Is Pope Francis Being Deliberately Provocative?

Pope FrancissmilesIt is hard to escape the conclusion that Pope Francis would like to turn the whole Catholic Church into the pastoral equivalent of the decadent and dying Archdiocese of Buenos Aires, where Catholics — as in all of South America — are defecting to Protestant sects, there are no vocations, and the former Archbishop Bergoglio “authorized ‘curas villeros,’ the priests sent to the peripheries, to give communion to all, although four fifths of the couples were not even married.”

Antonio Socci, who has gone from being a fervent supporter of Pope Francis to one of his leading critics as the evidence of his disastrous pontificate mounts, put the matter this way: “For decades the South American Church has been falling into ruin, its crisis the greatest on the planet: the latest data, just published by the Pew Center, confirming the precipitous drop of membership in the Catholic Church in Latin America.  Now that same recipe for failure is being applied to the whole Church.  And so we soon we will see the same ruins.  The Bergoglio Effect.”

One sign of the spreading decadence provoked by the “Bergoglio Effect” is the Pope’s outrageous personal invitation to Patti Smith, the so-called Godmother of Punk Rock, to perform at this year’s Vatican “Christmas concert.”

Smith, a notoriously pro-abortion “rock star,” is infamous for the “lyric” in her first album, which begins with the lines: “Jesus died for somebody’s sins/but not mine.”  Why on earth did Francis choose this woman to perform at a Vatican concert supposedly in celebration precisely of the birth of the Redeemer? The phrase “diabolical disorientation” comes immediately to mind.

Think Patti Smith has changed her tune? Not at all. As she recently told the press: “Anyone who would confine me to a line from 20 years ago is a fool…. I was 20 and I wanted to make my own mistakes. And I didn’t want anyone dying for me. I stand behind that 20-year-old girl, but I have evolved. I’ll sing to my enemy! I don’t like being pinned down and I’ll say what the f–k I want — especially at my age.”

This is the foul-mouthed, arrogant low-life Pope Francis personally invited to his “Christmas concert.” Now age 67, Smith views the invitation as “I’ll sing to my enemy,” meaning the Church or Christ Himself, although she declares “I like Pope Francis and I’m happy to sing for him.”

Loved by the world — even by a pro-abortion punk rocker — but criticized by a growing number of alarmed members of his own flock. Such is the pontificate of Pope Francis. Even Sandro Magister, not known for extremes, has had enough“Francis’ popularity is more conspicuous outside the Church, even if it isn’t eliciting waves of conversions…. The Christianity from the mouth of Bergoglio is no longer provocative, does not create problems as in the past, it can be treated with courtesy, superiority and detachment.  Christianity matters less.”

Quite simply, there has never been a Pope like this.  The crisis predicted in that part of the Third Secret we have yet to see has clearly entered a new, and perhaps its final phase. Our Lady of Fatima, intercede for us!   Source

Comments invited…

72 responses

  1. “The crisis predicted in that part of the Third Secret we have yet to see has clearly entered a new, and perhaps its final phase.”
    This pope has been putting the finishing touches to the work begun by Vatican II. I don’t see what else is left to do – the Church has been mocked, ridiculed, her divine origin denied, and her mission reduced to social service and saving the planet. The division between those who know there was a Church before Vatican II and those who are clueless is becoming more visible.

    For Pope Francis to invite the Patti Smith to perform at the Vatican concert is, to give scandal. What message is he giving to the youth? What is he doing to Catholic parents who are struggling as it is, to raise their children in the Faith?

    • Jobstears,

      Well said. Given that Pope Francis has castigated “traditional/rigid/intolerant/judgmental” Catholics and that without any sign of his famous “mercy” I can’t help but wonder what on earth he hopes to gain by publishing, in stark contrast, his obvious approval of this blasphemous, foul mouthed punk rocker. As you say, how is this supposed to help beleaguered Catholic parents trying to raise their children in the Faith? It’s ironic that home-educators who opted out of the school system to protect their children from secular influences there, now have to protect them from the pope himself. Goodness, you just couldn’t make this stuff up.

      I doubt if any of the usual suspects among the “Francis Fans” in the Scottish Division will dare to come on here and defend his shocking invitation, but let’s see. One never knows, one really doesn’t…

      • Mr. John Vennari famously said:

        “I would never allow Pope Francis to teach religion to my children.”

