Here is a summary of the major stories we’re keeping an eye on today:
- The Bishop Barros story continues to progress, as we reported yesterday, with some members of the pope’s own commission on sexual abuse now going public with information that he received a victim letter in 2015, contrary to his claims of no victim having come forward. Abuse victim and former commission member Marie Collins tweeted yesterday, “This is why I was shocked when I heard the Pope had said on the plane the Karadima victims had not come to him and he would listen if they did. I knew they had contacted him directly with this letter three years ago!
#chile #karadima“. Nicole Winfield from the Associated Press, who broke the latest development in the story, offers a timeline summary of events today at Crux to help put the story in order.
- The Vatican-China Compromise continues to defy belief. Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, has now praised the Communist Chinese government as “best implementing the social doctrine of the Church”. Sorondo virtually gushes about China’s approach to poverty, drugs, the economy, and the environment. (Not mentioned, in light of Pope Francis’ comments that capital punishment “is, in itself, contrary to the Gospel” [spoiler: it isn’t], is that China is the death penalty capital of the world, even treating it like a spectator sport.) Meanwhile, Roberto de Mattei’s Corrispondenza Romana reports that new Chinese regulations in 2018 will clamp down on retreats and private religious gatherings in both the official Chinese Church and the underground Church — with the latter facing more severe consequences. “Religious schools can meet only if they are registered and above all only under the control of the state. All other cases, including the celebration of Holy Mass, will be considered ‘illegal religious activity .” The Global Times — a China-based English-language tabloid with ties to the Chinese government — is running a piece today accusing “Western media outlets” and “right-wing commentators in the West” of amplifying a “civil war within the Catholic Church” over this issue.
- Paul VI is going to be canonized, according to Andrea Tornielli of La Stampa. At Vatican Insider today, Tornielli reports that “Paul VI will be canonized soon” following the approval of a “miracle attributed to the intercession of Giovanni Battista Montini”. The only thing left, writes Tornielli, is “Francis’ approval and the announcement of the date for the canonization.” The alleged miracle involved a healing of an unborn baby at five months’ gestation. The child’s mother was said to have been at risk of miscarriage from a (unspecified) disease, but gave birth to a healthy baby girl after asking for Montini’s intercession.
OnePeterFive offers Catholic news, commentary, and information. We are dedicated to rebuilding Catholic culture and restoring Catholic tradition.
If the Vatican is going to canonize Paul VI, then it will be kind of strange to mess with Humane Vitae. But with this Papacy the principle of Contradiction applies. LOL! Or is the Vatican saying that it approves of the Protestantized of the Catholic Mass allowed by Paul VI? Very confusing.
They are attempting to canonize Vatican II, not Humanae Vitae. Even saints can make mistakes.
Blink left and turn right. Peronism.
The canonization of Pink Paul just demonstrates that “pope” Francis is, in itself, contrary to the Gospel…
He was truly ‘pink’, according to MANY sources. And, if people would just do some investigating, he was not the author of Humanae Vitae. He took credit for it, but it was not him who composed it.
Who did write it then? Also, can you name sources that confirm he was gay?
The word is that Paul VI wrote it but Ottaviani made the Catholic corrections to it (the Thomistic bits that stand out in an uneven document). Like so many things Paul VI never bothered reading the final draft before signing. It came out and uproar ensued. The thing that gives the story credence was that Paul VI refused to write another encyclical over the next ten years of his pontificate. Even though he wrote seven! in his first five years. Was he angered by the outcome of Humane Vitae and being outmanuevered by Card Ottaviani?
I’m pretty sure it should be St. Ottaviani at this point… that man fought until the end.
Thanks, and yes, Ottaviani was the one that revised H.V.
AMEN to THAT!
Moreover, I am sure if we pray to God for something what can be done only by God’s hand, and we do that with the intercession of st Ottaviani, – MOST probably it will be done! Anybody should give it a try!
My brother said that he had to give the city of Rome props for naming a railway station after Cardinal Ottaviani
For doubters, in 1963 John XXIII established a Papal Commission of six individuals to study the issue of artificial birth control. Both John
XXIII and Paul VI rejected any inclusion of this issue in Vatican II’s
deliberations despite requests. Paul VI himself hand picked an
additional 66 members of the commission, bringing the total to 72. In
1966 his hand-picked Pontifical Commission released its findings, widely reported, that there was no problem with artificial birth control. This news was widespread in the Catholic world and the issue was settled.
