FrancisChurch – In Liquidation: And We Thought It Was About Doctrine And The Dubia…

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In yesterday’s post, we outlined a general observation that basically asserted that the reason for Francis’s worse than usual “bad mood” recently, may be the result of money problems.

Today we make more observations about the 2015 Vatican financial performance, while we wait for detailed financial statements to appear in the public domain.

We observed that the 2015 financials reports were 8 months late in appearing and that extraordinary entries, having a “one off” nature, appear in the limited information that has been made available. One of these entries, a €50.0 million figure, described as “from Vatican Bank” is actually larger than the entire net income generated from the consolidated Vatican operations.

For CONTEXT purposes, one must be cognizant of the fact that it is “financial considerations” that are really the driving force behind the Francis bishopric of Rome, starting from the “ATM shutdown” that most likely tipped the scale of the Benedict abdication, to the question as to the FFI “property holdings” that most likely played a large part in the suppression of the FFI and the legal harassment of its founder and his family, right down to the takeover of the “Sovereign” Order of Malta, just to name three.

Now, on the back of this above information, we also need to recall the “strange reaction” of one Cardinal Reinhard “Bling” Marx, the Archbishop of Swank, to the information that Cardinal Pell provided in early 2015, information to the effect that 100’s of millions of Euros” were found in non-disclosed and unknown to the auditors bank accounts,  and now we can start seeing a pattern.

In the above cited post, we can read the words of Card. “Bling” Marx, who made the following statement:

However the German cardinal said that the presentation of specific figures (Card. Pell disclosure) was “not very helpful.” He said that the assets of the Vatican can only be measured meaningfully when they are balanced against financial obligations.

If we are to correctly “discern” the following information, it would appear as if the Vatican (IOR in this case) is in fact cash rich. Yet that cash appears to be sitting in Vatican Bank “accounts” that might not be the property of the Vatican. In other words, the cash is sitting in The Vatican Bank’s client accounts.

On the “obligations” side, the Vatican is generating operating losses. This is most likely what is meant by the phrase “balanced against financial obligations”.

Now the problem with this above situation, (if this is the situation, which it most likely is) is that in an environment of negative interest rates (NIRP) such as is the case in Euroland at present, the Vatican Bank, like all banks has a problem. That problem is that the Vatican Bank does not earn any interest income on its cash holdings. The reason being that the interest rates are negative, meaning that it is the Vatican Bank that pays the corresponding bank (as opposed to receiving interest income in a normal positive rate environment), for that corresponding bank to hold the money of the Vatican bank. And like with any bank, it is this interest income that is the main source of income for a “savings bank”, like the IOR.

So that leaves us with ONE BIG QUESTION and that is this: How does a savings bank, in a Negative Interest Rate environment make €50.0 million per annum?

I will leave this question open for the time being…

Back to the story. Given the above, what we might be seeing is that since the Vatican is losing this source of income (interest income from the Vatican Bank), it is looking at other sources of income to make up for the operating losses. And just a quick reminder, those operating losses are incurred by the Holy See as a result of the diminishing “contributions made pursuant to Canon 1271 of the Code of Canon Law”, i.e. the collection plate income from the Universal Church. 

Enter Card. “Bling” Marx’s observation. The issue that the Archbishop of Swank was most likely signaling in the above cited text, is that it is the German Bishops’ Conference that is subsidizing The Vatican’s operating loss. So presenting the Vatican as “cash rich” is very counterproductive as per the Germans, since it doesn’t create the “environment of urgency” that is needed in the Universal Church, an urgency that will get those ‘lazy,’ ‘egotistical,’ ‘constantly condemning’ members in other countries to crack open their wallets and help the brother FrancisChurch out.

Now, the above described situation was the case for the 2014 fiscal year. In that year, The Vatican incurred a €25.6m loss from the Holy See against a €63.5m gain from the City State. This financial performance did not include any “extraordinary” income entries.

Fast forward to Fiscal Year 2015, we get less income from the City State, meaning less pilgrims, i.e. the REAL FRANCIS EFFECT. On the Holy See side, we see no information about cost reductions, yet we see that the operating loss halved. And assuming that the income from “contributions made pursuant to Canon 1271 of the Code of Canon Law” did not rebound (i.e. we can use the decrease in City State income as a proxy for the rate of change of membership numbers in the Universal Church), we are left with the only one answer, and that is that it was these extraordinary income entries that caused the “halving of the operating loss” of the Holy See.

Yet those one off extraordinary payments amount to €50.0 from Vatican Bank + income from ‘unspecified “investments’.” which would indicate that 2015 might have just been that year when the bottom fell out from the collection plate take in the Universal Church.

Which in turn just might be the reason behind not only the rumors of removing Francis, but it could be the reason behind Francis’ increasing “bad mood” and his lashings out at those conservative, read “moneyed” Catholics.

And we thought is was about doctrine and the Dubia…

NB: If we look at the SSPX/FrancisChurch recognition process in light of Francis gaining a “buyer of last resort” for dormant post-conciliar FrancisChurch – In Liquidation’s tangible assets, it all begins to make sense. But I digress…

So we wait and watch for those 2015 Consolidated Financials to be released…

and read the below article from Life Site News, bringing us Catholics Francis’ latest “homiletics”. (see here)

PS If you dear reader would like a personal blessing message from Francis, please click here.

*****

Pope Francis rebukes ‘lazy,’ ‘egotistical,’ ‘constantly condemning’ Christians

ROME, Italy, January 20, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Francis continued his veiled criticism of Catholics opposed to “new horizons” in his homily Tuesday morning, labeling them “parked Christians.” He continued with this theme as he has throughout his pontificate, speaking in this morning’s homily of the “egotistical mentality” of the “doctors of the law” who “constantly condemn” others.

Francis said Christians should be open to change, saying they cannot “park” and be “lazy” when faced with adversity or remain in their “refrigerator.” For some, he added, life is “living in the fridge, just like that, so that everything remains the same.”

Francis specifically mentioned “lazy Christians, Christians, who do not have the will to continue, Christians, who do not struggle for a change of things, for new things to come, those that if changed would be a good for everybody.” Specifying about whom he was speaking, Francis added, “when I say Christians I mean all: lay, priests, bishops, all of them.”

In his homily at Casa Santa Marta this morning, the Pope said, “Consider the doctors of the law who persecuted Jesus. These men did everything prescribed by the law. But their mindset was distanced from God. Theirs was an egotistical mindset, focused on themselves: their hearts constantly condemned [others].”

The frequency with which Pope Francis has verbally reproached those not alligned with his progressive agenda within the Church has seen a marked increase in recent months. Only ten days ago he lashed out at “doctors of the law” who he said were incoherent, hypocritical, clericalist, and lacking in real authority.

FrancisVatican And “Free Money”…

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today we continue with a money theme. If you, dear reader recall, we provided information about the financial performance of the Vatican yesterday. (see here)

And just as a reminder, in 2015…

  • The Holy See generated a loss of €12.4m v. a loss of €25.6m for 2014.
  • On the side of the Vatican City State, (Museums, etc.) the gain was smaller than in 2014, namely €59.9m in 2015 v. €63.5m in 2014. (Those fickle crowds!)
  • So the consolidated net income for The Vatican was €47.5m for 2015 v. a €37.9m gain for the preceding year. 

What also needs to be mentioned is that there appear to be one off sources of income for 2015. These were described as a “sum of 50 million euros from the Institute for the Works of Religion” and a gain in the income of the Holy See from “unspecified “investments.”

While I am still waiting for a source document to comment further, a couple of comments that can be made at this time. One is this: if the income for 2015 was netted for the two extraordinary income statement events (€50.0 from Vatican Bank + income from “unspecified “investments.”) , we would no doubt see a loss on the consolidated financial statements€47.5m – €50.0m+ = – €2.5m+).

One further comment, please also keep in mind that the Jubilee Year of FrancisMercy began in the last month of 2015. This would mean that the revenue from those pilgrimage numbers should be seen in the 2016 figures for the Vatican City State, in their 2016 financial statements. Once we see these, it will give us confirmation about the “success” of this event.

And now to Charles Hugh Smith’s post about a very similar, and I dare say timely topic. That topic is captured very succinctly in the title of the post, namely When Money Is “Free,” Discipline Evaporates; When Discipline Evaporates, Decisions Are Disastrous. 

What we actually see in the FrancisVatican is a cabal of people who do not “appreciate” the source of their funding. This has allowed these individuals to “game the system” without any thought of where that funding came from. This “system gaming” is appearing to have caught up with them. The two extraordinary income statement events could be an indication of just this. Further indication could be the situation that recently transpired with the “Sovereign” Order of Malta.

Furthermore, this could also be the cause behind the extremely shrill tone of the Francis “magisterium” of late. Nothing like a financial crisis to get the old South American populist blood boiling, maybe? But I digress…

These latter extraordinary events, like the first two also have a strong money component.  For that story, we go over to the National Catholic Register and Edward Pentin. In a story that appeared originally in the German newspaper Bild, the following is the lede:

Germany’s mass-selling Bild newspaper has reported that the Grand Chancellor of the Order of Malta, Baron Albrecht Freiherr von Boeselager, accepted a 30 million Swiss franc donation ($31 million) on behalf of the Order from what Bild calls “a dubious trust” in Geneva. Boeselager denies any wrongdoing.

