“A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, 'You are mad; you are not like us.” ― St. Antony the Great
It is nearly impossible to comment on this other than to state that it is just one more indication that Bergoglio and his Vatican apparatchiks are diabolical. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò was joined by Cardinals Zen, Müller, Bishop Strickland and a gaggle of others retired or marginalised signing another petition that will be ignored Cardinal Sarah had signed but was pressured by "friends" to remove his name. I must give them credit though for trying.
Not even Dan Brown could write this bovine scatology.
About the revocation of S. Em.'s membership. Card. Robert Sarah at the "Appeal for the Church and the World" released yesterday, May 7.
Monday, May 4, Mons. Carlo Maria Viganò called His Eminence the Card. Sarah on the phone, to propose that he sign the appeal. Taking reading the text, the Cardinal stated: "It seems to me a very serious matter. I think this appeal will do very well, because it will make us think and take a stand. I agree that this should be published as soon as possible.' Mons. Viganò then asked His Eminence if he intended to sign, which confirmed: "Yes, I give my agreement to put my name, because it is a struggle that we must wage together, not only for the Catholic Church but for all humanity."
At 3 p.m. on Thursday, May 7, the employees mons. Viganò presented to the Associated Press, the press and a list of Catholic blogs the text of the Appeal and the names of the main signatories, including that of the Card. Sarah.
At 17:48 Monsignor Viganò received a text message from the Cardinal: "Dear Excellency, as I am still in operation in the Roman Curia some friends advised me not to sign the Appeal you proposed. Maybe it would be better to remove my name this time. I'm so sorry. You know my friendship and my closeness to your person. Thank you for your understanding. Robert card. Sarah.
Being engaged in the dissemination of the Appeal and in answering the calls of journalists, Mons. Viganò could only read the message later. At about 19:35 the Cardinal phoned Monsignor Viganò and asked for the text to be removed. Desolate, His Excellency took care to point out to the Cardinal that the Appeal and signatures had been circulated for more than four hours. In the course of the conversation, however, no official cancellation was requested, nor a "joint communiqué" in which news was made about the Cardinal's decision to withdraw his membership.
While acknowledging to His Eminence the broader power to reverse his decision at any time, and understanding the strong pressures to which the Cardinal is exposed because of his duties at the Roman Curia, his choice to post messages on Twitter has placed Mons. He felt that he had to specify what had happened, so as to avoid prejudice against his person or his associates.
His Eminence's name has been removed from the official appeal website, as can be verified at the url veritasliberabitvos.info
As the crisis in the Church brought about by Bergoglio and his minions, Bishop Athanasius Schneider has stated his support for Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller’s "Manifesto of Faith." He also deals quite firmly and harshly with the obvious heretic, Walter Kasper, the Cardinal who has done Bergoglio's bidding from the very beginning. Cardinals and Bishops, you must speak now. You must confront Francis to his face. Your soul is at risk. https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/bishop-schneider-cdl.-muellers-manifesto-of-faith-a-necessary-and-a-very-ti
Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller’s recent Manifesto of Faith
is a necessary and a very timely initiative, edifying the Faith and bringing
light in the enormous spiritual confusion, which for quite a while reigns in
the life of the Church and which has reached in our days unimagined dimensions.
This initiative brings to the faithful consolation and
encouragement. In this Manifesto of Faith is being made from the mouth of a
high-ranking representative of the Church’s hierarchy a public and unmistakable
profession of the immutable Catholic Faith. This profession from Cardinal
Müller covers particularly those truths of the Faith and of its sacramental
practice, which in our days are mostly disfigured, being such a disfiguration
often through a cunning and gnostic interpretation passed off as a hermeneutic
or a “development of doctrine, in continuity.”
A clear profession of the Divinely revealed truths is in our
days in the life of the Church often not anymore tolerated and is perceived
even as a provocation, as one could see this, for instance, from the prompt,
intolerant and astonishingly aggressive reaction with which Cardinal Walter
Kasper has rejected the Manifesto of Faith of Cardinal Müller. With his
reasoning against the Manifesto of Faith, Cardinal Kasper has only demonstrated
that he himself does not anymore live in the true Faith of the Apostles and of
the Church of all times, but, on the contrary, he represents a Christianity
that in the manner of a gnosis has built up for itself a world of an alleged faith
after the taste of one’s own ego or the predominance of the respective
“Zeitgeist” (the spirit of the age).
Cardinal Müller’s initiative of Faith deserves full
recognition. It is an important contribution to stem the flood of the
neo-gnostic Christianity inside the Catholic Church. One must wish and pray,
that inside the Church there will now sound a numerically growing, uniform
voice of the true Faith, an “una vox verae fidei,” comprising all members of
the Mystical Body of Christ, representatives both of the Magisterium and of the
Lay Faithful. In their profession of Faith, they should not allow themselves to
be confused or intimidated by anybody – not even from a Cardinal Kasper – for
with Saint Paul they can serenely and convincingly say: “I know Whom I have
believed! (scio, Cui credidi!)” (2 Tim. 1: 12).
