Tag Archives: Fiducia supplicans

Church History, History, News

Gladio, Pope Francis & the making of the One Religion of the New World Order

12 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Traduction française

The recent trend in opposition to ‘Fiducia supplicans’, which is tending to grow ever more muted and conciliatory, demonstrates how strongly the CIA controls the Catholic Church, both interiorly through the members of the Sacred Hierarchy, from Pope Francis down to your local Bishop, and exteriorly through the way the MSM reports on events in the Catholic Church. There is a third pole of control, also, the fake-opposition, which consists in apparently independent Catholic media and infuencers who tow the CIA narrative, while pretending to oppose the interior system of control.

Let’s unpeal the multilayered onion of these three Globalist control systems to show how much 99.00% of Catholics are totally deceived into walking lock-step into the Satanic New World Order One World Church. It’s happening, and the speed of the march will increase in 2024, so it’s important to recognize the steps, who is in the marching band, and the marching tune they are playing.

First, one has to understand that the problem in the Catholic Church did not begin with Pope Francis, nor with Vatican II, but with the Lateran Pact of 1929, whereby the masonic Kingdom of Italy paid the Apostolic See 1 Billion Lira to settle their dispute with the Papal States for the forced annexation of its territories in 1871. Another nearly equal value was given in state bonds of the Kingdom.

These monies which were enormous at the time (roughly equal to $400 million U. S. Dollars), had to be invested. And so Pius XI entrusted them to a Freemason, Bernadino Nogara, who was a Rotchschild agent. To obtain his financial expertise, he required Pius IX to agree to allow him to invest these monies without regard to Catholic Doctrine. So he began to invest heavily in Rothschild concerns and during World War II even got involved in war profiting on the Nazi side by purchasing investments in companies which would profit from their confiscation of rivals’ concerns.

After the war, armed with information about war profiteering, the Skull and Bones controlled OSS (US Military Intelligence) leveraged this information to convince or constrain Pius XII to take $20 million a year to fund the new Italian political party, the Christian Democrats, which took the name of the previous Catholic party, but now would be run by conservative Freemasons. The Vatican Bank had become, de facto, a money laundering operation for CIA concerns.

Dependent now upon monies from the U. S. Government, the Vatican was ripe for being plucked. After the successes in overthrowing the governments of Nicaragua and Iran, the CIA decided that at the death of Pius XII it was time to move. Threats, bribes and outright coercion during the Conclave forced Cardinal Siri, the Catholic candidate to withdraw, and there was elected Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli, who as Apostolic Nuncio to Greece and Turkey, a decade before, was convinced by the Freemasonic Patriarch of Constantinople to join a pact to convene an new Ecumenical Council to conform the Church to the spirit of the age, as the international Conference of Freemasons at Istanbul had requested months earlier.

With a promise of $2 million in funding from the U.S. Government, the newly crowned John XXIII faked an inspiration from the Holy Spirit (his own secretary said as much in his memoirs) at Saint Paul’s Basilica and convoked the Second Vatican Council. The ideological program for this council was already decided upon in the U.S. Department of Defense Program for Ideological Warfare written in 1953, and only declassified 60 years, 6 months (66) afterwards, during the first year of the CIA installed, Pope Francis.

Vatican II became thus the new Gospel, replacing Tradition and Scripture which comes from God through the Apostles. Inside the Church the Vatican began appointing Globalist agents and assets as Bishops round the world and promoting only those who would collaborate to Vatican offices and pontifical institutions world-wide: thus, the formation of priests and the training of theologians and canonists all came to be colored in the monotone of Globalist narratives. The culmination of this infiltration reaches its climax in Pope Francis, the Propaganda Due choice to oust Pope Benedict XVI from power in the uncanonical conclave of 2013. For this reason, the Catholic Church in nearly all its institutions and personnel today is incapable of resisting the march toward the Great Reset or is in fact working to advance it ever more rapidly by using the institutions of the Church in the causes of Globalism: from destruction of national identities, denigration of the human person with technologies and experimental injections, genocide of nations with the DeathVaxx, extermination of traditions and faith through the Aggiornamento and Episcopal suppression of any initiative which bucks these narratives. For this reason the Vatican has ever lauded the MSM, NATO, the UN and the WEF. And this is why opposition to the “Gay Blessings” document, Fiducia supplicans, is generally limited to those dioceses in those nations where influence of USA, NATO, CIA & MI6 are weakest.

At the same time the U. S. Government founded a multi layer control external system for the Church, which was based on NATO and a system of stay-behind-groups (known collectively as “operation Gladio“, the name for the organization in Italy), composed of NAZI and Fascist assets (personnel and monies), which ostensibly prepared Europe to defend against Soviet Invasion, but which really consisted in an ideological and political control system for the West, in which criminal organizations, far-right special operation teams and journalists and publications collaborated to control the narrative on all topics. This is why the MSM misinforms, disinforms and outright lies. They do not do this of their own will, but at the request and directive of the CIA and of all the western intelligence agencies under their control. And even unlikely people are waking up to this truth. — The cupola of power, however, was vested in the World Economic Forum, founded by a Gladio asset, a Hapsburg, and the son of a Nazi industrialist, Klaus Schwab. They are the “brain” of the system of control.

The third system of control, that of the fake opposition (which I call the “Grifter Collective“), has been frequently criticized and exposed here in the pages of FromRome.Info. This consists in Gladio controlled network of publications and influencers recruited by intelligence agencies directly and indirectly, if not working in government offices themselves, which lament the march toward apostasy and globalism but use their influence to stifle any effective opposition and character assassinate any Cardinal, Bishop, Priest, Religious, Layman or publication who calls for uprooting any one of the prior two systems of control. Their mantra is “Recognize and Resist”!, which means “Whine but do nothing!”, and their principal founders and faces, most of whom are “converts” and “reverts” or who descend from Jews, either were hired in Washington D. C. (e. g. Peter Skojec of 1 Peter 5), attended institutions which were founded by the CIA (e.g. Michael Matt, Christendom College), MI5, or are themselves members or had parents who were members of Intelligence Agencies (Archbishop Lefebrve’s father was MI6, Steven O’Reilly is CIA), have close ties to individuals who founded or attended WEF meetings, or were recruited by the Gladio Network in Spain (e. g. Citizen Go & John Henry Westen) which funds dozens of Catholic Newspapers, Websites and TV and Radio Stations (more than 70 through Opus Dei alone). This third network runs and or controls 99% of all Catholic media world wide, and is the secret arm of the Gladio system of control.

FromRome.Info is one of the very very few Catholic news and commentary which exposes and opposes these three networks of control. Along with OMC Radio TV and a few bloggers and writers, these should be your sources of information if you desire truly to serve Jesus Christ and break free from the Globalist narratives and control systems. We are few, but with your support we will hasten the triumph of God against these Antichrist agencies.

 We hold that the overthrow of the Great Reset requires the removal of Pope Francis from office, the dismantling of the fake opposition and the rejection of Vatican II on ideological grounds. And we do not just say this, we propose concrete effective and direct means to do this, such as the Sutri Initiative and the Committee against Apostasy.

If you would like to keep FromRome.Info operating and support the growth of our news platform, consider a generous donation to our efforts to defend the Church and humanity.

CREDITS: The featured image by FromRome.info depicts the seal of the Central Intelligence Agency, the unit patch of the Gladio Network, a photo of Pope Francis (licensed), a fresco of the Antichrist receiving counsel from Satan (Abbadon) and the official logo of the World Economic Forum (Wikipedia licensed).

________________

FromRome.info is an electronic journal chronicling the events of the Church without keeping silent about the duty of Catholics to respond with faith-filled action, rather than as mere spectators. This article is one of more than 10,000 published since September 2013 A. D.. For more information about our journal, see our About Page.

