Bishop Barron's Admiration of Martin Luther Is Downright Heretical

Bishop Robert Barron, Auxiliary of Los Angeles, wrote an article on Martin Luther that appeared in Aleteia.  I link to it now and will highlight some of the more egregious parts.

• "For at the core of Luther’s life and theology was an overwhelming experience of grace."  What "grace" leads one to separate oneself from the One True Church?  What grace inspires a person to eschew the Sacraments and deposit of faith?  I believe apostasy is a mortal sin.  By definition, sanctifying grace is absent from one in a state of mortal sin.
• "Luther was an ecstatic, and the religious movement he launched was a love affair.”  If ever anyone needed proof of the dangers of exalting subjective experience over the immutable teachings of the Church, look no further.  What Barron stupidly calls "a love affair" has led to the splintering of the Church and the damnation of perhaps millions of souls.
• "At bottom, Luther was a mystic of grace, someone who had fallen completely in love."  In love with what??  No one who truly loves God separates him/herself from the One True Church.  They certainly don't hold cheap their own sacerdotal orders.
• "So overwhelmed are they by the experience of the beloved that they are given to words such as “only” and “never” and “forever.” If you doubt me, read any of the great romantic poets, or for that matter, listen to a teenager speak about his first crush"  I think in some convoluted way, Barron is trying to excuse or even justify Luther's mangling of the Bible to justify his sola fide heresy.  Look - it's one thing for a person in love to pepper his/her own language with effusive terminology.  It's quite another for the person in love to twist the words of the one whom he/she allegedly loves.  That's precisely what Luther did when he added the word "alone" to that Romans passage and removed several Old Testament books from his heretical version of the Bible.
• "What Ryrie’s characterization of Luther has helped me to see is how the great Solas;of the Reformation can be both celebrated and legitimately criticized. Was Luther right to express his ecstatic experience of the divine love in just this distinctive way?"  News flash!  One does not celebrate spiritual poison.  The answer to that last question is a resounding "NO!"  If Bishop Barron is actually regurgitating this crap to his flock, perhaps he should surrender his miter now.

Gloria.tv has some other choice quotes from Martin Luther.  Are those "expressions of ecstatic experience"?

Saint John Fisher was a contemporary of Luther's.  He wrote several works to refute Luther's heresies.  A youtube series appears in four parts.  I post the second part below.  If you watch it on youtube as opposed to this blog, you can get the whole series.  It's worth some time, especially since Pope Francis seems hell-bent on celebrating this heretic during this coming October.

Hell Is Real, Father Barron's Errors Notwithstanding

Father Robert Barron of Word on Fire recently uttered some very misguided statements about the reality of hell and damnation.  Basically he stated that we could harbor "a pious hope that no one is in hell".  Not true.  Our Lord Himself made clear that some would be damned by their own choices.  Our Lady of Fatima showed the three children visions of hell and the damned suffering therein.  I'd go so far as to say that Father Barron's claims are dissident and maybe even heretical.

In his Vortexes of the past few days, Michael Voris debunks such ridiculous and dangerous notions that hell can be dismissed.  I'd suspect Satan would be overjoyed if more people ceased believing in hell.  That way, they'd be more careless about staying free from sin.  I recall a story about the Venerable Bishop Fulton Sheen.  A woman imperiously stated to him that she didn't believe in hell.  He immediately replied, "Madam, you will when you arrive there."

Today is All Saints' Day; it is also the beginning of the month that the Church has traditionally set aside to ponder death.  Let us ponder too the Last Four Things: Death, Judgment, Heaven and Hell.  Every one of us will undergo the first two, and only one of the latter two.  We'll be in either of these states depending on our obedience to God and His Church.  Now the videos, below the jump break.

Bishop Barron Declares Bob Dylan A "Spiritual Poet"

Well, I have to give the somewhat lackluster bishop some credit where credit is due.  Dylan may well be a spiritual poet.  The million-dollar question is, for what spirit does Dylan produce poetry?  I grew up during the sixties and know very well the answer.  Michael Matt does a nice job unpacking the mess that Barron puts forth.

