Tags
Boris Johnson, BREXIT, Catholic Church, Catholic Church in Poland, Cavalcade of the Three Kings, Chapel of the Holy Trinity, chastity belts, Chlamydia trachomatis, Cryptosporidium, Cultural Marxism, Deconstructionism, Father Anthony Cekada, Fox News, Francis Effect, Frankfurt School, FSSP, Genderism, George Soros, Germany, Giardia lamblia, Gonorrhea, Great Cardinal, Havana, Hemorrhoids, heretical pope, Herpes simplex virus, hippies, HIV, Holy Year of Mercy, Human immunodeficiency virus, Human papilloma virus, Humanism, Isospora belli, Jacque Derrida, James O'Keefe, Jesuits, Jesus Christ, Joseph Ratzinger, Jozef Pilsudski, Keynes, Keynesian Economics, Kirill I, Krakow, Law of Unintended Consequences, messeging, Mexico City, Microsporidia, Miracle on the Vistula, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Nassim Taleb, neo-modernism, Neo-Pagan, Net Neutrality, new springtime, New York Times, Nigel Farage, Pagan Christians, pathological, Poland, Polish Bolshevik War 1920, Pontifical High Mass, Pope Pius VI, President Andrzej Duda, Project Veritas, Raymond Burke, Republic of Poland, retained foreign bodies, risk event, Roman Curia, s "c"atholicZombie, s "theological structuring", s ABC News, s ABERRO AGENDA, s aberro-sex agenda, s AIDS, s Ambiguity, s Anal Cancer, s anorectal traum, s Archbishop of Warsaw- Praga, s Associated Press, s Austria, s Benedict XVI, s Bergoglio, s Big Gender, s Card. Muller, s Cardinal Burke, s Cardinal Kazimierz Nycz, s cardinal Walter Kasper, s Pope Francis, Saul Alinsky, Sexually transmitted diseases, spirit of Vatican II, SSPX, St Thomas Aquinas, sustainability, Synod 2014, Synod of Filth, Syphilis25, Tags anal fissures, Tags Black Lives Matter, Team Bergoglio, The Remnant, The Scholasticum, theological deconstructionism, Thomism, Tradition, TransRational, Truth, Unjust ruler, Vatican II, Work of Human Hands, ZombieBishop, ZombieChurch, Zombies
I will jump over to the Soap Bubble Papacy™ for the next series of post. The reason that I am doing this is to highlight… no… ingrain into my dear readers collective conscience, just how big of an illusion this Bergoglian EPIC FAILED NEO-MODERNIST EXPERIMENT™ IS in fact. Aside, I have put up an entire page dedicated to chronicling the “Soap Bubble-i-ness” of this entire pontificate HERE.
In the below post, I would like to draw your attention dear reader to a post that appeared, and that I have translated on the Spanish website Religión la voz libre. (see here) I am re-posting it to set up my next post. Because: CONTEXT IS KEY!
The subject matter of the below post is an overview of the meeting that was held this past Monday, the 5th of December Anno Domini 2016. The meeting was hosted by Roberto De Mattei and the guests were Cardinal Raymond Burke and the aptly named Archbishop Athanasius Schneider. Nomen omen? But I digress…
Next, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that 80+ priests and other laymen came to this function. Please also be cognizant that the Vatican clergy are living in a “reign of terror” and that these brave clerics also had to make the assumption that Francis, the bishop of Rome would have his spies in the crowd.
Another reason that I am bringing this post to your attention is to CONTRAST it with another meeting that took place in a Roman venue a couple of years earlier. This earlier meeting was hosted by one of the most progressive Vatican correspondents of the GR1 Raffaele Luise. The guests were the likewise heretical progressive Cards Walter Kasper and Francesco Coccopalmerio. The informal group that met designated themselves with the moniker “Cenacolo degli amici di Francesco”, (“Friends of Francis”). Here is how the overview of that meeting looked: (see here)
From the blog Rossoporpora.org edited by the Vatican correspondent Joseph Ruskin, we learn of the existence of the “Cenacle of Friends of Francis”, “Francis” being the current Pope Francis. It is a small group of journalists and intellectuals – who could be described as supporters – led by the Vatican correspondent of the GR1 Raffaele Luise and formed shortly after his election to the pontificate of Pope Bergoglio.
