Victor Manuel (Heal Me with your Mouth) "Tucho" Fernandez
Bergolio's choice to be Prefect of the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith.
Posted on 07/28/2024 2:46:22 PM PDT by ebb tide
The pontifical puppeteer has thrown caution to the wind by installing a diabolic puppet to turbo-charge his hellish demolition of the Church. ... Tucho, at Jorge's behest, will abandon the orthodox rigour, wisdom and prudence of Tradition to entrench Modernist ideology by still further injection of heterodoxy and heresy into the Catholic bloodstream. ... Clearly, the moral and doctrinal sellout will only deepen and worsen from hereon.
In light of Rome's latest effort to debase and refashion the Faith by stealth — i.e., "to initiate processes rather than possess spaces" as strategised in Evangelii Gaudium by the Pope of Ambiguity and Deception — readers will surely indulge the impudence of quoting myself! I do so only to underline the straight line between the weasel-worded Declaration on the pastoral meaning of blessings issued on 18 December 2023 by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, and the appointment of Archbishop "Tucho" Fernández to head the DDF, as forewarned in the above editorial essay. Unlike those who wondered how such a reckless, inflammatory Declaration could ever see the light of day, those who read the editorial were left in no doubt as to what was coming down the pipeline from the co-writer of Amoris Laetitia.
The inexorable downward spiral should not induce resignation and despondency, however. Not at all! Well informed and thus alert to this fearful phase of salvation history unfolding before our very eyes we must react instead like soldiers of Christ: called and blessed to bear steadfast witness before unprecedented scandals that will finally cleanse and purify the Church. For, even as the Enemy's useful idiots weaponise ever greater abominations to divide-and-conquer the faithful in their demented push for 'liberating' schism, Almighty God is simultaneously instrumentalising them; using their betrayal as a scourge with which to chastise His children:
Thou hast forsaken me, saith the Lord, thou art gone backward: and I will stretch out my hand against thee, and I will destroy thee: I am weary of entreating thee. And I will scatter them with a fan in the gates of the land: I have killed and destroyed my people, and yet they are not returned from their ways. [Jeremiah 15:6-7]
And again:
Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them: and thou shalt rejoice in the Lord, in the Holy One of Israel thou shalt be joyful. [Is. 41:16]
When the sifting and winnowing is done and Jorge, Tucho and the entire Modernist scourge has been fanned and scattered "like small dust: and as ashes passing away" [Is.29:5], there will remain, as the late Father John Hardon insisted, only two sorts of Catholics: ex-Catholics — those millions misled by a corrupt hierarchy whose lifestyles were not in accord with Church teaching and who are no longer coming to Mass to receive their sacrilegious Communions; and heroic Catholics — "a remnant, selected out of grace" [Rom. 11:5].
To avoid being overwhelmed and paralysed with disgust and dismay, therefore, we must view all our trials and especially the current Bergoglian scourge in that biblical context; giving thanks to God for His winnowing fan currently at work in the providential outpouring of episcopal and priestly protest against Fiducia supplicans ("Supplicating trust").
Divide and Rule
Typically unleashed under a pious title, this latest genuflection to the homo collective is more aptly named Sodomorum supplicans ("Supplicating Sodom"). The studious Roberto de Mattei righteously commented that this Declaration "marks one of the lowest points of Pope Francis' pontificate." (No mean feat after 10+ years of scandal without end!) "Indeed," de Mattei insisted, "this document, contradicting Church doctrine, approves and in fact promotes the "blessing" of "couples" living in an intrinsically immoral situation, with a special focus on homosexual couples."
Headlines captured the uproar that immediately ensued: strife that was strategically sought by pitting homo advocates in Church and State — e.g., "Father James Martin blesses homosexual ‘couple’ at Jesuit residence in New York City"; "Joe Biden welcomes Pope Francis’ decision to allow blessings for homosexual ‘couples'" —against defenders of Catholic truth: e.g., "Prominent canon lawyer Fr. Murray excoriates new Vatican doc endorsing ‘blessings’ of gay couples"; "SSPX superior general: Vatican approval of same-sex blessings ‘accelerates the loss of souls’"; "Pope’s homosexual ‘blessings’ document pretends to be magisterial teaching but is not."
