Thursday, 8 December 2016

Catholic Scholars and Pastors express full support for the four Cardinals and express "grave" concern!

I have, this morning, received an email from Dr. Joseph Shaw. Dr. Shaw as one of the original signatories to the letter of academics to Pope Francis on Amoris Laetitia.

+ + +

Statement of Support for the Four Cardinals’ Dubia

     As Catholic scholars and pastors of souls, we wish to express our profound gratitude and full support for the courageous initiative of four members of the College of Cardinals, Their Eminences Walter Brandmüller, Raymond Leo Burke, Carlo Caffarra and Joachim Meisner. As has been widely publicized, these cardinals have formally submitted five dubia to Pope Francis, asking him to clarify five fundamental points of Catholic doctrine and sacramental discipline, the treatment of which in Chapter 8 of the recent Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (AL) appears to conflict with Scripture and/or Tradition and the teaching of previous papal documents – notably Pope St. John Paul II’s Encyclical Veritatis Splendor and his Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio. Pope Francis has so far declined to answer the four cardinals; but since they are in effect asking him whether the above weighty magisterial documents still require our full assent, we think that the Holy Father’s continued silence may open him to the charge of negligence in the exercise of the Petrine duty of confirming his brethren in the faith.

     Several prominent prelates have been sharply critical of the four cardinals’ submission, but without shedding any light on their pertinent and searching questions. We have read attempts to interpret the apostolic exhortation within a ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ by Christoph Cardinal Schӧnborn and Professor Rocco Buttiglione; but we find that they fail to demonstrate their central claim that the novel elements found in AL do not endanger divine law, but merely envisage legitimate changes in pastoral practice and ecclesiastical discipline.

     Indeed, a number of commentators, notably Professor Claudio Pierantoni in an extensive new historical-theological study, have argued that as a result of the widespread confusion and disunity following the promulgation of AL, the universal Church is now entering a gravely critical moment in her history that shows alarming similarities with the great Arian crisis of the fourth century. During that catastrophic conflict the great majority of bishops, including even the Successor of Peter, vacillated over the very divinity of Christ. Many did not fully lapse into heresy; however, disarmed by confusion or weakened by timidity, they sought convenient compromise formulae in the interests of “peace” and “unity”. Today we are witnessing a similar metastasizing crisis, this time over fundamental aspects of Christian living. Continued lip service is given to the indissolubility of marriage, the grave objective sinfulness of fornication, adultery and sodomy, the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist, and the terrible reality of mortal sin. But in practice, increasing numbers of highly placed prelates and theologians are undermining or effectively denying these dogmas – and indeed, the very existence of exceptionless negative prohibitions in the divine law governing sexual conduct – by virtue of their exaggerated or one-sided emphasis on “mercy”, “pastoral accompaniment”, and “mitigating circumstances”.

     With the reigning Pontiff now sounding a very uncertain trumpet in this battle against the ‘principalities and powers’ of the Enemy, the barque of Peter is drifting perilously like a ship without a rudder, and indeed, shows symptoms of incipient disintegration. In such a situation, we believe that all Successors of the Apostles have a grave and pressing duty to speak out clearly and strongly in confirmation of the moral teachings clearly expounded in the magisterial teachings of previous popes and the Council of Trent. Several bishops and another cardinal have already said they find the five dubia opportune and appropriate. We ardently hope, and fervently pray, that many more of them will now endorse publicly not only the four cardinals’ respectful request that Peter’s Successor confirm his brethren in these five points of the faith “delivered once and for all to the saints” (Jude 3), but also Cardinal Burke’s recommendation that if the Holy Father fails to do so, the cardinals then collectively approach him with some form of fraternal correction, in the spirit of Paul’s admonition to his fellow apostle Peter at Antioch (cf. Gal. 2:11).

     We entrust this grave problem to the care and heavenly intercession of Mary Immaculate, Mother of the Church and Vanquisher of all heresies.

December 8, 2016, Feast of the Immaculate Conception


Msgr. Ignacio Barreiro Carambula, STD, JD
Chaplain and Faculty Member of the Roman Forum

Rev. Claude Barthe,

Dr. Robert Beddard, MA (Oxon et Cantab), D.Phil (Oxon)
Fellow emeritus and former Vice Provost of Oriel College Oxford.

Carlos A. Casanova Guerra
Doctor of Philosophy, Full Professor,
Universidad Santo Tomás, Santiago de Chile

Salvatore J. Ciresi MA
Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College
Director of the St. Jerome Biblical Guild   

Luke Gormally, PhL
Director Emeritus, The Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics (1981-2000)
Sometime Research Professor, Ave Maria School of Law, Ann Arbor, Michigan (2001-2007)
Ordinary Member, The Pontifical Academy for Life

Rev. Brian W. Harrison OS, MA, STD
Associate Professor of Theology (retired), Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico; Scholar-in-Residence, Oblates of Wisdom Study Center, St. Louis, Missouri

Rev. John Hunwicke, MA (Oxon.)
Former Senior Research Fellow, Pusey House, Oxford; Priest of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham; Member, Roman Forum

Peter A. Kwasniewski PhD (Philosophy)
Professor, Wyoming Catholic College

Rev. Dr. Dr Stephen Morgan
Academies Conversion Project Leader & Oeconomus
Diocese of Portsmouth

Don Alfredo Morselli STL
Parish priest of the Archdiocese of Bologna

Rev. Richard A. Munkelt PhD (Philosophy)
Chaplain and Faculty Member, Roman Forum

