Over at FirstThings, several more sincere young clergy members manifest a comforting level of true Catholic instinct. God bless them, and may many more follow their example:
Reverend Synod Fathers,
On our ordination days, each of us was asked by his ordaining bishop: “Do you promise respect and obedience to me and my successors?” Each of us answered in the affirmative, confident not in his own merits, but in the grace of God, who called each of us to priestly ministry in his Church. We are young Catholic clergy, and so we answered this question only a short time ago—some of us within the past year. And it is in the same spirit of respect and obedience that we write today. We wish to express our concern about the unfolding crisis of sexual abuse in the Church, especially the Church in the United States. Specifically, we are concerned about how this crisis relates to the Synod on the Faith, Young People, and Vocational Discernment, which is to take place in Rome in October.
The secular media was alive with it!
It was broadcast in Times Square!
Millions watched as the People's Pope unveiled his fine papal portrait...
Have a look for yourself:
Yeah, lots of vibes going on there... you got the Fabio-esque mood lighting, the 80s-style brush strokes, the 70s collage craze, the "let's pretend children love him" pose, the God complex, the flattering weight loss, and the um... rainbow over the Vatican?
What audience is falling for this?
Check out some official portraits of previous popes:
(That look is the reason this is one of the most famous papal portraits of all time.)
Even, although cheesy, this one... Benedict XVI
Here are images of popes on their throne, looking every inch the ruler, as they should be. They are not, however, making themselves out to be Jesus Christ Himself.
Francis the Humble didn't commission a portrait at all. What he has is a propaganda mural taken seriously by only the blindest sycophants.
Just compare those portraits once more: Which popes look more secure in their legacy?
It's no wonder that spoofs of this papal vanity shot are already crowding cyberspace:
As LifeSiteNews recently reported:
Cardinal Kevin Farrell, appointed by Pope Francis to head the Vatican's life and family dicastery, told young people during a televised youth forum that aired Sunday that the Pope wants to hear the voice of young people to bring about change in the Church.
“We really need to let our voice be heard, if not, life will go on as before. And that is not the way we want it to be. We need the Church to be more involved with the young people of the world, and you, my dear people, are the ones who are going to tell us how to do that,” he said.
Young people, he said, must say “how the Church needs to change its ways of doing things so we can be more attuned to the voice and to the hearts of the young,” he added later during the show.
The show was organized by Canada’s Salt and Light and co-hosted by Vatican consultant Fr. Thomas Rosica.
Faithful Catholics have raised concern that just as the recent Synods on the Family were used to undermine the Church’s teaching on marriage and the Eucharist, so too do they fear that the Youth Synod will have an analogous agenda.
By the way, the guy in charge of the Synod, Cardinal Farrell, was disgraced child predator (and former papal advisor) then-Cardinal Ted McCarrick's roommate for six years. He recently claimed to be "shocked and overwhelmed" by revelations of Teddy's Krueger-esque penchant for terrorizing kids and seminarians.
Meanwhile, back at the Circle O (Opus Dei, that is), it's business as usual:
Yes, that's right-- the "conservative" "watchdog of orthodoxy", Opus Dei, our sentry at the gate, is still keeping the sheeple in the dark about what's really going on here. As a friend recently noted, "They will not only go along with, but boldly champion whatever the man in white says, no matter what. They willfully ignore all problems--including heresy, approving adultery, banning death penalty, not answering credible sex abuse cover up allegations--the whole nine yards. As long as they have their pristine place in the Church with tons of money and are left alone, they will cheerlead whatever The Argentinian says."
St. Josemaria, protect us from Opus Dei
On September 15, an article quietly appeared on the Society of St. Pius X website which acknowledged, for the first time, what some are calling the Scandal of the Century—new and devastating revelations of the full extent of the clerical sex crisis which has been rocking the Church for decades.
Though this article commented in depth on the Pennsylvania Grand Jury report, oddly enough it makes no mention of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s bombshell 11-page testimony which in many ways stole the thunder of the Pennsylvania report, and I can’t figure out why they omitted this.
On the Vatican’s reaction to the revelations in Pennsylvania, the Society report quotes Greg Burke’s defense of Francis, claiming that, “Victims should know that the Pope is on their side.”
