The Smoke Of Satan Within The Church

Pope Paul VI is said to have uttered the phrase "the smoke of Satan is within the Church".  I believe he said this in the wake of the Vatican II conference and the wholescale destruction of much of Church tradition done in the so-called "spirit of Vatican II".  These days I believe we are seeing such smoke coming through several key avenues:

• The Vatican embrace of climate-change envirowhackoism as evidenced by last week's conference hosted by the Pontifical Academy for Sciences
• The willingness of prelates to kowtow to the gay-mafia agenda, as evidenced by last October's sin-nod
• Vatican acquiesence towards Islam, as displayed by the pope's allowance of muslim prayers on Vatican property and by other strange behaviors towards islam (as evidenced by Cardinal McCarrick).
• Malevolence towards those upholding authentic tradition, evidenced in the suppression of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate and treatment meted out to faithful clergy such as Cardinal Burke and Father Guarnizo
• The involvement of the Vatican in partnerships with organizations that fund abortion, contraception, sterilization to the point of directing these organizations in their malevolent activities.
• The denial of the above-mentioned evils by obstinate pollyannas, who delight in denouncing the messenger rather than addressing the message

As an example of the last bullet-point, I present to you an article by George Weigel.  He seems to take great amusement, if not scorn, at the concerns raised by faithful Catholics regarding ominous signs that point towards Vatican embrace of UN climate-change and population control goals.  What he thought he was accomplishing with his mutation of the Gospel of Luke is beyond me.  He sneeringly points out that no one has read the soon-to-be-released article.  I must wonder if he bothered to read the report that was issued by the Pontifical Academy for Sciences (probably written by Jeffrey Sachs).  This report openly calls for embrace of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and population control.  I suppose the answer to my rhetorical question is "no", for that might force him to remove rose-colored glasses.

Looking at the second point, we are dismayed to learn that in London next Sunday, Cardinal Vincent Nichols will celebrate Mass especially for gays.  Nowhere in this article do we read that these homosexuals are living chastely and not engaging in perversion.  Nowhere do we read that they are receiving real pastoral help to live according to God's laws.  This is kowtowing to political correctness - at the expense of the souls of those gays who need the truth for their salvation.

In yesterday's Vortex, Michael Voris dwells on the loss of England to protestantism.  At 1:25 he asks how England could have fallen so quickly, then answers:  "Cowardice and political machinations of the bishops at the time."  The church was corroded from within by the smoke prevalent at that age.  We must pray that the smoke be removed and shine the light through it.

More On Unhelpful PollyAnnas Among Faithful Catholics

As I suggested in my previous "pollyanna" post a few days ago, there are some Catholics who cannot accept that sometimes the Pope's words and/or deeds can and indeed should be criticized.  Let me clarify something.  He is the Vicar of Christ and must always receive all due respect.  We never criticize him as a person - never!  When he teaches in the name of the Church, those teachings are due all respect and yes, obedience.  There are those times when he will pronounce dogma in a solemn fashion, that is, ex cathedra.  On those occasions he does indeed speak infallibly.  We also have the Magisterium's promise that he will never teach error.

That said, the "off-the-cuff" interviews he has been giving lately cannot by any stretch of the imagination be called "teaching moments", let alone solemn declarations in which he speaks infallibly.  It is quite legitimate for faithful Catholics to question spontaneous remarks and certainly acceptable to discuss the means of delivery of said messages.

Many of us have been questioning the wisdom of the pope's conduct of these interviews for they have often led individuals to believe that he is altering the Church's age-old teachings on faith and morals - particularly the latter in regards to the life issues.  In the latest interview with La Repubblica there was even talk of the necessity of each individual to follow their concept of right and wrong - minimizing the need for a properly formed conscience.  I needn't rehash that here; see my previous post.

I've been involved in some on-line discussions regarding these interviews.  One of the more recent ones was with some good-hearted Catholics who enthuse over these debatable remarks by the Holy Father - and who in fact go so far as to insinuate that those of us who are wary are somehow "pharisees" or "holier than the pope" or other such pejorative sentiments.  They admit that what he's saying is different, but "God must be showing us a new way".  Apparently I'm not the only one who is baffled by this mindset; see this from American Catholic.  To quote him, I have indeed seen this: "Frankly, the most evident fruit of the papacy thus far seems to be the willingness of orthodox Catholics to break out the cutlery and start stabbing whenever someone expresses unease over the Pope’s actions and words."  I was actually threatened with expulsion from a facebook group when I didn't "get with their program" and join in their giggle-fest when the Pope posed for a "selfie" (that's a group cell-phone photo) with some teenagers.

My previous post also showed a video of a rather pathetic attempt by Father Fessio to put a "positive spin" on the pope's remarks.  Such attempts, unfortunately, abound.   See what the Creative Minority Report reveals.  So we "shouldn't attach value to individual words, but an overall sense"?  Really?  Father Lombardi, how, oh how, is this "overall sense" defined and communicated, if not by judiciously chosen words?  This is a philosophical - and theological - disaster in the making.  One would hope that a Vatican spokeman would know better, but Father's gaffe seems symptomatic of another problem.

This problem is broached by Hilary White of LifeSiteNews.  She senses a breakdown of coordination and communication in the Vatican itself - one starting from the onset of this papacy.  I urge you all to read it, and the comments besides.  Now we are hearing that there were inaccuracies in the La Repubblica interview; witness this from the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter.  However, one must ask why they waited so long to issue some disclaimer.  Are they only doing so pursuant to a lame attempt at "damage control"?   There is also the revelation that the Vatican was offered the opportunity to vet the La Repubblica article prior to its release.  It seems that a proper review might have apprehended some of the errors arising from Scalfari's poor memory.  Not only was there no review, but the Vatican even posted the article on their own site and here it is, straight from the Vatican.

Some might say that the Pope didn't speak infallibly so "what's the big deal"?  The "big deal" is two-fold in my opinion:

1. Many people who dissent from the Church's moral teaching and who are in fact living in mortal sin are taking false comfort from imprecisely-stated ideas
2. The Pope is undermining his own credibility so that if an occasion does arise when he must, some might conclude that the occasion is just another "off-the-cuff" affair.

To be clear, I am grateful that the Holy Father has spoken clearly on matters of faith and morals when he has.  I pray for him that his interviews (and/or the Vatican communications staff) don't trip up the essential message of the Church.