Did the Vatican Denounce Scalfari?

by Giuseppe Nardi

The column published yesterday by Eugenio Scalfari led to a brief reaction from the Vatican Press Office. Scalfari revealed in the daily La Repubblica that Francis entrusted him, in a personal conversation, with the conviction that Jesus Christ was "not God at all". But how did the Holy See react to this nuclear bomb of atomic bombs?

Strictly taciturn. So far, only the new Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni has reacted. He said:

"As has been said on other occasions, the words that Dr. Eugenio Scalfari ascribed to the Holy Father in conversations with him, are not as a faithful representation of what has actually been said, but above all are a personal and free interpretation of what he has heard, as it quite obviously seems, what is written today concerning the deity of Jesus Christ."

Will the Vatican spokesman say that Scalfari is senile or even malicious? Or did he just want to say that the doyen of Italian left-journalism no longer hears well, and put together something in good faith that Francis has neither said nor meant?

And that was it?

Various media today claim that "Pope Francis" or "the Vatican" has denied Scalfari.

Why does Francis talk to a journalist, not to any journalist, but to Eugenio Scalfari, who he knows will then make the conversation public and, by reason of his position, will be well received? Not once, but repeatedly.

Given the long list of scandalous statements attributed to Francis by Scalfari since 2013, papal behavior is not explained by what has been said on other occasions. All the "corrections" made by the Vatican press office, which had previously been made to Scalfari, were everything, just no real denials. Why?

As any observer can convince, the Vatican press office knows very well to express a clear distancing. Exactly that has never happened to Scalfari.

As in the past his two predecessors Federico Lombardi SJ and Greg Burke also Bruni denied the said. Rather, it is each more or less confirmed, so even yesterday. Scalfari just simply interpreted the pope's words a bit "freely".

As usual, Francis is silent

Pope Francis is silent. He was silent on every Scalfari scandal produced in his name. Scalfari is very public with his media and its international reputation. Francis knows that too. Still, he talks to Scalfari again. Why? Especially since, according to Scalfari, he is "not converting" anyway.

The fact is that Scalfari, as spokesman for Pope Francis, is accustoming the public, above all the Catholic community, to the incomprehensible and unthinkable with a constant increase. This creates a stagnation that could accelerate the process of erosion in the Church in unexpected ways. And everything happens as usual:

As usual, Scalfari publishes a scandal "in the name of the Pope".

As usual, the Vatican signals without really denying that this is not to be taken literally.

As usual, Francis continues to contact Scalfari.

As usual, the "not so literal" Pope's opinion circulates in public and draws its circles.

As usual, the Scalfari Teaching Office follows a precise worldview that today is that of the mainstream and, for a long time, that of Freemasonry.

As usual, in today's edition of La Repubblica, we do not say a word about a Vatican denial. Why?

Not true, but probably

It is not only clear that the Pope should choose his interlocutor better. The matter is much more serious.

It is clear that the weak reaction of Vatican spokesman Bruni is not an adequate answer to the incomprehensible scandal, Pope Francis denied the deity of Jesus Christ.

After all, his Jesuit General, Arturo Sosa Abascal, has already doubted the genuineness of the Gospel and the words of the Lord handed down in it, for after all, there are no electronic recordings of it.

"Unbelievable, but true," wrote Vatican writer Sandro Magister at the time.

The bottom line is not just another unpleasant aftertaste (how much does the Church tolerate?), But far more worrying, because the statement may not be true, but likely.

Picture: MiL

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

AMDG

Devilish ”Black Pope” Says Devil is Only Symbolic

(Rome) As he once said, the Jesuit General Arturo Sosa Abascal reiterated his claim that the devil exists only as a "symbolic reality".

Since October 2016, the Venezuelan Jesuit, Arturo Sosa Abascal, Superior General of the Jesuit Order and thus, is the 30th successor of St. Ignatius of Loyola. General Sosa distinguished himself in the 70s and 80s by trying to bring about a symbiosis of Christianity and Marxism. These aspirations were concretized by a jubilee address to the Communist Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.

