The Holy Father Francis "heretic" and "apostate". And if it was a providential “Pied Piper”?

Say the Fathers of The Island of Patmos



There is no historical memory of a Pope who like the ruling has been branded as “heretic” and “apostate” by a number of means insignificant Catholics and not linked solely to areas of “fundamentalists”. Therefore we believe that this new phenomenon merits a clear and honest answer at the theological and ecclesiological, given below by Fathers of The Island Patmos them in two different writings on the sensitive issue.



I understand well your maneuvering limits, say, however, that "the Holy Father is in a" cage "in which it was put by some obscure characters that surround him and from which unfortunately is not easy to get out ...", It is frankly not credible, considered the personality of the Holy Father, which he has now at his side whom he wanted. Others are marginalized. Or am I wrong?

Licio Zuliani


The Reverend Fathers of this island who support this theory [Ed. "The Holy Father is in a" cage "in which it was put by some obscure characters that surround him and from which unfortunately is not easy to get out"], They know not to further aggravate the situation. Make it a disservice which hurts the salvation of souls. The private doctor It is demolishing everything. What a scandal visiting the tomb of Don Milan, even he would like to emulate him by inviting priests to do the same. From 2013 we have such a large amount of objective elements (written, homilies, speeches, video) to define an apostate […]. Dear Fathers of this Island, have charity to say the whole truth is at stake is the salvation of souls that you will answer before the judgment seat of Christ. No one can be sure that the sun is a grain of salt.



John Cavalcoli, o.p.



PDF Articles print size



the late Lucio Battisti [Rieti 1943 – Milan 1998], one of the “sacred monsters” the history of Italian pop music, author of the song Confusion. To listen click on the image

The problem of the Holy Father Francis is a problem essentially moral, that is the question of his moral conduct and his pastoral, not of his doctrine of the Vicar of Christ. On this point we have to listen to good Catholics and not do as Lefebvre and Lutherans, who accuse him of heresy. And this, essentially, that the Father Ariel remembers in his snappy response.


The problem of the Holy Father, a common view of the Fathers de The island of Patmos, that this theme devote two different answers, is precisely that of not having a strong personality, but being a person influenced, except to take sometimes authoritarian attitudes, but affect the weak and leave the strong prosper.


The Holy Father will find themselves pitted with a very powerful modernist environment, which is what prompted the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI to make an act of renunciation. The Pope is surrounded, circumvented and adulated by false friends and traitors. The Church has the enemy at home, It has now reached the highest places: we think of the case of Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, for which Masons are our "brothers" [cf. WHO, WHO] or of Cardinal Walter Kasper, for which the dogma is mutable, or General Superior of the Society of Jesus Arturo Sosa [cf. WHO], for which we do not know what Christ has taught, since at that time there were no recorders [cf. WHO], or Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, devotee of Pannella or Bianchi, for whom homosexuality is a gift from God.


Alberto Melloni is instead convinced now that the priesthood is over and that the Pope is on a par with the Patriarch of Constantinople [cf. WHO]. The modernists have penetrated the Pontifical Faculty, in the Roman Curia and in the same Secretary of State. The devil knocks at the Hospice Santa Marta disguised as a Muslim immigrant. The Pope is forced to choose collaborators among those who in fact is found to have around. He has to put the brave face on.


Modernists play wickedly the card of the Pope's strong capacity for human contact and human understanding, and having the great mass media in hand, spread the false image of a funny Pope, populist and revolutionary, "Leader of the international left" against Donald Trump, portrayed as a hater of poor immigrants and a servant of American capitalism, hiding from people his identity as Vicar of Christ and presenting him as a modernist or a new Che Guevara. The story really seems to have demoted to 1968 and today one has the impression of living, inside the church, in the early seventies of the twentieth century.


In this very difficult emergency situation, under this onslaught of diabolical forces never happened in the history of the Church, the Pope has to get by, should be careful at every step he takes, It must somehow adapt to their own situation to protect the role of the Roman Pontiff.


The modernists have indeed understood and favor the Pope his excessive affection for the people, organizing popular rallies, about which one can ask is true that success, that is, if it comes from a correct interpretation of the role of the Pope or perhaps rather by his very full of humanity. These crowds, what they see in the Pope? The messenger of the gospel or the large crowds exciting performances of conductor? This doubt success, in our opinion, makes the Pope swayed and yielding to the formidable, wealthy and smart modernist pressure.


This unfortunate situation It has dragged on since the time of Paul VI and today is even worse. The fact therefore that the Pope does not have the means to defend themselves and to defend the Church by modernists. The Pope must do, as they say, the best of a bad situation. This is why we do not feel absolutely accuse the Pope of favoring the heretics. And if you accusing us of 'not to say all », some would like us were to say that the Pope is a heretic, or even worse, an apostate, Well cavatevelo well as from the head, because what it would be impossible both as priests and as theologians. Besides the fact that to say this - that accuse the "reigning Pope heresy" or "apostasy" -, would "tell all", as calls for our Player, but saying instead the false.


No problem to state which in our opinion, the Holy Father is pliable is too condescending, the too good, as they say, motivated by the desire not to cause further suffering to the Church and not let her suffer more scandals. If in fact he openly revealed the plots of modernists, Church would happen in a bigger mess than it was in 1943 in Italy with the fall of Fascism.


In such a dramatic eventuality, the Pope could be tried and deposed and the modernists might be elected an anti-pope, Giovanni XXIV, Behind illuminated proposal Gianfranco Ravasi and Walter Kasper, offesissimi, and Alberto Melloni and Andrea Grillo. The Lefebvrians, for reaction to this intolerable affront, could in turn elect, at the suggestion of Antonio Socci, Don Alexander Minutella and Excellencies Monsignori Marmet Bernard and Richard Williamson, un altro antiPope, Pio XIII, their party. So they would have three Popes, not counting the fourth, Benedict XVI, always it is still alive. Meanwhile, the deposed Francesco I, benefiting from a special pardon, It could devote himself full time to care for the immigrants on the island of Lampedusa. Certain, all it may sound sci-ecclesiology, but we have not so far.


Therefore, the faithfuls, not to be scandalized by the Pope and fail him due respect as Vicar of Christ, They have to do this reading of what is happening: we must fight the modernists and defend the Pope, because if in any way the Pope is attacked, explains Father Ariel in its response following commentary: it undermines the stone that holds the whole construction, with consequences not so hard to imagine ...


from The Island of Patmos, 26 June 2017




Ariel S. Levi Gualdo



PDF Articles print size



an old 45 laps of complex I Chameleons: There is nothing new, a song that today would be fit to play and sing in different cathedrals, instead anthem Here Priest. To listen click on the image

The Fathers de The island of Patmos they are conscious the ecclesial situation and current ecclesiastical and for that you look from going to break up the rock on which Christ built his Church [cf. Mt 13,16-20], they are men of faith. There is not the worst thing that destroy the house on the basis of “because I think”, “because I feel”

The mysteries of faith not based on “I think”, “I feel”... two assumptions which give rise to a "faith" emotional, immature and childish, however devoid of a critical perspective related to the action of the Holy Spirit's grace that eventually turned, one snooty weak and timid as Peter, into a martyr and witness of faith.


If the reigning Pope is "apostate", as stated in our Player, at the same player should be remembered that Peter, chosen and willed by Christ Himself, It was much worse than Francis I. Also because Peter, act of apostasy from the faith in the incarnate Word of God made her seriously. Instead, Francesco I, He has never publicly denied Christ and before the danger he has not taken flight. But Peter not only denied him publicly, but he did the false swearing and cursing: "Then he began to curse and to swear: "I do not know the man!”» [Mt 26,69-75].


We have never denied the defects, the theological deficiencies and ambiguous and confusing ministry of the Holy Father Francis, as do certain fearful ecclesiastical career, improvvisatisi today everyone poor&refugees. We never denied his faults to the same extent that we believe in the Holy Spirit "the Lord and the life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son" [cf. Symbol of faith], sent by Christ to the nascent Church at Pentecost. Therefore we do not exclude that a person limited and ambiguous as the exhibition can be the reigning Pontiff, Also at the end of his life, as happened with Peter, turn into a great confessor and defender of the faith.


