That Francis Effect strikes again…
Finnish Lutherans given “Holy Communion” at Vatican
Boy, what a beginning of the year it’s been: Chaos Frank is causing damage at full throttle, and this in the “Year of Mercy”. In fact, it seems as though he is determined to embarrass and humiliate the authors of the new book against Sedevacantism, for ever since its release, Francis has shifted his blatant apostasy into high gear. First he released a video reducing our Lord Jesus Christ and His Truth to just one nice option among many religions, claiming that there is no certainty about who is right; then he visited a synagogue in Rome to tell the Talmudists how wonderful they are; then he raked traditionalists over the coals for refusing to embrace what we’re calling “Surpriseology”, his pseudo-theology of “surprise” which conveniently translates his every fancy into the will of the Holy Ghost; then, on the same day, he received an ultra-liberal Lutheran delegation from Finland; and just yesterday it was announced that Francis had officially changed the rubrics of Holy Thursday to open up the foot-washing ceremony specifically to women.
Not surprisingly, the foot-washing change has caused a huge ruckus on the internet (except, of course, on Michael Voris’ Comedy Channel, where criticism of Francis is forbidden). This is a curious phenomenon because, by comparison, we do not see as much of an outrage when there are other, much worse things going on. For example, many Novus Ordo “traditionalists” have long counted “Cardinal” Gerhard Ludwig Muller among the solid conservatives in the Vatican because he opposes adultery dressed up as “annulment”, yet they totally ignore the fact that the man does not believe in the Resurrection of Christ, does not believe in the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and does not believe in Transubstantiation. Similarly, when Francis said that Catholics are united with Non-Catholics in an “ecumenism of blood”, when he claimed that Faith without works is not true Faith, when he said that there is “no answer” to why children suffer, or when he publicly joked about the Crucifixion of our Blessed Lord, the blogosphere was comparatively silent. Somehow the outrage seems tied to sexual issues only, or at least mainly. Whenever there is a scandal that involves sexuality (abortion, contraception, divorce, homosexuality, male/female issues, etc.), then the indignation knows no bounds. And while these things are important issues, it is very concerning that when Francis directly attacks God Himself, or the Blessed Mother, or the Faith, or the Catholic Church, the anger shown is absent, mild, or at least noticeably less by comparison.
However, in this post we will not focus on the foot-washing controversy; rather, we will discuss the liberal Finnish Lutheran delegation Francis welcomed so cordially on Monday, January 18. It has now been reported that these Protestants attended the Novus Ordo worship service then offered at the Vatican and were given “Holy Communion”, even though they had indicated that they did not wish to receive “Communion”. Instead, the “Catholic priests” insisted on giving it to them.
The following is an English translation of a report put out by the Finnish news organization Kotimaa:
Catholic Communion Given to Finnish Visitors at Vatican
January 19, 2016 12:30 – Jussi Rytkönen World
A group of Finns, led by Samuel Salmi, the Bishop of Oulu, faced a surprise on Friday at St. Peter’s in Rome, when they received an ecumenical gesture of good will.
The Finnish representatives of the [Lutheran] diocese of Oulu, who assisted at the Mass, were given Catholic communion. This despite the fact that the ministers of the Mass were aware that their Finnish guests were Lutherans.
Bishop Salmi was also asked to present the words of greeting of the Evangelical-Lutheran Church of Finland in the middle of the Mass, which was celebrated for the international congregation of St. Peter’s.
An ecumenical rarity was also the fact that Mass was partially sung by the Oulainen Youth Choir. The choir performed in Latin the hymn Sanctus, which is part of the liturgy.
Bishop Salmi stated that when communion time in the Mass arrived, the Finns started to head with the rest of the congregation to the distributors of the Eucharist. As an ecumenical gesture all Finnish visitors placed their right hand on their left shoulder. This is a sign that the person is a member of a different Christian church or community.
“But the Catholic priests, who were distributing communion, paid no attention to this gesture and wanted to give Catholic communion to us Finnish Lutherans. And I also received it,” Salmi said.
“This reflects the new ecumenical attitude of the Vatican”
The opening of the Lord’s Supper to a member of a different church is a remarkable ecumenical event even in exceptional cases. Salmi thinks that this is definitely a result of the new agenda, created by Pope Francis. Even though intercommunion between churches is still not officially established, last fall the Pope left the question about the participation of the Lutherans to the Catholic Eucharist as a matter of conscience.
