I never believe the woman. It’s a sad thing to say but the growing evidence is that women lie about sexual assaults as a way to get revenge, because there is rarely any consequences if they do.
But for the men, even after they have been vindicated, they are the losers. The most recent example is from the University of Cincinnati. In the lawsuit, the principals were referred to as John Doe and Jane Roe. They had met on Tinder and had sex in Doe’s apartment. After he never called her again, she went to the university and accused Doe of sexual assault.
In what has become common practice in universities these days, Doe was not allowed to defend himself and all the information in the university’s kangaroo court came from Jane Roe. He never had a chance.
He was suspended from school and the assault prevented him from enrolling elsewhere. But now, two years later, he has won in court and the university will have to pay his lawyer bills, but he didn’t get a dime, but he lost two years of his life and Jane Roe gets off with no punishment.
The sexual encounter in question happened in September 2015. Doe and Roe had met on Tinder and ended up having sex in Doe’s apartment. Doe said the sex was consensual.
A month after the encounter, Roe reported it as an assault to school officials. Doe was not informed of the allegations until February 2016.
After a hearing in which Doe was not allowed to cross-examine Roe, her witnesses or the officials who originally compiled the report, Doe was found “responsible.” After Doe’s appeal, which was denied, he was suspended in December 2016. It was then that he pursued legal action.
Fortunately for Doe, he ultimately won this battle. The settlement with his school included $47,152 in attorneys’ fees, an end of his suspension, the dropping of all disciplinary sanctions and having the “responsible” tag expunged from his record.
But even this victory comes at a steep price. The settlement agreement was signed last month. The original allegations happened in 2015 and the suspension was in 2016. That’s well over two years of suffering and pain that Doe dealt with based on nothing more than unsubstantiated allegations.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on HUMAN ACTS ALMOST ALWAYS HAVE CONSEQUENCES
German Ecclesiastics Like Cardinal Walter Kasper Want to Destroy the Papacy in Order to Appease the Lutherans and Annex the Lutheran German Church Tax (Kirchensteuer) Revenues
Let us open with a quote from the new MUST-HAVE BOOK: “The Divine Right of the Papacy in Recent Ecumenical Theology” by J. Michael Miller, ARSH 1980, (who is now the Archbishop of Vancouver). Let us quote the opening words of Chapter NINE, “Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue”, emphases mine, with screen cap below:
In ecumenical dialogs the question of papal primacy was long avoided. Theologians preferred to discuss a series of other controversial questions before taking up the papacy, the one teaching which all non-Catholics reject. When Paul VI said to the members of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity that “the pope… is without doubt the most serious obstacle on the road to ecumenism,” he articulated the difficulty which all ecumenists recognize. The first bilateral conversations on the ministry and related themes shied away from any lengthy discussion of papal primacy.
The taboo against broaching the question of the papacy has been lifted by recent discussion. Whereas Catholic ecumenists have concentrated their attention on ways of restructuring the papal office in order to make it more attractive to non-Catholics, some Lutherans have moved towards a critical acceptance of a reformed papacy.
MOTIVES FOR “FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORMING THE PAPACY”: RATZINGER vs. KASPER et. al.
POPE BENEDICT XVI RATZINGER
I believe that Pope Benedict’s motive in wanting to “fundamentally transform the papacy into a collegial, synodal ministry” was to appease the Lutherans (and Anglicans) so that he, Joseph Ratzinger, would go down in history as the man who “healed the Protestant schism”. I’m afraid that we all severely underestimate the role of PRIDE in the heart of Pope Benedict XVI in this massively erroneous mess. Look again at +Ganswein’s speech from the Gregorianum of 20 May, ARSH 2016. Remember, Pope Benedict read and approved this speech. Emphases mine.
Indeed, I must admit that perhaps it is impossible to sum up the pontificate of Benedict XVI in a more concise manner. And the one who says it, over the years, has had the privilege of experiencing this Pope up close as a “homo historicus,” the Western man par excellencewho has embodied the wealth of Catholic tradition as no other; and — at the same time — has been daring enough to open the door to a new phase, to that historical turning point which no one five years ago could have ever imagined. Since then, we live in an historic era which in the 2,000-year history of the Church is without precedent.
[….]
And I, too, a firsthand witness of the spectacular and unexpected step of Benedict XVI, I must admit that what always comes to mind is the well-known and brilliant axiom with which, in the Middle Ages, John Duns Scotus justified the divine decree for the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God:
“Decuit, potuit, fecit.”
That is to say: it was fitting, because it was reasonable. God could do it, therefore he did it. I apply the axiom to the decision to resign in the following way: it was fitting, because Benedict XVI was aware that he lacked the necessary strength for the extremely onerous office. He could do it, because he had already thoroughly thought through, from a theological point of view, the possibility of popes emeritus for the future. So he did it.
As a German, I think Joseph Ratzinger wanted to be nothing less than the man who “fixed” the German schism, that is to say, the Lutheran schism. And, if you bring the Lutherans back in, the Anglicans will eventually follow, because both schisms revolved around the Papacy. And so, in one of the most massive displays of pride the Church has ever seen, Pope Benedict Ratzinger decided that he could change that which is IMMUTABLE – that he could change the unchangeable. Except he didn’t. All he did was slam into an infinitely large reinforced concrete monolith (the Truth) at 100mph. The wall did not move or change. All that Pope Benedict achieved was causing a massive, flaming mess, which he survived as the one and only living Pope, whether he likes it or not. The Truth, and the Papacy, remain fully intact.
Walt€r Ka$p€r and th€ oth€r Faithl€$$ G€rman Pr€lat€$
Let’s do a quick review of the German Church Tax, or Kirchensteuer. Many Americans are unaware of this, and shocked when they learn about it. In Germany, there is a MANDATORY 8% tax that is levied on top of one’s income tax due. In order to NOT pay the Church Tax, one must formally, in writing, APOSTASIZE from whatever Christian church one was baptized into. For Catholics, this means that they may not partake of the Sacraments, their children may not be baptized in the Church, and they may not receive a Catholic funeral. Yes, this is simony. No question. And it is one of the primary reasons that the German Church should be put under interdict. For Protestants it is the same, although the stakes are considerably lower for them, considering….
Here is a sample calculation of the German Church Tax. All figures are made up and simplified.
If a German makes €100,000 and is in the 20% income tax bracket, his income tax due is €20,000. The Church tax is 8% on the TAX DUE, so in this case €1600. So, the TOTAL tax due, income tax plus Kirchensteuer on a €100,000 income would be €21,600, or which the state automatically funnels the €1600 to whatever Church or “c”hurch the taxpayer was baptized into.
In ARSH 2016, despite the fact that the practice of Christianity in any form in Germany is almost completely gone, and despite the fact that Germans are formally apostasizing by the hundreds of thousands every year in order to not pay the Kirchensteuer, the Catholic Church in Germany received Kirchensteuer revenues of €6 BILLION. That was $7.2 BILLION. The total assets of the German Catholic Church are estimated to be AT LEAST €26 BILLION.
Now, consider this: the Protestant churches in Germany (mostly Lutheran) are about equal in terms of numbers of people. Germany is split fairly evenly Catholic-Protestant. Godless, faithless wretches like Cardinal Walter Kasper are desperate to appease the Lutherans and get some sort of formal “re-unification” on the civil books WITH AN EYE TOWARD FOLDING THE LUTHERAN KIRCHENSTEUER REVENUES INTO THE CATHOLIC SLUSH FUND, WHICH WOULD COME CLOSE TO DOUBLING THE ANNUAL REVENUES.
