Birds of a feather flock together.
Bergoglio's housemother, and Prelate of the Vatican Bank, is also a verified member of the lavender mafia.
Posted on 12/05/2016 9:50:06 AM PST by ebb tide
"Why hasn’t the pope responded to the cardinals?"
>>The pope doesn’t give binary answers to abstract questions. But that does’t mean he hasn’t responded. His response is to approve and to encourage positive pastoral practices. A clear and obvious example was his response to the Buenos Aires area bishops, when he encouraged them and confirmed that their reading of Amoris Laetitia was correct.<<
>>In other words, the pope responds by encouraging, and indeed loves to respond to the sincere questions put to him by pastors. The ones who really understand Catholic doctrine are the pastors, because doctrine does not exist for the purpose of debate but for the salus animarum [‘the health of souls’] – for salvation rather than intellectual discussion.<<
Did you catch that? Yes, that was
a) an admission that the pope won’t offer yes or no answers (Sorry, Mt. 5:33!) on the dubia and
b) That the Buenos Aires letter — famous for its tacit endorsement of Communion for the divorced and remarried — is the new law of the land in the Church… and
c) Since he “loves to respond to sincere questions put to him by pastors” and he won’t respond to the four cardinals, ergo, their questions are either not sincere or they are not pastors, or both.
And here’s Spadaro, doubling down on b):
"The cardinals want to know whether Amoris Laetitia ever makes possible absolution and Holy Communion for people who are still validly married but having sexual relations with another. They claim that hasn’t been made clear."
>>I think that the answer to that has been given, and clearly. When the concrete circumstances of a divorced and remarried couple make feasible a pathway of faith, they can be asked to take on the challenge of living in continence. Amoris Laetitia does not ignore the difficulty of this option, and leaves open the possibility of admission to the Sacrament of Reconciliation when this option is lacking.<<
>>In other, more complex circumstances, and when it has not been possible to obtain a declaration of nullity, this option may not be practicable. But it still may be possible to undertake a path of discernment under the guidance of a pastor, which results in a recognition that, in a particular case, there are limitations which attenuate responsibility and guilt – particularly where a person believes they would fall into a worse error, and harm the children of the new union.<<
>>In such cases Amoris Laetitia opens the possibility of access to Reconciliation and to the Eucharist, which in turn dispose a person to continuing to mature and grow, fortified by grace.<<
“I think the answer to that has been given, and clearly,” he says. Followed by three paragraphs of incomprehensibly vague word salad that sounds mostly like, “Reconciliation and the Eucharist for people who don’t feel guilty of adultery even if they’re violating the 6th Commandment is totes okay.”
Ping.
‘If I am too stupid to make you understand, it’s your fault!”
As a kid I always thought it was my responsibility to seek And find God even if authority figures were pointing in the wrong direction.
Spadaro is mistaken. The answer has never been given clearly. It was only exposed when Bergoglio's private letter to the bishops of Argentina was leaked. It took the Vatican days to admit that the letter was authenic.
Bergoglio is, by nature, a stealth heretic. And sometimes a public one.
The first thing you learn when you begin learning how to think is that a statement is true or false, and that there is no middle ground between true or false. The original “binary”.
“Don’t know” and “maybe” don’t count. What you know doesn’t matter. This is about the objective truth of the statement.
Looks like the pope was out drinking when they gave that lesson in seminary.
Spadaro would have made a great employee at Oceania’s Ministry of Truth.
Binary questions must be answered when a pope promulgates new doctrine at odds with existing doctrine. The binary question: if both doctrines can not be true at the same time... which one is true?
I think we’ve successfully reached the point that I’ve seen suggested elsewhere. His silence is consent for the misinterpretations — for if he answers one way he is outed as a heretic, and if he answers the other, his revolution dies.
No one gets any grace from sacrilegious Communions.
I have known this, literally, since I was SEVEN YEARS OLD, as has every properly-instructed First Communicant.
Adulterers cannot be “fortified” by making sacrilegious Confessions and Communions.
I think, at this point, there isn't any article, blog, etc that sheds any further light on this matter for me. We are in a holding pattern until The Four actually follow through on their promised "formal correction". I'm not convinced that it will actually happen, so I will believe it when I see it.
I read the whole article and my Gaydar is alarming. Spadaro's behavior through all of this has been childish, petulant, hysterical, shrill, personal and girly. He referred to the four cardinals as "witless worms." In this article, he refers to the circumspect, terse questions of the cardinals as "yelling" and then turns around and talks about his and the Pope's response as "serene dialog", as if invective like "rigid" (repeated ad nauseaum), "doctors of the law" and "witless worms" are examples of "serene dialog".
This guy is a fully paid up member of the lavender mafia. He's a real sissy boy.
Specifically this:
As the same website has now also revealed, in a separate article – although Professor Spaemann appears not yet to know of this speculation – the other two prelates who had earlier also signed the dubia which were sent to Pope Francis are “in all probability” the retired Curial Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes of Germany and His Beatitude Sviatoslav Shevchuk, Major Archbishop of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.
The two other mystery signers of the dubia. I thought the involvement of an Eastern Rite bishop was particularly interesting, and might have something to do with the fact that Ecumenical Patriarch, Bartholomew I has suddenly, out of nowhere, found the need to become involved in this mess.
Eastern Rite involvement is a bit of a "wild card" and one on which Francis may not have counted.
But the Popes do give euphemistic and abstract answers to direct questions, binary and otherwise; always trying to be like Paul - all things to all men.
There are lots of statements whose truth or falsity are matters of opinion.
You mean additional prelates who wrote the private letter? Also, it sounds like this is only at the level of speculation.
Why assume he was drunk instead of a fundamental moral character issue with him? :)
But if true, it could mean that has potential for upheaval beyond the confines of the Latin Rite.
Birds of a feather flock together.
Bergoglio's housemother, and Prelate of the Vatican Bank, is also a verified member of the lavender mafia.
Given the universal nature of the moral teachings, it should be beyond the confines of the Latin Rite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.