Kissy-Face's Lame Attempt At Damage Control

Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez, aka Kissy-Face, issued yesterday what he claims to be a "clarification" of Fiducia Supplicans.  In reality, it seems nothing more than a lame attempt to throw smoke and dust into the eyes of those who clearly see the diabolical nature of the screed.

Look at section 4 of that letter.  The "theological reflection" as he calls FS, is, according to him, "a real development from what has been said about blessings in the Magisterium and the official texts of the Church".  Substitute the word "divergence" for "development" and you have a halfway-true statement.  Then he said that "the text requires an effort to think serenely, with the heart of shepherds, free from all ideology."  Italics mine.  Let's unpack that double-speak, shall we?  What is meant by "ideology" in this context is the doctrines and dogmas of the Church as handed down through the centuries, because they ultimately come from God Himself.  By the way - Kissy Face should be delighted to know that there is a place that is free of all that "ideology".  It's called hell.

He goes on to betray his disdain for the Church's teaching by saying that Francis "proposed that we think of a way of blessing that does not require the placing of so many conditions to carry out this simple gesture of pastoral closeness, which is a means of promoting openness to God in the midst of the most diverse circumstances."   These conditions are the moral teachings of the Church.  How can a desire to be free of those not be its own serious sin?   Now substitute for the phrase "most diverse circumstances" the more accurate phrase "inherently sinful situations".

As we all know by now, entire bishops' conferences and religious orders see FS for the cow plop that it is and are refusing to implement it.  So now in section 5 the arm-twisting of these clerics is underway.  In section 5, of these so-called "blessings" he says, "we are talking about something that last about 10 or 15 seconds.  Does it make sense to deny these kinds of blessings to these two people who ask for them?"  Ladies and gentlemen, when have you ever seen this kind of pouting and whining in a Church document?  What difference does it make that this act of cooperating with sin lasts only a few seconds?  Most murders take about the same amount of time.

I have neither time nor stomach to analyze this entire tome.  GloriaTV has done a nice job, as has Peter Kwasniewski in Crisis Magazine.  I will say this, though.  I dubbed Cardinal Fernandez "Kissy Face" because of that less-than-theological masterpiece (cough!) that he wrote called "Heal Me With Your Mouth - The Art Of Kissing".  After wading both through Fiducia Supplicans and this pig-slop of a "clarification", I'm glad that I didn't subject myself to the torture of reading that book.

BIshop Strickland, A True Bishop - Bishop Kissy-Face, Not So Much

During the Dodger's accolades for the pervert bunch "sisters of perpetual indulgence" in Los Angeles California, Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler Texas led a rosary procession outside the stadium in protest of this orgy, which was both the elevation of evil and blasphemy and mockery of the Catholic Church.  We might point out that no LA bishop could bestir himself to utter a peep of protest, let alone join Bishop Strickland.

Almost immediately afterwards, Bishop Strickland was advised that he was to undergo an "apostolic visitation" ordered by the pope.  Taylor Marshall informs us that one of the bishops descending upon Strickland is Bishop Kicanas of Tuscon, AZ.  Haven't we heard that name earlier?

LifeSiteNews lists a number of Strickland's activities that might have aroused some rancor in the Vatican, causing them to jump into Nazi/Mafia mode.  The protest against the perverts strikes me as a key possibility, in light of other concurrent Vatican activities.

One of them is the invitation that the pope extended to a so-called "artist" named Andres Serrano.  He is a photographer who, in 1987, took a photo of a Crucifix completely submerged in a jar containing his urine.  This was known as "P--s Christ".  It rightly caused great outrage due to its sacrilegious nature and intent.  Observe the picture of the pope giving a "thumbs-up" to this unrepentant blasphemer.  What was that about the nine ways of cooperating with sin?  By the way - if Serrano offered a public apology with commensurate acts of reparation, please advise.  Else, I hold that he remains unrepentant.

Then there is the appointment of an old buddy of the pope's to the post of Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.  The new appointee?  None other than Argentinian Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez.  He is also the author of that (ahem!) "theological masterpiece" called "Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art Of Kissing".  Hence his nickname "Bishop Kissy-Face".  He is widely believed to be the ghost-writer behind Amoris Laetetia. 

