Editor’s Note: On 2 May, George Neumayr’s book, The Political Pope: How Pope Francis is Delighting the Liberal Left and Abandoning Conservatives, was published. OnePeterFive reached out to him, and he kindly gave us an interview. George Neumayr also gave us permission to publish Chapter One of his book, which we post here below, right after the interview itself. We strongly encourage our readers to support George Neumayr’s courageous book by buying it. It is available on Amazon.
Maike Hickson: What inspired you to write a book on Pope Francis?
George Neumayr: From the first moment I saw him, I knew that he was going to be a Modernist wrecking ball, and he struck me from the beginning as the prototypical “progressive” Jesuit. I knew it was an extremely bad sign that the Church would name the first Jesuit pope at the very moment the Jesuit Order was in its most corrupt and heterodox condition. I knew it was going to be a distressingly historic pontificate, and from the first moment of Francis’ papacy I began thinking that his pontificate would be a good subject for a book. As it unfolded, it became clearer and clearer that someone need to chronicle this consequentially chaotic pontificate.
MH: You studied at the Jesuit University of San Francisco. What was your first response when you saw and heard Pope Francis, the first Jesuit Pope in the Church’s history?
GN: Having gone to a Jesuit university, I am very familiar with the flakes and frauds that populate that order. When I heard the pope, in the first few months of his pontificate, engage in non-stop left-wing babble, it reminded me of all the nonsense that I heard as a student from similar “progressive” Jesuits. The program of Francis was so obviously set to promote political liberalism while downplaying doctrine; that was the formula of trendy and empty Catholicism that I saw on display at the Jesuit University of San Francisco.
MH: What approach did you take in order to be able to make a proportionate characterization of Pope Francis as pope in his actions and words?
GN: I went back and looked at his time at Buenos Aires, Argentina, at his formation in the Jesuit Order, I read all of his available speeches and writings – when he was a bishop, before he was pope; I read all the existing biographies about him; I talked to Latin American priests, I talked to Jesuits, I talked to Vatican officials, I talked to Catholic activists and Catholic academics and canon lawyers. Given the sensitivity of the topic, most of the people were only willing to speak anonymously with me. I tried to look at all the salient news items that relate to Bergoglio, before he was pope and when he was pope.
MH: What is the main conclusion of your research?
GN: The undeniable conclusion is that the Catholic Church is suffering under a bad pope and that the cardinals must address this crisis.
MH: How do you describe in your book the political worldview of Pope Francis? In which fields of politics does he show his left-leaning tendencies?
GN: Pope Francis is a product of political leftism and theological Modernism. His mind has been shaped by all of the post-enlightenment heresies and ideologies from Marx to Freud to Darwin. He is the realization of Cardinal Carlo Martini’s vision of a Modernist Church that conforms to the heresies of the Enlightenment. On almost all intellectual fronts, Francis is a follower of the Modernist school. He is a student of Modernist Biblical Scholarship, which can be seen in his ludicrous interpretation of certain passages from the Gospel: such as the time when he described the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes as a metaphor and not a miracle. On more than one occasion, he said that it was not a miracle but a lesson in sharing: “This is the miracle: rather than a multiplication it is a sharing, inspired by faith and prayer. Everyone eats and some is left over: it is the sign of Jesus, the Bread of God for humanity.”
MH: Do you think that Pope Francis, in his more political statements, misuses his office as Head of the Catholic Church?
GN: Yes, this pontificate is a blatant example of out-of-control clericalism. Pope Francis is using the pulpit of the papacy, not to present the teachings of the Church, but, rather, to promote his personal political agenda.
MH: Are his political statements in line with Catholic teaching?
GN: Many of his statements are not in line with the Church’s teaching, as I document in the book. Pope Francis is the worst teacher of the Faith in the history of the Catholic Church. One could not trust him to teach an elementary school religion class.
MH: When describing Pope Francis as a more left-leaning man, could you give us evidence for that? Which Marxist authors for example did he admire or approve of? Which political figures of the left are admired by him?
GN: I speak about this at the beginning of the book. His mentor was Esther Ballestrino de Careaga who was a very fervent Communist. Francis has acknowledged that he had teachers who were Communists who influenced him. I point out in my book that he also met with the widow of Paulo Freire, the author of the book The Pedagogy of the Oppressed which is a classic of the Socialist left in Latin America.
MH: Which practical acts as pope show that Pope Francis actively supports Marxist or revolutionary movements?
GN: I document in the book all of the liberation theologians whom Pope Francis has rehabilitated. Leonardo Boff is at the top of the list. He is an openly Socialist priest who left the priesthood but who is now in the good graces of the Vatican so much so that he was a counselor to the papal encyclical Laudato si. He also reinstated to the priesthood the Communist priest Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann from Nicaragua who is still in touch with President Daniel Ortega. That priest has now resumed his Communist polemics.
MH: How would you describe Pope Francis’ moral teaching in relation with his political teaching? Is there a parallel between his political and moral liberalism?
GN: He pays homage to the moral relativism and socialism that are at the heart of the global left. It is no coincidence that his signature phrases have been “Who am I to judge” and “Inequality is the root of all evil.” He is a darling of the global left because he is advancing many of the items of their agenda, such as climate-change activism, open borders, and abolition of lifetime imprisonment (a position still so far left that not even the U.S. Democrats take that position). He is a spokesman for gun control, for world government, for the redistribution of wealth by central planners. The pope is pandering to the willfulness inherent in liberalism which takes both the form of moral relativism and a form of a “virtue signaling” socialism. He gratifies the liberals’ egos by offering them a pontificate of “virtue signaling” without any teaching of actual virtue. In other words, liberals like to appear good but not be good. And a pontificate which combines political liberalism with moral or doctrinal relativism agrees with their self-indulgent politics. They also like a dash of non-threatening spirituality in their politics which a Jesuit dilettante from Latin America provides them with.
MH: You talk in your book also about Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. Is this document in line with Catholic teaching as it has been always taught by the Catholic Church?
GN: Amoris Laetitia is one of the most scandalous documents in the history of the Church. Pope Francis gives an obvious wink and a nod to adulterers in footnote 329 of that document (“In such situations, many [divorced and “remarried”] people, knowing and accepting the possibility of living ‘as brothers and sisters’ which the Church offers them, point out that if certain expressions of intimacy are lacking, it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers.”). In my book, I speak about the intentional ambiguity of that document and that Archbishop Bruno Forte, who helped to write the draft of the 2014 Synod on the Family, had acknowledged the deviousness of the document and said that it was typical of a Jesuit; and that Pope Francis himself had told Forte at the time that, if they had explicitly endorsed adultery, it would have caused a backlash, and, so, they had to introduce this topic into the Synod document more subtly.
MH: Are there other fields of Catholic teaching where you would say that Pope Francis departs from orthodoxy?
GN: Pope Francis is subverting the Church’s teaching on divorce and thereby subverting teaching on many of the Sacraments such as Marriage, Penance, Holy Eucharist, Holy Orders. He is subverting the Church’s sacramental theology. I chronicle in my book many of his subversions of Church teaching, from his support of the use of contraceptives with regard to the Zika virus, to his religious indifferentism and his antinomianism, which has become a hallmark of his pontificate. Pope Francis frequently pits the law against mercy which is the essence of the antinomian heresy.
MH: What do you say about the response of the prelates of the Church, especially the cardinals, to some of the problematic parts of Amoris Laetitia?
GN: The response has been feeble. Bishop Athanasius Schneider is an outstanding exception, he has spoken forthrightly about the heresy at work within that document.
MH: What should the cardinals be doing now? Are there ways for the cardinals to correct a pope?
GN: My position is that the cardinals should forthrightly confront the pope on this matter and make it clear to him that the heterodox position to which he is adhering is absolutely unacceptable. And then, if he fails to respond to the dubia, they must move to a formal correction.
MH: What are the reasons for the silence of so many prelates of the Church in the face of heterodox teachings coming out of Rome?
GN: One reason is their lack of conviction, another reason is shameful careerism, the third reason is that many of the bishops are cowards before the spirit of the age, and a lot of these “conservatives” are Modernists in slow motion.
MH: How is it possible that such a revolutionary pope could be elected as head of the Catholic Church? Do you touch upon this matter in your book?
GN: As I argue in the book, Pope Francis is the culmination of the Modernist movement which goes back over a hundred years. Modernism has been gathering strength in the Church since the Enlightenment, and it picked up speed in the 19th century and went into overdrive in the 20th century, producing the pontificate of Pope Francis. Pope Pius X’s encyclical on Modernism reads almost like a clinical description of the relativistic pontificate of Francis. Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI were later speed bumps in that road, inasmuch as they realized that the “Spirit of Vatican II” was wreaking havoc within the Church. But, with Francis now at the wheel, those speed bumps have been completely disregarded, and he seeks to complete the Modernist revolution.
MH: How would you describe Modernism, and what is fundamentally wrong with it?
GN: The essence of Modernism is the absorption of modern liberalism into Catholicism.
MH: So how should the Church find its way back to a strong and healthy response to any weakening and undermining of its teaching as it has been handed down to us from the Apostles?
GN: All of the reforms can be reduced to one reform: a return to orthodoxy and holiness.
MH: You are of the younger Catholic generation, born in 1972. What is and was your own response to the Catholic Church as it presented itself to you in the Novus Ordo Mass, but also in the Catechesis and in all the other aspects of Catholic life? What went wrong and what is missing?
GN: I belong to a generation of Catholics that asked for bread and only received stones.
MH: What do you intend to effect with your book, and what would you say that we Catholic authors and journalists should and could do in this current situation of confusion in order to help the faithful?
GN: My hope is that a book like this would contribute to the restoration of orthodoxy and holiness in the Church, and I think it is the duty of journalists to speak the truth without fear or favor.
——————————————————————————————————————-
Excerpt from THE POLITICAL POPE
by George Neumayr
Chapter ONE
The Pope They Have Been Waiting For
You must straighten out your position with the Church,” Pope John Paul II shouted at a cowering Ernesto Cardenal, a Catholic priest turned Marxist activist. In violation of his religious vows, Cardenal had joined the communist Sandinista government in Nicaragua, and Pope John Paul II was scolding him before the cameras of the entire world. That sensational scene in 1983 on a Managua airport runway provided one of the most startling images of Pope John Paul II’s anti-communist pontificate.
So strong were Pope John Paul II’s anti-communist credentials and so effective was his anti-Soviet advocacy that Kremlin leaders, according to historians, hired a Turkish gunman to assassinate him. That attempt failed, and Pope John Paul II continued to denounce the Soviets until their empire crumbled in 1991.
Joseph Ratzinger also opposed communism fiercely. After serving as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Ratzinger succeeded John Paul II in 2005 and took as his papal name Benedict XVI. In his role as doctrinal guardian of the Church, Ratzinger repeatedly warned the faithful to reject “liberation theology,” a Marxist-inspired ideology disguised as concern for the poor that the Soviet Union’s KGB spies had helped smuggle into Latin America’s Catholic Church in the 1950s.
“The movement was born in the KGB, and it had a KGB-invented name: liberation theology,” according to Ion Mihai Pacepa, who served as a spymaster for Romania’s secret police in the 1950s and 1960s.
The Soviets had long eyed the Catholic Church for infiltration. In the 1950s, Bella Dodd, the former head of the Soviet-controlled Communist Party of America, testified before the U.S. Congress that communists occupied some of the “highest places” in the Catholic Church. “We put eleven hundred men into the priesthood in order to destroy the Church from within,” she said. “The idea was for these men to be ordained, and then climb the ladder of influence and authority as monsignors and bishops.” As an active party member, Dodd said that she knew of “four cardinals within the Vatican who were working for us.”
According to Pacepa, the KGB took “secret control of the World Council of Churches (WCC), based in Geneva, Switzerland, and used it as cover for converting liberation theology into a South American revolutionary tool.” Seeking to spread atheistic Marxism among the religious peasants of Latin America, Soviet leaders instructed the KGB to send agents into ecclesiastical circles. In 1968, Latin America’s bishops loudly endorsed liberation theology at a conference in Medellín, Colombia. The KGB served as a puppet master at the event, reported Pacepa.
“In the 1950s and 1960s, most Latin Americans were poor, religious peasants who had accepted the status quo, and [Soviet premier Nikita] Khrushchev was confident they could be converted to communism through the judicious manipulation of religion,” he wrote. “In 1968, the KGB was able to maneuver a group of leftist South American bishops into holding a conference in Medellín, Colombia. At the KGB’s request, my [spies] provided logistical assistance to the organizers. The official task of the conference was to help eliminate poverty in Latin America. Its undeclared goal was to legitimize a KGB-created religious movement dubbed ‘liberation theology,’ the secret task of which was to incite Latin America’s poor to rebel against the ‘institutionalized violence of poverty’ generated by the United States.”
Against this historical backdrop, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI viewed the spread of liberation theology in Latin America with alarm. They feared that a Marxist-influenced ideology, which progressive theologians within the Catholic Church were harnessing to their own long-percolating socialist politics, would corrupt the Catholic faith. Pope Benedict XVI called liberation theology a “singular heresy.” He argued that it deceives the faithful by concealing “Marxist dialectics” within seemingly harmless advocacy for the lower classes. He drew attention to Marxism’s philosophical incompatibility with Christianity and disputed the claim of many churchmen that Christianity could purify the Marxist elements of socialist thought.
How shockingly different statements from the Holy See sound today under Pope Francis. The first Latin American pope in Church history, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has generated headlines not for scolding Marxists but for supporting them, not for rebuking liberation theologians but for honoring them.
Under Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, the Western media spoke disapprovingly of a “holy war against liberation theology.” Now media outlets eagerly run stories about Pope Francis’s sympathy for it. “Liberation Theology Rehabilitation Continues at Vatican,” ran a characteristic headline on a story from the Associated Press.
In one of his first major interviews, Pope Francis said that liberation theologians have a “high concept of humanity.” A few months after he became pope on March 13, 2013, Francis welcomed the founding father of liberation theology, the Peruvian priest Gustavo Gutiérrez, to the Vatican as an honored guest. Gutiérrez had disappeared from high ecclesiastical circles under Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI after making a Marxist appeal for “effective participation in the struggle which the exploited classes have undertaken against their oppressors.” But after the elevation of Francis, Gutiérrez suddenly found himself basking in praise. Vatican officials pronounced him an impeccable thinker, responsible for one of “the most important currents in 20th century Catholic theology.” The Vatican’s newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, asserted that the election of Pope Francis would bring liberation theology out of the “shadows to which it has been relegated for some years, at least in Europe.”
Leonardo Boff, who has long gloried in his status as a renegade liberation theologian from Brazil, also enjoyed a stunning change of fortune after the election of Pope Francis. Owing to his open Marxism, Boff was silenced by Pope John Paul II’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Boff was also condemned by the Vatican for his threatened hijinks at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, activism that eventually led Boff to leave the priesthood. But these days Boff finds himself back in the Church’s good graces. Pope Francis recruited him to serve as an adviser for Laudato Si’, his 2015 encyclical endorsing the political agenda of climate change activists.
Taking advantage of the new wind blowing from the Vatican, Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, whose role in Nicaragua’s Marxist revolutionary government in the 1970s led to his suspension from the priesthood, sent in 2014 a request to Pope Francis that his priestly faculties be reinstated. Pope Francis granted the request. “The Holy Father has given his benevolent assent that Father Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann be absolved from the canonical censure inflicted upon him, and entrusts him to the superior general of the institute (Maryknoll) for the purpose of accompanying him in the process of reintegration into the ministerial priesthood,” announced the Vatican.
D’Escoto, among his other Marxist activities, had served as an official at the aforementioned KGB-controlled World Council of Churches. No sooner had Pope Francis granted d’Escoto’s request than the recipient of the Lenin Peace Prize resumed his Marxist polemics, calling capitalism the “most un-Christian doctrine and practice ever devised by man to keep us separate and unequal in a kind of global apartheid.” He condemned Pope John Paul II for an “abuse of authority” and rhapsodized about Fidel Castro as an inspired figure whose murderous regime heralded “the reign of God on this earth that is the alternative to the empire.” Even now as a priest in good standing under Pope Francis, d’Escoto lobbies for the Libyans, remains a member of the Sandinista National Liberation Front, and continues to serve as an adviser to Daniel Ortega, whom the Soviets planted in the presidency of Nicaragua in the 1980s.
According to Boff, Pope Francis will eventually rehabilitate all of the condemned liberation theologians from Latin America. Boff believes that Pope Francis is waiting until their old critic, Pope Benedict XVI, dies. “I believe that as long as the retired pope lives, he will neither reconcile nor redeem these theologians,” according to Boff. “But, when he is by himself, he will rescue the 500 theologians whose heads were severed. I believe this pope is capable of dismantling this machine of punishment and control, and leave it to the local churches.”
A Radical Pontificate
After only four years of his pontificate, Francis has emerged as one of the most political popes in the history of the Church. His left-wing activism is relentless, ranging across causes from the promotion of global warming theory to support for amnesty and open borders to the abolition of lifetime imprisonment. That alone would make this papacy historically significant. But the ambitions of Pope Francis go well beyond an unusually aggressive political dilettantism. As this book will detail, he is not only championing the radical political agenda of the global left but also subverting centuries-old Catholic teaching on faith and morals, evident in his unprecedented support for granting the sacrament of Holy Communion to the divorced and remarried and in his drive to dilute the Church’s moral and theological commitments.
At a time of widespread moral relativism and assaults on marriage, his 2014–2015 Synod of Bishops on the Family served not to strengthen the Church’s stances but to weaken them. For the first time in the history of the Church, a pope approved of Catholics in a state of adultery. He also authorized his aides to float unprecedented proposals in favor of blessing the “positive aspects” of gay relationships and couples living together outside of marriage.
Amidst this doctrinal confusion, many cardinals are beginning to feel buyer’s remorse. “The more he talks, the worse it gets,” says a Vatican official, who asked to remain anonymous, in an interview for this book. “Many bishops and cardinals are terrified to speak out, but they are in a state of apoplexy. The atmosphere is so politicized and skewed. The Church is becoming unrecognizable.”
“We haven’t hit bottom,” says an American priest interviewed for this book. He describes his parishioners as “distressed,” so much so that he carries around a list of all the popes to remind them that “bad popes don’t live forever.”
“I have never been so discouraged about the prospects for the Church,” an unnamed prelate said to Traditionalist magazine in 2015. In an interview with the Spanish Catholic weekly Vida Nueva, Cardinal Raymond Burke, the former head of the Vatican’s highest court who was removed from that position by Pope Francis in 2013, disclosed that “many have expressed their concerns to me” and that “at this very critical moment, there is a strong sense that the Church is like a ship without a rudder.”
These are “dark times,” Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Kazakhstan has said. The liberalism of this pontificate, he argues, is exposing the faithful to “spiritual danger” and creating the conditions for the “fast and easy spreading of heterodox doctrines.”