Since his election to the Jesuit General Sosa attracted little favor. His spiritual "bon mots" range from syncretistic excursions to the polemical denial of the authenticity of the Gospels. Notorious for this is his answer in connection with the controversial post-synodal letter of Pope Francis, Amoris laetitia, whether the Lord’s command on the indissolubility of marriage is still valid. The "Black Pope" in all seriousness meant that at that time nobody had a tape recorder, so there was no sure proof of the authenticity of the Lord’s words.

In 2017, General Sosa also said that the devil is not a person and that his existence is only as a "symbolic figure" to name evil.

There was no official reaction from the Order or the Holy See either in one instance or the other. Pope Francis, otherwise stingy with criticism of his own ranks, did not utter a word of disapproval or correction to his religious superiors.

Now Sosa has repeated his adventurous thesis about the devil. On August 21, the weekly Tempi published an interview with the Black Pope, as the Jesuit General is traditionally called. He said:

Tempi: Father Sosa, does the devil exist?

Arturo Sosa Abascal: In different ways. We need to understand the cultural elements to refer to this figure. In the language of Saint Ignatius, it is the evil spirit that makes one do things that are directed against the Spirit of God. He exists as personified evil in different structures, but not in humans because he is not a person. He is a way to realize the evil. It is not a person like a human. It is a way of evil to be present in human life. Good and evil are in constant conflict in the human conscience and we have different ways to name them. We recognize God as good, as completely good. Symbols are part of reality, and the devil exists as a symbolic reality, not as a personal reality. 

According to the logic of the Jesuit general, is God, logically, only a "symbolic reality" that serves to name the good?

Will the General Curia of the Jesuit Order and the Holy See also stay away this time? Will Pope Francis remain silent this time, even though the Superior General of the Church's largest and traditionally most powerful order challenges the foundations of the Church and of religion as a whole? Some could at least recognize agnostic approaches in his words.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Wikicommons
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Jesuit General Sosa Signed a Hymn of Praise to Fidel Castro in 1989

In 1989, Sosa signed a manifesto, that Fidel Castro be celebrated as a hero

(Havana) The life of Arturo Sosa Abascal, the 31st Father General of the Jesuit Order reigning since October 2016, reads like a Marxist. In the late seventies, in the high bloom of liberation theology, he dealt with the question of how Christian faith could be mediated Marxistically. Many years later, he joined the circle of convinced Castro followers. This is the result of a declaration of solidarity, which was signed by the now "Black Pope".

"Unprecedented victory over tyranny, corruption and vassalism"

In 1989, 911 Venezuelan intellectuals and artists published a Manifiesto de Bienvenida a Fidel Castro , in which they welcomed the visit of Fidel Castro, the communist dictator of Cuba, and celebrated it as the "leader of the Cuban Revolution".

"We want to pay public respect for what you have achieved for the dignity of your people and for the whole of Latin America"

Says the statement.

"In this dramatic hour for the continent, only ideological blindness can deny the place you occupy in the history of the liberation of our peoples. 30 years ago, you came to Venezuela immediately after the exemplary victory over tyranny, corruption and vassalage. At that time, you were received by our people, as only a hero who embodies and symbolizes the collective ideal could."

Fidel Castro already visited Venezuela in the late 1950s

The signatories assured Fidel Castro, "for the same reasons today," to express their affection associated with "the hope" of building a "just, independent and solidarity Latin America". The persecution of the Church by the Cuban regime obviously did not touch the Jesuit Sosa.With this attitude, he was not alone among progressive Catholics. Christians who are not left are not true Christians, but reactionaries who deserve to be persecuted. Thus, the Swiss Capuchin Walbert Bühlmann formulated it in 1986 and thereby meant the Christian persecution of the Cuban supported Marxist regimes of Angola and Mozambique.

