The Remnant Forum: CIVIL WAR: A Church in Crisis | 29Dez2014 20:07:17
Cardinal Burke Banished!
Your Eminence! As someone who has watched what you have done to support Latin Mass back in the States. So grateful! Keep up the good work! God Bless you!
(Michael Matt) Well again ladies and gentlemen, Michael Matt for The Remnant Forum.
Well, the hits just keep on coming. We now have major mainstream journalists using words like “civil war” with respect to what’s happening here in the 2nd year of the Pontificate of Pope Francis.
A lot of things are happening pretty quickly, Chris Ferrara, why don’t we start with this idea of civil war. What do you think? I mean, are we uuuh,… are we heading to a civil war in the Catholic Church?
(Chris) I don’t know why I’m sitting here chuckling because there’s a lot of truth to that observation. When someone like Damien Thompson writes a story, the headlines of which reads “Watch out Pope Francis: the Catholic civil war has begun”, you know, there’s something to the allegation. The subheading of that is “Uncertainty over how much reform the pope wants is splitting his church into factions”. I don’t think there’s any doubt that that is happening right now.
(Matt) Well, he ends that particular piece, does he not, by actually drawing a parallel between Pope Francis and President Obama, which is a dangerous and inflammatory thing for a non-trad to do, right?
(Chris) Well, he develops the point that the Pope was elected as a kind of hope-and-change Pope. And this was going to be the hope-and-change Pontificate. And instead we’re getting a lot of confusion and division in the commonwealth of the Church. And so he concludes by saying this suggests a far closer analogy than that with Henry VIII. “There is another world leader, elected amid huge excitement, who has surprised and disappointed the faithful by appearing disengaged and even helpless in moments of crisis. This is an awful thing to say, but we could be watching Jorge Bergoglio turn into Barak Obama”.
(Matt) (laughing) It’s incredible.
(Chris) What can one say?
(Matt) And again these are not traditionalists, journalists, that are speaking out.
Chris, I want to do something a little different today, I wanna try to set the context again or maybe just go back and review the context. I wanna talk just for a moment about the abdication of Pope Benedict XVI one last time. And the reason I wanna do that is because I think people are loosing sight of that. I mean, when you see these unbelievable things happening in Rome right now that no one ever anticipated, not only us, journalist guys like us, but cardinals of the Catholic Church never anticipated this moment. And so if you would humor me a little bit, and let’s just go back and look a little bit at that abdication, with special emphasis on… do you remember the dossier, I mean, you were at the Conclave, I was at the Conclave. The talk of Rome at that time was a dossier which was based on the Vatileaks scandal. The dossier was set up by Benedict himself, was commissioned and compiled by 3 cardinals who were delegated to look into the Vatileaks affair. You remember all this? Vatileaks was the talk of the Conclave, the dossier. The question is, about with respect to this dossier which indicated high level infiltration of the Catholic Church by a certain homosexual cadre of some sort, whatever happened to the dossier?
(Chris) Great question, a very good question because that dossier was at the center of the storm that surrounded Benedict as he abdicated from the Papacy. And we even saw a video of the first encounter between the Pope and Francis, and we were told that during that encounter the box of documents was handed over to Francis, personally, by Pope Benedict. That’s how sensitive apparently the contents of these files were. And I remember that Pope Francis, after his election, recounted how he received this box of documents from Benedict and how amazed he was at the retentiveness of the abdicating Pope’s memory. You know all that he said, such intelligence, all of it committed to memory. And now suddenly Francis seems to have forgotten that the box exists!
(Matt) Right, right, right! Doesn’t quite fit the bill of the doddering old senile Pope, does it? And here as far as I know, and correct me if I’m wrong, this is all we’ve gotten thus far from Pope Francis, vis-à-vis the dossier. He says, quote, “A lot is written about this gay lobby, I still haven’t found anyone at the Vatican who has “Gay” on his business card.” Hahaha!
(Chris) Well, that settles that. I mean…
(Matt) That’s it!
