¿Es católico el papa Francisco? [1 de 2] (por José Martí)

[NOTA: Al ser la entrada excesivamente larga, he optado por dividirla en dos. Para leer la segunda pinchar aquí]

El ateo Eugenio Scalfari y el papa Francisco

Alguno podría escandalizarse al leer la expresión que da título a esta entrada: 

- ¿Cómo no va a ser católico el Papa? ¡Qué disparate! Tú estás pirado. ¡Tú eres el no católico, hablando así del Papa! ¡No sé cómo te atreves a decir esas cosas!

- No lo digo yo. Lo dice el propio Francisco.

- ¿Cómo? ¡Yo nunca he oido que él haya dicho eso!

- Y yo tampoco, porque no lo ha dicho ... Bueno no lo ha dicho así, explícitamente, con esas palabras ... pero no hay más que pensar un poco.

- No entiendo nada. Tendrás que ser más concreto y explicarte mejor.

- En realidad, no es demasiado complicado llegar a esa conclusión. Te recuerdo unas palabras que (¡éstas sí!) fueron pronunciadas por el papa Francisco, de modo explícito (tanto por escrito como en youtube se puede encontrar). Esto dijo:  “Yo creo en Dios. No en un Dios católico, no existe un Dios católico, existe Dios".

- Bien, de momento, te sigo. ¿Hay algo más?

- Presta atención, primero, a un conjunto de afirmaciones respecto a las cuales no se puede tener ninguna duda. Si discrepas de algo que afirme me lo dices.

1. El Papa representa a Jesucristo en la tierra. Es su vicario. Y tiene la obligación de transmitir con fidelidad todo el depósito recibido, sin inventar ni quitar nada; así como también tiene la misión de confirmar a sus hermanos en la fe (Lc 22,32)
2. Fue Jesucristo quien fundó su Iglesia ... Y dio unas instrucciones muy claras a sus apóstoles. De entre ellos eligió, de un modo especial, a Pedro, a quien dijo: Tú eres Pedro y sobre esta piedra edificaré mi Iglesia (Mt 16, 18). Y luego lo confirmó como sucesor suyo y cabeza visible de la Iglesia fundada por Él, cuando, después de resucitar, le dijo por tres veces: Apacienta mis corderos, apacienta mis ovejas (Jn 21, 51). Esa es la misión del Papa, de todo Papa.

- De acuerdo hasta ahora. Continúa.

- La Iglesia que Jesucristo fundó es única: no fundó, ni pudo formar, muchas iglesias al mismo tiempo. Esto es evidente. Y esta Iglesia fundada por Él no es otra que la Iglesia católica. Pues bien. Teniendo en cuenta que:

- Jesucristo es Dios: "El que me ve a Mí, ve al Padre" (Jn 14, 9) y "es el mismo ayer y hoy y lo será siempre"(Heb 13, 8), de modo que "no existe ningún otro Nombre por el que podamos salvarnos" (Hech 4,12).
- Jesucristo dijo a Pedro: Te daré las llaves del Reino de los cielos, y cuanto ates en la tierra será atado en los cielos, y lo que desates en la tierra quedará desatado en los cielos (Mt 16, 19). Y a los apóstoles, en unión con Pedro: "Quien a vosotros escucha a Mí me escucha; y quien a vosotros rechaza a Mí me rechaza. Y quien me rechaza a Mí rechaza al que me ha enviado" (Lc 10, 16)
- La Iglesia es el Cuerpo Místico de Cristo, pues "todos nosotros hemos sido bautizados en un solo Espíritu, judíos y griegos, esclavos y libres, para formar un solo Cuerpo; y todos hemos bebido de un solo Espíritu" (1 Cor 12, 13). Y en otro lugar dice san Pablo: "Ahora ... completo en mi carne lo que falta a la Pasión de Cristo, por su Cuerpo, que es la Iglesia" (Col 1, 24)
- Un católico no puede quedarse para sí mismo el tesoro que ha recibido: "Lo que de Mí oíste, ante muchos testigos, confíalo a hombres fieles, que sean capaces, a su vez, de enseñar a otros" (2 Tim 2, 2). "Id por todo el mundo -dijo Jesús- y predicad el Evangelio a toda criatura" (Mc 16, 15). Ése es, precisamente, el significado de la palabra católico; es decir, universal, para todos: "Dios quiere que todos los hombres se salven y lleguen al conocimiento de la verdad" (1 Tim 2,4)

- Todo eso que dices ya lo conozco, pero me alegro de que me lo recuerdes. Así se refrescan las ideas y no se atrofia la memoria. Y máxime, en este caso, en el que estamos considerando una serie de cosas que son fundamentales para nuestra fe.

- Estupendo. Veo que me vas siguiendo. Sigamos razonando, pues: Si resulta que es verdad -como lo es- que fuera de Cristo no hay salvación y que también es verdad que Cristo está en su Iglesia, la cual es su Cuerpo, como dice san Pablo: "Vosotros sois cuerpo de Cristo y miembros cada uno por su parte" (1 Cor 12,27), la conclusión es obvia: Fuera de de la Iglesia no hay salvación posible. 

[Por supuesto que estamos hablando de la única Iglesia verdadera, que es la Iglesia católica. Muy interesante, a este respecto, lo que dice fray Gerundio en su artículo Dios es católico]

- Sigue, por favor.

- Vale, te explico: si has entendido bien lo que acabo de decir, sólo tienes que aplicar las leyes de la lógica elemental. El razonamiento es muy simple:

Premisa 1: Francisco representa a Dios, puesto que es el Papa.
Premisa 2: Pero, según Francisco, Dios no es católico.
Conclusión: Luego ... el papa Francisco no es católico

En definitiva: si (como afirma Francisco) Dios no es católico, entonces él tampoco puede serlo. Porque, además, ¿qué sentido tiene decir que un papa es católico si es el representante -según él- de un Dios no católico? 

- Tu modo de discurrir parece impecable. ¿No habrá algún tipo sofisma escondido en lo que dices?

- Tú has escuchado con atención todo mi razonamiento y veo que lo has seguido perfectamente. ¿Por qué tiene que haber algún sofisma? ¿Es que hay que defender a capa y espada TODO lo que un Papa diga? Tal vez ese sea el error de fondo de mucha gente, un error que está muy extendido entre los "católicos" y que tiene un nombre: papolatría. Latría significa adoración y este culto se le debe de profesar sólo a Dios ... ¡y el Papa no es Dios! Esta aclaración es importante.

- Pese a todo, me quedo algo aturdido, pues yo le he oído decir al papa Francisco cosas muy buenas y ortodoxas, católicamente hablando.

