The Four Pillars:
a study of the Bergoglian heresy
GEORGE A FIELD III·MONDAY, AUGUST 5, 2019
This work has two parts:
Part 1: The Philosophical Base of Bergoglianism
Part 2: 55 Bergoglian heretical statements and acts spawned
by the Four Pillars of Bergoglianism
Part 1
The Four Pillars of Bergoglianism
It is important to know that this Pope does not engage in stumbling, random acts. He always acts for a reason, frequently a disordered reason, but always for a reason. But, that said, what is the explanation for his statements which diverge from traditional Catholic teaching? Does he have a rational, philosophical foundation for the statements he makes?
The answer is “yes”. The Pope does have a structured, philosophical base from which he operates. What is it?
For six years now, the Pope has been explaining to us the building blocks of his philosophy, but the messages are buried in the stealthy Bergoglianese code he employs in order to get his messages on the record without raising a storm of protests.
What are his philosophical building blocks? There are four.
- “Time is greater than space.” (Evangelii Gaudium, #222, 223)1
- “Unity prevails over conflict.” (Evangelii Gaudium, #226) 1
- “Realities are more important than ideas.” (Evangelii Gaudium, #231) 1
- “The whole is greater than the part.” (Evangelii Gaudium, #234) 1
How does one translate these obscurities and how do they explain Bergoglianism? Six years ago, when Evangelii Gaudium was released, no one had any idea of what these murky phrases meant. But now we know, as a result of the six-year track record of this Pope’s statements and acts which he has executed pursuant to the four enigmatic proclamations. He has revealed and explained the meaning of his 2013 obscurities by his subsequent acts. Now consider that record.
- “Time is greater than space.” Replace the word “Time” with “Change” or “Process”, and replace the word “Space” with “Rules” or “Principles”, and you then begin to gain a sense of what Francis intends. Change is greater than Rules. Process is more important than Principles. Francis is saying that time can change our understanding of truth. Experience can change our understanding of right and wrong, good and evil. As we learn more about God and about ourselves, we can begin to see that what we once thought was good can actually be evil, and vice-versa. In the Bergoglian mind, this philosophy justifies the following papal actions and statements, each one of which contradicts Catholic doctrine:
Adulterers are no longer necessarily excluded from Holy Communion2;
Capital Punishment (permissible for 2,000 years) is now impermissable.3
One’s conscience determines whether the acts he commits are good or evil. “Listening to and obeying conscience means deciding in the face of what is understood to be good or evil. It is on the basis of this choice that the goodness or evil of our actions is determined.”4 - “Unity prevails over conflict.” By this statement, Francis proposes that, without exception, the peaceful unity of people is more important than any moral norm, natural law, or Church doctrine. Therefore, “compromise” is the prime directive for humanity, not God’s commandments or the natural law. In the Bergoglian mind, this philosophy justifies the following papal actions and statements, each one of which contradicts Catholic doctrine:
“The Church should consider the benefits of Gay civil unions”.5
“All human persons are children of God”.6
“There are many paths to God”.6
Atheists go to heaven if they follow their consciences. 7
“I do not try to convert the atheist. I respect him.” 8
Pope Francis appoints abortion advocate Nigel Biggar to the Vatican’s Academy for Life.9
Pope Francis appoints Gay Rights advocate Fr. James Martin to Vatican’s Communications Secretariat.10
Pope authorizes Vatican to issue Martin Luther stamp.11
On many occasions over the past four years, this Pope has stated that “Christians and Muslims worship the same God.”12 - “Realities are more important than ideas.” By this statement, Francis proposes that “real life, concrete circumstances” (i.e. “Realities”) are more important than, and take precedence over, any moral norm, natural law, or Church doctrine (i.e. “Ideas”). In the Bergoglian mind, this philosophy justifies the following papal actions and statements, each one of which contradicts Catholic doctrine:
Sexually-active unmarried cohabitation (e.g. adultery) can be, in some circumstances, precisely what God wants us to do.13
Artificial contraception for the prevention of pregnancy is not intrinsically evil.14
Doctrine serves pastoring (i.e. doctrine is subordinate to pastoring).15
Conscience trumps doctrine.15
At the foot of the Cross, Mary doubted God.16
Some unmarried cohabitations (adultery) are “real marriage”.17 - “The whole is greater than the part.” By this statement, Francis proposes that a good end justifies the means applied to achieve it. Evil may be employed or tolerated in order to accomplish good. In the Bergoglian mind, this philosophy justifies the following papal actions and statements, each one of which contradicts Catholic doctrine:
The potential benefits of a Vatican relationship with the Chinese government are more important than, and take precedence over, any moral worries about that government’s atheism or abortion sponsorship or human organ harvesting.18
The foremost abortion practitioner and advocate in the history of Italy can also be, in Pope Francis’ words, “one of Italy’s forgotten greats”.19
Mortal sin has benefits for us.20
Sin is sometimes unavoidable.21
God’s grace is not always sufficient for us to avoid sin.22
This belief, of course, contradicts 2000 years of Church teaching, including the papal encyclical by Pope St John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor23, but it does justify the Pope’s decision to cede bishop-choosing authority to the Chinese government in exchange for a relationship between that government and the Vatican. For the Bergoglian, it is reasonable to sometimes compromise with evil in hopes that, someday, you might persuade it to be good.
These four statements by Pope Francis should be understood as the “Four Principles (or ‘Pillars’) of Bergoglianism”. This is the foundation upon which the entire edifice is built. It is impossible to understand Bergoglianism without understanding the Four Principles.
They are the philosophical framework by which Bergoglianism sees good and evil as being relative things which move and morph over time, accommodating each other, shifting positions, and at times actually trading places with each other as circumstances change. They explain why intrinsic evil (i.e. “always evil”) is a false doctrine for Bergoglians24 and why God sometimes asks us to commit mortal sin (which actually ceases to be mortal sin when God ask us to do it).13
So, what do we make of all this?
Sooner or later, the Catholic Church must come to grips with a fact: Bergoglianism does not misunderstand Catholic teaching. Bergoglianism understands Catholic teaching quite well, and rejects it.
Chip
“We must love them both, those whose opinions we share and those whose opinions we reject, for both have labored in the search for truth, and both have helped us in the finding of it.” – Aquinas, Commentary on Aristotle
Part 2:
A description of 55 heretical statements and acts, each of which is born from one or more of the Four Pillars of Bergoglianism.
Did the Pope really say that?
In the six years since his election in March, 2013, there has been much ink spilt in the debates over what Pope Francis has said and not said. I thought it might be useful to collect, in one bucket, a list of those controversial acts and statements, with documentation to either back them up or back them down. With that thought in mind, and although not exhaustive, because it grows daily, here is the current list.
Chip Field
“We must love them both, those whose opinions we share and those whose opinions we reject, for both have labored in the search for truth, and both have helped us in the finding of it.” – Aquinas, Commentary on Aristotle
These 55 Bergoglian statements and acts are organized by category as follows:
Absolute Truth
- There is no absolute truth. Truth is relationship.
Abortion - Abortion advocate Nigel Biggar appointed to Vatican dicastery.
- Emma Bonino honored
- Why must the Church always talk about abortion?
Artificial Contraception - Artificial contraception for the prevention of pregnancy is not intrinsic evil.
Atheism - Do not try to convert atheists, respect them.
Doctrine - Church Doctrine not only can change, it MUST change in order to be true.
- The death penalty was not, but is now, intrinsic evil.
God - God has a womb.
- God cannot be God without man.
- God cannot do everything.
Good and Evil - Good and evil are variable and interchangeable truths, depending upon each person’s viewpoint.
- Evil contains the seed of Good.
- Whether an act is good or evil depends upon the intention of the actor.
Grace - God’s grace is not always sufficient for us to avoid sin.
Hell - There is no eternal punishment for anyone.
- At the end of time, all will be saved, all.
Holy Communion/Eucharist - Jesus becomes bread in the Eucharist.
- Holy Communion is now open to adulterers.
- Non-Catholics may receive Holy Communion.
- We already have unity (among religions). Let’s not wait on the theologians to agree on the Eucharist.
- Many things are the Eucharist. Ecumenical (multi-religion) prayer is Eucharist. The memory of Protestant martyrs is Eucharist. Protestant works of charity is Eucharist.
Homosexual Acts and LGBTQ Rights - God made you homosexual and that is the way he wants you to be.
- The Church should consider the benefits of homosexual civil unions.
- LGBTQ activist Fr. James martin appointed to Vatican Communications Dicastery.
Jesus - Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 was a sharing, not a multiplying.
- Sinner’s blood, and Joseph’s blood, run through Jesus’ veins.
- Jesus became the Devil.
- Jesus ceased to be God.
Marriage and Divorce - Marriage is only an “ideal”, not a prerequisite, for sexually active cohabitation.
- Pope Francis dissolves the Pope St. John Paul II Institute for Marriage and Family (modeled on Scripture, the Natural Law, and the Magisterium), and replaces it with his own new Institute to be modeled on Amoris Laetitia
32. Unmarried sexually-active cohabitation (adultery, fornication,
homosexual civil unions) “is a true marriage” because “it has the grace of marriage”.
Mary - The Immaculate Conception is a lie. Mary was not born without sin.
- Mary had defects.
- Mary doubted God.
Mercy; Pastoring - Pastoral concerns and personal conscience always trump doctrine.
Personal Conscience - One’s personal conscience is the supreme moral authority.
- Atheists and non-Christians go to heaven if they follow their consciences.
- Personal conscience determines what is good and what is evil.
- Obedience to one’s own personal conscience can save that person without faith in Jesus Christ.
Sex - Sex must be taught as a gift from God, but not with strictness.
Sin - God sometimes wants us to sin.
- Sin is sometime the best gift we can offer to God.
- Adultery is not always mortal sin.
- There are benefits to mortal sin.
- Jesus likes us to sin because it was his mission to become the sinner for us.
Syncretism and Universalism - There are many paths to God, outside of Christianity.
- All religions are willed by God.
- There is no Catholic God.
- Christians and Muslims worship the same God.
- Pope Francis formally honors Martin Luther with a Vatican sponsored statue and stamp.
- Pope Francis gives St. Peter’s bones to a non-Catholic schismatic sect.
The Nature of the Catholic Church - Carnival time is over.
- The Church has no right to impose rules on a lay person’s private life.
- The “People of God” are not the Church. The “People of God” are the indigenous peoples of the earth.
Absolute Truth
- There is no absolute truth.
Pope Francis’ words: “You ask me whether it is erroneous or a sin to follow the line of thought which holds that there is no absolute, and therefore no absolute truth, but only a series of relative and subjective truths. To begin with, I would not speak about “absolute” truths, even for believers, in the sense that absolute is that which is disconnected and bereft of all relationship. Truth, according to the Christian faith, is the love of God for us in Jesus Christ. Therefore, truth is a relationship. As such each one of us receives the truth and expresses it from within, that is to say, according to one’s own circumstances, culture and situation in life, etc.”1
Analysis: Eugenio Scalfari is an infamous atheist with whom Pope Francis has had a long friendship. The Pope often invites Scalfari to the Vatican for one-on-one chats. In 2013, the two exchanged letters which were published in Scalfari’s newspaper, La Republica, and also published by the Vatican on the Vatican web site (link embedded below). One of Scalfari’s questions was, “Is there such a thing as ‘absolute truth’ ?” Pope Francis’ response was quoted above and paraphrased here: “Absolute truth, as such, does not exist, even for believers. Rather, truth is a relationship. Each one of us receives truth and expresses truth, legitimately, only according to one’s own circumstances, culture, and situation in life.”
1 Links:
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130911_eugenio-scalfari.html (paragraph 21)
Abortion
- Pope Francis appoints Nigel Biggar, pro-abortion philosopher, to Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life
Analysis: The Pontifical Academy for Life, founded by Pope St. John Paul II, exists for the promotion and defense of human life, especially regarding bioethics in the light of Christian morality, and most especially for the protection of the most defenseless of humans, the pre-born and the aged. Its statute was defined by the motu proprio Vitae Mysterium of Pope St. John Paul II on 11 February 1994. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/index.htm
On June 13, 2017, the Vatican announced that Pope Francis had appointed Nigel Biggar, pro-abortion philosopher, to the Pontifical Academy for Life. Biggar is on the record as stating that “a human fetus is not the same thing as a mature human” and that human abortions prior to 18 weeks gestation are moral acts.
Links:
- Pope Francis praises Emma Bonino, infamous abortionist, as one of Italy’s “forgotten greats”.
Analysis: On February 8, 2016, in an interview with one of Italy’s most prominent dailies, Corriere Della Serra, Pope Francis praised Italy’s leading and most infamous proponent of divorce, contraception, and abortion – Emma Bonino — as one of the nation’s “forgotten greats”. On numerous subsequent occasions, he has continued to meet with her and publicly acknowledge her social contributions.
Wikipedia: Emma Bonino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Bonino
“Bonino has fought numerous battles for civil rights and individual liberty, mainly concerned with liberalizing divorce, the legalization of abortion, the legalization of drugs, and for sexual and religious freedoms. She is a leading member of the Italian Radicals, a political party which describes itself as a party subscribing to cultural liberalism concerning moral issues.”
Links:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-calls-italys-foremost-abortion-promoter-one-of-nations-forgotten-great
- Why must the Church always talk about abortion?
Pope Francis’ words: “We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time. The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.” 1
Analysis: This September 30, 2013 interview with Francis was conducted by the Rev. Antonio Spadaro2, editor in chief of La Civiltà Cattolica, an Italian Jesuit journal whose content is approved by the Vatican. Francis, the first Jesuit to become a pope, agreed to grant the interview after requests from Father Spadaro and Fr. James Martin, the editor of America, a Jesuit magazine based in New York.
Father Spadaro conducted the interview during three meetings in August. The interview, kept under wraps for weeks by the Jesuits, was released simultaneously by 16 Jesuit journals around the world. Francis personally reviewed the Italian transcript, and it was translated by a team into English.
According to Francis, as quoted in this Vatican-approved script, the Church’s condemnation of abortion, one of the most horrific sins ever conceived by the blackest heart of man, is merely one of a “disjointed multitude of doctrines” which cannot “be imposed insistently” and with which “the church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed.”
According to Francis, the Church has more important matters to tend to than the ongoing murders of millions of Catholic children by their Catholic mothers.
Links:
1 https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/world/europe/pope-bluntly-faults-churchs-focus-on-gays-and-abortion.html
2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Spadaro
Artificial Contraception
- Artificial contraception for the prevention of pregnancy is not intrinsically evil.
Pope Francis’ words: “Paul VI, a great man, in a difficult situation in Africa, permitted nuns to use contraceptives in cases of rape… (therefore, we know that), preventing pregnancy (using artificial contraceptives) is not an absolute evil.”1
Analysis: There is not much analysis needed here. The Vatican confirms the Pope’s verbatim statement (web link below1). Artificial contraception for the prevention of pregnancy is not intrinsically evil. A prior Pope’s Encyclical (Humane Vitae, web link below2) and 2,000 years of Church doctrine3 say that this Pope is wrong.
Now, to the question of whether Pope Paul VI authorized nuns to use artificial contraceptives against rape. Is Pope Francis’ claim accurate? No. There is no evidence that Pope Paul VI ever authorized anyone, anywhere to use artificial contraceptives.4
Links:
1http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2016/february/documents/papa-francesco_20160217_messico-conferenza-stampa.html
2Humanae Vitae, Sec 14
http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html
3Veritatis Splendor, Sec 80
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
4Did Pope Paul VI authorize nuns to use contraceptives against rape?
https://timeline.com/pope-francis-got-his-history-wrong-when-talking-about-contraception-and-zika-6a9d5d0960cd
Atheism
- Do not try to convert atheists, respect them.
Pope Francis’ words:
“I do not approach the relationship (with atheists) in order to proselytize, or convert the atheist; I respect him…nor would I say that his life is condemned, because I am convinced that I do not have the right to make a judgement about the honesty of that person…every man is the image of God, whether he is a believer or not.” (On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13, book by Pope Francis and Rabbi Abraham Skorka, published 2010 and 2013)1
Analysis:
Francis’ statement is flawed on at least five levels. But it is not only illogical, it is also heretical in that it clearly and directly contradicts the Church’s Infallible Magisterial Teaching.
First, It violates the Infallible Magisterial teaching of the General Councils of the Church: “atheists are anathema” -Vatican 1, session III, canon 1.1.2
Second, it violates the teaching of the Bible: “God will inflict vengeance on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.” -2 Thess 1:7-9.
Third, it violates Jesus’ clear instruction to us: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them, and teaching them all I have commanded you.” -Matthew 28: 18-20.
Fourth, one’s “honesty” has nothing to do with whether that man is right with God. I have never met an atheist who was not “honestly” convinced that there is no God.
Fifth, the fact that every man is made in the image of God, although a true statement, does not in any way justify him before God. Jesus justifies, humanness does not. If our humanity justifies us, then the doctrine of original sin is a false doctrine and both Jesus and the Church are nothing more than surplus baggage… flotsam and jetsam on the sea of eternity.
Links:
1 https://www.ignatius.com/On-Heaven-and-Earth-P2767.aspx
2 “If anyone denies the one true God, creator and lord of things visible and invisible: let him be anathema.” (Vatican I, Session 3, Canon 1.1)
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum20.htm
Doctrine
- Doctrine can change, and must change, in order to be true.
Pope Francis’ words: “Doctrine cannot be preserved without allowing it to develop, nor can it be tied to an interpretation that is rigid and immutable without demeaning the working of the Holy Spirit.” 1
“The word of God cannot be moth-balled like some old blanket in an attempt to keep insects at bay! No. The word of God is a dynamic and living reality that develops and grows because it is aimed at a fulfilment that none can halt. This law of progress…is a distinguishing mark of revealed truth as it is handed down by the Church, and in no way represents a change in doctrine.” 1
“Tradition (Doctrine) is like a root which gives us the juice to grow… The tradition (Doctrine) of the Church is always in motion…. Tradition (Doctrine) is the guarantee of the future and not the keeper of ashes. It is not a museum. Tradition (Doctrine) does not preserve ashes; the nostalgia of (Catholic) fundamentalists [is] to return to the ashes. No, tradition (Doctrine) is the roots that guarantee the tree grows, flowers and gives fruit.”2
Analysis: The need for doctrinal change is a constant Bergoglian drum- beat. In Bergoglian-think, Church Doctrine not only CAN change, it MUST change, in order to be true. Pope Francis’ disclaimer in the second quoted paragraph, that a change of doctrine is not a change of doctrine, reminds me of the scene in the classic film, The Wizard of Oz, where the Wizard’s control booth manipulations are exposed and in a futile effort to avoid detection the Wizard exclaims, “Never mind that man behind the curtain, I, the face you see on the screen, am the great and powerful Oz!”
