Who was and is behind the Dictator who is Pope?

There is anticipation about the ebook that is taking Italy by storm, Il Papa Dittatore, to be published in English on Monday through Kindle. OnePeterFive has an advance copy and excerpts. This is one that many will have already read:

In late 2013, the archbishop of Westminster gave an interview to the Catholic Herald in which he admitted not only to campaigning at the Conclave, but to gaining Bergoglio’s assent to be their man. 

The article by Miguel Cullen in the September 12, 2013 edition of the Herald says, “The cardinal also disclosed that he had spoken to the future Pope as they left the Missa pro-Eligendo Romano Pontifice, the final Mass before the conclave began on March 12.”
 Murphy O’Connor said, “We talked a little bit. I told him he had my prayers and said, in Italian: ‘Be careful.’ I was hinting, and he realised and said: “Si – capisco” – yes, I understand. He was calm. He was aware that he was probably going to be a candidate going in. Did I know he was going to be Pope? No. There were other good candidates. But I knew he would be one of the leading ones.’” The admonition to Bergoglio to “be careful” certainly seems to imply that Murphy O’Connor – and Bergoglio – knew he was at least bending the rules.

This is supported again in the same article in the Herald where Murphy O’Connor is quoted saying, “All the cardinals had a meeting with him in the Hall of Benedictions, two days after his election. We all went up one by one. He greeted me very warmly. He said something like: ‘It’s your fault. What have you done to me?’”

In an interview with the Independent after the Conclave, Murphy O’Connor also hinted there was a particular programme laid before the 76 year-old Argentinian, that he was expected to accomplish in about four years. The English cardinal told journalist[3] and author Paul Vallely, “Four years of Bergoglio would be enough to change things.” A fair enough comment after the fact, but this was the same phrase recorded by Andrea Tornielli in La Stampa in an article dated March 2, 2013, eleven days before Bergoglio’s election: “Four years of Bergoglio would be enough to change things,’ whispers a cardinal and long-time friend of the archbishop of Buenos Aires.”

Bergoglio knew. In his caution to Nicholls, "be careful" and Nicholls' "Si – capisco," they both acknowledge the conspiracy to elect Bergoglio as Bishop of Rome and they, at least in theory, may have already excommunicated themselves according to the Law in force by John Paul II.

I repeat below my blog post giving more damning evidence of a conspiracy to elect Bergoglio and undertake a great change in the Church. Change that is not of God, but of man. Evil. Vile, Despicable. Heretical. 

It is of the Antichrist.

Thursday, 28 April 2016

Who was Cardinal McCarrick's friend and what was the role of Freemasonry in the election of Jorge Bergoglio?

Theodore Cardinal McCarrick, former Archbishop of Washington during a talk at Villanova University gave the following recollection of a conversation with an "influential" Roman during the period before the Conclave which elected Jorge Bergoglio as Bishop of Rome.

18:20 Just before we went into the general conversations when everybody can talk, a very interesting and influential Italian gentleman came to ask if he could come and see me, so I said “sure.”

He came to see me at the Seminary, at the American College where I was staying; and we sat down. He is a very brilliant man, a very influential man in Rome and we talked about a number of things. He had a favour to ask me when I get back to the United States, but then he asked,

“What about Bergoglio?”

I was surprised at the question, I said, “what about him.”

He said, “Does he have a chance?”

I said, “I don’t think so, because no one has mentioned his name, he hasn’t been in anybody’s mind, I don’t think it’s on anybody’s mind to vote for him.”

He said, “He could do it you know.”

I said, “What could he do?”

He said, “He could reform the Church, if we gave him five years, he could put us back on target. “

“Well, he’s 76.”

“Yeah, in five years, if he had five years. The Lord working through Bergoglio in five years could make the Church over again.”

I said, “That’s an interesting thing.”

“I know you’re his friend.”

“Well, I hope I’m his friend.”

He said, “Talk him up.”

That was the first that I heard from people that Bergoglio would be a possibility in this election.

(...)

I hope that the new, that the one who is elected Pope, will be someone who, if he is not himself a Latin American, would at least have a very strong interest in Latin America”. “Was that part of it? Who knows?  What is it my friend said? “Push Bergoglio”?  Did he say it to a lot of people? I don’t know.”

Consider this then.

Gustavo Raffi, Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy

"With the election of Pope Francis nothing will ever be the same again. With Pope Francis, nothing will be more as it was before. It is a clear choice of fraternity for a Church of dialogue, which is not contaminated by the logic and temptations of temporal power"

“A man of the poor far away from the Curia. Fraternity and the desire to dialogue were his first concrete words. Perhaps nothing in the Church will be as it was before. Our hope is that the pontificate of Francis, the Pope who 'comes from the end of the world' can mark the return to the Church-Word instead of the Church-Institution, promoting an open dialogue with the contemporary world, with believers and non-believers, following the springtime of Vatican II."

"The Jesuit who is close to the least ones of history," Raffi continues, "has the great opportunity to show the world the face of a Church that must recover the announcement of a new humanity, not the weight of an institution that closes itself off in defense of its own privileges. Bergoglio knows real life and will remember the lesson of one of his favorite theologians, Romano Guardini, for whom the truth of love cannot be stopped.

"The simple cross he wore on his white cassock," concludes the Grand Master of Palazzo Giustiniani, "lets us hope that a Church of the people will re-discover its capacity to dialogue with all men of good will and with Freemasonry, which, as the experience of Latin America teaches us, works for the good and progress of humanity, as shown by Bolivar, Allende and José Martí, to name only a few. This is the 'white smoke' that we expect from the Church of our times."  