ALWAYS. FOLLOW. THE. MONEY.
For filth like Kasper, and almost all of the rest of the German prelates, this is all about POWER, with MONEY being the manifestation and measure of power. For many of them sex/sodomy is also in play as a manifestation of power, but I think the POWER of MONEY is what drives Kasper.
Kasper has been and continues to be at the absolute forefront of the attack on the top two Catholic dogmas needed to appease the Lutherans: The indissolubility of marriage, and the Papacy. The heresy that Antipope Bergoglio has pushed from day one of his usurpation regarding the acceptance of divorced and civilly “remarried” persons (that is, public, unrepentant adulterers) to receive Holy Communion is CALLED THE KASPER PROPOSAL. And remember this scandal, when Antipope Bergoglio went to the Lutheran church in Rome, and when asked by a Lutheran woman if she could receive Holy Communion with her Catholic husband, Antipope Bergoglio said THIS (citation from LifeSiteNews):
And as we can see from the screen cap below from the Index of Names in Miller’s text, Kasper was and is at the very heart of the madness of “restructuring the Papacy in order to make it more attractive to non-Catholics”.
Journalists need to go after Kasper. Might I recommend the following question?
Q. Cardinal Kasper, do you believe that Pope Benedict’s fundamental transformation of the Papal Office into a synodal ministry opens the door to more robust and fruitful ecumenical dialogue with Lutherans and Anglicans?
And then just let the faithless money grubbing scumbag talk. But make darn sure your phone’s battery is fully charged.
I hope this helps, and that everyone is having a wonderful Christmas.
Finally, I would like to conclude this post with a quote that was sent to me by a reader, from St. Philip Neri, who is very closely joined to this entire endeavor, and is one of its patrons:
“Besides pardoning those who persecute us, we ought to feel pity for the delusion they are laboring under.” -St. Philip Neri
TWELVE VALID CARDINALS, i.e. CARDINALS APPOINTED BY POPES BENEDICT XVI AND SAINT JOHN PAUL II, MUST ACT SOON TO REMOVE FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL FROM THE THRONE OF SAINT PETER BEFORE HE DAMAGES THE INSTITUTIONAL CHURCH EVEN MORE THAN HE HAS ALREADY DAMAGED IT.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CARDINALS OF THE HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND OTHER CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN FAITHFUL IN COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE
Recently many educated Catholic observers, including bishops and priests, have decried the confusion in doctrinal statements about faith or morals made from the Apostolic See at Rome and by the putative Bishop of Rome, Pope Francis. Some devout, faithful and thoughtful Catholics have even suggested that he be set aside as a heretic, a dangerous purveyor of error, as recently mentioned in a number of reports. Claiming heresy on the part of a man who is a supposed Pope, charging material error in statements about faith or morals by a putative Roman Pontiff, suggests and presents an intervening prior question about his authenticity in that August office of Successor of Peter as Chief of The Apostles, i.e., was this man the subject of a valid election by an authentic Conclave of The Holy Roman Church? This is so because each Successor of Saint Peter enjoys the Gift of Infallibility. So, before one even begins to talk about excommunicating such a prelate, one must logically examine whether this person exhibits the uniformly good and safe fruit of Infallibility.
If he seems repeatedly to engage in material error, that first raises the question of the validity of his election because one expects an authentically-elected Roman Pontiff miraculously and uniformly to be entirely incapable of stating error in matters of faith or morals. So to what do we look to discern the invalidity of such an election? His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, within His massive legacy to the Church and to the World, left us with the answer to this question. The Catholic faithful must look back for an answer to a point from where we have come—to what occurred in and around the Sistine Chapel in March 2013 and how the fruits of those events have generated such widespread concern among those people of magisterial orthodoxy about confusing and, or, erroneous doctrinal statements which emanate from The Holy See.
His Apostolic Constitution (Universi Dominici Gregis) which governed the supposed Conclave in March 2013 contains quite clear and specific language about the invalidating effect of departures from its norms. For example, Paragraph 76 states: “Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.”
From this, many believe that there is probable cause to believe that Monsignor Jorge Mario Bergoglio was never validly elected as the Bishop of Rome and Successor of Saint Peter—he never rightly took over the office of Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and therefore he does not enjoy the charism of Infallibility. If this is true, then the situation is dire because supposed papal acts may not be valid or such acts are clearly invalid, including supposed appointments to the college of electors itself.
Only valid cardinals can rectify our critical situation through privately (secretly) recognizing the reality of an ongoing interregnum and preparing for an opportunity to put the process aright by obedience to the legislation of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, in that Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis. While thousands of the Catholic faithful do understand that only the cardinals who participated in the events of March 2013 within the Sistine Chapel have all the information necessary to evaluate the issue of election validity, there was public evidence sufficient for astute lay faithful to surmise with moral certainty that the March 2013 action by the College was an invalid conclave, an utter nullity.
What makes this understanding of Universi Dominici Gregisparticularly cogent and plausible is the clear Promulgation Clause at the end of this Apostolic Constitution and its usage of the word “scienter” (“knowingly”). The Papal Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis thus concludes definitively with these words: “. . . knowingly or unknowingly, in any way contrary to this Constitution.” (“. . . scienter vel inscienter contra hanc Constitutionem fuerint excogitata.”) [Note that His Holiness, Pope Paul VI, had a somewhat similar promulgation clause at the end of his corresponding, now abrogated, Apostolic Constitution, Romano Pontifici Eligendo, but his does not use “scienter”, but rather uses “sciens” instead. This similar term of sciens in the earlier abrogated Constitution has an entirely different legal significance than scienter.] This word, “scienter”, is a legal term of art in Roman law, and in canon law, and in Anglo-American common law, and in each system, scienter has substantially the same significance, i.e., “guilty knowledge” or willfully knowing, criminal intent.
Thus, it clearly appears that Pope John Paul II anticipated the possibility of criminal activity in the nature of a sacrilege against a process which He intended to be purely pious, private, sacramental, secret and deeply spiritual, if not miraculous, in its nature. This contextual reality reinforced in the Promulgation Clause, combined with: (1) the tenor of the whole document; (2) some other provisions of the document, e.g., Paragraph 76; (3) general provisions of canon law relating to interpretation, e.g., Canons 10 & 17; and, (4) the obvious manifest intention of the Legislator, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, tends to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the legal conclusion that Monsignor Bergoglio was never validly elected Roman Pontiff.
This is so because:1. Communication of any kind with the outside world, e.g., communication did occur between the inside of the Sistine Chapel and anyone outside, including a television audience, before, during or even immediately after the Conclave;2. Any political commitment to “a candidate” and any “course of action” planned for The Church or a future pontificate, such as the extensive decade-long “pastoral” plans conceived by the Sankt Gallen hierarchs; and,3. Any departure from the required procedures of the conclave voting process as prescribed and known by a cardinal to have occurred:each was made an invalidating act, and if scienter (guilty knowledge) was present, also even a crime on the part of any cardinal or other actor, but, whether criminal or not, any such act or conduct violating the norms operated absolutely, definitively and entirely against the validity of all of the supposed Conclave proceedings.