News

50+ Scholars, Lawyers ask Bishops to block & Pope to withdraw ‘Fiducia supplicans’

8 Comments

Commentary and Critique on the above by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Traduction française

An online letter has no canonical force. It must be sent to each Bishop and/or Cardinals who are ordinaries, and to the Pope himself. If it did not do this, then this ‘Filial appeal’ wins the “misfire of the year award”. — However, if you are going to participate in the Sutri Initiative, it would be powerful to add a copy of this appeal, with all the signatures, and URL to the original, to your correspondence.

However, the authors of this Appeal include in their letter a serious historical error and interpretative mistake, when they say:

Never in the history of the Catholic Church has a document of the Roman Magisterium experienced such a strong rejection.

Because Pope Honorius I’s Letter in 635 to Sergius I, the Monothelite heretic who occupied the the Patriarchate of Constantinople, on the matter of whether there be two or one will in Christ, was condemned by ALL the Bishops of the Third Council of Constantinople on September 16, 681 A. D.. — In that they show grave ignorance of Church History.

But they also show a grave ignorance of the proper understanding of a Church document, when they call ‘Fiducia supplicans’ a “document of the Roman Magisterium”, because Pope Francis did not write the document, he merely added his signature during a meeting with Cardinal Fernandez; in addition, that Cardinal within 2 weeks affirmed that the doctrine in the document did not need to be accepted by all everywhere. So it clearly is not a document of the Roman Magisterium, since that belongs to none one but the Roman Pontiff, a dicastery cannot exercise it.

They also show ignorance of the basics of canon law, because a Dicastery erected by an antipope does not exist canonically, and there is implicit in their Filial Appeal a total ignorance of what Pope Benedict XVI did on Feb. 11, 2013, in not abdicating, only resigning.

These 3 errors are not light ones, and they all are grave for another reason too, because together they support the argument that Pope Francis never was an antipope and without the petrine munus could pass laws and exercise the Papal Magisterium: presuppositions which undermine their own basis for opposing ‘Fiducia supplicans’.

However, the statement quoted above from the letter does observe something true, because never since Honorius I, who was elected not according to the canons (there were none back then) nor by the Cardinals (they did not have an exclusive right back then) but by the Faithful of Rome (clergy electing, laity acclaiming) has a Pope encountered such opposition from the entire Church. On January 30th, last year, like Honorius I, Pope Francis was elected by Apostolic Right, the method which the Holy Spirit inspired the Apostle Saint Peter to arrange for the election of his successors. As I wrote more than a year ago, when this happens, the entire Church is united to Christ through the successor of Saint Peter in a manner which maximizes the influence of the Holy Spirit to promote unity with a holy pastor and oppose an errant or evil one.

For these reasons, I would discourage any true scholar from signing this document which would just serve as a canonical fact that the one signing it is totally ignorant of canon law, Church history, and argumentation. — These filial appeals have achieved nothing in the past, except to get scholars and bishops round the world to carry water for the Bergoglian narrative and turn true opposition into complicit silence. Which is perhaps the reason they recruit signatories by email, so that they can psychologically pound signers into conformity if they dare say anything else in public which diverges from it.

As for the whole concept of filial appeal, that is not what Pope Francis needs right now. To use a metaphor, he rather needs a Saint Nicholas fraternal slap in the face, or a Padre Pio boot in the rear of the pants.

So the next time you hear that FromRome.Info is “unrealiable” or that I am “unqualified”, ask them if they signed this Petition, as a conversation starter.

News

Bishops of Ecclesiastical Province of Rome are silent on ‘Fiducia supplicans’

4 Comments

Report by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Traduction française

While ‘Fiducia supplicans’ has ignited a fierce and lively reaction round the world, the 15 Bishops/Abbots of the ecclesiastical province Rome are saying nothing about it on their official websites.

While this does not mean that they have NOT spoken personally or official about the matter, it does show a strong sign that they regard the document as too controversial to stain their public present on the Internet with it.

And this is a good sign. Because these 15 Bishops have the authority to remove Pope Francis for heresy or, more precisely, on account of an invalid claim to the Papacy, as is explained here.

This should be a great encouragement to all those who have not yet participated in the Sutri Initiative, to join the effort.

But this is also a strong sign, that those Catholics round the world, who have already participated and written their letters, have had a great spiritual effect on the entire episcopate of the province.

From a Canonical point of view, the Bishops are in a difficult position: because since ‘Fiducia supplicas’ is heretical, as many Bishops round the world have explained or insinuated, then any Bishop of the province who publicly affirms assent to its errors would give canonically valid testimony for his removal from office under canon 1364. Likewise, if any of them spoke against it, he might expect swift and violent retribution from the increasingly impenitent Pope Francis. — Their only way out of this Catch 22 is to declare the Apostolic See impeded, as I have explained here and here, for that is the canonical ‘get-out-of-penalty-free-card’, as it were.

Likewise, since only those Bishops of the province who oppose heresy, can rightfully call and vote in a provincial council, those who do speak in favor of ‘Fiducia supplicans’ shoot themselves in the foot, as it were, by guaranteeing that they will not be heard in a provincial council.

In my opinion, their collective silence is very significant, therefore, of opposition to the document.

Hopefully, they will take encouragement from the recent theological condemnation of ‘Fiducia supplicans’ by their colleague in the Episcopacy at Mostar, Croatia, Bishop Emeritus Ratko Peric, who closed his analysis by expressing firm hope in the charism of Saint Peter to convince Pope Francis to withdraw his support. For in a provincial council, the first goal is to obtain repentance from an erring pontiff, as the Petition of the Sutri Initiative affirmed 4 months ago.

CREDITS: The Basilica of Saint Peter, as seen from the Via della Conciliazioni. © 2022 — All rights reserved. FromRome.Info.

News

La Croix pushes Gladio Narrative about ‘Fiducia supplicans’

Leave a comment

Editor’s Note: It is shameful to publish propaganda. It is shameful to do so at the request of the intelligence agency of your own country.. But it is most shameful to do so at the request of a foreign intelligence agency. And it is most shameful, when you mix into it the worst kind of masonic, marxist racist ideology, which pretends that sodomy is a cultural advancement and that those who cannot accept it are backwards. — La Croix wins all the “loser of the year” awards with this report.

News

Bishop Ratko Peric of Mostar: Pope Francis should withdraw ‘Fiducia Suppicans’!

2 Comments

By Bishop Ratko Ratko Perić

Bishop Emeritus of Mostar, Croatia

English translation of original written in Croatian, which can be found here

Traduction française

The statement Fiducia supplicans on the pastoral meaning of blessings was issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith on December 18, 2023. It is the first statement by the same institution after the declaration Dominus Iesus on the unity and saving universality of Jesus Christ and the Church, on August 6, 2000.

Creator’s blessing

How was it from the beginning?

“God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female created he them. And God blessed them and said to them: Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it!” (Genesis 1:27-28).

This act and intention of God can be discerned from that biblical sentence:

First, in the beginning God created man, i.e. male and female, in his own image, breathing into them a soul with reason and free will.

Second, he blessed them as a complementary married couple with a purpose in life.

Thirdly, this purpose is fruitfulness, the multiplication of people, populating and subjecting the land to their management with the awareness that it is God’s land.

Fourthly, everything that is contrary to that creative plan, is not the image of God, has no purpose and goal of God and therefore does not have God’s blessing either.

What happened over time?

Sodomy

The name comes from Sodom, with which Gomorrah is connected, the neighboring cities where the Dead Sea is today, located between Israel, Palestine and Jordan. These cities are an example of sexual perversion called sodomy. The Bible describes their wickedness and their destruction by fiery sulfur rain with the story of Abraham’s cousin Lot and his family: his wife and two daughters, as he had already “wiped off the face of the earth” with the flood all the people of that time in that part of the world, except the righteous Noah, because every thought in man’s mind was “only wickedness” (Genesis 6:5), and as the Babylonian city cursed the people who wanted to reach the sky with a tower through their arrogance (Genesis 11:8).

In the Old Testament

Sodomy is considered an ungodly shame = nefandum flagitium, as moral theology calls it. Why? Because Sodom allowed every kind of sin against human nature as God created, legislated and blessed it.