- Eso es cierto. Nadie lo pone en duda. Pero piensa que aquí no estamos emitiendo un juicio acerca de la persona del Papa. Jesús nos advirtió de ello severamente, para que no hiciéramos tal cosa: "No juzguéis y no seréis juzgados. No condenéis y no seréis condenados" (Lc 6, 37). Ahora bien: Jesús no nos prohibió pensar y hacer uso de nuestras facultades humanas, entre ellas, la razón. Y así, cuando se realiza un análisis acerca de algo o de las acciones u omisiones de alguien (que no de su persona), es necesario, si se procede con rigor, tener en cuenta todos los datos de los que dispongamos. 

Si amamos la verdad "de verdad" (es decir, por encima de todo) y observamos, por ejemplo, que Francisco habla, con relación a un determinado tema (el que sea) de modo tal que, en un contexto concreto dice algo ... y luego, en otro contexto (hablando de lo mismo) dice todo lo contrario... Si eso es así (¡y lo es!) es que algo no va bien ... lo que, además, tiene una importancia mucho mayor aún cuando -como es el caso- tal modo de proceder es una constante en todo lo que lleva de Pontificado. No se puede ir en contra del principio de no-contradicción. 

Y si es cierto que amamos la verdad por encima de todo (la Verdad, que es Cristo) entonces se requiere, es necesario tener en cuenta todas las expresiones, acciones u omisiones ... ¡y no sólo las que a nosotros nos interesa, por las razones que sean! Si nos quedamos sólo con aquello que dice el Papa que coincide con lo que sabemos que es ortodoxo ... entonces estaríamos traicionando la verdad ... y, según dice san Pablo: "Nada podemos contra la verdad, sino en favor de la verdad" (2 Cor 13, 8). Hay que analizarlo todo y ver si hay coherencia.

-No acabo de entenderte del todo. ¿Podrías ponerme algún ejemplo?

- Los ejemplos se pueden multiplicar. El 13 de julio hará cuatro años y cuatro meses que Francisco ocupa la silla petrina. Durante esos 52 meses de pontificado ya puedes imaginarte la cantidad de cosas que ha dicho (u omitido) y que ha hecho. De modo que te pondré tan solo un par de ejemplos que me vienen ahora a la mente.

- Adelante

-  Fue durante la conferencia de prensa de una hora en el avión de Manila a Roma, al final del viaje a Asia de una semana ... en donde Francisco habló largo y tendido sobre control de natalidad y población, problemas que surgieron en las Filipinas, donde la Iglesia local se opone a una ley del gobierno que hace asequibles los anticonceptivos.

“ (…) Existe quien cree que para ser buenos católicos debemos ser como conejos” dijo, añadiendo que la Iglesia promueve la “paternidad responsable”. 

Duración: 34 segundos

Mencionó a una mujer, que recibió recientemente, la cual tuvo siete hijos por cesárea poniendo en riesgo su vida si se embarazaba de nuevo. La reprendió por “tentar a Dios” y agregó: “Esa fue una irresponsabilidad”.

Es cierto que en su idea de paternidad responsable aludió a la Humanae Vitae, que no permite el recurso a los anticonceptivos, sino la regulación natural de la natalidad. Pero, hablando así, deja abierto el camino a interpretaciones diversas, como efectivamente ocurrió. Los medios ya se encargan de dar esta noticia de manera que parezca que la Iglesia permite los anticonceptivos, lo cual no es cierto (además de que, hoy en día, prácticamente todos los anticonceptivos son abortivos).

- ¿Y dónde está aquí la contradicción?

- Aquí no hay contradicción, propiamente, sino falta de claridad en cuanto a lo que significa esa paternidad responsable. La contradicción puedes verla si escuchas este vídeo, evento que tuvo lugar a los dos o tres días del anterior. 

Duración: 22 segundos

Las familias sanas son esenciales en la vida de la sociedad. Da consuelo y esperanza ver tantas familias numerosas que acogen a los hijos como un verdadero don de Dios. Ellos saben que cada hijo es una bendición.

Aquí (que son frases leídas) sí que viene expresado lo que siempre ha dicho la Iglesia, lo correcto ... ¡no así en el caso anterior del avión! (allí dijo lo que realmente sentía, sin guión). ¿Con cuál de los dos vídeos nos quedamos? En el primero, la familia numerosa es equiparada a "criar como conejos" y como "una irresponsabilidad", digna de reprensión, como así hizo él con aquella mujer que tenía siete hijos y estaba embarazada del octavo: "Eso es tentar a Dios". 

Y en el segundo vídeo habla del carácter esencial de las familias numerosas en la sociedad, en donde cada hijo es acogido como un verdadero don de Dios y una bendición. 

Ambas expresiones han sido pronunciadas por Francisco. El tema es el mismo: la familia numerosa. Con la diferencia de que en el primer caso una familia numerosa supone una irresponsabilidad y en el segundo una esperanza y un consuelo. ¡Algo no cuadra! ¿Entiendes?

(Continúa)

La anti-Iglesia ha llegado. ¿Por qué los fieles católicos no deben tener miedo? (Rvdo Linus Clovis) AL FIN TRIUNFARÁ MARÍA [4 de 4]

The anti-Church has come. Why faithful Catholics should not be afraid

Rvdo Linus Clovis

In the end ...

The advent of Pope Francis has, in the divine order of things, proved a great and true blessing. A hidden conflict has been raging in the Church for over one hundred years: a conflict explicitly revealed to Pope Leo XIII, partially contained by St. Pius X, unleashed at Vatican II. 

Under Francis, the first Jesuit pope, the first pope from the Americas and the first pope whose priestly ordination was in the New Rite, it is now full blown, with the potential of rendering the Church smaller but more faithful. Consequently, there is a burgeoning fear among the more astute of the clergy who, because of their training, education and expertise in matters ecclesiastical, are generally able to see further and understand better than the average lay person the fallout from either an open conflict or the maintenance of the status quo. 

Duración 12:37 minutos

The apostolic exhortation, Amoris Laetitia is the catalyst that has divided not only bishops and Episcopal Conferences from each other but, priests from their bishops and from each other, and the laity, anxious and confused. As a Trojan horse, Amoris Laetitia spells spiritual ruin for the entire Church, as a gauntlet thrown down it calls for courage in overcoming fear. In either case, it is now poised to separate the anti-Church of which St. John Paul II spoke from the Church that Christ founded. As the separation begins to take place, each one of us, like the angels, will have to decide for himself whether he would rather be wrong with Lucifer than right without him.

At this point, if Amoris Laetitia is interpreted “in continuity with the doctrine of the Magisterum” the conflict will continue surreptitiously as anti-Church not only flourishes best in double speak, ambiguities and uncertainties but also fears the sensus catholicus. 

On the other hand, should it be interpreted as actually contrary to the perennial Magisterum, it is difficult to conceptualise how an open break can be avoided and even more difficult to predict the fall out. 

