Is the reason Francis can’t answer 5 dubia because he is too busy granting interviews?

Nope, he can’t answer the 5 dubia because he would have to admit he is busy destroying what’s left of Catholic morals with his modernist ambiguity!

The following is the full text of the interview the Holy Father granted to the Belgian Catholic weekly publication “Tertio”, on the occasion of the conclusion of the extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy.

 [(Interviewer) Representative of the bishops for means of communication …

(Francis) You once brought me some young people who asked good questions

(Interviewer) There is a Pope who gives good answers…

(Francis) I’ll wait a moment … I want to see the questions, because I haven’t seen them…]

QUESTION - In our country we are going through a moment in which national politics wishes to separate religion from public life: for example, in education. It is the opinion that, in a time of secularisation, religion should be reserved to private life. How can we be at the same time a missionary Church, outbound towards society, and live this tension created by this public opinion?

FRANCIS - Well, I do not want to offend anyone, but this is an old-fashioned mindset. This is the legacy that the Enlightenment has left to us - is it not? - in which every religious phenomenon is a subculture. It is the difference between laicism and secularism. I have spoken about this with the French. … Vatican Council II tells us about the autonomy of things, of processes and institutions. There is a healthy secularism, for instance, the secularism of the State. In general, a secular State is a good thing; it is better than a confessional State, because confessional States finish badly. But secularism is one thing, and laicism is another. Laicism closes the doors to transcendence, to the dual transcendence: both transcendence towards others and, above all, transcendence towards God; or towards what is beyond us. And openness to transcendence is part of the human essence. It is part of man. I am not speaking about religion, I am speaking about openness to transcendence. Therefore, a culture or a political system that does not respect openness to the transcendence of the human person “prunes” or cuts down the human person. Or rather, it does not respect the human person. This is more or less what I think. Therefore, sending to the sacristy any act of transcendence is a form of “asepsis”, which has nothing to do with human nature, which cuts from human nature a good part of life, which is openness.

QUESTION - You are concerned about the interreligious relationship. In our times we live with terrorism and with war. At times it can be seen that the roots of the current wars reside in the difference between religions. What can be said about this?

FRANCIS - Yes, I believe that this opinion exists. But no religion as such can foment war. Because in this case it would be proclaiming a god of destruction, a god of hatred. One cannot wage war in the name of God or in the name of a religious position. War cannot be waged in any religion. And for this reason terrorism and war are not related to religion. Religion is distorted to justify them, this is true. You are witnesses of this, you have experienced it in your homeland. But they are distortions of religion, that do not relate to the essence of the religious fact, which is instead love, unity, respect, dialogue, all these things. … But not in that aspect, or rather, we must be categorical about this, no religion proclaims war for the fact of religion. Religious distortions, yes. For example, all religions have fundamentalist groups.

All of them, we do too. And they destroy, starting from their fundamentalism. But these are small religious groups that have distorted and have “sickened” their religion, and as a result they fight, they wage war, or they cause division in communities, which is a form of war. But these are the fundamentalist groups we have in all religions. There is always a small group …

QUESTION – Another question on war. We are currently commemorating the centenary of the First World War. What would you say to the European continent about the post-war message, “No more war!”?

FRANCIS - I have spoken to the European continent three times: twice in Strasbourg and once last year, or this year, I do not remember, when there was the Charlemagne Prize [6 May 2016]. I think that “No more war!” has not been taken seriously, because after the First there was the Second, and after the Second there is this third war we are experiencing now, piecemeal. We are at war. The world is conducting a third world war: Ukraine, Middle East, Africa, Yemen … It is very grave. Therefore, we say the words “No more war!”, but at the same time we manufacture weapons and sell them, and we sell them to those who are fighting, as arms producers sell them to this and that, to those who are at war with each other. It is true. There is an economic theory that I have not tried to confirm, but which I have read in several books: that in the history of humanity, when a State saw that its accounts were not in good shape, waged war to balance its budget. That is, it is one of the easiest ways to produce wealth. Certainly, the price is very high: blood.

“No more war!” was something that Europe said sincerely, I believe: Schumann, De Gasperi, Adenauer … they said it sincerely. But afterwards … Nowadays there is a lack of leaders; Europe is in need of leaders, leaders who go ahead. … Well, I do not want to repeat what I said in the three speeches.

QUESTION - Is there any chance that you will come to Belgium for this commemoration of the war?

FRANCIS - It is not planned, no … I used to go to Belgium every year and a half when I was the provincial [superior], because there was an association of friends of the Catholic University of Córdoba. And so I used to go there to speak. They did the [spiritual] Exercises, and I used to go to thank them. I became fond of Belgium. For me the most beautiful city in Belgium is not yours, but rather Bruges [laughs].

[Interviewer: I have to tell you that my brother is a Jesuit.

Francis: Really? I didn’t know!

Interviewer: So, apart from being Jesuit, he’s a good person.

Francis: I was about to ask you if you were Catholic … (laughter)]

QUESTION – We are about to conclude the Year of Mercy. Can you tell us how you lived this Year, and what you expect when the Year comes to an end?

FRANCIS – The Year of Mercy was not an idea that came to me unexpectedly. It takes its cue from Blessed Paul VI. Paul VI had already taken a number of steps to rediscover God’s mercy. St. John Paul II then placed great emphasis on this with three facts: the Encyclical Dives in Misericordia, the canonisation of St. Faustina, and the Feast of Divine Mercy on the Octave of Easter; he died on the eve of that feast day. He introduced the Church onto this road in this way. I felt that the Lord wanted this. It was … I don’t know how the idea formed in my heart. One fine day I said to Msgr. Fisichella, who had come about matters related to his Dicastery, “How I would like to hold a Jubilee, a Jubilee of Mercy”. And he said, “Why not?” And that is how the Year of Mercy began. It is the best assurance that it was not a human idea, but rather that it came from on high. I believe that it was inspired by the Lord. And evidently it went very well. In addition, the fact that the Jubilee was held not only in Rome, but all over the world, in all dioceses and within each diocese, created a lot of movement, a lot of movement … People were very active. There was a lot of activity and people felt called to reconcile themselves with God, to encounter the Lord again, to feel the caress of the Father.

QUESTION – The German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer made the distinction between cheap grace and costly grace. So, what does cheap or costly mercy mean to you?

FRANCIS – Cheap mercy or costly mercy: I do not know Bonhoeffer’s text, I don’t know when he explains this. .. But it is cheap because there is nothing to pay; one doesn’t have to buy indulgences, it is a pure gift. And it is costly because it is the most precious gift. There is a book based on an interview I gave, entitled “The name of God is Mercy”. It is precious because it is the name of God: God is merciful.

It reminds me of that priest I had in Buenos Aires, who continued to celebrate Mass and to work, and he was 92 years old! At the beginning of Mass he would always give certain warnings. He is very energetic, 92 years old, preaches very well, the people go to listen to him. “Please, switch off your mobile phones”. And during the Mass, the Offertory began, and a telephone began to ring. He stopped and said, “Please, switch off your mobile phones”. And the altar boy, who was next to him, said, “Father, it is yours”. And he took out his phone and answered: ‘Hello!’” [Laughter]

QUESTION – To us, it seems that you are indicating Vatican Council II for our times. You are showing us ways of renewal in the Church. The Synodal Church. … In the Synod you explained your vision of the Church of the future. Could you explain this for our readers?

FRANCIS - The “Synodal Church”, let me take this word. The Church is born from the community, it is born from the foundation, it is born from Baptism, and it is organised around a bishop, who brings it together and gives it strength; the bishop who is the successor of the Apostles. This is the Church. But in all the world there are many bishops, many organised Churches, and there is Peter. Therefore either there is a pyramidal Church, in which what Peter says is done, or there is a synodal Church, in which Peter is Peter but he accompanies the Church, he lets her grow, he listens to her, he learns from this reality and goes about harmonising it, discerning what comes from the Church and restoring it to her. The richest experience of all this was that of the last two Synods. There all the bishops of the world were heard, during preparation; all the Churches of the world, the dioceses, worked. All this material was worked on during the first Synod, which gave its results to the Church, and then we returned a second time – the second Synod – to complete all this. And from there Amoris Laetitia emerged. It is interesting to see the rich variety of nuances, typical of the Church. It is unity in diversity. This is synodality.

Do not descend from high to low, but listen to the Churches, harmonise them, discern. And so there is a post-Synodal exhortation, which is Amoris Laetitia, which is the result of two Synods, in which all the Church worked, and which the Pope made his own. It is expressed in a harmonious way. It is interesting that all that it contains [Amoris Laetitia], in the Synod it was approved by more than two thirds of the fathers. And this is a guarantee. A synodal Church means that there is this movement from high to low, high to love. And the same in the dioceses. But there is a Latin phrase, that says that the Churches are always cum Petro et sub Petro. Peter is the guarantor of the unity of the Church. He is the guarantor.

This is the meaning. And it is necessary to progress in synodality, which is one of the things that the Orthodox have conserved. And also the Oriental Catholic Churches. It is a richness of theirs, and I recognise it in the Encyclical.

