Today Is A Day Of Shame For The Catholic Church

We knew this would happen since September.  The announcement appeared today on the Vatican website that Cardinal Raymond Burke has been removed from his post as Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura and will now be patron of the Order of Malta.  Until today, Burke was the highest ranking American in the Vatican, overseeing the Vatican's highest court.  Now his position is largely ceremonial.  Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake about it.  Cardinal Burke, for all his loyal and impeccable service to the Church, has been shamefully insulted by the Pope.  Some will wince at that last statement, but it is what it is.  LifeSiteNews has more detail.  On that page is an open letter to the Cardinal, thanking him for his service at the Vatican.

I now link to an archive of all posts I've written that touch upon Cardinal Burke and how he's stood for the Faith.  I'm also now reading "Remaining In The Truth Of Christ".  The book is an anthology of articles written by Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Pell and others that defend the Church's teaching on marriage and Holy Communion.  It was written and published in anticipation of the attacks that were sustained on the Church's teachings in those two crucial areas.  We all recall that Cardinal Kasper fired some opening volleys on the Magisterium in those areas.  In Cardinal Burke's article entitled "The Canonical Nullity Of The Marriage Process As The Search For The Truth", Cardinal Burke contradicts Cardinal Kasper by name.  This book is no doubt part of the reason why the Pope has thrown Cardinal Burke under the bus, because truth is spoken in that book.  Ignatius Press published it; I got my copy through Amazon.

It is this same Cardinal Kasper who spoke at CUA yesterday and who I suspect will be poisoning contributing to the USCCB meeting next week.  Kasper claimed to speak for the pope; since the latter never repudiated that I assume there's truth to Kasper's statement.  Moreover the pope praised Kasper's "serene theology" during the SinNod.  Burke took issue with some of that "sereneness".  I strongly suspect that earned him the sacking that was made official today.

To Cardinal Burke:
Your Eminence, thank you for your service to Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church in the face of formidable opposition.  That you have maintained fidelity and charity - even as that opposition came from the highest offices of the Vatican - redounds to your credit and I trust, to outpouring of graces upon the Church that stands in desperate need of those graces.  God bless you, sir, and we will keep you and the Church in prayer.

Cardinal Burke - Latest Target Of Papal "Accompaniment"

Frankly, this latest comes as no surprise.  It was just a matter of time.  From LifeSiteNews today, we read that the New Daily Compass reported on Francis' alleged intentions to evict Cardinal Burke from his apartment in Rome and to terminate his salary.   During a meeting with the heads of the Roman curia on November 20th, he is reported as saying, "Cardinal Burke is my enemy, so I am taking away his flat and salary."  My!  Isn't all this "papal accompaniment" so, so ... special?

Of course this is right on the heels of Francis kicking Bishop Strickland out on his ear.  As in the case of Strickland, Cardinal Burke himself has received no official notice of these proceedings.  This almost has the feel of some mafia don giving orders for hits, all the while making plain that the chopping block orders came from him.Francis' marginalization of Cardinal Burke began early in his seizure of Peter's Chair.   Pope Benedict had appointed Burke as Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura; Francis dismissed him as punishment for criticizing his "papacy".  Burke was also part of the Congregation of Bishops.  Again, Francis axed him, replacing him with the liberal Cardinal Wuerl.

Now two questions come to mind:

1. What else will Francis do to Burke?  Bear in mind that Francis is reportedly having health issues.  Burke, presently a Cardinal, is eligible to vote in the next papal conclave.
2. Who is next?

Pope Francis Demonizing Faithful Catholics During His Christmas Address To The Curia

The pope's Christmas Greeting to the Roman Curia this year was singularly lacking of any semblance of Christmas cheer.  National Catholic Register has some commentary on the address, but at the bottom of that article is the full text of the pope's address.  He speaks of the "reform of the curia" and making it "conform to the signs of our time".  Shouldn't it be conforming to God's immutable will?

We then see how he talks of "malicious resistance" to this reform, and how he says this resistance "takes refuge in traditions, appearances, formalities".  He's taking pot-shots at those faithful Catholics who adhere to God's teachings, particularly on marriage and family, and I believe he's taking deliberate aim at the four cardinals who promulgated the dubia.  Then he calls for "unconditioned obedience" to this "reform".  Where is his call for unconditional obedience to Christ's teachings regarding marriage and worthiness to receive Holy Communion?

Perhaps his ire against the dubia cardinals, particularly Cardinal Burke, may be a motivation behind another recent action of the pope's.  Recall that Pope Francis named Cardinal Burke as patron of the Order of Malta after he ejected Burke from some Vatican posts.  It seems that a senior official of the Knights of Malta was involved in the distribution of condoms.  For that he was ejected from the order.  Lepanto Institute did a very thorough investigation into the matter and found ample evidence that this official was indeed involved in that very anti-life activity.  His ouster was entirely justified.

