Tridentine Mass
Springtime Update: Legal immigrant priests need apply
The great Springtime of Renewal promoted non stop by the modernist neocon Catholics, including all the way to the top, continues to sputter, falter and show continued signs of regression, not progression.
To think otherwise is to have the same psychiatric delusions of say, a Caitlyn Jenner. Just cause you want it don’t mean it will be so. If that were true, ESH would be the King of France. Yet we all know Hollande and his socialist friends won’t let ESH run things in Paris.
Read and weep. The Church in Amerikka is, and has been, missionary ground, if only the collegial conciliar fanatics would only have the same zeal for forming new vocations as they do for, say, ecumania and statements on the environment which they prefer to worship, rather than the Creator of that environment. Leaving them standing much as the profane, secular world that masonically worships man rather than the One, Triune God.
So Amerikka will import priests from Africa and Asia, if any remain after ISIS murdering ways. And some from places such as Poland, ravaged for decades by godless atheistic communism, now reeling as the West does from materialism, the flip side of communism.
On a positive note, despite the hostilities by the conciliar church leaders to conversion, a number of protestants (including former “ministers”) are making their way into the One True Church of Christ, several of them via the Byzantine and other Eastern Rites, where more sanity has prevailed since the revolution of Vatican II. But even there, all is not well. Ten years ago the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostum–the Mass of the Byzantine Rites–changed the millenial Nicene Creed to remove that long time bogey man of the Orthodox world, the filioque, conceding that the Holy Ghost proceeds from only the Father.
Only in the Traditional Rites does one see growth in vocations since the 1960s. One example: St Thomas Aquinas Seminary is bursting at the seems so much, that the SSPX is poised to open a new huge seminary in rural Virginia, moving that operation from Winona, MN where it has been for almost 30 yrs because they just cannot hold all the young men seeking a solid orthodox training and the insurmountable obstacle to heresy found in the Tridentine Rite Holy Mass. It’s getting hard for the dicosese of Richmond, VA to ignore them anymore.
In Pittsburgh, the SSPX took back once Catholic Sts James Church in the city’s West End right from under the nose of Bishop Zubik, after the diocese closed it in 2004. Zubik’s “inclusive” response was nothing short of a woman scorned with a fury reserved only to the faithful of Christ’s only True Church.
So much mercy, so much caring, sharing and “new evangeliszation” examples adorn these remains of the Novus Ordo’s “square earth society”.
Fr Nicholas Gruner, +Requiescat in Pace
Please pray for the repose of the soul of this saintly priest who took his vows quite seriously, and worked tirelessly–at the cost of much calumny and vituperation against his person–for the Message of Our Lady of Fatima of repentance and conversion, and the still-to-be-performed consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Holy Father in unison with all the world’s bishops at the same time.
| He never enriched himself from his aposolate and lived ascetically by today’s materialistic standards by many religious. He was devoted to the Immemorial Tridentine Rite Mass as he progressed in years. He was fearless against attacks by enemies of the Faith, the Church and Our Lady, to Whom he was assiduously devoted. ESH was fortunate to meet Fr Gruner several times, either at his own Center’s conferences or at one of the many times he spoke at Human Life International conferences. |
|
| Requiescat in pace! |
|
Catholic Family News
from Catholic Family News editor John Vennari…
Father Nicholas Gruner
Requiescat in pace
By now you probably heard about the sudden death of Father Nicholas Gruner. He died of an apparent heart attack on April 29 around 7:00 pm while working at his office in Fort Erie.
Father Gruner was truly the world expert on Fatima. I can say this as one who worked closely with him for over 20 years. He was more knowledgeable on this subject, and on the true nature of the Fatima Message than anyone else. His devotion to Our Lady was strong and genuine.
Please remember Father Gruner in your prayers, a good personal friend and true Catholic Crusader.
In the Immaculate Heart,
John Vennari
Below is the announcement from the Fatima Center:
Rest in Peace
Father Nicholas Gruner
May 4, 1942 — April 29, 2015
The Management Team of the Fatima Center sadly announces the death of Father Nicholas Gruner, who passed away suddenly this evening.
Father died at his office, working to his last breath on the goals to which he dedicated his 38 years in the priesthood — the promotion of the Message of Fatima, especially the release of the full Third Secret and the Consecration of Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.
Details concerning the wake/visitation and funeral for Father will be announced in the upcoming days. For now, in your charity, please pray for Father and for his Apostolate, which will continue to seek to bring his life’s work to a successful conclusion.
Please click here for both video and information on funeral…
(Funeral Mass to be held in Niagara Falls this Saturday)
Bergoglio is doing to the Church what O’Bama has done to the USA
Bergoglio is doing to the Church what O’Bama, the part Irish Kenyan kommie, has done to the USA these past 6 years. ESH has said this frequently over the past 3 years and it remains truer and truer each passing day, something with which one cannot be pleased since it wounds the spotless Bride of Christ with a recurring Passion and Golgotha from within rather the usual enemies from without.
It is not a new concept. Judas was the first such internal traitor. There have been many since the past 2000 years. The holy Pope St Pius X said as much in his groundbreaking encyclical on Modernism, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, when he directly attacked the synthesis of all heresies–Modernism–and stated its worst proponents were within the bosom of Holy Mother Church.
So, Ann Barnhardt, re-converted protestant to Catholic Tradition a few years back, holds no punches when she decides to expose evil and error. She is not timid nor the stuff used to make jello like diplomats.
She nails it again, tapping into Church teaching (the official kind) and the excellent works of the telegenic saintly Blessed Bishop Fulton Sheen. Is she right or wrong? Excessive? Divisive? There are many names the devil uses to call those who expose his scheming and machinations, even in the guise of a liberation theology afficianado like Bergoglio.
You can read it all here….
Loyal priest exposes sodomites, persecuted by bishop for whistleblowing
Father Haley, a priest in the diocese of Arlington, VA, has been permanently suspended by Bishop Paul Loverde for testifying in a legal deposition about the immoral practices of his fellow diocesan clergy. In a formal notice to Haley, given on October 28, 2002, Bishop Loverde stated that Haley was guilty of violating an order for him not to publicize priestly wrongdoing in order “to avoid scandal, to maintain ecclesiastical discipline and to protect the reputation and privacy of both the faithful and priests of this diocese.” [As quoted in The Washington Times, November 13, 2002.]
In fact Father Haley never went public with any of his incriminating information. For years he went privately to Bishop Loverde, not just with his complaints, but with indisputable evidence of clergy immorality in his diocese. Bishop Loverde’s reference to Haley “publicizing priestly wrongdoing” concerns deposition testimony given by Father Haley pursuant to a law suit brought against Bishop Loverde and his diocese by a parishioner, James Lambert. The suit alleged diocesan negligence in failing to remove an obviously unfit priest who had given public scandal for years. [The lawsuit was eventually dismissed for failing to comply with the statute of limitations.]
Having exposed the perverted sodomites of the lavendar mafia , now he must suffer in virtual silence. Pray for this courageous priests, and all proests, that they may faithfully discharge their duties and vows.
Ember Days, Five All Souls Saturdays reminder
Just a friendly reminder from your neighborhood Hunky, this week Weds, Fri and Saturday are “Ember Days” on the 
Traditional Roman calendar.
This traditionally meant days of fasting and partial abstinence, which are voluntary today. In the penitential motif of Holy Lent, and our efforts to be closer to God, these practices were commonplace not so many decades ago, with the change of seasons, just as we are ready to go into Spring, despite the winter like weather in most parts of the US, even the normally more balmy South and West.