Only a day after Bishop Schneider issued a correction (my word choice) to Bergoglio's latest heresy, Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has issued a "Manifesto of Faith," wherein he upholds the Catholic faith in what can only be considered as a direct contradiction of Francis' ongoing heresy. Let us not complain that it is too little, too late, We should know by now that nothing in the Church has ever worked quickly, except for tearing Her down. Destruction always is easier than building. What is important is that the Dubia, the Filial Correction and more, continue and build upon one another. Note as well, it is not prudent for diocesan bishops and cardinals to undertake what these have done. Bishop Schneider, Cardinal Müller and Cardinal Burke and others are in different positions. There can be no doubt now that the text signed by Bergoglio with the Islamic leader from Egypt is a heretical document. It is so blatantly heretical and blasphemous it cannot be considered to have referred to God's "permissive" will. Bergoglio must be confronted. Prelates must act. More must come forward to oppose this heretic and apostate who sits on the Chair of Peter.
Manifesto of Faith
“Let not your heart be troubled!” (John 14:1)
In the face of growing confusion about the doctrine of the
Faith, many bishops, priests, religious and lay people of the Catholic Church
have requested that I make a public testimony about the truth of revelation. It
is the shepherds' very own task to guide those entrusted to them on the path of
salvation. This can only succeed if they know this way and follow it
themselves. The words of the Apostle here apply: “For above all I have
delivered unto you what I have received” (1 Cor. 15:3). Today, many Christians
are no longer even aware of the basic teachings of the Faith, so there is a
growing danger of missing the path to eternal life. However, it remains the
very purpose of the Church to lead humanity to Jesus Christ, the light of the
nations (see LG 1). In this situation, the question of orientation arises.
According to John Paul II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is a “safe
standard for the doctrine of the faith” (Fidei Depositum IV). It was written
with the aim of strengthening the Faith of the brothers and sisters whose
belief has been massively questioned by the “dictatorship of relativism.”[1]
1. The one and triune God revealed in Jesus Christ
The epitome of the Faith of all Christians is found in the
confession of the Most Holy Trinity. We have become disciples of Jesus,
children and friends of God by being baptized in the name of the Father and of
the Son and of the Holy Spirit. The distinction of the three persons in the
divine unity (CCC 254) marks a fundamental difference in the belief in God and
the image of man from that of other religions. Religions disagree precisely
over this belief in Jesus the Christ. He is true God and true Man, conceived by
the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. The Word made flesh, the Son of
God, is the only Savior of the world (CCC 679) and the only Mediator between
God and men (CCC 846). Therefore, the first letter of John refers to one who
denies His divinity as an antichrist (1 John 2:22), since Jesus Christ, the Son
of God, is from eternity one in being with God, His Father (CCC 663). We are to
resist the relapse into ancient heresies with clear resolve, which saw in Jesus
Christ only a good person, brother and friend, prophet and moralist. He is
first and foremost the Word that was with God and is God, the Son of the
Father, Who assumed our human nature to redeem us and Who will come to judge
the living and the dead. Him alone, we worship in unity with the Father and the
Holy Spirit as the Only and True God (CCC 691).
2. The Church
Jesus Christ founded the Church as a visible sign and
instrument of salvation realized in the Catholic Church (816). He gave His
Church, which “emerged from the side of the Christ who died on the Cross”
(766), a sacramental constitution that will remain until the Kingdom is fully
achieved (CCC 765). Christ, the Head, and the faithful as members of the body,
are a mystical person (CCC 795), which is why the Church is sacred, for the one
Mediator has designed and sustained its visible structure (CCC 771). Through it
the redemptive work of Christ becomes present in time and space via the
celebration of the Holy Sacraments, especially in the Eucharistic Sacrifice,
the Holy Mass (CCC 1330). The Church conveys with the authority of Christ the
divine revelation, which extends to all the elements of doctrine, “including
the moral teaching, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be
preserved, explained, and observed” (CCC 2035).
3. Sacramental Order
The Church is the universal sacrament of salvation in Jesus
Christ (CCC 776). She does not reflect herself, but the light of Christ, which
shines on her face. But this happens only when the truth revealed in Jesus
Christ becomes the point of reference, rather than the views of a majority or
the spirit of the times; for Christ Himself has entrusted the fullness of grace
and truth to the Catholic Church (CCC 819), and He Himself is present in the
sacraments of the Church.
The Church is not a man-made association whose structure its
members voted into being at their will. It is of divine origin. "Christ
himself is the author of ministry in the Church. He set her up, gave her
authority and mission, orientation and goal (CCC 874). The admonition of the
Apostle is still valid today, that cursed is anyone who proclaims another
gospel, “even if we ourselves were to give it or an angel from heaven” (Gal
1:8). The mediation of faith is inextricably bound up with the human
credibility of its messengers, who in some cases have abandoned the people
entrusted to them, unsettling them and severely damaging their faith. Here the
Word of Scripture describes those who do not listen to the truth and who follow
their own wishes, who flatter their ears because they cannot endure sound
doctrine (cf. 2 Tim 4:3-4).
The task of the Magisterium of the Church is to “preserve
God’s people from deviations and defections” in order to “guarantee them the
objective possibility of professing the true faith without error” (890). This
is especially true with regard to all seven sacraments. The Holy Eucharist is
“source and summit of the Christian life” (CCC 1324). The Eucharistic
Sacrifice, in which Christ includes us in His Sacrifice of the Cross, is aimed
at the most intimate union with Him (CCC 1382). Therefore, the Holy Scripture
admonishes with regard to the reception of the Holy Communion: “Whoever eats
unworthily of the bread and drinks from the Lord's cup makes himself guilty of
profaning the body and of the blood of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:27). “Anyone
conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before
coming to communion” (CCC 1385). From the internal logic of the sacrament, it
is understood that civilly remarried divorcees, whose sacramental marriage
exists before God, as well as those Christians who are not in full communion
with the Catholic Faith and the Church, just as all who are not properly
disposed, cannot receive the Holy Eucharist fruitfully (CCC 1457) because it
does not bring them to salvation. To point this out corresponds to the spiritual
works of mercy.