“There are evident manifestations of uneasiness,” according to the Vatican correspondent Sandro Magister in an interview with Italia Oggi. “It’s beginning to look as if the cardinals made a terrible mistake when they decided that this particular Catholic should be a pope,” wrote the British Catholic journalist Damian Thompson.
“In the Vatican, some people are already sighing: ‘Today, he has already again another different idea from yesterday,’” the German philosopher Robert Spaemann has said. “One does not fully get rid of the impression of chaos.”
In an interview for this book, Michael Hichborn, president of a Catholic watchdog organization in Virginia called the Lepanto Institute, recounted, “I had a meeting with a bishop who turned to me and said, ‘How do you remain loyal to Peter when Peter is not loyal to the Church?’ He was genuinely confused and felt stuck.”
Such bewilderment leaves Pope Francis untroubled. He even romanticizes his reckless heterodox activism. “I want a mess,” he said at the 2013 World Youth Day in Rio de Janeiro. “We knew that in Rio there would be a great disorder, but I want trouble in the dioceses!” Many Catholics found this a puzzling goal to set for the Church. But his pontificate has undeniably lived up to it. “Mission accomplished,” quipped Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, Rhode Island, in 2014.
Supremely confident in his chaotic course, Pope Francis is shrugging off the mounting concerns and delighting in his reputation as a socialist and modernist maverick. After Pope Francis early in his papacy decried capitalism as “trickle-down economics” — a polemical phrase coined by the left during the Reagan years that Francis frequently borrows — radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh commented, “This is just pure Marxism coming out of the mouth of the Pope.” Talk show host Michael Savage called him “Lenin’s pope.” Pope Francis took such comments as a compliment. “I have met many Marxists in my life who are good people, so I don’t feel offended,” he told the Italian press.
His Communist Mentor
Pope Francis grew up in socialist Argentina, an experience that left a deep impression on his thinking. He told the Latin American journalists Javier Cámara and Sebastián Pfaffen that as a young man he “read books of the Communist Party that my boss in the laboratory gave me” and that “there was a period where I would wait anxiously for the newspaper La Vanguardia, which was not allowed to be sold with the other newspapers and was brought to us by the socialist militants.”
The “boss” to whom Pope Francis referred is Esther Ballestrino de Careaga. He has described her as a “Paraguayan woman” and a “fervent communist.” He considers her one of his most important mentors. “I owe a huge amount to that great woman,” he has said, saying that she “taught me so much about politics.” (He worked for her as an assistant at Hickethier-Bachmann Laboratory in Buenos Aires.)
“She often read Communist Party texts to me and gave them to me to read. So I also got to know that very materialistic conception. I remember that she also gave me the statement from the American Communists in defense of the Rosenbergs, who had been sentenced to death,” he has said. Learning about communism, he said, “through a courageous and honest person was helpful. I realized a few things, an aspect of the social, which I then found in the social doctrine of the Church.” After entering the priesthood, he took pride in helping her hide the family’s Marxist literature from the authorities who were investigating her. According to the author James Carroll, Bergoglio smuggled her communist books, including Marx’s Das Kapital, into a “Jesuit library.”
“Tragically, Ballestrino herself ‘disappeared’ at the hands of security forces in 1977,” reported Vatican correspondent John Allen. “Almost three decades later, when her remains were discovered and identified, Bergoglio gave permission for her to be buried in the garden of a Buenos Aires church called Santa Cruz, the spot where she had been abducted. Her daughter requested that her mother and several other women be buried there because ‘it was the last place they had been as free people.’ Despite knowing full well that Ballestrino was not a believing Catholic, the future pope readily consented.”
These biographical details throw light on the pope’s ideological instincts. Yet many commentators have ignored them, breezily casting his leftism as a bit confused but basically harmless.
“I must say that communists have stolen our flag. The flag of the poor is Christian,” he said in 2014. Such a comment would have startled his predecessors. They didn’t see communism as a benign exaggeration. They saw it as a grave threat to God-given freedom, as it proposes that governments eliminate large swaths of individual freedom, private property, and business in order to produce the “equality” of a society without economic classes.
In the early twentieth century, as Marx’s socialism spread across the world, Pope Pius XI declared the theory anathema. “No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist,” he said. To hear Pope Francis speak today, one might conclude the reverse: that no can be at the same time a good Catholic and an opponent of socialism.
“Inequality is the root of all evil,” Pope Francis wrote on his Twitter account in 2014. One can imagine Karl Marx blurting that out, but none of Francis’s predecessors would have made such an outrageous claim. According to traditional Catholic theology, the root of all evil came not from inequality but from Satan’s refusal to accept inequality. Out of envy of God’s superiority, Satan rebelled. He could not bear his lesser status.
He was in effect the first revolutionary, which is why the socialist agitator Saul Alinsky — a mentor to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (who did her senior thesis at Wellesley on his thought) — offered an “acknowledgment” in his book, Rules for Radicals, to Satan. Alinsky saw him as the first champion of the “have-nots.”
Were the twentieth-century English Catholic satirist Evelyn Waugh alive today, he would find the radical left-wing political flirtations of Pope Francis too bitterly farcical even for fiction. Could a satirist like Waugh have imagined a pope happily receiving from a Latin American despot the “gift” of a crucifix shaped in the form of a Marxist hammer and sickle? That surreal scene happened during Pope Francis’s visit to Bolivia in July 2015.
Evo Morales, Bolivia’s proudly Marxist president, offered the pontiff that sacrilegious image of Jesus Christ. Morales described the gift as a copy of a crucifix designed by a late priest, Fr. Luís Espinal, who belonged to the Jesuit order (as does Pope Francis) and had committed his life to melding Marxism with religion. Pope Francis had honored Espinal’s memory upon his arrival in Bolivia.
Had John Paul II or Pope Benedict XVI seen such a grotesque cross, they might have broken it over their knees. Not Pope Francis. He accepted the hammer-and-sickle cross warmly, telling the press on the plane ride back to Rome that “I understand this work” and that “for me it wasn’t an offense.” After the visit, Morales gushed, “I feel like now I have a Pope. I didn’t feel that before.”
Under Francis, the papacy has become a collage of such politicized images: friendly papal meetings with communist thugs like the Castro brothers, a papal Mass conducted under the shadow of the mass murderer Che Guevara’s mural in Havana, papal audiences with a steady stream of crude Marxist theoreticians and anti-capitalist celebrities such as Leonardo DiCaprio, “selfies” while holding up an anti-fracking T-shirt, a pro-amnesty Mass said on the border between Mexico and America, a succession of sermons, speeches, and writings that rip into capitalism and tout greater government control over private property and business.
By pushing the papacy in such a “progressive” direction, Francis has become a darling of the global left. His program of promoting left-wing politics while downplaying and undermining doctrine on faith and morals has turned him into the ecclesiastical equivalent of Barack Obama. “Pope Francis is a gift from heaven,” the radical academic Cornel West said to Rolling Stone. “I love who he is, in terms of what he says, and the impact of his words on progressive forces around the world.”
Pope Francis, as liberals once said of Barack Obama, is the “one they have been waiting for.” The world is witnessing nothing less than a liberal revolution in the Catholic Church — a revolution that is emboldening the Church’s enemies and alienating her friends.
How refreshing it is to hear someone speak the truth so clearly and directly..
Two things will end the crisis in the Church:
1) the revelation of the Third Secret of Fatima, I.e. the exact words of Our Lady which follow: “In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved…”
And
2) the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Holy Father in union with all the bishops of the world.
http://www.fatima.org/essentials/whatucando/
No, I do not agree with this. Prior to any Consecration and its effects is the election to the Throne of St. Peter of a truly orthodox and holy Pope. This is the key to the Restoration.
I believe you are right. It must be a man who has been tested under fire like Cardinal Marc Ouellet, formerly of Quebec. While in La Belle Province, he faced down atheists and traitors to the faith who taunted and bullied him mercilessly. I think it only a small exaggeration to say he had no friends in his homeland, once a Catholic stronghold that has now become a bastion of revolting secular immorality. At times it physically sickened me to see what they did to him, how the press maligned this good man, how they lied about his words on radio and television. But he never flinched. He’s the kind of man we need, a combat veteran bedecked with celestial medals.
I recently learned of St Andre, formerly known as Brother Andre Bessette of The Holy Cross. His thousands of miracle healings and the St Joseph Oratory he established in Montreal are truly amazing. To think that 1 million people attended his viewing & funeral over a one week period in 1937, which is not long ago..then to recognize the secular swamp Montreal has become (so I am told) is truly saddening.
Montreal and the whole province, Tom. Even secular atheists who dominate Quebec’s education system have become alarmed. The kids under their charge no longer even understand most street names in cities and towns. Why? Because the roadways are named after Catholic saints and devotions! If you want an aperçu of what Hell could be like, visit the (once) Belle Province, learn the language, and live there for just a few months. Nauseous. Brings tears to my eyes just to think about the spiritual devastation.
Supposedly, Cardinal O received the greatest number of votes early on in the 2013 Papal conclave, and made it clear that he did not wish to accept election. (Google or DuckDuckGo is your friend, here.)
If these accounts are truthful – and, of course, we aren’t supposed to have any information leaked from conclave voters- well, that doesn’t negate his prior record in Canada. But if he essentially removed himself from consideration, one wonders why he did so.
To the best of my recollection, Cardinal O himself confirmed this story. Whether my memory is right or wrong (I will be checking), I know he has made very disappointing, wish-washy statements during this pontificate. He didn’t sign the dubia, for a fact.
I just don’t see the basis for your praise. Like the rest of our bishops and cardinals, he is going along to get along as far as anyone can tell- no doubt, “for the good of the Church.”
Imho, I think you’re putting the cart before the horse. Remember this?
http://www.andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheEmperorsNewClothes_e.html
One person – a little child – told the truth, and the swindle was broken. That’s what the revelation of the Third Secret (I.e. the exact words of Our Lady which follow: “In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved…”) will do for the Church. *Then* we will get a holy pope.
Today is the Sunday of the Paralytic:
http://lit.royaldoors.net/2017/04/26/may-7-2017-fourth-sunday-of-pascha-sunday-of-the-paraltic-commemoration-of-the-appearance-of-the-sign-of-the-precious-cross-over-jerusalem-at-the-third-hour-of-the-day-during-the-reign-of-constanti/
Many are spiritually paralyzed by the crisis in the Church. One word of Our Lord cured this man. Our Lord is asking the world: “Do you want to be healed?” If we want to be healed, we have to take the cure that God gave through Our Lady.
Hang in there. The crisis in the Church won’t last forever.
Most Holy Mother of God, shelter us under thy holy Omophorion!
Will the world welcome such a good and courageous pope at time such as this? No.
More preparation may be necessary for the faithful, and for those who have yet made the decision for Christ and obedience to His Church. Our Lord is permitting all of this, so that we may prepare our minds, our hearts and souls for the Lord and His Church under such a reign of holiness. And because of His great mercy, is patiently giving more time for the
wayward to change their ways and their hearts towards God; to reorder their lives for Him through the Church’s teachings.
If Cardinal Sarah were elected pope, what would really be the end result in such a base and pagan world as this? Who would listen, but a few.
Yet, I do believe it is important for Cardinal Sarah and the rest to offer a formal correction and call out some of these very bad bishops, because it is simply impossible for men of such ordained authority, whose duty it is to defend the faith and guard the flock, not to.
If the world welcomed a good and courageous Pope then he is not a good and courageous Pope.
If the world loves you, it is most likely because you are not of Christ.
Yes, this is true.
I wish it would be a bit easier for this pope we speak of.
But, our Lord told us, He warned us. Thank you.
God bless you.
Thanks, I needed that!
You’re welcome. ?
I agree, truth is always good medicine for the world.
Quote:“If we want to be healed, we have to take the cure that God gave through Our Lady.”
Agreed but first must come the Great Miracle prophesied at Garabandal. Visionary Conchita’s locution with Our Blessed Lord refers. The event took place in 1963:
Q. “What is the purpose of the Miracle?
A. To convert the whole world.
Q. Will Russia be converted?
A. She will be converted also and then everyone will love Our Hearts.”
This prophecy clearly indicates that the conversion of the world including Russia will occur as a direct result of a future Great Miracle to take place at the ‘Pines’ (grove of Pine trees above the village in Garabandal where many of the ecstasies occurred). According to Fatima expert, the late Fr. J. Pelletier, A.A. in his book ‘Our Lady Comes to Garabandal’ Conchita said, in 1968, that this conversion would take place right after the great Miracle.
It logically follows that any reconciliation of dissident bishops with Rome as a consequence of the great Miracle would be a catalyst for a valid but late, consecration to occur. However before then must come the ‘Communist Tribulation’ and ‘Worldwide Warning.’
More here: http://www.garabandal.us/pdfs/dw_our_lady_comes.pdf
JohnAU.
John – didn’t Joey die a couple of years ago without recovering his eyesight?
Correct but that does not invalidate the Holy Virgins promise. Note, his sight will be restored as a result of the Miracle and not before as many have wrongly interpreted.
The visionaries while in ecstasy communicated with their vision whom they perceived as ‘very real’ and were surprised to later find out the onlookers were excluded from seeing or participating in them. This raises a very interesting possibility: that in some profound manner that veil will be lifted for those present in Garabandal for the Great Miracle thus Joey’s real presence with his new eyes will confirm the prophecy as the Holy Virgin promised.
Pax
John AU.
Well, I’m not convinced by that. I know the claims that Garabandal has been declared a false apparition are mistaken, but it has not been approved either, so I am wary. I know some people in Portugal who know Conchita personally, and they are pretty sure it’s a genuine apparition, but I have to say that the incident when the kneeling children motored backwards over rocks has more of the demonic about it than a usual Marian apparition.
As the events of Garabandal have not been condemned by the Church I think it best to maintain an open mind about the matter. The events are unique amongst Marian apparitions in so far as they will prove their own authenticity by fulfillment of the major prophecies. I would not expect official approval before then. Meantime, everyone knowledgeable about what occurred in that humble mountain village should live the content of the Holy Virgins Messages given for the world, as they have full ecclesiastical approval and are highly relevant to current events now occurring in the Church and the world. The late Fr Malachi Martin endorsed the Virgins Messages as containing the Fatima Third Secret in abbreviated form. Pope John Paul II in referring to those same messages in a letter to German author Albrecht Weber said: “May the Message of the Mother of God find entrance into the hearts of the faithful before it’s too late”
Pax.
JohnAU.
” … prove their own authenticity by fulfillment of the major prophecies. I would not expect official approval before then.”
That’s very fair and no doubt correct.
Letter to Joey Lomangino from Conchita Gonzalez (one of the visionaries of Garabandal)
_____________________________
March 19, 1964 – St. Joseph’s Day
“My Dear Joseph,
Just two lines to tell you the message which the Blessed Virgin gave me for you today at the pines…she told me that the voice you heard was hers and that you shall see on the very day of the Miracle. She also told me that the House of Charity you will establish in New York will bring great glory to God.” It seems to me that although somewhat mysterious, this prophecy does not require the conclusion that Joey would survive to that date. Garabandal is actually characterized by these somewhat enigmatic statements. Padre Pio, for example, died before the Miracle, although it had been prophesied that he would see it: “Conchita took advantage of this meeting to ask Fr. Cennamo:
‘Why did the Virgin tell me that Padre Pio would see the Miracle?’
He replied: ‘Padre Pio saw it [the Miracle] before his death. He told us himself.'” Similarly, Our Lady told Conchita that the body of Fr. Luis Andreu would be found incorrupt on the day after the Miracle. His exhumation has revealed natural decay. This does not invalidate the prophecy.
It is only proper that the Church would withhold approval until the very specific prophecies of Garabandal are fulfilled.
Very interesting and thank you very much for this information.
Glad it was helpful, tovarich. I was initially very skeptical of Garabandal, which I discovered, it seems to me, not that long after I was received into the Church in 2005. I was shaken to the core when I came across what appeared reliable information that Padre Pio believed it was authentic. Much reading and reassessment followed. But in all too human fashion, everybody is fixated on guessing the dates of the Warning and the Miracle rather than following Our Lady’s instructions to pray and do penance.
In any event, I think it is not accidental that the Garabandal apparitions began when the 1960 date came and went without the release of the Third Secret of Fatima, per Our Lady’s instructions to Sr. Lucia.
I was persuaded of its authenticity but then one or two people pointed out the (perceived) problems with it.
We can all agree that “something’s coming” whether from Heaven or from Kim Jong Un or similar.
More likely a visit to Russia by the Pope followed by an invasion of Western Europe via Kiev in the Ukraine.
May 4, 1962: “On that day, Mari-Loli and Conchita received new and prophetic revelations about the future tribulations of the brief but very difficult time of the “Pre-Aviso”. Conchita also said during her ecstasy that “Communism will also come back in Spain”. The Blessed Virgin also predicted to the visionary that “the Pope would go to Russia, to Moscow”, a trip absolutely unthinkable in the political climate of the 1960’s. She also added among other important things, that “As soon as the Sovereign Pontiff would return to the Vatican, successive violent persecutions would break out here and there in Europe”.
These would be signs that the world, and particularly the Church (people would then believe that She will be on the point of disappearing, etc.) were entering into the relatively short yet very difficult period of the Pre-Warning.”
Source ‘GARABANDAL’ page133.
The Holy Virgins messages instruct us how we should prepare for such calamities.
October18, 1961:” We must make many sacrifices, perform much penance, and visit the Blessed Sacrament frequently. But first, we must lead good lives, if we do not, a chastisement will befall us. The cup is already filling up, and if we do not change, a very great chastisement will come upon us.”
June 18, 1965: “As my message of October 18 has not been complied with and has not been made known to the world, I am advising you that this is the last one. Before, the cup was filling up. Now it is flowing over. Many cardinals, many bishops and many priests are on the road to perdition and are taking many souls with them. Less and less importance is being given to the Eucharist. You should turn the wrath of God away from yourselves by your efforts. If you ask His forgiveness with sincere hearts, He will pardon you. I, your mother, through the intercession of Saint Michael the Archangel, ask you to amend your lives. You are now receiving the last warnings. I love you very much and do not want your condemnation. Pray to us with sincerity and we will grant your requests. You should make more sacrifices. Think about the passion of Jesus.”
Note: the reference to bishops on the road to perdition and its relevance to any hoped for Consecration of Russia.
JohnAU.
Quote: “It is only proper that the Church would withhold approval until the very specific prophecies of Garabandal are fulfilled.”
However we need to distinguish between the supernatural aspect (prophecies) and the Holy Virgins Messages which are the more important. Those messages were given ecclesiastical approval by His Excellency Bishop Aldzabel, [Nota issued on July 8th, 1965]. “We hereby declare that We have not found any matter deserving condemnatory ecclesiastical censorship either in the doctrine or in the spiritual recommendations that have been divulged on this occasion as having been addressed to the Christian faithful, for these recommendations contain exhortation to prayer and sacrifice, to devotion to the Holy Eucharist, to veneration of Our Blessed Lady in traditional and praiseworthy ways, and to the holy fear of God, offended by our sins. They simply repeat the common doctrine of the Church in this respect.” Those messages were later permitted for dissemination throughout the world by a change to Canon Law approved by Pope Paul VI. Conchita is on record as stating: “it is not even necessary to believe the supernatural aspect provided we accept and live the Holy Virgins Messages.”
Their importance should not be underestimated.
Thanks for this clarification. The Church did indeed take an affirmative action that underscores the orthodoxy of the message and its value in propagating the various aspects of the Faith enumerated in the declaration.
Every reason for us to hold fast to the faith of our fathers and put everything coming out of the Vatican to the test. The Holy Virgins Messages are the key to an understanding of what is taking place in the world and the Church right now. Meantime, follow Saint Pio’s advice: “Pray, Hope, and don’t Worry.” Our Blessed Lord will look after the rest.
Joey’s encounter with Padre Pio available below, (starts 30:18 into the program and highly recommended).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoXsD7CBCug
God bless you and your loved ones.
I just came upon this from the National Catholic Register, about a little-known miracle that followed the Miracle of the Sun:
“Then she said, One of the children [the three seers] saw the people had the rosaries all tangled. Then the children slid down from the shoulders, took a handful of [the tangled] rosaries and just passed them out. None were tangled! And everybody got the right rosary! We watched that happen!” she told Malburg, still in amazement.
The woman had waited to tell someone who someday in her lifetime was going to interview her that story about what she and her friends witnessed with the pile of tangled rosaries miraculously untangled, and each one immediately given to the right owner without the seer knowing who in that crowd owned which one.
“My wife and I got goosebumps listening to that,” Malburg recalls.
He immediately asked Haffert, “Are you aware people laid their rosaries in the mud hoping to get a blessing on them?” No one ever told him that, he answered.
“This lady told me a lot of rosaries were laid around the bush,” Malburg repeated, and she said “rosaries were all tangled up. She insisted they [she and her friends] were standing on the rocks, and saw the children pick the rosaries up and hand them out blindly, and everyone got their right rosary.”
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/joseph-pronechen/fatimas-other-miracle-after-the-sun-danced
This is exactly what the four Garabandal seers did routinely with rosaries, wedding rings, crucifixes and other sacramentals given to Our Lady to kiss. And regarding tangled rosaries, this from a 2002 issue of Garabandal Journal:
In Piedad’s kitchen, one of the women removed the rosaries from the bag intending to distribute them because each member of the group wanted personally to hand their own rosary to the visionary. The rosaries, however, were all tangled together in a big ball and it was impossible to get them apart. Piedad said, “Look, just put them back in the bag and give it to Loli. She will untangle them.” The women looked at Piedad not very convinced. “Don’t look at me like that,” she responded. “You’ll see, you’ll see!”
At the appointed time, Loli went into ecstasy holding the bag of rosaries. She left her house and went out into the village plaza followed by her father and a large crowd. After a while, she stopped, conversed with her Vision and then began effortlessly to draw the rosaries from the bag one by one to present to the Vision. Each time she did this, she took the rosary, and still in ecstasy with her head tilted back, went through the crowd until she was in front of the rightful owner, and then placed it around her neck. She repeated this action thirty times until all the women had their own rosaries, kissed by the Virgin, returned to them. Piedad said: “I saw weeping and fainting that night.”
http://www.ourlady.ca/info/affirmationsofFaith.htm
Fascinating!
Remember also, it was a little Child who brought light into the world!
I agree, but not only the Pope but I have serious doubts that some of the Bishops would do it. There seem to be quite a few unorthodox Bishops out there at least ones with a very weak spine.
“The essence of Modernism is the absorption of modern liberalism into Catholicism.”
And… modern liberalism is nothing else than communism in fifth gear.
Are you even Catholic?
Yes, I am a Catholic. What’s your point?
“The Church is becoming unrecognizable”. – A Vatican official
Only those either completely ignorant of the Catholic faith or those willfully blind cannot see that the Catholic Church, or the Vatican institution,has been unrecognizable as the true Catholic Church since the signing of the documents of Vatican II which gave legal status to a new religion incorporating the synthesis of heresies, Modernism, into every single part and parcel of the institution, most tragically, their abominable Novus Ordo liturgy.
The unfolding of the entrenchment of the false religion of Modernism, born of the Devil as all false religions are, has been incremental but no less damning to the salvation of millions of souls. The Devil has never been as successful in deceiving so many through their belief this false religion is the same as Catholicism.
And yet here we have another writer who still believes an apostate, an anti-Christ, a Judas, a blasphemer, could actually be the Vicar of Christ! Unbelievable and yet it makes sense when you think that the Antichrist will rise and will reign and how could that be possible without the support of the majority of people? Vatican II began the diabolical process of indoctrinating the people into believing that Judas could actually lead the Church Christ instituted. What greater success at deceit has Satan ever had than this?
What more proof do you need that the true Catholic Church cannot be the church headed now by an obvious servant of Satan but has not been the true Catholic Church since the signing of the documents of Vatican II which began in earnest the Revolution against Christ and His True Church like no other revolution in history?
The Truth will set you free!
After all that verbiage, and you don’t say:
1) Where is the Catholic Church?
2) Who is the Pope?
He is still the pope until a council or a sizeable group of Cardinals and/or bishops definitively declares that he has severed himself from the Church and that the faithful no longer owe him allegiance.
I highly recommend True or False Pope? A Refutation of Sedevacantism and Other Errors by John Salza and Robert Siscoe http://www.trueorfalsepope.com. This book has helped me immensely and I’m sure it will help you too. (Ditto for The Political Pope.)
Thank you Margaret.
You’re welcome.
As Margaret above me says, until the Church makes a declaration on the matter we must abide by what the Church tells us, in this case through the sensus fidei – the universal church tells us that John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and even Francis are all legitimate popes. None of us have the authority to say otherwise.
In addition, advocating for this is position, as you have, is in violation of our comment policy, which you can find at the top of any 1P5 page under the About tab. You’re specifically violating these points:
We encourage discussion and debate about these matters here, especially considering the confusing situation of two men wearing white in the Vatican who both have “Pope” before their names. However these assertions are far beyond that. This is your one and only warning. Any further violations and you will not be welcome to comment here anymore.
The truth will set you free. Censorship of it is certainly your privilege as owner.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is, by a very wide margin, far more political than theological, and it is unmistakably leftist politics. Once again in the past week, he has been ranting on about “rigidity”; about those who hide their own sins behind a wall of “rigidity”. It is an obsession with him. But this obsession reveals his far left bias. The leftists want to assert control over everything that the rest of us think, and to achieve this, they construct a politically correct narrative which we all must embrace. It is called “group-think”. And so it is with Bergoglio; all those among us who resist conforming ourselves according to the Thought of Chairman Francis” are committing the grievous sin of “rigidity.”
Pardon my rigidity, but I’m becoming ever more convinced there is not an element of supernatural faith left in the individual. Another piece in his lexicon is “peripheries.” Subconsciously he is perhaps aware that he is indeed over the edge.
James, that is an interesting perspective. I read some interesting, professional analyses of some of Obama’s statements which revealed his subconscious mind, regarding, among other things, his origins and true identity.
I remember the days when I was so edified by reading JP11 and Benedict’s works and I felt great joy in my interior assent to their guidance and teaching on behalf of the Deposit of Faith. I never ever thought…ok… this is only the ordinary Magisterium so I don’t need to assent to it. Now, Francis had made the faithful go through agonizing contortions and questions about how we can remain faithful and just not listen to him. Faithfulness to the Deposit of Faith, which is every pope’s mission, seems to be a thing of the past.
As one unnamed bishop is quoted here: “How do you remain loyal to Peter when Peter is not loyal to the Church?” An essential requirement of our beloved Catholic faith is fidelity to the Holy Father since, as Jesus told St. Peter; “Whoever hears you, hears Me.” Yet at this time, we know in our heart of hearts that Christ is not speaking through this man with regard to faith and morals. So, while we long to feel secure in the guidance that must come to us from the Petrine Office, we find ourselves in the unique position of choosing to disregard what this pope says with an easy conscience, while earnestly longing for that proper guidance to be restored. We need a shepherd whom we can trust. Frankly, for most of this purposely chaotic pontificate, I cannot bring myself to refer to this man as ‘the Holy Father’. It sounds like a sick joke.
So Pope Francis is a supposedly a communist or sympathizes with communists because he lived in Argentina?
That might be accurate. Maybe the author should acknowledge in Chapter 1 that Argentina experienced a far-right military dictatorship that murdered at least ten thousand people. Perhaps that is what made Bergoglio suspicious of anti-communism and conservatism (assuming that he is suspicious of it).
Perhaps Pope Francis realizes that the real criminals are not the communists in Latin America, but far-right Catholics such as Pinochet and Videla. The author doesn’t spends so much effort condemning Evo Morales and Father Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann but he does even acknowledge the atrocities committed under Pinochet and Videla. Maybe Pope Francis realizes right-wing anti-communism is murderous and sadistic
What is wrong with Bergogilo honoring Esther Ballestrino Carriega who lead a group that wanted to know the whereabouts and remains of their disappeared loved ones?
And maybe BlackRose you might acknowledge that the war against the Communist terrorists in Argentina was fought because they themselves killed more than 13,000 people.
Sorry, you won’t find me crying for those the Generals did away with. Civil strife is always a very nasty affair. But Communism is a demonic plague which has to be excised wherever it is found.
Do you have any evidence that they killed 13,000? You are probably quoting an estimate of what the junta killed. The only killed hundreds, and most of them in armed clashes against the police, military, and paramilitary groups.
So did the communists torture anybody or engaged in mass forced disappearances?
The fact is that the junta was a bunch of sadistic and malevolent criminals based on their actions. If people judge that they did not save the country, but only attacked their fellow citizens, then that judgment is one that is based on evidence and decent feeling. Many were rightly sentenced to prison during the Presidency of the Kirchners.
If people, such as Pope Francis, are suspicious of ardent anti-communism because of their atrocities, then their sentiments are justified. You have to deal with what the junta did, to understand Argentina and Pope Francis’ life. The author wants to ignore that. That is hugely misleading and dishonest.
400 million souls is the gory tally of the Moloch called Marxism. I am not going to debate with you on this subject. There is absolutely no point. Please do not reply.
It’s true. It’s true. Just say things that have no evidence and assert that it is true. Solipsism is a great philosophy.
You’re blocked. The last thing I want to read is trash from some leftie-loving ignorant hippy. Bye bye.
Rarely have I seen such foolishness displayed. I’d say your ignorant but mendacious and cruel is far more likely.
I haven’t killed anyone or tortured anyone. I don’t extol mass murder or turned a blind eye to it.
So tell me how I am cruel?
So what is wrong with my disgust for the atrocities of the Argentine junta?
“Those who thus appreciate true valor should in their daily
intercourse set gentleness first and aim to win the love and esteem of
others. If you affect valor and
act with violence, the world will in the end detest you and look upon you as
wild beasts. Of this you should
take heed.”
Your doing a job on me. Button up.
Don’t forget the Holodomor of 1932-33 which the real Stalin ordered to force collectivization on the Ukrainian people. 7-14 million people died of forced starvation.
You might wish to start a tally on the millions of individuals murdered by secular materialism, the Communism being at one time the most visible, but its multifaceted alter-ego roaming the halls of the globe with multiple monikers — Bergoglianism being the newest.
Take your blinders off.
…
As many as 100 million souls were murdered by Marxist ideologues. That does not include the millions subjected to imprisonment, let alone those ostensibly “free” to walk the streets of their occupied countries only to live in fear.
Take a trip to Venezuela. In fact, just move there. You are a malicious troll.
I posted in the wrong section. I meant to challenge the notion that the guerillas killed 13,000 people, even in armed conflict.
I don’t know how one arrives at the hundred million figure from, but there needs to be evidence for it.
http://web.archive.org/web/20080602090250/http://www.etext.org/Politics/Staljin/Staljin/articles/AHR/AHR.html
That is a good article about the toll of Stalinist repression based on the Soviet archives. And yes, we should condemn those events and administrators that enabled the “terror” of 1936-38 where 681,692 people were murdered.
Still this is about Pope Francis’ life and experiences, not about what Stalin and Mao alleged did. And again, even then Stalin’s legacy was denounced by Nikita Khrushchev.
The reason it is relevant to bring up Communist tyrants in a discussion about Bergoglio is simple; because he has been openly soft on Communism and Communist economics, economics being a topic he admits he knows little about yet continues to, well, pontificate about. All of this as if he is totally unaware of the fact that Communism gave the world the first mass legalization of abortion, espouses starvation economics and religious oppression.
It’s completely insane when you really think about it. Like if Simon Wiesenthal ignored the Holocaust in an effort to support Nazism for its introduction of the Autobahn system to the world. Except…Communism hasn’t even done anything approaching THAT as a positive.
That the Church has openly, unabashedly and vociferously condemned communism and socialism both going back to the prophetic writings of the Popes with Quod Apostolici Muneris and forward isn’t to be forgotten, tho it apparently IS forgotten by Bergoglio.
The “Black Book of Communism” says around 400 million James. Mao was responsible for 100-120 million of those, Lenin and Stalin maybe 40-60 million. Other assorted demons the rest.
Let’s not forget abortion. the Commies gave us legalized abortion, an “error” that has been adopted throughout the world.
Rose, lay off the tired, ’60s anti-capitalist cliches. Our Lady appeared at Fatima in 1917 not to warn us about ……*New York Times buzzword*…..”the far-right”. She came to warn us about atheistic communism and the havoc it would cause in the world and the Church.
Bergoglio never got the message. It’s as simple as that.
Interestingly, he’s going to Fatima next week, coz he’s the Pope and he’s gotta go for the 100th anniversary. Pay close attention to what he says……or more to the point……to what he doesn’t say.
I’ve been looking forward to the canonization of Francisco and Jacinta for decades. I’m afraid I’ll not be taking advantage of EWTN’s coverage. The sight of the fraud is unbearable to me.
What an irony.
Sister Lucia was also told by Our Lady that she would go to Heaven. But she has been forgotten – they will do anything not to draw attention to her.
Be patient, Joe!
The process is proceeding. I would rather see Sister Lucia wait a bit and go through the required process as did Francisco and Jacinta. Our Lord will allow her to display her intercessory power. You go drop-jawed when you think what that little girl, quiet sister and concealed Discalced Carmelite accomplished.
Hopefully she will find her acknowledgement during a pontificate characterized by orthodoxy and holiness, not fruadulence.
Amen to that and may it come quickly James.
Lol, I talked about Pinochet and Videla. They did not take power in the 60s.
Bergoglio and Videla were chummy by most accounts — including that of a Jesuit priest who fell prey to the junta.
Trouble with Bergoglio is that he seems NOT to have boldly supported the resistance to the Peronist Regime until it was all over. Opportunism?
Was he a Liberationist when being a Liberationist got you “disappeared”? Apparently not. Yet now? One wonders if he holds any uncompromising beliefs.
Hard to know what to make of it.
Maybe the book will shed some new light.
The moment Bergoglio walked out onto the balcony of St. Peter’s on the night of his election and leered at the throng gathered below with a psycopathic, glassy-eyed stare, I got a real bad feeling. That bad feeling turned to deep foreboding shortly after when he announced that he was much too humble to simply follow in the footsteps of his predecessors and live in the simple papal apartments but would instead reside in his own suite in a Vatican hotel.
I knew right then that this man hated Catholic tradition.
You, me and a million others had that immediate visceral reaction Kiwi. I am sure that it was our Guardian Angels warning us that a false prophet had somehow become Pope. I am myself of the opinion that Bergoglio is THE false prophet of Scripture.
Just how many of us knew the moment he emerged? We’ve been through that discussion before, and the number is not unsubstantial.
I wept as I did on 9/11. Far more many souls are in jeopardy in the face of this horror show on stage in Rome.
My immediate reaction was so strong that the words “He’s a devil” came unbidden to my mind.
I cried when Benedict XVI announced his resignation. It was worse than when my grandmother passed away.
We KNOW for certain that Benedict XVI resigned under huge pressureS, thanks to his friend Mgr Luigi Negri, the archbp of Ferrara, thus fulfilling the prophecy he made on the day he began his pontificate: “Pray for me so that I will not flee before the wolves”.
We didn’t pray enough.
Therefore Benedict’s renunciation was invalid and he is still the true Pope.
Bergoglio was elected through a mafia’s manipulations, that same “mafia” that probably pressured Benedict.
Now everything is clear and can be explained: The Holy Spirit doesn’t back Bergoglio, thus He doesn’t prevent him uttering heresies together with a lot of nonsenses.
When we pray for the Pope, we pray for the “Pope emeritus”, not for Francis.
The jury is out regarding Pope Bendict’s resignation. The Church will decide this YEARS after we are dead.
It would be so easy if he weren’t in fact the legitimate Pope. You wouldn’t have to listen to any of his nonsense. Unfortunately, he is, more’s the pity. I just try to remember that in all things God is the true Master and in his good time will be made whole. Until that blessed day, we have this passion and suffering. I just offer it up in union with Our Lord’s passion for the good of souls. Even though we have to offer it up, we still need to fight as best we can in our capacity.
Remember the vision of Pope St. Pius X who saw a pope alone crying and praying in the Vatican then being martyred… who had the same name as Pius X. His name was Guiseppe Sarto. Guiseppe is the Italian name for Joseph.
Joseph…Ratzinger?
I need details about the vision
Pope Pius X (1903-14): In 1909, in the midst of an audience with members of the Franciscan order, he seemed to fall into a trance. Moments passed, then his eyes sprung open and he jumped to his feet. “What I have seen is terrifying!” he cried out. “Will I be the one, or will it be a successor? What is certain is that the Pope will leave Rome and, in leaving the Vatican, he will have to pass over the dead bodies of his priests!” Later, shortly before his death, another vision came to him: “I have seen one of my successors, of the same name, who was fleeing over the bodies of his brethren. He will take refuge in some hiding place; but after a brief respite, he will die a cruel death. Respect for God has disappeared from human hearts. They wish to efface even God’s memory. This perversity is nothing less than the beginning of the last days of the world.”
Very interesting. I wonder if that ties into part of the Fatima secrets where a bishop in white is martyred?
I think that’s exactly what his vision was about.
God forbid that that should ever happen.
Look into all the work being done on Canon 188. If Pope Benedict was indeed erroneous when he thought he could bifurcate the papacy into an “active” and “contemplative” branch with himself the latter, whomever new the former, and essentially TWO popes (why else the white, the Pope Emeritus title, etc?) then by that Canon the resignation is invalid and Benedict is still Pope.
You say: He is the legitimate Pope since the Vatican said so and nobody dares to contradict this.
But since evidence was given that Benedict was pressured until he resigned, this renunciation is invalid. It cannot be otherwise.
Please get True or False Pope? A Refutation of Sedevacantism and Other Errors by John Salza and Robert Siscoe http://www.trueorfalsepope.com.
They bring up this point in the book.