Ember Days were any of a number of days reserved for fasting and prayer in the Western Catholic Church. Ember days traditionally comprise the Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday following St. Lucy’s Day (December 13), the first Sunday in Lent, Pentecost (Whitsun), and Holy Cross Day (September 14), though other days are observed locally.
In the Eastern Rites, five All Souls Saturdays are observed, 3 of which fall during Holy Lent in successive weeks, with the praying for the souls of the dearly departed who may still be in Purgatory anticipating a heavenly reward at the appointed time. A roll call of names of the deceased (Hramoty) is read during a service called Panachida which closely resembles the prayers before the casket at wakes or at the grave site during funerals, in the Eastern Rites.
The other two All Souls Saturdays are the Saturday of Meatfare Week (2nd Sunday before Lent) and the Saturday before Pentecost Sunday.
Let’s do that something extra this Holy Lent to become more closer to God spiritually, along with other acts of prayer, fasting and almsgiving. These are two additional ways one can do that.
Pagan episcopal consecration in Chile…with Catholic bishops!
Pagan gods of the blood thirsty Incas were invoked last month in Chile…
Part of the ceremony of episcopal consecration of Fr Moises Atisha as the new Bishop of Arica, Chile, was an act of Inca worship, dedicated to the pagan gods Pachamama (earth), Tata Inti (sun) and the Malkus (spirits of the mountains). A large group of Chilean Bishops was present at that ceremony on January 17, 2015.
See more of the photos at the article at Tradition In Action…here’s just one of the event, with Catholic bishops and priests participating in a pagan ceremony in direct refutation of the First Commandment, offering various items to placate pagan deities:
/A614_Inti-01.jpg)
Francis and his false dichotomy
Pope Francis was at it again last Sunday, using the gospel of Jesus healing the leper to once again beat down those who see the mercy of Christ AND the need for repentance and conversion. Not the “either/or” false dichotomy of the Pope. He did so at the Sunday consistory for a number of cardinals.
He dwells long and hard with laying out more and more his social justice church of “mercy” that throws off the commandments required by its Founder.
The Bergoglio Cardinal Gang of Eight
Read here from the Remnant on this excellent insight into the contradictory psyche of Francis and his Newchurch.
The conclusion from the author is chilling:
“The gravity of this looming crisis cannot be overstated. If this proposal is adopted, it will be more far-reaching than any other of the post-Conciliar manipulations like Communion in the hand or altar girls. This will strike, in one blow, against the very pillars of the Faith: the Eucharist and the priesthood. The Eucharist, the presence of which was barely preserved in the New Mass, will be systematically desecrated. And those who will be expected to do the desecrating will be the priests, who will certainly be punished if they refuse.
“It will also put paid to whatever hopes we have of restoring the Faith by the work of an up-and-coming young faithful priesthood, since only men who have demonstrated their willingness to desecrate the Holy Eucharist will be considered suitable for the seminary.”
ESH sees more and more the program of anti-Christ and anti-God freemasonry infection within the highest levels of the Bride of Christ infecting it thoroughly from the top on down. They need not overtake the Church when they have someone who thinks as they do at the helm.
Francis goes Buddhist
From DICI 1/30/15, the text says it all, especially the end.
ESH also says “Je suis catholique!” and not some pagan lost religion from which Francis seems we of the one, truth faith can learn something. Here ESH thought Christ was the light of the world, the narrow sheep gate through which we must go to reach the Father and eternal salvation.
The church “has become more respectful”? She always has been, it does not mean you stop telling the truth, even if it is hard to hear: those outside the Barque of Peter are going to hell, Holy Father. Too bad you forgot the catechism of your youth, even though you act as if you remember. This modernism is destructive and scandalizes the faithful, at least those who continue to bitterly cling to their Traditional Faith.
“On board the airplane that brought him from Colombo to Manila on January 15, 2015, the Supreme Pontiff answered questions from journalists. One of them, Christoph Schmidt, asked him about that visit to the Buddhist temple. “What was the reason for such an apparently spontaneous visit? Are you impressed by that religion? We know that the Christian missionaries believed right up to the twentieth century that Buddhism was a fraud, a diabolical religion.”
“The Pope replied that the man in charge of the temple “came to greet me at the airport and I went to visit him…. At Madhu I saw something which I would never have expected: not everyone there was Catholic, not even the majority! There were Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, and each one came to pray; they go and they say they receive graces there. There is among the people—and the people are never wrong—the sense that there is something there that unites them. And if they are so naturally united in going together to pray at that shrine…, then why shouldn’t I go to a Buddhist temple to greet them? What happened yesterday at Madhu is very important. It helps us to understand the meaning of the interreligious experience in Sri Lanka: there is respect for one another. There are small fundamentalist groups, but these are not with the people: they are ideological elites….
“Now, as for their going to hell! Even the Protestants…. When I was a child, some seventy years ago, all Protestants were going to hell, all of them. That’s what we were told…. But I believe that the Church has become much more respectful—as I said during the interreligious meeting in Colombo—and appreciative. When we read what the Second Vatican Council said about the values to be found in other religions, the Church has grown greatly in this regard. And yes, there are dark periods in the history of the Church, we must admit, without being ashamed, because we too are on a path of constant conversion: always moving from sin to grace. And this interreligious experience of fraternity, each always respecting the other, is a grace.”
This prompted the Italian journalist Alessandro Gnocchi to write at his website Riscossa Cristiana: “Interreligious experience regarded as a grace by the Vicar of Christ: never before had we gone that far. We had never reached the point where a Pontiff plainly calls the fact of not belonging to Our Lord a grace. In view of all the self-destructive activity that had brought the Church to this point, and to be realistic about it, we are surprised at the surprise of those who wonder how the Pope can say such things: this is Modernism, dear friends, sooner or later this had to happen. Welcome to the new religion. Me, I’m keeping the old one: ‘Je suis catholique.’” [The Italian author wrote here in French, parodying the signs held by those protesting the murder of the staff of Charlie Hebdo. – Translator’s note.]”
(Sources: apic/eda/vis/radiovatican/vatican.va/benoît-et-moi – DICI no. 309 dated January 30, 2015)
Francis repudiated: Large families are where vocations are found
So, the mouth running of Pope Bergoglio has caused him much indigestion as Traditionalists and even some neo con conservatives have finally opened the schepulcre to rail against the incessant and increasing War on Tradition by this Pope.
Let us look to the insights that align with Catholic Tradition and the unchanging Magisterium that has always encouraged openness to life, which is not ‘tempting God’ as the Holy Father chided recently to a mother of 7.
From the recent interview of Fr Emmanuel DuChalard, SSPX, who was in the inaugural (1970) seminary class of SSPX at the seminary in Econe:
Can you say a few words on the initial formation of vocations?
“…Even if the ways of the Lord are infinite, the natural cradle for vocations is generally the Catholic family, then the example of true and holy priests in the parish. Liturgical service as altar servers also plays a decisive role, bringing the young boys close to the altar with deep respect. The traditional liturgy gave a sense of the Mystery and of the sacred. Today, for many, they no longer exist. The ideal of the Catholic family was a large family, always considered as a glory for the Church. Large families are thus generally a source of many vocations. In the Society there are many examples of the sort. One might ask why this connection between large families and vocations?
