Pope Francis (left), with Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State in a 2020 photo. (Credit: Daniel Ibanez/CNA)
Vatican City, Jan 13, 2024 / 10:15 am (CNA).
Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican’s Secretary of State, has commented on the divided reaction to the Fiducia Supplicans document, amid a great backlash from episcopal conferences.
“This document has aroused very strong reactions; this means that a very delicate, very sensitive point has been touched; it will take further investigation,” Cardinal Parolin said on Friday, Jan. 12 during a conference held at the Accademia dei Lincei in Rome.
The cardinal went on to say that “if these ferments serve to walk according to the Gospel to give answers to today, these ferments are also welcome,” while reiterating that “the Church is open and attentive to the signs of the times but must be faithful to the Gospel.”
When asked in a follow-up question by an Italian journalist if the document was a mistake, the Vatican’s top diplomat responded curtly: “I do not enter into these considerations; the reactions tell us that it has touched a very sensitive point.”
The Dicastery for the Doctrine of Faith’s Dec. 18 document has made it permissible for priests to offer extra-liturgical blessings for couples in “irregular” situations, including gay couples, noting “that it offers a specific and innovative contribution to the pastoral meaning of blessings, permitting a broadening and enrichment of the classical understanding of blessings.”
“What has been said in this Declaration regarding the blessings of same-sex couples is sufficient to guide the prudent and fatherly discernment of ordained ministers in this regard. Thus, beyond the guidance provided above, no further responses should be expected about possible ways to regulate details or practicalities regarding blessings of this type,” Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, head of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), wrote in Fiducia Supplicans.
However, following widespread backlash from episcopal conferences in Africa and Eastern Europe, and strong denouncements from some of the Church’s senior prelates, Fernández issued a five-page press release on Jan. 4 to provide clarification on the document, writing that its application will depend “on local contexts and the discernment of each diocesan bishop with his diocese.”
“In some places, no difficulties arise for their immediate application, while in others it will be necessary not to introduce them, while taking the time necessary for reading and interpretation,” Fernández continued in the letter.
One of the strongest statements to date came from Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo Besungu, Archbishop of Kinshasa and President of the Symposium of the Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM).
In his Jan. 11 letter, Besungu stressed that the African bishops “have strongly reaffirmed their communion with Pope Francis,” but noted that Fiducia Supplicans caused “a shockwave” and has “sown misconceptions and unrest in the minds of many lay faithful, consecrated persons, and even pastors, and has aroused strong reactions.”
In his address to the clergy of Rome on Jan. 13, the pope provided clarifying remarks on the document, stating that “the provision on the blessings of gay couples concerns people, not organizations. If the LGBT association comes, no, but always people. We bless people, not sin.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Pope Benedict XVI arrives in St. Peter’s Square in the Vatican for the Oct. 21, 2012, canonization ceremony for Jacques Berthieu, Pedro Calungsod, Giovanni Battista Piamarta, Maria Carmen Salles y Barangueras, Marianne Cope, Caterina (Kateri) Tekakwitha, and Anna Schaffer. / Photo by Franco Origlia/Getty Images
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jan 2, 2023 / 14:00 pm (CNA).
During his pontificate, Pope Benedict XVI beatified 870 people and canonized a total of 45 saints. Though his papacy was relatively short, spanning from 2005 to 2013, the 45 people whom he declared saints are models of faith and holiness, celebrated by Catholics all over the world.
Here are seven of the best-known saints Pope Benedict XVI canonized:
St. Kateri Tekakwitha
St. Kateri Tekakwitha, or “Lily of the Mohawks,” was the first Native American saint to be canonized. Born in what is today New York state, she was the daughter of a Mohawk father and a Christian Algonquin mother. She was baptized at age 21 and fled persecution to St. Francis Xavier Mission near Montreal, Canada, joining a community of Native American women who had also converted to Christianity. She is remembered for her suffering, devout faith, courage, and her purity. St. Kateri died on April 17, 1680, at age 24.
Statue of St. Kateri Tekakwitha with lily. Shutterstock
She was canonized by Benedict XVI on Oct. 21, 2012. He said: “Kateri impresses us by the action of grace in her life despite the absence of external help and by the courage of her vocation, so unusual in her culture. In her, faith and culture enrich each other! May her example help us to live where we are, loving Jesus without denying who we are.”
St. Hildegard of Bingen
St. Hildegard of Bingen was an abbess, artist, author, composer, mystic, pharmacist, poet, preacher, and theologian from Germany. Born in 1098, in her late teens she became a Benedictine nun at the Monastery of Saint Disibodenberg. From the age of 3, she experienced visions of God and was asked by her confessor to write them down in what became the influential illustrated book “Scivias.”She founded two monasteries and was a prolific writer of poetry, theology, and sacred music. She died on Sept. 17, 1179.
