PopeWatch

PopeWatch: UberMass

 

 

From the only reliable source of Catholic news on the net, Eye of the Tiber:

 

Uber has announced plans to begin offering Mass deliveries beginning early next year.

Attempting to expand beyond the borders of ridesharing and food delivery, Uber will launch its UberMass service in Grand Rapids, Michigan before expanding to other cities later in the year.

According to listings on a number of job recruiting websites, UberMass is advertising for a number of “priest jobs” not only ranging from saying Mass, but to hearing confessions and giving last rites, showing that the company is serious about reaching everyone “where they’re at.”

“There’s a lot of momentum in the organization behind UberMass, and we think the market is ripe for Mass delivery,” said UberMass general manager Simon Patel at a launch event in New York on Wednesday. “As numbers has proven, Mass attendance have been plummeting for some time now. We think that can be fixed. Catholics will simply go to the app, order a priest, and one will be dropped off to them. Easy as that, they fulfil their Sunday obligation.”

Patel said that for an extra charge, UberMass customers will also be able to purchase add-ons such as a guitarist to play hymns during the Mass, a friendly usher to greet them in their own home, as well as a sick parishioner to come and sit directly next to them on the couch.

Uber is also considering a UberMassShare option which would be cheaper, and would allow others around the neighborhood to join in the Mass and to split the cost.

“All this will be available to our customers so that they no longer need to leave the comfort of their homes to experience the beauty of Mass. Depending on the success of our new venture, we’re also considering UberConfession as well as UberXtremeUnction.” Continue reading

PopeWatch: Ordinary Magisterium

 

 

Father Z brings us the news that the Vatican is ginning up attacks on the Four Cardinals who asked for clarification in regard to Amoris Laetitia:

 

A few days ago Vatican Insider, at La Stampa, run by the ultimate Italian weather vane Andrea Tornielli, supplied a piece against the Four Cardinals of the Five Dubia (and against anyone who agrees that more clarity is needed) by one Thomas Walford.  Walford’s piece has the feeling of a collaborative effort in papolatry.  Of course it was published simultaneously in Italian and in English… because that happens all the time.  Right?

Today, Sandro Magister at Settimo Cielo supplied a piece which analyzes the Vatican Insider project.  It is published anonymously.  The reason for anonymity is that the writer is a cleric (I had a text this morning saying who it is), and in the present lib-dominated environment of mercy a cleric who writes like will be crushed like a bug.

A good question (itself a response to Walford) is in the piece’s title: “If it were so easy to resolve the dubia, then why hasn’t the Pope responded?”

In a nutshell, Walford proposed (inter alia) that virtually anything that the Pope says in his ordinary Magisterium, he says with the aid of the Holy Spirit, and that it must be accepted by the faithful.

Anonymous Cleric (my title for him) responds (my rapid translation – surely Magister’s own will soon be available):

B)  The arguments of the formal order refer to some affirmations of the Magisterium about the Petrine primacy and reach the conclusion that “Pope Francis – being the beneficiary of the charisma of the Holy Spirit, which helps him also in the ordinary Magisterium (as St. John Paul II taught) – legitimately made reception of holy Communion possible on the part of the divorced and remarried whose cases have been carefully considered.

I will try to respond to these arguments, beginning with the second series, on account of the fact that they are logically decisive: in fact, if all the acts of the Magisterium were always clear and perfect and enjoyed – for the mere fact that they were pronounced by the Pontiff – infallibility (without considering, for example, the tone of the document, the circumstances in which it was pronounced, the fact that a teaching could be relatively new or repeated, etc. etc.), or if every “flatus vocis” [mere, insignificant word] of the Roman Pontiff ought to be considered dogma and should require, always and in any case, the internal assent of the faithful, the question would be closed from the get-go.

In reality, the Magisterium of the Church certainly constitutes a unique body (containing that which the Church proposes to us for belief), of which, nevertheless, not all affirmations have the same value; in other words, not all the pronouncements – even if authentically proposed – require the same level of assent. The “dubia” of the Cardinals serve also to clarify what weight there can be in an answer in the course of the interview on an airplane and in a private letter to some bishops (indicated by Mr. Walford as if they were definitive interpretations), neither published in the Acta Apostolica Sedis. Certainly both were pronouncements of the Pope, but, as Lumen gentium 25 affirms, the level of adhesion must be deduced “from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.”

