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.

Another attack on the Catholic faith

First, it was the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate and then, the Sisters who were told, "they pray too much."  Not so many months ago, the Mariaweld Trappist Monastery was closed down. Their commonality? A new and growing traditional Catholicism.

The Fraternity of the Holy Apostles was established by the former Archbishop of Brussels, André Léonard. Not long after his retirement and his replacement by his replacement De Kesel, a radical protegé of disgraced pervert protecting and Bergoglian promoter Godfried Danneels, the Fraternity was dissolved. 

A group of lay people sought to appeal the decision to the Apostolic Signatura, the highest court in the Church. Before that appeal could be heard, it was summarily ended. The news is now out that Francis Bergoglio has unilaterally used his full, complete and universal jurisdiction to permanently dissolve the Fraternity.

Let this serve as a warning to the SSPX and FSSP.

More importantly, let this serve as a warning to Bergoglio.

No Bergoglian apology without bloggers

As you may have heard, Bergoglio has issued a screed against bloggers. I won't print it here.

He has issued a rather pathetic apology to the victims of homosexual men in the priesthood in Chile.

Do you think for one minute that he would have issued that "apology" without the intense pressure put upon him by outraged Catholics around the world who were informed by bloggers?

Bergoglio eats crow over Barros

“I have made serious mistakes in the judgement and perception of the situation, especially due to a lack of truthful and balanced information.”


Thus, Jorge Bergoglio, Bishop of Rome admits his grievous error stemming from his own pride and arrogance not to believe the truth when it was given to him.

He insulted the victims in his own pitiful rage.

Shame on him.

Did Bergoglio's sycophantic lapdog Spadaro write the latest vindictive papal assault on faithful Catholics?

It would surely seems so according to Sandro Magister.

Including the slap in the face to Cardinal Sarah.

The interweb is full of Bergoglio's minions from Spadaro to Martin to Crux to Faggioli on others telling us the "five takeaways" from this monstrous document. A man who quotes himself as "authority" in a document that insults Catholics and reveals at it's core that Bergoglio is a Lutheran. To some, that was evident in his first exhortation five years ago. To others, it was when this monster emerged on the loggia dressed for lounging. A fraud of humility staying in a room more costly than the papal apartment in a bed for more luxurious than what is there.

The man is a fraud.

For five years we have put up with this boor, this insulting, demeaning, abusive father. The Catholic faithful have had enough.

Cardinals, do your damned duty and do it now!

Call an imperfect Synod and denounce this man as the heretic that he is.

A "Fomenter of coprohagia," he surely is.

The official presentation at the Vatican press office, on Monday April 9, of “Gaudete et Exsultate” - the third apostolic exhortation of Pope Francis after  "Evangelii Gaudium" and "Amoris Laetitia" - was a completely useless exercise, in terms both of the worthlessness of the things said, which were not even put into the routine bulletin, and of the insignificance of those who said them: the vicar of the diocese of Rome, Angelo De Donatis, the former president of the Italian branch of Catholic Action, Paola Bignardi, and the journalist Gianni Valente, the latter a close friend of Jorge Mario Bergoglio since before he was elected pope. All three with the air of having done no more than to read in advance the document they had to illustrate, without knowing anything else about it.

To make up for this, however, the director of “La Civiltà Cattolica,” the Jesuit Antonio Spadaro, stepped in immediately to fill in the blanks of the official presentation.

Fr. Spadaro, in fact, posted online that same day, on the website of his magazine - which is printed with the pope’s imprimatur - a presentation of his own, in four languages, of “Gaudete et Exsultate” that right from the title proclaims that it will reveal its “roots, structure, and significance.” And he did so with such abundance and precision of information as to make one think that if the initial compilation of the papal document was not his work, it wasn’t far from it.