A sculpture of Hildegard of Bingen by Karlheinz Oswald at Eibingen Abbey in Hesse, Germany. . Gerda Arendt (CC BY-SA 3.0).
St. Hildegard was canonized on May 10, 2012, and declared a Doctor of the Church by Benedict XVI on Oct. 7, 2012. He said: “In Hildegard are expressed the most noble values of womanhood: hence the presence of women in the Church and in society is also illumined by her presence, both from the perspective of scientific research and that of pastoral activity.”
St. Damien of Molokai
The bronze cast of Marisol Escobar’s ‘Father Damien’ in the National Statuary Hall (detail). public domain.
Joseph de Veuster, later to become St. Damien of Molokai, was born in 1840 in rural Belgium. At the age of 13, he was forced to leave school to work on a farm but later decided to pursue a religious vocation with the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary. As a priest, he served victims of leprosy quarantined on the Hawaiian island of Molokai. He eventually contracted the disease, losing his eyesight, speech, and mobility. St. Damien died of leprosy on April 15, 1889. Benedict XVI said of St. Damien, whom he canonized on Oct. 11, 2009: “Following in St. Paul’s footsteps, St. Damien prompts us to choose the good warfare, not the kind that brings division, but the kind that gathers people together. He invites us to open our eyes to the forms of leprosy that disfigure the humanity of our brethren and still today call for the charity of our presence as servants, beyond that of our generosity.”
St. Marianne Cope
St. Marianne Cope was born in Germany in 1838 and entered religious life with the Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis in Syracuse, New York, in 1862. Mother Marianne served as an educator and opened two of central New York’s first hospitals. She was sent to Kalaupapa on the island of Molokai in Hawaii at age 45 to care for leprosy patients and established an education and health care system for them in the years she was there.
Painting of nun Saint Marianne Cope and images with lepers and her team on Molokai Island at Mary, Star of the Sea, Catholic Church, Kalapana, Hawaii. Claudine Van Massenhove / Shutterstock
Benedict XVI canonized St. Marianne Cope on Oct. 21, 2012. Of her legacy, he said: “At a time when little could be done for those suffering from this terrible disease, Marianne Cope showed the highest love, courage, and enthusiasm. She is a shining and energetic example of the best of the tradition of Catholic nursing sisters and of the spirit of her beloved St. Francis.”
St. Jeanne Jugan
St. Jeanne Jugan was born on Oct. 25, 1792, during the French Revolution. At age 25, she joined the Third Order of St. John Eudes, a religious association for laypersons. After some time serving as a nurse caring for elderly women, she acquired an unused convent building that would hold 40 people and established the Little Sisters of the Poor. At the time of her death on Aug. 29, 1879, 2,400 members were serving internationally.
Portrait of St. Jeanne Jugan (1792–1879), foundress of the Little Sisters of the Poor, by Léon Brune 1855. Public domain
At St. Jeanne Jugan’s canonization on Oct. 11, 2009, Benedict said: “Jeanne lived the mystery of love, peacefully accepting obscurity and self-emptying until her death. Her charism is ever timely while so many elderly people are suffering from numerous forms of poverty and solitude and are sometimes also abandoned by their families.”
St. Pedro Calungsod
St. Pedro Calungsod was born in 1654 in the Philippines. In 1668, at the age of 14, he was among the young catechists chosen to accompany Spanish Jesuit missionaries — among them Blessed Diego Luis de San Vitores — to the Marianas Islands to spread the Catholic faith. St. Pedro was responsible for converting many people, especially through the sacrament of baptism. On April 2, 1672, he was killed, along with San Vitores, while they were conducting a baptism. He is now recognized as a martyr.
Pope Francis and Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle before a mosaic of catechist St. Pedro Calungsod in St. Peter’s Basilica on Nov. 21, 2013. Credit: Kerri Lenartowick/CNA.
He was canonized on Oct. 21, 2012. Of St. Pedro’s hardships, while visiting the Marianas Islands, Benedict said: “Pedro, however, displayed deep faith and charity and continued to catechize his many converts, giving witness to Christ by a life of purity and dedication to the Gospel. Uppermost was his desire to win souls for Christ, and this made him resolute in accepting martyrdom.”
St. Alphonsa
St. Alphonsa was born in Kerala, India, on Aug. 19, 1910. As a young woman, she rejected all suitors who came her way, as she was determined to enter religious life. In 1923, she suffered an accident that left her burned, disabled, and partially disfigured. She joined the Franciscan Clarist Congregation, and until her death suffered from physical ailments and problems associated with her disability. In her love for God, she embraced her sufferings until her death on July 28, 1946.
