“The inside story of the most tyrannical and unprincipled papacy of modern times. Jorge Bergoglio was elected Pope in 2013 as a liberal and a reformer. In fact, he had long been known in his native Argentina as a manipulative politician and a skillful self-presenter [self-promoter]. Behind the mask of a genial man of the people, Pope Francis has consolidated his position as a dictator who rules by fear and has allied himself with the most corrupt elements in the Vatican to prevent and reverse the reforms that were expected of him.”
“If you speak with Catholics of Buenos Aires, they will tell you about the miraculous transformation that took place in Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Their gloomy and serious archbishop has turned overnight into the smiling and cheerful Pope Francis, the idol of the people with whom he has completely identified himself. If you talk to those who work in the Vatican, they will tell you of a miracle in the opposite direction. When the television cameras are not on him, Pope Francis is transformed into another person: arrogant, unfriendly with people, vulgar in speaking, and famous for his violent outbursts of anger that are well known to all, from cardinals to drivers.”
“Florencia approached us with the explicit request of the Catholic Church to baptize their children under Canon Law. That there is that desire is reason enough to carry it out. I wish all parents (would) bring their children to baptism with this level of consciousness. I can see Florencia and Pablo really want to convey to Pablo and Isabella faith in Jesus.”
*Readers of this blog will know that one of Francis’ favorite past-times is inversion of the natural and spiritual.
The third case, “the one that moves me most, is Judas’ shame,” the pope said.
“Judas is a difficult character to understand; there have been so many interpretations of his personality. In the end, however, when he sees what he has done, he turns to the ‘righteous,’ to the priests: ‘I have sinned: I handed over an innocent man to be killed.’ They answer him: ‘What does that matter to us? That’s your affair.’ (Matthew 27:3-10) Then he goes away with that guilt that suffocates him.”
The Pontiff invites us to imagine a different fate for Judas: “Perhaps if he had met the Virgin Mary, things would have gone differently, but the poor man goes away, doesn’t find a way out of his situation, and he went to hang himself.”
“But, there’s one thing that makes me think that Judas’ story doesn’t end there … Perhaps someone might think, ‘this pope is a heretic…’ But, no! They should go see a particular medieval capital of a column in the Basilica of St. Mary Magdalen in Vézelay, Burgundy [in France],” he said.
The Successor of Peter describes how people in the Middle Ages taught the Gospel through sculptures and paintings. “On that capital, on one side there is Judas, hanged; but on the other is the Good Shepherd who is carrying him on his shoulders and is carrying him away.”
He revealed that he has a photograph of that two-part capital behind his desk, because it helps him meditate. “There is a smile on the lips of the Good Shepherd, which I wouldn’t say is ironic, but a little bit complicit,” he describes.
“There are many ways of reacting to shame; one is to despair, but we must try to help despairing people to find the true path of shame, so they don’t go down the path that put an end to Judas’ life.”
“The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but wo to that man, by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed: It were better for that man if he had not been born. And Judas, that betrayed him, answering, said: Is it I, Rabbi? he saith to him: Thou hast said it.” (Matthew 26, 24-25)
Dear brothers and sisters,
I am pleased to meet you at the end of the training course for clerics and laity promoted by the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota on the subject of the new matrimonial process and the Super Rato process. I thank the Dean, Msgr. Pinto, for his words. The course that has taken place here in Rome, and those held in other dioceses, are praiseworthy and encouraging initiatives, as they contribute to gaining a proper knowledge and an exchange of experiences at various ecclesial levels regarding major canonical procedures.
In particular, it is necessary to pay great attention and to adequate analyze to the two recent Motu proprio, Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus and Mitis et misericors Iesus, in order to apply the new procedures they establish. These two acts have arisen from a synodal context, they are the expression of a synodal method, and they are the arrival point of a serious synodal path. Faced with the most thorny questions concerning the evangelizing mission and the salvation of souls, it is important for the Church increasingly to recover the synodal practice of the first community in Jerusalem, where Peter together with the other Apostles and with the whole community under the action of the Holy Spirit endeavoured to act according to the commandment of the Lord Jesus.