The confession of sins in Holy Confession at least once a
year is one of the Church’s commandments (CCC 2042). When the believers no
longer confess their sins and no longer experience the absolution of their
sins, salvation becomes impossible; after all, Jesus Christ became Man to
redeem us from our sins. The power of forgiveness that the Risen Lord has given
to the Apostles and their successors in the ministry of bishops and priests
applies also for mortal and venial sins which we commit after Baptism. The
current popular practice of confession makes it clear that the conscience of
the faithful is not sufficiently formed. God's mercy is given to us, that we
might fulfil His Commandments to become one with His Holy Will, and not so as to
avoid the call to repentance (CCC 1458).
“The priest continues the work of redemption on earth” (CCC
1589). The ordination of the priest “gives him a sacred power” (CCC 1592),
which is irreplaceable, because through it Jesus becomes sacramentally present
in His saving action. Therefore, priests voluntarily opt for celibacy as
"a sign of new life" (CCC 1579). It is about the self-giving in the
service of Christ and His coming kingdom. With a view to receiving the
ordination in the three stages of this ministry, the Church is “bound by the
choice made by the Lord Himself. That is why it is not possible to ordain
women”(CCC 1577). To imply that this impossibility is somehow a form of
discrimination against women shows only the lack of understanding for this sacrament,
which is not about earthly power but the representation of Christ, the
Bridegroom of the Church.
4. Moral Law
Faith and life are inseparable, for Faith apart from works
is dead (CCC 1815). The moral law is the work of divine wisdom and leads man to
the promised blessedness (CCC 1950). Consequently, the "knowledge of the
divine and natural law is necessary" to do good and reach this goal (CCC
1955). Accepting this truth is essential for all people of good will. For he
who dies in mortal sin without repentance will be forever separated from God
(CCC 1033). This leads to practical consequences in the lives of Christians,
which are often ignored today (cf 2270-2283; 2350-2381). The moral law is not a
burden, but part of that liberating truth (cf Jn 8:32) through which the
Christian walks on the path of salvation and which may not be relativized.
5. Eternal Life
Many wonder today what purpose the Church still has in its
existence, when even bishops prefer to be politicians rather than to proclaim
the Gospel as teachers of the Faith. The role of the Church must not be watered
down by trivialities, but its proper place must be addressed. Every human being
has an immortal soul, which in death is separated from the body, hoping for the
resurrection of the dead (CCC 366). Death makes man's decision for or against
God definite. Everyone has to face the particular judgement immediately after
death (CCC 1021). Either a purification is necessary, or man goes directly into
heavenly bliss and is allowed to see God face to face. There is also the
dreadful possibility that a person will remain opposed to God to the very end,
and by definitely refusing His Love, "condemns himself immediately and
forever" (CCC 1022). “God created us without us, but He did not want to save
us without us” (CCC 1847). The eternity of the punishment of hell is a terrible
reality, which - according to the testimony of Holy Scripture - attracts all
who “die in the state of mortal sin” (CCC 1035). The Christian goes through the
narrow gate, for “the gate is wide, and the way that leads to ruin is wide, and
many are upon it” (Mt 7:13).
To keep silent about these and the other truths of the Faith
and to teach people accordingly is the greatest deception against which the
Catechism vigorously warns. It represents the last trial of the Church and
leads man to a religious delusion, “the price of their apostasy” (CCC 675); it
is the fraud of Antichrist. “He will deceive those who are lost by all means of
injustice; for they have closed themselves to the love of the truth by which
they should be saved” (2 Thess 2:10).
Call
As workers in the vineyard of the Lord, we all have a
responsibility to recall these fundamental truths by clinging to what we
ourselves have received. We want to give courage to go the way of Jesus Christ
with determination, in order to obtain eternal life by following His
commandments (CCC 2075).
Let us ask the Lord to let us know how great the gift of the
Catholic Faith is, through which opens the door to eternal life. “For he that
shall be ashamed of me, and of my words, in this adulterous and sinful
generation: The Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when He shall come in
the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” (Mark 8:38). Therefore, we are
committed to strengthening the Faith by confessing the truth which is Jesus
Christ Himself.
We too, and especially we bishops and priests, are addressed
when Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ, gives this admonition to his companion
and successor, Timothy: “I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, Who shall
judge the living and the dead, by His coming, and His kingdom: Preach the word:
be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience
and doctrine. For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound
doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves
teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the
truth, but will be turned unto fables. But be thou vigilant, labour in all
things, do the work of an evangelist, fulfil thy ministry. Be sober.” (2 Tim
4:1-5).
May Mary, the Mother of God, implore for us the grace to
remain faithful without wavering to the confession of the truth about Jesus
Christ.
United in faith and prayer
Gerhard Cardinal Müller
Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
2012-2017
[1] The numbers in the text refer to the Catechism of The
Catholic Church.
In an interview with the Italian publication La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana and translated by LifeSiteNews, Cardinal Müller affirms the legitimacy of the Dubia of the four Cardinals, two of whom are now deceased. He also goes on to state that there are "no exceptions," to the ban on Holy Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried.
