quarta-feira, 19 de junho de 2019

Bispos pedem Desculpas por TFP.


Tradição, Família e Propriedade, organização civil católica fundada pelo ilustre católico brasileiro Plínio Corrêa de Oliveira e que hoje está presente em inúmeros países foi assunto hoje.

A TFP britânica fez campanha contra a ideologia de gênero (foto acima) em panfletos dentro de uma revista distribuída pela Arquidiocese de Liverpool. Daí, estupidamente, os bispos pediram desculpas por isso!!!

A arquidiocese diz que "o conteúdo do panfleto não tem apoio da arquidiocese e não deveria ter aparecido na revista". E que o diz o conteúdo? Ora, questões básicas do ser humano e verdades elementares: que Deus criou apenas homens e mulheres e que ativistas anti-cristãos querem criar gêneros por meros desejos.

Pode a arquidiocese ser contra isso?

Meu Deus, que tempos estes. Salvai-nos.

Vejam parte da reportagem do Life Site News.

UK bishops apologize for Catholics defending traditional teachings on sex and gender

LIVERPOOL, England, June 18, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Leaflets produced by a traditionalist Catholic group that deplored gender theory were inserted into a magazine distributed by the Archdiocese of Liverpool, eliciting apologies from two bishops.
Dubbed “transphobic” by establishment media, leaflets created by Tradition Family and Property, an international traditionalist Catholic organization, were included in the archdiocesan publication Catholic Pic that was handed out to Catholics students of the Archdiocese of Liverpool. According to the leaflets, “sophisticated activists” seek to impose “anti-God” views on children. The cover of the leaflets bear the image of a group of boys and girls asking “Am I a boy? Am I a girl? Or both?” and is accompanied by the Bible quote: "Male and female, He created them."
he leaflets describe “Gender Theory” as a “delirious ideology claiming everyone can fancy themselves as a man, woman, neither or both at the same time according to mere whims.” They claimed that “sophisticated activists are already at work to impose their anti-Christian and anti-God views on children at your school.”

According to a statement from the Archdiocese of Liverpool, Mersey Mirror, which distributed the magazine, will issue an apology to the schools for adding the leaflets to the publication.
“An insert was inadvertently placed in the June edition of the Catholic Pic, the magazine of the Archdiocese of Liverpool, and in a number of Catholic publications across the country," said a spokesman in a report by The Independent. "It is normal procedure for such inserts to be sent to the publishers in advance for review. In this instance, that did not happen. The content of the leaflet is not endorsed by the Archdiocese of Liverpool and it should not have appeared. In light of this incident, procedures have been reviewed ensuring that all future inserts are checked prior to publication."
The leaflets also appeared in a number of other Catholic publications distributed to schools across the United Kingdom. The Diocese of Northampton, which is led by Bishop Peter Doyle, has also apologized for including the leaflet in the diocesan magazine.
--


segunda-feira, 17 de junho de 2019

A Ideologia Política do Papa Francisco - "Peronista Guardia de Hierro" e "Povo Místico"


O jornalista italiano Sandro Magister fez um excelente artigo para mostrar a ideologia política do Papa Francisco, que abandona preceitos da fé em nome de políticas eivadas de mundanismo, como mudança climática e abertura aos imigrantes.

Vale muito a pena ler o artigo, que mostra a formação política de Bergoglio na Argentina na defesa do grupo peronista "Guardia  de Hierro" (guarda de ferro) e a formação ideológica dele em Rodolfo Kusch, pensador alemão que via o "povo da América Latina" como algo místico, algo bem Teologia da Libertação, que substitui Deus por "povo".

Aqui vão partes do artigo de Magister. leiam tudo no site dele:

From Ratzinger To Bergoglio. Two Political Visions Light Years Apart

by Sandro Magister

...
It is difficult, if not impossible, to find even a trace of Ratzinger’s vision in the idea of politics that is ingrained in Pope Francis, born instead from his experience of life, beginning with the Argentine ’68:
In Argentina, the student and labor uprisings flared up shortly after those in Paris or Los Angeles, in 1969, the year in which Bergoglio celebrated his first Mass, and immediately the militias joined the fray, the Montoneros, who in 1970, when he took his vows, kidnapped and executed former president Pedro Aramburu.
Precociously appointed novice master, the then 34-year-old Bergoglio completely espoused the cause of bringing back Juan Domingo Perón, who in those years was in exile in Madrid. He became the spiritual director of of the young Peronists of the Guardia de Hierro, who had a powerful presence at the Jesuit Universidad del Salvador. And he continued this militancy after his surprise appointment as provincial superior of the Jesuits of Argentina in 1973, the same year in which Perón returned to the country and won his triumphant reelection.
Bergoglio was among the writers of the “Modelo nacional,” the political testament that Perón wanted to leave after his death. And for all of this he drew the ferocious hostility of a good half of the Argentine Jesuits, more leftist than he, especially after he surrendered the Universidad del Salvador, which was put up for sale in order to stabilize the finances of the Society of Jesus, to none other than his friends of the Guardia de Hierro.
It was in those years that the future pope developed the “myth” - his word - of the people as protagonist of history. A word that by its nature is innocent and a bearer of innocence, a people with the innate right to “tierra, techo, trabajo” and that he sees as overlapping with the “santo pueblo fiel de Dios.”
But in addition to his experience of life, Bergoglio’s political vision also took shape thanks to the instruction of a teacher, as he confided to the French sociologist Dominique Wolton in a book-length interview that Wolton also edited, entitled “Politique et societé,” released in 2017:
“There is a thinker that you should read: Rodolfo Kusch, a German who lived in northwestern Argentina, an excellent philosopher and anthropologist. He made one thing clear: that the word ‘people’ is not a logical word. It is a mythical word. It is not possible to speak of people logically, because that would mean making only a description. In order to understand a people, to understand what are the values of this people, one must enter into the spirit, into the heart, into the work, into the history, and into the myth of its tradition. This point is truly at the basis of the theology called ‘of the people.’ That is to say, to go with the people, see how it expresses itself. This distinction is important. The people is not a logical category, it is a mythical category.”
An author of both anthropological and theatrical works, Rodolfo Kusch(1922-1979) took his inspiration from Heidegger’s philosophy to distinguish between “being” and “dwelling,” describing with the first category the rationalistic and domineering vision of Western man and with the second the vision of the indigenous Latin American peoples, in peace with nature and animated by none other than a “myth.”
For Kusch, the first of the two visions, the Eurocentric one, is intolerant and incapable of understanding the second, which he instead wanted to accentuate and to which he dedicated his most important studies. For this reason too he found himself at the margins of the culture of the dominant elites and instead found an admirer in Bergoglio.
So according to Bergoglio, “it takes a myth to understand the people.” And he has recounted this myth, as pope, above all when he called around him the “popular movements.” He has done it three times so far: the first time in Rome in 2014, the second in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia, in 2015, the third again in Rome, in 2016. Every time he rouses the audience with endless speeches, of around thirty pages each, which when put together now form the political manifesto of this pope.
The movements that Francis calls to himself are not ones that he created, they preexist him. There is nothing overtly Catholic about them. They are in part the heirs of the memorable anti-capitalist and anti-globalization gatherings in Seattle and Porto Alegre. Plus the multitude of rejects from which the pope sees bursting forth “that torrent of moral energy which springs from including the excluded in the building of a common destiny.”
It is to these “discards of society” that Francis entrusts a future made of land, of housing, of work for all. Thanks to a process of their rise to power that “transcends the logical proceedings of formal democracy.” To the “popular movements,” on November 5, the pope said that the time has come to make a leap in politics, in order “to revitalize and recast the democracies, which are experiencing a genuine crisis.” In short, to upend the powerful from their thrones.
The powers against which the people of the excluded are rebelling, in the vision of the pope, are “the economic systems that in order to survive must wage war and thus restore economic balance,” they are “the economy that kills”. This is his key for explaining the “piecemeal world war” and even Islamic terrorism.
It can be added that at the first meeting in Rome and at the one in Santa Cruz there was present, in his capacity as “cocalero” activist, president of Bolivia Evo Morales, a champion of the populist left in Latin America.
Who was again invited to Rome, in April of 2016, as a speaker at the conference organized by the pontifical academy of sciences for the twenty-fifth anniversary of the social encyclical of John Paul II “Centesimus Annus,” together with fellow populist leader Rafael Correa, the president of Ecuador, neo-Malthusian economist Jeffrey Sachs, and the far-left Democratic candidate for the American presidency, Bernie Sanders:
Pope Francis received as a gift from him a letter from unspecified representatives of the “popular movements” and three books on the health benefits of coca, of which Morales himself is a fervent cultivator. And the farewell between the two - the agencies reported - was “very affectionate,” just the contrary of the opposition that the bishops of Bolivia have been carrying out against him there, going so far as to accuse him openly of “bringing drug trafficking into the structure of the state.” With the result that, back in Bolivia, Morales advised the bishops to “form openly a pro-capitalist and pro-imperialist party.” While on his side he exhibits the pope. Who “is content with what we have done and has told me: You always stand with the people”.
To the drawn-out speeches to the “popular movements” can be added the one Pope Francis gave on November 27, 2015 to the young people of the Nairobi slums, there too with the exaltation of the native “wisdom found in poor neighbourhoods,” as also, in the same perspective, his incessant gestures, journeys, and speeches concerning migrants.
But one must also take the same tack in reinterpreting the speech Bergoglio gave at the summit of Latin American judges convened at the Vatican in early June of 2019 - one year after a similar summit held in Buenos Aires - on the theme of social rights and of “Franciscan doctrine” (in reference not to Saint Francis of Assisi but to the pope who bears his name).
This too was a long speech, with extensive references to the second of the three addressed to the “popular movements,” the one given in Bolivia, and plainly written by a hand not his own even if in full agreement, perhaps by one of the Argentine judges present, Raúl Eugenio Zaffaroni, a prominent figure, member of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and supporter of a “critical theory” of criminology that traces the genesis of crime and the nature of justice back to the structure of the social classes and to inequality.
“There is no democracy with hunger, there is no progress with poverty, there is no justice with inequality”: this is how Francis summarized his vision, to thunderous applause.

sexta-feira, 14 de junho de 2019

Papa Francisco Defende Imposto sobre Carbono. Segundo ele, o Mundo vai Acabar Logo.


Meu Deus, ele chegou atrasado, o mundo já acabou segundo o que nos disse Al Gore por volta de 2006. O Papa defende que o mundo adote urgentemente um imposto sobre carbono, caso contrário o aquecimento global vai destruir o mundo em breve. Sem falar, que ele ainda falou em temperaturas, disse que acredita que as temperaturas aumentarão em 1,5º C.

É muito ridículo, não dá nem para comentar. E mais ridículo ainda porque supostamente temos um representante de uma religião a falar do fim do mundo por conta de um gás, que na cabeça dele, destruiria o mundo.

Vejam reportagem do Breibart sobre o assunto que ainda lembra a ironia de um papa que vive falando contra a "política do medo" em defesa dos imigrantes muçulmanos mas agora pratica uma política de desespero climático.

Pope Francis Urges Carbon Penalties to Avert Climate ‘Catastrophe


ROME — Pope Francis warned of disastrous consequences if humanity does not immediately react to the threat of climate change, since the world has reached a “critical moment” and there is no time to waste.

“Dear friends, time is running out!” the pope told a group of participants in a Vatican-sponsored conference on energy transition Friday. “We cannot afford the luxury of waiting for others to come forward or of prioritizing short-term economic benefits. The climate crisis requires decisive action from us, here and now.”
Despite the pontiff’s frequent denunciation of a “politics of fear,” he seemed determined to paint as frightening a picture as possible of an impending climate apocalypse in order to incite people to action.
This conference “takes place at a critical moment,” Francis said. “Today’s ecological crisis, especially climate change, threatens the very future of the human family, and this is not an exaggeration. For too long we have collectively ignored the fruits of scientific analysis, and catastrophic predictions can no longer be viewed with contempt and irony.”
The pope’s words Friday went beyond sounding a general alarm and scorning climate-change skeptics. They also urged specific political action, most notably regarding penalties for carbon usage such as a carbon tax.
“A carbon pricing policy is essential if humanity wants to use the resources of creation wisely,” he said. “The failure to manage carbon emissions has produced a huge debt that will now have to be repaid with interest from those who come after us.”
The cost of carbon usage must be paid here and now by those who use it, and not deferred for future generations to cover, he proposed.
“Our use of common environmental resources can be considered ethical only when the social and economic costs of their use are recognized in a transparent manner and are fully sustained by those who use them, rather than by other populations or future generations,” he said.
The pope reiterated the popular belief that “the effects on the climate will be catastrophic if we exceed the 1.5ºC threshold outlined in the Paris Agreement goals,” for which we have “only a little over a decade.”
“In the face of a climatic emergency, we must take appropriate measures, in order to avoid committing a grave injustice towards the poor and future generations. We must act responsibly well considering the impact of our actions in the short and long term,” he said.
“Future generations are soon to inherit a very ruined world,” the pontiff stressed. “Our children and grandchildren should not have to pay the cost of the irresponsibility of our generation.”
Appearing to take a page from AOC’s Green New Deal, Francis expressed his conviction that an energy transition from fossil fuels to a low-carbon society “can generate new employment opportunities, reduce inequality, and increase the quality of life for those affected by climate change.”
Today “a radical energy transition is needed to save our common home,” he warned. “There is still hope and the time remains to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, provided that there is prompt and resolute action.”

quinta-feira, 13 de junho de 2019

O 5º Mandamento do Papa Francisco: "Evitem Grupos Hostis a Mim".


O site Vatican News noticiou hoje que o Papa Francisco em reunião com núncios apostólicos pediu que os núncios cumprissem 10 mandamentos. Ele fez seu próprio decálogo para os núncios.

O Vatican News deu destaque no título para o 5º  Mandamento que diz que o  "núncio é homem do Papa", e sendo assim os núncios devem evitar blogs e grupos hostis a ele.

O Vatican News relatou as seguintes palavras do Papa Francisco sobre o 5º  Mandamento:

“ É, portanto, incompatível o ser Representante Pontifício com o criticar o Papa por trás, ter blogs ou até mesmo se unir a grupos hostis a Ele, à Cúria e à Igreja de Roma. ”

Hummm...que coisa né. Homem do Papa? Estranho.

Não precisa muito para saber a quem o Papas está se referindo. E se mutos suspeitam que o Vaticano monitora e pune aqueles que divergem do Papa Francisco, isto agora ficou mais claro. O Big Brother da Cúria está olhando vocês. 

Servirão a Deus ou ao Big Brother? Tenho a impressão que o primeiro mandamento do Papa está em contradição com o quinto mandamento dele.

Vejam o texto do Vatican News:


Francisco a Núncios: defendam a Igreja e não se juntem a blogs e grupos hostis ao Papa
O Pontífice encontrou os Núncios no Vaticano e, em discurso escrito para a ocasião, compartilhou preceitos simples para a missão pontifícia. No decálogo, dirigido também a bispos e sacerdotes de todo o mundo, a importância do Representante Pontifício como homem de Deus, de Igreja, de zelo apostólico e de reconciliação, de homem do Papa, de iniciativa, de obediência, de oração, caridade e humildade.
Andressa Collet – Cidade do Vaticano
Na manhã desta quinta-feira (13) e pela terceira vez no Vaticano, o Papa Francisco recebeu em audiência mais de 100 Representantes Pontifícios, dois quais 98 Núncios Apostólicos. O encontro faz parte de uma reunião, convocada pelo próprio Pontífice, que termina no sábado (15) e contempla momentos de espiritualidade e sessões de trabalho sobre atualidade eclesial, de colaboração internacional e diálogo inter-religioso.
O Papa dirigiu algumas palavras em caráter privado e entregou o discurso escrito para a ocasião, que começava com um convite: analisar a vida da Igreja com “olhos de pastores” e refletir sobre a “missão delicada e importante” dos Representantes Pontifícios. Para isso, Francisco compartilhou alguns preceitos “simples e elementares” através de um “decálogo”, dirigido também aos colaboradores, para fazer o serviço com “o mesmo entusiasmo do primeiro mandato”. Nas orientações, escreveu o Papa, dirigidas também a bispos e sacerdotes de todo o mundo, a importância do Representante Pontifício como homem de Deus, de Igreja, de zelo apostólico e de reconciliação, de homem do Papa, de iniciativa, de obediência, de oração, caridade e humildade.

1 - O Núncio é homem de Deus

Francisco descreveu o “homem de Deus” como aquele que segue “Deus em tudo e para tudo”, vivendo “pelas coisas de Deus e não por aquelas do mundo. Para não “sair dos trilhos e prejudicar a Igreja”, o Núncio precisa saber caminhar com humildade, praticar a justiça e manter o coração aberto aos menos favorecidos da sociedade.
“ O homem de Deus não ludibria e nem engana o seu próximo; não cede a fofocas e boatos; conserva a mente e o coração puros, preservando olhos e ouvidos da sujeira do mundo. Não se deixa enganar pelos valores mundanos, mas olha para a Palavra de Deus para julgar o que for apropriado e bom. O homem de Deus procura seriamente ser ‘santo e irrepreensível diante dele’ (Ef 1,4). ”

2 – O Núncio é homem de Igreja

O Papa recordou que o Núncio representa o Sucessor de Pedro e “o rosto, os ensinamentos e as posições da Igreja”. Para tanto, Francisco fez menção à tentação do servo mau ao falar de Núncios que “tratam mal os seus colaboradores” e têm outras posturas:
“ É feio ver um Núncio em busca de luxo, roupas e objetos ‘de marca’ entre pessoas que não têm o necessário. É um contratestemunho. A maior honra para um homem de Igreja é aquela de ser ‘servo de todos’. […] Ser homem de Igreja quer dizer defender corajosamente a Igreja diante das forças do mal que sempre tentam desacreditá-la, difamá-la ou caluniá-la. ”

3 - O Núncio é homem de zelo apostólico

Francisco afirmou que o zelo apostólico é aquela força que “nos protege do câncer da desilusão” e da tentação de cair na “timidez e na indiferença dos cálculos políticos e diplomáticos, ou mesmo no ‘politicamente correto’”. O Pontífice, então, citou a “grande figura de São Maximiliano Maria Kolbe”, quando escreveu sobre a propagação do “indiferentismo”, segundo o Papa, “uma doença quase epidêmica que vai se espalhando de várias formas, não só na generalidade dos fiéis, mas também entre os membros dos institutos religiosos”.

4 – O Núncio é homem de reconciliação
É importante que o Núncio, sendo um homem comunicação, seja também da “mediação, da comunhão, do diálogo e da reconciliação”, acrescentou Francisco, procurando ainda ser “imparcial e objetivo”.
“Se um Núncio se fechasse na Nunciatura e evitasse de encontrar as pessoas, trairia a sua missão e, ao invés de ser fator de comunhão e de reconciliação, se tornaria obstáculo e impedimento. Vocês não devem jamais esquecer que representam o rosto da catolicidade e a universalidade da Igreja nas igrejas locais espalhadas em todo o mundo e nos governos.”

5 – O Núncio é homem do Papa

Francisco lembrou que o Núncio não representa si próprio, mas o Sucessor de Pedro e, assim, “concretiza, atua e simboliza a presença do Papa entre os fiéis e as populações. É bonito que, em diversos países”, disse o Pontífice, “a Nunciatura é chamada ‘a Casa do Papa’”.
Um bom Núncio precisa ter uma vida de nômade, isto é, “viver sempre com a mala pronta” para ser enviado do Papa e da Igreja, inclusive nas comunidades onde o Pontífice não consegue chegar. E Francisco enfatizou:
“ É, portanto, incompatível o ser Representante Pontifício com o criticar o Papa por trás, ter blogs ou até mesmo se unir a grupos hostis a Ele, à Cúria e à Igreja de Roma. ”

6 – O Núncio é homem de iniciativa

O homem de iniciativa é uma pessoa que segue as capacidades de Jesus e o modelo dos Apóstolos, “é um mestre que sabe ensinar aos outros como se aproximar da realidade” para não ser pego de surpresa pelas tempestades da vida.
Além disso, disse o Papa, o Núncio precisa “adotar uma conduta adequada às exigências do momento, sem jamais cair nem na rigidez mental, espiritual e humana, nem na flexibilidade hipócrita e camaleônica. Não se trata de ser oportunistas, mas de saber como passar do conceito à implementação, tendo em mente o bem comum e a lealdade ao mandato”.

7 – O Núncio é homem de obediência

“A virtude da obediência é inseparável da liberdade”, disse Francisco, e “a obediência a Deus não se separa da obediência à Igreja e aos Superiores”. O Núncio deve seguir o estilo de vida de Jesus de Nazaré e, parafraseando tanto São Maximiliano Maria Kolbe como Santo Agostinho, o Papa alertou:
“Um Núncio que não vive a virtude da obediência – mesmo quando é difícil e contrário à própria visão pessoal – é como um viajante que perde a bússola, arriscando, assim, de falhar com o objetivo. Recordemos sempre o ditado ‘Medice, cura te ipsum’. É contratestemunho chamar os outros à obediência e desobedecer.”

8 – O Núncio é homem de oração
A relação com o Senhor, a familiaridade com Jesus Cristo, deve ser alimento diário de um Representante Pontifício, lembrou o Pontífice:
“A primeira tarefa de cada bispo, então, é aquela de se dedicar à oração e ao ministério da palavra. […] Sem a oração nos tornamos simples funcionários, sempre descontentes e frustrados. A vida de oração é aquela luz que ilumina todo o resto e toda a obra do Núncio e da sua missão”.

9 – O Núncio é homem de caridade ativa

O Papa Francisco enalteceu a importância do encontro com Jesus através da necessidade de “tocar com as mãos a carne de Cristo”, os pobres, as pessoas mais frágeis, a inteira família humana. Não basta se limitar às atividades práticas e inerentes ao Representante Pontifício, mas fazer render a missão com obras de caridade para ser realmente um pai e um pastor.
O Pontífice, ao falar da caridade como gratuidade, tratou também do “perigo permanente das regalias”:
“ A caridade ativa deve nos levar a sermos prudentes ao aceitar os presentes que são oferecidos para obscurecer a nossa objetividade e, em alguns casos, infelizmente comprar a nossa liberdade. Nenhum presente de qualquer valor deve nos escravizar! Recusem os presentes muito caros e, muitas vezes, inúteis, ou enviem à caridade. E recordem que receber um presente caro não justifica nunca o seu uso. ”

10 - O Núncio é homem de humildade

O Papa conclui o discurso entregue aos Representantes Pontifícios, abordando o preceito do Núncio como homem de humildade, ao repropor a oração escrita por um Servo de Deus e ex-Secretário de Estado, o card. Rafael Merry del Val (1865-1930), que, em síntese, indica o caminho cristão da humildade e do amor.



segunda-feira, 10 de junho de 2019

Cardeais e Bispos Divulgam Declaração de 40 Verdades da Fé Contra as Confusões de Francisco


Mais um documento que procura dar alguma clareza de fé em tempos de Francisco. O cardeal Muller já tinha feito isso e muitos outros teólogos e filósofos já assinaram inúmeros apelos ao Papa para que ele explicasse seus atos.

Dessa vez, os cardeais Janis Pujats e Raymond Burke e arcebispos, Tomash Peta, Jan Pawel e Athanasius Schneider divulgam hoje documento com 40 verdades da fé. Algumas dessas verdades fazem referência a palvras e atos do Papa Francisco e outras procuram conter a extensa confusão na Igreja no pontificado de Francisco. Os autores pedem que mais clérigos assinem o documento.

O site Life Site News diz que documento foi divulgado em várias línguas. Eu não havia conseguido o link para o português, mas depois meu leitor Emanoel  me enviou um link do Dies Irae com a versão em português.

O documento tem 8 páginas e tem uma nota explicativa, difícil colocar tudo no blog.

Praticamente todos os pontos estão relacionados a alguma fala do Papa Francisco:

Eu vou colocar alguns dos pontos que achei mais interessantes. O documento reafirma as verdades da fé católica, desde a defesa da Pena de Morte até a defesa do casamento e da vida.


1) Sobre as novidades na fé. Item 1 do documento afirma que essas novidades não podem atentar contra os preceitos de fé e a Tradição da Igreja:

O significado correcto das expressões “tradição viva”, “Magistério vivo”, “hermenêutica da continuidade” e “desenvolvimento da doutrina” inclui a verdade de que qualquer nova compreensão do depósito da fé não pode ser contrária ao que a Igreja sempre propôs no mesmo dogma, no mesmo sentido e no mesmo significado (cf. Concílio Vaticano I, Dei Filius, 3, cap. 4, «in eodem dogmate, eodem sensu, eademque sententia»).                

2) Sobre muçulmanos adorarem o mesmo Deus cristão, o documento nega isso, explicitamente. Item 5;

Os muçulmanos e todos aqueles que não têm fé em Jesus Cristo, Deus e homem, mesmo sendo monoteístas, não podem prestar a Deus a mesma adoração dos cristãos, isto é, o culto sobrenatural em Espírito e Verdade (cf. Jo 4, 24; Ef 2, 8) de quantos receberam o Espírito de adopção filial (cf. Rm 8, 15).   

3) Sobre as ideias panteístas, que muitas vezes estão relacionadas no ambientalismo exagerado do Papa Francisco, os cardeais e arcebispos negam a proximidade com o cristianismo. Item 6

As espiritualidades e religiões que promovam qualquer tipo de idolatria ou panteísmo não podem ser consideradas nem como “sementes” nem como “frutos” do Verbo Divino, porque se trata de enganos que impedem a evangelização e a salvação eterna dos seus aderentes, como ensina Sagrada Escritura: «para os incrédulos, cuja inteligência o deus deste mundo cegou, a fim de não verem brilhar a luz do Evangelho da glória de Cristo, que é imagem de Deus» (2Cor 4, 4).     

