BACK

 

HOME

 

BELOW –

PREVIOUS BULLETIN POSTS THAT ARE NOT OUTDATED

 

 

 

But a resounding explicit confirmation came from Benedict XVI himself, who, during an unexpected pilgrimage to Fatima on May 13, 2010, affirmed:  “He deceives himself who thinks that the prophetic mission of Fatima is concluded.” He added: “there are indicated future realities of the Church which little by little are manifesting themselves… and therefore it is the sufferings of the Church which are announced.”

immaculate-heart1.jpgBut could such prophecies be found in that text [of the vision]?

These two phrases of the Pope in that discourse at Fatima prompt reflection:  “Man has the power to unleash a cycle of death and terror, but he is not able to stop it.” And then: “The faith in vast regions of the earth risks being extinguished, like a flame without fuel.”

From these words of Pope Benedict one discerns, therefore, that there is truly something else in the Third Secret and that it is dramatic for the world and the Church. Perhaps it is precisely due to that visit by the Pope that this book was released, from which another precious little piece of the truth filters out.

The volume in fact draws from the letters of Sister Lucia and from the unpublished diary “My Way.” Impressive, among things previously unpublished, is the account of how Sister Lucy overcame the terror that prevented her from writing down the Third Secret.

The Unpublished Account:

At around 4 p.m. on January 3, 1944, in the chapel of the convent, before the Tabernacle, Lucia asked Jesus to make known His will: “I then felt a friendly hand, maternal and affectionate, touch my shoulder.”

And the Mother of God said to her: “be at peace, and write what I have commanded you, but not, however, that which has been given to you to understand its meaning,” intending to allude to the meaning of the vision which the Virgin herself had revealed.

Immediately afterward, said Sister Lucia, “I felt my spirit inundated by a mystery of light that is God and in Him I saw and heard: the point of a lance like a flame that is detached, touches the axis of the earth, and it trembles: mountains, cities, towns and villages with their inhabitants are buried. The sea, the rivers, the clouds, exceed their boundaries, inundating and dragging with them, in a vortex, houses and people in a number that cannot be counted. It is the purification of the world from the sin in which it is immersed.  Hatred, ambition, provoke the destructive war.  After I felt my racing heart, in my spirit a soft voice said: ‘In time, one faith, one baptism, one Church, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic. In eternity, Heaven!’  This word ‘Heaven’ filled my heart with peace and happiness in such a way that, almost without being aware of it, I kept repeating to myself for a long time: Heaven, Heaven.”

From this came the strength to write the Third Secret.

Antonio Socci, APOCALYPTIC NEWS FROM FATIMA (THE LATEST MYSTERY: THE SILENCE OF THE SISTERS, BUT WHO IS SILENCING THEM?, August 17, 2014

 

 

Pope Francis, in corrupting the Sacrament of Matrimony, has perpetrated a terrible injustice to countless Catholics!

Many Catholic families had hoped that the Synod on the Family would address the serious problem of the divorce epidemic and its long-term damage to youth, innocent spouses, the sacrament of marriage, the culture, and the Church. (It did not!) The divorce plague has inflicted severe pain upon Catholic families worldwide. Married couples need to be encouraged by the Church not to give up on their marriages during stressful, unhappy times, and to persevere in loyalty to their marital vows. [.....] Over the past forty years, I have never worked with a Catholic marriage in which both spouses wanted a divorce. In the majority of marriages under stress, one spouse remains happy with the marriage, believes the conflicts can be resolved and is loyal to the sacramental bond.

The spouses who are not happy and who want to pursue divorce and a decision of nullity most often refuse to address their own weaknesses. Instead, they portray themselves as victims of insensitive treatment or emotional abuse.[......]

The majority of spouses who pursue divorce — in our experience with several thousand couples — have never worked on these issues. This explains, in part, why the national survey of divorced men and women, conducted by the Office of Survey Research at the University of Texas at Austin, found the honest response that only one in three divorced spouses claimed that both they and their ex-spouses worked hard enough to try to save their marriage. There is reason to be hopeful about the resolution of marital difficulties. In a major study from the University of Chicago among spouses who rated their marriages as very unhappy, 86 percent of those who persevered reported themselves as happily married five years later.

One grave danger to Catholic marriages and families from the changes made in canon law made by the Holy Father (without a careful study by a commission of experts) is that spouses will not be motivated to engage in the hard work of addressing personal psychological and spiritual weaknesses. Instead, they will pursue divorce and with a belief that they are entitled to a decision of nullity if they can meet the criteria cited, including the new one, “etcetera.”

With all due respect, the determination of nullity by only one priest or by a bishop after 30 to 45 days, is seriously flawed because they lack the proper mental health training to uncover and evaluate the numerous complex psychological conflicts that lead to a decision for divorce. This new process is a grave injustice and, therefore, a manifestation of a severe lack of mercy towards the sacrament of marriage, innocent spouses, children, and Catholic families.

In his closing talk at the Synod, the Holy Father criticized bishops and priests, whom he claimed hide behind rigid doctrines and ignore wounded families. In fact, his radical change in canon law in regard to annulments, made prior to the Synod, will weaken and harm Catholic marriages and families. [.....]

Rick Fitzgibbons, Psychological Science and the Evaluation of Nullity, published by “The Catholic Thing”

 

 

Apparently, the “morality underlying Amoris Laetitia” does not forbid lying!

In fact I hear many comments – they are respectable for they come from children of God, but wrong – concerning the post-synod apostolic exhortation. To understand Amoris Laetitia you need to read it from the start to the end. Beginning with the first chapter, and to continue to the second and then on … and reflect. And read what was said in the Synod

A second thing: some maintain that there is no Catholic morality underlying Amoris Laetitia, or at least, no sure morality. I want to repeat clearly that the morality of Amoris Laetitia is Thomist, the morality of the great Thomas. You can speak of it with a great theologian, one of the best today and one of the most mature, Cardinal Schönborn. 

I want to say this so that you can help those who believe that morality is purely casuistic. Help them understand that the great Thomas possesses the greatest richness, which is still able to inspire us today. But on your knees, always on your knees…

Pope Francis, Attributing the vulgar immorality of Amoris Laetitia to St. Thomas, interview Sept 28, 2017

 

Faith: the principle cause and sign of unity in the Church; Dogma is the proximate Rule of Faith!

The apostles and their successors are God's vicars in governing the Church which is built on faith and the sacraments of faith. Wherefore, just as they may not institute another Church, so neither may they deliver another faith, nor institute other sacraments. 

St. Thomas Aquinas, ST III, q. 64, a. 2, ad 3

 

 

Pope Francis, the CEO of the Homosexual Lobby “will not say another word” but his C9 will issue “potential and necessary clarifications.”  What is “potential” may not necessarily become act.  So, although the “clarifications” are “necessary”, we may not in fact ever see them. After all, it is not “Viganò’s case”, it is Viganò’s allegations of moral turpitude on the part of Francis and his C9 club. 

Incoming “clarifications” on Viganò’s case from the Holy See

Announced in the press release of today's C9 meeting, along with the news that the structure and composition of the council of cardinals is about to change

andrea tornielli  | vatican city |  September 9, 2018

The Holy See is preparing a response with the necessary clarifications on Viganò's case, namely the accusations raised against the last three Popes and their collaborators by the former nuncio to the United States in the dossier published on 26 August last which also includes the request for resignation addressed to Pope Francis.  

This is what can be read in the communiqué that on the afternoon of Monday 10 September was released by the Vatican Press Office at the end of the first meeting of the 26th working session of the C9, the Council of nine cardinals called to help the Pontiff in elaborating the reform of the Curia and in the government of the universal Church. 

The Council, reads the last paragraph of the press release, "expressed its full solidarity with Pope Francis before what has happened in recent weeks, aware that in the current debate the Holy See is about to formulate potential and necessary clarifications". Thus the Vatican, in the light of the existing documentation in the archives, is about to release some "potential and necessary clarifications".  

But more emerges from the first C9 meeting, as various parties have long suggested: the conclusion of the working session on the draft of the apostolic constitution - which will redesign the face of the Roman Curia – represents in fact an opportunity for the Pope to make some changes within the Council of 9 Cardinals.  

"The Council of Cardinals, in preparing to hand over to the Holy Father the proposal for the reform of the Roman Curia drawn up in the first five years of activity, and with a view to continuation, decided to ask the Pope for a reflection on the work, structure and composition of the Council itself, also taking into account the advanced age of some members".  […..]

 

“Since one cannot help everyone, one has to be concerned with those who by reason of place, time, or circumstances, are by some chance more tightly bound to you.”

St. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine

 

De Mattei: The Church and the Men of the Church

Roberto de Mattei | Corrispondenza Romana | September 12, 2018

            The courageous denunciation of ecclesiastical scandals made by  Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has generated  the consensus of many, but also the displeasure of others, convinced that everything discrediting the representatives of the Church should be covered up by silence. This desire to safeguard the Church is understandable when the scandal is an exception. There is the risk in that case of generalizing, by saddling the behavior of a few onto everyone . Quite different is the case when immorality is the rule, or at least is a widespread way of living accepted as the norm. In this case public denunciation is the first step towards the necessary reform of “morals”. Breaking the silence is part of the duties of a pastor, as St. Gregory the Great admonishes: “What in fact is the fear of a pastor to state the truth, if not the turning of his back on the enemy with his silence? If, instead, he fights in defense of his flock, he builds a bastion for the House of Israel against its enemies. For this the Lord through the mouth of Isaiah admonishes: “Cry, cease not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet” (Isaiah, 58,1).

            At the origins of a guilty silence there is often the lack of distinction between the Church and the men of the Church, be they the simple laity, bishops, cardinals or Popes. One of the reasons for this confusion is precisely the prominence of the authorities involved in the scandals. The higher their dignity, the more the tendency to identify them with the Church, attributing good and evil indifferently to the one and the other. In reality the Good is the sole business of the Church, whereas all the Evil is due to the men who represent Her. For this the Church cannot be defined as sinful: “She – writes Father Roger T. Calmel O.P. (1920-1998) – asks forgiveness to the Lord not for the sins She has committed, but for the sins committed by Her children, insofar as they do not listen to Her as Mother.” (Breve apologia della Chiesa di sempre, Editrice Ichtys, Albano Laziale 2007, p. 91). All the members of the Church whether of the teaching or student parts, are men, with their own nature, wounded by original sin.  Neither Baptism renders the faithful faultless, nor Holy Orders render the members of the Hierarchy such. The Pope himself can sin and fall into error, except for that which concerns the charism of infallibility.

            It must be said, moreover, that the faithful do not constitute the Church, as happens in human societies, created by the members that form them and dissolved as soon as they separate. To say “We are Church” is false, since the belonging of the baptized to the Church, does not derive from their will: it is Christ Himself who invites us to belong to His flock, by repeating to everyone: “You have not chosen me but I have chosen you” (John 15, 16).  The Church founded by Jesus Christ has a Human-Divine constitution: human as it has a material and passive component, made up of all the faithful, part of both the clergy and the laity; supernatural and divine for Her soul. Jesus Christ, Her Head, is Her foundation and the Holy Spirit is Her supernatural propeller.

            The Church therefore is not holy because of the holiness of Her members, but it is Her members that are holy thanks to Jesus Christ Who directs Her and the Holy Spirit Who gives life to Her. From them comes all Good, that is, all that is “true, noble, just, pure, lovable, honorable and worthy of praise” (Phil. 4,8). And from the men of the Church comes all the Evil: disorders, scandals, abuse of power, violence, turpitudes and sacrileges. 

            “So – writes the Passionist theologian Enrico Zoffoli (1915-1996) who dedicated many fine pages to this theme –  we have no interest in covering up the faults of bad Christians, of unworthy, cowardly, inept, dishonest and arrogant priests. The intent to defend the cause and mitigate their responsibilities would be ingenuous and useless along with minimizing the consequences of their errors, having recourse to historical contexts and singular situations in order then to explain  away and absolve everything” (Chiesa e uomini di Chiesa, Edizioni Segno, Udine 1994, p. 41).

            Today there is great filth in the Church, as the then Cardinal Ratzinger said during the Via Crucis of Good Friday 2005, which preceded his rise to the papacy.  “How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to Him! (Jesus)”.

            Monsignor Carlo Maria Viganò’s testimony is praiseworthy, since, by bringing to light this filth, he renders the work of purification of the Church more urgent. It must be [made]clear that the conduct of unworthy bishops or priests is not inspired by the dogmas or morals of the Church, but constitutes their betrayal, as it represents a negation of the law of the Gospel.  The world that accuses the Church for Her faults accuses Her of transgressing a moral order: but in the name of what law and doctrine does the world claim to indict the Church? The philosophy of life professed by the modern world is relativism to the degree that there are no absolute truths and the only law of man is to be devoid of [all] laws; the practical consequence is hedonism according to which the only form of possible happiness is the gratification of one’s desires and the satisfaction of one’s instincts.   

            How can the world, devoid of principles as it is, judge and condemn the Church?  The Church has the right and duty to judge the world because She has an absolute and immutable doctrine. The modern world, child of the principles of the French Revolution, develops with coherence the ideas of the libertine Marquis de Sade (1740-1814): free love, free blasphemy, total freedom to deny and destroy every bastion of Faith and Morals, as in the days of the French Revolution when the Bastille, where Sade was a prisoner, was destroyed. The outcome of all this is the dissolution of morality, which has destroyed the foundations of civil society and over the last two centuries has created the darkest age in history.

The life of the Church is also the history of betrayals, defections, apostasies and insufficient  correspondence  with Divine Grace.  But this tragic weakness always goes along with extraordinary faithfulness: the falls, even the most terrifying, of many members of the Church, are interlaced with the heroism of the virtue seen in many other of Her children.

            A river of sanctity gushes out of the side of Christ and runs flowing through the course of the centuries: the martyrs who face the wild animals in the Coliseum; the hermits who abandon the world to live a life of penitence; the missionaries who go to the ends of the earth; the intrepid confessors of the faith who combat schisms and heresies; the contemplative religious who sustain the defenders of the Church and Christian civilization with their prayers; all those, who, in different ways, have conformed their lives to the Divine one.  St. Theresa of the Child Jesus wanted to gather up all these vocations in one supreme act of love to God.

            The saints are different from one another, but what they all share is union with God: and this union, which never flags, makes it so that the Church, prior to being One, Catholic and Apostolic, is first of all perfectly Holy. The holiness of the Church doesn’t depend on the holiness of Her children; it is ontological, given that it is connected to Her very nature.

            For the Church  to be called holy it is not necessary that all Her children live a saintly life; it is enough that a part, even a small part, thanks to the vital flow of the Holy Spirit, remain heroically faithful to the law of the Gospel during times of trial.

 

 

“And what is most remarkable is that the enemies of the Church—the movements that rend and crucify her—are in a sense her own offspring and derive their dynamic force from her.” And this includes her current enemies who attach from within the Church. In the crucible of conflict, the saint is forged and the crown is won.

Actually, however, Christianity has never accepted these postulates, and the Christian ought to be the last person in the world to lose hope in the presence of the failure of the right and the apparent triumph of evil. For all this forms part of the Christian view of life, and the Christian discipline is expressly designed to prepare us to face such a situation.

Christianity, to a far greater degree than any other religion, is a historical religion and it is knit up inseparably with the living process of history. Christianity teaches the existence of a divine progress in history which will be realized through the Church in the Kingdom of Cod. But at the same time it recognizes the essential duality of the historical process—the co-existence of two opposing principles, each of which works and finds concrete social expression in history. Thus we have no right to expect that Christian principles will work in practice in the simple way that a political system may work The Christian order is a supernatural order. It has its own principles and its own laws which are not those of the visible world and which may often seem to contradict them. Its victories may be found in apparent defeat and its defeats in material success.

We see the whole thing manifested clearly and perfectly once and once only, i.e. in the life of Jesus, which is the pattern of the Christian life and the model of Christian action. The life of Jesus is profoundly historical; it is the culminating point of thousands of years of living historical tradition. It is the fulfillment of a historical purpose, towards which priests and prophets and even politicians had worked, and in which the hope of a nation and a race was embodied. Yet, from the worldly point of view, from the standpoint of a contemporary secular historian, it was not only unimportant, but actually invisible. Here was a Galilean peasant who for thirty years lived a life so obscure as to be unknown even to the disciples who accepted his mission. Then there followed a brief period of public action, which did not lead to any kind of historical achievement but moved swiftly and irresistibly towards its catastrophic end, an end that was foreseen and deliberately accepted.

And out of the heart of this catastrophe there arose something completely new, which even in its success was a deception to the very people and the very race that had staked their hopes on it. For after Pentecost—after the outpouring of the Spirit and the birth of the infant Church—there was an event as unforeseen and inexplicable as the Incarnation itself, the conversion of a Cilician Jew, who turned away from his traditions and from his own people so that he seemed a traitor to his race and his religion. So that ultimately the fulfillment of the hope of Israel meant the rejection of Israel and the creation of a new community which was eventually to become the State religion of the Roman Empire which bad been the enemy of Jew and Christian alike.

If you look on all this without faith, from the rationalist point of view, it becomes no easier to understand. On the contrary it becomes even more inexplicable; credo quia incredibile.

Now the life of Christ is the life of the Christian and the life of the Church. It is absurd for a Christian who is a weak human vehicle of this world changing force to expect a quiet life. A Christian is like a red rag to a bull—to the force of evil that seeks to be master of the world and which, in a limited sense, but in a very real sense, is, as St. John says, the Lord of this world. And not only the individual but the Church as an historic community follows the same pattern and finds its success and failure not where the politician finds them, but where Christ found them.

The Church lives again the life of Christ. It has its period of obscurity and growth and its period of manifestation, and this is followed by the catastrophe of the Cross and the new birth that springs from failure. And what is most remarkable is that the enemies of the Church—the movements that rend and crucify her—are in a sense her own offspring and derive their dynamic force from her. Islam, the Protestant Reformation, the liberal Revolution, none of them would have existed apart from Christianity—they are abortive or partial manifestations of the spiritual power which Christianity has brought into history. “I have come to cast fire on the earth and what will I, but that it be kindled.”

Christopher Dawson, Dynamics of World History

 

 

 

Ben Shapiro, in an op-ed column at Newsweek, says what many Catholics are already thinking:

NEWSWEEK | OPINION | August 31, 2018

So, did the press leap to investigate Vigano’s claims? Did they demand answers from Pope Francis? Did we see the same type of courageous, comprehensive coverage of Francis’ activities that we saw from the Globe team circa 2003? Of course not.

Instead, mainstream media outlets went out of their way to portray Vigano as a disgruntled conservative angry at Pope Francis’ progressive interpretation of Catholic doctrine. The New York Times headlined, “Vatican Power Struggle Bursts Into Open as Conservatives Pounce.” Their print headline was even worse: “Francis Takes High Road As Conservatives Pounce, Taking Criticisms Public.”

Yes, according to the Times, the story wasn’t the sitting Pope being credibly accused of a sexual abuse cover-up—it was conservatives attacking him for it. The problem of child molestation and sexual abuse of clergy took a back seat to Francis’ leftist politics, as the Times piece made clear in its first paragraph: “Since the start of his papacy, Francis has infuriated Catholic traditionalists as he tries to nurture a more welcoming church and shift it away from culture war issues, whether abortion or homosexuality. ‘Who am I to judge?’ the pope famously said, when asked about gay priests. Just how angry his political and doctrinal enemies are became clear this weekend…”

It wasn’t just the Times. On Wednesday, Reuters headlined, “Defenders rally around pope, fear conservatives escalating war.” On Thursday, Reuters doubled down with this headline: “Conservative media move to front line of battle to undermine Pope Francis.” The Telegraph(U.K.) reported, “Vatican analysts say the attack appears to be part of a concerted effort by conservatives to oust Pope Francis, who they dislike for his relatively liberal views…”

But why in the name of God is calling on the Vatican not to defend sexual abusers a political issue for the press? Why isn’t this something we can all agree upon? Why aren’t the press asking the pope tough questions, instead of focusing on the supposed motivations of the whistleblowers?

The media’s disgraceful attempts to cover for Francis because of their love for his politics merely exposes the actual malign motivations of many in the media: they were happy to expose misconduct and evil inside the Catholic Church when the pope was a conservative; they’re happy to facilitate a cover-up when the pope is a liberal.

That’s vile. And most Catholics understand that if the members of the media—an overwhelmingly secular group of people—are steadfastly defending a papacy accused of sexual abuse cover-ups, it’s not out of goodwill for the Church generally. It’s out of a belief that traditionalist doctrine must be rooted out at any cost, even including the abuse of minors and the violation of basic canon law.

 

 

Homosexual Lobby members are “playing the man, rather than the ball.”  The Lobby’s line is that Archbishop Viganò’s allegations have no merit because the man himself is disaffected conservative ideologue. The charges of Archbishop Viganò are really straight forward and merit a thorough investigation and a reply from Pope Francis irrespective of the motive of their revelation. So the cover-up by Francis will continue but as a rule of thumb for those watching the story unfold: those who defend Pope Francis are ipso facto members of the Homosexual Lobby, those who call for a thorough investigation place the welfare of the Church before personal interests, and those who say and do nothing...., being “neither hot or cold,” and therefore, will be vomited.....

U.S. Bishops Are Divided in a Way Rarely Seen in Public

Viganò letter exposes ideological rift that mirrors American politics

Wall Street Journal | Ian Lovett | September 3, 2018

The crisis engulfing the Catholic Church and the papacy has exposed deep rifts in the U.S. church.

The latest trigger is a letter released last week by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò accusing Catholic Officials, including Pope Grancis, of covering up sexual abuse, allegedly by ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick among others.

While U.S. bishops profess broad agreement about the need for new measures to address abuse, their responses to the letter have dramatically diverged.

Those who support the pope’s emphasis on issues like immigration and climate change have criticized the letter. San Diego Birhop Robert McElroy said the letter displays a “hatred for Pope Francis” and that “Archbishop Viganò consistently subordinates the pursuit of comprehensive truth to partisanship, division and distortion.

Meanwhile, conservative U.S. bishops who disapprove of Pope Francis’ conciliatory tone on remarriage and homosexuality in the priesthood have openly defended Archbishop Viganò.

Bishop Robert C. Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin, said he was “convinced of [Archbishop Viganò’s] honesty…and impeccable integrity,” and called for an investigation into his allegations.

Although theological disagreements have existed among U.S. bishops for years, they have seldom before been so openly on display.

“I fear the Catholic church in the U.S. has become divided by the same ideological forces that have roiled American politics,” said Stephen Schneck, former director of the Institute for Policy Research and Catholic Studies at The Catholic University of America.

The public back-and-forth also highlights the opposition Francis has faced for years from some clergy in the U.S., which has been a hub of resistance throughout his papacy.

In his letter, Archbishop Viganò claimed the pope knew as early as 2013 about allegations that ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, a former archbishop of Washington, had been sexually active with seminarians and that Pope Benedict XVI had privately disciplined him. Pope Francis, the letter alleges, lifted restrictions on then-Cardinal McCarrick, who stepped down from the College of Cardinals after allegations against him became public earlier this year.

Archbishop Viganò served as Vatican ambassador to the U.S. until Pope Francis removed him in 2016, after he set up a meeting between the pontiff and Kim Davis, a Kentucky clerk who refused to sign same-sex marriage certificates and became a symbol of opposition to same-sex marriage.

Following the release of the letter—which was published in the National Catholic Register, a conservative Catholic outlet in the U.S.—Pope Francis told reporters on Sunday that he would “not say one word” about the accusations and encouraged journalists to judge for themselves.

Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of Springfield, Ill., said in an interview, “With all due respect, that response is not adequate. If I was accused of covering up for one of my priests, I would not get away with saying, ‘Just make up your own mind.’…I don’t know if [Pope Francis] realizes how serious this situation is.”

A theological conservative who has taken a hard line toward same-sex marriage in the church, Bishop Paprocki also called for an investigation, adding that he found Archbishop Viganò to be “a very credible person…who would be in a position to know.”

At the same time, officials named in the Viganò letter have directly criticized its author, in some cases pointing out that he himself has been accused of covering up sexual abuse in Minnesota.

Archbishop Viganò, through a spokesman, has denied those allegations.

Cardinal Joseph Tobin, archbishop of Newark, N.J, and a close ally of Pope Francis, said Archbishop Viganò’s letter was filled with “factual errors, innuendo and fearful ideology.”

At mass on Sunday, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, the archbishop of Washington who was also named in the Viganò letter, said, “We need to hold close in our prayers and our loyalty our holy father, Pope Francis. Increasingly, it’s clear that he is the object of considerable animosity.”

As soon as he said those lines, a parishioner shouted, “Shame on you!” from the pews, then walked out.

Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, struck a more neutral tone. In a statement, he said the questions raised by Archbishop Viganò “deserve answers that are conclusive and based on evidence,” and asked for an audience with the pope.

The Conference of Bishops’ statement stands in contrast to more supportive remarks in recent days from clergy in other parts of the world, said Mr. Schneck, formerly of The Catholic University of America. The conference of Latin American bishops, for example, said, “We want to reinforce in these moments the communion with your person and teaching.”

Phil Lawler, editor of Catholic World News, said the upheaval in the U.S. church was forcing officials to openly debate issues that had been shrouded in secrecy for far too long, like attitudes toward gay men serving in the clergy. But he said it was regrettable that the debate broke along ideological lines.

“In the last few weeks, you’ve seen a hardening of the lines,” he said.

 

 

Francis_Black_Eye_7.jpgPope Francis lays the groundwork to overturn Humanae Vitae

“The welfare of the family is decisive for the future of the world and that of the Church… The anthropological-cultural change, which today affects all aspects of life and requires an analytical and diversified approach, does not allow us to limit ourselves to pastoral and missionary practices that reflect forms and models of the past. We must be conscious and passionate interpreters of the wisdom of faith in a context in which individuals are less sustained than in the past by social structures, in their affective and family life. In the clear purpose of remaining faithful to the teaching of Christ, we must look with the intellect of love and with wisdom of realism to the reality of the family today, in all its complexity, in its lights and in its shadows.”

Pope Francis, in his Motu Proprio, Summa Familiae Cura, referencing his own document which overturned all Catholic morality, Amoris Laetitia 

 

 

“Attack”?  Since when does the truth constitute an “attack”? Or rather, for whom does the declaration of truth constitute an “attack”? “Silence and prayer” should be the permanent canonical disposition for anyone who has aided and abetted the crime of sodomy and scandal within the Church of Jesus Christ. 

Under-attack Pope calls for 'silence and prayer'

Pope Francis has so far refused to respond to allegations made last month that he for years covered up sexual abuse allegations against a prominent US cardinal

AFP | Vatican City | September 3, 2018

Pope Francis on Monday said "silence and prayer" were the answer to those seeking "scandal and division", amid a barrage of attacks from ultra-conservative Catholics.

The pope has so far refused to respond to allegations made last month that he for years covered up sexual abuse allegations against a prominent US cardinal.

"With people who lack goodwill, with people who seek only scandal, who seek only division, who seek only destruction, even within the family: (there is nothing but) silence. And prayer," Francis said during a service at St Martha's, the boarding house where he stays.

Among some ultra-conservative Catholics, the pope is regarded as a dangerous progressive who is more interested in social issues than traditional Church matters.

His comments came after Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, a former Vatican envoy to Washington, claimed in August that Francis ignored sexual abuse allegations against US cardinal Theodore McCarrick for five years.

The timing of the letter's release -- right in the middle of Francis's landmark trip to Ireland -- immediately raised speculation about a campaign against the Argentine pontiff.

But so far, Francis has remained silent, refusing to address the allegations and saying only that Vigano's missive "speaks for itself".

On Saturday, Vigano launched a fresh attack, accusing the pope of knowing full well that he was meeting an arch-conservative opposed to gay marriage during a 2015 visit to the United States.

The Vatican said at the time that the pope met Kim Davis, a Kentucky clerk who has refused to sign gay marriage certificates, during a reception along with 'dozens of other guests' at the embassy in Washington.

 

 

The Diocese of Harrisburg Commits to Never Repeat the Sins of the Past

Witness.jpgWe, the members of this grand jury, need you to hear this. We know some of you have heard some of it before. There have been other reports about child sex abuse within the Catholic Church. But never on this scale. For many of us, those earlier stories happened someplace else, someplace away. Now we know the truth: it happened everywhere.”

This opening paragraph of the Report of the 40th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury paints a bleak and corrupt image of the Catholic Church. As hard as it may be to accept, this report presents a view of the sinful past of some clergy in the Harrisburg Diocese. But it does not reflect the Church of today.

The Diocese has worked faithfully to implement safety programs since the 2002 Charter for the Protection of Children and Young

People was approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. The Grand Jury Report even stated that “the bulk of the discussion in this report concerns events that occurred before the early 2000’s,” and that “...we recognize that much has changed over the last fifteen years.”

While much has changed within the Diocese during the past decade and a half, there is still work to be done. Today, we make you this pledge:

To support the survivors of child abuse by the hands of Church clergy, employees or volunteers.

The Diocese has made it our top priority to assist survivors and their families in their journey toward healing. We assist survivors in obtaining outpatient counseling from mutually agreed upon licensed, quality providers, regardless of when the abuse occurred. Our Survivor Assistance office also maintains contact with survivors, to ensure they are receiving the resources and assistance needed to help them heal. The Diocese encourages those who suffered abuse at the hands of a clergy member, an employee or a volunteer with the Diocese, regardless of when the abuse occurred, to come forward and let their voice be heard. Please call the toll-free PA ChildLine at 1-800-932-0313 and call the Diocesan toll-free hotline at 1-800-626-1608.

Throughout the past several weeks, many discussions have surfaced on Pennsylvania’s current statutes of limitation laws. While we believe now is a time for profound remorse and heartfelt apology, the Church strongly supports SB 261 and believes that this legislation will significantly aid in the protection of children. We believe that the final decision with regard to the statute of limitations and the constitutional arguments that exist will be handled by the General Assembly in the halls of the Capitol.[…..]

Diocese of Harrisburg, August 31, 2018

COMMENT: The first requirement in formulating a solution to any problem is to properly define the problem.  This pledge from the Diocese of Harrisburg assumes that the problem is pedophilia.  The problem is not pedophilia and therefore, since they cannot define the problem they cannot propose a workable solution.  In over 90% of all clerical sexual abuse, homosexual pederasts are preying on adolescent boys and young men.  Homosexuals become priests by lying so they can use the clerical collar as cover for their decadent lives.  Catholic doctrine and morality condemn sodomy as intrinsically disordered act against the natural law and exclude all homosexuals as candidates for any religious vocation.  The only solution is to remove every homosexual cleric from the priesthood and religious orders.  Those who are guilty of obfuscating a clear understanding of the problem are part of the problem.  They are just members or fellow travelers of the Homosexual Lobby. 

 

 

 

 

Homosexual Lobby members are “playing the man, rather than the ball.”  The Lobby’s line is that Archbishop Viganò’s allegations have no merit because the man himself is disaffected conservative ideologue. The charges of Archbishop Viganò are really straight forward and merit a thorough investigation and a reply from Pope Francis irrespective of the motive of their revelation. So the cover-up by Francis will continue but as a rule of thumb for those watching the story unfold: those who defend Pope Francis are ipso facto members of the Homosexual Lobby, those who call for a thorough investigation place the welfare of the Church before personal interests, and those who say and do nothing...., being “neither hot or cold,” therefore, will be vomited.....

U.S. Bishops Are Divided in a Way Rarely Seen in Public

Viganò letter exposes ideological rift that mirrors American politics

Wall Street Journal | Ian Lovett | September 3, 2018

The crisis engulfing the Catholic Church and the papacy has exposed deep rifts in the U.S. church.

The latest trigger is a letter released last week by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò accusing Catholic Officials, including Pope Grancis, of covering up sexual abuse, allegedly by ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick among others.

While U.S. bishops profess broad agreement about the need for new measures to address abuse, their responses to the letter have dramatically diverged.

Those who support the pope’s emphasis on issues like immigration and climate change have criticized the letter. San Diego Birhop Robert McElroy said the letter displays a “hatred for Pope Francis” and that “Archbishop Viganò consistently subordinates the pursuit of comprehensive truth to partisanship, division and distortion.

Meanwhile, conservative U.S. bishops who disapprove of Pope Francis’ conciliatory tone on remarriage and homosexuality in the priesthood have openly defended Archbishop Viganò.

Bishop Robert C. Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin, said he was “convinced of [Archbishop Viganò’s] honesty…and impeccable integrity,” and called for an investigation into his allegations.

Although theological disagreements have existed among U.S. bishops for years, they have seldom before been so openly on display.

“I fear the Catholic church in the U.S. has become divided by the same ideological forces that have roiled American politics,” said Stephen Schneck, former director of the Institute for Policy Research and Catholic Studies at The Catholic University of America.

The public back-and-forth also highlights the opposition Francis has faced for years from some clergy in the U.S., which has been a hub of resistance throughout his papacy.

In his letter, Archbishop Viganò claimed the pope knew as early as 2013 about allegations that ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, a former archbishop of Washington, had been sexually active with seminarians and that Pope Benedict XVI had privately disciplined him. Pope Francis, the letter alleges, lifted restrictions on then-Cardinal McCarrick, who stepped down from the College of Cardinals after allegations against him became public earlier this year.

Archbishop Viganò served as Vatican ambassador to the U.S. until Pope Francis removed him in 2016, after he set up a meeting between the pontiff and Kim Davis, a Kentucky clerk who refused to sign same-sex marriage certificates and became a symbol of opposition to same-sex marriage.

Following the release of the letter—which was published in the National Catholic Register, a conservative Catholic outlet in the U.S.—Pope Francis told reporters on Sunday that he would “not say one word” about the accusations and encouraged journalists to judge for themselves.

Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of Springfield, Ill., said in an interview, “With all due respect, that response is not adequate. If I was accused of covering up for one of my priests, I would not get away with saying, ‘Just make up your own mind.’…I don’t know if [Pope Francis] realizes how serious this situation is.”

A theological conservative who has taken a hard line toward same-sex marriage in the church, Bishop Paprocki also called for an investigation, adding that he found Archbishop Viganò to be “a very credible person…who would be in a position to know.”

At the same time, officials named in the Viganò letter have directly criticized its author, in some cases pointing out that he himself has been accused of covering up sexual abuse in Minnesota.

Archbishop Viganò, through a spokesman, has denied those allegations.

Cardinal Joseph Tobin, archbishop of Newark, N.J, and a close ally of Pope Francis, said Archbishop Viganò’s letter was filled with “factual errors, innuendo and fearful ideology.”

At mass on Sunday, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, the archbishop of Washington who was also named in the Viganò letter, said, “We need to hold close in our prayers and our loyalty our holy father, Pope Francis. Increasingly, it’s clear that he is the object of considerable animosity.”

As soon as he said those lines, a parishioner shouted, “Shame on you!” from the pews, then walked out.

Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, struck a more neutral tone. In a statement, he said the questions raised by Archbishop Viganò “deserve answers that are conclusive and based on evidence,” and asked for an audience with the pope.

The Conference of Bishops’ statement stands in contrast to more supportive remarks in recent days from clergy in other parts of the world, said Mr. Schneck, formerly of The Catholic University of America. The conference of Latin American bishops, for example, said, “We want to reinforce in these moments the communion with your person and teaching.”

Phil Lawler, editor of Catholic World News, said the upheaval in the U.S. church was forcing officials to openly debate issues that had been shrouded in secrecy for far too long, like attitudes toward gay men serving in the clergy. But he said it was regrettable that the debate broke along ideological lines.

“In the last few weeks, you’ve seen a hardening of the lines,” he said.

 

 

 

Pope Francis 'outed' as the CEO of the Homosexual Lobby

Ex-Nuncio Accuses Pope Francis of Failing to Act on McCarrick’s Abuse

In a written testimony, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò claims Pope Francis withdrew sanctions against Archbishop Theodore McCarrick.

National Catholic Register | Edward Pentin | August 25, 2018

In an extraordinary 11-page written testament, a former apostolic nuncio to the United States has accused several senior prelates of complicity in covering up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s allegations of sexual abuse, and has claimed that Pope Francis knew about sanctions imposed on then-Cardinal McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI but chose to repeal them.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, 77, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington D.C. from 2011 to 2016, said that in the late 2000s, Benedict had “imposed on Cardinal McCarrick sanctions similar to those now imposed on him by Pope Francis” and that Viganò personally told Pope Francis about those sanctions in 2013.

Archbishop Viganò said in his written statement, simultaneously released to the Register and other media, (see full text below) that Pope Francis “continued to cover” for McCarrick and not only did he “not take into account the sanctions that Pope Benedict had imposed on him” but also made McCarrick “his trusted counselor.”  Viganò said that the former archbishop of Washington advised the Pope to appoint a number of bishops in the United States, including Cardinals Blase Cupich of Chicago and Joseph Tobin of Newark. 

Archbishop Viganò, who said his “conscience dictates” that the truth be known as “the corruption has reached the very top of the Church’s hierarchy,” ended his testimony by calling on Pope Francis and all of those implicated in the cover up of Archbishop McCarrick’s abuse to resign.   

Francis_Rainbow_1-001.jpgOn June 20, Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, on the order of Pope Francis, prohibited former Cardinal McCarrick from public ministry after an investigation by the New York archdiocese found an accusation of sexual abuse of a minor was “credible and substantiated.”  That same day,the public learned that the Archdiocese of Newark and the Diocese of Metuchen in New Jersey had received three accusations of sexual misconduct involving adults against McCarrick. Since then media reports have written of victims of the abuse, spanning decades, include a teenage boy, three young priests or seminarians, and a man now in his 60s who alleges McCarrick abused him from the age of 11. The Pope later accepted McCarrick’s resignation from the College of Cardinals.  

But Viganò wrote that Benedict much earlier had imposed sanctions on McCarrick “similar” to those handed down by Cardinal Parolin. “The cardinal was to leave the seminary where he was living,” Viganò said, “he was also forbidden to celebrate [Mass] in public, to participate in public meetings, to give lectures, to travel, with the obligation of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance.”  Viganò did not document the exact date but recollected the sanction to have been applied as far back 2009 or 2010.

Benedict’s measures came years after Archbishop Viganò’s predecessors at the nunciature — Archbishops Gabriel Montalvo and Pietro Sambi — had “immediately” informed the Holy See as soon as they had learned of Archbishop McCarrick’s “gravely immoral behavior with seminarians and priests,” the retired Italian Vatican diplomat wrote.

He said Archbishop Montalvo first alerted the Vatican in 2000, requesting that Dominican Father Boniface Ramsey write to Rome confirming the allegations. In 2006, Archbishop Viganò said that, as delegate for pontifical representations in the Secretariat of State, he personally wrote a memo to his superior, then Archbishop (later Cardinal) Leonardo Sandri, proposing an “exemplary measure” be taken against McCarrick that could have a “medicinal function” to prevent future abuses and alleviate a “very serious scandal for the faithful.” 

He drew on an indictment memorandum, communicated by Archbishop Sambi to Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, then Secretary of State, in which an abusive priest had made claims against McCarrick of “such gravity and vileness” including “depraved acts” and “sacrilegious celebration of the Eucharist.”    

Memos Ignored

But, according to Viganò, his memo was ignored and no action was taken until the late 2000s — a delay which Archbishop Viganò claims is owed to complicity of John Paul II’s and Benedict XVI’s respective Secretaries of State, Cardinals Angelo Sodano and Tarcisio Bertone.

In 2008, Archbishop Viganò claims he wrote a second memo, this time to Cardinal Sandri’s successor as sostituto at the Secretariat of State, then Archbishop (later Cardinal) Fernando Filoni. He included a summary of research carried out by Richard Sipe, a psychotherapist and specialist in clerical sexual abuse, which Sipe had sent Benedict in the form of a statement. Viganò said he ended the memo by “repeating to my superiors that I thought it was necessary to intervene as soon as possible by removing the cardinal’s hat from Cardinal McCarrick.” 

Again, according the Viganò, his request fell on deaf ears and he writes he was “greatly dismayed” that both memos were ignored until Sipe’s “courageous and meritorious” statement had “the desired result.” 

“Benedict did what he had to do,” Archbishop Viganò told the Register Aug. 25, “but his collaborators — the Secretary of State and all the others — didn’t enforce it as they should have done, which led to the delay.”  

“What is certain,” Viganò writes in his testimony, “is that Pope Benedict imposed the above canonical sanctions on McCarrick and that they were communicated to him by the Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, Pietro Sambi.” 

The Register has independently confirmed that the allegations against McCarrick were certainly known to Benedict, and the Pope Emeritus remembers instructing Cardinal Bertone to impose measures but cannot recall their exact nature. 

In 2011, on arrival in Washington D.C., Archbishop Viganò said he personally repeated the sanction to McCarrick. “The cardinal, muttering in a barely comprehensible way, admitted that he had perhaps made the mistake of sleeping in the same bed with some seminarians at his beach house, but he said this as if it had no importance,” Viganò recalled in his testimony. 

In his written statement, Viganò then outlined his understanding of how, despite the allegations against him, McCarrick came to be appointed Archbishop of Washington D.C. in 2000 and how his misdeeds were covered up. His statement implicates Cardinals Angelo Sodano, Tarcisio Bertone and Pietro Parolin and he insists various other cardinals and bishops were well aware, including Cardinal Donald Wuerl, McCarrick’s successor as archbishop of Washington D.C. 

“I myself brought up the subject with Cardinal Wuerl on several occasions, and I certainly didn’t need to go into detail because it was immediately clear to me that he was fully aware of it,” he wrote. 

Ed McFadden, a spokesman for the Archdiocese of Washington, told CNA that Wuerl categorically denies having been informed that McCarrick’s ministry had been restricted by the Vatican.

The second half of Viganò’s testimony primarily deals with what Pope Francis knew about McCarrick, and how he acted. 

He recalled meeting Cardinal McCarrick in June 2013 at the Pope’s Domus Sanctae Marthae residence, during which McCarrick told him “in a tone somewhere between ambiguous and triumphant: ‘The Pope received me yesterday; tomorrow I am going to China’” — the implication being that Francis had lifted the travel ban placed on him by Benedict. (Further evidence of this can be seen in this interview McCarrick gave the National Catholic Reporter in 2014.)

At a private meeting a few days later, Archbishop Viganò said the Pope asked him “‘What is Cardinal McCarrick like?’” to which the archbishop replied: “He corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance.” The former nuncio said he believes the Pope’s purpose in asking him was to “find out if I was an ally of McCarrick or not.” 

Freed From Constraints

He said it was “clear” that “from the time of Pope Francis’s election, McCarrick, now free from all constraints, had felt free to travel continuously, to give lectures and interviews.”

Moreover, he added, McCarrick had “become the kingmaker for appointments in the Curia and the United States, and the most listened to advisor in the Vatican for relations with the Obama administration.” 

Viganò claimed that the appointments of Cardinal Cupich to Chicago and Cardinal Joseph Tobin to Newark “were orchestrated by McCarrick,” among others. He said neither of the names was presented by the nunciature, whose job is traditionally to present a list of names, or terna, to the Congregation for Bishops. He also added that Bishop Robert McElroy’s appointment to San Diego was orchestrated “from above” rather than through the nuncio. 

The retired Italian diplomat also echoed the Register’s reports about Cardinal Rodriguez Maradíaga and his record of cover-up in Honduras, saying the Pope “defends his man” to the “bitter end,” despite the allegations against him. The same applies to McCarrick, wrote Viganò.

“He [Pope Francis] knew from at least June 23, 2013 that McCarrick was a serial predator,” Archbishop Viganò stated, but although “he knew that he was a corrupt man, he covered for him to the bitter end.”

“It was only when he was forced by the report of the abuse of a minor, again on the basis of media attention, that he took action [regarding McCarrick] to save his image in the media,” wrote Viganò. 

The former U.S. nuncio wrote that Pope Francis “is abdicating the mandate which Christ gave to Peter to confirm the brethren,” and urged him to “acknowledge his mistakes” and, to “set a good example to cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them.”  

In comments to the media Aug. 25, Viganò said his main motivation for writing his testimony now was to“stop the suffering of the victims, to prevent new victims and to protect the Church: only the truth can make her free.” 

He also said he wanted to “discharge my conscience in front of God of my responsibilities as bishop for the universal Church,” adding that he is an “old man” who wanted to present himself to God “with a clean conscience.” 

“The people of God have the right to know the full truth also regarding their shepherds,” he said. “They have the right to be guided by good shepherds. In order to be able to trust them and love them, they have to know them openly, in transparency and truth, as they really are. A priest should always be a light on a candle, everywhere and for all.”

After requests from EWTN News for comment, the Vatican press office has declined to give immediate response to Viganò's letter

 

 

 

Pope Francis Knew About McCarrick, Covered for His Sexual Crimes

Former papal nuncio offers written testimony incriminating Holy Father, says pope must resign

ChurchMilitant.com | Christine Niles, M.St. (Oxon.), J.D. | VATICAN CITY | August 25, 2018

Church_Militant.jpg          In spite of knowing about former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick's sexual assaults, Pope Francis lifted sanctions from him that had been imposed by Pope Benedict.

 LifeSiteNews is reporting that Abp. Carlo Maria Viganò, former papal nuncio to the United States, has written an 11-page statement testifying that Pope Francis was aware of McCarrick's homosexual predation but "continued to cover him," even making him "his trusted counselor" in naming bishops for appointment, including Cdl. Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey (McCarrick's former diocese) and Cdl. Blase Cupich of Chicago, Illinois.