What was Paul VI’s reaction? Crickets for nearly two years. Is this
reaction at all consistent with the man who would write Humanae Vitae?
Compare Paul VI’s approach here with that of the New Mass. He delayed the New Mass for two years, not because of his rejection of Bugnini’s radical protestant experiment, but due to hesitancy on how to implement it.
The anger after HV on the part of the Church’s theologians ect was
due to Paul VI’s “betrayal” and the shocking and unexpected findings. I believe this betrayal was completely unintended on Paul VI’s part
Randy Engel’s “The Rite of Sodomy”.
Lots (and lots and lots) of detail.
“Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, has now praised the Communist Chinese government as “best implementing the social doctrine of the Church”.” And, hey, they’ve cut down on the sources of global warming, or global climate change, or whatever liberals call it now. I mean, the ChiComs murdered at least 45 million people who would have otherwise added enormously to the already heavy burden our poor planet bears! I think I see some shiny new Commander of the Pontifical Equestrian Order of St. Gregory the Great medals on the horizon for Xi Jinping and the boys in Beijing!
Xi Jinping will be made a Cardinal with veto powers at this point and China named the new Holy Roman Empire.
Just more wins for the inscrutable Bergoglian Ostpolitik Master Plan!
Don’t joke. I actually came up with the plot of an apocalyptic novel where something similar happened.
There’s something fishy with the whole Barros cover-up.
First the pope cries with the sex abuse victims in Chile and then he calls the whole Barros accusation slander?
It’s called El Pasodoble Bergogliano. He learned the steps from Argentine dictator Juan Perón, the Arthur Murray of this dance.
I wish someone would PLEASE do some in depth investigating of Gustavo Vera, one of Bergoglio’s long time friends. Maybe it’s a no big deal, but it needs to be looked into. It may or may not be the answer to your question but, it needs some digging into…..by someone.
There is also something extremely suspicious about the fact that he has gone three times now to South America yet not once visited his homeland.
Well, I can only think that:
1. All flights to Buenos Aires have been fully booked.
2. He’s ‘done’ Argentina from Patagonia to Tierra del Fuego so he wants to see other parts of the continent. He does visit these countries as a tourist, doesn’t he? Because he does precious little refuting of error or confirming of the brethren.
3. He’s a firm believer (never thought I’d use that phrase to describe him!) that a miscreant should never return to the scene of the crime.
Rumour has it they don’t want him. Can’t think why
I’m in shock,
because George Wiegel has said Francis and the Vatican have made a deal with the Devil,
Chinese Communist Party :
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456107/vatican-china-dispute-church-capitulates-naming-bishops
correction; Barron’s book title is To Light a Fire on the Earth: Proclaiming the Gospel in a Secular Age
Is there something in particular which Bishop Barron has said or done that leads you to describe him as “liberal”?
Bp. Barron praises James Martin SJ. Have you read his book.
He wonders why there are so many ‘nones’ out there.
Young people don’t want heresy.
I think they’re leaving the Catholic Church because they’re not hearing the faith that was once taught……instead they’re hearing drivel.
Bp.Barron refuses to condemn Martin’s heresy,
so young people refuse to go to church.
1) Barron also peddles the nonsense that we have a “reasonable hope that all men are saved.” https://www.churchmilitant.com/main/generic/faq-barron
2) Barron also totally failed to witness to the truth that homosexual conduct is disordered and self-destructive when Dave Rubin interviewed him before an audience of MILLIONS. Moreover, he expressly stated that he is not interested in procuring the restoration of the definition of marriage as proper only between one man and one woman in that very same interview. https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/bp.-barron-reversing-gay-marriage-would-cause-too-much-trouble
3) Barron also failed to point out that the fictional character Walter Kowalski’s “self-sacrifice” at the end of Gran Torino was actually sinful because it was an act intentionally committed to provoke his own murder, and provocation is one of the ways of being an accessory to another’s sin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94SV0T5Q8PE
And I don’t even follow the man closely. He is a wolf in shepherd’s clothing.