But we as lay faithful can not make that determination. Even though it seems that Benedict was ousted, there is no concrete proof. If if there was, we as lay people can’t make that call.
We lay people can petition our bishops and cardinals to look into this matter. They can make the call.
It’s not “the Vatican” that said so, it’s the universal church. There’s a difference and it’s important. And the only time we can say otherwise is if either some incontrovertible evidence comes up, which we do not have, or the proper authority in the Church tells us otherwise (that authority would either be an ecumenical council or a future pope.) Until then, we deal with the reality on the ground, like any good soldiers, and the reality on the ground is that, at least apparently, Francis is the pope and this pope is clearly a material heretic.
Jesuits take an oath to serve the pope, not to become pope. Also, the papal ballots were not done in secret. He had cardinals lobbying for him to become pope, outwardly influencing other cardinals. This was clearly wrong and he should be removed on that basis.
That’s because your Grandmother didn’t quit.
Thank you – it’s so thoughtful of you! XOXO
She passed away Oct. 1, 1990 – the Feast of the Protection of the Mother of God.
Splendid reply!
I didn’t cry but I was upset
I didn’t have the feeling of dread that everyone describes but I certainly had a feeling of disappointment (that I couldn’t quite explain…it was not like I had a bet on the election) and a faint feeling of “something’s off…”
Not to beat a dead horse — but it really wasn’t a feeling. It was the absolute certitude that a catastrophe had befallen us. In the following weeks there was confirmation almost on a daily basis. Of course, it continues.
My formative years were unfortunately mutilated by “sixties” priests and sisters peddling a fraudulent Catholicism. Thankfully I had sufficient common sense and pre-1965 catechesis to recognize that the generation entrusted with my Catholic education were catering to their own necessities. I think more of us than we care to acknowledge knew they were lapping up a bill of goods that was entirely vacuous. Of course as time went most of them pealed away, abandoned their vocations and got married or something. There were more than a few, however who pealed away because they too knew they were being sold a bill of goods and didn’t want to endure the evisceration of the Church, the priesthood and religious life.
It was a horrible time to live through. Who knew we would have a repeat performance with clown leading the second act.
“Who knew we would have a repeat performance with a clown leading the second act.”
Perfect.
The Great Stalin, I have long appreciated your comments. I have a question, where can I find the prophecy in scripture about the coming false prophet?
Very kind, PaxTecum, my thanks to you Sir.
Look at the Apocalyse of St. John, Chapter 13, verses 1-18 and the chapters that follow, all the way to chapter 20. It’s very interesting that these follow on from “the woman clothed with the Sun” of chapter 12, which many commentators think may refer to Our Lady at Fatima.
Also, these are pertinent in the light of Bergoglio’s aims:
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” [Matthew 7:15]
“For from the heart come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false testimonies, blasphemies.” [Matthew 15:19]
“He said to him: Which? And Jesus said: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness.” [Matthew 19:18]
“And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many.” [Matthew 24:11]
“For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect.” [Matthew 24:24]
“Thou knowest the commandments: Do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, bear not false witness, do no fraud, honour thy father and mother.” [Mark 10:19]
Also Mark 13:22.
And “Woe to you when men shall bless you: for according to these things did their fathers to the false prophets.” [Luke 6:26]
“Thou knowest the commandments: Thou shalt not kill: Thou shalt not commit adultery: Thou shalt not steal: Thou shalt not bear false witness: Honour thy father and mother.” [Luke 18:20]
Scripture itself strongly condemns Bergoglio and all who sail with him.
Best Biblical descriptor I’ve found as yet is the “Man of Lawlessness”, 2 Thess. 2.
This pontificate leaves me hoping for a schism of the sort that Jesus created in the Temple; the driving out of money-grubbing thieves who bilked the worshiping poor in order to advance their own positions. I do not see in any way how the parallel is not one of metaphysical certitude when one simple looks at the Kirchensteuer-sucking German heretics and their front man for lawless living.
Such a schism is not a breaking of the Body of Christ, it is the excision of a cancerous tumor.
Please see my reply to Ivan. Thank you.
Nothing in that passage precludes this man from being observably a man of lawlessness. Whether that passage refers to another, specific man is not the point. It could well be so and appears to be. But Bergoglio has in fact made no bones about it; laws are for the “rigid” and are to be condemned. What else is that but lawlessness?
You’re right. You and I DO have a lot of common views!
‘It is principally of these last and cruel persecutions of the devil, which shall go on increasing daily till the reign of Antichrist, that we ought to understand that first and celebrated prediction and curse of God, pronounced in the terrestrial Paradise against the serpent. It is to our purpose to explain this here, for the glory of the most holy Virgin, for the salvation of her children, and for the confusion of the devil.’ St Louis de Montfort. True Devotion to Mary
‘I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.’ Gen 3:15
On the day that Pope Paul VI arrived at Fatima, May 13, 1967, the encyclical Signum Magnum, the ‘Great Sign,’ was published. The encyclical states: ‘The great sign which the Apostle John saw in
heaven, “a Woman clothed with the sun,” is interpreted by the sacred Liturgy, not without foundation, as referring to the most blessed Mary.’ This is the Woman spoken of from the cross; “Woman behold Thy Son,” the same Woman of Genesis 3:15 who “shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” In this is seen the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary over Satan and his two earthly representatives, the False Prophet and the Antichrist.
JMJ
Cf. The Apocalyptic Beasts – http://wp.me/p2Na5H-ol https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d8ecb97d981d8746cadd560875a527c5538d2b1cc11e95e2f59f465db3628a15.png
What I found most offensive in the initial introduction was the cloying humility and blatant insincerity of his “bow” to the very people he intended to betray, reminding me of the Dickens character Uriah Heep in David Copperfield. My heart sank when I saw that bow, and its image remains primary and indelible when I think of him.
“Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, Who opposeth, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God.
. . .
For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way. And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him,
Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 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)
That’s about the Antichrist, not the false prophet. He will come after the period of peace promised by Our Lady of Fatima.
WOW! Scarey. Absolutely, terrifyingly scarey. And to think we are all living, and suffering through this now. Keep praying our Rosaries.
I didn’t buy into that ‘false prophet’ theory early on, even though I knew he was very bad news for the Church of Christ. But……..I whole heartidly believe that is absolutely true now. He can be non other than THE false prophet of the Bible, full stop.
Bergoglio isn’t persuasive enough to be the false prophet. His Marxist tendencies are very off-putting.
Same thing I said about Obama being the Antichrist…they are both precursors though, I’m sure
Good point.
Off-putting to you, but maybe not to the rest of the secular world. I have heard many people (who are not devout Catholics) sing his praises. You live in a world overrun by secular, immoral politics to the extent that satanism and the occult are becoming acceptable practices. Faithful Catholics may very well be in the minority, and historically he may fit the profile of a false prophet.
I believe George Neumayr lays out the case very well for Pope Francis being THE False Prophet. Cf. This comment of mine here: http://disq.us/p/1ih98r3
You opine that Bergoglio is the False Prophet. Others such as Ven Fulton Sheen and Fr Malachi Martin, based on their writings, would agree with you. One may ask; ‘So what?’ Fr V Miceli wrote that the second beast of the Apocalypse, the False Prophet, is an assistant to the Antichrist, aiding him to triumph over men, possessing all authority and might of the Antichrist, leading the nations to worship his master and finally branding them with the mark of the Prince of Darkness. ‘The Antichrist’ p37.
In ‘Making Clarity about Amoris Laetitia’ Prof. Anna Silvas described the resurgence of the spirit of the seventies bringing with it seven other demons and that this alien spirit appears to have finally swallowed
up the See of Peter, dragging ever widening cohorts of compliant higher Church leadership into its net.
How bad were the seventies and eighties? Fr Malachi Martin wrote on the occasion of the 1987 Marian Year of JPII; ‘the Catholic Church is in a shambles, sacramentally, theologically, missiologically, politically, devotionally … In country after country there is already existent in shadowy outline a new Church whose prelates and priests and nuns eschew any real control of the Pope over the beliefs they profess or the
morality they preach and practise.’
That year a luciferian bible ‘Urantia,’ claimed to be authored by spirits and meaning ‘Earth,’ was circulated within Satanic circles with copies being distributed to every public library of the Western world. ‘Urantia’ advises: ‘Christianity has indeed done a great service for this world, but what is now needed most needed is Jesus. The world needs to see Jesus living again on earth … The Christian Churches of the twentieth century stand as great, but wholly unconscious obstacles to the immediate advance of the real gospel ─ the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth … A house divided against itself cannot stand. The living Jesus is the only hope of a possible unification of Christianity.’
Thirty years later we have a new Church, presided over by the False Prophet (if you are correct).
Could you be correct? ‘The contemporaries of Antichrist who are enlightened by the Sacred Scriptures will alone be able to discover the solution to this problem. Such was the case with those who were contemporary with Jesus Christ of whom Antichrist will be the counterpart. ‘History of Antichrist’ Fr P Huchedé. p 11.
JMJ
The Urantia Book is a plagiarised invention – the wiki article on it is unusually detailed. A clear invention.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Urantia_Book#History_and_future_of_the_world
If one concludes that Bergoglio is the FP of the Apoc then the implications are grave. One conclusion is that the appearance of his master the AC is imminent. The apostasy/crisis has robbed
countless Catholics of many defences, such as personal spirituality, orthodox sacraments, sound doctrine and faithful shepherds, hence I believe when the counterfeit Christ arrives many will be seduced.
In the case of non-believers, they will accept the AC ─ ‘all the earth was in admiration after the beast.’ (Apoc 13:3) and all that dwell upon the earth adored him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb.’ (Apoc 13:8). Unlike those Catholics consecrated to the Blessed Virgin Mary, the non-believers have no supernatural defences against this diabolical deception. Catholic missionaries have always known that long term absence or suppression of religion results in superstition. This would explain the success of the New Age Movement with its promise of a New Age and New Age ‘Christ’ in the apostate and pagan West.
The Urantia book does not have a monopoly on plagiarism or falsehood. The Maitreya writings and claims of Benjamin Crème and a legion of other occultists fall within the same category. In the case of Russia, the press and state controlled TV promote occult topics ranging from UFOs, aliens, psychic healing, seances to ‘scientists fear they’ve opened gates of hell’ during a 9-mile-deep drilling operation. Dr Rudakov, psychotherapist deplored that the ‘the state-run media would contribute to this hysteria.’ A disillusioned party member viewed state sponsorship of occult studies as a sort of official opiate; ‘They fed us rubbish about the dream of Communism for years and we now see that they were lying. At least this gives us something new to dream about.’
Something new to dream about? The global infestation of the occult has all the characteristics of psychological warfare which is ‘the planned use of propaganda and other measures designed to
influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes and behaviour of target personnel in support of current policy, aims or of a plan.’
We should not be surprised. This is what the modernists have done to Catholics since the Council. But what of the plagiarism/invention observation? This is to be expected in psyops. We are not interested in their occult claims ─ phony or otherwise. What interests us is that such a plan is in play and what is its purpose.
Ordinarily these speculative observations would not raise an eyebrow. However, if your view that Bergoglio is the FP is correct then the situation changes. Expect the unexpected and you won’t be
disappointed.
JMJ
I agree with every word of this post. The world is being prepared for the arrival of the man of sin – I have thought this for years.
My sensus Fidei started going on alert when he didn’t accept the red and gold stole in order to give his first blessing. That really unnerved me.
Regardless of any other feelings we have about this pope, negative or positive, there is one thing that has to weigh on the mind of any dispassionate observer, viz. what I deem his ostentatious humility. A truly humble man wears his hair shirt under the robes as Thomas Becket did. Jorge Bergoglio wears it as one might a douillette.
Making absolutely sure his hair shirt doesn’t touch his skin
Glad I’m not the only one who uses the term “ostentatious humility” to describe Pope Francis
Pope Heep.
Tom, I just finished The Political Pope and, to my surprise, the phrase shows up there too! But I think many of us can lay claim to its discovery free of all influence. I mean, the reasons for using it are just so compelling. In the book, for example, there is this gem. When Francis arrived at Fiumicino airport in Rome prior to his first papal trip to America in 2015, he discovered that his briefcase was already on the plane; an aide had placed it there in preparation for the flight. Bergoglio, however, didn’t like that arrangement and ordered the aide to retrieve the satchel. He wanted to be seen carrying it on himself. This seemingly odd and insignificant incident gives us an insight, I believe, worthy of James Joyce’s small book of “epiphanies.”
That was my first thought too. The lack of humility. As soon as he walked out onto the balcony without the traditional garb, I didn’t like or trust him. When one becomes Pope, he is no longer his own man, able to do whatever he wants. He belongs to the people and to tradition. But, he wanted none of that. He wanted to “do it HIS way.” And he has been doing that ever since—doing it HIS WAY.
Very nicely put, Mary Fran, “He belongs to…tradition.” That’s one I know I’ll probably want to steal.
I was in RCIA when his name was announced. I sensed an overwhelming, dark “blanket” draped over my heart. I seriously pondered leaving the room and the prospect of reception into the Church. I had no explanation for the event at the time. I had no knowledge of the man nor any reason to resist his name. Since then my experience has been one of confirmation of every criticism I ever had for the Catholic Church.
Yet, I am grateful I stayed, because even amidst the chaos that exists in the Church today, I have come to know the Lord Jesus Christ better in the teaching of the Catholic Church than I ever did in my previous decades of Protestant academic and personal study. But one must apply oneself, sometimes with a disconnected, almost technical approach, in order not to be derailed by emotive despair in watching Holy Mother Church be mauled while the do-nothing leadership stands by and watches.
I continue to pray that our Lord’s teaching will be re-established in its rightful place among the prelates and priests of the Church for the eternal benefit of the faithful and…most importantly, for the lost who know not the Blessed Lord Jesus.
God is sifting the Church, and under the man known for ambiguity we have now been presented with the clarity of choice between God and Man, between God’s Kingdom and Man’s State. The option now is made easier for every man who leads a family and indeed, every Catholic, to join with the Joshua in saying at a similar time of crisis in the history of the Hebrew people, “as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord”.
May God save the Catholic Church.
Just like French God will save if more people pray.
I and many here relate to seemingly have to stay on the technical side of doctrine for safety. Yet, this present darkness is a tremendous opportunity to unite our agony with Christ’s Agony In The Garden. The Church seems to be following Her Blessed Lord in His Passion. Through this cup, we can become profoundly emotionally and spiritually close to our Blessed Lord. Like the Apostle John and The Most Blessed Virgin, we should choose to stay close to the Lord during His Passion and The Passion of His Church. May the Lord bless all here with increased faith, hope and charity to preserve to the end. Amen.
His hatred so great that he wants to extinct the Christ’s Church as fast as he can. He’s no Vicar of Christ. Please God, stop him and his minions.
I remember how the crowd fell into bewildered silence as this total stranger walked out onto the balcony. It was a very weird moment and felt very bad. Has that ever happened before at the election of a Pope?
Yeah…that was weird
The truly frightening part of this is that the vast majority of cardinals who voted to make him Pope had to have known exactly what they were getting with him. The only upside is that the War From Within on the Church is finally out in the open.
With the internet making knowledge almost instantly available, no Catholic whatsoever nowadays has any excuse for not knowing the truth about this dreadful man Bergoglio. As I have said on several occasions, the Jesuits have more than outlived their usefulness to the Church and must be suppressed, this time for good.
“He is the realization of Cardinal Carlo Martini’s vision …”. Yes, indeed. And that man was a damned heretic too.
When we one day have a truly orthodox Pope (the one who declares Vatican II a false Council, deletes the entirety of post-Vatican II magisterial teaching from the Acta Sedis), to begin the process of cleansing he will have to declare an anathema sit against Bergoglio and his entire Pontificate.
We have an out-and-out heretic standing in the shoes of the fisherman. Paraphrasing King Theoden, how did we allow it to come to this? The laity have gone along with it for fifty years, the Hierarchy have gone along with it for fifty years. When will Our Lord Jesus Christ stop it?
Well, I don’t know. So we just have to avoid what is commonly called the mainstream Church as much as possible and find one’s Sacraments with those untainted by the Revolution and by this latter Jesuit coup d’etat.
Hey, the Jesuit coup d’etat was cool. No one died. Unlike in Argentina and Chile! Or even Ukraine or Honduras.
After reading three of your comments you are already very close to being blocked by me.
I once helped a priest bury a Catholic victim of the GULAG in Russia. Here is her story. Maybe you will have the humility and grace to think a little bit after reading it.
——————–
It is the Winter of 1941. The German armies threaten Moscow. The cold is the worst for many decades. In the centre of Moscow, just a stone’s throw from the Kremlin and its surrounding streets is a prison, also the headquarters (it remains so to this day) of one of the most evil organisations in the world’s history. The prison is the Lubyanka, and the organisation is the NKVD (now called the FSB).
In one of its underground cells is a girl, a student. Her name is Margarite. Not the Russian “Margarita” but “Margarite”. She is the daughter of a Russian father and a Polish mother. She has been arrested for becoming a Catholic. A clever student, she had started that fateful academic year at MGU (Moscow State University) in the Faculty of Foreign Languages. One day, she was walking past the Catholic Church of St. Louis (given to the Catholic diplomats to the Russian Court by Tsarina Catherine II in 1799. As it happens, the church is just 200 metres from the Lubyanka). It is the only Catholic Church allowed in Russia by the Soviets. On an impulse truly from God, this girl, brought up all her life as an atheist, walks into the Church and tells the one priest allowed by the Communists that she wishes to become a Catholic. Greatly suspicious of an NKVD provocation, he says “no”, but she comes back and eventually he is persuaded of her genuineness and baptises her.That night, she tells her best friend in the University dormitory that she has been baptised and the next day she is arrested. Her best friend has betrayed her to the secret police. She receives eight years in the Camps.
It is now 2008, the Summer. I receive a call from Father Ryan asking me to assist him at the burial of old Margarite. I know a little of her story, but none of the details. I had met her at Father Ryan’s English Mass in the crypt of the Catholic Cathedral in Moscow several times (a decrepit and nearly blind old lady, always with her devoted friend Svetlana). On one occasion she looked me in the eyes and held my gaze, seeming to search my soul. I felt that I failed the test. Svetlana told me, “Don’t worry, she wants to know if you are a good man”. I knew this was a special lady. Her eyes were deep pools of memory and suffering.
On the appointed day, Father and I met at her home. A small Soviet flat. Poorly furnished with the usual Soviet furniture but scrupulously clean; a few photographs and many books. There aren’t many people there, maybe four or five. Propped up on two old wooden chairs is the coffin, which is open: Margarite is visible and her colour is already a mottled red and black. Father and I sing the “Salve Regina” and he says a few impromptu prayers. The hearse (a rickety old minibus) arrives and the workers ask us to leave the flat: to get the coffin out and down the stairs, they have to take Margarite’s body out of it and put it back in once they have manoeuvred the coffin onto the narrow stairwell. They don’t want us to see them do it.
