Cardinal Tagel: "The Church's approach to the LGBT world is present at the Youth Synod."
(Rome) Christopher Lamb, a member of the progressive British Tablet, reported on the press briefing held daily by the Vatican Press Office and Synod Secretariat during the synod. Today, Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, the Archbishop of Manila, took part in what has been described for some time in progressive circles as the successor to Pope Francis.
The cardinal is President of Caritas Internationalis and member of the communication commission of the synod. Lamb asked him if the Final Document of the Youth Synod included a reference to "LGBT Catholics." The homophile term "LGBT Catholics" is taken from the aberrosexual linguistic milieu. It is a paradox. It refers to Catholics who indulge in the grave sin of sodomy.
The response from Cardinal Tagle was published by Lamb in the early afternoon on Twitter:
When asked about #LGBT Catholics wants to be referred to in # Synod18 document Cardinal Tagle says 'my hunch is there' but could not say in what form.
Meanwhile, a video of the press conference is available, which is why the precise answer of Cardinal Tagle can be reproduced:
"I have the feeling and also the hope that these topics will be part of the final document of the Synod Fathers. Speaking in the assembly hall and in my English-speaking circulus - I do not want to call it a problem - the Church's approach to the LGBT world is present. "
In the run-up to the Synod, various sources, especially Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia, had criticized that the term "LGBT" of the aberrosexual milieu had been included in the preparatory document. Cardinal Tagle's response, speaking of LGBT and "LGBT world" himself, shows that it was not a slip-up. The preparatory document also required the consent of Pope Francis.
The "approach of the Church to the LGBT world" is in full swing and obviously wanted by the current Church leadership - and it is a path of flattery and pandering.
Critics spoke months ago that the real agenda of the Youth Synod was a recognition of homosexuality.
Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Twitter (screenshot)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG
Tagle a "pope wanna be" just like Parolin, will never be pope. But like Francis, he's not a true Catholic. That's where they are similar.
ReplyDeleteI've always predicted that the next Pope will be directly opposite to Francis and his filth in the Vatican. I read many Catholic websites, and have some priest-friends in Rome (1 is a clerk/admin assistant in the Vatican). From my reading, and e-mailing my friends, I know that Pope Francis, his agenda and his papacy is universally despised. In Rome, among the average people, he is hated. Literally.
I read that people in the Vatican (and this even includes bishops and Cardinals of the Curia), dislike him os much that they are praying for him to either resign, or die.
I would never pray for someone to die....but it shows how much he is hated. And by extension, all his associates, from the queers like Cardinal Coco, to people like Bruno Forte, Parolin, and Tagle.
Which is why Tagle will never be Pope.
Any Cardinal who has hopes to be Pope will distance himself from Francis and his crowd.
Damian Malliapalli
A majority of Cardinals elected Bergoglio. Francis added more of his own, and put them in the most influential positions. The chances of getting another "stealth" candidate Pope are very high. Conservatives are also too stuck with the rules. The progressivists are funded by Soros, and illicitly lobby and campaign whereas conservatives are stuck on rules. Next Bergoglian will be more polished and tactful and shrewder.If Soros puts his money on it, it's a sure winner.Maybe not Tagle. He has a toady-like follower personality. But a Parolin or Forte? Much classier, more deadly!
ReplyDelete"The Catholic Church and the anti-church currently co-exist in the same sacramental, liturgical, and juridical space."
ReplyDeletewake-up people.....wake up.
https://www.barnhardt.biz/2017/09/05/the-catholic-church-and-the-anti-church-currently-co-exist-in-the-same-sacramental-liturgical-and-juridical-space/
I think we are in for a surprise in the next conclave. I don't know why, but I have a feeling that a "Francis Cardinal", or a progressive who voted for him in 2013, will not be elected. I think it will be a Benedict XVI cardinal who, unfortunately over 70, will be in his very early 70's, and perhaps will have 10-15 years to undo the damage and begin to clean up the wreckage of the Francis papacy.
ReplyDeleteI think Francis' papacy will be over sooner than we think....not only because he is going to be 82. I think that there will be 1-2 more HUGE bombshell scandals either from Vigano, or from the secrete 300 page dossier comoplied for Benedict XVI about queers in the Vatican which is now in the hands of people who will likely release it, or from other sources (Germany, Argentina, etc) which will bring Francis down and out....alone with all his people. It'll be so big that Papalspokesmen will not be able to cover-up, rationalize away the damage. Francis, and the office of the papacy will be so badly damaged that he will quit. And the next Pope WILL NOT be a Francis cardinal, or one whose agenda is in any way similar to Francis at all.
(the building scandal regarding Francis in Argentina is gathering momentum already....and it's bad....very bad).
Damian Malliapalli
Does it really matter if its a Benedict or Francis Cardinal? Neither of whom will reject the heresies of V2 nor the new mass. The revolution will simply change pace, not direction.