Now why, oh why, does Pope Francis find it necessary to create an entire commission to investigate the matter?  It seems rather simple to me; an official in a Catholic organization was caught in activities not becoming a Catholic.  He was ejected from his post as a result.  Granted, when other such scandals have been unearthed, it's only when public scrutiny occurs that the offending party is disciplined (and sometimes the offender is retained).  But Cardinal Burke is at the helm of the Order of Malta, and I think it's likely that he took immediate and proper action.  So why does the pope seek to meddle after the fact?  Is he that much of a micro-manager or is this just an excuse to take out some long knives against Cardinal Burke?

In an interview with Catholic World Report, Cardinal Burke pointed out that any pope who professes formal heresy would automatically cease to be pope.  In that article, Burke goes into the provisions in canon law for such a scenario.  He also voiced hope that the pope will answer the dubia, to allay possible schism.

Cardinal Walter Brandmuller, another of the four dubia cardinals, granted an interview to Der Spiegel.  He too was questioned about the dubia and its implications.  Brandmuller pointed out that "whoever thinks that persistent adultery and the reception of Holy Communion are compatible is a heretic and promotes schism.”  As we read the article, we are reminded that Pope Francis, in his letter to the Argentinian bishops, did make allowance for unrepentant adulterers to receive Holy Communion; in other words, Pope Francis gave approval for sins of sacrilege to occur.

Now consider both these interviews together.  On the one hand, Cardinal Brandmuller states that someone allowing for Holy Communion to be given to unrepentant adulterers is a heretic and promotes schism.  In that same article, Pope Francis is fulfilling that definition of "heretic" in his letter to the Argentinian bishops.  On the other hand, Cardinal Burke points out that a pope formally professes heresy automatically ceases to be pope.

Faithful Catholics, do we understand the gravity of the situation?  Depending on how Pope Francis treats the dubia, the Catholic Church might well find itself in schism.  If he states formally the heresy that those in public mortal sin can receive Holy Communion, it seems that he will have ejected himself from Peter's chair.  The Church might well find herself in schism.  As hard as it is to admit, schism would be far preferable than the Church being led into error.  As you read further down the LifeSiteNews piece, Pope Francis himself seems to understand that he could well divide the Church.

Dignitatus Humanae Institute Clarifies Buzz Feed Interview With Cardinal Burke

From Aleteia we read that Dignitatus Humanae Institute, the organization that arranged Cardinal Burke's interview with Buzzfeed took the latter to task for rearrangement of words - a rearrangement that misquoted Cdl Burke as saying the "pope was harming the Church".

Rather, what Cardinal Burke said was "that in his opinion a general lack of clarity regarding the Pope’s position had caused harm to the Church."  In brief, he did not fault the Pope, but the "general lack of clarity" for harming the Church.  Buzz Feed has reprinted the entire text of the interview.  I appreciate Cardinal Burke's statement to set things right and to get his exact wording out there.  But now new questions are raised.

• Why, oh why, would there be any lack of clarity about the Pope's positions regarding divorced/remarried/adulterous relationships and sodomite situations?  The Magisterium has spoken on these things for 1000+ years.  Somehow I think that Pope Benedict XVI would have made his own positions crystal clear.
• Cardinal Burke asked the Pope to issue defense of the Church's teachings in light of the flim-flam that was called the interim relatio.  I do not believe that defense ever came.
• Let me elaborate on my previous sentence.  Here is the Pope's closing address.  In it, he states 
 "And this always – we have said it here, in the Hall – without ever putting into question the fundamental truths of the Sacrament of marriage: the indissolubility, the unity, the faithfulness, the fruitfulness, that openness to life."  That is not a definitive defense of the Church's teachings.  All he claimed here is that these teachings were not called into question during the SinNod; the interim relatio contradicts the Holy Father here.

So that little bit was cleared up.  Cardinal Burke did not attack the pope - as if I ever believed he did.  Will these other questions be answered?

Media Lapdogs Take Swipes At Cardinal Burke

If ever we wanted prima facie evidence that the leftwing media is in cahoots with the pope and others who want to dismantle Sacred Tradition, we need look no further than two recent hit pieces aimed at Cardinal Burke.

A few days ago, the Washington Compost, through its "correspondent" Emma-Kate Symons, put forth a piece of editorial excrement.  Symons condescended to offer some precious pearls of wisdom to tell "How Pope Francis Can Cleanse The Far-Right Rot From The Catholic Church".  I'm suspecting that Symons herself isn't Catholic so I fail to see how she has a dog in this fight - except to quell a possible nagging conscience by attempting to silence the voice of God as it sounds forth from the Church's timeless teachings.  She refers to Burke as "renegade cleric", "rebel prince", "unrepentant and defiant", etc.  Dare I speculate that Symons doesn't know diddly-squat about real repentance?  But I digress.  We get hints of her biases and mindsets as we see telltale catch phrases such as "Francis' reformist compassionate papacy", "conservative wing that wants to reassert white Christian dominence", etc.

Symons is great at contradicting herself.  She suggests that the pope rebuke Burke for "his unacceptable political interventions" while in the next paragraph she defends the pope for "daring to suggest that building a wall on the United States’ southern border was un-Christian."  Boys and girls, can we say "double standard"?  Or is acceptability of "political interventions" dependent on their leftward tilt?