Pope and his PR man, Opus Dei's Greg Burke
To my knowledge, the author of this Society brief is among only a handful who still take the affidavits and assurances of the Vatican’s damage control agent, Greg Burke, at all seriously.
The Society report is useful since it collates the reactions of others to this biggest crisis since the promulgation of the New Mass. For example, it mentions that “in the US, over 140 theologians, educators and lay directors called for all the American bishops to resign” in an open letter of provocation. But then it also highlights Pope Francis’ (the “Sovereign Pontiff”) words in his Letter to the People of God:
“In his letter, the successor of Peter considered that one of the sources of these ‘ecclesial wounds’ is a ‘peculiar way of understanding the Church’s authority.’ ‘Clericalism’, he accused, ‘supports and helps to perpetuate many of the evils that we are condemning today,’ such as ‘the thirst for power and possessions’ and spiritual corruption.’” (Whether or not the SSPX concurs with this papal diversionary tactic is not obvious to the reader.)
The report moves on into the general reaction to the Pope’s letter, citing the issues raised by journalist Aldo Maria Valli, LifeSiteNews, unavox.it, and Carlos Esteban, a Spanish journalist. But the report does not here add any of its own critique, which I find frustrating since the Society should be in a position to hold a hard line on this. Confusion and ambiguity are tools of the Vatican. Let’s not do that.
In the final section, entitled: The Hypocrisy of the World and the Statistical Reality, the Society report states: “The fact that men invested with the priestly dignity could have committed such acts is indeed a shame.” And then moves on to suggest that much of this is the work of anti-Catholic media:
“The media attacks the Church furiously while pretending to forget that these cases, as scandalous as they may be, are only a tiny minority compared to the abuse committed by adults on children in schools, sports activities, or stepfamilies, not to mention the shady circles of fashion, the show business and the media.”
The report then lists stats which appear to show a higher number of abuse cases in families and among peers than those which originate from priests and religious. No doubt, this may be the case. But what is the Society report getting at?
To my thinking, for even just one Catholic priest to abuse a child or engage in homosexual acts is infinitely worse than for a hundred pagans who don’t know better to do something similar. And the fact that so many dioceses have lost lawsuits and had to pay out millions of dollars is itself proof that this problem cannot be dismissed as mostly the concoction of Catholic-bashing media.
The report continues: “As serious as it may be, it remains a marginal reality, much more marginal, in any case, than the media, always ready to pounce on an opportunity to dishonor the Church, would have it.” And…? The fact that it’s happening at all is the ugly story here.
Closing line: “The Church intercedes for her wounded children, not for this hypocritical and corrupt world for which Christ refused to pray (see Jn. 17:9).”
As a member of the Society faithful, I’m grateful that the SSPX has now addressed the clerical sex abuse crisis in the Church. As a woman living in the world, I appreciate priestly guidance on this issue so that I can be prepared to answer the many questions that are put to me at work about this scandal and how to separate it from the spotless Bride of Christ.
That said, I sincerely hope to hear more from the Society in the future, since to my view they neglected to mention the game-changer in all this, i.e., Archbishop Viganò, and further developments since the month-old PA Grand Jury incident. What does the Society think of the bombshell everyone else is talking about: Archbishop Viganò’s Testimony and the implication of members of the hierarchy, up to and including Pope Francis, in a massive coverup scandal?
Especially since it appears to many that Archbishop Viganò, in choosing to stand alone for morality, is a heroic figure not unlike Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was. The ‘deep state Church’ on which Archbishop Viganò shines his torch could be said to represent the ultimate vindication of Archbishop Lefebvre.
The parallel at least is interesting: Viganò stands alone for Catholic moral theology just as, thirty years ago, Archbishop Lefebvre had stood alone for Doctrine and Liturgy. I would think the Society—more than anyone else—would want to point to this parallel precisely because Archbishop Viganò’s testimony fulfills Archbishop Lefebvre’s prophesy of dire moral consequences if the Church leadership did not stand for traditional doctrine and liturgy after Vatican II.