Francis' elevation of Bishop Kissy-Face and glad-handing of Serrano are just the latest two manifestations of what appears to be his total disdain for Holy Mother Church and her Traditions.  Bishop Strickland, on the other hand, has been fearlessly upholding the Church and her Lord.  He is now experiencing much of what Cardinal Burke, Archbishop Vigano, Cardinal Zen, Father Altman and other faithful clergy have been experiencing.  We must stand with these men and against the tyrants that crawl the halls of Vatican City.

I understand that the Peter's Pence collection is underway.  Boycott it.  Do not fund Bishop Kissy-Face's new position and other nefarious productions from this Vatican.

Prefect Of The Dicastery For The Doctrine Of The Faith - A Porn Author

Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez, aka Kissy-Face, published a book in 1995 called "Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art Of Kissing", for which he is rightly derided.  Now comes the news that several years later, in 1998, he published a far worse book called "The Mystical Passion".  If it's not pornographic, I don't know what is.  Complicit Clergy links to the book.  Be warned, it is quite graphic.  Think about that last statement.  We're talking of the writings of a priest, not some seedy pervert in a slum.  Well, come to think of it, maybe they're both correct (save for the "slum" descriptor.

Consider that he was already a priest when he penned that filth.  He could only write it if it was in his mind.  I don't know what's worse: its salacious statements or the blasphemous ones.  Given the vetting that the Vatican does when it elevates people to trusted positions, they had to have known about both books.  So Francis elevated Kissy despite his porn-dabbling?  Is it "despite" or is it "because"?

On one hand, we have Bishop Strickland being given the heave-ho for allowing the Traditional Latin Mass to be offered in his diocese.  Will Kissy-Face be let go, as well?  For the benefit of the entire Church, not to mention his own soul, he should be dismissed from his post, if not the clerical state.

Now help me out with this matter of confusion.  Kissy is Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith - or is that Dung Heap of Filth?

Our Lady - Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix

As the Solemnity of Mary, the Mother of God draws near, we must address the latest and needless kerfuffle to emanate from the Vatican.  Apparently, they are discouraging the use of the terms "co-redemptrix" and "mediatrix" as titles for Our Lady.  This was accomplished through the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith on November 4, when they issued Mater Populi Fidelis.  By the way, the prefect is Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez, aka, Cardinal Kissy-Face, who has published veritable pornography.  In a nutshell, it's more dumbing down of the faith, all to appease the idol of false ecumenism.

A few weeks ago, Father James Altman was interviewed by John-Henry Westin of LifeSiteNews.  Among other things, they discuss these insults to Our Lady.  He states that this move is just the latest step to try to turn the One True Faith into just another protestant denomination.  I recommend that you read this piece and watch the embedded video.

Also read this piece from eternallycatholic.com.  The author delves into some history behind those two Marian titles, showing how popes, bishops, and doctors of the Church have advocated their usage.  This latest insult, courtesy of Kissy-Face, flies in the face of the Tradition of the Church.

Why Fiducia Supplicans Is Spiritually Poisonous

Some otherwise faithful Catholics are obviously having difficulty accepting that the Vatican is so depraved that it has put out such a poisonous document.  They want to believe so badly that this pope is not so corrupt as to undermine the Church that they twist themselves into pretzels believing that there might be some redeeming quality to FS as to restore their faith in this papacy.  But therein lies their error.  They put too much faith in a sitting pope rather than in the Church's teachings and traditions as handed down through the centuries.

I will now relay some of the most frequent denial tactics that I've read on social media. Here is the text of Fiducia Supplicans.  By the way- please have the FS document open as you read this post.

"The priest gives a blessing to all people after Mass".  That is a general blessing to the congregation at large, not targeted to specific people, especially those designated because of sinful relationships.  It has always been ok to bless people and ask for God's guidance.  That begs the question of just why did the pope highlight those in "irregular relationships"?  And why is the word "irregular" used when the more truthful adjective is "sinful"?

"The theology of marriage isn't challenged"  Perhaps not overtly, but it is.  A blessing on a gay couple, even though it may not be "liturgical", does lend legitimacy to the relationship that makes those two people a "couple".   "Only individuals are being blessed, not the relationship".  Read the document.  It's right there in the title to Section 3 of the tome.

Those are two common attempts to deny the harm of FS.  Let's take another look at the thing, shall we?

Since my previous post on this topic, there have been a number of commentaries that have demonstrated the fatal flaws of Fiducia Supplicans.  I see no need for me to "reinvent the wheel as it were, so I will link to them and recommend all to your reading.  An important aside - I link to articles such as these so that you can draw your own conclusions and not just rely on my understandings of what the authors say.  We ALL have a duty, no matter our stations in life, to be informed of these matters.  Ignorance is not a morally acceptable option.