Barron also subscribes to the heresy that Christ did not have knowledge of His Messianic duty until He “learned” it later.
On the topic of Dave Rubin: https://youtu.be/IS71EDAwX1o
Empty inside. A demagogue as most false teachers, especially their chief bergoglio.
“…A wolf in shepherd’s clothing.”
Why else would our Caudlillo “bishop” him?
Aha….I did not know that he had embraced Martin,
You pull our leg?
Well he’s a modernist and modernism was known as liberalism until Pius X gave it a new name, so…
I understand the contention, I was thinking more of some comments he’s published or been recorded which contradict the historical teachings and dogmas.
Does George actually blame the Pope? Because hell would be frozen over.
If the office of Promotor Fidei were to be brought back in its full capacity and were to examine concilliar Popes such as Paul VI, would his canonization be given the green light? I think we all know what the answer to that one is.
The Vatican kowtowing towards Beijing is becoming unbearable. It makes me sick. The Holy See obviously no longer needs a freemasons’ lodge to sell its soul. Benedict XVI seemed te be right: Fatima isn’t over yet. With the new Ostpolitik it’s only getting worse. Maranatha, do not leave us as orphans…
Think however of the consistency here. First, Francis praises a mass murderess, Emma Bonino, saying she is one of Italy’s greats. Now his pal Bishop Sánchez (not Sorondo, as I have seen some say) praises a regime that can legitimately claim the title of Greatest Murderer of Innocent Citizens In All Human History. What we are seeing is the mask of reason being ripped off the faces of the current rulers at the Vatican. They are modernists, progressives in the vein of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Mao.
They praise a regime where it is illegal NOT to have an abortion.
This article worth reading on Cdl Zen from S. China
Morning Post newspaper:
I am quite thankful that so many have come out and challenged the RCC and PF regarding Barros. We should all be thankful that SOMETHING has changed from where we were before. No longer, and not even the pope, will be immune from being held accountable for what they say and do regarding CSA. They can try and spin their webs like before but too many know what is going on and are speaking out. This is progress.
The China thing, that is beyond belief. China the world leader in abortions, gender specific to boot. The RCC has abandoned the faithful in their time of need, and would rather defend the environment, social programs, than the faith. Handing it over to the government is outright heresy and opens the door to every other country’s political system to declare the same. Why even have a catholic church then if government can do it. Even to the extent of China stating that holding a Mass is illegal. So really why even have a pope?
“China the world leader in abortions, gender specific to boot.”
The outrage is just beginning to “do a Krakatoa” on this.
Thirty seven days in and already 2018 has produced three stunts that clearly expose for anyone with eyes to see the canker at the heart of the regime currently occupying the Vatican. ‘Motus in fine velocior’ has been bandied around quite a bit on Catholic websites to describe the increased frequency of the anything-but-Catholic antics we see coming out of Rome. I hope one day soon, in fact very soon, it proves to be true.
Who is kidding whom here? They are in full court press mode trying to do as much damage as possible as quickly as possible. The Faithful Cardinals and Bishops (no matter how pathetically few they truly are in number) simply needed to denounce this man and his court for what they are: Agents of the Anti-Christ.
I am afraid they will never speak up.
If any of these men were to finally speak truthfully I would assume it was a miracle from God. I am not joking. It would be a true miracle.
The canonization of Paul VI would be the last straw for me. It will be time to dust off that minority theological opinion that canonizations are not infallible acts after all.
Around the time of the canonization of St. Teresa of Kolkata Pope Francis was sited as saying he was not sure that a canonization is an infallible act. Now I understand there has been disagreement about this over the centuries, but the preponderance of opinion is on the side of yes, infallible. But can an act be regarded as infallible if the pope in question appears not to hold it as such?
There is not an iota of the past five years which does not require reexamination.
The atrocities of this pontificate are countless, but unique among them all is the betrayal of Chinese Roman Catholic’s by the pope. If this does not call down God’s justice I don’t know what will.
