A Venda de Hóstias Sagradas na Internet - Satanismo e Simonia

Essa semana foi noticiado que o site de vendas online Etsy estava vendendo hóstias sagradas (imagem acima). Um terror para católicos, seria a venda do Corpo de Cristo.

O Life Site News entrevistou um padre exorcista sobre o assunto, padre Chad Ripperger. Ele disse basicamente que:

1) Isso é mais comum do que se pensa e deve piorar;

2) Mas Católicos devem saber que a consagração da hóstia age apenas sobre os "acidentes do pão e não sobre o Corpo de Cristo", assim os crimes contra a hóstia consagrada não fazem o Corpo de Cristo sofrer, mas O ofende profundamente;

3) Roubar objetos sagrados, qualquer um, para obter lucro é praticar o crime de simonia, mesmo pessoas ditas católicas fazem isso;

4) Muitas vezes são os satanistas que roubam hóstias para suas cerimônias;

5) Até padres estão envolvidos com satanismo e roubam hóstias para os rituais satânicos;

6) O vendedor das hóstias confirmou isso, dizendo que recebeu as hóstias de um padre na Alemanha e que "há muitos padres envolvidos com o satanismo"

7) O site lembra que o eBay anunciou venda de hóstias em 2005, mas com os protestos dos católicos retirou o anúncio.

Entrem em contato com o Etsy pedindo para retirar a venda em

Etsy Support Hotline: 1-844-659-3879 or 1-844-387-9910

Etsy Customer Service: 800-328-5933, email: support@etsy.com

Etsy Corporate CEO Josh Silverman
55 Washington Street, Suite 512
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Twitter: @jgsilverman

Rezemos pela Igreja que tem até padres praticando satanismo.

Quantas Vezes o Papa Desprezou os Apelos de Fiéis e Clérigos?

Em 2017, eu já tinha mostrado uma lista de apelos desprezados pelo Papa Francisco aqui no blog (a lista já era grande). Mas agora com a Carta que acusa o Papa de heresia, em que muitos críticos dizem que os signatários deveriam primeiro pedir audiência privada com o Papa, o Life Site News resolveu catalogar todas as vezes que fiéis e clérigos tentaram esse contato com o Papa Francisco e foram desprezados.

O momento mais triste da lista é o desprezo do Papa aos quatro cardeais que assinaram o Dubia, com questionamentos ao Papa. O Papa nunca respondeu, e ainda disse que recebeu a notícia pela imprensa (o que é mentira, o Dubia foi entregue em mãos). Dois dos quatro cardeais já faleceram.

O momento mais ridículo da lista de desprezos do Papa ocorreu diante das acusações do arcebispo Viganò. Jornalistas perguntaram diretamente ao Papa sobre isso e ele respondeu que não iria dizer "nenhuma palavra", e que os jornalistas tirassem suas próprias conclusões.

Vejam a imensa lista de desprezos do Papa aos fiéis e clérigos catalogada pelo Life Site News, dividida entre "Tentativas Diretas de Contactar o Papa" e "Tentativas Indiretas de Contactar o Papa":