Rev. John Osman MA, STL
Parish priest in the archdiocese of Birmingham,
former Catholic chaplain to the University of Cambridge

Dr Paolo Pasqualucci
Professor of Philosophy (retired),
University of Perugia

Dr Claudio Pierantoni
Professor of Medieval Philosophy in the Philosophy Faculty of the University of Chile
Former Professor of Church History and Patrology at the Faculty of Theology of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Member of the International Association of Patristic Studies

Dr John C. Rao D.Phil (Oxon.)
Associate Professor of History, St. John's University (NYC)
Chairman, Roman Forum
Dr Nicholas Richardson. MA, DPhil (Oxon.)
Fellow emeritus and Sub-Warden of Merton College, Oxford
and former Warden of Greyfriars, Oxford.

Dr Joseph Shaw MA, DPhil (Oxon.) FRSA
Senior Research Fellow (Philosophy) at St Benet's Hall,
Oxford University

Dr Anna M. Silvas FAHA,
Adjunct research fellow, University of New England,
Armidale, NSW, Australia.

Michael G. Sirilla PhD
Director of Graduate Theology,
Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio

Professor Dr Thomas Stark
Phil.-Theol. Hochschule Benedikt XVI, Heiligenkreuz

Rev.  Glen Tattersall
Parish Priest, Parish of Bl. John Henry Newman, Archdiocese of Melbourne
Rector, St Aloysius' Church, Melbourne

Rev. Dr David Watt STL, PhD (Cantab.)
Priest of the Archdiocese of Perth
Chaplain, St Philomena’s chapel, Malaga

+ + +

Bergoglio insists suggestion on remarried has church backing - Yes, he is right, so did Our Lord's Crucifixion! Openly declares a "new" Church and admits to heretical statements and notions on Catholicism!

Even the Associated Press gets it - that Bergoglio is forcing upon the Church, the reception of Holy Communion to those divorced from valid Catholic marriages and remarried civilly without a Decree of Nullity, that is, that the original marriage, for consenting or legal reasons, simply did not take place and was not valid. What he is doing, and the Associated Press gets it, is to sanction adultery, sacrilege and mortal sin.

If you read this blog, you already know these things. What this Francis Bergoglio has done is in error, it bears repeating and communicating. Catholic bishops must cease their silence and cowardice, the faithful must wake out of their stuppour.

There is no mercy in this. This is error. This is evil. This is sacrilege and blasphemy. This is heresy and it comes from the very Pope himself. 

He continues in the interview to the Belgian press, quoted correctly by AP below; that, "it is interesting" how the fundamentals of Amoris Laetitia's support at the Synod is a "guarantee." A guarantee of what, he does not say, one would think that he believes, it guarantees some kind of twisted orthodoxy. He continues in this vein that it was "approved" at these Synods by more than "two-thirds" of those present, which seems to indicate his theory of there being a "guarantee."

He speaks of majorities, and votes and "two-thirds."

Let us remind this Bergoglio that the Church, as it was, and more even than a two-thirds majority of its High Priests (Bishops) condemned to the gibbet Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ and gave us, Barabbas!

We recall that two, only two, - Holy Nicodemus and Holy Joseph of Arimathea were, like our four Cardinals, alone in their opposition. Today, we remember and we revere these names, these two Old Testament Saints, whilst we hold the name Caiphas in disgrace - a man, a worm who has gone to his judgement.

Friends, what I am about to say will scandalise some but it must be said.

Jorge Bergoglio is a liar and a manipulator. His own words have condemned him.

I will follow him, as Pope, when he preaches the truth in conformity with Catholic doctrine. I will not follow Jorge Bergoglio into error and I will not be silent as he leads souls to Hell.

Thirteen Cardinals, including our own in Toronto, Thomas Collins, wrote to him about concerns on how the second Synod was being stage managed and that they were not being listened to. This follows those, such as Cardinal Pell, who, during the first Synod in 2014 declared that it was being "manipulated." Further, Bergoglio appointed to the Synods, which is his right as Pope, bishops and cardinals who would not normally have been there, - those which would support his views and those of the heresiarch Kasper. He stacked the deck. 

Further, two-thirds of those voting at the Synods most certainly did not vote for Holy Communion for the divorced in adultery because this is not in the final relatio of the Synod. A Pope can take all, part or none of a Synod, that is true, but he cannot change doctrine which is what he had done, by stealth, though now clear. He has now come out publicly and stated that which did not happen and it is at best, an unintentional mistake, and at worst a bold-faced lie.

Further, Bergoglio speaks in the interview, correctly quoted below. about "unity and diversity." In other words, the old cranky, backward and doctrinaire Church in Poland or Gabon can do whatever it wants and so can the Church in the enlightened Germany or Argentina. Well, this is not Catholic, which means universal. In fact, it is protestant congregationalism and it is heretical. It is Anglicanism in its worst form in governance combined with Lutheran heresy of faith.

On one hand, he speaks of "synodality" and "collegiality" and that Peter must not be a "dictator" and then, as the wily old Peronist he is, defies synodality and collegiality and dictates what he wants for the Church as if it is his church, and sends out his minions to discredit those opposed to his error and to tell us it is all from the Holy Spirit and we are defying the pope and God - one assumes, the "god of surprises."

Our God is not a "god of surprises." The Holy Spirit is not a liar. He does not change. He does not treat us and our ancestors over two-thousand years as fools for believing one thing that is only now revealed to have been wrong.

