Friday, July 7, 2017

French Bishop Consecrates Priest With Pagan Rites -- "Worst Bishop in France"

(Paris) Bishop François Fonlupt has been the diocesan bishop of the French diocese of Rodez since 2011. The Catholic columnist, Francisco Fernandez de la Cigoña, calls him the "perhaps worst bishop in France." The occasion for the indignation is a priestly consecration, which Bishop Fonlupt offered at the Cathedral of Rodez last June 25th.


Msgr. Fonlupt, 62 years old, was consecrated by Pope Benedict XVI. as diocesan bishop. "His appointment seemed to me a misfortune. This has been confirmed," says Fernandez de la Cigoña. What is serious is that "the popes do not examine it beforehand." At least, as far as France is concerned, "the appointments of Pope Francis do not seem worse to me than those of his predecessor."


"Why do not the popes check beforehand?"


On the Pontifical appointment policy for France, Fernandez de la Cigoña says: "Some say that Benedict, as far as the bad appointments are concerned, did not know who he was, but Francis does. I can not say whether the latter is true, but I am convinced that Benedict was not informed."



Msgr. François Fonlupt


Fernandez de la Cigoña also writes clearly: "Fonlupt was bad before his appointment, was bad at the time of his appointment and has been bad since his appointment. He is probably the worst bishop in France. "


The reason for the columnist's outrage, whose grandfather, because Catholic, was murdered by members of the Popular Front (Communists, Socialists, Anarchists, Radical Legionaries) is a video of a priestly ordination given by Bishop Fonlupt a few days ago. What happened on 25 June in the Cathedral of Radez was "absolutely painful." Bishop Fonlupt consecrated a Tamil deacon to the priesthood.


Bishop gives priest consecration with the "third eye"



Ritual dancers in the altar room


The "inculturation" was pushed to the summit in the consecration. Only the miter of the bishop can be seen as a Christian symbol. For the rest it is unclear whether it is Indian folklore or forms of syncretism. "I do not know where these ritual forms come from, whether they belong to the Brahman caste, which is hardly conceivable for Tamils, whether they are used for the worship of Vishnu or Kali. It seems to me, however, that they have nothing to do with the confection of the sacrament of Holy Orders in a French church." This was especially true of the "third eye," the "Bindi," a religious symbol of Tantric Hinduism, which the bishop wore on his forehead during the liturgy. Hinduism maintains the place as a chakra, an "energy center" and the seat of a "secret knowledge". In the West, the "third eye" is mainly concerned with esotericism. But Christianity is not a secret doctrine.


The same applies to the execution of the offertory and ritual Hindu dances, which were performed in the sanctuary. "The Holy Liturgy of the Church has lost nothing to Hinduism."


Communion for remarried divorced


Bishop Fonlupt is already engaging the "new practice" of offering the Holy Communion to married divorced people. When he was still active as a parish priests in Clermont-Ferrand, he denied the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. All this did not prevent the Apostolic Nuncio for France, Archbishop Luigi Ventura from proposing Fonlupt to the Vatican as a suitable candidate for the Bishop's seat of Rodez. Such a recommendation could scarcely be imagined without a corresponding reference by a French Archbishop to the Cardinal. Pope Benedict XVI had only received a certificate of appointment, submitted for signature.


François Fonlupt, born in 1954, was ordained priest for the Diocese of Clermont in 1979. The diocese of Rodez, to which he has been responsible since 2011, dates back to the 5th century. With 280,000 inhabitants, Catholics have a share of 97 percent of the population. The number of practicing Catholics, however, is very low. If the diocese still had 638 parishes in 1980, it is now only 36. The number of priests shrank in the same period from 615 to 160. Tendency: rapidly falling. In 1950, for every priest there were 300 Catholics, there are today 1,700. The figures, however, must not obscure the fact that the priestly vocations depend not on the number of Catholics on paper, but on the existence of practicing Catholics who take their faith seriously and ask for priestly services from God.

Video of Pagan Ritual

Text: Giuseppe Nardi

Bild: Riposte catholique/Youtube (Screenshots)

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

AMDG

47 comments:

  1. Heretical clown of the conciliar sort.

    ReplyDelete
  2. He's simply imitating "St." John Paul II; cf. this image.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is the ordination valid? If so how? If not, why not?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm still left wondering how they get ordained in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At least in this diocese.

