TRANSCRIPT

There is nothing on the table that isn’t being weaponized by the Left — and we are talking about the Left inside the Church who, for the record, really aren’t in the Church because they reject Church teaching on a variety of issues. And they are digging in.

Nonetheless, since they continue to portray themselves as “Catholic,” then they get to be treated as “Catholic,” meaning their propaganda should be exposed on a theological level for the garbage that it is.

One of the leading provocateurs in the lefty Catholic camp is Austen Ivereigh, British author who never misses a chance to foster dissent. For example, just before the infamous Sex Summit began in Rome last February, Ivereigh tweeted, “Why do you say our Lord had no homosexual tendencies? By what signs or gestures do you deduce this?”

He was in a Twitter war with Fr. Jacob Straub, who responded, “This is very scandalous and possibly a heresy. You need to remove this tweet and confess your sin. Lord, have mercy.”

And so it goes with the lefty Catholic crowd, so closely associated with the lefty political crowd so as to be indistinguishable.

Ivereigh, who used to write for the notorious leftist Catholic rag The Tablet, located in the U.K., really came onto the radar for publishing a book on Pope Francis, The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope, back in 2014, jumping on the bandwagon of Team Francis.

Ivereigh is happy to not just support the so-called reforms of Pope Francis, but he never loses an opportunity to slam other Catholic media who question those reforms. Anyone who questions the pope’s moves gets torn to pieces by Ivereigh and the rest of his gang (although many of those same men had no problem openly criticizing Pope Benedict or Pope John Paul).

Ivereigh, you might recall, is the same fellow at one of the first press conferences of the Amazon Synod who tried to portray the Pachamama statues (really idols) as Our Lady and St. Elizabeth — until he got contradicted by panelists, and eventually the pope himself, who called them Pachamama, not representations of Mary and Elizabeth.

But with this crowd, whatever helps push the narrative is all that matters.

A few days back, America Magazine, the flagship publication of the largely dissident Jesuit order, hosted a book launch party for him for his latest tome titled Wounded Shepherd: Pope Francis’ Struggle to Convert the Catholic Church. 

The use of the term “convert” in the title is more than a little telling. Of course, Ivereigh’s book has the full-throated endorsement of homoheretic James Martin, who never met a fellow traveler along the road to overthrowing the Church he hasn’t joined forces with.

Ivereigh and his crowd see this pontificate as a tool, perhaps a willing tool, to talk in generalities about Church teaching and downplay any specificity. So in his book and in his comments at the book launch, he talks about the need to stop talking about dogma or doctrine and start emphasizing personal experience in making moral judgments — meaning, at bottom, whether to commit sin or not.

Problem is Ivereigh and company don’t seem to either know or care anything about the actual concept of sin and its resultant consequence of damnation if a soul were to die in that state. But that doesn’t matter to these guys. They don’t really believe in the Church as She is actually constituted.

It’s much easier for them to think of and present the Church in terms of a giant multinational outfit, whose mission is to create some kind of utopia — Heaven on earth — as opposed to focusing on attaining actual Heaven.

To this end, any moral teaching, especially the ones on sexuality, are free to be passed over because those sins aren’t really sins, their rightness or wrongness being left up to the individual’s “personal experience.” But eat a piece of beef or contribute to so-called man-made climate change — and the fires of Hell await you.

Ivereigh straight up is a liar, who follows the agenda of the Left like the nice, little waterboy he is. For example, the uproar about the Pachamama idols prompted him to say that it grew out of EWTN-fueled panic that never asked indigenous people themselves about the “idols.”

That’s not even in the slightest imagination true. EWTN was not the first to report on the Pachamama. As far as we can tell, Church Militant was the first to identify the statues as symbols of Pachamama and demonstrate their connection to “Mother Earth,” or more specifically, “Earth Mother.”

For the record, it may not have been us, but if it wasn’t, we were certainly among the first, and it was not EWTN.

Secondly, the so-called “indigenous people” didn’t need to be asked specifically when the reports were first issued, because the very telling video moment of them bowing down to them on an earth blanket in the Vatican Gardens said a lot all on its own.

People don’t physically bow down to concepts. They bow down to representations of a concept.