There has been no formal regime change in China since Mao oversaw the mass murder of 45,000,000 innocent human beings, the greatest governmental slaughter in human history. The Chinese people still suffer under one of the most repressive regimes in the world, and China is still run from Beijing by the Chinese Communist Party, Mao’s party. Let’s think about this for a moment. If the Hitlerites had prevailed somehow in WW 2, would any Catholic prelate dare say about its latest iteration what Sánchez says here about the ChiComs, the nauseous poppycock about their implementing the social doctrine of the Catholic Church?
Ah….wait….maybe I shouldn’t ask. I fear what the answer might be in this Bergoglian papacy.
He is plain evil or a moron.
I’ll charitably opt for moron. He’s a liberal, as close as one can come to a synonym for moron.
A different criteria for a different type of Saint, Professor. Yes a “Saint”but according to whom? And on what criteria? Certainly nothing that matches up with traditional Catholic criteria. No Devil’s Advocate to put up any objections. It’s an Aggiornamento Lifetime Achievement Award nothing more nothing less.
We need to start using proper titles for neo-canonized men like Paul VI and JPII: pseudo-saint, neo-saint, or something similar.
Maybe just NotASaint? Or use hyphens? I’d be fine with Not-A-Saint Paul VI. Or perhaps Novus Ordo Saint? We could abbreviate that as NO St. John XXIII.
To paraphrase the Medical Examiner of the Munchkins, he’s not only merely not a saint, he’s truly most sincerely not a saint!
Thx for the link. The whole exposé is truly horrific.
For anyone overwhelmed by the length of the chapter, the section dealing with Paul VI’s sodomitical affairs begins about half way down.
This are my concerns with JPII’s canonization. My Top Ten.
1. His 1983 Code of Canon Law allows protestants to receive communion on special occasions. This is a sacrilege and a profanation of the truth and nature of the Church.
2. The CCC teaches people that they can masturbate without committing a mortal sin. This strikes a hammer blow to Catholic sexual ethics. If one’s culpability for committing sexual sin can be lessened (the original version said “eliminated altogether”) than any sin can be likewise rationalized.
3. JPII taught that Catholics can live in adultery as long as they live as “brother and sister”. This is profoundly superficial and causes public scandal and is no different than telling young couples that they can live together as long as they don’t have sex. This also reinforces the idea that marriage is a social construct.
4. Theology of the Body teaches “mutual submission” of spouses. Far worse its leading advocates now teach men that they can put their member in any orifice as long as they finish in the correct one. How can we battle sodomy when proponents of TOB are themselves advocating sodomy with bishops approval? This is one example of how TOB’s unsound philosophy continues to mutate.
5. He continually reminded Catholics that the God of Islam and the Catholic God are the self-same God.
6. By word and action he committed the objectively mortal sin of communicatio in sacris and public idolatry. He was the first Pope to enter a synogogue and mosque to worship, because Catholics are forbidden to do such things. He stated that this idolatry was a “catechism” teaching us the truth about ecumenism and dialogue.
7. He taught that the Old Covenant has never been revolked. This makes a mockery of the entire New Testament.
8. He set the precedent of a Pope changing disciplines on a whim by defying his own teaching from 1980 in Cena Domini with his allowance of female altar servers in 1994. This contributed to the liturgical transgenderism of the New Mass.
9. He taught that the death penalty goes against the culture of life. Therefore a Catholic who ascribes to traditional Church teaching cannot be considered Pro Life.
10. He taught that Catholics can receive sacraments from the schismatic and heretical Orthodox Church. This is advocating the mortal sin of communicatio in sacris and again goes against the very truth and nature of the Catholic Church. The orthodox allow marriage up to three times (Francis uses their terms and theology—they call these ‘marriages of mercy’). The orthodox also openly permit contraception.
So THAT’s why my priest told me what he told me when I was struggling with that particular sin. It wasn’t until I started treating it like an actual mortal sin, and did not receive communion if I had committed and not confessed it, that I was actually able to kick it…
I’m right there with you Dr. K!
Indeed. But this says something else too. Something much bigger and much more important.
About the fact of self-excommunicated clergy, who odes NOT belongs to Christ’s Holy Church anymore.
Let alone they pretend to represent the Church and to lead the flock (to the Hell)
Enough was already ENOUGH, a long time ago…
“Self-excommunicating” and self-exterminating, as well.
