Grand Scheme of Things

My sources have confirmed the movement of ecclesiastics in the Philippines.

The hopes of another ecclesiastic to follow in the footsteps of his revered teacher are now going down the drain because of the powers at play from the distant corn field near the Valley, a prime lot and center of thinking run by a society of grand schemers.

I expect the movement of a powerful and cheerful and sometimes dramatic cleric to the echelons of power soonest.

The movement of a young up and coming rock star of a cleric to a neighboring mission to that darling of the media is an indication of things to come.

In the grandest scheme of things, was it the Holy Spirit working or the machinations of men who are more concerned of their liberal and careerist agenda?

It is true indeed.

The Church is holy, but its members here on earth are still fallible and mortal men struggling to follow the will of the Lord.

Pray unceasingly.

BREAKING NEWS: So called "Bishop of Bling" appointed to Vatican post

Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst, the former Bishop of Limburg who triggered a scandal over the cost of his lavish bishop’s residence, has been given a new assignent in Rome: he will hold a catechesis-related post in the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelisation.

 

Read more here.

BREAKING NEWS: Conservative Opus Dei bishop removed by Pope Francis!

Read the entire article before you react.

***


(Reuters) - Pope Francis has dismissed a Paraguayan bishop accused of protecting a priest suspected of sexually abusing young people, the Vatican said on Thursday.

The sacking followed a Vatican investigation of the bishop, the diocese and its seminaries, said the statement, which gave no details.

Vatican sources said the bishop had refused to resign after the investigation and reports of irregularities in his diocese and clashes between the conservative Livieres Plano and other bishops in the country. [The reporter makes it appear that the sacking is caused by two things one of them is Plano IS conservative.]

The Argentinian-born pontiff has vowed zero tolerance of clerics who abuse minors, after church scandals in several countries over many years. Last May, Francis called such abuse an "ugly crime" and likened it to "a Satanic mass".

The Ciudad del Este diocese said in a statement that accusations that he lacked unity with the other bishops of Paraguay were "unfounded" but that he would obey the pope's order. The diocese's statement did not mention the allegations that he had protected the priest accused of sexual abuse.

The Vatican's ambassador in Paraguay, Archbishop Eliseo Ariotti, told reporters in the capital Asuncion it would be up to the new administrator of the diocese to make decisions regarding the priest accused of sexual abuse.

Ariotti said that as part of the disciplinary procedure against Livieres Plano, the bishop would not be allowed to say mass in public but only in private.

According to reports in Catholic media while the Vatican investigation was in progress, Livieres Plano had promoted a priest accused of sexual abuse while serving in the United States.

CONSERVATIVE

Livieres Plano had defended both himself and the priest, saying the charges were unfounded, Catholic media have reported.

The bishop was a member of the conservative Roman Catholic group Opus Dei and often clashed with more liberal clerics, according to the reports.

The Vatican said Pope Francis had taken the "onerous decision" to remove Livieres Plano after careful examination of the results of the Vatican investigation.

SNAP, a U.S.-based victims' group which has often called on the Vatican to discipline bishops suspected of covering up abuse, said it was "encouraged" by the move. It said Livieres Plano had "protected and promoted a credibly accused sex offender cleric".

BishopAccountability.org, a U.S. resource center on sexual abuse in the church, called the move "bold" but said the Vatican should say if he had been "fired primarily because of his wanton disregard for the safety of young people" or because of his divisive behavior in his diocese. [They have a point.]

The dismissal of the Paraguayan bishop came two days after the pope approved the arrest in the Vatican of a former archbishop accused of paying for sex with children while he was a papal ambassador in the Dominican Republic.


***

Pray for our bishops.  Stop making them into soap opera stars.

They are not.

They are pastors.  And they must be pastoring, not crying on TV or talking in every retreat or forum.

Get it?

So.....the pope is out to sack incompetent bishops or bishops who transfer erring priests, eh?

I have some dioceses in mind here in the Philippines.

Here in Metro Manila, we have......

***

UPDATE:  6:30PM

It seems observers are seeing the deep reason for the "firing"

Livieres was named bishop of Ciudad del Este in 2004 and immediately disturbed other more progressive bishops in Paraguay by opening his own seminary, following a more orthodox line than the main seminary in the capital, Asuncion. Paraguay's bishops are known for their progressive bent in a poor country where liberation theology found fertile ground.

Relations between Livieres and the rest of Paraguay's bishops worsened when he got into a public spat with the then-archbishop of Asuncion, whom he accused of being gay.

....


There was no reference in the Vatican statement that Livieres' removal had anything to do with Urrutigoity. [A priest accused of sex abuse but the bishop accepted in his diocese.] Rather, the Vatican spoke of the need to maintain unity among Paraguay's bishops, suggesting that political and ideological issues were of far greater concern to Rome and that Urrutigoity's past was a secondary factor.

As a result, the removal underscored the deep ideological shift in the Catholic Church with Francis in charge. Vatican watchers say it is highly unlikely that Pope Benedict XVI would have removed either Livieres or the "bling bishop," since both had strong supporters among the more conservative prelates in Rome who appreciated their firm orthodoxy in the face of opposition from more progressive parts of the church.

Urrutigoity had been a member of the schismatic, traditionalist Society of St. Pius X. After leaving the society, he joined the Scranton diocese, where he founded a priestly society where the pre-Vatican II old Latin Mass was celebrated. In 2004, Scranton Bishop Joseph Martino suppressed the society, citing financial instability and allegations of sexual misconduct against Urrutigoity.

And the bishop does this.

 

Pope Francis scales down his public appearances

Vatican City, 14 June 2014 (VIS) – The Holy See Press Office published further information on the Pope's engagements during the months of July and August 2014.

During the month of July, all Wednesday general audiences will be suspended. They will resume on the first Wednesday of August in the Vatican, taking place on 6, 20 and 27 August.

On Wednesday, 13 August, there will be no general audience as the Pope will travel to Korea (from 13 to 18 August).

The Angelus prayer will continue to take place in the Vatican every Sunday in July, except during the days of the Holy Father's absence during his trip to Korea (Sundays 15 and 17 August).

The morning mass at the Domus Sanctae Marthae will be suspended during the summer, from early July until the end of August, and will resume at the beginning of September.


***

In a most recent news, the Holy See Press Office has denied the Holy Father is sick.

Always keep in mind, that popes are no superhumans.

They are humans occupying a supernatural office.

Think about it.

BREAKING NEWS!!! Paul VI to be beatified in October 2014?

Well placed sources in the Holy See have informed me that Venerable Paul VI will probably be beatified on October 19, after the Synod of Bishops.

Take this with a grain of salt.  Only Pope Francis can set the date but this is the date going around the rumor mills in the Vatican.

So is the Holy See in a rush to place in the altars the so-called Vatican II popes?

How about this pope?

No, can do?  Why?  We need the radical Jews and history-revisionists to give their assent before he gets beatified?

Since when did people of other faiths have a say in who we beatify, huh?

"Vice Pope" Maradiaga opens his mouth...again!

From the Vatican Insider

***

La Croix has interviewed Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, President of the Commission of eight cardinals [there's the source of his attitude!] chosen by Pope Francis to advise him on Curia reform. The Honduran cardinal and Archbishop of Tegucicalpa [what a lively archdiocese that is!  ha!]  gave a broad overview of what the landscape of the Church’s central government could look like in the future. The original French article by Sébastien Maillard can be read here. The cardinal stressed, amongst other things, his idea of creating a Congregation for the Laity (lay people are currently represented by a Pontifical Council). [it's his dream...wild dream!]

“The Church definitely needs this. We have a Congregation for Bishops, for Religious Life and for the Clergy, but the Laity only gets a Pontifical Council even though they are a majority within the Church. We cannot go on like this. After the Second Vatican Council all the laity had was a Secretariat. A Pontifical Council is limited because it has no legal power. This is why we need a real Congregation.”  [And the point is?]

According to the cardinal, within this Congregation there should also be a Pontifical Council for the Family, “headed by a married couple. Why not? It would be a wonderful sign. And it would be great to have a Congregation for the Laity within the Church. I can tell you that the Spirit is pushing in this direction. More and more lay men and women are taking the joint responsibility of being leaders in the Church.”  [What spirit?  Is this cardinal saying that our pastors need the help of the sheep?  Is this cardinal implicitly saying that celibate men cannot decide for married couples regarding affairs for married couples?  Is he sounding like the Ateneo theologians now? And what is Bishop Ongtioco doing...........................................NOTHING................................STILL]

Regarding the fate of the Institute for the Works of Religion (IOR) and its possible elimination, Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga said “everything depends on what the reports say. But it is better to heal a sick man than bring someone back from the dead. I think we will avoid amputating any arms.”

Maradiaga also discussed the Commission’s work in terms of the Church’s central government, saying that he and the other seven cardinals “have now noted down all our observations regarding the Secretariat of State. We have stressed that the Secretary of State is meant to essentially be the Pope’s secretary. He is not a prime minister or a viceroy.”  [And look what he is doing!]

The Honduran cardinal – who has given so many interviews it almost seems he has been given a “mandate” [given?  or he likes to talk off the cuff too, you know, like, you know...ya know?] to talk about reform – mentioned the possibility of creating one single financial body. “It could be called a financial secretariat. It is a very reasonable idea and I believe it is necessary in order to help us be more organised and serve better. Finances are split between the various dicasteries. We currently have the Administration of the Patrimony of the Holy See, the Prefecture for the Economic Affairs of the Holy See, the Governorate of Vatican City, the IOR… Maybe, but this is one of the things we are discussing; it could be an idea for one person to be responsible for everything.”

And this person, Maradiaga said, will be a cardinal. “Given the system currently in place in the Vatican, it is likely a cardinal would be put in charge of the financial secretariat. But a permanent Council could also be set up as a support and it could include some lay people.”

***

These are dangerous attempts if you ask me.

And we continue to wait...

By the way, this is the cardinal that said that the prefect of the CDF does not know what he is doing.

Pope Francis' tweet for Pope benedict

Indeed the pope emeritus is a man of humility. He is an example for our times when men who crave for power, wealth and attention, cling on to positions as if it were a birthright, an inheritance.

May Pope Benedict's example teach us that humility is far beyond dressing simply. It takes guts to step down and leave the golden throne!

His example will SHAME people who cling on to positions of power, who think they are doing God's will, who think they are fulfilling their mandate, when in fact their only desire is to fulfill their lust and greed!

If you are looking for the humblest man, do not look at someone who dresses simply but is full of hate and pride.  Do not look for someone who always smiles and is friendly in public, but is in fact hateful and conceited, shunning the company of people he thinks are inferior than he is.

What these liberals wackos now enjoy and call as the Francis Revolution would not have happened if a humble worker in the Lord's vineyard names Benedict, did not have the courage and humility to admit that it is time to let go.

Benedict is the man of courage and humility.