The first of these is an analysis by Cardinal Gerhard Muller.  He notes several troubling aspects of FS.  First, there is the attempt to introduce another type of "blessing".  Why?  Because the blessing already recognized by the Church demand agreement between the blessings and the Church's teachings.  Having this last sentence in mind, please pop over to the other browser window with FS open, and read paragraph 12 in its entirety.  You should be getting a sense of how insidious FS is, since it overtly calls for a new type of "blessing" that is not subjected to "too many moral prerequisites",  because they could "overshadow the unconditional power of God's love".  Absolute satanic nonsense!  The "moral prerequisites" are God's Commands.  His love and His commands stem from Him.  God does not have a split personality.

Muller goes on to say that sinful persons can be blessed, e.g., blessed to ask graces to turn from their sin.   However, paragraph 31 talks of blessing homosexual couples, not individuals.  An attempt to do that would be to cooperate in the mortal sin of homosexual conduct.  One cannot bless a couple without blessing what defines them as a couple - in this case, mortal sin.  That is both sacrilege and blasphemy.  Added to that is the guilt of cooperating with the mortal sin of sodomy.

Again, I urge you to read Cardinal Muller's entire piece.  But now we'll read what others have said.

The next article to consider was written by Father Thomas Weinandy and was published in First Things.  Father cleared up a misconception held by many.  Francis did not pen that tripe.  Rather, it came from Cardinal Victor Fernandez, aka Kissy Face, with Francis' approval.  Weinandy's main focus appears to be on paragraph 31, which is quite the poison pill amidst all that word salad.  Weinandy aptly calls it "jargon, sophistry and deceit".

In his last paragraph, Weinandy suggests the possibility that FS might have been well-intentioned.  Here I must disagree with Father.  The track records of both Francis and Kissy-Face testify against any possibility that this is well-intentioned.  It is a brazen attempt to cajole poorly-educated clergy into doing the indefensible - to normalize mortal sin in the Church's teachings.

Now let's look at what Eric Sammons says in Crisis Magazine.  He speaks a bit on the role of the pope in the Church and contrasts that with Francis' conduct.  In the writings of previous popes, their footnotes are drawn upon Scripture, doctrines, writings of their predecessors.  Not so for Francis.  Sammons states, and I think him correct, that approximately 65% of his references are his own previous teachings and/or writings.  He is his own source of teaching, in other words.

Paragraph 7 states that "the Holy Father's above-mentioned response invites us to broaden and enrich the meaning of blessings."  Sammons correctly points out that it is not the proper role of any pope to "broaden and enrich" anything.  Rather, the pope's responsibility is to teach and guard what has been handed down from the apostles.

Sammon's piece deserves a close and careful read.  I need not rehash what he said, but he does do a great job in unpacking FS, illustrating its divergence from Tradition.

More on FS soon.

Why We Should Read Laws That Are Passed!

To the left-wing, progressive types:  OK, boys and girls!  We know you like things that are all huggy-kissy, touchy-feely.  So Governor Brewer of Arizona has so kindly decided to help you understand the importance of reading with this cute little video!  We know that the Hell Bill was a bit too much to read (and thus a bit too much to pass, but we've already discussed that before, now haven't we?) but this law is very simple.  Now watch the video and learn the importance of reading.  (Click here if you can't see embedded videos)



I truly hope the progressive population enjoys a basic modicum of literacy.

Now that we all understand the importance of reading, here's the link to Arizona's S.B. 1070.
READ IT!

CUA Ethicist Recommends Reworking Of Amoris Laetitia

Sometimes Crud gets it right.  This time is occasioned by the publishing of a commentary by Michael Pakaluk, professor at Catholic University of America.  He is troubled by the obvious input of Archbishop Victor Fernandez.  He points out that several of the passages in AL, including some from Chapter 8, were lifted almost verbatum from earlier writings done by Fernandez.  Apparently the same can be said for some passages from both Evangelii Gaudeum and Laudato Si.

I've written a bit about Fernandez before; see this anthology of posts.  For obvious reasons, he could well be nick-named "bishop kissy-mouth".  At any rate, Pakaluk delves more into the errors of Fernandez's statements and his misquotes of prior church writings in an attempt to justify the twisted conclusions embedded in Amoris Laetitia.  Pakaluk therefore suggests that "Amoris needs to be taken back to the shop" and while they're at it, to address the other ambiguities broached by the dubia.  Agreed.

