Sunday, November 19, 2017

Pope Francis, Fessard, Relativism and Amoris Leatitia

Austen Ivereigh at Crux just reviewed a book by Massimo Borghesi called "Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Una Biografia intellettuale" which shows that much of Pope Francis's thinking comes from Fr. Gaston Fessard.

Ivereigh claims that Fessard is "anti-Hegelian."

As usual, Ivereigh is wrong.

Back in 1950, Thomist Jules "Icaac was accusing Fessard of identifying this quasi-science of thought with the science of the real order, or metaphysics. That is what Hegel does."

"The executive function of the dialectic, as Isaac interpreted Aquinas, uses the law of thought in a concrete instance of thinking or arguing. Because Fessard used these laws not as laws of arguing, but as laws of the development of historical events, he is again accused of Hegelianism." ("Gaston Fessard S.J., His Work Toward A Theology of History," by Mary Alice Muir, 1970, page 30)

Sadly, Fessard realized that Hegelianism is historicism or relativism.

He hoped to save Hegel's dialectic thought from relativism with his confused twisting of Aquinas, but instead it appears that he became a soft Hegelian historicist and relativist.

It appears that Francis is a historicist and relativist if his thinking comes from Fessard.

As the scholar Fr. Edmundus Waldstein shows this "soft" historicism, that its proponents deny is Hegelian, but is Hegelian relativism despite the denials, brought us subjectivist Bernard Haring's "moral" theology, endorsed by Francis, which denies intrinsically evil acts. (sancrucensis.wordpress.com, "Dubia and Process," December 7, 2016)

This relativism it appears brought us Amoris Leatitia's ambiguous "spreading of heresy" and it's denial of intrinsically evil acts as Josef Seifert and the Filial Correction so clearly show to be the fruits of this papal document.

Pray that the Dubia Cardinals issue the correction. Say a Our Father now for this intention.

Saturday, November 18, 2017

The Judge Moore Hypocrisy & Franken's Rape of American Public's Mind with Sleazy "Humor"

Leeann Tweeden


@LeeannTweeden
I’ve decided it’s time to tell my story. http://www.kabc.com/2017/11/16/leeann-tweeden-on-senator-al-franken/ 





In their hypocrisy, the media and Washington elite after liberal Al Franken's proven sexual assault do not politely ask him to step down, but conservative Judge Roy Moore because of unproven allegations is commanded to step down.

(It seems that Moore may have committed legal odd acts, that is date woman under age 18, but so far the only solid evidence of sexual misconduct, the signed yearbook, appears to be a fabrication.)

The elites' double standard and rape of the American public's mind began a long time ago before the Moore/Franken hypocrisy.

Below is a example of how Franken has been raping the American public's mind for a long time with his sleazy "humor."

“[Radio host Al] Franken also imitated a priest giving Communion, saying "Body of Christ" when an imagined pedophile priest was in line but "not for you" when pro-choice politicians came up,” according to Michael Goodwin of the New York Daily News.
[http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/story/192671p-166266c.html]

This Franken mockery of the Eucharist on Air America radio proves he is a creepy anti-Catholic bigot. This ridicule reminds one of the Nazi propaganda that mocked the most sacred religious Jewish customs.

The Jewish religion holds God’s very name in the highest respect and reverence. The radio host, who claims to be Jewish, in the introduction of his new book Lies And the Lying Liars has a disrespectful mock conservation with the Holy One of the Old Testament. Here‘s an sample Franken‘s mockery:

“’TOTAL BULL____,’ God said. ’ START BY ATTACKING THEM. HE’S [former CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg who wrote a book about liberal bias] CLEARLY A DISGRUNTLED FORMER EMPLOYEE, AND SHE [Ann Coulter who wrote a book about liberal bias] JUST LIES. BY THE WAY, THERE’S SOMETHING SERIOUSLY WRONG WITH HER. ’”

Franken’s purpose for writing his book was to “prove” that there isn’t a liberal bias. According to the radio host “[a]lmost every fact in this book [Lies And the Lying Liars] is correct. Either that, or it’s a joke.”

Franken’s Alleged Facts and Humor

Here’s another example of radio host ’s alleged humor in his book on page 239:

“’Give it back! [Clarence] Thomas’s squeal broke their reverie.’ Give me back my magazine.’

‘ Kerry and Gore jumped topsides and saw Ashcroft holding a cheaply printed magazine featuring teenage Vietnamese prostitutes.’”

I assumed this “joke” refers back to the alleged and “totally uncorroborated charges of off-color language against” the then African American Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas.

Franken thinks its funny to promote “totally uncorroborated charges“ against the African American Thomas, but is fuming in his book because of “[c]redible rape charges” against his great hero Bill Clinton who sexually abused women (imagine the media indignation if sex abusing priests had used cigars), allegedly raped a woman, obstructed justice and lie under oath.

The radio host is outraged on page 138 because Bill O’ Reilly “deplored not only the Clinton’s alleged rape of Broaddrick, but also the mainstream medias’ rape of the American public in failing to report the alleged rape.”

Brent Bozell shows the “double-standard” of the media in this case best when he wrote:

“Credible rape charges are not news when levied against a liberal president, no matter how grave those charges are. But totally uncorroborated charges of off-color language against a conservative Supreme Court nominee totally dominated the news for a solid week.
The national media’s double-standard has descended from the merely awful to the absurd.”
[http://www.mediaresearch.org/press/1999/press19990308.asp]

Franken is the “Teensiest Bit Selective”

Or maybe it’s not fair and balanced to Franken's "humor" to compare the media handling of Clinton’s “[c]redible rape charges” vs. the “uncorroborated charges of off-color language” against Thomas.

Maybe it’s “the teensiest bit selective.”