Symons' suggestions to the pope only serve to illustrate her complete ignorance of what constitutes Church teaching by saying, "Francis could seize the agenda. In time-honored papal tradition, he could write an encyclical on the burning questions of populism and nationalism, with specific reference to migrants, Muslims and Jews, so priests including Burke know they are in breach of church teaching when they try to act as power brokers for the international extreme right."  Reminder - the Church can only teach authoritatively on Faith and Morals in keeping with Tradition.  Anything else, including this "encyclical" that Symons suggests would simply be outside the proper competence of the Magisterium.  Oh, they might try such a stunt but such pronouncements would not bind on pain of sin.

Now that we see why subscription numbers at the Compost are plummeting, let's take a look at the Guardian from "across the pond".  They seem to have received the same progressive Vatican talking points.  They tell us that "US Cardinal Raymond Burke Stokes Papal Tensions By Meeting Nationalist In Rome".   This drivel was spewed forth by Stephanie Kirchgaessner.  What seems to have her undies bunched is that the Cardinal met with Matteo Salvini, a supporter of President Trump.  We gather that Kirchgaessner herself has a visceral animosity towards Trump, as do many of the pope's lackeys in the Vatican.   As Kirchgaessner states, Cardinal Joseph Tobin opined that Trump's travel ban was "opposite of what it means to be an American".  I might point out that Tobin's indifference to lesbians using a KofC hall in his diocese to celebrate their perversion was "opposite of what it means to be a bishop".

Did Kirchgaessner issue rebukes to the Vatican for inviting anti-life and anti-God persons to speak to them?  If so, I'd be grateful if links to those articles would be directed to me.  I speak of:

• Paul Ehrlich's scheduled appearance at a Vatican conference in a few weeks.
• Jeffrey Sachs
• John Schnellnhuber
• Jerry Brown (yes, Moonbeam himself)
• Naomi Klein

I'm sure I could drudge up others, but these make the case that progressives such as Symons and Kirchgaessner are acting like good little lapdogs for their Vatican counterparts, waxing indignant about Cardinal Burke while turning willfully blind eyes to true slime oozing forth from the Vatican.

From The Maturation Department - Rabbitgate And Rotagate?

You might remember that at the close of last October's sin-nod that Pope Francis gave an address.  In it he said we had a year to be brainwashed into swallowing the undermining of Tradition regarding marriage and family "mature".  Almost immediately the "maturation efforts" began in earnest and the bile continues to spill.  The rabbitgate incident is just one of the latest installments in our "maturation lessons".

It cannot be difficult to discern what is meant by "rabbitgate".  We all recall the interview during the trip from the Philippines to Rome last week.  When I put my post onto facebook I got all sorts of scolding, with folks claiming that I was just going with mainstream media and that the pope really didn't rebuke the poor expectant mother.  I was also remonstrated for not considering the sources.  Well, guess what, "first-hand sources" indicate that he rebuked her for being pregnant.

I link now to commentary from Mundabor.  He in turn links to a video produced by Louis Verrecchio; the latter shows video of the actual interview, with the Pope speaking Italian.  Both Mundabor and Verrecchio are Italians who speak the language.  Both verify the Italian verb for "rebuke".  So now irrefutable proof exists that the pope rebuked a pregnant woman for - being pregnant.  Just what good did he expect that rebuke to accomplish?  If the woman was already under stress owing to previous c-sections, the last thing she needed was more stress as she tries to carry the pregnancy through to birth.  For all the yap and yammer about being "pastoral", I cannot see how that papal behavior filled that bill.

Vatican damage control has leaped into action (they're getting a lot of practice these days).  We heard yesterday from the Vatican's State Department that "Pope Francis was surprised that his words on responsible parenthood were not widely taken in the sense that he intended them."  The rest of the article is just as ridiculous.  NEWS FLASH!  When millions of people, all from widely differing perspectives and languages, are gleaning very similar, if not identical messages, perhaps the fault for that lies not with the listeners, but the delivery and/or content of the message itself!  Got that??  I would ask why they haven't learned from confusion caused by previous disastrous interviews, but I think I know the answer.  Confusion is precisely what they want - confusion regarding God's first command to mankind to "be fruitful and multiply", confusion regarding marriage and sexuality, confusion regarding the transmission of life.  In other words, we're supposed to "mature", a la "sin-nod" style.

Now onto rotagate  Recall that a few months ago, Cardinal Burke was relieved of his post as head of the Roman Rota and shuffled to the Knights of Malta.  The bulk of duties of the Roman Rota is to hear cases for marriage nullity.  Shortly before the October sin-nod, Cardinal Burke co-authored a book called "Remaining In The Truth Of Christ".  I have a copy and urge all to get their own.  Cardinal Burke's piece is entitled "The Canonical Nullity Of The Marriage Process As The Search For Truth".  In a nutshell, Cardinal Burke cautions against tampering with a process that has developed over hundreds of years: a process developed to rigorously search for the truth behind individual cases.  What he wrote flies in the face of the tinkering that was proposed at the sin-nod.  My strong suspicion is that the Cardinal was removed from all positions of real influence at the Vatican owing to his standing for truth in the face of the progressive juggernaut underway there.

