Thank you for sharing this; what a clear thinker he is and has always been. Sin is still sin, no matter how many times an attempt is made to rename it, or to redefine it. Tell us the truth. Stop confusing us.
Splitting hairs. Please read the comments below this video. Good Father Mark is beginning to sound ridiculous. “A couple of tomatoes?” Really? “Betrayal “ is an act of “deliberate disloyalty “. Maybe that’s not the case here but the man is seriously confused.
As was said above, "you can't ride 2 horses at once". And really, I don't remember hearing anyone inviting a "union" over for supper on a Saturday evening....
He is so gentle and so sincere. He wants only what is best for the Church. And I am sure he has prayed very hard over this. I think he is naive because of his goodness and purity. God will lead him where he needs to go--just not on our time table.
It's becoming clear the boys at the top no longer worry about sins of the flesh. They ignore the impact of the sexual revolution. They are modernists who ignore Fatima and Akita as fairy tales. To quote Cardinal Schonburg on homosexual unions "the Church should not look in the bedroom first, but in the dining room"! Turning a blind eye to impurity because they don't recognise impurity because only the pure see the utter filth of such acts. As for Sodom & Gommorah they ignore at their peril. Why do you think Akita mentions fire falling from the sky? Precisely because of sins of the flesh - abortion and all kinds of perversions acceptable in our sick society.
There was a time when the Vatican's communications department tried to dispel the controversies that arose around Pope Francis's controversial statements, as in the interviews with Eugenio Scalfari, for example, but what I currently see is that there was no intention of the current Vatican spokesperson to dispel the controversy that arose as a result of this new document.
I never doubted that the poor man really faithfully transcribed what Francis said to him in the interviews; I even think he had a great chance to convert in the face of this. In the end, if the church is an institution that lives by financially exploiting people's fear of hell (as many atheists think of us), why would the "current administrator" undermine this fundamental principle? It would be the equivalent of Coca-Cola changing its traditional formula that has guaranteed years of success (in terms of a financial analytical view).
https://popehead.substack.com/p/andrea-cionci-buenos-aires-lightning Andrea Cionci- "Buenos Aires: lightning on the halo and keys of St. Peter. Bergoglio at the end of the road?" Cionci Article Pope Head I am reposting another article by Andrea Cionci that was originally published in Sfero. _______________ Well, from a faith perspective, how should we interpret the lightning bolt that struck the statue of St. Peter on December 17th? Statue of Saint Peter, Buenos Aires On Sunday December 17, 2023, lightning literally pulverized the key and halo of the statue of Saint Peter, located on the facade of the Sanctuary of Our Lady of the Rosary of San Nicolas , north of Buenos Aires, Argentina. The news was reported by the Telegram channel "The Pope's Pearls" : it seemed to be fake, given that no news could be found on the web, but the event has just been confirmed by the Reverend Father Justo Lofeudo, a priest who is certainly a Bergoglian. A typical "Ratzinger effect", evidently, that particular phenomenon whereby the Bergoglians or the una cum, (Bergoglio's legitimist conservatives) unconsciously offer information, documents and testimonies that are very useful for the reconstruction of the Magna Quaestio. In this case it would obviously only be a "sign from Heaven" which, however, has been interpreted by many Catholics without too much difficulty. Father Lofeudo certainly did not realize the effect that the disclosure of the photo would have. The priests of the Sanctuary have issued a statement that rejects the symbolic interpretation of the fact, but not the fact itself: “The Sanctuary does not agree with the interpretation that has been given with respect for the damage produced in the image of the apostle Saint Peter.” What is striking, in fact, is that the event occurred on Jorge Mario Bergoglio's birthday, the day before the publication of the "Fiducia supplicans" declaration which opens up blessings for gay couples. This measure marked a sort of point of no return: the faithful are starting to understand that something isn't working. Even the place where the accident occurred is rich in meaning: first of all, the Sanctuary of San Nicolas is in Argentina, homeland of the anti-pope, a few kilometers from Buenos Aires, the city of which Bergoglio was bishop for a long time. The channel “The Pope's