THE CHURCH MILITANT - BELEAGUERED BY BERGOGLIANISM

The pope answers questions inflight. Next to him, the new 'interim' Vatican sokesman, Alessandro Gisotti.

I had reserved this space for any reports or commentaries of significance about the recent WYD 2019 in Panama City. As usual with Bergoglio events, the pope himself undercuts
the significance and appropriate evaluation of the main event by the not always positive headline-making statements in his post-event airplane news conferences. This last event
was no exception.


This pope’s calculatedly
contradictory statements
[Often made in the same breath]
by Riccardo Cascioli
Editorial
Translated from

January 29, 2019


The pope’s inflight news conference returning from Panama confirmed his tendency to use a language containing statements that contradict each other, so that in the end, his listeners may choose to hear that which they want to hear. But any careful examination of what he says always makes it clear which way he intends to go.

This one offered a number of interesting take-off points [as his extended extemporaneities usually do]. But remembering always that whatever he says on these occasions are not Magisterium but are his personal opinions and which Catholics should consider as nothing more than that.

[But no! Mr Cascioli, you forget he once said that “Everything I say is Magisterium” – yet another measure, of course, of his hubris, since the personal opinions of popes do not constitute Magisterium at all, and none of his predecessors ever claimed their personal opinions did. Yet that arrogant presumption by Bergoglio is only a step away from declaring “Everything I say is infallible” , even if he does not say so in formal papal documents, and even if what he says is not directly about faith and morals, the only two categories whereby a pope may be infallible – always on the condition that what he says does not contradict what the Church has taught for more than two millennia.]

Nonetheless, the mere fact that such opinions are emitted by the pope means they are destined to ‘orient’ the Catholic public and to create the perception among non-Catholics of how things really stand within the Church.

Moreover, it is worth discussing this if only because on the one hand, they furnish us with indications of the pope’s reasoning process, and on the other hand, they offer indications on the pastoral choices that he is already carrying out or intends to carry out.

The main fact that leaps to the eye is the self-ontradictory way this pope epresses himself – affirming one thing but also its opposite, such that his listeners can take away whatever part of the binomial they agree with.

An obvious example of this was his reply to a question on priestly celibacy. First, he defended with drawn sword the ‘gift’ of celibacy and its perennial validity which he says he does not even remotely intend to question.

But then he cites an exception: “Such a possibility remains only in the most remote places – like some of the Pacific slands, but it is something to think about [doing away with priestly celibacy] when the pastoral need arises”. Meaning, “if there are not enough priests and the Eucharist can be distributed only rarely, then…” It is clear therefore why some newspapers headlined that as far as this pope goes, priestly celibacy is untouchable along with any other opening about married priests.

In fact, if one looks deeper into his answer, it is clear that he is at his favorite methodology of ‘initiating processes’ so dear to him. [It is the tried-and-true technique of the camel sticking one foot into the tent until, unimpeded, he fully gets in.]

He starts with the exceptions: those remote places, which are visied by a priest only once a year (which is not a new problem, but previous popes have never considered this a reason to think of allowing married priests), and then the exceptions soon become the rule. Moreover, the German bishops have already started down this road, and the subject of viri probati will be on the table at the special synod on the Amazonia which takes place in Rome this October.

At the inflight news conference, the pope also threw in the hypotheses of one Fr. Fritz Lobinger on a ‘reduced’ form of the priesthood for married man – as if it had been an extemporaneous thing he just thought of, to point out that there are many hypotheses to consider. But no! – this is something he has been thinking about for some time.

Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Munich, one of the pope’s closest collaborators, said in November 2017, referring to the idea of married priests, that in 2015, during the German bishops’ ad limina visit to Rome, the pope had urged them to read the works of Fr. Lobinger. It becomes clear here which way the pope wants to go.

Another example of this pope’s way of speaking every which way is on the subject of migrants. During this pontificate, he has hammered away on the themes of total welcome for migrants, of open frontiers towards everyone, to the point that his most wild-eyed followers have started to demand the excommunication of those who merely want to rein in uncontrolled and indiscriminate immigration into Italy.

But on the plane – and in fairness, not for the first time – the pope spoke in moderate and detailed terms about the issue, even getting to the subject of “let us help intending migrants first in their own countries” – words that would sound plausible if they were said by Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini. So once more, one could take from the pope’s statements what best matches his own opinions.

