Tags
Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, Bishop Franz-Peter van Elst Tebartz, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal of Bling, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Eponymous Flower blog, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, Limburg, messeging, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Roman Curia, spirit of Vatican II, Swank Cardinal, Synod 2014, Vatican, Vatican II
Today we move back to a „big picture” view of the subject of our recent interest, one Cardinal Reinhard “Bling” Marx.
We have been focusing on the good Cardinal over the past few posts, but the time has come to begin to explain why it is “him” that we are focusing on specifically. Especially, when there are so many other “juicy” candidates, saying ridiculous things, and ones who are closer to power in Francis’ central committee cardinal committees. (see here). The reason is due to the fact that our “Peirce/Ockham pragmatic method” (see here) selection criteria that the Deus Ex Machina blog has adopted, has indicated that he is the most important actor in this Synod of Shame process outside of Francis. And since this blog is exclusively focusing on the upcoming Synod of Bishops for the next 251 days, Cardinal Reinhard “Bling” Marx is the logical first choice. We will start with him and work out way down the order from most to the least important.
Man Marking Marx – The Cardinal of “Bling”
Today will focus on some of Card. “Bling” Marx’ character traits and try to produce a profile that can give us a good idea of the man who is the “driving” force behind Francis’ TRUE AGENDA at the Synod of Bishops. But more on this in a subsequent post.
The two of the most striking character traits of the Cardinal are the blind ideology (see here) and the raw ambition of the man. A excellent example of this man’s ideology and ambition can be discerned from his relations with his fellow bishops both in the German Bishops’ Conference and in Rome. Needless to say, Cardinal “Bling” Marx has relationship issues. It is these relationship issues that have earned Cardinal Marx the “Bling” moniker on the Deus Ex Machina blog.
Allow me to explain. The “Bling” moniker was assigned to Marx due to the transparently outrageous and totally vile campaign that he led against a fellow bishop and the former bishop of Limburg, Franz-Peter van Elst Tebartz. The information below should provide you dear reader, with a good idea of the type of character we are dealing with.
Here are excerpts from the Corrispondenza Romana via the Eponymous Flower blog (see here).
“Are punitive measures soon to be weighed against the power hungry Archbishop Reinhard Marx of Cardinal of Munich and Freising?” Asks Corrispondenza Romana .
The question is being asked since the cardinal decided to do some renovation work on his chancellery. Here are the details:
The Archdiocese is currently building a chancery in the city on the Isar. Now, the costs have been published. 51 million euros for the beautification of the Archdiocese, says Vicar General Peter Beer. At seven and a half million more than recently estimated, because the roof was to blame. Whether you have reached the end of the story, it seems not yet to be clear.
So the cost was not only an initial bill for 51,000,000 Euros (FIFTY ONE MILLION Euros was approximately $67,000,000 at the time of the post), but some cost overruns were incurred as well. 7,500,000 Euro for the roof? Could be the most expensive roof in all of Christendom. But I digress… And that’s not all, a further cost was incurred, namely:
The diocesan employees were outsourced for the construction and distributed to six locations with additional costs. There they have to stay longer than planned. Probably until the end of the 2015.
But there is more. Looks like Cardinal “Bling” Marx is a serial “big spender”. Here is the tab “Bling” Marx ran up in 2008:
His colleague, Cardinal Archbishop Reinhard Marx of Munich and Freising in 2008 came out with at least eight million euros of renovation costs for his episcopal palace. The order is important to note. Apart from that the Bishop of Limburg seems to be surrounded by bad advisers. After the costs appeared, not once has any asked for them.
And “Bling” Marx likes to travel in style:
There was a media campaign waged against Bishop Tebartz van Elst until he was gone. Not a word of criticism, however, was heard for the little “luxury” Archbishop Reinhard Marx allowed himself in his indulgent 13 million euros stays in Rome – which it may be added have become more frequent. This unequal treatment shows that the real reasons for the attacks in the case Limburg were to be sought elsewhere. (see here)
So is it any wonder why the Corrispondenza Romana asks the following question:
Will the German press launch a campaign against the “Swank-Cardinal”? Will Rome exile Cardinal Marx for a break in a monastery and then cashier him coldly?
