We certainly could go a lot of places with that headline, am I right?
The story at LifesiteNews is titled: “Chaste same-sex attracted Christians counter Pope Francis: ‘God did NOT make us gay’.” HERE
Indeed, the responses are harsh, and the universal theme is: Shut up, fake news, fake pope, fake religion. Either we believe what we believe or we don’t, and lying to people in order to make yourself popular, on a matter that concerns the salvation of souls, is a most detestable act.
No commentary is necessary: (my emphasis)

There is one thing…that every single one of these chaste same-sex attracted men and women made clear in their statements to LifeSiteNews: God most certainly did not make them gay.
Thomas Berryman wonders “just how seriously the Holy Father takes the Church’s teachings on this and other issues of sexual morality … It is deeply disturbing to believe that leaders of the Roman Catholic Church are more concerned about winning people’s affection and approval than the fate of their eternal souls.”
“This certainly makes it a lot harder for those of us who are same-sex attracted and trying to obey the Church’s timeless teachings to do so–or even feel like we are truly welcome in the new, paradigm-shifting Church,” said Berryman. “Belonging to a Church whose leaders don’t even believe in its teachings does seem kind of dumb.”
The Pope’s “remark disturbed me greatly because first of all, it’s a lie, and second of all, he is deceiving millions of people into hell,” said Anita Angelo, who did not mince words when speaking to LifeSiteNews. “He just told millions of homosexuals that it’s ok to stay gay and sold them on the devil’s lie. It’s not. Sure Jesus said to ‘come as you are’ but He will turn your life around if you let Him. God can and will deliver us from every yoke of bondage if we let Him.”
Angelo said that those who have “itching ears … longing for affirmation” need to know that the Pope’s alleged but uncorrected statement “logically speaking doesn’t even make sense.” She asked, “Why would a loving God create someone to be same-sex attracted and then at the same time condemn them to hell? He just wouldn’t.”
“I am very grieved over his remark,” said Angelo. “It actually makes me sick to my stomach because people will stay trapped and not even know it.”
Before he started his outreach in San Francisco to the LGBT community, Catholic Joseph Sciambra assumed his struggle would be with the secular gay community. Yet he found, “Those who stand up for truth … have almost no support from the hierarchy.”
“Over the past ten years, because of this issue, I have teetered every day on the edge of leaving the Catholic Church. Beyond the physical and mental torments I have suffered due to a decade I spent as a gay man, the Church has been my greatest source of suffering,” said Sciambra in a published opinion.
“When I hear those in the Catholic Church say ‘you were born gay,’ I think: My God, they are killing us,” he concluded.

You can read the rest over there.

St. Joan of Arc, convicted of heresy by Bishop Pierre Cauchon, a legitimate prelate of the Roman Catholic Church, along with a corrupt bench of judges. Burned at the stake at Rouen, 30 May, 1431.

“About Jesus Christ and the Church, I just know they are one in the same thing.”
“One life is all we have and we live it as we believe. But to surrender who you are and to live without belief is more terrible than dying – even more terrible than dying young.”
In response to the trick question as to whether she was in the state of grace: “If I am not, may God put me there; and if I am, may God so keep me.”
“It is better to be alone with God. His friendship will not fail me, nor His counsel, nor His love. In His strength, I will dare and dare and dare until I die.”
“You say that you are my judge; I do not know if you are; but take good heed not to judge me ill, because you would put yourself in great peril.”
“Children say that people are hung sometimes for speaking the truth.”
“Go forward bravely. Fear nothing. Trust in God; all will be well.”
“All battles are first won or lost in the mind.”
“ACT, AND GOD WILL ACT.”
“I am not afraid, I was born to do this.”
Upon being chained to the stake: “Hold the Cross high, that I may see it through the flames.”