Bergoglio is a deceitful, manipulative liar. 

He has disgraced this season of Advent and he has blasphemed this holy day of the Immaculate Conception worse than he did last year permitting the blasphemous light show on this Holy Day upon the Temple of God.

This blog post is being sent to Thomas Cardinal Collins with the following:

Thomas Christopher Cardinal Collins, 
Your Eminence,
     During the Synod on the Family, you faithfully and bravely and wisely stood up along with thirteen of your brother Cardinals to make "Peter" as did Paul, of the truth. During your recent deanery meetings, you were asked by priests about Amoris Laetitia and its interpretation, to which you advised that your position and that of the Archdiocese of Toronto is that which was issued by the Bishops of Alberta and the Northwest Territories. That is, that people in adulterous situations be ministered to but that they must live according to the Ten Commandments and the teachings on marriage and the family as articulated fully by St. John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio with specific mention of living in "continence" as "brother and sister."
     Will you now join your four brother Cardinals and insist that Jorge Bergoglio, Bishop of Rome respond to the Dubia.
     Will you put your bishopric and scarlett on the line and stand up for the truth of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church?

All Cardinals, all bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, you have a sacred duty. 

Jorge Bergoglio has openly stated to the Bishops of Buenos Aires in his Argentina, approved the statements of the Vicar of Rome which conformed to the Buenos Aires statement and now to secular media that he is changing church teaching and discipline. He has openly declared statements which are heretical and antithetical to Catholicism. Even the Associated Press gets it.

Will you stand up for the Faith and the sheep or will you go down into Hell with those who have set out to destroy the Faith?

Do you dare to leave the sheep amongst the wolves?

Are you nothing more than effeminate, emasculated, faithless, episcopal hirelings?

Image result for bergoglio

Pope insists suggestion on remarried has church backing
Associated Press        
December 7, 2016
VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis says the majority of the world's bishops back his suggestion that civilly remarried Catholics can receive Communion, adding fuel to the debate that has riled some conservative Catholics.
In an interview Wednesday with the Belgian Catholic weekly Tertio, Francis said his 2016 document "The Joy of Love" — which contains the suggestion — was the fruit of two meetings of bishops over two years.
"It is interesting that all that (the document) contains, it was approved in the Synod by more than two thirds of the fathers. And this is a guarantee," he said.
Some conservatives have voiced increasing concern that Francis' opening on the divisive issue of Communion for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics is sowing confusion among the faithful about the church's teaching on the indissolubility of marriage. The debate has been stoked by the recent publication of a letter from four conservative cardinals asking Francis to clarify his position.
Francis hasn't directly responded to them, but he has sent signals, including Wednesday's comments. He was responding to a question about the decentralized, "synodal" church he favors, where the pope listens to his church, "lets her grow," harmonizes that growth and returns it to the local churches — such as in the form of a teaching document.
"It is unity in diversity," he said.
In September, Francis fully endorsed the interpretation of the question by Argentine bishops, who wrote a set of guidelines saying "The Joy of Love" clearly allows the possibility of access to the sacraments in exceptional cases. "There are no other interpretations," Francis wrote in approving the Argentine guidelines.
Church teaching holds that unless divorced Catholics receive an annulment, or a church decree that their first marriage was invalid, they are committing adultery in a new civil marriage and cannot receive Communion.
Conservatives had insisted the rules are fixed. Liberals had sought wiggle room to balance doctrine with mercy and look at each couple on a case-by-case basis.
Francis said pastors should help individual Catholics ascertain what God is asking of them, and linked such discussions of conscience with access to the sacraments.

Pope Bergoglio - you have lots of time to speak to media about coprophilia, yet you can't answer the Dubia of the four Cardinals?

Lots of time our Pope Bergoglio has on his hands. Lots of time to sit down and give an interview with secular media.

Not one minute to publicly answer the Dubia of the four Cardinals and the cries of the Catholic faithful.

Oh, look.

The Vatican itself has published the full interview with all the content about coprophagia and coprophilia.

It's as if they're proud of it.

Does this become part of his Magisterium, then?

Will the papolaters out there tell us that this bile emanating from his mouth is as infallible as incense coming from the same place as those over whom he obssesses for eating excrement?

Truly, what is wrong with this man. He is a vulgar, insulting and dictatorial man who was never fit to be the Vicar of Christ. 


Interview with the Holy Father Francis for the Belgian Catholic weekly, “Tertio”, 07.12.2016

