- when I stepped up on the platform
the man gave me the news... He said you must be joking son,
where did you get those shoes?
Posted on 02/22/2013 7:20:34 AM PST by marshmallow
The Vatican has refused to comment on Italian press reports that an internal report on the “Vatileaks” scandal might have influenced the decision by Pope Benedict XVI to resign.
The daily La Repubblica reported that in their report to the Pope, a commission of 3 cardinals investigating the leaked papal documents had found evidence of a homosexual network within the Vatican, and hinted at the possibility that some Vatican officials were subject to blackmail.
“There will be no comment, denials or confirmation of what has been written in an Italian newspaper,” Father Federico Lombardi, the director of the Vatican press office, told reporters during a February 21 briefing. However the papal spokesman urged reporters to be responsible in their handling of unsubstantiated rumors.
Father Lombardi said that the three cardinals had submitted their report privately to Pope Benedict, and it would be passed on to his successor. The three prelates who investigated the “Vatileaks” scandal and prepared a thorough report—Cardinals Julian Herranz, Jozef Tomko, and Salvatore De Giorgi—will not be giving interviews or divulging details regarding the contents of the report, he said. Cardinal Herranz, who chaired the commission, confirmed: “The Pope is the only person we have reported to on this question.”
Lombardi: An invitation to accurate reporting on great moment in life of Church (Vatican Radio)
Pope Benedict retired after inquiry into 'Vatican gay officials', says paper (The Guardian)
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicculture.org ...
And they seem utterly oblivious to the fact that a world without traditional marriage, traditional families, or the Catholic Church is not going to be a better word for anybody, including gay people.
Yes, it will be interesting to see what comes out, since they apparently plan to release more of whatever it is they have.
Personally, I think you’re going to find that a lot of JPII’s closest associates were involved in this hanky panky. I don’t think he was involved in it, but he was simply a weak administrator who preferred to turn a blind eye to many things, particularly those involving his friends. One of the odd things about JPII is that in many ways, he separated himself from the Church as a whole and presented himself to the world as a good, loveable Pope (and I’m not denying the good he may have done by this) almost on a free-lance basis. His responsibility was to ensure that the whole Church reflected this, but he was very lax and the little enforcement there was - either in theological orthodoxy or morals - came from Ratzinger as head of the CDF.
I’m sure BXVI has been aware of this for a long time, but I think he also feels that it would give great scandal to the faithful if he revealed the fact that JPII probably knew about it as well and did nothing.
Incidentally, I read an interesting article in the Spanish press the other day that said that BXVI has, in the last several years of his pontificate, quietly removed and replaced an average of 3 bishops a month, worldwide. He felt that a lot of the corruption, while it may have been committed by the lower clergy, only got going because the senior clergy either permitted it or even participated in it themselves. And, from what I have seen, he was right in that. Thus, one of the objectives of his Papacy was to renew the episcopate.
It’s worse than that. That wasn’t Malachi Martin, that was Pope Paul VI. Malachi Martin merely reported what the Pope was referring to: having found a black mass being conducted in the Vatican. Years later, court documents have revealed that Cardinal Bernardin, once called “the American Pope” for his incredible domination of every line of ecclesiastical power in the US was accused of sexually desecrating the sacrament (and a little girl!) in a horrifying black mass. What’s more, Bernadin was head of the papal household (”camerlingo”) at the time Pope Paul discovered the black mass going on.
So what exactly was this “black mass?” (And here I refer to the Vatican black mass only, for this contains no element of sexual abuse): The 33rd rite of initiation of the Southern Rite of the Scottish Freemasons, as detailed in Albert Pike’s book, is a mimicry of the Catholic mass, with hoods worn. Albert Pike’s book is no expose; it is the very handbook of the rite.
The Southern Rite is not your Founding Fathers’ freemasonry. It was founded in Charleston, SC in the early 19th century, and it is from whence the Ku Klux Klan came from. In contrast to George Washington’s tolerance and appreciation of Catholicsm, it seeks the destruction of Catholicism.
Guess who is from Charleston, SC? Yup. Cardinal Bernadin.
