From The Maturation Department - Cardinal Baldiserri Embraces Heresy Of Modernism

I came across a video of a talk given by Father Paul Scalia of the Diocese of Arlington.  This is an expose of the heresy known as modernism.  In it Father details why it is a heresy and what various popes, particularly Pope St Pius X, had to say about it.  One of the links I'll give below gives the entire text of the Oath Against Modernism that the sainted pontiff ordered all clergy and seminary teachers to take.  The context of the video itself makes plain that this talk occurred several years ago when Pope Benedict XVI was still the reigning pontiff so he could not have had any premonition of the events of the past year, particularly of the disastrous sin-nod of last October.  One salient point came at the 25:57 mark, when Father said "once you have 'evolution of dogma' there's really no dogma whatsoever".  Hold that truth in mind as we proceed through this post.

Two weeks ago, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldiserri opened a three-day conference of lay and family movements.  Aleteia has more coverage of that.  The conference was called to reflect upon the preparatory document for next October's synod; encompassed in that was the final report from last October's sin-nod: the one that contained, by order of Pope Francis, the three morally questionable statements that had been voted down by the synod fathers.

The Cardinal took some questions.  One of them was from an organization that expressed shock that Cardinal Kasper could suggest that those divorced and remarried Catholics who never had their first marriages declared null by the Church, should be able to receive Holy Communion while living in de facto adultery.  (By the way - here's some more examples of the problems with Cardinal Kasper.)  The Cardinal replied by saying "we shouldn't be shocked that there is a different position from the 'common doctrine'".   Then he went on to say, "there’s no reason to be scandalized that there is a cardinal or a theologian saying something that’s different than the so-called ‘common doctrine.’ This doesn’t imply a going against. It means reflecting. Because dogma has its own evolution; that is a development, not a change." Emphasis mine, and for reasons stated in the first paragraph.

Edward Pentin has a brief commentary, but his includes the text of Pope Pius X's Oath Against Modernism.  He too highlighted the relevant statements.  If Cardinal Baldserri took that oath, he violated it.  By the way - if the name "Edward Pentin" seems familiar, he's the British journalist whose career Cardinal Kasper tried to destroy after Pentin caught Kasper in a lie regarding his "african" quip - but I digress.  A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics has some additional commentary.

Some may wonder why I harp on Cardinal Baldiserri since the sin-nod happened in last October.  What happened last October was a preparation for the Ordinary Synod on the Family that will occur next October.  Baldiserri, by the pope's designation, will have the same leadership role next October as he did last time.  You must understand the minds and the errors that will pervade next year's meeting.  Understand, too, that the pope said we have a "year to mature".  It seems like one phase of this attempted "maturation" is to induce Catholics to swallow the heresy of modernism.  Watch Father Scalia below to learn more of this threat.

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?

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.

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.

Double-Shame On CUA - Dissident Cardinal Kasper To Receive Award From CUA

Two days ago the esteemed Cardinal Burke gave an interview to the Catholic World Report.  In that interview he lamented that the SinNod was obviously orchestrated by certain elements (and Edward Pentin opines from the top - the Pope?) to advance progressive, dissident agendas.  He also went so far as to say that Cardinal Kasper's racist remarks were made to advance his dissident positions.  It is obvious that indeed the remarks were a clumsy attempt to discredit Cardinal Napier.  He might have gotten away with his lie had it not been for Edward Pentin's recording.

Quite frankly, Cardinal Kasper has been shown to be a flaming dissident and a bald-faced liar.

Now comes the burning question  Why, oh why, is the Catholic University of America going to bestow its Johannes Quasten Award on him on Nove 6th?  See this Rorate Caeli post for the details.  Apparently the attendees will also sit through his wind-bag exercise about the "Theological Background of the Ecclesiological and Ecumenical Vision of Pope Francis".  I don't know about any of you, but I think the world has already had its face rubbed enough in that muddy mess of a "vision".  At the end of his closing remarks at the end of the SinNod, the pope said we now have "one year to mature".  "Mature" means to be brainwashed into accepting heresy.  It's odd how I'm just noticing now that "mature" and "manure" are different by only one letter - but in the context of the pope's address I don't think it's that much of a difference.  But with this address, the "manure-maturation" process will be underway!  I am reminded of David Kupelian's book The Marketing of Evil.  He talks of the psychological process of jamming.  Since the progressives in the Church are working for acceptance of the gay sin inside our Church, I can see him borrowing a tactic of gay activists.

But let's get back to the Catholic University of America.  What has gotten into them?  As we saw yesterday, they are about to renege on their responsibilities as Catholic educators and let a gay rights activist be celebrated on campus.  Now they're going to bestow a prestigious award to a dissident cleric who has attempted to push through his warped agenda during last week's SinNod.  In prior posts I have lauded CUA for standing firm in Catholic matters, such as keeping their dorms unisex.  Now with these two pieces of news that I share, I must wonder if they've been infected with that deadly disease known as "the Francis Effect".  Pray for CUA, for things don't bode well for them spiritually.

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.

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.

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. 

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.

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.

More Details On What Is Being Called The Shadow Council

I wrote yesterday of the Shadow Council that happened in the Vatican a few days ago.  Edward Pentin wrote a follow-up piece that listed some of the key invitees to that meeting.  He pointed out that there was not a variety of perspectives represented at the meeing.