The following is the full text of the interview the Holy Father granted to the Belgian Catholic weekly publication “Tertio”, on the occasion of the conclusion of the extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy.
Representative of the bishops for means of communication …
(Pope Francis)
You once brought me some young people who asked good questions
(Interviewer) There is a Pope who gives good answers…
(Pope Francis)
I’ll wait a moment … I want to see the questions, because I haven’t seen them…]
QUESTION - In our country we are going through a moment in which national politics wishes to separate religion from public life: for example, in education. It is the opinion that, in a time of secularisation, religion should be reserved to private life. How can we be at the same time a missionary Church, outbound towards society, and live this tension created by this public opinion?
POPE - Well, I do not want to offend anyone, but this is an old-fashioned mindset. This is the legacy that the Enlightenment has left to us - is it not? - in which every religious phenomenon is a subculture. It is the difference between laicism and secularism. I have spoken about this with the French. … Vatican Council II tells us about the autonomy of things, of processes and institutions. There is a healthy secularism, for instance, the secularism of the State. In general, a secular State is a good thing; it is better than a confessional State, because confessional States finish badly. But secularism is one thing, and laicism is another. Laicism closes the doors to transcendence, to the dual transcendence: both transcendence towards others and, above all, transcendence towards God; or towards what is beyond us. And openness to transcendence is part of the human essence. It is part of man. I am not speaking about religion, I am speaking about openness to transcendence. Therefore, a culture or a political system that does not respect openness to the transcendence of the human person “prunes” or cuts down the human person. Or rather, it does not respect the human person. This is more or less what I think. Therefore, sending to the sacristy any act of transcendence is a form of “asepsis”, which has nothing to do with human nature, which cuts from human nature a good part of life, which is openness.
QUESTION - You are concerned about the interreligious relationship. In our times we live with terrorism and with war. At times it can be seen that the roots of the current wars reside in the difference between religions. What can be said about this?
POPE - Yes, I believe that this opinion exists. But no religion as such can foment war. Because in this case it would be proclaiming a god of destruction, a god of hatred. One cannot wage war in the name of God or in the name of a religious position. War cannot be waged in any religion. And for this reason terrorism and war are not related to religion. Religion is distorted to justify them, this is true. You are witnesses of this, you have experienced it in your homeland. But they are distortions of religion, that do not relate to the essence of the religious fact, which is instead love, unity, respect, dialogue, all these things. … But not in that aspect, or rather, we must be categorical about this, no religion proclaims war for the fact of religion. Religious distortions, yes. For example, all religions have fundamentalist groups.
All of them, we do too. And they destroy, starting from their fundamentalism. But these are small religious groups that have distorted and have “sickened” their religion, and as a result they fight, they wage war, or they cause division in communities, which is a form of war. But these are the fundamentalist groups we have in all religions. There is always a small group …
QUESTION – Another question on war. We are currently commemorating the centenary of the First World War. What would you say to the European continent about the post-war message, “No more war!”?
POPE - I have spoken to the European continent three times: twice in Strasbourg and once last year, or this year, I do not remember, when there was the Charlemagne Prize [6 May 2016]. I think that “No more war!” has not been taken seriously, because after the First there was the Second, and after the Second there is this third war we are experiencing now, piecemeal. We are at war. The world is conducting a third world war: Ukraine, Middle East, Africa, Yemen … It is very grave. Therefore, we say the words “No more war!”, but at the same time we manufacture weapons and sell them, and we sell them to those who are fighting, as arms producers sell them to this and that, to those who are at war with each other. It is true. There is an economic theory that I have not tried to confirm, but which I have read in several books: that in the history of humanity, when a State saw that its accounts were not in good shape, waged war to balance its budget. That is, it is one of the easiest ways to produce wealth. Certainly, the price is very high: blood.
“No more war!” was something that Europe said sincerely, I believe: Schumann, De Gasperi, Adenauer … they said it sincerely. But afterwards … Nowadays there is a lack of leaders; Europe is in need of leaders, leaders who go ahead. … Well, I do not want to repeat what I said in the three speeches.
QUESTION - Is there any chance that you will come to Belgium for this commemoration of the war?
POPE - It is not planned, no … I used to go to Belgium every year and a half when I was the provincial [superior], because there was an association of friends of the Catholic University of Córdoba. And so I used to go there to speak. They did the [spiritual] Exercises, and I used to go to thank them. I became fond of Belgium. For me the most beautiful city in Belgium is not yours, but rather Bruges [laughs].
[Interviewer: I have to tell you that my brother is a Jesuit.
Pope: Really? I didn’t know!
Interviewer: So, apart from being Jesuit, he’s a good person.
Pope: I was about to ask you if you were Catholic … (laughter)]
QUESTION – We are about to conclude the Year of Mercy. Can you tell us how you lived this Year, and what you expect when the Year comes to an end?
POPE – The Year of Mercy was not an idea that came to me unexpectedly. It takes its cue from Blessed Paul VI. Paul VI had already taken a number of steps to rediscover God’s mercy. St. John Paul II then placed great emphasis on this with three facts: the Encyclical Dives in Misericordia, the canonisation of St. Faustina, and the Feast of Divine Mercy on the Octave of Easter; he died on the eve of that feast day. He introduced the Church onto this road in this way. I felt that the Lord wanted this. It was … I don’t know how the idea formed in my heart. One fine day I said to Msgr. Fisichella, who had come about matters related to his Dicastery, “How I would like to hold a Jubilee, a Jubilee of Mercy”. And he said, “Why not?” And that is how the Year of Mercy began. It is the best assurance that it was not a human idea, but rather that it came from on high. I believe that it was inspired by the Lord. And evidently it went very well. In addition, the fact that the Jubilee was held not only in Rome, but all over the world, in all dioceses and within each diocese, created a lot of movement, a lot of movement … People were very active. There was a lot of activity and people felt called to reconcile themselves with God, to encounter the Lord again, to feel the caress of the Father.
QUESTION – The German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer made the distinction between cheap grace and costly grace. So, what does cheap or costly mercy mean to you?
POPE – Cheap mercy or costly mercy: I do not know Bonhoeffer’s text, I don’t know when he explains this. .. But it is cheap because there is nothing to pay; one doesn’t have to buy indulgences, it is a pure gift. And it is costly because it is the most precious gift. There is a book based on an interview I gave, entitled “The name of God is Mercy”. It is precious because it is the name of God: God is merciful.
