Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Welcome Information Connoisseurs
Showing posts with label Pope Francis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pope Francis. Show all posts

Friday, April 01, 2022

Situation Ethics is the Law of the Post-Renaissance Papal Church


Situation Ethics is the Supreme Law of the Post-Renaissance Papal Church


By Michael Hoffman

www.RevisionistHistory.org


This essay has been published in a much enlarged, extended study in the April, 2022 issue of Revisionist History® newsletter no. 119.  


It is available for purchase at this link



_______________

Monday, December 26, 2016

Ecclesiastical Operations of the Occult

Untangling the Ecclesiastical Operations of the Occult

UPDATED JULY 21, 2020

By Michael Hoffman

Contents:

I. Anglicans contra Disraeli and the Rothschilds

II. Sovereignty of the Knights of Malta  

III. New “traditional Catholic" doctrine on the pope

IV. Roberto de Mattei’s Farce

Today is the feast of St. Stephen on the liturgical calendar, commemorating the first martyr of the Church founded by Jesus Christ. Why did that Church of Jesus place the anniversary of a martyr’s bloody death immediately after the commemoration of His joyous birth? To remind us of the price to be exacted in this world for following the babe in the manger from Bethlehem to Calvary. What does it mean to follow Him? First and foremost, if Jesus is not the Truth then He is nothing. Therefore, to follow Him is to follow the truth wherever it leads, and however much one loses human respect, support, or life itself for having declared it.

On and on the wheels of deception roll and much of it centered on the fake reputation cultivated by the Church of Rome since the Renaissance, when it morphed from the Catholic Church into the occult Church.

One part of the propaganda campaign has been to paint Rome prior to Vatican II as the bulwark against Freemasonry and Judaism, and “the Protestants” as the enablers.

We recently received the following query from a researcher: 

On Dec 26, 2016, at 7:04, R.S. wrote: 

I have not read yet what you written about Benjamin Disraeli (Revisionist History Newsletter No. 85: “British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli: Head of State and Head of the Rothschild Conspiracy”), but after reading a review in Chronicles Magazine, Aug. 2016, by Patrick J. Walsh of the biography, Disraeli: The Novel Politician, by David Cesarani, I came away with the thought that Protestantism, especially that of the Church of England, is more a heresy of Judaism than it is of Catholicism. 

Do you think there is any truth to that thought? Do you think that British Judaic Protestantism was what formed the impetus for British support for the creation of the state of Israel?

Our reply to R.S.

Dear Mr. S.

It’s more complicated that what you have briefly sketched. We hope Chronicles pointed out the formidable difficulty that Rothschild had in being seated in Parliament without swearing an oath to uphold Christianity. Conservative Anglicans put up a good fight, but it was Queen Victoria’s support for Disraeli that lost that battle.

There were several Anglican groups dedicated to converting Judaics to Christianity, and the foremost attack on the Talmud in the 19th century (The Talmud Tested) was written by the Rev. Dr. Alexander McCaul, an Anglican Professor of Hebrew at King’s College, London. Nothing comparable was written by any Catholic in that era.

The extent to which the occult (in the form of Freemasonry), influenced Anglicans after Disraeli, tells us much about the subsequent genesis of the Balfour Declaration in Palestine, but then the Church of Rome from the Renaissance onward was deeply enmeshed in the occult. In fact, as we demonstrate in our book (The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome), Rome’s Neoplatonic Hermeticism gave rise to Freemasonry. So who has clean hands in this arena?

(End quote from our reply to R.S.).

“Sovereign” Knights of Malta

The Church of Rome and the occult are back in the news with the jockeying for power within the necoon-warmonger Knights of Malta, who are self-advertised as the defenders of Christianity against “The Muslims.”  Whenever you observe the failure to distinguish between Shiite and Sunni-Wahhabist Muslims, you know you are in the realm of Zionist information-warfare (hasbara).

Though it is being presented to the public as a contest between anti-abortion and pro-abortion Knights of Malta, the actual rivalry underway takes us inside the corridors of the papal precincts where the battle is being waged between the two factions. According to Roger Peyrefitte (Chevaliers de Malte, Flammarion, Paris 1957): “...after the Second World War...the (Knights of Malta) Order was able to thwart an attempt to fuse them with the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre. This struggle came to a halt in 1953 with the sentence by a Tribunal of cardinals which recognized the sovereignty of the Order of Malta, but nonetheless affirming its dependence on the Holy See as far as concerned the religious life of the knights.  

“The Order of Malta accepted the sentence, conditioning it on some points:  1)  the recognition of  the rights due to it as subject of international law; 2) the limitation of religious independence of the Order only to professed knights and Chaplains; 3) the exclusion of subjection to the Vatican Secretary of State.”

End quote from Prof. Roberto de Mattei; emphasis supplied.

The Knights of Malta are “sovereign.” How is that? Why is this “sovereignty” limited to members of Rome’s secret society? After the founding of the United States, every American was sovereign and this sovereignty prevailed more or less intact until the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. The Knights of Malta also have recognition and rights under “international law.” How did the Church of Rome’s secret society gain these “rights” from the New World Order?

Prof. Mattei:

“The Holy See’s competence does not involve then the internal and international governing of the Order, but limits itself to the strictly religious sphere. At this point one could imagine that the Pope, having identified deviations of a moral and doctrinal order among the knights, had thought of intervening to straighten out the situation.”