        Something that bears pondering is this – Out of all the immoral Popes we have had in history, I don’t think any of them dared to tamper with doctrine, like we have today. Truly a diabolical disorientation and a most unprecedented crisis.

        The Pope should be calling people like Patti Smith to repentance, not giving her the red carpet and at the Vatican of all places!

        Truly, we must pray.

        • DOTF,

          It’s quite a thought that a Catholic, like John Vennari, knowledgeable in the Faith and well versed in the roots of the current crisis in the Church, wouldn’t let the Pope teach religion to his (lovely – I’ve met them) children. Says it all, really.

          Also, you make an important distinction between immoral living popes of the past and what is happening right now, in the pontificate of Pope Francis. It’s a distinction that papolatrists just cannot see. I’ve had this conversation so often when they insist there’s nothing to worry about, we’ve had “bad popes” before. I’ve pointed out that being a “bad pope” because there’s some serious sin of immorality puts that “bad pope” into the same category as a “bad teacher/doctor/whatever…” – they are perhaps a tad hypocritical in the eyes of those who know about their sin, but, unless they are publicly preaching that there IS no sin, they may not been quite as “bad” as painted.

          What is a truly bad pope, teacher etc. is someone who preaches and teaches error. A bad Maths teacher is not a teacher who is cohabiting – if she is teaching her subject faithfully and correctly then she remains a GOOD teacher but is objectively, certainly, an immoral person. Try getting the diocesan Catholic in the pew to see the difference. It’s very hard work indeed.

  2. Editor,

    “It’s ironic that home-educators who opted out of the school system to protect their children from secular influences there, now have to protect them from the pope” SO True!

    I wonder how the Michael Voris followers are going to white-wash this latest antic! If it weren’t a matter of souls being lost, their excuses for the pope would be funny! At least at the time of the Borgia popes, Catholics had Catholic sense, the same can’t be said of them today!

  3. Well, if Austen Ivereigh’s revelations about the conclave that elected Pope Francis are proven to be true, then it could be that his election to the Papacy is nullified by reason of canonical irregularities. I’m not seeing the general response to Ivereigh’s claims concerning the secret workings of Cardinals Cormac Murphy-O’Connor and Walter Kasper (“Team Bergoglio”) that I thought we might see across the Internet, but its a very serious matter and it needs to be investigated without delay. Or, if any Cardinal of the Church is aware of forbidden canvassing, punishable by Latae Sententiae excommunication for those involved, then they need to come forward for the good of the Church. Censures relating to those who break the seal of secrecy on the conclave itself could not be applied in the case of a prelate exposing devious workings that are damaging the Church. So if there’s truth in Ivereigh’s claim and others know about it, they are obliged before God to state clearly what went on.

    As for Pope Francis himself, assuming he is the valid Pope, as we must believe until the Church declares otherwise, it is clear that he has set his sights on a full application of the hidden time bombs of Vatican II to the detriment of the Faith handed down, completely the opposite of what his duty as Supreme Pontiff requires of him. He is loved by the world because he is of the world. Yes, his Papacy is the greatest disaster the Church has ever known, and that’s just a statement of fact. As to his culpability, that again is for a Papal successor to weigh in the future. We have to assume good will in him, despite appearances to the contrary, and pray hard for him, hoping that he knows not what he does! God have mercy on this Pope and on the flock who are afflicted by him. Our Lady of Fatima, pray for him and for us.

    • If Francis is an invalid Pope, due to these dark and murky goings on in the conclave through the rumoured canvassing etc, and if Benedict XVI was forced out, as I believe he was, though I can’t prove it, by the enemies of the Church, would that mean Francis’s successor would be the lawful successor of Benedict XVI, and that Francis’s unfortunate reign could be understood as an interregnum with Francis as an impostor, even if the hierarchy says he was lawfully Pope and that the next Pope is Francis’s successor?

      • I hasten to add that I believe Francis is a valid Pope, as although I believe something fishy went on in Benedict’s abdication and Francis’s election, I can’t prove it, the Church has not declared anything, and thus what I say is purely conjecture.

      • CC,

        I think it’s important that we all understand fully and finally that Benedict XVI was NOT overtly forced to relinquish the Papacy. He stated himself that he was “retiring” of his own free will. Of course this “retirement” of Benedict was a complete innovation of his own invention, one which fulfilled a long-desired goal of the Modernists for the undermining par excellence of the Papal office. Benedict handed them this dream development without scruple. Popes do not “retire”!

