V2 Magesterium Saved Humanity? Mother Teresa "Canonized", Gay Vestments & Francis Visits
Latest news from Vatican II NewChurch
Vatican II has been destroying the Church and Society. More gay propaganda and Francis visits his Talmudic buddies in Rome.
The Holy See, a bulwark against the clash of civilisations
The magisterium of the last three pontificates, which grew out of the Second Vatican Council, staved off fundamentalist currents and those who wanted to put new walls up
FRANCESCO PELOSO
In the last quarter century, since the fall of the Berlin Wall redrew the map of the world, the Holy See was the only global institution that firmly and clearly opposed the so-called clash of civilisations. Many in the West and the Middle East sought this clash of civilisations due to economic, territorial and political interests. The magisterium of three Popes – John Paul II, Benedict XVI and now Francis – tried to halt the spread of conflict and above all the spread of mistrust, hatred, division between people and religions, identity and cultural clashes. This is why in recent decades the Roman Catholic Church and St. Peter’s Square itself have become the symbol of reason, champions of dialogue even when everything seemed lost, a reference point for believers and non-believers alike, who refused to succumb to violence.The Holy See and dialogue with other faiths
John Paul II had seen the risks he was up against and this is why he promoted the interreligious meetings in Assisi and a tough dialogue with interlocutors who were very different. “Do not kill in the name of God”, all three Popes repeated. “It is blasphemy to use God's name to justify violence,” Francis said at this Sunday’s Angelus. The attempt to keep dialogue between the great religious traditions of “the Book” alive, the visits to Jerusalem, Istanbul, Lebanon and Jordan, the ecumenical encounters and the meetings with religious authorities, including Jewish and Muslim authorities representing different Islamic currents, a diplomatic approach that is attentive to its relations with Teheran, Moscow, Washington and Riyadh, are just some of the instruments employed by the Holy See in these complex years. The dramatic words pronounced by John Paul II as the world was plummeting into the 2003 Iraq war – the effects of which can still be felt – remain ingrained in people’s minds.” He said: “you will answer to God and to history”. Then there was Benedict XVI’s moment of prayer in Istanbul’s Blue Mosque which surprised the world. A prophetic and undoubtedly also political and diplomatic approach rooted in the Second Vatican Council, in documents such as “Nostra Aetate”, with which the Church expressed its openness to dialogue and conversation with other faiths, combining this choice with the “signs of the times”, with that modernity which, in the mid 60s, was already so global that it could not be rejected and condemned a priori. In his Apostolic Exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium”, published in 2013, Pope Francis speaks of the need to engage in dialogue with Islam, he stresses the need for religious freedom in Muslim countries and highlights the common roots of the two religions. “Faced with disconcerting episodes of violent fundamentalism, our respect for true followers of Islam should lead us to avoid hateful generalizations, for authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence,” he observed. But, the risk at the moment, is precisely this: that hatred, frustration and fear lead to rejection of the other, even in a Europe where millions of Muslims have been living peacefully for years. Walls are not the solution, Francis repeated during his visit to the Lutheran Church of Rome on Sunday. Indeed, if these walls spring up in our cities, harmonious co-existence, peace and freedom will be at risk.
Reformatory Islam is put in the corner
In this time, one definitely senses the lack of a reformatory Islam. Its voice is drowned out by bloodshed. And yet, the public gestures of prayer initiated by the Imams of Europe’s Muslim communities for the victims of the Paris attacks and against terrorist violence, have multiplied in recent days, perhaps more than ever before. Many of them took part in the solidarity demonstrations in the streets and squares of European cities. The history of the past 25 years has been marked by regional conflicts with global consequences, where the religious factor has often been key, sometimes indirectly but always evoked on the ground. The conflict, war and suffering among people have led first and foremost to the marginalisation and killing of reforming Islamic leaders in Muslim countries. Recent history has been marked by an uninterrupted series of wars. In1990-1991 the first Gulf war broke out (sparked by the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, under Saddam Hussein), these were the years in which Washington was thinking about a “new world order”; then came the Balkan wars which spanned 1991 through to 1995, involving Serbia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia and later Macedonia. Meanwhile, the Chechen war - which came in two rounds, from 1994 to 1996 and then from 1999 to 2009 - raged in the East. Chechnya lost its independence to Putin. In 2001 the world witnessed the Twin Tower attacks (though the World Trade Centre had already been the target of a failed attack in 1993). Then came the invasion of Afghanistan in 2002 and in 2003 the second and more scandalous Iraq campaign unfolded: Baghdad and the Saddam Hussein regime fell and an ongoing civil conflict began.
