It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:57 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 280 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Bergoglio information 
Author Message

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 60
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Alan Aversa wrote:
John Lane wrote:
Alan, it gets worse.
Quote:
"And I believe in God, not in a Catholic God, there is no Catholic God, there is God and I believe in Jesus Christ, his incarnation. Jesus is my teacher and my pastor, but God, the Father, Abba, is the light and the Creator.
Arianism. Jesus is a different Being from God. And Jesus is not the Creator? Could heresy be any more clear?


Here's the original Italian:
"E io credo in Dio. Non in un Dio cattolico, non esiste un Dio cattolico, esiste Dio. E credo in Gesù Cristo, sua incarnazione. Gesù è il mio maestro e il mio pastore, ma Dio, il Padre, Abbà, è la luce e il Creatore. Questo è il mio Essere."

Here's my translation (with better punctuation than the one you give):
"And I believe in God. Not in a catholic God; a catholic God does not exist; God exists. And I believe in Jesus Christ, his incarnation. Jesus is my master/teacher and pastor, but God, the Father, Abba, is the light and the Creator. This is my Being."

Yes, it's strange he uses a disjunction between God and Jesus. He also says Jesus Christ is God's incarnation. God becomes man? The Second Person of the Holy Trinity took on human flesh; the Incarnation was not a substantial change from Godness to humanness. So, yes, he certainly is promoting Arianism.


More Arian-type talk from Bergoglio:

Vatican Radio article, 'Pope Francis: Jesus continues to pray and intercede for us' wrote:
(Vatican Radio) At the centre of Pope Francis’ homily on Monday morning was the passage from the Gospel of Luke during which Jesus remained in prayer throughout the whole night before choosing the twelve apostles, and he pointed out that Jesus continues to pray and to intercede for us.

Speaking to those gathered at Casa Santa Marta for Mass, the Pope said that by praying to God to choose his apostles, Jesus was “putting together his team together” – and afterwards a great number of people came to be with Him and to be healed by Him, because “power was coming Him and healing them all”. And he referred to three different rapports Jesus has: “Jesus and the Father, Jesus and his Apostles, Jesus and the people”. And the Pope pointed out that “Jesus prayed to the Father for the Apostles and for the people”. And he said: he is still praying.

Jesus has saved us, he said, with his prayers, with his sacrifice, with his life. He is gone now and he continues to pray – the Pope said – but does that mean that Jesus is a spirit? Jesus – he underlined – is not a spirit! He is a person, a man with flesh like our flesh, but in the glory of God. He said Jesus has wounds on his hands, on his feet and on his side. And when he prays he shows the Father the price of our salvation. Pope Francis said: “it is as if he is saying: Father, may this not be lost!”

So prayer stems from Jesus who prays and intercede for us.

“We often say to each other: pray for me. I need prayers. I have so many problems”. And that is good – Francis pointed out – “because we are brothers and we must pray for each other”.

And the Pope says he prays to Jesus to pray for him and intercede for him.

He concluded saying that He prays for all of us, and he does so courageously, showing the Father the price of our redemption: his wounds.

We must think about this – concluded the Pope – and we must thank the Lord. We must thank him for giving us a brother who prays for us and intercedes for us. And speaking to Jesus we must say: “Lord, you have saved me. And now pray for me”. “It is to him we must entrust our problems, our life and many other things so that He may take them to the Father”.


[from http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/10 ... en1-741365]

_________________
Thomas Williams


Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:57 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:31 am
Posts: 696
Location: Moscow, Idaho, U.S.A.
New post Re: Bergoglio information
I don't know if I have mentioned this before now, but my sister and brothers, with whom I have been "discussing", sometimes rather heatedly, whether or not the NO is the Catholic Church, and my insisting that all these so-called popes are antipopes, actually now believe that Frankie is the Precursor of Antichrist and don't like him. I was amazed when she called me to tell me this.

My response was, "Well, you're a little late..."

They also now apparently really believe he is an heretic. I was doubly amazed.

_________________
Kenneth G. Gordon


Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:57 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:14 pm
Posts: 210
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Its never too late, and thank God they finally woke up on the matter. God Bless your family! What a joy you must have now don't grow weary or discouraged, persevere the rest will come if you remain faithful to your calling.

Yes little by little, once they get to analyze the text without re-interpretation glasses they will see clearly that the man is so heretical that it is impossible to excuse him. This is precisely the proof that I needed to sleep at night with certainty that I owe 0 allegiance to the claimants. I kept thinking that it was possible, that maybe SV'ist were misinterpreting them, but the truth is far from it! If one of these men were impostor's it follows that all of them are impostors likewise. All I needed was one undoubtedly anti-Pope so that everything would fall into place, I thank God every day for Bergoglio... The clarity he has given me is something that I was praying for a very long time... Ohh how I wish the devilish JP II would have been as explicit as Bergoglio. Yeah, I knew for a fact that the minute they would actually announce the date of canonizations it would be "the sign" I was looking for that this man is as anti-Christ as it can get.

_________________
Laudare, Benedicere et predicare...
Bitcoin donations: 15aKZ5oPzRWVubqgSceK6DifzwtzJ6MRpv


Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:52 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Oh my: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/franc ... um_en.html

47,000 words! Something for everyone?



NB Check out the unforgivably bad "poem" to Our Lady at the end. Deserves an "F".

_________________
In Christ our King.


Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:42 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Bergoglio information
What, precisely, is an "APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION"?

I thought, maybe, the ending poem just lost something in translation, but it doesn't look any better in Spanish (the Vatican's website does not yet have this piece in Latin).

If anyone has the time, is there a "Cliff Notes" version of this? I am simply not going to even try to read and understand anything this man says.

[Edited to add the following]

I should probably explain that last comment. I have tried to read the writings of Modernists many times. I have actually read at least three of Ratzinger's books and I read many of Wojtyła's encyclicals. To me, they're just a bunch of words on the page. The words form grammatically correct sentences, but there's not thoughts conveyed. I read and re-read a page or a paragraph and I have no better understanding of what thought was trying to be conveyed as I was prior to the attempt. Even in English, their writings might as well be in a foreign language. Sure, I can read the word "spirit" on the page but I have no earthly idea what the writer means by the word for it is so often used in ways that seem to be void of any concrete meaning.

I find it incredible that I can read, follow, and understand pre-Conciliar encyclicals (even if it sometimes takes a couple of reviews) but I simply cannot follow any of the documents of Vatican II and anything written after.


Tue Nov 26, 2013 2:28 pm
Profile

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:31 am
Posts: 696
Location: Moscow, Idaho, U.S.A.
New post Re: Bergoglio information
TKGS wrote:
I find it incredible that I can read, follow, and understand pre-Conciliar encyclicals (even if it sometimes takes a couple of reviews) but I simply cannot follow any of the documents of Vatican II and anything written after.

