It’s Ash Wednesday, let’s meet some unrepentant homosexuals and lesbians!
Francis rolls out the red carpet for perversion and sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance in the middle of his homosexual clerical sex abuse scandals. What a way to kick off the Lenten season!
This group is pro-priest marriage, pro-homosexual marriage, pro-perversion, marches in PRIDE parades, and is committed to spreading all manners of depravity throughout the world. It can be summed up by this quote from their official website, “A fully inclusive pastoral ministry with and for LGBT Catholics, parents and families, inevitably leads to understanding Church teaching on sexuality and gender identity as a developing area of magisterial teaching and not something fixed once and for all in previous documents from the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith...we therefore call upon the Church's hierarchy, globally and locally, to undertake a serious listening process, involving LGBT Catholics, parents, theologians and pastoral workers, bishops and priests, in order to bring about the vision expressed by Pope Francis in The Joy of Love (Amoris Laetitia): “The unity that we seek is not uniformity, but a “unity in diversity”, or 'reconciled diversity'. Fraternal communion is enriched by respect and appreciation for differences within an overall perspective that advances the common good."”
Pope Francis – A Man of His Word (a Wim Wenders’ film)
“when I became a believer… you know I identified as a Christian and was reading the bible a lot, but the moment I really began to believe in Jesus Christ, I left the church.” — Wim Wenders
“I had the highest regard for Pope Francis before I ever met him, just from seeing him on television and from reading his sermons or his encyclicals. But meeting him eye to eye, and then also seeing and hearing him every day in the editing room, not only in our own interviews, but also his many talks all over the world, to refugees, prisoners, politicians, scientists, children, rich or poor or regular people, made me realize how courageous he was, how fearless. And that would be my wish: that he never loses that relentless courage. Whenever he left our set, the last thing he said was: “Pray for me!” And that wasn’t just his way of saying good-bye, he meant it. And I’ve heard him ask the same from people all over the word. So that would be my other wish: that he is carried by all those prayers for him, from all these people (including my little film crew) for whom he represents a man whose word we can trust in. That has become such a rare and precious thing today: a man who is not acting for himself, but for the common good.” — Wim Wenders
“There is something that does not take peace away from me, but which does hurt me, and that is gossip. I don’t like gossip, it makes me sad. It often spreads in closed-off worlds. When it happens in a world of priests and religious I want to ask: how is this possible? You left everything, you decided not to have a wife next to you, you didn’t marry, you had no children… Do you want to finish as a gossiping old bachelor? Oh, my God, what a sad life!”
“I never call a difficulty a “resistance” for to do so would be to renounce discernment. I prefer to discern. It is easy to say there is resistance and not realize that a moment of conflict is actually bringing out some crumbs of truth. So I think that such conflicts can help me. I often ask a person: “What do you think?” This would help me to relativize many things that at first sight might seem like resistances but are actually a reaction that comes from a misunderstanding, from the fact that some things need to be repeated, better explained… This might be my defect, the fact that sometimes I take things for granted and make a logical jump without explaining the process clearly, for I am convinced that the person I am talking to has quickly understood my reasoning. I am aware that, if I go back and explain things better, then at that point the other will say, “Ah, yes, agreed…” All in all, it is very helpful for me to examine the meaning of conflicts carefully. But when I am aware that there is true resistance, certainly, I am displeased. Some say to me that it is normal that there is resistance when someone wants to make changes. The famous “this has always been done this way” reigns everywhere: “It has always been done this way, why should we change? If things are the way they are, they have always been done this way, so why change?” This a great temptation that we all faced in the period after the Second Vatican Council. The resistances are still present and try to tell us to relativize the Council, to water it down. I am even sadder when someone joins a campaign of resistance. And alas I see this too. You asked me about resistances, and I cannot deny that there are some, then. I see them and I know them.
There are doctrinal resistances that you know about better than I. For my own good I do not read the content of internet sites of this so-called “resistance.” I know who they are, I know the groups, but I do not read them for my own mental health. If there is something very serious, they tell me about it so that I know. You know them… It is displeasing, but you have to go on. Historians tell us that it takes a century for a Council to put down its roots. We are halfway there.