The Church used to demand pretty spectacular miracles before anyone was declared a saint. They were seen as proof that God Himself wanted this person held up as an example to the rest of us. When a pope or a committee say ‘We think this is a miracle’ I think it’s reasonable to doubt that this is God’s will. In the past people were only fast tracked to sainthood if many, many miracles could be attributed to them. Now it’s just on a whim. JPII started this nonsense. Much too many dodgy ‘miracles’ going around.
And I don’t care what the Vatican declares. I will not call Paul VI saint.
There is something wrong with canonizations and the canonization process. It’s the been the elephant in the room for decades and the mainstream neo-Catholic and tradition-minded Catholics haven’t woken up to this yet. Maybe this latest garbage canonization will wake them up.
As reported in Catholic Herald today:
“Catholics should use the season of Lent to look for signs and symptoms of being under the spell of false prophets and of living with cold, selfish and hateful hearts, Pope Francis said.”
Finally, something I agree with that Pope Francis said. I hope Catholics take his advice. They will find a false prophet in the Vatican.
I find that quote quite chilling….just who is he referring to please?
Oh for goodness sake bishops and cardinals: look what he is telegraphing here?
Do we think he is talking about the prophet Mohammed? -nooo
Do we think he talking about the prophet of Buddha?- nooooooo
Good God, how thick are the skulls of our cardinals and bishops? Get off your a&%, come out of your fine robes and vestments and pontifical Masses ( which I do so love), read less of theologians at the moment( even the very good ones), and meet this enemy of Christ’s Bride head on.
It is your duty not only to Christ and the laity, but just as importantly to the faithful priest whom, BTW, as cardinal you swore to protect and guide, I believe?
The man is on the run now! He has set his sails about him and calling on anti Church forces to rise!
Sorry but now miracles are reduced to an unborn baby you can’t even properly diagnose to begin with? Also who are all these people with a devotion to Paul VI? Do you see his photo on anyone’s fridge, even liberals? This all seems terribly contrived.
Maybe James Martin?
The mother was simply “at risk” for a miscarriage. That’s just… really??? Sorry, not a miracle. I mean, maybe. But no way to prove it. At all.
Yes, even more contrived than the ongoing process of canonizing Marxist or Marxist-sympathizing priests and bishops like Rother and Romero. No miracles required if we call them martyrs for the faith, when it appears much more likely that they were killed in civil wars for supporting “the revolution.” That in no way means I think those who killed these men were somehow justified. Murder is still murder. But it doesn’t make the victims automatic martyrs just because they were ordained clergy, or because the murder happened as Mass was being celebrated. The underlying reason for the murder is still relevant.
I’ve tried to explain this to people.
It hasn’t ended well…
Sounds super sketchy
Remember that in the case of Pope John XXIII, Pope Francis waived the need for a second miracle altogether.
Yeah because of the “good fruits” of the Council. He was literally canonizing the Council!
How many times have we heard of women who were told ‘You’re pregnancy is risking your life. the baby will kill you. Have an abortion’? My own sister was told this 5 times. She ignored it. Has six healthy children. (My goodness! Does that mean 5 miracles? Or maybe 5 lying doctors?)
Look at this Priest, God help us. http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A767-Flamb.htm
Effeminacy is a vice.
His head and buttocks should be put in a vice! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9ea95935e1757563a1f700a07d171215412222d9b3ec99053b7970677013e238.jpg
It might be risky to talk of buttocks and head in the presence of this ….er….priest, Barry.
True, if unfortunate enough to be in his presence at say a parish hall with two doors, one
should keep in view both exits by taking a cross-eyed position with one’s back against a wall.
That man offers the Holy Sacrifice? He preaches homilies? He instructs children in the faith? *shudders*
Brood of satan.
If you ask me, this priest is on a fast track to great power at the Vatican. He’s clearly part of the Bergoglian paradigm shift.
Sorondo is the iron fist of this lavender mafia. If Francis is the capo famiglia and Maradiaga is the consigliere, Sorondo is the caporegime. He directs the foot soldiers and reports directly to the boss. He organizes the hits and takes care of business
His praise of the Communist Chinese government amounts to spitting in the face of the Underground Church. Recall that this is the guy who was circus master at the recent Vatican conference which featured prominent population control advocates and abortion supporters.
