The Trevi Fountain in Rome is Colored Red "For the Blood of Christian Martyrs"

(Rome) This coming April 29, the famous Trevi Fountain in Rome will turn red as "the blood of Christian martyrs". This action seeks to raise awareness of the plight of persecuted Christians in different states.

The initiative for action comes from the Catholic aid charity Kirche in Not. Meanwhile, numerous Catholic organizations have joined the effort.

ACN published a short video to announce the action.The pictures show the horrors of the persecution of Christians. Pope Francis can  be heard in the original sound with the words:

"Our brothers shed their blood just because they are Christians."

The Trevi Fountain is the largest fountain in Rome and one of the most famous in the world. It is regarded as one of the main attractions of the Eternal City.

In 1640 the contract was issued by Pope Urban VII. for drilling the well  to Gian Lorenzo Bernini, but it was only begun in 1732.

After an extensive and thorough restoration,  the fountain was reopened five months ago.

Among visitors to Rome, it is customary to throw a coin into the fountain, which guarantees a return to the city. The coins are fished out once every year by the City Council, most recently since the restoration work began in 2013. From this point forward, this money goes to Caritas. In 2013 there were 1.2 million euros.

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

Amoris Laetitia: Pope Francis Has Proposed a "New Form of Application" of Ecclesiastical Doctrine

(Rome) Is the Spanish Episcopal Conference forging the path that the whole Church will soon be using to follow the Apostolic Letter Amoris Laetitia? Yesterday  Archbishop Carlos Osoro of Madrid, the deputy president of the Spanish Bishops' Conference held a press conference yesterday. He was accompanied by the rector of the seminary of his archdiocese, a professor of the Pontifical University of Salamanca, José María Gil Tamayo, Secretary General of the Episcopal Conference and two Jesuits who played an important role.

Ambiguities of "Amoris Laetitia" bring Archbishop of Madrid to embarrassment 

One wants to "value" the Exhortation of Pope Francis explained Archbishop Osoro the reason for the press conference. In this, however, it became clear that there is considerable unrest among clergy since Amoris Laetitia and there are numerous requests from priests asking how  they would have to act now.

After 55 minutes of the theoretical explanations involving the controversial aspects of Amoris Laetitia, there was ​​a detour, then came the first question from journalists and it was aimed immediately on the ambiguities in the papal document.  How do you respond to the "possible paradox" that a priest could grant the divorced and remarried communion and another does not.

It was one question that brought Archbishop Osoro and the others present to clear embarrassment. No one wanted to answer the question until finally the Jesuit Pablo Guerrero, pastoral theologian at the Pontifical University of Comillas, gave an answer that none of the others present contradicted, not even Archbishop Osoro.

"That would have put this decision at the discretion of the priest. But this is not the case. The Pope has asked in a clear exercise of synodality and communion with the entire College of Bishops of the Church Pastors of each diocese, to appoint the priests of his diocese a number of general and equal criteria in order to avoid arbitrary judgments. No priest should feel as if he is the owner of the word of God," Father Guerrero.

"New Style of the Magisterium" not divided into "good" and "bad"

All participants of the press conference stressed that the Church's teaching "does not change". Pope Francis had  proposed to the bishops, however, "a new form of application" of this doctrine. The papal letter "recommends," said Father Julio Martinez, Rector of the Pontifical University of Comillas and the second Jesuit at the conference table, not to divide the world into "Pure and Impure" and not in "good and bad".

"The full recognition of the Magisterium is not inconsistent with an internal Church debate. We are facing a new style of  Magisterium. It is about the harmonious coexistence between salvation and morality in order not to fall into a religious rigor."

With this the Spanish Episcopal Conference seems to acknowledge the softening of the indissolubility of marriage.  Because with the aforementioned "universal and equal criteria" that should be given to the priests in guiding, implicitly recognizing that there are situations in which the indissoluble marriage is still dissoluble. At the same time, the Episcopal Conference is trying to prevent anarchic situation  that according to Amoris Laetitia, every priest could decide at their own discretion. The Episcopal Conference is expected to draw the question of "general and identical criteria" for the clergy itself.

"Tactical finesse" of the Pope?

Prior to the publication of the post-synodal letter was, depending on the position, the worry or the hope was cherished that Pope Francis could adopt a general rule that it would accept the divorced and remarried to communion so that recognizes the divorced and remarried and lifts the indissolubility of sacramental marriage. That would have been guilty of heresy in the eyes of the defenders of the marriage sacrament. He did nothing of the sort  and everything else. The "tactical finesse" ( Secretum meum mihi ), as now emphasized by proponents and critics, lies precisely in the absence of a general rule. Thus Francis has introduced no new rule, but even more has not confirmed the existing traditional rule. He proves to be a "door opener", without being challenged on it.