Sometimes we ask: but that man, that woman, have they read the Council? And there are people who have not read the Council. And if they have read it, they have not understood it. Fifty years on! We studied philosophy before the Council, but we had the advantage of studying theology after it. We lived through the change of perspective, and the Council documents were already there.
When I perceive resistance, I seek dialogue whenever it is possible; but some resistance comes from people who believe they possess the true doctrine and accuse you of being a heretic. When I cannot see spiritual goodness in what these people say or write, I simply pray for them. I find it sad, but I won’t settle on this sentiment for the sake of my own mental well-being.”
“I think that one of the things that the Church most needs today is discernment. This is put very clearly in the pastoral perspectives and objectives of Amoris Laetitia. We are used to a “yes you can or no you can’t” mentality. The morality used in Amoris Laetitia is the more classic Thomist morals, that is, the one from St. Thomas himself not the decadent version of later Thomism that some have studied. I too received a formation in the way of thinking of “yes you can or no you can’t,” or “up to this point you can, up to here you can’t.” I wonder if you remember [and here the pope looks at one of those present] that Colombian Jesuit who came to teach morals at the Collegio Massimo? When he taught the sixth commandment someone dared to ask: “Can a man and a woman who are engaged to be married kiss each other?” If they could they kiss each other! Do you get it? And he replied: “Yes they can! No problem! They just have to put a tissue between them.” This is a forma mentis (a way of thinking) for doing theology generally. It is a forma mentis that is based on a limit. And we bear the consequences.
If you take a look at the panorama of reactions to Amoris Laetitia you will see that the strongest criticisms of the exhortation are against the eighth chapter: “Can a divorced person receive communion, or not?” But Amoris Laetitia goes in a completely different direction; it does not enter into these distinctions. It raises the issue of discernment. This was already at the heart of truly great classic Thomist morals. So the contribution that I want from the Society is to help the Church to grow in discernment. Today, the Church needs to grow in discernment. And to us the Lord has given this family grace to discern. I do not know if you know this, but I have said it during other similar meetings with Jesuits: at the end of Fr. Ledóchowski’s time as superior general, the highest work of the spirituality of the Society was the Epitome. Everything you had to do was all regulated in an enormous mix of the Formula of the Institution, the Constitutions and the rules. There were even rules for the cook. And it was all mixed, without following a hierarchy. Fr. Ledóchowski was a great friend of the abbot general of the Benedictines and once he went to visit him bringing along this volume. Shortly after, the abbot sought him out and said: “Father General, with this you have killed the Society of Jesus.” And he was right, for the Epitome took away any room for discernment.”
“Thank you. The word “reconciliation” is not only manipulated, it is demolished. Today – not just here for this applies in other Latin American countries too – the word “reconciliation” has been emptied of its power. When St. Paul describes the reconciliation of all with God, in Christ, he delivers a strong word. Today, however, “reconciliation” has become wrapping paper. It’s been emptied out. It’s been weakened not only of its religious content but also of its human content, that is, what we share when we look each other in the eye. Instead, today, it is being done under the counter.
I would say that these stunts should not be accepted, nor should we struggle against them. We must say to those who adopt it in its weaker form: use it, but we won’t use it, for the concept has been demolished. We do need to continue to work, however, seeking to reconcile people. From below, from the sides, with a good word, with a visit, with a course to help understanding, with the weapon of prayer that will give us strength and make miracles, but especially with the human weapon of persuasion, which is humility. Persuasion acts through humility.”