Now it is too early to tell whether the above mentioned extraordinary income statement events, along with the fact that the disclosure of the Consolidated Financial Statements for The Vatican for 2015 were delayed by 8 months had anything to do with the very rapid “takeover” of the said Order and Francis’ mood deteriorating, but I am sure we will be hearing much about this in the not too distant future.

If for no other reason that this here

In the mean time, some general information about what happens when a “society” loses its discipline due to “free money”…

*****

When Money Is “Free,” Discipline Evaporates; When Discipline Evaporates, Decisions Are Disastrous

March 17, 2017

The only possible output of a system lacking any discipline is self-destruction.

Whatever is free is squandered. When water is free, it’s freely wasted. When electricity is free, there’s no motivation to use it wisely.

The same principle holds true for money. If money is free, or nearly free, there is no motivation to invest it wisely, or consider the opportunity costs of spending it versus investing it or preserving it as savings.

Money that can be borrowed for next to nothing is essentially “free” because the costs of interest are negligible. Money that can be borrowed in virtually unlimited quantities is also “free,” as whatever funds are squandered or lost to malinvestment can be easily replaced with more borrowed money.

Nothing enduringly productive can be built without discipline and a steady focus on the bottom line of production costs, revenues, overhead expenses and opportunity costs, i.e. what else could have been done with this capital and labor?

These dynamics are scale-invariant, meaning they apply to individuals and households as well as to companies, institutions and nation-states.

Thus we see the same poor results in trust-funders whose income is “free” (pouring in monthly whether the individual was productive or not) and national governments that can simply borrow another trillion dollars (or $10 trillion, hey why not?) when they’ve squandered all the tax revenues.

We intuitively grasp the necessity of discipline to corral impulses and desires that are self-destructive in the longer term. Eating chocolate cake and ice cream might appeal to our immediate cravings, but longer term the consequences of unbridled consumption of this kind of sweets are dire.

We also grasp the role discipline plays in learning difficult subjects/tasks and in accomplishing long-term, often arduous projects.

If there is any commonality to genius, it is a prodigious work ethic based on a highly disciplined schedule of daily productive effort.

All of which leads us to ask: what precisely have we accomplished by borrowing and blowing $9 trillion in additional national debt over the past eight years?With interest rates near-zero and the credit line of the nation essentially unlimited–recall that the central bank created $3.5 trillion of money out of thin air and used much of it to buy federal bonds–there was no need for any difficult choices or trade-offs–that is, discipline.

The trillions could be borrowed from future taxpayers painlessly, and squandered on propping up unaffordable entitlements and programs that were each immune to discipline.

So a pharmaceutical company raises the cost of a pinworm medication from $3 to $600. When money can be borrowed in endless quantities for “free,” there’s no need to ask if this predatory piracy is justified or necessary for the good of the nation; just borrow another trillion to pay for Medicare and Medicaid costs that are largely skims, scams, fraud or unproductive paper-shuffling.

As long as the money spigot is “free,” there’s no need to ask why the F-35 fighter aircraft is four times as costly as the aircraft it replaces.

As long as the money is “free,” why should any politico risk telling a National Security agency such as the CIA “no more money for your agency until you can account for the tens of billions you’re spending on gosh knows what.”

Lowering interest rates to near-zero has reduced the need for fiscal-political discipline to near-zero. Politicos of all stripes are only too willing to borrow trillions from future generations–why not borrow and blow the money now to assure my re-election, and let future taxpayers figure out what to do about the crushing burden of debt we’re leaving them?

High interest rates were basically the only mechanism of discipline imposed on short-term, free-spending politicos. Once the cost of interest was reduced to signal noise, politicos were freed of the burdens of discipline: of having to reckon the burdens of future interest, of opportunity costs, of trade-offs and the difference between productive investments and cronyist pork-barrel spending on marginal (but highly profitable) “infrastructure.”

How disciplined will your gambling be in the casino when all your losses are covered by future taxpayers? Why hold back from risky gambles when any losses will be paid by others? Go head and gamble wildly–any lucky wins will be yours to keep, and all the losses will be covered by nameless others.

This is how “free money” leads to disastrous decisions. With the need for discipline eliminated, there’s no motivation not to gamble wildly, fund every special interest group’s demand, and grease the palms of every insider, every crony and every oligarch.

This is how a great nation will self-destruct. The only possible output of a system lacking any discipline is self-destruction.

And to leave off this post on a bright side, see here.

An Accounting To Peter – The 2015 Figures…

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today is a red letter day. The first reports of the 2015 Vatican Consolidated Financial Statements appeared on the SSPX’s DICI.org website. (see here)

I have not been able to trace down the source document, but when I do, I will have more to say.

In the mean time, I have re-published the DICI post and have made comments in [red] to provide the 2014 figures for CONTEXT. Furthermore, please reference our Giving an Accounting to Peter which provides commentary on the 2014 results.

*****

Vatican Publishes 2015 Financial Report

The Vatican’s Secretariat for the Economy published its consolidated financials for 2015 on March 4, 2017, eight months behind schedule. The Holy See reported a deficit of 12.4 million euros in 2015, [v. €25.6 deficit for 2014] half of what was recorded in 2013 and 2014.

Among the entries is a sum of 50 million euros from the Institute for the Works of Religion, the Vatican’s private bank. The Holy See also reported income of 24 million euros from the contributions of dioceses [v. €21.0 for 2014] , but also from unspecified “investments.” [The 2014 figure does not include a “unspecified investment” in the position “contributions made pursuant to Canon 1271 of the Code of Canon Law”. As far as I can tell, this is something new.]

[Therefore, 2015 Consolidated Financial Statements show a 59.9 million euros gain from the Vatican City State against a 12.4 million euros loss from the Holy See giving a 47.5 million net gain for 2015]

As in previous years, the most significant expenditures are costs related to staff, without any indication of the exact number of employees.

The Governatorato of Vatican State shows a surplus of 59.9 million euros in 2015 [ v. €63.5 for 2014], in total approximately the same as in the previous year. This result is chiefly due to the income brought in by the Vatican Museums and other cultural activities.

In a press release quoted on the Vatican website on March 4, 2017, the Secretariat for the Economy emphasizes that this statement is “the first step towards full conformity with the Vatican Financial Management Policies (VFMP), approved by Pope Francis on 24 October 2014. These policies are intended, according to the press release, to “improve the quality and transparency of financial information” and to “increase discipline in financial reports and audits.”

However, observers have not reached a consensus on this report. On March 6, the news site cath.ch quotes Vaticanist David Jansen, for whom the Vatican is still “a very exotic political structure”: no income tax, or goods and services tax, or ecclesiastical tax. “The Holy See’s chief source of income is its financial heritage, but the 2015 statements do not spell out how much that is.” The journalist points out that “no official number on the total value of this fortune has ever been communicated up to now.” In 2015, the Vatican only indicated that the heritage of the Holy See had increased by 939 million euros, but without providing a total value. Specialists estimate this fortune of the Vatican at 12 billion euros, but they cannot provide any verifiable numbers.

Denmark: Taking The Long Way Home…

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today I bring you a report of Christian “green shoots” in Denmark. Below is a post from … who else?… Zero Hedge (see here) about the state of the immigration crisis in Scandinavia.

What is of interest to us in the below text, is that it provides us with another example of a country… bah… a society that is on the brink. On the brink of collapse, that is. And there are some, about one half of the population according to the article, who are desperately searching for answers.

This desperate searching for answers has led these Danes to actually identify the problem, make observations, formulate hypotheses, which is leading to general theories being made. (see here)

And it would appear that the general theories that are being formulated have one common element:

GOD!

What is left, is only the implementation!

Oh, if it was only that easy….

Below is the original text. The highlighted part is from the original Zero Hedge post. Notice what the author took as important points. The red text in turn, is emphasis from your truly. The [text] in brackets are my comments.

Think about the below as a “brick by brick” development, taken to an entirely different level.

Is Denmark On The Brink?

Authored by Erico Matias Tavares via Sinclair & Co.,

Iben Thranholm examines political and social events with focus on their religious aspects, significance and moral implications. She is one of Denmark’s most widely read columnists on such matters. Thranholm is a former editor and radio host at the Danish Broadcasting Corporation (DR), at which she created a religious news program that set a new standard for religious analysis in the newsroom. She has traveled extensively in the Middle East, Italy, the United States and Russia to carry out research and interviews. She has been awarded for her investigative research into Danish media coverage of religious issues.

E Tavares: Iben, thank you for being with us today. Over a year ago we talked to Dr. Tino Sanandaji, an economics professor at a leading Swedish university, on the inconsistencies of Swedish immigration policies. The resulting post was hit, revealing a significant interest for this topic. 

In a sense Sweden is the canary in the coalmine of Europe’s demographic future, since they have been at the forefront of this transformation and openly embrace it. Being a close neighbor we would like to get your views on what is happening there, as well as in Denmark. How do the Danes look at Sweden, with hope or apprehension? 

I Tranholm: With absolute horror! 

The Swedish media, which is quite pro-government and its left-wing policies, does not always report the full extent of the problems in their society. So it is hard to have a very accurate picture of what is going on. But we in Denmark have a good sense. We are very aware of the murders, rapes, riots, violence and the hand grenades that go on there. This does not often make the news but we know it is going on. And we don’t want to go down the same route. 