In "pursuit of synodality" as the Jesuit Guerrero put it at the press conference in Madrid,  Francis put the iron in the fire by the convening of the Synod of Bishops on Marriage and Family. With Amoris Laetitia he is pushing the now-hot iron to the bishops, which specifically, since their introduction by the Second Vatican Council, is what Episcopal Conferences are meant to do. Through the unrest  borne into the church, among the faithful and the clergy, the bishops are obliged to adopt this general rule, to which the Pope has renounced.

The question is shifted to 130 Episcopal Conferences and 3,000 Dioceses

Pope Francis has burst the door open so that every Episcopal Conference and every diocesan bishop may adopt criteria to allow divorced and remarried to communion. The traditional doctrine must now be confirmed individually by each Episcopal Conference and every diocesan bishop. The probability that there will be at least only one Episcopal Conference or a bishop who softens the indissolubility of sacramental marriage is based on approximately 130 global Episcopal Conferences and Synods of Bishops and nearly 3,000 dioceses is quite likely. In any case, a question valid for the unity of the entire world Church is a question to be answered a hundred times.

The Spanish Episcopal Conference feels the actual or even perceived pressure of the faithful and priests. Uncertainties caused by Amoris Laetitia were palpable at the press conference in Madrid. Neither has it been consistently reaffirmed if the indissolubility of marriage actually means indissolubility, neither has it been affirmed that this logically leads to a categorical no to admission to the sacraments public adulterers, as it has always taught the Church.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Religion Confidencial (Screenshot)

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Edit: just a small point of disagreement.  This has been ongoing for a long time since the Episcopal Conferences were put into effect, and the tragic results in terms of the implementation of the Bugnigine Missal are clear for anyone to see who cares to. It reminds us of Father Malachi Martin's explanation of the "superforce" as that diabolical grip on the Church, freezing even some of the most fervent defenders of the Church into general inaction and lassitude.

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

"In This Respect There is an Explosive Power in Them" -- Amoris Laetitia and Schönborn's "Disobedience"

Baldisseri and Schönborn

"Farewell to the Magisterium"

(Vienna) The Catholic theologian and director of the left-liberal, and management of the  Austrian daily newspaper. Der Standard, Wolfgang Bergmann, identified the key to Amoris Laetitia yesterday in the ORF broadcast "Praxis - Religion and Society" (ORF-focus "Mother Earth"). He explains this by that which does not exist in the document, namely, the "Farewell to the Magisterium" and therefore to normative standards.

Bergmann is considered to be a "Church insider." He formerly headed the public relations of the Austrian Caritas and was communications director of the Archdiocese of Vienna. He was, until 1999. a close collaborator of Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna.

Amoris Laetitia was presented by Cardinal Schönborn not only on behalf of the Pope to the world, but has also contributed his handwriting in some cases. The first section of the controversial eighth chapter begins with the "gradualness", a keyword that  Schönborn coined in the first Synod of Bishops, 2014. Accordingly, there are no irregular situations in relationships between two people, but only a gradation in the realization of the marriage "ideal". It's a concept that has already been criticized at the time criticized as a relativistic dissolution of marriage sacrament, but it still found its way into an official papal document.

"Roman theology has come to the end"

According to Bergmann there has only been "very minimal progress" by Amoris Laetitia. However, the positive side is a "farewell to the Magisterium" initiated by Pope Francis.  The pope has written, "preaching, lyrically, citing writers, he is pedagogical-psychological [Some might say pedantic and deliberately insulting.], but theological only a few places."  But there is a reason, says Bergmann: "The Roman theology has come to the end."

Pope Francis had "opened the door for the sacraments" to public adulterers, Bergmann speaks of divorced and remarried, though in "only in two footnotes," and thus in a "hidden form".

Then Bergmann reported on the "Vienna Praxis." Cardinal Schönborn had been engaged in this praxis "for 15 years" even as he presented Amoris Laetitia at the press conference and thus even refuted  the reputation he's had so far - albeit with a decreasing tendency - the attributed Image of a "Conservative". [Nobody ever believed that once they got to know what he really was.]

"Schönborn has lived in disobedience here"

In the Archdiocese of Vienna, it had long been a practice given by Cardinal Schönborn, says Bergmann, "which was actually against the line of Rome, which Schönborn has lived in disobedience here," which could lead "to the blessing of remarried divorced couples."  "To that extent, this practice is now legitimized by Rome."

This also shows "that it is a very good to be a time disobedient, because one can be obtain later through praxis. This can perhaps now be extrapolated to other topics, including the blessing of homosexual couples. In this respect there is an explosive power in them." The "Vienna Praxis" would also include homosexual relationships.

Bergmann sees also in Amoris Laetitia a conscious "renunciation of power" by the Pope.  "In fact, exerts Pope Francis has engaged in a renunciation of power." This "renunciation of power" by its displacement to the local Churches must now, however, be specific and be exhausted, not only in announcements and "encouragement" but to prevent  a later reversal,  so says the Standard's manager.

