Tradcast Express
Tradcast Express, it's Thursday, June 7th, 2018.
The Vatican's latest official document quotes Pope St. Pius X.
Can you believe it?
Yeah, well, unfortunately, the document is about sports,
and that's why they didn't mind mentioning Pope Pius X,
who reigned as Supreme Pontiff from 1903 to 1914,
and was the arch-enemy of modernism.
The document that was just released on June 1st is entitled
Giving the Best of Yourself,
a document on the Christian perspective on sport and the human person,
and it was published by the Vatican's Dicastery for Laity, Family, and Life.
And now you know why they didn't have time to make every effort
to keep Ireland from legalizing abortion.
It's because they were working on a 37-page, 21,000-word document about exercising.
Well, I mean, priorities, you know.
So, what is Pius X quoted as saying?
Let me just read to you the entire short paragraph as follows.
Quote,
In 1904, Pius X opened the doors of the Vatican to sport
by hosting a youth championship.
Gymnastics event.
The chronicles of that time do not hide their amazement towards this gesture.
A story is reported that in response to the question from a puzzled priest of the Curia,
where are we going to finish?
Pius X replied,
My dear, in paradise.
Unquote.
So, yeah, out of all the topics they could have quoted Pope Pius X on,
out of all the things he said during his pontificate,
this is what they chose to quote.
And you notice that they don't even call him Saint Pius X.
They just refer to him as Pius X.
Well, you know, he was only incorrupt when they canonized him in 1954, but hey.
Paul VI, you can bet your bottom dollar, is going to get the title Saint all over.
And that will happen in October this year, in case you didn't hear about it yet.
So, yep, the Francis will actually declare the one man most responsible
for the existence of the Novus Ordo religion.
The way we know it, to be a Roman Catholic saint.
Now, a true Pope, of course, would not be able to do that.
And that is going to be yet another proof that Francis cannot be what he claims to be,
namely, the Pope of the Catholic Church.
And that still won't matter to people like Christopher Ferraro, of course,
who said in 2011 that it would be impossible for John Paul II to be declared a saint.
But, well, in 2014, Francis,
did precisely that.
And what did Ferraro do?
Did he conclude that, therefore, Francis could not possibly be a true Pope?
No, of course not.
In fact, on May 3rd of this year, Ferraro published a post on the Remnants Fetzenfliegen blog
entitled, Will No One in the Hierarchy Follow the Example of St. Paul?
And in this post, he once again appeals to the incident of St. Paul rebuking St. Peter,
recorded in 1418.
In Galatians chapter 2, verses 11 through 14, here's what Ferraro says, quote,
When St. Paul went to Antioch and encountered the error of the first Pope
in refusing to eat with the Gentiles, clinging to the old law and thus jeopardizing the Church's
universal mission, he did not issue an epistle calling upon the Galatians to reaffirm the
universality of the divine commission while failing to oppose the very Pope who, in his
very presence, was fatally compromising it.
Rather, he issued an epistle in which he recounts that he had been forced to oppose
Peter to the face because he was to be blamed, Galatians 2.11.
St. Paul thus recorded the divinely revealed truth about what the Church must do when confronted
by a wayward Pope, unquote.
Yeah, well, except that Galatians 2 is not talking about a Pope teaching error, but about
a Pope behaving in a potentially scandalous manner.
That's a crucial difference.
Some scripture scholars, such as St. Augustine, doctor of the Church, for example, said that
St. Peter was merely guilty of a venial fault of imprudence, nothing more.
And yet, by applying this passage to our situation today with Francis, Ferraro makes it seem
as though St. Peter had, you know, fallen into apostasy or something.
In any case, whatever the actual sin or degree of sin may have been, this was not an instance
of St. Peter teaching error.
It was an instance of St. Peter teaching the Church, as Francis does in Amoris Laetitia.
It was an instance of St. Peter conducting himself a certain way with the Jews in relation
to the Gentiles.
And you can look this up in traditional Catholic sources that speak about this passage.
For example, in paragraph number 283 of his book On the Church of Christ, which is part
of the Sacre Theologiae Summa Dogmatic Theology Collection, published in the mid-1950s,
Father Joachim Saloveri writes that St. Paul did not correct St. Peter for an error in
teaching, but for his way of acting, which was less suited to the truth of the teaching.
And he goes on to say this in paragraph 284, quote,
The truth of the teaching that must be held by all is this, that the observance of the
Mosaic Law for Christians, in addition to the Law of Christ, is not necessary for salvation,
but they are free to observe it if they wish.
And let me just interject here and point out that that was true only until the destruction
of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD, because that is when the Mosaic Law, observance of
the Mosaic Law, became intrinsically wrong.
Therefore, de facto to observe it could not be said to be forbidden intrinsically, or
by reason of the truth itself of the teaching, but extrinsically, or by reason of the teaching.
extrinsically, or by reason of the teaching.
And so Paul himself, when he took on Timothy as a companion, circumcised him because of
the Jews, Acts 16.3.
Rightly, therefore, Tertullian said,
Saint Robert Bellarmine too writes about this, quote,
When St. Peter compelled the Gentiles to Judaize, this was not an error of preaching, but of
conduct.
