Francis the Feminist
by Thomas A. Droleskey
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis is beginning to put his cast of revolutionaries in place. He is sending clear signals that what he sees as his predecessor's "suffocation" of the doctrinal and pastoral revolution wrought by the "Second" Vatican Council and its aftermath is now over, that a the "spirit" is "breathing fresh air" again into the "evolving" life of the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
Readers of this site know that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI was one of the chief architects of the "Second" Vatican Council and that he used his seven years, ten months, nine days as the conciliar church's "Petrine Minister" to justify his revolution as being perfectly compatible with Tradition, doing so by means of the so-called "hermeneutic of continuity," and to "institutionalize" his own interpretation of the conciliar revolution as the "authoritative" one for the future. Not being a Thomist, however, Ratzinger/Benedict could never see the teleology of his "hermeneutic of continuity" was a recipe only for instability as there is nothing to future a future "Petrine Minister" from using the same illogic to throw out everything he taught just as he jettisoned everything about Catholic doctrine, liturgy and pastoral praxis he not "like" while claiming it all had to be understood in light of Tradition.
To wit, Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not at all consider himself bound to Ratzinger/Benedict's interpretation of the "Second" Vatican Council any more than John Calvin considered himself bound by Martin Luther's interpretation of Sacred Scripture. Modernism must produce inherently instability and change as it is from the devil, who wants the unpredictable to be a predictable part of what is thought to be Catholic life in order to get ordinary Catholics into accepting doctrinal, liturgical and pastoral change as good and stability and immutability as bad.
This is why Senor Bergoglio has decided to appoint the head of the Order of Friars Minor, "Father" Jose Rodriguez Carballo, as Secretary of the Occupy Vatican Movement's Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated life and the Societies of Apostolic Life, thereby placing him in a position to assure nervous leaders of formerly Catholic communities of religious men and women that the days of supposed "witch hunts" of the like represented by the slap on the wrist given to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious in the United States of America are now over:
The Spaniard will bring his rich international experience as head of a major religious order to his new post of responsibility. Together with Cardinal Braz de Aviz, he is expected to play a key role in working to overcome and heal the tensions between the Vatican, and in particular the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), and the leadership of the umbrella organization of some 59,000 American women religious – the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR).
In April 2012, the CDF issued a highly critical doctrinal assessment of the situation of the LCWR, accusing them of taking positions that undermine Catholic teaching on the priesthood and homosexuality and of promoting “certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.” In the light of that report, Pope Benedict appointed the US Archbishop Peter Sartain of Seattle to supervise the reform of the LCWR within five years.
In recent months it had been widely rumored in the USA and Rome that Benedict XVI would appoint an American bishop or religious priest to that key post in the Vatican congregation to reinforce that tough line, but this did not happen. Informed sources in Rome now say that by choosing Carballo, Pope Francis has clearly opted for a different, more Gospel-inspired approach to consecrated life in general and, also, to help overcome the ongoing, painful tensions with the American religious women. (Apostate Layman/Petrine Minister Picks Franciscan as Secretary of the Congregation for Religious.)
The Order of Friars Minor has been just a month a den of feminism as the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWC) in the United States of America. Indeed, many Franciscans here in the United States of America came to the rescue of the LCWC following the wrist-slapping administered by the then prefect of the conciliar Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, William "Cardinal" Levada.
To refresh you memories on this point, the now retired Levada learned well from his academic mentor, Father Joseph Ratzinger, to accept the Modernist view of the nature of dogmatic truth (see Generating Controversy and Negative Press and Rescind the Appointment at Once, both which were written my "resist and recognize days in 2005; Anathematized by His Own Words, No Need to be in Limbo Any Longer, Piracy, Conciliar Style, Red Carpet For A Modernist, Words Really Do Matter and Short And To The Catholic Point. Levada, the man who, as the conciliar "archbishop" of Portland, Oregon, once told the late Father Eugene Heidt, whom he suspended for offering the Immemorial Mass of Tradition without "permission," that Transubstantiation is a "long and difficult word" and "that we don't use it any more" (see Invincible or Inculpable) issued an eight-page Doctrinal Assessment of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious almost precisely one year ago now to raise concerns about some of the speakers chosen to appear at the LCWC's conferences and certain beliefs and liturgical practices at variance with the Catholic Faith.