Father Arturo Sosa appears as the 811th signatory to the Declaration, which he signed as Director of the Centro Gumilla ( de Investigacion y Accion Social ). He also published his essay "La mediacion marxista de la Fe cristiana" (The Marxist mediation of the Christian faith) in the SIC of the Centro, which he directed from 1979-1996. Seven years after the praise of Fidel Castro, Sosa became Provincial Provincial of the Jesuit Province of Venezuela in 1996.

"The story is history, you can not deny," wrote the Spanish columnist Francisco Fernandez de la Cigoña. For people can change over the years. What matters is where they are. The praise to Fidel Castro could however at best be considered a very late "sin of youth," since Sosa was already 41 years old at that time.

The past has passed: what if the now is even more serious?

Sosa after his election to the Jesuit General

Fidel Castro is dead, his brother Raul still dominates Cuba with a Marxist fist, while Sosa's homeland Venezuela is in a serious crisis. The "bolivarian" Maduro regime, with whom communist Cuba is closely aligned, shoots protesters.

More serious than the Marxist and real socialist aberrations of the Jesuit generation in the past are some doubtful statements today. At the very least, his assertion that Japan can only be evangelized in cooperation with Buddhism and Shintoism (see also the discernment between spirits ) is misleading . A comment in an interview with the Swiss journalist Giuseppe Rusconi brought a charge of heresy  against Sosa. The Father General of the Jesuits questioned nothing but the validity of Jesus' words. In order to justify the admission of remarried divorced to the sacraments and the softening of the sacraments of the Church as they read out parts of the Church from the post-synodal letter Amoris laetitia, calling on Pope Francis, Sosa questioned the infallibility of Jesus. At that time nobody had a tape recorder to record the words.

The case is pending with the Congregation of the Faith, which is now faced with the unusual task of judging a Superior General of the Jesuit Order. However, the situation in the history of the Church and the Order is not entirely new.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Photo: Venezuelavetada / MiL / Jesuit.org (Screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches...
AMDG

Heresy Charge Against "Black Pope" -- Pope Francis and Cardinal Müller Are Presented With Heresy Charge Against Jesuit General

Jesuit General Arturo Sosa Absacal left of Pope Francis: is the
"Black Pope" spreading heresy?

(Rome) Next Sunday, Pope Francis will visit the small diocese of Carpi in the Po Valley.  A courageous priest of this diocese is currently pestering the Pope. He raises the question with a memorandum of whether the new Jesuit Father General, Arturo Sosa Absacal, spreads heresies.

Memorandum against the "Black Pope"

The priest is Don Roberto Bertacchini and is a pupil of three priests of stature, the German Jesuit, Father Heinrich Pfeiffer, art historian at the Gregoriana in Rome, and the two Italian Jesuits, Father Francesco Tata, former religious prosecutor of Italy, and Father Piersandro Vanzan, Augustine connoisseur and leading author of the Roman Jesuit paper, Civiltà Cattolica . The reference to his Jesuit teachers is not without significance in the matter. Bertacchini was ordained priest in 2009 by the then Archbishop Carlo Ghidelli of Lanciano-Ortona.

Last week, as the Vaticanist Sandro Magister reports, Don Bertacchini sent both Pope Francis and Cardinal Gerhard Müller a memorandum. On six pages, the priest critically comments on a recent interview of the new General Superior of the Jesuit Order, who has been in office since October 2016. The Venezuelan Arturo Sosa Abasca  stands very close to Pope Francis, himself Jesuit.

Does the Jesuit General Want a "Christianity without Christ"?

The Jesuit general had represented theses in the interview, which are "so serious that they can not be passed over without silence, without making one's self complicit." Bertacchini accuses the "Black Pope", as the Jesuit general is traditionally called, of speaking of  "a Christianity without Christ".