(Chris) As long as there is no ID card saying I am a member of the Gay Mafia there’s nothing to investigate, is there? What’s ironic here is that the Pope appointed as the very head of the Papal Household in the Institute of Religious Works and therefore as the prelate, so-called, of Vatican Bank Nuncio Ricca who had a bulging file full of objections and protests regarding his flagrant homosexual conduct. This is the man he puts in charge of the place where he lives! Should put the picture up on the screen of one of the photographed encounters between the Pope and the beloved Head of his very household now. Unbelievable!
(Matt) It is.
(Chris) This man doesn’t even need a Gay Mafia membership card, it’s all over the place.
(Matt) Remember the name, what was his name? - Pablo Gabriel, the Pope’s butler. I mean, if you think about the drama that we all went through leading up to that abdication, remember that the butler finally gets himself arrested. And I remember thinking this at the time in Vatican City. After he’s arrested he’s thrown into some sort of Vatican dungeon, and the media was more or less on the side of the Pope’s butler because he kept saying, he kept defending himself “I love this Pope, I’m trying to defend Benedict, I have served him always” and everyone was wondering what that was all about; there was a sympathy vote for the butler. Benedict finally, you remember, he pardons him before he abdicates, but it gives you an idea of the intrigue that was going on, all having to do with this question of homosexual infiltration of the Catholic Church and not only, as we say, has the dossier disappeared but we’re having this whole new conversation now about the Church since the Synod changing or reforming or mellowing out her teachings with respect to the question of homosexuality. Chris, is that a coincidence?
(Chris) No, it’s hardly a coincidence. There is a veritable revolution going on. I don’t know what the Pope’s motives are but I do know what has come out of that Synod which is a wave of revolutionary sentiment that its proponents are now claiming is simply unstoppable! Think about what Cardinal Marx said, a member of the Pope’s “gang of eight”. Cardinal Marx, said and I’m quoting him directly from Zenit News, “we have a procession”, he says, “that goes three steps forward and two steps… no, it’s better, three steps forward and two backwards, or two steps forward and one step backward. This is the procession that we have in Germany”. So he’s saying the Synod is now following the procession or the progressive revolution in Germany which consists of two steps forward and one step backward. You know where that phrase comes from?
(Matt) Vladimir Lenin.
(Chris) It’s Vladimir Lenin’s pamphlet, that’s the title of his pamphlet about the Soviet Party Congress, the 2nd congress that met in 1904, and the two steps forward was the formation of the Communist Party, one step backward was the division of the Communist Party into the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks – the Bolsheviks being the radical wing and the Mensheviks being the wing – sound familiar? – that says “Oh, not so fast, not so fast.” And that’s what we’re seeing in the Church today: a Bolshevik Party of radicals and a Menshevik party – the neo-Catholics, we call’m for want of a better term – who basically go along with everything as it happens, but say “Not so fast, not so fast”. And in the end accepting everything anyway.
(Matt) Right. No wonder we’re getting to hear this idea of a civil war schism at the highest levels of the Church.
You know, we talked earlier that we wanted to touch today on this idea of Benedict finally breaking his silence and I think, in fact, that’s exactly what is happening. But when he was invited to go to the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage to St. Peter’s and to be present for the traditional Latin mass that was to be celebrated by Cardinal Raymond Burke last week, and he said something in there, Chris, in his reply to the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage leadership, or organizers, he refers to himself as a cloistered monk, living in the Vatican, and then he says he only leaves, he can only leave his “cell”, quote unquote, when invited to do so by Pope Francis. This seems like an odd thing for him to say because how exactly does one refuse invitations from the Pope? So, when there were so many photo apps, for example of the beatification of Paul VI, Pope Benedict was trotted out and given an apparent opportunity to give a blessing or to approve this whole ridiculous beatification. I’m sorry, that’s what it was, it was a political trumped up beatification. Is he in fact going on his own will, Benedict, or is he being invited/ordered to endorse these things now?