          "In this extremely dramatic moment for the universal Church, he [Pope Francis] must acknowledge his mistakes and, in keeping with the proclaimed principle of zero tolerance, Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them," Viganò writes.

          "The appointments of Blase Cupich to Chicago and Joseph W. Tobin to Newark were orchestrated by McCarrick, Maradiaga and Wuerl," says the former papal nuncio, "united by a wicked pact of abuses by the first, and at least of cover-up of abuses by the other two."

          "Regarding Cupich, one cannot fail to note his ostentatious arrogance, and the insolence with which he denies the evidence that is now obvious to all," he continued, "that 80% of the abuses found were committed against young adults by homosexuals who were in a relationship of authority over their victims."

          Cdl. Viganò on Wuerl: The Cardinal lies shamelessly and prevails upon his Chancellor, Monsignor Antonicelli, to lie as well.

Viganò also insists Washington, D.C. Cdl. Donald Wuerl was well aware of McCarrick's sexual misconduct and "lies shamelessly":

His recent statements that he knew nothing about it, even though at first he cunningly referred to compensation for the two victims, are absolutely laughable. The Cardinal lies shamelessly and prevails upon his Chancellor, Monsignor Antonicelli, to lie as well.

Cardinal Wuerl is denying the allegations, claiming he "did not receive documentation or information from the Holy See specific to Cardinal McCarrick's behavior or any of the prohibitions on his life and ministry suggested by Archbishop Vigano."

          Viganò makes clear the pope was immediately notified in 2000 of McCarrick's crimes as soon as the nunciature became aware.

"I will immediately say that the Apostolic Nuncios in the United States, Gabriel Montalvo and Pietro Sambi, both prematurely deceased, did not fail to inform the Holy See immediately, as soon as they learned of Archbishop McCarrick’s gravely immoral behavior with seminarians and priests," he said.

          He says Richard Sipe’s public letter to Pope Benedict in 2008 (published on Sipe's website) "had had the desired result":

Pope Benedict had imposed on Cardinal McCarrick sanctions similar to those now imposed on him by Pope Francis: the Cardinal was to leave the seminary where he was living, he was forbidden to celebrate [Mass] in public, to participate in public meetings, to give lectures, to travel, with the obligation of dedicating himself to a life of prayer and penance.

          When McCarrick was summoned to the nunciature and told the news of his sanctions, "a stormy conversation, lasting over an hour" ensued, and "the Nuncio's voice could be heard all the way out in the corridor."

          A number of other cardinals and bishops are implicated in the cover-up, including Cdls. Pietro Parolin (current secretary of state), Angelo Sodano, Tarcisio Bertone, William Levada, Lorenzo Baldisseri and Francesco Coccopalmerio, among others.

Viganò accuses Coccopalmerio and Abp. Vicenzo Paglia of belonging to "the homosexual current in favor of subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality." He also named Cdl. Edwin O'Brien as belonging "to the same current" — whom Church Militant has revealed was a homosexual ringleader in New York and deliberately underreported homosexual priestly abuse in the military.

Viganò accuses Coccopalmerio and Abp. Vincenzo Paglia of belonging to 'the homosexual current in favor of subverting Catholic doctrine on homosexuality.'

          Coccopalmerio came under scrutiny last year when his secretary, Msgr. Luigi Capozzi, was busted by Italian police during a drug-fueled gay orgy in the Vatican apartments. Coccopalmerio, head of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts and close adviser to the pope, had once recommended Capozzi for bishop.

          Viganò also implicates Cdls. Kevin Farrell and Sean O'Malley, saying of Farrell, "Given his tenure in Washington, Dallas and now Rome, I think no one can honestly believe him."

          On Fr. Marciel Maciel's homosexual predation, he says, "If he were to deny this, would anybody believe him given that he occupied positions of responsibility as a member of the Legionaries of Christ?"

          Church Militant reported last month that a former Legionary priest, J. Paul Lennon, close friend of Farrell's brother, Bp. Brian Farrell, when all were in the Legion of Christ, contradicted Farrell's claims that he had only met Maciel "once or twice" during his years in the Legion. Farrell had in fact been a member of Maciel's trusted inner circle and held a position of high rank in the Legion, necessitating multiple meetings with his founder.

          On O’Malley’s denials of knowledge, Viganò wrote, "I would simply say that his latest statements on the McCarrick case are disconcerting, and have totally obscured his transparency and credibility."

          The former papal nuncio also calls out homosexualist Jesuit Fr. James Martin as "nothing but a sad recent example of that deviated wing of the Society of Jesus."

          Viganò ends with a plea to the bishops to purge the Church of the gay lobby.

          The homosexual networks present in the Church must be eradicated, as Janet Smith, Professor of Moral Theology at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, recently wrote. "The problem of clergy abuse," she wrote, "cannot be resolved simply by the resignation of some bishops, and even less so by bureaucratic directives. The deeper problem lies in homosexual networks within the clergy which must be eradicated." These homosexual networks, which are now widespread in many dioceses, seminaries, religious orders, etc., act under the concealment of secrecy and lies with the power of octopus tentacles, and strangle innocent victims and priestly vocations, and are strangling the entire Church.

          I implore everyone, especially Bishops, to speak up in order to defeat this conspiracy of silence that is so widespread, and to report the cases of abuse they know about to the media and civil authorities.

 

 

De Mattei: “I will not say a single word about this”

Roberto de Mattei | August 28, 2018

            With this sentence, uttered August 26th 2018, on his return flight from Dublin to Rome, Pope Francis responded to the shocking revelations made by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, which involve him directly. To the journalist Anna Matranga (NBC) who had asked him whether the things the former Nunzio to the United States had written were true, the Pope in fact replied: “I read that statement this morning, and I must tell you sincerely that, I must say this, to you and all those who are interested: Read the statement carefully and make your own judgment, I will not say a single word on this. I believe that the communiqué speaks for itself, and you have enough journalistic skills to draw the conclusions. It’s an act of trust (confidence): after a while when you have drawn your conclusions, perhaps I will speak. But I’d like your professional maturity to do this work: it will be good for you, truly. Fine like that.” 

            A bishop demolishes the atmosphere of conspiratorial silence and connivance, naming names and giving precise circumstances of a “pro-homosexual current in favor of subverting the Catholic doctrine regarding homosexuality” and the presence of “homosexual networks, now widespread in many dioceses, seminaries, religious orders etc.,” that “act covered by secrets and lies with the tentacle-like power of an octopus crushing innocent victims, priestly vocations and  strangling the entire Church.”

            Confronted with this courageous voice which breaks the silence, Pope Francis remains silent and entrusts the mass-media with the task of judging it, according to their political and worldly criteria, so very different from that of the religious and moral judgment of the Church. A silence which appears even graver than the scandals brought to light by Archbishop Viganò.

This leprosy developed after the Second Vatican Council, as the consequence of the new moral theology which denied absolute morals and claimed the role of sexuality both heterosexual and homosexual, thought of as a factor in the growth and realization of the human person. The homosexualization of the  Church started to spread in the 1970s and 1980s, as the meticulously documented  book by Father Enrique Rueda reveals: The Homosexual Network: Private Lives and Public Policy, published in 1982.

            In order to understand the situation at that time, it is essential to read the study dedicated to Homosexuality and the Priesthood. The Gordian Knot – of Catholics? by Professor Andrzej Kobyliński of the Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw.* Kobyliński cites a book entitled The Changing Face of the Priesthood: A reflection on the Priest’s Crisis of Soul, by Donald Cozzens, Rector of the Cleveland Seminary in Ohio, wherein the author states that at the beginning of the 21st century the priesthood became a “profession”, exercised predominantly by homosexuals and we can even talk about  “a heterosexual exodus from the priesthood.”

            Kobyliński reports an emblematic case: that concerning the Archbishop of Milwaukee (Wisconsin), Rembert Weakland, acclaimed exponent of the American progressive and “liberal” current. “Weakland has, for decades, covered up cases of sexual abuse by priests, sustaining a vision of homosexuality contrary to that of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. At the end of his tenure, he effected a gigantic embezzlement of about half a million dollars from the funds of his archdiocese, to pay his former-partner who was accusing him of sexual molestations.  In 2009, Weakland had his “coming out”, by publishing his autobiography entitled: A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church, wherein he himself admitted to being homosexual and of having had, for decades, continuative sexual relationships with many partners. In 2011, the Archdiocese of Milwaukee was constrained to declare bankruptcy, for the high profile of compensations due to the victims of pedophile priests.”      

            In 2004 The John Jay Report appeared, a document prepared at the request of the American Episcopal Conference, in which all the cases of sexual abuse of minors by priests and deacons, from 1950 to 2002, were analyzed. This document of almost 300 pages is of extraordinary informative value – writes Kobyliński.  The John Jay Report  “demonstrated the link between homosexuality and sexual abuse of minors by Catholic clergy. According to the report of 2004, in the overwhelming majority of cases of sexual abuse it is not about pedophilia, but ephebophilia, that is, a degeneration that consists not only of sexual attraction towards children, but towards adolescent boys, at the age of puberty. The John Jay Report demonstrated that about 90% of the priests condemned for sexual abuse with minors are homosexual priests.”

            The McCarrick scandal is therefore not the last act in a crisis that goes way, way back. Yet, in the “Letter of the Pope to the People of God, and throughout his trip in Ireland, Pope Francis has not once denounced this moral disorder. The Pope retains that the main problem in sexual abuse by the clergy is not homosexuality but clericalism. Referring to these abuses, the progressive historian Alberto Melloni, writes that “Francis finally deals with the crime on the ecclesiastical level: and he entrusts it to that theological subject - the people of God. To the people Francis says without mincing words, that it is “clericalism” which has incubated these atrocities, not an excess or lack of morality” (La Repubblica , August 21, 2018).

            «Le cléricalisme, voilà l’ennemi!». “Behold the enemy - clericalism,” The famous phrase pronounced on May 4th 1876 in the French Chamber of Deputies by Léon Gambetta (1838-1882), leading exponent of The Grand Orient of France, could easily have been made Pope Francis. This phrase, however, was considered the watchword by the Masonic secularism of the 19th century, and by applying it, the governments of the French Third Republic, carried out in the following years, an “anti-clerical” political program which had its stages in the secularization of the school, the expulsion of religious orders from the national  territory, divorce and the abolition of the concordat between France and the Holy See.  The clericalism Pope Francis speaks of is apparently different, but deep down he identifies it with that traditional conception of the Church which over the centuries was fought against by the Gallicans, the Liberals,  the Freemasons and the Modernists.  

To reform the Church and purify Her of clericalism, the Italian sociologist Marco Marzano suggests the following to Pope Francis: “For example, a start might be to remove parish priests completely from the running of the parishes, depriving them of those monocratic and absolute  governing functions (financial and pastoral) of which they benefit today. It might be possible to introduce an important element of democracy, making bishops electable [by popular vote]. It might be possible, by replacing them with open and transparent structures, to close the seminaries, institutions of the counter-reform in which clericalism as a “spirit of caste” is still exalted and cultivated today. It might above all, be possible to cancel the norm upon which clericalism is today mostly based (and which is also the basis for the overwhelming majority of sexual crimes by the clergy)  and that is, - obligatory celibacy. It is precisely the chastity presumed in the clergy, with all the consequences of the purity, the sacredness and superhuman [aspects] that go along with it, which establish the main basis of clericalism”. (Il Fatto Quotidiano, August 25th 2018).   

            Those who wish to demolish clericalism, want to destroy the Church. And if instead clericalism is meant as an abuse of power that the clergy exercise when they abandon  the spirit of the Gospel,  then there is no worse clericalism  than that of those who forsake stigmatizing extremely grave sins like sodomy and forget that the Christian life  must necessarily attain Heaven or Hell. In the years following Vatican II a great part of the clergy abandoned the idea of the Social Reign of Christ and accepted the postulate of secularization as an irreversible phenomenon. But when Christianity is subordinate to secularism, the Kingdom of Christ is transformed into a worldly kingdom and reduced to structures of power.  The militant spirit is replaced by the spirit of the world,  And the spirit of the world imposes silence on the drama the Church is living through right now. 

COMMENT: Pope Francis the Homosexual Lobby CEO, is asking the help of his great ally, the secular press, to misdirect the question to obfuscate truth. The sexual abuse problem in the Catholic Church is almost entirely a problem of the homosexual clerics infesting the Church who have established a network of control and cover-up to use the Church for the gratification of their own degraded decadent passions. The secular press knows this. They have no objection in principle to sodomy and the hate Jesus Christ and His Church. Therefore, they must misdirect the understanding of the problem. The sexual perversion from clerics is always referred to as pedophilia by the secular press when it most certainly is not. The cause of pedophilia is then claimed to be "clericalism" which Roberto de Mattei very nicely defines and describes in this article. The prescription to cure pedophilia then becomes forcing the clergy to become undistinguishable from the laity which is a prescription to destroy the Catholic priesthood. Pope Francis the Homosexual Lobby CEO may or may not be a homosexual himself but he is using the Lobby as a weapon against God's Church. He is the destroyer and he must be opposed by all the faithful who keep Dogma as their rule of faith.

 

 

The customs of God’s people and the institutions of our ancestors are to be considered as laws. And those who throw contempt on the customs of the Church ought to be punished as those who disobey the law of God. 

St. Augustine, Ep. ad Casulan. xxxvi 

 

 

More Timely as Time Goes By:

Excerpt from Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission Open Letter Addressed to Bishop Joseph McFadden, June 29, 2011

          The recent document Universae Ecclesiae published by the Pontifical Commission of Ecclesia Dei (PCED) is the instruction on the application of Pope Benedict XVI’s Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum, which concerns the use of the 1962 Missal.  That Missal has been variously known as the Missal of John XXIII, the Bugnini transitional Missal of 1962, the Indult Missal, and now, as the “extra-ordinary form” of the Novus Ordo expressing a single ‘lex orandi/lex credendi’ of the later Bugnini edition, which is now called the “ordinary form” of the Novus Ordo.  The 1962 Missal can be identified by any number of descriptive names except, the “received and approved” immemorial Roman rite of the Mass.  It is impossible that the 1962 Missal could be the “received and approved”2 immemorial Roman rite because it is impossible that the immemorial Roman rite could ever be reduced to the status of an Indult, or treated as a grant of legal privilege entirely as a matter of Church discipline subject to the free, independent and arbitrary will of the legislator, or even worse, as the proper subject matter for experimentation by “liturgical experts” staffing “liturgical committees.” The 1962 Missal has never been afforded the standing of immemorial custom by the authorities in Rome and it has proven itself to be just as unstable and transitory today as it was when first published in 1962.  We agree with Pope Benedict that there exists no antithesis between the 1962 Missal and the 1970 edition of that rite.

          The Masses offered at Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission are offered according to the immemorial Roman rite of Mass before Rev. Annibale Bugnini, as secretary for the Commission for Liturgical Reform, overturned the principles of organic liturgical development and subjected the “received and approved” Roman rite of Mass to artificial man-made theories of liturgical innovation.  These theories, that are clearly foreign to the Catholic sense of liturgical development, are of the same kind used by the Protestants in the 16th century, and later by the Jansenists in the 17th and 18th centuries, to employ liturgy as a means of changing doctrine.3  Since we do not use the 1962 Missal, we are not subject to the PCED, whose particular competency is to govern the use of that edition with its anticipated updates in the ongoing “reform of the reform,” nor are we subject to the restrictive norms established for the use of that Missal.

          We have some small appreciation for the challenge facing Pope Benedict in his attempt to correct the Novus Ordo liturgical problems in the Latin rite, problems which he himself described as “a liturgical collapse,”4 but he is not without a share in the responsibility for the current state of affairs.  Implementing his ‘hermeneutic of continuity/discontinuity’ by employing a Hegelian dialectic to create a new liturgical synthesis between the Bugnini Missal of 1962 and the Bugnini Missal of 1970 will only produce another artificial construct by liturgical innovators.  We are not opposed to these “reform of the reform” corrections and anticipate a general benefit for all Catholics when, for example, the high altar is restored to its proper position in Catholic sanctuaries, and such abuses as communion in the hand are ended, but why should these corrections be paid for by a compromise of immemorial tradition?  No one should expect Catholics who have been faithful to tradition over the last 50 years to willingly subject themselves to another liturgical edition of “musical chairs” with no idea where they will end up when the music stops.  Liturgical instability has become the norm.  It is for this reason that we did not consider any suggestion to become an Indult community by Bishop Rhoades.

          Ss. Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Mission claims that by virtue of our baptism, whose character both empowers and obligates us to profess our Catholic faith and to worship God in the external forum, we have the right to the “received and approved” immemorial traditions of our Church that are perfectly consonant with that faith we hold in the internal forum and by which our faith is visibly manifested, most importantly, we possess  the right to have the “received and approved rites customarily used in the administration of the sacraments” (Council of Trent).  We further hold that, although these rights can be duly regulated by properly constituted authority, they can never be conditionally exercised by required concessions or compromises of Catholic faith or morals. 

          We further publically avow that we have made every effort to insure that our consciences, according to Catholic moral principles, have been properly formed and that they are both true and certain on these questions that pertain to faith and worship; and have made every effort to conform our actions to our conscience which we as Catholics are morally obliged to do. […..]

 

 

Failed to Mention: Novus Ordo Church receives massive federal handouts for supporting illegal immigration!

“The Catholic Church has been terrible about this [immigration issue]. The bishops have been terrible about this. By the way, you know why. You know why. Because [they're] unable to really – to come to grips with the problems in the church, they need illegal aliens. They need illegal aliens to fill the churches. It’s obvious on the face of it. … They have an economic interest. They have an economic interest in unlimited immigration, unlimited illegal immigration.”

Steve Bannon, executive chairman of Breitbart and former chief strategist for President Trump, faulted the Catholic bishops for their stance on immigration, interview 60 Minutes, 9-10-17 with Charlie Rose

 

Response: “That's insulting and that's just so ridiculous that it doesn’t merit a comment.” 

Cardinal Timothy Dolan

 

You get what you pay for!

Catholic Church collects $1.6 billion in U.S. contracts, grants since 2012

The Washington Times | Kelly Riddell | September 24, 2015

Not to be lost in the pomp and circumstance of Pope Francis’ first visit to Washington is the reality that the Catholic Church he oversees has become one of the largest recipients of federal largesse in America.

The Church and related Catholic charities and schools have collected more than $1.6 billion since 2012 in U.S. contracts and grants in a far-reaching relationship that spans from school lunches for grammar school students to contracts across the globe to care for the poor and needy at the expense of Uncle Sam, a Washington Times review of federal spending records shows.

Former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York once famously noted in 1980 that the government funded 50 percent of Catholic Charities ‘budget, commenting “private institutions really aren’t private anymore.” Today, those estimates remain about the same, according to Leslie Lenkowsky, who served as the chief executive officer of the Corporation for National and Community Service under George W. Bush.

Catholic Charities USA, the largest charitable organization run by the church, receives about 65 percent of its annual budget from state and federal governments, making it an arm of the federal welfare state, said Brian Anderson, a researcher with the Manhattan Institute.

The federal government came to increasingly rely on the church to help it with Lyndon B. Johnson’s “War on Poverty,” and the charities “imbued with their new faith in the government’s potential to solve social problems, eagerly accepted government money,” Mr. Anderson wrote in an essay for the Manhattan Institute.

Catholic Charities received nearly a quarter of its funding from government by the end of the 1960s, more than half by the late 1970s and more than 60 percent by the mid-1980s, the level where it has remained ever since, Mr. Anderson said.

 

 

The Source of Protestant “Infallibility”!

What do I care whether the Popes cry out “The Church! The Church! The Fathers The Fathers!” The Prophets and Apostles have erred. With the word of God we judge both the Church and Apostles. ….. I do not care for a hundred texts of the Bible and if you find that my doctrine is contrary to that of the Church and of the Fathers, you must know that I care not for all that. … My words are the words of Christ, my tongue is the tongue of Christ – I am certain that I cannot err.

Luther, taken from History of the Protestant Reformation (in four volumes), first volume, History of the Life, Works and Doctrines of Luther, Jean M Vincent Audin, 1845

 

 

 

Pope Francis - A radical revolutionary who hates everything Catholic!

“The break with the past became the categorical imperative of a generation.” The term “categorical imperative” was coined by Immanuel Kant who St. Pius X identified as the philosophical and theological source for the heresy of Modernism.

“Christians never give up dreaming of a better world”

The Pope at the Rimini Meeting: “We are going back to erecting walls instead of building bridges. We tend to be withdrawn, rather than open to others who are different from us”. But “authentic faith always implies a profound desire to change”

Andrea Tornielli | Vatican City | August 19, 2018

          “Christians can never give up dreaming of a better world”. Also this year, through the Secretary of State Pietro Parolin, Pope Francis sends a greeting to the participants of the Rimini Meeting. The message addressed to the bishop of the city in Emilia Romagna, Francesco Lambiasi, was read during the opening mass of the 39th edition of the Rimini festival.  

          The message reads: “The title of the Meeting – ‘The forces that move history are the same ones that make man happy’ – resumes an expression of Don (Luigi) Giussani (founder of Communion and Liberation) and refers to that crucial turning point occurred in the society in 1968, the effects of which are not yet exhausted, fifty years later, so much so that Pope Francis affirms that ‘today, we are not living an era of change but a change of era’”.  

          “The break with the past – continues the message – became the categorical imperative of a generation that placed its hopes in a revolution of structures capable of ensuring a greater authenticity of life. Many believers yielded to the charm of this perspective and turned faith into a moralism which, taking the Grace for granted, relied on the efforts for a practical realisation of a better world”.  

          This is why “it is significant that, within that context, Don Giussani said to a young man completely absorbed in the search for the ‘forces that dominate history’: ‘The forces that move history are the same ones that make man happy’. With these words, he challenged him to verify what forces can change history, raising the bar with which to measure his revolutionary attempt”.   

          What happened to this attempt? What was left of that desire to change everything? “This is not the place to draw a historical balance – the papal greeting reads – but we can find some symptoms that emerge from the current situation of the West. We are going back to erecting walls instead of building bridges. We tend to be withdrawn, rather than open to others who are different from us. Indifference is spreading, rather than the desire to take initiative for change. A sense of fear prevails over trust in the future. And we ask ourselves whether in the last half-century the world has become more of a place to live in”. (?)  

          A question, the Pope observes, that “also concerns us the Christians, who have gone through the turmoil of 1968 and urges us to reflect – together with many other protagonists – and to ask ourselves: what have we learnt? What can we take in? Man’s temptation has always been to think that his intelligence and abilities are the principles that rule the world; a claim that can be fulfilled in two ways: ‘One is the attraction of Gnosticism, […] which ultimately keeps one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The other one is the neo-Pelagianism […] of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers’ (Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, 94)”.  

          But should Christians give up their desire for change in order to avoid these two temptations repeatedly condemned by the Pontiff? “No, it is not about withdrawing from the world – Francis replies – to avoid the risk of making mistakes and to preserve a sort of pristine-pure faith, because an authentic faith always implies a deep desire to change the world, to move history, as reads the title of the Meeting. Many will wonder: is it possible? Christians can never give up dreaming of a better world. It is reasonable to dream of it, because a profound conviction is at the root of this certainty, that Christ is the beginning of the new world”.  

      A certainty that Francis summarises with these words: “His resurrection is not a thing of the past; it contains a life force that has penetrated the world. Where it seems that everything is dead, the buds of the resurrection come back to light from every part. It is an unparalleled force. In the midst of the darkness, something new always begins to blossom”.  

          “Who will save today – the message continues – this desire that lives, even if confusedly, in the heart of man? Only something that comes up to its infinite yearning. In fact, if desire does not find a suitable object, it remains blocked, and no promise, no initiative will be able to move it. No effort, no revolution can satisfy the human heart. Only God, who made us with an infinite desire, can fill it with his infinite presence”.  

          The very nature of Christianity “consists in recognising the presence of Jesus and following him. This was the beautiful experience of those early disciples who, meeting Jesus, were fascinated and full of amazement before the extraordinary figure of the One who spoke to them, and in the way in which He treated them, giving answers to the hunger and thirst for life of their hearts”.  

      “The Holy Father – concludes the message signed by Cardinal Parolin – wishes that this year’s Meeting be, for all those who participate, an opportunity to deepen or to welcome the invitation of the Lord Jesus: ‘Come and see’. This is the force that, while freeing man from the slavery of ‘false infinities’ that promise happiness without being able to deliver it, makes him a new protagonist on the world scene, called to turn history into a place where the children of God meet their Father and brothers meet among them”.  

Comment, St. Pius X replies:

In the maze of current opinions, these priests [dedicated to the works of Catholic Action] should not allow themselves to be led astray, attracted by the mirage of a false democracy. They should not borrow from the rhetoric of the worst enemies of the Church and of the people, high-flown phrases full of promises, as high-sounding as they are unattainable. They should be convinced that the social question and social science did not arise just yesterday; that the Church and the State, in harmonious accord, have always raised up fruitful organizations to attain this end; that the Church, which has never betrayed the happiness of the people by consenting to compromising alliances, does not need to free herself from her past.
All that she must do is to retake, with the help of true workers for the social restoration, the organisms shattered by the Revolution, adapting them in the same Christian spirit that inspired them to the new environment created by the material development of today’s society. For the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists.

Pope St. Pius, X, Norte Charge Apostolique, 1910

 

 

“Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.” Isaias 5:20

Hence it is can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace. More is involved here than mere ignorance of the rule. A subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding “its inherent values”, or be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin. As the Synod Fathers put it, “factors may exist which limit the ability to make a decision.”

Pope Francis the Lutheran, Amoris Laetitia

 

          “The end of the way of the universe is in the fullness of God, which has already been achieved by the risen Christ, fulcrum of the universal maturation…. The final end of other creatures is not in us. Instead, all advance, together with us and through us, toward the common destination, which is God, in a transcendent fullness where the Risen Christ embraces and illuminates everything. The human being, in fact, gifted with intelligence and love, and attracted by the fullness of Christ, is called to lead all creatures back to their Creator.”
[Note: This is my own translation, as the Vatican’s English translation is not faithful to the original Italian, including the key phrase
fulcro della maturazione universale  — “fulcrum of the universal maturation.”]
          With all due respect, what sort of nonsense is this?  Christ has not “achieved the fullness of God” with the Resurrection.  Christ
is God, and He rose by His own power.  Nor is Christ any sort of “fulcrum” of a “universal maturation,” according to which “all creatures” are “advancing” “through us” toward some nebulous “transcendent fullness.”   This is nothing other than de Chardin’s bogus notion of Christ as the Omega Point, or end, of the evolution of all things. And, indeed, Francis at this point in the “recyclical” cites none other than de Chardin: “Against this horizon we can set the contribution of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin…”
          Contribution? What contribution?  In terms of science, Teilhard contributed two frauds: the alleged “missing links” Piltdown Man and Peking Man, the former withdrawn in disgrace by the British Museum and the latter consigned to oblivion when evidence emerged that this so-called evolutionary ancestor of man was simply an ancient man.

Christopher Ferrara, On Laudato Si, the papal encyclical on earth worship

 

 

“Things can be known because they are created.”

The fundamental statement about the “truth of all things” is found in St. Thomas’ Questiones disputatae de veritate; it reads: res naturalis inter duos intellects constituta (est); whatever is real in nature is placed between two knowing agents, namely – so the text continues – between the intellectus divinus [God’s mind] and the intellectus humanus [human mind]. 

These “coordinates” place all reality between the absolutely creative, inventive knowledge of God and the imitating, “informed” knowledge of us humans and thus present the total realm of reality as a structure of interwoven original and reproduced conceptions. 

Based on this twofold orientation of all things – so Thomas continues his reasoning – the concept of the “truth of all things” is also twofold: first, it means “thought by God”; second, it means “knowable to the human mind.” The statement, “All things are true,” would therefore mean, on one hand, that all things are known by God in the act of creation and, on the other hand, that all things are by their nature accessible and comprehensible to the human mind. 

All things can be known by us because they spring from God’s thought. Because they originated in God’s mind, things have not only their specific essence in themselves and for themselves, but precisely because they originated in God’s mind, things have as well an essence “for us.” All things are intelligible, translucent, clear and open because they are created by God’s thought, and for this reason they are essentially spirit related. The clarity and lucidity that flows from God’s knowledge into things, together with their very being (more correctly: as their very being) – this lucidity alone makes all things knowable for the human mind. St. Thomas, in a commentary on Scripture, remarks: “A thing has exactly as much light as it has reality.” And in one of his late works, in his commentary on the Liber de causis, we find a profound statement that expresses the same thought in almost mystical terms: ipsa actualitas rei est quoddam lumen ipsius; “the reality of a thing is itself its light”– and “reality” is understood here as “being created”! It is precisely this “light” that makes a thing visible to our eyes. In short: things can be known because they are created. 

Josef Pieper, Catholic Philosopher

 

 

 

He who does not keep the true Catholic faith whole and without error will undoubtedly be lost.  He who is separated from the Catholic Church will not have life. 

Pope Gregory XVI, Perlatum Ad Nos

 

That the Mystical Body of Christ and the Catholic Church in communion with Rome are one and the same thing is a doctrine based on Revealed Truth.  That we must necessarily belong to the true Church if we are to attain everlasting salvation is a statement which some people reduce to meaningless formula. 

Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis

 

Nature of DOGMA - “A genuine supernatural message or communication from the living God Himself” -

and its Denial by Modernists

    Thus, We have reached one of the principal points in the Modernists’ system, namely the origin and the nature of dogma. For they place the origin of dogma in those primitive and simple formulae, which, under a certain aspect, are necessary to faith; for revelation, to be truly such, requires the clear manifestation of God in the consciousness. But dogma itself they apparently hold, is contained in the secondary formulae.
    To ascertain the nature of dogma (for the modernist), we must first find the relation which exists between the religious formulas and the religious sentiment. This will be readily perceived by him who realises that these formulas have no other purpose than to furnish the believer with a means of giving an account of his faith to himself. These formulas (for the modernist) therefore stand midway between the believer and his faith; in their relation to the faith, they are the inadequate expression of its object, and are usually called symbols; in their relation to the believer, they are mere instruments.
    Hence it is quite impossible (for the modernist) to maintain that they express absolute truth: for, in so far as they are symbols, they are the images of truth, and so must be adapted to the religious sentiment in its relation to man; and as instruments, they are the vehicles of truth, and must therefore in their turn be adapted to man in his relation to the religious sentiment.
But the object of the religious sentiment, since it embraces that absolute, possesses an infinite variety of aspects of which now one, now another, may present itself. In like manner, he who believes may pass through different phases. Consequently, the formulae too, which we call dogmas, must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. An immense collection of sophisms this, that ruins and destroys all religion. Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed.
St.Pius X, Pascendi

 

If the teaching proposed by the Church as dogma is not actually and really the doctrine supernaturally revealed by God through Jesus Christ Our Lord, [........] then there could be nothing more pitifully inane than the work of the Catholic Magisterium. [........] This common basis of the false doctrinal Americanism and of the Modernist heresy is, like doctrinal indifferentism itself, ultimately a rejection of Catholic dogma as a genuine supernatural message or communication from the living God Himself. It would seem impossible for anyone to be blasphemous or silly enough to be convinced, on the one hand, that the dogmatic message of the Catholic Church is actually a locutio Dei ad homines, and to imagine, on the other hand, that he, a mere creature, could in some way improve that teaching or make it more respectable. The very fact that a man would be so rash as to attempt to bring the dogma of the Church up to date, or to make it more acceptable to those who are not privileged to be members of the true Church, indicates that this individual is not actually and profoundly convinced that this dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church is a supernatural communication from the living and Triune God, the Lord and Creator of heaven and earth. It would be the height of blasphemy knowingly to set out to improve or to bring up to date what one would seriously consider a genuine message from the First Cause of the universe.
Fr. Joseph C. Fenton, AER, The Sacrorum Antistitum and the Background of the Oath Against Modernism

 

 

Whether in the Ordinary or Extra-ordinary flavor: The “Assembly…Celebrates.”

General Instruction on the Novus Ordo Mass

The Lord’s supper or Mass is the sacred assembly or congregation of the people of God gathering together, with a priest presiding, in order to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.  For this reason, Christ’s promise applies supremely to such a local gathering of the Church: “Where two or three come together in my name, there am I in their midst.”

Article 7(1969)

COMMENT: Almost any believing Protestant of whatever denomination would be able to assent to such a definition. 

Msgr. Klaus Gamber

 

The Cross was necessary not just to redeem from sin,

but to make those redeemed, by grace, “share in the friendship of God,”

 the “power to be made the sons of God.”  John 1:12

He is known to have shed, not a little drop of blood,- though this would have sufficed for the redemption of the entire human race, because of the (Hypostatic) Union with the Logos, - but streams of it, like unto a river… That the mercy involved in such a large effusion (of blood) be not rendered vain, empty, and superfluous, He laid up for the Church militant a copious treasure, which the good Father desires to dispense to his children, in order that it may become an infinite store-house for men, and that those who make use of it may share in the friendship of God. 

Pope Clement VI, Unigenitus, 1343

 

 

"Only non-dogmatic truths can be ranked in order of importance. All Catholic dogmas rank equally, because to deny just one is to deny God’s authority which is behind them all." 

Bishop Richard Williamson

 

 

At least we won't have to hear about the Cardinal Keeler Center any more, but do not expect it to be renamed in honor of Rev. Enrique Tomas Rueda who warned the Church about the Homosexual Network in 1982.  Does the bishop have a plan to cleanse the diocese from all the homosexual clerics?

Bishop Gainer Makes Building Naming Policy Retroactive

Bishop Ronald W. Gainer announced on Wednesday, Aug. 1, that a new Building Naming Policy has been approved, effective immediately, for the Diocese of Harrisburg. Under the new policy, the name of every Bishop since 1947 will be removed from any building, facility, room or other position of honor in the Diocese. This move is in response to the extensive investigation by the Dioceses into reports of and inadequate response to allegations of child sexual abuse.

The investigation caused the Diocese to take a frank look at its past as well as its present. Part of that assessment was an evaluation of whether any lingering symbols of the sad history revealed in the investigation should remain.

Bishop Gainer directed a “Committee on Names” be formed, to advise him on whether any of the persons criticized in the investigation should have their names removed from the Diocese’s facilities.

As a result of the investigation, it was clear the leadership of the Church did not in every case take adequate measures when handling matters related to offending clerics. This information was reviewed by the Diocese’s legal counsel and along with the unanimous recommendation of the “Committee on Naming,” the decision was made to approve the new policy.

“I agree with the recommendations that I have received from my advisors on these matters and have instructed Diocesan Staff to begin efforts to change names, effective immediately,” said Bishop Gainer.

Bishop McDevitt High School will not have its name changed because there are no records of these matters during the tenure of Bishop McDevitt and the investigation only extended back to 1947, twelve years after his death.

 

Truth always bears repeating. Unless the problem is properly defined, there can be no solution!

Cardinal Bertone correct in linking clerical sex abuse and homosexuality, says psychiatrist

    West Conshohocken, Pa., Apr 16, 2010 / 04:38 pm (CNA News)

    Following Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone’s comments in Chile about a link existing between homosexuality and pedophilia in cases of clerical sexual abuse, both Church officials and secular figures clarified his statement. But Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a psychiatrist with experience treating sexually abusive priests, told CNA that the cardinal’s statement is accurate. 

    At a press conference last Monday evening at the Pontifical Seminary of Santiago, Chile, the Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone said, “Many psychologists and psychiatrists have shown that there is no link between celibacy and pedophilia.” Instead, they have found a “relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia,” he added.

    Many gay rights organizations reacted vehemently to Cardinal Bertone’s statement, leading Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican Press office, to assert  that “it obviously refers to the problem of abuse by priests and not in the population in general.”

    A statement from the French Foreign Ministry calling the linkage “unacceptable” was followed by a statement by Fr. Marcus Stock, the General Secretary of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales. “To the best of my knowledge, there is no empirical data which concludes that sexual orientation is connected to child sexual abuse,” he said.

    “The consensus among researchers is that the sexual abuse of children is not a question of sexual ‘orientation,’ whether heterosexual or homosexual, but of a disordered attraction or ‘fixation,’” Fr. Stock added.

    However, a U.S. psychiatrist with experience in treating priests with pedophilia disagrees that there is no link between homosexuality and sexual abuse of children. “Cardinal Bertone’s comments are supported completely by the John Jay study report and by clinical experience,” Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons told CNA. “In fact, every priest whom I treated who was involved with children sexually had previously been involved in adult homosexual relationships.”

    Fitzgibbons, who has been the director of Comprehensive Counseling Center in West Conshohocken, Penn. since 1988, has worked extensively with individuals suffering from same sex attraction (SSA) and priests accused of pedophilia. He also presently serves as a consultant to the Congregation for the Clergy at the Holy See.

    In his 2002 “Letter to Catholic Bishops,” Fitzgibbons identified priests prone to sexual abuse as having suffered “profound emotional pain” during childhood due to loneliness, problems in their relationships with their fathers, rejection by their peers, lack of male confidence, and poor self image or body image. Fitzgibbons said that these experiences lead priests especially to direct their sadness and anger towards the Church, her teachings on sexual morality, and the Magisterium.

    He also noted that priests who have engaged in sexual misconduct with minors suffer from a “denial of sin in their lives.” “They consistently refused to examine their consciences, to accept the Church’s teachings on moral issues as a guide for their personal actions, or regularly avail themselves of the sacrament of reconciliation. These priests either refused to seek spiritual direction or choose (sic) a spiritual director or confessor who openly rebelled against Church teachings on sexuality,” the letter said.

    When asked what sort of new information has become available since the publication of the letter, Fitzgibbons put an emphasis on narcissism. “This epidemic personality weakness in the west predisposes individuals to excessive anger, the worship of self, rebelliousness against God and His Church particularly in regard to sexual morality and sexual acting-out,” he said.

    The psychiatrist also reviewed the findings of the John Jay researchers, who reported that 81 percent of the victims of clerical sexual abuse were male, 51 percent of whom were age 11-14, 27 percent were aged 15-17, 16 percent between 8-10, and 6 percent were under 7 years of age, emphasized Fitzgibbons.

    For priests who do suffer from SSA, “I would recommend that they become more knowledgeable about the emotional origins and healing of same-sex attractions, as well as the serious medical and psychiatric illnesses associated with homosexuality,” advised Fitzgibbons. “We have observed many priests grow in holiness and in happiness in their ministry as a result of the healing of their childhood and adolescent male insecurity, loneliness and anger and, subsequently, their same-sex attractions.”

    Because of the link between homosexuality and clerical sexual abuse mentioned by Cardinal Bertone, priests and seminarians with same sex attraction have a solemn responsibility to seek help and to protect the Church from further shame and sorrow, said Fitzgibbons.

 

 

 

According to Francis the Most Merciful, the Catholic Church has approved, as morally permissible for the last two thousand years, the 'intrinsically evil' act of capital punishment!

Heresy in the Catechism. Wolf in the Vatican. No Shepherds in Sight.

OnePeterFive | Steve Skokec | August 2, 2018

Just as the latest round of homosexual network and sex abuse allegations in the Church are reaching a fever pitch, Pope Francis – who has been eerily quiet of late – dropped a nuclear theological bomb into our midst.

From CRUX: 

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the death penalty now is no longer admissible under any circumstances. The Vatican announced on Thursday Pope Francis approved changes to the compendium of Catholic teaching published under Pope John Paul II.

“The death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,” is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church now says on the death penalty, adding that the Church “works with determination for its abolition worldwide.”

As I have previously attempted to demonstrate, this is simply theologically wrong. There’s no way around that. But I wanted the opinion of an expert – which I am not – so I reached out this morning to a trustworthy theologian who is well versed in the finer distinctions of Magisterial authority and its limits. This was the response I received:

“The traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on the intrinsic morality of the death penalty is irreformable dogma. To deny this or assert the contrary is formally heretical. Catholics remain obliged to believe and accept this doctrine regardless of any changes to the Catechism.” [.....]

COMMENT:  This is just further proof that the doctrine of Religious Liberty is heresy and, like all heresy, leads to objective sin.  Religious Liberty is based upon the belief that the dignity of man is so great that he is free to ignore the truths God has revealed and disobey His commandments.  It leads to the moral error of religious indifferentism in the practical order. This teaching on capital punishment is just another extension of this doctrinal error.  Here Francis/Bergoglio claims that the dignity of man is so great his life cannot be forfeited regardless of his crimes.  If this were true understanding of natural law, which in creation is a manifestation of the mind of God, it would apply to God as well.  This explains why the modernist Novus Ordo heretics who profess religious liberty deny the eternal punishment of hell.  Unfortunately for them, this denial will only provide them with the opportunity to learn by experience. 

 

 

Francis/Bergoglio in practice affords greater right to life to the abortionist than his victim!

What's Going on in Bergoglio's Pontifical Academy for Life Anyway?

Is there no end to the anti-life scandals at Pontifical Academy for Life?  Or is it Death?

Karolinska Institute is NOT a “Medical University.” It’s a Big Auschwitz for unborn children.  

In the selection of its members, the Vatican must also consider the institution that the member represents. In the case of Katarina Le Blanc that institution is the Karolinska Institute – one of the world’s foremost promoters of abortion and abortifacients. The Institute also is involved in non-therapeutic fetal experimentation and the provision of fetal tissues from aborted babies.  Its eugenic mind-set is illustrated by its pioneer promotion of human embryo pre-implantation diagnosis and in-vitro Fertilization.   

Either remove Le Blanc and all the other anti-life characters which infest the “academy” or just shut the growing hell-hole down! Enough is enough!

Randy Engel, U.S. Coalition for Life, July 19, 2017

 

Building Bridges to Hell – The homosexual agenda does not seek to be left alone in their vices but rather seeks to have their vices recognized and approved as normal moral behavior! 

Many of the gay persons who I met that week revealed a deep spirituality and faith. And most interesting of all, the people I met asked that we, as ministers of the Church, be people of compassion and understanding, and not be afraid to teach the message of the Gospel and the Church with gentleness and clarity even in the midst of ambiguity of lifestyle, devastation, despair and hostility. As a Church and as pastoral ministers, we still have a long journey ahead of us as we welcome strangers into our midst and listen to them.

Over the past weeks, I read many of the critical comments of Jesuit Fr. James Martin’s book, Building a Bridge. I shook my head in bewilderment several times as I read venom and vitriol in some of the critiques. It is one thing to critique and raise questions. It is another to condemn, disparage and dismiss. I sensed palpable fear and anger in some of the negative commentaries. I made it a point to read the book in one sitting last weekend. I was astounded that what I read in commentaries, blogs, some bishops’ messages, had very little to do with what I considered to be very mild, reflections offered by a well-known Jesuit priest who simply invited people to build bridges with those who are on distant shores. Fr. Martin’s book is not dogma or doctrine. It is by no means revolutionary. It is merely an invitation to sit down and talk, face-to-face with people we consider to be different.

Whereas Fr. Martin and Pope Francis invite us to build bridges and become instruments of dialogue, critics of both Fr. Martin, the Pope, and many of us who support Pope Francis thrive in erecting high, impenetrable walls and noisy echo chambers of monologue.

Fr. Thomas Rosica, Vatican spokesman for English speaking people, addressing the homosexual haven Most Holy Redeemer Church in San Francisco.  Rosica is endorsing and defending to homosexuals the homosexual friendly book by the Jesuit, Fr. James Martin.  Homosexuals cannot praise each other too highly.  Martin’s book does not endorse any Catholic ministries that support conversion, repentance, chastity.  He endorses only those organizations that reject Catholic morality, such as, New Ways Ministry.

The National Catholic Reporter said:

It was a real-life horror story that galvanized Martin to write this manuscript. Just weeks after the massacre of 49 people at Pulse, a gay nightclub in Orlando (by a conflicted Moslem Homosexual), he was offered the Bridge Building award from New Ways Ministry, a longtime Catholic advocacy and ministry organization for LGBT Catholics and their families. Building a Bridge is an expansion of his acceptance speech. […..] Part of what motivated Martin to accept the Bridge Building Award was the inadequate response offered by Catholic bishops to the Pulse tragedy. Although many church leaders expressed both horror and sorrow, only a handful of the more than 250 Catholic bishops used the words gay or LGBT,” Martin writes. “I found this revelatory.”

 

 

I am glad that we are talking about “homosexual people” because before all else comes the individual person, in his wholeness and dignity. And people should not be defined only by their sexual tendencies: let us not forget that God loves all his creatures and we are destined to receive his infinite love.

Pope Francis

 

It is not the position of the Roman Catholic Church that a pope is incapable of leading people astray by false teaching as a public doctor…. He may be the supreme appeal judge of Christendom… but that does not make him immune to perpetrating doctrinal howlers. Surprisingly, or perhaps not so surprisingly, given the piety that has surrounded the figures of the popes since the pontificate of Pius IX, this fact appears to be unknown to many who ought to know better…. (There is now) a danger of possible schism…  (but, not as possible as) an immediate danger as the spread of a moral heresy.

Fr Aidan Nichols, O.P., author of over 40 books of philosophy, theology, apologetics and criticism who has lectured at Oxford and Cambridge and the Angelicum in Rome, speaking at the annual conference in Cuddesdon of an ecumenical society, the Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius, to a largely non-Catholic audience

 

All this applies as well to the Deep State, that thinks itself a king, that President Trump has exposed.

A Power without limits is an essentially Anti-Christian Power and it is simultaneously an outrage done the majesty of God and the dignity of man. A Power without limits can never be a ministry or a service, and political Power under the imperatives of Christian civilization can never be anything less. Unlimited Power is also an idolatry lodged within both subject and king: idolatry in the subject because he adores the king; idolatry in the king because he worships himself.

