Letter From the Periphery: "First Comes the Pastoral Schism, Then Comesthe Doctrinal"

Edit: this doesn't appear in Chiesa yet, but we're impatient so here it is.

(Rome) The Vatican expert Sandro Magister has published the thoughts "of a non-Italian prelate, whose name deserves confidentiality."

Using a Case by Case Pastoral Instead of Preaching is a Dangerous Game

from ***

After the Synod  some bishops and cardinals that the Church declared they should "be attentive to", "discerning of" and "accompany" the Church.   The "art of pastoral care" and "inclusion" with a pastoral style is sought, which is not only unapparent in the final document of the Synod, but also many comments from representatives of the ecclesiastical world.

A sensitive access to the people of our time is being looked for. Personally, I am glad that the priest in the confessional takes every effort to understand my particular situation, rather than to slap me with the Catechism. But is this also a suitable access to the mass media? What happens if the non-confessional but the public communication is dominated by a case-by-by-case mentality? Can talking about the concern about the single individual replace the Christian message? Does the basic tension between liberals and conservatives perhaps have something to do with the imminent danger that the proclamation of the doctrine is  evaporating more and more?

Today's media system with its myriad digital networks represents a major challenge. The globalization of communication through interactive platforms has changed the process of the formation of public opinion. The attitude of the Church towards this reality requires a different point than the local pastoral.

If a very good shepherd of souls, to the man of good will, tells  a homosexual in a direct conversation that he does not want to condemn him, then that's a good thing.  But then in the case that this good shepherd of souls is located in a plane, and says the same thing to the journalists around the world, we are dealing with two completely different levels. In the latter case, the words are incorporated directly into the commercial and political space of the medial field.

Almost all the Western media are characteristically secular or agnostic  and interpret the religious themes in the horizontal plane, that is, in the political, historical, sociological, but not on their corresponding vertical plane toward God. What about the transcendent dimension of a message? The original sin? No, that does not count for anything. The only thing that matters is the media sensation. The reader or the viewer wants a story that causes a sensation: "The Church condemns homosexuals no longer." That's a message! And the next chapter? "The church has changed its sexual morality". And then: "The validity of the Ten Commandments depends on the decision of each person in his own conscience."  The durability of the value of such messages is only but brief. The media system always requires a new blockbuster. If the pastoral discourse replaces the teaching of doctrine, then the  result will be an erroneous media presence in the Church.

But some shepherds understand these mechanisms very well. Perhaps they also understand the difference between communication in counseling and communication in the mass media. Maybe they are just afraid of the media. They are afraid of internet bullying, in a martyrdom in the circus of the published opinion.  Most desirable is a pastor who condemns no one. This can go so far as some flirt with the press or on TV or even develop a "Stockholm Syndrome" to ally with  his own kidnappers. Is that not ultimately the desire of a Church that finds broad support: a privileged Church?

Whatever the reasons may be, the proclamation of  doctrine has now receded into the background. It does not explain more what the Church has always declared true and good, or what She has always declared wrong and bad. One is content, however, upon merely  explaining  that not all cases are equal. What consequences will this have? What will that mean for the unity of the Church and the pastoral practice? What about evangelization? Among the faithful who remain faithful to the teaching of the Church, it will be the cause  of confusion and discomfort. One can already find in many countries, that progressivist circles are benefiting in the meantime from the lack of a binding proclamation,  to relativize the teaching and to require an adjustment to the time. This is a dangerous game. It can lead to a schism in the Church: first in the pastoral practice and even in teaching.

What would the Apostle Paul do? He didn't speak upon the Areopagus to the Gentiles  with a situation-dependent pastoral care. He also didn't speak  immediately of Christ, but first of the culture which he had found  there. He pointed to his listeners that he had seen their gods and their sanctuaries in Athens and that he understood their world. He knew that the better he understood their world, the better he would be understood.

Undoubtedly, today we have to show that we have understood the idols of the 21st century, such as the optimization of worship, hedonism or the technologisation, to show that we have  better on offer.  Firstly, however,  we must yet realize that we can't do that  only on a  Case-by-case pastoral care. In order to succeed, we must first declare the Church's teaching, and make it suitable for the media, but not adapted to the media. Faithful to the faith, but not with the communication style of the past.

Jesuit Antonio Spadaro on the issue: Is Communication Style of Pope Francis Condemned to Misunderstandings?

As far as the letter from the periphery. Sandro Magister points to an Aleteia interview with the Jesuit Antonio Spadaro from the Civilta Cattolica on the communication style of Pope Francis last April. Father Spadaro is one of the closest confidants of the pope, as particularly demonstrated around the Synod of Bishops. In the interview the question was asked whether the communication style of the Pope does not entail the risk of misunderstanding in itself. Here is the question and answer of Spadaro.

Aleteia: "Is there a danger of being misunderstood? Some pastors complain, the faithful who are divorced and remarried come at them, putting them in the role of the 'evil one,' with the statement, "the Pope said ''?

Father Antonio Spadaro: "There is a danger of misunderstanding concerning the words of the Pope  and is part of their communicative ability. The communication, if it is real, is ambiguous. If it is, however, only from press releases from formulas and lessons, the word is clear, but does not communicate. The Pope has a clear choice: to favor  pastoral care and to talk to people. Certainly this is ripe for  possible misunderstandings, but at the same time it moves, it moves, the people of God to appeal to their shepherds. The pastors are called today to re-read the Gospel, to explain it to the people better, to be shaken by the words of Francis. The word of the Pope is not the last, is not definitive, it lacks judgment, but the Word  is able to move the people of God and to initiate processes. This is a key to understand Bergoglio. He is a Pope who does things, but one who initiates  processes. "

Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Settimo Cielo / MiL

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

Pope Thinks Pious Clergy is Creepy

Edit: I've found that leftist clergy favored by Bergoglio is the most likely to be creepy, unstable and engage in illegal and anti-social acts. And how many times has anyone heard Father Flapdoodle at St. Gay's Parish complain about "rigidity"?

Does he even know what piety means?

POPE FRANCIS TODAY described some Catholic priests as so scary and neurotic he keeps well away from them.

In comments at a conference on training for the priesthood, the 78-year-old pontiff revealed he is instinctively suspicious of overly pious candidates.

I will tell you sincerely, I’m scared of rigid priests. I keep away from them. They bite!

His remarks drew laughs from the audience, but Francis was making the serious point that some people drawn to a clerical career are fundamentally unstable, and that this inevitably creates problems for the church if they are not weeded out.

http://www.thejournal.ie/pope-francis-neurotic-priests-unstable-doctor-2458376-Nov2015/

Wailing and Lamentation From the Vatican

The Vatican in View

Guest Post by Manfred Ferrari *

In these days a time bomb has exploded in the Vatican, whose existence was long known to insiders. The Pope from Argentina had tried to transform the existing framework into a "church of the poor". He did so with good intentions.  He ignores the fact that the Vatican is a construct that has been shaped over the centuries. Francis could not or would not see that the Curia is a powerful apparatus whose middle management is more important than the honorable leadership of cardinals and bishops. The Pope from distant Argentina, whose authoritarian management style is well attested, veiled by a populist posturing, is  able to enforce his new thinking against the wishes of the powers of the Vatican.

Now a "palace revolution" has been inflamed. The anonymous prelates of the second rank have made themselves known to journalists. For many connoisseurs, the outbreak of this situation had  long expected. The more his acceptance by the Catholic foot soldiers increased, the more the internal anger at the unconventional style of leadership became known. Dozens of wrong decisions were never made public because they were hardly interesting for the media. They concerned marginal theological questions but   fell well within the competence of middle management.  Curial archbishops and Cardinals are easily interchangeable. The "Middle Management" of the Vatican rarely changes rapidly. Yet many of the papal decisions were and are marked by a shocking naivety. It was quickly  becoming known that Francis was planning changes that would change the very structure of the Church to its foundations.

A small example. For decades it was customary that the diocese of large dioceses were occupied by bishops from smaller diocesan sees. So the experience of aspirants could be tested and a pool career could be created. Francis  took over it filled the major archdioceses of Bologna and Palermo with simple priests. Imagine how dismayed the passed over episcopal candidates were, and the pontiff grumbled.

At the beginning of his pontificate, the Pope spontaneously made the managing director of his priests  retirement fund,  chief director of the IOR, an important post in the Vatican.  It soon became apparent that Mons. Ricci was dismissed from the diplomatic service years ago, because of his aberrosexual affairs.  Ricci's personnel dossier simply  lacked these distressing pages.  Francis refused to reverse the decision. How should the Curia take such Pontifex seriously? Almost everyone at the Vatican knew of the misconduct of the priest.

And the waste in the Vatican under Pope Francis has increased rather than decreased. While the Pontiff symbolically pulls up in the small car in front of the White House, he flies his Cardinals in private Swiss MAX AIR to Astana in Kazakhstan to attend the inauguration of the new Greek Catholic Church, a convenience that should have cost around 20,000 Swiss francs.

For many members of the curia this Pope is simply no longer acceptable, because no one really knows where he stands morally. Francis has become famous for his contradictory statements. Was it  not  he himself who said on the flight from Manila to Rome: "Who am I to judge?" And then many more prelates ask, who else may judge, if not the Pope?

The Pope  continues to "wallow"  in the enthusiasm of the masses. The trouble is that departures from the Catholic Church in Germany have risen sharply.  Where is the eagerly anticipated "Francis effect"? Italy's (left)  media cheers him, and the atheistic Scalfari, editor of La Repubblica, boasts to be a friend of Francis. But there remain a few hundred hypocrites in the Vatican who perform for kippers before the pope and give him the illusion of a "pope
 for all".  But the pope from Argentina is in danger, even before his death, to find a new place to live. In the Vatican itself there will be little room for a second Pope pensioner.

* Manfred Ferrari, Vatican expert, kathmedia.org, fotoferrari.com

Picture: fotoferrari.com

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

Islamic Gunmen Attack Hotel in Mali

Edit: Vatican II states that religious hostility that has characterized relations between Muslims and Christians is a thing of the past. 

Just what parts of Vatican II were infallible again?  I'm asking this question because it seems amply plain that Muslims haven't quite got the message no matter how much the current man we are told is now Pope might suggest otherwise, or protest his outmoded 1960s-era message of peace.