But even in this case, the real process the pope has initiated must be understood in the overall context of the interventions and mechanisms he has set in motion over the past six years: Every rule that every so often he articulates in favor of open welcome is accompanied by a massive dose of interventions and gestures to support those who advocate the abolition of national frontiers [to favor the entry of migrants]. Many of the Itaian bishops have become true and proper ‘ultra’-migrationists in this respect.

In any case, this calculated method of ‘putting forward’ his thoughts equivocally inevitably creates a lot of confusion, frustration and division, which one sees in the way observers and many of the faithful often come to verbal blows because of this pope’s self-contradictory statements.

Not having followed the Panama WYD in any way, I thought my only take-away message from it would be the following account which I could not miss because photos of
the monstrosity were ubiquitous on the Internet. I will just cite this account by an obviously biased site, whose major biases I happen to share... I should have known
better, of course, that the pope's subsequent inflight pontifications always amount to a barrage of new outrages, mostly anti-Catholic from the papal lip, a virtual
M16 aggressive weapon always set to automatic fire.



Top: The Panama 'monster-ance'; bottom left, the pope elevating the monstrance in Panama; bottom right, doing the same in Fatima in 2017. The Fatima monstrance was supposed to represent the Miracle of the Sun in the final
appearance of Our Lady to the three shepherd children. What is wrong with traditional monstrances that they must be replaced with something contemporary if this something represents a distraction?

MONSTER-ANCE!

January 26, 2019

Covering the horrid theological and liturgical junk the Vatican II Sect puts out on a daily basis, one gets used to a lot, but there are times when you just want to jump out of your chair and yell, “No way! They can’t be serious!”

Today was such a day.

“Pope” Francis is currently spreading his Masonic-Naturalist poison in Panama on the occasion of World Youth Day… Whereas yesterday evening saw a Novus Ordo version of the Stations of the Cross (with dancers, of course!), tonight’s big event was a vigil prayer service.

When the time came for “Eucharistic” adoration, Francis made himself comfortable in a chair while everyone else knelt. [Of course, there are no pictures to be seen online – at least, so far – of the pope seated for the Adoration, but I am sure the video must show it somehow (I must admit I have no desire to look at these videos)] There was no footwashing ceremony scheduled, his knees must have conked out once again, but that’s just business as usual.

The lowlight of the evening’s ceremony was the “monstrance” used for adoration. Screenshots taken from the video of the event show a hollow metal statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary. There is a separate and removable receptable for the Novus Ordo version of the Blessed Sacrament, which gets placed into the hands of the statue. Not only is it ugly, it is also very disturbing when seen from the front… The immodest overtones are more than evident. [ALso, whoever designed the ensemble forgot to provide a base for the monstrance other than the 'hands' of the statue, so the pope has to hold it by the bottom part of the frame holding the Eucharist.]

The full video of the entire spectacle can be found here:


[Yes, the ensemble was not pretty, if not exactly downright ugly, and rather unflattering to Our Lady – the face looks old and distorted - but I do not see the immodest overtones that are supposed to be evident. The entire concept is bizarre, if not theologically wrong, because Mary’s womb was the original Tabernacle of tabernacles…

Somewhere, it is mentioned that the statue was fashioned out of melted bullet casings, and everyone can attribute whatever symbolisms he wants to that. But the whole point of Eucharistic Adoration is to focus the worshipper’s attention on the Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, not to distract him or her – however transiently – with some unexpected and unjustified bizarrerie.

One recalls with pleasure WYD Madrid 2011 when the monstrance used for the Eucharistic Adoration and Rayer Vigil led by Benedict XVI was the 500-year-old Monstrance of Toledo - “popularly known for being used during the Corpus Christi procession each year in Toledo - almost 9 feet tall and made of gold and silver”, considered the ‘finest example of Spanish silverwork of all time”. That occasion in Madrid was, of course, made unforgettable and spectacularly awesome by a surprise torrent and hailstorm that ‘halted’ the event for about 20 minutes, and which the Pope and the almost 2 million young worshippers who were there endured while it lasted and then calmly went on with the Adoration.

Obviously, Bergoglio cannot be blamed for the bizarreries foisted on him. But isn’t Mons. Guido Marini, master of papal liturgical ceremonies, supposed to make a site visit beforehand to any place the pope is visiting just to make sure that all liturgical preparations are comme il faut? Did he not visit Panama City beforehand and did he not know of the ‘monster-ance’ commissioned for the Eucharistic Adoration? And if he knew about it, did he approve of it? In the same way, one must then assume he approved of the commissioned monstrance used by Bergoglio in Fatima in 2017.]

[Modificato da TERESA BENEDETTA 01/02/2019 15:38]