Today over at theweek.com, Michael Brendan Dougherty ask probing questions about the bizarre state of affairs inside the Vatican right now--a Vatican, by the way, which more and more seems to be morphing into a clearing house for the radical ideas of far-Left loons.  Dougherty writes:  "What is going on at the Vatican? Low-level plots and high-octane insults are leaking out a steady rate. And for now, Pope Francis seems to be absent. There is the ongoing attempt to smear the pope’s top reformer. Francis has given Cardinal George Pell extraordinary power to reform the Vatican’s finances, particularly its bank, a job that has put a lot of Italian noses out of joint. Earlier this year, anonymous critics began to charge that Pell was racking up outrageous expenses. In an effort to make Pell look like an out-of-touch traditionalist, he was accused of purchasing a "cappa magna," a long and luxurious robe that is strongly associated with the arch-traditionalist Cardinal Burke, whose career was basically ended by Francis last year. It was an obvious, clumsy smear.

"Now Pell is being hit by much graver accusations. Last week, Peter Saunders, a lay member of a Vatican commission that is handling cases of child sexual abuse, went on the Australian version of 60 Minutes and called Pell a sociopath. The accusations, combined with a media campaign in Australia, make it seem as if Pell was intimately involved in protecting an abusive priest. But he was not a bishop in charge of that priest, and his record on the issue is one of the few commendable ones in the church hierarchy. Pell says he is considering legal action against Saunders, creating the ugly spectacle of a battle between two Vatican reformers.

"Has Pope Francis intervened to protect his cardinal? No, not really.

"Recently Vatican officials held a conference on climate change. The invited speakers included economist Jeffrey Sachs and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon. The former has been a noted opponent of the church on a number of issues, and even promotes abortion as a "low-risk" intervention to reduce fertility, as part of an effort to reduce the global population. When Catholic and pro-life journalists sent questions to Archbishop Sánchez Sorondo, one of the conference's organizers, he responded with a breathtaking glibness that reads like a mid-2000s contribution to DailyKos.

"When asked simple questions by pro-lifers about the wisdom of the church offering those men a platform, Sorondo said, "The Tea Party and all those whose income derives from oil have criticized us." He castigated the questioner by saying that Sachs and Moon "don’t even mention abortion or population control. They speak of access to family planning and sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights." What does this Vatican official think is meant by "reproductive rights”? But Sorondo’s nasty, conspiratorial response was outdone by Margaret Archer, president of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Her response to pro-lifers accused the questioner of being a defective Catholic who must only be concerned with human dignity between conception and birth, a clichéd rhetorical attack that should be beneath a woman of her station, let alone a representative of the Vatican. She also accused the critics of being in the pocket of energy industry lobbyists. Does no one else find this unseemly? Her high-handedness and open partisanship were astounding: "I am appointed by the pope and responsible directly to him. I’m afraid that leaves you and your cohort out in the cold."

"In other words, when asked for clarity about the Vatican giving a platform to population-control advocates, the Vatican’s published response was, essentially: 'You lousy corrupt Tea Baggers don’t even know what Catholicism is'."  READ THE REST OF THIS EXCELLENT ARTICLE HERE

REMNANT COMMENT: I can't imagine how much more evidence would be required to convince our neo-Catholic friends that something has gone very wrong here. At this point one would have to be obstinately refusing to see the coup d’état that has taken place under Francis. This is our Church.  The Vatican is ours. As faithful Catholics, we have every right to demand an explanation. Has the Pope lost his mind?  Is he ill? Is he senile? Is he being blackmailed?  God help us, what are we waiting for? We demand answers, and if that means we must wrestle them from this bizarre pontiff and his friends, so be it! Let's get started.  But let's stop denying the obvious fact that the Catholic Church is now in the hands of radicals who will do all in their power to destroy her human element if the Catholic people don’t wake up.

Francis Received Lady “Archbishop,” Head of Insane Lutheran “Church” of Sweden, Calling Her “Esteemed Sister”

As Francis continues to do whatever he pleases and to say whatever he feels like saying, even when he is aware that “it may sound… heretical,” the sense that the Church has “lost its compass” and is now “a rudderless ship,” as noted by Cardinal Burke, continues to spread among the faithful and a growing number of priests, bishops and cardinals.

