Did The US Deep State Force The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI?

As we all know, Pope Francis is critically ill.  There is well-founded concern that he may be in his final days.  Calls for prayers on his behalf have been all over the internet.  We certainly must pray for his repentance and conversion to the One True Faith.  Let's face it.  He has done much to deconstruct the Church: the full-on attacks of the Traditional Latin Mass, cancelation of faithful bishops and priests, foisting the abortion-tainted Covid vaccine at every opportunity, hob-nobbing with Jeffrey Sachs and promoting earth-worship under the guise of "protecting the climate" etc.  That list could go and on.

Should he recuperate without repentance, that list would no doubt lengthen.  Therefore, with no sign of repentance, I will withhold prayer for physical healing.  Ladies and gentlemen, we cannot loose sight of the forest (millions of Catholics) for the sake of one tree (Francis).  Thanks to his wreck-o-vation of the Church, millions have had their faith compromised and weakened, perhaps at the cost of their eternal salvation.  Do we accuse Francis in this matter?  No, but by the same token, neither do we excuse him.  We look at his actions and see what has happened.

It's only natural to think about possible successors to Francis, especially in light of how he stacked the College of Cardinals over the years.  We also need to reevaluate whether or not Benedict's resignation was valid or invalid, and the integrity of the conclave that "elected" Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio to the papacy.  Why now, you may ask?  Because any underhanded machinery that most likely engineered that transition will be brought back into action when Francis passes to his reward.

We've known for some time that there was undue influence regarding the election of Bergoglio.  McCarrick made no bones about that.  Other pertinent articles are here. 

On Feb 20, LifeSiteNews published some very relevant pieces.  I urge you to read them and to watch the videos embedded therein, as well as reading the linked articles.  See here and here. 

Linked here is a petition to ask President Trump to investigate alleged pressure placed by the US government on Pope Benedict to resign the papacy.  Understand that if the investigation determines that such coercion happened, then by canon law, Benedict's resignation would invalid and thus the papacy of Bergoglio would likewise be null and void.

Again, please pray for his conversion and repentance.  Pray also that no more US deep state interference occurs, so that there is some slim chance of a truly holy, capable Catholic being elevated to Peter's Chair.

Glenn Beck Interviews Taylor Marshall Regarding State Of The Church

Glenn Beck interviewed Taylor Marshall on his program yesterday.  They discussed some aspects of the Church's current situation, and Pope Benedict's book that was just released posthumously.  They went into some details regarding Archbishop Vigano's work for Benedict and how Vigano came to expose so much of the Church's corruption, particularly as it pertained to the now-disgraced Theodore McCarrick.  Please see below. 

By the way - the title of this clip is "How Vatican City's Dark Secrets Are Relevant To You".  Make no mistake, they ARE relevant to each and every one of us.  No one can excuse themselves from the obligation to inform themselves of such matters.  No one can pretend that what happens in the Vatican has no bearing on their individual life.  It most certainly does, as what happens in the Church can have decisive consequences for eternal salvation, particularly if they remain culpably ignorant of them.

Rush To Judgment Regarding Pope Benedict XVI

No, I'm not talking of those who might be bad-mouthing the late pontiff.  Far from it.  I am quite baffled about those who have already declared him not only a saint but a Doctor of the Church.  Utilizing the canard of "not speaking ill of the dead", they poo-poo legitimate objections to their haste for the bestowal of these honors and in fact cast aspersions on those of us who do raise cautionary voices.

Let's face some unpleasant facts now, shall we?  When Benedict ascended to the papal throne in 2005, he asked people to "pray for me that I may not flee for fear of the wolves."  He had some knowledge of what progressive elements in the Vatican could do.  Yet he took the papal oath anyway.  Included in that oath is the promise to "keep without sacrifice to itself the discipline and the rite of the Church.  I will put outside the Church anyone who dares to go against this oath.."  He did do that, most notably with his July 2007 Summorum Pontificum that took the Tridentine Mass out of the evil clutches of progressive bishops.