This is what has been done in the synodal assemblies on the family, in which, in the spirit of communion and fraternity, representatives of the episcopate from all over the world gathered in assembly to listen to the voice of the communities to discuss, reflect and carry out the work of discernment. The Synod had the purpose of promoting and defending the Christian family and marriage for the greater good of spouses faithful to the covenant celebrated in Christ. It also had to study the situation and development of the family in today’s world, preparation for marriage, ways to help those who suffer as a result of the failure of their marriage, the education of children, and other issues.
As you return to your communities, strive to be missionaries and witnesses of the synodal spirit that is at their origin, as well as of the pastoral consolation that is the purpose of this new matrimonial provision, so as to strengthen the faith of the holy people of God through charity. May the synodal spirit and pastoral consolation become the form of your action in the Church, especially in field as delicate as that of the family in search of the truth about the conjugal state of spouses. With this attitude, each of you is a sincere collaborator of your bishop, to whom the new norms grant a decisive role, especially in the streamlined briefer process, as he is the natural judge of the particular Church.
In your service, you are called to be close to the solitude and suffering of the faithful who expect from ecclesial justice the competent and factual help to restore peace to their consciences and God’s will on readmission to the Eucharist. Hence, the need and the value of the course you have attended – and I hope that others will be organized – to promote a just approach to the matter and an increasingly wide-ranging and serious study of the new matrimonial process. It is an expression of the Church that is able to welcome and care for those who are wounded in various ways by life and, at the same time, it is an appeal for the defence of the sacredness of the marriage bond.
To make the application of the new law for marriage process, two years after its promulgation, the cause and reason for salvation and peace for the great number of faithful who are wounded in their matrimonial situation, I have decided, in my office as bishop of Rome and Peter’s Successor, to specify some fundamental aspects of the two Motu proprio, especially the figure of the diocesan bishop as personal and single judge in the streamlined process.
The diocesan bishop has always been Iudex unum et idem cum Vicario iudiciali; but since this principle is interpreted as de facto excluding the personal exercise of the diocesan bishop, delegating almost everything to the Tribunals, I establish as follows how I consider to be decisive and exclusive the personal exercise of the role of judge by the diocesan bishop:
1. The diocesan bishop, by virtue of his pastoral office, is the personal and sole judge in the briefer process.
2. Therefore, the figure of the diocesan-bishop-judge is the architrave, the constitutive principle and the discriminating element of the entire briefer process, established by the two Motu proprio.3. In the briefer process, two indispensable conditions are required, ad validitatem: the episcopate, and the fact of being the head of a diocesan community of faithful (cf. canon 381 § 2). If one of the two conditions is not met, the briefer process cannot be followed. The case must be judged via the ordinary process.4. The exclusive and personal jurisdiction of the diocesan bishop, set out in the fundamental criteria of the briefer process, refers directly to the ecclesiology of Vatican Council II, which reminds us that the bishop already has by consecration the fullness of all the authority that is ad actum expedita, through the missio canonica.5. The streamlined process is not an option that the diocesan bishop can choose, but rather an obligation that derives from his consecration and from the missio received. He holds exclusive competence in the three phases of the briefer process:
— the request must always be addressed to the diocesan bishop;— the preliminary phase, as I have already affirmed in my address at the Course held by the Roman Rota on 12 March last year, will be conducted by the bishop «always assisted by the judicial vicar or other instructor, even a layperson, by the assessor, and always with the presence of the defender of the bond”. Should the bishop not have the assistance of clerical or lay canonists, the charity, which distinguishes episcopal office, of a nearby bishop may come to his aid for the time necessary. Furthermore, I reiterate that the briefer process must typically be concluded in one session, requiring as an indispensible condition the absolute evidence of the facts proving the alleged nullity of the marriage, as well as the consent of both spouses.
the decision to pronounce coram Domino is always and only taken by the diocesan bishop.
