Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Even the Vatican itself doesn't know what Francis said!

Nor does Michael Voris!

According to Michael Voris and ChurchMilitant.TV the nonsense about Francis has to STOP!  And NOW!  In one of their latest Vortex videos, Voris laughably says Francis is ill quoted and misrepresented!  Do any readers of Call Me Jorge... think we do this?  Voris insists one should ignore the media and blogs until the Vatican and/or Voris can clarify what Francis really meant to say.  In other words don't believe the conclusions you have reached (with your ears, eyes, Catholic morals, and your brain) but wait for the gatekeepers to explain away all that heretical behavior of Francis.  The first misleading point Voris makes in his video is what the term civil union in Italy means.  The definition of civil union in Italy is when two people of the opposite sex get married in front of a government official with two witnesses.  We will say more on this in a moment.  Next, Voris makes his listeners think Italy is different from the United States if one is a Catholic when it comes to marriage but this simply isn't true.  See he leads the listener to believe if you are Catholic one needs to have a civil marriage before one has a marriage in the church.  This is only the case for non-Catholics.  From the United States Diplomatic Mission to Italy

Religious Ceremony: A religious ceremony is considered valid if performed by a Roman Catholic priest.  A separate civil ceremony will not be necessary, as the priest will register the marriage with the civil authorities.

...A religious ceremony performed by non-Roman Catholic clergy requires that a civil ceremony be performed prior to the religious one to ensure the legality of the marriage.  If you are planning such a religious ceremony, you should consult with the priest, minister, or rabbi far in advance of the actual ceremony.

See how Voris plays fast and loose with the facts?  He is as guilty of the same thing he is accusing others of!  Not to mention back in Argentina, Cardinal Bergoglio was against same-sex marriage under the auspices of the church but for same-sex civil union contracts by the Argentinian government!   Pro-sodomy activist, Marcelo Marquez wrote a letter to the Argentinean church leaders upset about them not supporting same-sex marriage.  Less than one hour later his phone rang and on the other end was Cardinal Bergoglio.

"He told me. ... 'I'm in favor of gay rights and in any case, I also favor civil unions for homosexuals, but I believe that Argentina is not yet ready for a gay marriage law.'"

Voris then informs everyone how ill informed they are about same-sex civil unions as if in Europe the countries which have them are rare.

European Countries which recognize same-sex civil unions:
  • Belgium
  • France
  • Denmark
  • Iceland
  • Portugal 
  • Netherlands
  • Luxembourg *
  • United Kingdom
  • Sweden
  • Spain
* enacted in 2014 and will become law 1 January 2015

Voris ignores these facts on same-sex civil unions in Italy:
  • 155 municipalities  that have approved the register of same-sex civil unions
  • 5 municipalities issue same-sex couples the certificate of a registered family
  • 8 district councils which have approved  the register of same-sex civil unions

Mike also fails to mention troubling recent behavior:

Voris also turns a blind eye to the past behavior of Francis.  According to Leonardo Boff in a Der Spiegel interview, 

For example, a few months ago he explicitly permitted a homosexual couple to adopt a child. He kept in touch with priests who were expelled from the official church because they had gotten married. And no one could ever persuade him to change his position, which was: we have to be on the side of the poor, even if it means opposing the powerful.

Did you catch that?  He permitted a child to be adopted by sodomites when he was Archbishop of Argentina!  This is clearly against Catholic teaching.  Has Francis changed since moving to the Vatican?  Nope!  Did you hear a peep from the Vatican when on 5 April 2014 two lesbians had their daughter baptized at Cordoba Cathedral?  Sources in the church said, 

"if Jorge Bergoglio were not Pope, it would have been more complicated."

Once again this is against Catholic teaching.  Children are to be raised in a Catholic home and bishops as well as priests are instructed to forcibly remove the child from the home if this isn't the case.  Sodomy, lesbianism, whatever you want to call it, it isn't Catholic.  Don't believe us, then look it up  in a commentary on Canon Law.  We haven't even mentioned, this same couple was married in an Argentinian civil union because of a law Francis supported! 