From this perspective many are sadly lacking, simply because they have no faith in the action of grace, because their faith is played all over Clik of "I like it”, "I do not like”, because they live the Church as a socio-political phenomenon useful as an outlet for arguing in the microcosm of their backyard, where there is only black and white, good and bad, where sentences “that's it“, but not because they set out the objective data or amounts truths of faith, but because it establishes the “I think”, “I feel”, that ends up being the only true and objective, the new dogma tragic being and existence of many men immersed in the world of’iocentrismo and self-referentiality. Lin faith, however, it is another thing: "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" [EB 11, 1-7].


We never cease to give thanks to the Holy Father Francis for bringing into the open a so thick and numerous army of Christians whose "faith", de facto, It was based on nothing. Indeed, the first blast have fallen, screaming so excited and emotional "heresy!», "apostasy!», and any other kind of anger towards the Chair of Peter. But most of all we thank him for bringing into the open a subject even more serious, that is to say all those cardinals fringes, bishops and priests, besides an army of heretical theologians in the chair for a few decades, that under the pontificates of Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI, They have long worked with “admirable” patience in obscurity, behind the scenes, playing as long as they could to the transformation dictated by obvious career ambitions, all in accordance with the technique so acute as dangerous modernists, that lacks neither the planning nor patience.


No worries, on my part, to provide in this regard examples. Imagine if I, as we urge to do the same Supreme Pontiff [see WHO], I'm afraid to "denounce names and surnames". If anything, the problem is that the Holy Father, beyond his words uttered in predicozzi morning, the complainants with your name if you keep them all around like ivy wrapped around the Chair of Peter, while the few who dared to report the den of snakes around the sacred throne, They are finished as they are finished, to the praise and glory of God. Therefore, the Supreme Pontiff, in addition to being limited it is unfortunately also inconsistent, because it shows that between his preaching to blows slogan Effect to the delight of the secularist press, and his concrete action, there is a mismatch.


Exhortation contained in this latest predicozzo morning, I answer thus providing the Holiness of Our Lord Jesus Christ Augustus reigning Pontiff, a high birth name that can apply to many other: Cardinal Gualtiero Bassetti, Archbishop of Perugia and today President of the Italian Episcopal Conference …


Cardinal Bassetti, He was able to move forward with that "peasant cunning" which causes it to tell the host that it wishes to hear, up to believe that this simple settler acts as a very faithful servant in the best interests of the landlord and property. Now we will see how he carried out his climbing, as the Successor of Peter seems to enjoy them as much the 'complaints' accompanied by' first and last names "- as well as facts, naturally -, to which he urges us in his predicozzi morning.


Gualtiero Bassetti, He entered in thanks Cardinal Silvano Piovanelli, Archbishop of Florence, Finally it favored in its promotion Episcopal. He has never been an eagle theological nor a man of deep culture, which it is not in itself and by itself no problem, indeed quite the opposite, In fact, we know well the enormous damage done under Pope Giovanni Paolo II from the last batches of dire bishops professors. It should therefore be pointed out that today, People of God and ourselves Ministers in sacris We venerate the saints who were people of a theological and cultural limitations sometimes bleak, but this did not affect the heroic nature of their virtues, up to be canonized and declared models of holiness for priests themselves, from our patron, that pace of the Supreme Pontiff and Cardinal Bassetti, remains the Holy Curé of Ars Giovanni Maria Vianney. Even despite, a few days ago, It has assisted the elevation of Don Lorenzo Milani Barbiana Prior to the sublime priestly model for the work of the Holiness of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the reigning Pontiff Augustus, to which Enzo Bianchi and Alberto Melloni on duty told directly or indirectly the two magic words before which Francis I even come to losing my mind, but above all objective spirit: "A true priest of the poor … a priest of the last … a frontier priest lost in existential suburbs …», and the game was made, a Bose heretic praise and politician no less heretical to the Bologna School.


The future cardinal bishop and president of C.E.I Gualtiero Bassetti, with certain saints certainly it shares the mediocrity and the limited, not, however, the heroic virtues and the sanctity. And apart from a juvenile “office appointment” to curate, in fact, he has spent his entire priestly life preceding the episcopate of the intricacies of the Florentine Curia: assistant at the Institute, then rector of the minor seminar, then rector of the major seminar, then pro-vicar general … In 1994 he was appointed bishop of the diocese of a small but ancient Tuscan Maremma, Massa Marittima, erected in the fifth century in the corner of that splendid Etruscan land and ruled by the proto-vescovo Cerbone; a particular church in which he, reasonably, he should achieve his 75 years of age.


But we know well, but above all we experienced several times bitterly on our priestly skin, both in our capacity as submitted both in our capacity as victims, that while men of God called to tremble if certain tasks, since most are equipped with wisdom, intellect, advice, fortress, science, pity, fear of God, longer feel inadequate, contrary to their mediocre which tend to be cloaked in outward humility and above which the gifts of the Holy Spirit bounce back like rubber balls on a concrete wall, inside themselves they are never happy with what they got undeserved, why try to make up for all their demerits aspiring to get more and more. Here, then, that with all the typical loyalty of the loving and devoted husband, Gualtiero Bassetti leaves only after four years, in 1998, the diocese of Massa Marittima, to become bishop of the Diocese of Arezzo, and for territorial extension and the number of priests is the second largest diocese in Tuscany. Obviously - God forbid! —, these subjects are accustomed contact their bishop's chair to the clergy and faithful with the tear from the eye of Dramatic Art Theater, uttering the fateful words that ... "against my will, beloved sons and daughters beloved, the Holy Father has commanded me, and I obey " …


… but also a bride as the Church of Arezzo It was not up to her husband so much, just like those husbands close to sixty years that once piazzatisi well in society as professionals or entrepreneurs and made a nest egg of money, first leaving his wife to struggle with her menopausal problems and take a girl as a girlfriend 25 years that could be their daughter, which it joins them for love, exclusively for deep passion of love. In this case, the devoted husband Gualtiero Bassetti, Arezzo leaves the bride to become Archbishop of Perugia. And, for the second time, repeats the dramatic art representation of rite, with the announcement made by the Arezzo Bishop's chair: "Unfortunately, the Holy Father has commanded me, and I obey ".


It's really unusual that over the last two decades, before these commands given by the Holy Father, if anything, he did not even know the existence, the name and geographical location of certain small and medium-sized Italian dioceses, but that even despite commanded and needless to say offered for the third time at a bride groom more “rich” and “bella” … ever, I say never, one of these “faithless husbands” I've answered: "Holy Father, I've already changed two brides, Therefore I beg: let me husband of my wife. Not assigned to me for the third time to a new and larger diocese ". No One faithful husband has instead acted in this way, in a episcopate that seems conducive to divorce and marriage to the second and third most attractive brides. Understandable why: because everyone is the penalty of hard-obedient when it comes to move from a small to a medium diocese, then by an average diocese to a great historical site that benefits the metropolitan pallium. In conclusion, be a little man, first marriage, He had the final blow to marry the daughter of a baron of the province, then his second wife, the daughter of a city Count, It may perhaps be so foolish as to not accept to leave the second to take as a third wife, the daughter of a prince who lives in the capital? In fondo, in pastoral programs of faith - because here is pure faith that it is, mind you! —, must on the one hand to aim higher and higher, the other point to duc in altum, ie take off, Christ teaches us in the Gospel of the miraculous catch, indeed it commands just Himself to Peter: "Put out into the deep" [LC 5,1-11]. However, it remains in doubt: Christ the Lord, to Peter, She made him chief of the fishers of men, or leader of a group of wives of fishermen increasingly high places?


