The closeness of the vote - the stacked deck did it, and who was that lay "brother" and why was he allowed to vote?

Dr. Robert Moynihan has just sent out a letter with the votes on the three closest paragraphs. Clearly, the Synod was stacked as is evidenced by the opposition to these most controversial paragraphs. There was one vote from a lay "brother." Who was he and why was he allowed to vote? A religious brother is a layman, because he is not cleric. 

Now we see clearly; as I wrote previously, as have others, the Synod was a sham. It should be forgotten and ignored along with those who made this "mess."  

The three paragraphs which received the lowest vote totals were Paragraphs 84, 85, and 86. These paragraphs, on "Discernment and Integration," deal with "the baptized who are divorced and civilly remarried." Paragraph 84 received 187 "yes" votes and 72 "no" votes. Paragraph 85 received 178 "yes" votes and 80 "no" votes. (Since 177 votes were needed for a two-thirds majority, this also passed, but it was close; though in this particular case, 173 votes were enough for a two-thirds majority of the 258 votes that were cast, as seven Fathers abstained; this paragraph received the lowest percentage of votes given to any paragraph.) Paragraph 86 received 190 "yes" votes and 64 "no" votes. Here are the paragraphs in question, in my own English translation (the official English translation is not yet available). The Three Less Unanimous Paragraphs Discernment and integration  84. The baptized who are divorced and civilly remarried need to be more integrated in the Christian communities in the different ways possible, avoiding any occasion of scandal.
 The logic of integration is the key to their pastoral accompaniment, in order that they know not only that they belong to the Body of Christ which is the Church, but can have a joyful and fruitful experience of it. They are baptized, they are brothers and sisters, the Holy Spirit pours out into them gifts and charisms for the good of all. Their participation can be expressed in different ecclesial services: it is therefore necessary to discern which of the various forms of exclusion currently practiced in the liturgical, pastoral, educational and institutional realms can be overcome. They not only should not feel themselves excommunicated, but can live and mature as living members of the Church, feeling her to be a mother who welcomes them always, who takes care of them with affection and who encourages them in the path of life and of the Gospel. This integration is also needed for the care and Christian education of their children, who must be considered the most important. For the Christian community, taking care of these people is not a weakening of their faith and testimony about the indissolubility of marriage: rather, the Church expresses in this very care her charity. 85. St. John Paul II offered a comprehensive criterion, which remains the basis for the evaluation of these situations: "Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to discern situations carefully. There is indeed a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage. Finally, there are those who have contracted a second marriage for the sake of the children, and are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous marriage, irreparably broken, had never been valid" (FC, 84).
 It is therefore the duty of priests to accompany the people concerned on the way of discernment according to the teaching of the Church and the guidelines of the Bishop. In this process, it will be useful to make an examination of conscience, by means of moments of reflection and penance. The divorced and remarried should ask themselves how they have behaved towards their children when the conjugal union has entered into crisis; if there have been attempts at reconciliation; what is the situation of the partner who has been abandoned; what effect has the new relationship on the rest of the family and on the community of the faithful; what example it offers to young people who are preparing for marriage. A sincere reflection can strengthen trust in the mercy of God that is not denied to anyone. Moreover, one can not deny that in some circumstances "imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or nullified" (CCC, 1735) due to various conditions. Accordingly, the judgment of an objective situation should not lead to a judgment on the "subjective culpability" (Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration of June 24, 2000, 2a). Under certain circumstances people find it very difficult to act otherwise than they do. Therefore, while maintaining a general rule, it must be recognized that the responsibility with respect to certain actions or decisions is not the same in all cases. Pastoral discernment, while taking account of a properly formed conscience of the people, must take these situations into consideration. The consequences of acts taken are not necessarily the same in all cases. 86. The process of accompaniment and discernment orients these faithful to an examination of conscience regarding their situation before God. The interview with the priest, in the internal forum ("foro interno"), contributes to the formation of a correct judgment on what hinders the possibility of a fuller participation in the life of the Church and on the steps that can foster it and make it grow. Given that in the law itself there is no graduality (cf. FC 34), this discernment will never be able to prescind from the needs of the truth and the charity of the Gospel proposed by the Church. In order for this to happen, the necessary conditions of humility, confidence, and love for the Church and its teaching, must be guaranteed, in the sincere search for God's will and the desire to achieve a more perfect answer to it. 

Modernist heresiarch James Martin, S.J. already interpreting Synod Relatio where "conscience" not truth, is the guide

It has been said over and over again. Those of us who stand by the Church have today been called out by the Bishop of Rome himself because we are not the "true defenders of doctrine" because we uphold the "letter." 