[Telegraph] A building contractor who works at the Radisson hotel in Bamako has told the Daily Telegraph: 

"When I was going to the hotel in the morning, I saw people arriving in a diplomatic vehicle. There were three with guns. They killed the security guards oustide the hotel and took their weapons. 

"And then they went inside. And I heard more shooting."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/12006988/Mali-Bamako-terrorist-attack-170-hostages-Paris-live.html

Rome Makes New Proposal to SSPX

[Cathcon] The Holy See has made a new proposal to the Society of St. Pius X. Specifically, it relates to the status of the SSPX. The Fraternity is not canonically recognized and therefore for decades has been in a state of suspension, which leads to different interpretations among canon lawyers and bishops as to whether it is part of the Catholic Church or not.

A sedivacantist website of the United States claimed that an agreement between the SSPX which was founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Rome was imminent. This was denied to gloria.tv by Father Franz Schmidberger, Rector of the International Seminary of the SSPX in Zaitzkofen in Bavaria.

Father Schmidberger confirmed the proposal, but denies agreement.

http://cathcon.blogspot.com/2015/11/rome-makes-new-proposal-to-sspx.html?m=1

And Katholisches...

AMDG

Fabulous Mercy Vestments Approved by Vatican

Edit: remember when the Vatican Website in the German Section was celebrating "gay pride"?  

Here are the official fabulous vestments of mercy.

Every time people complain about this sort of thing, they take it down. How about doing some personnel changes?

H/t: TheBonesyouhavecrisheaythrill

http://thatthebonesyouhavecrushedmaythrill.blogspot.com/?m=1

Remember these fabulous seamless vestments?

"One Faith, One Baptism, One Lord" -- Papal Riddles: Is Pope Francis Calling for Inter-communion?

(Rome) Pope Francis visite the Evangelical Lutheran community of Rome on November 15th. That had been done before him by John Paul II. and Benedict XVI., albeit with slightly different accents. Pope Francis responded to some questions. The second question asked by Anke de Bernardinis, made a veiled question for Pope Francis to answer her question if after the interreligious general audience of 28 October, in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Rome there would be intercommunion? Which understanding does Pope Francis have of Eucharist? The word "Eucharist" was never used by the Pope, instead, he used the Protestant community's preferred expression "Lord's Supper" throughout.

My name is Anke de Bernardinis and like many people in my community, I'm married to an Italian who is a Roman Catholic Christian. We lived together happily for many years and share the joys and pains. It hurts us very much to be separated by faith, and not to be able to go together to the Lord's Supper. Would that we could  do at last as community [ital. comunione] to reach this point?
 

Cardinal Kasper as Pope Francis mentions him  

Pope Francis: Thank you, madam. [Silence]

When asked together to share the Lord's Supper, it is not easy for me to answer you, especially not in the presence of theologians like Cardinal Kasper! I'm afraid! [laughs;laughter; Applause]

I think that the Lord has told us when he gave us this mandate: "Do this in remembrance of me". And if we share the Lord's Supper, remember and imitate him, we do the same, that the Lord Jesus has done. And the Lord's supper, there will be the last banquet in the New Jerusalem, but that will be the last. On the way, however, I wonder - and I do not know how to answer, but  will make your question my own - I ask myself: Is this common Lord's Supper the goal of a path or it is to go the provision for the road to go together? I leave the question to the theologians, those who understand something of it.

It is true that in some ways  that there are no differences between us; that we have the same doctrine  - I underline the word, a difficult-to-understand word - but I wonder: But have we not the same baptism? And if we have the same baptism, then we have to go together.

They are a testimony of a deep path, because it is a conjugal way, a way of the family, of human love and said shared faith. We have the same baptism. If you feel as a sinner - and I feel myself very much a sinner - if your husband feels like a sinner, then you go to the Lord and ask him for forgiveness; your husband does the same and goes to the priest and asks for absolution. This is a help  to keep the baptism alive.

Pope takes notes during the question by Anke de Bernardinis, to which he responds spontaneously and freely

When you pray together, this baptism is growing strongly; if you teach your children who Jesus is, why Jesus came, what Jesus has done for us, you are doing the same whether in the Lutheran language or in the Catholic language, but it is the same. The Question: And the Supper? There are issues on which one, if one is honest with himself and with the few theological "Lumina", which I have, nonetheless must respond, see for yourself. "This is my body, this is my blood," the Lord has said, "do this in remembrance of me", and that's a provision on the way which helps us to go. I had a great friendship with a 48-year-old, married Anglican bishop with two children and he had this difficulty: a Catholic wife, Catholic children, himself a bishop. He accompanied his wife and children on Sunday for Mass, then went and directed the worship with his community. It was a step of participation in the Lord's Supper. Then he was gone, the Lord has called him, a righteous man. On your question I will pose to you  only one question: How can I go with my husband, so that the Lord's Supper accompanies me on my way? This is a problem that everyone must answer. But a pastor friend told me: "We believe that the Lord is there at present. He is present. You believe that the Lord is present. And where is the difference?" ---- "Ah, there are the statements, interpretations ... ".