Terrorism comes to Europe
Islamist terrorism hit Europe on 11 March 2004, when Madrid Atocha railway station was attacked, leaving 191 people dead and more than 2000 injured. In 2005, it was the London underground’s turn: 54 were killed and hundreds injured. Bombs went off in Asia and Africa, in various premises and embassies and car bombs devastated Iraq, claiming the lives of thousands. Then, between the 2010 and 2011, the “Arab Spring” revolts spread through the Middle East: street revolts in which for the first time, entire sections of Middle Eastern societies were claiming freedoms, rights, social equality and the separation of the civil and religious spheres. But soon enough, radical or conservative Islamist currents infiltrated these movements, with the aim of altering the meaning of the protests, dominating them.
The battle ended up being between autocracies, dictatorships and fundamentalism, civil society and modern Islam were crushed, the leaders of Tahrir Square (in Cairo) were put behind bars or forced to flee. Syria was no exception: from the initial bloody demonstrations against Bashar al-Assad’s single-party regime which were stifled, to an extremely violent civil conflict. The war led to the birth of the violent and oppressive Islamic State which attracted combatants from all across the world.
Meanwhile, Gaddafi’s Libya was falling to pieces, partly thanks to the French-American military intervention. Lebanon entered a crisis it is struggling to come out of and Sunni and Shia Islamist militia took over. Millions of Syrian refugees flooded the Middle East, bombings killed civilians without distinction and Europe was eventually involved in the conflict. In January 2015, the offices of Charlie Hebdo came under attack and on 13 November the Paris attacks followed. Islamic radicalism permeates many of the above-mentioned events and is mixed in with nationalism and economic and territorial interests. The message of the Church has perhaps been one of the few sources of light for a world that has been hopelessly falling to pieces, with religious, ethnic and political persecution becoming the norm. Today, the Christian principles that stemmed from the Council are perhaps one of the few cultural, human and collective resources acting as a support to prevent not only our civilization but civilization as a whole from collapsing.
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/vaticano-vatican-papa-pope-44705/
Turkson: Vatican's Eco-Encyclical Propogandist Puppet
Cardinal Turkson: Amazon region deserves better future
(Vatican Radio) Cardinal Peter Turkson, the
President of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, said the
Amazon region deserves a different future, after a history of
“persecution, dehumanization and extermination.”
He was writing to the Ecclesial Meeting of the Pan-Amazonian Network (REPAM), taking place in Bogotà.
In his message, Cardinal Turkson put the issues facing the Amazon
region into the perspective of the “shameful attacks” in Paris, Beirut,
Iraq, and Syria, by recalling the words of Pope Francis during his 9
July 215 address to the Second World Meeting of Popular Movements in
Bolivia.
“Do we realize that something is wrong where so many senseless
wars are being fought and acts of fratricidal violence are taking place
on our very doorstep? Do we realize something is wrong when the soil,
water, air and living creatures of our world are under constant threat?”
“What we are learning is that these two questions are not different,
but two different ways of asking about one crisis affecting our
civilization and the Earth - ‘our common home’ - as the subtitle states
in Laudato si’,” Cardinal Turkson said. “Christians, Do we have today
the light, courage and determination to wrestle with these two questions
side-by-side, as the Holy Father challenges us to do?”
The Cardinal said we live in a “world with enormous challenges”, and
acknowledged the work done by REPAM in protecting the places and people
in the Amazon region.
“In these times of darkness and gloom in Europe, I would like today
to express my gratitude for the commitment, for the perseverance and for
the witness which illuminates South America,” he said.