“Yesterday I spoke to the priests and religious men and women of Chile in the cathedral of Santiago. This is the greatest desolation that the Church is suffering. It brings shame, but we need to remember that shame is also a very Ignatian grace, a grace that St. Ignatius asks us to make in the three colloquies of the first week. And so let us take it as a grace and be fully ashamed. We have to love the Church with her wounds. Many wounds…
Let me tell you something. On March 24 Argentina remembers the military coup d’état, the dictatorship, the desaparecidos (the disappeared)… and every March 24 the Plaza de Mayo fills to remember it. One year, on March 24, I left the archbishop’s house and went to serve as confessor for the Carmelite sisters. On my return I took the subway and got out six blocks away from Plaza de Mayo. The Plaza was full … and I walked those six blocks to enter by the side. When I was about to cross a road, there was a couple with a child of two or three years, and the child ran ahead. The father said to him: “Come, come, come here… Be careful of the pedophiles!” How shameful I felt! What shame! They didn’t realize that I was the archbishop, I was a priest and… what shame!
Occasionally there are “consolation prizes,” and someone might even say: “OK. Look at the statistics … I don’t know … 70 percent of pedophiles are in the family setting, people known to the family. Then at the gyms and in the swimming pools. The percentage of pedophiles who are Catholic priests does not reach 2 percent, it’s 1.6 percent. It is not that much.” But it is terrible even if only one of our brothers is such! For God anointed him to sanctify children and adults, and instead of making them holy he has destroyed them. It’s horrible! We need to listen to what someone who has been abused feels. On Fridays – sometimes this is known and sometimes it is not known – I normally meet some of them. In Chile I also had such a meeting. As their process is very hard, they remain annihilated. Annihilated!
For the Church this is a great humiliation. It shows not only our fragility, but also, let us say so clearly, our level of hypocrisy. In cases of corruption, in the sense of abuse of an institutional type, it is notable that there are some newer Congregations whose founders have fallen into these abuses. These cases are public. Pope Benedict had to suppress a large male Congregation. The founder had spread such habits. He abused young and immature religious men. It was a Congregation that had a female branch, and the female founder had also spread such habits. Benedict had started the process on the women’s branch. I had to suppress it. You here have many painful cases. But it is curious that the phenomenon of abuse touched some new, prosperous Congregations.
Abuse in these Congregations is always the fruit of a mentality tied to power that has to be healed in its malicious roots. And I will add: there are three levels of abuse that come together: abuse of authority (mixing the internal forum with the external forum), sexual abuse and an economic mess.
There is always money involved. The devil enters through the wallet. Ignatius places the first step of the devil’s temptations in riches…then come vanity and pride, but first of all, it’s riches. The three levels come together very often in the new Congregations that have fallen into this problem of abuse.
Forgive my lack of humility in suggesting that you read what I said to the Chileans. That material is more carefully articulated and reasoned than what comes to me now spontaneously.”
“Thank you. I’ll reply with just one word. It might seem that I say nothing, but instead I say everything. And the word is “Council.” Pick up again the Second Vatican Council, and read Lumen Gentium. Yesterday, with the bishops of Chile – or was it the day before, I don’t even know what day it is! – I encouraged them to declericalize. If there is something that is very clear, it is the awareness of the faithful holy people of God, infallible in credendo, as the Council teaches us. This brings the Church forward. The grace of being missionary and proclaiming Jesus Christ comes to us in baptism. From there we can move forward…
We should never forget that evangelization is done by the Church as a people of God. The Lord wants an evangelizing Church, I see that clearly. This came from my heart, in simplicity, in the few minutes I spoke during the general congregations before the conclave. A Church that goes out, a Church that goes out proclaiming Jesus Christ. After or in that very moment when she adores and fills herself with him. I always use an example tied to the Book of Revelation where we read: “I am at the door and knock. If someone opens I will enter” (cf. Rev 3:20). The Lord is outside and wants to come in. Sometimes the Lord is inside and is knocking because he wants us to let him out! The Lord is asking us to be a Church outside, a Church that goes out. Church as a field hospital… Ah, the wounds of the people of God! Sometimes the people of God is wounded by a rigid, moralist catechism, of the “you can or you can’t” variety, or by a lack of testimony.
A poor Church for the poor! The poor are not a theoretical formula of the communist party. The poor are the heart of the Gospel. They are the center of the Gospel. We cannot preach the Gospel without the poor. So I say to you: it is along this line that I feel the Spirit is leading us. And there are strong resistances. But I must also say that for me the fact that resistances arise is a good sign. It is a sign that we are on the right road, this is the road. Otherwise the devil would not bother to resist.
