T -140: The Long And Winding Road – Part I

Tags

Benedict XVI, Bergoglian/Kasperian "hate theology done on the knees", Bergoglio, Berlin Wall, Bolsheviks, Boston Globe, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, communism, corrupt information, corruption, David Gibson, FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO, Francis church, From Rome blog, German Bishops' Conference, Glastnost, Global Warming, Great Cardinal, Helmut Kohl, heretical pope, hippies, homosexuality, intrinsic disorder, Intrinsically Immoral, Jesuits, John XXXIII, Joseph Ratzinger, JP II, Kirchensteuer, messeging, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, New York Times, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Paul VI, Peoples Liberation Front of Judea, PewSitter Blog, Polls, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, Secret Synod 2014, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Tags "alternative realities", Tags "the new springtime of the spirit of Vatican II, Team Bergoglio, TeamBergoglio, Tradition, US Bishops' Conference, Vatican, Vatican II, Virtual Realty

Today is the 136th day from the start of what this blog has designated as the Stealth Sex Synod of 2015™. There has been a lot of new information coming out into the public domain recently, directly related to the afore-mentioned synod, so today we take one step back and incorporate this new material into our analysis. Therefore I will try to incorporate this new information into a series of posts, so as not to run long on any one particular sub-topic and to keep the analysis focused.

Just to demonstrate how drastically the EXPLICIT AGENDA of Francis, his hand-picked team of clerics in charge of the Synod, i.e. TeamFrancis and the German Bishops’ Conference leadership who are promoting this AGENDA has changed since Francis called for the Synod on the Family, we go to the very beginning. It needs to be pointed out that at the outset of this process, the “advertized” end result of this bi-synodal process was to be an apostolic exhortation along the lines of an “updated” Familiaris Consortio.

The first that was heard about this Extraordinary Synod of Bishops was in early October 2013, or 6 months after Francis was enthroned. The purpose of convening this Synod was as follows: (see here)

Today, Pope Francis called for an Extraordinary Synod of Bishops that will be held from October 5-18th, 2014 at the Vatican. The synod will reflect on the theme “The Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of the Evangelization.”

The original problem identified for which the Synod was convened was described as follows:

It is important that the Church move forward together as a community, in reflection and prayer, and decide on common pastoral orientations dealing with the most important aspects of our life together – particularly on the family – under the guidance of the Pope and the bishops. The convening of this Extraordinary Synod is a clear indication of this direction.

The stated goal of the Synod was as follows:

During that meeting, Pope Francis stated that the matter would be discussed with the Council of Cardinals, which took place last week in the Vatican, as well as in the next Synod of Bishop. “A synodal approach should be taken to study this problem.

Just so we are clear, the “study” of this “problem” related to “important aspects of our life together – particularly on the family”. The result of this bi-synodal PROCESS would be a papal document along the lines of an postsynodal apostolic exhortation along the lines of “updated Familiaris Consortio”.

So this is how the process was billed.

Just to demonstrate how “off the radar” was any issue related to changing Catholic doctrine with respect to “objective intrinsic disorders” collectively knows as aberro-sexuality was at this time, here is how Sandro Magister described the interventions at the Secret Synod of 2014: (see here)

Homosexuality was one of the most controversial questions at the recent extraordinary synod on the family, as proven by the vast difference between the paragraph dedicated to it in the final “Relatio” and the three paragraphs of the previous “Relatio” halfway through the discussion.

And what was the basis for this “vast difference”? It was as follows:

But the prehistory of these paragraphs is also indicative. Two of the three synod fathers who had raised this issue during discussions in the assembly – the only ones out of the almost two hundred present – in fact supported their arguments with statements of pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

Archbishop of Kuching John Ha Tiong Hock, president of the episcopal conference of Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei, referred to the passage of the interview with Francis in “La Civiltà Cattolica” in which the pope urges the Church to mature and reformulate its judgments on the understanding that the man of today has of himself – including on the matter of homosexuality, the archbishop specified – with the same willingness for change that it demonstrated in the past in radically changing its judgments on slavery:

And just to demonstrate the impact that these three individuals had on the mid-term Relatio, here is how Magister described it:

The “Relatio post disceptationem,” in the three paragraphs dedicated to homosexuality, revisited and further developed the things said in the assembly by the Malaysian archbishop, by Fr. Spadaro, and by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, the third to speak on the issue.

The inferences that one should extract from the above are as follows:

– Since only 3 of the more than 200 participants even raised the issue, the Synod bishops were not prepared to discuss issues relating to changing Catholic teaching regarding aberro-sexuality,

– Francis had to lay the groundwork for these three interventions since there is NO MAGISTERIAL TEACHING in existence that would support the types of changes that TeamFrancis wanted to institute,

– The Synod bishops recognized that the only supporting “theology” that the three interventions had for their position on aberro-sexuality was from interviews given by Francis to the Jesuit magazine La Civiltà Cattolica,

– This issue was such a “non-issue” that one of the interventions was by the editor of the above mentioned offending magazine, Fr. Antonio Spadaro. It can be assumed that this issue was not even discussed before the Synod since Fr. Spadaro raised it so that it would at least get raised,

– In the case of the Malaysian archbishop, his intervention was made on the basis of a cognizant belief that it was Francis who wanted this change in Catholic moral teaching and the issue only arose after the La Civiltà Cattolica article.

So this was the state of play in October 2014.

And what is the state of play at present?

For this we go to the Edward Pentin article in the National Catholic Register that was reproduced in the previous post titled So It Was The Homo Agenda All Along. (see here) Here are the salient data points from the “one-day study meeting — open only to a select group of individuals — took place at the Pontifical Gregorian University on Monday with the aim of urging “pastoral innovations” at the upcoming Synod of Bishops on the Family in October.”:

The closed-door meeting, masterminded by the German bishops’ conference under the leadership of Cardinal Marx. ( It) took place just days after the people of Ireland voted in a referendum in support of same-sex “marriage” and on the same day as the Ordinary Council of the Synod of Bishops met in Rome. Some observers did not see the timing as a coincidence. So secret was the meeting that even prominent Jesuits at the Gregorian were completely unaware of it. Cardinal Marx insisted the study day wasn’t secret. But he became irritated when pressed about why it wasn’t advertised, saying he had simply come to Rome in a “private capacity”.

The cardinal is known to be especially eager to reform the Church’s approach to homosexuals. During his Pentecost homily last Sunday, Cardinal Marx called for a “welcoming culture” in the Church for homosexuals, saying it’s “not the differences that count, but what unites us.”

The key topics discussed at the closed-door meeting was how the Church could better welcome those in stable same-sex unions, and reportedly “no one” opposed such unions being recognized as valid by the Church.

Among the featured participants was “included Jesuit Father Hans Langendörfer, general secretary of the German bishops’ conference and the leading figure behind the recent reform of German Church labor laws to controversially allow remarried divorcees and homosexual couples to work in Church institutions. A prominent critic of Humanae Vitae (The Regulation of Birth), as well as a strong supporter of homosexual clergy and those pushing for reform in the area of sexual ethics, Father Schockenhoff. In 2010, he gave an interview in which he praised the permanence and solidarity shown in some same-sex relationships as “ethically valuable.” He urged that any assessment of homosexual acts “must take a back seat” on the grounds that the faithful are becoming “increasingly distant from the Church’s sexual morality,” which appears “unrealistic and hostile to them.”
Father Schockenhoff has also gone on record saying that moral theology must be “liberated from the natural law”. Another suggestion was that “official Church” should be done away with because of a growing gap between the institutional Church and the Church of the faithful. This is widely seen as code words for understanding the Bible differently from Tradition — and the need for a “reflection on a theology of love.”

By replacing the theology of the body with a “theology of love,” it creates an abstract interpretation that separates sex from procreation, thereby allowing forms of extramarital unions and same-sex attractions based simply on emotions rather than biological reality.

At the meeting, conspicuously failed to mention sin, ended by saying that “further discussion on the future of marriage and family is necessary.

And yet…

(At the meeting, among others was discussed the) “importance of the human sex drive,” and the “develop” the Church’s teaching on human sexuality and called not for a theology of the body, as famously taught by St. John Paul II, but the development of a “theology of love.”

“Imagine if the Church accepted homosexual relationships,” said one source speaking on condition of anonymity. “Ultimately, that is what these people want.”

Summa summarum, it should become quite obvious reading the above, how the “advertised” purpose for calling the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops was described in early October 2013 and how it mutated into the present state of affairs.