I think you have hit the nail squarely on the head.

The writings after VCII are pure psychobabble: a plethora of words with no substantive meaning, or with a meaning so obscure and so near to pure heresy as to be unintelligible to anyone who can really think.

Their minds are divided: they are, essentially, schizophrenics who are trying to reconcile in their minds, and souls, two completely contrary principles, God and Mammon, or more precisely, God and satan. Fools.

After all, as some have said, sin makes you insane, and they are truly insane.

_________________
Kenneth G. Gordon


Tue Nov 26, 2013 4:45 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:03 am
Posts: 23
Location: New England
New post Re: Bergoglio information
"The liberalism of Catholic liberals," Cardinal Billot observed, "escapes all classification. It has one single characteristic, that of perfect and absolute incoherence." (H. Le Floch, p. 4)

_________________
"Oportet Meliora Tempora Non Expectare, Sed Facere."


Tue Nov 26, 2013 6:14 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
TKGS wrote:
I thought, maybe, the ending poem just lost something in translation, but it doesn't look any better in Spanish (the Vatican's website does not yet have this piece in Latin).


In no language will this be anything but bad poetry and disgusting to the intellect of a Catholic:

"pray for the Church, whose pure icon you are,
that she may never be closed in on herself"

And a new title for Our Lady, making her responsible for the collapse of faith which the Modernists call "the new evangelisation": Star of the new evangelisation.

I don't understand what they write either, TKGS, in the traditional sense of understanding a text (i.e. the text asserts or explains, and you take the meaning the author intended and you feel confident that you have done so). There is no unambiguous meaning of the text, that's the whole point. You're meant to take from it what you want. The heretics who are given all the power and never hindered from exercising it will take what they want, which is there in abundance (e.g. "decentralisation" - merely a way of encouraging independent thought and action, or to put it in succinct form, dissolving the Church). And the “conservatives” will take what they want (the references – undefined – to “faith” and the ruling out of priestesses, for example). The Beeb has summarised it well, I think: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25102720

_________________
In Christ our King.


Tue Nov 26, 2013 10:35 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Bergoglio information
John Lane wrote:
TKGS wrote:
I thought, maybe, the ending poem just lost something in translation, but it doesn't look any better in Spanish (the Vatican's website does not yet have this piece in Latin).


In no language will this be anything but bad poetry and disgusting to the intellect of a Catholic:


Who knows? I was giving the benefit of the doubt; maybe it was "translated" by the ICEL.


Tue Nov 26, 2013 11:28 pm
Profile

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:31 am
Posts: 696
Location: Moscow, Idaho, U.S.A.
New post Re: Bergoglio information
I suspect that the modernists have, perhaps, gone too far, even for our patient God. Insulting Our Lady like this is simply too much. As some saint (maybe Augustine) said once to Protestants, "If you throw out the Mother, the Son will be sure to follow.". In my opinion, this sort of trash is far worse.

God will accept practically any insult to Himself for a long time, but I doubt if He will put up with an insult to His Mother longer than about 1 microsecond.

This reminds me of an incident reported of King St. Louis of France when told of a very ill-advised "discussion" which was attempted by some well-meaning, but rather unenlightened churchmen with some Jewish Rabbis in a Church dedicated to Our Lady. King Louis was highly incensed and stated that anyone who insulted Our Lady should have his (Louis') sword "...stuck into his belly as far as it would go...".

I must agree with his sentiments.

_________________
Kenneth G. Gordon


Wed Nov 27, 2013 5:14 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
TKGS wrote:
Who knows? I was giving the benefit of the doubt; maybe it was "translated" by the ICEL.


LOL!

_________________
In Christ our King.


Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:15 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Bergoglio serves up another piece of ammunition for tradition-hating Modernists:

Quote:
93. Spiritual worldliness, which hides behind the appearance of piety and even love for the Church, consists in seeking not the Lord’s glory but human glory and personal well-being.
...
94. This worldliness can be fuelled in two deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of gnosticism, a purely subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas and bits of information which are meant to console and enlighten, but which ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.

95. This insidious worldliness is evident in a number of attitudes which appear opposed, yet all have the same pretence of “taking over the space of the Church”. In some people we see an ostentatious preoccupation for the liturgy, for doctrine and for the Church’s prestige, but without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact on God’s faithful people and the concrete needs of the present time. In this way, the life of the Church turns into a museum piece or something which is the property of a select few.


What's extraordinary is how accurately he describes himself and his own. Let's parse this text.

"the self-absorbed"

Accepting the objective divine revelation is an act of self-abnegation. Heresy, which signifies a choice, is pure pride.

"promethean"

The promethean (in his own mind) is the man who invents his own religion, that is, the Modernist. The Catholic's only prometheus figure is Christ, the Creator and Saviour of mankind, in Whom is our sufficiency, as St. Paul says.

"neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers"

Pelagianism is indeed rampant since Vatican II, in the Vatican II milieu. Grace has been downplayed or outright denied for decades. Indeed, one could say that the denial or perversion of the notion of grace is the very pith of Modernism.

"and feel superior to others"

The most deceptive and subtle of all conceits is surely that which dresses singularity as humility, which is the keynote of Jorge Mario Bergoglio's behaviour.

"because they observe certain rules"

As if obeying the law, divine or human, is something to be deprecated!

"or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past."

Those who are truly addicted to what they suppose to be "particular Catholic styles" are Bergoglio and those like him who display their singular religiosity at every opportunity.

"A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism"

Narcissistic and authoritarian elitism is a perfect description of the kind of misrule these Modernist bullies have engaged in for fifty years, persecuting the innocent and the humble merely for failing to change religion, whilst hypocritically claiming to be serving Christ. Tyranny is awful; tyranny dressed as justice and charity is simply disgusting.

"whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others"

In 47,000 words Bergoglio manages not to do any preaching of the Gospel, and instead spends a very large proportion of his effort analyzing and classifying others! Hypocrite!

"These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism."

Again, a word-perfect description of his own kind. Anthropocentric, that is, man-centred, is the First Name of the New Religion, as Montini said so clearly ("We worship man!"). Immanentism is its Surname.

"It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity."

It hasn't. Look around.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Thu Nov 28, 2013 10:03 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:54 pm
Posts: 29
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Quote:
...instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others,...

What a hypocite!


Fri Nov 29, 2013 5:26 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:14 pm
Posts: 210
New post Re: Bergoglio information
I am still in shock, I will share my thoughts later on this but seriously Bergoglio is our best preacher of Sedevacantism. At this rate in 5 years all true Catholics will be wide awake as to the reality that it is metaphysically impossible to have a non-member be the head of the Church. This man has zilch, nada, nothing of the Catholic faith left. He is a spitting perfect image of the Council which is why he reflects the new religion so perfectly. This is what a real genuine modernist is really like, none of this double talk we used to hear before that used to enchant some of us with the ray of hope that they might be Catholic.

