I mentioned Amoris Laetitia to someone yesterday, and they fired back, “Ugh! Are people still talking about that?”
The answer is yes, and will be for many years to come.
The fallout from the post-synodal apostolic exhortation began almost immediately upon its release, with groups like the Philippines Bishops Conference raring and ready to go on communion for the divorced and remarried because, they asserted, “Mercy cannot wait. Mercy should not wait…”
When it comes to the most controversial passages in chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia, Sandro Magister has discovered a template, a secret decoder ring, if you will, that shows us that the devil (in this case, one Archbishop Víctor Manuel Fernández, papal ghostwriter extraordinaire) is certainly in the details. In a brilliant bit of sleuthing, Magister compares several paragraphs of Amoris Laetitia with sections of two articles written a decade ago by Fernández — articles so controversial, Magister tells us, that they actually gave cause to the Congregation for Catholic Education to block his candidacy for the position of rector of the Universidad Católica Argentina.
The man who fought to eventually give that job just five years later was “then-archbishop of Buenos Aires Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who fought tooth and nail to clear the way for the promotion of his protege.” The same Bergoglio who, according to Magister, “was already doing it [allowing the divorced and remarried to receive communion] when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires.”
Magister goes on:
In 2013, just after he was elected pope, Bergoglio even bestowed episcopal ordination upon Fernández, with the title of the extinct metropolitan see of Teurnia. While he confined to the Vatican Apostolic Library the chief culprit of the rejection, Dominican theologian Jean-Louis Bruguès, without making him a cardinal, as instead is the tradition for all the librarians of the Holy Roman Church.
And since then Fernández has almost spent more time in Rome than in Buenos Aires, swamped as he is with acting as ghostwriter to his friend the pope, without any growth in the meantime of his credentials as a theologian, already anything but brilliant at the outset.
The first book, in fact, that revealed the genius of Fernández to the world, was: “Heal me with your mouth. The art of kissing,” published in 1995 in Argentina with this presentation to the reader, written by the author himself:
“Let me explain to you that I write this book not so much on the basis of my personal experience as on that of the life of people who kiss. In these pages I would like to summarize the popular sentiment, that which people feel when they think of a kiss, that which mortals feel when they kiss. This is why I spoke for a long time with many persons who have a great deal of experience in this matter, and also with many young people who are learning to kiss in their way. Moreover, I have consulted many books and I wanted to show how the poets speak of the kiss. In this way, with the intention of summarizing the immense richness of life have come these pages on behalf of the kiss, which I hope may help you to kiss better, urge you to liberate in a kiss the best of your being.”
Try not to think about that last paragraph too much if you’re planning on eating or sleeping anytime soon.
We’ve told you before about Fernández’ views on the Francis papacy; about how he believes Francis is aiming at irreversible reform, which is why he is moving “slowly” in his pursuit of pet issues, so the effect will be deep and lasting. How Fernández also believes that if Francis perceives he is running out of time, we’ll see him suddenly speed up — which certainly seems to me to have happened. But Magister cites another opinion of Fernández, taken from the same period of time, in which he gives yet more evidence of the program:
“I have read that some say that the Roman curia is an essential part of the Church’s mission, or that a prefect of the Vatican is the sure compass that keeps the Church from falling into ‘light’ thinking; or that the prefect ensures the unity of the faith and guarantees for the pope a serious theology. But Catholics, reading the Gospel, know that Christ has assured special guidance and illumination for the pope and at the same time for the bishops as a whole, but not for a prefect or for another structure. When one hears such things it almost seems as if the pope would be one of their representatives, or someone who has come to shake things up and must be controlled. [. . .] The pope is convinced that what he has already written or said cannot be punished as a mistake. Therefore, in the future all will be able to repeat those things without the fear of receiving sanctions.”
Magister concludes:
So this is the figure that Francis keeps close as his thinker of reference, the man who put down in writing large parts of “Evangelii Gaudium,” the program of the pontificate, of “Laudato Si’,” the encyclical on the environment, and finally of “Amoris Laetitia,” the post-synodal exhortation on the family.
And then, Magister shows his work, in citations like this one, comparing the language of the exhortation — language attempting to redefine objective sin in a way that might normalize “irregular unions — directly to Fernández’ own published work:
“AMORIS LAETITIA” 305
AL: 305
Because of forms of conditioning and mitigating factors, it is possible that in an objective situation of sin –which may not be subjectively culpable, or fully such – a person can be living in God’s grace, can love and can also grow in the life of grace and charity, while receiving the Church’s help to this end. Discernment must help to find possible ways of responding to God and growing in the midst of limits.[Footnote 351: In certain cases, this can include the help of the sacraments. . .].
(Fernández 2006: 156)
This Trinitarian dynamism that reflects the intimate life of the divine persons can also be realized within an objective situation of sin (p. 157) as long as, because of the burden of influences, one is not subjectively culpable.(Fernández 2006: 159)
A “realization of the value within the limits of the moral capacities of the subject” [Footnote 46]. So there are “possible goals” for this influenced subject, or “intermediate steps” [Footnote 47] in the realization of a value, even if they are always aimed at the complete fulfillment of the norm.[Footnote 46: G. Irrazabal, “La ley de la gradualidad como cambio de paradigma,” in “Moralia” 102/103 (2004), p. 173].
[Footnote 47: Cf. G. Gatti, “Educación moral,” in AA.VV., “Nuevo Diccionario de Teología moral,” Madrid, 1992, p. 514].(Fernández 2006: 158)
“There is no doubt that the Catholic magisterium has clearly admitted that an objectively evil act, as is the case with a premarital relationship or the use of a condom in a sexual relationship, does not necessarily lead to losing the life of sanctifying grace, from which the dynamism of charity draws its origin.(Fernández 2005: 42)
On the other hand, given that we cannot judge the subjective situation of persons and taking into account the influences that attenuate or eliminate imputability (cf. CCC 1735), there always exists the possibility that an objective situation of sin may coexist with the life of sanctifying grace.(Fernández 2005: 42)
Does this not justify the administration of baptism and confirmation to adults who may find themselves in an objective situation of sin, on the subjectively culpability of whom no judgment can be made?
This is — or should be — a huge story. The parallels are unbelievably overt, and they span paragraphs 300-305 of AL.
Look at it again: where AL is somewhat vague, talking about how “it is possible that in an objective situation of sin –which may not be subjectively culpable, or fully such – a person can be living in God’s grace, can love and can also grow in the life of grace and charity, while receiving the Church’s help to this end,” Fernandez’ own writing is far more direct, saying “There is no doubt that the Catholic magisterium has clearly admitted that an objectively evil act, as is the case with a premarital relationship or the use of a condom in a sexual relationship, does not necessarily lead to losing the life of sanctifying grace, from which the dynamism of charity draws its origin,” and “there always exists the possibility that an objective situation of sin may coexist with the life of sanctifying grace.”
Go to Magister’s piece and read the whole thing. It’s eye-opening, brilliant journalism, and he is to be commended for it.
Well, then. I suppose it’s no wonder Francis claimed he couldn’t remember footnote 351 when asked about it by the press a few weeks ago; it seems patently obvious that he didn’t write it in the first place!
I wonder how the Francis-can-do-no-wrong-there’s-nothing-to-see-here-with-AL apologists on the various Disqus forums are going to explain this away.
This is the internet. Surely you aren’t unacquainted with the concept of the paid shill.
Common as they are on politics discussion forums today I think traditionalist leaning Catholics could do well in remembering their existence.
More stuff that comes out each day, plus this that was shared with me, a little inside information on the conclave that elected Pope Benedict, https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2016/05/24/archbishop-georg-gansweins-revelations-point-to-conclave-pact-to-elect-bergoglio/ this must come to an end soon to protect the Church and her faithful.
Sorry, but that article is totally ridiculous and salacious. Ratzinger did not want to be Pope in the first place and would have gladly declined the office given such an ‘ultimatum’ and abuse of the conclave. Nor would other cardinals agree (there ARE good ones contrary to popular belief). How could they force the conclave to agree anyway? Public defection? Moreover Benedict XVI not commenting or criticising Francis is not a smoking gun for people controlling him but rather consistent with charity and to avoiding more division between the faithful. Of which we Catholics are sadly good enough in creating ourselves.
People. We have Francis. He IS our Pope. If you want to help the Church, look to your own sanctity. Get on your knees and pour out your hearts to God, not revel in this gossip, detraction, slander and speculation. As right as we think we are in indulging in these things, it is wrong. We are calling down condemnation on yourselves. Would Our Lady say it? Spread it? That is our litmus test.
“Penance, Penance, Penance.”
Is PF grooming Archbishop Fernández to be the third person of this Pontificate? As chief adviser & ghost writer for PF he certainly seems to be the more “active” part of the active half of this presently dual Papacy and might well be heading in that direction. Strange how Cardinal Müller has not thought to pronounce this double/treble act as heretical and not in keeping with Tradition or the teaching on Infallibility which the CC always upheld, at least up to Vatican II, but has plenty to say about the SSPX having to accept in full the teaching of Vatican II, despite PF proclaiming them to be Catholic and not schismatic?
“The Art of Kissing” as the basis for an Apostolic Exhortation.
Yeah, we need to kiss Francis goodbye.
Great!
Msgr Ricca kisses everyone there goodbye, hello, and everything else.
BAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH best thing said. If you said that to a Catholic like my lecturer for instance he would just get so mad and say all the reasons for Francis. Losers I tell you.
Jorge Bergoglio, the man allegedly too humble to tolerate the ceremony that comes with his office, and who likes to be called Jorge or Bishop of Rome at most, when determined to promote sin, likes to claim special powers as… (surprise!) Pope. Then he puffs himself up and exercises without reservations a truly autocratic rule. He says that he feels it is the Holy Spirit’s will, when he, humble Jorge, wants pre-planned surprises.
Now we know who this unholy spirit is – a peculiar priest, expertly at kissing-healing.
In my Catholic high school many years ago I recall learning situation ethics. It smelled bad then, but now I know a lot more of why. AL and its promoters smell very bad to me, like the stench of the pit.
Synod of the Family = Big show
The outcome was written years ago. You have to make the thesis and then propose the anti-thesis in order to get the synthesis or at least act like you are doing that. This is what the show was for. The deck was stacked but there were some faithful bishops speaking out at times.
It seems that they (“they”=the infiltrators and betrayers of Christ’s Truth) believe the faithful to be fools and push the notion that God evolves. God will not be mocked.
“Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.” 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
Yes, their god evolves into a collectivist human. It is the so called Christ consciousness in all of us, all children of an impersonal love energy permeating the universe. Say something against this ideology – you prove to them that you are in the category of beings disruptive to the unfolding of the New Age of loving coexistence. A. Bailey would say under the inspiration of an “ascended master” that this category needs to be delegated to the darkest corners of the universe.
Bergolio’s bashing of dangerous traditionalist extremists is a prelude to this removal of negative energy from among evolved humanity. It is a humanity which evolves through kissing and depraved sexual activity, not a worship of an evil Demiurg.
Kapser & Co have now got what they’ve always wanted – a Papal Exhortation which undermines marriage and the family – and which has made the womb a much more dangerous place to be for our pre-born brothers and sisters. The Kasperites are operatives of the world population control clique – make no mistake.
Even if you’re already familiar with the messages of Our Lady of Akita, I’d still recommend a viewing of the video entitled Akita and the Fatima Secret (this can be found on YouTube). It puts it all in a neat little nutshell.
So, Amoris Laetitia doesn’t even meet the basic plagiarism standards set for school exams. Another first for the Holy See.
Lol!
I think it is interesting that the wheels are starting to fall off this whole scam of a papacy during the month of May – as we commence the 12 months leading up to the centenary of Our Lady’s visitation to Fatima.
Perhaps she is working to ensure that the evil deeds of her Son’s enemies are brought out into the light and exposed for all the faithful to see. Maybe the serpent’s head is being drawn out so that it can be crushed. Are we starting to see the victory of her Immaculate Heart unfold? Will the bishops of the world – particularly those who hauled their carcases to Rome for the Synods – finally realize that they have been scammed by a fraud and charlatan who never even took the time to read his own “Post Synodal” (LMAO) “Apostolic Exhortation”?
Keep praying the Rosary, fellow bead-counting “self-absorbed promethean neo-pelagians” – all power to our Holy Mother’s arm. Our life, our sweetness and our hope, Mother of Mercy, save us!
The bishops ar
The bishops are too glossed over with their own decadent, easy lifestyles to care. Still waiting to hear one refute Bergoglio and his cronies…nor happening. The disease of VII has pretty much infected everyone of the hierarchy.
Jorge Bergoglio indeed.
The mini-me protege even wears the same pectoral cross as his patron. Not a crucifix, note.
I notice the same thing and thought on commenting about it. Thanks for observing it.
Actually, there’s a gaggle of them, and it’s kinda spooky: http://bit.ly/1eixCUE
Actually, if you look closely there is a corpus.
It’s an image of the Good Shepherd. Not what’s commonly understood by the term “corpus”.
Thank you for presenting this information. It is terribly unsettling but it least it motivates one to pray and sacrifice for the Church. Pray for your children so they can keep the Faith and not become confused. Sad days.
