenomenon.” One of who is the profoundly disobedient Tomislav Vlašic, who was dismissed from the Franciscans
• Last year, and who the Holy See has relieved, upon his own request, from any priestly duty or responsibility. The other is Brother Jozo Zovko, who has been deprived from any priestly duty in the territory of this diocese since 2004, and who, according to news stories, has been pulled out of the territory of Herzegovina by his religious superiors and has been forbade from any contact with Medjugorje.

 

The Cardinal remained enthusiastic about the many confessions heard at Medjugorje where the Father’s mercy was expressed. We believe that the mercy of the Heavenly Father is equally expressed in Medjugorje as in any other parish of our diocese, before or after the Medjugorje phenomenon. Just take a look at the long lines of faithful in front of the confessionals in all of our parishes, especially before Christmas, Easter, liturgical feasts, or confirmations. Many claim that the confessions at Medjugorje are a strong proof that our Lady “appears.” According to such conclusions regarding to the numerous confessions, our Lady would appear in all of our parishes, and not only to those three persons to which she appears once a year at Medjugorje and the other three to whom she appears every day, both inside and outside of Medjugorje, and even at the Vienna cathedral, as they say. In total, up to now, some 40,000 “apparitions!” Moreover, we have the impression that some of the “visionaries” decide where and when Our Lady will “appear,” since she appears where and when they want. Isn’t this an unacceptable manipulation of Our Lady, and of the sacred in general?

As diocesan bishop, I wish to inform the faithful with this statement that the visit of Cardinal Christoph Schönborn does not imply any recognition of the “apparitions” related to Medjugorje, I am saddened by the fact that the Cardinal, with his visit, presence, and statements, has contributed to the current suffering of the local church, and even added to it, which does not contribute to the much needed peace and unity.

Ratko Peric, bishop

 

It is a tragedy that "Bishop" Ratko Peric is associated with the counterfeit church of conciliarism as he has the apostolic courage necessary to be a true bishop in defense of the true Faith against the falsehoods of conciliarism. The Medjugorje apparitions are clearly false, and one of the greatest ironies is that a proof of their falsehood stems from an alleged statement of Our Lady that it does not matter what religion a person belongs to as long as they are sincere in their beliefs, something that the Mother of God, who has sought the conversion of individuals and nations to the true Faith, would never say. This is ironic because the conciliar "pontiffs" reaffirm adherents of false religions in their false beliefs. If only "Bishop Peric understood this irony he might be inclined to accept the face that his conciliar "pontiff" is an apostate.

There is, of course, another tragedy to this whole episode that is so typical of the counterfeit church of conciliarism: Ratzinger/Benedict will do next to nothing to clarify the situation, although some conciliar dicastery might issue a statement reiterating the ban on "official" pilgrimages while attempting to claim that Christoph Schonborn's visit was "private." It is very doubtful that the conciliar Vatican is going to reprimand Schonborn publicly. Indeed, it is more likely that "Bishop" Ratko Peric might find himself in a time-share condominium with "Bishop" Joseph Martino.

Remember, it is now 269 days (or 6,456 hours or 387,360 minutes or 23,241,600 seconds; see Date Calculator - number of days between dates) since Robert Zollitsch, the conciliar "archbishop" of Freibourg im Breisgau, Germany, and the president of the German conference of conciliar "bishops," denied that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ died on the wood of the Holy Cross in atonement for our sins without a word of "papal" rebuke. What's the big deal about giving mixed signals about Medjugorje when a doctrine of the Faith has been denied by a prominent "archbishop," who has been allowed to continue in his post and to remain without censure thereafter.

As I noted a few weeks ago now, Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., explained in but one sentence the simple fact those steeped in error cannot have any part in the Catholic Church, meaning that Federico Lombardi's desire to put aside "differences" is of the devil, not of God:

There is a fatal instinct in error, which leads it to hate the Truth; and the true Church, by its unchangeableness, is a perpetual reproach to them that refuse to be her children. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, commentary on the life of Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen.)

 

The true Church, the Catholic Church, cannot countenance falsehood and error. Although there have been disputes aplenty among bishops in the past even when we had true popes, the sorts of disputes occurring at this time in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, some of which involve clear, outright, public rejections of the doctrine of the Faith, are almost without precedent as the conciliarists seem almost always to be at odds with each other.

Tomorrow is the great feast of the Epiphany of Our Lord, the time in which He was made manifest to the Three Kings from the East. We permit Him to make Himself manifest in our own souls as we seek to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, giving unto Him all of our prayers and sacrifices and sufferings and humiliations that we endure through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother. This is the moment that God has chosen for us to be alive, which means that there is work for us to do as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit. We must accept the difficulties of the present moment, no matter their source, as coming from the hand of God and as we thank Him with a hearty "Deo gratias!" each time that we are called to suffer for Him and His Sacred Truths.

May our recitation of the Joyful Mysteries today help us to prepare to make Our Lord manifest each day in our own lives by means of our conduct and deportment so that He may live in us more fully as we die to self, lifting high the Cross with love and joy.

Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

 

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Pope Saint Telesphorus, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints