Monday, May 23, 2016

Fr. Perrone on grave implications of defecting from the true Church

Fr. Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" [temporary link] (Assumption Grotto News, May 22, 2016):
Another one bites the dust

What triggers the quotation of this well-worn, if abused, cliché indicating defeat? It's the knowledge that one more relative of mine has ceased to practice the Catholic faith and is now attending a non-Catholic "church." I didn't do a calculation to get an exact number of these family defectors, of those who have abandoned the faith, but it's a higher number than I'd like to admit. My reason for telling you this dark family secret is to give you that scant consolation of commiseration. These relatives of mine, only a few years ago, had been Catholics. Technically speaking, they are still Catholics: "once a Catholic, always a Catholic." However, these relatives do not regard themselves as being Catholics any longer, and this is a literal shame for me and a shame on them.

There's no greater misfortune that can befall man in this life than to be out of the true Church. It's a dogma of faith that there is no salvation outside the Church. Since there is only one Church, the one Christ founded, this amounts to saying that there's no salvation outside the Catholic Church. A dogma means a necessary teaching, one that's demanded by the very nature of the Christian faith. While interpretations of this dogma are various (and I do not intend to delve into them there), my purpose in reviewing it is to indicate how grievous a sin it is to abandon the true Church for any other.

I don't know of any family where all the relatives have kept the Catholic faith. The widespread defection is symptomatic of this age of unbelief, but it's also the result of the gross negligence of irresponsible priests, catechists and parents for failing to teach the faith, for misleading and deceiving their charges about the real meaning of the Church's teachings, or else for trivializing the liturgy by their impiety. When people are left ignorant by vacuous religious instruction or scandalized by silly, irreverent liturgies, they may at some point come to a religious consciousness and ask themselves, Can this be the true Christian religion? Upon discovering the bible and sincere Christians of some sect or other, they may easily be swayed to league up with them and depart from the Church. In such cases, culpability for leaving the Catholic Church may be mitigated, or even be entirely non-existent due to the fault of others. God knows. But one should not err on that account in believing that though they have left the true Church, that at least they now love the Lord and are better off than had they remained non-practicing Catholics. Objectively speaking, to leave the true Church is a grave evil. Subjectively one may not be accountable for this, depending on circumstances, depending on circumstances, but this does not refute the substantive evil of defection from the faith. For the faithful, it is truly a suffering to learn that someone has converted to a sect. (I speak nothing here about apostates -- those who have left Christianity for a pagan religion or a cult: this is an even worse evil.)

Today is Trinity Sunday. The dogma of the Blessed Trinity is a truth revealed to us by the Church, not by the bible alone, which does not clearly specify this dogma. And so, the dogma of the Trinity is an example of the necessity of the Catholic Church to explicate and impose its divinely revealed teachings upon, us, without which we would be doctrinally sunk, unsure about anything supernatural were we made to rely solely upon the many and diverse interpretations of the bible.

Let us cherish the true, orthodox, Catholic faith in all its fullness. Let us pray never to be unfaithful to it, trembling upon recollection of our Lord's words, "When the Son of Man comes again, will He find faith left on earth?" We, unhappy witnesses of the disintegration of the Catholic faith and of a massive defection from the Church in our time, need to pray steadily for the return of lapsed Catholics and to show them the good example of our patience and love which may, in the end, prove most convincing of all proofs of the truth of our holy faith.

Next Sunday is Corpus Christi Sunday. After the noon orchestral Mass there will be a procession (outdoors, as possible) with the Holy Sacrament and adoration of the One whom we love and revere as true God and true Man. Following the Procession, food at a nominal cost will be made available by our trusty ushers.

Fr. Perrone


Rotunda C Burly said...

Has Fr Perrone ever discoursed on baptism of desire? Seems like a hot topic round these parts. Juz sayin'.

Catholic Mission said...

Outside the church no salvation?

