Sandro Magister has done some heavy journalistic lifting with this analysis of Amoris Laetitia and its Archbishop of Kissing's ghostwriter.
When you read at the link, it will turn your stomach when you realise how much heretical nonsense this priest was spouting in Argentina and how it came to be enshrined in Amoris Laetitia, paragraph by paragraph. Note also how this Fernandez was ostracised from the university there, only to be resurrected by Pope Bergoglio who then isolated those who found Fernandez to have expressed a false theology and situational ethics.
Let us again call for Amoris Laetitia do be denounced.
Friends, we are getting to them. We are getting to this Pope, to those around him and to those who speak for him. The proof is there that they cannot take the pressure because we are on to them and their diabolical plan.
One Pope? Two Popes? No Pope?
No wonder!
by Sandro Magister
![]()
ROME, May 25, 2016 – They are the key paragraphs of the post-synodal exhortation “Amoris Laetitia.” And they are also the most intentionally ambiguous, as proven by the multiple and contrasting interpretations and practical applications that they immediately received.
They are the paragraphs of chapter eight that in point of fact give the go-ahead for communion for the divorced and remarried.
That this is where Pope Francis would like to arrive is by now evident to all. And besides, he was already doing it when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires.
But now it is being discovered that some key formulations of “Amoris Laetitia” also have an Argentine prehistory, based as they are on a pair of articles from 2005 and 2006 by Víctor Manuel Fernández, already back then and even more today a thinker of reference for Pope Francis and the ghostwriter of his major texts.
Further below some passages of “Amoris Laetitia” are compared with selections from those two articles by Fernández. The resemblance between the two is very strong.
But first it is helpful to get the broad picture.
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351303?eng=y
When you read at the link, it will turn your stomach when you realise how much heretical nonsense this priest was spouting in Argentina and how it came to be enshrined in Amoris Laetitia, paragraph by paragraph. Note also how this Fernandez was ostracised from the university there, only to be resurrected by Pope Bergoglio who then isolated those who found Fernandez to have expressed a false theology and situational ethics.
Let us again call for Amoris Laetitia do be denounced.
Friends, we are getting to them. We are getting to this Pope, to those around him and to those who speak for him. The proof is there that they cannot take the pressure because we are on to them and their diabolical plan.
One Pope? Two Popes? No Pope?
No wonder!
“Amoris Laetitia” Has a Ghostwriter. His Name Is Víctor Manuel Fernández
Startling resemblances between the key passages of the exhortation by Pope Francis and two texts from ten years ago by his main adviser. A double synod for a solution that had already been writtenby Sandro Magister
ROME, May 25, 2016 – They are the key paragraphs of the post-synodal exhortation “Amoris Laetitia.” And they are also the most intentionally ambiguous, as proven by the multiple and contrasting interpretations and practical applications that they immediately received.
They are the paragraphs of chapter eight that in point of fact give the go-ahead for communion for the divorced and remarried.
That this is where Pope Francis would like to arrive is by now evident to all. And besides, he was already doing it when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires.
But now it is being discovered that some key formulations of “Amoris Laetitia” also have an Argentine prehistory, based as they are on a pair of articles from 2005 and 2006 by Víctor Manuel Fernández, already back then and even more today a thinker of reference for Pope Francis and the ghostwriter of his major texts.
Further below some passages of “Amoris Laetitia” are compared with selections from those two articles by Fernández. The resemblance between the two is very strong.
But first it is helpful to get the broad picture.
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1351303?eng=y