Her sentence was reversed and annulled by the Church in 1455. Beatified 11 April 1909. Canonized 16 May 1920.
St. Joan of Arc, ora pro nobis

The greatest temporal threat to Satan are the Contemplative Orders. Period, Full Stop.
I say “temporal”, because these warriors exist and operate temporally, in the world, but hidden from it. However, the work they do is not temporal, but spiritual. The supernatural warfare waged by these orders is the driving force that keeps legions of demons in check, and their strategic position in the battlespace cannot be overstated. You may have noticed a shift in this war over the past fifty years or so, in favor of the enemy. Well, Satan still isn’t satisfied, and no quarter will be given. The enemies of God, the enemies of the Church, who are now “running” the Church, will not stop until this elite class of special operators is wiped out.
We could see this coming a couple years ago, when the Apostolic Constitution, “Vultum Dei quaerere” was published. Now we have the juridical mandate “Cor orans” just released, thoroughly explained over at The Remnant HERE and HERE, with direct testimony from a group of cloistered Carmelites. Here is a quick taste:

“The Cor Orans document is the death-knell of Carmel. It signals the end of the contemplative monastic life. Not only does it destroy the autonomy of the Monasteries, something Our Holy Mother St. Teresa was extremely insistent about, but it also removes the Superior, dissolves her authority and power, removes the financial independence of each Monastery, and destroys the specificity of each charism… This is a disaster. Especially for Carmel.”

Click on the links to read about how the dismantling will take place. And remember, this directly affects every person on the planet. All of those prayers, especially the prayers from the orders who pray the old breviary, are extremely powerful and beneficial for all souls in the world. Their suppression means more attacks on YOU.
I wrote a bunch of words about it back when Vultum was released. Not much to add now, and out of time yet again, so I’ll just repost the entire thing. Keep in mind at the time of this post, I had yet to renounce “Francis” as an antipope.

He starts with a brief synopsis of the three necessary moral conditions of conjugal union: Complementarity, fidelity and permanence, and openness to the transmission of life.
(pssst… that means sodomy between men is mortal sin, but so is sodomy between a husband and wife and so is contraception between husband and wife… note well)
He goes on to explain the only two rational ends of claiming God makes someone “gay”:

• If God makes people gay, then He has started making human beings who possess a different nature than what was revealed to us throughout creation history. God changed the rules and didn’t tell us.

or else,

• The natural laws of conjugal union are still in place, but God purposely creates people with a nature that is incompatible with the plan he has revealed.

Obviously, both of these are big fat NOPES. I could write 3000 words on this, but I’m out of time today.
The video really is only five minutes. Give it a listen.
 

Joseph Sciambra has a piece over at LifesiteNews HERE.

“At age 17, a Catholic priest told me God had created me this way. Over a decade later, I would talk to another Catholic priest. This time, I was suffering from an anal prolapse. God still made me gay. When I crawled half-dead out of San Francisco, I never thought I would have this conversation with Catholics. When I went to the Castro in 1988, it was the height of the AIDS crisis, but I didn’t care. I’d been alone my whole life, and I was willing to risk my life, if I could live like a human being for a few years rather than as a freak…The local Catholic Church had a rainbow flag hanging outside the front door. I watched as friends dropped into the grave, but I didn’t care – because I was alive. Sometimes the greatest punishment endured by those who survive is surviving. I can’t forget those I left behind. After seeing such carnage, I cannot understand why the gay experiment has not been abandoned like other failed utopian philosophies that resulted in mass murder – fascism, Nazism, communism. After over 300,000 gay men in the U.S. alone have died of AIDS, that the Church allows this debate to continue is reprehensible. When I hear those in the Catholic Church say “you were born gay,” I think: My God, they are killing us.”

If you don’t know Sciambra or his story, you really need to read it, on an empty stomach. HERE.
On to Pat Buchanan channeling Cardinal Muller channeling John Senior: HERE

