"The Dictator Pope": Mysterious New Book Looks "Behind the Mask" of Francis

I agree with much of the above.

For those who seem to be concerned about my beliefs, let me copy this 1996 quote from the True Life in God messages which I think most know I believe in strongly. The quote represents what I believe. Even if you don't believe in the authenticity of these messages, they speak eloquently of how God looks at us in our generation.

today, to My great sorrow, a huge population from every country is being drawn to worship the Beast and he has become for them their ruler and their god, for they have accepted his kingdoms and their luxury; they have become the traders of the earth; yes! they have set their hearts on the fruits of the world; deceived by Satan, they promote error, obsessed with their sins, they promote liberalism and the like, defying the Truth and the Tradition of My Church; the Lie is defying the Truth ....

so I want you to pray for them, daughter, for I love them too; pray, for they are under the influence of evil forces; these dark powers of the underworld are deluding them and interfering in their priestly ministry ... these evil powers of hell are after My consecrated souls to draw them to believe what is untrue; you are well aware of the depths of My Wounds and I have let you know how much I suffer by trickling from your eyes tears of blood; 1 how could I not suffer when I see My very Own, whom I love dearly, be so utterly deceived and accepting this deadly poison .... this is why I am telling you with insistence: pray for them, and regard them as brothers to you who need correction;

today this deadly poison is affecting My consecrated souls; this is the smoke that penetrated into My Sanctuary; they are breaking the Law of My Church2 and their sin will condemn them unless they repent; now they are the gangrene of My Body who listen to My Word but do not obey it; nobody can imagine them irreligious when you see them, but you will always know them by their fruit which is: disobedience;

- disobedience to this3 Law of My Church,
- disobedience to the Vicar of My Church,
- disobedience to the Tradition of My Church,
- disobedience to My entire Law;

frantic persecutors of My messengers who reveal them and their plans to the entire world, promoters of liberalism; persecutors of My Abels4 who oppose them and who instruct My lambs in virtue, defending My Law; these5 are of whom Scriptures say: "these are the ones who have kept their virginity6 and not been defiled with women; they follow the Lamb wherever He goes; they have been redeemed from amongst men to be the first-fruits for God and for the Lamb; they never allowed a lie to pass their lips and no fault can be found in them;" 7 "they are the learned who supply to My lambs truthfulness and who shine as brightly as the vault of heaven, and as bright as stars for all eternity;" 8

those who produce the fruit of disobedience are a living abomination in My Eyes and a condemnation of the way they disobey the Law given by My Church .... alas, for that Day! alas, for My Day, which is drawing near, it will be a day of great sorrow that day; for the unlawful it will be terror, since they had put Me, their Lord, to the test; but I tell you, the supporters of the Beast will fall together with their pride and power and everything they have will crumble into dust;

http://www.tlig.org/en/messages/985/
​

 

It pains me to no end when people think I am some idiot clinging to the letter of the law. It is an insult of the highest order really. My faith is not based on sitting and poring over a "rule book".

But the Law cannot simply be disregarded because...Love

Anyone who thinks that is on the wrong road.

I have no desire at all to sit and point out laws that are being violated left and right.
It is precisely because the faith is being disregarded that we are forced to defend the laws.
The Modernist "left" has pushed us into this position.

God gives us the Grace to overcome anything He puts or allows to come into our paths.
It is never His Will that some continue to live in the mortal sin of adultery as has been stated.
That is blasphemy!

 

I agree totally DavidT. Remember St JohnPaul2 was the pope at this time. He was busy condemning liberation theology and socialism while our current pope was being totally disobedient and embracing them. She was spot on about evil and disobedience and Pope Francis.

 

Wait a minute!
We have reached a convergence of universe.
David just posted something and Picadillo just liked it!

 

IMHO, the following is good to consider from ChurchMilitant, https://www.churchmilitant.com/vide...nto-piety?mc_cid=5f666d1e21&mc_eid=2a0b6c7ef6,

TRANSCRIPT

If there was ever a time for militancy in the Church, this is that time. But please note, militancy comes in a variety of forms. There is, of course, the militancy of faith — prayer, fasting, sacrifices etc. But there is also the militancy of action, of works. Faith, after all, without works, is dead.

There is an attitude among many faithful Catholics that bishops and priests simply can never be questioned and certainly not challenged. Many of the more progressive or careerist bishops and priests play this up to their advantage. Which is kind of funny because while insisting on a degree of obedience from the laity — a degree of obedience the laity do not owe to bad prudential decisions — they themselves will be disobedient in matters of which they actually are supposed to be obedient.

