Solve et Coagula is a formula associated with occult, alchemical freemasonry and is also reflected in the motto of the current occupant of the See of Peter, ” ¡Hagan lío!” Or, it can be expressed another way: in Hegelian terms, “Thesis, antithesis and synthesis”. All those terms could be applied to the work of this Pontiff, who is now “humbly” correcting the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. In the Bergoglian Reformation words mean whatever His Holiness intends them to mean and so now, life means death.
Today, a reader alerted us to an informative article on the new focus of the re-constituted Pontifical Academy for Life. The Humble One® dissolved the Pontifical Academy for Life and rebuilt it into his own image. Now, in typical marxist fashion, the Academy for Life is working to extinguish life at both ends of the spectrum.
Judie Brown’s American Life League carried the following article by Dr. Elizabeth Wickham of Lifetree (link in our sidebar).
Palliative Care, the Real Story
By Elizabeth Wickham, PhD
Because of the new appointments to the Pontifical Academy for Life, its workshops and conferences in 2017, plus the one planned for winter 2018, my comments here are directed to the low-profile wing of the euthanasia movement known as the Third Path, which relies on the new field of palliative medicine. Today’s palliative care is falsely advertised as the moral alternative to physician-assisted suicide. Having studied this low-profile wing for over 15 years, I believe the activities at the Pontifical Academy for Life are very troubling.
Would you like to retain the Blessed Sacrament in your own home, in order to have Eucharistic Adoration at your convenience? Are you a faithful Catholic, adhering to all the commands of the faith, completely committed to living a life consecrated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, observing the faith meticulously?
Well, that lets you out, chump! That honor and privilege is only for those on the proposed Third Way, the Ordo Penitentium. Read on…
Sandro Magister has posted another article by the French Dominican theologian Thomas Michelet, fancifully entitled, “The Synod. The Preparatory Document’s Arabian Phoenix”. In his introduction, Magister remarks about the Ordo Penitentium, “Everybody says there is one, what it is nobody knows. It is the “penitential way” to communion for the divorced and remarried.” He is referring to the Arabian Phoenix, Cosi fan tutte.
Michelet begins by noting that the Instrumentum Laboris, in ¶123 asserts that, “a great number agree that a journey of reconciliation or penance, under the auspices of the local bishop, might be undertaken by those who are divorced and civilly remarried, who find themselves in irreversible situations.” Taking note of the obvious, that there is no factual basis provided for this “great number (who) agree”, Michelet decries the statement’s imprecision and warns that the lack of precision could open the way to a variety of pastoral practices.
“(T)he indefiniteness of the proposal conceals a true and profound dispute that threatens to last for a long time, even in the final proposals of the next synod if there is not greater precision. There would be the risk of a declaration of principle on the doctrinal level that would not be discussed by anyone, but would then open the way to the most highly varied pastoral practices that would in fact involve very different doctrines. After a few years, we would find ourselves facing the fait accompli of these practices and of the doctrinal change that they imply and that they would have brought into common acceptance.
“According to some commentators, there has been a move from the idea of an “all or nothing,” of an immediate admission or a persistent refusal of access for the divorced and remarried to the Eucharist, to what could seem like a “third way”: the idea of an admission conditional on the completion of a penitential journey, on which everyone finally seems to be in agreement. Great, but concretely, what sort of process would this be? What would be its specific steps? …
Note, the application of Hegelian dialectics; thesis (refusal of access), antithesis (immediate admission) then resolved by the synthesis or “third way”. With the stage set, Michelet then proceeds to his second hypothesis.
“This second hypothesis – that of maintaining the current discipline – is therefore the only one that seems conceivable to us, granting that one wishes to be faithful to the Word of Christ. Does this mean that we are talking about an absolute rejection of any change with respect to the present situation? Not necessarily. Even in fidelity, there is always the possibility of a new development, of a “surprise of the Holy Spirit.”
In this, we see our humble Pontiff’s God of surprises. But wait, it gets better.
“First of all, there are various ways of presenting the matter. Either as a door that is closed and the rejection of any way of salvation, or rather as a pilgrimage in which the one who undertakes a journey of happiness is already on the right path, even if he is not able to conform immediately to all the aspects of life in the Spirit according to the Gospel. This second way of acting, which should be decisively preferred, in fact consists in integrating the law of incrementalism presented by Pope John Paul II in “Familiaris Consortio” no. 84, without creating confusion with its inverse figure, that of incrementalism of the law (which would be the first hypothesis of which we just spoke).
Note the false dichotomy between a closed door, rejecting salvation for the poor sinner who “finds himself” in this deplorable state (seemingly through no fault), and a merciful way of a penitential “pilgrimage, a journey of happiness”. Who could resist!
“Moreover, it remains to be acknowledged that some pastoral practices faithful to this teaching of Pope John Paul II have already been established since that time, demonstrating that they can give good fruits of grace. For example, it has happened that some “divorced and remarried” couples have manifested, in making the decision not to receive communion anymore, such faith and such profound respect for the Eucharist that the bishop has allowed them to keep the real presence in their homes, in order to nourish their journey of conversion through Eucharistic adoration.