Initially, the Secret Synod of Bishops were caught off guard by a HIDDEN AGENDA that only emerged after the release of the mid-term Relatio. Since this moment however, the Synod bishops have been so effective in blocking this revolutionary HIDDEN AGENDA of TeamFrancis that the Bishops have forced the TeamFrancis subversives to declare what it is that they are after.

And now that the Catholic bishops are aware what it is that TeamFrancis and the promoters of this HIDDEN AGENDA want to force through the Stealth Sex Synod of 2015, they should be in a much better position to not only resist, but to thwart the entire subversion of Catholic moral teaching by Team Francis and its promoters.

But more on this tomorrow.

T -141: So It Was The Homo Agenda All Along.

Tags

Benedict XVI, Bergoglian/Kasperian "hate theology done on the knees", Bergoglio, Berlin Wall, Bolsheviks, Boston Globe, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, communism, corrupt information, corruption, David Gibson, FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO, Francis church, From Rome blog, German Bishops' Conference, Glastnost, Global Warming, Great Cardinal, Helmut Kohl, heretical pope, hippies, homosexuality, intrinsic disorder, Intrinsically Immoral, Jesuits, John XXXIII, Joseph Ratzinger, JP II, Kirchensteuer, messeging, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, New York Times, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Paul VI, Peoples Liberation Front of Judea, PewSitter Blog, Polls, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, Secret Synod 2014, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Tags "alternative realities", Tags "the new springtime of the spirit of Vatican II, Team Bergoglio, TeamBergoglio, Tradition, US Bishops' Conference, Vatican, Vatican II, Virtual Realty

FOR THE RECORD:

Below is an article from the National Catholic Register. (see here) The reason that I am reproducing this article in its entirety is that it adds more data points that strongly confirm two themes that this blog has been pursuing.

The first theme is that the two Synod’s were called due to a HIDDEN AGENDA, a HIDDEN AGENDA that this blog identified as “changing Catholic moral teaching on aberro-sexuality”. Reading the below, it becomes obvious that communion for remarried is just a side issue, as was the billing as a Synod about the family. The side issues were needed to create the impression that the HIDDEN AGENDA encompassed more than just the fraction of the 1% of Catholics who may suffer from any of the “objective intrinsic disorders” that collectively comprise aberro-sexuality. We laid out the case for this in a series of post that culminated in our post titled The Three Paragraphs. (see here)

The second theme that we have been pursuing is that of the Soap Bubble Papacy™. We have demonstrated that the entire Francis Effect at its base, is nothing more than a VIRTUAL REALITY, a media created illusion that Francis is “popular”. This aspect of the Francis Effect was very poignantly summed up by Cardinal Brandmuller when he made the following observation: “It is superficial. Were this a religious movement, the churches would be full”. We illustrated this Soap Bubble Papacy™ in posts such as Searching for the “Illusive Francis Effect” (see here) and A Grand Ole Time Had By All (see here).

When reading the below, please keep the above in mind for context. (with emphasis added)

Confidential Meeting Seeks to Sway Synod to Accept Same-Sex Unions

ROME — A one-day study meeting — open only to a select group of individuals — took place at the Pontifical Gregorian University on Monday with the aim of urging “pastoral innovations” at the upcoming Synod of Bishops on the Family in October.

Around 50 participants, including bishops, theologians and media representatives, took part in the gathering, at the invitation of the presidents of the bishops’ conferences of Germany, Switzerland and France — Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Bishop Markus Büchel and Archbishop Georges Pontier.

One of the key topics discussed at the closed-door meeting was how the Church could better welcome those in stable same-sex unions, and reportedly “no one” opposed such unions being recognized as valid by the Church.

Participants also spoke of the need to “develop” the Church’s teaching on human sexuality and called not for a theology of the body, as famously taught by St. John Paul II, but the development of a “theology of love.”

One Swiss priest discussed the “importance of the human sex drive,” while another participant, talking about holy Communion for remarried divorcees, asked: “How can we deny it, as though it were a punishment for the people who have failed and found a new partner with whom to start a new life?”

Marco Ansaldo, a reporter for the Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica, who was present at the meeting, said the words seemed “revolutionary, uttered by clergymen.”

French Biblicist and Ratzinger Prize-winner Anne-Marie Pelletier praised the dialogue that took place between theologians and bishops as a “real sign of the times.” According to La Stampa, another Italian daily newspaper, Pelletier said the Church needs to enter into “a dynamic of mutual listening,” in which the magisterium continues to guide consciences, but she believes it can only effectively do so if it “echoes the words of the baptized.” 

The meeting took the “risk of the new, in fidelity with Christ,” she claimed. The article also quoted a participant as saying the synod would be a “failure” if it simply continued to affirm what the Church has always taught.

The closed-door meeting, masterminded by the German bishops’ conference under the leadership of Cardinal Marx, was first proposed at the annual meeting of the heads of the three bishops’ conferences, held in January in Marseille, France.

The study day took place just days after the people of Ireland voted in a referendum in support of same-sex “marriage” and on the same day as the Ordinary Council of the Synod of Bishops met in Rome. Some observers did not see the timing as a coincidence.

The synod council has been drawing up the instrumentum laboris (working document) for the October synod on the family. Integrated into the document will be the responses of a questionnaire sent to laity around the world. Those responses, particularly from Switzerland and Germany, appeared to be overwhelmingly in favor of the Church adapting her teachings to the secular world.

 

Why the Lack of Publicity?

No one would say why the study day was held in confidence. So secret was the meeting that even prominent Jesuits at the Gregorian were completely unaware of it. The Register learned about it when Jean-Marie Guénois leaked the information in a story in Le Figaro.

Speaking to the Register as he left the meeting, Cardinal Marx insisted the study day wasn’t secret. But he became irritated when pressed about why it wasn’t advertised, saying he had simply come to Rome in a “private capacity” and that he had every right to do so. Close to Pope Francis and part of his nine-member council of cardinals, the cardinal is known to be especially eager to reform the Church’s approach to homosexuals. During his Pentecost homily last Sunday, Cardinal Marx called for a “welcoming culture” in the Church for homosexuals, saying it’s “not the differences that count, but what unites us.”

Cardinal Marx is also not alone, among those attending the meeting, in pushing for radical changes to the Church’s life. The head of the Swiss bishops, Bishop Büchel of St. Gallen, has spoken openly in favor of women’s ordination, saying in 2011 that the Church should “pray that the Holy Spirit enables us to read the signs of the times.” Archbishop Pontier, head of the French bishops, is also known to have heterodox leanings.

The meeting’s organizers were unwilling to disclose the names of everyone who took part, but the Register has obtained a full list of participants. They included Jesuit Father Hans Langendörfer, general secretary of the German bishops’ conference and the leading figure behind the recent reform of German Church labor laws to controversially allow remarried divorcees and homosexual couples to work in Church institutions.

 

Father Schockenhoff

Among the specialists present was Father Eberhard Schockenhoff, a moral theologian. Some are particularly disturbed about the rise to prominence of Father Schockenhoff, who is understood to be the “mastermind” behind much of the challenge to settled Church teachings among the German episcopate and, by implication, at the synod on the family itself.

A prominent critic of Humanae Vitae (The Regulation of Birth), as well as a strong supporter of homosexual clergy and those pushing for reform in the area of sexual ethics, Father Schockenhoff is known to be the leading adviser of German bishops in the run-up to the synod.

In 2010, he gave an interview in which he praised the permanence and solidarity shown in some same-sex relationships as “ethically valuable.” He urged that any assessment of homosexual acts “must take a back seat” on the grounds that the faithful are becoming “increasingly distant from the Church’s sexual morality,” which appears “unrealistic and hostile to them.” The Pope and the bishops should “take this seriously and not dismiss it as laxity,” he said.

Father Schockenhoff has also gone on record saying that moral theology must be “liberated from the natural law” and that conscience should be based on the “life experience of the faithful.”

He has also insisted that the indissolubility of marriage is “not seriously called into question” by admitting remarried divorcees to holy Communion and that the term the “official Church” should be done away with because of a growing gap between the institutional Church and the Church of the faithful.

Also present was Marco Impagliazzo, president of the Sant’Egidio lay community; Jesuit Father Andreas Batlogg, professor of philosophy and theology and chief editor of the liberal periodical Stimmen der Zeit (Voices of the Time); and Salesian Msgr. Markus Graulich, prelate auditor of the tribunal of the Roman Rota — one of very few Curial officials to attend. Some of those participating, such as Msgr. Graulich, took part in the previous synod.

 

Media Participation

Also noted were the large number of media representatives. Journalists from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, German broadcasters ZDF and ARD, the Italian daily La Repubblica and French-Catholic media La Croix and I-Media were also present. Their presence was “striking,” said one observer, who predicted they will be used to promote the agenda of the  subject matter under discussion in the weeks leading up to the synod.