        That Benedict was under pressure from the more extreme liberals in the Church is indisputable; they made this moderate liberal Pope’s life hell on earth. But it was Benedict who ultimately chose to come down from the Cross of his own free will.

        The conclave that followed was a valid conclave and, before Ivereigh’s claim, elected what we all believed to be a valid Pope. Should that election be declared been null and void due to serious canonical irregularities, then the Cardinals would have to meet again in conclave to elect a valid successor to Benedict. Francis would be considered at that point to be an anti-Pope. But this is an issue for the Church’s authorities to weigh, assuming that a significant number of prelates are aware of a conspiracy to elect Francis and are prepared to come forward with what they know. If this doesn’t happen, then we must assume that Ivereigh’s claim is baseless in fact.

  4. I had heard about this little corker a few days ago, but I thought our dear Ed would put it up on the blog. I’ll say the same thing (sans expletives) what I said then: this Pope is a living disaster zone. His off-the-cuff misguided, garbled, largely heretical remarks are damaging my faith, and the faith of countless others. He is causing the cancer of a relativism and indifferentism to spread in a way that is previously unknown. Not only does he deny doctrine, by saying atheists can be saved, not to mention his comments on ‘bead counters’, young people and the TLM, not to bother attending Mass, baptising aliens etc. I could go on. By inviting this venomous witch, with her obvious hatred and mockery for Our Divine Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, he is desecrating, blaspheming and scandalising the Holy Temple of God. How can he invite such a woman, with full knowledge of her views on abortion and Christ’s propitiatory sacrifice? Is he trying to appeal to the young? I’m 20, and this holds no appeal- I’d rather listen to the Sistine Chapel Choir chanting the Missa de Angelis, as would many others. Francis is an absolute thundering disgrace of a Pope. The Catholic Church will become the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires writ large. No one can take this Pope seriously, and he is clearly operating as a puppet of the ringmasters of the Vatican II circus, the Communists, Freemasons, Modernists and the Jews, the eternal enemies of the Church. Who else could it be? Such actions would grieve and wound the hearts of all previous Popes, this Pope does not possess the true Catholic spirit.

    “St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in the day of battle; be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do Thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the power of God, cast into Hell, Satan and all the other evil spirits, who wander throughout the world, seeking the ruin of souls. Amen”.

    Pray, pray and pray…and when you’ve done that….pray again!!!

    • Catholic Convert,

      “His off-the-cuff misguided, garbled, largely heretical remarks are damaging my faith, and the faith of countless others”

      I really urge you not to let anything affect your faith. Faith should not be disturbed by anything on this earth. Saints like St Paul have us well warned about “principalities and powers” trying to make us lose our faith and Our Lady has let us know that the crisis in the Church “begins at the top” (Cardinal Ciappi gave that away as part of the undisclosed Third Secret). There is really no need for our faith to be disturbed. If anything, as I’ve read on this blog countless times, this crisis should strengthen our faith.

      Only one other thing; I don’t like “the Jews” en masse being lumped in with Communists, Freemasons and Modernists. I know some Jews personally and they are not “enemies of the Church” – I remember one Jewish friend being riveted to the TV screen during the visit of Pope John Paul II to the UK and praising him highly. IMHO it’s sufficient to say Freemasons because that covers all the enemies of the Church, including any Jewish enemies. I think it’s unjust to brand every Jew.

      I do love your closing line!

      • Michaela,

        I appreciate the comments of your first paragraph, and I can tell you that it is Our Most Blessed Lady that has kept me in the fold as it were. The prophecies at Fatima are proof that the Catholic Church is the True Church, and that these terrible times were foretold, and that good people chose to do nothing.

        However, whenever I ‘lump’ Jews in with Masons, Communists and Modernists, I mean Jewish leaders, viz. rabbis, the Anti-Defamation League, B’nai Brith, the World Jewish Congress et al, who go around peddling the erroneous doctrines, courting the Pope and the hierarchy and coaxing them into the ecumenical and interreligious unity movement. I do believe that Judaism is inimical to our Faith, and that it is one of Catholicism’s main enemies, as it says in 1 John 2:22:

        ‘Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son’.

        The Jews are called to repent and be changed, and their entire faith is built around hatred of Our Lord and Our Dear Lady. Catholics should always commit themselves to convert Jews.

