I have been wondering how they would go about their "SUBTLE" INSIDIOUS plan to destroy the Church from the INSIDE, as we were warned about...
THIS:
*<<< "I’ll say it without mincing words: the synodal lobby expects Leo to lend canonical legitimacy to a subversive process of disposing of the Papacy; a sort of voluntary abdication of the Monarch in favor of a Parliament that, in response to the surrender of the power of jurisdiction and governance, recognizes him as having an honorary primacy that can be useful at the ecumenical level. In a legal paradox, this lobby demands that the holder of a divine right exercise supreme authority in order to transmit that right to the synod, something the Pope cannot do. This ecclesial coup is intended to carry out to its extreme consequences the revolutionary process inaugurated at Vatican II with the episcopal collegiality of Lumen Gentium,3 extending the governance of the Catholic Church to the laity and to women, to the complete detriment of the indissoluble bond between the power of Holy Orders and the power of Jurisdiction that has existed in the Church since time immemorial. On the other hand, the extension to women of functions previously reserved for clerics opens up a practical opportunity for the introduction of para-ministerial roles such as deaconesses and non-ordained ministers. It is impossible not to see also in this the fulfillment of what the Agenda 2030 requests for Gender Equality." *>>>
In other words...THEY FORM A COMMITTEE/PARLIAMENT and SUBVERT THE LEGITIMACY of the POPE.
Because of his already Socialist beliefs, Francis was easily pushed into the ideology of the Marxists, but Pope Leo, I believe is a lot more centered in his beliefs and won't be swayed in the same way. He has made some WRONG choices though and that is telling. The way they get around any of his resistance will be to lessen his power as Pope.
MAKES TOTAL SENSE!
-----------------------------------------
SUBSTACK:
EXCLUSIVE interview with Archbishop Viganò, Part 1: Leo
"I fear that Leo represents 'Modernism with a human face."
Stephen Kokx: Your Excellency, many of Prevost’s decisions indicate that he wishes to continue along the heretical course of his predecessors, particularly the synodal path charted by Jorge Bergoglio. Many seem to believe we need to “give him time” and “hold out hope” that things will improve. At the same time, it seems Prevost’s agenda is quite clear and that silence or “giving him the benefit of the doubt” – while also putting a more positive spin on his reign – could cause scandal by omission and/or by creating false hope. What do you make of these arguments and how should Catholics be viewing this “pontificate” a little over two months in?
Carlo Maria Viganò: None of us can judge the internal forum, that is, the interior dispositions with which a person acts or speaks: only Our Lord, who sees into the depths of our hearts, can do that. But this does not mean that we cannot express an assessment on the external forum, that is, on the effects and consequences that a person’s actions or statements can have in general or in a specific context. This also applies to Leo, whose election is seen by many as a sign of change from the disastrous period of Bergoglian usurpation, even though there is no evidence to suggest this. Indeed, Leo’s governance actions, appointments, and public statements are multiplying, demonstrating his complete alignment with his predecessor of ill-fated memory.
I myself, as I think many noted in the days immediately following the election, preferred to refrain from publicly expressing my views on Leo with comments that might have seemed hasty.
After just over two months, however, I believe it is possible to find consistency in Leo’s actions and statements with the line drawn by Bergoglio. And perhaps that impromptu appearance of Sister Nathalie Becquart 1 and other members of the Synod elite for a selfie with the newly elected pope 2 today acquires a significance that may have initially escaped most. The message we can glean from this – and which is accompanied by the blissful and satisfied smiles of many ultra-progressive Electors (among them Cardinal Cupich of Chicago) who appeared on the Loggia after the white smoke – is that the synodal path from which the Bergoglian and post-Bergoglian Church can in no way escape has already been mapped out, and that Leo was elected on the fourth ballot as the continuator of the synodal mandate, and not of the munus petrinum.
*<<< I’ll say it without mincing words: the synodal lobby expects Leo to lend canonical legitimacy to a subversive process of disposing of the Papacy; a sort of voluntary abdication of the Monarch in favor of a Parliament that, in response to the surrender of the power of jurisdiction and governance, recognizes him as having an honorary primacy that can be useful at the ecumenical level. In a legal paradox, this lobby demands that the holder of a divine right exercise supreme authority in order to transmit that right to the synod, something the Pope cannot do. This ecclesial coup is intended to carry out to its extreme consequences the revolutionary process inaugurated at Vatican II with the episcopal collegiality of Lumen Gentium,3 extending the governance of the Catholic Church to the laity and to women, to the complete detriment of the indissoluble bond between the power of Holy Orders and the power of Jurisdiction that has existed in the Church since time immemorial. On the other hand, the extension to women of functions previously reserved for clerics opens up a practical opportunity for the introduction of para-ministerial roles such as deaconesses and non-ordained ministers. It is impossible not to see also in this the fulfillment of what the Agenda 2030 requests for Gender Equality. *>>>
more here:
https://kokxnews.substack.com/p/exclusive-interview-with-archbishop