The idea that God is responsible for homosexual orientations, that the pope and the Catholic Church are fine with men being attracted to one another, and that those so oriented should be happy with it, appears, on its face, to be heresy. It implies that what Catholics regarded for centuries as moral truth was wrong, or that moral truth has evolved and must be made to conform to modernity. This is moral relativism: Truth changes with the times.
…the pope’s position is close to Hillary Clinton’s. In 2016, at a New York fundraiser, Clinton recited her infamous litany of sins common to the “basket of deplorables” backing Donald Trump. Said Hillary, they are “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic.” A phobia is “an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.” Clinton was thus saying that those who have an aversion to homosexuality are morally or mentally sick…
The new morality we hear from the pope and Hillary reflects a historic change in the moral thinking of the West. For the belief that homosexuality is normal and natural, and not only acceptable but even praiseworthy, has carried the day… Legislatures and courts have written this “truth” into law. It has been discovered by the Supreme Court to be lurking in that Constitution whose authors regarded and treated homosexuality as a grave crime.
Consider the views of Cardinal Gerhard Muller, lately removed as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, as to what is behind the drive to have “homophobia” regarded as a mental disorder.
“Homophobia (is) an invention and an instrument of the totalitarian dominance over the thoughts of others. The homo-movement is lacking scientific arguments, which is why it created an ideology which wants to dominate by creating its own reality.”
In short, cultural Marxists and their progressive allies have taken an ideological assertion — homosexuality is normal, natural and moral — without any historical, biological or scientific basis, and asserted it as truth, established it as law, and demanded that we accept and act upon this truth, or face the wrath of the regime.
Said Muller: “It is the Marxist pattern according to which reality does not create thinking, but thinking creates its own reality. He who does not accept this created reality is to be considered as being sick.
“It is as if one could influence an illness with the help of the police or with the help of courts. In the Soviet Union, Christians were put into psychiatric clinics. These are the methods of totalitarian regimes, of National Socialism and of Communism.”

Their motto: Reality is whatever we say it is, and bringing you into conformity with their “reality” will be accomplished by whatever means necessary. Tolerance was never the goal, it was just a tactic. Acceptance isn’t the goal either. They will take this all the way to PARTICIPATION, if not in actual sodomy then at least in the profanation of sacred things by way of commingling with sodomy.
We’re crossing the Rubicon, folks. Get your head around what’s happening. Much will be required of you, and you need to start preparing for battle in more ways than one.

Returning to our developing theme of Amoris Laetitia >> adultery >> fornication >>  Humanae Vitae >> contraception >> sodomy, let’s continue to keep score as the narrative is drawn in sharper relief with each passing day.
Following is the lead headline on Drudge as of this moment, 10:16am MST, 21 May 2018:

Yes, Antipope Bergoglio over the weekend was reported to have further abused an abuse victim by telling him his homosexuality was from God. God made him that way, God loves him that way, and he should love himself that way. This actually goes way beyond “born this way,” to say that God Himself is the author. This is so diabolical, words fail. If God is the source of homosexuality, that would mean God wills evil, which is impossible. While it is true that we all have our crosses to bear, and while God does allow us to be tempted, the source of our weakness is Satan, through Original Sin and the resultant concupiscence. This is basic Catholicism. And although it’s not wrong to pray to be freed from disordered thoughts, learn well that God doesn’t often lift these burdens, so we are also meant to look upon them as an opportunity — an opportunity to cooperate with God’s grace, which He always offers us in sufficient quantity to avoid sin, as explained by Saint Paul:

“And lest the greatness of the revelations should exalt me, there was given me a sting of my flesh, an angel of Satan, to buffet me. For which thing thrice I besought the Lord, that it might depart from me. And he said to me: My grace is sufficient for thee; for power is made perfect in infirmity. Gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may dwell in me. For which cause I please myself in my infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ. For when I am weak, then am I powerful.” 2 Cor 12:7-10

As even the secular media begins to feed on this reportage of Bergoglio promulgating the doctrine of Born This Way, I have a feeling the pace of events regarding The Situation is about to go into hyperdrive. If sodomy is from God, who can be against it? We already know that Genesis 19 was only about sodomitical RAPE, right? God would never be against CONSENSUAL sodomy, right? Haters gonna hate. Love is Love.
Don’t laugh. I have friends who call themselves “Christians” who firmly believe this. And it makes logical sense, because they also believe contraception is a responsibility, abortion is merciful, and a number of other things that are grossly incompatible with the gospel. If you are unaware of the direct connection between artificial contraception and the embrace of sodomy, just trust me on this point for now. I’m posting a thorough explanation in the coming days.
 
Did you happen to see the post by an anonymous priest at Lifesite a few days ago HERE?