Prof. Mattei is a so-called “traditional Catholic” (so-called because Catholic tradition is most assuredly not preserved by the Renaissance papal legacy of usurious occultism which virtually every “traditional Catholic” embraces). 

“Conservative” and “traditional Catholics” have invented a new theology of papal power now that liberal Pope Francis is on the throne of Rome, whereby dissent from the pope is encouraged and limits on his power are delineated. 

Mattei's Farce
Before “conservative” Pope Benedict XVI abdicated however, nearly all of his papal powers were trumpeted and upheld by Right-wing Catholics. Consequently, Mattei can write the absurdity that the pope (“Holy See”) does not have the “competence” (legal authority) to govern the Malta Knights internally and internationally. What a farce. He is speaking of a papacy that once saw the pope wage war in armor, at the head of whole divisions of troops while ruling papal territories outside Vatican City. The legal authority (competence) of the pontiff in post-Renaissance Catholicism is unlimited. Here is why: no matter what the supposed “Vicar of Christ on earth” does or pronounces, he cannot be deposed by any Catholic. Now that a liberal is pope the “traditional” and “conservative” Catholics have forgotten their own history.

Mattei:

“It was brought to light that (Grand Chancellor) Albrecht von Boeselager, during his time as Grand Hospitaller of the Order, had abused his power, promoting the distribution of tens of thousands of condoms and contraceptives, also abortifacients, (see the reports related to the United Nations’ program against HIV/AIDS in Myanmar document), [so] the (Knights of Malta) Grand Master Matthew Festing intervened to bring an end to the scandal and asked Boeselager to resign, appealing to the vow of obedience made to him.

“The Grand Chancellor, strong in his friendship with the Secretary of State, Pietro Parolin and of his brother George’s recent appointment to the board of the IOR (Institute for the Works of Religion -- the Vatican Bank) rejected the request arrogantly, laying claim to his ‘liberal Catholic’ stance.” (End quote; emphasis supplied).

It’s fascinating to observe these mafia-like clans jockeying for power as the Vatican Secretary of State and his brother, who is on the board of the pope’s own usury bank (which bears the disingenuous name, “The Institute for Religious Works”), is lobbying to assist Grand Chancellor von Boeselager against Grand Master Matthew Festing. This of Christ? 

Tribal and clan rivalries (“Never go against the family, Sonny”), invoke Pavlovian brand names to gain allies. When we read the word “liberal” in connection with Boeselager we’re supposed to automatically hiss on cue and join in the denunciation of his “arrogance.” Had he been a “conservative” Knight of Malta however, then it is likely that his defiance would be put forth as noble. Christians who take sides in these secret society affairs are lost before they take even one step into the fray.

Mattei:

“The creation on the part of the Secretary of State of an investigative group of five members, all of them more or less connected to Boeselager, constitutes a serious case of interference in the governing of the Order. The Holy See should limit itself to watching over the religious life through its Cardinal Patron, Cardinal Burke, appointed by Pope Francis himself. The Pope has every right to be informed with regard to the Order’s internal affairs, but it is irregular for this to take place through a commission which bypasses the pontifical representative, unless there is the desire to accuse the latter.”

“The Holy See should limit itself...” What a joke coming from a Right wing “traditional Catholic."

“Cardinal Burke” is the American Raymond Burke, who leads a movement challenging Francis over the pontiff’s view that those who are divorced without a Church annulment may in some circumstances receive the Eucharist. Burke, who enjoys parading in garb worthy of Herod the Great (the cappa magna shown at the top of the page here), is the hero of the “conservatives” who are ignorant of the fact that the Church of Rome’s “traditional Catholic” Right wing opposition to Francis is (like the pope himself), heavily implicated in defense of the Talmud and usury as we demonstrate in our study, The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome. 

Mattei writes:

“A Cardinal, however, can be judged only by his peers and not by Vatican bureaucrats.”

But a liberal pope can be judged by seemingly anyone, including Roberto de Matttei? This is another joke, bordering on an insult to our intelligence.

Mattei: 

“Equally improper is entrusting a Vatican Commission with the judgement of matters regarding not the religious life, but the governing of the Order, accusing, in this case, the Grand Master. The latter has done well to reject the bogus actions by the commission. Unfortunately not only is the procedure bogus, but the judgment in particular coming from the Vatican Authorities regarding it.” (End quote).

Under the popes who the “traditional Catholics” admire fervently, such as Leo XIII and Pius IX, words of defiance like the preceding would have been crushed, to hearty cheers from the Right. Now it is the Right that is doing the defying. 

The scenes and the costumes change so fast it is difficult to keep track of the players  and the play —  or is that the whole point of this alchemical theatre?

In the much maligned Middle Ages, the true Catholic Church hewed to principle and dogmatic truth with unbending loyalty and rigor. Usury, situation ethics, Talmudism, Kabbalism and the occult were suppressed. Now they flourish on the Left and the Right, in the ebb and flow of Thesis and Antithesis, empowering a Synthesis first set into motion by a certain Greek at the Council of Florence, marking the start of the new dark age for Christ’s Church.

Copyright©2016-2020 by RevisionistHistory.org

For further reference: 
Roberto de Mattei, “The Pope and Malta: A bogus commissioning,” Corrispondenza Romana, (Italy) December 24, 2016. Translated by Francesca Romana.

