Look at this extract from one of the linked articles in this excellent contribution from Chris:

"Martini was the leading antagonist to Popes John Paul II and Benedict—a Jesuit famous for groaning that the Church was “200 years behind.” In Night Conversations with Cardinal Martini, he cringed at the “major damage” caused by Humanae Vitae. The Church spoke “too much” about the sixth commandment and sin. He said legal abortion was, ultimately, “positive.”"

What does it take for someone to be excommunicated? This is like a senior general at the Pentagon openly selling nuclear secrets to North Korea on a TV broadcast and not being prosecuted for treason.

As a bit of light relief, it reminds me of the late Malcolm Muggeridge quoting an Anglican bishop who allegedly said that the Ten Commandments were like an exam paper - eight only to be attempted. Or the cruel wag who described them as the Ten Suggestions.

Your observations are excellent as well. (Excommunicated? I'd have written executed.) I, too, appreciate many of the author's revelations and observations such as, for example, "Evidently, the schedule of the 'Pope Emeritus,' who pronounced himself too feeble to be an actual Pope, remains so busy he cannot devote his attention to the theological views of the very man who succeeded him on the Chair of Peter ..."

“[God] Who bringeth to nought the designs of the malignant, so that their hands cannot accomplish what they had begun: Who catcheth the wise in their craftiness, and disappointeth the counsel of the wicked” Job V, 12-13
“An enemy is known by his lips, when in his heart he entertaineth deceit. When he shall speak low, trust him not: because there are seven mischiefs in his heart. He that covereth hatred deceitfully, his malice shall be laid open in the public assembly. He that diggeth a pit, shall fall into it: and he that rolleth a stone, it shall return to him.”
Proverbs XXVI, 24-27
“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written: I will catch the wise in their own craftiness.”
1 Corinthians III, 19

We know that Benedict had a phone talk with Cardinal Meisner on the eve of his death last year. Unless an exceptional coincidence, this was certainly not the first talk they had this year and before.
Can anyone imagine that the ongoing crisis, Bergoglio and peculiarly the dubia were not in the heart of Meisner and Benedict's conversation? But we will never know for sure.
I personally have passionate talks with my parish priest who is same minded as I am about the bergoglian pontificate. He asked me never to share this with anyone because he would be at risk of retaliations from his bishop and from a lot of his colleagues priests of the diocese.
Here is how the Catholic Church is working in 2018.

Let me just say that the already labored task of evangelizing non-believers has been made that much more exasperating, particularly to those who have at least a modicum of currency regarding the foibles of Rome these past few years. It has been hard enough trying to define the bulls eye post Vatican II, but now with this pontificate, it has virtually been removed from the firing range.

Mario , evangelizing whom and why ? Have you lost your mind ? If your local priest become aware of your heresy you might be forbidden from receiving communion .

They may work for the Master Deceiver, but they surely are not masters of deceit, themselves. They are amateurs in this game of propaganda, doing more harm for the Bergoglio than good.
Regarding the pic with the tee - it really is a good representation of this "pontificate". Not that he's in any way a superhero, but that he's a real comic book character.

It is a grave mistake to believe and act as though Pope Bergoglio appeared from nowhere to run the Neo-Catholic Church . Instead he was the natural and indispensable continuation of his five immediate predecessors . Each one of them pushed further the envelope of heresies , although Pope Montini did most of the heavy lifting .

Outstanding, Mr. Ferrara. Why can't we get weekly Matt/Ferrara videos? Once a month? This is the fuel of the true Catholics who still make up the real Church.

Wonderful piece, Mr Ferrara. “Quaffing beer during the unfolding apocalypse”. You can really turn a phrase! You are a treasure. Thank you.

Nothing surprises me given the actions of the Borgoglian brainwash subterfuge machine.
Listening to his imposition and noise only propagates antipathy though we are called to pray for our enimies and sinners.
It was a nice spash of fresh air to see Chris Ferrara give reference to one of Cardinal Sarah newest books where he speaks about cultivating "silence" within ourselves.

Quote:("the laudatory preface Benedict provided to Cardinal Robert Sarah’s “The Power of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise”—a book that Benedict has read. In that preface, entirely “composed in his diminutive handwriting during Easter Week,” we read the following:

As I was reading the new book by Robert Cardinal Sarah, all these thoughts went through my soul again. Sarah teaches us silence—being silent with Jesus, true inner stillness, and in just this way he helps us to grasp the word of the Lord anew….

From this vantage point, he [Sarah] can then see the dangers that continually threaten the spiritual life, of priests and bishops also, and thus endanger the Church herself, too, in which it is not uncommon for the Word to be replaced by a verbosity that dilutes the greatness of the Word…. Cardinal Sarah is a spiritual teacher, who speaks out of the depths of silence with the Lord, out of his interior union with him, and thus really has something to say to each one of us…. With Cardinal Sarah, a master of silence and of interior prayer, the liturgy is in good hands.")

