Theologians & Scholars Formally Request Correction of Amoris Laetitia

http://www.onepeterfive.com/theologians-scholars-formally-request-correction-amoris-laetitia/
Theologians & Scholars Formally Request Correction of Amoris Laetitia


In a press release issued today, an international group of “Catholic academics and pastors” states that they have petitioned Rome to address serious theological problems with the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia.

Among the 45 signatories are Catholic prelates, scholars, professors, authors, and clergy from various pontifical universities, seminaries, colleges, theological institutes, religious orders, and dioceses around the world. They have asked the College of Cardinals, in their capacity as the Pope’s official advisers, to approach the Holy Father with a request that he repudiate “the errors listed in the document in a definitive and final manner, and to authoritatively state that Amoris laetitia does not require any of them to be believed or considered as possibly true.”

According to their statement, the group

submitted an appeal to Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Dean of the College of Cardinals in Rome, requesting that the Cardinals and Eastern Catholic Patriarchs petition His Holiness, Pope Francis, to repudiate a list of erroneous propositions that can be drawn from a natural reading of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia. During the coming weeks this submission will be sent in various languages to every one of the Cardinals and Patriarchs, of whom there are 218 living at present.

Describing the exhortation as containing “a number of statements that can be understood in a sense that is contrary to Catholic faith and morals,” the signatories submitted, along with their appeal, a documented list of applicable theological censures specifying “the nature and degree of the errors that could be attributed to Amoris laetitia.”

This is a noteworthy effort, and it seems fair to say that it is the single largest indication to date that the problematic passages in Amoris Laetitia that have been so widely commented upon are being taken seriously by at least some of those who have been charged with a duty to defend and teach the faith and nurture souls on the path to salvation.

“We are not accusing the Pope of heresy,” said Joseph Shaw, a signatory of the appeal who is also acting as spokesman for the authors, “but we consider that numerous propositions in Amoris laetitia can be construed as heretical upon a natural reading of the text. Additional statements would fall under other established theological censures, such as scandalous, erroneous in faith, and ambiguous, among others.”
​

The full text of the release follows:

Press Release

7/11/16

A group of Catholic academics and pastors has submitted an appeal to Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Dean of the College of Cardinals in Rome, requesting that the Cardinals and Eastern Catholic Patriarchs petition His Holiness, Pope Francis, to repudiate a list of erroneous propositions that can be drawn from a natural reading of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia. During the coming weeks this submission will be sent in various languages to every one of the Cardinals and Patriarchs, of whom there are 218 living at present.

Describing the exhortation as containing “a number of statements that can be understood in a sense that is contrary to Catholic faith and morals,” the signatories submitted, along with their appeal, a documented list of applicable theological censures specifying “the nature and degree of the errors that could be attributed to Amoris laetitia.”

Among the 45 signatories are Catholic prelates, scholars, professors, authors, and clergy from various pontifical universities, seminaries, colleges, theological institutes, religious orders, and dioceses around the world. They have asked the College of Cardinals, in their capacity as the Pope’s official advisers, to approach the Holy Father with a request that he repudiate “the errors listed in the document in a definitive and final manner, and to authoritatively state that Amoris laetitia does not require any of them to be believed or considered as possibly true.”

“We are not accusing the pope of heresy,” said a spokesman for the authors, “but we consider that numerous propositions in Amoris laetitia can be construed as heretical upon a natural reading of the text. Additional statements would fall under other established theological censures, such as scandalous, erroneous in faith, and ambiguous, among others.”

The 1983 Code of Canon Law states that “According to the knowledge, competence, and expertise which they possess, they [the Christian faithful]have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful” (CIC, can. 212 §3).

The thirteen-page document quotes nineteen passages in the exhortation which seem to conflict with Catholic doctrines. These doctrines include the real possibility with the grace of God of obeying all the commandments, the fact that certain kinds of act are wrong in all circumstances, the headship of the husband, the superiority of consecrated virginity over the married life, and the legitimacy of capital punishment under certain circumstances. The document also argues that the exhortation undermines the Church’s teaching that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics who have made no commitment to continence cannot be admitted to the sacraments while they remain in that state.

