Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Pope Francis and the Appointment of Bishops: "He Looks For the Most Progressive Candidates"

Pope Francis and Cardinal Ouellet shortly before the Conclave
of 2013 on St. Peter's Square
(Rome) Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the Roman faith prefect is not the only cardinal who is marginalized by Pope Francis (see Pope Francis and the Marginalization of the CDF). This also applies to another "Ratzingerian", the French-Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect the Congregation for Bishops. 
In his first interview with the atheist Eugenio Scalfari on the October 1, 2013 for the daily newspaper La Repubblica,  Pope Francis said, looking at some members of the Roman Curia: "the court is the leprosy of the papacy ".
But Francis seems "to fight the leper and not the leprosy," said Secretum meum mihi . The daily newspaper Le Journal de Montréal headline in yesterday's edition: "Cardinal Ouellet no longer has the ear of the Pope".  Cardinal Ouellet is responsible, as prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, for the appointment of bishops. His dicastery is preparing the appointment of bishops by the pope, is collecting the necessary information and recommends candidates.

Pope Francis "throws Ouellet's recommendations in the trash"

Under Pope Francis, things have fundamentally changed: "Pope Francis has thrown his recommendations for the appointment of new bishops into the trash," said the French-Canadian newspaper.
"It is worrying because it is the task of Cardinal Ouellet in Rome to propose in the Pope's name, but he ignores them and decides on all other candidates," said Quebec Religion specialist Alain Pronkin.
The French daily La Croix reported a few days ago that "it has already happened, that Pope Francis rejected all three names submitted to him by Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, [...] and even sought out others for direction. "
According to the weekly magazine L'Espresso that was the case, for example, in the replacement of three important Sees: Chicago, Madrid and Sydney.
The appointments for Francis are not only a question of suitability, but a question of direction. The real revolution of Pope Francis is done by appointment .

Pope Francis looking for "the most progressive candidate"

According to Le Journal de Montréal , it was even "very rare" that the Pope follows the recommendations of the Cardinal, although that is his task and Cardinal Ouellet, through his staff, has the best overview of the situation in a diocese.
However, the Pope uses his own channels, not the official, but informal, and which may also come about by accident. According to Alain Pronkin, Pope Francis is looking for the "progressive candidates". For this he has to rely on recommendations. What he rejects with Cardinal Ouellet are accepted from among the Pope's confidants. In other words, the belief and understanding of the Church by Cardinal Ouellet, a Ratzingerianer, displeases the pope.
"A concrete example: The Pope believes in the fact that the divorced and remarried can receive Communion, while Cardinal Ouellet, however, expressed his rejection of this," said Alain Pronkin.
The same applies to the issue of homosexuality.
For this reason, Francis shuns everything that is presented to him by Cardinal Ouellet and relies instead on labile random recommendations.

Recommendation by a progressive confidant enough to be Bishop

This was not quite by chance. The Pope operates by information obtained from part of the Jesuit Order.  What is decisive for Francis is the progressive attitude of the candidates who must be confirmed to him by a confidant. That is enough. The Pope then needs no dossiers and reports, as they are presented to him by the Congregation for Bishops. A person's recommendation of trust is sufficient to make someone a bishop.
The archdiocesan chair of Chicago is one of the most influential in the US.  and Pope Francis rejected all three candidates that were presented to him by Cardinal Ouellet,  in collaboration with the Apostolic Nuncio and the former Archbishop Cardinal Francis George. Instead, he appointed Bishop Blaise Cupich, who was regarded as one of the biggest outsiders in the episcopate of the United States because of his progressive views. Thus, Francis not only drove a splinter, but a real stake into the heart of the Catholic Church in the United States. Archbishop Cupich has already called for the communion for divorced and remarried and the acceptance of homosexuality.
Shortly before his death, Cardinal George wrote about the Synod of Bishops in Rome:
"The pope has said he wants to see on every question, and so it happened, so he got what he wanted, and now he has to fix it. [...] This raises the question of why he does not clarify these things himself. Why is it necessary that apologists have the burden to find the best interpretation? He has not realized the consequences of some of his statements, or even his actions? Does he not realize the impact? "
As is known,  the post-synodal Letter of Amoris Laetitia did not receive papal clarification, for the "apologists" are busy again on the road, "to find the best interpretation".