Thank you Pope Francis for proclaiming that truth!

God bless our pope and our pope emeritus!

A lot of people think Pope Francis changed Catholic dogma

Well, a lot of liberals and crazy hippies still living in the 1960s aggiornamento, trying to revive a brain-dead patient named "Spirit of Vatican II".

Council of Trent happened 450 years ago

We should have celebrated the 450th Anniversary of Trent, but liturgical experimentors like Fr. Geny Diwa and other Chupungcan liturgists tend to kill this Council and instead focus our attention on Vatican II which happened 50 years ago.

What is it with Trent that modern liturgists loath?

Wasn't this Council that trashed the Protestant Heresy?

Wasn't this Council that strengthened the Church?

***

WASHINGTON — The Council of Trent — which firmly reasserted Catholic doctrine in the face of the Protestant Reformation — concluded its last session exactly 450 years ago on Dec. 4, inspiring a renaissance of Catholic art and spirituality that shaped the life of the Church for nearly half a
millennium.

“Trent created the form of Catholicism that evangelized the New World, that gave birth to many saints and that successfully met the challenge of the political madnesses of the 19th and 20th centuries. That’s a noble legacy,” said Catholic author George Weigel.  [Don't start me with the Vatican II comparison now.]

The Council of Trent was convened on Dec. 13, 1545, in Trento, Italy — 28 years after an Augustinian monk named Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses to a church door, igniting the Protestant Reformation. The bishops, abbots and theologians at Trent responded to the issues raised by Luther and other Protestants in 25 sessions over nearly two decades, adjourning on Dec. 4, 1563.

Trent addressed some of the most fundamental questions of Christianity, such as the relationship between Scripture and Tradition and the nature and number of the sacraments.  [See that?  This Council was convened to address created by that monk!]

“One was the question of: how are we saved? Are we saved by grace alone or are we saved by works alone — good works alone? Or are we saved by some combination of grace and good works? Of course, the Lutherans said by grace alone,” said Jesuit Father John O’Malley, a Georgetown University historian and author of Trent: What Happened at the Council. “The Council of Trent wrestled with this problem and said we’re primarily saved by grace. We do not save ourselves, yet, in some limited way, some small way, with the help of grace, we do contribute to our salvation. We’re not puppets of grace. We have to cooperate in some way.”  [Yet after Vatican II, you hear liberals saying "we are all saved no matter what religion we join!"]

In addition to the debate over salvation, Trent confirmed the sevenfold number of the sacraments, set the canon of Old and New Testaments, declared that Scripture and Tradition are both authoritative, affirmed the sacrificial nature of the Mass and unhesitatingly renewed its commitment to the doctrine of transubstantiation, which holds that the substance of bread and wine in the Eucharist is wholly changed over into the substance of Christ’s body and blood.  [In Vatican II...Seven sacraments, check!  Canon of Old and New Testaments, check, still the same! Sacrificial nature of the Mass...check...though some liberals call it, the Meal of Love...transubstantiation...though some Vatican II liturgists call it "Christ's presence is in the people assembled."  Ugh!]

But Trent also launched a sweeping reform of Church life that affected everything from how people become married to how they learn about the faith, laying the foundation for institutions and practices that Catholics today take for granted, historians say.  [those are the keywords people!]

“They wanted to bolster the spiritual and moral character of the clergy, which had been one of the contributing factors to the Reformation. They wanted to kindle a similar kind of piety in laypeople. And they wanted to make the Church more missionary or evangelical,” said James Hitchcock, a historian at St. Louis University and author of History of the Catholic Church: From the Apostolic Age to the Third Millennium. 

“Now, I think most of us, even those who have been part of the post-Vatican II disorders, have lived with that as a kind of an ideal of what the Church ought to be, and that’s directly attributable to Trent.”  [That's because the Vatican II hijackers claimed the Council threw away Trent! And Super Council Vatican II started everything!]

One abuse that Trent ended was pluralism among bishoprics. “Let’s say you live in Pittsburgh, and you found out that your bishop was also functioning as bishop of Cleveland and as bishop of Minneapolis. That would … seem very, very strange. But the practice of ‘pluralism,’ as we call it, was very common before Trent,” Hitchcock said.  [We have a priest appointed to the CBCP yet he thinks he can control other bishops about how they celebrate Mass and even tell them to disobey the pope's motu propio Summorum Pontificum.  Yeah, we still have that pluralism.  His name is Fr. Genaro Diwa.  Write it down!]

Pluralism was possible, according to Father O’Malley, because dioceses were funded by a benefice — a medieval version of an endowment. Although it was against canon law, bishops would take the money and hire someone else to do the job, allowing them to serve in several dioceses while amassing a fortune, O’Malley said.

Another fundamental reform was the institution of the seminary, where candidates for the priesthood would be trained in theology, receive spiritual formation and be evaluated by their superiors for their suitability for the priesthood. “All of that sort of seems like common sense but, as a matter of fact, there were no seminaries prior to the 16th century,” Hitchcock said.

The Catechism — a Church-approved compendium of core teachings in terms accessible to the laity — also was borne out of Trent, according to Hitchcock. “Again, what an obvious thing to have, but they didn’t have one prior to the Council,” he said.

Trent left its mark on marriage too, mandating that priests be witnesses for marriages. The rule was targeted at secret marriages, in which couples would privately exchange vows, enabling one spouse to abandon the other, denying there ever was a marriage, according to O’Malley. [The priest is the witness for the Church.]

