CHURCH HISTORY

THE NAZI FOREFATHERS OF THE ST. GALLEN MAFIA

FEBRUARY 6, 2020FROM ROME EDITOR1 COMMENT

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

This is a follow-up report to my article on how the members of the Rampolla episcopal lineage were instrumental in helping Nazi war criminals escape to Argentina, and how the wealth and ideas they took with them might be at the foundation of the St. Gallen Mafia. Not all members of the St. Gallen Mafia are Rampolla men, but those who are not trace their lineages back to close friends, collaborators and allies of that Sicilian Cardinal.

Here I will list the Bishops and Cardinals in the German and Austrian Episcopates who were Nazi sympathizers or collaborators, so you can see that when Bergoglio denounces anyone as a Nazi, he probably does not mean it as an insult, but merely as political theatre. All of them are Rampolla men, or like the St. Gallen Mafia members, descendants of Rampolla allies.

The first worthy of mention, is Cardinal Innitzer of Vienna, Austria, who on the occasion of the annexation of Austria by Hitler in 1938, he ordered the Catholic Churches of the city to display the Nazi flag and ring their bells to greet the Dictator upon his arrival in the City on March 14th of that year.

Needless to say, Cardinal Innizter was  a member of the House of Rampolla del Tindaro, just like Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, since both trace their episcopal lineage back to the Sicilian Cardinal, by a direct line of principal consecrators. See the evidence here for Cardinal Innizter and here for Cardinal Bergoglio.

Cardinal Innitzer, however, by October of the same year of 1938, had turned against the Nazi Regime, when he saw what it really meant. But his act of ordering Nazi flags to fly lead many astray.

The next Nazi collaborator was Bishop Alois Hudal, whose co-consecrator was Bishop Ferdinand S. Pawlikowski, a Rampolla man. Historical sources also indicate that Hudal was promoted to Bishop by none other than Cardinal Merry del Val, a Rampolla man and close collaborator with Rampolla.

As I mentioned in my article on Nazi Refugees, Hudal was instrumental in organizing at least one Rat Line to help Nazis escape Germany after the War.

But what I did not mention, was that Hudal rose in power at the Vatican after key members of the Rampolla faction — Cardinal Gaspari to be specific — praised a book written by the Austrian Diplomat, Pastor, who was the patron of Hudal. This is the kind of indirect methods of influence and control for which the St. Gallen Mafia moved their members into key positions during the Pontificate of John Paul II — I speak of Cardinal Daneels.

So zealous was Hudal for Hitler than he attempted to get Austrian clergy to vote in favor of the Anschlaus of Austria, by inviting them to do it upon the German Heavy Cruiser, the Admiral Scheer, in the harbor of Gaeta, Italy, in April of 1938.

Bishop Hudal in 1937 published a book, whose title in English translates as, The Foundations of National Socialism, in which he praised the Nazi State and its vision for Germany but criticized elements of their ideology as a bad form of National Socialism. That Cardinal Innizter gave the book an Imprimatur, shows that Hudal was clearly the spokesman for the Rampolla pro Nazi faction. Hitler is said to have been impressed by the book, though he ordered it banned in Germany because it advocated that the education of Catholic boys be kept in the hands of the clergy.

Bishop Hudal, after the War was one of the chief organizers of Ratlines to help escaped war criminals. The evidence is quite devastating, so I will quote it from his Wikipedia article:

In 1994, Erich Priebke, a former SS Captain, told Italian journalist Emanuela Audisio, La Repubblica, that Hudal helped him reach Buenos Aires, verified by church historian Robert Graham, a Jesuit priest from the United States.^[53]

In 1945, Hudal gave refuge to Otto Wächter.^[54] From 1939 onward, as governor of the Cracow district, Wächter organized the persecution of the Jews and ordered the establishment of the Cracow Ghetto in 1941. Wächter is mentioned as one of the leading advocates in the General Government who were in favor of the Jewish extermination by gassing and as a member of the SS team who under Himmler‘s supervision and Odilo Globocnik‘s direction planned Operation Reinhard, the first phase of the Final Solution, leading to the death of more than 2,000,000 Polish Jews.^[55] After the war, Wächter lived in a Roman monastery “as a monk”, under Hudal’s protection. Wächter died on 14 July 1949 in the Santo Spirito hospital in Rome.^[56][57]

While his official status was minor, Hudal clearly played a role in the ratlines. In 1999, Italian researcher Matteo Sanfilippo revealed a letter drafted on 31 August 1948 by Bishop Hudal to Argentinian President Juan Perón, requesting 5,000 visas, 3,000 for German and 2,000 for Austrian “soldiers”.^[58][59] In the letter, Hudal explained that these were not (Nazi) refugees, but anti-Communist fighters “whose wartime sacrifice” had saved Europe from Soviet domination.^[15]

It cannot be ignored that Hudal had help in Argentina and that his chief efforts were to export Nazis to Argentina. Cardinal Bergoglio, it must be remembered, is the heir of the Rampolla faction in Argentina.

Finally, there is Bishop Franz Justus Rarkowski, a man promoted by Cardinal Gasparri, a close Rampolla ally and collaborator. Rarkowski was the Bishop chaplain of the Germany Army during the Second world war, and was an enthusiastic supporter of the Nazi State. Here are the exact words of the Bishop:

“The German Nation has a great duty to fulfill in the face of the Eternal Almighty. Abroad and at home the Fuehrer has thanked God that his plea for His blessing for our good and just cause was expressed more than once, and was understood. Certainly, other nations opposed to us pray to God and beg Him to grant them victory. God is, in the same manner, Father of all nations, but He is not, in the same manner, arbiter of justice and injustice, of honesty and mendacity. From reports of field chaplains who were with you on all fronts during the past year, I was able to observe how naturally and joyfully you participated in religious services and received the sacraments, not only immediately before battle, but also in the many months when the fronts were quiet. Your Christian faith was everywhere where you, as soldiers, often had to achieve the superhuman, and was a valuable part of your spiritual and moral equipment.”^[4]

Rarkowski praised the annexation of Catholic Poland, whose Bishops were nearly all non Rampolla men. For Rarkowski it was a just war.

That war continues today against all Bishop who will not buckle under the St. Gallen Mafia regime, ruling the Vatican.

To get an idea of how much material from Nazi Germany made it to Argentina and was kept in Buenas Aires, see this video:

_________

CREDITS: The images are all in the public domain. The Featured Image shows Bishop Lugwig Sebastian, Bishop of Speyer and Bishop Franz Rudolf Bornewasser, Bishop of Trier, giving the Nazi Salute at an official celebration in Saarbruken City Hall, following the annexation of the Saarland. Neither are Rampolla men.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

FEBRUARY 6, 2020

The Democrats ‘Transition’ to Radical Gender Ideology

KEVIN BURKE

If you support Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, or Bernie Sanders, you’d better pay close attention to what they are saying about the transgender movement. If elected in November, their administration will have a direct impact on your son’s or daughter’s long-term emotional and physical health, especially if they are on the autism spectrum.

Wrapped in the manipulative mantle of civil rights, politicians are advancing this radical ideology that is literally mutilating and poisoning our youth.

On January 25, for instance, Joe Biden tweeted: “Let’s be clear: Transgender equality is the civil rights issue of our time. There is no room for compromise when it comes to basic human rights.”

Likewise, at a recent CNN town hall, a self-described “transgender American” named Jacob—all of nine years old—asked Elizabeth Warren, “What will you do in your first week as president to make sure that kids like me feel safer in schools?” Mrs. Warren replied:

I want to have a secretary of education who both believes in public education and believes in the value of every one of our kids and is willing to enforce our civil rights laws.

And here’s my plan, Jacob. I’m going to find just the right secretary of education… I want to make sure that the person I think is the right secretary of education meets you and hears your story. And then I want you to tell me if you think that’s the right person, and then we’ll make the deal. Does that sound good?

No, Mrs. Warren, that does not sound “good.” If you’re a parent, it should sound horrifying.