112 years ago, Pope Pius X warned us about men like Pope Francis, condemning them as “Modernists” who “lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything is subject to change, and must in fact be changed… The Modernist says that Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and be changed.” – Pope Pius X, Pascendi Domini Gregis (Encyclical on the Doctrine of the Modernists, paragraphs 13 and 26), 1912 3
Links
1http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2017/october/documents/papa-francesco_20171011_convegno-nuova-evangelizzazione.html
2 https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/full-text-of-pope-francis-in-flight-press-conference-from-romania-53358
3 http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html
- The Death Penalty was not, but is now, intrinsic evil
Catholic Catechism #2267 before Pope Francis’ change: “The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty.”
Catholic Catechism #2267 after Pope Francis’ change: “The Church teaches that (quoting Pope Francis, of course) the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”. (Pope Francis, Discourse, 10-11-17)
Analysis: On August 2, 2018, Pope Francis changed the Catholic Catechism (#2267), and 2000 years of Church Magisterial teaching, formally declaring that capital punishment, theretofore licit, was thereafter “inadmissible”. What had been permitted in some situations (i.e. not intrinsically evil), was now not permitted in any situation (i.e. intrinsically evil). This is intellectual gibberish. Good and evil cannot morph back and forth into each other depending upon who currently occupies the Chair of St. Peter.
Some say that his new change still leaves room for exceptions to the rule against the death penalty, and therefore, is not a contradiction of prior Magisterial teaching.
But, how can the same act be both “morally inadmissible” (Pope Francis’ new rule) and “morally admissible” (justified by exceptions to Pope Francis’ new rule)?
It is only in Bergoglian word games that opposite truths can coexist.
Obviously, this Pope’s 2018 catechetical change (making the death penalty “inadmissible”) expressly contradicted Magisterial teaching which “does not exclude recourse to the death penalty”.
Links
God
- God has a womb.
Pope Francis’ words: “(God) has promised to amaze them (the human race) eternally with the unfading beauty of all those “visible and invisible” things hidden in the womb of the Creator.”
Analysis: It is noteworthy that Pope Francis closed his 6-25-18 remarks to the Pontifical Academy for Life (see boxed link #1, below) with a specific reference to “the womb of the Creator.” If this description of God the Father as having a “womb” has any precedent in orthodox Catholic writing, I am unaware of it. However, the phrase is quite common in Greek mythology (https://greekgodsandgoddesses.net/goddesses/gaea/)
and pantheistic religions which speak of the earth as a “mother goddess” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_goddess).
Links:
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2018/june/documents/papa-francesco_20180625_accademia-provita.html
- God cannot be God without Man.
Pope Francis’ words: “God cannot be God without man.” 1
Analysis: The Church has always taught that man is “nothing”, compared to God. But, Pope Francis says that God is a contingent being. That is, he says that God’s existence as God is contingent upon the existence of man. Of all the Bergoglian heresies showered upon us over the past six years, this is perhaps the most absurd. As it is absurd, it is also perhaps the most revealing because it is one of the building blocks of madness by which this Pope is able to deify the human conscience, as he does in Amoris Laetitia, Chapter 8 2. Such proclamations come not from wisdom or spiritual authority, but from darker places.
Links:
1 Paragraph #7 of Pope’s “Catechesis”
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2017/06/07/170607a.html
2 Amoris Laetitia
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
- God cannot do everything.
Pope Francis words: “When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do anything. But that is not so.” 1
Analysis: This is a good example of how the Vatican editing office frequently cleans up statements the Pope has made. In this case, the phrase “able to do anything” was quoted by all the original sources as being the Pope’s words.1 But when the Vatican published the speech2, the phrase was deleted. The original, accurate quote was more damning than the edited version, clearly stating that there are some things that God cannot do. Apparently, God is no longer omnipotent.
Links
Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (10-27-14)
1 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-declares-evolution-and-big-bang-theory-are-right-and-god-isnt-a-magician-with-a-magic-9822514.html
2 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2014/october/documents/papa-francesco_20141027_plenaria-accademia-scienze.html
Good and Evil
- Good and evil are variable and interchangeable truths, depending upon each person’s viewpoint.
Pope Francis words: “Each of us has a vision of good and of evil. We have to encourage people to move towards what they think is good…Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them.” 1
Analysis:
Pope St John Paul II says in Veritatis Splendor #35, and elsewhere, that good and evil have fixed meanings and are not changeable from time to time, place to place, or person to person. 2
Pope Francis says that each of has our own opinion of what is good and what is evil, and that each of those opinions is valid. 1
Pope St John Paul II’s position is consistent with Magisterial teaching. Pope Francis’ position contradicts Magisterial teaching.
Links
1 Pope Francis (contradicting Magisterial teaching): We each have our own opinion on what is good and what is evil.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-to-atheist-all-people-can-receive-grace-seek-the-good
2 Pope St John Paul II (consistent with Magisterial teaching): Good and evil have fixed meanings which are not changeable from time to time, place to place, or person to person.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
- Evil contains the seeds of Good.
Pope Francis’ words:
“The divine logic does not halt before evil, but instead transforms it slowly but surely into goodness.”
Analysis: How can evil become good? There is no seed of good in evil. God can use the evil perpetrated by man to accomplish his good purpose (e.g. Genesis 50), but that does not mean that there is good in evil, nor that evil can become good. This error is one of the important components of Bergoglian philosophy. You can see it manifested in Amoris Laetitia chapter 8. This Pope really does believe that good is embedded in evil and that it is the Church’s job to accept the evil while it grows the good. In fact, he believes, because good is embedded in evil, that evil is not necessarily “evil” at all, but rather, evil is often a worthy effort that falls short of the ideal. It is this false and novel notion that allows Pope Francis to formally declare that:
sometimes, God wants us to sin (see #40);
Holy Communion is no longer closed to unmarried, sexually-active cohabitants (see #19);
there are benefits in mortal sin (see #43);
unmarried, sexually-active co-habitation can be “true marriage” (see #30); and
marriage is an “ideal” but not a prerequisite to sexually active co-habitation (see #28).
Links:
(Paragraph #6)
http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2018/12/21/181221c.html
- Whether an act is good or evil depends upon the intention of the actor.
Pope Francis’ words:
“Listening to and obeying conscience means deciding in the face of what is understood to be good or evil. It is on the basis of this choice that the goodness or evil of our actions is determined.”1
Analysis: Eugenio Scalfari is an infamous atheist with whom Pope Francis has had a long friendship. The Pope often invites Scalfari to the Vatican for one-on-one chats. In 2013, the two exchanged letters which were published in Scalfari’s newspaper, La Republica, and also published by the Vatican on the Vatican web site (link embedded below) 1. One of Scalfari’s questions was, “Are ‘good’ and ‘evil’ absolute truths which are fixed and not variable?” Pope Francis’ response was, see quote above, that our acts are good or evil depending upon whether we follow our consciences.
Catholic moral theology has always, until now, taught that although an actor’s culpability may be mitigated by his intentions, the nature of the act is in no way altered by the actor’s intentions.2
Links:
1 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130911_eugenio-scalfari.html (paragraph 20)
2 “It is possible that the evil done as the result of a … non-culpable error of judgment may not be imputable to the agent; but even in this case [the act] does not cease to be an evil.” Pope St John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, #63 (August 6, 1993)
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
Grace
- God’s grace is not always sufficient for us to avoid sin.
Pope Francis’ words: “A subject may know full well the rule [to not sin], yet have great difficulty in understanding “its inherent values”, or be in a concrete situation [of sin] which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin…conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation [of sin] does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel [to not sin]. It [personal conscience] can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response [serious sin] which can be given to God.” (Amoris Laetitia 301, 303)
Analysis: Pope Francis is saying that we sometimes find ourselves in situations which do not allow us to avoid sin and, in fact, our personal conscience can “recognize with sincerity and honesty” that such sin “is the most generous response which can be given to God.” In other words, even God’s grace is insufficient in these cases for us to avoid sin, and that sometimes God actually wants us to sin. This novel and false idea contradicts Church doctrine, as originally articulated by St. Paul:
“But he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ ” (2 Cor 12:9)
“No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.” (1 Cor 10:13)
“But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.” (Galatians 5:16)
Pope Francis is telling us that St. Paul, and the Church which has followed St. Paul’s teaching for 2000 years, are both dead-wrong.
Links:
Amoris Laetitia #301, 303
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
Hell
- There is no eternal punishment for anyone.
Pope Francis’ words: “No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation [of sin] they find themselves.” (Amoris Laetitia #297)
Analysis: In Bergoglianism, sin is a peccadillo, a minor infraction, a lapse in etiquette, a shortfall from the ideal, which is easily, automatically, and universally dismissed by God’s infinite mercy. This false and novel notion has absolutely nothing to do with the Catholic faith and specifically contradicts 2,000 years of Magisterial teaching.
Links:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
- At the end of time, all will be saved, all.
Pope Francis’ words: “At the end of our history, there will be Merciful Jesus (when) everything will be saved. Everything.” (Pope Francis, General Audience at the Vatican, 10-11-17)1
“The human race is destined to life in God.” 2 (Pope Francis, address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life, 6-25-18)
Analysis: This Bergoglian belief that, at the end of time, no one will be condemned and that all will be saved is not a new heresy. It is called Universalism and was proposed at least as far back as Origen in the A.D. 200’s (the doctrine of “Apokatastasis”), reaffirmed in more recent years by such luminaries as Fr. Tielhard de Jardin (another Jesuit, of course), and condemned repeatedly down through the centuries by the Councils and Catechism of the Catholic Church3. As G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, “Most new ideas are simply the repeating of old mistakes.”
Links:
1 https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/audiences/2017/documents/papa-francesco_20171011_udienza-generale.html
2 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2018/june/documents/papa-francesco_20180625_accademia-provita.html
3 “If anyone says or holds that the punishment of demons and impious human beings is temporary and that it will have an end at some time, and that there will be a restoration of demons and impious human beings, let him be anathema.” The Canons of the Synod of Constantinople (543 A.D), reconfirmed by the Council of Constantinople (553 A.D.)
https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2015/01/27/the-canons-of-the-synod-of-constantinople-543/
“The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.” The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.” Catholic Catechism #1035
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a12.htm
Holy Communion/Eucharist
- Jesus becomes bread in the Eucharist
Pope Francis’ words: “Jesus himself who becomes bread…God himself contained in a piece of bread.” 1
Analysis: What is the Eucharist?
Pope Francis says that Jesus becomes bread.1
The Catholic Church says that the bread becomes Jesus.2
Does it matter? What at first glance appears to be an insignificant word-swap is actually contradiction.
Catholic Dogma says that what appears to be bread is, in fact, Jesus, “body and blood, soul and divinity”. It is only the appearance of bread. No bread remains. Pope Francis says that bread remains.
The point is this: if bread remains after transubstantiation, then Jesus’ presence is only “spiritual”, not “real”, not actual, leaving transubstantiation a meaningless term and converting the Mass into a Protestant memorial service.
Notice the subtlety of this strategy. A seemingly meaningless change in word sequence cracks open the door just wide enough to get the seeds of heresy into the public record of Magisterial teaching, from which future weeds will grow. This is doctrinal destruction by stealth, moral death by a thousand cuts. It is yet another example of how the Bergoglian heresies can seep in through the cracks of the sanctuary. They creep silently into our subconscious on cat paws.
This is not the theological stumbling of an unformed intellect. Rather, it is purposeful craft, efficiently executed with careful forethought to intertwine with the larger master plan. If Jesus becomes bread, and, therefore, is not “really present” in the Eucharist, then the Eucharist becomes merely a symbol of ecumenical hospitality, legitimizing such otherwise preposterous ideas as Holy Communion for active adulterers, Holy Communion for non-Catholics, and the Eucharist being the memory of Protestant martyrs. (See #’s 19, 20, 21, and 22 of this work).
Links
1 Pope Francis says that “Jesus himself becomes the bread…God himself contained in a piece of bread”. (paragraphs #3 and #6) http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/homilies/2019/documents/papa-francesco_20190623_omelia-corpusdomini.html
2 The Council of Trent says…“If anyone says that in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist there remains the substance of bread and wine together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denies that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the entire substance of the wine into the blood, the species of the bread and wine only remaining, a change which the Catholic Church most fittingly calls transubstantiation: let him be anathema.” (Council of Trent, Session 13, Canons 1, 2; Denz. 883-884) http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch13.htm
Catholic Catechism #1376, quoting the Council of Trent: “Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood.” http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm
- Holy Communion is now open to adulterers.
Pope Francis’ words: “As for the way of dealing with different “irregular” situations [i.e. unmarried, sexually-active cohabitation], the Synod Fathers [the 2015 Family Synod] reached a general consensus, which I support: “In considering a pastoral approach towards people who have contracted a civil marriage, who are divorced and remarried, or simply living together, the Church has the responsibility of helping them understand the divine pedagogy of grace in their lives and offering them assistance so they can reach the fullness of God’s plan for them [i.e. valid marriage].”
-Amoris Laetitia #297
Does that “assistance” to unmarried, sexually active cohabitants include the receipt of Holy Communion? Francis says, “yes”, as follows……
“Because of forms of conditioning and mitigating factors, it is possible that in an objective situation of sin [sexually-active unmarried cohabitation] – which may not be subjectively culpable, or fully such – a person can be living in God’s grace, can love and can also grow in the life of grace and charity, while receiving the Church’s help to this end. In certain cases, this [the Church’s assistance] can include the help of the sacraments. Hence…I would also point out that the Eucharist “is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.”
-Amoris Laetitia #305
Analysis: The preceding formal, authoritative papal teaching says clearly that Holy Communion is no longer closed to unmarried sexually-active cohabitants (i.e. adulterers/fornicators). For those who say it does not say that, Pope Francis has issued a clarification, reconfirming his new teaching and formally declaring it to be “Authentic Magisterium”. That clarification has three components: (1) the Argentine Bishops’ 9-5-16 formal instruction to their priests stating that these new teachings in Amoris Laetitia do open Holy Communion to unmarried sexually-active cohabitants; (2) The Pope’s same-day (9-5-16) response letter to the Argentine Bishops (same day response from Rome to Argentina? no collusion there, right?) saluting and confirming the Bishops’ interpretation; (3) the Pope’s 12-2-17 Acta Apostolicae Sedis, recorded in the Vatican Archives and accessible online, by which he formally declared both the Bishops’ instructions and his same-day letter of confirmation to be “Authentic Magisterium”. All three of these documents can be found on the Vatican’ website, through the web links embedded below. 1
Therefore, by means of these three documents (the Bishops’ letter interpreting Amoris Laetitia, the Pope’s same-day confirmation of that letter’s interpretation of Amoris Laetitia, and the Pope’s 12-2-17 Acta Apostolicae Sedis declaring the two letters to be “Authentic Magisterium”), Pope Francis has formally declared that Holy Communion is no longer closed to persons engaged in ongoing sexually-active relationships (i.e. adultery/fornication).
For the first time in the history of the Church, a Pope has formally declared the following doctrine to be “Authentic Magisterium”: unrepentant, ongoing mortal sin is now welcome at God’s altar for Holy Communion.
1 Links:
- Non-Catholics may receive Holy Communion
Pope Francis words: In answer to the question of whether Lutherans (or, by implication, any Protestant) may receive Catholic Holy Communion, Pope Francis answered, “I do not have the authority to say, ‘Yes’. But, talk to the Lord and then make your own decision. I dare not say anything more.” 1
Analysis: Jesus and 2,000 years of Church doctrine say that the Eucharist is the actual, real body and blood of Christ.2 St Paul said that anyone who receives Holy Communion without recognizing that it is, in fact, the actual body of Christ commits serious sin.3 Beginning with St Paul, and for the past 2,000 years, Catholic doctrine has been that Holy Communion is not shareable4 with non-Catholics for two reasons:
a. Because the bread and the wine are not bread and wine at all, but are the actual body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, proper stewardship of the body of Christ, and proper stewardship of our non-Catholic brothers’ souls (we are our brothers’ keepers, notwithstanding Cain’s disclaimer in Genesis 4), we therefore are obligated to limit the receipt of Holy Communion to those persons who recognize the Eucharist as the body and blood of Christ.
b. The Eucharist, Holy Communion, is the central act of Catholic worship. It is the public sign and reaffirmation that we are a family, gathered at God’s table, eating the communal meal which is, in fact, the body and blood of our Savior Jesus Christ. Sharing that meal with those who scoff at God, mix him with impurities, or reject our beliefs denigrates our relationship with our family and our relationship with the Father of our family
Lutheran teaching rejects the Catholic understanding, based on Scripture and 2000 years of Magisterial teaching5, that, in Holy Communion, the entire bread and wine actually becomes the entire Jesus, body-and-blood-soul-and-divinity, and that no bread or wine remains. What appears to be bread and wine is actually not bread and wine at all. What we see and touch is only the “appearance” of bread and wine. The confecting of this miracle is performed by the Holy Spirit, but only through the conduit of the validly ordained Catholic priest. This miracle of Holy Communion is called “transubstantiation”. All Lutheran churches rejects transubstantiation. Some branches of Lutheranism profess, instead, “consubstantiation”, which means that Jesus’ body and the bread co-exist in the same space. In any event, there is no Lutheran church anywhere which agrees with the Catholic understanding of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
From the beginning, the Church has taught that the Eucharist is the actual body of Christ and that no bread or wine remain, but only the appearance of bread and wine.2,3,4,5 Lutheranism rejects this teaching.
St Paul, and the Church for the past 2000 years, both say that anyone who receives Holy Communion without recognizing that it is in fact the [unadulterated] body of Christ is guilty of serious sin. 2,3,4,5
Pope Francis says that St Paul and the Church should be ignored, that each person, instead, should rely on their own personal conscience in deciding whether to receive Holy Communion.1
There sits another example of the tyranny of personal conscience so loved by Pope Francis… it is, in effect, the deification of personal conscience. Adam and Eve tried it in Genesis 3 and it did not turn out well for them or us. What Adam and Eve missed, and had to learn the hard way, and what Bergoglianism also fails to understand, is that personal conscience forfeits its authority when it contradicts God.
