Friday, September 28, 2018

Is there a Vatican Gay Lobby and Chinese Communist Alliance?

The radical gay New Ways Ministry, who are notorious dissenters according to a 2011 US Bishops statement, revealed in 2012 thatCardinal Paolo Romeo apparently was part of the Vatican gay lobby:

” GayStarNewsreports:

“Three Italian Catholic cardinals have agreed to prayer vigils held by the religious group Gionata for the victims of gay hate and discrimination for the first time.“LGBT groups will pray for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in Milan, Florence and Palermo, in Sicily as part of the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO) to be celebrated . . . in an estimated 100 countries around the world. . . . 

“Cardinal Paolo Romeo, in Palermo, . . . [has] backed it, even though he banned the vigil last year. The liturgy there will be celebrated at 9pm . . . in the San Gabriele Arcangelo church.” [https://www.newwaysministry.org/2012/05/17/three-italian-cardinals-support-prayer-vigils-for-international-day-against-homophobia-and-transphobia/] 

The pro-gay Romeo, a year after coming out of the closet about supporting LGBT “liturgy,” in China spoke of an assassination attempt on Pope Benedict XVI to “Italian businessmen and Chinese representatives of the Catholic Church” according to the Telegraph in 2012:

“Cardinal Romeo reportedly made the startling prediction of the Pope’s death during a trip to China in November 2011.”

“He seemed so sure of the fact that the people he spoke with, including Italian businessmen and Chinese representatives of the Catholic Church, were convinced that he was talking about an assassination attempt.”

“… The extraordinary comments were written up in a top-secret report, dated Dec 30, 2011, and delivered to the Pope by a senior cardinal, Dario Castrillon Hoyos, a Colombian, in January.” 

“The Vatican has reportedly opened an investigation into the claims.”

“The report was written in German, apparently to limit the number of people within the Vatican who would understand it if it was inadvertently leaked.” 

“It warns of a “Mordkomplott” – death plot – against Benedict.”

“‘The story was broken on Friday by an Italian daily, Il Fatto Quotidiano, with the headline ‘Plot against the Pope – he will die within 12 months'”. 

“The newspaper, which has a reputation for scoops, published a page from the confidential report. 

“‘During his talks in China, Cardinal Romeo predicted the death of Benedict XVI within 12 months. His remarks were expressed with such certainty and resolution that the people he was speaking to thought, with a sense of alarm, that an attack on the Pope’s life was being planned,'” the paper reported.”

“‘Cardinal Romeo could never have imagined that the indiscreet remarks he made on the trip to China would be communicated back to the Vatican by third parties.'”

“Asked about the reported comments on Friday, however, Romeo said that the words attributed to him were ‘absolutely without basis.'” [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/9073811/The-Pope-will-die-within-a-year-Vatican-assassination-fears-revealed.html]

Despite Romeo’s denial Benedict’s close associate Cardinal Hoyos thought the assassination threat serious and delivered the “top-secret report” to the then Pope.

On September 26, the liberal and apparently pro-Chinese regime Maria Antonietta Calabrò, who is considered a well-informed and highly respected Italian journalist, claims there is a connection between the “obscure threat” of an assassination threat alleged to have been spoken of by the pro-gay Romeo and the “obscure threat” of former Apostolic nuncio Carlo Maria Viganò’s testimony about Pope Francis’s gay sex abuse cover-ups. 

Calabrò in Italy’s HuffPost (link) wrote:

“Surprisingly, the pope referred to the attack against him, launched exactly a month ago, by the former Apostolic nuncio Carlo Maria Viganò. The Pope did not call him by name, but he said:  “When there was that famous communiqué of a former Apostolic nuncio, the episcopates of the world wrote to me saying that they felt close, praying for me; Even the Chinese faithful have written [a letter], and the signature of this writing was of the Bishop – say so – of the traditional Catholic Church and the Bishop of the Patriotic Church: Together, both, and the faithful of both churches. For me, this was a sign of God”.

“… No one can deny that the accord of the Vatican with China takes on a geopolitical value beyond a spiritual and religious value.”
“Just when the United States of Trump has begun a trade war with Beijing, the American Catholic right in recent days recalled the role of unofficial negotiator carried out by the now former Cardinal McCarrick precisely with China.”
“It is precisely about a trip to China by McCarrick in 2013 that the former Nuncio Viganò spoke in his ‘statement,’ as proof of the Pope’s condescension towards him.”

“… The Viganò case, in short, ended up speeding up the Pope’s agreement with China.” 

“No one can deny that the Vatican’s agreement with China assumes a geopolitical value as well as spiritual and religious. Just at the time when the United States of Trump started a trade war with Beijing, the American Catholic Right has recalled in recent days the role of unofficial negotiator played by the now McCarrick in 2013 spoke the former nuncio Viganò in His “communiqué”, as proof of the pope’s condescension towards him. Also the predecessor of Francis, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI, also a extensor of an open letter to Chinese Catholics, received at the beginning of 2012 obscure threats after a trip to China of another prelate. And that document ended up in the first Vatileaks scandal.” [Italy’s HuffPost, ESTERI  26/09/2018 16:25 CEST  |  Aggiornato26/09/2018 16:26 CEST  Papa Francesco, il caso Viganò e il “segno di Dio” che ha accelerato l’accordo con la Cina]

Dr. Robert Moynihan writing on the Calabrò article in Letter 61 said:

“So her argument is that the attacks on Pope Francis and the calls for his resignation are in some way animated by… forces close to the present US government, seen as in strong opposition to the Holy See’s new “opening” to China.”
“In today’s piece, Calabrò notes that former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, 88, the man at the center of Vigano’s Testimony(which is, essentially, a “who’s who” of those in the Church hierarchy whom Vigano charges ‘covered’ for McCarrick over the past two decades) made at least 8 trips to China over many years, including at least one during this pontificate of Pope Francis.”
“She notes that it was precisely a trip that McCarrick made to China in June of 2013, with Francis’ evident knowledge and blessing — after a period of about 7 years under Pope Benedict when McCarrick made no trips to China — which was used by Vigano as ‘proof’ that Francis ‘favored’ or ‘rehabilitated’ McCarrick though (Vigano says) Francis knew of allegations sexual abuse against McCarrick.”
“In other words, she is pointing out that the trip of McCarrick to China in June 2013 is a key hinge point in Vigano’s Testimony.”
“This is interesting, as a thesis.”
“But the concluding lines of this report today by Calabrò seem a bit odd.”

“… This is puzzling. An allegation that someone has covered up for someone who has sexually molested young men (the allegation made against Francis by Vigano) is seemingly not comparable to the prediction that a Pope will die of poisoning due to a plot against him by his enemies (the prediction made by Romeo about Pope Benedict). Why are they compared?[On Sep 26, 2018 7:58 PM, “Dr. Robert Moynihan” MoynihanReport@xxxxxx]

The answer to Moynihan’s puzzle may be:

– That the Chinese regime is and was involved or allied with the Vatican gay lobby represented by McCarrick (and Cardinal Pietro Parolin who Viganò has testified covered-up for the McCarrick) in the betrayal of the Chinese Church. 

– That possibly the Chinese regime and the gay lobby represented by Romeo while in China spoke of the alleged assassination threat just prior to Pope Benedict’s resignation to “Chinese representatives of the Catholic Church” some of whom may have been Communist operatives as part of a operation to pressure Benedict to resign.

Were there Communist operatives in that group of “Chinese representatives of the Catholic Church”? 

According to Moynihan’s Letter 61 there is “one bishop from the “underground” Catholic Church loyal to Rome” apparently willing to betray his own Chinese Church to the Communist in a letter to Francis:

“… one bishop from the “Patriotic” Catholic Church… and… one bishop from the “underground” Catholic Church loyal to Rome.”

 Was China involved or allied with the Vatican gay lobby in the assassination threat just prior to Pope Benedict’s resignation as part of a operation to pressure Benedict to resign?
 Was the alleged assassination threat one of the reasons Benedict resigned? 

Say an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church? Fred Martinez at 5:27 PMShare

No comments:

Post a Comment

›HomeView web version

About Me

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/ref

Thinking the Unthinkable

Rev. Jerry J. Pokorsky

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2018

The word “unthinkable” is an amusing expression, an oxymoron wrapped in a single word.  Nevertheless, it points us towards some very unpleasant things we are forced to think about, such as nuclear war or a Church in crisis.

Until very recently, the prospect of a pope promulgating significant doctrinal error was unthinkable.  But many of us are now fretting about ambiguous papal pronouncements said to be “authentic magisterium” that directly oppose Scripture and Tradition.

It is always helpful to remember that a pope does not create doctrines; he elucidates doctrines to conserve the Faith he has received.  The Fathers of the First Vatican Council defined the teaching authority of the pope.  But they link his authority to Scripture and Tradition, the Church’s entire doctrinal history:

The Roman pontiffs . . . sometimes by summoning ecumenical councils or consulting the opinion of the Churches scattered throughout the world, sometimes by special synods, sometimes by taking advantage of other useful means afforded by divine providence, defined as doctrines to be held those things which, by God’s help, they knew to be in keeping with Sacred Scripture and the apostolic traditions. (Vatican I, Chapter 4, emphasis added.)

The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council Fathers likewise link the authentic magisterium to Tradition and Scripture:

But when either the Roman Pontiff or the Body of Bishops together with him defines a judgment, they pronounce it in accordance with Revelation itself, which all are obliged to abide by and be in conformity with, that is, the Revelation which as written or orally handed down is transmitted in its entirety through the legitimate succession of bishops and especially in care of the Roman Pontiff himself, and which under the guiding light of the Spirit of truth is religiously preserved and faithfully expounded in the Church. (Vatican II, LG 25, emphasis added.)

For example, the infallible teachings about Mary’s Immaculate Conception and Assumption emerged from unsettled Catholic theology.  But the deeper understanding could be explained in light of Tradition and in relationship with the rest of Catholic doctrines and dogmas.

On sexual matters, the Church’s constant teachings in her ordinary magisterium on the nature and goods of marriage – and intrinsic sexual disorders such as contraceptive acts and homosexual behavior – are well-defined infallible teachings of the Church rooted in Scripture and Tradition.  These clear doctrines not only provide precise moral guidance but opportunities for fruitful theological reflection bringing even greater clarity.

The Council Fathers carefully defined the authority of bishops – and assumed their fidelity and goodwill in conserving and faithfully teaching Catholic truth.  But the Fathers surely knew the many ways that unfaithful bishops betray their office, usually by neglect but sometimes by flawed teachings.

The Fathers apparently did not see the need to state the obvious:  doctrinal violations of Church teaching by bishops cannot bind the faithful in conscience.  It is at least conceivable that a pope might also reject and abuse the graces of his office in a similar way.  Such errors may muddy the waters of the ordinary magisterium, but obviously cannot bind in conscience.

Of course, deliberate ambiguities in papal teaching, incompetence, and infidelity that tamper with the “authentic magisterium” would be disastrous:  sowing confusion and even suggesting the unthinkable, that the gates of Hell have prevailed in the Church.

But this cannot be the case as a matter of logic.  The truth of Christ remains.  His Gospel is handed down in Scripture, Tradition – and the cumulative magisterial teaching of popes, bishops, councils, and synods throughout history.

Grace perfects nature and the pope’s teaching authority is not magic.  Every presumed magisterial thought that a pope eventually decrees must always be judged against Scripture and Tradition.  Even conciliar pronouncements, including the pronouncements of Vatican II, must also be aligned with Scripture and Tradition.

Does this imply a “pick and choose” magisterium?  No.  The interlocking strength of Scripture and Tradition, and the authentic magisterium throughout history, ensure that the truth of Christ will not be circumvented by innovations.  Sometimes corrections need to be made – as Paul corrected Peter at Antioch. (cf. Galatians 2:11-21)

Hence, bishops (supported by orthodox theologians) must recognize their obligation to respond to papal pronouncements that are dangerously ambiguous or contradict Scripture and Tradition. They need to do so respectfully but firmly and without fear, both because – under the guidance of the Holy Spirit – they have solemnly promised to do so by their oaths of office and because they have the historical content of Revelation on their side.

Corrections may also come from the faithful who are, after all, endowed with the sensus fidei (sense of the faith).  But the elimination of doctrinal distortions and errors (and restoration of doctrinal clarity) is difficult.  As widespread clerical dissent from Humanae Vitae demonstrates, doctrinal repair and restoration can lead to generations of painful conflict.

Unfortunately, like the prospect of nuclear war, the thought of significant papal doctrinal missteps is no longer unthinkable.  But we should be confident that doctrinal error and schism can be avoided, with God’s grace, by a careful and insistent logic that protects the integrity of the Faith:  Authentic papal magisterial authority cannot be in opposition to the doctrinal history of the Church.

People, priests, and bishops need not shrink from the obligation to defend the Faith.  We should consider it a privilege:  “Since we have the same spirit of faith as he had who wrote, ‘I believed, and so I spoke,’ we too believe, and so we speak.” (2 Cor. 4:13)

*Image: Christ’s Charge to Peter by Peter Paul Rubens, 1616 [Wallace Collection, London]

© 2018 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.orgThe Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

High-End Fashion Designer: I Was Warned About Homosexual/Pedophile/Satanic Infiltration of Catholic Church in the Early 80’s

EDITOR’S NOTE: Marie Toone, the author of this guest article, spent over a decade working in both the high-end fashion and entertainment industries.  Through her work, she was in close, personal contact with famous singers, actors, athletes, and business leaders.  Over the past three years, Mrs. Toone (who lives in the UK) has spent weeks with the Hichborn family so she could tell her story to Michael Hichborn.  This article merely touches on an amazing life story that is both shocking and inspiring, tragic and hopeful.  Through the course of extensive interviews and pouring over photographs, Hichborn has found Mrs. Toone to be a highly credible witness to the events detailed below.  Specific names regarding celebrities have been omitted.

After having worked in the fashion and entertainment industry for several years, where I styled and dressed many high profile celebrities, I thought that nothing could shock me; that is until the Met Gala. Let’s face it, what could be more shocking than the punk-rock era of the 1970’s with studs, chains, black leather and rubber fetish bondage trousers, dyed and ripped t-shirts, neck chains with razor blade pendants and matching fanned Mohawk hair styles coupled with self mutilation and body piercings? Or let’s take the “Goth” look of the 1980’s, with its different styles of a post-punk era and death metal subculture where black was the predominant color and everything was dark and morbid. Both male and female goths dressed alike with black hair, black eyes, black eyeliner, black lipstick,black nail polish and very pale complexion. The 80’s also gave us Madonna, hailed the queen of pop, who mastered the art of shocking us with her style, videos, lyrics and dance routines.

So here we have Madonna, once accused by the Vatican of staging one of the most satanic shows in history, perform for the guests at this year’s Met Gala with the theme being “Heavenly Bodies, fashion and the Catholic imagination.” The Vatican not only approved of this gala, but loaned over 50 garments and accessories for the exhibition. During her performance, Madonna juxtaposed sex and religion as she performed “Like a Prayer” dressed as a monk, flanked by backing vocalists and dancers dressed as monks.  At one point, they strip her of her habit revealing a see through dress with corset and suspender belt.  Following this, Madonna then performed “Hallelujah,” followed by male and female “priests” with rosary beads around their necks.

The Met Gala — formally called the Costume Institute Gala and also known as the Met Ball and affectionately referred to as the “Oscars of the Fashion industry” — is an annual event for the benefit of The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute in New York City. It marks the grand opening of the institute’s annual fashion exhibition and whatever theme they run with becomes the “expected” theme for the costumes of the guests.  The Met Gala is the creme de la creme of all galas with tickets priced at $30K per ticket or a whopping $275K to reserve a table! The Annual Gala Ball brings designers and celebrities alike to the Metropolitan Museum Of Art where they don the most avant-garde creations in red carpet history and vie for the title of “Best Dressed.”

While this year’s theme shocked and scandalized Catholics around the world, the truth is that this event is only the public manifestation of a vast demonic attack on the Catholic Church.  What I am about to reveal is something I have kept mostly to myself for several decades, but given what is happening, and after praying about it, I have decided to reveal what I was told about the infiltration of the Catholic Church while I was working in the fashion and entertainment industries.

Over 30 years ago, I was working as the maître d’ for a high-end club frequented by entertainers of all sorts; actors, musicians, athletes, and wealthy industrialists.  One evening, I was contacted by a very high profile lady within the music business, who later revealed herself to me as a self-proclaimed satanist. She called me and asked if I could do her a huge favour by picking up a few bottles of champagne and dropping them off at her house.  She said that she had a party going on and had run out. I got the champagne and after work drove over to her house, which I had been to on a couple of occasions previously. However, I had no idea what this night had in store for me! When I arrived, she answered the door and invited me in, there were a few young people hanging around in the entrance hall including her children who were celebrating a birthday party. She took the bottles from me and gave them to her son who’s birthday it was, keeping one bottle for herself. She then beckoned me to follow her into a large study and sat me down opposite her. She poured two glasses of champagne and handed one to me, but as she did, I heard a small inner voice tell me not to drink the champagne because I needed to be alert. This turned out to be so true and a night that I will never forget as this was the night I learned about Satan’s plan to destroy the Catholic Church!

She took her glass of champagne and as she sipped it she looked at me intently and started to talk about a previous time I attended a party at her house. She began to talk about The Catholic Church, which she referred to as “your Church” (meaning mine) and how Satan had infiltrated it with sexual predator priests, bishops AND cardinals.  She told me that many were pedophiles, placed there to destroy the Catholic Church from within. She continued to say that the Illuminati and Freemasons were behind the plot to destroy the Catholic Church. She added that Satan’s plan was not only to destroy the Catholic Church but also to bring down the family, explaining that divorce was high on his agenda. She further told me that Satan had infiltrated the music industry and many celebrities had sold their souls for fame and fortune and that the Illuminati were behind this as well.

I need to be clear about something.  Up until this point, I had never heard of the Illuminati and had no idea what a pedophile was.

I had met this woman several times before, but mainly at a famous and very exclusive night club called Tramp. Although she always wore black clothing and skull rings, I had no idea – and never even thought it possible – that she was a practicing satanist until then. She elaborated on the fact that Satan was not in the slightest bit interested in any denomination of Christianity other than the Catholic Church because he knows it’s the “True Church.” What she said next has echoed in my mind with each new scandalous revelation being made about the Church this past summer … said to me “mark my words, your Church will be defunct 30 years from now.”

She proceeded to tell me that she herself had sold her soul to Satan many years ago and went on to tell me where, how and why she did it. She continued on about the Catholic Church and informed me that there were black masses and orgies going on in the Vatican on a regular basis and these black masses were carried out by bishops and cardinals. Now remember we are going back over 30 years ago when there was no internet, unlike now where we can find out anything at the touch of a button, so for me this was an absolutely terrifying experience; so much so that I didn’t know whether I was more afraid to stay or to get up and leave.  I was paralyzed with fear and could not take in what she was telling me about the Vatican and the black Masses, however I did know that the devil was real because I was brought up in a very Catholic household where I was warned of the dangers of Satan from a very young age. All I could do was continuously call on the Holy names of Jesus, Mary and Joseph over and over again in my head as she continued to bombard me with terrifying stories of her personal satanic experiences.  There is so much more that I was told me that night which I’m not going to go into here.

At one point she said “I’ll prove to you what I’m saying is true” and she briefly left the room.  It was at that point I started to say the prayer to St. Michael and called on every angel and saint in Heaven to get me out of there. When she returned to the room she was carrying a couple of large books which she placed on the table in front of me.  One was the satanic bible and the other was about the Illuminati and Freemasonry.   She pointed to the satanic bible and said to me “open it” … I sat there frozen on the spot with the hair on my neck literally standing on end! Inside I was crying out to Our Blessed Lord and to Our Lady to please get me out of there. I did not dare open it and as I eventually got up to leave, she followed me to the door and as she did she was carrying both books and told me I had to take them with me! I politely, but very nervously told her “I’ll get them another night.” I had no intention of ever getting them, but I was so scared and just wanted to get the heck out of there!

Fast forward to 2018 with the current and ongoing scandal rocking the Catholic Church, it would appear to me that what she told me over 30 years ago regarding the cardinals, bishops and priests working for Satan inside the Vatican was in actual fact completely and utterly true! They had been placed there by Satan all those years ago to try and destroy the Catholic Church.

For instance, one cannot help but note that among the most recognizable attendees at the Met Gala, it was Cardinal Timothy Dolan who told the Hollywood Reporter

“In the Catholic imagination, truth, goodness and the beauty of God is reflected all over the place, even in fashion.  The world is shot through with his glory and his presence. That’s why I’m here, and that’s why the church is here.”

Really? I beg to differ! The reason Cardinal Dolan was there, accompanied by the controversial homosexualist Fr. James Martin, is the fact that Satan has definitely infiltrated Holy Mother Church and that infiltration begins at the very top with the Vatican itself (bearing in mind that the Vatican loaned ecclesiastical garments and accessories).

According to the National Catholic Register, the Pontifical Council for Culture chose to collaborate with an exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York because of the Met’s significance to culture and global outreach, but officials were unaware of the widely criticized gala that took place. I find it inconceivable that the Vatican would lend such sacred and historical items which have never previously left the Vatican to an exhibition that they had not fully investigated. All you have to do is click on Wikipedia and it tells you everything you need to know about the gala and how everyone attending are expected to wear something along the chosen theme. Are we expected to believe that after several meetings with the gallery’s curator Andrew Bolton they were not told that those attending would be obliged to wear a costume representing the theme? Are they so careless with such treasures? I don’t think so, otherwise it would not have been the first time most of these priceless ecclesiastical garments and accessories had ever left the Vatican!

So to recap on the night let’s take a look at just some of these sacrilegious and blasphemous costumes:

Rihanna arrived dressed as a Pope wearing an elaborate gemstone Pontiff outfit which was festooned in hundreds if not thousands of pearls. This consisted of a strapless low cut mini dress and a Papal Cope and Miter reminiscent of those worn by pre-Vatican II Popes. Her sacrilegious costume was designed by John Galliano for Madison Margiela.

Madonna arrived dressed in a John Paul Gaultier black dress adorned with a large revealing see through cut out cross which she paired with a black net veil held in place by a crown donned with several jeweled crosses. She wore a Rosary around her neck and a long chain adorned with several crosses.

Cardi B, American rapper and hip hop artist, arrived in a shocking heavily embellished and very low cut revealing costume with a crown mocking the Blessed Virgin Mary. Her sacrilegious costume was designed by Moschino.

Singer songwriter Lana Del Ray arrived dressed by Gucci in a peach crystal embellished gown with a large heart pierced with daggers in mockery of Our Lady of Sorrows…this had to be the most shocking and sacrilegious costumes of the night…

Ariana Grande arrived dressed by Vera Wang in a ball gown inspired by Michelangelo’s “The Last Judgement,”a painting inside the Sistine Chapel.

I find it interesting that the framed fresco depicts humanity awaiting their eternal judgement by God. It would appear that Cardinal Timothy Dolan didn’t appear too concerned about that dreadful judgement when he said “I didn’t really see anything sacrilegious” on the night and described the night as a “great evening.” He went on to praise the corresponding exhibition as “beautiful.” I’m at a loss for words as to what is beautiful about a collection of sacrilegious and blasphemous costumes!

The battle for souls has begun in earnest and we are talking about the loss of countless souls to this demonic industry as foretold by Our Lady of Fatima almost 101 years ago when she said “Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord very much.”

Nowhere in the world have we seen such immodest and offensive dress as at this year’s Met Gala where a leading prelate of the Church not only attended but didn’t think there was anything sacrilegious or blasphemous about these costumes as he posed for photographs with Donatella Versace and others while the Choir from the Sistine Chapel sang at this blasphemous event.

All over the world people were shocked and scandalised by this event. Even the secular media talked about it – every one of them mentioning the word sacrilegious and or blasphemous – while the Vatican remained silent. Where was Pope Francis in all of this? Why was there no public condemnation from the Holy Father? In fact the silence from the Vatican was deafening which seems to be the norm in this current Papacy!

About 15 years ago I was living in North Yorkshire and this whole demonic thing in the entertainment industry was really troubling me (we had not yet seen the much worse and more serious situation within the Church) as it was becoming more and more apparent that many celebrities were indeed selling their souls to Satan. It troubled me so much that I visited with the parish priest and told him of my anguish at what was going on in the entertainment world. I asked him if he could offer Mass once a month for the conversion of this industry. He personally thought this was a wonderful idea but would need the permission of the bishop. He suggested that I set up a meeting with the diocesan bishop who at that time was Arthur Roche from the Leeds diocese.

Bishop Roche agreed to have a meeting with me at his residence in Leeds Cathedral. On the day of the meeting I was met by a secretary who led me into a study and told me that the bishop would be with me shortly.

When Bishop Arthur Roche arrived he greeted me with a warm smile and handshake as he invited me to take a seat. He then arranged for tea and niceties to be delivered. I told him the entire story of my night with the satanist although I omitted the bit about the Church being infiltrated and focused on the entertainment industry as this was my primary concern at that time. I told him of my demonic experiences and about the worrying reality of satanic influence and participation in this hugely influential medium. I talked about the overtly satanic and sexual videos as well as the culture of death within the music industry. He took in everything I had to say and asked some questions along the way. After talking with him for quite some time and having explained that I was someone who worked in this industry for many years and experienced what I had first hand, knew the power that these celebrities had over the youth of today and how much more powerful one Holy Mass said once a month would be. I then asked him if he would authorise one public Mass a month for the conversion of the music and entertainment industry. I said, “Can you imagine if only one major celebrity had a conversion as a result of this and what an impact that would have?” He sat there, looked at me intently, and said “I’m sorry, this is not something I can do.”

I was both shocked and saddened at his response given I didn’t spare any details about what I was told by a practising satanist. I left the bishop’s house and headed straight for the cathedral where I prayed and cried! I felt completely demoralised as I made my way home.

This Met Gala and the current scandal going on with pedophile and sodomite priests, bishops and cardinals in the Catholic Church confirms what I was told by a self confessed satanist over 30 years ago about Satan infiltrating the Church from within is indeed true. We are now seeing what I was told all of those years ago unfold before our very eyes in the most diabolical way, with countless clerical abuse cases being reported never before imagined. I have kept this secret in my heart for over 30 years and have only  told a handful of very close and trusted friends as well as some priests. I now feel it is important for everyone to know the truth about what’s really going on within the Catholic Church.

Every single Catholic needs to take up their Rosary beads and pray like never before because this battle is real, very real, and the Rosary is our weapon. We need to return to fasting and to making acts of reparation to The Sacred and Immaculate Hearts.

Please pray for the Lepanto Institute and all of the Catholic media outlets who are courageous enough to speak out against this demonic scourge within the Church, and pray especially for all of the holy bishops who are being persecuted because of their faithfulness. Please also pray for me.

May Almighty God bless and protect us and may the most Holy and Immaculate Virgin Mary wrap us under her mantle.

Marie Frances Toone

15th September 2018 the feast day of Our Lady of Sorrows

Share this:

German Paper Exposes Coccopalmerio, Francis 86ing Bishop Abuse Tribunal

Marco TosattiSeptember 28, 20180 Comments

• OnePeterFive

After the important investigation of Der Spiegel on the pope, entitled “Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness,” now another German daily, Herder Korrespondenz, which certainly not even the most frenzied Bergoglianist could condemn as conservative, is examining the authority of the Church, its questionable characters, and its ambiguities.

Benjamin Leven, a well known German theologian and editor, explains in an essay that, according to his Vatican sources, it was Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, one of the closest counselors of Pope Bergoglio, who promoted an attitude of indulgence at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith toward priests who were responsible for sexual abuse.

Thanks to the English translation of Maike Hickson, we are able to offer this report to our readers, which is definitely of interest, given both the source and the means of communication. According to several sources, Coccopalmerio interceded with the pope in favor of Don Mauro Inzoli, the priest of C.L. (Communion and Liberation) who had been condemned for sexual abuse but was then reinstated in his priestly ministry.

Coccopalmerio was president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts until April 2018. In 2010, he was named as a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). In 2015, Pope Francis named him as a member of a new arm of the CDF that was commissioned to examine the appeals of priests accused of abuse. According to the testimony of Archbishop Viganò, Coccopalmerio is a part of the pro-gay “current” in the Vatican.

The author of the essay in Herder Korrespondenz, Benjamin Leven, lives in Rome and has close contacts in the Vatican. His essay entitled “Francis and Abuse: The Papal Secret” discusses the problem of abuse and the role of the pope. Leven writes about the drug-fueled homosexual party that took place in the apartment of the palace of the CDF occupied by Msgr. Luigi Capozzi, Coccopalmerio’s secretary. Leven confirms the story that Capozzi obtained this apartment, “which was destined for another person,” thanks to the personal intervention of the pope. Leven adds that “the warnings which had been given were ignored” by the pope, since “the elevation of Capozzi to the role of bishop was being planned.”

Leven recalls that Coccopalmerio “generally spoke against using laicization as a punishment for a priest” because such a priest would be treated equivalently to “someone condemned to death.” This is a position the cardinal consistently maintained, and, in fact, writes Leven, “he regularly proposed light penalties” to the CDF for abusers. With this affirmation, Leven reveals that it may well have been Coccopalmerio who opposed Cardinal Müller’s hard line against sexual abuse, when the former CDF prefect revealed that there were “persons close to the pope” who thought Müller had a “lack of mercy” in dealing with those responsible for abuse. Only 20% of those found guilty were laicized, “but even this was too much for some of those holding influence with the pope [Papsteinflüsterer].”

Leven relates how, through the personal intervention of the pope, several priests who were working in the disciplinary section responsible for handling cases of abuse were dismissed from the CDF. “These positions still have not been filled.” And, in passing, we recall that these arbitrary dismissals, which Müller protested, gave the pope the occasion to publicly tell a lie in front of journalists: “He (one of the dismissed officials) did a great job but he was a little tired and he went back to his homeland to do the same work for his bishops.”

The ambiguous role of the pope on abuse does not stop here. Leven reveals that it was Pope Francis himself who intervened to stop the plan “to establish a permanent criminal tribunal for bishops” implicated in cases of sexual abuse. The CDF does not have jurisdiction over bishops: “here, the pope in person is the judge.” According to Leven, the pope abandoned the plan of having a tribunal for bishops. Leven concludes that “thus, there seems to be here an ambivalent image: the pope addresses the problem, has the power to intervene, and he meets with victims of abuse. But at the same time he turns a blind eye to individual cases and shows himself impermeable to the advice being given to him.”

In another part of the essay, Leven writes that his Vatican sources have told him that the testimony of Viganò is true but that also “in reality things are even worse.” There are many people in the Vatican who do not like its current state of vice, and if somebody decided to speak, “not a stone upon a stone would remain standing.” The essay concluded with a dramatic question: “Will the Catholic hierarchy have the strength to purify itself?”

Editor’s note: A version of this article originally appeared in Italian at Marco Tosatti’s blog. Translated for 1P5 by Giuseppe Pellegrino. 

REPRINTED BY VATICAN NEWSLETTER OF ROBERT MOYNYHAN

— Overall, active U.S. bishops average 65 years of age, ranging in age from 45 to 80.

— On average, bishops were ordained at age 26, spent a quarter-century as a priest, and were elevated to the rank of bishop at age 52. They have served as bishop an average of 14 years.

— The bishops are less diverse than the overall Catholic population of the United States, but their distribution almost exactly matches that of the Catholic population over 60 years of age; 88% white, 9% Hispanic/Latino, and 3% African American.

— Although bishops overall are most likely to have received their seminary education in North America, archbishops are more likely than diocesan bishops or auxiliaries to have received their seminary education in Rome; 44% of archbishops studied in Rome, vs. 21% of diocesan bishops and 14% of auxiliary bishops.

— Eighty-five percent of the active bishops were consecrated during the pontificate of John Paul II.

— Sixty-nine percent of their first episcopal appointments are as auxiliary bishops, 305 were first appointed diocesan bishop, and two archbishops were elevated to the rank of archbishop upon their first appointment.

— Only nine active bishops have had more than three appointments as bishop, and eight of these involved promotion from coadjutor to bishop or archbishop as their fourth move.

– Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington is the only one to have had four distinct episcopal appointments. Auxiliary Bishop of New York, Bishop of Metuchen, Archbishop of Newark and Archbishop of Washington.