        • CC,

          There is much youthful exuberance in your comments, but you are off the mark a little.

          Fr. Nicholas Gruner made a Fatima DVD programme a few years ago in which a number of leading figures were interviewed. To the surprise of many, one of the interviewees was a Jewish Rabbi who lamented the liberal changes in the Catholic Church after Vatican II. He also spoke very favourably about the Message of Fatima.

          In addition to this, I can state that a number of Jews over the past 15 years or so, Rabbis amongst them, have spoken up in defence of Pope Pius XII. Indeed, if you read the testimonies of the world’s leading Jews upon the death of Pius XII in 1958, you will see how grateful the Jews were to Pius and how they genuinely respected him and the Church for the kindness they and their families and friends received during the Nazi persecution.

          Rome’s own wartime Chief Rabbi, Israel Zolli, was so touched by the charity of Pius XII for his people that he converted to the Catholic Faith and took Eugenio as his Christian name in honour of the Pope.

          So, no, not all Rabbis and Jewish leaders are wilfully hostile to the Church.

          We should not forget that Muslims also reject Christ Our Lord as their Divine Redeemer, as do Hindus, Buddhists and others. These are every bit as obliged as the Jews to accept the Son of God for their salvation. That few of them do is tragic indeed, but it is not automatically a sign that they act from malice.

          The ones who cause Our Lord the greatest suffering are those of His own House who crucify Him daily by their mortal sins. Yes, the Jews, Muslims, etc., do Him injustice by their continued blindness, but Christian heretics and sinners do Him equal violence by their ingratitude. We have to bear this in mind when speaking of the unbaptised and others outside the Church.

          Yes, there are certain Jewish groups that are very hostile to Catholicism. But there are also Muslim enemies, Protestant enemies, atheistic enemies and many, many in-house enemies of the true Faith. We have to hope and pray for the conversion of all of these.

          • Athanasius,

            Great post – many thanks for it … However…

            I hope you’re not counting the Orange Order among the enemies of the Church? According to SCO columnist Kevin McKenna they’re our best friends, more or less! AND he exhorts “the Church” (in Scotland) to accept the invitation to participate in their celebrations in 2015, so watch out for a bishop or two, if not eight in next year’s Orange marches 😀
            Ignore the grin, I’m being deadly serious 😀 Ignore that one, too… !

            • Editor,

              Maybe we’ll be treated to another of those orange balloon masses after the example of Cardinal Schönborn!!!

              • Yes, Athanasius, with Kevin McKenna as the very definitely extraordinary minister of something or other. That is, if he makes it there at all – according to him, God understands if he’s had one too many (drinks, not chips with his haggis, numpty!) and doesn’t manage to fulfil his Sunday obligation – not that he sees it as an obligation, but you’ll get my drift.

                Well, I hope somebody gets my drift… I’m beginning to ramble now. Say nothing.

  5. Yes, this pope is a real shocker. Perhaps we should pray that Pope Benedict speak out. He has a duty to do so because I’m sure he knows exactly what’s going on.

    • Helen

      I still remember that lightening bolt striking the dome of St. Peter’s on the day Benedict announced his “resignation”!

    • Helen,

      If only Pope Benedict WOULD speak out – WOW! Whether or not he speaks out…

      He must surely be thinking something along the lines of… “On my election, I asked for prayers that I would not flee for fear of the wolves, and now.. well… Have I allowed one of the wolves to take my place?”

  6. I wouldn’t regard “every Jew” as an enemy of the Church, however for those who haven’t lived in Los Angeles and worked in Beverly Hills/Hollywood for 25 years as I have, saying that “not every Jew” is an enemy of the Church (on one level or another) is like saying that “not every atheist” is an enemy of religion.

    • DaleThorn,

      Oooooh! Lived in Los Angeles? Worked in Beverly Hills/Hollywood? Who do we have here, lurking under the username DaleThorn? Tom Cruise? Swoon 😀

      I refer you to Athanasius’ excellent response to Catholic Convert on the subject of the Jews at 10.09 pm. I would add only the fact that, believe it or not, we’ve had the occasional atheist on this blog (I’m thinking of one in particular) who have expressed apparently genuine interest and wish to be convinced of the truths of the Faith. Their problem is, they can’t grasp the fact that, in the very nature of things, the kind of “proof” that they demand is not available in the study of religion – we’re never going to be able to say “Here, dear atheist, this is God – say ‘hello'”

      There have been, remember, astonishing stories of the conversion of atheists, not least the conversions at Fatima on the day of the miracle of the sun.