4) Os cardeais e arcebispos asseguram que o Inferno existe, item 8

O inferno existe e aqueles que são condenados por qualquer pecado mortal sem arrependimento são eternamente punidos pela justiça divina (cf. Mt 25, 46). Segundo o ensinamento da Sagrada Escritura, não apenas os anjos caídos, mas também as almas humanas são eternamente condenadas (cf. 2Ts 1, 9; 2Pe 3, 3). Além disso, os seres humanos eternamente condenados não serão aniquilados, uma vez que as suas almas são imortais de acordo com o ensinamento infalível da Igreja (cf. V Concílio Lateranense, sess. 8).                     

5) Reafirma que só existe uma religião desejada por Deus e não várias, renegando o que assinou Francisco junto com um líder muçulmano no documento de Abu Dhabi. Item 9.

A religião nascida da fé em Jesus Cristo, o Filho de Deus encarnado e o único Salvador da humanidade, é a única religião desejada positivamente por Deus. É errado afirmar que, assim como Deus quer positivamente a diversidade dos sexos masculino e feminino e a diversidade das nações, também quer a diversidade das religiões.  

6) Os pecados estabelecidos pela Igreja não se contradizem, item 14.

Todos os mandamentos de Deus são, igualmente, justos e misericordiosos. É, portanto, errado dizer que uma pessoa, obedecendo a uma proibição divina – como, por exemplo, ao sexto mandamento, ou não cometendo adultério –, possa pecar contra Deus por tal acto de obediência, prejudicar-se moralmente ou pecar contra o próximo.     

7) Itens 16 e 17 são contra o aborto:

A lei natural e divina impede que uma mulher, que concebeu um filho no seu ventre, mate essa vida humana nela presente, seja no caso em que seja ela mesma a fazê-lo, seja no caso em que o façam outros, directamente ou indirectamente (cf. João Paulo II, Encíclica Evangelium Vitae, n. 62).    

Os procedimentos que provocam a concepção fora do útero «são moralmente inaceitáveis, porquanto separam a procriação do contexto integralmente humano do acto conjugal» (João Paulo II, Encíclica Evangelium Vitae, n. 14).          

8) Item 22 reforça que o pecado do segundo casamento (problema trazido pelo documento Amoris Laetitia do Papa Francisco);

Quem obteve um divórcio civil do cônjuge com quem é validamente casado (ou casada) e tem um matrimónio civil com outra pessoa durante a vida do cônjuge, e vive more uxorio com o seu parceiro civil e opta por permanecer neste estado com pleno conhecimento da natureza do seu acto e com pleno consentimento da vontade para com esse acto, encontra-se num estado de pecado mortal e, portanto, não pode receber a graça santificante e crescer na caridade. Portanto, estes cristãos, a menos que vivam como “irmão e irmã”, não podem receber a Sagrada Comunhão (cf. João Paulo II, Exortação Apostólica Familiaris Consortio, n. 84).       

9) Item 23 reafirma o gravíssimo pecado dos atos homossexuais:

Duas pessoas do mesmo sexo pecam gravemente quando procuram um prazer venéreo recíproco (cf. Lv 18, 22; Lv 20, 13; Rm 1, 24-28; 1Cor 6, 9-10; 1Tm 1, 10; Jd 7). Os actos homossexuais «não podem, em caso algum, ser aprovados» (Catecismo da Igreja Católica, n. 2357). Assim, é contrário à lei natural e à Revelação Divina alegar que Deus, o Criador, assim como deu a alguns humanos uma disposição natural para experimentar atracção sexual por pessoas do sexo oposto, a outros deu uma disposição natural para sentir desejo sexual em relação a pessoas do mesmo sexo e que, neste último caso, Deus quer que se coloque em prática tal conduta em algumas circunstâncias.       

10) Item 28 reafirma que a Igreja aceita a possibilidade de uso da pena de morte:

Em conformidade com a Sagrada Escritura e a tradição constante do Magistério ordinário e universal, a Igreja não errou ao ensinar que o poder civil possa legitimamente exercer a pena capital contra os malfeitores, quando isso é verdadeiramente necessário para preservar a existência ou a justa ordem da sociedade (cf. Gn 9, 6; Jo 19, 11; Rm 13, 1-7; Inocêncio III, Professio fidei Waldensibus praescriptaCatecismo Romano do Concílio de Trento, p. III, 5, n. 4; Pio XII, Discurso aos participantes do Encontro Nacional de Estudos da União dos Juristas Católicos Italianos, 5 de Dezembro de 1954).         


11) Os itens 30 a 40 tratam do sacramento da Eucaristia, enfatizo a parte que fala da necessidade do estado de graça (item 37):

Em virtude da vontade de Cristo e da tradição imutável da Igreja, o sacramento da Sagrada Eucaristia não pode ser dado àqueles que estão em estado público de pecado objectivamente grave, e a absolvição sacramental não pode ser dada àqueles que expressam a sua relutância em se conformarem à lei divina, mesmo se essa relutância diz respeito a uma só matéria grave (cf. Concílio de Trento, sess. 14, c. 4; João Paulo II, Mensagem ao Cardeal William Wakefield Baum, 22 de Março de 1996).     


Em inglês, para acessar todo o documento clique aqui, para acessar a nota explicativa clique aqui.



sexta-feira, 7 de junho de 2019

Texto para Aqueles que Tentam Salvar Papa Francisco


Dan Hitchens, editor de um dos maiores jornais católicos do mundo, o The Catholic Herald, escreveu um artigo para aqueles que tentam tornar o Papa Francisco em um papa verdadeiramente católico.

O artigo foi escrito para a First Things, talvez a revista católica de maior prestígio nos Estados Unidos.

Hitchens basicamente tem três recados àqueles que tentam provar a cada frase herética do Papa Francisco que 'na verdade" a frase é pura ortodoxia católica:

Primeiro recado:  Qualquer frase herética pode ser transformada em frase ortodoxa se você se esforçar o bastante. Por exemplo, se alguém diz que Cristo não é filho de Deus, basta você distorcer o que significa filho. Hitchens usa duas frases que Francisco realmente disse para provar seu ponto.

Segundo recado:  Olhem os terríveis efeitos das confusões de Francisco entre os fiéis. Com Francisco, os católicos estão desorientados, não sabem mais o valor católico da Eucaristia nem do casamento, não sabem mais o que é inferno, nem o que a Igreja tem a dizer sobre contracepção, nem se a Igreja apoia ou não a pena de morte.

Terceiro recado: Quando confrontado com suas ações e palavras o Papa Francisco agora deu para dizer que não se lembra.

