Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight His paths.

Once again, Francis is dumbfounded at why children suffer.

“Perché la sofferenza dei bambini è certamente la più dura da accettare; e allora il Signore mi chiama a stare, anche se brevemente, vicino a questi bambini e ragazzi e ai loro familiari. Tante volte mi faccio e mi rifaccio la domanda: perché soffrono i bambini? E non trovo spiegazione. Solo guardo il Crocifisso e mi fermo lì.”

source: Vaticano, Incontro con i bambini dei vari reparti all'Ospedale Pediatrico, Parole del Francesco (English translation below the video)

(the quoted Italian begins at 49 min & ends at 49 min 43 sec)

— English translation —

“Because the suffering of children is certainly the most difficult to accept; and then the Lord calls me to stay, albeit briefly, nearby with these children and their families. So many times I make, and I refer the question: why children suffer? And I find no explanation.  I only look at the Crucifix and I stop there.”

Recall during his visit January 2015 visit to the Philippines when Francis was asked by a tearful 12 year old former street child, Glyzelle Palomar, “Many children are abandoned by their parents. Many children get involved in drugs and prostitution. Why does God allow these things to happen to us? The children are not guilty of anything.” And Francis answered, “She is the only one who has put a question for which there is no answer and she wasn’t even able to express it in words but in tears. The nucleus of your question … almost doesn’t have a reply.”  That time Francis used a poor child for a photo-op to make himself appear compassionate when he was anything but.  His answer was an empty naturalistic attempt devoid of any Christianity.  In our previous post on this topic, Francis' compassion or indifference to a little girl in the Philippines?, we recommended Francis to read the Baltimore Catechism which has the answer as well as the Gospel According to Matthew.  

As Francis demonstrates in his speech at the pediatric hospital in Genoa, his religion has no answers.  This even though he is gazing directly at the reason.  As Jesus the Christ says in, the greatest sermon of all time, The Sermon on the Mount,

“Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.” (St. Matthew 7:5)

May God through His infinite Mercy and Grace cast the beam out of Francis’ eyes, open his heart and mind, in order to convert him to the Catholic Faith, where he will find the answers to his questions.


Baltimore Catechism

60. What are the chief punishments of Adam which we inherit through original sin?

The chief punishments of Adam which we inherit through original sin are: death, suffering, ignorance, and a strong inclination to sin.

All things are delivered to me by my Father. And no one knoweth the Son, but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him. Come to me, all you that labour, and are burdened, and I will refresh you. Take up my yoke upon you, and learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart: and you shall find rest to your souls. For my yoke is sweet and my burden light.

Gospel According to St. Matthew, 11: 27-30

Francis contra the New Testament

“In the resurrection, Christ rolled back the stone of the tomb, but he wants also to break down all the walls that keep us locked in our sterile pessimism, in our carefully constructed ivory towers that isolate us from life, in our compulsive need for security and in boundless ambition that can make us compromise the dignity of others.”

— Francis’ homily at Easter Vigil Mass —

contra...

“And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And behold there was a great earthquake. For an Angel of the Lord descended from heaven: and coming, rolled back the stone, and sat upon it. And his countenance was as lightning, and his raiment as snow.”

— Gospel of St. Matthew 28, 1-3 —

Notes for Ver. 2. Behold ... an angel. The angel did not remove the stone to afford a passage to Christ when he arose; for Christ most certainly arose before the angel appeared; but he removed the stone to prepare the way for the women, and to shew the soldiers that Christ was arisen. He sat on the stone, that the women might know he had removed it; and, in the second place, that they might not be terrified at the appearance of the soldiers; for he exhorted them not to fear, but to come and see; and lastly, to prevent the soldiers from putting in another body, had they been so disposed. The holy women seem not to have known that there were guards placed near the sepulchre; otherwise they would not have been so solicitous who should roll away the stone for them, as how they should deceive the guards and break the seal. (Tirinus) --- For an angel of the Lord. This angel, who came to testify Christ's resurrection, removed the great stone; but Christ was risen before, who according to all the fathers, says Estius, rose, the sepulchre being yet shut.[2] --- St. Matthew and St. Mark name but one angel; St. Luke and St. John name two. It may be answered, that the women saw one at one time, and two at another: one upon the stone, out of the monument; (which also frightened the guards) afterwards this angel disappeared, and the women coming near, and looking into the vault, saw two angels, when he that was on the right side said, why seek you him that is living, among the dead? --- Another difference to be observed, is, that Sts. Matthew, Mark and John tell us, that the angel, or angels, sat; and St. Luke, that they stood: they might sit at one time, and stand at another. Besides that in the style of the Scriptures, standing, or sitting, many times imply no more than that they were present there. --- In the third place, we take notice that Mary Magdalene seems to have come running to St. Peter, and St. John, as soon as she saw the stone removed, with these words, They have taken away the Lord ... and we know not where they have laid him: John xx. 2, we do not there read that she said any thing of the angels. Or perhaps St. Peter and St. John ran away before they heard all that Magdalene had to say. In all these there is no contradiction; and the difficulties rise only from this, that each evangelist does not relate all the circumstances. (Witham)

Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary, 1859 edition, St. Matthew Ch. 28 Ve. 2

Francis ‘the humble’ “loves to use expletives” and is having “outbursts of rage” with increasing regularity!

Francis showing his true colors.

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes off thorns, or figs off thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the bad tree bringeth forth bad fruit.”

— Gospel of St. Matthew 7, 15-17 —

“And enemies are enemies, and they are treated really badly. Apparently, thus it has been reported, Francis loves to use expletives with small groups of people, curses, [and] crudeness that cannot be printed [i.e. words that are so bad they cannot be repeated here — even worse than coprophagia and all that it entails]. In addition, his outbursts of rage have become more frequent as of late. He loves to humiliate even his most loyal collaborators: ‘Humiliation’, the Jesuit then adds, is an important spiritual experience, as though he had [taken] it from the famous spiritual exercises of the founder of the [Jesuit] order, St. Ignatius of Loyola.”

source: Die Weltwoche, Papst Allerlei

Francis’ renewal is revitalizing the Novus Ordo

by taking it to depths it has never seen.

Related:

• Francis is a change agent

• Jorge Bergoglio taught his Godson how to swear!

• Francis the 'humble' loses his temper

• Francis ‘the humble’ is “boiling with rage” because four cardinals ask him to clarify Amoris Laetitia

‘Old Heretical’ erupts every hour and a half

Francis leaves the Vatican shetl to go on his pre-Purim retreat at the Arriccia synagogue

We often lament having to post day after day about Talmudic Judaism and its connection to the post-Vatican II Novus Ordo church.  We admit that it becomes tiring, however we feel the need to post about it once again.  The most virulent form of Talmudic Judaism is Hasidism and one of Hasidism’s worst branches are the Chabad-Lubavitchers.  They have captured the ears of the leaders of the Russian Federation, the United States of America, Israel, and the Holy See.

Francis is on his Lenten retreat this week in Arricca.  Yesterday, Fr. Giulio Michelini, OFM gave two spiritual meditations on “Jesus’ last words at the beginning of His Passion” in the Gospel According to Saint Matthew.  So far so good, right? Here’s what Zenit reported:

Quoting Rabbi Baal Shem Tov (1698-1760), considered the founder of modern Hassidism, he noted that the words that come out of the mouth of masters, or of those who pray without having a heart turned to heaven do not rise, but fill the house from one wall to the other and from the floor to the ceiling.” 

Jesus, continued the preacher, was silent before those who accused him of being a blasphemer and wanted to destroy Him. It was a silence broken by the cry with which Jesus ended His earthly life and by the thrust of the lance. 

However, the Franciscan observed, there are different forms of silence: the silence of rancor that ponders vengeance, or the silence of one, as Elie Wiesel said, who ”never helps the victims.”

Why on a Lenten retreat during as spiritual meditation is Michelini quoting someone who practiced the Lurianic Kabbalah, believed that “to conceive a child on Christmas Eve will result in the birth of either an apostate or a pimp (Sefer Baal Shem Tov Vol. 2:43a)”, told his followers that his son’s conception and birth were miracles as he hadn’t been with his wife for fourteen years, etc...?  Then to follow it up with a quote from Elie Wiesel, the Hasidic high priest of holocaustianity himself?  To quote two men who denied the divinity of Christ and did everything in their power to destroy Christianity!  What frauds Francis and his ilk are!

It only gets worse as Michelini like the rabbis and Talmudists he so greatly admires twists the word of God to mean something other than what the Church has always taught:

Father Michelini then evoked the different personages that appear in this passage of Matthew: Caiaphas, the chief priests and the elders of the people, who decided to arrest Jesus, but not during the feast to avoid a revolt. He immediately observed that in no case is it about stigmatizing the Jews because this attitude concerns a religious hierarchy that can represent all sorts of religious institutions: it is an attitude that loses the right perspective believing that it serves God. It is the confrontation between two logics: on one side there is Jesus, a practicing Jew but a “layman” who is preparing to celebrate the Passover, and on the other the great priests who are preparing to kill an innocent, who are concerned with the feast in the sense of its exterior unfolding.

