Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Vatican Sec State Parolin says he is “deeply pained” by the SSPX ordinations today. “It is a schismatic act” he does not know when or how the excommunications will take place. “Despite this serious wound I hope that we can find ways to resolve this problem”

Delia Gallagher

4,528 subscribers

46,568 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Education

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

EXCOMMUNICATING the SSPX: The Vatican Is Bluffing . . . Again Of course, it sounds scary, but it's not. This is a spitting contest over technicalities of Canon Law. It wasn't serious in 1988 (which is why Pope Benedict lifted the "excommunications" for the SSPX bishops in 2009), and it's not serious now. Want proof? Watch this video all about how the Vatican's “great big scary” decree of excommunication fell apart the first time around -- way back in 1991.

EXCOMMUNICATING the SSPX: The Vatican Is Bluffing . . . Again Of course, it sounds scary, but it's not. This is a spitting contest over technicalities of Canon Law. It wasn't serious in 1988 (which is why Pope Benedict lifted the "excommunications" for the SSPX bishops in 2009), and it's not serious now. Want proof? Watch this video all about how the Vatican's “great big scary” decree of excommunication fell apart the first time around -- way back in 1991.

Michael J. Matt

23,181 views • 2 months ago

I have worked consistently with this man for the last 15 years including in the Cabinet. Even Riggy G the other day confessed that Davies Chirchir is a very serious man. He does not play politics (He does not even know how to). When he says that from 31st October (51 days from today) you will drive from Nairobi to Rironi on a dual carriage way better believe him. He says what he means and he means what he says.

I have worked consistently with this man for the last 15 years including in the Cabinet. Even Riggy G the other day confessed that Davies Chirchir is a very serious man. He does not play politics (He does not even know how to). When he says that from 31st October (51 days from today) you will drive from Nairobi to Rironi on a dual carriage way better believe him. He says what he means and he means what he says.

Hon.Moses Kuria,HSC

409,044 views • 3 days ago

He says he is not black, and he does not know what that means. He says a black person who is articulate and sophisticated will not experience racism when encountered by the police.

He says he is not black, and he does not know what that means. He says a black person who is articulate and sophisticated will not experience racism when encountered by the police.

kevin blue

196,790 views • 10 months ago

🇺🇦‼️ Zelensky answered the question of whether Russia will attack NATO countries 💬 “He does not know how to end this war without a large-scale occupation or a major victory for his society. He does not understand how to do it. It is easier for him to find some smaller country. It will not matter to him whether this country is a member of NATO or not. He wants a quick victory. Be 100% sure that he will win, occupy or destroy all authorities. And it can be any country,” the President of Ukraine said in an interview with CNN.

🇺🇦‼️ Zelensky answered the question of whether Russia will attack NATO countries 💬 “He does not know how to end this war without a large-scale occupation or a major victory for his society. He does not understand how to do it. It is easier for him to find some smaller country. It will not matter to him whether this country is a member of NATO or not. He wants a quick victory. Be 100% sure that he will win, occupy or destroy all authorities. And it can be any country,” the President of Ukraine said in an interview with CNN.

MAKS 26 🇺🇦👀

111,460 views • 1 month ago

Kendrick Perkins says there is a problem with a lot of people out here that don’t take LaMelo Ball serious: “And I don’t know what’s the problem, I don’t know why people feel like this man is not a hooper or a competitor, I don’t know if it’s because he has the IG followers, he post on IG or he has the tattoos. But when this man steps between the lines, this man goes out there and gives people that work. I understand it may look like he’s having fun and he is, but at the same time he’s trying to bust your a** every time he gets between those lines”

Kendrick Perkins says there is a problem with a lot of people out here that don’t take LaMelo Ball serious: “And I don’t know what’s the problem, I don’t know why people feel like this man is not a hooper or a competitor, I don’t know if it’s because he has the IG followers, he post on IG or he has the tattoos. But when this man steps between the lines, this man goes out there and gives people that work. I understand it may look like he’s having fun and he is, but at the same time he’s trying to bust your a** every time he gets between those lines”

NBA Courtside

399,505 views • 2 months ago

The Society of Saint Pius X has gone through with its defiance of Pope Leo XIV, consecrating four new bishops at Écône without a papal mandate. Rome had warned that the move would constitute a schismatic act and trigger automatic excommunications under canon law, echoing Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s 1988 break with John Paul II. The Vatican has not yet issued its formal response, leaving open whether Rome will simply confirm the excommunications or take further action against the SSPX. Follow: AF Post