By the way, here's another sample of Dylan's "spiritual poetry" that Matt didn't mention.  It really is quite telling.  As far as being explicitly Christian in the eighties, I'll take that into consideration when he repudiates his left-wing warblings.

Bishop Barron, your feeble attempts to be "with it" are a farce".  Surely you can find better models for spiritual poetry.  How about John of the Cross?  Maybe Blessed Herman the Cripple?  St Thomas Aquinas?  There are others, as well, who wrote Catholic masterpieces that have withstood the test of hundreds of years.  Give it up!  You are a successor to the Apostles.  Please have the sense and sobriety of one.

Of Hysterics Against The Latin Mass And Horrid Red Hats

Below is last week's episode of the Anchor Team.  Michael and Alyssa Hichborn spent the bulk of the time on the conversion of Shia  LaBeouf and his subsequent interview with Bishop Robert Barron.  It is an hour and twenty minutes long and I myself am in the process of listening to it (in chunks).  Here is the link.  From what others tell me, LaBeouf brings the focus on the Traditional Latin Mass as being a key factor of his conversion.  He learned of it as he was preparing for his role as Padre Pio in a biographical movie of the saint.  Hichborn tells of his impressions of Barron's reaction to LaBeouf's account.

From what Hichborn says, Barron's reaction to the Latin Mass is somewhat similar to what Molly Olmstead wrote in the Slate a few days ago.  Here is her screed.  In addition to being informed of what she says, you'll also have the added benefit of mortification of your sensibilities as you take in both her ignorance and arrogance.  She says the Latin Mass is "controversial", as if that is a bad thing.  The fact is that for centuries, the Catholic Faith has always been "controversial" enough in the eyes of those set in their sins that they have always striven to mock and persecute us.

However, these days the persecution of faithful Catholics is coming from quite a few prelates.  We just saw several questionable bishops receiving their red hats from Francis, one of them being Robert McElroy of San Diego.  I've written a lot on him in the past.  Towards the end of the Lepanto clip, the Hichborns discuss some ominous theories that could well have solid basis.  There's talk of Francis appointing a "papal co-adjutor", owing to his failing health.  Cardinal Cupich, who has his own long litany of insults to the Faith, seems to be a top contender for that role.  Should that happen, there's a decent possibility that McElroy would be moved to Chicago, to further cement that archdiocese's descent into disbelief and debauchery.  In fact, all these appointments place many souls in jeopardy.

As mentioned in my previous post, it is high time that faithful Catholics stood up to the tyrants that are literally in our midst.  Some are already about that important task.  One such effort in the DC area will occur Saturday Sept 17 - a pilgrimage for the restoration of the Latin Mass.  More details can be found here.

Next Saturday, Sept 3, this same group will be conducting a Rosary Rally at 10 am outside the Papal Nunciature.  The address is 3339 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington DC.

Attempts To Silence Us In The Church And Civic Life

When truth is spoken, those who revel in falsehood and fantasy lash out at those who speak it.  They fear both the searing of their consciences and for some the threat to their exploitation of the good faith of those who might be inclined to listen and obey them.  I believe that is why a plethora of these progressive wonks are trying to cajole and even coerce us into silence.

Let's examine the attempt being made by Bishop Barron.  He recently suggested that the US bishops introduce a mandatum for those "who claim to teach the Catholic faith online".  He laments "those trading in hateful divisive speech".  One wonders how he defines "divisive", for truth is divisive.  One either heeds it, or they don't.  There really is no "meeting of the minds" here.  If the bishops were really serious about cleaning up the teaching of the Faith, they have their work cut out for them at so-called Catholic institutes of higher learning like Georgetown University or Marquette University or Notre Dame.  Then of course there's Bishop Barron's heretical "hope" that no one is in hell.  Would that cause him to be denied this "mandatum"?  Of course not!