(Chris) Well, how do you say no to the Pope? Unless you want to formally commit a breach with him, and yet we see that in some ways the Pope is indicating a breach with his successor. We have in the article that I quoted to you before from Damien Thompson, this passage which is very telling.
He says this, and I agree with it, and now he says in the midst of all this revolutionary furor, “Another voice is being heard. The last Pope is neither dead nor senile” – in which case I ask again, why did he resign in the first place? – “nor as silent as we thought he was going to be. In the last month”, says Thompson, “Benedict XVI has written to the ex -Anglicans of the Ordinariate expressing delight that they now worship in the former Bavarian chapel in Warwick Street, London; to Rome’s Pontifical Urban University about the dangers of relativism; and, most significantly, to supporters of the old liturgy”. Listen to what he says about the old liturgy. As he wrote: “’I am very glad that the usus antiquior [the traditional Latin Mass] now lives in full peace within the church, also among the young, supported and celebrated by great cardinals’.” Now, all of this is significant. First of all, he expresses delight at the Ordinariate. We know that Francis has said, “Oh, the Ordinariate is quite unnecessary. This is what he said to an Anglican Prelate: “You should just stay Anglicans, we don’t need any Ordinariate.”
(Matt) What is that famous quote of his? – “We are not about to go fishing in the Anglican pond” or something, some years ago.
(Chris) Yeah, he basically said: “We’re great with Anglicans, we don’t need the Ordinariate.” In respect to the old liturgy, he’s very happy the usus antinquior was in full peace within the Church. Francis doesn’t seem to be happy with it, he can’t even understand why young people are attracted to it! He seems to think it’s a fad to which some people are addicted. So that’s another opposition. Lastly Benedict says, “Well, great Cardinals are celebrating this Mass.” I can think of two great Cardinals who celebrate this Mass. Only two, and this isn’t a coincidence, Mike, both of these Cardinals have expressed publicly opposition to the Synod of Francis.
(Chris) We can quote, and I mean Cardinal Pell, he celebrated the traditional Mass, and still does, and Cardinal Burke, he’s a veritable champion of Summorum Pontificum. These are the great Cardinals that Benedict is talking about. So obviously, in a very quiet way, he’s letting it be known that he’s just not happy with the way this Pontificate is going.
(Matt) And why should he be? I mean, everyone is aware of the fact now that they are taking Ratzinger’s reforms out and they’re putting Bonini’s back in. That’s not speculation about who the great Cardinals are that he’s referring to. He’s referring to Cardinal Pell and Cardinal Burke who were both in Rome for the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage saying the traditional Latin Mass. And Cardinal Pell, interestingly enough, uses that occasion to preach a sermon in which he says: “The Church is not built on the rock of Peter’s faith but on Peter himself despite his faults and failings. Pope Francis is the 266th Pope and History has seen 37 false or antipopes.” Now you tell me, why is Cardinal Pell bringing up antipopes? He doesn’t think Francis is an antipope, obviously, but things are so crazy now that he’s trying to calm people down.
(Chris) Well, he doesn’t think the Pope is an antipope, and neither do we, we’re not talking about Sedevacantists. He’s just saying that in History we’ve had 36 or 37 dramatic examples of, let us say it, horrendously bad popes whose governance was a disaster for the Church. So in some way he’s saying, “Don’t be overly disturbed or overworked by what is happening today – it’s happened before. We simply have to deal with it.
Now, on the question of how we deal with it, we have another bishop, happily named Athanasius Schneider, he’s auxiliary bishop of the archdiocese of St. Mary in Kazakhstan, and here’s what he said:
(Matt) Who offered, by the way, who offers the traditional Latin Mass, I believe every day, or certainly with frequency. Privately.
(Cris) He’s probably the single most traditional bishop within the ecclesiastical establishment today, outside of the Society of St. Pious X whose canonical problems are a different subject. But here’s what he says, and I think it’s worth quoting at length: “Then on the very bosom of the Church there are people who undermine the teaching of Our Lord” – in the very bosom of the Church, Mike. “Became an obvious fact, and one for the whole World to see, thanks to the internet and the work of some Catholic journalists who were not indifferent to what was happening to the Catholic faith which they consider to be the treasure of Christ.”