“A large family requires of the parents a spirit of generosity and of sacrifice, and of the children the ability to share, to renounce. They cannot live as egoists; the older ones have to help the younger ones. Is there any better way to educate a child in a spirit of sacrifice and service?
“A vocation is above all an answer to God’s call to sacrifice oneself, to leave all things to follow the Lord. He who is not used to sacrifice will have a hard time answering His call. Besides, the seminary life is a regular and community life. If someone is not used to that, it can be very difficult, almost impossible.
“It is for all these reasons that more and more pre-seminaries are being opened in the Society, in order to test and consolidate the vocations, but also to create little by little the habit of a regular and community life…”
Now, that would have been a much better and orthodox statement from the off-the-cuff pontiff. You can read the entire interview which also discusses the persecution of the FFI and cloistered nuns by the present Regime here…
Eucharistic sacrilege hootenany at Papal Philippine Mass
Thoroughly disgusting and an affront to the Blessed Sacrament was the bill of are at the historic Papal Mass in the Philippines yesterday, with an estimated 6 million people attending.
What wasn’t reported was the laisse faire attitude towards the Blessed Sacrament during the passing out of consecrated Hosts during that same Mass.
As the following video shows, those who hate Our Lord or Satanists could have easily desecrated or absconded (for later desecration) the Real Presence of Our Lord, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity.
The scandal known as the Bishop of Rome continues:
Please offer some manner of Reparation for this huge sacrilege against the Real Presence. The Angel of Fatima’s prayer is an excellent starting point:
Fatima Prayer of Reparation
Taught by the Angel to the Children at Fatima
“Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, I offer Thee the most precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, present in all the tabernacles of the world, in reparation for the sacrileges, outrages and indifference by which He Himself is offended. And through the infinite merits of His most Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg of Thee the conversion of poor sinners.”
#Je suis got it wrong
From the “wish I had said it first” department, an excellent brief summary of the problem of the “Jes suis Charlie” robots who defend anything said about anyone, anytime. Truth is, blasphemies against the Son of God, and His Ever Virgin Mother are never defended by the leftist secular drive by media, here and abroad. Too bad the Pope did not defend the founder of the Church of which he is vicar on earth, and His Mother, with the alacrity with which he dispenses of his Traditionalist nemeses in the Church as neo-pelagians and other insults.
For whom does the bell toll?
One million demonstrators in Paris on January 11, 2015, chanted the slogan, “Je suis Charlie,”—“I am Charlie,” while brandishing a pen, which has become the symbol of assassinated freedom of expression; this is the official, unanimously agreed-on version of the media outlets and the political parties. But in reality, when you know what the satirical publication Charlie Hebdo really is, you would have had to attribute to each of those demonstrators the following sentiments: I am in favor of anarchy and sacrilege, like the cartoonists who depicted the Blessed Virgin in an obscene manner in their Christmas issue; I am a nihilist and a blasphemer like those who, a few years ago, drew two recycling bins with the caption, “This is my body” and “This is my blood,” or more recently showed a condom in the form of a Host.
On January 7, the day of the attack, Pope Francis declared that it was imperative to “oppose hatred and all forms of violence, which destroys human life, violates the dignity of the human person, and radically undermines the fundamental good of peaceful coexistence among persons and peoples, beyond differences of nationality, religion and culture.” And Bishop Stanislas Lalanne of the Diocese of Pontoise, and Bishop Pascal Delannoy of the Diocese of Saint-Denis were the official representatives of the Church at the January 11 demonstration. During that time, one of the surviving cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo said that he “puked on those who, suddenly, say that they are our friends,” and added ironically: “We have lots of new friends, like the Pope, Queen Elizabeth or Putin: that makes me laugh.”
On January 8 at noon, in the rain, Notre Dame Cathedral sounded the death knell. For whom did that bell toll?
–Father Alain Lorans
Epiphany/Theophany confirm Christ as King of Kings
The Feast of Epiphany is today, Jan 6th, and it is upon us. It is also celebrated as a Holy Day of obligation in many European countries and certainly in the various Byzantine and Eastern Rites, known in the latter as Theophany.
One emphasizes the visit of the Three Magi to the Baby Jesus in Bethlehem, the latter celebrates the manifestation of Christ to the world with His baptism in the Jordan by St John the Baptist, the Forerunner.
Let the great Dominican theologian of the early 20th century explain the Epiphany:
Feast of Epiphany explained by Gueranger
The Feast of the Epiphany is the continuation of the mystery of Christmas; but it appears on the Calendar of the Church with its own special character. Its very name, which signifies Manifestation, implies that it celebrates the apparition of God to his creatures…
At Divine Liturgy today, the Byzantine Rites bless the “Jordan water” which is then taken home for personal use as a sacramental, much as the Roman Rite does at the Easter Vigil.
Matthew 3:13-17 – Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now; for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. And when Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and alighting on him; and lo, a voice from heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” (RSV)
Lamb and Redeemer – John’s baptism was looking toward repentance. Its purpose was to bring hearers to the point of experiencing conviction for their offenses. John, however, did not want anyone to draw the conclusion that Jesus himself also came to the Jordan to repent of his sins. So he sets this point straight from the outset by calling him both Lamb and Redeemer of all the sin that is in the world. He who is able to take away the sins of the whole world was himself without sin. (St. John Chrysostom, Commentary on Matthew)
Modernism: madness immersed in Kantian subjectivity
This is a nice summary position of the madness of Kantian philosophy, which has broght us to the present state of affairs of subjective liberalism, that which denies objective truth and is a main cause of the malady sickness in the Church and society i.e. modernism.
Bishop Williamson, both loved and hated by different factions, does an excellent job bringing the essence of the problem to a head for those still uninitated as to why “things are so screwed up” in the world, both spiritually and otherwise.
Put aside the calumny and ad hominem attacks to review if this does not accurately explain many things of the malady of the Church and culture.
Curious Case of sodomite Urrutigoity continues, part VI
More updates on the curious case of known sodomite, pervert, pederast and pedophile Carlos Urrutigoity and his escapades across Pennsylvania/North American as well as South America.
This is the sixth in a series of posts on the Urrutigoity case. Read the first part here, the second here, the third here, the fourth here, and the fifth here.
This comes in a series done in an uncommon place, Commonweal, known more for its liberal “catholicism” than for anything else, usually sympathetic to the perverted sodomite cancer within the bosom of the Church.
In one section, after plying his targets with alcohol and smokes, “Urrutigoity would not allow John to use the SSJ’s car to attend AA meetings in town. “Fr. U. flatly forbade me,” John testified. ‘He said I didn’t need them…that it [AA] was full of crap.'”
Read the shocking story that, even as told, allows the perp to roam freely in South America.
Commies 2, USA 0
The commies of the world showed everyone they still have some firepower, comrade!
The Kenyan kommie handed communist dictators in Cuba a huge PR victory at no cost to them and lots of cost to the USA yesterday, declaring he’s opening up trade and travel with the anti-capitalist running dogs. It is the will of the people. The Kenyan kommie said so! We can’t do things the same way and expect a different result. Really?
What do you call the same playbook the Dems and the left run to at every election. Oh, BTW, how did that work for ya in the Nov 2014 elections, Barrie? If the Castro bros hold a Liberation Theology Mass, presided by Pope Francis, and the Kenyan kommie is made altar BOY/valet, is that racist?
The poor, squashed citizens of Cuba got nothing in the deal and ther lot will remain piss poor, the same as it has since 1959 when Fidel’s commies overthrew Batista and nationalized most private property including casinos and the like held by the Mob. They have long memories, Dear Leader.
