Clarity, Truth and intellectual honesty from some in Vatican - reveals a schizophrenic hierarchy

Vatican’s Chief of Doctrine Condemns Liberalism, Relativism, Nihilism

Cardinal Gerhard Müller reviews Cdl. Sarah's new book God or Nothing

by Ryan Fitzgerald  •   September 25, 2015   11 COMMENTS

FILED UNDER: SECULARISM, AFRICAN BISHOPS, MODERNITY, CRISIS IN THE CHURCH, SCANDAL, THE DECLINE OF THE WEST, IDEOLOGICAL COLONIZATION, GENDER THEORY, YES

3

REGENSBURG, September 25, 2015 (ChurchMilitant.com) - The Vatican's Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cdl. Gerhard Müller of Germany, is condemning a wide range of Western theological, philosophical and ideological errors like liberalism, relativism and nihilism.

In a wide-ranging review of Cdl. Robert Sarah's new critically acclaimed book, God or Nothing, Cdl. Müller, with the book, condemns everything from feminism, gender ideology and atheistic nihilism to Communion for divorced and "remarried" adulters and the infamous "spirit of Vatican II."

http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/vaticans-chief-of-doctrine-condemns-liberalism-relativism-nihilism

Not the dew of the Holy Spirit

LifeSiteNews has an article reprinted from Voice of the Family in which a statement is made and a question is asked:

"This cardinal has opposed Church teaching on marriage for years. Why did the Pope hand pick him for the Synod."

The answer the question quite succinctly.

"There is very good reason to believe Cardinal Dew has been appointed to the Ordinary Synod not despite his heterodox views but because of them."

And Cardinal Burke has not. 

Is the pervert protecting Cardinal Danneels running from the facts? What are the facts?

LE VIF in Belgium has issued a "correction" to the previous story about Cardinal Danneels and the "mafia" conspiracy to undermine Benedict XVI and elect Jorge Borgoglio.

Too little, too late Eminence.

You can't run from this.



 
http://www.levif.be/actualite/belgique/godfried-danneels-a-oeuvre-pendant-des-annees-a-l-election-du-pape-francois/article-normal-420243.html

(rough computer translation)

CORRECTION

The article "Godfried Danneels has worked for years with the election of Pope Francis" has a historical mistake, committed after the approval and correction of their quotes by authors. The penultimate paragraph has not been reproduced as had been stated in the above corrections.

The erroneous paragraph (we changed the meantime) was as follows:. "The election of Bergoglio was prepared in St. Gallen, it is clear and the outline of his program are those whose Danneels and co discussed for more than ten years. "

However, correspondence with the journalist mentions the following passage: "The election of Bergoglio corresponded to the aims of St. Gallen, it is clear and the outline of his program are those whose Danneels and his colleagues were discussing for more. ten years ".

As the original path was not met, the reader has the impression that the St. Gallen Group was a lobby. This is incorrect and in addition the St. Gallen Group was no longer met after 2006, seven years before the conclave to elect Pope Francis. Since the passage we want to rectify is taken by the international media, it is important for a proper understanding of historical reality and our integrity as historians and biographers of the Church of Cardinal Danneels regrettable that this adaptation of our citation is rectified.

Karim Schelkens and Jürgen Mettepenningen

Cardinal electors "shall further abstain!"

Pope St. John Paul II.  Universi Dominici Gregis:

The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition. It is not my intention however to forbid, during the period in which the See is vacant, the exchange of views concerning the election.

I likewise forbid the Cardinals before the election to enter into any stipulations, committing themselves of common accord to a certain course of action should one of them be elevated to the Pontificate. These promises too, should any in fact be made, even under oath, I also declare null and void.

With the same insistence shown by my Predecessors, I earnestly exhort the Cardinal electors not to allow themselves to be guided, in choosing the Pope, by friendship or aversion, or to be influenced by favour or personal relationships towards anyone, or to be constrained by the interference of persons in authority or by pressure groups, by the suggestions of the mass media, or by force, fear or the pursuit of popularity. Rather, having before their eyes solely the glory of God and the good of the Church, and having prayed for divine assistance, they shall give their vote to the person, even outside the College of Cardinals, who in their judgment is most suited to govern the universal Church in a fruitful and beneficial way.

Did the pervert protecting Cardinal Danneels organise a "mafia" to destroy Pope Benedict XVI? Was Bergoglio engineered as Pope a year in advance? What was McCarrick's role? What is the implication for the Holy Catholic Church - or do we already know?