In “Gaudete et Exsultate” there is nothing that Bergoglio has not already said and written, even long ago. And Spadaro furnishes the index of this:

- the first big interview of Pope Francis with “La Civiltà Cattolica” in August of 2013;
- the idea of the “holiness of the door just down the way,” borrowed from the French writer Joseph Malègue, dear to Bergoglio;
- some passages of “Evangelii Gaudium,” the agenda-setting text of this pontificate;
- the “Reflexiones sobre la vida apostolica” written by Bergoglio in 1987;
- the presentation made by Bergoglio in 1989 of the book “My ideal of sanctity” by the Argentine Jesuit Ismael Quiles, who was his professor;
- the maxim “simul in actione contemplativus” of the Jesuit Jerónimo Nadal, one of the first companions of Saint Ignatius of Loyola;
- the book “Discernimiento y lucha espiritual” by the Jesuit Miguel Ángel Fiorito, the spiritual father of the young Bergoglio, who wrote the preface to this in 1985;
- the maxim of Saint Ignatius that is so precious to Francis: “Non coerceri a maximo, contineri tamen a minimo divinum est” (Not to be constrained by that which is greatest, to be contained in that which is smallest, this is divine);
- the concluding document of the general conference of the Latin American episcopate in Aparecida in 2007, of which Bergoglio was the main architect;
- and finally, various morning homilies of Francis at Santa Marta.

But on this basic backdrop, with the general theme of the “call of everyone to holiness,” Pope Francis arranged to weave in a bunch of his invectives - these too recurring in many of his previous writings and talks - against his critics and their objections.

*

On his objectors within the Church, Francis sketches in “Gaudete et Exsultate” a profile that is prejudicially dismissive.

They are those with the “funeral faces” who have an “obsession with the law, ostentation in the treatment of the liturgy, the doctrine, and the prestige of the Church.”

They are those who bend religion “to the service of their own psychological and mental lucubrations.”

They are those who conceive of doctrine as “a closed system, devoid of dynamics capable of generating questions, doubts, interrogatives.”

They are those who close themselves off in a “tranquil and anesthetizing mediocrity,” made up of “individualism, spiritualism, becoming closed off in little worlds, dependence, systematization, repetition of prearranged frameworks, dogmatism, nostalgia, pessimism, taking refuge in the norms.”

They are those who love “to get teary-eyed in a presumed ecstasy” and assert “a ‘dry cleaner’s’ sanctity, everything beautiful, everything just right,” but in reality “fake.”

They are, in two words, the modern “Gnostics” and “Pelagians,” a current version of these two ancient heresies.

In these invectives of Pope Francis against his objectors, is it possible to recognize any reference “ad personam”?

According to what Fr. Spadaro writes, the answer would be yes.

There is one passage, in paragraph 26 of “Gaudete et Exsultate,” that seems to wipe out two millennia of contemplative monasticism, male and female:

“It is not healthy to love silence and avoid the encounter with the other, to desire repose and reject activity, to seek prayer and underestimate service. We are called to live contemplation even in the midst of action.”

And this is what Spadaro writes, in making his exegesis of this passage:

“This is the Ignatian ideal, in fact, according to the famous formula of one of his first companions, Fr. Jerónimo Nadal: to be ‘simul in actione contemplativus.’ Alternatives like ‘either God or the world’ or ‘either God or nothing’ are erroneous.”

Attention. “God or Nothing” and “The Power of Silence” are precisely the titles of the two main books by Cardinal Robert Sarah, the most authoritative representative of a vision of the Catholic Church alternative to the one advocated by Pope Francis.

*

In addition to the invectives against his opponents, in “Gaudete et Exsultate” Francis also inserted some responses to criticisms made against him.

For example, in paragraphs 101 and 102, the criticisms of his way of handling the question of migrants:

“Some Catholics affirm that it is a secondary issue with respect to the ‘serious’ issues of bioethics. That such things should be said by a politician preoccupied with his success is understandable, but not by a Christian.”

Another example. In paragraph 115 the pope goes after those “Catholic media” that try “to compensate for their own dissatisfactions” by violating the eighth commandment: “Do not bear false witness,” just to “destroy the image of others without pity.”

Curiously, however, the day on which Francis put his signature to “Gaudete et Exsultate” was March 19.

Which was the feast of Saint Joseph. But it was also the final day of the “Viganò saga,” the most colossal piece of “fake news” fabricated so far by the pontificate of Francis, and moreover at the expense of his innocent predecessor, Benedict XVI.

(English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.)

What fresh Hell is this from the mouth and pen of Bergoglio?

Late last evening, the Vatican released the latest "Apostolic Exhortation" from the Bishop of Rome.

In it, he derogates contemplative Orders. You know, those are the Religious Nuns and Monks and and Anchorites throughout history, who even in the Old Testament, sought to escape the world and pray and contemplate God. Once, I heard Raymond Arroyo answer someone who opined that those Nuns of Mother Angelica didn't really do anything, - they didn't nurse, or feed the poor or march in protests or ride buses. Arroyo's answer was clear and I will paraphrase, "The fact that the bus that just missed you when you were crossing the road and did not run you over and kill you was due to the prayers of those Nuns!"