“I said it right from the beginning, when Amoris Laetitia was first published, with its infamous Chapter 8 that allows individual conscience to trump objective moral law and thus effectively eliminate the notion of intrinsic moral evil: The real issue is not Holy Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried. After all, Pope Francis had already streamlined the annulment process, to allow declarations of nullity which were generally easy to attain, to be even easier. The real issue is all about sodomy, and normalizing — even blessing — this behavior called by the Catechism “intrinsically disordered.” “

I do have a quibble when he states that giving Holy Communion to adulterers is not the “real issue.” It should not be dismissed this casually, because it is the camel’s nose under the tent, on the road to the complete destruction of the moral order. But that last paragraph is meant to be an uppercut to the jaw, which, if you’ve ever been on the receiving end of an uppercut to the jaw, you know what I mean.
Please click on the link and read the whole thing; he really does have a firm grasp on the situation, and the article serves as a good encapsulation of the entire affair, should you need to explain to someone in short order. I am skipping over a bunch of supporting evidence he provides, along with  a lot detailed annotation. Go read it.
In the end, he distills it down to this:

“Call it modernism, call it corruption of doctrine, call it by whatever name one sees fit. I submit that winning moral approval for homosexual behavior is the real goal of Amoris Laetitia, and that this is precisely why the teaching of Humanae Vitae and the Natural Law must be cast aside, which is: that by God’s design, there exists an inseparable link between the unitive and procreative meanings of the marital act, and that the unitive meaning is subordinated to the primary end: procreation…if the procreative meaning can be eliminated from the marital act, then one is effectively left with no argument against sodomy.
And those who promote the sodomite agenda know this. They know that they must also discard the notion of physical and emotional complementarity of the sexes, as well as the concept of intrinsic moral evil – which in effect means they must overturn the entire moral order…This also explains why for over a year now we’ve heard talk of “re-examining” the teaching of Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical. Those who desire to cast Humanae Vitae into the trash bin are now showing their hand…
More arguments to permit the exclusion of the procreative end of sexual activity are sure to come from those who seek approval of homosexual behavior, because they know that they cannot succeed as long as the teachings of Humanae Vitae and the Natural Law stand.“

All this ties neatly back to something that came out a few months ago. You don’t need any sort of advanced degree to connect the dots:

“Italian moral theologian Father Maurizio Chiodi said at a December 14 public lecture at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome that there are “circumstances — I refer to Amoris Laetitia, Chapter 8 — that precisely for the sake of responsibility, require contraception.”…When “natural methods are impossible or unfeasible, other forms of responsibility need to be found,” argued Fr. Chiodi in his lecture entitled: Re-reading Humanae Vitae (1968) in light of Amoris Laetitia (2016).
In such circumstances, he said, “an artificial method for the regulation of births could be recognized as an act of responsibility that is carried out, not in order to radically reject the gift of a child, but because in those situations responsibility calls the couple and the family to other forms of welcome and hospitality.” The Italian professor’s comments come as the Church this year marks the 50th anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae, which reaffirmed the Church’s ban on contraception. In his encyclical, Paul VI called artificial contraception “intrinsically wrong,” approved natural family planning, and upheld the Church’s teaching on conjugal love and responsible parenthood.” HERE

To sum this up, we again return to the deceitful and utterly diabolical idea that there are certain “concrete situations” in which we must go beyond the law, and not only is the sinful behavior acceptable, it’s actually what God himself is asking. God wills sin, you know. It’s as if the moral law is wholly arbitrary and not grounded in metaphysical reality, because the Modernists don’t believe in reality itself. The “reasoning” being employed in this specific example is especially laughable, because the erroneous appeal to “responsibility” was specifically called out BY NAME, thoroughly examined, and CONDEMNED in Humanae Vitae. This will be explained in the forthcoming redpill post.
Sodomy is the endgame. You’ll be forced to pick a side.
 

“It cannot be difficult to find out which is the true religion, if only it be sought with an earnest and unbiased mind; for proofs are abundant and striking. We have, for example, the fulfilment of prophecies, miracles in great numbers, the rapid spread of the faith in the midst of enemies and in face of overwhelming obstacles, the witness of the martyrs, and the like. From all these it is evident that the only true religion is the one established by Jesus Christ Himself, and which He committed to His Church to protect and to propagate. For the only-begotten Son of God established on earth a society which is called the Church, and to it He handed over the exalted and divine office which He had received from His Father, to be continued through the ages to come. “As the Father hath sent Me, I also send you.”‘ “Behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”(6) Consequently, as Jesus Christ came into the world that men “might have life and have it more abundantly,”(7) so also has the Church for its aim and end the eternal salvation of souls, and hence it is so constituted as to open wide its arms to all mankind, unhampered by any limit of either time or place. “Preach ye the Gospel to every creature.”(8) Over this mighty multitude God has Himself set rulers with power to govern, and He has willed that one should be the head of all, and the chief and unerring teacher of truth, to whom He has given “the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”(9) “Feed My lambs, feed My sheep.”(10) “I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not.”(11)”
 