He has my pom-pom support, if anyone actually bothers to read this document that has the Catholic faith and does not become seriously disturbed needs a new heart and mind!

_________________
Laudare, Benedicere et predicare...
Bitcoin donations: 15aKZ5oPzRWVubqgSceK6DifzwtzJ6MRpv


Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:32 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 60
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Ken Gordon wrote:
God will accept practically any insult to Himself for a long time, but I doubt if He will put up with an insult to His Mother longer than about 1 microsecond.


Just in time for Christmas...

Bergoglio wrote:
The Mother of Jesus was the perfect icon of silence [ . . . ] how many times she remained quiet and how many times she did not say that which she felt in order to guard the mystery of her relationship with her Son, up until the most raw silence at the foot of the cross. The Gospel does not tell us anything: if she spoke a word or not… She was silent, but in her heart, how many things told the Lord! ‘You, that day, this and the other that we read, you had told me that he would be great, you had told me that you would have given him the throne of David, his forefather, that he would have reigned forever and now I see him there!’ Our Lady was human! And perhaps she even had the desire to say: ‘Lies! I was deceived!’ John Paul II would say this, speaking about Our Lady in that moment. But she, with her silence, hid the mystery that she did not understand and with this silence allowed for this mystery to grow and blossom in hope


Source: http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/th ... sco-30745/

_________________
Thomas Williams


Sun Dec 22, 2013 7:47 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:49 pm
Posts: 552
Location: Argentina
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Did you read this?

Bergoglio said:

Quote:
Jesus is consubtantial with God, the Father,but also consubstantial with his mother, a woman. And this is his consubtantiality with his mother: God entered history, God wanted to become history. He is with us. He has journeyed with us”.


http://www.news.va/en/news/gods-surname

_________________
"Il n`y a qu`une tristesse, c`est de n`etre pas des Saints"

Leon Bloy


Sun Dec 22, 2013 11:06 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 60
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Cristian Jacobo wrote:
Did you read this?

Bergoglio said:

Quote:
Jesus is consubtantial with God, the Father,but also consubstantial with his mother, a woman. And this is his consubtantiality with his mother: God entered history, God wanted to become history. He is with us. He has journeyed with us”.


http://www.news.va/en/news/gods-surname


Hadn't seen it! Hope you won't mind if I further circulate the article.

_________________
Thomas Williams


Mon Dec 23, 2013 12:54 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:49 pm
Posts: 552
Location: Argentina
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Thomas Williams wrote:
Cristian Jacobo wrote:
Did you read this?

Bergoglio said:

Quote:
Jesus is consubtantial with God, the Father,but also consubstantial with his mother, a woman. And this is his consubtantiality with his mother: God entered history, God wanted to become history. He is with us. He has journeyed with us”.


http://www.news.va/en/news/gods-surname


Hadn't seen it! Hope you won't mind if I further circulate the article.


Of course I don´t mind! :)

_________________
"Il n`y a qu`une tristesse, c`est de n`etre pas des Saints"

Leon Bloy


Mon Dec 23, 2013 1:34 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 60
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Already got a few responses on another forum. The most compelling reply cites Sacred Scripture in defense of Bergoglio's words:

Gal 4:4 wrote:
But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law:


Unless I'm missing something else -- and if I am, please point it out to me -- it looks like Bergoglio [accidentally] said something that wasn't heretical.

_________________
Thomas Williams


Mon Dec 23, 2013 3:20 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:49 pm
Posts: 552
Location: Argentina
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Thomas Williams wrote:
Already got a few responses on another forum. The most compelling reply cites Sacred Scripture in defense of Bergoglio's words:

Gal 4:4 wrote:
But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law:


Unless I'm missing something else -- and if I am, please point it out to me -- it looks like Bergoglio [accidentally] said something that wasn't heretical.


That quote of Saint Paul means that Our Lord has the same nature as we do. The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost have the same substance, that`s why the Blessed Trinity is one God and not three. To say that Our Lord and Our Lady have the same substance it means they are the same thing. Either She is a "fourth" person of the Trinity or Our Lord is not God.
You and me have the same nature: human. But we don´t have the same substance. You and me are
not the same thing.

Please, someone correct me if I`m wrong.

_________________
"Il n`y a qu`une tristesse, c`est de n`etre pas des Saints"

Leon Bloy


Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:13 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
That's a good point, Cristian, and also notice how he starts with "Jesus" rather than "the Word" or "the Son" being "consubstantial" with God the Father (and again, "God, the Father" so that comma keeps appearing...). So he starts with a non-Catholic formula, one in which the meaning is clouded, senseless, casting doubt on whether the Person called Jesus is God, or man, but not both. So that's heresy right there. Then he goes on to comment on the "consubstantiality" of Jesus and Mary, which as you say is monstrous - and heretical too.

We don't say that "Jesus is consubstantial with the Father," precisely because when we use the Holy Name of Jesus we are referring to the God-Man, the same Person as the Word but in His dual natures. The God-Man is not consubstantial with the Father. To assert that He is would be to assert either that the Father is man, not God, and as Cristian rightly points out, it would be to assert that the Father and the Son are not merely both men, but that they are both the same individual man. Weirdness. Alternatively, the expression would mean that Jesus Christ is God but not man, which is equally heretical.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Mon Dec 23, 2013 2:22 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:49 pm
Posts: 552
Location: Argentina
New post Re: Bergoglio information
John Lane wrote:
That's a good point, Cristian, and also notice how he starts with "Jesus" rather than "the Word" or "the Son" being "consubstantial" with God the Father (and again, "God, the Father" so that comma keeps appearing...). So he starts with a non-Catholic formula, one in which the meaning is clouded, senseless, casting doubt on whether the Person called Jesus is God, or man, but not both. So that's heresy right there. Then he goes on to comment on the "consubstantiality" of Jesus and Mary, which as you say is monstrous - and heretical too.

We don't say that "Jesus is consubstantial with the Father," precisely because when we use the Holy Name of Jesus we are referring to the God-Man, the same Person as the Word but in His dual natures. The God-Man is not consubstantial with the Father. To assert that He is would be to assert either that the Father is man, not God, and as Cristian rightly points out, it would be to assert that the Father and the Son are not merely both men, but that they are both the same individual man. Weirdness. Alternatively, the expression would mean that Jesus Christ is God but not man, which is equally heretical.


Agreed!

How weird his language is, isn´t it?

_________________
"Il n`y a qu`une tristesse, c`est de n`etre pas des Saints"

Leon Bloy


Mon Dec 23, 2013 3:43 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:49 pm
Posts: 552
Location: Argentina
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Thomas Williams wrote:
Ken Gordon wrote:
God will accept practically any insult to Himself for a long time, but I doubt if He will put up with an insult to His Mother longer than about 1 microsecond.