Text: Martha Burger Weinzl
Image: Vatican.va/OR (Screenshot)

Trans: Tancred vekon99@hotmail.com

Link to Katholisches...

AMDG

Not All Churchmen Are Good People

Edit: another example of self-serving Bergoglian exegesis?

[Dailypedia] In a homily delievered at the chapel of Saint Martha residence in the Vatican, Pope Francis shared the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, which is found in the Gospel of Luke.

"The rich man boasted of fine clothing and ate lavish meals [Cardinal Marx certainly looks like he enjoys lavish meals], while Lazarus was a beggar who lived near his house, struggling with hunger and diseases. [The Church is starving for orthodox preaching while Bergoglio luxuriates in media adulation.]

Pope Francis explained that the rich man was not really evil, but "the eyes of his soul were certainly tinted so as not to see."

“Maybe he prayed and a couple times a year [Or offers the Sacrifice of the Mass in the guesthouse chapel of a luxurious four star hotel where he takes up a pretty large carbon footprint?] he surely went up to the temple to offer sacrifices and he gave big donations to the priests, [Takes big donations from globalist, pro-abortion,  NGOs?] who in their clerical cowardice would thank him and give him a seat of honor,” [Pro-Abort Bernie Sanders comes to mind.] Pope Francis said.

http://www.thedailypedia.com/2016/03/pope-francis-not-churchgoers-good-people/#sthash.M7GoaSkE.dpuf

Professional Media Catholic has to Find New Job

WASHINGTON

Tony Spence, director and editor-in-chief of Catholic News Service, a sinecure  he's held since 2004, resigned after he was asked to step down by USCCB's general secretary. 

In recent days Spence's leadership  had been called into question by the Lepanto Institute, Catholic Family News and Lifesite News, according to the other fake Catholic news service, NCR. The business drone was clearly unhinged by the recent media agitprop campaign against states refusing to bow to pressure, by allowing male sexual deviants to use women's restroom. It's quite a hill to die on.  He demonstrated his own deviance from Catholic teaching and had posted about the "controversial" religious freedom bills in North Carolina and Georgia. Some sane Catholics abovmwntiond accused Spence of "promoting the LGBT agenda." Doh!

Evil, fans of sodomy using the name Catholoc wailed ineffectually: "The far right blogsphere and their troops started coming after me again and it was too much for the USCCB," Spence told NCR in an interview Thursday.

There was no outcry from Patheos bloggers. Of course, the Patheos bloggers completely missed this one,  Mark Shea and Father Longenecker were too busy trying to blame faithful Catholics for the Church's problems, and attacking Lepanto Institute  as judgmental, divisive, mean and contentious.

Pope Francis: "I Started the Fire, I Will Put it Out Again"?

(Rome) "I started the fire, I will put  it out again." These were the words on the news page Secretum meum mihi (SMM) which they put in the mouth of Pope Francis for the photo and provides a context of the recent Apostolic Letter Amoris Laetitia  that has recently made visible the deep division and disunity in the Catholic Church.

"That should at least be what should happen in our opinion, but it is not yet done. That is the thought which has come to us at the sight of the above photo disseminated by Vatican," says SMM.

At the end of yesterday, the Wednesday audience, Pope Francis addressed firefighters. The group of a fire brigade came from  Fort de Demont in France and participated in the general audience in St. Peter's Square.

Francis with French firefighters

The photographer of the Vatican Press Office, who accompanied the Pope on his tour could caught for a few moments in which Pope Francis donned a fireman's helmet, wearing it as firefighters do on duty.  The French Firefighters made the Pope  a gift of it. The special feature: The helmet is decorated in the colors of the Papal States, Yellow and white.

At the same time, the firefighters presented the pope a pope mascot.

Text: Andreas Becker
Image: Vatican.va/OR (screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG

New Anti-Catholic Film Critical of Blessed Pius IX

Edit: it's based on a true story, just like Spotlight.  Spielberg, who is directing this upcoming film, has a penchant for anti-Catholic films.  Why wouldn't he be anti-Catholic?  But he really doesn't meet with much of an adverse reaction when he does these things.  Imagine if the show were on the other foot?   If someone were to make a film about a forced famine in the Ukraine during the 30s, and it certainly deserves a major film treatment, it is very unlikely it would be made owing to the religious sensibility and the anti-Christian and anti-Catholic proclivity of the overseers who caused it to happen.

Edgardo Montara became a Catholic priest.  Sounds like a happy ending to us.

Will there be a papal reaction to this film?  We can only hope not. 

[Catholic Herald] Oscar-winning actor Mark Rylance is to play the part of Pope Pius IX in a new film produced by Steven Spielberg.

