In one of these buildings has been recently living a 'Luxury Bishop'. Whoever gets the answer right wins a night in a lavish hotel in Rome. I know a lot of money has been spent on the residence of a Prince of the Church. But what happened to, 'Who am I to judge?'
Exactly how much does it cost to maintain Vatican residences? What happened to 'mercy' and 'not casting the first stone'? Why don't German Bishops 'tell tales' on their brother Bishops to the Holy Father when one of their brother Bishops is spouting heretical nonsense, fostering dissent and rebellion against Church doctrine or when they are covering up some heinous clerical crimes?
Why can the Holy Father be so swift and decisive in suspending a Bishop in Germany for the sin of spending too much money on residences which he must know will house his successors after him, but a more 'politically difficult' or 'unpopular' decision is put on hold indefinitely? Is morality in 'the court' of Francis only about money and its prudent spending?
I am sad to ask the questions, but why are unpopular statements left to such as Archbishop Mueller, but popular decisions like this taken by Pope Francis to the joy of the media, so that others look nasty and mean, but the Supreme Pontiff always ends up looking great? It all seems very Latin American to me, but I didn't think the papacy was a political position but a spiritual one - involving spiritual fatherhood to not just the laity, but priests and even Bishops. Moreover, I always thought Jesus taught us that it was a joyful and holy thing, to be hated by the World for the sake of Jesus and His Gospel and that if the World spoke well of us, something is seriously wrong.
Holy Father? Don't you want to share in the humiliations and sufferings of those who proclaim the truth for love of Jesus?
Say a prayer for a man who just walked into Rome a Prince and walked out of Rome a leper. Oh...and while we're on the subject: Whatever did happen to that 'explosive dossier' on the 'gay lobby' in the Vatican? Has it, like Francesca Chaouqui's saucy Twitter feed, suddenly disappeared?
I always thought 'worldliness' wasn't just about the disordered quest for money and possessions, but also about the disordered quest for sex and power as well.
I always thought 'worldliness' wasn't just about the disordered quest for money and possessions, but also about the disordered quest for sex and power as well.
11 comments:
I wrote a post about the real reasons why Bishop Tebartz-van Elst is hunted like a deer.
My English is too bad to translate all. Maybe google can help.
http://derkatholikunddiewelt.blogspot.de/2013/10/warum-wird-bischof-tebartz-van-elst.html
In 2008 he stood up against one of his high ranking clergy who blessed a homosexual "couple".
Since "homophobic bullying" is a "grave violation of human rights" as New World Order (officially named UN) Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon told the world, http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sgsm14008.doc.htm
the poor Catholic bishop who also dared to advocate the rights of the parents and of the family had to go.
Thanks to our new "poor church for the poor" the media had a new and as we know now very successful means of exerting pressure on the bishop.
And the pope who doesn´t want to judge homosexual clergy...
the rest is history.
The family of the bishop got death threats and his 87 year old mother is despaired.
I forgot to mention that at least three of his fellow bishops helped the media to do their dirty work by stabbing him in the back too. In the diocese of one these bishops who is even a cardinal a "gay pride parade" takes place for decades.
Excellent post, and right on the mark.
Well said!
I have been wondering how significant it is that Greg Burke who manages the Pope's publicity is a former (?) Fox (Murdoch) employee. Shortly after Pope Francis was elected Burke came to London and gave a talk which was posted on Youtube. I don't know whether it is still available but the main theme was Burke's enthusiasm about how they had the perfect 'product' in Pope Francis.
Sorry, forgot to add: Sky News= Fox News (U.S. version). Greg Burke is an Opus Dei supernumerary,Chaouqui says she is 'very close' to them and Abp Gaenswein is Opus Dei. Gaenswein (however) seems to be trying to play the honest broker between the 2 Popes, even describing himself as the bridge (ponte) between the two Popes (Pontefice/i. Was anyone else taken aback by the programmatic and image-controlling nature of Greg Burke's rapturous talk in London? Why is Burke never mentioned and yet Lombardi is fading into nescience? Burke is also an old friend of John Allen's; Allen has been clamoring for years for someone 'professional' to take charge of the Pope's image after what Allen claimed were the publicity 'disasters' of Pope Benedict. There is a serious point to all this regarding the nature of the Church. Well-connected Catholic journalists like Allen did nothing to rebut the claims of the media about B16, turning the story instead into a reason for bashing B16's supposed ineptitude with the media and claiming that professional spinning was needed. But should the Pope need spinners rather than explainers? Why could Catholic journalists not have made the story (think Regensburg, Williamson)how the media got Pope Benedict wrong rather than why the Papacy needed professional spinners? It gives plain Catholics a sense that EVERYTHING is now being spun and we are flies in a web of someone else's devising. This is not honest or truthful; it is not good for the Church and it's certainly not good for Catholics. But it could be part of the reason we're all so confused. Francis has allowed these people to manage his image and played up to it because he is a man of gesture rather than reason and speech: 'Everyone likes a bit of Evita' he is reported as saying in BA. (Except that not everyone does). This doesn't sit well with many of Francis' other more genuinely pastoral sentiments and statements. Perhaps he is as confused as much as we are? This is not intended as criticism of Opus Dei; I just don't see why we need a Fox/Sky operative deciding the 'strategy' for the papacy. Perhaps he/they doesn't/don't and perhaps some of your readers will know better. I really hope so. Once the papacy becomes a news 'product'then it falls under a certain sort of political theology which recent Popes have been at pains to prevent.
That building looks the kind of place that the authorities would insist on being restored to the highest standards of historical authenticity, which inevitably costs and arm and a leg.
Pope Francis is getting away playing people for fools, in my opinion. First of all, most of the world has placed him on a pedestal because he keeps telling everyone just how humble he is. Pope Francis also continually downplays his authority. He refers to himself as the "Bishop of Rome" and seems to shun any reference to his role as the successor of St. Peter and head of the Universal Church. Yet, he seems to carry a big stick on many issues. There's a rumor floating around - and I am not sure if it has been substantiated - that he forced someone to interrupt a bishop as he was offering Mass to step into the rectory to take a phone call from him so he could exercise his authority and tell him to call off an investigation of a priest who may have been involved in an abuse case. Then, as you mentioned, we have him sweeping the investigation of gay activity among big whigs at the Vatican under the rug. We have him refusing to pass judgment on the acts of a bishop who all evidence seems to say has been very actively living the homosexual lifestyle. Yes, we know all about not judging our neighbor, but shouldn't Pope Francis be concerned about scandal within the Church among bishops? A day doesn't go by that we aren't scrambling to make sense of what Pope Francis is doing or saying. More and more, I wonder if Benedict XVI's abdication wasn't helped along by some powerful men within the Vatican who just couldn't wait to further their radical agenda.
Once again I think we have to take Benedict T his word. He resigned last February for HEALTH reasons due to an advancing old age. His doctor told him last spring no more travels which would mean no Rio. So we need to believe what he says, otherwise he are calling him a liar. BTW he has been hinting or years he was planning to resign when it was time, and that time was this year,
More and more, as time goes by, and Benedict continues in the background, not passing away, I am concluding that he was forced to resign to avoid schism with the German church. By forced I mean precisely that; it was not a willing act, despite the words.
Subsequent events suggest that by the time of the conclave powerful people had their candidates in place; one of the key motivations was indeed the question of freedom from Rome which came to a head on the child abuse and homosexuality issues. Many cardinals / bishops wanted to be free to exercise their control over these matters, as opposed to Rome taking control to get rid of the filth amongst the clergy. The case of the Cardinal Archbishop of St Andrews & Edinburgh, and others including Marini and Ricca, points to this.
Sooner or later people will begin to say who is the true pope? This is the problem with papal resignations, and Benedict, being a wise man, knew this.
I don't know where all this leads.
I am very thankful that some people such as yourself are publicly asking the questions and raising points that keep arising in my own mind. I was worried about this papacy from day 1 and it just seems to become more and more worrying as time goes on.
Post a Comment