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PREVIOUS BULLETIN POSTS THAT ARE NOT OUTDATED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.”
But 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volume in fact draws from the letters of Sister Lucia and from the unpublished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 Impressive, among things previously unpublished, is the account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The Unpublished Account: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.
Pope 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
We,
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.
On 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
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 both 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
McCarrick 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
Christopher 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. That’s 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
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 recently, 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
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
LifeSiteNews | 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
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 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.
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, 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
There 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
Juan 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
The 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 pro-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 advocate 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
OnePeterFive | 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:
Today 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
In 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 relationships, 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
Michael 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
In 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.")
Scalfari
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
Bishop 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”!
They (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, 2018
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 to 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
Pope 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?
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.
Breitbart | 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 scandal 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
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
LifeSiteNews | 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.
CNA/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
PREVIOUS
BULLETIN POSTS THAT ARE NOT OUTDATED
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