1996 stamp of India with photo of St. Alphonsa. India Post, Government of India via Wikimedia Commons
St. Alphonsa was canonized by Benedict XVI on Oct. 12, 2008. She is the first Indian woman to become a saint. In a Vatican statement released on the day of her canonization, she is described as “a victim for the love of the Lord, happy until the final moment and with a smile of innocence always on her lips.”
Pope Francis at the Angelus Nov. 27, 2022. / Vatican Media.
Vatican City, Nov 27, 2022 / 07:20 am (CNA).
It is good to remember that God is present to us even in the small, everyday events of our lives, Pope Francis said on the first Sunday of … […]
Manchester, United Kingdom, May 23, 2017 / 04:16 am (CNA/EWTN News).- After what has been deemed a terrorist attack killed 22 people – mostly youth – at a theater in Manchester Monday night, local Bishop John Arnold condemned the act, saying there is no justification for such violence.
“The citizens of Manchester and members of the Catholic community are united in condemning the attack on the crowds at the Arena. Such an attack can have no justification,” Bishop Arnold said in a May 23 statement via the diocese’s Twitter account.
In a series of tweets, he thanked the emergency services “for their prompt and speedy response which saved lives. We join in prayer for all those who have died and for the injured and their families and all affected by this tragedy.”
The bishop stressed that “we must all commit to working together, to help the victims and their families and to build and strengthen our community solidarity.”
Bishop Arnold, who oversees the Salford diocese that includes Manchester, made his statement in response to an attack which took place at Manchester Arena Monday night at the end of a concert by popular American pop artist Ariana Grande, who is popular among teens.
A bomb exploded in the foyer of the arena May 22 around 10:30p.m. local time, as concert goers were beginning to leave. At least 22 are dead, including children, and almost 60 are injured, according to reports.
The lone attacker was also killed in the blast. He is believed to have been carrying an improvised explosive device, which he detonated to cause the explosion, according to Manchester Police Chief Constable Ian Hopkins.
Investigations have not yet revealed whether the attacker was working alone or if he was part of a larger network or terrorist group.
Cardinal Vincent Nichols, head of the Archdiocese of Westminster in London, sent a letter to Bishop Arnold May 23 expressing his condolences for the attack.
“It was with great sorrow that I heard the media reports of last night’s atrocity, in Manchester,” he said. “May God welcome into His merciful presence all who have died. May God turn the hearts of all who commit evil to a true understanding of His desire and intention for humanity.”
“I assure you, and all those you serve, of the prayers and condolences of your brother bishops in England and Wales,” he said, adding that “We, too, mourn this loss of life. We pray for the eternal repose of all who have died.”
The Diocese of Salford announced that Bishop Arnold would say a special Mass for the victims May 23 at 12:30p.m. at St. Mary’s Church, commonly called the “Hidden Gem,” and which is the Catholic Mother Church of Greater Manchester. Another Mass will be held at the Salford cathedral at 7p.m. local time.
In a May 23 statement immediately following a meeting of the government’s emergency meeting, Cobra, UK Prime Minister Theresa May called the bombing “a callous terrorist attack” that targeted “some of the youngest people in our society with cold calculation.”
“Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and the families and friends of all those affected,” she said, noting that the attack is “among the worst terrorist incidents we have ever experienced in the United Kingdom.”
“All acts of terrorism are cowardly attacks on innocent people,” May continued, but said the arena attack stands out “for its appalling, sickening cowardice, deliberately targeting innocent, defenseless children and young people who should have been enjoying one of the most memorable nights of their lives.”
Although he’s traveling abroad, U.S. President Donald Trump said during a joint appearance with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas Tuesday, that the “wicked ideology” of terrorism “must be obliterated.”
“I extend my deepest condolences to those so terribly injured in this terrorist attack, and to the many killed and the families, so many families, of the victims.”
“So many young, beautiful, innocent people living and enjoying their lives, murdered by evil losers in life,” he added. “I won’t call them monsters, because they would like that term, they would think that’s a great name. I will call them, from now on, losers, because that’s what they are.”
The attack is the worst Britain has seen since a bombing on the London transport network on July 7, 2005 killed 52 people.
When Bergoglio opens his mouth, confusion pours out. It seems beyond him to speak clearly, concisely, and with power what is and what is not sin. More importantly, when he gets wand up in this side issues, the centrality of Jesus Christ crucified and resurrected is lost; he is excluded from the conversation. I view that as the first sign that when Christ is flagrantly ignored, then evil is afoot.
Saints protect us and may the will of God be done.