In the foregoing paragraph, Michelet states that these people, by “making the decision not to receive communion anymore”, are thereby allowed (by an unnamed bishop) to have the Most Holy Eucharist in their homes. No mention of turning away from their sinful life, but just because they refrain from unworthy reception of the Eucharist. Amazing! A monstrous sacrilege against the Blessed Sacrament to reward people who refuse to amend their lives. Michelet blithely continues,
“In order to move forward along this line of innovative fidelity defined by Pope John Paul II, we ourselves have made the proposal of an updating of the “ordo pænitentium,” the restoration of this ancient order of penitents of Christian antiquity that long survived in tandem with the current form of the sacrament of penance. This “ordo” could find renewed interest, because it took place over a long period of time and in stages marked by liturgical celebrations. It was considered sacramental right from the stage of the imposition of ashes, not only in the final stage of absolution. It also had the advantage of demonstrating well that the sinner was not excluded from the Church, because he was part of an “ordo,” and was therefore on the contrary urged to nourish himself on the Church’s treasury of graces in listening to the Word of God and participating in its life of prayer. Just as the emergence from the regime of Christendom procured the grace of the rebirth of adult baptism, it could also lead to the rebirth of these orders of penitents in what was most evangelical about them, without reviving, obviously, the excesses that were not connected to their essence. Thus the penitent would have a prophetic mission to accomplish in the Church: that of urging greater respect for the Eucharist and greater consideration of one’s sins.
Note the skillful use of, “the restoration of this ancient order of penitents of Christian antiquity”. That should surely bring in the support of those rigid traditionalists, so intransigent in their taste for the old fashions! Michelet began his article by sounding like a staunch defender of orthodoxy and ends by proposing the sacrilege of giving the Blessed Sacrament to obstinate sinners as a reward for their not receiving Holy Communion sacrilegiously. In what parallel universe is this faithful to the Magisterium? Oh, I forgot, it is “innovative fidelity”!
I leave it to those who are more learned decipher for us the sentence, “Just as the emergence from the regime of Christendom procured the grace of the rebirth of adult baptism, it could also lead to the rebirth of these orders of penitents in what was most evangelical about them, …” Love to hear your thoughts on that!
In 1916, 99 years ago, St. Michael the Archangel taught the shepherd children to make reparation to the Blessed Sacrament. It seemed puzzling at that time, since the most Blessed sacrament was universally throughout the Church adored and glorified. Indeed, in those days, there was no dearth of respectful Eucharistic Adoration in all the world, carried out devoutly by obedient and chaste Catholics. But reparation was needed precisely because at this time, a church of opposition would propose sacrilege in the name of mercy.
If you read this blog regularly, you know by heart the prayer which we call, the Forgotten Prayer of Fatima. Please renew your efforts to pray it and to spread its devotion.
“Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, I adore Thee profoundly, and I offer Thee the Most Precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the same Son Jesus Christ present in the Tabernacles of the world, in reparation for all the sacrileges, outrages, and indifferences by which He Himself is offended. Through the infinite merits of His Most Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg of Thee the conversion of poor sinners.”
Immaculate Heart of Mary, Queen of the Holy Rosary, restore the faith!
The goal of Pope Bergoglio’s Third Way: It is already being done in Germany: communion for the divorced and remarried, tolerance for second marriages, approval of homosexual unions.
Recently, we reported that the revolutionaries who have control of the Church have been using Hegelian dialectics to move the Church irrevocably towards a man made church of the world. They have done this by first, discovering a hitherto unknown “problem”, proposing a radical solution which alarms the mainstream, thus creating a conflict, then instituting (imposing) a “solution” which supposedly “resolves” the conflict. This thesis, antithesis and synthesis is simply standard modus operandi for the anti-Christian governments today and it is not at all surprising the the revolutionary modernists controlling the Church use the same tactics. After all, they serve the same master.
Sandro Magister’s blog, Chiesa has an article exhibiting the result of this whole process, which is evident for all to see in the Church in Germany. Cardinals Kasper and Marx have been industriously working to achieve the fullness of Vatican II ecclesiology in Germany for many years now. Here are a few quotes from Magister’s article. The full article can be found here.
Cardinal Marx stated in February this year, “We are not a subsidiary of Rome. Every episcopal conference is responsible for pastoral care in its own cultural context, and must preach the Gospel in its own original way. We cannot wait for a synod to tell us how we must shape the pastoral care of marriage and the family.” Marx’s position here is exactly what Hans Kung intended for the modern, post-concilar church, using collegiality to fracture the unity of the Church.
But now it is Germany’s episcopal conference itself that has set this same concept down in black and white, in its official response – after consulting the “people of God” – to the preparatory questionnaire sent out from Rome in view of the next session of the synod.
When it comes to the question on “how to promote the determination of pastoral guidelines on the level of particular Churches,” the German bishops in fact write:
“Referring to social and cultural differences, some of the responses favour regional agreements on pastoral guidelines at local church level. The basis could also be formed by diocesan discussion processes on the topic of marriage and the family the outcome of which would be discussed with other local churches. This would be conditional on all concerned being willing to engage in a dialogue.”
The formulation is a bit contorted, but the facts speak for themselves. In almost all the dioceses of Germany, sacramental absolution and Eucharistic communion are given to the divorced and remarried, as already made clear by a previous document from the German episcopal conference, approved on June 24, 2014 and proudly exhibited in Rome at last October’s session of the synod on the family:…”
Magister notes, “Not only do the German bishops approve of giving absolution and communion to the divorced and remarried, but they also express the hope that civil second marriages be blessed in church, that Eucharistic communion also be given to non-Catholic spouses, that the goodness of homosexual relationships and same-sex unions be recognized.”
So, this is where the Church is headed. The method for this is the Third Way, or some version thereof, which will be offered, then imposed by our merciful Pontiff in order to reconcile the “crisis” presented by the various episcopal conferences deciding on their own, to jump the gun as the German Bishops have done. We can’t have a schism, therefore we must all jump in and join them in the schism. What a fine example of modernist logic! It is the culmination and fulfillment of Vatican II’s opening to the world. No longer preaching the Gospel, no longer beckoning men to repent and follow Christ. Simply offering sinners a wealth of worldly platitudes (Live and let live, Who am I to judge?) and endless dialogue.
We have a brief window of opportunity between now and the final Synod to pray and fast for the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. To her has been given the task of once again crushing the serpent’s head, once again defeating heresy in the Church. Remember her promise:
‘In time, one faith, one baptism, one Church, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic. In eternity, Heaven!’
Immaculate Heart of Mary, Queen of the most holy rosary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death!
† Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us, have mercy on the Holy Father! Thy Kingdom come!
† Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us, pray for our priests!
† St. Joseph, protect our families!
† Remember, Pray the Rosary and confound the devil!
~ by evensong for love of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
From Vaticanist Sandro Magister comes word of a dramatic proposal to “resolve” the impasse between the two factions that arose after last Fall’s Synod. This so-called “Third Way” is the synthesis you would expect from the clever people who brought us the Mid-term relatio in the first place.
Hegel’s sequence of thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis (Hegelian dialectics) is the way the Prince of the World moves mankind away from the reign of Christ the King, as it moves the Church also away from adherence to the unchanging deposit of faith and into an ever-changing maelstrom of “living tradition” in which there are no certainties, no truths and eventually, no God. The way that Hegelian dialectics is applied to the Church and will be applied at and after the final Synod, is to “solve” the false problem of those who are excluded from the Holy Eucharist due to their persistence in iniquity, that is hardened in the practice of mortal sins as a lifestyle choice.
The Bergoglio/Kasper agenda intends to present through Father Michelet, a “merciful” solution of the Third Way, as if it were a compromise solution. In fact the result will be allowing those who have chosen to disobey the clear laws of Christ and His Church, to partake of sacramental communion.
Magister’s article on “The Third Way” is found here. A few quotes, “Unbending against divorce, merciful with sinners. Suggested by a French theologian. It is a new form of the sacrament of penance, following the example of the ancient Church.” Magister explains that Dominican theologian Thomas Michelet has published a proposal,
“to institute an ‘ordo paenitentium’ for those who find themselves in a persistent condition of divergence from the law of God, so that they undertake a journey of conversion that could last for many years or even for life, but always in an ecclesial, liturgical, and sacramental context that would accompany their ‘pilgrimage’.
The model of this order of penitents is the sacrament of penance in the ancient Church, in an innovative form. Although they would not be permitted to receive Eucharistic communion, the penitents would not find themselves excluded from sacramental life, because their journey of conversion would itself be a sacrament and source of grace.”
There are four elements for confession: contrition, confession, absolution and penance, performed in that order. While noting that those four elements are inviolable, Father Michelet nevertheless proposes,
The order in which they take place, however, is not (inviolable), in that it is only since around the year 1000 that penance has become the customary follow-up to absolution, as an effect of the sacrament for the sake of reparation, while in ancient penitence it was the precondition, certainly as reparative suffering but also as the predisposition to contrition.
Moreover, the ordinary form of the sacrament has become, so to speak, “instantaneous,” combining all of these elements in a single brief ritual act, while ancient penitence was extended for many years and involved various liturgical phases, from entrance into the order of penitents to the final reconciliation.
So then, this is precisely the case of the divorced and remarried, and in a more general way of all those who have difficulties in detaching themselves completely from their sin, who for this reason need a journey that may take a long time.
In its current form, the sacrament of penitence can no longer integrate this temporal and progressive dimension, which however was characteristic of ancient penitence, was still in use in the Middle Ages, and has never been suppressed. On these two points, the regime of penitence would therefore have the possibility of new enrichment – and it would be good to do this, because it is truly an element that is missing – by integrating, in addition to the sacramental forms already supplied by the ritual in effect, another “extraordinary” form, simultaneously new and profoundly traditional.
Even recent history demonstrates that, in order to initiate such a reform, a simple motu proprio would seem to suffice; but it would probably be opportune to dedicate to it first of all an assembly of the synod of bishops … “
Note, that the whole concept of abstaining from sin is absent from this Third Way. So that is how Pope Francis intends to accomplish his irreversible changes to the Church.