We are wrong because we do not uphold the "spirit."

No interest in "dialogue" from this Jesuit.

What follows is the first public scandal over the Synod document caused by a Catholic priest who has stated quite clearly for the world to see that through the "internal forum" the divorced and remarried can make the decision to receive the Holy Eucharist. This is the devolution of doctrine and it has been done by Francis the Bishop of Rome his gang of clericalist thugs, particularly the puffed up with pride and arrogant, Jesuits. 

The apologists for Francis and those engaged in papolatry cannot deny it any longer.  

The "spirit" of Francis's vision is already being implemented.

Welcome to Vatican III.

It's not the letter of the "doctrine" but the "spirit" - and you're a jealous sibling or an upset labourer if you disagree, so there, now shut-up and do what I say!

"The Synod experience also made us better realize that the true defenders of doctrine are not those who uphold its letter, but its spirit."

May God protect us from these malefactors and St. Michael come to our aid. 

Gird your loins brothers and sisters. It has begun.

Final Discourse of Pope Francis

By Pope Francis

Dear Beatitudes, Eminences and Excellencies,
Dear Brothers and Sisters,

I would like first of all to thank the Lord, who has guided our synodal process in these years by his Holy Spirit, whose support is never lacking to the Church.

My heartfelt thanks go to Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, Secretary General of the Synod, Bishop Fabio Fabene, its Under-Secretary, and, together with them, the Relator, Cardinal Peter Erdő, and the Special Secretary, Archbishop Bruno Forte, the Delegate Presidents, the writers, consultors and translators, and all those who have worked tirelessly and with total dedication to the Church: My deepest thanks!

I likewise thank all of you, dear Synod Fathers, Fraternal Delegates, Auditors and Assessors, parish priests and families, for your active and fruitful participation.

And I thank all those unnamed men and women who contributed generously to the labours of this Synod by quietly working behind the scenes.

Be assured of my prayers, that the Lord will reward all of you with his abundant gifts of grace!

As I followed the labours of the Synod, I asked myself: What will it mean for the Church to conclude this Synod devoted to the family?

Certainly, the Synod was not about settling all the issues having to do with the family, but rather attempting to see them in the light of the Gospel and the Church’s tradition and two-thousand-year history, bringing the joy of hope without falling into a facile repetition of what is obvious or has already been said.

Surely it was not about finding exhaustive solutions for all the difficulties and uncertainties which challenge and threaten the family, but rather about seeing these difficulties and uncertainties in the light of the Faith, carefully studying them and confronting them fearlessly, without burying our heads in the sand.

It was about urging everyone to appreciate the importance of the institution of the family and of marriage between a man and a woman, based on unity and indissolubility, and valuing it as the fundamental basis of society and human life.

It was about listening to and making heard the voices of the families and the Church’s pastors, who came to Rome bearing on their shoulders the burdens and the hopes, the riches and the challenges of families throughout the world.

It was about showing the vitality of the Catholic Church, which is not afraid to stir dulled consciences or to soil her hands with lively and frank discussions about the family.

It was about trying to view and interpret realities, today’s realities, through God’s eyes, so as to kindle the flame of faith and enlighten people’s hearts in times marked by discouragement, social, economic and moral crisis, and growing pessimism.

It was about bearing witness to everyone that, for the Church, the Gospel continues to be a vital source of eternal newness, against all those who would “indoctrinate” it in dead stones to be hurled at others.

It was also about laying closed hearts, which bare the closed hearts which frequently hide even behind the Church’s teachings or good intentions, in order to sit in the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superiority and superficiality, difficult cases and wounded families.

It was about making clear that the Church is a Church of the poor in spirit and of sinners seeking forgiveness, not simply of the righteous and the holy, but rather of those who are righteous and holy precisely when they feel themselves poor sinners.

It was about trying to open up broader horizons, rising above conspiracy theories and blinkered viewpoints, so as to defend and spread the freedom of the children of God, and to transmit the beauty of Christian Newness, at times encrusted in a language which is archaic or simply incomprehensible.