I would say these are the criteria: poverty, being missionaries, the conscience of the faithful people of God… In Latin America, particularly, you should ask: “But where have our people been creative?” With some deviations, yes, but it has been creative in its popular piety. And why have our people been able to be creative in popular piety? Because the clergy weren’t interested, and so they let them do it… the people went on ahead…
And then, yes, what the Church is asking today of the Society – this I have said often, and Spadaro, who publishes these things, has grown tired of writing it – is to teach discernment with humility. Yes, as pontiff I ask this of you officially. Generally, above all, we who are part of the religious setting of life as priests and bishops often show little ability to discern, we don’t know how to do it for we have been educated with another theology that is more formal. We go as far as “you can or you can’t,” as I said to the Chilean Jesuits concerning the resistances to Amoris Laetitia. Some people are reducing the entire fruit of two synods – all the work that has been done – to “you can or can’t.” Help us to discern then. Certainly, someone who is not discerning cannot teach others to discern. And to be discerning you have to enter into practice, you have to examine yourself. You have to start with yourself.”
‘We elected you to make reforms, not to destroy everything.’
Francis had a private audience with this cardinal
three days after the incident was reported in the media.
Last Friday, Italian Marco Tosatti reported on his blog (bold is ours for emphasis),
“And, if what we have learned from two different sources is true, perhaps it is an annoyance also shared in the Vatican. A cardinal of great renown, an ex-diplomat, and one with an important curriculum as the head of Congregations and other important offices in the Secretariat of State, has reproached the Pope for his actions, saying in essence: ‘We elected you to make reforms, not to smash (destroy) everything.’ The news spread itself around the Vatican because the conversation, if it can be called a conversation, took place at high decibel levels, which overwhelmed the fragile barrier of the doors and the walls. The cardinal in question was one of those who supported the candidacy of Jorge Mario Bergoglio in the conclave of 2013.”
Cardinal Leonardo Sandri like Francis hails from Argentina.
Today the German website, katholisches.info, identified the mystery cardinal as none other than Francis’ fellow countryman,
“Francis received his compatriot Leonardo Cardinal Sandri. The cardinal, born like Francis in Buenos Aires, is the son of Italian immigrants but seven years younger than the pope. Ordained priest in 1967, he was secretary to the then Archbishop of Buenos Aires and sent to Rome in 1971 to attend the Diplomatic Academy of the Holy See. He joined the State Secretariat in 1974 and served as Apostolic Nuncio in Venezuela from 1997 to 2000, then in Mexico for a few more months, to be appointed as a substitute to the State Secretariat by John Paul II at the end of 2000. As such, he announced in April 2005 the death of the Polish Pope.
In 2007, Pope Benedict XVI appointed him. became Prefect of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches and elevated him to the cardinal's office in the same year. In 2013 he was in the conclave to the voters of his compatriot Jorge Mario Cardinal Bergoglio. One of not a few cardinals who supported the archbishop of Buenos Aires, contrary to the legend, that Bergoglio's election was an uprising against the Roman Curia.”
I cordially greet all of you who attend the third International Symposium on the Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, convened by the Office for Pastoral Care of the Family of the Italian Bishops’ Conference.
The theme you have proposed: The Gospel of Love between Conscience and Norm, is of great importance, and can illuminate the path that the Churches in Italy are taking, in order to respond to the desire for family that emerges in the soul of the young generations. Love between a man and a woman is obviously among the most generative human experiences; it is the leaven of a culture of encounter, and introduces to the present world an injection of sociality. Indeed “the good of the family is decisive for the future of the world and of the Church. (Amoris laetitia, 31)” The family born of marriage creates fruitful bonds, which reveal themselves to be the most effective antidote against the individualism that currently runs rampant; however, along the journey of marital love and family life there are situations that require arduous choices, which must be made with rectitude. In the domestic reality, sometimes there are concrete knots to be addressed with prudent conscience on the part of each. It is important that spouses, parents, be not left alone, but accompanied in their commitment to applying the Gospel to the concreteness of life. On the other hand, we know well that “we are called to form consciences, not to pretend to substitute them. (Ibid., 37)”
The contemporary world risks confusing the primacy of conscience, which is always to be respected, with the exclusive autonomy of the individual with respect to the relations that he entertains in life.
