Who was he talking to? There can be no dispute this time. The Catholic community are now quite used to some insulting jibe from Pope Francis, and, sure, after five years of it, it has become generally quite obvious to whom he is directing his insults, but this time Francis was a little more specific in the intended direction of his barbed arrows of irritation and displeasure. Breitbart - and interestingly not many other agencies - have covered the story fully. (Update: The 'full disclosure' can now be read at La Civilta Cattolica / Masonica, whatever they call it nowadays...)
It has taken five years for the Pope to talk even indirectly about Catholic websites and blogs that are critical of his pontificate of massive upheaval and thinly-veiled revolutionary intention, but finally, after all the work bloggers and Catholic websites have put into analysing his documents and speeches, reacting to his gestures and actions, and writing and presenting lines of defence of Christian doctrine against the wiles of Pope Francis, they finally have the spoken recognition of the Pope.
Few bloggers critical of this notorious pontificate, mired in scandal upon scandal, can be surprised that the Pope regards them as enemies to be prayed for, but ultimately ignored, like a bedraggled Big Issue vendor outside a supermarket might be for much of his time. Some, but not many, will be surprised to hear that he 'sees them and knows them' and that it is unlikely that he sees 'spiritual goodness' in many of them. How could he? This is the man who threw his toys out of the pram at the end of the Synod on the Family and started hurling insults at those who blocked the vote for Holy Communion to be given to the divorced and remarried, labelling them as types who 'sit in the Chair of Moses throwing stones at others', or something such like. You'll have to check the book of insults if you want the actual wording.
'Gee...Chicago sure has changed since I last visited!'
Let's face it, the Pope is a little disingenuous when he says that there are some forms of 'resistance' that he approves of, the persons who express it being the kind with which he can 'dialogue', while others are just the kind of persons he has to ignore for the sake of much discussed 'mental health'. Only sad gossips would discuss such things, of course! No. There are, on the one hand, all forms of resistance he cannot deal with, because the resistance is expressed through firm disagreement and then there is on the other hand all other forms of obeisance he can deal with, because it is expressed through obsequious agreement. Five years has brought about two camps. The majority of bishops, however, are utterly silent and refuse to categorically say to which camp they belong...unless you've booked yourself into ++Cupich's conference in which case you've laid your cards on the table. The guys in the middle, the silent men, he can deal with quite happily. Just don't say, 'No!' that's all!
Lent is a good time - there is no better time, indeed - to stem the tide of depression, anxiety and vehement anger that are the fruits of this pontificate with something to take our minds off the whole source of confusion and dread, like hunger pangs, recollected and sincere prayer, meditation on the Lord's saving Passion and why not throw in a few acts of mortification for a new and holy Pope? The good Lord will act when He chooses and His timing is perfect, even if in our human sight all we see is destruction and decay, evil parading its vainglorious triumph before us and gloating over Christ and His faithful ones. Our confidence must be completely and totally in God. We do not know what further horrors await us in this vale of tears, nor what other scourges the Church must endure in our lifetimes, be they short or long. If you're the type with an imagination, its probably best used for now on your meditations.
Turning to the Pope's words, though, they are clarifying as to precisely where we stand with Francis, if we didn't already know, and are indicative of just how defiant and resolute he is in terms of his unique plan - which must be ancient now - to uproot Christian doctrine and morality and replace it with teachings of purely human, or perhaps of even diabolical, origin.
'The fearsome resistance...'
Speaking of 'the resistance', the Pope used words similar to those he has used in his Curial Christmas addresses in the past...
“The famous saying ‘this is the way it’s always been done’ reigns everywhere; it’s a great temptation that we all have faced.”