This past Friday the pope met with the Rota (sans Burke) as they begin a new year.  Among other things, he urged Rota member to "have great care and sensitivity to the importance of a formed conscience – or lack thereof – in regard to the nature and purpose of marriage, and the ways in which conscience can affect the very validity of marital unions.."  Whether he intended to do so or not, he just gave divorcing couples a Mack-truck-sized loophole to have any kind of marriage declared null.  Would that statement have been made if Cardinal Burke had been in the room?  Did we hear more "maturation" going on?

More On Burke-Wuerl Switch

Last week Cardinal Burke was in the country and gave an interview to EWTN's Raymond Arroyo.  I commented on that and posted the video.  At that time I did not know that he had been effectively replaced on the Congregation for Bishops by Cardinal Wuerl (see here).  I can only wonder if Cardinal Burke was aware at the time of his interview.  Cardinal Burke clearly spoke truth to power, as much as a Vatican official can.

George Neumayr penned a piece called "Reaping the Wuerl Wind" that appears in American Spectator.  All in all, I think his article is spot-on.  Among other things, he says the move to remove Burke and replace him with Wuerl "deserves a special place in the annals of in-your-face papal politics".  Frankly, that is the first thing that occurred to me when I first saw the reports.

When the first papal bloopers came out, Catholic pollyannas were rushing over themselves to convince us that the fuzzy comments were just a brilliant piece of Jesuit-talk to get us to ponder the "deeper meanings" or other such nonsense.  Well, ok.  I suppose that these latest incidents (the Burke-Wuerl exchange and the upset over the Franciscans celebrating the Tridentine rite) are a way of drawing out defenders of orthodoxy to speak out.  They certainly are.

• From Pat Archibald
• From Ann Coulter (speaking about an earlier gaffe)
• A whole bevy of pro-life leaders

We will pray for our Holy Father, but we will - for the sake of Holy Mother Church -speak out.

Why Is Cardinal Burke Being Demoted?

The news is all over the internet that Cardinal Raymond Burke, current head of the Apostolic Signatura, is to be relieved of that post and to be relegated to "patron of the Order of Malta".  See LifeSiteNews, Chiesa, Remnant, Breitbart.  Some time ago, the Cardinal was removed from his post at the Congregation for Bishops.  It seems that he was deemed to still have too much voice and influence at the Vatican, so off he has to go!

As head of the Apostolic Signatura, Cardinal Burke was slated to attend the Extraordinary Synod on the Family.  He has always been a defender of the practice of withholding Holy Communion from those Catholics who are divorced and civilly remarried. It is said that he collaborated with Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Muller and three other cardinals in writing a book that will be released October 1, warning the Synod not to relax nor change Church teachings regarding Communion to divorced and civilly remarried people.

That this demotion - and the 20-couple wedding extravaganza - occurs just before the Synod, is much more than mere coincidence.  I must agree with Rorate Caeli that this move against Burke is a direct insult and punishment for Burke's fidelity and courage in standing for the Tradition and teachings of the Church.

The "Patron of the Order of Malta" is merely a symbolic position, reserved for those prelates at or beyond retirement age.  But Cardinal Burke is only 66 years old.  That one of the few faithful prelates is being so degraded does, quite frankly, reflect badly on the judgment of Pope Francis.

Cardinal Burke TRIES To Explain Some Recent Statements By Pope Francis

Recently the website "Courageous Priest" published a letter by Cardinal Burke in which the latter tried to clarify some very understandable confusion caused by some of Pope Francis' recent remarks, or at least their translations.   Before the text of the Cardinal's letter, they preface it by saying, "We know many feel uncomfortable with Pope Francis.  Can we let Cardinal Burke put your mind at ease?"  If that was the purpose of the Cardinal's letter, I regret to say that it flopped.  If anything, it actually justifies even more our misgivings.  Cardinal Burke has proven to be outspoken in defense of authentic Church teaching.  I understand that as a Prince of the Church, he is between the proverbial "rock and hard place" and is obliged to defend the Holy Father.  However, in trying to paint the Holy Father's missteps in the best possible light, some logical contortions can be seen in this letter.

This statement is something I find troubling. "The Holy Father, it seems to me, wishes to pare back every conceivable obstacle people may have invented to prevent themselves from responding to Jesus Christ’s universal call to holiness. We all know individuals who say things like: “Oh, I stopped going to Church because of the Church’s teaching on divorce”, or “I could never be Catholic because of the Church’s teaching on abortion or on homosexuality”. The Holy Father is asking them to put aside these obstacles and to welcome Christ, without any excuse, into their lives. Once they come to understand the immeasurable love of Christ, alive for us in the Church, they will be able to resolve whatever has been troubling them about the Church, His Mystical Body, and her teaching."

The teachings of Jesus Christ on the moral issues are NOT "obstacles". How can they disregard them (for even an instant) and expect to "understand the immeasurable love of Jesus" when by their disregard for the so-called "obstacles", they BLOCK the love of Jesus? At best, such love is reduced to a horribly mutated caricature of authentic charity. There is no mercy without repentance. The repentance must come first, for it is mortal sin that blocks sanctifying grace (and the love of God) in the life of anybody.

