Ratzinger Message read at Meisner Funeral
Benedict XVI: Church is “On Verge of Capsizing”
“Abp.” Ganswein reads Benedict XVI’s Message at Cologne Cathedral
Image credit: domradio.de (video screenshot)
[UPDATE 18-JUL-17: Ganswein denies Benedict meant to criticize Francis]
Today, July 15, the Novus Ordo Sect in Germany conducted the solemn funeral rites for “Cardinal” Joachim Meisner, who had died July 5 at the age of 83. Numerous high-ranking prelates of the Modernist Sect were gathered at the magnificent Cathedral of St. Peter in Cologne. Among them were “Cardinals” Reinhard Marx, Karl Lehmann, Gerhard Ludwig Muller, Peter Erdo, and of course Rainer Maria Woelki, the current “Archbishop” of Cologne and main celebrant of the Requiem.
Another high-profile guest was the ubiquitous “Abp.” Georg Ganswein, Prefect of the “Papal” Household under Francis and Personal Secretary of the “Pope Emeritus”, Benedict XVI. In his role as the latter, Ganswein, who is a heretic in his own right, read to those present a message from Benedict XVI on the passing of “Cardinal” Meisner. “Pope” Francis also had a tribute for the deceased, which was read by the Vatican’s Nuncio to Germany, “Abp.” Nikola Eterovic (see report in German here).
Bergoglio’s tribute, however, was overshadowed by the message of his predecessor, and for good reason. Here is Ratzinger’s panegyric in English translation. Pay close attention to the underlined parts:
At this hour, when the church of Cologne and faithful from further a field gathered to say goodbye to Cardinal Joachim Meisner, my heart and thoughts are with you also, and gladly accepting the invitation of Cardinal Woelki, I wish to address a word of remembrance to you.
When I heard of the death of Cardinal Meisner last Wednesday, I did not want to believe it. The day before we had talked on the phone. His gratitude for the fact that he had been on vacation after he had participated in the beatification of Bishop Teofilius Matulionis in Vilnius on Sunday before (June 25) was clear in his his voice. The love for the Church in the neighboring countries in the East, which had suffered under the Communist persecution, as well as the gratitude for the withstanding the sufferings of that time, shaped his life. And so is it is no coincidence that the last visit to his life was one to a Confessor of the Faith in those countries.
What particularly impressed me in that last talk with the retired Cardinal, was the loosened joy, the inner joy, and the confidence he had found. We know that this passionate shepherd and pastor found it difficult to leave his post, especially at a time in which the Church stands in particularly pressing need of convincing shepherds who can resist the dictatorship of the spirit of the age and who live and think the faith with determination. However, what moved me all the more was that, in this last period of his life, he learned to let go and to live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even when the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing.
Two things in recent times which pleased him more than anything:
On the one hand, he has always told me how deeply he in the Sacrament of Penance, how young people, especially young men, are experiencing the grace of forgiveness – the Gift, they have found the life that only God can give.
The other thing that has always touched him and gave him joy, was the quiet growth of Eucharistic Adoration. At the World Youth Day in Cologne this was a central point for him – that there was Adoration, a silence in which only the Lord spoke to the heart. Some pastoral and liturgical experts felt that such silence in looking at the Lord cannot be achieved with such a huge number of people. Some were also of the opinion that Eucharistic Adoration was overtaken as such, by the Mass, since the Lord would be received in Eucharistic bread and not be looked at. But that this Bread can not be eaten like any food, and that the Eucharistic sacrament “welcomes” all dimensions of our existence – that reception must be worship, has now become very clear. Thus, the time of Eucharistic Adoration at the Cologne World Youth Day has become an interior event, which remained unforgettable to the Cardinal.
When, on his last morning, Cardinal Meisner did not appear at Mass, he was found dead in his room. His Breviary had slipped out of his hands: he was praying as he died, looking at the Lord, talking to the Lord. The death that was given to him, shows once again how he lived: looking at the Lord and talking to him. So we can confidently recommend his soul to the goodness of God. Lord, we thank thee for the testimony of thy servant Joachim. Let him now be an intercessor for the Church of Cologne and around the globe! Requiescat in pace!
(“Benedict XVI’s Message at the Funeral of Joachim Cardinal Meisner”, Fidem in Terra – Faith on Earth, July 15, 2017; some corrections made; underlining added.)
Benedict’s message was also published officially and in writing by the Novus Ordo archdiocesan authorities in Cologne. It can be downloaded in the original German here:
The following is a video clip showing Mr. Ganswein reading Benedict’s tribute (source: domradio.de):
It does not take much reading between the lines to see what is being said here. Keeping in mind that Meisner is one of the four (in)famous “dubia cardinals” who have publicly challenged Francis, and considering that Meisner retired approximately one year into the Francis “pontificate” (on Feb. 28, 2014), Ratzinger is effectively saying that the Church is capsizing specifically under Francis.