We board the bus and are stuck in traffic for an hour and a half before we reach the cemetery. Once we find the plot, we have to break and pull out some of the overgrown weeds which obstruct any view of the grave that has been dug. Father blesses the grave with Holy Water and I light the incense in the thurible. We sing some hymns, Father says a short version of the burial service, and that is that. I feel very tearful.
And so was laid to rest Margarite, a soul who suffered in Stalin’s Camps for her Catholic Faith, which she kept until the day she died.
The fall of the satanic cult of Communism was a happy day for her. Even more, the restoration of the Church in Russia was a day of great joy. She made herself known to the first Catholic Bishop and was asked to help translate the Novus Ordo into Russian, which she did. She attended Mass every Sunday, whenever her ailments allowed. She and Father Ryan came to know each other and were very fond of each other. It was a very great honour for me to know this martyr for the Faith, a great honour. Someone who put a human face on all those books I had read about the GuLAG by Solzhenitsyn, Shalamov and Marchenko and all the others. Someone who had known suffering, true suffering, but who lived her life loving and trusting Our Lord.
May God forgive her her sins, take her into His arms and grant her eternal rest and peace! Of your charity, please pray for the soul of a true Catholic, a Russian lady called Margarite.
Why? Because I condemn the Argentina and Chilean junta for mass murder?
Fine, I condemn Stalin for the Katyn massacre. He was as malevolent as the Latin American dictators.
Why should I pay attention to that story, since you said yourself that you would not be “crying for those the Generals did away with”? You would not shed a tear for Esther Carriega.
Look, Khrushchev denounced Stalin. And many people in Russia regret the collapse of the Soviet Union. Stalin is condemned immediately after he died.
Socialism and communism have utterly trashed Central and South America. They have brought far, far more misery to this part of the world than any “far right” dictators. Exhibit A is Venezuela right now. People are starving thanks to Chavez and Maduro’s attempts to imitate Castro’s hell-hole in Cuba. Ask the Cubans in Miami what they think of socialism. Ya know…..the ones who’ve actually lived under it, unlike clueless head-trippers who swallow what the leftists in college spoon feed them.
Allende was bringing exactly the same misery to Chile until Pinochet stepped in and stopped it. Naturally the left hates him because he turned Chile into a modern, prosperous country. Argentina was also a prosperous country until socialism trashed it and it defaulted on its debts.
It’s the same everywhere. Anyone with half a brain can see it apart from demented ideologues such as Bergoglio.
Ask the people in Cuba what they think about it. Ask Elian Gonzalez.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/11/27/elian-gonzalez-has-fond-words-fidel-castro/94512530/#
The CIA engaged in sabotage to “make Chile scream”.
No, Pinochet did not do that.That’s a myth.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/notes/2007/N2490.pdf
This is a Rand Corporation link. It says that during the 1980s, there was a massive recession in Chile where 30% were unemployed the country has large foreign debt, and that “local industries have been decimated”. It is on page 15 and 16. Do you think Rand has a pro-communist bias? The preface on “iii” reveal the report’s purpose which is to “provide useful information for USAF planners and intelligence analysts”.
Also, El Salvador and Guatemala were ruled by pro-American leaders in the 1980s. So how those countries are doing now?
Thank you for this fantastic story. I think this is your first post in a long time (if not *the* first one) that’s going into my favorite 1P5 posts file. ?
Glad that at least one of my comments has been deemed worthy! haha!
You’re cute. ?
This is from 2 years ago, but I think you might like it:
http://lit.royaldoors.net/2015/03/03/march-13-2015-friday-of-the-fourth-week-of-great-lent/
Since you posted the story of my namesake, I thought I should reciprocate in some way.
Btw, do you still have the email address of Bishop Athanasius Schneider? If so, please post it. Thank you.
Can’t find it immediately but his postal address is:
His Excellency Bishop Athanasius Schneider, O.R.C.
Ul. Tashenova 26
P.O. Box 622
Astana 010010
Kazakhstan
Дякуємо! Grazie! Thank you!
No, only countless souls lost while they walked the earth robbed of the Gospel. We can hope that their eternal fate will mitigated due to the malevolent pastoring to which they were subjected.
The Jesuits require suppression and disbursement.
No, those souls were not murdered. They could live out lives and fine the Gospel somewhere else. Perhaps God would have mercy on them once they die.
This is a work for which can be truly thankful.
The lid is lifted. The stench is overwhelming. The raking light is brought to bear – let our eyes remain wide open.
One phrase after another in the interview – an exacting litany of the gross injustice, the fraudulent comportment, the pastoral malpractice we endure. Of all his bulls eyes the one that strikes me to the core is the rationale supporting the episcopate’s silence “…their lack of conviction, another reason
is shameful careerism, the third reason is that many of the bishops are cowards before the spirit of the age, and a lot of these “conservatives” are Modernists in slow motion.”
Mr. Neumayer is kind. Let it be said plainly – not simply a lack of conviction, rather their lack of
faith.
How Mr. Neumayer could muster the fortitude and self-governance to probe the Bergoglian catastrophe is beyond me. God reward him, and I have ordered the book and will read it cover to cover – provided I too am graced with the courage.
Exactly my thoughts. During this past Lenten week, I wept looking at the crucified Jesus, and thinking – like many of the apostles who fled during Jesus’ final hours at Gethsemane, most of the “shepherds” to whom Jesus entrusted his Church, have utterly betrayed him – how this must sadden the Father. But I know, though many will lose their salvation because of this betrayal, it is a time of separating the wheat from the chaff. Let us continue to speak out, pray and be faithful to our Lord and Savior.
James, all this chatter and outrage isn’t worth a hill of beans if nothing is done to get rid of this tool of Satan. The faithful Cardinals and bishops must take over the Vatican and throw the bum out! No Catholic should obey him in any way. He should be marginalized.
It is worth it. The truth must be recorded. And it provides support for those who with the greatest danger to themselves are seeking to accomplish the restoration of Roman Catholicism.
I think you’re making my point, James. While I agree with you, it is also true the truth has been recorded over and over again on this and other sites. When does the recording end and an active solution to the greatest evil ever to enter the Church in her history begin? Cardinal Burke was supposed to confront Bergoglio months ago. What happened to him? Is he recording the truth? He started out well, but it appears he’s gotten cold feet. Exactly what the Church doesn’t need.
Now that George Neumayr has fully exposed Bergoglio, it’s time for action. Margaret has posted the addresses of a few prominent Cardinals. Everyone on this list should write a letter to them reminding them that Bergoglio has severed himself from Holy Mother Church and can no longer be the Pope. We must demand that they organize themselves and depose that heretic, defrock him and send him back where he came from. We cannot continue like this!
James, I suggest you go to your regular physician. Tell him what you’re about to undertake and explain you want a quick and short prescription for Lorazepam, 0.5mg tablets; you’ll need them to sleep soundly. No use ruining your health.
No. I’ll have to man-up and brave it on my own. I will keep a cup at hand into which I’ll spit tacks.
Are you a doctor?
No, but I have taken Lorazepam for sleeping problems. It helps by calming anxiety that keeps one awake. I tend to link one concern with another at night, everything from Rome to Paris to DC, and I end up tired the next day. One small tablet stops that from happening and lets me get 8 hours sleep.
This is about Lorazepam:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorazepam
I take medication myself. Also, I’ve worked 18+ years in a family-owned health food store. If people are on medication, the only thing I will suggest for them is whole-food magnesium (a mineral).
Funny you should mention magnesium. My oldest daughter & I recently talked about the Lorazepam and she suggested magnesium applied topically (to obviate any intestinal problems)! I bought some but haven’t had a chance to try it yet. Thanks for the link you provided.
Topical magnesium is ok, provided that it’s put on clean skin. However, whole-food magnesium in supplement form is good. This is what I have on my kitchen table:
http://www.hollyhillhealth.com/shop/product_view.asp?id=261178&StoreID=FBKJ0ADCM5PE9NWHS5QG6WKHAH6PC4AD&private_product=0
Tried it last night, Margaret, remembering our conversation. It worked!
Good! However, after 18+ years working in a health food store, I’ve heard so many complaints from customers who have told me the side effects they’ve had from different pharmaceutical drugs.
We can’t do anything about their medications, but we can help them in other ways.
You sure can! Margaret, I owe you big time for this tip. I have suffered from insomnia all my life and have become dependent on over- the-counter meds to get me through the night — and even that is hit and miss, with hangover the following day. I have taken whole-food magnesium three nights now, and it is really making a difference. And just in time, because my hair is falling out by the handful, and I suspect the long-term consumption of those meds is involved, so I’ve gone off them.
You’re welcome. However, imho, you should talk to your doctor about weaning yourself off of your medication. NEVER quit your medication “cold turkey”, especially anti-depressant medication.
I did that when I was much younger and learned a lesson the hard way.
Re hair loss: it’s one of the classic symptoms of hypothyroidism. My doctor orders me a thyroid panel with reverse T3 for me twice a year, because i have hypothyroidism. (Most doctors do a TSH, but a thyroid panel is more comprehensive.)
Re insomnia: Try eating *foods* that are rich in Vitamin C (organic oranges and organic red bell peppers are my favorites).
Vitamin C helps support your adrenals, which like the thyroid, are part of the endocrine system.
By contrast, ascorbic acid (which is how the government classifies Vitamin C) is only one part of the Vitamin C complex. I highly suggest reading the book Going Back to the Basics of Human Health by Mary Frost 4th (or later) edition. If you can find an older edition, that’s ok too. It’s short, easy to read and is a great introduction to real nutrition.
The meds are over-the-counter, including Nyquil, so I don’t think cold-turkey withdrawal will be an issue. I have suspected hypothyroidism, adrenal fatigue or even iodine deficiency (now that we all consume non-iodized fancy-pants salt, don’t you know?) But I also found that hair loss is a side-effect of at least one and possibly both of the basic antihistamines that constitute those meds that I have taken — especially for people of my sex and age. So I have a number of factors to look at. For round one, I’m going to go back to my normal supplements that I had been neglecting for about four months, cut the meds, and see if there’s any change. Round two will be a thyroid check.
I’ll send Steve my work email and phone number. Then we can either talk on the phone or keep in touch by email. I have a few more suggestions but I don’t want to publicly post them. Is that ok?
Wonderful! I will appreciate any counsel you can give me, Margaret.
Lorazepam’s active chemical belongs to benzodiazepins class.
Benzodiazepins have been recently exposed as chemicals easing Alzheimer disease in people who are using them since long.
I stopped using Lexomil immediatly for that reason.
Try tisanes of camomille or linden blossoms instead.
Yes, I learned this when reading the link Margaret sent me. I tried magnesium last night as she suggested and it had the same effect as Lorazepam, so I think I’ll not be using the latter very often from now on. I’ve tried tisanes but they never seem to work as will with me. Thanks for the information you sent along. Science appears to create three new problems every time it solves an old one!
I heard of Esther Carriega before, while reading about Alfredo Astiz. Again, what is wrong with Pope Francis honoring the life and death (and a brutal one, as she wasn’t just merely shot in the back of the head, but also brutally tortured) of a former superior and acquaintance?
Because the man is a bloody ideologue who, in all honesty, should have no pulpit provided him by the Church for any reason at all.
He should be laicized and provided a means of support that keeps him away from those vulnerable to rank mendacity.
You just don’t get it, do you?
Get what? Esther Ballestrino Carriega fought to draw attention to the junta’s atrocities. What is wrong with Pope Francis for honoring such a courageous woman?
I also happy that Alfredo Astiz can now enjoy his life. He has been practically resurrected from the dead, given that pancreatic cancer has a very high morality rate. I now have no ill will towards him; he got what he deserved.
Dear friends, along with supporting Neumayr by purchasing his book, you can make this — and all — your Amazon purchases through “Amazon Smile.”
When you so, Amazon will donate .5% (one-half of one percent — about 6 cents on Neumayr’s book — it adds up!) of the purchase price to the charitable cause of your choice at no additional cost to you. My “Smile” proceeds go to 1P5.
For more info, search “What is Amazon Smile?”
This is an unsolicited plus for Amazon Smile … and 1P5!
Good idea! For some time all my Amazon purchases have gone the same way, with a donation to 1P5!
I never heard of Amazon Smile. Thanks for the tip!
A little surprised you are plugging anything Amazon. As you know, the Washington Post has been sold to Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. The Washington Post has proven itself to be a communist rag setting itself against both morality and truth. Amazon is an arm of the rich and powerful globalists. Their agenda is not ours.
I have some mobility limitations and so do a lot of online shopping for convenience as well as price. Truth be told, I didn’t give a thought to Bezos’ politics. I was simply delighted that I could support 1P5 with every Amazon.com purchase, meager though the help might be.
I am of limited mobility and restricted income. I shop a lot online. Convenience and price are priorities for me, and I appreciate the opportunity to painlessly support the mission of 1P5. Nothing more to it.
Thank you Patricia. There are some folks who would have us Boycott the entire world. Not a very practical approach.
You’re welcome, Steve.
I am of the opinion that, as far as “the world” is concerned, I only “know” what the powers-that-be *want* me to “know.” I’m not confident of my ability to distinguish the degree of truth in much of that so-called “knowledge,” or the “good guys” from the “bad guys.” I try to be responsible with my vote, drive no more than 5 mph over the speed limit, and donate blood and bottled water. Boycotts are not effective, IMHO.
In matters of faith, however, I have a pretty good idea of who the “good guys” are, and I believe you’re one of them. So, you and yours are in my prayers and, if Amazon’s willing to share its profits with you, and I can help them do that, so much the better! I wish I could do more.
Agreed ?
Since it is obvious Bergoglio is anti-Catholic and seeks to destroy the Church, how is it he is allowed to remain in his office? Faithful Cardinals and bishops, led by the four Dubia Cardinals should instruct members of the Curia and bishops all over the world they no longer owe allegiance to the current pope. If no one but his stooges obey him and everyone else ignores all of them his authority will vanish. Cut their salaries and order the Swiss Guard to deny them access to Vatican offices and facilities.
I don’t know what the process for calling a consistory, but I bet Cardinal Burke does. Get to work, guys!!
I don’t know if these still apply, but here goes:
Cardinal’s addresses:
His Eminence Raymond Cardinal Burke,
Sovereign Military Order of Malta
Magistral Palace
Via Condotti, 68 – 00187 Rome –Italy
His Eminence Robert Cardinal Sarah,
Prefect, Congregation of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments
Palazzo delle Congregazioni, 00193
Roma, Piazza Pio XII, 10 Italy
His Eminence George Cardinal Pell,
Prefect, Secretariat of the Economy
Palazzo Apostolico, 00120 Citta del Vaticano
His Eminence Wilfred Fox Cardinal Napier, O.F. M.
Archbishop of Durban, South Africa,
Street address:
154 Gordon Road, Morningside, Durban, South Africa
Postal address:
P O Box 47489,
Greyville, 4023 , Durban, South Africa
My grateful thanks to author George Neumayr and Maike Hickson for this excellent interview.
I have been sharing and explaining the current situation to friends, but it was in bits and pieces, a few articles at a time. This account of Bergoglio’s Marxist background, his agenda, how he carried it out successfully in full view of the world, shows the weakness that exists in the Church today. Our thanks to faithful sites like this for speaking out.
From the start, I felt that the synod fathers should not have signed off the final Synod document after all the manipulation and devious tactics by Walter Kasper and his minions. The head of the serpent should have been crushed at the outset, now the Church is in a shambles as the Francis effect divides, desecrates and spreads heresy.
How can the Correction process be sped up?
Every single day is one day too many. Maybe if the cardinals and bishops are too career minded and afraid, the people should rise up and confront the heresy in the Vatican. Shame on these whitened sepulchers!
The Fatima prophecy is coming to pass right before our eyes.
And the Akita prophecy: Bishop against Bishop, Cardinal against Cardinal ….
Nah, this ain’t the time of the Akita prophesy.
See, we have heretics all right, but almost nobody among the prelates is publicly against them!
So we have to wait until there’s actually some “agin'” goin’ on before we enter into the time of Akita!
LOL.
After reading this article that had my chest tightening I went to a news channel and saw Venezuala up in flames with 33 people dead after rioting in the streets. These people have no medicines, no food, no toilet paper!!! Is this the ‘equality’ that Francis so admires in this socialist country? Is this the utopia that he and his confreres want to impose on the rest of the world? Are they really that stupid that they cannot see that Christ’s kingdom is not of this world? Our Pope is desperately in need of catechisis!!! He is not capable of writing Apostolic Exhortations ( as we know, he didn’t even write them) !! It sends chills up and down my spine when I see in how many places the Russians have had their influence in bringing down the church in the west and Latin America.
I doubt that PF believes in God.
In answer to your questions, raphaelheals: Yes.
“The undeniable conclusion is that the Catholic Church is suffering under a bad pope and that the cardinals must address this crisis.”
Let us pray — with all our hearts — for his conversion, and for the conversion of the modernist clerics he is assembling to turn the formal apparatus of the Church into a vehicle for a Utopian one-world government.
The spirit of Antichrist has certainly invaded the Church. May the Lord save us from the fires of hell.
Pope Francis has abandoned the faithful. There can be absolutely no mistake about this.
He has taken our Church, while seemingly on “skid row” and has thrown her into the alley of drunkards and wayward tormentors. He uses the sense of anger and resentment and jealousy to spurn many on to savagely attack her teachings, employing Marxism as a panacea for their ills. The world is his “oyster”, not heaven, and he proposes in so many countless ways to encourage anyone and everyone of this mind set.
Pope Francis is indeed a very bad pope. There can be no mistake about this as well.
I have never witnessed so much unleashing of the demonic within the Church during my lifetime.
We now have many bishops of England promoting LGBT teaching in their Catholic schools, with children of a very young age. A.L. exhortation is the tip of the iceberg with this pope. Married and divorced and remarriage is really irrelevant for him, in my estimation. It is a way of opening the barn door to the acceptance of sin.
And when that unfolds, as we are seeing before our very eyes…….a Church no longer be needed by most.
Her sacraments, Sanctifying Grace unnecessary many will claim.
I cannot believe that we have not yet had public correction of this pope, after all this time.
What a terrible shame and forgive me, very possibly, a terrible sin that our cardinals will have committed, if they fail in their duty to protect the faith, to protect the flock in fidelity to Christ.
The religious orders have been destroyed, Catholic education is now the best way to ensure your children apostasize, fewer and fewer marry or baptise their children, the Sacraments have all been protestantised, vocations are falling again (after an up-tick under Benedict XVI), the Hierarchy are all cowards and many are outright heretics, yet they still shout “Renewal! Renewal! A new springtime for the Church!”
Knaves, all of them, and Bergoglio is the worst of them.
Hard to argue with any of that.
Let us not forget that coyotes and wolves are born in the Spring!
I, and several of my Catholic friends felt from the start that there was something sinister about Bergoglio. Archbishop Sheen, in one of his books, stated that there would be a ‘Pope, under the control of Satan……’
..And who is holding up the beatification of Bishop Sheen but Cardinal Dolan of the New York Archdiocese ,who is challenging the court’s decision in favor of Sheen’s family to release the remains of Sheen to the Peoria, Illinois so that the beatification process can go forward. Sheen said of lot of things that are upsetting to less than faithful Christians… not to mention Catholic clergymen.