“This was not a coincidence either. This certainly reflects the new ecumenical attitude of the Vatican. The Pope was not at this Mass, but his agenda is to promote love and unity. He has many theological opponents in the Vatican, so it’s hard to guess how much he can actually say. But he can make some decisions about the practice,” Salmi evaluates.
Salmi thinks that the tectonic plates of theology are now moving.
“Extremely significant innovations took place in this communion service. This means also that we as churches are ecumenically in motion.”
In 2014 the Oulainen Youth Choir had already received a request to perform in the Vatican, which was the purpose of this trip. Besides singing in the Mass, it also performed before 7,000 people at the papal audience, singing Sibelius’ Finlandia.
“I am very happy and proud that we have such a skillful youth choir. The ecumenical opening and service it has now done is very significant. The choir and its leader Tapani Tirilä worked great together with the maestro of St. Peter’s.”
At the papal audience Salmi also had a chance for private conversation with Pope Francis.
This past week Rome also hosted the traditional ecumenical visit of Finnish Bishops. All three were Bishops of Helsinki: Irja Askola from the Lutheran, Ambrosius from the Orthodox, and Teemu Sippo from the Catholic church.
Yesterday the Bishops met with Pope Francis, who received as a gift a piece of protected wild forest in Porvoo.
All three Bishops celebrated on Tuesday the Ecumenical Mass of St. Henry in the Church of Santa Maria Sopra Minerva. Bishop Askola will also preach in the church of the Bridgettine Nuns during ecumenical Vespers, which will be celebrated by the president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Cardinal Kurt Koch.
(Source: “Suomalaisseurueelle Vatikaanissa katolinen ehtoollinen”, Kotimaa24.fi, Jan. 19, 2016)
Surely, Francis’ most stalwart defenders will now claim that he had nothing to do with this, and this quasi-sacrilege (we say “quasi” because the Novus Ordo “Mass” is invalid, of course) cannot be laid to his charge. However, the truth is that this is the fault not only of Francis but also that of the entire Vatican II religion, especially that of “Pope Saint” John Paul II, who first officially authorized non-Catholics to receive Novus Ordo “Communion” under certain circumstances, enshrined in the 1983 Novus Ordo Code of Canon Law:
Novus Ordo Canon 844:
3. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.
4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.
(Antipope John Paul II, Novus Ordo Code of Canon Law , Canon 844.3-4)
Yes, the circumstances in which this shared communion is allowed are quite limited, but that is irrelevant because the principle of shared sacraments has been admitted, and thus the floodgates have been opened. Now it is merely a matter of further tweaking the circumstances, and this is what Francis is currently busy doing:
In the case of the Finns, the amusing thing is that they didn’t even ask to receive — instead, it was practically “forced” on them. So much for “conscience.”
As a reminder, Lutherans have no valid priesthood and no valid sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. They deny the dogma of Transubstantiation and adhere to the heresy of Consubstantiation, also known as “impanation”, which holds that Christ is somehow present alongside the bread, which remains bread, after the “consecration”:
- The Heresy of Consubstantiation (Catholic Encyclopedia, 1908)
So, as you can see, Francis is simply expanding on the law already on the books in the 1983 Bogus Ordo Code of Canon Law. And this code, in turn, is simply an adaptation of church law to the new teachings of the Second Vatican Council. It is a direct application of the ecumenism and false ecclesiology taught by Vatican II, and it comes with the (putative) “authority” of John Paul II, who imposed it. Remember this next time someone tells you that Vatican II taught nothing new — oh yes, it did! This idea that Non-Catholics can participate in the reception of Catholic sacraments (in clear violation of the words of our Lord in Matthew 7:6), already hinted at in the Council’s Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 8, is a direct result of the false ecclesiology of the Council, its false new teaching that Non-Catholic Christians are in “imperfect communion” with the Catholic Church merely in virtue of a valid baptism, the profession of heresy notwithstanding (this false teaching has been nicknamed “Frankenchurch” or “patchwork ecclesiology” and is exposed and refuted here and also here). This is something Francis again emphasized in his general audience the very same week he received the Finnish heretics.