The reason that the Corrispondenza Romana was asking this question was due to a media smear campaign that Cardinal “Bling” Marx led against a brother bishop, i.e. the former Limburg, Bishop Franz-Peter van Elst Tebartz as indicated in the above paragraphs. Yet no such mention ever appeared in the media regarding “Bling” Marx questionable expenses. Here are the relevant facts:
Really amazing when you think back to the smear campaign against the Limburg Bishop Franz-Peter van Elst Tebartz who went through all the tabloids last year. From the “bishop of bling” was the kind of talk which was circulated by the media or better by the cocoa poured to the amusement of the “people”. There was talk about a gilded bathtub and particularly brave, intelligent contemporaries actually made a determined search, but they could find nothing.
But what exactly did Bishop van Elst do?
However, concerning 31 million, of which the finance committee of the Diocese now talks, is not the impression manipulated by the critics, only to a small part, the Bishop’s house. It’s about a building complex comprising a diocesan center and other facilities. The finance committee, which now matches the chorus of critics, however, seem to have been asleep for years.
In other words, the Bishop of Limburg had to renovate a large building complex that was left in a state of ruin by his leftist progressive predecessor. It was this renovation that was used in the smear campaign. The subsequent investigation that was conducted into this affair found that the charges were groundless.
However, if you dear leader thought that after the findings cleared Bishop van Elst, an apology was in order, and he was reinstated back at the diocese of Limburg, you would be NOT CORRECT.
Not only did Bishop van Elst’s accuser (actually accusers) not apologize, but Bishop Van Elst was summoned to Rome and:
And so it happened: the “hopeful” bishop had been banned by the Pope to a convent and after being allowed to mull over the matter with some Montegras, so that the pious people of God might not yet even think of an uprising, he was deposed.
But how did Francis get involved, you might ask?
The answer is that an up an coming bishop and competitor for the presidency of the German Bishops’ Conference led a smear campaign in the media and even in Rome. And it later turned out that Francis knew about the whole think and was tracking the developments. (see here)
But back to Marx and his fellow bishops. Here is how a fellow cardinal and the former Archbishop of Cologne described Bishop van Elst and what he had to say about Marx:
It was just Cardinal Marx, who vehemently and also in Rome campaigned for the removal of Tebartz van Elst. So loudly that Cardinal Joachim Meisner, Archbishop of Cologne at that time pointed to the lack of “episcopal fraternity” being exhibited at the time for the Limburger Pastor, who was actively exposed by some clergy and lay church officials to a public lynching. Meisner called out Cardinal Marx explicitly by name. And what the attitude of the German bishops was really concerned with: Only a handful of bishops in the Bishops’ Conference had resisted the Marx-Woelki-Langendörfer-Synod which attempted to enforce the sexual revolution in the Church.
As to Cardinal Meisner, here is more.
Cardinal Meisner defended his brother Limburger and praised his “theological depth and decidedly Catholic orientation”. A description of the Tebartz van Elst that already stood out from the majority of the German bishops. But nobody wanted to hear, media, liberal laity and priests and Brothers in the Episcopate had tasted blood. The hypocrites indeed railed mightily about the money, but in reality it was about a factional dispute within the Church. The mob, which calls for the crucifixion, is there always.
Concluding, it is plainly evident that with Marx, we are dealing with an individual whose character is total devoid of any sense of either guilt, remorse, justice, shame, humility or even that trait that he continuously talks about,i.e. mercy. What we are witnessing is the ascent to the upper echelons of the Catholic Church leadership of a very amoral and aggressive political ideologue. He is driven by two factors. First, by his blind ambition and who ever gets in his way, will be eliminated. And secondly by pride. He doesn’t have the proverbial ounce of self doubt nor the least sense of self criticism. He’s right, and damn the consequences. He is the epitome of a thug in ecclesiastical garb.
And why can he get away with this thuggery in broad daylight you may ask?
Well, the answer is that thuggery is all the rage in Rome these days.
Like the old Italian expression states: the fish starts rotting at the head.
blueskirtwaltz said:
Dear Sarmaticus,
Your post above left me very, very sad. I have the following prayer taped to my computer screen: “Eternal Father, I offer Thee the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ and all the instruments of His Holy Passion, that Thou mayest put division in the camp of Thine enemies; for as Thy Beloved Son hath said, “A kingdom divided against itself shall fall.” I say it often.
Off topic, but are you able to change the background from black to white and the script to black? I find it difficult to read. Also, are you able to make the font one point larger? The mauricepinay blog recently made similar changes.
Thank you for this blog and all the time you put into it. Your intellect is razor sharp and the logical thinking is much welcomed in these days of sentimental prattle.
Our Lady bless you.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
Hi:BSW
Thank you for your kind words.