The name is not Bergoglio, it’s Pope Francis. You violate the fundamental truth, respect and devotion that is owed to him and his office. Just because we are not used to the ways of this pontificate, that does not mean his is wrong. Nor does it mean that he ceases to be Christ’s vicar and one moved by the Spirit of God. Please pray to Mary for insight into Pope Francis. I truly believe that Pope Francis will be vindicated in the years to come.
Please. His blatant heresies, which are numerous, are not simply idiosyncratic “ways of his pontificate”. And the support he has given for crimes against humanity entitle any observer to disrespect him as a man no matter what his status or title he holds inside or outside the Church.
Given the strongly encouraging trend that the priesthood is becoming more “conservative”, i.e., orthodox with each incoming generation, it is quite likely that someday Bergoglioism will be defined as a heresy and anathemized by either a future Supreme Pontiff or Ecumenical Council. Pope Francis is our first bad pope in something like two centuries so it’s really hard for ultramontanists to recognize the evidence. Of course, he is very machiavellian, so that helps him hide the hypocrisy behind a pastoral facade.
Pictured. El Hombre Jorge in his former cantina bouncer mode [prior to the ferments] exhorting a wainful Card Parolin. Now the cardinal perceives these ferments [useful deprecation for outrages] as deserving attention. Even the previously thought progressive African Card Ambongo issues a sharply worded rebuke.
What next? Who would have thought at the Vatican war room that for a change ballistic missiles would be incoming. Dare there be papal investigations like at Tyler and oustings. Likely not. Too messy. Expect lots of platitudes, thoughtful observations.
Africans en masse, handfuls of Europeans and Americans, armfuls of S Americans and Asians are prepared for battle, commander Ambongo holding high the dreadful banner “We bless people, not sin”.
However we may agree that FS is a well crafted document completely in line with tradition, as Fr Robert Gahl assoc Prof Ethics at the Pontifical U of the Holy Cross in Rome would argue, it nevertheless is read by the majority world audience that Fiducia is an approbation of homosexual relationships [as Fr Gahl also agrees]. Why, if so well crafted? Aquinas correctly held as a major premise that it’s the act that determines its morality not the intent per se. People generally perceive the act as determinative, in this instance the act of blessing as affirmative of homosexuality, whether as a double blind, as explained below by Anna, for good or for evil.
Father, with all do respect, paragraph 25 that insults the a pastoral approach informed by the application of doctrine as necessarily the product of elitist narcissism is in line with tradition?
Edward, I’m quoting Fr Gahl on his assessment of FS, not my approval. FS is filled with double meaning, or what psychology terms as double blind comments. “Thus, when people ask for a blessing, an exhaustive moral analysis should not be placed as a precondition for conferring it” (FS 25).
This can be interpreted as either making little of no precondition or going too far in examining the request. So if the texts are read positively as Fr Gahl implies, it would be considered acceptable. I would not because of the seeming purposeful double blind wording. But hasn’t that been a modus operandi of this pontificate?
That so many clergy, priests and bishops are interpreting the texts as a green light to bless unrepentant deviants is consistent with the early interpretations of Amoris Laetitia, which virtually all bishops and cardinals inclusive of conservatives believed the texts including ch 8 were theologically orthodox. It wasn’t until opposite, well thought out opinions appeared that the same approving prelates reread the texts more intelligently and came to opposite conclusions regarding their previous assessment. Nevertheless, even if the wording was perfectly clear and orthodox the act itself of blessing would be interpreted as an endorsement of homosexual relationships.
Edward. The double blind is seen in the previous sentence of FS 25, “instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying”, which suggests the priest forgo interrogation and simply offer a needed blessing. Although if I confer the blessing for that need I’m also blessing a homosexual relationship. Now it must also be understood Edward that there is no canon law requirement that I should interrogate any and all who ask for a blessing. I do not ask, Are you homosexuals?, or are you adulterers?, and so forth. I don’t do impromptu inquisitions. I examine persons when appropriate in the process of reconciliation. If I were to enquire, the persons would have to be known, or give indication of irregular behavior. Not a facile task and certainly a delicate one.
Correction: I meant a double bind, not blind. A double bind in psychology is a dilemma in communication in which an individual or group receives two or more reciprocally conflicting messages. For example, the proposition in FS that we may bless a couple as persons rather than their homosexual behavior, actually contains two conflicting messages. 1. That you may bless two persons only. 2. That in doing 1, you also bless two homosexuals living together.
A double blind in psychology is when neither the examiner nor the two participants are aware of who is being tested.
Among other questionable items, Cardinal Fernandez published an account of his erotic conversation with a 16 year old girl. It’s going to be difficult for the DDF to operate under the leadership of a man who needs to be investigated as a child predator.
““This document has aroused very strong reactions; this means that a very delicate, very sensitive point has been touched; it will take further investigation,” Cardinal Parolin said on Friday, Jan. 12 during a conference held at the Accademia dei Lincei in Rome.”
This is a fine example of the real evil that feeds the current situation and has been feeding other similar situations. Blessing homosexual couples (unions, whatever) came as a result of the use of murky and deceitful language when speaking of God’s matters.
What we have here: cardinal Parolin states that the reason for “very strong reactions” to ‘FS’ is that it “touched a very sensitive point”. No, it is not the real reason. The real reason “for very strong reactions” is that ‘FS’ is heretical, contrary to our faith and God’s design. People react strongly not because they are “homophobes” or “latent homosexuals” or “sensitive” but because they know the apostolic teaching on the particular matter which ‘FS’ violates. A heresy coming from Vatican is shocking indeed. Could anyone imagine apostle Paul blessing “a homosexual couple”? – If not then it is the end of the story and a heresy must be called plainly “a heresy”.
However, it appears to be difficult to do so for many because the document in question is so well crafted. ‘FS’ sets a double bind: we bless a couple but without approving their activity together. “A double bind” in psychology is a term for two contradictory messages given simultaneously, one cancels another so a mind is trapped (a double mind is believed to be responsible for some mental disorders). “They bless a homosexual couple” – “they do not approve it” sounds like madness so those who are pro- such blessings embrace the first part while those who are against them are supposed to embrace the second part – and some manage to embrace both, including some priests. The solution here is to ask “if the Church already blessed homosexual persons before why do we need a new document?” The response is usually “but not a couple” and then a person gives a blind stare; there is hope for them waking up and seeing for what purpose ‘FS’ was written. Or not.
I was told by a good Roman Catholic priest that to become holy means “to become a whole person”, in Christ. Clearly the force which is growing within the Church now is the vector opposite to becoming a whole person or whole Church but towards the disintegration of the persons making a disintegrated anti-church, with its peculiar documents, language and so on.
“This document has aroused very strong reactions; this means that a very delicate, very sensitive point has been touched; it will take further investigation.”
“Sensitive point”? “Investigation”? But wait, we did both steps . . . we spoke unilaterally and now are counting “one, two, three”!
About the universal scourge of siloed BUREAUCRACY, and worse, might we suppose that the Vatican might convene at least a few cardinals in the same room at the same time and with the same and living Magisterium in mind? Beginning to “listen” with both ears?
Sometimes and over the long term, the Holy Spirit “writes straight [double entendre intended] with crooked lines.” Might the next conclave even elect an African as the next pope? These are Apostolic times, and the 5th-century St. Augustine was a Berber from North Africa.
The pope says “We bless people,not sin.” Really? It sure doesn’t look like that to the rest of the world. It is one thing to bless an individual, separate and apart from others. It is quite another thing to bless couples, two people together at once, who deliberately embrace and celebrate a sinful lifestyle.
The “bless people, not sin” phrase fails. The couple heading for an abortion want a blessing before the premeditated murder. The two teens want a blessing before committing sodomy. The mafia hit-couple want a blessing before the kill. The boss and secretary want a blessing before committing adultery. In each case, the priest has been asked for the blessing and it is self-evident that the couple are going to do the sin. Yet, the Pope is saying, “bless the people, not the sin” … and keep it under 15 seconds!
Theater of Pontiff Francis: the Secretary of State, played by Eminence Parolin, takes the stage to “groom” the faithful with “diplo-prop.”
Perhaps a “secret accord” confected by the “ever-so-faithful-Secretariat-of-State-bureaucracy” can satisfy this “delicate” situation.
Yes, Yes says “the-monarch-Pontiff” Francis: “a man of delicacy” is “our man” for “this our moment.”
Here is a “non-diplomatic dispatch,” from a “a non-delicate” apostle, who died for the Gospel, rather than “hand-it-over” to the empire: “Woe to you if you do not preach the Gospel…. If for this life only you have hoped in Christ, you are of all men most to be pitied.”
And the last word to “The Pontiff Francis Players” is from The Man Crucified by the empire: “You cannot serve both God and Mammon.”
Good explanation of “double bind.” It perfectly explains Fiducia Supplicans and every statement and document that has come from this confused papacy: a papacy—which by now should be evident– is intentionally contradicting 2,000 years of Christ’s revealed truth and scandalizing the world! But they try to cover their rear ends and hoodwink the faithful with double-speak, nonsensical documents like Fiducia Supplicans.
Parolin has a convincing grasp of the obvious. Christs Catholic Church is being “governed” by complete idiots. And we’re being played for fools by agents of Satan. God, please help us.
“This document has aroused very strong reactions; this means that a very delicate, very sensitive point has been touched; it will take further investigation” …
In 1966 the bishops removed the requirement to abstain from meat on Friday. However, there was a Part B: Catholics were highly encouraged to continue some form of penance on Friday. But what we heard was “Whoo-hoo, hamburgers on Friday!” When, if ever, did you hear a priest mention Part B? And at the moment Catholics/non-Catholics are hearing “Whoo-hoo, the Catholic Church approves of same sex relationships, and soon same sex couples will be able to get married in the Church.” And the corollary is “If the Church changed this teaching, then it can change anything.” Women priests, birth control, abortion, sex outside of marriage (well, that is now a given), euthanasia, pornography, etc. are now all on the table.
The point it touched is note other than the rejection of Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the perennial Magisterium by a reigning pontiff. Cardinal “China” has the temerity to sell Chinese Catholics into the hands of genocidal maniacs but he can’t challenge “the boss.”
We are led by faithless morons and cowards.
That is the truth, as we are counseled by the Secretary-of-Paradigm-Shift, that his “apparatus” is fostering a shift, which we can all now recognize is away from Jesus and his apostles, to a new paradigm, and “this their reset” requires diplomacy…to “pull it all off.”
Nausea! Eternally wrong if one believes two people pleasuring themselves physically is love. It’s selfish thrill. No bond. Many involved. Such would be the consequences of surruptitously giving the green light through tangential blessings. Am afraid the cat’s out of the bag now. Time will tell. Always does. Then it ends.
When Bergoglio opens his mouth, confusion pours out. It seems beyond him to speak clearly, concisely, and with power what is and what is not sin. More importantly, when he gets wand up in this side issues, the centrality of Jesus Christ crucified and resurrected is lost; he is excluded from the conversation. I view that as the first sign that when Christ is flagrantly ignored, then evil is afoot.
Saints protect us and may the will of God be done.
The name is not Bergoglio, it’s Pope Francis. You violate the fundamental truth, respect and devotion that is owed to him and his office. Just because we are not used to the ways of this pontificate, that does not mean his is wrong. Nor does it mean that he ceases to be Christ’s vicar and one moved by the Spirit of God. Please pray to Mary for insight into Pope Francis. I truly believe that Pope Francis will be vindicated in the years to come.
Please. His blatant heresies, which are numerous, are not simply idiosyncratic “ways of his pontificate”. And the support he has given for crimes against humanity entitle any observer to disrespect him as a man no matter what his status or title he holds inside or outside the Church.
Given the strongly encouraging trend that the priesthood is becoming more “conservative”, i.e., orthodox with each incoming generation, it is quite likely that someday Bergoglioism will be defined as a heresy and anathemized by either a future Supreme Pontiff or Ecumenical Council. Pope Francis is our first bad pope in something like two centuries so it’s really hard for ultramontanists to recognize the evidence. Of course, he is very machiavellian, so that helps him hide the hypocrisy behind a pastoral facade.
Patrice: We pray for Bergoglio whenever we attend Holy Mass.
Amen, sister, and Amen.
Pictured. El Hombre Jorge in his former cantina bouncer mode [prior to the ferments] exhorting a wainful Card Parolin. Now the cardinal perceives these ferments [useful deprecation for outrages] as deserving attention. Even the previously thought progressive African Card Ambongo issues a sharply worded rebuke.
What next? Who would have thought at the Vatican war room that for a change ballistic missiles would be incoming. Dare there be papal investigations like at Tyler and oustings. Likely not. Too messy. Expect lots of platitudes, thoughtful observations.
Africans en masse, handfuls of Europeans and Americans, armfuls of S Americans and Asians are prepared for battle, commander Ambongo holding high the dreadful banner “We bless people, not sin”.
However we may agree that FS is a well crafted document completely in line with tradition, as Fr Robert Gahl assoc Prof Ethics at the Pontifical U of the Holy Cross in Rome would argue, it nevertheless is read by the majority world audience that Fiducia is an approbation of homosexual relationships [as Fr Gahl also agrees]. Why, if so well crafted? Aquinas correctly held as a major premise that it’s the act that determines its morality not the intent per se. People generally perceive the act as determinative, in this instance the act of blessing as affirmative of homosexuality, whether as a double blind, as explained below by Anna, for good or for evil.
Father, with all do respect, paragraph 25 that insults the a pastoral approach informed by the application of doctrine as necessarily the product of elitist narcissism is in line with tradition?
Edward, I’m quoting Fr Gahl on his assessment of FS, not my approval. FS is filled with double meaning, or what psychology terms as double blind comments. “Thus, when people ask for a blessing, an exhaustive moral analysis should not be placed as a precondition for conferring it” (FS 25).
This can be interpreted as either making little of no precondition or going too far in examining the request. So if the texts are read positively as Fr Gahl implies, it would be considered acceptable. I would not because of the seeming purposeful double blind wording. But hasn’t that been a modus operandi of this pontificate?
That so many clergy, priests and bishops are interpreting the texts as a green light to bless unrepentant deviants is consistent with the early interpretations of Amoris Laetitia, which virtually all bishops and cardinals inclusive of conservatives believed the texts including ch 8 were theologically orthodox. It wasn’t until opposite, well thought out opinions appeared that the same approving prelates reread the texts more intelligently and came to opposite conclusions regarding their previous assessment. Nevertheless, even if the wording was perfectly clear and orthodox the act itself of blessing would be interpreted as an endorsement of homosexual relationships.
Edward. The double blind is seen in the previous sentence of FS 25, “instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying”, which suggests the priest forgo interrogation and simply offer a needed blessing. Although if I confer the blessing for that need I’m also blessing a homosexual relationship. Now it must also be understood Edward that there is no canon law requirement that I should interrogate any and all who ask for a blessing. I do not ask, Are you homosexuals?, or are you adulterers?, and so forth. I don’t do impromptu inquisitions. I examine persons when appropriate in the process of reconciliation. If I were to enquire, the persons would have to be known, or give indication of irregular behavior. Not a facile task and certainly a delicate one.
Correction: I meant a double bind, not blind. A double bind in psychology is a dilemma in communication in which an individual or group receives two or more reciprocally conflicting messages. For example, the proposition in FS that we may bless a couple as persons rather than their homosexual behavior, actually contains two conflicting messages. 1. That you may bless two persons only. 2. That in doing 1, you also bless two homosexuals living together.
A double blind in psychology is when neither the examiner nor the two participants are aware of who is being tested.
Among other questionable items, Cardinal Fernandez published an account of his erotic conversation with a 16 year old girl. It’s going to be difficult for the DDF to operate under the leadership of a man who needs to be investigated as a child predator.
Looks like Pope Francis is testing himself, not the sinners, to see how far he can fall?
““This document has aroused very strong reactions; this means that a very delicate, very sensitive point has been touched; it will take further investigation,” Cardinal Parolin said on Friday, Jan. 12 during a conference held at the Accademia dei Lincei in Rome.”
This is a fine example of the real evil that feeds the current situation and has been feeding other similar situations. Blessing homosexual couples (unions, whatever) came as a result of the use of murky and deceitful language when speaking of God’s matters.
What we have here: cardinal Parolin states that the reason for “very strong reactions” to ‘FS’ is that it “touched a very sensitive point”. No, it is not the real reason. The real reason “for very strong reactions” is that ‘FS’ is heretical, contrary to our faith and God’s design. People react strongly not because they are “homophobes” or “latent homosexuals” or “sensitive” but because they know the apostolic teaching on the particular matter which ‘FS’ violates. A heresy coming from Vatican is shocking indeed. Could anyone imagine apostle Paul blessing “a homosexual couple”? – If not then it is the end of the story and a heresy must be called plainly “a heresy”.
However, it appears to be difficult to do so for many because the document in question is so well crafted. ‘FS’ sets a double bind: we bless a couple but without approving their activity together. “A double bind” in psychology is a term for two contradictory messages given simultaneously, one cancels another so a mind is trapped (a double mind is believed to be responsible for some mental disorders). “They bless a homosexual couple” – “they do not approve it” sounds like madness so those who are pro- such blessings embrace the first part while those who are against them are supposed to embrace the second part – and some manage to embrace both, including some priests. The solution here is to ask “if the Church already blessed homosexual persons before why do we need a new document?” The response is usually “but not a couple” and then a person gives a blind stare; there is hope for them waking up and seeing for what purpose ‘FS’ was written. Or not.
I was told by a good Roman Catholic priest that to become holy means “to become a whole person”, in Christ. Clearly the force which is growing within the Church now is the vector opposite to becoming a whole person or whole Church but towards the disintegration of the persons making a disintegrated anti-church, with its peculiar documents, language and so on.
“This document has aroused very strong reactions; this means that a very delicate, very sensitive point has been touched; it will take further investigation.”
“Sensitive point”? “Investigation”? But wait, we did both steps . . . we spoke unilaterally and now are counting “one, two, three”!
Meanwhile, is (endangered?) Cardinal Fernandez either wising up or standing down? “I must say that I don’t think I will be in the news in the foreseeable future because in the dicastery we don’t foresee topics that could be very controversial, like the last ones.” The last line in: https://www.ncregister.com/news/vatican-s-doctrinal-office-preparing-very-important-document-on-human-dignity-cardinal-fernandez-says
About the universal scourge of siloed BUREAUCRACY, and worse, might we suppose that the Vatican might convene at least a few cardinals in the same room at the same time and with the same and living Magisterium in mind? Beginning to “listen” with both ears?
Such an “investigation” (visitation?) is very HEARTENING of course. And, hopefully even part of a trend, given the recent warning issued by the same Cardinal Parolin and Pope Francis to Germania (with mention of possible excommunication) to stand down on female ordinations or any Anglican-style perpetual synodalish thingy. https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2023/11/24/vatican-draws-line-on-womens-ordination-and-homosexuality-in-new-letter-to-german-bishops/
Sometimes and over the long term, the Holy Spirit “writes straight [double entendre intended] with crooked lines.” Might the next conclave even elect an African as the next pope? These are Apostolic times, and the 5th-century St. Augustine was a Berber from North Africa.
I believe we’ve had at least two African popes in the past and many African saints.
God bless Africa.
The pope says “We bless people,not sin.” Really? It sure doesn’t look like that to the rest of the world. It is one thing to bless an individual, separate and apart from others. It is quite another thing to bless couples, two people together at once, who deliberately embrace and celebrate a sinful lifestyle.
The “bless people, not sin” phrase fails. The couple heading for an abortion want a blessing before the premeditated murder. The two teens want a blessing before committing sodomy. The mafia hit-couple want a blessing before the kill. The boss and secretary want a blessing before committing adultery. In each case, the priest has been asked for the blessing and it is self-evident that the couple are going to do the sin. Yet, the Pope is saying, “bless the people, not the sin” … and keep it under 15 seconds!
Theater of Pontiff Francis: the Secretary of State, played by Eminence Parolin, takes the stage to “groom” the faithful with “diplo-prop.”
Perhaps a “secret accord” confected by the “ever-so-faithful-Secretariat-of-State-bureaucracy” can satisfy this “delicate” situation.
Yes, Yes says “the-monarch-Pontiff” Francis: “a man of delicacy” is “our man” for “this our moment.”
Here is a “non-diplomatic dispatch,” from a “a non-delicate” apostle, who died for the Gospel, rather than “hand-it-over” to the empire: “Woe to you if you do not preach the Gospel…. If for this life only you have hoped in Christ, you are of all men most to be pitied.”
And the last word to “The Pontiff Francis Players” is from The Man Crucified by the empire: “You cannot serve both God and Mammon.”
Good explanation of “double bind.” It perfectly explains Fiducia Supplicans and every statement and document that has come from this confused papacy: a papacy—which by now should be evident– is intentionally contradicting 2,000 years of Christ’s revealed truth and scandalizing the world! But they try to cover their rear ends and hoodwink the faithful with double-speak, nonsensical documents like Fiducia Supplicans.
Parolin has a convincing grasp of the obvious. Christs Catholic Church is being “governed” by complete idiots. And we’re being played for fools by agents of Satan. God, please help us.
“This document has aroused very strong reactions; this means that a very delicate, very sensitive point has been touched; it will take further investigation” …
It will take further revocation.
In 1966 the bishops removed the requirement to abstain from meat on Friday. However, there was a Part B: Catholics were highly encouraged to continue some form of penance on Friday. But what we heard was “Whoo-hoo, hamburgers on Friday!” When, if ever, did you hear a priest mention Part B? And at the moment Catholics/non-Catholics are hearing “Whoo-hoo, the Catholic Church approves of same sex relationships, and soon same sex couples will be able to get married in the Church.” And the corollary is “If the Church changed this teaching, then it can change anything.” Women priests, birth control, abortion, sex outside of marriage (well, that is now a given), euthanasia, pornography, etc. are now all on the table.
I think the teaching on birth control/contraception has already been de facto changed, and that is a large part of the reason we are where we are.
The point it touched is note other than the rejection of Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the perennial Magisterium by a reigning pontiff. Cardinal “China” has the temerity to sell Chinese Catholics into the hands of genocidal maniacs but he can’t challenge “the boss.”
We are led by faithless morons and cowards.
The problem is that Cardinal Parolin and his Vatican pals love having a “very sensitive point” touched.
That is the truth, as we are counseled by the Secretary-of-Paradigm-Shift, that his “apparatus” is fostering a shift, which we can all now recognize is away from Jesus and his apostles, to a new paradigm, and “this their reset” requires diplomacy…to “pull it all off.”
Nausea! Eternally wrong if one believes two people pleasuring themselves physically is love. It’s selfish thrill. No bond. Many involved. Such would be the consequences of surruptitously giving the green light through tangential blessings. Am afraid the cat’s out of the bag now. Time will tell. Always does. Then it ends.