Most marriages today are invalid, Pope Francis suggests

Where does this type of thinking stop? Priests ordinations? What other sacraments?

 

This directly contradicts what Pope Francis himself said in January of this year, as shown in my previous post above, whereby he was adamant that these matters do not invalidate a marriage unless they 'influence the person's will'.

Given what Pope Francis clearly stated last January to the Roman Rota and in light of the drastic correction of his 'great majority' remark, I think the latter should be entirely disregarded for the obvious spur-of-the-moment hyperbole that it was and normal service be resumed.

 

No problem meeting with sinners. I have a problem when he shares the same values as unconverted sinners.

Perhaps you missed the quote under the photo from George Clooney praising the Pope because he shares the same values as Francis. And Francis shares the same values as Clooney. I repeat the quote below:

At the Vatican event, Clooney praised Scholas Occurrentes, saying that it was “wonderful” to see “so many religions talking about inclusion.” He praised Pope Francis for using the best way to combat “fundamentalist attitudes,” namely by focusing on school children. “We have to start with schools, because we know that hatred and fundamentalist attitudes have to be taught. We’re not born this way, it’s a learned behaviour. Pope Francis is focusing on schools, because he knows that this is the only way we’re going to fight it,” he said during the event.

The Pope's attitude to inclusion is summed up in his famous phrase 'Who am I to judge'?

Note Clooney' statement on combating 'fundamentalism' is almost identical to the Pope's recent charge against his own flock.

Pope Francis - "We Catholics have some -- and not some, many -- who believe in the absolute truth and go ahead dirtying the other with calumny, with disinformation, and doing evil." "They do evil," said the pope. "I say this because it is my church.""We have to combat it," he said. "Religious fundamentalism is not religious, because it lacks God. It is idolatry, like the idolatry of money." "They do evil," said the pope. "I say this because it is my church." "We have to combat it,"

Scholas Occurrentes is Pope Francis's pet project that he helped start in Artentina.

http://www.scholasoccurrentes.org/

Scholas Occurrentes that Pope Francis promotes has a wholly secular agenda and paradigm based on the values of humanism. Hence the buzz words - inclusion, social justice, fundamentalism, sustainable development - these are all of course buzz words of the New World Order. The Directors of Scholas Occurentes are also called at times to speak at conferences organised by other Vatican bodies - for example Nov 2015 event sponsored by the pontifical academy of sciences on the theme of 'Children and sustainable development, a challenge for education. Speakers included the neo-Malthusian economist Jeffrey Sachs and the Argentine Maria Paz Jurado who spoke on issues of 'global citizenship' as a 'paradigm shift in education'.

Scholas Occurentes has recently entered into a five year partnership with that wonderful "child friendly" organisation UNICEF (the latter phrase is by the way ironic).

VATICAN CITY/NEW YORK, 21 April 2015 – His Holiness
Pope Francis and UNICEF Executive Director Anthony Lake met
today in Rome to launch a new partnership


UNICEF is actually an oxymoron since it works proactively at preventing the birth of children covertly as well as overtly undermining human fertility by distributing contraceptives and abortifacients, performing forced and coerced abortions, donating sterilization kits, funding sterilizing vaccines and immunization programmes to deliver them under the pretext of combating childhood diseases and improving maternal health and subverting people’s reproductive rights and the family structure by perverting the ministries of health of every developing nation on earth. As such, UNICEF has become one of the world’s principal genocidal agencies and a real and present danger to children,mothers and families around the world.

The Pope is not only meeting with 'sinners' he is working with them.

But who am I to judge?

 

I guess we're on the honor system.

 

The fundamentals of something are its basic, essential foundations. To be a non-fundamentalist Catholic is not to be a Catholic at all.

By disregarding the fundamentals it is all too easy, for example, to deceive oneself into finding 'compassionate' reasons to justify ripping a baby from its mother's womb.

 

Even the secular media realises the Church is in a profound crisis.