QUESTION - It seems to me that the Second Synod made the passage from the method of “seeing, judging and acting” towards “listening, understanding and accompanying”. It is very different. These are the things that I am constantly saying to people. The passage of the Synod is from seeing, judging and acting, and then to listening to the reality of the people, understanding well this reality and then accompanying people on their path…

FRANCIS - Because each person said what he thought, without fear of feeling judged. And everyone had the attitude of listening, without condemning. And then we discussed, like brothers, in the groups. But it is one thing to debate like brothers and another to condemn a priori. There was great freedom of expression. And this is beautiful!

QUESTION - In Krakow, you gave valuable inspiration to the young. What could be a special message to the young people of our country?

FRANCIS - Not to be afraid, not to be ashamed of faith; not to be ashamed to seek out new ways. And to the young who are not believers: do not worry, search for the meaning of life. To a young person, I would give two pieces of advice: seek out horizons and do not go into retirement at the age of 20. It is very sad to see a young pensioner at 20, 25 years of age, isn’t it? Seek out horizons, go ahead, continue to work in this human task.

QUESTION - A final question, Holy Father, regarding the media: a consideration regarding the means of communication…

FRANCIS – The communications media have a very great responsibility. Nowadays they have in their hands the possibility and the capacity to form opinion: they can form a good or a bad opinion. The means of communication are the builders of a society. In and of themselves, they are made to build, to interchange, to fraternise, to make us think, to educate. In themselves they are positive. It is obvious that, given that we are all sinners, also the media can – we who use the media, I am using a means of communication here – become harmful. And the communications media have their temptations. They can be tempted by calumny, and therefore used to slander, to sully people, especially in the world of politics. They can be used as a means of defamation: every person has the right to a good reputation, but perhaps in their previous life, or ten years ago, they had a problem with justice, or a problem in their family life, and bringing this to light is serious and harmful; it can annul a person. In slander we tell a lie about a person; in defamation, we leak a document, as we say in Argentina, “Se hace un carpetazo” – and we uncover something that is true, but already in the past, and which has already been paid for with a jail sentence, with a fine, or whatever. There is no right to this. This is a sin and it is harmful. A thing that can do great damage to the information media is disinformation: that is, faced with any situation, saying only a part of the truth, and not the rest. This is disinformation. Because you, to the listener or the observer, give only half the truth, and therefore it is not possible to make a serious judgement. Disinformation is probably the greatest damage that the media can do, as opinion is guided in one direction, neglecting the other part of the truth. And then, I believe that the media should be very clear, very transparent, and not fall prey – without offence, please – to the sickness of coprophilia, which is always wanting to communicate scandal, to communicate ugly things, even though they may be true. And since people have a tendency towards the sickness of coprophagia, it can do great harm. Thus, I would say that there are these four temptations. But they are builders of opinion and can construct, and do immense good, immense.

QUESTION – To conclude, a word for priests. Not a speech, because they say we have to conclude. … What is most important for a priest?

FRANCIS – It is a rather Salesian answer, but it comes from the heart. Remember that you have a Mother who loves you, and never cease to love your Mother, the Virgin. Secondly, let yourself be looked at by Jesus. Third: seek out the suffering flesh of Jesus in your brothers: there you will encounter Jesus. This as a basis. Everything comes from here. If you are an orphan priest, who has forgotten that he has a Mother; if you are a priest who has drifted away from He Who called you, from Jesus, you will never be able to carry the Gospel. What is the way? Tenderness. May they have tenderness. Priests should never be ashamed of having tenderness.

May they caress the suffering blood of Jesus. Today there is a need for a revolution of tenderness in this world that suffers from “cardiosclerosis”.

QUESTION - Cardio…?

FRANCIS – Cardiosclerosis.

source: Bollettino, Interview with the Holy Father Francis for the Belgian Catholic weekly, “Tertio”, 07.12.2016

• Dutch excerpt from interview — Tertio, “Revolutie van tederheid bezweert cardiosclerose”

• Spanish full interview — Bollettino, Entrevista del Santo Padre Francisco en el semanario católico belga "Tertio", 07/12/2016

• Italian full interview — Bollettino, Intervista del Santo Padre Francesco al settimanale cattolico belga “Tertio”, 07.12.2016

Just another typical day at Francis’ Vatican

A little humor...

 After Francis’ new beatitudes come the new commandments.

source: Mahound’s Paradise, The Ten Commandments According to Francis

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

The Year of Mercy is over!

Recently four cardinals (Caffarra, Burke, Brandmuller, and Meisner) went public with five dubia they had sent to Francis, pertaining to Amoria Laetitia, some two months ago that have gone unanswered.

