A Canon212 reader writes:
I posted this comment on today’s Vortex:
“CM does great work, but there’s a hot potato it won’t touch – Bergoglio is not the Pope! According to Pope John Paul’s Universi Dominici Gregis, which is absolutely binding on the whole church, Bergoglio is not the pope unless the 2013 conclave was carried out strictly in accordance with UDG. It’s obvious to anyone not living under a rock or without their head stuck in the sand that it wasn’t. For over a year Bishop Gracida of Texas has been calling for the Cardinals who participated in the conclave to meet together to deal with the situation, but he is mostly ignored.”
And received this FrancisReply from Church Militant:
“If NO cardinal who was in the conclave has not come out and said that – then neither can you. And NO, not every cardinal in the conclave was bad. Burke was in there, Sarah, and so forth. So for your claim to be accurate, you would have to say either, you have more knowledge and understanding then the men IN the conclave, or they are ALL in on it. We dont think you have more knowledge then they had/have, nor do we think they are ALL in on it.
We are going to let your comment remain, ONLY so people see our response to it.”
Then I tried to reply and found out I was FrancisBanned.
Comment: In FrancisChurch, no matter how faithful you are, there is a point where a hammer will drop down out of the sky and onto your head until you turn off your brain and cover your eyes and ears.
I really detest censorship of authentic commentary. We denounce in progressives what we ourselves do, limit the ability of others to speak freely. Civil discourse in the days of social media require limits on speech that is pornographic, vulgar, threatening, but short of that, to limit expression is totalitarian, how can it be condoned? It’s horrible, and I am amazed at how common that thinking has become. Why are we so threatened by the opinions of private individuals, are people not entitled to have opinions? If we are just an echo chamber, what if we are operating in error, will we ever come to know it? I’m beginning to think we are all under diabolical disorientation at various levels. After all, we are living in a time where the pope is an obvious homosexualist who actively dismantles Catholicism while promoting pagan practices including infanticide, suicide, shamanism, the sexual abuse of children and consorting with “spiritS”. He refuses to kneel before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament and has refused to kneel or genuflect, except to Muslims or Communists. Yet Catholics continue to carry on as if it were 2012.
I think we’ve all gone a little goofy.
Ohhh…..it ain’t all that bad! Church Militant showed me the door several years ago after I said some not very complimentary things about Bergoglio but life goes on. The internet, being what it is, will always have avenues for you to express your contempt for the Argentine Apostate.
Interestingly, CM has now come around to saying some of the very same things for which I was banned but that’s another story…….
I got band from Church Militant when I asked the honest question if Michael Voris wears a wig.
Strict!
Was that your main concern? Really? Who cares if he wears a wig? There are more important things to worry about…don’t you think?
It’s just a question.
How dare you, Father. Voris is a god.
How many active Cardinals have called Amoris laetitia “Heresy” especially since it was published in AS ..as “there is no other interpretation” ? None
How many active Cardinals have stated that the Francis’s sentiment that the death penalty is suddenly inadmissible is Heresy especially as the teaching since the Church fathers has been changed in the official Catechism? None
How many Cardinals have stated that the destruction of conservative orders and the coverup of favored prelates is an injustice before God. None.
How many active Cardinals has stated that the Pagan working document instrumentum laboris is a agenda of Apostasy? None
How many active Cardinals have publicly countered Cardinal Cupich statements and actions as even unchristian, let alone Catholic ? None
CM needs to acknowledge a harsh reality. The prelates of king Francis XIII would rather become non-Catholic and maintain their lifestyle then engage in a fight to maintain being Catholic.
so… in conclusion for ALL YOUR “none” is…
that ALL the “cardinals” and all the “bishops” are PART OF THE COVER UP.
by OMISSION.
because you can have ONLY TWO CHOICES:
OR you are with Crhist AND the REAL theology
Or you are AGAINST Crhist and the “desctruction” of the “church”
_maybe the church of the destruction_ ??
Yes. Isn’t Church history filled with that same story of abandonment even beyond the confines of 1500’s England? The Arian Heresy comes to mind. Lonely Athanasius was not an active bishop as he was retired. He was also excommunicated for speaking the Truth . And John the Baptist was alone in his condemnations of errors. None the Pharisees publicly backed him in front of Herod’s evils. Human beings sacrificing for God’s Truth, that they claim to believe in, is a rare commodity then as now.
