Skip to main content

Weinandy Sounds like he is giving a Valedictorian Speech upon Graduating from the Francis Re-Education Camp

Fr. Thomas Weinandy sounds like he is giving a Valedictorian speech upon graduating from the Francis re-education camp. What he stood for before, and what he is saying now, appear to be two different things.

 In 2018, The Way of Improvement website wrote that Fr. Weinandy accused Francis of the "risk... [of] sinning against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth”:

 "Last year, in a letter to the pope from the former head of the doctrine office at the U.S. bishops’ conference in Washington, Fr. Thomas Weinandy accused "the pope [Francis] of 'demeaning' the importance of doctrine, appointing bishops who 'scandalize' the faithful, and creating 'chronic confusion' in his teachings. 'To teach with such an intentional lack of clarity, inevitably risks sinning against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth.' [https://thewayofimprovement.com/2018/09/12/politics-in-the-catholic-church/] 

Now, it appears that Weinandy has went over to Francis's side in "risk[ing]...sinning against the Holy Spirit" and is now attacking Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano: 

"I very much appreciate Archbishop ViganĂ² taking the time to respond to my article that appeared in Inside the Vatican on July 27, 2020. However, I found his response, posted on August 10th at Inside the Vatican, disappointing taking the time to respond to my article that appeared in Inside the Vatican on July 27, 2020. However, I found his response, posted on August 10th at Inside the Vatican, disappointing... "

 "... Vatican II is not, to use the archbishop’s term, a “container-council” into which false doctrine was poured. What counts is what the Council taught, though one has to take into account, as the Council itself did, of the magisterial authority of each of it documents. As Dogmatic Constitutions, Lumen Gentium and Dei Verbum have much greater magisterial authority than those documents that are titled Decrees and Declarations. Even worse, because the archbishop sees Vatican II as a “container-council” into which heretical elements were smuggled, he designates it “a devil council.” If such was and still is the case, then we would have to admit that Ecumenical Councils do not necessarily teach reliably the faith handed down from the apostles, even where a council, including Vatican II, intends to state definitive doctrine."

"Such a position smacks of being the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit. One has essentially placed one’s own judgement over that of the Council." [https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/08/13/a-response-to-archbishop-viganos-letter-about-vatican-ii/] 

Did Francis and his inner circle applying a type of gaslighting psychological abuse on Weinandy?

Gaslighting is a popular word for cognitive re-definintion "management" manipulation.

This type of manipulation can be summed up as persons being pressured, usually by fear of losing their job, position or standing in an organization, into changing their deepest beliefs.

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.

Remember Cardinal Gerhard 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 next big statement that year that those in adulterous second marriages can be sexually active if they have subjective "doubt as to the validity of the 'first' marriage, He writes:

'... In the case... a Christian is convinced in conscience that their first bond... was not valid... public-objective status of the 'second' marriage and subjective guilt can open... Holy Communion.'" (romalocutaest.com, "Cardinal Muller, the Dubia and the Formal Correction," October 31, 2017, by Steven O'Reilly)

The bewilderment or confusion just got greater as Muller appears to say it is possible for everyone to self annul if their conscience subjectively doubts the validity of the "first" marriage and be sexually active.

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

Francis and his inner circle appear to be using cognitive re-definition "management" manipulation, which management expert Richard Ofshe labeled "thought reform," on persons who disagrees with their cognitive re-definition of Church doctrine in Amoris Laetitia and the Argentina letter.

Below is Jesus Christ's teaching on divorce and adultery, next is 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 they are not in mortal sin "if they can't change their sinful behavior," don't know it is wrong and 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)

Popes 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/]

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

"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 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 gender ideology leftists 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 one doesn't have by grace the power to overcome sin then the cross of Christ is emptied of its power.

Francis and his inner circle who 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 never that Jesus had 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 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.

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.

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, Muller and now Weinandy?

Is Weinandy the latest victim of gaslighting?

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of the Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Comments

Justina said…
In a recent tweet, Bishop Barron asks what is to be done about the surge of Catholics questioning certain objectively dubious aspects of the Second Vatican Council and its implementation. Significantly, His Excellency does not inquire into the truth or falsehood of such concerns, appealing instead to the ecclesial legitimacy of the process (it was convened by the successor of Peter, etc.). In this way Bishop Barron represents the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church as merely "The Party," beholden not to Jesus Christ but to its own internal consensus. The fact remains that the successor of Peter, like Peter himself, holds the keys to a Kingdom which is not his own. Popes and councils cannot alter Revelation or reality itself, and it constitutes attempted thought control to accuse of "disloyalty" those with the temerity to point out such distinctions. Combine with this tweet Bishop Barron's recent meeting about how to quell online dissent from the Barron Cult of Personality, and it sure sounds like Word on Fire is about ready to torch Catholic traditionalism wherever it rears its ugly head. If the likes of Father Weinandy can succumb, why not go after the lesser mortals, too? Let the gaslighting begin!
Fr. VF said…
The Ape Church and its hierarchy hang their hats on process and COSMETICS. A man dresses up in white and comes out on the balcony, so he is "pope." They NEVER engage with the DATA. I.e., the plainly illicit scheming of the St. Gallen Mafia, or the WORDS of Benedict's "resignation," or the fact that he wears white, gives out "Apostolic Blessings," etc. Or the fact that Bergoglio has RENOUNCED every "historic title" of his "office" other than "Bishop of Rome."

They are making the same kind of jejune defenses of "the Council." Nobody denies that a bunch of bishops met in Rome, called together by "the Vicar of Christ," but the Ape Church defenders just pound and pound those few undeniable facts. They NEVER engage with the WORDS of the documents or the fifty-five years of complete collapse that followed. "EVERY council has been followed by a century of total collapse of the Church" is what they would have us believe.
Paul Jackson said…
As Louis Verrechio helpfully pointed out, this text appears in the Appendix to Lumen Gentium:

"Taking conciliar custom into consideration and also the pastoral purpose of the present Council, the sacred Council defines as binding on the Church only those things in matters of faith and morals which it shall openly declare to be binding. The rest of the things which the sacred Council sets forth, inasmuch as they are the teaching of the Church's supreme magisterium, ought to be accepted and embraced by each and every one of Christ's faithful according to the mind of the sacred Council. The mind of the Council becomes known either from the matter treated or from its manner of speaking, in accordance with the norms of theological interpretation."

Nowhere in the rest of the document, nor anywhere else that he could find among the sixteen Vatican II texts, was there any mention of anything that was "binding on the Church".

Of course, the next two sentences are about as clear as mud and appear to require faithful Catholics to be mind readers!
Paul Jackson said…
Correction to my post above, the source of the observation is Louis Verrecchio, which I misspelt the first time.
Ana Milan said…
“We are witnessing the disintegration of the Church’s Catholicity” @ncregister.com, 23rd, February 2018, reported by Edward Pentin.

It is a statement with which I concur – in fact, since it was made it would seem that the only factor identifying the OHCA Church of Christ is its claim to Apostolic succession which is being chiseled away by dark forces since VII. We are told that this malfeasance was introduced in the 1930/40s by Bella Dodd (an agent of Stalin) to undermine the OHCA Church from within. When VII was called by PJXXIII (a known Mason) these men had already reached the upper realms of the CC & their mission was undeniably to change the entire structure of God’s Church on earth by eliminating every aspect of Divinity it upheld i.e. the Mass of Ages, the Sacred Eucharist, the Ten Commandments, changing Scripture to mean what they want it to mean, getting rid of our altar rails, confessionals, introducing lay readers & extraordinary ministers of HC etc. “I am convinced that the crisis in the Church that we are experiencing to-day is, to a large extent, due to the disintegration of the Liturgy.” PBXVI.

VII promulgated a False Ecumenism that manifested itself by dropping the command Christ gave the First Apostles via the Great Commission. This in turn led to the Assisi disaster of PJPII kissing the Koran & allowing false idols to be placed in Catholics Churches & venerated according to the rites of infidels. This was the forerunner of the Pachamama (Mother Earth) blessing & veneration within the Vatican at the Amazon Synod & the bowl of dirt placed on the altar during the closing Mass of that Synod. Following this public idolatry we had to witness the signing of the Abu Dhabi Declaration stating that God desires all religions, thereby putting the OHCA Church of Christ on the same footing as schismatics & infidels. With the additional abomination of handing over 7M Chinese Catholics to the CCP in exchange for a reported $3B per annum without any sign of outrage from our silent prelature, it would seem Marxism fueled by Freemasonry & Sodomy, has won the day – for now.

As an average Catholic pew-sitter I should like to ask Fr. Weinandy why can it now be possible to have a bifurcated papacy when Christ gave this position to St. Peter & his successors – not to the other Apostles & theirs? Does he not uphold Canon Law relating to both papal resignations & papal elections & does he believe that electioneering is permissible to garner votes for a particular candidate rather than prayer & the invocation of the Holy Ghost?




Popular posts from this blog

OPEN LETTER TO TAYLOR MARSHALL

Dr. Marshall, for many of us (myself included), your podcasts have been a source of enlightenment, entertainment, and—quite frankly—hope, during this very dark time in the history of the Church.  As someone who studied his way into the Catholic Faith, having the grace and the integrity to acknowledge the necessity of conversion from the Protestant sect to which you formerly belonged, you have not been content to rest on your laurels but have “put yourself out there,” launching the New Saint Thomas Institute and discussing current events sub luce aeternitatis.  Your willingness to deal with things the way they are, and not the way they would be if we were all painted on holy cards already, is refreshing and appreciated.
Accordingly, I am writing to you today in regard to your recent statements about being “open” to the idea that Jorge Bergoglio is not actually the pope.  For a person in your position, so much as admitting that possibility must require all the grace and integrity you h…

High-profile Lawyer Barnes: Amy Coney Barrett would be a Disaster

High-profile trial lawyer Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that Amy Coney Barrett would be a disaster.
The Barnes Twitter report shows that Coney Barrett has "sid[ed] with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations... [and] exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps... [and] hid behind precedent... to prohibit pro-life activists from exercising their free speech."The Avvo.com lawyer directory reports that attorney "Robert Barnes embraces the challenge to defend the little guy and stand up for what is right. This is why he left the prestigious Yale Law School, whom publicly stated their unwillingne…

Sex-abuse Worldview Vs. Christian Worldview

By Fred Martinez

Professor Allan Bloom, a philosopher who wrote "The Closing of the American Mind," thought that Friedrich Nietzsche was the father of modern America. He said, "Words such as 'charisma,' 'lifestyle,' 'commitment,' 'identity,' and many others, all of which can easily be traced to Nietzsche ... are now practically American slang."

But the most important Nietzschean slang word is "values."

"Values" are the death of Christian morality because values simply mean opinions. If opinion is how things are decided, then might makes right.

One must remember that whenever someone talks about values in modern America – family values or religious values or place-the-blank-in-front-of values – they are saying there is no real or objective right or wrong – only opinions of the self and its will to power.

Nietzsche's philosophy is summed up by Bloom as

Commitment values the values and makes them valuable. Not love…