6. To entrust the entire briefer process to the interdiocesan court (either neighbouring or multiple dioceses) would lead to a distortion and reduction of the figure of the bishop, from father, head and judge of his faithful to a mere signatory of the judgement.7. Mercy, one of the fundamental criteria ensuring the salus, requires that the diocesan bishop implement the briefer process as soon as possible; should he not consider himself ready at present to do so, the case must be addressed via the ordinary process, which must in any case be conducted with the proper solicitude.8. Closeness and gratuitousness, as I have repeated several times, are the two pearls most needed by the poor, whom the Church must love more than anything else.9. With regard to jurisdiction, in receiving the appeal against the affirmative judgement in the briefer process, on the part of the Metropolitan or of the bishop indicated in the new canon 1687, it is specified that the new law confers to the Dean of the Rota a new and therefore constitutive potestas decidendi regarding the rejection or admission of the appeal.
In conclusion, I would like to reiterate clearly that this is to occur without asking for permission or authorization from another Institution or from the Apostolic Signatura.
Dear brothers and sisters, I wish you well for this study and for the ecclesial service of each one of you. May the Lord bless you and Our Lady protect you. And please, do not forget to pray for me. Thank you.
Thanks to Andrew Guernsey who posted this radio sermon and scanned the two transcripts below to his youtube channel.
Dear brothers and sisters,
I greet you all, participants in the seventh Festival of the Social Doctrine of the Church, which this year is entitled “Fidelity is Change”. This expression, which intentionally causes a certain logical “surprise”, leads us to consider that, in reality, being faithful involves the capacity for change.
Let us think of the experience of Abraham, whom the Bible shows to us as a model of faith. When he was already elderly, God said to him, ““Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing” (Gen 12: 1-2). To be faithful, Abraham had to change, to depart. The Word of God helps us to distinguish between the two “faces” of change: the first is trust, hope, openness to the new; the second is the difficulty of leaving certainties to head for the unknown. Indeed, it makes us feel calmer to stay in our enclosure, to conserve, to repeat the usual words and gestures – this makes us feel more secure – rather than to go out, to depart and to start up new processes.
Let us ask ourselves, then, what happens if we keep our faith in God and man. We have seen in the story of Abraham the effect of the Lord’s calling: his life changed radically, he entered into a new story, unexpected horizons opened up to him, with new skies and new lands. When one responds to God, one always activates a process: something unexpected happens that leads us where we would never have imagined. This is important: a process is always activated, one goes ahead, one does not occupy spaces, one initiates processes.
Fidelity to man means coming out of oneself to meet the real person, his face, his need for tenderness and mercy, to make him come out of anonymity, from the peripheries of existence. Fidelity to man means opening the eyes and the heart to the poor, the sick, to those who have no work, to the many who are wounded by indifference and by an economy that discards and kills, to open oneself to refugees fleeing violence and war. Fidelity to man means defeating the centripetal force of one’s own interests, selfish interests, and making space for passion for the other, rejecting the temptation of desperation and keeping alive the flame of hope.
In such a way, fidelity to God and to man converge in a dynamic movement that takes the form of change in ourselves and change of reality, overcoming immobility and convenience, creating space and work for the young and for their future. Because change is healthy not only when things are going badly, but also when everything works well and we are tempted to make ourselves comfortable with the results obtained. Enlarging our service, participating in other projects, broadening the spaces of creativity, means welcoming the challenge of change precisely to remain faithful to God and to man. It seems to be a contradiction, but fidelity is this path that initiates processes and does not allow us to remain in the spaces that defend us from any creativity, spaces that in the end are of the type: “it has always been done this way”.
In sending you this brief message, I address a fraternal greeting to His Excellency Msgr. Zenti, bishop of Verona, city that hosts the Festival of the Social Doctrine of the Church, to Don Vincenzi and all his colleagues, speakers and volunteers. I hope that this initiative may contribute to inspiring and supporting the evangelizing mission of the Church in the world of work, the economy and politics.
I bless you, and I ask you, please. to pray for me. Thank you!
“Local Catholics in a Belgian town are outraged as a cruciform cow has been erected as art at the center of a consecrated Catholic church. They are urging the local bishop to have it removed and offer public prayers of reparation.
The “art” exhibit by Tom Herck is to be displayed until early December in the small parish church of Saint John the Baptist of Kuttekoven, in the Flemish town of Borgloon.
[...]
The “artist” went through the grueling process of actually nailing the 500 kg corpse of a cow to a cross before covering it with silicone paint: it is the resulting mold that hangs, “crucified” in the center of the church as a sneering mockery of one of the most sacred images of the Catholic faith: that of the crucified God and Saviour of mankind.