Pope Francis on "dialogue"

"Dialogue, dialogue, dialogue!" This, he said, is the only way for individuals, families and societies to grow. He said fraternal relations between people and cooperation in building a more just society are not some vague utopia but the fruit of a concerted effort on the part of all, in service of the common good.

http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-francis-my-advice-is-always-dialogue-dialogue

Pope to U.S. bishops: be shepherds in unity and dialogue

http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/09/23/pope_to_us_bishops_be_shepherds_in_unity_and_dialogue/1174163

Pope at Mass: Those who do not dialogue disobey God

http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/04/16/pope_at_mass_those_who_do_not_dialogue_disobey_god/1137174

Pope's general prayer intention for November is for dialogue

http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/10/31/popes_general_prayer_intention_for_november_is_for_dialogue/1183565

Pope  Francis calls for solidarity and dialogue

http://americamagazine.org/issue/pope-francis-calls-solidarity-and-dialogue

Pope Francis Congressional Address: A Dialogue with Four Faces of America (13 times)

https://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/pope-francis-address-to-us-congress/

Pope Francis to Japanese students: 'Dialogue is what brings peace'

http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/pope-francis-japanese-students-dialogue-what-brings-peace

The whole video can be seen here.

New Zealand's "Dew" is not that of the Holy Spirit but of Bergoglio's "god of surprises"

How can the "Reform of the Reform" be anything but dead with the likes of John Dew in the leadership of the Church. 

Bergoglio appointed "Cardinal" John Dew, an alleged priest of Jesus Christ, has declared that due to his inspiration by Pope Francis a "creative initiative" will take place in the Nervous Disordered liturgy - the laity will read the Gospel.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-zealand-cardinal-makes-pope-francis-inspired-change-to-mass 

Gosh, just imagine the captions that one could come up with for the look on George's face over this prize.

Give it a go.

Catholics live in an abusive family, the time to stand up to the abusers is long past - wake up!

Catholics today are living in dysfunctional household. We have a father who is abusive. In his heart, he is an unhappy man because he resents the life he has had. He lashes out at his children, he calls them names and insults them, he derides their offerings of love and affection to him, he uses vulgar descriptions and epithets. His love for our mother is superficial, he never really loved her, he uses her and abuses her and we are never, ever to talk about it. Some of our brothers and sisters think we must keep quiet and never, ever mention that father is an evil man. Some of our uncles have sexually abused us, they have done awful things to us, degrading, vulgar things. Many of our brothers and sisters have left home because of it and have lived lives of hatred, sexual depravity and substance abuse. Yet, our father seems to care more about those who did this to us then we ourselves.

"Something profoundly worrying about criticisms on the signatories of the Correction specifically for speaking out about problems which every informed Catholic already knows about, is the mindset it reveals, one focused not on the truth, but on appearances. It is strongly reminiscent of the mindset at work in abusive families, where children are taught to pretend things are all right, when they are not: certain topics are not to be broached, certain facts are not to be referred to. This attitude can be enforced not by the abusive parent directly, but by other family members who are trying to keep up appearances and hold the family together. It is nevertheless profoundly unhealthy, and indeed is linked to psychological disorders in the children." Dr. Joseph Shaw, Oxford

It is time to decide where you stand and how much abuse you are going to continue to take.

Read the rest of his words at LifeSiteNews.

Marc Cardinal Ouellet warns against "alarmist" interpretations of Amoris Laetitia and its obvious heresy - move along folks, nothing to see here!

Marc Cardinal Ouellet spoke yesterday at the annual plenary of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB). and addressed before his fellow bishops, Amoris Laetitia. Clearly concerned about the Correctio Filialis, Canada's former Primate warned against "alarmist interpretations" of the document.

With all due respect to the good Cardinal, a man who was reportedly nearly elected instead of the Argentine Peronist, he needs to get his head of the sand and be honest with his brother bishops and the faithful. 

The Catholic Register reports that the Cardinal said:

"Any alarmist interpretation" that says the document is "a break with tradition," or a "permissive interpretation that celebrates access to the sacraments" for the divorced and remarried is "unfaithful to the text and to the intentions of the Supreme Pontiff."

Alarmist? Is he serious?

The Argentine bishops interpreted Amoris Laetitia in the most "permissive interpretation" to which Pope Bergoglio responded in writing, "there is no other interpretation." Yet, Ouellet conveniently ignored this fact. Nowhere, did the good Cardinal challenge the heretical interpretations of the bishops in Malta to say nothing of the egregious actions there against faithful priests. I cite but two examples, readers here know of many more.

Cardinal Ouellet is acting cowardly, fearfully. He might have been elected pope as a moderate alternative to Bergoglio but by his own admission, he fought it off. He is a weak man. He has failed as an apostle and he has mislead his brothers asking them to put their heads in the sand right along with him. 

He has blatantly ignored the heresies, or at least the heretical interpretation in various places but has no hesitation in accusing those who see these heresies clearly, as being "alarmist." To Ouellet and his ilk, the emperor is well dressed, well at least as well dressed as Bergoglio can be in polyester.

The time has now come, if it is not long since passed, for the two remaining Dubia Cardinals to gather other like thinking bishops and cardinals in conference to denounce the obvious heresies and call upon the Bishop of Rome to respond publicly or be guilty of heresy himself.

Marc Ouellet and the rest of our bishops and priests are filled with fear. They may agree that Amoris Laetitia is heretical and the Bishop of Rome is himself, a heretic. Yet, they sit and do nothing. They think they have faith. They have fear.

Father John Hunwicke, a signor of the Correctio Filialis, is not a man with fear and he has something to say about it.

Fear is quite beautiful, isn't it, as a Satanic operational strategy? The Enemy disseminates Fear. He fills good honest men with guilt because they feel too fearful to do what they know they should do. And then, when the Correctio is published, his ministers sneer as they answer the journalists' questions, and glibly point out how few signatories there are. As Marco Tossati has put it, "Belittle, label, marginalise".http://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.ca/2017/09/the-aetiology-and-mechanics-of-fear.html

Without a doubt, those who fail to confront this crisis are doing the work of Satan. They are cowards, weak, effeminate men who will be spat out of His mouth for their lukewarmedness. 