The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome (Softcover, 723 pages, dozens of rare plates, many in color)
______________


These columns by M. Hoffman, an independent scholar without institutional support, are made possible solely b donations from you, the reader. If you would like to see these columns appear less frequently, or disappear altogether, then do nothing and rest assured that your wish will be fulfilled.
______________

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

The Papal Grave-Digger of Europe

By Michael Hoffman

The ideology of Neoplatonic Hermeticism gained firm purchase among members of the Catholic elite in Florence, Italy circa 1450; after that it entered the Vatican toward the end of the 15th century, and the papacy itself by 1515. It predates Hegel’s concept of thesis-antithesis-synthesis by centuries. Among its most famous early Renaissance practitioners were Cosimo and Lorenzo Medici and Nicolo Machiavelli.

But what of the pope’s victory at Lepanto and the papal burning of the Talmud? Those events were akin to Pope Paul VI issuing Humane Vitae (his encyclical condemning artificial birth control) while suppressing the Tridentine Latin Mass. The thesis is visible but not the occult antithesis, and people are deceived.

The current thesis has Pope Francis announcing that a Muslim Mayor of London with connections to Sunni Wahhabist extremists, is good for Europe, while in the same interview he poses his antithesis: praising and offering support to the anti-Muslim Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

La Croix: "You received, on the past April 1st, Bp. Bernard Fellay, Superior-General of the Society of Saint Pius X. Is the reintegration of the Lefebvrists in the Church once again being considered?" 

Pope Francis: "In Buenos Aires, I always spoke with them. They saluted me, they asked for [my] blessing on their knees. They consider themselves Catholic. They love the Church. Bp. Fellay is a man with whom we can dialogue. It is not the case of other somewhat strange elements, such as Bp. Williamson, or others who have radicalized. I think, as I had expressed in Argentina, that they are Catholics on the path to full communion. During this Year of Mercy, it seemed that I should authorize their confessors to pardon the sin of abortion. They thanked me for this gesture...We dialogue well, we do a good work.” (End quote).

To  the Right wing of the Church he gives this approbation to the “traditional Catholic” SSPX. To the Left he lends his support to mass Sunni-Salafist migration to Europe. 

Pope Francis to La Croix:

"Coming back to the migrant issue, the worst form of welcome is to ‘ghettoize’them. On the contrary, it’s necessary to integrate them. In Brussels, the terrorists were Belgians, children of migrants, but they grew up in a ghetto…. I am thinking here of Pope Gregory the Great (pope from 590 – 604), who negotiated with the people known as barbarians, who were subsequently integrated. This integration is all the more necessary today since, as a result of a selfish search for well-being, Europe is experiencing the grave problem of a declining birth rate.” (End quote).

The terrorists congregate in a ghetto because their brand of Salafism demands a ghetto. It is not the fault of Europe. Some terrorists have been shown to have attended European universities often at the taxpayer’s expense, and yet still they return to their ghetto mentality and spew blood and fire upon the hand that fed them so generously.

Furthermore, Pope Gregory did not oversee the “integration” of barbarians into Europe in the sixth century. They were already there. They were mostly indigenous. Pope Gregory helped to organize the conversion of the barbarians. Only after they were converted  to Catholicism were they integrated, and not before. Don’t imagine that Francis is not familiar with these facts. He is playing a game. 

In the La Croix interview he purports to lament the declining birth rate of Europeans. This is a macabre jest. The pontiff has admonished Catholics for allegedly talking too much about abortion and contraception. He refused  to campaign against laws in Ireland and under his nose in Italy, conferring state recognition of marriage upon practicing homosexuals. He is on record referring disparagingly to Catholics with many children, saying they breed like rabbits. On May 19, on learning that pro-abortion politician Marco Pannella had died, the Papal spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi praised — in a written statement, not off the cuff —  the man who helped lead Italy in the 1970s to legalize abortion. [Rorate Caeli]

This writer will not be the only one to draw attention to the duplicity of Francis in these matters. But we will be mostly alone in raising the awareness that when the Pope issues these Janus-faced pronouncements and double-talk, he is doing so consonant with the 500-year-old tradition of Neoplatonic Hermeticism inside Rome. 

Because we have been sufficiently processed, the game is played now in the open, whereas in centuries past, of necessity it operated in a more clandestine context. In either case, the joke is on us.


Copyright©2016

Michael Hoffman's next book, “The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome,” is due for publication this autumn.

____________

Friday, September 04, 2015

Orban Speaks in Defense of Christian Europe

The Invasion of Europe from North Africa:

The Prime Minister of Hungary Speaks Words of Truth in Defense of Christian Europe 

By Michael Hoffman
www.revisionisthistory.org

Our friend of many years, Dolores (“Dee”) Lawless of Long Beach, California, who passed away in 2014 at age 93, would often moan when we would inform her that one of her putative “Christian” heroes had feet of clay. Like most of us, Dee longed for a true leader and would sometimes become momentarily angry at this writer for deflating her belief in this-or-that “conservative” Republican or Catholic (Dee was a pre-Vatican II Catholic), who we would point out, was a faker, or worse. Later she would recover from her disappointment and thank us for assisting her in identifying and frauds and traitors and denying them support and allegiance.

