Catholic News Agency (CNA), the mission of which was once understood by its own to be that of providing an orthodox alternative to the USCCB’s Catholic News Service (CNS), has become a joke.
Sure, CNA has always been far more a “conservative” champion of all things conciliar than a true defender of the perennial Faith, but even so, the outlet had at times shown a noteworthy degree of openness to tradition (e.g., in publishing my series of articles on John Courtney Murray).
Well, that was before Benedict the Abdicator fled for fear of the wolves.
Under the reign (or siege depending upon one’s relative Catholicity) of Pope Francis, CNA has morphed into nothing more honorable than an active agent of papal propaganda intent on propping up his truly disastrous pontificate.
Knowing what I do of CNA’s Director, Alejandro Bermúdez, I am certain that he’s convinced that CNA is rendering a valuable service to the Church in its spinning of Francis.
He is, however, wrong.
In a recent news story excerpting Pope Francis’ in-flight comments wherein he explained that the hammer and sickle “crucifix” given to him by Bolivian president Evo Morales did not offend him, CNA editorialized a bit, saying:
Taking a “hermeneutic” approach to the crucifix – one that involves an interpretive act of understanding with an emphasis on dialogue – the Pope made an analysis of the times, saying that Fr. Espinal “was an enthusiast of this analysis of the Marxist reality, but also of theology using Marxism.”
What the hell kind of “hermeneutic” approach to blasphemy renders it acceptable to God and likewise unoffensive to those who love Him?
It’s enough to make one wonder if CNA’s editorial approach isn’t motivated, more than anything else, by a personal desire to see the first Latin American pope flourish in the eyes of the world; so much so that there is no offense against Christ that can’t be explained away.
The reason that the sacrilegious image of Our Blessed Lord nailed to a hammer and sickle did not offend Pope Francis is simple:
He does not sentire cum ecclesia.
That is, he does not think and feel according to the mind of the Holy Catholic Church. In his view of the world, he’s far more populist than pope. This much has been obvious from the earliest moments of his papacy, and the hammer and sickle affair only serves to confirm it. Again.
As part of its attempt to put a Catholic spin on the pope’s behavior, the CNA report (which isn’t attributed any particular writer and is presented as a “news” item; not as an editorial), states:
He [Pope Francis] noted that during his life, Fr. Espinal had sympathies with the Marxist interpretation of Liberation Theology, which at that time was widely popular in South America.
Pay close attention to what is being said here:
In spite of the suggestion to the contrary, there really is no such thing as an interpretation of Liberation Theology that isn’t Marxist; i.e., it’s simply not possible for one to embrace the former without drinking deeply from the poisonous well of the latter, and rest assured, Pope Francis has most certainly done both.
This pope never tires of making his steadfast commitment to the almighty “class struggle” plainly known – the same that forms the very heart and soul of every self-respecting Marxist.
Indeed, in the foundational document of his pontificate, Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis makes numerous references to “inequality” among the classes before ultimately concluding, “Inequality is the root of social ills.” (And here you thought is was sin!)
Be not fooled, the Franciscan solution to this “inequality” problem isn’t conversion to Jesus Christ and the one true Faith, rather, its about much more earthbound endeavors, namely:
…international activity aimed at the integral human development of all the world’s peoples and by the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the State, as well as indispensable cooperation between the private sector and civil society. (cf Address of Pope Francis to representatives of the UN, 9 May 2014)
The reason CNA considers it so important to lead its readers to believe that there is a Catholic version of Liberation Theology is plain – Pope Francis embraces it.
Incidentally, this isn’t the first time CNA has shown a willingness to massage reality in order to paint a picture that is prettier (i.e., more Catholic) than the Bergoglian reality, in particular as it concerns Liberation Theology (e.g., see here).
CNA isn’t alone, certainly. They’re just one of any number of media outlets that, when Catholic sensibilities and Pope Francis collide, will bend over backwards to glorify Jorge, even if it means making excuses for egregious offenses against Christ.
As such, they simply can’t be trusted for Catholic news, much less any editorial content.
Hope no one gives Bergolio a Confederate flag crucifix during his September sojourn in the States.
I don’t think it is motivated by a “personal desire to see the first Latin American pope flourish in the eyes of the world” because Americans, Europeans, Asians and Africans engage in this sort of spin. I think it is too difficult to face the awful truth the pope is not Catholic and he hates the Catholic faith and is trying to destroy it. I think this is what motivates the avoid-ers, deniers, and spinners. I sympathize with them.
