Rorate Caeli

BOMBSHELL—New internal CDF information shows Pope Francis flagrantly lying about bishops’ TLM survey

The full transcript of Diane Montagna's revelatory lecture at the Catholic Identity Conference 2021, held in Pittsburgh this past weekend, has just been published at The Remnant, enriched with additional material. "Traditionis Custodes: Separating Fact from Fiction" includes extensive quotations from the internal CDF document in which the bishops who responded predominantly spoke favorably of Summorum Pontificum and the TLM in their dioceses (some even requested help with establishing the Mass). It also includes inside information about the crooked path by which Traditionis Custodes was pre-designed, with the survey used as a convenient screen for a foreordained decision.

Excerpt:

"Sometimes things are not as they seem. And sometimes, there are two 'realities': one that is officially given by those in power, and one that we then discover to be the truth....

"According to Pope Francis, the consultation of bishops played a fundamental role in his decision to severely restrict the traditional Mass. As he said himself, the results so 'preoccupied and saddened' him, that they 'persuaded' him to 'intervene.' And he ordered that the decree take immediate effect. Following the promulgation of Traditionis Custodes, considerable speculation was therefore swirling about the survey, but the Vatican has not published its results....

"But does Traditionis Custodes truly reflect what the real situation is? Was the survey on which Pope Francis said he based his decision a fair consultation of the world’s bishops? Would this consultation be considered fair if some of the content of Traditionis Custodes had already been suggested during a plenary meeting of the CDF, at the end of January 2020, that gave way to a consultation that was meant to justify the decisions reached in Traditionis Custodes? Could it be called fair if it came to light that there was a second, parallel report created within the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, which was completed before all the responses from bishops had been received by the CDF? And could it be called fair if Traditionis Custodes did not accurately represent the main, detailed report prepared for Pope Francis by the CDF’s fourth section, i.e., the former Ecclesia Dei? Many people, in fact, knew that this report was being prepared.

"Let’s examine what has now come to light about each of these three questions."

Thank you, Diane Montagna, for your tireless work in uncovering the truth, unsavory as it too often is, of what is really going on in the Vatican. (Read the whole exposé here.)

Now a word to Diane and any Vaticanistas who have access to the CDF internal report: please, for the love of God and the love of Holy Mother Church, find a way to publish this report IN FULL, so that all the world can see the lies exposed, and with them, the mettle of the people who are assaulting the tradition of the Roman Church. Its full publication would be as great a moment of clarity as Archbishop Viganò's McCarrick revelations in August 2018. This is an urgent duty of conscience: the pontifical secret cannot be invoked for hiding malice and mendacity.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.

_______
NOTES

(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!