Quite apart from the apparent notorious violations of the prohibition on a cardinal promising his vote, e.g., commitments given and obtained by cardinals associated with the so-called “Sankt Gallen Mafia,” other acts destructive of conclave validity occurred. Keeping in mind that Pope John Paul II specifically focused Universi Dominici Gregis on “the seclusion and resulting concentration which an act so vital to the whole Church requires of the electors” such that “the electors can more easily dispose themselves to accept the interior movements of the Holy Spirit,” even certain openly public media broadcasting breached this seclusion by electronic broadcasts outlawed by Universi Dominici Gregis. These prohibitions include direct declarative statements outlawing any use of television before, during or after a conclave in any area associated with the proceedings, e.g.: “I further confirm, by my apostolic authority, the duty of maintaining the strictest secrecy with regard to everything that directly or indirectly concerns the election process itself.” Viewed in light of this introductory preambulary language of Universi Dominici Gregis and in light of the legislative text itself, even the EWTN camera situated far inside the Sistine Chapel was an immediately obvious non-compliant act which became an open and notorious invalidating violation by the time when this audio-visual equipment was used to broadcast to the world the preaching after the “Extra Omnes”. While these blatant public violations of Chapter IV of Universi Dominici Gregis actuate the invalidity and nullity of the proceedings themselves, nonetheless in His great wisdom, the Legislator did not disqualify automatically those cardinals who failed to recognize these particular offenses against sacred secrecy, or even those who, with scienter, having recognized the offenses and having had some power or voice in these matters, failed or refused to act or to object against them: “Should any infraction whatsoever of this norm occur and be discovered, those responsible should know that they will be subject to grave penalties according to the judgment of the future Pope.” [Universi Dominici Gregis, ¶55]
No Pope apparently having been produced in March 2013, those otherwise valid cardinals who failed with scienter to act on violations of Chapter IV, on that account alone would nonetheless remain voting members of the College unless and until a new real Pope is elected and adjudges them.
Thus, those otherwise valid cardinals who may have been compromised by violations of secrecy can still participate validly in the “clean-up of the mess” while addressing any such secrecy violations with an eventual new Pontiff. In contrast, the automatic excommunication of those who politicized the sacred conclave process, by obtaining illegally, commitments from cardinals to vote for a particular man, or to follow a certain course of action (even long before the vacancy of the Chair of Peter as Vicar of Christ), is established not only by the word, “scienter,” in the final enacting clause, but by a specific exception, in this case, to the general statement of invalidity which therefore reinforces the clarity of intention by Legislator that those who apply the law must interpret the general rule as truly binding. Derived directly from Roman law, canonical jurisprudence provides this principle for construing or interpreting legislation such as this Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis. Expressed in Latin, this canon of interpretation is: “Exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis.” (The exception proves the rule in cases not excepted.) In this case, an exception from invalidity for acts of simony reinforces the binding force of the general principle of nullity in cases of other violations. Therefore, by exclusion from nullity and invalidity legislated in the case of simony: “If — God forbid — in the election of the Roman Pontiff the crime of simony were to be perpetrated, I decree and declare that all those guilty thereof shall incur excommunication latae sententiae. At the same time I remove the nullity or invalidity of the same simoniacal provision, in order that — as was already established by my Predecessors — the validity of the election of the Roman Pontiff may not for this reason be challenged.”
His Holiness made an exception for simony. Exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis. The clear exception from nullity and invalidity for simony proves the general rule that other violations of the sacred process certainly do and did result in the nullity and invalidity of the entire conclave. Comparing what Pope John Paul II wrote in His Constitution on conclaves with the Constitution which His replaced, you can see that, with the exception of simony, invalidity became universal.
In the corresponding paragraph of what Pope Paul VI wrote, he specifically confined the provision declaring conclave invalidity to three (3) circumstances described in previous paragraphs within His constitution, Romano Pontfici Eligendo. No such limitation exists in Universi Dominici Gregis. See the comparison both in English and Latin below:Romano Pontfici Eligendo, 77. Should the election be conducted in a manner different from the three procedures described above (cf. no. 63 ff.) or without the conditions laid down for each of the same, it is for this very reason null and void (cf. no. 62), without the need for any declaration, and gives no right to him who has been thus elected. [Romano Pontfici Eligendo, 77: “Quodsi electio aliter celebrata fuerit, quam uno e tribus modis, qui supra sunt dicti (cfr. nn. 63 sqq.), aut non servatis condicionibus pro unoquoque illorum praescriptis, electio eo ipso est nulla et invalida (cfr. n. 62) absque ulla declaratione, et ita electo nullum ius tribuit .”] as compared with:Universi Dominici Gregis, 76: “Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.” [Universi Dominici Gregis, 76: “Quodsi electio aliter celebrata fuerit, quam haec Constitutio statuit, aut non servatis condicionibus pariter hic praescriptis, electio eo ipso est nulla et invalida absque ulla declaratione, ideoque electo nullum ius tribuit.”]Of course, this is not the only feature of the Constitution or aspect of the matter which tends to establish the breadth of invalidity.
Faithful must hope and pray that only those cardinals whose status as a valid member of the College remains intact will ascertain the identity of each other and move with the utmost charity and discretion in order to effectuate The Divine Will in these matters. The valid cardinals, then, must act according to that clear, manifest, obvious and unambiguous mind and intention of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, so evident in Universi Dominici Gregis, a law which finally established binding and self-actuating conditions of validity on the College for any papal conclave, a reality now made so apparent by the bad fruit of doctrinal confusion and plain error. It would seem then that praying and working in a discreet and prudent manner to encourage only those true cardinals inclined to accept a reality of conclave invalidity, would be a most charitable and logical course of action in the light of Universi Dominici Gregis, and out of our high personal regard for the clear and obvious intention of its Legislator, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II. Even a relatively small number of valid cardinals could act decisively and work to restore a functioning Apostolic See through the declaration of an interregnum government. The need is clear for the College to convene a General Congregation in order to declare, to administer, and soon to end the Interregnum which has persisted since March 2013. Finally, it is important to understand that the sheer number of putative counterfeit cardinals will eventually, sooner or later, result in a situation in which The Church will have no normal means validly ever again to elect a Vicar of Christ. After that time, it will become even more difficult, if not humanly impossible, for the College of Cardinals to rectify the current disastrous situation and conduct a proper and valid Conclave such that The Church may once again both have the benefit of a real Supreme Pontiff, and enjoy the great gift of a truly infallible Vicar of Christ. It seems that some good cardinals know that the conclave was invalid, but really cannot envision what to do about it; we must pray, if it is the Will of God, that they see declaring the invalidity and administering an Interregnum through a new valid conclave is what they must do. Without such action or without a great miracle, The Church is in a perilous situation. Once the last validly appointed cardinal reaches age 80, or before that age, dies, the process for electing a real Pope ends with no apparent legal means to replace it. Absent a miracle then, The Church would no longer have an infallible Successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ. Roman Catholics would be no different that Orthodox Christians. In this regard, all of the true cardinals may wish to consider what Holy Mother Church teaches in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, ¶675, ¶676 and ¶677 about “The Church’s Ultimate Trial”. But, the fact that “The Church . . . will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection” does not justify inaction by the good cardinals, even if there are only a minimal number sufficient to carry out Chapter II of Universi