It goes without saying that the local response by Archbishop Vincent Nichols rationalised the Declaration as no big deal. In a short note to his priests of 21 December he assured them it was perfectly Catholic and harmless. One expects no less from a decades-long promoter and defender of subversive agendas openly pushed by militant sodomites; not least his zealous support for sacrilegious 'gay' Masses, and his parroting of the insidious "stable relationships" mantra which placed married Christians on a par with co-habiters and homo pairs in order to legalise sodomitic propaganda in British schools (CO passim).
Very happily, a British confraternity representing over 500 priests countered him. Alert to the myriad dangers created by muddying the clear waters of pristine Catholic doctrine on the sin that "cries to heaven," they rapidly issued the following letter, effectively shredding the Archbishop's complicit note while fulfilling his duty for him [my bold emphases]:
The British Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, responding to widespread confusion over Catholic doctrine on same-sex unions and sexual behaviour outside of marriage, feel impelled to re-assert the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church (from the Catechism of the Catholic Church) which remains unchanged and unchangeable:
§2357: Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
§ 2391: Carnal union is morally legitimate only when a definitive community of life between a man and a woman has been established.
It is in this context that we must assess the recent document Fiducia Supplicans – which proposes a call for discernment which may lead to bestowing blessings on those in same-sex or unmarried unions. We note the noble pastoral desire to assist people to move forward by renewal of life and the call to conversion, building on all aspects of natural good will and virtue. Nevertheless, we see no situation in which such a blessing of a couple could be properly and adequately distinguished from some level of approval. Thus, it would inevitably lead to scandal – to the individuals concerned – to those involved directly or indirectly in the blessing – or to the minister himself. Furthermore, we fear that the practice of these blessings would confuse the faithful over the actual theology of marriage and human sexuality. Indeed, from the comments in the media over the past few days, and from concerns passed on to us by the faithful, we can already see such misunderstandings. We believe that genuine charity always follows true doctrine and that such blessings would work against the legitimate care a priest owes is flock. With honest parresia and from our own experience as pastors we conclude that such blessings are pastorally and practically inadmissable.
Kudos to the British Confraternity, and their priestly counterparts in Australia and the US, for intervening to protect Christ's flock from hireling shepherds [Jn 10:12]; prelates mired in heresy, heterodoxy, and the via media quicksand offalse charity and private opinion dressed up as Catholic authority.
Cavalcade of righteous rebukes
Of course, the usual suspects across the Channel (the woke synodal mob: Germans, Austrians, Swiss, Belgians et. al.) joined their fellow hireling Vincent in welcoming the Declaration. This was to be expected, since these arch-Modernists have been 'out and proud' for a very long time, dishing out sacrilegious blessings to unrepentant sodomites both as individuals and as pairs.
More surprising, though, was the decisive manner in which the hirelings were opposed and called out for their infidelity by so many true shepherds. Instead of emulating their emasculated brethren and faux 'Catholics' like Joe Biden who welcomed Sodomorum,entire conferences, led as so often by the outspoken Africans, stood firm with Christ. At the time of writing, 'dissident' local Churches included those of Poland, Ukraine, Hungary, Angola & São Tomé, Cameroon, Nigeria, Rwanda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Burkina Faso & Niger, Benin, Antilles, Haiti, Ivory Coast, Mozambique, Togo, Congo, and Senegal, Mauritania, and Cape Verde & Guinea-Bissau. These uncompromising Catholic blocs raised the alarm, issuing collective statements banning application of the subversive document.
Typically, the Malawi conference stated that in order "to avoid creating confusion among the faithful we direct that for pastoral reasons, blessings of any kind and for same-sex unions of any kind, are not permitted in Malawi.”
The Polish conference declared that "Since practicing sexual acts outside marriage, that is, outside the indissoluble union of a man and a woman open to the transmission of life, is always an offence against the will and wisdom of God expressed in the sixth commandment … people who are in such a relationship cannot receive a blessing."
The Cameroon conference entertained no ifs or buts: "we formally forbid all blessing of ‘homosexual couples’ in the Church of Cameroon."