Monday’s meeting is just the latest attempt to subtly steer the upcoming synod in a direction opposed by many faithful Catholics. A statement on the study day released by the German bishops’ conference May 26 said there was a “reflection on biblical hermeneutics” — widely seen as code words for understanding the Bible differently from Tradition — and the need for a “reflection on a theology of love.”

This, too, is seen as undermining Church teaching. By replacing the theology of the body with a “theology of love,” it creates an abstract interpretation that separates sex from procreation, thereby allowing forms of extramarital unions and same-sex attractions based simply on emotions rather than biological reality. Gone, say critics, is the Catholic view of marriage, which should be open to procreation.

The statement, which conspicuously failed to mention sin, ended by saying that “further discussion on the future of marriage and family is necessary and possible” and that it would be “enriched by a further, intensive theological reflection.”

This, too, is code for wanting a change in teaching, giving the impression that the doctrine in these areas is open to change. But for the Catholic Church, it is a settled issue.

“Imagine if the Church accepted homosexual relationships,” said one source speaking on condition of anonymity. “Ultimately, that is what these people want.”

I rest my case!

Concluding, somehow I am not shocked,… shocked that the HIDDEN AGENDA of the Secret Synod of Bishops of 2014 and the upcoming Stealth Sex Synod of Bishops of 2015 was and will be all about “changing Catholic moral teaching on aberro-sexuality”.

T -203: Re-blog From Rome: It’s Networking or Apostasy.

Tags

argumentativeness, being easily annoyed., Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, Cardinal Burke, Catholic Church, Crazy, defiance, Francis church, From Rome blog, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Holy Year of Mercy, Insanity, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Justice and Mercy, messeging, Modernists, MSM, narratives, negativity, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, No Mercy without Justice, No Mercy without Truth, Novelty, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Peoples Liberation Front of Judea, Pope Francis, psychological imbalances, psychological problems, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Saint Felix of Valois, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Tags American Psychiatric Association, Team Bergoglio, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II

A common theme that this blog has tried to promote over its short life, is the critical need for the Faithful to organize. It is with great pleasure that this humble blogger can recommend the ” A Year for True Conversion” (Y4Tc) initiative. Please read and reflect upon the below post.

And get involved!

T -204: “Fake Mercy Without Justice!”

Tags

argumentativeness, being easily annoyed., Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, Buenos Aires, Cardinal Burke, Catholic Church, Crazy, defiance, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM, Francis church, From Rome blog, Great Cardinal, Harveting the Fruit blog, heretical pope, hippies, Holy Year of Mercy, Insanity, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Justice and Mercy, Louie Verrecchio, messeging, Modernists, MSM, narratives, negativity, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, No Mercy without Justice, No Mercy without Truth, Novelty, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Peoples Liberation Front of Judea, Pope Francis, psychological imbalances, psychological problems, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Saint Felix of Valois, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Tags American Psychiatric Association, Team Bergoglio, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II

Today we transition from “mental illness” to what can be described as “institutional illness” and clear our psychiatrist’s couch to make room for the extraordinary Jubilee Holy Year of Fake “Mercy”.

Why is this Holy Year of Fake “Mercy” a Jubilee year, you may ask dear reader?

Well, the answer is that this variety of “Mercy” that is being celebrated was only discovered encountered by the Catholic Church 50 short years ago. And to mark this Great discovery Encounter with “Mercy”, Francis has announced that next year, to be more exact, from Dec. 8, 2015 (Feast of the Immaculate Conception) to Nov. 20, 2016 (Feast of Saint Felix of Valois), the Universal Church will be celebrating 50 years of this encounter.

More on St. Felix of Valois later.

To help explain what this all means, we turn to the Harveting the Fruit blog, (see here) where the proprietor, Louie Verrecchio is known as a Catholic with his hand on the pulse of the Catholic Church, both American and Universal. Here is how he describes the news:

This Holy Year announcement has all the markings of a well-planned strategy designed to fertilize Catholic minds with the manure of modernism, that the seeds of the Franciscan revolution might more readily flourish.

Mr. V., as he is known in his comment box, does get the point across.

However, I must take a small exception to the above. For two obvious reasons.

First of all, manure does in fact “help seeds flourish”. But Mr. V. here is speaking about “Catholic minds fertilized” with the “spirit of Vatican II”, a “spirit” that can be best described as a barren grandmother way past here reproductive age. In fact, there is “so much sterility within our Mother Church: when because of the weight of the hope in the Commandments, that pelagianism that all of us carry within our bones, she becomes sterile. She believes she is capable of giving birth… no, she can’t! (see here and here) In this case, no amount of manure, or hormone treatments for that matter, will help anything flourish in the “fertilized minds” or uteruses for that matter, of the NewChurch.

The next observation is one of style, namely a small faux pas committed by the author. Actually two, and they are quite common. I would just like to point out that Francis does not like the word strategy. He prefers “Lord’s pastoral call” instead. (see here) And since I am on the subject, please stop calling Francis pope. He prefers to be called “the bishop of Rome”. Two short years, and we are already forgetting these courtesies. Good upbringing, or as the Germans would call it “good breeding” is a Catholic hallmark. But I digress…

Back to the story.

Aside from the minor slip-ups, Mr. V makes the truly brilliant observation in the last few paragraphs. I will reproduce it in full, since it is so good and add my emphasis:

Imagine, in the space of just this one sermon, not only has Pope Francis invoked the very King whose decrees he would undermine, he even went so far as to entrust the revolution to the care of the Queen Mother!

How much longer can this possibly go on?

And we know that to them that love God all things work together unto good: to such as, according to his purpose, are called to be saints. (Romans 8:28)

We may well be living in the lead-up to a conclave that will respond to these terrible offenses against Our Lord by electing the antithesis of Pope Francis; a pope who will repeat after the Psalmist, “Oh, how I love thy law!”

This next pope may even be the very Holy Father who will at long last carry out Our Lady of Fatima’s simple request; that the desire of her Son might be realized as devotion to the Immaculate Heart is placed beside devotion to His Sacred Heart.

With this in mind I say:

Bring. It. On.

I wholeheartedly agree.

And I will add just one personal observation which is, the cardinals and bishops who sit there at the Domus Sanctae Marthae day in and day out and listen to this manure “teaching”, what is their religious affiliation again?

But let’s move on.

A second post appeared regarding the same subject, i.e. the Holy Year of Fake “Mercy” over at the From Rome blog. (see here) The beauty of this post is that it not only mirrors Louie Verrecchio’s post as to the symptoms of the NewChurch “infertility”, but provides a “course of treatment” that would eventually start bearing fruit.

Here is the relevant passage: (emphasis is the author’s)

It is a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit to laud, with a sacred act, that which attacked in every way the blessings which the Church had received by Her own fidelity to the Holy Spirit’s gift of piety to Her through the course of 1933 years…

It is a sacrilege of the very notion for which the Jubilee years were established, to turn a year which should be marked by the quest of the forgiveness of one’s own sins through penance and prayer and alms-giving, into a political event equivalent to patting one’s self on the back for having destroyed everything holy in the Church.

Mercy, as any Christian knows, has nothing to do with ignoring or excusing sin, as Pope Francis has made absolutely clear he’s about. Its about confessing one’s sin, in the humble recognition that God, not man nor the Pope, defines what is right and wrong, and man must accept or be thrust down into the everlasting fires of Hell!

Now that was the diagnosis of the “infertility, and now for the course of treatment:

To call for a YEAR FOR TRUE CONVERSION (with the official Acronym: Y4Tc).

To participate meritoriously in this authentic year of grace, a Catholic will pledge himself in thought, word and deed to calling for the repentance of all those addicted to the Second Vatican Council as the new Gospel of the Church.

By reminding them,

1. that it is God, not men, Who is the Author of Creation and of Man, and of all natural institutions which are consequent to these.

2. that is is God, not men, Who is the Author of the Catholic Faith and Founder of the Catholic Religion, such that no man, not even the pope or bishops united with him, has any power to alter or change that which God has established;

3. that is is God, not men, Who is the Author of all authentic spiritual renewal of each and every individual and of the entire Church, and that no man, not even the pope with all the bishops united with him, can set up another path for spiritual renewal, than that which He has always worked.

Now dear reader, the above is what the cardinals and the bishops should be telling Francis to his face… in the spirit of synodality and collegiality, of course.

But back to the post.