Poor Rubio and Cruz are really ticked off, rightly so. Let’s see if they make something of blocking this in the new Congress come Jan 2015.
The Sony capitulation involves a seedier backstory but is no less disturbing in terms of its meaning for fundamental rights, particularly the rights of free speech and private ownership of property.
Sony’s planned release of “The Interview” clearly caught the attention of North Korea’s psychotic despot dictator, Kim Jong Un.
Mr Rogan, tear down this screen! And so Sony did. Guess it’ll always be Sony in Pyongyang Now! So much about “courage” and “bravery” to discuss now at the Awards, especially after all these displays of raw cowardice.
On the matter of Fr Michael Rodriguez
This brave faithful priest continues to be persecuted by his bishop for…gasp, being loyal and faithful to his vows…
Please pray for the intentions of Fr Michael Rodiguez who was put involuntarily on “sabbatical” and may not offer Holy Mass in public during this time, something that in older times was reserved for the modernist quasi-masons who run many of the chanceries in the US today.
From the posting of his sermon on youtube:
As of November 10, 2014, Fr Michael Rodríguez, is no longer the Administrator of Sacred Heart Mission in Shafter, TX. He has been given a six-month sabbatical in order to discern God’s Will for the future. Fr Rodríguez remains a priest in good-standing of the Diocese of El Paso. He will most likely be looking at options for priestly ministry beyond the Diocese of El Paso. Fr Rodríguez has been offering the Traditional Latin Mass [Mass of All Times] exclusively for the past three years, and this has led to increasing difficulties for him with the local hierarchy. Fr Rodríguez asks for your prayers, and he especially asks you to pray for the small group of faithful (about 50) of the Presidio-Shafter area who are heartbroken over the loss of the Traditional Latin Mass and parish life based on the Traditional Latin Mass.
Admittedly, Fr Rodríguez is in a very difficult situation. On the one hand, he intends to do his best to be obedient to his bishop. On the other hand, Fr. Rodríguez is convinced that God is calling him – through the Church – to dedicate his priesthood and all his energy and strength to promote the Church’s greatest treasures: her timeless liturgy and doctrine. Both Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI have acknowledged that the Church is suffering through a terrible crisis of Faith in the post-Vatican II era, and Fr. Rodríguez, as a loyal priest and son of the Church, cannot stand idly by in the face of such widespread disparagement and abandonment of the Catholic Faith.
In making any decisions for the future, Fr Rodríguez is begging God to purify his motives, so that he may act, first and foremost, out of love and fidelity to Jesus Christ and His holy Church, and for the salvation of souls. As a loyal son of Holy Mother Church, Fr Rodríguez is 100% committed to following, teaching, promoting, and defending her Traditional Mass (holy liturgy) and her unchangeable truths (holy doctrine), e.g. the sacredness of marriage, the indissolubility of marriage, the grave sin and intrinsic evil of homosexual acts.
In closing, Fr Rodríguez asks that efforts be redoubled to pray for the Holy Father so that he will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary as requested by Our Lady of Fatima. May the reign of Christ the King come through the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of His Mother!
In a few days a number of us will begin a continuous series of nine-day novenas imploring the intercession of Our Lady and the saints on Fr. Rodríguez’s behalf. I will email more information on that in a few days. Moreover, we will pray a 54-Day Rosary Novena on his behalf from Dec 10 – Feb 1, that is between the Marian feasts of the Immaculate Conception and the Purification of Our Lady, (also the feast of Our Lady of Good Success). We invite all to join us in offering these prayers. Thank you very much for your prayers and support.
Francis: more War on Tradition
The Francis effect is now quite well known in the Catholic world, and elsewhere. It is the ongoing, incessant War on Tradition, the Mass of All Times, sanctity and conversely, the elevating of all that is contrary to the faith and right reason, in the muddy quadmire of personal sin, or that has been anathemitized as heretical and schismatic.
Louie Verrecchio deals with it this past week in the “diminished and distorted Christ” in the modernist quasi-masonic world of Francis, full of clown noses and beach balls on the same altar where the perfect and immaculate sacrifice re-enactment of Calvary occurs.
Full of attacks on those who wish to be most faithful and pious in their fealty to Christ and His Spotless Bride the Church, yet nothing but luv, luv, luv for those who despise Christ and His bride with lives thrown into divorce, remarriage, cohabitation, contraception, abortion, sodomy and so on.
Louie quotes Cardinal Rodriguez and says:
The function of the hierarchy is redefined in reference to Jesus as Suffering Servant, not as “Pantocrator” (lord and emperor of this world); only from the perspective of someone crucified by the powers of this world it is possible to found, and to explain, the authority of the Church.
Further:
Pope Francis, apparently, has great difficulty reconciling humble service with the majestic dignity inherent to kingly authority, as if the two are mutually exclusive.
In truth, Christ the King is the perfect synthesis of these attributes; even as those who act in His person as priests, bishops and ultimately as His Vicar (the Sovereign Roman Pontiff) are at times persecuted in this world by those who reject Him.
And yet, Pope Francis can only seem to imagine that he is Vicar of a Christ who is servant alone, apart from being the King who reigns over all men and all nations. Thus is his Christology, and likewise his understanding of his own office, rendered “diminished and distorted.”
And always to be defended by the Neo-Catholics with a brutalness previously reserved only for those against the One, True Faith, bordering on a dictatorship of the proletariat-esqueness, with zero tolerance and hate-filled invective. No one is to be burned at the stake except Trads!
How true!
The Real Santa: St Nicholas punks heretic Arius
Yeah, the REAL Santa is, of course, St Nicholas. And as he attended the Council of Nicea, the one that gave us the Nicean Creed recited every Sunday at Holy Mass (and by many protestant churches as well), he became perturbed and irritated at the major heretic, Arius, an Egyptian priest who ostensibly denied that Christ was God, using deceptive language in his arguments, much like today’s modernists.
The Arian heresy had spread so far that >80% of the bishops of the time and 2/3 of all priests were caught in its lies. The great defender against Arianism, St Athanasius, was known to say, “they have the churches but we have the Faith”. Sound familiar?
St Nicholas, known for bailing out 3 poor children with his anonymous coins down the family’s chimney, has gone on to become a fat clown in a red suit coming down the chimney, as it were, owing to his charitable and generous spirit in the 4th century AD.
Listen to how this generous saint was also a fierce defender of Christ’s divinity, a real man, and not some milquetoast who rolled over by “getting along” with the status quo heresy of the day.
Pope Francis and the Masons
From the “this can never be good” Dept:
The Grand Master of the Italian freemasons has a bromance crush on the modernistic tendencies of Pope Francis. Listen to his masonic indifferentism verbiage and compare to the liberalism contained within some V2 documents, such as that on Religious Liberty:
From Facebook 12/2/14:
“A man of the poor far away from the Curia. Fraternity and the desire to dialogue were his first concrete words. [ESH emphasis] Perhaps nothing in the Church will be as it was before. Our hope is that the pontificate of Francis, the Pope who ‘comes from the end of the world’ can mark the return to the Church-Word instead of the Church-Institution, promoting an open dialogue with the contemporary world, with believers and non-believers, following the springtime of Vatican II.” http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_162_Berg-GOI.html
Gasp! Team Bergoglio lobby group worked Conclave
Put on your surprise face! Pshaw! We know Jesus loves surprises, right?