Here’s what he says further: “I was pleased to see that some Catholic journalists and internet bloggers behaved as good soldiers of Christ and drew attention to this clerical agenda of undermining the perennial teaching of Our Lord. Cardinals, bishops, priests, Catholic families, Catholic young people have to say to themselves” – this is momentous what he’s about to say here – “I refuse to conform to the neo pagan spirit of this world, even when the spirit is spread by some bishops and cardinals. I will not accept their fallacious and perverse use of holy divine mercy and of a new Pentecost. I refuse to throw grains of incense before the statue of the idol of gender ideology, before the idol of second marriages, of concubinage, EVEN IF my bishop will do so.” End of quote. Absolutely stunning! He’s talking, of course, about the Synod. And we have connected the remaining dots. It’s the Synod of Francis.
(Matt) Right, right.
(Chris) Do with that what you will, you may prudently want to avoid saying that, if you’re in a certain position where it would be reckless to even say it, but if you’re a free agent, a member of the Church who has the right to speak, you ought to remark the obvious, and you ought to counsel each other, and comfort each other in how you’re going to handle this situation.
(Matt) Go back for a minute there, Chris, and read that section again you highlighted for us about bloggers and journalists. In other words, you have now Cardinal Marx in an interview acknowledging what we said on this program several times that the controversial paragraphs in the Relatzio belong to Francis and Francis wanted them in there. So we have Cardinal Marx saying those are Francis’ baby, he wanted them in there. Now we have Athanasius Schneider saying he’s thanking journalists and bloggers for standing up and objecting to these exceedingly problematic paragraphs in the Synod documents. End of story, right? In terms of don’t criticize the Pope, for Heaven’s sake, if we stop at this point short of acknowledging the reality we’re defying reason and logic, we’re just being silly, we’re just playing a game of “let’s pretend”!
(Chris) Yeah, I agree with that. And even if given your position is more expedient for you, saying you’re a member of the hierarchy, or a priest in a parish, to criticize the Pope’s ministers rather than the Pope, criticize the king’s ministers rather than the king, those who are able to do so, lay people who don’t have an ecclesiastical superior to worry about, not only have the right, but in my view, the obligation to speak out about what the Pope is doing and to raise a voice of opposition. And it’s preposterous, and indecent, for any lay Catholic commentator to suggest that if he doesn’t decide to do this, when others do it it’s a sin and they’re enemies of the Church. Now I’m thinking of a particular Catholic apostolate, one of whose script writers has become increasingly incomprehensible on this point.
First he was saying, no you can’t criticize the Pope; now he’s saying Pat Archbald can criticize the Pope, and those who are right like Pat Archbald, but not The Remnant and Catholic Family News because he doesn’t like their rhetoric. Where is a principle in any of this? There is not. This is just a grudge match on the part of this particular rather “ boorish” (17:26) character whose name I will not bother the viewers with. I think we all know who he is anyway. So it’s great that the Bishop has said that Catholic journalists and internet bloggers who openly air these discussions and counsel their fellow Catholics not to go along with this madness, are acting as “good soldiers of Christ”, to quote him. That’s what we did when we took our oath at the time of our Confirmation. We pledged to become soldiers of Christ. Can we be guilty of rhetorical excesses sometimes, in our zeal for the faith? Of course we can! Do we apologize for those when they occur? Of course we do! Are we going to remain silent, however, about what’s going on in the Church? Absolutely not!
(Matt) Yeah, I’m just getting so tired of this whole harangue. I mean, don’t people realize where we are? I sat in church last week and listened to a sermon from an excellent priest. I felt like I was listening to Edmund Campion under Elizabethan rule. I mean, he was up to saying, “This is it, folks, this is it! Your only security is to attach yourself, arm yourself with Catholic tradition.
