Tags

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


Marx VToday we are 225 days away from what we have dubbed the “Stealth Sex Synod” of 2015 and we pick back up Man-Marking Marx and the interview with the Jesuit America magazine that we covered in the earlier posts. ( see here) Over at the SSPX website (see here), there is a very nice summary about the “strange” views expressed by our cardinal of “Bling”. One date point and the larger thread that should be of interest is the following:

The de-clericalization of power is very important in the Roman Curia and the administrations of dioceses. We must look at canon law, and reflect theologically, to see what roles necessarily require priests; and then all the other roles, in the widest sense possible, must be open for lay people, men and women, but especially women.

I say it and repeat it also in my diocese: Please see what you can do to bring lay people, especially women, into positions of responsibility in diocesan administration. We have made a plan for the Catholic Church in Germany to have more leading positions in diocesan administrations to be fulfilled by women.

On this issue we must make a great effort for the future, not only to be modern or to imitate the world, but in realizing that this exclusion of women is not in the spirit of the Gospel.

Aside from the obvious “departure from reality” of card. “Bling’s” assertion that what the Church needs is more “but especially wymyn”, the reason that I bring this to your attention is due to the following musings of our bishop of Rome, as related on the Rorate Caeli website: (see here)

Remarkably the Pope criticizes the “Reform of the Reform” outright but he did not say anything negative about Summorum Pontificum itself, quite the opposite. Nevertheless, his apparently condemning and contemptuous words about “traditionalist” diocesan seminarians cannot and should not be explained away as simply referring to the immoral behavior of some such seminarians — behavior that can also be found, empirically much more frequently, among non-traditionalist seminarians. By specifically naming the (“Reform of the Reform”?) “liturgies” celebrated by “traditionalist” seminarians, once ordained, as the manifestation of their “moral and psychological” “imbalances”, it is clear that the Pope’s target is the traditional-friendly views on the sacred liturgy of many young priests and seminarians. By mentioning that the Congregation of Bishops is conducting interventions in this regard, the message is sent out loud and clear: bishops accept “traditionalist”-leaning seminarians at their peril. By declaring outright that moral and psychological problems “happen often” in traditionalist “environments” a broad bush, apparently lacking in mercy, may now henceforth be used to tar these young men. 

Now I don’t think one needs to be a rocket scientist or a brain surgeon to put these two data points together to see the pattern.

And to finish the story about which way this pattern is heading, we get this from Rorate Caeli in the adjacent post:(see here)

VATICAN CITY – The event took place on Tuesday, February 10, but the Pope made it known only today during the meeting with the clergy of Rome. During the regular mass at the Domus Sanctae Marthae, Bergoglio faced the issue of the marriage of priests.

At the celebration, there were seven preiests who were celebrating their 50th anniversary of priesthood, but also five priests who left the ministry due to marriage. Following the question of one of the priests who were present, Fr. Giovanni Cereti, on the issue of married priests (in which was recalled the case of the Eastern Churches, where married men can be ordained priests, and the thousands of married priests of the Latin Rite who on the other hand cannot celebrate), Bergoglio answered surprisingly: “The issue,” Francis assured in his response, “is present in my agenda.”

If you intentionally create a priest shortage, then it is only natural that you would need to find a “field expedient solution”. And voila, card. “Bling” provides the solution. Actually, it appears more likely that the “solution” is already waiting for the problem. It’s been waiting for the last 50 years. Hint, Hint, Know what I mean?

And that is where the Francis TRUE AGENDA is heading.

Will this work?

Of course not.

But there is nothing to stop the FrancisChurch from trying. Besides, since it’s not like they are playing with their own money and since “there is no hell”, they have no “skin in the game”.

Or so their reasoning goes!

Advertisements