      Delete
    2. Notice that it was a Tamil priest. I strongly suspect that Rodez doesn't draw any native priestly vocations any longer.

      But then, it's not like they're drawing any laity into the churches, either.

      Delete
  5. You have to remember that the pontiffs depend on their apostolic nuncio for evaluations and nominations. That is why Francis has been so careful in his selections of nuncios. Here in the U.S., it is Christophe Pierre who is Haitian, I believe. He appears to be responsible for Cupich, Tobin, and McElroy. There is a picture of them clustered together at a bishops' conference.---You also have to remember that bishops are no longer consecrated. This was a move to take away the supernatural link. They are now merely ordained and well along in the effort to do away with "clericalism" and to equate the clerical and lay states.----Finally, the "third eye" may have another cruder meaning. There is a band named "One Eye Blind". This is potentially a sexual innuendo for male genitalia. Looking at this pumpkin in a photograph only reinforces the imagery.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good and useful comment. Thank you!

      Delete
    2. Pierre has only been nuncio since April of 2016. Cupich and McElroy were appointed before that.

      Delete
    3. A bit of clarification is needed on Christophe Pierre. He was born in France. JPII appointed him as nuncio to Haiti. Later, he was moved to Uganda. Benedict transferred him to Mexico in 2007.---Francis visited Mexico and criticized the Mexican bishops. The Mexican media blamed Pierre and he was then transferred to the U.S. Pierre is a "yes man" and Francis saw no problem with that.---The target was Carlo Maria Vigano who had stirred trouble in the Vatican. Francis transferred him to the U.S. and waited for an appropriate replacement. That was seen in Pierre.---I had received a nice letter of response from Pietro Sambi who was previous to Vigano. This was a settled time when JPII instilled order and his men preached the Gospel. What is going on now can only be called the "great destruction" predicted by Francis of Assisi.

      Delete
  6. Abomination has well and truly entered the Sanctuary.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So first we have the French bishops saluting Simone Veil (Vile), the woman who was instrumental in the legalisation of abortion in France in 1975. And now this episcopal exhibitionism comes to light
    When St. Joan of Arc was asked by a prosecuting bishop at her trial,"Do you believe in God?" she fired back,"Better than you do!" Well, I doubt if she could even bear to look at this current crop of bishops, nevermind actually speak to them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. There is a process to appoint a Bishop Cf. How Bishops Are Appointed - http://www.usccb.org/about/leadership/appointing-bishops.cfm
    ***
    It is clear the enemy has infiltrated the Church all the way up to the top. I would cut Popes St. John Paul II and BXVI some slack. After all Monsignor Luigi Capozzi (cf. recent news on Vatican gay orgy), secretary to Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio has been put forward by the latter to Pope Francis as a candidate to the Episcopate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like to call him Cardinal Cocopuffs.

      Seattle kim

      Delete
    2. The overwhelming majority of bishops are not exactly Saint Athanasius.

      Delete
  9. The red dot on this clown's forehead, which some call "the third eye", is actually known as a Bindi (in Hindu belief, it's a sacred symbol of the cosmos. AND, which makes this fake bishop doubly a fool, is that this tradition of wearing the Bindi is common only in WOMEN...in India, parts of Sri Lanka, Nepal....and wherever there are Hindu minorities living. HAHAHAHA! This patronizing attempt at inculturation, of adopting the traditions of other-usually non-Christian groups-only to appear as if one is respecting their culture is pathetic if one doesn't really understand what's behind it. The Bindi is for women! It is never worn by laymen, and only very,very rarely worn by Hindu sadhus(holy men/hermits/monks)....and even then, it takes on a different appearance (larger, etc.)
    I'm half Indian (as my name implies ;) so I know the tradition, even though the Indian part of my family have been solidly traditional Catholics for close to 125 years. In India we are (technically speaking), of the Brahmin caste (highest caste in Hindu India), and our family even after converting to Roman Catholicism (some in India over the last 50 years have drifted over to Syrian/Greek Orthodoxy in India), are considered of the wealthy/noble class. Among our relatives was the late Cardinal Valerian Gracias who was created a cardinal by the late, great Pope Pius XII.
    So this "bishop" in his layclothes is just a clown, a heretic. The adoption of the Hindu temple dancers for the ordination was plain wrong....even if John Paul II did it. But the wearing of the Bindi is laughable and pathetic. It's for women. And I would not be surprised that if he went about with that on his forehead in India, the men would think he was a queer. Which possibly/probably he is anyway.
    Damian Malliapalli


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Damian,

      Thank you for the interesting post. Ask +Cardinal Gracias to pray for his confreres on earth. I'm sure he'll listen to you.

      M

      Delete
  10. ...He's simply imitating "St." John Paul II; cf. this image.....

    Only those who love the truth, and take the ax to the root, can see as such.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Before you blame others, you must study other cultures and traditions. Do not show your ignorance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We've already studied that false religion. Saint Francis Xavier addressed it.

      Delete
  12. when they bring in the ritualistic dancers, you may want to GTFO pronto!. I have to thank the weirdo priest who finally sent me full time to the TLM. I had been still going to the Novus ordo alternatively with the TLM on different weekends. Finally this priest has Filipino dancers in the middle of the mass bring up the gifts or whatever they did. I didn't even stay for that mass to recceived Holy Communion, i GTFO and never went back. Nothing wrong with Filipino dancing, it's a lovely expression of their culture, just not in Church

    ReplyDelete
  13. He looks a bit light-in-the-loafers to me.

    ReplyDelete
  14. And why the **** is this 'bishop' wearing a secular business suit and tie? If not the cassock, then not even a clerical shirt and jacket? Can this creep do anything right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's the most liberal,the most radical who repudiate the clerical dress of any type and wear layclothes. Fortunatly today, they are a very aged group. This idiot represents the tail end of the wave of rejection of Catholic tradition, from disciplinary,liturgical, and clerical dress that followed Vatican II.
      All the Orders of nuns that discared the habit in favor of layclothes now have a median age of th late 70's and have had no vocations to speak of for 50 years.
      Example. If one Order of liberal priests or sisters has 1,000+ members around the world, and averages 50-60 deaths a year of their members, they take in if they are lucky, 1-2 new members-so they have a net loss of 48+. That's just for deaths. Does'nt include departures which nowadays are about 10-20 per year. Right after Vatican II, some big Orders lost 150-250 a year by departures alone. The Jesuits and Salesians are still both averaging -300 members per year. The Salesian decline fluctuates, but the Jesuit decline is accelerating since Francis, not leveling off. Good riddance!
      So this guy represents the tail end of the Vatican II era. UNfortunatly, there's still enough in the mid to late 60's to be trouble for another 10 years.
      Damian Malliapalli

      Delete
  15. I remember reading this vocational evaluation of a current priest in good standing with the Benedictines from when he was a novice, and the novice master recommended against him becoming a priest and this man's entire criticism hinged upon his effeminacy, which resulted in a host of strange and anti-social behaviors. Never the less, this priest persisted and eventually got accepted in the monastery, despite the unequivocal objections of the novice master. This priest went on to become an equally determined sexual predator. It's hard for me not to see this and the way it's developed in the Church, as something that wasn't someone intentional. It just can't be explained by fallible human nature in itself.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This is why the pre-June 1968 rite of Holy Orders are so important.
    The very words of those rites (pre-June 1968) confirm the Bishops/priests intention.
    It also prevents these types of disastrous sacrilege mentioned in the article.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, if one takes time to study the pre-1968 ritual, you are so right: besides the 5 minor orders prior to priestly ordination, priests were specifically ordained to hear confessions---that part, stripped in the 'new rite.' And as you say, post 1968, bishops were no longer consecrated, but "ordained"---again? Ordination, having an indelible mark, is not possible to 'repeat'. And then there is the changing of the wording of the specific prayer over the bishop-candidate ('Send that governing spirit..'etc) ---which wording Pius XII in Sacramentum Ordinis (1947) decreed were specific words required for validity of episcopal consecration, words that could not be changed.

      But this clown clearly is not a valid bishop, regardless of the high-brow canonical arguments, and his sacraments, like him, are null and void.

      Delete
    2. In the Anaphora of Addai and Mali, perhaps the oldest Eucharistic prayer in the history of the Church does not have the words of institution and yet is accepted as a valid form of the Mass/Holy Liturgy.
      The Church is greater than the Sacraments that flowed from its life in Christ. The Church then has the power to change the way its Sacraments are worded and shaped.