The spokesman said, “It is our hope that by seeking from our Holy Father a definitive repudiation of these errors we can help to allay the confusion already brought about by Amoris laetitia among pastors and the lay faithful. For that confusion can be dispelled effectively only by an unambiguous affirmation of authentic Catholic teaching by the Successor of Peter.”
​

Dr Joseph Shaw, an Oxford academic and a signatory to the appeal, is acting as spokesman for this group of Catholic scholars and pastors. The group has set up the email address appealtocardinals@gmail.com to answer press enquiries about the appeal.

​

Dr Shaw’s personal details can be found at the following link.

​

http://casuistrycentral.blogspot.co.uk/p/about-me.html

​

His role as signatory and spokesman for the group is as a private person, concerned Catholic, and philosopher, and should not be construed as representative of the institutions for which he serves in an official capacity.

 

http://www.onepeterfive.com/cardina...mily-amoris-laetitia-confusion-in-the-church/
Cardinal Caffarra on Marriage, Family, Amoris Laetitia, & Confusion in the Church

Cardinal Carlo Caffara: Image Source

Editor’s note: the following is an exclusive interview with Cardinal Carlo Caffara, conducted by OnePeterFive’s Dr. Maike Hickson. Cardinal Caffarra is Archbishop emeritus of Bologna and former member of the Pontifical Council for the Family. It was in a letter to Cardinal Caffarra that Sister Lucia of Fatima revealed that “the final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family.”

Maike Hickson (MH): You have spoken, in a recent interview, about the papal exhortation Amoris Laetitia, and you have said that especially Chapter 8 is unclear and has already caused confusion even among the bishops. If you had the chance to speak with Pope Francis about this matter, what would you tell him? What would your recommendation be as to what Pope Francis could and should now do, given that there is so much confusion?

Cardinal Caffarra (CC): In Amoris Laetitia [308] the Holy Father Francis writes: “I understand those who prefer a more rigorous pastoral care which leaves no room for confusion.” I infer from these words that His Holiness realizes that the teachings of the Exhortation could give rise to confusion in the Church. Personally, I wish – and that is how so many of my brothers in Christ (cardinals, bishops, and the lay faithful alike) also think – that the confusion should be removed, but not because I prefer a more rigorous pastoral care, but because, rather, I simply prefer a clearer and less ambiguous pastoral care. That said – with all due respect, affection, and devotion that I feel the need to nourish toward the Holy Father – I would tell him: “Your Holiness, please clarify these points. a) How much of what Your Holiness has said in footnote 351 of paragraph 305 is also applicable to the divorced and remarried couples who wish still anyway to continue to live as husband and wife; and thus how much of what was taught by Familiaris Consortio No. 84, by Reconciliatio Poenitentia No. 34, by Sacramenttum unitatis No. 29, by the Catechism of the Catholic Church No. 1650, and by the common theological doctrine, is to be considered now to be abrogated? b) The constant teaching of the Church – as it has also been recently reiterated in Veritatis splendor, No. 79 – is that there are negative moral norms which allow of no exceptions, because they prohibit acts which are intrinsically dishonorable and dishonest – such as, for example, adultery. Is this traditional teaching still believed to be true, even after Amoris Laetitia?” This is what I would say to the Holy Father.

If the Holy Father, in his supreme judgment, would have the intention to intervene publicly in order to remove this confusion, he has at his disposition many different means to do so.

MH: You are also a moral theologian. What is your advice to confused Catholics concerning the moral teaching of the Catholic Church on marriage and the family? What is an authoritatively, well-formed conscience when it comes to issues such as contraception, divorce and “remarriage,” as well as homosexuality?