Jesuit-Run Churches in Washington Spew Forth Abuses

On January 18, 2009, then VP-elect Joe Biden received a standing ovation during Mass at Holy Trinity Catholic Church, not far from Georgetown University.  Not only did this nonsense happen during Mass, but apparently it happened minutes after he received Holy Communion!  Words almost fail me!  During Mass, Our Lord should be the One receiving honor and praise - the only One.  Well, not only was He insulted in attention being diverted to someone else, but that "someone else" was being applauded just after he received Our Lord in a sacriligeous manner.

Well, it seems that the Jesuits are continuing to profane the Mass.  The latest (of which I'm aware) happened this past Sunday at St Aloysius Gonzaga on North Capitol Street.  I am told by an eye-witness that at the 9:30am Mass, that the congregation called out the "Prayers of the Faithful" just before the Offertory.  That's bad enough in and of itself, but when the prayers expressed political and even dissident proclivities (such as ending the "archdiocese's prejudices against gays"), things clearly went over the top.  "Father Glen" said that Mass. 

Then, as the Canon was about to begin, Father "invited" the congregation to join him around the altar.  This is liturgical abuse - pure and simple.  The laity (unless they're designated ministers) do not enter the sanctuary.  The Canon of the Mass is a most solemn occasion, when Christ Himself is called down upon the altar by the priest during the Consecration.  It it not to be treated as a huggy-kissy kumbaya-fest.

This sort of stunt is not new, though.  About 20 years ago, I worked close to St Rose of Lima in Gaithersburg.  I attended their noon Masses during the day when I could.  At that time, they were plagued with some left-wing priests - including the pastor at the time.  The pastor was fond of calling the laity to join him around the altar.  I and another brave soul stayed in our places and (gasp!) kneeled.  Well, one day the pastor just decided he had enough of our lack of compliance with his disobedience.  He took the opportunity - during Mass, just before the Canon - to mock us.  We both stood our ground - by remaining kneeling.  Don't you love it?  Those who pride themselves on not conforming with the Magisterium are the first to have hissy-fits when others don't jump at their strange beck and call.  That's because we were pricking his conscience.

Those of you who are so plagued with these priests and their similarly ditzy-minded fan clubs, be bold and speak out.

We Are Born For Combat- Pope Leo XIII

So much for the huggy-kissy, gentler-kinder namby-pamby faux katholycism that was the fad of the 1960s kumbaya crowd.  Pope Leo XIII laid it on the line.  His encyclicals are linked in the sidebar on the right..  Click here if you cannot see embedded video.

Cardinal Kissy-Face

Color me unsurprised.  Here is the official list.  Several years ago, One Peter Five linked to Fernandez's, uh, "theological masterpiece" and highlighted some telling passages.  

Just think!  This man will be a prince of the church and has an influential role in governing Church doctrine!  Are you now motivated to continue your daily Rosaries with ever more urgency?

Usual Gang Of Suspects To Attend October's Sin-Nod

In October the gab-fest begins.  The list of attendees is out, and we know how things will wind up.  The usual gang of homophiles and dissenters will be there, including:

• Cardinal Gregory
• Cardinal Cupich
• Cardinal Farrell
• Cardinal Tobin
• Cardinal McElroy
• Archbishop Fernandez, aka Kissy-Face
• Father James Martin
• Cardinal Maradiaga

I'm sure there are more, of which I don't know.

They are going to prattle about "hot-buttom topics" such as women deacons, LGBTQ(append any letter you wish) outreach, priestly celibacy.  You know what?  In a spirit of positive Church service, I am going to save the Church thousands, if not millions, of dollars in dealing with these matter - or more accurately reminding that they have been addressed two thousand years ago.

• LGBTQ outreach?  It has always existed in the Church.  For those engaged in perverted practices, there is the Sacrament of Confession, encompassing repentance and resolution to cease such behaviors.
• Women deacons?  As in ordination?  That has already been determined.  The answer is NO.  What's the point of bantering about that?

There now!  I've just saved these guys from hours, even days, of useless jabber-jawing about already-decided matters, saving thousands of dollars in the process!  Thank me very much!  Alas, I fear the Vatican will not heed these words of wisdom!

Well, I guess there is one advantage to all this yammering.  It gets those progressives out of their chanceries and unable to wreak their normal havoc.