Breaking news from La Stampa in Italy, the full text of which follows at the end of this post.

In an authorised  biography of Godfried Cardinal Danneels, the pervert protecting retired Cardinal of Brussels states that he lead a "Mafiaclub" known as "St. Gallen" that plotted to elect Jorge Bergoglio as Pope in secret meetings of cardinals and bishops. The meetings were organised by the late Carlo Maria Martini former Archbishop of Milan who allegedly told then Cardinal Ratzinger, that if elected, he would need to "resign" at some point. We have written previously about Martini and certain Masonic affiliations. 

Edward Pentin also writes on the matter with other information about Danneels and his history as a libertine in the matter of sexual ethics and catechesis. Danneels has been appointed by Jorge Bergoglio, the Pope of the Holy See to the Synod on the Family and Cardinal Burke has not.
La Stampa states that:

"Danneels according to the authors, would have worked for years to prepare for the election of Pope Francis, which took place in 2013. He himself, moreover, in a video recorded during the presentation of the book in Brussels he admits that he was part of a secret club of cardinals who opposed Joseph Ratzinger. Laughing, he calls it "a club Mafia and bore the name of St. Gallen". The group wanted a drastic reform of the Church, much more modern and current, with Jorge Bergoglio Pope Francis in the head. Besides Danneels and Martini, the group according to the book were part of the Dutch bishop Adriaan Van Luyn, the German cardinal Walter Kasper and Karl Lehman, the Italian Cardinal Achille Silvestrini and British Basil Hume, among others." 

This is not the first time that information has come out that the election of Jorge Bergoglio was engineered. 

In a speech delivered at Villanova University on October 11, 2013, the long-suspected active homosexual Cardinal Emeritus of Washington, D.C., Theodore McCarrick, spoke of a "very influential man" lobbying him prior to the conclave to engineer the election of Jorge Bergoglio. "He could do it you know ... five years to make the Church over again...to put us back on target." (listen at 18:20). Make over the Church to what? Back on target for what?

That lobbying is illegal.

It is vital that this information not be hidden. The Catholic world must wake up to this and the horrendous implications of what it means.

Who forced Pope Benedict XVI to resign? Can we sit by any longer and assume that he was not pushed and left "for the good of the corporation" notwithstanding his reasoning? What threat did they make against him? Was he threatened with death? Would they have killed him and hundreds or even thousands of others at the same time at a Mass? What could they have done to him that would have made him renounce the Papacy? 

The Catholic faithful have a right to know the truth - the truth of Papa Ratzinger's shocking departure and the truth of the who was behind it and of the election of Jorge Bergoglio.

The time for silence is over!

Souls are at risk and the very unity of the Catholic Church!

Francis: election prepared years beforehand

La Stampa: The election of Jorge Bergoglio was the result of secret meetings that cardinals and bishops, organized by Carlo Maria Martini, held for years in St. Gallen in Switzerland. This is what Jürgen Mettepenningen and Karim Schelkens are claiming. They are the authors of a newly published biography of the Belgian Cardinal Godfried Danneels, who calls the group of cardinals and bishops a "Mafia-club".
Danneels, according to the authors, worked for years to prepare for the election of Pope Francis, which took place in 2013.
He himself, moreover, in a video recorded during the presentation of the book in Brussels admits to having been part of a secret club of cardinals who opposed Joseph Ratzinger. Laughing, he called it "a Mafia-club and bore the name of St. Gallen".
The group wanted a drastic reform of the Church: for it to be much more modern and current, with Jorge Bergoglio - Pope Francis as its head: which, in fact, is what has occurred
According to the book, besides Danneels and Martini, the members of this group were: the Dutch bishop Adriaan Van Luyn, the German cardinals Walter Kasper and Karl Lehman, the Italian Cardinal Achille Silvestrini and the British Cardinal Basil Hume, among others.
Belgian newspaper "Le Vif" reports that: “On March 13, 2013 an old acquaintance was alongside the new Pope Francis: Godfried Danneels. Officially, he was there as dean of the Cardinal-Priests, but in reality he had worked discreetly for years as a creator of kings ".
Danneels has again been invited by Pope Francis to the Synod on the Family to be held in October in Rome, but he has been criticized very much. He tried to dissuade a victim of sexual abuse from reporting the perpetrator, a bishop (the uncle of the victim). For this reason, at the time of the 2013 Conclave, in Belgium there were those who demanded that he not be allowed to participate in the papal election.
Furthermore, Daneels’ positions on gay marriage and abortion - according to the revelation of two parliamentarians he wrote the king of Belgium exhorting him to sign the law to allow abortion - does not seem in agreement with the Magisterium of the Church; and with what Pope Francis has said on these issues.