Cardinal Sarah was in Toronto, Ontario Canada Monday evening March 12 at Saint Micheal's Cathedral Basilica. https://www.stmichaelscathe...

Those blurred out lines sound like the only part of the letter Pope Benedict actually wrote himself.

Isn't a Jesuit Church an oxymoron ?

This whole sordid business reminds me of a bad 'infomercial' that airs in the wee hours of the morning. Invariably, some shill provides a fake testimony to the efficacy (or bargain) offered by some such dubious product or service. The point being to ensnare the unwitting insomniacs.

I first learned of the Journalist's Creed in high school. The third tenet reads: "I believe that clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism." And the eighth and final tenet states, in part: "I believe that the journalism which succeeds best — and best deserves success — fears God and honors Man; is stoutly independent, unmoved by pride of opinion or greed of power..."

I think one of the problems today in Francis' feel good religion is that very few actually fear God.

PLEASE PIN THIS COMMENT:

Apropos the letter from Benedict to Vigano, I look at it from a lawyer's perspective, as this is really a kind of forensic affair involving many suspicious circumstances.

A good method for preparing to cross-examine a witness is to picture yourself in the same situation as the witness, with all of the attendant circumstances, and then ask yourself what a witness in that situation would really do, as opposed to any claim about what he supposedly did. This yields a more subtle picture of the letter at issue.

So, (1) Benedict is an ailing 90-year-old with failing eyesight, who is probably in the very last days of his life; (2) he is physically very weak, and, like all very elderly people, susceptible to undue influence, a more subtle form of coercion than outright threats; (3) he has abdicated the papal throne under mysterious circumstances and has taken a pledge to remain cloistered while avoiding any criticism of Francis; (4) he is a conflicted liberal who, nevertheless, is imbued with the Catholic piety of a Bavarian upbringing that produced two vocations in his family; (5) he lives in a monastery building and is not a Web surfer or computer user; (6) whatever he writes he writes by hand, the old-fashioned way, including (7) his entirely handwritten preface to Cardinal Sarah's book, which is an obvious critique of the state of the Church under Francis.

Given these facts, the following picture emerges, which avoids the caricature that the letter is a total fake, on the one hand, or exactly what Benedict meant to say, on the other:

1. Benedict did not compose the letter in MS Word and then click the Print button. Obviously, someone created the document for him.

2. That being so, either (a) it was written by another, and he approved it by signing it after reading it, or (b) he dictated or wrote by hand a draft which may exist, and the draft was edited by him or by another.

3. Given 2(a) or (b) it is reasonable to conclude that the letter is a combination of Benedict's literal words and those of another. This would account for the stylistic differences within the text, including the suspiciously clumsy "foolish prejudice" and the closing paragraphs, which sound like the more nuanced Benedict.

4. Therefore, the letter is essentially what Benedict was willing to swallow, perhaps under some degree of undue influence, while at least adding a precision or two that he knew would preclude its use as a ringing endorsement of Francis.

5. The letter is the best that could be extracted from Francis, which is why the Vatican had to hide its inconvenient portions while still employing it as a desperately needed "endorsement" of Bergoglio's madness by his predecessor.

So, if I were to cross-examine Benedict, I would ask him (1) whether he personally typed it on a computer (probable answer: NO), (2) whether one or more people contributed to the text (probable answer: YES), (3) whether Vigano told him he needed a positive review of the eleven books (probable answer: YES), (4) whether he fully endorses as free from problems all the teachings of Francis, including Amoris Laetitia, Chapter 8 (probable answer: a non-committal evasion, not an endorsement of "the theology of Pope Francis"); (5) whether he read the quotations from Sarah's book cited in my article (probable answer: YES, given that he says he read the book); (6) whether he disagrees with any of the sentiments expressed in those quotations (probable answer: a revealing equivocation supporting Sarah's critique of the Bergoglian pontificate); (7) whether he has seen the dubia respecting AL (probable answer: either YES or a revealing "no comment"); (8) whether he agrees with the need for the dubia (probable answer: YES or a revealing "no comment").

Conclusion: The letter is a compromise between what Benedict was expected to say and the totality of what he really thinks, which is not entirely in accord with what was expected. Being able to do no better, the Vatican went with what it had, resorting to concealment of the part that did not serve its narrative.

In The New Rosary, you pointed out the stylistic differences in RVM, the 2003 encyclical signed by PJPII. This sounds like the same modus operandi under similar circumstances (e.g. both were elderly and could easily be taken advantage of).

Chris , do you really believe that Ratzinger's letter was worth all this analysis ? Are we not rearranging the deckchairs on the Neo-Catholic Titanic ? Would not arguing over the sex of angels be more interesting ? We could also spend hours debating the right pronouns . But it goes without saying that angels are transgender . What else could they be right ?