What can one say? His Holiness pins upon those who maintain the 2,000 year Christian doctrines the fault that those who cling to Christ's own teaching simply do not like change for its own sake. And apparently, this fanatical desire to cling to Christ and Tradition (which as we shall see, borders on mental illness!) 'reigns everywhere'. Sadly, were it true that fidelity to Tradition reigned everywhere, there is no way the Pope would have gotten away with what he has hitherto successfully achieved, but would have been fraternally corrected, deposed and sent away to do penance some time ago. If fidelity to Tradition 'reigned everywhere', you'd be able, for example, to find the Latin Mass 'everywhere' and orthodox and sound clergy 'everywhere' all complaining that the Pope was trying to upend and turn upon its head the supernatural Faith of the Church for purposes that could never be justified as noble or good. Were his assertion true, Bishops would 'everywhere' and in great number be up in arms about the secular humanistic vision wrapped in a Vatican flag, masquerading as the Christian Faith, being trumpeted by Pope Francis, ++Marx, ++Kasper, ++Cupich and every unconvincing Bishop and Cardinal he clearly enjoys 'fruitful dialogue' with. The fact that His Holiness sees the reiteration of the teachings of his predecessors, even those he canonizes, as a 'temptation' is confusing to say the least. How can you be 'tempted' to affirm Catholics in the Truth!? Perhaps God does lead into 'temptation' after all! But He has left each Pope free will.
It was the best of Council's, it was the worst of Councils...
His Holiness nips quickly onto Vatican II and gives us yet further evidence of just what a disaster the fruits of that Council have been, when responsibility for its 'deployment' into Dioceses falls into the hands of those who, let's be honest, do not even believe those inerrant parts of the Council documents which tie in harmoniously with the timeless and immutable Faith of the Church...
“The opposition after Vatican II, which is still present, has this aim: to relativize and water down the Council.”
We can talk about the problems - and I dare say that there are a few - with the Second Vatican Council documents, but do we seriously believe that the likes of Pope Francis see within the Council documents anything but some religious assertions that can be passed over (just as Christ's words, St Paul's words and Paul VI's words can be) and some gaping cracks to be exploited in the demolition process to bring the House of God down, only to erect a House of Man in its place? Make no mistake, Pope Francis is the Pope who is going to - and sadly this wouldn't be the first time, since deception is the hallmark of this pontificate - deceive the Flock of Christ into thinking that the goals of the Second Vatican Council were not merely as its documented aim says they were, but that the mysterious and ineffable Mind of the Council exists to this day, in a living way, that continues to evolve on a macro-level to finally embody an entirely new anti-Christianthesis.
This Catholic blogger thinks he has caught the Pope, but it's just a big shark...
Some will argue that such would be the most honest thing he has done or said, but I am not wholly convinced. Funny, isn't it, that the Mind of the Council continues to be a living and active thing for Francis, but that God's Holy Word can be discarded at whim, yet the Council exhorted Christians to fidelity to God's revealed Word. Whatever the merits or failings of that Council, Pope Francis is the Pope who is most likely going to take the Council with him when he is lowered into the his tomb. Yes, even if ++Cupich or ++Tagle replace him. Francis is making the glories of the Council as credible as the 'Great Deal of China' or his reputation for thorough marriage preparation on a plane. Perhaps, in doing all he is doing, and doing it in the name of the Mega-Council, he is in fact fulfilling God's purposes for and verdict on the Second Vatican Council and those who implemented it. Who can say?
Francis has form, according to his own words...
Yep, when Francis is lowered into the ground, he's taking the Council with him for good or bad. Trent and all previous Councils may yet survive intact above ground, to be treasured once again by the Church which has forgotten Francis and remembered her Lord. All those Popes who tried to recover some sense of order from the revolutionary 'spirit' unleashed by the Council, they were apparently 'watering down' and 'relativizing' the Event which brought about the 'rebirth' of the Church. Those stupid Christian Popes!
Again, Francis reveals that the Word of God and Sacred Tradition can be adapted to whatever agenda suits him and his strange coterie of friends, cut from the precise same cloth as those who propagated and championed the 'new dawn' of the Council in flower-power days, but woe betide you if you should consider the pastoral and ecumenical Council itself as being a useful but widely misused response by the Church to the post-war world and the outbreak of liturgical chaos that followed its wake to be a disaster. Really! How seriously must we take a Council when its own concrete assertions on liturgy, (Gregorian Chant, etc) were ignored by the majority of the Church? Oh, and its best not to believe strongly those things in those documents which firmly do adhere to Sacred Tradition (that's the vast majority of it) because that would be rigid and absolutist! You must only absolutely believe the Mind of the Council and that Mind is only knowable to those people who wish the Church to be completely secularised from top to bottom.
It was good for its time (during that time, we hated it)...