See dear reader, according to Michelini the Jews who condemned Christ are innocent, instead it’s an analogy to the religious hierarchy in all sorts of religious institutions, you know those whom Francis refers to as obsessed with ‘small-minded rules’ and “rigidity”.  What a load of bunk!  Michelini quotes two who deny Jesus — as the Christ, as the Son of God, as the second person of the Trinity — who are spiritual descendants of Caiaphas, the chief priests, and the elders of the people who condemned Jesus the Christ to death, in order to explain Our Lord’s passion in the Gospel of St. Matthew!  Then Michelini has the audacity to exculpate Caiaphas and company for Our Lord’s death!  What chutzpah!

“And the chief priests and the whole council sought false witness against Jesus, that they might put him to death: And they found not, whereas many false witnesses had come in. And last of all there came two false witnesses: And they said: This man said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and after three days to rebuild it. And the high priest rising up, said to him: Answerest thou nothing to the things which these witness against thee? But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest said to him: I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us if thou be the Christ the Son of God. Jesus saith to him: Thou hast said it. Nevertheless I say to you, hereafter you shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priests rent his garments, saying: He hath blasphemed; what further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now you have heard the blasphemy: What think you? But they answering, said: He is guilty of death. Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him: and others struck his face with the palms of their hands, Saying: Prophesy unto us, O Christ, who is he that struck thee?”

— The Gospel According to Saint Matthew 26, 59-68 —

3rd Sunday after the Epiphany

Jewish roots, Anti-semitism, Nostra Aetate, blah, blah, blah

Several notes to the readers, keep these in consideration as you read Francis' words.

There are two types of Torah in Talmudic Rabbinical Judaism.

• Torah Shebeal peh - Oral Torah or The Talmud

• Torah SheBiehtav - Written Torah or The Five Books of Moses

How did the Rabbinical Jews come by the Torah Shebeal peh?

Steinsaltz Talmud on types of study

The Steinsaltz Talmud says of religious study there are three types:

• Bible - the lowest form

• Mishnah - the next best form 

• The Talmud (Gemara) - the highest form

Torah Shebeal peh or the Talmud nullifies The First Five Books of Moses.

The Tradition of the Elders or what became the Torah Shebeal peh is referred to by Christ in the New Testament several times.  One example from the Gospel According to Saint Matthew 15, 1-10:

Then came to him from Jerusalem scribes and Pharisees, saying: Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the ancients? For they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answering, said to them: Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for your tradition? For God said:  Honour thy father and mother: And: He that shall curse father or mother, let him die the death.  But you say: Whosoever shall say to father or mother, The gift whatsoever proceedeth from me, shall profit thee.

The gift: That is, the offering that I shall make to God, shall be instead of that which should be expended for thy profit. This tradition of the Pharisees was calculated to enrich themselves; by exempting children from giving any further assistance to their parents, if they once offered to the temple and the priests, that which should have been the support of their parents. But this was a violation of the law of God, and of nature, which our Saviour here condemns.

  And he shall not honour his father or his mother: and you have made void the commandment of God for your tradition.  Hypocrites, well hath Isaias prophesied of you, saying:  This people honoureth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me.  And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men.  And having called together the multitudes unto him, he said to them: Hear ye and understand.

Commandments of men: The doctrines and commandments here reprehended are such as are either contrary to the law of God, (as that of neglecting parents, under pretence of giving to God,) or at least are frivolous, unprofitable, and no ways conducing to true piety, as that of often washing hands, etc., without regard to the purity of the heart. But as to the rules and ordinances of the holy church, touching fasts, festivals, etc., these are no ways repugnant to, but highly agreeable to God's holy word, and all Christian piety: neither are they to be counted among the doctrines and commandments of men; because they proceed not from mere human authority; but from that which Christ has established in his church; whose pastors he has commanded us to hear and obey, even as himself. St. Luke 10. 16; St. Matt. 18. 17.

The Torah Shebeal peh or the Talmud also mocks Jesus the Christ, blasphemes Him, says He was crucified by the Rabbinical Jews, is in hell, and has been set up as an idol by His followers and worshiped ever since by them.

With these points in mind read Francis' speech.  Underlines are ours for emphasis.

ADDRESS OF HIS FRANCIS TO MEMBERS OF THE 

“INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHRISTIANS AND JEWS”

Clementine Hall
Tuesday, 30 June 2015

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

I am pleased that your meeting is taking place this year in Rome, the city where the Apostles Peter and Paul are buried. For all Christians, both Apostles are an important point of reference: they are like “pillars” of the Church. Here in Rome, we also find the most ancient Jewish community in Western Europe, whose origins can be traced to the time of the Maccabees. Christians and Jews therefore have lived together in Rome for almost two thousand years, even though their relations in the course of history have not been without difficulty.

The development of an authentic fraternal dialogue has been made possible since the Second Vatican Council, following the promulgation of the Declaration Nostra Aetate. This document represents a definitive “yes” to the Jewish roots of Christianity and an irrevocable “no” to anti-Semitism. In celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of Nostra Aetate, we are able to see the rich fruits which it has brought about and to gratefully appraise Jewish-Catholic dialogue. In this way, we can express our thanks to God for all the good which has been realized in terms of friendship and mutual understanding these past fifty years, as his Holy Spirit has accompanied our efforts in dialogue. Our fragmented humanity, mistrust and pride have been overcome thanks to the Spirit of Almighty God, in such a way that trust and fraternity between us have continued to grow. We are strangers no more, but friends, and brothers and sisters. Even with our different perspectives, we confess one God, Creator of the Universe and Lord of history. And he, in his infinite goodness and wisdom, always blesses our commitment to dialogue.

Christians, all Christians, have Jewish roots. Because of this, since its inception, the International Council of Christians and Jews has welcomed the various Christian confessions. Each of them, in its own way, has drawn near to Judaism, which in its time, has been distinguished by diverse trends and sensibilities. The Christian confessions find their unity in Christ; Judaism finds its unity in the Torah. Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the Word of God made flesh in the world; for Jews the Word of God is present above all in the Torah. Both faith traditions find their foundation in the One God, the God of the Covenant, who reveals himself through his Word. In seeking a right attitude towards God, Christians turn to Christ as the fount of new life, and Jews to the teaching of the Torah. This pattern of theological reflection on the relationship between Judaism and Christianity arises precisely from Nostra Aetate (cf. no. 4), and upon this solid basis can be developed yet further.

In its reflection on Judaism, the Second Vatican Council took account of the ten theses of Seelisberg, formulated in that Swiss town in 1947. These theses are closely linked to the founding of the International Council of Christians and Jews. We can say that there was already in embryonic form an initial concept of cooperation between your organization and the Catholic Church. This cooperation was officially inaugurated after the Council, and especially after the establishment of our Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews in 1947. This Commission of the Holy See always follows your organization’s activities with great interest, in particular the annual international meetings, which offer a notable contribution to Jewish-Christian dialogue.

Dear friends, I thank all of you for this visit and I wish you well for your meeting. May the Lord bless you and keep you in his peace. I ask you please to pray for me. Thank you.

Jewish roots, Anti-semitism, Nostra Aetate, blah, blah, blah

Zuhl$dorf is at it again!

"Birds of feather, flock together!" from left to right; Paul Nicholson, 

Michael Voris, Frank Pavone, and John Zuhl$dorf

John Zuhl$dorf , the sacrilegious money begging blogger, is looking to add new adjectives towards describing himself.  One word which describes his blog post, The upcoming “environment” encyclical, “human ecology”, and the everlasting pains of Hell, is hypocrite.

Look at the screenshot from his blog above.  Zuhl$dorf goes from Francis' upcoming encyclical on the enviroment to a movie about St. Francis, which he proceeds to rip to shreds, called Brother Sun, Mister Moon.  (None of us at Call Me Jorge... has seen this movie nor heard of what its about.)  In the middle of this diatribe against the movie, he posts a link so the reader can purchase the same movie at amazon.com where Zuhl$dorf conveniently receives a commission from everyone of his readers who decide to click the link and buy Brother Sun, Sister Moon.  Cha-ching!!!  Who cares if it is a leftist movie (according to Zuhl$dorf) as long as one makes a buck off of it!  That's not all, for John Z. is only getting warmed up.

Read that last line in the screenshot,

"People who promote and have sex between people of the same sex are violating God’s obvious will."

We, at Call Me Jorge..., couldn't agree more with the statement.  Here's where the hypocrisy part comes in.  See dear reader, John Zuhl$dorf has in the past promoted movies which have sodomy in them.  We quote from our post, "Don" Zuhl$dorf's sacrilegious and immoral blog post,

Now that we have covered the background, onto the disturbing post. Call Me Jorge... read the entry, An Important Anniversary, which was supposedly announcing the 7th anniversary of Summorum Pontificum. Dear reader, if you were to write a column on Summorum Pontificum how would you start it? With a story about the Tridentine Mass or one about Benedict XVI? Neither if you are "Don" Zuhl$dorf. Let's look at a screenshot from his entry, An Important Anniversary.