In contemporary art, by far the most important part of an opus resides in the “discourse” – or, more appropriately, gibberish – that surrounds it. The installation in Borgloon, Tom Herck is happy to explain, aims to make a stand against modern wastefulness. The cow on the cross, surmounting a basin containing 5,000 litres of milk, is supposed to symbolize industrial breeding and thrown-away food. Visitors are welcomed with beef and cheese appetizers.
The choice of a church supposedly points to wasted architectural space in a time of housing shortage. Herck openly admits he is particularly seeking to attract attention to the “innumerable” churches that remain empty in Flanders on Sundays because, he says, the Flemish are no longer interested in “insufferably tedious Masses.”
Katholiek Forum say the local diocese has been slow to act on the blasphemous installation in the church of Saint John the Baptist, which has never been deconsecrated and where religious services are still held. They say the “crucified cow” is a “satanic image and a disgusting insult to God and Catholicism.”
“We are disappointed by Patrick Hoogmartens. He has done nothing against this self-styled work of art because he wants to avoid confrontation. He is terrified by the media. That is why we came to pray here, because Catholicism has been dishonored,” said Dries Goethals.
Shortly after the installation was opened to the public at the beginning of the month, the diocese of Hasselt published this reaction as its sole response:
The diocese of Hasselt is astonished at the ‘Holy Cow’ exhibition in the church of Kuttekoven. We are always ready to collaborate in dialogue with art projects in a church, and we can certainly appreciate humor. But a cow on the cross, on the spot where Christ hung on the cross, that is to our mind really a bridge too far. Transformation is a trend in the art world. Deep symbolism, such as that of the cross, cannot however receive another meaning just like that. That can be hurtful or come across as a will to ridicule. Even though the church of Kuttekoven is soon to be deconsecrated, we find this way of changing its destination unbecoming. Or should we perhaps today consider certain forms of art as the ‘holy cow’?
The statement was published on November 7 and was not followed by any form of action on the part of the Catholic diocese of Hasselt to put an end to the defilement of the image of the crucified Christ in a church that, to LifeSite’s knowledge, still belongs to it. If not, similarly to other religious buildings that are property of the State in Belgium, the Catholic Church at least has full sovereignty over its use. ”
source: LifeSiteNews, ‘Crucified cow’ on display at center of Catholic church, locals outraged
“The accusations concern a former seminarian who is now a young priest for the Como dioceses and member of the Don Folci association. Reporter Gaetano Pecoraro interviewed an ex-student who said the seminarian would come into his dorm at night demanding oral sex, starting when he was 13 and continuing until he was 18.
The seminarian was a year older and held a position of authority over the other students, reported the ex-student who was identified only as “Marco.”
The student’s roommate, Kamil Jarzembowski, said he witnessed dozens of incidents, first denouncing them to seminary officials, and then in writing to cardinals and finally the pope in 2014. Church officials say internal church investigations were conducted, though initially not interviewing the boys in question, and the claims were determined to be false.
The accused seminarian, meanwhile, was ordained a priest earlier this year. None of the accusers continued on to the priesthood.
The former students, including another one who reported a groping incident when the seminarian was 20 and he was 15, have gone public with their allegations in a book and series of investigative television reports on the program “Le Iene” (The Hyenas).
Their testimony prompted the Vatican to announce Nov. 18 that it was reopening an investigation into the case because “new elements” had emerged. The Vatican said it wanted to “shine full light on what really happened.”
Before the Vatican acted, the Opera Don Folci lashed out at the ex-students’ allegations in a statement on its website, calling them “mud,” a “violent attack on the church” and nothing more than “calumny and falsifications.””
source: AP News, Catholic officials warn ex-seminarians over sex claims
Dear friends,
As I prepare to visit Bangladesh, in just a few days’ time, I wish to send a word of greeting and friendship to all the people. I cannot wait for the moment in which we will be able to stay together.
I come as a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, to proclaim His message of reconciliation, forgiveness and peace. My visit is intended to confirm the Catholic community of Bangladesh in its faith and witness of the Gospel, which teaches the dignity of every man and woman, and calls upon us to open our hearts to others, especially the poorest and most in need.