Pearls”reports: “Above all, it is a place of worship and veneration because inside there is the beautiful statue of the Madonna of the Rosary, which appeared for years to the visionary Gladys Quiroga de Motta, starting from early 1980s, giving her more than 1800 messages. In them, the Holy Virgin says she has returned to continue the Apparitions of Fatima, and many of these clearly speak of the terrible struggle between the devil and the Church." Since February 11, 2013, various "suggestive" events have dotted the story of the usurpation of the Chair of Peter reconstructed in three documentaries in The "Ratzinger Code"investigation. We can remember the lightning that struck the Dome the same night as Pope Benedict's "resignation"; the inexplicable blocking of the bells of Castel Gandolfo following the invalid election of Francis; the killing of the doves released by Bergoglio by crows and seagulls; the fire of the Bethlehem chapel a few hours after Francis' visit; the fire in the Consistory Hall of Castel Gandolfo a few months ago, in the same days in which we published this appreciated reportand many other events that Catholics of just a century ago would have interpreted as unequivocal "press releases" from the Eternal Father. Well, from a faith perspective, how to interpret the lightning that struck the statue of St. Peter on December 17th? It seems that the time for antipope Francis is coming to an end: heaven would have symbolically destroyed his halo of sanctity and disintegrated the key, which represents the pope's authority. Strange that the statue only held one key, it seems. Symbolically, the golden key alludes to power in the kingdom of heaven and the silver key indicates the spiritual authority of the papacy on earth. The rope connecting the key eyelets alludes to the link between the two powers.
The “confusion” is a big thorn in my side. The confusion is leading good priests down the path of compromise.
I'll tell you something that is a bit of a mystery at the moment; the people on this forum are not confused at all at the moment (with one or two very notable exceptions) They can see through all the confusion very,very clearly indeed and are not the least bit taken in by all the diabolical deception. Unlike what we see in the wider world were, for instance pretty well all the Bishop of Europe (for instance)have gotten lost in the devils smoke. Then when we turn to the word we can see that people like Archbishop Chaput retain a razor sharp vision between right and wrong and know perfectly evil and evil goings on when they see it. He, too, is bright eyed and bushy tailed! Why is this? Why do some wonder around like zombies and some keep the straight paths in Satan's mists and fogs? Well my guess would be Devotion to Mary the Mother of God, Star of the Sea. She directs our steps in the Ways of Righteousness. Ave Maria ! Stella Maris!
https://www.piercedhearts.org/theology_heart/writings_on_saints/padre_pio_priest_victim.htm VI. Padre Pio and Priests This brings us to a subject of capital importance: Padre Pio and priests. The Lord has confided to many victim-souls that his priests are "the apple of his eye", yet so often they are so far from fulfilling what he expects of them. Not surprisingly, very early in his state of victimhood, Padre Pio was called to make reparation for priests. Here is an account which he made to Padre Agostino, his spiritual father, on 7 April 1913. On Friday morning [28 March 1913] while I was still in bed, Jesus appeared to me. He was in a sorry state and quite disfigured. He showed me a great multitude of priests, regular and secular, among whom were several high ecclesiastical dignitaries. Some were celebrating Mass, while others were vesting or taking off the sacred vestments. The sight of Jesus in distress was very painful to me, so I asked him why he was suffering so much. There was no reply, but his gaze turned on those priests. Shortly afterwards, as if terrified and weary of looking at them, he withdrew his gaze. Then he raised his eyes and looked at me and to my great horror I observed two tears coursing down his cheeks. He drew back from that crowd of priests with an expression of great disgust on his face and cried out: "Butchers!" Then turning to me he said: "My son, do not think that my agony lasted three hours. No, on account of the souls who have received most from me, I shall be in agony until the end of the world. During my agony, my son, nobody should sleep. My soul goes in search of a drop of human compassion but alas, I am left alone beneath the weight of indifference. The ingratitude and the sleep of my ministers makes my agony all the more grievous. Alas, how little they correspond to my love! What afflicts me most is that they add contempt and