By the way is clear, it is legitimate, indeed sometimes desirable that in certain large metropolitan locations are assigned the bishops who have already gained pastoral experience, which in rare cases also it occurred in the past, as well as a bishop, Once elected to a seat, It was immovable until death. But it is, note, very rare cases. For instance, in Italy, where we have over two hundred dioceses, the great locations that may require a bishop with pastoral experience already gained, will be about ten: Palermo, Naples, Florence, Bologna, Genoa, Milan, Turin … And here again I note that while the Diocese of Arezzo, largest and extensive Umbrian Archdiocese, has 245 parishes and a presbytery formed by 270 priests between secular and, the Archdiocese of Perugia has 155 parishes and a clergy composed of 190 priests, between secular and. But it, to Perugia, It is a Metropolitan Archbishop, while that of Arezzo, Although the diocese of major proportions as parishes, clergy and territorial extension, It is a suffragan diocese of the underground headquarters of Florence. And at that Florence, city ​​that the future Cardinal hyper-bergogliano She gave birth, before certain figures it is usual jesting: «Eh, I know you, mask …».


Cardinal Gualtiero Bassetti is a paradigm for a reason that now illustrate the end: under the pontificate of Giovanni Paolo II, everyone remembers this character, Massa Marittima before and Arezzo later, as a public defender of family and non-negotiable values. Under the pontificate of Benedict XVI, everyone remembers him in Perugia as a public defender of theological orthodoxy and good liturgy. Under Pope Francis I, all we are seeing, in his new role as President of the Italian Episcopal Conference, like a poor man all, refugees and jus soli. Here, I wondered if by chance, the great fathers of Roman Law, in addition to jus soli, we do not even coined the legal institution of … jus sòla.


Maybe, the forked tongue of Pietro Aretino, before which Giovanni Boccaccio was almost a “timida educanda”, he made his debut with some sonnets more or less in this way ... "at least the whores customers Changing Images, but even if he was always there remain, to the contrary of other, that put instead quirks and shapes according to the different needs of their customers novi ".


How capita, we are talking about people not only lack coherence, but devoid of common sense of the ridiculous, convinced that the People of God may be poor Obtuse formed unable to grasp, understand and analyze. No problem, because they will understand, willy-nilly, you must want to forcibly, When arriving one day a party wall in the square of their cathedral church will feel screaming by a mob angry: "buffoons, buffoons!». And from this eventuality anything but science fiction and remote, Today I say to you - or if you allow me “you a prophet” - that we are not far away. And as, of this, They are also different in their hearts aware episcopetti and cardinaletti, you can well understand why, before moral and social questions of unprecedented severity, They bent his head and fell silent on marriage between same-sex couples, shots on the nth data to the little that remains of the family, the violent ideological forms of an increasingly aggressive secularism towards every Christian sentiment, the dictatorship of gender, by the repressive police actions gaystapo and so, because on one hand they do not have the manly courage, the other live in fear of losing their social and economic power, who soon will lose, because the countdown has started since the beginning of this new millennium, and today we are now running out of the last grains of sand in the hourglass. We want to understand it or not, that soon, in Europe we will be outlawed, while the short-sighted Italian episcopate heats within the dangerous Islamic serpent that tomorrow will put our heads in bell towers instead of the clappers of the bells? It is that the heads will be our, not those of Gualtiero Bassetti and Nunzio Galantino, they will meanwhile emigrated to Switzerland, where they will step forward to speaking concierge on our skin and in our blood, continuing to ensure that Islam is a religion of peace.


Or do you think that the Italian episcopate has prostituted up to smooth the hair at that devil incarnate by Marco Pannella for pure Christian charity? Come, mica are children! If he bowed his head before the father of the abortion laws, on civil unions, on gay marriage, and untiring ideologue of homosexual culture, of gender, dell'eutanasia, of genetic testing, of wombs for rent … it was only for a simple reason: a Pope who on the one hand gave rise to his pontificate invoking a poor Church for the poor [cf. WHO], a strong economic crisis, and at the same time a free fall in the course of the credibility of the clergy, beset by moral and economic scandals unprecedented, in such a situation the possessed Marco Pannella would have been enough just half a whistle to mark an unprecedented electoral victory by calling the Italians vote in a referendum popular on the abolition of the Eight Thousand tribute to the Catholic Church; and the first to vote in favor would have been many Catholics. Just so … the Italian episcopate has been sold off as Esau sold off his birthright for a plate of lentils [There 12,50] …


… and for the first time, around the Chair of Peter, They were seen circling the henchmen of Satan as Marco Pannella and Emma Bonino, one who still called abortion "great social achievement worthy of a civilized country", while the Pontiff who dreams of a poor Church for the poor, He did not hesitate to accept it repeatedly - something instead repeatedly denied four cardinal pious -, and to call it "a large Italian", together with the communist atheist and anticlerical Giorgio Napolitano [cf. WHO]. And here we note in passing that the great atheist and communist Italian Giorgio Napolitano, He turned in his formal address these words to the Roman Pontiff:


"We were struck by the lack of dogmatism, the taking of distances from "positions are not touched by a margin of uncertainty", the reference to the "leave no room for doubt" of its "great leaders of God's people" » [Text of the speech, WHO].


Which translated means: Finally, a Pope who does not speak of the dogmas of the faith, or the fact that certain issues are not negotiable by the Catholic morality, as for example, the value and the protection of human life from the moment of conception and so forth. Then it follows a marked speech on relativism, anthropocentrism and so, behind which it is not difficult to identify, for us insiders, the hand of certain theologians, or rather of some theological school known Italian, whose founders attended too politics and political buildings …


Of, The poor Church for the poor! Hopefully tomorrow the people there do not take shots with a steel bar in the street, when before long will run out of various scams priests trafficoni that overnight they have set up reception centers for “refugees”, managing one hand large sums of money and on the other by donating a few apartment to the beloved grandchildren. What will happen, the lack of supervision of our "blind guides" [cf. Mt 23,16], when several will be reported Onlus founded by priests for many different purposes benefits, social and welfare, including even a worthy association for the fight against pedophilia, and all species in Southern Italy, when you find that these “pie foundations” They have never submitted a budget, who receive generous funding from various state and European bodies, despite having the Association recommendations “top secret” trained everyone from siblings, sisters, nephews and cousins, none of which has, if anything, a job, but they live as they say on the great big market “charity”? And what will happen when they find out that thanks to “refugees”, different structures of Caritas, especially from Naples down, far from benefiting ninety percent of volunteers free the amor Dei, They have solved certain problems of unemployment, or more easily deficient desire to work, guaranteeing a salary brothers, sisters, grandchildren, cousins, friends and … even “boyfriends” certain priests?


Back then the bishops and the cardinals of our discourse in question, It is perhaps best …


Even the Cardinal Giuseppe Betori, current Archbishop of Florence, He was under the pontificate of Giovanni Paolo II, from when he was Secretary General of C.E.I. under the presidency of Cardinal Camillo Ruini, a defender of family and non-negotiable values; afterwards, as a diocesan bishop and as a cardinal, under Pope Benedict XVI was a defender of theological orthodoxy and good liturgy. The difference, however, runs between Cardinal Giuseppe Betori and Cardinal Gualtiero Bassetti, is that the first, mindful of what they thought both Giovanni Paolo II and Benedict XVI, and even before them, Paul VI and John XXIII, hath been careful not to beatify Don Lorenzo Milani, indeed said "to me is not holy" [cf. WHO, WHO], and thus he remained in the consciousness itself before the world and history. A completely different pasta Cardinal Gualtiero Bassetti, that does not change the nature, but simply changed customer, he immediately declared suitable "for me is holy", thus showing their miraculous himself in the trend of the times [cf. WHO, see video WHO], the so-called … jus sòla.