It falls to Pope Francis, whose charism is to confirm his brethren, to resolve the doubts rising in the wake of Amoris Laetitia and, until he does so, great fear is being generated by the uncertainties the separation will precipitate. If, however, it is remembered that one is called to be united first and foremost to Christ (50) and through Him to all those who belong to Him (51), then this fear will be greatly mitigated.

To further reduce our fear it is necessary that we face squarely the reality of our situation. That is, since ignorance is a cause of fear, we must both admit that there is a problem and identify the nature of the problem. Thank God, this work has already been done for us by St Pius X who unmasked Modernism, the enemy within; by St John Paul who alerted us to the anti-Church, the form of the enemy within; and by Pope Paul VI, who on the 60th anniversary of the Miracle of the sun, described the extent of the success of the enemy within “The tail of the devil is functioning in the disintegration of the Catholic world. The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of the faith, is spreading throughout the world and into the highest levels within the Church.” (52) Grappling with the thought that the evil of the great apostasy of which the Apostles spoke (53) could actually be imminent and hearing of its source, magnitude, extent, influence and power, we are naturally overwhelmed by fear.

To conquer our fear we must first identify and overcome its various manifestations. Given that we love the shepherds whom Christ has placed over us as the guardians of our souls (54), our fear is reverential. Our fear can also be considered grave since the thought that the true Church could disappear or, that the teaching of error could be attributed to her, would disturb even the most steadfast among us. We must, therefore, be zealous and ready to defend the Church first, by living its teachings uncompromisingly; second, by preaching its truths courageously from the housetops (55); and third, by being willing and ready, like the Maccabean martyrs, to die for it. Thus, fear’s first manifestation, laziness, is overcome.

A consideration of the fact that we brought nothing into this world and can take nothing out (56) should be sufficient for us to overcome shamefacedness, the second manifestation of fear. The loss of our jobs, positions, titles, family, friends, is of little import as long as we can remain faithful to Christ’s Church which is the light (57) He has placed on the lamp stand to give light to all in the house (58).

The Apostles’ joyful resilience after suffering dishonour for the sake of the Name (59), illustrates that shame, fear’s third manifestation, can be conquered when one realises there is absolutely nothing to fear in being ridiculed or, abused or, punished for doing what is right (60).

We are overwhelmed by a fear that is essentially extrinsic in as much as the unthinkable suddenly becomes possible. It is with amazement that we observe that the Church we love and know to be the barque of Peter, while under attack from all sides, “is drifting perilously like a ship without a rudder, and indeed, shows symptoms of incipient disintegration”. We gain encouragement from the Gospel story of the Apostles (61), who, while the Lord slept at the stern of the boat, were caught in a violent night storm on the Sea of Galilee and, though frightened, worked all the harder at baling the water. Far from being paralysed ourselves, we should, therefore, like them work even harder, all the time calling on the Lord, who sleeps in the barque of Peter: Lord, do you not care that we are going down? Thus, amazement and stupor, the fourth and fifth manifestation of fear are overcome.

The present situation in the Church and in the world is a consequence of our infidelities and sins as Our Lady had made abundantly clear one hundred years ago at Fatima. Our sins make us anxious, especially when we realise that we are once again responsible for crucifying Christ, albeit in His Mystical Body. Knowing, however, that God is always ready to forgive and to show mercy to a repentant sinner, let us beat our breasts, saying, “Lord be merciful to us sinners” and we would have overcome anxiety, fear’s sixth manifestation.

At Baptism we became members of the Church Militant and, at Confirmation, soldiers of Christ; we, therefore, have been recruited and armed for deadly combat against the three implacable enemies of our souls: the world, the flesh and the devil. Recognising that “we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places” (62), we fight, like the Apostles, taking the martyrs for our models and Christ Jesus, Himself as our reward. 

Since Our Lord has told us explicitly that we should not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul, we can immediately dismiss those whose greatest injury to us is in the material order. Christ, however, does warn us about the soul killers, namely, the “many false prophets (who) will arise and lead many astray” (63), especially those prophets who “show signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect.” (64)

Further, since the world will speak approvingly (65) of these false prophets, they will be readily believed by people who “will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths” (66). These then we should fear because they lead poor sinners to eternal damnation as much with a multiplicity of words and writings that dilute the rigor of the Gospel as with their deliberately ambiguous and confused affirmations (67).

Whilst it is true that we should be wary of those who, like Eleazar’s friends with their specious reasoning and counterfeit compassion, seem to have our best interests at heart, ultimately, however, it is the Creator of all, whose law is life (68), whom we should fear. God has told us to listen to His Son (69). The rigor of His Son’s Gospel, that is, those things that in the words of St Vincent of Lerins are believed “always, everywhere and by everybody”, is what will save souls (70). Any dilution of the rigor of Christ’s Gospel (71), whether in the name of modern scholarship or, in light of a new and more profound understanding or, out of mercy, not only reduces it to a human gospel (72) but also, by proposing only a pharisaic righteousness (73), does great spiritual injury to souls.

The salvation of souls is the supreme law (74). This was the reason that one hundred years ago our most Blessed Lady came to Fatima and convinced three young children to embrace an austere lifestyle and to practise rigorous penances that the souls of poor sinners may not fall into hell. Encouraged by St John Paul II’s first words and confident in Her promise that “in the end My Immaculate Heart will triumph”, let us not be afraid. Rather, let us “Be strong!” We will not give in where we must not give in. We will fight, not hesitantly but, with courage; not in secret but, in public; not behind closed doors but, in the open.

Audemus fidem nostram defendere! Non timemus!

Padre Linus Clovis

--------

1 1Cor.14:8

2 Jn.3:16

3 Is.7:10-14

4 Jer. 38 - 40

5 Is.7:11

6 Job 1:6-2:10

7 wjpbr.com/leoxiii.html

8 Mt16:18

9 1Sam.15:22

10 Lk.21:26

11 Yates, W. B., The Second Coming

12 John Paul II, Inaestimabile donum, no.18

13 Gen.27:22

14 Lk.4:36

15 Lk.12:3

16 http://www.fatima.org/essentials/facts/rianjo.asp

17 Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I-IIae, qq.22-48

18 Mt.25:14-28

19 Lk.16:1-8

20 Lk.24:41

21 Mt.28:4

22 Lk.23:48

23 Mt.27:56; Lk.22:54

24 Gen.3:10

25 Gen.4:13-14.

26 Heb.2:14-15

27 Mt.10:28; Lk.12:5

28 Prov.14:27

29 Prov.9:10

30 Lk.12:20, see also Lk.9:25

31 Macc.6:24-28

32 2Macc.6:29

33 2Macc.8:17

34 2Macc.7:29

35 1Macc.1:23

36 Eccles.1:9

37 On June 29, 1972, Pope Paul VI remarked that the smoke of Satan was seeping into the Church through the cracks in the wall. On October 13, 1977, he said: “The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of faith, is spreading throughout the world and in to the highest levels within the Church.”