According to the oral and written traditions that reached the final redaction of the Pentateuch of Moses, we read in Genesis: “And the inhabitants of Sodom were very wicked, sinners against the Lord” (13:13). It is not described here what exactly the sin of the Sodomites consisted of, but from this wording: “very wicked”, it can obviously be concluded that there are no sins that they did not commit against God’s law and order, that is, against human nature or common sense as works of God. It’s as if it’s enough to say “Sodom” and you immediately know what’s going on.

In the same book of Genesis, God, who appears with two angels in human form, tells Abraham: “There is a great cry against Sodom and Gomorrah that their sin is too great” (18:20). It has not yet been determined precisely what made the sin in Sodom “too heavy”. Abraham dares to intercede with God for the Sodomites starting from the number fifty and downwards. And each time God promises him that he will not destroy Sodom if there are so many inhabitants who are not infected with the Sodom virus. If Abraham had gone lower than 10, it is likely that the Lord would have mercifully responded to Abraham’s request, for the sake of Abraham’s friend. But there weren’t even ten of them, just Lot’s family of four.

The book of Genesis in chapter 19 shows the specific crime and punishment of Sodom. When the two mentioned angels came before Sodom, they found Lot at the entrance to the city. He hosts them in his house.

Tuesday »citizens of Sodom, young and old, all the people down to the last man, surrounded the house. They called Lot and said to him: ‘Where are the people who came to you last night? Bring them out to us so that we can kiss them?'” (Genesis 19:4-5).

Here, the sinful practice of the Sodomites is explicitly spoken of, that men sin against men in a carnal, unnatural way. The people of Sodom would even abuse two angels of God in their Sodomic perversions.

The Levitical Code, from the 13th century BC, strictly prohibits:

»Don’t lie with a man as you lie with a woman. That would be an abomination” (18:22).

This same Old Testament Jewish Law, a little further on, prescribes:

“If a man were to lie with a man as one lies with a woman, both would commit an abomination. Let them be killed, and let their blood fall on them” (Lev 20:13).

And here is the punishment on the citizens of Sodom. After Lot was saved,

The Lord “rained down sulfurous fire from heaven on Sodom and Gomorrah, and destroyed those cities, and all that plain, all the inhabitants of the city and all the vegetation on the earth” (Genesis 19:24-25).

The sin against human nature shown in these four mentioned places consists in this:

  • – that the inhabitants of Sodom are “very wicked”, “themselves sinners against the Lord”, i.e. against his creation, moral order and law;
  • – that their sin is “too heavy”, i.e. unbearable, kills not only the soul, but also the body;
  • – that such a sin is a real “abomination”, i.e. the abomination of desolation in the realm of life; and
  • – that such a sin is such a “heinous act” that deserves the death penalty, moreover, all the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were also destroyed. Like when a man dies, infected with an epidemic, and all his clothes and house are burned!

“The Law of God is perfect, it strengthens the soul; the Lord’s law is reliable – the ignorant learn” (Ps 19:8). And human iniquity weakens the soul and the ignorant freaks out!

It is, therefore, about terrible crimes against human nature as God created it, blessed it and ordered it to be respected and served, not to go against it. God created and determined male and female, endowed them with the natural ability to give birth and raise children as complementary beings, to maintain life on earth. And people over time turned God’s order upside down and decided on their own that man with man, woman with woman sin and annul God’s creative project task and associated blessing. God ordained that a woman give birth and as a mother lovingly raise her children, but some people have turned God’s order upside down and teach that as few births as possible or that they themselves will eugenically determine how many will be born and which one will be the right one.

In the New Testament

In his inaugural sermon in Galilee, the Lord Jesus uttered the first words: “Repent and believe the Gospel!” (Mk 1:15). The basic message of Jesus is: conversion from every evil that destroys, and complete faith in the Gospel that saves! That is the good news of Jesus.

The Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Romans writes about unnatural passions that have been activated both among men and among women:

“That is why God gave them over to shameful passions: their wives replaced natural intercourse with unnatural ones, and so also men, abandoning natural intercourse with women, became enflamed with lust for one another, and men committed shameful acts with men and received the deserved reward of their deviation.” (Romans 1:26-27).

The apostle, as one inspired, declares that “male worshipers” will not see the kingdom of God:

“Don’t be fooled! Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor soft travelers, nor adulterers, nor thieves, nor gluttons, nor drunkards, nor swearers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 6:9-10).

In the same list, with regard to the violation of God’s order, Paul includes both “adulterers” and “robbers”! These “masculinists” are not only defilements of boys.

In these two places, the apostle uses the most severe terms for these abuses of both male and female persons: to replace natural communion with unnatural deviation. Neither perverts nor sodomites not only do not have God’s blessing, but they will not inherit the kingdom of God. Is there a bigger penalty?

In the time of the Fathers of the Church

Numerous holy fathers in their commentaries on the mentioned biblical texts refer to the wickedness of Sodom and their punishments. Here are just two examples:

Tertullian says: “[All] other raging passions – ungodly towards bodies and genders – beyond natural law, let’s drive them not only from the threshold, but from every shelter of the Church, because these are not crimes, but monsters”.[1]

Augustine similarly: “Wickedness that is against nature should be condemned and punished everywhere and always, such as the wickedness of the Sodomites, for example.” If all nations started them, according to the divine law, they would all be blamed with equal guilt, because that law did not make people such that they could communicate among themselves in this way”.[2]

Some recent teachings and interpretations

Jesuits in the 17th century. In 1612, the supreme superior of the Society of Jesus, Claudio Acquaviva (1543-1615), elected general of the Order in 1581, served as superior for 34 years, until his death, condemned the moral position that held that some light pleasure in deliberately sought sexual desires it does not involve mortal sin. Not only did he oblige the Jesuits to obey that teaching under the threat of excommunication, but he imposed on them the obligation to reveal the names of those Jesuits who violated even the spirit of the decree.[3] There was sealed the decision that no sin against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments had lightness or smallness of matter – parvitas materiae, especially not in the area of sodomy. It is noticeable that this rigorous view did not apply to any other commandment of God.

The Second Vatican Council does not have the explicit words: homosexuality or homosexuality in any document.

Persona humana, statement on some issues of sexual ethics, 1975.

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith signed by the head, Card. Francis Šeper and Archbishop Jérôme Hammer’s secretary, and was previously “approved and confirmed” by Pope Paul VI, says:

»According to the objective moral order, acts in homosexual relationships are deprived of their essential and irreplaceable goal. Holy Scripture condemns them as severe depravity and even portrays them as a fatal consequence of abandoning God”.[4]

When man does not keep God’s law, then he is condemned to keep man’s illegal law.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1992,

With the introductory apostolic constitution Fidei depositum of Pope John Paul II, prepared under the leadership of the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Card. Joseph Ratzinger, states that the “sin of Sodom” is among the five sins that cry out to heaven.[5] The Catechism talks about homosexuality in several places, usually with these qualifications:

that same-sex relationships cannot be approved under any circumstances[6];

that these are grave sins[7];

that homosexual persons, who have an objectively disordered tendency, through their effort, struggle, prayer, self-denial can bring them closer to Christian perfection,[8] and that in this sense the Church should help them to free them from their sinful state.

Veritatis splendor, 1993,

the encyclical of Pope John Paul II, mentions the concept of homosexuality only once:

“On the basis of the naturalistic understanding of the sexual act, contraception, direct sterilization, autoerotism, premarital relations, homosexual relationships and artificial insemination would be morally unacceptable”.[9]

The “naturalistic” concept is that strange theological understanding according to which some changeable human behaviors are attributed an unchanging character. This is what some “Catholic” theologians say that the Catholic Church teaches, says the encyclical! “They say that man, as a rational being, not only can, but actually should freely determine the meaning of his behavior”. You should be your own moral standard! Regardless of God’s law.