The Society of Saint Pius X has gone through with its defiance of Pope Leo XIV, consecrating four new bishops at Écône without a papal mandate. Rome had warned that the move would constitute a schismatic act and trigger automatic excommunications under canon law, echoing Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s 1988 break with John Paul II. The Vatican has not yet issued its formal response, leaving open whether Rome will simply confirm the excommunications or take further action against the SSPX. Follow: AF Post

AF Post

101,451 views • 2 months ago

Sen. Warnock: We know the SAVE Act will disenfranchise Americans. We have no evidence this is a problem that needs to be solved. Trump says this is his number one priority. Why is this the main thing he feels he must get done? I'll tell you why. It's because he knows that he has broken every promise he has made.

Sen. Warnock: We know the SAVE Act will disenfranchise Americans. We have no evidence this is a problem that needs to be solved. Trump says this is his number one priority. Why is this the main thing he feels he must get done? I'll tell you why. It's because he knows that he has broken every promise he has made.

Headquarters

27,016 views • 5 months ago

John Fetterman is in a suit today… so you know how serious this is. He says he regrets believing the lies Fauci pushed.

John Fetterman is in a suit today… so you know how serious this is. He says he regrets believing the lies Fauci pushed.

Tim Young

1,316,126 views • 1 month ago

Jeffrey Epstein made a phone call to his mom the night before he died in prison. Only problem? His mom died years before. We don’t know who he actually called, but the DOJ says he and this person talked about dental floss. The DOJ’s new report says Epstein’s suicide death is marred by a series of coincidences. How many coincidences does it take for it to not be a coincidence?

Jeffrey Epstein made a phone call to his mom the night before he died in prison. Only problem? His mom died years before. We don’t know who he actually called, but the DOJ says he and this person talked about dental floss. The DOJ’s new report says Epstein’s suicide death is marred by a series of coincidences. How many coincidences does it take for it to not be a coincidence?

Jesse Watters

3,490,861 views • 3 years ago

Kelly: This letter or anything that Hegseth says or does to me is in no way going to affect the way I do my job. His option is he can continue with this kind of bullshit or he can go take a hike. That's his options.

Kelly: This letter or anything that Hegseth says or does to me is in no way going to affect the way I do my job. His option is he can continue with this kind of bullshit or he can go take a hike. That's his options.

Acyn

61,412 views • 8 months ago

FOX NEWS: The president is threatening the Insurrection Act. How serious is that threat? Will that happen? KRISTI NOEM: I spoke to the president about it this morning. That certainly is within the president's constitutional authority to use that if he thinks he needs to

FOX NEWS: The president is threatening the Insurrection Act. How serious is that threat? Will that happen? KRISTI NOEM: I spoke to the president about it this morning. That certainly is within the president's constitutional authority to use that if he thinks he needs to

Aaron Rupar

66,408 views • 8 months ago

Honestly, it is a MIRACLE that Trump didn't return to the White House in 2020. He is a CHANGED MAN now. He was given 4 years to figure out how the Deep State thwarted him and how he can DISMANTLE the whole thing. When I met with him on Tuesday, he made it very clear: Change is coming FAST and the Deep State will NOT know how to deal with it.

Honestly, it is a MIRACLE that Trump didn't return to the White House in 2020. He is a CHANGED MAN now. He was given 4 years to figure out how the Deep State thwarted him and how he can DISMANTLE the whole thing. When I met with him on Tuesday, he made it very clear: Change is coming FAST and the Deep State will NOT know how to deal with it.

Glenn Beck

1,559,165 views • 1 year ago

Breaking They forwarded this to me that Ebuka Obi has apologised! I am not asking for his apology, i am asking him to condemn Hope Uzodinma for the killing of Biafrans in Imo State since he want to talk politics. He must take a stand on the killing of Biafrans in Imo state and condemn Hope for the killing or is he supporting Hope for killing Biafrans? I am not accepting this apology, he apologised to his congregation not to Biafrans. The only apology we will accept is for him to condemn Hope for killing Biafrans.

Breaking They forwarded this to me that Ebuka Obi has apologised! I am not asking for his apology, i am asking him to condemn Hope Uzodinma for the killing of Biafrans in Imo State since he want to talk politics. He must take a stand on the killing of Biafrans in Imo state and condemn Hope for the killing or is he supporting Hope for killing Biafrans? I am not accepting this apology, he apologised to his congregation not to Biafrans. The only apology we will accept is for him to condemn Hope for killing Biafrans.

