Capuchin Friar accuses Pope Francis of "calumny" and "demeaning" the importance of doctrine and creating confusion!

Capuchin Friar, Fr. Thomas Weinandy released a letter publicly, a letter which he wrote to Pope Francis in July. Weinandy is not unknown for controversy of the good kind, at least according to the National Uncatholic Reporter as they rejoiced in his stepping down from a USCCB post a few years ago.

As interesting and notable as the letter he issued to the Bishop of Rome is the lead up to it.

 

"There was no longer any doubt that Jesus wanted me to write…"

by Thomas G. Weinandy

Last May I was in Rome for an International Theological Commission meeting.  I was staying at Domus Sanctae Marthae, and since I arrived early, I spent most of the Sunday afternoon prior to the meeting on Monday in Saint Peter’s praying in the Eucharistic Chapel.

I was praying about the present state of the Church and the anxieties I had about the present Pontificate.  I was beseeching Jesus and Mary, St. Peter and all of the saintly popes who are buried there to do something to rectify the confusion and turmoil within the Church today, a chaos and an uncertainty that I felt Pope Francis had himself caused.  I was also pondering whether or not I should write and publish something expressing my concerns and anxiety.

On the following Wednesday afternoon, at the conclusion of my meeting, I went again to St. Peter’s and prayed in the same manner.  That night I could not get to sleep, which is very unusual for me.  It was due to all that was on my mind pertaining to the Church and Pope Francis.

At 1:15 AM I got up and went outside for short time.  When I went back to my room, I said to the Lord: “If you want me to write something, you have to give me a clear sign.  This is what the sign must be.  Tomorrow morning I am going to Saint Mary Major’s to pray and then I am going to Saint John Lateran.  After that I am coming back to Saint Peter’s to have lunch with a seminary friend of mine.  During that interval, I must meet someone that I know but have not seen in a very long time and would never expect to see in Rome at this time.  That person cannot be from the United States, Canada or Great Britain.  Moreover, that person has to say to me in the course of our conversation, ‘Keep up the good writing’.”

The next morning I did all of the above and by the time I met my seminarian friend for lunch what I had asked the Lord the following night was no longer in the forefront of my mind.

However, towards the end of the meal an archbishop appeared between two parked cars right in front of our table (we were sitting outside).  I had not seen him for over twenty years, long before he became an archbishop.  We recognized one another immediately.  What made his appearance even more unusual was that, because of his recent personal circumstances, I would never have expected to see him in Rome or anywhere else, other than in his own archdiocese.  (He was from none of the above mentioned countries.)  We spoke about his coming to Rome and caught up on what we were doing.  I then introduced him to my seminarian friend.  He said to my friend that we had met a long time ago and that he had, at that time, just finished reading my book on the immutability of God and the Incarnation.  He told my friend that it was an excellent book, that it helped him sort out the issue, and that my friend should read the book.  Then he turned to me and said: “Keep up the good writing.”

I could hardly believe that this just happened in a matter of a few minutes.  But there was no longer any doubt in my mind that Jesus wanted me to write something.  I also think it significant that it was an Archbishop that Jesus used.  I considered it an apostolic mandate.

So giving it considerable thought and after writing many drafts, I decided to write Pope Francis directly about my concerns.  However, I always intended to make it public since I felt many of my concerns were the same concerns that others had, especially among the laity, and so I publicly wanted to give voice to their concerns as well.

Now, the letter...

Your Holiness,

I write this letter with love for the Church and sincere respect for your office.  You are the Vicar of Christ on earth, the shepherd of his flock, the successor to St. Peter and so the rock upon which Christ will build his Church.  All Catholics, clergy and laity alike, are to look to you with filial loyalty and obedience grounded in truth.  The Church turns to you in a spirit of faith, with the hope that you will guide her in love.

