Showing posts with label Anti-Catholic Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anti-Catholic Media. Show all posts

Friday, October 18, 2013

Hired Prostitutes Attack Archbishop of Brussels

(Brussels) Archbishop Andre-Joseph Leonard of Brussels-Malines was again attacked by pseudo-feminists of FEMEN. As of last April the disturbed, paid "political activists" came from the red light district to a meeting, in which Monsignor Leonard participated in as a speaker. The reaction of the Archbishop, now already familiar with the methods of the extremists, robbed FEMEN of some of the peak of their performance.

In the red light district hired "political activists" are hired to appear topless and again target the brave Archbishop of Brussels-Mechelen. There are probably lush cash payments for the FEMEN-strippers in the background in Belgium (see separate report Who's behind FEMEN protest and their anti-Christian activities? Paid activists from the red light district). The incident occurred last Friday night in Brussels during a meeting of the Catholic St. Michael's College.

Attack against Archbishop Leonard

While the former French minister and member of the Pontifical Family Council, Christine Boutin spoke, topless FEMEN stormed onto the stage and wrapped her with a rainbow flag. The FEMEN activists were accompanied by a bunch of left-wing extremists, which were meant to serve as a sort of bodyguard and extras in the stylized media appearance. After they had interrupted Madame Minister, they hurled a pie at Archbishop Leonard's face. The Archbishop stole the show from the horde by tasting the cake with a subtle smile.

The First Aggression

The first attack against Archbishop Leonard by FEMEN occurred last April during a podium discussion at the University of Brussels. The women shouted sodomophilic slogans and poured water on the archbishop. He said nothing, but reposed himself in prayer.

The European Bishops' Conference lent their support to the Brussels Pastor with their solidarity. The FEMEN activists were described by the bishops as "completely implausible and without any sense of decency." That Archbishop Leonard's discussion with an atheist was disturbed by FEMEN, was proof that the Church has standing in the debate in a pluralistic society, while FEMEN tries to prevent this.



Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Bild: RTBF (Screenshot)
 Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMGD

Monday, September 30, 2013

Roberto de Mattei: "I Have Strong Reservations About the Communication Strategy of Pope Francis"



(Rome) Since the extensive interview with Pope Francis by the Jesuit magazine Civilta Cattolica, new confusion reigns in the Catholic camp. While the mass media cheer and celebrate Pope Francis as "revolutionary", some Catholics defended the Pope with the formula, that the mass media is attempting to misunderstand Francis consciously and intentionally twisting his remarks, because the Pope did not alter the Catholic doctrine, while he only has his own very special style. Pope Francis did not speak as an academic, but as a preacher to the people, as the U.S. Catholic writer George Weigel has said. Another part of the Catholics observed the way the world communicates with Pope Francis with increasing concern. Not least because of the applause from the wrong side.

There are doubts about the usefulness of a form of communication expressed, which is obviously prone to misunderstandings. What's more, some have doubts whether it is the Pope just communicating a new form with the people that is controversial, or even to changes in content. It's not an open break with parts of doctrine, but perhaps an indirect softening by ambiguity. Officially, nothing would be changed, but in practice in the minds of the people very much. Just as, say some critics, is already the case, like the "hot buttons", such as abortion and homosexuality. The Pope emphasizes that the teaching of the Church is to be clearly defined, but they do not speak out, or at least among the general public, but only in certain circles.

This happened about abortion, which is a matter of life or death. In the Civiltà Cattolica interview which went around the world, the Pope used a painful diction that was "hurtful" even for Pro-Lifers, like the American, Catholic philosopher, Michael Novak complained. During the interview, the Pope declared that he will not say too much about it in the future and thus the abortion advocates could rejoice, yet he was found the next day in front of the Catholic doctors giving very clear words for the protection of life. Words, however, were only made known in Catholic circles.

The famous Catholic historian, Roberto de Mattei criticized the communication of Pope Francis in an interview for Fomiche.net by Francesco de Palo.

The press has exploited, but the Pope has helped them: This is the opinion of the traditional Roberto de Mattei, professor of modern history and Christianity at the European University of Rome until 2011 and Vice Chairman of the National Research Council of the Republic of Italy. De Mattei is the publisher and editor of the monthly magazine Radici Cristiane, Nova Historia and the Catholic Information Service Corrispondenza Romana. In an interview with Formiche.net he analyzed the first semester of the new pontificate, and expresses strong reservations about the communication strategy of Pope Francis.