38 Mt.5:37

39 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCH2JKOM7sY

40 Mt.4:1-10

41 St. Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, 15 August, 1910

42 http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/fatima-visionary-predicted-final-battle-would-be-over-marriage-family-17760/

43 Mt.13:24-30

44 Cardinal Dolan led the 2015 St Patricks Day Parade, which included a gay activist component but excluded a pro-life group. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cardinal-dolan-marches-with-homosexual-activists-at-nyc-st.-patricks-parade

45 Priest reprimanded for denying Holy Communion to lesbian.https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archdiocese-of-washington-reprimands-priest-for-denying-communion-to-a-lesb

46 Morning Meditation in Domus Sanctae Marthae, December 20, 2013

47 Jn.19:26-27

48 Is.7:2

49 2Pet.2:10-16

50 1Cor.1:12

51 Rom.1:6; 7:4, 1Cor.1:10, 2Cor.18:8

52 Pope Paul VI’s October 13, 1977 address on the Sixtieth Anniversary of the Fatima Apparitions

53 2Thess.2:3

54 1Pet.5:2

55 Lk.12:3

56 1Tim.6:7

57 Jn.1:9; 3:21; 8:12; 12:46

58 Mt.5:15

59 Acts.5:41

60 2Tim.2:9; Heb.11:36; 1Pet.2:20, 3:14-17, 4:12-19

61 Mk.4:38

62 Eph.6:12

63 Mt.24:11

64 Mk.13:22

65 Lk.6:26

66 2Tim.4:3-4, 1Tim.4:1, 2Pet.2:1

67 1Tim.4:1

68 Prov.19:16

69 Mt.17:5; Mt.9:7; Lk.9:35

70 Catholic is defined as “quod semper, ubique et ab omnibus”. That is, catholicity implies antiquity, universality and consent.

71 Gal.1:6-9; Heb.13:9

72 2Cor.11:4

73 Mt.5:19-20

74 Code of Canon Law, canon 1752

La anti-Iglesia ha llegado. ¿Por qué los fieles católicos no deben tener miedo? (Rvdo Linus Clovis) IGLESIA y ANTI-IGLESIA [3 de 4]

The anti-Church has come. Why faithful Catholics should not be afraid

Rvdo Linus Clovis

The Church and anti-Church

Pope Paul VI (37) spoke of the “smoke of Satan” having entered the Church, and Sister Lucia, that the apostasy in the Church would begin at the top. For the past half-century, there has been a growing crisis in the Church, arising as much from a lack of clear and unambiguous teaching, as from the climate of dissent among priests, Religious and laity. Within the contemporary Church, the crisis has been brought to fever pitch, if not breaking point, by the rejection of Our Lord’s yes/no paradigm and the undermining of established doctrinal positions by protean pastoral practises. 

Duración 13:42 minutos

One recent example is Bishop Fernando Ocariz’s pixilated declaration in defence of Amoris Laetitia’s proposed Holy Communion for adulterers - quote – “a new pastoral impulse which requires concrete answers in continuity with the doctrine of the Magisterum” (39). The blood-dimmed tide is loosed as there emerges from the darkness and confusion a real and open conflict between those who remain faithful and loyal to Our Lord’s Gospel and the increasing numbers of the uncatechised, who, by adhering to the praxis of ‘political correctness’ formulated by LGBT ideologues, reject the Christian Gospel. The open and unilateral imposition of this politically correct ideology in many parishes and dioceses is validating an anti-Church that is in opposition to the Catholic Church, the true Church of Christ.

The anti-Gospel of the anti-Church is, in many cases, indistinguishable from secular ideology, which has overturned both the natural law and the Ten Commandments, the sources that, from time immemorial, have informed and protected man’s moral, spiritual and physical well-being.

This anti-Gospel, which seeks to elevate the individual’s will to consume, to pleasure and to power over the will of God, was rejected by Christ when tempted in the wilderness (40). Disguised as “human rights”, it has reappeared, in all its luciferian hubris, to promulgate a narcissistic, hedonistic attitude that rejects any constraint except that imposed by man-made laws. 

Thus approaching its fulfilment is St. Pius X’s prophesy that “the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.” (41)

Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, the founding president of the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family, wrote to Sister Lucia asking for prayers for this new undertaking. She declared in a signed response (42) to him that “the final battle between the Lord and the kingdom of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Do not be afraid, (she added), because anyone who works for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be fought and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue.” And then she concluded: “however, Our Lady has already crushed his head.” 

The Cardinal noted that for John Paul II this was the crux, as it touches the very pillar of creation, the truth of the relationship between man and woman, and among generations. It is well known that any tampering with a keystone risks the collapse of the entire building. The keystone, the basic cell of society is marriage and family. With the tacit acceptance of contraception and divorce, the recent ‘merciful’ embracing of remarried civil divorcees and the benign nod to same-sex ‘marriage’, the keystone has been tampered with and the omega point has been reached. With this background, the question as to whether Amoris Laetitia should be treated as a gauntlet thrown down or a Trojan horse naturally raises its head.

For nearly three centuries, the popes have confronted the dark trinity of masonry, liberalism and modernism, which in our time, having transmuted into atheistic secularism, has a baneful grip on all the major institutions of global influence but particularly on education, communications, politics and the law. Atheistic secularism has been working for the demise of the family, its driving spirit being the LGBT ideology; its public face, “political correctness”; its Sunday dress, “inclusivity and non-judgmentalism”.

St. Pius X was the first to clearly identify Modernism, that subversive rebellion against fixed moral norms and religious belief, as the synthesis of all heresies and as the hidden enemy within the Church. Though he unmasked Modernism, with his Encyclical Pascendi, he failed to uproot it and, like the cockle (43) in the field, it continued growing and developing ideals, doctrines and goals that were quite alien, if not diametrically opposed to the Catholic Church. Thus, Modernism, remaining within the Catholic Church, has metastasised into the anti-Church.

It is self-evident that the Catholic Church and the anti-Church currently co-exist in the same sacramental, liturgical and juridical space. The latter, having grown stronger, is now attempting to pass itself off as the true Church, all the better to induct, or coerce, the faithful into becoming adherents, promoters and defenders of a secular ideology (44). Should the anti-Church succeed in commandeering all the space of the true Church, the rights of man will supplant the rights of God through the desecration of the sacraments, the sacrilege of the sanctuary, and the abuse of apostolic power. Thus, politicians who vote for abortion and same-sex “marriage” will be welcome at the Communion rails; husbands and wives who have abandoned their spouses and children and entered into adulterous relationships will be admitted to the sacraments; priests and theologians who publicly reject Catholic doctrines and morals will be at liberty to exercise ministry and to spread dissent, while faithful Catholics will be marginalised, maligned and discredited at every turn. Thus, the anti-Church would succeed in achieving its goal of dethroning God as Creator, Saviour and Sanctifier and replacing Him with man the self-creator, the self-saviour and the self-sanctifier.