In conclusion I repeat that the Holy Father Francis we have deep gratitude, because like the Pied Piper of Hamelin has brought into the open these mice; and here let me tell you, this analysis, I did not now, but four years ago, After just three months of his pontificate [see WHO]. And we, after the extraordinary work of the Pied Piper, mice take them all to jump into the river. Because tomorrow, These paralyzed people in this power, certain that this present is a kind of Unmoved Mover that will never, such as lack of an eschatological future perspective because paralyzed in everything at once, immediately, will not in any way be recycled on the new leader wagon, something that we will have to make deep thanks to Pope Francis I, forever. Otherwise, before any attempt to gattopardesco clerical recycling, for us it will be a so-called brainer, remind everyone how they lived and how they acted under this pontificate flattery, in order to obtain ecclesiastical positions and benefits of every kind of merit of the poor, refugees and existential suburbs. Finally it will be our Christian mission “cut off their heads”, from that of Cardinal Gualtiero Bassetti, one of several that, if anything had been erected in the City, should have given the title of cardinals that of the Church of Santa Maria del Chameleon. Why does this man, tomorrow, as evidence amply lived his life, the minimum wind change would not hesitate to go out in public with seven meters magna hood and to declare that the Crusaders saved entire populations from Muslim attacks and therefore are revered as true defenders of the faith. But above, the first change of wind, would not hesitate to declare that should be restored to the healthy and holy old methods of the Inquisition to proceed to burn at the stake Enzo Bianchi and Alberto Melloni.


That the Church was holy and prostitute, This affirms the Holy Bishop and dottore Ambrogio, but saying this in his own sermon [chaste whore, in Luke: III, 23], He looked back to the Old Testament literature and particularly the episode of the prostitute Rahab of Jericho who helped the Israelites as a "chaste harlot", that "many lovers to attend the attractions of love but without the contamination of sin '. In opposite way, characters like Gualtiero Bassetti and related, instead they changed the Church in a whore who goes where the wind blows; and this is something else, compared to chaste harlotry. Or in the words of the Rev. Prof. Joseph Ratzinger, this means changing the Holy Church of Christ "in a structure of sin" [cf. Introduction to Christianity, and 1968], pace the pretext of poor, of refugees, existential suburbs and many priests improvised street today, border and the outskirts, to follow along with all the stereotypes of the South American banana republic seventies now in vogue, on which many are doing dazzling and damaging ecclesiastical careers, without the Tenant Augusto Santa Marta is aware of the damage that is favoring, but most of what in the future will have to answer to Christ, he has entrusted his Holy Bride, not an ideal and idealized villas of misery


Despite all this, we believe with deep faith and certain that what the Pope Francis I, through the work of the Holy Spirit grace, will end up being, and with the turn out in retrospect a pontificate that as few others have rendered great service and great good for the Church of Christ for his future.


In May 2016, when nobody could imagine certain events present, for sincere honesty deemed it appropriate to address these words to the President of the Italian Episcopal Conference, Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, towards which I was rough in 2013 for the funeral porcine the presbyter Andrea Gallo:


"Eminence Father Cardinal, will not be long that we, with a heavy heart and tears in my eyes risogneremo recent times in which we as a reference point and pastoral equilibrium models extraordinary men like her. Tomorrow we will live in your memory and feel dramatically your lack. And those who, like myself, at times they have treated harshly, repent - but if that's why I'm already regretting - of having been strict with you and make your old age less suffering COMING to kiss his hand and telling you with deep devotion that in truth you were authentic Church Fathers; and we'll tell sincere and convinced after trying the worst of it on our skin of priests faithful to the Holy Church of Christ and his teaching is now preparing ' [the full article can be read WHO].


I've never jumped on the bandwagon, suffice it to say that I have lived through years of priestly formation in Rome and then another the following years as a priest in the Diocese of the Supreme Pontiff, without ever having seen once closely neither Giovanni Paolo II nor Benedict XVI nor Francis I.. Also because I have never tried to approach them, even when again and again I paid the pontifical liturgical service of Benedict XVI. And why would I? They mention every day the Holy Father in the Mass canon, this thing that just to them and just to me. If anything, I approach those from large wagon fell, ceasing to be the stars of their descent, and today no one seeks them, perhaps not even remember them, since the journalists chasing them like hounds. To those I have always been close, in their solitude and on their way; and that's where born the most beautiful relationships, when the relationship between the one who approaches, and one who can be approached, It is characterized by the total absence of any kind of interest, certainly not by the hope of ending the three candidates for appointment as bishop.


Accordingly I conclude: these words written over a year ago to Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, is there someone who now intends to give me wrong, both before the new Italian episcopate, and before the new presidency of C.E.I, it sounds to me as much as the new president of jus sòla on the bandwagon of the great carnival of Rio de Janeiro?


from The Island of Patmos, 26 June 2017




Dear Readers,

The island of Patmos It is filled with the Spirit but does not live by spirit alone, and the maintenance of the site that hosts this observatory, this magazine, It has cost, among other things on the rise. We have always gone ahead thanks to your offers, of which we thank you. The truth I offer it for free with all our heart and our total “peril”, But remember that you work it, wrap it up and spread it, unfortunately coast.

God reward you.







About Drafting

La Redazione de L'Isola di Patmos Articoli Redazionali ( Click on the name to read all the articles )

35 thoughts on "The Holy Father Francis "heretic" and "apostate". And if it was a providential “Pied Piper”?

  1. Dear Andrea,

    I explain the difference between Father Giovanni Cavalcoli and me, and a specialist in thoracic surgery.

    If you go to a surgeon e, without knowing the rudiments of human anatomy and internal medicine, first explain to him his original idea of ​​anatomy, then below how he should perform surgery for a lung transplant, these … he would get angry like a hyena and would make her run out of the hospital.

    Father John and I, even in the same situation, do not we get angry nor do we let anyone run “outside the hospital”, because we have the so-called … “official duty” of Christian charity with all related “obligations of professional ethics“.

  2. To understand how the one who, for opposite reasons, from right and left, It is depicted as a kind of “Subcomandante Bergoglio”, It is actually intimately away from any modernism, just read these his two recent interventions:
    They are outdated speeches, courageous, vigorous, for facade. Despite its cultural limitations and its fixations more “peroniste” and Christian for the poor, it is strange that his own temper he has not yet revealed how much it is different from that of those he surrounds.

    1. As far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong, that marriage is indissoluble told Christ: are perhaps “untimely speeches, courageous, vigorous, for facade” repeat what was stated in the Gospels or the “minimum wage” that you can expect from the successor of Peter?

      1. The Holy Father reiterated in every way the indissolubility of marriage and its sacramental nature.
        What you just do not get to make it clear to many people and that many people are determined not to understand, and if he is explained with all the theological criteria applicable at that point refuse the explanation, is that “indissolubility of marriage” the A “communion for divorced and remarried” are two different issues and problems.

        We explained in all ways and with all the doctrinal criteria, but apparently to no avail, that the ban on Communion for divorced and remarried is not a dogma of the Catholic faith, but an ecclesiastical discipline, born of prudence and pastoral wisdom of the Church; discipline that we hope is maintained, especially today. But we can not deny that the Supreme Pontiff, if you would, He would have full and legitimate right to change this discipline, without anyone being able to scream heresy, all’apostasia, to the violation of the dogma of faith.
        The discipline has not changed it at all, in fact, Amoris Laetitia reconfirms the discipline of St. John Paul II, but, some ambiguous expressions, they opened the doors to the confusing situation we have before our eyes today.

        Whenever we have explained all this, we have received numerous messages from people explaining their confused idea of ​​dogmatic theology and sacramental dogmatics, telling us more or less explicitly or implicitly that we had “wrong job”, for things were indeed as they claimed, and all this even if a good part of these people would have fallen like pears in front of the most elementary questions of the Catechism of Saint Pius X on Catholic doctrine prepared for the preparation of children for First Communion.

        The problem is that more and more people refuse to listen and if they are given explanations, they react or sometimes attack by saying: «no, it's as I say ".

        Therefore, if on the one hand Cardinal Walter Kasper supports the “evolution” Dogma, other, there is a far more dangerous army of “practical theologians” or “teologi-fai-da-te” that after having pecked like birds from one blog to another, they invent dogmas that do not exist and even get angry if two dogmatic theologians tell them that the dogma of faith on no to Communion for the divorced and remarried does not exist.