For example, let's begin with proper instruction in the Faith — an area massively ignored for the past 50 years and still ignored or substituted for with protestantized, watered-down instruction. If you got to hear the radio interview with a local Scranton, Pennsylvania, radio show last week where I was a guest and talking about Fr. James Martin's scheduled address there, the host, a pleasant enough fellow, Frank Andrews, at one point said to me he was "uncomfortable" with challenging bishops. He had viewed an earlier Vortex where I said Bp. Joseph Bambera was flat out wrong for supporting homosexualist James Martin and had, as a consequence, made the label of homosexualist apply to himself as well. He is advancing, defending and promoting the homoheresy, as Polish priest Fr. Darius Oko calls it. So a cleric, any cleric, who supports the homoheresy is by definition a homosexualist. But notice the immediate reaction. The host was "uncomfortable" with criticizing a bishop or priest for that fact.

That whole approach is how the homosexual, priest-sex abuse crisis rose to the disastrous level it did with thousands of wounded souls — some of whom committed suicide — and $4 billion in damages and counting — right, Cdl. Timothy Dolan, who just shelled out another $40 million dollars. Remember that New York Catholics when Dolan comes around with his tin cup.

We laity do not owe obedience to a bishop or cleric's bad prudential decision that has the effect of destroying the Faith through scandal. Bishop's all over the country told naive laity back in the day not to mention anything about Fr. Chester the Molester. Then, they transferred him to parish after parish. They played the laity, capitalizing on their image of one commanding obedience in all things, which they do not.

Yet still, good Catholics have this wrong. They are still "uncomfortable" with saying things about a bishop or priest's decisions that are harmful to the Church. From allowing bad dissident priests to run parishes, to horrible heterodox faculty at seminaries, to backing homoheresy-promoting priests, to keeping their mouths shut very tightly about contraception etc, the list of abuses is mind-boggling. And of course, they paint the whole social justice garbage agenda — immigration, climate change, gun control, the death penalty - as though it's dogma, and they can never be challenged.

The task of helping advance the Faith and saving the Church has fallen directly to the laity as Venerable Abp. Fulton Sheen said 40 years ago. And since we are not just spiritual beings but also composed of matter, existing in the material world, our purely spiritual works must be joined to temporal works as well.

Consider for a moment what Our Blessed Lord desires from us. Think about the wedding at Cana when Our Blessed Mother launched Our Lord to His Sacred Passion by asking Him to reveal His Divinity by performing the miracle of producing wine where there formerly was none. Did Our Lord just wave His hands and voila, there was wine? No. He desired that human agency participates in His action. He bade the waiters to "fill the jars with water." Why? He could have just had the thought, and they would have been filled with water. In fact, He would have just skipped the whole water part and gone straight to the wine. Why the water? Because he wanted humanity to have a participation in His miraculous working, and it was quite the participation.

Back in the day, the amount of effort to fill those large jars with water would have been enormous — going back and forth to the well, drawing the water out, transporting it back to the location of the jars, filling them up. Only after humanity had supplied the material labor so to speak, did Our Blessed Lord step in and finish the job.

We cannot simply retreat into piety in these difficult and challenging days in the Church. We must fill the jars with water — do the backbreaking work that we are capable of doing — have some "skin in the game" so to speak and not just sit back and wait for a miracle and claim that we trust when the reality is that we are actually lazy or selfish. Say a few prayers, and I've done my part. Not good enough, if you or your state in life render you capable of doing more.

Make sure you are not tricking yourself by focusing so much on prayer that you never actually roll up your sleeves and do the work that faith demands.
​

BTW, I think that most of us on MOG already have our sleeves rolled up.

PS- I should have given the credit to Crewdog, he posted this on another thread.

 

This is exactly what our Lady has been warning us about:

La Salette Journey


Catholic Blog dedicated toward Our Lady of La Salette: Reconciler of Sinners.

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2017
is reporting that:

"Pope Francis may have begun a new phase in his pontificate: doctrinal change, a priest and former philosophy professor has written.

Italian Fr. Giovanni Scalese, the local Ordinary for Afghanistan, wrote a post titled 'Fase B' (Phase B) on his blog 'Antiquo robore,' arguing that Pope Francis laid out his new plan for doctrinal evolution in the Church in a recent speech.

The October 11 speech to the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization, in which Pope Francis presented his views on the death penalty, has a 'programmatic' character, Scalese said. It represents a 'turning point.' By concentrating on the details of Francis’s speeches, Scalese argued, some might miss the bigger picture of what the Pope is doing.