How does a 'Catholic without compromise', as you call yourself, survive the public statements of Pope Francis about homosexuals and divorced?

My opinion is that there is significant exploitation of the words of the Pope, in the sense that I do not see these large openings. At least from the perspective of doctrine, also because Pope Francis himself has stressed that his attitude in these subjects did not differ from that of the catechism.

How do you parse Berglio's manifesto similar interview in Cività Cattolica?

Just because the Pope stressed that he stood with regard to the doctrine of faith in the continuity of the Church's teaching, and intended no doctrinal innovations, is the level to which he goes with this interview, pastoral or strategic in nature. That is, what he is proposing is not a new doctrine, but a new way to approach these problems.

What kind of repercussions?

Since Bergoglio has to go according to his own words, from the level of doctrine to those of the communication strategy, it is lawful for every Catholic to discuss this approach. And viewed from this perspective, it is in my opinion an unfortunate approach, because it makes the exploitation of his words possible. But this is not solely responsible for this manipulation by the press, if we like, it's doing its job, but also who makes it possible with a language that is completely ambiguous in some points.

What is the result of this new language?

I think that it can be very dangerous, because the world of communication is not controlled by the Pope, and  even less of  Catholics, but of lobbies and  powers antagonistic to the Church that are capable of distorting its use. Personally, I have strong reservations about the communication strategy of the Pope.

Is Giuliano Ferrara's the daily newspaper Il Foglio justified in its assertion that non-negotiable principles are more of a dead letter now?

That seems excessive. These are principles that can experience moments of blackout due to their nature. It seems to me that the Pope has said, without denying them, that he prefers other points in his communication because he, in his own words, is starting from the premise that the right to life and family are already well-known principles. The real problem is that the positions of the Church to the general public are simply not known, and there is also great confusion in the Catholic world. The only two popes who opposed this were John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Bergoglio, although he doctrinally presents with his predecessors in continuity seems to want to express a strategic discontinuity.

How do you assess this decision?

I prefer the previous communication strategy, but of course the time will tell and you will see that the tree bears fruit. I hope that the consequences of this approach will not be destructive.

And the letter from Ratzinger Odifreddi is a way to set the milestones?

It is a letter that has already in my opinion made more of the already reigning confusion, because although he is representing clear principles, it conveys the impression that it could be at the level of a private Magisterium, two phases that intervene at the same time on the same stage [Francis and Pope Benedict XVI.], in this particular case in the newspaper La Repubblica. I have had many thoughts that Benedict XVI. wanted to withdraw completely from public life, to lead a life of prayer and silence. By this I do not mean to say that he has done something wrong, because his criticism of Odifreddi are precise and to the point. So I do not question the content in question, but have doubts about whether it was opportune.

Do you think that now the reform of the Curia will come?

It has not started yet. So we wait before we judge. For now, there were normal operations, but no sign of reform. In October, the Pope will meet with the group of cardinals, to whom he entrusted the task to submit proposals. We will see in the coming months and assess.

Introduction / Translation: Giuseppe Nardi Image: Formiche.net

Saturday, September 14, 2013

Murder Plot Against Pope Francis? The Mad World of Paul Zulehner and the Austrian Media

Pope Zulehner
(Vienna) A neutral statement of the interview appointed new Secretary of State of the Holy See, Monsignor Pietro Parolin, should trigger a new celibacy debate. At least, it is desired in progressive Church circles. The Austrian pastoral theologian Paul Zulehner is sure that Pope Francis wants to abolish priestly celibacy and hopes that the Pope is not killed before he can by his enemies. In the tangled, cabaret plot world of Zulehner the possible perpetrators are also certain: There are, of course, "conservatives".

Two days ago an interview took place with the future Secretary of State of the Holy See, Monsignor Pietro Parolin. Compared to a business newspaper in Caracas, Venezuela, where Parolin is currently still Apostolic Nuncio, the Archbishop appointed number two in the Vatican Curia by Pope Francis, said that the priest celibacy was "no dogma". Which is really no stretch. The need for a purely "formal-technical" response to Parolin is controversial. The new Secretary of State responded to a question from journalists, including several inquiries, but without expressing a personal opinion. Numerous media made of it a sensationalist presentation of readiness for the abolition of celibacy. An intention which can not be seen from Parolin's words like that, but grist to the mill for progressive Church circles that are promoted by the mass media of the unchurched with special fondness. Celibacy is an eyesore to the world.

ORF and verbeamteter churches Definer Zulehner play each other for the ball

Various "tenured" Church officials with progressive soundbites immediately jumped on the media train. In an especially colorful way, it was motivated by the Austrian pastoral theologian, Paul Zulehner. The priest and university professor emeritus, who was from 2000 to 2007 Dean of the Faculty of Catholic Theology at the University of Vienna, is not representative of the Catholic Church, but so aptly represents the state of the Catholic Church in Austria. This also means that in questions about Church, Zulehner is a permanent resident in the ORF [Formerly Reichsender Radio during WWII]. Through his glasses, he explains for Austrian state radio to the Austrians, how things should run in the Church.

Since the wish is father to the thought, and the desire surprising celibacy abolition is also in the ORF religion Editorial little, was promptly re Paul Zulehner asked by the ORF into the studio to tell the Austrian public, what used to think it about celibacy.

Zulehner has reliably fulfilled all expectations and more. In the words Parolins himself gave, the pastoral theologian is "optimistic" that priestly celibacy could fall soon. He assumed the new Secretary of State, who had personally expressed no opinion, just that he would actually loosen celibacy. But that's not enough, he transferred from Parolin, a desire easily subordinated to Pope Francis. The time is "ripe to consider the abolition of celibacy for Catholic priests," said Zulehner, who wants to say something out of his mouth, that the priestly celibacy should have been abolished long ago. Zulehner's position is already known on that.

Zulehner's Antipathy to Celibacy is Nothing New - So He Adds an Assassination Plot

So, if there nothing new under the sun, not even for all the opponents of celibacy, Zulehner was best permitted by ORF to give his opinion, and not a defender of celibacy, and thus the official Church teaching and discipline.

But in order to secure, despite his too-familiar position on celibacy, Zulehner has to put some attention on a log. And pretty brazen at that. Pope Francis would fundamentally reform the church and finally eliminate just like the priest celibacy. Zulehner hopes that the Pope will push through his reform plans, which of course the pastoral theologian is pretending to know exactly, but only he, because the Pope has made known no specific "reform plans". Not all. Because of the alleged intention to eliminate celibacy, he, Zulehner, has fears for the Pope. The pastoral theologian said he hopes that Pope Francis would not previously killed by his opponents.

The Invention of a Rumor - Mythical Applause for a "Different" Church Zulehner literally told ORF Vorarlberg: "Some people also fear that the Conservatives are too many and that some also considering to kill him [the Pope]. There are such rumors. "Rumors, which of course in turn, only Zulehner knows. In other words, ORF viewers were witnesses as a rumor was invented and brought into the world.

The ORF also interviewed the head of pastoral care for the diocese of Feldkirch (Vorarlberg), Walter Schmolly, who applauded the abolition of priestly celibacy, who was "delighted" by Archbishop Parolin's utterance. He also mentioned the lack of priests and celibacy debate in one breath, as there is a "need" to lift priestly celibacy and as could be that the lack of priests, the expression of a far deeper crisis, namely a crisis of faith and radical demographic shifts is to be "structurally" solved.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
 Image: Kreuzgang.org
Trans: Tancred AMGD

Thursday, September 12, 2013

There's no Absolute Truth? -- Misunderstood Papal Letter to Atheist Eugenio Scalfari

Edit: one thought is that a journalist who writes as sensitively and perceptively, if evilly, about the Church as Scalfari has,  ought to  have appreciated the Pope’s attempt at word play, but he’s not interested in making the Church look good.  In fact, anyone this many says good things about is very suspect indeed.

(Rome) Pope Francis has written a letter to the former chief editor of the left-liberal daily La Repubblica and leading Italian journalist, Eugenio Scalfari. Scalfari, who comes from an old Masonic family, co-founded the Radical Party , is an atheist, a vociferous opponent of the Church, senator for life and one of the principal propagandists of Italian referendums of the 70s with which divorce and abortion were legalized. The initiative of the Pope is therefore exceptional, in need of explanation and partially controversial.