Life is greater than the explanations and interpretations. Take always with respect to the baptism: "One faith, one baptism, one Lord," Paul   tells us, and draw the consequences. I'll never dare to give permission to do this, because it is not my responsibility. One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Speak with the Lord and continue. I do not dare to say more. [Applause]

The video for the answer

That's how Pope Francis  answered the question of a Lutheran. Did Pope Francis in his response urge inter-communion? Is  the answer of the head of the Catholic Church to be taken seriously: "I'm not saying that you should do it, but do it!"? What theological reasoning is this guide to action based on a question that has separated the Protestant denominations of the Catholic Church for half a millennium.

The video with the original sound begins at the point where the appropriate question is asked.

,

Text: Giuseppe Nardi 

Bild: CTV (Screenshots)

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

Pope Recommends Sacrilegious Communions

But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 

For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.

Edit: never mind Holy Scripture, canon law, or the constant practice of the Church over 2,000 years, logic, or  the unanimous agreement of the Fathers. 

Surely everyone who's been at the parish level for the last 50 years or so has seen this kind of sacrilege hand-in-hand with other illegitimate practices like Eucharistic Ministers and Communion in the Hand. He's abusing his magisterium by suggesting sacrilege.   

Here's the article from the heretical NCR:

ROMEPope Francis has strikingly suggested that Lutherans married to Catholics can personally discern whether to take Communion in the Catholic church, saying it is not his role to give permission to such persons but to encourage them to listen to what God is telling them about their situations. [You're supposed to teach them, as Pope.]

In a moving ecumenical visit to Rome’s Evangelical Lutheran church Sunday afternoon, the pontiff also called for “reconciled diversity” between the Christian denominations and said both must ask forgiveness of each other for historic persecutions. 

The pope’s words about the issue of communion for Lutherans will likely attract wide attention, as Catholic teaching currently prohibits members of other Christian denominations from taking communion in the church in normal circumstances.

http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-suggests-lutherans-can-discern-taking-catholic-communion-individually
Image: Utah Local News.

Benedict's Quote Which Bergoglio Found Offensive

  [Father Ray Blake Blog] "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only bad and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." Manuel II Palaiologos (Byzantine Emperor from 1391 to 1425) quoted by Benedict XVI at Regensburg September, 2006.

To understand much of our present situation, the mess in the Church and in the world it is worth reading this extraordinarily perceptive speech.

Just a few thought going through my mind at the moment - The big one is can the West self destructive low birthrate ever be reversed?
But then - must the Church re-examine its relationship with Islam? Must the West? Where will it lead us? What will be the reaction of the majority, the secularists? How do we evangelise Islamists? Is the Church capable of it?

http://marymagdalen.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/pray-for-paris.html?m=1

Confidant of John Paul II: "We Are in the Midst of an Islamic Invasion"

Bishop Tadeusz Pieronek: "The EU is Aiming
to Islamicize Europe"

(Warsaw) The EU cares more about the interests of the financial oligarchy than the real concerns of the poor.  At the same time they are aiming at the  Islamization of Europe. These are the words of Msgr. Tadeusz Pieronek, Emeritus Auxiliary Bishop of Sosnoviec and former Secretary General of the Polish Episcopal Conference. The Professor of Theology at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow is considered an expert in canon law and was a great friend and confidant of Pope John Paul II.   Msgr. Pieronek is titular bishop of Cufruta in the former Roman province Bycancium in present-day Tunisia, which has been under Islamic rule since 698.  Bruno Volpe led an interview for La Fede quotidiana   with Archbishop Pieronek. Here is an excerpt from it.

Archbishop Pieronek: "I do not make policy. But I think of the recent elections in my country. The Liberal Party, which was in the government, had pushed  too far to the left, followed  EU directives without contradiction that today often do not coincide with the Christian values ​​and the Catholic tradition of our country. As Poles we have to pay attention to our peculiarities and our identity. 

As European citizens, we have not only the possibility, but - I would say - even the duty,  to peacefully rebel against this Europe, which is currently managed by different standards than those that we want and that are contrary to Christian values. 

An EU that is very attentive to the interests of financial oligarchies, but pays little attention to those among the real poor. This does not take into account the European Christian values ​​in its. 

In addition, they have succeeded to Islamicize the continent  piece by piece. We are in the midst of an Islamic invasion.

Is Orban right?

Bishop Pieronek: Despite his limits, he is trying to the Christian character of Europe. rope.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: La Fede quotidiana

Trans:: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

"The Chaos in the Vatican" -- Is the Media Honeymoon for Pope Francis at an End?

Gianpaolo Pansa on Pope Francis

(Rome) Is the media honeymoon with Pope Francis coming to an end? Is the media circus becoming tired of him? Is the anti-Ratzinger effect spent? Or does the reigning pontiff no longer meet the expectations placed in him?

Giampaolo Pansa, a known source for left journalism in Italy, has attacked Pope Francis in an unusually sharp manner. This Panza is a historical companion of Eugenio Scalfari, the preferred atheist interlocutor of the Pope. Pansa was one of the founders of the Scalfari daily newspaper La Repubblica, its deputy, and he served as editor in chief from 1978 to 1991. Since 2000 Panza is again constant columnist of the left media flagship.

In 1987  he also created the column "Bestiario" (Bestiary), at the first  it appeared in the bourgeois weekly magazine Panorama, from 1990 in the left-wing weekly magazine L'Espresso, since 2008 in the left-liberal daily Il Riformista and now it is printed in the right-wing liberal daily newspaper since 2011, Libero. What has remained unchanged is the author of the Bestiary, namely Giampaolo Pansa.