The film tells the story of a Jewish boy in Italy in 1858 who is taken from his parents, raised Catholic and then becomes a priest.

The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara is expected to go into production at the start of 2017 and the filming will begin this summer.

Link to Herald...

"Amoris Laetitia" and the Practical Consequences -- the Pastors of Biella Will Now Give Communion to Divorced and Remarried

The Pastors of Biella

(Rome) The Post-Synodal Exhortation Amoris Laetitia by Pope Francis, with its conclusions from the two Synods of Bishops 2014 and 2015 about marriage and the family, has plunged the Catholic Church plunged into a big mess and is presenting its first real impact.

The papal document led to a major disagreement in  interpretation. The Pope's closest confidants celebrate the letter as "most important document of the last 1000 years" (Cardinal Walter Kasper). The "revolutionary" implications have dawned on  progressive church circles after an initial disappointment (Alberto Melloni, School of Bologna). "Conservatives" also try desperately to explain away Amoris Laetitia,  and to reinterpret the official Magisterium of the Pope as a "personal" and therefore non-binding statement  (Cardinal Raymond Burke). Traditional Catholics who do not withdraw from the substantive debate, speak of a "catastrophic document" (Roberto de Mattei). For external observers, there reigns the perfect mess.

Rarely has the Catholic Church shown itself so fractiousness and disunited on how conceive and implement a papal document. The confusion concerns the whole Church. They range from the very top to the very bottom. How  is it now dealing with the divorced and remarried? And how with the other people who live in an irregular relationship?

The priest Don Luca Mele wrote the Pope on Twitter: "Be a little more clear: do I have to absolve them or not? Do I have to give them Communion or not? Thank you!"

The example of the Piedmontese town of Biella

The pastor of the town Biella (45,000 inhabitants) in Piedmont, which is the from which the ancestors of Pope Francis came, made it known yesterday in the local news that they are "for the admission of remarried divorcees to communion". The explosiveness lies in the subtitle of the newspaper report: "Following the publication of Amoris Laetitia by Pope Francis". In other words, the pastor of the town had previously disagreed.

The German-speaking bishops had let the world know in advance: If Rome does not guarantee thaqt public adulterers receive Communion  that they would act alone. Given the "play room" (ZDF), which the papal document leaves means that the need for  "going alone" is no longer needed. The "revolution" is that there is no general rule any more. The categorical no by the Catholic Church to communion for public adulterers has been replaced by the large numbers of "case by case" solutions. One method applied by Amoris Laetitia to the so-called "divorced and remarried", could be applied equally well in a further step, including  also homosexuals and other groups of people and situations.

The part of the Church which was "loyal to Rome" under John Paul II., which had arisen in response to the post-conciliar upheaval, is proving itself spellbound. Some have, since 2013, left off progressive solutions  under the pretext of being "loyal to Rome." The rest are staring at the pope like the rabbit at the snake.  He is supposed to increase the brothers in faith and feed the flock and protect them from the wolves. The eventuality that he could lead the Church astray himself, was categorically excluded as a possibility of thought.

Now that it is in the opinion an of attentive observer, that this part of the Church acts as if paralyzed and on many it is beginning to dawn that their conception of the papacy may need to corrected.

The Catholic Church seems thus to be facing complex new upheavals as late effects of the undigested Vatican II are to be considered and  with that, unleashed forces.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Biellanews (Screenshot)

Trans: Tancred vekon99@hotmail.com

Link to Katholisches....

AMDG

Ban on Criticizing the Pope is a Structural (Conservative) Problem

Cardinal Kasper: Amoris Laetitia is "the most important document
in Church history of the last 1,000 years"

(Rome) While Cardinal Walter Kasper called Amoris laetitia "the most important document of the Church's history in the past 1000 years," his great adversary in the Synod of Bishops in 2014, "Cardinal Raymond Burke" (Sandro Magister), clings to formal restrictions.

There is no shortage of parts of the Church that match vociferously with Kasper's  assessment. This includes the daily newspaper Avvenire  of the Italian Episcopal Conference . It  is  headed by  another papal confidant, Bishop Nunzio Galatino. The daily sees Amoris Laetitia not just "according to the thinking of a wise father," but exactly how Cardinal Burke does not want to see it. Namely, a regular document of the Magisterium Amoris Laetitia which was a "revolutionary" document that sealed  "by archiving  pastoral prohibitions and constraints," and "that had turned more into a reading of the code of canon law, instead of the Gospel."

"Poor Cardinal Burke, who clings to codes and commas"

"Poor Cardinal Burke, a great canonist, who clings to nothing but codes and commas ...", said the Vatican expert Sandro Magister. "Undoubtedly," said Magister,  Pope Francis  has also thought of Burke, when he speaks of the Article 305 in Amoris Laetitia, writing of those who know "only how close their heart only with moral laws...", "as if they were boulders that were thrown on the lives of people. "

In comparison, the proponents of the "pastoral reorientation" (Cardinal Schönborn) appear to have an easy time. They offer to people supposedly what they want to hear.