This piece is longer but necessary to see all the machinations and Machiavellian antics of the quasi-masonic modernists and liberals within the highest levels of the Church:
https://fromrome.wordpress.com/
Pope Francis Team Bergoglio Valid Election
From Rome
An International Venue for Catholic Thought
The Chronology of Reports on “Team Bergoglio”
Rome, Dec. 2, 2014: The revelations by Dr. Austen Ivereigh in his new book, The Great Reformer, have provoked response and comment throughout the world. Since, in such an important story it is useful to understand the chronology of the reporting, the From Rome Blog will attempt to cover in this article, a short summary of events in the timeline, for the utility of its readers and of journalists following the story. This timeline will be updated from time to time, until the magnitude becomes something too great for one blogger to follow.
Nov. 21, 2014: Dr. Austen Ivereigh presents his book to Pope Francis (Reported by Dr. Ivereigh’s Twitter feed: see screen shot here).
Nov. 22, 2014: John Bingham, reporter for the Telegraph, writes his report, Pope Francis: how cardinals’ Conclave lobbying campaign paved way for Argentine pontiff, which appears on the online edition at 8:15 PM London time. It is in this report that the allegations of Dr. Ivereigh, regarding vote canvassing are first made news. All the subsequent reports will react to this.
Nov. 23, 2014: A report by John Bingham, entitled, “English Cardinal ‘lobbied for Pope’“, is published on p. 16 in the Sunday Telegraph, UK, regarding Dr. Ivereigh’s book and the allegations concerning the vote canvassing by Cardinals in days preceding the Conclave of 2013 (according to Maggie Doherty’s Letter to the Editor in the Daily Telegraph, Nov. 25). An image of page 16 of the Sunday Telegraph is subsequently published by a Spanish blog on Dec. 1 (here)
Nov. 25, 2014: Dr. Austen Ivereigh’s book, The Great Reformer: the Making of a Radical Pope is published in English in the USA/UK (according to Amazon.com) and Italian.
Nov. 25, 2014: In a Letter to the Editor of the Daily Telegraph, Maggie Doherty, the spokeswoman for Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor denies that Cardinal Bergoglio was approached by Cardinals or consented to the work of “Team Bergoglio”. (See here for an image of that letter).
Nov. 25, 2014: The From Rome blog reports the events known and speculated about the canonical implications of UDG 81, in “If Ivereigh is to be believed, was Bergoglio’s election invalid?“
Nov. 26, 2014: The From Rome blog adds an addendum concerning the implications of canon 171 to its previous report.
Nov. 27, 2014: The From Rome blog returns to the topic of “Team Bergoglio” in, Ivereigh + UDG 81 = A Radical Problem for the Pope, which discusses both the letter by Maggie Doherty and the canonical reasons why it appears that the election of Cardinal Bergoglio may now be open to a challenge.
Dec. 1, 2014: In the morning, Marco Tosatti, noted Vaticanista at La Stampa, reports the imbroglio on his blog, San Pietro e Dintorni, Il caso di “Team Bergoglio”. Tosatti is the first journalist to cite UDG 81, and gives a HT to the From Rome blog.
Dec. 1, 2014: In the late morning, the Italian news blog, Il Sismografo publishes, , the apparent transcript of a private communication by Fr. Frederico Lombardi, the Vatican Press Office spokseman, denying the allegations of Dr. Ivereigh. (Original here at a somewhat indescript url, not the front page: our translation here). Fr. Lombardi’s denial names the four Cardinals.
Dec. 1, 2014: The blog, Rorate Caeli (here), and the Spanish news service EFE (here) report on Il Sismografo’s report and the preceding news. The former adds speculations regarding who were involved in convincing Pope Benedict XVI to resign and lamented the dearth of investigative reporting on that story. The From Rome blog, follows with its unofficial English translation, in Fr. Lombardi denies Ivereigh’s allegations.
Numerous news agencies then leaped on the report, mostly in the Spanish speaking world:
Europa Press: El Vaticano desmiente una estrategia entre cardinales en el ultimo conclave para elegir a Francesco
Periodista Digital: La Santa Sede niega la existencia de un acuerdo previo al conclave para la eleccion de Francisco (RD/Agencias)
El Papa en la prensa: El complot (que non era) de cuatro cardenales para elegir Papa al Cardenal Bergoglio (This report contains a image of page 16 of the Sunday Telegraph, cited above).
Radio Formula: Cardenales niegan campaña para elección papal de Bergoglio. This Report adds the names of 2 more Cardinals, Sean O’Malley (Boston) and Christoph Schönborn of Vienna, and reports the implications of UDG 81. (Notimex)
Ansa Brasil: Cardeais negam campanha por eleição de Francisco (Source: http://www.papafrancesconewsapp.com/por/)
Ansa Italia: Papa: Porpore negano accordi pre-Conclave (in the briefest of terms).
(This list is not exhaustive.)
Dec. 2, 2014: The From Rome blog publishes for the first time, The Chronology of Reports on “Team Bergoglio”
Dec 2, 2014: Marco Tosatti publishes on his blog, San Pietro e Dintorni, Team Bergoglio. Ivereigh Scrive., which the blog, From Rome notices on his twitter feed, just 2 minutes after the first publication of its Chronology report. Tosatti’s report cites Ivereigh’s clarification, notices that he has not denied anything, and adds corroborative information concerning Bergoglio recognition of the campaign and its effectiveness.
Pope Francis: how cardinals’ Conclave lobbying campaign paved way for Argentine pontiff
New biography of Pope Francis discloses how ‘Team Bergoglio’ reformists lobbied cardinals ‘below the radar’ ahead of Vatican Conclave
Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor Photo: Getty Images
By John Bingham, Religious Affairs Editor
8:15PM GMT 22 Nov 2014
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the former leader of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, helped to orchestrate a behind-the-scenes lobbying campaign which led to the election of Pope Francis, a new biography claims.
The choice of the largely unknown Argentine cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio as head of the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics came as a surprise to Vatican watchers and the faithful alike when the announcement was made in March last year.
The conclave to elect a successor to Benedict XVI, the first pope for more than 600 years to step down, was viewed as wide open, although most predicted that the Italian Cardinal Angelo Scola or Cardinal Marc Ouellet of Quebec would be elected.
When 76-year-old Bergoglio emerged as Pope on only the second day of voting, it was largely explained as a unity candidacy to prevent deadlock between rival factions.
But a biography of Pope Francis, to be published next month, discloses that there had been a discreet, but highly organised, campaign by a small group of European cardinals in support of Cardinal Bergoglio.
Related Articles
15 Mar 2013
14 Feb 2014
15 Mar 2013
The Great Reformer, by the British Catholic writer Austen Ivereigh, nicknames the group “Team Bergoglio” and says members toured private dinners and other gatherings of cardinals in the days before the conclave, quietly putting their case.
Cardinal Bergoglio was effectively the runner-up in the 2005 conclave, in which Joseph Ratzinger was elected, having been put forward by an alliance of mainly European reformists.
But it later emerged that his chances of election were hampered by what amounted to a dirty tricks campaign by opponents from Argentina.
He also effectively pulled the plug on any campaign in 2005, urging would-be supporters to throw their weight behind Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and making clear that he did not wish to be the focus of a faction.
By 2013, he had been largely discounted by most commentators, partly due to his age, as well as because he had signalled that he did not wish to stand in Cardinal Ratzinger’s way.