Don’t be fooled by the senator’s folksy, progressive posturing. She is talking about throwing the weight of the federal government behind radical transgender ideology. Your local elementary and secondary schools will become transgender indoctrination centers. As the Heritage Foundation reports,

The Equality Act would extend Title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) as protected classes leading to potential changes to curricula in public schools, requiring texts to affirm and promote radical views of gender and sexuality… to implement curricula that teach students the nonscientific belief that gender is fluid and subjective, and that traditional beliefs about marriage and family are rooted in bigotry.

Candidates like Biden, Warren, and Sanders will enshrine this “right” under the protective cloak of “civil rights.” Transgender ideology will be introduced to vulnerable children at all levels of the curriculum.

School personnel will be obligated to affirm the students in their gender dysphoria and refer confused children to a transgender-affirming therapist or physician or both. Your adolescent son or daughter could begin taking powerful puberty-blocking drugs, or even schedule a mutilating surgery, without your consent.

❧

Let’s look at this advancement of transgender ideology as seen through the eyes of a parent with a daughter on the autism spectrum.

Dr. Kathleen Levinstein is a Professor of Social Work at the University of Michigan, Flint. Her research and advocacy work includes human and civil rights violations against the autistic community. Her daughter has undergone transgender medical transitioning, which she describes in a heartbreaking interview with the website 4thWaveNow:

My daughter, who is on the autism spectrum, … is now 19. When she was 16, she began watching a TV show called Degrassi, which featured a [female-to-male transgender] character. After a few weeks, she announced that she was not actually… lesbian, as she had previously said, but was in fact trans.

She started attending a local PFLAG where she met many trans people, including a number of [female to male] trans teenagers who were raving about a certain “gender therapist” who gave my daughter the go-ahead to have a bilateral mastectomy after only two sessions… Healthy organs were amputated…

It is a crime not just against women, but particularly against disabled women. So many of these young women who are “transitioning” are also autistic.

If your political party supports the indoctrination of non-scientific transgender ideology in schools, and the exploitation and mutilation of vulnerable youth, challenge its representatives to re-examine their support and promotion of transgender ideology. Let them know that indoctrination of vulnerable youth (especially those on the autism spectrum) with transgender ideology is child abuse. Tell them you do not support the misapplication of civil rights laws to deny parents their God-given right to be part of life-changing healthcare decisions that impact their children.

When you cast your ballot in November, think about Dr. Levinstein and the thousands of other vulnerable students and families. Vote for candidates who will not serve as useful idiots for the transgender revolutionaries.

Photo credit: Twitter.com/Elizabeth Warren

Tagged as Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, transgenderism170

By Kevin Burke

Kevin Burke is co-founder of Rachel’s Vineyard, leader of the Fatherhood Forever initiative of Silent No More and a member of the pastoral team of Priests for Life.

JOHN-HENRY WESTEN

Five Cardinals and two prominent bishops speak about the end times

‘The Church is shrouded in the darkness of modernism, but the victory belongs to Our Lord and His Bride. We desire to keep vigil with her and with Jesus, in this new Gethsemane of the end times.’Tue Feb 4, 2020 – 10:53 am EST 

• Share on Facebook1.7k
• Share on Twitter
• 7
• Share via Email
• Print this Page

​​​​​February 4, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The situation in the Church today is so severe that five Cardinals and two of the most prominent bishops in the world have spoken about these as the end times. 

It is likely one of the most underreported stories of 2019 (and I bet even most of you missed it since it was so close to Christmas) but Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former papal representative to the USA who blew the whistle on Pope Francis’ knowledge of the abuses of former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, gave an enormously important summary of the Francis papacy that must be heard.

I was blessed to spend some time speaking with Archbishop Viganò while I was in Munich, Germany last month for the Acies Ordinata. He remains in good health and in good spirits. He knows full well that the battle is the Lord’s and he said how much he appreciates all the prayers said for him by countless Catholics who pray for him every day.

Just before Christmas, Archbishop Viganò released another testimony. Never before have I seen from Archbishop Viganò this type of forthrightness. In his statement, he said the following:

The tragic story of this failed pontificate advances with a pressing succession of twists and turns. Not a day passes: from the most exalted throne, the Supreme Pontiff proceeds to dismantle the See of Peter, using and abusing its supreme authority, not to confess but to deny; not to confirm but to mislead; not to unite but to divide; not to build but to demolish.

Material heresies, formal heresies, idolatry, superficiality of every kind: the Supreme Pontiff Bergoglio never ceases stubbornly to humiliate the highest authority of the Church. His action seeks to violate the Sacred Deposit of Faith and to disfigure the Catholic Face of the Bride of Christ by word and action, through duplicity and lies, through those theatrical gestures-of-his that flaunt spontaneity but are meticulously conceived and planned, and through which he exalts himself in a continuous narcissistic self-celebration, while the figure of the Roman Pontiff is humiliated and the Sweet Christ on earth is obscured.SUBSCRIBEto LifeSite’s daily headlinesSUBSCRIBEU.S. Canada World Catholic

“For more than six years now we have been poisoned by a false magisterium,” he added.

But Archbishop Viganò points out that modernism has been affecting the church since at least the Second Vatican Council:

Over these last decades, the Mystical Body has been slowly drained of its lifeblood through unstoppable bleeding: the Sacred Deposit of Faith has gradually been squandered, dogmas denatured, worship secularized and gradually profaned, morality sabotaged, the priesthood vilified, the Eucharistic Sacrifice protestantized and transformed into a convivial Banquet…

Now the Church is lifeless, covered with metastases and devastated. The people of God are groping, illiterate and robbed of their Faith, in the darkness of chaos and division. In these last decades, the enemies of God have progressively made scorched earth of two thousand years of Tradition. With unprecedented acceleration, thanks to the subversive drive of this pontificate, supported by the powerful Jesuit apparatus, a deadly coup de grace [death blow] is being delivered to the Church.

With Pope Bergoglio — as with all modernists — it is impossible to seek clarity, since the distinctive mark of the modernist heresy is dissimulation. Masters of error and experts in the art of deception, “they strive to make what is ambiguous universally accepted, presenting it from its harmless side which will serve as a passport to introduce the toxic side that was initially kept hidden.” (Fr. Matteo Liberatore SJ). And so the lie, obstinately and obsessively repeated, ends up becoming “true” and accepted by the majority.

The result of this abuse is what we now have before our eyes: a Catholic Church that is no longer Catholic; a container emptied of its authentic content and filled with borrowed goods. 

The advent of the Antichrist is inevitable; it is part of the epilogue of the History of Salvation.  But we know that it is the prerequisite for the universal triumph of Christ and his glorious Bride.

Those of us who have not let ourselves be deceived by these enemies of the Church enfeoffed in the ecclesial Body, must unite and together face off against the Evil One, who is long defeated yet still able to harm and cause the eternal perdition of multitudes of souls, but whose head the Blessed Virgin, our Leader, will definitively crush.

He concluded his reflection, which you can read in full by clicking here, by saying that we are living in the “Gethsemane of the end times.”

But it is not only Archbishop Viganò who sees these times as apocalyptic.

Another bishop whose voice God has raised in these perilous times to international recognition is Kazakhstan Bishop Athanasius Schneider.

In a recent interview with the Remnant’s Michael Matt, aired in November, His Excellency makes the same comparison to the current time of calamity in the Church to Christ’s passion. His Excellency spoke in away that reminds one of what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says, most especially when it notes that the Church will “enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection.”

The Catechism also states that the kingdom will be fulfilled “not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God’s victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven. God’s triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgment after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world.”

In terms of Cardinals in the Church who are speaking out on this subject, we turn first to His Eminence Cardinal Raymond Burke. In July 2017 at the Church Teaches Forum in Kentucky, Burke said that the “confusion, division, and error” within the Church are coming from shepherds themselves, even at the highest levels. 

His Eminence said that this indicates that we “may be” in the end times. “We are living in most troubled times in the world and also in the Church,” he said. “In such a pervasively disordered cultural condition, there is legitimate fear of a global confrontation which can only mean destruction and death for many. Clearly, the present situation of the world cannot continue without leading to total annihilation.”

Cardinal Burke repeated those remarks in December 2017 in an interview with Paolo Gambi published at the Catholic Herald in the United Kingdom. 

“In the present moment there is confusion and error about the most fundamental teachings of the Church, for example with regard to marriage and the family,” His Excellency said. He then described the debate in the Church over communion and divorce and remarriage. “There is today confusion as to whether there are acts which are intrinsically evil and this, of course, is the foundation of the moral law. When this foundation begins to be questioned within the Church, then the whole order of human life and the order of the Church itself are endangered.”

“So there is a feeling that in today’s world that is based on secularism with a completely anthropocentric approach…the Church itself seems to be confused. In that sense one may have the feeling that the Church gives the appearance of being unwilling to obey the mandates of Our Lord. Then perhaps we have arrived at the End Times.”

The feeling that we are in the end times was expressed also by the late, great Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, one of the signatories of the dubia.

Speaking at the Rome Life Forum in May 2017, Cardinal Caffarra recalled the letter Sr. Lucia of Fatima sent him speaking about “the final battle between Our Lord and the kingdom of Satan being over marriage and the family.” 

He said that it was his conviction that what Sister Lucy had written him about “is being fulfilled in these days of ours.” Watch his remarks by clicking here.

A third Cardinal has also spoken of these times with apocalyptic references.

In the lead up to the Amazon Synod, Cardinal Walter Brandmüller said, “the frightening question arises whether the protagonists of this synod are not more concerned with the attempt secretly to replace religion as man’s answer to the call of its Creator by a pantheistic natural religion of man – namely, by a new variant of Modernism from the beginning of the 20th century.” 

“It is difficult not to think of the eschatological texts of the New Testament!” he exclaimed.

As the Pachamama scandal broke out during the Synod, Cardinal Brandmüller made direct reference to the apocalyptic warnings of Christ, calling the Pachamama idols in the Vatican “the abomination of desolation set up in the holy place.” 

Cardinal Walter Brandmüller had made the reference while praising the actions of the two young men who threw the Pachamama idols into the Tiber River. “These two courageous ‘Maccabees’ who have removed the ‘abomination of desolation in the holy place’ are the prophets of today,” he said.

Use of apocalyptic language is not only coming from the dubia cardinals. Cardinal Gerhard Müller, who was unceremoniously removed by Pope Francis was the head of the powerful Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, issued his Manifesto of Faith in February of last year. 

In that heroic document, His Excellency said that, “To keep silent about these and the other truths of the Faith and to teach people accordingly is the greatest deception against which the Catechism vigorously warns. It represents the last trial of the Church and leads man to a religious delusion, ‘the price of their apostasy’ (CCC 675) it is the fraud of Antichrist. ‘He will deceive those who are lost by all means of injustice, for they have closed themselves to the love of the truth by which they should be saved.’ (2 Thess: 2-10)”

For our fifth Cardinal, we have Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk of the Netherlands.

Writing in the National Catholic Register in May 2018, Cardinal Eijk said: “Observing that the bishops and, above all, the Successor of Peter fail to maintain and transmit faithfully and in unity the deposit of faith contained in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, I cannot help but think of Article 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

“The Church’s ultimate trial Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.”

In a follow-up interview with LifeSite’s Paris correspondent Jeanne Smits, Cardinal Eijk explained his reference this way:

“I quoted number 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Because there are cardinals who plead for the blessing of homosexual relationships, I referred to this paragraph of the Catechism as a warning. It states that shortly before the Apocalypse, voices will rise within the Church itself, and even among the highest authorities of the Church who will express divergent opinions in relation to Catholic doctrine. I did this as a warning: let us be careful not to find ourselves in this situation.”  

As you can see, there are at least 5 cardinals and two prominent bishops who have raised the spectre of the end times. But as we’ve said here before, that is not something to be down about.

Let me return to the inspiring words of Archbishop Viganò who, after stating bluntly the catastrophic situation facing the Church today, concluded with encouragement.

Now it is our turn. Without equivocation, without letting ourselves be driven out of this Church whose legitimate children we are and in which we have the sacred right to feel at home, without the hateful horde of Christ’s enemies making us feel marginalized, schismatic and excommunicated.

Now it is our turn! The triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary — Coredemptrix and Mediatrix of all graces — passes through her “little ones,” who are certainly frail and sinners but are absolutely opposed to the members enlisted in the Enemy’s army. “Little ones” consecrated without any limit whatsoever to the Immaculate, in order to be her heel, the most humiliated and despised part, the most hated by hell, but which together with Her will crush the head of the infernal Monster.

The Church is shrouded in the darkness of modernism, but the victory belongs to Our Lord and His Bride. We desire to continue to profess the perennial faith of the Church in the face of the roaring evil that besieges her. We desire to keep vigil with her and with Jesus, in this new Gethsemane of the end times; to pray and do penance in reparation for the many offenses caused to them.

NEWS

DEFEND BERGOGLIO, BECOME BERGOGLIO

FEBRUARY 6, 2020FROM ROME EDITORLEAVE A COMMENT

FIRST – the King of unctuous smears…GottaGoBergoglioBXVI is the only pope@ProcessionsUSA

@CanonTwoTwelve
Someone should ask Skojec if he plans to remove every article written by a woman on his publication. You know, bc he uses 1 Tim2:12 to try to shut Ann Barnhardt up.

38:45 AM – Feb 6, 2020Twitter Ads info and privacySee GottaGoBergoglioBXVI is the only pope’s other Tweets

Translation: “Women should just shut up. Only self pontificating laymen, who have no Church document to back me up, should be allowed to speak outside of Church.”

NEXT — Creative Minority Report

Creative Minority@CMReport · 30mReplying to @CMReport

I for one, lost my nice paying gig because I refused to not tell the truth about what is happening. I doubt many of your favorites can say the same.Creative Minority@CMReport

As for the fact that many of these people stridently disagree with the tenets of Benevacantism is a testament to their seriousness. If they more or less came to these conclusions around the same time, it is because this particular strain of the sedevacantism virus just emerged.9:32 AM – Feb 6, 2020Twitter Ads info and privacySee Creative Minority’s other Tweets

Translation: “Your defense of the teaching of the Church and Canon law is a mental disease. We who sacrificed to ‘recognize and resist’ are the holy ones who give power to the beast.”

_____________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of a twitter timeline, used here according to Fair Use standards for editorial comment.  The Tweets above are cited as examples of the further descent of the “Bergoglio is certainly the Pope” Crowd into Bergoglian speech habits, whereby you throw out insults on a daily basis to keep from having to explain your irrational of self-contradictory positions.

CHURCH HISTORY

BL. URBAN II, PATRON OF POPES WHO COURAGEOUSLY OPPOSE ANTI-POPES

FEBRUARY 6, 2020FROM ROME EDITOR2 COMMENTS

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

One of the greatest popes of all time, was born nearly 1000 years ago, in 1035 A. D., at Châtillon-sur-Marne, in the Kingdom of the Franks, to a noble family of knights and warriors who dominated that countryside.

Moved by the grace of God, in his youth, he forsook the easy life of a diocesan priest, with promises of being a local Bishop, and gave up this world and became a humble son of Saint Benedict, at the famous Monastery of Cluny, nearby.  Cluny was one of the leading religious communities in the Church. Founded nearly a century ago by Saint William in the remote forests, it grew to be a great center of monastic life, on account of the zeal and devotion of its monks and that it was free from all Feudal obligations of tax, tithe and service.