Bergoglio's overreach with the tolerance of perverts exposes his hypocrisy. Is James Martin next?

There were remarks made yesterday by Jorge Bergoglio, the man thrust upon the Chair of St. Peter by malefactors, on the matter of child abuse. Edward Pentin reported on Twitter that the Vatican media were instructed only to report the "prepared text" on the abuse of minors. The Bergoglian regime has learnt well from Peron on the manipulation of the truth and the control of the message. Too bad it can't hide from Internet reality. After some blowback they relented that the casual remarks would need to be vetted. Such fools.

Let us be perfectly clear on the matter of child sexual abuse in the Church. While there has been some despicable sexual abuse of girls, the overwhelming majority has been due to the admission of sodomites - homosexuals into the priesthood. These perverts came in to the priesthood to put then in close contact with their potential victims, with the indisputable facts that show that these victims were post-pubescent boys between thirteen and seventeen years. It is the age perversion of hebephilia and ephebophilia.  

In the "off-the-cuff" that was probably intended not to be reported, La Stampa writes that Bergoglio stated that the he has never "signed a request for grace," in the matter of abusers. 

Well, history seems to show something different and even the National Catholic Reporter did its homework back at the time.

Let us re recall then, the case of Mauro Inzoli, a notorious sodomite who infiltrated his way into the priesthood of Christ in order to find his young male victims with which he could enjoy his sexual deviance, Known as "Don Mercedes" after his love of luxury, this filthy sodomite was found out, Pope Benedict XVI defrocked him, only to see this Bergoglio come along and retract Benedict's decision and reinstate the carbuncle on the Body of Christ. That was until it was found out and the pervert priest Inzoli did it again and Bergoglio had to defrock the cretin again.

The Catholic New Service  translation states Bergoglio did say that he has "never and would never grant a papal pardon to a proven perpetrator."

But this is not true as we've seen above, to say nothing of Msgr. Ricca caught with his boy-toy in an elevator. The tolerance of the situation in Chile, Danneels and how many others?

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2015/03/has-pope-francis-appointed-homosexual.html

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2013/06/bishops-take-lead-marching-into-hell.html

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2015/03/holy-father-why-have-you-allowed-this.html

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2015/09/popes-protection-of-minors-is.html

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2016/12/what-did-bergoglio-and-argentine.html

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2017/01/will-sexual-abuse-scandal-end-papacy-of.html

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2017/02/pervert-protecting-bergoglio-betrays.html

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2017/03/the-fraud-of-pope-francis-and-vaticans.html

How many more examples are necessary to show the hypocrisy of Bergoglio?

Apparently, he also stated that he has been learning “on the job” better ways to handle priests found guilty of abuse. He actually recounted the Don Mercedes situation and that his made a "decision he has now come to regret: that of agreeing to a more lenient sanction against an Italian priest, rather than laicizing him as the doctrinal team recommended." 

Is this the closest that the victims and the faithful will get to an apology from Father Bergoglio.

What it really shows is his own pathetic arrogance, his own delusion of grandeur of the "merciful Francis." He has overreached on his manufactured mercy and it has come up an bitten him harshly. 

It is not beyond question that the pathetic and scandalous tweeting and articles of Bergoglio's fellow Jesuit, James Martin, is going to blow up right in his face. The overreaching by both of these pathetic men cannot continue.

Persecution of Catholics on the uptick by the Bergoglian regime - now we are a "cancer"

In what can only be described as a regime rather than a papacy, it is quite obvious to all that are prepared to take their heads out of the sand that it is open season on faithful Catholics.

We see an unending and almost obsessive stream of publicity from the homosexualist James Martin, S.J., and a string of supporters lined up behind him including now Robert McElroy, Bishop of San Diego. This McElroy puts forward the notion that one who upholds the Catholic truth, that sodomitical acts are grievous sins in the eyes of God and one of the four sins which "cry out to heaven for justice," are a "cancer" in the Church and opposed to Pope Francis.

Can you imagine that a Bishop of the Catholic Church of Christ would write this?

It would be too easy to say that Robert McElroy is badly-formed or deluded. No; the man is a bishop, he is educated he can only be described as evil, a wolf, a son of Satan, he is not a true shepherd of Jesus Christ. Robert McElroy is a man that is going to Hell for the souls he is leading there.

If you are a cancer call McElroy and let him know at 858-490-8300.

What these filthy malefactors are doing is, as Father Zed calls it, outright "bullying."

I stand with Jesus Christ, and His Church and its magisterial teaching over time. I do not stand with a pope, bishop or priest who does not. If this puts this writer against the current claimant to the Chair of Peter, then so be it.

Professor Claudio Pierantoni is a scholar of patristics and professor of medieval philosophy at the Universidad de Chile in Santiago. In this report on LifeSiteNews, Pierantoni explores the dismissal of Dr. Josef Siefert from the Catholic university at Granada, in Spain. He writes of this as an "official persecution" under the regime of Jorge Bergoglio.

Make no mistake, this is true in every way and I can speak of this personally and directly some of which has been made public on this blog and much of which cannot be made public. It is diabolical, hypocritical and deceitful and I can assure you, they will not triumph.

Let it be clear to Martin, McElroy, Bergoglio, Spadaro, Maradiaga and the rest of these malefactors, - we're not going anywhere and we are on the side of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We will not leave our Holy Mother, the Church, we will not abandon Her and, with the help of God, we will defeat you.

These filthy priests and prelates must repent and do reparation before it is too late. Their judgement will be swift, severe and eternal.

Cormac Murphy-O'Connor lobbied to elect Bergoglio

The former Archbishop of Westminster, Cormac Murphy-O'Connor has died. It has long been known that he was part of the St. Gallin Mafia with the pervert protecting Daneels from Belgium, a mafia that worked to elect Bergoglio in 2005 and then succeeded upon his cowardly renouncement of the papacy. Now, a new book reveals that Murphy-O'Connor lobbied Cardinals of the Commonwealth to elect his friend from Buenos Aires - except for two, Canada's Marc Ouellet and George Pell from Australia.