But by last year, the appetite for reform in the Vatican and a pope without links to the establishment, widely seen as corrupt and riddled with in-fighting, had become intense.
“Spotting their moment, the initiative was now seized by the European reformers who in 2005 had pushed for Bergoglio,” Mr Ivereigh, who once served as Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor’s press secretary, explains in the book.
He wrote that Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, then 80 and no longer with a vote in the conclave, teamed up with the German cardinal Walter Kasper, whose controversial call for remarried divorcees to be allowed to receive communion was one of the main points of division at the synod that Pope Francis held in Rome this year.
Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor’s role included lobbying his North American counterparts as well as acting as a link for those from Commonwealth countries.
“They had learnt their lessons from 2005,” Mr Ivereigh explains. “They first secured Bergoglio’s assent. Asked if he was willing, he said that he believed that at this time of crisis for the Church no cardinal could refuse if asked.
“Murphy-O’Connor knowingly warned him to ‘be careful’, and that it was his turn now, and was told ‘capisco’ – ‘I understand’.
“Then they got to work, touring the cardinals’ dinners to promote their man, arguing that his age – 76 – should no longer be considered an obstacle, given that popes could resign. Having understood from 2005 the dynamics of a conclave, they knew that votes travelled to those who made a strong showing out of the gate.”
A spokeswoman for Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor said that the then Cardinal Bergoglio was not approached with a view to seeking his assent as a candidate for the papacy.
A key turning point came during the series of closed meetings before the conclave, known as congregations, when Cardinal Bergoglio gave a short but moving speech about the state of the Church.
But, the book argues, a ban on official updates about what was happening in the congregations meant that what information did emerge relied on leaks which concentrated on in-fighting within the Italian church.
“For this reason and because the organisers of his campaign stayed largely below the radar, the Bergoglio bandwagon that began to roll during the week of the congregations went undetected by the media and to this day most [Vatican watchers] believe there was no organised pre-conclave effort to get Bergoglio elected,” Mr Ivereigh says.
Dear Rosemarie,
here is a link that discusses the issue a bit by a franciscan brother bugnolo who lives in rome these days.
https://fromrome.wordpress.com/
I myself don’t have enough background to make any sensible comments from a legal perspective, whereas the man cited above does.
My take is that it matters little, these days, what the law says given the batch of cardinals we have in place now. Many of them have no fear of God or man…well maybe they fear a bit of adverse public opinion for a bit, but after awhile they carry on as usual.
There is enough innuendo and rumours doing the rounds since the election to call for a full scale commission of inquiry if one truly fears God and wants only the truth. But the chances of that are occurring are zilch, nada, zero, nothing…etc Given the inaction re the pederasts in the Vatican and the continuing outrageous heretical remarks and practices going on by Bergog, who is going to act? Too much money and privilege to be lost for anyone to take a punt at the issue….cf Card Burke who spoke the mildest of comments about the pope….know anyone else who is ready to step up to the plate? I thought so….none so far…
Good men like Vennari et al are besides themselves with frustration….
So I am sorry I cannot be of any real help re the legal aspects…why JP2 changed the various provisions of Paul 6 and why he changed what was previous etc is not easy to find….one would have to have language skills to ferret out say the Latin and Italian commentaries on the Canon Law to get to the bottom of it….
As with most of the 83 code it is the progeny of the Evolutionary V2 council, which is predicated on constant change. The 17 Code reflected an unchanging set of beliefs and practices but not the 83. Some things appear to be stable in the 83, but they are cast to be interpreted liberally….
I pray that this finds you well
IHB
Fr M
| Página 16 del Sunday Telegraph con el reportaje sobre el “team Bergoglio”. |
https://fromrome.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/denial.jpg Letter in English
Bookmark the permalink.
If Ivereigh is to be believed, was Bergoglio’s election invalid?
London, Nov. 25, 2014 — A remarkable letter to the editor, if ever there was one. A denial, which draws more attention, than the matter would otherwise merit. In today’s Daily Telegraph Letter’s Page, print edition, Maggie Doherty, the press-secretary to Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, denies a key fact in the reporting by Austen Ivereigh, a British journalist who just published a book exposing a concerted effort among Cardinals of the Roman Church to canvass for votes on behalf of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, in the days prior to the Conclave of March 2013, which elected the latter as successor to Pope Benedict XVI. The on-line edition of the Telegraph has a short story about this, by John Bingham, which opens thus:
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the former leader of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, helped to orchestrate a behind-the-scenes lobbying campaign which led to the election of Pope Francis, a new biography claims.
The Election of Pope Francis has seen a great deal more publicity than any in modern times, especially concerning the remarkable novelty of revelations coming from Cardinals themselves — remarkable, since according to papal law, to make such revelations is punished by automatic excommunication!
The papal law is Universi Dominici Gregis, promulgated by Pope John Paul II on the Feats of the Chair of St. Peter, February 22, 1996 A.D.. The key paragraphs regarding this excommunication are as follows:
- Those who, in accordance with the prescriptions of No. 46 of the present Constitution, carry out any functions associated with the election, and who directly or indirectly could in any way violate secrecy — whether by words or writing, by signs or in any other way — are absolutely obliged to avoid this, lest they incur the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See.
- In particular, the Cardinal electors are forbidden to reveal to any other person, directly or indirectly, information about the voting and about matters discussed or decided concerning the election of the Pope in the meetings of Cardinals, both before and during the time of the election. This obligation of secrecy also applies to the Cardinals who are not electors but who take part in the General Congregations in accordance with No. 7 of the present Constitution.
However, today’s denial regards another requirement of the papal law, regarding Conclaves: the express prohibition of canvassing for votes prior to the commencement of the Conclave. John Paul II’s Apostolic Constitution of 1996 makes that a high-crime, punishable by automatic excommunication.
- The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition. It is not my intention however to forbid, during the period in which the See is vacant, the exchange of views concerning the election.
- I likewise forbid the Cardinals before the election to enter into any stipulations, committing themselves of common accord to a certain course of action should one of them be elevated to the Pontificate. These promises too, should any in fact be made, even under oath, I also declare null and void.
- With the same insistence shown by my Predecessors, I earnestly exhort the Cardinal electors not to allow themselves to be guided, in choosing the Pope, by friendship or aversion, or to be influenced by favour or personal relationships towards anyone, or to be constrained by the interference of persons in authority or by pressure groups, by the suggestions of the mass media, or by force, fear or the pursuit of popularity. Rather, having before their eyes solely the glory of God and the good of the Church, and having prayed for divine assistance, they shall give their vote to the person, even outside the College of Cardinals, who in their judgment is most suited to govern the universal Church in a fruitful and beneficial way.
The Reason for the Press-Secretary’s Denial is now manifest
If Maggie Doherty had not gone to the lengths of issuing a denial in such language, I would never have taken notice. But now that she has, having consulted the papal law on Conclaves, it appears manifest why she has. If Austen Ivereigh’s book contains verifiable evidence that any of the Cardinals who voted for Jorge Mario Bergoglio canvassed for votes in the manner forbidden, especially if he tacitly consented to this, then by that very fact (ipso facto) they fell under the penalty of excommunication in the same moment they agreed to do such and/or did such. And, if Bergoglio tacitly agreed (that is, had knowledge, and consented without opposing what they were doing), then he, too, would have been excommunicated prior to the Conclave.
Does this mean that the Papal election was invalid?