Donoso Cortes, Catholic diplomat and apologist

 

“The words of Jesus Christ,” says (Bishop Jacques) Bossuet, “reflect something of the divine in their simplicity, in their depth, by a certain gently authority with which they issue forth. Never has man spoken like this man, because man has never been God, like him. Nor has man had over all spirits that natural authority which pertains to truth, and which speaks to the soul so sweetly and so intimately.” But this Word, absolutely divine - divine by its own character, divine by its effects, always subsisting - whose should it be if not Jesus Christ's? Who should be the inventor of the wisdom of Jesus Christ? At a distance of nearly two thousand years the Word of Jesus Christ remains the only true light of man on himself an don God. It upholds the Catholic world, encompassed by fanatical enemies; it sustains the natural law, infested and crushed by a man philosophy; it upholds human reason, subject to madness and error; it not only preserves and repairs, but it brings forth; it begets both priests and saints; it begets faith, and from the most stony and sterile hearts it wrests admiration and love. Who could have invented this Word?

Louis Veuillot, The Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ

 

Opinions opposed to reason inevitably produce actions opposed to nature.

Louis de Bonald, French counter-revolutionary statesman

 

Harrisburg Diocese Releases Names of Over 70 Priests Accused of Abuse

OnePeterFive | Steve Skojec | August 1, 2018

The Diocese of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania has just released the names of over 70 members of its clergy who have been accused of sexual abuse in cases spanning back to the 1940s.

At a news conference this morning, Bishop Ronald Gainer of Harrisburg released the list, revealing that since becoming bishop in 2014, he has overseen an effort to “verify the status of priests” accused of abuse going back more than half a century. He told the York Daily Record that he wanted to release the list sooner but that the office of the attorney general had requested that the diocese refrain from doing so to avoid interference with the state investigation of clerical abuse throughout Pennsylvania.

With the pending release of an interim grand jury report detailing findings of some 300 priests accused of abuse in six of Pennsylvania’s eight dioceses, including Harrisburg, the diocese decided to move forward with disclosure of the names. According to the Record:

“Gainer said he has learned that some survivors who had confidentiality agreements with the diocese have felt constrained by those agreements. He is waiving those confidentiality agreements. This is expected to be huge for survivors who want to tell their stories.” [....]

 

 

 

Stand in the multitude of ancients that are wise and join thyself from thy heart to their wisdom: that thou mayst hear every discourse of God. 

Ecclesiasticus 6:35

 

 

Homosexual network has infested the entire Church hierarchy to the very top.  The only way to clean house will be a divine fumigation, a cleansing from God which will separate the hirelings from the shepherds.  One thing is certain, McCarrick's network of those who protected him and those he protected will expose a host of perverts that has been covered up for years.  

Revelations of US cardinal sex abuse will force pope’s hand

VATICAN CITY (AP) | Nicole Winfield | July 21, 2018— Revelations that one of the most respected U.S. cardinals allegedly sexually abused McCarrick_Francis.jpegboth boys and adult seminarians have raised questions about who in the Catholic Church hierarchy knew — and what Pope Francis is going to do about it.

If the accusations against Cardinal Theodore McCarrick bear out — including a new case reported Friday involving an 11-year-old boy — will Francis revoke his title as cardinal? Sanction him to a lifetime of penance and prayer? Or even defrock him, the expected sanction if McCarrick were a mere priest?

And will Francis, who has already denounced a “culture of cover-up” in the church, take the investigation all the way to the top, where it will inevitably lead? McCarrick’s alleged sexual misdeeds with adults were reportedly brought to the Vatican’s attention years ago.

The matter is now on the desk of the pope, who has already spent the better part of 2018 dealing with a spiraling child sex abuse, adult gay priest sex and cover-up scandal in Chile that was so vast the entire bishops’ conference offered to resign in May.

And on Friday, Francis accepted the resignation of the Honduran deputy to Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, who is one of Francis’ top advisers. Auxiliary Bishop Juan José Pineda Fasquelle, 57, was accused of sexual misconduct with seminarians and lavish spending on his lovers that was so obvious to Honduras’ poverty-wracked faithful that Maradiaga is now under pressure to reveal what he knew of Pineda’s misdeeds and why he tolerated a sexually active gay bishop in his ranks.

The McCarrick scandal poses the same questions. It was apparently an open secret in some U.S. church circles that “Uncle Ted” invited seminarians to his beach house, and into his bed.

While such an abuse of power may have been quietly tolerated for decades, it doesn’t fly in the #MeToo era. And there has been a deafening silence from McCarrick’s brother bishops about what they might have known and when.

Fraternal solidarity is common among clerics, but some observers point to it as possible evidence of the so-called “gay lobby” or “lavender mafia” at work. These euphemisms — frequently denounced as politically incorrect displays of homophobia in the church — are used by some to describe a perceived protection and promotion network of gay Catholic clergy.

“There is going to be so much clamor for the Holy Father to remove the red hat, to formally un-cardinalize him,” said the Rev. Thomas Berg, vice rector and director of admissions at St. Joseph’s Seminary in Yonkers, the seminary of the archdiocese of New York.

Berg said the church needs to ensure that men with deep-seated same-sex attraction simply don’t enter seminaries — a position recently reinforced by the Vatican at large and by Francis in comments to Chilean and Italian bishops.

Berg said the church also needs to take action when celibacy vows are violated.

“We can’t effectively prevent the sexual abuse of minors or vulnerable adults by clergy while habitual and widespread failures in celibacy are quietly tolerated,” he said.

McCarrick, the 88-year-old retired archbishop of Washington and confidante to three popes, was ultimately undone when the U.S. church announced June 20 that Francis had ordered him removed from public ministry. The sanction was issued pending a full investigation into a “credible” allegation that he fondled a teenager more than 40 years ago in New York City.

The dioceses of Newark and Metuchen, New Jersey, simultaneously revealed that they had received three complaints of misconduct by McCarrick against adults and had settled two of them.

Another alleged victim, the son of a McCarrick family friend identified as James, came forward in a report in The New York Times and subsequently in an interview with The Associated Press. James said he was 11 when McCarrick first exposed himself to him. From there, McCarrick began a sexually abusive relationship that continued for another two decades, James told AP.

“I was the first guy he baptized,” James told AP. “I was his little boy. I was his special kid.”

McCarrick has denied the initial allegation of abuse against a minor and accepted the pope’s decision to remove him from public ministry.

Asked Friday about James, a spokeswoman said McCarrick hadn’t received formal notice of any new allegation but would follow the civil and church processes in place to investigate them.

Even now, Francis could take immediate action to remove McCarrick from the College of Cardinals, said Kurt Martens, a canon lawyer at the Catholic University of America.

He recalled the case of the late Scottish Cardinal Keith O’Brien, who recused himself from the 2013 conclave that elected Francis pope after unidentified priests alleged in newspapers that he engaged in sexual misconduct. In 2015, after a Vatican investigation, Francis accepted O’Brien’s resignation after he relinquished the rights and privileges of being a cardinal.

O’Brien was, however, allowed to retain the cardinal’s title and he died a member of the college.

“I think that is totally unsatisfactory,” Martens said, noting that just as the pope can grant the title of cardinal, he can also take it away. “O’Brien resigned, the pope accepted it. Isn’t that the world upside down that someone picks his own penalty?”

O’Brien was never accused of sexually abusing a minor, however, as McCarrick now stands.

The stiffest punishment that an ordinary priest would face if such an accusation is proven would be dismissal from the clerical state, or laicization.

The Vatican rarely if ever, however, imposes such a penalty on elderly prelates. It also is loath to do so for bishops, because theologically speaking, defrocked bishops can still validly ordain priests and bishops.

Not even the serial rapist Rev. Marcial Maciel was defrocked after the Vatican finally convicted him of abusing Legion of Christ seminarians. Maciel was sentenced to a lifetime of penance and prayer — the likely canonical sanction for McCarrick if he is found guilty of abusing a minor in a church trial.

 

 

The Ties that B(l)ind

American_Conservative.jpgMcCarrick has long been said to be close to Francis. As I wrote the other day, McCarrick's longtime friend and protege, Bishop Kevin Farrell, was made a cardinal by Francis and made head of the Vatican's office in charge of family policy for the worldwide church. Farrell has endorsed Father James Martin's book advocating affirmation of LGBTs in the Catholic Church, and is overseeing next month's world family meeting in Dublin, where Father Martin will give a keynote speech. ..... And what about Cardinal Tobin? As I wrote the other day, McCarrick's influence with Francis is believed to have been behind the swift rise of Archbishop Joseph Tobin on (sic) Indianapolis, who was created a cardinal by Francis, then moved to Newark, McCarrick's old see..... Farrell, Tobin, and one more big one. Cupich. McCarrick is a main reason Cupich is in Chicago. The last three American cardinals all owe something to the patronage or intervention of McCarrick.

Rod Dreher, The American Conservative

 

Rome, under Novus Ordo Saint JPII, was warned about McCarrick long ago!

Back then (in 2000), I received a tip from a priest who had gone on his own dime to Rome, along with a group of prominent US Catholic laymen, to meet with an official for the Roman Curial congregation that names bishops. It had been rumored at the time that Theodore McCarrick, the Archbishop of Newark, was going to be moved to Washington, DC, and to be made a cardinal. This group traveled to Rome to warn the Vatican that McCarrick was a sexual harrasser of seminarians. The story this priest shared with me was that McCarrick had a habit of compelling seminarians to share his bed for cuddling. These allegations did not involve sexual molestation, but were clearly about unwanted sexual harassment. To refuse the archbishop’s bedtime entreaties would be to risk your future as a priest, I was told.

Rome was informed by these laymen — whose number included professionally distinguished Catholics in a position to understand the kind of harm this would cause –that McCarrick was sexually exploiting these seminarians, but it did no good. McCarrick received his appointment to the Washington archdiocese in 2000.

Rod Dreher, The American Conservative

 

 

“It will never be known what acts of cowardice have been motivated by the fear of not looking sufficiently progressive.”

Charles Péguy, French poet and Catholic apologist

 

 

Fr. Enrique Rueda, who helped in the formation of our Mission, wrote about the Homosexual Network and its infiltration of the Catholic Church back in 1982.  That was 36 years ago and he was persecuted by the Homosexual Network in the Church for the rest of his life. Don't expect his canonization under Pope Francis/Bergoglio.

Veteran Catholic Journalist: All Bishops Involved in Sex Abuse Scandal Must Resign

OnePeterFive | Maike Hickson | July 17, 2018

OnePeterFive.jpgChristopher Manion, a veteran journalist and political analyst, makes the striking call that all U.S. bishops should resign who knew about the ongoing abuse crisis within the U.S. hierarchy for years and yet did not intervene. He also now reveals some painful aspects of the role of Rome in this regard – namely, the lame response from Pope John Paul II to this crisis.

Writing on 30 June for the Catholic newspaper The Wanderer, Dr. Manion picks up on the McCarrick scandal and the fact that the gravely immoral behavior of this prelate had been known to many in the U.S. hierarchy for many years. As an example, he refers to the work of Paul Likoudis, the now deceased courageous editor of The Wanderer, who was among the first to reveal the homosexual network within the U.S. episcopacy. (Here we might also remember Father Enrique Rueda’s early 1982 book on the homosexual network in the Church.) In a cutting tone, Manion comments, as follows:

Long before The Boston Globe published its “exposé” in early 2002, Paul reported on one instance after another of abuse and cover-up in chanceries nationwide. For his yeoman efforts, he was ridiculed, hectored, threatened, bullied, and, above all, studiously ignored whenever possible by one guilty bishop after another.

When, in 2002, the crisis became better known, says this journalist, the U.S. bishops claimed to have it “under control.” “‘It’s over,’ Auxiliary Bishop (now Vatican Cardinal) Kevin Farrell told the Knights of Malta in February 2002.”

In one of the most pertinent parts of his article, Manion speaks about the role of Rome (emphasis added):

That April [of 2002], USCCB officials told the Vatican not to worry. Our bishops could handle the situation themselves, they insisted. Days later, Pope John Paul summoned every American cardinal to the Vatican. He could have demanded serious changes, but he didn’t. Nor did he condemn the profound malfeasance of America’s hierarchy. Instead, he accepted the plaintive excuses that they had been repeating for years. They had been misled by “clinical experts” who thought that homosexual child rape was an illness, not a crime. It wasn’t their fault.

The cardinals then went home, Manion adds, promising “to do better.” Cardinal Mahoney went home “to spend a billion dollars of the faithful’s money to cover up for abuse and evading prosecution (he even insisted that priests’ personnel files were protected by the secrecy of the confessional!).” This comment alone revealed how ineffective the papal words were. “Not one of the American prelates offered his resignation. Nor did any demand the resignation of any of their colleagues in the bishops’ conference.”

Before continuing to present Manion’s article, we should consider this summary of the handling of the sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church in America as a scandal in itself. It shows the deep failure of the whole Church’s hierarchy, beginning at the top, to punish and eradicate abusers from the ranks of the clergy. It is heart-rending, especially considering the damage to so many souls. (In the new Austrian scandal, there is one woman who was sexually harassed by a priest. He is still active, even though he left his parish. She has now left the Faith, blaming the priest and his responsible bishop, Alois Schwarz.)

Continuing with Manion’s history of the abuse scandal in the U.S., in June of 2002, when meeting in Dallas, the U.S. bishops were confronted with an article that showed that half of them had been involved in the cover-up of abuse cases. “Thus, when they issued their ‘Protection’ charter,” Manion says, “they exempted themselves on national TV and went home to circle the wagons. Not one [of them] quit (Cardinal Law, now deceased, fled to Rome).” One wonders why Cardinal Law was even received in Rome.

Concerning Rome, Manion reveals the painful fact that McCarrick received from Pope John Paul II the red hat, in spite of the fact that by then, there was sufficient information sent to Rome against such a decision. Manion writes:

Another prelate attending the meetings in Rome and Dallas 2002 was Washington Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. In his previous posts in Newark and Metuchen, he had already privately settled two lawsuits involving his sexual assaults on adult males. Rod Dreher reports that a group of Catholics had gone [in 2000] to Rome to warn the Pope about McCarrick – to no avail: Pope John Paul appointed him archbishop of Washington, D.C., in 2000, and named him a cardinal the following year.

It is after this painful description of sustained unworthy conduct, in light of a history of many cover-ups, that Manion calls for the resignation of every single bishop who was somehow involved in it. After first quoting a Jesuit who explains that “[b]ishops do not fraternally correct one another, because they do not want to be fraternally corrected,” he asks, “So what is to be done?”

Now is the time. The laity has to set those wagons on fire. The bishops have followed Ben Franklin’s adage – “either we hang together, or we hang separately.”

Enough! Every bishop who covered up for McCarrick and other abusers so they could all stay in power has to quit – right now. Their credibility is shredded – why do they stay?

In light of these strong and much needed words from a veteran journalist who has witnessed the last decades of episcopal failure with regard to the abuse crisis, it is noteworthy that now one of the victims of Cardinal McCarrick speaks up in public, for the New York Times. In that article, the New York Times refers to Boniface Ramsey as another source – a priest who now reveals that he had, early on in 2000, warned Rome about McCarrick. With this revelation, we shall end this piercing report:

At least one priest warned the Vatican against the appointment [of McCarrick]. The Rev. Boniface Ramsey said that when he was on the faculty at the Immaculate Conception Seminary at Seton Hall University in New Jersey from 1986 to 1996, he was told by seminarians about Archbishop McCarrick’s sexual abuse at the beach house. When Archbishop McCarrick was appointed to Washington, Father Ramsey spoke by phone with the pope’s representative in the nation’s capital, Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo, the papal nuncio, and at his encouragement sent a letter to the Vatican about Archbishop McCarrick’s history. Father Ramsey, now a priest in New York City, said he never got a response.

Update: In light of the serious effects this McCarrick case has had on many Catholic faithful in the U.S., we shall quote here the witness of Bart Aslin, a former priest who left the priesthood because of this scandal:

“The things I witnessed in the seminary and as a priest ultimately led me to leave the priesthood after five years. It was the hypocrisy of McCarrick and my fellow (gay) priests that led me to leave. In some ways, I was forced out because I did not fit the mold of a Newark diocesan priest. It was difficult enough to live a celibate life, but knowing that my ‘brothers in Christ’ were not following the Church’s teachings caused me great strife and spiritual pain. […]

“I conclude by saying that it pains me that the Church took over 30 years to remove this reprehensible man. They knew all about his actions and turned a blind eye. I observe each Sunday how few young people and families attend Mass. Is there no wonder? The sin and hypocrisy of its servants has turned off and away its people. How the Lord must weep!”

 

 

“Anyone can be born a pedophile”, The Homosexual Network wants to normalize all sexual perversion. They want your children! The admission fee for a TED talk is $6,000.00.  Thats the price liberals pay to have their groupthink validated.

TEDx speaker: ‘Pedophilia is an unchangeable sexual orientation,’ ‘anyone’ could be born that way

LifeSiteNews | WÜRTZBURG, Germany | July 18, 2018 – A German medical student sparked online backlash after she was filmed telling an audience that “pedophilia is an unchangeable sexual orientation, just like… heterosexuality.”

Mirjam Heine gave a lecture in defense of pedophiles during the “independently organized” TEDx Talk at the University of Würtzberg in Germany in May. The title given to Heine’s talk was “Why our perception of pedophilia has to change.”

Introducing her theme with the “story” of “Jonas,” a 19-year-old pedophile who studies law and plays soccer, she asked her listeners to put aside their revulsion for pedophiles.

“Anyone could be born a pedophile,” she told them.

According to the medical student, pedophilia is just another “unchangeable sexual orientation just like, for example, heterosexuality.” Heine asked her audience to differentiate between sexual attraction to children, which she believes should be accepted and tolerated as involuntary “feelings,” and child sexual abuse, which she underscored was always wrong.

“The difference between pedophilia and other sexual orientations is that living out this sexual orientation will end in a disaster,” she said.

Meanwhile, Heine made the surprising assertion that “scientific studies” show that only 20 to 30 percent of all child molesters are pedophiles.

“The vast majority of perpetrators are not pedophiles but are sexually interested in adults,” she stated. Her example was a man who sexually abuses his step-daughter because he’s angry at, or jealous of, her mother.

At times Heine’s ideas were confused. She said heterosexuality and pedophilia were both orientations, while saying pedophilia can be “heterosexual,” “homosexual,” and “bi-sexual.” She intimated that a non-pedophile could sexually abuse a child, but also included within her definition of pedophiles people attracted, to a lesser extent, to adults. And although she seems to think people are “born” pedophiles, she also said pedophilia has biological, social, and psychological factors.  

For Heine, pedophilia is not something that someone actually does but something that someone would like to do, as a sexual preference that they would “live out freely,” if only it weren’t contrary to leading “an upright life.”

Heine stressed that social isolation of pedophiles is an important factor in how likely they are to sexually assault children. But to her, “social isolation” didn’t mean being without parents or friends – it meant the pedophile’s reluctance to tell them about his sexual inclinations.

“For example, they can’t tell their children they can’t go to the beach because children in swimsuits may be there as well,” Heine said. “They can never be completely frank with someone else.”

Openness about one’s sexual feelings is crucial to Heine. She believes that a pedophile’s ability to be “frank” and have his “orientation” acknowledged, tolerated, and accepted is key to preventing child sexual assault.

“We shouldn’t increase the sufferings of pedophiles by excluding them, by blaming and mocking them,” Heine said. “By doing that, WE increase their isolation and WE increase the chance of child sexual abuse.”  

Central to Heine’s argument is that pedophiles are not to blame for their feelings and thoughts, only for their actions. She does not, however, address the topic of deliberate fantasizing or the use of pornography. And, at the same time, while arguing that pedophiles cannot change their “feelings,” she encouraged her audience to change their own feelings of revulsion for pedophiles.

“Just like pedophiles, we are not responsible for our feelings,” she said. “We do not choose them...but it is our responsibility to...overcome our negative feelings about pedophiles and to treat them with the same respect we treat other people with.”

According to Breitbart, once it was posted to YouTube, Heine’s lecture resulted in a massive online backlash. In response, the organizers of the independent TEDx event removed the video, and the founding TED Talks media organization has been trying to remove “illegal copies” from the internet. Representatives for TED Talks made a statement defending the censorship.  

“After reviewing the talk, we believe it cites research in ways that are open to serious misinterpretation. This led some viewers to interpret the talk as an argument in favor of an illegal and harmful practice,” they wrote.

TED Talks continued, “Furthermore, after contacting the organizer to understand why it had been taken down, we learned that the speaker herself requested it be removed from the internet because she had serious concerns about her own safety in its wake.”

“Our policy is and always has been to remove speakers’ talks when they request we do so. That is why we support this TEDx organizer’s decision to respect this speaker’s wishes and keep the talk offline.”

 

The springs of action are to be found in belief, and conduct ultimately rests upon conviction.

St. Francis of Assisi

 

There are many who if they commit sin or suffer wrong often blame their enemy or their neighbor. But this is not right, for each one has his enemy in his power, - to wit, the body by which he sins. Wherefore blessed is that servant who always holds captive the enemy thus given into his power and wisely guards himself from it, for so long as he acts thus no other enemy visible or invisible can do him harm. 

St. Francis of Assisi, on mortification

 

How much interior patience and humility a servant of God may have cannot be known so long as he is contented. But when the time comes that those who ought to please him go against him, as much patience and humility as he then shows, so much has he and no more. 

St. Francis, on patience

 

And let no man be bound by obedience to obey any one in that where sin or offence is committed. 

St. Francis of Assisi, Letter to all the Faithful

 

 

cath-image17.gif

 

 

 

Pius XII - the man responsible for planting the seed of liturgical destruction!

Fr. Annibale Bugnini had been making clandestine visits to the Centre de Pastorale Liturgique (CPL), a progressivist conference centre for liturgical reform which organized national weeks for priests.
Inaugurated in Paris in 1943 on the private initiative of two Dominican priests under the presidency of Fr. Lambert Beauduin, it was a magnet for all who considered themselves in the vanguard of the Liturgical Movement. It would play host to some of the most famous names who influenced the direction of Vatican II: Frs. Beauduin, Guardini, Congar, Chenu, Daniélou, Gy, von Balthasar, de Lubac, Boyer, Gelineau etc.

It could, therefore, be considered as the confluence of all the forces of Progressivism, which saved and re-established Modernism condemned by Pope Pius X in Pascendi.
According to its co-founder and director, Fr. Pie Duployé, OP, Bugnini had requested a “discreet” invitation to attend a CPL study week held near Chartres in September 1946.

Much more was involved here than the issue of secrecy. The person whose heart beat as one with the interests of the reformers would return to Rome to be placed by an unsuspecting (?) Pope (Pius XII) in charge of his Commission for the General Reform of the Liturgy.
But someone in the Roman Curia did know about the CPL – Msgr. Giovanni Battista Montini, the acting Secretary of State and future Paul VI – who sent a telegram to the CPL dated January 3, 1947. It purported to come from the Pope with an apostolic blessing. If, in Bugnini’s estimation, the Roman authorities were to be kept in the dark about the CPL so as not to compromise its activities, a mystery remains. Was the telegram issued under false pretences, or did Pius XII really know and approve of the CPL? [.....]

This agenda (for liturgical reform) was set out as early as 1949 in the Ephemerides Liturgicae, a leading Roman review on liturgical studies of which Fr. Annabale Bugnini was Editor from 1944 to 1965.
First, Bugnini denigrated the traditional liturgy as a dilapidated building (“un vecchio edificio”), which should be condemned because it was in danger of falling to pieces (“sgretolarsi”) and, therefore, beyond repair. Then, he criticized it for its alleged “deficiencies, incongruities and difficulties,” which rendered it spiritually “sterile” and would prevent it appealing to modern sensibilities.
It is difficult to understand how, in the same year that he published this anti-Catholic diatribe, he was made a Professor of Liturgy in Rome’s Propaganda Fide (Propagation of the Faith) University. His solution was to return to the simplicity of early Christian liturgies and jettison all subsequent developments, especially traditional devotions.
These ideas expressed in 1949 would form the foundational principles of Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium. For all practical purposes, the Roman Rite was dead in the water many years before it was officially buried by Paul VI.

Dr. Carol Byrne, How Bugnini Grew Up under Pius XII

 

 

 Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity

“Muslims adore the one God, living and subsisting in himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men.” 

Vatican II, Nostra Aetate 

 

“Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry or of Islamism, and refuse not to draw them all into the light and Kingdom of God.” 

Act of Consecration to the Sacred Heart before Vatican II

 

 

Wisdom is only possible for those who hold DOGMA as the Rule of Faith!

Besides, every dogma of faith is to the Catholic cultivated mind not only a new increase of knowledge, but also an incontrovertible principle from which it is able to draw conclusions and derive other truths. They present an endless field for investigation so that the beloved Apostle St. John could write at the end of his Gospel, without fear of exaggeration: “But there are also many other things which Jesus did: which if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.”

The Catholic Church, by enforcing firm belief in her dogmas—which are not her inventions, but were given by Jesus Christ—places them as a bar before the human mind to prevent it from going astray and to attach it to the truth; but it does not prevent the mind from exercising its functions when it has secured the treasure of divine truth, and a “scribe thus instructed in the kingdom of heaven is truly like a man that is a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old.” He may bring forth new illustrations, new arguments and proofs; he may show now applications of the same truths, according to times and circumstances; he may show new links which connect the mysteries of religion with each other or with the natural sciences as there can be no discord between the true faith and true science; God, being the author of both, cannot contradict Himself and teach something by revelation as true which He teaches by the true light of reason as false. In all these cases the householder “brings forth from his treasure now things and old.” They are new inasmuch as they are the result of new investigations; and old because they are contained in the old articles of faith and doctrine as legitimate deductions from their old principles.

Fr. Joseph Prachensky, S.J., The Church of Parables and True Spouse of the Suffering Saviour, on the Parable of the Scribe

 

 

Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity

Pope Francis in Evangelii Gaudium Smears Faithful Catholics as "Neo-pelagians":

Catholics faithful in keeping God's moral law and believing His revealed truth are "self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism [who] observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style [characterized by a] narcissistic and authoritarian elitism [which is a]

manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity."

 

94. This worldliness can be fuelled in two deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of gnosticism, a purely subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas and bits of information which are meant to console and enlighten, but which ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.

Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium

 

          While in the same document he has this to say about the possibility of salvation for "Non-Christinas:

 

254. Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”.

Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, this teaching of Pope Franics references the teaching of the International Theological Commission.

 

          "By God's gracious initiative" is pure invention. God has never revealed this fable. This is Pelagianism by definition. This is what a Pelagian heretic affirms that salvation is possible through being "faithful to their own consciences." Catholic dogmas, formal objects of divine and Catholic faith, affirm that supernatural faith, the sacraments, membership in the Church, and subjection to the Roman Pontiff are necessary as necessities of means to obtain eternal salvation. Pope Francis is a Pelagian heretic. So where is his source material for this error?  He cites as his authority the International Theological Commission which teaches:

 

10. Exclusivist ecclesiocentrism—the fruit of a specific theological system or of a mistaken understanding of the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus—is no longer defended by Catholic theologians after the clear statements of Pius XII and Vatican II the possibility of salvation for those who do not belong visibly to the Church (cf, e.g., Vatican II, LG 16; GS 22).

Christocentrism accepts that salvation may occur in religions, but it denies them any autonomy in salvation on account of the uniqueness and universality of the salvation that comes from Jesus Christ. This position is undoubtedly the one most commonly held by Catholic theologians, even though there are differences among them.

International Theological Commission, Christianity and the World Religions, 1997

 

          The is the fundamental doctrine of Neo-Modernism that holds that Dogmas need not be taken in a literal sense because they are always undergoing evolutionary development in an effort to achieve a closer approximation of truth. Catholics believe, as St. Pope Pius X said, dogmas are "truths fallen from heaven." Pope Pius XII never denied the dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.  Those who claim he did are simply liars. Vatican II on the other hand did, and Vatican II cites as its authority for the denial of the dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, the heretical 1949 Holy Office Letter that teaches that the one and only thing necessary for salvation is the 'desire to do the will of a god who rewards and punishes'. This can be known by natural philosophy and is simply a necessary presupposition to receiving the Gospel message. The 1949 Holy Office Letter and Vatican II are teaching Pelagianism.  The very error that Pope Francis attributes to faithful Catholics who believe the revealed truths of our faith and keep our immemorial traditions. Is it any wonder that Pope Francis who denies the necessity of faith, the sacraments, membership in the Church, and submission to the Roman Pontiff as necessary for salvation as necessities of means would then thoroughly corrupt the definition of "genuine evangelization"?

 

Catholics who "observe certain rules (like keeping the Ten Commandments or believing Catholic dogma) or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style (the "received and approved rites customarily used in the solemn administration of the sacraments" Trent)" are guilty of "self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism... narcissistic and authoritarian elitism [that is a] manifestation of an anthropocentric immanentism...  [whereby, it is] impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity."

Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium

 

          What is "Genuine evangelization"? Pope Francis said: "Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense. We need to get to know each other, listen to each other and improve our knowledge of the world around us. ..... I believe I have already said that our goal is not to proselytize but to listen to needs, desires and disappointments, despair, hope" (Interview with Italian journalist and atheist Eugenio Scalfari). He also said in answer to a question from a Lutheran girl, "It is not licit that you convince them of your faith; proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path." On another occasion he said, "Proselytism among Christians, therefore, in itself, is a grave sin." 

          How is this possible? Proselytism means to seek converts. A "proselyte" is a convert. It was the Great Commission given by Jesus Christ to His Church: "Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned." (Mark 16:15-16) The goal of "preaching" is to bring other to "believe" the revealed truth and become members of the Church through "baptism" so that they may become a "proselyte," like one of the first deacons of the Church, Nicolas in Acts 6:5, and be "saved."

          "Genuine evangelization" is the act of proselytism and the fruit of evangelization is proselytes. "By their fruit you shall know them." In South America alone there have been more than 40 million Catholics lost to the faith since Vatican II. This is the fruit of the "new evangelization" of Pope Francis which does not seek converts at all because he sees no reason to convert. 

          So who in end is "self-absorbed promethean neo-pelagian"? Prometheus was eternally punished for his hubris of defying the gods while Pope Francis does the same thing by "intransigently" overturning God's revealed truth.  His heresy is the fruit of his own "narcissistic and authoritarian elitism" to believe that he is better than God.  He proposes an "adulterated form of Christianity" which explains why he promotes Catholic divorce.  Heretics always permit divorce because marriage is the metaphor used by God to describe His relationship to His Church and to each of His faithful.  The heretic cannot stand the integrity of the metaphor and always permits divorce.  This is the unmistakable sign that Pope Francis is a heretic.

 

 

 

Why are Eastern Europeans hostile to Islam? Look at history

American Thinker | July 18, 2018 – Why have several Eastern European nations been so adamant against taking in Muslim migrants? Most American_Thinker.jpgrecently, when Polish lawmaker Dominik Tarczyński was asked earlier this month how many "refugees" Poland has taken in, he flatly responded: "Zero." 

When the British interviewer, whose nation has taken in millions of Muslim migrants, scoffed, "And you're proud of that?," he said: "We will not receive even one Muslim, because this is what we promised [to voters] ... this is why our government was elected; this is why Poland is so safe, this is why we have not had even one terror attack."

Considering that "thousands of Catholics formed a human chain along the borders of Poland" late last year "to pray for peace and 'against the Islamisation of Europe,'" it is clear that the Polish government is acting on behalf of the people.

What accounts for this staunchly anti-Islamic response? The answer rests in history. Unlike most Western European nations, which, thanks to their geographical proximity, have for centuries been out of the reach of – and thus have forgotten all about – Islam, Eastern Europeans are intimately acquainted with it. 

Indeed, an event that occurred this week in history sheds much light on the current situation. On July 14, 1683, the largest Islamic army ever to invade European territory – which is saying much, considering the thousands of invasions preceding it since the eighth century – came and surrounded Vienna, the heart of the Holy Roman Empire and de facto nemesis of Islam.

Some 200,000 Muslim combatants, under the leadership of the Ottomans – the one state in nearly fourteen centuries of Islamic history most dedicated to and founded on the principles of jihad – invaded under the same rationale that so-called "radical" groups, such as the Islamic State, cite to justify their jihad on "infidels." Or, to quote the leader of the Muslim expedition, Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa, because Vienna was perceived as the head of the infidel snake, it needed to be laid low so that "all the Christians would obey the Ottomans." 

This was no idle boast; sources describe Mustafa as "fanatically anti-Christian." After capturing a Polish town in 1674, he ordered all the Christian prisoners to be skinned alive and their stuffed hides sent as trophies to Ottoman Sultan Muhammad IV. 

Such supremacist hate was standard and on display during the elaborate pre-jihad ceremony presaging the siege of Vienna. Then, the sultan, "desiring him [Mustafa] to fight generously for the Mahometan faith," to quote a contemporary European, placed "the standard of the Prophet ... into his hands for the extirpation of infidels, and the increase of Muslemen."

Once the massive Muslim army reached and surrounded the walls of Vienna on July 14, Mustafa followed protocol. In 628, his prophet Muhammad had sent an ultimatum to Emperor Heraclius: aslam taslam, "submit [to Islam] and have peace." Heraclius rejected the summons; jihad was declared against Christendom (as enshrined in Koran 9:29); and in a few decades, two thirds of the then-Christian world – including Spain, all of North Africa, Egypt, and Greater Syria – were conquered. 

Now, over a thousand years later, the same ultimatum of submission to Islam or death had reached the heart of Europe. Although the Viennese commander did not bother to respond to the summons, graffiti inside the city – including "Muhammad, you dog, go home!" – seems to capture its mood.

So it would be war. On the next day, Mustafa unleashed all Hell against the city's walls, and for two months, the holed up and vastly outnumbered Viennese suffered plague, dysentery, starvation, and many casualties – including women and children – in the name of jihad.

Then, on September 12, when the city had reached its final extremity, and the Muslims were about to burst through, Vienna's prayers were answered. As an anonymous Englishman explained:

After a siege of sixty days, accompanied with a thousand difficulties, sicknesses, want of provisions, and great effusion of blood, after a million of cannon and musquet shot, bombs, granadoes, and all sorts of fireworks, which has changed the face of the fairest and most flourishing city in the world, disfigured and ruined [it] ... heaven favorably heard the prayers and tears of a cast down and mournful people.

The formidable king of Poland, John Sobieski, had finally come at the head of 65,000 heavily armored Poles, Austrians, and Germans – all hot to avenge the beleaguered city. Arguing that "it is not a city alone that we have to save, but the whole of Christianity, of which the city of Vienna is the bulwark," Sobieski led a thunderous cavalry charge – history's largest – against and totally routed the Muslim besiegers. (See Sword and Scimitar for a detailed recounting of this pivotal battle.)

Although a spectacular victory, the aftermath was gory: before fleeing, the Muslims ritually slaughtered some 30,000 Christian captives collected during their march to Vienna, raping the women beforehand. On entering the relieved city, the liberators encountered piles of corpses, sewage, and rubble everywhere.

It is this history of Islamic aggression – beginning in the fourteenth century, when Muslims first established a foothold in southeastern Europe (Thrace), and into the twentieth century when the Ottoman sultanate finally collapsed – that informs Eastern views on Islam. 

As one Pole, echoing the words of Sobieski, said during last year's human chain demonstration,  "a religious war between Christianity and Islam is once again underway in Europe, just like in the past." 

Whereas Western nations cite lack of integration, economic disparities, and grievances to explain away the exponential growth of terrorism, violence, and rapes that come with living alongside large Muslim populations, Eastern nations see only a continuity of hostility.

 

 

 

Homosexual Heresy - The Great Vatican Silence

·     “We must clearly, explicitly and reservedly say: yes, there is a strong homosexual underground in the Church ... such circles in the Church strongly oppose the truth, morality and Revelation, cooperate with enemies of the Church [and] incite revolt against Peter of our times.

·     “It is for [his] accuracy of opinion that he is so vehemently opposed, or even hated by some in the Church, especially by members of the homolobby which represents the very center of internal opposition against the Pope.”

·     “If homolobbyists are allowed to act freely, [in Poland] in a dozen or so years they may destroy entire congregations and dioceses — like in the USA, where priestly vocation is more and more now called a gay profession.”

·     “The global network of the homolobbies and homomafias must be counterbalanced by a network of honest people. An excellent tool that can be used here is the Internet, which makes it possible to create a global community of people concerned about the fate of the Church, who have resolved to oppose homoideology and homoheresy. The more we know, the more we can do.”

·     “This is about the Church’s to be or not to be. If homolobbyists are allowed to act freely, in a dozen or so years they may destroy entire congregations and dioceses – like in the USA, where the priestly vocation is more and more now called a gay profession (particularly with reference to American Jesuits), or like in Ireland, where men are hesitant about joining the emptying seminaries for fear of being suspected of suffering from some disorders.”

·     “The Church does not generate homosexuality, but falls victim to dishonest men with homosexual tendencies, who take advantage of its structures to follow their lowest instincts. Active homosexual priests are masters of camouflage. They are often exposed by accident. ... The real threat to the Church are cynical homosexual priests who take advantage of their functions on their own behalf, sometimes in an extraordinarily devious way. Such situations cause great suffering to the Church, the priestly community, the superiors. The problem is indeed a very difficult one.” F. Józef Augustyn

Fr. Dariusz Oko, Ph.D., WITH THE POPE AGAINST THE HOMOHERESIES

 

 

Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, formal archbishop of Washington, removed from ministry after Archdiocese of New York found that "the allegations credible and substantiated" that he had sexually abused teenage boys. Cardinal McCarrick was replaced in the Archdiocese of Washington by the equally homosexual friendly cleric, Cardinal Donald William Wuerl. 

John Vennari: According to a news report, a Catholic attorney in Florida recently said, “The good priests who keep in contact with me say that 70 percent of the U.S. bishops are homosexual.” That statement would have shocked many Catholics, but I am sure it did not shock you.

Randy Engel: No. The existence of a large and dominant homosexual contingent in the American hierarchy and within the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (formerly the National Conference of Catholic Bishops/United States Catholic Conference) in Washington, D.C. is one of the dominant themes of my book.
The rise of this phenomenon, that is, the emergence of a large number of homosexual cardinals and bishops in AmChurch (American Church), has been a gradual process covering more than 100 years and closely parallels the rise of the secular Homosexual Movement in the United States and abroad. It is the presence of the Homosexual Collective within Am-Church’s hierarchy that has made possible the wholesale homosexual colonization of many dioceses in the United States, and the subsequent cover-up of clerical sexual abuse cases by the American hierarchy with the co-operation of the Holy See. When shepherds turn into wolves, not only are seminarians, priests and religious under their care at risk, but their flock as well.

John Vennari: Is there a difference between the Homosexual Collective within the Church and the secular Homosexual Collective?

Randy Engel: Generally speaking, no. Catholic homosexual clergy and religious toe the secular party line. They use the same language, promote the same rhetoric and advance the same political agenda. This becomes startling clear in the chapter devoted to the so-called Catholic pro-homosexual organization New Ways Ministry.
I think there are many Catholics who think that a self declared “gay” bishop, priest or religious doesn’t behave like other homosexuals, that is, he’s not into sodomy, porn, drugs, or sexual seduction, etc., but this is just wishful thinking. The odds are that he is.

Catholic Family News, excerpt of interview of Mrs. Randy Engel, author of The Rite of Sodomy, Homosexuality, Satanism, and the Roman Catholic Church, interview published in April 2011

 

 

The one and only hope for Europe is to return to the Faith that formed her!

I desire you to remember that we are Europe; we are a great people.  The faith is not an accident among us, nor an imposition, nor a garment; it is bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh: it is a philosophy made by and making ourselves.  We have adorned, explained, enlarged it; we have given it visible form.  This is the service we Europeans have done to God.  In return He has made us Christians.  Hilaire Belloc, Open Letter on the Decay of Faith, 1906

 

Worth recalling how the Catholic universities in the U.S. were destroyed.  This was orchestrated by the president of Notre Dame University, Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, who divorced Catholic education from Catholic doctrine and Catholic morality at the Land O’Lakes Conference in 1967.  These schools have not simply been secularized but have in fact become anti-Catholic.  A Catholic student is much more likely to keep his faith in a secular university than in a “Catholic” university.  This revolution by Hesburgh was unopposed by the Catholic hierarchy!

50 years later, Catholic colleges still reeling from statement rejecting Church authority

LifeSiteNews | DENVER, Colorado | July 26, 2017– On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Land O’Lakes statement on Catholic education, Lincoln Bishop James Conley likened the controversial declaration to the ultimate rejection of God.

Bishop Conley described the statement as the “the ‘non serviam’ moment of many of America’s Catholic universities.”

Non serviam,” a Latin phrase for “I shall not serve,” is typically attributed to Lucifer’s Old Testament words expressing his rejection of serving God. The prophet Jeremiah also used it to describe the Hebrew people’s disobedience to God.

“The Land O’Lakes statement proposed to redefine the mission of the Catholic university,” Bishop Conley said. “It rejected the authority of the Church, and of her doctrinal teaching.”

“It rejected the idea that faith and reason work best in communion with one another,” he continued. “It prioritized the standards and culture of secular universities over the authentic mission of Catholic education. It was a statement of self-importance, and self-assertion.”

This self-importance “defies an authentically Catholic view of education,” he said.

The statement “declared that Catholic universities would become independent from the hierarchy of the Church, from any obligation to orthodoxy, and from the authentic spirituality of the Church,” the bishop went on to say.

Speaking July 5 to teachers and principals at the Regional Catholic Classical Schools Conference at the Institute for Catholic Liberal Education in Denver, Bishop Conley said, “Fifty years ago, a ‘declaration of independence’ in Catholic education transformed the Church.”

The document came from some 26 presidents and administrators from 10 institutions who convened at a retreat center in Land O’Lakes, Wisconsin, for the North American summit for the International Federation of Catholic Universities. Holy Cross Father Theodore Hesburgh, Notre Dame’s president and head of the federation at the time, had summoned the attendees.

The meeting’s purpose was to establish a vision for Catholic higher education in the wake of Vatican II. The “Statement on the Nature of the Contemporary Catholic University” was signed July 23, 1967.

It is considered by many to have devastated Catholic education because of the ensuing loss of Catholic identity in Catholic colleges and universities. Bishop Conley spoke about the ripple effects on the U.S. church.

“Land O’Lakes sought to make many parts of the Catholic university indistinguishable from secular counterparts,” Bishop Conley said. “And that has impacted the entire Church in the United States.”

In the 50 years since the statement, he said, secularization in Catholic universities has caused secularization in many Catholic elementary and high schools. There are textbooks that don’t reflect Catholic perspectives and, he said, “teachers who have, regrettably, not been trained to think or teach from the heart and wisdom of the Church.”

“An entire generation of bishops, priests, religious, and lay Catholics — myself included — were formed in the wake of Land O’Lakes,” stated Bishop Conley. “And we formed another generation, which now forms another, all of us doing the best we can, but regrettably, without being exposed to much of truth, goodness, and beauty of the Church’s tradition.” […..]

                                               

 

God, who is the perfect and infinite intelligence—that is, the infinite and perfect reason—created man to His own likeness, and gave him a reasonable intelligence, like His own. As the face in the mirror answers to the face of the beholder, so the intelligence of man answers to the intelligence of God. It is His own likeness. What, then, is the revelation of faith, but the illumination of the Divine reason poured out upon the reason of man? The revelation of faith is no discovery which the reason of man has made for himself by induction, or by deduction, or by analysis, or by synthesis, or by logical process, or by experimental chemistry. The revelation of faith is a discovery of itself by the Divine Reason, the unveiling of the Divine Intelligence, and the illumination flowing from it cast upon the intelligence of man; and if so, I would ask, how can there be variance or discord? How can the illumination of the faith diminish the stature of the human reason? How can its rights be interfered with? How can its prerogatives be violated? Is not the truth the very reverse of all this? Is it not the fact that the human reason is perfected and elevated above itself by the illumination of faith?

Cardinal Edward Henry Manning, The Revolt of the Intellect Against God

 

SSPX leadership has betrayed every Catholic faithful to Tradition!

Regina Einig:  Do you personally trust the Holy Father Pope Francis?

Bishop Fellay: We have a very good relationship. If we let him know that we are in Rome, the door is open to him. He is always helping us on a smaller scale. For example, he told us, "I have problems when I do something good for you. I help Protestants and Anglicans - why can not I help the Catholics? "Some want to prevent the agreement. We are a disruptive factor in the church. The Pope stands in between.

(He smiles and shows a handwritten, French-written letter from the Holy Father to him beginning with the address Cher frere, cher fils - dear brother, dear son).

Bp Fellay interviewed by Regina Einig, German newspaper “Die Tagespost” on June 28, 2018

 

 

"We see, then, what dogma means. The Holy Catholic Church always has been and always must be dogmatic."

Now our Divine Lord, speaking to the woman of Samaria, said, ‘You adore that which you know not;’ because they were ‘an idolatrous people, of mixed race, partly of Israel, partly of the nations brought and planted in a portion of the Promised Land. They had intermarried with the people of Israel, they had received the books of the Pentateuch, and they had a sort of fragmentary knowledge of the old revelation; but they did not rightly know the True God; and so much as they did know of the True God, they did not know truly. Therefore they could not worship Him ‘in spirit and in truth.’ For this cause our Divine Lord said, ‘You worship that which you know not;’ and He then further said, ‘We adore that which we know, for salvation is of the Jews.’ The full and pure light of revelation is in Jerusalem. The true knowledge of the True God is with us; and yet the time is coming when ‘they that adore shall adore neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem, but everywhere in spirit and in truth.’