This is the best and most logical explanation of Benedict's behavior I have seen yet.

Yup, I think you nailed it, Chris.

None of this absolves Benedict for his cowardice and willful obliviousness of the last five years. But to cast him as some sort of Vatican II heretic in the same mold as Francis is barking up the wrong tree, in my view.

Furthermore, to interpret his weird, pathetic letter as some sort of endorsement of Francis is wrongheaded and counterproductive. Benedict is a doddering old man with one foot in the grave. He is not the issue now. The issue is Francis the Merciful.

Which is why we shouldn’t criticize Benedict. From the headlines we know the Vatican is full of evil, manipulative men. Few of us could handle such a den of vipers let alone a 90 year old man who is frail and ill. Pray for Pope Benedict. He was a good pope and did his best in very difficult circumstances.

The sad thing is that to some degree, he lives in a cell of his own construction.

Yes.

Yes. This sounds perfectly logical, unlike most of the letter.

Where is Greg Burke of Opus Dei, plucked from Fox to bring some authenticity and professionalism to the antiquated Vatican communications team?
What happened to Greg Burke?
What happened to Opus Dei?

Ecclesia appears now to be the hands of a group of dog collared criminals who are without concern of maintaining a flock of believers. Some nominal adherents appreciative of their backs scratched provide an excuse for this oligarchy to exist, collect their stipend,
perks and prestige of a two thousand year old eviscerated edifice with no other purpose than to be a place saver in a society freed from assent to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Their credence rests on valor stolen from saints, scholars and decent churchmen who walked before them.
Their hands on not only the physical and economic assets of the institution, they can now
craft the decomposition of the spiritual assets – the perennial Magisterium, the academic brilliance, the history, the relics, the iconography, the lexicon, the art and architecture.
The destruction of the Church engineered by the episcopal forces of secular materialism allows them to go unperceived. There be no martyrs, no blood, no heroes, and no silent
witness to Jesus Christ. His image destroyed, His image eliminated in society, in history, will not His image be erased in humanity?
When the Son of Man returns will He find any faith on the earth?
These malefactors have not an iota of concern for the likes of the faithful who perceive what is transpiring. Their goal is for us to “self-select,” to opt out, to comment ourselves to death, to get discouraged, to jump ship into the whatever – into hell – even though believe neither in it or Eternal Beatitude. The more outrageous they behave the better – it only serves their purpose. The more they behave as they wish the more likely we are to evaporate.
Everything coming up, and it is going to be an avalanche over the next few years, is designed to get rid of what remains of the faithful and allow parasitic atheist members of
the episcopate to keep their place in the palace. The episcopate is in the hands of bold liars. Those who aren’t are cowards. An anonymous remainder are – God willing – calculating the optimum moment to expose the fraudulence occupying the Chair.
“These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where the See of Holy Peter and the Chair of Truth has been set up as the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be.” – Pope Leo XIII
Lord, correct me if I am wrong.
Never have I longed to be so wrong.

Again...I post,
The Second Coming won't come soon enough for me.
JMJ

Semper Fidelis

With gentle respects: The Second Coming isn't about you alone.

No kidding...

I have now on my desk, "In Search of Freedom: Against Reason Fallen ill and Religion Abused", a speech by then Cardinal Ratzinger given on the 60th anniversary of the Invasion of Normandy in 1994. He does just as Mr. Ferrara cites: "Upon an abstract, an ahistorical reason, a state cannot endure" and YET "the secular state follows from a fundamental Christian decision". Even allowing that "secular" has become a more poisonous term 25 years later, the Cardinal is fence-sitting. It provides a nice view, but as we have seen, no one can live a human and Christian life sitting there.

I never believed that the Literary Analysis I was taught many years ago would be of any use, but this letter has given me the opportunity.Applying their methods, it's abundantly clear that this is not the work of Benedict XVI. The general flow makes it suspect but the words used, taking into account translation, confirm that it is not from Benedict XVI. As if he would ever use words such as "Foolish^ He has a far too complex and intellectual mind than to ever dismiss or openly criticise in such a manner.

When he was still reigning as pope, I'd always watch his homilies during the papal Masses that EWTN broadcasted. Imo, his homilies were like scholarly dissertations. You almost had to have a PhD in order to understand them! That's why I was very suspicious when the news first broke about this "endorsement".

Chris Ferrara ably dissected this "endorsement" with critical accuracy and marvelously put it into words.

Thank God for Michael Matt, Chris Ferrara and the army of Remnant writers who continue to prove true the adage that "the pen is mightier than the sword".