Here is a summary of the concerns that were expressed by the so-called Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2009 that led to an investigation of the LCWC by Leonard Blair, the conciliar "bishop" of Toledo, Ohio, at the conciliar Vatican's request:
The decision of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) to undertake a
doctrinal Assessment of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) was communicated to the LCWR Presidency during their meeting with Cardinal William Levada in Rome on April 8, 2008. At that meeting, three major areas of concern were given as motivating the CDF’s decision to initiate the Assessment:
o Addresses at the LCWR Assemblies. Addresses given during LCWR annual Assemblies manifest problematic statements and serious theological, even doctrinal errors. The Cardinal offered as an example specific passages of Sr. Laurie Brink’s address about some Religious “moving beyond the Church” or even beyond Jesus. This is a challenge not only to core Catholic beliefs; such a rejection of faith is also a serious source of scandal and is incompatible with religious life. Such unacceptable positions routinely go unchallenged by the LCWR, which should provide resources for member Congregations to foster an ecclesial vision of religious life, thus helping to correct an erroneous vision of the Catholic faith as an important exercise of charity.
Some might see in Sr. Brink’s analysis a phenomenological snapshot of religious life
today. But Pastors of the Church should also see in it a cry for help.
o Policies of Corporate Dissent. The Cardinal spoke of this issue in reference to letters the CDF received from “Leadership Teams” of various Congregations, among them LCWR Officers, protesting the Holy See’s actions regarding the question of women’s ordination and of a correct pastoral approach to ministry to homosexual persons, e.g.
letters about New Ways Ministry’s conferences. The terms of the letters suggest that these sisters collectively take a position not in agreement with the Church’s teaching on human sexuality. It is a serious matter when these Leadership Teams are not
providing effective leadership and example to their communities, but place themselves outside the Church’s teaching.
o Radical Feminism. The Cardinal noted a prevalence of certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith in some of the programs and presentations sponsored by the LCWR, including theological interpretations that risk distorting faith in Jesus and his loving Father who sent his Son for the salvation of the world.
Moreover, some commentaries on “patriarchy” distort the way in which Jesus has structured sacramental life in the Church; others even undermine the revealed doctrines of the Holy Trinity, the divinity of Christ, and the inspiration of Sacred Scripture. (Doctrinal Assessment of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious.)
"Bishop" Blair presented all of the requested documentation to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2010, resulting in a meeting with "Cardinal" Levada on the "bishop" members of the congregation on January 12, 2011. Here are the highlights of the report issued on April 18, 2012:
On June 25, 2010, Bishop Blair presented further documentation on the content of the LCWR’s Mentoring Leadership Manual and also on the organizations associated with the LCWR, namely Network and The Resource Center for Religious Institutes. The documentation reveals that, while there has been a great deal of work on the part of LCWR promoting issues of social justice in harmony with the Church’s social doctrine, it is silent on the right to life from conception to natural death, a question that is part of the lively public debate about abortion and euthanasia in the United States. Further, issues of crucial importance to the life of Church and society, such as the Church’s Biblical view of family life and human sexuality, are not part of the LCWR agenda in a way that promotes Church teaching. Moreover, occasional public statements by the LCWR that disagree with or challenge positions taken by the Bishops, who are the Church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals, are not compatible with its purpose.
All of the documentation from the doctrinal Assessment including the LCWR responses was presented to the Ordinary Session of the Cardinal and Bishop Members of the CDF on January 12, 2011. The decision of that Ordinary Session was:
1) The current doctrinal and pastoral situation of the LCWR is grave and a matter of serious concern, also given the influence the LCWR exercises on religious Congregations in other parts of the world;
2) After the currently-ongoing Visitation of religious communities of women in the United States is brought to a conclusion, the Holy See should intervene with the prudent steps necessary to effect a reform of the LCWR;
3) The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith will examine the various forms of canonical intervention available for the resolution of the problematic aspects present in the LCWR. (Doctrinal Assessment of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious.)
There are several observations that should be reiterated before explaining how many Franciscans in the United States of America came to the "rescue" of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious.
First, none of this was "news" a year ago and it is not news now as hundreds of articles and scores of books have been written about the doctrinal, moral and spiritual corruption of the older communities of women religious that once made up the backbone of Catholic education and health-care here in the United States of America. Many of us have experienced this corruption on a first-hand basis.
Second, the problems listed in the "doctrinal assessment" last year are not confined to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. They are pandemic in most of the once proudly Catholic communities of women religious that have "moved beyond" even the official apostasies of conciliarism into a pantheistic "spirituality" that does not exclude, at least in many instances, outright practice of witchcraft and other occult rituals. Taking more time to "examine the various forms of canonical intervention available for the resolution of the problematic aspects of the LCWR" is absurd as that organization is simply representation of the life of the older communities of women religious that bought into the conciliar agenda back in the 1960s.
