September 13, 1917: Our Lady tells the children that in October, Our Lord will come, as well as Our Lady of Sorrows and Our Lady of Carmel. Also, Saint Joseph will appear with the Child Jesus in order to bless the world. About 30,000 people come to the Cova and again, many witness supernatural phenomena indicating Our Lady’s presence. Fatima Timeline
Against the backdrop of the Fatima apparitions in 1917, when key dogmas were reinforced by Our Lady, as well as a warning of the diabolical disorientation to come, which we are witnessing today, the following report from the Fatima website ought to come as no surprise. Utterly shocking, of course, but no surprise to any truly informed Catholic.
Christopher Ferrara writes…
Sandro Magister reports on the alarming, but at this point hardly unexpected, news of a video of one Father Giovanni Nicolini, a priest of the Diocese of Bologna and “among those closest to Jorge Mario Bergoglio,” who claims “that in the Amazon the celebration of the Mass by married deacons is already a de facto reality, authorized by the local bishops. And Pope Francis, informed of the matter, is alleged to have said: ‘Go ahead!’”
Nicolini, Magister stresses, “is not just anybody.” He is one of the most prominent priests in the key Archdiocese of Bologna, whose archbishop, Matteo Zuppi, was made a cardinal “only a few days ago” by Francis. Nicolini is a disciple and “spiritual son” of Giuseppe Dossetti (1913-1996), the famous (in Italy) politician-turned-priest and monk who, not surprisingly, was one of the movers and shakers at Vatican II.
Nicolini heads the “Family of the Visitation” community made up of “thirty monks and nuns and as many married couples…” and is also a member of the ultra-progressive “school of Bologna,” founded by Dossetti. The adherents of this “school” include the “Church historian” (read: revisionist) Alberto Melloni, who condemned the four “dubia cardinals” because of the public reservations about the disastrous Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia, and Enzo Bianchi, head of the fake “ecumenical monastery” at Bose whose “monks” include Protestants. Back in 1967, when some degree of sanity still prevailed in the “Church of Vatican II,” “the Bishop of Biella issued an interdict for the presence of non-Catholics in the community, but the following year it was removed thanks to the intercession of Michele Cardinal Pellegrino,” another Vatican II mucky-muck. Both Melloni and Bianchi, along with Nicolini, are, as Magister notes, “ultra-Bergoglians.”
In the cited video, to audible gasps and at least one snicker from the audience, Nicolini declares that “the Church of priests [is] coming to an end.” To which someone replied: “Is that a prophecy?” No, said Nicolini, “it’s already a reality.” Nicolini went on to say (further translation provided by Magister) that “the Church of priests is coming to an end” because there are no vocations for the supposedly vigorous and renewed “Church of Vatican II.” As Nicolini explained:
“We are now reaching the height of folly, every priest is taking care of six parishes, but this is how it ends. This crisis of the priesthood in any case will increase relentlessly, until serious consideration is finally given to the suitability of abolishing the celibacy of priests. As long as this celibacy of priests remains, the decline is unstoppable…”
As liberals of all stripes always do, Nicolini argues that unless we accommodate a given evil — in this case the abolition of priestly celibacy, a tradition of apostolic origin — another evil will ensue: i.e., that priests will have sexual relations anyway. Says he: “But it is clear that when I find out that a thirty-year-old priest who comes to me for confession, now they are putting him in a big rural area by himself, in six months he has a mistress. And so now this decline will be very rapid.”
Is this just hypothetical or has Nicolini violated the seal of confession? In either case, the sophistry is the same: We must let priests marry or else they will fornicate. And what kind of priest would fornicate if he is not allowed to marry? Why, a priest of the “Church of Vatican II.” Of which there is a very small and rapidly dwindling number. Indeed, Nicolini cites the very failure of the “Church of Vatican II” to attract vocations as justification for abolishing the celibate priesthood: “[I]n 2030 Bologna will have 30 priests. Right now there are 450, and that’s already a big decline. And so this structure of the Church will no longer be there.”
Here, yet again, the incompetent physician prescribes the cure for the patient he himself is killing. Having destroyed priestly vocations, the relentless ideologues of Vatican II now call for the abolition of the priesthood as the Church has always known it.