Aqui vai parte do texto de Hirchens:

Pope Francis Forgets
by Dan Hitchens
6.7.2019

Did Pope Francis know? Was he told, five years before the world found out, that the powerful Cardinal McCarrick was a serial sexual abuser? The diplomat who claims to have informed the pope, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, names two dates on which he raised the matter with Francis: June 23 and October 10, 2013. But the Holy Father, in a new interview with Valentina Alazraki, says he simply can’t remember. “When [Viganò] says he spoke to me that day, he came ... I do not remember if he told me about this. If it is true or not. No idea.”
This is not the only gap in the papal memory. Alazraki asked Francis about a February speech that described persistent critics of the Church as “relatives of the devil.” The pope replied: “I do not remember the text but no, no. I do not feel that way.” What about the headline-making 2014 phone call in which the pope allegedly encouraged a woman to ignore Church teaching on Communion and divorce? Also a blank: “What I said to that woman I do not remember.”
Francis is also unsure about his famously ambiguous footnote on Communion for those in “irregular relationships”: “I don’t remember the footnote,” he told the press in 2016. The Holy Father is an eighty-two-year-old man with a lot on his plate. But the impression of all these forgettings is—and it hurts to say this—of a teacher who often speaks without much reflection, before or after. While that may not be the greatest of imperfections, in a pope it can be catastrophic.
Because of those forgotten statements about Communion, dioceses and even a national bishops’ conference have permitted Communion for the sexually-active divorced and remarried. In so doing, they have discarded the teaching of Jesus Christ about marriage, the EucharistConfession, and divine grace, and endangered many souls. At the parish level, the evidence is necessarily more anecdotal, but it is disturbing enough. From Normandy to northern Argentina, the pope’s words are treated as a green light for Communion for the remarried. Eric Sammons, who spent five years as director of evangelization for the Diocese of Venice in Florida, saw widespread confusion on this and other matters. “I saw Catholics engaged in adultery receive Holy Communion... ‘because Pope Francis.’ I saw Catholics assert that it was wrong to evangelize... ‘because Pope Francis.’ I saw Catholics denigrate big families... ‘because Pope Francis.’” Such stories are common.
...
For years I used to tell myself and others that Francis had been misread by intemperate bloggers and ignorant reporters. But the more you do this, the more you start to realize two things.
First, that practically any statement can be reconciled with Church teaching, if you try hard enough. Give me a minute, and I can probably explain why a papal remark such as “States must be secular” or (of some cohabiting couples) “they have the grace of a real marriage” can be given an orthodox interpretation. Indeed—to move from real examples into a thought experiment—“Jesus Christ is not the son of God” could be given an orthodox interpretation if you really want one. (It all depends on the meaning of “son”…)
But the mere possibility of an orthodox reading is not the only thing that matters. This is the second thing you realize: It also matters whether the words mislead people. And the pope’s words—combined with his actions and his conspicuous silences—are frequently, needlessly, seriously misleading about Catholic doctrine. Some of the most glaring examples relate to contraceptionhell, and the theoretical legitimacy of the death penalty, but the list grows practically every month.
The Vatican’s liturgy chief, Cardinal Robert Sarah, recently observed: “Every day I receive calls for help from everywhere from those who no longer know what they are to believe. Every day in Rome, I receive discouraged and suffering priests. The Church is going through the dark night.” Cardinal Sarah points the finger at “high-ranking prelates” rather than the pope himself. Nevertheless, his image will resonate with the many Catholics who feel that darkness has descended on the Church, and that they can scarcely see more than a few steps ahead.
Now, what you are meant to do in a dark night, if I have understood the spiritual writers correctly, is to persevere. To resist the temptations—to anger, to despair, to rash actions, to apostasy—which may press upon you. To keep to your ordinary duties, and hand on Christ’s teaching to others. To pray and offer up your sufferings, not least for any churchmen who have challenged your faith. And to remember the Church’s previous crises—including the darkest of dark nights, many centuries ago, when hope itself seemed utterly dead and buried.

quarta-feira, 5 de junho de 2019

30 Anos do Massacre na Praça Tiananmen em Beijing. Chineses Não Lembram.



Reportagem da CBS acima mostra que os chineses não sabem o que aconteceu no dia 4 de junho de 1989, mesmo mostrando a foto mais conhecida do protesto dos chineses contra a ditadura (foto abaixo). Analistas dizem que milhares foram mortos pela ditadura por conta dos protestos. A reportagem entrevista um sobrevivente que mora nos Estados Unidos e ele diz que até hoje não pode voltar para a China nem seus familiares podem sair de lá.



Terrível ditadura chinesa, que muitos no Brasil e no mundo elogiam.


Papa Paulo VI, Jacques Maritain e Saul Alinsky





Desde o lançamento, ando lendo os comentários feitos sobre o livro nos Estados Unidos, além de uma entrevista que o próprio Marshall deu sobre o livro em que rebate algumas críticas.

Sobre o livro, conheço o Dr. Marshall há algum tempo, sei que ele conhece muito a Igreja e sua história. Discordo dele sobre o pensamento que ele tem sobre economia e catolicismo (mais essa não é área de especialização dele) e também discordo dele sobre a atitude que se deve ter em relação ao Papa Francisco (ele considera que o Papa é terrível, mas não defende que o Papa Francisco seja herético, pelo menos não defende isso abertamente).

Mas eu estava lendo uma avaliação do livro feita pelo Padre John Todd Zuhlsdorf (no seu blog Father Z).

Lá no fim do texto, o padre Z diz: "você sabia que o Papa Paulo VI se encontrou três vezes com Saul Alinsky? E que Jacques Maritain era um entusiasta do pensamento de Saul Alinsky? E que Alinsky era um entusiasta do pensamento do Paulo VI?"

O quê? Como?

Caramba, não sabia disso. Saul Alinsky foi uma marxista radical que queria conquistar a sociedade cristã por dentro, por meio de organização de comunidades. Alinsky dedicou seu livro mais famoso (Regras para Radical)  a Lúcifer, por representar a rebeldia contra o domínio. Fico agora sabendo que  o próprio Jacquers Maritain pediu que Alisnky fizesse esse livro.  Perguntado se preferia o Inferno ou o Paraíso, Alinsky respondeu que preferia ir para o Inferno. Barack Obama é fã de Alinsky, assim como Hillary Clinton.

Daí descobri um artigo do The Remnant sobre Paulo VI, Jacques Maritain e Saul Alinsky, escrito por Christopher Ferrara. Gosto muito dos textos de Ferrara, mais até do que os textos de Marshall.