Conservative prohibition of criticism  forces it to a sideshow 

Even Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, another Cardinal who had rendered outstanding services in the past two years to defend the sacrament of marriage, has so far limited his formalistic criticism of Amoris Laetitia. The content of the post-synodal letter was not the problem, but the false interpretations. In other words, what the Pope says, that it is all right, it is  just misunderstood. A reading of this pontificate, which was bumpy from the start and  easily turns into a stumbling block, just as  now.

Cardinals Burke and Brandmüller  in not criticizing the pope, are forced to resort to a sideshow and to steer clear of the actual battlefield. Criticism of Amoris Laetitia  turns out to be weak when it renounces the direct, substantive confrontation. While some are going onto the sidelines,  Cardinals like Kasper and Schönborn roll ahead at full speed on the main line and announce the exact opposite. They talk about content and refer explicitly to Pope Francis. The do not address  formal questions. 

The weakness of the cardinatial resistance is homemade in this case because the cardinals themselves are possessed of their strongest means, when they bring forth a substantive confrontation. What are they afraid of? Are they afraid of the consequences? What consequences? Is it not perhaps a lack of the insight on the part of the papacy, which proves to be the inhibition?

Approaches a substantive criticism

Both cardinals seem to be aware  of the weakness of their own reasoning. Sandro Magister points out that both Burke and Brandmüller, for example,  don't dispense  quite completely with a  substantive review.

Cardinal Brandmüller  explained  to the Bild newspaper that it was unacceptable to grant exemptions to the Communion ban for people living in the state of the public and persistent adultery. This is categorically impossible for religious reasons and also in individual cases.

Cardinal Burke sees the danger in a dangerous misconception that in Amoris Laetitia the formulation of marriage as an "ideal" may arise. "In the document, there are numerous references to the "ideal marriage." Such a description of marriage can be misleading. You can lead the reader to think that marriage is an eternal idea of what  men and women approach more or less under varying circumstances. But Christian marriage is not an ideal. It is a sacrament that gives the grace of a man and a woman to live in a true, lasting and fruitful, mutual love," said Cardinal Burke.

Rethink self-imposed ban on the Pope's criticism

The self-imposed ban against criticizing the Pope proves to the defenders of religious marriage and morality as a major weakness because it is structural. With consistent compliance, it gives the other side an almost insurmountable advantage and can be repeated as well as on other matters.

The self-limitation is  anachronistic anyway because Pope Francis had given his critic Antonio Socci a free pass  in which he explained that the criticism is legitimate and is thought to be, according to Socci, that the  criticism was "good for" the Pope. Socci had nevertheless doubted the legality of the Pope's election for half a year.

In a time in which the Pope is himself the engine of controversial breaks, faithful Catholics, particularly the so-called "conservatives" have to rethink their attitude towards the Pope. They will not fail to be bound and  soon  will not be able to check  if and how they have  been weighed down by the erroneous ballast of the papacy. And they will have to get rid of it if they want to fulfill their duty to defend the immutable doctrine.

Then to hoped that the pontificate of Francis might not be long, could yet prove to be as  double-edged as the prohibition of criticism.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: MiL (Screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG

But What if the Pope Does What Protestants Have Been Accusing Him of Doing For Five Hundred Years and He Contradicts the Gospels?

Edit: does this mean we have to give Babette's Feast a five star rating on Rotten Tomatoes?  If the Bergoglian Magisterium contradicts perennial Catholic teaching and even Christ Himself, then what?

Amoris Laetitia is "non-magisterial"? Not so fast ... 

The following piece was written exclusively for Rorate by a wise -- and very informed -- holy priest who felt compelled to speak out: 

By Father Ignatius
The contents of Amoris Laetitia -- and its approval -- through omissions and coded language, of sacraments for the divorced and remarried, I suppose, came as no surprise to any of us. Over the past three years, Francis repeatedly announced his determination to find a way for this radical change, so we were all conditioned to expect the sound of the explosion when it finally came. 

Nor did most of the critical reactions come as a surprise. Writers like those whose posts immediately appeared onRorate (de Mattei, Socci, Confitebor) denounced the phony, modernist doctrinal/pastoral distinction in the document for the shell game it is. 

What did cause surprise, however, was Raymond Cardinal Burke’s commentary on Amoris Laetitia that appeared in theNational Catholic Register. Given the strong language that the good and esteemed cardinal had previously used to warn against a change in church teaching and practice on sacraments for the divorced and remarried, we all expected him to come out against the document like a Leo rugiens.