Dominici Gregis and operate the Interregnum. This Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis, which was clearly applicable to the acts and conduct of the College of Cardinals in March 2013, is manifestly and obviously among those “invalidating” laws “which expressly establish that an act is null or that a person is effected” as stated in Canon 10 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. And, there is nothing remotely “doubtful or obscure” (Canon 17) about this Apostolic Constitution as clearly promulgated by Pope John Paul II. The tenor of the whole document expressly establishes that the issue of invalidity was always at stake. This Apostolic Constitution conclusively establishes, through its Promulgation Clause [which makes “anything done (i.e., any act or conduct) by any person . . . in any way contrary to this Constitution,”] the invalidity of the entire supposed Conclave, rendering it “completely null and void”. So, what happens if a group of Cardinals who undoubtedly did not knowingly and wilfully initiate or intentionally participate in any acts of disobedience against Universi Dominici Gregis were to meet, confer and declare that, pursuant to Universi Dominici Gregis, Monsignor Bergoglio is most certainly not a valid Roman Pontiff. Like any action on this matter, including the initial finding of invalidity, that would be left to the valid members of the college of cardinals. They could declare the Chair of Peter vacant and proceed to a new and proper conclave. They could meet with His Holiness, Benedict XVI, and discern whether His resignation and retirement was made under duress, or based on some mistake or fraud, or otherwise not done in a legally effective manner, which could invalidate that resignation. Given the demeanor of His Holiness, Benedict XVI, and the tenor of His few public statements since his departure from the Chair of Peter, this recognition of validity in Benedict XVI seems unlikely. In fact, even before a righteous group of good and authentic cardinals might decide on the validity of the March 2013 supposed conclave, they must face what may be an even more complicated discernment and decide which men are most likely not valid cardinals. If a man was made a cardinal by the supposed Pope who is, in fact, not a Pope (but merely Monsignor Bergoglio), no such man is in reality a true member of the College of Cardinals. In addition, those men appointed by Pope John Paul II or by Pope Benedict XVI as cardinals, but who openly violated Universi Dominici Gregis by illegal acts or conduct causing the invalidation of the last attempted conclave, would no longer have voting rights in the College of Cardinals either. (Thus, the actual valid members in the College of Cardinals may be quite smaller in number than those on the current official Vatican list of supposed cardinals.) In any event, the entire problem is above the level of anyone else in Holy Mother Church who is below the rank of Cardinal. So, we must pray that The Divine Will of The Most Holy Trinity, through the intercession of Our Lady as Mediatrix of All Graces and Saint Michael, Prince of Mercy, very soon rectifies the confusion in Holy Mother Church through action by those valid Cardinals who still comprise an authentic College of Electors. Only certainly valid Cardinals can address the open and notorious evidence which points to the probable invalidity of the last supposed conclave and only those cardinals can definitively answer the questions posed here. May only the good Cardinals unite and if they recognize an ongoing Interregnum, albeit dormant, may they end this Interregnum by activating perfectly a functioning Interregnum government of The Holy See and a renewed process for a true Conclave, one which is purely pious, private, sacramental, secret and deeply spiritual. If we do not have a real Pontiff, then may the good Cardinals, doing their appointed work “in view of the sacredness of the act of election” “accept the interior movements of the Holy Spirit” and provide Holy Mother Church with a real Vicar of Christ as the Successor of Saint Peter. May these thoughts comport with the synderetic considerations of those who read them and may their presentation here please both Our Immaculate Virgin Mother, Mary, Queen of the Apostles, and The Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.N. de Plume Un ami des Papes
December 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – The journalist and book author Paul Badde, who lives in Rome and works for EWTN, has worked for years on the history and significance of an ancient relic that has been cherished by Christianity for a long time, but had been lost for some centuries: The Holy Face of Manoppello – which is believed be a miraculous picture of Our Lord at the moment of His Resurrection.
Badde has written severalbooks on this holy image which is now being kept in a monastery in Manoppello, Italy, and which Saint Padre Pio himself allegedly visited, in bilocation, and not long before he died. Padre Pio called this relic depicting the face of Jesus, “the greatest miracle we have.”
Holy Face of Manoppello
LifeSiteNews conducted an interview with Paul Badde because he has just published in English a new booklet which sums up the recent developments and findings concerning this relic, which includes the prominent and public support of this relic and its authenticity by Archbishop Georg Gänswein, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI’s secretary.
LifeSiteNews already published a book review of this booklet when it first appeared this year in German. The book review can be read here. However, the English version, as now published by Sophia Press, contains some additional information.
In this new interview, Paul Badde reveals how intensely the Holy Face of Manoppello – or the Volto Santo, as the Italians call it – is involved in the Church’s recent history. Paul Badde shows, for example, how Cardinal Joachim Meisner visited the Holy Face only a short time before the 2005 Conclave. At that Conclave, with Paul Badde’s help, Cardinal Meisner was able to show his fellow cardinals that there then existed an attempt – by people such as Cardinal Achille Silvestrini, Cardinal Walter Kasper, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, Cardinal Godfried Danneels, Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, Cardinal Audrys Juozas Bačkis, and Cardinal Carlo Martini – to prevent Joseph Ratzinger’s election. As Badde then heard it, they had intended Cardinal Martini’s election. During that same Conclave, however, he also later heard in Rome the name Jorge Bergoglio mentioned.
Detail of Holy Face of Manoppello
Cardinal Meisner succeeded in his struggle – with a picture of the Holy Face kept in his pocket – and Joseph Ratzinger became Pope. The rest is history.
Later, Paul Badde found out that this group of cardinals working against Ratzinger was the so-called “Sankt Gallen Group.”
***
Full interview with Paul Badde:
LifeSiteNews:You have already written extensively about the Holy Face of Manoppello. What is the reason that you wrote yet another book on this topic? Has there come forth new evidence about its veracity?
Paul Badde: You are right, it is the fourth book I have written about the Holy Face of Manoppello, along with innumerable articles. I also made two films for EWTN about the Face of God. The main reason to write this new book, however, is that Pope Benedict XVI has prompted an entirely new development in research and the rediscovered significance regarding the Sanctissimum Sudarium (as it was formerly called in Rome) after he visited the Holy Veil on 1 September, 2006 — he was the first pope to do so after more than 400 years. In my former books, I have presented a good number of arguments for the evidence about the veracity of the Holy Veil. With this book, I would like to invite the readers again to become pilgrims to the Face of God in Manoppello, where they will experience that this sacred arch-icon of the Lord is a form of pure evidence in itself. It is as if we would follow the Apostle Philipp in the Gospel when he said to Nathaniel: “Come and see!”
LifeSiteNews:What would you tell someone who is new to this topic: what are the main reasons to believe that the Volto Santo is truly the Face of Jesus Christ when He walked this earth?
Paul Badde: What I keep telling everybody is exactly this: “Come and see!”
LifeSiteNews:It was the private secretary of Pope Benedict XVI, Archbishop Georg Gänswein, who not long ago participated in a public procession with a copy of the Holy Face in Rome, a procession that was done the first time in the year 1208. What was his message presented in his homily?
Paul Badde: Yes, that’s right. But to start with, I would like to say this: Some weeks ago Archbishop Georg Gänswein presented here in Rome Rod Dreher’s Book The Benedict-Option in the Italian Parliament where he called the actual crisis another nine/eleven in the Church.
What I found more amazing, however, was that he used the term “eclipse of God” to identify the inner character of the catastrophe we are experiencing in these days.
It is an expression which has been used by Pope Benedict time and again and which stems from the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber if I recall it correctly. And here we should not forget that the eclipse of the sun means that the moon comes between our planet and the sun, blocking the sun from our view. It doesn’t mean that the sun ceases to exist.
