Posted on 06/05/2021 12:08:54 PM PDT by ebb tide
I’m taking a brief time out from a larger work to comment on the big news dominating Catholic, and much of secular, media this morning: Cardinal Marx Submits Letter of Resignation to Pope Francis!
Euronews, a network that claims to reach to “over 400 million homes in 160 countries,” called the letter “stunning.”
The Wall Street Journal reported it as a “surprise move.”
National Catholic Reporter weighed in by declaring the resignation “shocking.”
Based on the reaction of many so-called “conservative” and “tradition-minded” Catholics on social media, the most shocking thing of all, in my view, is the level of naïveté on the part of those who should know better.
This is wonderful news. Good riddance!
Praise be Jesus Christ!
God is cleaning house!
No, sorry, this isn’t an example of God tidying up His “house” (otherwise known as the Catholic Church), a society to which neither Marx nor Bergoglio actually belong.
Even those who refuse to acknowledge that the conciliar institution of which they are members is not the Holy Roman Catholic cannot deny the degree to which the Bergoglian Vatican apparatus is committed to using public relations as a means of pushing the modernist agenda forward.
“Francis” (best known for his role as “The God of Surprises”) may indeed accept Marx’s resignation, but regardless of what unfolds moving forward, this production has propaganda written all over it.
From what I’ve read thus far, it appears that there aren’t many, if any, journalists embedded in Rome (or Munich) these days as numerous unanswered (and likely unasked) questions abound.
Am I the only one who wonders how Marx’s resignation letter came to be so rapidly and so widely available in English? In other words, who translated it, who was the first to publish it as such, and why?
Well, it ends up that the magnificently well-funded (and thus highly influential) Archdiocese of Munich kindly provided its own official English translation of the German text, as well as one in Italian, publishing each on its website.
Is this standard operating procedure?
I poked around a bit on the archdiocesan website and found that of the top dozen or so news stories published under the “Press” heading the Marx resignation letter, along with his “personal declaration,” are the only two items that the Archdiocese of Munich chose to translate for an international audience. Why?
About that declaration…
In it, Marx revealed that he tendered the resignation letter on May 21. Evidently, Francesco has yet to decide whether not to accept it. In the meantime, however, he has made at least one important decision:
He has now informed me that this letter may be published…
Did Reinhard ask for permission to publish it or did Jorge and his handlers suggest it?
Again, why publish it all?
I mean, would it not have been enough for the archdiocese to issue a press release stating that Marx had submitted his resignation and is awaiting a decision from Rome?
If Marx desired to provide his tax-paying, revenue-generating sheep with an explanation via a personal declaration, fine, but was it necessary to publish it and the resignation letter itself in English, Italian and German?
C’mon, folks, get your faces out of Facebook and use your head; there’s nothing even remotely subtle about this operation. If you’re among the millions of poor souls who think that Marx and Bergoglio are members of the sacred hierarchy, you’re being played.
Obviously, the reason these texts have been prepared for international consumption is because they contain information that the scoundrels involved consider useful, not to the cause of Christ, but to the cause for which they have labored for the duration of their clerical lives, the destruction of His Church.
Though I doubt we’ll ever find out for certain, I’d say that odds are great that Jorge’s PR team assisted Marx in crafting both the letter and the declaration, all with an eye toward their global dissemination.
So, what do these texts tell us?
The central claim of the letter, repeated in the declaration, is that Marx wishes to resign in order to take responsibility for “the catastrophe of the sexual abuse by Church [sic] officials over the past decades.” Even so, he pledges to render “pastoral” service moving forward.
Note very well that Marx does not limit his observations to the situation in Germany; in fact, he is at pains to make it clear in both the letter and the declaration that he desires to impact “the institution of the Church as a whole.”
But before he ever mentions the sexual abuse crisis – a distraction if ever there was one – the real purpose of this production is made plain in the letter’s opening paragraph:
My impression is that we are at a ‘dead end’ which, and this is my paschal hope, also has the potential of becoming a ‘turning point.’
There you have it, the key to understanding exactly what is unfolding:
The Reinhard Marx resignation dust-up isn’t really about the sexual abuse catastrophe. That emotionally charged situation is merely being leveraged in order to facilitate the so-called “turning point,” which itself is nothing more than the conciliar institution’s version of, and contribution to, the Great Reset desired by the World Economic Forum and its allies.
One notes that precisely the same strategy is being employed by both organizations, with each one acting according to the motto, Never let a good crisis go to waste.
Conciliar Institution: The sex abuse crisis has revealed grave deficiencies in the Church’s structure; therefore, we must treat it as an opportunity to remake ecclesial society and to build back better!
World Economic Forum: The COVIDS has revealed grave economic and cultural deficiencies on a global scale, therefore; we must treat it as an opportunity to remake human society and to build back better!