6 Matt. 28:20, 7 John 10:10, 8 Mark 16:15, 9 Matt. 16:19, 10 John 21:16-17, 11 Luke 22:32.
Pope Leo XIII, IMMORTALE DEI, 1 November 1885

If Jesus is a liar, then He isn’t divine. If He isn’t divine, then Catholicism is a lie.

“But it is pride which exercises an incomparably greater sway over the soul to blind it and plunge it into error, and pride sits in Modernism as in its own house, finding sustenance everywhere in its doctrines and an occasion to flaunt itself in all its aspects. It is pride which fills Modernists with that confidence in themselves and leads them to hold themselves up as the rule for all, pride which puffs them up with that vainglory which allows them to regard themselves as the sole possessors of knowledge, and makes them say, inflated with presumption, We are not as the rest of men, and which, to make them really not as other men, leads them to embrace all kinds of the most absurd novelties; it is pride which rouses in them the spirit of disobedience and causes them to demand a compromise between authority and liberty; it is pride that makes of them the reformers of others, while they forget to reform themselves, and which begets their absolute want of respect for authority, not excepting the supreme authority. No, truly, there is no road which leads so directly and so quickly to Modernism as pride.”
Pope St. Pius X, PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS, 8 September 1907

And finally, back to Leo XIII:

“This wicked dragon pours out, as a most impure flood, the venom of his malice on men of depraved mind and corrupt heart, the spirit of lying, of impiety, of blasphemy, and the pestilent breath of impurity, and of every vice and iniquity. These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where the See of Holy Peter and the Chair of Truth has been set up as the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be.”

You can read more about that last quote HERE.

I’ve been into the quotation headlines lately, and I predict it will continue. This one comes to us from Pope Leo X, by way of HERE.

“…since truth never contradicts truth, we declare every assertion contrary to the truth of illumined faith to be altogether false; and, that it may not be permitted to dogmatize otherwise, we strictly forbid it, and we decree that all who adhere to errors of this kind are to be shunned and to be punished as detestable and abominable infidels who disseminate most damnable heresies and who weaken the Catholic faith.”
Fifth Lateran Council, Bull Apostolici Regiminis; Denz. 738

Although the topic being treated therein is wholly different, I shall shamelessly apply it to my own ends.
Yesterday’s post proved quite popular, thanks to Frank Walker over at Canon212. The ongoing theme is the direct link between Amoris Laetitia and intercommunion, and this will be further developed as we flesh out the link between Amoris, intercommunion, Humanae Vitae, and sodomy. Oh yes, dear friends, I’m afraid the endgame is sodomy. False unity, through false transcendence; the doctrine remains as an ideal, but we are called to go BEYOND mere doctrine by discerning the “spirit” in order to perfect our conscience. Only then can we be properly disposed to share the Body with our less fortunate brethren, knowing that in certain cases it is God himself who wills the sacrilege.
You best learn well this angle of attack and know how to refute it.
Take a look at this post from Tancred over at Eponymous Flower, titled “The Connection Between Amoris Laetitia and Intercommunion:”

“…it is clear that there is a red thread connecting inter-communion with Amoris laetitia. On the one hand, in dogmatic questions, a primacy of life over doctrine is asserted and, at the same time, in moral questions a primacy of life over the object of action. In fact, the true life of faith needs clear instruction and moral life clear guidance as to whether an action is good or bad in itself. Otherwise, “a false primacy of a false life will result,” says Don Morselli.
It follows automatically that life can never be a lie. The lack of agreement of one’s own life with the truth, which can be seen from the objective nature of things, leads to “life lies.” It is true that life is greater and more than the principles of the councils. But it is equally true that without these “explanations and interpretations” no real Christian life is possible.
Therefore, there is no possible “communion” (society) with Jesus and the Church possible if communion is lacking in faith because of the lack of the necessary approval for doctrine. Don Morselli in reference to the words of Pope Francis:
“A gesture that expresses something false is not a, ‘life that is greater than explanations and interpretations,’ but a lie.”“

Read the whole thing HERE.
It really just comes down to the “nature of things.” Truth, objective reality, metaphysics, ontology. Read a book. Augustine, Aquinas, Garrigou-Lagrange. We are talking about the fundamental underpinnings of the created universe being attacked. Everything is tied together.
You need to be grounded in the real.
 