In Pope Francis’s Responsum to the 5 Cardinals

To the Question: “Does the Church have the authority to bestow blessings on same-sex unions?” – Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 2021, gives the Answer, signed by the head, Card. Luis Ladaria, a Jesuit, and Archbishop Giacomo Morandi’s secretary, informed and authorized to be published by Pope Francis, proclaims this traditional truth:

“The Church does not have, nor can it have, the power to bless same-sex unions”.[10]

The definition is understandable and unquestionable, it does not need new clarifications and responses, unless the terms: “authority”, “blessing” and “same-sex community” mean something completely different.

Belgian bishops have been practicing some “blessings” of homosexual communities for years, reported Antwerp Bishop Johann Bony, a delegate to the 5th General Assembly of the Synod Way, which was held in Frankfurt from March 9 to 11, 2023. The bishop said that the Belgian bishops had previously were on an official visit to the Vatican from November 21 to 26, 2022, and that the Pope, in the audience of November 25, approved the “blessing of homosexual couples” if all the bishops agreed with it. All 11 Belgian bishops agree with this, reports the Antwerp prelate, except that the French-speaking bishops have the same texts in French, not in Flemish.[11]

Fiducia supplicans, 2023

Here we are at the Statement on the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings, which, without consultation with the cardinals and bishops who are members of the Dicastery, was compiled by the new head of the Office for the Doctrine of the Faith, Card. Victor Manuel Fernandez, co-signed by the secretary Msgr. Armando Matteo, returned Ex audientia from Pope Francis on December 18, and announced.

In a strict liturgical sense, the blessing requires that what is being blessed be in accordance with the will of God as expressed in the teaching of the Church.[12] The Lord Jesus, on leaving this world, raised his hands and blessed the disciples. And while he was blessing them, he parted from them and was taken up to heaven. The disciples returned to Jerusalem and blessed God all the time in the Temple (cf. Lk 24:50-53). Here Jesus gives his divine blessing to the apostles in a descending sense and the apostles in an ascending sense bless God, i.e. praise him, thank him for all the work of redemption.[13]

Under III. point Statement from numbers 31 to 41 talks about “blessing couples in irregular situations and same-sex couples”. The statement tries in every way to notice the difference between the sacramental blessing of a married couple that follows the church formula and ceremony, from the “blessing” of an irregular or same-sex “couple” that does not follow any formula or ceremony. In other words, a “pastoral”, informal, unformulated, non-ritual, spontaneous, random, incidental, momentary “blessing” differs from a “liturgical” sacramental, ritual, formulated, prescribed blessing. The key to the theme is ambiguous in that such irregular “couples” and same-sex “couples” are given a “blessing” in a “church” context and by a “church” ordained minister. The term “couple” is mentioned as if it were a legal “couple”, even if two signs of the cross were made on two people. The same words “blessing”, “ordained minister” are attached to two different realities and with different meanings.

We all know that in no area of life can there be more ambiguity, various allusions, ambiguous jumps, deliberate intrusions, double standards, multi-layered concepts, double messages than in the area of sexuality, that is, the Sixth and Ninth Commandments of God. And that in conversations, in the media, on film, in cartoons. The serious evangelists did not record any ambiguous jokes about Jesus, and it can be assumed that there were some from the corrupt Pharisees and Sadducees. What is the need for us to introduce confusion and at the same time say: there is confusion here, watch out for confusion. We emphasize only the thought from the Statement:

“It should neither ensure nor promote the rite of blessing of couples in an irregular situation. At the same time, the proximity of the Church to people should not be prevented or prohibited in every situation where they could seek God’s help with a simple blessing. In a short prayer that precedes this spontaneous blessing, the ordained minister might pray for individuals to have peace, health, the spirit of patience, dialogue and mutual help – but also God’s light and strength so that I can fully fulfill his will”.[14]

Let’s try to break down the given point:

First, everything is put in a conditional form, in no way obligatory.

Second, it should neither provide nor promote a “couple blessing ceremony” on irregular occasions. Here, an even greater optionality and at the same time contradiction in the phrase “rite of blessing of couples” is highlighted. This contradiction is expanding.

Thirdly, it should not be prevented or forbidden for the Church to approach them with an ordained minister to pray for peace, health, a spirit of patience, dialogue, “mutual help”.

Fourth, to also pray for God’s light and strength so that these “couples” can completely fulfill the will of God and that he accompanies them as individuals with a “spontaneous blessing” of a few seconds, and that they remain unrepentant and unconverted in adulterous or Sodomic “couples” and lawlessness.

A reasonable believer wonders: if everything is in this conditional form, and if the Church should neither promote nor not promote, the “rite” of “blessing” such “couples”, the Church should neither prohibit nor forbid proximity, and that by ” “ordained” minister, how can we hope that these “couples” in irregular situations of persistent adultery or persistent same-sex relationships will completely fulfill the will of God without any conditions and signs of their repentance and exit from unnatural lawlessness and sin?

In no. 41. The statement says that apart from the indications presented, no other answers should be expected from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in possible ways to standardize details or practical aspects with regard to blessings of this kind.

However, as soon as two weeks passed and the rain of declarations from individual Bishops’ Conferences and other church organizations and persons appeared, the need to issue a special press release became apparent.

Announcement on the acceptance of the statement Fiducia supplicans, 2024. The Dicastery here introduces the practice of interpreting its Statement with a new document, the Announcement, from January 4, 2024, i.e. 16 days after the Statement, it develops a catechesis on the pastoral blessing of irregular and same-sex couples.

Why? Because it is

  • – a certain number of Bishops’ Conferences of the world, each in its own way, refused to accept the pastoral “blessing” of adulterous and homosexual “couples”;
  • – an even greater number of individual cardinals and bishops, each in their own way, rationally and morally criticized individual points of the Declaration;
  • – a considerable number of individual priests, monks, and lay persons, each in their own way, distanced themselves from the Declaration, and
  • – several Catholic associations declared that they are not in favor of such a Declaration.[15] From all the above-mentioned criticisms, an indelible question arises: Who cares that this kind of confusion is allowed in the Church of God with its already existing two-millennium doctrinal clarity? To mix schism with the unity of the Church? With orthodox heresy? With healthy biblical and traditional food she unnecessary?

From the Announcement of the Dicastery, a thought about the content and time of the “blessing” should be highlighted:

“In that case, the priest can pray a simple prayer: “Lord, look at these children of yours, give them health, work, peace and that they can help each other. Free them from everything that is contrary to your Gospel and allow them to live according to your will. Amen”. He then ends with the sign of the cross on each of the two persons. – We are talking about something that lasts about 10 or 15 seconds. Does it make sense to deny this kind of blessing to these people who asked for it?” [16] asked the Cardinal Head together with the Secretary, this time without Ex audientia.

What does that mean:

First, when a stable “Sodom couple” comes to the priest and confidently asks him (fiducia supplicans) for a “blessing”, and the priest prays the above-formulated prayer individually over one and the other homosexual to help each other, for Jesus to free them from everything what contradicts the Gospel and that they live according to God’s will, and they persistently continue to live in a “Sodom couple”?

Second, if a priest makes the sign of the cross or “blessing” over homosexuals individually, who do not recognize an unnatural sin as a sin and thus sin against the Holy Spirit, without repentance and without conversion, is it exposed to the general opinion that he is “blessing” the sinful union of same-sex persons?

Thirdly, if the priest finishes it all quickly, in 10-15 seconds according to the above prayer formula, can such a spontaneous “blessing” which is not a blessing, but is a blessing, be denied to individuals who live in an unnatural state of sin? All the recommendations of the Communication are based on the principle of contradiction, because always, from creation through redemption to the present state, such a simple and spontaneous “blessing” of an irregular adulterous “couple” and a same-sex “couple” was considered a sacrilegious, sinful counterattack to God’s blessing of the created married couple, male and women (Genesis 1:28) for the sake of bearing children and helping each other in life.

