Today marks the most recent in what promises to be a series of you-know-what-hitting-the-fan moments wherein each and every member of the sacred hierarchy is being forced to demonstrate his testicular fortitude, if indeed he even has any, courtesy of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops. In other words, we are about to find out in short order who among them actually possesses the stones necessary to stand up in defense of our Holy Catholic Faith in the face of Generalissimo Bergoglio’s well-orchestrated and plainly visible assault.
To be specific, the gut check of today comes in the form of the Synod’s Midterm Report; otherwise known as the Felatio Pro Deceptionem… I mean, Relatio Post Disceptationem. (We’ll address the Synod’s homo-deviant affirmations at a later date.)
After a cursory review of the text, one of the first things that jumps out is the following:
In considering the principle of gradualness in the divine salvific plan, one asks what possibilities are given to married couples who experience the failure of their marriage, or rather how it is possible to offer them Christ’s help through the ministry of the Church. In this respect, a significant hermeneutic key comes from the teaching of Vatican Council II, which, while it affirms that “although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure … these elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward Catholic unity” (Lumen Gentium, 8).
Back in the good ol’ days of Benedict the Abdicator, we used to get all worked up over the incessant calls to apply that elusive… nay, mythical “hermeneutic of continuity” to the conciliar text. Little did we know at the time that this was mere child’s play compared to what the Bergogliologues have in store.
Now the “teaching” of Vatican II has become “a significant hermeneutic key” all its own! As far as this crowd is concerned, it’s to Hell with “continuity!” Who needs it? “Continuity,” if it were to actually exist, would serve no more useful purpose to these people than an anchor that just might threaten to keep the Good Ship Francis moored to something that partially resembles Catholicism.
More noteworthy still is the admission offered in the very next paragraph:
The doctrine of levels of communion, formulated by Vatican Council II, confirms the vision of a structured way of participating in the Mysterium Ecclesiae by baptized persons.
There was a time when the post-conciliar popes, and the bishops who aided them in undermining the Faith, would insist that the Second Vatican Council never even attempted to formulate doctrine; this even as they behaved as if it not only did precisely that, but also gave them endless license to craft novelties of their own making.
Now we have the Synod practically boasting about the fact that Vatican II most certainly did “formulate” a new “doctrine” in Lumen Gentium as it concerns the conciliar invention known as partial communion.
For the neophyte traditional reader, let me be clear: The Church doesn’t just up and formulate new doctrines out of whole cloth in this manner, much less in a gathering (Vatican II) that had not the mandate nor the intention of binding the faithful via doctrinal definitions.
In other words, this newly formulated “doctrine” of partial communion is by virtue of its newness alone utterly and obviously false, and this by the tacit admission of the Synod itself.
If we can be thankful for the “Francis Effect” on any level, it is for the fact that the modernists wolves who dance with delight to the tune of this dreadful pontificate are so entirely confident of their position that they are no longer even bothering to costume themselves as sheep.
Like I said, the excrement is hitting the proverbial fan…
We must hunker down now. PRAY like never before. Keep our eyes on Jesus and Mary and do what we can in our own sphere. We must revisit learning the true truths of our faith and adhere to them, no matter what these ‘progressives’ throw at us.
Nothing new under the sun. The Christian world once went almost totally arian including the bishops, etc. How many left the Church for protestant heresies, including bishops leading the way.
But there is more to this. What is the underlying sin? Yes, that three letter word. What happened to that 300 page expose on homoheresy? Nothing. No one cleaned out but rather some known homosexuals ‘forgiven’ and placed in positions of authority. To turn the back on the teachings of Christ, shows that sin is reigning. The good and faithful bishops are being exiled, demoted, and cast aside. The corruption is greater than we imagined and we imaged it pretty bad and deep. And now we see it in the open when we have cardinals spouting heresy with impunity and even protected by the pope.
Let us pray for a short papacy. I must trust that the good Lord will only let this all go so far and when He intervenes, it will not be pretty.
I often reflect on how Pope Benedict XVI’s ‘resignation’ was the primary impetus for the ravening wolves to creep out into the daylight for all the sheep to see whereas had he marshalled-on the wolves would never have been exposed for what they are.
I think it may just be possible that Pope Ratzinger realized his ‘resignation’ precisely would have this effect and it was better for the flock to have the false prophets unmasked.
Pope Benedict has not fled from the wolves. He’s only a stones-throw away.
The idea of partial communion, as clarified in Dominus Iesus, lends no support to the heresies coming out of this Robber Synod. There is truth found in non-Catholic religions of course – despite their errors, not because of them. And there is truth found in the context of immoral relationships, too – despite their immorality, not because of them. So, what does this mean? Partial communion does not make anyone a Catholic entitled to the sacramental privileges of Catholics; neither does the goodness or virtue that might be found in the context of immoral relationships change the nature of those immoral relationships.