To achieve its objectives, the anti-Church, in collaboration with the secular powers, uses the law and media to browbeat the true Church into submission. By adroit use of the media, the activists of the anti-Church have managed to intimidate bishops, clergy and most of the Catholic press into silence. Equally, the lay faithful are terrorised by fear of the hostility, ridicule and hate that would be visited upon them should they object to the imposition of LGBT ideology. For example, in 2015, the congregation of St Nicholas of Myra in the Archdiocese of Dublin gave a standing ovation to their parish priest when he declared from the pulpit that he was gay and urged them to support same-sex “marriage” in the Irish referendum. It is not difficult to imagine the kind of treatment that an objector would have received. Thus, the oppressive influence of the anti-Church is most clearly seen at work when a person is fearful to openly uphold God’s revelation about homosexuality, abortion or contraception in their parish community.

Indeed, faithful Catholics, both lay and clerical, are increasingly subjected to a legitimate fear that their livelihood and careers would be in jeopardy should they stand up against the anti-Church (45). Employers are particularly fearful when activists of secular groups level charges of ‘homophobia’ or ‘transphobia’ against their faithful Catholic employees. Dreading the potential loss of business, employers, in these situations, often feel constrained into silencing or even dismissing accused Catholics. 

Whilst bad publicity from the LGBT lobby can damage business, most employers have an even greater fear of the adverse legal judgments that conflicts with such groups can bring them. Even so, one should not ignore the reality that there are still other employers who would readily acquiesce to complaints against a faithful Catholic because consciously, or unconsciously, they are in sympathy with the anti-Church. As is well known from numerous test cases, when employers are faced with pressure from LGBT activists, freedom of speech and freedom of conscience of their employees are disregarded, if not suppressed. Most faithful Catholics, especially those working in the public sector, know this, feel intimidated and so keep quiet about their opposition to secular ideology.

Priests and bishops are the immediate and more natural leaders of the laity and they, above all, are caught in the broadening spectrum of fear generated by the Anti-Church. Additionally, because of the clerical vow of obedience and respect, their fear, being reverential, is greatly aggravated, especially when they find their ranks divided; their unity split; long-standing sacramental disciplines violated; canon law ignored; their evangelising spirit dismissed as proselytism and solemn nonsense. In regard to their persons, they are labelled as little monsters throwing stones at poor sinners, or who reduce the sacrament of reconciliation to a torture chamber or, hide behind the Church’s teachings, sitting on the chair of Moses and judging at times with superiority and superficiality. As clerical sons, they see themselves as less deserving of a papal embrace than Italy’s arch-abortionist Emma Bonino and even less worthy of rehabilitation than renowned false prophet and global population and abortion advocate, Paul Ehrlich. 

As priests, they are told they owe an apology to gays and that the "great majority" of Catholic marriages they would have blessed are invalid; in addition, they are called sayers of prayers and, for considering Mass attendance and frequent confession as important, are branded Pelagians. 

As Catholics, knowing that the Five First Saturdays were requested in reparation for blasphemy against our most Blessed Lady, they are personally affronted by the scurrilous musings (46) that, on Calvary, where She became the Mother (47) of all those redeemed by Christ, the Holy Virgin of Fatima perhaps, desired in Her heart to say to the Lord “Lies! Lies! I was deceived.” As “trees of the forest shake before the wind” (48), so clerical hearts quake with fear at the possibility that they could actually be more Catholic than the Pope (49)!

(Continúa)

La anti-Iglesia ha llegado. ¿Por qué los fieles católicos no deben tener miedo? (Rvdo Linus Clovis) MIEDO [2 de 4]

The anti-Church has come. Why faithful Catholics should not be afraid

Rvdo Linus Clovis

Fear

In Thomistic thought (17), a passion is that motion or modification that the recipient undergoes when acted on by some agent. In human nature, a passion is that motion which arises from the senses and can even affect the body when one imagines or thinks of good or evil. One such passion is fear which springs from the perceived threat of some present or future evil and whose power resides in the belief that one lacks the ability to overcome the evil. In simple terms, fear is an unsettling of soul - a mental disturbance that regards a present or future evil as irresistible and actually able to conquer good. It can be contrasted with hope, whose object is a future good, difficult but possible to attain.

Duración 12:45 minutos

St. Thomas enumerates the various manifestations of fear as: laziness, shamefacedness, shame, amazement, stupor and anxiety. The cause of fear may be intrinsic or extrinsic.

The first three are intrinsic since they come from one’s personal actions and may be defined as follows. Laziness is that response which shrinks from work for fear of effort. This is characterised by the third servant in the parable (18) of the talents who, having hidden his talent, offered the excuse he was afraid. He was punished for being “wicked and lazy”. Shamefacedness, a kind of embarrassment, is that fear that deters one from committing a disgraceful act. The parable (19) of the steward who was afraid to beg illustrates that fear. Adam hid from God because of shame for having disobeyed. 

Amazement, stupor and anxiety are extrinsic since they have their origin in external factors far greater than one can overcome. Amazement is the fear that is felt when the threat is so great that one is unable to gauge its magnitude, whilst at the threat of an unprecedented evil one feels stupor even to the point of being cataleptic. Lastly, anxiety is the kind of fear produced by an unforeseen occurrence resulting from an unexpected event. Examples of these would be the resurrection of Our Lord from the dead, which was a source of amazement (20) to the disciples, stupor (21) to the guards at the tomb who were like dead men and, anxiety to those who were responsible (22) for the crucifixion of the Lord.

Amazement and stupor paralyse the understanding just as laziness is the paralysis brought about by fear of exertion. This implies that amazement and stupor shrink from the difficulty of grappling with a great and unwonted occurrence just as laziness shrinks from undertaking physical toil. There is a subtle difference between stupor and amazement in that the one amazed shrinks from forming a judgment on what, at present, amazes him but, he would be willing to do so later. Stupor, however, places one in a seemingly permanent coma. Amazement, therefore, may be the beginning of philosophical research to which stupor is a hindrance since, the one overcome by stupor fears both to judge at present and to inquire into the future.

For our purpose, two different kinds of fear need to be considered. First, fear may be grave if it influences a steadfast person but slight if it affects only a person of weak will. In order for fear to be grave, It must be grave in itself and not merely in the estimation of the person fearing. It must be based on a reasonable foundation. The threat must be possible of execution. The execution of the threat must be inevitable. Grave fear diminishes will power but does not necessarily remove it totally. This is exemplified by those of the disciples who, after their panic when Jesus was arrested, followed Him at a distance (23). Slight fear is not considered as even diminishing will power.

Second, reverential fear is that disposition one has towards one’s parents or towards those in positions of authority and it springs primarily from one’s reluctance to offend them. If such fear is used as a compelling force, then its justness or otherwise comes from the validity for which it was exercised.