Marx invokes the phrase “turning point” no less than three times, twice in the letter and once in the declaration, but what exactly does it entail? He plainly defines it in his letter:
A turning point out of this crisis is, in my opinion, only possible if we take a ‘synodal path,’ a path which actually enables a ‘discernment of spirits’ as you have repeatedly emphasized and reiterated in your letter to the Church in Germany.
Remember, regardless of exactly who had a hand in writing this letter, one thing is entirely certain; Jorge Bergoglio wanted it, and the declaration, published, and that includes their passionate defense of the so-called “synodal path,” which is being presented in the letter as a valid expression of, if you will allow, Bergoglian spirituality.
The most important takeaway is simply this: Francis evidently agrees.
Also deserving of attention is Marx’s statement in the declaration saying that he was asked by a journalist “whether one of the bishops had taken responsibility and offered his resignation in light of the presentation of the survey [on the sex abuse crisis].”
“I replied to this question with: ‘No,'” Marx writes, “and also in this case I have increasingly felt afterwards that this question cannot just be set aside.”
In other words, pressure must be put on other bishops in the German conciliar episcopacy to resign as well!
This is aimed, first and foremost, at those who are not on board with the blessing of homo-sex and the synodal path. If a few proponents of Operation Turning Point fall in the process, no matter, the mission will go on.
The way in which this production has been crafted, one must admit, is brilliant since it puts the modernists in a win-win position.
If he accepts Marx’s resignation, Bergoglio will be hailed for his leadership in ridding the Church of episcopal miscreants. Doing so, however, also amounts to his agreement with Marx and the case he put forth in the letter. In other words, accepting the resignation is like saying, “You are correct, you must go for the reasons given,” reasons that serve as justification for implementing the synodal path.
If he fails to accept the resignation, which I think rather unlikely, Bergoglio will most certainly be criticized, but the leader of the synodal path will remain in his place of influence to carry the agenda forward.
In whichever way this thing plays out, the winner has already been decided; it’s the synodal path. So too is it clear who the losers are, namely, the poor souls who continue to believe that the institution led by the likes of Marx and Bergoglio is the Catholic Church.
A turning point out of this crisis is, in my (Marx') opinion, only possible if we take a ‘synodal path,’ a path which actually enables a ‘discernment of spirits’ as you (Bergoglio) have repeatedly emphasized and reiterated in your letter to the Church in Germany.
Ping
Just a note… The only thing Marx is resigning from is his position and his responsibilities as head of his diocese. To my knowledge, he’s not resigning from being a cardinal, a member of the Curia, or any of the other many positions of power he holds.
This is all about setting things up so that he can be the head of the German synodal church, so be that will not be bound by the laws of the universal Church, which is so yesterday, but at the same time will be able to claim that it is in communion with Rome because it is accepted by the pope. Or any rate by Bergoglio.
It’s not necessary to make a splash resignation of Marx in order to promote the synodal way. I wonder if there’s something else more pertinent to him personally that makes it advisable for him to get out of the limelight.?
Don’t forget Marx is still a member of Bergoglio’s “Council of Seven”.
Why not, Marchmain? Bergoglio has recently been inundated by numerous bishops and cardinals with requests to shut down the Germans' synodal schism.
Marx' faux resignation is just a staged stunt to keep the schism going.
Why was the letter not released in Latin? If Latin was good enough for Luther's 95 theses...
When is Pope Marx going to resign?
Marx, scapegoat for the countless unpunished cases of abuse? Time to move past all that now?
It’s plausible, but I don’t think the part of the laity that pays attention is going to buy it. Pelosi, Biden and their Catholic circle of influence will like it.
The very least Francis could be doing is besides raising theological questions on the assertions made in the Islamic codex (which is their code of observance and behavior) known as Sharia, and should be defending the Chinese Catholics.
Ignores this http://www.theusmat.com/islamandfreewill.htm
and also seems to ignore what Our Savior went through to establish the new covenant , Then Plays with suppressors of the faith
Francis continuing destructive confusing pontificating on temporal worldly social behavior,which has nothing to do with and avoids articles of faith and morals rebukes or restrains contemplative religious orders to favor such behavior .
By refusing to question and expound on the profound differences with the claims made by Islam and its followers Reaching out to and defend what Judeo/Christian beliefs are.Or challenge claims that Islamist make they are following God’s command using deceit and deception when ruthlessly murdering and torturing non believers and destroy their edifice .Smply because of its assertion of being monotheistic. Then winds up making a point of honoring it and placing it on an equal level because of that claim. Is leading to misguided conversions which is the result of my so called Pope playing games with this so called mono theistic cult and is creating a serious fracture within Christianity and The Roman Rite .
Only ebb tide can duly confirm the title of Modernist (ha ha), but I’ll say this:
Marx does sanction marital-like “blessings” of homo unions.
So says the woman who defends the Second Vatican Council and Bugnini's New Mess, tooth and nail; and attacks Archbishop Vigano every chance she gets.
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.