      So, let’s be (cough) inclusive and (cough) embrace equality…. in the sense St Paul meant when he wrote:”in Christ there is no male or female, no Jew or Gentile… for all are one in Christ.” In other words, God’s grace is available to all – you know that, I know that, what are we arguing about? 😀

  7. 109th anniversary of Msgr. Lefebvre’s birth. His “A Letter to Confused Catholics”, would, to-day, find Catholics even more confused than in when he wrote the book. What would he have to say, now?

    • Sixupman,

      For what it’s worth, my own opinion is that Archbishop Lefebvre would be buying a one way ticket to the Vatican and demanding daily conversations with “Holy Father Francis” until he saw the error of his ways.

      • If Archbishop Lefebvre were alive at 109 to witness the reign of Pope Francis, he wouldn’t make it to 110!!

  8. Athanasius, would you, (if you can find the time!), kindly enlarge on your most interesting post at 3.26pm yesterday, about Austen Ivereigh’s ‘revelations’ re the conclave that elected Pope Francis.
    I’ve previously heard nothing good about the former, and note that he believes that ‘far from damaging the Church, Francis is restoring it’.

    So what is one to make of his setting this particular hare running?

    • Oops! I’ve just noticed more about this on the General Discussion thread, so I’ll follow up the links there.

  9. Here is an extract from Pope Francis’ address to Turkish authorities during his three-day visit to that country:

    “Fanaticism and fundamentalism, as well as irrational fears which foster misunderstanding and discrimination,” the Pope said, “need to be countered by the solidarity of all believers,” which must rest on three pillars: “respect for human life and for religious freedom,” “commitment to ensuring what each person requires for a dignified life,” and “care for the natural environment.”

    Note the “all believers” is spoken of in a generic sense. The Pope spoke of God in this same sense without mentioning Our Lord, whose Vicar on earth he is. There is absolutely nothing in this address which is the least offensive to Our Lord’s enemies. Quite the opposite, in fact. By speaking of care for the environment, His Holiness shows himself to be more concerned with the natural than the supernatural.

    This is confirmed in the next paragraph of the report, where we read: “…It is essential, he stressed, that all citizens, Muslim, Jewish and Christian, respect each other’s duties and rights. “Freedom of religion and freedom of expression, when truly guaranteed to each person,” he explained, “will help friendship to flourish and thus become an eloquent sign of peace.”

    Francis’ assertion is, of course, pure heresy, most admirably condemned by Pope Pius IX in his Encyclical Quanta Cura of 1864, who wrote: “…they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our predecessor, Gregory XVI, an insanity, viz., that “liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed in every rightly constituted society”…But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching liberty of perdition…”

    How much longer, O Lord!

  10. Talking of Francis being provocative just have a little look at this wheeze from Istanbul, courtesy of Beelzebub’s Broadcasting Corporation (alias BBC):

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30257506

    Isn’t it lovely Pope Francis cuddling up to Muslims to the Muslims, and standing in ‘silent adoration’ in one of their most notable Satanic temples, the Blue Mosque. Which God, or god (s) is he ‘adoring’? Is it the Holy and Blessed Trinity, or an assorted false god such as allah, or even the ‘god’ which Francis made up when he said ‘I don’t believe in a Catholic God, just god’. I’m speechless…and like Ed, that’s not something I can say often!! I jest of course. Ed is known for being shy and retiring.

    Why is Francis not utilising this visit to speak up for the beleaguered members of the Catholic, Orthodox and Armenian Churches in Turkey? The Orthodox Church is down to around 10,000 members, mostly elderly, from around 150,000 in the 1950s. The Armenian Apostolic Church is only doing marginally better, with around 50,000 members. There are around 30,000 Catholics in Turkey, and the Vicar Apostolic, Msgr. Luigi Padovese was beheaded by his deranged and fanatical chauffeur in 2010.