As it is unseemly to speak ill of the dead, I shall leave it at this. Murphy-O'Connor has now met our Lord Jesus Christ. We should hope that the Lord was merciful to him as we hope he shall be to all of us.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/03/revealed-british-cardinal-fixed-vatican-conclave-friend-pope/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw

Robert Mendick, Chief Reporter

3 SEPTEMBER 2017 • 9:30PM

It is a tale every bit as intriguing as the plot of Conclave, Robert Harris’s best-selling thriller set during a fictitious papal election.

For it has emerged that Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the former Catholic archbishop of Westminster who died last week, intervened in the last Conclave to ensure his friend was elected Pope Francis.

In the days before the 2013 vote, Murphy-O’Connor co-hosted a reception at the British embassy in Rome to lobby support for Cardinal Bergoglio, the then progressive archbishop of Buenos Aires.

According to a new book, Murphy-O’Connor invited cardinals from the Commonwealth but deliberately left off the invitation list two powerful but conservative clerics - Cardinal Ouellet from Canada, who had been a frontrunner, and Cardinal Pell from Australia.

The plan, which succeeded, was to persuade the cardinals of the need for a liberal pope without interference from the senior conservatives.

The book by Catherine Pepinster, the former editor of The Tablet, details how embassy officials left the room to allow Murphy-O’Connor time to persuade the cardinals of the importance of voting for Bergoglio.

Murphy-O’Connor had been dismayed when Pope Benedict XVI was elected at the previous conclave and was determined to avoid another conservative Pope.

Ms Pepinster, whose book The Keys and The Kingdom: Britain and the Papacy from John Paul II to Francis is published next month, said: “Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor was a popular, genial man but beneath his jovial exterior was someone of great canniness who knew exactly how the Vatican worked.

“And that canniness meant he ensured his friend was elected Pope Francis - a pope who has made a huge impact on the Catholic Church and the world. There have been kingmakers in history; Cormac Murphy-O’Connor turned out to be a popemaker.”

Pope Francis was elected on March 13 2013, the second day of the conclave, on the fifth ballot. He need two-thirds of the 115 votes to win. It is thought the votes delivered by Murphy-O’Connor were instrumental. The two men became close friends after meeting for the first time when they were made cardinals on the same day by Pope John Paul II.

In 2013, Murphy-O’Connor was too old to vote under Vatican rules, but he travelled to Rome, like many other elderly non-voting cardinals, to participate in talks, called congregations, before the conclave.

Shortly after his elevation, Pope Francis was overheard telling Murphy-O’Connor: “Tuo e colpevole”, translated as “you’re to blame”.

The collapse of the Bergoglian regime - can it be far away?

This so-called papacy, of Jorge Bergoglio, can really best be described as a "regime." It is, after all, a word and governing style that he would be familiar with, coming from that Peronist swamp of the once great Argentina.

The man is either sheer deluded or just plain stupid by suggesting that the nation-state has no right to protect its borders and citizens and must allow the rest of the world to flock in to undermine its culture and life. It is preposterous to even imagine that a Vicar of Christ would speak such filthy rubbish that would endanger so many at this most difficult time in the world. Sadly, the globalist leaders of Europe seem to be hand in glove with this Bergoglio. What a disgrace.

He has surrounded himself with such heretical, filthy men such as Victor Emmanuel Fernandez who would suggest now, that fornication is no longer a sin. Since birds of a feather flock together, it is reasonable to assume that their thoughts are the same. This Bergoglio has never once rebuked this filthy, perverted, heretical Christ-hating, Catholic-faithful hating deviant as to be no less than one himself.

This papal regime is a fraud. It will come to a swift end in God's good time, and may that be soon.

The problem for us is this; will the next pope be a repeat of this one, except with a sharp mind as opposed to the one now or will it be the one who will restore all things in Christ?

Joseph Ratzinger has betrayed us by leaving the Chair of Peter to this man. While none of us have the authority to pronounce what we do not know, it seems clear to this writer that there is a reason that this Jesuit Peronist acts as he does. He simply cannot receive something for which it has been fraudulently taken.

"Pope" Bergoglio doubts his own orthodoxy - doubt no longer George!

What kind of intellectual pygmy in the realm of theology and philosophy is this Bishop of Rome who would need to ask if his crowning work, the abominable Amoris Laetitita, is "orthodox."

But he is no "intellectual pygmy." He knows exactly what he is doing.

Perhaps this is more of a "mafia" style. You know, a Mafia Don is caught in the act of something untoward by an underling and he says, "What did you see?" eliciting the response, "See? I didn't see anything?"

In a stunning revelation, his official "interpreter," Austrian Cardinal Christophe Schönborn, revealed that he had assured Bishop of Rome Bergoglio that this filthy and scandalous document penned by a committee of miscreants was "orthodox." and that assurance gave him "comfort."

The mask fell long ago on this papacy and the filthy minions around it. It is only now that it has become more clear to so many more.

The Spadaro's, Martin's and other priestly, clericalist boobs on Twitter can try to defend this monstrous intellectually bankrupt papacy, but it is no longer possible.

May God deliver us from this persecution without delay and send us a truly holy Pope who will restore all things in Christ.


https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-questioned-orthodoxy-of-amoris-laetitia

https://cruxnow.com/commentary/2017/07/15/cardinal-schonborn-moral-theology-needs-principles-prudence/

Me, and my buddy

Tony Blocked-By Spadaro, EssJay, and Luis lobbying-to-be-the-next Pope Tagle, enjoying some fun time together.

Nice bar boyz.

Who's apartment?

Where's Coco?

Vatican targets and insults faithful Catholics - The Unholy See

The gross insult to faithful, American (and many Canadians by extension) Catholics by Tony Spadaro is below. If one says that the Bishop of Rome did not know about it he surely does now. 