However, less than eight years later, that changed.  He announced his rather odd and frankly, canonically irregular (if not impossible) resignation from the papacy.  Looking back, I think we can all see the evil hand of the Sankt Gallen mafia driving that whole thing.  Maybe we couldn't see it at the time, but no doubt Benedict did.  How could have not have known what was to follow after he left Peter's chair?  Perhaps he wasn't privy to all the details of their plans, but he must have known that they had their long knives out for Holy Mother Church.  He did not remain at his post to guard the Deposit of Faith.  Some argue that we don't know Benedict's real motives for so doing.  Be that as it may, could any well-intentioned motive have even mattered?

Some are now saying that because the papacy is now "no longer bifurcated" that Francis is now pope without a doubt.  Hold up a minute.  There remains the matter of compromised elections, that would render a papal election to be invalid.  I touched upon that in a post from seven years ago.  One correction to that post; whereas I assumed Francis' election was valid, I no longer hold that assumption.  I simply don't know.

The late pope will be buried later this week.  We must pray for his soul and for Holy Mother Church.  Here is a take on the matter from Michael Matt.

Pope Benedict XVI - Requiescat In Pace

The Holy Father - the real one - passed away at 9:34 Italian time this morning.  We pray now for his immortal soul and the Church Militant that he left behind.  I believe it was in 2007 when he released his moto propitio that made clear that the Tridentine Mass was a valid rite and that no prelate could prevent its celebration.  The current occupant of the chair of Peter undid that, as well as unleashing immeasurable harm against Holy Mother Church.

Regrettably Benedict shared some responsibility for that harm, with his extremely irregular "resignation".  When he proffered that, he paved away for the destructive debacle known as Francis' papacy.  Some are now lamenting that Francis is now unrestrained.  I am not certain how he was ever restrained, but only time will tell.

In the meantime, we pray for the eternal repose of Benedict XVI and for the return of a true pope.  At this time, owing to all the signs that Francis' election was rigged and therefore canonically invalid, I am not certain that we have a true pope at this time.  Pray for the One True Church, now rudderless.

Pope Francis Becomes More Blatant In Enabling Sin Of Homosexual Relations

Pope Francis, in a handwritten letter that supported Fr. James Martin's gay-enabling website, stated that "God does not disown any of His children".   Nowhere in that letter is there any mention of the need to repent of sins of sodomy and other gay perversions.  All that letter does is offer false comfort to those who, by homosexual acts, are throwing themselves to hell.

It's worth noting that this regrettable letter from the pope directly mischaracterizes Our Lord.  He Himself said that those persisting in sin would be denied by Him.  Read Matthew 10:32-38 and Matthew 25:1-11 and Matthew 7:21-24.  

Moreover, the Church has always recognized that we can be guilty of serious sin ourselves if we cooperate with the sins of others.  Specifically, there are nine ways that can happen; that link explains those ways.  The pope's letter defends the sinful act of sodomy by not stating that repentance is required.  He offers praise to those facilitating perversions.

The pope is getting a bit more brash and bold with these dissident statements and actions.  Mind you, this one pertains to both morals and faith.  Might he soon proclaim heresy definitively?  He seems to be testing the waters, inching ever so closely towards it.  If so, I believe that would mean that his papacy is invalid.  That might already be the case, as the video below (a follow-up to last week's videos) explores.

Benedict XVI May Still Be Pope

Last week I posted a video from Taylor Marshall that offered commentary on Cardinal Robert Bellarmine's treatise on the deposition of a heretical pope.  The Cardinal is a Saint and Doctor of the Church.

Below I post a video of John-Henry Westen's interview with Dr. Edmund Mazza, a professor of Church history.  The topic of discussion is whether or not Cardinal Bergoglio's election to the papacy was valid.  More to that point, the question is whether or not Pope Benedict's resignation was valid.  There may be enough canonical anomalies to render it invalid, meaning that the real pope is Benedict XVI, not Francis.  We know that progressive prelates lobbied for Pope Francis, in possible violation of Canon Law.

Please consider these matters.  Moreover, please do NOT beg off your obligation to be informed about them.  We are lay people, yes, but no more can we content ourselves with just minding our own spiritual houses, as it were.  If this evil continues without YOU shining a light of truth on them, you may well be held culpable for your indifference to these matters.  No more of this "but we're only little lay people" cop-out.  No more can we blindly trust our prelates to tell us the unvarnished truth; in fact, that may never have been a morally valid option for us to take.

By the way, things may be falling apart for Francis in the Vatican.  Please continue to pray your daily Rosaries.