That is a big deal, and it is already being picked up as such by some Novus Ordo news outlets and blogs:
- BREAKING: Pope Benedict XVI says Church is ‘on the verge of capsizing’ (Life Site News)
- Benedict XVI’s words for Card. Meisner’s funeral (Mr. Zuhlsdorf)
- Pope Benedict Warns Church is in Collapse (The Eponymous Flower)
- Benedict XVI: “Francis = Capsizing Boat” (Rorate Caeli)
- Le message de Benoît XVI pour les funérailles du cardinal Meisner, signataire des Dubia (Le Blog de Jeanne Smits)
This is the second time in a little more than 2 weeks that Benedict XVI has uttered a somewhat cryptic message. On June 29, he had received five newly-created “cardinals” together with their (and his) boss, “Pope” Francis, and reminded them somewhat unwarrantedly: “The Lord wins in the end” (source).
What is going on here?
It doesn’t take great predictability skills to anticipate that most “conservative” and “traditionalist” Novus Ordo blogs and web sites, especially those with a great disdain for Bergoglio, are going to use this as a welcome indication that the “perfectly-orthodox” Benedict is trying to slam the openly heterodox Francis (wait till Michael Voris picks this up!); and the Resignationists will see this as further “evidence” that their man, Benedict, is still the real Pope, desperately trying to send a message to the outside world from his Vatican prison. Although awfully convenient to advance their respective pet positions perhaps, neither of these analyses would do justice to the known facts, some of the more inconvenient of which we will now examine.
To get to the heart of the matter right away, we’ll say this loud and clear:
Few people in the world bear more personal responsibility for the theological, moral, liturgical, and pastoral chaos in the Vatican II Sect than Joseph Ratzinger.
As theological advisor to Cardinal Josef Frings, Ratzinger participated in the shaping of some of the Vatican II documents to a significant degree. As an influential theology professor at various universities, and as an academic and author, he helped inculcate in his students’, colleagues’, and readers’ minds the “letter and spirit” of that infernal synod. As “Archbishop” of Munich and Freising, Ratzinger implemented and applied Vatican II throughout his diocese. As Prefect of the so-called Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he determined the official “magisterial” interpretation and application of the Second Vatican Council for over 23 years, in close collaboration with “Pope” John Paul II.
Novus Ordo milestones such as the 1983 Code of Canon Law, the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church, the 1993 Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism, the 1993 Balamand Declaration, the 1999 Lutheran-Catholic Accord on Justification, and the 2000 Dominus Iesus Declaration were all issued under Ratzinger’s watch. And as “Pope” from 2005-13, well, he had the power to do whatever he pleased. He could have changed anything he liked, righted every wrong, retracted or corrected every error, excommunicated every heretic. Instead, he had Hans Kung over for coffee, went to synagogues and mosques, paid his obeisance to the Jews at the Wailing Wall, continued the blasphemous Assisi prayer meetings introduced by John Paul II, gave “Communion” to a known Protestant, and appointed “cardinals” like Donald Wuerl, Reinhard Marx, Rainer Woelki, Kurt Koch, Luis Tagle, Gianfranco Ravasi, and Francesco Coccopalmerio.
Is the Novus Ordo Sect capsizing? You bet it is! Though not despite Joseph Ratzinger, but in large part because of him.
It is an old trick: Lament the very problems you yourself are responsible for creating or aggravating! Governments love to use it. It evokes compassion and makes you look like a hero. It works every time it’s tried because people have a very short memory. And it is particularly easy to pull off when your complaint blackens your successor, when you yourself are no longer in the game and thus won’t be called to account anymore.
Folks, don’t be taken in by Benedict’s crocodile tears. Back in 1985, a mere 20 years after the close of the council, he was making headlines claiming we needed to “rediscover the true Vatican II” (see Joseph Ratzinger and Vittorio Messori, The Ratzinger Report [Ignatius Press, 1985], pp. 29-31) and warned against “degrad[ing] the liturgy to the level of a parish tea party and the intelligibility of the popular newspaper” (p. 121). That was 32 years ago! That record has been playing ever since.