When Pope Benedict 'breaks his silence' it usually is to please the Masons?
When Pope Benedict 'breaks his silence' it seems as if he has to say something to please the Masons, liberals and disssenters.He does not 'break his silence' to affirm traditional teachings of the Church. He did not 'break his silence' to say that Amoris Laetitia contradicts Veritatis Splendor of Pope John Paul II which he approved as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
He has said that the Message of Fatima was complete (May21,2016) even though the magisterium officially recognises that Our Lady said that 'the dogma of the faith will be lost' ( in future) 'except in Portugal'.This indicates that there will be an apostasy in the Church and the apostasy will extend to even the pope.
Then a few months back he said that the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) is no more like it was in the 16th century. In other words it has been changed.He means that when he assumes hypothetical cases mentioned in Vatican Council II,are objectively known in 2016 , the dogma EENS can be changed.The dogma EENS would have 'practical exceptions'. He calls this change 'a development'.
When he breaks his silence he is politically correct with the Left, who represent Satan.In both cases here, extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Fatima, there seems something wrong or there is a false hood.
Our Lady said the dogma of the faith will be lost. We know the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has been lost. Pope Benedict in the Catechism of the Catholic Church refers to extra ecclesiam nulla salus as an aphorism (846) even though it is a dogma defined by three Church Councils.Now Pope Benedict officially and in public 'breaks his silence' to tell us that the dogma has been lost as it was known over the centuries.It has also been lost by assuming what is invisible is visible and mixing up what is implicit as being explicit.This is the irrational reasoning used to get rid of the dogma and this is a dogma which is at the centre of the Church's de fide teachings on other religions, ecumenism, religious liberty, liturgy etc.
Then the first part of the Fatima message indicates that since the dogma of the faith will be lost there will a world wide apostasy which will be approved by the pope.How could the dogma of the faith, or an aspect of the faith be lost, if the pope does not allow it ? It is because the pope will permit the dogma of the faith ,or some aspect of the faith to be lost, that it will be lost in the Church.This deduction has to be made since the message seems missing in the Fatima message made public.It was incomplete.
So the message of Fatima which we have been given by a pope who says Jews do not need to convert in the present times,contradiciting Jesus, is incomplete.This is obvious through simple deduction.
This incompleteness of the Fatima message approved by the Vatican is made clear by Our Lady in her messages ( locutions) to Fr. Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests. She speaks to Fr. Gobbi extensively and in great detail about the Fatima message and the condition of the Church in general.At Fatima she was terse as compared to the messages to Fr. Gobbi in which she was elaborate.
She also tells Fr.Gobbi that the Masons and all the enemies of the church will unite and the Church will be attacked from within with error and there will be an apostasy.In the end her Immaculate Heart will Triumph.
So when Pope Benedict 'breaks his silence', it usually is to make a statement which will please the enemies of the Church and create confusion.

Catholic Mission said...

Instead he could have announced that the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus has not developed since there are no known exceptions in Vatican Council II to the dogma. He did not say this. If he did there would be an uproar from the Jewish Left.

He did not say that apostasy and heresy has entered the Church and so the dogma of the faith, extra ecclesiam nulla salus, has been officialy rejected by the magisterium.

He did not say that the Fatima message made public was incomplete since it does not mention what specific dogma would be lost and in what way was the faith lost or will be lost.This has to be deduced from what is already approved by the Vatican.

He did not say that the magisterium is interpreting Vatican Council II, with an irrationality; with the new theology approved by Ratzinger-Rahner, which makes Vatican Council II a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So the Council becomes non traditional and heretical.The fault is there not with the Council but with the irrational premise and conclusion used to interpret the Council officially.So in this sense the German priest Fr. Ingo Dollinger is correct when he suggests that Vatican Council II indicates a loss of faith.This is something obvious for those who are aware of the irrational premise and conclusion used by the contemporary magisterium.

With the irrational premise and conclusion the ecclesiology of the Church has been changed and so there is a new ecclesiology which is non traditional and heretical. This is the new ecclesiology of the Novus Ordo Mass. It is also the new ecclesiology with which the Tradtiional Latin Mass is offered today with the approval of the present magisterium. The fault is not there with the Mass but with the ecclesiology. So in this sense too Fr.Ingo Dollinger was correct.