Al in his continued attempt to show that there is not a liberal bias on page 33 says “from among the hundreds of thousands of hours of broadcast news over the last three decades Bernie is able to coble together a few instances of slanted reporting. But even when Goldberg seems to have a point, it still feels just the teensiest bit selective.”

However, the radio host in his chapter called “I Bitch-Slap Bernie Goldberg” in his rigorist fact finding effort was the “teensiest bit selective:”

When he forgot to mention that Goldberg in his book Bias considered that the media’s anti-conservative bias against the great “social” issues such as abortion and homosexuality to be even greater than against the “Democrat-versus-Republican sort” of issues; Goldberg wrote:“Why were we doing PR for the AIDS lobby by spreading an epidemic of fear, telling our viewers about how AIDS was about to break out into mainstream heterosexual America, which simply was not true?”

I guess the “I Bitch-Slap Bernie Goldberg” chapter was another creepy joke because it's another example of Franken's raping of the American public's mind on the truth of the media cover up of gay pedophilia.

Franken’s and “the Most-Gay Presidential Candidate Ever” John Kerry’s Buddies

Which brings us back to the radio host’s “joke” about a priest giving Communion to pedophile priests, but not to pro-choice politicians. Why were Franken and his close associate the then “the most-gay presidential candidate ever” Catholic John Kerry helping their buddies in the radical gay movement and liberal psychological establishment to cover up the fact that the Catholic scandal is overwhelmingly a homosexual sex abuse scandal?

The cover up tactic is to say that the scandal is about pedophilia and then claim that pedophilia is not associated with homosexuality.

The gay activist expert and psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover, who wrote the book "Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth," which the Congressional Record of May 1996 called the "best book on homosexuality written in our times," states this is a standard spin.

He writes:

"Activists are aware of the adverse effect on the gay-rights movement that could result if people perceived any degree of routine association between homosexuality and pedophilia…They have denied this association by focusing on the (true) fact that—in absolute numbers—heterosexuals commit more child molestation than homosexuals." "But careful studies show that pedophilia is far more common among homosexuals than heterosexuals."

According to an article by Register Correspondent Ellen Rossini, "Although heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by a ratio of at least 20 to 1, homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses," said Tim Dailey, a senior fellow for culture studies at the Family Research Council. (The National Catholic Register, September 15-21, 2002) [http://www.ncregister.com/register_News/091002sem.htm]

With the above in mind I said in my book The Hidden Axis of Evil: The Clinton, Sex Abuse and the Aborting of America:

"If [the liberal “Catholic” organization] VOTF and the liberal bishops really want to end the church scandal, then they have to stop covering up the gay part of 90 percent of the scandal [The February 2004 National Review Board Report says 81 percent of the victims were males]. If VOTF and [VOTF’s Rev.] Doyle really want to end the pedophilia part of the scandal, then they have to expose the fraudulent scientific data eliminating penalties for sexual abusers and the Kinseyan [psychological] ‘experts’ who are advising the bishops."

It is Franken’s and "Catholic" gay activist Kerry‘s radical gay friends in the priesthood, who are there contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church, who have caused the overwhelming majority of the scandal. It’s also their friends in the liberal psychological establishment with their fraudulent scientific data who are eliminating penalties for sexual abusers and who advised the bishops to allowed homosexuals priests into their dioceses.

Unfortunately, it also isn’t a fact that the vast majority of Catholic priests are not giving Communion to pro-choice politicians. Sadly it’s not a joke that many American bishops appear to be okay with politicians- who vote for killing unborn babies- receiving the Eucharist which includes all the bishops who voted for Cardinal Cupich to be their pro-life chairman. This despite the Catholic Church law (Canon 915), which states that the Eucharist should be withheld from “Catholic” public figures who advocate abortion.
[http://www.all.org/crusade/canon915.htm]

What is the Real Agenda of Franken’s “Humor”?

Nor is it a joke that Franken and his close associate “Catholic” John Kerry support even late-term abortion, which should really be called infanticide. It is a fact that Al did a warm up “comedian” act for Planned Parenthood in 2000.
[http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38d93ec50ced.htm]

Above all, it is a fact that Franken’s creepy jokes “deadens, instead of sharpening, the intellect.“

It is appropriate that his culture of death “sense of humor” is associated with Planned Parenthood's participation in the killing of millions of unborn babies and the sale of their body parts, which is a grim reminder that PP’s founder Margaret Sanger promoted eugenics/Nazi teachings on the need to eliminate the world of "inferior people."
[http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38d93ec50ced.htm]

C. S. Lewis in his book The Screwtape Letters describes the real agenda of Franken’s  culture of death “humor” best. In this book his character, who is a senior evil spirit, says:

"But Flippancy is the best of all. In the first place it is very economical. Only a clever human can make a real Joke about virtue, or indeed about anything else; any of them can be trained to talk as if virtue were funny. Among flippant people the Joke is always assumed to have been made. No one actually makes it; but every serious subject is discussed in a manner which implies that they have already found a ridiculous side to it. If prolonged, the habit of Flippancy builds up around a man the finest armour-plating against the Enemy [God] that I know, and it is quite free from the dangers inherent in the other sources of laughter. It is a thousand miles away from joy; it deadens, instead of sharpening, the intellect; and it excites no affection between those who practice it."

Rosary To The Interior: For the Purification of the Church

My friend James Larson, author of "War Against the Papacy," send me the following email and post:
 
"I consider the attached document of great importance for the future of the Church. I plead with you to publish it, to send it to any other websites that might be interested, to share it with any priests you might know, and to take any other actions which might further its diffusion. As you can see, the author does not desire recognition."
 