Archbishop Vigano Calls For An Investigation Of Pope Benedict's Resignation

LifeSiteNews acquired a copy of an interview in which Archbishop Vigano and Aldo Maria Valli engaged.  Among other things, Vigano opines that there are reasons to doubt both the legitimacy of Pope Benedict XVI's resignation and the election of Cardinal Bergoglio as pope.  For the record, I too believe that there is cause for such concern.

For your consideration I will post two videos that Taylor Marshall recently created regarding the Archbishop.  One is a commentary on the Valli interview.  The next is on another interview in which the Archbishop engaged with Dr. Armando Mannochia.  I haven't watched that one yet, but understand that he has kind words to say regarding Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the SSPX.  On a personal note, I was able to attend Holy Mass and receive Holy Communion during the early days of the pandemic only because local priests of the SSPX conducted "drive-in" Masses that were allowed by local authorities.  They didn't shutter their doors altogether as did our diocesan bishops.   Now the videos.

Priest Disciplined By Cardinal Ratzinger (Now Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI) Is Driving Force Behind Amazon Sin-Nod Mess

Remember how I poked fun at the Laboris Instrumentum for claiming that the "earth cries"?  That concept comes from Leonardo Boff, the dissident and heretic behind that document and much of the sin-nod itself.  Note that he left the priesthood after he was silenced by Cardinal Ratzinger.  Sound familiar?  That's because Boff was not the only one disciplined by Benedict XVI and rehabilitated by Pope Francis.  Recall that McCarrick himself was ordered to conduct no public appearances but who had those sanctions lifted when Francis took the throne.  It's quite possible that some of the motivation here is to provide yet another poke in the eye to Benedict XVI.

Did you also catch that this sin-nod will take place in Rome and not near the Amazon itself?  Wait a minute!  What about all that highfalutin talk about "smell of the sheep" and "accompaniment"?  Now I just wonder how many private jets will be spewing their carbon footprints all over the place to ferry their well-heeled passengers to this gab-fest?  At any rate, the two surviving dubia cardinals have outright condemned the Instrumentum Laboris. I would think that by extension they have rightly condemned the upcoming sin-nod itself.

Of Papal Resignations And Depositions

The seemingly non-stop insults to Tradition coming from Pope Francis have led to much discussion regarding the possibility of deposing a sitting pope and, in this case, whether or not Benedict XVI's resignation was valid.  Below are two videos.  The first is a discussion between Taylor Marshall and Eric Sammons regarding the possibility of deposing a pope.  As you listen, pay close attention at the 6:04 mark, when Sammons says, "there's only been one pope at a time; never has there been a case of two popes at a time."

That dovetails into Ann Barnhardt's video, in which she makes a case, from canon law, that the "resignation" proffered by Pope Benedict XVI was invalid.  That being the case, Benedict is still pope and Jorge Bergoglio never has been.  These videos are long, but they are well worth the investment of time to consider.  You may agree or disagree with what these individuals say, but they raise questions that all faithful Catholics must ponder for we are indeed living in treacherous times, and much of that treachery comes from Church leadership.  Now the videos...

Possible Reasons For Pope Benedict's Resignation

Dr Taylor Marshall reviews some situations in the Vatican that may have contributed to the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI from the papacy.

Revisiting The 2010 Gonzaga Debacle

In his now-famous testimony, Archbishop Vigano stated that Pope Benedict XVI had forbidden then-Cardinal McCarrick from offering public Masses, and this prohibition occurred between 2009 and 2010.  I could be incorrect, but I think it safe to assume that if it was later, then it had to have happened in the early part of 2010, certainly before June.

Let's take a stroll down memory lane, shall we?  Long-time readers of this blog will recall that we picketed the 2010 commencement exercises of Gonzaga High because Sr Carol Keehan, who was so instrumental in foisting Obamacare on this country, was giving the commencement address.  Our account of it is here.  Please note that the video includes a very direct rebuke to then-Cardinal McCarrick, who presided at the Mass.

Now keep in mind that this Gonzaga even happened June 6, 2010.  Also consider from the first paragraph that he had been sanctioned by Benedict, probably before that commencement happened.  McCarrick was most likely offering that Mass in direct disobedience to Pope Benedict XVI.  Moreover, it is very likely he did so with Wuerl's full approval.  At the time, we had no way of knowing or even suspecting that.  We can assume the same ignorance of the Gonzaga administration and Sr Carol; I'm not sure they would have cared, but that's beside the point.