Pope Benedict refuses to break his silence and say that without the irrational premise and conclusion, without the new ecclesiology, Vatican Council II and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus are not a break with Tradition.He wants to maintain the lie.He refuses to break his silence and say that the old and new Mass can be offered with the old ecclesiology.He maintains the deception. If we do not use the Rahner-Ratzinger new theology, which is based upon an irrational observation, then the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is still the same as it was in the 16th century.He is not going to announce this.-Lionel Andrades

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

Recent prophecies of Fr Gobbi:

December 1, 1973: "This year will not end before a great sign is accomplished."

April 1978: "This year will not end before a great sign is accomplished." [Same sign as Medjugorje and Garabandal - the warning]

November 25, 1978: "This is the hour of my battle."

January 1, 1979: "The Church is now emerging from a great trial because the battle between me and my adversary has been waged."

January 1, 1980: "In this new year, many things that I foretold you at Fatima will come to pass." [Nothing happened]

February 10, 1978: "As long as he lives [Pope Paul VI] ... I can still hold back the arm of God's justice. But after his death, all will come crashing down." [He has been dead for a long time now.]

July 1, 1981: "This is the hour of the final battle; the hour of my victory."

May 2, 1985: "Not much time will go by before a great chastisement will strike the whole of your poor country."

July 5, 1985: "That which I predicted at Fatima... is today becoming a reality ... everything is moving towards its most painful and bloody fulfillment."

September 8, 1985: "You are close to the greatest chastisement."

October 13, 1985: "The great battle has already arrived."

November 12, 1985: "The times of the purification and of the bloody trial are drawing close."

July 4, 1986: "These are the years of the painful purification which is about to come to its most bloody finish."

January 1, 1987: "Already in the course of THIS YEAR some events will reach their fulfillment. AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR, how much suffering and how many sorrows I see along your paths." [Again nothing happened in 1987.]

May 13, 1987: "You are now beginning to live through that which I had foretold to you at Fatima."

July 3, 1987: "AS OF THIS YEAR ... [see above] Already DURING THIS YEAR, certain great events will take place, concerning what I predicted at Fatima and told, under secrecy, to the children to whom I am still appearing at Medjugorje."

September 8, 1987: "As of THIS YEAR…"

Fr Gobbi is no Carnac the Magnificent

December 31, 1987: "You are beneath the sign of the great events which have been foretold to you...THERE ARE OCCURRING GREAT SIGNS IN THE SUN, ON THE MOON, AND IN THE STARS." [Nothing!]

January 1, 1988: "The great events for which I have prepared you WILL BEGIN TO TAKE PLACE ..." [There is more, but this is enough. We made our point about Gobbi’s prophesies.]

Pertinacious Papist said...

What we can and cannot know about That Day seems clear from Jesus' words in the New Testament:

On the one hand, none but the Father knows the day or the hour: "But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" (Matthew 24:26)

On the other hand, only the thick-headed cannot see the general signs of the times: "[Jesus] replied, 'When evening comes, you say "It will be fair weather tomorrow for the sky is red"; and in the morning, "It will be foul weather today, for the the sky is red and lowering." O you hypicrites, you can discern the face of the sky; but can you not discern the signs of the times?'" (Matthew 16:2-3).

Catholic Mission said...

Anonymous Rotunda C Burly said...
Has Fr Perrone ever discoursed on baptism of desire? Seems like a hot topic round these parts. Juz sayin'.

No he has not!
He has not said that the baptism of desire and blood are not known to us in the present times and so Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) is not an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
I have written so many reports upon this subject but he will not comment.
No wonder there is so much confusion on extra ecclesiam nulla salus and his family members have also not had the truth proclaimed to them, on this subject.

He has not said that the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made an objective mistake. Since a hypothetical case ( Baptism of desire) cannot be relevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus , as it was known in the 16th century.
-Lionel Andrades