DeleteThe acolytes of the God of Surprises are so predictable that the element of surprise no longer comes into it. In *my* English-speaking circulus, I call Cardinal Tagle and all those who agree with him a MASSIVE problem who in saner, Catholic times would have been shown the door of the sheepfold without their feet touching the ground.
ReplyDeleteThe preferred moniker is now LGBTP, as pedophiles cannot be excluded from this club.
ReplyDeleteWhat does this stand for-
ReplyDeleteL-Lesian
G-Gay
B-Bi-sexual
T-Transexual
P-Pedophiles (perverts=priests)?
Then what is Q (which I've seen recently.) Don't mean to ask a naïve, stupid question, but to me a man is a man, a woman is a woman....period. I don't pay attention to all this LGBTQP garbage. Plenty of people in my field are this (I'm a model), and some are ok as people......but when they start pushing/emphasizing their status as LGBTQ, and how much victims and persecuted they are...I ignore all that.
Damian Malliapalli
One of the sources of the latest invective against Cardinal Tagle is the absurdly and fraudulently named 'Xavier Rynne' in daily rumormongering and 'alternative fact'
ReplyDeletereports published in George Weigel's 'First Things.' Any mention of the Synod's response to Gay and Lesbian Catholics is made in the context of the Synod's wider message to young people especially of listening to them and their concerns. Commenters here ignore that larger context and instead focus on a convenient but bogus and ideologically confected beat up.
That said, commenters here should know that there are officially endorsed Catholic chaplaincies in the Church such as 'Courage', etc that support Gays and Lesbians to grow in their faith lives. These groups of Catholics are just as legitimate as the FSSP, individuals such as Bishop Schneiders, Cardinals Sarah, Burke and others in the Church who have been endorsed and supported by the Holy See and various national episcopal bodies.
Someo brave soul at Courage will now, no doubt,
ReplyDeletemake room for romantic relationships between adults and children.
Tom A:
ReplyDeleteThat's a bit too depressing talk. Think positive. I do, because I read a lot, and I have some priest friends who know more than me about the issues. What I read, and what I am told, is that Francis and his people, his style of being Pope, and his agenda as Pope is hated by a very good percentage of those working in the Vatican, and by many Cardinals. Unfortunately, they are jellyfish like Benedict XVI and are afraid to confront the heretic whose ass is currently sitting on the papal throne.
But a couple of things I know. Francis is hated, his agenda is hated, Parolin, gayboy Cardinal Coco, Tagle, Cupich,Wuerl,McCarrick,Tobin,Farrell etc. have very,very few allies in the Vatican or elsewhere. Many are actually hated just like Francis, especially Parolin (who will never be Pope.....nor will Tagle).
As crazy as it sounds, I have a feeling that the next Pope will be somewhere to the right of Benedict XVI, but not a 100% traditionalist. He will be 70 (or close to it), or manye 1-2 years past it, when elected. But he will look, and dress, and act and speak like a real Pope....like Benedict XVI did. He will re-open Castel Gandolfo for exclusive papal use, he will make his first appearance in papal mozzetta and stole. He won't celebrate the Tridentine Latin Mass right off, but he will publish a document within a year of his election making it fully equal to the Novus Ordo, to the point that it will no longer have to be called the "Usus Antquior" anymore. It will be simply "the Mass". He will promote all Catholic traditions, and new traditional Orders, and strongly encourage existing Orders to introduce the TLM once again in their houses.
He will still cling to Vatican II in some things, but it will look like he is repudiating it in other actions (though he won't come out and actually repudiate the Council). Under him, gay marriage, gay priests, married priests,women deacons/priests etc. will be closed issues once and for all.
The liberals during his first few years will try to thwart him at every turn, like the Democrats do to Trump. But they will back down when he shocks the world and starts removing/reassigning/re-shuffling posts....cleaning out the Francis rot.
One last prediction......he may be an American (who the liberals have always reviled), he may be a German, he may be an African who has a high Vatican post but is largely ignored by Francis. The first choice and the third choice I think is very possible, with the third choice more likely than the first.
But whoever is chosen, Francis is so disliked by so many, as is his agenda, that the next Pope will be far to the right of him, even if he isn't far enough to the right for some of us :)
Damian Malliapalli
Damian, if this were left-right politics, I would be supportive of a politician who I could agree with 70-80%. That would be superb. But this is the Catholic Faith we are talking about. I do not think we should be happy to get 99%. The Catholic Faith is an all or nothing proposition. To deny one iota of the Faith is heresy. I know this is inconvenient and goes against the Western notion of compromise and expediency, but the cannot stand with any deviation, even in the smallest matter.
