Letters to the Editor Cont....
by the gradual working-out of the present sharp conflicts.
And to bring this about, Papa Bergoglio will not need to issue any clear, explicit and unambiguous denials of Catholic doctrine! Indeed, such crystal-clear heterodoxy might well provoke a strong orthodox reaction from those many prelates who, as Dr.
Silvas notes, are now clutching at hermeneutical straws in order to give a tradition-friendly interpretation to the bare text of Amoris, which they read in isolation from its real-life existential and ecclesial context.
Why should Francis risk possible defeat by provoking their ire when he can pave the way for final victory more smoothly, albeit more slowly, by simply letting the confusion and conflicts gradually work themselves out in the developing praxis of a Church led at grass-roots level by cardinals and archbishops who will be increasingly of his own ilk?
After all, the fault-lines already chiseled by original sin into our fallen human nature will ensure that the final working-out of this dialectical process will be one that smothers the objective moral order with the subjective demands of individual "conscience", so that (among other things) the Holy Eucharist will finally be open to all those who present themselves for it. In a report in La Repubblica that was never denied by the Vatican, its atheist editor Eugenio Scalfari asserted that the Pope himself, in a phone conversation, revealed that to be the future "bottom line" of his reforms. (In this Bergoglian strategy there are also hints of John Dewey’s pragmatism and the Marxist theorist Antonio Gramsci’s approach: gradually undermining the status quo from within rather than directly and violently confronting it.) I hate to say this, but the word ‘diabolical’ keeps popping up in my mind as I contemplate this horrid scenario. After all, if you’re the devil, and you’re out to destroy the Church by attacking her truth and holiness, you’ll want to "deceive even the elect", as Our Lord prophesied (cf. Mt. 24:24). So you’re not going to blow your cover by issuing obvious, outright denials of Catholic dogma. In fact, you’ll "reassure" devout papal loyalists by throwing in generous doses of orthodoxy and sound piety into your pronouncements - good wheat alongside the cockle. Also, where is Satan going to start if not at our weakest point? Well, what point in fallen human nature is weaker than our disordered sexual desires? And what aspects of the Church’s teaching about sexuality are now more vulnerable, in the forum of ‘enlightened’ public opinion, than her rejection of unnatural birth control and remarriage after divorce?
So it makes sense that you’re going to sow confusion in those areas first, with ambivalent or seemingly contradictory words and actions that will allow the theological equivalent ("Bad doctrine drives out good") of Gresham’s Law ("Bad money drives out good") to gradually spread moral poison throughout the Mystical Body.
Whatever about that, Anna Silvas’ perceptive observations on Amoris certainly help us to see why Francis is refusing to answer the cardinals’ dubia - and why he almost certainly never will.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!
Fr. Brian Harrison, O.S. St. Louis, Missouri
Sexual Revolution in Nursing Homes and at Mass?
Editor, The Remnant: I’m now in my mid-70s and had lived in a 55-plus community for about 15 years. Let me assure you, it isn’t ONLY the young people these days who are "sex obsessed". The elderly are also! Not only that, but they have to TELL ALL, whether or not you want to hear their stories.
Another friend from years past is now living in a Catholic nursing home, and at age 84 has a 94-year-old "lover". Yes, she, too, must TELL ALL about their hook ups.
I no longer live with the older, active (gulp!) adults, but have chosen to live in an apartment home—no one above, next door, or below. These are separate units, and I can be left alone with "The Liturgical Year" and other wonderful spiritual readings, as well as the ability to attend a Traditional Latin Mass. But even there, one has to have "custody of the eyes" because so many do not dress properly for "the Most Beautiful Thing This Side of Heaven". Truly, it is scandalous, but then not everyone at those Masses is Traditionalist. Shorts, skimpy tops and short skirts, jeans, and all kinds of casual wear is seen at these Masses. It truly disgusts me, and my eyes are often kept in my Missal.
Honestly, I’m not sure what I am supposed to do about these matters, but like I said, it isn’t only the young who are sexually active without benefit of marriage. My younger brother has recently "married" and he is her fifth husband! Needless to say, he is no longer a practicing Catholic. Keep up the good work. Love Remnant TV!
Dominus vobiscum.
With prayers always, Name Withheld (by Remnant editor)
Yet Another War?
Editor, The Remnant: War drums are getting louder by the day, with demonstration of the latest super-bomb.
This may gladden the steel hearts of war-hawks John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Nikki Haley, and the "Defense Contractor Community" (as warned against by Generals Dwight Eisenhower and Douglas MacArthur 65 years ago).
Outmaneuvered by their Russian allies in the on-going Syrian (Civil) War, the frantic war-hawks have discovered a new meddling opportunity in the Korean peninsula. There they may have a new comrade in National Security Adviser, General H.R. McMaster—who grabs the latest headline with militant advice: "We cannot accept a nuclear North Korea".
Well, who is "we"—and who is asking him to "accept" anything? Is he giving personal advice, or is he speaking for President Trump—our rambling leader who strangely tweets at 3am, "I’m both a nationalist and a globalist" (never mind the glaring contradiction)? We have a busy President who is reinterpreting Webster’s entire dictionary—at 3am any day of the week. The President’s new son-in-law, Jared Kushner, as new top adviser, has a real job on his hands— how to refocus presidential attention on Jerusalem.
But now back to the unfinished Korean War, an active real war for three years (1950-1953), and then under an informal armistice for 64 years— with armed forces still aligned on an artificial boundary set by United Nations authority. Now with General McMaster announcing "We Cannot Accept a Nuclear North Korea"—perhaps he is a bit late in thumping the war-drums, the Marxist regime may already possess the nuclear ability, certainly its Chinese Marxist regime ally has the nuclear weapons.
So, can President Trump "make a deal" here and now? Or does General McMaster get unofficial "authority" to produce a war plan which will satisfy our Homeland War Hawks? Since President Trump seems unable to decide whether he is a real "America First" advocate, or some kind of a Globalistwithout- Borders, may U.S. Congress be allowed a vote?
Regarding any proposed restart of the Korean War of 1950-53, it may be of use to recall that President Harry Truman aborted any further American military involvement when in 1951 he "fired" General Douglas MacArthur, preventing his advance to the Yalu River (boundary with China), thus allowing Red Chinese takeover of North Korea.
So, it seems obvious that the only way General McMaster can find any solution to a renewal of the Korean War, or its prevention, is to gain Chinese diplomatic aid. Meanwhile, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Nikki Haley, please shutup and put the war drums back in your toy boy.
Robert Dahl Maryland