Direct attempts by clergy and laity to reach Pope Francis 

• In October of 2014, a large U.S. Catholic parish – St. John the Baptist (Front Royal, Virginia) issued an Affirmation of Faith Concerning Marriage and the Family that gained more than 1,000 signatures from parishioners and was sent to Pope Francis. 
• On 16 April 2015, the Catholic newspaper The Wanderer published an Open Letter to Pope Francis, in which the signatories asked Pope Francis that he “would celebrate the conclusion of the Synod of the Family with a clear and strong reaffirmation of the Church’s timeless teachings on the indissolubility of marriage, the nuptial nature and definition of marriage and conjugal love, and the virtue of chastity, as presented in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”
• After the first troubling synod, in December of 2014, the author of this article herself made her own small attempt to defend the Church's teaching on marriage by writing an Open Letter to Pope Francis, arguing on the basis of her own experience as a child of divorce. This letter was sent to Pope Francis, but was never responded to. It was also sent to the Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops, but was not responded to, either. 
• On 24 April, very shortly after the publication of the papal document, Bishop Athanasius Schneider published a charitable and clear critique of Amoris Laetitia, speaking about the confusion and “contradictory interpretations even among the episcopate” flowing from this papal text, and calling upon the Church's hierarchy and the laity to beg the Pope for a clarification and an official interpretation of Amoris Laetitia in line with the constant teaching of the Church. 
• On July 13, 2016, in a spirit of love, humility, and faithfulness, 16 international life and family advocates asked Pope Francis in a powerful "plea to the Pope" to unambiguously speak the truth of the Catholic faith, to end doctrinal confusion, to restore clarity, and to be the Holy Father that Catholics need. 
• In July of 2016, 45 clergy and scholars published their letter to the cardinals of the Catholic Church, in which they “request that the Cardinals and Patriarchs petition the Holy Father to condemn the errors listed in the document in a definitive and final manner, and to authoritatively state that Amoris Laetitiadoes not require any of them to be believed or considered as possibly true.” The letter contains a very detailed list of potentially heretical or heterodox statements that could be drawn out of Amoris Laetitia.
• On 3 August 2016, Professor Josef Seifert published a detailed critique of Amoris Laetitia, listing several errors in the document that could be potentially heretical, and asking the Pope to “revoke them himself.” Seifert was later, in August of 2017, to issue a second text on Amoris Laetitia, with a question addressed “to Pope Francis and to all Catholic cardinals, bishops, philosophers and theologians. It deals with a dubium about a purely logical consequence of an affirmation in Amoris Laetitia, and ends with a plea to Pope Francis to retract at least one affirmation of AL.” That question pertains to AL's claim “that we can know with ‘a certain moral security’ that God himself asks us to continue to commit intrinsically wrong acts, such as adultery or active homosexuality.” 
• On 14 November 2016, four cardinals published a letter to Pope Francis that they had sent to him privately on 19 September and that remained unanswered, which is very unusual. The letter contained the now-famous five dubiaconcerning Amoris Laetitia, for example as to whether those who live in a second “marriage” after a divorce may now receive the Sacraments and as to whether there still exist intrinsically evil acts, that is to say acts that are under all conditions to be regarded as evil. The cardinals requested a papal audience, but were never received. The four dubia cardinals are Cardinals Joachim Meisner, Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffarra, and Walter Brandmüller. (Two of the four dubia cardinals have since died.)
• Subsequently, 15 cardinals, archbishops, and bishops individually expressedtheir support for the dubia, among them Cardinals Joseph Zen and Willem Eijk, Archbishop Charles Chaput and Archbishop Luigi Negri.
• At the end of 2016, two scholars, Professor John Finnis and Professor Germain Grisez, publish an Open Letter to Pope Francis, asking him “to condemn eight positions against the Catholic faith that are being supported, or likely will be, by the misuse of his Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia.” They also called upon the bishops to join this request.
• On 23 September 2017, more than a year after the publication of Amoris Laetitia, 62 clergy and scholars issued a “Filial Correction” of Pope Francis, in which they stated: “we are compelled to address a correction to Your Holiness on account of the propagation of heresies effected by the apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia and by other words, deeds and omissions of Your Holiness.”
• On 1 November 2017, Father Thomas Weinandy published a letter that he had sent to Pope Francis in July of that year. In that letter, Weinandy says that Francis' pontificate is marked by “chronic confusion,” and he warns the Pope that a “seemingly intentional lack of clarity [of teaching] risks sinning against the Holy Spirit.” 
• On 2 January 2018, three Kazahk bishops – among them Bishop Schneider – issued a Profession of the immutable truths about sacramental marriage in light of Amoris Laetitia, and especially in light of the many episcopal pastoral guidelines permitting Communion for the “remarried” divorcees. These prelates reaffirm the traditional teaching of the Church on marriage and the family. Subsequently, one cardinal and six bishops – among them Cardinal Janis Pujats and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò signed this statement.
• Also in January of 2018, Cardinal Willem Eijk asked Pope Francis publicly to clarify questions about Amoris Laetitia and to clear the confusion stemming from the document. Eijk proposed that the Pope write an additional document in which doubts should be removed. 
• On 7 May 2018, Cardinal Eijk once more raised his voice and asked Pope Francis to clarify questions arising from the discussion among German bishops to give Holy Communion to Protestant spouses of Catholics. He observed that “the bishops and, above all, the Successor of Peter fail to maintain and transmit faithfully and in unity the deposit of faith contained in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.”
• Pope Francis, over the course of several years, made statements against the death penalty. He finally decided, in August of 2018, to change the Catholic Church's Catechism, declaring the death penalty to be immoral in all cases. Two weeks later, a group of 75 prominent clergy and scholars issued a public letter to cardinals asking them to urge Pope Francis to recant and rescind this change in the Catechism.
• In August of 2018. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò published a testimony, in which he claims, among many other things, that Pope Francis was aware of the moral corruption of then-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and of the fact that Pope Benedict XVI had placed certain restrictions upon him, but that he chose to ignore them. The Archbishop called upon the Pope to resign. When Pope Francis was asked about this document, he answered, saying that he would later respond to it (“When some time passes and you have drawn your conclusions, I may speak.”), but then he never made any response.
• In August of 2018, 47,000 Catholic women worldwide called upon Pope Francis to answer the question as to whether Archbishop Viganò's claim is true. 
• The U.S. Website Church Militant – who up to then had been careful not to criticize Pope Francis for his teaching on marriage and the family – called upon Pope Francis to resign, in light of his complicity with McCarrick's sins.
• In 2019, Pope Francis signed the controversial Abu Dhabi Statement which says that the “diversity of religions” is “willed by God.” Both Bishop Athanasius Schneiderand Professor Josef Seifert strongly opposedthis formulation and called upon Pope Francis to rescind it. Bishop Schneider, on 1 March, was able to receivefrom the Pope in a private conversation a sort of correction that this formulation really meant the “permissive will of God,” yet both he and Professor Seifert maintain that a public and definite correction is needed. 