The “Dubia”

1. It is asked whether, following the affirmations of "Amoris Laetitia" (nn. 300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the Sacrament of Penance and thus to admit to Holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person "more uxorio" (in a marital way) without fulfilling the conditions provided for by "Familiaris Consortio" n. 84 and subsequently reaffirmed by "Reconciliatio et Paenitentia" n. 34 and "Sacramentum Caritatis" n. 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” found in note 351 (n. 305) of the exhortation "Amoris Laetitia" be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live "more uxorio"?

2. After the publication of the Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation "Amoris Laetitia" (cf. n. 304), does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical "Veritatis Splendor" n. 79, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?

3. After "Amoris Laetitia" (n. 301) is it still possible to affirm that a person who habitually lives in contradiction to a commandment of God’s law, as for instance the one that prohibits adultery (cf. Mt 19:3-9), finds him or herself in an objective situation of grave habitual sin (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration, June 24, 2000)?

4. After the affirmations of "Amoris Laetitia" (n. 302) on “circumstances which mitigate moral responsibility,” does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical "Veritatis Splendor" n. 81, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, according to which “circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice”?

5. After "Amoris Laetitia" (n. 303) does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s encyclical "Veritatis Splendor" n. 56, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, that excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and that emphasizes that conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object?

This set things into motion.  According to Edward Pentin, a Vatican reporter for the National Catholic Register, “There has been no formal reaction from the Vatican but I do understand from sources within Santa Marta that the Pope is not happy at all and he is in fact quoted as boiling with rage. So, he’s really not happy at all with this.”  In fact, Francis is so upset he decided to cancel the consistory with the college of cardinals he had scheduled to happen on 19 November 2016.

Edward Pentin describing Francis as “boiling with rage”

Francis’ Jesuit buddy, Antonio Spadaro, quickly denied the story, “When I read that #PapaFrancesco was "furious" because of ecclesiastical quarrels I burst out laughing There are many other things that make him "infuriated"”.

source: twitter @antoniospadaro, 17 November 2016

Once something has been denied it becomes ‘official’.  In an interview with Francis conducted by Stefania Falasca and published in the Italian daily Avennire on 17 November 2016, Francis brings up Amoris Laetitia.

 “The Church exists only as an instrument for the communication of God’s merciful plan to the people.  At the Council [Vatican II], the Church felt it had the responsibility to be a living sign of the Father’s love in the world. With Lumen Gentium, it returns to the origins of its nature, the Gospel. This shifts the axis of Christianity away from a certain kind of legalism which can be ideological, towards the Person of God, who became mercy through the incarnation of the Son.  Some — he (Francis) thinks of certain replies to Amoris Laetitia — still do not understand, or it’s black or white,  even though it is in the course of life that we are called to discern.  The Council told us this, but historians say that a century needs to pass before a Council is properly absorbed into the body of the Church… we are half way.” 

Does it sound as if something is gnawing at him?

The chutzpah Francis has to suggest that before Vatican II the Church was not living up to the Gospel, it was instead legalistic and without God’s love!  It’s little wonder, Francis who promotes himself as ‘humble’ blew his stack when someone dared ask him to clarify a few points in Amoris Laetitia.

Recall last year in October, when Francis went on a rampage in the Vatican after 13 cardinals wrote him raising their objections to the Synod.  Sources reported that Francis caught up in a sudden violent outburst of anger, thundered against them saying, “If this is the case, they can leave. The Church does not need them. I'll throw them all out!”  In fact, Francis was so worked up, people in Vatican fearing for his life sent for a doctor who diagnosed Francis with tachyarrhythmia (a resting heart rate which exceeds 100 beats per minute).

Perhaps, as an anonymous commentator suggested, Francis wasn’t speaking about himself to the attendees of his Wednesday general audience when giving advice on how to put up with annoying people but was talking about his cardinals particularly; Caffarra, Burke, Brandmuller, and Meisner. 

The ‘Jubilee Year of Mercy’ is officially over in two days and it appears Francis ended it just in time as he has exhausted his supply of Mercy.  One would have thought that Francis ‘the humble’ would be understanding of these cardinals, especially Burke who despite having a doctorate in Canon Law and an award’s case full of honors pertaining to Canon Law had to have the Vatican explain to him that individuals who have undergone sex-change operations cannot be validly be admitted into a religious institute or society of consecrated life.  And also, that if a transsexual is now living in a religious order the transsexual must be expelled from the religious house.  Isn’t it reasonable to assume that Francis would show Burke some patience?  Here we were thinking that Francis was a bridge builder!  Oh, well!

We at Call Me Jorge... believe that Msgr. Adriano Bernardini summed it up best about Francis (who was then only ‘humble’ Cardinal Bergoglio) when he was the nuncio to Argentina,

“He’s a man sick with power.”

On Friday morning Mr. Pentin reconfirmed his statement with a tweet.

source: twitter @EdwardPentin, 18 November 2016

On a scale from 1 to 10 — zero meaning calm, 10 meaning boiling rage — Here’s Francis with a score of 1

It make us wonder, what would a “boiling rage” look like?

Francis’ rabbinical buddies publishing new book

 The announcement announcing El Concilio Vaticano II y Los Judíos (The Second Vatican Council and the Jews).

 get the book at Latin American Rabbinical Seminary's website

The book, El Concilio Vaticano II y los judíos: 50 años de diálogo Judeo Cristiano relatado desde sus líderes (The Second Vatican Council and the Jews: 50 years of Judeo Christian dialogue told from their leaders), edited by rabbi Abraham Skorka and rabbi Ariel Stofenmacher is being published the Latin American Rabbinical Seminary.  It includes a small selection of writings from Talmudic Jews and Novus Ordo modernists including; 

Jorge Mario Bergoglio-Jorge Maria Mejia-Abraham Skorka-Norberto Padilla-Carlos Escudé (Nachman ben Avraham Avinu) -Joseph Miguez Bonino-Yattah-Celina Lértora Ernesto Mendoza-Daniel Goldman-Carlos Cerda-Alejandro Ariel Bloch-Stofenmacher-Victor Manuel Fernandez Marcelo Polakoff-José María Arancedo-Mario Rojzman-Rafael Braun-Mario Hendler-Guillermo Bronstein-Michel Schlesinger-Leandro Tomchinsky Galanternik-Shmuel Szteinhendler

 Look it’s rabbi Ariel Stofenmacher the co-editor of the book.

Here's rabbi Ariel Stofenmacher, on 25 May 2016, in the Metropolitan Cathedral in Buenos aires Argentina commemorating the founding of Argentina with a Te Deum. From left to right: Kissag Archbishop Mouradian, Primate of the Armenian Apostolic Church in Argentina, rabbi Ariel Stofenmacher the Latin American Rabbinical Seminary, sheikh Abdelnaby Elfhefnawy, Imam of the mosque El-Ahmed, Ruben Proietti, president of the Christian Alliance of Evangelical Churches of Argentina, and Undersecretary of Cult of the Nation, Alfredo Abriani.

Francis is the noahide kosher buddy of rabbis Ariel Stofenmacher and Abraham Skorka.

Blase Joseph Cupich recommends more Vatican II and less tradition

Archbishop Cupich’s Column

April 19 - May 2, 2015

Catholic New World

Catholic-Jewish relationsCultivating the good seed others have sown

Earlier last month I was privileged to present some opening remarks at the 20th anniversary of the Joseph Cardinal Bernardin Jerusalem Lectures at DePaul University. Cardinal Bernardin himself inaugurated this series and gave his “Jerusalem Lecture” in 1995 at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The topic was anti-Semitism — a topic of no small interest then and now.

My initial appearance on this occasion gave me the chance to thank the American Jewish Committee, the Chicago Board of Rabbis, the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, and the Spertus Institute of Jewish Studies for their support of these lectures over the past two decades.

This year’s lecturer, Rabbi David Sandmel, was quite familiar with the history of Catholic-Jewish relations, noting that the document, “Nostra Aetate,” the declaration on the relation of the church with non-Christian religions, has provided “a framework for working through the difficulties that have arisen, and that inevitably will arise.”

This watershed document from the Second Vatican Council clearly condemned anti-Semitism noting:

“True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in his passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. The Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ. Furthermore, in her rejection of every persecution against any man, the church, mindful of the patrimony she shares with the Jews and moved not by political reasons but by the Gospel’s spiritual love, decries hatred, persecutions, displays of anti-Semitism, directed against Jews at any time and by anyone.”

In my remarks I noted that we have seen a rise in anti-Semitism in Europe, the United States and elsewhere. This has sometimes been accompanied by incidents of violence and even death. These developments point to the fact that the way of thinking embraced by the church since the Second Vatican Council has not taken hold. The framework of mutual understanding needed for resolving difficulties, as Rabbi Sandmel noted, is not adopted by all.

Sadly, some people seem to be returning to, or perhaps more realistically never left, a former storyline of anti- Semitism. They find it much easier to know “who you are against rather than what you are for.” In hard times and even in good ones, blaming others and not taking responsibility is an easy thing to do.

Recent events call us to enhance our efforts at mutual understanding and make them more widely known, to develop a positive narrative that will capture the imagination of most people, and to make our positive relationships what comes first to mind for the majority of people. Our starting point must be positive — friendship, hospitality, mutual concern.

In my remarks I took the opportunity to offer some suggestions about how we might move in these positive directions.