I betting on a rainbow flag crucifix. I think in America he is going to do something symbolic or make an ambiguous statement that can be used by the homosexuals to attack the Church. He seems to focus on whatever the liberals are agitating about in the country he is visiting and then uses that to undermine the Church. In the Philippines it was birth control so he made the breed like rabbits statement. In Bolivia it was communism so the hammer and sickle crucifix. In America it is either going to be something with homosexuals, inequality, immigration, or something to divide the races.
If he is going to divide the races it wouldn’t be the confederate flag it would be saying something anti-police about police brutality. Or maybe visit Baltimore’s ghetto.
Another poster somewhere else nailed it: It’s not about whether the Pope was offended by the gift from Hell, God was offended. And laying the blasphemous necklaces at the feet of the BVM?
The socialist George Orwell wrote his acclaimed satirical novels against totalitarianism ( “Animal Farm” and “1984”) to graphically demonstrate how Political subversion depends on a subversion, of logic and language-just as we see in the press today. Communists have the ultimate aim of monopolizing human lives and other resources.
But accomplishing such widespread enslavement requires capturing and abusing the Public Trust despite the many “unforgettable” existing historical examples- even in our recent past.
We find the answers to how this happens, in the teachings of our Faith. Darkness affects the intellects and wills of billions of people on earth today who remain tightly bound by the effects of original and/or post-Baptismal Mortal sin. They are fertile ground for the lures and control of Satan, who permanently rejected the Divine Will, and makes an art of playing on human desires for security, peace, equality, prosperity and comfort. In their afflicted conditions, they swallow his propaganda which camouflages failures, incompetence, and falsehood, and works hard to make his opposition into their “public’s enemies”.
Because our Church leaders abandoned the concept of the Universal Kingship of Christ and His mandate to go teach all the nations all that He taught us, Baptizing them; we now find ourselves living in a “democratized” world ruled by majorities blinded by sin, who have become our natural enemies and persecutors.
“A man’s enemies will be those of his own family”. Thank God for comforting us in our own era, with the promise of Our Heavenly Mother: ” In the end,
my Immaculate Heart will triumph.”
If he can squeeze it in, I suppose he might go to the US-Mexican border to console the illegal immigrant throng:
“To enter the United States from the border with Mexico would be a beautiful gesture of brotherhood and support for immigrants,” Francis said in January 2015 on his return flight to Rome from his Philippines papal tour.
Don’t count the god of surprises out yet.
Upon reflection, and considering the logistics of an unscheduled trip to the border with Mexico, I strongly expect there will be a US photo-op version of the Bergolio “Lampadusa Moment” to show how the massive tide of illegal immigrants represent no threat whatsoever.
I think you would be right if he was visiting the southwest but since he is going to the east coast that might hard to pull off. But he could visit a sit where illegal immigrants hang out waiting for work.
Democracy? What democracy? In the U.S., we’re ruled by unelected judges with lifetime appointments and the best politicians money can buy.
You make a valid point about the legislating Courts. But let’s face it, before the Court ruling 37 States and the District of Columbia had already legalized same sex perversion-as-marriage by popular vote.
Speaking of misguided “Catholic” media and press, I find our diocesan
newspaper, the Catholic-free Press of Worcester MA, to be nothing but a shill for the democratic socialist party. Has anyone else noticed this?
Yes, that was our brother in Christ, Liam Ronan, on Fr Ray Blake’s website. He always gets to the crux(!) of the matter. Pope Francis as is his wont, being a modernist and relativist, has made it about himself, when, of course, it is an objective symbol and objective blasphemy. And his culpability is as high as it could possibly be, given his knowledge, objective intent (not subjective) and his duty. As I’ve said ad nauseam, in response to irrational excuses being proffered on his behalf: diplomatic “gifts” and meetings are agreed in detail long beforehand, at this high level of Heads of State, and the Pope would’ve signed off on these gifts and received briefing on them. Reparation!
The a Rule of Law no longer exists in the US, Ireland and many, many other countries. The judges invented a new institution which they regrettably insisted on calling “marriage”, new “rights”, etc., all in contravention of the a Natural Law and justice, constitutional law and justice, and reason. Obviously, it was erroneous on its face and ultra vires, and is thus necessarily null and void. However, as the Ruke of Law is not adhered to in a tyrannical state, the authorities will act as though it were a legitimate and correct application of the Constitution to the issue before the Court.
Well said, Indignus Famulus.
Yes, the Catholic Herald of Arlington, Va is a liberal newspaper. They stopped publishing letters to the editor because of all the negative comments, I suppose. I cancelled our subscription because I didn’t want my kids reading it!
The Confederate flag needs to be raised, not lowered. See: http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-confederate-flag-needs-to-be-raised-not-lowered
Dear Indignus famulus,
Where do you get 37 states? I count only 11 at
Far more states actually passed legislation to preemptively ban it.
For July 16th (link below to Rorate Caeli includes a beautiful image)
” The most extraordinary event in English history ”
“The Mother of God and her Divine Son appear to Saint Simon Stock in (1251)Cambridge – 764 years ago today: has there been any other moment in English history whose consequences have aided so many souls throughout the world achieve and keep holiness, reaching final perseverance? Men and women, made of flesh, need material reminders of the presence of God in their lives – and what could be more profitable than the blessed physical sign that Our Lady’s Mantle covers us at all times, that Her Divine Son keeps watch over us day and night?”
Got it from several sources (including the link below) :
“Prior to the ruling, 37 states and the District of Columbia had legalized gay marriage: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.”
“Most other states had enacted constitutional or statutory bans on same-sex marriage, known as “Defense of Marriage” Acts”
You may be correct despite what this info appears to state, if the term “legalized” includes court-reversals of existing laws banning it. If so, thanks for the important correction, as it didn’t occur to us to check that.
Even non Catholics are starting to get concerned by what’s going on at the Vatican ,claiming there’s been a communist coup and asking why the Church broke with a 2 thousand year old tradition of never electing a Jesuit as Pope. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auRES1NCVJ8
I believe Alex Jones is basically spot on. The “globalists” he refers to are the Judeo- Masons, who are the generals and masters of the assault, in honor of lucifer. Our Lady warned us, Saints warned us, Popes warned us. We will suffer, but we have nothing to fear. Our Lord is permitting this as punishment for sin, but He is in control. Our Lady will crush lucifer’s head beneath Her foot. All we have to do is to remain loyal and true to our Holy Catholic Faith – pure and unadulterated. Set aside the false NO, the ludicrous R&R; wear the brown scapula and say the Rosary daily. Thank God that even if we are not able to assist at the true Mass physically, we may still do so virtually on the internet and then be calm.
here is an excerpt from an interesting essay written by a Mr. Gary Potter I found on Catholicism.org, An Online Journal Edited by the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire, and dated May 16, 2005. The essay is entitled “Catholicism and the Old South”, and the excerpt deals with the imprisonment of Confederate President Jefferson Davis:
“The treatment endured in prison by Davis — a gentleman, a hero of the Mexican War, one-time son-in-law of a U.S. President (Zachary Taylor), a U.S. Secretary of War and U.S. Senator from Mississippi prior to becoming President of the C.S.A. — ill bespoke those who imprisoned him. It was clearly calculated to break him as a man. For instance, guards were posted around the clock inside his cell in order to deprive him of all privacy, including even at the times every day when nature required that he take care of the most private needs of all.
“As unchivalrous and plain indecent as was the treatment meted out to him by his vindictive jailers, President Davis was not without solace during confinement. A rosary sent by some sisters in Savannah reached him. More notably, comfort was extended by the Vicar of Christ himself, Ven. Pope Pius IX. It took the form of a crown of thorns woven by the pope with his own hands and a portrait of the pontiff autographed with the words from Scripture, “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.”
“These items, the crown and the portrait, were sent to the Confederate President when he was still in prison and they may be viewed today at a museum in New Orleans. The portrait is an etching. The crown, with thorns about two inches long, is such that it is hard to see how the pope could have fashioned it without hurting himself.
Why did this pope who is a Venerable of the Church — the very one who promulgated the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, published to the world the famous Syllabus of Errors, and presided over the Vatican Council that solemnly defined the dogma of papal infallibility — seek to comfort Davis, who was not a Catholic?”
Pope Pius IX, himself a prisoner of the Vatican, commiserated with, and reached out to comfort, the prisoner President Davis. Something quite unheard of today in our era of ‘political correctness’. which is really masked progressivism.
How very interesting! I wonder how President Davis responded?
“Some people just can’t be offended.” Not by offensive and evil things, that’s for sure – but that’s what the ‘hermeneutic’ is for. And the street-clothes ‘Marxist-Jesuit-priest’, Espinal, who “gave a lot of importance to the dialogue between Marxists and Christians”, gets to continue his work from beyond the grave courteousy of Bergoglio and Morales. This is the reality of liberation theology – spreading the ideology of Marx in the name of Christ. Basically revolting against any authority not under their own control, by employing Christ’s name, using ‘the poor’ as their human shields (or employing the children of the poor to become child soldiers), and being as violent as they please to achieve their aims (the armed and murderous ‘guerrilla priest’ is all part of the ‘liberation’ process). Espinal has been called a ‘jesuit hero’.