One Peter Five linked to a translation of an Italian news source that gave some details of the discussion proceeds.  I link to it here but must warn you that some of the ideas expressed at that meeting appeared to border on pornographic.  If the transcripts of the meeting are indeed made public, we may have to rate them "x" or "r" as we do some movies.

Pope Paul VI is said to have lamented the "smoke of satan entering in the Church."  It seems that a large component of that smoke may be carbon monoxide.  Pray.

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.

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.

Mic'd Up - UnCatholic Media

In today's Mic'd Up, Michael Voris takes on "unCatholic media".  He places four groupings of media organizations under that umbrella:

1. Establishment Catholic media - for example, the official publications of the various dioceses
2. Dissident media - examples include the publications of Catholics For Free Choice, New Ways, etc.
3. Reactionary media - Under this category he places the Remnant, Catholic Family News
4. Secular media - Washington Post, Boston Globe

Below is the video.  As you watch it, please bear these posts in mind.  They pertain to Vortexes that he put up several months ago.  As background, he is responding to criticisms from others for not pointing out the pope's faults.  In my own posts I acknowledged he had the right to determine his own policies in what he published.  Where I did take exception was his lambasting us who did point out dubious papal doings and sayings.

Since the time of those regrettable posts, the number of papal gaffes have multiplied to such an extent that no reasonable person can escape noticing them and that is evident in the video below.  Pay close attention to his conversations with Edward Pentin (particularly at the 12:20 mark) and Christina Niles (particularly at 36:00 as she speaks of "right diagnosis").  Perhaps it was the muck and mire proceeding from last October's sin-nod that proved the tipping point; who knows?

As far as that first grouping of "establishment Catholic media" goes, one such outlet can be thanked for the origin of this blog.  The Catholic Standard's obstinate refusal to acknowledge the problems in the DC chancery left me no alternative but to start this to get the truth out.  Now the video:

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

From The Maturation Department: Forward, Ho!

Like The Titanic,  The Pope Moves Us Forward!

March 7th was the 50th anniversary for Mass in the vernacular.  Pope Francis celebrated the occasion in a Mass in Rome.  Speaking of the "liturgical reforms" of the past 50 years, he said in his homily, "Let us thank the Lord for what he has done in his Church in these 50 years of liturgical reform. It was truly a courageous gesture for the Church to draw near to the people of God so that they are able to understand well what they are doing. This is important for us, to follow the Mass in this way. It is not possible to go backwards. We must always go forward. Always forward!  And those who go backward are mistaken. Let us go forward on this path."

An important note: When I speak of "liturgical reforms" in quotes, I am NOT speaking of the Novus Ordo rite, as stipulated in real Vatican II documents.  Rather, I refer to popular bastardizations of the same.  Vatican II never mandated:

• Use of the vernacular.  Rather, they mentioned that Latin was to be held in high esteem and to be commonly used
• Turning of altar towards the people
• Removal of Communion rails
• Distribution of Holy Communion in the hand rather than on the tongue

So what are some of the fruits of these bogus "liturgical reforms" for which we should be "thankful"?

• Clown and balloon Masses
• Mass attendance plummeting from 80% of Catholic to approximately 10%
• Terrible seminary formation (although that might be up-swinging slightly)
• Reception of Sacraments declining
• Contraception and abortion being practiced by Catholics resulting in..
• Reduced numbers of parishioners, resulting in disappearance of entire parishes
• Religious orders vanishing due to lack of vocations

That list could go on and on; you get the point.  Anyway, the logic in his statements is fundamentally flawed.  "It is not possible to go backwards"?  How about when the course on which one is embarked is wrong or even sinful?  Isn't repentance and conversion all about changing course?  By the way - USA Today confirms the growing popularity of the Latin Mass, that is, Mass in the Extraordinary Rite.

But I would suspect this talk of "moving forward" and "not possible to go backwards" is really part and parcel of the "maturation effort" that seems to have been put in place since the sin-nod ended last October.

We all recall that disastrous interim relatio that came out midway into the sin-nod last October.  It is important to remind ourselves that far from being unaware of this horrid document, that Pope Francis knew of its contents and approved of its release.  At the conclusion of this sin-nod, the pope said we had a "year to mature" before next October's sin-nod.  That remark seemed to be the signal for the progressives in Church hierarchy to bombard us all with "maturation efforts".  I had to develop the "maturation department" on this blog to keep track of it.  We know that there will be more "maturation" efforts during these next few months.  By the way - speaking of "bombardment", realize that it is a tactic of psychological warfare; read this and see how relevant it is to all this "maturation".

One of the latest examples is an effort by Gary Cutting, a philosophy professor at Notre Dame and obviously a protege of the late Fr Hesburgh.  A quote from the Cardinal Newman Society indicates that Cutting finds the teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ to be "philosophically untenable and theologically unnecessary".  I sure hope he repents before he has that conversation before Our Lord, but I digress.  To be fair to Cutting, what he said is just a step or two beyond the dissident plop that was the interim relatio.

Edward Pentin is a British journalist (and faithful Catholic) who did much to shine the light on some chicanery last October.  A few days ago he published a piece that explains why the selection of attendees at the next synod may be an attempt to stack the attendance with those of dissident leanings.  We certainly know that Cardinal Burke won't be in attendance this time.

While the Pope cannot formally declare error (lest he be an anti-pope), we do know that grave harm can be done in the name of being "pastoral".  All indications are that this is a key motive behind all the nonsense oozing from progressive quarters in the Church.  We will keep the spotlight on the cockroaches.  We will continue to pray - and maybe discontinue donations.  I'm sure there will be updates.