CC: The condition in which marriage finds itself today in the West is simply tragic. Civil laws have changed the definition, because they have eradicated the biological dimension of the human person. They have separated the biology of generation from the genealogy of the person. But I shall speak about this later. To Catholic faithful who are confused about the Doctrine of the Faith concerning marriage, I simply say: “Read and meditate upon the Catechism of Catholic Church nn.1601-1666. And when you hear some talk about marriage – even if done by priests, bishops, cardinals – and you then verify that it is not in conformity with the Catechism, do not listen to them. They are the blind leading the blind.”

MH: Could you explain to us, in this context, the moral concept that nothing that is ambiguous is binding upon the Catholic conscience, and especially so when it is proven to be intentionally ambiguous?

CC: Logic teaches us that a proposition is ambiguous when it can be interpreted in two different and/or contrary meanings. It is obvious that such a proposition can have neither our theoretical assent nor our practical consent, because it does not have a sure and clear meaning.

MH: In order to help Catholics in this time of much ambiguous equivocation and “mental reservation,” would there be something that Pope Pius XII could still especially teach us, concerning the questions of marriage and divorce, and on the forming of the little children unto Eternal Life, since he has so amply written about these matters?

CC: The Magisterium of Pius XII on marriage and child-rearing was very rich and frequent. And in fact, after Holy Scripture, he is the author who is most quoted by Vatican II [the Second Vatican Council]. It seems to me that there are two speeches which are particularly important to answer your question. The first is the “Radio address on the correct formation of a Christian conscience in the young,” March 23, 1952, in AAS vol. 44,270-278. The second is the “Allocution to the Fédération Mondiale des Jeunesses Feminines Catholiques,” ibid. 413-419. This latter is of great magisterial importance: for, it deals with situation ethics.

Con't

 

Thank God!

 

Con't

MH: The German Jesuit, Father Klaus Mertes, just said in an interview with a German newspaper that the Catholic Church “should now help to establish a human right to homosexuality.” What should be the proper response of the Church to such a proposal? To include the fitting disciplinary sanction, as well as the moral doctrine.

CC: I honestly cannot understand how a Catholic theologian can think and write about a human right to homosexuality. In the precise sense, a (individual) right is a morally legitimate and legally protected faculty to perform an action. The exercise of homosexuality is inherently irrational and hence dishonest. A Catholic theologian cannot – may not – think that the Church must strive to “establish a human right to homosexuality.”

MH: More fundamentally, to what extent may men have a human right – eg., a claim in justice – to do what is wrong in the eyes of God, such as, for example, practicing polygamy?

CC: The issue of individual rights has now changed substantially in its meaning. It identifies the right with its own desires. But we do not have here the space to address this issue from the human legislator’s point of view.

MH: Since Father Mertes has stressed in his interview the importance of separating procreation from the marriage act in order to make the way free for homosexuality – could you explain to us the traditional moral teaching of the Church about the ordered ends of marriage and the primacy of the procreation and education of children for Heaven? [see below for the response]

MH: Why is procreation such an important purpose of marriage? Why could it not be that the mutual love and respect between the couple come first and should take precedence? Do you see practical consequences if one inverts the ends of marriage – namely, if one puts mutual love and respect above procreation of children for Heaven?

CC: I would prefer to give a synthetic answer to the three questions posed in these two [previous questions]. They in fact touch upon one big question which is of fundamental importance for the life of the Church and of civil society. The relationship between the aspects of conjugal love on the one side, and of the procreation and education of children on the other, is a correlation, the philosophers would say. That is to say: it is a relationship of interdependence between two distinct realities. Conjugal love which is being sexually expressed when the two spouses become one flesh is the only place ethically worthy of giving life to a new human person. The capacity to give life to a new human person is inscribed in the exercise of conjugal sexuality, which is the spousal language of reciprocal self-giving between the spouses. In short: conjugality and the gift of life are inseparable.