And then the clincher. According to Nicolini, Francis explicitly approved of the practice in the Amazon of married deacons “saying Mass.” As Nicolini recounts:
“In the Amazon one evening, from an isolated mission parish in the Amazon they made a phone call, it was an old deacon, in his sixties, married, who said to his bishop: ‘I have to tell you that tomorrow there won’t be any Mass, because there is no priest.’ And the bishop told him: ‘You go there and say Mass.’ A married deacon, children already raised, the ‘elders’ are called, and the bishops there have given him authorization to preside over the liturgy. They told the pope about this and the pope said: ‘For now we cannot write anything, you go ahead!’ I wondered, when I found out that he was convening the worldwide meeting of bishops for the Amazon, who knows if perhaps he can or wants to say something. But the Church, in its concrete juridical structure, as it exists now, is at an end.”
Magister wants to know, as do we, “Is it true or false, what he says about the ‘Masses’ already being celebrated in the Amazon by married deacons? And is it true or false that Francis gave the go-ahead?” I think we already know the answers to those questions. And the answers will be confirmed by the Vatican’s resounding silence in the face of what Magister has published.
Behold the Modernists bringing an end to their own work of destruction by levelling whatever remains of what they have destroyed. But after their work of destruction is done, the Church of all time will emerge ever more clearly into view. Plentiful vocations to the celibate priesthood in the traditional orders and communities will carry on the faith of our fathers, abiding that time when, through the intercession of the Mother of God, the rotted branch of Modernism is cut away from the visible structure of the Church and what remains intact in some places will return everywhere.
Francis evidently believes he has the right to pursue a megalomaniacal “dream” of “transforming everything so that the Church’s customs, ways of doing things, times and schedules, language and structures can be suitably channelled for the evangelization of today’s world rather than for her self-preservation.” But he will learn, his Modernist collaborators will learn, and the world will learn that the Church is no mere human kingdom ruled by an earthly monarch, but the Mystical Body of Christ, whose will is not governed by the vain imaginings of deluded Modernist visionaries. Source
If we don’t need priests to offer Mass in the Amazon, then, logically, we don’t need priests to celebrate Mass anywhere. Agreed?
And, if ever we needed more proof of the utter failure of the Vatican II experiment (the Church’s new “springtime” 😀 ) this is it… Agreed?
Point for Reflection: if (when?) this scandal comes to a parish near you, believe me, there will be useful idiot parishioners who will go along with it, presuming that Mr Smith’s “Mass” is fine… And if someone suggests returning to the traditional Mass down at the local SSPX church, they will look in horror and say “but they’re in schism!” Truly, you could not make this stuff up. Or, perhaps more grammatically, UP you could not make this stuff… 😀
August 13, 2019 (LifeSiteNews)
Austen Ivereigh, the British journalist and biographer of Pope Francis, has stated that the circle surrounding Pope emeritus Benedict — which he said includes the Vatican’s former doctrine head Cardinal Müller — must be brought under “control” since it is a source of “scandal and of division.”
Ivereigh made these comments in an August 10 interview to the Chilean newspaper La Tercera, in which he speaks about his upcoming book on Pope Francis, titled The Wounded Shepherd.
Speaking about those who he holds as resisting Pope Francis, Ivereigh points especially to the circle around Pope emeritus Benedict XVI, and most especially to Cardinal Gerhard Müller — the former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith — whom he describes as a “leader” of the opposition.
“We have to find a way to control his [Benedict’s] court, which is at this moment a source of scandal and of division,” he said.
Ivereigh singled out Cardinal Müller as one of the most senior voices of opposition against the way Pope Francis is leading the Catholic Church. He mentioned a “very vociferous and potent” group of Catholics which launches “a missile every month,” trying to “discredit him [the Pope]”. Click here to read rest of this report on the outrageous Ivereigh.
“We have to find a way to control Benedict’s court…” Outrageous! Just who does this guy think he is? And what’s with this “Benedict’s court”? We don’t have a “court” for Pope Benedict. If there are still people in the Vatican who cling to some Catholic beliefs, that’s great. If they happen to be friendly with Benedict, that’s interesting but not surprising. Pope Francis doesn’t like Catholicism. He has made that clear. So anyone who continues to believe in the “old Faith” better keep quiet around Papa Francis. Hardly breaking news. As for trying to discredit the Pope – priceless! He’s done that all by his little Argentine self; he really doesn’t need any help in that department.
Arrogance personified, Austen Ivereigh came to fame as the co-founder of Catholic Voices, an organisation of lay people set up in 2010 to provide speakers on request from the media, prior to the visit to the UK of Pope Benedict. They were there, we kept hearing, to provide competent lay people, representatives who could explain the Church’s teaching in news broadcasts, discussions etc. They were not officially linked to the Bishops’ Conference but the group had the Bishops’ blessing, which tells you all you need to know about the likelihood of their orthodoxy. Indeed, it was painful watching them in action with one gaffe following another in various TV programmes. Catastrophically, Ivereigh, along with his co-founder Jack Valero, showed unbelievable ignorance about Catholic sexual morality in a series of TV interviews following Pope Benedict’s unfortunate comments about condoms. Read SPUC’s response – Jack Valero and Austen Ivereigh need remedial training in Catholic teaching on sexual ethics
Then there was the much publicised case against the Daily Mail – click here to read about that sorry episode…
All in all, Ivereigh strikes me as a decidedly unsavoury character, and an opportunist. He leapt, for example, at the opportunity to spread dissent through the creation of the Catholic Voices group, so, opportunist or not, he has to be given credit for not missing and hitting the wall, as the saying goes.
And his devotion to this shocker of a pontiff is something else. He has already written one book in praise of Pope Francis, The Great Reformer (just look at the names of those who are delighted with it…) and now he’s writing another which, judging by the title (The Wounded Shepherd) has moved Francis out of the “Great Reformer” category into victim mould. Poor Papa Francis! Being criticised for trying to overturn the Commandments, especially the one on adultery which is just tooooooo difficult; and his efforts to end “homophobia” are just not appreciated by those nasty, bigoted, Catholics who want to live in a museum Church… I can just imagine it but will apologise profusely if I’m on the wrong track. Whatever, we can be certain that Ivereigh will not be joining the ranks of those of us deeply concerned about the damage which Pope Francis is doing to the Church – that’s a given.
As for his assault on Pope Benedict, dressed up as criticism of Benedict’s “circle” or “court” – how dare he! My advice to Ivereigh is to educate himself in the Catholic Faith so that he sees the truth about Pope Francis who is the person doing the wounding. He is wounding the faith of countless Catholics, ordained and lay, by undermining doctrine and morality. If he entitles his next book Francis: Worst Pope in History, I’ll feel there may be hope for him after all. Until then, I’ll keep working on my book about Austen Ivereigh – entitled Clueless About Catholicism…
What would your book title be, if you decided to write about Mr Ivereigh? Keep it printable and non-actionable, please and thank you!
Pope Francis has fully regularized the Society of St Pius X (SSPX), James Bogle, the ex-president of Una Voce International, told Gloria.tv (video below: see link – Ed)
Bogle stressed that the SSPX and the sacraments administrated by them, including marriages and confessions, have been formally recognized by Francis. The Society is also allowed to ordain to the priesthood whomever they see fit.
Francis further appointed SSPX Bishop Bernard Fellay as a judge at the Rota Romana, the highest appellate tribunal of the Church, thus recognizing his authority.
“I don’t see how much more regular you can get than that,” Bogle concludes. He acknowledges, however, that there are a lot of intolerant bishops who still treat the SSPX as if it were irregular.
To them, Bogle answers that those who do not like the integration of the SSPX “better have the argument with Pope Francis.” Click here to read more and view video
“Will the bishops, successors of the Apostles be silent? Will the cardinals, the Pope’s advisors in the governing of the Church be silent, in the face of this political-religious manifesto which perverts the doctrine and praxis of the Mystical Body of Christ ?”
The first reactions in response to the Instrumentum Laboris for the Amazon Synod were focused on its opening to married priests and the insertion of women into the sacramental orders of the Church. But the Instrumentum Laboris is something more: it’s a manifesto for liberation eco-theology which proposes a pantheist, egalitarian “cosmo-vision” , unacceptable for a Catholic. The gates of the Magisterim, as José Antonio Ureta, rightly highlighted, are being thrown wide open “to Indian Theology and Ecotheology, two Latin American derivatives of Liberation Theology. After the collapse of the USSR and the failure of “real socialism”, the advocates of Liberation Theology (LT), on the Marxist style, attributed the historic role of revolutionary force to indigenous peoples and to nature”.*
In the document, published by the Holy See on June 17, the Amazon “bursts” into the life of the Church like a “new entity” (n.2). But what is the Amazon? It is not only a physical place and a “complex biosphere” (n.10) but also “a reality full of life and wisdom” (n.5), which ascends to a conceptual paradigm and calls us to a “pastoral, ecological and synodal” conversion (n.5). In order to carry out its prophetic role, the Church must heed “the Amazon peoples” (n.7). These people are able to live in “intercommunication” with the entire cosmos (n.12), but their rights are threatened by the economic interests of the multinationals, which, as the natives of Guaviare (Colombia) say “have slashed the veins of our Mother Earth” (n.17). Click here to read more…
The new Vatican document ‘Male And Female He Created Them’ is coming under fire from the LGBT+ lobby, who, predictably, claim that it will encourage hatred and bigotry… Click here to read more…
In fact, the document is calling for the usual “dialogue” (yawn) so if the LGBT+ folks can prove their case, who will Pope Francis be to judge?
Share your thoughts…
On the plane ride back from his trip to Romania, Pope Francis told reporters that since “there is already Christian unity,” there is no need for the faithful to “wait for the theologians to come to agreement on the Eucharist.” Some progressive Catholics have considered this to be evidence that the pope may be open to granting full Eucharistic communion to non-Catholics. If that is indeed what Francis meant — what else could he have meant? — then he is forcing the Church to address a series of rather difficult and uncomfortable questions.
Not least among them: What is the Eucharist? Is it a tool to be used to facilitate a “Christian unity” that the pope insists “already” exists? Or is it an expression of full communion with the Catholic Church? If the Church reverses herself and contradicts her unbroken Magisterium on the admission of schismatics and dissenters to the sacraments, what happens to her dogmatic integrity on other settled questions of faith and morals? Is the entire canon perpetually subject to the modish preferences of the current and future occupants of the Petrine chair? Most astounding, why is she unwilling to “wait for the theologians to come to agreement” before making a change of such gravity?
Theology, in St. Anselm’s classic formula, is fides quaerens intellectum — faith seeking understanding. If the pope’s goal is to formulate a discipline wherein faith is joined to right reason, there is nothing to fear in allowing rightly disposed “theologians to come to agreement on the Eucharist.” If his goal is to unshackle the Church from her bimillennial moorings, that is another project altogether, one that might not be aided by waiting for a consensus of theological opinion. Click here to read the rest of this [worrying] report…
The author of the above National Review report is manifestly correct in pointing out that: Popes throughout the centuries were undivided in their opinion on the subject. Particularly before the Second Vatican Council, popes were stark in their indiscriminate opposition to intercommunion, considering it a profanation and an abject evil to be avoided. Pope Pius IX put it rather precisely in his encyclical Amantissimus (1862), where he proclaimed that “whoever eats of the Lamb and is not a member of the Church has profaned.” Such precision is of little import to the “innovators” that Pope Pius XII warned the faithful about. Give the “innovators” of the post-conciliar Church enough time and they will wiggle their way out of even the Church’s most unambiguous statements of antiquity [emphasis added].
It’s getting to the stage where we are all going to have to check with our priests/bishops every time the Pope is quoted in the media, to ask if we are going to see this or that change (in this case inter-communion) in our own local churches, as we did when we learned that he had ordered a change to the words of the Our Father. Outrageous.
We must obviously re-double our prayers and use all the means available to us to bring about the spirit of faith that would lead to the Consecration of Russia – see www.fatima.org – and thus an end to this scandalous papacy.
That’s what we – the humble laity – can do. What about the clergy, the bishops, though. Aren’t ANY of the UK bishops and priests remotely concerned, do any of them have a sense of duty that might lead them to DO something about this pope? Interesting that the National Review report concludes with a quote from Pope St Pius X – To echo the lament of Pope Pius X, “Far, far from the clergy be the love of novelty!” Yet, modern priests have embraced novelty. Why is that? By speaking out to warn against this Pope’s errors, priests may, of course, lose their position, their parish, their office – but they won’t lose their heads, as did our great martyrs of old. Come on, there must SURELY be someone in the ordained class who will speak out to warn the faithful about this dreadful pontiff. Or am I about to wake up in the “real world” again? And what, if anything, in practical terms, can we do if inter-communion is introduced in our parish?