In this screed, he also targets Michael Voris and the folks at ChurchMilitant. By extension, this Jesuit attacks individual Catholics, including those of us who blog and think along the same lines as Michael Voris which to me, is to think with the Church. The Church of my childhood, the Church of my parents, the Church of my Maronite ancestors.

We did not ask for this. We were living in peace until that March in 2013. We have continued, in spite of the insults, degradation and heretical statements of the Bishop of Rome to continue to remain loyal to the Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church and the Rock of Peter and to do the work necessary and to which we have been called. In my case, it is the weekly chanting of the true and proper Mass in a community two hours from my home. A community growing, with many children, with an organist now ready to go on to Catholic college and her 12 year old sister preparing to take over playing 14 Gregorian Masses, five Creeds and more. My work continues in Toronto with the assistance and training for the proper and true Roman Mass. I will not be stopped. You must not be stopped.

This screed is a disgrace but it must be seen by all of us as a badge of honour.

Never, did I think, I would live to be insulted by the Bishop of Rome.

Rejouissance!

Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism in the USA: A surprising ecumenism

Antonio Spadaro S.J., Editor-in-chief of La Civiltà Cattolica

Marcelo Figueroa, Presbyterian pastor, Editor-in-chief of the Argentinean edition of L’Osservatore Romano

In God We Trust. This phrase is printed on the banknotes of the United States of America and is the current national motto. It appeared for the first time on a coin in 1864 but did not become official until Congress passed a motion in 1956. A motto is important for a nation whose foundation was rooted in religious motivations. For many it is a simple declaration of faith. For others, it is the synthesis of a problematic fusion between religion and state, faith and politics, religious values and economy.

Religion, political Manichaeism and a cult of the apocalypse

Religion has had a more incisive role in electoral processes and government decisions over recent decades, especially in some US governments. It offers a moral role for identifying what is good and what is bad.

At times this mingling of politics, morals and religion has taken on a Manichaean language that divides reality between absolute Good and absolute Evil. In fact, after President George W. Bush spoke in his day about challenging the “axis of evil” and stated it was the USA’s duty to “free the world from evil” following the events of September 11, 2001.  Today President Trump steers the fight against a wider, generic collective entity of the “bad” or even the “very bad.” Sometimes the tones used by his supporters in some campaigns take on meanings that we could define as “epic.”

These stances are based on Christian-Evangelical fundamentalist principles dating from the beginning of the 20th Century that have been gradually radicalized. These have moved on from a rejection of all that is mundane – as politics was considered – to bringing a strong and determined religious-moral influence to bear on democratic processes and their results.

The term “evangelical fundamentalist” can today be assimilated to the “evangelical right” or “theoconservatism” and has its origins in the years 1910-1915. In that period a South Californian millionaire, Lyman Stewart, published the 12-volume work The Fundamentals. The author wanted to respond to the threat of modernist ideas of the time. He summarized the thought of authors whose doctrinal support he appreciated. He exemplified the moral, social, collective and individual aspects of the evangelical faith. His admirers include many politicians and even two recent presidents: Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

The social-religious groups inspired by authors such as Stewart consider the United States to be a nation blessed by God. And they do not hesitate to base the economic growth of the country on a literal adherence to the Bible. Over more recent years this current of thought has been fed by the stigmatization of enemies who are often “demonized.”

The panorama of threats to their understanding of the American way of life have included modernist spirits, the black civil rights movement, the hippy movement, communism, feminist movements and so on. And now in our day there are the migrants and the Muslims. To maintain conflict levels, their biblical exegeses have evolved toward a decontextualized reading of the Old Testament texts about the conquering and defense of the “promised land,” rather than be guided by the incisive look, full of love, of Jesus in the Gospels.

Within this narrative, whatever pushes toward conflict is not off limits. It does not take into account the bond between capital and profits and arms sales. Quite the opposite, often war itself is assimilated to the heroic conquests of the “Lord of Hosts” of Gideon and David. In this Manichaean vision, belligerence can acquire a theological justification and there are pastors who seek a biblical foundation for it, using the scriptural texts out of context.

Another interesting aspect is the relationship with creation of these religious groups that are composed mainly of whites from the deep American South. There is a sort of “anesthetic” with regard to ecological disasters and problems generated by climate change. They profess “dominionism” and consider ecologists as people who are against the Christian faith. They place their own roots in a literalist understanding of the creation narratives of the book of Genesis that put humanity in a position of “dominion” over creation, while creation remains subject to human will in biblical submission.

In this theological vision, natural disasters, dramatic climate change and the global ecological crisis are not only not perceived as an alarm that should lead them to reconsider their dogmas, but they are seen as the complete opposite: signs that confirm their non-allegorical understanding of the final figures of the Book of Revelation and their apocalyptic hope in a “new heaven and a new earth.”

Theirs is a prophetic formula: fight the threats to American Christian values and prepare for the imminent justice of an Armageddon, a final showdown between Good and Evil, between God and Satan. In this sense, every process (be it of peace, dialogue, etc.) collapses before the needs of the end, the final battle against the enemy. And the community of believers (faith) becomes a community of combatants (fight). Such a unidirectional reading of the biblical texts can anesthetize consciences or actively support the most atrocious and dramatic portrayals of a world that is living beyond the frontiers of its own “promised land.”

Pastor Rousas John Rushdoony (1916-2001) is the father of so-called “Christian reconstructionism” (or “dominionist theology”) that had a great influence on the theopolitical vision of Christian fundamentalism. This is the doctrine that feeds political organizations and networks such as the Council for National Policy and the thoughts of their exponents such as Steve Bannon, currently chief strategist at the White House and supporter of an apocalyptic geopolitics.[1]

“The first thing we have to do is give a voice to our Churches,” some say. The real meaning of this type of expression is the desire for some influence in the political and parliamentary sphere and in the juridical and educational areas so that public norms can be subjected to religious morals.