As to the background color of this blog, there are two reasons behind it:
1) The theme is labeled “Piano Black”. I use it in honor of “the Pianist” https://sarmaticusblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/20/secret-synod-play-it-again-sam/
2) Using a black background is easier on my eyes. I find black, being the absence of color is easier for me to read. And I spend all day behind screens.
But because you and IndignusFamulus asked, I will look through my selections of themes and see what I can come up with.
As to your feeling of sadness, I concur. I look at it this way: it is the cross that this generation of loyal sons and daughters of the ONE TRUE FAITH have to bear”. Other generations had to bear their own. But I always try to keep mt focus on the eternal reward. It’s priceless. 🙂
Once again, thks for the kind words,
S.A.
LikeLike
indignusfamulus said:
Dear SA,
It’s a gray background while we’re typing our replies, and reading yours, and that makes it plenty- easy for us.
If the black is better for YOU, please don’t change it on our account. You spend a lot of time working on these posts, and certainly don’t need eye-strain. 🙂 🙂
Sincerely.
God Bless.
LikeLike
indignusfamulus said:
Dear SA,
The link at the start of today’s post goes perfectly with your last line: “The Fish starts rotting at the head.”
–Our thanks also to Radical Catholic for posting this. (We’d comment on his blog too, but we can’t ever seem to get in there past all the qualifiers. )
This is Rome telling all traditionals, something is standing in our way, and it’s YOU.
Something’s gotta go, and it’s YOU.
So we’re coming right out and telling you the truth about our agenda:
‘THE IMAGE AND THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH CHANGED.”
This is very big. It goes on, with more garbage aobut the conseqeunces, and threatens to evict us, basically. But in that one statement, you have the renunciation of the Mission Christ gave His Church. Renunciation of something that cannot change. the REASON Nostra Aetate says “we worship the same God” as the Muslims. The REASON for all the loose wording and abuses they foisted on us.
ALL of it.
And they’re trying to say the Holy Spirit wants it, so we can’t say NO.
The OLD spirituality goes. The NEW spiritually stays.
THAT IS WHAT THE POPE WANTS (last line below)
“Likewise, its concept that related faith with history and society changed; therefore the social and political options became more important. In this context, there was no mystical renovation and it remained “traditional,” consistent with another vision of the faith and of the mission, and inconsistent with the new ecclesial experiences. In this context, a spirituality does not motivate, it becomes irrelevant. It ends up being perceived as a useless appendix and ends up being abandoned, since a mystic that does not nourish the human experience stops having meaning; a spirituality that is foreign to the ecclesial model that is being lived leads to the crisis of the Christian “schizophrenia.” Many abandonments of the ecclesial life, and even of the faith, are rooted there. The only answer is not in abandoning all mystic or reversing the renovation of the institutions or options (due to fear of a collapse of the Christian values), but in deeply renovating the faith and spirituality starting from love to reach mercy. That is what the Pope wants.”
Sorry to get sidetracked SA, but this is too important.
and we KNOW what horse just kicked us in the gut.
Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich 1820:
” I saw again the strange big church that was being built there in Rome. There was nothing holy in it. I saw this just as I saw a movement led by Ecclesiastics to which contributed angels, saints, and other Christians. But there in the strange big church all the work was being done mechanically according to set rules and formulae. Everything was being done according to human reason …I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions. There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed very successful. I di not see a single Angel nor a single saint helping in the work. ”
“”I saw deplorable things:… All sorts of abominations were perpetrated there. Priests allowed everything and said Mass with much irreverence. I saw that few of them were still godly… All these things caused me much distress. ”
“Then I saw an apparition of the Mother of God, and she said that the tribulation would be very great. … pray above all for the Church of Darkness to leave Rome.. “
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
Dear IF:
If you want to post on RadCat’s blog, the fastest way is to set up a gmail account. Leave it open on your browser and go over to RadCat’s blog. Enter you comment, click that you are not a robot and press Publish. Your comment will join the queue, and when RadCat accepts it, it will appear under his post.
As to your comments on this blog, please feel free to comment on whatever you like.
And yes, it is very important.
I will add this. Looking at the big picture, it would appear that there are a lot of truly heretical “musings” coming out of the modernist camp at present. We have the post in the Italian Bishop’s owned newspaper, we have Baldisseri berating the Pro-Life deligates, we have Cupich and Maragiaga. It would appear that Francis is having problems with the bishops for the upcoming synod. And this “heretical material” appears to be a strategy to try to demoralize the opposition.
Once I get through with Marx, I will write something about it.
S.A.