The Vatican Celebrates Gay-Enablers While Threatening SSPX With Excommunication

On July 1, the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) will ordain four bishops, to take their place among the current bishops who are aging.  Pope Leo, a few days ago, warned them against the ordination, stating that they risk being in schism.  Last month I wrote about excommunication and declarations of schism, and still wonder to whom those penalties would actually apply.

One who was unjustly and most likely improperly declared excommunicated is Archbishop Vigano.  He recently made public a letter that he wore to the pope.  One impetus behind this release is that he had made an appointment to discuss serious matters with the pope.  The pope canceled the meeting.  Thus he wrote the letter denouncing his excommunication as improperly done and thus null and voice, and declared that he was not in schism.  Read for yourselves.  

In my neck of the woods, word has it that Cardinal McElroy has banned the construction of new communion rails and the restoration of those communion rails that had been removed.  He also is reportedly discouraging the use of temporary kneelers.  Does that mean the prie-dieu as well?

More troubling, however, is that McElroy is supporting the perversion-promoting cleric Father James Martin's Outreach Conference that is happening now at Georgetown University.  Not only did he write a glowing letter (see for yourselves), he also spoke at the pervert gab-fest.  I would be pleasantly shocked if he took the opportunity to call the attendees to repentance for promoting and/or committing homosexual perversions, but I realistically harbor no such hope.  Dare I say that after that slop that he sent them, that he should require such penance himself?

By the way - the faithful and intrepid young men of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property were on hand at Georgetown to perform various Works of Mercy in the face of the blasphemy and sacrilege that this Outreach conference foisted on Georgetown.  A video will appear below the jump break.

Now let's get back to the situation at hand with the SSPX.  I am also posting a video from Anthony Stine of Return to Tradition who is dealing with this topic.  Note from the video a few things:

• There seems to be some scuttlebutt that not only will the pope excommunicate the bishops of the SSPX, but also the priests, deacons, sub-deacons and seminarians, as well as other religious (such as sisters) who are affiliated in any way with the SSPX.  Will he next put the laity who attend SSPX Masses into his cross-hairs?
• Stine cites canon law that stipulates that excommunication cannot occur for the ordination of the SSPX bishops.  They have no desire to separate from Rome and sincerely believe that the Church is in a state of emergency.  With prelates seeking to obliterate piety from Holy Mass and actively aiding and abetting the mortal sin of homosexual conduct, who can honestly doubt the emergency that truly does exist?
• Some traditional Catholics state that the SSPX is wrong to decline Cardinal Fernandez's offer for "dialog".  Perhaps they aren't aware of the strings that Fernandez attached: no consecration, and the doctrinal issues are off the table.  Oh, by the say, this Fernandez is Kissy-Face.

Now below this jump break are the videos

From The Paradigm Shift Department: Allowing Perverts To Be Godparents And Tinkering With The Papal Conclave

Canon Law, specifically articles 872-874 of Chapter 4, are quite specific regarding the requirements for godparents.  First, there can be no more than one godparent of a given gender.  The godparent(s) must living a life in conformity to Catholic faith and morals.  Clearly no one can be a godparent who not only engages in mortal sin but who champions it.  That would include those engaging in sexual relations with another of the same gender are who considers themselves "transgender".  This past Wednesday, Francis and Bishop Touchy-Kissy signed a document that gives permissions for perverts to flout Canon law.  They are giving cover for the sin of sacrilege and for cooperating in the mortal sins of the perverts to be involved.

Meanwhile, there seems to be an effort underway to "reform the papal conclave" - in other words, to stack the papal electors so that another of Francis' mindset will succeed him when Francis is called to his eternal reward (such as that may be - pray for him).  Francis is currently "reviewing" it.  The upshot is that the cardinals over 80 years of age would be excluded from the preparatory phase and - here's the crucial part - have 25% of the electors comprised of laity and women religious.  All these would be appointed by Francis.  In short, Sister Mary Pantsuit would cast a vote for the next "pontiff".

Ladies and gentlemen, when Francis yammered on about "paradigm shifts", he wasn't kidding.  He intends to distort and turn the Church into some kind of horrible caricature of its former self.  He's not even trying to hide it anymore.  Are we awake yet?

Using The Papal Office To Normalize Mortal Sins Via Sacrilege

Francis today issued a mess called Fiducia Supplicans - a rather verbose attempt to legitimize the blessings of same-sex shack-ups.  I linked to the English version on the Vatican's website.  Read it for yourselves - the whole thing.  I realize it's a bit of a word salad, but that appears to be his favorite strategy - bury the poison pill in the midst of a multitude of pious-sounding platitudes.