Dolan has definitely been exposed as a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Among other, if you could classify as rainbows in the midst of the storm, is the uncovering of the enemies of Christ’s Church. We see the separation of the sheep from the goats in real time. It struck me the quote from Michael Hitchborn when a Bishop turned to him and said: ‘How can one be loyal to Peter when Peter is not loyal to the Church?’ The only way I know how to be loyal, is to be loyal to CHRIST in His true Church. To be loyal to the Popes who WERE loyal to Christ in His Church. I sum up my feelings for Bergoglio this way: I pray for him EVERY DAY. I keep him both in my Rosary daily and in my morning offering, EVERY DAY. But………….. I wouldn’t walk across the street to either see him in person or to receive his blessing.
I pray for him everyday as well. Sadly, my wife and I had our marriage blessed by him when we were in Rome for our honeymoon. I remember my wife, who can sometimes sense when things are “off” in a spiritual sense, felt that something was “off” about him and was profoundly perplexed about it.
This was before the Synods, when his true colors had not yet started to show.
I pray to him anyway. I don’t need any canonization ceremony to convince me he IS a saint. What are you waiting for, someone’s permission? He is a saint already even if his face is not yet on a holy card. From the instant his soul left his body and entered heaven, where he was welcomed by choirs of angels he has been there able to hear and pass on our pleas.
I pray to Bishop Sheen also. He suffered much in New York because of Cardinal Spellman, his superior at the time, who removed him from his prime-time TV show and restricted him from preaching at the Cathedral.
Thanks for sharing! I think Bishop Sheen would be a great intercessor for the Church, him and Mother Angelica.
I did not know you are God that you know this for a fact.
He is a student of Modernist Biblical Scholarship, which can be seen in his ludicrous interpretation of certain passages from the Gospel: such as the time when he described the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes as a metaphor and not a miracle.
Read the Pope’s Angelus address! He does not so much as even hint that a miracle never occurred. Rather, he points out the greater “miracle” of the people’s sharing in the multiplied loaves and fish.
His mentor was Esther Ballestrino de Careaga who was a very fervent Communist. Francis has acknowledged that he had teachers who were Communists who influenced him.
“We are careful not to oppose fair arguments even if they proceed from those who are not of our faith. . . . God, in His love to men, has manifested His truth, and that which is known of Him, not only to those who devote themselves to His service, but also to some who are far removed from the purity of worship and service which He requires; and that some of those who by the providence of God had attained a knowledge of these truths, were yet doing things unworthy of that knowledge, and holding the truth in unrighteousness” Origen, Contra Celsum VII.46
I point out in my book that he also met with the widow of Paulo Freire, the author of the book The Pedagogy of the Oppressed which is a classic of the Socialist left in Latin America.
“Guilt by association”? Really? And, not even “by association,” since Bergoglio didn’t even meet with Freire himself. Apparently, they don’t offer any elementary logic courses at Mr. Neumayr’s Jesuit university.
He pays homage to the moral relativism and socialism that are at the heart of the global left. It is no coincidence that his signature phrases have been “Who am I to judge” and “Inequality is the root of all evil.”
And, what does the Master say?
“For God sent not His Son into the world, to judge the world: but that the world may be saved by Him.” (Jn. 3:17)
“You judge according to the flesh: I judge not any man.” (Jn. 8:15)
“And if any man hear my words and keep them not, I do not judge him, for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.” (Jn. 12:47)
As for the Pope’s statement on “inequality,” Mr. Neumayr should know that the word, “iniquity,” derives from the Latin, in, and aequalitas. In other words, “inequality” = “iniquity” = “sin” . . . which – yes, as the Pope rightly says – is the root of all evil.
He is a darling of the global left because he is advancing many of the items of their agenda, such as climate-change activism, open borders, and abolition of lifetime imprisonment (a position still so far left that not even the U.S. Democrats take that position). . . .”
As for the last, let’s consider the words of that hoary-headed Leftist, St. Isaiah the Prophet:
The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me: he hath sent me to preach to the meek, to heal the contrite of heart, and to preach a release to the captives, and deliverance to them that are shut up. (Is. 61:1)
He is a spokesman for gun control, for world government, for the redistribution of wealth by central planners. . . .
Such is the nonsense from Mr. Neumayr. The Pope offends his own economic and political sensibilities, so that the Pope must be the worst ever: a “bad” Pope.
As for me, I view this Pope – whatever warts one might judge him to have – to be thoroughly Catholic.
You can parse it as you like, Comrade, but it won’t work you know. There is far, far too much evidence that Neumayr (and many others) are right with their analyses.
I cannot read a person’s soul – only actions. And, as far as I can see, His Holiness Pope Francis is a Catholic believer: He accepts Jesus as His Lord and Savior; he prays; he goes to Confession; he loves and honors Mary; he offers and goes to Mass when he’s supposed to; he observes the feasts and fasts of the Church; etc. Hence, he is “thoroughly Catholic.”
But “actions” are not the only things we can see, hear and read, are they? He is not a mechanical toy, after all.
Have you read ANY of the learned analyses of his ideological statement “Evangelii Gaudium” or the disgusting document “Amoris Laetitia”? They are full of heresies.
At least the arch-heretic Luther still believed faith to be necessary for Salvation. Bergoglio thinks being the “natural man” (who St. Paul tells us to put away and take on Christ) is enough! For him, not even faith is necessary for Salvation.
Hello! Matthew! I am waiting for a reply to the post above.
I wish it was that straightforward with this Pope.
You have to ask yourself if Pope Francis inspires you to be a better Catholic or a better Democrat.
Your comment about the Democrats only goes to show that the rank “politicization” of the Church occurs on BOTH sides of the spectrum: at Latin Masses with incense and chant as at Masses with puppets and dancing.
” … show me … anyplace where it enjoins on me as a Catholic to affix, connect, or otherwise relate the salvation of my eternal soul with or to the Roman Pontiff!”
“Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”
UNAM SANCTAM, Pope Boniface VIII, Bull promulgated November 18, 1302 using the formula for an infallible teaching.
And, yet, you quietly ignore this part:
Therefore, if the terrestrial power err, it will be judged by the spiritual power; but if a minor spiritual power err, it will be judged by a superior spiritual power; but if the highest power of all err, it can be judged only by God, and not by man
Last I checked, you and I were both still men.
I “quietly ignored” nothing but answered your question to the other poster.
I do not judge his heart of course, but I do judge his words and actions as Pope, as far as I am able as a layman.
Canon Law itself gives me the right to do so.
And, what does Canon Law say? To wit:
Can. 1373. A person who publicly incites among subjects animosities or hatred against the Apostolic See or an ordinary because of some act of power or ecclesiastical ministry or provokes subjects to disobey them is to be punished by an interdict or other just penalties.
And, for comparison with what came before:
Can 2344. Qui Romanum Pontificem . . . publicis ephemeridibus, concionibus, libellis sive directe sive indirecte, iniuriis affecerit, aut simultates vel odia contra eorundem acta, decreta, decisiones, sententias excitaverit, ab Ordinario non solum ad instantiam partis, sed etiam ex officio adigatur, per censuras quoque, ad satisfactionem praestandam, aliisve congruis poenis vel poenitentiis, pro gravitate culpae et scandali reparatione, puniatur. (1917 C. I. C.).
According to either Code, you stand condemned.
Yet no-one has placed one or even sede vacantists under any interdict nor has excommunicated one, so it seems that no ecclesiastical crime has been committed.
Do you deny the canonical right given even to the laity to correct even the highest authority when that authority is causing grave scandal (at the very least!) to the faithful? You would condemn even St. Catherine of Siena for her letters and remonstrations to the face of a bad Pope!
Let’s cut to the chase Matthew: do you support Bergoglio’s theological Modernism? Call a spade a spade for once. Up until now, all you have done is call for obedience to a Papal tyranny. That’s not Catholicism.
Yes, you are correct and it is most unfortunate that the Church has become so involved in politics. We should follow the example of Christ in this regard.
Thoroughly reptilian, along with the nest of vipers who laid in waiting from 1978 until 2013.
Keep spinning it, baby.
Just curious. Did this pope’s smiling reception (and then retention) of Evo Morales’ gift tell you anything? Did it too seem “thoroughly Catholic” to you? One can isolate actions and words of Pope Francis, and then defend them one by one as merely curious anomalies. When viewed as a pattern, though, the chance of each being an anomaly decreases. And, as for the language lesson, while we know the words “inequality,” “iniquity,” and “inequity” all three derive from the Latin “in” and “aequitas,” we also know that in English they don’t mean quite the same thing. It’s a safe bet the pope knows that too, and he probably also knows the word “inequality” isn’t the best synonym for “sin.” He could have chosen “iniquity,” far closer to the mark, but instead he chose “inequality” for his Tweet in English. I suspect he had a reason to do so.
First of all and last of all, which one of us here, who are but ashes and dust, has ANY PLACE adjudging anyone to be outside the Church or no longer “Catholic.”
Shake and tremble, Brothers and Sisters, because your day of accounting will come, too.
Nonsense. You confuse the objective with the subjective. The latter is the province of God alone. Only He can judge the heart.
But the objective is very much our province in this world, and judge we have to. Otherwise there couldn’t even be Courts of Law … .
There are clear criteria on who is in or outside the Church. Pius XII summed it up in an Encyclical. Heretics and schismatics are outside. So if Bergoglio et al are heretics, then, ipso facto …. .
It’s really not difficult, is it?
“By the measure with which you measure” . . . let’s hope that on that “great and wrathful day” you have lived by your own measure perfectly, because that’s how you’ll be judged. Otherwise, . . . who knows? (Hopefully, you’ll have access to the Sacraments beforehand.)
I am not the Pope, Matthew. Jorges Bergoglio is, and Pastor Aeternus of Vatican I tells all Catholics what a Pope should do. Bergoglio is doing the opposite.
Thank you for your concern for my Salvation. I fear and tremble enough given my past life without you adding you six pennyworth.
A question for you. Why are you defending him? He thumbs his nose at the Catholic Faith constantly. I think a defence of him is itself indefensible.
Notice, Joe, that Matt is a faithful student of the Bergoglian Method. He darkly hints that you are headed straight for Hades if you dare hazard an opinion concerning the orthodoxy of the pope’s words and actions. “Who am I to judge…except you’re very likely to go straight to Hell if you don’t get to Confession pronto!”
“Who am I to judge…except you’re very likely to go straight to Hell if you don’t get to Confession pronto!”
Hmm, that sounds like solid Catholic teaching to me. But, perhaps, I have misread the Council of Trent.
Thank you Matthew for your citation of Canon 2478.
That is exactly what the four Cardinals, the forty-five theologians, the group of Catholic intellectuals and the recent conference in Rome have all sought – yet Bergoglio refuses an audience with one of the four which has been asked for for months.
You didn’t answer my question, so I will ask another: do you support Pope Francis’ twisting of Scripture, his selective citation of another Pope’s Encyclical, his questioning of dogma and his refusal to “confirm the brethren” in the faith?
As they say, context is everything. It’s something you find elusive, evidently, here and especially in your assessment of this disastrous papacy. At least you’re consistent.
A question for you. Why are you defending him?
C. C. C. 2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved [St. Ignatius Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, no. 22]
Absolutely true.
Are you actually saying that Pope Francis’ entire pontificate is a mistake of confused interpretations?
I suggest this: Study the Pope, his words and actions and then reflect on just how confusing he is. Or…isn’t.
We may have been able to brush aside some of his statements early on for being slips of the tongue, mistranslations or simple idiomatic expressions misunderstood, but can one now say that the overwhelming preponderance of the meanings he has put forth is not clear now?
Especially when he himself has been begged to clarify his own and remains silent while it is interpreted in heretical ways?
What to do with his letters of support for the Maltese and Argentine bishops for example?
Just a couple more “confusions”?
Pardon the interjection, but you seem to be confusing discernment (a spiritual gift) with passing judgement. One can discern that another is in error without judging the state of their soul. In fact, we are called to discernment. How else are we to avoid heretical danger and call it by name when we see it?
Your problem, Matt, is that I never said a word about anyone being either inside or outside the Church; that’s your inference entirely. “Thoroughly Catholic” is the phrase you used when judging (pardon my noticing that you did so) Pope Francis. My watchword is strictly, who am I to judge? You appear to be especially sensitive about this issue. Forgive me for also remarking that, like some others in the Bergoglio camp, you seem to be more than a tad judgmental about those you deem….unseemly judgmental.
My watchword is strictly, who am I to judge?
A good startingpoint, since Christ commanded you not to.
What’s your favorite ride at the amusement park, dodge-’ems? But enough, no more. You are a tiresome troll and I am tired of you.
Just as an aside: “who am I to judge?” seems to be Pope Francis’ go-to response, also.
Who commanded us to be shrewd as serpents and to judge righteous judgment?
We cannot judge the heart of any man, and we may not judge a Pope in any legal fashion, but words we must define with reason. Obviously if there is difficulty in defining, we must give the benefit of the doubt to anyone but especially a Pope. And we must give assent to the teaching of a Pope…but just exactly what IS this Pope’s “teaching”? Opinions from
30,000 feet?
Misquoting Jesus? Approving of the communing of adulterers? Railing on issues of economics when he himself has publicly admitted he doesn’t know much about economics…which doesn’t stop him from then going on to rail on and on about economics? Condemning environmental degradation and the lifestyles of others when he himself has a Sasquatch-sized carbon footprint?
In charity, I sometimes wonder if there is a mental/medical problem here.
Here’s what he says:
“Jesus then takes those loaves and fish, looks up to heaven, recites the blessing — the reference to the Eucharist is clear — and breaks them and gives them to the disciples who distribute them… and the loaves and fish do not run out, they do not run out! This is the miracle: rather than a multiplication it is a sharing, inspired by faith and prayer. Everyone eats and some is left over: it is the sign of Jesus, the Bread of God for humanity.”
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/angelus/2013/documents/papa-francesco_angelus_20130602.html
To repeat, he says:
“This is the miracle: rather than a multiplication”…
How in the world you can affirm that this is itself an affirmation of a miracle I do not know. Indeed, it reads quite straight forwardly like a denial thereof. He even avoids the use of the term miracle in the followup description of the event, preferring to call it a “message” which of course references the act of “sharing” to which he points as the principle meaning of the event.
Ambiguous at the very least. And that is being charitable.
In his defense, he adds at the end:
“The disciples witnessed the message but failed to understand it. Like the crowd they are swept up by enthusiasm for what has occurred. Once again they follow human logic rather than God’s, which is that of service, love and faith. The Feast of Corpus Christi asks us to convert to faith in Providence, so that we may share the little we are and have, and never to withdraw into ourselves. Let us ask our Mother Mary to help us in this conversion, in order to follow truly and more closely the Jesus whom we adore in the Eucharist.”
Except nowhere in the “message” does he explicitly or strongly imply that the event is a miracle. It is quite easy to interpret in the mainline Protestant “historical Jesus” way, merely as an act of solidarity and not a miracle.
There are reams of problems with interpreting Francis in an orthodox way. An entire site is dedicated to his statements and “messages”.
https://en.denzingerbergoglio.com/
His issues with arms are really problematic. You can google his other statements for yourself but as he condemns the makers of weapons he himself is protected by the Swiss Guard which naturally is equipped with the latest security weaponry themselves…the same types of weapons by which he himself benefits! His apparent and manifest hypocrisy is shocking. As stunning is his constant condemnation of maintaining walls for defense of state and nation when he himself lives behind and is protected by them!
It goes on and on. His replacement of God with Man and direct misquote of Jesus in Evangelii Gaudium 161 comes to mind, as does his made-up Scripture in his message at the closure of the synod when he says the disciples walked on leaving Blind Bartimaeus when the Scripture says nothing of the sort.
I shudder to think this is all “Catholic”.
How come I have never heard of George Neumayr?!. This guy is great and what a terrific interview! When I realized that Pope Francis was trouble, I thought and suggested that people ought to look into his past and that’s what Mr. Neumayr did before writing his book. Well done to him, and to 1P5 and to Dr. Hickson!
Joachim of Fiora and the Reformers were right after all, anti Christ would rise up from within the church and take the seat of Christ. I take Bergoglio any day over an ignorant Benedict IX though. Or any pope of the pornocracy era. And you should too.
Why? None of them challenged the Faith itself.
That’s just it. The concerns many have cited are directed at the “Reformation” religion Francis continuously supports. “Protestantism” is anti-Christian in many ways, denying the demands of Christ and denying the morality of Christ’s teaching. Leaving people in sin is just about as “anti-Christ’ as it gets. In fact, that is what makes it popular. And it appears that religious popularity is the thing which Francis seeks, at the very least where doctrine takes second place to making-friends and preserving institutional revenue.
Francis appears to me to be small potatoes when it comes to being “the” anti-Christ, anyhow, assuming a singular personage is the interpretation one chooses.
It is a good thing that this book is being written so the true story of Pope Francis devastation is in one place and a ready reference.
I bought the book as suggested. We should all buy the book, pray for all involved, speak and write about the horror of Pope Francis, and hope and pray God will provide some help to bring the management of the Catholic Church back to its senses.
The Catholic Church was given the mandate to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. There are many who stridently demand that this consecration was accomplished in 1984. Disregarding the currently precarious geopolitical situation, how can it be that a Church that has properly complied with Heaven’s request for the collegial consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary should now find herself being throttled to death by the very “errors of Russia” that would have been consigned to the trash can of history by the consecration demanded by Heaven at Fatima?
The Consecration is to be followed by a period of world peace. That is one of the two promises of Our Lady (the other being the conversion of Russia).
I don’t suppose the inhabitants of Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or a hundred other places would subscribe to the view that the Consecration has been done.
Ah! But didn’t you know? Saint Vlad is the saviour of the Christian peoples! This is the sole purpose of the massive Russian military presence in Syria! Didn’t you know that Saint Vlad is a devout Christian? Or maybe Saint Vlad is the Great Deceiver, and he’s brilliantly playing the effete Christians of the West for the fools that they are? That’s certainly the way it has always looked from my perspective, but I suppose I’m just an old cynic.
Comrade Putin is a Russian and a Chekist to boot. Which means that for him the survival of the Russian State is the be all and end all. His power and money are tied to it after all. If an alliance with the Russian Orthodox Church supports this – which it does – then he is a believer. When he’s behind closed doors I rather suspect it’s a different story.
It annoys me greatly, the number of Traditionalists who think he’s our saviour. They have taken leave of their senses.
Michael Matt of the Remnant – who appears to have become a paranoiac in the last two or three years, going on and on about the “New World Order” and talking as if he was to be imminently arrested by the Thought Police – has been one of the major Putin cheerleaders (although in one or two more recent articles he has rowed back a little).