    At my University, in the module ‘government and politics of Europe’, most of the class want Turkey to join the EU. I said, how can you say this when Christians are being attacked, churches desecrated, the refusal to recognise the Orthodox Patriarch, refusing to return historical Churches to the denominations, refusal to recognise the Armenian Genocide in which 600,000-1.5 million were killed, and no apology for the 1955 Istanbul Pogrom. Thousands of homes, shops, churches, businesses, cemeteries were attacked or destroyed, the Patriarchal cemetery was desecrated, and tens of thousands left the country and men and Priests were dragged from their beds and forcibly circumcised. The government of Adnan Menderes instigated the pogrom in ‘retaliation’ for supposed Greek extremists bombing the Turkish Consulate in Thessalonica over the Cyprus issue, which happened to be Ataturk’s place of birth. In reality it was a Turkish extremist who was the perpetrator.

  11. Yes, he is being deliberately provocative. The evidence can be found on page 117 of his book On Heaven and Earth, where Francis, by dismissing the harmful nature of same-sex sexual relationships that he describes as “private”, do not include children, and are not called marriage, and thus, according to Francis, do not affect society, dismisses also the fact that man is not an end in himself, nor is man a means to an end; man was created to live in Loving relationship, in communion with God, The Communion of Perfect Love, that Is The Blessed Trinity, Who Willed us worthy of Redemption.

    The election of Francis is not valid because prior to being elected pope, Francis supported same-sex sexual unions. One cannot support same-sex sexual unions and remain in communion with Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

    • Annedanielson,

      I agree entirely with your comments about Pope Francis’ strange views on same-sex unions. However, I would caution that his errors do not invalidate his Papacy. It is a great mistake to believe that subordinates in the Church have the power from Our Lord to depose a Pope, or to decide by their own lights that a particular Pope was never validly elected. These matters are for a future Pope to decide.

      If there was something untoward about Francis’ election, I’m thinking of a possible breach of canonical rules relating to the conclave, then it is for the prelates who participated in that conclave to speak up. Unless and until this happens, we are obliged to accept Francis as Pope and pray for him. This does not mean, however, that we should abandon our duty to publicly oppose those words and actions of Francis which clearly offend against the Church’s perennial teaching.

  12. Read this (and see the photograph) to see just how the Faith is lost at the highest level.

    http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/11/for-first-time-in-history-silent.html#more

    What troubles me about the Rorati Caeli site is that it continuously portrays Benedict XVI as some kind of wonderfully traditional Pope. He was not a Traditional Pope, he was a moderate liberal of the Modernist camp.

    Yes, he did some good things regarding the old Mass. But that is not sufficient of itself to make him a Pope after the fashion of the pre-conciliar Pontiffs.

    We have to recall that Benedict XVI participated in one of those Assisi atrocities, began the canonisation process for the architect of said atrocities, John Paul II, visited Mosques and Synagogues against the teaching of the Church, promoted the heresy of separation of Church and State and degraded the authority of the Papal office by becoming the first ever Pope to “retire”, paving the way for the present destructive Pontificate.

    Francis may be the first fully Modernist Pope the Church has seen, an extreme liberal of shocking proportions, but let no one lose sight of the fact that Benedict hails from the same school of Modernist innovators, those whose evolutionary/revolutionary religious agenda has brought the Church to her knees in just fifty years. It’s about high time the intellectual pride and theological ignorance of this school of Reformers was highlighted and rejected in all of its various subtle and less subtle manifestations.

    • How would have thought that the Sovereign Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ and the Father of Kings would bow down to the schismatic! Truly shocking!

    • Athanasius,

      That is utterly horrendous. Absolutely incredible. No wonder he’s inviting foul-mouthed blasphemers to lead the Vatican Christmas concert. That’s beginning to pale into insignificance already.

      I’m really becoming more and more impatient with the loud silence from informed clergy not to mention the bishops whom we are told are “confused” by this pontiff. Why don’t they show some leadership and speak out?

      • Editor,

        This is the tragedy of our times, vis, that those who should be speaking out remain silent. Our Lady prophesied precisely this tragedy at Quito. But what of the judgment of God on those shepherds of souls who have made themselves complicit in sin by their silence and false obedience? I think a good many priests and prelates need to seriously examine their consciences and start doing their sacred duty.

    • Athanasius,

      I agree with your remark in an earlier post about Rorate Caeli. In the link you posted at 8.32pm they are playing down every other papal request for “blessings” from non-Catholics by arguing either that these were reciprocated – fancy that, a papal blessing being equal to any other pagan or Protestant “blessing” – or that it was given in private (e.g. Justin Welby).