Conclusion

Pastor aeternus, the dogmatic constitution on the Church of Christ of the First Vatican Council, in 1870, precisely determines the ministry of Peter’s successors:

“And Peter’s heirs were not promised the Holy Spirit so that in with his revelation they announced a new doctrine, but with his help they guard the sacred and faithfully present the revelation, or deposit of faith [depositum fidei], received from the apostles”.[17]

Therefore, we believe that the Bishop of Rome, the High Priest, is keeping before his eyes the thought that the Lord Jesus said to Peter at the Last Supper – and in Peter to his successors – Peter, I have prayed for you that your faith may not weaken. So when you come to your senses, strengthen your brothers! (Luke 22:32). In faith, truth and love.

We believe that the Holy Father loves Jesus more than others, as the Lord asks and expects from Peter (John 21:15-17), and from his successors. And at the same time, the resurrected Jesus commands Peter every time to graze his lambs and sheep, i.e. to be the shepherd of Jesus’ flock.

We believe that the Holy Father can disprove the Statement of December 18, 2023 and the Announcement of January 4, 2024, documents that have been convincingly demonstrated in these last three weeks – both legally and liturgically, and morally and dogmatically – at the world church level that they are imbued with ambiguity, ambiguity and contradiction, which has never been a teaching characteristic of the Catholic Church.

We believe that the Holy Father, through the action of the Holy Spirit, will find a way to “preserve the sacred and faithfully present the revelation, or treasure of faith, received from the apostles”, and resolutely devalue the mentioned documents, because “it was not so from the beginning” (Mt 19:8). nor throughout the entire history of the Catholic Church until the 21st century, ambiguous documents, imbued with the play between natural legal marriage and irregular “couples” and unnatural same-sex unions. The word of the apostle is: “God is not to be trifled with” (Gal 6:7).

FOOTNOTES

[1] Tertullian (d. 155 – d. 220), Christian writer, De Pudicitia – On chastity, 4: Reliquas autem libidinum furias impias et in corpora et in sexus ultra iura naturae non modo limine, verum omni ecclesiae tecto submovemus , quia non sunt delicta, sed monstra.

[2] St. Augustine (354-430), church teacher, Confessiones, III.,8,15: Itaque flagitia quae sunt contra naturam, ubique ac semper detestanda atque punienda sunt, qualia Sodomitarum fuerunt. Quae si omnes gentes facerent, eodem criminis reatu divina lege tenerentur, quae non sic fecit homines ut se illo uterentur modo.

[3] Patrick Boyle (1932-2022), American Jesuit, Parvitas Materiae in Sexto in Contemporary Catholic Thought (Lanham, University Press of America, 1987), p. 14-16. The general’s decree referred to the Jesuit Order, but it had an impact, through the Jesuit professors, on a wider circle of believers.

[4] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Persona humana, statement, December 29, 1975, no. 8, Zagreb, 1976, KS Dokumenti, no. 47. The entire number 8 is dedicated to the issue of homosexuality, which is mentioned 7 times:
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_it.html

[5] Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1867. Other sins that cry out to heaven: the blood of Abel; the wail of the oppressed people in Egypt; the wailing of the stranger, the widow and the fatherless; injustice to the employed worker.

[6] KCC, no. 2357.

[7] KCC, no. 2396.

[8] KCC, no. 2358-2359.

[9] John Paul II, Veritatis splendor – Splendor of truth, encyclical addressed only to brothers in the bishopric, August 6, 1993, no. 47. Zagreb, 1998, Documents KS 107.

[10] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Responsum, February 22, 2021. Published March 15, 2021.
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2021/03/15/0157/00330.html#ita

[11] See the link with further links: https://lanuovabq.it/it/benedizioni-gay-i-vescovi-si-ribellano-e-guerra-delle-pastorali

[12] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Fiducia supplicans [FS] – Trust that prays, statement, December 18, 2023, no. 9. The statement has 5,620 words, 45 numbers, 31 notes, 20 of which refer to the teachings of Pope Francis.
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2023/12/18/231218b.html

[13] FS, no. 18.

[14] FS, no. 38.

[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_opponents_of_Fiducia_supplicans – (January 8, 2024)

[16] Announcement on the acceptance of the statement of Fiducia supplicans, no. 5 – https://www.vaticannews.va/hr/vatikan/news/2024-01/dikasterij-nauk-vjere-fiducia-supplicans-kardinal-fernandez.html

[17] DS, no. 3070. Neque enim Petri successoribus Spiritus Sanctus promissus est, ut eo revelante novam doctrinam patefacerent, sed ut, eo assistente, traditam per Apostolos revelationem seu fidei depositum sancte custodirent et fideliter exponerent.

News

Major News Engines are now running cover for Vatican Scandals

2 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Traduction française

Everyone, except those who live on Mars, knows that from the moment Pope Francis stepped out on the loggia of Saint Peter’s Basilica on the evening of March 13, 2013, the Main Stream Media has been having a love affair with the globalist pontiff.

What most do not know, though it was uncovered by Ordo Militaris Radio TV and reported here at FromRome.Info, is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio was the Propaganda Due Lodge choice as successor of Pope Benedict XVi, a choice supported and assisted fully by the U.S. State Department and the CIA, which controls most Media outlets round the world.

So, despite the feigned shock, that Pope Francis would thank the Vatican Press Corp, last week, for keeping silent about Vatican Scandals, the censorship of news about the Vatican goes on.

The latest of which FromRome.info is reporting is the tight lipped control of search results on the three largest Search Engines, Google, Bing and DuckDuckgo.

Ever since the Catholic Hierarchy world-wide overwhelmingly rejected or ignored ‘Fiducia supplicans’, these search engines have begun to ignore Catholic publications which are airing the controversy.

I say, “ignore” because as a webmaster at FromRome.Info, I know full well that their bots still index these news stories and that in their databases they have information about them. But if you search for them you will not find them at all or easily at any of these three search engines.

In fact, the essence and nearly all the daily reports of opposition to Pope Francis, ‘Fiducia supplicans’ or scandals at the Vatican — except the most salacious ones — have been eliminated from results under the rubrics “Vatican” or “Catholic Church”. — If you do not go to some of the more conservative fake opposition sites or to the totally uncontrolled opposition sites, you will never know these events even take place.

Thus, de facto, Catholics have returned to the 80’s when we had no way to know what was going on in the Church but what the New York Times or the like chose to make known to us.

Welcome to 1984!

CREDITS: The featured image is a Google Image search for Pope Francis’ meeting with Leo Panetta, former CIA director. A direct search for Pope Francis and the CIA turned up nothing.

Canon Law, Editorials

How to avoid becoming a cancelled Cardinal, Archbishop, Bishop, Priest, Deacon etc..

4 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

French Translation

Not even a dog keeps doing the same thing over and over if it hurts. The Lord God and Creator gave even dogs enough sense which rivals the intelligence of sinful men, in such circumstances. And this is why through the ages it has often been this observation about dogs which gets men to change their ways.

And this is what the clergy need to do in regard to the whole phenomenon of “cancelled clergy”: a recently coined term or neologism by which there is signified a member of the clergy, upright and honest, who is the victim of the abuse of authority by a superior intent on pushing globalism, modernism, heresy, or sodomy.

Though the word is a new one the genus of persecution is an old one. Before the Second Vatican Council it was much more mild, and simply consisted in being side-lined by your Bishop or superior. But there was always hope that if one persevered in following the laws of the Church and right discipline that with the next change of superior, at his death, transferal or the next ecclesiastical election of one kind or another, the new superior would recognize the worth of the sidelined Cardinal, Archbishop, Bishop, Priest, Monk, Sister etc..

After the Council, however, the penal system of the Church was weaponized against faithful clergy and religious. But in many cases the Faithful never recognized what was going on, simply because back then there was no uncontrolled Catholic media and the main stream media simply ignored such news.

But as the decades have past the persecution of honest men and women of God has become more frequent, and the pretexts for doing so less and less credible, such that we are less and less shocked that individuals are persecuted, and being persecuted by such revolutionaries and heretics is becoming more and more a wreath of honor.