Just in time for Christmas...

Bergoglio wrote:
The Mother of Jesus was the perfect icon of silence [ . . . ] how many times she remained quiet and how many times she did not say that which she felt in order to guard the mystery of her relationship with her Son, up until the most raw silence at the foot of the cross. The Gospel does not tell us anything: if she spoke a word or not… She was silent, but in her heart, how many things told the Lord! ‘You, that day, this and the other that we read, you had told me that he would be great, you had told me that you would have given him the throne of David, his forefather, that he would have reigned forever and now I see him there!’ Our Lady was human! And perhaps she even had the desire to say: ‘Lies! I was deceived!’ John Paul II would say this, speaking about Our Lady in that moment. But she, with her silence, hid the mystery that she did not understand and with this silence allowed for this mystery to grow and blossom in hope


Source: http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/th ... sco-30745/


Pure blasphemy!

_________________
"Il n`y a qu`une tristesse, c`est de n`etre pas des Saints"

Leon Bloy


Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:14 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Bergoglio information


Borgoglio et al.'s applause of Skiorka's Christ-denying speech is a public act of apostasy.

As St. Thomas says regarding apostasy:
Summa II-II q. 12 a. 1 c. wrote:
Apostasy denotes a backsliding from God. This may happen in various ways according to the different kinds of union between man and God. For, in the first place, man is united to God by faith; secondly, by having his will duly submissive in obeying His commandments; thirdly, by certain special things pertaining to supererogation such as the religious life, the clerical state, or Holy Orders. Now if that which follows be removed, that which precedes, remains, but the converse does not hold. Accordingly a man may apostatize from God, by withdrawing from the religious life to which he was bound by profession, or from the Holy Order which he had received: and this is called "apostasy from religious life" or "Orders." A man may also apostatize from God, by rebelling in his mind against the Divine commandments: and though man may apostatize in both the above ways, he may still remain united to God by faith.

But if he give up the faith, then he seems to turn away from God altogether: and consequently, apostasy simply and absolutely is that whereby a man withdraws from the faith, and is called "apostasy of perfidy." In this way apostasy, simply so called, pertains to unbelief.
Here's Skorka's full speech (if you know Spanish).

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:39 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
I agree it's an act contrary to faith, Alan. It's very clear that what is being said constitutes a challenge to the faith which places any Christian present under an obligation not to show approval, and in the case of those up the front, who have by their involvement taken some kind of responsibility for the entire event, there's an obligation to show disagreement with this. Instead, Bergoglio applauds. Without judging his soul, it's appalling.

Who made the video? They're nuts. :) They warn of a schism (due to heresy) to come? It happened several decades ago! Traditional Catholics are the Catholics who recognised and reacted sanely to the revolution, separating themselves from it, and therefore from those who embraced it (no matter how reluctantly) insofar as those people embraced it. That was a schism due to heresy, absolutely classical in its essential nature, no different from the schism of the Catholics and the Arians, or the Catholics and the Nestorians, or the Catholics and the various Protestants in Germany, England, or anywhere else that the clergy fell away and adopted a new religion. Now we are told we must separate ourselves from Modernists? Well, hello! :)

_________________
In Christ our King.


Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:33 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Francis' 10 Most Erroneous & Destructive Statements of 2013




_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Sat Jan 11, 2014 8:31 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Wanna see my picture on the cover
Wanna buy five copies for my mother...
Wanna see my smilin' face
On the cover of the Rollin' Stone...

_________________
In Christ our King.


Wed Jan 29, 2014 12:46 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Bergoglio information
John Lane wrote:
Wanna see my picture on the cover
Wanna buy five copies for my mother...
Wanna see my smilin' face
On the cover of the Rollin' Stone...
I saw your post about 10 minutes ago, and it didn't make any sense until I saw this:
Image

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Wed Jan 29, 2014 2:24 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 60
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Has a conciliar "pope" ever been more clearly heretical? And how did nearly everyone miss this in June:

Jorge ''Francis'' Bergoglio wrote:
What is reconciliation? Taking one from this side, taking another one for that side and uniting them: no, that’s part of it but it's not it ... True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.


Source: http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-the-chr ... ad-to-reco

_________________
Thomas Williams


Sat Feb 22, 2014 12:19 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 4:08 pm
Posts: 48
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Thomas Williams wrote:
Has a conciliar "pope" ever been more clearly heretical? And how did nearly everyone miss this in June:

Jorge ''Francis'' Bergoglio wrote:
What is reconciliation? Taking one from this side, taking another one for that side and uniting them: no, that’s part of it but it's not it ... True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.


Source: http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-the-chr ... ad-to-reco


How was that missed?


Sat Feb 22, 2014 3:39 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
It is truly incredible! What a perverted mind!

_________________
In Christ our King.


Sat Feb 22, 2014 6:14 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Thomas Williams wrote:
Has a conciliar "pope" ever been more clearly heretical? And how did nearly everyone miss this in June:

Jorge ''Francis'' Bergoglio wrote:
What is reconciliation? Taking one from this side, taking another one for that side and uniting them: no, that’s part of it but it's not it ... True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.


Source: http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-the-chr ... ad-to-reco
Wow, I didn't think anything could be worse than these quotes from Evangelii Gaudium:
§254 wrote:
Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”. But due to the sacramental dimension of sanctifying grace, God’s working in them tends to produce signs and rites, sacred expressions which in turn bring others to a communitarian experience of journeying towards God. While these lack the meaning and efficacy of the sacraments instituted by Christ, they can be channels which the Holy Spirit raises up in order to liberate non-Christians from atheistic immanentism or from purely individual religious experiences.
This is even worse than §247, on the Old Covenent still being in effect for Jews, because it supports a heretical conception of justification that could be termed "sola conscientia," reaffirms Lumen Gentium's "subsistit in" ecclesiology, and destroys the supernatural order by saying sanctifying grace operates in purely natural religions (naturalism).
Quote:
16. I was happy to take up the request of the Fathers of the Synod to write this Exhortation.[19] In so doing, I am reaping the rich fruits [!] of the Synod’s labours. … Nor do I believe that the papal magisterium should be expected to offer a definitive or complete word on every question which affects the Church and the world. [I guess the "fruits" weren't rich enough, then…] It is not advisable for the Pope to take the place of local Bishops in the discernment of every issue which arises in their territory. In this sense, I am conscious of the need to promote a sound “decentralization”.
Quote:
255. The Synod Fathers spoke of the importance of respect for religious freedom, viewed as a fundamental human right. [Which the Syllabus etc. condemned!] This includes “the freedom to choose the religion which one judges to be true and to manifest one’s beliefs in public”. [a quote from Benedict XVI] A healthy pluralism [viz., syncretism‽], one which genuinely respects differences and values them [Freemasons value syncretism, not Catholics!] as such, does not entail privatizing religions in an attempt to reduce them to the quiet obscurity of the individual’s conscience or to relegate them to the enclosed precincts of churches, synagogues or mosques. This would represent, in effect, a new form of discrimination and authoritarianism. The respect due to the agnostic or non-believing minority should not be arbitrarily imposed in a way that silences the convictions of the believing majority or ignores the wealth of religious traditions. In the long run, this would feed resentment rather than tolerance and peace.
Unbelievable. He says we must "value" the errors of false religions!