And” – this is a paraphrase but it’s close, - “if what you are hearing, even at the highest levels of the Church conflicts with Catholic tradition, you have an obligation, according to St. Thomas, to stand up and object!” I mean, that’s just… that’s just the Catholic thing that must be done in times like these. We hail the great saints who stood up and objected in the past when the Faith was threatened by those in authority; it has to happen now, we’re obligated to do it, and as far as I’m concerned, people who are throwing eggs at us for doing so are the useful idiots of the revolution. I’m sorry to use the term, but it’s applicable in this case.
(Chris) They’re not doing the Church, or themselves or their fellow Catholics a favor. I mean, even John Allen gets it. In an article he just did under the title “Does Francis have an Enemies list?” This is what Allen is saying, and asking. He writes: “Many Catholic conservatives and traditionalists these days are asking if the pontiff has an enemies list of his own.” And then he lists the three bishops that are often targeted for apostolic visitations and two of them were removed, or are about to be removed. We have Bishop Livieres Plano, we have Bishop Robert Finn and Bishop Mario Oliveri of the diocese of Albenga in Italy. And he says, noting what others observed, “Many observers can’t help but notice that all three prelates have one obvious thing in common: each is among the most conservative members of their respective bishop’s conferences.” Now, of course there are problems in their dioceses, there are problems in practically every Catholic diocese. There are problems with homosexual infiltration in practically every Catholic diocese.
The Pope hasn’t acted against all these other dioceses, he’s targeted three of the most conservative bishops in the world for apostolic visitations, and one of them has been removed. He even quotes Marco Tosatti, one of the most respected vaticanists with the proposition that “the crackdown is the leading edge”, according to Allen, “of a wider “witch hunt’” – this is what Tosatti said, “describing it”, quoting Tosatti, “as an internal war being waged in the name of the pope”. And then Allen concludes with this rather provocative statement: “The risk” – he says – “ is that a good chunk of the Church may conclude that if the pope sees them as the enemy, there’s no good reason why they shouldn’t see him the same way.” Even John Allen is writing this way. We have a situation on our hands. It’s useless to deny it.
(Matt) No, no, that’s it. I mean, you know I had a friend recently who wrote me an email, he said “It must feel pretty interesting for traditionals to be exonerated because clearly you’re being fully exonerated”. I said “I want nothing to do with exoneration. I want my Church back, I’ve got seven children I need to raise in this Church, how are we supposed to do this? I want a pope back who I can rely on. This is the problem: we’ve hit critical mass now, not that we can change this as journalists or as commentators, but my goodness, we have to at least try, we have to stand up and try to do something about the fact that Holy Mother Church has been infiltrated, there’s a coup d’état that has taken place. Everyone can see it, I think even pope Benedict is now aware of what’s going on and gently in his academic way is trying to intervene and do something about it.
(Chris) Well Cardinal Burke said it best, and this is another statement of historic proportions, when he said that many of the faithful have come to him to express the sense that it seems as if, two things he said, one, the Church is now without a rudder. And the second thing he said was that it seems as if we’re attempting to create the Church out of nothing, as if there is no path. Burke who is still technically now the head of the Apostolic Signatura, or I guess he’s been officially removed as of this day. This is what he said, when he was still technically the head of the Apostolic Signatura: “The Church seems to be without a rudder and that the Church seems to be created anew by these revolutionaries, who act as if the previous teachings of the Church don’t exist. Even the teachings of John Paul II. Thirty three years ago in Familiaris Consortio, that’s how rapid this process has accelerated.
(Matt) Yeah, the wheels are coming off. Cardinal Burke also said the faithful are becoming sea sick. And what’s very important for people to realize is that this is a prince of the Church and Collegiality has bound the hands of the princes of the Church for 50 years. So when you have a cardinal, in the level of Cardinal Burke saying the sort of things he’s now saying, you need to read between the lines a little bit. This man is terrified, not only because of what is happening to the government of the Church, but also to what is going to happen to souls as a result of it, there is no other motivation for a man as holy and as committed to his duty as a person of the Church as Cardinal Burke he would have no other motivation. He would not be saying this if he weren’t much more concerned, even in his own statements of late indicate.