In his speech, the Pope challenged previous Catholic teaching by calling the death penalty 'contrary to the Gospel.' He said he would like the Catechism of the Catholic Church to change according to a 'new understanding of Christian truth,' saying that only a 'partial vision can think of ‘the deposit of faith’ as something static.'"

Change the Catechism of the Catholic Church according to a "new understanding of Christian truth"?

The First Vatican Council:

"For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles."

In his Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, Pope John Paul II said that, "The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church's faith and of Catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Church's Magisterium. I declare it to be a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the kingdom!"

A sure norm for teaching the faith! But Francis believes himself wiser than all those who worked on this Catechism. And just who was that?

Again, Pope (Saint) John Paul II:

"It can be said that this catechism is the result of the collaboration of the whole Episcopate of the Catholic Church, who generously accepted my invitation to share responsibility for an enterprise which directly concerns the life of the Church. This response elicits in me a deep feeling of joy, because the harmony of so many voices truly expresses what could be called the symphony of the faith. The achievement of this catechism thus reflects the collegial nature of the Episcopate: it testifies to the Church's catholicity."

We are witnessing a pontiff who forgets that we stand on the shoulders of giants. A man who believes it is the Church which must change and that this is so because he is "wiser" than all previous Popes, Saints, Doctors and Fathers of the Church - as well as the entire Episcopate combined.

A regular font of humility!

 

Hi Padraig with respect, you dont make statements like that. "We have a very,very bad Pope indeed and he is ably assisted by very,very many very bad Cardinals and Bishops." play the ball not the man. If the Pope departs from the truth then we must defend the truth. Cardinal Burke defends the truth, but he does not make statments like that or indeed the prolife leaders.

 

While I wouldn't disagree with you, I'm curious about the football metaphor. What do you do when the man is supposed to be the captain of your team, lines out with the opposition and shoves the ball up his jersey?

 

With all due respect to you as well, An, I think Padraig was merely calling a spade a spade.
Our Lady spoke at Akita, I believe it was , about this. When Padraig speaks about a bad Pope or bad Bishops, one merely has to see the fruits of their actions and/or lack of action.
We are still waiting for the hierarchy to act.
Not a good situation, maybe could even be called a BAD situation.

 

We have a very bad Pope.
Padraig has been quite mild.
Many of us are trying to discern the level of Heresy.

 

Yes I have dark thoughts regarding the whole buisness, dark, dark thoughts. Calling him a bad Pope is in a way a compliment.

Dark, dark thoughts.

Only in heaven will we discover the goings on down here.

 

Yes but she also paid a very great price, Her Heart was pierced much like many here.

 

Yes, both herself and Jesus I believe knew all about Judas and his goings on in that first seminary and must have tried without success to have deterred him from his evil course. With no success.

You know when Mary cried beneath the Cross I believe she cried for Judas too, for she loved him.. Just as we have many Judas's to cry over today too.

 

I was about to click "buy" on the book at the Amazon online shop and then stopped. This is just going to drag me down. I didn't buy it. I thought of Paul's words to the Romans "Stay excellent in all that is good and remain innocent of evil." Pope Francis is certainly giving the church a big shake at the moment and from ay to the next I don't know what to think about it. I think the Pare Pio meme you post occasionally sums it up, Padraig: "Pray, Hope and don't worry". Jesus did tell Peter that the gates of hell would never hold out against The Church.

 

It will all work out in the end. ... at least it does in the Bible.

 

Yes. Sometimes when I meditate on the Sorrowful mysteries I think of Jesus at the High Priests looking for Judas. Longing to show him by a look that he can be forgiven and the heartache of that empty space. It puts a deeper more anguished tone to suicide. If only Judas had hung on and repented like Peter.

 

Well there are no accidents with God.

Thos ewho are meant to burn in hell , burn in hell. Thos ewho are meant to fly to heaven, fly to heaven.

 

http://magister.blogautore.espresso...ve-not-disappeared-nor-has-cardinal-caffarra/
The Pope Has Spoken. But the Doubts Have Not Disappeared, Nor Has Cardinal Caffarra

> Italiano
> English
> Español
> Français

> All the articles of Settimo Cielo in English

*

Both things happened almost on the same day. On the one hand the publication in the “Acta Apostolicae Sedis” of that which is presented as the official and definitive interpretation of the controversial eighth chapter of “Amoris Laetitia,” in favor of communion for the divorced and remarried. On the other the release of a book with homilies and texts by Carlo Caffarra, one of the four cardinals who submitted to Pope Francis their very serious “dubia” precisely on that chapter.

