Skip to main content

Pope John Paul II Was No Gaslighter, Vatican II Apologist Fr. Gaitley!

"It is supremely ironic, in fact, to hear the claimants of the Karol Wojtyla charism appealing not to reason and Revelation as he did, but resorting to Tradition Shaming instead.  If people have questions about Vatican II, why should they not be answered?  If divine mercy is as great and limitless as Father Gaitley and the current Bishop of Rome contend that it is, why do these clerics and others like them marginalize and stigmatize those with whom they evidently disagree?  And what does it tell us when we witness the proponents of the Amoris Option lapsing into abusive and indeed Communist/secularist tactics instead?" - Catholic Monitor

Sunday in his podcast, Taylor Marshall nails it.  He says he has had enough of people playing the “John Paul II Card,” in order to legitimize ambiguities in Vatican II (and not just in that Council’s implementation, or interpretation).  In Dr. Marshall’s own words (9:20 or so):

When I hear Bishop Barron using the ambiguities that I’ve heard over and over and over, and then it kind of, it just (sic) you know getting the glue stick out and cutting out a little picture or holy card of John Paul II and just stamping it on everything you say, to prove that it’s right, or to get a Mother Teresa holy card, get the glue stick, STAMP STAMP STAMP—to me, that’s just not convincing.

In a video released on Saturday, Father Michael Gaitley of the Divine Mercy Fathers does exactly that.  Explaining that he is making the video in response to the urging of a friend to address the craziness all around us, Father Gaitley responds that he will do so if he can talk about what is going on in the Church as well.  And I quote (8:45):

But amid them all the craziest is not the calls to defund the police or deface the Founding Fathers, but rather calls to repeal or reject Vatican II, as if it were some kind of mistake or tool of the Devil.  Now, in my opinion, that’s crazy talk and what’s even crazier is that an alarming number of Catholics seem to be believing it.

This popular young priest, well known for his “33 Days to Morning Glory” program and for his promotion of the Divine Mercy Devotion goes on to do exactly what Taylor Marshall says the “Barronites” are always going to do.  Asking where the true Council and its allegedly good fruits may be found, Father Gaitley responds (11:22):

I saw it in the future great saint, Pope John Paul II.

And that’s it.  There follows no serious discussion of any issues with the documents of Vatican II itself, only the whitewashing that Taylor Marshall justly identifies and rejects. 

The great irony here, of course, is that John Paul II never thought or behaved in the way that Father Gaitley and Bishop Barron do.  He never called people “crazy”--not even the Nazis or Communists with whom he had to deal.  He handled them as he did the young people he instructed during the time of his ministry in Poland and the crowds who gathered by the millions across the globe to catch a glimpse of him as Pope and to hear him speak—with a charity irrevocably grounded in the truth.  Hence his signature encyclical, Veritatis Splendor.

As the talk progresses, Father Gaitley does have the good grace to admit that there is some legitimacy to certain Catholics’ concerns, but by then it is too late; the name-calling has been accomplished up front, and the rest is just Father playing “good cop” to his own “bad.”  Conceding that it is “understandable” that people might feel queasy about the Council’s “failed implementation” and “false interpretation,” he affirms (9:17):

I’d like to help us see (Vatican II) not as a failure or mistake, but as a great gift of hope and mercy for our time.

Let’s just say, Father, that if this video is any indication, you’re not helping at all. 

It is supremely ironic, in fact, to hear the claimants of the Karol Wojtyla charism appealing not to reason and Revelation as he did, but resorting to Tradition Shaming instead.  If people have questions about Vatican II, why should they not be answered?  If divine mercy is as great and limitless as Father Gaitley and the current Bishop of Rome contend that it is, why do these clerics and others like them marginalize and stigmatize those with whom they evidently disagree?  And what does it tell us when we witness the proponents of the Amoris Option lapsing into abusive and indeed Communist/secularist tactics instead?