Magister published Bertacchini's memorandum . Giuseppe Rusconi, the Swiss Vaticanista, published the interview where he criticized him last February 18. Arturo Sosa had reviewed the text and released it for publication.

Bertacchini's criticism is centered on the massive doubts expressed by the Jesuit General about the credibility of the Holy Scriptures. Arturo Sosa made fun of it. Rusconi addressed himself to criticism of the controversial papal Amoris laetitia . The words of Jesus were opposed to the admission of remarried divorced persons to the Sacraments. Sosa replied sloppily that nobody could know exactly what Jesus had said "really," because no one had "a tape recorder" with him.

According to Bertacchini, the Jesuit General says that the words of Jesus on the indissolubility of marriage are not a theological fixed point, but only the point of departure for the doctrine, which must then be developed "comfortably." In this way, however, the exact opposite could be represented, in other words the compatibility of divorce and Christian life."

Jesuit genius "too smart" to openly represent a heresy

Bertacchini emphasizes that Arturo Sosa Absacal SJ, "is too smart to fall into an obvious heresy, which in some respects is even worse. It is, therefore, necessary to follow the thread of his reasoning."

In an interview, the Jesuit General asked whether the evangelists were credible or not. His answer: One must distinguish. He thus implied, by way of a roundabout way, that it is not said, about the credibility of the Gospels. He thus questions the truthfulness of Jesus' whole doctrine of faith. The Jesuit had been careful to go into details. He remained general, but nevertheless offered a statement destructive in its core. If we consider that, in all his statements on marriage and the newly remarried divorced, Pope Francis never cited the words of the Lord on the indissolubility of marriage, the thrust of the Jesuit General would be clear. Bertacchini added:

"If the Pope does not quote these passages, it means that he has made a distinction and does not consider it authentic. They are therefore not binding. But all the popes have taught the contrary! So what? They will be wrong. Or they have said true things and taught for their time, but not for ours. "

The Jesuit General does not say it apertis verbis, but interprets it and lets it show through.

"This gives the Pope's a reading to the  family pastoral, which deviates from the traditional doctrine."

Jesuit General: "We know today that Jesus never taught that marriage is indissoluble"

Sosa asserts nothing less than that

"We know today," that Jesus probably, probably almost certainly, never taught that marriage is indissoluble. The evangelists would have misunderstood this."

"On the other hand, the Sensus fidei tells us that the evangelists are credible. Our Jesuit General, however, rejects this credibility and even ignores the fact that St. Paul received this doctrine from the teaching as directly following Jesus, and passed it on to his congregations." (1 Cor 7: 10-11).

According to Bertacchini, the consensus of the Synoptics is "too clear" in the rejection of  adultery.  Moreover, St. Paul reaffirms this doctrine in the Epistle to the Ephesians and even strengthens it. He reaffirmed it by quoting the passage from the book of Genesis, which Jesus also quoted, and strengthened it because Christ loved the Church in an indissoluble way, so much so that he gave his life for it and beyond his earthly life. This faithfulness of the Lord is what Paul calls the model of marital fidelity.

There is, therefore, evidently a continuity between the pre-Easter and the post-Easter teachings. Equally obvious is the break with Judaism, which retained the possibility of the repudiation. Bertacching asks the following questions: "If Paul himself refers to Jesus for this break, what is the meaning of the Gospels? Where should this leap come from which determined the practice of the early Church, if not of Christ?"

It should be remembered that divorce was also permitted in the Greco-Roman sphere, and that a form of the concubinage existed, which could easily lead to a later marriage, like the life of St Augustine shows. The rejection of a abandonment, divorce, concubinage constitutes a cultural breach, a phenomenon which is decisive in the history of culture, what should it point back to, if not to Jesus? And if Jesus is the Christ, why should the faithfulness of the Gospels be doubted?