So in an analogy to the eclipse of the sun, we have the eclipse of God. This doesn’t mean that God has ceased to exist. It means that sin has come between ourselves and God, making it seem like he is no longer present to us. And in our times, it’s clear that it is the satanic shadow of the sins by the Church that make it appear to many that God is no longer present.
But God still exists, of course. And this is exactly the time when the Holy Face now reappears in the United States, where the Catholic Church is haunted by the news of so many troubles and sins and crimes committed by priests.
And now He reappears behind the clouds of sins again, telling us, beyond all the shadows: “Look, It’s Me, I became Man, as you can see, I was tortured and killed like a lamb and died (to take away the sins of the earth). Then I rose from the dead, alive forever. Don’t be afraid, for all is true that you heard about me: Truth alone will prevail, not the lie, nor sin.”
As to your initial question, though, I have to tell you that it was precisely Archbishop Gänswein, the secretary of Benedict XVI, who started, as I said, on the vigil of Sunday, 16 January 2016, in the Parish Church of Santo Spirito in Sassia (close to Saint Peter’s) a new tradition of venerating the Holy Face (again), when he introduced a new feast on the day “Omnis Terra”, which is the second Sunday after the Feast of Epiphany, remembering the day in 1208 when Pope Innocent III. had first shown the Holy Veil in public in the Latin Church of the West.
Prior to the Solemn Mass presided over by Archbishop Gänswein, a big group of citizens from Manoppello had brought a copy of the Holy Face to Rome where they had carried it in a solemn procession first to Saint Peter’s and then from there to Santo Spirito in Sassia, headed by the former Nuncio, Archbishop Edmond Farhat of Lebanon. In his homily Archbishop Gänswein declared on that unique occasion, there follows, among other things:
This Sunday is called Omnis Terra with the words of Psalm 65. Omnis terra adoret te, Deus, et tibi psallat! That means: ‘All the earth worships You, O God, and sing psalms for You!’ This psalm was sung here also eight hundred years ago; and even then, as today, the Gospel of the wedding feast of Cana was proclaimed in Catholic churches around the world. Empires have fallen since then, swept away like autumn leaves; the Church saw the continuous succession of ninety-two popes. Violent revolutions and wars have shaken Europe; fatal divisions have lacerated Christianity. So the tranquility seems like a miracle with which, in the liturgy of this Sunday, we sing today as then: Praise the Lord, all peoples!
It is with this sense of jubilation that we now remember that Pope Innocent III had this holy sudarium carried from St. Peter’s to Santo Sasso eight hundred and eight years ago. […]
[It is the holy image which the Pope] showed to the pilgrims and which for more than four hundred years has been preserved in Abruzzo, near the Adriatic Sea, in an outlying area of Italy, and which for the first time was brought back to where its public worship began in Rome. From here, innumerable copies have spread the Christian awareness of the existence of a true The Holy Face and Veil throughout the world. In this lies the deepest meaning of this moment. Before coming to Rome, the Sacred Veil was guarded in Constantinople, prior to that it was in Edessa, and even earlier it had been in Jerusalem. This face cannot be the property or the jealous treasure of one place, one church, or one owner, not even of the popes. It is the ‘trademark of Christians.’ It is only we who know that God has a face; only we know who and how He is. For this reason, the face of Christ is the most noble and precious treasure of all Christianity, indeed of all the earth, omnis terra! To this face we have to set out ever anew—always as pilgrims; always to areas of the periphery of our conception. And always having only one goal in front of us: the moment we will face him face-to-face. Amen.
LifeSiteNews:Could you tell us some of the names of high-ranking prelates that so far have visited Manoppello?
Paul Badde: I alone and personally accompanied Cardinal Meisner, Cardinal Wetter, one half of the German Bishops’ Conference (who had been ordered to go there by Cardinal Meisner in 2007 or so), 40 African Bishops in the winter of 2010, Cardinal Erdö, an entire congress of orthodox and western prelates, Cardinal Koch, Cardinal Pell, Cardinal Sarah, and Cardinal Tagle.
However, a much bigger number of bishops and high-ranking prelates you can now find in the register of the Cappucin friars in Manoppello.
LifeSiteNews:You once described Cardinal Joachim Meisner’s visit at the Shrine of the Holy Face. What would you say was the significance of the Holy Face for this German cardinal?
Paul Badde: Here again, I have got to tell you a little story of his visit: My first article about the Holy Face had appeared in the German daily newspaper DIE WELTin Berlin on 23 October 2004.
In January of 2005, I met Cardinal Meisner, who had come from Cologne down to Rome, and he asked me whether I could take him to Manoppello, and we agreed upon a pilgrimage to there on 4 April 4 of that year.
But on 2 April, Pope John Paul II died, and my wife and I wondered whether Cardinal Meisner would show up at all. And be mindful of this, those were days when journalists from all over the world flocked to Rome. So it seemed a little odd to leave the town in those days as a correspondent for my newspaper. But at 7 O’clock in the morning, the Cardinal rang at our door, so it was clear that we had to go. He had asked Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger for an extra dispensation to do that.
We drove very fast – praying a rosary. In the middle of Italy, however, Cardinal Meisner got a phone call from the Vatican, in which he was invited for a last farewell to John Paul II in the Sala Clementina in the Apostolic Palace, where he was lying in state. Which meant that I was to drive even faster. We arrived in Manoppello, where the Cardinal immediately got on his knees in front of the Holy Face, and there we prayed together another rosary. Then Father Carmine Cucinelli, the Rector of the Shrine, carried the reliquary with the Holy Face into the court of the convent for the Cardinal, who at once then said: “In this Holy Face, the Heart of God becomes visible.” That’s what he also left as his impression and assessment of the veil in the guest book of the Friars in Manoppello.
Then we drove back from coast to coast to Rome, where we arrived just before noon that same day, at about half past twelve, and where the Cardinal invited me to join him for a last farewell to John Paul II in the Sala Clementina. There, we prayed a fourth Rosary, right beside him, on our knees. So on precisely that day, after I had left the city I became the only journalist in Rome to have visited John Paul II for a last time.
But later that day, Cardinal Meisner went to Cardinal Ratzinger and told him: “I’ve seen the Risen Lord today” and he repeated that in an interview with Radio Vatican. Fourteen days later, he entered the Conclave with a photo of the Face of God, as he told me. Whether or not he had been in Cologne in the meantime, I don’t recall.
On 17 April 2005, however, a Prelate from within the Vatican called and informed me that he had evidence about a conspiracy of Cardinals who had tried to prevent the election of Joseph Ratzinger as next pope. It was the so-called Sankt Gallen group, as I know now, and the Prelate gave me also a list with their names, among them Cardinal Achille Silvestrini, Cardinal Walter Kasper, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, Cardinal Godfried Danneels, Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, Cardinal Audrys Juozas Bačkis, and Cardinal Carlo Martini.
I called Cardinal Meisner in the afternoon and asked him what to do in a responsible way, since I didn’t want to create a scandal.
He got furious, but told me calmly: “Follow your conscience.”
So I wrote an article mentioning the hints I had gotten, all of which appeared the following day, on 18 April, in the daily newspaper DIE WELT.
On that day, Cardinal Meisner not only brought a photo of the Face of God into the Conclave, but also that article of mine and fought like a lion against this conspiracy, no matter how alone he was, and despite his limited Italian.
“It’s been the hardest day of my life!” he later told me, not mentioning, however, any other details.
