On The Amazon Synod Horizon: Fake Women Priests, Paganism And Infanticide

Below I post a talk given by Michael Hichborn about an hour ago in which he comments about the damage to the Church being wreaked by the pope and his cronies via the Amazon Synod.  I'll have more information and another video below that.



Hichborn made mention of an interview that Edward Pentin conducted with Bishop Erwin Krautler.  The latter is a key synod figure and is unabashedly in favor of women priests.  He states that one reason is to bring the Sacraments to indigenous peoples.  Of course that is pure fantasy.  The Church simply hasn't the authority to ordain women as the Lord Himself ordained only men.  If there was any such attempt to ordain women, both the women and miscreant "ordaining" bishop would incur immediate excommunication.  Moreover, any "sacraments" attempted by these women would be completely invalid.  Any "mass" would simply be a sham and not valid at all.  No remission of sins would occur in any fake "confession" in which they might engage.  Rather than serve the people, these false "priests" would be engaging in a cruel joke on those poor people, assuming they were so poorly catechized that they didn't know the idea of "women priests" is completely bogus.

Now below I'll post a Vortex showing the ties of some South American synod "fathers" with tribal infanticide.  Apparently in the Brazilian Parliament, a law is being debated that will ban infanticide among indigenous tribes.  The liberals among them are claiming that the indigenous peoples cannot be told to abandon "cultural practices".  That such a matter has to be debated only shows the depths of depravity to which western society has sunk.  The Brazilian Catholic Conference has ties to a leading proponent of infanticide.  These national "catholic conferences" really need to be trashed, but I digress.

Now remember - this is a synod about "listening" and "dialoging" and "learning from their wisdom".  So they are going to teach us imperialistic first-world westerners that burying children alive is okie-dokie with "mother earth"?  Of course I can see how Planned Parenthood, NARAL and other outfits might be down with that - but Catholic clergy?

A word of warning - the Vortex does show snippets of the child murders being committed, so be prepared.

Usual Gang Of Suspects To Attend Amazon Sin-Nod

Do any of these names sound familiar?

• Ki-Moon Ban
• Jeffrey Sachs
• Hans Schellnhuber

They should.  Over the past few years, I and others have written about these progressive, pro-population-control individuals who have all been invited to various Vatican-sponsored conferences.  They gave presentations and lent their pernicious influence to the various synodal documents, including Laudato Si and Amoris Laetitia.  Put any one of their names in this blog's search box (top left with the magnifying glass) to get more background information.  They will be attending next month's Amazon Sin-nod, per the Vatican list of attendees.

Edward Pentin has also pointed out the high German representation at this gabfest.  Cardinal Reinhard Marx was personally appointed by the pope to attend.  Other dissident prelates include Cardinal Maradiaga, Cardinal Schonborn and Archbishop Paglia.  Put those names in the search box for some eye-fulls; space and time do not permit me to elaborate on the unfitness of each and every one of them to guide the Church on anything.

The hoax known as "climate change" will be bandied about ad nauseum as though it were settled science.  Even if it were, that subject matter falls outside the competence of clergy for solemn pronouncements. 

HOWEVER, if they insist, here's some thoughtful input for them to consider.

Raymond Arroyo On The Amazon Sin-nod And Other Matters

Here is Thursday's episode of The World Over.  Arroyo discusses the upcoming sin-nod with Edward Pentin and Damian Thompson.  Other topics are discussed, such as the UK bishops' silence in the wake of that attempted forced abortion in England.  Mention is made of a website created by the Society for Tradition, Family And Property.  It is called panamazonsynodwatch.com.  It may well be worth a visit from time to time.

A Sin-Nod Circus Starts This Week

What might that be?  Why, it's the so-called summit entitled "Protection of Minors in the Church".  In light of McCarrick's dismissal from the clerical state - and the reasons for it - you can see the problem right away in the title of gab-fest.  Approximately 80% of the victims are young men over the age of 14.  They are not little children.

Hilary White, on her blog, posted a video in which Edward Pentin and another ask a panel of clerics, including Cardinal Cupich, about the focus of this summit.  They make the point that most of the victims are past puberty and that many of the victims are seminarians.  They, in a word, challenge the focus, opining that there should be at least some time devoted to their predation.  Cupich et al do quite a job tap-dancing around the question.  Basically, they tell Pentin that the focus is on the protection of children and that is that.  At the very least, I'd hope that Cupich et al understand that the Catholics in the pews are not going to be fooled by this upcoming dog-and-pony show.

