Michael Matt of The Remnant posted another video recently. He discussed, inter alia, Card. Dolan’s examination of conscience about how the Church handled the “lockdown” and also the infamous Pact of the Catacombs near the end of Vatican when a bunch of progressivist bishops got together in the Catacombs of Domitilla and pledged themselves effectively to a kind of Liberation Theology, in part underpinned by Card. Lercaro… who had been put in charge of the Consilium to “reform” the Mass, et al. The signatories of their manifesto pledged not to use trappings of office, such as rings or crosses of precious metals or any fancy clothing.
One of the characters involved in the Pact was a Brazilian bishop, Helder Camara. As it happens – and this is in the Remnant video – someone who was deeply influenced by Camara was Klaus Schwab (think “Great Reset”… “One World Order”, who had Camara come to Davos.
Camara, by the way, in the 30’s had been a pro-Mussolini clerical fascist in Brazil. Then he went Communist and pro-Castro. Of course.
Also, you might remember a story about the death of an Italian bishop named Luigi Bettazzi. He was a signatory of the Pact. He was Card. Lercaro’s auxiliary in Bologna. At the Council the young Bettazzi got up on his hind legs about what we might these days recognize as the yammering about “synodality” (“walking together”) in the incipient guise of “collegiality”. He was a dedication “discontinuity” bishop for his career, holding that Vatican II was a break. He was also behind the innovative idea that bishops are a kind of superpriest rather than a priest with greater jurisdiction, a massive can of worms that is still crawling today.
Bettazzi remarked: “The Pact of the Catacombs today is […] Pope Francis”.
In any event, Michael connects some interesting dots.
YouTube pulled The Remnant’s video as having violated the blah blah. You can see it at their website. HERE
Loading ...
Pingback: TVESDAY MORNING EDITION – BigPulpit.com
“The signatories of their manifesto pledged not to use trappings of office, such as rings or crosses of precious metals or any fancy clothing.”
Hear! Hear!
I may be a traditionalist but clergy dressed in ludicrous fancy trappings being greeted obsequiosly has to go. Remember Pharisees – broader phylactories?
[Spelling challenges aside… the word “ludicrous” implies excess, which is not virtuous. And who does that? I’ve been a priest for over 30 years and have yet to find many people who greet me obsequiously. Do you know what phylacteries are? Different styles of dress for different occasions is entirely appropriate. I recommend a reading of Leviticus and more careful reflection on Matthew 23:5.]
@Maximillian
“The modern man thought Becket’s robes too rich and his meals too poor. But then the modern man was really exceptional in history; no man before ever ate such elaborate dinners in such ugly clothes. The modern man found the church too simple exactly where modern life is too complex; he found the church too gorgeous exactly where modern life is too dingy… Becket wore a hair shirt under his gold and crimson, and there is much to be said for the combination; for Becket got the benefit of the hair shirt while the people in the street got the benefit of the crimson and gold. It is at least better than the manner of the modern millionaire, who has the black and the drab outwardly for others, and the gold next his heart.” – G.K. Chesterton