And why didn’t Ivereigh go and ask the “indigenous people” swarming all over Rome, instead of sitting in the Vatican press hall getting shot down by the panel when saying the statues were of Our Lady and St. Elizabeth?

Where did he get his wrong idea? Certainly not from the “indigenous people,” because the statues are a symbol of Mother Earth and fertility and so forth, as they themselves — and the pope and the Vatican — have said.

There are so many ways to dissect the lefty Catholic crowd’s agenda and war on the truth that it’s actually easy. On the sex abuse crisis — proven time and again that its foundational cause is homosexuality, seeing as how four out of every five victims was a teenage boy — Ivereigh simply ignores that truth and says of that assertion: “This leads to terrible diagnoses, best example is their diagnosis of the sex abuse crisis by likes of Viganó and Cdls. Mueller and Burke.”

Of course, Ivereigh is demonstrably wrong, so much so that he seems to require more pity than correction.

In perhaps his most telling quote, demonizing anyone who supports Tradition in the Church (meaning clear doctrine), he says: “Everything is filtered through an ‘ideology of suspicion’” by a party that is trying to undermine him.

“This is a direct attack on his leadership” but “of course they don’t see it that way.” They say it is justified in the name of saving the Church, and in the “name of Tradition.”

Hey, Austen, have you looked around the Church these days? For the past half-century, in fact?

Of course, things have to be viewed in a suspicious manner, just like a fire chief looks at a four-alarm blaze in a suspicious manner, until the objective truth is arrived at. You and your carrying of the water for the Left must also be looked at suspiciously, and eventually denounced — yours and the rest of your elitist-minded “journalist” crowd.

You aren’t journalists. You are little else than mere stenographers for the Left, dutifully repeating their talking points because they excuse any sin you may enjoy. You desire nothing else than to keep the discussion of morality centered on earth as opposed to Heaven.

That is not what the Savior of the world desired. You might recall that loving God is the First Commandment; neighbor comes second. Heaven comes before earth on the priority list.

Read the source:  https://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/vortex-digging-in

PAPAL BIOGRAPHER ADMITS ‘ABORTION’ AFFAIR

Scandal-making papal biographer reviews papacy

WASHINGTON (ChurchMilitant.com) – A Catholic journalist who was in an affair that ended in abortion is weighing in on the Wuhan virus and what he calls Pope Francis’ missed opportunity to use the crisis to bring about change in the Church.

Austen Ivereigh, papal biographer and writer for Commonweal Magazine, America Magazine and the British Tablet, is speaking out on his recent interview with Pope Francis, somehow managing to have grabbed the lead role among journalists who report on the Francis papacy — a role some find disturbing considering a past affair where the woman aborted their child — something Ivereigh denies he had agreed to.

A second instance of a different woman who, reports say, miscarried before being able to carry through with an abortion for hers and Ivereigh’s twins presents a troubling track record for the liberal journalist.

Ivereigh, whose personal troubles have been well documented, has also written two books on Pope Francis entitled The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope, and more recently Wounded Shepherd: Pope Francis and His Struggle to Convert the Catholic Church. 

Ivereigh’s Personal Scandals

In 2006, Ivereigh had to resign as senior advisor to Cdl. Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, then-head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, after admitting to having an affair that led to abortion.

Ivereigh had won £30,000 in libel damages at the High Court in London after claiming he was “unfairly trashed” by an article in the Daily Mail accusing him of being a hypocrite over abortion, tattering his reputation as a spokesman and writer for the Catholic Church.

Ivereigh had admitted to a relationship with a woman called Siobhan that included fornication and abortion while he was a post-graduate student at Oxford in 1989. He also had another more recent affair with a divorced woman whom he had impregnated with twins.

In 2008, the court ended in a hung jury, but in 2009 the court ruled in his favor.

Ivereigh said in the libel trial that the Daily Mail had accused him of callously maneuvering two women into terminating their pregnancies while publicly condemning the practice, which would mean automatic excommunication according to the spirit of canon 1398 in the Code of Canon Law.

Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail, had denied libel and said its story was substantially true and fair comment.

Ivereigh seemed relieved when he was told she was considering abortion.Tweet

Concerning his relationship with Siobhan, Ivereigh alleged her mother had insisted on marriage or abortion after news of the pregnancy emerged. Siobhan had told the court earlier that Ivereigh had become cold and evasive when she told him of her pregnancy, leaving her feeling “abandoned and in despair.” She said he seemed relieved when he was told she was considering abortion.

“I wanted to keep the baby,” she had said. “I hoped Austen and I would get married. But he made it clear that he would not support me and would play no part in the child’s upbringing. I was devastated. He maneuvered me into a position where I felt I had no choice but to have a termination,” she had lamented.

Ivereigh denied the Daily Mail’s claim that he drove her to the abortuary, which would have been cooperating in a procured abortion.

WATCH MORE LIKE THIS

The divorced woman who had been carrying his twins was in court identified as “X.” Ivereigh claimed he proposed to X, but when their relationship deteriorated, he suggested postponing the marriage. He claimed X wanted nothing more to do with him, despite him wanting to provide materially for their babies.

X, on the other hand, claimed Ivereigh backed out of their relationship and his offers of support were not sincere. She felt she was left with no other alternative but to abort his children. Before that could occur, she miscarried.

“It falsely alleged that he was a hypocrite for not practicing what he preached in relation to the issue of abortion,” Ivereigh’s lawyer claimed.

He was found not guilty.

Ivereigh’s Papal Interview

In a conference call/virtual meeting entitled “The Papacy Confronts Coronavirus,” Ivereigh aimed to discuss the papacy of Francis and the Wuhan virus crisis. He was joined by moderator Paul Elie, senior fellow at the Berkley Center at Georgetown University, and Kim Daniels, associate director of Georgetown’s Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life and member of the Vatican Dicastery for Communication.

The discussion was mainly centered on six questions that Ivereigh sent to Pope Francis before Easter, which focused on the Church’s response to the Wuhan crisis. Ivereigh said the interview was conducted in Spanish and that the translation was his own.

In some highlights of the virtual meeting that can be found online, Daniels speaks of the pope’s love for the poor, explaining how the health crisis has brought into sharper focus the pope’s commitment to reshaping ways Catholics engage with the poor. The pope’s spiritual and moral leadership from the top, she noted, has been met to a significant degree by the “Church from the bottom up that’s really acting to serve people on the ground.”

It falsely alleged that he was a hypocrite for not practicing what he preached in relation to the issue of abortion.Tweet

Elie mentioned the difference in approach between popes Benedict and Francis. Benedict saw the battle more as the Church vs. the world, i.e. “us vs. them,” as he specifically mentioned his “Dictatorship of Relativism” homily before he was elected pope. Francis, on the other hand, tends to focus more that we are all vulnerable to the challenges of our time, such as the pandemic, environmental degradation and the like.

With regard to the general theme of the pope’s message, Ivereigh says “there’s a kind of paradox there; we pray for an end to this (pandemic), but on the other hand we also trust it has a purpose. We need to engage in that purpose for it to bear fruit in us.”

Elie voiced concern that Pope Francis’ “field hospital” model of the Church is being resisted by some of the Church’s institutional leaders, whose priority is instead religious liberty. Daniels, however, said the dichotomy between field hospital priorities and religious liberty protections may not be so opposed. While she says it is clearly “dangerous to weaponize religious liberty,” she also noted that those legal protections are vital for allowing churches to live out their faith in public life.

Francis is inviting us to reconnect with what matters, with nature and with family, Ivereigh explained, and also to “remember how we’ve got here and realize that God has been with us all along.”

This can change us and change the future, Ivereigh added. He stressed that the potential for profound individual conversion in the face of major trials has been a long-term theme of Francis’, which has accelerated during the pandemic.

With regard to the deinstitutionalization of the Church, a theme he said many Catholics falsely attribute to Francis, Ivereigh said the pope asserted this is something to be resisted. The Church is institution, and it is the Holy Spirit that institutionalizes the Church, Francis said.

Elie pointed out that this “powerful” statement challenges the language of “progressive church people on the Left” who use the term “institution” as a pejorative and advocate for dismantling it. Nonetheless, pointing to the Acts of the Apostles, the pope offered clarity that the Holy Spirit “deinstitutionalizes what is no longer of use and institutionalizes the future of the Church.”

Read the source: https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/papal-interviewer-follow-francis-through-crisis