"Apart from this, if Jesus is not to have said these words, from whence comes the drastic commentary of the disciples in Matthew 19:10 (" then it is not good to marry at all?") Among these disciples was also the evangelist himself who does not strike a good figure. They understood late what Jesus taught them because they were then still dependent on the traditions of their time that Jesus criticizes. "From a historical point of view, the pericope Mt 19, 3-12 is credible in every respect," the priest said.

Bertacchini then goes into detail on the "dogmatic horizon" of the statements of the Jesuit General. In it, he expanded his criticism and extends it to a recent article in the Roman Jesuit journal Civilta Cattolica, with the Jesuit Giancarlo Pani, where the prohibition of female priesthood is questioned. Bertacchini criticizes the fact that the solemn gospel, which calls for infallibility, is questioned without hesitation. The priest criticizes this work of subversion with the aim of destroying safe dams.

What will Pope Francis do with the inscription of Don Roberto Bertacchini? What will CDF Prefect Müller do with it?

Link to Katholisches...
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Amoris Laetitia: New Jesuit General Defends Pope on "Dubia" of the Four Cardinals

While Pope Francis continues his silence, the Jesuit General has commented on the Dubia (doubts), the controversial post-synodal Letter Amoris laetitia of four cardinals Brandmüller, Burke, Caffarra and Meisner.

On 14 October, Arturo Sosa Abascal was selected 31 Superior General of the Jesuits. The Venezuelan Jesuit has now entered into the public for the first time and does so with a defense of Pope Francis, who also belongs to the Jesuit Order.

So far, the new "Black General", as the Father General of the Jesuits is also called, has  only been known for statements from the distant past. This includes primarily an essay on "the Marxist mediation of the Christian faith" from 1978. Whether he meant, or perhaps still thinks that the Communists "think as Christians think" is not known. At least it resembles Pope Francis, according to the recent interview with Eugenio Scalfari, on November 11 published by La Repubblica.

The Superior General of the Jesuits was interviewed by the Vaticanist Luigi Accattoli for the weekly supplement La Lettura the Corriere della Sera which appeared yesterday. "We can not resign ourselves to this world of injustice," the title says, referring to a quotation from the 31st Jesuit General. In the interview, the 68-year-old Venezuelan also explains "the roots of the new mission of the Church".

The Cardinals have either not understood the pope, or ...

Iinterview with P. Sosa Abascal (Corriere della Sera)

The new Superior General has entered the dispute about the confusion surrounding Amoris laetitia to help the beleaguered pope. The support is doubly anchored. The reigning pope himself is Jesuit. His Order is also bound by a fourth, special vow of loyalty and obedience to the Pope. The Jesuits form a kind of praetorian guard of the first Jesuit of the Church's history, who sits on the papal throne.

What the Jesuit General Sosa Abascal says of the Dubia of the four cardinals, should reflect on the matter, should reflect what the Pope thinks about it. Father Sosa admits only three possibilities of which there is no room for papal self-criticism: the Cardinals either did not understand the pope, or they were playing an evil game. If there is "ambiguity" in some passages of the Pontifical Letter Amoris laetitia,  which could be the reason for the confusion and conflicting interpretations of the past few months, Sosa Absacal can not detect it.

Luigi Accatoli: What do you think of the letter of the four cardinals, including the Italian Carlo Caffarra, who asked the Pope to clarify  five "doubts" on the letter Amoris laetitia? Francis has not yet replied, and they have published the letter. Are you concerned about these developments?

Arturo Sosa Abascal: I'm not worried. These four have taken the liberty of the word to which the Pope had invited them to do. I like this happening. In our language, as Jesuits, it is said that it is necessary to know the opinions of all in order to make a real distinction. Of course, the game must be loyal, if someone asks for clarification, because he has not understood, we move within the framework of loyalty. It would be different if someone used the criticism as a tool for an advantage, or asking questions cause trouble."

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Corriere della Sera / Wikicommons (screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholishes...
AMDG