unbelief to their indifference. Many times I have been on the point of annihilating them, had I not been held back by the Angels and by souls who are filled with love for me. Write to your (spiritual) father and tell him what you have seen and heard from me this morning. Tell him to show your letter to Father Provincial ..."45 In the annals of the mystics there are no few such plaints recorded as coming from the lips of our Redeemer. The ones from whom Christ looks most of all for consolation, particularly priests, are often precisely the ones who are the most indifferent to his loving plea for reparation. Tragically, some add contempt and unbelief to their indifference. I believe that this vision which Padre Pio had in the early days of his priesthood was highly prophetic. If it was true in 1913, it can be verified, I believe, much more readily today. Indifference, contempt and unbelief have ravaged tens of thousands of priestly souls, unleashing an extraordinary tide of devastation upon the Church. Have we reached "high tide" yet? Only God knows and only he can respond. What is needed to turn the tide? More than anything else, I believe, are priest-victims. When one considers the growing impact which the humble friar of the Gargano continues to have even twenty-seven years after his death, can one doubt that a legion of priests who willingly embraced victimhood, as he did, could change the face of the Church? I am convinced that there is no greater need facing the Church today. VII. Padre Pio and Victims You may say that I should be talking to priests and, no doubt, I should. But, I speak to you because you are here and because there is also a great need of victim-intercessors for the Church and for priests. Let us listen to a final excerpt from another letter which Padre Pio addressed to Padre Agostino just a short time before the previous letter: Listen, my dear Father, to the justified complaints of our most sweet Jesus: "With what ingratitude is my love for men repaid! I should be less offended by them if I had loved them less. My Father does not want to bear with them any longer. I myself want to stop loving them, but ... (and here Jesus paused, sighed, then continued) but, alas! My heart is made to love! Weak and cowardly men make no effort to overcome temptation and indeed they take delight in their wickedness. The souls for whom I have a special predilection fail me when put to the test, the weak give way to discouragement and despair, while the strong are relaxing by degrees. They leave me alone by night, alone by day in the churches. They no longer care about the Sacrament of the altar. Hardly anyone ever speaks of this sacrament and even those who do, speak alas, with great indifference and coldness. My heart is forgotten. Nobody thinks any more of my love and I am continually grieved. For many people my house has become an amusement centre. Even my ministers, whom I have loved as the apple of my eye, who ought to console my heart brimming over with sorrow, who ought to assist me in the redemption of souls -- who would believe it? -- even by my ministers I must be treated with ingratitude and slighted. I behold, my son (here he remained silent, sobs contracted his throat and he wept secretly) many people who act hypocritically and betray me by sacrilegious communions, trampling under foot the light and strength which I give them continually ..." Jesus continues to complain. Dear Father, how bad I feel when I see Jesus weeping! Have you experienced this too? "My son," Jesus went on, "I need victims to calm my Father's just divine anger; renew the sacrifice of your whole self and do so without any reserve." I have renewed the sacrifice of my life, dear Father, and if I experience some feeling of sadness, it is in the contemplation of the God of Sorrows. If you can, try to find souls who will offer themselves to the Lord as victims for sinners. Jesus will help you.46
Prayers for poor young Father Mark, he has been blown way out to sea and is lost in storm; bring him home dear Lord, I am fond of Father Mark.
I admire the holy innocence of the saints. They always ascribe the best, most charitable motives to other men. That’s what Fr. Mark is trying to do here, ascribe the best, most charitable interpretation of Pope Francis signing off on this heretical document. But we’re long past the point where such motives can be ascribed to this papacy. You could have validly made this argument ten years ago, but not now, not after consistent heretical words and acts and the promotion of numerous actively homosexual and/ or abusive personnel. At this point it is not innocent holy naïveté. It is blameworthy ignorance and a denial of an all too obvious reality. I still love Fr. Mark. But he is simply wrong here.