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Sat Feb 22, 2014 7:14 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Playing devil's advocate here:

Perhaps he meant that Christ took on our sins just as He took on our flesh. Christ doesn't become a man, as though He ceased being God; He is true God and true man, yet we say "Christ became man" as a shorthand for saying that Christ took on human flesh. Perhaps Francis is using a similar "shorthand" here: "Christ became a sinner" for "Christ took on our sins."

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Sat Feb 22, 2014 8:08 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Alan Aversa wrote:
Playing devil's advocate here:

Perhaps he meant that Christ took on our sins just as He took on our flesh. Christ doesn't become a man, as though He ceased being God; He is true God and true man, yet we say "Christ became man" as a shorthand for saying that Christ took on human flesh. Perhaps Francis is using a similar "shorthand" here: "Christ became a sinner" for "Christ took on our sins."


This suggestion would be a lot more credible if one didn't have to find a "devil's advocate" to attempt to show what he says could somehow be understood in a Catholic sense but only sounds wrong because of his poor choice of words just about every single time he opened his mouth.


Sat Feb 22, 2014 8:52 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Bergoglio information
TKGS wrote:
This suggestion would be a lot more credible if one didn't have to find a "devil's advocate" to attempt to show what he says could somehow be understood in a Catholic sense but only sounds wrong because of his poor choice of words just about every single time he opened his mouth.
Oh, yes, at the very, very least what he said is offensive to pious ears.

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Sat Feb 22, 2014 9:05 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Alan Aversa wrote:
Playing devil's advocate here...


I was thinking: Perhaps it's not really appropriate to say that you were playing "devil's advocate" here since you were suggesting how he could have meant something orthodox. With Bergoglio, trying to explain his foibles is more like playing "heaven's advocate".


Sun Feb 23, 2014 5:49 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Alan Aversa wrote:
Playing devil's advocate here:

Perhaps he meant that Christ took on our sins just as He took on our flesh. Christ doesn't become a man, as though He ceased being God; He is true God and true man, yet we say "Christ became man" as a shorthand for saying that Christ took on human flesh. Perhaps Francis is using a similar "shorthand" here: "Christ became a sinner" for "Christ took on our sins."



Well, Christ did become man, he didn't just take on human flesh. In any case, I’m not sure that’s the problematical part. It's quite normal to speak of Our Lord loading Himself down with our sins, and feeling the disgust of them as He takes responsibility for them, truly as if the sins were His own. That is indeed what He did in His Passion. My feeling is that saying He became the sinner for us would be nothing worse than a pious exaggeration, aimed at inculcating the very mysterious concept of Our Blessed Redeemer “taking on” our sins. Not that one trusts Bergoglio to be aiming at any orthodox doctrinal point. He is a stopped clock, right by accident twice per day.

But what is certainly horrible and unorthodox is the next part, “When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.”

Yes we absolutely express our sin, accuse ourselves of sin, and God does indeed forgive us, freely, without preceding merit on our part, entirely because He is loving and merciful without limit. To deny that this is what happens is horrible. It is not His sin! It is ours! He takes it on, makes it His own, by His divine will, on Calvary, but that His sovereign choice, for Him to express, not for us to do. We have no active role in that; we are the subjects of mercy. It smacks of blasphemy to say what Bergoglio says here. It’s disgusting and no Catholic could say it.

Further, one of the essential parts of the Sacrament of Penance is contrition, of which a firm purpose of amendment is included. The sacrament is not valid without this, and instead of being a path to eternal salvation it would become a sacrilege. Telling the Christian to make his confession whilst thinking, “I will sin again” is utter madness, totally contrary to the most obvious sound pastoral practice, for it threatens the very validity of the sacrament. I do not mean that one cannot think that one, being weak and having bad habits, is likely to sin again. Obviously we know that, but rather, we are taught by the Church to say “I will not sin again (by Thy grace).” That is how the Catholic Church teaches us to speak in the confessional, for she knows her own doctrine, and she is aware always that the integrity of this sacrament depends upon a firm purpose of amendment.

Bergoglio is a heretic. He knows less about Christian doctrine than any instructed seven year old. Somebody needs to make him read this, or something similar: https://archive.org/stream/cihm_47188#page/n7/mode/2up

Finally, this is blasphemy as well: “And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.” He likes sin? He likes being told “This is your sin” by the sinner? He likes being told, “I will sin again”? NO!

Look at Him in the garden at Gethsemane, sweating blood, utterly disgusted by the load of sin He is taking on, repulsed by its ulginess, hating sin with His entire Being!

He loves to forgive us, but He had laid down an essential condition according to which He will forgive absolutely anything – that we own up to our sins and form the resolution to leave them behind, never to commit them again. Precisely the opposite of Bergolgio’s madness. Our Lord gives us the grace to form this resolution, so we are not even asked to do this much on our own, but that only reinforces how necessary it is for us to say, “This is MY sin and I will NOT sin again!” God does not give graces for no reason.

Bergoglio’s nonsense smacks of Lutheranism. The Catholic Church teaches that justification is a real change in the soul of the justified. We can see that this is her mind in everything she touches in relation to our salvation. Her instruction that we must truly intend to change our lives when we kneel in the confessional is one illustration of that. Her insistence that we own our sins, that we accuse ourselves, speaks of the same doctrinal foundation. The Lutheran heresy, on the other hand, is that justification is merely a covering over of the sinfulness of man; that rather than changing man’s state, justification is God blinding Himself to sin, choosing not to see it. This seems to be Bergoglio’s doctrine. It suggests strongly that Our Lord’s Passion is a kind of magic by which sin is forgiven without any real change on the part of the sinner “I will sin again.” This is heresy. God does much more for us than this. He actually restores us. He sets the example on Calvary of taking responsibility for our sins, then He calls us by grace to the tribunal that He has created in order to dispense His mercy, and then He has us own up, change our mind about sin, and make some actual (if little) satisfaction for it. The Catholic Church is about changing men for the better. That is what Christ Jesus desires to do, and actually does. Bergoglio is all talk. He is not a Christian.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Sun Feb 23, 2014 11:31 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Bergoglio information
John Lane wrote:
Well, Christ did become man, he didn't just take on human flesh.[/qutoe]Yes, which is why I said "Christ doesn't become a man, as though He ceased being God."
John Lane wrote:
But what is certainly horrible and unorthodox is the next part, “When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.”
Denzinger 913 Can. 3. wrote:
If anyone says that those words of the Lord Savior: "Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins ye shall retain, they are retained" [John 20:22 f.], are not to be understood of the power of remitting and retaining sins in the sacrament of penance, as the Catholic Church has always understood from the beginning, but, contrary to the institution of this sacrament, distorts them to an authority for preaching the Gospel: let him be anathema [cf.n. 894 ].