Indirect attempts by clergy and laity to reach Pope Francis 

• Cardinal Gerhard Müller – then the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – published a book The Hope of the Family, in which he maintains the indissolubility of marriage, adding that “Not even an ecumenical council can change the doctrine of the Church.”
• The Voice of the Family, an international coalition of pro-life and pro-family organizations was founded ahead of the first family synod in 2014, establishing a website and organizing conferences in Rome in order to protect marriage and family from perceived threats. 
• Five Cardinals – Cardinals Walter Brandmüller, Gerhard Müller, Carlo Caffarra, Raymond Burke, and Velasio De Paolis – write, together with other authors such as Professor John Rist (one of the signatories of the Open Letter to Bishops), a book in defense of the Sacrament of Marriage, called Remaining in the Truth of Christ. 
• At the first Synod of Bishops on the Family, in October of 2014, there was a group of bishops strongly opposing to introduce heterodox statements concerning homosexuality and “remarried” divorcees into the synod document; subsequently, neither the Kasper proposal nor a change of the Church's teaching on homosexuality was included in the final document.
• In 2016, before the publication of Pope Francis' Amoris Laetitia, tens of thousands of Catholics signed a Filial Appeal, a Declaration of Fidelity to the Church's unchangeable teaching on marriage. This appeal had also been signed by Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Caffarra, Cardinal Pujats, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider.
• Also before the second family synod, Father José Granados – at the time Vice-president of the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family in Rome – published a book in defense of the indissolubility of marriage.
• In May of 2015, before the second Synod of Bishops on Marriage and the Family, nearly 1,000 priests issued a statement asking the synod to affirm the Church's teaching on marriage and the family.
• In August of 2015, Ignatius Press publishes the Eleven Cardinals Book, called Eleven Cardinals Speak on Marriage and the Family: Essays from a Pastoral Viewpoint. The authors – among them Cardinals Paul Josef Cordes, Dominik Duka, O.P, and John Onaiyekan, but also Robert Sarah and Carlo Caffarra – once more defend the Church's teaching on marriage and publish proposals for a good pastoral care for marriages.
• In September of 2015, just before the second synod, eleven African prelates – among them Cardinal Robert Sarah and Cardinal Barthélemy Adoukonou – published a book, Christ's New Homeland: Africa, in which they analyzed and sharply criticized the essential preparatory Vatican documents for the upcoming synod, once more defending the Church's teaching on marriage and the family.
• In February of 2019, just before the beginning of the 21-24 Abuse Summit in Rome, the two remaining dubia cardinals – Cardinals Raymond Burke and Walter Brandmüller – wrote an Open Letter to the Presidents of the Conferences of Bishops encouraging them “to raise your voice to safeguard and proclaim the integrity of the doctrine of the Church” and also to address the protracted problem of homosexual networks in the Catholic Church.
• At the same time, the Swiss lay organization Pro Ecclesia and LifeSiteNews launched a petition to “Stop homosexual networks in the Church” that aimed at tightening the Church's law in order both clearly to punish the priests who violate the Sixth Commandment by homosexual acts and those who abuse minors and vulnerable adults such as seminarians.
• Also in 2019, Cardinal Gerhard Müller published his Manifesto of Faith, in which he restated the main tenants of the Catholic Faith and Morals as they have always been taught and as they can be found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He did so with the expressed reference to the many clergy and laymen who have asked him for such a doctrinal clarification in the middle of a grave confusion in the Church.
• In April of 2019, Pope emeritus Benedict XVI published a letter on the sex abuse crisis, in which he points to the moral and doctrinal laxity that has entered the Catholic Church in the wake of the cultural revolution of the 1960s. Here thereby tried to help to point to deeper explanations of the current sex abuse crisis than the mere references to “abuse of power and spiritual abuse,” as well as “clericalism, as they had been presented at the February 2019 Sex Abuse Summit in Rome.
• Throughout these years, there have been many individuals who have raised their voices. Among the first papal critics were the now-deceased Mario Palmaro and Alessandro Gnocchi (“We do not like this Pope") and Professor Roberto de Mattei, who accompanied this papacy with numerous articles and commentaries. Then there were also Father Brian Harrison (here and here) and the internationally renowned Catholic philosopher Professor Robert Spaemannwho is now deceased.
• Later on, several books were written which describe in a critical manner Pope Francis' leadership and doctrinally confusing actions and words. Among them are The Political Pope by George Neumayr, The Dictator Pope by Henry Sire, The Lost Shepherd by Phil Lawler (who subsequently also authored The Smoke of Satan dealing with the sex abuse crisis), and José Antonio Ureta’s book Pope Francis’ Paradigm Shift: Continuity or Rupture in the Mission of the Church? — An Assessment of his Five-year Pontificate 

