Latest Heresy From Vatican Communications Office

Recall that last month dissident Father James Martin SJ was appointed as a Consultor to the Vatican Communication Office.  I opined that he would continue to shill for mortal sin, particularly that of sodomy.  Indeed he has.  LifeSiteNews reports his assertion that some of the saints are gay; in other words, they were actively committing mortal sin and died in their sinful states, yet they are in heaven.  Boys and girls, can we all say "heresy"?

LifeSiteNews quotes from St. Peter Damian, a Doctor of the Church who combated sodomy especially as it reared its ugly head in religious life.  We can also look to Sacred Scripture:

• 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 
• Romans 1:24-27 

To engage in homosexual relationships is to commit mortal sin.  Unless one who has committed such acts repents and makes a good confession, he/she will not enter heaven.  Does Father Martin think he'll be greeted by practicing gays when he dies?  That might well be the case if he doesn't repent and stop leading souls astray to perdition.

Those who knowingly appointed this dissident to his current prominent position in the Vatican could very well share the same fate.

Fr. Martin Handling Vatican Tweets - What Could Possibly Go Right?

On Wednesday I posted the sad news that Father James Martin, Jesuit heretic (was that redundant?), was appointed as Consultor to the Vatican Communications Office.  Cal-Catholic informs us that Martin will be handling the Pope's twitter account.  Well, Martin certainly is prolific with his tweets, so no one, not even the pope, can claim ignorance of his heresies.  To wit:

Irish archbishop: St. Patrick was an 'undocumented migrant' https://t.co/sbGjhvZgam

— America Magazine (@americamag) March 16, 2017

Martin retweeted a complete botch-job of the story of St. Patrick.  He is not to be likened to an illegal immigrant sneaking across our borders.  He was captured as a slave and brought to Ireland against his will.  As for being "undocumented", his capture and enslavement was probably quite legal, relative to the laws of the Irish chieftans of the time.  This lame attempt to justify amnesty for illegal immigrants would be quite humorous if people were more educated regarding Church history and less inclined to swallow that tripe "hook, line and sinker".

Here is a tweet of Martin's, that someone saved.  It no longer appears in his twitter feed.  One can see why he did so, as this would not be the sort of thing that would be an asset on the resume of a Vatican official.

No wonder New Ways honored him.  He is the poster boy for perversion-enabling clergy.  This particular tweet was pulled, but anyone can go to his feed and see all sorts of nonsense.  In fact, while looking for this "trans" tweet, I stumbled on his St. Patrick gaffe.  Anyway, you'll see all kinds of tweets blathering on about "immigrants"(never differentiating between law-abiding and law-breaking), "climate change", even one claiming that Hillary really won the election.  Not once did I see anything dealing with baby-murder or contraception.

Now that Martin will have his hand in papal twitter feeds, they'll probably become even more heretical.  The Vatican knew about this when they brought him on staff.  Now no one can claim that the pope is "at the mercy of poor translators".  He owns this mess.  Instead of cleaning it up, he's dirtying it even further.

This Easter season, pray for wide-spread conversion to the One True Faith within the Vatican walls.

Dissident Father James Martin Appointed By Pope Francis To Foul Up The Vatican Communications Office

Father Arturo Sosa Abascal, recently elected Superior General of the Jesuits, has proven himself to be quite the water-carrier for Pope Francis.  He voiced approval of the Pope's treatment of the dubia and of the Cardinals who published them.  He has recently caught some flak for his attempt to cast doubt on Jesus' words concerning marriage (in what probably is an attempt to boost the credibility of Amoralis Lamentia).  In a saner time, any priest who cast doubt upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition would have been defrocked.  Instead though, because he is obviously of the same mind as the pope, he remains head of a major religious order.

Today we learned of another Jesuit dissident being rewarded for his heresy.  Father James Martin, another Jesuit (yes, this one), has been named a consultor to the Vatican communication office.  To my friends who insist on blaming the pope's statements on "bad translations", you can no longer invoke the "mistranslation" canard and maintain integrity.  Bear in mind that Martin has shown himself, over and over again, to be a shill for the gay agenda.  He is just another voice, like Abascal, to aid in the deconstruction of Christ's teachings on marriage, sexuality and family life.  Personnel is policy, as they say.  With personnel such as these two Jesuits, we know what the Vatican policies now are.

Here's another consideration regarding Martin's appointment.  Recall that he is editor of the Jesuit dissident rag called America.  One of Martin's predecessors in that role was Father Thomas Reese.  Reese was editor when Pope Benedict XVI assumed the papacy.  One of Benedict's first acts was to eject Reese from his editor position because of his dissidence.  Now we see another dissident editor of America exalted because of his dissidence.  Might this appointment by Pope Francis be a disguised insult to the Pope Emeritus?

Those Danged Dastardly Translators!

Bad little Italian-to-English translators in the Vatican offices!  Naughty!   It's all their fault, those meanines!  We can blame everything on them - and no one else!  Oh, by the way - who'd like to buy some Florida swamp lands?