Bergoglio has chastised and insulted thousands of Nuns and Monks in today's world and in history and has accused them of not properly loving or serving Christ, calling it "not healthy," that they "seek the prayer and belittle the service." When did they "belittle the service?" When is prayer, not "service?"

Contradicts Our Lord Jesus Christ

Luke 10:38-42  38 Now it came to pass as they went, that he entered into a certain town: and a certain woman named Martha, received him into her house. 39 And she had a sister called Mary, who sitting also at the Lord's feet, heard his word. 40 But Martha was busy about much serving. Who stood and said: Lord, hast thou no care that my sister hath left me alone to serve? speak to her therefore, that she help me. 41 And the Lord answering, said to her: Martha, Martha, thou art careful, and art troubled about many things: 42 But one thing is necessary. Mary hath chosen the best part, which shall not be taken away from her. Douay-Rheims translation of the Latin Vulgate

It is clear that in the mind of Our Blessed Lord, Jesus, that the contemplation of Mary was the "best part." Not that Martha's active service was not of value and important but that Mary's contemplation was better.

What an evil, dastardly and diabolical thing to say. What a lie. What a filthy, stinking slander against those Saints of history and those praying to be one today. He goes so far as to question the Holy Spirit's action because it does not conform to his diabolical "god of surprises."

This man, this Pope in law, has again disgraced the Faith. Again he has mocked Catholics, today and throughout history who have attempted against all odds to follow Jesus and live a holy life. He is a disgrace. 

No man who truly has a Catholic heart could write such bile, such slander.

I will no read the rest of this pathetic document. 

Nor will I relent on the pressure that must be brought to bear on this evil man.

O God, deliver us from this man Jorge Bergoglio and his evil minions. Convert them or take them to Your judgement. Send to us, O LORD, in Your mercy, a holy Pope who will "restore all things in Christ."

Declaration of the Rome Conference

DECLARATION:

  

"Therefore we testify and confess…"

Final declaration of the conference "Catholic Church, where are you going?" Rome, April 7, 2018

Due to contradictory interpretations of the Apostolic Exhortation "Amoris laetitia," growing discontent and confusion are spreading among the faithful throughout the world.

The urgent request for a clarification submitted to the Holy Father by approximately one million faithful, more than 250 scholars and several cardinals, has received no response.

Amidst the grave danger to the faith and unity of the Church that has arisen, we baptized and confirmed members of the People of God are called to reaffirm our Catholic faith.

The Second Vatican Council authorizes us and encourages us to do so, stating in "Lumen Gentium," n. 33: "Thus every layman, in virtue of the very gifts bestowed upon him, is at the same time a witness and a living instrument of the mission of the Church itself 'according to the measure of Christ's bestowal' (Eph. 4:7)."

Blessed John Henry Newman also encourages us to do so. In his prophetic essay "On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine" (1859), he spoke of the importance of the laity bearing witness to the faith.

Therefore, in accordance with the authentic tradition of the Church, we testify and confess that:

1) A ratified and consummated marriage between two baptized persons can be dissolved only by death.

2) Therefore, Christians united by a valid marriage who join themselves to another person while their spouse is still alive commit the grave sin of adultery.

3) We are convinced that there exist absolute moral commandments which oblige always and without exception.

4) We are also convinced that no subjective judgment of conscience can make an intrinsically evil act good and licit.

5) We are convinced that judgment about the possibility of administering sacramental absolution is not based on the imputability of the sin committed, but on the penitent’s intention to abandon a way of life that is contrary to the divine commandments.

6) We are convinced that persons who are divorced and civilly remarried, and who are unwilling to live in continence, are living in a situation that is objectively contrary to the law of God, and therefore cannot receive Eucharistic Communion.

Our Lord Jesus Christ says: "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free" (Jn 8: 31-32).

With this confidence we confess our faith before the supreme pastor and teacher of the Church and before the bishops, and we ask them to confirm us in the faith.

Divine Mercy image and theology? Where are His wounds?

This post will no doubt be controversial to many. It is not my intent to offend. I am not stating that Sister Faustina is not a Saint nor that she did saw an apparition of whom she thought was Jesus.