(Chris) Well, I think that what Bishop Athanasius Schneider says, and that name could not be more appropriate because the one courageous bishop in the time of Arian Heresy was named bishop Athanasius, I don’t think that parallel can be over emphasized, but what he says is precisely the truth of the matter, that the Catholic laymen have to raise a veritable storm of protest. They have to say “This will not pass” – even if it means saying to the Pope, “Your Synod is a disaster. You have to stop it. We need to raise through every Catholic blogger, every Catholic journalist, every Catholic website on the Planet a unified protest against the direction in which this pope, I’m sorry to say, seems to be determined to take the Church. We have a duty to do!
(Matt) Yeah, we have a duty, and in closing, Chris, let’s just say a couple little things; we’re almost out of time. You know, sometimes people think that what we are doing at The Remnant is polemic. I don’t always want to be in polemics, but let’s face it that’s part of what we do for a living, and they say “You’re being hard on the bloggers, you’re being hard on some of the more neo-Catholic bloggers.” No we’re not, Chris. Time is running out. When what we want to be doing is facing the enemies of the Church we can’t, because we have guys that are actually decent fellows, neo-Catholic types who are constantly snipping at the effort to do what Athanasius Schneider is praising bloggers and journalists for doing. We need to come together on this, and it would be great, it would be WONDERFUL if we could get together with all of these bloggers, all of these neo-Catholic fellows and say “Ok guys put down your interesting (25:06) squabble, put down your circular firing squad mentality. JOIN US! We need more people, we need to stand up and try to make a difference in our time, and instead we have to resort to this, what seems like sort of silly polemics against people who do share our faith, and that’s most unfortunate.
(Chris) Yeah, and people bristle at the use of the term neo-Catholic, but I think it’s a very necessary descript. Let me give you a concrete example using what you are talking about. One of them just came out the other day and said “Oh it’s actually wonderful that Elton John loves Pope Francis, because this disposes him to become a Catholic.” This is sheer idiocy! He doesn’t love the Church! He loves what Francis is saying that seems to contradict what the Church has always taught. He loves the person of Mario Bergoglio, who is now Pope Francis, because of what he says to the detriment of the Magisterium. And yet this fellow with this rather prominent blogsite is causing immense damage by legitimating this preposterous development. One of the world’s leading homosexuals who proposed to be married to a man, who has inflicted on innocent children the horror of adopting them, is crazy about Francis. He finds this to be wonderful! This is the problem we’re dealing with. This is exactly why calling them neo-Catholics is the only way to describe them. If this isn’t a new kind of Catholicism, what would be?
(Matt) Yeah, that’s exactly it. That’s exactly it. So you see them praising, it seems a good thing when Elton John does this, and in the same week you, myself, John Vennari, we’re all publicly called “enemies of the Catholic Church” by another supposedly tradition-leaning website. I mean, I wouldn’t say that, really, about anyone, about the Sedevacantists, about neo-Catholics. “Enemies of the Catholic Church”! That’s quite a statement! And yet that’s what’s happening, that’s how much vitriol there is reserved for the Society of St. Pious X, people like The Remnant, like Catholic Family News. And why is it? Because we are resisting, Chris. That’s why to me the attack on the Society of St. Pious X has much less to do with their canonical standing, much more to do with carrying water for those in powerful positions today who are trying to silence all opposition. That’s what’s going on with the Society of St. Pious X. No one really cares in the neo-Catholic world about their lack of proper canonical standing. “Oh I’m shocked! I’m scandalized!” No! It’s somehow they’ve been co-opted to oppose resistance, to oppose Catholic counter-revolution. I don’t know what to make of this. Why is this happening?