Hence, during the “Year of Mercy” decreed by Pope Francis, from December 8, 2015 to November 20, 2015, Catholics adhering to the YEAR OF TRUE CONVERSION will pray and work for the conversion of all who are addicted to the Second Vatican Council by reminding them that the Deposit of Faith is Scripture AND Tradition, as interpreted and taught by the Perennial UNCHANGING Magisterium of the Church, and that it is

1. a MORTAL SIN of IDOLATRY to regard any other authority as the basis of the Catholic Faith.

2. a MORTAL SIN OF SACRILEGE to despise or contemn any ecclesiastical tradition, whether written or not, which the Church has received from Christ, from the Apostles or Prophets, from the Fathers or Doctors of the Church, from the Saints, or from the pre-Vatican II Magisterium or Popes.

3. a MORTAL SIN OF IMPIETY to propose new and novel forms or meanings for any Catholic liturgy, ritual, word, practice, devotion, for the purpose of mixing the spirit of the world, of the flesh, or of the devil, into Catholic life and belief.

The purpose of this Year of True Conversion will be to obtain the explicit and verbal recognition of these truths and the abandonment of that sacrilegious impiety known as the Aggiornamento, which has sought to adapt faith to life, in such wise, as to make of life the rule of faith.

Sounds like a plan.

ON an aside, I wonder if part of the plan should entail getting  “Vatican II”addiction defined as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders DSM of the American Psychiatric Association? (see here) But I digress…

But regardless of the above, here is what I suggest.

I think it is an excellent plan. In this run-up to the Stealth Sex Synod of 2015 and the adjoining Holy Year of Fake “Mercy”, I suggest that each and every one of us should take the above words to heart and get involved. Each one of you dear readers lives in a parish. And no doubt each one of us will come into contact with this Holy Year of Fake “Mercy” initiative. Here is how this will play out, according to Mr. V.:

No doubt the various national episcopal conferences will soon announce plans relative to the Holy Year of Mercy; with the appointment of ad hoc committees, the assembly of councils of laity, and calls for the input of dioceses and parishes.

And when we see these initiative taking place, we should get involved. Since the hierarchy wants involvement, we should give them involvement. Or¡Hagan lío! as a certain bishop of a large metropolitan city in Italy is quoted as saying. And who should be our patron?

Why yes, Saint Felix of Valois!

Now who was St. Felix? Here is the relevant passage:

Felix was born in 1127. He was surnamed Valois because he was a native of the province of Valois. At an early age he renounced his possessions and retired to a dense forest in the Diocese of Meaux, where he gave himself to prayer and contemplation.

St. John of Matha, a young nobleman, a native of Provence, and doctor of divinity, who was lately ordained priest, having heard of the holy hermit of Cerfroid, sought him out, and put himself under his direction. St. John proposed to him the project of founding an order for the redemption of captives. Felix, though seventy years of age, readily agreed.

And this is how the Order of the Holy Trinity for the Redemption of Captives, or the Trinitarians were founded.

And since the Holy Year of Fake “Mercy” will end on the feast day of St. Felix and the “founding-intention for the Order was the ransom of Christians held captive by non-Christians, a consequence of crusading and pirating along the Mediterranean coast of Europe“, it is a natural fit that St. Felix could serve as the patron for an initiative whose intention is for the freeing of Catholics from the non-Christian neo-modernist “spirit of Vatican II” that has captured the only means of salvation known to man.

And the motto for this initiative should be : “Fake Mercy without Justice”.

T -227: Re-blog: Secret Synod: Synod of the Three Paragraphs

Tags

Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, Cardinal Kasper, Catholic Church, corruption, David Gibson, FAMILIARIS CONSORTIO, Francis church, From Rome blog, heretical pope, hippies, homosexuality, intrinsic disorder, Intrinsically Immoral, Jesuits, John XXXIII, JP II, messeging, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Paul VI, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, Secret Synod 2014, spirit of Vatican II, Synod 2014, US Bishops' Conference, Vatican, Vatican II

Today we added another data point to our catalog of supporting evidence that appeared yesterday, one that strongly supports our analysis of the TRUE AGENDA driving the Synod of Bishops. In the below post titled “Synod of the Three Paragraphs”, we set out what the TRUE AGENDA is and how it was derived. Just to remind our readers, here is what we wrote:

With this new information, we have been able to posit three underlying facts about the true agenda of Synod and why it was called, namely; 1) Francis called the Synod to engage in a “re-branding exercise” of Catholic teaching, 2) the Synod of 2014 had very little if anything to do with “The Family” and had everything to do with a hidden agenda relating to “communion for divorced remarried” and “changing teaching on homosexuality” and 3) upon closer examination, the issue of communion for divorced remarried was a red herring and the Synod of 2014’s true agenda was to change the Church teaching on homosexuality.

With respect to the data point itself, there is a story on Drudge linked to Yahoo News Canada with the following headline: (see here)

“Gay Catholic group gets VIP treatment at Vatican for first time”

For context, here is how the From Rome blog interprets this incident in a post titled:

So then, Francis, your reforms are all about advancing the Homo-heresy?: (see here)

“With great dis-ingenuity, when greeting the groups present, the Pope hid their presence by not mentioning them by name. The article makes a point to cite a “Team Bergoglio” journalist:

And veteran Vatican watcher David Gibson says that is a very big deal.

“It’s a substantial change of direction for the Catholic Church, not just a symbolic move,” Gibson, of the Religion News Service, told The Daily News.

“In the past, such groups or individuals would never be formally acknowledged in any way — not even a response to a letter — for fear that some could view such an attitude as approval,” he said. “Now Francis is saying the Church must cast aside such fears.”

Since we have identified the issue of trying to “change the Church teaching on homosexuality” as THE UNDERLYING ISSUE driving the TRUE AGENDA and therefore driving the upcoming Synod of Bishops that will commence in 227 days, we will be looking deeper into this matter in the upcoming posts.

But for now, here is the “Synod of the Three Paragraphs” re-blog that we first published on the 18th of December 2014 as a point of reference.

The Deus Ex Machina Blog

Over the last 10 days, Deus Ex Machina has been analyzing the „watershed” interview that Francis gave to the Argentine newspaper La Nacion. (see here) One area of the interview that interested this blog had to do with the the Secret Synod of 2014. With this new information, we have been able to posit three underlying facts about the true agenda of Synod and why it was called, namely; 1) Francis called the Synod to engage in a “re-branding exercise” of Catholic teaching, 2) the Synod of 2014 had very little if anything to do with “The Family” and had everything to do with a hidden agenda relating to “communion for divorced remarried” and “changing teaching on homosexuality” and 3) upon closer examination, the issue of communion for divorced remarried was a red herring and the Synod of 2014’s true agenda was to change the Church teaching on homosexuality.

View original post 2,136 more words

T -231: A Letter from St. Paul to the Corinthians…scratch that… to Francis

Tags

"chanta", "macaneador", "piola", "trucho", Argentine Catholic Church, Bergoglio, Buenos Aires, Cardinal Burke, Catholic Church, Colegio Maximo, Francis church, From Rome blog, heretical pope, hippies, Jack Tollers, Jesuits, Jorge Bergoglio, Leonardo Castellani, Letter to the Corinthians, lost election, messeging, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, Nouvelle Theologie, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Peron, peronism, Pope Francis, Rahner, Society of Jesus, spirit of Vatican II, St. Paul, Suarez, Synod 2014, Team Bergoglio, Teilhard, Unam Sanctam blog, Vatican, Vatican II

Today is Quinquagesima Sunday. Today’s reading is from St. Paul to the Corinthians, and anyone who has ever been at wedding must surely have this famous, if not the most famous Epistle passage firmly embedded, written in indelible ink in ones mind. But just in case…, St. Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians writes:

THOUGH I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

Therefore, using mathematical notation we can define the following relationship:

“And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor” ≠  Charity

Now that we have an understanding about what “charity” is and IS NOT, we go to the From Rome blog for a translation of the homily that Francis gave on the 15th of Februray 2015, i.e. Quinquagesima Sunday. Here is the relevant passage: (see here)

Consequently, charity cannot be neutral, ascetic, indifferent, tepid or impartial! Charity is contagious, it impassions, it risks, it co-involves! Because true charity is always unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous! (cf. 1 Cor. 13). Charity is creative in finding a proper language to communicate with all who have been considered incurable and hence untouchable.  To find the just language … Contact is the true communicative language, the same affective language which transmitted healing to the leper.  How many cures we can accomplish and transmit by learning this language of contact!  He was a leper and he became an announcer of God’s love.  The Gospel says:  « But he went off and set out proclaiming and publishing the deed » (Mk, 1:45).

