Thursday, 8 December 2016

Bergoglio insists suggestion on remarried has church backing - Yes, he is right, so did Our Lord's Crucifixion! Openly declares a "new" Church and admits to heretical statements and notions on Catholicism!

Even the Associated Press gets it - that Bergoglio is forcing upon the Church, the reception of Holy Communion to those divorced from valid Catholic marriages and remarried civilly without a Decree of Nullity, that is, that the original marriage, for consenting or legal reasons, simply did not take place and was not valid. What he is doing, and the Associated Press gets it, is to sanction adultery, sacrilege and mortal sin.

If you read this blog, you already know these things. What this Francis Bergoglio has done is in error, it bears repeating and communicating. Catholic bishops must cease their silence and cowardice, the faithful must wake out of their stuppour.

There is no mercy in this. This is error. This is evil. This is sacrilege and blasphemy. This is heresy and it comes from the very Pope himself. 

He continues in the interview to the Belgian press, quoted correctly by AP below; that, "it is interesting" how the fundamentals of Amoris Laetitia's support at the Synod is a "guarantee." A guarantee of what, he does not say, one would think that he believes, it guarantees some kind of twisted orthodoxy. He continues in this vein that it was "approved" at these Synods by more than "two-thirds" of those present, which seems to indicate his theory of there being a "guarantee."

He speaks of majorities, and votes and "two-thirds."

Let us remind this Bergoglio that the Church, as it was, and more even than a two-thirds majority of its High Priests (Bishops) condemned to the gibbet Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ and gave us, Barabbas!

We recall that two, only two, - Holy Nicodemus and Holy Joseph of Arimathea were, like our four Cardinals, alone in their opposition. Today, we remember and we revere these names, these two Old Testament Saints, whilst we hold the name Caiphas in disgrace - a man, a worm who has gone to his judgement.

Friends, what I am about to say will scandalise some but it must be said.

Jorge Bergoglio is a liar and a manipulator. His own words have condemned him.

I will follow him, as Pope, when he preaches the truth in conformity with Catholic doctrine. I will not follow Jorge Bergoglio into error and I will not be silent as he leads souls to Hell.

Thirteen Cardinals, including our own in Toronto, Thomas Collins, wrote to him about concerns on how the second Synod was being stage managed and that they were not being listened to. This follows those, such as Cardinal Pell, who, during the first Synod in 2014 declared that it was being "manipulated." Further, Bergoglio appointed to the Synods, which is his right as Pope, bishops and cardinals who would not normally have been there, - those which would support his views and those of the heresiarch Kasper. He stacked the deck. 

Further, two-thirds of those voting at the Synods most certainly did not vote for Holy Communion for the divorced in adultery because this is not in the final relatio of the Synod. A Pope can take all, part or none of a Synod, that is true, but he cannot change doctrine which is what he had done, by stealth, though now clear. He has now come out publicly and stated that which did not happen and it is at best, an unintentional mistake, and at worst a bold-faced lie.

Further, Bergoglio speaks in the interview, correctly quoted below. about "unity and diversity." In other words, the old cranky, backward and doctrinaire Church in Poland or Gabon can do whatever it wants and so can the Church in the enlightened Germany or Argentina. Well, this is not Catholic, which means universal. In fact, it is protestant congregationalism and it is heretical. It is Anglicanism in its worst form in governance combined with Lutheran heresy of faith.

On one hand, he speaks of "synodality" and "collegiality" and that Peter must not be a "dictator" and then, as the wily old Peronist he is, defies synodality and collegiality and dictates what he wants for the Church as if it is his church, and sends out his minions to discredit those opposed to his error and to tell us it is all from the Holy Spirit and we are defying the pope and God - one assumes, the "god of surprises."

Our God is not a "god of surprises." The Holy Spirit is not a liar. He does not change. He does not treat us and our ancestors over two-thousand years as fools for believing one thing that is only now revealed to have been wrong.

Bergoglio is a deceitful, manipulative liar. 

He has disgraced this season of Advent and he has blasphemed this holy day of the Immaculate Conception worse than he did last year permitting the blasphemous light show on this Holy Day upon the Temple of God.

This blog post is being sent to Thomas Cardinal Collins with the following:

Thomas Christopher Cardinal Collins, 
Your Eminence,
     During the Synod on the Family, you faithfully and bravely and wisely stood up along with thirteen of your brother Cardinals to make "Peter" as did Paul, of the truth. During your recent deanery meetings, you were asked by priests about Amoris Laetitia and its interpretation, to which you advised that your position and that of the Archdiocese of Toronto is that which was issued by the Bishops of Alberta and the Northwest Territories. That is, that people in adulterous situations be ministered to but that they must live according to the Ten Commandments and the teachings on marriage and the family as articulated fully by St. John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio with specific mention of living in "continence" as "brother and sister."
     Will you now join your four brother Cardinals and insist that Jorge Bergoglio, Bishop of Rome respond to the Dubia.
     Will you put your bishopric and scarlett on the line and stand up for the truth of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church?

All Cardinals, all bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, you have a sacred duty. 

Jorge Bergoglio has openly stated to the Bishops of Buenos Aires in his Argentina, approved the statements of the Vicar of Rome which conformed to the Buenos Aires statement and now to secular media that he is changing church teaching and discipline. He has openly declared statements which are heretical and antithetical to Catholicism. Even the Associated Press gets it.

Will you stand up for the Faith and the sheep or will you go down into Hell with those who have set out to destroy the Faith?

Do you dare to leave the sheep amongst the wolves?

Are you nothing more than effeminate, emasculated, faithless, episcopal hirelings?

Image result for bergoglio

Pope insists suggestion on remarried has church backing
Associated Press        
December 7, 2016
VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis says the majority of the world's bishops back his suggestion that civilly remarried Catholics can receive Communion, adding fuel to the debate that has riled some conservative Catholics.
In an interview Wednesday with the Belgian Catholic weekly Tertio, Francis said his 2016 document "The Joy of Love" — which contains the suggestion — was the fruit of two meetings of bishops over two years.
"It is interesting that all that (the document) contains, it was approved in the Synod by more than two thirds of the fathers. And this is a guarantee," he said.
Some conservatives have voiced increasing concern that Francis' opening on the divisive issue of Communion for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics is sowing confusion among the faithful about the church's teaching on the indissolubility of marriage. The debate has been stoked by the recent publication of a letter from four conservative cardinals asking Francis to clarify his position.
Francis hasn't directly responded to them, but he has sent signals, including Wednesday's comments. He was responding to a question about the decentralized, "synodal" church he favors, where the pope listens to his church, "lets her grow," harmonizes that growth and returns it to the local churches — such as in the form of a teaching document.
"It is unity in diversity," he said.
In September, Francis fully endorsed the interpretation of the question by Argentine bishops, who wrote a set of guidelines saying "The Joy of Love" clearly allows the possibility of access to the sacraments in exceptional cases. "There are no other interpretations," Francis wrote in approving the Argentine guidelines.
Church teaching holds that unless divorced Catholics receive an annulment, or a church decree that their first marriage was invalid, they are committing adultery in a new civil marriage and cannot receive Communion.
Conservatives had insisted the rules are fixed. Liberals had sought wiggle room to balance doctrine with mercy and look at each couple on a case-by-case basis.
Francis said pastors should help individual Catholics ascertain what God is asking of them, and linked such discussions of conscience with access to the sacraments.


TLM said...

Francis and his 'cronies' are after more than 'Communion for the civilly divorced and remarried'. The even bigger 'prize' is Communion for homosexuals who are actively engaged in that lifestyle. It's the 'unspoken' goal of this entire A.L. fiasco.

John Fisher said...