Pope Bergoglio Praises Feminist Marxism in "Amoris Laetitia"

Francis "Amoris laetitia": "remarkable improvements in the recognition of women's rights". He criticized female genital mutilation, violence against women, surrogacy etc. - Significance of the man in the family

 Vatican (kath.net) Pope Francis writes in "Amoris laetitia:" In this brief look at the reality, I would like to emphasize that while there have been notable improvements in the recognition of women and their participation in the public area of ​​rights, there is still much that needs work in some countries. The eradication of unacceptable practices are not yet managed.

I point to the shameful violence that is sometimes perpetrated against women, the abuse in the family and various forms of slavery, which are not a proof of male power, but a cowardly loss of dignity. The verbal, physical and sexual violence, which is perpetrated in some marriages against women, contradicts the nature of the conjugal union. I think of the terrible genital mutilation of women in some cultures, but also of the inequality in access to decent jobs and decision-making positions. The history bears the marks of the excesses of patriarchal cultures where the woman was considered of secondary importance, but we mus also recall surrogacy or "the exploitation and commercialization of the female body in contemporary media culture."

Some think many current problems have occurred since the emancipation of women. "But even that is not a valid argument. It is wrong, it is not true! It is a form of chauvinism. "The identical dignity of man and woman is a cause of joy to us that old forms of discrimination have been overcome and developed in the families as a practice of reciprocity.

If forms of feminism have arisen that we may not consider appropriate, we admire nevertheless in the clearer recognition of the dignity of women and their rights, a work of the Spirit. [See Femen, No Fault Divorce and the influence of the Nanny State on the family.] The man "plays a particularly important role in the life of the family, particularly with regard to the protection and support of his wife and the children [...] Many men are aware of the importance of their role in the family and fill it with their male spirit. [Only when he's allowed to.]

The absence of the father from the life of the family, deprives the education of children and severely affects their integration in the society. It may be a physical, emotional, mental and spiritual absence. This lack brings the children to an adequate model paternal behavior "(Amoris laetitia 54-55). Amoris Laetita - TEXT PDF - Several times Click on the picture to start the download

The Condemnation of Action Française and the Birth of Vatican II

Edit: We received this interesting piece which addresses the life of Father Roger Thomas Calmel, O.P., about some of the preliminaries that led to Vatican II and the defeat of scholasticism in France, which took place well in advance of the fateful year of 1963. We've also attached the postscript by Roberto de Mattei. This was originally posted on Rorate Caeli, but taken down for some reason:



Posted by Sacerdos Romanus at 2/27/2016 @ Rorate-Caeli

Pope Pius XI’s condemnation of a political party supported by many French Catholic royalists was a revival of the ralliement of Pope Leo XIII, a dangerous ecclesiastical policy that was reversed by St. Pius X [see comment below]. The condemnation paved the way for the rise of a new theology that would be of great influence at Vatican II.

***

The Condemnation of Action Française and the Birth of the Nouvelle Theologie

Anthony Sistrom

The Condemnation of Action Française signaled the end of Thomist dominance in French seminary studies and the arrival of the nouvelle theologie. As a result three leading Thomists were fired from their jobs: Fr. Henri LeFloch, cssp, rector of the French seminary in Rome, Cardinal Louis Billot, SJ who taught at the Greg and Fr. Thomas Pegues, OP regent of studies at St. Maximin in Provence.

On the eve of the Condemnation, Fr. Marie Vincent Bernadot, OP and Fr. Etienne Lajeunie, OP met with Pius XI. They found common goals. Pius XI wanted to normalize relations with the French government and an opening for his beloved Catholic Action. Frs. Bernadot and Lajeunie wanted the removal of Fr. Pegues from his post at St. Maximin and a ban on Action Française as the bastion of Thomism.

In the wake of the condemnation Fr. Bernadot would launch his journal, La Vie Intellectuelle and a publishing house, Editions du Cerf that would publish Catholicism by Fr. Henri de Lubac, SJ. The conventional account of this affair is newly told by Fr. Peter Bernardi, SJ “Action Française Catholicism and Opposition to Vatican II’s Dignitatis Humanae” in the festschrift A Realist Church: Essays in honor of Fr. Joseph Komonchak. Fr. Bernardi tries to convict Cardinal Billot of antiliberalism, failing to convict Pius XI for a monumental error which Pius XII would reverse in his first act as pope. Vide Philippe Prevost, “Condamnation de l’Action française : preferer la verite historique a route papolatrie.” But the last word belongs to a saint. Fr. Roger Thomas Calmel, OP writes at the end of his life (1974):

Between the two modernisms there was the savage condemnation of Action Francaise; in that lamentable affair a pope very authoritarian unable to understand that his repressive operations carried out according to his desire, had no. other outcome than disaster; first the crushing of Catholics attached to the Syllabus, then the rise of an episcopacy not opposed to modern errors; regarding the famous Catholic Action, it would not find any advantage other than politicizing itself and bending in the direction of socialism.