Trent’s anniversary is a time not only to celebrate its legacy, but also to reflect on lessons for the present.

“Trent shows us how the Church can meet the challenge of new cultural and political circumstances with intelligence and pastoral courage — and strong Church leadership,” Weigel said. [Whiccchhhh....we didn't have after Vatican II...]

Trent is an object lesson in the universality of the Church’s teachings and practices, according to Father Joseph Lee, academic dean at Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary near Lincoln, Neb., which is run by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP).

“This can be a healthy corrective to an over-emphasis on ‘inculturation,’ which has proved over the last few decades to have been as much a source of problems and confusions as of enrichment in the Church’s life,” he said. Catholics also would do well to emulate Trent’s focus on carefully defined principles as a “basis for theological work and formation,” Father Lee said.  [BOOM!!! Take that Chupungcan liturgists!  Inculturation created more problems.  It brought more confusion!  It lead to a breakdown of discipline in the Church's liturgy.]

Even as we celebrate Trent’s legacy, we should not go too far in applying it to the present, Weigel warned. “The mistake comes when we think we can freeze-frame Tridentine Catholicism, [oh yes! I agree!] as if it were a mode of being Catholic applicable to every cultural and historical circumstance,” he said.  [Hello SSPX?]

In his book Evangelical Catholicism: Deep Reform in the 21st-Century Church, Weigel argues that a new “evangelical” form of Catholicism is supplanting the “Counter-Reformation” Catholicism that developed out of Trent. “It’s instructive to note that the living parts of the world Church are the parts that have embraced the New Evangelization, while the dying parts are those still fighting the battle of the 1960s and 1970s,” Weigel said.  [Hmmm...]

Even the FSSP, known for its preference for the Mass that existed before Vatican II, is not “in the business of propping up Trent as some sort of definitive moment in the Church’s life — anymore than it would want to do so for Vatican II,” Father Lee said. Instead, he said, each of the Church’s councils must be understood within their historical contexts. [This is where liberals and even sedevacantists fall.  As if Trent is the only Council, as if Vatican II is the only Council.  Hermeneutic of rupture!]

“There is a danger nowadays of seeing the Church as somehow defined by a council or councils. Benedict XVI warned against this when he spoke of the danger of seeing Vatican II as a kind of ‘super council’ sweeping away everything that had gone before it and canonizing every development since it,” Father Lee said.  [Watch out for these theologians, nuns, priests and bishops who speak this way!]

The 450th anniversary of Trent is also an opportunity to dispel some popular myths about what it did, O’Malley said.

For example, the Council did not establish a distinctive “Tridentine” liturgy, according to Father O’Malley. “There is no such thing as a Tridentine liturgy. … The problem was manuscripts of the text of the Mass. And, of course, a lot of scribal errors had crept into different versions, and the same thing happened with printing.  So there was no control. So [the] Council of Trent said the liturgical books need to be revised so as to make them conform to each other. That’s all,” Father O’Malley said.

But it was the “same old Mass” that had been used for the previous seven or eight centuries, Father O’Malley said.  [And this same old Mass is the Mass celebrated under the 1962 Missal, of course over the course of time reforms were made with the prayers, etc...ending up with the 1962 Missal.]

Added Father Lee, “I know that the form of the liturgy the FSSP celebrates is commonly called the Tridentine liturgy, but that liturgy was only codified after Trent.”

Trent also did not mandate that the Mass be in Latin rather than in the “vernacular” local language, Father O’Malley said. The Council devoted all of one line each in two documents to the issue. “What it says is: It is wrong to say the Mass must always be in the vernacular,” Father O’Malley said. “In other words, Latin is legitimate. It doesn’t have to be in Latin. That’s very different than what people think Trent said.”

Trent did not ban the vernacular Bible either, according to Father O’Malley. The issue was raised during the Council, but “they decided not to decide,” Father O’Malley said. The Church later did impose restrictions on the vernacular — but those were the result of a document stemming from the Council, but not directly produced by it.

“That [document] was never discussed at the Council [and] never approved by the Council, so the Council Trent did not forbid vernacular Bibles,” Father O’Malley said.

The legacy of Trent is perhaps clearer today than it was just half a century ago.

“When Vatican II was going on and right after it ended, a lot of people were specifically saying that [it] was a repudiation of the Council of Trent,” Hitchcock said. According to proponents of this view of the Second Vatican Council, there would now be less emphasis among Catholics on doctrinal orthodoxy and on studying the Catechism, and seminary formation would be fundamentally revised because, previously, it was too rigid and had produced unworldly and somewhat irrelevant priests.

“Much effort was put into repudiating Trent as a way of implementing Vatican II,” Hitchcock said. “It took a generation of work by important theologians, of whom Pope Benedict was one, to emphasize the spirit of continuity which needs to exist rather than one of rupture.”  [because much of these theologians were either a.) depending their story on a myth or b.) was really out to reshape Catholicism.  Protestant Reformation from the inside folks!  And that is why liberals still hate Pope Benedict!]

That “hermeneutic of continuity” was recently reaffirmed by Pope Francis in a Nov. 19 letter to Cardinal Walter Brandmuller for the 450th anniversary of Trent.

“Graciously hearing the very same Holy Ghost, the holy Church of our age, even now, continues to restore and meditate upon the most abundant doctrine of Trent. As a matter of fact, the ‘hermeneutic of renewal’ … which our predecessor Benedict XVI explained in 2005 before the Roman Curia, refers not only to the Tridentine Council, but also to the Vatican Council,” Pope Francis wrote.