Now, I do not know about you, but it would appear that what St. Paul is instructing Francis the Corinthians about, might not be the same thing that Francis has in mind, when using the word “charity”. Paul writes “Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.” So how does this square with what Francis said, i.e. “Charity is creative in finding a proper language to communicate with all who have been considered incurable and hence untouchable.  To find the just language …” and How many cures we can accomplish and transmit by learning this language of contact! . 

Now once again, I don’t know about you, but it would appear that “whatever “creativity” that Francis’ “god of surprises” “charity” possesses, according to St. Paul, this “creativity” “…whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.”

Ouch!

Here is the From Rome explanation of the heresy error that Francis introduces:

Unfortunately, the healing of the leper by Our Lord, was not what the Pope is proposing.  He was not healed by contact with another human body, or by human words; he was healed by an act of the Will and Power of God Himself, the Incarnate One, and hence the Anointed par excellence, the Christ.

And though we are all called to have the charity to help the sick and the outcast, we cannot head or love in the same manner God does.  For God first loves a thing, and only then does it come into being; and when He finds moral depravity, He first wills to cure it and then the immoral person if he accepts the grace, becomes good.

We on the other hand cannot command the power of God or the grace of God or the mercy of God and apply it to whomsoever we wish, or to whichsoever category of sinner we want.

That is why Christ commanded the Apostles to preach, first, faith and penance, then to lay hands upon those who believed.

This point needs to be emphasized.  There is absolutely no case in the entire Gospel where a non-believer was cured by Our Lord.

This point needs more emphasis.  There is absolutely no case in all of Scripture where God has revealed, said, promised or declared that He has any desire to heal or cure the impenitent.

Now, one possible explanation for Francis making this “rookie mistake (?)” could be related to that provided by Mr. Jack Tollers in his essay titled “Who is Pope Francis”, when he writes (see here):

Take Bergoglio, for example. His studies amount to nothing substantial. The Jesuits over here have no professors worthy of the name, the subjects were tossed about in an un-scholarly manner, the philosophy would never be properly taught (and, it would only be crassly digested Suárez in the best of cases). The theology seats had been all but captured by badly trained Jesuits who were prone to repeat the last of Teilhard’s work, or Rahner’s, when not divulging the Liberation Theology’s tenets (the Nouvelle Theologie never made it over here, few people could read French or German, and St. Thomas was all but perfectly ignored).

Yep, sounds just like a “sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal” to use St. Paul’s metaphor.

That’s the ticket!

Which leaves me with an observation. What are the odds that Francis made “charity” the theme of his homily, most likely not being cognizant of the fact that he is delivering that homily on Quinquagesima Sunday, or the Sunday when the proper reading is devoted to real Charity?

I will leave you, dear reader to answer this question.

However, I continuously keep having this recurring though, namely: I wonder if this could be another instance when real “God of surprises”, i.e. Holy Spirit did a little “lio” on Francis.

T -255: The Field of Battle

Tags

1968, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, Bruno Forte, Cardinal "Bling" Marx, Cardinal Bagnasco, Cardinal Brandmuller, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Caffarra, Cardinal Danneels, Cardinal De Paolis, Cardinal Erdo, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Lehmann, Cardinal Meisner, Cardinal Muller, Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, Cardinal Napier, Cardinal Oullet, Cardinal Pell, Cardinal Piacenza, Cardinal Poletto, Cardinal Ravasi, Cardinal Robles Ortega, Cardinal Sarah, Cardinal Schonborn, Cardinal Scola, Cardinal Tagle, Cardinal Wuerl, Catholic Church, despondence, Deus Ex Machina, Dr. Austen Ivereigh, Eponymous Flower blog, Francis church, Franciscans of the Immaculate, From Rome blog, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Immemorial Mass of All Ages, Italian Bishops' Conference, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, Lineamenta, lost election, messeging, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, Novus Ordo, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Peoples Liberation Front of Judea, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, spirit of Vatican II, SSPX, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Team Bergoglio, Team Francis, Tradition, US Bishops' Conference, Vatican, Vatican II

despondence

1. a state or spell of low spirits <her slumping posture betrayed a growing despondence>
2. utter loss of hope <the ability to endure defeat without despondence has allowed him to weather the ups and downs of an acting career>

Prologue

Before we get started, I would just like to inform our new readers, since we have experienced a mini-boom of readership of late, as to one of the main reasons that I decided to launch this humble effort. A major motivating factor was a sense of despondence that I felt reading comment boxes across the wider Catholic blogo-sphere. I noticed this same sense of despondency not only in the Traditional circles, but likewise in the Novus Ordo 1960’s hippie church circles. However, when looking at the landscape, especially post Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, the situation is actually quite positive. True, the Novus Ordo church is decomposing. Good riddance to bad rubbish I say. However, on the Traditionalist side, we are experiencing quite an extraordinary rebirth, a rebirth that is gaining momentum even in a very hostile environment that is the Francis pontificate. And just to make you, dear reader aware of this situation, I have provided a definition of despondance above. I have also providing two links for your information. One is to a post on the Camden N.J. Catholic Star Herald website which explains quite neatly the association between despondency one of the Seven Deadly Sins, namely Sloth. (see here) The second post and associated link that I am providing is to one that I wrote explaining how this Restoration began, a Restoration that can only be described as the work of the Holy Spirit protecting His “indefectible” Church and allowing the Faithful to rebuild it from the ashes. The associated link is to the largest global mass directory informing the Faithful where they can find an Immemorial Mass of All Ages being offered. (see here and here) Please read through this material, and tuck it away in the back of your mind. And if possible, get involved in this epic endeavor of “restoring all things in Christ”. (see here)

Introduction

Over the course of the last few weeks, this blog has tried to identify the essential elements with respect to the TRUE AGENDA of Francis and his backers. We have also identified the STRATEGY that Francis has put in place for advancing this TRUE AGENDA through the upcoming Synod of Bishop that will begin in 255 days.

Today, we will begin discussing the FORCES that will be taking part in this epic battle at the upcoming Synod. Please keep in mind, that this Synod will be like no other in the history of the Catholic Church. The reason that it will be like no other is the for the first time in Church history, we have a Roman Pontiff that has instructed his bishops to DISREGARD THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, in order to satisfy some undertakings that this pontiff has made to a SPECIAL INTEREST group. The proof of this reality is contained in the Lineamenta, or the guideline document that was sent out to the Bishops’ Conferences on the 9th of December 2014, and reads as follows: (emphasis added)

The proposed questions which follow and the reference numbers to the paragraphs in the Relatio Synodi are intended to assist the bishops’ conferences in their reflection and to avoid, in their responses, a formulation of pastoral care based simply on an application of doctrine, which would not respect the conclusions of the Extraordinary Synodal Assembly and would lead their reflection far from the path already indicated.

It is an issue of DOCTRINE that this war is being fought over!

The Field of Battle

Today we will undertake to identify and review the opposing forces and the individual players. We will break down the sides into two camps:

TEAM CATHOLIC: will designate the organizations and individuals who are resisting the CHANGE OF DOCTRINE BY STEALTH, i.e. the TRUE AGENDA of Francis and the Manipulators.

TEAM FRANCIS: (Not to be confused with “Team Bergoglio” of Ivereigh allegations fame.) will designate the individuals and organizations that ARE ATTEMPTING TO CHANGE THE DOCTRINE BY STEALTH, i.e. the TRUE AGENDA of Francis and his operational elements, i.e. the Manipulators

CATHOLIC Forces

From the evidence assembled to date, the armies of the battle formation TEAM CATHOLIC are comprised of the following:

Roman Curia: We know that over 90% of the Roman Curia is against either FRANCIS or his TRUE AGENDA. We have confirmation of this from sources associated with the Novus Ordo camp that is supporting Francis. (see here)

Bishops’ Conferences: So far, we have observed that the CATHOLIC forces are comprised of the following bishops’ conferences: United States, Spain, Italy, Poland, Eastern Europe and Africa.

Individual Prelates: We know that the high level prelates who are in the CATHOLIC forces are Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Pell, Cardinal Muller, Cardinal Oullet, Cardinal De Paolis, Cardinal Scola (see here), Cardinal Piacenza, Cardinal Brandmuller, Cardinal Meisner, Cardinal Napier, Cardinal Bagnasco, Cardinal Caffarra, Cardinal Robles Ortega, Cardinal Erdo, Cardinal Sarah.

FRANCIS Forces

From the evidence assembled to date, the armies of the battle formation TEAM FRANCIS are comprised of the following:

Bishops’ Conferences: The Bishops’ Conferences supporting the forces of FRANCIS are the Germans. However, there are problems within the German camp. (see here) It would be more appropriate to say that it is the leadership of the German Bishop’s Conference that is the main driver behind the TRUE AGENDA of Francis .The other potential Bishops’ Conferences that could be supporting but have not been identified by this blog are the Austrians, Belgians.