In the course of this Synod, the different opinions which were freely expressed – and at times, unfortunately, not in entirely well-meaning ways – certainly led to a rich and lively dialogue; they offered a vivid image of a Church which does not simply “rubberstamp”, but draws from the sources of her faith living waters to refresh parched hearts.¹

And – apart from dogmatic questions clearly defined by the Church’s Magisterium – we have also seen that what seems normal for a bishop on one continent, is considered strange and almost scandalous for a bishop from another; what is considered a violation of a right in one society is an evident and inviolable rule in another; what for some is freedom of conscience is for others simply confusion. Cultures are in fact quite diverse, and each general principle needs to be inculturated, if it is to be respected and applied.²

The 1985 Synod, which celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council, spoke of inculturation as “the intimate transformation of authentic cultural values through their integration in Christianity, and the taking root of Christianity in the various human cultures”.³

Inculturation does not weaken true values, but demonstrates their true strength and authenticity, since they adapt without changing; indeed they quietly and gradually transform the different cultures.⁴

We have seen, also by the richness of our diversity, that the same challenge is ever before us: that of proclaiming the Gospel to the men and women of today, and defending the family from all ideological and individualistic assaults.

And without ever falling into the danger of relativism or of demonizing others, we sought to embrace, fully and courageously, the goodness and mercy of God who transcends our every human reckoning and desires only that “all be saved” (cf. 1 Tm 2:4). In this way we wished to experience this Synod in the context of the Extraordinary Year of Mercy which the Church is called to celebrated.

Dear Brothers,

The Synod experience also made us better realize that the true defenders of doctrine are not those who uphold its letter, but its spirit; not ideas but people; not formulae but the gratuitousness of God’s love and forgiveness. This is in no way to detract from the importance of formulae, laws and divine commandments, but raather to exalt the greatness of the true God, who does not treat us according to our merits or even according to our works but solely according to the boundless generosity of his Mercy (cf. Rom 3:21-30; Ps 129; Lk 11:37-54). It does have to do with overcoming the recurring temptations of the elder brother (cf. Lk 15:25-32) and the jealous labourers (cf. Mt 20:1-16). Indeed, it means upholding all the more the laws and commandments which were made for man and not vice versa (cf. Mk 2:27).

In this sense, the necessary human repentance, works and efforts take on a deeper meaning, not as the price of that salvation freely won for us by Christ on the cross, but as a response to the One who loved us first and saved us at the cost of his innocent blood, while we were still sinners (cf. Rom 5:6).

The Church’s first duty is not to hand down condemnations or anathemas, but to proclaim God’s mercy, to call to conversion, and to lead all men and women to salvation in the Lord (cf. Jn 12:44-50).

Blessed Paul VI expressed this eloquently: “”We can imagine, then, that each of our sins, our attempts to turn our back on God, kindles in him a more intense flame of love, a desire to bring us back to himself and to his saving plan… God, in Christ, shows himself to be infinitely good… God is good. Not only in himself; God is – let us say it with tears – good for us. He loves us, he seeks us out, he thinks of us, he knows us, he touches our hearts us and he waits for us. He will be – so to say – delighted on the day when we return and say: ‘Lord, in your goodness, forgive me. Thus our repentance becomes God’s joy”.⁵

Saint John Paul II also stated that: “the Church lives an authentic life when she professes and proclaims mercy… and when she brings people close to the sources of the Saviour’s mercy, of which she is the trustee and dispenser”.⁶

Benedict XVI, too, said: “Mercy is indeed the central nucleus of the Gospel message; it is the very name of God… May all that the Church says and does manifest the mercy God feels for mankind. When the Church has to recall an unrecognized truth, or a betrayed good, she always does so impelled by merciful love, so that men may have life and have it abundantly (cf. Jn 10:10)”.⁷

In light of all this, and thanks to this time of grace which the Church has experienced in discussing the family, we feel mutually enriched. Many of us have felt the working of the Holy Spirit who is the real protagonist and guide of the Synod. For all of us, the word “family” has a new resonance, so much so that the word itself already evokes the richness of the family’s vocation and the significance of the labours of the Synod.⁸

In effect, for the Church to conclude the Synod means to return to our true “journeying together” in bringing to every part of the world, to every diocese, to every community and every situation, the light of the Gospel, the embrace of the Church and the support of God’s mercy!

Thank you!

Do not be optimistic friends - it is not going to be good

"Aye, fight and you may die. Run, and you'll live, at least a while. 

And dying in your beds, many years from now,

would you be willing to trade all the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives,

but they'll never take our Church!"

Friends, today is the day.

As I write, the bishops are getting the report, the Relatio. They have been ordered by the Synod manipulators, Balidsseri and the others to remain silent on it. These malefactors, and that is what they are, demanded of the Synod Fathers that they do their work in secret and then demand that when they go home, the Relatio is not to be shared. Yesterday, the bishops had to fight as they were not going to be even given copies, it would have simply been read to them. By whom, one wonders. 

