Deposing Francis: The clock ticking as the plot thickens

image

By Louis Verrechio on AKA Catholic

Just in case anyone happened to miss it; another important piece to the puzzling case of Jorge Bergoglio emerged a couple of days ago courtesy of Edward Pentin.

In an interview with with the Austrian media outlet, Kathpress, on December 1, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Gerhard Müller, implied that Francis has ordered him not to respond to the dubium.

In a December 6th article, Church Leaders Respond to the ‘Dubia,’ Pentin quoted Cardinal Raymond Burke as having confirmed that this is indeed the case:

Cardinal Burke told the Register last month that Cardinal Müller earlier had relayed to the signatories that the Pope would not be responding to the questions they had submitted. ‘He [Cardinal Müller] was told by the Pope that he was not to respond to the Dubia and that there would be no response to them,’ he said.

When the dubium was first made public, it seemed rather likely to me that the four cardinal-authors of the text had collaborated with Cardinal Müller beforehand. Now, it appears obvious that they are, in fact, in cahoots (as well they should be).

It’s not clear, however, to what extent the five cardinals may have anticipated, or not, an explicit order from Francis for the Prefect of the CDF to ignore the simple yes/no questions posed in the dubium. It’s difficult to imagine that Francis’ reaction has taken them, or anyone else who is paying attention, by surprise.

That said, think about what we now know.

As I mentioned in my initial post on the Pentin-Burke interview, one may very well imagine that interviewer and interviewee coordinated their efforts in order to make a precise presentation.

We now know that this is true, and what’s more, we know that this coordinated effort continues.

Consider: Cardinal Burke provided the above mentioned quote (about Francis explicitly silencing the CDF) to Edward Pentin on or before November 15, the date on which the interview was published.

Obviously, that information was always newsworthy; in fact, even though we have grown numb to the Humble Dictator’s despicable behavior, it’s no exaggeration to call it a bombshell.

Here we have a pope who has explicitly instructed Cardinal Müller and the CDF, which has the “proper duty of promoting and safeguarding the doctrine on faith and morals in the whole Catholic world,” not to do their job; i.e., Francis deliberately ordered that errors concerning matters of faith and morals be left unaddressed so as to spread unabated.

Yes, this is a bombshell alright; an unprecedented one at that.

So, why didn’t Pentin drop it three weeks ago?

Apparently, it was decided (presumably by Cardinal Burke) that it would be best for Pentin to keep that particular card in his hip pocket until further notice.

In other words, all indications are that Burke is playing Bergoglio’s game of leveraging his contacts in the media in order to control the dissemination of important information; timing its publication in whatever way may best serve the mission at hand. Touché!

We also now have good reason to believe that Edward Pentin may be sitting on any number of other pieces of critically important information that further demonstrates just how fiercely Francis is opposed to the Catholic faith.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Edward Pentin already knows precisely when and how Cardinal Burke and the other three cardinal-authors of the dubia intend to issue the “formal act of correction” (and if it pleases God, Bergoglio’s formal deposition) that we now await.

In my opinion, the time is well at hand, but I suspect that it will not come until after Christmas; perhaps sometime in early January 2017.

Then again, this sad affair may just drag on until May; that’s right, exactly 100 years after the Fatima apparitions began.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Deposing Francis: The clock ticking as the plot thickens

  1. kathleen says:

    @ Joe

    Your criticism of Ed Pentin is nonsense. Pentin is one of the most honest and intelligent journalists in the business, and a practising Catholic too. In his typically-British, unflappable manner, and consistent reliability, he has become a trusted source to go to for inside information from the Vatican, on both sides of the pond.

  2. GC says:

    Dear CP&S, you’ll have to help me identify that protuberance from Cardinal Müller’s superimposed mouth. It looks like a worm of some most unseemly kind, but I hope it’s a sort of floppy straw?