It is important to recall that fear did not exist in human nature at the time of creation but rather, is one of the consequences of the sin of our first parents. In the state of original innocence, Adam lived with beasts without any fear and his relationship with God was also void of fear. Once he sinned, however, he became exceedingly afraid and hid himself among the trees. When God called him, he responded: “I heard the sound of thee in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself"(24).

This fear arose not only from dread of punishment but also from shame for having disobeyed God. Human fear increased and became terror when Cain had to face the consequences of his act of fratricide: “My punishment is greater than I can bear. Behold, thou hast driven me this day away from the ground; and from thy face I shall be hidden; and I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will slay me” (25). From the moment Cain laid violent hands on his brother, fear morphed itself into a hierarchy: dismay, fright, cowardice, dread, terror. Additionally, fear, arising from many sources and manifesting itself in multitudinous ways, has enthroned itself in the human psyche and, even more grievous, the devil uses it as a weapon to enslave and oppress us (26).

In acknowledging the reality and indeed the power of fear, Christ distinguished between the two kinds of fear to which we are subjected. “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell, .... yes, I tell you, fear him!” (27). Although threats to our body may provoke many degrees of fear, these fears can all be vanquished by a holy and reverential fear: “The fear of the Lord is a fountain of life, that one may avoid the snares of death” (28). Fear of God leads to awe and obedience to Him, that is, to keep His commandments, to love Him and to lead a life of repentance.  "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (29).

In Christ’s counsel that we should fear our Creator above all things is a simple reminder of the existence of a hierarchy of fears. In particular, since death, the greatest of the natural objects of fear, is inescapable, we should be even less afraid of losing all the things belonging to this world, that is, all material goods, all social and professional advantages, all titles and all dignities which, on our departure, must, in any case, be left behind. “God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required of you; and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’” (30). Moreover, Our Lord merely confirmed what the heroes of the Maccabeus period had already believed, articulated and zealously practised. The great martyr Eleazar who was determined not to violate the ancestral laws by eating pig’s flesh, vociferously rejected, his friends’ ploy that he should only pretend to do so.

Such pretence is not worthy of our time of life,” he said, “lest many of the young should suppose that Elea′zar in his ninetieth year has gone over to an alien religion, and through my pretence, for the sake of living a brief moment longer, they should be led astray because of me, while I defile and disgrace my old age. For even if for the present I should avoid the punishment of men, yet whether I live or die I shall not escape the hands of the Almighty. Therefore, by manfully giving up my life now, I will show myself worthy of my old age and leave to the young a noble example of how to die a good death willingly and nobly for the revered and holy laws (31).

This narrative illustrates Eleazar’s two major fears. First, was his inability to escape the hand of God and the second, the fear of setting a bad example which could mislead the young. Interestingly, we are told that “Those who a little before had acted toward him with good will now changed to ill will, because the words he had uttered were in their opinion sheer madness” (32). This supposed madness of Eleazar was also shared by the mother of the seven sons who exhorted each and every one of them to hold faithfully to God’s laws and to accept a most cruel death rather than to abandon their “ancestral way of life” (33) saying “Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God’s mercy I may get you back again with your brothers” (34).

The zeal and clear-sightedness of the Maccabean martyrs should be a source of inspiration and encouragement for us, especially as we are currently confronted with resolute policies that threaten to undermine and to change our ancestral customs and traditional beliefs. We need to recall that, even when those advocating such change seem to have the support (35) of authority, we are not facing anything new as the Preacher (36) once declared “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; and there is nothing new under the sun”. As disciples of Christ, as believers and more, as leaders aware of our responsibilities before God, we need to become “full of passionate intensity” for our convictions and, to proclaim, even “from the housetops”, the unadulterated Gospel of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. It is time to cleave the deepening darkness with the light of truth.

(Continúa)

La anti-Iglesia ha llegado. ¿Por qué los fieles católicos no deben tener miedo? (Rvdo Linus Clovis) FÁTIMA Y LA IGLESIA [1 de 4]

El 18 de mayo en "Rome Life Forum", en un evento organizado por “Voice of the Family", el Padre Linus Clovis habló de un enfrentamiento actual entre la Iglesia y una anti-Iglesia: “Es evidente que la Iglesia Católica y la anti-Iglesia actualmente coexisten en el mismo espacio sacramental, litúrgica y jurídicamente.”

Está en inglés y el video subtitulado en español es de 52 minutos. Por eso divido esta entrada en cuatro con sus correspondientes trozos de vídeo. Pueden verse todos de una vez o en varias veces. Pero realmente merece la pena, porque aclara las ideas a todos aquellos católicos que viven hoy confusos este mundo en el que nos ha tocado vivir y, en particular -y de un modo muy especial- en la Iglesia actual.

La noticia, en Inglés, se encuentra en  LIFE SITE NEWS
Hay un vídeo de la intervención del padre Linus Clovis, que ha sido traducido por Veritas TV. Amor a la verdad

Rvdo Linus Clovis

The anti-Church has come. Why faithful Catholics should not be afraid (Rvdo Linus Clovis)

-----

ROME, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- Pope St John Paul II’s first words, on appearing on the loggia of St Peter’s Basilica, on 16th October, 1978, the day of his election, were “Be not afraid”. Now, thirty-nine years later, in light of the events that have overtaken contemporary Catholicism, his first words seem to be, not only prophetic but more, a clarion call in preparation for battle (1).

Whenever the pendulum of human and salvation history swings through a period of encroaching darkness and turmoil, God often inspires prophets to speak so that some light may be cast to dispel the darkness and, that the turmoil may be assuaged with hope. These prophets appealed for more trust in God’s active and caring concern for His people (2). 

Duración 12:52 minutos

Thus, for example, with entreaties to have faith in God’s loving providence, Isaiah (3) begged King Ahaz to ask God for a sign before he acted and, Jeremiah (4) warned that God would save Jerusalem from total destruction only if the city surrenders to the Babylonians. The Church herself, has not been deprived of the blessings of the prophetic grace as is amply demonstrated by God raising up saints such as Bernard of Clairvaux, Francis of Assisi, Catherine of Siena, Margaret Mary Alacoque and, in more recent times, by sending His Blessed Mother to Lourdes, La Salette and Fatima.

A century ago, God sent the Queen of Prophets to the Cova da Iria in Fatima, Portugal with a double pronged message for our contemporary world. First, She warned that the world was already facing a peril far more destructive than that which faced Jerusalem and, secondly, She presented a heavenly solution, wiser and more prudent than that offered to Ahaz who had refused to ask God for a sign either as “deep as Sheol or high as heaven” (5). 

The Virgin, however, from maternal solicitude, established the gravity and veracity of Her twin message with a vision and a sign. On 13th July, 1917 ‘deep as Sheol’ was illustrated by a disturbing vision of hell. Four months later, on 13th October, ‘high as heaven’ was confirmed with a sign, the awe-inspiring miracle of the “dance of the sun” which was witnessed by more than seventy thousand people. 