Simon Ekpa

122,301 views • 2 years ago

There is a very small action in The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring that I find increasingly unsettling the more closely I look at it: when Saruman reveals the Palantír, Gandalf immediately pulls the cloth back over it. One man wants to look. The other wants to cover up the very thing that allows him to see more. Why? If the Palantír is a tool that allows someone to see across great distances, shouldn't a wise person want to know as much as possible? And yet this scene suggests a paradox: sometimes the danger does not lie in knowing too little, but in becoming too convinced that what we know is enough to draw a conclusion. Saruman is the clearest example of this. When he shows the Palantír to Gandalf, Saruman says: “I have seen it.” The sentence sounds like a declaration of knowledge. I have seen it. I know what is happening. I understand Sauron’s power. But that is precisely the problem: seeing one thing is not the same as seeing the whole truth. The Palantír gives Saruman a wider field of vision, but a wider field of vision does not necessarily mean a complete perspective. Saruman can see Sauron’s rising power, the scale of the threat, and things an ordinary person could never see. But he cannot see everything that will ultimately determine the outcome of the war. He does not see Frodo. He does not know how far a small Hobbit can go. He does not know how loyalty, friendship, sacrifice, and seemingly insignificant choices will shape the course of history. In other words, Saruman has more information, but that does not mean he possesses the whole truth. And this is where the Palantír becomes such an interesting image of the trap of knowledge. Because information does not draw conclusions by itself. Human beings do. Saruman sees that Sauron is powerful. From that, he reasons that Sauron will win. Then, from “will win,” he arrives at “cannot be resisted.” And finally: “We must join with him.” Notice the word “must.” Saruman does not say, “I want to stand with Sauron.” He says, “We must.” A personal choice is transformed into an inevitability imposed by reality itself. That is Saruman’s real tragedy. He does not need to stop thinking in order to become corrupted. On the contrary, he continues to reason. He continues to analyze. He continues to speak in the language of rationality. He even calls his choice wisdom: “It would be wise, my friend.” And this is where intelligence begins to become a trap. Saruman has constructed a chain of reasoning in which every path leads to the same conclusion: Sauron is too powerful, therefore resisting him is futile; if resistance is futile, then cooperation is the practical choice; and if that is the practical choice, then surrender can be called wisdom. He is no longer using reason to search for the truth. He is using reason to protect a conclusion he has already accepted. That is a particularly dangerous form of self-justification: when a person begins to call what they fear something they “must” do, and then calls their surrender “reason.” And this is why Gandalf’s reaction to the Palantír is so significant. He does not argue with Saruman that knowledge is bad. He simply says: “A Palantír is a dangerous tool.” Then he covers it. Gandalf understands something Saruman has forgotten: being wise does not mean always wanting to see more. It means knowing the limits of your own understanding. There are things we need to know. But there are also things we need to recognize that we cannot fully control in the way they affect us. Gandalf does not cover the Palantír because he is afraid of the truth. He covers it because he understands that not everything we can see should be looked at in whatever way we choose. Especially because Gandalf also says: “We do not know who else may be watching.” That line completely changes the meaning of the orb. The Palantír is not merely a window through which we can look out at the world. It is also a window through which someone else can look back at us. Saruman thinks he is using the tool to observe Sauron. But eventually, Saruman himself becomes trapped in a relationship he no longer controls. This is the paradox of power: we think we are holding the tool, until we realize that the tool has begun to shape the way we see the world. And from here, the two Wizards stand before the same problem but respond to it in completely different ways. Saruman looks at Sauron’s power and concludes: We cannot win. Gandalf looks at the same thing but refuses to accept that conclusion. Not because Gandalf knows for certain that they will win. But because he understands that no one has the right to turn a possibility into a destiny simply because they cannot yet see a way out. That is why Gandalf’s question cuts so deeply: “When did Saruman the Wise abandon reason for madness?” Gandalf does not ask: “When did you become evil?” He asks: “When did Saruman the Wise abandon reason?” Because Saruman’s fall begins with the very thing that once made him powerful: his intelligence. Intelligence itself is not the problem. The problem begins at the moment a person believes their intelligence has become great enough that they no longer need to question themselves. And perhaps that is what makes the Palantír such an intriguing symbol. It is an orb designed to see far into the distance. Yet the farther Saruman sees, the narrower his world becomes. He sees Sauron and no longer sees the possibility of resisting Sauron. He sees power and no longer sees courage. He sees war and no longer sees the small people who might change its outcome. Gandalf, meanwhile, sees less, but leaves room for more possibilities. And perhaps this is the deepest difference between the two. Saruman wants a complete view of the world so that he can be certain about the future. Gandalf accepts that the future cannot be seen in its entirety. One seeks certainty. The other accepts the limits of knowledge. And in Tolkien’s world, it is the second person who remains free. Because sometimes the most dangerous thing is not that we do not know enough. It is that we know a little, reason a great deal, and then begin to believe that our conclusion is the whole truth. Saruman is not defeated by the Palantír simply because he looks into it. He is defeated by what happens afterward: he allows what he sees to become the limit of what he can imagine. And Gandalf, through an action so small that it could almost be overlooked, simply pulls the cloth back over the Palantír. As if reminding us: Wisdom does not always mean seeing more. Sometimes wisdom means recognizing that the very way we see can deceive us.