Yet, Your Holiness, a chronic confusion seems to mark your pontificate.  The light of faith, hope, and love is not absent, but too often it is obscured by the ambiguity of your words and actions.  This fosters within the faithful a growing unease.  It compromises their capacity for love, joy and peace.  Allow me to offer a few brief examples.

First there is the disputed Chapter 8 of "Amoris Laetitia."  I need not share my own concerns about its content.  Others, not only theologians, but also cardinals and bishops, have already done that.  The main source of concern is the manner of your teaching.  In "Amoris Laetitia," your guidance at times seems intentionally ambiguous, thus inviting both a traditional interpretation of Catholic teaching on marriage and divorce as well as one that might imply a change in that teaching.  As you wisely note, pastors should accompany and encourage persons in irregular marriages; but ambiguity persists about what that "accompaniment" actually means.  To teach with such a seemingly intentional lack of clarity inevitably risks sinning against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth.  The Holy Spirit is given to the Church, and particularly to yourself, to dispel error, not to foster it.  Moreover, only where there is truth can there be authentic love, for truth is the light that sets women and men free from the blindness of sin, a darkness that kills the life of the soul.  Yet you seem to censor and even mock those who interpret Chapter 8 of "Amoris Laetitia" in accord with Church tradition as Pharisaic stone-throwers who embody a merciless rigorism.   This kind of calumny is alien to the nature of the Petrine ministry.  Some of your advisors regrettably seem to engage in similar actions.  Such behavior gives the impression that your views cannot survive theological scrutiny, and so must be sustained by "ad hominem" arguments.

Second, too often your manner seems to demean the importance of Church doctrine.  Again and again you portray doctrine as dead and bookish, and far from the pastoral concerns of everyday life.  Your critics have been accused, in your own words, of making doctrine an ideology.  But it is precisely Christian doctrine – including the fine distinctions made with regard to central beliefs like the Trinitarian nature of God; the nature and purpose of the Church; the Incarnation; the Redemption; and the sacraments – that frees people from worldly ideologies and assures that they are actually preaching and teaching the authentic, life-giving Gospel.  Those who devalue the doctrines of the Church separate themselves from Jesus, the author of truth.  What they then possess, and can only possess, is an ideology – one that conforms to the world of sin and death.

Third, faithful Catholics can only be disconcerted by your choice of some bishops, men who seem not merely open to those who hold views counter to Christian belief but who support and even defend them.  What scandalizes believers, and even some fellow bishops, is not only your having appointed such men to be shepherds of the Church, but that you also seem silent in the face of their teaching and pastoral practice.  This weakens the zeal of the many women and men who have championed authentic Catholic teaching over long periods of time, often at the risk of their own reputations and well-being.  As a result, many of the faithful, who embody the "sensus fidelium," are losing confidence in their supreme shepherd.

Fourth, the Church is one body, the Mystical Body of Christ, and you are commissioned by the Lord himself to promote and strengthen her unity.  But your actions and words too often seem intent on doing the opposite.  Encouraging a form of "synodality" that allows and promotes various doctrinal and moral options within the Church can only lead to more theological and pastoral confusion.  Such synodality is unwise and, in practice, works against collegial unity among bishops.

Holy Father, this brings me to my final concern.  You have often spoken about the need for transparency within the Church.  You have frequently encouraged, particularly during the two past synods, all persons, especially bishops, to speak their mind and not be fearful of what the pope may think.  But have you noticed that the majority of bishops throughout the world are remarkably silent?  Why is this?  Bishops are quick learners, and what many have learned from your pontificate is not that you are open to criticism, but that you resent it.  Many bishops are silent because they desire to be loyal to you, and so they do not express – at least publicly; privately is another matter – the concerns that your pontificate raises.  Many fear that if they speak their mind, they will be marginalized or worse.

I have often asked myself: "Why has Jesus let all of this happen?"   The only answer that comes to mind is that Jesus wants to manifest just how weak is the faith of many within the Church, even among too many of her bishops.  Ironically, your pontificate has given those who hold harmful theological and pastoral views the license and confidence to come into the light and expose their previously hidden darkness.  In recognizing this darkness, the Church will humbly need to renew herself, and so continue to grow in holiness.