NOTA BENE: Tuesday, April 10. I was correct, it was controversial and some found it offensive; and yet, there are many who agree with me. I put this devotion in the same place as Medjugorje. I don't believe either but if God brings good out of what was a fraud, then that is His perfect will. The fact is, there was a reason it was banned and a Polish Pope who undid it not just be enshrining it but by having it unbanned decades earlier, to be studied. When I first saw the image, I saw the Polish flag and still do. You can believe that it was a real apparition, but it is in the realm of private devotion. It has debased Fatima and the Sacred Heart.

How ironic is it that on a Sunday where in the Gospel of the Mass we recall the actions and words of St. Thomas the Apostle where he literally places his fingers in the wounds in the hands and sides of the Lord Jesus and then proclaims, "My Lord and my God," we find the day has been co-opted by the cult of Divine Mercy and a Jesus who has no wounds.

Think of two hymns. That Eastertide With Joy Was Bright; -- "He showed to them His hands, His side, where yet those glorious wounds abide. Alleluia."  Think of the great Advent hymn, Lo! He Comes With Clouds Descending, "Those dear tokens of His passion, still, his dazzling body bears, ... with what rapture, gaze we. on those glorious scars."

The Venerable Saint Bede (commenting on Luke 24) taught that Christ kept His scars. 

First and chiefly for Christ’s own glory. Christ “wears [His scars] as an everlasting trophy of His victory.”

Second, these scars confirm the hearts of the disciples in the faith in His Resurrection. The scars increase our faith.

Third, Christ retained his scars so “that when He pleads for us with the Father, He may always show the manner of death He endured for us.” They have propitiatory signification in Heaven!

Fourth, Christ kept His scars so “that He may convince those redeemed in His blood, how mercifully they have been helped, as He exposes before them the traces of the same death.” This reveals that He is the Divine Mercy of God!

Fifth, Christ will appeal to His wounds so that during the Judgment Day “He may upbraid them with their just condemnation.” The holy wounds will silently sentence the damned to Hell.

It has always been the teaching of the Church that Christ's glorious wounds remain. 

When Our Blessed Lord appeared to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque she testified of the visibility of His wounds.

Did Sister Faustina see Our Lord Jesus?

If she did, where are His wounds?

She was apparently so insistent with the painter, how did she not insist on the presence of His wounds?

Why has "Divine Mercy" been allowed to surpass the Most Sacred Heart?

Vatican Monsignor Carlo Capella finally arrested on child pornography charges

The highly placed source and rumour first disclosed on Twitter yesterday by this writer at 11:05 EDT before other Catholic media has been confirmed. Trust me, there is more to come over the next few weeks.

Masturbating child-porn pervert Monsignor Carla Capella has been arrested by the Vatican Gendarmerie. After all, what else does one do with child pornography on their computer? Imagine that, — this filthy sodomite pervert sitting there getting his jollies at the suffering of children, real children, and then going and offering the Holy Sacrifice!

A former Vatican diplomat in Washington, the State Department requested the lifting of Capella's diplomatic immunity so that he could be arrested, the Vatican refused. During Christmas 2016, Capella was staying at a parish in Windsor, Ontario where investigators determined he was trading in child pornography on the computer. A Canada-wide warrant was issued by the RCMP for his arrest as reported then on Vox Cantoris, it is not known if a formal extradition request was made by the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs.

http://voxcantor.blogspot.ca/search/label/Pervert%20Capella

Pretty-boy Capella`s arrest by the Vatican Genderamine raises many questions.

Why did it take eight months to take a formal action and what was Capella doing in the meantime; was he still accessing pornography? Was he making contact with young teenage boys? The homosexual perversion rarely remains in the masturbatory fantasy enclave of a private computer.

What was Capella doing in Washington at the Nunciature? Did he have a role in the financial scandal involving the Papal Charities?

Was Bergoglio trying to hide this pervert and hope that it would go away, similar to Cocaine Capozzi's Holy Week 2016 cocaine and crystal-meth sodomite orgy?

Did someone in Washington or Ottawa twist the arm of Bergoglio to act?

What does QANON mean when he says that "Bergoglio will have a bad May?"

Why is homosexual pervert Ricca still involved with the Vatican Bank and was the removal of Cardinal Pell a plot by the financial malfeasant and corrupt sodomites to prevent the clean-up of Vatican finances?

Is Bergoglio being blackmailed? Is he a closet sodomite himself? Did he fail to act in previous cases and is there more cover-up in his background?

Was Barros in Chile just the beginning?