This is the result of decades of policies promoting multiculturalism in Sweden. And what is left is this hollow house. You know, in the Bible it is said that if a house is left swept, tidied and unoccupied it eventually it will be taken over by evil. And I fear that this is what is happening in Sweden. Far from being a multicultural paradise, the problems can no longer remain hidden. 

ET: Indeed, even President Trump made some controversial comments about Sweden at a recent rally in the US, causing an international uproar, with many debates on whether he was right or wrong. Did this cause some discussion in Denmark as well?

IT: It wasn’t much of a discussion because we in Denmark know what is happening in Sweden. Malmo is very close so we only need to go there to see it with our own eyes. 

There was a TV ad partially paid by the Swedish government recommending that all Swedes integrate into this new multicultural society they are creating. Think about that. Even old Swedes now need to adjust to this new reality, instead of immigrants adapting to Swedish society. They call it “Det nya landet”, which means the new country. Traditional Sweden is gone.

ET: Swedes and Danes share many cultural traits. What explains this divergence in opinions? Is it because you do not face the same societal problems? 

IT: We are not as politically correct as the Swedes. So there is a lot of discussion here. (…) As such we have a greater awareness of our heritage and tend to be more protective of it.

Which is not to say we don’t have problems. We do. We face the same identity issues, and our traditions – in particular our Christian heritage – are fast disappearing from our society. That same hollowness is now becoming mainstream in Denmark. And this eliminates much of the arguments to defend ourselves against the importation of foreign values and customs, many of which are at odds with our own. [Cultural Marxism!] Simply forbidding things will not change this reality. [Sounds like a job for Stefan Molyneux. The Order of Preachers would be a much better fit, but somehow I don’t think FrancisChurch is ready for this undertaking.]

ET: And how has integration been? Seems to be going better than other European countries since we don’t hear much about “no-go” zones and riots in your country, unlike France and Sweden, for instance.

IT: We have those problems as well but because Denmark is a small country you won’t hear about them as much. 

We have is belief here that welfare is the solution for everything. No matter who comes here from whatever part of the world will get housing, work, entertainment and healthcare. The government will give those to you with the expectation that if you have all those things you will happily assimilate into Danish society, learn Danish and adapt to our culture. As a result we will become a vibrant multicultural society. 

The reality is quite different. The relativism that this multiculturalism engenders ends up putting different sides of society at odds with each other, especially when their values and beliefs are very different to begin with. [Calling Dr. Jordan Peterson, please answer the courtesy phone, Dr. Peterson, please pick up the courtesy phone. (see here)]

When immigrants come to Denmark they may be taken care of, but they have no dominant culture that they can assimilate into, certainly not in the religious sense. We are completely devoid of God. And as a result they end bringing elements of their culture and religion which often create friction, misunderstandings and also crime. [Nature abhors a vacuum] So Danish society becomes more and more divided as a result. 

ET: Politicians seem to be getting the message. Your parliament recently passed legislation to ensure that immigration would never reach a level that would threaten Danish national identity. What do you make of this?

IT: We have a very divided society here as well, even without considering the waves of immigration that have recently settled here. 

Half of the population wants open borders, mass immigration and welfare for all. They reject traditional values and are very much in favor of globalism and multiculturalism. The other half is very much opposed to that, but they lack any persuasive arguments to support that position. All they can do is to forbid immigration, forbid women from wearing a head cloth and so on. 

We no longer have a moral compass. Before, Christianity provided this role, keeping us united over centuries. Now we can no longer distinguish between good and evil, and ultimately this is what this struggle comes down to. Without this any preventive measures like this are just quick fixes that will not solve anything over the longer term. What is needed is a positive alternative in a moral sense. 

ET: Is there any data or independent studies on the benefits and costs of immigration in Denmark? In Sweden for instance this topic is almost taboo, but there are many concerns in terms of finding good employment opportunities for immigrants, coming from the immigrants themselves in fact.

IT: With this new culture we have adopted in the West we stopped having enough children to support our welfare state. So yes, one argument is that we need more people to support it. 

In our own very secular society the state is God. It is supposed to provide and care for everybody. So the economic arguments become less relevant. Of course they are consideration since people are paying for these policies, but in a sense they are secondary.

ET: We are at the cusp of an automation wave that threatens to displace millions of workers across the developed world. This will raise even more concerns regarding mass immigration, which traditionally consists of lower skilled workers. Is there any discussion in Denmark about this?

IT: No. The only discussion is around the cultural aspect, namely the impact on our values and traditions. 

And in a sense this just shows how weak we are. For instance, there are only 250,000 Muslims in Denmark, so a tiny minority. And yet the majority of our political debates focusing on culture over the last ten years have largely revolved around Islam. That’s how weak our culture has become.

So while as an open society there is resistance to women having to cover themselves up, having separate swimming pools for men and women and so forth, we have lost the argument to combat these imported traditions largely because we have lost our Christian roots and values. So over time they will become more prevalent in our society. We are already seeing it.

ET: Secular Muslims may also lose out a result. Many cherish Western values but will increasingly find a native society that is at odds with them, as their own communities become more extremist. Many complain that the Islam in Denmark and other European countries is more hardcore or even radical than in their home countries.

IT: That is true. And again that is largely a result of this cultural hesitation in the societies that host them. As a result, those more aggressive forms gain more ground to the detriment of everyone, especially women. 

ET: Much of the developing world faces a difficult situation and undoubtedly the countries that can help should. Let’s face it, faulty Western foreign policies have made bad situations even worse across much of the Middle East, although other very important sectarian and ethnic conflicts play a large role as well. 

There are those who suggest that instead of opening the borders this help should be provided at the origin, which would be cheaper and thus could help many more people, would place refugees closer to their homes and avoid many of the social problems we are unfortunately seeing across Europe – caused by a minority to be sure, but still very problematic. What do Danish politicians think about this?

IT: That would be logical in many ways, but again the debate is not economical. People want to be perceived as doing good, meaning opening their communities, welcoming and caring for others. 

I would be in favor of that if we were talking about women and their children, even families. But the reality is different. The majority of people we have welcomed in recent years, especially following the migrant crisis, are fit young men. They bring their conflicts and their frustrations with them, creating a difficult environment for everyone. 

So yes, arguably it would be more efficient to provide care at the source but this is not how the debate is framed.

ET: Denmark is supposedly the happiest country on the planet. But you have little reason to be happy these days as you find yourself on the receiving end of government censorship, not only for expressing your concerns about the future of your country but also for working for a Russian news outlet. What happened here? You recently wrote a powerful piece about this, expressing your feelings not only as a woman who does not toe the party line but especially as a Christian. 

IT: In 2015 I wrote an article criticizing our politicians who for the most part hate Christianity but nevertheless use Christian values, especially charity and compassion, to promote their own agendas, in particular mass immigration. So I called them out on that.

A few months later I got a call from a politician here who told me that I was on a government blacklist, supposedly acting as a pro-Russian propagandist agent, despite having absolutely no evidence to that effect. I occasionally work for a Russian news outlet, but that’s simply my job as a journalist. 

Today, in a society where supposedly there is freedom of speech, if politicians want to silence their critics they simply accuse them of working for the Kremlin, or having some unexplained ties with Russia. That is what happened to me, and it also happening to high profile politicians and journalists in the US, France and Germany. If you don’t agree with the multicultural policies of Europe then you are labeled a Russian agent. Which is really a form of political or character assassination. 

They are so afraid of the rise of what leftist politicians in Europe call “populism”, which threaten the existence of their beloved European Union. And this year the stakes are very high with elections in France and Germany. So they resort to these kinds of tactics to quash any dissenters. 

So I find myself in a blacklist in a supposedly free country like Denmark, but if a conflict with Russia emerges I can end up in prison under the pretext of being a foreign agent. Again, with no proof and no judicial process. This is very much how totalitarian societies operate. First they put you on a list, then when there is a problem or a made-up reason they will come for you.

ET: You were only expressing views that are consistent with those of many conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic. There are certainly many people concerned about the future of Western societies. In many ways this evokes memories of the Soviet Union, and the great new society they tried to create, with the disastrous consequences we all know.

That is actually a very real and concerning comparison. After all, communism was a Western idea and it was imposed on Russia, they did not create it. And it did not die with the collapse of the Soviet Union. On the contrary, it is still very much alive and roaming around our continent. While it operates differently, the goals are not too dissimilar. The version we have spreading across the West is Cultural Marxism.

We no longer have families, religion, even genders. In Sweden now they have invented a gender neutral term to address little boys and girls at kindergarten. This is a complete change from traditional Western values that have kept Europe safe from outside invasion for centuries. And this is now gone. 

All this talk of multiculturalism and open borders sounds very nice, but in practice it has led to a progressive transformation of our societies, and as Sweden shows not for the better. Less freedoms, less safety, less cohesion; more crime, more fragmentation, more social problems. It really is a struggle of good versus evil, and we in the West can no longer distinguish between the two. I would even call it diabolical disorientation. [Wow. “Diabolical disorientation”. And coming from a European protestant!]

ET: So how long you think before the Christian cross is removed from your flag? And how does the Danish monarchy, which is sworn to protect Danish culture and religion, feel about all of this?

IT: No European politician will stand up for Christianity. Nobody. Expect from perhaps Hungarian Prime Minister, Victor Orbán. 

There is this unholy alliance between the left and radical Islam. Many Europeans have such a disdain for their own traditions that they would prefer to see Christianity being eradicated even if it might cost their way of life and even personal freedoms in the end. [Yes, leftism is a suicide cult.]