The preface of this tome is written by none other than Cardinal "Kissy-Face" Fernandez.  He yaps about the "development" of the "pastoral meaning of blessings".  Notice those two words: development and pastoral.  It's like they are saying that for the past 2000+ years, the Church's understanding of blessings was woefully lacking.

Then the screed mentions "irregular unions" quite a few times.  Irregular?  Try "mortally sinful".  Paragraphs 31 and 32 mentions those who "recognize themselves to be destitute and in need of his (God's) help" and "who do not claim to be righteous but who acknowledge themselves humbly as sinners."  Those people, if they are sincere, will immediately repair to the nearest confessional and receive the Sacrament of Confession with the intentions of ceasing their sexual perversions and removing themselves from the near occasion of sin - that is, their sinful situations.  This is not rocket science.  We learned this in second grade as we were preparing to go to Confession for the first time.

Those who persist in "popesplaining" need to consider what was said above instead of trying to fabricate some meaning out of "blessing" that justifies this tome's proposition that gay shack-ups be blessed.  Another crucial lesson in moral theology is understanding the nine ways that one can cooperate in another's mortal sin, and thus share the guilt and punishment of that mortal sin.  I just linked to them.  This is not the first time that Francis has tried to normalize mortal sin.

The USCCB issued its own commentary regarding the FS slop.  The last sentence mentions "the imparting of pastoral blessings because each of us needs God's healing love and mercy in our lives."  Again, that is to be found primarily in the Sacrament of Confession.  Isn't it telling that this "Fiddlefaddle Soup" screed utters not one peep about the Sacrament of Confession?  It's not hard to figure out why.  In order to receive God's authentic mercy, one must actually be contrite and have a firm resolve to not fall into that sin again.  This "fiddle-faddle" thing is taylor-made for those who have no intention of forsaking their perversions, even if it means damnation in the next life.  The perverts might not be alone in their damnation.  That statement isn't a judgment, but rather a warning.

The Stakes Are Becoming Clearer To All Now

A few days ago, Archbishop Vigano laid bare the case against Francis in no uncertain terms.  Recently, we've also heard from Cardinals Burke and Sarah, along with Bishop Schneider regarding the affronts posed by Francis to the Faith.  The bulk of their recent comments are directed at Fiducia Supplicans, the document penned by Cardinal Kissy-Face Fernandez and signed by Francis.  That document gives the go-ahead for "gay unions".  Given the fact that that to counsel for sin and to approve it are ways of cooperating with sin, the production and the promulgation of Fiducia Supplicans has been inherently sinful on its face.

On June 14, Cardinal Sarah came to Catholic University of America in Washington DC to address some students there.  In his remarks, he held out, as an example to follow, his fellow African bishops who refuse to implement Fiducia Supplicans. owing to its "grave error".  At about the same time, in an interview, Cardinal Burke stated, "we affront the Lord, we show profound lack of respect for Our Lord in love for Him if in some way we try to ask blessing for something that’s sinful."

Bishop Schneider's stance is none too nuanced.  He called Fiducia Supplicans "a mockery of the natural and revealed law of God."  And so it is.  Then he said something very wise, laying bare a part of the insidious strategy of the goons in the Vatican.  He said, "but perhaps creating a state of permanent debate, generalized uncertainty, and doctrinal and practical anarchy, was precisely its aim."  Francis seems to excel at this, to undermine the certainty that has always been a hallmark of God's truth as revealed through Holy Mother Church.

Bishop Kissy-Face: "Refusal To Use Condoms Contradicts Demands Of Charity"

Remember!  He is now head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  Here is prima facie evidence of him proclaiming heresy against Catholic morality.  To insinuate that the refusal to commit an act that is inherently sinful "contradicts charity" speaks of fundamental rebellion against Sacred Tradition and the God Who authored it. 

In a 2006 article, written as vice-dean of the Catholic University of Argentina theology faculty, #PopeFrancis’s new doctrinal chief, Archbishop Víctor Fernández, argued that a woman’s “inflexible refusal to use condoms” could, in some cases, contradict the demands of charity.