Let’s ask ourselves, by way of an example: “Do the papal interviews on an airplane or do private letters of a Pontiff require – in and of themselves – the same level of assent as the teaching on contraception proposed by documents such as Casti connubi, Humanae vitae, Familiaris consortio, etc. or can one entertain some uncertainties in the face of the aforementioned interviews or letters”? The response to this is given by the Magisterium itself, beginning with the instruction Donum veritatis in 1990 “On the ecclesial vocation of the theologian”, which is also cited by Mr. Walford:

It can happen, however, that a theologian may, according to the case, raise questions regarding the timeliness, the form, or even the contents of magisterial interventions. Here the theologian will need, first of all, to assess accurately the authoritativeness of the interventions which becomes clear from the nature of the documents, the insistence with which a teaching is repeated, and the very way in which it is expressed. […]

In any case there should never be a diminishment of that fundamental openness loyally to accept the teaching of the Magisterium as is fitting for every believer by reason of the obedience of faith. The theologian will strive then to understand this teaching in its contents, arguments, and purposes. This will mean an intense and patient reflection on his part and a readiness, if need be, to revise his own opinions and examine the objections which his colleagues might offer him. If, despite a loyal effort on the theologian’s part, the difficulties persist, the theologian has the duty to make known to the Magisterial authorities the problems raised by the teaching in itself, in the arguments proposed to justify it, or even in the manner in which it is presented. He should do this in an evangelical spirit and with a profound desire to resolve the difficulties. His objections could then contribute to real progress and provide a stimulus to the Magisterium to propose the teaching of the Church in greater depth and with a clearer presentation of the arguments.

Moreover, Pope Francis, at §2 of Amoris laetitia, writes:

“The complexity of the issues that arose revealed the need for continued open discussion of a number of doctrinal, moral, spiritual, and pastoral questions. The thinking of pastors and theologians, if faithful to the Church, honest, realistic and creative, will help us to achieve greater clarity.”

Continue reading

PopeWatch: Pontifical Academy for Death

 

Sandro Magister gives us the details as to why the Pontifical Academy for Life should be renamed:

At the Pontifical Academy for Life, the first big uproar was over the appointment of the Anglican moral theologian Nigel Biggar, a supporter of abortion until “18 weeks after conception.”

Asked to comment by Vatican Insider, Archbishop Paglia tried to justify the appointment by asserting that Biggar – apart from words he exchanged in 2011 with the staunchly pro-abortion philosopher Peter Singer – “has never written anything on the issue of abortion” and that on the end of life “he has a position absolutely in keeping with the Catholic one.”

But it didn’t take much to discover that neither statement corresponds to the truth, and that Biggar has expressed his liberal positions on abortion in a 2015 article for the “Journal of Medical Ethics,” and on euthanasia in his 2004 book “Aiming To Kill. The Ethics of Suicide and Euthanasia.”

Then it was noted that other new members of the academy are rather far from the Church’s positions:

– Katarina Le Blanc of the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, Sweden, who uses stem cells taken from human embryos fertilized in vitro;
– Japanese Nobel laureate Shinya Yamanaka, who in spite of his fame for producing pluripotent stem cells artificially has by no means rules out continued research on the use of embryonic stem cells, and explains why in an article in the scientific journal “Cell & Stem Cell.”
– the Israeli Jew Avraham Steinberg, who admits in some cases abortion and the destruction of embryos for scientific use;
– Maurizio Chiodi, a leading Italian moral theologian, who in his book “Ethics of life” makes allowances for artificial procreation, if it is supported by an “intention of fertility.” Continue reading

PopeWatch: Lavender Mafia

 

 

It should always be recalled that a large part of the impetus behind Pope Francis and his attempt to transform the Catholic Church into an Episcopal Church with worse music is the Lavender Mafia.  One of the poster children for the Lavender Mafia is Father James Martin, SJ.  Liturgy Guy connects the dots:

With each passing week the pace quickens. The revolutionaries continue to grow more emboldened. There is no time to lose. For those who wish to remake the Church in the image of fallen Man, instead of defending the immutable Truth of Our Risen Lord,  the time is now.

With every new tweet to his 125,000 followers on Twitter, or every pro-LGBT article shared to his half a million Facebook followers, Fr. James Martin, S.J. ups the ante. The rogue Jesuit (which might be redundant), described by some as a wolf in sheeps clothing (or Roman collar), has apparently made it his personal mission to change the faith of our fathers.