The great Archbishop Lefebvre knew that when the Church began stripping away the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the priesthood would quickly cease to have a purpose and would degenerate into the evil thing we have today—a twisted and perverse caricature of its former self. This abandonment of doctrinal and liturgical tradition is the state of emergency to which Lefebvre was alluding, is it not? And therefore, he kept his Society aloof from a mainstream Church fraught with spiritual and moral corruption.
Why then, does the Society report close with what appears to be an attempt to minimize the clerical abuse crisis in the Novus Ordo? Is the Society investigating the hundreds of charges against Novus priests to assess credibility, or is there some other method of determining that rampant immorality in the priesthood does not, in fact, follow doctrinal and liturgical laxity? Why does the Society feel the need to champion the Novus Ordo all of a sudden? And is the Society in a good position to even know what’s really going on in the Novus Ordo?
The Society have been removed from the seminaries and dioceses for decades, thank God; but perhaps this make us less apt to know the full extent of the rot than would, say, the priests and bishops who have boots-on-the-ground experience at the diocesan level—conservative and tradition-friendly Novus Ordo priests who are not, by the way, questioning the fact that homosexuality and child abuse are rampant in the new Church. Rather, the response of 20 to 30 honest bishops has been to nod, cringe, and side with Archbishop Viganò, even if some priests may in fact have been falsely accused. The reality is or at least seems to be that sexual abuse has reached crisis proportions in the Novus Ordo. And yet, curiously, the Society seems to be suggesting otherwise, even in the face of diocesan priestly testimony:
Why do this, when the well-meaning diocesan priests and bishops apparently recognize Viganò’s testimony as a way to finally begin to root out the corruption they know exists? You have men such as Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco, for example—a man friendly to the Society in the past—nevertheless calling these horrific revelations a “purification” of the Church; Archbishop Chaput admitted that, based on this Pennsylvania report, a synod on “youth” would be painfully ironic right now; Bishop Paprocki and others are organizing public penance.
Cordileone, Chaput, Paprocki
Does the SSPX not want to get behind these men? If not, why not? What am I missing here? Again, as someone who’s attended SSPX chapels for many years, I’m trying to understand why the Society is taking this course of action, especially since this horrific situation is the ultimate vindication for everything Archbishop Lefebvre did, as well as grounds for the “state of urgency” provisions under which I’ve been receiving absolution from Society priests for the past fifteen years.
Is this not an opportunity for our dear Society to lead boldly and compassionately; to support good prelates in their quest for truth, to encourage their Catholic sense and to commiserate with their anguish and that of the victims and their families? This approach seems more conducive to healing than does quibbling over the precise numbers of the PA Grand Jury and telling us that the “sovereign pontiff” and Greg Burke have it all under control—something that beggars belief, quite frankly.
The Church needs our Society now more than ever. This is not meant to be a criticism, but rather an encouragement. If we lose the Society as defenders of the fort, I fear many of us will not fare well.
It’s been a month of misses for The People’s Pope, no matter what Cupich would have you believe. As his popularity falls drastically (according to this poll), he continues to nail the lid on the coffin of what remains of his positive credibilty:
Preview our new Print edition HERE
Subscribe to the oldest Traditional Catholic Newspaper in the world!
Don't miss the new Ferrara Blockbuster: Can the Church Defend Herself Against Bergoglio? Some Surprising Answers...
"These lessons of history should suffice to dispel the pious fable that every Pope is chosen by the Holy Ghost to lead the Church. This theological error, which Bergoglio has exploited to the hilt, is a key element in the related error of papalotry, which elevates the person of the Pope above the office he occupies and makes of him the leader of a personality cult, rather than a custodian and defender of the Deposit of Faith." --Chris Ferrara
Michael J. Matt: The War to Stop Francis
Father Celatus: Bishops in White and Now a Red Heifer
Hilary White: Advice for Women considering vocations
This just in from the Vatican: “The Holy Father Francis, after hearing the Council of Cardinals, decided to convene a meeting with the Presidents of the Bishops Conferences of the Catholic Church on the theme of ‘protection of minors.’”