1Links to Pope Francis’ statement that Lutherans may receive Catholic Holy Communion
2 The Eucharist, Holy Communion, is the real, actual body and blood of Jesus Christ.
Jesus (Matthew 26:26, Luke 22:19, 1 Corinthians 11:24)
“Take, eat, this is my body which is given for you.”
https://biblehub.com/matthew/26-26.htm
https://biblehub.com/luke/22-19.htm
https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/11-24.htm
St Ignatius. Bishop of Antioch, A.D. 110, personal student of St John, the Apostle
“…give ear to the bishop and to the presbytery (the priests) with an undivided mind, breaking one Bread, which is the medicine of immortality, the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ.” (Letter to the Ephesians).
“l desire the Bread of God which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire his Blood, which is love incorruptible.” (Letter to the Philadelphians)
“Take note of those who hold unorthodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God… They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ.” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans).
St Justin the Martyr. A.D. 150
“We call this food ‘Eucharist’; and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true…For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our savior was made incarnate by the work of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus. ” (First Apology, #65).
By A.D. 150, the structure of the Mass was set. St. Justin Martyr’s description of the mass reads as though he were describing today’s mass at your local parish church:
“No one may share the Eucharist with us unless (1) he believes that what we teach is true, (2) unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and (3) unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ.
“We do not consume the Eucharistic bread and wine as if it were ordinary food and drink, for we have been taught that as Jesus Christ our Savior became a man of flesh and blood by the power of the Word of God, so also the food that our flesh and blood assimilates for its nourishment becomes the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus by the power of his own words contained in the prayer of thanksgiving.”
St Irenaeus. Bishop of Lyons, A.D. 190 personal student of St Polycarp of Smyrna, who was a personal student of St John the Apostle
“He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is my body’. The cup is likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood.” (Against Heresies, Ch 4, 5, 17).
“If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body, and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?” (Against Heresies, Ch 2, 4, 33).
“He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood… and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body…a grain of wheat, falling on the ground, decomposes and rises up in manifold increase through the Spirit of God who contains all things; and then, through the wisdom of God, comes to the service of men, and receiving the Word of God, becomes the Eucharist, which is the body and blood of Christ.” (Against Heresies, Ch 2, 5).
St Cyprian of Carthage, A.D. 250
“As the prayer continues, we ask and say, ‘Give us this day our daily bread’, and we ask that this bread be given us daily, so that we who are in Christ and daily receive the Eucharist as the food of salvation, may not, by falling into some more grievous sin and then in abstaining from communicating, be withheld from the heavenly Bread, and be separated from Christ’s Body. He himself warns us, saying, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.’ Therefore do we ask that our Bread, which is Christ, be given to us daily, so that we who abide and live in Christ may not withdraw from his sanctification and from his Body.” (Treatise on the Lord’s Prayer, Ch 18).
“And who is more a priest of the Most High God than our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when he offered sacrifice to God the father, offered the very same which Melchisedech had offered, namely bread and wine, which is in fact his Body and Blood!” (Letter of Cyprian to Cecil).
St Cyril of Jerusalem, A.D. 350
“The Bread of the Eucharist after the invocation of the Holy Spirit is simple bread no longer, but the Body of Christ.” (Catechetical Lectures, Ch. 21.3).
“This one teaching of the blessed Paul is enough to give you complete certainty about the Divine Mysteries, by your having been deemed worthy of which, you have become united in body and blood with Christ. For Paul proclaimed clearly that: ‘On the night in which he was betrayed, our Lord Jesus Christ, taking bread and giving thanks, broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, ‘Take, eat, This is my body.’ And taking the cup and giving thanks, he said, ‘Take, drink, This is my blood.’ He himself, therefore, having declared and said of the Bread, This is my Body’, who will dare any longer doubt? And when he himself has affirmed and said, This is my blood’, who can ever hesitate and say it is not his Blood?” (Catechetical Lectures Ch 22.1)
“Do not, therefore, regard the Bread and the wine as simply that; for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the Body and Blood of Christ.” (Catechetical Lectures, Ch. 22.3).
“Having learned these things and certain in faith that what seems to be bread is not bread — though it tastes like it — but rather the Body of Christ, and what seems to be wine is not wine — though it seems so to the taste — but the Blood of Christ, strengthen your heart by receiving this Bread as spiritual food and put a cheerful face on your soul.” (Catechetical Lectures, Ch. 22.9).
St. Ephraim, A.D. 370
“And the Lord extending his hand, he gave them the Bread which his right hand had made holy: Take, all of you eat this, which my word has made holy. Do not now regard as bread that which I have given you; but take, eat this Bread, and do not scatter the crumbs, for what I have called my Body, that it is indeed. One particle from its crumbs is able to sanctify thousands and thousands, and is sufficient to afford life to those who eat it. Take, eat, entertaining no doubt of faith, because this IS my body, and whoever eats it in belief eats in its Fire and Spirit. But if any doubter eat of it…if anyone despise it or reject it or treat it with disrespect, it may be taken as a certainty that he is disrespecting the Son of God, who called it and actually made it to be his Body.” (Songs of Praise, Ch 4.4, 4.6).
St Athanasius A.D. 373
“But after the great and wonderful prayers have been completed, then the bread is become the Body, and the wine the Blood, of our Lord Jesus Christ. And again: Let us approach the celebration of the mysteries. This bread and this wine, so long as the prayers and supplications have not taken place, remain simply what they are. But after the great prayers and holy supplications have been sent forth, the Word comes down into the bread and wine — and thus is his Body confected.” (Sermon to the Newly Baptized).
St Ambrose of Milan A.D. 380
“As often as we receive the sacramental elements which through the mystery of the sacred prayer are transformed into the flesh and blood of the Lord, we proclaim the death of the Lord.” (The Faith, Ch. 4, 10, 124).
“You may perhaps say: This bread is ordinary.’ But that bread is bread before the words of the Sacraments: where the consecration has entered in, the bread becomes the flesh of Christ.” (The Sacraments, Ch. 4, 14).
St Gregory of Nyssa, A.D. 383
“Rightly then, do we believe that the bread consecrated by the word of God has been made over into the Body of God the Word.” (The Great catechism, 37).
St John Chrysostom. A.D. 386
“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not communion of the Blood of Christ? Very trustworthily and awesomely does he say it. For what he is saying is this: What is in the cup is that which flowed from his side, and we partake of it.” (On First Corinthians, Ch. 24.1.3)
“What is the Bread? The Body of Christ!” (On First Corinthians, Ch. 24.2.4).
“This is that body which was covered with blood, and pierced with a spear, which poured forth saving streams of blood and water. He gave us this body to hold and to eat, and this is a proof of intense love.” (On First Corinthians, Ch. 24.4).
“How many people now say: ‘l wish I could see his form, his figure, his clothes, his shoes!’ Behold, you do see him, you touch him, you eat him. And you, indeed, wish to see his clothes; but he allows you not only to see, but also to eat, and to touch, and to receive him within you.” (On First Corinthians, Ch. 24.4).
Theodore of Mopsuesita. A.D. 400
“He did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body, and this, is the symbol of my blood,’ but rather, he said, ‘This my body and my blood.’ Teaching us not to look upon the nature of what is set before us, but that it is transformed by means of the Eucharistic action (transubstantiation) into Flesh and Blood.” (Commentary on Matthew).
“It is proper, therefore, that when Christ gave the bread, he did not say, This is the symbol of my body,’ but rather, he said, This my body’. In the same way when he gave the cup he did not say, This is the symbol of my blood,’ but rather, he said, This is my blood. For he wanted us to look upon the Eucharistic elements after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit not according to their nature, but, that we should receive them as they are, the Body and Blood of our Lord. We ought not, therefore, to regard them merely as bread and wine, but as the Body and Blood of Christ, into which they are transformed by the descent of the Holy Spirit.” (Catechetical Homilies, Ch.5)
St Augustine of Hippo, A.D. 420
“I am mindful of my promise. For I promised you, who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the Sacrament of the Lord’s Table, which you now look upon and of which last night you were made participants. You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ. The faithful know what I am saying. They know Christ in the breaking of the Bread. For not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ, becomes Christ’s body. What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps may be sufficient for faith; yet faith does desire instruction. How is the bread his body? And the chalice, or what is in the chalice, how is it his blood? Those elements, brethren, are called Sacraments, because in them one thing is seen, but another is understood. What is seen is the corporeal species (i.e. the physical portion); but what is understood is the spiritual reality.” (Sermon to the newly baptized: Sermons, Ch. 227, 234.2, 272).
St Cyril of Alexandria, A.D. 430
“He said, This is my body’, and, This is my blood’, in order that you may not think that these things which are seen are a figure, or type, but that, in some mysterious manner, they are changes by almighty God into the body and blood of Christ, in truth. The savior himself says, Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.’ By this statement it is to be seen that Christ does not say he will be in us only after the fashion of some relation that is solely intellectual, but also through a participation truly according to nature.” (Commentary on John, Ch. 10.2).
St Leo l A.D. 461
“When the Lord says, Unless you shall have eaten the flesh of the Son of man and shall have drunk his blood, you shall not have life in you’, you ought to so communicate at the Sacred Table that you have no doubt whatever of the truth of the Body and Blood of Christ.” (Sermons, Ch. 91.3).
St John Damascene A.D. 743
“The bread itself and the wine are made over into the body and blood of God. If you inquire into the way in which this happens, let it suffice for you to hear that it is through the Holy Spirit, just as it was through the Holy Spirit that the Lord took on himself from the Holy Mother of God the flesh that subsisted in himself. More than this we do not know, except that the word of God is true and effective and all-powerful.” (The Source of Knowledge, Ch. 3, 4, 13).
3 Anyone who receives Holy Communion without recognizing that it is, in fact, the body and blood of Christ, commits serious sin
St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 11: 27-29
“Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord… For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the Lord’s body eats and drinks judgment on himself.”
https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/11-27.htm
St. Ephraim, A.D. 370
“And the Lord extending his hand, he gave them the Bread which his right hand had made holy: Take, all of you eat this, which my word has made holy. Do not now regard as bread that which I have given you; but take, eat this Bread, and do not scatter the crumbs, for what I have called my Body, that it is indeed. One particle from its crumbs is able to sanctify thousands and thousands, and is sufficient to afford life to those who eat it. Take, eat, entertaining no doubt of faith, because this IS my body, and whoever eats it in belief eats in its Fire and Spirit. But if any doubter eat of it…if anyone despise it or reject it or treat it with disrespect, it may be taken as a certainty that he is disrespecting the Son of God, who called it and actually made it to be his Body.” (Songs of Praise, Ch 4.4, 4.6).
4 Beginning with St Paul, and for the past 2,000 years, Catholic doctrine has been that Holy Communion is not shareable with non-Catholics.
St Justin the Martyr. A.D. 150
“We call this food ‘Eucharist’; and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true…For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our savior was made incarnate by the work of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus. ” (First Apology, #65).
5 For 2,000 years the Magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church, has said that:
a. The Eucharist is the real, actual body of our Lord Jesus Christ.
b. To receive the Eucharist while denying the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is serious sin.
c. Because of “a” and “b”, immediately above, and for other reasons, the Eucharist is not shareable with non-Catholics.
a. Catholic Catechism # 1333, 1376, 1411 (The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist)
“At the heart of the Eucharistic celebration are the bread and wine that, by the words of Christ and the invocation of the Holy Spirit, become Christ’s Body and Blood… Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation… Only validly ordained priests can preside at the Eucharist and consecrate the bread and the wine so that they become the Body and Blood of the Lord.”
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm
b. Catholic Catechism # 1385 (To receive the Eucharist while denying the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is serious sin.)
“Anyone who eats and drinks [the Eucharist] without discerning [that it is] the body [of Jesus Christ] eats and drinks judgment upon himself.” http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm
c. Guidelines for the reception of Holy Communion, US Conference of Catholic Bishops (The Eucharist is not shareable with non-Catholics)
“Because Catholics believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is a sign of the reality of the oneness of faith, life, and worship, members of those churches with whom we are not yet fully united are ordinarily not admitted to Holy Communion… We also welcome to this celebration those who do not share our faith in Jesus Christ. While we cannot admit them to Holy Communion, we ask them to offer their prayers for the peace and the unity of the human family.”
http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/guidelines-for-the-reception-of-communion.cfm
“Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone.” Catholic Code of Canon Law 844.1
http://www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris-canonici/eng/documents/cic_lib4-cann834-878_en.html
- We already have unity (among religions). Let’s not wait on the theologians to agree on the Eucharist.
Pope Francis’ words: “We [Catholics and non-Catholics] go together! Ecumenism is walking together, walking together, praying together… The ecumenism of prayer. In history, we have the ecumenism of blood. When they killed Christians they did not ask: Are you Catholic? Are you Orthodox? Are you Lutheran? Are you Anglican? No, [they asked] are you Christian! And the blood mixed together. It is the ecumensim of witness. Another ecumenism, of prayer, of blood… and then the ecumenism of the poor, those that work together. That we must work to help the sick, the infirm, for example, the people that are a little at the margin, below the poverty line, to help. “Matthew 25” is a beautiful ecumenical program, it comes from Jesus. To walk together: this is already Christian unity, so we must not wait for theologians to agree in order to come to the Eucharist.” 1
Analysis: Pope Francis believes that common experiences shared by Catholics and non-Catholics (like prayer, martyrdom, witnessing, and service to the poor) are reason enough for inter-communion, shared Eucharist. This belief contradicts 2000 years of Catholic Magisterial Dogma. It has nothing to do with the Catholic Church, but it has everything to do with opposing it.
1 Links:
https://zenit.org/articles/full-text-of-holy-fathers-press-conference-returning-from-romania-to-rome/
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/full-text-of-pope-francis-in-flight-press-conference-from-romania-53358
- Many things are the Eucharist. Ecumenical (multi-religion) prayer is Eucharist. The memory of Protestant martyrs is Eucharist. Protestant works of charity are Eucharist.
Pope Francis’ words: “We all walk together!… Are you Catholic? Are you Orthodox? Are you Lutheran? Are you Anglican? No, you are Christian!.… The Eucharist is done every day [by Catholics, Lutherans, Orthodox, Anglicans] with prayer, with the memory of the blood of our martyrs, with the works of charity and also loving one another.” 1
Analysis: Protestant memories, Protestant works, and Protestant prayers are Eucharist? What kind of gibberish is this? The world has never seen anything like this before. We are real-time witnesses to a willful, calculated attempt by a Pope to deconstruct the Catholic Church.
1 Links:
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/es/speeches/2019/june/documents/papa-francesco_20190602_romania-voloritorno.html
Homosexual Acts and LGBTQ Rights
- God made you homosexual and that is the way he wants you to be.
Pope Francis’ words: “Juan Carlos, it doesn’t matter that you are gay. God made you like this and that is the way He wants you to be.”
Analysis: In May 2018, major news outlets reported that Pope Francis spent three days in April at the Vatican with adult Chilean sexual abuse survivor, Juan Carlos Cruz, who is a professed homosexual.1
Since those reports, the Vatican has been asked many times to confirm or deny them but has declined to do so. The Vatican’s chief spokesman, Greg Burke, responded to multiple press requests for denial or confirmation by saying: NO COMMENT (“We do not comment on the Pope’s private conversations.”) 1
Describing his 3-day encounter with the Pope, Cruz told the news outlets that Pope Francis said to him, “You know, Juan Carlos, that you are a homosexual person does not matter. God made you like this. God loves you like this. The Pope loves you like this and you should love yourself and not worry about what people say.” 1
If the Pope said it (he has not denied it), what did he mean? This statement by the Pope clearly embraces homosexuality and homosexual behavior as being designed and bestowed by God. But the Bible says many times2, in both the Old and New Testaments, that homosexual behavior is one of only four sins so serious that they “cry to heaven for vengeance”. 4,000 years of Judeo-Christian moral teaching says that homosexual behavior is serious sin. The Catholic Catechism says that homosexual behavior is an “act of grave depravity” and “intrinsically disordered”.3
Side Note: [Bergoglians (e.g. Fr. James Martin, Cardinal Cupich, Cardinal Marx) say that the Church’s moral doctrines should adjust because they are grossly out of step with “lived reality”, out of sync with “concrete circumstances” (some of Pope Francis’ favorite phrases). But isn’t that the purpose of the Church’s doctrines? They call us to a higher moral standard than everyday living seems to offer us. The world should conform to God’s will, not God to the world’s.]
Although not yet proven by science, let’s assume for the sake of discussion that one’s sexual preferences have a genetic origin. That is, that one’s preference for same-sex partners, animal-sex partners, toy-sex partners, or a self-sex partner are all inherited traits. Bergoglianism says that because homosexual orientation is inherited, genetic, then homosexual behavior must be God’s positive will. But since when did genetics mandate morality? Do you see the resulting cascade of catastrophes? If all sexual desire and behavior is God’s positive will, then concupiscence is God’s positive will. If concupiscence is God’s positive will, then Original Sin is God’s positive will, which means that all of Scripture and Jesus are both cruel jokes played on Man by God.
Here’s the point: whether homosexuality is a pure choice or genetically related is IRRELEVANT to the morality of homosexual acts. Why? Because ALL temptation is genetically related. There is no temptation that is not genetic. The inclination to sin is passed from generation to generation as part of our fallen nature. A homosexual man’s (genetic?) desire for a man is similar, although not identical, to a heterosexual man’s (genetic?) desire to have sex with a woman not his wife. Both acts are moral crimes. It is irrational, therefore, to single out the particular temptation of homosexual behavior for elevated toleration or encouragement. That we desire something does not mean that God wants us to have it.
If “genetics” is the justifier, the normalizer of behavior, by which a circumstance or behavior is understood to be good, then any circumstance or behavior with a genetic origin must be “good”. A short list of such “goods” demonstrates the absurdity of the Bergoglian position: cancer, cystic fibrosis, schizophrenia, depression. These are all genetically derived or related, so they are therefore “goods”? God wants children to be born with cystic fibrosis?
Bergoglians single out homosexual behavior as being a “good” because of its genetic origin (“God made you this way.”). What is the criteria, the authority, by which they select that one particular desire, that one particular act, and separate it from what has been the constant teaching of Judeo-Christian thought for 4,000 years? “It seems like the right thing to do” cannot be the sole litmus test by which we judge the morality of any act, because then any act is moral for anyone who judges it to be so.
Therefore, the apparent (and ongoing) Bergoglian reinterpretation of truth is to be greatly discounted. Being unable to identify any rational explanation for the Pope’s statements on this subject, and others like it, one can only conclude that this Pope has decided that God speaks more clearly to Jorge Bergoglio today than he has spoken to the 2,000-year old Magisterial mind of the Church.