Wait a minute! Isn't this supposed to be about Summorum Pontificum? Instead "Don" Zuhl$dorf is writing about the immoral movie of John Boorman. For those who don't know about this film, Deliverance, it is infamous for its scene of sodomy. Ever heard the quote "squeal like a pig" used? It's from the same notorious scene. As if that isn't bad enough, several people are also murdered in the film. Why would a 'priest' blog about a piece of music from this film? Why introduce your readers to a film this perverse? Are there not other films having their anniversary this day? This isn't the first time he has written of an immoral film in his blog. Who could forget,The Lives of Others? Thankfully this time, "Don" Zuhl$dorf didn't put an amazon link to this film for his readers to purchase in the post. One last thing about the clip "Don" Zuhl$dorf chose to embed on his website, it uses God's name in vain not once but twice! This can be heard at the 3 minutes 59 seconds and the 4 minutes 6 seconds marks of the clip. This man calls himself a priest? What were they teaching in the seminary he attended?

Zuhl$dorf also has the audacity to call the National Catholic Reporter instead the National Sodomy Reporter!  How can he do this when he promotes a film with sodomy, links to a clip from the same movie which uses God's name in vain not once but twice, and puts an amazon link to another film with nudity and sex on his blog?

We at Call Me Jorge... feel that Christ said it best in His sermon on the mount,

And why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother' s eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye? Or how sayest thou to thy brother: Let me cast the mote out of thy eye; and behold a beam is in thy own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother' s eye.

Matthew 7, 3-5

Francis' compassion or indifference to a little girl in the Philippines?

It was only one month ago, when Francis visited the Philippines.  During his trip he said and did many things.  So many, we can't keep up with them all!  One of these which astounded us but shouldn't have, after all it was Francis, was his un-Catholic answer to a tearful street child.  Below is the raw untranslated video of Francis' encounter with this girl.  Immediately following that, is Michael's, over at Public Vigil, take on what happened.  Lastly, some quotes we added which address the subject.

Tuesday, February 3, 2015

bergoglio the atheist

bergoglio the atheist

A twelve year old girl in the Philippines asked bergoglio, "Why do children suffer?"... and then broke down in tears...

bergoglio responded that "there is no answer"... and then gave her a hug...

... he might as well have answered "because there is no God"...

... by saying "there is no answer" he was saying to this little girl... "there is no God"... this is the answer that Nietzsche would have given... "there is no answer... because there is no God..."

The girl's question when properly understood is a question about the existence of God...

... the answer she hears from the world all around her is that God is a lie... where is your God... why doesn't he help the children... you see little girl that  you have been lied to... God does not exist... and if He does exist then he must be a cruel God...

... and bergoglio affirmed this by saying "there is no answer"...

And yet... and yet...

... there was no uprise of popular indignation and protest... on the contrary there was great praise for bergoglio... did you see... he gave the little girl a hug... what a kind and compassionate man he is...

... have we fallen so far... yes, this is the measure of how far we have fallen as a Catholic people... when we do not recognize when our own faith is being trampled upon...

... we should recoil in shock as if someone had trampled upon a Crucifix... instead we oooh and aaah... even as our faith is insulted...

... yes we recognize the insult when it comes to personal matters such as how many children we should have ("rabbit-gate") or insulting depictions of women in a Vatican promo video... matters which are as much (or more) about our humanistic views of "freedom" as they are about anything having to do with our Catholic faith...

+ + +

For a much more complete and thorough response to this overlooked example of bergoglio's false compassion please see the following Novus Ordo Watch article (yes, they are sedevacantist -- so what?)...

[LINK]

Here is a quote from the article which sums up the very serious nature of bergoglio's empty response...

"What surer way is there to make people lose Faith in God — or begin to have an aversion for Him and get angry at Him — than to say that there is no answer to the problem of suffering, especially the suffering of children and innocent people?"

+ + +

May God have mercy on us all.

Pick up your cross and follow Christ!

Baltimore Catechism

60. What are the chief punishments of Adam which we inherit through original sin?

The chief punishments of Adam which we inherit through original sin are: death, suffering, ignorance, and a strong inclination to sin.

All things are delivered to me by my Father. And no one knoweth the Son, but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him. Come to me, all you that labour, and are burdened, and I will refresh you. Take up my yoke upon you, and learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart: and you shall find rest to your souls. For my yoke is sweet and my burden light.

Gospel According to St. Matthew, 11: 27-30