At the same time I wish to encounter the entire population. I am especially keen to meet religious leaders in Ramna. We live in a time in which believers and men of good will in every place are called to promote mutual comprehension and respect, and to support each other as members of the single human family.
I know that many in Bangladesh are hard at work to prepare for my visit, and I thank them. I ask each one of you to pray that the days in which I will be with you may be a source of hope and encouragement for all. I invoke divine blessings of joy and peace upon you and your families!
See you soon!
Dear friends,
As I prepare to visit Myanmar, I want to send a word of greeting and friendship to all its people. I look forward to this time we will have together.
I am coming to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ, a message of reconciliation, forgiveness and peace. My visit is meant to confirm the Catholic community of Myanmar in its worship of God and in its witness to the Gospel, which teaches the dignity of every man and woman, and commands us to open our hearts to others, especially to the poor and those in need.
At the same time, I wish to visit the nation in a spirit of respect and encouragement for every effort to build harmony and cooperation in the service of the common good. We are living at a time when religious believers and people of good will everywhere sense the need to grow in mutual understanding and respect and to support each other as members of our one human family. For all of us are God’s children.
I know that many in Myanmar are working hard to prepare for my visit, and I thank them. I ask everyone to pray that my days among you will be a source of hope and encouragement to everyone. Upon you and your families, I invoke the divine blessings of joy and peace!
See you soon!
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is unquestionably an innovator. But in method, before it can be seen in results.
He always introduces the innovations in little doses, on the sly, perhaps in an allusive footnote, as he did with the now-famous footnote 351 of the post-synodal exhortation “Amoris Laetitia,” only to say later with candor, when questioned on one of his equally famous airborne press conferences, that he doesn’t even remember that footnote.
And yet those few cryptic lines were enough to ignite within the Church an unprecedented conflict, with entire episcopates squaring off, in Germany in favor of the innovations and in Poland against, and so all over the world between diocese and diocese, between parish and parish, where what is at stake is not only the yes or no to communion for the divorced and remarried, but the end of the indissolubility of marriage and the admission of divorce within the Catholic Church too, as is already taking place among Protestants and Orthodox.
There are those who are becoming alarmed over this confusion that pervades the Church. But Francis is doing nothing to put the house back into order. He is moving right along with confidence. No point in even waving to the cardinals who submit their own “doubts” and those of many to him, on capital questions of doctrine that they see under threat, and ask him to bring clarity. He lets run free the most disparate interpretations, whether conservative or progressive in the extreme, without ever explicitly condemning any of them.
[...]
But this is precisely what the first Jesuit pope in history is doing today: setting into motion “processes” within which he is sowing the innovations that he wants to win out sooner or later, in the most diverse fields, as for example in the judgment on Protestantism.
In Argentina, Bergoglio unleashed terrible invectives against Luther and Calvin. But as pope he is doing the complete opposite, he does nothing but sing Luther’s praises. On a visit to the Lutheran church in Rome, when asked to say whether Catholics and Protestants may receive communion together in spite of the fact that the former believe that the bread and wine “really” become the body and blood of Christ while the latter do not, he answered yes, and then no, and then I don’t know, and then figure it out yourselves, in an ecstasy of contradictions, but in practice giving the go-ahead.
It is the fluidity of his magisterium that is the true novelty of Francis’s pontificate. What he does not tolerate is that anyone should dare to tie it down in clear and distinct ideas, purging it of its innovative contents.
source for excerpt: L’Espresso, Bergoglio's Revolution. In Little Doses, But Irreversible by Sandro Magister
“The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: ‘Let us differentiate.’ Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of ‘let us differentiate’ between totally different species.”
“This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world … The difference in the inner quality between Jews and nonJews is so great that the bodies should be considered as completely different species.”
“An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness.”
“As has been explained, an embryo is called a human being, because it has both body and soul. Thus, the difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish embryo can be understood.”
“…the general difference between Jews and non-Jews: A Jew was not created as a means for some [other] purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all [divine] emanations was created only to serve the Jews.”
“The important things are the Jews, because they do not exist for any [other] aim; they themselves are [the divine] aim.”
“The entire creation [of a non-Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews.”