So talented and devout was Odo de Lagery, that he was chosen Prior of Cluny some time before 1046 A.D., as I estimate it. And as such he received a guest that would forever change the history of the world. I speak of  Saint Hildebrand

Hildebrand was an Italian. The son of a blacksmith in southern Tuscany. He had been a guest-student at the Benedictine Monastery of Tre Fontane in Rome, and had attached himself to the retinue of the man he thought was the pope, John Gratian, reigning under the name of Gregory VI  However, at the Council of Sutri in 1046, Gratian was deposed for the crime of having obtained the papacy by simony. At the time his acolyte, was but 16 year of age, and so when he went into exile he took the young Hildebrand with him.

Gratian died shortly afterwards, and Hildebrand, finding himself in Burgundy sought out the Monks of Cluny for lodging, perhaps having nothing to live upon and no where to go, as the former acolyte of an Antipope. But Prior Odo took him in for several weeks. Whereupon he left and attached himself to a Bishop in Burgundy, who was close friends with the Monks of Cluny: Saint Bruno of Egisheim, Bishop of Toul, who at the Diet of Worms late in 1048 was elected as Pope Leo IX.

Years later, after battling against simony and the abuse of lay princes in nominating Bishops, Saint Hildebrand, himself was raised to the Apostolic Throne, in April of 1073, and took the name, Gregory VII: he went on to become one of the top 10 greatest popes in history, and certainly the greatest of the Middle Ages for his unswerving zeal for the liberty of the Church of Christ.

Seven years later, Gregory VII named Prior Odo, Cardinal Bishop of Ostia, and in 1084 made him Apostolic Legate to the Holy Roman Empire. He was so trusted by Saint Hildebrand, that the Saint named him as one of the three men that should succeed him. Blessed Odo was the third, in that succession, and became Pope at Terracina, on March 12, 1088.

Pope Urban II

He took the name Urban II, recalling the Saint and Martyr by that name who reigned on the See of Peter at the beginning of the Third Century.

But Pope Urban II did not inherit a Church at peace, for in the strife which reigned between Pope Gregory VII and the German Emperor, the Emperor had descended to Rome in 1084 and set up the Antipope Clement III who had reigned there firmly ever since. So from day one, Bl. Urban II had to contend with an Anti-pope.

It is to be noted, that the mere fact that an Antipope controls Rome is NO OBSTACLE for the Church of Rome to elect a successor to the true Pope.

Many a man, and many a pope, would have run away or become so totally obsessed with the bad position in which he was in, as to take ineffective measured and let the Schism go on. But not Bl. Urban.

He traveled Italy — staying away from Rome — and held Councils at Amalfi, Troia and Benevento, condemning the Antipope and restoring ecclesiastical discipline with those Bishops who were favorable to true reform and renewal. Ancient canons were re-established, guilty clergy were punished and expelled. He assisted faithful Catholic nobility and clergy throughout Western Europe by sound counsel and decrees. He was ever open to holy suggestions.

The First Crusade

Upon the mountain of merits he had accumulated, God sent him the answer to his troubles which he never foresaw.

This answer began with a man called Peter the Hermit. It is not clear if he was a hermit or simply a priest of Northern Francis with that surname. Inspired by love of God he had traveled to the Holy Land on pilgrimage in 1093-4 and found himself in the spring of 1094 praying one midnight in the Holy Sepulcher, where Christ was buried and rose from the dead. There, he had a vision of Christ Crucified who commanded him to speak with the Greek Orthodox Patriarch and call upon the Bishop of Rome to call upon the Men of the West to liberate the Holy Land from the cruel yoke of the Muslims under which it had labored for centuries but, very heavily in the last 60 years. Peter complied, and the Patriarch wrote the Catholic Bishop of Rome asking for help.

Peter met Bl. Urban at Bari, in Apulia, in the fall of 1094, and traveled with him to Piacenza, in northern Italy, in March 1095, where the Greek Orthodox Emperor of Constantinople renewed the call for military assistance. Bl. Urban had met his destiny and eagerly responded.

He went to Clermont, France, where he had summoned all the Bishops of the West, and on the 27th of November of 1095 gave a speech which changed the history of the world: for he called on the Catholic knights and noblemen present to lay down their arms against their brothers in the faith and take them up in a penitential pilgrimage to Jerusalem to free it from the infidel. — The crowds were so moved with fervor at his speech, that they shouted out DEUS VULT!  God wills it.

Bl. Urban II died on July 29, 1099 A.D., fourteen days after the Catholic Forces of the First Crusade had captured Jerusalem, in a military venture which was so unexpected and miraculous that all historians since have spoken of it and tried to explain it. The Crusaders took the city because the True Pope had called them and promised them victory. And God granted it, because Urban II and not Clement III was His Vicar on Earth.

The First Crusade was followed by 9 others, and they forever changed Europe, because they opened the Catholic World up to the idea of bringing the Gospel to all the Earth and defending the rights of Christians everywhere against the forces of unbelief. For this reason, Bl. Urban is the most hated pope by all the enemies of the Church, inside and outside the Church. But should be the most beloved by all who truly love the true God.

Bl. Urban had the consolation in seeing his rival also driven from power in 1097. Because one of the many Crusader contingents, passing through Italy on the way to Jerusalem, drove the Antipope from Rome and re-established the authority of the true pope.

The moral of the story is, be generous with God and He will be generous with you. And all take heart and be of good cheer, because all the Providence of God is at the back of those who support the True Pope!

_________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a photo of the Statue of Bl. Urban at the Place de la Victoire, Clermont-Ferrand, France, and is used here according to the Creative Commons Share-Alike 3.0 unported license described here. — The sketch of Bl. Urban is by Artaud de Montor, see here for more info.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

Former Corpus Christi mayor on the campaign trail with Pete Buttigieg

Martinez said she plans to continue to campaign for Buttigieg throughout his candidacy.Author: KIII StaffPublished: 6:17 AM CST February 5, 2020Updated: 6:17 AM CST February 5, 2020

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas — Former Corpus Christi Mayor Nelda Martinez has been on the campaign trail with Pete Buttigieg and spoke with 3News on Tuesday.

Martinez said she met Buttigieg when they were both first-time mayors back in 2012.

“Every state that I’ve been in, things change last minute and you understand that that’s just the nature of a schedule of trying to meet people’s needs, and making sure we are communicating our message,” Martinez said.Buttigieg Pulls Back On Victory SpeechFEATURED BY

Martinez said she plans to continue to campaign for Buttigieg throughout his candidacy.

(BUTTIGIEG IS AN EXTREME SUPPORTER OF ABORTION EVEN UP TO THE TIME OF NATURAL BIRTH, WHICH TRANSLATES INTO INFANTICIDE. LUCKILY FOR THE EX-MAYOR I NO LONGER HAVE CANONICAL POWER TO IMPOSE A CANONICAL PENALTY ON HER FOR HER PUBLIC SUPPORT OF A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WHO IS AN EXTREME SUPPORTER OF ABORTION.) Abyssum

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Pete Buttigieg Defends Abortion Up to Birth and Infanticide: “It Should be Up to the Woman”

NATIONAL   STEVEN ERTELT   FEB 6, 2020   |   5:54PM    WASHINGTON, DC 

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg defended abortions up to birth and infanticide on Thursday, saying that “it should be up to the woman” to decide whether or not to kill her baby in an abortion. Buttigieg, in an appearance on ABC’s The View, again refused to back any limit whatsoever on abortion – even partial-birth abortion – or to support protections for babies born alive.

During the questioning, View host Meghan McCain asked him about infanticide and late-term abortions and even cited Virginia Governor Ralph Northam and his infamous defense of infanticide — saying that babies should be left o die if parents wanted that.

Buttigieg refused to condemn infanticide or Northam’s comments and dismissed that that even happens even though CDC statistics clearly show babies have been left to die after abortions.

He also misled viewers into thinking that late-term abortions are done for egregious medical conditions even though statistics clearly show 80 percent of late-term abortions are done for elective reasons on healthy mothers and healthy babies.

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

Pete Buttigieg Says Infanticide is Not a Thing, CDC Shows Hundreds of Babies Left to Die After Failed Abortions

NATIONAL   STEVEN ERTELT   FEB 7, 2020   |   11:09AM    WASHINGTON, DC 

Yesterday on “The View,” Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said that infanticide was not a thing. He claimed that nobody really seriously believes babies are killed and infanticides across United States.

But figures from the Centers for Disease Control show hundreds of babies are born alive and left to die after they survive failed abortion attempts.

The issue is serious enough that Congress has previously passed legislation requiring babies to receive medical care if they survive an abortion and Congress is currently considering legislation to hold doctors accountable for failing to provide that appropriate medical care.

During questioning, Meghan McCain asked Buttigieg about comments from Virginia Governor Ralph Northam defending infanticide and whether he would support any limits on abortions up to birth — even opposing partial-birth abortions.

“My point is that it shouldn’t be up to a government official to draw the line, it should be up to the woman who is confronted with the choice,” Buttigieg said defending abortions up to birth and infanticide.

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

New Democratic Frontrunner Makes Disgusting Comments About Abortion

by The Patriotic Timesabout 4 hours ago2.2kViews

The apparent winner of the Democrat caucuses in Iowa, Pete Buttigieg, recently appeared on The View. The presidential candidate was pressed about his views on abortion. He’s already on record as saying pro-life Democrats aren’t welcomed in the party anymore. Now, what he says about a child’s life will have you disgusted.

Not that long ago, a pro-life Democrat woman asked Pete Buttigieg if there was “still room” for her in the party. There are some 20 million Democrats that consider themselves pro-life (sounds impossible, I know, but it’s true). In recent years, they’ve watched as the party embraces more and more radical forms of abortion.

Buttigieg refused to say that pro-life Democrats were welcomed. In fact, his comments suggested that he cared more about abortion rights than reaching those liberal voters who hate the practice. 

This should be troubling news to any pro-life American. Democrats are jumping off the cliff when it comes to abortion. Once upon a time, they considered it a “necessary evil.” Today, they pump hundreds of millions of dollars into Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics. They all but encourage the practice for young women. Even the governor of Virginia supported murdering a child after he or she is born.

Seems like Buttigieg is all for the left’s radical, aggressive support of abortion. When asked if he supported post-birth abortion—also known as infanticide—he gave a pathetic answer. Proving once again that he has no problem with the murder of babies.

Buttigieg spoke with The View’s Meghan McCain regarding his stance on abortions Thursday morning. McCain reminded Buttigieg that he once suggested that unborn babies can be aborted up until they draw their first breath, and offered Buttigieg a chance to walk back this statement…

“If a woman wanted to invoke infanticide after a baby was born, you’d be comfortable with that?” McCain asked him…
“I don’t know what to tell them morally about what they should do,” he continued. “I just know that I trust her and her decision medically or morally isn’t going to be any better because the government is commanding her to do it.” [Source: Daily Caller]

That is a spineless answer from a man too scared to take a stand. But read between the lines of what he’s saying. A man who wants to be president says it’s okay for a woman to kill a child after he or she is born. He says it’s not “moral” for the government to protect the life of a human being.

Shocking Study in Japan Shows This Nutrient Forces People To Poop Out FatIt’s probably in your refrigerator right nowFind Out More 84,218

That kind of stance is not passive. It’s an embrace of some of the most evil and heartless actions a person can inflict on a child. Buttigieg says it should be up to the woman—that he “trusts” the woman to make the right choice.

Right choice? We’re talking about ending a human life. There is only one right choice and that’s not to kill a baby.

Think about what Buttigieg is saying. He’s not just allowing people to murder children after birth. His stance would encourage it. Considering most abortion clinics get government funding—and they push abortion to keep business coming—Buttigieg’s pro-infanticide stance would open the floodgates. 

Democrats went from supporting a woman’s right to choose to pushing the most extreme forms of child murder. 

It should come as no surprise. Every last 2020 Democratic candidate wants to turn America into a socialist state. They want to control your health care, so you have no say in what kind of treatments you can get. 

That kind of thing is mighty expensive. Wouldn’t it be easier on the government if, say, population growth slowed down? If most women aborted their babies, to make the burden on government lighter?

That would also be a good way to control the country overall. The fewer people, the fewer problems, right?

Sound crazy? Why else would a man like Buttigieg think it’s okay for a woman to kill her newborn child? 

Looks like the Democratic party has moved from being passively evil, to downright demonic.

CHURCH HISTORY

SAINT IVO OF KERMARTIN, PATRON OF LAWYERS AND CANONISTS

FEBRUARY 6, 2020

FROM ROME

By Attorney Frank Magill

As a convert, one of the aspects of Catholicism that I find most appealing is the Communion of Saints. Here, awaiting only our willingness to read and learn, is a treasure-trove of inspiration and wisdom, both practical and intellectual. Coming from every conceivable background, the most humble fisherman to the high-born, the dregs of society to royalty, the saints teach us how to live virtuously, to receive and revere the Sacraments, to overcome the greatest of challenges, to pray and practice devotions: in short, how to get to Heaven — if we will but follow their example.

It would be hard to find a more compelling example of a holy and virtuous life than that set by St. Ivo¹ of Kermartin, who is revered as a patron saint of lawyers and judges as well as abandoned children. Most everyone has heard of St. Thomas More, also a patron saint of lawyers, but St. Ivo seems to be lesser known. Ervoan “Ivo” Helori, meaning “son of Helor”, was born in 1253 at the Manor of Kermartinnear the town of Treguiér in Brittany, in the northwest of France, to a “noble and virtuous” family. His parents chose to educate him at home rather than sending him to a monastery or convent school. At that time, of course, the “progressive” institution of public, secular schools, (deemed by Marx and Engels to be a key component of a model communist society),² did not yet exist in France.³

Saint Ivo went to the University of Paris in 1267 at age 14 to study the liberal arts and theology. According to Butler — whose account cites the evidence given in support of St. Ivo’s canonization as well as the Bull of canonization itself ⁴ — Ivo strongly desired to live a holy life, having been inspired from his childhood by his mother’s exhortations, and was repulsed by the hedonistic behavior of many classmates, devoting himself instead to his academic studies and to prayer. In his spare time he visited the sick at local hospitals. It was believed that Ivo’s example served to convince some of his fellows to reform their own ways. Following his years at Paris, Ivo moved on in 1277 to Orleans to study under two different clerics who later became bishops, one also being created Cardinal . Throughout his course of education, Ivo was noted both for his ability to learn and his piety.

By this time Ivo had established an ascetic way of life that would be unthinkable to most people today, when relatively few Catholics even know the fundamentals of the Faith, much less practice severe forms of self-discipline. He wore a hair shirt under his clothing, slept only sparingly, and then on straw or a mat, using a stone pillow. He strictly observed both Lent and Advent with bread and water fasts, as well as on vigils, ember days and other days during the year, and abstained from both meat and wine at all times. Privately, he took a vow of chastity, politely declining a number of offers of possible marriage without disclosing the real reason.

On completion of his course of study at Paris and Orleans, Ivo returned to Brittany where he was appointed to an ecclesiastical judgeship in the city of Rennes, on account of minor orders he had received at Orleans. Wigmore points out that, at this point in history, the Church courts were the most advanced in Europe, having civil and criminal, as well as ecclesiastical, jurisdiction. Here Saint Ivo began in earnest his service to the poor, carefully protecting them from legal oppression, sometimes even representing indigent clients in other courts, paying their expenses, and visiting them in jail. His reputation as a judge among all parties was one of fairness and impartiality, and he would not accept the judicial bribes that were then common, nor did he ever accept fees for representation of the indigent. As a result of his actions, Ivo gained the informal appellation “Advocatus pauperum” (Advocate of the Poor).