1 Links:
2 Bible references
Genesis 18:20 Romans 1:24-32
Genesis 19:4-6 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Leviticus 18:22 1 Timothy 1:10
Leviticus 20:13 Hebrews 13:4
Judges 19:22-23 Jude 1:7
3 Catholic Catechism
Catholic Catechism, Article 8, Section 5, #1867
Catholic Catechism, Article 6, Section 2, # 2357-8
Catholic Catechism, Article 6, Section 3, #2360
- The Church should consider the benefits of gay civil unions.
Pope Francis’ words:
On March 5, 2014 interview, confirmed by various Catholic new outlets (and never denied by the Pope), Pope Francis was asked, “Many nations have regulated (homosexual and other unmarried) civil unions. Is it a path that the Church can understand? But up to what point?”
Pope Francis answered, “Marriage is between a man and a woman. Secular states want to justify (homosexual and other unmarried) civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as ensuring health care. It [homosexual and other unmarried civil unions] is about pacts of cohabitating of various natures, of which I wouldn’t know how to list the different ways. One needs to see the different cases [of homosexual and other unmarried civil unions] and evaluate them [for costs and benefits] in their variety.” 1
Analysis: What do we make of this statement by Pope Francis? Cardinal Dolan says that Francis’s statement opens the debate on the pros-and-cons of homosexual civil unions (see Dolan web link below) 2. Dolan is right. But the Pope’s statement has effects far beyond Dolan’s observation. By saying that the costs-and-benefits of gay civil marriage should be carefully analyzed, Pope Francis has also said that gay civil unions are not intrinsically evil. (If they were intrinsically evil, how could they have benefits?) If gay civil unions are not intrinsically evil, then (because the acts are intrinsic to the unions) homosexual acts are not intrinsically evil, which means that God and his Church have both been wrong for 4000 years. Pope Francis tries to justify his novel teaching by saying that although gay civil unions should be considered, “marriage” is still between a man and a woman. So, Pope Francis agrees with God on marriage but disagrees with God on homosexual acts. The Pope’s position is wildly irrational, not to mention heretical. One cannot be both, and simultaneously, for and against God.
Homosexual acts are one of the four sins so heinous that the Bible sets them apart from other sins and says that they “cry to heaven for vengeance”. (Genesis 18:20-21; Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13; Ezekiel 16:49-50; Romans 1:26-28; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11; 1 Timothy 1:8-11; Jude 1:5-8).
The Catholic Catechism (#2357) describes homosexual acts as being “grave depravity”, “intrinsically disordered”, “contrary to natural law” and, therefore, “under no circumstances can they be approved.”1
If any homosexual activity is “gravely depraved” and one of only four sins that cry to heaven for vengeance, then why does Pope Francis say that homosexual civil unions can be beneficial, and why is he encouraging dialogue on the merits of such unions?
What is this papal statement if not a path to doctrinal change? If homosexual acts are intrinsically evil, there are no circumstances which can accommodate them, neither inside nor outside of civil unions. In fact, the Catholic Catechism says exactly that. “Under no circumstances can they be approved.” (Catholic Catechism #2357). One can reasonably conclude that “civil unions” are not an exception to this rule. On the other hand, if homosexual acts can be accepted under some circumstances (e.g. “civil unions”), then they are not intrinsically evil. If they are not intrinsically evil, then the Bible, the Catechism, and 2000 years of Church teaching are all wrong.
So, which is it? If the Church is right, then this Pope’s statement is heretical. If this Pope’s statement is not heretical, then the Church is wrong, and she is not what she has claimed to be for 2,000 years.
1 Links:
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/transcript-pope-francis-march-5-interview-with-corriere-della-sera
2 https://www.ncronline.org/news/politics/cardinal-dolan-pope-francis-opened-door-gay-civil-unions-debate
- Pope appoints, and retains, LGBTQ activist Fr. James Martin to Vatican Communications Dicastery.
Pope Francis’ act:
On April 12, 2017, Pope Francis appointed LGBTQ activist Fr. James Martin to the Vatican Communications Dicastery. 1
Analysis: In the two years since Fr. Martin’s appointment, Martin has produced a long litany of preposterous errors, apparently all approved by Pope Francis since the Pope continues to support Martin in his Vatican office. Here is a partial list of Martin’s atrocities:
- The Holy Spirit is female. “The Holy Spirit knows what She is doing.”
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/fr.-james-martin-our-lady-was-a-lesbian
https://www.facebook.com/FrJamesMartin/posts/10154760118671496?pnref=story - Church teaching on homosexuality is not authoritative because it has not been accepted by the LGBTQ Community. https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/eight-extreme-things-fr.-james-martin-just-said-about-catholics-and
- Homosexual marriage is merely a different tradition. “Why is it so terrible to go to a gay wedding, but it is not terrible to go to a Jewish wedding? Catholics need to see it in light of that, that it is a different tradition…different belief system than most Catholics are used to…but it’s supporting the person that you love.”
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/eight-extreme-things-fr.-james-martin-just-said-about-catholics-and - Homosexual couples should be allowed to kiss each other at mass. “So I hope in ten years you (homosexual male) will be able to kiss your (homosexual male) partner (at mass) or, you know, soon to be your husband. Why not? What’s the terrible thing?”
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/eight-extreme-things-fr.-james-martin-just-said-about-catholics-and - “LGBTQ Catholics are fully Catholic. Like Jesus, LGBTQ Catholics are rejected. LGBTQ Catholics should demand to participate in all ministries in the Church, including all leadership ministries.”2
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=370073563910969
1 Links:
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2017/04/12/father-james-martin-appointed-pope-francis-vatican-department-communications
Jesus
- Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 was man’s sharing, not God’s multiplying.
Pope Francis’ words:
“This is the miracle: rather than a multiplication it is a sharing.”1
Analysis: This homily by Pope Francis, delivered in St. Peter’s Square on 6-2-13, is so classic, so epitomically Bergoglian, that is should be carved on a rock and preserved for study by all future students of heresy in the Church. What Bergoglianism fails to understand is that Jesus’ feeding the 5000 is not about the generosity of man, it is about the generosity of God. It is not about man’s learning to share his goods with others. It is about the abundance of God’s love and his absolute rule over everything temporal. This is not to say that sharing is a bad idea. All Christians are called to see themselves as mere stewards of God’s gifts. But that is not the message of this miracle. The job of the Christian teacher is to show how the world can be changed to fit the Gospel. Here, Pope Francis shows how the Gospel can be changed to fit the Bergoglian (socialist) view of the world.
1 Links:
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/angelus/2013/documents/papa-francesco_angelus_20130602.html (paragraph #4)
- Sinners’ blood, and Joseph’s blood, run through Jesus’ veins.
Pope Francis words: “In the Gospel, we have heard the genealogy of Jesus (Mt 1:1-17….Joseph’s genealogy), which is not a “simple list of names”, but rather a “living history”, the history of the people that God journeyed with; by making himself one of us, God wanted to announce that the history of the just and of sinners runs through his blood.” 1
Analysis: Pope Francis’ explains in his 9-8-17 homily (Vatican weblink below1, paragraph #4) that Jesus had in his veins the “history” of pagans and sinners. How can “history” be in blood except by blood? As proof of his statement he cites the genealogy of St. Joseph2, Mary’s husband. In other words, according to this Pope, the blood of sinners, including Joseph’s blood, courses through Jesus’ veins.
What is this Pope trying to teach us by saying that Jesus had sinners’ blood in his veins? That sin is part of Jesus’ experience? And, what is he trying to teach us by saying that Joseph was Jesus’ biological father (for how else could Jesus have Joseph’s blood in his veins?). If Joseph was Jesus’ biological father then Mary is not a virgin and Jesus is not God.
Ponder this historic moment. Recorded history has never seen one like it. We have before us what appears to be a Pope explaining to the world that Jesus is not God.
So, does this Pope really think that Jesus had Joseph’s blood and sinners’ blood in his veins? His words say that, but does he really mean what he says? Heaven only knows.
Jesus told us to be in the world, but not of the world. With that counsel in mind, here’s the problem with this Pope, and it is far worse than gaffes or odd sayings: he so dilutes and distorts the Faith that it becomes indistinguishable from the world it came to save.
Links
1 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/homilies/2017/documents/papa-francesco_20170908_omelia-viaggioapostolico-colombiavillavicencio.html
(9-8-17 Papal homily, paragraph #4)
2https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1%3A1-17&version=NIV
- Jesus became the devil.
Pope Francis’ words:
“I wear the Cross… as a reminder of the One who made himself to be sin, who made himself to be devil, serpent for us.” (This meditation is recorded in the Vatican Archives and can be read on the Vatican web link, below.) 1
Analysis:
On April 4, 2017, Pope Francis presented this Morning Mediation in the Domus Sanctae Marthae (Saint Martha’s House), a building located contiguous to St. Peter’s Basilica. The building functions as a guest house for clergy having business with the Holy See, and as the temporary residence of members of the College of Cardinals while participating in a papal conclave to elect a new pope. Pope Francis has lived in a suite in the building since his election in March 2013, declining to use the papal apartments in the Apostolic Palace.
Pope Francis says that Jesus became the devil when he was raised on the Cross1. Jesus became the devil? Pope Francis is explaining to us that the Bible itself (Numbers 21:4-9) teaches us that Jesus became the devil. He is saying that Jesus was raised on the Cross just as the serpent was raised on the staff in Numbers 21 and, therefore, Jesus is the “serpent” who becomes sin for us, who becomes the sinner for us, who becomes the devil.
St Paul explains in 2 Corinthians 5:21 that Jesus “who never sinned, became sin for us”. What does St Paul mean when he says that “Jesus became sin for us”? St Augustine explains: “He [Jesus] loved us so much that, sinless himself, he suffered for us sinners the punishment we deserved for our sins. He bore the punishment of sinners, though without sin himself. “ (Saint Augustine of Hippo. Sermon Guelf 3 from the Office of Readings, Monday of Holy Week) 2
St. Thomas Aquinas joins St. Augustine in opposition to Pope Francis, explaining 2 Corinthians 5:21 as follows3:
“He made him to be sin, that is, the victim of sacrifice for sin.”
“He made him to be sin, that is, made him assume mortal and suffering flesh.”
“In Christ there is no proneness to evil, much less sin.”
Jesus did not become the devil, as Pope Francis says. Rather, Jesus became the sin offering on our behalf. He took our penalty for sin, but he in no way sinned or knew sin. (“He who knew no sin he [God the Father] made to be sin on our behalf.” 2 Corinthians 5:21)
The image of the serpent was raised on the staff in Numbers 21 to save the Hebrews from real serpents. Jesus was raised on the Cross to save the people from their real sins (John 3:14). But the image of the serpent was not a real serpent, nor was Jesus a sinner, much less the devil. The messages of Numbers 21, John 3, and 2 Corinthians 5 are all the same message: God saves his people. There is nothing here that says Jesus became the devil.
Why would Pope Francis manipulate Scripture to say something that it does not say? Because if Jesus can become the devil, then sin is not nearly the problem the Church thought it was. If sin is not a problem, then the world is free to kumbaya its way into the Bergoglian Church, which is actually not a church at all but merely an imaginary umbrella claiming to cover the universal, secular family of Man.
Links:
1http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/cotidie/2017/documents/papa-francesco-cotidie_20170404_in-the-sign-of-the-cross.html (paragraph #9)
2https://enlargingtheheart.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/augustine-of-hippo-let-me-not-boast-except-in-the-cross-of-our-lord-jesus-christ/
3 Summa Theologiae, Third Part, Question 15
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4015.htm
29. On the Cross, Jesus ceased to be God and was
stained by sin. Pope Francis’ words:
“Look at the Crucifix and see this very mystery: a God ‘emptied of his divinity’? — completely! … If we want to know the love of God, we look at the Crucifix. There we meet a man who is tortured, died, who is God, emptied of divinity, tarnished, who ‘became sin.” (This meditation is recorded in the Vatican Archives and can be read on the Vatican web link, below1, and, attachment #2 to this transmittal.)
Analysis:
On the Cross, Jesus was God, but was not divine? How can God be both God and not God? How can the Spotless Lamb of God2 be tarnished, stained?
On March 14, 2016, Pope Francis presented this Morning Mediation in the Domus Sanctae Marthae (Saint Martha’s House), a building located contiguous to St. Peter’s Basilica where he maintains a suite of rooms for his lodging.
In this meditation, recorded in the Vatican Archives, Pope Francis says that, on the Cross, Jesus “is God” but is “emptied of divinity”. How can God be God without divinity? Heretics known as Adoptionists (2nd century) and Arians (4th century) would certainly agree with Pope Francis regarding this moment on the Cross since they believed that Jesus was not God at all.
Pope Francis also says that, on the Cross, Jesus was “tarnished”, stained. The Spotless Lamb is tarnished? By what Magisterial authority does this Pope proclaim that the Spotless Lamb was stained? (“Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.” 1 Peter 1:19). Tarnished with what? Sin, of course. Why does Pope Francis say that Jesus was tarnished with sin? If his statement is true, then Christianity is a cruel joke on man.
So, there we have it. Straight from the Pope. On the Cross, Jesus was not divine (“emptied of his divinity”… he days this twice, so there can be no mistake about his meaning), and he was stained with sin (“tarnished”). This is an astounding proclamation. To my knowledge, no bishop of the Catholic Church has yet objected to these blasphemies. There are only three possible reasons I can think of why the bishops remain silent:
- They are unaware of the blasphemy.
- They are aware of the blasphemy, but are too cowardly to speak.
- They agree with the Pope on these points.
In any event, God cannot be happy with the Catholic Church’s moral paralysis in the face of the Bergoglian assault on its doctrine.
Links:
1http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/cotidie/2016/documents/papa-francesco-cotidie_20160315_the-serpent-that-kills-and-the-one-that-saves.html (paragraphs 7 and 9)
2 1 Peter 1:19
Marriage and Divorce
- Marriage is only an “ideal”, not a prerequisite, for sexually active cohabiting couples.
Read carefully what follows. Pope Francis is saying that, although Christian marriage is the ideal venue for human sexual cohabitation, it is not the only valid venue. Furthermore, Pope Francis is saying that, sometimes, depending upon personal conscience, unmarried sexually active cohabitation is precisely what God wants us to do.
Pope Francis’ words:
“I have seen a great deal of fidelity in these cohabiting couples, a great deal of fidelity; and I am certain that this is a true marriage, they have the grace of matrimony, precisely because of the fidelity that they have.” 1
“It can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situations [e.g. the divorced and remarried, fornicators 2] are living in a state of mortal sin (because) one’s responsibility for an action may be nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological and social factors. Pastoral discernment [not doctrine], taking into account a person’s properly formed conscience, must take responsibility for these situations. The individual’s conscience needs to be better incorporated into the Church’s praxis in certain situations which do not objectively embody our understanding of marriage (e.g. divorce and remarriage). Conscience can recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God [e.g. continuing to live more uxorio {sexually active} with a person not your spouse], and come to see with a certain moral security that it [a sexually active relationship with a person not your spouse] is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while not yet fully the objective ideal [i.e. the “objective ideal” being Christian marriage]. In any event, let us recall that this discernment is dynamic; it must remain ever open to new stages of growth and to new decisions which can enable the ideal [Christian marriage] to be more fully realized.” Amoris Laetitia #’s 301 – 305 3
“Christian marriage, as a reflection of the union between Christ and his Church, is fully realized [not “only” realized] in the union between a man and a woman who give themselves to each other in a free, faithful and exclusive love, who belong to each other until death and are open to the transmission of life, and are consecrated by the sacrament, which grants them the grace to become a domestic church and a leaven of new life for society. Some forms of union (unmarried sexual cohabitation) radically contradict this ideal (Christian marriage), while others realize it in at least a partial and analogous way.” (Amoris Laetitia #292) 3
“It must remain clear that this [divorce and remarriage, fornication] is not the ideal which the Gospel proposes for marriage and the family.” (Amoris Laetitia #298) 3
“I would point out that in no way must the Church desist from proposing the full ideal of marriage.” (Amoris Laetitia #307) 3
“A lukewarm attitude, any kind of relativism, or an undue reticence in proposing that ideal, would be a lack of fidelity to the Gospel and also of love on the part of the Church for young people themselves. To show understanding in the face of exceptional situations never implies dimming the light of the fuller ideal.” (Amoris Laetitia #307) 3
“At the same time, from our awareness of the weight of mitigating circumstances – psychological, historical and even biological – it follows that “without detracting from the evangelical ideal, there is a need to accompany with mercy and patience the eventual stages of personal growth as these progressively appear”, making room for “the Lord’s mercy, which spurs us on to do our best.” (Amoris Laetitia #308) 3
“The Church’s pastors, in proposing to the faithful the full ideal of the Gospel and the Church’s teaching, must also help them to treat the weak with compassion, avoiding aggravation or unduly harsh or hasty judgements. The Gospel itself tells us not to judge or condemn.” (Amoris Laetitia #308) 3
Jesus’ and the Magisterium’s words:
Jesus:
Divorce and remarriage is adultery (i.e. mortal sin). (Mark 10:7-12; Luke 16:18; Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:8-9)
Magisterium:
“According to our Teacher (Jesus), they are sinners who contract a second marriage, even though it be in accord with human law.” -St Justin Martyr, First Apology 15 (A.D. 151)
“In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ, the Church affirms that a new union cannot be recognized as valid if the preceding marriage was valid. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God’s law.” -Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1994) 4
“If the prior marriage of two divorced and remarried members of the faithful was valid, under no circumstances can their new union be considered lawful and therefore reception of the sacraments is intrinsically impossible. The conscience of the individual is bound to this norm without exception.” -Letter of the CDF concerning objections to the Church’s teaching on remarriage and divorce (1998) 5
“New unions following divorce under civil law cannot be considered regular or legitimate. This severity does not derive from a purely disciplinary law or from a type of legalism. It is rather a judgment pronounced by Jesus himself.”
-Propositions on the Doctrine of Christian Marriage 6
“People who have obtained a divorce usually intend to enter into a new union, obviously not with a Catholic religious ceremony…This is an evil (because) their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church.” -Familiaris Consortio #84 (1981) 7
Analysis: Pope Francis is saying that, although Christian marriage is the ideal venue for human sexual cohabitation, it is not the only valid venue. Furthermore, Pope Francis is saying that, sometimes, depending upon personal conscience, unmarried sexually active cohabitation is precisely what God wants us to do.
