Balloon-Mass Cardinal Schönborn to take over CDF ? Heaven help us.

schoenborn_ballonAccording to Kath.net Pope Francis intends to remove Cardinal Müller as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and replace him with the Modernist, Cardinal Schönborn, of notorious fame for his sacrilegious ‘Balloon Masses’ and pro-homosexual views.

The Eponymous Flower has also reported on this and other surprising changes in Curia appointments.

All this comes in the wake of last week’s bombshell: the appointment of the “ecclesiastical vandal”, Archbishop Cupich, to the Congregation of Bishops.

2013-01-30-WolfSheep1This is a tremendous lack of judgement on the part of the pope. These bishops do not defend the Church’s magisterial teachings. They are wolves in sheep clothing. They should not have been allowed to continue preaching heresies, much less promoted to positions where they can wreak even more damage.

Pope Benedict XVI managed to steer clear of the wolves by stepping down from the Papacy. Instead they are now being fed to us, the flock. May Heaven help us.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Balloon-Mass Cardinal Schönborn to take over CDF ? Heaven help us.

  1. Blossom says:

    Cardinal Schonborn as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith????? This appointment requires an academician who us also a devout , chaste and holy priest. No one with any observational skill whatsoever would ever label this cardinal in such a way.

    This pope knows he has carte blanche to protestantise and politicise the faith from the top because the orthodox bishops ill not stand in unity and accuse him of heresy .

    The pope may or may not be a good man, but he is not a Catholic man, all claims to the contrary.

  2. JabbaPapa says:

    I can’t see that this “exciting” story should be believed.

  3. When a story has to do with the horrors of this pontificate, I’ll believe that anything is possible. Replace Müller? It’ll happen, just wait. Replaced maybe not with Schönborn, but replaced.

  4. kathleen says:

    Jabba, I assume you are referring to Card. Schonborn’s appointment? Yes, I don’t think it has been confirmed yet.

    But the second link in the article referring to the ultra liberal Archbisop Cupich’s appointment to the Congregation of Bishops is definitely underway. Apparently this “ecclesiastical vandal” (as John Vennari understandably calls Cupich) was hand-picked for the job by Pope Francis himself!
    Take a look at the video from the link:

  5. David Hurley says:

    Balloon-Mass Cardinal Schönborn to take over Heaven ?

    CDF help us !!!

  6. Magdalene says:

    Why do you think it is a lack of judgment? Is this not an intended direction as the appointment of those in the ‘gang of 8’ or the naming of Cupich, etc. also part of a progressive direction?

  7. Tom Fisher says:

    Pope Benedict XVI managed to steer clear of the wolves by stepping down from the Papacy. Instead they are now being fed to us, the flock

    So in just two sentences, we have Churchmen as wolves, as rocks – then, incredibly, Churchmen as wolves, who are fed to Catholics, who are sheep in this context. A remarkable bit of writing, not least because of the bizarre image of wolves being fed to a flock

  8. mmvc says:

    Looks like the dreaded re-shuffle is on the cards:

    https://www.gloria.tv/video/k7hPSm6zXVA5LgiXDAynBU3RR

  9. kathleen says:

    Thanks mmvc! Yes, our worst fears are being realised as more of these wolves are now being officially foisted upon us.
    Will our friend, Jabba, still see this disaster as nothing more than an “exciting story”?😉

    May we cling faithfully to the True Faith (with daily Holy Mass, prayer and the Rosary) as the battle against Satan and his minions heats up

  10. johnhenrycn says:

    Tom Fisher (06:03) -That’s hitting below the belt. Nowhere in this report does CP&S call the churchmen in question ‘rocks’. But yes:“the image of wolves being fed to a flock” is not quite the appropriate metaphor. H.W. Fowler wept. Jesus too, but for a different reason.

  11. Tom Fisher says:

    Nowhere in this report does CP&S call the churchmen in question ‘rocks’.

    Yeah, unfortunately it’s implicit in the first metaphor

  12. JabbaPapa says:

    No, the simple fact that multiple sources are promoting **the same story** about Schönborn simply demonstrates its existence, not its truth.

    Such an appointment would be an aggressively schismatic policy that would cause massive damage to the Church, and I cannot see that the Pope would want any such thing.

    The main reason why I do not believe it though is that Schönborn is pure & simple NOT a dogmatic theologian, and so has no professional qualifications for such work.

  13. kathleen says:

    Well, dear Jabba, however much these reported papal changeovers might appear inconceivable to you, some previously unheard of, shocking and quite amazing changes have already taking place within Francis’ Pontificate, unbelievable though just the idea most of them would have been to Catholics less than four years ago. Therefore don’t try too hard to insist this newest one is no more than “a story”; it appears the sources reporting on it are pretty reliable.
    (All the same, I would love to be proved wrong here!)

    With Cardinal Müller (who had the unenviable task of keeping errors out of the Pope’s writings) Francis might well have calculated just that – i.e., that replacing him with pro-gay, liberal Card. Schönborn, who as you say is not a “dogmatic theologian”, these heresies, er, novelties he would like to slip into his future exhortations just might go by unnoticed!! That’s the whole point.

    Here’s another supposed ‘rumour’ Archbishop Bruno Forte revealed about the background of the controversial post-synodal letter Amoris laetitia on 2nd May, and quoted again the other day on ‘Eponymous Flower’. Perhaps you’ve already heard it? Pope Francis had supposedly given him direction as Special Secretary for the drafting of the Synod document, so he told ++Forte:

    “If we explicitly speak of communion for remarried divorcees, who knows what a casino [fuss] will be made. We therefore do not talk directly about it. Make it so that the premises are given, then I draw the conclusions I prefer. “

    True or false – (given the evidence.)?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s