É Preciso Ataque ao Dogma para ser Herético?

Diante da Carta que acusa o Papa Francisco de heresia, há um debate na internet sobre as questões técnicas para se declarar alguém culpado de heresia. O debate envolve determinar se o Papa é materialmente herético (cometeu heresias mesmo sem saber), é formalmente herético (se cometeu heresia, sabe que cometeu heresia e ainda é obstinado no ato), se o Papa é obstinado ou não na suas heresias, se uma heresia envolve apenas os dogmas da Igreja ou qualquer ato infalível.

Para mim, é um debate meio fariseu e até bobo diante de tantas evidências contra o Papa Francisco e do silêncio do Papa ao não se defender dessas evidências.

Mas eu fiz esse debate no Capítulo 7 do meu livro acima que publiquei em março passado, por e-book.

Em suma, eu acho que o Papa não pode alegar desconhecimento de teologia dogmática, nem dos atos infalíveis da Igreja, acho que ele é obstinado nos ataques a Doutrina Católica e acho que não é necessário que o ato envolva dogma, nem só atos infalíveis, por óbvio em que temos uma Igreja sustentada na Bíblia e na Tradição, em que se exalta que temos uma doutrina de "vestimenta sem costura".

Hoje, eu leio um artigo que defende justamente o que eu disse no Capítulo 7 e é destaque em sites católicos dos Estados Unidos.

O autor do texto está rebatendo um católico americano conservador famoso chamado Jimmy Akin que alega que é necessário que seja dogma e que não se pode provar que o Papa é obstinado.

Mas a conclusão do autor do texto do site Aka Catholic, depois de várias análises de documentos da Igreja, é idêntica à minha.

Leiam o artigo ou o Capítulo 7 do meu livro.

Signatários da Carta que Acusa Papa de Heresia Respondem aos críticos.

A Carta Aberta que acusou o Papa de heresia começou com 19 signatários e conta agora com 77, segundo site Life News.

Eu diria que as críticas à Carta Aberta têm dois tipos de argumentação:

1) se o crítico é de esquerda, ele usa a falácia "ad hominem", ataca o caráter dos signatários.  Vai dizer que os signatários são incompetentes, imbecis e deveriam ser excomungados;

2) se o crítico é de direita, ou minimamente conservador, vai procurar detalhes técnicos, vai dizer que os signatários não provaram que o Papa é "herético formal", que os signatários não provaram que o Papa procura de forma "obstinada" praticar heresia.

Do lado dos signatários, eles não dão muita trela aos críticos de esquerda e respondem aos críticos de direita.

O site Life Site News fez uma seleçao de várias posições sobre a Carta Aberta e ao final colocou as respostas de dois ilustres signatários.

Eu acho que uma simples racional resposta aos críticos é usar dois argumentos de Chesterton.

Ele disse que "a maior sabedoria de todas é gritar antes que te firam" E que "para saber que algo é ruim basta ver o que seus defensores dizem".

O Papa e seus defensores são péssimos em suas defesas.

Mas vejamos as respostas dos signatários abaixo:

Signers defend themselves

Philosopher Professor John Rist, one of the original 19 signatories of the “Open Letter”, told LifeSiteNews by email today that he expected that there would be “little support even among conservatives” for the initiative.  

“In the present situation there is no need for the Bergoglians to say much; their work is being done for them by those who should be the friends of the letter writers. Often they are making rather bureaucratic suggestions rather than facing the real issues in the Church, such as that one of the reasons I signed the letter was because it renewed the ignored plea of the dubia cardinals for 'clarification'.” 

Rist believes that commentators are “merely evading the issue” when they concentrate on the canonical accuracy of the Open Letter’s charge against Pope Francis or the number of canonists or scholars with doctorates in theology on the list. 

“On that last point, in view of the present situation in theology generally, having more people with doctorates might have been a positive disadvantage,” Rist said. 

“What has happened, I think, is that these commentators have used feeble objections on minor points to avoid the main issue,” he continued.

‘This perhaps could be summed up by my view that [Pope] Bergoglio wants to transform the Church into a mildly spiritually flavoured NGO.”     

Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, one of the original Open Letter signers, defended his action, stating in an article that the document provides “furnishes clear evidence of heretical (not just erroneous) statements that may be found in the approved writings of Pope Francis, as well as evidence—in the form of repeated acts and omissions of governance—that he is fully aware of what he is promoting.”

“Many people have been asking: What’s the good of taking a step like this? Will it not further polarize the situation? Will it not offer excuses to the Bergoglio party to intensify their confinement and persecution of Catholics? Is it not overwhelmingly likely to be ignored? Can anyone do anything about a wayward pope—mustn’t we just wait until God sorts it out for us? And besides, aren’t the signatories lacking in sufficient theological qualifications,” he writes.

In answer to these questions, Kwasniewski provides three reasons why the document is “good and valuable.”

Signing the document is a “step we take before God, as a testimony of our conscience,” he wrote. 

“Perhaps there are others who can sleep like babes without raising a voice of protest to the autodemolition of the Faith and the misleading of countless souls; who see what the Pope is saying and doing, but who shrug their shoulders and figure that it won’t redound to lasting damage. I am not such a person, and I think the same is true of the other signatories,” he added.

“From those to whom more has been given, more will be expected. If we have been given to see a wolf in shepherd’s clothing, we are expected to do something about it. We will cry “Wolf!” to the vulnerable sheep, and pray fervently that other true shepherds will come to the rescue, in ways that we cannot. If they fail to do so, that is not our problem, but theirs to answer for,” he said. 

"Escrevemos para Vocês para Acusar o Papa Francisco do Crime de Heresia".

A carta assinada inicialmente por 19 teólogos e estudiosos acusando o Papa de heresia está causando enorme debate.

Hoje, acordei com um texto de Jimmi Akin dizendo basicamente que a carta não é canonicamente convincente para acusar o Papa de heresia e dizendo que os signatários são ridículos. Ele desejava que a carta foi quase já uma completa investigação canônica.

Mas a carta a acusa o Papa de heresia e pede justamente essa investigação canônica.

O primeiro parágrafo da carta é explícito sobre os objetivos dela: 1) acusar o Papa de heresia; 2) pedir que os bispos investiguem.

Vejamos o primeiro parágrafo:

"We are addressing this letter to you (bishops) for two reasons: first, to accuse Pope Francis of the canonical delict of heresy, and second, to request that you take the steps necessary to deal with grave sittuation of a heretical pope"

(Traduzindo: "Estamos endereçando esta carta a vocês (bispos) por duas razões: em primeiro lugar, para acusar o papa Francisco do crime canônico da heresia, e em segundo lugar, para pedir que você tome as providências necessárias para lidar com a grave situação de um papa herético).

Em termos canônicos, a carta mostra como é fácil identificar que o Papa é "materialmente herético" (comete heresias), a identificação de "formalmente herético" (comete heresias de forma obstinada e consciente) é trabalho para os bispos.

Alguns sites tiveram a coragem de dizer que a carta não acusa o Papa de heresia. Não leram nem o primeiro parágrafo.

No vídeo acima, meu ex-professor de teologia Taylor Marshall discute a carta e menciona Jimmy Akin. Sobre Akin, eles dizem que Akin não discutiu se o Papa é materialmente herético apenas denegriu os críticos do Papa, no mesmo estilo do próprio Papa.

Aqui vão algumas frases do vídeo traduzidas:

1) "Nós católicos não podemos estar em comunhão com um bispo luterano ou um bispo herético, pois seríamos heréticos também".

2) "Como a carta diz que temos um Papa herético, deveria dizer imediatamente que os signatários não estão em comunhão com ele".

3) "A carta deveria ser respondida pelo Papa, como disse um padre, pois desde Lutero (que só foi respondido depois de duas décadas), vemos que a falta de resposta prontamente da Igreja traz enormes problemas".

4) "A carta é assinada por renomados teólogos, autores de inúmeros livros que estão no espctro político da centro-direita não são radicais da extrema direita".

5) "A carta chama o Papa de herético logo no primeiro parágrafo, mas já que pede investigação não deveria chamá-lo logo de herético".

6) "O documento aponta 7 heresias do Papa Francisco e mostra que ele é persistente (obstinado) nesses erros"

7) "Ninguém tem o poder de julgar o Papa, vivemos tempo de lamento"

8) "Deus pode agir com a Igreja como agiu com os judeus que adoraram outros deuses, como há décadas os clérigos desprezam o magistério, a moral, os sacramentos e a teologia da Igreja, Deus pode decidir destruí-la por um tempo, como fez com o Templo de Jerusalém e tudo que representava o judaísmo"

9) "Não se pode dizer que as leis divinas são impossíveis de serem seguidas" (acusação 1)

10) "Deve-se seguir os mandamentos de Deus e não apenas ter fé neles" (acusação 2)

11) "Algumas heresias que acusam o Papa lembram a posição de Lutero, como a heresia de achar que as leis divinas são contraditórias e que seguir Deus pode significar pecar" (acusação 3).