(Chris) Well, this has always been the function of this constituency in the Church, and I’m not judging this or objecting to this position. In fact, in “The Great Façade” that I wrote back in 2002, I said that many of the people in this constituency, this revolutionized reformed constituency of the Church that we have called neo-Catholic are Catholics in good faith and the faith of many of them surpasses that of a number of the traditionalists that you refer to as ugly traditionalists.
(Chris) That isn’t the point of the term neo-Catholic. The point is to provide an objective description of characteristics of thought that have been very harmful to the Church, without judging the average Catholic in the pews. And, again, we’re not dealing with a new thing in the Church, a new form of Catholicism that has become gay-friendly. – Friendly to the divorced and remarried, living in a state of public adultery, friendly to concubines, as we saw at the Synod. If that isn’t the new thing that could be called neo-Catholicism, then nothing could be. And to say that we’re dealing with this new phenomenon, this new neo-catholic phenomenon, which has legitimating the revolution, is not to condemn anyone’s subjective disposition, or to cast anybody out of the Church. We never do that, but they do it to us, and that’s the other aspect of this term that was coined. It’s a defensive appellation. We're saying that we're sick and tired of being called extreme traditionalists by these people who are in effect the neo-conservatives of Roman Catholicism, who think they’re conservative, and may subjectively be completely innocent of any offense against the Church but are acting in ways that are detrimental to the Church because they embrace this entirely new thing, which is so obviously ruining us.
(Matt) Right, right. And it’s not just you or me, we’re not the only ones saying this. If you think about what Cardinal Burke said about his… let’s leave the Pope out of it for a moment. He’s talking about bishops and cardinals at the zenith of the Catholic Church, that is at the highest levels. Those bishops and cardinals oversee dioceses, oversee priests, oversee millions of people who are getting this message. And if what that message was vis-à-vis adultery and homosexual unions, if that isn’t neo-Catholicism, what the heck is it? You know? And Cardinal Burke is targeting it.
(Chris) That, I think would be an appropriate note to conclude this because now in this constituency and these commentators and neo-Catholic domain have a real problem on their hands. Are they going to begin to condemn Cardinal Burke, are they going to begin to condemn Cardinal Pell, are they going to condemn Bishop Athanasius Schneider, are they going to condemn the Pat Archbalds and other mainstream figures who are saying “This has gone too far!”? How are they going to distinguish us from these critics of the so-called mainstream including at least two cardinals that the Pope emeritus has called great cardinals? What are they going to do now? They have a choice: They ought to begin throwing cardinals and bishops under the bus or along with us or they admit that maybe we just have a point about what’s going on.
(Matt) No, that’s it, Chris. Let’s conclude our matter and also let’s conclude by making an overture to all the people, you know, the vast middle ground of folks who are heavily influenced by, quote unquote, neo-Catholic bloggers. If you look at the comment boxes lately under some of the premier bloggers, neo-Catholic bloggers, half the time they’re going to the blogger himself, whatever he’s just posted, because they’re seeing the problem. Many people are seeing the problem. I guess we can conclude this program by reaching out to those folks. You guys are brother-Catholics, are brother and sister-Catholics in Christ. We’re in crisis. Traditionals don’t want to ostracize you, we want to bring you together, we want you to help us. Let’s all stand together, say our prayers and take the stand that has to be taken. But I think, Chris, that at the end of the day there is an awful lot of those folks, quote unquote “neo-Catholics”, because they don’t know anything else, but they can see now that something is terribly wrong.
(Chris) It’s time to wake up. The Remnant isn’t the problem, Catholic Family News isn’t the problem, radical traditionals are not the problem, the Society of St. Pious X is not the problem. The problem is in Rome. Unless we wake up to that reality as cardinals and now even bishop Athanasius Schneider has done we’re not going to be able to address the crisis in the Church. That’s all I have to say.
(Matt) Well stated, and we’ll end on that note and will just pick this up next week. Thanks very much. It was very nice visiting with you despite all the problems, and I will talk to you soon.
(Chris) God bless you.