"two-thirds" of those present, which seems to indicate his theory of there being a "guarantee." When Francis said this he lied. We know the relatio was written before the synod and we know the bishops did not vote two thirds for the inclusion of what was in the final draft. Francis was the one who forced the inclusion of sentences that had been voted against. This is what liberals do. They have agenda and ignore curtail opposition. Look at how cardinal Burke was removed from the Apostolic Signatura. Francis is a heretic and what he has forced on us is the routine receiving Holy Communion while in a state of mortal sin and have no intention of avoiding or Confessing it. It is a desecration of the Holy Eucharist.

DJR said...

What some people seem to be missing about this scenario is the following:

1. Assume for the moment that the first marriage is not valid but for some reason that cannot be proven via the tribunal process (although the likelihood of a denial of an annulment is slim at best).

2. The fact that someone's first marriage is not valid does not thereby validate a second union if that second union has not been contracted in the Church. All it means is that a Catholic has entered into two invalid marriages.

3. If a Catholic in an invalid marriage is permitted to make use of the marital privilege and still receive Holy Communion, that means that the Church would be permitting a certain number of people to engage in the marital act without being married.

4. If that's the case, there is no reason to not allow others to do the same, although their situations may be slightly different ("gays" that are "married," people in cohabitation situations, et cetera).

Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...

What I am going to say is meant to add, what seems like an important point, to the conversation.
I got married - civilly only, at a time when my Catholic faith was all but gone.

I am now a Catholic, but my spouse of about 25 years despises religious belief. It creates great difficulty.

I think that my conscience is in good shape, and can assure everyone, that I never had a desire to overthrow Church teaching, It has been the exact opposite. The longer I live, the more I understand that barriers, walls, prohibitions, when put in place by God Himself, always serve our good.

The sexual revolution of the sixties I was too young to remember, led to the destruction of Christian morality. It was done so by design. Rather than to stop it, the Church looked on passively. We are now very distanced from God's plan for us.

This is a reason to go back, to re-discover God's wisdom and repent our foolishness. It is not a reason to press forward with the destruction of family, as Jorge Bergoglio would have us. The world has changed, it is true, it has rejected God.

The only way forward (it means toward salvation) is to go back, to God.

Murray said...

Unity in diversity.

Where have I heard that before?

Oh, right.

Luciano said...

"the faithful must wake out of their stuppour"...besides praying, writing emails/letters to bishops which are consistently ignored, reducing parish/diocesan support to a bare minimum what else can faithful lay Catholics do

Dan said...

I think it is time for all faithful Catholics to inundate this p*pe and the Vatican on any social media platform that he/they use. Twitter for example. We need to put the pressure on him to answer the dubia!

susan said...

Aside form all the obvious mis-statements and outright lies in his statements, since when is a synod (particularly a hand-picked and stacked one) an infallible 'guarantor' of orthodoxy?....he is a snake, and the world would appear to be waking up to it. The line is clearly drawn.

Peter Lamb said...

" ...what else can faithful lay Catholics do"?

Faithful Catholics can be CATHOLICS. They can do what St. Paul told them to do in these circumstances - let them be anathema! That's what Holy Scripture tells us to do. It does not say consort with them; pray with them; petition them; recognise them as that which they are not. Shake their dust off your shoes and have nothing to do with them. Join St. Athanasius and his faithful Catholics in the fields. What has Christ with belial?

Anil Wang said...

DJR said..."2. The fact that someone's first marriage is not valid does not thereby validate a second union if that second union has not been contracted in the Church. All it means is that a Catholic has entered into two invalid marriages."

While your points is valid, point 2. does not necessarily imply point 3. or 4. Co-habitation and "gay unions" are not marriages, period. OTOH, two Protestants who marry outside the Catholic Church are in a valid sacramental marriage and Catholics who marry outside the Church still need to go through the annulment process if they wish to marry someone else within the Church, and it is possible, through radical sanation to bring a marriage contracted outside the Church into the Church. Radical sanation can happen if one of the married parties refuses to convalidate the marriage within the Catholic Church and it is simply done by retroactively declaring that original extra ecclesial vows were valid. So clearly Catholics who attempt marriage outside the Church are in a canonically ambiguous state WRT marriage that needs to be resolved one way or another before they can take part in the sacramental life of the Church. And yes, they are in mortal sin and should refrain from receiving communion.