As I said recently to the Pontifical Academy for Life, “There are those who even speak of ego-latry, that is, of a true worship of the ego, on whose altar is sacrificed everything, including the dearest affections. This perspective is not harmless: it molds a subject that looks constantly in the mirror, until it becomes incapable of turning its eyes to others and the world. The spread of this attitude has most serious consequences for all the affections and ties of life. (5 Oct., 2017)” This is a “pollution” that corrodes souls and confounds minds and hearts, producing false illusions.
Romano Guardini, in a text on the subject of conscience, indicates the way to the search for the true good. He writes: “From this imprisonment in myself I am free only if I find a point, which is not my ego: a height higher than myself; something solid and working in my interior – and behold! Here we are come to the core [...] that is, to religious reality. That good [...] is something alive. [...] It is the fullness of worth, which belongs to the selfsame living God. (La coscienza, Brescia 1933, 32-33)”
In the very depths of each one of us there is a place wherein the Mystery reveals itself, and illuminates the person, making the person the protagonist of his story. Conscience, as the II Vatican Council recalls, is this, “most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, Whose voice echoes in his depths. (GS 16)” To the Christian falls the task of being vigilant, so that in this sort of tabernacle is no want of divine grace, which illuminates and strengthens married love and parental mission. Grace fills the amphorae of human hearts with an extraordinary capacity for gift, renewing for the families of today the miracle of the wedding feast at Cana.
Commenting on that Gospel episode, I have been able to say that, “By transforming into wine the water of the jars used ‘for the Jewish rites of purification’ (Jn 2:6), Jesus preforms an eloquent sign: he transforms the Law of Moses into the Gospel, bearer of joy. (Gen. Audience, June 8, 2016)” Jesus points in particular to the medicine of mercy, which cures the hardness of the heart, restoring the relationship between husband and wife, and between parents and children.
Dear Brothers and Sisters, I wish all the best for your work in this Symposium. Let the Church in Italy help to assimilate and develop Amoris laetitia’s content and style; may she contribute to the formation of family group animators in parishes, associations, and movements; may she support the journey of so many families, helping them to live the joy of the Gospel, and to be active cells in the community. I bless you, and I ask you, please, to pray for me.
There are errors galore in this BBC piece but it is interesting in the sense that the mainstream media is having to publicly ask the question and reassure its listeners in the affirmative.
All will be answered, on November 10th, in “Risposte amichevoli ai critici di Amoris laetitiaˮ (Friendly answers to the critics of Amoris laetitia). Written by professional academic and politician, Rocco Buttiglione, with introductory essay by Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Destruction of the Faith. The old adage says one shouldn’t judge a book by its cover but let’s make an exception in this case. Fives slashes in yellow fabric represent, what could it represent? The five dubia? Tears in the papal color of yellow? A coming schism?
“In the global situation, in which virtually there are no longer any more homogeneously Christian environments that can offer the individual Christian the support of a collective mentality and in the “only partial identification” with the Catholic faith and with its ensuing sacramental, moral and spiritual life, perhaps the problem, mutatis mutandis, of a dissolution of a first marriage contracted not “in the Lord” (1 Corinthians 7:39) in favorem fidei. may also arise for the baptized Christians that were not sufficiently evangelized.”
Curial cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller does not rule out admitting remarried divorcees to Communion “in extreme individual cases”, according to media reports. Although a general admittance to Communion for such members of the faithful could not be granted, in specific cases there could be “an admittance in the realm of conscience”, the leader of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said in a conversation with “Focus” magazine. This was also the view of John Paul II’s 1981 document “Familiaris consortio” (n. 84), according to Muller. “It is possible to think further in this direction”, the German cardinal said. In any case one would have to proceed in accordance with “theologically justifiable perspectives”.
As prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Muller is participating in the world synod of bishops currently in session. He is part of the German language group, in which are represented nearly all synod participants from Germany and Austria, among them Cardinals Walter Kasper, Reinhard Marx, and Christoph Schönborn.
“It’s provisional, and because of this the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null. Because they say “yes, for the rest of my life!” but they don’t know what they are saying. Because they have a different culture. They say it, they have good will, but they don’t know.”
[...]
Pope Francis attributed the marriage crisis to people who “don’t know what the sacrament is” and don’t know “the beauty of the sacrament.”
“They don’t know that it’s indissoluble, they don’t know that it’s for your entire life. It’s hard,” the Pope said.
[...]
“I’ve seen a lot of fidelity in these cohabitations, and I am sure that this is a real marriage, they have the grace of a real marriage because of their fidelity”
Francis meeting with his fellow revolutionary Jesuits in Colombia.
While in Colombia during his travels, Francis stopped the city of Cartagena de Indias, the capital of the region of Bolívar, on 10 September 2017. After meeting the crowds of laity there, “he went into the inner courtyard where he met privately with representatives of the community of the Society of Jesus made up of 65 religious.” A brief Question & Answer session transpired between Francis and the assembled Jesuits. Even though none of the Jesuits present asked about Amoris Laetitia Francis felt the need to speak of it.
“I’ll use this question to say something else that I believe should be said out of justice, and also out of charity. In fact I hear many comments – they are respectable for they come from children of God, but wrong – concerning the post-synod apostolic exhortation. To understand Amoris Laetitia you need to read it from the start to the end. Beginning with the first chapter, and to continue to the second and then on … and reflect. And read what was said in the Synod.
A second thing: some maintain that there is no Catholic morality underlying Amoris Laetitia, or at least, no sure morality. I want to repeat clearly that the morality of Amoris Laetitia is Thomist, the morality of the great Thomas. You can speak of it with a great theologian, one of the best today and one of the most mature, Cardinal Schönborn.
I want to say this so that you can help those who believe that morality is purely casuistic. Help them understand that the great Thomas possesses the greatest richness, which is still able to inspire us today. But on your knees, always on your knees…”
Wow! The five dubia and “Filial Correction” must have been grating Francis’ nerves for him to bring this topic up. Then Francis proceeds to tell his audience that Amoris Laetita is Thomistic! This from the mouth of the same man who told another fellow Jesuit (Michael Rogers) in 2014 that, “Studying fundamental theology is one of the most boring things on earth.” Everyone who follows the Vatican closely know that Francis perverted buddy, ‘Smoochie’ Fernandez ghostwrote Amoris Laetitiaand anyone who has read St. Thomas Aquinas and Amoris Laetitiaunderstands that not only does it distort St. Thomas, it uses his writings to support an unsound point as well as suggesting things contrary to St. Thomas (see Amoris Laetitia, #301). Fernandez reminds us of the bible-nullifying Talmudic rabbis. Francis next has the audacity to recommend speaking with “a great theologian”, Cardinal Schönborn! Here’s what Francis had to say about Schönborn last year,
“I can say yes, period. But it would be an answer that is too small. I recommend that you read the presentation of Cardinal Schonborn, who is a great theologian. He was the secretary for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, and he knows the doctrine of the faith well. In that presentation, your question will find an answer.”
The presentation which Francis mentions, (can be read here) answers how Amoris Laetitia should be interpreted concerning the question of sacraments for those in “so-called irregular situations” (hint: communion for all). This shouldn’t be a surprise as the zionist, Christoph Schönborn, “is a descendant of old nobility of the Holy Roman Empire known for its sheltering of usurers, rabbis, intelligencers and the Talmud itself (see: Judaism Discovered) and peddling of alcohol on credit via Judaic front-men to the poorest of Christian peasants.” The Schönborn family are experts at keeping “the Christian common folk as mystified, dumbed down, docile sheep for shearing by themselves and their fellow rabbi and banker mobsters.” Essentially, the freemason Cardinal Schönborn is carrying out what his family has done for centuries. Lastly, Francis mentions getting down “on your knees” ostensibly to pray to God. Have you ever seen Francis on his knees in prayer? We at Call Me Jorge... can only recall him getting on his knees once to pray at Palm Sunday Mass, usually he is kneeling to do things such as wash transgenders feet on Maundy Thursday or receive blessings from people.