The issue that is jumped over here and in the two Synods is that of the Church's exercise within Marriage Tribunals of Decrees of Nullity. As one who was granted a Decree of Nullity which had numerous grounds aside from canonical irregularities, it always struck this writer as the misunderstood right of the Church and faithful in this whole discussion. Let us put aside the polemical debate of "abuse" of the process. If the parties are honest and tell the truth and the Church decrees nullity, then there is no sin, nor deception on the part of the faithful. If the Tribunal abused the process then it is the sin of those judges and the bishop. The fact is, if a Decree of Nullity is granted, it renders the fact that the first "marriage" was not valid, there was no marriage. The process of "discernment" and "accompaniment" are the inherent issues of Eucharistic attack in Amoris Laetitia. Let the few, very few Catholics who care about practicing their faith seek decrees of nullity. Let the Church's age-old practice apply, streamlined if necessary. It is not a degrading process, nor is it overtly expensive, at least not from the experience of most.
But Müller's argument falls apart when he returns to the internal forum matter. He confirms that Amoris Laetitia throws a battering ram through the traditional process of Decrees of Nullity for accompaniment, - accompaniment is the new annulment process. Why bother then for what is true and right, just make your own decision with a priest who is prepared to go along with it. Of course, what we did not know, is that it is all for North Korea and Haiti. And we thought selling ones soul for Wales was serious.
Cardinal Müller clarifies: There are ‘no
exceptions’ to ban on Communion for ‘remarried’
Cascioli: And so we touch on the question of the
indissolubility of marriage. In recent days, it’s been said that you are
convinced there can be some exceptions.
Cardinal Muller: No exceptions. This idea is false. I gave a
clear theological explanation, which left no room for misunderstanding. I would
like to bring peace to the situation and not fuel polemics between opposing
groups.
And so we need to be clear that when it comes to a
legitimate sacramental marriage there can be no exceptions. The sacraments are
efficacious ex opere operato. Just as there are no exceptions in the validity
of baptism, or of the transubstantiation of the bread into the Body of Christ.”
But in Buttiglione’s essay, he refers to several very
particular situations in which there would be a venial sin, so that it should
be possible to be absolved and to receive the sacraments while maintaining the
state of the second union.
In my introduction it is very clearly written that
reconciliation is needed, and this is only possible if there is first
contrition and a firm purpose not to commit the sin anymore. Certain people who
address these issues do not understand that approaching the Sacrament of
Reconciliation does not mean automatic absolution. There are essential elements
without which reconciliation cannot be achieved. If there isn’t contrition
there cannot be absolution and if there is no absolution, if one remains in the
state of mortal sin, one cannot receive Communion.
As for Buttiglione, he refers to situations where knowledge
of the Catholic faith is a problem. These are cases of unconscious Christians,
who are baptized but unbelieving, who may have gotten married in Church to
please their grandmother, but without a real awareness. Here it becomes a
problem when, after many years, they return to the faith and then question the
marriage. There are many such cases. Benedict XVI also looked at the issue. So
what’s to be done? In this sense we can say with the Pope that discernment is
needed, but this does not mean that one can be granted access to the sacraments
without the conditions mentioned above. The issue here is not about the
indissolubility of sacramental marriage, but about the validity of many
marriages that aren’t really valid.
But in your essay you also refer to cases of people who
convert or return to the faith after already having entered a second union, and
regarding the sacraments you talk about a decision in the internal forum. What
do you mean?
While in Europe things are clear enough at least
theoretically, in many countries there are many difficult situations to judge.
In Latin America, for example, there are many marriages that are not celebrated
according to the canonical form. There are couples who live together but one
doesn’t know if there is an actual marriage consent. I was in Haiti recently
and the situation there is disastrous; everyone is called a spouse. They live
together but they aren’t formally married either in church or civilly. When
some mature, they start going to church and then you have to determine who the
true husband or wife is. And here it’s important for the person to be honest
and say sincerely with whom they have expressed true consent, because it is the
consent that makes a marriage, not only the canonical form. In any case, in
order to be admitted to the sacraments, the parish priest or bishop must
clarify the situation in cooperation with the freedom of the faithful. But
there are also situations that are overturned.
Can you say more?
There are particular circumstances, for example under
regimes that persecute the Church, where it isn’t possible to be married
canonically. Let’s take the example of North Korea: the few Catholics who are
present there still have the right to marry, and here a marriage is possible
only through consent. But if in time something happens and the two separate,
and they want to remarry, then everything depends on the internal forum, on
their honesty in acknowledging if there was consent or not, and they have to
express that to the priest or to the new husband or wife.
This is where conscience comes into play.
Yes, but conscience understood properly, not like certain
journalists explain it who water down the truth. We are talking about a right
conscience, one that cannot say “I don’t have to respect God’s law.” Conscience
does not free us from God’s law but gives us the guidance to fulfill it.
However, in your introduction to Buttiglione’s book, you shy
away from casuistry and seem especially concerned with offering several clear
criteria for understanding Amoris Laetitia so as to avoid what you explicitly
call “heretical interpretations.”
Exactly. Unfortunately, there are individual bishops and
whole episcopal conferences that are proposing interpretations that contradict
the previous Magisterium, admitting to the sacraments persons who persist in
objective situations of grave sin. But this is not the criterion for applying
Amoris Laetitia. Pope Francis himself spoke of a Thomist apostolic exhortation.
And so it is right to read it in light of St. Thomas, and on admission to the
Eucharist, St. Thomas is clear dogmatically and also has a pastoral sensitivity
for individuals.