Then we have the chief of the Italian Bishops' Conference, Cardinal Bassetti, telling Catholics who question the pope's ever-increasing indiscretions to consider leaving the Catholic Church.  In other wods, he is advocating schism.  Similarly, the pope himself had similar gripes.  He coined a new term: "deepfake news".  Of course, if he had been inspired with that phrase by watching CNN or reading the Washington Post I might understand, but the context makes clear his thinking.

The close timing of these two statements by Barron and Bassetti are, I suspect, no coincidence.  They understand that they no longer have total control of the public arena of ideas.  They also know that not only will we spread the word, we will NOT spread our money; recall Saturday's post.  Both of these facts threaten their progressive schemes for the Church.

We are seeing similar backlashes against the truth in the secular arena as well.  In Virginia, the now-Democrat-controlled house is considering HB 1627.  This bill would essentially criminalize any criticism of the governor and other elected officials.  Please note that it is the progressives, mostly Democrats, who are devoid of any sense of obedience to God.  Thus, perceiving themselves to be de facto gods, behave as authoritarian, jack-booted thugs and tyrants.

As we assume the mantle of Church Militant, evil will push back.  We must double down on our prayers, particularly Mass and Rosary.  We must also stand for the Faith.

The Perils Of Indifferentism

As my blogging colleague at Tenth Crusade points out, there has been much heated discussion about Father Robert Barron's critique of Ralph Martin's book, "Will Many Be Saved?".  Father Barron seems to hold the very dangerous notion that hell is not an imminent danger for folks today.  I join my friend, Dr. Martin and many, many saints (including Our Lady of Fatima) who hold that indeed hell will most likely be a very crowded place.  We might recall, by the way, during the deliberations about the new Mass translations, how the phrase "pro multis" was changed from "for all" to "for many"; that caused quite a stir.

I'm going to post a Vortex below, but first I'll say a few things about indifferentism and how some good people seem to be seduced by it.  At Mass during September, there was a homily on "purity of heart".  The priest held up as an example of such "purity" - Mahatma Gandhi.  Mind you, I have no way of knowing his state - one way or the other (yes, non-judgmentalism is a door that swings both ways).  I do know, however, that he was invited to examine Christianity but declined to do so.  One such overture to Gandhi was related during that homily.  Father related that a friend of Gandhi approached him and invited him to become Christian.  To that invitation, Gandhi replied, "Why don't you?".  Father then called that "a good challenge".  I beg to differ.  It seems that in addition to snubbing that Christian's invitation, Gandhi was holding himself as a competent judge of that Christian's virtue.  That was not "a good challenge" but plain old snarkiness - for which I hope he repented.  The troubling aspect of this homily was that Gandhi was being held as a model for Christian purity of heart - without being a Christian.  That homily left a wide opening for the heresy of indifferentism to take hold in the minds of the congregation that day.

In addition to such teaching, indifferentism has found another avenue into the hearts and minds of many sincere Catholics.  That insidious avenue has a name - Medjugorje.  In the early '80s, when word of the apparitions reached the US, I believed them and started to take my Catholic faith more seriously.  However, because I took my faith seriously, I read much traditional literature - and realized that some underlying themes of the apparitions didn't measure up to tradition.  I cannot say there was a subtle undercurrent of indifferentism in the "messages" coming from the apparition - for there was nothing subtle about it.  For a taste of the indifferentism, read this piece from someone who still believes the apparition's claims that it is the Blessed Mother.  Note that it says "you must respect each man's beliefs".  Wrong.  We must respect each man as being created in the image and likeness of God.  But that's very different from saying we must respect the beliefs of each man - for these very same beliefs may lead one to damnation.  (What??  We should "respect" the beliefs of jihadists, satanists, human sacrificers, etc?)  Then it holds out as an example of holiness a Muslim woman who lived in the village at the time.  Now perhaps this lady was a good kind lady - but without sanctifying grace (that comes from the sacraments) I don't see how she'd fit the definition of "holy".  Furthermore, I have difficulty believing that there was no decent Catholic woman in the village who might have been holy.  This evidence of indifferentism has made me realize that the apparition is not what it claims to be.

Now here's the Vortex.  Click here if you can't see embedded video.