  3. mmvc says:

    Now there’s a conundrum, GC!
    A snapped pencil or biro perhaps, or – more boringly – an air bubble?
    Your guess is as good as mine. 😉

  4. johnhenrycn says:

    “…if it pleases God, Bergoglio’s formal deposition…”

    A bit ambiguous that. Does Verrechio mean the removal of “Bergolio” from office or compelling him to make a pronouncement to explain the meaning of Amoris Laetitia in light of Church teaching? I take his use of PF’s patrynomic as a broad hint of what Verrechio hopes will please God.
    ___
    I see that Ann Barnhardt is telling people that the title of Amoris Laetitia is actually code for the type of love that dare not speak its name, because, or so she says, Amoris in classical Latin denotes (primarily) homosexual sodomy.

  5. Toad says:

    “@ Joe – Your criticism of Ed Pentin is nonsense. Pentin is one of the most honest and intelligent journalists in the business, and a practising Catholic too.”

    What criticism, Kathleen? Your comment – seems to be the first in line.
    Has Joe’s comment been killed, shortly after appearing, like several of mine?
    Own up!
    And how “honest” can any journalist be?
    Remember all the usual, vile. epithets CP&S regularly slings at the loony media?

    [One paragraph REDACTED]]

    “So, why didn’t Pentin drop it three weeks ago?
    Apparently, it was decided (presumably by Cardinal Burke) that it would be best for Pentin to keep that particular card in his hip pocket until further notice.”

    …Or maybe it simply didn’t suit them to to tell the truth (as they saw it) at that particular moment.
    Perfectly reasonable. We all do it.
    Shabby stuff, though.

  6. JabbaPapa says:

    because, or so she says, Amoris in classical Latin denotes (primarily) homosexual sodomy

    No it doesn’t — it denotes primarily love within the family.

    Why do you keep on repeating this sort of unsubstantiated lies ?

  7. GC says:

    Maryla, 4 above here. Or some rather strange-looking verticalised dribble? One finds oneself at a loss here. But my first guess would be some horrid little worm emanating from the Eminence’s pie-hole.

    Best then to get one back to one’s liturgy of the hours and spiritual reading in this current climate. 😉

  8. kathleen says:

    What criticism, Kathleen?

    Not worth bothering your little green head about, Toad. 😉
    And, no, I did not “kill” Joe’s critical comment myself, but ‘chapeau’ to the moderator who did the job.

    ———-

    @ JH

    Wow, wow!! Ann Barnhardt’s article was a real hard hitter!
    But, truthfully, whether one likes her outspoken style or not, it’s hard to deny that she’s got a very sharp mind and makes a great deal of sense in all her arguments.
    And is as ready to go into ‘battle’ to defend the Faith as Saint Joan of Arc!

  9. Toad says:

    Kathleen @10 Dec 19.29
    “Not worth bothering your little green head about, Toad.😉
    And, no, I did not “kill” Joe’s critical comment myself,”

    Who suggested you did?

    “Wow, wow!! Ann Barnhardt’s article was a real hard hitter!
    But, truthfully, whether one likes her outspoken style or not,… “

    Really? I thought it was the usual ravings of a bitter madwoman.
    But, as we so often agree, Kathleen – it takes all sorts, dunnit?
    Both Ann and “Randy” seem to nourish an unhealthy interest in sexual perversion.
    I wonder why. (And I hope that’s not too outspoken for you?)

  10. johnhenrycn says:

    Toad (07:26)
    Re Ann Barnhardt: I told Hilary White on her blog a few months ago that she and Ann are paid-up members of the tin foil hat brigade (Hilary allowed my comment through) so yes, I have some doubts about AB’s mental equilibrium; and when you see some of her YouTubes, the The Madwoman of Chaillot does come to mind. But she is not bitter. If you follow her blog, the best way to describe her is: funny, ironical, exuberant and committed. And perhaps a genius – certainly more intelligent than you (Toad) or me, judging by her writing. Perhaps manic-depressive as well; but whilst she oft exhibits her manic side, I’ve never seen her possible other side. I wrote to my (secular) pundit hero Mark Steyn once – your (secular) hero H.L. Mencken was a mere piker pundit compared to Steyn – asking him point blank if he was bi-poplar. He never answered me (nor would I in his bespoke Lobbs – why would he?), but unlike Ann Barnhardt, who is only gone for a week at most between posts, Steyn is occasionally gone for a month or more without a credible explanation.

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