Of course, continuity implies both harmony with and change from the past. Indeed, were the Fathers of Trent to come back today, they would be “puzzled by a lot of things they saw,” Hitchcock said.

“And it would take some time to speak, to investigate and explain and so forth … to let them see the spirit of continuity which is there,” Hitchcock said. “We are always doing both: We’re maintaining continuity, and at the same time, we’re innovating in various ways.”


***

For people my age, the 70s and 80s, the time when the Council was being implemented was the most notorious age for theologians and catechists.  I had to spend hours in the library reading books and theological commentaries about what Vatican II actually said and meant.

The first big question that came to our minds was "Did the Council really wanted a New Mass?"

It was a confusing age!  

But that was the year when we do not have the Internet!

Information today is at the tip of one's finger.  Liberals cannot hide what the Holy See actually said and actually meant.  We cannot be lied again with "This is what the Vatican said...or this is what must be done."

The laity are now more informed and more empowered.  The Code of Canon Law gives upon the lay the right to call into question erring clerics.

And that goes to erring liturgists!

After Vatican II, liturgists used their degrees and their influence to tell bishops what they want to see in the liturgy, to deface the liturgy, to introduce innovations not even conceived by the Council Father.

It was a confusing age.

In order to understand Vatican II, start with Trent...

In fact, read the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

How to end the careerism in the Roman Curia

Awards and Honours again

OK I may have misunderstood but I thought the situation was as follows. The conclave gathered after the unfortunate resignation of pope Benedict XVI. He was the greatest Supreme Pontiff since his namesake Benedict XIV but was overwhelmed by the corruption he saw in the Church and so decided to throw his hat in. The conclave are of the opinion that one of the Great Problems is the Roman Curia. It is full of self-obsessed Promethean Neo-Pelagians only concerned with how they can make further progress up the greasy pole and is a scandal. So step forward Cardinal Bergoglio who has what it takes to do the job and is elected on the understanding that he will reform the Curia.

So what happens? To overcome the great evil of clergy careerism it is decreed that the title of Monsignor will be abolished for all below the age of 65 to prevent clergy working to procure a handful of purple buttons. Hurrah, they say this man means business. But wait: this applies to the whole Catholic world except the Roman Curia where it will be business as usual and priests over the age of 35 who have completed five years service will automatically become Monsignors. Well that shows the Curia they`d better change their ways.  [FOR THE WIN!!!]

Looking forward to the next reforms!

***

SUPER LIKE IT!!!!

Visit the blog here, written by a priest!

The whole truth about the new "Monsignori" rule is out

In a statement issued by the Secretariat of State, the Vatican said it had informed bishops’ conferences, through a circular sent via their corresponding nunciatures, that “in the world’s dioceses, the only ecclesiastical title henceforth to be conferred shall be “chaplain of His Holiness”, to which the appellation, “monsignor”, shall correspond. The title shall be conferred only upon priests who have reached the age of 65.”  [I scratched my head too when I came to know of a priest who is not even in his 50s yet, to get the monsignori title and conferred with a Protonotary Apostolic super de numero, which is the highest outside of the Diocese of Rome.  Made me ask how he got it.  I have my theories after hearing stories from priests how some monsignori got theirs.]

from the National Catholic Register

***

Confirming rumors over the past few days, the Vatican announced today that in dioceses, the title of “monsignor” will henceforth only be granted to priests who are at least 65 years of age. [Not all the rumors are true though.]


The circular further clarifies that the use of the title “monsignor” in connection with certain major offices and where this is a cultural practice – such as for a bishop or the vicar general of the diocese - “remains unchanged.”  [Vicars general still are addressed as such.]

Concerning the Roman Curia, the Vatican said “no change has been made either in the titles or in the use of the appellation “monsignor”, these being connected to the offices entrusted, and to the service performed.”

The statement added that the new rule “has no retroactive effect” and that those “who received a title in the past, keep it.”

There are three grades of monsignor: apostolic protonotary, honorary prelate of His Holiness, and chaplain of His Holiness. Bishops are asked to resubmit any pending requests for papal honors in accordance with the new rules.

The Vatican did not explain the reasons for the change, but the move is being seen as consistent with Pope Francis’ warnings against careerism and personal ambition within the clergy.  [uh-huh....like that young priest who suddenly became secretary to the most powerful prelate in the country today...and he acts as if he is now the archbishop...right Reggie?]

Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi told reporters yesterday that Pope Paul VI had reformed the system of ecclesiastical honors in 1968, reducing the number of titles to three.

"Pope Francis' decision thus follows in the same line, with further simplification," he said.

***

Some bishops abused their powers of conferring titles to certain priests.  The title is conferred upon a priest who deserved it for his years of service and significant contribution to the growth of the Church, not just by holding the position.

There are lots of stories I can share about seminarians who are quickly singled out as possible "monsignori material" or even "bishop material" while they are still in their theological studies, all due to the fact that the powers may be are moving their hands so that this guy gets promoted, while they wield their powers behind the watchful eyes of other priests and bishops.

Some priests are really more deserving of the honorific title of monsignor because of the hard work they did.  Others are plain after the title.  I still wonder how some got theirs.  No excellent record in parochial or chancery work.  A poor preacher.  Poor administrator...  Really mind boggling how someone could get honored for doing nothing!

Oh...I forgot.

One became cardinal.

Ok.

Next!

