“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
Showing posts with label Pope Francis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pope Francis. Show all posts
Thursday 2 August 2018
Monday 28 May 2018
New FrancisCardinal alleged to have a concubine and children. Well, at least it's a woman!
The latest potential Bergoglian scandal is breaking. Adelante la Fe is reporting that one of the new Cardinal elects of Pope Francis, Bishop Toribio Ticona, Titular Bishop of Timici and Prelate Emeritus of Corocoro in Bolivia has a concubine and children.
On Twitter, Edward Pentin is reporting that he has requested comment and confirmation from the Vatican.
Edward Pentin
PS We use the term "married" because his wife speaks properly of her husband.
On Twitter, Edward Pentin is reporting that he has requested comment and confirmation from the Vatican.
Edward Pentin
@EdwardPentin More
@EdwardPentin More
In response to reports (https://adelantelafe.com/escandalo-francisco-nombra-cardenal-a-obispo-casado-y-con-hijos/ …) that Bolivian Cardinal-Designate Bishop Toribio Ticona, 81, has a "wife" and "children," I've asked #Vatican to confirm whether story is true, and if so, whether the #Pope knew of it before he named him Cardinal. Will post updates
FORWARD THE FAITH
SCANDAL: Francisco appoints Cardenal to Bishop "married" and with children
05/28/18 9:45 am
by Adelante la Fe
Pope Francis announced on May 20, 2018, that in the consistory of June 29 of this year at the Feast of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, he will create a cardinal to Bishop Toribio Ticona, Titular of Timici, Prelate Emeritus of Corocoro in Bolivia The 81-year-old Bishop was born on April 25, 1937, was ordained a priest in 1967, and consecrated titular Bishop of Timici and Auxiliary of Potosí, Bolivia on May 31, 1986, in 1992 he was appointed Prelate of Corocoro retiring in 2012.
In his repeated visits to Oruro, at the beginning of his episcopate, being at that time Bishop of Oruro, the future Third World cardinal, Julio Terrazas Sandoval, CSsR, prided himself on visiting the Bishop of Oruro, calling him his "godfather", since he affirmed that he owed Terrazas his promotion to the episcopate, because he served several times as President of the Episcopal Conference of Bolivia, evidently being very influential among the other bishops and the Apostolic Nunciature.
Ticona attended two Ad Limina visits in 2008 and 2017. He served as "mayor" according to the uses and customs of a community of 12 people in Bolivia. During the decade of the Bishop-Prelate Ticona in the Prelature of Corocoro the Catholic congregation went from 94.6% to 87.6%, giving growth to the Protestant sects. It is public knowledge that while working in Corocoro, at the same time, in the Bishopric of Oruro he maintained a marital life with a woman, the wife and children are proud to call themselves the wife and children of the "Bishop of Patacamaya" as is also known Bishop Toribio Ticona.
The family of the "Bishop of Patacamaya" Monseñor Toribio Ticona inhabited three different homes in the city of Oruro.
From the iron age of the pontificate in the ninth and tenth centuries there had been no certain and reliable news that a Concubine Bishop was "rewarded" with the Cardenalato. Being a Prince of the Church entails an important responsibility for those who are created as such, because their service is done directly to the Petrino Ministry, therefore, the promotion of a Concubine Cardinal carries two messages, one the desire of Pope Francis for the suppression of Celibacy Priestly, and the other the most serious, is to have a "scapegoat" with which I managed to break the hierarchy of the Bishops of Bolivia. This year will be renewed 2 archbishoprics and other 3 ecclesial circumscriptions of Bolivia, we do not doubt that the Barros case will be repeated in Bolivia, whereupon the Pope Francisco would have with the support of Evo Morales the control of the Bolivian Church that would be of leftist imprint.
Forward Faith
Thursday 10 May 2018
Thursday 19 April 2018
Evil idiots at the top of the Church of Christ
The German Heresiarchs have stated that there will be "intercommunion" between Catholics and Lutherans.
It seems that there are a few Catholic bishops left in Germany seeking clarification in a rather weak attempt to stand up for the Catholic faith.
It was reported earlier this week that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with the approval of Pope Francis, has written to the German bishops to state that the expected "intercommunion" cannot occur.
It has then been reported that Pope Francis has ordered that the letter to the German bishops be kept "secret."
The German bishops are denying that the Pope has sent a letter.
Heresiarch Cardinal Marx is going to visit Pope Francis.
That is all.
Thursday 5 April 2018
Bergoglio's conversation with Scalfari was "intolerable" - Cardinal Burke
In an interview at La Nuova Busso la Quotidiana, Raymond Cardinal Burke, has a hard pointed interview on the recent and continuous actions of Pope Bergoglio and his minions.
http://www.lanuovabq.it/it/burke-correggere-il-papa-per-obbedire-a-cristo
http://www.lanuovabq.it/it/burke-correggere-il-papa-per-obbedire-a-cristo
There are those who charge of disobedience all who have expressed doubts, questions and criticism of the work of the Pope, but "correction of confusion or error is not an act of disobedience, but an act of obedience to Christ and thus to his vicar on Earth." So the cardinal Raymond Leo Burke in this interview with the new BQ, on the eve of a major conference that there will be in Rome on Saturday 7 April on "where is the Church."
There are those who charge of disobedience all who have expressed doubts, questions and criticism of the work of the Pope, but "correction of confusion or error is not an act of disobedience, but an act of obedience to Christ and thus to his vicar on Earth." So says Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke in this interview with the new BQ, on the eve of a major conference that there will be in Rome on Saturday 7 April on the theme "where is the Church" (click here), whose cardinal Burke will be one of the speakers. The Conference in Rome will take place in the memory of Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, who died last September, one of the signers of the Dubia. As you recall these 5 questions to Pope Francis times to have a clear statement of continuity with the previous Magisterium following the confusion created by the different and sometimes opposing interpretations of the post synodal Apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia. Those Dubia, whose cardinal Burke is a signatory, never has been answered nor Pope Francis has never responded to repeated request for a hearing by the Cardinals signatories.
Your eminence, you will be one of the main speakers at the meeting of 7 April, which is the name of cardinal Caffarra you will query on the direction of the Church. Already from the title of the Conference is perceived concern for the direction taken. What are the reasons for this concern?
The confusion and Division in the Church, on the core issues and most important – marriage and family, the sacraments and the right to access it, intrinsically evil acts, eternal life and the new ones – are becoming increasingly spread. And the Pope not only refuses to clarify things with the announcement of the constant doctrine and healthy church discipline, a responsibility that is inherent to his Ministry as the successor of St. Peter but also increases the confusion.