Gradualism…..I’m gradually off to bed bewildered by the document and all the blogs and comments
The one that summed it up was a tweet by Michael Dougherty….
“Go and sin {no more,}…like a little less”
And
“The law of graduality. In which the Church abandons it’s teaching and people keep abandoning the Church. But slowly.”
O.K. – that’s it for me and Father Z:
That’s it for me and Fr. Z:
rubyroad2013 says:
13 October 2014 at 1:06 pm
The ENTIRE report is a disgrace. [Simply stating so doesn’t make a case.]
His comment is within the brackets.
Today is the Feast of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima in 1917. Our Lady’s predictions regarding the “diabolic orientation” of the Catholic Church are being fulfilled. Unless Russia is consecrated to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart exactly according to Her commands, things could only get worse.
The synod is a mine field of the time bombs planted at the Second Vatican Council. Can you hear the explosions?
Our Lady of Fatima, please come to our aid, please intercede for your children.
To say that I am disheartened is an understatement.
This mid Synod report makes for truly shocking reading. The report may not be binding. But the seeds of capitulation have been planted as evidenced in what this report states.
I can’t see Francis rejecting the conclusions of this report. I do envisage that some or all of the recommendations will be adopted eventually. It is a sorry day that the bishops/archbishops/cardinals of Catholic Church could produce a report making such conclusions.
I do believe that we’re in the end times and this report is a clear unambiguous signpost on that route to the end times. I cannot accept that the recommendations in that report reflect the views of the Founder of the Church.
Let the chips fall where they may.
More than a few bloggers have used the word “crazy” lately to describe our current Church leadership. Modern psychiatry prefers using terms like ” behaviorally disordered” and discussing symptoms, such as these from an April 2013 article by Alexander Burgemeester on Narcissistic Personality Disorder in a Leader:
____
He typically becomes more and more self-assured and less and less constrained. He begins to feel invincible, attracting admirers due to his enthusiasm, yet listening less and less to words of caution or advice, taking more and more risks.
____
He is not really comfortable with emotions, demanding empathy from others while lacking in genuine empathy himself -tending to listen only for information he seeks to hear at the moment. He doesn’t learn well from others, unless he views someone as an equal or superior being.
____
He likes to dominate with speech, but his faults become more evident the more known he becomes. Despite this, he is still able to communicate and inspire with passion and conviction. ( eg. Stalin, Mao Tse-tung) He is extremely sensitive to even the slightest perceived criticism, tending to keep others at an emotional distance, building walls of isolation. He is uncomfortable with other people expressing negative emotions, preferring not to know what people think of him.
___
Although the narcissistic leader might say that he wants teamwork, what he really wants is a group of people who agree with him. When feeling verbally attacked, he becomes overly defensive.He really doesn’t care what others think unless it has become a problem, and can’t tolerate dissent -especially among those closest in command to them. He either ignores those who disagree with him or gets rid of them.
____
Narcissists do have an emotional cleverness but it is rooted more in exploitation. They know whom they can use and they don’t think twice about being callously manipulative. That explains why they are often unlikable despite their charm, charisma and personal magnetism.
http://thenarcissisticlife.com/some-important-narcissistic-leaders-in-history/
@rubyroad2014,
“His comment is within the brackets.” Just to let you know, it ain’t.
Anyway, I too am finito with Father Z. and all that earlier “¡Vaya lío!” stuff and reading Benedict through Francis tap-dancing. I wish him well, but I am disappointed he’d just stick his chin out.
More and more bloggers have been using the word “crazy” lately in talking about what’s happening with our current Church leaders, while modern psychologists use terms like “behaviorally disordered” and prefer to discuss “symptoms” such as these from an article by Alexander Burgemeester (April 2013) on Narcissistic Personality Disorder in Leaders. Any way you choose to put it, these shoes seem to fit more than one pair of fisherman’sl feet:
____
He typically becomes more and more self-assured and less and less constrained. He begins to feel invincible, attracting admirers due to enthusiasm, yet listening less and less to words of caution or advice, taking more and more risks.
____
He is not really comfortable with emotions, demanding empathy from others while lacking in genuine empathy himself -tending to listen only for information he seeks to hear at the moment. He doesn’t learn well from others, unless he views someone as an equal or superior being.
____
The Narcissist has an emotional cleverness but it is rooted more in exploitation. He knows whom he can use and doesn’t think twice about being callously
manipulative–why the narcissist is often unlikable despite his charm, charisma and personal magnetism. He likes to dominate with speech, but his faults become ever more evident the more known he becomes. Despite this, he is still able to communicate and inspire with passion and conviction. ( Stalin, Mao)
____
Extremely sensitive to even the slightest perceived criticism, the narcissistic leader tends to keep others at an emotional distance, building walls of isolation. Although he might say that he wants teamwork, what he really wants is a group of people who agree with him. When feeling verbally attacked, he becomes overly defensive. Preferring not to know what people think of him, he really doesn’t care what others think unless it has become a problem, and can’t tolerate dissent -especially among those closest in command to them.
He either ignores those who disagree with him or gets rid of them. http://thenarcissisticlife.com/some-important-narcissistic-leaders-in-history/
More bloggers have been using the word “crazy” lately in talking about what’s happening with our current Church leadership. Modern psychologists use terms like “behaviorally disordered” and prefer to discuss “symptoms” such as these from an article by Alexander Burgemeester (April 2013) on Narcissistic Personality Disorder in Leaders. Any way you choose to put it, these shoes seem to fit more than one pair of hierarchical feet:
____
He typically becomes more and more self-assured and less and less constrained. He begins to feel invincible, attracting admirers due to enthusiasm, yet listening less and less to words of caution or advice, taking more and more risks.
____
He is not really comfortable with emotions, demanding empathy from others while lacking in genuine empathy himself -tending to listen only for information he seeks to hear at the moment. He doesn’t learn well from others, unless he views someone as an equal or superior being.
____
The Narcissist has an emotional cleverness but it is rooted more in exploitation. He knows whom he can use and doesn’t think twice about being callously
manipulative–why the narcissist is often unlikable despite his charm, charisma and personal magnetism. He likes to dominate with speech, but his faults become ever more evident the more known he becomes. Despite this, he is still able to communicate and inspire with passion and conviction. ( Stalin, Mao Tse-tung)
____
Extremely sensitive to even the slightest perceived criticism, the narcissistic leader tends to keep others at an emotional distance, building walls of isolation. Although he might say that he wants teamwork, what he really wants is a group of people who agree with him. When feeling verbally attacked, he becomes overly defensive. Preferring not to know what people think of him.. He really doesn’t care what others think unless it has become a problem, and can’t tolerate dissent -especially among those closest in command to them. He either ignores those who disagree with him or gets rid of them.
____
http://thenarcissisticlife.com/some-important-narcissistic-leaders-in-history/
We’ve been seeing the word “crazy” more and more lately in articles talking about what’s happening with our Church leadership; even though modern psychiatrists prefer to use terms like “behavior disordered” while discussing “symptoms” –such as these from an article by Alexander Burgemeester on Narcissistic Personality Disorder in Leaders.
– Any way you put it, these shoes seem to fit more than one pair of hierarchical feet:
____
He typically becomes more and more self-assured and less and less constrained. He begins to feel invincible, attracting admirers due to enthusiasm, yet listening less and less to words of caution or advice, taking more and more risks.
____
He is not really comfortable with emotions, demanding empathy from others while lacking in genuine empathy himself -tending to listen only for information he seeks to hear at the moment. He doesn’t learn well from others, unless he views someone as an equal or superior being.
____
The Narcissist has an emotional cleverness but it is rooted more in exploitation. He knows whom he can use and doesn’t think twice about being callously
manipulative–why the narcissist is often unlikable despite his charm, charisma and personal magnetism. He likes to dominate with speech, but his faults become ever more evident the more known he becomes. Despite this, he is still able to communicate and inspire with passion and conviction. ( Stalin, Mao Tse-tung)
____
Extremely sensitive to even the slightest perceived criticism, the narcissistic leader tends to keep others at an emotional distance, building walls of isolation. Although he might say that he wants teamwork, what he really wants is a group of people who agree with him. When feeling verbally attacked, he becomes overly defensive. Preferring not to know what people think of him.. He really doesn’t care what others think unless it has become a problem, and can’t tolerate dissent -especially among those closest in command to them. He either ignores those who disagree with him or gets rid of them.
____
http://thenarcissisticlife.com/some-important-narcissistic-leaders-in-history/ April 2013.
Ah come on folks. Chill. They mentioned “sin” at least once in 5000 words which was 100% more than I expected. Let the sh*t hit the fan. It is really needed after 50 years of banality from the apostate termites and innovators of novelty, nonsense, division, dissent and heterodoxy. Sunlight is still the best disinfectant. They will not be able to hide much longer. To win any war you must first be able to specifically identify your enemy before targeting and defeating them. These guys are like cockroaches (not to demean the lowly cockroach). They will not go quietly into the night. Satan and his minions never do. Prayer, fasting, penance, knowledge, faith, fortitude all under the mantel of Our Lady of the Rosary will prevail. It’s not a coincidence that the Midterm Report was released today October 13, the 97th anniversary of Fatima. Arrogance and Hubris have no bounds. These worms of worship always forget one minor detail…Namely, Our Mamma Wears Combat Boots.
“Felatio Pro Deceptionem” – oh no he didn’t!
—–
One must maintain a (proper, Catholic) sense of humor through *any* crisis, so, bravo to you, Louie.
I certainly intend to pray more, etc, but I am thinking that I will get a Twitter account and learn to use it, and barrage our BORF. How dare he encourage this blatant attack on God and His holy Church!!? He at least needs to hear from the cheap seats that his grievous apostasy is not appreciated!