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/11/16/cardinal_turkson_amazon_region_deserves_better_future/1187129
Mother Teresa to be canonized in September, report says
The Rev. Brian Kolodiejchuk of the Missionaries of Charity Fathers, postulator for the cause of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, discussed her legacy in 2010 at the Knights of Columbus Museum in New Haven, Conn. (CNS photo/courtesy Knights of Columbus)
ROME — An Italian news agency reported Wednesday that Mother Teresa will be declared a saint by Pope Francis in early September 2016, though the Vatican’s Congregation for the Causes of Saints has still not attributed to her a second miracle, a step needed to complete canonization process.The Italian agency AGI reported that the canonization, the formal act of declaring someone a saint, would be held Sept. 5, 2016, although L’Avvenire, the official newspaper of the Italian bishops’ conference, said it would more likely be Sept. 4, a Sunday.
Sept. 5 is the official feast day for Mother Teresa as a “blessed,” the final stage before sainthood, and it is also the anniversary of her death in 1997.
The Vatican’s medical board has already confirmed the inexplicable cure of Brazilian man who had been diagnosed with multiple brain tumors as due to the intercession of Mother Teresa, but the board’s decision still has to be approved by the bishops and cardinals who make up the sainthood congregation.
The Vatican Insider news agency reports that the miracle attributed to Mother Teresa’s intercession will be examined by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints in December.
The bishops could request further proof, which would delay the process. But if they accept the medical ruling, the prefect of the congregation, Italian Cardinal Angelo Amato, will present the case to the pope, who will still need to accept the miracle and set a date for the ceremony in order for the canonization to move forward.
“The [sainthood] process of Mother Teresa is still ongoing, so it’s premature to talk of a date for the canonization,” said the Rev. Federico Lombardi.
Lombardi told the Associated Press on Wednesday that canonization “would be lovely” and called the possibility she would be made a saint next year a “reasonable hypothesis, desire” by admirers.
Rumors about the canonization of Mother Teresa have been especially strong since Pope Francis called for a Holy Year of Mercy, which begins Dec. 8.
Whenever the canonization comes, it is expected to be among the largest public events in Rome’s recent history.
Mother Teresa was born to Albanian parents in Skopje, Macedonia, on August 26, 1910, but spent most of her life in India caring for the poorest of the poor.
During a September 2014 trip to Tirana, Albania’s capital, Pope Francis paid a special tribute to Mother Teresa, saying that she, “together with the martyrs who witnessed to their faith, most certainly are rejoicing in heaven because of the work of men and women of good will who contribute to the flourishing of civil society and the Church in Albania.”
At the time, Francis told the priest who served as his interpreter during the one-day trip that he had met Mother Teresa at a 1994 gathering of bishops in Rome. According to Lombardi, the pope told the priest that that Mother Teresa wasn’t fazed by anything and “always said what she wanted to say.”
“She sat right behind me during the sessions,” Francis told the priest. “I admired her strength and the decisive character of her involvement, never letting herself be fazed by the assembly of bishops.”
“I would have been scared if she had been my mother superior,” the pope told the priest.
Mother Teresa is the founder of the Missionaries of Charity, a religious order that today operates in 133 countries and runs hospices and homes for people with HIV/AIDS, leprosy, and tuberculosis, as well as soup kitchens, mobile clinics, orphanages, and schools.
Francis is not the real Pope so it is a moot point
Who’s going to replace Francis? Maybe one of these guys
There’s no reason to believe his papacy is nearing an end, and every reason to think it’s full steam ahead.
On the other hand, Francis has dropped hints that his might be a relatively brief run, and he’s also spoken approvingly about the example set by Pope Benedict XVI in resigning. Given his capacity for surprise, it’s entirely possible he’ll blindside the world with a decision to step aside just when it’s least expected.
No matter how things play out, it’s never too early to have an eye on what might come next – in part because it speaks to the future of the Church, and, in part because, let’s face it, such speculation is just fun.
Over the weekend, we got an intriguing X-ray of where things might stand should a transition in the papacy suddenly beckon. It came in a Vatican statement confirming the 12 prelates elected at the recent Synod of Bishops on the family to the “Ordinary Council,” meaning the body that will oversee synod operations until the next general assembly.