As I’ve written about before, Fr. Martin’s latest effort is Building a Bridge: How the Catholic Church and the LGBT Community Can Enter into a Relationship of Respect, Compassion, and Sensitivity (Harper Collins, 2017). The book is interesting enough for the simple fact that it largely comes from an address Fr. Martin gave to New Ways Ministry in October of last year.

**********************************************

What is different now from the past, however, is Rome itself. Leading the defense of orthodoxy and doctrinal clarity back then was Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. While Fr. Robert Nugent and Sr. Jeannine Gramick could spread their errors and ambiguities, they did so with the condemnation of the Holy See. That is not the case with Pope Francis.

To understand who is really responsible for today’s revolutionary spirit, one that seeks to make the LGBT’s agenda the Church’s own, go back to the back…of Fr. Martin’s book that is.

Who else do we find endorsing Fr. Martin’s 2017 repackaging of the New Ways message of the 1990’s? None other than three of Pope Francis’s most recent episcopal appointments: Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey; Cardinal Kevin Farrell, Prefect of the Dicastery for Laity, Family, and Life; and Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego, California. Continue reading

PopeWatch: Contradiction

 

 

The former head of the Vatican Bank,  Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, lets Pope Francis have it in an essay in La Verita:

 

I see two implicit messages in the Pope’s failure to answer the dubia. The first implicit message is “I can contradict myself if I want to.” At the start of the Synod on the Family (October 2014), the Pope invited the cardinals to speak openly and frankly, without fear of embarrassing the Pope (the famous parresia). And yet for months the Pope has refused to respond privately or publicly to the dubia expressed by four cardinals who represent a large part of the faithful.

The second implicit message seems to be a declaration of the intent to impose a “New Catholic Morality.” This would be founded on the awkward circumstances of the new ethical demands (or requirements) of new situations created by the secularized world, not on the Commandments, the Catechism and the Magisterium invoked by the “obsolete” Veritatis Splendor.   

In the past, the Church’s concern was to keep the faithful “strong in the Truth” in order to conserve the faith. She therefore discouraged a disposition to interpret doctrine and the magisterium in a subjective and dangerously misleading manner. Indeed, back then the task of pastors was to confirm the certainties of faith by “teaching,” not just by “listening.”

Today, it could be said that you should have subjective and unresolved doubts to demonstrate that you have an “authentic faith.” You must not try to resolve them or seek answers to questions on points of ambiguous interpretation because that would be insolent and arrogant. Doubts are necessary because it seems that we don’t want to affirm a single, absolute and objective truth. A pluralist and dialectical truth has taken its place because this latter truth, a truth based on the conclusions of a “self-taught” individual conscience, has replaced doctrine as the judge of actions (praxis).  

One might say that traditional morality has been overridden by circumstances (and not the ideal), and since we should not longer judge (that is, objectively evaluate circumstances), the Church seems to want to renounce the possession of the truth and its teaching (unless it concerns the environment, poverty and immigration). Thus, a failure to respond to the dubia confirms that doctrine is abstract and that it is of no use to salvation because truth is transitory, subjective and open to differing interpretations. It is better to dialogue, then, than to teach something that is no longer eternal. Continue reading

PopeWatch: Checkmate

 

From the only reliable source of Catholic news on the net, Eye of the Tiber:

 

 

Society of St. Pius X chess grandmaster Larcel Mafebvre has turned four of his pieces into bishops without approval from the World Chess Federation, officials have confirmed.

“Mr. Mafebvre has, without approval from the Federation, created bishops out of pawn pieces,” said World Chess Federation head Antonio Salamanca. “After speaking with Mr. Mafebvre regarding abiding by the new chess rules, wherein players are given the freedom to concelebrate the match, and to say the words of ‘checkmate’ in the vernacular, he has sadly decided to ignore our requests.”

Salamanca went on to tell reporters that Mafebvre had automatically incurred excheckommunication because of his disobedience.

“I must do what is in my conscience to preserve the dignity of the game,”  Mafebvre told EOTT in an exclusive interview. “Therefore, I have decided to consecrate four of my pieces into bishops to help my depleted side, for, from some Fischer, the smoke of Satan has entered the chessboard of God.”

At press time, one time follower of Larcel Mafebvre’s, Bavid Dawden, told EOTT that he has decided to become head of the World Chess Federation, though he only has three pawns to play with. Continue reading

PopeWatch: Apostasy

 

Edward Pentin at National Catholic Register has a barn burner of interview with Monsignor Nicola Bux, a former consultor to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:

Monsignor Bux, what are the implications of the ‘doctrinal anarchy’ that people see happening for the Church, the souls of the faithful and priests?

The first implication of doctrinal anarchy for the Church is division, caused by apostasy, which is the abandonment of Catholic thought, as defined by St. Vincent of Lerins: quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditur (what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all). Saint Irenaeus of Lyon, who calls Jesus Christ the “Master of unity,” had pointed out to heretics that everyone professes the same things, but not everyone means the same thing. This is the role of the Magisterium, founded on the truth of Christ: to bring everyone back to Catholic unity.

St. Paul exhorted Christians to be in agreement and to speak with unanimity. What would he say today? When cardinals are silent or accuse their confreres; when bishops who had thought, spoken and written — scripta manent! [written words remain]— in a Catholic way, but then say the opposite for whatever reason; when priests contest the liturgical tradition of the Church, then apostasy is established, the detachment from Catholic thought. Paul VI had foreseen that “this non-Catholic thought within Catholicism will tomorrow become the strongest [force]. But it will never represent the Church’s thinking. A small flock must remain, no matter how small it is.” (Conversation with J. Guitton, 9.IX.1977).

 

What implications, then, does doctrinal anarchy have for the souls of the faithful and ecclesiastics?

The Apostle exhorts us to be faithful to sure, sound and pure doctrine: that founded on Jesus Christ and not on worldly opinions (cf. Titus 1:7-11; 2:1-8). Perseverance in teaching and obedience to doctrine leads souls to eternal salvation. The Church cannot change the faith and at the same time ask believers to remain faithful to it. She is instead intimately obliged to be oriented toward the Word of God and toward Tradition.

Therefore, the Church remembers the Lord’s judgment: “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” (John 9:39). Do not forget that, when one is applauded by the world, it means one belongs to it. In fact, the world loves its own and hates what does not belong to it (cf. John 15:19). May the Catholic Church always remember that she is made up of only those who have converted to Christ under the guidance of the Holy Spirit; all human beings are ordained to her (cf. Lumen gentium 13), but they are not part of her until they are converted.

 

How can this problem best be resolved?

The point is: what idea does the Pope have of the Petrine ministry, as described in Lumen gentium 18 and codified in canon law? Faced with confusion and apostasy, the Pope should make the distinction — as Benedict XVI did — between what he thinks and says as a private, learned person, and what he must say as Pope of the Catholic Church. To be clear: the Pope can express his ideas as a private learned person on disputable matters which are not defined by the Church, but he cannot make heretical claims, even privately. Otherwise it would be equally heretical.

I believe that the Pope knows that every believer — who knows the regula fidei [the rule of faith] or dogma, which provides everyone with the criterion to know what the faith of the Church is, what everyone has to believe and who one has to listen to — can see if he is speaking and operating in a Catholic way, or has gone against the Church’s sensus fidei [sense of the faith]. Even one believer can hold him to account. So whoever thinks that presenting doubts [dubia] to the Pope is not a sign of obedience, hasn’t understood, 50 years after Vatican II, the relationship between him [the Pope] and the whole Church. Obedience to the Pope depends solely on the fact that he is bound by Catholic doctrine, to the faith that he must continually profess before the Church.

We are in a full crisis of faith! Therefore, in order to stop the divisions in progress, the Pope — like Paul VI in 1967, faced with the erroneous theories that were circulating shortly after the conclusion of the Council — should make a Declaration or Profession of Faith, affirming what is Catholic, and correcting those ambiguous and erroneous words and acts — his own and those of bishops — that are interpreted in a non-Catholic manner.