Now, it must be noted that--like Vatican II itself--certain words and deeds of Pope John Paul II are also deserving of closer inspection and even of principled criticism.  It honors that great man’s memory and example, rather than dishonoring it, to say so.  But in no case can one hide behind his legacy while calling concerned Catholics “crazy”—worse, somehow, than the atheistic ideologues burning churches and toppling statues of Padre Serra?  How, Father Gatiley?  Tell us exactly.  How? 

Pope John Paul II--whatever his faults—treated all interlocutors with respect, Father Gaitley.   If you think so highly of him, you would do well to follow his example in this, rather than implicitly joining the personality cult centering on, and principally promoted by, Bishop Robert Barron of “Word on Fire.”  The “fire” that Our Lord came to “cast upon the earth” (Lk. 12:49) and wasn’t that of a gaslight, after all.

Pope John Paul II was no gaslighter, Vatican II apologist Fr. Gaitley! 

Note: This was written by a good friend and one of the most intelligent persons I know. The Catholic Monitor is honored to post it.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of the Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

 

Comments

The Bear said…
Good one. Disappointing that the author of 33 Days to Morning Glory would take that tack, but on the other hand, True Devotion to Mary by St. Louis de Montfort isn't too bad. (Sardonic Bear smile.) If we're going to judge by fruits, the Church has produced a bumper crop after Vatican II. However, this is old news. As for Pope John Paul II, there was a lot to admire in the man, but I don't have his rookie year holy card in my collection. In hindsight, the Cult of the Pope might not have been such a great thing for the Catholic Church. Sigh. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I have to reach back to Pius X to get excited about a pope. The exercise of the jus exclusivae by Emperor Franz Joseph against Cardinal Rampolla was perhaps divinely inspired, since there was evidently some cause for suspicion of yet another unsavory Swiss Connection. Or, who knows, perhaps the very same as the St. Gallen Mafia. If so, the Church failed to make full advantage of the chance.

Popular posts from this blog

"Exorcist Fr. Ripperger is asking everyone to say this Prayer until the Election is Resolved"

A good friend of the Catholic Monitor got this from a group message. She said "exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger is asking everyone to say this prayer until the election is resolved": Prayer of Command In His Name and by the power of His Cross and Blood, I ask Jesus to bind any evil spirits, forces and powers of the earth, air, fire, or water, of the netherworld and the satanic forces of nature.  By the power of the Holy Spirit and by His authority, I ask Jesus Christ to break any curses, hexes, or spells and send them back to where they came from, if it be His Holy Will.  I beseech Thee Lord Jesus to protect us by pouring Thy Precious Blood on us (my family, etc.), which Thou hast shed for us and I ask Thee to command that any departing spirits leave quietly, without disturbance, and go straight to Thy Cross to dispose of as Thou sees fit.  I ask Thee to bind any demonic interaction, interplay, or communications.  I place N. (Person, place or thing) under the protectio

High-profile Lawyer Barnes: Amy Coney Barrett would be a Disaster

High-profile trial lawyer Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that Amy Coney Barrett would be a disaster. The Barnes Twitter report shows that Coney Barrett has " sid[ed] with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations... [and] exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps... [and] hid behind precedent... to prohibit pro-life activists from exercising their free speech ." The Avvo.com lawyer directory reports that attorney "Robert Barnes embraces the challenge to defend the little guy and stand up for what is right. This is why he left the prestigious Yale Law School, whom publicly stated their unwill

If Kamala Harris' Father is part White & part Jamaican African and her Mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black?

  Is Joe Biden's running mate really Black? If Kamala Harris' father is part white and part Jamaican African and her mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black? Reason.com tries to figure it out: Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's pick to be the Democratic Party's vice-presidential nominee, is the daughter of an Indian immigrant mother and a Jamaican immigrant father. Her father, as I understand it, has ancestors of both European and African origin. [Welcome new Volokh readers. FYI, I've been working on a book on the American Law of Race, with this forthcoming article the first relevant output. My own opinion is that Ms. Harris should be deemed American, period, but there is no such box on government forms, and if you decline to state your race, someone will decide for you… First things first. There is no multiracial or mixed-race category in American law in any jurisdiction. Nor is there an Indian category. So Harris cannot be legally Indian, nor can she b