My account of the 2010 episode garnered many comments, some allegedly from parents.  We had some irate parents confront us, not caring that a dissident was addressing their sons.  We wonder now what they would say, knowing that a serial rapist of young men was in such close proximity to their sons.

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.

The Pope Benedict Letter That Wasn't

The blogosphere has been all aflutter with the news/rumors that a letter from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI confirmed his beliefs that he and Pope Francis were essentially in alignment as far as philosophy and theology goes.  Some blogs evincing sedevacantist leanings went so far as to say that the pope emeritus is just another modernist, heretic, etc.  I personally have been slow to comment on this, both because of time-consuming personal matters and because I sensed that there was more to this than meets the eye.  Lo and behold, we find that the latter is true.

LifeSiteNews and other sources published the news today that the Vatican distorted the letter that Benedict XVI issued.  They obscured a paragraph to give the impression that the Pope Emeritus was giving endorsement to some books on the theology of Pope Francis.  In fact, that omitted paragraph states that the Pope Emeritus could not give an educated opinion because he hadn't read the works in question.

Now to the perpetually naive who find it impossible to imagine that the Vatican would stoop so low as to essentially falsify what Benedict XVI said, recall some recent history.  Recall the reason why Cardinal Baldiserri is known as "Book Thief Baldi".  Two years ago, many of us hypothesized that the sin-nods were dog-and-pony shows designed to foist some heresy on the Church.  We now know that heresy to be called Amoris Laetitia - or, as I call it, Amoralis Lamentia.  Cardinal Pell even called them out on it quite loudly.  So yes indeed, the Vatican of Pope Francis is well-practiced in all the skulduggery tricks of the trade.

Still, all this seems not to be enough for our sede friends.  They obviously don't appreciate the fact that Benedict XVI just politely told the Vatican mafia that they can take those books on Francis' theology with them as they take a flying leap.

There's no gainsaying that this stunt of the Vatican has backfired into a major fiasco for them.  Now the real question is, "will people understand the significance of this"?  This question should be answered not only by progressives but by sedes.

Common Core Theology From Pope Francis And Father Spadaro

Yesterday Father Antonio Spadaro, a close confidant of Pope Francis', released a tweet in which he opined "2+2 in theology can make 5 because it has to do with God and real life people".  As Mr. Olson (author of that article) points out, this statement constitutes a direct violation of the law of non-contradiction: that is, truth cannot contradict itself.

I'd urge all to read Mr. Olson's article closely.  He points out that Spadaro realized his tweet was going over like a lead balloon and issued another, essentially stepping from the frying pan into the fire: "GOD was made flesh and shows us that he is NOT only a MATHEMATICAL reason but that this original Reason is also LOVE #BenedictXVI"  He misquotes the Pope Emeritus who actually said at Auschwitz in 2006: "The God in whom we believe is a God of reason - a reason, to be sure, which is not a kind of cold mathematics of the universe, but is one with love and with goodness."  Spadaro set up a false contradiction between "love" and "reason".  Pope Benedict XVI, on the other hand, acknowledged that love can transcend reason but never contradict it.

We heard similar blathering from the newly-installed Cardinal Joseph Tobin, who took the reins at the Archdiocese of Newark.  He stated, "to believe in Jesus is not acceptance of a doctrine or a moral code, but of a person who lives now and is the source of life".  Notice the trick of setting up false dichotomies that seems now to be a perfected art form, starting at the Vatican.  The fact is that acceptance of Jesus does entail the acceptance of the doctrines and moral teachings of the Church.  If those "doctrines and codes" are not accepted, there is no belief in Jesus.  Why?  Because those "doctrines and codes" came to us from Jesus Himself.  Moreover, they are immutable because the God who bestowed them on us is Himself immutable.  Hear the words of Our Lord Himself.  I'll link to the Douay-Rheims Bible and invite you to peruse these passages:

• John 14: entire chapter
• John 15:10
• John 16:27
• 1 John 5:3
• 2 John 1:6

Notice the emphasis is on obedience, not "experience".  Too many Catholics are seduced by emotional experiences, thinking that these "experiences" have great significance.  They don't.

