"Satanists are working in the Vatican"
A friend sent me this article the other day.
It is an interview with the indominable Fr. Amorth by Il Foglio. He says, in a nutshell, "There are satanists in the Vatican Curia".
Satanists in the Vatican? "Yes, even in the Vatican there are members of satanic cults."
Who is involved? These simple priests or laity? "There are priests, monsignors and even cardinals."
Forgive me, Father Gabriel, but how do you know? "I know from people that I have been able to report because they had no way of knowing directly. And it's 'confession' several times by the devil himself under obedience in the exorcisms.
Is the Pope informed? "Of course he was informed!"
Of course, my response to my friend was exactly what you're thinking: "Well, duh!"
"Flash! Ocean discovered to be very large and filled with water!"
But wait!
Not every one is yawning and switching over to see the Onion's latest funny video about orangutans or Sarah Palin.
Apparently some are shocked. Some are even "beyond shocked", (and apparently, not just for laughs).
Others, however, are outraged. Some are saying what a horrible thing it is to dare to malign the wonderful "edifying and virtuous" collection of prelates we have in the glorious post-JPII Catholic Church. In fact, some have said that saying such a thing is uncharitable, scandal-mongering ...
...divisive.
Fr. Jose Antonio Fortea Cucurull, a Spanish priest and theologian who specializes in demonology and is now studying for his doctorate of theology in Rome, responded to Fr. Amorth's assertions on March 1.
After reading reports of Fr. Amorth's accusations pointing a finger at members of the clergy, including cardinals [Oh no! not the great and glorious college of cardinals! Why, it can't be!], Fr. Fortea declared that it is a "duty of justice" to speak out in their defense.
Noting that some prelates "are more spiritual and others more earthly, some more virtuous and others more human," he wrote on his blog, "from there to affirm that some cardinals are members of Satanic sects is an unacceptable distance."
I'm sure it is. Quite unacceptable.
Apparently, the current crop of cardinals is the most virtuous the Catholic Church has ever seen.
"Our College of Cardinals, if we compare it with past centuries is the most edifying and virtuous that history has ever known. One would have to go back to the epoch of the Roman Empire to find a body of electors so distanced from all earthly pretension as the current one is."
Well. We've been told.
It all made me think of an amusing game.
A quiz, actually, "How to tell if you're a Trad-Catholic or a Neo-Con Catholic".
A little while ago, someone poked Mark Shea's anti-Trad button and he went all wiggy, as he does, flailing and spitting and doing his usual apoplectic head-spinning Shea thing. It was all very amusing.
What seemed to set him off this time was the assertion by the Trads that he is a "neo-con".
"Wot?!Wot?!Wot?! I don't even know what that means!
I'M JUST A CATHOLIC, dammit, and anyone making such unnecessary distinctions is just plain...
...divisive..."
So, I've been trying to think of ways to help him out.
Quiz: "How to tell if you're a Trad-Catholic or a Neo-Con Catholic"
How do you respond to the following assertion?
"There are satanists in the Vatican curia"1) "That's an outrageous accusation! The Catholic Church is the last bastion of righteousness in the world. There is nothing whatever going wrong in the Vatican, and all the problems in the Church stem from inexplicably bad individual bishops that are connected in no way to the Curia.
...and our Pope, John Paul the Great, is the very mouthpiece of God on earth..."
...
"Oooo, wait, I meant the new guy."
2) "Well, Duh. Where have you been?"
14 comments:
If you don't know the correct answer...
My first thought upon reading the Amorth bit was, "Well, that would explain a few things."
I am a person in the church because of JPII and he was a prophet.
But all Popes are prophets whether they are good or bad.
I still say "Well Duh" us ex-fundies aren't surprises where Satan shows up.
faustina (JPII saint in case you didn't notice)
One of the things that makes this story delightfully, errrrrr, pre-modern, is that Fr Fortea Cucurull believes as explicitly in the Devil and in demonic possession as does Fr Amorth.
Another is that his surname sounds as though it should be the Catalan or the Provencal for Cockadoodledoo.
Interesting.
Malachi Martin said the same thing 15 years ago.
Cheers,
-John-
Did the Satanic rites have an aggiornamento of their own, I wonder? Or were they already Mason-friendly? I've always unimaginatively envisaged them as fairly Gothic somehow.
Perhaps Dr Bugnini revised those, too.
I think we should all just get along and start concentrating on more important matters. BTW---what all is being done to commemorate the 1600th anniversary of the sack of Rome by Alaric the Goth?
Yah reckon? Do you really think the traddies are saying "Well, duh. Where have you been?"
If I had to guess, I would say the reaction to such news comes down to the temperament of the Catholic in question.
Hi, Hilary Jane!
Frankly, I'm IMPATIENT with such hair splitting by some over "Trad" or "Neo-con" Catholics. I'm far more concerned that we all be ORTHODOX in faith and morals.
As for Fr. Amorth, I eventually decided he was a crank to whom we should not pay much attention. About the only good book in English about exorcism/demonic possession is Malachi Martin's HOSTAGE TO THE DEVIL (pub. before MM himself went off the rails).
Yes, I believe Satan is real and that SOMETIMES demons can take possession of human beings. I don't understand why so many have a hard time accepting the existence of Satan. If you believe God exists, I fail to see why you should boggle at Him creating ANGELS, whether good or evil.
As for Fr. Amorth saying some members of the Curia are Satanists, he should remember it is a sin to slander others. UNLESS, of course, he can PROVE his charges. In that case those charges should be investigated.
From the Pope on down, we are ALL sinnners in need of repenting and the mercy of God.
Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks
Bing! we have a winnah!
Sean dear,
it's a joke ...
and judging from your earnestly outraged reaction, it's on you.
But since we seem to be so interested, the real answer to the satanists-in-the-Vatican question is: who gives a shit?
Is there anything we can do about it? Does it make the slightest difference to you or to me in doing our jobs?
Of *course* there are satanists in the Vatican. If you were Stan, what would be your FIRST (since we're so fond of our caps key) job?
For Pete sake. What do you think he does on his weekends?
BTW: one of the first signs of a neo-con is their feverish insistence that the distinction is specious and "divisive" and one of their fondest pet arguments is that we should all concentrate on "orthodoxy".
cf: my mockery of Shea, above.
Hi, Hilary Jane!
Ha ha ha! You were only joking? Putting us on? Drat! You got me GOOD.
But I do consider myself to be merely a lower case "c" conservative. More in the line of thought developed by Edmund Burke and John Adams. As explicated by Russell Kirk in his book THE CONSERVATIVE MIND.
I truly don't care about "paleo" or "neo" when it comes to conservatves.
Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks
"Did the Satanic rites have an aggiornamento of their own, I wonder? Or were they already Mason-friendly? I've always unimaginatively envisaged them as fairly Gothic somehow."
11:14 PM
Bill White said...
"Perhaps Dr Bugnini revised those, too."
This exchange has had me laughing for days. Where is Monty Python?
Faustina
This story is the main headline on Drudge right now.
Post a Comment