In a 2006 article, written as vice-dean of the Catholic University of Argentina theology faculty, #PopeFrancis’s new doctrinal chief, Archbishop Víctor Fernández, argued that a woman’s “inflexible refusal to use condoms” could, in some cases, contradict the demands of charity. 👇 pic.twitter.com/C8Thtq9pjx

— Diane Montagna (@dianemontagna) July 7, 2023

H/T - Canon 212 

Archdiocese of Washington's Director Of Evangelization - To What??

About four years ago, when Cardinal Gregory was just getting his feet wet in the Archdiocese of Washington, he held a meeting with young Catholics downtown.  Right off the bat he started singing the praises of Fortunate Families, an organization that facilitates the commission of homosexual perversions.  He was quite unabashed about it, and most likely still is.  Please watch that video.

LifeSiteNews broke a story about a rather prominent priest in this diocese, who is clearly moving up the echelons of ecclesial power.  He is Father Edgardo "Lalo" Jara.  He hails from Costa Rica and has been until recently stationed at St. Camillus in Hyattsville, a liberal parish if there was one.  Currently he occupies the position of Director of Evangelization and Parish Planning for the Archdiocese, among others.

LifeSiteNews reports a rather squalid association that Jara has with what is known as a "sexologist".  This individual, Margarita Murillo, also hails from Costa Rica.  She fancies herself to be an "expert in gender" and advocates for LGBT agenda and quite a bit of sexual perversion.  Among the perverted practices are contraception, masturbation and the use of sex toys.

From his website
cafeteando.com

Jara brought this woman to Catholic schools to spread her poison to children and to give a workshop on "healing sexuality".  Does that sound familiar?  Think Cardinal Kissy-Face!

Jara, advocating for mortal sin, urges us to "respect homosexuality" and not condemn it.  He urges parents not to change the channel if their children are watching two of the same sex engaging in kissing.  Hold that thought while I now switch focus to an unfolding situation in Montgomery County.

During the 2020-2021 school year, the Montgomery County School Board enacted its "Gender Support Plan".  Among the provisions of this thing is an explicit allowance for keeping parents in the dark regarding their children's misguided wishes to "transition".  Parents became alerted when they received notices that they would no longer be allowed to opt their children out of "gender identity lessons".  So far the courts have turned a deaf ear to them.

Montgomery County is within the Archdiocese of Washington.  Given that Jara disrespects parents who try to keep gay-affirming slop from their children, do you think these beleaguered parents can expect any support from the local chancery?  Neither do I!

We have here yet another reason not to give a penny to the Archdiocese and to homeschool our children.

Austen Ivereigh - Water Boy For Papal Progressives

As the left wing in the US has been taking potshots at US history and those who defend our traditions, so too do their counterparts in Church circles snipe at those who defend the Teachings of Jesus Christ.  Recently a Crud commentator named Austen Ivereigh penned a diatribe called "Pope Francis And The Convert Problem".   In his second paragraph, he claims "I don't want to be seen as sniffy and condescending towards people who become Catholic.."  The italics are mine and for a reason.  He doesn't want to be seen for something he really is; what else do we call it when he coins the term "convert neurosis"?

I could take an hour to unpack that mess.  Suffice it to say that he is simply trying his level best to disparage faithful intelligent converts as a lame excuse for not paying attention to their common-sense questions and objections.  I, a cradle Catholic, have documented scores of this pontiff's misdeeds and gaffes, and I haven't been the only one.  It doesn't take a degree in advanced theology to understand that those living in adultery cannot receive Holy Communion, etc, etc..  By the way - that is one reason why it should have taken the pope only a few minutes to craft a proper reply to the dubia that were submitted by the four cardinals almost one year ago.

Today we see that Mr. Ivereigh moved on to other faithful Catholics who have taken issue with the immorality that is sanctioned by Amoris Laetitia (or Amoralis Lamentia).  Today's Crud piece is called "Papal Confidante Says Amoris Critics Locked In Death-Trapped Logic".  That "confidante" is none other than Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez, a.k.a. "Bishop Kissy-Face".  I dubbed him that because of a porn piece book that he wrote called "Heal Me With Your Mouth - The Art Of Kissing".  The article states that Fernandez helped draft Amoris; indeed they do have similarities to things he wrote long before the two synods: so much for Amoralis Lamentia stemming from all this "collegiality" of the bishops.

Going further down the article, we are treated to some very faulty theology from the bishop (surprise!).  To wit:"In the case of norms forbidding killing and stealing, for example, the norms are absolute, admitting of no exceptions; yet it is questionable, he said, whether taking life in self-defense is killing, or taking food to feed a hungry child is stealing."