Does this make sense? No, but Francis isn't there to make sense. He's there to make a real mess and to be as rupturous and disruptive to the Christian vision of life as possible. Speaking personally, I don't even believe Francis believes in the esoteric nonsense espoused by those who consider Vatican II the defining moment of the Church's history. Really, what proportion of prelates such as Francis actually believe the contents of the documents? Francis cannot even bring himself to teach what is in the Catechism compiled after the Council. He knows it, he has read it but...he no likey! From Francis's own behaviour, one could be forgiven for wondering if Francis is in fact a militant atheist dressed in a white cassock who uses Vatican II and every official means possible as a fine excuse to destroy the Church Christ founded. To many in the Church, this is precisely what it is. Remember, Francis is probably going to canonize Paul VI - because he wants to and it is expedient, for there is little other reason - and then trash his teachings and order the post-natal abortion of Humanae Vitae. Is this the behaviour of a Christian believer or of a complete imposter grinning inanely and all?
“When I perceive opposition, I try to dialogue, when dialogue is possible; but some resistance comes from people who believe they have the true doctrine and accuse you of being a heretic,”
For this reasons cited above, one is unsure whether 'accusing' Pope Francis of being a 'heretic' is all that helpful even though very few people actually accused Francis directly of anything. Certainly, the Four Cardinals did no such thing, neither have the many blogs and websites documenting the effluence coming from the Vatican, despite the fact that the propagation of the Argentine Letter advocating Holy Communion to the divorced and remarried as an Acta Apostolicae Sedis should be enough to have the entire episcopacy in uproar, crying out, 'Heresy!'. What have Fr Antonio Spadaro and Fr Thomas Rosica been telling him? Heretics believe, firmly and willfully, Christological errors or deny articles of Faith revealed by God. I don't know whether apparent atheists masquerading as Christians who get off on duping the People of God really fall into that category. I don't know what Francis believes, my conclusion after five years is that he doesn't believe in anything, but he's a fine actor with a fine PR team. Well, I thought that, until he called abuse victims liars and slanderers and lost swathes of the world's media and then doubled-down on that unmitigated disaster by telling the world he was right but sorry to be so right.
Baptised Catholics do not 'believe we have the true doctrine'. We believe what you guard, Your Holiness, in the Sacred Deposit of Faith. We believe what you are called to teach! We believe in the teachings of the Church, we do not regard them as 'ours'. They are the Commandments of God and the precepts of the Church, the teaching of Christ the Lord! We will not accept some fraudulent imitation of these teachings from any man, even if that man comes dressed in angelic white. We are Catholics. We are not Bergoglians. Or Kasperites. Or even Burkeists. People would not talk of your documents and sayings as 'heretical' were you to simply teach what you have been mandated to teach: the authentic Catholic Faith handed down to you. It is not terribly difficult to teach. You will find it expressed eloquently within the Catechism that it is rumoured you would like to be changed to suit your own more palatable agenda - one shared by those who have influence over you. But rewriting the Truth and teaching a lie will not help you or anybody for Eternity. Is this really so difficult to understand? I fear rather that you do understand it. That is why your pontificate is so profoundly troubling. You know what the Christian teaching is, but prefer your own. You have truly come 'in your own name', not in the Name of our Blessed Saviour.
'When I do not find spiritual goodness in these people, because of what they say or write, I simply pray for them. It pains me, but I don’t dwell on it, for the sake of my mental health.”
As long as your 'mental health' is alright, Your Holiness, that's the main thing! It's not like there are a billion Catholics out there outside the walls of the Vatican who need Christian instruction and exhortation to true Christian doctrine for the benefit of their Salvation, or anything. You just stay in your cosy bubble, surrounded by your sycophantic cronies, while you unleash doctrinal chaos around the world and oversee the break-up and disintegration of the visible Communion of the Catholic Church worldwide. We're still praying for you, also, because we hope against all reason for hope and pray, against all reason to pray, that you will one day wake up to the reality and Majesty of God in this life - the One True God - rather than come in the next to the Lord's Seat of Judgement stained by the guilt of unrepented crimes against God's Church endangering the souls He has placed in your care.
You can do every wicked thing you wish to God's Church, see, the Lord is permitting all manner of perversity and evil to flourish for a time and a season, everything you see indicates that you will get away with it, but nevertheless, the true Church of Catholic believers will, in some form or another, survive you, but if you do not turn to God, you will not survive the Wrath that is to come. I don't know if you know who I am. I don't know if you would see spiritual goodness in this blog. I know you'll probably never read it. You are set firmly on a course of personal destruction of unspeakable suffering. It is not too late to turnaround! If you cannot endure criticism from abuse victims, or from bloggers or Catholic websites or even questions from Cardinals or bishops, or clergy, whose own mental health has, I expect, declined dramatically during your pontificate, I ask you, are you really fit to be Pope? More and more people are openly saying it, Your Holiness: repent or resign! Perhaps consider both!
Give it time, readers, give it time, no the time is already here, when faithful Catholics, for criticising this pontificate and its abominable fruits will be called "heretics" and "dissenters". What penalty will follow these accusations? The dictatorship of relatvism is well and truly established in the Vatican and there are enough willing executioners placed in positions of powers to purge the Church of those who would resist the destruction of Christian Faith and morals and love Christ enough to stand up and be counted as opponents of the plan we now see unfolding. We know the score by now. Pope Francis himself won't be leading the charge, not publicly at least, but he'll almost certainly be giving his benediction to the smear and its consequences from behind the scenes. But then again, who can say for sure? If the only information he receives is really from those who do his research for him, gathering the names for the list His Holiness has ("I know who they are"/"I've got a little list") then perhaps His Holiness is just ignorant of the arguments presented against his novel ideas that sideline Christ and exalt man for his own glory, without any requirement for man to know, love or share the immutable Faith necessary for his Salvation. I personally doubt it, but it is possible.
A Catholic blogger criticises Pope Francis
It is less possible to take away many positives from his 'conversation' with Jesuits made public by their official organ other than an open declaration of intent and one does also detect that in choosing to draw attention to his need to maintain his 'mental health' (boiling with rage, forgetting footnotes, mislaying letters and compulsion to media attention all seem to be a reoccurring problem for him) that the mad, schizophrenic or psychotic are to be found writing Catholic blogs and maintaining Catholic news and opinion websites. See those bloggers, over there, they are loco! You won't find such tendencies inside the walls of the Vatican, anywhere near Sancta Marta. Oh no!
In my experience in 'dialoguing' with atheists, accusations of madness, mental health problems or religious psychosis were what drew the religious part of our conversation to a close before we cracked open another beer and recorded another song. Not in Lent, mind and certainly not on a Friday. I guess that's where are with our beloved Holy Father, 'you religious nutcases'. But one final thing, His Holiness must have known these words would reach bloggers, I surmise we are, in this case, his intended audience. The clear message, received loud and clear is this: 'Say what you want, I am not listening, you are wasting your time.' But it is never a waste of time, Your Holiness, to defend Christ and His Church from error and the seductions of false apostles, whether you choose to listen or not! If you do not listen to those irritating bloggers, someone else will. Perhaps that someone will clean up your terrible mess, some bright day!
To all readers, I wish a blessed and holy Lent.
May the Lord grant to you the victory that, like His Holy Church, belongs to Him. Your Holiness, that includes you. Not that you'll ever read this! Just think...it'll be Sunday soon!
It is worthwhile casting our minds back to that plane interview years ago when the Pope, when asked about Mgr Ricca and a homosexual scandal replied with his notorious, "If a someone who is gay is seeking the Lord and has goodwill then who am I to judge?" comment. He went on to quote, relatively accurately, a section of the Catechism, indeed he cited it as he said it, concerning the need for homosexual persons to be treated with respect, sensitivity and compassion.
It just so happens that fellow Jesuit and brother in omission, the splicing and twisting of doctrine and the Gospel, Fr James Martin S.J is also very keen on quoting this section of the Catechism and utilising it for his ongoing LGBTQI ministry, a ministry receiving some powerful patronage and support in the Church, tacitly from Francis, who has no interest in reigning him in, and blatantly from oddball Francis Cardinal appointees such as ++ Tobin, ++ Blaise Cupich and ++ Kevin Farrell (for those who doubt please see evidence of his endorsement of Fr James Martin's book here) who pretty much endorse Fr James Martin's subversive ministry and want him in their Dioceses misleading their flocks. These men are very loyal to Francis and in particular to his contradictory, ambiguous and subtly revolutionary Magisterium.