Otherwise, it would be grotesque that, while seeking unity with non-Catholic Christians or even understanding with non-Christians, apostasy and division is being fostered within the Catholic Church. For many Catholics, it is incredible that the Pope is asking bishops to dialogue with those who think differently, but does not want first to face the cardinals who are his chief advisors. If the Pope does not safeguard doctrine, he cannot impose discipline. As John Paul II said, the Pope must always be converted, to be able to strengthen his brothers, according to the words of Christ to Peter: “Et tu autem conversus, confirma fratres tuos [when you are converted, strengthen your brothers].”  Continue reading

PopeWatch: Audience

 

The four dubia Cardinals drafted a request for an audience on April 25, 2017:

 

Most Holy Father,

It is with a certain trepidation that I address myself to Your Holiness, during these days of the Easter season. I do so on behalf of the Most Eminent Cardinals: Walter Brandmüller, Raymond L. Burke, Joachim Meisner, and myself.

We wish to begin by renewing our absolute dedication and our unconditional love for the Chair of Peter and for Your august person, in whom we recognize the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Jesus: the “sweet Christ on earth,” as Saint Catherine of Siena was fond of saying. We do not share in the slightest the position of those who consider the See of Peter vacant, nor of those who want to attribute to others the indivisible responsibility of the Petrine munus. We are moved solely by the awareness of the grave responsibility arising from the munus of cardinals: to be advisers of the Successor of Peter in his sovereign ministry. And from the Sacrament of the Episcopate, which “has placed us as bishops to pasture the Church, which He has acquired with his blood” (Acts 20:28).

On September 19, 2016 we delivered to Your Holiness and to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith five dubia, asking You to resolve uncertainties and to bring clarity on some points of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia.

Not having received any response from Your Holiness, we have reached the decision to ask You, respectfully and humbly, for an Audience, together if Your Holiness would like. We attach, as is the practice, an Audience Sheet in which we present the two points we wish to discuss with you. Continue reading

PopeWatch: Unholy Ghost

 

 

An article at Crisis by Julia Meloni focuses on one of the ghostwriters for the Pope:

 

 

In Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis announces: “No one can be condemned forever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!” (297). Josef Seifert warns that it’s “nearly unavoidable” to deduce a denial of Hell—a fear echoed by others. Anna Silvas notes Amoris Laetitia’s “missing” lexicon of eternity: “There are no immortal souls in need of eternal salvation to be found in the document!”

But papal ghostwriter Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez is ebullient with joy because, as he declares in a 1995 article, “I rely firmly upon the truth that all are saved.” The author of Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art of Kissing, Fernandez elsewhere rhapsodizes that extra-marital sex can express “ecstatic” charity and “Trinitarian richness.”

And Fernandez the papal ghostwriter—as Michael Pakaluk and Sandro Magister have shown—repeatedly plagiarizes his previous work in Amoris Laetitia. For instance, Fernandez’s 2006 declaration that “Trinitarian” love can be “realized within an objective situation of sin” is echoed in Amoris Laetitia 305.

Last September, the four cardinals submitted their dubia out of grave concern for “the true good of souls.” They’ve now published a letter from April requesting an audience with the pontiff—who has not responded.

As the months of papal non-engagement grow, Pope Francis’s maxim that “time is greater than space” feels increasingly ominous. Fernandez—whose cited and uncited work also appears in Pope Francis’s Evangelii Gaudium—has long claimed that we’re in an age of revolutionary “time.”

In his book The Francis Project, Fernandez laments that conservative “fanatics” can’t accept that the “Spirit”—which can “elude the supervision of the institution of the Church”—is leading us “toward a different phase.” It’s a phase where, apparently, God is “Mother” and “you should follow your conscience” and “a pope who tells us that God wants us to be happy on this earth will never ask us to be obsessed with sacrifice.” It’s a phase where, to quote Pope Francis, the Church isn’t “obsessed” with abortion or sexual ethics either. Continue reading

PopeWatch: Christ?

 

A Francis appointed Bishop shows us that under the current Pontificate the words of Christ in regard to marriage mean less than nothing:

An Argentinian bishop, inspired by Pope Francis’ Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, celebrated a special Mass for civilly-divorced-and-remarried couples in his diocese. The thirty or so couples were all invited to receive Holy Communion despite there being no indication that any of them had promised to live as brother and sister.

“Welcome back home,” Bishop Angel José Macin of the diocese of Reconquista told the couples during the Mass celebrated on the June 11th Feast of the Blessed Trinity, according to Argentinian news website Radioamanecer.com.ar

The couples were given Holy Communion in what was described as a “festive atmosphere” in the parish church of Saint Roque. Relatives took photographs. Continue reading

PopeWatch: Dark

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the only reliable source of Catholic news on the net, Eye of the Tiber:

 

 

In an effort to attract more young people, the USCCB announced today that they will begin working on a dark, gruesome, and gritty reboot of the Novus Ordo.