Rushdoony’s doctrine maintains a theocratic necessity: submit the state to the Bible with a logic that is no different from the one that inspires Islamic fundamentalism. At heart, the narrative of terror shapes the world-views of jihadists and the new crusaders and is imbibed from wells that are not too far apart. We must not forget that the theopolitics spread by Isis is based on the same cult of an apocalypse that needs to be brought about as soon as possible. So, it is not just accidental that George W. Bush was seen as a “great crusader” by Osama bin Laden.

Theology of prosperity and the rhetoric of religious liberty

Together with political Manichaeism, another relevant phenomenon is the passage from original puritan pietism, as expressed in Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, to the “Theology of Prosperity” that is mainly proposed in the media and by millionaire pastors and missionary organizations with strong religious, social and political influence. They proclaim a “Prosperity Gospel” for they believe God desires his followers to be physically healthy, materially rich and personally happy.

It is easy to note how some messages of the electoral campaign and their semiotics are full of references to evangelical fundamentalism. For example, we see political leaders appearing triumphant with a Bible in their hands.

Pastor Norman Vincent Peale (1898-1993) is an important figure who inspired US Presidents such as Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump. He officiated at the first wedding of the current president and the funeral of his parents. He was a successful preacher. He sold millions of copies of his book The Power of Positive Thinking (1952) that is full of phrases such as “If you believe in something, you get it”, “Nothing will stop you if you keep repeating: God is with me, who is against me” or “Keep in mind your vision of success and success will come” and so on. Many prosperity prosperous televangelists mix marketing, strategic direction and preaching, concentrating more on personal success than on salvation or eternal life.

A third element, together with Manichaeism and the prosperity gospel, is a particular form of proclamation of the defense of “religious liberty.” The erosion of religious liberty is clearly a grave threat within a spreading secularism. But we must avoid its defense coming in the fundamentalist terms of a “religion in total freedom,” perceived as a direct virtual challenge to the secularity of the state.

Fundamentalist ecumenism

Appealing to the values of fundamentalism, a strange form of surprising ecumenism is developing between Evangelical fundamentalists and Catholic Integralists brought together by the same desire for religious influence in the political sphere.

Some who profess themselves to be Catholic express themselves in ways that until recently were unknown in their tradition and using tones much closer to Evangelicals. They are defined as value voters as far as attracting electoral mass support is concerned. There is a well-defined world of ecumenical convergence between sectors that are paradoxically competitors when it comes to confessional belonging. This meeting over shared objectives happens around such themes as abortion, same-sex marriage, religious education in schools and other matters generally considered moral or tied to values. Both Evangelical and Catholic Integralists condemn traditional ecumenism and yet promote an ecumenism of conflict that unites them in the nostalgic dream of a theocratic type of state.

However, the most dangerous prospect for this strange ecumenism is attributable to its xenophobic and Islamophobic vision that wants walls and purifying deportations. The word “ecumenism” transforms into a paradox, into an “ecumenism of hate.” Intolerance is a celestial mark of purism. Reductionism is the exegetical methodology. Ultra-literalism is its hermeneutical key.

Clearly there is an enormous difference between these concepts and the ecumenism employed by Pope Francis with various Christian bodies and other religious confessions. His is an ecumenism that moves under the urge of inclusion, peace, encounter and bridges. This presence of opposing ecumenisms – and their contrasting perceptions of the faith and visions of the world where religions have irreconcilable roles – is perhaps the least known and most dramatic aspect of the spread of Integralist fundamentalism. Here we can understand why the pontiff is so committed to working against “walls” and any kind of “war of religion.”

The temptation of “spiritual war”

The religious element should never be confused with the political one. Confusing spiritual power with temporal power means subjecting one to the other. An evident aspect of Pope Francis’ geopolitics rests in not giving theological room to the power to impose oneself or to find an internal or external enemy to fight. There is a need to flee the temptation to project divinity on political power that then uses it for its own ends. Francis empties from within the narrative of sectarian millenarianism and dominionism that is preparing the apocalypse and the “final clash.”[2] Underlining mercy as a fundamental attribute of God expresses this radically Christian need.

Francis wants to break the organic link between culture, politics, institution and Church. Spirituality cannot tie itself to governments or military pacts for it is at the service of all men and women. Religions cannot consider some people as sworn enemies nor others as eternal friends. Religion should not become the guarantor of the dominant classes. Yet it is this very dynamic with a spurious theological flavor that tries to impose its own law and logic in the political sphere.

There is a shocking rhetoric used, for example, by the writers of Church Militant, a successful US-based digital platform that is openly in favor of a political ultraconservatism and uses Christian symbols to impose itself. This abuse is called “authentic Christianity.” And to show its own preferences, it has created a close analogy between Donald Trump and Emperor Constantine, and between Hilary Clinton and Diocletian. The American elections in this perspective were seen as a “spiritual war.”[3]

This warlike and militant approach seems most attractive and evocative to a certain public, especially given that the victory of Constantine – it was presumed impossible for him to beat Maxentius and the Roman establishment – had to be attributed to a divine intervention: in hoc signo vinces.

Church Militant asks if Trump’s victory can be attributed to the prayers of Americans. The response suggested is affirmative. The indirect missioning for President Trump is clear: he has to follow through on the consequences. This is a very direct message that then wants to condition the presidency by framing it as a divine election. In hoc signo vinces. Indeed.

Today, more than ever, power needs to be removed from its faded confessional dress, from its armor, its rusty breastplate. The fundamentalist theopolitical plan is to set up a kingdom of the divinity here and now. And that divinity is obviously the projection of the power that has been built. This vision generates the ideology of conquest.

The theopolitical plan that is truly Christian would be eschatological, that is it applies to the future and orients current history toward the Kingdom of God, a kingdom of justice and peace. This vision generates a process of integration that unfolds with a diplomacy that crowns no one as a “man of Providence.”

