This is an excellent summary. The canonization of the "Conciliar" popes (John XXIII thru JP2) cannot be seen as anything but political and ideological. It has been a shameless effort to canonize the modernist V2 itself. No pope after Pius XII could face the scruitiny of a competent devil's advocate. All disregarded our Queen's mandate to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart; all appointed rogue prelates; none upheld the deposit of faith handed down over millenia. Paul IV and JP2 were either hostile to or indifferent to the ancient TLM. A 50 year waiting period on canonizations should be seen as a minimum (e.g. for Padre Pio types) - I'd submit that a century is necessary for popes.
One more note on waiting periods using Bishop Fulton Sheen as an example. There is much emotional support for his sainthood which I understand. I have read many of his excellent books. However, should his deafening silence about the dangers of modernism and ambiguity within V2 documents be excused? How about his refusal to support anti-communist language during V2? How about his silence during the violent suppression of the TLM and the implemention of the newly fabricated Novus Ordo? I am not condemning him, simply pointing out what an honest devil's advocate would argue.
50 years ago, Abp Lefebvre distinguished between the Catholic Church and the "Conciliar Church." Presumably you are an advocate of the latter? The fruit of V2 or at least its "spirit" and its New Mass is apparent - catastrophic apostasy, doctrinal ambiguity, a lavendar clergy, untold sexual victims (e.g. teen boys), and a broad loss in moral authority. Everything is tolerated except traditional worship. We're all still waiting for that "New Springtime" as churches close and consolidate.
This is an excellent summary. The canonization of the "Conciliar" popes (John XXIII thru JP2) cannot be seen as anything but political and ideological. It has been a shameless effort to canonize the modernist V2 itself. No pope after Pius XII could face the scruitiny of a competent devil's advocate. All disregarded our Queen's mandate to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart; all appointed rogue prelates; none upheld the deposit of faith handed down over millenia. Paul IV and JP2 were either hostile to or indifferent to the ancient TLM. A 50 year waiting period on canonizations should be seen as a minimum (e.g. for Padre Pio types) - I'd submit that a century is necessary for popes.
Yes, Agree.
Why do we feel these recent canonizations have the impression were done to garner political ends than declarations of truth?
One more note on waiting periods using Bishop Fulton Sheen as an example. There is much emotional support for his sainthood which I understand. I have read many of his excellent books. However, should his deafening silence about the dangers of modernism and ambiguity within V2 documents be excused? How about his refusal to support anti-communist language during V2? How about his silence during the violent suppression of the TLM and the implemention of the newly fabricated Novus Ordo? I am not condemning him, simply pointing out what an honest devil's advocate would argue.
Interesting stuff here.
Might I also suggest this:
https://www.wmreview.org/p/dogmatic-suicide
50 years ago, Abp Lefebvre distinguished between the Catholic Church and the "Conciliar Church." Presumably you are an advocate of the latter? The fruit of V2 or at least its "spirit" and its New Mass is apparent - catastrophic apostasy, doctrinal ambiguity, a lavendar clergy, untold sexual victims (e.g. teen boys), and a broad loss in moral authority. Everything is tolerated except traditional worship. We're all still waiting for that "New Springtime" as churches close and consolidate.