Holy Father, I pray for you constantly and will continue to do so.  May the Holy Spirit lead you to the light of truth and the life of love so that you can dispel the darkness that now hides the beauty of Jesus’ Church.

Sincerely in Christ,

Thomas G. Weinandy, O.F.M., Cap.
July 31, 2017
Feast of St. Ignatius of Loyola

Masonic - Catholic conference to take place in Italy!

Promoted on the Twitter page of the Masonic Grand Orient Lodge of Italy is this conference to take place on November 12 in Siracusa (Syracuse) located on the southwest coast of Sicily with relevant reading at:

http://www.lafedequotidiana.it/un-vescovo-e-un-importante-sacerdote-parteciperanno-ad-un-incontro-sul-riavvicinamento-tra-chiesa-e-massoneria/

https://onepeterfive.com/letter-to-tosatti-i-fear-we-are-in-the-end-times/

See also our own writings on the Grand Lodge of Italy and their praise, still existing on the Masonic Press Agency web page, that under Bergoglio, "nothing will be the same again."

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2015/02/grand-orient-masonic-lodge-of-italy.html

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

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/2016/05/the-catholic-church-has-never-rescinded.html

Take courage friends. Stay close to Our Lord and the Rosary. 

Catholics arrested in Brussels Cathedral

These things have I spoken to you, that you may not be scandalized. They will put you out of the synagogues: yea, the hour cometh, that whosoever killeth you, will think that he doth a service to God. And these things will they do to you; because they have not known the Father, nor me. But these things I have told you, that when the hour shall come, you may remember that I told you of them. John: 16. 1-4

In the Cathedral of St. Michael, the seat of Jozef De Kesel, Bergoglio appointee to the See of Mechelen-Brussels, a group of Catholics were arrested for praying the Hail Mary. They were doing penance for the blasphemous celebration of the protestant revolution and the praising, in the same cathedral, of the heretic, Martin Luther. 

Welcome to the merciful FrancisChurch.

The Ecumenical Mass of Bergoglio is straight out of Hell

Early this year, the blogger "Fra Cristoforo" on Anonimi Della Croce posted about the development of an "Ecumenical Mass" for Catholic and Protestants to celebrate together. The blog is now back with a new address and the rumour has actually gained some credibility. 

We wrote about the latest on this blasphemous matter in a story by Marco Tossatti. Now, in his blog, Stilum Curae, Tossatti goes even further in describing the unrestrained influence of a lay Italian "liturgist," Andrew Grillo, who is involved in a major way, in the process, Grillo is a professor at the Pontifical Academy of Saint Anselmo.

“Transubstantiation is not a dogma, and as an explanation it has its limits. For example, it contradicts metaphysics.”

You can read the detailed analysis by Steve Skojec over at OnePeterFive.

What does Bergoglio think of all this?

Be strong friends, it is getting very rough. Remember that Christ has already won it. Do not submit to these malefactors, these liars, these haters of Christ. Denounce these men. Denounce their actions. Denounce this ecumenical abomination of desolation which removes Christ from the Mass. Denounce any bishop who forces it. Denounce any and every priest who participates in this blasphemy. Do not accept it under any circumstances.

Amoris Laetitia is more about the Holy Eucharist then anything else. They hate the Truth, they hate Our Lord, they hate His Church, they hate you.

And Bergoglio still will not genuflect at Mass.

Cardinal Brandmüller: Defenders of a Second Union are "excommunicated"

Has Cardinal Brandmüller just thrown down the gauntlet at Bergoglio?

Does he have bodyguards and a food taster?

Bergoglio will not answer the dubia. If he answers one way, he would need to renounce his program of error and uphold magisterial teaching. If the other, he convicts himself of heresy and would cease to be Pope.