He’s a real piece of work.
Check out also the links: http://www.catholicherald.uk/news/2018/02/06/beijing-paper-praises-franciss-wisdom-on-chinese-bishops/
I saw it yesterday on cath-herald, but now is that page removed!
Please see above. I hit the wrong “reply”.
thanks. I see it. And I don’t know neither.
The Herald article was reproduced in New Oxford Review, which is where I found it. But when I posted the link and tried it, it said it was unavailable. Why it sould have been removed, I have absolutely no idea.
That is the weakest case for a miracle I’ve ever heard! There are a LOT of ways that could have happened naturally… this is why we need a Devil’s Advocate…
Come on! Really??? That’s just… ugh…
While many REAL saints are purposely obstructed for the decades…
Just to mention one,- Bl. Aloysius Stepinac.
Blessed Solanus Casey performed way more real miracles.
The “gays” already have a patron saint of Sodomy, the Emperor Nero.
Why do they need another?
If I remember correctly, Nero liked horses too. New moral territory for Reinhard Marx and company?
Marx is reportedly working on a liturgical blessing whereby a man (in individual cases, and taking respectful account of concrete circumstances) may solemnize a union with his own belly.
I believe that that was Caligula. Various rumors claim that he A) married his horse, Incitatus (“at full gallop”), B) that he made the horse a consul and C) that he made the horse his priest. Some claim it was because he was nuts; others say he was scamming the Roman senate for laughs, letting them know what he thought of their skills as politicians.
Apparently Catherine the Great was a member of the horsey set as well.
You’re right, of course. Damn! So many perversions and so little mental space to catalog them all! Now that I think about it for a moment, Nero was into something perhaps closer to Reinhard’s point, little boys (no pun intended). Approval for pedophilia and ephebophilia seems to be on the Left’s radar screen these days and Marx is a leftist’s leftist, so who knows what his pronunciamento for tomorrow or the next day might be?
Ephebophilia. That’s a new one for my vocabulary. I’d say you’re doing rather well with the cataloging.
Back when the Boston sodomiscandals were first revealed in all their horror, HLAM, I first heard this word myself. Believe it or not, at a public meeting a priest sought to make the scandals seem less serious by explaining that ephebophilia and not pedophilia was the crime/sin in almost every case! In slightly more sophisticated English than I’ll use here, he proclaimed, “Hey, those priests weren’t molesting little boys at all! Why, their victims were all big boys!” The organizer of this meeting failed to provide the audience with one essential item, barf bags.
Ah, Boston…you’re in “Kuhner country;” that’s got to be some consolation, no?
It is indeed. Funny how a city as thoroughly corrupt as Boston in a state equally as corrupt can produce such good radio. (Of course, I know that Kuhner-man hails from Montreal and that he taught at McGill. Even that’s surprising, though, since they’re both corrupt in a polite Canadian way.)
“…being ridden “at full gallop”…
Would that be that whore on the many-headed beast? /sarc
The Commission for the Protection of Minors was wound up in December and we await its reformation. Will Cardinal O’Malley survive as chairman? Is there some difficulty in finding new suitable members? Father Martin for example?
You know you’re a Jebbie in deep trouble when a leftist rag like Commonweal jumps on your case:
Keep in mind that from 1234 (when Popes got involved in canonizations) to 1979 there were only 300 people canonized over a period of 745 years.
From 1979 to 2005, a mere 26 years, JPII himself canonized 482 people.
So you’re telling me the same scrutiny is at work, based on the same traditional criteria? Yes, a saint, but to whom? And based on what criteria?
In the case of Pope John XXIII, Pope Francis waived the need for a second miracle.
I know that the name of, and detailled information about, that red haired actor friend of Paul IV is on the internet somewhere. Can anyone locate it? I know it’s there because I read it, but foolishly assumed that enough people were aware of it generally that Paul IV would never be canonized.
There is a time for charitable silence about the sins of others, and there is a time when charity demands that truth be spoken. St. John the Baptist did not discreetly conceal the sexual sins of King Herod.
Steve, would you be willing to do a story on this?