Individual Prelates: We know that the high level prelates who are in the FRANCIS camp are Cardinal Kasper (“Team Bergoglio” – see here), Cardinal Lehmann (“Team Bergoglio”- see here), Cardinal Danneels (“Team Bergoglio”- see here), Cardinal Schonborn (“Team Bergoglio”- see here), Cardinal “Bling” Marx (see here and here and here), Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor (“Team Bergoglio” – see here), Cardinal Tagle (see here), Cardinal Poletto (see here), Cardinals Ravasi (see here), Cardinal Wuerl (see here).

Synod MANIPULATORS : Cardinal Baldisseri (see here), Bishop Forte (see here), Bishop Fernandez (see here) and Reverend Spadaro (see here).

Over the course of the next 255 days, this blog will be reassessing the above battle formations, their supporting forces and their leadership to try and present an accurate picture of the state of the battlefield. When new groupings or individual prelates join the battle lines, we will be updating the above. Consider the above an informal Table of Organization and Equipment (TOE) of both sides. When new information arises, we will provide the links to that information next to the organization or individual to which it pertains.

 Update: 22 January 2015 07:34 a.m.

I have put up a page titled: Synod of Bishops 2015: Table of Organization and Equipment (TO&E) where I will be tracking the movements of formations and personnel.

T -256: The Razor’s Edge

Tags

agneda, Andrea Gagliarducci, Asia trip, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Catholic Church, Cause, Curia, Curia reforms, Deus Ex Machina, Dr. Austen Ivereigh, effect, Evangelii gaudium, Francis church, From Rome blog, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Lineamenta, messeging, Modernists, MondayVatican blog, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, spirit of Vatican II, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops of 2015, Team Bergoglio, The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope, Universi Dominici Gregis, Vatican, Vatican II

Yesterday the Deus Ex Machina went “inside baseball” so to speak. The post titled Numquam Ponenda est Pluralitas Sine Necessitate provided an overview of the framework by which information is selected and processed, the results of which are the posts published on this blog. Today, we will look at one example of the effectiveness of this methodology.

In the post titled the Hermeneutic of the “Paradigm of Discontinuity”, (see here) we observed the phenomenon of three separate occurrences which were independent of each other, yet appeared to be related. This phenomenon was described in the MondayVatican blog titled Pope Francis, beyond the paradigm of discontinuity, which was published on the 8th of December 2014.

The three independent yet related occurrences identified in the above mentioned MondayVatican post were:

A) the stoppage of the Curia reforms,
B) the stoppage was caused by the “agenda of the Manipulators” at the Synod of Bishops,
C) the timing of the stoppage was caused by “vote canvassing” allegations detailed in a book authored by Dr. Austen Ivereigh titled: The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope.

The observation of these three occurrences led to their analysis in the next post titled: Crisis? What Crisis!, (see here) published on the 15th of January 2015. In this post, we laid out the case that issue A) above, i.e. the stoppage of the Curia reforms was not a major concern for Francis per se.

This contrasted with what was written in the MondayVatican blog on the 15th of December 2014, titled Pope Francis beyond the crisis. Waiting to appoint new cardinals. (see here) In this post, the author at the MondayVatican writes as follows:

This crisis lies on two issues: the debate about the Synod of Bishops, and the discussion on Curia reform. In both cases, the discussion has become very lively. In both cases, the Pope is called to take a strong stance.

We labeled the above describe crisis as the “crisis that Francis was beyond” in honor of the MondayVatican post title.

The new piece of information (data point) that caught our eye was that the Stoppage of the Curia reform was elevated into the category of cause of the “crisis that Francis was beyond”. This data point caught our eye since the word “crisis” was not used by the MondayVatican blog anywhere in the preceding posts.

Next, we examined this MondayVatican post further and determined that the assumption that one of the true causes of the “crisis that Francis was beyond”, i.e. B) caused by the “agenda of the Manipulators” at the Synod of Bishops was reinforced through new information which appeared. This new information was the impact that the issuing of the Lineamenta for the Synod of Bishops of 2015 had on the Church hierarchy.

What we concluded was as follows: (emphasis added)

The conclusion that can be inferred from this information thus far is: Francis actions demonstrate that the Synod of Bishops’ agenda of the Manipulators is more important than any Curia reform process that has been undertaken thus far. Furthermore, Francis is willing to create a “crisis” in order to get the Synod of Bishops’ Manipulators agenda passed. This Synod of Bishops’ Manipulators agenda has very strong precedence over the Curia reform process, a process that was the primary reason for his election to the papacy and that he has instituted almost at the beginning of his pontificate.

So the above is the state of play on the 15th of January 2015.

Fast forward to the MondayVatican post on the 19th of January 2015, titled Pope Francis: Five Revealing Details. In this post, we read as follows: (emphasis added)

The contest over reforms is, however, still not over, and it will certainly not be completed before the end of 2015. Pope Francis – this is the fourth revealing detail from the Asian trip – does not seem too interested in the reforming process. He speaks about it, he takes part in meetings, but his priority is that the Church be in a state of permanent mission. “We need a missionary domain that brings salt and light to the world,” he writes in the Evangelii gaudium. And this is what you find in Pope Francis’ preaching, while Curia reform is not a hot topic even in his private discussions.

What we have in the above paragraph is confirmation that Francis doesn’t give a rat’s rear end about reform in general, let alone the Curia reform. Therefore, the Deus Ex Machina blog was correct when it wrote that the Curia reform is in no way a cause of the “crisis that Francis was beyond” identified in the MondayVatican blog post of the 15th of December 2014. On the 19 of January 2015, the MondayVatican blog confirmed that that which the Deus Ex Machina blog observed and wrote about on the 15th of January is in fact correct.

Concluding, the main take away from that which is written above is that we can take out our Ockham’s razor and unmercifully wield it. We have confirmation that the assumption that Curia reform is a cause of the “crisis that Francis is beyond” is false. Therefore, we have one less assumption.

Our assumptions to the hypothesis about the causes of the ongoing “crisis that Francis is beyond” can be restated as follows:

a) The Synod of Bishops’ agenda of the Manipulators is the TRUE AGENDA of Francis. For Francis, this TRUE AGENDA is more important than any reform process that has been undertaken thus far. Furthermore, Francis is willing to go to extreme lengths to force through this TRUE AGENDA, even willing to create a “crisis” in order to get the TRUE AGENDA passed.

1. Confirmation that the TRUE AGENDA of Francis is a cause of the “crisis that Francis is beyond” was provided by the additional information obtained after the release of the Lineamenta. The release of the Lineamenta reinforced this assumption since the text instructed the Synod Bishops to disregard the Catholic doctrine in the upcoming Synod. This instruction in turn created a revolt in the Church hierarchy which includes the cardinals and bishops that took part in the Secret Synod of 2015 and includes members of the Roman Curia.

b) According to the MondayVatican blog, the most important “instance” i.e. cause of the “crisis that Francis is beyond” is the allegations in the Dr. Austen Ivereigh book titled: The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope that a group of cardinals “secured Bergoglio’s assent”, which “raised of the validity of Bergoglio’s election, since ‘Universi Dominici Gregis’, the Constitution that regulates papal elections, forbids any ‘political’ agreement before a conclave.” In the opinion of the Deus Ex Machina blog, this assumption derived from the MondayVatican blog is true.

I will leave off here.

Still crazy?

Hope you are still holding that thought…

T -259: The Disposable Bishop of Rome W/ Editor’s Note

Tags

Abril y Castelló, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, Bishop Fellay, Card. Lehmann, card. Marx, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Catholic Church, Conclave, Danneel, doctrine, Dr. Austen Ivereigh, Eponymous Flower blog, Francis church, From Rome blog, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, messeging, Modernists, MSM, Murphy-O'Connor, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, O’Malley., optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, Schonborn, Special Interest, spirit of Vatican II, Synod 2014, Team Begoglio, US Bishops' Conference, Vatican, Vatican II, Vingt-Trois

Editor’s Note: After publishing the below post, along with the above photo, this blog has received comments with respect to the prudence of using this posted image.

For the record: the optical and emotional response to this image was intended, however the “target of this optical and emotional response” is not the Holy Father per se, but rather the cabal of corrupt prelates who collectively comprise “Team Bergoglio”, as defined and alleged by Dr. Austen Ivereigh in his book The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope. A careful reading of this post will bear this out.