Of all the possible interpretations of the magisterium of Pope Francis, one of the Last Supper – Raffaele Luise is among the most progressive. No coincidence that at the first public event three nights ago in Rome, the keynote speakers were the inevitable Cardinal Walter Kasper and Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio. Given the number of guests at the event, probably “the Last Supper” could refer to the number of participants (no more than twenty present at all).
Now just to put this meeting in a proper chronology that provides CONTEXT, it was held in mid-November of 2014. In other words, just after the first of the bi-Synods and 3 weeks before the infamous La Nacion article appeared on December 7 of 2014. We did a series of posts on just this, one of which was titled Context: The Modernist’s Magic Words. It was in this La Nacion article that we found out that Francis was going to disregard the intent of the 2014 Synod and simultaneously launch a war on the Curia. So the proper CONTEXT in which to understand the “Cenacle of Friends of Francis” is that it was held in the best of times. For Francis that is. Or using a more contemporary expression, before the … well, feces hit the rotating device.
Here is how we summed up that meeting:
Got that? The first public event hosted by the Friends of Bill Francis or FoF’s, with the top architect and promoter of Francis’s “theology on the knees” and less than 20 people were present. And this includes the two cardinals and no doubt some FoF staff. Also one has to ask if the restaurant staff were included in the “no more than twenty present in all”?
So there you have it. A perfect example of the “two V II councils Secret Synods” phenomenon in practice, where we see TeamFrancis with the assistance of the media creating one set of optics, but the reality on the ground being quite to the contrary. And just as the old journalist adage states “believe nothing that you reads and only half of what you sees”, this is very wise and sound advice for anyone following church affairs these days.
So this was the state of play in the middle of November Anno Domini 2014!
Concluding, what we see is a Soap Bubble Papacy™, one that we have been observing and has been ILLUSORY since mid November 2014. The FAKE popularity was generated by what we have subsequently labeled as the PRESSTITUTES in the LEGACY MEDIA. But the OBJECTIVE REALITY all along has been that the Bergoglio Papcy is a FRAUD. Not only in terms of “theology” but in terms of popularity.
Furthermore, what is more important to understand is that there never was any sizeable number of cardinals, let alone bishops that stand behind Francis. What he has is a small group of thugs and sycophants who owe their meteoric rise to the fact that they most likely have the same kind of “issues” as does Francis. We see this in his “hostel keeper” the notorious Msgr. Ricca, in Abp. Bruno “slippery as an eel” Forte, in the piano playing Card. Baldisseri. We have also identified Abp. Paglia and Pinto as being part of what we are now calling the Coprophagians. And to finish off this thought, these Coprophagians are supported and funded by the German Bishops’ Conference and the obscene KIRCHENSTEUER. And with maybe a couple more sycophants like Frs. Spadao and Rosica, this is as far as this cabal reaches.
And one more aside: is it any wonder Francis is making cardinals exclusively out of the likes a Cupich, Tobin, Farrel and De Kesel. He needs to muster as many Coprophagian bodies as he can get since he is greatly outnumbered.
I will leave off with this thought.
I will pick up this thread in the next post.
And once again I would like to reemphasize ad nauseum that to properly understand what is transpiring behind the Sacred Vatican Walls: CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING!
Now, I am re-posting this material…
FOR THE RECORD
80 priests (and +) in defense of Schneider and Burke
ROME (Jeanne Smits) – While the heart of Rome vibrated Monday night, prelates and scholars gathered in a room at the foot of the Basilica of San Balbino, a few steps from the Baths of Caracalla. Convened at the invitation of the Lepanto Institute, the private meeting centered around Bishop Athanasius Schneider, who recently made headlines with his frank support for the “dubia” published in the hope of clarifying the apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia. Two of the cardinals who wrote this statement were present: Cardinal Burke and Cardinal Brandmüller; And the subject of the meeting was precisely that question. It is a theme that has agitated the Church, in which the supreme authority on earth, the Vicar of Christ, has refused to clarify crucial points about the morality of marriage, access to the Eucharist, sin and acts intrinsically Bad and the existence of an immutable truth.
The meeting was by invitation only, given the expected crowd – and the crowd that was actually present – was not clandestine. In the Catholic Church, there is no place for conspiracies; Everything is said openly, in “transparency” and loyalty, as was rightly reminded by Professor Roberto de Mattei, host of the meeting. The journalists were invited to attend and “cover” the event: in particular Sandro Magister, who brought the letter of the four cardinals to the Pope to the attention of the world.