The example is intended to document that something is seeming to change in the relationship between the media and Pope Francis.

Chaos in the Vatican. Pope Francis brings more confusion than Ignazio Marino

Il Bestiario

"Is that clear?" This sarcastic question of just three short words with a question mark, which Pope Jorge Mario Bergoglio growled under an improvised press conference will go down in history. The meeting with journalists took place on board an aircraft, which brought  the pope from one stage of his autumnal trip to the US. The pope had fired them, in order to deny that he had invited Ignazio Marino [since June 2013 Mayor of Rome's left Democratic Party, resigned on 12 October 2015 in accordance with a corruption scandal], at that time still Mayor of Rome,  to the World Meeting of Families, which was being held in Philadelphia. But unfortunately for Pope  Bergoglio, he was not aware that his famous "Is that clear?” would also remain a part of his history as head of the Vatican. A real mess, with all due respect and without innuendo, which is still phenomenal, as the collapse which Marino left, when they had chased him out of the Capitol.

What Does  Bestiary Think about Bergoglio? He talks too much

Should I say what Bestiary thinks about Bergoglio? The past of each of us is a peephole to what he will be like in his future. I speak mainly about us old gentlemen, as much the undersigned as the current Pope. Pope Francis is an unpredictable figure, an inexhaustible source of problems, even for himself. He talks too much. Every day he invents something new. is how my grandmother Caterina would have complained, at her praying daily of the rosary, after all, the whole Psalter. He is always on the move. He meddles in matters that really do not concern him, since he is not a political leader. Finally, he shows a strong tendency to the left as it seems.  Libero has already designated him as Peronist. For the rest, even though he is descended from a family of Asti, he is also a son of Argentina, the landing place of many Italian emigrants.

Antonio Socci, a really excellent colleague who knows all about priests, bishops and popes, has recalled in this newspaper since, that Bergoglio had left a bad impression of himself when he was head of the Argentine Jesuits. At that time he proved to be a disaster and caused lots of problems. According to a Big of the Society of Jesus, he had surrounded himself with a retinue of super loyal, Peronist Pasdaran and was displeased in no way is to be the object of a personality cult. This led to a number of problems which are not yet solved even after many years. Maybe the same ones who today also happen in the Vatican.

A Hellish Landscape Comes to Light

Do I speak badly of the Pope? Not at all, I think, but even if that were so, I would commit no sin. I'm not religious. On the evening before I fall asleep, I ask my parents, my succor in his sleep and let me wake up in good health and sound mind again the next morning. Therefore, I can afford it, to think that Bergoglio should ask himself the fatal question "Is that clear?". The reason for this lies in front of everyone. With thanks to the publication of books by Gianluigi Nuzzi and Emiliano Fittipaldi, it comes to light, revealing a landscape that seems like hell, though it lies in the shadow of the dome of St. Peter.

As mayor of Rome, Ignazio Marino will have recognized too late the weeds that grew around the clique run by Salvatore Buzzi & Co.  of “Capitol-Mafia". This has now earned him his ironic nickname 

Ignaro (ignorant) instead of Ignazio. But even showing himself more ignorant than he was Pope Bergoglio. His court today trying to assert that the reports and research by Nuzzi and Fittipaldi would reflect a disastrous situation which had already been fixed by the drastic intervention of the Pope. But the bestiary seems just a useless porch. Not to say that this is a completely unsuitable escape.

Vaticanopoli Many Times Worse than Tangentopoli

I have told the tragedy of Italian parties for many years.  And every time I was overwhelmed with protests of many of the porter caste that dominated both the First and the Second Republic. If they do not accuse me of spreading falsehoods, they claimed that the defects described by me and other colleagues in daily and weekly newspapers were related to the past. The that blots that I discovered had already been resolved. When in February 1992 the Tangentopoli bribery scandal broke out and the investigation by the Prosecutor of Milan brought undeniable facts to light, it also came to light that the rot was just not eliminated. The earthquake that followed, we still remember all too well.

Today one must have the honesty to say that the dramatic scenario that has everything on the banality of entertainment films related to  the accountant Ugo Fantozzi, is also coming to light behind the sacred walls of the Vatican, which is hundreds of times greater than what came to  light at the time of Tangentopoli. And that with an aggravating factor: this time it comes to a reality, and thus also to an authority which is much much greater than the political caste of Italian parties.

Francis Has Not Only the "Cross" of Bertone to Wear, but Vallejo and Chaouqui

The Vatican and the Catholic Church are the only hope that millions have remained faithful. This hope appears to be going to rot,  that is flushed to the surface, causing a myriad of believers great pain, the horrified witness a disaster that no one had expected. And we are only at the beginning. Yesterday there was a cartoon published about the pope on the front page of Corriere della Sera, in which has   Emilio Giannelli has drawn an new class of satire. The cartoon "Via Crucis" shows us Bergoglio who wears a large cross on his shoulder: Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone. But an old saying goes, the devil is in the details. This also applies to the Vatican disaster. Bergoglio has namely to do with two extras: a Spanish prelate and a Moroccan lady. He is located  in the papal prison, the only reason she was not jailed is because she is pregnant. But the media are relentless and not all are obedient to Francis.