[Katholisches] "Every Catholic, especially every bishop
and every cardinal, has a positive and constructive relationship with the Pope.
But this is anything but courtly manners and the groveling of subordinates,
against which Pope Francis always spoke."
"That means that not everything he does and says is,
from the outset, already perfect and unquestionable."
"There should be no personal cult and a pope-touching
tourism."
Cardinal
Gerhard Muller, prefect of the Roman Congregation for the Congregation of the
Doctrine and the Faith, no longer in office, on Pope Franziskus, report of the
German Press Agency (DPA), quoted from Der Spiegel v. July 19, 2017.
Now, can we get this Cardinal to speak up about a few more things of which he knows? Muller's replacement, The new Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Luis Ladaria, has now said:
‘I am in a
deep and spontaneous harmony with the Pope’.
"Deep and spontaneous harmony"? What if the Pope is wrong? Truly, the job of the Prefect and the curia in general is to serve the pope, but they are to serve Christ first. The presumption is, of course, that the pope is serving Christ. This writer has referred many times to "papolatry." It is a sin. It is a violation of the First Commandment of God. The Pope is a man. He is the servant of the servants of God. He is to be respected and obeyed in so far as he is carrying out the true faith and teaching true doctrine in line with his predecessors and the Magisterium. When he deviates from the truth, he is to be corrected. If he refuses to be corrected, then he is to be ignored and if necessary, publicly scolded for his apostasy and heresy. These are not personal sins, this is public scandal. However, his heresy and apostasy is magnified when his minions in clerics and the faithful people in their ignorance and blind obedience, give unto any pope, that which is reserved to God alone. Add to this, a character of infallibility that is just not what the Church teachers or has ever taught. Protestants, Neo-Caths and Sedevacantists carry this papal authority too far. The First Vatican Council in its declaration of infallibility did not give power to the pope, it defined it, and, it limited it. Do not ascribe to the Bishop of Rome that which he does not have! Why are Catholics doing what Protestants have accused Catholics of doing, worshiping the pope as if his passing of gas has the scent of frankincense? His is not the odour of sanctity, it is more like sulphur. Stop this papolatry! No pope, not John Paul II not Francis is to be given such treatment. It is all around Francis, people are blind, they are sycophantic, but they are waking up. Unfortunately, there are those around him who are lusting at the ability to exploit peoples good intentions and ignorance and this pope's megalomonia for their own evil purposes. May God deliver us soon from this Peronist Pope and the Jesuit and sodomite regime that has seized control of the Church.
Steve Skojec and Maike Hickson of OnePeterFive have the breaking news of information from Germany and the dismissal of Cardinal Muller as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The story is based upon anonymous sources in Germany. Hickson, fluent in German, frequently writes on German matters and through German contacts. While this is not evidenciary and would in a court be considered, hearsay, and; one could say that it is in the realm of "fake news," given the pattern of this "papacy" and the continuing revelations of sodomy, drugs and orgies along with financial corruption in the Vatican, can it be discounted? Muller was summoned to a meeting with Pope Bergoglio, expecting a normal business agenda. He was presented verbally with five questions, as follows:
According to this report, Cardinal Müller was called to the
Apostolic Palace on 30 June, and he thus went there with his working files,
assuming that this meeting would be a usual working session. The pope told him,
however, that he only had five questions for him:
Are you in favor of, or against, a female diaconate? “I am
against it,” responded Cardinal Müller.
Are you in favor of, or against, the repeal of celibacy? “Of
course I am against it,” the cardinal responded.
Are you in favor of, or against female priests? “I am very
decisively against it,” replied Cardinal Müller.
Are you willing to defend Amoris Laetitia? “As far as it is
possible for me,” the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith replied: “there
still exist ambiguities.”
Are you willing to retract your complaint concerning the
dismissal of three of your own employees? Cardinal Müller responded: “Holy
Father, these were good, unblemished men whom I now lack, and it was not
correct to dismiss them over my head, shortly before Christmas, so that they
had to clear their offices by 28 December. I am missing them now.”
Thereupon the pope answered: “Good. Cardinal Müller, I only
wanted to let you know that I will not extend your mandate [i.e., beyond 2
July] as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith.” Without any farewell
or explanation, the pope left the room. Cardinal Müller at first thought that
the pope left in order to fetch a token of gratitude, and thus he waited
patiently. But, there was no such gift, nor even an expression of gratitude for
his service. The Prefect of the Papal Household, Archbishop Georg Gänswein,
then had to explain to him that the meeting was over, and that it was time for
him to leave.
At the time of this writing, we have not been able to obtain
confirmation of these events from Cardinal Müller, nor from his secretary, to
whom we reached out for comment. Similarly, we requested a comment from Greg
Burke at the Vatican Press Office, but as of press time, we have received no
response.
If this report is true – and, given the sources, we have
little reason to doubt it – we can well imagine why Cardinal Meisner would have
been distressed after hearing about this meeting in the hours before his death.