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Mon Feb 24, 2014 12:39 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:49 pm
Posts: 552
Location: Argentina
New post Re: Bergoglio information
John Lane wrote:
Alan Aversa wrote:
Playing devil's advocate here:

Perhaps he meant that Christ took on our sins just as He took on our flesh. Christ doesn't become a man, as though He ceased being God; He is true God and true man, yet we say "Christ became man" as a shorthand for saying that Christ took on human flesh. Perhaps Francis is using a similar "shorthand" here: "Christ became a sinner" for "Christ took on our sins."



Well, Christ did become man, he didn't just take on human flesh. In any case, I’m not sure that’s the problematical part. It's quite normal to speak of Our Lord loading Himself down with our sins, and feeling the disgust of them as He takes responsibility for them, truly as if the sins were His own. That is indeed what He did in His Passion. My feeling is that saying He became the sinner for us would be nothing worse than a pious exaggeration, aimed at inculcating the very mysterious concept of Our Blessed Redeemer “taking on” our sins. Not that one trusts Bergoglio to be aiming at any orthodox doctrinal point. He is a stopped clock, right by accident twice per day.

But what is certainly horrible and unorthodox is the next part, “When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: 'This is your sin, and I will sin again'. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.”


That´s exactly what I thought John.

Great post btw!

_________________
"Il n`y a qu`une tristesse, c`est de n`etre pas des Saints"

Leon Bloy


Mon Feb 24, 2014 12:45 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Thank you, Cristian and Alan.

The original text is here, by the way: http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-the-chr ... ad-to-reco

There's a bit more there, such as this: "Christ became sin for me! And my sins are there in his body, in his soul! This - it's crazy, but it's beautiful, it's true! This is the scandal of the Cross!"

No, it's the scandal of Frank.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Mon Feb 24, 2014 4:01 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 12:28 pm
Posts: 284
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Even Protestants are seeing Bergoglio's heresy.

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/pope-f ... d-religion

What a scandal!


Mon Feb 24, 2014 1:33 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Thanks Recusant.

I had not seen this quote before:

Quote:
In ideologies there is not Jesus: in his tenderness, his love, his meekness. And ideologies are rigid, always. Of every sign: rigid. And when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought… For this reason Jesus said to them: ‘You have taken away the key of knowledge.’ The knowledge of Jesus is transformed into an ideological and also moralistic knowledge, because these close the door with many requirements. The faith becomes ideology and ideology frightens, ideology chases away the people, distances, distances the people and distances of the Church of the people. But it is a serious illness, this of ideological Christians. It is an illness, but it is not new, eh?


So doctrinal purity is Pharisaism, and faith is reduced to kindness (i.e. it is kindness or it is not faith at all). What is really fascinating, and not a little frightening, is how this man manages to confuse everything. There are no distinctions, it seems - except of course for the new ones he imposes. So, all doctrine, except this one he expresses here, is unkindness. Nobody can impose his doctrine on another - except Francis, who imposes this nonsense on all. All doctrine must be flexible - except the doctrine that all doctrine must be flexible. That, it is clear, is inflexible, irreformable, doctrine, obligatory on all. "Believe nothing - or else!"

_________________
In Christ our King.


Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:16 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Source: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/0 ... ?hpt=hp_t2


Pope Francis: Church could support civil unions

By Daniel Burke, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

(CNN) - Pope Francis reaffirmed the Catholic Church's opposition to gay marriage on Wednesday, but suggested in a newspaper interview that it could support some types of civil unions.

The Pope reiterated the church's longstanding teaching that "marriage is between a man and a woman." However, he said, "We have to look at different cases and evaluate them in their variety."

States, for instance, justify civil unions as a way to provide economic security to cohabitating couples, the Pope said in a wide-ranging interview published Wednesday in Corriere della Sera, an Italian daily. State-sanctioned unions are thus driven by the need to ensure rights like access to health care, Francis added.

A number of Catholic bishops have supported civil unions for same-sex couples, including Pope Francis when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 2010, according to reports in National Catholic Reporter and The New York Times.

Behind closed doors, pope supported civil unions in Argentina, activist says

But Wednesday's comments are "the first time a Pope has indicated even tentative acceptance of civil unions," according to Catholic News Service.

Pope Francis, who marks his first year in office on March 13, has sought to set a more tolerant tone for his 1 billion-member church and suggested that a broad range of topics are at least open for discussion.

In January, the Pope recalled a little girl in Buenos Aires who told her teacher that she was sad because "my mother's girlfriend doesn't like me."

"The situation in which we live now provides us with new challenges which sometimes are difficult for us to understand," the Pope told leaders of religious orders, adding that the church "must be careful not to administer a vaccine against faith to them."

The Vatican later denied that those comments signaled an opening toward same-sex unions.

Last June, Francis famously refused to judge gay priests in comments that ricocheted around the world. He has also said that the church should not "interfere" in the spiritual lives of gays and lesbians.

Pope Francis' greatest hits of 2013

Support of same-sex unions of any type is fiercely contested by many Catholic church leaders.

In Wednesday's interview, Francis also addressed several other controversial issues, including the Catholic Church's ban on contraception, the role of women and the devastating clergy sexual abuse scandal.

On contraception, the Pope praised Pope Paul VI for having the "courage" to "go against the majority" when restating the ban in 1968. But, Francis said, the church must also be "merciful" and "attentive to concrete situations."

Contraception and church's ban on divorced Catholics receiving holy communion, will likely be addressed at major meetings of Catholic bishops in Rome in 2014 and 2015.

“We must give a response. But to do so, we must reflect much in depth,” the Pope said Wednesday.

On the role of women in the church, an issue of particular concern to Catholics in the United States, the Pope hinted that changes could be in the works.

"Women must be present in all of the places where decisions are taken," Francis said in the newspaper interview, but the church must consider more than "functional" roles for women. To that end, Catholic leaders are engaged in "deep reflection" on women's role in the church, he said.

On the sexual abuse of children by Catholic clergy, a scandal that has rocked the church in the United States, the Pope said the abuse has left "very deep wounds" on victims.

In response, the church has done more than other institutions to be open and transparent about sexual abuse by its employees, Francis said. “But the Church is the only one to be attacked."

A United Nations panel criticized Catholic leaders last month in a hard-hitting report on clergy sexual abuse.