Yes of course, Russia in supporting Assad is doing what we in the West should have been doing. But this doesn’t make him some kind of Christian King. Russia has a lot of investment in Syria to protect and its only warm water port at Tartus. It’s just another round of the Great Game, nothing else.
In any reference to the Russian Orthodox Church in this context we specifically mean ‘Head Office’ or the Moscow Patriarchate, which was established by Josef Stalin in 1943 as an organ of the state. It still serves that purpose, and has an ‘external affairs’ department known as the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, (ROCOR). In 2006, the Moscow Patriarchate financed the building of an Orthodox cathedral in Pyongyang, though Kim Jong Il contributed an estimated $1M from the coffers of his severely impoverished nation. As recently as 2013 there were known to be at least three North Korean ‘seminarians’ studying (God knows what) at the Moscow Theological Seminary.
Many point out the undeniable religious revival that is occurring in Russia as ‘proof’ that the consecration of the WORLD by Pope St. John Paul II has been accepted as fulfilling Our Lady’s request at Fatima. But this flourishing of religion in Russia concerns only the ROC. Severe restrictions remain in place with regard to other religions, and the ROC has a long history of implacable hostility towards Rome.
We are promised that Russia will play a vital role in the re-evavngelisation of the West, and I personally do not doubt this in the slightest, but there are those who make the preposterous assertion that this re-evangelisation is already underway. It is preposterous because this process can never be undertaken by the Russian Orthodox Church. It will be a post-Consecration, converted CATHOLIC RUSSIA that will accomplish this. The religious revival now underway in Russia testifies to the Holy Spirit preparing the Russian people for their mass conversion once the consecration has been done in strict accordance with Heaven’s demands. And this will not happen until we have been brought to our knees in desperation. Humanity has gone from bad to far, far worse in the last 100 years, and we don’t deserve to be let off the hook lightly.
I’m sorry, but this sort of talk about Eastern Orthodox Christians rests on ignorance of church history. We as Catholics ought to long for reunion with the Orthodox, our very closest brothers and sisters in faith.
That longed-for reunion will be – One Flock under One Shepherd. That is the way it was always meant to be, and that is what it will be. But, it can only be a worthy shepherd. Which rules out Bergoglio. Patriarch Kiril is more than a match for him.
SAF, my constant experience with real, believing Russian Orthodox is that they are Traditionalist Catholics but don’t know it. So, so much is the same.
Yet schismatics they are and sadly heretics too, at least as far as the marriage law of their churches go. And many of them refuse to believe in Purgatory.
” … undeniable religious revival …”
Dear Stewart, I know what you mean, but nevertheless, after many years’ residence in Russia I beg to demur. It’s still too early to know whether the “revival” post 1991 can even be a preparation for conversion as you say.
1. Around 75% of non-Buddhist/Moslem/Shamanist Russians are now baptised but 1% (!) attend Sunday Mass. For very many, an occasional visit to a church to light a candle suffices.
2. I know I am repeating Gogol or Lermontev here, but really – for many, an icon is something to pray to one minute and something to cover your pan on the oven with the next. Their religion is cultural and a mark of their allegiance to “Russianness” rather than being a lived faith.
3. I am told by a priest friend still in Moscow that the number of Orthodox seminarians is falling. I cannot verify this but his information is usually good.
4. Many young Russians are as interested in magicians, Siberian shamanism and vague Indian philosophies as are interested in Orthodoxy. I personally know of several who are into the whole karma and reincarnation thing.
5. A Christan nation also has Christian laws. Russia continues to have an extremely high abortion rate and divorce is at very high levels. There is an horrendous drug problem with more than one million AIDS cases and frankly HIV and other diseases are out of control.
Therefore, 6,000 churches may have been restored or built. The monasteries and convents are manned. But these do not a Christian country make.
I take your point. This ‘great religious revival’ is, I have no doubt, largely wishful thinking by certain Catholic bloggers who want to cite it as ‘proof’ of the validity of the 1984 consecration. That “Russia will be converted” means Russia’s restoration to the One True Faith. I have always believed that Russia’s promised conversion will be quite spontaneous and will astonish the world. And the whole world will come to understand by Whose all-powerful intercession before the Throne of Grace this miraculous conversion has been obtained. This is what Fatima is about; namely revealing to the world the truth as to who, and what Mary is in the Economy of Salvation. The Blessed Trinity is now demanding that the Church make this known to the world.
I have read that at this time, there is a huge increase in interest in the occult among young Russians. Also the terrible situation re – HIV/AIDS, and drug and alcohol abuse. I can’t quote statistics off the top of my head, but I have seen some alarming figures quoted.
So, you’re probably correct in that the apparent resurgence in interest in religion in Russia doesn’t even amount to the Holy Spirit “softening ’em up for the Big One”. First will come a world that has been plunged into total chaos and seeming hoplessness, and that can come about very, very quickly. Then will the bishops see for themselves the horrendous consequences of their indifference, their negligence and even antipathy.Humanity must be brought to this point for our own sakes.
Both Pope St. Pius V and Pope St. Pius X stated, in effect, that all the evils in the world are due to the weakness and negligence of Catholics. To my way of thinking, that should be so glaringly obvious, it shouldn’t even need to be said. But since it ain’t obvious to the majority, we must be brought to the point wherein it does become so. That’s what will be required, and nothing less.
Regarding the Chekist Putin, I agree with you completely. But there is more. Putin is not the originator of this serpentine deception. Gorbachev was the apparent front man. In the same year that JPII, acting desperately, announced the Marian Year, Gorbachev introduced ‘glasnost’ or openness to the Soviet people. He bombarded the West with religious statements:
God on high has not refused to give us enough wisdom to find ways to bring us an improvement in our relations. ─ ‘The Gorbachev Touch’ Time Jan 1 1990.
God is on your side at the United Nations. ‘God – or History’ Time Dec 19 1988.
To JPII. We need spiritual values, we need a revolution of the mind, we have changed our attitude toward religion. ‘Gorbachev, God and Socialism’ Time, Dec 11 1989.
There are only two people who can help us: I am one, the other is Jesus Christ.’ June 25 1990.
Dwayne Andreas, Soviet insider and Gorbachev supporter addressed the Council for Foreign Relations and in glowing terms described how “Gorbachev peppers speeches and private
conversations with phrases like “Thank God” and “God willing; quotes from the Bible and cites stories about Jesus. In short, he’s taking the ‘Godless’ out of ‘Godless Communism.’ ‘Should we save Gorbachev,’ The Wanderer, Feb 23 1989.
When Stalin remarked as a young seminarian, “They lie to us, there is no God,” he revealed the root of Communism ─ Atheism. A 1990 book review commented on Gorbachev and his wife Raisa, a doctor of Marxist theory; “How could two devout party members have climbed to the top of the Communist apparatus while nurturing heretical ideas … he is like Soviet leaders before him, a master of double-think … there is no bottom line to the Soviet socialist ideal ─ it’s a snake pit of hypocrisy.” ‘The Man who changed the World: The Lives of Gorbachev’ Time Dec 3, 1990.
Gorbachev urged the Communist Central Party to surrender its monopoly on power which they did ‘willingly’ with a vote of 248 to 1! Next, a law forbidding the government restricting ‘the study, financing and propagandising of religion’ was passed by a vote of 341 to 1! Gorbachev was ‘deposed’, the drunkard Yeltsin elected and in turn KGB Lt Col Putin nominated as Yeltsin’s replacement.
Yes, Putin is a player in this saga but he is not on the side of the angels. Besides Russia’s various errors, already spread throughout the world, Russia’s abortion situation demonstrates the grip Satan has over that poor nation. Abortion was legalized in Russia in 1920, the first state in the world. To this day, Russia has the highest abortion rate in the world per capita, a crime crying out to Heaven for vengeance. With a population of 143 million, there are 1.2 million abortions per year (2015). Statistically, the average Russian woman will have eight abortions in her childbearing years
although missionary priest Fr Mauer believes it is more like twelve abortions per woman. He has spoken to women who have had as many as 25 abortions.
Only a Pope in union with the bishops can remove the diabolical control of Russia by consecrating that country to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. ‘Useful idiots’ such as Putin’s cheer leaders, types of Chamberlain, will eventually be seen to have been duped.
JMJ
On his side is Obama?
The final battle is where one side will be victorious and the other side will suffer defeat. Hence from now on we must choose sides. Either we are for God or we are for the devil. There is no other possibility. … Sister Lucy.
JMJ
Cf. When they are Assembled at Armaged′don, it Behooves them to Choose A Side Wisely. – http://wp.me/p2Na5H-Sa
***
Obama, who is with Babyon, says Putin/Russia is NOT with them. Plain conclusions follow.
That period has just ended.
You know, we talk about the errors of Russia that the Blessed Virgin Mary referred to, yet the errors were also propagated from London and New York.
And now from just about every state university in the US of A.
That is, those errors have metastasized.
“errors of Russia”
***
Please tell us what errors did our Lady refer to and how is Russia spreading such errors today?
I began to fear him when I read the story of him stealing the holy rosary from the dead hands of his confessor who was lying in state before the altar of the cathedral in Buenos Aries. Remember after the reforms of Vatican II, it was not the congregation that turned their backs to the cross, but the priests themselves while preparing the host.
I speak Spanish and for a time attended a church in Florida where a Latin American priest gave masses in both English and Spanish. At that time I was in a state of spiritual crisis that was nearly my whole life in the making, in which I was often attending mass twice a day, and so many times went to both the English and the Spanish versions. The homily given to the largely working class and probably in part illegal Spanish congregation could have been lifted directly from Moscow, in comparison to those given by the same man on the same days to the “anglos”. It was as if, daily, he was committing a spiritual fraud.
After I had been several times sitting in the back, not in a state for which I could receive communion, the priest came to me after the service and asked me why I would choose to come to such a service and the purpose of my irregular visits. I am blonde and blue eyed, and obviously did not fit the template of the others in the pews. When I answered him in Spanish, he became very flustered and on a following day suggested to me that it was inappropriate for me to be there as these were services that were not meant for me, and he basically implied that I was not welcome.
It was as if the gospel of Jesus Christ was a malleable weapon of political activism rather than the word of God, and suitable for all who would hear it? In his homilies, he would literally encourage law breaking by the congregants and preach the oppression of anglo America upon the latinos before him. But, I had effectively busted him, and he knew it.
I believe this goes on all over the world and is one of the reasons why the destruction of the Latin Mass after Vatican II was, and is, so injurious to the Church and her faithful. For it has built inside the faith a kind of sanctioned Tower of Babel which has lead to the schisms we see today.
All of this was occurring during a time when a very kind and holy Monsignor in Puerto Rico was guiding me to my First Communion and Confirmation, Also, I was traveling back and forth for business, so it was my lot to have two or three churches that I went to and my disdain for this marxist in a white collar eventually meant I avoided his Church. But I did go back once or twice and one time in particular by design, when he organized a kind of day of rage, complete with red crosses in the garden of the parish, and to rally his “immigrant” congregants in opposition to our US Laws.
I am very private and emotional in my prayer, probably because my life experience has made more powerful to me the gift of my complete surrender to the truth that has been revealed to me. because of this, I often attend mass at times when the social aspects are to be the least distracting. But I still feel that my presence at that special “rally” mass was necessary as a kind of rein against the heresy he would feel more comfortable shouting from the altar had not my blonde mop and blue eyes been staring into his throughout. Also, I like to think that we are all brothers in Christ and my being there perhaps helped the other congregants feel the same
During my journey, at a time when I was egotistically fighting against the conversion I had been struggling against my whole life, I became friends on an intellectual level with the monsignor who later saved my mortal and spiritual soul. Over those years I had a chance to eat dinner with his mentor, a cardinal elector from Latin America. Much of the evening was a me asking questions concerning JPII who had first planted the seed of truth in me during the early days of the Solidarity movement. Unlike Francis, many private aspects concerning that saintly heir to Peter were revealed to me that solidified my own journey. Unlike the Argentine, St. John Paul II did not carry news crews to advertise the humility and Godliness that were in him. Through this cardinal, I had confirmed to me things that so humbled me concerning this great man who first came to me in the fight against communism in the cold war and some so personal, I have never seen them referenced anywhere else.
While Bergoglio has chosen to make an issue of moving into the dormitories with his “boys”, JPII slept almost overnight of his papacy, even when he traveled would pull himself from his sick bed in the middle of the night, to sleep on the stone floor of his room wrapped only in an old woolen army blanket. He was truly a soldier for Christ. Later, again during this journey which i put off mostly because of the scandal of the homosexual abuses propagandized as peophelia and my inability to reconcile it with what I believe should be a profoundly masculine vocation, I also learned from one who participated, that JPII and Reagan and the CIA took amazing risks using the Church to engage in the fight against communism in Poland and elsewhere. Indeed, this St. conspired with another great Catholic, Bob Casey to use the Church to smuggle hundreds and hundreds of mimeograph machines into Poland so that the movement could operate an underground and very effective press. Which inspired the explosion of support for Solidarity, and eventually the collapse of communism.
In a beautiful sense, many many years before I had drowned in an awful accident and was given up for dead and on life support and could remember very little except the gentle hands of a woman who had held my head and stroked me while telling me that all would be okay and i must go back now. I am in tears now in telling this because of how long it took me to understand who She was. But I was miraculously healed, and now I am constantly in devotion to Her. As a final note, I received my first communion in the spring of 2014, on the Day of Divine Mercy and the same day JPII was canonized. – the same day that JPII was canonized. Be no afraid.. xo Jack
I am in two minds about JPII. So much of the crisis we now face is due to his dereliction of duty (awful Bishops’ appointments, going along with Vatican II, particularly with the ecumenism and inter-faith betrayals, not doing anything to fix the liturgical meltdown), yet I too suspect his direct involvement at one specific moment in time which brought me back to the Church in 2005.
To be pope is a great undertaking, under which no cardinal should hope to aspire.
This was the case for JP ll. I believe he was a very holy man, who had great love, the love that Christ has for all His children. But, as the wolves were pounding all around him, with enemies near and far, a Church, which he recognized was lost in the novelties of the Vatican ll, which he played a great role in, may have caused weakness and distrust in his own abilities?
It is the greatest responsibility on this earth to sit in the Chair of Peter, as one truly gives up everything for the Church.
I, too, a younger mother of five little ones, truly, came to KNOW that our Church was Christ’s Church. Yes, I knew this in my mind, but……it became cemented in every bone of my body, during JP ll funeral. I, like many, were disheartened with the sexual abuse cases of the thousands within our Church, and disliked the irreverence of the Mass that seemed like the ONLY Mass in town.
Fond memories of First Communion, kneeling at the altar were so distant, yet……this “celebration” if you will was the ONLY Mass for so many of us. And so, like many, I hunkered down, going to Mass, saying the Rosary, but watching priests, bishops forget the Eucharist.
It was difficult.
I was saddened of JP ll’s death, I did not know much, except he seemed to love the youth and he loved to travel so as to bring Christ and the Church to many. I NEVER knew of this Assisi extravaganza until the last several years. Goodness, what was poor JP ll thinking or hoping to accomplish? Perhaps he was trying to catch bees with honey, and made a mistake in his manner of doing so. The Church has been trying to please the world, before John Paul ll became pope, and he fell into it as well.
The day of his funeral, I was peeling potatoes, preparing for dinner, in the late afternoon.
A small television was in my kitchen, and quite honestly, I turned it on, not to see the funeral, but just to watch something to occupy my task. Every channel had JP ll’s funeral…..!
I watched. I saw thousands upon thousands from every walk of life attend this funeral for our Church. Tears come upon me as I write this, for those were the same tears I felt at that moment.
The Church is Christ’s Church!!! And I have been blessed, and have so taken her for granted, came to my mind instantly. A moment of reason came upon me as well, for how on earth, could such a Church continue to survive for over all these thousands of years, in spite of scandal, and still move men to come.
Forward, I went, reading the lives of the saints, documents, early Church Fathers,…
And no matter the scandal, and this crisis we are in right now, I know in every bone of my body that Christ’s Church, HIS CHURCH, in good and not so good moments will get through this as well. I may not live to see this glorious resurrection of the Church, but I can say, I
loved her, I wept for her, and I will defend her. And that shall be enough for our Lord, I pray.
You good soul! That’s a wonderful post.
“Perhaps he was trying to catch bees with honey ..”.
Yes, I think in all charity that’s spot on.
That is a beautiful testimony.
You cradle Catholics have put up with a lot. To say the least.
God bless you.
I appreciate your words, for I always read with enthusiasm your well thought out posts, always written with such a zeal for our Church.
God bless you too.
Thank you for your words. The common nature of this faith that fills me and you and our Church is proof of the path I have chosen.
“Perhaps he was trying to catch bees with honey ..”.
The philosophy behind Pope John XXIII’s new direction for the Church as summed up in his opening address to V2 no doubt.
Which is that the Church condemned for a long time but no longer. Now the Church would go on to only affirm that which is good.
Of course this method is ‘nice” but diverges from the method god has used to bring truth since the beginning, thru Jesus, the Fathers and of course the entire history of the church till the moment J23 spoke those words.
Since then, curiously enough…we get lots of affirmation. Condemnation? Not of enemy of the faith ideologies like Freemasonry and Islam, but woe to you if you are anything that can be described as a “rigid” Catholic…….
Thank you for sharing some of your beautiful story and welcome to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I’m so glad you found your way home and were led by our most lovely Mother. Totus Tuus!
Thank you and those like you for always being the people in my life I found myself wanting to follow. It was not until recently that I had the courage to stand beside you in the fight and lead myself.
My mother’s name is Noreen. You’re quite rare and special. 🙂
Thank you so very much for sharing your spiritual and life journey. Perhaps you might write a testimonial of sorts as a guest for 1 Peter 5. I don’t know if the editor and moderators here would publish it, but I would be interested in reading more about your life and experiences. You write well, by the way.
I have been struggling with the idea. Without irony, Augustine’s Confessions was the book i searched for when I was at my lowest. The same day I made my beautiful choice to kneel before the altar and began my spiritual salvation. A friends ex-wife h murdered her two children and herself and that night and for many weeks I sat with him. Through all of this I learned so much about grace and almost daily little miracles were revealed to me. Not the least of which was a group of old women who surrounded me after a dawn mass while I was on my knees weeping and saying the rosary for the first time in my life. In silence they had made a circle around me and began saying it aloud.
Those mornings with these old ladies will be remembered by me as some of the most beautiful moments of my life. They taught me and shared their grace and wisdom. In a sense it has always been the mothers, mine, them and the Mother of our savior who have always shown strength. It occurred to me along the way that Mary is the ultimate example of a victim of state terror. I try fervently to empathize with her powerlessness as her Son was tortured to death. Sad to think that her veneration has also been sidelined by the recent history of the church, when really she could be such a great tool to carry in devotion against the “liberation theologists” and their marxist partners like Castro, Chaves, Ortega and the punk Morales from whose hands Francis took that hammer and sickle “cross”. Also, i believe it is why the vision of fatima foretold of Russia accepting the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Like the politically oppressed of all the world and particularly in communist states whose objective is to kill the Son again, Mary, i believe should be employed as a messenger and a support to the powerless to persevere. Using her grace personally and her image publicly as a rebuke to the mortals who would destroy every thing that makes the human condition divine.