We will do a little unpacking here.  The Fifth Commandment forbids murder.  Not all homicide is murder.  Thus the homicide in self-defense would not be any sort of violation of the Fifth Commandment.  The Seventh Commandment forbids the taking of property against the reasonable will of the owner.  If the taking of food is the only way to feed a starving child, the reasonable will of the owner would be to give the food.  In both cases, the Commandments are not violated.  See how these progressives attempt to justify situation ethics by obfuscating the language?

In the following paragraph he attempts to continue the obfuscation in order to justify the mortal sin of adultery.  In this case, both parties in adultery are endangering their own souls and each other's, as well as inflicting scandal upon the children.  That is what is being touted in Amoralis Lamentia.

Now who are these "amoris critics locked in death-trap logic"?  That august number might include the converts whom Ivereigh vilified in his earlier article.  They most certainly include the dubia cardinals who seem to be preparing a formal correction.  Ivereigh appears to have a new job - damage control for the Vatican progressives.

Ominous Yet Expected Answers To Dubia

Today, as the Sin-Nod on Sodomy approaches, Francis received a new set of dubia, another attempt to ask him to clarify his statements and actions.  This is signed by five cardinals.  The first two are the surviving two cardinals who issued the first set of dubia about seven years ago: Cardinal Burke and Cardinal Brandmuller.  They were joined by Cardinals Sarah, Zen, and Sandoval-Iniguoez.

Cardinal Burke, on his webpage, gives some critical background and information regarding the dubia, as well as its text.  Originally, five dubia were presented to Francis this past July.  Francis was rather prompt in issuing replies to them, unlike the ones from several years ago.  He did so, however, in such a way that allowed for, shall we say, "wiggle room".  Realizing the problem, the five cardinals reissued their dubia in August.  At that time, the questions were formulated so that a "yes" or "no" would be required to answer the questions.  After not receiving answers to the August dubia, the cardinals decided to make them public knowledge on October 2nd.  The full texts of the two sets of dubia, as well as the responses to the first set of dubia, are found on Burke's site.  

I should point out that the five cardinals received some key support.  Both Cardinal Muller and Bishop Scheider voiced their support for the dubia.  They praised the five cardinals for acting as true advisors to the pope and calling on him to answer the dubia.  While these dubia have not received formal answers as of this writing, recent actions seem to answer at least a few of them.  It is a case of "actions speak louder than words".

The five cardinals weren't the only ones to submit dubia to Francis.  In July, Cardinal Dominik Duka of Prague submitted ten dubia on behalf of the Czech Episcopal Conference.  These focused on the care of divorced/remarried Catholics in light of Amoris Laetitia.  Francis and Cardinal Victor "Kissy-Face" Fernandez replied that Amoris Laetitia does indeed allow those de facto adulterers to receive Holy Communion, thus committing sins of sacrilege.

During a pre-synod retreat, Father Timothy Radcliffe (where have we heard that name before?) gave an address of sorts.  He started by apologizing for his limitations.  What are these limitations that necessitated an apology?  Why, he's old, western, white and male!  Oh, the horror!  He commiserates with those who might feel "marginalized" - folks who might be divorced/remarried, in gay relationships, polygamous, etc".  Why, they "long for a renewed church in which they will feel fully at home, recognized, affirmed, and safe."  Doesn't that sound lovely?  A bastardized renewed church!  And what about that "affirmed" part?  Affirmed in mortal sin?  How will that assist the sinner as they stand before God's judgment seat?

Now recall Francis' answer to the first dubia regarding marriage, particularly, attempts by gays to simulate "marriage".  While Francis reiterated that marriage can only be between man and woman, he voiced the possibility of "blessing" gay shack-ups.   Full stop!  One cannot "bless" mortal sin.  Such an attempt would be its own sin.  Francis and many Catholics need to review the nine ways of cooperating in the sin of others, for that is what they are doing.

He's leaving it up to individual priests as to whether or not they should "bless" gay shack-ups.  So consider; he gives priests that illegitimate option, but comes down heavy-handed on them if they should celebrate the Latin Mass!  Does that make any sense?  Well, yes it does!  Both these actions are attempts to deconstruct the Church and undermine the teachings of God as revealed through His church.

Today is October 4.  This Sin-Nod on Sodomy is expected to go on all month.  Already it is proving to be a proverbial train wreck.  No doubt there will be more damage to come.