Furthermore, it was decided to use this image to emphasis the situation inside the Vatican and in the leftist Vatican circles, details of which have reached my attention, and which have been confirmed by another well informed blog, the MondayVatican. In the post dated 12 January 2015, the following passage appears:

It was to this passage that the image was “matched”. I intended and still intend to do a follow up post, whose subject will be exactly this material. However for the sake of clarity, I am providing this explanatory Editor’s Note at this time.

Introduction

Yesterday, we identified the STRATEGY that Francis will use to force through the TRUE AGENDA at the upcoming Synod of Bishops of 2015 which will commence in 259 days this Sunday. We defined the STRATEGY to be that as written in the MondayVatican blog and is as follows: (emphasis added)

Anyone who thinks that the only cardinals of import are those who ultimately will be voting in a Conclave is wrong. Pope Francis’ vision seems to be short-term. The need to make reforms, both in pastoral and, eventually, in doctrinal matters, requires that he form a hard core of individuals who will support those reforms in the meetings that he often convenes, as if he wishes to keep the Church in a state of permanent synod. Given that the Pope even convokes consistories to discuss hot issues in the life of the Church, every red hat carries its own weight, no matter the age of the Cardinal who wears it.

Today we pick with the second part of our two part analysis, namely:

Identify the most likely SPECIAL INTEREST group who stands behind Francis, and is responsible for his actions of trying to  force through this agenda of the Manipulators (TRUE AGENDA) at the upcoming Synod of Bishops of 2015.

We pick up our narrative on the 8th of January 2015.

The Disposable Pope Bishop of Rome

Over the course of the last few months, actually since the Secret Synod of 2014 ended, this writer has observed what could only be described as a series of rather strange incidents. From observing these incidents, one could easily infer that Francis is not fully in charge. The reason why such observations are strange is that Francis, by definition is an absolute sovereign, a monarch who was installed for life. No one can force him to abdicate, in theory at least. Yet we see that at times, Francis appears to be acting as if there is another power, a power behind the throne and he was only a puppet monarch. (see here)

One of these observations that Francis is not fully in charge, can be read in the Modernist Magic Words post (see here) from the 11th of December 2014. During the analysis of the interview that Francis gave to the Argentine newspaper La Nacion, this blog made the following observation:

The second important piece of information is that he appears to be justifying his actions and himself as well. The question is, who is he justifying himself to? He is after all the pope, so he can do whatever he pleases. So the question is why?

Another more recent observation of this phenomenon was highlighted in the “Winning” In a Charlie Sheen Sort of Way! post. (see here) Here is that observation:

Furthermore, “in persona” Francis, we observe the actions of a man who appears to have made “undertakings” to some unknown, undisclosed, obscure but at the same time “powerful interests”. He acts as if he is not only beholden to them, but that his very survival depends on his “performance”. So Francis is willing to “create a crisis”, insult, berate, lie, manipulate, in short to do “whatever it takes”, in order to “perform”. The rest be damned. And what it is that he has to “perform”, is that he has to get an agenda passed, this same agenda that is being promoted by the Synod Manipulators and the same one alluded to by Dr. Vallet in the Le Journal du Dimanche.

These two above described observations bring to mind the famous exchange between Benedict XVI and Bishop Fellay, as related in the Remnant article titled The Legislating Church posted on the 11 of June 2012. (see here) In this article, the above exchange is related by Bishop Fellay as follows:

Indeed, why does the Pope not simply govern the Church directly, restoring good order in keeping with the Power of the Keys that is his, and his alone?

[…] During an audience with the Pope, Bishop Fellay found himself alone with the Pope for a moment. His Excellency seized the opportunity to remind the Pope that he is the Vicar of Christ, possessed of the authority to take immediate measures to end the crisis in the Church on all fronts. The Pope replied thus: “My authority ends at that door.” (Castel Gondolfo August, 2005)

From the above observations, it would appear that since 2005, the “realpolitik” inside the Sacred Walls of the Vatican has not changed.

Returning to the present, in the MondayVatican post of the 5 January 2015, the following sentence appears:

Pope Francis’ vision seems to be short-term.

This blog does not necessarily agree with the above statement, however for the sake to this analysis, let us assume that this is a correct statement. In the post on the 12 of January, the MondayVatican blog continues with this theme, implying that Francis does not have a long term strategy, and here is the relevant passage: (emphasis added)

But if the Pope does not have a long term plan in mind, is there anyone out there who does? According the Austen Ivereigh’s book “The Great Reformer,” the team of Cardinals who backed Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s election convinced skeptical Cardinals to support him by arguing that Benedict XVI’s resignation established the principle that from now on a pope could leave office at the right time. These Cardinals certainly had in mind a plan for the Church.

Just in case we have forgotten who “These Cardinals” refers to, we please see the post Westminster, We Have a Problem (see here).

Further down in the MondayVatican 5 January post, we are provided with this interesting passage about some peripheries i.e Asia being more equal than others i.e. Africa:

None of these peripheries has been rewarded with a new Cardinal. Instead during the Synod of Bishops Cardinal Walter Kasper, in an interview he reportedly thought was off-the-record, said that the problems of the Africans should not concern us.

Thus arises the notion that there are peripheries worthy of concern and others that are not. Notice that an initial clue to this mindset comes from Cardinal Kasper, i.e., from a German, coming from a Church with a long tradition, but one that is strongly anti-Roman and sometimes influenced by Protestantism. It is noteworthy that Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Munich-Freising, a prime engineer of Vatican reforms and one of the main players in this season of the Church, has recently insisted that the Church should learn from Luther.

This above implies, correctly in this bloggers humble opinion, that it is the Germans who are the power “behind the throne chair” of Francis. This is confirmed by another independent source, Roberto de Mattei in his article pertaining to the case of the card. Burke’s demotion. Roberto de Mattei writes: (see here)

The only plausible reason is that the Pope has offered the head of Cardinal Burke on a plate to Cardinal Kasper and, through him, to Cardinal Karl Lehmann, the ex-President of the German Episcopal Conference. Everyone knows, actually, at least in Germany, that the one who is still pulling the strings of dissent against Rome is precisely Lehmann, an old disciple of Karl Rahner. Father Ralph Wiltgen, in his book The Rhine Flows Into The Tiber, highlighted Rahner’s role in the Second Vatican Council from the moment the Episcopal Conferences carried out a determining role.

So the question now becomes, just how powerful are the Germans?

Returning back to the MondayVatican blog, we read the following:

All of the Cardinals in the alleged ‘team Bergoglio’ are promoters of a progressivist agenda, one that favors a less doctrinal and more pastoral Church, an agenda of mercy that could not care less about justice. All of these Cardinals knew that Bergoglio, filled with the Latin American periphery’s anti-Roman sentiment, would back the reforms they hoped to see enacted. Nevertheless, they probably already have someone in mind for the next conclave.

What this last paragraph is saying is that Bergoglio is a stand in. A pawn if you will. What is implied here, and in the Ivereigh passage is that the Germans are so powerful, that they can bring down a pope. And I don’t think they are exaggerating.

Returning back to the MondayVatican post, here is how this post ends:

It is indelicate to speak about the next Conclave while any pope is reigning. However, the current circulation of rumors signals that maneuvers over the next papacy have already begun. If the secret war over the synod and curial reforms can be said to be the most immediate issue on people’s minds, there is nevertheless a longer-term war they are also thinking about.

For his part, Pope Francis does not seem to be a part of this war; he is mostly a pawn in it. But his unpredictability together with his impulsivity and improvisation constitute real contributions to the war effort. In the end, everybody knew which were the peripheries the Pope loved the most. And everybody knew about his resentment toward Rome and central church structures. Many of his latest choices prove it.

OK

Let this sink in for a while.

From the above, we can infer the following. Francis is a puppet monarch, picked by a cabal of corrupt cardinals to advance their own agenda.  Reading between the lines, it becomes apparent that this cabal has a problem due to Francis’ unpredictability. For the time being, it is working to their advantage, but they are not taking any chances. They are already working on promoting the next puppet monarch. Which would explain why Bergoglio is going that extra mile lio to be in their good graces.