Further down in the letter he does point out that Our Lord began His public life with the words, "Repent and believe the Gospel".  So the "obstacles" are to be dealt with, not "set aside".  Repentance must precede any experience of God's love; else, any other "experience" is a cheap counterfeit at best and diabolical deception at worst.  In fact, the call to face one's sin and to repent of it IS an essential part of receiving God's love.

Sadly that message isn't coming through, and people are literally dying to receive it.  The fact that Cardinal Burke is putting forth this "damage control" letter is stark evidence of communications issues that didn't exist with the previous two popes.  I pray these are corrected quickly.

Disdaining Truth And Authentic Worship For The Sake Of Ecumenicide

As most have heard, Pope Francis will be going to Sweden to "celebrate" the 500th year anniversary of the birth of Lutheranism.  I put "celebrate" in quotes for Martin Luther committed mortal sin and was the cause for millions going astray these past 5 centuries.  Mortal sin is to be mourned, not celebrated.  Catholic Family News has an article detailing the real character of the apostate known as Martin Luther and why his doings are to be abhorred not celebrated.

Greg Burke, head of the Vatican Press Office, said Catholics and Lutherans are "no longer defining themselves in opposition to each other but in communion with one another".  Oh, really?  I haven't heard any news of the Lutherans recanting their errors, for that's the only way true communion will come about.  Any real unity must have its basis in truth - that is, the Teachings of Jesus as entrusted to the Roman Catholic Church.

A little "aside".  Who remembers all the excuses for the papal gaffes that involved "poor English translations" from the Italian?  Consider the name of this Vatican press office head - sounds like something originating from the British Isles, doesn't it?  Hmm..  But I digress!  On with the main topic of this post!

LifeSiteNews put up a piece today regarding the impending ecumenicide debacle (fitting that it's occurring on Halloween, for it sure will be filled with horrors - but again I digress!)  It mentions the "hopes for intercommunion" by both Catholic bishops and Lutheran officials.  Both Cardinals Burke and Sarah denounced the very idea of non-Catholics receiving Holy Communion for it would constitute sacrilege.  They are correct.  Keep these two cardinals in mind for there is other news regarding them.

So on Halloween there is a "service" (one that we pray doesn't involve the mortal sin of sacrilege on the part of the pope).  The following day the pope will celebrate Mass for the local Catholic community. Crud ran an article on that, and the first few lines purport to be the pope's real sentiments about that Mass.  I'll quote now. "At first, Pope Francis did not want to celebrate a Catholic Mass in Sweden in order to preserve Monday’s ecumenical witness at the joint Catholic-Lutheran commemoration of the Reformation in Lund, he revealed in an interview released today. He later changed his mind after reflecting on his role as pastor of the Catholic community, and in response to a request from the local Church. But he put the Mass on the following day, Tuesday, in order to 'avoid confusing' the ecumenical event with the Catholic one."  If this quote is accurate (and it probably is), this means that the pope didn't want an icky old pelagian Mass to poop the ecumenicide party.  Now faithful Catholics know that Holy Mass is the highest form of worship that we can offer to Almighty God.  During the Consecration, the bread and wine are transformed into Jesus Christ Himself, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity.  It takes precedence over all other acts of Catholic worship.  It certainly is far, far superior to any other prayer service and we beg the pope and his entourage to remember that.

Earlier in this post I said there was news regarding Cardinals Burke and Sarah.  It is quite troubling.  Today it was announced that the pope has completely revamped the membership of the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship.  Only Cardinal Sarah remains as prefect.  Quite a few of the faithful members were ejected including Cardinal Burke.  Others include Cardinals Pell, Ouellett, Ranjith.  They were replaced by those of a liberal bent, virtually isolating Cardinal Sarah as he attempts to maintain tradition and reverence in Catholic liturgy.  Call me suspicious, but I do think some of the motivation for this may have been punishment for Cardinals Burke and Sarah for daring to remind Catholics, including the pope, that non-Catholics cannot be given Holy Communion on pain of sacrilege.

Ecumenicide is getting to be quite the idol these days.  Not only do good prelates get marginalized, but Holy Mass itself is shunted to the side.  When will it end?

With The Ouster Of Cdl Burke And Misconduct Of SinNod, The "Lovable" Mask Comes Off Pope Francis

No longer can any thinking, alert Catholic believe that Pope Francis is an affable "good ole boy" who likes to live simply and put clown noses on his face for silly selfies.  It is becoming painfully obvious that he is quite skilled in Machiavellian and Alinskyan tactics for advancing his agenda.  These skills have been displayed all too well at this SinNod.

A few days ago, after the release of the interim relatio, Cardinal Burke publicly urged - challenged - the Pope to defend unambiguously the teachings of the Church regarding marriage.  It should be emphasized that these teachings are those of Jesus Christ Himself.  Yesterday Cardinal Pell echoed that challenge.  However, it does seem that the agenda of the SinNod was planned well in advance - and that the relatio may have been written before the SinNod convened!