Pope Francis has a problem. He believes he heads a religious organization so inept and impotent, it cannot even marry its own members reliably.

http://theweek.com/articles/631039/forgive-pope-francis-sins-against-reason

 

Headline news: The world is in profound crisis.
But, I believe in the Catholic Church. That It will be here until the end of time. That was the promise, right?

 

CRISIS OF FAITH IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH (Father John Hardon)

Prophetic as this article was written in 1996:


Why did such a crisis come about in the first place? Surely no phenomenon is without some explanation, and this one better be explained. The explanation is not hard to find. There is a crisis of faith in the Catholic Church because there has been an intrusion of alien ideas.

The moment we say this, however, we are immediately confronted with the two terms, "intrusion" and "alien ideas," for the simple reason that those responsible for the crisis will deny either that there has been an intrusion or that the new ideas are anything else except that they are "new," but they should not be called alien.

An idea is alien to any religion when it openly contradicts what that religion stands for. For example: the Catholic Church has always believed that God is all perfect because He is infinite. There are now writers, ostensibly Catholic, who say the opposite, that God is finite and, in fact, He needs us to reach whatever perfection He will eventually attain.

The Catholic Church has always believed that God became man in the Person of Jesus Christ. There are now learned writers who deny this: they believe that Jesus is somehow divine because God was close to Him, but He is really only human, the Man from Nazareth.

The Catholic Church has always believed that Christian marriage is an indissoluble union of one man and one woman until death. There are now presumably Catholic moralists who say that is part of the past. From now on (they say) even sacramental marriages can and should be dissolved with the freedom to enter a second or a third partnership after divorce.

The Catholic Church has always believed that Jesus Christ practiced the counsels of chastity, poverty, and obedience, and those who receive the grace are urged to follow His example. But now there are ostensibly Catholic proponents of a new spirituality that erases this whole tradition. Instead of celibacy they propose meaningful relationships with persons of the opposite or same sex; instead of actual poverty they would substitute a subjective concern for the poor, and instead of obedience they promote shared responsibility or group consensus to replace authority.

But if these ideas are alien, in the sense of foreign to the Catholic philosophy of life, are they intrusions? Yes, they are on several counts, as anyone who knows what is taking place in the world can testify.

They are first of all an intrusion because they are unjustified by the premises of authentic Roman Catholicism. A finite God is not an infinite God; a merely human Jesus is not the Son of God who became man for our salvation; a sacramental priesthood is not a merely functional ministry; an indissoluble marriage is not a dissoluble marriage; and a purely subjective poverty or nominal celibacy or verbal obedience are not the evangelical counsels that the Church has declared were revealed to us in the life and teaching of the Savior.

Either the Catholic Church remains constant in her fundamental articles of faith, over the centuries, or she is no longer the Church founded by Christ.

These alien ideas are furthermore an intrusion because for many persons they have literally invaded people's minds by unsuspected credence being given to things that appeared orthodox but are in fact heterodox.

It is not to lay blame on particular individuals whose names by now are commonplace to anyone professionally in the sacred sciences. What is beyond question is that in many, perhaps most, cases when these vagrant ideas were first ventilated they seemed so plausible, even persuasive, that it is not surprising there have been so many victims of this massive assault on the believing Catholic mind.

But there is one more reason that must sadly be added to explain why it is justifiable to call what we are describing an invasion of alien ideas. An invasion is, by definition, done not only by an outside force and not only surreptitiously. It is also done coercively.

Of course it is not always by physical force, although physical violence even now is being exercised against millions of our fellow Christians in China, and Africa, where the most inhuman means are used to break down the resistance of priests, religious and the laity - to give up their Catholic heritage.

What is meant by intrusion is the coercive pressure: psychological and social, economic and legal, academic and professional, educational and governmental that cumulatively can become all but irresistible to conformity with the people and agencies and institutions that are in control of today's mind-shaping structures and social communications.

That some of these compulsive elements have also entered the sacred precincts of the Church's organization is not strange. There is a crusade of conformism in societies like America. Woe to anyone who dares to raise a voice in protest or who invokes the rights of conscience to protect himself from those who, in the name of conscience, are demanding allegiance to doctrinaire theories of a structure-less Church, or a cult-less priesthood, or a rule-less religious life, or that every marriage is open to ecclesiastical annulment.