The report said the Vatican "has not acknowledged the extent of the crimes committed, has not taken the necessary measures to address cases of child sexual abuse and to protect children, and has adopted policies and practices which have led to the continuation of the abuse by and the impunity of the perpetrators.”

The Vatican said it would study the U.N. report.

Kick out those who sexually abuse children, U.N. panel tells Vatican

On Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, who has surprised church-watchers with public appearances after saying he would live a cloistered life in retirement, Francis said he considers his predecessor a "wise grandfather."

"The Pope Emeritus is not a statue in a museum," Pope Francis said. Rather, the two men have decided that Benedict should participate in the church's public life rather than live a shuttered life.

"I thought about grandparents who with their wisdom, their advice, strengthen families and don't deserve to end up in an old folks home," Francis said.

Finally, he may sometimes wear a cape, but don't call Pope Francis a Superman, the popular pontiff said.

"To paint the Pope as a sort of Superman, a kind of star, seems offensive to me," Francis told Corriere della Sera. "The Pope is a man who laughs, cries, sleeps soundly and has friends like everyone else. A normal person."

Earlier this year, graffiti depicting a muscle-bound and flying Francis appeared on walls near Vatican City, but the Pope said Wednesday that he doesn't like the "mythology" surrounding his papacy, which marks its first anniversary on March 13.

For instance, Francis debunked the idea that he sneaks out of the Vatican at night to feed the homeless.

"It never occurred to me," he said.

(CNN's Delia Gallagher assisted in translating Pope Francis' remarks from the Italian.)


Wed Mar 05, 2014 8:10 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 12:28 pm
Posts: 284
New post Re: Bergoglio information
The best words, in my mind, to describe this person is "satanic impostor"!

Honestly, if this doesn't convince a sedeoccupantist that this man is not a true pope, I'm afraid nothing ever will.


Thu Mar 06, 2014 1:48 am
Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Recusant wrote:
The best words, in my mind, to describe this person is "satanic impostor"!

Honestly, if this doesn't convince a sedeoccupantist that this man is not a true pope, I'm afraid nothing ever will.


Sadly, for most (if not all) of them I know personally, nothing ever will.


Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:37 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:49 pm
Posts: 552
Location: Argentina
New post Re: Bergoglio information
This news is in Spanish but I guess you can found it in English as well.

http://www.ambito.com/noticia.asp?id=737804

So Bergoglio just called an Argentinean divorced woman and told her she can go to communion because "she did nothing wrong" by divorcing... and that the Vatican is studying the issue (what for? one may think).

_________________
"Il n`y a qu`une tristesse, c`est de n`etre pas des Saints"

Leon Bloy


Wed Apr 23, 2014 1:29 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Here it is in a reputable newspaper in English: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religio ... union.html

I keep imagining that something really clearly against the faith will produce a sea-change amongst sedeplenist trads, so this new scandal gets the thoughts running again, but is it really any different from the 1983 Code permitting Holy Communion to non-Catholics?

_________________
In Christ our King.


Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:23 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Bergoglio information
John Lane wrote:
I keep imagining that something really clearly against the faith will produce a sea-change amongst sedeplenist trads, so this new scandal gets the thoughts running again, but is it really any different from the 1983 Code permitting Holy Communion to non-Catholics?


I've been reading comments condemning sedevacantism on another forum. I've come to the conclusion that the anti-sedevacantists are scared of what is coming but they are beginning to make arguments that will ensure that, no matter what happens, they will say that it isn't an "infallible declaration" and sedevacantists are just stupid and of bad will.

Frankly, as I told someone recently, I don't think that a declaration allowing for inter-communion with the Anglicans and Lutherans (which I think is a distinct possibility before 2017) or even the ordination of women (which I think is closer than anyone thinks) would change the minds of most sedeplenist trads.

For most of them, their highest dogma seems to be that sedevacantism is wrong and they will twist anything to keep it that way.

I haven't seen the argument that divorce and remarriage can be legitimized by the pope since he "has the keys" and can "bind and loose" yet. I wonder why they haven't brought that up yet.


Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:58 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
I note that around the Web people are running for the "it's a hoax" refuge. The trouble with that thesis is that the Vatican has already been asked directly to confirm the story and said that it will neither confirm nor deny it. Now if it were a hoax, there'd be a denial issued. If it were considered a scandal by the Vatican, there'd be a denial issued. On the other hand, if it's true, the Vatican may well choose not to confirm it for political reasons. That is, let the story hang out there doing the work we all know it will do - i.e. shifting the views of Novus and "Conservative" Catholics to the left - whilst allowing those who won't shift their views a desperate refuge.

Memo to all: whatever else you may think, the Vatican does not consider that this story is scandalous.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:17 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 60
New post Re: Bergoglio information
In Rome, on the morning of Low Sunday, A.D. 2014, Bergoglio "canonized" two of his predecessors:

'Pope' Francis wrote:
For the honor of the Blessed Trinity, the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the increase of the Christian life, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and our own, after due deliberation and frequent prayer for divine assistance, and having sought the counsel of many of our brother bishops, we declare and define Blessed John XXIII and John Paul II be saints and we enroll them among the saints, decreeing that they are to be venerated as such by the whole church. In the name of the Holy Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/facts-and-figures-about-sundays-canonization/2014/04/26/5cc20e7a-cd32-11e3-b81a-6fff56bc591e_story.html

A dedicated thread on this topic was started by Bellarmine Forums user Recusant the same day: http://strobertbellarmine.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&p=16278

_________________
Thomas Williams


Sun Apr 27, 2014 10:42 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 60
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Earlier today, the impostor in the Vatican officially "Tweeted" the following:

Pope Francis ‏@Pontifex wrote:
Inequality is the root of social evil.


Also "Tweeted" in the Latin (!) account:

Papa Franciscus ‏@Pontifex_ln wrote:
Iniquitas radix malorum.


Despite what several neo-con types have tried to say about Bergoglio not fitting the Liberation Theology type, it appears we have a fine encapsulation of his true (Marxist) ideology... straight from the talking mule's mouth, er, Twitter account.

_________________
Thomas Williams


Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:31 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Hmmm, so much for loving Holy Scripture. How about, "the desire of money is the root of all evils" from St. Paul? Radix malorum est cupiditas.

The end must be nigh when the devil cannot even quote Holy Writ, but must make up his own aphorisms...

_________________
In Christ our King.


Tue Apr 29, 2014 1:19 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 4:08 pm
Posts: 48
New post Re: Bergoglio information
More Frantics:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -baptized/

"Pope Francis: Even Martians have a right to be baptized"

Quote:
Pope Francis said Monday that everyone has the right to be baptized — even aliens from outer space.

The pope said during his daily mass that the Catholic Church should not close its doors to people who wish to be baptized, even if they are “green men, with a long nose and big ears, like children draw,” French news agency AFP reported.