This episode is illustrative of the unprecedented crisis the Church and the world is in. As the Church has always taught us, lies are an essential attribute of the fallen angels, and we make ourselves like unto them whenever we lie. We live in a sea of lies (what is 99% of advertising, but casual lies?), and as a consequence we have, as if by diabolical design, lost our natural repulsion to lying. i.e., we've lost our healthy repugnance to evil, and the fallen angels.

That those in the Vatican would so casually lie like this, and flippantly say, "Yep! You caught us lying. No biggie!" -- it beggars belief. They are admitting that they are like unto Satan, and they don't care. Nay, they positively like being children of the evil one. And these men have control of the Church. I've known this for some time, but it really drives it home for me. We should all be begging God for mercy -- begging the One, True, Triune God, not the demigod Bergoglio, and his evil god of surprises, mind you!

Kyrie eleison!

It pops out at me that Benedict does call PF's theological and philosophical formation "profound," which means intense, not necessarily 'good.'

"The Pope in the Attic......". LOL!!

Yeah, that's a good one. Says it all.

I don’t think we can judge Benedict at all. He is a frail, elderly man who is isolated and surrounded by corrupt liars and manipulators in the Vatican. He is probably a prisoner of sorts. I feel very sorry for him. We have no right to condemn are criticise him. He is not responsible for Francis. The cardinals who elected him are. Pray for him. Also thank him because he gave us the motu which freed the TLM!

I would not like to judge Cardinal Ratzinger's soul either, but unfortunately we are witnesses to his writings, teachings and witness over the past 60 years. He can be convicted by his own words. You, charitably, claim that he is not responsible for the election of Pope Francis - that some evil ones have snuck into the field and sowed cockle - but this was done on Ratzinger's watch, without any, or very little, condemnation of those evil men.

God will only judge harshly the guilty. We don't know about Cardinal Ratzinger, or Pope Francis either. But we can and must be observers, if only for the warnings such behaviour give us.

Pope Benedict, please.

As the headlines tell us, the Vatican is full of corrupt, immoral and evil men. I seriously doubt few of us could survive long admist that den of vipers. Now imagine you’re elderly, frail and ill and entirely dependent on your persecutors. Very few of us could deal with that. Benedict only deserves our concern, best wishes and prayers.

Tradition tells us that Saint Peter was an old man when he sought to escape Rome.
"Domine, Quo Vadis?" (Lord, where are you going?) St Peter asked Our resurrected Lord appearing to him carrying his cross.
To which Christ responded:
“Eo Romam iterum crucifigi.” (I go to Rome to be crucified once again.)
An ashamed Peter turned towards Rome again where he was to be martyred by crucifixion upside down (the orientation being Peter's choice)
We have the prediction of these events handed down by tradition in the Gospel at John 13:36.
This is the example Benedict XVI should follow. I don't buy it that he can just shirk responsibility.

https://uploads.disquscdn.c...

We now have a new category to define and add to the traditionalist, conservative, progressive and liberal Catholics. The new category is the moderate modernist. LOL. Reminds me of the pro-life battle for truth, where those who support abortion with exceptions are the "moderates" while the full pro-lifers are the "extremists". I remember from my Catholic university philosophy classes in Aristotelian Logic that words are the signs of thoughts. The thoughts are prior. Which means in today's vocabulary there is a whole lot of confused thinking going on. Great to read clear thinking here in Mr. Ferrara's and other articles. A great relief actually. The abuse of the intellect going on everywhere is painful.

Just a few years ago, I could never imagine I would get sick to my stomach every time I see the pope in the news.

Chris Ferrara's conclusion that divine intervention is needed before things get better, overlooks the more immediate remedy of restoring the Church's foundational teaching on Original Sin - removed by Marxists' a century ago. Put it back, and stand back for the fireworks.

Peter

Oh I know it right?! When I even hear his name I immediately frown.

It's expensive, but worth every penny: The Mystery Hidden for Ages in God. Paul M. Quay, SJ.

Published almost 25 years ago, it's a time bomb buried deep under the Modernists and their "church," and their world.

Thank you Arthur. Can you give some insight into the book's treatment of Original Sin? Did you know theistic evolution which has replaced Creation "ex nihilo", is refuted by the Lateran IV definition of Creation.

No surprises that there are unscrupulous media tricksters in the Vatican.
Can we really trust anyone on team Bergolio?
How utterly absurd this two pope scenario is. I tire of giving Benedict the benefit of the doubt and people having to second guesse him and his views on what is happening in our church today with the modernist destroyers of faith in control.

Insightful and on the money as usual from Christopher. How absurd is this two Pope situation.How pathetic are these bumbling Vatican media tricksters. How bleak is our church's immediate future with the modernist destroyers of faith in control.
As Christopher suggests in his conclusion , divine intervention seems the only way

Think of it : there has been indeed internal continuity from 1958 on but it has been hidden behind a wall of obfuscation and deceit . Eureka !!!!!!! Bravo Chris !