golden ticket
Is Pope Francis’ idea of Heaven Way Too Easy?
Vatican City, 9 March 2015 (VIS) – Yesterday afternoon Pope Francis visited the Roman parish of Santa Maria Madre del Redentore in the peripheral suburb of Tor Bella Monaca, where he was welcomed by more than a thousand young people. Before entering the Church, the Holy Father visited the Caritas Centre to greet sick and disabled assisted by the Missionaries of Charity. “Jesus never abandons us”, he said, “because on the Cross he experienced pain, sadness, solitude and many other things. … Never lose your trust in Him”.
Later, in the church, he met with a group of children and young people, and answered their questions. The first was: if God forgives everything, why does Hell exist? The Pope replied that Hell is the desire to distance oneself from God and to reject God’s love. But”, he added, “if you were a terrible sinner, who had committed all the sins in the world, all of them, condemned to death, and even when you are there, you were to blaspheme, insults… and at the moment of death, when you were about to die, you were to look to Heaven and say, ‘Lord …!’, where do you go, to Heaven or to Hell? To Heaven! Only those who say, I have no need of You, I can get along by myself, as the devil did, are in Hell – and he is the only one we are certain is there”.
Not to say that Jesus isn’t merciful. Jesus is. But nevertheless it’s vital that we don’t presume upon His mercy, isn’t it?  Notwithstanding those convenient and burgeoning tenets of ‘social justice’ there is such a thing as real justice.  Pope Francis makes it sound like a serial killer can just call on the Name of Christ at the moment of death and it’s a golden ticket to Heaven! Why repent, atone, or confess?
And what about all that ‘do-gooding’ we keep hearing about?  Skipping that will negate all our prayers and ‘religious homages,’ rendering us hypocrites destined for Hell, yes?
Finally, before celebrating Mass, Francis spoke with the parish pastoral council and their collaborators who described to him the situation in the area, in which many marginalised families live, and where there are many problems linked to drug abuse and crime. “The people of Tor Bella Monaca are good people”, emphasised Francis. “They had the same flaw that Jesus, Mary and Joseph had: they are poor. With the difference that Joseph had a job, Jesus had a job, and many people here do not, but they still need to feed their children. And how does one get by? You know how. Goodness is sorely tested by injustice; the injustice of unemployment and discrimination. And this is a sin, it is a grave sin. Many people are compelled to do things they do not want to do, because they cannot find another way. … And very often people, when they feel they are accompanied, wanted, do not fall into that web of the wicked, who exploit the poor. Mafiosi exploit the poor too, to make them do their dirty work, and then when the police discover them, they find those poor people and not the mafiosi who are safe, and also pay for their safety. Therefore, it is necessary to help the people. … The first pastoral commandment is closeness: to be close to them. … We cannot go to a house where there are sick or hungry children and say ‘you must do this, you must do that’. No. It is necessary to go to them with closeness, with that caress that Jesus has taught us. … This is my main pastoral advice to you”.
Take that pastoral advice for what it’s worth.  Apparently it’s a mortal sin not to absorb and act upon socialist-sounding drivel, you mafioso-type exploiter.  Don’t put demands on the marginalized. They might be driven to commit some unavoidable crime because of you.  Just give them things and fulfill my first pastoral commandment of closeness.

tomasi7The Vatican’s UN Observer Archbishop Silvano Tomasi is always speaking and saying UN-type things on behalf of Christ’s Church.  Why on earth does the Vatican care to inform the UN of their eager and submissive collaboration?

As the Holy See stated during the UN Climate Summit, the enjoyment of a sustainable environment is an issue of justice, respect and equity. Environmental degradation can and does adversely affect the “enjoyment of a broad range of human rights.”[1] The Human Rights Council itself has stated, “environmental damage can have negative implications, both direct and indirect, for the effective enjoyment of human rights.”[2]

Climate change must be true despite the absence of evidence because if it weren’t then they wouldn’t need the FrancisVatican to step in and lend their depleted credibility to try and attach various forms of ‘justice’ to it.

These situations must be approached from the perspective of the principle common and distributive justice. Contributive justice in the sense that all shall contribute according to their financial and technological possibilities; distributive justice, in order to provide to each country the know-how as well as the possibility to develop, to produce goods and to deliver services. Reparative justice implies that those who have benefited more from the use of natural resources, and having thus damaged the environment more, have a special duty to work for its restoration and care.

I learned yesterday that my Alma Mater is now offering a Masters degree in Social Justice.  I suppose they will teach people to sub-divide social justice into billions of categories; one for every dollar’s worth of someone else’s property.

Let’s face it. Christ’s work of redemption is done. We’re all going to Heaven as long as we’re liberals, so lets’ get busy trying to make ourselves more comfortable while we’re alive. Does it seem like it’s getting hotter in here to you?

The human rights obligations relating to the environment also include substantive obligations to adopt legal and institutional frameworks that protect against environmental damage that would interfere with the enjoyment of human rights, including harm caused by private actors. As my Delegation has already stated in the intervention on Transnational Corporations, we reiterate our call to protect human rights from environmental harm. States have to strike a balance between environmental protection and other legitimate societal interests. But the balance should be reasonable and not result in unjustified and foreseeable infringements of human rights.

That’s quite specific, bringing in the human factor and all.  “Wait a minute, speaking on behalf of the Church I’d like to say don’t forget to think about humans, OK, and while you’re at it be sure to increase costs and restrictions on those ‘private actors,’ whatever unfortunate creatures they turn out to be.”

 

Bouncers

It seems that the forces that be are not content to let Vox Cantoris’s apparent reprieve from the Vatican’s Fr. Thomas Rosica stand.  Is there ever an end to punishment for those who cross liberals?

The National Catholic Register which can join the “Reporter” in the fish-wrap category has a comment in its post regarding the recent situation and the lifting of the threat of a lawsuit which was apparently never real in the first place, it was all just a little game.

Why is a Catholic journal of great respect and owned by EWTN allowing an anonymous comment of “Francis Pope” in the combox that contains nothing but calumny, slander, character assassination and defamation?

If you think that I’m peeved now, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet!

I demand its removal, a retraction and a public apology!

Under the pseudonym FrancesPope at the Register, a commenter wrote:

David is no martyr. He’s been brazenly libelling people for years; and we’re not just talking of people like Fr. Rosica. He’s written tirades in his blogs against people who were formally his friends, kids at least 3 decades younger than he. He’s even lashed out at others in the traditionalist movement here in Toronto and undermined their efforts when they’ve organized Solemn Masses on Holy Days at churches that haven’t so much as smelt incense in 40 years.
This man was a ticking time bomb. It was only a matter of time. If Rosica pursues this and decides to reach out to other people David’s libelled it could get interesting. And it would be his own doing.
I’ve been reading comments on the traditional Catholic blogosphere giving David all kinds of advice from “hiring a canon lawyer” to suggestions of writing to our archbishop or even writing to the pope. Some are painting this as some vast conspiracy instigated by Francis to silence blogs that he doesn’t like. With respect, Francis is likely busier smoking a big big spliff with Rabbi Skorka and Msgr. Ricca in a heated jacuzzi in Sanctae Marthae than following bloggers of the likes of Domet. All this support from clueless people who don’t even know him just feeds the beast that is David’s ego at the expense of more sober thought.
Rosica has a good prima facie case for libel. This is true not because the judges are bad or the system is corrupt or because Canada is an awful, hedonistic, sodomitic, anti-Catholic country. If Mars were a common law jurisdiction, David would be in trouble there too. Considering all the facts, should he issue a retraction, remove the objectionable posts and escape this with his finances in order, his roof over his head and not facing [redacted] it’ll be because of Fr. Rosica’s goodness. But knowing David, he won’t do that. Facts and laws be damned. David is always right, you see”
Perhaps I’m naive, but I never heard of these kinds of destructive lies and attacks among Catholics before in my lifetime.  This seems to be a novelty of the new FrancisChurch.  It’s certainly not new among secular liberal politicos and media people, but it is as much an indication of the deeply disturbing nature of this pontificate as his worldwide press approval on the night Francis walked out.
The world is invested in this pope and his goals and they will fight dirty to defend them.  Why?