        1. Cavalcoli and Levi di Gualdo belong to the most refined and most dangerous category of the modernist current: they criticize and condemn modernism, but at the same time they marry several of the fundamental errors.
          If Christ dogmatically declared marriage indissoluble, consequently the prohibition of communion for the divorced and remarried is bound to a dogma, therefore this prohibition is a dogma accordingly, and whoever says the opposite denies a dogmatic truth.

          1. Am I wrong or Jesus has deliberately “communique, by his own hand, Down from?

          2. Not all divorced and remarried people live in sin…
            Not all regular married couples live in a state of grace…
            The Magisterium teaches that it is convenient and healthy to approach the Eucharist in a state of grace or sin?

          3. Dear Andrea,

            the prohibition of communion for the divorced and remarried is certainly a practical application of the dogma of the indissolubility of marriage, but the dogma could be respected even if the Pope granted Communion in certain cases. And this is because the prohibition of Communion does not necessarily derive from a moral dogma as a single logical consequence derives from a speculative dogma, but as a contingent and therefore variable and changeable application it derives from a universal moral principle.

            Let's take an example of both cases. From the dogma of transubstantiation, speculative dogma, one and only one consequence is necessarily deduced, that is, under the Eucharistic species Christ is really present. For this, denying this consequence necessarily implies the denial of dogma. Not so when it comes to applying principles or practical dogmas. In this case, even opposite consequences can be deduced from a single principle.

            For instance, the commandment of respect for life may require in some cases the treatment of the sick and in others the death penalty for the criminal. A similar case is that of the question of Communion for the divorced and remarried, about which, without prejudice to the absolute value of the indissolubility of marriage, moral dogma, the Pope demonstrates inlove joy that in some cases it cannot be excluded that their access to the sacraments may be a way in which they pay homage to the dignity of marriage, certainly not in how much they live it, given their concubinary status or "irregular" union, but as their love, however defective and inclined to sin and not free from sin, however, can be sustained, at least at intervals, from that grace, which reaches its fullness in marriage.

          4. In this regard, I would like to point out that in FC no. 84 it is read: "The church, however, It reiterates its practices, based on Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced and remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto, since their state and their condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church, signified and effected by the Eucharist. There is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church's doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage. "
            And I remark this: 1) the emphasis placed on "practice" at the beginning; 2) The "special pastoral reason" alleged: now, this peculiar reason is based on reasons of expediency (the confusing ...), but the presence of this reason of opportunity would be absurd, and it is doctrinally confusing and misleading, if the non-admission to communion, as Fr.. Cavalcoli, “necessarily descended from a moral dogma as a single logical consequence descends from a speculative dogma.”

            That said, I think "progressives" in good faith (and I don't think they are many ...) that aim at modifying the discipline in this matter are going to slip into an inextricable mess. Anyhow, the doctrinal framework that is the background to this merciful loosening of the "positive law" of the Church should be effectively clarified, in such a way that clarity does, pedagogically, counterweight to forgiveness, and at the same time be the prerequisite. The Church is moving in this direction? For nothing, I think, with the risk of transforming the encounter with "people" into one with the spirit of the world.

        2. It is not necessary to proclaim a dogma to know that Communion cannot be given to the divorced and remarried. Since when it is necessary to present to two Priests, although substantially modernists like Father Ariel and Father Cavalcoli, that it is not possible to approach the Holy Communion in mortal sin, it is not something that even children in the Catechism know? How is it possible that two like them who consider themselves theologians question this basic and elementary Truth?. And’ truly absurd what they say about this question. I already know that they will answer me that “it is not always said that the divorced and remarried are in mortal sin” and here we reach the non plus ultra of heresies not content with the aforementioned precedent.

          1. Dear Suresh Babu,

            how do you know that the divorced and remarried are always in a state of mortal sin? The fact that they are in an irregular state does not authorize us to pronounce that judgment, which can only be reckless, since us, to be able to form it with validity or knowledge of the facts, we should be able to monitor the intimate movements of their consciousness day and night, 24 hours on 24, this is evidently possible only for God who searches hearts and for those interested.

            Their irregular status is certainly reprehensible and scandalous, it is a very dangerous condition of life for their soul, it constitutes a constant temptation to sin; but to say this and to say that I am always at fault, runs there and it is not lawful to do so, since the passage from the tendency to sin or from being able to sin to the act of sin depends on free will, of whose acts we are masters, free will that can always refuse to sin, as well as, if where, he can immediately repent, get up and ask God for forgiveness; he can therefore always recover the lost grace and obtain the forgiveness requested, even without confession.

            For this reason the Holy Father inlove joy, while recognizing the evident grave malice of adultery, it reminds us that God's mercy is always looking for sinners to induce them to repent, so it is not impossible that the divorced and remarried, at intervals between one sin and another, are in grace, so in principle, once the Pope granted it (note 351), they could be admitted to Communion.

      2. Put content and tone together and you will see that in the Church today they are exactly what I said: untimely speeches. In addition to, there is a big difference between repeating like a parrot or a notary “what Christ said” and indirectly reaffirm it with a vision of life (and in this particular case of marriage) which sounds authentic and not borrowed. Then, when it comes to writing encyclicals, the Pope lets himself be ensnared in the undone style, talkative and ambiguous of a certain contemporary theology in which “greyness” sees a hint of mercy, or does not know how to intellectually dominate the subject it deals with; or that when he speaks off the cuff, words come out in various interpretations; that is another matter.

  3. Today is the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul. I remind all, primarily to the Island Fathers, Pope Francis, like every pope, It is equipped with the Petrine “charism of truth and FAITH THAT NEVER FAILS” [“never-failing faith”, The eternal shepherd, IV (Denzinger 3071)], that is definitive doctrine and dogmatic fact that Pope Francis is unwavering in faith: how can sin and err, He can never fall into heresy, nor in apostasy (obviously neither in schism, since no one can insubordinarsi himself). Is not he have to remain in communion with the rest of us, but the rest of us with him. This Fathers should teach more and better, refuting with relentless logic any adverse position (including those comments that are uncertain at the point, when the opposite view), and should remember to Card. Caffara, calling him and other 3 to their grave duty to publicly profess the indefectibility Pope, to be loyal to the end to his august person and frank towards the whole Church, in a time when they look at their many who clearly do not believe this truth absolutely binding for those who profess…

    1. Thank you for his learned lessons and we guarantee that we shall restore as soon as possible to study both the basic treaties of dogmatic theology, and the first of the two that will recover to study as a seminaretto, It will be the Pontifical John Academic Cavalcoli.

      If she had read everything we wrote during these past two and a half years, in defense of the Petrine ministry and also in defense of the reigning Pontiff who is the legitimate custodian, He would not have sent this “predicozzo” which qualifies her and not us.

      And now we face a nice tour de instructive archive The island of Patmos, before writing and any other additional crap, that just does not do them honor.

    2. If the Fathers do not deem inappropriate, I have a question for Maurilio.

      She, Maurilio, reproached Cardinal. Caffara, evidently for dubia. It explains what's the problem? The operating mode of dubia is a traditional practice of the Church. Since when is interpreted as a challenge to the Pope? Maybe he believed to be unnecessary, because the Pope's position is clear? But then how does he explain that various bishops and entire episcopal conferences have explicitly taken opposite positions? If you cross a bridge over the Oder, border between Germany and Poland, on the one hand some things are legitimate and on the other not. He thinks it's normal? In my ignorance, it seems to me that in the Canon of St.. Vincenzo di Lerin wrote to it “everywhere”. And I believe that the principle of non-contradiction is still valid. It is not just a question of divorcees: there are bishops, and based on their interpretations of Amoris Laetitia, they also give Communion to homosexuals, let's say so, “in the exercise of their functions”. You don't think clarification is needed?