It was no different for John Paul II. As far back as 1980, he ostensibly bewailed “the varied and frequent abuses being reported from different parts of the Catholic world” concerning the liturgy (see Instruction Inaestimabile Donum, Foreword). Over 20 years later, he was still “lamenting” the same thing: “In various parts of the Church abuses have occurred, leading to confusion with regard to sound faith and Catholic doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament” (John Paul II, “Encyclical” Ecclesia De Eucharistia , n. 10). The following year, he once again emphasized that “it is not possible to be silent about the abuses, even quite grave ones, against the nature of the Liturgy and the Sacraments” (Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum, n. 4) — all the while his own “papal” liturgies looked like this.
“Pope” Paul VI did the same thing when he “deplored” (boasted?) that “the smoke of Satan has entered the sanctuary” (Homily of June 29, 1972), yet he himself continued to fan the flames at every opportunity. This is not the mark of sincerity, it is the mark of hypocrisy.
We could go on and on, but you probably get the point: Don’t fall for this latest episode of the same old charade. They’ve been doing it for decades.
The latest trick is that they’re trying to make you believe there is an essential difference between the “good and orthodox” Benedict and the open Modernist Francis. The truth, however, is that both are selling you a pig — it’s just that Benedict’s has lipstick on it.
I thought B’s reference to Eucharistic bread was interesting. Like everything else, it can be taken either way.
Do you know if this is a theological term from pre-Vatican II times?
Otherwise it reminds me of that quote (which no doubt you have at your fingertips!) where he says in reference to the consecrated bread and wine, that Christ gives Himself to us in them.
Paul VI was like a common arsonist. He lights a fire, then runs around heroically warning everyone, yelling “Smoke! Fire!”
In April 2005, Ratzinger quoted Ephesians 4:14.
“Today, having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be “tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine”, seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires…We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man. He is the measure of true humanism.”
He goes on to espouse true humanism as an ‘adult faith.’
This from the man who described conversion to the Catholic Faith as unnecessary – something that belongs to the realm of ‘conscience.’
In the Luciferian ‘light’ of VII, the teachings of the heresiarchs make sense. Not Catholic sense.
You hit the mark!
There was a huge reason they removed the Last Gospel out of the novus ordo liturgy, their intent was to bring in Lucifer as the “light” and exile The Light of Christ, as the Gospel proclaims.
So that’s why they did it? Wow!
It’s hard to know if he’s critically lamenting the state of things, or laying out the strategy for the modernist takeover. Who’s “we”?
In hindsight, it seems it was ‘laying out the strategy.’ We is the ‘royal’ farce of fake church, fake pope and fake teachings.
Good cop; bad cop.
The problems with the SSPX is that they are just as duplicitous enablers, as he and the rest of the “conservative” novus ordo followers. If Benedict were truly traditional, he would publicly repent for all of the theological and liturgical harm he has done over the decades, starting with his professor status in the 50’s, move to beginning, during and after Vatican II, then as “Cardinal” and “Pope”. Then, after his public Confiteor, perform an exorcism over the Vatican, and with the help of the Swiss Guard, arrest Bergoglio and the rest of the filthy sodomites and Freemasons, then eradicate they and their minions out of the Church.
Going back to the duplicity point, the last paragraphs of this article rings eerily similar to the SSPX lamentations in the last 10-15+ years.
I think the main point was to indicate that this Cardinal, who was so orthodox he could question the Pope and so holy that he died reciting his Office, was all about the incredible travesty of World Youth Day.
After reading David Yallop’s book in which he demonstrates the inconsistencies in the official account of the death of ‘John Paul I’ (there was also the tragic bungling relating to the disappearance of Emanuela Orlandi) I don’t take seriously any account of the death of anyone in the Vatican.
I hope no one poisoned Cardinal Meisner!
As far as the material-formal and totalists go, where does NOW come down on the matter? I read the Bp. Sanborn article and was surprised that he is a material-formal supporter.
We generally don’t take sides when it comes to matters that intra-sedevacantist matters one can legitimately disagree about. May there be a fruitful and charitable discussion of the pros and cons of the material-formal thesis.
Actually, I have a different theory. By the “spirit of the age”, he’s referring to the traditionalist and “alt-right” pushback against postmodernism that has been happening in the last few years, even in the secular world. “Convincing shepherds” means those who can keep the sham going in the minds of the Novus Ordo’s adherents. And by the “faith” that’s in danger of “capsizing”, he means the Novus Ordo, and the fact that fewer and fewer people are willing to buy into it any more.
I think that there already is a great deal of clarity for those who choose to see it.
I like the illustration. It says it all.
That’s fine; however, since the scandal he has caused by his sins is public, Catholic morality REQUIRES that if he now be repentant of it, he redress the scandal likewise IN PUBLIC.
If someone we love is led to eternal death by a man we choose to support or, purport equanimity towards due to popular pressure – and, against our better judgement because we know he is a liar – what should our view of the man be? Or what of ourselves for our complicity?