Rosary To The Interior:
For the Purification of the Church
(Feast of the Purification and Presentation, Friday, Feb 2, 2018)
 
What is now called The Feast of the Presentation, celebrated on February 2, is actually a double Feast: that of the Purification of Mary, and the Presentation of Our Lord in the Temple. I would like to suggest that Catholics throughout our country journey to their churches on this day in order to pray the Rosary for the expressed intention of the Purification of the Church. If access is denied to the interior of the Church, the Rosary might be prayed at its entrance.
The Presentation celebrates the coming of Jesus Christ, the Light of the World, into His Temple. It is, in fact, the premier Feast of Light¸ and the Triumph of Light over the Darkness of Evil. Traditionally called Candlemass, it signifies the “success” and triumph of the Incarnation, has been traditionally celebrated with triumphal candlelight processions, and is the liturgical day designated for the blessing of candles.
The Purification is the Feast of Our Lady considered to be the oldest Marian liturgical Feast in the Church (having its beginnings in the liturgical life of the Church in Jerusalem) which, while exteriorly signifying an act which fulfilled the prescription of the Old Law, interiorly represents a whole new reality. The purification prescribed in the Old Law was in consequence of original sin and the pain and “sorrow” which now accompanied all childbirth. Mary, conceived without sin, was free from this sorrow. The Purification of the New Testament, therefore, is to be identified with the interior sorrow and suffering of Mary and the Church which has to be undergone in order to usher Christ’s Light into His Temple the Church, and from there into the world:
And Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary his mother: Behold this child is set for the fall, and for the resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be contradicted; And thy own soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts, thoughts may be revealed.”
The Church has now been penetrated by a darkness greater than at any time in its history – not only the darkness of sexual sins and other moral “filth”, but that which consists of every conceivable form of error masking itself as truth, and of darkness masquerading as light. The task of unmasking these “thoughts”, and thus paving the way to the Triumph of the Truth of Christ, has been entrusted to Mary. Most specifically, it has been entrusted to Our Lady of the Rosary. St. Paul writes, “The night is passed, and the day is at hand. Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and put on the armor of light.” The Rosary, as revealed in the messages of Our Lady of Fatima, is this armor of light possessing the power from God to cast off the works of darkness which now pervade the Church, the world, and especially the minds and hearts of individual Catholics.
We need to be immensely grateful to Poland for beginning this militant crusade with its “Rosary on the Borders”, and for Catholics in Italy and Ireland who have followed suit. I believe that the title “Rosary to the Interior” is singularly appropriate to such an effort in the United States, since we are a primary source of the evils that have permeated the modern world: abortion, contraception, the destruction of the family, pornography, homosexuality, materialism and consumerism, all the evils of the media which destroy the intelligence and morality of young and old alike, denial of the Kingship of Christ over all nations, and manifold heresies in regard to the Truths of Christ.
We also need to recognize that Polish Catholics were right in coupling this collective praying of the Rosary to the fate of their nation. St. James the Apostle declares: “the friendship of this world is the enemy of God”. (James 4:4). In the United States this “friendship of the world” has taken the form of constant compromise with American culture and politics, which has produced all those evil “fruits” mentioned above. The campaign of the Enemy within the Church is now taking the form of declaring an end to this “enmity” between Christ and the world, and of promoting inclusiveness towards every conceivable form of evil. The Rosary must therefore be embraced not only as a form of armor protecting us from personal evil, but as a militant weapon in order to defeat the deceits of those who work in darkness, from within, to overthrow Christ and His Church. It must now, first and foremost, be directed in intention towards the Interior of the Church.
Finally, it would seem especially necessary, given the profound lack of unity which exists among various apostolates and agendas operating within the United States, that this effort not be taken over by any one organization. I pray that it will rise from the hearts of many, be promoted by every form of organization and media, and be subsumed by none. I personally, along with family, friends, and any other Catholics we might influence, will be there. Let it thus proceed as a united effort to purify the Church and convert our nation.
Note: Any of the above may be used without crediting the author. As long as the intention remains the same – “Rosary to the Interior: For the Purification of the Church” – it may also be amended to suit individual circumstances. I suggest that parish priests and bishops be asked for permission to use their Church, and even to promote this endeavor from the pulpit and the church bulletin. Finally, I would ask all those interested in participating in this Rosary to the Interior to consider what contacts they might make in order to promote this effort towards the purification of their Church. Its power and effectiveness, with the aid of God’s grace, is designed to begin in the heart of each individual believer and multiply to unity with all the faithful in a cry for God’s mercy and assistance.
 – The author does not desire recognition.
 
Below is a shorter version of the above for possible use in the pulpit or in bulletins:
 
Rosary To The Interior:
For the Purification of the Church
(Feast of the Purification and Presentation, Friday, Feb 2, 2018)
 
What is now called The Feast of the Presentation, celebrated on February 2, is actually a double Feast: that of the Purification of Mary, and the Presentation of Our Lord in the Temple. I would like to suggest that all our faithful journey to Churches on this day in order to pray the Rosary for the expressed intention of the Purification of the Church.
The Purification is the Feast of Our Lady considered to be the oldest Marian liturgical Feast in the Church (having its beginnings in the liturgical life of the Church in Jerusalem) which, while exteriorly signifying an act which fulfilled the prescription of the Old Law, interiorly represents a whole new reality. The purification prescribed in the Old Law was in consequence of original sin and the pain and “sorrow” which now accompanied all childbirth. Mary, conceived without sin, was free from this sorrow. The Purification of the New Testament, therefore, is to be identified with the interior sorrow and suffering of Mary and the Church which has to be undergone in order to usher Christ’s Light into His Temple the Church, and from there into the world:
And Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary his mother: Behold this child is set for the fall, and for the resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be contradicted; And thy own soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts, thoughts may be revealed.” (Luke 2: 35).
To Mary has been entrusted the mission from God to carry the light of Christ into His Church in order that it might then become a beacon of light to free the world from darkness and sin. As revealed through the messages of Fatima, this is especially to be accomplished through the Rosary.
I would ask all the Catholics of this parish, if it is at all possible, to journey here on Friday, February 2 [a specific time might here be appropriate) for the praying of the Rosary for the Purification of the Church and the Triumph of Christ’s Light over the darkness that now appears to be descending at an accelerating pace over our world, and especially over our nation. The Church will be open all day, and into the evening, for this purpose.