And this is why the diplomacy of the Holy See wants to establish direct and fluid relations with the superpowers, without entering into pre-constituted networks of alliances and influence. In this sphere, the pope does not want to say who is right or who is wrong for he knows that at the root of conflicts there is always a fight for power. So, there is no need to imagine a taking of sides for moral reasons, much worse for spiritual ones.

Francis radically rejects the idea of activating a Kingdom of God on earth as was at the basis of the Holy Roman Empire and similar political and institutional forms, including at the level of a “party.” Understood this way, the “elected people” would enter a complicated political and religious web that would make them forget they are at the service of the world, placing them in opposition to those who are different, those who do not belong, that is the “enemy.”

So, then the Christian roots of a people are never to be understood in an ethnic way. The notions of roots and identity do not have the same content for a Catholic as for a neo-Pagan. Triumphalist, arrogant and vindictive ethnicism is actually the opposite of Christianity. The pope on May 9 in an interview with the French dailyLa Croix, said: “Yes Europe has Christian roots. Christianity has the duty of watering them, but in a spirit of service as in the washing of feet. The duty of Christianity for Europe is that of service.” And again: “The contribution of Christianity to a culture is that of Christ washing the feet, or the service and the gift of life. There is no room for colonialism.”

Against fear

Which feeling underlies the persuasive temptation for a spurious alliance between politics and religious fundamentalism? It is fear of the breakup of a constructed order and the fear of chaos. Indeed, it functions that way thanks to the chaos perceived. The political strategy for success becomes that of raising the tones of the conflictual, exaggerating disorder, agitating the souls of the people by painting worrying scenarios beyond any realism.

Religion at this point becomes a guarantor of order and a political part would incarnate its needs. The appeal to the apocalypse justifies the power desired by a god or colluded in with a god. And fundamentalism thereby shows itself not to be the product of a religious experience but a poor and abusive perversion of it.

This is why Francis is carrying forward a systematic counter-narration with respect to the narrative of fear. There is a need to fight against the manipulation of this season of anxiety and insecurity. Again, Francis is courageous here and gives no theological-political legitimacy to terrorists, avoiding any reduction of Islam to Islamic terrorism. Nor does he give it to those who postulate and want a “holy war” or to build barrier-fences crowned with barbed wire. The only crown that counts for the Christian is the one with thorns that Christ wore on high.[4]

FOOTNOTES

[1] Bannon believes in the apocalyptic vision that William Strauss and Neil Howe theorized in their book The Fourth Turning: What Cycles of History Tell Us About America’s Next Rendezvous with Destiny. See also N. Howe, “Where did Steve Bannon get his worldview? From my book”, in The Washington Post, February 24, 2017.

[2] See A. Aresu, “Pope Francis against the Apocalypse”, in Macrogeo(www.macrogeo.global/analysis/pope-francis-against-the-apocalypse), June 9, 2017.

[3] See “Donald ‘Constantine’ Trump? Could Heaven be intervening directly in the election?”, in Church Militant (www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-donald-constantine-trump).

[4] For further reflection see D. J. Fares, “L’antropologia politica di Papa Francesco», in Civ. Catt. 2014 I 345-360; A. Spadaro, “La diplomazia di Francesco. La misericordia come processo politico”, ib 2016 I 209-226; D. J. Fares, “Papa Francesco e la politica”, ib 2016 I 373-385; J. L. Narvaja, “La crisi di ogni politica cristiana. Erich Przywara e l’‘idea di Europa’”, ib 2016 I 437-448; Id., “Il significato della politica internazionale di Francesco”, ib 2017 III 8-15.

New Bergoglian CDF Prefect Ferrer implicated in paedophile priest cover-up!

So, as long as he is not a priest, he is not the Church's responsibility?

Another scandal, this time, the new Jesuit Prefect Luis Laderia Ferrer who, together with Cardinal William Levada, laicised a child-molester priest and did not tell the police. That defrocked pervert priest later went on to rape 8 boys. 

The Church is in a crisis of filth and perversion. Where are the Cardinals and Bishops who will call this out and demand full disclosure and accountability?

Enough!

Another sex scandal at the Vatican! This time it involved a confidante of Pope

http://wolnosc24.pl/2017/07/04/kolejna-seks-afera-w-watykanie-tym-razem-zamieszany-jest-w-nia-zaufany-czlowiek-papieza/

Not a week passed, and the Vatican has already shaken the third turn-sex scandal. This time he is involved in a confidant of Pope Francis, Jesuit Luis Ladaria Ferrer, appointed Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in just last Sunday.

Recall - last Thursday treasurer of the Vatican, Australian Cardinal George Pell, has been formally accused of committing a sexual assault against dzieci.Kardynał Pell, who was prefect of the Secretariat. Economics, which is equivalent to the finance minister in the Vatican, the personality number three in the Catholic Church and the highest in the history of the Vatican dignitary, who has been accused in connection with the scandal concerning sexual abuse among the clergy.

Not yet faded echo of the scandal, and the Holy See rocked again. They tried to hide it for a few months, but the case is issued. It was important for the secretary of Cardinal, one of the closest collaborators of the Pope. Secretary of the organized gay party building above Sant'Uffizio (Holy Office), the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, where he is also taking cocaine. Moved "criminally" to the monastery at Monte Cassino he got there again in another sex scandal.

Read: Again unprecedented scandal at the Vatican! Cocaine and gay party in the Holy Office and the monastery at Monte Cassino. Is Pope Francis stand it?

The head of that secretary-homoseksulaisty and drug addict was Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Mueller z Niemiec, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which Pope Francis dismissed last Saturday. The new prefect was the Spanish Jesuit and Archbishop Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer. Now it turns out, however, that he may be involved in a pedophile scandal.

"There had been two days of the decision of Pope Francis to change the position of Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and already dark clouds hung over the head of his successor, Jesuit Luis Ferrer Ladarii" - writes on Facebook Jacek Pałasiński, long-press correspondent in Rome.