But if what Austen Ivereigh alleges, did happen, would the election of Pope Francis be null and void? The grounds for this are entirely different from those alleged in Antonio Socci’s best-selling book in Italy, Non è Francesco, (He is not Francis: i.e. he should not be called Pope Francis), which is based on the fact that on March 13, 2013, Bergoglio was elected by 5 votes, when the papal law only allows 4. Or the challenge now being brought in the Petition to the College of Cardinals, which regards 3 canonical questions which arise from the violations of the penalties imposed by the Second Council of Nicea, the Council of Trent, and Pope Paul IV.
Let us take a look at the papal law, again. It is very important to note, what Pope John Paul II says in the previous paragraph, n. 78:
- If — God forbid — in the election of the Roman Pontiff the crime of simony were to be perpetrated, I decree and declare that all those guilty thereof shall incur excommunication latae sententiae. At the same time I remove the nullity or invalidity of the same simoniacal provision, in order that — as was already established by my Predecessors — the validity of the election of the Roman Pontiff may not for this reason be challenged.(23)
Paragraph 78, regards the buying or selling of votes; which does not seem what Ivereigh has alleged; for when votes are bought and sold, then the validity of the election which would otherwise be worthy of doubt or challenge, is, according to Pope John Paul II’s law, free from ever being so challenged (which he does with the words: “I remove the nullity or invalidity of the same simoniacal provision”). Simony is the crime of buying or selling spiritual things, in this case, of votes, with the promise of monies paid in advance.
However, as regards, however, the excommunications leveled for canvassing, Pope John Paul II does not remove the nullity or invalidity of the election.
This leaves the question, whether the election of Pope Francis could be challenged now?
It seems at least possible, since it is not a question of the invalidity of an election on the basis of the fact that Cardinals were excommunicated on account of vote canvassing, but on account of a certain sort of coercion of the process to elect the Pope, which process must guarantee the liberty of the Cardinals to chose a Pope in a manner free from the deceits and maneuvers of worldly politics.
This doubt of the validity of the election is what seems to be implied by the Press-Secretary’s denial. Because, if it were only a question of a Cardinal’s excommunication for violating secrecy or canvasing votes, he could easily appeal to Pope Francis to be pardoned and the excommunication lifted. Indeed, what victorious candidate, now Pope, would not pardon the Cardinals who helped him get elected, if they did canvass for votes? Thus, it certainly seems to the thoughtful reader, that there may be some more urgent reason for the denial. … Cui prodest?
Addendum of Nov. 26, 3PM GT
I had a look at the general norms in the 1983 Code of Canon law regarding canonical elections and found some confirmatory information. There in Canon 171, there are these stunning requirements for a valid election:
Can. 171 §1. The following are effected to vote:
1/ a person incapable of a human act;
2/ a person who lacks active voice;
3/ a person under a penalty of excommunication whether through a judicial sentence or through a decree by which a penalty is imposed or declared;
4/ a person who has defected notoriously from the communion of the Church.
- 2. If one of the above is admitted, the person’s vote is null, but the election is valid unless it is evident that, with that vote subtracted, the one elected did not receive the required number of votes.
The importance of this Canon, I opine, is thus: if what Ivereigh alleges in his book, is true, and the manner of canvassing votes is that penalized with automatic excommunication, then the Cardinals who did this, and Cardinal Bergoglio — if he expressly consented, as Ivereigh’s print edition says he did — would be excommunicated prior to the begining of the Conclave; and the election would be null and void, on the grounds that the 32 votes Bergolio received in the first round of voting (as reports allege, which votes are presumably nearly or mostly those who participated in the vote canvassing) would be null and void, coming as they did from excommunicated electors. That would make the 78 votes which Cardinal Bergoglio got in the final 5th vote, to be insufficient to elect him. (I am no canonist, so this is my opinion, though I have studied the tract on Canonical Censures at a Pontifical Instititute at Rome).
Postscript
Having carefully read the papal law, Universi Dominici Gregis, of Pope John Paul II, and that modification of Pope Benedict XVI, Normas nonnullas, I find it very curious that neither specifies explicitly who is eligible to be elected Pope. Even the 1983 code is silent. This is a serious deficiency, since the Bull of Pope Paul IV does specify this, and thus, if this matter is not included specifically in modern legislation, the terms of Pope Paul IV’s, Cum ex apostolatus officio, seem to remain in force. (If any canonists know, please leave a comment below, Thanks!).
FOLLOW UP REPORTS:
Bookmark the permalink.
Ivereigh + UDG 81 = A Radical Problem for the Pope
(Screen shot, of Dr. Ivereigh’s twitter timeline: Nov. 21, 2014 A. D.)
Rome, Nov. 27, 2014: Last Friday, His Holiness Pope Francis had the occasion to receive from Dr. Austen Ivereigh, a copy of his new book, the Great Reformer: Francis and the making of a Radical Pope which unbeknownst to both men, would within a week be the cause of great consternation for them both.
As John Bingham, a reporter for the Telegraph, in the UK, reported the next day, Dr. Ivereigh’s book contained the stunning revelation that certain supporters of Jorge Cardinal Bergoglio — whom he names, “Team Bergoglio”— canvassed for his support in the days prior to the Conclave of 2013.
The Curious denial of Ivereigh
A key fact alleged in the book, namely, that Cardinal Bergoglio expressly consented to the work of Team Bergoglio, was denied in a letter published on the Daily Telegraph Letter’s Page, print edition, by Maggie Doherty, the press-secretary to Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor. The text of that letter reads:
As I surmised, yesterday, here at the From Rome blog, in my article entitled, If Ivereigh is to be believed, was Bergoglio’s election invalid?, the version of events reportedly asserted in Ivereigh’s book, presents the opportunity of a grave canonical challenge to the validity of Pope Francis’ election to the office of Roman Pontiff.
Maggie Doherty’s statement is remarkable for several reasons.
The first of which, is that Dr. Ivereigh is, himself, a former secretary to Cormac Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, a close confident as any Cardinal could have, someone who would be de officio familiar and friendly with all the friends and colleagues of the Cardinal the world over, seeing that it would have been his duty to interact and communicate daily with each and every one of them. From such experience, Dr. Ivereigh could have legitimately acquired a vast network of contacts from which he could have first hand information of all which regarded the events prior to the Conclave of 2013; information which could be freely offered him, since the Apostolic Constitution regarding the elections of the Roman Pontiff (Universi Dominici Gregis), penalizes only the divulging of information regarding affairs which occurred in or during the conclave itself.
The second of which, I mentioned yesterday, is that if there were no adverse consequences of the facts presented in Dr. Ivereigh’s book, the Great Reformer, then there would be no need for Maggie Doherty to issue a denial, let alone in the form of a letter to the editor!
The third remarkable aspect of her letter is that it speaks only of Cardinal Bergoglio, and denies only that he was approached or consented to the canvassing of votes. This denial makes it appear that Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor was acting, in divulging it, to protect the reputation of the Pope, perhaps, even on the request of the Vatican Secretary of State.
The fourth remarkable aspect is that she denied only the activities of Cardinals, and said nothing regarding the activities of Bishops or priests or others who may have been involved.