Saturday, November 11, 2017

Would Cupich give "Prolife" Hitler Communion since he Fought Against Joblessness & Anti-Environmentalism Despite his Cutting Up & Killing People?


Blase Cupich on Face the Nation said that he would give Communion to pro-abortion politicians

In his interview with Face the Nation the then Archbishop Blase Cupich was asked:

"When you say we cannot politicize the communion rail, you would give communion to politicians, for instance, who support abortion rights."

Cupich said on Face the Nation in 2014 that he would give Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians:

"I would not use the Eucharist or as they call it the communion rail as the place to have those discussions or a way in which people would be either [sic] excluded from the life of the church. The Eucharist is an opportunity of grace and conversion. It’s also a time of forgiveness of sins. So my hope would be that that grace would be instrumental in bringing people to the truth." [http://www.crisismagazine.com/2014/on-giving-communion-pro-abortion-politicians]

In 1933, when the Nazis came to power, one of pro-abortion politician Hitler's first acts was to legalize abortion for the "health of the mother" which meant abortion on demand. By 1935 Germany had 500,000 abortions a year.[http://www.klannedparenthood.com/nazis-and-abortion/hitler-was-pro-choice/]

Cupich stated that pro-abortion politicians like Hitler should receive Holy Communion and he, also, explicitly said cutting up babies is morally equal, much the same as, joblessness and other issues. The Chicago Cardinal said:

"While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness."

In 2015, Cardinal Cupich sounded like a Nazi sympathizer when he compared the genocide and mutilation of unborn babies to joblessness and other issues.

He compared the "Planned Parenthood grisly traffic in aborted babies body parts to... joblessness and a broken immigration system."
("Leftist CDL Cupich In Running to Chair US Bishops' Pro-Life Committee," Church Militant, October 24, 2017)

Would Cupich call Hitler "Prolife' since he Agreed with many of his Consistent Ethic of Life Stances?

Hitler agreed with many of Cupich's consistent ethic of life stances.

The Cardinal and Hitler stand united in the following consistent ethic issues. The Nazi dictator fought against joblessness and anti-environmentalism.

The progressive pro-Cupich magazine Commonwealth reported that Pope Francis, in an article titled "How Pope Francis Reframed the Politics of Being 'Prolife,'" now says:

Being "prolife" is not a "single-issue" and, also, means '''the environment devastated by man's predatory relationship with nature'... undocumented immigrants and unemployed workers."
(Commonwealth, By John Gehring, September 13, 2017)

Since pro-life is not a single issue then by Cupich's Nazi sympathizer-like reasoning then Hitler's grisly death camp genocide should be counterbalanced by the fact that the Nazi government reduced unemployment from six million to one million and was one of the first to create environmental protection laws.

Francis and the Cardinal in their statements down play the abortion genocide while making climate change a top priority and appear to, also, equate environmentalism (and even tobacco smoking which was just outlawed in the Vatican) with having a consistent ethic life position.

By their reasoning Hitler was pro-life since it's not a single issue and he agreed with many of Cupich and Francis's consistent ethic of life stances.

Hitler had a "stance against Tobacco use" and the "Nazi's were the first to create environmental protection laws in history" according to the Nazi sympathizer website europeanknights project.com.
(12 Things You We're Not Told About Adolph Hitler and Nazi (NSDAP) Germany," January 13, 2017)

The scholarly book "How Green Were the Nazis?: Nature, Environment, and Nation in the Third Reich," also, impartially reports that Hitler's government "mounted the most effective anti-smoking propaganda campaign ever before 1980" and "nature protection and conversation laws... from an environmentalist perspective, the best in the world." (amazon.com/go/aw/reviews/082141672, First review)

Lifesitenews.com pointed out that Cupich said abortion "is a 'controversial issue.' It needs to be 'put behind us so the government can focus on it's budget.'"

This statement sounds like something similar to what a Nazi sympathizer would say:

The Jewish genocide is a "controversial issue," it needs to be put behind us so the government can focus on it's budget, joblessness, environmental issues and train prices.

The Lifesitenews responding to the Chicago Cardinal's statement said:

"Your Eminence, abortion is immoral because it kills... Dietrich Bonhoeffer didn't fret about train prices in Nazi Germany. He spoke truth to power about the genocide of Jews and eventually lost his life."
("Cardinal Cupich shows his priorities in responses to two different tragedies," November 8, 2017, Lifesitenews.com)

The California Catholic Daily wrote:

"Cupich indicates there’s a moral equivalence between abortion and other moral issues."

Charles J. Chaput
Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput: “The deliberate killing of innocent life is a uniquely wicked act”.

"None other than Philadelphia’s archbishop, the Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput has fired back.

Archbishop Chaput wrote in his August 10 editorial for Catholic Philly:

'Here’s a simple exercise in basic reasoning... theft is bad, assault is worse and murder is worst. There’s a similar texture of ill will connecting all three crimes, but only a very confused conscience would equate thieving and homicide. Both are serious matters. But there is no equivalence.'