 

Not a parody. This is really happening. HERE

The President of Germany…Frank-Walter Steinmeier said: “Let us seek ways of expressing the common Christian faith by sharing in the Last Supper and Communion. I am sure: Thousands of Christians in interdenominational marriages are hoping for this.”
 
 
Cardinal Marx echoed the words of the German President, saying: “When someone is hungry and has faith, they must have access to the Eucharist. That must be our passion, and I will not let up on this.”
Protestant German comedian Eckart von Hirschhausen caused particular controversy by demanding to be “handed that wafer” because, since he is married to a Catholic, he pays his Church tax. “I don’t see the point of a public debate about wafers,” …he said that, since he paid his Church tax, the Church had “better happily hand out a wafer for it, or give me back my money!”

The abomination of desolation much? First it’s Catholics in obstinate grave sin who get to receive, then proddies. Who’s next? Non-Christians. Who’s next? Atheists. Remember, there are atheist saints, you know, so why shouldn’t they have access to the Blessed Sacrament? Why would you deny them “food for the journey”? You’re mean!
As I wrote barely a week ago about this, it will be those bishops, priests and laymen who hold fast to true doctrine who will be accused of “eating and drinking unworthily,” and it’s going to get very, very nasty. It has all been laid out precisely in Amoris Laetitia #186 HERE.

#186 The Eucharist demands that we be members of the one body of the Church. Those who approach the Body and Blood of Christ may not wound that same Body by creating scandalous distinctions and divisions among its members. This is what it means to “discern” the body of the Lord, to acknowledge it with faith and charity both in the sacramental signs and in the community; those who fail to do so eat and drink judgement against themselves (cf. v. 29). The celebration of the Eucharist thus becomes a constant summons for everyone “to examine himself or herself ” (v. 28), to open the doors of the family to greater fellowship with the underprivileged, and in this way to receive the sacrament of that Eucharistic love which makes us one body. We must not forget that “the ‘mysticism’ of the sacrament has a social character”. When those who receive it turn a blind eye to the poor and suffering, or consent to various forms of division, contempt and inequality, the Eucharist is received unworthily. On the other hand, families who are properly disposed and receive the Eucharist regularly, reinforce their desire for fraternity, their social consciousness and their commitment to those in need.

Analysis:

Paragraph #186 teaches precisely the OPPOSITE of what St. Paul teaches. In this version, it is those who have failed to share the Eucharist (aka rigid doctors of the law who withhold the Eucharist from those unworthy to receive) who are guilty of taking the Eucharist unworthily themselves. Is it not abundantly clear what he means by “open the doors to greater fellowship with the ‘underprivileged’”? The people who fail to discern – the guilty ones – are the mean people who are blocking “unity” by denying the Eucharist to others. It’s the Faithful Catholics who are the ones creating “scandalous distinctions…divisions, contempt, inequality.”…
The logical ends of this are now playing out before our eyes:

1. Unrepentant mortal sinners must be shown mercy, because unity is the ultimate commandment
2. The law remains unchanged, but it is to be seen merely as an “ideal”
3. The mercy of God transcends the reality of the law
4. Those who refuse to accept this “greater reality” commit mortal sin themselves
5. The transcendence of the Spirit also extends to protestants, non-Christians, and atheists, because “a little bread and wine does no harm”, we are all children of God, proselytizing is solemn nonsense, and atheists go to Heaven. Capiche?