1) We must continue our healing processes — for many people the centuries of conflict are still alive in local traditions and anecdotes. We must continue to acknowledge the truth of the past as we move into the future. This is an ongoing project.

2) We must continue to esteem the values of the Jewish tradition and its contribution to the church. As Cardinal George noted in his 2005 Bernardin Lecture which commented on “Nostra Aetate”: “As a Catholic, I must both respect the truth in Judaism and preserve and promote the spiritual and moral goods of Jewish faith and the values of Jewish culture and society. Pope Francis made a similar point in “Evangelii Gaudium”: “God continues to work among the people of the Old Covenant and to bring forth treasures of wisdom which flow from their encounter with his world. For this reason, the church also is enriched when she receives the values of Judaism.”

3) We must continue our catechesis and our positive instruction of the next generations, for many Catholics and some Jews as well have not assimilated the changes of the last 50 years and thus need to embrace our new framework for looking at things.

4) We need to continue to work toward deeper mutual understanding and toward deeper sensitivity to the needs of those on the margins — especially those living in Chicagoland.

5) Most importantly, we must continue to develop our friendship with one another. This roots our common understanding and our common efforts.

The friendship the Archdiocese of Chicago has enjoyed with the Jewish community over the years and especially through the sponsoring partners of this lecture series, has borne much fruit, which I witnessed in our gathering at DePaul.

The fruit yielded through common labors should make us proud of all those who cultivated it, but it also should give us hope that like all good fruit, it will produce seeds for future growth. All we need to do is cultivate it.

Francis administers his daily spanking to traditionalists

"Those who reject dialogue, disobey God!"

How long until Sister Cristina sings at the Steubenville Youth Conference Concert with Stan Fortuna?

We at Call Me Jorge... have no clue as to why this video was shot in front of the 30ft (9m) sculpture, The Writer by artist Giancarlo Neri.  The Writer is a piece of artwork about writer's block.

the "new evangelization" in Brazil

...with Padre Elvis

All shook up!

how to dance the bergoglio

Tomorrow is Francis' 78th birthday and get this, in honor of it there will be public 'flash mob' tangos taking place in Rome near the Vatican!  The very same dance condemned by Pope Saint Pius X!  More on that later, after it takes place.  For now, we have an entry below taken from Michael over at PublicVigil and embellished with pictures!


bergoglio joke of the day

how to dance the bergoglio

The basic step is one step forward and two steps backward.

The weight is shifted from left to right, but always maintaining more weight on the left.

The music is usually tango, although the latest trend is to use punk rock sung by old washed up former "stars" or new covers of tired old 80s disco classics sung by new wannabee "stars" dressed as nuns.

The dance starts by one of the partners bowing his head on the chest of the other who kisses him on top of his head. This opening move is referred to as "the dialogue".

The dance is performed by two males. Traditionally one of the partners is referred to as "jorge" and the other as "bart".

In theory the lead partner is "jorge" but in practice bart and jorge are co-leaders, although this can cause some confusion for the dancers... and also the audience.

After the opening "dialogue" the rest of the dance troupe dressed in red forms a circle around the lead dancers. Their task is to try to imitate the moves of the lead dancers which can be quite difficult since the dance is so unpredictable.

If one of the members of the troupe is unable (or unwilling) to imitate the moves of the two lead dancers then they are escorted to the "maltese room". This is a separate isolated area. There is no admittance back into the dance from the maltese room.

Eventually all the dancers become exhausted and dizzy from all the hopping and contortions and spinning and fall on the floor in a pile of bodies.

.... this is when the real fun begins...

~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~

I'm getting dizzy just watching all of that spinning...

... and the contortions required to follow the lead dancer dressed in white...

... call him "jorge"... that's what he likes...

... right, "jorge"... he's a very accomplished dancer....

... yes, he learned those intricate tango moves in argentina...

... in the whore houses...

... oh no, they dance tango in the cathedral these days...

... that's good... i guess... i still can't get used to two men tangling their legs up that way...

... oh, but it's very trendy and popular...

... i know... but i am having a hard time appreciating this new fashion... it must just be me...

... no, it's not just you...

What's Suor Cristina promoting?

...the mockery continues!

Sister Cristina was on Italian television pushing sales of her new self-titled album.  She appeared on "La Iene" today singing 'Like A Virgin' with hosts Ilary Blasi and Teo Mammuccari. In the always scripted world of 'surprise' television everyone was dressed as a nun, yes even Teo!  What lows Cristina will stoop to, in order to get a few shekels!

A surfing priest and the "New Evangelization"

Fr. Donald Calloway says, "Christians could learn a lot from the zeal of surfers!"