How many priests were removed from ministry during the Scamdemic because they refused to observe the controls (by continuing to give communion in the mouth), to shut their churches (by keeping them open), to wear masks, or to replace the Gospel with preaching the Scam?

But through these 60 years of persecution, the hardest and saddest thing is that those persecuted nearly immediately fell out of any network of charity, such that they no longer had anyone to help them, save but their immediate relatives or friends, a charity which often lasted only a short time.

I remember when I realized that my former community was canonically lawless and had no intention of observing the Rule of Saint Francis. I requested my superior permission to do so according to the Papal Decrees on the Rule of Saint Francis, and got a letter back immediately denying my request and suggesting I leave. But when I did leave, my own parents denied me housing and food in an attempt to convince me to give up my vocation. I would say that this was the darkest moment of my vocation.

How many religious women face the same conflict and never found help and thus gave up. Religious brothers too. That is why I am so ardent about insisting that we persecuted religious who do not give up have more the right to keep calling ourselves “religious” than those of us who remain in communities which are corrupt to their core and in many cases openly heretical or apostate.

Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops and Priests usually have a less hard time since their dignity in orders naturally attracts many supporters and benefactors.

Neverthless, no priest wants to be a cancelled priest, and nearly every priest will use as much discretion as possible to avoid the worse forms of being cancelled. Most of the time it is simply reticence and pretending is nothing wrong.

Those of us, like myself, who are not priests, are often wrong in our impatience with such honest men who are avoiding being cancelled and thus too silent about the problems in the Church. They do this for us, knowing that more rapacious men would take their places if they got cancelled. We need to remember this in our public declamations about clergy doing nothing.

But if you are a member of the hierarchy or a priest, deacon, or religious and you want to avoid being cancelled, I would give this advice.

Recognize that the Apostolic See, or the episcopal See of your diocese, or your religious superior is impeded in the execution of his office by the public manifest errors which that office has been used to promote, confirm, authorize, establish, defend or support.

Unlike simply giving up, like Bishop Strickland, or saying there is no solution like Cardinal Burke, or affirming that a heretic can remain Pope, like Bishop Athanasius Schnieder, or daily criticizing the Pope, like so many Bishops, or declaring the Pope a heretic and thus no longer the pope — some of  which can get a member of the clergy out of a job quickly, whether by excommunication, suspension a divinis, laicization etc.., declaring the Apostolic See impeded balances two truths which need to be kept in mind: that Schism from a legitimate superior is a grave crime, and that obeying a legitimate superior in what is morally unacceptable is a grave sin.

And such a declaration need not be a canonical one. It can simply be a way of critiquing the present situation by applying discernment of the kind which comes from the grace and charism of truth which is bestowed in holy Orders or analogously by one’s religious vocation.

By such a declaration or recognition, a man or woman of God avoids the charge of schism, because such a declaration affirms that the Pope is the pope. At the same time it canonically conditions criticism of a bad Pope, who has gone into the extremes of  heresy and apostasy and idolatry by public acts, within the bounds of remaining in communion, while insisting on the freedom granted in Canon 212 to speak out against injustice.

So the next time you are tempted to say Pope Francis is a heretic, schismatic, apostate, idolater or no longer the Pope. Start by recognizing that he has impeded the Apostolic See by his public insistence of approval for the manifestly heretical, illogical, sacrilege promoting, wrong and just false teaching in ‘Fiducia supplicans’, such that everyone in the Church objectively, and not just yourself subjectively, no longer has the moral obligation to obey his decrees while he remains in the state of impenitence.

Don’t say I will no longer obey him. Full Stop. Since that can be understood as an act of schism or heresy. Say rather, that man by his heretical profession in approving ‘Fiducia supplicans’ has taken a position which the entire Church can never accept and thus has so discredited himself as a superior, that it would be both unreasonable and uncanonical to persecute those who call a spade a spade, rather than seek his removal from office in whatever canonical manners that is possible.

And in the mean time do NOT give up the ministry or your vocation. Keep serving God where you are and do not understand such a recognition or declaration as a pretext for violating Church law. Why, you do not even have to publish the fact of your recognition, if you are not a Bishop. Bishops however are now gravely obliged to make such declarations as they will assist the Bishops of the Roman Province to call a provincial council and take the ultimate action as requested in the Sutri Initiative. As for those who are NOT laymen and lay women, I would urge great caution in participating in the Sutri Initiative if you are a priest, deacon or religious, since your letter could be used against you to persecute you, if any one of the Bishops receiving it return a copy to your superior. But if you are a Bishop you should write them as you have the grave duty to act.

At the same time, Bishops have, on account of the objective state of impedition of the Apostolic See, now awesome powers and liberty of action, as I have explained here.

 

News

Cardinal Ambongo: By ‘Fiducia supplicans’ Pope Francis has discredited the Synod on Synodality

1 Comment

Editor’s Note: It has not even been two weeks since Cardinal Ambongo went to Rome and crafted a letter with Cardinal Koch to make it appear that the Bishops of Africa would agree to disagree, while accepting ‘Fiducia supplicans’.

Now, surprisingly, he has openly decried Pope Francis without naming him, for perpetrating a dishonest fraud on the entire Catholic World through his “synodal process”. This is a major shift in the relationship between African Bishops and Pope Francis. And we can expect even more militancy from the Mystical Body of Christ in Africa, which, we pray, has finally realized that Pope Francis needs to repent of his heretical profession or he needs to be removed from power.

If you have contacts in Africa, please share with them the articles on the Sutri Initiative and the Impeded See, which are now available in English, French and Italian, with your contacts there. Let us do our little part to uproot the problems in the Church once and for all.

Debates, News

Pope Francis: Everyone who criticizes ‘Fiducia supplicans’ will eventually accept it

3 Comments

Rebuttal by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Many have accused or alleged that Pope Francis is a false prophet, but no one story or quote has so demonstrated the truth of that accusation as this one. — You have to be way beyond simply confused or ignorant, to allege that in the future your heretical blasphemy which runs counter to logic, reason, the Gospel and all Biblical or Apostolic teaching will become the faith of the Church.

Yet there is some truth in what he says ….

But while his assertion is blasphemous and heretical, there is a truth in it for the fake opposition. What he is really saying is that 99% of those whom you think oppose it, are merely grifters who will move along withe the heretical flow out of fear of being out of sync with “the pope”.

That I would agree with, as has been demonstrated on numerous occasions in the past 4 years, about which I frequently comment. For grifters, opposition only means criticism today, acceptance tomorrow, since they follow the modus operandi of the conservative Masonic Lodges, which operates this way to suppress true opposition to the projects of the Illuminati-Rothschilds. That is why they will always be promoted, because they are your most clever enemies.

Indeed, logically, criticism presupposes acceptance — Only rejection implies condemnation

And condemnation to be true seeks the removal of the causes of the error, which are Pope Francis, Cardinal Fernandez and the staff of the Dicastery.

In this way true Catholics will persevere and triumph over this heretical conspiracy of this homosexual cabal.

And for those, whose Dioceses have fallen to this apostasy, you can do your part to fight, by joining the Committee against Apostasy in taking a stand in your own diocese, a unique way of working against this evil prophecy of the man whom by all means wants to be the False Prophet spoken of by Saint John.

Brainwashing by repetition

The reason why Pope Francis has said this outrage is because he knows that, by now, most Catholics are so plugged into the Matrix, that they simply believe what they are told on social media, and pay no attention any more to Jesus Christ, the Apostles, the Doctors or Fathers of the Church, or anything before Vatican II. He has spent his 10+ reign gaslighting the Catholic world, and while the Prayer of Christ as High Priest is now raising a storm against him, he is doubled down and decided that God is his enemy.