From these words I draw one conclusion, namely, that knowledge is the first and vital condition of all true worship. You will remember how S. Paul at Athens found an altar ‘to the unknown God,’ and how he commended the people for their intentions of piety, but reproved them for their ignorance. He said, ‘Him whom you ignorantly worship, Him I declare unto you.’ Without knowledge there can be no adoration ‘in spirit and in truth;’ and just in the measure of our knowledge will our adoration be more or less perfect, that is, intelligent and spiritual. If our knowledge be full and perfect, so will our adoration be. From this let us draw two consequences, and then pass on.

The first is this. How great is the superstition of those who for centuries have pleased themselves by accusing the Catholic Church of teaching that ‘ignorance is the mother of devotion.’ The other consequence is: that the mother of all true knowledge relating to God, and therefore the mother of all true worship, is the Holy Catholic Church alone. Is it not a masterpiece of craft that the father of lies should have so darkened the understandings of our adversaries as to lead them’ into the profound superstition of believing that we keep people in ignorance in order to make them devout? My purpose, then, will be to trace out the connection between what the world scornfully calls dogma and devotion, or the worship of God ‘in spirit and in truth.’

1. Now, first of all, let us see what is dogma. In the month of the world it means some positive, imperious, and overbearing assertion of a human authority, or of a self-confident mind. But what does it mean in the mouth of the Church? It means the precise enunciation of a divine truth, of a divine fact, or of a divine reality fully known, so far as it is the will of God to reveal it, adequately defined in words chosen and sanctioned by a divine authority.

It is the precise enunciation of a divine truth or of a divine reality; for instance, the nature and the personality of God, the Incarnation, the coming of the Holy Ghost, and suchlike truths and realities of the mind of God, precisely known, intellectually conceived, as God has revealed or accomplished them. Every divine truth or reality, so far as God has been pleased to reveal it to us, casts its perfect outline and image upon the human intelligence. His own mind, in which dwells all truth in all fulness and in all perfection, so far as He has revealed of His truth, is cast upon the surface of our mind, in the same way as the sun casts its own image upon the surface of the water, and the disc of the sun is perfectly reflected from its surface. So, in the intelligence of the Apostles, when, by the illumination of the Holy Ghost on the Day of Pentecost, the revelation of God was cast upon the surface of their intellect, every divine truth had its perfect outline and image, not confused, nor in a fragmentary shape, but with a perfect and complete impression. For instance, that God is One in nature; that in God there are Three Persons, and one only Person in Jesus Christ. Next, it is not enough that a truth should be definitely conceived; for if a teacher know the truth, and is not able to communicate it with accuracy, the learner will be but little the wiser. And therefore God, who gave His truth, has given also a perpetual assistance, whereby the Apostles first, and His Church from that day to this, precisely and without erring declare to mankind the truth which was revealed in the beginning; and in declaring that truth the Church clothes it in words, in what we call a terminology: and in the choice of those terms the Church is also guided. There is an assistance, by which the Church does not err in selecting the very language in which to express divine truth. For who does not see that, if the Church wore to err in the selection of the words, the declaration of truth must be obscured? We are conscious every day that we know with perfect certainty what we desire to say, but, from the difficulty of finding or choosing our words, we cannot convey our meaning to another. The Church is not a stammerer as we are. The Church of God has a divine assistance perpetually guiding it, to clothe in language, that is, in adequate expression, the divine truth which God has committed to her trust. Therefore a dogma signifies a correct verbal expression of the truth correctly conceived and known. But, lastly, it is not sufficient that it be clearly understood in the intellect and accurately expressed in words, unless the authority by which it is declared shall be divine; because without a divine authority we cannot have a divine certainty; without a divine authority we can have no such assurance that the doctrine which we hear may not be erroneous. The Apostles were such a divine authority, for they spoke in the Name of their Master. Their successor to this day is the Church, which, taken as a whole, has been, by the assistance of the Holy Ghost, promised by our Divine Lord and never absent from it, perpetually sustained in the path of truth, and preserved from all error in the declaration of that truth. Therefore ‘He that heareth you heareth Me’ is true to this day. He that hears the voice of the Church hears the voice of its Divine Head, and its authority is therefore divine. This, then, is a dogma: a divine truth clearly understood in the intellect, precisely expressed in words and by a divine authority. There are many things which follow from this. First, it proves that the Church of God must be dogmatic: and that any body which is not dogmatic is not the Church of God. Any body or communion that disclaims a divine, and therefore infallible, authority cannot be dogmatic, because it is conscious that it may err. And therefore the Catholic Church alone, the Church which is one and undivided throughout the world, united with its centre in the Holy See,—this, and this alone, is a dogmatic Church (as the world reproachfully reminds us), and on that I build my proof that it alone is the Church of God. A teaching authority which is dogmatic and not infallible is a tyranny and a nuisance: a tyranny, because it binds the conscience of men by human authority, liable to err; and a nuisance, because as it may err, in the long-run it certainly will, and ‘if the blind lead the blind, shall they not both fall into the ditch?’ We see, then, what dogma means. The Holy Catholic Church always has been and always must be dogmatic. In this, and in no other sense, is it dogmatic; for it delivers nothing to us to be believed except upon divine authority, and that which it so delivers was revealed by God.

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, The Glories of the Sacred Heart, Dogma the Source of Devotion, 1876

 

 

 

Just when we thought at last, a homosexual predatory bishop would finally spend time behind bars, they will seriously consider giving him "home detention." 

Pedophilia, bishop in Australia sentenced to 12 months

Archbishop Philip Wilson of Adelaide might be able to avoid imprisonment after the Newcastle tribunal, north of Sydney, will evaluate his eligibility for home detention

vatican insider | staff  |  rome |  July 4, 2018

Archbishop Philip Wilson of Adelaide might be able to avoid imprisonment after the Newcastle tribunal, north of Sydney, will evaluate his eligibility for 12-month home detention. The decision will be taken on 14 August. The Prelate will be eligible for parole after serving six months.  

Wilson, 67, who suspended himself but did not resign as Archbishop of Adelaide and Vice President of the Australian Bishops' Conference, was sentenced for covering up serious crimes - the sexual abuse of children committed by priest James Fletcher in the 1970s, when both served in the diocese of Maitland, near Newcastle. Fletcher died in prison at the age of 65 in 2006, one year after being sentenced to almost eight years for nine paedophile crimes committed between 1989 and 1991.  

"The whole community is devastated in so many ways by decades of abuse and its concealment," magistrate Robert Stone said over pedophile abuse within institutions, in his sentencing. Given the seriousness of the offence and the need for general deterrence, only a custodial sentence can be imposed, whereas a suspension of the sentence would not correspond to this need, he said. The only option is therefore to serve a sentence in prison or at home. Given the age, mental and physical condition of the defendant and the absence of any criminal record, also 12 months of home detention would  be an appropriate punishment.  [.....]

 

Vatican pushing Gaia cult earth worship as Novus Ordo One World Religion

Cardinal warns of ’possible collapse’ of Earth’s livability at Vatican event

Pietro Parolin cites ’clear urgency’ in Vatican push for climate action

Vatican Insider | Joshua J. McElwee | vatican city | July 5, 2018

The Vatican’s secretary of state warned July 5 that humanity is facing a “possible collapse” in the Earth’s ability to sustain life, as part of a two-day conference hosted by the Catholic Church to urge global leaders to mitigate the devastating impacts of climate change. 

In an address opening the “Saving Our Common Home” event, Cardinal Pietro Parolin said there is a “clear urgency” to the task and that people around the world, “as members of the common household, need to come together.” 

The Vatican’s Dicastery for Integral Human Development is hosting the July 5-6 event among some 400 global faith leaders, scientists and politicians with hopes to influence separate meetings later this year of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the U.N. Climate Change Conference. 

The conference is pegged to the third anniversary of the publication of Pope Francis’ 2015 environmental encyclical “Laudato Si’: On Care for our Common Home.” [....]

 

 

Comments from those who have read the Third Secret of Fatima:

·       “I cannot say anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the third Secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one concerns the Pope. The other, logically – although I must say nothing – would have to be the continuation of the words: In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.[3] [emphasis added] – Joseph Schweigel, S.J., d. 1964 (interrogated Sister Lucia about the Third Secret on behalf of Pope Pius XII on Sept. 2, 1952)[4]

·       In the period preceding the great triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, terrible things are to happen. These form the content of the third part of the Secret. What are they?

·       If ‘in Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved,’ … it can be clearly deduced from this that in other parts of the Church these dogmas are going to become obscure or even lost altogether.Thus it is quite possible that in this intermediate period which is in question (after 1960 and before the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary), the text makes concrete references to the crisis of the Faith of the Church and to the negligence of the pastors themselves.” [5] [emphasis added] – Fr. Joaquin Alonso, C.M.F., d. 1981 (Cleratian priest and official Fatima archivist for over sixteen years; had unparalleled access to Sister Lucia)

·       The Secret of Fatima speaks neither of atomic bombs, nor nuclear warheads, nor Pershing missiles, nor SS-20’s. Its content concerns only our faith. To identify the Secret with catastrophic announcements or with a nuclear holocaust is to deform the meaning of the message. The loss of faith of a continent is worse than the annihilation of a nation; and it is true that faith is continually diminishing in Europe.” [6] [emphasis added] – Bishop Alberto Cosme do Amaral, d. 2005 (former bishop of Fatima-Leiria; remarks made in Vienna, Austria on Sept. 10, 1984)

·       “It [the Third Secret] has nothing to do with Gorbachev. The Blessed Virgin was alerting us against apostasy in the Church.” [emphasis added] – Cardinal Silvio Oddi, d. 2001 (Vatican diplomat and personal friend of Pope John XXIII, from whom he knew certain details concerning the Third Secret) [7]

·       “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.” [emphasis added] – Cardinal Mario Luigi Ciappi, O.P., d. 1996 (personal theologian to Popes John XXIII-John Paul II) [8]

Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité, The Whole Truth about Fatima, [2], Volume 3.

Posted by OnePeterFive

 

Euch.gif

 

 

God, who is the perfect and infinite intelligence—that is, the infinite and perfect reason—created man to His own likeness, and gave him a reasonable intelligence, like His own. As the face in the mirror answers to the face of the beholder, so the intelligence of man answers to the intelligence of God. It is His own likeness. What, then, is the revelation of faith, but the illumination of the Divine reason poured out upon the reason of man? The revelation of faith is no discovery which the reason of man has made for himself by induction, or by deduction, or by analysis, or by synthesis, or by logical process, or by experimental chemistry. The revelation of faith is a discovery of itself by the Divine Reason, the unveiling of the Divine Intelligence, and the illumination flowing from it cast upon the intelligence of man; and if so, I would ask, how can there be variance or discord? How can the illumination of the faith diminish the stature of the human reason? How can its rights be interfered with? How can its prerogatives be violated? Is not the truth the very reverse of all this? Is it not the fact that the human reason is perfected and elevated above itself by the illumination of faith? 

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, The Revolt of the Intelligence Against God

 

All law proceeds from the reason and will of the lawgiver; the Divine and natural laws from the reasonable will of God; the human law from the will of man, regulated by reason. Now just as human reason and will, in practical matters, may be made manifest by speech, so may they be made known by deeds: since seemingly a man chooses as good that which he carries into execution. But it is evident that by human speech, law can be both changed and expounded, in so far as it manifests the interior movement and thought of human reason. Wherefore by actions also, especially if they be repeated, so as to make a custom, law can be changed and expounded; and also something can be established which obtains force of law, in so far as by repeated external actions, the inward movement of the will, and concepts of reason are most effectually declared; for when a thing is done again and again, it seems to proceed from a deliberate judgment of reason. Accordingly, custom has the force of a law, abolishes law, and is the interpreter of law. 

St. Thomas Aquinas

 

 

Do not work together with unbelievers.

St. Paul, II Corinthians 6:14

The Greatest Error of Vatican II

“It was declared at the Second Vatican Council that atheists too are not excluded from this possibility of salvation… The only necessary condition which is recognized here is the necessity of faithfulness and obedience to the individual’s own personal conscience. This optimism concerning salvation appears to me one of the most noteworthy results of the Second Vatican Council. For when we consider the officially received theology concerning these questions, which was more or less traditional right down to the Second Vatican Council, we can only wonder how few controversies arose during the Council with regard to these assertions of optimism concerning salvation, and wonder too at how little opposition the conservative wing of the Council brought to bear on this point, how all this took place without any setting of the stage or any great stir even though this doctrine marked a far more decisive phase in the development of the Church’s conscious awareness of her Faith than, for instance, the doctrine of collegiality in the Church, the relationship between scripture and tradition, the acceptance of the new exegesis, etc.”

Fr. Karl Rahner, The Anonymous Christian

 

 

Planned Parenthood pledges $1.5 million to protect pro-abortion Pennsylvania governor

Life_Site.jpgLifeSiteNews | PENNSYLVANIA | June 21, 2018 – Planned Parenthood has announced it intends to spend heavily to ensure that pro-abortion Democrat Tom Wolf remains the Governor of Pennsylvania.

“With nearly 75% of the Pennsylvania legislature opposed to safe and legal abortion, Governor Tom Wolf is critical to Planned Parenthood’s survival,” Planned Parenthood Pennsylvania Advocates & PAC declares in its solicitation for online donations. The group plans to spend $1.5 million toward his reelection this fall, the Tribune-Review reports.

The money will also support other pro-abortion candidates in the state, and finance door-knocking, phone calls, text messages, direct mail campaigns, and digital advertising.

Wolf “is a brick wall against efforts to roll back health care access and rights of Pennsylvanians,” Sari Stevens, the PAC’s executive director, said. Republicans control both chambers of the Pennsylvania legislature, meaning the fate of pro-life legislation currently rests entirely with the governor.

Wolf and his wife Frances are both former Planned Parenthood volunteers, and the governor has dutifully continued to serve the abortion giant in office.

He has used his veto pen to block legislation that would have banned late-term and dismemberment abortions, and has promised to veto legislation banning abortions that target Down syndrome children and abortions on babies with detectable heartbeats.

Pro-lifers have also hit Wolf for refusing to hold the abortion industry accountable for its treatment of women, noting that he praised a Planned Parenthood facility which has repeatedly failed state health inspections, and nominated for Virginia Secretary of State Pedro Cortes, a man who failed to take action against notorious Philadelphia abortionist and convicted murderer Kermit Gosnell while holding the same office in a previous administration.

In 2015, the government data analysis site InsideGov named Wolf the most liberal governor in America, as well.

“It's no surprise that Tom Wolf is setting records for donations taken from special interests. He is bought and paid for by those filling up his campaign coffers,” Andrew Romeo, a spokesman for Wolf’s Republican challenger Scott Wagner, responded.

The Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation says Wagner, currently a state senator, holds a 100% pro-life voting record. Wagner sponsored the late-term abortion ban Wolf vetoed, as well as legislation to defund Planned Parenthood. As “governor he would continue to fight for the rights of the unborn, which would include supporting the heartbeat bill,” Romeo said last month.

Current pro-life laws in Pennsylvania include requiring parental consent for abortion, a 24-hour waiting period, informed consent requirements including fetal development and abortion risks and alternatives, and abortion facility standards and inspections enacted in the wake of the Gosnell scandal.

 

 

“The True Challenge of the Pontiff is the Heresy of Homosexuality”

“The Holy Father has confirmed that which everyone had known for many years.  I think that the wall of omertà that has existed for a long time is destroyed.  But now, how to demolish that other wall of omertà that exists inside the seminaries? Who is concerned with the revolution of Benedict XVI who forbade the ordination of homosexual priests?  The problem of the gay lobby in the Vatican is important, but marginal.  The true challenge of the Pontiff is the heresy of homosexuality, what I call the ‘homoheresy’, that is, the rejection of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church on homosexuality, whose defenders are in favor of priesthood for gays. The Holy Father must combat this heresy that has spread throughout the Church.  Who, in Italy, is interested in the current situation of the seminaries?   And there is where the future of the Church is decided! The only way forward is to continue the revolution of Ratzinger, who wished to ‘free’ the seminaries from gay educators and homosexual seminarians.” ...

Fr. Dariusz Oko, theology professor, Pontifical University John Paul II, Krakow, who has denounced the gay lobby in the Vatican

 

 

 

Feminist_Tyburn_London_1.jpg

Feminism Unmasked

It’s called ‘She Guardian,’ by Russian artist Dashi Namdakov who spent the last two years sculpting the towering figure out of four massive tons of bronze. The statue measures 36-feet high. Mr. Namdakov says the attention-grabbing piece is intended to express a sense of “maternal protectiveness.”  The feminist work is “symbolic of female strength and a desire to care for the young.” But, with a mother like this, it is not surprising that there are no pups being cared for in the sculpture for the vast majority of feminists are sterile. The demonic statue by an odd coincidence has been erected in a place of precedence at the Marble Arch located opposite the North-East corner of Hyde Park in London (Buckingham Palace opposite the South-East corner of the park). The Marble Arch is where the infamous Tyburn gallows was located for the public execution of common criminals along with faithful Catholics. It is to Tyburn that Catholic recusants, such as St. Edmund Campion, Blessed Ralph Sherwin, Blessed Alexander Briant, St. Oliver Plunkett, etc., etc., etc., were literally dragged from Newgate Prison to be ‘hung, drawn and quartered.’ This rabid feminist bitch is directly overlooking the hallowed ground of Catholic martyrs. It only needs a sign warning the public not to pet or feed the animal.

 

 

 

The Love of God is Conditional Upon Believing His Revealed Truth and Keeping His Commandments!

Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you.’ (II John 10).

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, Jan. 6, 1928

 

 

Consecration to the Sacred Heart of Jesus composed by St. Margaret Mary

Adorable Heart of my most loving Jesus, what good have You found in me to make You love me without limit, even though my heart, stained by a thousand faults, was so cold and indifferent toward You?  The great proofs of love which You have shown me, even when I did not love You, give me hope that You will now find acceptable the proofs of my love.  Receive then, my loving Savior, my desire to consecrate myself entirely to the honor and glory of Your Sacred Heart; accept the gift of all that I am.  I consecrate to You my person, my life, my actions, my pains and sufferings, desiring to be in the future a victim consecrated to You glory, on fire at this moment, and one day to be entirely consumed by the holy flames of Your love.  I offer You then, my Lord and my God, my heart with all its desires, that during my whole life it may be perfectly conformed to Yours.  I belong, then, wholly to Your Heart, I am entirely Yours.  O my God, how great are Your mercies toward me! 

My adorable Savior, accept my consecration also in reparation for the offenses which I have not ceased to commit against You until now, by corresponding so badly to You love.  I am giving You very little, I know, but at least I wish to give You all that is in my power and all You wish, for that You desire from me; therefore, by consecrating my heart to You, I give it to You never to take it back.

Teach me, O loving Savior, perfect forgetfulness of self, for that is the one way by which I can enter Your adorable Heart; and since in the future I shall do everything for You, grant that all I do may be worthy of You.  Teach me what I must do to arrive at the purity of Your love, but also give me this love, give me a most ardent, generous love.  Give me that profound humility without which no one can be pleasing to You, and accomplish in me all Your holy will.

 

 

Once again, the Novus Order Regime in Rome endorses the United Nations call for One World Government based upon a “Genuine and Profound Humanism”! 

As Benedict XVI has affirmed in continuity with the social teaching of the Church: “To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago.”  […….] Here, continuity is essential, because policies related to climate change and environmental protection cannot be altered with every change of government. Results take time and demand immediate outlays which may not produce tangible effects within any one government’s term. That is why, in the absence of pressure from the public and from civic institutions, political authorities will always be reluctant to intervene, all the more when urgent needs must be met. To take up these responsibilities and the costs they entail, politicians will inevitably clash with the mindset of short-term gain and results which dominates present-day economics and politics. But if they are courageous, they will attest to their God-given dignity and leave behind a testimony of selfless responsibility. A healthy politics is sorely needed, capable of reforming and coordinating institutions, promoting best practices and overcoming undue pressure and bureaucratic inertia. It should be added, though, that even the best mechanisms can break down when there are no worthy goals and values, or a genuine and profound humanism to serve as the basis of a noble and generous society. 

Pope Francis, Laudato Si’, On earth worship, global warming, etc.

 

Modernists are Deconstructionalists - the deny the intentionality of words and thus destroy the ability of language to convey truth! They are our modern "sophists." They attack the revelation of God at its very source.

Plato's literary activity extended over fifty years, and time and again he asked himself anew: What is it that makes the sophists so dangerous? Toward the end he wrote one more dialogue, the Sophist, in which he added a new element to his answer: "The sophists," he says, "fabricate a fictitious reality." That the existential realm of man could be taken over by pseudorealities whose fictitious nature threatens to become indiscernible is truly a depressing thought. And yet this Platonic nightmare, I hold, possesses an alarming contemporary relevance. For the general public is being reduced to a state where people not only are unable to find out about the truth but also become unable even to search for the truth because they are satisfied with deception and trickery that have determined their convictions, satisfied with a fictitious reality created by design through the abuse of language. This, says Plato, is the worst thing that the sophists are capable of wreaking upon mankind by their corruption of the word.

Josef Pieper, Abuse of Language- Abuse of Power, 1974

 

 

 

Modernism vs. Neo-Modernism: What is the Difference?

    The overarching principle of post-conciliar theology is not modernism, properly speaking. Let us get our terms straight.
Modernism is the idea that there are no eternal truths, that truth is the correspondence of the mind with one's lifestyle (adaequatio intellectus et vitae), and that, therefore, old dogmas must be abandoned and new beliefs must arise that meet 'the needs of modern man'. This is a radical denial of the traditional and common sense notion of truth: the correspondence of the mind with reality (adaequatio intellectus et rei), which is the basis of the immutability of Catholic dogma.
    No, the post-conciliar theological principle is neo-modernism, and the theology that is based on it is known as the nouvelle theologie.  It is the idea that old dogmas or beliefs must be retained, yet not the traditional 'formulas': dogmas must be expressed and interpreted in a new way in every age so as to meet the 'needs of modern man'.  This is still a denial of the traditional and common sense notion of truth as adaequatio intellectus et rei (insofar as it is still an attempt to make the terminology that expresses the faith correspond with our modern lifestyle) and consequently of the immutability of Catholic dogma, yet it is not as radical as modernism.  It is more subtle and much more deceptive than modernism because it claims that the faith must be retained; it is only the 'formulas' of faith that must be abandoned--they use the term 'formula' to distinguish the supposedly mutable words of our creeds, dogmas, etc. from their admittedly immutable meanings.  Therefore, neo-modernism can effectively slip under the radar of most pre-conciliar condemnations (except Humani Generis, which condemns it directly) insofar as its practitioners claim that their new and unintelligible theological terminology really expresses the same faith of all times.  In other words, neo-modernism is supposed to be 'dynamic orthodoxy': supposedly orthodox in meaning, yet always changing in expression to adapt to modern life (cf. Franciscan University of Steubenville's mission statement).  
    Take extra ecclesiam nulla salus as a clear example of a dogma that has received a brutal neo-modernist re-interpretation: they claim that the old 'formula' that ”there is no salvation outside the Church” must be abandoned; rather it is more meaningful to modern man to say that salvation is not in, but through, the Church;  people who are not in the Church may still be saved through the Church; thus, to them the dogma that “there is no salvation outside the Church” means that there is salvation outside the Church.  Hence see Ven. Pope Pius XII condemning those “reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.” (Humani generis 27).

    Yet this mentality of reinterpreting everything anew in order to 'meet the needs of the times' is generally tends to be found in different degrees among different post-conciliar sources:  

    It tends to be  (1) rampant in men like De Lubac, Von Balthasar, Congar, etc.: it is the ultimate goal of their writings, teachings, and activities as churchmen.   To achieve this end, they employ the technique of 'resourcement', the neo-modernist strategy of fishing for the few dubious, questionable, or idiosyncratic teachings of some Fathers of the Church and other authoritative writers, and gather them into a massive, heterodox theological argument against the traditional understanding of the faith (which they like to relativize by giving it names such as “Counter-Reformation” Theology, “Tridentine” Theology, or “Scholastic” Theology, instead of just admitting that it is Catholic Theology plain and simple).  This technique accomplishes three things that go hand-in-hand: (a) offers a refutation of traditional Catholicism, (b) defends an interpretation that meets the needs of modern times, and (c) gives it a semblance of being traditional, because it appears to be based in the Fathers et al.  This type of argument is used, for example, by Von Balthasar in his nearly heretical book, Dare We Hope that All Men be Saved? to 'prove', not that Hell does not exist (that is a dogma), but that it is empty.  But this technique and its neo-modernistic underpinnings is not only practiced in almost all of these men's writings; it is also defended in theory by many of them, particularly in Von Balthasar's daring little book, Razing the Bastions, where he demonstrates that “Tridentine” theology must be rejected in our times because it is 'boring'.

    It also tends to be (2) present in a more moderate way in the non-binding statements by post-conciliar popes, since they themselves were deeply involved in the developing of the nouvelle theologie.  Just to give one of a million possible examples, see Pope Benedict's evolutionistic re-interpretation of the Resurrection of Our Lord.  Nothing here obviously contradicts  the dogma of the Resurrection (it may be interpreted as a simple analogy, even if a bad one, and nothing more), but it is a novelty that can be easily understood as claiming that the Resurrection is part of the natural development of nature (thus giving credence to some of the nouvelle theologie's pet doctrines, such as De Lubac's heterodox notion of the supernatural and De Chardin's pantheistic evolutionism).   This happens almost on a daily basis in what comes out of the Vatican, not to mention what comes from local bishops.

    And finally, neo-modernism tends to be present (3) mostly implicitly or behind-the-scenes in the Council, the Catechism, etc., even though it seldom comes out more explicitly.  Things are done at this level under the pretext of 'aggiornamento', a euphemism for neo-modernism.  That is usually all the justification provided since at this authoritative level, there is no need to justify things theologically.  Hence, Vatican II and the Catechism are not outright neo-modernistic.  Rather, they (like most of post-conciliar doctrine) tend in that direction and/or are inspired by that mentality.  In other words, most of the time these documents do not explicitly teach neo-modernist errors (the kind of errors you hear explicitly from neo-modernist theologians and priests). Rather, they are full of dangerous ambiguities: statements that in a technical sense could be interpreted as being in harmony with the traditional faith, but that, in their natural, non-forced, interpretation are heterodox.  One clear example of this is Dignitatis humanae, par. 2; entire monographs have been written in order to prove that, despite appearances, this document does not contradict previous teaching.  Maybe in fact it ultimately does not, but it is obvious that the prima facie meaning does; otherwise there would be no need to write so many volumes to prove it.
    It must be noted that these are general tendencies, and that in some documents (cf. Gaudium et Spes) and every now and then in papal and episcopal statements neo-modernist principles come out more explicitly.    

    For a more detailed philosophical and theological critique of neo-modernism, and how it is nothing but a re-hashing of modernism, see Garrigou-Lagrange's Where is the New Theology Leading Us? and his The Structure of the Encyclical Humani Generis.

Francisco J. Romero Carrasquillo, Ph.D., Professor of Theology and Philosophy

 

 

 

 

If men are “obligated” to a “right faith” then “Religious Liberty” is a lie!

That by Divine Law Men are obliged to a Right Faith

As sight by the bodily eye is the principle of the bodily passion of love, so the beginning of spiritual love must be the intellectual vision of some object of the same. But the vision of that spiritual object of understanding, which is God, cannot be had at present by us except through faith, because God exceeds our natural reason, especially if we consider Him in that regard under which our happiness consists in enjoying Him.

a.) The divine law directs man to be entirely subject to God. But as man’s will is subjected to God by loving Him, so his understanding is subjected to Him by believing Him,—but not by believing anything false, because no falsehood can be proposed to man by God, who is the truth: hence he who believes anything false does not believe God.

b.) Whoever holds an erroneous view about a thing, touching the essence of the thing, does not know the thing. Thus if any one were to fix on the notion of irrational animal, and take that to be man, he would not know man. The case would be otherwise, if he was mistaken only about some of the accidents of man. But in the case of compound beings, though he who errs about any of the essentials of a thing does not know the thing, absolutely speaking, still he knows it in a sort of a way: thus he who thinks man to be an irrational animal knows him generically: but in the case of simple beings this cannot be,—any error shuts out entirely all knowledge of the thing. But God is to the utmost degree simple. Therefore whoever errs about God does not know God. Thus he who believes God to be corporeal has no sort of knowledge of God, but apprehends something else instead of God. Now as a thing is known, so is it loved and desired. He then who errs concerning God, can neither love Him nor desire Him as his last end. Since then the divine law aims at bringing men to love and desire God, that same law must bind men to have a right faith concerning God.

Hence it is said: Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. xi, 6); and at the head of all other precepts of the law there is prescribed a right faith in God: Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one Lord (Deut. vi. 4).

St. Thomas Aquinas, Of God and His Creatures

 

The Four Sins that “Cry to Heaven for Vengeance” are protected acts under U.S. Law

No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree.  The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable.  When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law.  These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them.

The nature of law is to maintain justice.  This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are the same thing.  There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate.  This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are “just” because the law makes them so.  Thus, in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for law to decree and sanction it.  Slavery, restrictions, and monopoly find defenders not only among those who profit from them but also among those who suffer from them. 

Frederic Bastiat, The Law

 

Prophecy of St. Francis of Assisi

“Act bravely, my brethren; take courage and trust in the Lord. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase. The devils will have unusual power; the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who obey the true Supreme Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal ears and perfect charity.

“At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour to draw many into error and death. Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it.

“There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God….

“Those who persevere in their fervor and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the earth…

“Some preachers will keep silent about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them, not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.”

St. Francis of Assisi, Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis of Assisi, published in 1882 by the London-based Catholic publishing house R. Washbourne, 1882, pp. 248-250.

 

 

“Vatican II was a pastoral council by its teachings, that is, its doctrines.  In a word, Vatican II was pastoral by being doctrinal.”

Fr. John O’Malley, Jesuit “historian and theologian,” author of What Happened at Vatican II, speaking at Caritas International Conference, “Vatican II, Remembering the Future: Ecumenical, Interfaith and Secular Perspectives on the Council's Impact and Promise.” The event was co-hosted by Georgetown, Marymount University in Arlington, Va., and the Washington National Cathedral.

COMMENT: This is a remarkable admission of the necessary relationship between Catholic doctrine and Catholic practice.  It is a Truth of our Faith that has been constantly denied by the Modernists since Vatican II because, if this Truth had been admitted, no one would have accepted the Council’s novel teachings which were imposed by a corruption of practice.  Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission has affirmed that every Catholic possesses a right to the immemorial traditions of our Church because we have a duty imposed by God to profess our faith openly and publicly which these traditions perfectly signify.  And thus, these immemorial traditions constitute necessary attributes of the Faith because without them, the Faith cannot be known or communicated to others.  And now, those who have foolishly adopted the novel practices dictatorially imposed after Vatican II are to understand that they in fact do signify a new doctrine, that “Vatican II was pastoral by being doctrinal.” The Modernists want the new doctrines to be professed that the new practices signify.  No Catholic is bound by any novel doctrine, therefore, no Catholic is bound by any novel practice which signifies these new doctrines. The only reason that Fr. O’Malley is now admitting this Catholic truth is to impose formally the novel doctrines which the Novus Ordo practice signifies. 

 

 

The Church again is victimized by homosexual clerics and their lobby!

Pedophilia, Clergy abuse victims settle with US diocese

The church of St. Paul and Minneapolis will deliver $210 million to 450 people sexually abused by members of the clergy. Money to be placed in a trust fund for the claimants

Vatican_Insider.jpgvatican insider staff  | turin | June 1, 2018

Record compensation was provided by the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis in the United States, which announced a 210 million dollars settlement for about 450 victims of clergy sexual abuse. This is the second largest reparation for the scandal that has shaken the Catholic Church of the United States, after that of 2007 when the archdiocese of Los Angeles liquidated cases of clergy sexual abuse of 508 victims paying 660 million dollars.  

Most of the funds, about $170 million, will come from insurance companies, the rest from parishes, a pension fund and the sale of real estate.  

The victim's lawyer, Jeff Anderson, said that the money - a total of $210,290,724 - will go in a trust fund for the claimants, survivors of the abuses perpetrated by several priests in past decades. During the conference the lawyer also showed the sole of his shoes where the phrase "Rise up and claim the truth" was written.  

"The victims of the abuses will have their payments made as soon as the court approves the plan", Archbishop Bernard Hebda assured, from 2016 at the head of the diocese hit by the scandals, which in 2015 filed for bankruptcy.  

The prelate said he was "grateful to all those who courageously presented themselves to denounce what had happened". "The Church", he added, "has disappointed you and I am very sorry: the abuses have stolen so much from you, from your childhood, from your innocence, from your security, from your trust and in many cases from your faith". 

 

 

The Homo-Lobby is so deeply imbedded it can only be removed by persecution!

Chile, the Pope’s words on gays and Wojtyla’s forgotten directives

The Chilean case demonstrates the existence - not only in the South American country - of serious problems of discernment in vocations in seminaries, and in the processes of episcopal nomination

Vatican Insider | andrea tornielli  | vatican city | May 31, 2018

The case of Chile and the emergence of new scandals, following the renunciation of the entire episcopate who has placed their fate in the hands of the Pope, shows how deeply rooted is the disease that afflicts the Chilean Church and not only. Yet, it also shows how much the teachings of the Popes, published in recent decades, have been considered dead letters by the bishops.  

Last week, speaking behind closed doors with the General Assembly of the Italian Episcopal Conference, Pope Francis, though expressing all his concern for the decline in priestly vocations, had invited the bishop to focus more on the quality of future priests than with quantity, citing the case of homosexual persons who wish to enter the seminary: “If you have even the slightest doubt, it is better not to let them in”. Francis spoke in the wake of two documents published in recent years by the Holy See: the first is of 2005, at the beginning of the pontificate of Benedict XVI, the second is of 2016 and was promulgated during the pontificate of Bergoglio. In both, while deeply respecting the people in question, it is argued that it is not possible to admit to seminary and sacred orders “those who practice homosexuality” or “have deeply rooted homosexual tendencies”.  

In a note of the document given by Pope Francis to the Chilean bishops who arrived in Rome, one could read a criticism for having entrusted the leadership of the seminaries to “priests suspected of practicing homosexuality”. The existence of branched and organized networks of priests who lured their prey via the web, as well as cases of abuse of minors involving eminent priests, clearly indicate that the criteria of discernment were not well applied.  

Already in 1992, therefore more than ten years before the 2005 publication of the Instruction of the Congregation for Catholic Education on the theme “Criteria for the discernment of vocations with regard to persons with homosexual tendencies in view of their admission to the seminary and to holy orders”, and more than twenty years before the publication of the Ratio Fundamentalis of the Congregation for the Clergy entitled “The Gift of the Presbyteral Vocation” (these are the two documents that invite those who have a deeply rooted homosexual tendency or practice homosexuality not to enter the seminary), John Paul II made known the apostolic exhortation Pastores dabo vobis on “the formation of priests in the circumstances of the present day”.  

In that document, we read: “Since the charism of celibacy, even when it is genuine and has proved itself, leaves one’s affections and instinctive impulses intact, candidates to the priesthood need an affective maturity which is prudent, able to renounce anything that is a threat to it, vigilant over both body and spirit, and capable of esteem and respect in interpersonal relationships between men and women. A precious help can be given by a suitable education to true friendship, following the image of the bonds of fraternal affection which Christ himself lived on earth”.  

Pope Wojtyla also affirmed: “Human maturity, and in particular affective maturity, requires a clear and strong training in freedom, which expresses itself in convinced and heartfelt obedience to the “truth of one’s own being, to the “meaning” of one’s own existence, that is to the “sincere gift of self” as the way and fundamental content of the authentic realization of self. Thus understood, freedom requires the person to be truly master of oneself, determined to fight and overcome the different forms of selfishness and individualism which threaten the life of each one, ready to open out to others, generous in dedication and service to one’s neighbor”.  

The problem that has emerged from recent scandals is not only that of pedophilia: in many cases it is the abuse of children who have already entered adolescence. The widest and deepest problem to which no adequate answer has yet been given concerns the affective immaturity of candidates for the priesthood, who, if they are not men mature in their affectivity - whether heterosexual or homosexual - will be conditioned by their affective immaturity in relations with others.  […….]

 

 

 

READ CARFULLY: Benedict/Ratzinger does not possess the power to alter what Christ established!

Completeness or not of Fatima message is beside the point: what matters is that what is known is unfolding

Roberto de Mattei | Corrispondenza Romana | May 25, 2016

          The centenary year of Fatima was opened on Pentecost Sunday to news that caused quite a sensation.

          The German theologian Ingo Dollinger revealed to the “OnePeterFive” site that after the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima, Cardinal Ratzinger had confided to him: “Das ist noch nicht alles!”, “We didn’t publish everything”. The Vatican Press Office intervened with an immediate denial in which it stated: “Pope emeritus Benedict XVI declares never to have spoken with Professor Dollinger about Fatima’, clearly affirming that the remarks attributed to Professor Dollinger on the matter ‘are pure inventions, absolutely untrue’, and he confirms decisively that ‘the publication of the Third Secret of Fatima is complete.”

          The denial doesn’t convince those like Antonio Socci who had always sustained the existence of an undisclosed part of the secret, which would refer to the abandonment of the faith by a part of the Church’s hierarchy. Other scholars like Dr. Antonio Augusto Borelli Machado, think the secret disclosed by the Vatican is complete and tragically eloquent. On the basis of the information at our disposal, today we cannot affirm with absolute certainty, either the entirety of the Third Secret text nor its incompleteness. What appears absolutely certain is that the prophecy of Fatima is unfulfilled and that its fulfilment concerns an unprecedented crisis in the Church.

          Regarding this, an important hermeneutic principle needs to be borne in mind. The Lord, through revelations and prophecies, which add nothing to the deposit of the faith, at times offers us some “spiritual direction” to guide us through the darkest periods of history. Yet if it’s true that the Divine words cast light on dark times, the opposite is also true: historical events, in their dramatic unfolding, help us to understand the significance of prophecy.

On July 13th 1917, when Our Lady announced at Fatima that if humanity didn’t convert Russia would have spread its errors throughout the world, these words appeared incomprehensible. It was the historical facts that revealed their significance. After the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917, it was clear that the expansion of Communism was the instrument God wanted to use as a punishment to the world for its sins.

          Between 1989 and 1991, the evil empire of the Soviet Union apparently crumbled, but the disappearance of its political packaging allowed for the diffusion all over the world of Communism, which has its ideological nucleus in philosophical evolution and moral relativism. The “philosophy of praxis” which according to Antonio Gramsci sums up the Marxist cultural revolution, has become the theological horizon of the new pontificate, outlined by theologians like the German Cardinal, Walter Kasper and the Argentinean Archbishop, Victor Manuel Fernàndez, inspirers of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia.

          In this sense it’s not the Fatima Secret we need to start from in order to understand the reality of a tragedy in the Church, but from the crisis in the Church[itself]in order to understand the ultimate meaning of the Fatima Secret. A crisis which goes back to the 1960s, but with Benedict XVI’s abdication and Pope Francis’ pontificate, has seen a shocking acceleration.

          While the Vatican Press Office was making haste to defuse the Dollinger case, another bomb exploded with an even greater impact. During the presentation of Prof. Don Roberto Regoli’s book, Oltre la crisi della Chiesa. Il pontificato di Benedetto XVI (Lindau, Turin, 2016) held in the auditorium at the Gregorian Pontifical University, Monsignor Georg Gänswein highlighted Pope Ratzinger’s act of renunciation with these words:

          “From February 11th 2013, the papal ministry is not the same as before. It is and remains the foundation of the Catholic Church; and yet it is a foundation that Benedict has profoundly and lastingly transformed by his exceptional pontificate”.

          According to Archbishop Gänswein, the Pope’s resignation is “epochal” as it introduced into the Catholic Church the new institution of “Pope emeritus” transforming the concept of munus petrinum - “the petrine ministry”. “Before and after his abdication, Benedict intended and intends his task as a participation in a “petrine ministry” such as this. He left the Papal Throne and yet with his step on February 11th 2013, he did not entirely abandon this ministry. Rather he integrated the personal office with a collegial and synodal dimension, almost a shared ministry (...). From the election of his successor, Pope Francis—on 13 March 2013—there are not then two Popes, but de facto an enlarged ministry with an active and a contemplative member. For this reason, Benedict has not renounced either his name or his white cassock. For this reason, the correct title with which we must refer to him is still “Holiness.” Furthermore, he has not retired to an isolated monastery, but [has retired]within the Vatican, as if he had simply stepped aside to make space for his Successor, and for a new stage in the history of the Papacy.(...). With this act of extraordinary boldness he has instead renewed the office (even against well-meaning and undoubtedly competent advisors) and in a last endeavour has strengthened it (as I hope). This certainly will only be demonstrated by history. However, in the history of the Church, 2013 will remain the year that the renowned Theologian on the Throne of Peter became the first “Pope Emeritus” in history.”

          This discourse is of an explosive nature, and, by itself, demonstrates how we are not “over” the crisis in the Church but more than ever in it. The Papacy is not a ministry that can be “enlarged”, since it is an “office” given personally by Jesus Christ to a sole Vicar and a sole successor of Peter. What distinguishes the Catholic Church from every other church or religion is precisely the existence of a unitary and indissoluble principle in the person of the Supreme Pontiff. Monsignor Gänswein’s discourse(it is difficult to understand where he wants to go with it) suggests a two-headed Church and adds confusion to a situation already far too confusing.

          One sentence connects the second and third part of the Fatima Secret: “In Portugal the dogma of the faith will always be kept.” Our Lady is talking to three little Portuguese shepherds and assures them that their country will not lose the faith. But where will the faith be lost? It has always been thought that Our Lady was referring to the apostasy of entire nations, but today is seems increasingly clearer that the greatest loss of faith is occurring among churchmen.

          A “bishop dressed in white” and “various other bishops, priests and religious” are at the centre of the Third Secret, in a setting of death and ruin, legitimate to imagine as not only material, but spiritual. Before writing the Third Secret, the revelation that Sister Lucia had at Tuy on January 3rd 1944 confirms this, and is hence indissolubly linked to it. After the vision of a terrible cosmic catastrophe, Sister Lucia recounts that she had heard in her heart “a soft voice that said: ‘in time, one faith, one baptism, one Church, Holy Catholic, Apostolic. In eternity Heaven!’!”

          These words represent a radical negation of any form of religious relativism which the heavenly voice contradicts with the exaltation of Holy Mother Church and the Catholic Faith. In history the smoke of Satan can invade the Church, but whoever defends the integrity of the Faith against the powers of hell will see, in time and in eternity, the triumph of the Church and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, definitive seal of the dramatic but fascinating Fatima prophecy.

 

 

Land of the Lemmings

Ireland votes to legalize abortion: ‘a tragedy of historic proportions’

LifeSiteNews | IRELAND | May 26, 2018 – Irish citizens voted to legalize abortion on Friday, ending Ireland’s legacy as one of the world’s most pro-life nations.

Life_Site.jpgThe votes are still being officially counted, but the pro-abortion campaign is declaring victory and pro-lifers are calling this a “tragedy of historic proportions.”

“The 8th amendment did not create a right to life for the unborn child – it merely acknowledged that such a right exists, has always existed, and will always exist,” the pro-life Save the 8th campaign said in a statement. “What Irish voters did yesterday is a tragedy of historic proportions. However, a wrong does not become right simply because a majority support it.”

Ireland has one of the lowest maternal mortality rates in the world. The Eighth Amendment of its Constitution guaranteed equal rights for pre-born babies and their mothers.

Repealing the Eighth Amendment was a decades-long goal of the abortion movement. The Irish voted by 67 percent to add the Eighth Amendment to their constitution in 1983, making the Emerald Isle a uniquely safe place for pre-born babies in contrast to the rest of the West’s liberal abortion regimes.

There have been five previous votes on repealing the Eighth Amendment, all of which failed. One was in 1983, three were in 1992, and one was in 2002.

More people in Dublin, where the majority of residents supported the “repeal” campaign, voted in this referendum than in 2015 on same-sex “marriage” and in their general election.

One students’ union in Dublin created a safe space-like “chill zone” where students could “de-stress” as the results were counted. It became apparent that abortion advocates had won and only 14 students utilized the room, The Guardian reported. Exit polls showed around 87 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds voted for abortion.

In early 2018, the Irish government approved putting the Eighth Amendment to a vote in May with the promise that if passed, legislation allowing abortion on demand would be introduced. The proposed legislation – which may be introduced next week – is expected to be abortion on demand during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy for healthy babies and later throughout pregnancy for nebulous “health” reasons, for babies with disabilities, and babies conceived in rape.

Pro-life activists responded to the referendum with a massive canvassing and public awareness campaign about how many lives have been saved by the Eighth Amendment, how one in five babies in England is aborted, the fact that abortion kills a living human being, and the many harms to women and society that come with legalizing it.

“The unborn child no longer has a right to life recognised by the Irish state,” the Save the 8th’s defeat statement continued. “Shortly, legislation will be introduced that will allow babies to be killed in our country. We will oppose that legislation. If and when abortion clinics are opened in Ireland, because of the inability of the Government to keep their promise about a GP led service, we will oppose that as well. Every time an unborn child has his or her life ended in Ireland, we will oppose that, and make our voices known.”