On October 13, 1884, exactly 33 years before Our Lady’s appearance at Fatima, Pope Leo XIII, had an extraordinary spiritual experience. He overheard a conversation between God and Satan in which Satan challenged God, boasting that, given greater power over priests (6), he could destroy the Church within 100 years. God granted him that time to test the Church - ultimately for His own honour and glory (7) and also, to confirm that His Church was indeed built on rock and able to sustain the attacks of hell (8) with as much fortitude as the Patriarch Job. In preparation for this trial, Pope Leo immediately composed the Leonine prayers, with a particular invocation of St Michael, for the defence and protection of the clergy and he ordered their recital after every Mass.

Aware of how desperate modern times would be, with the battle being fought at fever pitch, the Virgin proposed a strategy which, if adopted would secure the salvation of a great number of souls. 

The strategy required that, in order to “appease God, who was already so deeply offended”, three major conditions should be satisfied, namely, a reform of morals with full adherence to natural and divine laws, the Five First Saturdays devotion and the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. 

Then to further emphasise how perilous the approaching times would be, the Virgin, with motherly concern, warned of the consequences of ignoring Her message: wars, Russia spreading her errors, the persecution of the Church and of the Holy Father. She, nonetheless, concluded Her message with a vestige of hope: “in the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph and a period of peace will be given to the world.”

On 13th August, 1917, the children were kidnapped and, through no fault of theirs, were unable to keep their tryst with the Lady. Appearing to them six days later, the Lady asked them to return to the Cova da Iria on 13th September, confirming that She would work the promised miracle, although it would not be “as great”. This incident highlights the importance of observing all Heaven’s instructions exactly (9) since partial compliance diminishes the proffered blessings. 

In 1929, Our Lady specifically promised a period of world peace if the Pope, in union with the bishops of the world, would consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart. This specific consecration has not yet been done and, I believe, that, this has contributed to the present crisis. 

While blessings may follow partial compliance to Heaven’s requests, these, no doubt, are bestowed as encouragement to proceed to full compliance. Thus, both Spain and Portugal were spared the Second World War, after their bishops consecrated those countries to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Similarly, the Second World War was shortened, after Pope Pius XII, even without the bishops’ participation, consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart and, Communism collapsed soon after Pope John Paul II, with the bishops’ participation but with no explicit mention of Russia, consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart.

The social and political uncertainties of the post World War I years provided the conditions for the twin spectres of Nazism and Communism to grow until 25-26 January, 1938, that fateful “night of the unknown light”. This “unknown light” signified the imminent outbreak of a worse war which, Our Lady of Fatima predicted, in July 1917, would occur during the pontificate of Pius XI. This Second World War ended in 1945 with the defeat of Nazism but peace was not assured as the now hungry spectre of Communism, having swallowed half of Europe, ominously and threateningly, loured and looked to further territorial expansion.

The Church

The election of a cardinal from Communist Poland at the second Conclave of 1978 was sufficiently a threat to the status quo that an attempt to eliminate him was made on 13th May, 1981. Two years, prior to his election as Pope John Paul II, Karol Wojtyla, the archbishop of Cracow, delivered a prophetic message in Philadelphia on the occasion of the bicentennial anniversary of American Independence.

We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through. I do not think that wide circles of American society or wide circles of the Christian community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel versus the anti-Gospel.

We must be prepared to undergo great trials in the not-too-distant future; trials that will require us to be ready to give up even our lives, and a total gift of self to Christ and for Christ. Through your prayers and mine, it is possible to alleviate this tribulation, but it is no longer possible to avert it. . . .How many times has the renewal of the Church been brought about in blood! It will not be different this time.

Today, forty years later, this speech has such an ominous ring to it that, in the current global climate, it is difficult not to recall Our Lord’s own words: People will faint from fear and foreboding of what is coming upon the world, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. (10) At present we are experiencing recurring afflictions and uncertainties causing fear which can be attributed to the wilful neglect of the Virgin’s warning.

There is a growing sense, even among the least sophisticated, the spiritually indifferent and the historically naive, that something is wrong, that something has to give or, as W. B. Yates expressed with poetic elegance:

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity. (11)

Certainly, in regard to the Church, it seems that the centre can no longer hold. The Petrine authority has stealthily been whittled away that it seems to no longer possess the supremacy of judicial power but rather only that of primus inter pares. One need only recall Paul VI’s prohibition against Communion in the hand and the outright disobedience, if not defiance, of several hierarchies that forced his capitulation or, the uproar and denunciation that followed his issuance of Humanae Vitae. Equally the declaration (12) of John Paul II against female altar servers was soon undeclared by a new and authentic interpretation of Canon 230§2 in the Code of Canon Law. Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum, like a lame duck, fared no better.

Perhaps even more serious is the feeling that “things ecclesiastic and catholic” are falling apart and a pastoral anarchy has been loosed upon the Church. The current media spin presents the Petrine office as little more than the opinion, even the most insouciant, of the incumbent. Yet, even in the midst of this imbroglio, there seems to be a hidden exercise of power at work that can reform the marriage annulment process without the customary consultation of the appropriate Roman dicasteries; issue a broad and scathing rebuke of the Roman Curia in a Christmas address; purge a dicastery’s membership, which effectively vitiate the influence of its Prefect who had stood firmly against innovations injurious both to the teachings on marriage and to the tenets of the liturgy; cripple the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate; and shut down the Melbourne campus of the John Paul II Institute. One can hardly be blamed for judging like Isaac, mutatis mutandis that “Although the voice is Jacob’s, the hands are Esau’s” (13).

With such teachings and with unespied power behind it (14), it is no surprise that the “best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity”. Indeed, the sensus catholicus is troubled and voices that should be raised in its defence are muted, while the spirit of the age is not short of tongues that proclaim from the housetops (15) what could well be the anti-Gospel of which, four decades ago, Cardinal Wojtyla had spoken. It becomes even more dire as the Cardinal went on to warn that we should be “prepared to undergo great trials in the not-too-distant future; trials that will require us to be ready to give up even our lives, and a total gift of self to Christ and for Christ”.

Cardinal Wojtyla’s anxiety gives us additional grounds to take the message of Fatima seriously. In August 1931, Our Lord Himself appeared to Sister Lucia and, referring to His command for the collegial consecration of Russia, commanded her to “Make it known to My ministers that given they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My request, they will follow him into misfortune.” (16) This warning, together with the Cardinal’s declaration that this trial cannot be averted, is perhaps, what has so many fearful. Like every passion, fear, in order to be morally good, must be regulated by reason.

(Continúa)

Clavo argentino (por Luigi Bisignani)

FUENTE: THE WANDERER

La soledad del Papa Francisco. Desde Argentina a Estados Unidos cae la popularidad de Jorge Mario Bergoglio entre escándalos, errores, purgas y disputas internas que dividen la Curia.