Good to remember.
Didn’t Cardinal Brandmuller condemn the working document for the Amazon synod?
Didn’t Cardinal Brandmuller condemn the working document for the Amazon synod?
CM is all about banning and toeing “their” party line whatever it may be. Soon enough they’ll have a miraculous breakthrough and pretend that yours was their position all along. Part the clouds and cue the angels. The one eighty will be visible to all save those who have their eyes pointed upward at the all knowing Voris–where spin and falsehood continues in the measure he allows.
I’m truly sick of them. They do work. Some is good. Some is quite awful as they play “pope” in an effort to control the narrative. It’s much the same at 1Peter5. Believe what I do or watch out — vilification, pontificating, bullying, shaming, and, when they discover that they’re raging at themselves with zero argument, then the ban hammer comes down.
Some time ago on CM I commented that CM roundly castigated modernist, ultra-leftist, secularized cardinals and bishops. I completely agreed with this. However, if Bergoglio didn’t happen to be pope he would have been at the top of this list of mediocrities. There were crickets about Pope Francis. This was back in the day when CM fell back on the premise that the poor beleaguered pontiff was a captive of the dark forces in the Vatican — something that manifestly was preposterous given Bergoglio’s personality. My sage comment was tagged and discarded. Then one day Bergoglio came out with some overtly pro-Gay nonsense and CM’s honeymoon with this Supreme Pontiff crashed and burned. As to whether or not Bergoglio is actually the pope or not is a matter of opinion but prudence dictates that an organization such as CM be very careful so as not to be completely discounted by those few sheeple who still attend the liturgical high-jinx.
There is nothing in Canon Law or the moral law that prohibits anyone’s having or expressing an opinion, with the exceptions of confessional matter and matter subject to an oath of confidentiality.
CM has it backward. The Cardinals who were there are bound by an oath of secrecy. The laity are not.
CM: “If NO cardinal who was in the conclave has not come out and said that – then neither can you.”
Why?
CM: “And NO, not every cardinal in the conclave was bad.”
So what? Where in UDG does it say that transgressions require malice or bad character?
CM: “So for your claim to be accurate, you would have to say either, you have more knowledge and understanding then [sic] the men IN the conclave, or they are ALL in on it. We dont think you have more knowledge then [sic] they had/have, nor do we think they are ALL in on it.”
So the cardinals _can’t_ be wrong? Then why did JPII write UDG in the first place? The document presupposes that the cardinals can fall short of the law of the Church. Besides, what about the information we have that’s public and which, by all appearances, conflicts with UDG? Are the laity supposed to blind themselves to the obvious implication? How does one even do that? Magic?
CM does good work. I was banned several years ago for criticizing Pope Francis but got the ban lifted after they started calling out PF themselves about a year ago.
Now I make no comments on CM basically because I agree with all they do except they should never reject a comment unless it is crude and salacious.
They have a great interview with Cd. Zen. Poor guy had to eat dinner with Parolin and Francis.
As to whether or not Pope Francis is legitimately the pope ….. what does it matter? The time and talent wasted on thinking about this, trying to prove it one way or another, is better spent informing others of the truth of the Faith or in prayer. Pope Francis acts like he is the “top dog”. He has all of the power and is supported by those one level below him whom he has chosen. Those who believe that he is not truly the pope can yell it from the highest mountain, throw a tantrum and make a list a mile long as to why he isn’t really the pope and it will make absolutely no difference. A man in a position of supreme authority, who cannot be judged by any other man, cannot be ousted by any man and who can basically do whatever the hell he wants, is the pope whether or not in name only. We would we be having this discussion if the person in question was JPII???
Be aware – be ready – Maranatha
Popes matter. If there isn’t a Catholic pope, then getting one should be on the agenda.
Left CM when they lambasted the SSPX as a ‘phony’ order of priests who are not truly Catholic and never recanted their mistake. I have their letter to me to back this attitude up. Sorry, Michael, when you grow up and realize that this order of priests are the true saviors of the Roman Mass I will return to CM.