The country once known for its strong Catholic heritage and identity voted in 2015 to amend its constitution to permit same-sex “marriage.” Despite Ireland’s move toward secularism and approval of redefining marriage, polls on how the Eighth Amendment vote would go were extremely close toward the end of the abortion vote.

In 2012, a woman named Savita Halappanavar, who was 17 weeks pregnant, died of sepsis (blood poisoning) at Galway University Hospital. Three official investigations found that the 31-year-old died of a blood infection caused by “extremely virulent bacteria,” E. coli ESBL. Under Ireland’s abortion laws, the woman would have been permitted an abortion had doctors realized how sick she was when she came to the hospital. They didn’t, and her death was due to medical negligence, not lack of abortion, official investigations revealed. According to the Health Information and Quality Authority, which investigated her death, doctors missed 13 opportunities to save her life.  Irish abortion activists exploited Savita's case and lied about her death, culminating in Friday’s vote.

COMMENT:  Ireland, forever to be known as the land of the Lemmings, ranks close to the bottom for intelligence of all the nations of Europe:  https://iq-research.info/en/average-iq-by-country

This vote to introduce legalized abortion, which naturally follows fast upon their legalization of homosexual “marriage” three years ago, confirms these findings, for whom, after seeing the demographic destruction of Italy, Spain, France, England and Germany, all who have so decimated their populations by abortion that they cannot replace their own and must import Muslim workers who will soon dominate and destroy their native cultures, would follow them in their national folly?  Yet Ireland is the only country to legalize these perversions by popular vote.  The nations of Poland and Hungry are far more intelligent and possessing a clearer moral sense are moving to restrict as much as possible this satanic crime.  They had abortion imposed upon them by Communism and are working to reverse this policy of national suicide.  But Ireland has no excuse.  Having kept the faith through hundreds of years of persecution they have now returned to their Druid past where ritual murder including that of children was part of the routine worship, for abortion in the end is a form of ritual murder.  The dog that returns to its vomit is far different than one trying to restore their Catholic culture after years of communist rule.  Ireland is through and will suffer a punishment that will make its inhabitants pine for the good old days of imposed English famine.  All of this is no problem for the Catholic Novus Ordo Irish Church that has been so thoroughly infiltrated by homosexual clergy that it can only wonder how they will establish ecumenical relations with their Druid counterparts. 

 

 

A patron in high places at last!

Medjugorje, the Pope appoints Hoser as permanent visitor

The Polish archbishop had carried out a pastoral survey on behalf of the Pontiff. Now he will be in charge of accompanying the faithful on a permanent basis but without entering into matters relating to the authenticity of the apparitions

Vatican Insider | andrea tornielli  | vatican city | May 31, 2018

Vatican Insider.jpgThere is still no pronouncement regarding the supernatural nature of the Marian apparitions that have followed one another over decades, but a significant decision that shows Francis’ priorities: the accompaniment of the many faithful who go to Medjugorje from all over the world.  

On 31 May 2018 Pope Bergoglio appointed Monsignor Henryk Hoser, Archbishop Emeritus of Warszawa-Prague in Poland, as “ special apostolic visitor to the parish of Medjugorje, for an indefinite period and ad nutum Sanctae Sedis”, that is, at the disposal of the Holy See.  

The Vatican Press Office informs that it is an “exclusively pastoral task, in continuity with the mission of the Holy See’ special envoy of the parish of Medjugorje, entrusted to Monsignor Hoser on 11 February 2017 and concluded by him in recent months”.  

“The mission of the apostolic visitor - the communiqué concludes- is to ensure a stable and continuous accompaniment of the parish community of Medjugorje and of the faithful who go there on pilgrimage, whose needs require special attention”.  

The director of the Vatican Press Office Greg Burke stressed the “pastoral, not doctrinal” character of Hoser’s mission and therefore, today’s decision “does not enter into the doctrinal questions” concerning the truthfulness of the Marian apparitions of Medjugorje. The appointment therefore represents “not the conclusion” of the Medjugorje affair, “but the next step” to Hoser’s first mission. The prelate, moreover, “will have residence in Medjugorje, for a tighter collaboration with the bishop and the local Franciscans”.  

It is well known that Monsignor Hoser, who was not in charge of overseeing the apparitions as such, but of the pastoral care of the faithful, was personally very much in favor of the recognition of the apparitions. [.....]

COMMENT:  The apparitions on demand to the visionaries  at Medjugorge are not from God.  Either they are demonic, from the demented, or a mere financial scam or a combination of all three.  They have been going on since 1981 and the show is from time to time taken on the road.  The messages have contained heretical judgments since the beginning.  The alleged apparitions have been investigated by the local bishop and the national bishops conferences numerous time and have never been approved as from heaven. In Pope Francis they find a patron for Dogma means nothing to him and the messages are sympathetic to his world vision. 

 

 

Pope Francis tells gay man: 'God made you like this'

Juan Carlos Cruz, who was sexually abused, says pontiff told him God did not mind that he was gay

The Guardian | Stephanie Kirchgaessner | Rome | May 20, 2018

Francis_Rainbow_1-001.jpgJuan Carlos Cruz said some of Chile’s bishops had sought to depict him as a pervert as they accused him of lying about abuse.

A survivor of clerical sexual abuse has said Pope Francis told him that God had made him gay and loved him, in arguably the most strikingly accepting comments about homosexuality to be uttered by the leader of the Roman Catholic church.

Juan Carlos Cruz, who spoke privately with the pope two weeks ago about the abuse he suffered at the hands of one of Chile’s most notorious paedophiles, said the issue of his sexuality had arisen because some of the Latin American country’s bishops had sought to depict him as a pervert as they accused him of lying about the abuse.

“He told me, ‘Juan Carlos, that you are gay does not matter. God made you like this and loves you like this and I don’t care. The pope loves you like this. You have to be happy with who you are,’” Cruz told Spanish newspaper El País.   [.....]

 

 

 

Pope Francis, an ideologue for the "new barbarians."

As Russell Kirk wrote, ideology is political religion. And the dogmas of the political religion by which we are increasingly ruled have displaced the teachings of Christianity and tradition.

Since the Stonewall Riot of 1969, homosexual relationships have gone from being seen as indecent and immoral, to being tolerated, to being accepted, to being on the same plane as traditional marriage, to being a constitutional right.

And if you do not accept the new morality, you are a deplorable bigot. And if you act on your disbelief in the equality of homosexuality, you will be ostracized and punished.

The truths being jettisoned built the greatest civilization known to man. Will the invented truths of our new egalitarianism survive the arrival of the new barbarians? It’s not looking all that good right now.

Pat Buchanan, Can the Pope Change Moral Truth?

 

 

All Chilean bishops offer their resignation over sexual abuse cover-up

It is not yet clear whether Pope Francis will accept resignations of 34 bishops

Guardian | Harriet Sherwood | May 18, 2018

Guardian.jpgThe scandal has damaged the credibility of the church in Chile. Photograph: Vincenzo Pinto/AP

Chile’s bishops have offered to resign en masse over a sexual abuse and cover-up scandal that has embroiled Pope Francis and has been highly damaging to the Catholic church.

Thirty-one serving bishops and three retired bishops signed a letter of resignation on Friday. “We have put our positions in the hands of the Holy Father and will leave it to him to decide freely for each of us,” they said. “We want to ask forgiveness for the pain caused to the victims, to the pope, to God’s people and to our country for the serious errors and omissions we have committed.”

There was no immediate indication of whether the pope would accept their resignations.

The bishops’ move came after Francis said the Chilean church hierarchy was collectively responsible for “grave defects” in handling sexual abuse cases and the resulting loss of credibility suffered by the church.

He accused them of destroying evidence of sexual crimes, putting pressure on investigators to downplay abuse accusations and showing “grave negligence” in protecting children from paedophile priests.

“No one can exempt himself and place the problem on the shoulders of the others,” Francis said in a letter to the bishops.

Francis summoned the bishops to a three-day emergency summit in Rome after he was forced to admit he had made “grave errors in judgment” in the case of Juan Barros, a bishop who had been accused of covering up alleged abuse by a Chilean priest, Fernando Karadima, in the 1980s and 90s.

The Chilean church has been rocked by the allegations of abuse by Karadima and others, and by claims that senior figures knew about or even witnessed what was going on.

Now 87 and living in a nursing home in Child, Karadima has always denied the allegations. Barros has said he was unaware of any wrongdoing.

Francis strongly defended Barros during a visit to Chile in January, accusing Karadima's accusers of slander, in remarks that shocked Chileans and others around the world. “There is not one piece of evidence against [Barros]. It is calumny,” he said.

Francis’s comments were seen as highly damaging to his reputation, compounding a widespread view that he has failed to take a robust stance on the issue of clerical sexual abuse since becoming pope.

The Vatican later sent two expert on sexual crimes to investigate claims of widespread abuse and cover-up in Chile. They delivered a 2,300-page report.

In a 10-page letter commenting on the report, which was handed to the Chilean bishops at the start of the summit, the pope said the church authorities had minimised “the absolute gravity of their [priests’] criminal acts, attributing to them mere weakness or moral lapses.”

Priests accused of abuse were moved but “were then welcomed into other dioceses, in an obviously imprudent way, and given … jobs that gave them daily contact with minors.”

Francis said he was “perplexed and ashamed” by the report’s evidence that pressure was put on church officials tasked with investigating sexual crimes, “including the destruction of compromising documents on the part of those in charge of ecclesiastic archives”.

He said: “The problems inside the church community can’t be solved just by dealing with individual cases and reducing them to the removal of people, though this – and I say so clearly – has to be done.

“But it’s not enough, we have to go beyond that. It would be irresponsible on our part to not look deeply into the roots and the structures that allowed these concrete events to occur and perpetuate.”

In an attempt to limit the damage caused by his comments in January defending Barros, the pope met and apologised to three Chilean abuse survivors at his Vatican residence, the Casa Santa Marta.

 

 

The Fruits of Vatican II - the apostasy extends to Ireland

Ireland votes to legalize abortion: ‘a tragedy of historic proportions’

LifeSiteNews | IRELAND | May 26, 2018 – Irish citizens voted to legalize abortion on Friday, ending Ireland’s legacy as one of the world’s most Life_Site.jpgpro-life nations.

The votes are still being officially counted, but the pro-abortion campaign is declaring victory and pro-lifers are calling this a “tragedy of historic proportions.”

“The 8th amendment did not create a right to life for the unborn child – it merely acknowledged that such a right exists, has always existed, and will always exist,” the pro-life Save the 8th campaign said in a statement. “What Irish voters did yesterday is a tragedy of historic proportions. However, a wrong does not become right simply because a majority support it.”

Ireland has one of the lowest maternal mortality rates in the world. The Eighth Amendment of its Constitution guaranteed equal rights for pre-born babies and their mothers.

Repealing the Eighth Amendment was a decades-long goal of the abortion movement. The Irish voted by 67 percent to add the Eighth Amendment to their constitution in 1983, making the Emerald Isle a uniquely safe place for pre-born babies in contrast to the rest of the West’s liberal abortion regimes.

There have been five previous votes on repealing the Eighth Amendment, all of which failed. One was in 1983, three were in 1992, and one was in 2002.

More people in Dublin, where the majority of residents supported the “repeal” campaign, voted in this referendum than in 2015 on same-sex “marriage” and in their general election.

One students’ union in Dublin created a safe space-like “chill zone” where students could “de-stress” as the results were counted. It became apparent that abortion advocates had won and only 14 students utilized the room, The Guardian reported. Exit polls showed around 87 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds voted for abortion.

In early 2018, the Irish government approved putting the Eighth Amendment to a vote in May with the promise that if passed, legislation allowing abortion on demand would be introduced. The proposed legislation – which may be introduced next week – is expected to be abortion on demand during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy for healthy babies and later throughout pregnancy for nebulous “health” reasons, for babies with disabilities, and babies conceived in rape.

Pro-life activists responded to the referendum with a massive canvassing and public awareness campaign about how many lives have been saved by the Eighth Amendment, how one in five babies in England is aborted, the fact that abortion kills a living human being, and the many harms to women and society that come with legalizing it.

“The unborn child no longer has a right to life recognised by the Irish state,” the Save the 8th’s defeat statement continued. “Shortly, legislation will be introduced that will allow babies to be killed in our country. We will oppose that legislation. If and when abortion clinics are opened in Ireland, because of the inability of the Government to keep their promise about a GP led service, we will oppose that as well. Every time an unborn child has his or her life ended in Ireland, we will oppose that, and make our voices known.”

The country once known for its strong Catholic heritage and identity voted in 2015 to amend its constitution to permit same-sex “marriage.” Despite Ireland’s move toward secularism and approval of redefining marriage, polls on how the Eighth Amendment vote would go were extremely close toward the end of the abortion vote.

In 2012, a woman named Savita Halappanavar, who was 17 weeks pregnant, died of sepsis (blood poisoning) at Galway University Hospital.

Three official investigations found that the 31-year-old died of a blood infection caused by “extremely virulent bacteria,” E. coli ESBL. Under Ireland’s abortion laws, the woman would have been permitted an abortion had doctors realized how sick she was when she came to the hospital.

They didn’t, and her death was due to medical negligence, not lack of abortion, official investigations revealed. According to the Health Information and Quality Authority, which investigated her death, doctors missed 13 opportunities to save her life. 

Irish abortion activists exploited Savita's case and lied about her death, culminating in Friday’s vote.

 

COMMENT:  Ireland, the land of the Lemmings, ranks close to the bottom for intelligence of all the nations of Europe. 

https://iq-research.info/en/average-iq-by-country

This vote to introduce legalized abortion, which naturally follows fast upon their legalization of homosexual "marriage" two years ago, confirms these findings, for whom, after seeing the demographic destruction of Italy, Spain, France, England and Germany, all who have so decimated their populations by abortion that they cannot replace their own and must import Muslim workers who will soon dominate and destroy their native cultures, would follow them in their national folly?  Yet Ireland is the only country to legalize these perversions by popular vote.  The nations of Poland and Hungry are far more intelligent and possessing a clearer moral sense are moving to restrict as much as possible this satanic crime.  They had abortion imposed upon them by Communism and are working to reverse this policy of national suicide.  But Ireland has no excuse.  Having kept the faith through hundreds of years of persecution they have now returned to their Druid past where ritual murder including that of children was part of the routine worship, for abortion in the end is a form of ritual murder.  The dog that returns to its vomit is far different than one trying to restore their Catholic culture after years of communist rule.  Ireland is through and will suffer a punishment that will make its inhabitants pine for the good old days of imposed English famine.  All of this is no problem for the Catholic Novus Ordo Irish Church that has been so thoroughly infiltrated by homosexual clergy that it is looking forward to  establishing ecumenical relations with their Druid counterparts. 

 

 

The Same Standard Applies to Conciliar Heretics!

Before answering the accusation (that Popes Liberius and Honorius were heretics and formally taught heresy), we must once more remind our opponents that, in order to overturn our thesis (of papal infallibility), they must prove not merely that Liberius or Honorius has spoken or written what is contrary to faith, or denied it, but that he did so as Pope, teaching in matters of faith or morals, and thereby binding the Universal Church.  If they cannot prove this, they prove nothing, for the fallibility would then be only personal and private, and would no more affect the infallibility of the Pope as Universal teacher, than the denial of Peter in the Court of the High Priest injured his infallibility as Prince of the Apostles.  They must, then, first produce good, historical evidence of the fact; secondly, they must prove that it was a definition or teaching contrary to truth in matters of faith; and, thirdly, that the Pope intended, by his teaching, to bind the Universal Church to believe it.

Rev. F. X. Weninger, S.J., D.D., On the Apostolical and Infallible Authority of the Pope, when teaching the faithful, and on his relation to a General Council

 

Vatican and Cardinal Dolan participates in Catholic mockery

Pro-LGBT Vatican advisor Fr. James Martin: They called me ‘sexy’ at Met Gala

LifeSiteNews | NEW YORK, New York | May 10, 2018 – Fr. James Martin, a Vatican advisor and Jesuit priest who has established himself as an Martin_James_and_rihanna_met_gala_.jpgadvocate of LGBT causes, tweeted from the Met Gala on Monday that a fellow attendee told him “I love that you got dressed up as a sexy priest.”

Martin listed other comments he received, including, “Funky outfit,” “I love your costume,” and “Is that, like, for real?” in reference to his priestly suit and collar.

Martin also “praise[d]” Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Archbishop of New York City, for attending the event, opining that it “was wonderful that the local ordinary supported this historic exhibit on Catholicism.”

The Jesuit priest has made a name for himself in recent years by making repeated public statements undermining the Catholic Church’s doctrines on sexual morality, particularly with regard to homosexual relations, which the Church condemns as “intrinsically disordered.”

Martin has spoken positively of homosexual relationships and claims that gay couples should be able to kiss each other during the sign of peace at Mass. He claims the Bible has been “taken out of context” in its condemnation of homosexual acts, and has re-tweeted a complaint that Catholic priests can’t bless same-sex unions. Hispanics condemned him in 2017 for re-tweeting an immodest image that seemed to parody Our Lady of Guadalupe.

The Met Gala is an annual fundraising event for the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Costume Institute in New York City. Numerous celebrities attend every year dressed in often immodest and sexually provocative costumes corresponding to that year’s theme.

This year, the Met Gala’s theme was Heavenly Bodies: Fashion and the Catholic Imagination, and included a number of women’s outfits in the style of bishops’ liturgical vestments or sporting sacred symbols of the Catholic faith.

Pop star Rihanna dressed in a sexually-provocative outfit made to look like papal vestments, and Madonna Ciccone wore a dress with a cross shape carved in front of it to reveal her chest.

The exhibit included a sadomasochistic bondage mask covered in rosaries.

But rather than condemning the event, the Vatican supplied vestments for an accompanying clothing exhibit, and sent the boy’s choir of the Sistine Chapel to sing for partygoers. Cardinal Timothy Dolan called it a “great evening” and “the social event of the year.” He later denied that the event was blasphemous.

However, many Catholics condemned the event for blaspheming and insulting the Catholic religion, as well as for its poor taste. Among them was the British journalist and fallen-away Catholic Piers Morgan, who asked, “What the hell was the Vatican thinking?” Others included Raymond Arroyo, Ross Douthat, Laura Ingraham, and Matthew Schmitz at First Things.

Joseph Sciambra, an ex-gay and former porn star who returned to the Catholic faith of his youth, said that Martin’s apparent desire for attention is “sad and desperate.”

“Something very sad and desperate going on here,” wrote Sciambra on his Facebook page. “James Martin, this doesn’t mean anything. Every time I outreach in the gay community, I get hit on and hear meaningless compliments. But I’ve never felt the need to reveal that fact; except now. That someone said such a thing to Martin is not important, that he recounts the incident in detail - is very telling.”

“Who didn’t hug Martin when he was a boy?” asked Sciambra, who added, “It seems he needs constant praise and reassurance – for now, he has found a deep well in the Catholic LGBT community. . . . Too bad whatever is going on inside his mind had to play out on the world-stage. Sometimes, I just feel kind of sorry for him.”

“Anyone shocked that James Martin was mixed-up in the whole Met Gala?” asked Sciambra in another Facebook post. “That's part of the plan, and has been for a long time - get a few gullible and greedy Bishops to mix with wealthy/well-connected members of the LGBT community at $30,000 a pop cocktail parties - meet the same-sex partner, listen to how uncharitable the RCC is to gay couples, approve the dissident ministry, go back to the chancery feeling good about yourself. We just changed the Church. It worked with Cardinal Schonborn. Easy.”

Sciambra lamented the loss of the sense of the sacred in the Catholic Church, and believes that this has brought about an inversion of the sacred and the secular.

“When the RCC [Roman Catholic Church] lost a sense of the sacred, the secular world, in a desperate need to experience transcendence - made the sacred into something profane. I've noticed this for many years in the gay community,” said Sciambra.

 

 

 

Once in our culture, common knowledge  - “None is good but God alone.” (Luke 18-19)

There is no wisdom in sneering at him who truly studies words. Words, even the idlest, are signs, and signs of things, realities, which things, realities, are to be come at only through the signs. The term God and the adjective good, are one and the same word; and from this we learn that our Anglo-Saxon ancestors called by one and the same name, the supreme being, and that which it is proper to be, to desire, to do, or to possess. Therefore, say our wise modern philosophers, our Anglo-Saxon ancestors believed that the supreme being is good; thus proving that Balaam’s ass, or rather that Balaam himself, yet liveth and speaketh. Say, rather, therefore, they believed and incorporated into their every-day speech, the great truth, the foundation and spring of all heroism, that nothing is proper to be sought after, to be done, or possessed, which is not Godlike, or divine. They found not God in good; but good in God. What shall I be? A God-man, God-like. What shall I do? That which is God-like. What shall I prize? A God-ly soul. They did not conceive of Good, independent of God,—make that conception the standard, and bring God to it, as before a tribunal, to ascertain whether he conformed to it, or not; but they regarded God himself as the standard, and whatever conformed to him, they called good, and said, That be, do, possess, live for, die for,—nothing else is worth a wish or a thought.

Orestes Brownson, The Present State of Society

 

 

The Times of St. Athanasius:

De Mattei: The religious war of the IV Century and of our times

Roberto de Mattei  | Corrispondenza Romana | April 25, 2018

          The Church advances through history forever victorious, in accordance with the marvelous plans of God. The first three centuries reached their peak under Emperor Diocletian (284-305). All appeared to be lost. Discouragement was a temptation for many Christians and among them there were those who lost the faith. But those who persevered had the immense joy, not many years later, of seeing the Cross of Christ blazing on the banners of Constantine at the Battle of Saxa Rubra (312). This victory changed the course of history. The Milan-Nicomedia Edict of 313, granting liberty to Christians, overturned Nero’s senatus consultum, which had proclaimed Christianity a “superstitio illicita”.  The public Christianization of society had its beginnings in a climate of enthusiasm and fervor.

          In 325, The Council of Nicaea, would seem to mark the doctrinal rebirth of the Church, with the condemnation of Arius, who denied the Divinity of the Word. At Nicaea, thanks to the decisive role of the Deacon, Athanasius ( 295-373), subsequently Bishop of Alexandria, the doctrine of the “consubstantiality” of the nature among the Three Persons of the Most Holy Trinity was defined. 

          In the years that followed, between the orthodox position and the Arian heretics a “third party” made its way in:  that of the “Semi-Arians”, in turn divided amongst themselves into various currents, which acknowledged a certain analogy between the Father and the Son, but denied that He had been “begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father” as was affirmed in the Nicene Creed.   They substituted the word omousios, which means “of the same substance” with the term omoiusios, which means “of similar substance”.

          The heretics, the Arians and the Semi-Arians, had understood that their success would be dependent on two factors: the first was to remain inside the Church; the second to obtain the support of the political powers, hence of Constantine and afterwards his successors. And indeed it happened so: a crisis, until then unprecedented, inside the Church which lasted for more than sixty years.

          Nobody has described it better than  Cardinal Newman in his book The Arians of the IV Century (1833), wherein he gathered all the doctrinal nuances of the question. An Italian scholar, Professor Claudio Pierantoni has recently outlined an enlightening parallel between the Arian controversy and the present debate on the Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris laetitia. * However, even in 1973, Monsignor Rudolf Graber (1903-1992), Bishop of Regensburg, when recalling the figure of St. Athanasius, on the XVI centenary of his death, had compared the crisis of the IV century to that following the Second Vatican Council (Athanasius und die Kirche unserer Zeit: zu seinem 1600 Todestag,  Kral 1973).

          Athanasius was harshly persecuted even by his confreres for his fidelity to orthodoxy, and between 336 and 366 was five times forced to abandon the city in which he was Bishop, thus spending long years in exile and strenuous combat in defense of the Faith. Two assemblies of bishops, at Caesarea and Tyre (334-335) condemned him for rebellion and fanaticism. Further, in 341, while a Council of fifty bishops in Rome had proclaimed Athanasius innocent, the Council at Antioch, in which more than ninety bishops took part, ratified the Acts of the Synods of Caesarea and Tyre and put an Arian in the place of Athanasius as bishop. 

          The subsequent Council of Serdica, in 343, ended with a scission: the Western Fathers declared the deposition of Athanasius illegal and reconfirmed the Council of Nicaea: those from the East condemned not only Athanasius, but also Pope Julius I, (afterwards canonized), who had supported him. The Council of Sirmium in 351, sought a middle ground between Catholic orthodoxy and Arianism. At the Council of Arles in 353, the Fathers, including the legate representing Liberius, who had succeeded St. Julius I as Pope, signed a new condemnation against Athanasius.

          The bishops were forced to choose between the condemnation of Athanasius and exile.  St. Paulinus, Bishop of Trier, was almost the only one in the battle for the Nicene Creed  and was exiled to Phrygia, where he died following mistreatment at the hands of the Arians. Two years later, at the Council of Milan, (355), more than three hundred bishops of the West, signed the condemnation of Athanasius and another orthodox Father, St. Hilary of Poitiers, was banished to Phrygia for his intransigent fidelity to orthodoxy.

          In 357, Pope Liberius, overcome by the sufferings of exile and at the insistence of his friends, but also driven by “a love for peace”, signed the Semi-Arian formula of Sirmium and broke communion with St. Athanasius, declaring him separated from the Roman Church, for his use of the term “consubstantial” as is testified in four letters transmitted to us by St. Hilary  (Manlio Simonetti, La crisi ariana del IV secolo, Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, Roma 1975, pp. 235-236).

Under the pontificate of the same Liberius, the Councils of Rimini (359) and Seleucia (359), which constituted a Great Council, representative of the West and the East, abandoned the term “consubstantial” of Nicaea and established an equivocal “middle way” between the Arians and St. Athanasius. It seemed as if rampant  heresy had conquered the Church.   

          The Councils of Seleucia and Rimini are not numbered by the Church today in the eight ecumenical councils of antiquity: there were, nonetheless, as many as 560 bishops present, almost the totality of the Fathers of Christianity, who were defined as “ecumenical” by their contemporaries.  It was then that St. Jerome coined the phrase wherein "the whole world groaned and woke astounded to find itself Arian” (Dialogus adversus Luciferianos, n. 19, in PL, 23, col. 171). 

          What is important to underline is that it wasn’t about a doctrinal dispute limited to some theologian, nor a simple clash between bishops where the Pope had to act as an arbiter. It was a religious war in which all Christians were involved, from the Pope down to the last faithful.  Nobody closed themselves up in a spiritual bunker, nobody stood looking out the window, a mute spectator of the drama. Everyone was down in the trenches fighting on both sides of the battle-lines.

          It wasn’t easy at that time to understand whether your own bishop was orthodox or not, but the sensus fidei was the compass to orient oneself. Cardinal Walter Brandmüller while speaking in Rome on April 7th 2018, recalled how “the ‘sensus fidei’ acts as a sort of spiritual immune system, through which the faithful instinctively recognize or reject any error. Upon this ‘sensus fidei’ rests then – apart from the Divine promise – also the passive infallibility of the Church, or the certainty that the Church, in Her totality, shall never be able to incur a heresy.”

          St. Hilary writes that during the Arian crisis the ears of the faithful who interpreted in an orthodox sense the ambiguous affirmations of the Semi-Arian theologians were holier than the hearts of the priests. The Christians who for three centuries had resisted emperors, were now resisting their own Shepherds, in some cases even the Pope, guilty, if not of open heresy, but to say the least, of grave negligence.

          Monsignor Graber refers to the words of Joseph von Görres (1776-1848), in his book Athanasius (1838) written at the time of the arrest of the Archbishop of Cologne, but it is even today of extraordinary veracity: “The earth is shaking under our feet. We can foresee with certainty that the Church will emerge unscathed from such ruin, but nobody can say and conjecture who and what will survive. We, then, in advising, in recommending and raising our hands, would like to impede the evil by showing its signs. Even the mules who carry the false prophets, bristle, pull-back and with human language throw back the injustice in the face of those striking them; those who do not see  the sword drawn (by God) which closes off the way to them (Numbers, XXII, 22-35). Work then while it is day, since at night nobody can. It serves nothing to wait:  waiting has done nothing more than aggravate things.”

          There are times when a Catholic is obliged to choose between cowardice and heroism, between apostasy and holiness. This is what happened in the IV century and it is what is happening even today.

 


 

 

 “The Devil is fighting a decisive battle”
Sr. Lucy also told me:

“Father, the Devil is fighting a decisive battle against the Virgin and, as you know, what most offends God and what will gain him the greatest number of souls in the shortest time is to gain the souls consecrated to God. For this also leaves unprotected the field of the laity and the Devil can more easily seize them.
“Also, Father, tell them that my cousins Francisco and Jacinta made sacrifices because they always saw the Blessed Virgin was very sad in all her apparitions. She never smiled at us. This anguish that we saw in her, caused by offenses to God and the chastisements that threaten sinners, penetrated our souls. And being children, we did not know what measures to devise except to pray and make sacrifices. …”
 Referring to the vision of Hell that Our Lady showed her and Jacinta and Francisco, she said:
“For this reason, Father, it is my mission not just to tell about the material punishments that will certainly come over the earth if the world does not pray and do penance. No, my mission is to tell everyone the imminent danger we are in of losing our souls for all eternity if we remain fixed in sin.
“Father, we should not wait for a call to the world from Rome on the part of the Holy Father to do penance. Nor should we wait for a call for penance to come from the Bishops in our Dioceses, nor from our Religious Congregations. No, Our Lord has often used these means, and the world has not paid heed. So, now each one of us must begin to reform himself spiritually. Each one has to save not only his own soul, but also all the souls that God has placed on his pathway.
“Father, the Blessed Virgin did not tell me that we are in the last times of the world, but I understood this for three reasons:
“The first is because she told me that the Devil is engaging in a battle with the Virgin, a decisive battle. It is a final battle where one party will be victorious and the other will suffer defeat. So, from now on, we are either with God or we are with the Devil; there is no middle ground.
“The second reason is because she told me, as well as my cousins, that God is giving two last remedies to the world: the Holy Rosary and devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. And, being the last remedies, that is to say, they are the final ones, means that there will be no others.

“And the third, because in the plans of the Divine Providence, when God is going to chastise the world He always first exhausts all other remedies. When He sees that the world pays no attention whatsoever, then, as we say in our imperfect way of talking, with a certain fear He presents us the last means of salvation, His Blessed Mother.
 If we despise and reject this last means, Heaven will no longer pardon us, because we will have committed a sin that the Gospel calls a sin against the Holy Spirit. This sin consists in openly rejecting – with full knowledge and will – the salvation that is put in our hands.
 “Also, since Our Lord is a very good Son, He will not permit that we offend and despise His Blessed Mother. We have as obvious testimony the history of different centuries where Our Lord has shown us with terrible examples how He has always defended the honor of His Blessed Mother.
 “Prayer and sacrifice are the two means to save the world. As for the Holy Rosary, Father, in these last times in which we are living, the Blessed Virgin has given a new efficacy to the praying of the Holy Rosary. This in such a way that there is no problem that cannot be resolved by praying the Rosary, no matter how difficult it is - be it temporal or above all spiritual - in the spiritual life of each of us or the lives of our families, be they our families in the world or Religious Communities, or even in the lives of peoples and nations.
 “I repeat, there is no problem, as difficult as it may be, that we cannot resolve at this time by praying the Holy Rosary. With the Holy Rosary we will save ourselves, sanctify ourselves, console Our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls.
 “Then, there is devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, our Most Holy Mother, holding her as the seat of mercy, goodness and pardon and the sure door to enter Heaven. This is the first part of the Message referring to Our Lady of Fatima, and the second part, which is briefer but no less important, refers to the Holy Father.”

Sister Lucy of Fatima to Fr. Augustin Fuentes in 1957

 

 

The Communist Party now owns the Church in China

Life_Site.jpgOnePeterFive | May 3, 2018  – On March 22, the Chinese Communist Party announced that all "religious affairs" in China would henceforth be supervised by a shadowy Party office called the "United Front Department." The former government agency responsible for Catholic and other believers – the State Administration of Religious Affairs bureau (SARA) – has been summarily abolished.

The reorganization attracted little attention outside of China, but it is certain to have unpleasant repercussions for Chinese believers. I believe that this move means that the persecution of Catholics and other believers is about to get much more intense, perhaps rising to levels not seen since the dark days of the 1950s.

The change also means that, in all probability, the draft agreement between the Vatican and Beijing that has been under discussion for years is now a dead letter. In fact, signing it now would mean more than surrendering papal authority over the appointment of bishops to the Chinese state, as bad as that would be. Signing it now would be a betrayal of the faithful into the hands of a new Red Emperor who seems to have a particular animus towards Christians, especially Catholics, and who seems determined to suffocate and extinguish the faith throughout his empire. [.....]

 

Penance then is as it were, a salutary weapon placed in the hands of the soldiers of Christ, who wish to fight for the defense of and restoration of the moral order in the universe.  It is a weapon that strikes right at the root of all evil, that is, at the lust of material wealth and the wanton pleasures of life.  Be means of various works of penance, the noble-hearted Christian subdues the base passions that tend to make him violate the moral order.  But if zeal for the divine law and brotherly love are as great in him as they should be, then not only does he practice penance for himself and his own sins, but he takes upon himself the expiation of the sins of others, imitating the saints who often heroically make themselves victims of reparation of the sins of whole generations, imitating even the divine Redeemer, Who became the Lamb of God, 'Who taketh away the sins of the world,' (1 john 1:29).... The divine Heart of Jesus cannot but be moved at the prayers and sacrifice of His Church, and He will finally say to His spouse, weeping at His feet, under the weight of so many griefs and woes: 'Great is thy faith, be it done to thee as thou wilt' (Matthew 15:28). 

Pope Pius XI, Caritate Christi

 

 

“But it did not last long.”

I saw many pastors cherishing dangerous ideas against the Church. . . . They built a large, singular, extravagant church which was to embrace all creeds with equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, and all denominations, a true communion of the unholy with one shepherd and one flock. There was to be a Pope, a salaried Pope, without possessions. All was made ready, many things finished; but, in place of an altar, were only abomination and desolation. Such was the new church to be, and it was for it that he had set fire to the old one; but God designed otherwise.
Blessed Anna Katherine Emmerich
 
I saw also the relationship between the two popes.... I saw how baleful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city of Rome. The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great darkness... Then, the vision seemed to extend on every side. Whole Catholic communities were being oppressed, harassed, confined, and deprived of their freedom. I saw many churches close down, great miseries everywhere, wars and bloodshed. A wild and ignorant mob took to violent action. But it did not last long.
Blessed Anna Katherine Emmerich, May 13, 1820

 

 

Pope Francis Kisses Hand of, and concelebrates Novus Ordo with, Notorious Homosexual Activist Priest - some sample quotations from this degenerate:

Francis_kiss_hand_homosexual_activist_Don Michele De Paolis.JPGToday the Church's attitude to homosexuals is strict, inhuman and has caused much suffering by claiming that homosexuality is sin.   Some church people say, “It is acceptable to be gay, but they must not have any relationships, they cannot love each other”!  The maximum is hypocrisy.  This is like talking to a plant, and saying, 'you cannot bloom, you may not bear fruit.' (sic)  

Don Michele De Paolis, Interview with LGBT group Bethel of Genoa, Italy.

 

In the holy Church of God, not everyone is suffering from homophobia.  Those who want to make you “heterosexuals,” as it is called,  would be force you to act contrary to nature and to make you unhappy psychopaths.   We need to put into our heads that God our Father wants us, his children, to be happy, by making fruitful the gifts that He has placed us in our “nature”!  [.....] You have the right to go looking for a partner.  And be quite unconcerned: where agape is, is God.  Live your love with joy.  And with our mother Church we must have patience. Her attitude to homosexuals will change.   In this sense numerous initiatives have already been engaged.

Don Michele De Paolis, Addressing gathering of homosexual activists

 

We must liberate our thinking from a risk: fundamentalism, that is, to take literally what the Bible says.  The new obedience to the gospel is free, responsible and conscious.  Instead of wasting energy in endless religious polemics, it aims to a new Christian spirituality of joyful acceptance of yourself forming gratitude to God, knowing that homosexual love is His gift, which is not less than the heterosexual.

Don Michele De Paolis, Essay

 

 

 

Francis_hanukka_3.jpgIn like manner, the ceremonies of the Old Law prefigured Christ as having yet to be born and to suffer; whereas our Sacraments signify Him as already born and having suffered.  Consequently, just as it would be a mortal sin now for anyone, in making a profession of faith, to say that Christ is yet to be born, which the fathers of old said devoutly and truthfully; so too, it would be a mortal sin now to observe those ceremonies which the fathers of old accomplished with devotion and fidelity.  Such is the teaching of St. Augustine. 

St. Thomas Aquinas

 

 

 

 

 

Human beings are created to praise, reverence, and serve God our Lord, and by means of this to save their souls.  The other things on the face of the earth are created for human beings, to help them in working toward the end for which they are created.  From this it follows that I should use these things to the extent that they help me toward my end, and rid myself of them to the extent that they hinder me.  To do this, I must make myself indifferent to all created things, in regard to everything which is left to my freedom of will and is not forbidden.  Consequently, on my own part I ought not to seek health rather than sickness, wealth rather than poverty, honor rather than dishonor, long life rather than a short one, and son in all matters.  I ought to desire and elect only the thing which is more conducive to the end for which I am created. 

St. Ignatius of Loyola, Principle and Foundation of the Spiritual Exercises

 

 

Catholic Mass attendance in U.S. plunges under Francis pontificate

LifeSiteNews | April 20, 2018 – The Catholic Church is seeing its biggest decline in Mass attendance in the U.S. in decades that started between the papacies of Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis, a new Gallup poll says.

"From 2014 to 2017, an average of 39% of Catholics reported attending church in the past seven days. This is down from an average of 45% from 2005 to 2008 and represents a steep decline from 75% in 1955," the poll found.

Francis became Pope in 2013. [.....]

 

Francis-appointed cardinal: ‘The church is moving on the question of same-sex couples’

LifeSiteNews | VILLANOVA, Pennsylvania, April 18, 2018 – The Catholic Church is “moving” on the issue of couples living in homosexual Life_Site.jpgrelationships, a prominent Francis-appointed U.S. cardinal said.

Cardinal Joseph Tobin said that LGBT-identifying persons’ place in the Church is not an easy subject for some Church leaders, but they must contend with it.

“I think it’s a very difficult question,” Tobin said in response to a question on the firing of LGBT individuals from Catholic institutions while speaking at Villanova University last Thursday. 

“The Church is moving on the question of same-sex couples,” Tobin said, although not as swiftly as some would like. 

St. Peter Damian, an 11th century Italian Catholic reformer and Doctor of the Church, described homosexuality in his famous Book of Gomorrah as a “diabolical” corruption of God’s plan for sexuality between a man and a woman.​ Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, the Church teaches that homosexual acts are “acts of grave depravity” and are “intrinsically disordered” since they are “contrary to the natural law” in that they “close the sexual act to the gift of life.” “Under no circumstances can they be approved,” States the Catechism of the Catholic Church. 

The cardinal’s opening address of last week’s Villanova conference centered on the fifth anniversary of the Francis pontificate. It was covered in a report from Jesuit-run America Magazine.

“Francis, a Voice Crying Out in the World: Mercy, Justice, Love, & Care for the Earth,” ran April 12-15, and gathered a list of high-level Francis advisors and confidantes. 

Aside from Tobin, the speaker roster included among others editor of La Civiltà Cattolica Jesuit Father Antonio Spadaro, Honduran Cardinal Óscar Rodríguez Maradiaga, a member of Francis’s advisory council of nine Cardinals, Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs and Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences President Margaret Archer.

Spadaro, often referenced as the pope’s “moouthpiece,” recently re-tweeted a call for EWTN to be put under interdict “until they get rid of Raymond Arroyo,” after a February World Over segment with a discussion critical of a speech he’d made. Spadaro has been critical of the cardinals who raised the dubia resting clarification from Pope Francis on Amoris Laetitia, and others who’ve questioned the exhortation as well. And he had co-authored an article charging conservative Catholics and Evangelicals in the U.S. as with forming an “ecumenism of hate” in their opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage.

Cardinal Maradiaga has also been critical of the four dubia cardinals.

Sachs, well known for his support for abortion and population control, has been a presenter at a number of Vatican conferences on climate change. 

Appointed president of the PASS in 2014, Archer had endorsed the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015 despite their containing language calling for “universal sexual and reproductive health rights,” and denounced a representative of Centre for Family and Human Rights Institute (C-Fam) for raising criticism about the Vatican’s invitation to abortion proponents for a 2015 climate change conference.

The conference by all accounts was a glowing salute to Francis, with a Crux article headline on the event stating, “Pope’s biggest fans celebrate five years of Francis at Villanova.”

“This pope is electric,” Spadaro is reported to have said at the conference, re-tweeting papal biographer Austen Ivereigh’s quoting him saying that around the pope "there are fields of attraction and repulsion." He is squeezing out bad spirit, outside as well as within the Church, as happens in Spiritual Exercises.

Sachs had said at the conference, “there is no voice more important in the world than Pope Francis in the fight for justice, peace, and decency.”

“The church in recent decades has been somewhat marginalized by many for what they see as a preoccupation with sexual ethics,” Cardinal Tobin said in his opening address. “The church cannot reverse itself on its sexual ethics, but Pope Francis has shown that there are other issues on which the church and world can work together. This, too, is a step in the trajectory that leads back to Vatican II.”

Tobin used the term “paradigm shift” to refer to both Amoris Laetitia and the Second Vatican Council, the America Magazine report said. 

Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin had described Amoris Laetitia as a “paradigm shift” in January, further confirming the exhortation’s controversial standing for opening the door to Communion for divorced and remarried Catholics and others in non-marital unions. 

The term paradigm shift has been used by Cupich to describe Amoris Laetitia as well, and prompted criticism from Catholics mindful that the Church doesn't change its doctrine for the world. 

Tobin voiced this mindset with his conference comments, stating of Amoris Laetitia, “As with all paradigm shifts, especially after some ecumenical councils, it provoked controversy.” [.....]

 

 

“Love Cannot Be Silenced”? - With a decline of 73% since Vatican II and an average age of 76 years, and this was more than five years ago, we will soon be entertained by the silence of the grave!

The Vanishing of the Nuns

New_York_Times.tifMichael Winerip | December 2, 2012

          In 1965, when the average age of a baby boomer was 10, there were 180,000 nuns in the United States. Today there are about 56,000. But even more dramatic than this decline is the age of the average Roman Catholic sister — 74 years old.

          Will there even be nuns in the church by the time the millennials reach middle age? Will the boomers be the last generation to know nuns as a large and powerful force in American Catholicism?

          Sister Kathy Sherman of LaGrange Park, Ill., at 60, a young nun by today’s standards, came of age during the Vietnam War, playing antiwar protest songs on her guitar. These days, Sister Sherman — whose voice sounds a lot like Judy Collins — has become known for a protest song she’s written (Love Cannot Be Silenced), aimed at the Vatican’s efforts to rein in American nuns.

 

 

Pope Francis coddles the Homosexual Lobby - Is this pay back or is he a bona fide member?

And, just days ago, the astounding installation of Juan Barros as the new Bishop of the Diocese of Osorno, Chile, despite substantial credible evidence, presented to Francis, that Barros both witnessed and later covered up the homosexual predations of boys by his close friend Rev. Fernando Karadima.  Although the statute of limitations had run on Karadima’s crimes, the Vatican found him guilty of sexual abuse in 2011, ordering him to a “life of prayer and penitence” (an order he has flouted).  The outrageous elevation of Barros to the office of bishop was greeted by massive protests against his installation by members of the laity, who literally tried physically to prevent it. 

Christopher Ferrara, director of American Catholic Lawyers Association and writer, April 10, 2015

 

 

 

 

Fall of the Tower of Babel

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fruits of Vatican II - Why is it that their “disease” always makes us sick?

Update on Msgr. Edward Arsenault : Press Release

We [Saint Luke Institute] have learned that Msgr. Edward J. Arsenault, former president and CEO of Saint Luke Institute, was sentenced today in New Hampshire after pleading guilty to misappropriating funds from the Diocese of Manchester, the Catholic Medical Center in New Hampshire and the estate of a priest.

This did not involve Saint Luke Institute funds. [....] This has been a very painful situation. We ask everyone to keep all those affected in their prayers.

COMMENT: FYI - The rest of the story: What Saint Luke Institute neglected to report in this press release is that the embezzled money was used by Msgr. Edward Arsenault to obtain sexual services from a young man by the name of Luke Parkin, a homosexual “performer.”  The money given to Mr. Parkin was not recovered.  He was not charged in the crime because he did not known the money was stolen.  Saint Luke Institute is owned by the Diocese of Washington, D.C. and advertises itself as a “healing ministry” that is committed to “providing... quality psychological therapy, spiritual support and physical wellness... in healing from anxiety, addiction, depression, substance abuse, boundary issues, interpersonal problems, sexual issues or other challenges” afflicting Catholic religious.  It is the most frequently used resource by U.S. bishops for the treatment of religious with “boundary issues” of sexual perversions.  Msgr. Arsenault followed in the same mold as the former CEO and founder of Saint Luke Institute, Fr. Michael Peterson, a priest-psychiatrist, homosexual and drug abuser who died of AIDS in 1987 at 44 years of age.  But, don't worry that Fr. Peterson may have died un-mourned.  Fr. Peterson was given an all star send-off to the grave with a “Mass of Christian Burial” officiated by Cardinal James Hickey and attended by 188 priests and 7 bishops, including Archbishop Pio Laghi, the Apostolic Pro-Nuncio, as well as a large contingent of nationally recognized homosexual activists.  Fr. Peterson is remembered as the one who framed the sex-abuse scandal in the Church as a problem of pedophilia and not, as it in fact is, a problem of homosexual pederasty in more than 90% of all cases.  The Saint Luke Institute, whose cliental are for the most part Catholic religious with sexual perversions, is notorious for two particularly egregious sins: They counsel and promote techniques that directly violate natural law and corrupt Catholic norms of sexual morality; and, they have declared notorious homosexual pederasts “cured” and fit for return to active ministry that have abused other adolescent boys.  Since the Institute holds that sexual perversions are genetic, they do not explain how they are “cured.”  As Msgr. William Lori (the current Archbishop of Baltimore), who was at the time Cardinal Hickeys Chancellor, said in a press release, the “sexual abuse of minors was ... a terrible disease.”