Newspaper, la Repubblica "L'Espresso article was published, the new prefect conceal one of the most notorious pedophile scandals in Italy. The authors describe a case of a pedophile priest Gianni Troty that, the decision was Archbishop Ferrer and his then-supervisor - b. Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Williama Levady, was sentenced in 2012. The maximum sentence provided for the code of canon, ie. The dismissal from the clerical state .

Unfortunately - adds a journalist - was accompanied by judgment note, according to which, information about the judgment and reasons for leaving Father. Troty of the priests and the Order of the Little Works of Divine Providence, had not spread. Unless b. Trota priest again commits lewd acts on children.

"I obediently silent church structures, the Italian investigative authorities have not been notified, precisely because of the decision of Archbishop. Ferrera. And, unfortunately, Father. Trota again committed. He remained in the same small town as a coach ... children's football teams, boyish and girlish. The parents knew nothing about his past. Approx. ten boys and ten girls again was molested by him. Only in 2015. As a result of accusations of one of the boys parents b. Fr.. Trota was arrested last year and sentenced to 8 years in prison for molesting one of the boys. Soon they have to start another process for another rape. "In practice - write Fittipaldi and Foschini - destroyed an entire generation inhabitants of this town" - writes Pałasiński.

How to react to this information now Pope Francis? And if the Pope Francis will cope with the task of cleaning the church?

Say hello to the new Bergoglian Bishop of Milan

Courtesy of Hilary White, say hello to the new Archbishop of Milan.

The Novus Ordo is an irredeemable abomination.

Get out of it. Get away from priests and bishops that promote this kind of blasphemy.

The Church of Man is in free-fall and the rot of Vatican II has infected the whole tree. The filth of priests and bishops is now reaching its zenith.

They will fall, they will be struck down and they will burn in Hell, if they do not repent and do public penance and reparation.

May it be soon.

Have the perverts of the St. Gallen Mafia turned on their own man, Bergoglio?

How wonderful that every occurrence in life and in the Church is explained somewhere in Holy Writ by the Prophets. Holy Isaiah in the forty-ninth chapter of his Book at the twenty-sixth verse tell us that the Lord said to him: 

And I will feed thy enemies with their own flesh: and they shall be made drunk with their own blood, as with new wine: and all flesh shall know, that I am the Lord that save thee, and thy Redeemer the Mighty One of Jacob.

Yes, the devil eats his own.

A report is making the news today apparently based upon a post by Antonio Socci referring to some thinking that those who put Bergoglio into the papal seat are now fearful that he is leading the Church into schism.

From his insults to the faithful to the heresy in Amoris Laetitia to the rumours of a blasphemous ecumenical "mass" and women deacons, Berogolio who mused, that he could "split the Church," is falling under enormous pressure. 

Now, even the man who was to clean-up the Church's perverts, when it was really Pope Benedict XVI, has now been shown to be nothing but a fraud with the reinstatement of sodomites and the resignations of laity from his Commissions of investigation.

Even LifeSiteNews has now reported that the mafia gave Bergoglio "four years" to makeover the Church, something reported repeatedly on this blog. It is good to see others waking up to what this writer has been saying since last year.

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2016/04/who-was-cardinal-mccarricks-friend-and.html

Do not trust the men that now want Pope Francis to be removed. They were evil enough to put him in there in the first place. They are sly foxes and devils, after all, they put him there in the first place.

Friends, we are on the verge of schism. A schism that may, in fact, by our liberation!

Deus vult!


The London Times reports:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/anti-reform-cardinals-want-the-pope-to-quit-z3h75h22v

A group of cardinals who supported the election of Pope Francis are worried that his controversial reforms are leading the Catholic church towards a schism and are planning to appeal to him to step down, a leading Vatican watcher has claimed.

“A large part of the cardinals who voted for him is very worried and the curia . . . that organised his election and has accompanied him thus far, without ever disassociating itself from him, is cultivating the idea of a moral suasion to convince him to retire,” Antonio Socci wrote in the Italian newspaper Libero.

The conservative Catholic author and journalist said that the election four years ago of Jorge Mario Bergoglio had been backed by progressive German cardinals and a curia faction impatient with the rule of his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI.

It was the latter faction who now believed that the Pope should resign and who would like to replace him with Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican secretary of state, Mr Socci said. He believed that the group numbered around a dozen, “but the importance of the members counts more than their number”.

“Four years after Benedict XVI’s renunciation and Bergoglio’s arrival on the scene, the situation of the Catholic church has become explosive, perhaps really on the edge of a schism, which could be even more disastrous than Luther’s [who is today being rehabilitated by the Bergoglio church],” Mr Socci wrote.

What was significant, he said, was that the doubters were not the conservative cardinals who had been in open opposition to the Pope since early in his reign.

Putting pressure on a pope to resign is a crime punishable under canon law, Mr Socci added, so it was unclear how the moral suasion might be exercised. “The cardinals are worried that the church could be shattered as an institution. There are many indirect ways in which the pressure might be exerted.”

The Pope’s openings to modernity on sexual morality, communion for remarried Catholics and friendly relations with other religions have opened a gulf between progressives and traditionalists.

“A good number of the majority that voted for Bergoglio in 2013 have come to regret their decision,” one expert on the Vatican said, “but I don’t think it’s plausible that members of the hierarchy will pressure the Pope to resign. Those who know him know it would be useless. [He] has a very authoritarian streak. He won’t resign until he has completed his revolutionary reforms, which are causing enormous harm.”

Antonio Pelayo, a Catholic priest who covers the Vatican for Spanish television, said that there were between ten and twenty conservative cardinals openly opposed to the Pope’s reforms, but only two or three who had voted for him and who now regretted it.

• Marie Collins, an Irish abuse victim, resigned from the Pope’s commission for child protection yesterday, citing institutional resistance to reform from within the Vatican curia. She said there were “fine words in public and contrary actions behind closed doors” and appeared to criticise the Pope for a decision to reduce sanctions against a perpetrator.