But when the conclave was over, it became clear that Meisner had become the king-maker, or more precisely, the pope-maker. So this was the essential role that the Holy Face had played in the election of Pope Benedict, which makes it also easier to understand why Ratzinger himself traveled to Manoppello as soon as possible after his election.
The Holy Veil has played a role for many popes, and it certainly will play a role for Pope Francis and future popes, too, though I don’t know its nature.
But some weeks ago, Pope Francis spoke about a spiritual void within the Church, which caused – according to him – the entire catastrophe of the clerical sexual abuses. Cardinal Gerhard Müller more or less told LifeSiteNews the same the other day, when he talked about spreading atheism in the heart of the church, as the number one reason for the crisis. [It’s as if] we do not anymore believe what the four Gospels are telling us.
And here we have the Face of God, which fills every void and emptiness – and which declares, with the power of silence – as Cardinal Sarah has put it – that all that we are declaring in our Christian Creed now for so many centuries, is true.
LifeSiteNews:I heard that you are preparing a series of films for EWTN in Rome and Germany about the 20 mysteries of the four rosaries in the Holy Land. Is there any link between the Holy Face and that endeavor – and could you tell us a little more about it?
Paul Badde: The Holy Face contains somehow the essence of the Rosary. That is the Face of the living God incarnated in Jesus of Nazareth, born of the Virgin Mary.
John Paul II said that the Rosary looks at Jesus with the eyes of His mother, and that is what we are trying to do with our films about the 20 mysteries of the rosary which are being aired in German-speaking countries since 4 November, 2018 and in other countries as soon as possible. In all the mysteries of the four Rosaries, we contemplate nothing but the Face of God being richly rewarded in every Ave Maria according to the discovery which St. Irenaeus made in the 2nd century, when he said: “The Glory of God is man alive; but the life of man is the vision of God.”
LifeSiteNews:There are two keys to the city of Manoppello, one is in Pope Benedict’s hands and one in yours. Is there any meaning to this?
Paul Badde: I understand it more symbolically, for there is no door there anymore in the city of Manoppello where these keys would really fit into.
It’s true of course, that I made Manoppello known in some parts of the world, as for instance in Poland or in the Philippines. Pope Benedict, though, made it known to the entire world.
And I do hope, of course, that this new book will open the doors to Manoppello a little bit wider also for American pilgrims who are looking for comfort in the crisis we are all facing and suffering.
LifeSiteNews:What do you hope the fruit of the further knowledge among Catholics about this Holy Face would be?
Paul Badde: What do I hope the fruit would be? That we will be better prepared to see Him again. Here I have got to tell you a last little story. I’ve been a friend for many years — until his death in 2002 — with Zvi Kolitz, an old Lithuanian Jew from New York, who cherished very highly the wisdom of Rabbi Loew, who lived in Prague in the 16th century.
And he was fascinated that this famous Rabbi said, time and again, that the Messiah would finally appear in that hour of history when men would try to stretch their hands towards the biblical “tree of life.”
And today, I read in the news that in China, the first “designer babies” have been made. I wouldn’t say in that context, though, that the miraculous reappearance of the Holy Veil is part of the Second Coming of the Lord already.
In Manoppello, however, you can already look into his eyes, the eyes of the God of Jacob.
Note: Follow LifeSite’s new Catholic twitter account to stay up to date on all Church-related news. Click here: @LSNCatholic
Dec. 13. 2018 correction: This article has been corrected to state accurately what an eclipse of the sun means and how it relates to an eclipse of God.
Leftist Professor: Francis “Handed People over to Death Squads… we have a Pope accused of having Committed Crimes against Humanity”
Global Research TV (GRTV) Interview with Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky who was an Visiting Professor at the Social Policy Institute of the Universidad Nacional de Cordoba, Argentina at the outset of the Argentinian military dictatorship’s “Dirty War” in 1976 said in an 2013 GRTV interview:
“Bergoglio [Pope Francis]… handed people over to death squads… this is the first time at least in modern history that we have a pope accused of having committed crimes against humanity and those accusations are to a large extent documented.”
Who is Chossudovsky?
He is Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research. He has acted as a consultant for the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean the African Development Bank and the United Nations Population Fund.[https://www.globalresearch.ca/michel-chossudovsky-biographical-summary/5580999]
The University of Ottawa (emeritus) professor is a leftist who is in agreement with Pope Francis’s United Nations population and economic agenda. For example, Chossudovsky said:
“For the West, the enemy was not “socialism” but capitalism.”[https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky] The leftist professor who is in agreement with the Pope’s leftist agenda wrote 4 months ago on August 29, 2018 that Francis “played a direct and complicit role in” the killing and torturing of the Argentinian military dictatorship’s “Dirty War” which was known by the Obama US State Department, “must have been known to one or more of” the cardinals who elected him and the media:
“Prior to his election by the papal conclave, the role of Jorge Maria Bergoglio in Argentina’s “Dirty War” was known and documented. It was known to the US State Department. It must have been known to one or more of the 115 ‘Cardinal Electors’ of the Papal Conclave which convened at the Sistine Chapel on March 12, 2013. Needless to say, both the Catholic Hierarchy and the international community turned a blind eye. And the media through ‘omission’ has remained silent.”
Importantly, Chossudovsky is inferring in the 2013 interview that Francis needs to be investigated and possibly be turned over to a justice system on charges of “crimes against humanity”:
“The [anti-“Dirty War”] lawyer Myriam Bregman who launched the lawsuit said that Bergoglio’s own statements prove that church officials knew from early on that the junta was killing and torturing its citizens.”
Fred MartinezFred Martinez is a widely published Catholic writer and former TV broadcaster who has been a pro-life activist, speaker and Board member/adviser with various organisations for many years. In 1985 he founded the Juan Diego Society through which hundreds of babies under threat of abortion were saved. Praise for Fred Martinez’s The Hidden Axis : “[T]horough piece of journalism.”- Dale Ahlquist, EWTN host and American Chesterton Society President, “[N]ecessary reading.” – Ginny Hitchcock, National pro-life leader and longtime colleague of Fr. Paul Marx, “[A] moral tour de force that is must reading .”- Chuck Morse, radio talk show host, WROL-Boston, “[O]ne incredible, thought-provoking book.” – Tony DiGirolamo, Executive Producer of the Culture Shock television show, “[P]rofoundly important.” – Dr. Pravin Thevathasan, Catholic Psychologist, “[T]renchant expose.” Click here for “Hidden Axis”: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1410746186/qid=1099936755/sr=11-1/refView my complete profile
One casualty of Original Sin was man’s gift of speech. We know from the account of the Tower of Babel that God meted out the confusion of language as a punishment for pride. But that particular punishment only sets in relief the damage that was really present from the start.
God granted man the faculty of speech as something of a divine prerogative. He entrusted to man the authority to speak on His behalf. God brought to him all the animals “to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.” (Gen 2:19) There was also a priestly dimension to the gift of speech. In man’s words, all of creation was to find a voice of praise for its Creator. Indeed, Adam’s first recorded words are a hymn of thanksgiving for the helpmate given to him:
This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; She shall be called woman, because she was taken out of Man. (Gen 2:23)
After man rebels against his Creator, his speech is wounded. It now strays easily from its purpose. Immediately after the fall Adam uses his words not for praise but to blame that same helpmate and, by extension, to fault her Creator: “The Woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.” (Gen 3:12)
In the fallen world, man’s power to articulate the truth and praise the Creator becomes also a means of deceit and manipulation. We find it throughout scripture, from Cain’s dodge – “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Gen 4:9) – to Judas’s insincerity: “Hail, Rabbi!” (Mt 26:49) We see it all around us, in the constant distortion and twisting of words to serve greed and gain rather than truth and worship. Most sadly, we see it in ourselves, in our own use of words to manipulate, blame, and deceive.