Third, there was a discussion of "radical feminism" in the "doctrinal assessment" without a recognition that all forms of feminism are contrary to the true femininity of the Mother of God, after whose humility and self-abnegation women religious should model their religious lives no matter the particular charisms of the communities in which they took vows. Why was there no discussion of the lack of space given at LCWC conferences to the Rosary and True Devotion to Mary as taught by Saint Louis de Montfort?
Fourth, the "doctrinal assessment" omitted mentioning the simple fact that the numbers of women religious plummeted in the United States of America from 179,954 in 1965 to 55,944 in 2011. The "doctrinal assessment," of course cannot mention this as the conciliar revolutionaries within the Vatican, starting with Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict stress that their false church is experiencing a "qualitative renewal" (see an early article on this site, written in my "resist but recognize" days, that deal with the then "Cardinal" Ratzinger's assertion in this regard, By the Numbers and by God's Book: Cardinal Ratzinger is Just Dead Wrong).
William Levada could not admit last year the Leadership Conference of Women Religious is merely reflecting a loss of the Catholic Faith that has resulted from the conciliar church's unremitting warfare against the Sacred Deposit of Faith and its implementation of a liturgical revolution that was designed of its nature to overthrow Catholic Tradition.
William Levada could not admit last year that the problems within the Leadership Conference on Women Religious are the direct result of the abandonment of traditional habits for women religious and in the wholesale change in the very structure of religious life that occurred in the wake of the "Second" Vatican Council that drove some women religious to have nervous breakdowns and many others to leave their communities altogether.
Fifth, the "doctrinal assessment" relied on the un-Catholic "Catechism of the Catholic Church" as the foundation of doctrinal orthodoxy, which is truly laughable (see Piracy, Conciliar Style, which contains an appendix with the contents of a review of this "catechism" found on a Society of Saint Pius X website). Remember, it was this "catechism" that was the basis for the "doctrinal discussions" that took place between officials of the conciliar church, working under Levada's direction, and the representatives of the Society of Saint Pius X that are about to result in a "happy reconciliation" within a relatively short period of time (see Just About To Complete A Long March Into Oblivion).
Sixth, the mention in the doctrinal assessment of the well-known fact that the "social justice" agenda of the LCWC ignores the surgical dismemberment of children in their mothers' wombs and efforts to kill the life of the elderly and the infirmed under cover of the civil law makes it appear while supporting outright perverse "lifestyles" that contravene the Sixth and Ninth Commandment is hardly earthshaking. The appendix below will relate a story, told previously on this site, of my experience as a speaker at the "First Annual Brooklyn Catholic Charities Congress" on Saturday, May 7, 1983. I am still waiting for a return invitation twenty-nine years later.
While the concerns listed in the "doctrinal assessment" are indeed serious and legitimate when considered on an isolated basis, it must be remembered that it is impossible to use the apostasies, blasphemies, sacrileges and errors of conciliarism as the foundation of any kind of "unity."
How is it possible for compel the LCWC to adhere to the strictures of the conciliar Vatican when the false pontiffs and their associates, men such as Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and William "Cardinal" Levada, have made warfare against the very nature of dogmatic truth, thus unwittingly making their own pronouncements as "historically conditioned" and "time bound" by the dogmatic decrees issued by the Fathers of Holy Mother Church's twenty legitimate councils and the encyclical letters issued by our true popes? It is not. (Glad to have answered that question for you.)
Well, it appears as though the concerns of the LCWC over any efforts over changing its ways is just much past history. The pleadings of many Franciscan friars in the United States of America did not fall on deaf ears. Jorge Mario Bergoglio was paying attention in Buenos Aires, Argentina, to these pleadings:
Leaders from the seven Franciscan provinces in the U.S. publicly backed a group of American nuns on Thursday, calling a Vatican crackdown on the women "excessive."
The Franciscan friars are believed to be the first Catholic religious order to voice support for the Leadership Conference of Women Religious since the Vatican announced a full-scale makeover of the group in April.
Vatican said the LCWR, which represents most of the nation's 57,000
nuns, does not adequately advocate against gay marriage, abortion and
The Vatican's "doctrinal
assessment" also faulted the sisters for sponsoring conferences that
featured "a prevalence of certain radical feminist themes incompatible
with the Catholic faith."