It reminds me of that priest I had in Buenos Aires, who continued to celebrate Mass and to work, and he was 92 years old! At the beginning of Mass he would always give certain warnings. He is very energetic, 92 years old, preaches very well, the people go to listen to him. “Please, switch off your mobile phones”. And during the Mass, the Offertory began, and a telephone began to ring. He stopped and said, “Please, switch off your mobile phones”. And the altar boy, who was next to him, said, “Father, it is yours”. And he took out his phone and answered: ‘Hello!’” [Laughter]
QUESTION – To us, it seems that you are indicating Vatican Council II for our times. You are showing us ways of renewal in the Church. The Synodal Church. … In the Synod you explained your vision of the Church of the future. Could you explain this for our readers?
POPE - The “Synodal Church”, let me take this word. The Church is born from the community, it is born from the foundation, it is born from Baptism, and it is organised around a bishop, who brings it together and gives it strength; the bishop who is the successor of the Apostles. This is the Church. But in all the world there are many bishops, many organised Churches, and there is Peter. Therefore either there is a pyramidal Church, in which what Peter says is done, or there is a synodal Church, in which Peter is Peter but he accompanies the Church, he lets her grow, he listens to her, he learns from this reality and goes about harmonising it, discerning what comes from the Church and restoring it to her. The richest experience of all this was that of the last two Synods. There all the bishops of the world were heard, during preparation; all the Churches of the world, the dioceses, worked. All this material was worked on during the first Synod, which gave its results to the Church, and then we returned a second time – the second Synod – to complete all this. And from there Amoris Laetitia emerged. It is interesting to see the rich variety of nuances, typical of the Church. It is unity in diversity. This is synodality.
Do not descend from high to low, but listen to the Churches, harmonise them, discern. And so there is a post-Synodal exhortation, which is Amoris Laetitia, which is the result of two Synods, in which all the Church worked, and which the Pope made his own. It is expressed in a harmonious way. It is interesting that all that it contains [Amoris Laetitia], in the Synod it was approved by more than two thirds of the fathers. And this is a guarantee. A synodal Church means that there is this movement from high to low, high to love. And the same in the dioceses. But there is a Latin phrase, that says that the Churches are always cum Petro et sub Petro. Peter is the guarantor of the unity of the Church. He is the guarantor.
This is the meaning. And it is necessary to progress in synodality, which is one of the things that the Orthodox have conserved. And also the Oriental Catholic Churches. It is a richness of theirs, and I recognise it in the Encyclical.
QUESTION - It seems to me that the Second Synod made the passage from the method of “seeing, judging and acting” towards “listening, understanding and accompanying”. It is very different. These are the things that I am constantly saying to people. The passage of the Synod is from seeing, judging and acting, and then to listening to the reality of the people, understanding well this reality and then accompanying people on their path…
POPE - Because each person said what he thought, without fear of feeling judged. And everyone had the attitude of listening, without condemning. And then we discussed, like brothers, in the groups. But it is one thing to debate like brothers and another to condemn a priori. There was great freedom of expression. And this is beautiful!
QUESTION - In Krakow, you gave valuable inspiration to the young. What could be a special message to the young people of our country?
POPE - Not to be afraid, not to be ashamed of faith; not to be ashamed to seek out new ways. And to the young who are not believers: do not worry, search for the meaning of life. To a young person, I would give two pieces of advice: seek out horizons and do not go into retirement at the age of 20. It is very sad to see a young pensioner at 20, 25 years of age, isn’t it? Seek out horizons, go ahead, continue to work in this human task.
QUESTION - A final question, Holy Father, regarding the media: a consideration regarding the means of communication…
POPE – The communications media have a very great responsibility. Nowadays they have in their hands the possibility and the capacity to form opinion: they can form a good or a bad opinion. The means of communication are the builders of a society. In and of themselves, they are made to build, to interchange, to fraternise, to make us think, to educate. In themselves they are positive. It is obvious that, given that we are all sinners, also the media can – we who use the media, I am using a means of communication here – become harmful. And the communications media have their temptations. They can be tempted by calumny, and therefore used to slander, to sully people, especially in the world of politics. They can be used as a means of defamation: every person has the right to a good reputation, but perhaps in their previous life, or ten years ago, they had a problem with justice, or a problem in their family life, and bringing this to light is serious and harmful; it can annul a person. In slander we tell a lie about a person; in defamation, we leak a document, as we say in Argentina, “Se hace un carpetazo” – and we uncover something that is true, but already in the past, and which has already been paid for with a jail sentence, with a fine, or whatever. There is no right to this. This is a sin and it is harmful. A thing that can do great damage to the information media is disinformation: that is, faced with any situation, saying only a part of the truth, and not the rest. This is disinformation. Because you, to the listener or the observer, give only half the truth, and therefore it is not possible to make a serious judgement. Disinformation is probably the greatest damage that the media can do, as opinion is guided in one direction, neglecting the other part of the truth. And then, I believe that the media should be very clear, very transparent, and not fall prey – without offence, please – to the sickness of coprophilia, which is always wanting to communicate scandal, to communicate ugly things, even though they may be true. And since people have a tendency towards the sickness of coprophagia, it can do great harm. Thus, I would say that there are these four temptations. But they are builders of opinion and can construct, and do immense good, immense.
QUESTION – To conclude, a word for priests. Not a speech, because they say we have to conclude. … What is most important for a priest?
POPE – It is a rather Salesian answer, but it comes from the heart. Remember that you have a Mother who loves you, and never cease to love your Mother, the Virgin. Secondly, let yourself be looked at by Jesus. Third: seek out the suffering flesh of Jesus in your brothers: there you will encounter Jesus. This as a basis. Everything comes from here. If you are an orphan priest, who has forgotten that he has a Mother; if you are a priest who has drifted away from He Who called you, from Jesus, you will never be able to carry the Gospel. What is the way? Tenderness. May they have tenderness. Priests should never be ashamed of having tenderness.
May they caress the suffering blood of Jesus. Today there is a need for a revolution of tenderness in this world that suffers from “cardiosclerosis”.
QUESTION - Cardio…?
POPE – Cardiosclerosis.