All things are to be restored in Christ, human speech included. The Word of God redeems our words by His Incarnation. In assuming our human nature, He also takes to Himself human speech. He redeems our speech by making it not only His own but also the vehicle of His truth. Speech has always been a sacred thing. But now that God Himself has spoken as we do, it carries divine significance.
The Blessed Virgin Mary, as the dawn announcing our Savior’s coming, heralds the restoration our Lord brings. She “entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth.” (Lk 1:39) We don’t know what she said. But we do know that at her words John is sanctified in the womb. Elizabeth tells her: “For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the child in my womb leaped for joy.” (Lk 2:44) Already in Mary we find human words redeemed and made a vehicle of grace.
Our Lady anticipates the instructions Saint Paul gives to all Christ’s followers: “Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for edifying, as fits the occasion, that it may impart grace to those who hear.” (Eph 4:29) We should heed her example, because what is true for Mary in a singular way is meant to become true for us as we grow in grace. Our words should also be gracious, in both their delivery and their effect.
Mary can speak gracious words to Elizabeth and cause John to rejoice because she first spoke words of trust to the archangel Gabriel: “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” (Lk 1:38) Of course, her response of faith stands in stark contrast to Zechariah’s words of doubt: “How shall I know this?” (Lk 1:18) He was struck mute – and fittingly, because without faith we have nothing to say.
After praising her greeting, Elizabeth also acknowledges Mary’s faith: “And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.” (Lk 1:45) Mary speaks words of trust and thus becomes the bearer of the Word and a bearer of gracious words.
To speak in a way that builds up – that is “good for edifying” – we must first believe in the Builder. It is trust in Him that enables us to speak words of truth, hope, and encouragement. Confidence in Him brings both strength and gentleness in our speech. Strength, because we speak as children of the Almighty. Gentleness, because we know that the power is in His truth, not our own ideas. We do not need to force it or devolve into harshness, because His truth can do great work with a little.
If we do not trust in His words and in His Word, then our speech remains confined to our own thoughts and relies on our own power. We soon end up either silent out of fear or harsh out of insecurity.
Most of all, our Lady reveals that gracious words require humility. Adam’s pride confounded his speech. Zechariah’s insistence on his own knowledge robbed him of his voice. Mary is the handmaid of the Lord, willing to be overshadowed by the Spirit. She is not full of herself. Her perfect self-forgetfulness means that she has room in her heart and mind for God’s word.
She thus has something to impart. We, on the other hand, do not like to be overshadowed. We are full of ourselves and thus have little room for His word within us. . .and little to impart to others.
In her visit to Elizabeth, Mary’s words imparted grace to those who heard. In our visits, especially in this season, may truth in Him and humility about ourselves enable us to do likewise.
*Image:The Visitation by Luca Giordano, c. 1680 [Guildhall Art Gallery, London]
The darkening that comes with the year’s shortest hours of daylight is like the lowering of the lights in a theatre as the play is about to begin. But in the “Drama of Salvation” by which the human race is offered the promise of restoration to its original glory, “all the world’s a stage,” and the acts and actors are real. The creation of the world was not a mere myth, otherwise we would not be here. Nor are good and evil abstractions, for they always have had real consequences. One of the most dramatic events in the progress of man, to which Saint Jude would later allude (Jude 1:7), was the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah about 1,700 years before the birth of Christ. He knew that the story of that destruction was not the sheer theatrics of fiction. Until recently, it was convenient for some scholars to pass it off as an instructive legend. Archeologists in a symposium this past month concluded that those cities north of the Dead Sea were utterly destroyed, and their land became uninhabitable for the next six hundred years. The substantial theory is that upwards of 60,000 inhabitants were wiped out by a meteor exploding at low altitude with the force of a ten-megaton bomb, dropping platinum and molten lava on the larger area called Middle Ghor, and unleashing a temperature the same as the sun. Wise ones interpreted this as punishment for the corruption of that culture. There is a symbiosis between matter and morality. When souls are disordered, there are consequences in all creation. So it was, that at the climax of the Drama of Salvation, when Christ died on the cross, the sky grew black. It has been quipped that if God does not punish our culture for its decadence and contempt for natural law, He owes Sodom and Gomorrah an apology. It was to save us from total destruction that the Word, whose utterance brought all things into being, became flesh and then appeared on a day now called Christmas. Twice did our Lord speak of Sodom, saying that its fate was less severe than that of anyone who by an act of willful pride, rejects Him and all that He requires in the way of obedience to His truth (Matthew 10:15; 11:24). Such severity is the outcry of the Christ who wants that none be lost and that all be saved. This is a reminder never to infantilize the Babe of Bethlehem for, while He may whimper in the manger, this is the Voice that made all things and judges all at the end of time. And in His humility by making Himself frail and fragile in a stable, He reveals a mercy more powerful even than an exploding meteor. “For their sake He remembered His covenant and showed compassion according to the abundance of His steadfast love” (Psalm 106:45).
NEW YORK, New York, December 20, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – The Vatican has become the equivalent of nuclear catastrophe in terms of its theology, a noted priest scholar said.
Father George Rutler, citing a number of Pope Francis’ statements and acts, including the pope’s recent pronouncements on the death penalty, said the Church’s highest office is diminished when its obligations to the perennial teachings of the fathers are neglected, and the faithful are also “at risk when they are offered confusion and superficiality in place of systematic thought.”
“In short,” Father Rutler said, “the Vatican has become a theological Chernobyl. We are in dangerous territory.”
Since capital punishment relates to natural law, he wrote, rejecting it as fundamentally wrong could affect any part of natural law.
When one reads the pope’s spontaneous remarks on varied topics today, “The quality of reasoning and information of facts is so fugitive, that frustration yields to sheer embarrassment,” he wrote.
Rutler cited for example in lead-up to his discussion of the pope’s death penalty remarks Francis’ comments to youth in Turin in June 2015. The pontiff had gone all over the map in listing concerns to the young people, he said, in an address that Reuters termed “a long, rambling talk about war, trust and politics.”
“While constrained by respect for the Petrine office,” Father Rutler said, “and aware of the strains that imposes, it is distressing to look for a train of thought and find only a train wreck.”
“That has to be the impression after reading the Pope’s remarks to a Delegation of the International Commission Against the Death Penalty,” he added.
Popes “in past centuries” ignored “the primacy of mercy over justice” in using the death penalty, Pope Francis stated Monday, also calling capital punishment an “inhuman form of punishment” that is now “always inadmissible.”
The pope had put aside his prepared speech during the private audience with the group, speaking to the anti-death penalty delegation in unscripted remarks. After the meeting, the Vatican provided the prepared address to reporters, also noting it had also been given to participants.
‘The progress of the doctrine of the most recent Pontiffs’ and ‘the change in the conscience of the Christian people’
The pontiff’s prepared remarks ran through his varied appeals over the years in favor of abolishing the death penalty.
The remarks referenced Francis’ recent change to Catechism of the Catholic Church, which he said, “Now expresses the progress of the doctrine of the most recent Pontiffs as well as the change in the conscience of the Christian people, which rejects a penalty that seriously harms human dignity.”