  4. At this time it is going to perform infanticide of little Charlie. The Church is totally silent. Including the Holy Father. It is impossible not to know the news and there is also a prayer of the faithful because they speak publicly about the case. I can not think of any rational reason may have to shut up. He has always been silent even in the case of Asia Bibi, and in that circumstance one could think of diplomatic reasons. They do not exist in the case of Great Britain. It's hard to think that co-workers are preventing him from doing something; it is inevitable to assume that he is not interested in it. On the other hand, we only know two facial expressions of him: grinning or grim (when he pontificates against the rigid or does not realize he is framed). JPII laughed, rejoiced, it was severe, but he also suffered, it was clearly seen that he shared the sufferings of Christ and others. Honestly the”love” for the souls of this pontificate it appears more a cold treatise on sociology, Marxist style, where they exist “classi” social (come the “waste”), but not singles like Charlie and his parents.

  5. But I fear that the non-profit organization will never be lynched. In Italy it is now ingrained the belief that everyone has a right to public money for a living, regardless of whether they pay money to go to a real job. And’ the same mechanism to which schools do not flunk anyone, hoping to maintain enrollment and “professorships”.

  6. Well, Massa Marittima was a difficult diocese even in the 1940s, let alone that it will have become in times closer to us.
    About the homily of Pope Francis quoted, it is moving how he avoids mentioning the “I do not care”, expression originally vulgar and obscene even if by now nobody or almost nobody realizes it anymore. However be him (who knows nothing of these things, others have told them, it's obvious) and Don Milani himself did not understand anything: the “I do not care” he was not a fascist “I don't care about others”, but “I don't care about death”, with reference to the daring of the Great War. In its own way, the Fascist regime also had a notorious inspiration “social”, which ended precisely with the Italian Social Republic. More: Mussolini was of very poor extraction and always remembered with indignation the years as a child at the Salesian boarding school where they made him find worms in the soup while the boarders of wealthy families ate properly. It is therefore not enough to say that we love the poor to boast merits.

  7. Dear Fathers, the hypothesis of “Pied Piper of Hamelin” it is suggestive, it would be more difficult to convert it into a demonstrable thesis. In any case it is a fairy tale, legend well that goes. If then we also want to define it “Magical”, the situation can only get worse… But it, I repeat, I understand that you are doing your best, Father Cavalcoli has already recently unjustly suffered his (I was going to write that he has already paid, but paid for that? to have told the truth).
    Fair Enough: faith, prayer and hope.
    With estimates

    1. Dear Licio,

      … and what I paid, thank God it's not public, but it remained, also by my determined will, enclosed in the spheres of the poor and small ecclesiastical world.
      In conclusion, as they say “we didn't miss anything”.
      But the service of truth and the salvation of the soul, has its own reasonable price to pay, which is, however, little or nothing, before eternal salvation.

  8. … a priest with a unique talent for writing. Often very long, but never banal and always precise in his arguments. Today he proposes this reading which deserves all about 20 minutes needed to carefully read his lucid and cutting-edge analysis of the current ecclesial situation.
    A dear greeting to all, and let us not lose hope united in prayer

  9. Dear Fathers,

    reasoning on the situation of Holy Mother Church at this moment is quite difficult. Conforming to the "mass" that describes the Holy Father as a heretic now seems easy, but of course, without denying objectively suspicious facts, it is difficult to understand what is happening inside the Vatican.

    Pope Francis immediately expressed his intention to "create" a Christocentric Church that should have rekindled the flame of Mercy in the hearts of all Christians and perhaps, soon piano, bring some lost sheep closer to God. The result, however, to date has been quite disappointing, so that, according to the latest data, the trend of priestly vocations has dropped and a lot (in 2015 the major seminarians are equal to 116.843 Unit, against the 116.939 of 2014, the 118.251 of 2013, the 120.051 of 2012, the 120.616 of 2011 and the 118.990 of 2010) and especially in "Catholic" Europe (and it touches me firsthand since, God willing, I would like to enter the seminary as soon as possible). A substantial increase occurred only in Africa. I believe these are data that should make us think.

    Probably labeling the Holy Father as a heretic is not entirely right but perhaps it is not even entirely right to call him a "Pied Piper". I believe the truth lies in the middle: Pope Francis is perhaps torn between the original idea of ​​a healthy and genuine renewal and the obligation of having to submit to the constant pressure of certain elements both from the clergy and not, who push for a neo-Protestant "modernization" that, in my opinion, it cannot lead to anything good; and this papal "surrender" is bringing us ever closer to a speedy one, disturbing and total (since it can still be defined as "partial") de-Christianization that perhaps in history will have no equal. But as is often said in these cases, God wants to test His people and then we just have to wait and see how the situation evolves, with the hope that the Divine hand can really and tangibly raise the Church from an important moral and political collapse.

    What is certain is that if ever Pope Francis should make new changes to the Holy Mass or even blasphemously alter the real meaning of the Transubstantiation (which is now being talked about with insistence) well, in that case there would be no more excuses or justifications.

    The thing that worries even more is this new social and spiritual Middle Ages that the entire European society is experiencing today, which is certainly the mirror of the modern Church. The route now seems to have been marked and people seem more and more at the mercy of this primitive wave of material and futile values ​​that are giving rise to a childish world, senseless and frighteningly cannibal. The stardom is the master and the sense of spirituality is such an abstract concept that even for those with good will it is difficult to remain standing.

    The question of Islam also harms us all and not a little. It is terrible that several young people from openly Christian families, they decide to follow the "fashion" of the Koran. Perhaps someone here in the Vatican office should begin to reflect a little and understand that at this moment there are too many sheep that have been lost and that it is unlikely that they will be recovered. But as always: Fiat volùntas Sua!

    1. Dear Luca,

      Thanks for your comment.
      I just give you absolutely unsolicited advice, who is this: before entering a seminar, think carefully. And I say think carefully because sometimes, to adequately undertake a vocational path, it may be necessary and appropriate to wait years, when the historical moment is so unfavorable and dramatic.

      I have said it over and over again, in the past, to several impatient twenties, who answered me variously: «But I have the vocation … I can't wait … I have to become a priest as soon as possible …». And when I brought to them the difficult situation to say the least and above all the non-guarantee of a Catholic formation for the priesthood given by many seminaries, they replied that … "The important thing is to reach the goal".

      These were the results:

      1. some, they entered and then left the seminaries in a deep crisis of faith ;

      2. other, they decided to hold up, convinced that "when I become a priest I will change things", with the result that having become priests they found themselves in such unmanageable and above all gangrenous situations, than after alone 6/7 months have left the priesthood.

      But, they had to "as soon as possible", they would "change things".

      You indicate the statistical data of the decline in vocations, well I tell you that there are much more alarming data, about which, however, no one speaks, but I'll tell you: the number of abandonments from the priesthood has increased considerably, over the past four happy years. And to abandon the priesthood were also and above all presbyters with twenty / twenty-five years of sacred ministry behind them.

      Just yesterday, I was reading the statistics of a diocese in Tuscany, where out of six sacred ordinations made over the past seven years, five have left the priesthood.

      If you are not one of those convinced that "when I am a priest I will change things" and if I can be of any use to you, do not hesitate to write to me in private.

      1. Dearest Father Ariel,

        Thank you for your clarifications, I had heard something about it but did not believe the situation was so serious.
        With real pleasure I will contact you to take advantage of your advice.


  10. I read just now (and summarily) this double article and I realize I was wrong to write a comment at the bottom of a previous article: it would have been more appropriate to write it here, where the double article is inspired by two comments from readers that I also used as a starting point for mine.
    I could thus have also taken into account the clarifications now provided by the two reverend authors on the subject of my comment (at first glance I would say that it was clear that I had well understood the fideistic motivations of their hypothesis but this did not make it more convincing).

    I take this opportunity to report that the “pied piper theory” it is not original (not that the authors of the two articles have boasted its primogeniture): personally, not with this beautiful fairy name (congratulations! 🙂 ) but of equal substance, I had first read it a few months ago in a comment from a reader on a popular Italian blog on the Church.