-------

Desde Argentina a Australia, y hasta en las habitaciones secretas de los pasillo vaticanos, sopla impetuoso el viento que amenaza con hacer volar el solideo blanco del Papa Bergoglio. 

La última novedad es la sustitución en el ex Santo Oficio del conservador Gerhard Müller por el arzobispo Luis Ladaria Ferrer, un jesuita español que tendrá la misión “revolucionaria” de abrir la Iglesia primero el diaconado y luego el sacerdocio femenino.

[Nota del traductor: un día después de publicada esta nota, se conoció la noticia que Mons. Ladaria Ferrer no denunció a la justicia italiana a un sacerdote condenado canónicamente por múltiples abusos de menores].

• En Argentina, una disputa comenzó a crecer, y puede convertirse en un incidente diplomático, cuando se anunció oficialmente que en enero de 2018 Francisco volverá “al fin del mundo” pero para visitar la desconocida y pequeña ciudad de Temuco, en Chile. 

Para los argentinos, siempre con diferencias contenciosas con los chilenos, la decisión del Papa de no volver a la catedral de Buenos Aires es considerada una provocación inaceptable, con ventajas solamente para los evangélicos. Hay quien dice, por lo bajo, que Bergoglio es de tal modo polémico en su propio país, que estaría preocupado por posibles disputas públicas. Parece, incluso, que a las autoridades chilenas les ha llegado la discreta novedad de que no sería agradable para el pontífice que asistieran huéspedes civiles o religiosos argentinos durante la visita, ni siquiera los miembros de su propia familia.

La imagen de Francisco que tenía los números suficientes para constituirse en “líder continental moral” sin la sombra de Barack Obama está velozmente entrando en crisis, no obstante el trabajo extraordinario del Secretario de Estado Pietro Parolin: 

• En Cuba con Trump, la diplomacia vaticana tartamudea. 
• En Colombia, el referendum por la paz se perdió porque los evangélicos del país lo sabotearon. 
• En Venezuela, todas las partes políticas están de acuerdo en decir que el tentativo de pacificación emprendido por el Vaticano, ha agravado la situación en vez de mejorarla. 
• Finalmente, en Brasil, después del éxito de la jornada mundial de la juventud, Río de Janeiro tiene como intendente a un obispo evangélico, anticatólico y, sobre todo, crítico de la Conferencia Episcopal.

Frente a este escenario internacional se puede comenzar a plantear un primer balance sobre los cuatro años de pontificado, intentando alguna comparación entre Francisco y sus predecesores. 

Lo que ocurrió luego de la renuncia de Benedicto XVI es muy similar a la transición entre el Papa Pío XII y su sucesor Juan XXIII. Bergoglio se inspiró en Roncalli, quien, sin embargo, se hizo cargo de una Iglesia lejana del pueblo, en profunda crisis misionera y, sin muchas proclamas, la revolucionó con la convocatoria del Concilio Vaticano II. Exactamente lo contrario a lo sucedido en la transición entre Ratzinger y Bergoglio. 

Después de haber realizado una campaña de prensa que transformaba al Papa argentino en un ídolo, el mundo está cayendo en la cuenta que, en el fondo, el trabajo del Ratzinger fue profundamente infravalorado. 

En un Vaticano divido por disputas, el Papa alemán puso al IOR en la white list, declaró la tolerancia cero a la pedofilia y comenzó un profundo estudio de la crítica de la Iglesia moderna frente a los desafíos futuros. Francisco, por tanto, llegó con un assist sin precedentes del que quizás ni siquiera él se dio cuenta, circundado de un modesto círculo mágico que le quita visión y que no le hace ver las críticas que amenazan con asumir dimensiones cada vez más grandes, alejándolo de sus predecesores. Casi un Matteo Renzi vestido de blanco.

Munido de una rara intuición, Bergoglio por lo menos juntas sus manos cuando delante de la Virgen de Fátima pide perdón por el “mal gusto que ha tenido en elegir a sus colaboradores”. 

El cardenal australiano George Pell, alejado en los últimos días, fue el puntero del escuadrón argentino elegido por Bergoglio. Pero, pedofilia aparte, la posición de Pell se agravó porque, después de haberlo llamado al Vaticano, no fue capaz de controlar las sociedades revisoras que están haciendo los exámenes a las cuentas pasadas y presentes de la Iglesia. Con algunas de ellas, había firmado preliminares de contrato para la creación del VAM (Vatican Asset Management) en el cual confluirían todos los bienes inmuebles de la Iglesia (incluso los que posee en Londres, París, New York y Hong Kong) y ahora las sociedades están pidiendo dinero. Mientras, el revisor de cuentas de la Santa Sede, Libero Milone, elegido por el propio Pell, parece que fue echado porque no quería avalar el balance de la Secretaría de Comunicaciones que contrataba voces millonarias.

Y mejor no hablemos de la modestia de los nuevos obispos italianos. En ciudades clave como Palermo, Padua, Brescia o Bolonia, y en gran medida por sugerencia del círculo mágico (San Egidio, Mons. Darío Viganò y aquellos que, en broma, son llamados los nuevos masones del “Nouvel observateur”), han sido nombrados honestos párrocos de barrio, pero que no están preparados para gestionar realidades complejas, y probablemente se convertirán en sus víctimas.

Siempre en Italia, nadie ha comprendido todavía el desastre financiero en torno al Hospital del Niño Jesús. En sólo dos años de la nueva gestión, se han quemado decenas de millones de euros bajo el gerenciamiento de la apedreada Mariella Enoc. Tiempos duros son los que le esperan al Papa Francisco; 

• La plaza ya no se llena de gente como en otros tiempos. 
• Las tan proclamadas reformas se han eclipsado en pequeñas nominaciones 
• Y los slogans publicitarios sirven poco para mantener alta la tensión mediática. 

La Iglesia americana ya le dio la espalda, así como la africana, y la soledad de un Papa que le dice a los suyos “Sigo solo adelante”, se enfrenta con la parábola del buen pastor que se detiene a recuperar hasta la última oveja perdida. 

¿Se verificará nuevamente el año de los tres papas como en 1978? Pero en este caso estarían los tres vivos y, por tanto, mientras esperamos a que Bergoglio se tome diez minutos para pensar lo que está haciendo, permanecemos en la Tradición Católica y le deseamos larga vida a los Papas.

-------

Il Tempo, domingo 2 de julio de 2017.Traducción: Rubén Peretó Rivas 

[Nota del traductor: El autor, Luigi Bisignani, está considerado uno de los hombres más poderosos de Italia]

"NADIE NOS PUEDE IMPEDIR PROCLAMAR LA VERDAD" (por el R P Custodio Ballester)

Tomado de Agnus Dei Prod

Duración 11:29 minutos