Monsignor Schneider’s speech on fidelity to the Church’s tradition and its moral teaching was important in many ways. We will return to it in due course, but what we must say at the outset is that Monday’s event was just that: an event. What is interesting is the existence of a meeting that attracted cardinals, bishops, priests, seminarians, religious in large numbers and laymen, all anxious to defend the immutable truth of Christ, specifically his words about marriage.
Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke and Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, these prelates, these princes of the Church, who do not feel authorized to retract the dangers of exposing the ambiguities of Amoris Laetitia, held the places of honor. We clearly affirm: It is impossible to deny that these ambiguities are dangerous, as evidenced by various interpretations of bishops and conferences that openly consider access to communion for divorced and remarried persons, whereas their original marriage bond is valid, not declared void and Without requiring them to live in continence.
Many priests were present: priests in cassocks, old and young, especially the young. Sixty or eighty priests came from near or far, anxious above all to find authorities who express Catholic truth, but also the certainty of not being alone. Times are “tumultuous,” as Cardinal Burke said in his remarks after Schneider’s speech. It is a time when it is good to be in a community, fortified and encouraged by the perseverance and strength of others. This was the mood, for example, of Bishop Andreas Laun of Salzburg, whom the French know well for their participation in the Parisian Marches for life.
I saw Dutch priests coming from afar in every sense of the word: from a country in religious agony, where fidelity to the Magisterium is rare and two churches close every week. “How many mosques are open?” -I asked for. “Two a week.” There was deliberate displacement. Like the Irish priest.
How did we get out of such an event? Moved, thankful, fortified. In any case, I lived it with the certainty that our Lord, beyond all vicissitudes, supports and preserves his Bride, the Church, in spite of all his tribulations. The vibrant Credo, sung by the audience to close the meeting, summed up this in a more than symbolic way.
Mark Thomas said:
S. Armaticus, hello,
Thank you for your reply, which included the following: “The SSPX makes no claim as to the orthodoxy of the sitting pontiff.”
With respect to you, I have to disagree with your statement.
When a priest of the Society of Saint Pius X, or any priest, prays the ancient Roman Canon during Mass, he proclaims in union with the Church Triumphant, Militant, and Suffering, that the Pope holds the true, orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Faith.
The people at Mass are united to God’s holy priest and his prayers (the Church’s prayers). They proclaim, via their “amen,” their union with the priest and his (the Church’s) liturgical prayers.
Therefore, the priest and all present during the Divine Liturgy declares that the sitting Roman Pontiff holds and proclaims the Catholic and Apostolic Faith.
During Holy Mass, the Holy Catholic Church does not commemorate schismatics/heretics. SSPX priests maintain that ancient Catholic practice via their praying the holy and error-free Roman Canon. Correct?
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
LikeLike
DJR said:
During Holy Mass, the Holy Catholic Church does not commemorate schismatics/heretics. SSPX priests maintain that ancient Catholic practice via their praying the holy and error-free Roman Canon. Correct?
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
_____
During the Great Western Schism, when there were three different “popes” being recognized by different Catholics, who were the Catholics of the Holy Catholic Church commemorating as pope in the error free canon?
Were any of those persons “schismatic”? If they were antipopes, how is it possible for them not to be schismatic?
Yet they were being prayed for in the error free canon. By practicing Catholics. Three different popes.
Your views are just unhistorical.
LikeLike
Richard Malcolm said:
Hello S.Arm,
I’ll just say you’re far more sanguine about the foreseeable future of the Church than I am.
We know how the story ends. I’m just deeply skeptical any of us will be alive to see any turnaround. The progressives have a strong enough grip on the hierarchy to keep control of it for decades to come, no matter how much their demographic base is collapsing.
But maybe that’s the chastisement we needed after all.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
Hi:
Think so?
How do you explain this: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351417?eng=y
What I am seeing is that this battle is in our minds. If we looks through the FAKE NEWS “inevitability of progress” narrative, the reality looks much, much different.
LikeLike
Richard Malcolm said:
It was a relieving development on a certain level, but the realist in me says it’s just a last hurrah of the Wojtylians and Ratzingerians in the U.S. hierarchy.
After all: We know who appoints bishops, and which American prelates are now in control of the pipeline to feed those episcopal candidates over at the Congregation for Bishops. Another 2-3 years and they will have made a very real dent in reshaping the U.S. episcopate – and there’s little that the likes of DiNardo, Chaput, Gomez, let alone Burke, can do about it. There’s more where McElroy, Cupich and Tobin came from.
And all this notwithstanding who *still* staffs most chanceries, theology departments, and other intermediate Catholic institutions. The extremely modest gains racked up by conservatives over the past twenty years show signs of vanishing fairly quickly.
The Left – the Transrationalists, if you will – are just far more effective and ruthless at the acquisition and maintenance of power than the opposition. Our consolation is that their legacy is always, in the end, ecclesiastical death. I wonder if a lot more death will have to be visited on the Church to purge of these errors than I previously appreciated – and that this is why we’ve been given this pontificate.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
All true, but the managers of the pipeline will also find it harder to find and to appoint their ilk. Let’s face it, to be a “left position” (Cd. Marx term) seminarian/young priest is not that easy. You have a stigma attached (fair or not regardless) of having an “issue”. And even if you are the careerist and go along with the “theology of death”, you have to face the reality that it will all fall apart before you turn 35. And then what will you do?
LikeLike
Richard Malcolm said:
No question such men are thinner on the ground in the U.S. than they were in the Jadot years (In parts of Western Europe it is a different story, as I am sure you know). You do have to dig harder.
And yet: There are about 38,000 priests in the U.S., several thousand of which are by the broadest definition of the right age and background to be considered for a purple hat. But there are only two to three dozen bishops – ordinaries or auxilliaries – appointed in a typical year. So you don’t need that many in the first place. And believe me: certain….”lavender” networks remain in existence, even among the youngest priests.
I don’t say any of this to counsel despair. Only to cast a realistic eye on just how much power the transrationalists, to use your label, now have, and just how much damage they can do in a short period of time. Not least because they’re so ruthless in wielding that power.
LikeLike
Bai Defending Macfarlane said:
Dear S. Armaticus,
How can I share with you some information about Cardinal Coccopalmerio and the Code of Canon Law that is explosive in these times? Can you send me your e-mail address, or is there a contact me page on your blog?
With the non-profit organization Mary’s Advocates, I have been working full time to uphold marriage against unilateral no-fault divorce for about 18 months. I’d been working in my spare time for 12 years before that. You could help us (I hope) find morally-grounded faithful spouses to plea with their local diocese to implement the canons on separation and divorce – before a divorce is finalized, or shortly thereafter. I think these morally-grounded faithful spouses could cause a see-change in exposing the errors of the “progressives” in a way that the average person would support.
LikeLike
Remnant Clergy said:
Bergoglio is a fake, an anti pope, the false prophet of Revelation 13.
LikeLike
Mark Thomas said:
S. Armaticus,
When a priest, for example, of the SSPX, prays the Roman Canon during Mass, he commemorates His Holiness Pope Francis as the orthodox chief shepherd of the Holy Catholic Church. The Faithful present are united to God’s holy priest and express their assent to his commemoration of Pope Francis.
At that very moment the Church Triumphant, Militant, and Church Suffering are united in expressing the Faith of the True Church: That Pope Francis is the orthodox Roman Pontiff of the Catholic Church.
If Pope Francis is an evil heretic, why do the SSPX priest and congregation pray the holy Roman Canon prayer in question, which, again, testifies that Pope Francis is orthodox?
Thank you..
Pax.
Mark Thomas
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
Hi Mark:
The SSPX makes no claim as to the orthodoxy of the sitting pontiff. They just recognize the OBJECTIVE REALITY.
S.A.
LikeLike
DJR said:
Mark:
When priests offered the liturgy during the pontificate of Pope Formosus, they also prayed for him as Vicar of Christ and earthly head of the Church on earth.
A couple of pontificates later, that of Stephen VI, Pope Formosus’ body was dug up by Stephen’s order, put on trial, condemned, and then thrown in the river.
Pope Stephen then declared Pope Formosus to be an antipope and declared null all his priestly ordinations and episcopal consecrations.
Now, tell us, was Formosus a true pope? Yes or no? If so, what would you have done during the reign of His Holiness, the orthodox pope of Rome, Pope Stephen VI?