Statements like the enthusiastic media reports have made easily digested conclusions on their own. So even wrote about the Italian Catholic daily Avvenire: "'God forgives, who follows his own conscience.' Pope Francis wrotes in a letter to the newspaper Repubblica, in response to two articles by Eugenio Scalfari that were published on the 7th of July and 7th of August. The Pope responded in a letter to two key issues that had Scalfari raised: 'it seems to me that it is on your mind, to understand the position of the Church to those who do not share faith of Jesus. Above all, you wonder if the Christian God forgives those who don't believe, and don't seek the faith. It is said that, and this is fundamental, that the mercy of God knows no bounds. The question for those who do not believe in God, is in obedience to their conscience. The sin exists also for the one who has no faith, if you act against your conscience."

New healing formula: God will save the atheists who follow their conscience?

The statement may not be so wrong, and really left uncontested, fits. But what does not fit, is the unspoken, but the logical conclusion: There is no need to turn to Christ, it is sufficient that one follows his private conscience. And now you can even invoke a pope. Yes, the Pope says it himself.

Thus, the saving act of Christ on the cross is diminished, if not meaningless, which should change and determine the whole life of the people and should really be proclaimed by the Church to all people. Here, the papal letter to Scalfari contains many bright moments on the relationship with Christ, which completely recalls Pope Benedict XVI. The relativization of conversion as a requirement for salvation is strange to the German Pope, however, strange and rather reminiscent of the new Bergoglio style that appeals to the media like that. The media reactions speak for themselves.

The new salvation formula is: God will save the atheists who follow their conscience? Because Christ doesn't play a role.

On Wednesday morning, the Pope said, but in his short sermon, the message of St. Paul was: "Christ is all," he is the wholeness and hope, "because He is the bridegroom, the victor".

And in the Wednesday audience with the Pope, he said: "In baptism, we are born of the Church as God's children." And urged the faithful to be "fruitful" so that the faith as "the light of Christ reaches all the ends of the earth."

Not a contradiction?

Etymological correctness with danger of a misunderstanding - that occurred promptly

Another point of the Pope's letter was picked up by various media with satisfaction: The Pope is supposed to have written to Scalfari that there is no "absolute truth". This is *not* what the Pope wrote. However, the formulation used by the Pope gave rise to misunderstandings, the wich La Repubblica immediately exploited to portray the Pope himself as a proponent of relativism. The question of whether there is an absolute truth or not, is central to the Christian faith.

"Absolute" is most often used as a synonym for definitely non-negotiable objective and incomparable. Francis Pope clarified in the letter to Scalfari however, that he is correct in his etymological meaning, which comes from Latin, used in the statement that "the truth is not absolute".

The term "absolute" is derived from the Latin verb absolve from, absolvere, which is composed of the preposition ab (from) and is composed from the verb solvo (loosen), when put together the past participle is conjugated as solutus, and is a passive form. Absolutus thus means "detached, loosed from". The Latin verb solvo refers not only to a physical separation but is also in the context of a relationship, such as is understood by Nuova Bussola Quotidiana. [Catholic Daily with Vittorio Messori and Andrea Tornielli] This makes that passage in the Pope's letter to Scalfari more understandable:

I would not even begin to speak of an "absolute truth" with those who believe, in the sense that this absolute is what is loosed, what is without that relationship. The truth, according to Christian faith is but God's love for us in Jesus Christ. Therefore, the truth is a relationship! [Note: It differs a bit from Rorate's translation. ]

 The truth is not "absolute", not because it is relative, but because it is a relationship and therefore needs bonds: the love of God, and his life in the reality of the Church.

The question of the usefulness of this word game of the Pope remains. The danger of a misunderstanding from the outset was on hand. Why, then, was this risk taken, which occurred promptly, as it was used, to the euphoria of La Repubblica, and in whose wake numerous other media? So who has availed themselves of etymological "correctitude"? Whose salvation should this benefit? How much additional confusion has been lent to it without necessity?