The fifth remarkable aspect is that Maggie Doherty says, “What occurred during the Conclave … is bound by secrecy”. This is grammatically and canonically not correct. All who participated in the Conclave are by Pope John Paul II’s aforementioned Apostolic Constitution are bound to keep secrecy. (Cardinals promise this in n. 12; all participating are bound to secrecy in n. 47; there is an entire Chapter, the fourth, on it; and in n. 47). And in n. 58 of that document, the penalty of excommunication is imposed for its violation. But if the Pope permits, this secrecy can be broken. So it is not the events that are bound, but the persons. Her statement is remarkable in this respect, because it speaks of an undue haste in its composition, without the counsel, at least, of an expert in canon law to review it. (This argues for the possibility that she wrote the letter at the personal request of Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, which we shall now see, Ivereigh would confirm).
The Thicket into which Ivereigh fell on that account
Dr. Austen Ivereigh, hours after the publication of Doherty’s letter to the editor — and after the publication of my own questioning blog post (If Ivereigh is to be believed, was Bergoglio’s election invalid?, which drew out and explicated the canonical problem resulting from the reported claims of his book) — retracted what he said on his Twitter Feed, at 3 AM on Nov. 25, writing in reference to the print edition of his book, already on sale in the USA/UK:
“They secured his assent” (p. 355) shd have read “They believed he wd not oppose his election”. Will amend in future eds. #TheGreatReformer
Which is Twitter abbreviated speak, I surmise and explicate, for:
Where I wrote, “They secured his assent” on p. 355, it should have read, “They believe he would not oppose his own election.” I will amend this in future editions of my book, The Great Reformer.
In another tweet, Dr. Ivereigh included the image of Doherty’s letter, with the message:
+CMOC clarifies in today’s Daily Telegraph letters page
Which lets us know that Doherty acted at the express direction of the Cardinal; somewhat reluctantly admitted, with the positive spin therein, by Dr. Ivereigh. All this within the first week of the books publication!
All this, so far, by way of introduction. Now, I will cut to the chase, as it were:
Ivereigh + UDG 81 = A Radical Problem for the Pope
What Ivereigh has, nevertheless, alleged and yet not denied, and what Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor has not yet denied, as far as I know, is that votes were canvassed.
And paragraph 81 of John Paul II’s law, Universi Domini Gregis, makes that an excommunicatable offense. Yesterday, I erred, when I said “certain” form of canvassing was prohibited. Today, looking at the Latin original of the law, it appears rather than all forms of vote canvassing are prohibited.
Let’s take a look, then, at the Latin original, to understand better how, not just any specific form of vote canvassing is a crime according to the Pope who “brought down the Wall”:
- Cardinales electores praeterea abstineant ab omnibus pactionibus, conventionibus, promissionibus aliisque quibusvis obligationibus, quibus astringi possint ad suffragium cuidam vel quibusdam dandum aut recusandum. Quae omnia, si reapse intervenerint, etiam iure iurando adiecto, decernimus ea nulla et irrita esse, neque eadem observandi obligatione quemquam teneri; facientes contra iam nunc poena excommunicationis latae sententiae innodamus. Vetari tamen non intellegimus, ne per tempus Sedis vacantis de electione sententiae invicem communicentur.
The official English translation from the Vatican Website, renders this text, thus:
- The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition. It is not my intention however to forbid, during the period in which the See is vacant, the exchange of views concerning the election.
This translation is not exact. Here is my own exact translation:
- Let the Cardinal electors, moreover, abstain from all pacts, agreements, promises and any other obligations you like, by which they might be constrained to give or refuse support (suffragium) for anyone (sing. & plural). All of which, if these were to occur, even when with a foreswearing, We decree are null and void, and none of them are to be held by any obligation of observance; those acting against (this), We now, hereby, bind up with the punishment of excommunication latae sententiae. Yet, We do not understand to be forbidden, that they communicate with one another concerning the election, during the time of the Sedevacante.
Now, the problem which arises for Pope Francis, from this, I have pointed out in my blog post yesterday, namely, that an election in which those who might fall under excommunication for violation of this law, expressed in n. 81, might be contested as to its validity. This on account of the general norm of Canon Law (canon 171, § 2), which expressly declares invalid the elections of those who obtained the required number only in virtue of votes of those who were excommunicated at the time of the election (cf. 171, § 1, 3°).
Such excommunication could be by special or general declaration, of a superior or by a law. Thus, the papal Law on Elections.
The sticky wicket, as it were, is that the common objection one hears to such formerly hypothetical discussions is that paragraph n. 35, of the Apostolic Constitution withstands this interpretation.
Let’s quote that here, for the importance that it is due. The text of this paragraph was slightly altered by Pope Benedict XVI, in his decree, Normals nonnullas, just a month before the conclave of 2013. The modified text reads:
No. 35. “No Cardinal elector can be excluded from active or passive voice in the election of the Supreme Pontiff, for any reason or pretext, with due regard for the provisions of Nos. 40 and 75 of this Constitution.”
(The small addition of the citation to n. 75, is all that was made.)
Any objection on the basis of paragraph 35, which would counter the claim of an invalid election on account of excommunicated voters, seems very probable at first inspection, but fails the test of a strict reading of papal law.
Because, if paragraph 35 excused doubt of the validity of an election in which excommunicated Cardinal electors participated, as a similar provision in the law of Pope Pius XII did do, then, there would have been no need for Pope John Paul II in his own law, which abrogated all the terms of previous papal laws specifically regarding Papal Elections, to state in n. 78 (see yesterdays report for text) the necessity of indulging an election, in which simony was involved, with validity, to remove all such doubts arising from a general norm of canon law or a specific penalty regarding simony. And thus, if there is a general norm or specific penalty which invalidates elections for other reasons, then one must presume it remains in force (cf. Canons 20 & 21).
Moreso, because paragraph 35 does not regard specifically the validity of elections, only the right of the Cardinals to vote.¹ But Canon 171, § 2 does not deny the right of excommunicated electors to vote, only the validity of elections in which they participate. These are 2 separate things; and according to the norms of canonical interpretation, the distinction must be recognized as that which was intended by the legislator.² This interpretation seems more probable, because of Canon 164, which applies the entire section of canons regarding elections to all ecclesiastical elections,³ and because of the norm of canonical interpretation, that laws which do not expressly or directly conflict, are not to be understood as doing so. Thus, the failure to explicitly include the words “or excommunication” in paragraph 35 of UDG, lends to the credence that it does not abrogate Canon 171, § 1, 3°, the validity of the election in which such voters participating, being apparently annulled in some such cases, consequently, in virtue of Canon 171, §2.
Thus, the allegations of Ivereigh + the terms of Universi Dominic Gregis, n. 81 = a Radical problem for the legitimacy of Cardinal Bergoglio’s claim to the Papacy.
_________________________________
FOOTNOTES
¹ And this without any apparent reference to Canon 171. For just as it seems incredible that Pope John Paul II in UDC would allow the mad (Canon 171, § 1, 1°) or the schismatic (4°) to vote; hence, similarly, neither those mentioned in 3°, the excommunicated. Thus, it seems more probable that paragraph 35 in UDC is reaffirms the right of the Cardinals not to fall under of Canon 171, § 1, 2° by any claim that might arise during the Conclave from other Cardinals’ accusations.
² However, I remain in the opinion, regarding these matters, as one who is a mere student of Canon Law, not an expert, and certainly not as one whose opinion on how to read it, is anything probative of itself.
³ Including Conclaves: cf. the commentary contained in Codice di Diritto Canonico, a cura di Juan Ignacio Arrieta, Colletti a San Pietro 2004, p. 163.
(Updated Nov. 29 15:15 Rome time)
EastSideHunky's Klobasa Klub 
You must be logged in to post a comment.