Aqui vai parte do texto de Ferrara sobre esse relacionamento terrível da Igreja com Alinsky:

Saul Alinsky and "Saint" Pope Paul VI: Genesis of the Conciliar Surrender to the World Featured

Written by  
This article, adapted from a presentation given at the 2018 symposium of the Roman Forum at Lake Garda, examines the origin of the current unparalleled crisis in the Church at its origin: the neo-Modernist uprising during the Interwar Period, culminating in that catastrophe known as the “opening to the world” at Vatican II.
The conciliar “opening to the world” was assisted mightily by two deluded “conservative” visionaries whose roles were absolutely decisive: Jacques Maritain and his disciple Pope Montini, whose relationship and mutual connection to none other than Saul Alinksy are the focus of this piece.
It is no longer possible to deny in good faith that the Council’s outcome has been the spread of an ecclesial disease that now affects virtually every region of the Mystical Body, and which both Maritain and Montini loudly deplored in its earliest stages while resolutely refusing to acknowledge their own role, and that of the Council, in the growing debacle.
For more than fifty years, traditionalist commentators, remarking the obvious, have chronicled the resulting ecclesial decline in every department. They have warned unceasingly that the reformist mania the Council unleashed—to the applause of both Maritain and Montini and their fellow deluded “conservative” reformers—would end in final disaster for the human element of the Church. Final disaster has arrived with the out-of-control papacy of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his circle of homosexual and homosexual-enabling collaborators, whom he has systematically elevated to positions of power in service to his veritable dictatorship over the Church.
...
While he lived to regret the ecclesial ruin he had provoked and then sought desperately to repair—too little, too late—Pope Montini was a revolutionary who had been formed by the “conservative” Modernism of another revolutionary: Jacques Maritain. As Montini famously admitted: “I am a disciple of Maritain. I will call him my teacher.”Maritain’s Integral Humanism (1936) was nothing less than the “‘petit livre rouge’ (‘little red book’) of a whole generation of Christians.” That is, liberal Catholics like Montini, the child of haute bourgeois “patriots” of the Italian state created by the revolutionary violence of the so-called Risorgimento.Like Maritain himself, Montini was seduced by the ignis fatuus of a New Age of humanity in which the Church, happily reconciled to pluralist democracy and the modern conception of rights, would be the leaven of a New Christendom, free from the disabling structures of what Maritain dismissed as the surpassed “sacral age” of medieval Christendom to which there could never be a return in any form. Montini and Maritain were typical of the false prophets of modernity who could not see, even as it was happening, what the pre-conciliar Popes readily predicted would happen were the Church ever to accommodate her teaching to the spirit of the age with its non-negotiable demand for the extinction of the Catholic confessional state.
The “First Modern Pope,”the deluded disciple of a deluded layman, would lead the Church on a disastrous deviation from the path of all his predecessors, only to be “confronted with the shattered assumptions of his whole pontificate.”[4] In his The Peasant of the Garrone, published in 1966, Maritain joined Montini in lamenting the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council while absolving it of any blame for the post-conciliar neo-Modernist uprising he deplored even though his own “thought,” which had spawned an international cult of Maritainismo to which Montini belonged, was instrumental in facilitating that uprising during and after the Council.
Maritain and Alinsky
In Peasant, Maritain writes of his own relationship to a fellow revolutionary, Saul Alinsky:I see in the Western world no more than three revolutionaries worthy of the name—Eduardo Frei in Chile, Saul Alinsky in America, ... and myself in France, who am not worth beans, since my call as a philosopher has obliterated my possibilities as an agitator…. Saul Alinsky, who is a great friend of mine, is a courageous and admirably staunch organizer of “people’s communities” and an anti-racist leader whose methods are as effective as they are unorthodox.
Inexplicably enough, Maritain was infatuated with the cigar-chomping, Jewish agnostic community organizer, whom he first met in 1945 during his wartime and post-war sojourn in America. The Maritain scholar Bernard Doering notes that whenever Maritain and Alinsky met, they “spent long hours exploring the democratic dream of people working out their own destiny. Both accepted democracy as the best form of government.”
Alinsky’s vaunted career as a social justice warrior in Chicago, where he developed deep connections with the progressive priests and prelates of the Chicago archdiocese, produced little or nothing in the way of actual justice. But, at the urging of none other than Maritain, he did produce a couple of influential books on how to be an effective rabble-rouser and political dirty trickster in the promotion of socialist causes. From “the very first days of their friendship in wartime America,” Doering writes, “Maritain had been urging, indeed relentlessly prodding, Alinsky to publish an explanation of his methods of community organization, a kind of handbook for authentic revolution.”
Alinsky wrote his Reveille for Radicals specifically at Maritain’s request, and Alinsky gave him the exclusive rights to the French translation. In a letter of recommendation for a foundation grant to Alinsky, Maritain described him as “practical Thomist”—an example of just how elastic was Maritain’s so-called Thomism. In the same letter, he described Alinsky as “a great soul, a man of profound moral purity…”
It was Maritain who also urged publication of Alinsky’s last work, the infamous Rules for Radicals (1971), which would influence the careers of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Apparently, Maritain either failed to read or decided to overlook much of the content of the book whose publication he would later laud.
Rules is dedicated to “the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom—Lucifer.” In Rules, Alinsky declares: “Dogma is the enemy of human freedom. Dogma must be watched for and apprehended at every turn and twist of the revolutionary movement.” He then immediately contradicts himself by laying down one dogma after another, including:
1) The “sacred right” to revolution.
2) The dictum that “Mankind has been and is divided into three parts: the Haves, the Have-Nots, and the Have-a-Little, Want Mores.” “The spiritual life of the Haves,” quoth Alinsky, is merely “a ritualistic justification of their possessions.”
3) Various ethical rules for the social justice warrior, including the right to employ blackmail other immoral means if really necessary to achieve a so-called social justice end.[9]
According to Alinsky’s ethical rules “the real and only question regarding the ethics of means and ends is, and always has been, ‘Does this particular end justify this particular means?’” “Ethical standards,” says Alinsky, “must be elastic to stretch with the times.” “To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles,” he further declared.
Alinsky even quotes Maritain—unfairly and out of context—to support his claim that SJW’s who will not fight dirty have “fear of soiling ourselves by entering the context of history is not virtue, but a way of escaping virtue.” Ethical judgments, says Alinsky, “must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point,” and “the less important the end to be desired, the more one can afford to engage in ethical evaluations of means.”
...
This was written at the same time neo-Modernist opposition to the Church’s teaching on marriage and procreation was impelling Montini to produce the document that became Humanae Vitae. In spite of all this, Maritain wrote to his beloved friend Alinsky in 1971, one of his last letters, to praise Rules as:
“A great book, admirably free, absolutely fearless, radically revolutionary…. I regard the book as history-making. If middle-class people can be organized and develop a sense of and a will for the common good—and if Saul is there to inspire them—they are able to change the whole social scene for the sake of freedom.”
After a few timid objections to Alinsky’s amoral situation and utilitarian ethics, for which he apologizes, Maritain concludes his dithyrambic epistle to the agnostic Jewish agitator: “You know that I am with you with all my heart and soul. Pray for me, Saul. And God bless you. To you, the fervent admiration and abiding love of your old Jacques.[13]
In an interview with Playboy Magazine very shortly before his death from a heart attack in 1972 at the age of 63, which interview is part of a declassified FBI file, the man Maritain asked to pray for him declared that he would unhesitatingly choose hell over heaven:
PLAYBOY: Having accepted your own mortality, do ·you believe in any kind of afterlife?
ALINSKY: Sometimes it seems to me that the question people should ask is not “is there life after death?” but “Is there life after birth?” I don't know whether there’s anything after this or not. I haven’t seen the evidence one way or the other and I don't think anybody else has either. But I do know that man’s obsession with the question comes out of his stubborn refusal to face up to his own mortality. Let’s say that if there is an afterlife, and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to hell. 
PLAYBOY: Why?
ALINSKY: Hell would be heaven for me. All my life I’ve been with the have-nots. Over here, if you’re a have-not, you’re short of dough. If you’re a have-not in hell, you’re short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I’ll start organizing the have-nots over there. 
PLAYBOY: Why them? 
ALINSKYThey’re my kind of people