LikeLike
indignusfamulus said:
Dear SA,
Thanks for the tips about RadCat.
You’re right about the leftist talk picking up in public, too. We noticed. Hard to tell if it’s coordinated or just a result of the smaller rats being emboldened by the bigger ones banishing some of the cats that intimidated them.
We think the reason this hit us harder than all the others, was its coming from the “inner council” and boldly claiming that it’s what the Pope wants, as well as the language being so directly targeted and specific towards traditionals– not the more vague innuendo or newspeak that has to be read-into in order to decipher it-which we usually got from the modernists. (albeit Cupich was also rather exceptional in his last one.)
It does occur to us that it could easily be disclaimed by Lombardi as not representative of the Pope’s actual thoughts, if they need to backtrack.
Regarding the Marx money trails–we’re reminded of Bertoni’s little retirement Palace in the Vatican, but it takes a back even farther – a few decades to the shocking murders and suicide scandals out of the Vatican under JPII , which it wouldn’t surprise us at all to find out are connected to these current affairs.
Are you at all familiar with this one?:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banco_Ambrosiano
Known as “the priests bank” Directly connected (by police) to the Italian Masonic Lodge…
KEY QUOTE : ‘There was much argument about who should take responsibility for losses incurred by the Old Ambrosiano’s off-shore companies, and the Vatican eventually agreed to pay out a substantial sum without accepting liability.’ (Definitely not out of mercy or charity) JPII funded Solidarity -secretly?
(There were also major Argentine connections, and it was allegedly linked to John Paul I’s death- unproven, of course)
=======
P.S. We very much like the lighter background- makes it less difficult to focus the eyes –less afterglow. Hadn’t really noticed till it got so much easier.
Thanks to your commenter above, (blueskirtwaltz) for the suggestions.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
HI IF:
I answered your question about the background color in the below comment.
As to “coordination” notice that it is the same players. Baldisseri, Cupich, Galantino (at the Italian newspaper), Maradiaga. Same bunch. Is it coordinated, in some for of way, probably yes.
As to the inner circle of Francis, it is what it is. If we understand that Francis is behind this “lio”, then we see that he is doing the dirty work through his lieutenants while keeping a facade of “plausible denial”. He has to do it so that no Cardinal can formally call him a heretic.
As to the Banco Ambrosianno, that was a loud one in its day. The head banker was found hanging under Black Friars Bridge. Like I mentioned before, when you are dealing with the Catholic Church, you need to also remember that you are deailng with a very old and wealthy institution. This institution has always attracted the type who individual who have weaknesses for worldly things. And these individuals are not necessarily lay people. So we have to keep it in context. Also keep in mind that the Catholic Church has always been under attack. The masons are just one group. The German Bishops’ Conference is another, and a far larger threat. 😉
Lastly, I think it needs to be mentioned that when you have a large institution, you can not micro-manage it. Like Francis is trying. What one needs to do is to find reliable and trustworthy people who are competent and let them get on with their job. Here Francis put card. Pell in charge, so that is a plus. But we see the mess in his other dicastries. One of his first appointments was a Franciscan named “Just call me Pepe” Rodriguez as the second at the Congregation for Religious. And he is the guy who put Volpi in at the FFI. There are rumors circulating that the reason behind the administration was that the Franciscans thought the FFI owned their property. When they found out that their property was in the name of family members (since FFI took seriously their vow of poverty) they dropped the rumors about financial malfeasance. Funny how those things works. And in no less than a year, turns out that one of the three branches of the Franciscans are not only broke, but liable for loses. http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/12/franciscan-minister-general-to-order.html
So life goes on. But Ricca and Rodriguez are still in their positions as if nothing happened. And everybody ignore the reason why they are there. Namely the bishop of Rome put them there.
S.A.
LikeLike
indignusfamulus said:
Great insights. And Ricca, with his background, should have been laicized long ago. Instead, he’s handed more than one control-position.
He’s like a neon sign flashing SOMETHING IS VERY ROTTEN HERE!.
Good thing we know from Scripture that nothing will remain hidden, and ALL things work unto Good, for those who believe.
🙂 🙂
BTW, Speaking of good things: Mundy has posted an encouraging piece on the growing number of priests who are no longer hiding their doubts and objections to Pope Francis.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
I seen that. This is good news indeed. If you happen to be on RadCat, he asked me if I thought that the recent overtures to the SSPX were serious. If he oked my response, go and read it.
But yes, I do. It looks like the indefectible church is coalescing.
S.A.
LikeLike