I would just like to remind all the faithful of the Teaching and Discipline of the Infallible Sacrosanct Council of Trent, which binds the Church forever…
Council of Trent, Session 13, canon XI:
“CANON XI.: If any one saith, that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be anathema. And for fear lest so great a sacrament may be received unworthily, and so unto death and condemnation, this holy Synod ordains and declares, that sacramental confession, when a confessor may be had, is of necessity to be made beforehand, by those whose conscience is burdened with mortal sin, howsoever contrite they may think themselves. But if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or obstinately to assert, or even in public disputation to defend the contrary, he shall be thereupon excommunicated.”
In this regard, we need to recall also what Pope Paul IV decreed to have perpetual validity, and which is recognized in Canon law to still have effect (e.g. cited numerous times in the CIC 1917; in CIC 1983 cf. c. 6 and 351), namely his Bull Cum ex apostolatus officio, n. 2…
“2. Hence, concerning these matters, We have held mature deliberation with our venerable
brothers the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church; and, upon their advice and with their unanimous agreement, we now enact as follows:
“In respect of each and every sentence of excommunication, suspension, interdict and privation and any other sentences, censures and penalties against heretics or schismatics, enforced and promulgated in any way whatsoever by any of Our predecessors the Roman Pontiffs, or by any who were held to be such (even by their “litterae extravagantes” i.e. private letters), or by the sacred Councils received by the Church of God, or by decrees of the Holy Fathers and the statutes, or by the sacred Canons and the Constitutions and Apostolic Ordinations – all these measures, by Apostolic authority, We approve and renew, that they may and must be observed in perpetuity and, if perchance they be no longer in lively observance, that they be restored to it.”
Especially because in that same document he declares a perpetual rule regarding the validity of elections of candidates for the Papacy…
“6. In addition, that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:
“(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;
“(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman
Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;”
Therefore, I truly believe the Sacred Hierarchy has a serious duty here and that we the faithful have a parallel duty to urge them to it: a formal public remonstration and investigation, a questioning and 3 offers to renounce this error of giving communion to those in public sin, otherwise…
Question: Now that the evidence is available is there the will to pursue a conviction? Past experience would say no. But rest assured God has other means.
What ‘evidence’?
All of the above.
Circumstantial at best. But you are correct, God has other means. Our job is to leave these sorts of things to Him and avoid vain curiosity, speculation and gossip. Because we do not see the whole picture and are therefore quite fallible in our judgements.
The skullduggery in Rome gets deeper and deeper. “The Art of Kissing”….creepy like a back rub from grandma.
I’ve never thought of back rubs as sexual. But yes, that stuff is creepy.
If Popes Benedict XVI and Francis were part of a pact or agreement prior to both conclaves, does that constitute a violation of paragraph 81 of Universalis Dominici Gregis? And if so, would that invalidate both elections?
This news is a novel development of the doctrine of inspiration by the Holy Spirit. I believe that it’s been called ventriloquism in other contexts: one dummy sitting in the lap of another.
So much for the God of Surprises.
The pope should abolish parish priests from “crowning” statues and covering them with gold. Such expenses should be spent elsewhere.
“On the other hand, given that we cannot judge the subjective situation of persons and taking into account the influences that attenuate or eliminate imputability (cf. CCC 1735), there always exists the possibility that an objective situation of sin may coexist with the life of sanctifying grace.”
This is so stupid! It is unbelievable! Folks, never let the devil quote the CCC!
If priests taught the people about Objective Mortal Sin (using condom, adultery, etc.) then the person in the state of mortal sin will not receive the Holy Eucharist.
This Fernandez is USING CCC paragraph 1735 to justify giving communion to those in Objective Mortal Sin with the line “an objective situation of sin may coexist with the life of sanctifying grace.”
CCC # 1735 is for the people who were never taught what a mortal sin is (therefore their punishment will be determine by the Perfect Judge – Jesus), and it doesn’t mean that they get a free pass to DESECRATE the Holy Communion!
Holy Communion is not the “MEDICINE” for those in the state of mortal sin. Communion transmits Eternal Life to those in the State of Grace: “He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.” – John 6:55
Confession and not repeating the sin will help those in the state of mortal sin.
This Fernandez is the perfect example of the devil using the Sacred Scriptures or the devil using the CCC!
It´s no news that Mons. Tucho Fernandez is Francis´ writter and reference theologian. Why not to use older texts to write AL? Why to waste time writting what it´s already written? It´s a scandal, but not surprising at all.
Despite the sensationalist title, the data is interesting.
http://zionistreport.com/2016/05/commentary-pope-francis-secret-agent-jews/