“The ralliement of Leo XIII: a pastoral experience that moved away from doctrine” – by Roberto de Mattei

Posted by New Catholic at 3/19/2015 @ Rorate-Caeli.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-ralliement-of-leo-xiii-pastoral.html

Roberto de Mattei

Corrispondenza Romana

March 18, 2015

The 1905 Separation, the complete failure of Leo XIII’s policy of ralliement: “The Separation: ‘Let us separate – I will keep your assets.'”

Leo XIII (1878-1903) was certainly one of the most important Popes in modern times, not only for the length of his pontificate, second only to Blessed Pius IX’s, but above all for the extent and richness of his Magisterium. His teaching includes encyclicals of fundamental importance, such as Aeterni Patris (1879) on the restoration of Thomist philosophy, Arcanum (1880) on the indissolubility of marriage, Humanum genus (1884) against Masonry, L’Immortale Dei (1885) on the Christian constitution of the States and Rerum Novarum (1891) on the question of work and social life.

The Magisterium of Pope Gioacchino Pecci appears as an organic corpus, in continuation with the teachings of his predecessor Pius IX as well as his successor Pius X. The real turning point and novelty of the Leonine pontificate, by contrast, is in regard to his ecclesiastical politics and pastoral approach to modernity. Leo XIII’s government was characterized in fact, by the ambitious project of reaffirming the Primate of the Apostolic See through a redefinition of its relationship with the European States and the reconciliation of the Church with the modern world. The politics of ralliement, that is, of reconciliation with the French, secular, Masonic Third Republic, formed its basis.

The Third Republic was conducting a violent campaign of de-Christianization, particularly in the scholastic field. For Leo XIII, the responsibility of this anticlericalism lay with the monarchists who were fighting the Republic in the name of their Catholic faith. In this way they were provoking the hate of the republicans against Catholicism. In order to disarm the republicans, it was necessary to convince them that the Church was not adverse to the Republic, but only to secularism. And to convince them, he retained that there was no other way than to support the republican institutions.

In reality, the Third Republic was not an abstract republic, but the centralized Jacobin daughter of the French Revolution. Its program of secularization in France was not an accessory element, but the reason itself for the existence of the republican regime. The republicans were what they were because they were anti-Catholic. They hated the Church in the Monarchy, in the same way that the monarchists were anti-republican because they were Catholics who loved the Church in the Monarchy. The encyclical Au milieu des solicitudes of 1891, through which Leo XIII launched the ralliement did not ask Catholics to become republicans, but the instructions from the Holy See to nuncios and bishops, coming from the Pontiff himself, interpreted his encyclical in this sense. Unprecedented pressure was exercised on the faithful, even going as far as making them believe that whoever continued to support the monarchy publically was committing a grave sin. Catholics were split into two currents of the “ralliés” and the “réfractaires”, as had happened in 1791, at the time of the civil Constitution for clergy. The ralliés accepted the Pope’s pastoral indications as they attached infallibility to his words in all fields, including those political and pastoral.

The réfractaires who were Catholics with better theological and spiritual formation, on the other hand, resisted the politics of ralliement, retaining that, inasmuch as it was a pastoral act, it could not be considered infallible and thus could be erroneous. Jean Madiran, who did a lucid critique of ralliement (in Les deux démocraties, NEL, Paris 1977), noted that Leo XIII had asked the monarchists to abandon the monarchy in the name of religion in order to conduct a more efficacious battle in defense of the faith. Except that, far from fighting this battle, with the ralliement, he effected a ruinous policy of détente with the enemies of the Church.

Despite Leo XIII and his Secretary of State Mariano Rampolla’s endeavor, this policy of dialogue was a sensational failure and unable to obtain the objectives it proposed. The Anti-Christian behavior of the Third Republic increased in violence, until culminating in Loi concernant la Séparation des Eglises et de l’Etat on December 9th 1905, known as “the Combes law” which suppressed all financing and public recognition of the Church; it considered religion merely in the private dimension and not in the social one; it established that ecclesiastical goods be confiscated by the State, while buildings of worship were given over gratuitously to “associations cultuelles” elected by the faithful, without Church approval. The Concordat of 1801, that had for a century regulated the relations between France and the Holy See, and that Leo XIII had desired to preserve at all costs, fell wretchedly to pieces.