Hope this reform of Pope Francis is really seen affecting the life in the diocese.  Will we see priests working hard to get the title?  Definitely it would limit the appointing power of the bishop, and priests looking to get the title and all the accouterments that come with the honor must either work hard to get it or pray that they live longer than 65 to qualify for the honors.

But on second thought.

Did Christ rebuke the apostles for fighting over who gets to be first?

The monsignori title is granted to those who deserve it like other papal awards.  It is not a sacrament but a public acknowledgement of a priest's hard work.

Pope Francis is not destroying traditions in the Church, in this respect IMHO.  He is putting things in perspective, IMHO.

I hope...

Because of the pope's vague statements...

Because of a vague statement, we have the wolves shedding the sheep's wool.

Keep on making those off the cuff statements and we'll have abortion being encouraged at the pulpits in the name of responsible decision made in conscience.


***

FREIBURG, Germany, January 7, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The president of the German bishops’ conference says the conference will press forward with their plan to begin distributing Communion to Catholics who have ‘remarried’ outside the Church after a divorce, despite the judgment of Archbishop Gerhard Müller, the prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  [The gloves are off!]

Müller had excluded the possibility that those entering a second union without having secured a declaration of nullity would be eligible to receive communion.  [As taught to us by the Church.  No one in a state of mortal sin can receive Holy Communion.]

But Archbishop Robert Zollitsch of Freiburg, in an interview with the German newspaper Die Welt on December 29th, denied that the issue was settled in light of Müller’s negative stance. “A Prefect is not the Pope,” Zollitsch stated, emphasizing the importance of a “responsible decision [made] in conscience.”   [But the prefect if the alter ego of the Pope on this matter.  He acts for and in behalf of the pope, with the pope's authority.  So, I am no pope, and I am no bishop, but I know that what Archbishop Zollitsch is saying is WRONG.]

Zollitsch has pointed to Pope Francis himself as having intimated that a change in the Church’s policy might be coming in the near future: “I feel very encouraged by Pope Francis, who has called a special synod on marriage and the family for October 2014,” the prelate said.  [And we need more vague statements from off the cuff statements.]

In a well-known interview given while he was returning from World Youth Day on July 28th, 2013, Pope Francis spoke of the need to develop a comprehensive pastoral program for the family and of streamlining the annulment process. He also referenced the Orthodox Church’s practice of permitting second marriages as giving the impression that the Catholic practice could undergo modification.

In September the controversy about communion for the divorced resurfaced when the Archdiocese of Freiburg released guidelines that made reception of Holy Communion available to divorced and remarried parishioners. Archbishop Müller quickly replied to this document in a letter to Zollitsch of October 8th, and more elaborately on October 22nd. Despite Müller’s interventions, on November 23rd Bishop Gebhard Furst of Rottenburg-Stuttgart indicated that the German bishops would adopt proposals on reinstating divorced and remarried parishioners as full members of the Church during their March plenary.

Various German bishops have subsequently weighed in on the controversy, often emphasizing that the disciplinary and pastoral dimensions of the Church’s ministry have been running counter to each other.  On December 12th, Cardinal Walter Kasper, who is also a member of the Vatican’s doctrinal congregation, contradicted Müller when he stated that “turning someone away from the communion rail – one doesn’t do that.” [Like what Cardinal Wuerl does to pro-abortion politicians in the USA.] Bishop Gebhard Fürst suggested that the current practice does not “take into account the concrete reality” – at least in certain cases.

So far few concrete arguments have been offered as to why the Church’s current practice of securing an annulment before another union is undertaken is incapable of resolving the pastoral problems that have been identified by the German bishops.

The Holy Father’s comments of July 28th, as well as Müller’s letter of October 22nd, indicate that the problem lies with the annulment process itself as well as with poor marriage catechesis. For instance, Müller has underlined the fact that “the entire sacramental economy is a work of divine mercy,” by which he implies that the rules of the Church are as they are for the good of all people.

***

And the bishop's conferences are acting as if they are independent churches like how happily scatted and un-united the Anglican Communion is.

Did I say that Germany was where the Protestant movement started with a monk named Martin Luther?

Just saying.

One of the things Pope Benedict could have addressed before he stepped down.

Weeding out the bad seeds in the Church!

CDF Prefect turns down giving more powers to National Episcopal Conferences

Vatican (Catholic news / CF / kathweb.at). The prefect of the Vatican congregation, Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, has turned strongly against decentralizing the Church on the level of the national bishop conferences. "The Catholic Church is made up of local churches, but it is one," said the Prefect for the Italian daily newspaper "Corriere della sera": "There are no 'national' churches." - The Presidents of the Episcopal Conferences are "coordinators, not vice-popes" stressed the Vatican defender of the Faith. While the papacy and the office of bishop have "divine right", the Patriarchs and Bishops' Conferences to facilitate work according to "human rights". Of course, these conferences also have doctrinal authority in certain areas, for instance when preparing local catechisms, liturgical books or the management of universities and Catholic schools: "The Pope can not know everything that happens in the individual countries," said Archbishop Müller. One must "find a practical balance." Pope Francis had recently announced in his letter "Evangelii Gaudium" considering more powers for national Bishops' Conferences. '

***

Here is the source.

Some observations:

1.  The archbishop mentioned that it is the National Conferences' job to prepare local catechisms, liturgical books or the management of universities and Catholic schools.  Local catechisms and liturgical books are already being done.  Catholic schools and universities are poorly managed by the CBCP.  Example:  Ateneo!

