Showing posts with label Sacrilegious Communions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sacrilegious Communions. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 8, 2017

Rome Makes Quibbling Denial of Planned Future Sacrilegious Communion Service with Lutheran Heretics

Pope's effusive praise for the Protestant Revolt have inspired credible rumors
about a future "Mass" combining evil Protestant and Catholic elements and sacrilegious
Communion.
Edit: isn't the protestant prayer service  the heart and soul of the Novus Ordo?

(Rome) Roman authorities deny that the Vatican is preparing to conduct an "ecumenical Mass."
At the Vatican, it is denied that there is "a commission charged with drawing up an 'ecumenical Mass' for Catholics and Lutherans to attend and receive communion."
The Vatican assures that rumors surrounding the anniversary of the Reformation are "completely wrong."

Official Vatican Commission or informal grassroots group with papal benevolence?

Vatican spokesman Greg Burke: What exactly did he deny?
To be precise, the Vatican denied that there was "a commission" officially in charge. In recent days, informal initiatives have been reported by various media, including InfoVaticana and Vaticanista Marco Tosatti. "Roman grassroots communities" are to work with the alleged "benevolence of Santa Marta" at an "ecumenical Mass".
The difference between official and informal is blatant, but in the concrete case - if the information is correct - it would only serve to conceal it. In the absence of an official commission, the Vatican could dispute anything while informally prepared with a papal blessing, that which is disputed.
In any case, if the rumor is wrong, it shows what observers of the Vatican already know, since the "Bergoglio style" had its entry there.

Is Cardinal Sarah being kept in the dark?

Tosatti had published a chronicle in the US magazine First Things and wrote in it of a "commission", which was to have created a "legendary (fabulous?)," so InfoVaticana, "ecumenical Mass". The Vatican also mentioned that Cardinal Robert Sarah, the prefect of the Congregation for Worship and the Order of the Sacraments, was being kept in the dark about it.
This is credible insofar as Cardinal Sarah has already been bypassed (or deceived) directly by Pope Francis. Although it falls within the faculty of the Cardinal, it happened two months ago that the Motu proprio Magnum principium was kept secret from him. He only learned about it from the paper, although the document, in addition to the pope's signature, also bears that of his secretary, Archbishop Arthur Roche, who was supposed to be the Cardinal's closest collaborator.
The rumors of an "ecumenical Mass" are also considered credible, because in the past 18 months Pope Francis poured out the deluge of praise for Martin Luther and his Reformation.

New food for rumors and denials

The rumors received new sustenance when the newspaper The Australian asked for a report from the Vatican about the nature of an "ecumenical Mass," but received no response.
"Ecumenical Mass" of tomorrow? In the picture a teddybear Mass
Last week, turmoil increased as names of alleged members of the ghostly "commission" emerged, including the well-known, progressive liturgist Andrea Grillo, who was a constant critic of Benedict XVI on liturgical issues, however, in this pontificate happens to be an Ultrabergoglian. Last Friday, Grillo denied to the Catholic Herald, the existence of such a Vatican Commission.
The restlessness must have been audible up to the highest floors of the Vatican, as it has now come to a double denial.
Curia Archbishop Arthur Roche, Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, told Christopher Lamb of the progressiveTablet, that the rumors about a Vatican commission to prepare an "ecumenical Mass" are "completely wrong". Likewise,Vatican spokesman Greg Burke, who stated when he was asked, that the rumors are "just wrong."

How credible are the denials?

The readers of InfoVaticana, following their comments, are not reassured by these denials. Too many remember the apparent confusion, which took place a few months ago surrounding Pope Francis and his immediate circle about another "commission". On June 14, 2017, the Roman historian, Prof. Roberto de Mattei, quite concretely wrote in an essay of the existence of a "secret commission" with the task to re-interpret the encyclical Humanae vitaeDe Mattei also mentioned the names of Commissioners, including as Head Msgr. Gilfredo Marengo.
Curia Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, a former Family Minister to the Vatican and current President of the Pontifical Academy for Life and Grand Chancellor of the Pontifical Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, spoke on June 16 in front of the microphones and categorically denied the existence of such a "commission" and especially such an intention. In the same breath, however, he casually let it be known that there was a "study group", which was almost completely lost.
Avvenire, the daily newspaper of Italian bishops, went so far as to present the information published by de Mattei on a "Commission" as "media manipulation.The rumors got louder and louder until on July 25, Msgr. Gilfredo Marengo of Radio Vatican gave an interview and confirmed the existence of a "research group." If one reads Paglia's disclaimer retrospectively and literally, he had ultimately only denied the existence of a "Commission". A "research group" is something completely different.
Such hair-splitting, which serve the concealment, are responsible for an apparent loss of confidence in statements by representatives by the papal clique, as the comments at InfoVaticana show.
The Vatican's Marco Tosatti was the first to report in mid-May about the existence of a secret commission on Humanae vitae, which turned out to be correct despite several weeks of denials by the Vatican. The same Tosatti now reported on the informal commission for the elaboration of an "ecumenical Mass". So should Pope confidante Roche and Vatican spokesman Burke have denied only the existence of an official Vatican commission, but not generally the existence of such commission on behalf of the Pope?
Text: Giuseppe Nardi 
Image: Vatican.va/Novusordowatch (Screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Tuesday, October 10, 2017

English Pop Star Receives Sacrilegious Communion in Colombia

The English pop star, Paul David Hewson, more popularly known as Bono, received sacrilegious Communion in the Hand, despite not being a professed Catholic.