That seems to be the gist of today's Vortex, which is really a snippet of the Mic'd Up program from a few days ago.  It probably is the case that there are some underhanded operatives within the Vatican communications apparatus who would like to spread confusion and will do so by sabotaging the English translations of the Holy Father's utterances.  Be that as it may, two questions immediately pop into mind:

1. How is it that the two previous pontiffs (Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II) didn't have nearly as much trouble getting their messages accurately translated into English?  Oh, there was that condom fluff-up a few years ago, but that was such an obvious failed-hit-job that we never heard of such issues again.
2. It's been a year now, and if the Holy Father isn't aware of the difficulty in getting his message translated into English, he's deliberately naive OR he welcomes the confusion.  What other explanation is there for not taking immediate measures to correct the English-translation difficulties? 

Some things the folks are saying in this video are so obvious that I'm surprised they are oblivious to their meaning.  For instance, at 4:00, they remark how the term "civil union" has a different meaning in Europe than in the English-speaking world.  Be that as it may - why, oh why, did the English translators choose that phrase?  They must have known how it would be interpreted, right? 

Then, right after that at 4:22, John Thavis remarks that no prior pope ever gave an interview to a journalist.  Well, gee-willikers!  Is it possible that the previous popes were onto something or perhaps just a tad more careful in making their messages plainly understood by all?  That's why there was "careful vetting": to ensure that the teaching of the Church was accurately presented and not reduced to a bunch of mishmash.

I am embedding only the summary of the Mic'd Up.  Here is a link to the entire thing; the "Francis Effect" is only one of several topics discussed.  In this longer version, Voris makes a good suggestion, if only in a "tongue in cheek" manner.  He suggests that some individual(s) in the English-translating office be fired.  Good idea!  Again, I look askance on the delay in remedying that sorry state of affairs in the Vatican.

More On Unhelpful PollyAnnas Among Faithful Catholics

As I suggested in my previous "pollyanna" post a few days ago, there are some Catholics who cannot accept that sometimes the Pope's words and/or deeds can and indeed should be criticized.  Let me clarify something.  He is the Vicar of Christ and must always receive all due respect.  We never criticize him as a person - never!  When he teaches in the name of the Church, those teachings are due all respect and yes, obedience.  There are those times when he will pronounce dogma in a solemn fashion, that is, ex cathedra.  On those occasions he does indeed speak infallibly.  We also have the Magisterium's promise that he will never teach error.

That said, the "off-the-cuff" interviews he has been giving lately cannot by any stretch of the imagination be called "teaching moments", let alone solemn declarations in which he speaks infallibly.  It is quite legitimate for faithful Catholics to question spontaneous remarks and certainly acceptable to discuss the means of delivery of said messages.

Many of us have been questioning the wisdom of the pope's conduct of these interviews for they have often led individuals to believe that he is altering the Church's age-old teachings on faith and morals - particularly the latter in regards to the life issues.  In the latest interview with La Repubblica there was even talk of the necessity of each individual to follow their concept of right and wrong - minimizing the need for a properly formed conscience.  I needn't rehash that here; see my previous post.

I've been involved in some on-line discussions regarding these interviews.  One of the more recent ones was with some good-hearted Catholics who enthuse over these debatable remarks by the Holy Father - and who in fact go so far as to insinuate that those of us who are wary are somehow "pharisees" or "holier than the pope" or other such pejorative sentiments.  They admit that what he's saying is different, but "God must be showing us a new way".  Apparently I'm not the only one who is baffled by this mindset; see this from American Catholic.  To quote him, I have indeed seen this: "Frankly, the most evident fruit of the papacy thus far seems to be the willingness of orthodox Catholics to break out the cutlery and start stabbing whenever someone expresses unease over the Pope’s actions and words."  I was actually threatened with expulsion from a facebook group when I didn't "get with their program" and join in their giggle-fest when the Pope posed for a "selfie" (that's a group cell-phone photo) with some teenagers.

My previous post also showed a video of a rather pathetic attempt by Father Fessio to put a "positive spin" on the pope's remarks.  Such attempts, unfortunately, abound.   See what the Creative Minority Report reveals.  So we "shouldn't attach value to individual words, but an overall sense"?  Really?  Father Lombardi, how, oh how, is this "overall sense" defined and communicated, if not by judiciously chosen words?  This is a philosophical - and theological - disaster in the making.  One would hope that a Vatican spokeman would know better, but Father's gaffe seems symptomatic of another problem.

This problem is broached by Hilary White of LifeSiteNews.  She senses a breakdown of coordination and communication in the Vatican itself - one starting from the onset of this papacy.  I urge you all to read it, and the comments besides.  Now we are hearing that there were inaccuracies in the La Repubblica interview; witness this from the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter.  However, one must ask why they waited so long to issue some disclaimer.  Are they only doing so pursuant to a lame attempt at "damage control"?   There is also the revelation that the Vatican was offered the opportunity to vet the La Repubblica article prior to its release.  It seems that a proper review might have apprehended some of the errors arising from Scalfari's poor memory.  Not only was there no review, but the Vatican even posted the article on their own site and here it is, straight from the Vatican.

Some might say that the Pope didn't speak infallibly so "what's the big deal"?  The "big deal" is two-fold in my opinion:

1. Many people who dissent from the Church's moral teaching and who are in fact living in mortal sin are taking false comfort from imprecisely-stated ideas
2. The Pope is undermining his own credibility so that if an occasion does arise when he must, some might conclude that the occasion is just another "off-the-cuff" affair.

To be clear, I am grateful that the Holy Father has spoken clearly on matters of faith and morals when he has.  I pray for him that his interviews (and/or the Vatican communications staff) don't trip up the essential message of the Church.