What happened especially after the Council? Against the teaching of the Council itself, one then so much insisted on conjugal love, that one considered procreation merely to be the collateral consequence of the act of conjugal love. Blessed Paul VI corrected such a view in the encyclical Humanae Vitae judging it to be contrary to right reason and to the faith of the Church. And St. John Paul II, in the last part of his beautiful Catechesis on Human Love showed the anthropological foundation of the teaching of his predecessor: namely, the act of contraception is objectively a lie saying it with the spousal language of the body. What are the consequences of the rejection of this teaching? The first and most serious consequence was the separation between sexuality and procreation. One started with “sex without babies,” and one arrived at “babies without sex”: the separation is complete. The biology of generation is separated from the genealogy of the person. This leads to “producing” children in the laboratory; and to the affirmation of the (supposed) right to a child. Nonsense. There is no right to a person, but only to things. At this point, there were all the premises to ennoble homosexual conduct, because one no longer sees its intimate irrationality, and all the serious and intrinsic dishonesty of the homosexual union. And so we have come to change the definition of marriage because we have uprooted it from the biology of the person. Really, Humanae Vitae has been a great prophecy!

MH: What is, in its essence, the purpose of marriage and the family?

CC: It is the legitimate union of one single man and one single woman in light of procreation and the education of children. If the two are baptized, this reality itself – not another – becomes a real symbol of the Christ-Church union. It gives them a status in the public life of the Church, with a ministry of their own: the transmission of the faith to their children.

MH: In the context of the current increase of moral confusion: to what extent does religious indifferentism (eg., the claim that one can be saved in whatever religion) lead to moral relativism? To be more specific, if one religion favors polygamy but is claimed to be salvific, is then not the conclusion that polygamy is not illicit, after all?

CC: Relativism is like a metastasis. If you agree to its principles, each human experience, be it personal or social, will be or will become corrupt. The teaching of Blessed J. H. Newman has here great actuality. Toward the end of his life, he said that the pathogen that corrupts the religious sense and moral conscience, is “the liberal principle,” as he calls it. That is to say, the belief that with regard to the worship we owe to God, it is irrelevant what we think of Him; the belief that all religions have the same value. Newman considers the liberal principle thus understood as being completely contrary to what he calls “the dogmatic principle,” which is the basis of the Christian proposition and affirmation. From religious relativism to moral relativism, there is only a short step. There is thereby no problem in the fact that one religion justifies polygamy, and another condemns it. In fact, there thus purportedly exists no absolute truth about what is good and what is bad.

Con't

 

Con't

MH: Would you like to make a comment about Cardinal Christoph Schönborn’s recent remark that Amoris Laetitia is binding doctrine and that all the previous magisterial documents concerning marriage and the family have now to be read in the light of Amoris Laetitia?

CC: I reply with two simple observations. The first observation is: one should not only read the previous Magisterium on marriage in the light of Amoris laetitia (AL), but one should also read Amoris laetitia in the light of the previous Magisterium. The logic of the Living Tradition of the Church is bipolar: it has two directions, not one. The second part is more important. In his [recent] interview with Corriere della Sera, my dear friend Cardinal Schönborn does not take into account what has happened in the Church since the publication of Amoris Laetitia. Bishops and many theologians faithful to the Church and to the Magisterium argue that, especially on one specific – but very important – point, there is not a continuity, but, rather, an opposition between AL and the previous Magisterium. Moreover, these theologians and philosophers do not say this with a demeaning or revolting spirit toward the Holy Father himself. And the point is, as follows: AL says that, under some circumstances, sexual intercourse between the divorced and civilly remarried is morally legitimate. Even moreso, it says that, what the Second Vatican Council has said about spouses – with regard to sexual intimacy – also applies to them (see footnote 329). Therefore: when one says that a sexual relationship outside of marriage is legitimate, it is therefore a claim contrary to the Church’s doctrine on sexuality; and when one says that adultery is not an intrinsically dishonest act – and that therefore there might be circumstances which render it not to be dishonest – that, too, is a claim contrary to the Tradition and Doctrine of the Church. In such a situation like this, the Holy Father, in my opinion – and as I have already written – thus has to clarify the matter. For, when I say “S is P,” and then say “S is not P,” the second proposition is not a development of the first proposition, rather, but its negation. When someone says: the doctrine remains, but it is only about taking care of some few cases, I answer: the moral norm “Do not commit adultery” is an ABSOLUTELY NEGATIVE norm which does not allow of any exceptions. There are many ways to do good, but there is only one way not to do evil: not to do evil.

MH: What is your general recommendation, as a shepherd, to us laypeople, as to what we should do now in order to preserve the Catholic Faith whole and entire and in order to raise our children unto eternal life?

CC: Caffarra: I will tell you very frankly that I do not see any other place outside the family where the faith which you have to believe and to live can be sufficiently transmitted. Moreover, in Europe during the collapse of the Roman Empire and during the later barbarian invasions, what the Benedictine monasteries then did can likewise be done now by the the believing families, in today’s reign of a new spiritual-anthropological barbarism. And thank God that they [the faithful families] exist and still resist.

A little poem written by Chesterton brings me to this reflection; he wrote it at the beginning of the twentieth century: The Ballad of the White Horse. It is a great poetic meditation on an historical fact. It takes place in the year 878. The King of England, Alfred the Great, had just defeated the King of Denmark, Guthrum, who first had invaded England. And thus came a moment of peace and serenity. But during the night after the victory, King Alfred has a terrible vision [in Book VIII: 281-302]: he sees England invaded by another army, which is described, as follows: “… What though they come with scroll and pen [a strange army it is, indeed, which has no weapons, but pen and paper – Cardinal Caffarra], And grave as a shaven clerk, By this sign you shall know them, That they ruin and make dark; By all men bound to Nothing, …. Know ye the old barbarian, The barbarian come again.”

Believing families are the true fortresses. And the future is in the hands of God.

 

http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2016/06/09/pope_those_who_say_“this_or_nothing”_are_heretics_/1235939

 

A time of great confusion.

 

Amen. Finally, some official Church movement on this. It will be difficult to argue now (at least with a straight face or any credibility) that AL is crystal clear and contains no error.

A lot of these signatories are employed by Catholic colleges/ universities/ institutions. I suspect the list of signatories has been withheld so that bishops don't attempt to use Ex Corde Ecclesia as a retaliatory weapon against their employment.

Please pray for these people and their families because they've really put everything on the line to defend the Faith, including their livelihoods.

 

This effort actually brings some clarity. Hopefully the pope will correct the mistakes in AL, or their document will be published in full so that we know the Truth.

 

Brian, that was the best, and most clearly TRUTHFUL, interview I've ever read. What a wonderful, faithful, Cardinal. Thank God for men like him!! I think the exortation will end up either completely redone or in the dust bin.

 

Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter Publishes a Critique of Amoris Laetitia
July 11, 2016

Maike Hickson

On the official website of the German section of the Fraternity of St. Peter, the head of the German District, Father Bernhard Gerstle has published a polite critique (http://petrusbruderschaft.de/pages/archiv/distriktsoberer/mai-2016—amoris-laetitia.php) of the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia. In his short 19 May commentary of one page, there are to be found some strong objections against the message of Amoris Laetitia which very well now could, in Gerstle’s eyes, give a doubtful opening toward the already wide-spread practice (praxis) of allowing “remarried” divorcees to receive Holy Communion. In the aftermath of this official statement, the Fraternity also has received permission to print and sell a more detailed critical commentary (http://petrusbruderschaft.de/pages/bakery/stellungnahme-zu-amoris-laetitia-63.php) written by Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Astana, Kazakhstan. With both of these publications the Fraternity of St. Peter makes it clear that it too has a gravely concerned view of this papal document because it might well endanger, at least in its effects, the salvation of souls.