All of these are connected in a filthy mysterious web that will no stay hidden forever.

May will be an interesting month.

And it is no coincidence that it is Mary's month.

Bergoglian minion and sycophant pervert Paglia condemns the "domestic church"

The Christian family

2204 "The Christian family constitutes a specific revelation and realization of ecclesial communion, and for this reason, it can and should be called a domestic church."⁹ It is a community of faith, hope, and charity; it assumes singular importance in the Church, as is evident in the New Testament.¹⁰

2205 The Christian family is a communion of persons, a sign and image of the communion of the Father and the Son in the Holy Spirit. In the procreation and education of children, it reflects the Father's work of creation. It is called to partake of the prayer and sacrifice of Christ. Daily prayer and the reading of the Word of God strengthen it in charity. The Christian family has an evangelizing and missionary task.

2206 The relationships within the family bring an affinity of feelings, affections and interests, arising above all from the members' respect for one another. The family is a privileged community called to achieve a "sharing of thought and common deliberation by the spouses as well as their eager cooperation as parents in the children's upbringing."¹¹

Archbishop Paglia, anointed by Bergoglio to undermine the John Paul Institute on the Family and the Pontifical Council for Life has stated that is is "dangerous" to speak of the family as a "domestic church."

The sodomite sympathetic bishop, who may even be one himself, has contradicted traditional Catholic as articulated in tradition, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Second Vatican Council.

The full text from LifeSiteNews follows below.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-archbishop-its-very-dangerous-to-speak-of-the-family-as-a-little-ch

Paglia is the filthy little pervert who allowed a blasphemous orgiastic mural to be painted with his naked butt emblazoned upon the walls of the Cathedral. The face of Our Blessed Lord was based upon the sodomite hairdresser in the town.

May the LORD free us from these filthy perverts and convert them to repentance or destroy them in his wrath.

https://twitter.com/PagliaAbp

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-archbishop-its-very-dangerous-to-speak-of-the-family-as-a-little-ch

“The Church, which is a familial Church, for me, it isn’t very clear, it’s dangerous, for example, to define the individual family as a little church,” Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia said to a group of clergy and laity gathered at the major seminary of the Mexican diocese of Queretaro on March 24.

“It’s very dangerous, because it can encourage an egoism of the family,” continued Paglia. “I’m complete. I’m a little church. No?”

Paglia called the tendency to the “egoism of the family” a form of “familyism” and claimed that Jesus spoke against “familyism.”

“In the Gospel we have the very beautiful words of Jesus against familyism, very beautiful!” said Paglia.

“When his mother and his brother came to Jesus, what did he say to them?” asked Paglia. “Who is my mother, who are my brothers? Those who listen to the word of God. Those who participate in the Mass on Sunday.”

According to Paglia, there is only a “domestic church” through unity with other families within the Church.

“You are a domestic church by uniting yourself to other families,” said Paglia, who added that the family shouldn’t have “one center,” and “for this purpose, it’s better to have two centers: the parish and the family.”

“This is of decisive importance for me,” said Paglia. “For example, what do you do with a believer who is alone? Is he excluded? No, he’s not excluded,” because he has the “family of Sunday.”

“Those who aren’t married? My family isn’t that of my mother and father . . . the true family is the family of the Church. Those among the elderly who are alone, they cannot remain alone in our houses. On Sunday they have to come to the Church, to the Mass of the community,” he continued.

Archbishop’s words at variance with Catechism, other Catholic documents

The archbishop’s words seem to reject the Catholic Church’s traditional doctrine, which is based on Sacred Scripture, which likens the family to the Church and calls the family the “domestic church.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states in paragraph 2204, “The Christian family constitutes a specific revelation and realization of ecclesial communion, and for this reason it can and should be called a domestic church.” The statement is a direct quote of Pope John Paul II’s apostolic exhortation Familiaris consortio.

The Christian family “is a community of faith, hope, and charity; it assumes singular importance in the Church, as is evident in the New Testament,” the Catechism continues, citing several passages of Scripture, including verses from the Letter to the Ephesians, chapter five.

The Catechism also cites the Second Vatican Council, whose Constitution on the Church, Lumen gentium, paragraph 11, states: “The family is, so to speak, the domestic church. In it parents should, by their word and example, be the first preachers of the faith to their children; they should encourage them in the vocation which is proper to each of them, fostering with special care vocation to a sacred state.”