In 2003, the same John Paul II reaffirmed this wicked “shared sacraments” law in his “encyclical” Ecclesia De Eucharistia, n. 45: “While it is never legitimate to concelebrate [the New Mass] in the absence of full communion, the same is not true with respect to the administration of the Eucharist under special circumstances, to individual persons belonging to Churches or Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church.” This goes for the Latin church as much as it does for the Eastern Novus Ordo churches, whose Code of Canons for the Eastern Churches, published in 1990, likewise by John Paul II, legislates the same thing (Canon 671 §§ 3-4).
In 1993, the Modernist Unholy See published a lengthy documented entitled Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism, which is a veritable manual for implementing the ecumenism and ecclesiology of Vatican II. It was approved, confirmed, and ordered to be published once again by Antipope John Paul II on March 25, 1993. This impious document states:
129. … [I]n certain circumstances, by way of exception, and under certain conditions, access to these sacraments [Eucharist, Penance, Anointing of the Sick] may be permitted, or even commended, for Christians of other Churches and ecclesial Communities.
130. In case of danger of death, Catholic ministers may administer these sacraments when the conditions given below (n. 131) are present. In other cases, it is strongly recommended that the diocesan Bishop, taking into account any norms which may have been established for this matter by the Episcopal Conference or by the Synods of Eastern Catholic Churches, establish general norms for judging situations of grave and pressing needand for verifying the conditions mentioned below (n. 131). In accord with Canon Law, these general norms are to be established only after consultation with at least the local competent authority of the other interested Church or ecclesial Community. Catholic ministers will judge individual cases and administer these sacraments only in accord with these established norms, where they exist. Otherwise they will judge according to the norms of this Directory.
131. The conditions under which a Catholic minister may administer the sacraments of the Eucharist, of penance and of the anointing of the sick to a baptized person who may be found in the circumstances given above (n. 130) are that the person be unable to have recourse for the sacrament desired to a minister of his or her own Church or ecclesial Community, ask for the sacrament of his or her own initiative, manifest Catholic faith in this sacrament and be properly disposed.
(Antipope John Paul II via Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism , nn. 129-131; underlining added.)
So, let’s get this straight: As long as they’re baptized, non-Catholic Christians can legitimately, according to Novus Ordo law, ask to be given “Holy Communion” , “absolution” , and “Anointing of the Sick” — and then just as legitimately receive the same — without converting to Catholicism, as long as they have an unspecified “grave and pressing need”, even outside the danger of death (as in, “I have no intention of becoming a Catholic, but I just need Catholic sacraments”), which is verified and/or judged in part by the “competent authority” of the non-Catholic’s false religion, as long as the non-Catholic is “unable to have recourse” to a false minister of his own heretical church!
This is unbelivable! How in the world could anyone, especially people in the Society of St. Pius X or the indult, possibly believe this junk can come from the Catholic Church of our Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? That this disgusting mockery of the sacraments could come from a true Catholic Pope?! Absurd! Impossible!
But it’s official Novus Ordo Church law, put in place by the great “conservative” John Paul II, the man who “ordained” the Rev. John Zuhlsdorf in 1991. Perhaps Mr. Zuhlsdorf cares to comment on this? Does he give “Catholic sacraments” to non-Catholics? Does he think it is a permissible, even commendable, thing to do?
Think we’re making this up? We’re misunderstanding something? We’re exaggerating? Oh no. See the video below, published by [Non-]Catholic Answers, to verify for yourself that we are quite rightly understanding Novus Ordo law:
Video: James “Jimmy” Akin explains on Catholic Answers Live that heretics can receive “Holy Communion” in the Novus Ordo Church in certain circumstances
Are you shocked? Well then, all we can say is: “Where have you been?” This mockery of the sacraments has been around for over 30 years. Maybe you need to stop watching The Vortex or listening to Vericast and wake up to the real Vatican II Church.
But it gets better still… that is, worse. Specifically with regard to giving the Novus Ordo sacraments to the Eastern Orthodox (better called Eastern Schismatics or Eastern Heterodox), John Paul’s Directory enjoins upon Novus Ordo clergy the duty to avoid any suggestion of seeking the recipient’s conversion to Catholicism:
125. Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and the anointing of the sick to members of the Eastern Churches, who ask for these sacraments of their own free will and are properly disposed.In these particular cases also, due consideration should be given to the discipline of the Eastern Churches for their own faithful and any suggestion of proselytism should be avoided.