“If tomorrow, for example, an expedition of Martians arrives and some of them come to us … and if one of them says: ‘Me, I want to be baptized!’, what would happen?” he joked.

The Argentine pontiff is known for his colorful sense of humor and his down-to-earth style in representing the Church.

Francis has been firm in his stance, arguing that children of divorced or cohabiting parents should not be denied a baptism, AFP said.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... z31YqYoSON



Forget about the Martian part for a second. Does anyone have a right to be baptized?


Tue May 13, 2014 3:03 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
I agree about forgetting the Martian nonsense, he is obviously being what he thinks is funny in order to make his point that baptism is for all. The media loves that kind of clowning with sacred things, so they give it prominence. What an ass he is.

But this last part is heresy, in my opinion.

"Francis has been firm in his stance, arguing that children of divorced or cohabiting parents should not be denied a baptism"

The Church has always been most careful only to baptise those who will endeavour to keep the baptismal promises. What Bergoglio is promoting is that baptism be treated without respect, that there be no seriousness about the promises (do they even exist in the Novus Ordo these days?), and this is a total revolution in thinking. It's in direct opposition to the mind of the Church for two thousand years. Just another piece of typically heretical nastiness from this strange creature.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Tue May 13, 2014 3:42 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 9:15 pm
Posts: 60
New post Re: Bergoglio information
More of the same from Bergoglio:

CNS wrote:
"We want the Holy Spirit to sleep," [Bergoglio] said. "We want to domesticate the Holy Spirit, and that just won't do because he is God and he is that breeze that comes and goes, and you don't know from where."

[ . . . ]

"The council was a beautiful work of the Holy Spirit," he said. "But after 50 years, have we done everything the Holy Spirit in the council told us to do?"

The pope asked if Catholics have opened themselves to "that continuity of the church's growth" that the council signified. The answer, he said, is "no."

Catholics seemed willing to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the council's opening in 1962, he said, but they want to do so by "building a monument" rather than by changing anything.

At the same time, Pope Francis said, "there are voices saying we should go back. This is called being hard-headed, this is called wanting to domesticate the Holy Spirit, this is called becoming 'foolish and slow of heart,'" like the disappointed disciples on the road to Emmaus.


SOURCE: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/storie ... 301701.htm

I thought he didn't like to judge??

_________________
Thomas Williams


Fri May 16, 2014 1:06 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Fr. Paul Kramer
Fr. Kramer posts today:
Fr. Kramer wrote:
BERGOGLIO INVALIDLY ELECTED

The source is confidential -- a prominent figure [He clarifies in the comments section: "A cardinal, who for obvious reasons wishes to remain anonymous, provides the details."] in Rome:

"There was an agreement when card. Ratzinger was elected Pope, as there was a stalemate: 70 to 40. [cf. this article]
Bergoglio had enough votes to block the election of card Ratzinger. So a group of about 12 mainly German and US cardinals changed their vote in favour in exchange for an illicit pact: that card. Ratzinger wouldn't last more than a given period and thereafter, if he had not died before, he would have had to step down and let card Bergoglio become Pope. Once Pope however Benedict tried to have it his own way, see for instance the Motu Proprio and his remarks on Fatima being a reference not to past events but to future ones. From thereon he was besieged and shelled from all sides: the various gay and paedophilic scandals and the abuses in the Vatican finances with hints that the Vatican bank, the IOR, would be a tool of money laundering, mafia connections and you name it.
"Pope Benedict was therefore reminded of the (illicit) pact and threatened of worse to come.
He felt therefore compelled to resign. This is one of the reason why I consider illegitimate the election of Father Bergoglio."

These mainly American and German cardinals were of the same group that coerced the newly elected pope (Cardinal Angelo Scola) to resign as he was making his way to the balcony of St. Peter's, after he had been elected Pope Benedict 's successor. Bergoglio's election is null & void -- canonically irregular.
He also says in the comments section:
Fr. Kramer wrote:
If an antipope is elected the oath does not bind. An oath is not absolutely binding, ss Catholic Moral Theology teaches. When ther is reason sufficient to overturn an oath, it no longer morally binds.
So, at least one bishop in Rome considers Francis an anti-pope.

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Tue May 20, 2014 7:08 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 4:08 pm
Posts: 48
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Fascinating, but seems to be useless except as a movie script for a blockbuster summer thriller.

Fr. Kramer almost makes Benedict out to be a victim.

I find it ironic that of all the things Ratzinger has said and done that has scandalized the faithful, to which the sedeplenists would usually appeal to such scandals needing to be "clarified" by their "Holy Father" (since it would be uncharitable to assume that he actually has meant what he's said for the last fifty years or so) before any conclusions about the meaning of such statements are arrived at.

Of course, no "clarification" ever came from Ratzinger on any of these points: Except one. The fact that he resigned! And no one wants to believe him. I think that's pretty funny.


Tue May 20, 2014 10:14 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Mithrandylan wrote:
Fascinating, but seems to be useless except as a movie script for a blockbuster summer thriller.

Fr. Kramer almost makes Benedict out to be a victim.

I find it ironic that of all the things Ratzinger has said and done that has scandalized the faithful, to which the sedeplenists would usually appeal to such scandals needing to be "clarified" by their "Holy Father" (since it would be uncharitable to assume that he actually has meant what he's said for the last fifty years or so) before any conclusions about the meaning of such statements are arrived at.

Of course, no "clarification" ever came from Ratzinger on any of these points: Except one. The fact that he resigned! And no one wants to believe him. I think that's pretty funny.
Fr. Kramer does admit Scola and Ratzinger are "still a modernist at heart…with the neo-conservative wrapper".

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Tue May 20, 2014 11:27 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Francis plans to place wreath on Zionist Theodore Herzl's to
Francis plans to visit and place a wreath on Zionist founder Theodore Herzl's grave in Jerusalem! (source)

(And St. Thomas says one would apostatize by worshiping at Mohammad's grave!)

This is an attack on one of Pope St. Pius X's most courageous acts, when he told Herzl in a private audience, despite Herzl expressing that Jerusalem, because of its holy places, would be extraterritorial:
Pope St. Pius X wrote:
The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.
Pope St. Pius X wrote:
If you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we shall have churches and priests ready to baptize all of you.

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Thu May 22, 2014 5:08 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Bergoglio information
Well, to be just, placing a wreath on somebody's grave is not "worshipping" them. St. Thomas was not referring merely to paying respects to somebody, otherwise the Church would have condemned public statues of war heroes, princes, etc as well.

Herzl was an atheist, by the way. Irony!

The scandal of this act is precisely that it recognises Herzl's life's work as a great good, when that work involved implicitly the denial of Christ - i.e. by asserting a claim which rested solely upon the Old Law. This is what St. Pius X was highlighting in his comments to Herzl.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Thu May 22, 2014 7:27 am
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 280 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 25 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.