So, His Holiness needs his Cardinals to tell him it’d be a good idea to maybe address the massive sex abuse crisis in his church? Well, at least there’s something that looks like acknowledgement going on now. So, when does this meeting happen?
“The summit will take place at the Vatican Feb. 21-24, 2019.”
Are they joking? Next year?! And here we thought Brother Blasé in Chicago was talking through his red hat. Apparently not:
According to a news post in The Tablet, the Vatican is preparing to issue a response to Vatican nuncio Archbishop Carlo Viganò's explosive dossier of allegations that Pope Francis covered up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s sexual abuse of priests and seminarians:
A statement released by the Pope’s council of nine cardinals said it was “aware that in the current debate” of recent weeks the Holy See is about to issue “necessary clarifications”.
Remnant Comment: As exciting as this news is, we the members of the Catholic press wish to confirm that, acting on the Holy Father’s own advice to us on the back of his airplane, we have indeed “read the document carefully and judged it for ourselves.” He needn't, therefore, "say one word" about it.
More episcopal support for Viganò, this time from Most Reverend David J. Walkowiak, Bishop of Grand Rapids. In a letter to his faithful dated September 10, 2018, he states:
“The 11-page testimony released by Archbishop Viganò needs to be investigated to the fullest extent. We need to arrive at the truth. Only a thorough investigation will determine whether the claims made by the Archbishop are true. If they are true, action needs to be taken promptly to fix these failures.”
And as the Vigano momentum grows, more of the ugly truth about Papa Bergoglio himself comes out:
Debris continues to fall from the two-week-old Viganò eruption, and the Vatican is still taking direct hits.
In a letter dated September 6, 2018, to the members of Legatus—an influential organization of business owners and CEOs—founder Thomas Monaghan of Domino’s Pizza fame, publicized the association’s decision to withhold its annual tithe to the Holy See:
“We have also had discussions regarding our (Legatus’) annual tithe to the Holy See, pertaining to how it is being used, and what financial accountability exists within the Vatican for such charitable contributions. The board has begun in dialogue long these lines, and in the meantime has decided to place the Holy See annual tithe in escrow, pending further determination (by the Board). Please certainly pledge our continued devotion to Holy Mother Church, and recognize the tithe has been an important commitment of Legatus since our founding. However, in light of recent revelations and questions, he believe it appropriate to respectfully request clarification regarding the specific use of these funds.” [See full letter below.]
Legatus is under the spiritual direction of Cardinal DiNardo, who said last week that the questions raised by Viganò’s Testimony “deserve answers that are conclusive and based on evidence."
National Catholic Register’s description of Legatus hints at why this is a big deal:
“Members must be Catholics in good standing and an owner, chairman, president or CEO of a business with a minimum of $6.5 million annual revenue and at least 49 employees, or, for a financial service company, with at least 10 employees and $275 million in assets under management. Membership grows through word of mouth, and the only advertisement is with bishops, who must give permission for a chapter to form in their diocese.”
But what about Ave Maria University? How disappointing it must be for AVU founder, Tom Monaghan, to see his dream in the hands of a lifelong Democrat who has joined the shoot-the-messenger crowd down in Naples. A Democrat? Apparently so, if we’re to take President Jim Towey’s own word for it.
By the way, an article in today’s Naples Daily News not only cites The Remnant’s opposition to President Towey’s decision to provide cover for Francis, but also provides the latest update on a growing list of AMU alumni who are not standing for it:
Ave Maria University President Jim Towey’s statement in support of Pope Francis has prompted a swift backlash from several members of the Catholic community, including a group of nearly 70 alumni who signed an open letter asking he make a formal retraction. Towey has since amended his original statement and wrote a follow-up letter apologizing for some of his words, but he maintained his support of Pope Francis…A priest identified as Father John Paul Echert wrote a letter published in The Remnant, a Catholic newspaper, that said he was “utterly astonished and appalled” by Towey’s words.
Hats off to Mr. Monaghan and his Legatus organization for a courageous decision to help defund the Vatican, at least until Archbishop Carlo Viganò’s credible accusations against Pope Francis have been thoroughly investigated and steps taken to reform and restore a Catholic hierarchy in obvious moral and spiritual chaos.