St. Ivo, Defender of the Poor

Ordered by the Bishop of Treguier to return to his home diocese, ⁵Ivo was ordained a priest over his initial objections in 1284. There, he proceeded to discharge the duties of that vocation just as virtuously and enthusiastically as he did his work in the law, often traveling throughout the diocese to preach at different parish churches, sometimes as many as seven times in a single day, with crowds sometimes following him from town to town. He arose nightly at midnight to pray the Office of Matins, and lay prostrate in prayer before the tabernacle before celebrating the Mass, at which he routinely shed tears of joy. His austere life style continued and even deepened during his priesthood, as he engaged in bread and water fasting several times per week year round, as well as throughout Advent and Lent as noted earlier. He continued his abstinence from meat and wine, celebrating high feast days by adding a couple of eggs to his regular spare vegetarian meals. Whether Saint Ivo ever took the habit of the Franciscan Third Order is disputed, according to Butler, with Gonzaga holding that he did so, but another ancient historian, Papebroke, denying that claim. Source.

On the legal side, he continued in the same capacity as at Rennes, advocating for the poor without remuneration when not serving as judge in his own court, and frequently prevailing upon litigating parties to settle their differences amicably. On one occasion, unable to convince a mother and her son to drop a particularly unpleasant legal dispute, Saint Ivo offered up a Mass for their reconciliation, whereupon they settled immediately. In another instance, Ivo saved a widow from being fleeced by two con-men, when he saw through their scheme and forced them to reveal their chicanery in open court.

In addition to his work before the bar and at the altar of the Holy Sacrifice, Ivo undertook to compile in one volume a record of all the various customary laws of Brittany, which was then “a welter of all sorts of unwritten and conflicting traditions as to tenure, dues, privileges, and the like.” Source. This book did not surface until about 20 years after St. Ivo’s death, but most likely proved quite useful to the legal profession and others for many years thereafter.

Saint Ivo died at the age of 49 on May 19, 1303, perhaps weakened by his hard work and severe fasting. His death was widely mourned in the region and throughout the country, with the cause for his canonization being championed by many, including John, Duke of Brittany, as well as King Philip and Queen Anne of France.

A commission was convened to examine the cause in 1330, which is reported to have heard a total of 800 witnesses: 500 at one sitting in the local church, and another 300 who were individually deposed.

Over 100 miracles were attested to by these witnesses, among which was the following account: A woman who lived in Treguier, after having discovered that her home had been robbed, prayed at the tomb of Ivo seeking his intercession. As she prayed, she heard Ivo’s voice speaking the names of three burglars. Two were apprehended and much of the missing property recovered; however, the third had apparently escaped. He, however, suddenly went blind and, believing he was being punished by God for his crime, returned to Treguier and gave back what he had stolen from the woman. His sight was instantly restored. This man himself was one of the individual witnesses before the commission.

Another miracle was attested by the Duke of Brittany, who averred that after praying for Ivo’s intercession, he had been cured of a “distemper” which his physicians had been unable to treat successfully.

The evidence taken by the commission ultimately resulted in the canonization of St. Ivo by Pope Clement VI, on the anniversary of his passing to glory, May 19 in the year 1347. Although not recognized as a feast day by the universal Church, the date is celebrated by the several dioceses in the Brittany region, and the Saint is listed in the Martyrologium Romanum for May 19: “In Brittany, [in the year 1303,] the holy Priest and Confessor Yves, who for the love of Christ pled the cause of orphans, widows, and the poor.” (Source). In addition, the University of Nantes, in the south of Brittany, once placed itself under his patronage, and the chapel of Kermartin is named after him, as are two churches in Rome, Sant’Ivo alla Sapienza and Sant’Ivo dei Bretoni. 

According to a 1991 article in the New York Times, local legend relates that the soul of St. Ivo approached the gates of Heaven along with a group of nuns. St. Peter asked the nuns to wait in Purgatory because there were already plenty of nuns in Heaven, but he told the Saint “You can enter immediately. We don’t yet have a single lawyer.” Another reported local saying about St. Ivo is “Advocatus sed non latro, res miranda populo,” or “A lawyer yet not a rascal, a thing that made the people wonder.”

The admiration shown by the people for Ivo has been shared also by many in the legal profession over the centuries, and even today brings lawyers and judges from around the world to the annual celebration of the Saint’s festival, the “pardon” (or pilgrimage) at Treguiers Cathedral, which contains an elaborate and beautiful cenotaph. (See photo below.) Visitors and locals also pay homage to the Saint at the church he endowed at the nearby suburb of Minihy, where his original tomb was located.

The Lesson of St. Ivo

As stated earlier, the saints provide us with many types of wisdom and inspiration by their examples as well as their written works. Unfortunately, we have no written opus of St. Ivo from which to benefit, except for his compilation of Breton common law, which presumably did not also contain his own commentaries. What we do have, of course, is his sterling example of a life of service to his fellow man, as a priest, lawyer and judge. I daresay his virtuous conduct of these vocations would meet with universal approval today as well as in his own time, and well it should.

But perhaps an even more timely lesson might be drawn from St. Ivo’s ascetic life, with his frequent fasting and his lifelong abstinence from meat and alcohol. Indeed, his asceticism was so pervasive that it arguably shortened his earthly life, though it undoubtedly hastened his passage through purgatory and into the Divine Presence. In today’s society in which, even in the Church, worldly matters seem to take complete precedence over any concern for death, judgment, Heaven, and hell, a man who showed such disdain for creature comforts would be scorned and ridiculed. Of course, that is how most of the world today reacts to all faithful Christians, even those of us who do not engage in the strict disciplines followed by St. Ivo. But the lesson remains, which once was, and ought now to be, urgently taught in every Catholic home, school and parish: the present world is but a proving ground for the world to come, the new Heaven and the new Earth, the promise of Christ to all His faithful disciples. We are to live in this world but not be of this world. To lose sight of this is to lose sight of Christ Himself. Let us pray that our Church regains its bearings and returns to this first principle.

______________

FOOTNOTES

1 Or Ives, in English, or Yves, in French

2  Marx & Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party, Chapter II, p. 27, Marxists Internet Archive (marxists.org) 1987, 2000, 2010.

3 Secular education at public expense became mandated in France in 1882 as a result of legislation advocated by Jules Ferry, then Prime Minister of the Republic, who helped to continue the French renunciation of its Catholic history begun by the Revolution of 1789.

4  Unfortunately, as of this writing the web archive of the Holy See includes only one document from the papacy of Clement VI, who canonized St. Ivo, and it is not the bull of canonization. Additionally, there seem to be no historical studies of the Saint extant in English. Thus, not being fluent in French, we are constrained to rely chiefly upon Butler’s and Wigmore’s narratives for most details of the saint’s life and canonization.

5 The diocese was suppressed and combined with another by the Concordat of 1802 between Napoleon and the Holy See.

_____________

CREDITS:  Rogier de Weyden, St. Ivo reading, in the National Gallery of Art, USA, is in the public domain (see here). — The Image of the procession is used under a GNU license (see here)

Catholic Monitor

Tuesday, December 18, 2018

Doctor of the Church St. Bellarmine: Francis is Teaching Heresy 

Francis is apparently teaching heresy in the following statement according to Doctor of the Church St. Robert Bellarmine that contradicts the “teachings of scripture, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and previous popes”: 

“[T]he Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that death penalty is always inadmissible for the Church is attentive to the inviolability and dignity of the person… the Magisterium of the Church believes that perpetual punishment [life imprisonment], which removes the possibility of moral and existential redemption for the benefit of the condemned person and the community, is a form of hidden death penalty.”
[https://www.lastampa.it/2018/12/18/vaticaninsider/the-pope-moratorium-on-the-death-penalty-no-to-arbitrary-executions-H4nLalvbjc2PzhQ0WXn0fO/pagina.html]

Renowned Catholic philosopher Edward Feser explains why the Francis teaching is Orwellian error, contradicts past teachings and is judged “heretical” by a Doctor of the Church:

“[Doctor of the Church] Bellarmine judged it ‘heretical’ to maintain that Christians cannot in theory apply capital punishment.”

 “… Pope Francis, by contrast, wants the Catechism to teach that capital punishment ought never to be used… he justifies this change not on prudential grounds, but ‘so as to better reflect the development of doctrine.'”