The confusion and Division in the Church, on the core issues and most important – marriage and family, the sacraments and the right to access it, intrinsically evil acts, eternal life and the new ones – are becoming increasingly spread. And the Pope not only refuses to clarify things with the announcement of the constant doctrine and healthy church discipline, a responsibility that is inherent to his Ministry as the successor of St. Peter but also increases the confusion.
It also refers to the proliferation of private statements that are reported by those who meet him?
What happened with the last interview with Eugenio Scalfari during Holy week and made public on Holy Thursday went beyond the tolerable. That a well-known atheist claims to announce a revolution in the teaching of the Catholic Church, claiming to speak in the name of the Pope, denying the immortality of the human soul and the existence of hell, has been a source of profound scandal not only for many Catholics but also for so many lay people who have respect for the Catholic Church and its teachings, even if you don't share them. Besides Holy Thursday is one of the holiest days of the year, the day on which the Lord instituted the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist and the priesthood, that he may offer us always the fruit of his redemptive passion and death for our salvation eternal. Also, the response of the Holy see are shocked reactions from around the world, was inadequate. Rather than announce the truth about the immortality of the human soul and clearly over hell, in denial it says only that certain words quoted are not the Pope. It does not say that the erroneous ideas, even heretical, expressed by these words are not shared by the Pope and the Pope rejects such ideas which are contrary to the Catholic faith. This play with faith and doctrine, at the highest level of the Church, rightly leave pastors and faithful scandalized.
What happened with the last interview with Eugenio Scalfari during Holy week and made public on Holy Thursday went beyond the tolerable. That a well-known atheist claims to announce a revolution in the teaching of the Catholic Church, claiming to speak in the name of the Pope, denying the immortality of the human soul and the existence of hell, has been a source of profound scandal not only for many Catholics but also for so many lay people who have respect for the Catholic Church and its teachings, even if you don't share them. Besides Holy Thursday is one of the holiest days of the year, the day on which the Lord instituted the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist and the priesthood, that he may offer us always the fruit of his redemptive passion and death for our salvation eternal. Also, the response of the Holy see are shocked reactions from around the world, was inadequate. Rather than announce the truth about the immortality of the human soul and clearly over hell, in denial it says only that certain words quoted are not the Pope. It does not say that the erroneous ideas, even heretical, expressed by these words are not shared by the Pope and the Pope rejects such ideas which are contrary to the Catholic faith. This play with faith and doctrine, at the highest level of the Church, rightly leave pastors and faithful scandalized.
If these things are very serious, and a source of embarrassment, but the silence amazes many pastors.
Of course, the situation is further compounded by the silence of many bishops and Cardinals who share with the Roman Pontiff the concern for the universal Church. Some are simply shut up. Others say that there is nothing serious. Still others spread fantasies of a new Church, a church that takes a totally different direction from the past, fantasizing for example of a "new paradigm" for the Church or a radical conversion of the Church's pastoral practice, making it completely new. Then there are those who are enthusiastic promoters of the so-called revolution in the Catholic Church. For the faithful who understand the seriousness of the situation, the lack of doctrinal and disciplinary direction from their pastors leaves them lost. For the faithful who do not understand the gravity of the situation, this lack leaves them in confusion and possibly victims of malicious errors to their souls. Many who have entered into full communion with the Catholic Church, being baptized in a Protestant ecclesial communion, because their ecclesial communities have abandoned the Apostolic faith, suffering intensely the situation: perceiving that The Catholic Church is going in the same street of the abandonment of the faith.
Of course, the situation is further compounded by the silence of many bishops and Cardinals who share with the Roman Pontiff the concern for the universal Church. Some are simply shut up. Others say that there is nothing serious. Still others spread fantasies of a new Church, a church that takes a totally different direction from the past, fantasizing for example of a "new paradigm" for the Church or a radical conversion of the Church's pastoral practice, making it completely new. Then there are those who are enthusiastic promoters of the so-called revolution in the Catholic Church. For the faithful who understand the seriousness of the situation, the lack of doctrinal and disciplinary direction from their pastors leaves them lost. For the faithful who do not understand the gravity of the situation, this lack leaves them in confusion and possibly victims of malicious errors to their souls. Many who have entered into full communion with the Catholic Church, being baptized in a Protestant ecclesial communion, because their ecclesial communities have abandoned the Apostolic faith, suffering intensely the situation: perceiving that The Catholic Church is going in the same street of the abandonment of the faith.
What she paints is an apocalyptic situation ...
This situation leads me to reflect more and more on the message of our Lady of Fatima who warns us of evil-even more serious of serious ills suffered due to the spread of atheistic communism-what is apostasy from the faith in the Church. The # 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that "[p] rhyme of the coming of Christ, the Church must go through a final round that will shake the faith of many believers," and that "[t] he persecution that accompanies his [the Church] pilgrimage on Earth will unveil the "mystery of iniquity" in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems, at the price of apostasy from the truth ".
This situation leads me to reflect more and more on the message of our Lady of Fatima who warns us of evil-even more serious of serious ills suffered due to the spread of atheistic communism-what is apostasy from the faith in the Church. The # 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that "[p] rhyme of the coming of Christ, the Church must go through a final round that will shake the faith of many believers," and that "[t] he persecution that accompanies his [the Church] pilgrimage on Earth will unveil the "mystery of iniquity" in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems, at the price of apostasy from the truth ".
In such a situation the bishops and Cardinals have a duty to proclaim the true doctrine. At the same time must lead the faithful to make reparation for the offences to Christ and the wounds inflicted to his mystical body, the Church, when faith and discipline are not appropriately safeguarded and promoted by shepherds. The great canonist of the thirteenth century, Enrico da Susa or Ostiense, confronting the difficult question of how to fix a Roman Pontiff that would act in a way contrary to his Office, says that the College of Cardinals is a de facto control against error.
Undoubtedly, today's much-discussed the figure of Francis. You switch easily from the uncritical glorification of anything he faces ruthless criticism of every ambiguous gesture. But somehow the problem of how to relate to the Pope goes for every Pope. So some things need to be clarified. Meanwhile, what is the Pope for the Church?
According to the constant teaching of the Church, the Pope, for the express will of Christ, is "the perpetual and visible source and Foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful" (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of the Council Vatican II, # 23). Is the essential service of the Pope to safeguard and promote the deposit of faith, the true doctrine and sound discipline consistent with the truths believed. In the interview cited with Eugenio Scalfari, referring to the Pope as "revolutionary" compliant. But the Petrine Office has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the revolution. In contrast, exists solely for the preservation and propagation of the Catholic faith unchangeable leading souls to the conversion of heart and lead all mankind to unity based on the order in writing by God in his creation and especially in the heart of man, the only earthly creature made in the image of God. Is the order that Christ has restored to the Paschal mystery we are celebrating these days. The grace of redemption that emanates from his glorious pierced heart in the Church, in the hearts of its members, gives the strength to live according to this order, that is in communion with God and neighbour.
According to the constant teaching of the Church, the Pope, for the express will of Christ, is "the perpetual and visible source and Foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful" (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of the Council Vatican II, # 23). Is the essential service of the Pope to safeguard and promote the deposit of faith, the true doctrine and sound discipline consistent with the truths believed. In the interview cited with Eugenio Scalfari, referring to the Pope as "revolutionary" compliant. But the Petrine Office has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the revolution. In contrast, exists solely for the preservation and propagation of the Catholic faith unchangeable leading souls to the conversion of heart and lead all mankind to unity based on the order in writing by God in his creation and especially in the heart of man, the only earthly creature made in the image of God. Is the order that Christ has restored to the Paschal mystery we are celebrating these days. The grace of redemption that emanates from his glorious pierced heart in the Church, in the hearts of its members, gives the strength to live according to this order, that is in communion with God and neighbour.
Surely the Pope is not an absolute ruler, yet today is very perceived in this way. "If the Pope says ..." is the common way to truncate any question or doubt on some claims. Is there some sort of papolatria. How would you respond?
The notion of the fullness of the power of the Roman Pontiff has been clearly set out already by Pope Saint Leo the great. The medieval canonists have contributed greatly to the development of the power inherent in the Petrine Office. Their contribution remains valid and important. The concept is very simple. The Pope, for the divine, enjoys all the power necessary to safeguard and promote the true faith, the true divine worship, and healthy demand discipline. This power belongs not to him but to his Office as the successor of Saint Peter. In the past, most of the time, the Popes have not made public their personal acts or their opinions, just to avoid the risk that the faithful are confused about what she does and thinks the successor of Saint Peter. Currently, there is a risky and even harmful confusion of the person of the Pope with his Office resulting in the darkening of the Petrine Office and into a worldly and political concept of the service of the Roman pontiff in the Church. The Church exists for the salvation of souls. Any act of a Pope that undermines the Mission of Christ in the Church, is an act heresy or is a sinful Act in itself, it is simply empty from the perspective of the Petrine Office. So even though it clearly bears very grave damage to the faithful, does not command the obedience of pastors and faithful. We always have to distinguish the body of the man who is the Roman Pontiff from the body of the Roman Pontiff, the man who exercises the Office of St. Peter in the Church. Don't make the distinction means papolatria and ends with the loss of faith in the Petrine Office divinely founded and supported.
The notion of the fullness of the power of the Roman Pontiff has been clearly set out already by Pope Saint Leo the great. The medieval canonists have contributed greatly to the development of the power inherent in the Petrine Office. Their contribution remains valid and important. The concept is very simple. The Pope, for the divine, enjoys all the power necessary to safeguard and promote the true faith, the true divine worship, and healthy demand discipline. This power belongs not to him but to his Office as the successor of Saint Peter. In the past, most of the time, the Popes have not made public their personal acts or their opinions, just to avoid the risk that the faithful are confused about what she does and thinks the successor of Saint Peter. Currently, there is a risky and even harmful confusion of the person of the Pope with his Office resulting in the darkening of the Petrine Office and into a worldly and political concept of the service of the Roman pontiff in the Church. The Church exists for the salvation of souls. Any act of a Pope that undermines the Mission of Christ in the Church, is an act heresy or is a sinful Act in itself, it is simply empty from the perspective of the Petrine Office. So even though it clearly bears very grave damage to the faithful, does not command the obedience of pastors and faithful. We always have to distinguish the body of the man who is the Roman Pontiff from the body of the Roman Pontiff, the man who exercises the Office of St. Peter in the Church. Don't make the distinction means papolatria and ends with the loss of faith in the Petrine Office divinely founded and supported.
In the relationship with the Pope in what a Catholic must take fuller?
The Catholic must always adhere to, absolutely, the Petrine Office as an essential part of the establishment of the Church from Christ. The moment in which the Catholic no longer complies with the Office of the Pope placed itself or schism or apostasy from the faith. At the same time, the Catholic must respect the man in charge with the Office which means attention to his teaching and pastoral leadership. This also includes the duty to express to the Pope the judgement of a properly formed conscience, when he diverts or seems to deviate from the true doctrine and healthy discipline or abandon the responsibilities of his Office. Natural law, to the Gospels, and the Church's constant tradition govern, the faithful are obliged to express to their pastors their concern for the State of the Church. Have this duty to which it is entitled to receive a reply from their pastors.
The Catholic must always adhere to, absolutely, the Petrine Office as an essential part of the establishment of the Church from Christ. The moment in which the Catholic no longer complies with the Office of the Pope placed itself or schism or apostasy from the faith. At the same time, the Catholic must respect the man in charge with the Office which means attention to his teaching and pastoral leadership. This also includes the duty to express to the Pope the judgement of a properly formed conscience, when he diverts or seems to deviate from the true doctrine and healthy discipline or abandon the responsibilities of his Office. Natural law, to the Gospels, and the Church's constant tradition govern, the faithful are obliged to express to their pastors their concern for the State of the Church. Have this duty to which it is entitled to receive a reply from their pastors.
Then you can criticize the Pope? And under what conditions?
If the Pope does not fulfill his Office for the benefit of all souls, it is not only possible but also necessary to criticize the Pope. This criticism must follow the teaching of Christ on fraternal correction in the Gospel (Mt 18, 15-18). First, the faithful or pastor should express his criticism in a private way, which will allow the Pope to correct themselves. But if the Pope refuses to correct his way to teach or act seriously missing, the criticism should be made public, because it has to do with the common good in the Church and in the world. Some have criticized those who have publicly expressed criticism of the Pope as a sign of rebellion or disobedience, but inquire – with due respect for his Office-the correction of confusion or error is not an act of disobedience, but an Act of obedience to Christ and thus to his vicar on Earth.
If the Pope does not fulfill his Office for the benefit of all souls, it is not only possible but also necessary to criticize the Pope. This criticism must follow the teaching of Christ on fraternal correction in the Gospel (Mt 18, 15-18). First, the faithful or pastor should express his criticism in a private way, which will allow the Pope to correct themselves. But if the Pope refuses to correct his way to teach or act seriously missing, the criticism should be made public, because it has to do with the common good in the Church and in the world. Some have criticized those who have publicly expressed criticism of the Pope as a sign of rebellion or disobedience, but inquire – with due respect for his Office-the correction of confusion or error is not an act of disobedience, but an Act of obedience to Christ and thus to his vicar on Earth.
Labels:
Pope Francis,
Raymond Cardinal Burke
Saturday 10 March 2018
Nick Donnelly, Vox Cantoris now Infovaticana - who's next on the Bergoglian hit list?
Yet another attempt by corrupt church officials to silence faithful Catholics.
It was just over three years ago when a Vatican communications "expert" attempted to sue this writer over his objection to the reasonable response to his public commentary. Between pressure from his Order, financiers, a Cardinal, Breitbart, and hundreds of blogs around the world, the matter ended in embarrassment and ridicule for him and boosted this blog from just over 600,000 page views after ten years to what will be 5,000,000 by Easter or sooner, depending on Pope Bergoglio.
This came after the silencing of Deacon Nick Donnelly and his blog "Protect the Pope," which the bishop then denied forcing the closure. Deacon Donnelly is quite active on Twitter at https://twitter.com/ProtecttheFaith where he wrote on March 9; “Four years ago this week I was forced to stand down from my blog http://www.protectthepope.com. I was told that 'men of high standing' had complained about my posts. All my requests to recommence PtP have been refused. The truth is Protect the Pope was closed down.”
Now, we see that the Vatican itself is attempting through an American law firm to shut down the Spanish blog, Infovaticana. They write, "The Vatican Secretariat of State wants InfoVaticana to close, and has contracted for it one of the most powerful law firms in the world, which does not accept any agreement that does not involve the final closure of this portal and the delivery of the InfoVaticana domain. com to your client."
The background on the story can also be read at ChurchMilitant who with Michael Voris was instrumental in assisting this writer's pushback against the "high profiled Vatican official" that attempted to silence this writer.
The Vatican, it seems, has learnt nothing from the past. Infovaticana must stand firm in this assault on freedom of thought, speech and expression and in violation of Canon 212.
Bergoglio, Parolin and the rest of these malefactors should understand it perfectly clear, we're not going away anytime soon.
Get used to it.
It was just over three years ago when a Vatican communications "expert" attempted to sue this writer over his objection to the reasonable response to his public commentary. Between pressure from his Order, financiers, a Cardinal, Breitbart, and hundreds of blogs around the world, the matter ended in embarrassment and ridicule for him and boosted this blog from just over 600,000 page views after ten years to what will be 5,000,000 by Easter or sooner, depending on Pope Bergoglio.
This came after the silencing of Deacon Nick Donnelly and his blog "Protect the Pope," which the bishop then denied forcing the closure. Deacon Donnelly is quite active on Twitter at https://twitter.com/ProtecttheFaith where he wrote on March 9; “Four years ago this week I was forced to stand down from my blog http://www.protectthepope.com. I was told that 'men of high standing' had complained about my posts. All my requests to recommence PtP have been refused. The truth is Protect the Pope was closed down.”
Now, we see that the Vatican itself is attempting through an American law firm to shut down the Spanish blog, Infovaticana. They write, "The Vatican Secretariat of State wants InfoVaticana to close, and has contracted for it one of the most powerful law firms in the world, which does not accept any agreement that does not involve the final closure of this portal and the delivery of the InfoVaticana domain. com to your client."
The background on the story can also be read at ChurchMilitant who with Michael Voris was instrumental in assisting this writer's pushback against the "high profiled Vatican official" that attempted to silence this writer.
The Vatican, it seems, has learnt nothing from the past. Infovaticana must stand firm in this assault on freedom of thought, speech and expression and in violation of Canon 212.
Bergoglio, Parolin and the rest of these malefactors should understand it perfectly clear, we're not going away anytime soon.
Get used to it.
Labels:
Blogs and Bloggers,
Pope Francis,
Vatican Circus
Sunday 4 March 2018
Honduran Bishop Pineda, Auxilliary to Maradiaga accused of gross sexual perversion - why has Bergoglio and Ouellet left him in place?
Auxiliary Bishop Juan José Pineda of Tegucigalpa shakes hands with Honduras' ousted President Manuel Zelaya (R) inside the Brazilian embassy in Tegucigalpa September 24, 2009. (REUTERS/Edgard Garrido ) |
Former Seminarians Allege Grave Sexual Misconduct by Honduran Bishop Pineda
The testimonies, submitted by former Archdiocese of Tegucigalpa seminarians to a Vatican investigation, reinforce existing concerns about the archdiocesan auxiliary bishop’s conduct.
Edward Pentin
VATICAN CITY — The Register has obtained the text of two testimonies, submitted by former seminarians to a Vatican investigator, detailing allegations of serious sexual misconduct by Auxiliary Bishop Juan José Pineda Fasquelle of the Archdiocese of Tegucigalpa, Honduras.
The content of the testimonies, along with previously known allegations of sexual misconduct by the bishop and additional information provided to the Register by sources within Honduras, has reinforced widespread existing concerns about the conduct of Bishop Pineda.
These concerns are heightened by the fact that Bishop Pineda has been in charge of the archdiocese since early January, while its archbishop, top papal adviser Cardinal Oscar Andrés Rodriguez Maradiaga of Tegucigalpa, undergoes chemotherapy treatment in Houston, Texas, for prostate cancer.
Read the rest at:
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/former-seminarians-allege-grave-sexual-misconduct-by-honduran-bishop-pinedaSaturday 20 January 2018
Tuesday 2 January 2018
Bishops of Kazakhstan Issue stunning correction of Pope Francis' approval of heresy
From Gloria TV:
Pope Francis’ approval of the pastoral norms of the Buenos Aires Bishops has caused a considerable and increasing confusion among the faithful and the clergy, write three Kazakhstan Bishops.
They are Astana Archbishop Tomash Peta, Karaganda Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga and Astana Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider. Their statement is dated December 31, 2017.
It sees the pastoral norms as a means of spreading the “plague of divorce” even in the life of the Church. Legitimating a second liaison “represents a substantial alteration of the two thousand-year-old” sacramental discipline and doctrine of the Church.
The bishops quote from the Church Fathers up to recent popes who unanimous agree that a second liaison is never legitimate.
They conclude, “It is not licit to justify, approve, or legitimize either directly or indirectly divorce and a non-conjugal stable sexual relationship through the sacramental discipline of the admission of so-called ‘divorced and remarried’ to Holy Communion, in this case a discipline alien to the entire Tradition of the Catholic and Apostolic faith.”
Profession of the immutable truths
about sacramental marriage
about sacramental marriage
After the publication of the Apostolic Exhortation "Amoris laetitia" (2016) various bishops issued at local, regional, and national levels applicable norms regarding the sacramental discipline of those faithful, called "divorced and remarried," who having still a living spouse to whom they are united with a valid sacramental matrimonial bond, have nevertheless begun a stable cohabitation more uxorio with a person who is not their legitimate spouse.
The aforementioned rules provide inter alia that in individual cases the persons, called "divorced and remarried," may receive the sacrament of Penance and Holy Communion, while continuing to live habitually and intentionally more uxorio with a person who is not their legitimate spouse. These pastoral norms have received approval from various hierarchical authorities. Some of these norms have received approval even from the supreme authority of the Church.
The spread of these ecclesiastically approved pastoral norms has caused a considerable and ever increasing confusion among the faithful and the clergy, a confusion that touches the central manifestations of the life of the Church, such as sacramental marriage with the family, the domestic church, and the sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharist.
According to the doctrine of the Church, only the sacramental matrimonial bond constitutes a domestic church (see Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 11). The admission of so-called "divorced and remarried" faithful to Holy Communion, which is the highest expression of the unity of Christ the Spouse with His Church, means in practice a way of approving or legitimizing divorce, and in this meaning a kind of introduction of divorce in the life of the Church.
The mentioned pastoral norms are revealed in practice and in time as a means of spreading the "plague of divorce" (an expression used by the Second Vatican Council, see Gaudium et spes, 47). It is a matter of spreading the "plague of divorce" even in the life of the Church, when the Church, instead, because of her unconditional fidelity to the doctrine of Christ, should be a bulwark and an unmistakable sign of contradiction against the plague of divorce which is every day more rampant in civil society.
The mentioned pastoral norms are revealed in practice and in time as a means of spreading the "plague of divorce" (an expression used by the Second Vatican Council, see Gaudium et spes, 47). It is a matter of spreading the "plague of divorce" even in the life of the Church, when the Church, instead, because of her unconditional fidelity to the doctrine of Christ, should be a bulwark and an unmistakable sign of contradiction against the plague of divorce which is every day more rampant in civil society.
Unequivocally and without admitting any exception Our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ solemnly reaffirmed God's will regarding the absolute prohibition of divorce. An approval or legitimation of the violation of the sacredness of the marriage bond, even indirectly through the mentioned new sacramental discipline, seriously contradicts God's express will and His commandment. This practice therefore represents a substantial alteration of the two thousand-year-old sacramental discipline of the Church. Furthermore, a substantially altered discipline will eventually lead to an alteration in the corresponding doctrine.
The constant Magisterium of the Church, beginning with the teachings of the Apostles and of all the Supreme Pontiffs, has preserved and faithfully transmitted both in the doctrine (in theory) and in the sacramental discipline (in practice) in an unequivocal way, without any shadow of doubt and always in the same sense and in the same meaning (eodem sensu eademque sententia), the crystalline teaching of Christ concerning the indissolubility of marriage.
Because of its Divinely established nature, the discipline of the sacraments must never contradict the revealed word of God and the faith of the Church in the absolute indissolubility of a ratified and consummated marriage. "The sacraments not only presuppose faith, but by words and objects they also nourish, strengthen, and express it; that is why they are called "sacraments of faith." (Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, 59). "Even the supreme authority in the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in the obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1125).
The Catholic faith by its nature excludes a formal contradiction between the faith professed on the one hand and the life and practice of the sacraments on the other. In this sense we can also understand the following affirmation of the Magisterium: "This split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age." (Second Vatican Council, Gaudium et Spes, 43) and "Accordingly, the concrete pedagogy of the Church must always remain linked with her doctrine and never be separated from it" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).
In view of the vital importance that the doctrine and discipline of marriage and the Eucharist constitute, the Church is obliged to speak with the same voice. The pastoral norms regarding the indissolubility of marriage must not, therefore, be contradicted between one diocese and another, between one country and another. Since the time of the Apostles, the Church has observed this principle as St. Irenaeus of Lyons testifies: "The Church, though spread throughout the world to the ends of the earth, having received the faith from the Apostles and their disciples, preserves this preaching and this faith with care and, as if she inhabits a single house, believes in the same identical way, as if she had only one soul and only one heart, and preaches the truth of the faith, teaches it and transmits it in a unanimous voice, as if she had only one mouth"(Adversus haereses, I, 10, 2). Saint Thomas Aquinas transmits to us the same perennial principle of the life of the Church: "There is one and the same faith of the ancients and the moderns, otherwise there would not be one and the same Church" (Questiones Disputatae de Veritate, q. 14, a. 12c).
The following warning from Pope John Paul II remains current and valid: "The confusion, created in the conscience of many faithful by the differences of opinions and teachings in theology, in preaching, in catechesis, in spiritual direction, about serious and delicate questions of Christian morals, ends up by diminishing the true sense of sin almost to the point of eliminating it" (Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitenia, 18).
The meaning of the following statements of the Magisterium of the Church is fully applicable to the doctrine and sacramental discipline concerning the indissolubility of a ratified and consummated marriage:
• "For the Church of Christ, watchful guardian that she is, and defender of the dogmas deposited with her, never changes anything, never diminishes anything, never adds anything to them; but with all diligence she treats the ancient doctrines faithfully and wisely, which the faith of the Fathers has transmitted. She strives to investigate and explain them in such a way that the ancient dogmas of heavenly doctrine will be made evident and clear, but will retain their full, integral, and proper nature, and will grow only within their own genus — that is, within the same dogma, in the same sense and the same meaning” (Pius IX, Dogmatic Bull Ineffabilis Deus)
• "With regard to the very substance of truth, the Church has before God and men the sacred duty to announce it, to teach it without any attenuation, as Christ revealed it, and there is no condition of time that can reduce the rigor of this obligation. It binds in conscience every priest who is entrusted with the care of teaching, admonishing, and guiding the faithful "(Pius XII, Discourse to parish priests and Lenten preachers, March 23, 1949).
• "The Church does not historicize, does not relativize to the metamorphoses of profane culture the nature of the Church that is always equal and faithful to itself, as Christ wanted it and authentic tradition perfected it" (Paul VI, Homily from October 28, 1965).
• "Now it is an outstanding manifestation of charity toward souls to omit nothing from the saving doctrine of Christ" (Paul VI, Encyclical Humanae Vitae, 29).
• "Any conjugal difficulties are resolved without ever falsifying and compromising the truth" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).
• "The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm [of the Divine moral law]. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 33).
• “The other principle is that of truth and consistency, whereby the Church does not agree to call good evil and evil good. Basing herself on these two complementary principles, the church can only invite her children who find themselves in these painful situations to approach the divine mercy by other ways, not however through the sacraments of penance and the Eucharist until such time as they have attained the required dispositions” (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 34).
• "The Church's firmness in defending the universal and unchanging moral norms is not demeaning at all. Its only purpose is to serve man's true freedom. Because there can be no freedom apart from or in opposition to the truth"(John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor, 96).
• “When it is a matter of the moral norms prohibiting intrinsic evil, there are no privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the "poorest of the poor" on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality we are all absolutely equal" (emphasis in original) (John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor, 96).