California Catholic Daily goes into detail about the planned short-comings of the SinNod:

• The prohibition against the publication of bishops' statements, unheard of in any other such gathering
• No mention of chastity or pursuit of holiness
• Over-emphasis on divorced/remarried issues to the exclusion of others (pornography, polygamy in Africa, etc)
• An obvious deference to the opinions of the secular world as to what constitutes "mercy"

Cardinal Walter Kasper of Germany appears to be the "front man" for the Vatican apparatus that is pushing for doctrinal changes in regards to distributing Holy Communion to de facto adulterers.  There is much information about Kasper and his thinking; I won't delve into it here lest I digress from the main points of this post, but I do urge all to read it. 

I will also link to a National Catholic Register article by Edward Pentin (the same who caught Kasper in a lie regarding his African quip).  The evidence he cites, plus other points cited by others and me (review my postings from this past week) during the past few days, indicates that this SinNod is not much more than an engineered "dog and pony show" conducted to give cover to the advancement of a diabolical agenda masterminded by a select few.  If true, we can only conclude that Pope Francis is one of those select few.  If this isn't Machiavellian and Alinskyan, I don't know what is.

Pope Francis has yet to answer the challenges of Cardinals Burke and Pell for defense of the Church's teachings on families.  Cardinal Burke had some words to say on this, stating that "the Pope has done a lot of harm by not saying openly what his position is", and that the "synod was designed to change Church teaching".  Both Buzz Feed and Rorate Caeli have accounts of this interview today.  In this same interview, His Eminence confirmed that he has been ousted from the Apostolic Signatura.

Some might think my words regarding Pope Francis to be rather caustic. But look at the events of the past few days and consider that they could not have happened without permission from the Pope.  I regret to say that his refusal to affirm Church teaching regarding the divorced/remarried seems to be a glaring signal of things to come.

I close now with a Vortex that was done just after Voris et al got word of the Cardinal's interview.

Cardinal Burke's Interview Two Months Ago - Truth With Clarity

Two months ago, Cardinal Burke gave an interview for a Polish magazine - naturally published in Polish.  LifeSiteNews has obtained an English translation of it.  In this interview, Cardinal Burke has outlined with clarity Christian truths as they impact our culture at large.

I urge careful attention to be paid to questions 7 and 10 - and most especially # 10.  Consider that in light of the HHS contraception mandate cases being heard by the US Supreme Court; oral arguments commenced today.

Today came the news that something called the "National Coalition of American Nuns" has sided with the Obamanistas and support the contraception mandate, throwing their fellow Catholics under the bus.  Of course, what also went under the bus are their religious vows.  Perhaps they should study question 7 in the Burke interview.

Judie Brown of American Life League and Rush Limbaugh weighed in on the interview as well.

Cardinal Burke: Nancy Pelosi Must Be Denied Holy Communion

LifeSiteNews published an article regarding an interview given by Cardinal Burke, head of the Apostolic Signatura.   The article links to the full interview as reproduced by the Wanderer.

As he commented about the status of the Church in the United States, he touched on many topics: the gay agenda, abortion, Tridentine Mass.  When asked about a particularly scandalous statement that Nancy Pelosi made regarding the Faith, he replied, "Certainly this is a case when Canon 915 must be applied." (emphasis mine)  Very simply, Canon 915 states that "those obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion".

Notice that His Eminence did not say that she shouldn't present herself for Holy Communion (that would be Canon 916).  No doubt he is aware that she would arrogantly do so anyway.  In invoking Canon 915, Cardinal Burke clearly lays the onus on the two bishops who would, before God, have some spiritual responsibility for Pelosi: Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco (her home diocese) and Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington DC (her "home-away-from-home" diocese).  Cardinal Wuerl has already made known his aversion to Canon 915.  Did I say "aversion"?  Perhaps "disregard" is a better word.  In fact, recall that in Lent of 2012, he actually punished a priest, Father Marcel Guarnizo for upholding Canon 915.  Most of my Feb-March 2012 posts elaborated on that disgraceful action of the DC chancery in regard to Father Guarnizo.

What Cardinal Wuerl and so many others call a "pastoral" approach is cowardice and/or currying of favor of powerful dissidents.  There is no real regard for the eternal destinies of Pelosi and others like her.  The real pastoral approach can be found in the words and practices of both Cardinal Burke and Father Guarnizo.

Cardinal Burke States The Obvious: Muslims Do NOT Worship The One True God

The Remnant has commentary on what Cardinal Burke said in a recent teleconference.  They point out that what Cardinal Burke flies in the face of some nonsense uttered in various Church documents.  Yes, it's nonsense to claim that Muslims worship the God that we worship.  Even Muslims will agree on that point, although they hold erroneously that their false idol "allah" is a deity.  We thank the One True God that Cardinal Burke had the guts to go against the politically correct nonsense - no, heresy - that claims that "allah" is just another word for God.

Cardinal Burke And Archbishop Schneider Warn Of Evils Underlying SinNod Debacle

Cardinal Raymond Burke, now Patron of the Order of Malta, gave an interview to Breitbart News this past Tuesday November 4.  In it he stated that the Church risks schism if bishops are seen as going contrary to the Church's teachings in the month ahead.  No doubt exists in my mind that he is speaking of Cardinals Kasper, Marx, Baldiserri and others who seek to change the Church's teachings on marriage and Holy Communion to a horrible deformation of Christ's authentic commands.  He warned of trying to accommodate the faith to the culture.