Versions of these names had already been reported, but the Vatican delayed making them official until Pope Francis decided on three additional figures to add by personal appointment.
- Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna, Austria
- Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier of Durban, South Africa
- Cardinal Oscar Rodriguzez Maradiaga of Tegucigalpa, Honduras
- Cardinal Peter Turkson of Ghana, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace
- Cardinal George Pell of Australia, prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy
- Cardinal Marc Ouellet of Canada, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops
- Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, India
- Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle of Manila, Philippines
- Cardinal Vincent Nichols of Westminster, United Kingdom
- Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship
- Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia, United States
- Archbishop Bruno Forte of Chieti-Vasto, Italy
- Patriarch Louis Raphael I Sako, head of the Chaldean Catholic Church in Iraq
- Archbishop Carlos Osoro Sierra of Madrid, Spain
- Archbishop Sérgio da Rocha of Brasília, Brazil
For one thing, they’re drawn from prelates who actually took part in the synod, and on any given occasion several papabili, meaning papal contenders, aren’t in the mix. (This time, for instance, the most serious American contender last time around, Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley of Boston, wasn’t in the synod.) For another, all the bishops in a synod vote for the council, but the electors in a papal ballot are exclusively cardinals.
Also, election to the council sometimes can be more a measure of the unique dynamics of a synod rather than an overall index of someone’s standing.
One could read the support for Pell, for instance, partly as a reaction to the controversy that erupted over a letter to the pope he helped organize at the beginning of the synod expressing concern over its procedures. It would be a way for prelates to say that whatever echo the affair had in the media, it didn’t alter the regard in which they hold Pell.
Similarly, some of the votes drawn by Chaput may have been a “thank you” for his labors in hosting the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia just before the synod began.
That said, elections to a synod council are still significant, largely because they’re about the only time that possible future popes face an open ballot among their fellow prelates.
So, what did we learn?
For one thing, the next conclave may struggle to find consensus.
Of the 12 elected prelates, six (Schönborn, Rodriguez, Gracias, Tagle, Nichols, and Forte) were associated with reform positions during the synods on the family, while five (Napier, Pell, Ouellet, Sarah, and Chaput) were seen as strong conservative voices. Turkson profiled more or less as non-aligned, with a foot in each camp.
The results are probably honest in reflecting sentiment inside the synod, but they also present a picture of a divided body of bishops.
In that light, a key question is which of these prelates might be positioned to attract cross-over support.
From the progressive side, the 70-year-old Schönborn could be such a figure.
He’s a Dominican who for much of his career was seen as a strong John Paul II/Benedict XVI bishop, and still has plenty of friends and admirers in more conservative Catholic circles. Among the most cosmopolitan figures in the College of Cardinals, Schönborn also draws good reviews for his personal graciousness and intellectual firepower.
As the synod rolled on, Schönborn was sort of its E.F. Hutton – when he talked, people listened, because they knew his utterances would be interesting.
From the conservative camp, the 71-year-old Ouellet remains a compelling personality.
Despite aligning with the opposition to Communion for the divorced and remarried, Ouellet avoided being drawn into the public fireworks surrounding the synod. He’s seen as a figure of deep personal humility and integrity, and as the Vatican’s prime mover in the naming of bishops for the past five years, he’s got a wide network of friends in high places.
Conservatives might prefer to consolidate around an African candidate, although it’s an open question whether either Sarah or Napier would have enough traction.
Sarah, for instance, might come off as a touch extreme — during the synod, he referred to both gender ideology and ISIS as “apocalyptic beasts” — and cardinals who head dioceses might also wonder whether, at 15 years and counting, he’s been in Rome too long to be in touch with life in the trenches.
As a result, it may be that the most compelling candidates from the developing world, as measured by the synod elections, are Turkson of Ghana and Tagle of the Philippines.
Both are relatively young, with Turkson at 67 and Tagle at 58, yet both are well-seasoned in major leadership roles. Both are articulate, charismatic, and likely would have strong support among those committed to continuity with Pope Francis.
Of the two, Turkson may have a better shot at backing across party lines. He’s the public face of Francis’ press on climate change, for example, but he’s also something of a hawk on Islamic extremism. (In 2012, Turkson stirred controversy at a different synod of bishops by playing an alarmist Youtube video warning of a Muslim takeover in Europe.)
At the moment, all this is no more than an amusing parlor game, for the obvious reason that there’s no conclave in the offing. The dynamics can, and almost certainly will, change between now and whenever that happens.
Yet the synod elections nevertheless offer a reminder of one key insight about a papal succession.
In the abstract, one can sit down and design a profile of a perfect pope, and heading into the next conclave many cardinals and pundits alike will doubtless do exactly that. In the end, however, it boils down to who’s realistically on offer — and for now, these 12 prelates certainly fit that bill.
Francis Will Visit Rome’s Great Synagogue in January
VATICAN CITY — The Vatican announced today that Pope Francis will soon
become the third pope to visit the Great Synagogue in Rome, following in
the footsteps of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
“Following the invitation from the chief rabbi and Jewish community of
Rome, Pope Francis will pay a visit to the Great Synagogue in the
afternoon of Sunday, Jan. 17, 2016,” a Nov. 17 communiqué from the
Vatican read.
Known for the great emphasis he places on ecumenism, Francis will follow
in the footsteps of two of his predecessors. In 1986, St. John Paul II
became the first pope to visit the synagogue. Benedict XVI imitated the
gesture, making a visit of his own in 2010.
According to the Vatican statement, the visit will consist of a meeting
between Pope Francis and representatives of Judaism and the members of
Rome’s Jewish community.
Specific details will be published “in due course.”
Pope Francis is the latest in a string of pontiffs since St. John XXIII
who have made Catholic relations with the Jews a priority.
St. John XXIII, frequently referred to as the “Good Pope,” is known to
have saved thousands of Jewish lives while serving as apostolic nuncio
to Turkey during World War II, creating false, though official-looking
documents and papers for Jewish refugees seeking to escape into
Palestine.
He formed a network of other Church officials and neutral politicians
whom he enlisted to assist him in his efforts to save and protect the
Jewish people.
In calling the Second Vatican Council, St. John XXIII provided the
necessary space to re-examine the Church’s relationship with other
religions, which culminated in the promulgation of Nostra Aetate, the Second Vatican Council’s declaration on the relation of the Church to non-Christians religions.
In an Oct. 28 interview
with CNA, Rabbi David Rosen noted that while Blessed Paul VI certainly
followed in St. John XXIII’s footsteps in publishing the document, as
well as being the first pope to go on pilgrimage to the Holy Land, the
Church’s relationship with the Jews made “a quantum leap” during the
papacy of St. John Paul II.
Rosen is international director of interreligious affairs at the
American Jewish Committee, as well as a member of the Chief Rabbinate of
Israel. He is also part of the Commission of the Holy See for Religious
Relations With the Jews.
St. John Paul II has a long track record of papal firsts in relation to
the Jewish people: In 1979, he was the first pope to go to Auschwitz and
pay homage to the Jewish people who died in the extermination camps; in
1986, he became the first pope since the first century to enter a
synagogue; he was the first pope to acknowledge the state of Israel in
1993; and he was the first pope who publicly recalled the Holocaust, in
1994. He was also the first pope to host and honor a long-term Jewish
friend in a pontifical residence.
While Benedict XVI continued to build on St. John Paul II’s legacy, Rosen said, “We’ve reached a new height with Pope Francis.”
“There has never been a pope in history, probably since the first, since
Peter, who knew the Jewish community as well as this Pope has done in
his own adulthood,” he said, noting how, as archbishop of Buenos Aires,
then-Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio often visited synagogues and Jewish
celebrations.
So when it comes to Pope Francis, “we’re not dealing with someone who
just understands cognitively or even in his heart that this has to be
done,” the rabbi said.
Francis, Rosen said, is somebody who has it “in his innards, as if it
were in his intestines — (that he) understands the Jewish reality and
has engaged with it. And that’s very definitely a new, significant stage
in the wonderful transformation of our relationship.”