The Apocalyptic Battle has begun

The Catholic Church is thus now truly involved in an apocalyptic battle, because it is true, that most Catholics in practice are pagans, and no longer care to fight against evil, anywhere, least of all in the Church. The feel overwhelmed by the intransigence of Pope Francis, who like a pedophile who the police won’t arrest, is intent on making everyone accept his deprivations. The Catholic World by sinning in accepting what the MSM said about Feb. 11, 2013, and taking what Cardinals and Bishops said, while denying what they could see with their own eyes, committed a moral error which has enslaved them to lies, and only rare souls, by the grace of the Blessed Virgin, are waking up and breaking free.

Yet, the vast majority are still plugged into the Web of Darkness, which has now been woven over all the nations, and much of the “opposition” to ‘Fiducia supplicans’ will melt away for that reason.

This is why for those who understand how dangerous this document is, not doing anything to get Pope Francis removed from office, nor opposing its errors in their own town, is contributing to this mass Apostasy.

We are in an Apocalyptic Battle, and the battle lines are now clearly drawn. And if you can see them, your culpability is all the greater, if you shirk your duty to fight to save the Church. Let us not be persuaded to do nothing, and let us realize that all those voices who say to do nothing, or to not listen to the voices which call for us to do something, are literally of the devil.

Use Discernment

So mark out which Catholic Media outlets are no longer using the words, “blasphemous”, “heretical”, “apostate” in regards to this controversy, but have toned down their reports to “confusing”, “scandalous”, “hard to understand”, “contradictory”.  And how nearly every last one of them, including all the talking heads who “hate” Bergoglio and denounce him daily, have accepted the de facto position of Sedevacantists, who, like the multitude of devils of sloth, advocate nothing to restore the papacy.

In the meantime, in response to this evil prophecy of Pope Francis, respond with, “It’s time to crusade to get this man removed from the Papacy!”: and join the Sutri Initiative. And in response to the voices who are telling you to shut up, stop with the criticisms, and who will play all the political cards of the LGTBSQEZ+ movement, like feigning to be offended, injured or hurt by your “hateful words”, tell them frankly that they are going to Hell and need to repent.

News

VATICAN: Pope Francis berates opponents of ‘Fiducia supplicans’ as “small ideological groups”

Leave a comment

Editor’s Note: In this report by a former Associated Press journalist, now pretending to be a Catholic, the Catholic world is gaslighted into thinking that the Catholic position on blessings represents a “small ideological” group which in time will be enlightened by the wisdom of Pope Francis to abandon Gospel teaching. The hubris of the article is only exceeded by that of Pope Francis. — To call the Catholic position names is canonically sufficient evidence of public, manifest pertinacity against revealed doctrine.

The Catholic News Agency has thus proven what they really mean by their name: Anti-Catholic Propaganda Agency.

The Sutri Initiative remains the only true Catholic response, short of praying the Lord to intervene.

The comments of Pope Francis were made during his interview by La Stampa. An English translation was published by Vatican News, see below:

News

Pope Francis has “amplified” the debate over ‘Fiducia supplicans’

Leave a comment

Editor’s Note: Here John Allen, an ex-Catholic priest, who married a woman civilly flaunts that he and she got a blessing once when they attended a Wednesday Audience at the Vatican — he omits that he actually got no such thing, since he is in the state of mortal sin — but the article remains one of value for explaining how the MSM spins a story and focuses sometimes on tidbits in an inauthentic way.

However, the article as a whole is an attempt at gaslighting, however so cleverly and smoothly it is packaged, because in “amplifying” the debate, Pope Francis has really given invalid rationales for his heresy, not being able to find any truth to sustain the lies of the document.

John Allen is a popular and sought after writer and speaker by CIA backed and funded publications and platforms. He garnered infamy for criticizing the Church in editorials published by the Boston Globe more than 20 years ago. Although, back then, they hid from the public that he was a defrocked priest.

CruxNow.com was founded by the Boston Globe but is now an independent platform. It is no way presents the Catholic view on anything, nay, it’s very purpose in existing is to sow disinformation, misinformation, and promote heresies and lies.

News

Cardinal Müller: ‘Fiducia supplicans’ is a failed project, but Pope Francis insists

1 Comment

Commentary by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

To hear the Cardinal’s criticisms, click the video above. But the Pope clearly is ignoring him.

As regards the video above, the Cardinal strongly criticizes Pope Francis for running the Church according to his personal views, prejudices and politics, and the Cardinal also denounces the Bishops who are persecuting Catholics who attend the Ancient Latin Mass as childish persons who are seeking approval. He also deeply critiques Pope Francis for using the ecclesiastical punishments which God and the Apostles ordained to defend the Faith and right morals, to punish those who disagree with Pope Francis’ personal views, sentiments and approach.

Arroyo for his part, breaks the dome of silence, about the Advent Miracle, by remarking that opposition to ‘Fiducia supplicans’ represents an unheard of international Catholic reaction against a papal innovation, the likes of which have never been seen. He is the first to speak of this, after FromRome.info pointed it out.

Pope Francis has been clearly ignoring the criticisms of the Cardinal since Dec. 21st when he exposed many of the errors in ‘Fiducia supplicans’ with a masterful critique. In fact Pope Francis has doubled down on his heretical profession, during his address yesterday to the staff of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, by attempting to square a circle, that is, by appealing to the materialistic error (which holds there is nothing but individuals), that things in relation are not in relation if we simply deny that we are considering them in relation. According to this philosophical error, which is Kantian (who taught that things are what I think they are), we can dispense of the circumstances of any moral act to absolve it from gravely offending God on account of those circumstances. And yes, this moral theory is the moral theory of pedophiles and of everyone with a bad conscience, at its core.

https://twitter.com/MLJHaynes/status/1750864811921952846

If the Pope were correct, then blessings are, by their nature, of persons not relationships, and thus the Sacrament of Matrimony has no effect and blessings of those in a Catholic Matrimony has nothing to do with blessing the Marriage or Union; Or, the Pope has just invented a non-relational blessing, which unlike the blessings talked about by God in Scripture or handed down in Tradition, blesses only the individual without any recognition of his public status or relationship to other. Thus, this second kind of blessing cannot be given to Kings as kings, Bishops as ordinaries of their dioceses, priests as pastors, politicians as holders of offices. It’s a really cheap dumbed-down concept akin to the nature of eternal punishment in Hell, which is only of the individual.

Thus, Pope Francis’ rationale in defending his heretical profession, is an even worse attack on the Christian religion than Fiducia supplicans. But this should surprise no Catholic, because you cannot defend a lie except with another lie. And thus, Pope Francis’ absurd explanation is an open confession that he recognizes at the deepest psychological level that ‘Fiducia supplicans’ is heretical.

The MSM universally consistent reaction to this statement by Pope Francis, and the controlled opposition’s non reaction, shows that what Pope Francis has just said is 100% W.E.F. approved and will become a core dogma of the One World Religion that they are plotting to impose upon the Catholic Church and the entire world.

More about this, here:

This article by CruxNow.com is bizarrely silent about the calls by Cardinal Zen and Msgr. Nicola Bux for the resignation of Cardinal Fernandez. –  So much for the “reliable” Catholic Press. — FromRome.Info is frequently decried by the “reliable” Catholic Press as “unreliable”. — If you like “unreliable” sources, please subscribe to FromRome.Info to get constant red pill information.

News

PANAMA: Cardinal Maradiaga says Bishops oppose ‘Fiducia supplicans’ for reasons of Civil Law

1 Comment

Editor’s Note: The heretical party pushing ‘Fiducia supplicans’ is especially proficient in mendacity. While Cardinal Ambongo claimed Africans could not accept the document by implying they were culturally backward and ignorant — an all too frequent racist theme spouted by members of the St. Gallen Mafia, who have extensive ties to the Nazi Regime (which is the same root of the W. E. F.) — Cardinal Maradiaga tries a new narrative, by claiming that opposition to the document arises only because of conflict with local laws. He is trying to gaslight the world into thinking that all the Bishops agree with the heresy in principle. — As can be seen, the Globalist alliance with Pope Francis has deep historical roots and is part of the plot to establish the Fourth Reich, which they call the New World Order, the Great Reset, and the New Agenda.