He was at a concert in Colombia and attended Mass at a boy's school there.

http://m.eltiempo.com/cultura/gente/bono-cantante-de-u2-comulgo-en-el-gimnasio-moderno-de-bogota-139010

AMDG

Monday, November 16, 2015

Pope Recommends Sacrilegious Communions

But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 

For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.

Edit: never mind Holy Scripture, canon law, or the constant practice of the Church over 2,000 years, logic, or  the unanimous agreement of the Fathers. 
Surely everyone who's been at the parish level for the last 50 years or so has seen this kind of sacrilege hand-in-hand with other illegitimate practices like Eucharistic Ministers and Communion in the Hand. He's abusing his magisterium by suggesting sacrilege.   
Here's the article from the heretical NCR:

ROMEPope Francis has strikingly suggested that Lutherans married to Catholics can personally discern whether to take Communion in the Catholic church, saying it is not his role to give permission to such persons but to encourage them to listen to what God is telling them about their situations. [You're supposed to teach them, as Pope.]
In a moving ecumenical visit to Rome’s Evangelical Lutheran church Sunday afternoon, the pontiff also called for “reconciled diversity” between the Christian denominations and said both must ask forgiveness of each other for historic persecutions. 
The pope’s words about the issue of communion for Lutherans will likely attract wide attention, as Catholic teaching currently prohibits members of other Christian denominations from taking communion in the church in normal circumstances.






http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-suggests-lutherans-can-discern-taking-catholic-communion-individually
Image: Utah Local News.

Friday, April 24, 2015

Old Liberal Bishop of Chicago Commits Sacrilege

Edit: as covered on ChurchMilitant.TV, one of the most Leftist prelates in the American Church commits sacrilege by cynically using the Blessed Sacrament as a bargaining chip, if you'll excuse the expression.
As follows:
Therefore, what appears to be a grave violation of Canon 844 has been committed. Present at the Mass was Chicago's new archbishop Blase Cupich.
In addition to the violation of canon law, the question is being asked: Was a sacrilege committed on the new archbishop's watch?
According to canon law, since the governor is a non-Catholic, he is unable to be given Holy Communion unless a number of conditions are all met:
  1. Foremost, there must be a grave and urgent need, usually understood to mean danger of death.
  2. The governor must demonstrate Catholic faith in the Real Presence.
  3. He must be duly disposed, and not conscious of any grave sin

Monday, March 25, 2013

Cardinal Dolan Gives Sacrilegious Communion to Biden?

Eternal damnation can be funny...

 Edit: so much for all that talk about the evils of abortion.
Vice President Joe Biden attended mass and received communion on Sunday at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York where the mass was celebrated by Cardinal Timothy Dolan. 
At a time when the administration is being sued by Dolan and the Catholic Bishop’s Conference over the Obama health care provision on birth control, the meeting was seen as an attempt to create a new dialogue. 
An Irish American Catholic, Biden receiving communion was also seen as significant. Dolan’s predecessor Cardinal Edward Egan refused to give communion to those who differed with the church on the abortion issue.
H/t: Pewsitter

Link to source…Irish Central...

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Pro-Abort US Democrats Receive Sacrilegious Communion at Papal Innauguration


"Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. 30 For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many have fallen asleep." --1 Cor. 11:27-30
Edit: Father Pavone promised an uproar if this happened. Let’s see the uproar now, please. Washington times reports:

Vice President Joseph R. Biden and House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi both received Communion during the Mass to celebrate the installation of Pope Francis in spite of their pro-choice position on abortion. 
The vice president’s office confirmed Tuesday night that both he and Mrs. Pelosi took Communion during the Mass at St. Peter’s Square in Rome. 
Some [All] Catholics argue that politicians whose positions on abortion and contraception conflict with church teachings should not receive communion.  

This occurred despite the fact that when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, he was against pro-abort politicians there receiving Holy Communion.  Neither one of these heretical politicians have commented on their crime so far.

According to the Puffington Post, Nancy Pelosi was specifically addressed by Pope Benedict:

When Pelosi met Benedict in 2009, the Vatican released a statement saying the pope spoke to her about the "requirement of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics." Biden also met Benedict in 2011, but the details of their conversation were not released.

Read more: Follow: @washtimes on Twitter Even EWTN knows this is problem:

 Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith [Note: The following memorandum was sent by Cardinal Ratzinger to Cardinal McCarrick and was made public in the first week of July 2004.]

 1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgment regarding one’s worthiness to do so, according to the Church’s objective criteria, asking such questions as: "Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?" The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," nos. 81, 83).

 2. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a "grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. [...] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to 'take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it'" (no. 73). Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. [...] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it" (no. 74).

 3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

 4. Apart from an individual's judgment about his worthiness to present himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion may find himself in the situation where he must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone, such as in cases of a declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin (cf. can. 915).

 5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin. [N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...