News of the first of these two publications came in early December, when the new volume of the official “Acta” of the Holy See came off the presses. But the decision to print in it the letter in which the pope approves the criteria adopted by the bishops of the region of Buenos Aires for the application of the eighth chapter of “Amoris Laetitia” dates back to six months before, to June 5.

That was, in fact, the day on which Francis gave the order to Cardinal Pietro Parolin, secretary of state, to proceed with the official publication of both of those documents, the pope’s letter and the text of the Argentine bishops, “velut Magisterium authenticum,” as authentic magisterum.

This is what it states in Latin in the endnotes for the two documents, on page 1074 of the “Acta Apostolicae Sedis,” An. et vol. CVIII, n. 10:

RESCRIPTUM "EX AUDIENTIA SS.MI"

Summus Pontifex decernit ut duo Documenta quae praecedunt edantur per publicationem in situ electronico Vaticano et in "Actis Apostolicae Sedis", velut Magisterium authenticum.

Ex Aedibus Vaticanis, die V mensis Iunii anno MMXVII

Petrus Card. Parolin
Secretarius Status

The two documents have been published in Spanish, their original language, with the pope’s letter placed first and bearing the title and qualification of “Epistula Apostolica,” followed by the text of the Argentine bishops, presented as “Additum ad Epistulam,” meaning an attachment to the papal letter.

It would therefore seem that with this Francis wanted to resolve once and for all the ambiguities of “Amoris Laetitia,” eliminating any doubt over his intention that under certain conditions the divorced and remarried could receive Eucharistic communion while continuing to cohabit “more uxorio.” In the letter, in fact, he writes that the text of the Argentine bishops “explains in an excellent way chapter VIII of ‘Amoris Laetitia.’ There are no other interpretations.”

This last sentence, however, raises a few doubts. If that of the bishops of the region of Buenos Aires is truly the only interpretation admitted by the pope, then what becomes of the solemn affirmations also written by the pope in the opening of “Amoris Laetitia,” according to which it is right that there should exist “various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it,” so that “each country or region can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs”?

What would become, for example, of more restrictive interpretations, like that of the Polish bishops or of the archbishop of Philadelphia, Charles Chaput? Or vice-versa, of more expansive interpretations, like that of the German bishops or of the even more reckless bishop of San Diego, Robert McElroy? Should they all be corralled within the criteria established by the Argentine bishops, because after all “there are no other interpretations”?

But even in Argentina, was it not perhaps going beyond the prudential criteria of his confreres of the region of Buenos Aires when the bishop of Reconquista, Ángel José Macín, publicly and collectively celebrated, in the cathedral, the return to communion of thirty couples of divorced and remarried persons who continue to cohabit “more uxorio”?

And again. Neither is it by any means clear what “authentic magisterium” means as applied both to the “apostolic letter” of Pope Francis and to its attachment. Nor is it clear how this act of “magisterium” can be reconciled with canon 915 of the code of canon law that forbids communion for those who “obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin.” Doubts have been raised on both of these points by a talented canonist like the American Edward Peters.

*

But getting back to June 5, the day on which Francis ordered the publication of the two documents among the official proceedings of the Holy See, it can be noted that on that date the pope had had on his desk for a month the heartfelt letter in which Cardinal Caffarra asked him for an audience together with the other cardinals of the “dubia,” which he resubmitted intact.

As is well known, neither the “dubia” nor this letter have ever received a response, nor can the publication of those two documents in the “Acta Apostolicae Sedis” be seen as one. Caffarra died on September 6, and even after then the pope has held himself back from any sign of esteem for him, even on October 1 when he went to visit Bologna, the diocese of which the deceased cardinal was archbishop from 2003 to 2015.

It was all the more striking, therefore, when on December 7, the day on which the book with the homilies and texts by Caffarra was released, a sincere and moving portrait of the cardinal appeared in "L'Osservatore Romano,” with the title “The gentle light of truth.”

Which states among other things:

“He was greatly pained in recent years by the misunderstanding of which some of his theological positions were the object. He suffered, but in peace. On December 21, 2016 he wrote: ‘I am very serene. The only true suffering is notice how much obsequiousness there is in the Church, and how much refusal to make use of the light of the intellect.’”