That was easy. I’m not great with computers and I made a twitter account really fast. I imagine I’ll use it mostly for this purpose. I hope more people will join me in my little campaign. It would be great if the BORF (thanks for the abbreviation, Fr. A) would see that all is not cheery and happy in the Church he’s trying to destroy.
Good one, ACT!
Dear Bosco49:
I tend to share your view about Benedict.
______
I think that he could still surprise us all, in a positive sense.
______
One thing is quite clear, his abdication is the quintessential exercise in separating the wheat from the chaff.
______
And at the end of this exercise, we all know where each and everyone stands.
______
They say that God works in mysterious ways. 🙂
Polish Heavy Cavalry to the rescue. 🙂
______
The Great Division – Wojtyła Nation to the Rescue.
President of the Polish Bishops’ Conference:
“Synod Document Unacceptable”
______
RC via Magister: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-great-division-wojtya-nation-to.html
______
Magister:
“In an interview with Vatican Radio, the President of the Polish Episcopal Conference did not hesitate to say that this document departs from the teaching of John Paul II, and even that in it can be noticed traces of the anti-marriage ideology. According to Archbishop Gądecki, this text also highlights the lack of a clear vision for the synodal assembly.
“Is the purpose of this Synod pastoral support to families in difficulty, or is its goal the study of special cases? Our main task is to support the family pastorally, not to hit her, exposing these difficult situations that exist, but which do not constitute the nucleus of the same family; they [the special cases] do not void the need for support, which should be given to good, normal, ordinary families, who are struggling not so much for survival as for fidelity,” said Archbishop Gądecki.
“Referring to the issues of marriage and family, certain criteria are being applied that raise doubt. For example, the criterion of gradualism. Can you really treat cohabitation as gradual, on the path to holiness? Today, the discussion also highlighted that the doctrine presented in the document is marked by the sin of omission. As if the world’s view prevailed and everything was imperfection which leads to perfection… Attention was paid not so much to what this document says, but to what it does not say. Speak about the practical exceptions, but we also need to present the truth. Also, the points that speak of children entrusted to same-sex couples are formulated somewhat as if this situation is being praised! This is also a defect of this text, which should be an incentive to fidelity, family values, but instead seems to accept everything as it is. It created an impression that the teaching of the Church has been merciless so far, as if the teaching of mercy were beginning only now.”
_______
If there is one thing that Bergoglio underestimated, it is the fanaticism of the “sect of JPII”.
_______
Sectarian violence at it’s best. 🙂
Bedlam reigns at the SECRET SIN SYNOD.
______
“Cardinal (Erdo) on his own Report’s paragraphs on homosexuality: “Ask him! I didn’t write this, the author must know what he meant!”
_______
Link here: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/cardinal-on-his-own-reports-paragraphs.html#more
_______
New Catholic writes:
“When presenting the “Relatio post disceptationem” this Monday, Cardinal Erdo was asked by reporters about the scandalous paragraphs on homosexuality, homosexual unions, and the raising of children by homosexual “couples”, that are in most aspects a 180-turn away from the 2,000-year-old permanent doctrine and practice of the Church, as taught even more strongly in the last two pontificates. Instead of explaining them, he refused to do so, and told Abp. Bruno Forte, the extreme liberal theologian who is acting as his assistant, to explain it, since Forte had authored it.”
________
Hey, I not the one driving this bus. 🙂
_______
Yes, the lunatics have truely taken over the VII asylum.
_______
And the head lunatic is non other than “el Papa Loco”. 😉
And finally, I saved the best for last:
______
“Francis: If laws don’t lead people to Jesus, they are obsolete.”
______
There you have it. Jorge Bergoglio is making this stuff up as he goes along.
______
Link here:http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2014/10/13/francis-if-gods-laws-dont-lead-people-to-jesus-they-are-obsolete/
_______
CH via Pew Sitter:
“The scholars were safeguarding the law “out of love, to be faithful to God,” the Pope said, but “they were closed up right there,” and forgot all the ways God has acted in history.
“They forgot that God is the God of the law, but is also the God of surprises,” he said.
_______
Folks, what we have here is the advent of a great prophet.
_______
A man sent by “god” who is the official interpreter of what “god” really meant to say.
_______
I bring you, the prophet Bergoglio.:)
_______
He resembles Bhagwan Rajneesha more than anything.
_______
With Bhagwan Bergoglio promoting the culture of death, maybe we are dealing here with a Jonestown in the making.
…and this from the Dallas Catholic Blog (one of my favorites, right behind this one and Mundabor.)