Big love and thank you for your kind words. We should talk about the book.
Was Mary powerless as “her Son was tortured to death”? From a human point of view, yes. But in a very real sense, no, Mary was not powerless at all.
Mary consented to her Son’s sacrifice. There she stood at the foot of the Cross, offering her Son for the salvation of the world, never giving in to despair or anger or righteous indignation, uniting her Immaculate Heart with the Sacred Heart of Jesus in offering Himself to the Father, desiring the salvation of souls, praying for the Lord’s executioners, loving the world back to life, and consenting to her Son’s sacrifice.
This is not powerlessness but the height of power and strength. This is the Mother of God, co-Redemptrix of the world. This is the woman who crushes the serpent’s head. She did so then. She will do so again.
Thanks for sharing such a beautiful testimony. From the comments and replies i see that many, like me, resonate so much with what you have expressed. May God bless you and may our holy Mother Mary hasten the triumph of her Immaculate Heart.
Gracias por este testimonio. Yo también hablo los dos idiomas (anglo, aprendí el castellano en la escuela, pero en serio, y luego estudié various años en España). Cuando me dicen que el problema con lo que dijo Jorge Bergoglio en un discurso yace en la traducción, lo leo en la versión original. Normalmente encuentro que es exactamente lo que había leído en inglés. ¡Palabrería!
Pope St. John Paul II, a Great Saint! Thanks be to God! And thank you for your post. I too hope you can write an article about your faith’s journey [cf. @susanlauren’s comment: http://disq.us/p/1igo0sr%5D.
***
Heaven will be a wonderful place with retelling [and seeing] of such simple yet great and heroic stories.
Your personal testimony touches me and I do recognize your inner struggle between the respect we simply owe to our pope on the one hand and the way I feel and sometimes speak or write about pope Francis on the other hand. Praying for him and the church might be the best thing indeed.
By the way, I didn’t know of his self-mortification, as sleeping on the stone floor for example. I just remember how I bursted out in tears and how I cried out on his shoulders when I first met John Paul II, years ago. A Holy Father for sure.
Read the book and weep. To write such a volume is an act of supreme courage. How is it that the laity are the ones speaking out and the clergy (for the most part) are either remaining silent or embracing Francis’ heresies?
It occurs to me that I should pray, “Thy Will Be Done,” rather than for any specific intention for both Francis and for Christ’s Church. Would it be possible to “pray against” John’s Apocalypse as well as multiple prophesies?
See my comment above. Our Lady of Good Success talked about this very thing.
Up to the Laity. And I think they are doing a wonderful job.
riforma del carcere, vaticano e sinistra italiana. Un esempio delle politiche di Papa Francesco. Un “gesuita moderno”, direbbe Rosmini. Di seguito articolo
http://www.domenicomassano.it/2017/04/se-35-anni-vi-sembrano-pochi-papa.html
I am absolutely going to buy the book. The ‘buyers’ remorse’ of the Bishops issue was mentioned a few times and what came to mind was the prophecy of Our Lady of Good Success. She spoke of marriage even within the Church being decimated, making it very easy for people to fall into sin. She mentioned freemasonry that would be ‘running the show’ within the Church in this century. And of those Bishops who should be defending Christ’s Church, she said: “Those that should speak will fall silent.” Our Lady of Good Success pretty much nailed everything we see happening around us at this very moment in time.
Don’t do it today, though. The Lord hates it when people shop on Sundays and Holy Days. He told that to Sr. Mary of St. Peter to whom He revealed the Devotion to His Holy Face.
Nope, not to worry, not today:)
Thank you. ?
Let none of us falter in our faith no matter what this Bergoglio and his heretic allies do or say.
Our priest today in his homily called the loss of faith during hard times the committing of a “spiritual abortion”. We must persevere to bring our faith to full term in God’s timing.
He is so right. We cannot be members of God’s family without faith, and we cannot have faith if we can see and grasp the goal. FAITH comes only when we cannot see and behold the victory. No faith is needed during a victory march.
May we all have faith in the ultimate victory of our Blessed Lord Jesus.
God bless the Holy Father! He’s a child of the revolution – whom Pope St. John Paul II made a cardinal! Maybe if even one of the popes from 1960 onward had the courage to consecrate Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart the Church would not be being punished by God as it is now. The Visible Head of the Mystical Body must lead us in truth, and if he fails to obey God then all of the members of the Mystical Body are punished. Sin has such an effect. God asked for Russia to be consecrated and even John Paul II did not obey that request. Cardinal Ratzinger acknowledged this to be the case. Maybe Pope Francis will obey God’s will on Saturday and perform this simple act of consecration rather than the less effective act of entrustment. God can work such a miracle. Trust in His Goodness.
He won’t do any such thing. He’ll declare that at Fatima the community has learned to come together in joyful, flexible (no rigidity please!) non-pharasaical anti-Pelagian mercy whereby all are on, one is all, moonbeams are nice, adultery is a preparation for the Gospel and would we all please call him Mustapha from now on.
It will be stomach churning to see how he bends Fatima to his purpose.
Recent history has had be wondering if the interpretation of the pope visualized in the third secret is walking by the bodies of dead priests and religious or over them.
Well, let’s put that one to bed. The Pope walking up the hill is praying for the souls of the slain priests and religious as he goes by so I suppose he isn’t walking over them. But your point is well made and understood!
I believe he must be able to pray for others. But in which way, how and with what intentions, that’s another thing…
Just found this at Rorate…
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/05/francis-in-fatima-i-am-bishop-dressed.html
I wonder if he’ll reference the Islamic roots of the Fatima place name!!
Ha!
How even could he ? That has happened a long ago in the 8th century… Thus a while before communism was born. Besides that kind of stuff was never mentioned in any scholar book by Marx or Engels…
Don’t even dare say that to the Portuguese! 🙂 The story is that the Fatima of the place’s name was the daughter of a local Caliph (this is in around the 11th century) who fell in love with a Catholic knight, converted and was then beheaded by her father for her pains.
I just pray that his reign may be short and another may take his bishopric…
Enough is enough.
Only the devil sows such confusion!
The explanation of Pope Francis’ ostentatious humility (will expnad in a post on my blog)
@JohnnyCuredents here: http://disq.us/p/1igl9zc
And F.C Ziegler Company gushes and spins:
And MSM + even Catholic publications ad nauseum: ‘humble Pope Francis’
My take is that Pope Francis is NOT at all humble after the manner of Our LORD and Savior Jesus Christ as he would want us to believe, but rather all of this ostentatious humility is in keeping with what I suspect his secret society degree to be, that of an Illuminati Priest.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5a856bceef2ea953ceac542029fdf1e630a5f05b17a9074de9d1123054c0f224.png
A truly humble man doesn’t feel a need to make certain the entire world knows just how humble he is.
If Francis/Bergoglio was truly humble, he would have worn the red and gold stole when first presented to the world as Supreme Pontiff. He would have lived in the Apostolic Palace, rather than insisting that funds be unnecessarily spent to upgrade his “humble” hotel lodgings. He would humbly acquiesce to the traditions that have grown around the office of the papacy over the centuries rather than taking every opportunity to show how he is “too humble” for them, as said traditions elevate not the man, but, rather, emphasize the sacredness of the office of the papacy itself.
But Francis/Bergoglio won’t do any of this, of course. And the only conclusion a reasonable man can draw is that the present pontiff is quite possibly the most narcissistic man to ever hold the office.
Plain!. Very well said, thank you!
Cardinal Burke: The dignity of the office does not alter the humility of the man – See more at: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/05/cardinal-burke-dignity-of-office-does.html#sthash.OtPfWvpz.dpuf
For the saying that the Third Fatima Secret is yet to be fully revealed and Russia’s Consecration to Our Lady is yet be accomplished, consider this:
And then ask yourselves:
1) Who currently fits the bill of the Antichrist/His Kingdom by being ruler of the treasures of gold and of silver, and all the precious things of Egypt; and the Libyans [with] the Ethiopians follow[ing] in his train?
2) Who currently fits the bill of the Antichrist/His Kingdom and is currently alarmed by news from the east and north?
This is a great interview and article. Do you think this book is the reason, pope Francis has been so insulting lately about young conservative Catholics (as the author of the book is in his 40’s)?
Pope Francis’s generation of liberal hippie leftovers are mad because they are old and soon to leave this world and their awful ideologies are being replaced by a younger generation that advocates for orthodoxy.
Not soon enough!
Not sure but his condemnation of young people in the Church is quite remarkable. At a time when the Church is bleeding members all thru the developed world, Francis attacks some of those who remain.
As if those who are not “rigid” and are sketchy about their commitment are devoid of sin while those who struggle to live in commitment to the teachings of Christ set themselves up as devoid of sin. But…of course, as usual, he isn’t specific. He just blasts away with sweeping condemnations, one of which is the condemnation of those who condemn, those who hold “judgmental attitudes”!
It’s all quite bizarre.
The gates of hell shall not prevail against Gods Holy Church. Pray the Rosary, go to confession, and always remember the Lord is with us in Holy Communion.
Gates of hell means the Church will always go on reaching the lost till Christ comes again. And so that will go on. The troubles notwithstanding.
Another way to look at this [which I also heard from Mr. Voris/Church Militant], is that it is not as if we are the ones behind the gates cowering before the enemy, but that we are the ones actually assaulting the powers[gates] of death, they are the ones cowring and we will overrun their defenses.
But Voris is a mendacious fraud. I have absolutely no time for him at all since his manic and thoroughly dishonest attacks on the SSPX.
But Voris is a mendacious fraud. Of that I am certain and we agree. Cf. how I tackle his intransigent, illogical, mistaken and nonsensical position of ‘never criticising the pope’: “Papal Response” to ChurchMilitant(dot).com’s ‘Public Criticism of the Pope’ – http://wp.me/p2Na5H-qO
I have also bee banned from his site.
Was just giving credit where credit is due.
The author is naïve when it comes to Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. They were part of the problem. They were Modernists. They weren’t out and out liberal Modernists like the Martini faction, but they were Modernists nevertheless. More on the conservative spectrum of Modernism. Pope John Paul held the line on morality and moral issues, but he was a disaster in everything else. He was a Vatican II liberal. Benedict in contrast was a traditionalist in liturgy, but a doctrinal Modernist like John Paul. Benedict was different from John Paul in the sense that Benedict was obsessed with reconciling Modernism and Tradition. He was a Hegelian always looking for the magic synthesis between Modernism and Tradition. He too was a disaster in governance like John Paul. As far as Benedict being strong against Liberation Theology, that ended up being a joke, because this was the man who as Cardinal Ratzinger, wrote the infamous Vatican letter against Liberation Theology, yet as Pope, made Cardinal Muller the head of the CDF, when Muller is a hardcore supporter and proponent of Liberation Theology.
Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. They were part of the problem.
***
Negative! Another grevious error from the Trads/the Trads circles and sedevacantists.
Your comment is rich. Your insight cannot be denied. That said, the final judgement on this obvious conundrum will not be rendered anytime soon.
As much as I respect both of them, John Paul and Benedict often left me confounded. All the opportunity over three decades to get the Barque back on course and they only fiddled with the opportunity.
“tall order” offers a comment on liberalism and conservativism that compliments your view.
Both tainted with liberalism and Modernism. Therefore their Pontificates could not possibly give us the Restoration.
We all know about the Koran kissing and of course Assisi stuff, but as I have said in the past, I strongly believe JPII and B16 were both traumatized by their experiences in World War 2, a specter that still haunts our culture to this day. I do not believe Catholic commentators give enough emphasis on just how radical has culture and world view been altered by that vast bloodletting {and really, the entire century of the heavy industry of murder the world experienced}. B-Fifteen said in WW1 that it was the “Suicide of Europe”. Prophetic indeed. The corpse took some time to stop twitching. Look at europe now. The colonizers now begging to be colonized by the Supreme Enemy of the Faith.
B16 troubles me more greatly, especially with his redefinition and denial {?} of “extra ecclesiam nulla salus”.
1958:
http://www.hprweb.com/2017/01/the-new-pagans-and-the-church/
1968:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_006_RatzingerSalvation.htm
2016:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-emeritus-benedict-says-church-is-now-facing-a-two-sided-deep-crisis
XB16’s recent statement is hard to define as to whether HE denies EENS or whether he is saying the church leadership and culture have walked away from it since V2. But his previous statements {1958 and 1968} are more troubling, but fit right in with his recent one.
And his denial of the inerrancy of Scripture in ‘Jesus of Nazareth’.
Bergoglio is NOT the Pope.
Benedict XVI is the true Pope: His renunciation was invalid.
Therefore the Holy Spirit doesn’t side with Francis and all the mess he has trigerred in the Church can be easily explained.
I hope the Holy Ghost can help you with your spelling.
Benedict XVI underwent huge (“enormi”) pressures to force him into his renunciation. Everyone suspected that his health concerns were not the true pretense for his renunciation.
His friend Mgr Luigi Negri, archbp of Ferrara, confirmed this recently.
Therefore the renunciation was invalid and he is still the true Pope.
Sorry Jacques but your conclusion does not necessarily follow on from your premise at all.
The central question is:
“Regarding a pope who is resigning under huge (and non canonical) pressures, is his renunciation valid?
There is no discussion to have about the pressures Benedict underwent from inside and OUTSIDE the Church: We know thanks to Mgr Luigi Negri that they were certain.
Therefore Benedict “lied” when he said he resigned du to health’s concerns.
I’m very glad this book has been written, but I wish the author had picked a stronger subtitle. It makes it sound like the pope’s opposition are politically or ideologically focused as well, when most have primarily a spiritual outlook.
L’Osservator Romano celebrated communist theorist Antonio Gramsci recently, too.
http://traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A727-Gramsci.htm
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/217fcd432c0cfa26b2fb9b1d8d42c3df35142be7fe7d773ac7d108a39af9feac.jpg
Great interview from an orthodox perspective. Many conservative Catholics will love it. So will orthodox Catholics. But why an author who wants to be taken seriously paints the argument as one between “liberal and conservative” as opposed to “orthodox vs. modernist”, I will never know. I would have assumed this was some neo-Catholic drivel had it not been Maike Hickson doing the interview. Where are these authors’ advisors?
Contemporary Church is swept up into revolutionary politics and paradigm. The anti-communist crusade brought the Church and the United States close–Reagan and JPII. The Church took sides with evil (classical liberalism) to combat evil (communism).
There are very few things the Mahometans have right. One being the United States is the Great Satan.
Unbeknownst to most, liberal and conservative are both revolutionary terms and are both liberal. The French Revolutionaries took sides of the court, the ‘conservatives’ on the right, and the ‘liberals’ on the left. This is where our left/right paradigm comes from. Both were exceedingly liberal; both advocated the overthrow of altar and throne. The left merely wanted to go further than they had already.
I made a similar comment below. It seems like the subtitle is may have been a poor choice.
Pope Imbroglio ordained some priests the other day, and the Catholic Herald reports that ” .. to the admonition that priests nourish their people with sound doctrine, Pope Francis added a request that they speak simply and clearly.”
You couldn’t make it up. It’s like a Mexican soap opera, minus the moustaches.
Is he insane? Is it geriatric dementia? Is he stupid? Is he a liar? Is he completely without self awareness?
Mexican soap opera is as good as any thing.
I remember that story from his autobiography, when he said as a young priest he liked teaching his nephew foul language when he was at home. There’s a personality disorder problem involved I would think.
That is “funny”. I see him as the Uncle who visits his sister’s family and gives the kids candy before supper…
What is that autobiography?
Featured on Rorate Caeli two-three years back. He wrote it when Archbishop of BA.
Wow! First time I’ve heard this.
Well, the superior who was head of the South American Jesuits warned against making him Archbishop of Buenos Aires back when that first happened warning Bergoglio had narcissistic tendencies… I forget the details, but in short, it’s pretty sure Bergoglio has a serious personality problem. Or possibly several.
Here is a short story about that posted on 19.03.2013.:
http://religion.orf.at/stories/2576261/
(“Kindheitserinnerungen von Papst Franziskus” [“Childhood Memories of Pope Francis”], ORF.at, Mar. 19, 2013.)
Don’t fall into the temptation of rigidity (a.k.a. don’t try too hard to follow Catholic moral teachings). Why would the leader of the Catholic Church on Earth say that?
I just started reading this book. I’m maybe 1/4th of the way through and, as a Catholic, it is deeply disturbing. This sort of stuff can take decades to repair.
My copy arrived today.
Nothing too new for those of us who have been observing closely over the last four years. Nevertheless having it all conveniently between two covers is gravely toxic.
That the Bergoglian epoch has descended upon us at the hands of bishops ostensibly committed to Jesus Christ is truly frightening. By and large we are pastored by the cowardly and the nefarious.
God help us.
How did they get BXVI to resign?
THAT is the question of the century!
All things, work together for those who love G-d, this Pope in this time is being used by G-d. We really have no idea how this is happening, since we cannot understand the invisible realm, at best we guess, surmise and speculate. I am a new Catholic. Confirmed this last Easter Vigil. For the last 33 years I have been in varieties of the Protestant church, the Anglican Church for a good 15, the others have been community, Dutch Reform, Gospel, and Pentecostal. Trust in G-d and His ways, trust that He has placed Pope Francis for this time even if it does not agree with you. Peace be with you.
While reading Mr. Niemeyer’s book, one cannot help but be reminded of the late Fr John Hardons address to delegates attending the 1998 Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation Regional Conference in Chicago who said: “As we come to the close of the twentieth century, we are seeing the gravest crisis in the history of Christianity. In my judgment, at the center of this crisis is the deep penetration of Marxism into our beloved country [USA]. I believe we can say even more. Our country is a Marxist nation. Dare I say still more? The United States of America is the most powerful Marxist country in the world…”
By any measure that wake up call is now more important and relevant than ever. Time is about to run out.
I’m currently reading the book. Still in the early chapters. Only complaint is the author’s use of “conservative Catholics “. That is the enemy’s language. There are believing or partial or unbelieving Catholics. The current occupant of the Throne of Peter is among the latter.
It is a theological given that no man is elected Pope without at least the permissive causality of God. Perhaps this Pope has been allowed to reign to strip us of the last vestiges of the excessive and unjustified hyper-papalism of the last two pontificates. After all, who “found” Bergoglio and made him bishop, archbishop, and finally Cardinal but the “Great” John Paul II? Who else but Benedict XVI did indeed “flee from the wolves” and left the Bride of Christ to be besmirched by this unworthy man?
For those of you on the sidelines, the Pope was allowed to speak for himself through extensive quotes, and his positions are made out to be clear. The critics will say it’s all made up but not one of them has the gall to bring up a particular instance. Anyone ranging from a layman who knows nothing about the faith to priests and even theologians may learn more than a thing or 2 from this book. It’s critical to understanding why PF does the things he does.