Found a couple of gems on Twitter. It would appear that Massimo Faggioli and the Vatican Cleaning Service are united in their concern about the redacted letter fiasco. We have some 'interior continuity' here, I think you'll agree! Benedict XVI also had some mediocre and untrustworthy men hovering around him. Interior continuity is go! Once you've lost the support of the cleaners, though, its all downhill from there, especially when they are responsible for polishing floors.
Then there's Pope News (not a satirical account apparently, but one does sometimes wonder), who, while having not withdrawn their (whoever 'they' are) vociferous support from Pope Francis the WonderPope TM, have instead just lost it publicly on Twitter.
Oh dear! It appears that one of the wheels has come off...
In all this there's a lesson for the next Pope, if he is watching events unfold. Surround yourself with men of integrity, honesty and moral character and if you must lean on PR at times,as the modern age at times demands, professionalism. It pays dividends in the long run...
A bunch of clowns apply for positions in PR positions in the Vatican.
'We're no worse than your present guys!', they say...
Rev, Mons. Dario Edoardo Viganò
Prefect, Secretariat for Communication
Vatican City
February 9, 2018
Rev. Monsignor;
Thank you for your kind letter of 12 January and the attached gift of the eleven small volumes edited by Roberto Repole.
I applaud this initiative that wants to oppose and react to the foolish prejudice in which Pope Francis is just a practical man without particular theological or philosophical formation, while I have been only a theorist of theology with little understanding of the concrete life of a Christian today.
The small volumesshow, rightly, that Pope Francis is a man of profound philosophical and theological formation, and they therefore help to see the inner continuity between the two pontificates, despite all the differences of style and temperament.
However, I don’t feel like writing a short and dense theological passage on them because throughout my life it has always been clear that I would write and express myself only on books I had read really well. (Read: I don't want to waste my time on this / I am playing the piano).
Unfortunately, if only for physical reasons, I am unable to read the eleven (small!) volumes in the near future, especially as other commitments await me that I have already made.(Read: I don't want to waste my time on this / I have to play with my cats).
I am sure you will understand and cordially greet you. (Read: I'm saying this very politely).
Yours,
Benedict XVI
Now, where was I?
Postscript: The Bones Reviews the Letter
Pope Benedict XVI writes as usual with great subtlety. Some people (myself included) have read certain things into his letter that may not really be there ('I am cargo unequivocably on board Francis's Train Wreak') and missed some things which are there. Benedict XVI is responding to the letter which seems to be asking for some kind of preface /foreword, something Benedict for some reason does not wish to provide (he is a terribly busy retired man!) endorsing the book itself.
Firstly, Benedict does not say that he wants to react against 'foolish prejudice' itself that Francis is X and Benedict is Y. He says he applauds the initiative that wants to react against that. You might think that makes no difference, but a subtle difference it is, because this is not an endorsement of the contents of the book. Obviously, the initiative or rather the collator of Francis's teachings is trying to present some kind of continuity (we haven't seen the book either) between the two men whose pontificates are quite, quite different. Benedict XVI makes his point that crude caricatures of these two pontificates are not necessarily helpful. He knows Pope Francis and where he is coming from. He knows himself and where he is coming from.
He sees the publication of this book (which he has no time to read in its entirety, honest!) as an opportunity to correct something he maintains is a misunderstanding. What is that prejudice? That Francis is only X and that Benedict is only Y. He sees this as a gross caricature of the reality. That is his opinion and he is entitled to it and from his point of view, an injustice is done towards him if he is presented, as he continually is, as a master theologian with no pastoral insight, sensitivity, compassion or understanding, a how-do-you-say, 'Doctor of the Law'.
Apparently, Benedict has heard it said somewhere that Francis is 'only' a 'practical man' (no brains just does loads of stuff) without 'particular' theological or philosophical formation. Why is a Pope raising the issue that questions surround the theological or philosophical formation of his Successor? Is this precedented? No. Could it have been passed over in silence? Yes. Is there some kind of problem here?