St. Peter did not ratify by some decree that they must Judaize, rather he formally taught
the contrary in Acts 15.
Nevertheless, when he was still in Antioch,
he separated himself from the dinner table of the Gentiles, lest he would give offense to those
recently converted to the faith from the Jews, and by his example compelled them to Judaize in a
certain measure, even Barnabas. But we do not deny that popes can offer the occasion of erring
through their own bad example. Rather, we deny that they can prescribe the whole church to follow
some error ex cathedra. Moreover, the examples and doctrines of the pontiffs are not equally
pernicious to the church, seeing that the Lord instructed them, saying, Do what they say,
but do not do what they do. Unquote. And that is from St. Robert Bellarmine's De Romano Pontifice
on the Roman Pontiff, Book 4, Chapter 8, and here I'm using the Ryan Grant translation.
So you can see that Ferrara is simply hijacking this passage because it floats his boat. He's
looking for something to use to advance the idea that the Pope can teach all sorts
of nonsense, even heresy, to the entire church, as Francis regularly does, and then the proper
response is to resist him to his face while still recognizing him as a valid Pope. And that is
simply not what St. Paul is saying in Galatians 2. The divinely revealed teaching in Galatians 2
is that one must rebuke even the Pope, if necessary, with regard to his personal moral
failures, not with regard to his magisterium.
So, exit Mr. Ferrara.
In other news, Dr. Brian McCall has become the new editor-in-chief of Catholic Family News,
filling the position that was formerly held by Mr. John Venari, who passed away in 2017.
The managing editor is Matthew Gaspers. Catholic Family News is a flagship recognize-and-resist
publication. It advertises itself as adhering to the traditional Catholic faith
100 times.
And yet it does not adhere to the Catholic teaching on the papacy, for example, because
they insist that Francis is the Pope of the Catholic Church, while at the same time they
refuse him submission, reject his teachings and laws, overrule his decisions, reject his canonized
saints, and so forth. So when McCall writes that he is committed to proclaiming the beautiful and
unchanging truths of the Catholic faith, I guess he means that the papacy is not one of them.
For more information on that, you can go to our blog at novusortowatch.org slash wire and search for
the post entitled Catholic Family News and the 100% Challenge, and you will see that they do not,
in fact, adhere to the Catholic faith 100%.
Now, Brian McCall is a U.S. attorney and an academic. He's also the author of three books
and has contributed as a writer to the Catholic Church. So, if you're interested in learning more
about him, you can go to the Latin Mass Magazine, Catholic Family News, The Remnant, and The
Angelus. The one article from him that I will always remember is the one he published in The
Remnant on September 9th, 2009, which was a commentary on the new encyclical that Benedict
XVI, Joseph Ratzinger, had just released then, entitled Caritas In Veritate. McCall opens his
article thus, quote,
Your experience reading the third encyclical of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI may have been similar
to my own. As I read through the text, I experienced the sensation of paradox and confusion. At one
point, I would rejoice over a clear affirmation of Catholic truth, much in need of proclamation
in these troubled times. But often, such a jewel would be followed by an almost incomprehensible
phrase, such as authentic integral human development, or a troubling practical suggestion,
such as the call for a global revolution. I would rejoice over a clear affirmation of Catholic truth,
such as the call for a global political authority capable of enforcing its decisions. Unquote.
Does this sound familiar, ladies and gentlemen? Yep, all the confusion and contradictions and
such, they didn't just start with Francis, you know? Francis is just taking everything
to a whole new level. In any case, later on in the article, McCall suggests that although
the encyclical Caritas In Veritate of Benedict XVI, although that encyclical is filled with
all sorts of novel things, it is not entirely true. The encyclical is filled with all sorts of novel
Vatican II terminology that is virtually incomprehensible to Catholics, since Benedict
XVI assures his readers that he is nevertheless teaching the apostolic faith unchanged from the
past, therefore a decoder is necessary to translate this Ratzinger speak into Catholicism.
Here is Brian McCall, quote, the consequence of this continued linguistic policy is that one needs
to approach the encyclical like a decoder. The Holy Father has told us that he is teaching the
same apostolic tradition. The same doctrine is pre-conciliar teaching. We must therefore read
the confusing language in light of tradition and translate the new ambiguous language into the
traditional language of the church. There is insufficient time to provide a complete codebook
of language for the encyclical, but here is my attempt at translating some of the major
forms of the encyclical.
Phrases used by the Holy Father, unquote.
Yeah, we'll just leave it at that. Folks, this is nothing but what the neo-Catholics,
the conservative Novels Orders are doing today with Francis. You've got Francis spouting all
these errors, the heresies and blasphemies, and then the pundits come in and tell you what Francis
really means. But I guess we're going to have to wait and see.
I guess when the Remnant does it with Benedict XVI, then it's considered, you know, top-notch
traditional Catholicism, right? In any case, the Ratzinger-speak decoder Brian McCall is now the
head of Catholic Family News. Don't say you weren't warned.
Tradcast Express is a production of Novos Ordo Watch. Check us out at tradcast.org,
and if you like what we're doing, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution
at
novosordowatch.org
slash
donate.