  11. Dear Fr Ariel Stefano,

    I read that some are scandalized and reproached the meritorious Fathers de The island of Patmos to defend the indefensible, by supporting the Successor of St. Peter and criticizing only certain of his collaborators.

    But since thus preparing for the evils of the times of the runners run, but worse than the [it will get much worse before it gets better], apologetically it is necessary to be "prudent as snakes and simple as doves" [Mt 10,16], at the cost of appearing in the eyes of someone even as poor fools.

    I therefore believe that you, as member of Fe.Ca.Ma.Ca. [Fe.derazione Ca.cciatori Ma.remmani Ca.ttolici], in your diligent "armed" defense [cf Eph 6: 16–17] of vine which the right hand of the Lord of hosts planted [cf Sal 80,15], rightfully you refuse to shoot directly on wild boar of the forest that the devastates and aim instead to hit the many wild animals by which it is surrounded [cf Sal 80,14] the, better, surrounds himself.

    The Catholic faith in the Petrine primacy recommends this hunting tactics to reach the intended purpose, ie protect the Bud may the Lord do it is cultivated [cf Sal 80,16]: Holy Church, in which souls find their eternal salvation, through the faith firmly established on the rock that is Peter the apostle and his legitimate successors.

    It is necessary to imitate what David did towards Saul already at the time of the Old Covenant: «May the Lord guard me not to do similar thing to my lord, to the consecrated of the Lord, from reaching out to him, because it is the consecrated of the Lord " [1Re 24,7].

    Otherwise: “When the foundations are shaken, what the right can do?» [Will 11, 3], what is left for him to do?

    From the Saints, like the great Catherine of Siena, this example comes to us: filial and unshakable devotion to the Roman Pontiff, even if these in the exercise of function knife be a victim of himself or listen to bad counsel or give bad teachings [cf Dante Alighieri, hell 27, 85–132] and admonish him to the need, for if he does not repent in time, he will pay the consequences at God's judgment.

    Only in this way can they be sung clear to him too, all and strong criticism for his conduct of government.

    This is the true spiritual freedom that distinguishes God's adopted children from courtiers, yesterday, today and forever "vile damned race".


  12. After reading this article - as always well done- I reread i dubia of the cardinals on Amoris Laetitia; Bergoglio does not seem to me to accept the possibility that communion for the divorced and civilly remarried is an ecclesiastical law and, anyway, the statements in my opinion not in line with Catholic doctrine are also others. Why Francesco does not clarify? He doesn't want to or can't? But how is it possible to let bishops give permission to communicate people in an irregular situation without incurring divine wrath ? And how to expect the faithful to keep quiet? We admit that communion for the divorced is an ecclesiastical rule: but where has it been changed? If the German or Argentine or Sicilian bishops began to ordain married priests or to celebrate Holy Mass with new invented rites or other, we should absolve the pope only because he is surrounded by very bad collaborators – that he chose himself – and, poor thing, cannot oppose it. Peter has “renegade” Christ under threat, but he sinned gravely. How many times this (alleged, in my opinion) pontiff has denied Christ, not only in doctrine, but in pastoral practice and in relations with the various principles of Catholicism?

    1. was the physicist,

      Pope Francis knows very well that the law that grants or prohibits Communion to certain people is an ecclesiastical law, because he enters the pastoral power that Christ has granted him to administer the sacraments. Now, while the divine law - for example the indissolubility of marriage - is so obligatory, that the Pope himself is bound to it, on the contrary, with regard to ecclesiastical laws, a Pope can change what the previous one did. Thus, while St. John Paul II forbade Communion to the divorced and remarried, the Pope present can grant it, while a later Pope than the present could reintroduce the law of St. John Paul II.

  13. With all due respect for the opinion on the Holy Father Francis expressed by the reverend fathers who write on this site, and while not agreeing with the disrespectful invitations to declare “heretic” and “apostate” the Pope, I cannot but disagree with your view that it is simply yielding and condescending to the pressure of the modernists. Many faithful (including me) – and as such faithful also to the Holy Father – they have the perception that some questionable positions taken by the pontiff are not a consequence of compliance or compliance with modernist pressures, but they are a movement proper to his soul and rather some prelates (I underline some), in the past unexceptionable on the sensitive issues in question, are showing yielding and condescending to the new course set by Francis and in which Francis seems to believe out of intimate conviction and not compromise. I'm sorry to contradict you, but for many it is not trivial “I feel”, “I think”, but rather a perception.. that is, not of abstract thought, but of objective data processed by our reasoning faculty. On the other hand, I agree that the accusations of heresy and apostasy cannot be resolved…

    1. The Pope also has his own opinions

      Peter was,

      any Pope and any Catholic is allowed to have "questionable" positions. There is no need to be alarmed or impressed. The important thing is not to question what, for his certainty of reason or faith, it should not be discussed. Instead, there are legitimately questionable opinions. On the contrary, characteristic of the opinion is that of being a questionable proposition, due to its obviousness and lack of certainty. This questionable, then, it should not be rejected, it should not be suppressed and should not be prohibited, but precisely addressed and discussed, because truth and certainty can emerge from discussion and confrontation.

      The phenomenon of opinion and therefore of formulating a simply probable proposition, refutable, changeable and questionable, it is a normal and inevitable phenomenon of the phenomenology of human thinking, due in part to its fallibility, partly due to its evolutionary nature. Only divine or angelic thinking does not know the opinion and is absolute certainty and intuitiveness. Certain, even human thinking possesses absolute certainties of reason and faith. But pretending to do without opinion to possess only science is a vice of Cartesian rationalism, source of dogmatism and saccenteria.

      We like certainty and we admire people who are certain of what they say. But we must be on guard against being in a hurry to reach certainty, when matter is dark, tangled or obvious, not to give for sure, maybe to make a good impression, what is not. But we must also guard against the opposite vice of skepticism, for which we question the truths we don't like.
      Vice versa, a regulated exercise of opinion belongs to humble people, free and intelligent, ready to correct themselves when they realize they are wrong. Doubting what is doubtful, discussing what is questionable is a sign of wisdom and a genuine love of truth. Even a Pope, as a fallible man, is subject to these conditions of human thinking and must draw the consequences. In the opinion, a Pope does not benefit from the charism of infallibility, but he is subject like everyone to the possibility of making mistakes.

      Indeed, opinion is a delicate exercise of thought, which must be regulated as well as by the rules of dialectics, which is the art of dialogue, from the moral virtue of modesty or prudence. And even on this point a Pope is not safe from sin: can accommodate, uphold or let slip imprudent opinions and rash, therefore he is obliged to correct them. He can be stubborn in his attachment to incorrect opinions and reject the correction. It can illegally impose its opinions.

      What must be rejected in thinking is the erroneous and above all what is certainly erroneous, because what it is just probably, what has not proved to be wrong, must be left in circulation, because what appears or seems only erroneous, to greater verification, may turn out to be true. Or it may happen that what seems wrong, to a more accurate verification, it really is.

      If in opinion there is the risk of dogmatism or, how do you say, of "fundamentalism", due to presumption, intolerance and aggression, there is also the opposite risk of reducing any thought to opinion, so that for a false modesty, out of opportunism and with the excuse of avoiding dogmatism, every idea, including truths of faith and dogmas, becomes questionable, uncertain, subjective, revisable and changeable. It is as interesting as the theorists of relativism themselves, trumpeters of "dialogue" and "respect for the different", they are also the most absolutist and intolerant of those who unmask their lie.

      You have already understood that a Pope, as an infallible guardian of the truth of faith, it cannot fall into this defect. It cannot reduce faith to opinion, the truth in appearance, the certain to the uncertain, the immutable to the changeable, the objective to the subjective, the eternal to the temporal, the indisputable to the questionable, the indispensable to the renounceable, the non-negotiable to the barageable. He can have questionable views in all fields, matter of faith excluded. It cannot reduce rock to sand, the robust to the fragile, the corruptible to the corruptible, he who is the "rock" on which Christ builds his Church.