In the following, I shall present some of Father Gerstle’s own words about Amoris Laetitia. After first benevolently saying that the papal text, “without doubt, contains many beautiful and precious thoughts about human love, marriage and the family,” Gerstle then addresses the grave issue of the “remarried” divorcees and their possible access to the Sacraments.

Father Gerstle continues:

“The Church has up to now always had a clear attitude [Haltung] in this question [of the “remarried” divorcees], even if there has developed, already for quite a while now, a practice of receiving Holy Communion that is in opposition to the objective norms of the Church.”

Thus, says Gerstle, this current discussion is finally about receiving a “retrospective blessing” for a practice of disobedience about something that has heretofore been gravely forbidden by the Church. With regard to Amoris Laetitia, the German priest says: “In Amoris Laetitia, Pope Francis now gives permission to the individual priests and pastors to examine each individual case with regard to the possibility of receiving the Sacraments (Penance and Holy Communion).” Thus, Pope Francis does not anymore, “in a general way, exclude those couples who live in an irregular situation (to include cohabiting couples) from the reception of the Sacraments.” Gerstle stresses that Pope Francis does not anymore demand from these couples the binding requirement to live in continence. He adds: “This is indeed a novelty and is thus being celebrated by the representatives of the liberal direction as being revolutionary and as constituting a landmark decision.” However, in Gerstle’s eyes, those who “feel bound to the valid teaching of the Church, and who fear the watering down of the indissolubility of marriage,” see a “justified reason for the great concern that now there will follow a complete breech of the levée.”

With this new approach, Gerstle says, “the Church’s teaching – according to which the validity of the Sacrament of Confession is dependent upon a penitent’s true contrition and his firm purpose to avoid the near occasion of sin if possible – would be taken off the hinges.” [emphasis added] This would mean “a serious breech with the elementary principles of the Church’s moral teaching, as it had last been confirmed to be the irreformable teaching of the Church by St. John Paul II himself in his encyclical Veritatis Splendor, as well as in his apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio.”

Gerstle concludes:

“Thus we have a great problem with the pope’s post-synodal text which provokes splits within the Church and which threatens the [visible] unity. The dilemma becomes even more clear – and in a sharp way – when we consider the words of Cardinal Gerhard Müller – the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – who now tries to limit the damage by saying that, if Pope Francis had had the intention to change the teaching of the Church, he would have had to say so in a clearer manner.”

This representative of the Fraternity of St. Peter in Germany – where there is situated one of the two seminaries of the Fraternity – also points out that even a weakening of the Church’s discipline with regard to the “remarried” divorcees would also mean that those divorced Catholics who have led their lives according to the Church’s teaching – involving many personal sacrifices, such as abstaining from having a new partner and such as faithfully practicing sexual abstinence – might well now rightly feel betrayed for having loyally lived according to God’s laws.

Father Gerstle concludes his comments with these piercing words: “We can only hope and pray that Pope Francis will respond with some subsequent clarifications, given the currently created confusion.” It is to be hoped that more and more informed Catholic voices will fittingly call upon Pope Francis to stop the spreading moral confusion. Such initiatives will thereby give additional signs of a faithful Catholic resistance and courageous witness.

http://thewandererpress.com/breaking/fraternity-of-st-peter-publishes-a-critique-of-amoris-laetitia/

 

"It is to be hoped that more and more informed Catholic voices will fittingly call upon Pope Francis to stop the spreading moral confusion."
So our prayers possibly helped but is this statements suggesting that we do more?

 

Yes. And yes.

For starters, keep praying.

But if the laity don't push this, the pope and/or the college of cardinals might ignore it. At their peril.

Spread this everywhere. Don't let it be ignored.

And for those Catholic commentators who ignore this, or blogs who would rather see reports that something might be seriously awry in the Vatican be silenced, there will come a day of reckoning.

 

Is this action unprecedented?

 

Yes, I think so, at least in modern times.

