Tags

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


Logic Yogii Berra

We pick up today where we left off two days ago; with defining an OPERATIONAL PLAN which constitutes a spiritual Work of Mercy performed by your humble blogger. This OPERATIONAL PLAN will attempt to first, IDENTIFY the ROOT CAUSE(S) and then suggest a way forward to ADDRESS the identified PROBLEM, which we defined as:

Francis trying to destroy the Church as Our Lord founded it.

To obtain the above described DESIRED ENDS, we have decided to use a methodology commonly referred to as ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS. The reason that we are taking a scientific route is that we CATHOLICS are outnumbered in this battle and our resources of both time and money are limited. On the other hand, we possess an ESPRIT DE CORPS that if deployed properly, should offset our limitations and gain for us a RESULT exponentially greater than the resources deployed.

Today we pick up with our analysis by further “drilling down” into of the ROOT CAUSE(S) driving this PROBLEM. By identifying the ROOT CAUSES, we will be able to design a more effective OPERATIONAL PLAN to counteract this PROBLEM.

In yesterday’s post, we restated that the HIDDEN AGENDA of the bi-Synods was in fact:

CHANGING CATHOLIC MORAL TEACHING AND ECCLESIASTICAL LAW WITH RESPECT TO “INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED” BEHAVIOR.

This HYPOTHESIS was a result derived from our Peirce/Ockham pragmatic methodology. (see here) We used this OBJECTIVE RESULT as our jump off point for further analysis.

Given the above, we next need to establish whether the HIDDEN AGENDA was the ENDS of the bi-Synod process or rather just the MEANS TO AN END.

Furthermore, since we have identified two separate groups who were promoting the HIDDEN AGENDA, we need to establish whether they both share the same ENDS. These two groups we identified as the SECRETARIAT (Francis) and the HERETICAL CLERICALISTS (Marx & co.) We also identified a special interest within these two groups, namely what is commonly referred to as the HOMO LOBBY. (see here) Since the HIDDEN AGENDA has a direct impact on the interests of the HOMO LOBBY, we will break them out and examine them as the third stand-alone group.

HOMO LOBBY

Starting with the third group, i.e. the HOMO LOBBY. If the Church would change its moral doctrine and in turn its teaching (practice) , then this group would be able to operate openly within the present Church structures. Therefore, it is an OBJECTIVELY TRUE statement that the success of the HIDDEN AGENDA is an ENDS for this group.

That was easy.

Furthermore, what we have noticed is that there is an overlap between the HOMO LOBBY and what Card. Danneels termed the “mafia club” which had as its mission to destabilize if not the outright overthrow of the Benedict papacy. Next, we see that with the Francis papacy, appointments of bishops who are openly ADVOCATING changing Catholic moral doctrine and ecclesiastical law with respect to the INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED behavior.

Now that is not to say that ALL clerics who ADVOCATE for these types of changes in Catholic doctrine are afflicted with this unnatural and harmful behavioral disorders, but what is an OBJECTIVELY TRUE statement is that ALL these clerics ARE using this HIDDEN AGENDA of the bi-Synod to drive their own personal or professional HIDDEN AGENDAS.

We need to be clear on this point.

HERETICAL CLERICALISTS

With respect to the HERETICAL CLERICALIST group, it does not appear that the HIDDEN AGENDA was an END for this group. Proof of this situation comes from Giuseppe Nardi writing in an Eponymous Flower post which reads: (see here[comment] and emphasis added)

The great commitment of Kasperians in their search for compromise [Synod Final Relatio] shows who was  worried about the failure of the Synod or at least feared it more. It also shows that a significant part of Kasperians are progressive in protection of the papacy, but there are not real modernist hardliners. 

Therefore, a better understanding of just who these people are is in order.

It is fair to say that clerics who CONTROL the HERETICAL CLERICALIST group are THE MAIN ADVOCATES of the bi-Synod HIDDEN AGENDA. To be more precise, these clerics provide the “theological platform” (read Kasper) and the funding (read Marx – German Bishops’ Conference Kirchensteuer). In essence, this CONTROL GROUP (in military jargon one would say Head Quarters elements)  is almost exclusively of ethnic GERMAN (Swiss and Austrians included) origins. Even the Belgians, English and French, who provide a multi-cultural façade, are nothing more than window dressing for these GERMAN dissenters.

These GERMAN dissenters in turn, constitute a sub-section of the GERMAN episcopate that traces its lineage to the Rahnerist camp of the Second Vatican council and the NOVELTY that the council created, i.e. national bishops’ conferences. (Christus Dominus). The present head of the German Bishops’ Conference is Card. Reinhard “Bling” Marx, who succeeded Robert Zollitsch, who in turn succeeded Karl Lehmann, who in turn succeeded Joseph Höffner, who in turn succeeded the first president Julius Döpfner. As to how Karl Rahner S.J. fits into this equation, please refer to the post titled The Network (see here) which provides the essential background.