The logic then, is that Bergoglio is already in heresy, it is only that it has not been formally proclaimed by those empowered to do so - cardinals and bishops in an "imperfect Council." Following logically then, whether an imperfect Council takes place or not to declare the formal declaration of heresy - that is one thing, the reality of the fact is quite another, that Bergoglio is in heresy. Then the real tough question must be asked, "If Bergoglio is in heresy, is he still Pope?"

"Anyone who says a new union can begin while a legally married partner is still alive is excommunicated, because this is an heresy," Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, 88, told the German daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (October 28).

Brandmüller explains: "The fact that marriage is a sacrament and therefore indissoluble is a dogma." It points out that no adulterer can receive Holy Communion.

The Cardinal can not understand the fact that Francesco does not respond to the Dubia about the Amoris Laetitia. He asks: "Can something be good today, if it was a sin yesterday?" Also: "Are there still actions that are always morally condemnable in every circumstance, such as murder or adultery?" Brandmüller is concerned about a "schism" in the Church.

More reading on this:

https://onepeterfive.com/cardinal-brandmuller-defenders-adultery-excommunicated/

Archbishop Paul Gallagher admits that the ecumenical movement is not about Christ!

Paul Gallagher is the Secretary for Relations with States at the Vatican's Secretariat of State. 

He is quoted as saying:

“Some have tended to see ecumenical endeavour as a question of church, or as an internal Christian affair in which our unity will be good for the growth or even survival of Christ’s church. Given all we face today, given the urgency and precariousness of our situation I would argue rather that ecumenical engagement is a moral imperative for all of us who are baptised in the name of the Blessed Trinity. We must proceed together as the one Body of Christ, not because it will be nice or cosy to do so but because we have to in response to the pressing needs of humanity.”

More false oecumenism for these modernists. If these Church leaders continue to refuse to make it clear to protestants that the goal must be their acceptance of the One, True, Church and the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Eucharist and the priesthood, then there can be no oecumenism. 

Barona at Witness has solid commentary.

Keep your wits about you, friend. It's going to get rough.

Next, the ecumenical "Mass" and the denial of Transubstantiation.

Bishop Crosby of Hamilton "commemorates" the Reformation! His Cathedral is to Christ the King!

One of these is Bishop Doug, the Catholic Bishop of Hamilton

In a Diocese with one of the most beautiful cathedrals in Canada outside of Quebec built in the 1930 and named after Christ the King, which commemorated the then recent institution of the Social Kingship of Christ the King by Pius XI on the protestant "Reformation Sunday," Bishop Douglas Crosby, OMI of Hamilton joins in celebration with Lutherans, the heretical poisonous action of that lecherous malefactor.

Clearly following the lead of Bergoglio of Rome, the one thing Crosby didn't do is erect a chocolate statue of the heretical Augustinian.

Celebrating and commemorating the loss of nation and peoples from the Church, the destruction of monasteries, the murder of hundreds of thousands of faithful Catholics, the spread of heresy, the creation of an environment of philosophical and theological error that persists to this day and which lead to the French Revolution, Freemasonry, Communism and Illuminism and the complete loss of faith of Germany and the rest of Europe. Yes, let us commemorate and celebrate that.

The article states, "the Spirit of God is calling us in our time to a renewed sense of common mission, prayer and service." What blasphemy. The Holy Spirit would only call protestants back to the unity of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Fifty years of this wretched false ecumenism and all it has done is make Catholics, protestant.

How many more stories such as this will we be subjected to this weekend?

Perhaps Bishop Doug should read this!

LUTHER? NOT A REFORM BUT A REVOLUTION

by Gerhard L. Cardinal Müller

There is great confusion today when we talk about Luther, and it needs to be said clearly that from the point of view of dogmatic theology, from the point of view of the doctrine of the Church, it wasn’t a reform at all but rather a revolution, that is, a total change of the foundations of the Catholic Faith.