• "The obligation of reiterating this impossibility of admission to the Eucharist is required for genuine pastoral care and for an authentic concern for the well-being of these faithful and of the whole Church, as it indicates the conditions necessary for the fullness of that conversion to which all are always invited by the Lord“ (Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration on the admissibility to the Holy Communion of the divorced and remarried, 24 June 2000, n. 5).
As Catholic bishops, who - according to the teaching of the Second Vatican Council - must defend the unity of faith and the common discipline of the Church, and take care that the light of the full truth should arise for all men (see Lumen Gentium, 23 ) we are forced in conscience to profess in the face of the current rampant confusion the unchanging truth and the equally immutable sacramental discipline regarding the indissolubility of marriage according to the bimillennial and unaltered teaching of the Magisterium of the Church. In this spirit we reiterate:
As Catholic bishops, who - according to the teaching of the Second Vatican Council - must defend the unity of faith and the common discipline of the Church, and take care that the light of the full truth should arise for all men (see Lumen Gentium, 23 ) we are forced in conscience to profess in the face of the current rampant confusion the unchanging truth and the equally immutable sacramental discipline regarding the indissolubility of marriage according to the bimillennial and unaltered teaching of the Magisterium of the Church. In this spirit we reiterate:
• Sexual relationships between people who are not in the bond to one another of a valid marriage - which occurs in the case of the so-called "divorced and remarried" - are always contrary to God's will and constitute a grave offense against God.
• No circumstance or finality, not even a possible imputability or diminished guilt, can make such sexual relations a positive moral reality and pleasing to God. The same applies to the other negative precepts of the Ten Commandments of God. Since “there exist acts which, per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object" (John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, 17).
• The Church does not possess the infallible charism of judging the internal state of grace of a member of the faithful (see Council of Trent, session 24, chapter 1). The non-admission to Holy Communion of the so-called "divorced and remarried" does not therefore mean a judgment on their state of grace before God, but a judgment on the visible, public, and objective character of their situation. Because of the visible nature of the sacraments and of the Church herself, the reception of the sacraments necessarily depends on the corresponding visible and objective situation of the faithful.
• It is not morally licit to engage in sexual relations with a person who is not one’s legitimate spouse supposedly to avoid another sin. Since the Word of God teaches us, it is not lawful "to do evil so that good may come" (Romans 3, 8).
• The admission of such persons to Holy Communion may be permitted only when they with the help of God's grace and a patient and individual pastoral accompaniment make a sincere intention to cease from now on the habit of such sexual relations and to avoid scandal. It is in this way that true discernment and authentic pastoral accompaniment were always expressed in the Church.
• People who have habitual non-marital sexual relations violate their indissoluble sacramental nuptial bond with their life style in relation to their legitimate spouse. For this reason they are not able to participate "in Spirit and in Truth" (see John 4, 23) at the Eucharistic wedding supper of Christ, also taking into account the words of the rite of Holy Communion: "Blessed are the guests at the wedding supper of the Lamb!" (Revelation 19, 9).
• The fulfillment of God's will, revealed in His Ten Commandments and in His explicit and absolute prohibition of divorce, constitutes the true spiritual good of the people here on earth and will lead them to the true joy of love in the salvation of eternal life.
Being bishops in the pastoral office those, who promote the Catholic and Apostolic faith ("cultores catholicae et apostolicae fidei", see Missale Romanum, Canon Romanus), we are aware of this grave responsibility and our duty before the faithful who await from us a public and unequivocal profession of the truth and the immutable discipline of the Church regarding the indissolubility of marriage. For this reason we are not allowed to be silent.
We affirm therefore in the spirit of St. John the Baptist, of St. John Fisher, of St. Thomas More, of Blessed Laura Vicuña and of numerous known and unknown confessors and martyrs of the indissolubility of marriage:
It is not licit (non licet) to justify, approve, or legitimize either directly or indirectly divorce and a non-conjugal stable sexual relationship through the sacramental discipline of the admission of so-called "divorced and remarried" to Holy Communion, in this case a discipline alien to the entire Tradition of the Catholic and Apostolic faith.
By making this public profession before our conscience and before God who will judge us, we are sincerely convinced that we have provided a service of charity in truth to the Church of our day and to the Supreme Pontiff, Successor of Saint Peter and Vicar of Christ on earth .
31 December 2017, the Feast of the Holy Family, in the year of the centenary of the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima.
+ Tomash Peta, Archbishop Metropolitan of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
+ Jan Pawel Lenga, Archbishop-Bishop of Karaganda
+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
Tuesday 19 December 2017
Oh look, Bergoglio's "great Italian" friend rejoices at the beginning of Italy's march towards euthanasia
No need to write a blog post.
The photos of Bergoglio's "great Italian" says it all.
Can the Argentian boil on the Seat of Peter really be this stupid?
Or is he just evil?
UPDATE:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-credited-with-helping-euthanasia-law-pass-in-italy
UPDATE:
The Pope's words on the topic were necessary, wrote Corrado Augias in La Repubblica, “to overthrow the last resistance of some Catholics and--probably--to convince at least a group of them to give their consent to [the pro-euthanasia law].”
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-credited-with-helping-euthanasia-law-pass-in-italy
Labels:
Abortion,
Euthanasia,
Italy,
More Bergoglian heresy,
Pope Francis
Monday 11 December 2017
But deliver us from Francis
Why did the Bishop of Rome raise the matter of the translation of The Lord's Prayer, specifically, "Lead us not into temptation?" Did he have this discussion with some minion stroking his self-confidence while holding court in the Vatican Motel's Ristorante Greasy Spoono? Was it something inspired by his "god of surprises" due to the odour of franks-incense emanating from his morning flatulence and thus, being a divine inspiration?
Or is it perhaps to direct our intention away from his heretical proclamation in the Offical Acts of the Apostolic See or perhaps the facts disclosed in The Dictator Pope?
Regardless, allow us to expand on the post below.
The Aramaic is pretty well translated as, "And let us not be put to the test, but deliver us from the Evil One."
The Aramaic, at least liturgically, has the same original source as we do in the West. It is from Greek.
The Greek was translated into Latin by St. Jerome as, "Et ne nos inducas in tentationem." Which is well translated into English as "And lead us not into temptation." It was at the command of St. Damasus, Bishop or Rome and Pope whose feast day is today that St. Jerome began his work.
In the Divine Office for today, we note in the third reading from Isaiah 13:9-11.
"Behold, the day of the Lord shall come, a cruel day, and full of indignation, and of wrath, and fury, to lay the land desolate, and to destroy the sinners thereof out of it."