Back to Voris and his Vortex of distortion.  Here is the quote from the interview of Francis by Ferruccio de Bortoli which Voris refers to but doesn't provide the viewer with.

Many countries have regulated civil unions. Is it a path that the Church can understand? But up to what point?
Francis: Marriage is between one man and one woman. The secular States want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of coexistence, spurred by the need to regulate economic aspects between persons as, for instance, to ensure healthcare. Each case must be looked at and evaluated in its diversity.

It is clear from the above quote Francis differentiates between marriages and civil unions however he doesn't differentiate between civil unions between heterosexuals and same-sex civil unions.   Francis doesn't come out and condemn this sinful behavior of same-sex civil unions instead he leaves the door open.   Before one believes the official what he really said look at the words above "different situations of coexistence" and "diversity".  Notice Voris in the video makes you think the question is about Italy when the interviewer said, "many countries."  Voris on the other hand says everyone got what Francis said wrong and sets up a straw man which he can attack to make himself look good.  Does Voris' behavior remind you of anyone?  Francis perhaps?  

It's not in this video but in others Voris has said the reason for this quote getting explosive play in the media is also due to it being mistranslated!  He tells listeners the Vatican translations are atrocious and at fault for making Francis seem un-catholic.  Who buys this hooey?  We compared the translation above to the original Italian and while it is not a literal translation it does say the same thing.  

What is growing old is the same old monotonous excuses Voris comes up for Francis' behavior as well as his ostrich-like response, where he sticks his head into the ground, when he doesn't want to address Francis' behavior because he cannot defend it.  If you don't like the "3rd rate chatter" of this blog and believe Francis is misunderstood and want to hear excuses for Francis instead, sign up for Voris' Retreat at Sea and tell him Call Me Jorge... sent you!

A more fitting name for is

And now onto Michael Voris and the Vortex...

Even the Vatican Itself Doesn't Know what Francis Said!

Remember to chill out and wait for the official word from the Vatican unless you are Voris mis-reporting that Francis is about to take a broom to the Curia and sack them all!


  1. There are none so blind as he who will not see.

  2. Michael Voris is part of the mouth of the beast

  3. Every one of us here who has received the grace to recognize the takeover of the papal chair by the Judaeo Masons needs to pray for people like Voorhis to be given the grace to have the blinders taken off. There is a lot of FEAR used by the devil to keep people in the novus ordo. They clearly use the OLD Church's "outside the Church there is no salvation" dogma regarding the TRUE Faith to beat those still wanting to be Catholic but who don't recognise that Jews and Freemasons have, in the words of Padre Pio to F.r Luigi Villa, "stolen into the papal shoes," from fleeing from the novus ordo counterfeit for the Catholic Church - as God commanded about the whore of Babylon which the counterfeit Vatican II sect is clearly the fulfillment of that prophecy in the Apocalypse. (The protestants got it wrong - and now they are whoring with the real WHORE - the Vatican II sect - while simultaneously still condemning the true Popes and councils. But they're "other communions" now to the novus ordo apostates so what can you say?) But to every other person on the face of the earth - heretics, non believers, atheists even, they say you are ok where you are. No "outside the Church there is no salvation" to them.

    Then you have Mother Angelica on EWTN saying "The Church used to teach this HERESY that 'Outside the Church there is no salvation' BUT...." She reminds me of the modernist 'nuns' I had in high school who kept defending their modernism with comments like "we're more mature now," etc. These same nuns, the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary, were always running off to "Father" Matthew Fox's Center for Creation Centered Spirituality - basically a new age/witchcraft center, before even the novus ordo got so scandalized by Fox that they booted him out and he ran off to hang out with Episcopal "Bishop" Swing with United Religions Initiative in San Francisco? I think. Fox really blew it. Had he just kept his mouth shut and bided his time and not gone around parading his witch friend Starhawk to teach 'theology" classes at places like Mount Angel Abbey in Oregon, he might have had a real shot under Bergoglio to be made an archbishop or even a Cardinal. The dude was moving way too fast for the infiltrators. Bummer for him.

