Monday, November 02, 2015

More News from the Renaissance Court


So Ms Chaouqui and her collaborator have been arrested along with her side-kick Monsignor Vallejo Balda have been arrested, in the renaissance court of this most renaissance papacy, the are perhaps the most renaissance, read what Magister had to say when Pope Francis appointed them.

Meanwhile Fr Lombardi denies the accuracy of yet another Papal interview with senile-none-note-taking-socialist-anti-clerical-journalist Eugenio Scalfari. Lombardi might tell us to move along, that there is nothing here every time the Pope gives an interview, and yet His Holiness keeps going back to the senile-none-note-taking-socialist-anti-clerical-journalist. Someone is either evil or mad in all of this and one hopes it is Scalfari.

Ms Chaouqui was the siren of doom for the Ratzinger Papacy let us hope she doesn't serve the same purpose in this one.

An interesting, if ironic statement from the Holy See:
“Publications of this kind do not contribute in any way to establish clarity and truth, but rather to create confusion and partial and tendentious interpretations,” it says. “We must absolutely avoid the mistake of thinking that this is a way to help the mission of the Pope.”

19 comments:

Woody said...

Ah, one wonders if they will languish in the dungeons of the Vatican?

Tommy said...

What do you mean she was the "siren of doom"? Thanks Father.

Pax Britannica said...

I thought, traditionally, offenders went to the 'papal galleys' (which actually meant, since the pope had long since ceased to have galleys, some dank dungeon under the Castel Sant'Angelo).

Charlesdawson said...

Hate to rain on the parade, Father, but having read the Scalfari article, he might be over 90 but this journalist is remarkably coherent for one hoped to be senile! One phrase attributed to the Pope leaps out: "this principle has been accepted by the Synod". Full steam ahead, in other words.

Liam Ronan said...

I'll bet they plead for mercy.

Fr Ray Blake said...

'Senility' is something attributed to him by those who say he got what the Pope said wrong, neither I nor apparently the Pope believes that or he wouldn't return for yet annother interview, ergo ....

JARay said...

I too have read that according to Scalfari the Pope told him that anyone who wants to receive Holy Communion and is living in a second (or third or more)"marriage" will be allowed to do so and that the Synod has agreed to this!!!
So Kaspar has won and the Church is changing its teaching!!!
St Paul got it wrong when he wrote that anyone who receives the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ unworthily is bringing judgement upon themselves!

pattif said...

I have in front of me the Sunday, 25th october edition of La Repubblica. In a piece bearing his byline, Eugenio Scalfari asserts that "The Pope does not have a tumour, even if it is benign, of the brain, nor any other malady. If he had, he would say so. Jorge Bergoglio is a man whose passions have been and are the truth and the faith. The truth for him is an absolute value.... I say this because we havediscussed this many times in our meetings. And because I do not believe in absolute truth...." (my translation). Is a man who does not, on his own admission, believe in absolute truth to be trusted to be absolutely accurate in quoting an interviewee? Senile like a fox.

Lepanto said...

THIS IS WHAT REALLY HAPPENED:
'Francis!'
'Yeah'
'Got that atheist guy, Scrofula on the phone, the one who always misquotes you and causes all the trouble.'
'Putta him onna'. 'Hey Eugenio, you wanna know abouta da Synod, OK. We keepa da traditional discipline an changa nothing, yeah? No es posible 'Now I unnerstan that you are very old and very stupida but coulda you try to get it righta THIS time?'
'Will do Francisco, unfortunately forgot my pen and forgot what you said'
'Oh, no, not again, I don believe thisa, neither will anyone else, when will I ever learna?
'Get me Lombardi on the phona!'

Robert said...

Check this article out Father.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/434620/PR-guru-Francesca-Chaouqui-to-help-rebrand-Vatican-s-tarnished-image

Look at image two of the article.

"Francis seems unconcerned that in 2010, in what is described as a spirit of fun, she posted a slideshow on YouTube that includes several apparently topless studio portraits of her with an unidentified boyfriend.

This is what the Holy Father picks as his "PR GURU". He must have been showing her MERCY when hiring her!!. Doubt she went to confession!

Jacobi said...

JARay,

With respect, Kasper has not won and the Church has not changed. If Scalfari is right and we must await clarification, then those who agree with this approach are guilty of formal heresy, are excommunicate, and are no longer Catholic.