“I have seen a great deal of fidelity in these cohabiting couples, a great deal of fidelity; and I am certain that this is a true marriage, they have the grace of matrimony, precisely because of the fidelity that they have.” 1
“Some forms of union [unmarried sexually active cohabitation] radically contradict this ideal [i.e. Christian marriage], while others realize it in at least a partial and analogous way.” Those alternative, valid venues [e.g. divorce-and-remarriage, fornication] 2 can often be “the most generous response which can be given to God” and, we can become morally certain that such unmarried sexually active cohabitation “is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal [i.e. Christian marriage].” -Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia, Chapter 8
Pope Francis does not think that he is changing truth, but that he is correcting the Church’s 2,000-year old misunderstanding of truth. But if the Church’s truth has been false for 2,000 years, or is now somehow morphing into falsehood by some unknown Jesuit alchemy, then what is the Church?
Can any reader look me in the eye and, with a straight face, tell me that this man is not proposing to change fundamental Church doctrine? According to Pope Francis, what was mortal sin, is no longer mortal sin and, in some cases, is precisely what God is asking us to do.
Do you comprehend the scope of the existential problem we face?
Links:
1http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2016/june/documents/papa-francesco_20160616_convegno-diocesi-roma.html (3rd paragraph from the end)
2 “I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves.” Amoris Laetitia #297 https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
3https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
4http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_14091994_rec-holy-comm-by-divorced_en.html
5http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19980101_ratzinger-comm-divorced_en.html#top
6http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_1977_sacramento-matrimonio_en.html
7http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio.html
- On September 8, 2017, Pope Francis abolished the Pope St. John Paul II Institute for Marriage and Family (modeled on Scripture, the Natural Law, and the Magisterium), and replaced it with his own new Institute (modeled on Amoris Laetitia).
In this item #29, I will reverse my usual sequence which places the Pope Francis act or quote first, and begin instead with Analysis. The reason for this resequencing is that the events take place over time, and, Pope Francis’ language is particularly murky in this case so it will help the reader grasp his meaning if the reader first has a preliminary grasp of the history behind the event and a general perspective of what Francis has actually done here.
Analysis:
- On October 7, 1982, Pope St John Paul II established the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family with the first-stated and primary goal “To provide a comprehensive understanding of person, marriage, and family faithful to the Catholic tradition”, a tradition explained in detail by the Papal Encyclical, Veritatis Splendor, written ten years later by the same Pope St. John Paul II. 1
- On September 8, 2017, Pope Francis abolished that Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family and replaced it with his own new Institute, which he named and purposed as follows: “the Theological Institute for Matrimonial and Family Science, broadening its field of interest [beyond that of the JP2 Institute], both in relation to the new dimensions of the pastoral task [Red Flag! Bergoglian code word for doctrinal change!] and of the ecclesial mission, and with reference to developments [Red Flag! Bergoglian code word for doctrinal change!] in the human sciences and in anthropological culture.” 2
- In June 2019, the new statutes for the new Institute were promulgated, specifically stating that the new Institute will operate “precisely in fulfillment of the aims and solicitations expressed by the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia and adhering to the renewed needs of today’s times.” 3
- On July 24, 2019, more than 150 students at the Pontifical John Paul II Institute in Rome signed a letter warning that newly approved statutes will undermine the institute’s mission and identity.4 For example, under the new statutes, the Institute’s faculty chair of moral theology was abolished, and, the Institutes two moral theology professors were dismissed.
The Pope St John Paul II Institute abolished by Pope Francis was modeled on Scripture, the Natural Law, and the Magisterium. Read JP2’s Encyclical, Veritatis Splendor5.
The new Bergoglian Institute is modeled on Situational Ethics/Moral Relativism, as evidenced by its foundational document, Amoris Laetitia. 6
We know that the new Bergoglian institute will be based on Amoris Laetitia because the Institute’s new statutes specify such,3 and the president of the Institute, Msgr. Pierangelo Sequeri, has said precisely that:
“The Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia will naturally be integral to the curricula and in the material that provides magisterial support for the various courses, as well as for in-depth research within seminars and in faculty publications.…. The central importance of the magisterial teaching of Amoris Laetitia, which must guide theological and pastoral understanding of the family—even in its most problematic circumstances—must surely imply recognizing the credence due to the authoritative expression of the living teaching of the Church.” -Msgr. Pierangelo Sequeri https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/08/12/amoris-laetitia-is-at-the-center-of-the-controversy-over-the-john-paul-ii-theological-institute/
The two schools of thought (Veritatis Splendor and Amoris Laetitia) are in direct opposition to each other.
Anyone who reads Veritatis Splendor and Amoris Laetitia side-by-side will be struck by their diametrical opposition. I will give you one example of such contradiction.
Amoris Laetitia
Unmarried, sexually-active co-habitation is “true marriage”.
“I have seen a great deal of fidelity in these [unmarried] cohabiting couples, a great deal of fidelity; and I am certain that this is a true marriage, they have the grace of matrimony, precisely because of the fidelity that they have.” (Pope Francis speech, 6-16-16) http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2016/june/documents/papa-francesco_20160616_convegno-diocesi-roma.html
Marriage is the “ideal” situation for sexually-active couples, but not a prerequisite.
“Some forms of union (unmarried sexual cohabitation) radically contradict this ideal (Christian marriage), while others realize it in at least a partial and analogous way.” (Amoris Laetitia #292)
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
Veritatis Splendor
“It would be a very serious error to conclude… that the Church’s teaching is essentially only an “ideal” which must then be adapted, proportioned, graduated to the so-called concrete possibilities of man, according to a “balancing of the goods in question”. (Veritatis Splendor, #103)
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
So, what are we to make of this clear contradiction of one Pope by another? “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
– Jesus (Mark 3:23–27; Matthew 12:25–29; Luke 11:17–22)
With this background in mind, the reader is prepared to read Pope Francis words…..
Pope Francis’ words (9-8-17): “More recently, the Church has taken a further Synodal journey… the climax of this intense journey was the post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, published on 19 March 2016… We do well to focus on concrete realities… pastoral challenges… pastoral conversion… pastoral sensibility… Anthropological-cultural change, that today influences all aspects of life and requires an analytic and diversified approach, does not permit us to limit ourselves to practices in pastoral ministry and mission that reflect forms and models of the past… Therefore, I have decided to institute a Theological Institute for Matrimonial and Family Science, broadening its field of interest, both in relation to the new dimensions of the pastoral task and of the ecclesial mission, and with reference to developments in the human sciences and in anthropological culture in a field so fundamental for the culture of life… With the present Motu Proprio I institute the Pontifical John Paul II Theological Institute for Matrimonial and Family Science which, linked to the Pontifical Lateran University, succeeds and substitutes the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, established by the Apostolic Constitution Magnum Matrimonii Sacramentum, which thus comes to an end… The (new) Pontifical Theological Institute, thus renewed [‘renewed’?… the New Pope Francis Institute abolished and replaced the JP II Institute. It did not “renew” it.], will adapt its own structures and use the necessary tools – professorships, lecturers, programmes, administrative staff – to carry out the scientific and ecclesial mission entrusted to it.” 2
Links:
Read these two links first, to get good overview of these events:
1 http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/es/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_07101982_magnum-matrimonii-sacramentum.html
2 https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/motu_proprio/documents/papa-francesco-motu-proprio_20170908_summa-familiae-cura.html
3 http://www.istitutogp2.it/wp/wp-content/uploads/Statuti-Approvazione-CEC-2019.07.11-INTEGRATO.pdf
4 https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/students-say-changes-at-romes-jpii-institute-undermine-its-mission-66538
5 http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
6 https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
Chronological list of relevant links:
9-19-17
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-francis-sets-up-new-john-paul-ii-institute-on-marriage-and-family
9-23-17
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2017/09/23/farewell-to-the-pontifical-john-paul-ii-institute-for-studies-on-marriage-and-family/
7-24-19
https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/all-profs-suspended-president-dismissed-as-part-of-destruction-of-john-paul-ii-institute?fbclid=IwAR0f5D6IG1CKypWx8eX1c1XzxKaAyseGLYGcJ2LfsIxTzCr1tIIPZTBuJSE
7-26-29
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/john-paul-ii-institute-upheaval
7-29-19
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/students-push-back-on-changes-at-john-paul-ii-institute
7-31-19
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/controversy-continues-at-john-paul-ii-institute
8-6-19
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/john-paul-ii-institute-bishops-dismissed-professor-comment
8-8-19
http://m.ncregister.com/daily-news/vp-of-romes-jpii-institute-at-stake-here-is-more-than-the-survival-of-an-ac?fbclid=IwAR17X08dk_IdmNNPVT9sS90aZVkiDlQbbMuxdLm2dYHwaTvuSMVEi8E3mdQ
8-9-19
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/losing-a-legacy-assessing-the-john-paul-ii-institute-controversy
8-16-19
https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2019/08/16/international-scholars-express-concerns-about-john-paul-ii-institute/?fbclid=IwAR2X4PKn8JNhuqnICDPuA6PTnFAcQG2vylKwqtyDTAg4WHNXKLG-Zhf3s9Q
8-17-19
https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/opinion/firemen-for-the-jpii-institute-scandal-struggling-to-put-out-the-fire
8-19-19
https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/08/betraying-the-legacy-of-john-paul-ii
8-24-19
https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/jpii-purge-could-damage-all-church-universities-german-philosopher-warns
8-30-19
https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/opinion/founding-prof-laments-destruction-of-john-paul-ii-institute
http://m.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/john-paul-ii-institute-is-being-destroyed-says-friend-of-late-pope
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Paul_II_Pontifical_Theological_Institute_for_Marriage_and_Family_Sciences
- Unmarried sexually-active cohabitation
(adultery, fornication) “is a true marriage” because it has “the grace of marriage”.
Pope Francis’ words (recorded on the Vatican web link, below1): “Yet I really say that I have seen so much fidelity in these [unmarried sexually-active] cohabitations, so much fidelity; and I am sure this is a true marriage, they have the grace of marriage, precisely because of the loyalty they have.” 1
Analysis: On June 16, 2016, Pope Francis spoke to the Pastoral Congress on the Family for the Diocese of Rome. His remarks are recorded in the Vatican Archives1 and many Catholic web links2. He was asked this question:
“Holiness, good evening. Wherever we go, today we hear of a marriage crisis. So I wanted to ask you: what can we aim for today to educate young people in love, especially in sacramental marriage, overcoming their resistance, skepticism, disillusionment, fear of the definitive? Thank you.”
In response to the question about sacramental marriage, the Pope answered:
“I am sure this [unmarried sexually active cohabitation] is a true marriage, they have the grace of marriage, precisely because of the loyalty they have.” 1
The Pope is saying that the same grace that comes to the spouses through the sacrament of marriage [he was answering a question about sacramental marriage] also comes to unmarried sexually-active cohabitants. The Pope is explaining to us that what has been serious sin for at least 4000 years is now a sacrament.
Links
1 See third to last paragraph: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2016/06/16/0447/01021.html
2 https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/pope-francis-most-marriages-are-null-some-cohabitations-are-real-marriage
Mary
- The Immaculate Conception is a lie. Mary was
not born without sin
Pope Francis’ words: “They are Our Lady and Saint Joseph! Yes, but let us not think it was easy for them: saints are not born, they become thus, and this is true for them too.” 1
Analysis: This 12-21-18 address by Pope Francis, recorded in the Vatican Archives and published on the Vatican website1, says Mary was not born a Saint, much less immaculate (sinless), but, like all Saints, became one over time, during her life on earth.
But the infallible teaching of the Church is that Mary was conceived without sin, and therefore, a Saint from her conception.
In his ex-cathedra (infallible) statement on December 8, 1854, Pope Pius IX declared, “Accordingly, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, for the honor of the Holy and undivided Trinity, for the glory and adornment of the Virgin Mother of God, for the exaltation of the Catholic Faith, and for the furtherance of the Catholic religion, by the authority of Jesus Christ our Lord, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own: “We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful.”2
Pope Pius IX said that Mary was born without sin, the Saint of Saints. Pope Francis said that Mary was not born a Saint, but became one over time. There is no reasonable reconciliation of the two Popes’ declarations.
Links
1http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2018/december/documents/papa-francesco_20181221_dipendenti-vaticani.html (paragraph 5)
2 http://www.piustheninth.com/apps/app12.htm
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9ineff.htm
- Mary had defects.
Pope Francis’ words: “The Church and the Virgin Mary are mothers, both of them; what is said of the Church can be said also of Our Lady and what is said of Our Lady can also be said of the Church!… All mothers have defects, we all have defects, but when we speak of our mother’s defects we gloss over them, we love her as she is.” (September 11, 2013)1
Analysis: These words are from the Pope’s homily delivered at his regular Wednesday general Audience on Wednesday, September 11, 2013, recorded on the Vatican web link. How can Mary be born Immaculate2, free of sin, and also be defective?
Links:
1 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/audiences/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130911_udienza-generale.html
2 http://www.ewtn.com/LIBRARY/PAPALDOC/P9INEFF.htm
http://www.piustheninth.com/apps/app12.htm
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9ineff.htm
- Mary doubted God and called God a liar.
Pope Francis’ words:
“She (Mary, at the Cross) was silent, but in her heart, how many things told the Lord! ‘You [God]… told me that he [Jesus] would be great, you had told me that you would have given him the throne of David, his forefather, that he would have reigned forever and now I see him there!’ Our Lady was human! And perhaps she even had the desire to say: ‘Lies! I was deceived!’ (Now, the Pope falsely attributes a Bergoglian heresy to John Paul II) John Paul II would say this, speaking about Our Lady in that moment.”1
Pope St John Paul II’s’ words: Here are JP2’s actual words which Pope Francis claims show Mary doubting God…..“The peak of this earthly pilgrimage of faith was Golgotha, where Mary intimately lived her Son’s paschal mystery: in a certain sense she died as a mother in the death of the Son and was opened to the “resurrection” with a new motherhood for the Church (cf. Jn19: 25-27). There, on Calvary, Mary experienced the night of faith, like that of Abraham on Mount Moriah, and after the enlightenment of Pentecost she continued on her pilgrimage of faith until the Assumption, when the Son welcomed her into eternal bliss.” (JP2, General Audience, Wednesday, March 21, 2001) 2
Analysis: This Bergoglian rambling is so confused, so contorted, that one must pause for a moment to take a breath and let it all sink in before proceeding. Pope Francis is telling us what he thinks he knows to be the words that Mary had in her mind as she stood at the foot of the Cross and witnessed her son’s death. Now this is all very interesting, since nowhere in Scripture are we told the words that Mary had in her mind. Instead, Scripture simply tells us that Mary was there.3 We can reasonably assume that Mary felt pain because she was Jesus’ mother, and, because Simeon had told her 33 years before that “a sword will piece your heart”.4 But feeling pain is not doubting God, nor does it mean calling God a liar.
Pope Francis cites Pope St John Paul II as confirmation of Pope Francis’ statement that Mary doubted God and thought him a liar. Is that true? Did the Sainted Pope John Paul II actually say that perhaps Mary accused God of lying, or wanted to?
There is nothing, nothing, in Pope St John Paul II’s Marian teaching that remotely supports Pope Francis’ statement that Mary doubted God at the Crucifixion. And yet, Pope Francis quotes John Paul II as an authority for that position. Did the Crucifixion cause Mary pain? A heaviness of heart? A deep and piercing sadness born of a parent’s loss of their child? In Pope St John Paul II’s words, did Mary, at the crucifixion, experience a “night of faith”? Yes, of course, all of those things. But her faith, like Abraham’s, persevered, never doubting. John Paul II recognizes Mary’s perseverance of faith and likens it to Abraham’s on Mount Moriah where Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his dearest for the love of God. There is nothing, nothing, in the Abraham-Isaac narrative in Genesis 22 that even hints that Abraham doubted God. In fact, the opposite is true. Abraham’s response to God’s will was pure obedience:
“Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.” 5
What was Abraham’s (like Mary’s) response to God’s command to sacrifice his son, Isaac? Worship and obedience. Abraham hurt, but did not doubt God. Mary hurt, but did not doubt God. Why does Francis propose that she did, or may have? Here is the answer: By commonizing Mary, by reducing her to human sin, he erodes one of the icons of the Catholic Faith, and, he dilutes the meaning and effect of sin itself. Why would he want to erode the Catholic Faith and dilute the meaning of sin? Because both are tactics in his campaign to remove all barriers to a world religion which would be based on Bergoglianism.
For those who do not yet recognize or understand Bergoglianism, a quick scan of Pope Francis’ words here may lead them to think that he is simply saying that Mary was tempted to doubt, but did not doubt.6 To those readers I will say, be careful. Pope Francis is not a word-bumbler. He is a brilliant wordsmith, carefully crafting his words so that the reader is drawn, by stealth, over time, away from orthodoxy and into Bergoglianism. Pope Francis says that “perhaps” Mary had the “desire” to accuse God of lying. What is the effect of Pope Francis’ word choice?
“Perhaps” means “possibly but not certainly”. (Webster’s Dictionary)
“Sin is an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to God’s law.” (Catholic Catechism #1849)
So applying the Catechism’s and Webster’s Dictionary’s meaning to Pope Francis words, he said, “It is possible that Mary sinned.”
Some readers may say, “Whoa, hold on there, Chip, you are taking his words out of context.”
To those readers, I will say, fine. Let’s put his words within the context of his other teachings on Mary:
“Mary was not born a Saint.” (see Day 32, Item #31 of this work)
“Mary had defects.” (see Day 33, Item #32 of this work)
Links:
1 Pope Francis statement (quoted by Vatican Radio)
https://www.romereports.com/en/2013/12/20/pope-s-mass-to-understand-god-s-mystery-embrace-silence-reflection/
1 Pope Francis statement summary (La Stampa report, quoting Vatican Radio)
https://www.lastampa.it/2013/12/20/vaticaninsider/francis-let-us-seek-the-silence-that-guards-our-relationship-with-god-BrniD35DhYFalRnYUpCmYN/pagina.html
2 Pope St. John Paul II’s statement:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/audiences/2001/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_20010321.html
3Mary at the Crucifixion
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+19&version=NIV
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+27%3A32-56&version=NIV
4 Simeon tells Mary that “a sword will pierce your heart”
https://biblehub.com/luke/2-35.htm
5 Genesis 22: Abraham and Isaac
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+22&version=NIV
6 “There are various ways of sinning against faith (including) Involuntary doubt (which) refers to hesitation in believing, difficulty in overcoming objections connected with the faith, or also anxiety aroused by its obscurity.” Catholic Catechism # 2088 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c1a1.htm
7 Special Note: As is frequently the case, the Vatican cleaned up the Pope’s formal statement before recording it in the Vatican Archives. Here is the edited Vatican version, deleting the problematic statements.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/cotidie/2013/documents/papa-francesco-cotidie_20131220_mystery.html
Mercy; Pastoring
- Mercy always trumps doctrine.