Did these five questions with their yes or no answers, if indeed they were
asked of Cardinal Müller, constitute a sort of reverse dubia? Were the
Cardinal’s responses, insofar as they were in accordance with orthodox Catholic
thought, the reason he was not asked to continue in his role as Prefect of the
CDF? Of the five questions, three (female diaconate, priestly celibacy, and the
promotion of Amoris Laetitia) have been widely discussed as part of the pope’s
“reform” agenda. (It seems worthy of mention in this regard that Archbishop
Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer, S.J., who has been tapped as Müller’s
replacement as CDF Prefect, was appointed last year as President of the
Commission for the Study of the Diaconate of Women.) But is the female
priesthood really expected to be reviewed in relation to the female diaconate,
even though Pope Francis has already personally affirmed the understanding that
Pope John Paul II ruled definitively against the possibility? And what of the
final alleged question — the one pertaining to the pope’s dismissal of three
priests from the CDF last year without cause? If such a question were asked,
was it merely a test of unquestioning obedience? Recall that the pope’s
reported answer, when asked by Cardinal Müller about the dismissal of these
three priests, was simply to say, “I am the pope, I do not need to give reasons
for any of my decisions. I have decided that they have to leave and they have
to leave.”
Clearly, there is a massive fight in the curia. There are Catholics there who fear for what is happening under this Bishop of Rome, I will not state, this "Holy Father." It is time for them to come clean and state unequivocally the facts and to stand behind it with their identities.
It is time for Cardinal Muller to disclose all before Christ and the Catholic faithful.
There is nothing more than the souls of millions of Catholics at stake, to say nothing of those Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Atheists and Protestants who will never now salvation because the Church of Man has taken over the Church of Christ and called him a liar.
There is one liar, from the beginning and there are those in the Church who do his bidding.
In an absolutely scandalous display of sacrilege and hubris, Jorge Bergoglio, in the middle of 2013 demanded that Cardinal Muller cease the offering of Holy Mass, even if it be the Novus Ordo, to attend to him in the sacristy.
I suspect that Cardinal
Müller is upset about his dismissal, but in a sense may see his own beheading as
a liberation. To write this article, I peeped into the confidential notes I had
made during the last four years regarding the German cardinal and his relations
with the reigning pontiff. The notes are the result of many private
conversations with high-ranking people in the Vatican who enjoyed the
cardinal’s friendship. It appears that Müller experienced life under Bergoglio
as a sort of Calvary. This, despite Müller’s statements—he has been a good
soldier to the end, and even beyond.
The first step of Müller’s
Calvary was a disconcerting episode in the middle of 2013. The cardinal was
celebrating Mass in the church attached to the congregation palace, for a group
of German students and scholars. His secretary joined him at the altar: “The
pope wants to speak to you.” “Did you tell him I am celebrating Mass?” asked
Müller. “Yes,” said the secretary, “but he says he does not mind—he wants to
talk to you all the same.” The cardinal went to the sacristy. The pope, in a
very bad mood, gave him some orders and a dossier concerning one of his
friends, a cardinal. (This is a very delicate matter. I have sought an
explanation of this incident from the official channels. Until the explanation
comes, if it ever comes, I cannot give further details.) Obviously, Mūller was
flabbergasted.
Muller should have been more than flabbergasted and his answer to send with this secretary back to this Bergoglio is clear, "when the Mass is ended!"
Cardinal Muller, it is time to man up.
What blasphemy.
What sacriledge.
Bishops, Cardinals, you will be held accountable for your silence.
The Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has been interviewed in the Italian magazine, Il Timone. The Cardinal Prefect, whilst not directly, essentially upholds Catholic doctrine and answers the dubia.
Yet, the recent dubia issued by the Cardinals cannot be answered in a magazine but must be answered officially and formally by the Congregation or by the Pope himself. Until that time comes, there can be no letting up on the pressure to ensure that Pope Bergoglio "confirms his brothers in the faith."
The Bishops of Malta, the Vicar of Rome, the Bishops of Buenos Aires, and various dioceses in the United States and elsewhere are pointedly criticised by Müller. Yet, if those bishops think that they are doing the Pope's bidding, then it is the document that is defective, and the Pope who is wrong.
What must happen to these bishops, if Müller is faithful to Christ and his role as guardian of doctrine, is a formal correction to these bishops by him and in the Pope's name. Given the confusion and diabolical disorientation, the correction must really come from the Pope himself.
But will the ever-humble Bergoglio yield? Will he repent of his error and correct himself and the wayward bishops? Or will he remove Cardinal Müller, along soon perhaps with Cardinal Burke, and further entrench what has become a dictatorship, a Peronist lead scandal upon the Holy Church of Christ.
Time will tell; but rest assured, Christ will not be mocked by anyone, let alone his Vicar!
Q - Can there be a contradiction between
doctrine and personal conscience?
A: (Cardinal Müller)No, that is impossible. For example, it
cannot be said that there are circumstances according to which an act of
adultery does not constitute a mortal sin. For Catholic doctrine, it is
impossible for mortal sin to coexist with sanctifying grace. In order to
overcome this absurd contradiction, Christ has instituted for the faithful the
Sacrament of penance and reconciliation with God and with the Church.
Q: This is a question that is being
extensively discussed with regard to the debate surrounding the post-synodal
exhortation “Amoris Laetitia.”
A: “Amoris Laetitia” must clearly be
interpreted in the light of the whole doctrine of the Church. [...] I don’t
like it, it is not right that so many bishops are interpreting “Amoris
Laetitia” according to their way of understanding the pope’s teaching. This
does not keep to the line of Catholic doctrine. The magisterium of the pope is
interpreted only by him or through the congregation for the doctrine of the
faith. The pope interprets the bishops, it is not the bishops who interpret the
pope, this would constitute an inversion of the structure of the Catholic
Church.To all these who are talking too much, I urge them to study first the
doctrine [of the councils] on the papacy and the episcopate.The bishop, as
teacher of the Word, must himself be the first to be well-formed so as not to
fall into the risk of the blind leading the blind. [...]