Appointments: Here the "revolution" Francis performs most effectively

Pope Francis has been working meticulously on a new personnel network on the decision-making level, which should lead the Church structurally well beyond his death in a particular direction. Maybe his personal policy, which is usually revealed very quietly, revealed even in the most important field of activity in which he transposes his vision of the Church vision. Here his "revolution" is at its most enduring.
According to Pronkin, Cardinal Ouellet could soon be replaced by Pope Francis. The French Canadian, says Pronkin, would not be the first high Curia employee who would deposed because of his criticism of the papal course. However, Francis had found a way to make the appointments himself, although the competent Congregation is in the hands of persons whose convictions he rejects. The informal, semi-clandestine appointments to official bodies in the  past is not only a temporary solution, but probably corresponds to the disposition of the Pope and his aversion to rules and laws. [Or he doesn't want to spend the political capital to get rid of him, when he can do the job himself.]
There have been advantages for the "revolution" of episcopal appointments that a Ratzingerianer still officially stands at the head of the Congregation for Bishops. It maintains the impression in the Church  that there is a balancing counterweight, but one  that does not exist in reality. [There were still very, very bad appointments under Benedict.]
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: MiL (Screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

37 comments:

  1. It was always going to be Francis' way to carry out his revolution via appointment, ie a claque of "yes" men, which is what all martinets do. However, Francis won't live for many more years and his successor, voted in by disgruntled curial cardinals, will be able to shift some of the hierarchy around and marginalise others. Given the cowardice and ambitions of many of the present hierarchy, they will willingly endorse a pope whose modus operandi is diametrically opposed to Francis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's "a wise guy.' http://mahoundsparadise.blogspot.com/2016/04/what-unappealing-man-wise-guy-taunter.html

      Delete
  2. Substitute John Paul for Francis in Genty's comment and it would make just as much sense. JP, a martinet to his fingertips, was a great one for appointing like-minded (reactionary in his case) cronies. All popes do it. It's the nature of the beast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's not even true. If only it were.

      Delete
    2. Wuerl and "Hollywood" Mahoney, for starters, were like-minded? HARHARHARHARHAR!!!!!!!! Maybe the term you were trying to recall was "Papal Nuncio to the USA," not Pope. Getting lost in the land of false equivalencies shows that the traveler did not learn how to read the moral road map adequately, at least not the Catholic one.

      JP II a martinet? Was that a word on your learn a new word a day calendar your aunt got you for Christmas? Had they not been clergymen, Benedict XVI, JP II, and even Paul VI gave you the impression that they could have been academics or statesmen, and JPII probably could have enjoyed an acting & directing career had he chosen it. Despite his no doubt many good qualities, what do you think he'd be doing if he weren't a clergyman?

      Delete
    3. Apologies... meant to close:

      "Despite his no doubt many good qualities, what do you think the current Pope would be doing if he weren't a clergyman?"

      Delete
    4. Francis is the next step from JPII. JPII was a lighter version of Francis. Additionally, JPII's scandals were not as well known, due to lack of widespread super media like the internet (except near the end of his pontificate). A lot of his writing, speeches, and actions are contrary to the Catholic faith – just like Pope Francis - and JPII was the one that made Francis a cardinal.

      JPII continued the horrific liturgical reforms, which harmed the faith of millions, and bad ecumenism, which communicated to onlooker that they did not need to convert to Catholicism. Unt Unum Sint was JPII’s version of Amoris. Asking St. John the Baptist to protect Islam was JPII’s version of Francis graciously receiving the communist crucifix. There are many startling parallels like this.

      So no, we should never hope that it was true he appointed people who were of his mind. But unfortunately I think he did.

      Remember: He made Bergoglio, Congar, and, de Lubac cardinals. He tried to make Blathasar one too. Notice something??

      Overall, JPII constituted further damage to the Church. In the case of Francis’ election and the continued employment of progressive-ambiguities, it seems JPII can share the blame.

      Delete
    5. Sheesh, JPII was too liberal in his management by any account.

      Delete
  3. Oh Lord please deliver us from the corruption and destruction of Pope Francis !

    ReplyDelete
  4. This article proves to me something I read about, suspected, but really didn't want to given in to because it sounded crazy. But now I believe it is true. The aim of Francis and his associates is to destroy the Catholic Faith, and replace it with something completely modern and up to date. It is sick, it is crazy, it is 100% evil.....but it's 100% Francis and his people.
    Damian Malliapalli

    ReplyDelete
  5. Caiaphas thought that he could kill God. This Caiaphas too will fail. Evildoers never do learn, do they?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey and guess what trads? In less than a year we'll have another 25 Francis Cardinals. The Catholic Taliban's days are numbered.

    ReplyDelete
  7. No, the real Taliban is headed by Francis the Lunatic and his heretical henchmen---but the joy lies that It is still Christ's Church and the present Masonic occupiers and traitors (Willard Money, who boasts that is his real name) are doomed to failure. It is you days, "Willard," that are numbered in the agenda of Christ the King, for you and other vermin like you have had the laughable audacity of trying to replace Him with your puny little god, Man. Meinred

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wait. So where will you go? SSPX? SSPX-resistance? CMRI? All your little schisms just breed more schisms. Meanwhile, I'll be hanging out in the Holy Catholic Church headed by His Holiness Pope Francis.

      Delete
  8. Hey, and guess what, heretic Willard? In a few months/years both you and Francis will be dead and appearing before the Judgment Seat of Almighty God. Edward

    ReplyDelete
  9. What a tragedy for the Church - bad formation of seminarians as a result - bad priests don't preach the Faith and enforce discipline and they appoint defective catechists - and then the Faith dies among the people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a thoroughly tragic lot!

      Delete
  10. The SSPX is good enough for me. The real schism is with those who have changed their faith to follow an evil maniac like Francis as the Catholic Church is not the pope and the pope is not the Catholic Church, but her servant---which Francis most certainly is not. Those who place the person of the pope over the Faith---a conundrum created by Francis and his ilk---are idolators, not Catholics. Edmund S.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I prefer the words of Saint Thomas More,

      “Inasmuch, my lord, as this indictment is grounded upon an Act of Parliament directly repugnant
      to the laws of God and His Holy Church, the supreme government of which, or of any part
      thereof, may no temporal prince presume by any law to take upon him, as rightfully belonging to
      the See of Rome, a spiritual preeminence by the mouth of our Savior Himself, personally present
      upon the earth, only to St. Peter and his successors, bishops of the same See , by special
      prerogative guaranteed, it is therefore in law among Christian men insufficient to charge any
      Christian man.”

      Delete
    2. 'willard', I'll see your shamelessly misused More and raise you a properly applied Bellermine:

      "A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church. Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction."

      Delete
  11. The Papacy could have been Cardinal Ouellet's, but he rejected it.

    Why, oh why, dear cousin, did you do that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because the Holy Spirit had other plans for him.

      Delete
    2. What, like the ninth circle of hell for cowardice? I think that was all Ouelette's decision.

      Delete
  12. The election of Francis was not the workings of the Holy Spirit. Rather it was the conspiracy of a dozen or so radical cardinals who worked to bring Benedict XVI down from the moment he was elected. They were the ones who championed Bergoglio in 2005....remember, Bergoglio was runner-up in 2005 and the liberals were devastated that he lost. They spent the next 7 years plotting....their work rewarded when Benedict XVI suddenly resigned....and guess who stepped into his place....Bergoglio.
    It was all planned.
    Anyone who does not believe that is naïve, and believe that Hillary will be a good president. What Bergoglio is doing to the Catholic Church, Hillary will do to the USA..
    Damian Malliapalli

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely right, Damian. Francis's election is the work of another "spirit." Robert

      Delete
    2. It is the actual well planned treachery by the cardinals ,enemies , within the Catholic Church to prove "Alta Vendita" is real . Will the Hierarchy ,Cardinals and Bishops , who are not part of this Mason gang courageously together come forward under the Leadership of Immaculate Heart of Mary ,like Lepanto battle, to set right the situation that Bergoglio resigns and a new Pope is elected. Something must be initiated . The Lord may send the Archangels for the battle.