Not once! Not Jesus Christ and not abortion. The very political Pope!

Not once was the name or Our Lord Jesus Christ proclaimed aloud.

Not even a subtle illusion.

Not even a blessing.

Even at St. Patrick's Church later, not even a formal blessing to Catholics.

Is the Pope embarrassed to be Catholic? Is he even?

Not once was the word "abortion" used. There were references to protecting "human life at every state of development." Yes, the Pope opposes abortion. But that weak statement could mean anything to anyone. To me it could mean from conception to natural death; to someone else it can mean birth until life has no dignity. It depends on  your perspective and your definition of when life begins and ends.

Let's get one thing perfectly clear.

Capital Punishment is recognised as legitimate in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It is in the Bible. In fact, many times God ordered it and nowhere in the New Testament did Our Lord Jesus Christ abrogate it.

The personal opinion of Jorge Bergoglio, Pope of the Holy See is his opinion. It is nothing more. It is his opinion and he has no right to demand from me or anyone else the "global abolition of the death penalty."

Why didn't the Pope say he wanted the "global abolition of abortion?"

The Pope made this political.

Tomorrow at the United Nations will he call for a United Religions of the World?

God help us, please.

Cardinal Nichols - a "sting in the tail" is better than a sacrilege!

Ah, Cardinal Nichols, what a happy inclusive old chap. 

When he's not terrorising priests and bloggers he likes to receive blessings from pagan priests. 

The good Cardinal, clearly on the side of the Kasperites, says that:

“Many write of happy and fulfilling marriages but often with a sting in the tail regarding their children having difficult and broken relationships and not keeping the faith. Time and again respondents refer to the pain and suffering caused by the denial of the sacraments to those whose marriages have failed and have divorced and remarried. The disturbing and damaging effect on children is frequently referred to.” 

All sentimentalism and emotionalism.

Because if they're "divorced and remarried" they are in a state of adultery!

But the Pope has come up with the perfect solution.

Water down the annulment process that not a bit of it matters anymore.

Problem solved, ipso facto.

Truly, these are evil men.

Read the rest of it at Catholic Herald.

The New Evangelism - An evangelism without Jesus Christ!

Courtesy of Mahound's Pardise is this translation some remarks from the Pope in Cuba. Not one word of Jesus Christ and His salvation. Not one word of sin. Not one word of repentance.

The suffering Cuban people deserved better.

Havana, 20 September, 2015:

You are standing up and I am sitting. How unmannerly. But you know why I sit down? It’s because I took some notes of some things that our companion here said, and what I want to say is based on these. 

One word that struck a chord is "dream." A Latin American writer has said that people have two eyes: one of flesh and another of glass. With the eye of flesh, we see what is before us and with the eye of glass, we see what we dream of. It’s nice, no? In the objectivity of life, the capacity of dreaming has to enter in. A young person who is not capable of dreaming is cloistered in himself, he’s closed in on himself. Sure, a person sometimes dreams of things that are never going to happen. But dream them. Desire them. Seek the horizon. Open yourselves to great things. 

I’m not sure if in Cuba they use this word, but in Argentina, we say, Don’t be wimpy. Open yourselves and dream. Dream that the world with you can be different. Dream that if you give the best of yourself, you are going to help this world be different. Don’t forget. Dream. If you get carried away and dream too much and life cuts you off, don't worry. Dream and share your dreams. Speak about the great things that you want, because inasmuch as your capacity to dream is greater, when life leaves you only half way, you will have gone farther. So, first dream. 

You said a phrase that I underlined and took note of: "that we might know how to welcome and accept the one who thinks differently than us." Truly, sometimes we are closed in. We shut ourselves in our little world: "This is either the way that I want it or we’re not doing it." And you went even further, "that we don’t close ourselves into the 'little convents' of ideologies or in the 'little convents' of religions. That we might grow in the face of individualism." 

When a religion becomes a "little convent" it loses the best that it has, it loses its reality of adoring God, of believing in God. It’s a little convent of words, of prayers, of "I’m good and you’re bad,’ of moral regulations. I have my ideology, my way of thinking and you have yours; I close myself in this "little convent" of ideology. 