Part of a functioning free press  is an iron mechanism: competition. Even the benevolent media can not long stand aside and leave the hostile-minded media field for the current incumbent in the Vatican. As told in an old motto? That's capitalism, little one! The very "generous" photos of Francesca Chaouqui,  of the until recently completely unknown PR consultant, add ingredients as spicy as malicious to a story which will have nothing on Boccaccio.

The Mayor and the Luxury Apartment in the Vatican

In comparison to this, even the chaos in the Capitol and the figure of mayor Ignazio Marino gets its real dimension back. The receipts of the poor "Ignaro" have, at best, the weight of a feather compared to the financial machinations of dubious figures together with high prelates who behave  "like Pharaohs" (Bergoglio dixit). Therefore Marino's words can not be ignored. He stated, and I quote the Messaggero of 11 October: "I'm humiliated. They treated me like the Mafia boss Provenzano. My wife can not leave the house. If you can imagine that?"

Last Tuesday, the now ex-mayor has acted properly when he took questions from Giovanni Floris on television. Not even with the merciless caricature of Maurizio Crozza did he bat an eyelash. What should we do with him? Put him against  the wall, exile, withdraw his civil rights? Ignazio the ignorant will remain among us. And I'm willing to take a bet that he will not leave the storeroom  locked. He will continue to speak, write and revenge, as I would also do in his place.

Does anyone remember the Garibaldi anthem, which was written in 1859 by Luigi Mercantini? It  began with the famous words: "Opens the graves, bring the dead out". If Marino really wants it, then he would have to open many graves. And since we're at it, he could tell us at the same time, how  he has managed to rent a luxury apartment in the Vatican. 

Introduction / translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Libero Online (screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG

Evil American Cardinal Reaches 75 Today

Edit: after a career of being a barnacle on the Church's hull, Cardinal Donald Wuerl is unlikely to be sent to rest, and will likely continue his highly successful career as a lupine predator in the fields of the Lord.

Any bets?

Photo from Lifesite…
AMDG

Pope Francis Addresses Slovakian Bishops -- Many Words Without MuchIntegrity

Edit: Catholic Culture likes to cling to these kinds of addresses as though they contradict the very highly documented and public acts and omissions of this papacy. Here, Pope Bergoglio urges Slovakian Bishops to stand fast to their Catholic identity during their recent ad limina visit as very hopefully offered by Jeff Mirus at Catholic Culture.

Their ability to tolerate two or more contradictory propositions on principles they claim to hold dear, uttered by a person they regard as above all reproach is truly a feat to behold.
[Catholic Culture] In an address given to Slovakia’s bishops during their ad limina visit, Pope Francis called upon Slovaks to “maintain their cultural identity and heritage of ethical and spiritual values,” a heritage that is “closely linked to the Catholic tradition.” [Empty words, since +Bergoglio himself is advocating the mass imigration which even threatens the Vatican itself.]

The nation of 5.4 million is 74% Catholic.
“I very much appreciate how much you are doing on behalf of the family,” the Pontiff continued, nine months after the nation’s bishops urged voters to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and to bar adoption by homosexual couples. [Why does Mirus have to fill in the blanks for him?]
Noting that youth are tempted to “hedonism, mediocrity, and instant success,” the Pope told the bishops that young people “need to have from you clear instructions about doctrine and morals, to build, in the city of man, the city of God.” [The bishops have their work cut out for them when +Bergoglio makes his own pronouncements appearing to legitimize and encourage the "homosexual lobby".]
“In our day, it is even more necessary to illuminate the path of people with Christian principles, seizing the opportunity the current situation offers to develop a new evangelization, which, with a new language, makes it easier to understand Christ’s message,” he added. [I shudder to think. He wants to add Pelagian confusion even to things Christ was clear about.]

Pope Francis also called upon the bishops to welcome migrants “in a spirit of charity and respect for the human person, in the context of a necessary observance of legality.”
- See more at: http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=26684#sthash.Zja5du0d.dpuf

Also, take a look at the some analysis of the upcoming  Apostolic Exortarion being threatened by the Pope:

https://harvestingthefruit.com/francis-reveals-contents-of-upcoming-exhortation/

From Saul to Paul of the Traditional Rite

(Milan) The Christian faith always aims to conversion and repentance This is what distinguishes the truth of God from the ideologies of men. This lifetime opportunity and possibility is what distinguishes Christianity. This allows diverse and unexpected ways. Such is reported from the Archdiocese of Milan. ""The infamous Msgr. Luigi Manganini until the end of 2012 was Archpriest at the Cathedral of Milan and master of ceremonies for the Archbishop, a sworn enemy of the traditional rite and as grim and zealous opponent of the Catholic tradition, has celebrated today in the traditional form of the Roman Rite", says the traditional site Chiesa e postconcilio.

For Decades, a Bitter Opponent of the Traditional Rite

For decades Msgr. Manganini was a fierce opponent of tradition and the traditional rite, he "insulted it in every possible way". Among other things, he spoke publicly of "old scrap iron destined for the heap,"  said Messa in Latino.

Canon Manganini was not just any priest, but until his retirement in late 2012, the most prominent liturgist in the Ambrosian Archdiocese.