Just one more observation, a plea for confidence, which means implicit trust in God.

No one who knows what the situation is, doubts that the Catholic Church is going through a veritable emergency of faith. What is an emergency but a time for urgent decisions, that is discriminating judgment? What leaders of the Church need to do today is not be shaken by the storm that is raging all around them, but to hold on literally for dear life to what Christ has revealed, to what has been defended for us by the champions of orthodoxy like Athanasius, Augustine, Jerome and Gregory the Great, lived out before us by saints and mystics like Benedict, Francis and Ignatius Loyola, like Clare, Margaret Mary and Teresa, like Elizabeth Seton and Thomas More, and experienced by us in whatever span of life we have so far lived.

There are seductive voices everywhere and some are very erudite. They may also claim numbers on their side. But no, the numbers in favor of the true Faith and the true Church are legion. They are all the myriad souls since Christ ascended to His Father who are now in the Church Triumphant. They are our intercessors before the throne of God, as they are also our consolation that we are not deceived. The present crisis is really a challenge or, better, a glorious opportunity to prove our loyalty to Christ the Truth so that one day we may possess Christ our Life who told us not to fear, "I have overcome the world." So shall we, with the help of His grace, and the Church will be the better and stronger for the experience of these critical times.

Prayer

Lord Jesus, you foretold that your Church would suffer opposition and persecution, even as you did. You declared that, so far from being anxious or worried, we should actually rejoice when the world hates us and says all manner of evil against us, for your Name. Give us the courage we need to resist the onslaught of seductive untruth. Above all, give us the confidence to realize that the trials of this life are a prelude to the glory that waits us, provided we have remained unshaken in our allegiance to you and your spouse, the Holy Catholic Church, of which you are the Teacher and the Guide. Amen.

 

http://www.fatimaperspectives.com/fe/perspective866.asp
Praise for Dr. Mirus
by Christopher A. Ferrara
June 16, 2016
The “traditionalist” or “Fatimist” view of the post-conciliar “regime of novelty” in the Catholic Church has never been about grinding an axe; nor does it involve personalities, grudges or the other base motives that fuel polemics for polemics’ sake. If anything, the traditionalist approach to the current crisis in the Church has been essentially an elaborate and well-documented presentation of the obvious: that the trajectory on which the human element of the Church embarked in the name of Vatican II has been ever downward, leading to ever more bizarre and frightening outcomes.

For decades the established Catholic commentariat, moving from newsprint and magazines to the Internet and the blogosphere, has been determined to deny the obvious by defending the patently disastrous decisions of Church authorities, from the Pope on down, that have produced nothing but what the former Cardinal Ratzinger called “a continuing process of decay that has gone on largely on the basis of appeals to the Council, and thus has discredited the Council in the eyes of many people.”

But all that has changed with the ascension of Cardinal Bergoglio to the Chair of Peter. For Francis, in all his recklessness, is showing to the Church — while the world applauds — that what lies at the end of the trajectory of the past fifty years is the dissolution of the Faith itself, if that were possible. Today, a growing number of Catholics who once belonged to the “normalist” constituency are raising objections to this pontificate’s continual demagogic assault on “rigorists,” meaning Catholics who hold fast to the Church’s teaching and discipline, particularly in the area of sexual morality.

For example, concerning Amoris Laetitia, the “apostolic exhortation” largely ghostwritten by the Pope’s loony friend, Archbishop Fernandez, author of “Heal me with your mouth: the art of kissing,” we read the following headline at LifeSiteNews: “Prominent Catholic academics say Pope’s exhortation presents danger to Church.”

Never in the past fifty years — never, in fact, in Church history — have we seen such an outpouring of concern from the laity over the heterodoxy of a papal document. This incredible development is the Humanae Vitae controversy in reverse: the Pope departs from the Church’s constant teaching in the realm of sexual morality while the laity defend it!