________
“This sham of a Synod takes a deadly turn”
________
Link here:http://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2014/10/13/this-sham-of-a-synod-takes-a-deadly-turn/
________
DAC writes:
“As with so much the left does, the stated motives and the true motivations are at 180 degrees from each other. The stated motive is “charity” for those in “irregular” situations, but encouraging those lost in grave sin to add sin upon sin by receiving the Blessed Sacrament is no charity, it is in fact an intolerable cruelty. One does the addict no favors by covering for them, giving them money, making excuses, and permitting them to continue to maintain their habit. Addiction is the sin of intemperance taken to the Nth degree…..but the same reasoning applies to all sins. Simply because a sin has become so popular it is now a veritable cultural monument doesn’t change its ugly, satanic reality. But the German bishops, who apparently still run the entire Church in spite of the collapse of the Faith in their own country, need money, no matter how many souls have to be damned for eternity.”
_______
Yes. I T ‘ S A L L A B O U T THE KIRCHENSTEUER. !
_______
No matter how may souls will be damned. 😉
_______
This SECRET SIN SYNOD is truly the “Jonestown of the souls”. 🙁
As laymen we personally find it difficult to draw clear lines between the “diabolical” and the “crazy”, but we noticed an increased use of both words on Catholic blogsites this week, [no surprise] and began wondering whether the apparently evil actions of modernists qualify by today’s psychiatric standards, as symptoms of “serious behavioral disorders”. We honestly didn’t expect to find anything so amazingly appropos as this article- describing leaders with Narcissistic Personality Disorder:
____
“They typically become more and more self-assured and less and less constrained. They begin to feel invincible, attracting admirers due to enthusiasm, yet listening less and less to words of caution or advice, taking more and more risks.
____
They are not really comfortable with emotions, demanding empathy from others while lacking in genuine empathy themselves -tending to listen only for information they seeks to hear at the moment. They don’t learn well from others, unless they view someone as an equal or superior being.
____
Narcissists have emotional cleverness but it is rooted more in exploitation. They know whom they can use and don’t think twice about being callously
manipulative–why the narcissist is often unlikable despite his charm, charisma and personal magnetism. He likes to dominate with speech, but his faults become ever more evident the more known he becomes. Despite this, he is still able to communicate and inspire with passion and conviction.
____
Extremely sensitive to even the slightest perceived criticism, the narcissistic leader tends to keep others at an emotional distance, building walls of isolation.
Although he might say that he wants teamwork, what he really wants is a group of people who agree with him. When feeling verbally attacked, he becomes overly defensive. Preferring not to know what people think of him.. He really doesn’t care what others think unless it has become a problem, and can’t tolerate dissent -especially among those closest in command to them.
He either ignores those who disagree with him or gets rid of them.”
____
http://thenarcissisticlife.com/some-important-narcissistic-leaders-in-history/
…. and this.
_____
Flagrant abuse of power by assistant at SECRET SIN SYNOD.
______
“Magister: Pitched Battle on a Mad Monday at the Synod
Our conclusion: Bruno Forte made up homosexuality paragraphs by himself”
_______
Link here:http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/magister-pitched-battle-on-mad-monday.html
_______
New Catholic writes:
“What appears clear from the sarcastic dismissal of rapporteur Erdo himself, the strong word used by Magister (“precaricante”, that is, a malicious abuse of one’s position), and the immediate furious response from the Synod Fathers (15 just during the morning and just on this matter, according to several reports, including many from the most vibrant region in the Church, Africa), is that Abp. Bruno Forte, known as an extreme liberal in theological matters, abused his position and the trust of Cardinal Erdo and included something that had not really been discussed in that way at the Synod but that was his own pet personal view on homosexuality and homosexual couples, and made it look as if it had been a Synodal view. That is why Erdo was so adamant to make clear that he, Erdo, was not responsible for this outrage, and why the response from the Synod Fathers was furious and explosive. Forte acted like a Bugnini for “Gayness”, making things up to achieve his own end.”
______
An heir apparent to Bugnini in the making?
______
So much for synadolity…. or whatever….
______
Making stuff up, despite what was actually said. (Now we know why all the SECRECY).
______
But then again, it “they” can “produce an “ancient” Eucharistic Prayer (II) written down on the back of an envelope over a couple bottles of wine at a Roman trattoria, in order to meet an editorial deadline” (b/t/w I’m still chuckling, making up a draft of what the council fathers “didn’t” said (grammatical error intended) at the SECRET SIN SYNOD is a piece of cake. 😉
_______
I think that it is plain for everyone to see, that the root of the problem is “the diabolical sect of Vatican II”.
_______
There just ain’t no way of hiding it now. 😉
_______
Maybe the “conspiracy theory” that says that this was Benedict’s plan may transform itself into a “conspiracy fact”.
We noticed an increased use of the words “diabolical” and ‘crazy” on Catholic blogsites this week, and wondered whether the apparently evil actions of modernists qualify by today’s psychiatric standards, as symptoms of “serious behavioral disorders”. Maybe it’s just us, but the descriptions in this article seem amazingly apropos -regarding leaders with Narcissistic Personality Disorder:
____
“They typically become more and more self-assured and less and less constrained. They begin to feel invincible, attracting admirers due to enthusiasm, yet listening less and less to words of caution or advice, taking more and more risks.