Notorious is the episode when the already elderly Msgr. Angelo Amodeo as privately celebrating Msgr. Manganini canon of the Cathedral of Milan, was on his way a few months before his death in 2012 in the house of the canons, to say the Holy Mass in the traditional Ambrosian rite, as it had been approved in 1954 by Blessed Archbishop Cardinal Ildefons Schuster. On the way he met Msgr. Manganini. When he saw the maniple and chalice veil, he berated him loudly and hurled against Msgr. Amodeo all the  curses  which one can only imagine. This Holy Mass was known as the "insult Mass" in  Milan Church history.

"The Holy Mass was to be celebrated, as if we were in the Soviet Union"

Msgr. Manganini at the celebration of Holy Mass in the traditional rite

Or the episode where in Saregno he forbade the celebration of the traditional Mass at first, then allowed, but only behind "closed doors", on the grounds that such a celebration would trigger "astonishment" among the faithful. Without rehashing all the details: In Saregno a conference on  Blessed Newman took place in 2010 with.Abbé Jean-Pierre Herman, the Secretary of the then Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels, the just consecrated Msgr. Leonard who wanted to celebrate the Holy Mass in the traditional rite.  Msgr. Manganini forbade it and then allowed the celebration only when Rome intervened. Nevertheless, he tried wherever possible to hinder the celebration. He knew at that very time already that the traditional Mass attracts the faithful. Therefore, the doors of the Church had to be closed. The faithful could only reach  it through the sacristy into the church. They had almost to secretly sneak into the church, as if they did something illegal or  to hide in the Jacobin France of the Revolution or in Communist Russia of the Soviet era. But what happened in Saregno 2010 was not played out in the time of the French Revolution and not in the Soviet Union, but in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Milan under Archbishop Dionigi Cardinal Tettamanzi  and had been ordered by Msgr. Manganini.

The Rediscovery of the Traditional Rite

Msgr. Manganini is now retired and it was very quiet around him. A few months ago he accepted the request of a group of faithful in Milan to celebrate the traditional Rite. "The formerly so despised and traditional believers are apparently the only ones still showing  honor to him, while in the higher church circles that he defended so zealously, no one seems to look after him," said Chiesa e postconcilio.

"What would those now say of Msgr. Manganini who was once an idol? Will they also go the way to Damascus, which was opened by Christ for all? " says Messa in Latino.

But Christ makes it possible that from Saul there can always be a Paul. And so it was that old Msgr Manganini, from whose mouth now came the words, which are a cause of real "astonishment":. Introibo ad altare Dei. Ad Deum qui Laetificat Juventutem meam.

Msgr. Manganini was ordained a priest on 21 June 1958 by the then Archbishop of Milan, Giovanni Battista Cardinal Montini, the future Pope Paul VI.  even in traditional Ambrosian rite.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Chiesa e postconcilio

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

Pharisees and Saducees of Our Time

The Sandhedrin of the time of Jesus was the Council of
Sadducees and Pharisees

by Roberto de Mattei *

Criticism of the "Pharisees" is often found in the words of Pope Francis. In numerous speeches 2013-2015 he has spoken on the "disease of the Pharisees" (September 7, 2013), "accusing Jesus of not honoring the Sabbath day" (April 1, 2014), from the "temptation of self-sufficiency and  clericalism, that codifying of faith in rules and instructions, like the scribes, the Pharisees and the lawyers of the time of Jesus" (September 19, 2014). During Angelus of 30 August 2015, he said: "As  then for  the Pharisees there is also for us the danger that we order, or worse: to consider ourselves better than the other based solely on the fact that we keep the rules, the customs,  even if we do not love our neighbor, are hard of heart, proud and arrogant. "On November 8, 2015, he compared   the attitude of the scribes and the Pharisees and their "exclusion", to Jesus, who was based in "inclusion." The reference to the Pharisees is equally evident in the speech in which the Pope concluded last October 24  for the XIV. Ordinary Synod on the Family. Who else are the "closed heart, who often hide behind even the teachings of the Church or behind  good intentions to sit  in the chair of Moses and - sometimes condescendingly and with superficiality - to address  the difficult cases and the injured Families,"  if not "the Pharisees, who made ​​religion to an infinite chain of commandments (June 26, 2014)?" Pharisees seem to be anyone who defend with stubborn pride, the existence of absolute and incontrovertible commandments, laws, rules of the Church.

Who Were the Pharisees Really?

Who were the Pharisees really? When Jesus began his teaching years, the Jewish world was divided into different currents, about which we are told from the Gospels, among historians, like Flavius Josephus (3 -100 AD.) in his works "Antiquities of the Jews" and "History of the Jewish War ". The main sects were those of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. The Pharisees were concerned with the details of the religious rules, but had lost the spirit of truth. They were arrogant men who forged the prophecies about the Messiah and interpreted the divine law  according to their opinions. The Sadducees taught even more serious mistakes. They doubted the immortality of the soul and rejected the majority of the Holy Scriptures. Both were fighting for power in the Sanhedrin, who, when Jesus was condemned, was led by the Sadducees.

The Sadducees are even mentioned by Mark and Matthew three times, while the Pharisees occur repeatedly in the Gospels of Mark and Matthew.  Chapter 23 of St. Matthew in particular, is an open accusation against them: "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Your tithe mint, anise and cumin, and left the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy and faithfulness. One must do the one thing without neglecting the others."