This Pope has never - not once - taught in any document or speech or interview, those preceding parts of the Catechism which draw attention either to the grave sinfulness of the act of homosexuality or to the disordered nature of the attraction. Not even to the part that links the condition with the Cross. Nor has Fr James Martin S.J. Some people think that Francis is so muddle headed that he quoted from the Catechism, cited it but maybe 'doesn't know' in much detail what the Catechism says about those aspects of homosexuality that are not so palatable to the gay lobby both inside and outside the Vatican. I expect that the opposite is true. Both Fr James Martin and Pope Francis are well-informed and knowledgeable of the Church's teaching on homosexuality but both wilfully overlook and refuse to teach those aspects of the Church's position which conflicts with the militant gay agenda. We need to start asking serious questions about what role, if any Pope Francis plays in the homosexualisation of the Church, because by hook or by crook he is sure doing his bit.
In the case of Fr James Martin, despite the forgiveable formational disadvantage of being a Jesuit (like Francis), it has been pointed out to him repeatedly that his presentation of Church teaching is incomplete and lacking in Catholic integrity, because his foundational premise uses the Catechism's language of 'respect' and 'sensitivity' but quickly hurries to omit the rest of the Church's teaching on the subject and veer off into queering moral theology and risibly inserting his own subjective suppositions into his arguments for good measure. Just like Francis did, however he spends most of his LGBTQI ministry emphasising the affirmative, or morally neutral parts of Christianity. 'We shouldn't judge', 'LGBT people have dignity', 'I am sure there are gay saints', etc.
In 2015 Francis's had a private meeting with a longtime friend from Argentina who has been in a same-sex relationship for 19 years. For some reason, the Vatican thought it wise that a 'private meeting' produce images such as this for CNN etc.
In contrast, Pope Francis does not ever talk about homosexuality, but dear readers, in order to subvert the Church's teachings he really does not have to. Why? Because he has Fr James Martin to preach his true message unhindered and without any form of reproach. He cannot vocalise his true message without needless confrontation and controversy. We don't want to wake the children, do we? He clearly feels that on this subject he should remain silent. All Francis has to do is create the atmosphere for certain plants to thrive. Fellow Jesuit, and media advisor, Fr James Martin SJ talks of little else. It is almost like that is his job - to be the LGBT wing commander number 1, gunning down Catholic doctrine and firing bullets into the Church while Francis distracts people with his unique persona and, ultimately, his still growing cult of personality.
But what these two have in common is the feature of deliberate omission of the teachings as they are given for the Faithful's Christian instruction and following the gay scandals that have hit the Church in this pontificate, as well the abuse crisis scandal now rocking Francis, I cannot help but feel this tendency of both men is instructive. They are both behaving in precisely the same way. Martin feeds ferociously off Francis's ambiguity and sudden reports of paradigm shifts and Francis, using precisely the same dissembling methods as Martin, happily provides Martin with the doctrinal vacuum and ground-shifting paradigm changes he needs to advance his LGBTQI agenda in the Church. This is a symbiotic relationship, Martin lives off Francis and Francis creates the culture for Martin to flourish.
Pope Francis is pictured holding hands with the open promoter of homosexuality, Fr. Luigi Ciotti in March 2014
One begins to wonder: Are they in fact working together for the same cause? The 'emancipation' of the militant gay movement in the Church? A year or two ago, I wouldn't have thought so, I would have thought Francis was interested in subverting Catholic morality for reasons known only to himself, but the more I think about his conduct for the last five years, the more it appears that far from having any concern about the 'gay lobby' in the Vatican (who don't, like Masons, carry identity cards, as we know), his efforts appear to support and bolster their movement quite strategically and in a manner that is becoming more blatant purely by the kind of company Francis keeps.
Pope Francis being greeted by scandal-hit Mgr Ricca
On the sole occasion the Pope has really ever broached this subject - because of a gay scandal that made the question from a reporter inevitable - he followed directly the precise tactic of Fr James Martin in his campaign to manipulate and mutilate the Church's teachings on homosexuality by providing a foundation from the Catechism, ignoring the less popular truth revealed and inserting his own baseless paradigm where true Catholic doctrine should follow or appear, fixing it in a phrase suggestive of mercy and clemency but received as an attitude of calculated indifference to sin, even the language of sin.