2.  Liturgical books have been under the watchful eyes of Chupungcan liturgists but what Diwa wants to do is to make the Misa ng Bayang Pilipino aka Misa ng Sambayanang Pilipino, the original name that the late Fr. Chupungco gave to his invented Mass, legitimate by making the illegal rite practiced everywhere so as to give it legitimacy, like what happened to Communion in the Hand.

3.  Fr. Diwa is racing against time to spread the liturgical abberation that is the MSP and has been pushing dioceses to celebrate it.  Fortunately, bishops know for a fact that they are the BISHOPs of their dioceses and not mere sounding boards of the academically invented MSP.  One archbishop even told me that Fr. Diwa acts as he is the "super pope of liturgy in the Philippines"  "Napakayabang!" the archbishop said.

So with this development, we can count more years how these proposals of Pope Francis to give more power to Bishop's Conferences will take shape.

In the meantime...

These are hard times

Both for the laity and the clergy.

Those who are attached to the traditional liturgy and to the legacy of Benedict XVI that is.

Whatever fantasies you have, those who are attached to Benedict XVI and the traditional liturgy have all been targeted for extinction, well...as far as the continuing "movements" in Rome and persecutions of the FFI are concerned.

Mark my words. This is a time that anything but "peace" and "brotherly love" would apply to those attached to the Traditional liturgy. No one is safe, not even a bishop.

I have received reports that a bishop who opened his diocese to the beleaguered Franciscans Friars of the Immaculate is now being "warned" to stop meddling and protecting the friars, and these threats came from a Capuchin Friar.  No, not all of Padre Pio's brothers are like him.  Father Fidenzio Volpi, the one tasked to lead in the "cleansing" of the FFI is anything but charitable and brotherly.


It is still baffling why Rome would declare an open war to a thriving congregation.

Is Rome not after vocations or Rome now is more concerned with harassing society's that are connected to the Traditional Liturgy?  The SSPX would be giggling right now.  They experienced the harrasment just because they wanted to celebrated the TLM.

What is it in the TLM that freaks out liberals?

Some of my sources have noticed how bolden and how "mayabang" the Genie of the Lamp in Intramuros has become 9 months ago.

I think we all know why.

These are hard times.

And the only way to combat them is to...

HA HA HA HA

That will freak them out!

"The Lord be with you"

SHOUT:  "Et cum spiritu tuo!"  ala JRR Tolkien.

PS:  Tolkien witnessed the liturgical revolution of the 70s.  He was a devout Catholic.  At the New Mass, he would respond in Latin, in raised voice: "Et cum spiritu tuo!" "Sursum corda!" "Habemus ad Dominum!"

And, as a Tolkien fan, I pray "Domine non sum dignus.."  ;)


PRAY! EVEN ST. PETER WAVERED TOO...BUT HE DIED UPHOLDING THE FAITH!

Liberal Cardinal Martini reincarnated?

The entire blog post can be read here.

If you ask me, I agree with the observations of the author.

NOW LET THE #ULTIMATEHYPOCRITE REACT!!!

Pope Francis thumbs down Marxism and women cardinals

I am pretty sure their is a very loud groan emanating from St. Vincent School of Theology, Loyola School and Maryhell School of Theology.

***

Vatican City, Dec 15, 2013 / 09:07 am (CNA/EWTN News).- In an interview published Dec. 14 in the Italian newspaper La Stampa, Pope Francis has responded to several questions touching controversial topics that have arisen in his papacy.

When asked by Italian Vatican analyst Andrea Tornielli about the accusations of Marxism from “ultra-conservative Americans,” who took issue with certain passages of the Pope’s recent apostolic exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium, the Pontiff was quick to denounce such ideology.

“The Marxist ideology is wrong,” he responded flatly.

The Pope had severely criticized the assumptions behind “trickle-down theories” in the exhortation, saying that they expressed “a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.”

In blasting economic practices driven by greed and leading to inequality, [hey!  just look at the guys working in Ortigas, Libis, Taguig and Makati!] he drew fire from the likes of radio host Rush Limbaugh, who contended that his comments were “pure Marxism” and “dramatically, embarrassingly, puzzlingly wrong.”

In the new interview, Pope Francis said he wasn’t offended by the comments, noting that he has known many Marxists who were still “good people.”

The Pope reaffirmed his adherence to the constant tradition of the Church, explaining that he had no intention of speaking in technical language.

“In the exhortation, there is nothing that is not found in the Social Doctrine of the Church. I didn't speak from a technical point of view, I tried to present a photograph of what happens,” he said.  [Maybe he is just being a Jesuit, you know.]

“The only specific citation was for the ‘trickle-down’ theories, according to which every economic growth, supported by the free market, is able to produce in itself a great equity and social inclusion,” he continued.

Sunday’s interview contained continued criticism of these specific ideas. “There was the promise that when the glass was full, it would have flowed over and the poor would have benefited from it. Instead, what happens is that when it is full the glass magically gets larger, and so nothing ever comes out for the poor.”  [The Church teaches that even when the glass is not full, give some to the poor.]

But “this was the only reference to a specific theory,” he repeated.

Pope Francis took the opportunity to re-emphasize his standpoint, stressing, “I repeat, I do not speak as a technician, but according to the Social Doctrine of the Church. And this does not mean being Marxist.”

When asked about another controversial topic, the possibility of women cardinals, the Pontiff was quick to point to the problematic assumption underlying the question. “Women in the Church must be valued, not ‘clericalized.’ Whoever is thinking (about) women cardinals suffers a bit from clericalism.”  [Toinks!  The Mass itself is being to clericalized and yet these very same liturgists claim that they are against clericalization so they think of ways of clericalizing the laity, aka active participation.  Can we clap for Fr. Genaro Diwa???]