News

Cardinal Müller: The Catholic Church does not belong to Pope Francis

1 Comment

Commentary by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Traduction française

It is surprising that this interview published 6 days ago, was not shared on any other platforms. But then again, I am not surprised, since the author, Cole DeSantis, opens by admitting that Pope Francis has approved “material heresy”.  Kudos to him and Crisis Magazine for breaking from the dome of silence of the controlled opposition English language Catholic press.

For this reason I will comment on the entirety of this interview by Cardinal Gerhard Müller, which is authoritative, seeing that Pope Benedict XVI appointed him as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the summer before his momentous Declaration in February of 2013.

That the Cardinal allowed this interview to proceed under the rubric that Pope Francis had endorsed “material heresy” already is big news, which every Catholic news outlet should have reported.

For those unfamiliar with theological notes, “material heresy” refers to the signification of heretical profession in a verbal statement. It prescinds from whether the speaker or those agreeing to it intend to break from the Church with a heretical profession. Thus, it is a category which refers to documents and statements, in regard to what they objectively signify, but not to persons in regard to what they subjectively intend to signify. Saying, thus, that ‘Fiducia supplicans’ is heretical is the same as saying that those who approve of it have professed ‘material heresy’, as regards the document.

First, I cannot omit to point out that the Cardinal’s responses are good, but that he professes profound theological errors, the first of which is to hold that a “Dogmatic Constitution” of Vatican II is the highest expression of the Ecclesiastical Magisterium. That is totally wrong. Since Vatican II expressly intended to teach nothing and to impose no discipline, the signatures of the Council Fathers were solicited without any reference to exercising their charism of truth, which they received in episcopal consecration.

Cardinal Müller favors the distinction necessary for the Sutri Initiative

And speaking of Episcopal and Papal Authority, Cardinal Muller drops this important bomb:

Those who fall short of the faith and the discipline of the Church must be put back on the right path with spiritual means and ecclesiastical punishments.

Which, I believe, is a veiled reference to a Provincial Council of the kind which was held at Sutri in 1046.

Again, the Cardinal professes that all Catholics must accept the fundamental distinction regarding the Pope, which is at the basis of the Sutri Initiative:

The fundamental problem arises from the distinction between the pope as the holder of the Petrine office with its specific powers on the one hand and the pope as an individual Christian in the pilgrim state, who can also lose sanctifying grace through mortal sin or who can inwardly and outwardly manifestly fall away from the faith, heretically contradict the doctrine of faith, or even schismatically separate himself from the Church.

Cardinal Muller contradicts Pope St. Leo II and the Third Council of Constantinople

However, after admitting the distinction, the Cardinal denies that this distinction has a canonical application. I will quote his entire section. But I will first remark that the Cardinal is a theologian and not a canonist, and indeed is also a poor Church historian.

Cardinal Müller: There can be no definition of these borderline cases because the definitions refer to the revealed faith. This can be seen in the attempts of the Councils of Constance and Basel, which had to find a practical way out of the Western schism despite the false doctrine of the superiority of the council over the popes and antipopes of their time. Beyond the aforementioned distinction (between the pope in his office as successor of Christ and the current holder of this office during his pontificate), there can be no canonical procedure (i.e., purely positive ecclesiastical law above divine law) that could officially declare a reigning pope a formal heretic and legally depose him. The personal charism of infallibility ex cathedra is not to be confused with the special grace of being saved from sin and apostasy in the pilgrim state. This gap cannot be closed within the Church because the supreme authority cannot be judged endlessly by an even higher one and therefore the only judge of the reigning pope is God alone. He will ensure that the Church does not destroy itself at the root of its unity in the truth of Christ. This is why our humble prayer and a Christian style of dealing with one another is all the more necessary in this situation.

Someone needs to ask the Cardinal to explain the Council of Sutri in 1046, which deposed 3 popes. Indeed, it is absurd to admit theologically that there is a distinction between the man who is the pope and the man as the Pope, but then say the man who is the Pope cannot be judged, for that would deny the universal authority of Jesus Christ to judge all things, which He in matters of religion imparted to the Church. It would thus create a schism between the Church and Christ and it would partake of the modern protestant error of presuming that the Church Visible never partakes fully in the authority of Christ over Christians.

Indeed, the rationale employed by the Cardinal of appealing to an endlessly higher and higher authority is faulty, and reflects the Cardinal’s ignorance of Sutri. Because at Sutri no one judged the Pope as pope, or appealed to a higher authority than the pope. The man who is the pope who claims to be the pope can have his claim adjudicated by the Bishops of the Roman Province.

The Catholic Position has always been the opposite, namely that the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy has jurisdiction over all Christians, a fact recognized when on September 16, 681 A. D., the Third Council of Constantinople condemned Pope Honorius I for his letter on the Monothelite Controversy wherein he failed to teach clearly against the heresy of Monothelitism. This case refutes Cardinal Müller’s claim at both a theological and canonical level. And Pope Leo II confirmed the Council’s condemnation as a “perfect expression” of the Faith. Thus, the Cardinal’s opinion has been already implicitly denied if not condemned by the highest expression of the Papal and Ecclesiastic Magisterium.

Indeed, what is Cardinal Müller trying to say: does he mean to say that all the Catholic Bishops who faulted Pope Francis personally for ‘Fiducia supplicans’ are in the wrong? Have sinned? or that Any bishop who publicly calls the document heretical has erred? Did he not do the same? — The Cardinal is clearly wrong. He has admitted the truth of the catholic principles whereby all Catholics must recognize God alone as the supreme authority, the Papacy only as custodian of what God has given us through the Apostles. Therefore, it follows immediately that a Pope or Bishop who teaches contrary to this Deposit of the Faith must be publicly rebuked and punished if he fail to repent. The Cardinal is playing games with his audience when he says there is no canonical procedure for such a case. He is also implying that the Church as Mother should not care for the salvation of an erring pope, and not seek to correct him with the most severe and ultimate remedies. His position is absurd.

Finally, in the closing statements of Cardinal Muller, he makes no space for any duty of Catholics to see that corruption be rooted out in the Church, especially corruption by their superiors. His profession of Faith, therefore, is not authentic, because it ignores the duty of every disciple of Christ to guard His Immaculate Bride until the end of time.

In closing, I remind all Catholics that the opinion of the Cardinal binds no one, not even himself. All are obliged to conform their consciences to truth and reality. The Council of Sutri in 1046 is part of that truth and that reality. The Sutri Initiative is thus 100% Catholic expression of such a conscience. The Cardinal for his part will have this interview of his numbered among his great historical mistakes, among those in which he wrote that the Blessed Virgin was not physically a virgin all her life, a heresy condemned in the Roman Council of 632, if I remember correctly, and that in which he implied the Sacred Heart, Hands or Feet of Christ is not present in the Most Blessed Sacrament. Both of which are horrible errors and blasphemies resulting from the Cardinal’s failure to recognize the philosophical and metaphysical distinction between proper and improper accidents. In the above interview, it appears, thus to me, that his error of denying a canonical application of a theological truth derives from his imperfect conception of Christ’s Mandate to the Apostles and the perfection of Holy Mother Church. Let us pray he reflects more profoundly on these things and conforms his judgement to the facts of history. In the present crisis urging the faithful not to do anything is detrimental and dishonest.

News

ITALY: Cardinal Zuppi, head of Bishops Conference, embraces heretical ‘Fiducia supplicans’

Leave a comment

Editor’s Note: The apostasy will begin from the top, we were told by Sr. Lucia. Cardinal Zuppi not only says he accepts Fiducia supplicans, but calls Pope Francis “a prophet”.  — He does not specify whether a “true” or “false” one. — But he does call for unity with Pope Francis, who signed and published and authorized the heretical declaration last month.

Stand against that heretical profession, by participating  in the Sutri Initiative or founding a Committee against Apostasy.

For more on Cardinal Zuppi, see here.

According to the statement cited above, it appears that Cardinal Betori has joined the heretical profession with him.