      Here’s an extract from a BBC report published about 8 minutes ago – I’ve been away all day and could not believe the content of your latest posts (I thought “the man’s mad…”) so went off to speak to my friend Google…

      At the Blue Mosque, one of the greatest masterpieces of Ottoman architecture, the Pope turned east towards Mecca, clasped his hands and paused for two minutes as the Grand Mufti of Istanbul, Rahmi Yaran, performed a Muslim prayer. Source

      Truly incredible. I am just amazed that these scandals are coming thick and fast with, as yet, no sign of divine retribution. Not that I’m willing it, but it cannot be far off now. The one notable thing is that none of the hitherto defenders of Papa Francis have come on here to defend his latest and current scandalous utterances and behaviour. Hopefully, even the thickest of the papolatrists are beginning to waken up and smell the scandal, better late than never.

      • Editor,

        Re the last paragraph of your post of 10.12pm. It is taught by the Church that God is not mocked. Well, He’s being mocked on a regular basis by this Pope and all those other syncretists and pan-Christians who mistake His divine patience for approbation of their heresies, which adds presumption to their sins. It’s difficult to see how these manifest departures from the truths of the Catholic Faith, these public insults to Our Lord by His own ordained ministers, can result in anything other than eventual chastisement on a terrifying scale. It doesn’t look like the perpetrators of these crimes are going to repent of them all by themselves any time soon. That leaves only one infallible outcome!

    • Anne,

      I have to say that I can understand why you are so frustrated by Pope Francis but I disagree with you entirely. You do not have the authority to declare that Jorge Mario Bergoglio was outside the Church and therefore unable to be elevated to the papal office.

      How do we distinguish between formal and material heresy. No sentence was pronounced on Bergoglio and he entered conclave eligible for election. Therefore that should be the end of the matter until a future pope declares otherwise , which may or may not happen. It is pride to take this authority as our own.

    • Annedanielson,

      Well, I’ll leave that judgment to the Church’s legitimate authorities if it’s all the same to you. I know the duties and the limits of the Catholic laity. Invalidating Popes is definitely not within my power.

    • Annedanielson,

      Read Canon 750 again together with the other associated canons cited in the document you’ve linked. You’ll note on closer inspection that excommunication is not applicable unless the person in question teaches heresy “obstinately,” having rejected Papal correction of his errors.

      Cardinal Bergoglio was not censured by the Church at any time prior to his election to the papacy. Therefore, the case of obstinacy in error cannot be made against him. Hence, charity demands that we consider his heresy to be material rather than formal. And material heresy does not constitute immediate grounds for excommunication.

  13. We have a pope who REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE 2 beseeching letters from a Catholic woman (Asia Bibi) who is under sentence of death for being a Catholic, and yet who takes the time to give an encouraging telephone message to an Argentinian woman who “married” a divorced man and subsequently bemoans the fact that her parish priest forbids her Holy Communion. His advice? Ignore your PP.

    I have been much affected today by the story of a Catholic woman in Mosul who was tied to a table whilst a stake was forced in her mouth and throat whilst her Muslim torturers gathered her blood into a bowl; yesterday Christ’s representative on Earth prayed for two minutes at a mosque in Istanbul.

    The wolf is in the sheepfold.
    God help us.

    • Therese,

      Could you please give me a reference for this terrible story? I haven’t been able to find anything.

      Many thanks.

      • Yes Santiago – visit The Remnant and look down the left hand and click on the Remnant TV – the Pope”s Enemies’ List.

        • Therese,

          Thank you again. Unfortunately, I come in contact with people who refuse to acknowledge that Christians are being persecuted and slaughtered for their beliefs. This is powerful witness.

          • Santiago

            You may wish to refer these people to The British Pakistani Christian Association who frequently report such outrages, and give names, dates etc.

            God bless.

            • Therese,

              My thanks to you, once again, for this information. I will certainly use it in the future.

              May God bless you also.

  14. To the unnamed martyrs of foreign lands who get no worldly recognition today: here are the words of a fellow martyr from England who will welcome you into your eternal happiness:

    St Edmund Campion before the Lord Justice at Westminster Hall:

    “It was not our death that ever we feared. But we knew that we were not lords of our own lives, and therefore for want of an answer would not be guilty of our deaths. The only thing that we have now to say is, that if our religion do make us traitors, we are worthy to be condemned; but otherwise are, and have been, as good as subjects as ever the Queen had.