      Delete
  13. But "Willard" you should also prefer the heroic actions of St. Thomas More who gave his life for both the papacy (not for a specific pope) AND for the integrity of the sacrament of marriage attacked then by Henry VIII and by Francis and his coterie of heretics today. But, again, expecting logical coherence and historical consistency from liberals and Modernists is not fair as their minds are clouded by ideology and their souls have been twisted by the Zeitgeist and its lord. Edmund S.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Asking a progressive Jesuit who should be made bishop is like asking Jeffrey Dahmer to select what is on the dinner menu.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the laugh, Thomas!!

      Seattle kim

      Delete
  15. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6FfTxwTX34

    the Ottoman Empire is living again, after having been inflicted a mortal wound (Revelation 13:3). The flow of (planned) refugees waves into Europe is only a beginning.

    to preach that Islam is a religion of peace is a lie and a deception.
    that convinced me that this pope is a false prophet.

    Obviously, liberalism being a mental disorder, the typical western citizen has every reflexes turned upside down, all reflexes being exactly the opposite of what they should be, if they would account for reality.

    For example:
    1- reality=Islam is by definition violent.
    2- Liberalism/ideology=Islam is a religion of peace/we are responsible for terrorism/terrorism is really caused by poverty. We should feel guilty of merely existing.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Bergoglio is a nasty piece of work and I really have to wonder if he considers himself to be a Catholic or whether he considers himself to be the first member of the Church of Bergoglio. Truth be told, I think I already know the answer to that question.

    The man is a disgrace, but he has succeeded in changing the Catholic Church forever. He has routed the "convictionless" conservatives in the Vatican and he has rewritten Church doctrine to suit himself.

    Oh that this papacy would end now.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Bergoglio, in typical leftist hubris and blindness, considers that Catholic doctrine is his personal property to do as he wishes. He is a monster, as are all who support him in whatever degrees---yes, even if that should be one's sweet papolator grandma. Hildebrand P.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bergoglio ha not changed the Church forever. When Pope Francis is dead....probably soon, everyon will be amazed how fast the new Pope distance himself from Francis and his agenda, and his associates. Then there will be the total repudiation of the agenda of Francis and a restoration of the kind of papacy and Church that Benedict XVI epitomized. The next Pope will be "youngish" in comparision to the ages at election of the last 2 Popes, and although not a traditionalist in the strict sense....will be enven more open to it than Benedict XVI....so much so that a papal means of transport, not used in almost 40 years, will be re-introduced amid great applause, and become standard in the new pontificate and beyond. A lot more will be restored that what happened under Benedict. And the next Pope will have the time, and the courage to get it done, and firmly but politely suppress the remnant liberal opposition once and for all.
    Francis will be just a bad memory in 14 months. He'll die before he get a chance to make another batch of his cardinals. And that will be a blessing.
    Damian Malliapalli.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I hope you are right in every word you say, Damian, but why are you so certain? What you have written sounds like a prophecy (one I wish would come true), but are you wishful thinking? I dread a new consistory where this heretic will consolidate his destruction of the Church for many generations to come, perhaps until the Second Coming. RC

    ReplyDelete
  20. Blaise Cupich an outsider? Come on! The USCCB is riddled with homosexuals and their sympathizers! Just look at who they fund! And how do you suppose Robert Spencer obtained the position from which he was just fired?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Outsider in the sense that he's actually far worse than most other bishops in the USCCB, as bad as they are.

      Delete
  21. Withdraw financial support whilst praying for them, the liberal priests, religious, bishops, cardinals and pope. Fully support spiritually, financially and physically, those who are faithful to Christ and His magisterium.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...