Bergoglio said, “Making a hermeneutic like this, I understand this work. For me it wasn’t an offense…” http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/francis-crucifix-blasphemy.htm
The fruits of Marxim = “Sixty-five million were murdered in China – starved, hounded to suicide, shot as class traitors. Twenty million in the USSR, 2 million in North Korea, 1.7 million in Africa. The nightmare of Cambodia (2 million dead) is especially vivid. “Reactionaries” were sorted out from the base population on the grounds of being supporters of the old regime, having gone to school or just for wearing glasses. They were taken to the side of paddy fields and hacked to death by teenagers.” http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100244023/the-left-is-trying-to-rehabilitate-karl-marx-lets-remind-them-of-the-millions-who-died-in-his-name/
“I wish to avenge myself against the One who rules above.” Karl Marx.
“The hellish vapours rise and fill the brain, till I go mad and my heart is utterly changed. See this sword? The prince of darkness sold it to me.” Karl Marx.
“With disdain I will throw my gauntlet full in the fact of the world and see the collapse of this pygmy giant… Then will I wander god-like and victorious through the ruins of the world. And giving my words an active force, I will feel equal to the Creator.” Karl Marx
“Karl Marx is a monster possessed by ten thousand devils.” Frederick Engels.
Karl Marx “had the devil’s view of the world and the devil’s malignity. Sometimes he seemed to know that he was accomplishing the works of evil.” Robert Payne (a friend of Karl Marx).
“We do not fight against believers and not even clergymen. WE FIGHT AGAINST GOD to snatch believers from Him.” Velchernaia Moskva (a Marxist newspaper).
The slogan of the Soviets in their early days was: “Let us drive out the Capitalists from the earth, and God from Heaven.”
“The World has never before known a godlessness as organised, miltarised and tenaciously malevolent as that preached by Marxism. Within the philosophical system of Marx and Lenin and at the heart of their psychology, HATRED OF GOD is the principle driving force, more fundamental than all their political and economic pretensions. Militant atheism is not merely incidental or marginal to Communist policy; it is not a side effect, but the central pivot. To achieve its diabolical ends, Communism needs to control a population devoid of religious and national feeling, and this entails a destruction of faith and nationhood. Communists proclaim both of these objectives openly, and just as openly put them into practice.” Alexander Solzhenitsyn
“We must hate. Hatred is the basis of Communism.” Lenin
“Hatred is an element of the struggle, a relentless hatred of the enemy…transforming him into an effective, violent and selective, cold blooded killing machine. A people without hatred cannot vanquish a brutal enemy.” Che Guevare.
And we must hate intrinsic evil and offences against God and all that is false, wicked and a danger to morals and salvation of souls.
Thanks for that!
I don’t know if it is allowed to post links here but there is a great article on Rorate Caeli on Francis’ clarification on the incident in his fly back to Rome.
The most important point made (though not explicitly) in the article is he knows the Church teaching on Marxism and Liberation Theology and he still did what he did(to me the most offensive and blasphemous action would be to offer the medallion that has the Communist Crucifix to Our Lady so he is probably the first Pope in Church history to directly commit blasphemy against God and offence against Our Lady in one single action). When someone made it clear he is going directly against Church doctrines with full knowledge that he is no longer a material but a formal heretic.
As a contrast to Bergoglio’s hammer and sickle crucifix, consider this one produced according to the exact anatomical detail depicted in the Shroud of Turin. This really brings the Passion home to me. They should have left off the loin cloth because Our Lord was stripped naked to further humiliate Him.
Wow. Pretty much all I can say.
Seriously? How’d you manage that? I’ve asked them to cease and desist over and over for years and they won’t stop sending me the blasted thing!
No, Mr Lamb. To show Our Lord naked would be grossly irreverent and a further “humiliation”. It was evil to strip Our Lord naked in public to humiliate him; and it would be evil for the Church to depict Our Lord naked at any time, just because his persecutors had done so. We do not treat Our Lord in such a way. Images of Our Lord must be reverent. Depicting a Our Lord naked would be to repeat the shaming over and over. we must always show the utmost reverence for God in depictions of Him.
Agree about this. John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself.
We have an obligation to ‘lift up’ Our Lord, not drag Him down, like the park-bench ‘Jesus’, blasphemy – oi.