Delete
ReplyDeletePeople have been grizzling and moaning about papal unpopularity of centuries. The views, sentiments or convictions are often driven far more by partisan politics than by anything of theological gravitas. Newman was different in what he saw as the extreme danger to the entire Church represented by Pius IX’s demands on Papal infallibility. It should be noted that Pius's fixation on infallibility being a charism given to the person of the Pope instead of a function of the Pope in the service of the Church (Newman's position), he was also paralyzed by fear of change. No wonder Newman terrified him with his teaching on the Development of Doctrine. Here's Newman's considered opinion about the tyrannical Pope Pius IX:
“We have come to a climax of tyranny. It is not good for a Pope to live 20 years. It is anomaly and bears no good fruit; he becomes a god, has no one to contradict him, does not know facts, and does cruel things without meaning it.” “But we must hope, for one is obliged to hope it, that the Pope will be driven from Rome, and will not continue the Council, or that there will be another Pope. It is sad he should force us to such wishes.” (John Henry Newman’s Letter to Fr. Ambrose St. John, August 22, 1870; in Charles Stephen Dessain’s The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, v. XXVI).
Please remember that Newman came from a protestant upbringing. I would trust Pope Pius IX's magesterial teachings over Newman's mere opinions.
DeleteI trust Manning long before I trust the fruity Newman.
DeletePeter W., you do know, don't you, that the conditions for the exercise of papal infallibility as defined at the First Vatican Council are proscriptive and very limited? To blame Pope Pius IX for the papolatrous misinterpretation of the charism that is rampant in our time is like blaming Moses for the irredeemable train-wreck that is Amoris Laetitia.
DeleteTagle = a total kiki. (Look it up.)
ReplyDeleteyes and let's be inclusive of crooked politicians who take bribes. You know, like the ones Tqagle is sucking up to in Manila?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/116544
Prior to his conversion to Catholicism, Newman was an Anglican, a 'Roman' Anglican, not a protestant. It was Newman who was responsible for a very highly restrictive notion of Infallibility that countered the outrageous confections of Pius XI and his inflated ego. You don't know what you're talking about.
ReplyDeleteAnd a heretic his entire life.
DeleteManning was a politician and a dunderhead. Newman was a man of the Gospel and a thinker. Newman's holiness has been formally recognised by the Catholic Church which rules out, by the very fact of his Beatification, any hint on heresy. Manning does not appear to have backers in the sainthood department.
ReplyDeleteI do understand completely why you trust Manning over Newman.
DeleteHow was Manning a dunderhead?
Newman was a nasty fruitcake, and the attacks he and his clique of aesthetes emoted against Manning are being echoed today on your lips.
You’re just as venemous and nasty as Newman.
"Prior to his conversion to Catholicism, Newman was an Anglican, a 'Roman' Anglican, not a protestant.":
ReplyDeletehey dip-shite...a "'Roman' Anglican" (the first of which was Henry VIII) IS a protestant. What a dunderhead you are.
Yeehaww: as loose as a granny's tooth.
ReplyDeleteListen, if you want to continue posting here, you better make an accounting of yourself.
ReplyDeleteHere's an account for you Tancred:
ReplyDeleteCardinal Manning was a convert from Anglicanism. Like many converts, he turned out to be Catholic fundamentalist, more Roman than Rome. Some modern equivalents are Scott Hahn, Ross Douthat, Bishop Conley, the poorly catechized vagrant cleric John Zuhlsdorf, John Hunwicke, Ray Blake and others. Manning was certainly extreme in his neoultramontanism and became one of the most vocal of the advocats for infallibility in the lead up to Vatican I. Like all dunderheads, Manning was unswerving in his conviction that he was absolutley right about everything and that his views were incontestable. Interestingly too was Manning’s choice of a theological advisor, another convert, William George Ward.
Ward would be classic example of the conflicted and disingenuous Catholic if he were alive today. I dare say he would be just as much a cafeteria Catholic as Tancred, Damian, JBQ, Yeehaw et al. He would have problems justifying his views on papal infallibility that he readily held in relation to Pius IX while probably rationalising like the living daylights with Pope Francis. Ward: “all direct doctrinal instructions of all encyclicals, all letter to individual bishops and allocutions published by the popes, are 'ex cathedra' pronouncements and 'ipso facto' infallible.”
I don’t see any information, I just see your opinion.
DeleteYou don’t matter.
Your rationalising gymnastics are of Olympian proportions. Congratulations on another gold medal performance for denialism.
ReplyDeleteAnd here's another spanner in your works: although Manning was a manipulative, opportunist ultramontanist in his support of Pius IX, he was also unflinching in his condemnation of exploitative capitalism, his advocacy for the teaching of Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum on the rights of labor and the obligations of employers, a fair distribution of wealth and related matters.
Like the previous comments, it's all a matter of documented history and yours to deny it at the cost of being discounted as a blind ideolog.
How was he manipulative?
DeleteThese are, like everything else you write, unsupported opinions. Even if you had credentials, you’d still have to support your controversial positions, even if they’re held by everyone else at your cocaine fueled orgies.
You’re an evil psychopath.
QED
ReplyDeleteYou have nothing to offer.
Delete