While a statement by the bishops’ conferences for Burkina Faso & Niger also banned sodomitic blessings outright: "the word of God disapproves of homosexuality as an abomination ... such blessings cannot be achieved without scandal for the faith and morals of our Christian faithful and without setting the Catholic Church in a bad light."
Before such virile declarations, made with pastoral love and charity in truth, we all cry with unified Catholic voice: Amen!!
Prelates and priests pile on!
Elsewhere beyond our episcopally complicit Isles not a few archdioceses and dioceses issued similar excoriations. In a joint statement from South Dakota’s Bishop Peter M. Muhich (Rapid City) and Bishop Donald E. DeGrood (Sioux Falls), the faithful were left in no doubt that "Fiducia Supplicans will have the impact of normalising serious sin," that "the ministers of the Church have no power to bless sin," and that "any sort of blessing that would give the semblance of condoning sin is not to be granted."
Priestly orders also chipped in. The superior general of the SSPX, Fr. Davide Pagliarani, warned that Sodomorum supplicans not only teaches "that a minister of the Church can call down God’s blessing on sinful unions, but by doing so, it actually reinforces these situations of sin."
The Transalpine Redemptorists in the far north of Scotland pointed out that the Declaration is "deeply offensive to Our Lord" but also to Our Lady. "Published as it was on the feast of the Expectation of the Blessed Virgin Mary," they noted, "it comes as a bitter sword of sorrow thrust into Her Immaculate Heart."
Meanwhile, individual shepherds remained rock solid.
The now emeritus bishop of the Diocese of Tyler, Bishop Joseph Strickland, was one of the very first out of the blocks with a LifeSite video message rejecting Sodomorum. Still sporting bruises after his brutal removal from his Texas see by the Bergoglian mafia, he addressed his brother bishops in particular in calling for solidarity: "We really simply need to be a united voice saying, ‘no,’ we will not respond to this. We will not incorporate this into the life of the Church because we simply must say ‘no.’ And it needs to be a united voice."
Rafael Escudero Lopez-Brea, 61, the ordinary of the Peruvian diocese of Mayobamba, personified the fed-up, no-nonsense mood articulated worldwide. Offering guidance "in the face of the unprecedented confusion caused by the Fiducia supplicans Document," his admirable letter to priests, religious, and laity could not have been more blunt in explaining that:
The underlying problem is much more serious, and that is that not a few brothers in the episcopate and priests, in contravention of the objective morality of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, have for a long time confused the People of God with the indiscriminate blessing of these objectively disordered and therefore sinful unions, incurring horrendous sacrilege.
Calling a spade a shovel, he went on in the same charitable vein:
Dear priests and lay faithful, let us not minimise the destructive and short-sighted consequences resulting from this effort made by some hierarchs of the Church to legitimise such blessings, in some cases with good intentions and in others, as many have been saying, with the intention of destroying the Sacred Deposit of the Church’s Tradition.
"This document harms the communion of the Church," stated Bishop Lopez-Brea with merciful candour, because the blessing of irregular couples and same-sex pairs is "a grave abuse of the Most Holy Name of God, which is invoked upon an objectively sinful union of fornication, adultery, or even worse, homosexual activity." Moreover, he helpfully pointed out the inconvenient papal truth underlying the Declaration;
In its 2021 Responsum, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith told us, with the Holy Father’s signature, that “The Church does not have, nor can she have, the power to bless unions of persons of the same sex.”
Hammering this stark contradiction that typifies the deceitful, lawless Bergoglian revolution, the faithful shepherd reminded one and all that (unlike a certain pontiff) "God does not contradict Himself," that "God does not lie to us," that "God never blesses sin... God, who always loves the sinner unconditionally, for this reason, seeks that he repent, convert, and live. God desires good for all of us."
Finally, recalling his sacred oath of office that FrancisChurch prelates have long betrayed, the dutiful Lopez-Brea wrote:
On the day of my episcopal ordination, I solemnly swore ‘to preserve the deposit of faith in purity and integrity, in accordance with Tradition always and everywhere observed in the Church since the time of the Apostles’. For this reason, I admonish the priests of the Prelature of Moyobamba not to carry out any form of blessing of couples in an irregular situation or of same-sex couples.”
Catholic Unity or Bergoglian Babel?