There is a very small action in The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring that I find increasingly unsettling the more closely I look at it: when Saruman reveals the Palantír, Gandalf immediately pulls the cloth back over it. One man wants to look. The other wants to cover up the very thing that allows him to see more. Why? If the Palantír is a tool that allows someone to see across great distances, shouldn't a wise person want to know as much as possible? And yet this scene suggests a paradox: sometimes the danger does not lie in knowing too little, but in becoming too convinced that what we know is enough to draw a conclusion. Saruman is the clearest example of this. When he shows the Palantír to Gandalf, Saruman says: “I have seen it.” The sentence sounds like a declaration of knowledge. I have seen it. I know what is happening. I understand Sauron’s power. But that is precisely the problem: seeing one thing is not the same as seeing the whole truth. The Palantír gives Saruman a wider field of vision, but a wider field of vision does not necessarily mean a complete perspective. Saruman can see Sauron’s rising power, the scale of the threat, and things an ordinary person could never see. But he cannot see everything that will ultimately determine the outcome of the war. He does not see Frodo. He does not know how far a small Hobbit can go. He does not know how loyalty, friendship, sacrifice, and seemingly insignificant choices will shape the course of history. In other words, Saruman has more information, but that does not mean he possesses the whole truth. And this is where the Palantír becomes such an interesting image of the trap of knowledge. Because information does not draw conclusions by itself. Human beings do. Saruman sees that Sauron is powerful. From that, he reasons that Sauron will win. Then, from “will win,” he arrives at “cannot be resisted.” And finally: “We must join with him.” Notice the word “must.” Saruman does not say, “I want to stand with Sauron.” He says, “We must.” A personal choice is transformed into an inevitability imposed by reality itself. That is Saruman’s real tragedy. He does not need to stop thinking in order to become corrupted. On the contrary, he continues to reason. He continues to analyze. He continues to speak in the language of rationality. He even calls his choice wisdom: “It would be wise, my friend.” And this is where intelligence begins to become a trap. Saruman has constructed a chain of reasoning in which every path leads to the same conclusion: Sauron is too powerful, therefore resisting him is futile; if resistance is futile, then cooperation is the practical choice; and if that is the practical choice, then surrender can be called wisdom. He is no longer using reason to search for the truth. He is using reason to protect a conclusion he has already accepted. That is a particularly dangerous form of self-justification: when a person begins to call what they fear something they “must” do, and then calls their surrender “reason.” And this is why Gandalf’s reaction to the Palantír is so significant. He does not argue with Saruman that knowledge is bad. He simply says: “A Palantír is a dangerous tool.” Then he covers it. Gandalf understands something Saruman has forgotten: being wise does not mean always wanting to see more. It means knowing the limits of your own understanding. There are things we need to know. But there are also things we need to recognize that we cannot fully control in the way they affect us. Gandalf does not cover the Palantír because he is afraid of the truth. He covers it because he understands that not everything we can see should be looked at in whatever way we choose. Especially because Gandalf also says: “We do not know who else may be watching.” That line completely changes the meaning of the orb. The Palantír is not merely a window through which we can look out at the world. It is also a window through which someone else can look back at us. Saruman thinks he is using the tool to observe Sauron. But eventually, Saruman himself becomes trapped in a relationship he no longer controls. This is the paradox of power: we think we are holding the tool, until we realize that the tool has begun to shape the way we see the world. And from here, the two Wizards stand before the same problem but respond to it in completely different ways. Saruman looks at Sauron’s power and concludes: We cannot win. Gandalf looks at the same thing but refuses to accept that conclusion. Not because Gandalf knows for certain that they will win. But because he understands that no one has the right to turn a possibility into a destiny simply because they cannot yet see a way out. That is why Gandalf’s question cuts so deeply: “When did Saruman the Wise abandon reason for madness?” Gandalf does not ask: “When did you become evil?” He asks: “When did Saruman the Wise abandon reason?” Because Saruman’s fall begins with the very thing that once made him powerful: his intelligence. Intelligence itself is not the problem. The problem begins at the moment a person believes their intelligence has become great enough that they no longer need to question themselves. And perhaps that is what makes the Palantír such an intriguing symbol. It is an orb designed to see far into the distance. Yet the farther Saruman sees, the narrower his world becomes. He sees Sauron and no longer sees the possibility of resisting Sauron. He sees power and no longer sees courage. He sees war and no longer sees the small people who might change its outcome. Gandalf, meanwhile, sees less, but leaves room for more possibilities. And perhaps this is the deepest difference between the two. Saruman wants a complete view of the world so that he can be certain about the future. Gandalf accepts that the future cannot be seen in its entirety. One seeks certainty. The other accepts the limits of knowledge. And in Tolkien’s world, it is the second person who remains free. Because sometimes the most dangerous thing is not that we do not know enough. It is that we know a little, reason a great deal, and then begin to believe that our conclusion is the whole truth. Saruman is not defeated by the Palantír simply because he looks into it. He is defeated by what happens afterward: he allows what he sees to become the limit of what he can imagine. And Gandalf, through an action so small that it could almost be overlooked, simply pulls the cloth back over the Palantír. As if reminding us: Wisdom does not always mean seeing more. Sometimes wisdom means recognizing that the very way we see can deceive us.

🎼🌺Music Love♥️

15,487 views • 25 days ago

#WATCH | Kolkata, West Bengal: TMC leader and candidate from Beleghata Assembly constituency, Kunal Ghosh, says, "The PM does not know how to speak in the mother tongue. If he does not know how to give a speech in Hindi, then what he says has no significance. He is insulting Bengal. He is completely insulting the Bengali language. This is not right. He is crossing the limits."

#WATCH | Kolkata, West Bengal: TMC leader and candidate from Beleghata Assembly constituency, Kunal Ghosh, says, "The PM does not know how to speak in the mother tongue. If he does not know how to give a speech in Hindi, then what he says has no significance. He is insulting Bengal. He is completely insulting the Bengali language. This is not right. He is crossing the limits."

ANI

77,471 views • 5 months ago

Zelensky: When Lukashenko says that he does not want to be dragged into this war, then he should be honest, at least with his own people. Because it is not he who can be dragged into the war. It is his entire country that can be dragged into the war by Russia.

Zelensky: When Lukashenko says that he does not want to be dragged into this war, then he should be honest, at least with his own people. Because it is not he who can be dragged into the war. It is his entire country that can be dragged into the war by Russia.

Clash Report

40,123 views • 2 months ago

I don’t care what anyone says this is an incredible moment. And you can say whatever you want about President Trump, but you can never say that he does not love this country. Or that he’s not proud of it. He is and he shows that to the world and I for one love to see that instead of the apology tours.

I don’t care what anyone says this is an incredible moment. And you can say whatever you want about President Trump, but you can never say that he does not love this country. Or that he’s not proud of it. He is and he shows that to the world and I for one love to see that instead of the apology tours.

Insurrection Barbie

102,926 views • 1 year ago

TODAY: 🇺🇸 Ex-NY Governor Andrew Cuomo says he believes the crypto Clarity Act issues will be resolved & it will pass: "I think they will resolve this ethics issue and they'll pass the bill. And again world is passing us by."

TODAY: 🇺🇸 Ex-NY Governor Andrew Cuomo says he believes the crypto Clarity Act issues will be resolved & it will pass: "I think they will resolve this ethics issue and they'll pass the bill. And again world is passing us by."

Altcoin Daily

78,530 views • 1 month ago

Mark Kelly: “Let me make it perfectly clear. This letter, or anything that Pete Hegseth says or does to me is in no way gonna affect the way I do my job. He can continue with this kind of bullshit or he can go take a hike”

Mark Kelly: “Let me make it perfectly clear. This letter, or anything that Pete Hegseth says or does to me is in no way gonna affect the way I do my job. He can continue with this kind of bullshit or he can go take a hike”

Marco Foster

535,582 views • 8 months ago