Noting that many
members of LCWR belong to female Franciscan orders, the friars pledged
solidarity with the sisters and called the Vatican assessment
"excessive, given the evidence raised."
sisters have been wrestling with complex contemporary issues, the
Franciscans said, and those deliberations should not be equated with
disobedience to Catholic doctrine.
efforts of LCWR to facilitate honest and faithful dialogue on critical
issues of our times must not result in a level of ecclesial oversight
that could, in effect, quash all further discernment," the Franciscans
Catholics since the Middle Ages have disagreed about how to apply church doctrine to public policy, the
friars argued, and seldom were those disputes deemed "equivalent to
questioning the authority of the Church's magisterium."
church observers suspect the Vatican crackdown was at least partially a
response to prominent Catholic sisters' support for President Obama's health care overhaul, despite bishops' objections.
than excessive oversight of LCWR, perhaps a better service to the
people of God might be a renewed effort to articulate the nuances of our
complex moral tradition," the friars said.
The LCWR itself has called the Vatican's assessment "unsubstantiated" and a source of "scandal and pain." (Franciscan friars back American nuns in Vatican spat.)
Did "Father" Jose Rodriguez Carballo take any action any the provincials who issued this statement? Not whatsoever. This is because the Orders of Friars Minor have l been a den of feminism, environmentalism, perversity and "Eastern spirituality" within a decade of the onset of the conciliar revolution. It is thus only logical that Bergoglio/Francis should look to his fellow layman, Jose Rodriguez Carballo, to effect "reconciliation" with the American Leadership Conference of Women Religious as Carballo heads an order that is deep in the throes of every doctrinal, Biblical, spiritual, pastoral, liturgical and moral revolution imaginable.
Indeed, it was back in the 1980s that I noticed the posters at Saint Francis of Assisi Church in the Borough of Manhattan in the City of New York, New York, for such things as courses in "Eastern spirituality," including "zen," and for lectures on "feminism" and "ecology." The parish was very "gay friendly," becoming even more so by the early-1990s. This was not atypical for Franciscan communities--or for most other older communities of men and women religious opened their doors to the conciliar revolution.
Here is one what Franciscan friar based in Canada wrote two years ago now to say that he was sick of all of the news about clergy abuse cases and efforts to tie this abuse to the conciliar revolution:
The Church has come a long way and needs to continue the path that was proposed in the Canadian Bishops’ From Pain to Hope.
This is especially true regarding the formation of priests. Again my
fear is that rather than help men become both holy and whole, faithful
to the Church and to themselves, there will be once more an era of
repression in the area of affectivity, sexuality, intimacy and healthy
interpersonal relationships. The other area that is critical is the
discussion of the exercise of power in the Church. Again, seminaries,
in an effort to rightly promote and focus on priestly identity, seem to
be doing a less than stellar job of helping young priests see themselves
as members of the People of God and collaborators with the laity.
The encouragement of the fetish attachment to 2 inch pontifical roman
collars and the lace of the Tridentine Liturgy does little to form
mature men able to minister with the men and women of our Church. It
replaces true spirituality with piety and external observance of
rubrics. The priest of today needs to be a person whose heart, mind,
spirit and body is given to the Lord. You can’t give what you don’t
know, own and love. I hope some of our young Franciscan Friars in
formation and seminarians look closely to their families, friends and
parishioners. It is in true relationships that they can learn about life
and discover much about themselves. It is also in friendship with the
down-to-earth, pastoral and faithful priests around them that they can
learn how to be real. To the young priests and seminarians of Toronto, I
would say: look closely to your archbishop. Look at his clothes, his
shoes, his way of moving about among people. Toronto is blessed with a
shepherd who walks the walk. Focus on being real. (
I know of one Franciscan priest who complained about the homosexuality rife within his friary. He found his few possessions packed in a suitcase on the sidewalk in front of the friary after a few errands one day, taking this to mean that he was being thrown out of his province. The priest took refuge in a "conservative" parish in the conciliar structures that also featured a Sunday "indult" Mass, which was offered at least twice a month, if not more, by a truly ordained priest. The man had been put out on the streets for simply complaining about moral turpitude within his religious house. Franciscan communities have shielded clerical abusers for a long time (see Franciscan Archive, Franciscan clergy-abuse case records released, Friar who once served Pittsburgh diocese accused of abuse in NH). This has also been a problem in the Capuchin Franciscan houses and the Franciscans of the Third Order Regular. Such is life in the doctrinally, liturgically and morally corrupt house that is the counterfeit church of conciliarism, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio has no intention whatsoever of cleaning that house.
How is it possible to believe that the "pope" who some believe will consecrate Russia to Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart wants to be discipline wayward women religious for their support of "alternative life styles" when Bergoglio/Francis himself believed that "civil union" status for homosexual and lesbian "couples" was preferable to "gay marriage" in Argentina even though Pope Pius XI condemned all notion of such unions for men and women living together outside of a valid marriage:
51. Armed with these principles, some men go so far as to concoct new species
of unions, suited, as they say, to the present temper of men and the times,
which various new forms of matrimony they presume to label "temporary,"
"experimental," and "companionate." These offer all the indulgence of matrimony
and its rights without, however, the indissoluble bond, and without offspring,
unless later the parties alter their cohabitation into a matrimony in the full
sense of the law.