The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Luis Ladaria Ferrer, S.J., argued in an accompanying explanatory letter to bishops that on the basis of the teaching of Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI, Francis’ “reformulation” of the Catechism represents an “authentic development of doctrine that is not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the Magisterium.”
Even before his more recent death penalty statements, Francis went beyond the position held by Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, who had opposed capital punishment but never considered it to be intrinsically evil.
Francis said the death penalty was “contrary to the Gospel” back in October 2017 during a speech to the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization, signaling that the teaching of the Catechism would change according to a “new understanding of Christian truth.”
And in 2015 while addressing the U.S. Congress just hours before the senators of the U.S. would be voting on defunding Planned Parenthood – which was fresh off being exposed for trafficking in aborted fetal remains – Francis eschewed mention of abortion in favor of speaking against capital punishment.
St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, along with Pope Pius XII, viewed capital punishment as legitimate for protecting the public from immediate danger and as punishment for serious crimes, in keeping with Catholic tradition. The death penalty is also presented as legitimate in both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible.
Rutler was one of 75 clergy and scholars to sign an appeal to Francis urging him to withdraw his death penalty teaching.
Inflicting ambiguity
In his Catholic World Report column, Rutler cited varied previous Church teaching and scholars to illustrate the Pope’s parting with Church doctrine on the death penalty, also analyzing semantics of how he does so.
Francis’s use of the term “inadmissible” to describe the death penalty, he said, while “it has no theological substance,” and coupled with his avoiding words such as “immoral” or “wrong,” “inflicts on discourse an ambiguity similar to parts of Amoris Laetitia.”
“The obvious meaning is that capital punishment is intrinsically evil,” said Rutler, “but to say so outright would be too blatant.”
“He also calls all life ‘inviolable,’” the priest continued, “a term which applies only to innocent life and has no moral warrant otherwise.”
Father Rutler then listed “the ancillary and unmentioned consideration of the role of punishment and hell” in the pontiff’s death penalty presentation, “conjuring a suspicion of universalism, which is the denial of eternal alienation from God.”
Francis has discarded then-Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Prefect Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (who became Pope Benedict XVI) saying in 2004 that there could be legitimate diversity of opinion on the death penalty but not on abortion or euthanasia, he said.
“This is no surprise,” said Rutler of Francis’ abandoning Ratzinger’s teaching, “since an attaché of the Holy See Press Office, Father Thomas Rosica, has said in a statement ultramontane to the point of heresy: ‘Our Church has indeed entered a new phase: with the advent of this first Jesuit pope, it is openly ruled by an individual rather than by the authority of Scripture alone or even its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture.’”
‘No warrant in reality’
“Pope Francis justifies himself by invoking a ‘progress’ in society,” continued Rutler, “but this is a humanistic – even Pelagian – confidence that has no warrant in reality. It also lets loose a cataract of contradictions.”
He provided the example of how “one of the Pope’s men,” Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, praised Communist China for coming “closer to Catholic social teaching” than the U.S.
“There were 23 executions in the United States last year compared with 1,551 in China,” Rutler added, “more than all other nations combined.”
“Pope Francis says that his innovative teaching, ‘does not imply any contradiction’ of the Church’s tradition,” said Rutler, “but, one has to say reluctantly, it indeed does.”
“The shift cannot be called a legitimate development of doctrine because it neglects all the classical criteria for authentic development,” he said, “most especially what John Henry Newman named ‘preservation of type.’”
The Newman concept refers to the later form of a teaching having the same essential characteristics as the earlier form.
Rutler warned that given the Church’s teaching on the death penalty is grounded in natural law, with the pope’s innovation on the death penalty, all perennial teaching is at risk – such as teaching found in Humanae Vitae or the moral doctrine of Veritatis Splendor.
“As capital punishment pertains to natural law,” said Rutler, “once it is rejected as intrinsically wrong, the same could happen to any aspect of natural law.”
You can stop praying for her Mr. Bear — she’s praying for all of us now!
(From an email to family and friends dated December 10, 2018)
Last night a moment arrived that I knew was coming but for which I could have never prepared enough. My baby daughter (known to some on the internet as “Tiny Princess”), born only eight months and two days ago, breathed her last as her mother and I held her in our arms. We had been preparing for this moment from the day of her birth back in April, but no amount of mental preparation really makes you ready for the moment when your child’s soul passes to eternity while their body remains behind.
The initial couple hours was much harder on mommy. I switched over to “on a mission” mode: keeping fastidious notes in the medical journal; making sure the kids were brought to see their sister one last time in an orderly and disciplined manner; notifying our family, our pastor, and several friends; cleaning and clearing the living room to make way for my wife’s sister and a handful of friends who immediately came over; generally keeping busy and being useful. But there were little things that prevented me from staying in the mindset of “I’ve got a job to do and need to focus only on that” which I didn’t expect, like turning off the auto-timer on my coffee maker. It had already been set to start brewing at 5:00 AM the next morning, the time I get up to take over watching my daughter, that precious hour and a half when I would have her all to myself in the quiet stillness of the morning. This morning was also quiet and still, but missing was the grip of her tiny hand on my pinky while the rest of the house slept.
Late last night I made the final entry in my daughter’s medical journal: that she was departing our home for the last time, en route to the funeral home. We had her body buckled into her car seat which I carried out to funeral home’s van. The phrase “I’ll take it from here sir, we’ll take good care of her” hit me a lot harder than I would have expected. It’s one thing to know that God gives you your children only for a while. At some point we have to let them go to make their way in the world. If we’re more traditional, we raise our daughters in obedience until we give them away to live according to God’s calling for them in this life. The realization hit me hard: in handing over the car seat I was giving away my little girl… not to any vocation of this world but giving her to God completely. How can I not be happy for her and proud that her pure, innocent soul now sees and will see God face-to-face for all eternity? At the same time, how can I not shed tears of sorrow that I can no longer hold her in my arms?
Now begins the bittersweet week where we will celebrate the votive Mass of the Angels before my baby girl is buried in the “little heaven” section of the cemetery which is reserved for the Baptized who died before attaining the use of reason. Now also, in a renewed way, we strive to live in a manner which is pleasing to God so that we can see her again in eternity.
Sometimes I’ve thought of children who die before they are able to offend God as the lucky ones: they go straight to heaven. But on second thought, maybe they regard us as the lucky ones. While they were never able to offend God they were also incapable of doing what we can do every moment of every day: willingly and selflessly give our thoughts and actions to the service of God. I imagine that my daughter is praying and interceding for me, her mom, and her siblings, and all of our friends and her benefactors with the hope that we’ll not only make it to heaven but that she’ll be able to tell the other holy innocents around her: “See those radiant souls waaaaaay up there, closer to God? Those are my family and friends!!!”
And so I renew my vows to renounce satan, his works, and his pomps and to serve God as thoroughly and completely as I can. Pray for us, my daughter — we are working to be with you as soon as God’s Will allows!
St. Bellarmine: Francis’s Death Penalty Teaching is “Heretical;” is “Analogous to Denying” Holy Trinity, has “Implications for the Pro-Life Movement [that] would be Catastrophic” & would let loose Murderers like Ted Bundy
Pope Francis just taught, again, a heresy according to Doctor of the Church St. Robert Bellarmine that contradicts the “teachings of scripture [the Revelation of God], the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and previous popes”:
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?
– “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.
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
You must be logged in to post a comment.