"Equally alarming is his apparent openness to ‘gay marriage’ in the form of ‘civil unions’. Most troubling of all is his open support for Cardinal Kasper who, at the 2014 Synod, called for admitting remarried divorcees to the Eucharist without them changing their marital status."
I have a great respect for Fr. Linus Clovis, the author of the article heading this thread. He makes a great many good points. However, statements like the above (in blockquotes) go beyond the evidence, or are contradicted by evidence: and when Fr. Clovis does this, it makes his important critique of Pope Francis' errors less effective, not moreso. To be just, as well as to be persuasive, it is necessary to be sure you're right before making a charge.
Support for "civil unions"? Support for admitting to Communion remarried divorcees? At least look at the counter-evidence.
Vaticanista Sandro Magister, writing for the Italian L’Espresso magazine, notes that since the extraordinary synod last October, Pope Francis has spoken out on questions like abortion, divorce, homosexuality, and contraception 40 times -- 40 times -- “without swerving a millimetre from the strict teaching of his predecessors Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI.” And, adds Magister, Francis has said “not a single word in support of the innovators” who want to “soften” doctrine or pastoral practice on these issues.
And --- the gay agenda?
"Let's not be naive, we're not talking about a simple political battle; this is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God."
That's Archbishop Jorge Bergoglio --- now Pope Francis ---opposing a “gay marriage” bill in Argentina.
“The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage. These realities are increasingly under attack from powerful forces which threaten to disfigure God’s plan for creation.”
That's Pope Francis supporting a successful referendum in Slovakia which
Don't anybody think I'm saying that Pope Francis, or any pope, is above criticism. Don't anybody think I haven't noticed that Pope Francis has been--- in his published remarks, appointments, and policies--- disturbing, ambiguous, contradictory, and altogether way too talkative.
I'm just saying: Consider all the evidence before you reach a verdict, and then --- judge justly.
Prayers and fasting I beg you, for the Successor of Peter.
In defense of Fr. Clovis, Sandro Magister is mistaken. Since the Synod, Francis received a transgendered woman and her soon to be finance (another woman) in a private audience. She left the meeting in “a period of peace” with the impending “wedding” still on.
The Rabbitgate affair that Fr. Clovis mentions above also occurred after the Synod.
Just recently, despite thousands of protests from both Catholic clergy and laity, Francis went ahead and promoted a man, with credible allegations of immoral sexual indiscretions in his recent past, as a bishop in Chile.
And finally, although Archbishop Bergoglio did publicly decry homosexual marriage in Argentina, he did encourage his fellow bishops to encourage support for civil homosexual unions. Fortunately, the other bishops did not heed his advice.
Magister, like others, seems to wear rose-colored glasses.
I am grateful to you for this post.
And I keep thinking of St. John Bosco’s vision.
Doesn't cancel out the bizarre, objectively heretical statements he has also made, and his enthusiastic support for Kasperian "serene" theology. But worse than that are his horrible appointments (well in excess of 40). When weighing the evidence, actions speak louder than words, and the evidence is painfully clear. He is providing material support to the modernist agenda, and the world is applauding him for it.
Prayers and fasting I beg you, for the Successor of Peter.
Amen to that.