Getting back to Mr. Olson's article, we see a quote from Pope Benedict's address at Regensburg in which the Pope Emeritus refutes the errors that Spadaro is evincing.  After Benedict gave that address, many too umbrage at the address - including then-Cardinal Bergoglio.  By the way - after that "spit in the eye" he gave to the then-sitting pope, now Pope Francis has the nerve to sic his underlings on the four cardinals who delivered their dubia in proper canonical fashion?  How does that work?

Some might think my reference to "common core theology" to be a tad flippant.  I believe it's quite accurate, and may actually indicate quite a relationship between Spadaro's errors and the deliberate dumbing down of intellectual life that I suspect is the purpose of Common Core.  Perhaps that is a reason that too many Catholic educational institutions are adopting Common Core.  Perhaps they not only want to glom onto federal funding but they too want to facilitate the dumbing down of Catholic intellectual and moral life - to rob the Catholic in the pew of his/her rightful patrimony in the Faith.  Is this part of the "maturation" that we Catholics were supposed to undergo in the wake of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family?  It seems that a main purpose of all this "maturation" is to divorce Catholics from their moorings in the immutable teachings of Jesus, as handed down through the Church for these two thousand years, so that we will be easily manipulated by the "god of suprises" puppet as put forth by Pope Francis to cram all manners of heresy in our faces.  We cannot let that happen.

Fundamentalism: Benedict XVI Vs Francis I

I had forgotten about Pope Benedict's homily given during April 2005, but was reminded of it by Vox Cantoris.  Benedict too spoke on fundamentalism.  However, his thoughts give appropriate due to Tradition and objective truth.  He acknowledged "fundamentalism" to be a positive good, as it denotes fidelity to immutable truth.  During his homily, the Pope Emeritus said:  "Today, having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine, seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires."

Regrettably, we hear in Pope Francis' denunciation of fundamentalism the very "dictatorship of relativism" decried by his predecessor.

Why Is Church Militant Laying Into The Pope Emeritus?

Yesterday a Vortex was released that, when taken in conjunction with the one released this past Thursday, paints a puzzling picture as to the modus operandi at Church Militant.  Last Thursday, Michael Voris painted a picture of Pope Francis being victimized and exploited by various villains in the Vatican.  Yesterday he seemed to lay much blame for that situation at the feet of Pope Emeritus Benedict.  He lays out a case for damage done to the papacy by Pope Benedict's resignation, stating "Benedict's leaving of office has engendered a whole host of problems (most likely unforeseen and unintended) and given them impetus."

I for one agree.  I also believe that one of those problems is the papacy of Pope Francis.  That problem is one that Church Militant won't acknowledge.  Ladies and gentlemen, Pope Francis has been in the Vatican for several years now.  This papacy has been one freak show after another and he owns this mess.  Why is Church Militant refusing to acknowledge this "elephant in the living room" and instead portraying the Pope Emeritus as a legitimate scapegoat?  Well, we do have a parallel situation in Washington and the disasters of the Obama administration, don't we?  Years after the Messiah Most Miserable took office, his Minions Most Mindless are still trying to dismiss Obama's bungles by blaming Bush.  More and more, the parallels between Obama and Pope Francis are increasing.

Towards the end of this Vortex, Voris says of Benedict's resignation, "we must be honest enough to look at that and say, yes, he made a mistake (a big one)" and "mistakes must be called out and recognized even when they are distasteful".  True enough.  Now I call upon Church Militant to apply the same logic to the various blunders of Pope Francis.  To take Pope Benedict to task and yet to say nary a word about the mistakes of this current papacy is nonsensical at best.  The blunders of Benedict are now a matter of history while those of Pope Francis, because they are ongoing, are currently inflicting much harm on the Church.  It is the latter that must be addressed, and will be by this blog.

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.

Belgian And German Prelates Promulgate Heresy Unfettered

Last week it was announced that Johan Bonny, Bishop of Antwerp (Belgium) made public his dissidence from Catholic teaching by promulgating his opinion that same-sex couples should be recognized by the Church.  He has gone so far as to hint that these couples should be allowed to adopt children.  This post from Angelqueen has more details.

At the bottom of that post you'll see an equally disgusting quote from the rector of the Catholic University of Leuven, Rik Tors: "Do not underestimate the significance of this. Bonny advocates a change in long-held unshakable principles, something that the dogmatic pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI no bishop could afford to do."