Nowhere is this sea change in the Catholic commentariat more striking than in the case of Dr. Jeffrey Mirus, head of the resolutely mainstream CatholicCulture.org and a constant critic of traditionalists over the years. In a recent sermon, Francis, alluding to the theme of Chapter 8 of Amoris, declared: “Jesus always knows how to accompany us, he gives us the ideal, he accompanies us towards the ideal, He frees us from the chains of the laws’ rigidity and tells us: ‘But do that up to the point that you are capable.’”

That was the last straw for Mirus. Clearly disgusted, he published an article entitled “On speaking the truth: Is confusion the chief ‘Francis effect’?” Therein we read:

It is patently false to claim that Our Lord teaches us it is perfectly all right to fail to accept the truth or to fail to live in accordance with it. It is also necessary to stress with the greatest possible strength that He never referred to “the way, the truth and the life” as an ideal…. [emphasis in original]

We have known for generations that a great many Catholic leaders are sympathetic to the modes of thought which produce such deformity. The male religious order which most obviously represents this sympathy is the Society of Jesus. But it is still sad to see what is essentially a form of worldly accommodation and comfort manifested so clearly in the personal tendencies of a man who has been made a Successor of Peter.

Even giving the benefit of every doubt, there is a recurring pattern here that forces us to admit that Pope Francis shares some of the unfortunate personal tendencies of the new Pharisees…

When a layman in Dr. Mirus’ position feels constrained publicly to characterize the reigning Pope as one of “the new Pharisees,” it is obvious that the ecclesial crisis has reached a new stage — a stage of such severity it cannot go on much longer without a drastic resolution, no doubt imposed from on high.

This is not the time for gloating. It could not have been easy for Dr. Mirus to write what he did. He is to be praised for doing so — not only on his own account, but because his example of candor will encourage others who know the truth to come forward. And that is essential now. As the hierarchy remains almost entirely silent in the face of this disastrous pontificate, we see today the same reversal of roles that was evident at the time of the Arian heresy in the 4th century. To quote Cardinal Newman’s famous lines in this regard:

[T]he body of the episcopate was unfaithful to its commission, while the body of the laity was faithful to its baptism; that at one time the Pope, at other times the patriarchal, metropolitan, and other great sees, at other times general councils, said what they should not have said, or did what obscured and compromised revealed truth; while, on the other hand, it was the Christian people who, under Providence, were the ecclesiastical strength of Athanasius, Hilary, Eusebius of Vercellae, and other great solitary confessors, who would have failed without them.

Justice requires that one give credit where credit is due, while charity commends the burial of past contentions. Thus I would urge my fellow Catholics to thank Dr. Mirus for his witness to the truth about our situation.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!​

 

Another secular media outlet displays that on this subject, it's "more Catholic than the pope." It's a shame that supposedly chatechized, faithful Catholics still insist on defending that which cannot and should not be defended.

 

View attachment 5049

 

Don't lose hope though, we still have Pope Benedict. Yes, POPE Benedict.
On 20 May, ARSH 2016, Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger’s personal secretary and confidant Archbishop Georg Gänswein delivered a speech at the Gregorian University in Romein which he described in detail Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger’s views on his status as pope. Gänswein stated openly that Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger considers himself still to be a participant in the Petrine Ministry, which by his “resignation” he “expanded”, with his role being “contemplative”, while his successor’s role is “active”. He further stated that Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger believes that his resignation was “quite different” to that of Pope Celestine V, and that it is specifically for this reason that Pope Benedict XVI did NOT revert to his given name and continues to wear the papal white cassock while living inside the Vatican Walls.

 

"A pope's off-the-cuff statements and personal opinions are not, and never have been, infallible guides. This presents no existential crisis for Catholicism.

So, what to do? The best advice, informed by centuries of history, is to just ignore or laugh at the pope when he says something so stupid. Popes in the past have expressed novel and erroneous views on matters of faith before. Pope John XXII argued for erring views on the afterlife. Pope John XII, who raped female pilgrims to Rome, was credibly rumored to have openly professed paganism.