We wish Dee were alive now to see Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban in action. I know not his past record, or whether he will surrender in the future under the enormous force of the intimidation and outcry he is facing, but for the golden present how precious indeed are his words of truth, so seldom heard on the world stage from any national leader, least of all the self-extinguishing subversives who lead Germany and the Vatican, from whence Prime Minister Angela Merkel and Pope Francis issue decrees encouraging hundreds of thousands of aliens to settle in their land. 

We will believe that Merkel and Francis are sincere when they invite the hoards from Dar Al Islam who Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States will not harbor under any circumstances, into their private mansions and palaces. Merkel’s family home could probably house several hundred migrants and Vatican City could easily take 25,000 or so. It would be delightful to see a photo of both the migrant-welcoming German head of state and the pope of Rome  in a Bombay-like tableau with hundreds of people clinging to them and sharing, for the next several years, the bathroom, kitchen and bedroom of their palatial abodes. But of these scenes are ones we shall not see. The pattern of the  limousine liberals is always the same: it is we the peasants who will have to share our neighborhoods and pay taxes to fund the invasion and maintain the invaders, while the popes and prime ministers drive past in heavily guarded motorcades and wave, on their way to their specially reserved residences of serene tranquility.

Merkel and the pope are little more than managers of the decline and fall of Christian civilization and the white race; that is their mandate from the Money Power. Both the civilization and the race are slated to gradually disappear as part of the self-hating white-liberal genocide approved by politically correct, fellow white-liberals. 

Another aspect of the facilitation of the mass migration from North Africa is the imposition of ever more features of a police state to protect society from the crime and terrorism which the migrants will inevitably bring when they do not quickly obtain the gold, girlfriends and power to which they feel they are entitled as “oppressed people in a white society.” Gratitude toward that society is no longer present as it was among their far more humble grandparents who emigrated decades ago, when the Europeans and British respected themselves and fought back against the stereotype of their nations as wicked, racist white societies that nevertheless offer economic opportunities that are irresistible to Third World invaders.

Amid all of this insanity and treason has stepped forth Viktor Orban of Hungary, with words of startling and refreshing truth.

On Sept. 3 Mr. Orban, Hungary’s prime minister, wrote in a leading German newspaper that it was important to secure his nation’s borders from mainly Muslim migrants, “to keep Europe Christian. Those arriving have been raised in another religion, and represent a radically different culture. Most of them are not Christians, but Muslims,” Orban wrote in a commentary for Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung.

“This is an important question,” he said, “because Europe and European identity is rooted in Christianity. Is it not worrying in itself that European Christianity is now barely able to keep Europe Christian?” Mr. Orban asked. There is no alternative, and we have no option but to defend our borders. Our Christian obligation is not to create illusions. We think all countries have a right to decide whether they want to have a large number of Muslims in their countries. 

“If they want to live together with them, they can. We don’t want to, and I think we have a right to decide that we do not want a large number of Muslim people in our country. We do not like the consequences of having a large number of Muslim communities that we see in other countries, and I do not see any reason for anyone else to force us to create ways of living together in Hungary that we do not want to see.”

Dee, we have at last, this day at least, a leader!

Missing from mainstream news reports and editorials related to the controversy is the fact that the western-supported Israeli state is a specifically Judaic nation which Prime Minister Netanyahu recently warned could be overwhelmed by Arab voters. The Israelis deny to hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees the right of return to their homeland. Conservative and liberal partisans of “Israel” all say that these Arabs must be denied entry, otherwise they will predominate over the Judaic inhabitants. Why don’t the Christian leaders of Europe have the right to speak in this way about their nations’ preservation? If Christian leaders such as Hungary’s Viktor Orban are wrong, how is it that Judaic leaders in the Israeli state are correct? Or do Israelis alone have right to preservation of religion and heritage denied to the nations of the West? 
__________

E-mail to the Hungarian Ambassador (ambassador.was@mfa.gov.hu) 

H.E. Réka Szemerkényi  
Ambassador Exraordinary and Plenipotentiary 
Embassy of Hungary, Washington D.C.  

Dear Ambassador Szemerkényi  

Please convey on my behalf and that of my colleagues and friends here in Idaho, USA, our deep appreciation to Prime Minister Orban for his courageous remarks defending Christian Europe and on behalf of its preservation. Our prayer is that the Prime Minister will continue to speak and act as he has, and not be intimidated by the pressure being placed upon him. May Jesus Christ grant Mr. Orban many blessings, and may God preserve the Christian people of Hungary. 

Sincerely, 
Michael Hoffman 

__________



Monday, March 23, 2015

The Occult infiltration of "traditional Catholicism”

By Michael Hoffman

Our colleague, who writes under the nom de plume "Maurice Pinay," has tracked the occult footprints in the “traditional Catholic” movement with admirable persistence.  

The occult is indeed alive and well inside so-called "traditional Catholicism." Occultism is not an exclusively Left wing or liberal phenomenon, though the Cryptocracy would like us to believe that it is limited to the Left. “Fatima priest” Fr. Gruner’s alliance with the Talmudic rabbi, as documented in Gruner's own video, is evidence of this (see Pinay, above). 