We have this bizarre situation where Western feminists support women having to wear a head cloth, along with foregoing many of the rights they should be able to enjoy in our countries. And these women often get penalized by their own communities when they try to assimilate into our society, while the feminists stay quiet. It is all very multicultural and good.

ET: You know Russia well as part of your work. Can you contrast what is happening there relative to the transformation taking place across much of Western Europe?

Believe it or not, we have swapped lanes. Now it is Russia who is adopting Christianity as the West gets rid of it by any means possible. 

Christianity runs very deep in Russia: in their literature, in their arts, in their culture. When the Soviets brutally tried to suppress it, at the cost of countless lives, it survived underground. People still celebrated it in secrecy, performing baptisms and the like behind closed doors. 

President Putin recently inaugurated an enormous statue of St. Vladimir, the patron saint of the Russian Orthodox Church, about 100 yards from the Kremlin walls. If you stand at a certain point across the street from the Kremlin, the cross that he bears is even taller than the star in the Red Square, so the symbolism is very potent. 

In the West, as we discussed, we are going the other way. We can’t discard our values and heritage fast enough. 

ET: There was a 2014 Russian movie, Leviathan, which alluded to this transformation. However it put Orthodox Christianity in a less positive light, essentially being used as an ideological argument to justify the power of the oligarchs in society. President Putin is certainly no saint. Isn’t this all just superficial?

IT: There are people in Russia who are also opposed to their own traditional values and who want a more Westernized Russia. I have not seen that movie so I can’t say if the director supports that view or not. 

People need to go to Russia and see it for themselves. President Putin is only responding to what is happening there and he respects the Russian people’s faith in Orthodoxy.

This is one of the reasons why I believe the West hate the Russians so much. They cannot tolerate the thought of having a resurgent and powerful Christian Russia who openly rejects their Cultural Marxism. And accordingly they demonized it in much of our media and political circles. [Exactly]

ET: So, is Denmark on the brink? Indeed, is the rest of Europe on the brink?

IT: Yes, Denmark is on the brink. And Europe is on the brink. We completely lost our culture, our values and our moral compass. What used to be good is now evil and vice-versa. 

You mentioned Denmark being the happiest country in the world but I am not sure that is true. We have high alcohol consumption and about half a million people on happy pills for a reason. 

Channel 1, our main TV channel here, recently aired a documentary on three Danish girls who converted to Islam out of their own will, not because they got married or anything like that. They all had the same background, coming from broken homes, dealing with alcoholism and so forth – basically part of the legacy of the 1968 revolution we had across Europe. What these girls lacked was structure, and they found it in Islam because it regulates all aspects of your life: how you dress, what you eat, with whom you can socialize with, how to pray, how to interact as a wife and so on. 

That is what the right-wing parties in Europe don’t understand. This is a spiritual battle. There is no political freedom without spiritual freedom. If you go around just forbidding things, like don’t wear the head cloth and so forth, it will not work. Our civilization will gradually disappear.

The only thing that can save Europe right now is a true spiritual, dare I say Christian, revival across the Continent. This played a significant role in the demise of communism in the Soviet Union and East Germany. The churches there provided hidden venues for people to congregate, express ideas and share their faith and hardships.

Since its inception Christianity was always about fighting evil with love, prayer and faith because these three are the key to freedom. And these are the values that the radical left and radical Islam do not tolerate, because of course both demand total obedience to the state and their conception of God, respectively. 

ET: Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and your courage. You deserve to be in the cover of a magazine, not on some government blacklist. Wish you all the best.

IT: Thank you.

The Donald Says: Laudato… Si You Later….

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Breaking from the G-20 Summit in Baden Baden Germany.

The below post appeared on the Zero Hedge website (see here) providing the rundown on what transpired at the G20 Finance Minister’s Meeting. What is of interest to us is the passage pertaining to the language about the “global warming” hoax.

As my dear and loyal readers already know, Elizabeth Yore presented the chronology of how the “global climate” hoaxers, of which Francis, the bishop of Rome is a key member, have been able to ram through this debilitating set of “economic” guidelines at the United Nations level. These guidelines are part of what is known as the AGENDA 21, a subversive plan to gain control over global resources by creating a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT, throwing in a ONE WORLD RELIGION into the package for Francis. The detail have been provided in a video in the post titled A Buffoon By Any Other Name… (w/Update).

So it is with no small amount of amazement and JOY that I have read the below communique from the G20. Here are the relevant bits for us Catholics:

Reuters also points out another potential win for Trump as the communique will also drop a reference, used by the G20 last year, on the readiness to finance climate change as agreed in Paris in 2015 because of opposition from the United States and Saudi Arabia.

Trump has called global warming a “hoax” concocted by China to hurt U.S. industry and vowed to scrap the Paris climate accord aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

Trump’s administration on Thursday proposed a 31 percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget as the White House seeks to eliminate climate change programs and trim initiatives to protect air and water quality.

Asked about climate change funding, Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s budget director, said on Thursday, “We consider that to be a waste of money.”

And this comes on top of a proposed 31% cut to the budget of the Environmental Protection Agency in next years budget (see here), and a proposed massive cut to the United Nations funding (see here).

Folks, God is answering our prayers!

What I think we need is to find a community of contemplative monks and get them to pray for The POTUS round the clock.

He is truly doing GODS WORK!

PS. At the top of this post is the latest from Laurence England and his video “Fernandez”.

Enjoy…..

Trump Wins: G-20 Drops ‘Anti-Protectionist, Free-Trade, & Climate-Change Funding’ Commitment

After delays and hours of discussions amid tensions over ‘trade’ comments between the United States and the rest of The G-20, it appears President Trump has ‘won’. While China was “adamantly against” protectionism, the finance ministers end talks without renewing their long-standing commitment to free trade and rejection of protectionism after US opposition.

The world’s financial leaders are unlikely to endorse free trade and reject protectionism in their communique on Saturday because they have been unable to find a wording that would suit a more protectionist United States, G20 officials said.

This would break with a decade-old tradition among the finance ministers and central bankers of the world’s 20 top economies (G20), who over the years have repeatedly rejected protectionism and endorsed free trade.

But the new administration in the United States is considering trade measures to curb imports with a border tax and would not agree to repeat the formulations used by previous G20 communiques, clashing with China and Europe, the officials said.

“Unless there is a last minute miracle, there is no agreement on trade,” one official, who declined to be named, told Reuters.  “This is not a good outcome of the meeting,” a G20 delegate quoted Bundesbank President Jens Weidmann as saying.

In a partial face-saving move, as The FT details, G20 finance ministers meeting in the German resort town of Baden-Baden noted the importance of trade to the global economy, but dropped tougher language from last year that vowed to “resist all forms of protectionism”.

The new communique said: “We are working to strengthen the contribution of trade to our economies. We will strive to reduce excessive global imbalances, promote greater inclusiveness and fairness and reduce inequality in our pursuit of economic growth.”

The watered-down commitments on free trade reflected the anti-globalisation mood that Donald Trump has brought to Washington and came in the first G20 meetings between Steven Mnuchin, the new US Treasury Secretary, and his foreign counterparts.

US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin spoke to reporters after the meeting:

  • *MNUCHIN: LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING CLOSELY W/ G-20 COLLEAGUES
  • *MNUCHIN: CONFIDENT U.S. CAN WORK CONSTRUCTIVELY WITH PARTNERS
  • *MNUCHIN: U.S. BELIEVES IN FREE, BALANCED TRADE
  • *MNUCHIN SAYS WILL LOOK AT TRADE SURPLUSES WITH VIEW TO CORRECT
  • *MNUCHIN SAYS MULTILATERAL AGREEMENTS HAVE VERY IMPORTANT PLACE
  • *MNUCHIN SAYS U.S. WANTS TO RE-EXAMINE TRADE DEALS INCL. NAFTA
  • *MNUCHIN: U.S. BELIEVES IN APPROPRIATE REGULATION
  • *MNUCHIN SAYS IMPORTANT BANKS CAN PROVIDE LIQUIDITY IN MARKETS

Reuters also points out another potential win for Trump as the communique will also drop a reference, used by the G20 last year, on the readiness to finance climate change as agreed in Paris in 2015 because of opposition from the United States and Saudi Arabia.

Trump has called global warming a “hoax” concocted by China to hurt U.S. industry and vowed to scrap the Paris climate accord aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

Trump’s administration on Thursday proposed a 31 percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget as the White House seeks to eliminate climate change programs and trim initiatives to protect air and water quality.

Asked about climate change funding, Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s budget director, said on Thursday, “We consider that to be a waste of money.”

The G20 do agree, however, to show continuity in their foreign exchange policies, using phrases from the past on foreign exchange markets.

As we noted earlier, needless to say, such an acrimonous end to the weekend’s summit would likely result in a surge in FX volatility when markets open for trading late on Sunday, reflecting the new state of global trade flux, in which the future of the US Dollar is completely unknown, and reflecting the emerging chaos over the future parameters of trade.
 

It’s Not Just The Catholics Who Are Asking For An Investigation…

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In yesterday’s post, we connected the dots that link the FrancisVatican to the post-Modernists Cultural Marxist international organizations which are in essence headed by one George Soros.

Yesterday, we looked at the ECCLESIASTICAL sub-set of the Visibilium Omnium, et Invisibilium and showed how the Soros organizations, using the governmental and internationalist subsidies have infiltrated the Vatican through the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (PAS).