In these cases and others, the "vast majority" of Christians held on to their faith, as best as they understood it, with no reference to their pope's day-to-day controversies. Now that the meticulously careful theologian Josef Ratzinger is neither the pope, nor the pope's ghostwriter, we're likely to deal with many popes expressing themselves in spectacularly unhelpful or stupid ways. Forgive them, and move on."

These are the last paragraphs from the article that Garabandal posted.

 

http://www.catholicconspiracy.com/a...e-francis-to-declare-2017-year-of-annulments/
BREAKING!! Pope Francis To Declare 2017 “Year of Annulments”


(AoftheANews) One day after speaking to the Diocese of Rome’s pastoral congress, where Pope Francis stated that “the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null”, Vatican sources disclosed to AoftheA News that he intends to declare 2017 “The Jubilee Year of Annulments”.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the sources said the Holy Father sees this as a natural extension of his pontificate. “It’s no coincidence this will come on the heels of the Year of Mercy. Time for a fresh start and all that. When you consider he’s streamlined the annulment process, and convened the Synod on the Family last year – this is a logical, progressive step.”

Few details were available at the time of publication. The AoftheA Vatican Bureau learned that the ‘Ministers of Mercy’ commissioned for the Year of Mercy will be renamed ‘Ministers of Nullity’, and be granted full power to automatically grant annulments. It’s rumored that canonist Ed Peters is Francis’ first choice to chair the yet-to-be assembled commission.

Photo credit: KOREA.NET – Official page of the Republic of Korea via Visualhunt / CC BY-SA



*Yes, AotA is another Catholic satire site. Good gallows humor like this is a rare find.

 

Let us not forget that we have a duty and an obligation to pray and make many sacrifices for Pope Francis.

This is what God expects from each of us.

 

garabandal, I pray daily for our Pope (and cardinals, priests, and bishops) in my rosary intentions, for his intentions, for his protection from evil, for him to lead more people to God, and for more people to trust him including all of us here on the forum, whatever side of the fence we find ourselves on today.

But, I have never been good at sacrifices. Can you (or anyone) offer up some good ideas? Is it something simple as giving up the piece of cake or scoop of ice cream at night (which may sound trite but I really like sweets Ideas are welcome as I think you are spot on and the power of prayer is clear to me, but I really could use some guidance on the sacrifices part . . .

 

Some of his critics believe one can do both, and act accordingly. They are correct.

 

"In an interview in 1946 with John Haffert of the Blue Army, Lucy was asked what was meant by the word sacrifice. Lucy answered “By sacrifice, Our Lady said that she meant the faithful fulfillment on one’s daily duty... The rosary is important because we are to pray it if we are to fulfill our daily duty...The Five First Saturdays is also important because if people make them, they will purge themselves of sin once a month and renew their purpose to fulfill their daily duty”.

"Later Lucy added “All that God wishes in the way of mortification is the simple, dutiful performance of one’s everyday tasks and the acceptance of their difficulty and tedium...Many people imagine that penitence means the practice of great austerities... Our Lord has said to me ‘The sacrifice that each one can make is to do his duty and obey my law. That is the form of penance I now demand.’ ”

 

Well, for one, practicing NFP (natural family planning) is sacrificing about 14 days out of each month. Though I think it's more of a sacrifice for my husband than I.
Headaches, laundry, a stubbed toe...everything that comes your way basically. Offer it all up and you will be "pray without ceasing" before you know it.

 

This post is very interesting in the light of what Holy Father Francis says about the state of our marriages in recent years.
We can certainly offer the difficulties that invariably present themselves between us as individual couples. An in so doing have much penance to offer Our Lord in union with His own sufferings for our redemption.

On a lighter note. I remember a friend of mine a few years ago telling me she had a row with her husband. She had made his sandwiches for his lunch the following day, and in the middle of the argument in fury she went and threw his sandwiches in the trash; and told him from now on he could make his own lunches.
Later on that evening, he apologised for whatever he had done, and she went out and took his sandwiches out of the trash, put dog food in them and left them on the side ready for him the following morning.

When he came home from work the next evening, he brought her a bunch of flowers to say he really was sorry for causing the argument. And oh boy was she sorry; but never had he courage to tell him what she had done. They were not practising Christians.