The St. Thomas Aquinas, Augustine and Bonaventure about the Pharisees

St. Thomas Aquinas explains in his commentary on this passage of Matthew that the Pharisees were not condemned by the Lord because they paid a tithe, "but only because they valued the lower more than  the spiritual commandments. But [deliver the tithe] in practice he seems to praise it, saying: 'These things shall be done' (Haec oportuit facere) according to the law, as Chrisostomos adds (Summa Theologica, II-IIae, q 87,. a. 2 ad 3).

St. Augustine said, referring to the Pharisees, of which St. Luke writes (18:10 to 14), that he has not been convicted of his works, but because he has boasted of his alleged sanctity (Epistola 121,1,3).  St. Augustine explains the same in his letter to Casulanus that the Pharisee was not condemned because he fasted (Luke 18,11ff), but "because he was inflamed in pride over the publicans" (Epistola 36,4,7). Because it is "fruitless for a man to fast twice during the week as the Pharisees, on the other hand, yet it is an exercise of religion in a  believer who is humble or  one who is a faithfully humble man  when Scripture does not say that the Pharisees had been condemned, but rather that the tax collector was justified." (Epistola 36,4,7).

The most concise definition of the Pharisees is found from St. Bonaventure: "Pharisaeus significat illos qui propter opera exteriora se reputant bonos; et ideo non habent lacrymas compunctionis" (De S. Mary Magdalene Sermo I, in: Opera omnia, Ad Claras Aquas, Florence 2001 Vol IX, col 556b..). "A Pharisees is described as one who thinks of themselves good because of their outer works  and therefore has no tears of penitence."

Pharisees were Proud Conservatives, the Sadducees Unbelieving Liberals

Jesus condemned the Pharisees because he knew their hearts: they were sinners, but considered themselves holy. The Lord wanted to teach his disciples that the external fulfillment of good works is not enough. That which is a good act is not only so in its own property, but the intention. Nevertheless, if it is true that good works are not enough, if good intentions are lacking, as it is also true that the good intentions are not enough, if good works are missing.   Gamaliel, Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea (Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1), and even St. Paul (Acts 23.6) who belonged to the party of the Pharisees, were better than that of the Sadducees, precisely because they, despite their hypocrisy, acclaimed the laws, while the Sadducees, from whose ranks the high priests Annas and Caiaphas came (Jewish Antiquities 18.35.95), also disregarded this.

The Pharisees were proud conservatives, the Sadducees unbelieving liberals. But both unified rejection of the divine mission of Jesus (Mt 3.7 to 10).

Who are the Pharisees and the Sadducees of our time? We can give an answer to this with quiet certainty. There are those who have tried before, during and after the Synod and will try to change the practice of the Church and through the practice of their teaching, on the family and marriage.

Pharisees and Sadducees rejected the divine teachings of Jesus

Jesus proclaimed the indissolubility of marriage as God had thought from the beginning, and she founded this on the restoration of the natural law, from which the Jews had removed, and strengthened them by the raising of marriage to a Sacrament. Pharisees and Sadducees rejected this doctrine by denying the divine Word of Jesus and introducing their own opinion. They appealed disingenuously to the law of Moses, as the innovators of our time invoked an alleged tradition of the early centuries, by falsifying the history and doctrine of the Church.

For this reason, a brave bishop and defender of the true faith, Monsignor Athanasius Schneider, speaks of a "neo-Mosaic practice". "The new disciples of Moses and the new Pharisees in the two most recent Synodal Assemblies (2014 and 2015) have veiled their practical denial of the indissolubility of marriage and their occasionally lifting the Sixth Commandment under the guise of charity, by expressions like  'way of distinction,' 'accompaniment', 'orientation by the bishop ', 'dialogue with the priest', 'internal forum', 'a more complete integration into the life of the Church' which are used to eliminate the accountability [in the law] of cohabitation in cases of irregular connections as much as possible (see. Relatio finalis, no. 84-86). "

The Pharisees and Sadducees of Today

The Sadducees are the innovators who openly claim to overcome the doctrine and practice of the Church. The Pharisees are those who, although they confess the indissolubility of marriage with  their mouths, still hypocritical deny it  by their deeds, by proposing a "from-a-case-by-case" - transgression of the moral law.

The real disciples of Jesus Christ belong to neither the Party of neo-Pharisees nor the party of neo-Sadducees, both modernist, but follow the school of St. John the Baptist, who preached in the spiritual desert of his time. The Baptist was, when he denounced the Pharisees and Sadducees as a "generation of vipers" (Mt 3,7) and admonished Herod Antipas for his adultery, not hard-hearted, but moved by love for God and for souls. Hypocrites and Hardhearted were the advisers of Herod Antipas, who wanted to bring his sinful and unrepentant loose life in harmony with the teaching of Scripture.  Herod had John the Baptist executed to bring the voice of truth to silence, but the voice of the forerunner is  still audible 20 centuries later. Whoever defends sound doctrine publicly, does not follow the exaample of the Pharisees and Sadducees, but the example of St. John the Baptist and Our Lord.

Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
Picture: Youtube (Screenshot)

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Link to Kath...

AMDG