"Obviously, the founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ, was not a surfer. But that matters little because, as God, He is the Creator of the oceans and their waves. He is the ultimate surfer because He doesn’t require a board to walk on water. In this sense, every follower of Christ is a potential surfer because it is the Christian’s God who made the ocean to serve as an analogy for the eternal stoke and joy we will experience in paradise where there truly are no bad days. On the other hand, every surfer is a potential Christian because every surfer seeks something more: the next wave, the ultimate ride. Many of the surfers I know are not Christians or, if they are, they are mediocre. Yet, ironically, all surfers, from beginners to pros, refer to the beach and their local break as their “church”. Trust me, some of these individuals are extremely devout in the practice of their daily ritual. They all want the experience of being in the barrel, the “green cathedral,” as it is commonly called."

- Fr. Donald Calloway - 

"As a Catholic priest who surfs, it would be my greatest desire to “surf in God” for all eternity. I love waves and could ride them forever, but to be able to experience the ultimate stoke of “surfing in God” for all eternity would be the most epic ride of all!"

- Fr. Donald Calloway -

source: Catholic Herald, The spirituality of surfing

Sister Cristina and the "New Evangelization"

...spreading the gospel of 

modernism wherever she goes!

It should only be a matter of time until the Novus Ordo churches are packed to the gills!

Sister Cristina appeared on the USA's Today Show.

Sister Cristina making new converts on the Today Show!

What a voice!

Why she sings 'Like a Virgin'

Spreading modernism in Freemasonic France.

Sister Cristina teaches catechism on French television!

For those who are gluttons for punishment, an eighteen minute interview with Sister Cristina!

The Fruits of the “New Springtime” of Vatican II in Italy

Abandoned by God? Italian churches turned into banks, bars, shops (PHOTOS)

Published time: October 31, 2014 14:48

Madonna della Neve church in Como, Italy was turned into a successful car repair shop by the building’s new owners. (Photo by Di Martino)

With the Italian economy crippled by recession, more and more churches are being deconsecrated and sold to private buyers, who repurpose these former houses of God into banks, theaters, night clubs and even car repair shops.

Several thousand churches have recently found new owners, indicating the hard times experienced by the Catholic Church and Italy’s general switch towards secularity.

“I loved all of them. I like places, which have irony in them. And that was the feeling I experienced in all of those churches,” says local photographer, Andrea Di Martino, who visited and took pictures of 70 former churches.

Madonna della Neve church in Como was among the first such churches he visited, inspiring the whole project.

It was deconsecrated in the late 1950s and turned into a successful car repair shop by the building’s new owners.

“When I left it, I realized that I want to learn what’s happened to the rest of those churches,” the photographer said.

Churches in Italy are deconsecrated when the condition of the building makes it dangerous, or when attendance drastically decreases.

They sell pretty well due to being solid structures, with high ceilings, usually located in the centers of towns and villages.

In the port town of Ugento, clerics had to clear the St. Philomena church so that court hearings could be held there. (Photo by Andrea Di Martino)

The Santa Lucia church in Montescaglioso fell into the hands of sports fans, who decorated the walls with football posters and also installed a Ping-Pong table. (Photo by Andrea Di Martino)

 

 A church in Salerno, dating back to 1,000 AD, has been turned into a museum of the local medical school. (Photo by Andrea Di Martino)

The former Santa Sabina church, which was completed in 1036, has served as a bank for the last four decades. (Photo by Andrea Di Martino)

A multimedia library found its home at Milan’s former church of Santa Teresa, which was built in 1694. (Photo by Andrea Di Martino)

A former house of God in Viareggio, which was deconsecrated in 1977, became a pizza place, named ‘La Chiesina’ (the [little] church). (Photo by Andrea Di Martino)

Repurposing defunct church buildings is a practice common not only in Italy, but in other Western European nations as well. In 2008, Dutch bookstore chain, Selexyz, turned a 1294 church in Maastricht into one of the most famous book shops in the Netherlands.

Source: Russia Today

the circus at the Vatican

We have to disagree with the kosher approved super-reporter extraordinaire, John Allen, even if it is only in a matter of degrees.  The Synod isn't like a soap opera but is a circus just like the Novus Ordo church.  Which tent do you want to be a part of?

Synod is more and more like a soap opera

by John Allen, Jr., 16 October 2014

ROME – Every day, the 2014 Synod of Bishops on the family, a summit of 260 bishops and other participants convened by Pope Francis, seems more and more like a daytime soap opera. Today brought more surprising turns on multiple fronts.

For one thing, the bishops made the unprecedented decision to release internal reports of small group discussions about a working document released Monday that became a sensation due to its positive language about same-sex unions, couples who live together outside of marriage, and others in “irregular” situations.