      If it is not legitimate for us to disagree with the Pope's dogmatic teaching, as the modernists and certain so-called "collaborators" do, on the contrary, it is legitimate for us to disagree with certain of his opinions, that, as a private doctor on the plane or on twitter they can appear questionable or even erroneous.

      It is therefore the rant and imposture of the modernists and the foolish alarmism of the Lefevrians the spread of the slander that the Pope does not believe in the dogma of hell, of original sin, of the vicarious satisfaction of Christ, of the sacrificial value of the Mass, of the Eucharistic transubstantiation, and that is preparing to allow communicatio in sacris with the Lutherans, to legalize divorce, sodomy and contraceptives, to authorize the Communion to those who are in a state of mortal sin, to admit women to the ministerial priesthood, and consider surpassed the condemnation of the heresies of Luther pronounced by Leo X and the Council of Trent.

      The Pope, and then, if you can not make changes to the dogma, You can make changes in the ecclesiastical and canonical laws, as well as in liturgical and pastoral directives quota, where he can change what you did the previous Pope or the next Pope can change in turn what he did this Pope. Fidelity to the dogma is not conservatism, but sacred duty; the changing of the dogma is not progress, but heresy. Move forward in the history of the Church is not modernism, but sacred duty. Absolute out the laws of the Church quotas is Catholicism, but ideology.

      It would therefore demonstrate indiscreet conservatism, if you wanted to cling to the rules of the previous Pope, as is typical of the indiscipline and a false prophecy modernist disobey the laws and arbitrarily assumed to be able to anticipate the times before the Pope has decided.

      Finally, remember that modernism is a heresy, so the suspect that the Pope give in to modernism is how to accuse him of heresy. What we can say is that sometimes he happens to use expressions that they know of modernism or Lutheranism, which can be interpreted in a modernist or Lutheran sense or which are unfairly interpreted in that sense.

      Pope Francis never openly advocates errors against the faith, unthinkable thing. However, what one can say is that he is too concerned not to displease the modernists and the Lutherans, so that he never or almost never remembers those truths which they do not like or which they neglect, such as the fear of God, divine immutability and impassivity, the beatific vision and eternal life, the relationship between reason and faith, the value of miracles, the opposition of dogma to heresy, the primacy of contemplation and love of God over mercy, the reparative value of the Redemption and of the Mass, the Eucharistic transubstantiation, the authority of the Pope, the primacy of the Catholic Church over other religions, the Church's need for salvation, the universality and immutability of moral values, the supernatural merits, the metaphysical foundations of morality, the existence of the damned, the divine punishments,

      It should also be noted that when the Pope speaks, he does not always make it clear whether he speaks authoritatively or infallibly as Pope, that is, as a teacher of the faith or as a private doctor, like the fallible man Bergoglio. Attention must be paid to the subject it deals with, whether of faith or reason, but it's not always easy. He talks too much and off the cuff, and in this way rash judgments and imprudent expressions easily come out, like when on a plane, perhaps under the influence of fatigue or taken aback, he said that “Luther was motivated by right intention, he did not want to divide the Church, but he offered her medicine ".

      It is evident that when I said that the Pope must resign himself to accept and bear the modernist and Masonic pressure, in order to avoid greater suffering for the Church and to have a decent room for maneuver for the exercise of her ministry, I did not mean that he is not free to exercise his will and that therefore he is not responsible for both the good sides of his pastoral, both of the defects that we charge them.

      I just say that we must not extend this responsibility to certain positions or scandalous or heretical statements of some of his collaborators or boasted "friends", that, I stepped forward by dint of recommendations to say the least, they would like to make use of their ambiguous relationship with the Pope to pass the theses of modernism or Freemasonry.

      The modernists would like to pass the Pope off as a "revolutionary" and a "reformer". In reality, they are flattering hypocrites, because if, really wanted the reform, they should begin by reforming themselves, which they have no intention of, because they consider themselves the advanced points of the Church (the self-styled "progressives").

      The Pope should therefore free himself from this ball and chain and replace them with good shepherds, faithful, God-fearing, Orthodox, capable, PII, dotti, zealous, fervent, lovers of the Church and dedicated to the salvation of souls. But he doesn't have the strength; there are too many obstacles. The good are too few and too weak, sometimes shy and fearful. It is therefore necessary to peacefully remember that even to holy popes certain situations get out of hand or must adapt to avoid the worst: Jesus himself did not have a Judas among the apostles? And he did not have to accept them in their ignorance and coarseness?

  14. Dear Fathers,

    In the vortex of the storm, who rules the boat of Peter?

    Perhaps a "Pied Piper": a naive Pope, ably circuit leccacalzini, perhaps even plagiarized ... in the cage by the Vatican secretariat.

    A Pope, much loved by the world, a pope who in his "sermons" dispensed and dispenses to an abundance of many offensive definitions of the sheep of his (little loved) flock (over a hundred according to those who keep this type of accounting ...)

    The Pope's most reliable collaborator should be Card. Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, ie keeper of the Deposit of Faith.

    It is common opinion that the Pope encounters difficulties even on a human level in relations with the cardinal, it's not just about character diversity, of mindset and studies, of knowledge of Church History. It seems that he suffers and is almost afraid of it, because he is still lived as a man of Benedict XVI, from which he inherited it. A Vaticanist a few days ago reported that the Pope did not accept yet another heartfelt exhortation from his faithful collaborator – that he had to undergo so many humiliations due to certain papal intemperances, who with commendable shrewdness has been able to carry out his delicate task, often keeping aloof – about the now imperative need to respond to Dubia; even would have prevented the obedient servant – the Vatican expert says he would have expressly forbidden him - to officially pronounce himself in the name of the Congregation.

    Povero card. Müller, in few days – the next 2 July the five-year mandate expires – then the Pope finally, will be free – choosing a more malleable and obedient collaborator – to fly even higher, without fear and hesitation, to finally renew, at least that's how he gets to write, an Argentine newspaper:

    We have already seen many of similar events of men and things of the world, so exciting but in the end all so earthly ...

    As many we will have to live ...

    Events and things by which we are put to the test and tomorrow when it will be our turn: we will be sifted by the Lord, some sheep to the right ... others goats to the left ...

    Who is holding Peter's boat? Perhaps a "Pied Piper", It does not matter.

    It matters to remain faithful.

    We have received a promise: But God had other plans.

    We have only one certainty: Nothing is impossible with God.

    We humbly repeat: Fiat voluntas Dei, now and always.

  15. Father Ariel Caro,

    I share only partially its reflection, I note two things:

    – the comparison between Peter and the Holy Father Francis seems out of place. Sure Peter betrayed Christ, but it was not yet the time of the incident “Head of the Church” given that there was no Church, They had accomplished some key events such as the Resurrection and Pentecost. In fact, Jesus speaks to the future when: “..Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church ..” Mt16,18

    – writes: “…Instead, Francesco I, He has never publicly denied Christ ..” Also on this sentence I have reservations. I invite you to feel the speech to refugees 19 January 2014 which urges Muslims to “move forward with faith(?) received from their fathers “.

    Here there is an explicit denial of Christ as “One True Salvation”, even if in partial form and indirect, still it remains very serious for the Vicar of Christ. If not then I think that you also, Father Ariel, You should use the same terms in front of the pagans without being “serious” problems of conscience.

  16. Caro father Ariel, even if you wanted (I know that yours is a joke) “… unhinge the rock on which Christ built his Church…”, perhaps there you be able?
    And even supposing that it was the will of our Holy Father Francis “… unhinge the rock on which Christ built his Church… “, maybe we succeed?

  17. From the premises realistically catastrophic, the conclusion, We should denounce a round and peremptory ” It does not follow”. Unless we put ourselves in a perspective of great faith, and trust ” In hope against hope”.

Comments are closed.