 

 

Modernism and Neo-Modernism, built upon linguistic Deconstructionism which denies the intentionality of language, “fabricates a fictitious reality.”  The Novus Ordo Church can only offer just another “pseudo-reality” to modern man and not the Absolute Truth of God's revelation.  The worst thing of all is that most Novus Ordo Catholics are “satisfied with a fictitious reality created by design through the abuse of language.” No wonder Pope Francis hates the “Absolute Truth” and declared it to be “idolatrous” and “godless”! 

Plato's literary activity extended over fifty years, and time and again he asked himself anew: What is it that makes the sophists so dangerous?  Toward the end he wrote one more dialogue, the Sophist, in which he added a new element to his answer: “The sophists,” he says, “fabricate a fictitious reality.”  That the existential realm of man could be taken over by pseudo-realities whose fictitious nature threatens to become indiscernible is truly a depressing thought.  And yet this Platonic nightmare, I hold, possesses an alarming contemporary relevance.  For the general public is being reduced to a state where people not only are unable to find out about the truth but also become unable even to search for the truth because they are satisfied with deception and trickery that have determined their convictions, satisfied with a fictitious reality created by design through the abuse of language.  This, says Plato, is the worst thing that the sophists are capable of wreaking upon mankind by their corruption of the word. 

Josef Pieper, Abuse of Language - Abuse of Power

 

 

The OBJECT of the Faith and Heresy is the SAME - DOGMA, therefore, Dogma is necessarily the proximate rule of faith!

St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas". The right Christian faith consists in giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are, therefore, two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church. 

Catholic Encyclopedia, 1907

 

 

On the "Character of Our Lord Jesus Christ" - The "New Evangelization" is clueless

We wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man.... As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one's personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism.

St. Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique

 

 

Intercommunion, 7 German bishops write to the Holy See

After the German Bishops Conference’s proposal, the former Holy Office was asked to express their views on the admission of non-Catholic spouse to the Eucharist

Vatican Insider | andrea tornielli | vatican city | 05/04/2018

Is it possible for a Protestant faithful to participate in the Eucharist of the Catholic spouse? Last February the German Bishops’ Conference approved by a qualified majority of two thirds, a draft open-ended document, which provided for this possibility “in certain cases”. On 22 March seven bishops from Germany, among whom also the Cardinal of Cologne, Rainer Maria Woelki, wrote to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and to the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, asking for a pronouncement of the Holy See and general criteria valid for the whole Church and not only for one of its regions.  [.....]

 

 

Think carefully before contributing to any 'official' Catholic charity

‘Alarming’: Archbishop withholds Development and Peace donations over pro-abortion funding

LifeSiteNews | EDMONTON, Alberta, Canada | April 6, 2018 – A Canadian archbishop is withholding funding from Canada’s official Catholic development agency after an internal review by the bishops found as many as 40 of its grantees are in violation of Church teaching. Edmonton Archbishop Richard Smith issued the following pastoral letter this week explaining the decision to deny funding to the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace. LifeSiteNews has reported extensively for years on Development and Peace’s funding of pro-abortion, pro-contraception, and pro-LGBT groups in the developing world.

 

 

An Uprising of the Cardinals Has Stopped (For Now) The Bergoglian Heresy on Hell. The Staged Denial and the Risk of Impeachment.

Antonio Socci | April 1, 2018

The falling plaster which fell from the ceiling of St. Peter’s Basilica on Good Friday seems like a symbol of the disastrous Easter 2018 of Pope Bergoglio and his declining pontificate. After months of incidents and slip-ups, now we have the eruption of a new thriller — the interview with Scalfari on hell.

It was supposed to be a high-profile attempt to recover the consensus that Francis is a “revolutionary pope” (he loves to define himself this way), but instead it became a serious misstep. He understood this on Thursday morning when he received a certain very difficult phone call (as we shall see below) and ran for cover.

The Ignored Denial 

But on Saturday the Vaticanist website “Il Sismografo” lamented that despite the “denial” of the “alleged sentence attributed to the Pope — something like ‘Hell does not exist’— already now for 48 hours it has caused an avalanche on the web, in every language.”

In fact it made a big splash abroad, but not in the Italian press. And above all — two days after the Vatican “denial” — “Repubblica” has not even mentioned it, as if it was non-existent. Why? Was it not unusual behavior? And why did Italian news outlets keep silent? So as not to step on the feet of the Vatican and “Repubblica”? It’s strange. In fact, this story made the specter of impeachment for heresy hover (and perhaps it still is hovering) over Bergoglio, which could cost him the papacy. Just as there is also hovering a sort of public moral-professional delegitimization over the “lay pope” of the Italian press, Bergoglio’s friend and confidant Eugenio Scalfari. Who is really telling the truth?

Either One or the Other

There are only two possibilities: either Bergoglio did make the explosive heretical affirmations which “The Times” carried with the headline “Pope Francis Abolishes Hell”, or else Scalfari made it all up and thus committed an unheard of professional gaffe which undermines the credibility of “Repubblica”, a very “loud” mistake to make at a time when every day they are decrying “fake news.”

If it’s true that Bergoglio said this, we are looking at the most colossal error in the 2000 year history of the papacy. If it’s not true that he said this, the supposed scoop of “Repubblica” would be the fake news of the century.

One or the other is true. Tertium non datur. There was only one possible third explanation that could have patched the hole at best, but in the Vatican they did not choose to make it. In fact — assuming that Scalfari did not render a sound account of their discussion about Hell — the matter could be finished if the press office had admitted that the two spoke about eschatological themes but that Scalfari completely misunderstood what the Pope said.

It would have been enough if the Pope, through his spokesman, restated his firm and convinced refutation of the heretical statements and his clear and explicit adherence to the Creed of the Church, adding that there was a colossal misunderstanding. 

That would have made Scalfari very wrong and appear totally incompetent, but it would have closed the case. But that is not what the Vatican “denial” said.

They Are Telling Us The Truth

In fact the Vatican did not deny that the two spoke on this topic, and they did not say that Scalfari misunderstood, but only affirmed that Scalfari’s text was “the fruit of his reconstruction” in which “the actual words [of the Pope] were not recorded.”

But what were the actual words? Why won’t they reveal them?

Every published interview is a reconstruction. The Vatican should tell us if Bergoglio disavows and rejects the statement that was attributed to him or not (that unrepentant souls “are not punished…there is no hell, only the disappearance of sinful souls”). Why hasn’t it done that? Authentic Catholic intellectuals in America have also asked the same thing: Why hasn’t the Vatican denied the substance of what was said?

The little story of the way Scalfari does his interviews informally without notes is old: it was already put in place by the preceding papal spokesman, Fr. Lombardi, after the first two interview-chats between Scalfari and Bergoglio.

All of the Vatican efforts to distance the pope from what Scalfari wrote were dissolved by the decision of the pope to republish those interviews in a book and thus endorse them.  Furthermore, on Thursday Scalfari said that he met Bergoglio for the umpteenth time “by his own invitation.”

“The Times” Believes Scalfari

Why did Bergoglio invite him to speak if he knew there was the risk that Scalfari would make one of his “explosive” non-authorized retellings of their conversation, attributing huge ideas to the pope which he doesn’t really think? Do they want to make us believe that once again, for the umpteenth time, Francis fell for it without wanting it to happen?

There is much that is doubtful. Such as, it is doubtful that “Repubblica” prints any of these interviews without some form of approval by the interested party.

“The Times” talked to an expert who said that on these interviews he “tends to believe Scalfari more than the Vatican,” because if you know that someone distorts your words, “you don’t continue to invite him.”

There is thus a game being played by Scalfari and Bergoglio for over five years now, in which the Argentine pope consents to a sort of double Magisterial track. When he speaks to Catholics he expresses himself a certain vague and theologically ambiguous way. He avoids explicit statements and thus little by little demolishes doctrine (the tactic of boiling frogs slowly).

Meanwhile, he speaks through Scalfari to the secular world, making known his true ideas, which are so totally modern, in order to build up his “revolution” and to have popularity among non-Catholics and the media.

It is no accident that “The Times” article, published on Friday on the front page, accredited Bergoglio’s words as substantially authentic and praised the pope, because with this “suggestion” on the non-existence of Hell he would be seeking “to reconcile the eternal truths with the customs and mentality of modern times.”

Already Stated By Cardinal Martini

As a matter of fact this idea about Hell has been a well known part of progressive theology. Cardinal Martini —who is considered one of the great precursors of this pontificate — in his final months wrote something of the sort in his book/testament:

“I nourish the hope that sooner or later everyone will be redeemed. I am a great optimist…. My hope is that God welcomes everyone, that He is merciful, and becomes ever stronger. On the other hand, naturally, I cannot imagine how people like Hitler or an assassin who abused children can be close to God. It seems easier for me to think that these sort of people are simply annihilated…”

With these ideas, progressive theology wants to be more merciful than God and than Jesus Himself, who in the Gospel describes with terrible words the punishments of Hell. This is the meaning of Bergoglian mercy: to improve the mercy of Jesus.

On Hell, he had allowed Scalfari to scout it out before him. Three times in “Repubblica” in the last few years, Scalfari has already attributed this statement to Bergoglio, without giving a direct quote. The Vatican has never denied it. It drew no reaction from the confused and annihilated Church. And so this time somebody thought that the moment had arrived to put these Bergoglian concepts inside quotation marks. When the interview was published on Thursday morning, there was no denial from the Vatican. Until at 3:00 pm, after several hours of delay, a statement was issued. Why? What happened?

The Revolt

It appears that this time – in the face of a direct quotation from Bergoglio stating two explicit heresies, contradicting two fundamental dogmas of the Church – an important cardinal (non-Italian) was outraged, called several of his colleagues and then, also in their name, directly sought to find out from the pope exactly what this interview could mean – because professing  explicit heresy is one of the four reasons the Petrine ministry can be lost.

Bergoglio then consulted with the Sostituto [of the Secretariat of State] Msgr. Becciu and decided to quickly run for cover through his spokesman, while Scalfari, who is in on the game to this very moment, was given a heads-up.

This explains why “Repubblica” made no mention of the “denial” and did not respond to it. But where is this whole thing going to end?

Antonio Socci

 

 

On the Doctrinal Authority of Vatican II Council

Let's sum up the facts of the case.  We're not dealing with interpretations, or opinions but FACTS regarding the Vatican II.  It rests purely on human authority since the Council refused to engage the Church's Attribute of Infallibility, it is nothing more than churchmen teaching by their grace of state.  It is nothing more the most extra-ordinary engagement of the authorized ordinary magisterium teaching by their grace of state.  Every Catholic is free to disregard or actively oppose any heretical novelty produced by the council.

1.  CANON LAW SUPPORTS THE VIEW THAT V2 WAS NOT INFALLIBLE, IN ANY WAY.

Canon Law 749 says that if something is not EXPRESSLY SAID to be infallible, then it's not:
*§3 No doctrine is understood to be infallibly defined unless this is manifestly demonstrated. *

2.  VATICAN II'S OWN DOCUMENTS ADMIT IT WAS NOT INFALLIBLE.

From V2's footnotes:
In view of the conciliar practice and the pastoral purpose of the present Council, this sacred Synod defines matters of faith or morals as binding on the Church only when the Synod itself openly declares so.

My note:  As a matter of fact, nowhere in the council documents does the Synod openly declare that such and such a doctrine is being defined.

3.  POPE PAUL VI ADMITTED PUBLICLY THAT VATICAN 2 WAS NOT INFALLIBLE -- THREE TIMES!

Today we are concluding the Second Vatican Council. [...] But one thing must be noted here, namely, that the teaching authority of the Church, even though not wishing to issue extraordinary dogmatic pronouncements, has made thoroughly known its authoritative teaching on a number of questions which today weigh upon man's conscience and activity, descending, so to speak, into a dialogue with him, but ever preserving its own authority and force; it has spoken with the accommodating friendly voice of pastoral charity; its desire has been to be heard and understood by everyone; it has not merely concentrated on intellectual understanding but has also sought to express itself in simple, up-to-date, conversational style, derived from actual experience and a cordial approach which make it more vital, attractive and persuasive; it has spoken to modern man as he is.
(Address during the last general meeting of the Second Vatican Council, December 7, 1965; AAS 58; http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6tolast.htm)


---

" There are those who ask what authority, what theological qualification , the council intended to give to its teachings, knowing that it avoided issuing solemn dogmatic definitions backed by the Church's infallible teaching authority. The answer is known by those who remember the conciliar declaration of March 6, 1964, repeated on November 16, 1964. In view of the pastoral nature of the Council , it avoided proclaiming in any extraordinary manner and dogmas carrying the mark of infallibility."
(General Audience , December 1, 1966 published in L'Oservatore Romano 1/21/1966)

---

"Differing from other councils , this one was not directly dogmatic, but disciplinary and pastoral."
(General audience August 6, 1975.)


4.  MANY, MANY OTHERS IN ROME HAVE SAID IT IS NOT INFALLIBLE.

Cardinal Ratzinger stated:
"Certainly there is a mentality of narrow views that isolates Vatican II and which provoked this opposition. There are many accounts of it , which give the impression that from Vatican II onward, everything has changed , and what preceded it has no value or, at best , has value in the light of Vatican II..... The truth is that this particular council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level , as merely a pastoral council."

( Address to the Chilean Episcopal Conference , II Sabato 30/7 5/8/1988

---

Cardinal Felici elaborated on this to Archbishop Lefebvre († 1991), who narrated his experience.

“These events I was involved in. It is I who carried the signatures to Mgr. Felici, the Council Secretary, accompanied by Mgr. de Proenca Sigaud, Archbishop of Diamantina: and I am obliged to say there occurred things that are truly inadmissible. I do not say this in order to condemn the Council; and I am not unaware that there is here a cause of confusion for a great many Catholics. After all, they think the Council was inspired by the Holy Ghost.  “Not necessarily. A non-dogmatic, pastoral council is not a recipe for infallibility." When, at the end of the sessions, we asked Cardinal Felici, “Can you not give us what the theologians call the “theological note of the Council?”” he replied, “We have to distinguish according to the schemas and the chapters those which have already been the subject of dogmatic definitions in the past; as for the declarations which have a novel character, we have to make reservations.”

(An Open Letter to Confused Catholics, By His Grace Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Chapter 14, “Vatican II is the French Revolution in the Church.”, p. 107)

---

John Cardinal Heenan of England stated as follows.
“It deliberately limited its own objectives. There were to be no specific definitions. Its purpose from the first was pastoral renewal within the Church and a fresh approach to the outside.” (Council and Clergy, 1966)

---

Bishop Butler of England publicly spoke to the matter twice.
“Not all teachings emanating from a pope or Ecumenical Council are infallible. There is no single proposition of Vatican II – except where it is citing previous infallible definitions – which is in itself infallible.” (The Tablet 26,11,1967)

---

Bishop Rudolf Graber wrote as follows.
“Since the Council was aiming primarily at a pastoral orientation and hence refrained from making dogmatically binding statements or disassociating itself, as previous Church assemblies have done, from errors and false doctrines by means of clear anathemas, many questions took on an opalescent ambivalence which provided a certain amount of justification for those who speak of the spirit of the Council.” (Athanasius and the Church of Our Times, 1974)

---

Bishop Thomas Morris expressed his relief on the matter.
“I was relieved when we were told that this Council was not aiming at defining or giving final statements on doctrine, because a statement of doctrine has to be very carefully formulated and I would have regarded the Council documents as tentative and likely to be reformed.” (Catholic World News 1,22,1997)


5.  POPE PAUL VI REQUIRED "RELIGIOUS SUBMISSION" TO V2, WHICH IS CONDITIONAL ONLY

Paul VI gave the theological note of the revolutionary Council in his Apostolic Brief for its closing, “In Spiritu Sancto”(December 8, 1965), which was read at the closing ceremonies of that day by Archbishop Felici, the General Secretary. Paul VI had already stated in his address concluding the Council the day before that the Council had not “wish[ed] to issue extraordinary dogmatic pronouncements” and therefore was not infallible; Felici went on to explain that Paul VI was making the Council a matter of religious submission, which is the assent given to non-infallible material, as we shall see.

“And last of all it was the most opportune, because, bearing in mind the necessities of the present day, above all it sought to meet the pastoral needs and, nourishing the flame of charity, it has made a great effort to reach not only the Christians still separated from communion with the Holy See, but also the whole human family. […] We decided moreover that all that has been established synodally is to be religiously observed by all the faithful, for the glory of God and the dignity of the Church and for the tranquillity and peace of all men. […] Given in Rome at St. Peter’s, under the [seal of the] ring of the fisherman, Dec. 8, on the feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the year 1965, the third year of our pontificate.”

(In Spiritu Sancto, Walter M. Abbott, SJ, The Documents of Vatican II, pp. 738-9)

Paul VI established at the Council’s end that “all that has been established synodally is to be religiously observed”. The 1983 Code of Canon Law distinguishes the matter of religious submission from infallible, definitive teaching.

---

“Can. 752. While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.”

So, “religious submission” is given when the Pope, either alone or with his bishops in a council, does not intend to “proclaim doctrine by a definitive act”: therefore the matter of religious submission is not infallible, which is why it does not require “the assent of faith”.  IT IS CONDITIONAL.


6.  CAN A NON-INFALLIBLE ECUMENICAL COUNCIL ERR?

Dr. William H. Marshner, Professor of Theology at Christendom College and Theological Editor of Faith and Reason, considers Vatican II’s authority in the Fall, 1983 issue of that journal. The issue was dedicated to Dignitatis humanae and whether it represents continuity or rupture with previous teaching. Marshner concludes that the Declaration on Religious Liberty is consonant with perennial doctrine, but he goes on to acknowledge certain other possibilities:

“At the same time, however, I join with all other theologians in saying that the new ground is non-infallible teaching. So when I say that the possibility exists that Vatican II is wrong on one or more crucial points of Dignitatis humanae, I do not simply mean that the Council’s policy may prove unfruitful. I mean to signal a possibility that the Council’s teaching is false.

But may a Catholic theologian admit that such a possibility exists? Of course he may. The decree (sic) Dignitatis humanae is a non-infallible document, and the teaching which it presents is admitted to be a “new development,” hence not something which is already acknowledged dogma ex magisterio ordinario. Therefore the kind of religious assent which Catholics owe to that teaching is the kind of assent which does not exclude the logical possibility that the teaching is wrong; rather our assent excludes any probability that the teaching is wrong.[20]

---

This synthesis agrees with that of Mr. Michael Davies, a Traditionalist apologist, where he cites a pre-Vatican II Benedictine theologian to this same effect:In a profound study intended to enhance the authority of the Ordinary Magisterium, Dom Paul Nau, O.S.B., cites a number of authors who reckon the duty of Catholics when confronted with a document of the Ordinary Magisterium “to be that of inward assent, not as of faith, but as of prudence, the refusal of which could not escape the mark of temerity, unless the doctrine rejected was an actual novelty or involved a manifest discordance between the pontifical affirmation and the doctrine which had hitherto been taught.”[23]

---

The final theologian we will cite regarding the possibility of error in Vatican II is Cardinal Avery Dulles. In discussing the four categories of Church teaching we have employed, he labels Vatican II’s teachings exactly as we have:
The third category has long been familiar to Catholics, especially since the popes began to teach regularly through encyclical letters some two centuries ago. The teaching of Vatican II, which abstained from new doctrinal definitions, falls predominantly into this category. In view of the mission given by Christ to the hierarchical magisterium, it is evident that when the magisterium formally teaches something as Catholic doctrine, it is not uttering a mere opinion that Catholics are free to disregard. The teaching has a real, though not unconditional, claim on the assent of the faithful.[24]

---

J. Robert Dionne, who produced “the most exhaustive investigation of the so-called ‘reversals’ of ordinary papal teaching”:
Dionne maintains that reversals occurred in Catholic doctrine regarding non-Christian religions, religious freedom, the ideal of church-state relations, the identity (or non-identity) between the Mystical Body of Christ and the Catholic Church, and the theology of church membership. On these and other issues, he contends, historical scholarship does not support the “maximalist” position that the ordinary magisterium of the pope is equipped with the charism of infallibility. To deny on principle that ordinary papal teaching can be corrected would be, in effect, to assert that all of it is definitive, and that none of it can pertain to the third and fourth categories in the CDF instruction.[29]


7.  CONCLUSION:  VATICAN II IS NOT INFALLIBLE, ONLY REQUIRES "CONDITIONAL" RELIGIOUS ASSENT, AND THUS, IN ITS NOVELTIES, IT CAN ERR.

 

Pax Vobis, CathInfo post

 

 

 

Pope Francis: 'There Is No Hell'

CNSNEWS.COM | Michael W. Chapman | March 29, 2018

CNS NEWS,COM_CybercastNewsService.jpgIn another interview with his longtime atheist friend, Eugenio Scalfari, Pope Francis claims that Hell does not exist and that condemned souls just "disappear." This is a denial of the 2,000-year-old teaching of the Catholic Church about the reality of Hell and the eternal existence of the soul.

The interview between Scalfari and the Pope was published March 28, 2018 in La Repubblica. The relevant section on Hell was translated by the highly respected web log, Rorate Caeli.

The interview is headlined, "The Pope: It is an honor to be called revolutionary." (Il Papa: “È un onore essere chiamato rivoluzionario.")

Hell.pngScalfari says to the Pope, "Your Holiness, in our previous meeting you told me that our species will disappear in a certain moment and that God, still out of his creative force, will create new species. You have never spoken to me about the souls who died in sin and will go to hell to suffer it for eternity. You have however spoken to me of good souls, admitted to the contemplation of God. But what about bad souls? Where are they punished?"

Pope Francis says,  "They are not punished, those who repent obtain the forgiveness of God and enter the rank of souls who contemplate him, but those who do not repent and cannot therefore be forgiven disappear. There is no hell, there is the disappearance of sinful souls."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hee and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, 'eternal fire.' The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs." (1035)

The Catechism further states, "The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: 'Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.'

"Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where 'men will weep and gnash their teeth.'"

Pope Benedict XVI said in a 2007 sermon, “Jesus came to tell us that he wants us all in Heaven and that Hell, of which so little is said in our time, exists and is eternal for those who close their hearts to his love.”

As for the human soul, the Catholic Church teaches that it is eternal, immortal in countless places throughout the Catechism.  One instance, "Endowed with 'a spiritual and immortal' soul, the human person is 'the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake.' From his conception, he is destined for eternal beatitude."

COMMENT:  The Vatican issued a statement that Scalfari's comments may not necessarily be true because he does not actually quote what Pope Francis said.  But this is nothing new.  Scalfari, the 93 year-old atheist and Bergoglio intimate, never takes notes during interviews with Francis and his reporting is typically is a paraphrase of what was said. Pope Francis has given several interviews with his good friend and if Scalfari was reporting things that Francis did not say and need to be qualified by Vatican officials, why does he continue to give him interviews? The Vatican qualification does not deny that Francis denied the eternal punishment of Hell, it just says that Scalfari may be a liar.  But there is no evidence of this so it is nothing more than calumny by the Vatican against Scalfari.

 

 

There is one that humbleth himself wickedly, and his interior is full of deceit.

Ecclus. 19:23

 

 

A Historical Indictment by Antonio Socci’s La Profezia Finale

          “Yet you, Holy Father, who are always cold and detached regarding the dogma of the Church, have uncritically wed yourself to absurd ecological dogmas … making a granitic profession of faith in that absurd climatist ideology… [I]t is improper and ridiculous that a Pope makes the climate and the environment (to which he dedicated the first encyclical he penned) the heart of his preaching… The Lord did not say: ‘Convert and believe in global warming,’ but rather: “Convert and believe in the Gospel.” And He never commanded: ‘Separate your refuse’ but rather ‘Go and baptize all peoples’“ (p. 134).....   “But above all, Father Bergoglio [a reference to the Pope’s penchant for introducing himself thus], how is it possible that you do not notice and do not indicate other emergencies than those of the climate, or at least with equal insistence? The apostasy of entire peoples from the faith of the true God is not a drama that merits your most ardent appeals? The war against the family and against life? The neglect of Christ and the massacre of Christian communities? It seems that only the environment and other themes of the religion of political correctness merit your passion.
          A great French intellectual, Alain Finkielkraut, has described you as “Supreme Pontiff of the world journalistic ideology.” Is he wrong? Does he exaggerate?
          In effect, in ‘your’ Church it seems that the themes of separating refuse and recycling take precedence over the tragedy of entire peoples who, in the turn of a few years, have abandoned the faith. You sound the alarm over “global warming” while the Church for two millennia has sounded it concerning the fire of Hell” (p. 142).

          “Before the spiritual catastrophe of the eternal perdition of multitudes, which induced the mother of God to come earnestly to Earth, I find it frankly incomprehensible that you preoccupy yourself for the most part—as you did in your encyclical Laudato si —with biodiversity, the fate of worms and little reptiles, the lakes, and the abuse of plastic bottles and air-conditioning” (p. 148).

          “I invite you, reread attentively these words because they describe dramatically what is occurring during your pontificate. In fact, it is precisely you personally, Holy Father, who accuse of ‘fundamentalism’ those who have a clear and certain faith and bear witness to their fidelity to Catholic doctrine….
           “You, curiously, are convinced that the danger for the Church of today is Christians fervent in their faith and those pastors who defend the Catholic creed. In your Evangelii gaudium you attack “some who dream of a monolithic doctrine” and those who “use a language completely orthodox.”
          “Should we then prefer those who are carried here and there by every ideology and use heretical language? Evidently yes, seeing that they are never attacked by you.
          “If one chooses any day, one will almost always find that you, in your discourse, attack those you call ‘rigorists,’ ‘rigid,’ that is, men with fervent faith, whom you identify with ‘Scribes and Pharisees’“ (p. 153-155).
          “(You)should overcome your personal resentment toward those who have studied; you should know that, in the Christian horizon, it is completely absurd to oppose mercy to Truth, because both are incarnated in the same Jesus Christ. Thus it is false to oppose doctrine to the pastoral, because that would be to oppose the Logos (doctrine) to the Good Shepherd (the Truth made flesh): Jesus is the Logos (the Truth made flesh) and, at the same time, the Good Shepherd” (p. 159).

          “… closed hearts that often hide even behind the teaching of the Church, or behind good intentions, to sit in the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superficiality and superiority, to judge difficult cases and wounded families….
          “The true defenders of doctrine are not those who defend the letter but the spirit; not the idea but the man; not the formula, but the gratuitous love of God and of his pardon.”
          “So doing, do you not think that you have disqualified your predecessors and all the Magisterium of the Church, in order to affirm your strictly personal concept of mercy different from the doctrine of the Church?...
          “Evidently, even Jesus would have been, according to you, doctrinaire, a rigorist, one who defends the idea instead of the man.
          “In effect—applying your criterion—we would have to say that Jesus would not have been accepted to a seminary during your pontificate because he was the most fundamentalist of all; in fact, not only was he certain of the truth, but he proclaimed himself the Truth made flesh (‘I am the way, the truth, and the life.’ Jn 14, 6).”

Antonio Socci’s La Profezia Finale

 

 

Old news for faithful Catholics but now it is published in popular media outlets!

SundayReview | Op-Ed Columnist

Pope Francis Is Beloved. His Papacy Might Be a Disaster

NewYorkTimes | Ross Douthat | MARCH 16, 2018

The papal plan for a truce is either ingenious or deceptive, depending on your point of view. Instead of formally changing the church’s teaching on divorce and remarriage, same-sex marriage, euthanasia — changes that are officially impossible, beyond the powers of his office — the Vatican under Francis is making a twofold move. First, a distinction is being drawn between doctrine and pastoral practice that claims that merely pastoral change can leave doctrinal truth untouched. So a remarried Catholic might take communion without having his first union declared null, a Catholic planning assisted suicide might still receive last rites beforehand, and perhaps eventually a gay Catholic can have her same-sex union blessed— and yet supposedly none of this changes the church’s teaching that marriage is indissoluble and suicide a mortal sin and same-sex wedlock an impossibility, so long as it’s always treated as an exception rather than a rule. (excerpt)

 

 

Vatican Treason Against Faithful Catholics

Police seize Chinese bishop who was asked to stand aside by Vatican

Catholic Herald | by Staff Reporter | March 27, 2018

Catholic_Herald-1.jpgBishop Vincent Guo Xijin had reportedly refused to concelebrate Mass with an excommunicated government-backed bishop

One of the Chinese ‘underground’ bishops who was asked by a Vatican delegation to stand aside for a government-backed prelate has been “kidnapped” by police.

Asia News, the outlet of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions, reports that Bishop Vincent Guo Xijin of Mindong was taken, along with the diocesan chancellor, after refusing to concelebrate Mass with the government-backed bishop.

Bishop Guo, who is recognised by the Vatican but not by the Chinese government, had recently been asked to make way for excommunicated bishop Vincent Zhan Silu. A Vatican delegation asked Bishop Guo to accept the position of auxiliary bishop under Bishop Zhan as part of a rumoured deal between the Holy See and Beijng.

However, the Office for Religious Affairs reportedly summoned Bishop Guo to a meeting on Monday afternoon, after which he returned to his residence and packed luggage. He was then taken away at 10pm.

The bishop had been held in police custody for 20 days during the Easter season last year.

Chinese Catholics are currently split between those in the ‘underground’ Church who remain loyal to Rome, and those in the Catholic Patriotic Association, which is backed by the government.

The CPA has ordained several bishops without Vatican approval, causing them to be automatically excommunicated. A rumoured deal between Beijing and the Holy See would address the appointment of bishops, a lead to excommunicated bishops being reconciled with the Pope.  It is not yet known if Bishop Zhan’s excommunication has been lifted.

 

 

Pope Francis opposition to underground Catholic Church places faithful directly under Communist Party control! Become "department" within Party!

Goodbye to the Religious Affairs Bureau: religions are now under the direct control of the Party

AsiaNews.IT | Wang Zhicheng | China-Vatican | Beijing | March 22, 2018

The State Administration for Religious Affairs (SARA), also known as the "Religious Affairs Bureau ", so far under the authority of the Council of State, has passed under the direct rule of the Communist Party. The move is among a detailed program of reforms on the Party and the state institutions released yesterday.

The decision to eliminate SARA was passed in the third plenary session of the 19th Communist Party’s Central Committee in late February. Part of the program was reviewed in the recently concluded National People’s Congress, China’s parliament. Detail of the program was made public on March 21, with indication that the reform should be implemented by the end of 2018.

Among the reforms, religious affairs are now managed by the United Front Work Department (UFWD), an organ of the Communist Party’s Central Committee, whose main function is to manage relations with the non-Communist elite, including individuals and organizations, such as religious groups. Also now under the management of the UFWD are the Overseas Chinese Affairs Office and the Ethnic Affairs Commission, both also originally under the State Council.

The structural change received mixed views among Chinese Christians and observers. “There won’t be big change to religious environment, neither loosen nor tighten. It is only a change on management structure and they will do the same thing,” said Father Liu, a priest who serves in a Southern province.

“The reform is to put all authority under the Party, no more sharing power with the State Council,” said a Chinese observer who asked not to be named. However, he agreed that there is nothing to surprise as the UFWD has always been the supervising unit of the SARA, adding that the UFWD will still keep the signboard of the SARA as it needs an executive office to implement the work.

“The move could unify different voices on the management of religions,” the observer said, noting that religious management could involve a number of departments, such as national security, public security, buildings and education, etc.

But Eric Lai, a Catholic commentator, sees the move shows the Chinese Communist Party no more regards religion as a target to liaise but actively using it as a tool to maintain stability.[.....] Ying Fuk-tsang, director of the Chinese University of Hong Kong’s Divinity School, also questioned on his Facebook if this is “reform or moving backward?”

“Religion is a citizen’s basic rights endowed by the Constitution. If it is assigned as specialized duty of the Party, this is undoubtedly a major change in the religious work since the founding of the Communist-rule China. It reflects the unlimited expansion of the Party’s power, interfering directly the basic rights of citizens. This kind of retrogression is definitely negative for the development of religious freedom in China,” he said.

Following closely recent China-Vatican developments, the Protestant professor said he “could not help but ask whether Vatican recognized these facts or still believe in wishful thinking that China’s freedom of religion is stepping forward to the bright side and that the Chinese citizens’ religious freedom will be fully safeguard?”

“Or will the Holy See make another interpretation to justify the Party's leadership over religions, and believe that it could bring greater space for freedom of religion in China by its own efforts?”

On the same day of the official announcement, SARA director Wang Zuoan held a meeting for all staff to relate the spirit of the deepened reforms. According to the SARA’s website, he said the decision “fully demonstrates the Party’s central high priority for religious work and is more conducive to strengthening and improving the Party’s leadership in religious work.” [.....]

 

 

 

Fr. Waters - persecuted by those who hope that “true Liturgy shall become extinct.”

The holy Fathers who have written upon the subject of anti-Christ, and of the prophecies of Daniel, without a single exception, as far as I know - and they are the Fathers both of the East and of the West, the Greek and the Latin Church - all of them unanimously say that in the latter end of the world, during the reign of anti-Christ, the Holy sacrifice of the Altar will cease.  In the work of the end of the world ascribed to St. Hippolytus, after a long description of the afflictions of the last days, we read as follows: “The Churches shall lament with a great lamentation, for there shall be offered no more oblation nor worship acceptable to God.  The sacred buildings of the churches shall be as hovels; and the precious Body and Blood of Christ shall not be manifest in those days; the true Liturgy shall become extinct.... Such is the universal testimony of the Fathers of the early centuries.”

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning

 

 

Our Lady of Good Success (Fortune) to the Catholics of Today

My Beloved Daughter, I am Mary of Good Success, your Mother and your Protectress, I carry my most Holy Son in my left arm and the scepter of the world in my right arm…. The sanctuary lamp which you just saw go out has several meanings.

     Firstly, towards the end of the nineteenth century and during a large part if the twentieth century there will arise various errors and the whole universe will become Republican. The precious light of faith will be going out following on the almost complete destruction of morals; in that time there will be many tribulations, moral tribulations also, both public and private. The little group of people who keep the true worship of faith and the virtues will have to suffer cruelly and indescribably. The constant martyrdom will bring many to an early death, they will be counted amongst the martyrs, they have sacrificed themselves for Church and country. In order to deliver oneself from the slavery of these errors one will need great strength of will, perseverance, courage and a great trust in God. These are gifts of the merciful love of my Divine Son, He has provided them for the renewal. In order to test the faith and the trust of the just and good men there will be moments when everything seems to be lost and paralyzed but that is the moment in which the happy beginning of the complete renewal starts.

     Secondly, my communities will be abandoned, sunk in an abyss, a deep ocean of bitterness and they will seem to be satiated with sufferings and afflictions. How many good vocations are lost because of lack of good and prudent spiritual direction; the Novice Mistresses should take great care of the prayers of the novices and they should show understanding of souls.

     The Third reason for the extinguishing of the sanctuary lamp is the spirit of impurity of those times, the air will be filled with this unclean spirit. A flood of filth will overflow the streets, the squares, and all public places so that there will be no virginal souls left in the world.

     Fourthly, in all layers of society errors will strive with great cunning to penetrate into the families in order to corrupt the youth too; Satan will congratulate himself that he can feed himself in the fouled way on the hearts of the children. The innocence of children will hardly exist anymore. Priestly vocations will be lost. That will be a true misfortune and priests will turn away from their holy duties and enter upon a false, wrong course, and therefore the Church will go dark. No prelate and father will be watching any longer with love, strength and prudence over this flock, and many of the prelates will lose the spirit of God and bring their own souls into danger. Pray constantly, call upon heaven without tiring, and weep without ceasing inwardly in your heart and pray to the Heavenly Father through the Eucharistic Heart of my Divine Son Who has nobly shed blood.

     Out of the bitterness and pains of His sufferings and death, pray that He will have compassion upon His servants, that He will bring an end to this terrible scourge by sending to the Church a prelate to renew the spirit of His priests. My Divine Son and I will surround this beloved son with a special love, we shall pour out a heap of many graces of humility of heart and docility towards God’s inspirations, and the strength to defend the rights of the Church so that he will know how to defend the rights of the Church with a heart which enables him to behave like another Christ towards the mighty people of this world and the little people of this world without despising the unfortunate ones. He will, with a divine gentleness, lead into the convents and monasteries souls consecrated to God for the service of God without making the yoke of the Lord heavy upon them. He holds in his hands the scales of sanctity in order that everything happen according to the weight and measure so that God be glorified.

     This prelate and father will form a counter-weight against the lukewarmness of priests and religious who are meant to be dedicated to God. As a result of the guilt of these faithless men, Satan will gain upon earth control of this world like a dark cloud which darkens the sky and darkens all of the people who are consecrated to the Most Holy Heart of my Divine Son. All will have to suffer chastisements because all kinds of crimes have been allowed. They will suffer pestilence, hunger, civil strife, degeneration of morals and the loss of countless souls. In order to blow away the black clouds which block the shining holiness and the freedom of the Church there will be a fearful war in which much blood will flow of priests and religious. This night will be so terrible that people will think that wickedness is conquering. Then strikes my heart and in a most sudden way I shall annihilate the pride of Satan, I shall assist and liberate the Church and country from his cruel tyranny.

     The Fifth reason why the sanctuary lamp went out is that influential men will watch with indifference, uncaringly, the oppression of the Church, the persecution of virtue and the triumph of wickedness. Because these influential people will not use their position of influence in order to combat evil or to renew the faith, the people will gradually become indifferent to the demands of God, they will take on an evil spirit and let themselves be swept away in all kinds of passion and vice. My beloved daughter, were you to live that terrible time you would die of pain or grief over the circumstances which I have described to you. The love of my Holy Son and mine which we have for this world which is our property demand from now on sacrifices and good works in order that the duration of this terrible catastrophe will be shortened.

The Blessed and ever Virgin Mary, under the title of Our Lady of Good Success, to Sister Maria Anna of Jesus, in the Convent of the Immaculate Conception in Quito on the 2nd February, 1634.  Sister was praying in front of the Blessed Sacrament when suddenly the sanctuary lamp went out.

 

 

And Novus Ordo Neo-Modernism is no different in its ends!

The opening of Vatican II John XXIII declared that there existed a disjunction between dogma and its "external formula or terminology"!

Modernism is condemned because it virtually destroys Christian dogma by denying that the dogmas of faith are contained in the revelation made by the Holy Spirit to the Catholic Church and subsequently defined through the supreme authority of the same Ecclesia docens{1}. Once the Holy Spirit, speaking through the supreme magisterium{2} of the Church, defines a doctrine as de fide{3} the dogma in question remains, both in se{4} and in its external formula or terminology, unchanged and unchangeable, like God, Whose voice it communicates to us, in the shape of definite truth. Modernism tells us quite the reverse.

{1} Ecclesia docens -- i.e., 'the teaching Church.'

{2} Magisterium = 'teaching authority.'

{3} De fide = 'what is of faith.'

{4} In se = 'in itself.'

Rev. Father Norbert Jones, C.R.L., Old Truths, Not Modernist Errors, Exposure of Modernism and Vindication of its Condemnation by the Pope, 1908

 

 

Why the Cross?

The thoughtful ones of earth contemplating the scene presented by a human activity that continually changes its purpose and is powerless to assign itself any purpose that human reason cannot instantly question, must feel the pathos of much well-meaning and humanitarian effort. Great generosity is shown and real kindness is spent in praiseworthy attempts to arrest the ravages of mortality, especially amongst the young. “Save the children” is an appeal that finds a ready response in the hearts of the humane and the kindly. Not with cynicism, but with real sympathy, one may ask, “Save them for what?” Is it for the adult life that frets itself away in vain endeavours to assign itself an adequate reason for living? Is it worthwhile to preserve children for what any person would logically confess to be not worth while? [Footnote: There is question only of those who have not the view of the aims and objects of life as furnished by the true faith or even by sound philosophy.] Is this charity of the kind-hearted dictated by the hope that somehow life for these children may prove different to what it has been for those who have tried to save them from death and disease? Are there grounds for hope that the little ones when come to adult age will light on, by chance, a solution of the problem of existence that has evaded their grown-up benefactors? What is the use of bestowing health unless there can be given with it the key to such a use of life as will issue in happiness? Life is a precious gift when it is accompanied by the knowledge of how to live rightly and the means to exercise this right living. […..]

Death is not a break, but a stepping stone by which one passes from one stage to another in the same existence. But man will perversely and blindly strive to effect a cleavage in that line and persuade himself that the good of the human life that precedes death can be different from the good of human life that follows death. The result is that he is necessarily at cross-purposes with God. It is not surprising that the creature, seeking to gain the goal of life — namely happiness — by a use of life’s powers and energies at variance with the design of the Creator, should be continually frustrated in his main object, should enjoy no peace, and should be involved in contradiction and become a prey to perpetual dissatisfaction. What is the way out of this impasse? The way out is through a thorough understanding of the religion of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and a practice based on such understanding.[…..]

The [Gospel] passages that reveal Jesus in the exercise of works of mercy, in healing disease, in consoling grief and in overcoming death, are given an undue emphasis. In this way the central truth is obscured, the truth, namely, that the conflict of the Redeemer was primarily with spiritual evil and only incidentally with physical evil. His purpose was to banish from earth the ills that appear to God as such, not those that appear so to the pain-dreading nature of man… The gospel is not a record of a more less successful philanthropic mission.

…To Christians, who persist in thinking that the function of Christianity is to provide men with good things and banish from their life evil things — understanding by good and evil what appear such to fallen human nature — life will speedily prove unintelligible. To men with such views the mystery of pain becomes insoluble. In the face of the harsh realities of existence their belief stands condemned. They have no answer to give to the ever-recurring question: if God is kind and good and tender towards human suffering, why does suffering continue to be not only for those that deserve it, but also for those who do not?

That Jesus, in His power and goodness, did not put an end to all human suffering shows that, in His eyes, suffering is not the real source of human unhappiness.

Rev. Edward Leen, Why the Cross?  

 

 

The Francis/Bergoglio Effect, Kasper doing more "theology on his knees"!

Cardinal Kasper: Homosexual unions are ‘analogous’ to Christian marriage

LifeSiteNews | March 14, 2018 – Cardinal Walter Kasper, whose theology appears to be the chief inspiration for Pope Francis’ doctrine on giving Holy Communion to people living in states of adultery in second marriages, now appears to be claiming that homosexual unions contain “elements” of Christian marriage and are even “analogous” to it in a way that is similar to the relationship between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian communities.

Moreover, the cardinal is attributing his claims to Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, despite the fact that the document explicitly contradicts him.

“The pope does not leave room for doubt over the fact that civil marriages, de facto unions, new marriages following a divorce (Amoris Laetitia 291) and unions between homosexual persons (Amoris Laetitia 250s.) do not correspond to the Christian conception of marriage,” writes Kasper in a recently-released book on Amoris Laetitia.

“He says, however, that some of these partners can realize in a partial and analogous way some elements in Christian marriage (Amoris Laetitia 292),” continues Kasper.

Kasper compares such relationships with the relationship between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian groups, whom Vatican II says contain “elements of sanctification and truth” of the Church.

“Just as outside the Catholic Church there are elements of the true Church, in the above-mentioned unions there can be elements present of Christian marriage, although they do not completely fulfill, or do not yet completely fulfill, the ideal,” adds Kasper. [.....]

 

 

Clinton Foundation Data from 2014 TAX  YEAR

Have you wondered why the Clinton Foundation folded so suddenly after Hillary was no longer in a position of influence? Perhaps this summary will provide some insight??

They list 486 employees (line 5)!  It took 486 people who are paid $34.8 million and $91.3 million in fees and expenses, to give away $5.1 MILLION

This is real. You can check the return yourself (see below). The real heart of the Clintons can be seen here.  Staggering but not surprising. These figures are from an official copy of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation for the tax year 2014. The copy of the tax return is from the National Center for Charitable Statistics web site (http://nccs.urban.org/) . You can obtain the latest tax return on any charitable organization there.

The Clinton Foundation:

Number of Employees (line 5)  486

Total revenue (line 12)                    $177,804,612.00

Total grants to charity (line 13)       $5,160,385.00  (this is less than 3%)

Total expenses of                            $91,281,145.00

Expenses include:  

    Salaries (line 15)                        $34,838,106.00

    Fund raising fees (line 16a)              $850,803.00

    Other expenses (line 17)              $50,431,851.00    HUH??????

    Travel                                           $8,000,000.00

    Meetings                                    $12,000,000.00

Net assets/fund balances (line 22)   $332,471,349.00

So it required 486 people, who were paid $34.8 million, plus $91.3 million in fees and expenses, to give away $5.1 MILLION!  And they call this a CHARITY?