The Church continues. We must be clear about this and shout it from the roof tops!

Physiocrat said...

It looks as if the wheels are coming off the wagon.

Nicolas Bellord said...

Why did Pope Francis give an interview to a man who previously openly admitted that he put words into the Pope's mouth? The interview said that any divorced person who asks for communion will get it. This would include those living in adultery. Ergo adultery is no longer to be regarded as a mortal sin excluding one from Eucharistic communion. This is directly opposed to the teaching of Christ and the ten commandments. Such a statement is of crucial importance. If a Pope were to make such a statement it surely means that Papal Infallibility in respect of faith and morals is a nonsense. Most Catholics will be led to query their Faith if such were to happen. That is why this issue is of crucial importance.

For the Pope to give an interview to a journalist of proven unreliability on such a crucial question is utterly irresponsible. If however his Holiness is flying a kite to see what the reaction is to such a statement which he can then deny that is atrocious.

Is it not time for the Cardinals to act?

This Papacy started with a minor infringement of tradition as to the washing of feet. At the time I wondered whether Father Blake and others were overreacting. But now we have this - is it all of a piece?

GOR said...

I have a lot of regard for Sandro Magister, having followed him for years. He has had his finger on the pulse of the Church and the Vatican for a long time and Pope Francis could have benefited from his knowledge and expertise. Instead he has been sidelined at the Vatican and Andrea Tornielli is now the “fair-haired boy”.

There’s a lot of competition among Vaticanistas to get the inside scoop on Vatican matters and be the ‘go-to’ reporter for those in power. This can result in ‘sour grapes’ when one is slighted and another preferred.

But I don’t believe this in Magister’s case. I believe he has the good of the Church and the Vatican at heart, is respected, reliable and steeped in Church and Vatican history. He would be a better friend to Pope Francis than some of those now ‘on the inside’.

JARay said...

I really must urge all to read the comment made by Bishop Athanasius Schneider that the door to divorce and re-marriage has been firmly kicked open by the final report of the Synod.
His words can be read on Rorate Caeli blogspot. They will allow anyone to reproduce any part of this comment but one must acknowledge Rorate Caeli.
Please go and read it.
And I must say that it comes as no surprise to me.
And, again, I am sure that Scalfari has not miss-reported Pope Francis.

Lynda said...

Read the whole essay of Bishop Schneider on the evil effected by the Final Document of the Synod: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.ie/2015/11/rorate-exclusive-bishop-athanasius.html?m=1

Nicolas Bellord said...

I second JARay in recommending Bishop Athanasius's article. There are some wonderful quotes which are absolutely apposite such as that from St Basil:

"All the while unbelievers laugh; men of weak faith are shaken; faith is uncertain; souls are drenched in ignorance, because adulterators of the word imitate the truth. The better ones of the laity shun the churches as schools of impiety and lift their hands in the deserts with sighs and tears to their Lord in heaven."

Marie said...

Nicholas Bellord wrote: "The interview said that any divorced person who asks for communion will get it. This would include those living in adultery."

Not necessarily. Scalfari's quote cleverly omits the words, "and remarried," as if to imply that the divorced may be admitted to Communion [as long as they remain chaste] but not the "remarrieds."

The trouble with most discussions on what happened in the Synod is that they lumped together the "divorced only" with the "divorced-and-remarried." They are two different situations.

Nicolas Bellord said...

Marie: But as a matter of logic if you just say 'the divorced' you mean ALL the divorced whether remarried or not. Thus it does mean communion for the divorced and remarried. If that is not what was meant then the speaker should correct themselves. That would be the honest thing to do and would clear up the confusion. Further if it applies only to the divorced and NOT remarried why do they have to ask to go to communion? Provided you are not in a state of mortal sin you can go to communion. It may be they have sinned in causing the breakdown of the marriage in which case if the sin was mortal they would need to confess it. But if you remarry and commit adultery then you are continuing to commit mortal sin and that is the problem. The KasperKampf seems to think that confessing to any sin causing the break up of the marriage is sufficient (even though one spouse may be entirely innocent) and they then ignore the continuing adultery. Their argument is deliberately confusing and muddled. They ignore the fact that one is still married to the first wife and civil divorce has not dissolved the marriage in the eyes of God who joined them together.