Open hearts. Open minds. If you are different than me, why don’t we talk? Why do we always throw rocks at that which separates us? At that in which we are differing? Why don’t we hold hands in that which we have in common? Motivate ourselves to speak about what we have in common, and then we can talk about the differences we have. But I said, talk, I didn’t say fight. I didn’t say close ourselves in. I don’t say "shut ourselves into our little convent," to use the word you used. But this is possible only when I have the capacity to speak of that which I have in common with the other, of that by which we are able to work together. 

In Buenos Aires, in a new parish, in a very, very poor region, a group of university students was building some rooms for the parish. And the parish priest told me, "Why don’t you come some Sunday and I’ll introduce them to you." They worked on Saturdays and Sundays on this construction. They were young men and women of the university. So I arrived, I saw them and they were introduced to me. "This is the architect. He’s Jewish. This one is Communist. This one is a practicing Catholic." All of them were different, but they were all working together for the common good. 

This is called social friendship: to seek the common good. Social enmity destroys. A family is destroyed by enmity. A country is destroyed by enmity. The world is destroyed by enmity. And the biggest enmity is war. And today we see that the world is destroying itself with war because people are incapable of sitting down and talking. OK, let’s negotiate. What can we do in common? In what things are we not going to give in? But let’s not kill more people. When there is division, there is death, death in the soul because we are killing the capacity to unite. We are killing social friendship. And that’s what I ask of you today: be capable of creating social friendship. 

There was another word that you said, the word hope. Youth are the hope of a people; we hear this everywhere. But what is hope? Is it to be optimistic? No. Optimism is a mood. Tomorrow, you wake up with an upset stomach and you’re not optimistic, you see everything in a negative light. Hope is something more. Hope is something that endures through suffering. Hope knows how to suffer to bring forward a project. It knows how to make sacrifices. Are you capable of making sacrifices for a future or do you only want to live today and leave what comes to those who come after? Hope is fruitful. Hope gives life. Are you capable of giving life? Or are you going to be a spiritually sterile young man or young woman, without the capacity to create life in others, without the capacity to create social friendship, without the capacity to create a homeland, without the capacity to create greatness? 

Hope is fruitful. Hope is given in work, and here I want to mention a very grave problem that is being experienced in Europe: the number of youth who don’t have work. There are countries in Europe where as many as 40% of youth 25 years old and younger live unemployed. I am thinking of one country. In another country, it’s 47% and in another 50%. 

Evidently, when a people is not concerned with giving work to youth — and when I say "people," I don’t mean government, I mean the entire people — it doesn’t have a future. 

The youth become part of the throwaway culture and all of us know that today, in this empire of the god money, things are thrown away and people are thrown away, children are thrown away, because they are unwanted, because they kill them before they are born, the elderly are thrown away — I’m speaking of the world in general — because they don’t produce anymore. In some countries, there is legal euthanasia, but in so many others there is a hidden, covered up euthanasia. Youth are thrown away because they are not given work. So then? What is left for a young person who doesn't have work? A country that doesn’t invent, a people that doesn’t invent employment opportunities for its youth, what’s left for this youth are addictions, or suicide, or to go around looking for armies of destruction to create wars. 

This throwaway culture is doing damage to all of us; it takes away hope, and this is what you asked for the youth: "We want hope." Hope endures suffering, it’s hardworking, it’s fruitful, it gives us work and it saves us from the throwaway culture. Hope that brings together, brings everyone together, because a people that knows how to bring itself together to look toward the future and build social friendship, as I said, despite thinking differently, this people has hope. 

And if I find a young person without hope, I've said this before, "a young retired person." There are young people who seem to have retired at 22 years old. They are young people with existential sadness, they are young people who have committed their lives to a basic defeatism. They are young people who lament. They are young people who flee from life. The journey of hope is not easy. And it can’t be made alone. There is an African proverb that says, "If you want to go quickly, walk alone, but if you want to go far, walk together." 

And I, Cuban young people, though you think differently from each other, though you have your own points of view, I want you to go along accompanying each other, together, seeking hope, seeking the future and the nobility of your homeland. We began with the word hope and I want to conclude with another word that you said and that I tend to use a lot: the culture of encounter. Please, let us not have "un-encounter" among us. Let us go accompanying each other, in encounter, even though we think differently, even though we feel differently, but there is something bigger than us, which is the greatness of our people, which is the greatness of our homeland, which is this beauty, this sweet hope for the homeland to which we have to arrive. 

I take leave wishing you the best, wishing you all of this that I have said, this I wish for you. I am going to pray for you. And I ask you to pray for me. And if one of you is a non-believer and cannot pray because he doesn’t believe, may he at least wish the best for me. May God bless you and bring you to walk along this path of hope, toward the culture of encounter, avoiding these "little convents" that our companion spoke about. May God bless all of you.