It is alleged that this is one of the greatest white-collar crimes ever committed. And just think---one of the participants was a former president and one wanted to be elected president of the United States.  If justice is ever truly served they will both be in prison.

 

 

 

The IRISH Famine: 1845-1852 – or tricks of political persecution the English taught “Uncle” Joe Stalin

FOOD for APOSTASY: What Our Catholics Ancestors Suffered to bring the Holy Faith to Us.

Throughout the entire period of the Famine, Ireland was exporting enormous quantities of food. In Ireland before and after the famine, Cormac O’Grada points out, “Although the potato crop failed, the country was still producing and exporting more than enough grain crops to feed the population. But that was a ‘money crop’ and not a ‘food crop’ and could not be interfered with.”

In History Ireland magazine, Christine Kinealy, a Great Hunger scholar, lecturer, and Drew University professor, relates her findings: Almost 4,000 vessels carried food from Ireland to the ports of Bristol, Glasgow, Liverpool and London during 1847, when 400,000 Irish men, women and children died of starvation and related diseases. She also writes that Irish exports of calves, livestock (except pigs), bacon and ham actually increased during the Famine. This food was shipped under British military guard from the most famine-stricken parts of Ireland; Ballina, Ballyshannon, Bantry, Dingle, Killala, Kilrush, Limerick, Sligo, Tralee and Westport. A wide variety of commodities left Ireland during 1847, including peas, beans, onions, rabbits, salmon, oysters, herring, lard, honey, tongues, animal skins, rags, shoes, soap, glue and seed. The most shocking export figures concern butter. Butter was shipped in firkins, each one holding 9 imperial gallons; 41 litres. In the first nine months of 1847, 56,557 firkins (509,010 imperial gallons; 2,314,000 litres) were exported from Ireland to Bristol, and 34,852 firkins (313,670 imperial gallons; 1,426,000 litres) were shipped to Liverpool, which correlates with 822,681 imperial gallons (3,739,980 litres) of butter exported to England from Ireland during nine months of the worst year of the Famine. The problem in Ireland was not lack of food, which was plentiful, but the price of it, which was beyond the reach of the poor.

Celil Woodham-Smith, an authority on the Irish Famine, wrote in The Great Hunger: Ireland 1845-1849 that no issue has provoked so much anger and embittered relations between England and Ireland “as the indisputable fact that huge quantities of food were exported from Ireland to England throughout the period when the people of Ireland were dying of starvation.” […….]

 (Protestant) Landlords were responsible for paying the rates of every tenant whose yearly rent was £4 or less. Landlords whose land was crowded with poorer tenants were now faced with large bills. They began clearing the poor tenants from their small plots, and letting the land in larger plots for over £4 which then reduced their debts. In 1846, there had been some clearances, but the great mass of evictions came in 1847. According to James S. Donnelly Jr, it is impossible to be sure how many people were evicted during the years of the famine and its immediate aftermath. It was only in 1849 that the police began to keep a count, and they recorded a total of almost 250,000 persons as officially evicted between 1849 and 1854.

Donnelly considered this to be an underestimate, and if the figures were to include the number pressured into “voluntary” surrenders during the whole period (1846–1854) the figure would almost certainly exceed half a million persons. While Helen Litton says there were also thousands of “voluntary” surrenders, she notes also that there was “precious little voluntary about them.” In some cases, tenants were persuaded to accept a small sum of money to leave their homes, “cheated into believing the workhouse would take them in.”

West Clare was one of the worst areas for evictions, where landlords turned thousands of families out and demolished their derisory cabins. Captain Kennedy in April 1848 estimated that 1,000 houses, with an average of six people to each, had been leveled since November. The Mahon family of Strokestown House evicted 3,000 people in 1847, and were still able to dine on lobster soup.

After Clare, the worst area for evictions was County Mayo, accounting for 10% of all evictions between 1849 and 1854. The Earl of Lucan, who owned over 60,000 acres (240 km2) was among the worst evicting landlords. He was quoted as saying ‘he would not breed paupers to pay priests’. Having turned out in the parish of Ballinrobe over 2,000 tenants alone, the cleared land he then used as grazing farms. In 1848, the Marquis of Sligo owed £1,650 to Westport Union; he was also an evicting landlord, though he claimed to be selective, saying he was only getting rid of the idle and dishonest. Altogether, he cleared about 25% of his tenants.

[……]Calcutta is credited with making the first (relief) donation of £14,000. The money was raised by Irish soldiers serving there and Irish people employed by the East India Company. Pope Pius IX sent funds and Queen Victoria (head of the Church of England) donated £2,000….. (about one brass farthing for every Irish Catholic who starved to death).  Wikipedia

 

 

It is true that, after his death, (Pope) Honorius was anathematized by the Orientals; but one must remember that he was accused of heresy, the only crime that makes the resistance of inferiors to superiors, as well as the rejection of their pernicious doctrines, legitimate.

Pope Hadrian II

 

“Against any and all enemies of the Christian name”

Truly in these tumultuous times, in this revolutionary upheaval, all good men must join the burdensome struggle against any and all enemies of the Christian name.[….] For in fact, when a leader of God’s holy Church, under the name of Priest, turns the very people of Christ away from the path of truth toward the peril of an erroneous belief, and when this occurs in a major city, then clearly the distress is multiplied, and a greater anxiety is in order. 

Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, addressed to all the faithful

 

 

Pope Francis – his “most gentle manner”!

Francis_video.jpgThey (our most holy predecessors) knew the capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, the innovators sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith that is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation. This manner of dissimulating and lying is vicious, regardless of the circumstances under which it is used. For very good reasons it can never be tolerated in a synod of which the principal glory consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding all danger of error. Moreover, if all this is sinful, it cannot be excused in the way that one sees it being done, under the erroneous pretext that the seemingly shocking affirmations in one place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of leaving it up the personal inclinations of the individual – such has always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it. It is a most reprehensible technique for the insinuation of doctrinal errors and one condemned long ago by our predecessor St. Celestine, who found it used in the writings of Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, and which he exposed in order to condemn it with the greatest possible severity. Once these texts were examined carefully, the impostor was exposed and confounded, for he expressed himself in a plethora of words, mixing true things with others that were obscure; mixing at times one with the other in such a way that he was also able to confess those things which were denied while at the same time possessing a basis for denying those very sentences which he confessed.

Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, 1794 papal bull addressed to all the faithful condemning 85 propositions from the Council of Pistoia, 1786

 

 

True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness.

But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors.

Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them.

He was as strong as He was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body.

Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one’s personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism. 

Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter, Our Apostolic Mandate

 

 

“Going down the synodal path” to Hell! -

The hard sell of heresy from the Vatican with the soft title, “Rejoice with me,” misery loves company!

Divorced and remarried, indications on how to discern case by case

Bishop Semeraro’s pastoral instruction: an application document of “Amoris laetitia” prepared and shared together with the priests

andrea tornielli | vatican city | 08/03/2018

It is a pastoral instruction entitled “Rejoice with me” dedicated to “Welcoming, discerning, accompanying and integrating into the ecclesial community the faithful who have divorced and civilly remarried”. The Bishop of Albano Marcello Semeraro, secretary of the C9, the council of cardinals who helps the Pope in the reform of the Curia and in the governance of the universal Church, is distributing it these days. The peculiarities of the document are two: it is a well-defined application instruction about the topic - described in the subtitle - and at the same time it is a generous document, which, although it doesn’t get into any case studies, it precisely outlines general main guidelines. And it is a document born from a diocesan synodal experience, which involved all the clergy.  

Semeraro recalls that in talks with his priests it emerged the number of cases of civilly remarried divorcees who live “in fidelity and with self-sacrifice their marital relationship ”. And that sometimes these faithful are “on the margins, or in the proximity of the ecclesial communities of the diocese”. For this reason, the bishop of Albano chose not to make “a solo journey, but to go down the synodal path” by asking the presbyteral council to devote all ordinary sessions of the pastoral year 2016-2017 “to reflection, to deepening and discernment on the concrete forms of response to the divorced and civilly remarried faithful present in our communities and to our brothers and sisters who ask for a word of consolation and orientation”. The contents of these reflections were then shared and discussed with all the clergy.  [.....]

 

Every single novelty introduced since Vatican II has always been introduced with the assurance that nothing of substance has really changed. Yet everything, without exception, has changed!

In New ‘Amoris Laetitia’ Pastoral Plan, Cardinal Wuerl Shares Missionary Mandate

ANALYSIS

Dominican Father Thomas Petri | Catholic News Agency | Mar. 5, 201National_Catholic_Register.jpg8

Since the beginning of the debate on whether Chapter 8 of Pope Francis’ Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love) permits the divorced and civilly married to receive Holy Communion, Cardinal Donald Wuerl has lamented that the exhortation has been co-opted by that single issue and that, really, the Holy Father’s concern is much broader than that debate suggests.     

Some people, though, have suggested that the synods and Amoris Laetitia were simply a cover to change the practice of not giving Holy Communion to the divorced and civilly married. In a newly released pastoral plan for the Archdiocese of Washington, Cardinal Wuerl has taken a decided step away from such a cynical view and captured the passion of Pope Francis’ insistence that because we are all in need of it, we must also go out and give God’s mercy and truth to those who do not know it, who are not living it, and who are desperate to receive it.

“Sharing in the Joy of Love in Marriage and Family,” the Archdiocese of Washington's pastoral plan, focuses the implementation of the exhortation not on questions of sacramental doctrine and practice, since these truths have been definitively taught and Church teaching has not changed.
Rather, echoing a cornerstone in the thought of Pope Francis, Pope St. John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI, Wuerl’s plan begins with the principle that “the desire to love and to be loved is a deep, enduring part of our human experience.” This desire is part of God’s providential care for us and his plan for marriage. Echoing a reflection on our need for God that Joseph Ratzinger once made in his Introduction to Christianity, Cardinal Wuerl notes that the joy of love in this life “gives us an invitation to experience Christian hope in the love of God that never ends.”

It’s somewhat surprising that it was thought necessary to hold two synods and to issue an apostolic exhortation to encourage priests and parish leaders to reach out to people living in irregular situations.  [etc., etc., etc.....]

 

 

So just what has the Novus Ordo Church been “dialoguing” about with the Jews?

“Judeo-Christian tradition does not exist!”

That fabled (Judeo-Christian) tradition does not exist, nor does the “Judeo-Christian ethic.” Though sharing a common origin in the Hebrew Scriptures, the two faiths read the scriptural texts differently. They believe in God, but view Him through different lenses. They each have a story, but they are not the same. They each have a concept of man, but they are not the same. They are both ethical religions, but with separate ideas of man's nature, salvation and destiny.

Raymond Apple, emeritus rabbi of the Great Synagogue, Sydney, Australia. Published in Jerusalem Post

 

PEW POLL: 95% of Jewish Leaders support abortion and “same-sex marriage.”

The Jewish question of our time does not differ greatly from the one which affected the Christian peoples of the Middle Ages. In a foolish way it is said to arise from hatred towards the Jewish tribe. Mosaism in itself could not become an object of hate for Christians, since, until the coming of Christ, it was the only true religion, a prefiguration of and preparation for Christianity, which, according to God’s Will, was to be its successor. But the Judaism of the centuries [after Christ] turned its back on the Mosaic law, replacing it with the Talmud (ii.), the very quintessence of that Pharisaism which in so many ways has been shattered through its rejection by Christ, the Messiah and Redeemer. And although Talmudism is an important element of the Jewish question, it cannot be said, strictly speaking, to give that question a religious character, because what the Christian nations despise in Talmudism is not so much its virtually non-existent theological element, but rather, its morals, which are at variance with the most elementary principles of natural ethics.

On the Jewish Question in Europe; La Civiltà Cattolica, Series XIV, Vol. VII, 23;10; October 1890

 

 

Is new Vatican doc on neo-Pelagianism at odds with Pope’s preferred pejorative?

LifeSiteNews | ROME, March 1, 2018  — In Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis refers LifeSiteNews_3.jpgto the “self-absorbed promethean neo-Pelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past.”

He added that “a supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying.”

Such people, he said in the apostolic exhortation, are not really “concerned about Jesus Christ or others.” 

Many have taken the Pope’s comments on neo-Pelagianism to refer to those whom he has said “rigidly” adhere to doctrine and tradition, particularly in light of other similar comments he has made in the course of his pontificate.

In an address on Christian Humanism delivered in Florence’s famous cathedral, Pope Francis said that Pelagianism “prompts the Church not to be humble, selfless and blessed. And it does so with the appearance of being a good.”

“In facing ills or the problems of the Church,” the Pope added, “it is useless to look for solutions in conservatism and fundamentalism, in the restoration of practices and outdated forms that even culturally aren’t able to be meaningful.” 

But is this what neo-Pelagianism really means, according to the Vatican? 

In a letter released today, targeting neo-Pelagianism and neo-Gnosticism as two contemporary errors that can be obstacles to salvation, the Vatican’s doctrinal office made no connection between these erroneous “tendencies” and Catholics who adhere to the Church’s tradition.

It also doesn’t mention rigidity or anything about neo-Pelagianism meaning those who “observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past.”

Entitled “Placuit Deo” (In His Goodness), the Letter was signed by Archbishop Luis Ladaria, S.J., prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), and approved by Pope Francis. Its aim is to “demonstrate certain aspects of Christian salvation that can be difficult to understand” in today’s culture.

The document focuses on Neo-Pelagianism and Neo-Gnosticism, which it says are two modern schools of thought that “resemble certain aspects of [the] two ancient heresies” of Pelagianism and Gnosticism. It notes that Pope Francis has often referred to these two “tendencies” in his addresses and homilies.

The letter refers to Neo-Pelagians as individuals who believe themselves to be “radically autonomous,” who presume to be able to save themselves and depend on their own strength. They are unable to recognize that they derive “from God and from others.” Such ways of thinking are “incapable of welcoming the newness of the Spirit of God,” it says.

Classical Pelagianism was the heresy of Pelagius, a British priest of the fifth century, who stated that humans are on their own, without need of grace, and could initiate their own salvation. St. Augustine of Hippo was one of the main opponents of Pelagianism, arguing that God’s unmerited grace is necessary for us to perform any good work that will help us get to heaven.

By contrast, Neo-Gnostics accept a model of salvation that is “merely interior, closed off in its own subjectivism.” The document adds that it consists in “improving oneself,” of being “intellectually capable of rising above the flesh of Jesus towards the mysteries of the unknown divinity.”

The Neo-Gnostic way of thinking “presumes to liberate the human person from the body and from the material universe,” and fails to see traces of God’s provident hand in creation. Neo-Gnostics experience a reality “deprived of meaning,” and foreign to the fundamental identity of the human person as a unity of body and soul. This idea of reality is therefore “easily manipulated by the interests of man.”

Classical Gnosticism is ancient pantheistic belief in “secret teachings” of Christ, namely, that he came in order to free us from the evils of matter so that we might live as purely spiritual beings.

Placuit Deo notes that while there is “a great difference” between modern, secularized society and “the social context of early Christianity, in which these two heresies were born,” there are  “similarities” between the ancient histories and the modern tendencies to which Pope Francis refers, insofar as they represent “perennial dangers for misunderstanding Biblical faith.”

It adds that as both modern-day versions of these heresies prevent Christ from mediating salvation, it is important to “reaffirm that salvation consists in our union with Christ.” [.....]

Asked which is the more important, he said it is “easier” to point to examples of neo-Pelagianism, but you could “fill books” with ancient Gnosticism which is a “very complicated phenomenon.”

In light of the Pope’s repeated use of the term neo-Pelagianism to describe those who “rigidly” adhere to doctrine or Tradition, the National Catholic Register asked why the word or sentiment does not appear in the Letter. Archbishop Ladaria said he was not aware the word was not included, and added there was “no particular reason” why it was not.

Finally, a journalist from the Associated Press said she “marveled” that the document only used the word ‘Catholic’ once (in the title) and asked whether Placuit Deo marked a departure from the Church’s teaching regarding the “fullness of salvation” being only found in the Catholic Church.

The CDF Prefect said the Church has often repeated what Vatican II taught that “Christ’s Church subsists in the Catholic Church.” He also referred to the Council document Lumen Gentium which teaches that “many elements of salvation are found in Christian religious confessions” and that these elements “tend towards Catholic unity.”

Archbishop Ladaria said that denominations have “elements of sanctification” and “we recognize these gladly.” And he stressed that “the fact that we don’t enter directly into this [in Placuit Deo] doesn’t mean that the teaching has changed. It seems to me to have deepened.”

 

COMMENT:  

          Pope Francis is a Neo-Modernist heretic. The heresy of Neo-Modernism, like Modernism, denies all dogma as divinely revealed truths that constitute the formal objects of divine and Catholic faith, and therefore, constitute the proximate rule of faith. The difference between the two is in their methodology. The Modernist denies dogma directly and the Neo-Modernist denies dogma indirectly by various methods. The Neo-Modernist will change established definitions, use words equivocally, qualify categorical propositions and/or change dogmatic propositions from the category of truth-falsehood to the category of authority-obedience and thus, negate all dogmas on the grounds of impossibility, excessive moral or physical burden, and whatever else excuses a person from fulfilling a legal obligation, precept, command, etc., etc.

          Now comes Pope Francis. He is not stupid but he is remarkably ignorant, self-willed, arrogant, proud, authoritarian, hypocritical, posturing, dissembling, viscous, revengeful, and uniformly shameless. He employs the term neo-Pelagianism to attack Catholic faithful loyal to our Lord's reveal truths who conform their lives to His moral law, and yet, he does not define his terminology. Obviously Francis is using term the same way that Jews use the term “anti-Semitism.” Accusations that are defined can be refuted and refutation is not what the calumniator is interested in. Joe Sobran defined “anti-Semitic” as a person the Jews don’t like. The same can be said that a neo-Pelagian is someone Pope Francis doesn’t like.

          The heresy of Pelagius was the denial of Original Sin, and because he denied Original Sin, he held that man could attain the supernatural end of salvation by natural means. He could obtain salvation by natural works. Francis therefore does not accuse faithful Catholics of denying Original Sin, he is accusing them of employing Pelagian methodology to obtain salvation. It is the ends that constitute the primary determinate of the moral act and thus Francis (Who am I to judge?) is guilty of nothing less than direct calumny by associating faithful Catholic with the heretic Pelagius because he sees a similarity of material acts that are in themselves morally neutral but have entirely different moral ends. 

          Modernism was called by Pope St. Pius X “the synthesis of all heresies.” Since Modernism denies all dogma as its end, every heresy can be discovered in the Modernist. Francis recently declared that Luther’s condemned heretical doctrine of Justification was “correct.” Luther denied the value of good works (and free will) in his heresy of justification by “faith alone.” So does Pope Francis. He interminably talks about caring for the poor but like all liberals, he gives mouth service to humanity and treats individual humans with contempt excepting photo-ops. What is particularly grating is his assertion that Catholics faithful to dogma and the moral law do not perform the corporal and spiritual works of mercy, that they are ‘enclosed upon themselves’. And this from the mouth of the hypocrite who degrades the spiritual works of mercy by calling proselytism “solemn nonsense.” Every Catholic university, school, hospital, nursing home, orphanage, charitable institute for the care of the poor or the ransom of captives, for the conversion of heretics and pagans, etc. was founded by Catholics faithful to dogma and the divine moral law. The Modernists have done less than nothing. They have so gutted the faith of any substance that they have overseen the greatest collapse of Catholic charitable works of mercy emptying religious institutions of vocations that completely overshadows the decimation caused by the plague in medieval Europe.

          Nothing could be more hypocritical than a Modernist, who denies an objective knowable truth, suggesting that anyone could be a heretic. You can be assured that there will never be a “syllabus of errors” condemning neo-Pelagianian propositions because that would require clear definitions and the structuring of sound judgments. The real purpose is to smear. Nothing more. Cardinal Laderia ends his interview by affirming the Vatican II heresies that deny the identity of the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Christ, and then affirms that heretical sects can be “elements of salvation.” In the end for Novus Ordo Modernist, salvation can be found anywhere. Why not in “neo-Pelagianism”?   

Maybe that's one of Francis' Gnostic secrets?

 

 

What Exactly is Pelagianism?

A far more radical heresy was that of the Pelagians. They admitted that Adam sinned, but denied that his sin is transmitted to his descendants. Pelagius himself and Clestius maintained the following errors: (1) Man, as now constituted, does not differ essentially in endowment from Adam before the Fall. The only difference (an accidental one) is that personal sins are committed in the present order. (2) Newborn infants do not bring original sin with them into the world; they are baptized not “for the forgiveness of sins,” but merely that they may be enabled to attain to the regnum coelorum, which, in the mind of these heretics, is something quite different from eternal life. (3) The sin which Adam committed in Paradise injured him, but not his descendants, except in so far as their willpower is weakened by his bad example. (4) Since Adam’s sin is not transmitted to his descendants, they cannot be punished for it. Death is not a punishment for sin, but a necessity of nature (necessitas naturae), and concupiscence is merely nature’s way of asserting itself (vigor naturae).

Few heresies were so vigorously combated from their very birth, and condemned by so many councils, as Pelagianism. During the short period from A.D. 412 (or 411) to 431 no less than twenty-four councils, in the East and in the West, denounced the new sect. Prominent among them is the Second Council of Mileve (416); its canons were taken over by a plenary council held at Carthage in 418, and approved and promulgated by Pope Zosimus in his Epistola Tractoria. Pelagianism was cut to the quick by the second canon of this council, which reads as follows: Whoever denies that new-born infants should be baptized immediately after birth, or asserts that they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but do not contract from Adam original sin, which must be expiated in the waters of regeneration, and that consequently the baptismal form ‘for the remission of sins’ applies to them not truly, but falsely; let him be anathema.” The Council bases this definition on Rom. V, 12 sqq., and on ecclesiastical Tradition, and concludes: According to this rule of faith little children, who are as yet unable to commit actual sin, are therefore truly baptized for the remission of sins, in order that by regeneration they may be cleansed of that which they have contracted by generation.”

The Council of Ephesus (A. D. 431) imposed this teaching on all clerics under pain of deposition, and the Second Council of Orange (A. D. 529) dealt Pelagianism a further blow by defining: — If any one asserts that the prevarication of Adam injured himself only and not his progeny, or alleges that bodily death, which is the penalty of sin, but not sin, which is the death of the soul, was brought by one man upon the entire human race, he attributes an injustice to God and contradicts the Apostle, who says: ‘By one man, etc.’”

Rev. Joseph Pohle, God, the Author of Nature and Supernatural

 

 

 “Endeavor to acquire the virtues in which you believe your brother to be wanting; then you will no longer be sensible of his defects, because they will have ceased to exist in yourself.”

St. Augustine

 

 

 

eucharist_Adoration_All_kneel_except_1.jpgPope Francis never kneels before the Blessed Sacrament! Why?

Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. John 6:54-59

For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 1 Cor 11:26-29

Because for Francis, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” (John 6:60)

 

 

 

 

Pope Francis for the second time has made the cover of the liberal and salacious Rolling Stone Magazine.  It may be because he is the first pope to actually duplicate Stan Laurel’s infallible magic match trick?

Rolling_Stone_1_match_trick.jpgLaurel_Stan_2.jpg

 

 

 

 

As we suffer under the moral and doctrinal Novelties of Pope Francis, it is evident why he wants the Novelty Master, Paul VI, to become another novel Novus Ordo saint.  Montini is the man who defined the Spirit of Vatican II” in one word: NOVELTY in order to please men.

“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.”

St. Paul, Galatians 1, 8-10

 

Blind that they are, and leaders of the blind, inflated with a boastful science, they have reached that pitch of folly where they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true nature of the religious sentiment; with that new system of theirs they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, condemned by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can rest and maintain truth itself.

St. Pius X, Pascendi

 

A lamentable spectacle is that presented by the aberrations of human reason when it yields to the spirit of novelty, when against the warning of the Apostle it seeks to know beyond what it is meant to know, and when relying too much on itself it thinks it can find the fruit outside the Church wherein truth is found without the slightest shadow of error.

 Pope Gregory XVI, Singulari nos, 1834, quoted by St. Pius X in Pascendi

 

It is impossible to approve in Catholic publications of a style inspired by unsound novelty which seems to deride the piety of the faithful and dwells on the introduction of a new order of Christian life, on new directions of the Church, on new aspirations of the modern soul, on a new vocation of the clergy, on a new Christian civilisation.

Leo XIII, Jan 27, 1902, quoted by St. Pius X in Pascendi

 

"... We wish to make our own the important words employed by the Council; those words which define its spirit, and, in a dynamical synthesis, form the spirit of all those who refer to it, be they within or without the Church. The word “NOVELTY”, simple, very dear to today’s men, is much utilized; it is theirs... That word... it was given to us as an order, as a program... It comes to us directly from the pages of the Holy Scripture: “For, behold (says the Lord), I create new heavens and a new earth”. St. Paul echoes these words of the prophet Isaiah; then, the Apocalypse: “I am making everything new.” And Jesus, our Master, was not He, himself, an innovator? “You have heard that people were told in the past ... but now I tell you...”– Repeated in the “Sermon on the Mount”.

It is precisely thus that the Council has come to us. Two terms characterize it: “RENOVATION” and “REVISION”. We are particularly keen that this “spirit of renovation”– according to the expression of the Council – be understood and experienced by everyone. It responds to the characteristic of our time, wholly engaged in an enormous and rapid transformation, and generating novelties in every sector of modern life. In fact, one cannot shy away from this spontaneous reflection: if the whole world is changing, will not religion change as well?

Between the reality of life and Christianity, Catholicism especially, is not there reciprocal disagreement, indifference, misunderstanding, and hostility? The former is leaping forward; the latter would not move. How could they go along? How could Christianity claim to have, today, any influence upon life?

And it is for this reason that the Church has undertaken some reforms, especially after the Council. The Episcopate is about to promote the “renovation” that corresponds to our present needs; Religious Orders are reforming their Statutes; Catholic laity is qualified and found its role within the life of the Church; Liturgy is proceeding with a reform in which anyone knows the extension and importance; Christian education reviews the methods of its pedagogy; all the canonical legislations are about to be revised.

And how many other consoling and promising novelties we shall see appearing in the Church! They attest to Her new vitality, which shows that the Holy Spirit animates Her continually, even in these years so crucial to religion. The development of ecumenism, guided by Faith and Charity, itself says what progress, almost unforeseeable, has been achieved during the course and life of the Church. The Church looks at the future with Her heart brimming with hope, brimming with fresh expectation in love... We can say... of the Council: It marks the onset of a new era, of which no one can deny the new aspects that We have indicated to you."

Paul VI, General Audience, July 2, 1969

 

 

 

What needs to be contextualized is the idiot Sosa.  The context is the heresy of Modernism!

Jesuit Superior General: We Don’t Know ‘What Jesus Really Said’

In a strangely convoluted interview, the new Superior General of the Jesuit order suggested that different interpretations of the Bible can all be valid since no one really knows what Jesus said anyway.

B_logo.tifBreitbart | Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. | 23 Feb 2017   “It would be necessary to start a nice reflection on what Jesus really said,” Father Arturo Sosa said in his interview with Swiss Vatican journalist Giuseppe Rusconi, since “at that time no one had a tape recorder to record his words.”

“What we do know is that Jesus’ words need to be contextualized. They were expressed with a language, in a specific setting and were directed to someone in particular,” he said.

Asked whether Jesus’ words have an “absolute value,” Father Sosa said that scholars have been struggling “to understand exactly what Jesus meant to say.”

“The word is relative, the Gospel is written by human beings, it is accepted by the Church which is made up of human persons,” he said.

“It is true,” he said, “that no one can change the word of Jesus, but we need to know what it was!”

Curiously, the Second Vatican Council, which Father Sosa appeals to, taught that “everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit,” and that the books of Scripture “must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation.”

It also declared that the Church has always firmly held that the four Gospels faithfully hand on “what Jesus Christ, while living among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation until the day He was taken up into heaven.”

Getting down to specifics, the interviewer asked Father Sosa whether Jesus’ words regarding divorce are “debatable.”

The priest answered that Jesus’ words should not be doubted but “brought under discernment.” His words continue to oblige, he said, but they oblige us to “follow the results of discernment.”

The Jesuit seemed to suggest that the Holy Spirit is very active in the discernment process but was not quite so active in inspiring the biblical text itself, which was simply “written by human beings” and is therefore “relative.”

What is up for discussion, he continued, is “not the word of Jesus, but the word of Jesus as we have interpreted it.”

“Doctrine is a word that I don’t like very much, it brings with it the image of the hardness of stone,” he said. “Human reality is much more nuanced, it is never black or white, it is in continual development.”

Doctrine is part of discernment, and “true discernment cannot ignore doctrine,” Father Sosa said.

At the same time, however, discernment can reach conclusions at odds with doctrine “because doctrine doesn’t substitute discernment or the Holy Spirit,” he said.

 

Heretics welcome for Novus Ordo Communion! What has been done sub rosa for years is now open practice.

At their spring conference in Ingolstadt, the German bishops' conference agreed that a Protestant partner of a Catholic can receive the Eucharist after having made a "serious examination" of conscience with a priest or another person with pastoral responsibilities, "affirms the faith of the Catholic Church," wishes to end "serious spiritual distress," and has a "longing to satisfy a hunger for the Eucharist."

Edward Pentin, National Catholic Register

 

 

Pope Francis comments on the Resistance to his Heresy

But when I realize that there is real resistance, of course it displeases me. Some people tell me that resistance is normal when someone wants to make changes. The famous ‘we’ve always done it this way’ reigns everywhere, it is a great temptation that we have all faced. … I cannot deny that there is resistance. I see it and I am aware of it. There is doctrinal resistance, which you all know better than I do. For the sake of mental health, I do not read the websites of this so-called “resistance.” I know who they are, I am familiar with the groups, but I do not read them, simply for my mental health. If there is something very serious, they inform me so that I know about it. You all know them … It is a displeasure, but we must move ahead. Historians say that it takes a century before a Council puts down roots. We are halfway there.

When I perceive resistance, I try to dialogue, when dialogue is possible. But some resistance comes from people who believe they possess the true doctrine and accuse you of being a heretic. When I do not find spiritual goodness in these people, because of what they say or write, I simply pray for them. It pains me, but I do not dwell on this feeling for the sake of mental hygiene.

Pope Francis the Destroyer, addressing a private meeting with ninety fellow Jesuits, January 16, 2018, Santiago de Chile. Their conversation was transcribed by Fr. Antonio Spadaro, editor of La Civilta Cattolicà, and was published in Italian with the Pope’s approval.

 

COMMENT: “True doctrine” is possessed by all faithful Catholics who hold DOGMA as their rule of faith. Pope Francis does not. He believes that he is the rule of faith and revealed Truth must bend to his will. Whatever he says and does is what every Catholic must say and do. Francis rejects DOGMA and that is why he is a heretic. He judges those who hold DOGMA as their rule of faith as an outward sign that “these people” are without “spiritual goodness.” What is evident is that Francis, who babbles that “time is greater than space,” cannot and will not be dissuaded from his commitment to destroy. He will not listen to those who offer filial correction and he does not accept evidence of the rotten fruits from Vatican II because it takes “a century before a Council puts down roots.” We are supposed to believe that in another fifty years we will really see the springtime of Vatican II? Unfortunately, at the current rate of decline there will not be a Catholic Church in another fifty years. God being God, this will not happen. Unfortunately for Francis, since he cannot repent, he will pay awful price for all eternity.   

 

Pope Francis' Idea of Zero Tolerance!

In Italy there has been an uproar over the act of “mercy” with which Francis has graced Fr. Mauro Inzoli, a prominent priest of the movement Communion and Liberation, reduced to the lay state in 2012 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for having abused numerous young boys, but restored to the active priesthood by Francis in 2014, with the admonishment that he lead a life of penance and prayer. In the civil arena, Inzoli was caught again and charged.  He has been sentenced to 4 years and 9 months in prison.

Sandro Magister

 

 

The Great Recurring Theme of Pope Francis and the Novus Ordo Church: "We will not walk, We will not hearken!"

Thus saith the Lord: Stand ye on the ways, and see and ask for the old paths which is the good way, and walk ye in it: and you shall find refreshment for your souls. And they said: we will not walk. And I appointed watchmen over you, saying: Hearken ye to the sound of the trumpet. And they said: We will not hearken. Therefore hear, ye nations, and know, O congregation, what great things I will do to them. Hear, O earth: Behold I will bring evils upon this people, the fruits of their own thoughts: because they have not heard my words, and they have cast away my law. To what purpose do you bring me frankincense from Saba, and the sweet smelling cane from a far country? Your holocausts are not acceptable, nor are your sacrifices pleasing to me. 

Jeremias, 6, 16-20

 

 

Leaked docs raise question of Pope’s personal role in new Vatican financial scandal

LifeSiteNews | ROME, February 20, 2018 – Leaked documents obtained by LifeSiteNews connect the Pope himself to a new Vatican financial Life_Site.jpgscandal and raise serious questions about his global reputation as the “pope for the poor.”

LifeSiteNews has obtained internal documents of the U.S.-based Papal Foundation, a charity with a stellar history of assisting the world’s poor, showing that last summer the Pope personally requested, and obtained in part, a $25 million grant to a corruption-plagued, Church-owned dermatological hospital in Rome accused of money laundering. Records from the financial police indicate the hospital has liabilities over one billion USD – an amount larger than the national debt of some 20 nations.

The grant has lay members of the Papal Foundation up in arms, and some tendering resignations. Responding to questions from LifeSiteNews, Papal Foundation staff sent a statement saying that it is not their practice to comment on individual requests.

Speaking of grants in general, the Papal Foundation said their mission has not changed. “The grants to help those in need around the world and of significance to the Holy Father are reviewed and approved through well-accepted philanthropic processes by the Board and its committees,” it said.

Lay membership or becoming a “steward” in the Papal Foundation involves the pledge “to give $1 million over the course of no more than ten years with a minimum donation of $100,000 per year.”  Those monies are invested in order to make a perpetual fund to assist the Church.

However, the majority of the board is composed of U.S. bishops, including every U.S. Cardinal living in America. The foundation customarily gives grants of $200,000 or less to organizations in the developing world via the Holy See.

According to the internal documents, the Pope made the request for the massive grant, which is 100 times larger than its normal grants, through Papal Foundation board chairman Cardinal Donald Wuerl in the summer of 2017.

Despite opposition from the lay “stewards,” the bishops on the board voted in December to send an $8 million payment to the Holy See. In January, the documents reveal, lay members raised alarm about what they consider a gross misuse of their funds, but despite their protests another $5 million was sent with Cardinal Wuerl brooking no dissent.

Along with this report, LifeSite is publishing three leaked documents.

‘Negligent… flawed… reckless’

On January 6, the steward who until then served as chairman of the Foundation’s audit committee submitted his resignation along with a report of the committee’s grave objections to the grant.

“As head of the Audit Committee and a Trustee of the Foundation, I found this grant to be negligent in character, flawed in its diligence, and contrary to the spirit of the Foundation,” he wrote in his resignation letter accompanying the report. “Instead of helping the poor in a third-world country, the Board approved an unprecedented huge grant to a hospital that has a history of mismanagement, criminal indictments, and bankruptcy.”

“Had we allowed such recklessness in our personal careers we would never have met the requirements to join The Papal Foundation in the first place.”

The audit committee chairman’s report noted that the Foundation’s “initial $8 million was sent without any supporting documentation.”

He said the board eventually received a “2-1/2 inch thick binder of information (mostly in Italian)” but it lacked essential details. The report notes:

There was no Balance Sheet.  There was no clear explanation as to how the $25 million would be used. Normal grant requests are fairly specific about how our money will be used. Buried in the thick binder was only a one-page financial projection labelled “Draft for Discussion” showing:

2017   1.6 million Euro PROFIT

2018   2.4 million Euro PROFIT

2019   4.4 million Euro PROFIT

And on this data, our Board of Directors voted to grant this failing hospital $25 million of our hard-earned dollars. To put this in perspective, rarely have we given above $200,000 to a grant request. I pointed out that there was NO PROFESSIONAL DUE DILIGENCE, just a lot of fluff. If the numbers presented were accurate, then this commercial enterprise should go to a bank.  They don’t need our money.  If the numbers were not accurate, then a decision could not be made. […..]

 

 

 

Hungarian Prime Minister: ‘Christianity is Europe’s last hope’

LifeSiteNews | BUDAPEST, Hungary | February 19, 2018 – Brushing aside any semblance of political correctness, Hungary’s Prime Minister said in his state of the nation speech on Sunday that, “Christianity is Europe's last hope.”  

Addressing his country and the world, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán warned that European nations which have encouraged migration have, “opened the way to the decline of Christian culture and the advance of Islam.”

Orbán painted an image of Western Europe being overwhelmed by the accelerating influx Muslim immigrants in recent years.  

“According to estimates, the proportion of immigrants will grow at an accelerated pace in the European countries west of us,” said Orbán. “I won't even say anything about France and Holland, but even the born Germans are being forced back from most large German cities as migrants always occupy big cities first.”

Orbán warned that as Western Europe becomes saturated with Muslim occupants, Islamists would soon seek to stream in to his country from both Western Europe as well as from Islamic nations.

“This means that the Islamic civilization, which always considers its vocation to convert Europe to what it calls the true faith, in the future will be knocking on the door of Central Europe not only from the south, but from the west, as well,” he said.

Prime Minister Orbán said his government will oppose efforts by the United Nations or the European Union to “increase migration” around the world.

In June, LifeSiteNews reported that Orbán had taken a strong stand and not backed down against outside globalist influences seeking to control his nation’s politics.

Billionaire George Soros, who famously backs many progressive initiatives around the world, locked horns with Orbán over the Central European University (CEU) he founded in 1989, which has been criticized as a funnel for anti-nationalist views. [……]

 

 

A Knife in the Back of every faithful Catholic, especially the Chinese.

“The Communists want to enslave the Church….  Cardinal (Pietor) Parolin (the Vatican Secretary of State) venerates the Ostpolitik diplomacy of his mater Casaroli [a reference to Cardinal Agostino Casaroli, the Secretary of State from 1979 to 1990, who was noted for his efforts to promote dialogue with the Soviet bloc] and despises the genuine faith of those who firmly defend the Church founded by Jesus on the apostles from any interference by secular power.”

Cardinal Joseph Zen, warning against a proposed Vatican deal with Beijing to formally recognize the Patriotic Catholic Church run by the Communist government as the official Catholic Church in China

 

Catholic saints and the religious that have followed their examples have done more for the poor, for children, for exploited women than all others throughout all of history.  We own no apology to anyone for Catholic charity!  Is Francis, the class warrior, begging for an apology because he was mistreated?

“I believe that the church not only should apologize to the person who is gay whom it has offended, but has to apologize to the poor, to exploited women, to children exploited for labor; it has to ask forgiveness for having blessed many weapons.” 

Pope Francis

 

 

 

Che-Guevara-Papst-mit-Sichel-und-Hammer.jpg

 

Effigy of Pope Francis the Communist being mocked in a Shrove Tuesday Celebration in 2017 along with cherub images of Mao, Lenin and Castro.  The measure of the man by faithful Catholics is being taken more accurately every day but unfortunately, the measure of the man is doing incalculable damage to the dignity of the office with the loss of many souls.

 

 

 

 

 

Cardinal says Vatican-China deal would put Catholics in communist cage

Reuters | HONG KONG | February 9, 2018 - A senior Catholic cardinal accused the Vatican on Friday of acting “unfaithfully” in its rapprochement with China, saying it would put the country’s some 12 million faithful in a bird cage controlled by the Communist Party.

Addressing a news conference, Hong Kong’s outspoken Cardinal Joseph Zen also said he was highly skeptical of a deal that reportedly would give Pope Francis the final say in the appointment of bishops, the key part of the agreement.

Nearly 70 years after China and the Vatican severed diplomatic relations, the two sides recently reached a framework accord on the thorny issue of who gets to appoint new Chinese bishops and a historic deal could be signed in a few months.

The 86-year-old former bishop of Hong Kong, recently rebuked by the Vatican after he said it had “sold out” China’s faithful, said sources told him that under the framework agreement the pope would have the final veto power over bishops who are effectively chosen by the Chinese government.

“They (The Chinese government) say the last word belongs to the Holy Father. Sounds wonderful? But it’s fake,” Zen said.

”They are not going to make good choices for the Church ... surely they choose the one they prefer, which means the one who always obeys the government. So how (could) the Holy Father approve such a choice?”

“Okay, he can veto. How many times? It takes courage to veto the second time, the third time, five times,” Zen said.

Catholics in China are split between the state-controlled Catholic Patriotic Association, where bishops are appointed by the government, and the “underground” Church that remains loyal to the pope while being systematically persecuted by Chinese authorities for years.

Zen, who has fiercely criticized the Vatican for attempting to force two “underground” bishops to give way to government-backed “illegitimate” bishops in order to foster the deal, was rebuked by the Vatican last Wednesday for “fostering confusion and controversy”.

Zen said that under the status quo, which he described as “the lesser evil,” the Vatican secretly approves candidates who are acceptable to both sides before the state-controlled Church makes them bishop.

But under the new agreement, where candidates would be selected via a “so-called democratic election” inside the Chinese Catholic community and endorsed by a state-controlled bishops’ conference before being submitted to the pope, the choice lies entirely in the hands of the government, Zen said.

“A church enslaved by the government is no real Catholic Church,” he said.

Zen said he was not criticizing the pope, whom he believed might not be briefed on “reality” because bureaucrats in the Holy See are eager to strike a deal.

“What they (Vatican negotiators) are doing is unfaithful,” Zen said. “I am not judging their conscience but ... it’s a surrender and they have no right to surrender.”

 

 

Those who think that the pope is the "rule of faith" will follow Francis into heresy.  Those who are faithful to dogma as the "rule of faith" can at least find salvation.

Scholar stumps Cardinal Cupich, asks if Pope’s ‘paradigm shift’ means ‘radical’ doctrinal change

Life_Site.jpgLifeSiteNews | CAMBRIDGE, England |  February 15, 2018 – A respected Catholic historian and philosopher challenged Cardinal Blase Cupich during a lecture last week about Pope’ Francis so-called “revolution of mercy” that has caused what many are defending as a “paradigm shift” in Catholic practice.

Professor John Rist, after listening to a February 9 lecture at Cambridge University in which Cardinal Cupich praised Pope Francis’ “paradigm shift” in Catholic practice, asked the Cardinal at the end of the lecture why Pope Francis “mercilessly” insults and eliminates his doctrinal opponents. 

Rist asked the Cardinal: 

Your Eminence, In view of your account of the sunny, caring and holistic features of Pope Francis’ revolution of mercy – described disturbingly by the leaflet for this meeting and by your Eminence as a ‘paradigm shift’ in the presentation of Catholicism – and of the Pope’s call for free and frank discussion of his challenging proposals and policies, I would like to ask why Pope Francis acts so mercilessly in insulting and eliminating doctrinal opponents:  

·       Cardinal Burke removed from the leadership of the Roman Rota;  

·       Three loyal priests from the CDF dismissed without explanation, followed by the abrupt termination of Cardinal Mueller himself;

·       The denial of a Cardinal’s hat to the much loved champion of the unborn, Archbishop Chaput;

·       The removal of most of the original members of the Academy for Life;

·       The apparent selling-down the river of Cardinal Pell, who may have been framed;

·       And more recently the banishment from Rome of the Professor of Patristics at the Lateran and editor of the challenging book Remaining in the Truth of Christ

The list goes on and on, but I stop there  to ask again whether harsh actions of this sort — combined with the well-documented rigging of the Synod on the Family — indicate that the Pope’s 'paradigm shift' should be recognized as an attempt — under cover of offering solutions to genuine social problems in Western society — to impose on the Church radical changes of doctrine, developed not by laity but largely in Germany by a group of relativist Hegelian theologians? 

Cupich sidestepped away from the question, replying that those who have such concerns should ask themselves: “Do we really believe that the Spirit is no longer guiding the Church?” reported the Catholic Herald. 

The professor said after the event that if he had been given the chance to reply, he would have told the Cardinal that “the Church is indeed guided by the Holy Spirit, via good Catholic souls such as Cardinal Burke and many others.”

Rist is a Professor of Classics Emeritus at the University of Toronto and now holds a Chair in Philosophy at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. A native of the United Kingdom, Rist is a life member of Clare Hall, Cambridge University. He is also a convert to Catholicism from agnosticism, thanks to his study of Plato, the Gospels and other ancient texts. 

Rist, whose career as a philosopher and a classicist spans fifty years and three continents, has written 16 scholarly books and over a hundred journal articles on ancient and Christian philosophy or the Gospels. He also contributed to Remaining in the Truth of Christ, the defense of Catholic teaching that was “intercepted” at the Synod on the Family.  

Rist told LifeSiteNews that he regards the Francis papacy as a “disaster.” 

“I regard this papacy as a disaster and Bergoglio as possibly — because of his tampering with established doctrine — as possibly the worst pope we have ever had,” he said. 

“Cupich's attempt to defend him [at Cambridge] was itself dependent on misrepresentations, the evading of legitimate questions, and in at least one case — that of my charge of the Synod on the Family being rigged — of downright lying. I was teaching in Rome at the time, and contributed to Remaining in the Truth of Christ, so I know about what happened firsthand,” he added. 

The professor said that one of the principal difficulties in the Church today is when people confuse the Church with the person of the Pope. 

"One of the basic problems we have is that too many Catholics (and others) confuse the pope with the Church,” he said. “Cupich tried to play that card by suggesting that Amoris Laetitia — even in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis — is de fide [i.e. doctrine that must be believed], which it manifestly is not.”

