Stellar article from John Vennari, that I got from Angelqueen. It is long, but well worth your time.
The alleged fact is described in this way:
“Father David told us that because Tony [Palmer] was not a Roman Catholic he had to ask his bishop’s permission to celebrate the requiem and though Tony’s wife and children are Roman Catholics, permission still had to be given for the requiem. The bishop agreed but said that Tony could not be buried as a bishop as he was not a Roman Catholic bishop. However, Pope Francis said he should and could be buried as a bishop, and so that put an end to that little bit of ecclesiastical nonsense
I do not know whether this is true, and I think the Vatican should make a statement on this. I suspect there is more to it, because I cannot believe Francis is as stupid as the man reports. Albeit… one wonders. If Francis has made himself culpable of such a heretical behaviour for the sake of his buddy, this truly tells you everything you need to know about his worth as a Pope. It would also mean that when he said “brother bishop” he really meant it. Heresy pure and simple.
The article goes on to discuss the particular view of the likes of Francis and the late non-bishop Palmer concerning “unity”. The operative word here is “convergence”. Convergence is, mind, not conversion. Every talk of “convergence” implies that there’s something wrong in the Church qua Church, and a new “something” will one day be created that is a fusion of Catholicism and Protestantism. To talk, or even think, in this way is to deny Christ’s Church, full stop.
No one has, in this perspective, to “convert” to anything, but rather they march in joyous heretical concord toward the creation of some vague and undetermined new entity; which, whatever it is, cannot be the Church of which Francis has said that he believes everything she believes and professes everything she professes. Quoting Vennari again: “Or as Francis says, “no one is coming home,” but we “meet in the middle” “.
Vennari says it very fittingly:
The new ecumenism that emanated from Vatican II, and that is fostered by Pope Francis, is a head-on-collision with the Catholic doctrine and practice of the past.  The Catholic Faith is not the personal plaything of the Pope that he can remold at will to accommodate the ecumenical spirit born of Protestantism. He is bound to teach the consistent doctrine of the centuries without change. To do otherwise is to be unfaithful, irresponsible and unpastoral.
I would add: heretical. I have written often on this blog that Francis works against Catholicism. He works against Catholicism because his mindframe is hostile to Catholicism. I am actually persuaded that he hates it, which is why he spends as much time as he can among Proddies and Heathens, disparages the Vatican as a place rich in leprosy, and freely insults all those who, with their pious behaviour and solid Catholic faith, remind him of Her Truth and Her beauty.
Please follow the link and enjoy the rest of this excellent article. It is consoling to know that the current madness meets such well-argued and articulated resistance.
The sad news reached me yesterday via “Harvesting the Fruits” that Tony Palmer, the wannabe bishop friend of the Pope, has died in a motorbike accident during the weekend. Palmer is the one who was at lunch with Francis when the man, who if you ask me was rather tipsy, had the idea of making the infamous “brother bishop” video.
Just two reflections here, because time is a tyrant.
1. Pope Francis does not seem to bring much luck. He calls the heathen to pray for peace in the Vatican gardens, and the two camps opposing each other in Palestine start massacring each other (actually, Hamas only tries; but that’s par with how stupid they are) within just a few weeks. He calls a perfectly not ordained proddie “brother bishop” and the latter dies in a motorbike accident. We must not be superstitious, but it does not seem to me that God is exactly smiling on this Pope’s endeavours.
2. Poor Palmer might have saved his soul. We cannot know for certain that he is damned. He might have repented. He might have been seriously thinking of conversion in the weeks preceding the accident. Perhaps he had, just before the accident, resolved to convert. Perhaps he had realised the errors of his ways. We do not know the state of his soul when he died, and we can only hope and pray (yes, we pray for deceased Proddies; and wish them all the best with all our hearts) that he saved his soul in the end. Nothing is impossible to God, and I have always been taught that just before death the effort of Heaven is strongest. Despair is not the answer. We pray for all the deceased because we know this massive effort did take place.
What we also know, though, is that the man was a public heretic, and that it seems very strange to start invoking “invincible ignorance” for a man who must have had a rather precise knowledge of what the teaching of the Church is, and what extra ecclesiam nulla salus means. A man, also, who was in a way “nearer” to the Church than most Protestants, and there was nothing in him of that “whore of Babylon”-mentality which might lead one to think invincible ignorance was possibly at play. We must, therefore, drily acknowledge that this possibility of salvation is linked not to his public activity – which, the Church says, would clearly suffice to damn him, whatever Francis may think in each of his various stages of sobriety – but to a combination of circumstances in his internal forum: either the clearly improbable invincible ignorance, or an internal motus of the soul toward the Church before he died. This may appear difficult to us but, as already said, for the Lord nothing is impossible.
Does this mean that we must now run to proclaim that Mr (Mister; Herr; Monsieur; Signor) Palmer is probably saved, or even (heavens!) in Paradise, because he was “such a good chap”, and “a friend of Pope Francis”?
Of course not. This would be heretical. The thinking that
“Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ”
is condemned in the syllabus of errors, emphatically meaning that good hope is not to be entertained. Why? Because Mr (Mister; Herr; Monsieur; Signor) Palmer was, at the moment of death, outwardly not in the true Church of Christ. So it is, again very drily said, obviously more probable that he is in hell than in purgatory; which is what happens if one dies a Protestant (how some people think invincible ignorance or repentance may send a heretic straight to heaven is beyond me…).
That’s how it is. That’s how important it is to belong to the Only Church. That’s how vital it is that we – with due prudence, but without undue cowardice – make this very simple fact known to the people we love, to those in our circle of family and acquaintance who are, objectively speaking, in clear danger of damnation.
How, then, completely ignoring the issue will contribute to the salvation of one, like Francis, who seems to do his best to positively dissuade people from conversion, I leave to your own reflection.