Fra’ Festing Just Says No (It’s about time someone did)
First, the wily Argentinian Jesuit on the Chair of Peter extorted the resignation of Fra’ Matthew Festing, former Grand Master of the Sovereign Order of the Knights of Malta (to use its popular name), summoning him to a secret audience on short notice and then demanding that he write out and sign a letter of resignation on the spot. With that, whatever remained of the sovereignty of the Sovereign Order of Malta was de facto annihilated.
Then, after having told Festing during the same audience that it would be alright if he were reelected as Grand Master at the meeting of the Order’s State Council commencing in Rome on April 29—a representation worth less than a Venezuelan Bolivar—Pope Bergoglio had his henchman, Archbishop Becciu, inform Festing that he is not to participate in the election or even be present in Rome while the meeting is held. In what was evidently thought to be a cunning maneuver, Becciu attempted to pass off this outrageous abuse of authority as his own decision, which he had merely “shared with the Holy Father.”
The Pope and the Cardinal go together, hand in hand
As Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Gerhard Müller is charged with the duty to “spread sound doctrine and defend those points of Christian tradition which seem in danger because of new and unacceptable doctrines.” When confronted with the “new and unacceptable doctrines” enunciated in the disastrous Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia, however, Müller engages in a shameless cover-up, leaving it to concerned members of the laity to defend the Church’s infallible moral teaching from AL’s blatant attack upon it.
In an interview published by Aleteia on April 21, Müller declares that “The pope has not, will not, and cannot change Revelation. Some claim that the pope has changed the foundations of Church morality and has relativized the sacrament of holy matrimony. This he would not and cannot do.”
With Pope Bergoglio’s approval, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has issued a letter respecting “regularization” of the marriages between adherents of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX). In pertinent part the letter provides that:
“to reassure the conscience of the faithful, despite the objective persistence of the canonical irregularity in which for the time being the Society of St Pius X finds itself;
“the Holy Father… has decided to authorize Local Ordinaries the possibility to grant faculties for the celebration of marriages of [SSPX] faithful…;
“the Local Ordinary is to grant the delegation to assist at the marriage to a priest of the Diocese (or in any event, to a fully regular priest), such that the priest may receive the consent of the parties during the marriage rite;
“followed, in keeping with the liturgy of the Vetus ordo, by the celebration of Mass, which may be celebrated by a priest of the Society;
“Where the above is not possible, or if there are no priests in the Diocese able to receive the consent of the parties, the Ordinary may grant the necessary faculties to the priest of the Society who is also to celebrate the Holy Mass…”
After four years of the Bergoglian tumult, it is undeniable that we are witness to a Pope who is averse to sound doctrine and whose teaching, if one can call it that, is generally unreliable if not positively contrary to the Faith. The faithful look on with growing alarm and disgust as Pope Bergoglio commits an error almost every time he opens his mouth to speak, earning the world’s applause for his cavalier disregard of orthodoxy and traditional disciplines of Apostolic origin. The Church is rocked by the horrific impact of his formal, ghostwritten documents. Evangelii Gaudium, Laudato si’ and Amoris Laetitia are rife with false statements of fact, misleading citations, dubious opinions on matters far beyond the papal competence, captious theological propositions, and blatant departures from prior teaching on faith and morals—always intermingled, however, with orthodox bits and pieces that allow for a sophistical defense of continuity with the Magisterium.
When, during that masterful press conference, Donald Trump told CNN’s weasely interrogator Jim Acosta that he had changed his characterization of CNN’s coverage of matters Trump from “fake news” to “very fake news,” even the hostile audience of media jackals arrayed before him had to laugh, the response to humor and the truth it so often reflects being instinctive and difficult to suppress.
The “Russia investigation” narrative is the fakest of the fake news the liberal media propaganda organs have been pumping out ever since they realized that Trump might actually win the GOP nomination and—oh the horror—the Presidency itself.
On and on and on the amorphous “Russia investigation” goes, like a Hydra that sprouts new heads whenever a head is cut off. Now in its sixth month, the “Russia investigation” involves “the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and representatives of the director of national intelligence,” as well as the House Intelligence Committee and the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism.
How the bankrupt theory of evolution has overthrown the Genesis account of the Fall with the help of its Catholic enablers.
Editor’s Note: With some frequency we encourage our Remnant website visitors to subscribe to The Remnant. The reason we do this is because so much of our work does not appear online, and in order to keep our website in operation we must keep our newspaper in operation. The newspaper subsidizes the website. This scholarly refutation of Evolution by Chris Ferrara, for example, provides a case in point for why it is necessary to subscribe to our Print/E-edition if you wish to benefit from the full body of our work. This 3-part article appeared in The Remnant almost two years ago and becomes more timely every day. Even Pope Francis (perhaps I should say of course, Pope Francis) says that that Evolution is not at all inconsistent with Church teaching because “God is not a magician and evolution may have been necessary for him”. We are well aware of how controversial and even lampoonable a strict defense of Genesis has become in 2017. And, quite frankly, we don’t care. Modern science also dismisses the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Modern science calls the Resurrection of Christ a hoax. Modern science denies the existence of the soul. If we are to allow modern scientific theories (and let us not forget, it’s called the ‘Theory of Evolution’) and scientism dictate what we Catholics believe and don’t believe, then all is lost, universal apostasy is complete, and the gates of Hell will have prevailed. We cannot and will not be bullied or intimidated when it comes to the defined doctrine of the Catholic Church that God created man ex nihilo, out of nothing, in a supreme act of His will. If this causes our sophisticated critics to laugh at and mock the Church and to laugh at and mock those of us who believe with all of our hearts that God did not make a man out of a monkey, so be it. And in this holy season of Lent we recall how the world laughed at and mocked the Man Who said He was God. Quite frankly, we at The Remnant are perfectly content to laugh at and mock Evolution—possibly the greatest hoax in history—and in the following series we rely on science as well as Church teaching to demonstrate what a laughable joke this antiquated and now totally outdated theory has become. MJM
Part I: A Theory Not Worthy of Catholic Credulity
“When we descend to details, we can prove that no one species has changed…” -Charles Darwin, 1863
"Through use and abuse of hidden postulates, of bold, often ill-founded extrapolations, a pseudo-science has been created. It is taking root in the very heart of biology and is leading astray many biochemists and biologists…” -Pierre-Paul Grassé, evolutionary zoologist, 1973
As the atheist ideologue Richard Dawkins famously observed in his oxymoronically entitled The Blind Watchmaker, “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” Darwinian and neo-Darwinian evolution provide the atheist with a substitute for God, concealing the insuperable problem noted by Hume (as quoted by Dawkins): “I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn’t a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one (emphasis mine).”
Pope Bergoglio is a man in a hurry. It is almost as if he working on some sort of deadline to impose his designs upon the Church—a deadline of four years to be exact, as LifeSiteNews reminded us regarding an anonymous comment by one of the cardinals who voted for this disaster of a Pope: “Four years of Bergoglio would be enough to change things.”
The co-conspirators themselves have openly admitted the existence of a plot to elect Bergoglio to “change things” in the Church rapidly and “irreversibly” in ways exceeding even the catastrophic innovations of the past fifty years—or so they thought. Pope Benedict’s secretary, Archbishop Georg Gänswein, spoke of “a dramatic struggle” during the 2005 Conclave “between the “so-called ‘Salt of the Earth Party’ (named after the book interview with Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) comprising ‘Cardinals Lopez Trujillo, Ruini, Herranz, Ruoco Varela or Medina’ and their adversaries: ‘the so-called St. Gallen group’ that included Cardinals Danneels, Martini, Silvestrini or Murphy O’Connor’ — a group Cardinal Danneels referred jokingly to as “a kind of mafia-club…” Another member of the “mafia-club” is Walter Kasper, the German arch-heretic who had fallen into obscurity until Bergoglio’s arrival on the scene.
As his pontificate nears its fourth anniversary, Pope Francis ever more clearly reveals a megalomaniacal conviction that the Church and her teaching are his to remake as he sees fit. Praising his own rather absurdly denominated “Apostolic” Exhortation opening the door to Holy Communion for public adulterers, Francis told the Jesuit general congregation gathered in Rome last October that Amoris Laetitia represents nothing less than a radical change in the Church’s view of “the whole moral sphere,” which at the time he was a seminarian “was restricted to ‘you can,’ ‘you cannot,’ ‘up to here, yes, but not there.’ It was a morality very foreign to discernment.”