Editor’s Note: Over the years since 1988, The Remnant has featured countless debates on the question of the SSPX “schism” and/or irregular canonical status. We have friends and allies on both sides of that divide, and, let’s face it, the complexities of the question are not easily unraveled even by canon lawyers, which is why there are many canon lawyers on both sides of the aisle. Where we’ve drawn the line in terms of publishing this debate is at those who seem disposed to willfully defend predetermined conclusions while consciously ignoring the facts that don’t fit their nice and neat little narrative. So, for example, those who insist on castigating the SSPX as formally “schismatic” even after heads of the CDF in Rome have clearly stated otherwise are, in our opinion, ideologically driven to grind the axe of their own pet peeve, and thus contribute nothing to the debate. Similarly, those in the SSPX who obstinately adhere to 1988 talking points about the FSSP, for example, poised to begin offering the New Mass and give enthusiastic across-the-board approval to the whole warp and disastrous woof of the Second Vatican Council, while ignoring the mountains of real-world evidence to the contrary are, in our opinion, counterproductive to serious debate as well. Mr. Achbold’s approach, on the other hand, is that of serious Catholics on both sides who are trying to uncover and then defend the truth. He may not  agree with important elements of the SSPX’s argument where jurisdiction is concerned, and yet the following article is an example of the fair, balanced and thus constructive discussion we at The Remnant have sought to promote and encourage for 25 years, even if and when it may depart in one way or another from our own editorial policy and opinion. Our thanks to Mr. Archbold for a fine example of the noble effort to cut through the inflammatory rhetoric on both sides and thus be part of the solution rather than the problem where the complex question of the SSPX is concerned. MJM

If my social media is indicative of trends among friends, two themes pop up in my feed over and over again. The first is videos of rogue police violating the constitutional rights of citizens caught on camera as a consequence of the emergence of the video age.   The other is hyperbolic criticisms of the SSPX, with the word schism thrown around like beers at a frat party.

Today our friend Matt Abbott over a RenewAmerica writes the following in his article entitled "Bruce Jenner and the culture of insanity": "The current main pop-culture headline involves former Olympian Bruce Jenner "transitioning" into a woman. He's on the cover of Vanity Fair as "Caitlyn," and he'll be receiving the Arthur Ashe Courage Award at the 2015 ESPY Awards.

"Sadly, a large segment of our culture celebrates that which shouldn't be celebrated. Jenner needs compassion – he obviously has a significant mental affliction – but he certainly doesn't deserve an award for courage. There's nothing courageous about a man living as a woman.

"The following Catholic priests agree."  READ MATT's COLUMN HERE

REMNANT COMMENT: Matt Abbott offers a one-word conclusion to all this with which we heartily agree: "Insanity"! But I would go a step further, as this is the kind of insanity that comes when creatures declare war on their Creator. This is evil, yes, but more importantly it is evil that should be regarded as predicatable as was always inevitable. To be surprised by the cultural phenomenon that is MISTER Jenner reveals a failure to fully comprehend what the revolution against God, the Catholic Church and the Christian family has always been about--the non serviam of hell itself. So MISTER Jenner is not insane in the classical or clinical sense of that word. He is diabolically disoriented, and he suffers the consequences--mental, spiritual, moral and physical--that come with open rebellion against God. He is in the process of committing suicide--first of the soul, then of the mind, then of his gender and ultimately of his life. Yes, MISTER Jenner's final act in this his one-man, media-driven reality TV show will be the taking of his own life. And the media will applaud that, as well.

The media are the Devil's eyes to the hell. Take away MISTER Jenner's TV cameras and he's still Bruce. Take away FOX News and CNN in Baltimore last month and the city would not have been set on fire. The media are providing the bread and circuses of pagan Rome. They give us 24/7 freak show, and we just can't keep our eyes off the bearded lady. Our whole society has become one big car crash complete with multiple vehicles and countless casualties--and we can't remove our eyes from the gore and the death and wrecked lives. It could happen to us at any moment, and that prospect--that danger, that threat, that possilbity--makes it all irresistable to us.