The only difference between what the Holy Father did on the plane and what Fr James Martin SJ does weekly, is that the Holy Father's conclusion on the issue was couched in the language of objective and balanced neutrality, instead focussing on the need for lenient judgement of individuals of 'good will'. We might very well ask the question: Are those whose clerics whose scandalous lifestyles compromise the Church's teachings, who just so happen to be given special protection by Francis, really men of 'good will' towards the Church? We have it only on the Pope's authority that they are! Perhaps they are of good will..toFrancis, their faithful friend and ally! Humane 'neutrality' grounded in the need for 'dialogue' is a critical signpost of this pontificate and it informs everything from the China deal to the gutting of the Pontifical Acadamy for Life, to praising Emma Bonino to persecuting the FFI to saying 'There is no Catholic God'.
The latest in a string of homoerotic circus acts at the Vatican, but as if to illustrate the Vatican's culture, these events pre-exist Pope Francis.
Of course, it is not really "neutrality" at all, it is the attempted destruction of Christianity by subversive and deceptive means. We know these things are all toxic to the Faith, but in order for 'neutrality' to be asserted, real Catholicism must be thwarted at every turn.
It is noteworthy too, that similarly, in the China-Vatican furore, Agent Parolin takes the 'flak', just as he does when he announces that Amoris Laetitia amounts to a 'paradigm shift' in the Church that replaces everything that has preceded it. Francis himself has never said, 'My Exhortation is a paradigm shift that alters reality, everybody!' It is not Francis that announced that an imminent 'breakthrough' deal with China is on the horizon, one that will replace faithful members of the Hierarchy with Communist stooges. Absurdly controversial and divisive figures have risen up to immolate themselves for Francis, make catastrophic decisions and say outrageous things to advance Francis's or their shared agenda, to take the heat off Francis by announcing these things themselves, but all the time they do it, Francis seems to look on applauding like a man who has just received another scantily clad man doing a circus performance just for him.
Pope Francis and Cardinal Parolin
Their job appears to be to look deadly and do seriously dirty work while Francis gets on with kissing babies and looking virtuous, granting everlasting plausible deniability to those dwindling number who still desperately want to think the Pope might still think like a Catholic.
Until Chile and the shocking Barros revelations it was all working a treat. Now it is all falling apart. Why? Because Francis overreached himself and broke his own rule of survival. He made very clear the Barros affair was his own personal decision and never laid it at anybody else's door. He even sacked 3 CDF priests for this guy's preservation. He even had a letter from a victim and laid himself open to charges of lying about his reception of evidence. He made the same error with Maradiaga who is conveniently absolved of guilt before adequate investigation. He now has to take ownership for decisions that look unjustifiable in the extreme. Protecting those who shielded abusers and who witnessed child abuse take place? Yes, TeamFrancis should be very worried now because even 'Mr Nice' in the mafia looks completely compromised and draped in both a rainbow flag and a red flag of corruption. The remaining question is, are these figures working for Francis, does he work for them, are they working for each other or are they all working for an external force?
New Ways Ministry are still rejoicing....
That said, another inch of the Francis mask has slipped this week, when it was announced his Lenten Retreat will be guided by a stridently LGBT focussed priest who thinks not much of Christ other than He 'hated rules'. A bit like Francis, then! Clearly, Fr James Martin is busy and has his hands full at the moment, so the Pope found someone else to guide the big gay retreat. Public knowledge of this is a massive hint drop of subtle approval of LGBTI ministry and queer theology in the Church. Those who hear of such news will assume this Pope is once more displaying his humane neutrality on gay issues.
Nobody will ever suspect that that the man in white is a subversive agent working towards the goal of the decimation of Christianity, or a major player in the homosexual lobby embedded in the Vatican, pursuing the normalisation of homosexual relationships and liaisons, or himself could potentially be mired in enough homosexual scandal to be blackmailed or controlled. No one will ever consider that, surely, because the Pope wears white, a symbol of purity. Right now, this Pope is only in Office because nobody can remove him. In the wake of this scandal, were he a bishop, Cardinal or priest, he would have been discreetly moved or retired off.