The reports photograph a vigorous debate within a divided synod, with one camp seemingly embracing a more positive vision of situations that fall outside the boundaries of official Catholic doctrine, and another clearly alarmed about going soft.

Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, one of the leaders of the moderate camp, today compared the situation in the synod in which a mother says “watch out, be careful,” and the father says “no, that’s fine, go ahead.”

In part, the decision to release the reports was probably a response to accusations that a policy of not providing individual speeches bishops had given earlier in the synod was intended to suppress conservatives who don’t support the line believed to be favored by Pope Francis.

Also today, the Vatican released a slightly modified English translation of the report from Monday which softened its language on gays; for instance, changing “welcoming” homosexuals to “providing for” them, and saying their unions can provide “valuable support” for partners rather than “precious support.”

Paradoxically, however, the Vatican also insisted that the Italian version is the definitive one, where the word accoglienza, meaning “welcome,” remains.

On a different front, Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church used his speech in the synod today to take a shot at the Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine, basically telling them to stop complaining about Russian foreign policy and the support for Russian incursions in Ukraine voiced by Russian Orthodox leaders.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York was sufficiently outraged that be grabbed Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk, head of the Greek Catholic Church, who was also in the synod hall, and immediately taped a segment for his radio show in New York to object to Hilarion’s rhetoric.

Outside the synod, things were no less interesting.

In an interview with Rome-based journalist Edwin Pentin, Cardinal Walter Kasper, renowned as the champion of the permissive camp on the question of allowing divorced and remarried Catholics to take Communion, said that African bishops at the synod “should not tell us too much what we have to do.”

Kasper later disassociated himself from the comments.

The emergence of the Africans has been one of the more intriguing bits of subtext to the 2014 synod. The fact that they tend to be conservative on matters of sexual morality, especially gay relationships, is no surprise; what has raised eyebrows has been the forceful way they’ve been inserting themselves into the conversation.

After Pope Francis named a six-member editorial committee to shape the synod’s final document, for instance, Africans objected that he hadn’t included anyone from the continent. (Naturally, conspiracy theorists saw this as part of the plot to muzzle the conservative voice.)

Today the Vatican announced that the pope had added Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier of South Africa to the group, along with Archbishop Denis Hart of Melbourne, Australia. Two days ago, Napier told a Vatican briefing that it “is not true” the entire synod stood behind the message delivered in Monday’s document.

One cardinal speaking on background today said that the Second Vatican Council in the mid-1960s, the Africans weren’t much involved in the discussion. Now, he said, they’ve come of age and are making sure their voice is heard.

In other words, the fault lines at the 2014 synod don’t just run left/right, but also north/south.

Each one of these twists probably deserves its own commentary, but for now here are three general observations.

First, tune in Saturday evening to see what happens with the final document the bishops are slated to vote on, paragraph by paragraph.

Given the divisions that have surfaced — which Francesco Miano, one of the laity in the synod, today phrased as a tension between truth and mercy — it’s virtually certain that some of the daring language from Monday’s interim report will be tweaked, more citations of Church teaching will be inserted, and a stronger focus on sin and the negative elements of certain relationships will emerge.

The drama is whether after all of that is done, the basic message of outreach and — even though the term has been redacted in English — welcome expressed in Monday’s document will still be there.

A cardinal put the question this way today: “Is the synod going to end up being more hesitant than the pope?”

Two, on the keenly debated issue of Communion for the divorced and remarried, it’s abundantly clear that there is no consensus one way or the other, and so the final document seems likely to call for further study rather than making a verdict.

Even that, however, would arguably mark a breakthrough of sorts for the reform position, given that the concluding document of the last synod specifically devoted to the family, in 1980, confirmed the existing rule “founded on Sacred Scripture, of not admitting the divorced and remarried to Holy Communion.”

That document was titled Familiaris Consortio, and was issued by Pope John Paul II. It was confirmed again in a letter from the Vatican’s doctrinal office in 1994, signed by the future Pope Benedict XVI.

Third, it will be fascinating to watch what bishops do over the next year, in the run-up to the larger Synod of Bishops on the family called by Pope Francis for October 2015.

Some will undoubtedly use the synod’s final document as a basis for open debate on the issues raised, without any pre-determined idea of how they should be resolved. Others, however, may well use the following 12 months to marshal their forces to bolster the positions they support, much as happened during the periods between sessions of Vatican II.

Next year, coincidentally, will mark the 50th anniversary of the closing of Vatican II in 1965. In many ways, the experience of this synod and what’s likely to happen from here is as close as the Church has come in the period sense to living some of the same drama.

Whether that’s a welcome development or something to rue, of course, depends on one’s point of view.

The Circus Show never ends with Francis!