Alinsky and Montini


The 30-year-long intimate friendship between “old Jacques” and Alinsky gave rise to a connection between Alinsky and Maritain’s foremost disciple, the future Pope Paul VI. Montini was then Archbishop of Milan, to which post he had been sent off without being made a cardinal after Pius XII lost confidence in him on account of his Modernist tendencies.
In his study The Radical Vision of Saul Alinsky, P. David Finks notes that “For years Jacques Maritain had spoken approvingly to Montini of the democratic community organizations built by Saul Alinsky.” Accordingly, in 1958 Maritain arranged for a series of meetings between Alinsky and Archbishop Montini in Milan. Before the meetings, Maritain had written to Alinsky to tell him that, as Finks recounts: “the new cardinal was reading Saul’s books and would contact him soon.”
There were three meetings between Montini and Alinsky in Milan during the late spring of 1958.
On June 20, 1958, Alinsky wrote to Maritain: “I had three wonderful meetings with Montini and I am sure that you have heard from him since.” Among the subjects discussed, according to Nicholas Hoffman, was how to counter rising Communist influence in the industrial north of Italy without “reinforcing reactionary elements that had less interest in democracy than in squelching the working man.”In other words, the old liberal game of using the threat of one political trap to drive the people into the jaws of another: oppose communism with soft socialism, just as socialism had been opposed by the Party of Order in France. And, in fact, soft socialism became Italian policy under the Moro government elected in an alliance with the Socialists in 1963.
We will never know what exactly passed between Montini and Alinsky during those “three wonderful meetings” in Milan, but we do know that upon his return to Chicago from Italy, Alinsky wrote as follows to George Shuster, two days before the papal conclave that elected John XXIII: “No, I don’t know who the next Pope will be, but if it’s to be Montini, the drinks will be on me for years to come.”
What did Alinsky know? What did he learn from his “three wonderful meetings” with the man who was soon to become the First Modern Pope? He learned what Maritain already knew about his disciple: that if and when Montini became Pope, there would be a revolution in the Church.
And so there was. It was Pope Montini who would declare after the Council on the pages of L’Osservatore Romano (July 3, 1974): “The important words of the Council are newness and updating… the word newness has been given to us as an order, as a program.”Never in Church history had a Pope uttered such nonsense in a public address to the Church universal.
...
Conclusion: The Bitter Harvest of a Revolutionary Fellowship
The relationship between Maritain, Montini and Alinsky was an early reflection of the de facto fusion of the human element of the Church with the world—the “temporalization of Christianity” Maritain was forced to recognize—that has since characterized the post-conciliar crisis as a whole. Thus was the New York Times able to observe early in the Bergoglian pontificate that none other than Barack Obama had “fit seamlessly into a 1980s Catholic cityscape forged by the spirit of Vatican II, the influence of liberation theology and the progressivism of Cardinal Joseph L. Bernardin, the archbishop of Chicago, who called for a ‘consistent ethic of life’ that wove life and social justice into a ‘seamless garment.’”
The Times notes that Obama, the young community organizer in Chicago’s progressive Catholic environment, which Saul Alinsky was instrumental in creating, was mentored by Gregory Galluzzo, “a former Jesuit priest and disciple of the organizer Saul Alinsky.” Obama even “had a small office with two cloudy glass-block windows on the ground floor of Holy Rosary, a handsome red brick parish on the South Side, where he would pop down the hall to the office of the Rev. William Stenzel, raise a phantom cigarette to his lips and ask, ‘Want to go out for lunch?’”.
As the Times further observes, while operating on a grant from the Archdiocese of Chicago, “Obama became a familiar face in South Side black parishes. At Holy Angels Church, considered a center of black Catholic life, he talked to the pastor and the pastor’s adopted son about finding families willing to adopt troubled children. At Our Lady of the Gardens, he attended peace and black history Masses and conferred with the Rev. Dominic Carmon on programs to battle unemployment and violence. At the neo-Gothic St. Sabina, he struck up a friendship with the Rev. Michael L. Pfleger, the firebrand [i.e., ultra-Modernist dissenter from doctrine and dogma] white pastor of one of the city’s largest black parishes.”
As a Senator in the Illinois State Senate, Obama, the social justice warrior from Alinsky’s Chicago and Bernadin’s corrupt, homosexual-infested Archdiocese, would refuse to support the Born Alive Protection Act, presented to the state legislature when it was revealed that the survivors of late-term induced abortions in Chicago hospitals were being left to die after delivery.[29] As President of the United States he would defend “partial birth abortion,” the compulsory subsidy of contraception by Catholic nuns, and federal “guidelines” for “transgender bathrooms” in public schools. And today, the Catholic bishops of America, most of whom probably voted for Obama, are united in the conviction that Donald Trump, usurper of the New World Order, must be stopped.
Behold the last and bitter harvest of a revolutionary fellowship between Catholic churchmen and the world, exampled early on by the link between Jacques Maritain, Saul Alinsky and “the First Modern Pope.”