Pope Francis’ words:
Mercy always has primacy over justice.1
“Ideas – conceptual elaborations – are at the service of communication, understanding, and praxis.” 2
“The Church’s way…has always been the way of mercy… The way of the Church is not to condemn anyone forever… (because) the mercy of God is not denied anyone…No one can be condemned forever because that is not the message of the Gospel. ” 3
“I encourage you to study how the various disciplines — dogma, morality, spirituality, law, and so on — may reflect the centrality of mercy.” 4
Analysis: In order to understand what Pope Francis is saying, one must pull the Bergoglian code book off the shelf.
“Mercy” means the freedom to stray from Doctrine when situations justify it.
“Justice” is a code word for doctrine, moral codes, commandments.
“Ideas – conceptual elaborations” is code for doctrine, moral codes, commandments.
“Praxis” means pastoral service, counseling.
In the Bergoglian world, Dogma, Doctrine, morality, spirituality, the Commandments, law….….all submit to “the centrality of mercy” because “mercy always has primacy over justice”.1 In other words, when mercy and justice conflict, mercy always prevails over justice. For the Bergoglian, God’s commandments are not obligations, they are ideals, guidelines, to apply in the process of the personal conscience’s discernment (see item #28 in this work). Right and wrong, good and evil, are interchangeable parts in this philosophical grab-bag of ever-morphing truth.
But the Church has always taught that the overriding commandment, to love, consists of both mercy and justice. “Mercy without justice is the mother of dissolution; justice without mercy is cruelty.” (- St Thomas Aquinas, Super Matthaeum, Cap. V, 1. 2.)
Bergoglianism sees mercy and justice in frequent conflict. But true mercy and true justice are never in conflict because both are love. Love is both merciful and just. Properly applied, mercy is just, and justice is merciful. Mercy and justice are two sides of the same coin. Either one without the other ceases to be itself. Bergoglianism rejects this truth.
Links:
1 Mercy always has primacy over justice (paragraph #6)
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2018/december/documents/papa-francesco_20181217_commissione-contropena-dimorte.html
2 Evangelii Gaudium #232
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html
3 Amoris Laetitia 291,294-296, 300, 303, 305, 307-308
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
4 Pope Francis speech (6-21-19), 7th paragraph from the end
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2019/june/documents/papa-francesco_20190621_teologia-napoli.html
Personal Conscience
- One’s personal conscience is the supreme moral authority.
Question posed to Pope Francis: “Your Holiness, you wrote that in your letter to me. The conscience is autonomous, you said, and everyone must obey his conscience. I think that’s one of the most courageous steps taken by a Pope.” 1
Pope Francis’ answer: “And I repeat it here. Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them. That would be enough to make the world a better place.” 1
Analysis: The interviewer is Eugenio Scalfari, famous Italian atheist and personal friend of Pope Francis. The Pope occasionally invites Scalfari into the Vatican for interviews. Scalfari conducted this Sept. 24, 2013 interview with the Pope at his Vatican residence, which was then published Oct 1 in the Italian daily La Repubblica.1
In subsequent years, Pope Francis has reaffirmed this moral primacy of the untethered conscience in such documents as his 2016 Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia2, and, his 12-2-17 Acta Apostolicae Sedis.3
The problem, of course, which Bergoglianism ignores, is that the personal conscience forfeits its authority when it contradicts God.
Links
1 Scalfari interview.
https://www.repubblica.it/cultura/2013/10/01/news/pope_s_conversation_with_scalfari_english-67643118/
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-to-atheist-all-people-can-receive-grace-seek-the-good
2 Amoris Laetitia (Chapter 8) http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia.html
3 Acta Apostolicae Sedis (12-2-17)…. See Item #19 of this work.
38. Atheists and non-Christians who do not seek
faith go to heaven if they follow their
consciences. Pope Francis’ words:
“I now wish to address the three questions from your article of 7 August. I believe that in the first two questions, what interests you is to understand the attitude of the Church towards those who do not share faith in Jesus. Above all, you ask if the God of Christians forgives those who do not believe and who do not seek faith. Given the premise, and this is fundamental, that the mercy of God is limitless for those who turn to him with a sincere and contrite heart, the issue for the unbeliever lies in obeying his or her conscience.” 1
Analysis: Eugenio Scalfari is an infamous atheist with whom Pope Francis has had a long friendship. The Pope often invites Scalfari to the Vatican for one-on-one chats. In 2013, the two exchanged letters which were published in Scalfari’s newspaper, La Republica, and also recorded in the Vatican Archives and published on the Vatican web site (link embedded below) 1. One of Scalfari’s questions was, “Do atheists go to heaven?” Pope Francis’ response was, paraphrased, “Because God’s mercy is infinite, atheists do go to heaven if they follow their consciences.”
Read the Pope’s statement slowly. Don’t just listen, hear. Don’t just read, understand. The Pope is talking about people who do not believe in God and do not seek him (read again the question that was asked of him). He says that atheists who do not seek faith but who obey their personal conscience are following God and will be forgiven and will be saved. There is absolutely nothing in Scripture or Tradition which supports this Bergoglian belief, and much that opposes it. For this Pope, the personal conscience is God.
Links
1 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130911_eugenio-scalfari.html (paragraph 20)
- Each man’s personal conscience determines what is good and what is evil.
Pope Francis’ words: (recorded in the Vatican Archives and available on the Vatican web link1.)
“Listening to and obeying conscience means deciding in the face of what is understood to be good or evil. It is on the basis of this choice that the goodness or evil of our actions is determined.” [Pope’s letter to Eugenio Scalfari]1
“Conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation [unmarried sexual cohabitation] does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel [i.e. Christian marriage]. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God [i.e. unmarried sexual cohabitation], and come to see with a certain moral security that it [unmarried sexual cohabitation] is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal [i.e. Christian marriage].” 2 [Amoris Laetitia #303]
Analysis:
Pope Francis is saying that one’s personal conscience has the authority to justify acts which would otherwise be serious sin (i.e. adultery, unmarried sexual cohabitation, and other serious sins 3). In other words, God’s “negative moral precepts” (i.e. “thou shalt not…”) have exceptions which are based on varying situations and based on each man’s personal conscience which judges, and sometimes overrides, those negative moral precepts. But 2000 years of Church Magisterial teaching has said “there are no exceptions to God’s negative moral precepts.” Pope St. John Paul II’s encyclical, (Veritatis Splendor #52, et al)4, states this teaching quite clearly.
Even the pre-Socratic minds of antiquity understood the principle of non-contradiction. That is, opposing principles cannot both be true. Amoris Laetitia and Veritatis Splendor defend opposing moral principles. Amoris Laetitia says that there are exceptions to our duty to obey God’s negative moral precepts. Veritatis Splendor says that there are no exceptions to our duty to obey God’s negative moral precepts. Therefore, Amoris Laetitia (Pope Francis) and Veritatis Splendor (Pope St John Paul II) cannot both be truth.
This disagreement between the Popes on Catholic Dogma is precisely why Pope Francis abolished the Pope John Paul II Institute for the Study of Marriage and Family (which was based on the principles of Veritatis Splendor), and replaced it with his own new Institute on Marriage and Family (which is based upon the principles of Amoris Laetitia [see Item #29 of this work]). It is noteworthy that Pope Francis’ new Institute eliminated its department of Moral Theology.
Of the 266 Popes to date, across two millennia, how many do you think have formally proclaimed that God’s negative moral precepts are subject to exceptions as determined by each man’s personal conscience? Only one. This one.
A civil war is raging in the Church. Essentially, it is a war between the opposing principles advocated by Amoris Laetitia and Veritatis Splendor. God does not oppose himself. But Amoris Laetitia and Veritatis Splendor oppose each other. How does one reconcile this contradiction? One of the two documents is inspired by God and the other is inspired by his Opponent.
The ground over which the battle is being fought is this: Is Man’s conscience subject to God’s Commandments, or, are God’s Commandments subject to Man’s conscience? In sum, is Man subject to God, or, is God subject to Man? This is not a minor difference of perspectives. This is an existential war for the mind of the Church and for the soul of Man.
Links:
1 Scalfari Letter (4th paragraph from the end of the letter)
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130911_eugenio-scalfari.html
2 Amoris Laetitia #303 https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia.html
3 Amoris Laetitia #297
“No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel! Here I am not speaking only of the divorced and remarried, but of everyone, in whatever situation they find themselves. “
4 Veritatis Splendor #52, 67, et al
“The negative precepts of the natural law are universally valid. They oblige each and every individual, always and in every circumstance. It is a matter of prohibitions which forbid a given action semper et pro semper, without exception, because the choice of this kind of behaviour is in no case compatible with the goodness of the will of the acting person, with his vocation to life with God and to communion with his neighbour. It is prohibited — to everyone and in every case — to violate these precepts. They oblige everyone, regardless of the cost, never to offend in anyone, beginning with oneself, the personal dignity common to all…. the negative commandments oblige always and under all circumstances…. The Church has always taught that one may never choose kinds of behaviour prohibited by the moral commandments expressed in negative form in the Old and New Testaments…. the negative moral precepts, those prohibiting certain concrete actions or kinds of behaviour as intrinsically evil, do not allow for any legitimate exception.”
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
40 . Obedience to one’s own personal conscience can save that person without faith in Jesus Christ.
Pope Francis’ words: “Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live ‘justified by the grace of God’, and thus be associated to the paschal mystery of Christ.” Evangelii Gaudium #254, 11-24-13 (“Interreligious Dialogue”)1
Jesus’ words: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6
St Paul’s words: “Without faith [in Jesus Christ] it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” Hebrews 11:6
Pope St John Paul II’s words: “It is only by man’s obedience to the divine law that [man’s conscience] abides in the truth ….man’s obedience to God’s commandments is the only way to affirm that freedom [of conscience].” Pope St. John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor #35, 36, 37, 40, 41, 45, 47, 54-56
Analysis: Pope Francis’ quoted words are verbatim from his Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium #254. He writes them within the context of “interreligious dialogue” in general, and regarding Muslim dialogue in particular.
Pope Francis has a history of this teaching. He repeats it in his 9-4-13 correspondence with his good friend and famous atheist, Eugenio Scalfari, which is recorded in the Vatican archives and posted on the Vatican web link, as follows:
“Above all, you ask if the God of Christians forgives those who do not believe and who do not seek faith. Given the premise, and this is fundamental, that the mercy of God is limitless for those who turn to him with a sincere and contrite heart, the issue for the unbeliever lies in obeying his or her conscience. It is on the basis of this choice [personal conscience] that the goodness or evil of our actions is determined.” 2
The Catholic Magisterium, as evidenced by Pope St John Paul II’s Veritatis Splendor, of course contradicts Pope Francis, as follows:
“… it is only by man’s obedience to the divine law that [his conscience] abides in the truth and conforms to human dignity. God’s eternal law, his commandments, pose no threat to man’s genuine freedom [of conscience]. On the contrary, man’s obedience to God’s commandments is the only way to affirm that freedom [of conscience].” 3 In other words, personal conscience forfeits its authority when it contradicts God.
Pope Francis’ words have no basis in any authentic Christian teaching. They are pure invention, pure novelty. If Pope Francis is right, then Jesus, St. Paul, and Pope St John Paul II are all dead wrong.
Links
1 Evangelii Gaudium #254 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html
2 Scalfari Letter
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130911_eugenio-scalfari.html
3 Pope St. John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor #35, 36, 37, 40, 41, 45, 47, 54-56 http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
Sex
- Sex must be taught as a gift from God, but not with strictness.
Pope Francis’ words: “Sex must be taught as a gift from God, but not with strictness.” Pope Francis’ verbatim statement is recorded in the Vatican Archives and available on the Vatican web link (see Pope Francis’ comment #4).1
Analysis: What an odd qualifier, “…but not with strictness.” What does that mean?
Like most Jesuits, Pope Francis speaks in obscurities and double entendre, interwoven by legerdemain. The key to understanding his statements is to read them within the context of the many other statements he has spoken or written on the same subject. For example, in the instant case, that “sex should be taught as a gift from God, but not with strictness” :
“It can no longer be said that all those [persons] living in irregular situations [unmarried, sexually active cohabitation] are living in a state of mortal sin.” (Amoris Laetitia # 301) 2
The Church acknowledges the benefits in those situations [unmarried sexually active cohabitation] which do not yet or no longer correspond to her teaching on marriage.”
(Amoris Laetitia # 292) 2
Holy Communion is no longer closed to adulterers [sexually active divorced-and-remarried persons]. (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 12-2-17, see Item #19 of this work.)
The Church should consider the benefits of homosexual civil unions. 3
Marriage is an ideal, a worthy goal, but not an absolute prerequisite to unmarried, sexually active cohabitation.
(Amoris Laetitia # 292, 297, 298, 303, 307, 308) 2
Once one understands this context out of which this Pope speaks, it is easy to understand what he means by his statement, “Sex must be taught as a gift from God, but not with strictness.”
Pope Francis believes, and teaches, that God does not call us to perfection, but to our self-determined reasonable efforts, given the difficulties and limitations imposed upon us by “concrete realities” and circumstances, and more, Pope Francis believes and teaches that God sometimes actually asks us to commit fornication and adultery, as follows.
“It [the personal conscience] can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response [unmarried sexually active cohabitation] which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it [unmarried sexually active cohabitation] is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal.” (Pope Francis, 3-19-16, Amoris Laetitia #303) 2
Three times in Scripture, Jesus says that Anyone who divorces and remarries commits adultery. (Matthew 19:9; Mark 10:11-12; Luke 16:18). The Judeo-Christian tradition (for 4,000 years), the Catholic Church (for 2,000 years), Jesus (for 2,000 years) and the Bible (for 1,600 years) have all taught that adultery, fornication, and homosexual sex are intrinsic evil and mortal sin. Pope Francis disagrees with those spiritual authorities. This man actually believes that God speaks more clearly to him, personally, than to the magisterial mind of the Church. The orchestrated media displays showing Pope Francis paying his own hotel bills and carrying his own luggage are a sham, a cover for the arrogance infesting the core of the man.
Links:
1http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2019/january/documents/papa-francesco_20190127_panama-volo-ritorno.html (Pope Francis comment #4)
2https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
3 https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/transcript-pope-francis-march-5-interview-with-corriere-della-sera
Sin
- God sometimes wants us to sin.
Pope Francis’ words: “Individual conscience needs to be better incorporated into the Church’s praxis [i.e. pastoral practice] in certain situations which do not objectively embody our understanding of marriage [i.e. unmarried sexually active cohabitation]. Naturally, every effort should be made to encourage the development of an enlightened conscience, formed and guided by the responsible and serious discernment of one’s pastor [why not guided by the Magisterial teaching of the Church?], and to encourage an ever greater trust in God’s grace. Yet [even an unenlightened] conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation [i.e. unmarried sexually active cohabitation] does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel [i.e. God’s commandment to not commit adultery]. It [personal conscience] can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God [i.e. the continuation of an unmarried sexually active cohabitation], and come to see with a certain moral security that it [unmarried sexually active cohabitation] is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal [i.e. sacramental marriage].” (Amoris Laetitia, 303)
Analysis: The meaning of the Pope’s words here are self-evident. He makes three points:
- Even an unenlightened (unformed) personal conscience has the authority to approve exceptions to, and variances from, God’s law.
- Sometimes, unmarried sexually-active cohabitation is the best that we can do for God, and he understands that fact.
- Sometimes, God wants us to live our lives in unmarried, sexually-active cohabitation.
But all three points are Bergoglian inventions. Pure novelty. Nowhere in the 4,000 year old Judeo-Christian tradition, nor in the 2,000 year-old Magisterial teaching of the Church, can one find it said that personal conscience trumps God’s laws, nor that sin is sometimes the best we can do for God, nor that God wants us to sin.
The Pope’s job is to guard the truth, not invent it.
Links:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf - Sin is sometimes the best gift that we can offer God.
Pope Francis’ words: “A subject may know full well the rule [God’s Commandment to not commit adultery], yet have great difficulty in understanding its inherent values, or be in a concrete situation [ongoing sexually-active unmarried cohabitation] which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin…conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation [ongoing sexually-active cohabitation] does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It [personal conscience] can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response [ongoing sexually-active unmarried cohabitation] which can be given to God.” (Amoris Laetitia 301, 303)
Analysis: Pope Francis is saying that we sometimes find ourselves in situations which do not allow us to avoid sin and, in fact, our personal conscience can “recognize with sincerity and honesty” that such sin “is the most generous response which can be given to God.” In other words, even God’ grace is insufficient in these cases for us to avoid sin.
This idea is not only novel, it contradicts Church doctrine, as originally articulated by St. Paul. God’s grace is always sufficient for us to avoid sin. If we sin, it is because we fail to cooperate with God’s grace, not because God’s grace fails us.
“But he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ ” (2 Cor 12:9)
“No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.” (1 Cor 10:13)
“But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.” (Galatians 5:16)
Links:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf (paragraphs 301, 303)
- Adultery is not always mortal sin.
Pope Francis’ words: “Individual conscience needs to be better incorporated into the Church’s praxis in certain situations which do not objectively embody our understanding of marriage [i.e. unmarried sexually-active cohabitation]… The Church possesses a solid body of reflection concerning mitigating factors and situations. Hence it is can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation [e.g. unmarried sexually-active cohabitation] are living in a state of mortal sin.” (Amoris Laetitia #301, #303)1
Analysis: Pope Francis is saying that divorced and “remarried” persons, or even never-married sexually-active cohabitants, are not engaged in adultery or fornication, not mortal sin, if their conscience tells them they are not. The Catholic Catechism (#1756) says that these situations are adultery or fornication, and, that such acts are always gravely wrong, evil, regardless of circumstances. 2 Jesus says that divorce and remarriage is adultery. 3 The Sixth of the Ten Commandments says, “Thou shalt not commit adultery”.
Pope Francis says they’re all wrong.
Links:
1 https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf (paragraphs 301, 303)
2 “There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery.” http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a4.htm
3https://biblehub.com/luke/16-18.htm
- There are benefits to mortal sin.