'A case is sometimes made that abortion is mainly a cultural and moral issue, and politics is a poor solution to the problem. The curious thing is that some of the same voices that argue against political action on the abortion issue seem quite comfortable urging vigorous political engagement on issues like health care, homelessness and the environment.'

'When it comes to moral issues, basic reasoning oftentimes proves more valuable than nuance... The latter obfuscates and confuses, as it blurs the distinctions and degrees separating good from evil, leaving people wondering what’s good and what’s evil.'" [http://cal-catholic.com/nuance-vs-clarity/]

Pray that the US Bishops put someone to Chair their Pro-Life Committee who doesn't have a "very confused conscience" and that doesn't have people "wondering what's good and what's evil."

Say a Our Father for that intention now.


Sunday, November 05, 2017

Pope Francis has Cardinals "Petrified" Silent with Fear says Vatican Expert Edward Pentin

Fr. Thomas Weinandy is an example of one who decided not to be silent and defend his cherished beliefs.

He lost his position with the USCCB instead of betraying his beliefs by the sin of omission.

The courageous Fr. Weinandy said in a letter to Pope Francis:

You "seem to censor and mock those who interpret Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia in accord with Church tradition... Many bishops are silent... Many fear that if they speak their mind, they will be marginalized or worst." (National Catholic Register, "Full Text of Father Weinandy's Letter to Pope Francis," November 1, 2017)

The example of the other side of this coin are all the silent bishops and Cardinals who "fear that if they speak their mind, they will be marginalized or worst" so they appear willing to betray their most cherish beliefs.

Vatican Expert Edward Pentin said "40 to 70 Cardinals" are silent because of their petrifying fear of Pope Francis and his Vatican. Pentin said:

"I was told earlier this year by a senior prelate that there is great concern by a good number of Cardinals about this pontificate and I also heard from another well placed source that... their estimate of about 40 to 70 Cardinals want a change, they are very concern, but they are simply petrified about speaking out."
(Fr. Z's Blog, November 4, 2017, "Edward Pentin's talk at the Catholic Identity Conference 2017," Quote from video in post)

That these Cardinals by their silence appear willing to betray their most cherish beliefs is the conclusion one gets from the video.

Even one source told Pentin that they know that they will have to answer to God on why they were silent during this crisis.

Fr. Z speaking of the video and Pentin said:

"Edward Pentin – at present the best English language Vaticanista in Rome – gave a talk at a conference.

There is a video of his talk. You might give it a shot.

Pentin, a sharp and reasonable guy, touches on a lot of sore points.

We have to stop blowing happy gas all around, as if everything in the Church was great. It’s not great."



Again, these Cardinals that Pentin speaks of in the video by their silence appear willing to betray their most cherish beliefs.

In fact, Pope Francis appointed Cardinal Blase Cupich said that bishops and Catholics must betray their most "cherished beliefs" which he associates with "and long-held biases" to follow Francis:

“It is our job to take up that discernment. It takes time. It involves discipline. Most importantly it requires that we be prepared to let go of cherished beliefs and long-held biases.” (November 2, 2017, LifeSiteNews, "Catholics must let go of ‘cherished beliefs’ to ‘discern’ like Pope Francis: U.S. Cardinal" [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholics-must-let-go-of-cherished-beliefs-to-discern-like-pope-francis-u.s])

Pray for the Dubia Cardinals that they issue the correction.

Pray also for the 40 to 70 Cardinals that they act like Fr. Weinandy and not commit the sin of omission by silence.

Say a Our Father now for these intentions.

Friday, November 03, 2017

Brainwashing: Pope Francis, Fr. Weinandy, Cardinal Muller & the Fearful Bishops?

-Updated November 5, 2017-

"We need a total, I might say 'brain washing.'"

Yesterday, Governor Jerry Brown made the above quote on climate change inside the Vatican.

He was invited by Pope Francis's Pontifical Academy of Sciences. (The Sacramento Bee, November 4, 2017, "World needs 'brain washing' on climate change, Jerry Brown says at Vatican")

Are Pope Francis and his inner circle at the Vatican applying a type of cognitive re-definition management manipulation or brainwashing?

Brainwashing and thought reform are other labels for this type of management manipulation.

Richard J. Ofshe, Ph.D., gives a overview of the cognitive re-definition manipulation:

"Coercive persuasion and thought reform are alternate names for programs of social influence capable of producing substantial behavior and attitude change through the use of coercive tactics, persuasion, and/or interpersonal and group-based influence manipulations (Schein 1961; Lifton 1961). Such programs have also been labeled 'brainwashing' (Hunter 1951)."[https://culteducation.com/group/798-abusive-controlling-relationships/3260-coercive-persuasion-and-attitude-changes.html

Generally when thought reform is used in management manipulation it can be summed up as persons being pressured, usually by fear of losing their job or position in an organization, into changing their deepest beliefs.

(Management manipulation will be explained in more depth later by quoting cognitive re-definition expert Edgar Schein.)

Persons under this manipulation have only two choices.

They can stay with the organization so long as they are willing to change their deepest beliefs.

Or they must be willing to leave the organization to keep their most cherish beliefs.

Fr. Thomas Weinandy is an example of one who decided to lose his position with the USCCB instead of betray his beliefs.

The courageous Fr. Weinandy said in a letter to Pope Francis:

You "seem to censor and mock those who interpret Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia in accord with Church tradition... Many bishops are silent... Many fear that if they speak their mind, they will be marginalized or worst." (National Catholic Register, "Full Text of Father Weinandy's Letter to Pope Francis," November 1, 2017)

The example of the other side of the management manipulation coin would be all the silent bishops and Cardinals who "fear that if they speak their mind, they will be marginalized or worst" so they appear willing to betray their most cherish beliefs.