Cardinal Baldisseri "blows a gasket" demands Vatican employee be "fired"

More from Edward Pentin's book, "The Rigging of a Vatican Synod? which you must buy! 

"A second source in the secretariat said that a “discussion” then took place among staff concerning what to do with the books. Cardinal Baldisseri, he said, was “blowing a gasket” about the book being delivered to the synod. He also alleged that the cardinal then got on the phone to the Governorate, the administrative body managing Vatican City State. He reached Giuseppe Cardinal Bertello, president of the Governorate, and ordered that the postmaster of the Vatican post office be fired, saying his staff had not done their job stamping the envelopes. In response, Cardinal Bertello reportedly told him to calm down and suggested the books be sent back to the Vatican post office to be stamped."

"The inside source said Cardinal Baldisseri still wanted their delivery blocked, but he was warned such an action would be a crime and so changed his mind. Instead, because they had not been stamped, he decided to apply a different tactic and had them sent back to the Vatican post office to be stamped properly. The books were then held back from distribution as long as possible."

Will Rosica sue?

"Father Rosica was criticized for appearing to give greater prominence to perspectives that played up a “progressive” agenda. As an example, he spoke of an intervention to the effect that “language such as ‘living in sin’, ‘intrinsically disordered’, or ‘contraceptive mentality’ are not necessarily words that invite people to draw closer to Christ and the Church.”

(...)

"According to many observers, during the synod, Father Rosica also failed to stress that such language is used in the Catechism and did not mention the reservations many have about changing such language because it undermines and weakens Church teaching. This led many people to see him as a collaborator in conveying a “progressive agenda”, even though other factors may well have been at play, too."   

 (...)                                                                                                                                  

"Some observers and synod participants stated privately that, in comparison to the other relators who stressed that the interim report was a working document, Father Rosica seemed to convey it as a “done deal” and seemed to suggest that the Church was calling on everyone to embrace it."

Quoted from in the Rigging of a Vatican Synod? by EdwardPentin

Cardinal Baldisseri - Jesus is too negative, put Francis first!

I am reading Edward Pentin's book, "The Rigging of a Vatican Synod? I would not have put the question period. I've only just started it but you must buy this book.

This excerpt is chilling and reveals the evil men and weak men as betrayers of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

On Friday, October 3, two days before the opening of the synod, this scholar received a call directly from Cardinal Erdö to come and meet him the next day. “I said: ‘Sure, when would you like me to come, maybe 4 or 5 P.M.’ ”, reported the scholar, thinking he would prefer to meet after a siesta after lunch. But the call was more urgent than that. Erdö wanted to see him at 1:30 P.M.

When he arrived at Cardinal Erdö’s office, the Hungarian cardinal was “ashen faced”. He had just come from Cardinal Baldisseri. Erdö had read to Baldisseri the Relatio that he had written, and the synod secretary general had picked it apart. “He’d just brow-beaten him into submission”, the scholar said.

Cardinal Erdö had, it seems, drafted the document with the opening line beginning with “Jesus Christ is our Master before all others and our only Lord”, and had stated, in an allusion to 2 Timothy, that the faithful owe obedience to Him whether it is convenient or not convenient.

“We’re sitting across the table from another, and he says with a tortured expression on his face: ‘Cardinal Baldisseri wants me to change that.’ ”

“I said ‘Why?’ ”

“He said: ‘It’s negative’ and that I should I begin with the ‘Joy of the Gospel’ [Pope Francis’ 2014 apostolic exhortation]33 and quote Pope Francis. Before Jesus Christ.”

Erdö asked the scholar: “Do you think I should quote Pope Francis first?”

The expert had been told by someone who knew Cardinal Erdö well that, although solidly orthodox, he would be liable to backtrack under pressure.

“You could have knocked me over with a feather”, the scholar told me. “Here we are, two days before the opening, there’s the Mass, two days before, and he’s asking me if we should start with Jesus Christ? I said, ‘Eminence, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. He is the Alpha and the Omega. We start with Jesus Christ.’ He left it in. You’ll see it, it’s still the first line.”

But the cardinal was not so successful with the second line. In his draft, Cardinal Erdö had wanted to move from Jesus Christ to Pope Paul VI, Evangelii nuntiandi (his 1975 apostolic exhortation on evangelization in the modern world), and from there to Pope Saint John Paul II with Familiaris consortio and then Benedict XVI and finally Pope Francis.