I am no scriptural scholar, I understand not Greek nor Aramaic, I speak no other language other than English and can understand some basic Latin due to absorption of 35 years of liturgical music and chant. But even to this ignorant soul, I know that the phrase from Our Lord never meant that "He" would lead us into temptation. It seemed to me to always be what it was, -- prevent us from falling into temptation and from being susceptible to Satan.
From Paul Anthony Melanson:
From Paul Anthony Melanson:
"The RSV records the Lord’s Prayer as follows:
6:9 Pray then like this: Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 6:10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven. 6:11 Give us this day our daily bread; 6:12 And forgive us our debts, As we also have forgiven our debtors; 6:13 And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil.
The Greek text is accurately rendered by the RSV, "Lead us not into temptation" with God understood as the subject. However, we should not understand this to mean that God actively tempts us to sin but that He allows us to undergo testing, including at the hands of the Tempter. In fact, this is precisely what happened to the Son of God who was driven or led by the Spirit into the wilderness, wherein He was tempted by Satan.
Father Hunwicke in his usual manner gets right to it.
Lead us not into temptation. It is unlikely that the Greek and Latin words translated by temptation meant the sort of thing we mean by 'temptation' in the confessional ... the 'temptation' to steal something, or to speak uncharitably, or to suspend the Custody of the Eyes. Peirasmos has been thought to refer much more probably to the time of testing, that is to say, of being tortured or intimidated to give up our Faith. Scripture teaches us that the End Times will indeed be marked by just such testings or persecutions. It is natural to ask God, whose providence disposes the times, to spare us this. [See for example Mt 26:41; Luke 8:13; Apocalypse 2:10 and 3:10.]
(And, by the way, Evil could be either masculine or neuter (tou ponerou). Many, probably most, people think it refers to the Evil One.)
So, in my opinion, PF is proposing a revision which is not, as he appears to have been told, a revised translation but a radical change in the meaning of the Greek original. With sorrow, I have to say that this new example of his gigantic self-confidence does not surprise me.
What repeatedly ... it seems, almost daily !! ... irritates me about PF is his endless propensity to treat the Depositum Fidei, the Universal Church and what she has inherited from the Apostles or from the generations since, as something which is at his disposal to change, to criticise, or to mangle in any way that appeals to his personal whimsy at any particular moment. He is like a toddler who has been given toys to play with ... a big, boisterous and wilful child who likes to play with them rather roughly; whose commonest phrase is "I want ...". If anyone suggests that he should perhaps handle them rather more gently, he throws a tantrum.
O Lord, deliver us from Francis.
Labels:
More Bergoglian heresy,
Pope Francis
Wednesday 6 December 2017
"But he chose the tribe of Judah, mount Sion which he loved."
I am of Lebanese Maronite ancestry from the region of the cedars. My ancestors left the region of Mount Lebanon between 1882 and 1912. The dreadful Ottoman's cared not about the Christian peoples and the continued persecution and attempted genocide at that time. My sister married a Melchite Catholic, born in Haifa after the end of that empire and under the British Mandate of the region of Palestine.
Let me also state that I understand full well that Rabbinical-Talmudic Judaism hates Our Lord Jesus Christ. I am not writing this from a religious perspective, only a political one. Reality is what it is. That being said, who are we to doubt the mysterious ways of God? Can we really think that he hates the Jewish people? Can we really believe that he wants them annihilated? Any people? No, he wants them brought to the fullness of the faith and redemption.
Notwithstanding the above, I believe in the right of the State of Israel to exist within secure and stable borders and in peace. One cannot rewrite history. The Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations and Sykes-Picot accord and later, the United Nations made this a reality. We govern ourselves by Laws, not by the rule of thugs and murderers such as the Black September or the PLO or Al Qaida or ISIS. The Arab nations rejected the UN partition which then gerrymandered around the population of Jewish and the ancient Philistine peoples. Had they accepted it, there would have been a viable nation-state of Palestine on more land today than it could ever hope to achieve now. The map above does not lie. The facts do not lie.
The Arabs continually attacked the "Zionist entity." Only now, do some see a better way.
Many believe that modern Israel's creation as a return for the Jewish people on their ancient land is in biblical prophecy. Yet, to believe that, one might claim that to be a Christian Zionist, is a heresy. I don't know about that.
What I know is this. The land was given by God to the Hebrew nation. The Psalms tell us that he "chose the tribe of Judah, mount Sion which he loved." Out of Judah came forth our redemption and those people of the Old Covenant have been brought together to a land where one day they will fully come into the New Covenant. If that makes me a Zionist, so be it.
Politically and militarily, both sides in this conflict have committed egregious acts. Yet, it is this tiny piece of land which the Jews have made bloom while the "Arabs," and the Palestinians are no more Arab than the Lebanese. Assyrians or Egyptians, the real Arabs have for decades and abused these people to keep the focus of their own peoples on the "Zionist entity" rather than their own shortcomings.
If Jerusalem is not the capital city of Israel than what city is? What city could possibly be? God established Jerusalem as Israel's capital. If one wishes to argue that this modern-state of Israel is not of God, that is a valid debate, but God permitted its creation and out of it, He will bring the full redemption of His Chosen People through His new Israel, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Under the UN partition plan, Jerusalem was to be a UN-administered city. That is of no consequence today. In two wars where Israel was attacked by the Arabs, 1948 and 1967, Jerusalem was captured first in part and then reunited. It was the Arabs that caused Jerusalem to be fully taken by Israel.
To the victor go the spoils.
Let's be clear. Palestine never existed as a nation-state. After the collapse of the Roman empire, it was a desolate land of a low population under the domination of the Mohammedan conquests. The Ottoman's dominated most of the region until they lost it after The Great War. The Palestinian claim to Jerusalem as a Capital City is bogus and fraudulent. It never was their capital, they never had a state. Most of what was their region is in what was Transjordan, now, the Kingdom of Jordan. Israel is never going to give up Jerusalem and the continued resistance to the recognition that it is and will always be undivided and Israel's capital prevents a viable peace agreement. The losers have always been those in the West Bank and Gaza strip but it is not Israel that has done it to them, it is their own filthy masters.
But the leaders of that Church, the new and true Israel have failed. For a thousand years, since the end of the Last Crusade, the Church has left billions of souls to perish in what can at best be described as the greatest Christian heresy, Mohammedanism. They have refused to call the Jewish people home. Five hundred years ago, these betrayers wrote of the Scandinavian countries and have since made no attempt to bring them back from the errors of Lutheranism. Since Vatican II, it has only gotten worse.