Let's take a look at what Torfs said.  He said that Bonny felt free to mock his own bishop's miter under this pontificate, not being "free" to do so under the previous pontiffs.  There might be truth in that.  Both John Paul II and Benedict XVI upheld the teachings of Jesus Christ and, like true successors to St. Peter, expected the bishops under them to do the same.  I'll emphasize this also; what Torfs stated as being "long-held unshakable principles" are much more than that, as they have originated from God Himself and cannot be flouted without severe consequences, even if those consequences happen only in the afterlife.

The German Bishops' Conference, led by Cardinal Reinhard Marx (a key player in last October's sin-nod) issued an official statement calling for the admission of Catholics who have divorced and remarried without annulment, i.e., those living in adultery (let's call it what it is) to Holy Communion.  In other words, they want to facilitate for those Catholics the sin of sacrilegious Holy Communions.

Vox Cantorus has another quote from Bonny.  Note the theme of allowing polluted secular culture to dictate Church practices - a common theme these days.  The Germans believe they have particular impetus to do so, to increase their revenues from Germany's church-tax.

In September of 2013, the Holy Father excommunicated an Austrilian priest for conducting himself as one after his faculties had been suspended.  They were suspended because he advocated various heretical positions, among them "same-sex marriage".  In light of that, one must wonder why he lets Bonny, Marx et al carry on with their shenanigans while he has sacked Cardinal Burke who is an exemplary champion of the Church.

Voris Rebukes Some High-Placed German Bishops

In today's Vortex, Michael Voris calls out the bishops of Germany for their heresy.  I just have a few caveats.  First, while he rightly rebukes Cardinals Kasper and Marx, one must bear in mind just who is enabling these men to wield considerable influence.  It is none other than Pope Francis.  While he lauds the heretical Kasper as a "serene theologian" he has stripped Cardinal Burke, a truly capable and faithful son of the Church of all Vatican authority and assigned him a largely ceremonial role.  I believe that means that Cardinal Burke will not be able to attend next year's Ordinary Synod on the Family.

I also hoped that he would have exempted Cardinals Gerhard Muller and Walter Brandmuller, for they have spoken against much nonsense, including some that occurred at last month's SinNod.  They are Germans but they are so in the mold of Cardinal Von Galen.  Of course we won't forget the German bishop who is now the Pope Emeritus.

He does accurately diagnose some motives behind Kasper's shilling for laxity in Catholic moral teaching.  Listen closely as he describes how Germany allots tax revenues to the churches in its borders.  But as you do, bear in mind the question, "who is enabling Kasper and Marx in their promulgation of heresy and dereliction of duty?"

CUA - Cardinal Kasper Does Damage Control For Pope Francis

As stated a few days ago, Cardinal Kasper was slated to give an address at Catholic University of America yesterday.  He did, as scheduled.  What I know of the address can be found at Catholic News Agency.

The main purpose of his address seemed to be to project a particular picture of Pope Francis.  He cautioned against conceptions "which try to appropriate Pope Francis in their own way."  Thus said he who claimed to speak for the pope a month or two ago.  Cardinal Burke's contradiction of that statement notwithstanding, Cardinal Kasper probably does speak for the pope.  It is precisely that which makes Kasper's shilling for Holy Communion for those living in adultery to be so troubling.

Further in the address Kasper said that Pope Francis can be better understood against "the backdrop of Argentinian liberation theology".  That would be the same "liberation theology" roundly condemned by Pope Benedict XVI in December 2009; see this Vatican site - you'll probably need to translate it.

Then he introduces a rather bizarre concept of "theology of the people".  "Theology of the people"???!??!  Pardon my french, but what the hell is that????   He says Pope Francis honors the concept of sensus fidei, but of course that leaves us to wonder how the pope honored the sensus fidei of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, or even that of the synod fathers when he ordered the voted-down heretical paragraphs to be included in the final relatio synodi.

I urge all to read carefully the Catholic News Agency link, for it summarizes quite well how dangerous Cardinal Kasper is to the True Faith.  Moreover, since Pope Francis has yet to contradict Kasper's claim of speaking for him, it is not unreasonable to opine that perhaps he too embraces those same harmful mindsets.

So now you have an idea of what will most likely happen at the USCCB meeting that starts Monday.