jump to navigation

Whenever Pope Francis wants to float a radical trial balloon…….. November 2, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, different religion, disaster, episcopate, General Catholic, horror, Papa, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, SOD, the struggle for the Church.
trackback

…..he goes to his main man, the militantly atheist freemason-connected Eugenio Scalfari.  The latest atrocity includes Pope Francis claim – as reported by the no-notes Scalfari – that ALL divorced and remarried who petition to receive the Blessed Sacrament will be allowed to do so:

Yes, he said it over the phone to his favorite journalist, Italian editor Eugenio Scalfari of La Repubblica (the Pope’sfavorite newspaper), in a conversation on October 28, revealed by the latter in an editorial published this Sunday.

There is no reason to doubt its general accuracy. We are way past the time of doubting the general accuracy of the Scalfari quotes. Not now, that the papal interviews to Scalfari have been published on the Vatican website, that they have been occasionally published by the Vatican publishing house (LEV) itself – for instance, as part of the book to the right.

It was a direct quote by Scalfari, as the Pope explained to his dear Atheist friend what the Synod had decided (in fact as an answer to another editorial on the Synod Scalfari had published in Repubblica). [Scalfari quote follows]

“It is true — Pope Francis answered — it is a truth and for that matter the family that is the basis of any society changes continuously, as all things change around us. We must not think that the family does not exist any longer, it will always exist, because ours is a social species, and the family is the support beam of sociability, but it cannot be avoided that the current family, open as you say, contains some positive aspects, and some negative ones. … The diverse opinion of the bishops is part of this modernity of the Church and of the diverse societies in which she operated, but the goal is the same, and for that which regards the admission of the divorced to the Sacraments, [it] confirms that this principle has been accepted by the Synod. This is bottom line result, the de facto appraisals are entrusted to the confessors, but at the end of faster or slower paths, all the divorced who ask will be admitted.” [Rorate translation, emphasis added]

I’m sorry, I do not doubt this at all.  It has been the nakedly apparent end game sine the first Angelus when Pope Francis showered praise on the “serene” theology-on-the-knees of the arch-heretic Kasper.

Now of course the denials are flying from the Vatican, but Rorate is correct-  previous “denials” have been followed by the “controversial” portions of certain interviews being uploaded to the Vatican website unaltered.  The “denials” are simply a way to quiet the immediate furor.  In fact, the whole pattern of denial, obfuscation, and eventual institutionalization of radical Franciscan comments has been broken down brilliantly in this post at 1 Peter 5.

Pope Francis very deliberately uses the atheist Scalfari to communicate to the principalities and powers of this world what the newchurch will be all about.  There is deep symbolism in this.  A new church of man uses a communist atheist to signal its intent to the new world order?  I hate conspiracy theories, but even paranoids have enemies, and this one looks increasingly true.

The only question in my mind now is why certain people seem psychologically incapable of recognizing who and what Pope Francis is.

Sorry I cannot post but very little today I have not been so busy at work in years.  I hope to get one more post out.

gettyimages-482923490

 

Comments

1. RC - November 2, 2015

I know I probably sounds like a dead horse bc I bring her up all the time, but if you haven’t you really, really need to check out the prophesies of Anne Catherine Emmerich. Other than Fatima and Akita they are the only things that I have read that completely mirror what is going on in the Church right now. The most recent of which is this “new church” that has come to fruition in Rome, Emmerich talks about this.
It truly is terrifying what is going on right now, could Pope Francis ACTUALLY be the false prophet talked about in the Book of Revelation? I have no idea, but he sure seems to be peddling heresy like Martin Luther on PCP.
At what point exactly does the Catholic Church stop being the Church? And is this one of the prophesies that said for a time the Church as we know it will disappear?

These are truly trying times, yet I feel like I don’t have anyone (in the hierarchy) to look to for guidance. It is very annoying and demoralizing.

Tantumblogo - November 2, 2015

You find Burke disappointing or insufficient? I’ll admit he’s not heroic, but he is fairly clear. Nor Lenga or Schneider?

RC - November 3, 2015

Your right Tantum. I do very much look to them, but I have a hard time believing that they would do anything, when/if the time comes and something truly needs to be done, then that’s probably when I should judge them for what they do or don’t do. I personally think that Bishop Fellet could very well be the one to call Francis out as he is not “within grasps” of Francis like the ones you mentioned are

LaGallina - November 3, 2015

I definitely have been disappointed in Burke et al! They should be shouting, “HERETIC!” from the rooftops. But no. They are all just going about their business making the occasional veiled reference to the “regrettable situation” in the Vatican.

Meanwhile as Rome burns, Catholics are either begging for truth and direction, or are celebrating that the Church isn’t Catholic anymore.

St. Thomas More, pray for us!

Tantumblogo - November 3, 2015

Did you see Rorate today?

RC - November 3, 2015

Yea I did, good for Athanasius

2. Baseballmom - November 2, 2015

So what does THE CHURCH with a heretic pope look like? I mean this with all honesty…. How does the promise of Our Lord that “the gates of hell will not prevail ” reconcile with what we are witnessing?

Tantumblogo - November 2, 2015

It doesn’t necessarily apply to the hierarchy? But without Peter, what is the Church?

These are questions upon which it is imperative to tread very carefully and avoid rash judgments. I know the Pope is promoting radical change, much certainly indicates heresy, but I don’t allow myself to decide, in my mind or otherwise, whether he is a heretic or not. He certainly has promoted some like Kasper. Perhaps its a sophistry on my part, but I think it prudent to leave judgment to He Who judges, at least when it comes to the Office of St. Peter.

Baseballmom - November 3, 2015

I think I was clear as mud…. Per usual…. I did not intend to say that PF is a heretic, but rather, if a Pope is a heretic then where does that put the Church….appreciated your response.

tm30 - November 3, 2015

The pope can spew all kinds of heresy in a private capacity. What he can’t do is spew heresy ex cathedra. And that is governed by a specific formulation of “definition”. What he says in an interview with an atheist freemason hack is in a private capacity.

c matt - November 3, 2015

My basic understanding of the situation is that a pope can be a heretic as tm30 says, but our Lord has promised to lead in all truth, meaning the pope will not officially teach heresy (although unofficially, ymmv). The other aspect, to quote our current occupant of the See of Rome “who am I to judge?” It is for the proper ecclesial authorities to judge a pope heretical. So it is a two-step tango – one, he has to be a heretic, and two, he has to be judged so by a competent authority. Personally, I see us perilously close to step one. Good luck with getting the current bunch of yahoos that pass for bishops to accomplish step two if it is ever necessary.

H-town - November 3, 2015

So true! The Sixth Ecumenical Council (681ad) posthumously anathematized Pope Honorius I for failing to condemn the heresy of Monothelitism. But that took almost 50 years after his papacy ended in 638ad. What’s going on in Rome now seems much worse, but don’t hold your breath.

Tantumblogo - November 3, 2015

Oh BBM I understood your meaning. Not trying to say you thought he was, just that I have seen a lot of folks who have. And that often tends to be where those thoughts lead. Like I said, it’s a very fraught area I have been kind of chicken to really delve into (unlike Eliot Bougis, who has delved like crazy, but I don’t know if he’s any the better/wiser for it).

Sobieski - November 3, 2015

Robert Siscoe has a number of good articles on this topic. Here’s one of them:

http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope

Baseballmom - November 3, 2015

Very thoughtful, prudent article. Thanks.

3. TLM - November 3, 2015

Yes tm30, I was just going to say that. You beat me to it. He can preach heresy in homilies, in interviews etc., etc, but once he speaks ‘from the chair’ that’s when it’s necessary for the Bishops to call him out and ask him to step down. I think that’s what they’re waiting for. Actually, they’re waiting for the ‘ex cathedra’ moment. Their hands are tied until then, unfortunately. I read something yesterday from someone in Argentina who said he is really very shrewd. They used to call him ‘the chess player’. He was a master at manipulating the situation to get the directives he wanted in place. That said, he is no match for Our Lord, through Our Blessed Mother. They know exactly how to handle him. PRAY THE ROSARY.

4. TLM - November 3, 2015

Exactly tm30. You beat me to it. The only way the Bishops can do anything, I do believe is if Francis speaks ‘from the Chair’. Until then, their hands are pretty much tied.

Tantumblogo - November 3, 2015

Not true at all. Previous Popes were judged wanting for non-dogmatic statements. Pope Honorius was judged a damnable pope after death for failing to oppose heresy strongly enough – NOT for promoting heresy himself, but for failing to oppose heresy. But those were very different days.

5. H-town - November 3, 2015

Pope Honorius I officially embraced the heresy of monothelitism and was later condemned by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (681ad) as a heretic “in his official capacity as pope.” Honorius never tried to formally teach this heresy (because he is not able to ) but he was complicit in it by his silence. This is quite similar to what Pope Francis is doing, by surrounding himself with heretics who are doing his dirty work for him.

Tantumblogo - November 3, 2015

Yeah what I was just saying.

H-town - November 3, 2015

neoCatholics love to shut down traditionalists by demanding “show me where Francis has formally taught error!” That’s really a non-argument because it’s not possible. The Holy Spirit would shoot him down. The pope obviously knows this, that’s why he’s taking the “decentralized Church” and “pastoral” approach to heresy and employing his army of Kasperites. Hey it worked at Vatican II, and remember he told us 2.5 years ago he was just the man humble enough to fulfill the teachings of the Council.

6. Maria-Louisa Mahase - November 3, 2015

Lord save Christianity! Lord sustain Catholicism, for greater glory and our salvation! Amen

7. Joe of St Therese - November 3, 2015

May this pontificate be short and another take his office, Amen…It seems to me that those that try to defend this Pope from everything, he himself is the cause of look completely stupid in doing such.

8. Mara319 - November 4, 2015

From Scalfari’s report: “…and for that which regards the admission of the divorced to the Sacraments, [it] confirms that this principle has been accepted by the Synod.”

Shouldn’t that go without saying? The “divorced alone” are not exactly banned from Communion, isn’t it? As long as they remain chaste and not remarried, aren’t they all right, especially the innocent party who was left behind?

It’s actually the “remarrieds” that are traditionally seen by the Church as problematic, i.e., living in adultery.

The trouble with most discussions on the Synod is that the “divorced” are often lumped up together with the “remarrieds,” as in, “divorced and remarried” without the qualifying hyphens.

Tantumblogo - November 4, 2015

I think folks assumed that was the reference from the foregoing text, but I get your point.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: