Fatima, Portugal, Apr 20, 2017 / 06:00 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The niece of Blessed Franciso and Jacinta Marto has voiced excitement for the coming canonization of her relatives, sharing stories of the time of the Fatima apparitions and personal memories of what it was like growing up in a family that had saints among its members.
“My family, my grandparents, my parents, all of us always accepted it as a gift from God,” Jacinta Pereiro Marto told CNA in an interview.
“God chose my uncle and aunt because this is what he wanted, so much that my grandfather used to say that the Virgin wanted to come to Fatima and she chose his children, but that we didn’t deserve anything,” she said.
Because of this attitude instilled in the family by her grandfather – father to Blessed Francisco and Jacinta Marto – “we always lived very simply because God chose, and he chooses who he wants. We don’t deserve anything.”
Marto, 74, is the daughter of Joao Marto, the brother of Fatima visionaries Bl. Francisco and Jacinta, and she shares the exact same name as her saintly aunt.
Just two years older than Francisco, Joao was the closest in age to the two out of the many Marto siblings.
Bl. Francisco and Jacinta this year will become the youngest non-martyrs in the history of the Church to be canonized after witnessing apparitions of Mary, now commonly known as the Our Lady of Fatima, alongside their elder cousin Lucia dos Santos in 1917.
In her interview with CNA, Marto said that she had “the joy” of being born in the same family home as Francisco and Jacinta, and to grow up there, since her father Joao continued to live in the house with his elderly parents.
“They always instilled in me a great love for God and for the Virgin, a life of simplicity, of belief and of religiosity,” she said, speaking of her grandparents.
Their home remains the property of the family, but is now open for visitors and pilgrims to see where the visionaries grew up. Across the street, Marto runs a souvenir shop and a small museum-of-sorts containing original photos and artifacts belonging to the family, including shawls used by Jacinta, the rosary Francisco prayed with before dying, and the bed he passed away in.
Marto said that it is thanks to her grandmother Olimpia Marto, mother of Franciso and Jacinta, that she received the same name as her aunt. Olimpia had wanted a grandchild that shared the exact same name as her saintly daughter, and was told by Joao’s wife that the next girl they had would get the name.
So when Marto was born, her grandmother, who was also asked to be her godmother, chose to call her Jacinta.
“I feel very happy to be Jacinta,” Marto said, explaining that “I feel a very strong presence and a great protection from my uncle and aunt. I think that Jacinta and my uncle are protecting me.”
“I am no one, I sin like the whole world,” she said, “but I believe they are protecting me, I feel that they and Our Lady protect me.”
Recalling memories shared by her father, Marto said Joao had been present with Francisco and Jacinta at the apparition of Mary in Valinhos, which took place in August, “but he didn’t see anything.”
“It was only Francisco, Jacinta, Lucia and my father, but he said that even though he opened his eyes and looked, he saw nothing,” she said.
Around the time Mary was to appear, Jacinta wasn’t there at first, she said, explaining that when Lucia asked him to go find her, Joao “didn’t want to, because he wanted to see.” He eventually went to find Jacinta, and when she arrived Mary appeared, but even though he waited with them, Joao couldn’t see anything.
Two months later when the “miracle of the sun” took place Oct. 13, 1917, Marto said her father, who was only 11 at the time, stayed behind that day because rumors were spreading, likely from other children, that “if the miracle of the sun didn’t happen the whole family would die.”
In order to help the people believe in the authenticity of the apparitions, Lucia had asked Our Lady during the apparition of July 13, 1917, to perform a miracle so people would see that they were true.
However, on that occasion Mary responded by saying that should the children continue to come each month until October, the miracle would occur. So on Oct. 13, the last apparition of Mary to the children, 30-100,000 people gathered to witness the miracle.
News reports and witnesses from the time said the miracle took place when the formerly cloudy sky parted and the sun appeared as an opaque, spinning disk in the sky. Multicolored lights flashed across the landscape and those present before the sun then spun toward earth and then zig-zagged back to its normal position in the sky. Additionally, clothes and mud previously wet from the rain had dried.
But while many members of their family were present for the miracle, Marto said her father “stayed at home (because) he was afraid to die” if the miracle didn’t happen, as the rumors had stated.
At just 11 years old, Marto said her father didn’t understand everything that was going on, but that after Francisco and Jacinta died, “my father said that he cried a lot, a lot. Because he saw that everything they said was happening.”
Speaking of her grandparents, Marto said her grandfather Manuel, father of Francisco and Jacinta, didn’t initially understand some of what was happening either, but had always believed his children were telling the truth.
Jacinta was the first one to tell her parents about seeing Mary after coming home from the first apparition, Marto said, explaining that when people began to say the children had made everything up, her grandfather would respond saying: “My children are not liars. I taught them, so if they say they saw, I think they saw.”
After the first appearance Manuel accompanied his children to the following apparitions, and although he didn’t see anything, “he said that he heard a sound, like a bee inside a jar.”
He was also present for the miracle of the sun, Marto said, explaining that “if he believed before, he continued to believe” after.
Marto said that for her, this belief was extraordinary, because “my grandparents weren’t at the beatification, none of it. When their children died they were known, but not with the fame of sanctity.”
“So they thought their children were a little different from the others, but they didn’t know how it was going to be. It was a question every day,” she said, but noted that her grandfather in particular “always believed.”
Referring to news of the acceptance of a second miracle allowing for the canonization of her uncle and aunt, Marto said she feels “a big joy” knowing they will be proclaimed saints. The two will be canonized May 13, during Pope Francis’ two-day visit to Portugal.
However, she stressed that the news “is not only for the family, it’s for Portugal and the whole world. Because Our Lady came for the world, and they were a message for the world.”
“I sometimes ask myself how two children that were seven and nine years old managed to capture and respond to the message of God. They had a message and assumed this message,” she said, noting that Francisco was all about “praising God, adoring God, worshiping God.”
Jacinta, however, was primarily concerned with conversion, and wanted that “everyone return to God, that everyone convert, that everyone went to heaven.”
“She lived this in anguish,” Marto said, explaining that she often asked herself: “we who have all these means of communication, we know what is happening in the world, all the suffering in the world, we see it on television…and what do we do?”
At just 7-years-old Jacinta had visions of wars, famines and persecutions, and as a result she “assumed the responsibility” of offering and making sacrifices so that everyone could be saved.
“And us? What are we doing?” she said, stressing that with television and social media it’s not necessary to have a vision of the suffering and tragedy in the world, but “we are part of this humanity and we are a bit responsible for everyone. Sometimes we don’t think well about this.”
Marto said that for her, she believes the core of the Our Lady of Fatima’s message is that she came “that we might return to God. That we don’t forget that God loves us, but that we have to praise him and must give thanks to him.”
In addition to this, “we must pray for each other,” she said, explaining that in her instructions to the children, Mary “didn’t ask many things that we can’t do.”
Pointing to the rosary, she said that according to Lucia, Mary asked that people pray it because “it’s an easy prayer,” and can be recited at church, in the car or while walking.
If someone isn’t able to pray the rosary, Marto suggested at least trying to pray one Hail Mary and Our Father a day, to honor Mary and give thanks to God “for being our friend.”
“God loves us very much and at times sends us his mother to refresh us a bit in order continue,” she said, explaining that “God wants us to be a bit better every day. Because we are always sinners, we are not perfect, but try to be a bit better every day.”
Marto said that she hopes to be present for Pope Francis’ visit to Fatima for the centenary of the apparitions in May. Having attended the beatification of her uncle and aunt in 2000, she said she also hopes to be present for the May 13 canonization of the visionaries.
She received communion from Bl. Pope Paul VI when he became the first Pope to visit Fatima in 1967, and was also present for the visit of St. John Paul II in 1982, but was farther away.
Although she wasn’t able to attend Mass when Benedict XVI came in 2010, she hopes to have a good seat at Mass with Francis, and “to be close to him.”
[…]
Lord Jesus Christ preserve us for Your clemency.
My loyalty is with Vigano.
“For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there are quarrels among you, my brothers and sisters. What I mean is that each of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.” Has Christ been divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?”
1 Corinthians 1:11-13
Paul wasn’t crucified, he was beheaded since he was a Roman Citizen.
Correct! And it is said that St. Paul ‘s head bounced three times on the ground before stopping. Nonetheless, there is never an excuse for schism.
Dear GF – that was a totally different situation.
Really?
Then maybe you and he should start your own church, like Luther.
As long as Francis is allowed by true Catholics, clergy and laity, to exercise the OFFICE of Pope, something he has clearly rejected by his words and actions, he will continue to make use of that Office to the detriment of the Church. As he has surrounded himself with modernists like himself, there is little hope that the present Vatican will do the right thing and remove him. That means that the Church Herself, outside of Her present “government” must do what is necessary. All through history, it has been the priests, good bishops and faithful laity that has served to keep The Church holy and in keeping with Christ’s commands.
You are SO right, dear Valerie.
As Jesus taught us, the littlest ones are greatest in His eyes.
“For those who defend authority against rebellion must not themselves rebel.” Tolkien, The Silmarillion
Totally depends on how we define ‘rebellion’.
The fuse has been lit. At the very least, ecclesiastical history will now forever record that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has been publicly charged in detail with heresy and apostasy by one of the most eminent prelates in the Vatican Curia.
Yeah, I think if anyone is to be on trial for schism, it isn’t AB Vigano.
FSSPX News website had said, unlike Archbishop Viganò, Archbishop Lefebvre never denied the legitimacy of the Church. Although the following position published by Lefebvre 1974 is similar to what Archbishop Viganò has said:
“We adhere
with all our heart and all our soul to Catholic Rome, guardian of the Catholic Faith and the traditions necessary to maintain it, and to Eternal Rome, mistress of wisdom and truth. On the other hand we refuse and have always refused to follow the Rome of the neo-Modernist and the new Protestant trend which was clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council in all the reforms which flowed from it” (Declaration Archbishop Lefebvre 1974).
Compare that with:
“I have no reason to consider myself separate from communion with the holy Church and with the papacy, which I have always served with filial devotion and fidelity. I maintain that the errors and heresies to which [Francis] adhered before, during, and after his election, along with the intention he held in his apparent acceptance of the papacy, render his elevation to the throne null and void” (Statement Archbishop Viganò 2024).
Difference may be seen in Viganò’s direct refutation of Pope Francis from Lefebvre’s indirect reference to Pope Paul VI as part of the Modernist Church. What they have in common is the allegation of a faithful Church to which they claim allegiance and a false Church which they repudiate. This identifies a problematic dynamic within the Church, the distancing of one, Left or Right from the other among its members, the Right frequently questioning the legitimacy of the pope. It would be beneficial for those who disagree with specious policies, non binding doctrines like Fiducia Supplicans to resist the errors but refrain from accusations of the illegitimacy of this pontificate.
Otherwise from a justice standpoint, it could be added in defense of Archbishop Viganò, that as an insider, is his access to first hand information that we don’t possess. For example in the recent defense of Pope Francis, “Report on the Holy See’s Institutional Knowledge and Decision Making Related to Former Cardinal Theodore Edgar McCarrick”, that report argued the Pontiff’s lack of knowledge of the McCarrick dossier, that report also confirmed several personal meetings [prior to the Archbishop’s allegation that Francis lied when he claimed no knowledge of the dossier] between Francis and Viganò of which Pope Francis says he remembers the meetings but nothing about the content.
Furthermore, there was the silence, a refusal to respond to the allegation that he lied in having no knowledge – but responded only when an accusation was made public of a prosecution case on Viganò’s family financial matters – the Pope remarking, “See! See!, That’s why I kept silent”. Anyone with intelligence can see through that response.
From Viganò’s conscientious perspective considering what he may have gleaned from personal contact he may possess what he honestly believes substantiates his accusations. We, lacking that presumed knowledge cannot place ourselves in his position nor can we say he lacks justification. Although it’s prudent to add that he may have had a greater influence in benefit of the Church on the allegations of errors and mismanagement if he followed the examples of Cardinals Raymond Burke and Joseph Zen.
Excellent points, Fr. Morello.
I think I remember reading an argument that Pope Francis is both the head of the true Church and a valid Pope, and also the leader of the false church. I can see that theory fitting what Archbishop Vigano has said, but he does not clearly state it.
As beloved Jesus Christ instructs us: “No one can serve two masters!”
Excellent comment.
Archbishop Vigano’s move ties the Church into proving one or more of the following, right at this time, or, as from this time:
1. heresy
2, apostasy
3. schismatic leadership
4. non-election
5. non-election by non-intent
6. non-election by non-eligibility.
Maybe there is more he has in mind and we can not surmise about it for the present.
It helps understanding to read universi Dominici gregis which are regulations regarding a Conclave and the biography of Godfried Danneels in which he openly states how he and his group violated them
Thus, we suffer illegitimate pronouncements & actions from an illegitimate pope.
Very helpful thank you. I’m bound to accept the election of Bergoglio since I personally do not know of any voiding defect.
In such a case if it should arise, that something arouses suspicion for me about that, still I must reserve judgment on it, or, finality of decision, or disservice of faith or prudence or impartiality or sound reasoning on my part, until it should be substantiated.
Bergoglio’s majority was well in excess of the required two-thirds margin. It suggests that if there were collusion but the number of individual electors involved does not reduce the voted majority below that margin, the election was not compromised. It would, however, then be up to the new Pope to deal correctly with the “now proven” problem, so uncovered. And also be for us to assess if the new Pope is being true resolving the issue in faith, rationality and prudence.
Right now it could possibly be a mere case that Archbishop has over-shot the issues. I would take no glee from it.
God bless.
‘ Benedict issued De aliquibus mutationibus in normis de electione Romani Pontificis on 11 June 2007 after two years as pope. In this five-paragraph document, Benedict denied the cardinal electors the options John Paul had allowed them and retained only John Paul’s determination that a change was required after many ballots had failed to produce a result. He restored the two-thirds majority rule. ….. Benedict resigned the papacy on 11 February 2013, effective 28 February. On 22 February he issued his second set of instructions on the papal election process, Normas nonnullas. Following his resignation, cardinals had questioned the rule that they delay starting the conclave until 15 days after the papacy fell vacant. Benedict allowed them to begin earlier “if all the Cardinal electors are present” while keeping their ability to delay the start until 20 days pass “for serious reasons”.He modified the oath of secrecy to be taken by all support personnel, making excommunication the automatic punishment (latae sententiae) for violations of the oath, which had previously been punished at the discretion of the new pope. ‘
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_election_reforms_of_Pope_Benedict_XVI
During the 4th century, St. Athanasius found himself in a similar position as Archbishop Vigano. Athanasius was almost the lone voice against the Arian heresy held by the overwhelming majority of bishops. Pope Liberius excommunicated Athanasius who refused to accept the validity of the excommunication, as Vigano likely will do if he is excommunicated.
It was Athanasius against the world, and in the end, the almost lone voice of the excommunicated Athanasius was right.
Is the Church in that same position today?
Excellent reminder of another courageous bishop who spoke truth to power in defense of the Church; history has vindicated St A
No. Vigano is in open opposition to discipline and refuses to even submit himself before his superiors as is his duty. If he is to be excommunicated, he may only be vindicated by the Church, whom he has chosen in this event to cut his last ties with.
Dear ‘EENS’ that’s not the key issue.
In the opinion of many Catholic experts, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is far more obedient to our KING, Jersus Christ than the revisionist PF administration.
Also, the PF administration has amply demonstrated that it has no interest in proper jurisprudence but is openly biased against everyone who offers logical and factual criticisms. They use a loaded dice.
In PF’s Rome, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò would not get a fair go.
In fact, his life could be endangered if he ventured into the dragon’s den.
Maybe Archbishop Vigano needs hip surgery. Certainly Rome has soom excellent medical doctors.
Dear Patrick – you must be thinking of how convenient it was for the PF lot when Pope Benedict and then Cardinal Pell (were) exited.
Agreed. St. Athanasius never hid. And Pope Liberius was never free, having an imperial sword on his neck. It cannot be said for sure that he freely acted to do anything.
Archbishop Vigano is paranoid, secluded and deluded. Cardinals Burke, Zen, Müller, et al., have not been disobedient or fomented schism. They are acting like St. Athanasius.
Dear GF, surely that is a very eccentric view of the actual circumstances?
Submission to superiors is never absolute. Any duty to submit is forfeited when superiors are spiritually and morally bankrupt. The faithful owe no duty to submit to a renegade pope.
Great point! When it comes to pope Francis, I’ve been suspicious about him for several years because he’s always given ambiguous answers to many subjects which, in the end, he ended up supporting!
It will be interesting how this works out. Will the Archbishop be excommunicated? Stripped of Episcopal and Priestly powers? Or basically just ignored? We shall see.
Here’s Archbishop Vigano on the verge of being excommunicated.
While Rupnik is free to indiscriminately desecrate the most sacred places and forcibly defile the most vulnerable of holy women.
It’s very clear. Bergoglio is the one who deserves to be booted.
Amen.
Two camps debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
“I maintain that the errors and heresies to which [Francis] adhered before, during, and after his election, along with the intention he held in his apparent acceptance of the papacy, render his elevation to the throne null and void,” Viganò wrote. Bravo. There is hope for the Chruch with men like Vigano.
God bless Archbishop Viganò. He has been in hiding for good reason. If he showed up in Rome, he would probably be poisoned.
These Bishops need to remember they must obey the Pope because he is head of the Roman Catholic Church,
If a Latin Mass means so much to a Bishop, especially in the United States where Religious Practices are free, Let them start their own American Catholic Church, where all Mass are in Latin and they could even make Donald Trump a Bishop like evangelicals (60% of American Catholics support him more than fellow Catholic Joe Biden)
As for me, I’m a Roman Catholic and I stand by Pope Frances.
Pardon my laughter.
A devout and faithful Catholic can smell the rot of CINO-Biden’s hypocritical shell of Catholicism which would kill any baby the mother didn’t want though she enjoyed the conceiving of same.
No, the Latin Mass does not mean much to the American Catholic Bishops, witnessing the decreased numbers they’ve permitted under the rule of Francis.
Lastly, Trump is a married and divorced man. He has never attended seminary, has never received the sacrament of Ordination to Holy Orders, and he is not even a Catholic, so your imagination needs a bit of reigning in.
Francis is not a woman, so perhaps you may reconsider how you spell his name. Just remember this little mnemonic: Francis, egotist, narcissist–his “I” is greater than any other letter.
Brilliant!
As with any debate or disagreement, if certain of your position, recoiling or hiding should not be an option to strengthen your argument. If Viganò is right, he should have the courage to face the Curia, win or lose. This the vow he took.
Dear Henry,
If you’d had the horror experience I’ve had of going into a judicial process, with trust that the truth would prevail and then discovering that all those involved had coluded to use any means whatever to destroy me, you would not be urging Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò to submit to PF’s ‘Star Chamber’, pseudo-legal process.
It would be the height of naivette to think justice is of any interest to PF & Co.
Sorry to say this; but still trusting in the grace & mercy of King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty
Even Jesus walked through the crowd of his townspeople ready to throw him over the cliff. There is a time for every reason. Jesus’ time had not yet come, and Vigano’s may never come.
Staying away from the hands of Francis’ hench-hit-men is a justifiably reasonable and smart move.
May St. Michael the Archangel, through the power of God, protect and defend the good Archbishop if it be God’s will.
I’m not Catholic but this pope is the least Christian pope I’ve ever seen.
If Catholics really & truly knew what was going on behind closed doors of the Vatican, they would be dumbfounded. I understand Archbishop Viganò I find it sad that there are not more couragous bishops like him. I fully stand with Archbishop Viganò.There is much I could say, but I will leave it at that. God bless Carlo Maria Viganò.🙏🏼
Sedevacantism is courageous? Hardly.
If he doesn’t accept the authority of Vatican 2 and also Pope Francis as Pope, why has he been in the Church all these years? And if he doesn’t accept Vatican 2, then what about the Pope’s who came after Vatican 2? Paul 6th, Pope John Paul1st, Pope John Paul 2nd, Pope Benedict and now Pope Francis? Who does Vigano think he is to decide who is a legitimate Pope? And to decide on the authority of Vatican 2? Vigano is guilty of schism!!
Sorry, dear Joseph, that is not the actual situation at all.
“I maintain that the errors and heresies to which [Francis] adhered before, during, and after his election, along with the intention he held in his apparent acceptance of the papacy, render his elevation to the throne null and void,” Viganò wrote.
“He also said he has “no reason to consider myself separate from communion with the holy Church and with the papacy, which I have always served with filial devotion and fidelity.”
We can know through both Faith and Reason, that by denouncing a schismatic who could not possibly be a Vicar of Christ, because prior to his election to The Papacy, he denied Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and The Teaching of The Magisterium, The Deposit Of Faith that Christ Himself Has Entrusted To His Church, Archbishop Vigano maintains communion with The Body Of Christ, which exists “Through Him, With Him, And In Him, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost(Filioque).
To denounce the election of Jorge Bergoglio to The Papacy, is to affirm The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, and thus the fact that “it is not possible to have Sacramental Communion without Ecclesial Communion”, due to The Unity Of The Holy Ghost (Filioque). To affirm The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, is to affirm the Papacy, and thus affirm every validly elected Vicar of Christ, and Magisterial Teaching grounded in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.
Jorge Bergoglio, unlike every validly elected Pope, rejects The Office Of The MUNUS, grounded in Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, And The Teaching Of The Magisterium, The Deposit Of Faith That Christ Has Entrusted To His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, Is “Forever”, thus Pope Benedict could not have resigned The Office Of The MUNUS because for a validly elected Pope it remains “Forever”. Even if Pope Benedict was in error when he abdicated The Ministerial Office, who can deny, that by stepping aside, Pope Benedict XVI illuminated the fact that Jorge Bergoglio was not in communion with Christ and The Magisterium Of His Church and could not have possibly hold The MUNUS because he rejected The Deposit Of Faith, and thus Ecclesial Communion, and thus Sacramental Communion. For this is our Sacred Heritage: The Sacred Heritage of all human persons, from the moment of conception, Salvation Is Of The Jews, From The Father, Through The Son, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost (Filioque).
https://biblehub.com/drbc/john/4.htm
The pope should resign in order to preserve the RC church from to much liberal ideas .
To keep the traditions as they should be and start a new conclave in order to elect
a more traditional pope .
I humbly ask Pope Francis to consider all that he has done and said and resign for the goodness of the whole RC Church .
Praise be God .
I’m saddened that vigano does not support pope Francis ,at this point in time everybody should be on pope Francis side, with the world gone mad he needs all the support he can get 😇
Francis needs all the support he can get. Right. Would that be help covering for sexual predators, help meeting with homosexualist priests, help undermining the traditional Latin mass,and help dismissing conservative prelates? If that’s the case, the less help and support Francis gets, the better.
Archbishop Vigano would have done better to stick with his early and discrediting revelation that the McCarrick phenomenon was not new news in the Vatican…
A BRIDGE TOO FAR, now, to explicitly pronounce that the pope is not a pope, and to seem to reject Vatican II (but what he seems to say latest is only that the apostasy started there, not that the “real” (Benedict’s distinction) Council, by its very nature and Documents, was the definitive cause).
Archbishop Vigano should have posed his accusations as questions, about the Church cohabiting with the One World Order. The rhyming GNOSTICISM of inventing a script and then prohibiting all contrarian views as inadmissible or even “backwardist”.
Then, instead of surrendering the possible high ground to legal proceedings against a schism, the full spectrum within the Church could be asking, where is the real DIALOGUE? Still a remote possibility…and a remotely possible substitute for what is seen by many as a self-gratifying and self-ratifying “Synod-on-Synodality”. Say what??? A “couple” of synods…
In graduate school even at a secular university, TRUTH can still happen. Why am I reminded, here, of a penetrating professor who denounced research papers that engaged in wool-gathering without demonstrable conclusions worthy of readers outside the echo chamber? Papers larded up with self-referential purple prose and very selectively read references—”a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing” (Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 5).
WHEN is a synod a crypto-synod?…Accountable only to itself rather than, say, to the relevant particulars of the Council Documents (e.g., Lumen Gentium, Ch. 3 with the Prefatory Note), or to the irreducible Apostolic Succession, or to the Magisterium and the explicitly incorporated Natural Law with its moral absolutes (the Catechism, Veritatis Splendor), or to the real Holy Spirit in union with the Son—“Jesus Christ, yesterday, today and forever” (Heb 13:8)? Or, instead, in step with the 5,000-word Fiducia Supplicans and even cohabiting with the irregular “couples,” as such?
QUESTION: For the fatally overreaching Archbishop Vigano and the fatally self-ratifying synod-on-synodality, both (!), to what extent might the professor’s meme equally apply: “intellectual masturbation”?
Vigano for Pope! Strickland for Cardinal!