____
They are not really comfortable with emotions, demanding empathy from others while lacking in genuine empathy themselves -tending to listen only for information they seeks to hear at the moment. They don’t learn well from others, unless they view someone as an equal or superior being.
____
Narcissists have emotional cleverness but it is rooted more in exploitation. They know whom they can use and don’t think twice about being callously
manipulative–why the narcissist is often unlikable despite his charm, charisma and personal magnetism. He likes to dominate with speech, but his faults become ever more evident the more known he becomes. Despite this, he is still able to communicate and inspire with passion and conviction.
____
Extremely sensitive to even the slightest perceived criticism, the narcissistic leader tends to keep others at an emotional distance, building walls of isolation. Although he might say that he wants teamwork, what he really wants is a group of people who agree with him. When feeling verbally attacked, he becomes overly defensive. Preferring not to know what people think of him.. He really doesn’t care what others think unless it has become a problem, and can’t tolerate dissent -especially among those closest in command to them.
He either ignores those who disagree with him or gets rid of them.”
____
http://thenarcissisticlife.com/some-important-narcissistic-leaders-in-history/
….and the “VII sect parody” award goes to Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe.
______
“Cardinal Sepe: Whoever Wastes Food, May Not Go to Communion”
______
EF blog has the story here:http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/10/cardinal-sepe-whoever-wastes-food-may.html
_______
Wonder if Cardinal Sepe flushes his toilet. 😉
We noticed Catholic blogsites saw an increase this week in the words “diabolical” and “crazy”, which led us to wonder if the actions of modernists really do fit today’s psychiatric descriptions of symptoms for serious behavioral disorders. Then we found this article discussing leaders with Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and are frankly still amazed at the way it seems to describe in great detail, all of our experiences with modernists over the last 50+ years and news reports right up to the present day:
__
“They typically become more and more self-assured and less and less constrained. They begin to feel invincible, attracting admirers due to enthusiasm, yet listening less and less to words of caution or advice, taking more and more risks.
____
They are not really comfortable with emotions, demanding empathy from others while lacking in genuine empathy themselves -tending to listen only for information they seek to hear at the moment. They don’t learn well from others, unless they view someone as an equal or superior being.
____
Narcissists have emotional cleverness but it is rooted more in exploitation. They know whom they can use and don’t think twice about being callously
manipulative–why the narcissist is often unlikable despite his charm, charisma and personal magnetism. He likes to dominate with speech, but his faults become ever more evident the more known he becomes. Despite this, he is still able to communicate and inspire with passion and conviction.
____
Extremely sensitive to even the slightest perceived criticism, the narcissistic leader tends to keep others at an emotional distance, building walls of isolation. Although he might say that he wants teamwork, what he really wants is a group of people who agree with him. When feeling verbally attacked, he becomes overly defensive. Preferring not to know what people think of him.. He really doesn’t care what others think unless it has become a problem, and can’t tolerate dissent -especially among those closest in command to them. He either ignores those who disagree with him or gets rid of them.”
____
http://thenarcissisticlife.com/some-important-narcissistic-leaders-in-history/
And speaking of Bugnini…..
______
This over at the New Liturgical Movement blog:”Fortune Favors the Brave.”
______
Link here: http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/10/fortune-favors-brave.html#.VDzl51fDWpg
______
Kwasniewski writes:
“The reader of Annibale Bugnini’s Memoirs comes upon a passage early on concerning a questionnaire sent around in 1948 to “almost a hundred liturgical experts in all parts of the world” by the editors of the Roman periodical Ephemerides Liturgicae, concerning “reform of the Missal, Breviary, calendar, Martyrology, and other liturgical books.”
_______
Ah, the old questionaire! Where have we seen that before?
______
Next:
“Today we look back sorrowfully (at times, wrathfully) over the utter devastation caused by Bugnini and his companions, but we cannot dispute their mastery of the psychology of attack, alliance, subterfuge, feint, calculated compromise, redoubled attack. They were men who seized their opportunities and did not sit on their hands wondering when other people would do the job for them, or worse, waste their time on endless bickering and hairsplitting. Like our political liberals, they could lay aside small differences for the sake of gaining major objectives.”
______
Ah yes. The SECRET SIN SYNOD was brought to life on the back of a questionnaire.
______
It’s like Yogi Berra once observed: “It’s deja vu” all over again”.
I wonder, where does this “Ratzinger’s champion of the faith” delusion come from?
I suppose Traditionalist media spinning.
Dear Bert:
Wishful thinking perhaps.
_______
Or maybe from the inherent intelligence and wisdom of a brilliant mind.
______
But one thing is for sure….. “the gates of hell shall not prevail”.
______
Chin up… ole boy!