The pope has designated Cupich to be the head honcho of this thing.  As this LifeSiteNews piece reminds us, Cupich is the one who dismissed Archbishop Vigano's testimony about then-Cardinal McCarrick's predation on young men, stating that the church wasn't going to "go down that rabbit hole".  Cupich now has many eggs on his face as the events of last week have vindicated Vigano.  Cardinal Muller, in commenting on the sin-nod, quoted the statistics cited in my first paragraph, stating that "anyone who ignores the facts does not want to solve the problem".   Indeed they don't for they are trying to put on an concerned facade while not acknowledging that the victims of the perversions of their buddies, or even themselves, are young men.

That last sentence is the key reason why I refer to this upcoming debacle as a sin-nod.  They seek to keep the chickens available as prey for the chicken hawks.  Recall that at the most recent USCCB meeting, a vote on action against these sex predators was taken off the table by Cupich, ostensibly to wait for the outcome of this staged cover-up of the real problem.  Now we see why, from their warped perspectives, they wanted that vote put off; they want to make certain that young men, including seminarians, are still fair game for perverted clerical lusts.

How long, oh Lord, how long?

Papal Posse And Edward Pentin Discuss The Vigano Testimony And Related Matter

More Of Pope Benedict's Real Letter Is Revealed

Two days ago, I posted the news that the Vatican had owned up to its dishonest alterations of a letter written by Pope Benedict XVI.  It turns out that even their "owning up" wasn't completely honest.  Edward Pentin and Sandro Magister reveal what we think and hope is the real complete letter penned by the pope emeritus.  It turns out that Benedict refused to write the review because those works contained contributions by Peter Huenermann, a dissident theologian who took potshots at Benedict during his pontificate.  Eponymous Flower has more on his screeds.

While I'm sure that there has been corruption in the Vatican for some time, I now believe that under this pontificate, the corruption is not so much endured as applauded and even mandated.  If there isn't a major personnel shake-up in the Vatican communication operations over this latest debacle, then there is no denying where the current pontiff stands on these matters.

Evil Hates To Be Exposed - Especially When It Controls The Church Hierarchy

Please read the title closely.  I believe that evil now controls the hierarchy of the Church, not the Church herself.  There is a difference.  However, that evil can and is causing much scandal and confusion that is literally causing damnation of souls.  Therefore, we must continue to shine the light on it, no matter where it resides.  Of course evil will hate to be exposed; it always has.  We must not shirk from that task now, out of misguided deference to the Church structures behind which the evil conceals itself.

Remnant TV hosted the Catholic Identity Conference this week.  Below I'm posting a talk from it by Edward Pentin.  He talks of the climate of fear that now exists in the Vatican - one that is very reminiscent of the climate that existed in the Soviet Union and that still exists in other repressive regimes.  Below that I'll have more commentary and an important action to take.



As I mentioned in the earlier post, the USCCB is obviously taking instructions from the Vatican (a novelty for them, for they certainly didn't do so during the previous two pontificates) as evidenced by their dismissal of Father Weinandy.  The faithful laity, by the grace of God, are calling them on the carpet.  See here and here.  LifeSiteNews started a petition drive, not so much as to persuade the USCCB to change their ways but to show public support for Father Weinandy.  Please sign it.  Besides prayer, we can influence the USCCB by withholding donations from any second-collection effort for them or their subsidiaries: most notably the Catholic Campaign for Human Development and Catholic Relief Services.

Is Cardinal Muller Cowering Before Vatican Progressives?

It certainly appears that way, given the statement that he released on Sunday.  He is Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  He said that a "fraternal correction" regarding Amoris Laetitia is "not possible" because AL poses "no danger to the faith".   Edward Pentin, in the National Catholic Register, points out that the CDF lodged a large number of corrections for AL; not one of them was accepted.

Now what else happened at the CDW just a few days prior to that?  Recall that on December 26, the pope ordered Cardinal Muller to dismiss three of the priests who were working with the CDW.  When the Cardinal succeeded in getting an audience so that he could discuss the matter with the pope, the pope tersely told the cardinal, "I am the pope, I do not need to give reasons for any of my decisions.  I have decided that they have to leave, and they have to leave".  He then walked out of the room, ending the meeting right then and there.  So much for all this "collegiality".  It seems reasonable to guess that Cardinal Muller felt the pope's displeasure.  One might think of the fear that a mafia underling would feel if his don behaved like that.

Like Mundabor, I strongly suspect that Muller is in "cya" mode: that is, "cover your @ss".  While I can understand Muller's "about-face", I can in no way condone it.  I had hopes that he was a bright spot in a very dark place, but he has cowed; no John Fisher is he.  Maybe he will reconsider; I pray he does.  But if he does not, let the four dubia cardinals press forward and do what needs to be done to bring some light and truth to the higher echelons of the Church.  Maybe Cardinal Napier can join them with his own dubium.

Amoris Laetitia And Dubia - Separating Wheat From Chaff

Slowly but surely the Dubia that the four cardinals submitted to Pope Francis is bringing a lot of dissent and heresy to light.  The head of the Greek Bishops' Conference (I won't even attempt that name) wrote to the four cardinals and flat out accused them of heresy.  One Peter Five has the text of the letter, and it is a beeyute!  He opens the letter by stating that the four cardinals should turn in their red caps (I don't know the proper term) and then accuses them of heresy, apostacy and scandal.  One wonders if he actually read the dubia, for all it does is ask the pope to clarify some passages in Amoris Laetitia that seem to contradict the tradition of the Church.  Or maybe he did read them and is simply trying to frighten others into not considering their input.

Cardinal Cupich seems to be mouthing similar things - almost as if they were all given "talking points".  I have written about the sword-crossing between him and Archbishop Chaput when the latter reaffirmed Church teaching in his own diocese.  In an interview, he told Edward Pentin that those who have "doubts and questions" regarding Amoralis Lamentia need "conversion in their lives".  I and others have written extensively about Cupich's dissidence many times.  Please read that list for yourselves for I haven't time nor space to detail just why Cupich may be the one needed conversion.

One wonders if that head of the Greek Bishops' Conference might have such strong words for his German counterpart.  Archbishop Robert Zollitsch openly declared his belief that "Christ did not die for the sins of the people as if God had provided a sacrificial offering, like a scapegoat."  He believes that Jesus only offered "solidarity with the poor."  Now that is heresy.  Will the Greek head say anything about that?  Will the Pope have a rebuke for this heresy-spouting bishop?  I think we'll hear crickets and Zollitsch will retain his post.

However, it does seem that the four cardinals are not standing alone.  Polish Bishop Josef Wrobel says "the four cardinals did well in asking for clarification about Amoris Laetitia".  He added that AL "is not written well".  He offered that as a potential excuse reason for its lack of clarity.

Two American bishops share the same last name: Tobin.  That's about all they share.  Bishop Thomas Tobin of Rhode Island opined last July that AL was "marked by ambiguity and that's intentional on the Holy Father's part, I think...so people can do just about whatever they want."  This bishop has consistently stood for the truth.  On the other hand we have Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Indianapolis.  In the previous link I detailed some issues we've had with him.  He called the four cardinals "troublesome".  Well, it might actually be a good thing to be regarded as "troublesome" to a progressive.  We know now why Joseph Tobin received his red hat!

Bishop Athanasius Schneider published a letter in which he defended the dubia and the four cardinals as a "prophetic voice."  In his letter, Schneider takes aim at the progressive syncophants who lobbed ad hominem attacks at the four cardinals without offering any real clarity, comparing the current situation to that of St Hilary of Poitiers and Pope Liberius.  The letter is worth careful study.

Then there is Bishop Jan Watroba, also of Poland.  He remarked on the ambiguity of AL, saying that he "preferred the clarity of Pope St. John Paul II".  I pray that these three bishops retain their posts and aren't sent to "diocesan siberia", if you get the drift.  I also pray that many more bishops join them to stand for the teachings of Jesus Christ.

LifeSiteNews is conducting a petition effort to ask the Holy Father to respond to the dubia.  Please sign and pass along.

Papal Reactions To The Dubia

Tomorrow there will be a consistory at the Vatican to formally create the new Cardinals.  Traditionally before such gatherings, the pope has held pre-consistory meetings with already existing cardinals before the ceremony.  This time he canceled it.  Understandably a number of eyebrows are raised, particularly because Pope Francis has often lauded "dialogue" and "collegiality".

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to postulate a reason for this cancellation.  That reason is the Dubia written by the four cardinals, requesting formal clarification regarding doctrinally questionable segments of Amoris Laetitia.  A response from the pope has been requested.  Can anyone doubt that it would seem grossly disingenuous of the pope if he didn't at least mention it at any meeting of cardinals.

The Dubia is formatted in such a way that it must be answered with "yes" or "no", with no "in-between" responses feasible.  In an interview, the pope had this to say: "Some, as with certain responses to Amoris Laetitia, persist in seeing only white or black, when rather one ought to discern in the flow of life.."  "Discern in the flow of life"?  What the hell does that mean???  Might it be a clever way of saying "go with the flow"?  If so, what flow?  Who/what determines the flow?  Are we even (in the pope's mind) even allowed to ask that question, because, well - the god of surprises!!!  Faithful Catholics have news for him.  Has he considered that at the end of time there will either be heaven or hell?  Doesn't that truth seem to be rather "black and white"?

Elsewhere in the interview he says critics of Amoralis Lamentia "don't understand" that the Church "exists only as an instrument to communicate to men God's merciful design".  As I learned my Baltimore Catechism, Jesus Christ founded the Church to help us get to heaven.  That is done by administration of the Sacraments, as well as promulgation of Christ's teachings.  His teachings on faith and morals are quite direct, "black and white".  One either obeys or disobeys them.

I will post now a video of yesterday's episode of World Over, where Raymond Arroyo interviews Robert Royal and Edward Pentin.  The whole thing is worth watching, but pay close attention between the 27:10 and 29:09 marks, where Pentin relates what his sources told him, that the dubia has the pope "boiling with rage".  While we'd hope for a calm response to the letter, at least we know that the dubia isn't being ignored - at least privately.

Let us pray that the pope reaffirms the Teachings of Jesus.  Barring that, let us pray that these cardinals stay the course and that others join them.  Vox Cantoris has words about that.  Now the video.

Must The Four Cardinals Formally Correct The Pope?

Earlier this week we learned of the attempt of the four cardinals to seek clarification from Pope Francis regarding the heretical statements in Amoris Laetitia.  The questions were formatted in such a way that they must be answered in the positive or negative - no "in-between".  In September they had posed their questions to the pope privately but received no reply.

Yesterday the National Catholic Register published an interview between Edward Pentin and Cardinal Burke regarding these questions.  Towards the end, Pentin asked His Eminence about any "next steps", should these publicized questions not be answered.  The cardinal spoke of "taking a formal action of correction of a serious error".

That more or less leaves the proberbial ball in the pope's court.  Whether or not such a formal action would be deemed necessary is largely up to him.  Unfortunately, he has given us an indication of his inclinations.  Recall that several months ago, Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia issued guidelines that plainly stated that divored/remarried Catholics may not receive Holy Communion unless they live as brother and sister.  He was directly contradicted by Cardinal-designate Kevin Farrell.  Farrell plainly stated that those de-facto adulterors could receive Holy Communion while continuing in their mortal sin.  Now recall that the pope picked Farrell to head the Dicastery for Laity, the Family and Life, as well as naming him a Cardinal.  With that in mind, it is reasonable to deduce that with regards to the heresies embodied in Amoralis Lamentia, that Farrell and the pope are of like mind.

Let us pray that the pope will ponder carefully the correction that the four Cardinals are trying to offer him.  But let us be prepared for what will likely follow in the wake of continued papal obduracy.

Was Pope Benedict Deposed To Make Way For Amoris Laetitia And Other Insults To The Faith?

This post will highlight two posts concerning this current papacy.  At first glance they may appear to be unrelated to each other.  I suspect they are very much related, for reasons that I'll state further into this post.

The first is from Bear Witness Central entitled "Was There A Coup In The Vatican To Depose Pope Benedict XVI?"  For the record, I believe there was, for Benedict's resignation appears to be most uncharacteristic of him.  Several circumstances are mentioned therein: the election of Pope Francis after the reigns of two faithful popes, the admission of Cardinal Danneels of a "mafia" within the Vatican that opposed Pope Benedict XVI, and Danneels' rise in prominence after Francis ascended the papal throne despite his own dissidence from the Church's moral teachings.  I won't go into every detail of that post here, but suggest its careful study since many facts of Pope Francis' words and conduct, and their relationships to one another, are illustrated.

The second is by Sandro Magister entitled "Amoris Laetitia Has A Ghost Writer. His Name Is Victor Manuel Fernandez."  If Fernandez's name sounds familiar, I regret that it is for cause.  I've written a bit about him in the past.  It was Edward Pentin who broke the news that Fernandez would be the principal author of the post-synodal exhortation; at the time of Pentin's revelation, Amoris Latetia was not yet named.  Fernandez is also the author of some crap entitled "Heal Me With Your Mouth; The Art Of Kissing".  That sure makes Fernandez sound like some porn author.  No wonder I was inspired to rename AL to be "amoralis lamentia".

What Magister points out that really raises eyebrows are the comparisons of theologically faulty pieces of AL with previous writings of Fernandez's of several years ago.  The similarities suggest that AL may well have been drafted before the two synods.  That seems to be the case for the synod reports: written before the synod fathers could have any meaningful input.  I agree with my colleagues at Rorate Caeli when they postulate that the two synods were merely fronts to legitimize the screed of Fernandez.

So what is the connection between these two posts that I cite?  Fernandez wrote his articles, the foundations of "amoralis lamentia" well before Cardinal Bergoglio became Pope Francis.  Its promulgation is one key step in the deconstruction of Catholic life as we know it.  Pope Benedict stood in their way and needed to be removed.  I believe he was.  After that, we immediately saw the little insults to traditions, such as dispensing with traditional papal garb, the beach ball on the altar of St. Mary Major, clown nose selfies to the more harmful gaffes ("who am I to judge").  I could go on and on, but the undermining of the Faith has worsened in both number and severity of incidents.

Pope Paul VI is quoted as saying, "the smoke of Satan has entered the Church".  He was right, and now the Vatican is full of carbon monoxide.  Pray, stay alert, and speak out.

Beware The Post-Synodal Exhortation

Two days ago I mentioned that the Post-Synodal Exhortation on Marriage would most likely be released.  That likelihood has now increased.  Edward Pentin has published an announcement by Cardinal Walter Kasper that the thing could indeed be released on Saturday March 19.  Kasper said that this document will be a "first step in a reform..after 1700 years", and that "we must not repeat past formulas and barricade ourselves behind the wall of exclusivism and clericalism".

My!  How the Church must have wallowed in despair and darkness, lo these past 1700 years, just pining for the "god of surprises"!

Kasper did get specific about allowing civilly remarried divorced Catholics - in other words, those living in adultery - to receive Holy Communion.  He gave lip-service to the "penitential period" crock, conveniently overlooking the critical detail that authentic penitence necessitates the cessation of sin and the occasions of such sin.  I've written quite a bit about Kasper in the past: enough to say that this announcement of his is quite typical for him.

Voice of the Family has put together quite a thorough analysis of this exhortation.  They warn of many dangers embedded in this exhortation.  In addition to adulterers being allowed to receive Holy Communion sacrilegiously, the Church's teachings on contraception are undermined, parental rights are undermined, etc.  I suggest that all read it and beware of what will soon be unleashed upon the Catholics in the pew.  Be prepared to shield yourselves from temptation and to assist your fellow Catholics through the confusion that this exhortation will foist on them.

Post-Synodal Exhortation And Its Dismal Prospects

From Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register, we read that the pope's post-synodal apostolic exhortation is due to be released sometime in March.  We are referring to the rather contentious synods on the family that occurred this past October and the year before that.

This exhortation has two big strikes against it, right from the get-go.  The first is its principal drafter, Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez, an Argentine friend of the pope's going way back.  He's quite a writer, apparently having heavy influence on Laudato Si and even Evangelii Gaudium.  He's also the author of a rather, uh, "interesting" tome called "Heal Me With Your Mouth; The Art Of Kissing".  So the fellow who wrote crap about "art of kissing" is supposedly putting together an apostolic exhortation about family life?  This promises to be a real hoot; at least it would be if it didn't have so much potential to lead countless souls astray.