Do you now understand why the non-response from Antipope Bergoglio to the dubia and every other letter, petition and plea put before him? The referential footnotes in Chapter Eight having been long ago exposed as completely dishonest, falsely claiming continuity with traditional thought, Bergoglio needs to lay claim to channeling a higher authority: The Third Person of the Trinity, of course. And so he will cite Holy Scripture as a CONTRAST to the closed-mindedness of the mean Old Church for failing to properly declare the “doctrine” of Unity through Diversity/Sharing, and will accuse orthodox Catholics of heresy for calling him out on it. This isn’t “big tent” Catholicism, this is the annihilation of Catholicism. Are you ready for what that means for you?

Please go read the whole post, so you fully understand.
 

That headline was the response given by Abp. Ganswein to the question of certain irregularities in the papal abdication. Pope Benedict had supposedly decided to resign, yet had chosen to retain his vesture, retain his title as pope, albeit with ’emeritus’ added (which is impossible), retain his residency within the Vatican enclosure, and his form of address as remaining “His Holiness”. HERE
The press questioned, “Why?”
The answer, “He considers that this title corresponds to reality.”
In Pope Benedict’s mind (“he considers”) that the title “Pope (Emeritus)” and the formal address “His Holiness” corresponds to reality.
But hey, I’m the crazy one for pointing out obvious stuff. Just go ahead and try to suggest on the interweebs that Pope Benedict thinks he retained some portion of the papacy. YOU’RE TWISTING HIS WORDS! YOU’RE NOT A MIND READER! After all, we clearly had a conclave, and “Francis” was clearly elected, and this result seems to have been clearly greeted by peaceful universal acceptance by the cardinals, right?
Do you know what is coming up this Saturday? Everyone is talking about it… The Royal Wedding! Harry and Meghan! It will be televised all around the world, and tens of millions of people will watch. It will look spectacular. All the rituals will play out, the ceremony will unfold, vows exchanged, and the prince and princess will be husband and wife.
Except they won’t be. You see, Meghan is still married to her first husband, because divorce doesn’t exist. Divorce is anti-reality. So all that will take place on Saturday is the appearance of a wedding, but in reality is simply fancy formalized adultery and fornication. Even though everything will be done correctly according to formula, nothing will actually happen. It doesn’t matter that all the attendees and everyone watching on television will believe that a wedding just took place. The metaphysical reality of the situation is that nothing happened, because a prior event (her actual wedding) nullifies the “result” of Saturday’s proceedings. In the words of Louie Verrechio, “an act of deception, no matter how cleverly conceived or convincingly executed, cannot change the objective reality of a given situation.“ HERE
Which is exactly why the 2013 conclave didn’t actually happen. It looked like it happened, everyone believed at the time it was real, but now we know that the weight of the evidence points towards a prior event nullifying its occurrence: Pope Benedict intending to hold on to at least part of the papacy. And if that is true, which I believe with moral certainty to be the case, then he didn’t resign any of the papacy, because Canon 188 says he didn’t. No resignation, no conclave.
“He considers that this title corresponds to reality.”
Out of error, truth.

“The “always” is also a “for ever” – there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this.” – Pope Benedict

Archbishop Gänswein…said that Pope Francis and Benedict are not two popes “in competition” with one another, but represent one “expanded” Petrine Office with “an active member” and a “contemplative.” “Therefore, from 11 February 2013, the papal ministry is not the same as before,” he said. “…before and after his resignation” Benedict has viewed his task as “participation in such a ‘Petrine ministry’. (Not in its “Office”, the governance of the Church in the world, but in its “essentially spiritual nature”, through prayer and suffering.) “He left the Papal Throne and yet, with the step he took on 11 February 2013, he has not abandoned this ministry,” Gänswein explained, something “quite impossible after his irrevocable acceptance of the office in April 2005.”

And lastly, Professor de Mattei: “Benedict XVI had the ability to renounce the papacy, but consequently, would have had to give up the name of Benedict XVI, dressing in white, and the title of Pope emeritus: in a word, he would have had to definitively cease from being Pope, also leaving Vatican City. Why did he not do so? Because Benedict XVI seems to be convinced of still being Pope, although a Pope who has renounced the exercise of the Petrine ministry. This conviction is born of a profoundly-erroneous ecclesiology, founded on a sacramental and not juridical conception of the Papacy. If the Petrine munus is a sacrament and not a juridical office, then it has an indelible character, but in this case it would be impossible to renounce the office. The resignation presupposes the revocability of the office, and is then irreconcilable with the sacramental vision of the Papacy.”