Summa Summarium

Concluding, it is evident from the above that the Catholic Church finds itself in a very precarious position. On the one hand, the head of the Church is a “pawn” according to sources that are supportive of his pontificate, such as the MondayVatican blog. The real power behind the pope is a couple of Germans, Lehman and his heir apparent Reinhard “Bling” Marx. The wider entourage who got Begoglio elected, and who promotes this SPECIAL INTEREST at the conclaves and consistories consists of  cards. Kasper, Murphy-O’Connor, Danneel, Vingt-Trois, Abril y Castelló, Schönborn and O’Malley. This cabal, along with some African cardinals and most South American cardinals collectively comprise what is known as “Team Bergoglio”. “Team Bergoglio” in turn picked Bergoglio to be their candidate at the 2013 Conclave. This cabal initially secured Bergoglio’s acceptance and then solicited votes for Bergoglio, as per the allegations made by Austen Ivereigh in his book. The reason that they picked Bergoglio was that they were certain that he would make a mess lio. However, after 22 months of Francis’ lio, they are becoming worried, since Francis has issues with “unpredictability together with his impulsivity and improvisation, which made the lio he created a bit large.

Therefore, as rumors have it “Team Bergoglio” is looking for the next “pawn pope” that they can install on the Throne of St. Peter, just in case Francis goes off the reservation, so to speak.

In other words, Francis is nothing more than a Disposable Pope Bishop of Rome.

Let us all reflect on the above.

We will leave the narrative off here, and this blog wishes everyone a nice Sunday.

With respect to the craziness of it all, I hope it is beginning to dawn on you, dear reader that this is less crazy than you first suspected.

However, if you still aren’t convinced, hold that thought…

T -263: The Hermeneutic of the “Paradigm of Discontinuity”

Tags

1968, Austen Ivereigh, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, blackmail, Bruno Forte, Burno Forte, card. Baldisarri, card. Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Catholic Church, Curia, Curia reforms, Eponymous Flower blog, Francis church, Francis Interview, From Rome blog, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Italian Bishops' Conference, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, La Nacion, Manipulators, messeging, Modernists, MondayVatican blog, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, Secret Synod, spirit of Vatican II, Synod 2014, The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope, US Bishops' Conference, Vatican, Vatican II

We left our last post off on the 7th of December. For your information, that was the day on which the Francis interview appeared in the Argentine newspaper La Nacion (see here).

On the 11th of December 2014, this blog published the post titled The Modernist’s Magic Words (see here). In the Introduction section to the post, and referring to the La Nacion article, the following is written:

The reason for the above mentioned time of reflection (ed. note: between date of publication and publication of commentary in The Modernist’s Magic Words post) was that this article was a watershed article in my humble opinion. The words of Francis in this interview provide the observer with two important pieces of information. The first piece of information is that we see a Francis on the defensive. He admits that mistakes were made, but they are really not his fault. And even if they are, it’s just the way he is. The second important piece of information is that he appears to be justifying his actions and himself as well. The question is, who is he justifying himself to? He is after all the pope, so he can do whatever he pleases. So the question is why?

It is a very important question. Please keep this question in the back of your mind for future reference. Over the course of the next few posts, more of these types of questions will appear. Let’s call these “the stragglers”. We will be “picking up these stragglers” in the subsequent posts.

But for now, let’s return back to the 8th of December, 2014, where we read this headline at the MondayVatican blog: (see here)

Pope Francis, beyond the paradigm of discontinuity.

Reading the title, one would not expect the opening paragraph to read as follows:

At the eve of the sixth meeting of the Council of Cardinals, it seems that the path of the reform of the Roman Curia has come to a halt – Pope Francis himself said that reforms will not carried out within the next year. As there was a de facto halt for what regards the most far-reaching positions during the last Synod of bishops, carried forward by those who were considered the closest to the Pope. As, in the end, there was a halt on many of the initial decisions of Pope Francis. These events suggest there are groups who want to prevent Pope Francis from carrying forward the reforms.

From the paragraph, it would appear that the “paradigm of discontinuity” is alive and doing quite well. We are obviously referring here to a “paradigm of discontinuity” between Francis and the Roman Curia.

Right?

Wrong!

Upon a closer reading of the above text, two VERY important points need to be stressed here, i.e.:

1) That the Curia reforms were “de facto halted” and
2) The Curia reforms were “de facto halted” due to “the most far-reaching positions during the last Synod of bishops, carried forward by those who were considered the closest to the Pope.”

From the above, it would appear that the “paradigm of discontinuity” is between Francis and the Bishops of the Bishops’ Synod”.

Which leaves one wondering, what does the Curia reforms have to do with the “far reaching positions…carried forward by those who were considered the closest to the Pope” at the Synod of Bishops in 2014.

And just to remind you dear reader, when referring to “those who were considered the closest to the Pope” we are referring to  Baldisseri, Forte & Co., collectively know on this humble blog as the Manipulators. (see here)

One possible explanation of what ties these two independent events would be that the members of the Curia attended the Secret Synod of Bishops of 2014, or followed its proceedings, were so upset by what transpired that they “revolted” and stopped Francis’ Curia reform dead in its tracks, a reform that “apparently” should in no way be related to what transpired at the Bishops’ Synod.

The above is probably the most likely explanation of the general situation on the ground inside the Vatican walls during the week preceding 8 December 2014.

Just to reemphasize this quite important point, let’s look at it in another way; due to Curial opposition to the “far reaching positions…carried forward by those who were considered the closest to the Pope”, the Curia members, and let us be specific, the Council of Cardinals, stopped the independent and unrelated Curia reforms.

Which lead one to ask the following question: why now?

As we know, the Synod had ended almost 2 months earlier, while the Curia reforms were progressing without any hint as to there being a stoppage up to this time. So why all of a sudden, did the Curia reforms ground to a halt?

The answer is provided in the next paragraph, which reads as follows: (emphasis added)

Perhaps, the most important instance is the account of the book “The Great Reformer,” written by the London-based journalist Austen Ivereigh.

Oh my!

Looks like we have tied together three seemingly independent events.

Let’s think about what this means.

The Curia reform was halted due to a revolt by the Curia members due to “far reaching positions…carried forward by those who were considered the closest to the Pope” at the Synod of Bishops which ended in October 2014. The reason that the Curial reform was halted now was because of the Ivereigh allegations contained in the book written by Austen Ivereigh. For the background on these Ivereigh allegations, please refer to the previous post titled Westminster, We Have a Problem (see here).

But back to the MondayVatican post, the following passage puts into context the events which were the direct cause of the stoppage of the Curia reform, according to the blog MondayVatican. Here is the relevant passage regarding the Ivereigh issue:

According to Ivereigh, the ‘team’ was composed by cardinals Murphy, Walter Kasper, Carl Lehman and Godfried Daneels. Ivereigh wrote, generating controversy, that the four cardinals “secured Bergoglio’s assent” (although this claim will be modified in the reprints of the book). The issue was raised of the validity of Bergoglio’s election, since ‘Universi Dominici Gregis’, the Constitution that regulates papal elections, forbids any ‘political’ agreement before a conclave.

The significance of this above passage cannot be underestimated, regardless of whether “this claim will be modified in the reprints of the book “. It is an issue of forensics now. Furthermore, this information provides us with the “smoking gun” that the Synod agenda and Curia reforms either are or have become intertwined, and the cause of the stoppage of the Curia reforms was due to the revelations contained in the Ivereigh book, The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope.

So what conclusions can be drawn from the above?

Needless to say, and it is important to stress here, that whatever “claim will be modified in the reprints of the books” isn’t really relevant to the situation on the ground on 8 December 2014. The reason is that the Curia had the evidence (one can easily venture to use the word “proof”) that Francis’ election had/has a high probability of being invalid. At this point, I also need to mention this: having evidence that a papal election has a high probability of being invalid and acting on this evidence are two entirely different things. A good case in point to keep in mind is the situation when the US House of Representative impeached William Jefferson Clinton, but the Senate did not remove him from office. I hope, dear reader that we are clear on this. Excuse the digression…

Please keep in mind also that ALL the Curia cardinals were in the conclave so they know exactly what transpired. Furthermore, the Curia cardinals know Canon Law, and are very familiar by this time with UDG 81, or at least they should be. Therefore, not only did the Curia have proof that Francis’ election had a high probability of being invalid; Francis must have known that that those cardinals knew that Francis’ election had a high probability of being invalid.

And finally, please keep in mind that it is not important whether you or I think something is probable or not, what is important is that the players think that something is probable or not.

This is where I will leave off today.

In closing, what needs to be noted is that however one wants to describe the situation inside the Vatican walls on this day, the expression “beyond the paradigm of discontinuity” is not it! The above explanation, technically speaking: a hypothesis, goes a long way to explain the “work stoppage” on the Curia Reforms, and provides a valuable insight into the relationship between the bishop of Rome, the Roman Curia, the Catholic bishops as represented by the Synod of Bishops’ of 2014 and the allegations leveled by Dr. Austen Ivereigh, the former spokesman for Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor in his book The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope.

Still think the above is crazy?

Once again, hold that thought…