One wonders how the present era is so awash with madness, and silliness? One looks to the Catholic Church for wisdom, and so often finds oneself bulldozed by endless documents emanating from the Vatican, since the opening of The Second Vatican Council, that are usually very long, sometimes wonderful, like several of Blessed John Paul II’s encyclicals, and Benedict XVI’s encylicals, and then there are many that are boring, and out of date like “Gaudium et Spes”, which was never really in date, or unwittingly revolutionary like Blessed John XXIII’s opening speech at The Second Vatican Council. John XXIII who had a wonderful devotion to St. Francis de Sales, never quite cottoned on to the fact, that Francis might have had the softest of velvet gloves, but the fist within was made of spiritual tungsten steel. One cannot imagine the “Gentle Doctor” talking about error and making it sound like the person who is erring. Here we see how the saintly Pope's vagueness regarding how to deal with error makes:
In these days, which mark the beginning of this Second Vatican Council, it is more obvious than ever before that the Lord's truth is indeed eternal. Human ideologies change. Successive generations give rise to varying errors, and these often vanish as quickly as they came, like mist before the sun.
The Church has always opposed these errors, and often condemned them with the utmost severity. Today, however, Christ's Bride prefers the balm of mercy to the arm of severity. She believes that, present needs are best served by explaining more fully the purport of her doctrines, rather than by publishing condemnations.
Not that the need to repudiate and guard against erroneous teaching and dangerous ideologies is less today than formerly. But all such error is so manifestly contrary to rightness and goodness, and produces such fatal results, that our contemporaries show every inclination to condemn it of their own accord.
Would that the errors had dissolved like mist in the morning sun. Quite the opposite happened, and errors spread like wild fire throughout the Church causing the immense havoc that is still with us. From the time of the Council men have embraced error with unbounded enthusiasm. Blessed John XXIII had a wonderfully attractive sanctity based on an imitation of St. Francis de Sales, but one cannot imagine Francis, even though he was even more gentle than John, who never ceased to be the down to earth peasant that he was, being gentle on error when he was preaching in the Chablais and courting martyrdom every day for two years as he pamphleteered and preached in the most difficult conditions. Francis would be very gentle with heretics, and if John was talking about the erring, or the heretic, it makes perfect sense. One should try and be merciful to a Pelagius, or to an Arius, but how can one be merciful to a heresy. It is, sadly, patent nonsense. It’s rather like being merciful to a lie, or a mathematical error, it is just impossible. With that small slip between cup and lip, the whole edifice of the Catholic attitude to heresy was tragically diluted, and the reformed Holy Office, now bearing the rather dull name of the CDF, became like a toothless tiger with blunted claws.
The warm hearted John, getting carried away in true Italian style, which has none of the restraint of Francis, quite wrongly dismissed those Catholics who were, rightly, very pessimistic about the world of the early 1960’s and well they might have been. What most commentators of Vatican II fail to point out is, that four days after the opening of The Second Vatican Council began, the Cuba Crisis exploded on the World, and by 27th of that month there was almost a nuclear war. That should have shown John that his optimism was somewhat misplaced. It is to his eternal, credit that it was due to him, as far as one can make out, that the Cuba crisis did not become a terrifying nuclear war. So his optimism about being open to the World must have taken quite a drubbing. If those were the problems that he was facing with the West and the Soviet Bloc, they paled into insignificance when one considers what some of his cardinals were up to.
Many years later Cardinal Tisserant, who sported an enormous beard worthy of an old fashioned Capuchin, was talking to the famous French philosopher Jean Guitton, who has been described as one of the greatest Catholic thinkers of the late 20th century. The Cardinal showed a portrait of himself and some fellow cardinals to Guitton and said:
“This picture is historic, or rather symbolic. It shows the meeting we had before the opening of the council, when we decided to block the first session by refusing the tyrannical rules laid down by John XXIII”
In that amazing statement, coupled with John’s mistaking error for the one who errs, we can see how the Church went mad, and is still reeling from such things. The Pope is the head of the Church, he is infallible. The Church is not run on the lines envisaged by The Council of Constance, when regular councils, every several years, would reduce the Pope to being simply a chairman. The Catholic Church ultimately is governed by the Pope, who is infallible in matters of Doctrine and Faith. John, bullied by rebels, withdrew his authority, and his successor, the gentle and intellectual Paul VI would spend his pontificate mourning the State of the Church, ringing his hands about it, and not doing very much to stop the chaos. By the time John Paul II appeared the damage had been done.
What is the damage? It is simply this: the pre Vatican II Church is supposed to have been wrong on most things, and now the Vatican II Church can do business with “The World”. The World is represented by people like Khruschev, Mao, Nixon, Pol Pot, Castro, Amin, and many many other people, many of whom are politicians, and others who are very powerful businessmen like the Rockefellers, Bill Gates and George Soros. Added to these doyennes of power and wealth the world of 20th century philosophy was hardly friendly to the Church, when one thinks of people like Sartre, or batty people like Derrida, or even the legendary Wittgenstein, until his conversion to Christianity. Then the arts could not be less congenial to Christianity when one considers Cubism, atonal composers like Berg, Schoenberg and John Cage, and it gets more and more mad, and the middle class intelligentsia purr with delight over all this nonsense, and cannot see that the Emperor has no clothes.
The acme of lunacy is reached when the Anglican Archbishop of York, John Sentamu says that there is an anomaly when a priest can bless a tree or a sheep but not a human relationship, which obviously means a gay relationship, but how can you bless a sin, and here one sees a terrifying link with Blessed John XXIII muddling error up with the erring. The Archbishop of Nairobi Dr Wabulaka’s pertinent observations on his fellow African’s thinking is given below. It is sad that Archbishop Wakabula is not Archbishop of York, or better still Canterbury.
Referring to comments by the Archbishop of York that the Church needed to think about the anomalies in a situation where it is willing to bless a tree or a sheep, but not a faithful human relationship, Dr Wabukala said the anomaly only exists, if it really is the case that a committed homosexual union can also be Christian.
Archbishop Wabukala has hit the nail on the head. Living under a more moderate tyrant than Idi Amin, namely President Arap Moi he, at least has not lost his head. One wonders if Archbishop Sentamu had lost his head literally then he would certainly be in better theological shape than he is now. What the Church of England fails to realize is that the Gay world is overwhelming promisicuous and not interested in marriage. Apparently the push for “Gay Marriage” so I am told, comes from, not only homosexual ideologues, but from “Gay” MPs. If the Anglican hierarchy would care to simply think coherently and logically, then they would realize that many heterosexuals aren’t getting married these days, so why should homosexuals want to? It would be good to remind Archbishop Welby and Archbishop Sentamu that one must think with the tradition of the Church, and heed the words of Dean Inge; “He who marries the spirit of the age will soon find himself a widower.” One can take heart from the fact that John XXIII was a saint living under the shadow of two terrible world wars. Justin Welby and John Sentamu should know better they have not; they should simply think, something these days that seems to be beyond must bishops, whether they be Catholic, Anglican, or Lutheran. As St. John Chrysostom, that great bishop and Father of the Church, rather worryingly commented, “Most bishops go to Hell.” That hopefully will concentrate the minds of the Archbishops of York and Canterbury.
St. Joseph, Protector of the Church, batter some sense into the brains of our bishops.