In 1980, Joseph Clark became Prime Minister of Canada and made a commitment, never realized, to recognize the reality of Israel's existence and determined to move Canada's embassy to the State of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, he failed. Now, the President of the United States who promised this in the election campaign and has not decided to do it. The Arab world is self-destructing. They eat each other. They have destroyed the most beautiful lands of Chaldea and Assyria, Babylon, Egypt and Mount Lebanon. Arabs in Israel vote, hold passports, have all the civil rights as any Jewish citizen and own land and business.
Today, the Bishop of Rome issued a statement wading into the decision already taken by the President of the United States. It is a blatant and mischievous attempt to insert himself into something that is none of his business. He should spend his time preaching Jesus Christ and Him Crucified and Resurrected and leave the politics for the real politicians. CruxNow calls it a "crisis." The only crisis is the state of the Catholic Church.
Whatever this Bergoglio can do to deflect from his formal errors he will do. This is a diversion on his part to deflect attention away from his heretical promulgation of Holy Communion for those living in adultery.
The Cardinals have their job, it is far past time for the kittens to do it.
Let me also state that I understand full well that Rabbinical-Talmudic Judaism hates Our Lord Jesus Christ. I am not writing this from a religious perspective, only a political one. Reality is what it is. That being said, who are we to doubt the mysterious ways of God? Can we really think that he hates the Jewish people? Can we really believe that he wants them annihilated? Any people? No, he wants them brought to the fullness of the faith and redemption.
Notwithstanding the above, I believe in the right of the State of Israel to exist within secure and stable borders and in peace. One cannot rewrite history. The Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations and Sykes-Picot accord and later, the United Nations made this a reality. We govern ourselves by Laws, not by the rule of thugs and murderers such as the Black September or the PLO or Al Qaida or ISIS. The Arab nations rejected the UN partition which then gerrymandered around the population of Jewish and the ancient Philistine peoples. Had they accepted it, there would have been a viable nation-state of Palestine on more land today than it could ever hope to achieve now. The map above does not lie. The facts do not lie.
The Arabs continually attacked the "Zionist entity." Only now, do some see a better way.
Many believe that modern Israel's creation as a return for the Jewish people on their ancient land is in biblical prophecy. Yet, to believe that, one might claim that to be a Christian Zionist, is a heresy. I don't know about that.
What I know is this. The land was given by God to the Hebrew nation. The Psalms tell us that he "chose the tribe of Judah, mount Sion which he loved." Out of Judah came forth our redemption and those people of the Old Covenant have been brought together to a land where one day they will fully come into the New Covenant. If that makes me a Zionist, so be it.
Politically and militarily, both sides in this conflict have committed egregious acts. Yet, it is this tiny piece of land which the Jews have made bloom while the "Arabs," and the Palestinians are no more Arab than the Lebanese. Assyrians or Egyptians, the real Arabs have for decades and abused these people to keep the focus of their own peoples on the "Zionist entity" rather than their own shortcomings.
If Jerusalem is not the capital city of Israel than what city is? What city could possibly be? God established Jerusalem as Israel's capital. If one wishes to argue that this modern-state of Israel is not of God, that is a valid debate, but God permitted its creation and out of it, He will bring the full redemption of His Chosen People through His new Israel, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Under the UN partition plan, Jerusalem was to be a UN-administered city. That is of no consequence today. In two wars where Israel was attacked by the Arabs, 1948 and 1967, Jerusalem was captured first in part and then reunited. It was the Arabs that caused Jerusalem to be fully taken by Israel.
To the victor go the spoils.
Let's be clear. Palestine never existed as a nation-state. After the collapse of the Roman empire, it was a desolate land of a low population under the domination of the Mohammedan conquests. The Ottoman's dominated most of the region until they lost it after The Great War. The Palestinian claim to Jerusalem as a Capital City is bogus and fraudulent. It never was their capital, they never had a state. Most of what was their region is in what was Transjordan, now, the Kingdom of Jordan. Israel is never going to give up Jerusalem and the continued resistance to the recognition that it is and will always be undivided and Israel's capital prevents a viable peace agreement. The losers have always been those in the West Bank and Gaza strip but it is not Israel that has done it to them, it is their own filthy masters.
But the leaders of that Church, the new and true Israel have failed. For a thousand years, since the end of the Last Crusade, the Church has left billions of souls to perish in what can at best be described as the greatest Christian heresy, Mohammedanism. They have refused to call the Jewish people home. Five hundred years ago, these betrayers wrote of the Scandinavian countries and have since made no attempt to bring them back from the errors of Lutheranism. Since Vatican II, it has only gotten worse.
In 1980, Joseph Clark became Prime Minister of Canada and made a commitment, never realized, to recognize the reality of Israel's existence and determined to move Canada's embassy to the State of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, he failed. Now, the President of the United States who promised this in the election campaign and has not decided to do it. The Arab world is self-destructing. They eat each other. They have destroyed the most beautiful lands of Chaldea and Assyria, Babylon, Egypt and Mount Lebanon. Arabs in Israel vote, hold passports, have all the civil rights as any Jewish citizen and own land and business.
Today, the Bishop of Rome issued a statement wading into the decision already taken by the President of the United States. It is a blatant and mischievous attempt to insert himself into something that is none of his business. He should spend his time preaching Jesus Christ and Him Crucified and Resurrected and leave the politics for the real politicians. CruxNow calls it a "crisis." The only crisis is the state of the Catholic Church.
Whatever this Bergoglio can do to deflect from his formal errors he will do. This is a diversion on his part to deflect attention away from his heretical promulgation of Holy Communion for those living in adultery.
The Cardinals have their job, it is far past time for the kittens to do it.
Labels:
God save America,
Israel,
Pope Francis,
Vatican Circus
Don Minutella: these penalties are "medals of honor"
https://www.catholicfamilynews.org/blog/2017/12/5/resist-resist-resist-cfn-exclusive-interview-minutella
CFN: How do you view your penalties of (de facto) suspension, or excommunications?
Don Minutella: For me these are medals of honor, like when a simple soldier carries out meritorious actions, and the commander rewards him. I hope, however, that one of the Cardinals who remain Catholic, will recognize it. I'll need this [support], even though Cardinal Burke and Cardinal Sarah have already encouraged me privately. The best spoils for the priest are souls. Saint John Bosco told Our Lord: Da mihi animas et coetera tolle! “Give me souls, and take the rest!” It is said of St. John of the Cross that Jesus appeared to him, saying: Ioanne, quid vis pro laboribus? “John, what would you like [as a reward] for your labors?” The Spanish saint responded: Domine, pati et contemni pro te, meaning “Lord, to suffer and to be despised for Thee.” It is something that I have expected since my time in the Seminary, and despite the heavy weight of suffering, I experience the supernatural joy of the Cross.
Labels:
Pope Francis,
Team Bergoglio,
Victim Priests
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)