(Antipope John Paul II, Directory on Ecumenism, n. 125; underlining added.)
Yes, “proselytism” rears its ugly head again! In a footnote, the Directory indicates that it understands “proselytism” to mean that which was described by Vatican II’s error-filled declaration Dignitatis Humanae as follows: “In spreading religious belief and in introducing religious practices everybody must at all times avoid any action which seems to suggest coercion or dishonest or unworthy persuasion especially when dealing with the uneducated or the poor” (n. 4; cf. Directory on Ecumenism, footnote 41).
In other words, do not even think about making the administration of Novus Ordo sacraments to the Eastern Orthodox dependent on their prior conversion to Catholicism! That would be “coercive”, “dishonest”, or “unworthy.” Of course, the true practice, rooted in dogma, of the real Catholic Church has always been that Catholic sacraments can only be given to, well, Catholics, so this is a direct attack on the authentic Catholic practice of requiring non-Catholics’ conversion to the True Faith before giving them access to the sacraments — which only stands to reason! See for yourself, from the real Code of Canon Law:
It is forbidden that the Sacraments of the Church be ministered to heretics and schismatics, even if they ask for them and are in good faith, unless beforehand, rejecting their errors, they are reconciled with the Church.
(Pope Benedict XV, Code of Canon Law , Canon 731.2; underlining added.)
This is the Roman Catholic law. What a stark contrast to that of the Vatican II Sect!
Clearly, the Novus Ordo law is wicked. It is antichrist. It is an abomination. And yet, it is the official law of the Vatican II Sect. Francis is merely expanding the “circumstances” under which the evil Novus Ordo law applies, but he is not establishing the principle that (putative) Catholic sacraments can be given to non-Catholics. Vatican II did that a long time ago.
Yet, the Catholic Church teaches about her own universal laws that they are infallible — they are divinely guaranteed not to be, in and of themselves, evil, harmful, heretical, sacrilegious, or impious:
“…as if the Church which is ruled by the Spirit of God could have established discipline which is not only useless and burdensome for Christian liberty to endure, but which is even dangerous and harmful and leading to superstition and materialism, — [this is] false, rash, scandalous, dangerous, offensive to pious ears, injurious to the Church and to the Spirit of God by whom it is guided, at least erroneous.”
“Furthermore, the discipline sanctioned by the Church must never be rejected or branded as contrary to certain principles of the natural law. It must never be called crippled, or imperfect or subject to civil authority. In this discipline the administration of sacred rites, standards of morality, and the reckoning of the Church and her ministers are embraced.”
(Pope Gregory XVI, Encyclical Mirari Vos, n. 9)
“The Church is infallible in her general discipline. By the term general discipline is understood the laws and practices which belong to the external ordering of the whole Church. Such things would be those which concern either external worship, such as liturgy and rubrics, or the administration of the sacraments. . . . If she [the Church] were able to prescribe or command or tolerate in her discipline something against faith and morals, or something which tended to the detriment of the Church or to the harm of the faithful, she would turn away from her divine mission, which would be impossible.”
(Jean Herrmann, Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae, Vol. 1 [4th ed., Rome, 1908], p. 258)
What does this mean for the Novus Ordo Church, whose laws are clearly heretical, evil, and sacrilegious in and of themselves? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that it therefore cannot be the true Catholic Church of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is the only possible conclusion, whether we like it or not.