So too is a forthcoming Right wing Catholic conference dedicated to honoring Ramon Lull, whose quasi-Kabbalistic tropes helped to influence the thought of Giordano Bruno. This conference dares to attempt to integrate Dante, the medieval bulwark against sorcery and usury, with Lull, medieval spiritual father of Renaissance sorcerers like Bruno: http://www.eventbrite.com/e/dante-llull-conference-conversioncoexistence-tickets-15060595647

This “Dante and Lull” conference will take place in Italy on May 29, twenty-five days after the 500th anniversary of the initiation, by Medici Pope Leo X, of a process of gradualism, whereby the Church's immemorial dogmatic law against the charging of interest on loans of money was incrementally relaxed and diluted, leading to the complete abolition of all ecclesiastical penalties for usury by Pope Pius VIII in 1830, and the absence of all such penalties in the 1917 and 1983 Codes of Canon Law. 

Will the Italian conference ostensibly dedicated to Dante, the scourge of usurers, note this malevolent anniversary and study its implications and methodology, whereby “pastoral” means were employed to gradually transform usury from a mortal sin to no sin at all? This “pastoral” technique for nullification of the Law of God should be familiar to all students of the devious tactics of revolutionary change agents, among whom the most notable contemporary example is the current pontiff, Pope Francis, spiritual heir of Giovanni di Lorenzo de’ Medici.

Furthermore, certain extreme Right wing “Catholic” occultists view the Tridentine Latin Mass as a magical rite and call for the “baptism" of the diabolic doctrines of Renaissance Hermeticism.

This is not the legacy of “Vatican II.” This is the legacy of the popes of the Renaissance and their co-conspirators, as we are endeavoring to establish in a revisionist history we hope to have finished, Deo volente, this autumn (“The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome”).

FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

On Dante, scroll to the bottom of the page at this link:

For Usury, The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not, click here:

Hoffman speaking in Lansing, Michigan:
Michael Hoffman is speaking on Usury in Christendom and ancillary topics in 
Michigan on Saturday, April 11. Tel. John Mangopoulas for details: 517-803-1375
(Includes a question-and-answer session and literature table).

Hoffman on the Web:

On the Contrary is a public service made possible by donations from truth seekers
_______________

Monday, March 10, 2014

"Who am I to judge?” -- The tombstone of any pro-family legal battle

An Italian Catholic journalist challenges the behavior and example of Pope Francis

Editor's Introduction: The following essay is the clearest clarion alarm we have seen in writing regarding the pontificate of Pope Francis. It is a jeremiad, but the Italian author, Mario Palmaro, makes his points with charity. Pope Francis famously telephoned Palmaro after his essay was published, with the sum effect of the phone call being the "I'm Ok/You're Ok" psychology of insipid niceness that passes for manly discussion and meaningful dialogue these days.

The religion of the pope and the Vatican is no longer Christ. Our Savior is merely a prop, a totem  presented with fanfare so as to maintain the facade. The religion of the pope and the Vatican is Talmudic Judaism (first) and "Diversity" (a close second).

The "Who am I to judge?” spiel has nothing whatsoever to do with not being judgmental! The pope, his cardinals like Dolan of New York and Schönborn of Austria, and the sodomites both Catholic and non-Catholic, pose as founts of tolerance and  compassion, and of course the controlled media play along.

But just observe the reaction of these paragons of equanimity if a Catholic bishop or priest were to declare the truth that Orthodox Judaism is an Antichrist creed which sends the souls of its adherents to perdition. Is anyone so bonkers as to believe that Pope Francis would respond to such a statement with the words, "Who am I to judge?"

A thundering chorus of judgment and denunciation would issue from the pope and his prelates, who would be "aghast" at the "provocation" and the "antisemitism,” and this judgment of theirs would deluge the television screens and newspaper front pages of the media of the West. We know this because we have witnessed it already from the mouths and the pens of the recent popes, most especially Pope “Saint” John Paul II and the quondam pontiff, Benedict XVI.

Why the differing reactions? Why a judgmental condemnation of those who practice truth telling concerning the religion of iniquity which the Pharisees in their Mishnah and Gemara concocted?

The answer is elementary: homosexual sodomy is not regarded by the pope as a scourge, or a horrible evil, or an outrageous offense against God and nature. This is the key to understanding the pontificate of Francis. He is not judging persons who commit sodomy beause he does not class homosexual sodomy as a true evil, on par with “the evil” of educating mankind concerning the religion of the Babylonian Talmud.

An exposé of the rabbis is judged to be an unpardonable evil in the eyes of all of the popes of the past fifty-six years, and for the current pontiff sodomy is much lower down the scale of transgression. Even on that scale the pope patently views this sin as merely venial; otherwise he would not be talking positively of “civil unions,” and his Cardinal, Dolan of New York, would not have congratulated an American homosexual football player last week who "came out of the closet" and announced he is a sodomite. Dolan’s response? He said, "Bravo!”

Judging people remains in place for the pope of Rome. He is, has been, is, and will be, barring divine intervention, extremely judgmental when responding to prominent critics of the Talmud or skeptics toward the Auschwitz gas chamber tales. His record in Argentina gives ample evidence of this. 

Let us keep these facts in mind when we hear from the young and the naive how “cool" it is that "Pope Francis has birthed a new dawn of non-judgmentalism.” They mistake a refusal to teach right and wrong concerning the sins that have always been sins since Sinai (and before), for “tolerance” —  not realizing that this pope and his confrères are ready, in the blink of an eye, to damn the new class of "foul sinners" whose “sin” (political incorrectness) didn't even exist 60 years ago.