The infiltration was accomplished by corrupt prelates, such as the Argentine  Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo (see here and here), who incidentally is beginning to receive a lot of attention of late. But I digress…  Msgr. Sonodro, who was appointed to the PAS in 1998, rose to head the institution under the Francis bishopric of Rome. In 2011, Pope Benedict XVI made the good Msgr. a member of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America.

In turn, the “economist” Joseph Stiglitz also obtained an appointment to the said Academy under the pontificate of JP “the great”, in 2003. These two individuals also have another “common history” in that Msgr. Sonodro, the FrancisBishop is from Argentina, a country that “employed” “Dr.” Stiglitz as an economic advisor under the former FrancisGovernments run by Nestor Kirchner and than passed down to his wife Christina Kirchner Fernandez. As a member of the Argentine hierarchy and Friend of Francis, tghe good Msgr. would have had access to circles of friends of the Kirchners (see here). And Stiglitz was definitely a member of that circle. Here is some insight about just how “in” Stiglitz was with that “in” crowd: (see here)

Something similar is happening now with respect to Stiglitz’s involvement with the Kirchner government in Argentina. Stiglitz filed a friend of the court brief on behalf of Argentina’s bid to appeal an American lower court’s ruling that would force it to honor $1.3 billion in bonds on which it defaulted in 2001. Stiglitz did not disclose — nor has he disclosed in his public statements or writings about Argentina, where he has argued that the country had no choice but to default on his debt — that he served as a paid expert for Argentina in a 2012 case before the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. Over the years, he has also traveled regularly to Argentina to advise the now-deceased Argentinian president Nestor Kirchner as well as his wife, the country’s current president, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and delivered several paid lectures there.

And to cut to the chase, we know how the Argentina story ended. (see here) And Christina Kirchner lost the recent elections to President Mauricio Macri, to whom Francis… showed the cold shoulder. (see here)

Today, we turn to POLITICAL sub-set of the VOeI, and a letter from 6 Senator of the United States. In the letter, the said Senators are “demanding” that the US State Department investigate one George Soros. Specifically, the Senators want the Secretary of State to:

how US taxpayer funds are being used by the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to support Soros-backed, leftist political groups in several Eastern European countries including Macedonia and Albania.

And just to bring this post full circle, in an unrelated… or maybe not…. matter, the Editors of The Remnant Newspaper have written another letter to the President of the United States this time, to ask the following: (see here)

With all of this in mind, and wishing the best for our country as well as for Catholics worldwide, we believe it to be the responsibility of loyal and informed United States Catholics to petition you to authorize an investigation into the following questions:

– To what end was the National Security Agency monitoring the conclave that elected Pope Francis? [6]

–  What other covert operations were carried out by US government operatives concerning the resignation of Pope Benedict or the conclave that elected Pope Francis?

–  Did US government operatives have contact with the “Cardinal Danneels Mafia”?  [7]

–  International monetary transactions with the Vatican were suspended during the last few days prior to the resignation of Pope Benedict.  Were any U.S. Government agencies involved in this? [8]

–  Why were international monetary transactions resumed on February 12, 2013, the day after Benedict XVI announced his resignation? Was this pure coincidence? [9]

–  What actions, if any, were actually taken by John Podesta, Hillary Clinton, and others tied to the Obama administration who were involved in the discussion proposing the fomenting of a “Catholic Spring”?

– What was the purpose and nature of the secret meeting between Vice President Joseph Biden and Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican on or about June 3, 2011? 

–   What roles were played by George Soros and other international financiers who may be currently residing in United States territory? [10]

Ending, all one can say is this: boy, this guy’s got his finger in many a pie!

PS Just to remind everyone about how the FrancisEconomy in Venezuela is doing, see here. And just as a further reminder about how “Dr.” Stiglitz was heaping praise for “Venezuela’s economic growth and “positive policies in health and education” of the Chavez government and it’s promising future in 2007, see here. But hey, who remembers that far back (see here)…

*****

Senators Demand State Department Probe Into Soros Organizations (see here)

Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and a group of his colleagues are calling on the newly appointed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to immediately investigate how US taxpayer funds are being used by the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to support Soros-backed, leftist political groups in several Eastern European countries including Macedonia and Albania.  According to the letter, potentially millions of taxpayer dollars are being funneled through USAID to Soros’ Open Society Foundations with the explicit goal of pushing his progressive agenda.

“Unfortunately, we have received a credible report that, over the past few years, the U.S. Mission there has actively intervened in the party politics of Macedonia, as well as in the shaping of its media environment and civil society, often favoring left-leaning political group over others.  We find these reports discoraging and, if true, highly problematic.”

“Much of the concerning activity in Macedonia has been perpetuated through USAID funds awarded to implementing entities such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundations.  As the recipient of multiple grant awards and serving as a USAID contractor implementing projects in this small nation of 2.1 million people, our taxpayer funded foreign aid goes far, allowing Foundation Open Society – Macedonia (FOSM) to push a progressive agenda and invigorate the political left.  Our foreign aid should only be used to promote a political agenda if it is in the security or economic interests of our country to do so, and even at that, we must be cautious and respectful in such an endeavor.  We should be especially wary of promoting policies that remain controversial even in our own country and that have the potential to harm our relationship with the citizens of recipient countries.”

As Fox News pointed out, USAID gave nearly $15 million to Soros’ Foundation Open Society – Macedonia, and other Soros-linked organizations in the region, in the last 4 years of Obama’s presidency alone.

The USAID website shows that between 2012 and 2016, USAID gave almost $5 million in taxpayer cash to FOSM for “The Civil Society Project,” which “aims to empower Macedonian citizens to hold government accountable.” USAID’s website links to www.soros.org.mk, and says the project trained hundreds of young Macedonians “in youth activism and the use of new media instruments.”

The State Department told lawmakers that in addition to that project, USAID has recently funded a new Civic Engagement Project which partners with four organizations, including FOSM. The cost is believed to be around $9.5 million.

A citizen’s initiative called “Stop Operation Soros” has also published a white paper alleging U.S. money has been funding violent riots in the streets, as well as a Macedonian version of Saul Alinsky’s far-left handbook “Rules for Radicals.

But Macedonia isn’t the only sovereign nation where U.S. taxpayers are unknowingly funding Soros’ efforts to force his leftist political agenda down the throats of the disaffected youth.

“This problem is not limited to Macedonia, but appears to follow a pattern of alarming activity in this volatile region. 
Respected leaders from Albania have made similar claims of US diplomats and Soros-backed organizations pushing for certain political outcomes in their country. 
Foundation Open Society – Albania (FOSA) and its experts, with funding from USAID, have the controversial Strategy Document for Albania Judicial Reform.  Some leaders believe that these “reforms” are ultimately aimed to give the Prime Minister and left-of-center government full control over judiciary power.”

Moreover, similar efforts in Hungary were blasted by Prime Minister Viktor Orban last month who expressed concern about Soros meddling in his country’s political fights, and warned about Soros’ “trans-border empire.” Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó told Fox News last month that they hoped that with a change in
administration in Washington, the Soros-led push against their government would decrease.

“I think it is no secret and everyone knows about the very close relationship between the Democrats and George Soros and his foundations. It is obvious that if Hillary Clinton had won then this pressure on us would be much stronger. With Donald Trump winning we have the hope that this pressure will be decreased on us,” he said.

Widely cited as an example of Soros’ influence during the Obama administration was a 2011 email, published by WikiLeaks, in which Soros urged Hillary Clinton to take action in Albania over recent demonstrations in the capital of Tirana.  Among other things, Soros urged Clinton to “bring the full weight
of the international community to bear on Prime Minister Berisha and opposition leader Edi Rama”.

Dear Hillary,

A serious situation has arisen in Albania which needs urgent attention at senior levels of the US government. You may know that an opposition demonstration in Tirana on Friday resulted in the deaths of three people and the destruction of property. There are serious concerns about further unrest connected to a counter-demonstration to be organized by the governing party on Wednesday and a follow-up event by the opposition two days later to memorialize the victims. The prospect of tens of thousands of people entering the streets in an already inflamed political environment bodes ill for the return, of public order and the country’s fragile democratic process.

I believe two things need to be done urgently:

1. Bring the full weight of the international community to bear on Prime Minister Berisha and opposition leader Edi Rama to forestall further public demonstrations and to tone down public pronouncements.

2. Appoint a senior European official as a mediator.

While I am concerned about the rhetoric being used by both sides, I am particularly worried about the actions of the Prime Minister. There is videotape of National Guard members firing on demonstrators from the roof of the Prime Ministry. The Prosecutor (appointed by the Democratic Party) has issued arrest warrants for the individuals in question. The Prime Minister had previously accused the opposition of intentionally murdering these activists as a provocation.

After the tape came out deputies from his party accused the Prosecutor of planning a coup d’etat in collaboration with the opposition, a charge Mr. Berisha repeated today. No arrests have been made as of this writing. The demonstration resulted from opposition protests over the conduct of parliamentary elections in 2009. The political environment has deteriorated ever since and is now approaching levels of 1997, when similar issues caused the country to slide into anarchy and violence. There are signs that Edi Rama’s control of his own people is slipping, which may lead to further violence.

The US and the EU must work in complete harmony over this, but given Albania’s European aspirations the EU must take the lead. That is why I suggest appointing a mediator such as Carl Bildt. Martti Ahtisaari or Miroslav Lajcak, all of whom have strong connections to the Balkans.

My foundation in Tirana is monitoring the situation closely and can provide independent analysis of the crisis.

Thank you, George Soros

Not surprisingly, within a few days, A U.S. envoy was dispatched.

Aren’t we all so lucky that Hillary’s State Department could rely on the “independent analysis” of George Soros during times of crisis?

* * *

The full letter:

 

 

A Buffoon By Any Other Name… (w/Update)

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Quick post today.

When I first launched this blog, I defined its mission as chronicling the Restoration of all things in Christ. Little did I know that the Restoration would be a much wider phenomenon than just that which I noticed taking shape in that part of the Visibilium Omnium, et Invisibilium (VOeI) that is its’ ECCLESIASTICAL sub-set.

When writing on my blog, I also set out to add a “quantitative” aspect to the information that I would be presenting. I set up various “news feeds” that I would filter for KEY WORDS that would, I hoped provide a “more full” picture of what in fact was taking place.

What I never imagined was that my filters would be picking up DATA POINTS that lay outside the ECCLESIASTICAL sub-set of the VOeI, and in significant numbers. Two sub-sets of DATA POINTS that kept appearing in close proximity were those from what I labeled secular “leftist initiatives” and ecclesiastical “leftist initiatives”. In this category,  what appeared to be the case was that leftist initiative instituted by the new Francis administration and those instituted by Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), especially those that work under the auspices of the United Nations “overlapped” to a significant degree.

One specific area where these overlapping “leftist initiatives” appeared was in the area of economics. I thought this was strange and did not assign to these DATA POINTS any great deal of significance. The reason being is that I could not connect the dots since I could not trace the lineage.

That is up until now.

Enter Elizabeth Yore and the video above. Actually, one name mentioned in the video above connected most of the DATA POINTS. And that name is Joseph Stiglitz. For my long time readers, you will remember that name. Likewise, you will not be surprised that your humble blogger is revisiting this below subject matter and this “personality”.

Specifically, the subject matter is Greece.

To be more specific, what Mrs. Yore did in the above video is to connect the dots (DATA POINTS). Those dots were connected through Joseph Stiglitz, who turns out to be a long standing member of the Pontifical Science Academy (headed by the Argentinian FrancisBishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo – of Tea Party fame), an advisor to the former Argentinian government (Bergoglio backed Fernandez regime), and a George Soros surrogate.

Who would have thunk?

And it turns out that it was during the reign of JPII “the great” that he was appointed!

Excuse the digression…

The reason that I mention this matter now is just to remind my dear readers that I have featured the good Dr. in a number of videos. The reason that I mentioned Stiglitz then was to warn my readers as to this buffoon and his “track record”.

If you dear readers recall, in 2010, Stiglitz appeared, along with Hugh Hendry on the BBC. Here is how that conversation went… (And HERE is the conversation Mr. Hendry had with another Soros surrogate and FrancisEconomist, one Jeffry Sachs.)

As you recall, at that time, the first Greek crisis was raging. Stiglitz, who was an official advisor to the Greek government was explaining about what Europe and Greece needed to do in order to exit the Greek crisis. His gibberish was called out by Hugh Hendry. And the rest is as they say… HISTORY.

Note bene: At that time, Hugh Hendry mentioned that Greek long term interest rates (10 year government bonds) were at 7%. Today, Greece long term interest rates are… wait for it… 7%. The level of these rates was unsustainable then, so one can just imagine how much “unsustainable-er” this rate is 7 years later!

So anyways, how does the situation in Greece look like after all these years of being advised by “Dr.” Stiglitz, the long standing member of the Pontifical Academy of Science, and… fill in the blank…??????

For the current state of the Greek economy and society in general, after all this “highly expensive advise” provided to the various Greek governments by the Pontifical Academy of Science’s Joseph Stiglitz, I turn you over to the Zero Hedge website (see here and here).

And before I end, I would just like to remind all my loyal readers about the LEX ARMATICUS and its founding principle, namely that:

Those individuals and institutions that comply to the et Invisibilium, will remain a part of the Visibisium Omnium. Those that do not, will be consigned to the trash heap of history.

Where the following definitions hold:

Visibisium Omnium – all the material “things” that we can identify with our senses (touch, sight, feel, smell, taste)

et Invisibilium – all the non-material laws and processes that regulate the visibilium omnium (e.g. the laws of physics – classical mechanics and quantum mechanics, laws of mathematics, rules of logic, etc.)

As to the effectiveness and the OBJECTIVE results of  the Pontifical Academy of Science long standing member’s Stiglitz’s advise, I will leave you dear reader to decide for yourself…

*****

“The Powers-That-Be Have Looted Everything” – Greek Farmers Fight Riot Police With Shepherd Crooks

The economic and social disintegration of Greece used to be big news.

However it’s largely been overshadowed by the migrant crisis, and the American media hardly reports on Greece anymore. If you’ve been out of the loop, allow me to get you caught up on the financial situation in that country, by giving two answers to the questions you’re probably thinking. Yes, the Greek government still sucks. And yes, the people of Greece are still really pissed off.

Believe it or not, riots are still a common occurrence in that country. In fact there was an incident last week in Athens, after the government tried to increase taxes and social security contributions. In response, over a thousand farmers from Crete, who used to be immune from these taxes, took a ferry to Athens and proceeded to riot outside of the agriculture ministry building.

This however wasn’t an ordinary riot, not even by Greek standards. The farmers fought the riot police with shepherd crooks.

Taxes are being hiked to satisfy inspectors who represent the international creditors who Greece’s debt. If the government can’t pay 7 billion euros by July, then the country will once again face the possibility of default. However, the farmers are determined to change their Leftist government’s mind about the tax hikes. One of the protesting farmers who spoke to The Guardian stated that “We want to have them take back everything they have encumbered us with. To us, it seems like the powers that be have looted everything.”

UPDATE 07:20 16 March 2017

A quick word (approximately 10:00) from Dr. Jordan Peterson about how to get out of the post-Modernist funk…

In the above video, he really captures the essence of the Bergoglio mindset…

Draining The Swamp – The UN Creature…

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A few weeks ago, I put up a link in the right hand margin to the The Conservative Treehouse blog. Today I re-post my first article from this site.

The CONTEXT of this post is provided by the Stefan Molyneux video I have linked to above and this HERE.

And as you can see quite clearly, The President Donald IS in fact doing God’s work…

*****

REPORT: President Trump Tells T-Rex Cut U.N. Funding by 50%…

Earlier today President Trump signed an executive order initiating a full review of all federal departments to include a recommendations within 180 days for which departments and programs can be completely shut down. Almost immediately the Swamp trees begin convulsing spasmodically.

The notification ripples had yet to carry across the swamp water notifying all of the inhabitants when…   Apparently President Trump was not satisfied with the XO instructions alone.  Trump slams down the atomic sledgehammer in an epic budgetary notification to battalion commander T-Rex.

WASHINGTON DC – President Trump’s administration has told the State Department to cut more than 50 percent of U.S. funding to United Nations programs, Foreign Policy reported.

The push for the drastic reductions comes as the White House is scheduled to release its 2018 topline budget proposal Thursday, which is expected to include a 37 percent cut to the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development budgets.

It’s not clear if Trump’s budget plan, from the Office of Management and Budget, would reflect the full extent of Trump’s proposed cuts to the U.N.

[…]  The U.S. spends roughly $10 billion annually on the U.N., and the cuts could have the greatest impact on peacekeeping, the U.N. development program and UNICEF, which are funded by State’s Bureau of International Organization Affairs. 

The fate of other popular programs, like the World Food Programme and U.N. refugee operations, are less clear. The World Food Programme’s funding comes from the Department of Agriculture. 

The magazine said it confirmed the potential cuts with three sources; one said the administration is considering cutting humanitarian aid programs by 36 percent.

Richard Gowan, a U.N. expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said the alterations would spark “chaos” if true.  (read more)

Oh noes, not chaos upon the EU Council on Foreign Relations…  quick, call Bono and Brangelina.. what?.. not together, well call Geldof then… and Branson, yes Branson; someone, anyone. Heck, find that old number for Sally Struthers…. Oh, and Gwyneth Paltrow too… Hurry!

How can that bad man cut U.N. funding by 50% and still expect us to promote the international CNN Heroes Campaign?

My God Man, have you no decency?

NORMALIZATION PROCESS™ – The Dutch Elections…

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today a quick repost from Zero Hedge. (see here)

Another event in the ongoing NORMALIZATION PROCESS™ will take place tomorrow. This event is the Dutch election where Geert Wilders, the anti-illegal immigrant politician is expected to win the election. Unfortunately, the voting will be split among many parties and it would appear that even if Wilders wins, he will not be able to form a coalition.

Yet, fate appears to be trying to help…

And that help comes in the form of the ongoing Turkish extortion effort that threatens to let in the next large wave of illegal immigrants into Europe if “certain” terms are not met.

The latest terms are outlined below…

So we watch…

***

Turkey Says “Migrant Deal Has Ended”, May Unleash Millions Of Refugees

As we noted moments ago, the tit-for-tat aggression resumed its escalation between Turkey and the Netherlands, with Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmus exclaiming from Ankara that “Europe’s politicians are under fascist, neo-nazi influence” and in response, Turkey will suspend all high-level diplomatic meetings and cancel all flight permissions for Dutch politicians.

As part of its furious response, Turkey said it would impose various travel sanctions on Dutch diplomats such as halting all high-level political discussions with the Netherlands in the wake of the Dutch government’s decision to bar two cabinet ministers from campaigning in the country. Kurtulmus said during a news conference following a weekly cabinet meeting that Ankara also is closing its air space to Dutch diplomats until the Netherlands meets Turkish requests, according to the AP.

Kurtulmus also says the Dutch ambassador to Turkey, who was traveling when the diplomatic row started, won’t be allowed to return, and said that Turkey’s government plans to advise parliament to withdraw from a Dutch-Turkish friendship group.

It was unclear what the sudden Turkish escalation means for economic ties between the two nations: as a reminder,  Dutch direct investment in Turkey amounts to $22 billion, making the Netherlands the biggest source of foreign investment with a share of 16%.  Furthermore, Turkish exports to the Netherlands totalled $3.6 billion in 2016, making it the tenth largest market for Turkish goods, according to the Turkish Statistical Institute. Turkey imported $3 billion worth of Dutch goods in 2016. Should the diplomatic spat lead to a collapse in trade relations, a Turkey recession is all but assured.

Kurtulmus said the political sanctions will apply until the Netherlands takes steps to “redress” its actions. He said: “There is a crisis and a very deep one. We didn’t create this crisis or bring to this stage.”

 

However the most troubling development, and one which has the potential to sway the outcome of the Dutch election which will be held in less than two days, is that in the final power play aimed towards Merkel, Kurtulmus exclaimed that since “Europe has not kept its promises on the migrant deal, for us that agreement has ended.

Which means that one year after it collected $3 billion for the migrant deal, Turkey has just voided the agreement, and the next step would be that Turkey is about to flood Europe with refugees currently held inside Turkish borders. And since by some estimates Turkey currently harbors over 2 million potential migrants, Europe’s refugee situation is about to get far worse, and as a corollary, support for anti-immigrant political organizations across the continent is about to take another step function higher.

This MUST Be Corrected!

Via the AKA Catholics blog, see original here.

Now when Peter was in the court below, there cometh one of the maidservants of the high priest. And when she had seen Peter warming himself, looking on him she saith: Thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying: I neither know nor understand what thou sayest. And he went forth before the court; and the cock crew. And again a maidservant seeing him, began to say to the standers by: This is one of them. But he denied again. And after a while they that stood by said again to Peter: Surely thou art one of them; for thou art also a Galilean.

But he began to curse and to swear, saying; I know not this man of whom you speak.  And immediately the cock crew again. And Peter remembered the word that Jesus had said unto him: Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt thrice deny me.

And he began to weep.

(Gospel according to St. Mark 14: 66-72)

This must to be corrected!

*****

SSPX offers stunning evaluation of Amoris, Francis

In Part 5 of an ongoing series of articles being published by the Society of St. Pius X, Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize attempts to answer the question, Is Pope Francis Heretical?

Here, I provide a necessarily detailed examination of Fr. Gleize’s jaw-dropping treatment; one that is sure to disappoint those who, in these deeply troubling times in which we live, have come to rely upon the Society for Catholic clarity and conviction. (I encourage especially those who fit this description to read this difficult post in its entirety.)

Before we begin, might I suggest that all concerned take heart by recalling the words of our first Pope:

And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. (John 6:68)

“The words of everlasting life” remain available to us, even if not in the utterances of present day churchmen, in the timeless decrees infallibly set forth by the Holy Catholic Church that speaks in the name of Our Blessed Lord.

It is these upon which I rely in the following.

Fr. Gleize proposes, “in order to be brief,” to explore the question at hand by examining “the essential idea of each dubium.”

The first dubium asks if it is possible to give absolution and sacramental Communion to divorced-and-remarried persons who live in adultery without repenting, to which Fr. Gleize responds, “For someone who adheres to Catholic doctrine, the answer is no.”

He then goes on to cite AL 305, followed by the infamous footnote:

“Because of forms of conditioning and mitigating factors, it is possible that in an objective situation of sin—which may not be subjectively culpable, or fully such—a person can be living in God’s grace, can love and can also grow in the life of grace and charity, while receiving the Church’s help to this end.” (AL 305)

He then cites the infamous footnote 351:

“In certain cases, this can include the help of the sacraments. Hence, I want to remind priests that the confessional must not be a torture chamber, but rather an encounter with the Lord’s mercy. I would also point out that the Eucharist ‘is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.’”

Fr. Gleize concludes:

“The doubt arises here with the note. There is no doubt about the fact that non-culpable ignorance of sin excuses from sin.”

A critical point that Fr. Gleize fails to mention is that while “it is possible” that one who commits an objectively grave sin “may not be subjectively culpable,” the Church does not have the right, or the ability, to render such judgments.

If and when it is the case that one is inculpable of a grave sin committed, it is God alone who renders such judgment. (Fair warning: It will be necessary for us to repeat this infallible doctrine often in the face of Fr. Gleize’s assessment.)

Fr. Gleize goes on to say:

“But to those who are victims of this ignorance and thereby benefit from this excuse, the Church offers first the help of her preaching and warnings, the Church starts by putting an end to the ignorance by opening the eyes of the ignorant to the reality of their sin.

The help of the sacraments can only come afterward, if and only if the formerly ignorant persons, now instructed as to the seriousness of their state, have decided to make use of the means of conversion, and if they have what is called a firm purpose of amendment. Otherwise the help of the sacraments would be ineffective, and it too would be an objective situation of sin.”

Now we seem to be getting somewhere… The Church’s response to every sinner is to preach, to warn, and to invite to conversion. She does not, however, enter into an examination of culpability as such is the prerogative of God alone!

According to Fr. Gleize:

“We are dealing here therefore with a doubt (dubium) in the strictest sense of the term, in other words, a passage that can be interpreted in two ways. And this doubt arises precisely thanks to the indefinite expression in the note: ‘in certain cases.’”

I disagree with the suggestion that this text from AL can be interpreted in two ways as it clearly proposes that the Church and her confessors have the ability, and the right, to weigh culpability, when in truth, they do not.

This, my friends, is the fundamental error upon which much of Amoris Laetitia, Chapter Eight, is constructed and must fall.

Frankly, I am surprised that Fr. Gleize has not seized upon this very point.

In his Encyclical on the Errors of the Modernists, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Pope St. Pius X repeated the traditional (and dogmatic) doctrine:

“We leave out of consideration the internal disposition of soul, of which God alone is the judge.” (cf Pascendi 3),

Even the dreadful conciliar document Gaudium et Spes gets this right:

“God alone is the judge and searcher of hearts, for that reason He forbids us to make judgments about the internal guilt of anyone.” (GS 28)

Moving on to the second dubium, which asks if, in light of AL 304, there is such a thing as intrinsically evil acts from a moral perspective that the law prohibits without any possible exception.

Fr. Gleize answers. “For someone who adheres to Catholic doctrine, the answer is yes.”

He then goes on to paraphrase AL 304:

“…citing the Summa theologiae of Saint Thomas Aquinas (I-II, question 94, article 4), [AL 304] insists on the application of the law, rather than on the law itself, and emphasizes the part played by the judgment of prudence, which allegedly can be exercised only on a case-by-case basis, strictly depending on circumstances that are unique and singular.”

It must be said yet again, there is no “part played by the judgment of prudence” with respect to intrinsic evils (such as adultery) that admit of no exceptions. “No exceptions” means precisely this.

Fr. Gleize then quotes AL directly:

“It is true that general rules set forth a good which can never be disregarded or neglected, but in their formulation they cannot provide absolutely for all particular situations. At the same time it must be said that, precisely for that reason, what is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances cannot be elevated to the level of a rule.” (AL 304)

Fr. Gleize concludes:

“This passage does not introduce any ambivalence, properly speaking. It merely insists too much on one part of the truth (the prudent application of the law), to the point of obscuring the other part of the same truth (the necessary value of the law), which is altogether as important as the first. The text therefore errs here by omission, thus causing a misreading.”

I find this stunning, to be quite honest. Remember what we are discussing – adultery.

“The law” in this case is absolute; it is not open to nuance or “prudent application,” properly speaking:

Thou shalt not commit… This formulation is very clear, and Our Lord even further clarified precisely what constitutes adultery.

Contrition, confession, firm purpose of amendment… The practical application (insofar as the remedy is concerned) is equally as clear.

That said, one should know that Francis is misappropriating St. Thomas’ teaching in order to give the impression that the Angelic Doctor considered the Commandment against adultery a mere “general rule,” when in fact he clearly treated it for what it is; a moral absolute upon which particular circumstances have no bearing.

AL 304 is an error plain and simple (and not simply by “omission” as Fr. Gleize states) since moral absolutes such as that expressed in the Commandment against adultery do indeed  “provide absolutely for all particular situations.”

Francis states the exact opposite, and that, my friends, is heresy.

Moving on to the third dubium we find a question concerning paragraph 301; paraphrased by Fr. Gleize as follows:

“Can we say that persons who habitually live in a way that contradicts a commandment of God’s law (for example the one that forbids adultery) are in an objective situation of habitual grave sin?”

Again, Fr. Gleize responds, “The Catholic answer is yes.”

He then quotes AL 301:

“Hence it can no longer simply be said that all those in any ‘irregular’ situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace.”

Fr. Gleize proposes:

“Two points should be emphasized. The sentence just quoted posits in principle the impossibility of making a universal affirmation. It does not deny the possibility of saying that public sinners are deprived of grace; it only denies the possibility of saying that all public sinners are deprived of it. This denial has always been taught by the Church.”

Once again, it is to be shocked. Here is what the Council of Trent had to say [with my emphasis]:

“In opposition also to the subtle wits of certain men, who, by pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent, it is to be maintained, that the received grace of Justification [sanctifying grace] is lost, not only by infidelity whereby even faith itself is lost, but also by any other mortal sin whatever, though faith be not lost; thus defending the doctrine of the divine law, which excludes from the kingdom of God not only the unbelieving, but the faithful also (who are) fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, liers with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards, railers, extortioners, and all others who commit deadly sins…” (Session VI, Chapter XV)

NB: It is to be maintained… Note as well the reason given: thus defending the doctrine of the divine law.

AL 301, in contravention of the divine law, presumes to overturn the infallible teaching set forth by the Council of Trent by insisting that it can no longer be maintained.

Folks, this is a no-brainer; it is plainly “heretical” according to Fr. Glieze’s own working definition of the word.

Fr. Glieze continued:

“There are in fact, in concrete human acts, what is called exculpatory or ‘mitigating’ reasons (or factors). Because of them, the sinner may not be morally responsible for the objective situation of sin.”

At this point, I am certain that you can say it with me: God alone judges such matters as moral responsibility.

As for what is required of Catholics who wish to remain in communion with the Church, we must accept what is stated by the Council of Trent: It is to be maintained…

Fr. Gleize’s treatment of AL 301, in an essay that proposes to examine whether or not Francis is a heretic, is at best perplexing.

For reasons that only he can explain, he has chosen to focus on the solitary sentence quoted above while ignoring entirely the one immediately following, which reads:

“A subject may know full well the rule [divine law concerning the mortal sin of adultery], yet have great difficulty in understanding its inherent values, or be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin.” (AL 301)

Once again, that which is set forth by Francis runs afoul of the infallible doctrine taught with piercing clarity by the Council of Trent:

“With the help of divine grace, one can refrain from such deadly sins as adultery and fornication.” (cf Session VI, Chapter XV)

NB: There are no “concrete situations” wherein one is unable to refrain from the mortal sin of adultery.

If this isn’t enough for one to conclude that Francis is heretical, consider as well:

“If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.” (Session VI, Canon XVIII)

NB: In stating that certain situations “do not allow” one to keep God’s commandment against adultery, Francis has most certainly anathematized himself.

This brings us to the fourth dubium which poses the question (as presented by Fr. Gleize) concerning paragraph 302:

“Can we still stay, from a moral perspective, that an act that is already intrinsically evil by reason of its object can never become good because of circumstances or the intention of the person who performs it?”

Once again, Fr. Gleize provides a response, “The Catholic answer is yes,” and then quotes Amoris Laetitia:

“A negative judgment about an objective situation does not imply a judgment about the imputability or culpability of the person involved.” (AL 302)

Fr. Gleize states:

“That is true, but the reverse is not, and by neglecting to say that, this passage again introduces doubt…

This is the case indeed, but yet again, the fundamental error undergirding much of this disastrous Exhortation is left unaddressed: The Church and her confessors simply do not have the right (or the ability) to weigh matters of imputability.

On this, Catholic doctrine leaves no room for confusion. Simply accepting and applying this doctrine is enough to remove all doubt.

Francis, in Amoris Laetitia, however, goes to great lengths to undermine it.

Finally, we arrive at the fifth dubium concerning AL 303:

“Can we say that conscience must always remain subject, without any possible exception, to the absolute moral law that forbids acts that are intrinsically evil because of their object?”

Fr. Gleize responds, “The Catholic answer is yes.”

He continued by stating that AL 303 is deficient in that it fails to make clear that “a will conformed to an erroneous conscience can be bad,” thus “introducing here a fifth doubt.”

In his treatment of AL 303, Fr. Gleize has once again chosen to focus on but one solitary sentence while ignoring entirely what, in this case, are perhaps the most offensive portions of the entire Exhortation:

“Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel.  It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal.”  (AL 303) [emphasis added]

Here, we have two more undeniably clear examples of heresy as defined by Fr. Gleize.

If, as Francis states, persisting in mortal sin is the most generous response which can be given to God, this necessarily means that “the demands of the Gospel” (God’s laws) are, at times, impossible to keep.

As previously noted in our examination of AL 301, according to the Council of Trent, Francis has thus anathematized himself:

“If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.” (Session VI, Canon XVIII)

At this we come to that truly odious proposition set forth by Francis which says that, at times, God himself is asking man to persist in his failure to meet the demands of the Gospel; in this case, to persist in the mortal sin of adultery.

This is a blatant instance of both heresy and blasphemy. As Sacred Scripture attests, and the Catholic conscience most certainly knows, the All Holy God never asks that we should persist in sin:

Let no temptation take hold on you, but such as is human. And God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able: but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it. (1 Corinthians 10:13)

Let no man, when he is tempted, say that he is tempted by God. For God is not a tempter of evils: and he tempteth no man. (James 13:1)

Far from asking us to sin, the Lord’s will is perfectly clear in spite of knowing our every weakness:

Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:48)

The Council of Trent teaches [emphasis added]:

“If any one saith, that it is not in man’s power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil God worketh as well as those that are good, not permissively only, but properly, and of Himself, in such wise that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of Paul; let him be anathema.” (Session VI, Chapter XVI, Canon VI)

By stating that God himself is asking one to persist, at times, in the intrinsically evil act of adultery, Francis is imputing this work of evil to God, properly, and of Himself. He has thus anathematized himself yet again.

CONCLUSION

An “Editor’s note” given at the conclusion to Fr. Gleize’s article provides the punchline:

“Fr. Gleize’s precise distinction will surprise more than one. In short, it seems that Pope Francis cannot be considered heretical…”

Surprise?

How about disgust.

Fr. Gleize, in his own words, concludes:

“The five dubia are therefore quite well-founded. The root of them is always the same: the confusion between the moral value of an act, a strictly objective value, and its imputability to someone who performs it, a strictly subjective imputability …  The Church’s traditional doctrine gives primacy to this objective order of the act’s morality, which follows from its object and its end or purpose. Amoris Laetitia, by reversing this order, introduces subjectivism into morality.”

No, the traditional doctrine does not simply “give primacy” to the objective order; it goes further by insisting that the Church does not judge subjective imputability.

Fr. Gleize asks rhetorically:

“Does such subjectivism, as understood in its principle as well as in the five conclusions that follow from it here, represent the negation of a divinely revealed truth that is proposed as such by an infallible act of the ecclesiastical Magisterium?”

He then states that the answer, at least for himself, “is far from obvious and certain.”

That I disagree has already been made clear. Know, however, that I am not alone.

Readers may recall that three Eastern European prelates – Archbishop Tomash Peta, Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider – recently issued a text concerning AL that includes the following observations:

God gives to every man assistance in the observance of his Commandments, when such a request is properly made, as the Church has infallibly taught: “God does not command that which is impossible, but in commanding he exhorts you to do that which you are able, and to ask for that which you cannot do, and so he assists you that you might be able to do it” (Council of Trent, session 6, chapter 11) and “and if someone says that even for the man who has been justified and established in grace  the commandments of God are impossible to observe: let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, session 6, canon 18.)

The Church, and specifically the minister of the sacrament of Penance, does not have the faculty to judge on the state of conscience of an individual member of the faithful or on the rectitude of the intention of the conscience, since “ecclesia de occultis non iudicat” [the Church does not judge internals] (Council of Trent, session 24, chapter 1). The minister of the sacrament of Penance is consequently not the vicar or representative of the Holy Spirit, able to enter with His light in the innermost recesses of the conscience, since God has reserved such access to the conscience strictly to himself: “sacrarium in quo homo solus est cum Deo” [conscience is the altar upon which man is alone with God] (Vatican Council II, Gaudium et spes, 16).

NB: There are no less than three direct citations of the dogmatic and infallible Council of Trent given in the above commentary provided by three “full communion” bishops.

Who would have thought that more Catholic clarity and conviction would come from these men-of-the-Council than from the Society of St. Pius X?

Throughout this lengthy examination of Fr. Gleize’s assessment of Francis vis-à-vis Amoris Laetitia, it has (in the present writer’s opinion) been sufficiently demonstrated that Fracnis is objectively “heretical” according to the parameters that Fr. Gleize himself established at the outset.

In a number of places, including portions of AL that Fr. Gleize chose not to address, Francis set forth propositions that directly contradict Sacred Scripture and have been unambiguously condemned by the Council of Trent.

And yet, remarkably, Fr. Gleize states:

“For this new theology of Francis, which extends that of Vatican II, avoids this sort of formal opposition with regard to truths already proposed infallibly by the Magisterium before Vatican II.”

If Amoris Laetitia does not represent “formal opposition” to the infallible Magisterium of the Church, nothing does.

As if all that has been written by Fr. Gleize is not disturbing enough, he states:

“If Amoris laetitia became the cause of heresy, it would be in an absolutely unique way, underhanded and latent as modernism itself.”

Pope St. Pius X defined modernism as “the synthesis of all heresies.”

And yet, how quickly Francis is being all but excused for his underhanded, latent, modernist screed; even by the Priestly Society that bears his name.

Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.