According to one of Pentin's sources, who happens to be a moral theologian, there is much danger of the latter being the result of this "exhortation".  He believes that the text "calls into question the natural moral law".

We can only hope and pray that this exhortation isn't the disaster that it could very well be.

By Its Rotten Fruit You Shall Know It - God Of Surprises That Is

Events of the past three days, spawned in great part by the lead of Pope Francis as he invokes this "god of surprises", makes painfully obvious that this "god of surprises" that the pope invokes is nothing more than a filthy false idol.  As noted in a post two days ago, we saw how Lutherans received Holy Communion.  It is sacrilege for non-Catholics to receive Holy Communion; that priest knew full well what he was doing.  May God bring him to speedy repentance.  Even if the pope ordered him to offer Holy Communion to non-Catholics, he was bound by the sacrament that he received not to commit mortal sin.  On the heels of this sacrilege we have a new outrage.

The pope ordered Cardinal Robert Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, to issue a decree ordering that women be admitted to the washing of the feet during Holy Thursday liturgies.  Edward Pentin gives full details in the National Catholic Register, along with the full text of Cardinal Sarah's decree.  Note that in his decree, the Cardinal ascribes full responsibility for this foolishness to the pope; who can blame him?  Indeed, in his letter to Cardinal Sarah, the pope said he had "the intention of improving the way in which it is performed so that it might express more fully the meaning of Jesus' gesture in the Cenacle."  Yep!  For over two thousand years, the Church had no idea what it was doing when it restricted the rite to men.  In fact, Jesus Christ Himself had no idea what He was doing when He washed only the apostles' feet on Holy Thursday night.  It has always been the Church's teaching that this rite was reflective of the Sacrament of Holy Orders.  Is the "god of surprises" once again trying to get women admitted to that Sacrament?

The demon(s) that masquerade(s) as this "god of surprises" seem(s) to have in mind the complete deconstruction of the Sacred Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church.  Let's be clear - when we say "Sacred Tradition" we are talking about the revealed will of Jesus Christ as He has communicated it to His Church.  God's teaching and will do not change for God Himself cannot change.

I will note that there is one tiny piece of silver lining to this dark cloud that the pope just released.  In issuing the order stating that "from now on the pastors of the church may choose" women to participate, he is acknowledging that prior to the order, that women were not allowed to participate.  In other words, he is acknowledging his own disobedience to Canon law, as well as thousands of other progressive clergymen.  What, if anything, will be done to repent of so many sins of disobedience to the Church on those occasions?  Do we hear crickets?

I believe the order does specify that those chosen must be Catholics, although heaven only knows what he means by "people of God".  Will he add insult to injury by continuing to select non-Catholics for the foot-washing?  I suppose we should breathe a sigh of relief that he did not order priests to select women, although progressive bishops can now use this order to coerce their faithful priests into doing so.

When I first heard of this order, this poem came to mind: "Disobey!  Have your way!  Then one day, they'll say ok!"  The poem would be a perfect fit except that this papal order is not a reluctant concession, but one given in all enthusiasm.  It is right up his ally, as is apparent from his previous patterns of action and speech.

Let us pray that these abominations end soon, for they are wreaking havoc with the eternal destinies of many thousands, if not millions of souls.

More Sin-Nod Pollution Bubbling To The Surface

Too many otherwise intelligent Catholics are absolutely gloating over the outcome of the synod claiming "we won", often with snark and guffaws at those of us who take a more sober look at the proceedings.  One of those concerned Catholics is none other than Cardinal Burke.  In an interview with Edward Pentin, he opined that the final report was "misleading" and lacks clarity on indissolubility of marriage.  He is focusing on paragraphs 84-86.  I urge you to read the interview.

From Voice of the Family we hear concerns about paragraph 58.  Apparently the majority of the prelates there voted for its inclusion: a paragraph that rejects Church teaching that states that parents are the sole authority over children's education regarding sexual matters.  The article points out that this paragraph has on it the paw prints of the United Nations.  In league with Planned Parenthood and other progressive cabals, the UN seeks to usurp the role of parents in moral formation of children.  Paragraph 58 of the sin-nod-slop plays right into their hands.