Pope Francis’ words: “Christian marriage, as a reflection of the union between Christ and his Church, is fully realized in the union between a man and a woman who give themselves to each other in a free, faithful and exclusive love, who belong to each other until death and are open to the transmission of life, and are consecrated by the sacrament, which grants them the grace to become a domestic church and a leaven of new life for society. Some forms of union (i.e. unmarried cohabitation) radically contradict this ideal (i.e. Christian marriage), while others realize it in at least a partial and analogous way. The Synod Fathers (2014-2015) stated that the Church does not disregard the constructive elements in those situations (i.e. unmarried sexually-active cohabitation) which do not yet or no longer correspond to her teaching on marriage.” (Amoris Laetitia #292)
Analysis: Pope Francis teaches us that there are Church-recognized benefits, “constructive elements” as he calls them, which come to us embedded in the mortal sin of sexually-active unmarried cohabitation. Mortal sin delivers benefits to us? That’s certainly a novel idea.
Am wondering why Pope Francis thinks that we receive benefits from mortal sin, and, why he thinks it important for him to share that teaching with us?
In accordance with his practice in such matters, Pope Francis omitted some highly relevant Catholic teaching from his statement, the inclusion of which would have fixed things for him. But he omitted it, so It is important for us to notice and think about what the Pope did not say and why he did not say it. Instead of designating good to be a subcategory of evil, as he did, he could have explained the Christian truth, exampled in Genesis 50, that God can and does sometimes use the evil perpetrated by others to accomplish his good purposes. That is pure Bible; pure Magisterium. But the pope did not say that. In the Pope’s view, there is a goodness embedded in unmarried cohabitation, a relationship which both God and the Church say is mortal sin. In the Pope’s view, there is goodness embedded in evil. That notion has absolutely nothing to do with Catholic teaching, or with God.
Links:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
- Jesus likes for us to sin.
Pope Francis’ words:
“True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: ‘This is your sin, and I will sin again’. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.” 1
Analysis:
Pope Francis says that when we go to confession, it is not our sin that we confess but Jesus’ sin.
Pope Francis says that when we go to confession, we affirm that we will sin again.
Pope Francis says that Jesus likes for us to put the blame on him and to affirm in confession that we will sin again. “Jesus likes that [he likes that we affirm our continuing sin] because it was his mission to become the sinner for us.”
These statements are preposterous. These statements are blasphemous. These statements are apostate.
Pope Francis starts with a Bible passage (2 Corinthians 5:21)2 and then warps it to fit his purposes. Paul’s point in 2 Corinthians, confirmed by the Church throughout her history (St Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas, etc.) is not that “Jesus became the sinner”, as Pope Francis claims, but rather, that Jesus became “the victim of sacrifice for sin”, “regarded as a sinner”, which is to say, “as if he were a sinner.”
Why would Pope Francis so warp the meaning of Scripture, and by that warping, oppose two thousand years of Catholic Magisterial teaching?
His purpose is to dilute the meaning and effect of sin (one of the primary goals of his pontificate) by making Jesus a sinner, and, by making sin something to be expected and even wished for.
Through distortions like these, Francis lays the groundwork for major heresies like Amoris Laetitia #303 where he proclaims that sometimes, sin is the best that we can offer God, and, sometimes, God actually wants us to sin. 3
Links:
1 https://www.catholicireland.net/pope-francis-the-christian-life-proclaims-the-road-to-reconcilation-with-god/ (6-15-13)
https://www.motherteresa.org/HolyFathersw/P_Francis-hom-week-7.html (6-15-13)
Footnotes:
2 2 Corinthians 5:21 (three different translations)
Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin…
Him who knew no sin he (God) made to be sin on our behalf…
God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might be made righteous.
3 Amoris Laetitia
See Items # 40 and #41 of this work.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
Syncretism and Universalism
- There are many paths to God, outside of Christianity.
Pope Francis’ words: In January, 2016, Pope Francis produced, and distributed to the world as his “Intentions for 2016”, a video showing a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Jew, and the Pope, himself, stating, “Many [people] think differently, feel differently…seeking God or meeting God in different ways… We have only one certainty, we are all children of God.” 1
Analysis: Pope Francis’ statement contradicts Jesus and Jesus’ Church.
Jesus said, “No man comes to the Father except through me. “ (John 14:6)
St John wrote: “Whoever denies the Son, denies the Father.” (1 John 2:23)
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, “Faith in the deity (God, the Father) is not enough without faith in the incarnation (God, the Son): ‘You believe in God, believe also in me’ (Jn. 14:1).” —St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Hebrews, 10:19-25 [502].
This is why Islam doesn’t work. This is why Judaism doesn’t work. This is why Buddhism doesn’t work. This is why Hinduism doesn’t work. This is why Shintoism doesn’t work. Need I continue? The list is a long one.
If they do work, then St. John and Aquinas were both wrong. Moreover, and more importantly, if they do work, then Jesus was wrong.
In concluding this video, Pope Francis says, “We have only one certainty: we are all children of God.”
The Pope’s statement is false. The One Certainty, the Central Truth is not an idea or a principle. The Central Truth is a Person, Jesus Christ the Righteous One, the Only Son of God. There are truths within this Central Truth but there is no truth outside it.
That is why Pope Francis is so, so wrong when he says, “There are many paths to God.” There are not. There is only one way. “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father except through me.” -Jesus Christ (14:6)
Links:
1 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-6FfTxwTX34
- God wills all religions.
Pope Francis’ words: “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom.” 1 (2-4-19)
“Why does God permit there to be so many religions? God wanted to permit this: the theologians of the Scholastica made reference to the volutas permissive of God. He wanted to allow this situation: there are many religions; some are born of culture, but they always look to heaven, they look to God. But what God wants is fraternity between us and in a special way – here is the reason for this trip – with our brothers, sons of Abraham like us, the Muslims. We must not be afraid of difference: God allowed this.” 2 (4-3-19)
Analysis: The howl raised among orthodox theologians by Pope Francis’ February 2019 statement (quote #1, above), that God wills all religions notwithstanding their contradictions, motivated the Pope to issue a qualifying statement two months later (quote #2, above), in which he says that God’s PERMISSIVE will (not his POSITIVE or AFFIRMATIVE will) validates all world religions. Pope Francis is explaining to us that because God allows all religions, that must mean that he approves all religions.
That is crazy-talk.
Every event or thing that has ever existed, good or evil, was permitted by God. God even permits moral evil (if he did not permit it, then it would not exist). Does the fact that God permits moral evil mean that he approves of moral evil? Of course not. The fact that God permits moral evil does not mean that moral evil is good or that God approves of it in any way.
The same is true for all the world religions. The fact that God PERMITS all the world religions does not mean that they are good or that he necessarily approves them.
Why would the God who is All Truth teach opposite principles as being true? He would not, of course, because, if he did, he would be the Father of Lies.
The idea that God teaches opposite principles as being true is nonsense. Likewise, the idea that God wills, sponsors, or approves of religions which teach opposing truths is also nonsense.
Bergoglianism is a theological madhouse, contradicting all reason, founded and governed by the prince of madmen.
Links:
1https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/travels/2019/outside/documents/papa-francesco_20190204_documento-fratellanza-umana.html
2https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2019/04/03/190403a.html
- There is no Catholic God
Pope Francis words: “I believe in God, but not in a Catholic God. There is no Catholic God.” 1
Analysis:
Is God “Catholic”?
Pope Francis says, “There is no Catholic God.” 1
He is probably right that God does not call himself “Catholic”. However, he is certainly wrong if he fails to understand that the only Church founded by God calls itself Catholic.2
Links:
1http://www.repubblica.it/cultura/2013/10/01/news/pope_s_conversation_with_scalfari_english-67643118/ (7th paragraph from the end)
2 “Wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
-A.D. 107, St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Chapter 8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_to_the_Smyrnaeans
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm
- Christians and Muslims worship the same God.
Pope Francis words: “We must never forget that they (Muslims) profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us (Catholic Christians) they adore the one, merciful God who will judge humanity on the last day.” 1
“We, Muslims and Christians, are the bearers of spiritual treasures. Among these we recognize some shared elements…such as the adoration of the All-Merciful God.” 2
Analysis: How can Christians and Muslims worship the same God if the Gods they worship are not the same?
Christians say that God is three Persons. Muslims say that God is one, not three.
Muslims say that Jesus is not God. Christians say that Jesus is God.
Christians understand God to be justly merciful and mercifully just. There is no mercy in Allah. Read the Qur’an one time and you will know this statement to be true.
There is no common ground here.
Jesus, St. John, and St. Thomas Aquinas all say that anyone who does not recognize Jesus as God does by that rejection also reject God.
Jesus said, “Whoever denies me on earth, he also I will deny before my Father in heaven.” -Jesus (Matthew 10:33)
St John wrote, “Whoever denies the Son, denies the Father.”
– 1 John 2:23
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, “Faith in the deity (God, the Father) is not enough without faith in the incarnation (God, the Son): ‘You believe in God, believe also in me’ (Jn. 14:1).”
—St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Hebrews, 10:19-25 [502].
Links
1 Evangelii Gaudium (November 2013), #252
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html
Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, #16. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
2 Address to the President of Religious Affairs in Turkey and Muslim and Christian political and religious leaders, Nov 28, 2014 (paragraph #7)
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2014/november/documents/papa-francesco_20141128_turchia-presidenza-diyanet.html
- Pope Francis formally honors Martin Luther with Vatican statue and stamp
Pope Francis’ acts:
- On October 25, 2016, the Pope received a group of 1,000 Lutherans and Catholics from Germany in the Vatican’s Paul VI hall and addressed them from the stage where the Pope had erected a statue of Luther. The Pope told the group, “I really like good Lutherans, Lutherans who really practice their faith in Jesus Christ. What I don’t like are lukewarm Catholics and lukewarm Lutherans.”1
- On November 23, 2017, Pope Francis issued a Vatican postage stamp honoring Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation.2
Analysis: On June 15, 1520, Pope Leo X condemned Martin Luther and his errors in the document, “ Exsurge Domine” (Arise, O Lord). https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/L10EXDOM.HTM
Six months later, on January 3, 1521, Pope Leo X issued the papal bull Decet Romanum Pontificem, which excommunicated the unrepentant Martin Luther from the Catholic Church. “Martin Luther has now been declared a heretic. On all these we decree the sentences of excommunication, of anathema, of our perpetual condemnation and interdict; of privation of dignities, honours and property on them and their descendants, and of declared unfitness for such possessions; of the confiscation of their goods and of the crime of treason; and these and the other sentences, censures and punishments which are inflicted by canon law on heretics and are set out in our aforesaid missive, we decree to have fallen on all these men to their damnation.” https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo10/l10decet.htm
Now, one may agree or disagree with the Church’s excommunication of Martin Luther and the rejection of his teachings. However, one cannot, within reason, fail to understand that Pope Francis’ honoring of the arch-heretic is a direct contradiction of the Catholic Magisterium.
Why would a Pope officially honor a heresiarch, an arch-heretic? That seems like fair question. Here is the answer………
Pope Francis (Jesuit priest) agrees with Pierre Tielhard de Chardin (also a Jesuit priest), that all of creation is moving toward the “Omega Point”, the end of time as it were, where all of creation will be saved (see item # 17 of this work). Therefore, according to his line of thinking, which religion you choose, in the end, makes no difference at all.
It is this belief which motivates Pope Francis to say:
- “The People of God is incarnate in the peoples of the earth, each of which has its own culture…. Grace supposes culture, and God’s gift becomes flesh in the culture of those who receive it.” -Evangelii Gaudium #115. In other words, the “People of God” is not the Church, rather, the “People of God” are the “peoples of the earth”. http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html
- “There are many paths to God [Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Christianity].” 2016 video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI0tiN88ldE
- “God wills the pluralism and diversity of religions.” 2019 Joint Declaration with Muslim Imam. http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/travels/2019/outside/documents/papa-francesco_20190204_documento-fratellanza-umana.html
This belief is a heresy, but it is not a new one. It is called “Syncretism”, and is closely related to “Universalism”, which was popularized by Origen in the early 200’s A.D., and was condemned as heresy by the 5th Ecumenical Council in A.D. 553, and then resurrected by the Modernists in the 20th century.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04308b.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Council_of_Constantinople
112 years ago, Pope Pius X issued his papal encyclical, Pascendi Domenici Gregis (Feeding of the Flock) warning against the doctrine of the Modernists, in which he condemned precisely the same teaching that Pope Francis now advocates. In paragraph 15, Pope Pius X wrote, “For the Modernist, to live is itself, alone, a proof of truth because, for them, life and truth are the same thing. Therefore, for the Modernist, all existing religions are equally true, for otherwise they would not exist.” 3
Earlier this year, 112 years after Pope Pius X wrote his warning, Pope Francis spoke the very words Pope Pius warned that Modernists would speak:
“The pluralism and the diversity of religions…are willed by God in His wisdom.” 4 (2-4-19)
“Why does God permit there to be so many religions? God wanted to permit this… We must not be afraid of difference: God allowed this.” 5 (4-3-19)
Links
1 https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/a-statue-of-luther-in-the-vatican-and-a-new-papal-definition-of-lukewarm
2 https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/11/26/vatican-issues-stamp-featuring-martin-luther-reformation-anniversary/
3 http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html (paragraph 15)
4https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/travels/2019/outside/documents/papa-francesco_20190204_documento-fratellanza-umana.html (paragraph 27)
5https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2019/04/03/190403a.html
- Pope Francis gives St. Peter’s bones to a non-Catholic schismatic sect
Pope Francis’ act:
On June 29, 2019, on the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, this Pope removed the reliquary containing bones of St Peter from the Vatican’s papal apartments’ chapel and gave them to the Orthodox Patriarch. The bones were immediately transported to the Phanar, the Orthodox patriarchate’s headquarters in Istanbul. 1
Analysis: Why did this Pope give St Peter’s bones to a schismatic sect?
For those who don’t speak Bergoglian, I will translate….
By this act, performed on the Feast Day of Sts. Peter and Paul, this Pope notified us that neither St Peter, nor St Paul, nor any of the Popes, nor the Church are who we thought they were. In the Bergoglian world, the Catholic Church is one of many true Churches. See items #47-51 of this work. Therefore, anything that emphasizes differences between ecclesial bodies is a bad thing, and, anything that dismisses or dilutes differences is a good thing. For the Bergoglian, truth cannot be found in Dogma, because “truth is relationship”.2
Links:
1https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2019/07/02/pope-gives-relics-of-st-peter-to-orthodox-patriarch/?fbclid=IwAR0HbKKfhaU_7DvKwqbCeEM7UJUTBSSeI4MCLm7hNpi_nz5U2G1ez5lDf9Q
2http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130911_eugenio-scalfari.html (paragraph 21)
The Nature of the Catholic Church
- Carnival time is over.
Pope Francis’ words:
“No thank you, Monsignore. You put it on instead. Carnival time is over!”
Analysis: The Pope’s comment was reported to have occurred immediately after his election, as his new Papal robes were being prepared for him to wear out to the balcony where the new Popes are introduced to the world. By this statement he declined the traditional papal robes in preference for a simple white cassock. The Vatican refused to confirm or deny the quote.
What could this act and these words by this Pope possibly mean?
For those who do not speak Bergoglian, I will translate.
By this act, this Pope notified us that neither St. Peter, nor any of the Popes, nor even the Church are who we thought they were before March 13, 2013. He is reemphasizing his teaching in Evangelii Gaudium that “the People of God” are not the Church, but rather, are “the peoples of the earth”. (EG #115) The traditional papal garb, for Francis, represents all that is wrong with the Church. When Pope Francis looks at the Church, he sees arrogance, elitism, and pretension, all of which he thinks is represented by the papal regalia. This Bergoglian iconoclasm is not limited to wardrobes. He sees the same arrogance in Magisterial teaching which, in his mind, is dominated by doctrine at the expense of mercy. History will come to understand that this Pope sees the Catholic Church, itself, as error. His goal is to remake the Church in the Bergoglian image. What would a Bergoglian Church look like?
Essentially, a Bergoglian Church would be a non-Apostolic, non-sacramental, loose association of all the peoples and cultures of the earth, where God’s commandments are replaced with non-binding suggestions, the compliance with which would be ruled by the omnipotent personal conscience.
- The Church has no right to impose rules on a lay person’s private life.
Pope Francis words: Regarding same-sex marriage (and moral rules in general), the then-Cardinal Bergoglio states: “Religion has the right to give an opinion as long as it is in service to the people. The religious minister does not have the right to force anything on anyone’s private life. If God, in creation, ran the risk of making us free, who am I to get involved?” 1
Analysis: One of the Church’s important jurisdictions and duties is instruction and correction. God has graced the Church with the knowledge, wisdom, and authority to teach the truth and to correct those who stray from it. For a Cardinal of the Church to downgrade that moral authority to an “opinion” and further, to abrogate his own duty to teach and correct with that authority, is preposterous and has absolutely nothing to do with the Catholic Church.
Links
1 Pope Francis’ book, On Heaven and Earth, p. 114
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Heaven_and_Earth
- The “People of God” are not the Church, but are all the people of the earth.
It is entirely fitting that this work end with the capstone of Pope Francis’ teaching. The preceding 55 days of this study actually feed this Day 56.
The Catholic Church has always understood the People of God to be the Church, the baptized. The Catholic Catechism is clear on this point: One becomes a member of the People of God not by a physical birth, but by faith in Christ and Baptism. 1
Pope Francis says the Catechism is wrong, that the People of God are all the peoples of the earth.2 It is important to note that Pope Francis has said this many times, in many places, throughout his pontificate. He said it in his first apostolic exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium. He has said it often during the six years since Evangelii Gaudium. He now says it again in the Amazonian Synod’s Instrumentum Laboris, a document which quotes him often. As you may know, Pope Francis is the President of the upcoming Amazonian Synod which will be held in Rome beginning this week and running October 6 – October 27. The Synod has been called by Pope Francis and is wholly inspired by his writings.
Please note the following statements from various documents published by Pope Francis during the past six years of his pontificate.