All those who are now wishing back for the days of Benedict XVI will be disappointed to find out that not only did he agree with the 1983 Code of Canon Law and the 1993 Ecumenical Directory as well, he even put into practice the law himself by giving “Holy Communion” to the public Protestant Bro. Roger Schutz in 2005. Here is a photo:
So, let’s recap:
- Allowing Non-Catholics to receive some of the “sacraments” is already permitted and “commended” in the New Church
- This is nothing new
- This law is the practical application of Vatican II’s “Frankenchurch” ecclesiology, in which the mere baptismal character creates a bond of “communion” with all the baptized, heretics or not
- This has been the official law of the Modernist Church since 1983
- This evil law goes for both the Latin and Eastern churches
- This has been specifically authorized and confirmed by John Paul II
- John Paul II specifically forbade any “proselytism” in connection with this concession, at least in regard to the Eastern Schismatics
- In 2005, “Cardinal” Ratzinger publicly gave “Holy Communion” to a well-known Protestant leader
- Francis is merely adjusting the “circumstances” under which this law is applied, which he is now expanding to the “conscientious decision” of each heretic
Can this evil come from the Catholic Church? Anyone care to comment? John Salza? Robert Siscoe? Mr. Zuhlsdorf? Michael Voris? Christopher Ferrara? Tim Haines? Michael Matt? Marian Horvat? Atila Sinke Guimaraes? Society of St. Pius X? We can’t hear you!
“But,” you say, “this isn’t binding” — you can just “resist” it, right? Ignoring for a moment that even if it weren’t binding, it would still be impossible for the Bride of Christ to even permit such grave sacrilege and heresy-in-action, and ignoring the fact that the Catholic Church teaches that her universal disciplinary laws are infallible (as we saw above), nevertheless if you believe the Vatican II Sect to be the Catholic Church and John Paul II to have been a valid Pope, then yes, it is definitely binding on your conscience. This isn’t Cafeteria Catholicism, you see, where you can pick and choose what you like. The fact is that if John Paul II was a true Pope, then the following words, with which he imposed the Novus Ordo Codes of Canon Law on his subjects, hold binding authority:
Trusting therefore in the help of divine grace, sustained by the authority of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, with certain knowledge, and in response to the wishes of the bishops of the whole world who have collaborated with me in a collegial spirit; with the supreme authority with which I am vested, by means of this Constitution, to be valid forever in the future, I promulgate the present Code as it has been set in order and revised. I command that for the future it is to have the force of law for the whole Latin Church, and I entrust it to the watchful care of all those concerned, in order that it may be observed.
(Antipope John Paul II, “Apostolic Constitution” Sacrae Disciplinae Leges ; underlining added.)
And the same goes for the Eastern Novus Ordo churches:
And thus, having invoked Divine Grace, supported by the authority of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, looking favorably on the certain knowledge and wishes of the patriarchs, archbishops and bishops of the Eastern Churches who have collaborated with me in a collegial spirit, and having used the fullness of the Apostolic authority with which I am endowed, by this, my Constitution, to be in force for the future, I promulgate the present Code as it has been arranged and revised, and I order and decree that it obtain the force of law for all of the Eastern Catholic Churches. I hand it over to the hierarchs of these same Churches to be observed with care and vigilance.
(Antipope John Paul II, “Apostolic Constitution” Sacri Canones ; underlining added.)
Two words for all non-sedevacantist traditionalists: Game Over. The Novus Ordo goose is cooked. It is absolutely impossible for the Vatican II Sect to be the Catholic Church founded by Christ the Lord, and for its heads to be true Popes of the Catholic Church. In both bogus “apostolic constitutions”, John Paul II makes clear that nothing can contradict his decree: “Notwithstanding any contrary ordinances, constitutions, privileges … or customs” (1983); “Nothing whatever to the contrary withstanding…” (1990). Nothing. That includes articles by The Remnant, books by John Salza and Robert Siscoe, Vortex episodes by Michael Voris, podcasts by Tim Haines, videos by John Vennari, blog posts by Rorate Caeli, even Skype calls by Christopher Ferrara and Michael Matt. But none are so blind as those who refuse to see. They want Francis and his five predecessors to be valid Popes, and so they have to deal with the consequences this entails.
And so the chaos continues, day in and day out, thanks to its countless enablers.
Over at The Remnant, professional rhetorician Christopher Ferrara is asking whether Francis is still compos mentis (in his right mind). At this point, we are beginning to wonder whether the same question ought not to be asked of Mr. Ferrara and all those who are still acknowledging Jorge Bergoglio as the Pope of the Catholic Church. The irrational insistence that this blaspheming apostate is the Vicar of Christ, is only perpetuating the problem.
Don’t complain about the problem if you’re a part of it.
Image sources: kotimaa24.fi / Getty Images
Licenses: fair use / rights-managed