12) "Muitas das heresias estão contidas no Amoris Laetitia, algumas passagens de Amoris Laetitia se posiciona do lado do ateísmo" (acusação 4).

13) "O Papa ver elementos positivos na relação homossexual, não se pode ver isso sendo católico/cristão" (acusação 5)

14)  "As determinações morais da Igreja são universais" (acusação 6)

15) "O Papa se contradiz em suas posições, assina um documento dizendo que Deus deseja positivamente muitas religiões e depois nega isso de forma privada para Bisco Schneider, mas as leis de Deus são proibitivas e lógicas (não contraditórias)" (acusação 7)

16) "Papa Francisco disse que Lutero não errou sobre justificação na fé. Oh, meu Deus, isso é heresia. E ele defendeu ainda mais Lutero. Isso é heresia"

Vejam o resto do vídeo.

Roger Scruton: como Ensinar que Bach é melhor que Lady Gaga? E a Física Gay.

No vídeo acima, o grande Sir Roger Scruton é perguntado sobre como ensinar aos alunos de hoje que Bach é melhor que Lady Gaga, já que eles irão reagir dizendo que é preconceito e velharia dizer isso.

A resposta de Scruton não é mágica, mas é simples: ensine aos alunos o que é música.

Em todo caso, a resposta de Scruton exige que os professores também saibam o que é música.

Hoje no Brasil, o Ministério da Educação parece-nos dizer que apenas o ensino técnico é importante para que um país se desenvolva, o resto seria jogar dinheiro fora.

Claro que é uma extrema estupidez se pensa assim, pois qualquer país deve seu desenvolvimento à sua ética e não ao conhecimento técnico, é a ética que sustenta o conhecimento e não o contrário.

Por acaso, hoje o renomado estatístico William Briggs fez um excelente texto cujo título é "As Universidades Irão Morrer".

No texto, Briggs mostra que muitas faculdades nos Estados Unidos estão ensinando "física para gays", "ciência de LGBT", "física dos negros", "arquitetura para gays", fazendo lista de astrônomos homossexuais...

Pois é, esse pessoal é bem técnico, mas eles estão ensinando também a estupidez e perdição  para muitas pessoas. Certa vez, eu disse em um zap de pais de alunos que um professor entrar na sala vestido de mulher sem abrir a boca já  está ensinando algo tenebroso.

Vejam parte do texto de Briggs abaixo:

Universities Are Doomed: What Next?

Oaths to Diversity. Mobs of filled-diaper students raging with demands. Academics thrown off cliffs by their vice-signalling brothers. De-platforming. Cowardly administrators. Craven professors. Social justice warriors. Student evaluations rated by inclusion. Studies degrees. Exorbitant student loans. Assistant Deans. Trigger warnings. Professors exiled for consorting with the wrong sort. Atheist theologians.

It goes on and on and gets worse and worse. No amount of publicity, exposure, teasing, or threats have made a dent in a ever-leftward slide into tyranny and ideology. Or into slowing an ever-burgeoning administration. Administrators now actually believe universities are theirs, and not the professors’.

“C’mon, Briggs. It’s bad in some places, sure. You’re only focusing on the negative, though. Math and science are doing fine.”

No, they’re not. They’re just being attacked last. Quotas are already in place. We have feminist math, queering physics, math education——

“Bull. There is no such thing as queering physics. Don’t exaggerate.”

Uh huh. “Teaching Queering Physics An Agenda for Research and Practice” in STEM of Desire. And “Queering Science for All Probing Queer Theory in Science Education.” How about a list of astronomers who have publicly revealed their enjoyment of sodomy?

“Well…”

Don’t stop me now. “Physics of Blackness: Beyond the Middle Passage Epistemology“, “Queering Architecture“, Queer mathematics, “Gender parity and queer awareness needed in mathematics“, “Mathematical Inqueery“, “Queering Critical Literacy and Numeracy for Social Justice: Navigating the—”

“Okay, okay, I get it. But——”

But me no buts. Have you ever spent a half hour browsing New Real Peer Review? Right now, right at the top, “Caravan Poetry: An Inquiry on Four Wheels“. Says “Through this inquiry into a new spatiotemporality for our research encounters, we experienced how the caravan offers a rupture from the mundane ongoingness enabling us to reconnect to the moment…” blah blah blah. By a person in the Department of Business Studies.

It never stops. It never slows. It grows, grows, grows.