Your simplistic view of the papacy is not Catholic, nor is your view that the Holy Ghost directly picks a pope.
That’s not Catholic.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
Hi:
You write:
“Pope Stephen then declared Pope Formosus to be an antipope and declared null all his priestly ordinations and episcopal consecrations.”
Hmmmm…..
Sounds like a way forward. 😉
Especially in light of this: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/12/dear-sycophants-of-pope-francis-if-you.html
S.A.
LikeLike
Mark Thomas said:
DJR, did we discuss that on a different blog?
DJR, you agree that the via the Roman Canon, God’s Holy priest commemorates the sitting Pope as one who holds and proclaims the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Faith. Correct?
The people present during Mass are united to the priest and the Church-approved prayers that he offers. Via their “amen” to the priest’s prayers, they and God’s holy priest testify to the Church’s belief that the Roman Pontiff hold and proclaims the orthodox Faith.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
LikeLike
DJR said:
Mark: “DJR, you agree that the via the Roman Canon, God’s Holy priest commemorates the sitting Pope as one who holds and proclaims the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Faith. Correct?
No, it doesn’t.
The very same section of the canon you cite also mentions the bishop.
Are you asserting that there has never been, in the history of the Catholic Church, a heretical bishop that was prayed for in that canon?
The canon prays for the pope, the bishop, and then it prays for all orthodox believers of the catholic and apostolic faith.
It makes no assertion whatsoever whether the pope falls under “orthodox believers.”
If you assert that it does, then you would also have to assert that every bishop ever prayed for using that canon was also “one who holds and proclaims the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Faith.”
A preposterous notion.
There have been hundreds of heterodox bishops in the two millennia of the Church.
LikeLike
Mark Thomas said:
DJR said…”Your simplistic view of the papacy is not Catholic…”
In regard to the priest’s prayer via the error-free Roman Canon, I presented Church teaching.
At Masses offered by the SSPX, FSSP, and each TLM offered by priests in communion with the Apostolic See, God’s holy priests commemorate His Holiness Pope Francis as the Church’s Chief Shepherd. God’s holy priests commemorate Pope Francis as holding the Catholic and Apostolic Faith.
That is what the Roman Canon declares. Correct?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
LikeLike
DJR said:
Mark said: “In regard to the priest’s prayer via the error-free Roman Canon, I presented Church teaching.”
___
Then I assume you believe that there has never been a heretical bishop.
In the section you reference, the “error free Roman Canon” makes the same assertion with regard to the bishop that you are claiming for the pope.
In the East, we pray for “our God-loving bishop.”
That’s “error free” too.
But that doesn’t mean every bishop is “God-loving.” The history of the Church is rife with bishops that were not “God-loving.”
Your views are simplistic.
LikeLike
Mark Thomas said:
DJR, does Pope Stephen VI’s Pontificate invalidate The First Vatican Council’s teaching that we are submit to the Roman Pontiff?
Does Pope Stephen VI’s Pontificate invalidate the First Vatican Council’s teaching that “in the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion has always been preserved immaculate “?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
LikeLike
DJR said:
You never answered the question as to whether you believe Pope Formosus to be a valid pope and whether you would have believed that under the pontificates of Stephen VI, Theodore II (who contradicted Stephen), John IX (ditto), and Sergius III (who contradicted Theodore and John).
If you lived during the pontificate of Pope Formosus, would you have considered him a valid pope and submit to him?
Would you then submit to Pope Stephen VI when he declared Pope Formosus to be an antipope and declared all his ordinations/consecrations invalid?
Would you subsequently change and submit to Popes Theodore II and John IX and reverse your opinion on the validity of Pope Formosus? They reversed Pope Stephen VI’s ruling.
Then later would have you again changed your mind under Sergius III, who reversed Theodore and John and again declared Pope Formosus to be an antipope?
The Roman canon was in use during each of those pontificates.
During the reigns of Stephen VI and Sergius III, would you have considered past Pope Formosus “orthodox,” or even a pope, for that matter?
Please tell us which popes you would agree with in regards to the papacy of Pope Formosus, and then tell us why you would not submit to the popes who contradicted the popes you agree with.
LikeLike
johnfkennedy63 said:
Looks like a new war front has opened http://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/6499/0/breaking-order-of-malta-top-official-removed-from-post
LikeLike