      Delete
    3. "Perhaps the oldest Eucharistic prayer in the history of the Church"
      Prove it.

      Delete
    4. An extract from the Traditionalist website:
      The Vatican text states:

      The principal issue for the Catholic Church agreeing to this request, is related to the question of the validity of the Eucharist celebrated with the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, one of the three anaphoras traditionally used by the Assyrian Church of the East. The Anaphora of Addai and Mari is notable because, from time immemorial, it has been used without a recitation of the Institution Narrative.

      Read the rest at: http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=34&catname=15


      Delete
    5. Great where is stayed unequivocally that its the oldest canon in church history?
      I'm not saying you're wrong and not saying your citation is wrong.

      Delete
    6. I said ‘perhaps’ and here is a little reference just to get you started on your own research:
      http://liturgy.co.nz/anaphora-of-adai-and-mari

      Delete
  17. I don't want to take away from your point, but many of the truly evil ones, like Daneels, Weakland, Mahony, Suenens, just to name a few, were ordained in that Rite.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure I understand---Mahony was 'consecrated' in the new episcopal rite in 1975, Weakland in 1977, Danneels in 1977---only Suenens was consecrated in the 'old'rite, in 1945.

      Delete
    2. My original point was the Pre-June 1968 rites prevent this type of sacrilege.
      The very words & surrounding ceremonies prevent any type of heresy or invalidity from occurring.

      Delete
    3. Daniels, Weakland and Mahoney are probably not real bishops and any priests they have ordained are probably not real priests. You have to have a true bishop for a valid ordination.
      Archbishop LeFebvre believed the new ordination rite to be doubtful and the new bishop consecration rite to be definitely invalid. The modern SSPX has conveniently forgotten this.

      That factor alone is a good explanation for why things are so bad in the conciliar church.

      Seattle kim

      Delete
  18. Perhaps you are referring only to priestly ordination for Danneels,etc., et al. But here and there, we have, unfortunately, always had priests who disgraced their sacramental orders. Bishops and cardinals, though it occurred, we're a rarity.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Johnathan, a seminarianJuly 11, 2017 at 12:07 PM

    The terms consecration or ordination anymore, speak mostly to the debate between canonists and liturgists, whether a priest is ordained or consecrated to the episcopacy. Wikipedia's article on consecration under Christianity actually does a pretty decent introduction to this ambiguity. They don't really clear it up but explain how and where in the documents the terms are used (spoiler alert: at this point, they're generally pretty interchangeable.)
    Hope that helps that!
    Sad to see what this man has done, I can't even tell what the singers are chanting at the doxology, I feel so bad for the newly (hopefully validly, for his sake and that of the souls he is appointed to shepherd) ordained priest. We need to pray for this Bishop's soul, those who have been in his care, and those in his care now.

    ReplyDelete
  21. If I were these French "priests", I'd track down Bp.Williamson or Bp.Ramolla asap & receive conditional ordination in all 7 steps of ordination.

    ReplyDelete
  22. SSPX no longer conditionally re-ordaines Novus Ordo priests. That's why a lot of SSPX members now go to independent sede or SSPX resistance chapels. It was my main reason for choosing an independent chapel over the SSPX.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't know if its true but, I've read the resistance Bishops will conditionally re-ordain upon request.(if you join their order)

      Delete
  23. This may not mean what the blogger and the commenters assume it means. In the Malabar Rites controversy which lasted from the 16th to the early 18th centuries, the Papacy granted that there were various Indian customs that could have both a religious and a secular meaning, and also customs with a religious bearing that could be adapted to Christianity. A major proponent and practitioner of this was the great Jesuit missionary Roberto de Nobili, who took on many of the accoutrements of a Hindu sannyasi (celibate ascetic), and allowed his converts to retain many of their customs, somethings requiring a Christianization of them. This was agitated and debated and thoroughly considered over many years. The practices criticized do not have one single meaning, and that a particular Hindu meaning, as the critics here assume. They sometimes have multiple meanings even withing Hinduism, which is arguably not one religion but many.

    However, I don't have much use for the liturgical dance.


    Allen W. Thrasher, Ph.D. (Sanskcit and Indian Studies, Harvard University)

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...