The Catholic Monitor

In Mozambique, on September 7, Francis said: "Young, rigid priests... take this attitude... from the museum." (Church Militant, "Clergy and Laity offer Strong Response to Pope's 'Rigid' Comments," September 13, 2019) Why is the old Francis so antagonistic and the archenemy of young priests who are rigidly upright and erect in upholding the infallible teachings of the Church? Is it because he is against erecting or building up the Church on the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Ten Commandments? Is it because he is not upright in position or posture on the infallible teachings of Jesus Christ and His Church? Is it because he is evasive and is not straight, honest or moral in his allowing and promoting of the sacrilege of Communion for adulterer? Is it because he is limp, sagging, floppy and nonrigid in following the God-man Jesus Christ in the virile and courageous hard "narrow... way, which leads unto life and few there are that find i

In last nights debate, even the far-left Socialist Bernie Sanders finally admitted that Nicholas Maduro is a "vicious tyrant." It appears that Francis is the last Western leader to still support the dictator Maduro. In June, the far-left National Catholic Reporter said "Maduro tried to claim he had the support of Pope Francis." (National Catholic Reporter, "Vatican supports new elections to solve Venezuelan crisis," June 15, 219) The leftist newspaper, like Sanders at the debate, appears to want to distance Francis from the "vicious tyrant," but Francis has never stated he doesn't support Maduro. In fact, in January, Francis in classic Argentinean Peronist equivocation said he still supported Maduro: "I support... the Venezuelan people... including those who are on one side [the Maduro tyranny] and the other [the freedom fighters]." (Catholic News Agency, "In leaked letter to 'Mr. Maduro,' Pope Francis reit

Francis's book "Dialogos entre Juan Pablo II Y Fidel Castro" presents evidence that he is pro-Communist, anti-Capitalism and by inference Anti-American because the United States is the driving force behind the global free market system. He wrote on page 23 that there apparently could be a "convergence" of "premises" between Communism and Catholicism: "Fidel Castro offered a... convergence or points of connection between Catholicism and the premises (los postulados) of the [Cuban Communist] Revolution." However, later in the his book he states there cannot be a convergence of premises between Capitalism and Catholicism: You cannot hold the premises (los postulados) of "neoliberalismo" (Capitalism) and be considered a Christian. The failures of Marxism and Collectivism don't authorize the Capitalist system (al sistema capitalista)... we find in "neoliberalismo" (Capitalism) the opposite of the Gospel... because

Francis in his Spanish language book "Dialogos entre Juan Pablo II Y Fidel Castro" in what looks like a propaganda piece for Cuban Marxist totalitarianism apparently claimed that the Cuban Dictator Fidel Castro offered Pope John Paul II a "convergencias" or convergence, that is a moving towards unity, between "Christianity and Marxism." Francis, it seems, implies that a possible Marxist/Catholic convergence was what motivated John Paul to visit Cuba: "From 1990 when Fidel Castro offered a strategic alliance between Christianity and Marxism he has not ceased in his attempts to find and show convergence or points of connection between Catholicism and the postulates (premises) of the Revolution [capitalized by Francis]." "It was this eagerness that provoked the approach and motivated the historic visit of Pope John Paul II to the Caribbean island, President Castro expressed that both the Church and the Revolution of history have had many

Frequent guest co-host on Dr. Taylor Marshall's YouTube TnT show Fr. David Nix stated he was a “resignationalist” : " Bishop Gracida of Texas is a great hero of mine for publicly questioning the valid resignation of Pope Benedict XVI.   I know for a fact that at least one other Cardinal in the world is questioning this, too.  But even if you do not buy our 'resignationalist' approach to the current crisis, then at least ask this:  Where are all the bishops denouncing the weekly heresy that we are now hearing from the top down?.. Here is why: The end does not justify the means, whether those means be sins of commission  or omission . Have you ever thought of the fact that sins of omission do not justify a good end?" (PadrePeregrino.org, "Courage over Consequentialism in the Hierarchy," March, 3, 2019) [ https://padreperegrino.org/2019/03/consequentialism/ ] Magnanimously, Marshall, who is 100 % against the “resignationalist” questioning of  the &q

"Since Vatican Council II, it has been the overwhelmingly prevalent view, especially among the Catholic hierarchy, that the Church must seek a new philosophical and theological basis for its teaching – an approach which will somehow bypass what is alleged to be the “intellectualism” of St. Thomas Aquinas..."   " This criticism of Thomism extends especially to the question concerning man’s “deification .” It is the contention of these same people that the “rigid” categories of thought, which they claim are inherent to Thomistic thinking, allow absolutely no room for any possible communication between God and man, that they destroy the basis for mystical prayer and contemplation, and thus ultimately negate any possibility for final union between God and man.'" " This long article is being written expressly to refute this position. It aims to prove that just the opposite is indeed the case – that it is the rejection of Thomism which is largely responsib