Speaking with EOTT, Bishop Robert Lombardo, who came up with the idea for the reboot, said that they hope to begin saying the new Mass beginning next fall.

“Right now we’re just beginning to work on the new translation, which we’re tentatively calling ‘The Mass: Rise of the Godman.’”

Lombardo also went on to explain that the reboot would skew more towards gritty priests and deacons and away from the smiling and happy priest and deacon that we’ve become accustomed to seeing.

“These days young adults are spending so much of their time and money watching dark movie reboots, so there’s no reason why we can’t do that within the context of the Mass. To say to someone in their 20’s and 30’s, ‘Hey, you enjoyed that gritty and gruesome movie last night, now come to Mass and enjoy the complete opposite of what you loved last night,’ is absurd. We have to give them what they want is what it boils down to.”

Gotham bishop Leonard Kelly told EOTT that the bishops also discussed a reboot for all the sacraments, including Confirmation, which will be called The Sacrament of the Blood Oath, Anointing of the Sick, which will be called The Sacrament of Bodily Annihilation, and Matrimony, which will be called The Sacrament of Mental Annihilation.

We also plan to change the vestments so that they’re simply red mantles and hoods, with the red symbolizing blood, all the blood Christ spilled for our transgressions.

At press time, Kelly has cryptically stated that it is time for the youth to heed the calling of the Light, saying “You either die a saint or live long enough to see yourself become the devil,” before throwing the hood over his head and leaping off the top of a church spire. Continue reading

PopeWatch: Lavender Mafia

 

 

The Lavender Mafia is alive and well at the Vatican:

 

Cardinal Joseph Tobin told the New York Times that it would have been “backhanded” of him to mention anything about sin to the “LGBT pilgrims” who he personally welcomed to a Cathedral Mass last month.

On Sunday, May 21, the Cardinal was on hand at Newark’s Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart to personally welcome homosexuals on a so-called “LGBT Pilgrimage.”

When asked by the New York Times if he should have used the event to call the “LGBT pilgrims” out of sin, Cardinal Tobin replied: “That sounds a little backhanded to me.” 

“It was appropriate to welcome people to come and pray and call them who they were. And later on, we can talk,” he said. 

The Cardinal said that to “combine his welcome with a criticism would not have been a full welcome at all.”

**********************************************************************************

Some other high profile priests and bishops pushing the envelope on the acceptance of homosexuality within the Church include: 

  • Fr. James Martin, SJ, editor-at-large for the Jesuit magazine America and recently appointed to the Vatican as a communications consultant, who just published his pro-homosexual book, Building a Bridge.
  • Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, now at the helm of both the Pontifical Academy for Life and the Pontifical Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, who paid a homosexual artist to paint a homoerotic mural in his cathedral church in 2007. The mural includes an image of the archbishop himself clasped to a semi-naked man.
  • Cardinal Kevin Farrell, recently appointed by Pope Francis to head the Vatican office on laity, family, and life issues, who has called on his city’s priests to embrace “LGBT families.”
  • The Diocese of San Diego, under Bishop Robert McElroy, recently announced that Fr. John Dolan, a priest with an LGBT-positive record, had been appointed by the Vatican to be an auxiliary bishop. Fr, Dolan had previously gone on record suggesting that there is no problem with homosexual “marriage” within the Catholic church.

Catholic parishioners in some major urban centers may also have noticed a creeping incrementalism of the acceptance of homosexuality within their parishes. 

For instance, in the Archdiocese of Baltimore, St. Matthew’s Parish has been promoting homosexuality and its so-called “compatibility” with Catholicism for years.

In the Archdiocese of New York, leaders of “gay and lesbian ministries” in three separate parishes openly flout Catholic teaching on sexual morality, saying that their lifestyle choices are part of how God made them.  Continue reading

PopeWatch: Unchanging

 

PopeWatch has long believed that the key to understanding Pope Francis is his life in Argentina, and, above all, this event:

 

A titanic struggle for the soul of Catholicism ensued. Bergoglio had strong support within the Jesuits when he became provincial superior in 1973. But by the time he ended his leadership role as rector of Buenos Aires’s Jesuit seminary in 1986, those who loathed him had begun to outnumber those who loved him. By 1990, his support within the order had been eroded by his authoritarian style and his incorrigible inability, in the words of the Jesuit, Father Frank Brennan, “to let go the reins of office once a [Jesuit] provincial of a different hue was in the saddle.” Another senior Jesuit told me: “He drove people really crazy with his insistence that only he knew the right way to do things. Finally the other Jesuits said: ‘Enough.’” Continue reading

PopeWatch: Bad Joke

 

Further evidence that this current pontificate is a bad joke:

 

Among the 45 new members Pope Francis has appointed to the Pontifical Academy for Life is an Anglican minister who has argued that abortion should be legal until “18 weeks after conception.”

University of Oxford Professor Nigel Biggar, who was appointed to the Academy for a five-year term, stated in a 2011 dialogue with pro-infanticide ethicist Peter Singer that a preborn baby is “not…the same kind of thing as an adult or a mature human being” and therefore does not deserve “quite the same treatment.”

“I would be inclined to draw the line for abortion at 18 weeks after conception, which is roughly about the earliest time when there is some evidence of brain activity, and therefore of consciousness,” he said as reported by Standpoint magazine.

Then, one year later, when he was the keynote speaker for an event at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, he said that “it is not true that all abortion is equivalent to murder.”

 

Go here to read the rest.  Pro-lifers in the Age of Francis need to watch their backs, because the Church sure will not be.

PopeWatch: Not a Liberal

 

 

Mathew Walther insists at The Week that Pope Francis is no liberal:

 

Indeed, I would go so far as to say that both of his predecessors, St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI, had more of the saccharine “Spirit of Vatican II” about them than Francis has. The current pope is a hard-headed practical man, with no illusions about human nature. Nor is he much of an intellectual, though his environmental encyclical Laudato si’ is one of the most important pieces of theological writing to have appeared in my lifetime.

 

His is a decidedly peasant spirituality of intense Marian devotion. He loathes pomposity with the fervor of his ascetic namesake, St. Francis of Assisi. While he is famous for not getting on well with mainstream traditionalists like me, the so-called rigorists and doctors of the law whom he has subjected to endless (and sometimes deserved) ridicule, he clearly has a soft spot for the much-maligned Society of St. Pius X, whose founder was shamefully — and perhaps invalidly — excommunicated by John Paul II. His gradual reintroduction of these battered and pious misfits into the wider life of the Church is the answer to many prayers. Continue reading

PopeWatch: Cardinal Sarah

 

PopeWatch has long thought that the alleged amity between the Pope Emeritus and his successor is basically a sham.  The flap over Cardinal Sarah’s book might be evidence of this:

 

“The arrogance, the violence of language, the disrespect and the inhuman contempt for Benedict XVI are diabolical and cover the Church with a mantle of sadness and shame,” Cardinal Sarah said.

“These people demolish the Church and its profound nature,” he added.

 

Critics of Benedict XVI have complained that the former Pontiff meddled in Church affairs by contributing the afterword to the German edition of the book, in which Benedict praises Cardinal Sarah and thanks Pope Francis for appointing the African prelate to his current post as prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

In his afterword to Cardinal Sarah’s book, The Power of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise, Benedict XVI wrote that the liturgy is in “good hands” with the Guinean cardinal, while also praising Sarah for his prayer life.

Sarah, Benedict writes, speaks “out of the depths of silence with the Lord, out of his interior union with him, and thus really has something to say to each one of us.”

“We should be grateful to Pope Francis for appointing such a spiritual teacher as head of the congregation that is responsible for the celebration of the liturgy in the Church,” Benedict writes.

The last line of the afterword reads, “With Cardinal Sarah, a master of silence and of interior prayer, the liturgy is in good hands.”

Critics were quick to accuse the former pope of interfering in Church politics and trying to undermine Pope Francis.

One, the Italian liturgist Andrea Grillo, a longtime detractor of Pope Benedict, claims that the former pope has behaved in a “scandalous way” by writing the afterword in praise of Cardinal Sarah and his book, accusing him of “clericalism” and “hypocrisy.”

“It’s as if Ratzinger suddenly renounced his renunciation and wishes to influence the decisions of his successor,” Grillo declared.

Continue reading

Recent Comments
Archives