Now, this is not to lay blame for ALL the sexual abuse in the Catholic Church at the feet of the freemasons. Back in 1961, Pope John XXIII saw sexual abuse as an endemic enough of a problem to issue rules that homosexuals should not be ordained because the strains of priestly celibacy (which are far greater than mere chastity) could mutate a homosexual’s sexuality even further. I’m even convinced that what launched Martin Luther was witnessing homosexual abuse in the monastery. (Whereas he usually exaggerates to the point of slander and invention his description of misdeeds by the Church’s men, he is enigmatically cryptic about what he saw in his own monastery that convinced him that priests should marry: “unspeakable acts done by men to other men.” That he is cryptic suggests to me that it is a point of shame.) Even the very first ecumenical council after that of Jerusalem, the Nicene Council, felt it necessary to call for the defrocking of any priest who brings “scandal” (which formally means salvation-depriving shame) upon children.
But with Bernadin begins a pattern of promoting sexual deviants to the highest reaches. The ritualization of the abuse, absent from mainstream media coverage, suggests it is not merely perverted sexual desires, but rape being used as a tactical weapon to destroy souls.
Like all human institutions, the Catholic Church has corrupt members and has had them since the beginning. This fact makes its 2000 year survival all the more miraculous.
Catholics can be confident that the truly faithful will always defeat the corrupt and the Church will survive to preserve, protect and deliver Christ’s message to the world forever.
How do we know this? Jesus told us: “The gates of hell will not prevail against my Church.”
There is no other explanation.
Yes - I feel like I’m holding my breath waiting to see the outcome of that war.
This is the legacy of Vatican II which has damaged the Catholic church far more than the Reformation ever did.
That is true. I read once that rape is not really about sex, but about power. I don't mean the drunk who goes home with another drunk, gropes her and has sex and then the next day she charges him with rape; I don't think power was involved in that! But I mean things like Islamic rapes of non-Muslims, the rapes of males in prison, and the calculated rape and sexual abuse by the powerful (clergy) in the Church of the less powerful (lower clergy, laity, children).
And they are all motivated by Satan himself, Lucifer, whose whole disatrous fall was because he wanted power. Sexual abuse is a devastatingly effective way of destroying souls and asserting Satan's power over them.
Particularly this part...
The ritualization of the abuse, absent from mainstream media coverage, suggests it is not merely perverted sexual desires, but rape being used as a tactical weapon to destroy souls.Powerful stuff.
The Cardinals came up through the ranks. If the ranks have a bad smell it only stands to reason that some of that smell is carried into the upper echelons.
It cannot be dnied that Bishops and Cardinals had to know what was going on.After all are they not the Confessors of the ranks?
Can't remember if this Charleston Mass was contemporaneous to the Black Mass in Rome?
I don’t think that statement protects the Vatican, nor does it protect every church. If it did, churches would never close due to internal corruption, hypocrisy, evil.
I think in the end “the church” will be small groups of like-minded Christians who continue to try and spread the word.
“For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”
I don’t think any specific denomination was declared “the church” and is therefore infallible. To do so would either be presumptuous, or arrogance.
Why its as honest as the day is long...
I don’t think any specific denomination was declared “the church” and is therefore infallible. To do so would either be presumptuous, or arrogance.
I foresee lavender smoke arising from the conclave.
Your doing the right thing.
Yet another in the “Real Reason the Pope Quit©” series.
I think I’ll sit it out and go with his own reason.