Pope Francis words: “The People of God is incarnate in the peoples of the earth, each of which has its own culture…. Grace supposes culture, and God’s gift becomes flesh in the culture of those who receive it.” 2 Evangelii Gaudium #115
“Jesus offers a life in fullness…reflected in (the Amazon’s) abundant bio-diversity and cultures.” 3 Instrumentum Laboris #11
“The good life” is life in abundance, is materialized in what they [the Amazonian indigenous peoples] call the ‘good living’…Such an understanding of life is characterized by the connectivity and harmony of relationships between water, territory and nature, community life and culture, God and the various spiritual forces.” 3 Instrumentum Laboris #12-13
“The territory [the Amazon] is a theological place from which faith is lived, it is also a peculiar source of God’s revelation.3 Instrumentum Laboris #19
“The love lived in any religion pleases God.” 3 Instrumentum Laboris #39
“To be Church is to be the People of God” (EG 114), embodied “in the peoples of the earth” and in their cultures (EG 115). 3 Instrumentum Laboris #114
“The inculturation of the faith is not a top-down [Dogmatic] process nor an external imposition, but a mutual enrichment of cultures in dialogue (interculturality). The active subjects of inculturation are the indigenous peoples themselves. As Pope Francis has affirmed, ‘grace presupposes culture’ (EG 115)”. 3 Instrumentum Laboris #122
“It would be appropriate to recognize indigenous spirituality as a source of wealth for the Christian experience.” 3 Instrumentum Laboris #123
“We must dare to find the new signs, the new symbols, a new flesh for the transmission of the Word.” Evangelii Gaudium #1672 and Instrumentum Laboris #1243
“The need for a process of discernment regarding the rites, symbols and celebratory styles of indigenous cultures in contact with nature that need to be assumed in the liturgical and sacramental ritual is confirmed… It is suggested that the celebrations be festive with their own music and dance, in tongues and with indigenous clothes, in communion with nature.” Instrumentum Laboris #126
Analysis:
The Catholic Church says that:
- The People of God are those who believe that Jesus Christ is Lord and are Baptized into that faith. Catholic Catechism #782 3
- God has revealed himself fully by sending his own Son, in whom he has established his covenant forever. The Son is his Father’s definitive Word; so there will be no further Revelation after him. Catholic Catechism # 734
Pope Francis says that:
- The People of God are all the people of the earth.2, 3
- The Amazon is a source of God’s Revelation. 3
You see the problem, do you not? With this understanding in mind, it is easy to see why Cardinals Burke, Brandmuller, Muller, Sarah, and Bishop Schneider are up in arms over the imminent Amazonian Synod.
The Catholic Church says, as it has always said, that the “People of God” are those who are baptized into the Church and by faith in Jesus Christ. They become the “People of God” by baptism and faith in Christ, not by physical birth or culture.
But……….
This Pope says, no, the Catechism and the Church are wrong, and that the “People of God” are “the peoples of the earth”. They become the “People of God” by being physically born, through their indigenous cultures.
This clear and direct contradiction of Catholic Dogma by this Pope is one of the cornerstones of the Bergoglian heresy. If one understands this Pope’s belief on this point, then one understands much of the Bergoglian heresy. It is this false belief that underlies such Papal statements as:
“Muslims and Christians worship the same God.” (2013, Evangelii Gaudium #252) http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/travels/2019/outside/documents/papa-francesco_20190204_documento-fratellanza-umana.html
“There are many paths to God”….Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism (2016 video issued by Pope Francis) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6FfTxwTX34
“God wills the diversity of religions.” (2019, Document on Human Fraternity, paragraph 27) http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/travels/2019/outside/documents/papa-francesco_20190204_documento-fratellanza-umana.html
If the Church is wrong and this Pope is right, then Bergoglianism is truth, and, the Church, as she has understood herself to be for 2000 years, does not exist and never did. If the Church is right and this Pope is wrong, then Bergoglianism is the most serious heresy ever to infect the Church and history will name Jorge Bergoglio as the archetypal heresiarch.
So, which is it?
These statements by this Pope are preposterous and have absolutely nothing, NOTHING, to do with the Catholic faith. In fact, these Bergoglian statements CONTRADICT the Catholic faith. He is intent of reinventing the Church in the Bergoglian image.
Links
1 Catholic Catechism # 781 – 782 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p2.htm
2 Evangelii Gaudium #115 (Nov 24, 2013)
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html
3 Instrumentum Laboris, Amazonian Synod (June 17, 2019) http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2019/06/17/0521/01081.html#spa
4 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a1.htm
Conclusion for Four Pillars of Bergoglianism
112 years ago, Pope Pius IX warned us about Pope Francis:
“For the Modernist, to live is itself, alone, a proof of truth because, for them, life and truth are the same thing. Therefore, for the Modernist, all existing religions are equally true, for otherwise they would not exist.”
http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-x/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_19070908_pascendi-dominici-gregis.html (paragraph 15)
26 years ago, Pope St John Paul II warned us about Pope Francis.
“Today, however, it seems necessary to reflect on the whole of the Church’s moral teaching, with the precise goal of recalling certain fundamental truths of Catholic doctrine which, in the present circumstances, risk being distorted or denied. In fact, a new situation has come about within the Christian community itself, which has experienced the spread of numerous doubts and objections of a human and psychological, social and cultural, religious and even properly theological nature, with regard to the Church’s moral teachings. It is no longer a matter of limited and occasional dissent, but of an overall and systematic calling into question of traditional moral doctrine, on the basis of certain anthropological and ethical presuppositions. At the root of these presuppositions is the more or less obvious influence of currents of thought which end by detaching human freedom from its essential and constitutive relationship to truth. Thus the traditional doctrine regarding the natural law, and the universality and the permanent validity of its precepts, is rejected; certain of the Church’s moral teachings are found simply unacceptable; and the Magisterium itself is considered capable of intervening in matters of morality only in order to “exhort consciences” and to “propose values”, in the light of which each individual will independently make his or her decisions and life choices.” -Pope St John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, #4 (August 6, 1993)
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
The Catholic Church is approaching a crossroads in her pilgrim journey. Her history has never before seen a time like this. Slowly, she is beginning to understand that God is calling her to make a decision of faith: whether to reaffirm her loyalty to her own 2000-year Magisterial teaching, or to change to a new road, pledging herself instead to the novel teachings of a temporary occupant of the Chair of St Peter.
Pope Francis does not think that he is changing truth, but believes instead that he is correcting the Church’s 2,000-year old misunderstanding of truth. But if the Church’s truth has been false for 2,000 years, then what is the Church? This is precisely the Bergoglian point of it all. The Church, as she has known herself to be, and represented herself to be, for 2000 years is a falsehood. The true “People of God” is not the Church, but are all the indigenous peoples of the earth.
Pope Francis’ defenders say that his acts and statements, if read “in context”, do not contradict Magisterial teaching. Be careful. Although it may be true that individual acts or statements, standing alone, may not appear to be obvious heresy, nevertheless, if one takes the time to view this Pope’s entire body of work as a comprehensive context, out of which particular acts and statements are born, then you cannot fail to miss his true message. Like most modernist Jesuits, Pope Francis speaks in obscurities and double entendre, interwoven by legerdemain. He speaks this way in order to get his Bergoglianisms on the papal record without raising a storm of protests. Even with heresies…. perhaps especially with heresies… as long as there is a possible alternative explanation to a particular act or statement, the heretic’s position is theoretically defensible, and he lives to preach another day. The key to understanding any particular Bergoglian act or statement is to read it within the context of the many acts and statements which preceded it.
Make no mistake, this papacy is out to change Church doctrine, but it will always disclaim that goal. At no time will this Pope explicitly declare himself to be changing Church doctrine. Instead, you will always hear this papacy state that “Church doctrine cannot be changed.” But don’t let that mantra lull you to sleep. Have you been watching over the past six years? Over time, you have seen Church PRAXIS (practice) changed to accommodate a more “merciful” and less “pharisaical” approach to pastoral care, so that the sinner can be “met where he is” with “accompaniment” by the “field hospital for sinners”.
For example, note this Pope’s answer to the question of whether the Church will approve unmarried cohabitation and artificial contraception: “The question is not whether to change the doctrine, but to go deeper and make sure that pastoral care takes account of situations and of what each person is able to do.” (3-5-14 interview with Italian Daily Corriere della Sera). Exactly two years after this interview, Pope Francis codified his statement into Magisterial law, elevating “mercy” to a position superior to “doctrine”, by the publication of the Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia (chapter 8).
Watch for more of the signs. You will see them. Over time, this new Bergoglian “praxis” will so dilute and displace Church teaching that Doctrine will seem to be outdated and irrelevant, anachronistic. God’s commandments will become God’s suggestions, degraded to be lofty ideals which should be respected as goals, but seldom achieved. Objective truth will be replaced by the Triumvirate of Self-Deception: personal conscience (the tyranny of the “internal forum”), moral relativism (right and wrong shift with circumstances and opinions), and moral determinism (circumstances are responsible for a person’s’ actions, the person is not).
You will continue to see all this and more. These changes will continue to be couched in terms of “praxis”, Church pastoral care practice. It will be alleged by those instituting the changes that “Church Doctrine” is not being changed. Church Doctrine will remain an “ideal”, a worthy goal for everyone to honor and respect…but not expect. It will be said that most of us will be unable to achieve the ideal, and our acts which fall short of the ideal (unmarried cohabitation, homosexual unions, artificial contraception, abortion, etc.) will no longer be understood as mortal sin and, therefore, will no longer disqualify us from participation in all Church activities, including Church leadership positions and Holy Communion. In Bergoglianism, “good” and “evil” and “truth” are all merely functions and products of intent and circumstance (“Truth is a relationship.” -Pope Francis). Neither absolute truth nor intrinsic evil exist in the Bergoglian world. Bergoglianism is the newest in a long line of man-invented religions. It has nothing to do with Catholicism, and very little to do with God.
These changes are not coming all at once, but they are coming nonetheless. They are creeping in on cat paws. The process is like an odorless, invisible, but deadly fog that seeps in through the cracks in the foundation (“By some fissure, the devil’s smoke has entered the sanctuary” -Pope Paul VI). You have heard this before….we are like the frog in the pot on the stove. If the heat is increased slowly enough, we are cooked before we feel the pain. “Evil walks in small steps. If it were to come all at once, we would not be deceived.” -Paisios of Athos
Pope Francis’ most cherished strategic goal is to remove all barriers to a world religion which would be based on Bergoglianism. One of his favorite tactics is to cast doubt on the Catholic Church’s most cherished icons of the Faith by which the Church is marked as being unique and set apart by God for her special purpose of evangelization.
History will come to understand that this Pope sees the Catholic Church, itself, as error per se. His goal is to remake the Church in the Bergoglian image. What will be the effect of these changes? Is this the Church’s Gethsemane? Maybe. No one knows but the Father.
What are we to do about all this? We must remain faithful to our charge and intrepid in its performance. “Do not fear or be discouraged because of this vast army against you, because the battle is not yours, but God’s.” (2 Chronicles 20:15). We must pray, fast, confess, receive Communion, learn, teach, serve, and sacrifice ourselves for the welfare of others. We must continue to pray for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, asking for courage, tenacity, and discernment so that we can speak the truth, and boldly. God will not desert us, but we will be tested, perhaps persecuted. As close as we are to these events, it is difficult for us to see how unique they are in the history of the Church. She has passed through difficult times before, but never times like these. God will save us from this new Egyptian army by again parting a Red Sea somehow, somewhere. But it is on us to keep the faith, speak the truth, and find our way to the water’s edge in cooperation with his salvific work.
What would a Bergoglian Church look like?
Essentially, a Bergoglian Church would be a non-Apostolic, non-sacramental, loose association of all the peoples and cultures of the earth, where God’s commandments are replaced with non-binding suggestions, the compliance with which would be ruled by the omnipotent personal conscience.
What is the essence of Bergoglianism?
Bergoglianism is an insidious, stealthy evil that seeps into the subconscious through the cracks of obfuscation and double-entendre.
It appeals to those dark corners of a man’s heart which have always searched for ways to justify his own sin. Bergoglianism’s essence is drawn from the ancient heresies of Syncretism, Universalism, and a new form of Antinomianism which claims that sometimes God actually wants us to commit serious sin.
What is the goal of Bergoglianism?
Bergoglianism’s goal is two-fold:
to destroy the idea that the Catholic Church has been set apart by God, uniquely blessed and designated for a special purpose; and
to homogenize all religious bodies into a new amalgamation which will be the Bergoglian Church, a non-Apostolic, non-sacramental loose amalgamation of all the peoples of the earth.
Being unable to identify any rational explanation for Bergoglianism’s doctrinal iconoclasm, one can only conclude that this Pope has decided that God speaks more clearly to Jorge Bergoglio today than he has spoken to the 2,000-year old Magisterial mind of the Church.
If the Church is wrong and this Pope is right, then Bergoglianism is truth, and, the Church, as she has understood herself to be for 2000 years, does not exist and never did. If the Church is right and this Pope is wrong, then Bergoglianism is the most serious heresy ever to infect the Church and history will name Jorge Bergoglio as the archetypal heresiarch.
A Church that changes to accommodate the world is no Church at all. Jesus established the Church to change the world, not to be changed by it. Jesus told us to be in the world, but not of the world. With that counsel in mind, here’s the problem with this Pope, and it is far worse than gaffes or odd sayings: he so dilutes the Faith that it becomes indistinguishable from the world it came to save.
Pope Francis’ most cherished strategic goal is to remove all barriers to a world religion which would be based on Bergoglianism. One of his favorite tactics is to cast doubt on the Catholic Church’s most cherished icons of the Faith by which the Church is marked as being unique and set apart by God for her special purpose of evangelization.
So, what do we make of all this?
I love Pope Francis. I also acknowledge that he is the quintessential heretic and the archetypal heresiarch whose goal is to deconstruct the Catholic Church and replace it with the Bergoglian Church which will operate without sin, without sacrament, and without boundaries. The Pope Francis is not stupid or confused. Those who think he is a bumbling stumbler who blurts words without thought are vastly underestimating his craftiness and his intentions. He is a brilliant and stealthy strategist. Sooner or later, the Catholic Church must come to grips with a fact: Bergoglianism does not misunderstand Catholic teaching. Bergoglianism understands Catholic teaching quite well, and rejects it.
The Pope’s job is to guard the truth, not invent it. The bishops better wake up, and fast. The heresy of Bergoglianism must be formally rejected by the bishops of the Church. It’s founder, Jorge Bergoglio, must be declared a formal heretic and anathema. These events will occur (for if they did not, the Church would, by that inaction, invalidate herself). The question is not whether they will occur, but when. As to that specific manner, time, and place….our work is before us and we should get to it, but the final resolution is God’s jurisdiction alone.
Chip Field
9-30-19
“We must love them both, those whose opinions we share and those whose opinions we reject, for both have labored in the search for truth, and both have helped us in the finding of it.” – Aquinas, Commentary on Aristotle
“Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It’s up to YOU, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops act like bishops, and your religious act like religious.” — Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, speaking to the Knights of Columbus, June 1972.
“In accord with the knowledge, competence, and preeminence which they possess, [lay people] have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and they have a right to make their opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward their pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons.” – Catholic Catechism #907 and Code of Canon Law, Can. 212 #3
“If the faith is endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly.” -Aquinas, Summa Theologiae: Fraternal Correction (Secunda Secundae Partis, Q. 33)
“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, he is, by that preaching, condemned.” St. Paul, Galatians 1:8
Footnotes
Part 1: The Philosophical Base
1 Evangelii Gaudium, Apostolic Exhortation (November 24, 2013) https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium_en.pdf
2 Adulterers no longer necessarily excluded from Holy Communion
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2013/july/documents/papa-francesco_20130728_gmg-conferenza-stampa.html
3 Pope declares death penalty “inadmissible”
https://zenit.org/articles/pope-francis-decides-to-update-church-catechism-to-assert-church-teaching-against-use-of-death-penalty/
http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2018/08/02/0556/01209.html#it
Catholic Catechism #2267. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm
4 One’s conscience determines good and evil. http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/letters/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130911_eugenio-scalfari.html
5 The Church should consider the benefits of Gay civil unions.
https://www.ncronline.org/news/politics/cardinal-dolan-pope- francis-opened-door-gay-civil-unions-debate
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-23489702
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2013/july/documents/papa-francesco_20130728_gmg-conferenza-stampa.html
6 The are many paths to God. All persons are children of God. Christians an Muslims worship the same God.
7 Atheists go to heaven if they follow their consciences.
“Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live justified by the grace of God, and thus be associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ.” (Evangelii Gaudium #254)
8 “I do not try to convert the atheist. I respect him.”
On Heaven and Earth, by Jorge This Pope, pp. 12-13 (2010)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Heaven_and_Earth
9 Pope appoints abortion advocate Nigel Biggar to the Vatican’s Academy for Life. (2017)
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/pro-abortion-theologian-picked-as-pontifical-academy-for-life-member
10 Pope Francis appoints Gay Rights advocate Fr. James Martin to Vatican’s Communications Secretariat.
11 Pope authorizes Vatican to issue stamp honoring Martin Luther.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/vatican-announces-stamp-of-martin-luther-on-500th-anniversary-of-reformatio
12 Christians and Muslims worship the same God.
https://zenit.org/articles/pope-s-address-to-representatives-of-the-churches-ecclesial-communities-and-other-religions/
13 Sometimes, serious sinning is what God wants us to do. (Amoris Laetitia, #303)
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
14 Artificial contraception
15 Pastoral concerns and personal conscience always trump doctrine. (Amoris Laetitia 291,294-296, 300, 303, 305, 307-308)
16 At the foot of the Cross, Mary doubted God.
“She was silent, but in her heart, how many things told the Lord! ‘You, that day, this and the other that we read, you had told me that he would be great, you had told me that you would have given him the throne of David, his forefather, that he would have reigned forever and now I see him there!’ Our Lady was human! And perhaps she even had the desire to say: ‘Lies! I was deceived!’ (Homily 12-20-13)
17 Some unmarried cohabitations are “real marriage” and “have the grace of real marriage”.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-most-marriages-are-null-some-cohabitations-are-real- marriage
18 The potential benefits of a Vatican relationship with the Chinese government are more important than, and take precedence over, any moral worries about that government’s atheism or abortion sponsorship.
19 The foremost abortion practitioner and advocate in the history of Italy can also be, in Pope Francis’ words, “one of Italy’s forgotten greats”.
20 Mortal sin has some benefits for us. (Amoris Laetitia #292)
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
21 Sin is sometimes unavoidable. (Amoris Laetitia 296-298, 300-303, 305)
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
22 God’s grace is sometimes insufficient for us to avoid sin. (Amoris Laetitia 301, 303, 305)
https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf
23 Veritatis Splendor #79
http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html
24 Pope Francis is on the record as stating that absolute truth, objective truth, is not absolute after all, but is based on “relationship” and can be affected by one’s circumstances.
“I would not speak about “absolute” truths, even for believers, in the sense that absolute is that which is disconnected and bereft of all relationship. Truth, according to the Christian faith, is the love of God for us in Jesus Christ. Therefore, truth is a relationship. As such each one of us receives the truth and expresses it from within, that is to say, according to one’s own circumstances, culture and situation in life.”