The republican battle against the Church, however, encountered the new Pope along its way, – Pius X, elected to the Papal throne on August 4th 1903. With his encyclicals Vehementer nos of February 11th 1906, Gravissimo officii of August 10th of the same year, Une fois encore of January 6th 1907, Pius X, assisted by his Secretary of State Raffaele Merry del Val, he protested solemnly against the secular laws, urging Catholics to oppose them through all legal means, with the aim of conserving the traditions and values of Catholic France. Faced with this determination, the Third Republic did not dare activate the persecution fully, so as to avoid the creation of martyrs, and thus renounced the closing of the churches and the imprisonment of priests. Pius X’s politics without concessions, proved to be far-sighted. The law of separation was never applied with rigor and the Pope’s appeal contributed to a great rebirth of Catholicism in France on the eve of the First World War. Pius X’s ecclesiastical politics, the opposite of his predecessor’s, represents, in the final analysis, an unappealable historical condemnation of the ralliement.

Leo XIII never professed liberal errors, on the contrary, he explicitly condemned them. The historian, nevertheless, cannot ignore the contradiction between Pope Pecci’s Magisterium and his political and pastoral stance. In the encyclicals Diuturnum illud, Immortale Dei e Libertas, he reiterated and developed the political doctrine of Gregory XVI and Pius IX, but the policy of ralliement contradicted his doctrinal premises. Leo XIII, far from his intentions, encouraged, at the level of praxis, those ideas and tendencies that he condemned on the doctrinal level. If we attribute the significance of a spiritual attitude to the word liberal, of a political tendency to concessions and compromise, we have to conclude that Leo XIII had a liberal spirit. This liberal spirit was manifested principally as an attempt to resolve the problems posed by modernity, through the arms of diplomatic negotiation and compromises, rather than with the intransigence of principles and a political and cultural battle. In this sense, as I have shown in my recent volume Il ralliement di Leone XIII. Il fallimento di un progetto pastorale (Le Lettere, Florence 2014), the principal consequences of ralliement, were of a psychological and cultural order more than a political one. To this strategy the ecclesiastic “Third Party” was called upon, which throughout the 20th century tried to find an intermediate position between modernists and anti-modernists who were contending the issue.

The spirit of ralliement with the modern world has been around for more than a century, and the great temptation to which the Church is exposed to, is still [with us]. In this regard, a Pope of great doctrine such as Leo XIII made a grave error in pastoral strategy. The prophetic strength of St. Pius X is the opposite, in the intimate coherence of his pontificate between evangelical Truth and the life of the Church in the modern world, between theory and praxis, between doctrine and pastoral care, with no yielding to the lures of modernity.

Cardinal Cordes: 'Amoris Laetitia' -- There is a Risk of Abusing the Statements

Roman Curial Cardinal Cordes on "Amoris Laetitia": There arises the risk of abuse of the statements, if they do not remain anchored in word and spirit of the whole letter, but are singled out and are quoted selectively

Rome (kath.net) "The Papal Letter (Amoris Laetitia) is in the continuity of a long standing conception and teaching. It recalls the Second Vatican Council ("Gaudium et Spes"), the encyclical of Pope Paul VI."Humanae Vitae", the "theology of the body" - presented by John Paul II -., referring to the encyclical of Pope Benedict XVI "God is love" The German Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes explains this in an interview with the "Daily Mail"... Cordes sees the writing as a compendium of the Marriage and Family Pastoral which can truly give a fresh impulse.

On the question of the newspaper, whether the Pope did not go too far in two footnotes (336 and 351) relating to sections 300 and 305 of "Amoris Laetitia," the cardinal explained that with the careful reading of the document it comes to light that the pope wants to address any and all of the needs of even the most complex cases. This leads, according to Cordes, then "occasionally to very subtle arguments," such as the "conscience" or a "special situation".

The Cardinal then stated: "So the risk of misuse of his statements arise when they do not remain anchored around the letter in word and spirit -- are just singled out and quoted selectively. This is also with the reallocation of the problem to the secrecy of the confessional, can not be found as 'a loophole of mercy' -- as it was called for at the Synod of the German Bishops in Würzburg 1975."

According to Cordes, should the consideration of a particular case, according to "Amoris Laetitia"(no. 300) "this discernment can never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church". The Pope himself explicitly warned against this connection that the Church would represent a "double standard." The corresponding footnotes, says the Cardinal, must be seen "in light of theological basic orientation" such as the Council of Trent (Canon 7) or the first Post-synodal letter to the family.

"Divorced and remarried faithful 'stand in the way, in so far as allowance (i.e., the Eucharist reception), since their state of life and their living conditions are in objective contradiction to every covenant of love between Christ and the Church, which the Eucharist makes visible and present'(Familiaris consortio No. 84)." This sentence from Familiaris Consortio can not be archived. For it was John Paul II. who the Catholic Church owes for the systematic reflection on this subject. Last but not least, according to Cordes. this Pope as a saint, a witness to the truth of the highest authority.

Link to Kath.net...

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Edit: at least he's not like Father Longenecker who uses it as an opportunity to attack real Catholics who are legitimately scandalized. He actually comes to the table with a rational account.

AMDG