Carta Aberta: Proeminentes Teólogos Acusam Papa Francisco de Heresia e Pedem Ação em Retaliação

Em um documento de mais de 20 páginas (clique aqui para ver), que veio como um passo adiante da Correção Filial que foi divulgada em setembro de 2017 (eu falei dela aqui no blog), proeminentes teólogos dizem que já está claro que o Papa Francisco é herético e pedem que os bispos investiguem os diversos atos considerados heréticos do Papa em nome da salvação das almas e façam estudos de como deve ser resolvido o caso de um papa herético.

Eles dizem que os bispos podem exigir que o Papa rejeite as heresias que ele propagou e caso o Papa insista, os bispos devem declarar que a Igreja está sem papa.

Os signatários também divulgaram um resumo da Carta Aberta, aqui vai abaixo:

Summary of open letter to bishops as presented by the authors themselves:

The Open letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church is the third stage in a process that began in the summer of 2016. At that time, an ad hoc group of Catholic clergy and scholars wrote a private letter to all the cardinals and Eastern Catholic patriarchs, pointing out heresies and other serious errors that appeared to be contained in or favoured by Pope Francis’s Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia. 

The following year, after Pope Francis had continued by word, deed, and omission to propagate many of these same heresies, a ‘Filial Correction’ was addressed to the pope by many of the same people, as well as by other clergy and scholars. This second letter was made public in September 2017, and a petition in support of it was signed by some 14,000 people. The authors of that letter stated however that they did not seek to judge whether Pope Francis was aware that he was causing heresy to spread.

The present Open letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church goes a stage further in claiming that Pope Francis is guilty of the crime of heresy. This crime is committed when a Catholic knowingly and persistently denies something which he knows that the Church teaches to be revealed by God. Taken together, the words and actions of Pope Francis amount to a comprehensive rejection of Catholic teaching on marriage and sexual activity, on the moral law, and on grace and the forgiveness of sins.

 The Open letter also indicates the link between this rejection of Catholic teaching and the favour shown by Pope Francis to bishops and other clergy who have either been guilty of sexual sins and crimes, such as former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, or who have protected clergy guilty of sexual sins and crimes, such as the late Cardinal Godfried Danneels. This protection and promotion of clerics who reject Catholic teaching on marriage, sexual activity, and on the moral law in general, even when these clerics personally violate the moral and civil law in horrendous ways, is consistent enough to be considered a policy on the part of Pope Francis. At the least it is evidence of disbelief in the truth of Catholic teaching on these subjects. It also indicates a strategy to impose rejection of these teachings on the Church, by naming to influential posts individuals whose personal lives are based on violation of these truths.

The authors consider that a heretical papacy may not be tolerated or dissimulated to avoid a worse evil. It strikes at the basic good of the Church and must be corrected. For this reason, the study concludes by describing the traditional theological and legal principles that apply to the present situation. The authors respectfully request the bishops of the Church to investigate the accusations contained in the letter, so that if they judge them to be well founded, they may free the Church from her present distress, in accordance with the hallowed adage, Salus animarum prima lex (‘the salvation of souls is the highest law’). They can do this by admonishing Pope Francis to reject these heresies, and if he should persistently refuse, by declaring that he has freely deprived himself of the papacy.

While this Open letter is an unusual, even historic, document, the Church’s own laws say that “Christ's faithful have the right, and, indeed, sometimes the duty, according to their knowledge, competence, and dignity, to manifest to the sacred pastors their judgment about those things which pertain to the good of the Church” (Code of Canon Law, canon 212.3). While Catholics hold that a pope speaks infallibly in certain strictly defined conditions, the Church does not say that he cannot fall into heresy outside these conditions.

The signatories to the Open Letter include not only specialists in theology and philosophy, but also academics and scholars from other fields. This fits well with the central claim of the Open Letter, that Pope Francis’s rejection of revealed truths is evident to any well-instructed Catholic who is willing to examine the evidence. The signatures of Fr Aidan Nichols OP and of Professor John Rist will be noted. Fr Nichols is one of the best-known theologians in the English-speaking world, and the author of many books on a wide range of theological topics, including the work of Hans Urs von Balthasar and Joseph Ratzinger. Professor Rist, who is known for his work in classical philosophy and the history of theology, has held chairs and professorships at the University of Toronto, the Augustinianum in Rome, the Catholic University of America, the University of Aberdeen, and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

The Open Letter is released just after the celebration of Holy Week and Easter Week, in the hopes that the present ‘passion’ of the Church will soon give way to a full resurrection of God’s saving truth.

Clergy and academics who wish to sign the open letter may send their name and credentials to organizers at this email address: openlettertobishops@gmail.com.  All requests will be thoroughly vetted.

Óbolo de São Pedro = Óbolo de George Soros?