Similarly, why he feels the need to say 'particular' rather than 'Catholic' or 'general' or 'rich' is left to the reader to construe. Clearly, Francis has a very deep-rooted and also a particular (let us call it a Jesuit) theological and philosophical formation. We know how much Benedict XVI admired the modern Jesuit approach to theology and philosophical formation, because he appointed Jesuits everywhere, didn't he? Tee hee. What Benedict XVI is not saying is:
a) Great Pope, love what he is doing.
b) Pope Francis has a deep CATHOLIC formation, the kind that can rattle off Catechism excerpts, or even agree with them or draw upon the ancient Fathers of the Catholic Faith, or the kind of theological and philosophical formation that roots the one formed in the One Faith that must be believed in order to attain Salvation
c) I will willingly write a preface of your book as an endorsement of the contents, most of which are the thoughts of my Successor.
If a Pope wanted to be effusive about his Successor he wouldn't leave his enquirer without:
a) a half-decent explanation as to why he cannot preface the book, at least not without saying 'I'd love to, but...'
b) Praise for the actual pontificate of his Successor, his Magisterium, teachings, his bold announcement of the Gospel, his moral character, integrity etc, etc, the possibilities are endless.
What really sinks in about this letter is how terrifyingly neutral and understated it is. Almost diplomatic. If I wrote a book about Catholicism and Pope Benedict XVI read it and sent me that letter, I'd feel a little let down, wouldn't you? Benedict XVI, draws attention also to the different 'style' of the pontificates. What does he mean? One was faithful, his? One is a PR-led fantasy on steroids, Francis's? We do not know. And as for temperament, we can only hope, or dare to presume that Benedict XVI has not been witness to Pope Francis's episodes in which his Successor has 'boiled with rage'. I expect he saves such outbursts for his most loyal and trusted friends.
Pope Francis is a man of 'profound' (deep-rooted) 'theological and philosophical formation'. Is this formation dissimilar to the Jesuit Superior General who said Satan doesn't really exist and Jesus didn't have a tape recorder? He has a profound theological and philosophical foundation too. Shame his theology and philosophy don't stack up against the actual Catholic Faith he was baptised into and he believes so much that we call error. Ditto Hans Kung. Ditto Martin Luther, the heretic founder of a new religion that rejects perennial Christian doctrine.
The one thing that does leave me puzzled is the phrase 'inner continuity' but even the word 'continuity' has to be qualified by this mysterious preceeding modifier 'inner' or 'interior'...
My Successor also dresses in white?
There are still regular parties at Cocco's place?
The spectre of an ongoing abuse crisis and claims of cover up still loom large?
The decor is an off creamy white, not magnolia but not brilliant white either?
The Vatican finances are still questionable and still being funnelled by money laundering drug / mafia rackets?
Vatican post still goes whereabouts, my Successor can't trust people around him either?
Homoerotic art is everywhere and is utilised for any given purpose?
PR disasters occur despite the best efforts to avoid them?
Archbishop Paglia has a crazy mural, it has to be seen to be believed?
Germans are still pulling the strings?
Morale in the Curia could be better?
Your guess is as good as mine, but what he is most likely not saying is 'my teachings are his teachings and his teachings are my teachings and the two are the same and 2 + 2 = 5'.
Let the reader understand, there has to be some kind of mysterious 'continuity' between these two pontificates, or it has to be said that there is by Benedict XVI because otherwise if there is no continuity at all we have schism be it announced or unannounced. Who knows what Benedict XVI is prepared to do or say to prevent schism in the Church? Hmm...
Whatever this letter is, it was essentially an opportunity for Benedict XVI to endorse a book collating the teachings and 'theology' of his Successor. He praised the initiative, not the contents of the book. To do so would be hard. It is a gathering of Francis's incoherent, self-contradictory ramblings filtered through some FrancisCamp diehards. History will record he was given the chance to preface a book on the theology of his Successor. History will record that he replied. He said, 'Thanks, but I'm busy. I am sure you will understand.' Those of you who think Benedict XVI is watching on while Francis dissolves Christian morality saying, 'This is fine!' are, I consider, very mistaken, but we are all entitled to our informed opinions.
May the Lord come to the aid of his ailing Church and send Her the prelate who will restore all things in Christ. But if this is not to be...Come, Lord Jesus!
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!
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-jerseyeveningpost-mna.s3.amazonaws.com/public/PZDORMAVGBC55F6R3VMSBMNRKI.jpg)