“… Nor does the letter from the CDF [Francis’s Vatican doctrine office] explain how the new teaching can be consistent with the teaching of scripture, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and previous popes. Merely asserting the new language “develops” rather than “contradicts” past teachings does not make it so. The CDF is not Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, and a pope is not Humpty Dumpty, able by fiat to make words mean whatever he wants them to. Slapping the label “development” onto a contradiction doesn’t transform it into a non-contradiction.”
(First Things, “Pope Francis and Capital Punishment,” August 3, 2018)

Moreover, Feser shows that it is “analogous to denying the doctrine that there are three divine Persons”:

“Once again the Pope both appears to condemn capital punishment as intrinsically wrong and claims that his remarks are consistent with past teaching. He tries to justify the claim that there is no inconsistency by saying that the Church has always affirmed the dignity of life. But this is analogous to denying the doctrine that there are three divine Persons and then claiming that this is consistent with past teaching, on the grounds that the Church has always affirmed that there is only one God.  In fact, the doctrine of the Trinity requires us to say both that there is only one God and that there are three Persons in God.  Similarly, consistency with scripture and previous papal teaching requires us to say both that life has dignity but also that an offender can in principle lose the right to his life.  To fail to affirm both of these things is precisely to contradict past teaching, not ‘develop’ it.”
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/sawing-off-the-branch-on-which-he-sits-experts-question-francis-attack-on-p]

Heresy in itself is a great evil, but this erroneous teaching could, also, bring about the evil of promoting more abortions while claiming to be “pro-life.” 

Dr. Joseph Shaw, as early as October 20, 2017, showed how the Pope’s death penalty heresy plays into the abortionist game plan with “implications for the pro-life movement [that] would be catastrophic”:

“The Pope speaks in this address with a level of technical precision not always
to be found in his remarks. He says:”

‘It is per se contrary to the Gospel, because it entails the willful suppression of a
human life that never ceases to be sacred in the eyes of its Creator and of which –
ultimately – only God is the true judge and guarantor.’

“This logically implies that the ‘willful suppression of life’ in self-defence and war is also always and everywhere ruled out.”

“This aligns his position with that made famous by the American theologian Prof
Germain Grisez (who, as a matter of fact, wrote an open letter to Pope Francis
protesting about the undermining of the teaching of the Church on marriage, with his longstanding collaborator Prof John Finnis). Grisez argues that warfare is morally possible if we think of soldiers not intending to kill, but intending to incapacitate.”

“This raises the question of whether Pope Francis or his collaborators would like at
some point to take advantage of another implication of Grisez’s position. Grisez’s
view is that it is intrinsically wrong to intend to take a life, and that this is always
wrong (even in a just war). On the other hand, it would be permissible to remove anon-viable fetus from the womb, if the intention was not to kill but to remove the fetus from the womb for the sake of the mother’s health. Indeed, to facilitate this removal, it would be permissible to cut the fetus into pieces first.
(See Germain Grisez ‘Towards a consistent Natural-Law ethics of killing’  American Journal of Jurisprudence 15 (1970) p4; cf. Finnis, Boyle, and Grisez Nuclear Deterrence, Morality and Realism (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987) p311)”

“This view was condemned by Pope St John Paul II in Evangelium vitae 62 (cf. §§40,
60, 63). It should be emphasised that Grisez and his collaborators accepted the
position of Evangelium vitae as binding on Catholics.

The condemnation of the death penalty in all circumstance could be part of a
strategy to adopt this understanding of a consistent pro-life ethic [seamless garment]. While it looks at first like a very strong ‘pro-life’ position, it allows so-called ‘therapeutic abortion’, and
adopting it would enable the Church to make an enormous concession to the
practice of abortion.”

“Is should be noted that the great majority of abortions are carried out under the
justification of the ‘health of the mother’, whether physical or mental, and while
Grisez would insist that few could be truly justified on his theory, it would not be easy
for legislators to distinguish which were and which were not. The practical result of
adopting this approach would be the end of the Catholic campaign against legal
abortion, and the resolution of the confrontation between the Church and the world on this most explosive of issues.”

“In short, the implications for the pro-life movement would be catastrophic.”
(LifeSiteNews interview on the ‘Death Penalty’ address of Pope Francis with Dr.
Joseph Shaw, Oxford professor, October 20, 2017) 

Not only is Francis unambiguously professing the material heresy that “the death penalty is inadmissible” which apparently will promote more abortions, but on top of that, he wants to let loose the Ted Bundys to rape and kill or else he is senile or so out of touch with reality that he thinks serial rapist and murderers are miraculously going to stop raping and killing.
[Francis’s material heresy:http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2018/08/unambiguously-pope-francis-formally.html?m=1]

Bundy was a serial murderer and rapist who, also, tortured the victims and even engaged in necrophilia with their bodies.

 If Ted Bundy had not received the death penalty and was instead given a sentence of life imprisonment would Pope Francis want Bundy set free?

In 2014 and now in 2018 Francis said:

– “[T]he Magisterium of the Church believes that perpetual punishment [life imprisonment], which removes the possibility of moral and existential redemption for the benefit of the condemned person and the community, is a form of hidden death penalty.”
[https://www.lastampa.it/2018/12/18/vaticaninsider/the-pope-moratorium-on-the-death-penalty-no-to-arbitrary-executions-H4nLalvbjc2PzhQ0WXn0fO/pagina.html]

– “A life sentence is just a death penalty in disguise.” (edwardfeser.blogspot, “The curious case of Pope Francis and the ‘new natural lawyers,'” June 3, 2017)

Pray for Francis because something appears to be seriously wrong with the poor man if he wants to free dangerous criminals and serial predators from prison to kill and rape innocent people.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church. 

Posted by Fred Martinez at 4:26 PM Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

NEWS

VATICAN INTELLIGENCE OFFICER: I AM A FREEMASON AND SO IS BERGOGLIO

FEBRUARY 5, 2020

FROM ROME EDITOR

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

BREAKING — In an intercepted phone call — one of many which were captured during the corruption investigation in Argentina over foreign influence from Iran, the Head Vatican Intelligence officer in Argentina affirmed that he and his boss, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, were indeed members of the Masonic Lodge.

The explosive revelations where made on Roberto Garcia’s TV program, La Mirada, which aired on November 27, 2017 on Channel 26 in Argentina.

Here is the full video:

The video above, at 27:57, features the guests Edgar Mainhard of Urgente24 and the man who speaks about Bergoglio, Juan Bautista “Tata”” Yofre, who was State Intelligence Secretary in Argentina between 1989-1990 and was the Ambassador of Argentina, concurrently to both Portugal and Panama, during the government of Carlos Menem.

In the interview, Roberto asks Tata to discuss the “unpresentables of Argentina that surround the pope”.

“Tata” recounts a phone call that had been aired during a time of “negotiations with Iran” and that such phone calls had been aired on national television. In one phone call between “Yussuf and Karim” which had come out in the outlet “La Nación”, but later disappeared, Tata says, during the call, Yussuf tells Karim about his encounter with Bergoglio’s Vatican Chief of Intelligence in Argentina. “Tata” made a parenthesis to emphasize that Bergoglio indeed had a Vatican chief of Intelligence there in Argentina and that he knew him personally, but did not mention the name.

Tata continues recounting that on the phone call, “Bergoglio’s Vatican Chief of Intelligence told Yussuf that he [the Chief] was a mason and so was Bergoglio.” Tata says, “This was on ‘La Nación’. You could have listened to it yourselves. I listened to it because I had to give it credit.

Canonical Implications

The penalty for becoming a member of the Masonic Lodge is excommunication. That this was the case, even after Vatican II was made clear in a letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, dated Feb. 17, 1981 and signed by Cardinal Franjo Seper (See text here). Cardinal Seper in that letter declared:

On 19 July 1974 this Congregation wrote to some Episcopal Conferences a private letter concerning the interpretation of can 2335 of the Code of Canon Law which forbids Catholics, under the penalty of excommunication, to enroll in Masonic or other similar associations.

Since the said letter has become public and has given rise to erroneous and tendentious interpretations, this Congregation, without prejudice to the eventual norms of the new Code, issues the following confirmation and clarification:

1) the present canonical discipline remains in full force and has not been modified in any way;

2) consequently, neither the excommunication nor the other penalties envisaged have been abrogated;

Two years later, on Nov. 26, 1983, following the promulgation by Pope John Paul II  of the new Code of Canon Law, a public doubt arose regarding whether that penalty had been removed or not in the new Code.  Cardinal Ratzinger, now head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith responded with an extraordinary intervention, confirmed in forma specifica by Pope John Paul II. The key passage of which reads:

Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enrol in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation from what has been decided above, and this in line with the Declaration of this Sacred Congregation issued on 17 February 1981 (cf. AAS 73 1981 pp. 240-241; English language edition of L’Osservatore Romano, 9 March 1981).

In other words, the excommunication leveled in Canon 2335 against all Catholics for enrolling in a Masonic Lodge remains in force. This is in accord with the principle of Canon 6 and Canon 20. And thus, the excommunication of Canon 2335 in the old Code is to be understood, in accord with this declaration made by the CDF, to be subsumed into Canon 1364, which punishes by excommunication latae sententiae the crimes of Heresy, Schism and Apostasy, since clearly affiliation with the Masonic Sect is equipollent to all three under the diverse aspects of its creed, its purpose, and its manner of working.

THE CONSEQUENCES ARE SERIOUS: An excommunicated person cannot validly receive any dignity, office or munus in the Church in virtue of Canon 1331 §2 n. 4, of the new Code of Canon Law. That means, that it is canonically impossible that Bergoglio have assumed any ecclesiastical office after his enrollment.

My Comments

Since Cardinal Ratzinger no doubt had testimonies that Bergoglio was a Freemason, it follows that as pope, if he was demanded to resign the Papacy, so that Bergoglio might succeed him, he would have had the most grave obligation to dissimulate, so that while appearing to renounce, he would deprive Bergoglio of the Petrine Munus, by renouncing something else, as I surmised in my previous article, How Benedict has defeated “Francis”. And especially in my article, Benedict’s End Game is to Save the Church from Freemasonry.

I think, now, you can see why no supporter of Bergoglio cares the lest thing for Canon Law. Cardinals included. How many others in the Vatican are members of the Lodge?

Will Chris Ferrara and Steve Skojec and others, like Cardinal Burke, now stop saying that Bergoglio is definitely the pope? Or are they Freemasons too? — I ask this question because the public has a right to know the answers.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

SHARE THIS:

CANON LAW, EDITORIALS

FROM STRAW MAN TO SUPERSTITION

FEBRUARY 5, 2020FROM ROME EDITOR5 COMMENTS

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

I have watched Steve Skojek’s argumentation over the last 14 months go from straw man arguments, to unreasoning blather, to insults and vicious invective against almost anyone who would point out the unreasonableness of his approach to the problems with the Declaratio of Pope Benedict XVI and its consequences in the Church.

And I have kept silent about it, except for a passing comment here and there, here at FromRome.Info, because I am not concerned with nit picking the sophistries of immature people who do not have the intellectual or moral integrity to discuss something honestly as an adult. I am concerned with the truth of history in this matter, not in the sense of what people might write about it now or in the future, but in the sense of what really did happen, and what it really does mean in canonical and theological terms.

But as Skojec’s private magisterium has become a personal superstition and grows daily among some minds as a cult of superstition, I consider it necessary to say something, because I want every one to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. And for this, error must be refuted, by all who can ably refute it.

So I will broach this topic by commenting on some twitter conversations, the screen shots I was given. Here Steve comments on two groups, as he calls them, the Sedevacantists and the Bennyvacantists. Steve says he did not invent the latter term, but he keeps using it as a 13 yr old petulant school-boy uses a phrase he thinks is cool, but which makes him appear in reality stupid. Because by the term, Steve thinks he is referring to those who hold that Pope Benedict is still the pope, but the term obviously refers to those who think that Benedict vacated the see. So the term really refers to himself. The other term, for those who do not know, refers to those who think there have been no popes since Pius XII. — So of these 2 groups, Steve says:

Steve, if my sources are correct, has admitted to taking one introductory course to Canon Law at Steubenville, where he graduated. My sources tell me that Steve also cannot read the Code of Canon Law, because he does not read Latin. So he reads it, when he does, in the English translation, which, as I have mentioned many times, is both not authoritative and full of errors. As far as I know, also, Steve has never tried to investigate the matter further than his limit of knowledge and has not gone to Rome to speak with anyone about the questions of law or fact. — I have it that he corresponds or at least knows Ryan Grant, whom I showed the other day does not know the basic principles of Canon Law. Ryan, himself, though he is a published translator, is not a very good one. The passages I have examined in his translation of Saint Alphonsus have more than one error in every sentence, and hence I conclude they are worthless for anyone to use.

For this reason, I think that Steve’s first tweet, above, is very honest. I do not think he has the intellectual preparation to see the differences or appreciate them. Even if he knew what they are. Sedevacantists are a group of individuals who do not care about the Church in the least. They only care about condemning others so that like Jansenists they can revel in a being better than everyone else kind of spirit.  Catholics, on the other hand, when they encounter schism and heresy, do something about it, by either trying to reconcile the parties involved or seeking their canonical solutions, because their love is for the Church and for the salvation of souls.

That is why, if you love the Church, you can probably see the difference between Sedevacantists and Catholics. It is not just an argument over what was said by so and so and whether that is heretical or not. Though, Sedes nearly always get this wrong, because they have an animus to find fault where not as much fault is found as they would want, in order to continually justify themselves as better than everyone else.

Catholics, concerned about the canonical problems in the Declaratio of Pope Benedict XVI, are obviously not interested at all in themselves, they are interested solely in the good of the entire Church and solving the problems at the root. To deny that is merely a glib ad hominem of a person who cares nothing for the Church and has no consideration for the possibility that his fellow man might actually care for the common good of the Church. His desire, rather, is always to put him down, because that is the only way to prove his superiority.

In his next, tweet Steve recites his straw man argument, which he brings out and dangles about like a shaman does with the bones of a dead man, before reciting an incantation on cue.  Steve has been shown by many interlocutors over the past year that the opinion of John of Saint Thomas about universal acceptance refers to a canonical election, not to a doubtful or uncanonical election — taking doubt here in the objective positive sense. — So his continued appeal to universal acceptance is simply dishonest. And his continued use of it as a dogma is superstition.

At this point A. J. Baalman shares a series of tweets, drawing on the commentary on Canons 332, 187 and 188 made by Cathy Caridi on her blog, Canon Law Made Easy, which I reviewed yesterday.  A. J. says:

Notice how Steve brings out his straw man, again, and rattles it in the air, as if by such an incantation you can participate in a rational argument. He omits the word “canonical” in front of “papal” once again, to make it seem more supportive of his position. But here he goes one step further. There can be no question of an problematic papal election so long as it was accepted. No need to investigate. — I do not know what others might thing about such a line of reasoning, but it sounds to me the kind of thing a canon lawyer working for the Lavender Mafia might use, because it really aids and abets almost any possible course of corruption and interference in a papal election, as to defy rational explanation. No honest man can reason thus.

A. J., counters and insists on an investigation, and Steve responds:

Steve says an investigation should be done, but it won’t be completed in the life time of the Pope or of Bergoglio. That is a very bold claim coming from someone who is not an investigator and who has shown no inclination to examine the facts already presented in the historical record. It is also another attempt at gaslighting, because it takes about 5 seconds to see the Renunciation is invalid.

Because all you have to do is 1) see that the Latin of Canon 332 §2 says munus, and that the Latin of the Declaratio says ministerium, and 2) recognize that what you do not renounce, you keep.

+ + +

Support FromRome.Info

Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.

$10.00

SHARE THIS: