More swamps to drain apparently: Claims of sex orgies, prostitution and porn videos shake Catholic Church in Italy http://religionnews.com/2017/03/09/...d-porn-videos-shake-catholic-church-in-italy/
This would be amusing if it weren't so tragic. Cardinal Nichols sends 'our' whole-hearted support and thanks. I suppose that includes me! Cardinal Vincent Nichols, the Archbishop of Westminster, has sent a letter of congratulations to Pope Francis on the fourth anniversary of his election as Pope, thanking him for his “steadfast” defence of Church teaching. Cardinal Nichols, president of the bishops’ conference, said he was writing on behalf of Catholics in England and Wales. The cardinal wrote: “We thank God that the Holy Spirit guided the Church in the process of your election and that the same Holy Spirit guides and supports you day by day. We thank God for the richness of the gifts and fruits of the Holy Spirit, which are the hallmarks of your ministry: joy and peace, patience and kindness, faithfulness, wisdom and mercy. “Holy Father, we thank you for the steadfast way in which you uphold the teachings of Christ and the Church, presenting them in deed and in word with a freshness and directness, which draws the attention of the world. We pray that God will give you strength and courage to continue this great ministry from which we all draw such encouragement. “I assure you, Holy Father, of the love, the esteem and the whole-hearted support of us all. “Please, Holy Father, give us your blessing as we give you our love.” http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/new...cis-for-steadfast-defence-of-church-teaching/
At a Vatican conference, "you would think that man and bacteria have equal moral status." So said Steven Mosher, a Catholic and the head of the Population Research Institute, who attended a Vatican conference with speakers advocating population control. One more nail in the Vatican's coffin? From Lifesite news: March 10, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – The Vatican hosting population control advocates at a conference is "such a departure from the solid, orthodox teaching [of] the two previous popes," a pro-life leader who has spent decades fighting the "myth" of overpopulation told LifeSiteNews. Steve Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute, told LifeSiteNews that the Pontifical Academy of Sciences shouldn't be surprised that speakers at its Biological Extinction conference, which included the pro-abortion "father" of the population control movement and supporters of contraception, espoused anti-Catholic views. "This is what you get if you invite secular humanists to speak at a Catholic conference," said Mosher. "You get a secular humanist perspective, which is to say, if you think that human beings – men – are nothing but animals, then it’s perfectly alright to thin the herd." This is done "on the pretense that there’s not enough in the way of resources to support the existing herd." And "they propagate their myth of overpopulation," said Mosher. During one part of the conference, the Population Council's John Bongaarts' claimed that there is a worldwide "unmet need" for contraception. "You have these numbers based on surveys where you go into countries and you ask women, ‘Have you had a child in the last two years?’" Mosher explained. "And if they say yes, then you ask them a second question: ‘Are you using a modern method of contraception?’ By which they mean an abortifacient pill, an IUD, condoms, Depo Provera, or other methods. And if they say no, then they have an ‘unmet need for contraception.’" Such surveys "assume that because [women have] had a baby in the last two years and because they’re not using a modern method of contraception, that they need contraception," said Mosher. They "are designed to produce pre-determined outcomes." Vatican bishop 'fails to understand why God created the Earth and human beings in the first place' During a discussion portion of the conference, Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo said "we don't know exactly" what the Church teaches about procreation, and "education" will help women have one or two children instead of "seven." Sorondo is the Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Sorondo "has spent his adult life – most of his adult life – in a country, Argentina, where the politicians for the last century have repeatedly, periodically destroyed the economy," said Mosher. They've done this "by periodically inflating the currency and destroying the middle class and the middle class savings and the middle class assets. So he has no idea how an economy should be run. He has no idea that a thriving, free market economy needs people. And that ... people are the ultimate resource – the one resource you cannot do without." Mosher continued, "For anybody who is a bishop in the Catholic Church – God help us all – who doesn’t understand the first commandment given our first parents to be fruitful and multiply, has never been rescinded and instead argues for people not to be generous in having children I think fails to understand why God created the Earth and human beings in the first place." "Silence implies assent," he said. "For him to hear contraceptives praised and promoted and not immediately contradict that position by stating what the position of the Church is makes him complicit in the misinformation that follows." Mosher said Sorondo was perhaps trying to be polite to his pro-contraception and pro-abortion guests. "Maybe he should’ve invited different guests [who don’t] contradict Church teaching," Mosher suggested. "Or maybe it was cowardice, that he wasn’t prepared to speak what the Church’s teaching was" to a hostile audience. "Whatever the motive, I think it sends exactly the wrong message." 'Such a rupture from the consistent teaching of the Church' This conference "takes us very far away from the views of both Pope John Paul II and the views of Pope Benedict," said Mosher. "Pope John Paul II was very clear in his condemnation in Evangelium Vitae of artificial methods of contraception. He reaffirmed and underlined the importance of Humanae Vitae." The conference missed the most crucial element of the Catholic view on environmentalism, Mosher said. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI "said that we must never forget that man is at the center of the environment, and if we’re protecting the environment we must protect men," said Mosher. "Where in that formulation can you justify deliberately frustrating the will of God to bring another soul into existence between a man and a woman who are united in marriage? Where in that formulation can you have people come forward and argue that the population of the Earth should be rapidly reduced? I find it such a departure from the solid, orthodox teaching from the two previous popes." The ideas expressed at this conference were "such a rupture from the consistent teaching of the Church over the centuries of man as a pinnacle of creation," said Mosher. Listening to them, "you would think that man and bacteria have equal moral status." "You hear these things at Stanford University, where I was and where I taught human biology for a time. You hear them at Berkeley, you hear them at Harvard, you hear them at Yale. You do not expect to hear them in the Vatican at a conference convened by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences," he said. Mosher called it "disturbing" that one might not be able to "differentiate" between the presentations at the Biological Extinction conference and "a seminar at Stanford." "The light show on St. Peter’s façade was revolting enough, but to allow people who believe in this false gospel of radical environmentalism and radical population control [to] express … these ideas without being contradicted, without any hint of dispute," is horrifying, said Mosher. "To have the Vatican itself provide a forum to propagate these falsehoods, it’s just ... I’m rarely lost for words, but words fail me."
The Last word to the article he couldn't come up with is demonic. This is a demonic conference supported by our pope. Shame!
Pondering this I am reminded of Daniel who that tells us that times and laws would be changed and that His Holy People would be oppressed and delivered into his hands for a time. I can't believe that I am equating that piece of scripture to that of our Vatican and leadership and I pray that I am wrong.
If you know italian this is a really good recent interview from Ettore Tedeschi, appointed by BXVI as head of the Vatican Bank or IOR (2009-2012). He was ousted by the board because he fought for transparency and there was tremendous resistance, some reports say. http://www.intelligonews.it/le-inte...u-complotto-obama-ratzinger-quello-che-so-io/
Chris Ferrara makes some good points as usual.... Exposing the Sham of “Discernment” In his address to the participants in a course on the “internal forum” at the Vatican, Pope Bergoglio promoted the novelty in moral theology which he has attempted to introduce into the life of the Church via the already infamous Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia (AL): “discernment.” What exactly is this “discernment”? Quite simply, it is a code word for the application of situation ethics in the confessional in the case of public adulterers living in “second marriages” so that they can receive Holy Communion without having to cease their adulterous relations. In other words, discernment is a sham. If that claim seems excessive, consider Pope Bergoglio’s own explanation of his novelty during the linked address: “Discernment enables one to distinguish always, to not confuse, and to never ‘paint everyone with the same brush.’ Discernment educates the sight and the heart, making possible that delicacy of spirit which is so necessary before one who opens the sanctuary of his conscience to receive light, peace and mercy. “Discernment is also necessary because, one who approaches the Confessional, can come from the most disparate situations; he can also have spiritual disturbances, whose nature must be subjected to careful discernment, taking into account all the existential, ecclesial, natural and supernatural circumstances.” That this advice to confessors is unworkable and even immoral nonsense should be apparent on a moment’s reflection. Suppose, for example, penitents in Diocese X, who feel the guilt of adultery because they have put away their true spouses and purported to marry another, come to confess their sins to a local parish priest. Are we seriously expected to believe that in each and every such case the priest is required to conduct an examination of “all the existential, ecclesial, natural and supernatural circumstances” surrounding each penitent’s decision to enter into and remain in an adulterous union? Even if such a brutally intrusive examination of every anonymous penitent confessing adultery were feasible in actual parish life — and it clearly isn’t — what would be the point of the exercise? Are we also expected to believe that the priest conducting these inquisitions of each penitent will render an on-the-spot verdict of “not guilty” of mortal sin based on various “disparate situations” — i.e., that the priest will practice some sort of situation ethics? No priest has any such authority. The subjective culpability of each soul is known only to God, and that judgment belongs to Him alone, not to a priest venturing his personal guess as to culpability. And whatever happened to “who am I to judge”? Indeed, who is the priest, confronted with the confession of the objective sin of adultery, to judge the subjective state of the penitent’s soul based on certain external data? (Padre Pio reputedly had the gift of reading souls, but even he would not have absolved an objective adulterer. His gift, rather, was directed to detecting sin, not excusing it.) In his important commentary on “Five Serious Problems with Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia,” the moral theologian E. Christian Brugger focuses on the perniciousness of this aspect of “discernment.” He writes: “But if we shouldn’t — and indeed can’t — render a judgment of condemnation on another person’s state of soul, then we shouldn’t and can’t render a judgment of acquittal either. But chapter 8 implies that pastors can have adequate certitude that a person lacks subjective culpability and so can free them to participate in the sacraments. No. 299 even refers to the divorced and civilly remarried as ‘living members’ of the Church. The common understanding of a ‘living’ member is a baptized person in grace. “But how can a priest judge that such people are in grace without judging? Pope Francis insists, and rightly so, that we mustn’t judge. But judgment is not only about condemning; it also means acquitting. The presumption here, and throughout the chapter, is that pastors can in fact render a judgment of acquittal on consciences so the people in irregular unions can move forward. “But if we cannot and should not judge the souls of others, then we can neither condemn them by saying they are certainly guilty of mortal sin, nor can we acquit them saying they are not subjectively culpable for choosing grave matter. We cannot judge.” What, then, should a priest do? He should do what priests have always done in the confessional — at least before Pope Bergoglio arrived to insist on his novelty of “discernment”: treat the objective sin and leave the judgment of subjective guilt to God. Brugger, who teaches moral theology to future priests, explains thus: “If pastors can’t judge souls, what are they to do? They should accept a person’s assessment of his own soul. If pastors pick up indications of mitigated culpability, they should gently help the person to see these factors, then charitably inform him about Jesus’s fuller teaching on marriage (i.e., they should engage in conscience formation)… “[T]he pastor should then find out if the person is resolved to live according to Jesus’ teaching as understood by the Catholic Church; if the person says ‘no’, or ‘I can’t’, the pastor says, ‘Well, I cannot tell you whether you are in serious sin by refusing to accept the Church’s teaching, for I cannot judge your soul. But even if you are truly in good faith, I cannot judge that you may rightly receive the Holy Eucharist, because I cannot know that, and my telling you that might well encourage you to rationalize ongoing mortal sin and result in your eternal damnation.’” Then again, as noted above, in any event the exhaustive cross-examination of penitents that “discernment” would seem to require will not happen because it is unfeasible and indeed inappropriately invasive of the privacy of someone who relies upon anonymity and circumspection in coming before the priest to confess his guilt. And if the penitent did not think he was guilty of adultery in the first place, he would not be in the confessional to unburden his adulterous “second marriage.” The implications, therefore, are staggering: “discernment” is a mere verbal disguise for what is really a disastrous permission to confessors to assist people objectively guilty of adultery in rationalizing their mortal sin so that they can be “absolved” and allowed to receive Holy Communion while continuing to commit adultery. Never, absolutely never, has a Pope lent his name to such a radical deviation from the Church’s constant teaching and intrinsically related practice. The sham of “discernment” clearly pertains to the situation of which Sister Lucia warned Cardinal Caffarra: “[T]he final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family.” Our Lady of Fatima, come to the aid of Your embattled Church!http://www.fatimaperspectives.com/fe/perspective971.asp
The Church will not fall but the Vatican can and so can the city of Rome if it persists and leads many to error. One only needs to take a glimpse to the Bible to see that God does not destroy the people of Israel, or his Church, but He does not shy away from destroying its cities, it's temples or its territory whenever they fall into idolatry, and He does it for the good of His own elected and the conversion of many.
Oops, Pope Francis out of touch with reality once again.... https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/...ration-crisis-greatest-tragedy-since-ww2.-but
It is clear to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear in the spiritual realm what the biggest crisis has been since WW2 and the reason why the world is in such a mess and dominated by evil. The fact that he cannot or refuses to acknowledge abortion as the greatest tragedy is indeed startling. But then Pope Francis has been critical of the Church's obsession with abortion, contraception and gay marriage.
But God cannot leave the crime unpunished: from the ground on which it has been spilt, the blood of the one murdered demands that God should render justice (cf. Gen 37:26; Is 26:21; Ez 24:7-8). From this text the Church has taken the name of the "sins which cry to God for justice", and, first among them, she has included wilful murder. For the Jewish people, as for many peoples of antiquity, blood is the source of life. Indeed "the blood is the life" (Dt 12:23), and life, especially human life, belongs only to God: for this reason whoever attacks human life, in some way attacks God himself. John Paul II Evangelium Vitae
I think the Vatican these days is willing to turn a blind eye to the "lesser evil" of abortion and contraception as long as you achieve the "greater good" of "saving the planet". The end justify the means. Allow the killing of a few million babies but achieve "sustainable development", whatever that means. It is part of the progressive/marxist worldview. Christians call it "Diabolical disorientation".
Institutionalized murder factories for children. Could there be anything more horrific? Our love has grown cold.
