Tags

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


Francis Bahner cryingToday your humble blogger will engage in what could be called our post Secret Synod of Bishops of 2014 and Stealth Sex Synod™ of Bishops of 2015 debriefing. This is not to say that the above designated bi-Synods are over, since we are still waiting for the post-synod FrancisDocument that will be promulgated, supposedly. But no matter what that document says, we already know the “mind of the Synod Fathers” so Francis’ document is for the most part irrelevant for the sake of this post.

What I am going to do today is a short post about how the Deus Ex Machina sees the lay of the land post bi-Synod and try to identify the winners and loser. A secondary consideration will be placed on gauging the state of the both the “mind of Francis”, the “state of his pontificate” and the overall state in which the Catholic Church finds itself in Anno Domini 2015.

So let’s get cracking.

First of all, the news is not bad. Actually, there is much, much more good news than there is bad news. I know, we all read the blogs and we are all aware of the advancement of what we termed the “hermeneutic of ambiguity” that the neo-Modernists are constantly promoting in order to undermine the moral doctrine and by extension the moral authority of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. This, no doubt is true.

However, since this is not a “DEFEATIST” blog, (Our Lord promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail) and since this blog tries to discern the deeper seated, more fundamental aspects of the state of FrancisChurch and “the Church” in general, your humble blogger will focus on the positive aspects and implications of what just transpired, since there were quite a few.

First “higher level” impression of what just transpired is that the bi-Synod process can be seen as the Waterloo for the Novus Ordo sect. What I mean by this is that even though the Heretical Clericalists and Francis were able to go to the “hermeneutic of ambiguity” well once again, their efforts were met with wide-spread and quite aggressive resistance. And this is in a situation where Francis brought in 45 FrancisFreakBishop delegates in order to stack the Synod, but it all came to naught. Here are just two quotes that bear this out: ([comment] and emphasis added)

This person relayed to me what they have been told: during the Synod, Pope Francis was, in fact, dead set on finding a way to give communion to the divorced and remarried.

Only there was a problem.

There was too much push back on the issue, and it was quite aggressive. (see here)

and

So it is surprising that nevertheless, a third of the Synod has refused the decisive compromise [Final Relatio] to the divorced and remarried, suggesting organized resistance. Organized so that it eluded the European diplomat’s [Shonborn’s] parquet. (see here)

Quick comment. What this situation clearly demonstrates is that 50 years of the “new springtime of the spirit of Vatican II” has taken its toll on the bishops of the “peripheries”, i.e. the Universal Church. One can even venture to say that they have lost their VII religion. More on this in the next point.

Next high level observation. The bi-Synod settled the philosophical/theological debate between the Ratzingerians and the Rahnerists. This subject is something that I tangentially wrote about (see here), but the implications are enormous for the Church going forward. The skinny in terms of this debate is that the hatred for Benedict XVI coming from the Rahnerists (Kasper, Marx & co.) is due to Benedict’s criticism of Rahnerism. At the end of the day, Rahnerism is nothing more than sophist Gobbledygook (see here), as is all neo-Modernist theology. The only reason why it has survived is that the Novus Ordo sect has been able to shut down any criticism of it. One theologian which they could not shut down was Ratzinger, and this is the real cause of the hatred and sabotage of his pontificate. I will go into more detail in a future post, but here is the example of this exact phenomenon:

The fact is also that Marco Ansaldo was one of those journalists who participated last May at the Gregorian University at the secret meeting of Kasperians which organized the representatives of the “new Mercy” for the Synod. Ansaldo in fact is thus a party to it. The more weight comes to his assessment, Cardinal Schönborn attributable to the progressivist camp, who has been classified yet very differently in general. Schönborn had himself taken part in the secret meetings. And the more it may be assumed that Ansaldo wanted with this certain intention, to involve Benedict XVI. in the matter. Apart from the fact that he for has von Schönborn in his thesis as the ideal mediator between the two great “fractions” of the church, between the Argentine and the German Popes. (see here)

Reading between the lines, what in fact is being describe above is a desperate, improvised process whereby the Rahnerist’s arch-enemy Benedict XVI was brought into the Synod negotiations at the behest of the Heretical Clericalists (Rahnerists) in order to save their man, Francis (read pontificate) from being overwhelmingly defeated by the Catholic Synod Fathers. And the only person on this earth who could have pulled the Heretical Clericalist’s chestnuts out of the fire is BENEDICT.

The further implication of this defeat of the Rahnerists is that it has demonstrated that the bishops of the Universal Church have lost faith in VII, i.e. its neo-Modernist philosophical underpinnings, regardless of whether they know it or not. In other words, they are looking for a firmer, more rational philosophical basis on which they can not only execute their mission, but survive. And it is Ratzinger which gives them this firmer footing, hence his moral authority to which the Rahnerists were forced to appeal to. The sad part of watching this spectacle play out is that because Ratzinger is himself a neo-Modernist, he can’t lead these Bishops back to scholasticism, Thomism and the ONE TRUE FAITH. But that in no way means that the Holy Spirit is not leading them back to Eternal Rome anyways.

Don’t believe me?

Think about this, in the voting on the notorious paragraphs 84,85 and 86, NO votes were 72, 80 and 64 respectively, 85 passing with one vote to spare. These were NO votes that even rejected the compromise Ratzingerian position. (see here)

What does that tell you?

Next and last high level observation pertains to the “mind of Francis”. As the consummate careerist and populist Peronist, Francis always had his antenna out to gauge the “mood of the crowd”. As the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio’s focus was the crowd that was the “hierarchy in Rome”, since it was the papacy that he craved. With respect to his “sheep”, Francis didn’t give a rats ass about them, least of all about their salvation. His strategy was to placate the them and give the sheep what they wanted. If the sheep wanted drugs, he instructed his priests to give them free needles. If the sheep wanted sex, he instructed his priests to give them free condoms. If the sheep were feeling depressed due to withdrawal symptoms from the drugs, or from butt warts from the cheap lubricants, then Francis instructed his Favela priests to give them the communion breakfast wafer to make them feel better.

Understanding the accuracy of the above, it is then not surprising to read the following:

There is also, I’m told, a general fear of social media within the higher echelons of our Church. It is not well understood, and they are unable to gauge effectively the power that it wields in shaping the narrative. This makes them very wary of provoking a viral firestorm of opposition. The petition, for example, may have only garnered 2800 signatures, but it was brought up during a Synod press conference with Cardinal Pell. It was the reason I was invited to write an op-ed about the Synod in the Washington Post. It was then referenced by Vaticanista Antonio Socci. (see here)

One reason for the above is that this papacy only exists due to the HOMO Lobby promoting “c”atholic and mainstream media. So the “narrative” is of the utmost importance. But the deeper meaning behind the “general fear of social media” is that not everybody buys Francis’ “money for nothing and chicks for free” “c”atholicism. And since they don’t know how to “buy off” the social media, they are fear struck by it. This aspect demonstrates just how far Francis is detached from reality and his only defence mechanism is to call his adversaries “dirty names”.

I will end here for today…