But again this was all inevitable. The forces of hell have been waging war on Christ, the Cross and the Church for a thousand years. They first ripped Christendom in half with the sword of Protestantism; then they took that sword and beheaded Chris the King by separating the crowned heads of Europe from their bodies; with the temporal authority of the Catholic State crushed beneath the cloven foot of the Enlightenment, they set out to breach the walls of the Church herself.  They infiltrated her from within and the attacked from without with such diabolical fury that before they were done the Pope himself had laid down his crown and the venerable Catholic Mass--bulwark of the Faith--had been banished from the Church.

What was left? All out war on the family, the unborn and now even the body God Himself has given to each of us. Total war on everything God has bequeathed to His children--even life itself.

MISTER Jenner is but a demonic manifestation of man's non serviam. There is nothing here that should surprise the Traditional Catholic who knew from the beginning that this war was never about "personal liturgical preferances", but rather the prevention of universal chaos in the world in which we live.

Bottom line: Stop fretting about MISTER Jenner. Turn off the TV. Break out the beads. This is it! The early Christians were not out campaining and doing petitions in protest of Caligula have sexual intercoarse with his horse and appointing the animal to the Senate in old pagan Rome. They had "come out from among them" and were worshipping God in catacombs, praying for deviverance from evil, and preparing for a date with the lions. And so must we. This world is no place for us anymore. And so we watch and wait and pray, while insisting that the old Latin Mass is our only hope and the only hope of the world. God help us, the forces of hell have been unleashed and the only solution now is the spiritual solution--the Rosary and the Mass. Nothing else matters.  

Over at SSPX.Org a new letter from Bishop Fellay was posted today.  Here's a snippet: "In itself mercy is a word that is dear to the heart of every Catholic, because it designates the most touching manifestation of God’s love for us...

"Nevertheless true mercy, which implies this initial, extremely touching movement of God toward the sinner and His misery, continues in a moment of the creature’s conversion to God: “God desires not the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live” (cf. Ezek 33:11). Hence the Gospels insist on the duty of conversion, renunciation and penance.  Our Lord went so far as to say: “Unless you do penance, you shall all perish” (cf. Lk 13:5)."

"Opposed to the true notion of mercy is the new "spirit of Vatican II" notion of mercy which lacks a sense of repentance, an error that is being promoted as part of Pope Francis' reform of the Roman Curia: Can you truncate mercy, cut it off from necessary repentance, as Cardinal Maradiaga does, for the stated purpose of giving a new spirit to the conciliar reforms and breaking with the traditional spirit? Certainly not!"  READ MORE HERE

REMNANT COMMENT: Question: Are these the words of a man who "sold out" to the Vatican in exchange for some personal gain and a more glorious place in history? The critics of Bishop Fellay seem to be revealing themselves as men on whom nuance and prudence are largely wasted. In constant pursuit of the next wild conspiracy theory, they seem to have difficulty grasping the significance of the crucial role Bishop Fellay is obliged to accept as one of the last remaining traditional Catholic bishops in the world today. His strategy requires diligence against the fever swamps to the right, while for the good of the whole Church (and not just the SSPX) maintaining lines of communication with the tiny remnant of believing hierarchs left in Rome--men who may be of some use in leading many diabolically disoriented shepherds back from the precipice and in the direction of sacred Tradition. Bishop Fellay does not seem to be settling for mere self-preservation either for himself or for the Society of St. Pius X. Rather it seems obvious that he is motivated by a much higher goal, which includes a stubborn refusal to abandon the Church in crisis. How easy it would be for him to spend every waking moment shooting at the sad and dizzy little modernist fish swimming round and round inside the Vatican fishbowl just now. But is that really what the Church needs? I think not. Rather, the Church desperately needs bishops who understand the awesome responsibility that comes with their holy mission to serve the Church with prudence and wisdom in times of great upheaval. There are not many such bishops left in the world today. Pray for this one, and stop playing the part of the useful idiot by attacking him for not being as strident, shrill and counterproductive as the Internet mob demands he should be.