All of this begs questions: What did happen to the homosexual mafia report that Benedict XVI handed onto his Successor to deal with, who desired to see "filth" purged from the Catholic Church? And seriously, who else was at Cocco's party in Lent of last year? We might never know, but Pope Francis's own record on this issue might give some people reason for concern. We seem to now have a situation in the Church in which the gay agenda is flourishing freely in the walls of the Catholic Church. Francis is in a most sinister fashion aiding their cause so much that one could be forgiven for wondering whether he is, in fact, directing it.
Whatever Pope Francis's role is in this growing epidemic, this contagion of heresy and the promotion of sin is afflicting souls in the Church, and homosexual persons are among the Faithful Catholics who, adhering to the Church's timeless Magisterium, and who seek to bear witness to the Truth, suffer real marginalisation within the Church. It is they, not renegade bishops, faithless clerics and LGBTQ ministry advocates who look more and more to be sidelined and shown the door to some deserted place 'outside the camp' but I'll let Joseph Sciambra, whose video appears at the top of this post, fill you in on that...
Pray for Holy Mother Church!
Pray for Pope Francis!
Five years to the day of his abdication, pray for Benedict XVI!
Dear readers and friends, it is now clear, by logical deduction, that the sequence of events concerning the letter from the abuse victim whose complaint, handed to the Pope, and which was not answered by the Pope, is as follows:
Two letters lay on the Pope's desk, one from the victim and one from Cardinal Burke and the then three other Cardinals in the form of a Dubia. The Pope sat down and responded to both in a most courteous and satisfying manner, with understanding, eloquence and apostolic zeal, concerned for both the safeguarding of the Church's infallible doctrines and for the protection of minors.
Unfortunately, in the envelopes, his secretary placed the answer to the four Cardinals in the envelope addressed to the victim and the answer to the victim in the envelope to Cardinal Burke. The victim, receiving the letter, was simply confused by the response to the dubia and binned it, thinking that another letter answering his complaint may arrive in future. Cardinal Burke, meanwhile, discovered to his horror charges of the covering up of abuse within the Church against a bishop and, scared by its contents and the implications for the institution of the Church, also binned the letter.
Therefore, to everyone's horror, it is clear what has taken place. The Pope has answered in an authorative manner the Dubia and Cardinal Burke has covered up allegations of child abuse and its cover-up in the Church.
Cardinal Burke must be brought to book about this and handed over to the authorities to be charged and most likely imprisoned, for a very long time. The Pope, exonerated completely must continue to fulfil his Office and Mission in the teaching of the flock of Christ with the full support of all the Church, with all criticism concerning his pontificate finally laid to rest conclusively. In a spirit of mercy, however, the services of the Pope's secretary will most likely be retained. Because the Pope shows zero tolerance to the cover-up of child abuse, Cardinal Burke must receive the full force of the law, so as to be an example to others. Justice must be done and seen to be done. Sad as it is, this is the only credible narrative to this story.
There still remains an outside possibly that Cardinal Kasper walked into the Pope's office and asked whether he may borrow "this 8-page selection of A4 paper" which just happened to be the abuse victim's letter, lying on the Pope's desk, to use it for a rough draft of a new ecumenical Mass for the separated brethren. The Holy Father, failing to look up from his copy of L'Espresso, would have replied something like, "Sure thing, whatever." The Vatican has immediately quashed rumours of the credibility of this theory while the Cardinal Burke theory has not yet been rejected. The in-depth investigation continues in the Vatican continues...
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-jerseyeveningpost-mna.s3.amazonaws.com/public/PZDORMAVGBC55F6R3VMSBMNRKI.jpg)
It just so happens that fellow Jesuit and brother in omission, the splicing and twisting of doctrine and the Gospel, Fr James Martin S.J is also very keen on quoting this section of the Catechism and utilising it for his ongoing LGBTQI ministry, a ministry receiving some powerful patronage and support in the Church, tacitly from Francis, who has no interest in reigning him in, and blatantly from oddball Francis Cardinal appointees such as ++ Tobin, ++ Blaise Cupich and ++ Kevin Farrell (for those who doubt please see evidence of his endorsement of Fr James Martin's book here) who pretty much endorse Fr James Martin's subversive ministry and want him in their Dioceses misleading their flocks. These men are very loyal to Francis and in particular to his contradictory, ambiguous and subtly revolutionary Magisterium. 