Wednesday, 7 December 2016

Sorry George, I do not tend toward being an eater of human waste. What does it say about you who would use such descriptions. Where is mercy?

And you thought it couldn't get any worse?

Is there a psychiatrist in Rome, or how about, an exorcist?

Can you get one over to the St. Martha Motor Inn right away, top floor?

Seriously, there are a few things to unpack in this which I've bolded. His Peronist style of dictatorship conflicting with his wants for a Synodal Church, and his own manipulation that two-thirds of those voting at the Synod voted for Holy Communion for adulterers. This is not the case. He is playing games with the ambiguity of his own work.

Cardinals, Bishops! You must speak out to "Peter!" Only four? Only Bishop Schneider and a handful of others.

Are the rest of you emasculated cowards?

Image result for pope francis smiling

ROME- Never one to shy away from a soundbite,  Pope Francis said media organizations have a tendency to “coprophragy”, meaning that which is dirty and base, and that they shouldn’t exploit this instinct to generate sales and readers.

Ah, the gentle soul Ines St. Martin. She is very prim and proper not wanting to offend. Who could blame here for substituting "smut" for what Bergoglio really said and what it really means.

Coprophagia /kɒp.rə.ˈfeɪ.dʒi.ə/[1] or coprophagy /kəˈprɒfədʒiː/ is the consumption of feces. The word is derived from the Greek κόπρος copros, "feces" and φαγεῖν phagein, "to eat". Coprophagy refers to many kinds of feces-eating, including eating feces of other species (heterospecifics), of other individuals (allocoprophagy), or one's own (autocoprophagy) – those once deposited or taken directly from the anus.[2]
Coprophilia (from Greek κόπρος, kópros—excrement and φιλία, philía—liking, fondness), also called scatophilia or scat (Greek: σκατά, skatá-feces),[1] is the paraphilia involving sexual arousal and pleasure from feces.[2][3] In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the American Psychiatric Association, it is classified under 302.89 – Paraphilia NOS (Not Otherwise Specified) and has no diagnostic criteria other than a general statement about paraphilias that says "the diagnosis is made if the behavior, sexual urges, or fantasies cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning".

Oh, and you thought this was the first time he's used this flowery language?

Now, back to Crux.

Francis has also said he prefers a “synodal” church, one in which the pope accompanies others and helps them grow, to a “pyramidal” church, where “Peter says what to do.”

The comments came in an interview with the Belgian weekly magazine Tertio.

On the media, the pontiff said news organizations  have the power to do a lot of good, but at the same time, are prone to what he called four “temptations.”

The first, he said, is calumny, “to tell a lie about a person,” something particularly seen “in the world of politics.”

Then there’s defamation, in which news stories damage people’s reputations.

The pope said that “every person has the right to a good name, but perhaps in their previous life, or in their past life, or 10 years ago, had a problem with the law or in his family life…so, bringing this into the spotlight is grave, it damages, it cancels a person.”

To describe this form of defamation, he used an Argentine expression meaning, roughly, “to bring out a file” on someone, holding them responsible today for what they did a long time ago, even after they have been punished or repented of it.

The third temptation is “misinformation,” meaning, “faced with any situation, to say one part of the truth but not the other.”

“No! This is to misinform,” he said. “Because you give half of the truth to the viewer. And as such, he [or she] can’t come to a proper judgement about the whole truth.”

Misinformation, he said, is “probably the biggest damage a news organization can cause. Because it directs public opinion in one direction by removing a part of the truth.”

Francis said that media are also called to be clean and transparent, without falling into what he called “the disease of coprophilia: constantly looking to communicate scandal, communicate ugly things, even if they are true.”

In the literal sense, coprophagy and coprophilia are perversions involving excrement, usually linked to mental illness. In Spanish, the language in which the interview was conducted, the terms are sometimes used to refer to an appetite for morbid or sick stories.

“And since people have a tendency towards coprophagy, it can be very damaging,” the pope insisted, before adding that the media are builders of opinion, and that as such, potentially do “immense good.”

This is not the first time Francis has used this language to refer to what he considers the media’s tendency to place too much emphasis on the negative. In a 2013 interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa, he was asked about corruption in the curia, the Vatican bureaucracy.

At that time, the pope said that the curia gave an important service, and that news about its corruption were often exaggerated and manipulated to spread scandal.

“Journalists sometimes risk becoming ill from coprophilia and thus encouraging coprophagia,” he told Andrea Tornielli at the time, “which is a sin that taints all men and women, that is, the tendency to focus on the negative rather than the positive aspects.”

In the interview with Tertio, released on Wednesday, Francis was also asked about his attempts to “renew the Church” inspired by the Second Vatican Council. In his reply, the pope distinguished what he called the ‘synodal Church’, which he contrasted with a pyramidal, or top-down, model.

“The Church is born from the communities, the bases, baptism, and is organized around a bishop that convokes it, strengthens it,” he said. “The bishop is the successor of the apostles. This is the Church. But in the world, there are many bishops, many organized churches, and there’s Peter.”

Hence, he continued, there’s either a “pyramidal” Church, where “what Peter says what to do,” or a synodal Church, where “Peter is Peter but he accompanies the Churches and makes them grow.”

The richest experience of the latter, Francis said, were the two synod of bishops on the family, which took place in October 2014 and again in 2015. During them, he continued, all the bishops of the world, representing their dioceses, made their voices heard.

“From there we have ‘Amoris Laetitia,’” the pope said, referring to the apostolic exhortation he released earlier in the year, as the fruit of the synods.

The richness of nuances present there, he added, is part of the Church: “Unity in differences. This is synodality. Not to go down from top to bottom, but to listen to the Churches and harmonize them, discern.”

Everything which is present in this document, Francis continued, was approved in the synod by two thirds of the bishops, and this is a “guarantee.”

Synodality, the pope said, is something the Catholic Church still has to work on and not to be afraid to embrace, adding the Latin phrase that says that the churches are always with Peter and under Peter, cum petro et sub petro, make the pope the “guarantor of the unity of the Church.”

Asked about the 100th anniversary of World War I, Francis said that Europeans didn’t live up to the post-war call of “war never again.”

While lip service is being paid to the idea, weapons are being produced and sold to both sides in a conflict.

Acknowledging he hasn’t studied this economic theory in depth, he mentioned reading in several books the theory that when a country’s accounts don’t balance as they should, nations go to war for financial reasons.

“Making war is an easy way to make wealth,” he said. “But of course, the price is very high: blood.”
Quoting his own reference of a World War III being fought piecemeal, he mentioned the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, the Middle East, Africa and Yemen as examples.

Asked about current conflicts being fueled by religious differences, Francis insisted, as he’s done before, on the fact that no war can be justified in the name of God or religion.

“Terrorism, war, are not related to religion,” he said. “Religious deformations are used to justify [war],” but they have nothing to do “with the essence of what is religious. Religion is love, unity, respect, dialogue.”

In the interview, Francis was also asked about a possible trip to Belgium, to which he answered it’s not currently in the works. Yet he did share something that was unknown even for Geert de Kerpel, editor of Tertio and the man behind the interview: while he was a Jesuit provincial in Argentina, Francis traveled to Belgium several times.

“There was an Association of Friends of the Catholic University of Cordoba,” Francis said. “And as its chancellor, I would go there to talk to them when they had their spiritual exercises.”

De Kerpel did some follow-up research and found out that the reason behind the travel was a Jesuit priest named Jean Sonet, once the rector of the Jesuit-run Université de Namur in Belgium. In 1958, De Kerpel told Crux, the priest relocated to Argentina, where he became the librarian of the Catholic University of Cordoba. Eventually, he became vice-rector of the university.

It was Sonet who asked his friends for help. The impact this group of friends had on the institution was such that a recently inaugurated new library at the Catholic University of Cordoba was named after Sonet.

Bergoglio confidant Anthony Spadaro, S.J. says that it is a moral duty to commit adultery and remain in mortal sin!

“When the concrete circumstances of a divorced and remarried couple make feasible a pathway of faith, they can be asked to take on the challenge of living in continence. Amoris Laetitia does not ignore the difficulty of this option, and leaves open the possibility of admission to the Sacrament of Reconciliation when this option is lacking.”
Image result for anthony spadaro jesuit francis
“In other, more complex circumstances, and when it has not been possible to obtain a declaration of nullity, this option may not be practicable. But it still may be possible to undertake a path of discernment under the guidance of a pastor, which results in a recognition that, in a particular case, there are limitations which attenuate responsibility and guilt – particularly where a person believes they would fall into a worse error, and harm the children of the new union.”

Tuesday, 6 December 2016

Our generation's Athanasius contra mundum! "Schism already exists"

Laudetur Jesus Christus!

Bergoglio's henchmen and minions are akin to the Soviets or even maybe, the Gestapo?

Perhaps some of our readers saw this picture last evening surface on Twitter. It is of Cardinal Raymond Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider speaking before a packed room in Rome's Centro Lepanto. 


You can bet that it was all over  Rome, that which was discussed, before those thugs, minions and hangers at the Vatican settled down for a rub down at one of Rome's more particular establishments with their gaystapo boytoys.because they sure weren't praying their Office or doing a Holy Hour! Why, you ask? Because if they did these things, they would not do what they do.

Courtesy of LifeSiteNews, here are the key quotes:

“When Christ preached 2,000 years ago, the culture and reigning spirit were radically opposed to Him. Concretely religious syncretism ruled, also Gnosticism among the intelligent leaders, as well as permissibilism among the masses — especially regarding the institution of matrimony. […] The sole purpose of the Son of God was to reveal the truth to the world.”
“The formulation of dubia, as the Cardinals here have expressed in their own terms, has been a common practice in the Church,” he explained. “We need to be able to ask questions openly without being afraid of repressions.”
“The reaction to the dubia is a proof of the climate in which we actually live in the Church right now,” Bishop Schneider said. “We live in a climate of threats and of denial of dialogue towards a specific group.”
“dialogue seems to be accepted only if you think like everyone else - that is practically like a regime.”
+Schneider brought up his experience in Russia, where he was born in the time of the Soviet Union. His parents were sent by Stalin to work camps, or “Gulags,” after the Second World War. “If you didn’t follow the line of the party, or you questioned it, you couldn’t even ask. That is for me a very clear parallel to what is happening now in the reactions to the dubia — questions — of the Cardinals.”
“This is a very sad experience especially since everybody is speaking about a ‘dialogue of culture’ after the Second Vatican Council. While bishops openly teach heresies and nothing happens to them, that is truly a grave injustice and very sad,” Bishop Schneider added.

Cardinal Burke is quoted:

Cardinal Burke has said a “formal correction” might be in order to resolve the situation of uncertainty. “In the language of moral theology, fraternal correction is an act of love — if it is given in obedience and with reason,” Schneider commented. “We have to return to this familiar way of dealing with it.”

As I wrote yesterday, they are "mad" in the sense of angry and deranged that we will not stop exposing the lies and manipulations that began at the first Synod, continued into the second and continue today.

The deal breaker for these Cardinals, in my view. was when Bergoglio confirmed the heretical statement by the Bishops of Buenos Aires compounded by those of the Vicar of Rome.

Bergoglio cannot hide from this. He must answer the dubia which will either nullify his attempts to change Divine Law on Holy Communion or expose himself as a heretic.

That's it friends, there's just no other way around it.

Make a mess, indeed.

Still no answer from Pope Bergoglio - the clock is ticking

Related imageSome of those close to Pope Bergoglio have defended him against the dubia of the four Cardinals. They have turned the tables, so to speak, to appear that the Cardinals  are in the wrong and have no basis to ask the questions and expect an answer.

Pope Bergoglio, by his silence, is creating for himself, and the Church, a grave crisis, perhaps Her gravest ever. The Cardinals have asked straight-forward questions that actually put Bergoglio in a corner. If he answers "no" then his program will be exposed as heretical and he will be compelled to withdraw it. If he answers "yes," then he will convict himself of making heretical statements.

These are facts, they cannot be argued with.

Image result for Dr. John R. T. LamontThe Cardinals, specifically, I should say, Cardinal Burke also opined that they would follow a course. You can be assured that before they even submitted the dubia to Bergoglio, they knew what they would be required to do and the risk that they were taking in making it public - an act totally justified in Scripture, I should add. 

Dr. John R. T. Lamont is a Canadian Catholic philosopher and theologian. He studied philosophy and theology at the Dominican College in Ottawa and at Oxford University, and has taught philosophy and theology in Catholic universities and seminaries. He is the author of Divine Faith (Ashgate, 2004), and of a number of academic papers; his academic website is at https://acu-au.academia.edu/JohnLamont.

He writes at Rorate Caeli blog and article: "Consideration on the dubia of the four Cardinals." It is long and requires some thoughtful reading. I give you below, the summation.


Various explanations have been proposed of how a Pope can be removed from office if he commits the canonical crime of heresy. The explanations seek to explain how the Pope can lose office without being judged by any of his inferiors in the Church on earth. The simplest and possibly the best explanation that has been offered is that the Pope by pertinaciously maintaining heresy effectively removes himself from office. However, all these explanations agree that a Pope who is juridically guilty of heresy can and must be removed from office. There is no dispute among Catholic theologians on this point – even among theologians like Bellarmine who do not think that a Pope is in fact capable of being a heretic.
            It is to be hoped that the correction of Pope Francis does not have to proceed this far, and that he will either reject the heresies he has announced or resign his office. Removing him from office against his will would require the election of a new Pope, and would probably leave the Church with Francis as an anti-Pope contesting the authority of the new Pope. If Francis refuses to renounce either his heresy or his office, however, this situation will just have to be faced.

A blessed Punch-a-Heretic Day!


I saw Santa punching Arius

I saw Santa punching Arius
in the council chambers at Nicaea.
He just couldn’t stand
to hear the heretic expand
his theory how Our Blessed Lord
was not much more than just a man.

Then I saw Santa grabbing Arius
by the beard to pull him off his chair.
The other bishops were justified,
in assuming this was undignified
throwing Santa in a cell for the night.

I saw Jesus and His Mother
come to Santa praying in his chains.
Christ asked, “Why are you here?”
“All for my love of You.”
Off fell the chains and to him was given
the pallium and the Gospels.

St. Nick went back up to the chamber
amazing everyone at the sight.
They said, “It must have been righteous anger!”
“It is Arius we must excommunicate.”

“The Son is consubstantial with the Father.”

On a more serious note:


This the confessor of the Lord, whose triumph
Now all the faithful celebrate, with gladness
Erst on this feast-day merited to enter
Into his glory. 

Saintly and prudent, modest in behaviour,
Peaceful and sober, chaste was he, and lowly.
While that life's vigour, coursing through his members,
Quickened his being. 

Sick ones of old time, to his tomb resorting,
Sorely by ailments manifold afflicted,
Oft-times have welcomed health and strength returning,
At his petition. 

Whence we in chorus gladly do him honour,
Chanting his praises with devout affection,
That in his merits we may have a portion,
Now and forever. 

His be the glory, power and salvation,
Who over all things reigneth in the highest,
Earth's mighty fabric ruling and directing,
Onely and Trinal. Amen.