(The Synod decisions on the fly have now released it in Italian only - they can't even get their skullduggery right)

http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2015/10/24/0816/01825.html

Do you believe how evil these men are?

The Catholic faithful have a divine right to know what Holy Mother Church's prelates are thinking and doing outside of the confessional. We demand to know what is in the Relatio!

We must depend on some bishop to let sunlight be the best disinfectant.

Balidisseri, Lombardi, Forte, Wuerl, Cupich- these are men committing great evil in the darkness.

I call upon faithful bishops to defy their heinous order of secrecy and release to the Catholic faithful the truth. The truth that these malefactors want hidden. What will it cost you? I have an extra room and Fox and Vox are good cooks. You can live here.

The faithful bishops should have walked out.

What kind of evil do these men do under the nose of the Pope himself? We know some of their names don't we friend? The Lord knows all of them and He will execute his judgement on these faithless and evil men. These Freemasons and sodomites in the priesthood and episcopacy. These vile and disgusting and immoral sons of Satan. These men and the adulterists and homosexualist ideas and lusts in their poisoned minds and souls filled with bile. Their Hell will be severe and they will go there for engaging in a Synod of Heresy, a Synod of Sodomy, a Synod of Adultery. Repent or be damned. 

Is the Pope behind this? My sources say that they are manipulating him. Why he allows this we do not know. Is he part of the problem? At least in that he allows it, yes. He needs to dismiss these heretics. He cannot ask for "pardon" for all these scandals and allow them to continue under his nose. 

Pope Francis, find your courage! Out these men before it is too late. God and history are both terrible judges.

When we look back over the last three decades, Benedict XVI and John Paul II allowed them to get away with it as well. What they have with Francis is either a simpleton and innocent or a cooperator. Our problem is, we don't know really know which it is. We can say that if he is a simpleton and ignorant, then he is being used and abused. Then what is it? What is it that prevents this Pope from condemning these heresiarchs?

In the post below, Cardinal Thomas Collins of Toronto hits back at Wuerl and Father Thomas Rosica over the Pope's message of questioning and openness and then their mockery of the thirteen when they tried to be open to the Pope. 

My contacts in Rome this morning tell me that there is little doubt that the letter of the thirteen was leaked by the synod agitators of heresy to make it appear that it was one of the thirteen in order to make them look like they were against the Pope. Cardinal Collins's comment to the Star, "What do we want, everyone to say nothing?" is one-hundred percent accurate. These Synod manipulators and deceivers want no dissent from their own dissent from the faith.

There are two possibilities; the Pope is an innocent, simple man with the best of intentions who has been used and abused and for whatever reason does not realise it or does not know what to do about it, if he does. You know the other possibility.

What I have been told, I will tell you exactly as it has been said to me.

The goal of these malefactors is divide us and make us look as if "we don't like the Pope."

Do not be optimistic.

This is the 43rd verse of a very bad song that had been written many, many years ago.

Pray the rosary.  

And mediate upon the lamentation of our Lord at Calvary.

Something some men have forgotten about.

Cardinal Thomas Collins defends his faithful and just Synod actions in manipulative story by the Toronto Star. Will the Basilians have him STFU too?

Cardinal Collins is one of the thirteen or whatever number it was that signed and sent a letter to Pope Francis at the beginning of the Synod. A few days ago, Cardinal Donald Wuerl lashed out in a Jesuitical periodical that some people, insinuating the thirteen, "just don't like the Pope." According to a Toronto Star reporter, Father Thomas J. Rosica sent the article to journalists allegedly stating, "I fully share Cardinal Wuerl's assessment."

The Toronto Star, contacted Cardinal Collins in Rome to explain himself, as if he answers to the Holy See Press Office or that anti-Catholic use for bird-cages and fish. Cardinal Collins stated, “I don’t know where they’re coming from, either Cardinal Wuerl or Fr. Rosica.” He went on to say that, “The Holy Father has been really clear: If you’ve got some concerns you express them."

In a post on LifeSiteNews, John-Henry Weston writes that "As for the Canadians, there are three who have garnered much attention.  The heroic act of Toronto Cardinal Thomas Collins as one of the thirteen Cardinals to sign on to the letter to the Pope expressing grave concern about manipulation at the Synod caused him much suffering. I met him at a restaurant and he looked very tired. I expressed a simple thanks and offered him prayers on behalf of life and family activists.  Archbishop Paul-Andre Durocher planted himself firmly in the progressive camp along with Fr. Thomas Rosica early on in the proceedings."

Cardinal Collins has remained clear on doctrine and has paid a personal price for it. Durocher was an embarrassment out of the gate with a snide comment on doctrine and his call for "deaconesses." There are no vocations in Gatineau and less than 50 priests left. Let it die.

Manwhile, Father Thomas J. Rosica, of the Congregation of St. Basil and based in Toronto with Salt + Light Television of which he is Executive Produce, had much to say at the Synod. Little needs to be said here. Thousands of Catholics on blogs and social media around the world have discovered for themselves what some of us already knew.

As for that Basilian Congregation, they have been hit with millions of dollars in lawsuits and settlements due to the now old and perverted sodomite priests in their Congregation who raped and abused so many boys dating back sixty years to the 1950's. This past July, after a nearly a century, they vacated the historic Holy Rosary parish in a joint decision with Diocesan officials. We have been given information which indicates that there was an extensive and unauthorised "kitchen renovation" which occurred within the year or two preceding their departure. Holy Rosary now has the former Seminary Rector and Monsignor appointed as Pastor.  

Still with these Toronto Basilians, Tim Scott and allegedly ordained priest made quite effective use of Twitter in exposing the kind of holiness is sought after within the Congregation of St. Basil. During the Extraordinary Synod on the family last October 2014, Scott Tweeted, "Just a little advice to #CardinalBurke to STFU." Scott, pictured at the left, was found out in February and promptly deleted the Tweet, then removed his Twitter account after it all became public by the good people at ChurchMilitant.com.  He had been public spokesman for the Basilian Congregation. Basilians have much to say, it seems. They seem to think that nobody else should.  

Cardinal Collins went on to state that sending the Pope a letter expressing certain concerns is, "Hardly opposing the Pope," adding that it is "ridiculous" to think that it would follow that one would not "like the Pope," in Wuerl's words for sending a letter. The Cardinal then asked the Star reporter rhetorically, "What do we want, everyone to say nothing?”

Yes, Your Eminence, that is exactly what they want.

Thank you for not giving it to them and by not giving it to them, you actually gave it to them good!

...

John-Henry Westen's editorial can be found at:

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/popes-encouragement-of-airing-formal-heresy-is-severing-the-church


The Toronto Star story is below:

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/10/22/do-some-cardinals-dislike-pope-francis.html

Do some cardinals dislike Pope Francis?

In a dispatch this week from Rome, Rev. Tom Reese, a close Vatican observer, put it bluntly: “Never in my lifetime have I heard of bishops and cardinals being so disrespectful of a pope, challenging his organization of this synod, even a few referring to him as a Protestant and threatening a fractured church if he goes against their wishes.”The public sniping was triggered by a letter to the Pope, leaked to an Italian journalist on Oct. 12. The letter was signed by 13 cardinals, including Toronto’s Thomas Collins, New York’s Timothy Dolan and the Vatican’s enforcer of Catholic doctrine, Germany’s Gerhard Muller.

They alleged the synod had been rigged to achieve “a predetermined conclusion.” They challenged the 10-member committee drafting the final document as appointed by the Pope “without consultation.” They also feared the synod would be dominated by attempts to lift the ban on divorced Catholics receiving communion after they remarry in a civil ceremony.

Pope Francis distressed some conservatives when he recently made it easier to annul marriages. Once annulled — if a spouse did not freely consent to it, for example — the couple is free to marry again and receive communion. Francis’s next step, conservatives fear, is to lift the communion ban on those who remarry without an annulment.

The Pope tried to ease conservative concerns during an address to the synod. But he also warned against giving in to conspiracy theories.

As debate heated up, German Cardinal Donald Wuerl lashed out at critics in an interview Sunday in the Jesuit magazine, America. Rev. Thomas Rosica, a Toronto priest and the Vatican’s English-language media attaché, emailed it to journalists with this message: “I fully share Cardinal Wuerl’s assessment.” “I wonder if these people who are speaking,” Wuerl said, “sometimes surreptitiously, sometimes halfway implying, then backing off and then twisting around, I wonder if it is really that they find they just don’t like this pope.” 

Cardinal Collins, Catholic archbishop of Toronto, dismissed Wuerl’s comments.

“I don’t know where they’re coming from, either Cardinal Wuerl or Fr. Rosica,” Collins said in a phone interview from Rome. “The Holy Father has been really clear: If you’ve got some concerns you express them. That’s hardly opposing the Pope or something; that’s ridiculous. What do we want, everyone to say nothing?”

Collins would not discuss the details of the letter. He described it as fulfilling a cardinal’s duty to give “candid and honest advice to the Pope.”

The synod’s 253 participants, most of them bishops, have presented hundreds of amendments to 147 sections contained in a draft working document to be voted on Saturday, Collins said. The synod is an advisory body; the Pope has the final say.

Collins said he could not imagine the synod recommending that remarried Catholics be allowed communion. But on Wednesday, German bishops — progressives and conservatives — proposed a compromise. The church ban on communion remains, but remarried Catholics could get it lifted privately by a priest or bishop after a period of penance. The proposal was backed by Cardinal Muller. 

Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, our latest heresiarch and homosexualist

Here's another. Oswald Gracias of Mumbai.

DANGER AHEAD. Synod document drafting committee member: Familiaris Consortio? "Circumstances have changed!" Divorced-and-remarried, "decentralization" still on the agenda

Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, one of ten mostly-liberal prelates assigned by Pope Francis to the drafting committee for the final Synod relation, has unexpectedly emerged in recent days as a champion for greater "openness" to homosexuals. His comments in today's Vatican press conference are true to form, and given his role in drafting the Synod document hints at something that can be manipulated in favor of Kasperite and liberal concerns.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/10/danger-ahead-signs-emerging-of-liberal.html

The deception from the Vatican continues - They will throw out the work of the Saint they just proclaimed

Updated!

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/10/danger-ahead-signs-emerging-of-liberal.html#more

Father Z reports that:

Regarding the Kasperite Proposal (to allow civilly divorced and remarried Catholics to go to confession and Holy Communion without requiring of them sexual continence), the breakdown is more or less as follows:

• 4 groups in favor of Kasperitism (of which, 2 groups want the matter decided in the internal forum, i.e., by the penitent, but in conversation with a priest in Confession).
• 1 group sort of in favor of Kaspertism
• 3 groups opposed to Kaspertism
• 1 group divided on Kasperism
• 1 group with no recommendation on Kaspertism
• 1 group asking Pope to establish a commission to study the Kasper Proposal
• 2 groups asking the Pope himself to decide about the Kasper Proposal.

So, the Kasper Proposal has not been completely defeated.

This Synod is a sham. It is a blatant disgrace. Committees  of liars in clerics. The manipulation continues.

Schism is in the offing.

It can be no other way.

But I'm not leaving, are you?

Rise up - the battle is not done!

Are you tired yet friend? How are you sleeping? How is the Synod to destroy the family affecting you? Take some time and write about it and let us know, it will be helpful to all.

Not that I'm into some kind of "sharing" a word that my good friend Tom Rosica likes to use, but it is helpful to know how others are reacting to this mess.

Think about it. Our parents and grandparents sat by at Vatican II because they could do nothing else. They didn't know what was going on until it was too late and even if they did, they had nothing in their knowledge base or toolbelt in order to respond.

These modernists, these sodomites - hidden as they were, these heresiarchs tore out the churches and destroyed the work of pennies from the faithful, they destroyed the Mass, the devotions, the music, the feasts, the liturgical cycle of time, the catechism, the religious orders, the faith.

There wasn't one stone they left unturned. Well one actually. The rosary, because that weak and incompetent man named, Giovanni Montini, didn't have the guts to go that far, notwithstanding the urgings of Bugnini. 

We will not let them to this again.

We will not abide another Pope doing it again.

I am tired. I am angry. I won't put up with it again.

Rise thou that sleepest and read this by  Matthew Karmel the nom de plume of a teacher, freelance writer and translator living in Zurich, Switzerland with his wife and three children. A lifelong Catholic, he is also the author of the blog The Radical Catholic.

It's all up to one man

THE SYNOD: The decentralization of the Church offends the Faith and common sense

22 October 2015

   

(by Roberto de Mattei IL FOGLIO October 20, 2015)


On October 17th 2015, Pope Francis announced how the Synod on the Family is going to conclude. Just a few days before the end of the work by the assembly of bishops, they have reached an impasse, and the way out of it, according to the Pope would be the decentralization of the Church.


This impasse is due to the division among those in the hall, who refer with firmness to the perennial Magisterium on marriage and those “innovators” who want to overturn two thousand years of Church teaching, but above all – the Truth of the Gospel. It is, in fact, the Word of Christ, the natural and Divine law, that a valid marriage – celebrated and consummated [ratum et consummatum] – by the baptized, cannot, under any circumstances, be dissolved by anyone.


A single exception [to this] would annul the absolute, universal value of this law and if it were to fall, the entire moral edifice of the Church would collapse. Marriage is either indissoluble or it isn’t and a disassociation between the principle and its practical application cannot be admitted. Between thoughts and words and between words and facts, the Church insists on a radical coherence, the coherence the Martyrs have borne witness to throughout history.


The principle that doctrine doesn’t change, but its pastoral application does, introduces a wedge between two inseparable dimensions of Christianity: the Truth and Life. The separation of doctrine and praxis is not of Catholic doctrine, but of Hegelian and Marxist philosophy, which turns upside down the traditional axiom according to which agere sequitur esse. Action, in the perspective of the innovators, precedes being and conditions it; experience does not live the truth but creates it.


Read the rest at: http://www.robertodemattei.it/en/2015/10/22/the-synod-the-decentralization-of-the-church-offends-the-faith-and-common-sense/

Heresiarch Cupich persecutes traditional Latin Mass. Does he believe Confession is about "forgiveness" - Bring it on baby, we'll out you all!

Thanks to Ann Barnhardt for digging up this little gem. If you want to read what Heresiarch Cupich thinks about the Sacrament of Non-Confession, read it all here.

“We use that word “reconciliation” all the time.  It doesn’t mean about giving people forgiveness. It comes from an anatomical root, namely the eyelash, it is called a cilia. So you begin to see eye-to-eye with people.”

Who appointed this heretic to Chicago anyway? 

Speaking of Chicago, the perhaps the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest and Canons of St. John Cantius might wish to Canon lawyer up. 

Trouble will come from this heresiarch.


http://rapidcityjournal.com/bishop-bans-latin-services/article_b37a5c37-b5a4-5af6-8014-48d9f5ef9da7.html

Bishop bans Latin services

March 27, 2002 11:00 pm  •  Mary Garrigan, Journal Staff Writer

RAPID CITY - A standoff between Latin-rite Catholics in Rapid City and their bishop has left the Latin Mass congregation of St. Michael's choosing to celebrate Good Friday services on the sidewalk instead of in church.

Members of the Latin Mass community, which has met in Rapid City for the past 12 years at Immaculate Conception Church on Fifth Street, say Bishop Blase Cupich has barred them from celebrating Good Friday and Easter vigil services at the church in an attempt to mainstream them into the English-language Mass.

"We've been prohibited by the bishop from celebrating the Easter Triduum liturgies and locked out of our church from noon on Holy Thursday until 8 a.m. on Easter morning," Dan Carda, 58, of Piedmont, said. Carda is a Latin Mass adherent who refuses to participate in the new-order English-language Mass that was mandated by the Second Vatican Council.

Instead, Carda and some of the other 220 members of St. Michael's congregation will gather at 3 p.m. today for Good Friday services on the sidewalk in front of the church.

Cupich sees his decision to not allow Good Friday Latin services at ICC as an invitation to unity, not a denial.

"We're just looking for an opportunity on an annual basis for us to all worship together, for one moment of unity as a Catholic church," Cupich said. "I'm looking for one time each year to do that, and it seems the day the Lord died for us all would be a good day to do it. That's all that this is about."

He said he would like the Latin Mass community to recognize unity with the wider Catholic church. "There has to be some occasion on a yearly basis to reflect the fact that we are one church under one bishop," Cupich said. "I would ask them, 'Why do they find it so difficult, on the day of the Lord's death, to celebrate with their bishop, who is the sign of the Lord's unity?'"

Carda sees it differently.

"This is his most-effective time to crack down, during Holy Week," Carda said, noting that Catholics such as he expect the elaborate pomp and circumstance of the Latin rite during Holy Week.

"I'm quite upset. It's disappointing and very disheartening," Carda, who has drafted a letter of complaint to Pope John Paul II, said. "I don't know why he feels like we are such a danger to him."

Carda and the Rev. Valentine Young, pastor of the St. Michael's community, say celebrating Holy Week in Latin is their right. They have a different understanding of the pope's position on the continuation of the Latin-rite Mass than does Cupich. The bishop's decision to prohibit some Holy Week services, as well as his recent decision to not allow children to make their First Communion or to be confirmed in the Latin rite, is contrary to the pope's wishes, Carda said.

"As long as the pope authorizes the Latin rite, I don't feel like I'm in violation of any of the legitimate authority of the church," Carda said.

After Vatican II, Carda stayed away from the Catholic Church for 30 years, returning only when the Latin rite started being celebrated again in a Sturgis congregation. "To me, the Latin rite is the real church. When you attend, you feel something very special that you do not when you attend a Novus Ordo (New Order) Mass," he said.

Young has said that the Ecclesia Dei document (the papal document allowing for the continuation of the Latin rite for people having trouble making the transition to English) ensures the right to worship in Latin. The document says, "Great respect should be shown to people still attached to the former Latin Liturgical Tradition." Cupich, he said, "is not showing these people respect by what he is doing."

Cupich says he's sorry the Latin Mass community is having trouble with his invitation to worship with him at the main Cathedral of Our Lady of Perpetual Help during Holy Week instead of at Immaculate Conception. "I'm supportive of their desire to have Sunday Mass there, and I'm going to be very patient with them," he said.

But his understanding of Ecclesia Dei is that "… eventually, Catholics have to understand that the reform of the Second Vatican Council is, in fact, an improvement and is important to our spiritual life."

Rome, Cupich said, has made it clear that any celebration of the Latin tradition is at the discretion of the local bishop. "And I've made my decision," he said.

Complaining about him to the Vatican and worshipping on the sidewalk probably won't help the Latin-rite cause, Cupich said. "My impression is that it will not help their standing with the wider church."

Subtitles

• subtitles off

Captions

• captions off

Chapters

• Chapters

What will Francis do?

It is clear that the Kasperites and sodomite supporting manipulators, such as Cupich, at the Synod are on the run. They kept telling us to trust the "Holy Spirit." We did, it was they that betrayed Him.

Yet, this is not over. The desperation of these malefactors knows no bounds. Their allies inside the Vatican and the radical "catholic" media will not stop. They will now go after and demand of Pope Francis that he ignore the bishops and do what they want. At least seven of the ten appointed by Francis to write the final report (it has already been written) are heterodox. This manipulation is not over.

Michael Voris lays it all on the table today how these rotten men, this boil on the Body of Christ, His Church; have manipulated this Pope from the very beginning and taken advantage of him.

The Pope must act and he must act as a Pope ought to act in the situation where the sheep are being abused by the shepherds.

The Pope needs to rid the Church, of these malefactors that set this up. We know their names and so do you, does he? We don't need to repeat them here, they are already outed on this blog. Will he? If he does not, then will he accept their pressure and betray Christ and His Church? 

What is the role of the Freemasonic Lodge at the Synod?

Last week, I wrote a post about Masonic commentary on the death of Cardinal Martini, Danneels presence at Lodge and the praising of the election of Jorge Bergoglio as Pope by the Grand Master of the Orient Lodge of Italy.

Did you get that?

Now, we have a comment by this heroic bishop that some at the Synod are promoting the interests of various "international organisations."

Now, if you follow the link above, you will find a video of Theodore McCarrick the former Cardinal Archbishop of Washington wherein he states that a "powerful and influential man" lobbied him to organise and elect Jorge Bergoglio.

Wake up people! 

You bishops and other Vatican minions reading this, and I know you are because vatican.va has been dropping by more than frequently, fear Christ or get out!

http://torontocatholicwitness.blogspot.ca/2015/10/breaking-bishop-biaasik-cardinals-and.html

(translation: Toronto Catholic Witness. You may use, but you must credit us). 

21.10.2015 

Bishop Białasik: At the Synod there were certain topics that should not have been discussed

The Synod of Bishops was a wonderful experience of the universality of the Church, but it also had its weak side. Many important family matters were not taken up, said Polish bishop missionary from Bolivia, Krzysztof Białasik. He claimed that many beautiful words were expressed at the Synod, it was a valuable witness, but family issues were not exhausted. In the opinion of  Bishop Białasik, there was an unnecessary preoccupation with issues not associated with the gathering. 

Bishop Białasik: 

"In my opinion it is sad that we consumed so much time on issues that the Synod should not have been touching, because those issues are of a different nature. It surprised me that there is a particular group of cardinals and bishops who have spoken out not always properly on issues of the family, interjecting issues that should  be considered in another situation; especially Communion for the divorced and homosexualism. These are other problems, problems that are either doctrinal, or [problems] that have been artificially conceived to destroy the family. These are exactly the matters promoted by various international organizations, in the first place from the USA and Western Europe. But it is surprising that they also have an influence on certain bishops. I do not know what is behind all this; but, if there is such a group of cardinals or bishops, and there is, it means that something is standing behind all of this. This is what pains me the most, that there can exist such people amongst the bishops".