 

This is indeed simply unprecedented. If folks are still looking for "signs of the times" but fail to see or acknowledge the biggest sign staring them right in the face, they're lost.

 

I love what that Cardinal said. ie if we know what is right from our upbringing and Catholic instruction, when we hear a Priest, Bishop, Cardinal or anyone else say something that is different, we should not listen. So we can carry on keeping the ten Commandments. Thank God.

I was thinking about the fundamental things we never really thought about until recent years. The first thing was about when life begins. And we had the answer in the Gospels all along and no one realised it.

When Blessed Mother went in haste to her cousin Elizabeth, she would have only conceived Jesus less than a couple of weeks. The unborn Saint John the Baptist leapt in his mothers womb as soon as Mary greeted Saint Elizabeth. What a huge clue for all of us. We never took that on board until the abortion debate.

Then I was racking my brains to try and find a definitive proof of how God has revealed the Truth to us about masculinity and femininity. And Hey Presto, it has been there from the very beginning. When God made Eve, He took a rib from Adam, and I believe to this day men have one rib in their rib cage less than women. Correct me if I am wrong. But I think we should look into this. Because this could be the big clue as to who is actually male and who is actually female. They do rabbit on about hormones.

I am convinced there is a good clear answer some where, and that is one simple route to question and explore.

 

Will do Brian . Very brave charge [or rather defense]of them.
It may well get very messy.

I thought of the massacre they may well face. Reminding me a little of this charge ... of the light brigade..





Still, no matter, they have already won.


Don’t be afraid, she added,because anyone who operates for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be contended and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue. And then she concluded: however, Our Lady has already crushed its head.
View attachment 5131

 

Cardinals Will Oppose Cardinals; Bishops Will Oppose Bishops; Satan Will Walk Among Them

Garabandal, Spain
At Garabandal, 1961-1965, St. Michael the Archangel gave to Conchita, one of the visionaries, the message from Our Blessed Mother on October 18, 1961:

“Before the cup was filling up, now it is flowing over. Many cardinals, many bishops, and many priests are on the path of perdition and taking many souls with them. Less and less importance is being given to the Eucharist. You should turn the wrath of God away from yourself by your efforts.…”

At Garabandal on June 18, 1965, St. Michael the Archangel appeared and delivered a message from Our Lady,

“Because the message of October 18, hasn’t been fulfilled, and the world doesn’t know about it, I tell you that this is the last one. I said before the cup was filling up. Now it is overflowing. Many priests, bishops, cardinals are on the road to perdition and are taking many souls with them. Each day we give the Eucharist less and less importance. We should use all our efforts to avoid God’s wrath. If you ask sincerely for pardon, He will forgive you. Your Mother, through the mediation of Saint Michael, the angel, asks you to correct your ways. You are now receiving the last warnings. Think of the passion of Jesus.”

Akita, Japan

At Akita on October 13, 1973 regarding the Apostasy we were told:

“Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary pray for the bishops and priests. The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church. One will see cardinals opposing cardinals … and bishops confronting other bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and condemned by their confreres; churches and altars will be sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will tempt many priests and religious to leave the service of the Lord … I alone am able still to help save you from the calamities which approach. Those who place their total confidence in me will be given necessary help.”

Mother Elena Patriarca Leonardi

Mother Elena Patriarca Leonardi was told by St. Padre Pio on February 4, 1947 that the Virgin would entrust her with a great Mission. Mother Elena Leonardi was born on November 4, 1910 and married at age 20. Her husband died in 1934, but she had a son and grandson. On April 22, 1968 she was run over by a car. After that her life was completely devoted to the realization of the Work, pronounced by St. Padre Pio in confession on February 4, 1947 in San Giovanni Rotondo. From March 21, 1953 to October 9, 1983 she received many messages.