Q: The exhortation of Saint John Paul II,
“Familiaris Consortio,” stipulates that divorced and remarried couples that
cannot separate, in order to receive the sacraments must strive to live in
continence. Is this requirement still valid?
A: Of course, it is not dispensable,
because it is not only a positive law of John Paul II, but he expressed an
essential element of Christian moral theology and the theology of the
sacraments. The confusion on this point also concerns the failure to accept the
encyclical “Veritatis Splendor,” with the clear doctrine of the “intrinsece
malum.” [...] For us marriage is the expression of participation in the unity
between Christ the bridegroom and the Church his bride. This is not, as some
said during the Synod, a simple vague analogy. No! This is the substance of the
sacrament, and no power in heaven or on earth, neither an angel, nor the pope,
nor a council, nor a law of the bishops, has the faculty to change it.
Q: How can one resolve the chaos that is
being generated on account of the different interpretations that are given of
this passage of Amoris Laetitia?
A: I urge everyone to reflect, studying the
doctrine of the Church first, starting from the Word of God in Sacred
Scripture, which is very clear on marriage. I would also advise not entering
into any casuistry that can easily generate misunderstandings, above all that
according to which if love dies, then the marriage bond is dead. These are
sophistries: the Word of God is very clear and the Church does not accept the
secularization of marriage. The task of priests and bishops is not that of
creating confusion, but of bringing clarity. One cannot refer only to little
passages present in “Amoris Laetitia,” but it has to be read as a whole, with
the purpose of making the Gospel of marriage and the family more attractive for
persons. It is not “Amoris Laetitia” that has provoked a confused
interpretation, but some confused interpretations of it. (I disagree, Amoris Laetitia is full of confusion and intentionally so and Berogoglio's comments at both and after the Synods affirms it. I suspect he is being political here so as not to contradict the Pope directly. - Vox) All of us must
understand and accept the doctrine of Christ and of his Church, and at the same
time be ready to help others to understand it and put it into practice even in
difficult situations.
All the talk about "collegiality" has
gone out the window with Jorge Bergoglio. Never would Pope John Paul II or
Benedict XVI have ever acted with the near maniacal manner in which this
occupant of the Seat of Peter presides over the Holy Catholic Church.
His remarks also come after it has emerged the
CDF had clear misgivings about the document before it was published — concerns
which were never heeded. One informed official recently told the Register that
a CDF committee that reviewed a draft of Amoris Laetitia raised “similar” dubia
to those of the four cardinals. Those dubia formed part of the CDF’s 20 pages
of corrections, first reported by Jean-Marie Genois in Le Figaro on April 7,
the eve of the publication of the document.
Another senior official went further, revealing
to the Register last week that Cardinal Müller had told him personally that the
CDF “had submitted many, many corrections, and not one of the corrections was
accepted”. He added that what the cardinal states in the interview “is exactly
the contradictory of everything which he has said to me on the matter until
now” and he had the “impression of someone who was not speaking for himself but
repeating what someone else had told him to say.”
Not only has Bergoglio and the minions surrounding
him ignored the Curial department charged with ensuring doctrinal orthodoxy but
they he has ignored up to thirty Cardinals and numerous National Conferences of
Bishops who have raised legitimate concerns about the matters contained in
Amoris Laetitia.
A significant number of episcopal conferences
around the world have expressed their concerns to the Pope, the Register has
learned, and like the four cardinals, have received no response. Also before
the document was published, 30 cardinals, having seen an advance draft of the
apostolic exhortation, wrote to the Pope expressing their reservations,
especially on the issue of communion for remarried divorcees, warning that the
document would weaken the three essential sacraments of the Church: the
Eucharist, marriage, and confession. The Pope never responded to that letter
either, a Vatican source told the Register.
Bergoglio's ignoring of both will allow history
to declare him "illegitimate."
The "climate of fear," in the Vatican was discussed on this blog back in December. OnePeterFive is reporting today more news, that the climate of fear is now descending to a climate of termination, retribution and revenge allegedly engineered by Pope Bergoglio himself. The same overstepping arrogance on the part of the Pope by creating a commission to investigate an internal administrative matter that is none of his business with the Knights of Malta has now apparently caused him to seek the heads of priests who may disagree with him. Maike Hickson writes that "Marco Tosatti, the well-informed and well-respected Italian
Vatican specialist, has just revealed another quite troubling development in
Rome. On 26 December, Tosatti reports on his own website Stilum Curiae that Pope Francis had just ordered the Prefect of one Vatican dicastery to dismiss
three of his priests from their duties in their congregation."
The head of a dicastery has
received the order to remove three of his employees (all of whom have worked
there for a long time), and it was without any explanation. He [the Prefect]
received these official letters: “….I request that you please dismiss ….” The
order was: send him [each of them] back into his diocese of origin or to the
Religious Family to which he belongs. He [the Prefect of the Congregation] was
very perplexed because it was about three excellent priests who are among the
most capable professionally. He first avoided obeying and several times asked
for an audience with the pope. He had to wait because that meeting was
postponed several times. Finally, he was received in an audience. And he said:
“Your Holiness, I have received these letters, but I did not do anything
because these persons are among the best of my dicastery… what did they do?”