Why the four dubia cardinals (Caffarra, Burke, Brandmuller, and Meisner) felt the need to have their confusion concerning Amoris Laetita clarified when Francis through his actions and words clearly explains how it is to be implemented leads us to conclude that they are members of a limited hangout.
Why the 146 ‘scholars’ felt the need to sign the “Filial Correction on Account of the Propagation of Heresies” when the document itself is in need of massive corrections leads us to conclude it is an empty act of virtue signaling done for the benefit of the few conservatives left in the Novus Ordo.
Why Francis felt the need to bring this matter of Amoris Laetita up in an off-the-cuff Q & A in Colombia demonstrates how fragile his ego is.
As we have written before, “Things continue to become more and more interesting at the chaotic Vatican!”
Francis loves to blather, no matter how banal or un-Catholic his message is.
Francis interviewed by Elisabetta Piqué on 4 December 2014 at Casa Santa Marta.
Elisabetta Piqué: Whenever the status quo changes, which is what happened when you were elected pope, it’s normal to find resistance. Some 20 months later, the resistance seems to have become more evident… Francis: You said it. Resistance is now evident. And that is a good sign for me, getting the resistance out into the open, no stealthy mumbling when there is disagreement. It’s healthy to get things out into the open, it’s very healthy. Elisabetta Piqué: Do you believe resistance is connected with your cleansing efforts, with the in-house restructuring of the Roman Curia? Francis: To me, resistance means different points of view, not something dirty. It is connected to some decisions I may occasionally take, I will concede that. Of course, some decisions are more of the economic type, and others are more pastoral….
Does Francis still stand by his words? Is the ‘Correctio Filialis De Haeresibus Propagatis’ a “healthy” sign of “getting the resistance out into the open” or is it “something dirty”?
Francis ‘the humble’ can’t help it. Everybody is out to get him or so he perceives. The first hit was his anger with Sandro Magister publishing 13 cardinals objections to the Synod, next up was the Anti-Francis Dossier making the rounds through the Vatican, followed by 45 scholars condemning Amoris Laetitia as heretical, then the big hit - Francis’ boiling over with rage at the public release of the five dubia, afterwards were the anti-Francis pasquino and the Fake L’Osservatore Romano, and subsequently the 25-page “Filial Correction” titled Correctio Filialis De Haeresibus Propagatis (“Filial Correction on Account of the Propagation of Heresies”) signed by 62 scholars.
This “Filial Correction” was given to Francis on 11 August 2017 but has only become public now since Francis, as is his modus operandi, ignored it.
This “Filial Correction” accuses Francis of spreading heresy in Amoris Laetita seven times! The introduction of press release for the “Filial Correction” says it all:
A summary of the document can be read (click here) and the full English text of Correctio Filialis De Haeresibus Propagatis(click here). One can peruse the 62 signatories (click here) which interestingly was signed by Opus Dei’s Dr. Gerard J. M. van den Aardweg, the European editor of the Empirical Journal of Same-Sex Sexual Behavior, and only one Bishop, Bernard Fellay the Superior General of the SSPX. The list is a who’s who of those upset with Francis. One more person of interest to readers is Fr. Robert Brucciani, the District superior of the SSPX in Great Britain, who was responsible for the disgustingBrook Sexual Behaviors Traffic Light Tool being part of the SSPX’s “St. Michael’s School Child Protection Policy, Procedure and Guidance”. Noticeably absent are the signatures of Raymond Burke, a false conservative; Walter Brandmuller, who must still be considering a ‘fraternal correction’; and Athanasius Schneider, he must be busy with interreligious dialogue!
Now that the “Filial Correction” has been made public, how will Francis respond?
