The new Prefect of the Dicastery for Doctrine of the Faith is… incredibly…
Archbp. Víctor Manuel Fernández
You will know him as a ghost writer for his boss. Questions of plagiarism were raised in regard to Amoris laetitia. HERE
He is also the author of that great 1995 hit…
Heal me with your mouth. The art of kissing
When on 1 July, today, the Holy See released a list of his previous works, for some reason that one wasn’t on the list.
He is 60 years of age. When made a Cardinal, it’ll be 20 years before he cannot vote.
A recent tweet.
NUEVA ETAPA DE FRANCISCO
Compartí una semana con Francisco
Trabaja el día entero
Tiene audiencias y reuniones a la mañana y a la tarde. Trabaja más horas que cualquiera en el Vaticano
Lo ven cansado tras 5 horas con cosas densas
pero después de la siesta estaba perfecto y feliz pic.twitter.com/SLobLWCi6b— Víctor Manuel Fernández, Tucho, obispo, monseñor (@Tuchofernandez) June 30, 2023
Loading ...
My first two thoughts: 1.) +Fernandez seems quite the narcissist… 2.) how long until Franciscus Caesar names his horse a Cardinal?” (or in today’s equine-free Vatican, how about Martin, SJBTQ?)
At least we know the Church cannot err on or change doctrine. Maybe if he tries, the Holy Spirit will intervene and we won’t have to worry about him voting in the next conclave. (I’m trying to not be so negative.)
With the Pope’s most recent appointments, if there is another consistory, I don’t see how the College of Cardinals isn’t definitively swamped by heretics. (The newly appointed Primate of Belgium took “Fratelli Tutti” as his Episcopal Motto.)
I despair for what remains of my faith. It is heartbreaking to think what will happen if the Church continues on this wide road to destruction.
Perhaps the most amazing part of it is that the Pope didn’t wake up one day and write a surprise document overturning document. This is all being done rather methodically, with clear signals as to what the result will be. And we see no meaningful opposition.
At least the bishops living under Henry VIII had the literal chopping block to fear.
Dang! I was hoping it was April 1st.
Archlaic says: names his horse a Cardinal?
Given the discussion some time back about Fernandez being a plagiarist, perhaps he just did?
Ann Barnhardt is starting to look very prophetic. In my very core, I do not believe that Bergoglio holds the Catholic faith. Seems like we are witnessing the true reason Sister Lucia was unable to write down the 3rd secret for many months.
Not only is the house being burned down, but the ground around it is being salted for good measure.
Archlaic says: names his horse a Cardinal?
This quote seems appropriate:
“Never were abilities so much below mediocrity so well rewarded; no, not even when Caligula’s horse was made Consul.”
Another day of sad news regarding the Church. This pontificate has seeded decades of problems. How much more of this do we have to suffer, Lord?
Ah, to my great shock, another gay moment in the life of the Church. It’s sad to think that Christ gave us the mystical body the Church and this is how we repay Him. I think the solution is in the death of this generation through time. The traditional kids will be the future. Until then, buckle up and walk straight. I’ve told people that it doesn’t matter that Francis has stacked the deck because the remaining John-Paul 2 and Benedict cardinals gave us Bergoglio. Normalcy is a hundred years out when the faithful kids are all that remain.
Judas knew something of kissing also.
I agree with APX: we know that the Church cannot change her doctrine and she cannot err. But I find this appointment extremely concerning. Take a look at what Archbishop Fernandez wrote regarding Amoris Laetitia in an essay dated from around May 2017. In it, Archbishop Fernandez argues that the magisterial “flip-flops” at Vatican II on religious freedom and salvation outside the Church set precedent for Pope Francis to contradict his predecessors in Amoris Laetitia:
THE LEGITIMACY OF A CHANGE IN DISCIPLINE
“Is this change possible and acceptable? Can Francis accept what was taught by St. John Paul II and yet open a door that was closed? Yes, because an evolution in the Church’s understanding of her own doctrine and its disciplinary consequences is possible. Let us look at some historical examples.
“In 1832, Pope Gregory XVI, in Mirari vos, had said that it is an “absurd and erroneous doctrine, or rather delirium, that freedom of conscience is to be claimed and defended for all men” (MV 15). In the Syllabus of Pius IX (1864) religious freedom is condemned as one of the principal ‘errors.’ But in the following century, the Second Vatican Council substantially modified these very firm ideas (cf. DH 2-3). A similar evolution occurred on the issue of the possibility of salvation outside of the Catholic Church. We recall also the case of slavery: Pope Nicholas V allowed the king of Portugal to take slaves. Then, in 1455 the Bull Romanus Pontifex reaffirmed this. And this is not a secondary issue, since it has to do with the inalienable dignity of the human person. (With respect to this subject of the evolution in the understanding of the doctrine, the examples can be taken into account which are given in: Thomas Rausch, ‘Doctrine at the service of the pastoral mission of the Church,’ La Civiltà Cattolica, v. 3981, May 14, 2016; pp. 223-236.) As of those changes in the understanding of doctrine, there were, as a consequence, various changes in discipline.
“However, some hold that these comparisons are not convincing, and insist that any evolution should be carried out in the same line as what was said previously by the Church. It would be a kind of magisterial ‘fixism.’ But, precisely in the examples mentioned above, it can be seen that the evolution did not take place ‘in the same line’ as before, at least not on the question in itself. Between allowing slavery and not allowing it in any case, there is an immense evolution. There is only Continuity in the general doctrine about human dignity, but not in the precise point in question, where the Church really evolved in its understanding. In the same way, between affirming that only a Catholic can be saved and holding that there is a possibility of salvation outside the Church, there is no continuity with regard to the question in itself. It is obvious that the Church grows into a better reception of the proposal of the Gospel, in a more complete vision and in new ways of applying what has been taught. But some have an enormous difficulty in admitting that something similar can occur in questions related to sexuality.”
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/08/full-text-pope-francis-ghostwriter-of.html
Again, I find this extremely concerning, and I find the archbishop’s arguments to be flat-out absurd. Thomas Pink has a fantastic essay on how there is no rupture or “change” regarding the teaching on religious liberty from what was before the Second Vatican Council. Even more absurd is the archbishop’s claim that an “evolution occurred on the issue of the possibility of salvation outside of the Catholic Church.” No such evolution has ever taken place, and the CDF has declared so time and time again, including in the wake of “Dominus Iesus” with the multiple clarifications offered there.
The archbishop appears to flat-out admit that there has been rupture in the areas of at least three defined doctrines when he says, “it can be seen that the evolution did not take place “in the same line” as before. What he calls “magisterial fixism” is simply fidelity to the teachings of Jesus Christ, Who is the same yesterday, today and forever.
Father Z… what are we to do as the laity? One of the successors of the Apostles, who is to safeguard the truth, seems to believe that fidelity to Jesus Christ and the teachings transmitted by His Church (or “magisterial fixism”) is a defect in the Body of Christ, and not something that should be promoted or even called a good. And even more so, this is supposed to be the man in charge of the dicastery that defends the faith against error!
The only other thing I can say is that I am deeply saddened that the man who wrote the above essay has been placed in such a position by the Holy Father. I’m trying not to despair, especially since I just went to Confession today… but this news is not helping me. Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us!
Correct me if I am wrong, but weren’t there reservations about Mueller when he was named Prefect of CDF? And now Cardinal M. is a champion of orthodoxy. Maybe this dicastery has a way of shaping its leaders in an encouraging way.
It’s not as though we needed an indication of where they want to lead the Church, but this is a pretty clear signal. One can only imagine the dubious responses to future Dubia.
Pingback: SATVRDAY EXTRA – Big Pulpit
A lot of shade is being thrown on Caligula’s horse, and I think it’s fair to say that he was probably the most virtuous and sincere senator in Rome since Cicero.
And he never wrote a book about smooching.
The rosetta stone for understanding Tucho’s appointment to head CDF came from Tucho himself in a 2015 interview: “The pope goes slow because he wants to be sure that the changes have a deep impact. The slow pace is necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the changes. He knows there are those hoping that the next pope will turn everything back around. If you go slowly it’s more difficult to turn things back. . . You have to realize that he is aiming at reform that is irreversible. If one day he should intuit that he’s running out of time and doesn’t have enough time to do what the Spirit is asking him, you can be sure he will speed up.”
Folks, Pope Francis has fired the flare gun here. He’s concluded that he’s very nearly out of time, and his pontificate is very likely in its closing chapters. As such, we’re moving into that final phase that Tucho himself foresaw 8 years ago. Thus begins Tucho’s promised “speed round” in which there will be an 11th-hour attempt to implement all heretofore-unrealized goals of the Bergoglian pontificate. Fasten your seatbelts…
The Horse is a great analogy. Vatican II is the Hoof and Mouth Disease. I must be eradicated.
Not,
Actually, no. Not great. It limps more than most analogies.
Hoof and Mouth is infamously a disease in cattle and other species – but not horses.
The more I think about this appointment, the more I think this is Pope Francis also signaling early that Archbp. Víctor Manuel Fernández should be his replacement once he passes away.