The answer was, as follows: “And I am the pope, I do not need to give reasons
for any of my decisions. I have decided that they have to leave and they have
to leave.” He got up and stretched out his hand in order to indicate that the
audience was at an end. On 31 December, two of the three [men] will leave the
dicastery in which they have worked for years, and without knowing the why. For
the third, there seems to be a certain delay. But then, there is another
implication which, if true, would be even more unpleasant. One of the two had
freely spoken about certain decisions of the pope – perhaps a little bit too
much. A certain person – a friend of a close collaborator of the pope – heard
this disclosure and passed it on. The victim received then a very harsh
telephone call from Number One [i.e., the pope]. And then soon came the
dismissal.”
…
Thus it is
not so astonishing when the atmosphere behind the walls and in the palaces is
not really serene. And one may now ask oneself what kind of credit this fact
gives altogether to all the elaborate and sustained fanfare about mercy.
…
One source
in Rome says that all those who work for the Holy See are afraid to talk about
anything for fear of being chopped because of the presence of informants
everywhere. He compared it to Stalinist Russia. He said two priest friends of
his, good men, have been fired from the CDF because they were accused of being
critical of Pope Francis.
There is a much to consider here.
Truth vs. rumour
Italian blogs are important to monitor for inside information on what is going on in the Vatican. Tosatti is well-regarded in Rome and is considered an insider. Based upon previous information, this news, should not come as a surprise. If true, what it shows is a deep arrogance but actual insecurity and fear on the part of Bergoglio and his minions. A fear that they are being thwarted in their plans to remake the Church in their image, not Christ's. Given what we know, my view is that this information is legitimate. They fear the truth, they fear blogs and the waking up of the faithful to their manipulations, their machinations and their satanic for the Church.
Consequences
The legitimacy will be verified by the actions which will flow from it. If these words spoken at the meeting between the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Pope are accurate, or even partly so, then everyone at that meeting, including Müller, will be on the chopping block for Bergoglio. He will know that he has been "betrayed" by Müller, or that there are others which he cannot trust.
Witnesses to history
How does someone like Archbishop Gänswein remain in the service of Francis to witness directly the destruction of the papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI? Is Gänswein a "double-agent?" Is he Benedict's "keeper" in his monastic prison only to be let out for a circus now and then? What about Msgr. Guido Marini, how long can he serve a Bishop of Rome who refuses to bend his knee to the Lord of Heaven and Earth? How many compromises must these men have made to now be stuck in their positions? Or, are they there to try to manage the situation?
Careers
During the dustup with Tom Rosica and the frivolous, vexatious and unjust attempt to litigate against me, he referred in one of his letters to this writer damaging his "reputation" and by extension, his career. We hear now that there is this "climate of fear" in these men for their "careers" and that they are being "fired." I am perplexed by this. These men were apparently called to the priesthood. Is that not the career? the vocation?
I have little sympathy for these in the Vatican who now live and work in this "climate of fear." These are men who have been given every privilege in life. They were given great education and the opportunity to serve God's people by offering the Holy Sacrifice, hearing confession, baptising and blessing the dying. They don't have to worry about the mortgage or the insane tax rates, or how to decide between the electrical bill and grocery list. They need not worry about balancing the hockey camp with the ballet lessons or that their children have been corrupted in the faith by errant teachers and priests. They don't need to worry about their livelihood being shipped off to some third-world backwater and never being able to properly provide again for their families. These fearful cleris do not live the life of the "deplorables" known as John and Mary Catholic. These privileged fearful Vatican men are in reality, sissies in cassocks.
Good grief men, find your pair and man up! Defend Our Lord and His Faith and His Church. Declare to the Catholic faithful what is going on. Do not follow a leader into Hell. Take your medicine, Stand up for the Truth. Defend Our Lord Jesus Christ and His faithful from these errors and these men who seek to destroy.
And stop whining about your climate of fear and get on with it.
"You are a priest forever, after the Order of Melchizedek." Start acting like it.
According to the Bergomeister, Cardinal Muller the former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has "good intentions" but is "like a child."This initiative brings to the faithful consolation and encouragement. In this Manifesto of Faith is being made from the mouth of a high-ranking representative of the Church’s hierarchy a public and unmistakable profession of the immutable Catholic Faith. This profession from Cardinal Müller covers particularly those truths of the Faith and of its sacramental practice, which in our days are mostly disfigured, being such a disfiguration often through a cunning and gnostic interpretation passed off as a hermeneutic or a “development of doctrine, in continuity.”
The story is based upon anonymous sources in Germany. Hickson, fluent in German, frequently writes on German matters and through German contacts. While this is not evidenciary and would in a court be considered, hearsay, and; one could say that it is in the realm of "fake news," given the pattern of this "papacy" and the continuing revelations of sodomy, drugs and orgies along with financial corruption in the Vatican, can it be discounted?
The Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has been interviewed in the Italian magazine, Il Timone. The Cardinal Prefect, whilst not directly, essentially upholds Catholic doctrine and answers the dubia.A significant number of episcopal conferences around the world have expressed their concerns to the Pope, the Register has learned, and like the four cardinals, have received no response. Also before the document was published, 30 cardinals, having seen an advance draft of the apostolic exhortation, wrote to the Pope expressing their reservations, especially on the issue of communion for remarried divorcees, warning that the document would weaken the three essential sacraments of the Church: the Eucharist, marriage, and confession. The Pope never responded to that letter either, a Vatican source told the Register.