Hence, the world turned upside down: the sins which the Church has always condemned are now massaged and caressed with "love and tolerance," in all humility, etc.  Meanwhile, freethinkers in the tradition of the Bereans (Acts 17:11), who use their God-given reason to question maniacal modernism, media pieties and Zionist impostures, who teach as Christ and the Apostles and saints throughout history have taught concerning the religion of Pharisaic Judaism — it is these contemporary Bereans who will be judged, since the media and the Sanhedrin will demand it, warning that the failure of the pope to condemn these independent-minded questioners and critics would constitute a "failure to bear witness."

In the following essay, Mario Palmaro bears true witness by addressing the failure to judge offenses against God which have been offenses for 6,000 years, not 60.

— Michael Hoffman

___________

Our Problem is the Catholic Church and her silence.  Where is the indignation? 

"Who am I to judge?” -- The tombstone of any pro-family legal battle

The Smoke of Satan in the Church


By Mario Palmaro

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-advance-of-abortion-homosexual.html

A note from Riccardo Cascioli: What follows is a little unusual, but as it is a central topic in the life of the Church and of our work, we offer it to you knowing well that it requires a considerable effort by those who want understand things thoroughly. Mario Palmaro, a well-known writer to the readers of La Nuova Bussola Quotidiano, wrote me a very long letter to express publically his indignation about the direction the Church is taking, above all regarding the homosexual aggression which is of interest to the whole world...Palmaro with his friend and colleague, Alessandro Gnocchi, were at the center of polemics in the past months because of a series of articles in Il Foglio, when they harshly criticized Pope Francis. The Pope himself, then telephoned Palmaro, after discovering that he had a grave illness.* Hence, I would like to take the opportunity to ask all our readers to pray for him.

--Riccardo Cascioli, 
Director of La Nuova Bussola Quotidana
(Catholic daily online publication) 

*Mr. Palarmo died yesterday in Italy at age 45, after a long illness. He is survived by his wife and four children. - M. Hoffman
___________

January 8, 2014
Dear Director

I read your editorial of January 3 [2014] – “Renzi - if this is progress!” , and I can only agree with your analysis on the new Secretary of the [Socialist] Democratic Party - his cunning self-confidence, his transformism, the inevitable contradiction between saying he is Catholic and his promotion of things that conflict not only with the Catechism, but with the natural law. I would like to add my appreciation for all that you have been doing for some time now with the Bussola in the face of the homosexual assault, and don’t want to reproach you in any way.

However, I feel the need to write to you and your readers. In all honesty: is our problem really Matteo Renzi? Did we really expect that one who becomes Secretary of the Democratic Party, would then set about defending the natural family, the unborn, combating artificial insemination, abortion, and opposing euthanasia? Forgive me, are you actually familiar with the PD electorate which include Catholics on pastoral committees, nuns and parish priests? In your opinion, what does that electorate want from Renzi?

It is obvious: “homosexual marriage” and “lesbian-democratic” adoptions. Have you ever listened to the average worker who votes for the left? In your opinion, do they want the defense of natural marriage or do they want council houses for our brother-homosexuals so horribly discriminated against? Let’s stop believing that the problem is Niki Vendola* or the ugly, bad, communist extremists and that it is important to be moderate; the points of reference for the average man are Fabio Fazio* and Luciana Littizzetto*, the Coop, Gino Strada*, Enzo Bianchi* and Eugenio Scalfari*. Renzi puts all these ingredients into his blender, mixes them with doses of homoeopathy from Don Ciotti* and Don Gallo*, and the result is the perfect brew which holds the “little democratic parish” and the Arcigay together. To expect something different from him would be stupid.

The scandal, forgive me, is another. Compared to Renzi - the Secretary of the PD who winks at the homosexuals, the scandal is in listening to the exponents of the New Centre Right who are saying: “Civil unions are not a priority for the government”. Do you get it? It is not that the NCD jumps up like a spring and declares: we shall never vote for these unions – ever! No: he says that they are not a priority. Someone meets Hitler who is talking about wanting to construct gas chambers. Does he reply like this: “Look, Adolf, this is not a priority.” We will do that, we will do that too, all in good time”?

I watched government minister, Hon. Lupi – a Catholic, who explained the situation on a Rai News program. With a very embarrassed face and the terrified eyes of one who is thinking (but I could be mistaken) : “Damn it! Now I have to talk about the non-negotiable principles and homosexuals, and I’ll end up like Pietro Barilla. I’ll have to leave my strategic and important ministry, where I can do so much good for my country and my movement. And then Lupi takes refuge in that well-known theme called ”priorities,” like all of the other lion-hearts in Angiolino and Roccella’s party, he says no, civil unions are not a priority.

Obviously there’s worse: on the same News program, there was Scelta Civica (Civic Choice) saying: we have to defend the rights of homosexual people. Scelta Civica, I believe, is that same party created in a rage by Todi 1* and Todi 2*, which the Italian bishops had erected as a new bulwark for the non-negotiable values under the ‘very Catholic’ leadership of Mario Monti. Then we have the worst of the worst. In the same News, there was a ‘lady’ belonging to Forza Italia who triumphantly announced that they would have put their proposals for homosexual rights together with those of Renzi. I heard a distant roll of drums against civil unions from Salvini’s Lega and even more feebly from the Fratelli d’ Italia. The end.