It is amazing what they will achieve with this Synod:
1)demonstrate the “Catholic Church”* is fallible and was wrong up until now
2)demonstrate Doctrine can/has to change to keep up with the world/laity
3)Make LGBT groups happy
4)Make Jews happy
5)Make atheists happy
6)Offend God and further bring misery and punishment to the world
and.. ultimately:
6)Make it clear for all that the “Catholic” religion is just another fake superstition like the rest of them, no biggie if you don’t follow it, because, after all, “we” have no clue ourself what it really entails or if it is even true, heck, maybe we’ll officially declare atheists are ok too in 5-10 years so hang in there.
*Vatican II Church
Dear Bert:
A side effect might be to drive the point home that Jorge and his band of “merry men” and their imaginary traveling companion “hey zeus” are nothing more than the product of a certain specific point in time. An age in which the deadly sin of pride collectively manifested itself like a cancer on the most advanced civilization known to man.
_______
Furthermore:
Up to the time when the bishops were “only” speaking of the truth that “subsisted” in the Catholic Church with respect to “other sects”, all was ok. Peace and quiet…. and social stability and all that…. reigned.
______
Unfortunately, and like in the case of all malignancies, once the “truth subsisting in the church” cancer meta morphed into “truth partially subsisting outside the church”, i.e. that it can subsist in sin…. as in aberro-unions, the cold shower effect was felt far and wide.
________
And “excrement hitting the oscillator” was on display for all to see on what will go down in church history as the “MAD MONDAY of the SECRET SIN SYNOD”.
The case is made by the unchangeable Deposit of Faith and the unchangeable Natural Moral Law. He is doing cartwheels trying to avoid the obvious – that the Holy See and its convened Synod is responsible for promoting intrinsic evil.
Dear Mr Morphy, This is just the proffering some of the evil fruits that many cardinals, bishops and priests (including Francis) have been assiduously sowing and tending for many decades. Lord, have mercy. May the eyes of the naive and foolish be opened.
God bless your bona fide efforts.
Diabolical disorientation raised to the power of ten.
True laws are not changeable. And they always lead to God. However, if one is continually in a state of mortal sin, one probably won’t want to acknowledge the laws and will come up with devious ways to subvert them.
Wasting food is a sin – and ought to be confessed. How much worse is the sin of sexual relations between persons of the same sex (physical, verbal, mental) or cooperation with, or failure to denounce same?
There ought to be no such thing as a “liturgical expert”. Every priest has a duty to know deeply and reverence and adhere to the liturgy, the ritualistic expression of the whole of the Faith.
The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church has been hidden for a long time.
One week on, and the SECRET SIN SYNOD (SSS) produces it’s first miracles.
______
Miracle 1:
6000 word document, simultaneously translated in 3 languages appears!
_______
Jesus (prounounced “Hey zeus”) working his “surprises” no doubt. 😉
______
Story here: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/1-6000-word-document-in-1-day.html#more
_______
Next miracle:
Work of Holy Spirit seen first hand. Begoglio passes notes to SSS chairman.
_______
No doubt Holy Spirist hard at work in the Lords vineyard working some “surprises”of his very own.
_______
And last miracle:
German cardinal (Muller) continuously criticizing Bergoglio/German bishops strategy. Says censorship is bad.
_______
Who would have thunk? 😉
_______
And maybe the final miracle, vast majority of council fathers against “El papa Loco” and his “merry (read gay) men”. 😉
_______
B/t/w what did happen to that 300 page report about the homomafia?
We need to ask ourselves just what in this document, and its jargon, is so appealing to Neo-Catholics?
Obviously there are many, including bloggers and columnists, who read the same words as we do, but find a different meaning there.
For myself when I tried to read the actual language of this document I found it very difficult to understand. Yes, evil ideas jumped out, so I knew it was awful, but it was almost unintelligible because of the bloated hippy language. How can the joe and jane in the Neo-Catholic pew get anything out of this?
It must be they are used to this jargon and so can swallow big chunks of it without gagging. Or they are not reading it at all because they don’t have any interest in going beneath the surface. And they hear nothing from the pulpit. All is well then.
We who go back and plow through the bull gab (tiresome!) can see how empty it really is. But we also see how good it can sound – all about maturity, mercy, growth, gradually coming from mortal sin to holiness – with Francis on the walk with you, finding some good apples in that rotten barrel and celebrating them…I don’t believe it’s a case of reading what you want to read. I think there is such sugary language here that satisfies. Truly demonic – it is a very good trick.
Thank God for all the holy nuns and monks around the world who are giving their whole lives to prayer and sacrifice for us. I’m thinking about Discalced Carmelites, and Benedictines and others. Hope they keep under the radar!
If Erdo didn’t write the scandalous things in the Synod report.
And if Erdo didn’t do his job to read the report over before approving it to be broadcast worldwide…
Then who did???
Why! It must have been the mysterious unseen hand of the ‘SPIRIT OF THE SYNOD ON THE FAMILY’!
MIRACLE!!!!!
____________________
UPDATE:
OMIGOSH!
IT’S DOING IT AGAIN! IT’S GRAFFITING LIO ON THE WALL!