O óbolo de São Pedro (chamado em inglês de Peter's Pence Collection) é uma arrecadação de donativos da Igreja em que os fiéis contribuem diretamente para o Papa, que ele usa para a manutenção da Igreja e para ajudar àqueles que considera que precisam. A arrecadação ocorre no dia 29 de junho, dia de São Pedro, ou no domingo mais próximo.

Foi com esse dinheiro que o Papa Francisco contribuiu recentemente meio milhão de dólares para àqueles que estão na fronteira dos Estados Unidos querendo entrar no país. O Papa muito provavelmente está colaborando com a vida dos traficantes de drogas que dominam a imigração clandestina nos Estados Unidos, facilitando a entrada de mais drogas dentro dos Estados Unidos, e assim facilitando mais mortes.

Elizabeth Yore escreveu um artigo para o site The Remnant alertando que o Papa está usando o dinheiro dos fiéis politicamente na linha do que faz George Soros, daí a imagem acima. E pediu que os fiéis não colaborem para o óbolo, que será arrecadado em 30 de junho este ano.

É um pedido muito arriscado, os fiéis que discordam frontalmente dos atos políticos e mesmo heréticos do Papa ficam em extrema dificuldade pois podem prejudicar muitas pessoas que precisam da Igreja ao negarem dinheiro ao Papa. Talvez devêssemos encontrar outra forma de ajudar. Não sei. Eu não tenho coragem de pedir que não contribuam com a Igreja. Mesmo sabendo que há muitos outros sofrimentos, por vezes provocados pelo próprio Vaticano, como é o caso dos sofrimentos dos católicos chineses, que não recebem ajuda financeira do óbolo.

Vejamos o texto dela

Sunday, April 28, 2019

PETER’S PENCE, SOROS’ PENCE: Pope to Give $500,000 to Illegal Immigrants

Written by  Elizabeth Yore

DrudgeReport headlines scream “Pope Funds Caravan” or “Border Battle: Pope Funds Caravan.” The Vatican wires half a million dollars from Peter’s Pence to aid the illegal immigrant caravan marching over the southern border of the United States.

Attention Catholics!

Pencil in June 30, 2019 on your church calendar. It signifies this year’s collection day for Peter’s Pence, the global collection plate for the Pope’s favorite charities. According to the USCCB website, the purpose of Peter's Pence Collection is to provide the Holy Father with the financial means to respond to those who are suffering as a result of war, oppression, natural disaster, and disease.

Surely, the persecuted Christians in Iraq, Egypt and Nigeria desperately deserve $500,000 to help them rebuild their devastated churches, schools, homes, and lives at the brutal hands of Islamic jihadists, do they not? After all, these innocent Catholics weren’t breaking the law when the violent jihadis terrorized their land, destroyed their Churches and raped their women.

What about the underground Catholic Church in China who are experiencing a massive destructive crackdown and demolition of their churches and lives by the Communist government? They could use $500,000 from Peter’s Pence to rebuild their places of worship.

Clearly, Catholics victims of the suicide bombings on Easter Sunday in Sri Lanka by Islamic terrorists would benefit greatly with $500,000 from Peter’s Pence, would they not?

Certainly, the funds from Peter’s Pence should be directed to the Catholic Church in the Middle East and Africa, after a genocidal year of unrelenting terrorism and Christian persecution by Boko Haram and other Islamic terrorists?

No, Francis is focusing on the Soros agenda, not the persecuted Catholics’ agenda. Recall that this is the Pope who said, “If I speak of Islamic violence, I must speak of Catholic violence.”

Francis shares the Soros view that “national borders are the obstacle.” The Pope incessantly interjects his view into American politics, by commenting about Trump’s wall as “those who build walls will become prisoners of the walls they put up” or intruding into the political campaign that politicians who promote a wall are“unchristian.”

The Vatican is no friend of America, what with the disturbing news that The Vatican appropriated $500,000 of Peter’s Pence funds to aid and abet lawbreakers on our southern border.

By pouring monies into illegal migrant caravans, Pope Francis is facilitating the soaring crime rates of human trafficking, illegal drugs, criminal organizations, and exploitation of women and children, along with the organized participation and funding of George Soros and the United Nations. Central American immigrants from the MS-13 gangs are flowing over our porous border and wreaking havoc in our communities.

It’s noteworthy that American Catholics are the largest contributors to Peter’s Pence. It is time to shut off the financial spigot to this Vatican scheme to undermine the safety, security and sovereignty of Europe and the United States. Closing wallets to the Vatican, sends a message that American Catholics want the border closed and secure. Like the Pope, Americans deserve a wall to keep us safe.

On the last Sunday in June, the second collection basket will be passed for Peter’s Pence. Close your wallet.

Remember, Peter’s Pence rejects the fence.