Two Very Different Family Conferences In Dublin In August

On August 22-24 in Dublin Ireland, the so-called "World Meeting of Families" will be conducted.  It's going to be based on Amoralis Lamentia.  Already it sounds like a hoot to be avoided, but it gets worse.  Among the presenters are: Cardinal O'Malley, Bishop Barron, Cardinal Cupich and Father James Martin.  Father Leo Patalinghug will be offering "recipes to strengthen family life".  Recipes?  I thought prayer and sacraments and fidelity to Tradition did that!  Whatever did families do for strength before Father Patalinghug was born?

You can put each of these names in the search box at the top left of this blog to understand why this debacle in Ireland will be a colossal waste of time and money, at best.

On the same dates and also in Dubin will occur the "Conference Of Catholic Families".  Judging from the roster of excellent speakers so far, this meeting promises to be faithful to the Tradition of the Church.  I'd recommend that.

Did Mario Cuomo Go To Heaven Or Hell

Of course that's a question we cannot answer.  We pray for God's mercy on his soul, for he did much to foster the culture of death in this country, despite his professed Catholicism.  We do, however, have to look askance at the preposterous claim of Father Robert Barron that we may have "reasonable hope that no one is in hell."  No we can't for such claims contradict the words of Jesus Christ Himself.  Consider today's Vortex.

Rogues' Gallery!

Here they are!  Whatever happened to all that "dialogue" and "encountering" and "tolerance" and  "accompanying" and "listening"?  Does that only happen when the end purpose is to quash piety, weaken the Faith, compromise Christ's moral teachings?  I guess so!

This was featured at the "Convolution of Catholic Leadership" that concluded in Orlando a few days ago.  The Vortex below gives more details of the disgusting way in which faithful Catholics, operating with Catholic donation dollars (and perhaps we should all stop donating to the national collections), are treated by their feckless "leaders".  By the way - the "somewhat well-known blogger" mentioned at the 5:05 mark is Brandon Vogt, employee of Bishop Robert Barron.  The latter is the quasi-heretic who called Martin Luther a "mystic of grace" and who thinks there is "reasonable hope that no one is in hell": and yes, he spoke at this Orlando gab-fest.

A Closer Look At The Met Gala Debacle

Two days ago, when I wrote about the Met-Gala sacrilege that relegated Catholics (once again) to the status of "niggers of the new age", I linked to a New York Post article.  It didn't dawn on me at the time but now I cannot help but notice how much Dolan seemed to carry on about feeding his face with hot dogs and peanut butter sandwiches.  It's apparent that he loves to chow down - more so than perhaps his Faith and his office as Prince of the Church.

He also loves to make a fool of himself, and by dint of his office, fools of his fellow Catholics and even Jesus Christ Himself.  Of course he had assistance in that from the Vatican, as they lent Catholic artifacts to the gala to be objects of mockery.

Father Peter West posted on Facebook some of the real damage that Dolan did at that gala.  I cannot find that post on Father's wall, but Eponymous Flower saved a screen shot.  I'm going to post a Vortex in which Michael Voris touches upon the roles that Cardinal Ravasi (this one!) and Archbishop Ganswein (designated by the pope to make sure the Pope Emeritus stays quiet?) had in engineering the gala-debacle.

By the way, Bishop Robert Barron seems to have trouble seeing the blasphemies and sacrileges for what they were that evening.  Of course, this is the prelate who entertains the delusions that hell may be empty.

Cardinal Marx, Hell Is Real!!

My blogging colleague at veneremurcenui pointed out a gross error uttered by Cardinal Marx, one of the members of Pope Francis' eight advisors, opined that the church must "repent of scaremongering hell".  With all due respect to His Eminence, he has that precisely ass-backwards.  Does he not recall that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom"?  I could go into a long tome regarding this error and the monstrous spiritual ramifications, but instead I'll post a homily on this very matter.  It's most relevant during November, as we ponder the Last Four Things.  If any friends of Father Robert Barron are reading, will you please ask him to pay special attention to the segment beginning at the 8:00 mark?