IT’S WRITING… “Mene, Mene, Tekel, Up…”
QUICK, SOMEBODY, CALL FRANCIS!
WHAT A SURPRISE OUR LORD HAS PREPARED FOR US!!!!
Of course Lynda, I meant “Catholic Church” (which really is just the crazed Vatican II offshoot) in the eyes of the blissfully ignorant majority only..
Unfortunately the majority of people (including many Traditionalists in the broader sense) only care for appearances.
They wear the robes, the mitre, got the nice churches etc. so they must be the genuine article.. or not?
In this respect, a significant hermeneutic key comes from the teaching of Vatican Council II, which, while it affirms that “although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure … these elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward Catholic unity” (Lumen Gentium, 8).-Fan, Meet Excrement
False conclusion from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 incorporated in Vatican Council II (Lumen Gentium 8) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church(1257-1260) now used by Cardinal Kaspar at the Synod of the Family.
The quote above (Lg 8) originates from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII. The error will seep into the Church.It will be placed in Vatican Council II and then the Catechism of the Catholic Church.Cardinal Walter Kaspar will use it in the Synod of the Family.
LETTER OF THE HOLY OFFICE 1949
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man’s final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the sacrament of regeneration and in reference to the sacrament of penance (, nn. 797, 807).
Lionel:
So far fine. The Council of Trent mentions implicit desire and so do the popes and saints.
It must be noted though that the Council of Trent does not state that these cases are visible to us in the present times or that they are exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.It does not state that we ‘know’ who are these persons.
Obviously, how can we know who has been saved as such, how can we seen them in Heaven for example in 2014?
Now, comes the false conclusion in this passage.
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel:
Since there are cases visible to them of persons saved with implicit desire, there is known salvation oustide the Church.This is the subtle false premise. So the conclusion is ‘that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member’. The dogma says every one needs to enter the Church for salvation here it is denied.
The traditional teaching is that all the members of other religions and Christian communities need to formally enter the Church ( with faith and baptism).Here the Letter infers that there are known exceptions outside the Church.So the dogma has been rejected.
It is implied that those saved with implicit desire are known or knowable and those who are in invincible ignorance can also be saved and they are known to us.
The conclusion is that not every one needs to enter the Catholic Church for salvation as was traditionally taught but only those who ‘know’.
False reasoning leads to a false conclusion. Here it is:-
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 says:
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.
Lumen Gentium 14 says:
Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says :
Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.
Now watch how Cardinal Kaspar picks up the error, which Fr.Karl Rahner S.J placed in the Denzinger (DS 3921).
In the course of the Council the “subsistit in” took the place of the previous “est”. It contains in nuce the whole ecumenical problem. The “est” claimed that the church of Christ Jesus “is” the Catholic Church. This strict identification of the church of Christ Jesus with the Catholic Church had been represented most recently in the encyclicals Mystici corporis (1943) and Humani generis (1950). But even according to Mystici corporis there are people who, although they have not yet been baptised, are subsumed under the Catholic Church because that is their express desire (DS 3921). Therefore Pius XII had condemned an exclusive interpretation of the axiom “Extra ecclesiam nulla salus” already in 1949.- Cardinal Walter Kaspar, on the website of the Vatican Council for Christian Unity 1
In the words of Bishop Bernard Fellay.
In the interview that he granted to the Vaticanist Andrea Tornielli on September 18th, the Cardinal(Kaspar) says: “Church doctrine is not a closed system: the Second Vatican Council teaches us that there is a development, meaning that it is possible to look into this further. I wonder if a deeper understanding similar to what we saw in ecclesiology, is possible in this case (i.e. that of divorced Catholics who have remarried civilly). Although the Catholic Church is Christ’s true Church, there are elements of ecclesiality beyond the institutional boundaries of the Church too.(Lionel: And which are known to him) Couldn’t some elements of sacramental marriage also be recognized in civil marriages in certain cases? For example, the lifelong commitment, mutual love and care, Christian life and a public declaration of commitment that does not exist in common-law marriages.” 2
See the pattern. First the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 concludes that there is known salvation outside the Church.Since those who are saved with implicit desire etc are visible on earth.Since they are visible they are explicit exceptions to the traditional interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So only those who ‘know’ need to enter the Church as opposed to all needing to enter the Catholic Church as it was traditionally taught.
Cardinal Richard Cushing and Fr.John C.Murray S.J placed the same error in Vatican Council II while the excommunication of Fr.Leonard Feeney was still not lifted.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger incorporated the objective error in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 -1260, the Balamand Declaratiion, two theological papers of the International Theological Commission. During the pontificate of Pope Benedict a front page article written in the L’Osservatore Romano by Cardinal Walter Kaspar,with this objective error, was sent to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel during the tension over the Good Friday Prayer for the Conversion of the Jews.
1
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/card-kasper-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20041111_kasper-ecumenism_en.html
2
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/interview-fellay-speaks-about-meeting.html#more