It is not realistic to argue that [Luther’s] intention was only to fight against abuses of indulgences or the sins of the Renaissance Church. Abuses and evil actions have always existed in the Church, not only during the Renaissance, and they still exist today. We are the holy Church because of the God’s grace and the Sacraments, but all the men of the Church are sinners, they all need forgiveness, contrition, and repentance.

This distinction is very important. And in the book written by Luther in 1520, “De captivitate Babylonica ecclesiae,” it is absolutely clear that Luther has left behind all of the principles of the Catholic Faith, Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition, the magisterium of the Pope and the Councils, and of the episcopate. In this sense, he upended the concept of the homogeneous development of Christian doctrine as explained in the Middle Ages, even denying that a sacrament is an efficacious sign of the grace contained therein. He replaced this objective efficacy of the sacraments with a subjective faith. Here, Luther abolished five sacraments, and he also denied the Eucharist: the sacrificial character of the sacrament of the Eucharist, and the real conversion of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, he called the sacrament of episcopal ordination, the sacrament of Orders, an invention of the Pope — whom he called the Antichrist — and not part of the Church of Jesus Christ. Instead, we say that the sacramental hierarchy, in communion with the successor of Peter, is an essential element of the Catholic Church, and not only a principle of a human organization.

That is why we cannot accept Luther’s reform being called a reform of the Church in a Catholic sense. Catholic reform is a renewal of faith lived in grace, in the renewal of customs, of ethics, a spiritual and moral renewal of Christians; not a new foundation, not a new Church.

It is therefore unacceptable to assert that Luther’s reform “was an event of the Holy Spirit.” On the contrary, it was against the Holy Spirit. Because the Holy Spirit helps the Church to maintain her continuity through the Church’s magisterium, above all in the service of the Petrine ministry: on Peter has Jesus founded His Church (Mt 16:18), which is “the Church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15). The Holy Spirit does not contradict Himself.

We hear so many voices speaking too enthusiastically about Luther, not knowing exactly his theology, his polemics and the disastrous effect of this movement which destroyed the unity of millions of Christians with the Catholic Church. We cannot evaluate positively his good will, the lucid explanation of the shared mysteries of faith but not his statements against the Catholic Faith, especially with regard to the sacraments and hierarchical-apostolic structure of the Church. 

Nor is it correct to assert that Luther initially had good intentions, meaning by this that it was the rigid attitude of the Church that pushed him down the wrong road. This is not true: Luther was intent on fighting against the selling of indulgences, but the goal was not indulgences as such, but as an element of the Sacrament of Penance.

Nor is it true that the Church refused to dialogue: Luther first had a dispute with John Eck; then the Pope sent Cardinal Gaetano as a liaison to talk to him. We can discuss the methods, but when it comes to the substance of the doctrine, it must be stated that the authority of the Church did not make mistakes. Otherwise, one must argue that, for a thousand years, the Church has taught errors regarding the faith, when we know — and this is an essential element of doctrine — that the Church can not err in the transmission of salvation in the sacraments.

One should not confuse personal mistakes and the sins of people in the Church with errors in doctrine and the sacraments. Those who do this believe that the Church is only an organization comprised of men and deny the principle that Jesus himself founded His Church and protects her in the transmission of the faith and grace in the sacraments through the Holy Spirit. His Church is not a merely human organization: it is the body of Christ, where the infallibility of the Council and the Pope exists in precisely described ways. All of the councils speak of the infallibility of the Magisterium, in setting forth the Catholic faith. Amid today’s confusion, in many people this reality has been overturned: they believe the Pope is infallible when he speaks privately, but then when the Popes throughout history have set forth the Catholic faith, they say it is fallible.