As for any rumors about his own consideration of the issue, “It is a line that has come from who knows where,” he said.

Tornielli’s questions also included the recently much-discussed topic of communion for divorced and remarried Catholics. Unless their first marriage has been annulled, the Church prohibits the reception of the Eucharist by these individuals, because they are living with someone other than their legitimate spouse.

“The exclusion from communion for divorced persons who live (in) a second union is not a sanction. It’s good to remember that,” replied Pope Francis.

“We must seek to facilitate people’s faith rather than control it,” he added.

Evangelii Gaudium had noted the need for both “prudence” and “boldness” in regards to the sacraments, saying “everyone can share in some way in the life of the Church; everyone can be part of the community, nor should the doors of the sacraments be closed for simply any reason.”

Pope Francis explained in the latest interview, however, “some (people) had immediately thought of the sacraments for the divorced and remarried, but I did not speak about particular cases: I wanted only to indicate a principle.”

The interview, which spanned three pages, also included the Pope’s thoughts on ecumenical matters and his concern for the poor, as well as his understanding of Christmas as “a meeting with Jesus” in which “the hope and the tenderness of the Birth of the Lord shakes us out of indifference.”

***

The entire interview of Andrea Tornielli can be read here.

After that...

Go spread the word and go ruin the day of an angry feminist nun who has an issue with his father and any father-figure or male authority like this bunch!

Did you know that this Marxist, anti-Church, pro-abortion pro-divorce group was founded by this "catholic" nun?

"Sr." Mary John Mananzan, proud Foundress of Gabriela

No women cardinal, Tita!

Go get another life.

BREAKING NEWS: Interview with atheist taken down from Vatican website

If there is nothing wrong with it, why take it down?

Is it being edited?

Is it being re-worded?

Or is it really just a wrong move to even have that interview in the first place.

I think someone really prevailed over this non stop interviews.

Let's me hear from those who defended the pope about this interview speak up.

I dare ya!

And here is something for you!

From the National Catholic Register

Fr. Lombardi also had underlined that “the interview is not part of Pope Francis' Magisterium” although he attested to its overall “trustworthiness”. Scalfari said he had shown the text to Francis for his approval, but the Vatican said at the time that it was not clear how closely the Pope had read it.

The Pope was therefore said to have “regretted” its publication in L’Osservatore Romano in its Oct. 2 edition and that it was included among the Holy Father’s speeches on the Vatican's website. Socci said the Pope complained of it to the director of L’Osservatore Romano, Gian Maria Vian, in Assisi on Oct. 4.

In view of the widespread concerns over parts of the interview, many will be relieved it’s no longer on the Vatican site.

The Holy Father, who was reluctant to give interviews prior to his election, has not given any new ones since the mix up.

Those who are dumb enough to just try sugar coat the confusion and angst created by that article can start picking up a pen and start writing these words:

"I'll think first."

Thank you!

UPDATE! Commemorative Medals recalled!

I noticed it too but did not mind it.

Well, obviously, the Holy See does not want the name "IESUS" be spelled as "LESUS".

So they are recalling the medals.

Like this one.

The Latin language does not have a letter "J".  The Holy Name of Jesus is spelled as "Iesus".

This is the correct rendition, like how the Jesuits write it.

BREAKING NEWS: Medals to mark the 1st year of Pope Francis' pontificate

The official medallion marking the first year of Pope Francis’ pontificate was presented here at the Vatican today.

Obverse of the Medal

(Francis, Supreme Pontiff, 1st Year)

Reverse of the Medal

(The scene recalling the call of Matthew, the basis for the pope's motto

Vidit ergo Iesus publicanum, et quia miserando atque eligendo vidit, ait illi, ‘Sequere me

In English is translated as "Jesus, therefore, saw the publican, and because he saw by having mercy and by choosing, He said to him, ‘Follow me’”)

Will these be locally produced?

I hope so.

We have great metal workers here in the country who can copy this.

Nice souvenir, don't you think?

GULP Alert: Liturgical Circus Master Piero Marini to be appointed at CDW?

And I can hear Fr. Geny Diwa, Fr. Godwin Tatlonghari and Fr. Reginald Malicdem all giggling in anticipation...

Rumors have been swirling since June of this year and yet another news has come up that this rumor is not a wild one.  The master innovator, the circus master of inculturationism and the living breathing protege of suspected freemason Annibale Bugnini is being rumored for so many months now to be appointed as Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship.

He is the same man, an archbishop of the Roman Catholic Church, to openly support the civil union of same sex couples.  He is the same man who openly criticized Pope Benedict XVI's liturgical renewal, "the reform of the reform", "the hermenuetic of continuity.  He is openly hostile against Summorum Pontificum and all the traditional Latin Mass communities, yet he does not bat an eyelash when it comes to naked tribes people dancing in front of the pope during Mass.

Here is a blog post from the Catholic Herald.  Spot on conclusion!

But this time, I am really nervous. For if he [Pope Francis] really does appoint Archbishop Marini as prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, it can mean only one thing: a radical rejection by Pope Francis of the pontificate of his predecessor, of one of the truly great popes of the last hundred years. It will mean a definitive return to the hermeneutic of rupture and discontinuity. That’s why I don’t believe it’s going to happen. But if it does…. Dear Heavens, what then?

If this truly happens, then God forbid it because I was not hoping to say this to my friends since I heard Bergoglio's name was announced.