Drilling down further, what is essential to our present analysis is to understand that this Rahnerist HERETICAL CLERICALIST group has been in control of the German Bishops’ Conference since its founding post VII and is responsible for the DESTRUCTION, by OBJECTIVE STANDARDS OF MEASURE of the German Catholic Church during the post-conciliar period.

This DESTRUCTION is not only apparent for all to see, but it is causing the wider German episcopate to question the leadership of the Rahnerists. Case in point is the “wafer thin” victory of Card. “Bling” Marx over his challenger Bishop Franz-Peter van Elst Tebartz. This leadership race turned very ugly, since to get “Bling” Marx elected, the Rahnerist had to literally destroy the former Bishop of Limburg van Elst Tebartz. For background please refer to our post The Cardinal of “Bling” (see here) and German Revolting Sheep, Catch Bishop In The Spot Light (see here). In other words, what we see is that the Rahnerist camp under siege and fighting for it’s very survival within the German episcopate.

Further evidence of this siege mentality of this HERETICAL CLERICALIST’S CONTROL GROUP can be observed in their disposition to the Benedict papacy. One of the main reasons for the resistance of this CONTROL GROUP was IDEOLOGICAL no doubt. A separate post on just this will be forthcoming. However, a parallel reason and one of an EXISTENTIAL NATURE, was due to Benedict appointing German bishops who were more CATHOLIC and less IDEOLOGICAL, i.e. less Rahnerists. It is this situation that is in no small part behind  the SHEER HATRED of Pope Benedicts by the Rahnerists and the threat of a Benedict papacy was the reason behind why the CLERICALISTS tried to initially block Cardinal Ratzinger from ascending to the Throne of St. Peter. (see here) When they lost that round, the CLERICALISTS began immediately organizing in order to undermine the Benedictine papacy and their actions in large part led to his eventual resignation. (see here) In the lead up to the 2013 Conclave, the HERETICAL CLERICALISTS organized an illegal canvasing operations to get then Card. Bergoglio elected. (see here)

Given the EVIDENCE above, what this course of action undertaken by these CLERICALISTS clearly demonstrates is the gravity of the threat that the Benedict papacy posed to their AGENDA. Furthermore, it can be easily inferred that this threat, whether perceived or real, at its ROOT stems from the Restoration efforts that Benedict undertook during his pontificate. This will also be treated in a subsequent post.

A secondary element that in no small manner can be overlooked is the ban by Benedict of ordaining men with INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED behavioral problems. This is where the interests of the HOMO LOBBY and the HERETICAL CLERICALIST initially overlapped (see here and here) and what initially gave the HERETICAL CLERICALISTS a very wide INTELLIGENCE network within the Sacred Vatican Walls. Later this INTELLIGENCE network transformed itself into an OPERATIONAL ELEMENT which eventually caused the Benedict resignation. Once Francis was elevated, he inherited these OPERATIONAL ASSETS which can be easily inferred by the Ricca appointment and the disappearance of the DOSSIER.

By the way, whatever did happen to THAT Dossier? (see here)

Concluding, what we have identified in the above text is that the interests of the HERETICAL CLERICALISTS and the HOMO LOBBY overlap. One CANNOT make the inference that these two AGENDAS are identical, yet a very strong case can easily made that the AGENDAS of these two “special interest” groups in large part overlap.

Yet these two AGENDAS do not overlap completely. One example of this is the following passage from the OnePeterFive blog were Steve Skojec relays the following: (see here)  ([comment] and emphasis added)

He [Francis] appears to think he has his finger on the pulse of the Church, and is therefore surprised, even”rattled” when his agenda faces real opposition. Several progressive cardinals are said to have advised Pope Francis not to push the issue too hard. Surprising names. Marx. Daneels. Schönborn. Those whom one would think would be among the most aggressive proponents of the push for communion to the unrepentant.

After reading your humble blogger’s above analysis, one SHOULD NOT BE SURPRISED that HERETICAL CLERICALISTS would try to reign in the HOMO LOBBY and Francis for the simple reason that they have different AGENDAS.

On an aside, what is interesting to keep a close eye on, is situations where the AGENDAS of these two “special interest” groups diverge. It is the interplay between these “competing” interests that can be observed on the “margins” of where their two AGENDAS interact, which then gives the keen analyst very useful insights into what is REALLY happening behind the Sacred Vatican Walls and in those “peripheries”. But I digress…

On an aside, the analysis of these type of “interplay at the margins” also make the savvy financial analysts and economics very wealthy. Excuse the further digression…

For our purposes here, this “marginal interplay” is giving us a very good idea of “where we are going”, since if you don’t know where your going, you will end up somewhere else.

I will leave off here for today with this “Yogi-ism” …

Advertisements