  4. Voris knows that Bergoglio is a follower of fellow Jesuit Cardinal Martini whom Voris stated ‘opposes Catholic moral teaching on same-sex marriage’ for approving ‘civil unions’ (presumably in Italy since Martini was Bishop of Milan) in a video he published on homosexuality right before Ratzinger resigned.
    “Recently, the now retired Cardinal Carlo Martini ... who was once considered a viable candidate for the papacy ... stated in his book that he opposes Catholic moral teaching on same-sex marriage. That’s a Cardinal. He said QUOTE: ‘I disagree with the positions of those in the Church, that take issue with civil unions… It is not bad, instead of casual sex between men, that two people have a certain stability… (the) …state could recognize them...’” 20:40
    I wonder if Francis (or a live cardinal) had said the same thing if Voris would (1) include the quote or (2) state it meant that ‘civil union’ was referring to hetero unions and that ‘a certain stability’ meant celibate friendships or anything but ‘same-sex marriage’.
    Voris himself without ever acknowledging that he is doing so (in fact implying the opposite by equating the terms as he does in the quote above) makes a distinction between the two in this video in one regard: he NEVER includes countries and U.S. states/locales that have approved homo civil unions, partnerships etc., but ONLY those that license ‘marriage’ for homosexuals:
    “Same sex marriage. That band of gold has been the brass ring that militant gays have been grasping at for years. And it has become one of the biggest, most divisive debates of our time. Four different polls released in 2011 show that … after a steady increase in support … over half of all Americans are now on their side. In addition, the Obama administration recently decided that it will pick and choose which laws it wants to uphold when it said that the Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA is no longer defensible. So it might be just a matter of time before gay marriage is the law of the land.In America ... at the time of recording this show ... it's already legal in eight states ... Connecticut, Iowa, Massachuesetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Maryland, Washington and Washington D.C. Worldwide, it is legal in ten countries: Canada, Argentina, South Africa, Belgium, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Denmark and Sweden. As of 2012, proposals exist to introduce same-sex marriage in at least ten other countries.” [12:36 and 28:31]
    But actually if Civil Unions are against church teaching, Hawaii passed partnerships in 1997 & civil unions in 2011, New York City (1998), California (1999), District of Columbia (2002), Maine (2004), New Jersey (2004), Washington (2007), Oregon (2008), Wisconsin (2009), Colorado (2009), Nevada (2009), Illinois (2011). To see the List of jurisdictions recognizing same-sex unions and dates when first legally recognized go here (lot more than 10 countries):

  5. I wonder if you would like to address the “60 issues bringing Catholic Church to its Knees” which Voris used recently to raise money. He said he sought $50k ‘expansion plan” and with that money he was able to knock down walls (apparently the work had already been contracted out) and hire several new people. He was already thanking everyone in the last episode (around 4:20 mark).
    Or watch the videos here:
    What I noticed was
    (1) communion for the divorced and remarried, baptism of ‘children of homosexual cohabitants’, or sacraments (like confirmation or communion) for homosexual cohabitants doesn’t appear on the list. i.e. the upcoming Synod on The Family wasn’t even on the list.
    (2) The list was all jumbled up and many times redundant, i.e. without coherence. You’d think if he’d been doing this since 2009, he would have some order by now. But no, his ‘expansion plan’ is to continue to collect even more of these individual violations. I have never subscribed so I am not sure if it is possible for subscribers to search church militant and immediately reference past posts on a particular issue. But for unsubscribers no matter how many violations Vortex has documented, there is no searchable record that I know about. Tradition In Action, which doesn’t conduct fund raisers for itself, has such an indexed site so that one has a record at one’s fingertips of all the abuses it has covered.
    (3) When I looked at the list in depth, I was confused by his constant refrain of ‘the church never called for’. This is especially interesting in view of Cardinal Hummes response as noted in today’s Rorate post: If Jesus were alive today, would he be in favor of gay marriage? I don't know, I formulate no hypothesis on this. Who must answer this is the Church in its entirety. We must take care not to raise issues individually, because this ends up creating more difficulties for us to reach a valid conclusion. I think we must get together, listen to people, those who have an interest, the bishops. It is the Church that must indicate the ways, and there must be a way for all. What do they mean by ‘the Church’?

  6. (4) Unfortunately, just taking the first few items on his list,
    (a) Holy Communion in the hand that was never called for by the Church: “in 1968 Pope Paul VI graciously sent out a questionnaire to all the bishops of the world asking if there should be a prudent change in the Church’s practice on how Communion would be distributed. The poll numbers came back overwhelming against Communion in the hand….When Rome did give the indult to the French bishops in 1969 it stated, “The new manner of giving Communion must not be imposed in a way that would exclude the traditional practice.” (my emphasis)
    And NOT mentioned: (A) What about other disciplines surrounding receiving communion, such as (1) receive in a ‘state of grace’ (gone to confession; priest grants absolution DURING mass after a Confiteor (of SIN) (2) receive kneeling; (3) Three hour fasting requirement; (3) Modest/respectful dress and head covering for women? (B) What about the NEW Theology of the mass that denies representation of sacrifice of Jesus Christ at Calvary, transubstantiation and real presence vs. ‘symbolic’ presence of Christ in the Eucharist and that even denies that Jesus Christ died for our sins?
    “Holy” communion world youth day 2013 wearing bikinis, plastic cups, etc.:
    ‘At WYD Sydney: A crowd descended on the unattended sacred vessels and, without scruples, began filling their bags, pockets and coats with the remaining Sacred Hosts while others stood by and watched. Still other members of the crowd dipped their fingers into the chalices filled with the Precious Blood in order to dab their foreheads with the contents.’
    ‘Sacred Hosts being scattered around on the WYD grounds and falling in the mud where they are trampled on;

  7. (b) Altar girls never called for by the Church: “With the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, some argued that this reservation to males no longer held,[6] based on the inclusion of both males and females in canon 230 §2: "Lay persons can fulfil the function of lector in liturgical actions by temporary designation. All lay persons can also perform the functions of commentator or cantor, or other functions, according to the norm of law." In some dioceses, females were allowed to act as altar servers under the "new canon law", without any explicit clarification on the matter from the Holy See.
    The clarification came in the form of a circular letter[7][8] from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to presidents of episcopal conferences on 15 March 1994, which announced a 30 June 1992 authentic interpretation (confirmed on 11 July 1992 by Pope John Paul II) from the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts. This authentic interpretation said that canon 230 §2 states that service at the altar is one of the liturgical functions that can be performed by both lay men and women. The circular letter, written by the cardinal-prefect of the Congregation, also clarified that canon 230 §2 has a permissive and not a perceptive character, that is, it allows, but does not require, the use of female altar servers. Thus it was for each diocesan bishop to decide whether to allow them in his diocese.
    (c) Priest facing the people never called for by the Church: “The altar should be built apart from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible." (GIRM – general instruction Roman Missal)
    1978: At 4:27 can see JP1(!) giving communion in hand 4:22 and people facing altar at his inaugural mass: 4:09
    1978 JP2 inaug mass – concelbratory ‘altar’ facing people 1:18 and comm in hand 1:29
    inaugural mass JPII: 4:33 distorted crucifix.
    Paul with new Cardinals inside St. Peter’s Basilica. From left to right František Cardinal Tomášek of Prague, Czechoslovakia, Paul VI, Msgr. Virgilio Noè (+2011, the then Master of Pontifical ceremonies), Giovanni Cardinal Benelli of Florence, Italy and Joseph Ratzinger of Munich, West Germany (UPI). Note the candles on the main altar.
    2005 Benedict inaugural – concelebratory mass altar facing people:2:11:12; group peace continues into agnus dei 2:21:58; 2:24 conditions for communion in English; 2:26:07 communion standing and in hand

  8. (d) Gregorian chant insisted on by Vatican II yet near totally neglected in every parish: How many parishes have sung liturgical services celebrated in Latin? “50. In sung liturgical services celebrated in Latin: (a) Gregorian chant, as proper to the Roman liturgy, should be given pride of place, other things being equal. Its melodies, contained in the "typical" editions, should be used, to the extent that this is possible. (b) "It is also desirable that an edition be prepared containing simpler melodies, for use in smaller churches."(c) Other musical settings, written for one or more voices, be they taken from the traditional heritage or from new works, should be held in honor, encouraged and used as the occasion demands.” Look at 52 to find out that Gregorian Chant is to be supplanted by the genuine promotion of new forms of sacred singing: 52. In order to preserve the heritage of sacred music and genuinely promote the new forms of sacred singing, "great importance is to be attached to the teaching and practice of music in seminaries, in the novitiates and houses of study of religious of both sexes, and also in other Catholic institutes and schools," especially in those higher institutes intended specially for this.[37] Above all, the study and practice of Gregorian chant is to be promoted, because, with its special characteristics, it is a basis of great importance for the development of sacred music.

    (e) So-called “Eucharistic ministers” never called for by the Church--according to Wikipedia it is the same Canon 230 in the NEW code of canon law that allows for altar girls permits ‘extraordinary’ minister of Holy Communion.
    Can. 230 §1 Lay men whose age and talents meet the requirements prescribed by decree of the Episcopal Conference, can be given the stable ministry of lector and of acolyte, through the prescribed liturgical rite. This conferral of ministry does not, however, give them a right to sustenance or remuneration from the Church. §2 Lay people can receive a temporary assignment to the role of lector in liturgical actions. Likewise, all lay people can exercise the roles of commentator, cantor or other such, in accordance with the law. §3 Where the needs of the Church require and ministers are not available, lay people, even though they are not lectors or acolytes, can supply certain of their functions, that is, exercise the ministry of the word, preside over liturgical prayers, confer baptism and distribute Holy Communion, in accordance with the provisions of the law.
    Pope Francis Mass at Lampedusa

    Holy” communion world youth day 2013:
    Toronoto WYD (Benedict): ‘Even more serious was the distribution of Communion from cardboard boxes by young girls while hundreds of priests remained in their seats.’
    Also “Eucharistic Ministers’ is a PROTESTANT term:

  9. (f) Use of Latin in Mass insisted on by Vatican II and neglected in nearly every parish: “According to the Constitution on the Liturgy, "the use of the Latin language, with due respect to particular law, is to be preserved in the Latin rites."[30] However, since "the use of the vernacular may frequently be of great advantage to the people"[31] "it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used. Its decrees have to be approved, that is, confirmed by the Apostolic See."
    (g) Movement of the tabernacles from center of the parish altar never called for by the Church GIRM 315 published in 1969 (would think a former seminarian would know!): “It is more in keeping with the meaning of the sign that the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved not be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated.Consequently, it is preferable that the tabernacle be located, according to the judgment of the Diocesan Bishop, a.Either in the sanctuary, apart from the altar of celebration, in a form and place more appropriate, not excluding on an old altar no longer used for celebration; b.Or even in some chapel suitable for the faithful's private adoration and prayer and which is organically connected to the church and readily visible to the Christian faithful.
    Research the list yourself. ALL. EACH. AND. EVERY. ONE. of these ‘issues’ can be traced directly back to the VATICAN, VCII and/or THE POPE and many times like in the case of Gregorian Chant and the use of Latin the VCII documents themselves contradict what he states. Also the abuses are far worse than he states and the biggest one he doesn’t talk about (upcoming synod). It’s hard to assess his motives: is he partly thinking his way is ‘good for the church & faithful’ and partly happy to have a life long job of abuse complaining (life long career as a ‘prolife’ minister) or is he purposely trying to misdirect people and NOT solve any of these issues but merely string as many as he can along with the VCII sect (he is expanding to research more of these issues). I would like to know who is bankrolling him—I seriously doubt it’s JQCatholic (or $50k).