Rist suggested that Pope Francis is not doing his job well.  

“It is the function of the Pope to provide unity in the Church by scrutinizing new ideas to see if they are compatible with the inherited regula fidei [rule of faith],” the professor continued. “Instead of unity Pope Francis has caused massive confusion and division – and many sad clergy are afraid of being sanctioned if they speak out.”

As have many others before him, Rist compared the challenges posed by Francis’ innovations to the crisis of faith in the fourth century. 

“The whole thing amounts to a heresy on the scale of the Arian heresy,” he stated. “That took some 60 years to wort out. I fear that this set of moral heresies may last even longer.”

 

 

Friends of Pope Francis - those who oppose sodomy are "corrosive and repugnant."

“We have to face the fact that there is a group of people across all religious views that are particularly antagonistic to LGBT people. That comes from deep within the human soul, and it’s really corrosive and repugnant.”

Quote from the Jesuit trained Pope Francis appointed San Diego Bishop, Robert McElroy, who endorsed the book written by the Sodomophile James Martin. S.J., Building a Bridge, that defends the LGBT agenda claiming that God created homosexuals as they are and that chastity is not required of them, that Catholics should reverence gay marriages and support transgenderism in children. He even endorses the aberrant displays of homosexuals kissing at the sign of peace during Novus Ordo services.

 

Gee, what do you suppose happened in the 1960s that started this “erosion of the Catholic Faith in Germany”?

One notes in particular in traditionally Catholic regions a very strong decline in participation at Sunday Mass, not to mention the sacramental life.  Where in the 1960s everywhere just about all the faithful still participated at Holy Mass every Sunday, today there are often less than 10 percent.  Ever fewer people seek the sacraments.  The Sacrament of Penance has almost disappeared.  Ever fewer Catholics receive Confirmation or contract Catholic Matrimony.  The number of vocations to priestly ministry and the consecrated life has sharply diminished.  In consideration of these facts, one can speak truly of an erosion of the Catholic Faith in Germany. 

Pope Francis, addressing the German bishops, Nov. 2015

 

Many of the actions of worldlings, which at first sight may appear innocent, have a natural and fatal tendency to pervert the morals of the just; and therefore, we must keep as much as possible at a distance from their society. --- Ismael was a figure of the synagogue, which persecuted the Church of Christ in her birth.

Fr. George Leo Haydock, scriptural commentary, Genesis 21, upon Abraham sending away Ismael with his mother, Agar.

 

 

Even the modern media is tiring of Pope Francis the Sham!

Global scandal: Francis exposed as a liar by own advisers on abuse victim

From the Associated Press, in what is turning out to be the greatest scandal of a sorry Pontificate:

By NICOLE WINFIELD and EVA VERGARA

Associated Press | VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis received a victim’s letter in 2015 that graphically detailed how a priest sexually abused him and how other Chilean clergy ignored it, contradicting the pope’s recent insistence that no victims had come forward to denounce the cover-up, the letter’s author and members of Francis’ own sex- abuse commission have told The Associated Press.
The fact that Francis received the eight-page letter, obtained by the AP, challenges his insistence that he has “zero tolerance” for sex abuse and cover-ups. It also calls into question his stated empathy with abuse survivors, compounding the most serious crisis of his five-year papacy.
The scandal exploded last month when Francis’ trip to South America was marred by protests over his vigorous defense of Bishop Juan Barros, who is accused by victims of covering up the abuse by the Rev. Fernando Karadima. During the trip, Francis callously dismissed accusations against Barros as “slander,” seemingly unaware that victims had placed him at the scene of Karadima’s crimes.
On the plane home, confronted by an AP reporter, the pope said: “You, in all good will, tell me that there are victims, but I haven’t seen any, because they haven’t come forward.”
But members of the pope’s Commission for the Protection of Minors say that in April 2015, they sent a delegation to Rome specifically to hand-deliver a letter to the pope about Barros. The letter from Juan Carlos Cruz detailed the abuse, kissing and fondling he says he suffered at Karadima’s hands, which he said Barros and others witnessed and ignored.
Four members of the commission met with Francis’ top abuse adviser, Cardinal Sean O’Malley, explained their objections to Francis’ recent appointment of Barros as a bishop in southern Chile, and gave him the letter to deliver to Francis.
“When we gave him (O’Malley) the letter for the pope, he assured us he would give it to the pope and speak of the concerns,” then-commission member Marie Collins told the AP. “And at a later date, he assured us that that had been done.”
Cruz, who now lives and works in Philadelphia, heard the same later that year.
“Cardinal O’Malley called me after the pope’s visit here in Philadelphia and he told me, among other things, that he had given the letter to the pope — in his hands,” he said in an interview at his home Sunday.
Neither the Vatican nor O’Malley responded to multiple requests for comment.
While the 2015 summit of Francis’ commission was known and publicized at the time, the contents of Cruz’s letter — and a photograph of Collins handing it to O’Malley — were not disclosed by members. Cruz provided the letter, and Collins provided the photo, after reading an AP story that reported Francis had claimed to have never heard from any Karadima victims about Barros’ behavior.
The Barros affair first caused shockwaves in January 2015 when Francis appointed him bishop of Osorno, Chile, over the objections of the leadership of Chile’s bishops’ conference and many local priests and laity. They accepted as credible the testimony against Karadima, a prominent Chilean cleric who was sanctioned by the Vatican in 2011 for abusing minors. Barros was a Karadima protege, and according to Cruz and other victims, he witnessed the abuse and did nothing.
“Holy Father, I write you this letter because I’m tired of fighting, of crying and suffering,” Cruz wrote in Francis’ native Spanish. “Our story is well known and there’s no need to repeat it, except to tell you of the horror of having lived this abuse and how I wanted to kill myself.”
Cruz and other survivors had for years denounced the cover-up of Karadima’s crimes, but were dismissed as liars by the Chilean church hierarchy and the Vatican’s own ambassador in Santiago, who refused their repeated requests to meet before and after Barros was appointed.
After Francis’ comments backing the Chilean hierarchy caused such an outcry in Chile, he was forced last week to do an about-face: The Vatican announced it was sending in its most respected sex-crimes investigator to take testimony from Cruz and others about Barros.

In the letter to the pope, Cruz begs for Francis to listen to him and make good on his pledge of “zero tolerance.”
“Holy Father, it’s bad enough that we suffered such tremendous pain and anguish from the sexual and psychological abuse, but the terrible mistreatment we received from our pastors is almost worse,” he wrote.
Cruz goes on to detail in explicit terms the homo-eroticized nature of the circle of priests and young boys around Karadima, the charismatic preacher whose El Bosque community in the well-to-do Santiago neighborhood of Providencia produced dozens of priestly vocations and five bishops, including Barros.
He described how Karadima would kiss Barros and fondle his genitals, and do the same with younger priests and teens, and how young priests and seminarians would fight to sit next to Karadima at the table to receive his affections.

“More difficult and tough was when we were in Karadima’s room and Juan Barros — if he wasn’t kissing Karadima — would watch when Karadima would touch us — the minors — and make us kiss him, saying: ‘Put your mouth near mine and stick out your tongue.’ He would stick his out and kiss us with his tongue,” Cruz told the pope. “Juan Barros was a witness to all this innumerable times, not just with me but with others as well.”
“Juan Barros covered up everything that I have told you,” he added.
Barros has repeatedly denied witnessing any abuse or covering it up. “I never knew anything about, nor ever imagined, the serious abuses which that priest committed against the victims,” he told the AP recently. “I have never approved of nor participated in such serious, dishonest acts, and I have never been convicted by any tribunal of such things.”
For the Osorno faithful who have opposed Barros as their bishop, the issue isn’t so much a legal matter requiring proof or evidence, as Barros was a young priest at the time and not in a position of authority over Karadima. It’s more that if Barros didn’t “see” what was happening around him and doesn’t find it problematic for a priest to kiss and fondle young boys, he shouldn’t be in charge of a diocese where he is responsible for detecting inappropriate sexual behavior, reporting it to police and protecting children from pedophiles like his mentor.
Cruz had arrived at Karadima’s community in 1980 as a vulnerable teenager, distraught after the recent death of his father. He has said Karadima told him he would be like a spiritual father to him, but instead sexually abused him.
Based on testimony from Cruz and other former members of the parish, the Vatican in 2011 removed Karadima from ministry and sentenced him to a lifetime of “penance and prayer” for his crimes. Now 87, he lives in a home for elderly priests in Santiago; he hasn’t commented on the scandal and the home has declined to accept calls or visits from the news media.
The victims also testified to Chilean prosecutors, who opened an investigation into Karadima after they went public with their accusations in 2010. Chilean prosecutors had to drop charges because too much time had passed, but the judge running the case stressed that it wasn’t for lack of proof.
While the victims’ testimony was deemed credible by both Vatican and Chilean prosecutors, the local church hierarchy clearly didn’t believe them, which might have influenced Francis’ view. Cardinal Francisco Javier Errazuriz has acknowledged he didn’t believe the victims initially and shelved an investigation. He was forced to reopen it after the victims went public.
He is now one of the Argentine pope’s key cardinal advisers.
By the time he finally got his letter into the pope’s hands in 2015, Cruz had already sent versions to many other people, and had tried for months to get an appointment with the Vatican ambassador. The embassy’s Dec. 15, 2014, email to Cruz — a month before Barros was appointed — was short and to the point:
“The apostolic nunciature has received the message you emailed Dec. 7 to the apostolic nuncio,” it read, “and at the same time communicates that your request has been met with an unfavorable response.”
One could argue that Francis didn’t pay attention to Cruz’s letter, since he receives thousands of letters every day from faithful around the world. He can’t possibly read them all, much less remember the contents years later. He might have been tired and confused after a weeklong trip to South America when he told an airborne press conference that victims never came forward to accuse Barros of cover-up.
But this was not an ordinary letter, nor were the circumstances under which it arrived in the Vatican.
Francis had named O’Malley, the archbishop of Boston, to head his Commission for the Protection of Minors based on his credibility in having helped clean up the mess in Boston after the U.S. sex abuse scandal exploded there in 2002. The commission gathered outside experts to advise the church on protecting children from pedophiles and educating church personnel about preventing abuse and cover-ups.
The four commission members who were on a special subcommittee dedicated to survivors had flown to Rome specifically to speak with O’Malley about the Barros appointment and to deliver Cruz’s letter. A press release issued after the April 12, 2015, meeting read: “Cardinal O’Malley agreed to present the concerns of the subcommittee to the Holy Father.”
Commission member Catherine Bonnet, a French child psychiatrist who took the photo of Collins handing the letter to O’Malley, said the commission members had decided to descend on Rome specifically when O’Malley and other members of the pope’s group of nine cardinal advisers were meeting, so that O’Malley could put it directly into the pope’s hands.
“Cardinal O’Malley promised us when Marie gave to him the letter of Juan Carlos that he will give to Pope Francis,” she said.
O’Malley’s spokesman in Boston referred requests for comment to the Vatican. Neither the Vatican press office, nor officials at the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, responded to calls and emails seeking comment.
But O’Malley’s remarkable response to Francis’ defense of Barros and to his dismissal of the victims while he was in Chile, is perhaps now better understood.
In a rare rebuke of a pope by a cardinal, O’Malley issued a statement Jan. 20 in which he said the pope’s words were “a source of great pain for survivors of sexual abuse,” and that such expressions had the effect of abandoning victims and relegating them to “discredited exile.”

A day later, Francis apologized for having demanded “proof” of wrongdoing by Barros, saying he meant merely that he wanted to see “evidence.” But he continued to describe the accusations against Barros as “calumny” and insisted he had never heard from any victims.
Even when told in his airborne press conference Jan. 21 that Karadima’s victims had indeed placed Barros at the scene of Karadima’s abuse, Francis said: “No one has come forward. They haven’t provided any evidence for a judgment. This is all a bit vague. It’s something that can’t be accepted.”
He stood by Barros, saying: “I’m certain he’s innocent,” even while saying that he considered the testimony of victims to be “evidence” in a cover-up investigation.
“If anyone can give me evidence, I’ll be the first to listen,” he said.
Cruz said he felt like he had been slapped when he heard those words.
“I was upset,” he said, “and at the same time I couldn’t believe that someone so high up like the pope himself could lie about this.”

 

 

Francis continues in his fulsome praise of Communists!

Vatican Official Praises China for Witness to Catholic Social Teaching

The U.S. has criticized the country regarding lack of human rights, pointing to ‘still-coercive population-control policies,’ other troubling practices.

National_Catholic_Register.jpgCNA/EWTN News | Vatican | February 7, 2018

VATICAN CITY — The chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences has said that China is exercising global moral leadership in the principles of Catholic social teaching and defense of human dignity.

Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, an Argentinian, is chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. In an interview with Vatican Insider, he recently said that, “at this moment, those who best realize the social doctrine of the Church are the Chinese.”

Bishop Sorondo told Vatican Insider that he had recently visited China, where he says he found that “they [the Chinese] seek the common good, subordinate things to the general good.”

“I found an extraordinary China; what people do not know is that the central Chinese principle is ‘work, work, work.’ ... As Paul said: ‘He who does not work does not eat.’ You do not have shantytowns; you do not have drugs; young people do not have drugs. There is a positive national consciousness — they want to show that they have changed; they already accept private property,” he said of his trip.

The bishop said that the People’s Republic of China has “defended the dignity of the human person” and, in the area of climate change, is “assuming a moral leadership that others have abandoned.”

He criticized the United States, where, he said, the economy dominates politics. “How is it possible that oil multinationals manage Trump?” he asked.

“Liberal thought has liquidated the concept of the common good; they do not even want to take it into account — it affirms that it is an empty idea, without any interest.” On the other hand, he said, the Chinese propose work for the common good.  

The bishop said that “China is evolving very well,” adding that “you cannot think that the China of today is the China [during the pontificate of] John Paul II or the Russia of the Cold War.”

In October 2017, the U.S. Congressional-Executive Commission on China criticized the country’s human-rights practices.

The commission condemned “the Chinese government and Communist Party’s continued efforts to silence dissent, criminalize activities of human-rights lawyers, control civil society, suppress religious activity, and restrict the operations of foreign media outlets, businesses and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) over the past 12 months.”

“Nothing good happens in the dark,” U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said in an October statement on China. “That is why the administration should shine a light on the Chinese government’s failures to abide by universal standards, shine a light on the cases of tortured and abused political prisoners, shine a light on China’s unfair trade practices and still-coercive population-control policies.”

 

 

Cardinal says Vatican-China deal would put Catholics in communist cage

Reuters | HONG KONG | February 9, 2018 - A senior Catholic cardinal accused the Vatican on Friday of acting “unfaithfully” in its rapprochement with China, saying it would put the country’s some 12 million faithful in a bird cage controlled by the Communist Party.

Addressing a news conference, Hong Kong’s outspoken Cardinal Joseph Zen also said he was highly skeptical of a deal that reportedly would give Pope Francis the final say in the appointment of bishops, the key part of the agreement.

Nearly 70 years after China and the Vatican severed diplomatic relations, the two sides recently reached a framework accord on the thorny issue of who gets to appoint new Chinese bishops and a historic deal could be signed in a few months.

The 86-year-old former bishop of Hong Kong, recently rebuked by the Vatican after he said it had “sold out” China’s faithful, said sources told him that under the framework agreement the pope would have the final veto power over bishops who are effectively chosen by the Chinese government.

“They (The Chinese government) say the last word belongs to the Holy Father. Sounds wonderful? But it’s fake,” Zen said.

”They are not going to make good choices for the Church ... surely they choose the one they prefer, which means the one who always obeys the government. So how (could) the Holy Father approve such a choice?”

“Okay, he can veto. How many times? It takes courage to veto the second time, the third time, five times,” Zen said.

Catholics in China are split between the state-controlled Catholic Patriotic Association, where bishops are appointed by the government, and the “underground” Church that remains loyal to the pope while being systematically persecuted by Chinese authorities for years.

Zen, who has fiercely criticized the Vatican for attempting to force two “underground” bishops to give way to government-backed “illegitimate” bishops in order to foster the deal, was rebuked by the Vatican last Wednesday for “fostering confusion and controversy”.

Zen said that under the status quo, which he described as “the lesser evil,” the Vatican secretly approves candidates who are acceptable to both sides before the state-controlled Church makes them bishop.

But under the new agreement, where candidates would be selected via a “so-called democratic election” inside the Chinese Catholic community and endorsed by a state-controlled bishops’ conference before being submitted to the pope, the choice lies entirely in the hands of the government, Zen said.

“A church enslaved by the government is no real Catholic Church,” he said.

Zen said he was not criticizing the pope, whom he believed might not be briefed on “reality” because bureaucrats in the Holy See are eager to strike a deal.

“What they (Vatican negotiators) are doing is unfaithful,” Zen said. “I am not judging their conscience but ... it’s a surrender and they have no right to surrender.”

 

 

Warning from the Francis the “Snake Charmer”

Beware of the illusions of “charlatans”, who trigger “violence against those who do not live up to our expectations”!

Pope’s message for Lent 2018: “snake charmers”, who manipulate human emotions in order to enslave others”. No to false remedies for young people “drugs, disposable relationships, and easy but dishonest gains”. Prayer, fasting and almsgiving, “set us free from greed”

Vatican Insider | salvatore cernuzio | vatican city | February 6, 2018

“Snake charmers”, “charlatans”,”swindlers”. Pope Francis’ message for Lent 2018 is a warning against today’s “false prophets” who offer cheap happiness, easy earnings and illusory liberations - in short, those “who offer easy and immediate solutions to suffering that soon prove utterly useless” – robbing, instead, “people of all that is most precious: dignity, freedom and the ability to love”.  […..]

 

 

Another Novus Ordo “Miracle” making another Novus Ordo “saint”! But who in their right mind would willingly exchange their hoped for eternal reward with any of them!

Vatican Saints’ Congregation Approves Miracle No. 2 for Blessed Paul VI

Unanimous Vatican vote was held Feb. 6. Next step: papal approval. Speculation is that the canonization may take place this fall.

Vatican Insider | Hannah Brockhaus | CNA/EWTN News | February 6, 2018

VATICAN CITY — On Tuesday the Congregation for the Causes of Saints approved the second miracle needed for the canonization of Pope Blessed Paul VI, allowing his canonization to take place, possibly later this year.

According to Vatican Insider, the saints’ congregation approved the miracle by a unanimous vote Feb. 6. The next step is for Pope Francis to give his approval, with an official decree from the Vatican. Then the date for the canonization can be set.

The miracle attributed to the cause of Paul VI is the healing of an unborn child in the fifth month of pregnancy. The case was brought forward in 2014 for study.

The mother, originally from the province of Verona, Italy, had an illness that risked her own life and the life of her unborn child, and she was advised by doctors to have an abortion.

A few days after the beatification of Paul VI, on Oct. 19, 2014, she went to pray for his intercession at the Shrine of Holy Mary of Grace in the town of Brescia, Italy. The baby girl was later born in good health and remains in good health today.

The healing was first ruled as medically inexplicable by the medical council of the congregation last year, while the congregation’s consulting theologians agreed that the healing occurred through the late Pope’s intercession.

Today’s meeting with cardinals was the final step before Cardinal Angelo Amato, head of the congregation, will take the miracle to Pope Francis, who has the final say in its approval.

After the Pope issues a decree approving it, the date of the canonization will be announced during a consistory. According to Vatican Insider, the canonization may take place in October of this year during the Synod of Bishops on youth.  […..]

 

 

Why are those responsible for this disaster on the fast-track to canonization?

Certainly the results (of Vatican II) seem cruelly opposed to the expectations of everyone, beginning with those of Pope John XXIII and then of Pope Paul VI: expected was a new Catholic unity and instead we have been exposed to dissension which, to use the words of Pope Paul VI, seems to have gone from self-criticism to self-destruction. Expected was a new enthusiasm and many wound up discouraged and bored. Expected was a great step forward, instead we find ourselves faced with a progressive process of decadence which has developed for the most part under the sign of a calling back to the Council, and has therefore contributed to discrediting it for many. The net result therefore seems negative. I am repeating here what I said ten years after the conclusion of the work: it is incontrovertible that this period has definitely been unfavorable for the Catholic Church. 

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, 1984

 

 

Ecumenism, Love, Hatred, and St. John the Evangelist

In his encyclical Mortalium Animos, Pope Pius XI makes notable appeal to the teaching of the Apostle and Evangelist John to distinguish between true and false charity toward non-Catholic Christians:

“These pan-Christians who turn their minds to uniting the churches seem, indeed, to pursue the noblest of ideas in promoting charity among all Christians: nevertheless how does it happen that this charity tends to injure faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment “Love one another,” altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ’s teaching: “If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you.” For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith. Who then can conceive a Christian Federation, the members of which retain each his own opinions and private judgment, even in matters which concern the object of faith, even though they be repugnant to the opinions of the rest? And in what manner, We ask, can men who follow contrary opinions, belong to one and the same Federation of the faithful? For example, those who affirm, and those who deny that sacred Tradition is a true fount of divine Revelation; those who hold that an ecclesiastical hierarchy, made up of bishops, priests and ministers, has been divinely constituted, and those who assert that it has been brought in little by little in accordance with the conditions of the time; those who adore Christ really present in the Most Holy Eucharist through that marvelous conversion of the bread and wine, which is called transubstantiation, and those who affirm that Christ is present only by faith or by the signification and virtue of the Sacrament; those who in the Eucharist recognize the nature both of a sacrament and of a sacrifice, and those who say that it is nothing more than the memorial or commemoration of the Lord’s Supper; those who believe it to be good and useful to invoke by prayer the Saints reigning with Christ, especially Mary the Mother of God, and to venerate their images, and those who urge that such a veneration is not to be made use of, for it is contrary to the honor due to Jesus Christ, “the one mediator of God and men.” How so great a variety of opinions can make the way clear to effect the unity of the Church We know not; that unity can only arise from one teaching authority, one law of belief and one faith of Christians. But We do know that from this it is an easy step to the neglect of religion or indifferentism and to modernism, as they call it.”

No one understands charity better than St. John, but he understood that the theological virtue of charity must be founded on the theological virtue of faith, and therefore anything that undermines the faith of necessity undermines charity. And therefore he commands us to avoid contact with those who would undermine the faith.

In general one can see that love necessarily cause the one loving to hate anything which threatens to destroy what is loved. Thus, since we naturally love health, therefore we naturally hate disease; since we naturally love life, we naturally hate anything that destroys our lives, and so on. And charity is no exception the supernatural love of God above all things necessarily implies hatred of sin, which is directly opposed to that charity, and error which is opposed to the faith on which it is founded.

But ecumenists have difficulty seeing this. Even if they would perhaps hesitate to use such strong words, they would probably agree with the non-Catholic New Testament scholar Gerd Lüdemann’s judgement on St. John, in his critique of Benedict’s Deus Caritas Est:

“[The] Johannine communities fell far short of exhibiting the love that [Pope Benedict XVI] recommends to the contemporary church. For not only does the First Letter of John—from which the encyclical takes its theme and exhortation—restrict brotherhood to those of orthodox belief, but the Second Letter of John, which quite predictably is not mentioned in the encyclical, takes the same approach and pushes it even further. In verses 9 through 11 of this very brief letter, its author, who identifies himself only as ‘the Elder,’ commands the community to receive into their homes only those brothers who confess Christ’s coming in the flesh. Any present or former brothers who have a different opinion concerning Christ’s incarnation should be spurned. Indeed, “John” forbids the members of his communities even to greet them. He deems this precautionary measure necessary, lest the community of right belief become infected by the evil doctrines and consequent guilt of its dissident brothers. How strange it is to encounter such harsh and hate-filled expostulations in a letter overflowing with assurances of mutual love and attesting to a community’s unanimous recognition of sacred truth!”

Lüdemann’s reasoning is precisely the sort of thing that one is likely to hear from contemporary ecumenists. And the reason is clear: they are not motivated by the supernatural virtue of charity, founded on the one true faith, but rather by a vague benevolence, founded on modernism and indifferentism. And like every kind of love, this vague benevolence causes a hatred of everything that threatens the object of love; they do not (like St. John) hate heresy, rather they hate “fanaticism” and “fundamentalism.” In other words they hate the perennial claim of the Catholic Church to teach the truth.

COMMENT: This was copied from the conservative Catholic blog, Rorate Caeli. It is interesting for two reasons. Firstly, because what it says concerning the virtues of Faith and Charity is what every traditional Catholic already knows and has defended over the last fifty years but, nevertheless we do not tire of hearing it repeated from time to time. It is also interesting because it politely affirms that Pope Benedict, and a fortiori, Pope Francis and Pope John Paul II, by professing the heresy of ecumenism, “are not motivated by the supernatural virtue of charity, founded on the one true faith” and therefore “hate the perennial claim of the Catholic Church to teach the truth.” It is a hopeful sign that younger conservative Catholics recognize that it is first and foremost the Faith that must be defended by keeping the immemorial ecclesiastical traditions that make that Faith known and communicable to others. At this time, established publications who claim to be traditional are content with the crumbs offered by Benedict XVI and continually heap praise upon him and his Motu Proprio, Summormum Pontificum, they fail to recognize that the battle has always been and will continue to be the Faith itself that Modernists and Neo-modernists aim to destroy. These younger conservative Catholics will hopefully become the radical traditionalists that are so desperately needed at this time for the Church militant. The Novus Ordo Church keeps two fast days during Lent and abstains on Fridays and has gutted liturgical prayer. Let us keep faithfully the traditional penances and practices during Lent as an act of reparation for our own sins and the welfare of the Church. If traditional Catholics do not do it, it will not be done.

 

 

 

Conservative Catholics, (actually, the children of Conservative Catholics), turning on the Golden Calf! Finally recognize that Vatican II is the sartorial equivalent of the Leisure Suit!

Time to Let Go of Vatican II

OnePeterFive | Brian Willaims | February 5, 2018

Several months back Father Hugh Somerville-Knapman, OSB wrote a must read article over at his blog, Dominus mihi adjutor. For those not familiar with Fr. Hugh, a Benedictine monk and priest of Douai Abbey in Berkshire, U.K., he is no liturgical bomb thrower. His arguments are always well reasoned and thoughtful, which is why it’s worth revisiting.

 “Vale Vatifan II: Moving On” verbalizes what a growing number of the faithful are finally coming to grips with. In the words of Fr. Hugh: “it is time now to let go of the Council.” While I encourage everyone to read the full article, there are several points worth highlighting here.

Fr. Hugh begins by making the (obvious) acknowledgement that the world has changed greatly since the 1960’s. This would hardly matter if the Council  had sought to clarify doctrine and timeless truths, but it is relevant for a Council claiming to be pastoral in its scope and very purpose. As Father writes:

It described itself as a pastoral council, and it sought to repackage the teaching, life and worship of the Church to suit a world in flux. For this very reason the Council was necessarily going to have a best-before date. That date has been passed. The sad thing is that its milk turned sour very soon after packaging.

Fr. Hugh rightly notes that “Catholic vitality has plummeted” in the post-conciliar years, at least when measured by weekly Mass attendance and vocations. There is no need to restate the dire data here. If one still disputes this they cannot be taken seriously and should step away from the grown up table; these discussions aren’t for you.

Father continues with an assessment of the ecclesial landscape of the last five decades:

By any reasonable standard of judgment the application of the Council failed, miserably, to achieve the Council’s aims. This statistical revelation of decline is quite apart from the decline experienced by Catholics as they have seen dogmas, doctrines, morals and many other elements of Catholic life thrown into chaos in the wake of the Council.

Acknowledging that the Church is indeed growing in much of the developing world (think Africa and Asia), Fr. Hugh notes that its growth in the west is only occurring in certain places:

But here’s the rub: it is growing precisely where much of what was discarded by the post-conciliaristas is slowly and sensibly being reclaimed and integrated into the world of 2017 rather than the mid-1960s. What they are reclaiming is essential, timeless Catholicism rather than the tired mantras and shibboleths of the “Vatican II Church”. The young have discovered, and many of the older re-discovered, that there was a Church before Vatican II, and it was healthy, vital and beautiful.

Fr. Hugh then states his simple, clear, and polemic free conclusion: it’s time to move on from the Council and (instead) to reclaim what the Church always was:

Thus it makes no sense to be constantly referencing every contemporary initiative to Vatican II, for justification or acceptance-value. It is time to move from a post-conciliar Church to a post-post-conciliar Church; which is to say, it is time to reclaim the Church as She has always been in her essence and her stable form, which has been able to function viably and vitally in every age and circumstance since the time of Christ.

A growing number of the faithful have indeed moved on from post-conciliarism. Among many Catholics, particularly the young, the sentiment and conclusions of Fr. Hugh are being realized. Our point of reference and foundation is the Church’s history and tradition, not simply the most recent Council in the history of the Church.

Sadly, it would seem few bishops have connected the dots yet. May thoughtful articles by thoughtful men, such as Fr. Hugh Somerville-Knapman, help them to finally move on (and move forward) as the Church reclaims “essential, timeless Catholicism.” For the sake of the salvation of souls, pray that it happens soon.

 

 

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning –

The true Revelation of God is both a Definite and Certain participation in God’s own knowledge.  IT is this fundamental truth of revelation that our Neo-Modernist hierarchy reject!

What, then, is the knowledge which God has restored to man through revelation but a definite knowledge, a participation of His own? The truth which has been revealed, what is it in the mind of God who reveals it, but one, harmonious and distinct? What was that know ledge as revealed by the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, but one, harmonious and distinct? What was the conception of that knowledge in inspired men, but one, harmonious and distinct also? And what was that knowledge when communicated by those who were inspired to those who believed, but one, harmonious and distinct as before? And what is this unity and harmony and distinctness of knowledge, which God revealed of Himself through Jesus Christ, but the faith we confess in our creed? Our baptismal faith, its substance and its letter, the explicit and the implicit meaning, article by article, is as definite, severe, and precise, as any problem in science. It is of the nature of truth to be so; and where definiteness ends, knowledge ceases. Observe, then, the distinction between finite knowledge and definite knowledge. Is not science definite? And yet it is also finite. The theory of gravitation, definite as it is, it is finite too. [……] Go through the whole range of physical sciences, what is it but an example of the same condition of knowledge, definiteness in conception with finiteness of reach? [….] If we have not a definite knowledge of what we believe, we may be sure we have no true knowledge of it.

But, further, it is evident that knowledge must also be certain. When we speak of certainty, we mean one of two things. Sometimes we say, that a thing is certain; at other times, that we are certain. When we say a truth is certain, we mean, that the proofs of that truth are either self-evident, or so clear as to exclude all doubt. This is certainty on the part of the object proposed to our intelligence. But when we say we are certain, we mean that we are inwardly convinced, by the application of our reason to the matter before us, of the sufficiency of the evidence to prove the truth of it. In us, certainty is rather a moral feeling, a complex state of mind. As light manifests itself by its own nature, but sight is the illumination of the eye; so certainty means truth with its evidences illuminating the intelligence, or, in other words, the intelligence possessed by truth with its evidences.

This we call certainty. I ask, then, is there not this twofold certainty in the revelation which God has given? Was not the revelation which God gave of Himself through Jesus Christ made certain on His part by direct evidence of the divine act which revealed it? Is it not also certain on our part by the apprehension and faith of the Church? Was not God manifest in the flesh that He might reveal Himself? Did not God dwell on earth that He might teach His truth? Has not God spoken to man that man might know Him? Did not God work miracles that man might believe that He was present? What evidence on the part of God was wanting that men might know that Jesus Christ was indeed the Son of God? And if there was certainty on the part of God who revealed, was there not certainty also on the part of those that heard? Look back into the sacred history. Had not Prophets and Seers certainty of that which they beheld and heard? […..] What, then, is the first condition of faith but certainty? He that has not certain faith has no faith. We are told that to crave for certainty implies a morbid disposition. Did not Abraham, and Moses, and Daniel, the Apostles and Evangelists desire certainty in faith, and crave to know beyond doubt that God spake to them, and know with definite clearness what God said? Was this a morbid craving? Surely this is not to reproved. But rather the contrary disposition worthy of rebuke. How can we venture to content ourselves with uncertainty in matters where the truth and honour of God and the salvation of our own souls are at stake? This truly is not without sin. […..] And yet, what is the very idea of Revelation but a Divine assurance of Truth? Where faith begins uncertainty ends. Because faith terminates upon the veracity of God; and what God has spoken and authenticated to us by Divine authority cannot be uncertain. 

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, Grounds of Faith

 

 

For unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition…. 2 Thes 2:3

“The divorced and remarried, de facto couples, those cohabitating, are certainly not models of unions in sync with Catholic Doctrine, but the Church cannot look the other way. Therefore, the sacraments of Reconciliation and Communion should be given even to those so-called wounded families and to however many who, despite living in situations not in line with traditional matrimonial canons, express the sincere desire to approach the sacraments after an appropriate period of discernment.

Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, his new book entitled, The Eighth Chapter of the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia

 

“Discernment” between “true doctrine of the Gospels” and the “rigidity of abstract doctrine” means never letting Revealed Truth stand in the way of our love of sin.

Pope Francis denounces ‘restorationist’ orders bursting with young people

LifeSiteNews | ROME | February 9, 2017 -- Pope Francis has stated that the rise of new religious institutes that attract numerous religious vocations “worries” him because they often promote “rigidity.” Francis denounced new traditional religious orders as “Pelagians,” who want a return to asceticism and penance.

In an obvious reference to the Legionaries of Christ, he called young people in traditional orders “soldiers who seem ready to do anything for the defense of faith and morality, and then some scandal emerges involving the founder [male or female].” 

“So, do not put hope in the sudden, mass blooming of these Institutes,” he added. 

“When they tell me that there is a congregation that draws so many vocations, I must confess that I worry,” he said during the closed-door meeting with 140 Superiors General of male religious orders and congregations that took place November 25. The transcript of the unscheduled Q&A was published this week by the leading Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.

Asked about how to fire the hearts of young people for the cause of the Gospel, the pope turned his focus to the training of “seminarians and future priests.”

Francis said that in priests’ training the “logic of black and white” that “can lead to abstract casuistry” must be avoided. 

“Discernment, meanwhile, means moving forward through the gray of life according to the will of God. And the will of God is to be sought according to the true doctrine of the Gospel and not in the rigidity of an abstract doctrine,” he said. 

Asked what should be done about the plummeting number of vocations to the priesthood, the pope said that while the decline “worries me” he is also worried about the rise of new traditional religious orders.

“Some are, I might say, ‘restorationist’: they seem to offer security but instead give only rigidity,” he said. 

“When they tell me that there is a Congregation that draws so many vocations, I must confess that I worry. The Spirit does not follow the logic of human success: it works in another way. But they tell me that there are so many young people prepared to do anything, who pray a great deal, who are truly faithful. And I say to myself: ‘Wonderful: we will see if it is the Lord!”

Traditional orders do not simply worry Pope Francis. Within months of becoming pope in March 2013, Francis moved quickly to utterly dismantle the flourishing Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. The order, which encouraged the Latin Mass, was one of the most faithful of all of the new Catholic religious orders, especially in regard to their pro-life commitment. The move stunned faithful Catholics. 

In 2015 the pope warned bishops against ordaining “traditionalist” seminarians, stating that doing so was like placing a “mortgage on the Church.” 

In 2012 under Benedict XVI, the Vatican was in the process of reforming the umbrella group of American nuns and sisters for their “secularist mentality [and] 'feminist' spirit.” After Francis took over the reigns of the Church, that process concluded by offering the nuns’ group a “positive message.”

During the November Q&A Francis also admitted that there is “corruption in the Vatican” but he is nevertheless “at peace” by the “grace of God.”

 

 

Catholics who actually believe the revealed truths of God are called the “far-right,” which the Washington Post identifies as the “rot” of the Catholic Church! There is no such thing as “separation of Church and State.”  That is the liberal shibboleth used to keep any other religion from competing with their own religion in the public forum.  Nothing the “far-left” fears more than a national populist uprising in the West that will return to the Faith of our Fathers. Maybe they have read the prophecies of the “Great Monarch”?

How Pope Francis can cleanse the far-right rot from the Catholic Church

Washington Post | Emma-Kate Symons | February 9

Pope Francis needs to take tougher action against the United States’ most influential Catholic in Rome, Cardinal Raymond “Breitbart” Burke. The renegade cleric is not only undermining Francis’s reformist, compassionate papacy, and gospel teaching as it applies to refugees and Muslims, but the rebel prince of the church is also using his position within the walls of the Vatican to legitimize extremist forces that want to bring down Western liberal democracy, Stephen K. Bannon-style. Simply put, the Vatican is facing a political war between the modernizing Pope Francis and a conservative wing that wants to reassert white Christian dominance.

Burke was reduced to a ceremonial patron role at the Knights of Malta after a power struggle at the ancient chivalric order, won by the pope last month, following a spat over its humanitarian wing’s alleged distribution of condoms. Losing the leadership battle and prestige at the secretive society headquartered in Rome — Francis is appointing his own special delegate above Burke — was seen as a papal rap on the knuckles for the cardinal leading the charge against Francis’s writings on communion for divorcees.  But the virulently anti-Islam (“capitulating to Islam would be the death of Christianity”), migrant-phobic, Donald Trump-defending, Vladimir Putin-excusing Burke is unrepentant and even defiant, continuing to preside over a far-right, neo-fascist-normalizing cheer squad out of the Holy See.

 This Vatican operation, called Dignitatis Humanae, or the Institute for Human Dignity, whose advisory board includes two of the four cardinals openly challenging Francis on marriage and sexuality, is slavishly promoting Burke’s favorite American white Catholic nationalist, Bannon, with star billing on its home page. The institute’s top office-bearers, Burke and his henchman, the media-savvy Breitbart contributor Benjamin Harnwell, are also encouraging Benito Mussolini fan Matteo Salvini, of Italy’s Northern League, and Muslim-baiting far-right Catholic poster girl Marion Le Pen, the National Front “rising star” niece of party leader Marine Le Pen in France.

 As the Italian press first revealed, Burke held a long meeting last week at his Vatican home with Salvini, a fierce critic of the pope who wants to push refugees back into the sea and close all mosques in Italy. It was a flagrant political intervention on the side of the extreme-right racist grouping ahead of the Italian elections. Mysterious posters also appeared around the Vatican decrying a sinister-looking pope’s “decapitation” of the Malta Knights order.

The situation facing the Catholic Church raises alarming parallels with the ideological warfare that split the Vatican in the 1930s when ethnic nationalism was sweeping Europe under Mussolini and Hitler and when fascist forces infiltrated the highest echelons of the church. In 1937, Pope Pius XI published an encyclical in German denouncing the Nazi regime and its racism. The diatribe infuriated Hitler, but the focus was more on Nazi persecution of Catholics than laws targeting Jews.

 In Italy, the Vatican had long made accommodations with Mussolini for its own geopolitical gains, and Pius XI failed to quell widespread institutional anti-Semitism in the church before it was too late. When Mussolini decreed in 1938 that Italian Jews were to suffer a legal fate similar to those in Germany, Pius XI tried to prepare a fresh encyclical deploring anti-Semitism and racism, as revealed in historian David Kertzer’s book “The Pope and Mussolini,” he was double-crossed by pro-fascist forces in the Vatican working in tandem with Il Duce. Senior figures in the French Catholic Church also collaborated with fascism in France, where the Vichy regime aided the Nazis in deporting about 80,000 Jews to the death camps.

 The lesson of history has not been lost on Francis. After President Trump’s inauguration, he warned that rising populism could produce a new Hitler. But now, as Europe faces historic elections that could bring extreme-right nationalists back into power across the continent for the first time since World War II, he must act. The bellicose anti-Islam invective being marshaled by figures such as Burke shares much in common with the vicious anti-Semitism many Catholic clerics adhered to in the 1930s, when they saw Jews as a danger to the Christian West whose rights must be restricted.

Burke, like Bannon, who says Islam is “the most radical” religion in the world, makes no distinction in his clash-of-civilizations frenzy between the Muslim faith’s diverse currents and interpretations, and violent jihadist movements derived mostly from Saudi-style Salafism. Unsurprisingly, Burke says he is “very satisfied” with Russian autocrat Putin’s “defense of life and family” and believes he may have “converted” since his KGB days. Yet, just as godless Communism posed an existential threat in the past, the Catholic Church has nothing to gain and everything to lose from cozying up to far-right extremists from the United States to Europe. They distort Christianity into an exclusionary ideology in defense of nation and race, and unite a new support base of Muslim-haters with historically anti-Semitic movements such as the National Front that are anything but Christian, and often neo-pagan.

The options open to the pope in dealing with Burke are limited. Excommunication isn’t in the cards; Burke is not a heretic denying the Catholic faith. Nor is Burke refusing to submit to the pontiff like French archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who was cast out by John Paul II after his ultra-conservative Society of Saint Pius X ordained its own bishops rather than take directions from the Vatican.

However, Francis, who has full authority over his cardinals, could fully remove Burke from his remaining sinecure with Knights of Malta, call him in for a pastoral correction on the issue of his unacceptable political interventions, investigate Dignitatis Humanae with a view to shutting it down for its subversive politicking, and send the rebel cardinal back home to the United States. As Burke tries to run an insurgency and rebukes the pope for his doctrinal “ambiguities,” with the backing of thousands of priests, Francis could seize the agenda. In time-honored papal tradition, he could write an encyclical on the burning questions of populism and nationalism, with specific reference to migrants, Muslims and Jews, so priests including Burke know they are in breach of church teaching when they try to act as power brokers for the international extreme right.

The stakes could hardly be higher, especially as the pope seems on a collision course with a Trump-Bannon White House that has imposed a form of a Muslim ban and disparaged him during the election campaign for daring to suggest that building a wall on the United States’ southern border was un-Christian. If the pope doesn’t put the reactionary elements such as Burke and his cronies back in their place, they could force a real schism during his papacy and leave the church open to justifiable accusations it failed to stand up to enablers of extremism and neo-fascism within its ranks.

 

 

Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity

Pope Francis Believes

In the call to be evangelisers, all the Churches and Ecclesial Communities discover a privileged setting for closer cooperation. For this to be effective, we need to stop being self-enclosed, exclusive, and bent on imposing a uniformity based on merely human calculations. Our shared commitment to proclaiming the Gospel enables us to overcome proselytism and competition in all their forms. All of us are at the service of the one Gospel.

In this moment of prayer for unity, I would also like to remember our martyrs, the martyrs of today. They are witnesses to Jesus Christ, and they are persecuted and killed because they are Christians. Those who persecute them make no distinction between the religious communities to which they belong. They are Christians and for that they are persecuted. This, brothers and sisters, is the ecumenism of blood.

Mindful of this testimony given by our martyrs today, and with this joyful certainty, I offer a cordial and fraternal greeting to His Eminence Metropolitan Gennadios, the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch, His Grace David Moxon, the personal representative in Rome of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and all the representatives of the various Churches and Ecclesial Communions gathered here to celebrate the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul.

Pope Francis to ecumenical gathering

 

The Catholic Infallibly Teaches

The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the "eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.

Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441)

 

Since Proselytism is Out of the Question, for Pope Francis the “Common Good” and the “Best Solution for Everyone” does not include their salvation! 

Dialogue is not negotiating in order to try and get one’s piece of the cake. Dialogue is to seek the common good, for everyone; it is to discuss together and think of the best solutions for everyone.

Pope Francis, defining "dialogue" to the Italian Episcopal Conference (CEI)

 

Irate with Pope Francis? Worry about it if you are not!

Only the person who becomes irate without reason, sins. Whoever becomes irate for a just reason is not guilty. Because, if ire were lacking, the science of God would not progress, judgments would not be sound, and crimes would not be repressed. Further, the person who does not become irate when he has cause to be, sins. For an unreasonable patience is the hotbed of many vices: it fosters negligence, and stimulates not only the wicked, but above all the good, to do wrong. 

St. John Chrysostom, Homily

 

Ire may be understood in two ways. In one way, as a simple movement of the will that inflicts punishment not through passion, but by virtue of a judgment of the reason: and in this case, without a doubt, lack of ire is a sin. This is how Chrysostom understands ire when he says: “Ire, when it has a cause, is not ire but judgment. For properly speaking, ire is a movement of passion. And when a man is irate with just cause, his ire does not derive from passion. Rather, it is an act of judgment, not of ire.”

In another way, ire can be understood as a movement of the sensitive appetite agitated by passion with bodily excitation. This movement is a necessary sequel in man to the previous movement of his will, since the lower appetite naturally follows the movement of the higher appetite unless some obstacle prevents it. Hence the movement of ire in the sensitive appetite cannot be lacking altogether, unless the movement of the will is altogether lacking or weak. Consequently, the lack of the passion of ire is also a vice, as it is the lack of movement in the will to punish according to the judgment of reason.

St. Thomas, Summa Theologiae

 

Super Bowl metaphysics: This is about as good as it gets for a modern Jesuit formation!

Great sporting events like today’s Super Bowl are highly symbolic, showing that it is possible to build a culture of encounter and a world of peace. May this year’s Super Bowl be a sign of peace, friendship and solidarity to the world.

Pope Francis, address to the Super Bowl audience

 

 

 

BELOW –

PREVIOUS BULLETIN POSTS THAT ARE NOT OUTDATED

 

 

 

Chapel Lent Easter 2011 050.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

HOME | About Us | Open Letters | Make a Contribution | Directions | Contact Us |

Pearl of York | Mass Schedule | List of Closed Parishes in the Diocese of Harrisburg |

| Announcements |

Why Move to Central Pennsylvania? | Canned Answers to Stale Objections