Vatican Expert Edward Pentin this year said "40 to 70 Cardinals" are silent because of their petrified fear of Pope Francis and his Vatican. Pentin said:

"I was told earlier this year by a senior prelate that there is great concern by a good number of Cardinals about this pontificate and I also heard from another well placed source that... their estimate of about 40 to 70 Cardinals want a change, they are very concern, but they are simply petrified about speaking out."
(Fr. Z's Blog, November 4, 2017, "Edward Pentin's talk at the Catholic Identity Conference 2017," Quote from video in post)

These Cardinals by their silence appear willing to betray their most cherish beliefs.

In fact, Pope Francis appointed Cardinal Blase Cupich said that bishops and Catholics must betray their most "cherished beliefs" which he associates with "and long-held biases" to follow Francis:

“It is our job to take up that discernment. It takes time. It involves discipline. Most importantly it requires that we be prepared to let go of cherished beliefs and long-held biases.” (November 2, 2017, LifeSiteNews, "Catholics must let go of ‘cherished beliefs’ to ‘discern’ like Pope Francis: U.S. Cardinal" [https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholics-must-let-go-of-cherished-beliefs-to-discern-like-pope-francis-u.s])

A final example of the other side of the management manipulation coin is Cardinal Gerhard Muller.

Remember Cardinal Muller's interview that caused puzzlement among his co-workers according to an article by Vatican expert Edward Pentin.

The January 9, 2017 article for the National Catholic Register is titled "Cardinal Muller's TV interview Causes Bewilderment."

The Cardinal's Sunday interview in which he criticized the Four Cardinal's dubia is causing "bewilderment" because in it he contradicted "everything he said...on the matter until now."

Those who know and work with him in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) are puzzled by his behavior. Pentin wrote:

"Another senior official...told him personally...that what the cardinal states in the interview "is exactly the contradictory of everything which he has said to me on the matter until now" and he had the "impression of someone who was not speaking for himself but repeating what someone else had told him to say."[http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/cardinal-muellers-tv-interview-causes-bewilderment#.WHRXZHOIYwg]

The "bewilderment" of those who know the Cardinal best can only have grown greater after Muller's newest statement this week that those in adulterous second marriages can be sexually active if they according to scholar Steven O'Reilly have subjective "doubt as to the validity of the 'first' marriage, He [Cardinal Muller] writes:

'In a matrimonial annulment procedure, therefore, the real will of marriage plays a fundamental role. In the case of a conversion in mature age (of a Catholic who is such only on the certificate of baptism) one can say that a Christian is convinced in conscience that their first bond, even if it took place in the form of a marriage in the Church, was not valid as a sacrament and that their current marriage-like bond, prized by children and with a living relationship matured over time with their current partner is a true marriage before God. Perhaps this cannot be canonically proven because of the material context or because of the culture of the dominant mentality. It is possible that the tension that occurs here between the public-objective status of the “second” marriage and subjective guilt can open, under the conditions described, the way to the sacrament of penance and Holy Communion, passing through a pastoral discernment in internal forum.'(see here; emphasis in the original article)' 

"Though Cardinal’s Muller’s “answer” to the first dubia remains a “no” to communion for divorced and remarried whose first marriage involved a “valid marital bond;” he now seems to intend something of an escape clause where the validity of the bond is in doubt. Muller’s out clause in the quote above from his essay relies on the subjective belief of the individual – and the discernment of the internal forum – that there never was a “valid marital bond” in the first marriage. By this device, I suppose he thinks he does not run afoul of Familiaris Consortio 84."

"Now, in my opinion, Muller’s new (?) position on this sort of internal forum ‘annulment’ is no less destructive of the institution of marriage in the Catholic Church than is blessing the “yet, but” communion-for-public-adulterer cases where a valid marital bond certainly exists. Certainly, to the observer in the pew they are the same thing. The obvious temptation for divorced and remarried individuals in such a position would be to discover they ‘sincerely doubt‘ the validity of their own first marriage, thereby easing acceptance of their second. There are other problems in such a system, not least of which is the lack of transparency of process and justice for both parties to the first marriage – especially if the other spouse would contest the subjective conscience of the other party or the discernment of the internal forum. I just do not see how Muller’s position, if I understand it correctly, saves him from contradicting Familiaris Consortio 84 (FC 84. (romalocutaest.com, "Cardinal Muller, the Dubia and the Formal Correction," October 31, 2017, by Steven O'Reilly [Click to see whole article: https://romalocutaest.com/])

Muller appears to be saying one can self annul, with the help of an undefined "internal forum," a first marriage if one has subjective belief that the first marriage was never a "valid marital bond" and have sex in the "second marriage" which is not a valid marriage.

If Muller's confused argument was true then the couple would be committing fornication.

In reality, what Muller is saying is that those in adulterous relationships can be sexually active if their subjective conscience doubts.

Muller's confusion and bewildering reversal in beliefs and convictions might be explained by cognitive re-definition management manipulation.

Pope Francis and his inner circle appear to be using Edgar Shein's cognitive re-definition management manipulation which coercive persuasion and attitude change expert Richard Ofshe labeled "thought reform" and "brainwashing."

This manipulation is specifically being used on persons who disagrees with their apparent cognitive re-definition of Church doctrine in Amoris Laetitia, the Argentina letter and other papal actions covered in the Filial Correction.

Below is Jesus Christ's teaching on divorce and adultery, next is Pope Francis's apparent redefinition of Church teaching on divorce, adultery, conscience and reception of Holy Communion and, then, the doctrine of the Catholic of Church on these same subjects.

 St. Matthew 5:32 says:

But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, excepting for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery. 


Amoris Laetitia and the Argentina letter reveal Pope Francis's new teaching to be:

Divorced and "remarried" Catholics, in some cases, can receive Holy Communion.

The Church has always taught those in the intrinsically evil act of adultery can't receive Holy Communion.

So, Francis and his inner circle appear to have redefined conscience, intrinsically evil acts, Trent's infallible doctrine of grace and adultery in a way that is contrary to the 2,000 year infallibly doctrine of the Catholic Church.

They redefine the intrinsically evil act of adultery as a "irregular relationship" and say mortal sin is not mortal sin because of the ultimacy of conscience and the supposed lack of grace to change sinful behavior.

This redefinition of Catholic conscience tells the murderer, rapist, sex abuser, the person in adultery or anyone in objective mortal sin that "if they can't change their sinful behavior" (which contradicts Trent's doctrine on grace) or don't know it is wrong that they are not in mortal sin.

Therefore, they may receive Holy Communion without forming their conscience and changing their sinful behavior.

Their redefinition of conscience is wrong.

As St. Thomas said "An erroneous conscience may bind, but it does not excuse" as the great moral philosopher Ralph McInerny wrote:

"I think murder is wrong, but make up your own mind...It is pretty clear that we do not really accept the ultimacy of conscience in this way. That the rapist and the one raped have different views on the morality of rape does not much interest us when we consider the kind of deed it is...."

"Each agent is obligated to follow his conscience, but this is not tantamount to saying that every agent has a well formed conscience. It is erroneous to believe that theft is permitted. It is wrong to hold that adultery is all right...If it is erroneous, we will be interested in his changing it. Indeed, we often prevent people from acting on their real or alleged views when those views are erroneous. Professional thieves are not considered to have an interesting and defensible concept of private property. As Thomas put it, an erroneous conscience may bind, but it does not excuse." (Ralph McInerny, "Ethica Thomistica," 1982, 1997, page 110-111)

The Pope and every Catholic is obliged to have a well formed conscience and have a firm amendment not to commit mortal sin in order to receive Holy Communion. The infallible Church doctrine of Trent teaches that God gives everyone the grace to repent and overcome sinful behavior. 

These Catholic Church doctrines can't be redefined, even by the Pope, because they are part of Revelation.

  on the The Deus Ex Machina Blog calls this type of cognitive re-definition: gaslighting. He said:

"GASLIGHTING is defined as:
a form of psychological abuse in which a victim is manipulated into doubting their own memory, perception, and sanity."

"What we are a witness to is Francis, the bishop of Rome engaging in a form of PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE whereby he is manipulating the Faithful “priests” into doubting their understanding of the meaning of the passage contained in Holy Gospel according to St. Matthew 5:32, among others, thereby trying to get them to doubt not only the OBJECTIVE TRUTH that the Catholic Church has taught for two millennia, but also their own memory, perception and sanity (rationality and healthiness of the human mind, like the ability to recognize objective truth)."[https://sarmaticusblog.wordpress.com/2016/12/13/the-soap-bubble-papacy-the-battle-is-in-your-mind-francis-gaslighting/]

As stated earlier, Richard J. Ofshe, Ph.D., shows that the cognitive re-definition process is another label for gaslighting or "brainwashing":

"Coercive persuasion and thought reform are alternate names for programs of social influence capable of producing substantial behavior and attitude change through the use of coercive tactics, persuasion, and/or interpersonal and group-based influence manipulations (Schein 1961; Lifton 1961). Such programs have also been labeled 'brainwashing' (Hunter 1951)."[https://culteducation.com/group/798-abusive-controlling-relationships/3260-coercive-persuasion-and-attitude-changes.html]

They redefine the meaning of words which have objective meaning in morals, faith and reason through association and repetition with this coercive persuasion, then isolate those who don't accept the new definitions, after which they ostracize the good name of any person or group that doesn't accept the new "culture" and isn't a "team player."

The ostracized Dubia Cardinals have experienced this part of cognitive re-definition.

It appears possible that Cardinal Muller has been influenced by this persuasive process because he has "a career investment in the organization" of the Vatican even after he was dismissed by Francis.

Muller appears to still hope that Francis might bring him back to the Vatican or as least be in his good grace and not be ostracized and pressured like the Dubia Cardinals.

The very respected management scholar Edgar H. Schein of MIT Sloan School of Management, who Ofshe considers very important in thought reform or brainwashing research, explains the pressuring procedure in Organizational Learning as Cognitive Re-definition: Coercive Persuasion Revisited:

"It may seem absurd to the reader to draw an analogy between the coercive persuasion in political prisons and a new leader announcing that he or she is going 'to change the culture.'

"However, if the leader really means it, if the change will really affect fundamental assumptions and values, one can anticipate levels of anxiety and resistance quite comparable to those one would see in prisons. The coercive element is not as strong. More people will simply leave before they change their cognitive structures, but if they have a financial stake or a career investment in the organization, they face the same pressure to 'convert' that the prisoner did. ... Consider, for example, what it means to impose a 'culture of teamwork' based on 'openness and mutual trust' in an individualistic society."

This is a process some corporate executives and gay ideology leftists, such as Pope Francis appointee Fr. James Martin, with media marketing ability learned they could use to create massive peer pressure – some would call it a "mob mentality," which changes the worldview of people with weak morals and weak faith.

These types of people see themselves as the "elite" because they accept the "culture of teamwork" and have "openness" to the new definitions.

Catholics who are open to the redefinition of "mercy" to mean the ultimacy of conscience may cease to be Christians because they deny that the Incarnate God-man Jesus Christ died to save us from our sins.

Pope John Paul II's Veritatis Splendor warns against the ultimacy of conscience in the third part called "Lest the Cross of Christ Be Emptied of its Power."

The ultimacy of conscience denies mercy because if there is no objective sin to be forgiven and if one doesn't have by grace the power to overcome sin then the cross of Christ is emptied of its power.

Pope Francis and his inner circle who are ostracizing the Dubia Cardinals for questioning the parts of Amoris Laetitia that appear to reject Veritatis Splendor are apparently rejecting the cross of Christ and saying it has lost its power.

They talk alot about atheistic secular issues and social work, but rarely or never about life after the death of the body, salvation and damnation.

Francis and his inner circle say Jesus had authority because he was (past tense) a servant, but rarely if ever that Jesus has authority because he is (eternal now) God.

One reason that they rarely or never talk about the four last things is that apparently in making individual conscience supreme, they deny truth, the authority of God and implicitly the existence of God.

Pope John Paul II said in Veritatis Splendor:

"Certain currents of modern thought...are explicitly atheist. The individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment...about good and evil...in this way the inescapable claims of truth disappear."

It may be a valid question to ask those who promote these redefinitions: Do you even believe in the Incarnation and salvation since you appear to deny the very words of Jesus Christ and his Church that he died to save us from our sins?

These persons of weak faith and weak morals wishing to be part of the "culture" or "team" are open to the managers semantic redefinition of "good or bad." Schein explains how it works:

"'Cognitive redefinition' involved two different processes. First, concepts like crime and espionage had to be semantically redefined. Crime is an abstraction that can mean different things in different conceptual systems when one makes it concrete. Second, standards of judgment had to be altered. Even within the western concept of crime, what was previously regarded as trivial was now seen to be serious. The anchors by which judgments are made are shifted and the point of neutrality is moved. Behavior that was previously judged to be neutral or of no consequence became criminal, once the anchor of what was a minimum crime was shifted. These two processes, semantic re-definition and changing one's anchors for what is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, are the essence of cognitive re-definition."[Organizational Learning as Cognitive Re-definition: Coercive Persuasion Revisited]

Fr. Antonio Spadaro who is called the "mouthpiece" of Pope Francis unwittingly pointed to where cognitive re-definition leads to by using a Doublethink phrase from the novel 1984. 

Doublethink is a process that uses "peer pressure" and other "programmes" on "thought-criminals." Spadaro Tweeted:
Theology is not #Mathematics. 2 + 2 in #Theology can make 5. Because it has to do with #God and real #life of #people...
— Antonio Spadaro (@antoniospadaro) January 5, 2017

 Wikipedia explains:

-"The phrase 'two plus two equals five' ('2 + 2 = 5') is a slogan used in many different forms of media, most notably in Part One, Chapter Seven of George Orwell's book Nineteen Eighty-Four; therein, it is used as an example of an obviously false dogma one may be required to believe, similar to other obviously false slogans by the Party in the novel. It is contrasted with the phrase 'two plus two makes four,' the obvious—but politically inexpedient—truth."

Orwell's protagonist, Winston Smith, uses the phrase to wonder if the State might declare 'two plus two equals five' as a fact; he ponders whether, if everybody believes it, does that make it true? The Inner Party interrogator of thought-criminals, O'Brien, says CV of the mathematically false statement that control over physical reality is unimportant; so long as one controls one's own perceptions to what the Party wills, then any corporeal act is possible, in accordance with the principles of doublethink."[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_%2B_2_%3D_5]

-"Doublethink is the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contexts.[1] Doublethink is related to, but differs from, hypocrisy and neutrality. Also related is cognitive dissonance, in which contradictory beliefs cause conflict in one's mind. Doublethink is notable due to a lack of cognitive dissonance — thus the person is completely unaware of any conflict or contradiction."

"George Orwell created the word doublethink in his dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (published in 1949); doublethink is part of newspeak. In the novel, its origin within the typical citizen is unclear; while it could be partly a product of Big Brother's formal brainwashing programmes,[2] the novel explicitly shows people learning doublethink and newspeak due to peer pressure and a desire to 'fit in', or gain status within the Party — to be seen as a loyal Party Member."[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink]

The above could be an example of how the cognitive re-definition and/or the Doublethink process worked on Muller.

Cardinal Muller had cognitive dissonance, according to those who know him at the CDF, about Amoris Laetitia teachings which contradicted with Church doctrine.

But, now it appears that he is "completely unaware of a conflict or contradiction" between Amoris Laetitia and the 2,000 year old doctrines of the Church.

To Muller's credit in the face of the tremendous peer pressure, until now, was saying couples in adulterous sexual sinful behavior are not allowed to receive Communion despite his cognitive dissonance between Amoris Laetitia and Church teachings.

Sadly, Muller is no longer in cognitive dissonance, but his new position is total confusion.

As stated before, he appears to be saying one can self annul a first marriage if one has subjective belief that the first marriage was never a "valid marital bond" and have sex in the "second marriage" which is not a valid marriage.

If Muller's confused argument was true then the couple would be committing fornication.

In reality, what Muller is saying is that those in adulterous relationships can be sexually active if their subjective conscience doubts.

Sadly, how many millions of Catholics are having cognitive dissonance and are beginning to deny that adulterous sinful behaviors are mortally sinful because of Francis, his inner circle, the many fearful bishops and now Muller?

How many are in danger of hell because of their gaslighting?

Francis and his inner circle are responsible for all the souls in danger of hell because of their teachings.

The Dubia Cardinals are, also, responsible for those souls if they don't do all in their power to rebuke and correct those false teachings.

The Dubia Cardinals need to issue the correction for the sake of those millions of Catholics who are in danger of losing their souls to hell and also for their own souls.

They need to remember that Dante said:

"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

Pray and do penance so the Dubia Cardinals will issue the correction. Say one Our Father for that intention right now.