52. Indeed there are some who desire and insist that these practices be
legitimatized by the law or, at least, excused by their general acceptance among
the people. They do not seem even to suspect that these proposals partake of
nothing of the modern "culture" in which they glory so much, but are simply
hateful abominations which beyond all question reduce our truly cultured nations
to the barbarous standards of savage peoples. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis believes in every "progressive" movement imaginable, including feminism. He has made clear on a number of occasions that he believes women should play a "greater role" in his false church even though they have already invaded the sanctuary, taken over effective control of chancery offices, parishes, universities and "religious education" "update" programs. Our Lady's perfect fiat to the will of God the Father at the Annunciation? No, women today need to be "empowered." They have no need to submit an all-male hierarchy that has repressed and persecuted them, and they have a friend in Francis the Feminist, Francis the Humble, Francis the Jansenist, Francis the Talking Apostate.
Blessed Anna Maria Taigi, to whom we are very devoted in the Droleskey household, prophesied in the Nineteenth Century that Saints Peter and Paul would choose a cardinal to be pope after a time of apostasy. How will this happen? I don't know. I pray for a miracle of this sort every day. I am a simpleton. It would be wonderful if such an unmerited relief from the A-P-O-S-T-A-S-Y that has held sway now for five decades takes place. I keep praying for this miracle. We must remain on our knees in fervent prayer.
As we await the miracle of the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary that will usher in a period of peace and restore Holy Mother Church, we must cleave to the Catholic Church, not to the counterfeit church of conciliarism, as we attempt to plant the seeds for the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary as we seek to live more and more penitentially, making reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our own many sins and for those of the whole word., praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits. No matter the problems in the Catholic catacombs, and they are problems aplenty, one can never lose heart and simply quit the practice of the Faith. We must persevere until the end, and none of us knows when our end is going to occur, do we?
It is thus time to plant the seeds to help more and more Catholics to see the true situation of the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal and to flee from the false conciliar church and its spiritual robber barons once and for all.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saints Soter and Caius, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints
The First Annual Brooklyn Catholic Charities Congress, May 7, 1983
Among the large number of people who were once
friends of mine but who have, within the Providence of God, of course,
withdrawn their friendship over the years, is the man who was
responsible in the summer of 1972 for directing me to pursue my
doctorate in political science. The professor, who was once a very close
friend and to whom I will always be grateful for his excellence as a
classroom instructor and for the years of friendship that he saw fit to
give, said, "You seem to have a flair for college teaching. Why don't
you consider getting a Master's degree and a law degree at the same
time. Lawyers are a dime a dozen. There are many law school graduates
today selling encyclopedias door-to-door." Well, I wound I taking his
advice entirely, eschewing admissions to several law schools, including
Saint John's, Baylor and Notre Dame, to pursue the doctorate.
It was at the recommendation of this professor in
1983, by then a colleague of mine, that I replaced him as a speaker at
something called the "First Annual Brooklyn Catholic Charities Congress"
on Saturday, May 7, 1983. Among the other speakers were none other than
the conciliar "bishop" of Albany, Howard Hubbard, who spoke on the
necessity of "economic justice." It was a pure exercise in naturalism of
the false opposite of the "left" from beginning to end. Another speaker
was a Sister Amada Miller of the Archdiocese of Detroit, the home of
the insidious revolutionary cell named "Call to Action" that was the
brainchild of the Modernist named John Cardinal Dearden, who said that
poor people needed to be given more material goods to make them happy.
(No, I am not making this up! I was there. I heard this with my own
thirty-one and one-half year-old ears.)
I began my own address by noting that the singularly
most important issue of genuine social
justice, to which the "congress" was supposedly dedicated, namely,
restoring legal protection to all preborn children without any
exception whatsoever, was not on their agenda. "I find this very
curious," I told those in the audience. Two elderly Sisters,
dressed in their traditional habits, applauded furiously. Everyone else
in the audience sat on their hands, including an auxiliary "bishop" of
the Diocese of Brooklyn, Joseph Sullivan, whose bald head turned beat
red as I noted and denounced the meeting's naturalistic, liberal agenda.
(Sullivan was a confidante and supporter of former United States
Representative Geraldine Ferraro Zaccaro and former Governor of the
State of New York Mario Matthew Cuomo.)
I was not invited back to speak at the "Second Annual
Brooklyn Catholic Charities" Congress in 1984. Was it something that I