No, dear Director, my problem is not Matteo Renzi.

My problem is the Catholic Church. The problem is that on the subject of the worldwide outbreak of the homosexual lobby, the Church has fallen silent. We have silence from the Pope to the humblest priest in the peripheries. And if the Pope speaks, the day after Padre Lombardi has to rectify, specify, clarify and differentiate. Please abstain from dusting off letters and declarations made by Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio ten years ago. If I find out today that my son takes drugs, what should I say to him: “go and re-read the joint declaration made by me and your mother six years ago when we told you not to take drugs”? Or would I face him and try to shake him immediately as best I can?

Dear Director, where are the Episcopal Conference and the bishops in this battle? A deafening silence has fallen upon them. Actually, no: Monsignor Domenico Mogavero, Bishop of Mazara del Vallo, ex-under-secretary to the CEI and canonist – no less – spoke – oh, and how he spoke:

“The law cannot ignore hundreds and thousands of people cohabitating. It is right that cohabitating couples be recognized also in Italy without putting them on equal terms with families.” For Mogavero, “The State can and must protect the pact that two cohabitants have made between themselves. In contrast to Christian mercy and universal rights – note well - two cohabitants don’t exist for the law. Today, if one of the two is taken to hospital, the other is even denied in the lending care or receiving medical information, as if they were an outsider.”

The Bishop concludes: “I think it is legitimate to recognize rights such as the reversibility of pensions or the transfer of rent in virtue of the person’s importance. It is unsustainable – Mogavero underlines – that the cohabiter is a Mr. Nobody for the law.” And as regards the Church, for which Pope Francis has invited reflection on this theme, in view of the extraordinary Synod on the Family, “without equating them to married couples, there are no obstacles to common-law unions.” Amen.

Do you get it, dear Director? Shortly they’ll take my son of seven and at school they’ll make him play with condoms and his genitals, and what does the Church talks about with me? About boatloads which sink near Lampedusa, about Jesus who was a refugee, about an obscure Jesuit of the 17th century just beatified! No, my problem is not Matteo Renzi.

Dear Director, where is the Archbishop of Milan, Angelo Scola in this battle?

Shortly they will stop us from saying and writing that homosexuality is against nature, and Scola talks to me about half-castes and of the need to understand and value the Roma (gypsy) culture. And again, it was the Archbishop of Milan some weeks ago who invited the Archbishop of Vienna, Schönborn, to our Cathedral: as the Church is disappearing in Austria, they asked him to come and explain to the priests of our diocese how to obtain such results - what their secret was. Just like this: a coach has brought his team to fall down on the league, and so we’ll give him the teaching post at Coverciano! [The central training ground and technical headquarters of the Italian National Football Team.]

And would you look at the coincidence, among other things: Schönborn – who wears the habit of St. Dominic and Thomas Aquinas – came to explain to the Ambrosian priests that he had personally intervened in protecting the nomination of two homosexuals for a parish council. Schönborn says he met them and: “I saw two pure young men, even if their cohabitation is not what the order of creation has foreseen.” There you have it, dear Director, this is purity according to a prince of the Church at the dawn of the year 2014.

And my problem should be Matteo Renzi and the PD?

They are going to take my seven-year-old son and brainwash him into thinking that homosexuality is normal and in the meantime, my Archbishop invites a bishop to the Cathedral to teach me that two homosexuals living together are examples of purity?

And so to finish. The Matteo Renzi who promotes civil unions is a physiological byproduct of a Pope who, in his travels is interviewed by journalists on the plane and declares: “Who am I to judge” etc, etc. Obviously, I know too that these two are not of the same nature, that the Pope is against these things and certainly suffers regarding them, and that he is motivated by good intentions. However, facts are facts. Confronted with that little sentence – epochal from the mouth of a Pope “Who am I to judge”–,  loads of corrective and reparatory articles can be written, which tireless troops of “normalists” have been doing now for months, in order to say, don’t worry all is well – everything is just fine.

But we both know well, and anyone else who knows the mechanisms of communications does as well, that, that “Who am I to judge” is a tombstone on any political and legal battle regarding the recognition of homosexual rights. If we were in rugby, I would tell you that that little sentence gained in a few seconds more meters in favour of the homosexual lobby, than decades of work by the world’s homosexual movement. I’ll tell you too, that bishops like Mogavero, in the shade of that little sentence “who am I to judge” can build castles of dissolution without impunity, and the only thing left for us to do is to keep our mouths shut.

Let’s be clear: to impute that the Pope or the Church are to blame because all the countries in the world are normalizing homosexuality would be foolish: this rising tide is unrestrainable, it cannot be stopped. The reason is simple: London, and Paris, New York and Rome, Brussels and Berlin have become a gigantic Sodom and Gomorrah. The point is however, whether we want to admit this, dispute and denounce it, or whether we want to play smart and hide behind the “Who am I to judge”. The point is also, whether this worldwide Sodom and Gomorrah, merit the language of mercy and comprehension.

 Well, then, I wonder, why don’t we also reserve the same mercy for the traffickers of chemical weapons, the slave-traders and financial embezzlers? Aren’t they also poor sinners? Right? Or do I have to ask Schönborn to meet them for lunch and evaluate their purity?