As for El Tucho, faced with this furious storm of his own making he hastily resorted to damage limitation, issuing a press release on 4 January "to help clarify the reception of Fiducia Supplicans, while recommending at the same time a full and calm reading of the Declaration so as to better understand its meaning and purpose."
Since it was issued by a lawless Vatican that mainstreams mortal sin in general and the supreme vice of sodomy in particular — and as that same Vatican is ruled by the heretical pontiff/landlord of Casa Santa Marta (Sodom Central) — we may confidently respond that a second reading is hardly needed to "better understand" its crystal clear "meaning and purpose."
Acutely aware of this and in panic mode, he added a token threat for good measure, warning that there is "no room to distance ourselves doctrinally" from his corrosive Declaration. Then, having affirmed that each bishop has authority in his own diocese, he promptly somersaulted in textbook Bergoglian fashion by prohibiting their "total or definitive denial of this path that is proposed to priests."
In other words: blocking the path to Hell is now anathema, while clearing that path is mandated.
The blessed hierarchical outcry against this demonic inversion of the Faith must now expand and intensify until Jorge and his process-initiating puppet back off, and God and souls are served instead of Sodom. As Bishop Strickland truly stated, only "a united voice" — viz., an episcopal unity steadfast before the Synodal Tower of Babel currently under construction — offers any hope at all of overcoming the suicidal designs of Occupied Rome.
For our part, therefore, throughout this New Year may faith, hope and charity fuel our prayers for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon chronically complicit shepherds, that under the holy weight of irrepressible grace they will:
1. Repent;
2. Reject the Modernist "process" of legitimising "men with men working that which is filthy" [Rm 1:27]; and
3. Take back possession of the Catholic "space" by proclaiming with Bishop Strickland and his righteous brethren a loud and resolute "No! Non possumus!”
Victor Manuel (Heal Me with your Mouth) "Tucho" Fernandez
Bergolio's choice to be Prefect of the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith.
Ping
the public (RCC parishioners AND MANY outside the RCC church) have always appreciated or at least respected the RCC for teaching good moral values
I am not addressing ritual. I am not addressing doctrine. I am not addressing attendance at mass. I am not addressing observance of the various holy days or fasts or whatever. I am not addressing pilgrimages, whether to Jerusalem or Lourdes or anywhere else. I am not addressing tithing.
I am only saying that the RCC has pretty much stood for good solid basic moral values. Until recently.
As the Scandinavian folk lore teaches, “a fish rots from the head”
I don’t know if this really honestly applies to a salmon but it sure seems to apply to today’s RC Church
so sorry to have to type this sort of thing. But we are also taught that it is sometimes necessary to speak up and even reprove somebody who is in mortal error.
No church should be “blessing” human conduct that is explicitly condemned in Holy Writ. As for everything else, I am open to discussion.
You really can't separate morality from doctrine.
that’s an interesting thought, thank you.
frankly, i am multi-tasking with several stressful events here right now so won’t be able to get into that topic much, sorry sorry
i do think that there are some fundamental moral teachings (which is what I am trying to address, hoping that the Church will continue to uphold them)
these teachings do not seem to directly depend on doctrines (such as, say, trinity, virgin birth, ...)
all I was trying to say is that (Imho) “do not murder” or “do not steal” or, indeed, marriage involves a man and a woman)
these very basic moral teachings do not require too much doctrine... they’re still valid, they’re still what our Creator wants ... and He wants most of them from everybody, in communion with the Church or outside of it....
in brief, all i was saying is at a very simple, elemental level, that the church has no business “blessing” conduct that is directly violative, contrary to these basic-level moral teachings or instructions. “blessing” these things is like spitting at God, imho. and it demeans the Church. Indeed, it raises the question of just what Power is this church seeking to serve?
all the rest will, respectfully, have to wait for another day as I am up to my neck right now working on 5 different things
thanks for understandin
Understood.
But there’s more. One of the conditions of the five, consecutive First Saturdays of the month is to receive Holy Communion, in a state of grace, with the intention of making an act of reparation for sins of mankind.
I’m not aware of any other “church” that makes such an act of reparation.
The question, rather, is just what power is Jorge Bergoglio and Tucho Fernandez seeking to serve.
Neither of the above are the Catholic Church.
good point, thank you.
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.