But Cardinal Baldisseri said, “No, invert the order.” He wanted the opening Relatio to begin first with Francis and Evangelii gaudium and then cover the other popes. The scholar reminded Erdö that it was common to start with the earlier popes and follow through, in chronological order, to more recent popes, because that is how doctrine develops.

Despite this, Cardinal Baldisseri got his way. According to the scholar, after pushing Erdö to make several rewrites and appealing directly to the pope to have contributions from Forte and others reinstated that Erdö had removed, the text was accepted.

In the report, it is still Jesus first, but then it is Francis, and then it is Paul. “Every reference to truth, the Word, bothered Baldisseri”, the scholar observed. “That’s Baldisseri”, he said. “He wanted mercy, a lot of mercy, less truth.”

Canonists speak out on Pope Francis' actions!

Full disclosure; your writer was granted a Decree of Nullity from the Tribunal in the Archdiocese of Toronto, therefore, what I write below is not to be construed as hypocrisy. The annulment was based on a Defect of Canonical Form, it was clear and precise and without question. It took nearly two years (because I was slow). It was not "painful" nor was it "humiliating" nor did it cost a lot of money. I recall that it was somewhere around $900 in three instalments as charitable donations for which tax receipts were issued. If I could not make a donation, it did not stop the process. It was thorough and detailed, witnesses were called and in the end, when the judge determined the issue of lack of form, it could have been decided in ten minutes! C'est la vie!

I didn't cry about it or whine about it. That time was good for me. It taught me patience and opened me up to God's possibilities for me. I didn't demand anything of the Church and I didn't whine about how mean She was. Had it been denied, I would have simply accepted it.

It was not a sacramental marriage, but it was a natural marriage and the fact that it was not sacramental did not necessarily invalidate it. That was not a criteria for considering the defect and I was told this clearly by the Auditor. There were other factors that could have been considered then, perhaps, other than the defect in Form. Under Pope Francis' changes to the annulment procedures, it would have been a slam dunk, notwithstanding the clear defect in form.

I do not support these changes. Not that the Bishop of Rome cares one bit about what I think. Having been through the process I find the whole debate about it insulting and manipulating. 

Marriage must always be presumed to be valid. Lack of faith. of one party to the marriage, must never be a consideration. The Church has always presumed validity of all marriages because marriage existed before the Church and in every culture. It was the Church that elevated it to a Sacrament - a Sacrament exchanged by the man and woman. The Pope may say in one breath that the doctrine is upheld, but the actions of this motu proprio do not support it.

The Pope cannot control what a bishop might do and whether or not he gives blanket approval to any case put before him. The issue of nullity is not an issue of mercy. It is an issue of law precisely because of the upholding of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. This is not the place for sentimentalism and emotionalism.  

Rorate Caeli blog has an important post to read with critical links to the commentary of some important canonists. 

I dare say that under this initiative of Francis, even Henry VIII would have been granted an Decree of Nullity to marry the whore Anne Boleyn and betray his true wife, Catherine of Aragon with Francis' blessing. Clearly, St Thomas More's martyrdom must have been for nought.  

Will the Pope head the advice or will he barrel ahead defying the whole notion of Vatican II collegiality?

How sadly ironic, eh?

It is diabolical to say that to defend dogma is to go against the Pope!

"To begin to say that each nation can begin to decide fundamental questions about the faith and its practice is simply to deny the Catholicity of the Church and to introduce a Protestant principle which would lead then to national churches and once this principal of division enters in it will all simply multiply itself as it has done in the Protestant churches."

"The penitential way has to be a way to help the individual truly repent and repentance includes necessarily a change in one's life."

Sadly this concentration of the question of those in irregular unions and the possibility of offering them Holy Communion has a wider scope ... to begin to say that other individuals who are living in public sin should also receive the sacraments."

"Those of us who are defending what the Church has always taught and practiced are now called the enemies of the Pope."

Africans will save the Church from Kasper and his fascist henchmen

Austin Ruse, President of the Centre for Family and Human Rights, opines at Crisis Magazine that it will be the Africans who save the Church and that he sees similar situations with African diplomats and the West with his work at the United Nations.

I urge you to read it there and subscribe to Crisis.