Dear Director, the situation by now is very clear: any Catholic politician, intellectual or journalist even if he wants to fight on the homosexualist front, will find himself spiked in the back by the mysticism of mercy and forgiveness. We are all completely de-legitimized, and any bishop, priest, theologian, director of a diocesan weekly or politician of the Catholic-democratic-type can shut us up with that “Who am I to judge”. We would be riddled with shots like a farm pheasant in a hunting chase by types like Mogavero.

Dear Director, our problem is not Matteo Renzi.

Our problem, my problem, is that the other day the Holy Father said the Gospel “is not proclaimed with doctrinal beatings, but with sweetness.” Also here, I would please ask “normalists” and timewasters to abstain. Even I know that effectively the Gospel is announced like that – apart from the fact that John the Baptist had rather brusque methods himself, and the Lord defines him “as the greatest among those born of woman”.

But you know very well that with that little sentence, we have both been spiked like codfish.

We have both been fighting against legalized abortion, divorce, in vitro fertilization, euthanasia, homosexual unions and cunning politicians like Matteo Renzi, who are promoting and spreading all that stuff. But there you have it, we are both irremediable doctrinal bashers, people without charity, ethicists, “theologians”, as some journalist from Communion and Liberation calls us. Furthermore, phenomenon like La Bussola and Il Timone are anachronistic examples of this lack of charity, of this unpresentable moral rigour. Plus, the daily, titanic efforts of the “normalists” will not be enough to subtract these titles of de-legitimization from official Catholicism, as all the balancing exercises in trying to keep your feet in two different shoes, always end up, sooner or later, with a tragic flight into the void.

I also think that the problem – forgive the personal aspect – is not dirty, ugly and bad Gnocchi and Palmaro, because of what they wrote in Il Foglio.

I would re-write the same thing again, ten, a hundred, thousand times more, since unfortunately, everything is coming to pass in the worst way, much worse than what we could have ever predicted.

This is why, dear Director, our problem and the problem of Catholics and ordinary people is not Matteo Renzi.

The problem is our Mother Church, who has decided to abandon us in the jungle of Vietnam: the helicopters have taken off and we have been left where we’ll let ourselves, one at a time, be spiked by the “Vietcong relativists.” I am not protesting for myself, and you know the reasons why. And besides, I prefer a thousand times, to stay down here waiting for the Vietcong, rather than ever get into one of those helicopters, in which perhaps there is the promise of a little seat in some clerical conference of the type “Scienza e Vita,” under the illusion that one is a part, in some way, of the official power, together with all the other ecclesial movements. Or with the crazy idea - written in black and white - that, Gnocchi and Palmaro were perhaps right, but they shouldn’t have said it, because certain truths should not be uttered, rather they should be somewhat denied publically in order to confound the enemy.

No, I am not protesting for myself.

However, I still have the problem of that seven-year-old son of mine and three older ones too. I don’t want to and can’t give them the response of the boatloads sinking near Lampedusa, the homosexual example of purity from Cardinal Schönborn, the half-castes and the praise of the Roma culture by Cardinal Scola, the disdain for doctrinal thrashings according to Pope Francis and the eulogizing of civil unions by Mogavero. To these children I cannot tell the fairy-tale called “Matteo Renzi.” Anyway, regarding Renzi, ten minutes done well by Crozza* will fix him.

Dear director, dear Riccardo, why would I ever write these things to you? Because last night I couldn't sleep. And because I’d like to understand – and ask the readership of Bussola a question: What more has to happen in the Church for Catholics to stand up, once and for all, and shout their indignation from the rooftops? Attention: I am addressing individual Catholics, not associations, secret meetings, movements, sects which for years have been managing the brains of the faithful for the benefit of third parties, dictating the line the followers have to take. These groups seem to me to be placed under the care of those minus habens [of lesser intelligence] and headed from afar by more or less charismatic individuals, who are more or less trustworthy. No, no: here I am making an appeal to individual consciences, to their hearts, their faith and their virility. Before it is too late.

I owe this to you my dear Riccardo. I owe this to all those who know me and still have esteem for me and for what I represent. Pardon me for having taken advantage of your patience and also that of your readers.
Mario Palmaro
__________________

Translation, slightly adapted to conform to informal style used by Mario Palmaro
– Francesca Romana 
Source: Bussola Quotidiana

Translator’s notes:

*Niki Vendola, homosexual ("LGBT") activist, left-wing politician
*Fabio Fazio, TV presenter for left-wing RAI 3
*Luciana Littizzetto, comedian, anti-Catholic, does TV spots for COOP
*Gino Strada, war surgeon, Founder of Italian NGO Emergency
*Enzo Bianchi, Prior of Monastic Community of Bose (Biella), but not a priest, and progressive Catholic writer
*Eugenio Scalfari, editor of left-wing daily – La Repubblica.
*Todi 1 and Todi 2 – two Forums held in the Todi, Umbria for associations and people of Catholic inspiration in the work place in October 2012
*Crozza, comedian of scathing satire
*Don Ciotti, Catholic priest, writer, social activist, particularly against drugs and the Mafia
*Don Gallo, Catholic priest, now deceased, famed for communist ideals and social activism

***