Currently these civil marriages are sacramentalized via convalidation or radical sanation but a future Pope might return to the pre-Trent defacto standard of recognizing civil marriages that meet the Catholic criteria for marriage as valid but declaring them to be a mortal sin unless the marriage is registered and a good confession is made since such marriages are sinful unless they are brought into and are rooted in the Church.

OTOH, no future pope could ever declare that cohabitation or "gay unions" are valid marriages or are free from mortal sin.

Jaybee said...

So "I exhort" now suddenly becomes "I suggest." Why? Cuz it sounds so much more mild and pleasant and reasonable in news articles! Who could be upset by a "suggestion" from a gentle pope? Only the most hidebound, ignorant extremists!

Anonymous said...

Bergoglio is a radical extremist anti Catholic,he's a Freemason who wanted to destroy Catholic Church and wanted to create a counter church by uniting all religion,a dangerous man working for New world order.

Archbishop Lefebvre

That Conciliar Church is a schismatic Church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship, all already condemned by the Church in many a document, official and definitive.... The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church.
Good article & God bless.

Peter Lamb said...

Dear Anonymous @ 10:24pm, That is an excellent quote of Abp. Lefebvre. Please can you tell me where you got it from?

Eirene said...

Dear Peter Lamb and Anonymous - Excellent points made, Peter and a resounding quote from Abp Lefebvre which, had it been backed up by the other high ranking clergy at the time of the Vatican 2 outrage, might have changed the course of history. Still, useless to ponder on what might have been. Thanks Vox for your strong stand throughout these perilous and devastating times. God bless and reward you with a sweet "Well done" in the Judgement Hour!

Anonymous said...

You'll find it here.

Thomas of Fatima said...

I left sedevacantism and returned to the so-called "Novus Ordo" Church. It was only after I realised that traditionalism is impossible.

If you are not a schismatic traditionalist it's about a matter of taste. Who cares about being "traditional" if you can go to heaven by not being traditional anyway? Certainly not me.

Then we go to SSPX traditionalist. These people deny authority given to the pope in all matters within the Church. They call him Holy Father but don't do what he says. More essentially they deny the indefectability of the Church by insisting that the Catholic Church must be resisted to be faithful to Christ. The final cause of the Church is to save souls, not damn them, so I don't see how it didn't fail if it enforces heresy. One cannot juxtapose faith against obedience. Whatever Church they are talking about is not one guided by God.

Then we go to sedevacantist traditionalist. These people have no magisterium. No one really has the authority to resolve any dispute definitely. If one sedevacantist bishop contradicts another, the laity can just interpret old documents and decided for himself who is speaking the truth. The magisterium here is dead. You interpret Church teaching wrong, you go to hell. God will damn you because the infallible teacher is dead. The magisterium is the third peg is the three legged stool of tradition, scripture and magisterium. It's not something incidental, but something integral to Catholicism. What Church they are part of is not the Catholic Church. It's a Church defeated by the gates of hell.

If traditionalism is impossible, is Catholicism false? Well, no. Almost every traditionalist engages in private interpretation of Church Teaching--as if interpreting the authentic meaning of either scripture or tradition were not solely the purpose of the living magisterium! So the magisterium says something that sounds wrong or contradictory: they judge that the magisterium’s pronouncements are in that case either not binding or mistaken. They never wonder if they themselves are mistaken somewhere--as if the gift of infallibility and indefectability were promised to each of them rather than the Church. So if a council binds the faithful to something they have doubts for they doubt the council. If the pope says something disturbing they ignore or ridicule the pope. If you bring up obedience they, in their mistaken zeal, denounce it as ultramontism or false obedience. Somehow they have to protect the Church because God isn't anymore.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but this is what it looks like. Can someone please explain where I'm wrong?