Here are a few excepts which reveal from Pentin's research the sheer manipulation (in spite of those who denied it and tried to sue me for it); the sheer evil present at the last Synod. Can you seriously doubt any longer that the fascistic and non-collegiality practices and are the work of the Holy Spirit? Does all of this discord come from God? It is not possible! Bishops calling for homosexual unions, Cardinals who should be in jail for covering up homopervert, sodomite priestly and episocopal abuse of children called by the Pope as delegates to the Synod. This is not the action of the Holy Spirit. It is sheer diabolical. The devil is not only sowing confusion, he is sowing deception and millions are falling for it!

Kasper did not learn well from his childhood in Germany. It is regrettable that he did not learn how not to be corrupted by Nazisim as Joseph Ratzinger did.

Pentin's book makes for a jarring wake-up for those who wish bury their heads in sand.

Don't be amongst them.




http://www.crisismagazine.com/2015/the-africans-will-save-the-synod-the-church-and-the-world

Pentin presents evidence of manipulation in practically everything related to the synod, including the fact that homosexuality was barely a topic of conversation for the synod fathers, yet loomed large in the interim document. 

Pentin reports on some things not previously revealed. For instance, he records that the synod secretariat deliberately excluded “conservative” theologians as experts for the meeting. He also reports that Archbishop Bruno Forte was elected to the position of special secretary of the extraordinary “by only a small number of the fifteen-member Ordinary Council of the Synod of Bishops.” Forte is generally blamed for writing the most controversial paragraphs of the interim document. Indeed he was outed as the author of the gay paragraphs by Napier of South Africa during the raucous first-day press conference.

Pentin also presents voluminous evidence that Kasper, seemingly with the approval of Pope Francis, initiated a global campaign to change Church teaching on marriage, beginning with his two-hour address to a consistory of cardinals wherein he “floats the idea of admitting divorced and ‘remarried’ Catholics to Holy Communion without amendment of life.” 

So it’s odd that Kasper and his allies got so angry when a group of cardinals and other experts published a book upholding Church teaching on marriage, and then tried to get copies to the synod fathers. Their efforts were blocked by the synod secretariat. 

Remaining in the Truth of Christ: Marriage and Communion in the Catholic Church.  

They decided the best way was to send them to the temporary addresses, which turned out to be Casa Santa Marta, the hotel-like residence within the Vatican walls. Organizers of the book did display a bit of skullduggery. They made sure the books were deliberately mailed from a post office away from the Vatican, and that “the books were placed in envelopes of different types and colors…” (they must have anticipated that there would be an attempt to block the distribution of the book, Vox)

Trouble brewed when a synod staff member looked inside of one of the packages after “an envelope came open and the book was identified.” Pentin reports that Cardinal Baldeserri “was ‘furious’ to learn that the book was being sent to synod fathers.”

Pentin says Baldeserri wanted the deliveries blocked, but was told that was illegal. Because most of the books had not been stamped by the Italian post office, he decided to send them back for stamping figuring the delay would mean synod fathers would never get them, which turned out to be true.

The cover-up of what happened with the book is quite remarkable. But there is also the fallout—the score settling. Pentin reports that Baldeserri’s cronies tried to get American Father Robert Dodaro to resign his post as president of the Institum Patristicum Augustinianum in Rome because Dodaro served as editor of the book.

Remarkably, Kasper said the book should have been given to him in advance so that he could “review it.” Vaticanista Marco Tosatti wrote in La Stampa that a group of Italian bishops told the Pope that the five cardinals who wrote the book had the “sole intention of fighting against Kasper,” and that the cardinals had committed a “mortal sin” in publishing it.

So angry was Kasper that he actually shouted at Cardinal Burke on the floor of the synod meeting. It is said the book was the final straw that caused the Pope to fire Burke from head of the Apostolic Signatura.

The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law ... he must not proclaim his own ideas

No, this is not my quote. This is not Vox being snarky or being anti-Francis. 

Rorate Caeli Blog has the whole beautiful homily. Read it and then consider if Francis' personal motion to undermine the process of annulments is prudent and even licit? He can choose tomorrow to demolish St. Peter's Basilica. He has the legal jurisdiction to do that, he is the supreme legislator. Remember that the next time that you neo-Caths cry about "papal infallibility" and "you can't criticise the pope." Read your history of Pius VII and Napoleon and stop ascribing a power to the pope that he does not have. The moon is not made of creamed cheese even he says it and his actions on annulments can and will be undone by a future Pope. History is a merciless judge.

How much do you miss him now, eh?



I miss my Papa so much that I want to cry every time I see his picture and then I realise that it is my fault because I did not pray for him enough that he not "flee for fear of the wolves."

I bet that the title of this post got your attention!