You are right – in general. However in this particular work I feel it might be different. I expected a reaction to my statement, but upon reflection, I decided to go ahead, because that the loin cloth should have been removed, was my initial reaction when I first saw this corpus:
1. I have been very interested in the Shroud of Turin for many years. No artifact on Earth has been as intensively studied as the Shroud has. I am utterly convinced – it is beyond all reasonable doubt – that it is authentic, miraculous and especially a miracle for our time. The technology enabling the discovery of 3 D information encoded in a 2 D image, is cutting edge. The frequency of the light which formed the image is in the order of an atomic explosion. The Shroud is telling Man – TODAY – I resurrected! I am God! This corpus is the product of state of the art science and technology.
2. Its visual impact is enormous for me – incomparable to any lily white corpus I have ever seen. This rammed the horror of the Passion into me. This is what God Almighty, The Creator of the universe, the King of Kings suffered for ME! Every time I’m tempted to sin, I think of this corpus. This corpus depicts the stark reality of the Passion – what is was really like. It rams home the brutality, the human suffering, the physical pain.
3. Our Lord was publicly stripped naked of his garments, on purpose, to further humiliate Him. The onlookers no doubt mocked and jeered. Imagine yourself stripped naked in public. You can imagine how it would feel. Our Lord suffered this extra humiliation for us, so why hide it in this corpus which, with consummate skill, has been created to scientifically and realistically represent the reality of Christ crucified? If we have the mettle to face reality, then why not face it? Our lord was crucified NAKED!
3. I can think of 5 anatomical reasons why nothing provocative would have been visible, to even Victorian eyes. Who would have been shocked in these days when apparently 90% of the traffic on the internet is pornography and almost every youngster has a cell phone? When even sodomy is publicly condoned? Let even spinster aunt Sally look upon the reality of what Our Lord suffered for her.
4. Our Lord created, most wonderfully, the human body. There is nothing repulsive about it – it is beautiful.
5. Modesty and reverent depiction of Our Lord is good and right. I would not for a moment advocate stripped corpuses on crucifixes in general, but on this specific one I would. The artist represented, by aid of state of the art science and technology, 99% of the terrible reality of Christ crucified and then obscured the deficit in fear of false modesty. I would definitely have shown it as it was.
This corpus has had a very beneficial effect in my spiritual life. I can visualize Our Lord clearly as He was being stripped of His garments. Scabs would have been ripped away with the clothing, causing fresh bleeding. His body covered in blood and wounds as the corpus depicts. He would have instinctively covered Himself with His hands, His eyes downcast in humble submission and embarrasment. A cap of thorns covering His cranium. His hair matted and caked with blood and dust. His right eye already beginning to swell and bruise. His vision blurred. He would have stood stooped forward with the sore, abraded knee flexed. He would have been pale as a ghost, sweating, swaying gently, shivering from shock caused by trauma, haemorrhage, dehydration from lack of fluid intake and hypoglycaemia.
When I get humiliated, I think of this picture in my mind and then my humiliation means nothing!
That is why the fight is so one-sided: all the zeal and toughness is on their side. We are wimps because we have bought the blasphemous lie that Our Lord Jesus Christ was a wimp.
But we must always, in our human way, show Our Lord in a respectful manner. We know He was stripped. But we don’t repeat the insult. We know He hung slack and totally dejected on the Cross, but we don’t depict Him that way.
Our Lord gave Himself, He was not crucified by anyone – He GAVE Himself to be crucified. That’s why the horrible crucifix that John Paul II made popular with Our Lord hanging in such an undignified way is blasphemy . It shows Him defeated. In reality He defeated death and we must always show His victory and completion of His sacrifice – it’s a triumph over death.
Well everybody is entitled to their own opinion. However, this corpus is unique and not comparable to any other. This is what the crucifixion looked like. This is how Our Lady looked upon her Son.
“We know He was stripped. But we don’t repeat the insult” sounds a bit like the Protestant “we won’t have a corpus on our crucifixes, because Christ was crucified once and we won’t crucify him again”.
The blasphemous NO crucifixes like the one you describe, are another matter entirely and I fully agree there. The motives behind their creations were entirely different.
I suppose the bottom line is that different people can look at the same thing and each see it differently.
The same thing happened with me, but I persisted until they finally complied. Keep trying! It’s such a relief to not have that rubbish show up anymore.
The Hammer & Sickle Crucifix was the last straw for me. I can’t believe Fr. Bergoglio is even Catholic, much less a Pope. May God provide a “Road to Damascus” experience to get his undivided attention. Dear God, please forgive the “NewChurch” it’s modernist insanity.
I am surprised that a priest was pleased to offer a Mass for the reparation of the blasphemy committed against Our Lord and Our Lady when I asked. So maybe all you guys here can print a copy of the article in Rorate Caeli on the incident and convince the priests you know to offer a Mass of atonement?
What a great idea!
That’s great! We ought to try.