A false, heretical understanding of Mercy reduces God to being tolerant of everything, to the point where sin disappears and black becomes white, the foolish are regarded as wise, the corrupt become virtuous. A tolerant God means mankind has no need of Redemption or Salvation, the whole Christological drama becomes unnecessary and humanity has no need of a moral compass, because whatever is done, so long as it doesn’t undermine the Enlightenment virtues, is fine.
This passage from Fr Ray Blake’s blog sums it up perfectly, I think.
There can now be little doubt that the Vatican, up to the highest level, is infested with sodomites.
When Pope Benedict XVI spoke of “so much filth”, this was surely what he meant. How the faggot fraternity managed to infiltrate themselves into positions of authority is a mystery, but they must have been a powerful force there for a very long time, possibly even before Vatican II. I wouldn’t go quite so far as American blogger Ann Barnhardt, who described the Vatican as a giant bath-house, where “they’re all sodomites”. But unnatural vice does appear to be endemic there.
The latest scandal involves Monsignor Luigi Capozzi, an expert in canon law, who organised a cocaine-fuelled homosexual orgy in a building next to St Peter’s basilica. His boss, Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, had earlier recommended that Capozzi be made a bishop.
Then there is Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, whom Pope Francis recently appointed to head up the Pontifical Academy for Life. Some years ago Archbishop Paglia paid a homosexual artist to paint a blasphemous homoerotic mural in his Cathedral of Terni-Narni-Amelia . The mural includes an image of the archbishop himself. I’m not reproducing the mural here, but you can find it on LifesiteNews.Com if you really want to see it.
It’s not just in the Vatican that homosexuality is rife. This cri de coeur, obviously by a disgusted curate in Britain or possibly the US, is from the combox of Fr Ray Blake, who had written a post deploring the way the BBC never misses an opportunity of extolling “the gay lifestyle”:
Fr Ray , if you were an orthodox Catholic priest assigned to a “Gay Friendly” parish, you would find yourself feeling bullied not only day after day, but night after night. You would notice that the Rainbow on the Parish Welcome Board was bigger than the Cross. You would be expected to celebrate Mass with Rainbow Vestments. Your gay-friendly Parish Priest would label you a prehistoric monster and advise you that the kind of “dialogue” you wanted to enable on issues of sexual morality was non PC…The only kind of dialogue required was one which accentuated the positive aspects of homosexual lifestyle. Such is the state of the Church today. The “Catholics for Gay Lifestyle” clergy juggernaut has now come out. And intends to broke no opposition. It is no coincidence that Cardinals, Bishops and Priests who are now openly promoting homosexual lifestyle are also the ones who are ok with divorce for Catholics. Co-habiting likewise receives their blessing. No word of authority from Pope Francis to correct the errant and strengthen the brethren in the true faith. Am I to believe then that these Cardinals Bishops and Priests who promote gay lifestyle are clerics in good standing?
Another wise take on the Synod–and Pope Francis. It’s from Fr Ray Blake’s blog. It’s obviously been written in a bit of a hurry, so I’ve taken the liberty of straightening out some of the word order and and punctuation a bit. I hope Father won’t mind.
I must admit I still don’t understand Francis. Is he the greatest thing since unsliced bread, a cunning old Jesuit, a conservative, a trad, a prophet, a fool or even the anti-Christ; a breath of fresh air or the stench from the tomb of those rather detestable men who surrounded the Blessed Paul VI and added to his suffering?
I have never done the Benedict through Francis thing at least, but neither am I entirely convinced of the Francis against Benedict thing. I am still perplexed and confused by him. Perhaps in Francis, rather than having an Emperor who is wearing no clothes we actually have clothes with no Emperor. I mean those morning homilies that come out of the marble halls of Santa Martha that are full of barbs but actually teach nothing. Perhaps we should expect nothing!
It is worth remembering that what many of the Cardinals were calling for before the Conclave was a de-centralised Church and greater Collegiality. The BBC, foolish people, have been talking about progressive Francis against the conservative Synod and how he failed to move the Church forward, as if the Synod was solely about the divorced and remarried, or practicing homosexuals. What seems to go under the radar is that for the first time in modern times Cardinals and Bishops have stood up to the Pope and very publicly defied him; some, like the Lion of the Synod Raymond Burke have even dared to demand he do his job and defend the faith, like Paul rebuking Peter.
What has happened in the Synod is that those of us who would hope that the successor of the Apostle Peter should defend the faith from other Bishops, have turned our gaze from the successor of Peter to the successors of the other Apostles. This I think was the defining action of the Synod: for the first time most Catholics looked to Bishops, not the Pope, to defend the Faith.
The synod on the family next month is shaping up to be a titanic struggle between representatives of the new modernism–those who believe, implicitly or implicitly, that the Church has abandoned, or should have abandoned, all those nasty rigid dogmas–and those who hold fast to what the Church has always taught about the Incarnation, the Resurrection, the Four Last Things, the necessity of repentance.
Fr Ray Blake sums up the modernist spirit in a devastating critique on his blog:
What seems to be being said is that the age of dogma and doctrine is dead, everything is pastoral, focus groups replace creeds, there is more concern with how we are conceived by public opinion than any teaching…What we are now concerned with is the “lived experience”. In the New Pentecost, the Age of the Spirit that has superseded the age of the articulated Incarnate Word; it is the experience of women and men. The pneumatic, blow-where-it-will Spirit is all that matters…It is about syncretism, dialogue, moderation, compromise, ambiguity, recognition of ignorance, the preference for the via negativa, the rejection of the via positiva. Christ and the apostles might be unambiguous about judgment, heaven and hell, about objective realities; but in fact “we have moved beyond” all of that. That is no longer the default position of the Catholic Church.
It’s not really surprising–is it?–that those who can swallow all of that have no difficulty with perverting the concept of “mercy” to include allowing unrepentant adulterers to be admitted to Holy Communion.