It is not my title, it is the title from an article at the Daily Mail. 

Now, before you opine that it is a tabloid rag and not traditional journalism, that is hardly the point. It is an actual newspaper with tens of thousands of readers and millions on the Internet. The headline is attention getting and the low information reader (most of them, I imagine) and the stupid, non-catechised Catholic (the rest of them) will point to it and believe it. What is worse is, they may actually read it and that would convince them!

It is a terribly incomplete article that cannot be called journalism, but that is not the point.

The point is, the Pope's careless words "who am I to judge" have been used time and time again by the enemies of the Church, the enemies of Truth, the enemies of Christ. The words of the German bishop Bode, written up here on Vox two weeks ago, have been quoted to indicate that it is a certainty.

The fault of this article lies with the unprofessional journalist that wrote it including leaving the reader hanging on the matter of abortion that the Church now has a "softer tone."

The greater fault lies with the Pope who has been careless and imprudent and irresponsible with his off-the-cuff comments (and he doesn't seem to learn from it) and the heretical Bishop Bode (in full communion) who would think in the manner that he does and spout error and lies from his filthy mouth.

Bishop Bode, you are a liar and a deceiver. Repent now or get out!

Christ will not be mocked.

Gay couples could get the Pope's blessing: Francis set to discuss plans with cardinals at key Vatican gathering next month.

Prospect of a major concession to same-sex rights was aired yesterday.

It came ahead of a key gathering of cardinals at the Vatican next month.

Pope is set to discuss plans for priests to give a blessing to gay couples 

By STEVE DOUGHTY SOCIAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 00:19 GMT, 17 September 2015 | UPDATED: 05:12 GMT, 17 September 2015

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3237695/Gay-couples-Pope-s-blessing-Francis-set-discuss-plans-cardinals-key-Vatican-gathering-month.html#ixzz3mBk4v1mr
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Pope Francis (pictured in St. Peter's Square, Vatican City,
 yesterday) is set to discuss plans for Roman Catholic
priests to give a blessing to gay couples

The Pope is set to discuss plans for Roman Catholic priests to give a blessing to gay couples.

The prospect of a major concession to gay rights was aired yesterday ahead of a key gathering of cardinals at the Vatican next month.  

Pope Francis has already set in motion a new liberal approach to another major source of conflict over sex and marriage among Catholics – the attitude of the church to divorced and remarried couples.

He has announced a fast-track scheme to allow divorced Catholics to have their marriages annulled so they can remarry and remain full members of the church.

Now, a similar reform to help gay couples will also come under consideration. 

The idea of blessings for gay relationships was acknowledged by a German bishop who will be among those making decisions at the Vatican synod on the family.

Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, one of three delegates from the liberal German church, told a Roman Catholic news agency that Roman Catholics already agree that there is to be no unjust discrimination against homosexual couples.

He added that it is important that the church should see their 'strengths and not only their weaknesses and deficiencies'.

The Bishop of Osnabruck said that while the church should treat gay couples in 'a positive way', their relationships could not be 'something that would be equal to a marriage'.

However, he added: 'But, with prayers and a private form of a blessing, one will be able to accompany them on their way.'

Bishop Bode's views are thought to have support from a strong body of less outspoken prelates who will be influential at next month's gathering. 

Any new liberal attitude to homosexuality that emerges from the family synod will provoke anger among Catholic conservatives and may make it hard for the Vatican to keep a lid on potential conflicts.

Yesterday a prominent conservative publishing house put out a report which said the synod is likely to introduce gay blessings under the guise of reforms to 'pastoral practice'.

The paper by analyst Edward Pention, put out by Ignatius Press, an imprint from the same Jesuit tradition that produced Pope Francis, said there are likely to be 'subtle attempts to circumvent church teaching'. 

It said that participants in the synod aim 'to emphasise innovative pastoral practice that many others see as being at odds with the church's doctrine'.

The paper added: 'Notwithstanding Pope Francis' wishes for an open discussion yielding a well-grounded unity, the next synod may result in even more confusion and dissension.'

The marriage annulment reform plans made public last week were the first practical liberalisation since Francis was elected in 2013.

The Pope has frequently hinted at his wish to soften Catholic teaching on sex and marriage.

Referring to gay people, Francis said in 2013 that 'we must be brothers'. 

He added: 'If a person is gay and seeks God and has goodwill, who am I to judge him?'

Earlier this month, he signalled a softer approach to abortion by extending to all priests the power to forgive a woman who has had an abortion if she makes clear her repentance.