We also have an editorial from LifeSiteNews pointing out that what is not present is a clear affirmation of Catholic teaching regarding homosexuality and the mortally sinful nature of homosexual acts.  The lack of reiteration of Catholic teaching does in fact send a message that the teaching is not binding on man as a dictate from God.

As we can all see, the fallout from the sin-nod is just starting to appear.  There will be more work done in examining the final report.  More importantly and more ominously, we will see within the next few months some insidious implementations of "the spirit of the synod" (I bet that phrase will enter progressive lexicons presently) in our dioceses and parishes.  This will vary according to the proclivities of local prelates.  In short, I expect the Archdiocese of Washington to continue its embrace of "social justice" crap while punishing priests who dare to uphold marriage and Holy Communion.

Stay tuned.  There will be more.

The Rigging Of A Synod

At the sin-nod last year, we were treated to a circus of subterfuge and insinuation of heresy under the guise of "being pastoral".  Recall how Cardinal Pell pounded his fist on a table and demanded of the sin-nod father that they "stop manipulating this synod".  Even at that, the "fathers" still slipped in gay-friendly statements that were explicitly voted out by those in attendance.

Since then, we've seen:

• Episode after episode of the gay agenda being coddled at Catholic events - including this most recent papal visit to the United States
• Petitions begging the Pope to uphold Catholic teaching regarding marriage and family - as though a Vicar of Christ should require such petitions to fulfill his God-given mission
• The German Catholic Conference uttering statements that sound like they're ready to go schismatic should the gay agenda not be openly embraced by the Church
• Various meetings and "secret synods" quietly conducted in order to plot the mechanics of insinuating the gay agenda into Catholic practice, if not teaching

In light of these facts and the revelations found in Edward Pentin's book on the rigging of the extraordinary synod, why should we doubt the revelations that Rorate Caeli made public today?  Apparently there will be a secret "parallel synod", comprised mainly of Jesuits.  The article is coy about the "Argentine" but since I'm not one to play games, let's say out loud that this "Argentine" is none other than Pope Francis.  It is that cabal that will be producing documents to further the gay agenda and so-called "annulment reform".  This so-called "Ordinary Synod" will only be a front - puppets, if you will - for this other group.

Edward Pentin revealed that tomorrow "procedural changes" to the conduct of the synod will be announced.  These changes will most likely facilitate the doings of this "secret synod" and stymie any efforts that Cardinal Pell, the African contingent and other faithful prelates might make to prevent heresy from oozing forth from this upcoming "sin-nod".

Right now it looks like all we can do is pray and continue to shine the light on the skulduggery that appears to be underfoot at the Vatican now. 

Sinister Machinations Behind Benedict-Francis Transition

Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Belgium is releasing an authorized biography of his life and was recently interviewed for the occasion.  Let us be very clear that he has demonstrated his heretical positions repeatedly.

• When a law was put to the king of Belgium to liberalize abortion, Danneels advised the king to sign it.
• He called same-sex #mowwidge a "positive development".
• He tried to silence a victim of clerical sex abuse.

During the interview, he revealed that he was part of a cabal of clerics that was organized for the express purpose of stymieing the efforts of then-Cardinal Ratzinger and later to lobby for Cardinal Bergoglio.  They called themselves both the Sankt-Gallen group and the "Mafia".  Isn't that telling?  

Their efforts failed that time as Cardinal Ratzinger was elected to be Benedict XVI.  Both LifeSiteNews and Edward Pentin have more details.  The report states that the group got another chance because "unexpectedly Pope Benedict resigned".  Well maybe that resignation wasn't so "unexpected" after all.

Last month Eponymous Flower put up a post detailing an eyewitness account of other skulduggery to sabotage Benedict's papacy.  Pope Benedict was told by some renegade clerics that they had gathered thousands of signatures to petition for his resignation and that if he did not comply, then leading clerics would break away from the Church.  As we know, Pope Benedict did resign shortly thereafter.  Did this threat of schism influence his decision?  Was this group of renegade clergy also the "mafia" described by Daneels?  If not, did the two groups have members in common?

Ann Barnhardt put up a piece to remind one and all that any cardinal elector who engaged in canvassing during the election incurred the penalty of automatic excommunication and such canvassing would result in the election being invalidated.  The question remains, "did some of the cardinal-electors do any lobbying for specific candidates for the papacy?"  To be clear, lobbying did occur.  Cardinal McCarrick admitted to the same, but he was not an elector.  If electors were lobbying, Pope Francis' election would seem to be invalid.

Many theories have been circulating around the internet to that effect.  Regrettably, Cardinal Danneel's admission along with that of Cardinal McCarrick seven months ago lends basis to the claim that the last papal election was invalid.  I do not believe these two admissions by themselves constitute irrefutable proof of the election's invalidity so for now I must assume its validity.  But no one can gainsay that there are reasonable doubts regarding the validity, for if prelates could scheme so vigorously and unethically to engineer the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, why should we assume that they'd have any scruples against lobbying for a specific outcome in the papal election?

Update - The blog "From Rome" had published some information regarding "team Bergoglio" in February, lending more evidence regarding the charges of conclave-lobbying.

Progressive Manipulation At The Sin-Nod And An Update From The Maturation Department

Remember the incident during last October's sin-nod, when Cardinal Pell rebuked sin-nod leaders?  Pounding the table with his hand, he demanded "you must stop manipulating this synod!"  He said this after it was announced that the proceeds from the small group discussions would not be shared with the synod at large.  After Pell and some others called out the skulduggery for what it was, the leaders and "editorial committee" relented and publicized those reports.  In a subsequent interview with LifeSiteNews, Cardinal Pell made mention of a "radical cadre" working for a very progressive outcome to the sin-nod.

It seems that Cardinal Pell's theory regarding the existence of this cabal has very solid basis.  A few months prior to the sin-nod, Cardinal Baldiserri, aka "Book-Thief Baldi", told Father Rosica that the Church needs to "update" and "be incarnate into time".  He also stated that if the sin-nod reiterated the Church's teachings, the sin-nod would be "meaningless".  I've no doubt he was thinking mainly of the Church's teachings on marriage, family, sexuality.  He might as well have thrown into the mix the Church's teachings on the Seventh Commandment.

Edward Pentin is a journalist associated with the National Catholic Register.  He covered the sin-nod and exposed much of the shenanigans there.  He did such a good job that Cardinal Kasper attempted to ruin his career; Kasper wound up with major egg on his face for that.  Two weeks ago he interviewed with Raymond Arroyo of EWTN and publicized his book, "The Rigging Of A Vatican Synod".  In that book he lays out a good deal of evidence that points to manipulation of the last sin-nod and possible attempts to do the same at the one occurring next month.  Now because this book is an e-book, it would seem safe from the clutches of "Book-Thief Baldi" - we hope!

UPDATE - We now provide an update from the Maturation Department.  The German bishops published today an apologia for same-sex #mowwidge.  Here is the news from LifeSiteNews.  With just a few weeks until the next sin-nod, these progressives are putting their "maturation" efforts into overdrive!

Here is the interview.

Heresy-Spouting Koch Is Archbishop Of Berlin

Last week I wrote about the "shadow council".  One of the more ridiculous statements coming out of that gab-fest is the notion that the Church should adapt its pastoral care practices to current "lived-out realities" particularly in matters relating with sexual ethics.  Of course that is precisely ass-backwards, as the timeless and immutable words of Jesus Christ are to be our sole guide - something that the Church has done for over two thousand years.

Cardinal Gerhard Muller called out this heretical foolishness for what it is, in no uncertain terms.  Edward Pentin quoted him in the National Catholic Register as saying that this attempt is "nothing more than the introduction of subjectivism and arbitrariness, wrapped up in sentimental and smug religious terminology."

With that in mind, many Catholics are puzzled as to why the Pope would have appointed Bishop Heiner Koch to be Archbishop of Berlin.  Koch was an attendee of the "shadow council" and has been known to defend the heresy of "gay marriages".  He said once that "to present homosexuality as sin is wounding".  No, it's God's truth.  That a bishop would regard God's teaching as "wounding" is cause for great alarm, not promotion to an important see.

While we pray that this appointment is not a harbinger of things to come in October, all indications are that such will be the case.