By the way - I've reason to believe that Cardinal Kasper will be exercising strong influence over the USCCB meeting that starts tomorrow in Baltimore.  Since he was in the area last Thursday, he may well even be at the meeting - or at least orchestrating things from the background.

The next day Archbishop Athanasius Schneider also gave an interview, echoing many of Burke's concerns.  Rorate Caeli has the entire text of the interview.  He state that during the SinNod there were moments of obvious manipulation and that "the interim report was clearly a prefabricated text with no reference to actual statement of the synod fathers".  I mentioned that in earlier posts.  Consider.  If indeed the SinNod puppet-masters put forth a prefabricated document while holding it out to be a reflection of deliberations that just happened, they were in fact lying to the Church at large.  There's no way to put lipstick on that pig.  Since the pope hand-picked those extra men (including Cardinal Wuerl) to the committee to compose that report, is it not logical to deduce that if the report was prefabricated that happened with the pope's approval if not initiation?

Schneider then called those paragraphs on divorced/remarried people and homosexuality as stemming from a "radical neo-pagan ideology".  He stated that the interim report will remain "a black mark which has stained the honor of the Apostolic See".  While he praises the final report, he also expresses concern that the paragraphs remain in the final report.  I've no doubt that this is being done to keep those topics "on the table" for next year's ordinary synod.

I'd urge study of the remarks of both these men.  Pray for them as well as the Church.  Cardinal Burke has already tasted vengeance for speaking the truth.  Will similar fates await Scheider, Muller, Pell and others?  We will be watching.

Cardinal Burke Calls For The Correct Consecration Of Russia To Mary's Immaculate Heart

On Tuesday Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes (of Germany) confirmed the statement of Father Amorth (Vatican exorcist) that Pope John Paul II did not consecrate Russia to Mary's Immaculate Heart in 1984.  Apparently he wanted to do so, but allowed himself to be persuaded by Vatican diplomats not to mention Russia for fear of causing political conflicts.

We all know that he consecrated "the world" to Mary's Immaculate Heart.  While that consecration was undoubtedly beneficial in and of itself, it was not done in the manner that Our Lady specified to the Fatima seers in 1917.  The LifeSiteNews posts reminds us that the Fatima apparitions are not part and parcel of the Deposit of Faith and one may be a true Catholic and not believe them.  That is true enough.  However, one either believes that the Blessed Mother spoke at that time, or they don't.  If they do believe that she spoke, then why the reticence about taking her at her word?  Why demure in complete obedience?  Why place the pleadings of Vatican officials over the requests of the Mother of God?

Today at the Rome Life Forum, Cardinal Burke called for the consecration of Russia to Mary's Immaculate Heart per her exact specifications.  He too stated that the consecration in 1984 was not in accord with Our Lady of Fatima's specifications.  His exact quote is: "Certainly, Pope Saint John Paul II consecrated the world, including Russia, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary on March 25, 1984.  But, today, once again, we hear the call of Our Lady of Fatima to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, in accord with her explicit instruction."

There are those good Catholics who insist on pretending that the Fatima requirements were satisfied in 1984.  They probably are loathe to believe that Pope St John Paul II might have faltered in being completely obedient to Our Lady of Fatima.  They fail to consider that while he was still on this earth, he was subject to his own sin-weakened human nature, as are we all.  However some others who don't have any intention to honor God have their own reasons.  One individual on Facebook believes that these faux-katholycs fear a large-scale return to Faith and Tradition if Russia is properly consecrated.  I think he's onto something, especially in light of the bad-mouthing that Cardinal Burke received from Cardinal Maradiaga (head of the pope's "gang of nine" because of his dissidence).

Cardinal Burke went on to list six requests of Our Lady of Fatima.  Five of them we should be doing regularly ourselves.  The sixth one has to do with the consecration of Russia.  Let us join the cardinal in acknowledging that the consecration to Russia has been inexcusably delayed and pray and call for its immediate fulfillment.

More On The Disgraceful Treatment Of Cardinal Burke

I truly suspect the book on which Cardinal Burke collaborated, called Remaining in the Truth of Christ, had much to do with the de facto removal of Cardinal Burke from a position of influence at the Vatican.  Read what Rorate Caeli says on the matter.  As you read it, take note of the book and its publisher in case you want to procure your own copy.  I plan to do so.

I'd also recommend a look at what Pat Archibald says in his EWTN piece "The Humiliation of Cardinal Burke (No Spin Zone)".  What's in parenthesis is key.  So many of these incidents are piling up (I've documented just a few) that one simply can no longer put a "happy face" and play "three monkeys" regarding the proceeds from the Vatican and still maintain intellectual and yes, spiritual honesty.

We need to hold the Holy Father in prayer.  However, we must also be honest and not be afraid to articulate what we see.  Else, our prayers will be greatly reduced in efficacy.

Cardinal Burke Weighs In On Responsible Catholic Voting

Yesterday LifeSiteNews relayed the proceeds of a teleconference with Cardinal Burke, in which they participated.  His Eminence gave some very cogent suggestion to Catholics and people of good will regarding the upcoming presidential elections.  I'll highlight and elaborate on a few salient points from the LSN article.