Of course, 500 years have passed. It’s no longer the time for polemics but for seeking reconciliation: but not at the expense of truth. One should not create confusion. While on the one hand, we must be able to grasp the effectiveness of the Holy Spirit in these other non-Catholic Christians who have good will, and who have not personally committed this sin of separation from the Church, on the other we cannot change history, and what happened 500 years ago. It’s one thing to want to have good relations with non-Catholic Christians today, in order to bring us closer to a full communion with the Catholic hierarchy and with the acceptance of the Apostolic Tradition according to Catholic doctrine. It’s quite another thing to misunderstand or falsify what happened 500 years ago and the disastrous effect it had. An effect contrary to the will of God: “… that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou has sent me” (Jn 17:21).

The slap in the face heard around the world

The praise of Bergoglio's Evangelii Gaudium, his "manifesto" or his "mein kampf" displayed for all who would read and comprehend, the destruction this fiendish and unscrupulous derelict had in mind for the Church of Christ.

Sandro Magister reminds us of that fact in this morning's post about the humiliation and rebuke of Robert Card. Sarah by the Bishop of Rome, a man incapable intellectually and spiritually of walking in the shadow of the African.

The "devolution" of the Catholic Church spoken of by Bergoglio after the second Synod on the destruction of the family is in full swing. He told everyone he would do it, and bishops and cardinals sit by and do nothing whilst this enemy of Christ and His poor abuse flock continue to react in horror as to what this malefactor undertakes.

Because the “process” that Francis wants to set in motion is precisely that of changing, through a devolution of liturgical adaptations and translations to the national Churches, the overall structure of the Catholic Church, turning it into a federation of national Churches endowed with extensive autonomy, “including genuine doctrinal authority.”

These last words come from “Evangelii Gaudium,” the agenda-setting text of Francis’s pontificate.

http://magister.blogautore.espresso.repubblica.it/2017/10/26/franciss-slap-at-cardinal-sarah-behind-the-scenes/?refresh_ce

Devolving doctrinal authority to local bishops conferences is not Catholic. 

Wake up people. Wake up to the reality that is in front of us

Do not, however, do not abandon Christ, or His Truth or His True Church. What is coming on us is going to shake the faith, shake the belief in the indefectibility of the Church. Do not doubt that, the Church of Christ, Catholic is indefectible, what these malefactors are doing is creating a false church.

Do not follow these men into Hell.

Remain faithful to Christ, eternal Rome and the magisterial teaching of the fathers.

"The worldly gospel has unleashed Hell on Earth." Now - which priests would those be who preach this "worldly gospel?"

The "Mass" of Bergoglio

In the article one below on Cardinal Sarah and the posted story by Marco Tosatti, there are two paragraphs which deserve to be highlighted separately.

Another humiliation occurred when the pope eliminated most of the existing members from the Congregation for Divine Worship and replaced them with people who are more hostile to Sarah and his liturgical views. And there is the matter of the “Ecumenical Mass,” a liturgy designed to unite Catholics and Protestants around the Holy Table. Though never officially announced, a committee reporting directly to Pope Francis has been working on this liturgy for some time. Certainly this topic is within the jurisdiction of the Congregation for Divine Worship, but Cardinal Sarah has not officially been informed of the committee’s existence. According to good sources, Sarah’s secretary, Arthur Roche—who holds positions opposite to those of Benedict XVI and Sarah—is involved, as is Piero Marini, the right-hand man of Monsignor Bugnini, author of such noted works as La Chiesa in Iran and Novus Ordo Missae. 

To those names, add the Undersecretary of Divine Worship, Corrado Maggioni, and a layman, the extremely “progressive” liturgist Andrea Grillo. Recently, Grillo harshly attacked Benedict XVI after the pope emeritus wrote in the preface to one of Sarah’s books that with Sarah, “the liturgy is in good hands.” And Grillo attacked Sarah himself, calling him “incompetent and inadequate.” If Grillo behaves so uncouthly, it must be because he is sure of being protected by friends in high places . .

Arthur Roche, Piero Marini - Bugnini is back from the grave.

Benedict XVI and John Paul II's work is all straw to these men.

Refuge is in the traditional Latin Mass.