Mother Elena Patriarca Leonardi was, it appears, actually given the Third Part of The Secret of Fatima by Our Blessed Mother, although Our Lady didn’t tell her it was the Third Part of The Secret. The messages given to Mother Elena have both the Apostasy and the Great Chastisement for Mankind spelled out in some detail.

On March 26, 1978 Our Blessed Mother told Mother Elena Leonardi:

“The time of the great trial will come also for the Church: cardinals will oppose cardinals, bishops against bishops. Satan marches triumphantly in the midst of their ranks due to their hubris and lack of charity! My daughter, there will be death everywhere because of the errors committed by the obstinate followers of Satan! Awareness of the terrible reality is urgent. Everyone must pray, do penance with the Holy Rosary, Holy Masses and Confessions. No sacrilegious Communions!”

On February 12, 1979, Our Lady as the Mother of all Peoples, said to Mother Elena Leonardi:

“My daughter, the time has run out; this is the Apocalyptic hour; if they do not return to my Heart, they will know only desolation. Cardinals and bishops will confront the Pope who will be accused and mistreated, since the days of suffering are being prepared for the Holy Father. Speak to him and tell him to be prudent and strong; I protect and watch over him.”

Sadie Jaramillo

In His message of January 25, 1996, to Sadie Jaramillo, a visionary and locutionist from California, Jesus said:

“Amongst those will be brother priests of Mine, for whom you suffer. The princes of the church now stand at odds, one against another, cardinal against cardinal, bishop against bishop and I behold all. The living fulfillment of prophecy becomes clearer and clearer with each passing moment.”

Sadie Jaramillo was told on September 8, 1997 by Mary:

“I have asked you specifically to pray for the Princes of the Church, for soon they will stand one against another openly. Whereas now, the division occurs where the heart of that shepherd is closed to the Vicar of Christ…. Pray for my Son’s Vicar, for soon he will fall under the oppositions force.…”

Janie Garza

On November 7, 1996 St. Michael said to Janie Garza, a married visionary, mother and stigmatist from Austin, Texas:

“The sufferings in your country will be manifested in many forms: Satan’s attacks on the family will increase in great strength, the persecution in the Church will be great, priests will turn against priests, bishops against bishops, cardinals against cardinals. The religious will also partake in this great division. There will be great slander and evil plots against the holy Vicar of Christ. Great will be his suffering.

Pedro Regis

Pedro Regis, Angüera, Brazil received on May 9, 1995 message 951 (in Venice)

“Dear Sons and Daughters, I invite you to pray for the conversion of sinners and lovingly live the messages I have already transmitted to you! And pray in a special way for My first beloved son, Pope John Paul II! Know, all of you, that the Church of my Son will pass through a crisis such as has never been seen. Cardinals and bishops will turn against the Pope, many will lose the faith, but as I have said, hear the voice of him who is truly the successor to the chair of Peter. The Pope is betrayed by his closest collaborators. There are few who have the courage of Peter, but many who have the courage of Judas. Pray! I repeat, Pray! The decisive time is coming. Those who are with the Lord will come out the better. All this must happen, but in the end the Lord will conquer. Courage! You are not alone. My Son goes with you. This is the message that I transmit to you in the name of The Most Holy Trinity. Thank you for permitting me to reunite you here once more. I bless you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. Be at peace.”

Jennifer

Jesus, as related in Words From Jesus in a message on 12/25/03, at 7:45 PM, told Jennifer, a mid-western United States visionary, locutionist, and mother of four: “My people the hour is drawing closer and these messages are to help guide you through these events that are about to unfold. You have begun to see the division in My church for too many of My chosen sons have fallen to the ways of the world. For as I have told you, priests will be against priest and nun against nun. You will see countries that have enormous power fall into ruins and the rise of the antichrist.”

http://www.sign.org/articles/cardinals-will-oppose-cardinals

 

I do miss border collie, IJOCP or some such, fatima and his pilgrim brother and of course silver tongue himself good old king David et al.

It seems that they have a few more names to add to their list of pharisees and hard hearted monsters.