The author of the article, Emanuela Ghini, is a discalced Carmelite nun, highly esteemed for her writings on Sacred Scripture and spirituality. A few months ago there came out in bookstores a very interesting correspondence, spanning half a century, between her and the theologian and then cardinal Giacomo Biffi (1928-2015), Caffarra’s predecessor as archbishop of Bologna.

The preface to the correspondence between Biffi and Emanuela Ghini is by Caffarra himself, a close friend of both.

Here is another book not to be missed, together with the one released in recent days with the homilies and texts of the cardinal. One page of which is reproduced below. It couldn’t be more timely.

*

 

continued from above...

THE FIVE SNARES FOR THE CHURCH TODAY


by Carlo Caffarra

The alternative to a Church without doctrine is not a pastoral Church, but a Church of whim and enslaved to the spirit of the time: “praxis sine theoria coecus in via,” as the medievals used to say. This is a serious snare, and if it is not overcome it causes great damage to the Church. For at least two reasons. The first is that, since “Sacra Doctrina” is nothing other than the divine Revelation of the divine plan for man, if the Church’s mission is not rooted in this, what is the Church saying to man? The second reason is that when the Church does not protect itself from this snare, it is in danger of breathing the central dogma of relativism: when it comes to the worship that we owe to God and to the care we must have for man, it does not matter what I think about God and about man. The “quaestio de veritate” becomes a secondary question.

The second snare is to forget that the key to the interpretation of all reality and of human history in particular is not within history itself. It is faith. Saint Maximus the Confessor maintains that the true disciple of Jesus thinks of everything in Jesus Christ and of Jesus Christ in everything. Let me give a very timely example. The ennoblement of homosexuality, which we are witnessing in the West, must not be interpreted and judged by taking the mainstream of our societies as the criterion; or the moral value of respect that is due to every person, which is “metabasis eis allo genos,” changing the subject. The criterion is the “Sacra Doctrina” on sexuality, marriage, sexual dimorphism. Reading the signs of the times is a theistical and theological act.

The third snare is the primacy of praxis. The foundation of the salvation of man is man’s faith, not his action. What must concern the Church is not “in primis” cooperation with the world in grand operational processes, to reach shared objectives. The tireless concern of the Church is that the world may believe in Him whom the Father has sent to save the world. The primacy of praxis leads to what one great thinker of the past century called the dislocation of the Divine Persons: the second Person is not the Word, but the Holy Spirit.

The fourth snare, closely connected to the previous one, is the reduction of the Christian proposal to moral exhortation. It is the Pelagian snare, which Augustine called the horrible poison of Christianity. This reduction has the effect of making the Christian proposal very tedious, and repetitive. It is only God who in his action is always unpredictable. And in fact at the center of Christianity stands not the activity of man, but the Action of God.

The fifth snare is silence on the judgment of God, through a preaching of the divine mercy made in such a way that it is at risk of removing from the conscience of the man who listens the truth that God judges man.

*

Two side notes.

The first concerns the “great thinker of the past century” to whom Caffarra refers. This is the Swiss philosopher Romano Amerio (1905-1997), author of “Iota Unum,” a formidable apologia for tradition against the “changes in the Catholic Church in the 20th century.”

The second concerns Cardinal Biffi. In addition to the correspondence with Emanuela Ghini, another valuable book of his has been released posthumously this year, “Things new and things old,” published by Cantagalli, which collects his pastoral texts between 1967 and 1975, when he was a parish priest in Legnano and Milan.

(English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.)

MY NOTES:
This is the same Cardinal Caffarra who had direct contact with Sister Lucia of Fatima,

"The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Don’t be afraid," she added, "because anyone who operates for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be contended and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue." And then she concluded: "however, Our Lady has already crushed its head." -- words of Sr. Lucia to Cardinal Caffarra https://onepeterfive.com/sister-luc...d-and-satan-will-be-over-family-and-marriage/
​

I'm also adding the following link to an article from Michael Matt of The Remnant Newspaper, https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/in...moris-not-an-exercise-of-magisterium-now-what along with the following link to an article from Christopher A. Ferrara of The Remnant Newspaper, https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/in...ctator-pope-a-call-to-hierarchical-opposition . And the following link from gloriatv, https://www.gloria.tv/article/UhRhSaFXKewF1W2krfzGWA2je . I think that this last one was posted already but I couldn't relocate it on the forum, maybe the same for the other 2 also.

I posted the following article on another thread but just in case some people missed it, this is from Steve Skojec at OnePeterFive, https://onepeterfive.com/the-only-way-out-is-through/ .