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
 Image: Nuova Bussola Quotidiana
 Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
 AMGD

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Mellow Out Subcaths: Making Unfounded Accusations of Anti-Semitism

Edit: Seems to us that Subcaths can’t help themselves. We’ve already determined that they can’t be Vatican II, really, because they’re against free speech, and really despise Catholics who are exercising their rights as adults to have an opinion. They have to use their paid positions of authority to shout down people who have true and legitimate concerns about what’s happening within the Church and hierarchy.

These anti-Catholic bigots have launched an attack on Catholics in recent days by misrepresenting them, accusing them of committing crimes punishable in highly advanced and profoundly moral countries like Germany, France, Denmark and Holland. Let’s say never again, and speak out whenever you see a friend exhibiting this hateful bigotry and call them out on their anti-Catholic bigotry. When they’re not busy ignoring the wholesale and unavanged slaughter of Catholics worldwide in places like Indonesia and Nigeria, they’re attempting to pull a diversionary maneuver on concerned Catholics by slandering them.

On a slightly more serious note, in the last few days there has been a mounting campaign of character assassination by the approved bloggers of the National Catholic Register, book end to the National Catholic Reporter, being launched against certain persons because of a report against Marcelo González, an Argentine Catholic who’d made a report, later confirmed and apologized about by Father Ray Blake and the hermeneutic of continuity blog , on traditional blog Rorate Caeli.

Apologies are not forthcoming from other bloggers, however, who have not only refused to apologize, but have piled on further accusations as well against Mr. González in particular, and Traditionalists in general. Initially, a woman named Dawn Eden (Goldstein), is maintaining the familiar libel against Traditionalists and politically unprogressive individuals in general, as “Holocaust Deniers”. Not only did she cast some unfair accusations about Rorate’s coverage of the issue, and mistakenly associated them with the SSPX, but hadn’t even read the original document she’d used to accuse Mr. Gonzalez of being evil in its original language, since she doesn’t speak Spanish and read a google translation instead.

Furthermore, a hysterical Simcha Fisher utters a demand that there ought to be some kind of public outcry against the evils of anti-Semitism. We’ve noted in the past here on this blog that it’s difficult, if impossible, in great part because official mouthpieces don’t help much, that violations of Catholic doctrine, liturgical rubrics, veritable insults against Christ Himself, go unpunished and unanswered by those in positions of authority time and time again, while faithful priests are punished in turn, sometimes at the urging of people like NCR and Patheos bloggers. We expect that even if there is an official concern about unfounded charges of anti-Semitism by Neoconservative journalists, we’re not sure how they would enforce a principle which isn’t part of the deposit of faith or if a canonical proceeding could handle such a thing. In any event, many real violations of doctrine take place virtually every day and go unpunished, so we can’t imagine how this charge of anti-semitism could be enforced even if it were the problem the often emotive Simcha Fisher insists it is. .

If you wish to complain about the rude and frankly, libelous behavior of bloggers in various states of employment with the Catholic Church, we’d invite you to contact EWTN and National Catholic Register to lodge your complaints. (800) 421-3230.

Monday, November 26, 2012

Steubenville Concedes to Anti-Catholic Media on Course Description

[Steubenville, OH]  Recently, the Franciscan University of Steubenville Ohio had come under fire for an excerpt in its course catalog which compared homosexuals to criminals. The course description created a tremendous amount of attention from the anti-Catholic media. The description for Social Work Research 314, as it has stood for about 30 years is as follows:


"SWK 314 DEVIANT BEHAVIOR focuses on the sociological theories of deviant behavior such as strain theory, differential association theory, labeling theory, and phenomenological theory. The behaviors that are primarily examined are murder, rape, robbery, prostitution, homosexuality, mental illness, and drug use. The course focuses on structural conditions in society that potentially play a role in influencing deviant behavior." 3 credit hours

The Catholic University Faculty has already voted to reword the course description while insisting that it will remain faithful to the Catholic teaching on homosexuality that homosexuals are to be treated with respect and dignity, but have a disordered condition.

At this point, the faculty has conceded that those who have been critical of the school, including one former student who is no longer Catholic because of the Church's teaching on homosexuality, that the statement in the course catalog comparing homosexuality to other forms of deviant behavior have a point.