Paglia seems to be rejecting the words even of Amoris laetitia itself, which repeatedly refers to the family as the “domestic church,” and which Paglia claimed to defend at the conference.

Paglia’s denunciation of “familyism” was also made in his preceding talk, Amoris laetitia: for the pastoral care of marriage and of the family, in which he warned of “a sentimental and despotic familyism, which annuls all other ties.”

“The faith is inspired by the wisdom of the creation of God, which has not confided to the union of man and woman the care of an intimacy that terminates in itself, but the impassioned goal of making the world domestic and familial,” said Paglia.

“The pope, in the third chapter of the apostolic exhortation [Amoris laetitia], asks himself if up to now we haven’t made a mistake in presenting ‘a theological idea of matrimony that is too abstract, almost artificially constructed, far from the concrete situation and of the effective possibilities of real families,’” added Paglia.

The archbishop made only two tangential references to marriage as a “sacrament” during his talk, and mostly spoke of marriage as a way of reproduction. He also warned that parents shouldn’t be “obsessed” with directing their children, quoting Amoris laetitia’s words to the same effect.

Paglia’s controversial leadership of the Pontifical Academy for Life

Since his appointment by Pope Francis to the presidency of the Pontifical Academy for Life, Paglia has caused much controversy by overseeing the dismissal of many of the strongest voices for life and family from academy membership, as well as the appointment by Pope Francis of a large number of Academy members who dissent from Catholic doctrine on the inviolability of the right to life and on sexual morality.  The purges have led to the creation of a parallel John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family (JAHLF), led by former members of the Vatican’s academy.

In his previous position as President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, Paglia oversaw the creation of a sex-ed program whose materials were so sexually explicit and even obscene that one psychologist associated with the Holy See’s Congregation for the Clergy said that Paglia should be evaluated by a sex abuse review board, and that “the pornographic images in this program are similar to those used by adult sexual predators of adolescents.”

While he was archbishop of the Italian diocese of Terni-Narni-Amelia, Paglia oversaw the creation of an “erotic” mural for his cathedral church that former members of the Pontifical Academy for Life called “blasphemous,” and even “demonic.”

The mural, painted by a famous homosexual artist, depicts Jesus carrying nets to heaven filled with naked and semi-nude homosexuals, transsexuals, prostitutes, and drug dealers, jumbled together in erotic interactions. The Savior himself is made to resemble a presumably homosexual male hairdresser from the town, and his private parts can be seen through his translucent garb. Paglia allowed himself to be painted among the other bodies in the nets, semi-nude and clutching a bearded man wearing nothing but a loose loincloth.

Paglia has steadfastly defended the mural, claiming it isn’t erotic or homoerotic. He has acknowledged that his sex-ed program “should have been dealt with more thoughtfully and professionally.”

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

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.

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.

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.

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 ".

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.

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.

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.

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. 

Has Bergoglio been told by Cardinals that he is at risk of losing the Petrine Office for heresy?

Antonio Socci is reporting on his blog, Lo Straniero, that at least one non-Italian Cardinal, representing others contacted Bergoglio directly and was "indignant" over "Hellgate" and the reporting of two explicit heresies and denial of two Catholic doctrines, the existence of Hell and the immortality of the soul. This caused the communications office to issue its supposed clarification. Socci reports that Bergoglio was told that this was one of the "four cases of cessation of the Petrine ministry."

He further writes that while the media around the world in multiple languages is reporting on the Bergoglio-Scalfari discussion on Hell's "non-existence," the Italian media is strangely silent. Not even La Republica itself is commenting on it, or the Vatican communications experts, "clarification." There is a "secular moral delegitimization" taking place of Bergoglio, Scalfari and the Italian press, Socci asks, "who is telling the truth."

The Vatican communications experts advise that there are no direct quotes attributed to Bergoglio that Hell and the eternal soul does not exist, only a "reconstruction" by Scalfair, even though the two frequently meet notwithstanding Scalfari's consistent behaviour in this regard. Bergoglio himself does not correct Scalfair, cease to speak with him, nor does he directly, with clarity, end the scandal.

Socci writes that Bergoglio has been using Scalfari in a "role-play" for five years as a "double-track magisterial" through "vague and theological ambiguity to slowly bring about the demolition of Catholic doctrine" and he emphasizes the approach of the "boiled frog."

Rejoice, He is risen. He is risen, indeed. Alleluia! And no man can ever take that away from us. All praise and honour to Jesus Christ, Risen and Reigning