• "The faithful must vote for the candidate who will do the most to advance the protection of human life, defense of the family, respect for freedom, and care for the poor."  Note the imperative "must".  Now cannot that be said for some third-party candidate?  No - simply because he/she will not get elected.  There are only two viable candidates: Clinton and Trump.  Whether or not we like that situation is irrelevant.  It is what it is.  We need to deal with reality as it presents itself, not as we might wish it to be.
• "Burke warned Catholics against not voting at all and against the practice of writing in the name of a preferred candidate on the ballot, saying it could inadvertently cause the election of a candidate who does not respect life, family, and freedom."
• "Those are difficult considerations, and I don’t say any of this in a kind of easy way. But I do think that Catholics especially need to be very cautious and not simply opting out, or good pro-life people and good pro-family people, simply just throwing up their hands."

In that last point, His Eminence addresses the spiritual and intellectual malaise that has deluded many, if not most, of the #nevertrump crowd.  It is that malaise that seems to have caused Alan Keyes to blather on like Cokie Roberts - and he's only one of several.

Regular readers of this blog will recall that I've put forth the case that not only is it moral to vote for Trump during this election, but not to do so would be immoral.  It seems that Cardinal Burke's words corroborate my understanding of the moral theology as it pertains to this particular presidential race.

From The Maturation Department: New Annulment Procedures - Weakening Of Marriage

Yesterday we received the texts of the pope's revision of the annulment procedures.  I am not a canon lawyer so my reflections will draw heavily on those who are canon lawyers.  Now consider that many progressives and others not friendly to the Church's perennial teachings on family life are waxing bubbly and giddy over this news, ever gushing about the "mercy" that is now newly-infused into this situation.  Mercy??  New???  Since when has mercy - real mercy, that is, been "new to the Church?  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that they are effusing over the perceived laxity that has been introduced into the annulment process.  I have to agree with them that laxity has been introduced.  Unlike them I do not find much cause for celebration, for what they call "mercy" is nothing more than sloppy sentimentality and disregard for wisdom acquired over the centuries.

Last October, Cardinals Burke, Muller and others published a book, "Remaining in the Truth of Christ", intending that it be "food for thought" during last October's sin-nod.  Recall that this is the book that Cardinal Baldiserri had stolen from the mailboxes of the attending synod fathers.  Cardinal Burke's essay outlined the development of the Church's annulment process over the centuries and cautioned against a radical overhaul.  I point out that Cardinal Burke is a canon lawyer.  He spoke on September 8th at the Franciscan University at Steubenville and voiced concerns over the provisions that are found in Pope Francis' Moto Proprio.  Follow this link to Fr Z's post with video embedded; Father gives pointers regarding the location of Cardinal Burke's talk on the video.

Consider two of the provision in conjunction with one another.  One provision allows the local bishop to pass judgment regarding certain annulment cases.  It's worth noting that most bishops are not canon lawyers, and marriage has juridical considerations that need to be carefully and knowledgeably weighed.  Now consider that in many cases, these decisions do not have to be evaluated by a second tribunal court.  A crucial provision for "checks and balances" has been eliminated in the name of "expediency and mercy" - a provision that in actuality is necessitated all the more since the first decisions will fall into the purview of those not trained to evaluate nullity petitions.  They might wind up declaring null a marriage that is, in actually, canonically and sacramentally binding.  Even more disconcerting is the expedition of those cases where both parties are in agreement as to the alleged invalidity of marriage.  Do we see the danger of collusion here in the denial of a valid marriage?  Dr. Peter's two posts are here and here.  As I said earlier, I'm not a canon lawyer, but some dangers are apparent just by dint of common sense.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am also troubled by the timing of these Moto Proprios.  This happened just a few weeks prior to the onslaught beginning of the Ordinary Synod on the Family.  I believe this is done to condition us for some real disasters that are on progressives' agendas.

Cardinal Burke: Formal Correction Now Necessary

As we all know, the pope has not responded to the dubia issued by Cardinals Burke, Branduller, Caffara, and the now-deceased Meisner.  The dubia were five very simple questions, requiring a mere "yes" or "no".

Cardinal Burke, in a recent interview, has stated that in light of the pope's unresponsiveness, a formal correction on some areas of the pope's teachings (particularly as found in Amoris Laetitia) is now necessary.  The pope will then be obliged to respond.  As Burke points out, the Church is being divided over various interpretation of Amoris Laetitia.  Recent comments from the Vatican favor interpretations that fly in the face of Church Tradition, i.e., the Teachings of Jesus Christ.

LifeSiteNews has summarized twelve points about this situation.  The text of the interview (at least the pertinent section) is here.   Meanwhile, Cardinal Brandmuller (another dubia cardinal) published an article about a tradition of popes reciting a declaration of faith upon their ascents to the char of Peter; it's high time that tradition was reinstated.

Let us pray that these Cardinals can proceed with all due haste, and more importantly, that the pope will respond to this correction in such a way that will preserve fidelity to the Church's timeless teachings on marriage, family, sexuality, and the sacraments.