:)
And as re the homosexual presence, A 2002 nationwide poll of 1,854 priests in the United States and Puerto Rico reported that 30% of Roman Catholic priests described themselves as Liberal, 28% as Conservative, and 37% as Moderate in their Religious ideology. 53 percent responded that they thought it always was a sin for unmarried people to have sexual relations; 32 percent that is often was, and 9 percent seldom/never. However, nearly four in 10 younger priests in 2002 described themselves as conservative, and were more likely to regard as "always a sin" such acts as premarital sex, abortion, artificial birth control, homosexual relations, etc., and three-fourths said they were more religiously orthodox than their older counterparts. Los Angeles Times (extensive) nationwide survey (2002). http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/reports/LAT-Priest-Survey.pdf http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_2_39/ai_94129129/pg_2
The survey also found that 80% of Roman Catholic priests referred to themselves as “mostly” heterosexual in orientation, with 67% being exclusively heterosexual, 8% leaning toward heterosexual, 5% completely in the middle, and 6% leaning toward homosexual and 9% saying they are homosexual, for a combined figure of 15% on the homosexual class. Among younger priests (those ordained for 20 years or less) the figure was 23%. ^
15 percent of the clergy polled listed themselves as "gay or on the homosexual side." Among younger priests 23 percent did so. Los Angeles Times (extensive) nationwide survey (2002). http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/reports/LAT-Priest-Survey.pdf
44 percent of the priests said "definitely" a homosexual subculture'--defined as a `definite group of persons that has its own friendships, social gatherings and vocabulary'--exists in their diocese or religious order. ^
After examining the official web sites of 244 Catholic universities and colleges in America, the TFP Student Action found that 107 – or 43% have pro-homosexual clubs. TFP Student Action Dec. 6. 2011; studentaction.org/get-involved/online-petitions/pro-homosexual-clubs-at-107-catholic-colleges/print.html
39 percent of Roman Catholics and 79 percent of born-again, evangelical or fundamentalist American Christians affirm that homosexual behavior is sinful. LifeWay (SBC) Research study, released Wednesday. 2008 LifeWay Research study. http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080606/survey-americans-divided-on-homosexuality-as-sin.htm
79 percent of American Jews, 58 percent of Catholics and 56 percent of mainline Protestants favor acceptance of homosexuality, versus 39 percent of members of historically black churches, 27 percent of Muslims and 26 percent of the evangelical Protestants. U.S. U.S. Religious landscape survey; Copyright © 2008 The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. http://religions.pewforum.org/comparisons#
56% of Catholics overall (and 46% of the general public) believe that sexual relations between two adults of the same gender is not a sin, while 39%. of Catholics say homosexual behavior is morally wrong, (versus 76% of white evangelicals and 66% of black Protestants, and 40% of Mainline Protestants). 41% of Catholics do not consider homosexual behavior to be a moral issue. (Pew Research Center, Religion & Politics Survey, 2009; PRRI/RNS Religion News Survey, October 2010; http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Catholics-and-LGBT-Issues-Survey-Report.pdf)
Catholics testify [2010] to showing more support (in numbers) for legal recognitions of same-sex relationships than members of any other Christian tradition, and Americans overall. Almost three-quarters of Catholics favor either allowing gay and lesbian people to marry or allowing them to form civil unions (43% and 31% respectively). Only 22% of Catholics said there should be no legal recognition of a gay couple’s relationship. (PRRI, Pre--election American Values Survey, 9/2010; http://publicreligion.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Catholics-and-LGBT-Issues-Survey-Report.pdf.)
This 2010 survey of more than 3,000 adults found that 41% of White American Catholics, 45% of Latino Catholics (versus 16 percent of White evangelical Christians, and 23% of Black Protestants) supported the rights of same-sex couples to marry, and 36% (22% of Latino Catholics) supported civil unions (versus 24% of White evangelicals, and 25% of Black Protestants). Among the general public the rates were 37 and 27 percent.
69% of Catholics disagree that homosexual orientation can be changed, versus 23% who believe that they can change. ^
19% of White Catholics, 30% of Latino Catholics, 58% of White evangelicals, 52% of Black Protestants and 29% of White Mainline Protestants oppose any legal recognition of homosexual marriage. ^
60% of Catholics overall, and 53% of the general public favor allowing homosexual couples to adopt children. ^
73% of Catholics favor laws that would protect gay and lesbian people against discrimination in the workplace, and 63% favor allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military. For the general public the figures are 68% and 58% respectively. ^
49% of Catholics and 45% of the general public agree that homosexuals should be eligible for ordination with no special requirements. ^
Among Catholics who attend services regularly (weekly or more), 31% say there should be no legal recognition for homosexual relationships (marriage or civil unions), with 26% favoring allowing gay and lesbian people to marry, versus 43% of Catholics who attend once or twice a month, and 59% of Catholics who attend a few times a year or less favoring allowance of homosexual marriage. ^
More :
Important point. This is how the entertainment industry became dominated by the gay culture.
Those numbers are rather distressing.
the man gave me the news... He said you must be joking son, where did you get those shoes?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.