    In condemning us you condemn all our own ancestors —all the ancient priests, bishops and kings — all that was once the glory of England, the island of saints, and the most devoted child of the See of Peter.

    For what have we taught, however you may qualify it with the odious name of treason, that they did not uniformly teach?

    To be condemned with these lights — not of England only, but of the world — by their degenerate descendants, is both gladness and glory to us.

    God lives; posterity will live; their judgement is not so liable to corruption as that of those who are now going to sentence us to death.”

    St Edmund Campion – pray for us.

    • Therese,

      Thank you for that beautiful and – in the light of Pope Francis’s treacherous behaviour – sobering quote from the great English martyr St Edmund Campion.

    • Thank you, Theresa, for the beautiful quote from St. Edmund Campion, and for the reminder of the horrific massacre of Christians. The story of the Christian woman being tortured should have made headlines somewhere- but it hasn’t. But then, the Pope hasn’t really expressed any righteous anger/outrage at this mass slaughter of his flock, has he?

      What a burden, the popes who refused to consecrate Russia as Our Lady asked, will carry with them to judgment day.

  15. Therese,

    Those words of St. Edmund Campion are just as applicable to the Tradition-persecuting post-Vatican II Reformers of our time as they were to the Revolutionaries of his time. Timeless wisdom!

  16. Therese,

    I can only add my thank you to that of Athanasius and our Editor for that quote of St Edmund Campion. How his words stand up in these times.

    I also paid a visit to The Remnant and clicked on Remnant TV – The Pope’s Enemies’ List, it may well be appropriate to hear what is said.

  17. Just watched the video, and I agree with Helen, it is both chilling and mind boggling. I don’t feel I’m being disrespectful when I add, I am heartily sickened by this Pope!

    • Jobstears,

      You wouldn’t be a Catholic if you weren’t “heartily sickened by this Pope”. He’s fast becoming matter for my confessions!

    • People will believe there’s a Hell when they’re at their judgement and on the precipice about to fall in…

      Does the Pope not read his Bible? How many times has Our Lord Jesus Christ mentioned hell?! God help us!

    • Gabriel Syme,

      There is another error in that statement of the Pope, besides universal salvation. He says that heaven is more a state than a place. This is completely at odds with Church teaching which defines heaven as a real place into which Our Lord physically ascended, where Our Lady was physically assumed and where all the blessed will one day have their resurrected, immortal bodies re-united to their blissful souls.

      • Athanasius,

        I’ve heard that loads of times, that heaven is more a “state” than a place. Pope John Paul II said that as well. It’s one thing to be criticising the Catholic schools for not teaching the faith but when the popes don’t know it themselves, what’s that all about?

        • Exactly, Margaret Mary! The Popes need to be more specific in their comments and teaching about heaven. But it’s the same old story since Vatican II – outright Catholic teaching on heaven would stop inter-religious and ecumenical initiatives dead in their tracks. Hence, the teaching is expressed vaguely and ambiguously to avoid upsetting anyone!

  18. Gabriel Syme, I’ve read that link to Rorate Caeli and it’s shocking! So it’s official: there’s no Hell!! It must be so if WE ARE ALL going to Heaven…..

  19. Pope Francis is mentally unstable and it will only get worse. His behaviour is like a little boy with a toy.

    • John Kearney,

      For his sake I hope Pope Francis is labouring under some kind of mental instability, but I very much doubt that he is. I think the bishops would have spotted that by now and took steps to protect the Faith. No, it seems more likely that the Pope is just completely given up to the irrationality of pure Modernism.

    • Comment removed

      Ed: Still, thanks for not trying to defend Pope Francis’s increasingly bizarre (to put it mildly) behaviour.

  20. From a report on the Pope’s address to the European Parliament:

    “…Ulrike Lunacek – author of a homosexual rights resolution that generated massive opposition by citizens – handed the Pope a rainbow scarf as he walked by. “It would be great if you had spoken up in favor of same-sex marriage or also for the use of contraceptives,” she told him.” Source

    I suppose we should be thankful that he didn’t wear it there and then… Let’s just hope he doesn’t take it into his head to wear it – ever! Or decide to reward Ms Lunacek with a personal phone call. Anything’s possible with Papa Francis.

%d bloggers like this: