I recently re-posted the image above (created last year) on my Facebook page and it caused a little stir among some well-meaning persons who do not dare ponder exactly how it is that our pope can imagine a resurrection that is more majestic than the real one.
I understand…
It’s very painful to acknowledge the fact – knowable simply by taking the Holy Father at his own word and by observing his deeds – that Pope Francis preaches a “diminished and distorted Christ.”
Take for instance the pope’s Urbi et Orbi message for Easter 2015.
Pope Francis begins:
Jesus Christ is risen!
Love has triumphed over hatred, life has conquered death, light has dispelled the darkness!
Out of love for us, Jesus Christ stripped himself of his divine glory, emptied himself, took on the form of a slave and humbled himself even to death, death on a cross. For this reason God exalted him and made him Lord of the universe. Jesus is Lord!
It is a fearful thing to recognize just how deficient the Christology of Pope Francis truly is, and perhaps more fearful still is considering how it informs his pontificate.
Let’s be very clear; Our Blessed Lord did not “strip Himself of divine glory.” Indeed, such a thing is utterly impossible!
Pope Francis is here referring to St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians:
For let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. (Phil 2:5-8)
This “emptying of self” is known in Catholic theology as “kenosis” (the Greek word used in Philippians) and it has been much written about and debated by the Church Fathers; particularly in combating Christological heresies like Arianism that undermine our faith in Our Lord’s sacred divinity.
Far from “stripping Himself” of the divine glory that has ever belonged to the one person Jesus Christ, the glory of God was in a sense hidden in Him by the frailties He willingly assumed in taking to Himself our human nature.
The Catholic Encyclopedia states it as such:
According to Catholic theology, the abasement of the Word consists in the assumption of humanity and the simultaneous occultation of the Divinity.
Note: “Occultation” simply refers to something being obscured, hidden or blocked from view by something else.
Pope Francis, no doubt thanks in part to his mistaken image of a stripped down Christ, went on to preach an Easter message that, not surprisingly, is decidedly earthbound:
By his death and resurrection, Jesus shows everyone the way to life and happiness: this way is humility, which involves humiliation. This is the path which leads to glory. Only those who humble themselves can go towards the “things that are above”, towards God (cf. Col 3:1-4). The proud look “down from above”; the humble look “up from below”…
The world proposes that we put ourselves forward at all costs, that we compete, that we prevail… But Christians, by the grace of Christ, dead and risen, are the seeds of another humanity, in which we seek to live in service to one another, not to be arrogant, but rather respectful and ready to help.
Is it true that the death and resurrection of Christ is about showing us the way to happiness; His grace ordered toward making us good little helper bees for other people?
Of course not, but this is precisely the sort of “Gospel” that emerges when one imagines that the Lord is stripped of divine glory and His resurrection somehow lacks in majesty.
Pope Francis preaches as if Our Lord provides little more than the good-deed-doer’s best example of what random acts of kindness should look like. (Funny how the example Jesus provides in condemning religious falsehoods and those who hold them never seem to get cited.)
But… the pope did say that “Jesus is Lord of the universe!”
Yes he did, but missing – not just in his Easter message, but in his preaching in general – is any sense that the Lordship of Christ concerns sovereignty, power and glory.
Likewise missing is any suggestion that Our Lord’s Kingdom on earth is the Holy Catholic Church, to say nothing of any clear and unambiguous call to enter her unto salvation.
In his Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium, for instance, the pope tells us:
Only the person who feels happiness in seeking the good of others, in desiring their happiness, can be a missionary.
Here we find Pope Francis speaking as if the mission of the Church is to make people happy, when indeed it is the salvation of souls.
This being the case, that his Easter message suggests that the Lord’s death and resurrection is ordered toward showing us the way to happiness comes as little surprise; indeed, it is entirely consistent with all that preceded it, and barring divine intervention, all that is likely to follow.
In any case, at the conclusion to his Urbi et Orbi message, Pope Francis moved though a series of calls for peace; you can read them for yourself on the Vatican website linked above.
If you do, what you will find is more earthbound talk about “the international community” and building “a fraternal society respectful of the dignity of the person … the marginalized, the imprisoned, the poor and the migrants…”
What you won’t find, even as the pope decried the persecution of Christians throughout the world, is encouragement unto the only thing truly capable of promoting the cause of peace; namely, conversion to Jesus Christ – not the false one who supposedly “stripped himself of his divine glory,” but conversion to Him who is risen from the dead unto majesty, Christ the King.
Perhaps, the Jesus that Bergoglio speaks of is the one from the Gospel of Bill O’Reilly in “Killing Jesus” which rightly should have been entitled “Killing the Gospels” or “Killing the Divinity of Jesus”.
Bergoglio is so good at twisting things, he should have worked to Carvel!
Jorge Bergoglio says: “Jesus Christ stripped himself of his divine glory, emptied himself, took on the form of a slave”.
Pope St. Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church (died, 461 A.D.), on the other hand, writes the following (Sermon 23):
“[A]s the form of God did not do away with the form of a slave, so the form of a slave did not impair the form of God…. [F]or that ’emptying of Himself,’ whereby the Invisible made Himself visible, was the bending down of pity, not the failing of power“.
Beautiful quote, Dumb_ox! Thanks so much.
Does this commentary shed any light?
Philippians 2:8
And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross
Php 2:8. And being found in fashion as a man — A common man, without any peculiar excellence or comeliness. The word σχημα, rendered fashion, includes all the particulars of a person’s outward appearance; such as his figure, air, looks, clothing, and gait.
The word is also applied to things inanimate, as, (1 Corinthians 7:31,) the fashion of this world passeth away. He humbled himself — To a still greater depth: for his condescension to the rank of low life among sinful mortals, wonderful as it was, did not content him; but he became obedient — To his Father; even unto death — The greatest instance both of humiliation and obedience: and to no common form of dissolution, but to the ignominious, as well as painful death of the cross, inflicted on few but slaves, or the vilest malefactors.
“The reasoning in this passage is beautiful. The Son of God did not proudly continue in his high station, but descended from it for a while, and placed himself in the lowest condition among men, serving every one with the humility and assiduity of a servant, or bondman, as δουλος signifies.
Then, in obedience to his Father, (John 6:38,) he finished his services by suffering the painful and ignominious death of the cross as a malefactor, for the salvation of the world.
Having this great example of humility and benevolence set before them by their Master, his disciples, who are above their brethren in station, should not on every occasion behave as their superiors; but, laying aside their dignity, they should cheerfully perform in person to their inferiors those offices of kindness and humanity which their distress requires; especially when the assistance wanted by their inferiors is of such an urgent nature that it admits of no delay.” — Macknight.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm
St.Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians
2:6 Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
2:7 But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man.
2:8 He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross.
Gospel of St.John
14:1 Let not your heart be troubled. You believe in God, believe also in me.
14:2 In my Father’s house there are many mansions. If not, I would have told you: because I go to prepare a place for you.
14:3 And if I shall go, and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and will take you to myself; that where I am, you also may be.
14:4 And whither I go you know, and the way you know.
14:5 Thomas saith to him: Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?
14:6 Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.
14:7 If you had known me, you would without doubt have known my Father also: and from henceforth you shall know him, and you have seen him.
14:8 Philip saith to him: Lord, shew us the Father, and it is enough for us.
14:9 Jesus saith to him: Have I been so long a time with you; and have you not known me? Philip, he that seeth me seeth the Father also. How sayest thou, Shew us the Father?
14:10 Do you not believe, that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I speak to you, I speak not of myself. But the Father who abideth in me, he doth the works.
14:11 Believe you not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?
He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, yea, the death of the cross. See, says one, He voluntarily became obedient; he was not equal to Him whom He obeyed. O you obstinate ones and unwise! This does not at all lower Him. For we too become obedient to our friends, yet this has no effect. He became obedient as a Son to His Father; He fell not thus into a servile state, but by this very act above all others guarded his wondrous Sonship, by thus greatly honoring the Father. He honored the Father, not that you should dishonor Him, but that you should the rather admire Him, and learn from this act, that He is a true Son, in honoring His Father more than all besides. No one has thus honored God. As was His height, such was the correspondent humiliation which He underwent. As He is greater than all, and no one is equal to Him, so in honoring His Father, He surpassed all, not by necessity, nor unwillingly, but this too is part of His excellence; yea, words fail me. ~ St. John Chrysostom
I have to be candid here. I find it a difficult to rationalise the “true God and true man” concept. The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ in his life on this planet was God and man. Being human, we can relate more readily to the man part of the concept. We know that Jesus felt emotion such as compassion and anger. We know too that Jesus suffered physical pain, terrible physical pain. What we cannot possibly comprehend is the God part of the same concept because of the restrictions that come with our individual humanity. None of us can have any concept of what the status of God could possibly be. None of us therefore could know how someone could be God and man at the same time. I guess it takes faith to be convinced that Jesus was God and man simultaneously.
Just to remind everyone, the “occultation” of Our Lord’s divine majesty was not complete; we do have the account of his Transfiguration where His Divine Majesty was revealed to the disciples:
–
“And after six days Jesus taketh unto him Peter and James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart:
And he was transfigured before them. And his face did shine as the sun: and his garments became white as snow.
And behold there appeared to them Moses and Elias talking with him.
And Peter answering, said to Jesus: Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
And as he was yet speaking, behold a bright cloud overshadowed them. And lo, a voice out of the cloud, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: hear ye him.
And the disciples hearing, fell upon their face, and were very much afraid.
And Jesus came and touched them: and said to them, Arise, and fear not.
And they lifting up their eyes saw no one but only Jesus.
And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying: Tell the vision to no man, till the Son of man be risen from the dead.”
–
Matthew 17: 1 – 9
–
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15019a.htm
–
Did the Pope forget about the Transfiguration?
Here is an interesting discussion of how the Angelic Doctor and another renowned churchman viewed the transfiguration:
–
http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2010/08/st.html
–
According to these two commentators discussed in this post, Our Lord always had his Glory so it is not correct to say that he stripped himself of His Divine Glory – either it was hidden, or He had not merited yet that his Glory be visible in his body.
Thank you, Louie, for once again clarifying the confusing words of Pope Francis. It is exhausting trying to read through the nonsense of his modernistic language. I read this Urbi et Orbi message for Easter 2015 and knew that something was wrong, but could not clearly see the poison through the subtleties. Thank you for your insight and for pointing out the dangers that are often (at least for me) difficult to see. May God reward you for your vigilance and your perseverance. And may He grant you a holy Easter season.
Dear Louie,
For what its worth here’s our “take” on all this.
Last year, Pope Francis’ homilies on “triumphalism” referred to it as a temptation not to be contented with the “ordinary” as we all should be, but rather to “fantasize” in a way which is, according to him, contrary to what the Lord teaches us -as not everything is “magical”.
__
What he seems to be consistently promoting, is the effort to bring everything about the Church and the Faith, down to a very common, earthy level, which he seems to believe represents God’s will. Nothing is off-limits in this regard–whether it be the TLM, Papal residences, , or even the way we are to think of Our Lord after the Resurrection–all must be disconnected from anything lofty or regal, apparently so no one feels out of place, or like they must try to “fit in”, including unrepentant mortal sinners whom he wants to make comfortable while “walking” along with them on their “journey”. The rules and regs have to stay on the back burner, of course, while he works to change “pastoral practices” . (Got some nice opposition on that, thank God)
___
He’s really just taking on the Jesuit modernists dreams of how VII can “change” the Church. God has let him become the Pope, so he’s doing his best to tear down all the walls he can, while he can.
The fact that so many of its novelties have been an obvious failure as far as the mission of the Church is concerned, doesn’t seem to register with modernists. They think that if something they try didn’t work, then they just need to do more of it. Some may be flat- out attempting to destroy the Church. We can’t read minds and hearts, but we do know that’s the devil’s plan.
-We intend to continue opposing all that is evil, standing up for the Truth, and helping Our Lady to her final victory though prayer and daily sacrifices.
Dear Paul Morphy,
” … I guess it takes faith to be convinced that Jesus was God and man simultaneously.”
Absolutely! The Credo starts: ” I BELIEVE in one God …” The Incarnation, the Trinity, Transubstantiation and many other dogmas of our Faith, we accept and believe by faith. These are mysteries beyond our current abilities to understand, or rationalise in this physical world and the Bible warns us not to try to understand things we are incapable of understanding, lest we are lead thereby into error. We see through a smokey mirror now, but one day (please God), we will understand all.
Dear Indignus,
Let us look at your statement and then take it bit by bit:
” … He’s really just taking on the Jesuit modernists dreams of how VII can “change” the Church. God has let him become the Pope, so he’s doing his best to tear down all the walls he can, while he can.”
1. So the Pope is taking on modernist dreams? Definitely he is a modernist! I would hazard a guess that 99.9% of the commentators on this site would agree with that statement.
But, Pope St. Pius X has taught infallibly that modernism is the synthesis of all heresies (Pascendi). Therefore, if Pope Francis is a modernist and formally disseminating modernist doctrine, he must be a heretic.
2. ” … how VII can “change” the Church.”
God is immutable. His teaching is therefore also immutable and is for all men, for all time. Therefore the Church is indefectable. It cannot change! Novelty is anathema. A Council operates under/by the authority of a Pope. The Pope’s job is to pass on, intact, what he received. He is the supreme guardian against heresies, errors and novelties being introduced into the Faith. Didn’t St. Paul say that even if an angel taught something just an iota different to what the Apostles taught, we should let him be anathema? Have Vatican II and the conciliar popes taught anything different to the Faith of our Fathers, or introduced novelties? Have they changed the Church? If they have, we must let them be anathema – so says St. Paul.
3. “… God has let him become the Pope … ”
Well, God let him be elected Pope, if he wasn’t a formal, pertinacious heretic when elected, but he has divested himself of that Office if he has become one since. (Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio.) So it is crucial for us to decide – is Bergoglio a heretic? Were his conciliar predecessors also heretics? If you answer “yes,” then the conclusion is inescapable.
4. “… so he’s doing his best to tear down all the walls he can, while he can.”
How could a Pope even want to do that? How could a Vicar of Christ want to destroy what Christ Himself established? If, as you say, Bergoglio is trying to do that, how can he be the Vicar of Christ? The Holy Ghost will not permit a Pope to formally teach error concerning Faith, or Morals. That is our Faith.
There is only one logical, Catholic answer to all of the above: Vatican II was a false council and the conciliar “popes” are anti – popes.
The dictatorship of relativism. Everything is made subjective and arbitrary. No objective truth. Let’s all be happy!
An excellent post, Peter.
Yes, it is impossible to be able to understand such a mystery, but Faith in that regard helps convict each and every believer. Please God if we get to Heaven we will be able to more fully comprehend.
Dear Louie,
The pictures you have placed at the top of this post are, in my opinion, humongously,
stupendously, tremendous!!! My vocabulary of superlatives is insufficient to do their brilliance justice. They say more than a million words. They illustrate and encapsulate the Catholic – NO war perfectly. I have never seen a better illustration of our situation. If you composed them, you are brilliant.
OK, last one I promise, but reading again the quote from Bergoglio’s homily of 2013 in Louie’s picture above, I feel the rage AlphonsusJr referred to the other day, burning me up again. What blasphemy! What arrant nonsense! How many evil heresies are included in two sentences! If anybody believes that is a Pope speaking, then I just give up!
The decision to try, judge and depose a Pope of heresy comes from the hierarchical structure Jesus established. The Church is not a democracy of the laity calling the shots.
Unfortunately, a very tiny minority of Catholics can see the reality of the current Papal situation. God is in control and has deemed that the current Pontiff is what is deserved right now, due to the wide spread unfaithfulness of the Church’s members. God will even allow some to have hell as their eternal reward if they choose.
Dear JamesTheLesser,
You are perfectly correct. The Magisterium calls the shots and invalidates the election of an heretical pope, or deposes a Pope who becomes a formal, pertinacious heretic:
Pope Paul IV, 1559, Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio:
” … in order that the flock may be faithfully guarded and beneficially directed, We are bound to be diligently watchful after the manner of a vigilant Shepherd and to ensure most carefully that certain people who consider the study of the truth beneath them should be driven out of the sheepfold of Christ and no longer continue to disseminate error from positions of authority. We refer in particular to those who in this age, impelled by their sinfulness and supported by their cunning, are attacking with unusual learning and malice the discipline of the orthodox Faith, and who, moreover, by perverting the import of Holy Scripture, are striving to rend the unity of the Catholic Church and the seamless tunic of the Lord… ”
” … We have been weighed upon by the thought that a matter of this kind [i.e. error in respect of the Faith] is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff,who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fulness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith. …”
” … 6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:
(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless; …
(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power… “
“The world proposes that we put ourselves forward at all costs, that we compete, that we prevail… But Christians, by the grace of Christ, dead and risen, are the seeds of another humanity, in which we seek to live in service to one another, not to be arrogant, but rather respectful and ready to help.”
I guess he’s occultly saying that he ain’t a Christian considering the shady and deceitful activities he engaged in at the 2014 October Synod (stealing books, publishing a midterm report that had not been cleared with his “fellow” bishops) and then publishing a final report that included HIS agenda even when it was voted down.
I wonder if in HIS (not God the Father or God the Son’s) Jubliee “Mercy” year, he will even allow the members of the FFI and his fellow bishops the rule of CANON LAW or will he insist all abide by his LAWLESS (so-called “pastoral”) feelings? Personally I prefer the rule of law to the rule of Caesar, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini or Henry VIII.
“but it will not be only way to participate in the Jubilee, centred around the mercy of the Holy Father, who never tires of forgiving and welcoming his children with open arms.”
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/40265/
When Kingship of Christ is denigrated, it is one’s OWN ego, one is elevating.
Dear Peter Lamb,
The points you make about modernism being a formally declared heresy by Pius X; the Church being immutable; and the problem of having what by all appearances is a heretic for a Pope, are all vital issues which have been discussed here many times, somethimes in depth and at great length, but eliciting differing conclusions.
__
With due respect, love, and admiration for your passionate expression Faith, 🙂 🙂
We disagree with some of the ideas you’ve presented here, –that there is “only one, logical Catholic answer to all of the above” .
You have taken it upon yourself to declare something that no individual Cardinal (even the ones we can still recognize as Catholic) or Council of the Church has formally declared–that the VII council was “false” and that we have had “anti-popes” since it took place.
___
While we agree that there is a lot of evidence of heretical thinking and error in what the press has provided us to study; we also have seen a number of first and second hand denials that these assessments and quotes are correct– Some of those came from the Pope and his agents, and were based on claims such as bad reporting, mistranslations of the Italian or Spanish the Pope spoke in at the time, misunderstanding and misinterpretations of “off the cuff” remarks, etc. etc.
___
We haven’t found those believable. But while we personally think we’ve seen enough video evidence (some of which we were able to translate accurately from the languages spoken), AND enough repetition of certain “themes” in various contexts by him, AND enough reports that confirm his ideas while in Argentina–that we think we are right in our assessments, we have also read enough about “bad” popes of the past, to realize that although some believed and even taught heresies on a personal level, the Church was protected by God from any of them officially promulating lies. One of them recanted just before death after preaching it during his entire papacy. (John XXIII -about the Beatific Vision) [ And for what it may be worth, so far we’ve found Roberto de Mattei to be respectable and trustworthy in his research and opinions]
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/01/a-pope-who-fell-into-heresy-church-that.html
__
So we bide our time and pray daily; denouncing the errors we see in a variety of ways: -personal talks with priests and Bishops; letters to Rome on a variety of levels including the Pope; group actions- locally and internationally; and individual encounters everywhere we find ourselves–work, neighborhoods, parishes, -no exceptions. (We’re not above instigating conversations)
–Right now, we wait for some official action, hoping it will come soon, and are very encouraged by the effects we see growing right now- from internet activities like Louie’s and others–acknowledged by Bishops and even Cardinals more recently- who seem emboldened by the laity’s efforts and are beginning to speak out in ways we haven’t seen over these last 55 years.
__
When official action comes, we believe it will be tied to the Fatima (and Akita) prophecies of Our Lady, as these chastisements we’re living through obviosly are. “The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, nations will be annihilated…” SOMETHING will bring about the official COLLEGIAL CONSECRATION of Russia (by name), before the miracle that converts that poor nation and the promised “time of peace” that will be granted to the world. One things certain. THAT has not happened. ISIS is only one proof, but its an irrefutable one.
__
Please believe that we don’t take these matters lightly, as we have “lost” relationships with numerous family members over these issues, by simply standing firmly for the Faith of our fathers, against the growing toleration of sin and outspoken error, which many of them believe the Church now teaches. We are the new Pharisees, lacking humility and charity in denouncing sin, according to many in power these days.. Not buying it.
–Carrying a lot of pain in our hearts from these divisions, we accept them knowing they are the direct result of following our Lord. We trust that Truth will win out in the end, while realizing that our lifetimes here on earth may not be long enough to see that happen with our own families-from this side of the grave, anyway. We leave that part to God, and in Our Lady’s capable hands.
___
So unlike what you say here, we DO NOT formally declare him a heretic. (We checked the Catholic Encyclopedia to see what that entails, and were overwhelmed by the list of types and degrees of heresy alone) Then read all the arguments we could find from all sides in that debate, and decided it must be resolved FORMALLY.
___
We DO however, not hesitate to denounce any and all errors that circulate, which contradict teachings of the past, spending a good deal of time reading the teachings and attempting to understand the truths they represent, as well as the essential differences between them and what is now being presented to the world–by anyone who presents it, including the Pope. We give our opinions of these, and hope the Bishops and Cardinals will be influenced by the growing number of laity speaking out this way. Apparently some have been greatly affected, and have said so.
___
God IS immutable. Dogma IS immutable. Some Church disciplines are not dogma, and therefore not immutable. THIS seems to be the area where modernists and progressives continue to attack the hardest, claiming they are not changing dogma. (We know how bogus most of that is, but this is where we see them cite philosophers who created new vocabularies, attempting to change the meaning of words used in the past to define things clearly. That is one of their methods for muddying the water. Our job is to study what they say and point out the treachery we see–as you point out–wherever something “different” (especially when it is opposite) is being attempted to be taught as truth.
___
You ask: “How could a Vicar of Christ want to destroy what Christ Himself established? ” Many reasons: Diabolical disoreintation was presented to us as the main one by Our Lady herself at Akita–infiltrating to the highest levels of the Church. Yet she still submitted her requests for the Consecration of Russia to the Pope. If she submits, we submit, until God takes action through His indefectible Church to change the situation. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WE TAKE LIGHTLY, OUR LADY’S SUBMISSION TO THE ” HOLY FATHER” WAS RECORDED AGAIN AND AGAIN BY SISTER LUCIA.
___
You say, “The Holy Ghost will not permit a Pope to formally teach error concerning Faith, or Morals. That is our Faith.” We say Amen.
_
Hope this helps you to see that there are at least some fellow Catholics who are living the Faith and battling for the Truth– as most commenters we’ve read here on Louie’s blog seem to be-, who are loyal to Our Lord and His Church, but have substantial reasons for not agreeing with your conclusions about what to do/declare concerning the current Pope and his official status.
Dear TWN,
Thanks for the link. It demonstrates why there is so much confusion about the “orthodoxy ” of Pope Francis. People need a hermeneutic of continuity with his other teachings –a lens through which to read what he says–to understand that although he’s sounding exactly like the Church of old in what is published here about the Year of Mercy; his homilies and remarks of the past point to him having a very different idea of what the Lord’s Mercy entails–ONE THAT INSISTS ON OVERLOOKING UNREPENTED (THEREFORE UNCONFESSED) ONGOING SIN. (evidenced more prominently recently, by all the machinations you mentioned regarding the synod, but as well by his initial promotions of Kasper and Kasper’s idea of Divine Mercy, before its opening)
__
From your link:
“In the booklet entitled “Look after the heart” distributed to the worshipers in St. Peter’s Square on 22nd Feb.as a guide to Lent, the Pope wanted to remind readers of the works of corporal mercy (giving food to the hungry, drink to the thirsty, clothes the naked, shelter to pilgrims, visiting the sick and incarcerated, burying the dead) and spiritual mercy (counselling those in doubt, teaching the ignorant, admonishing the sinners, consoling the afflicted, forgiving offense, tolerating with patience those who annoy us, praying to God for the living and the deceased).
In the “path” of the jubilee THAT BEGINS WITH SPIRITUAL CONVERSION” AND WILL HELP BRING PEOPLE CLOSER TO THE SACRAMENT AND RECONCILIATION, there will also be room for the rediscovery of the works of mercy.
=======
Unfortunately, in light of all we know about this Pope’s, ideas, THE SACRAMENT he hopes to draw people to, could be the Eucharist, and RECONCILIATION, could unfortunately be something he sees as happening at some time in the future–after that. Bad Catechesis is everywhere these days.
p.s. The point we were trying to make here, is that most of what he says and prints can be read in a variety of ways. Knowing what he really thinks and wants, isn’t easy for the average man on the street, who doesn’t research and study all he says and does.
I prefer Pius XI, 1925 to Francis 2013 .
The Holy Father is not a theologian, nor indeed am I. But there are two uncomfortable things in what he says. As you point out, in his Easter 2015 message there are errors. The one you point out, that is Christ could not empty Himself of Glory. Also, as an ordinary Catholic I might add, I am not happy with the statement “Jesus is Lord”. Does that not imply He is separate from and perhaps above other elements of the Triune God.
Now I know we ordinary Catholics might quibble about such “detail” over a glass of wine, or even a pint of beer, but the Holy Father in making such a universal statement ought to be more careful.
Yes I definitely prefer Pius X.
Dear Indignus,
Yes indeed, we are brothers in Christ, sincere Catholics, trying to adhere to the True Faith in tumultuous times, as are all the good people on this site. I don’t push sedevacantism from pride, or obstinacy, or any other motive than that to me it makes total sense. Catholics are confused. The church is a mess – truly in a state of “Diabolical Confusion.” This is not so by chance. This situation is orchestrated. We see the calculated effort of judeo-masonic Conspiracy and Invasion of the Church. The NO is the church of darkness predicted by Our Lady.
You and I and many others have paid a price for our loyalty to the true Faith. Some of my kids don’t speak to me now I’m a sedevacantist. I suppose one could infer from that, that we gave them a jolly good NO Catholic upbringing, before I saw the light! 🙂
We have to fight for the true Catholic Faith. We are obliged to, no matter what the cost to ourselves! The Holy Ghost gave us the grace to do so, fearlessly, at our Confirmation.
Now, if I may I’d like to answer you comment:
” … You have taken it upon yourself to declare something that no individual Cardinal (even the ones we can still recognize as Catholic) or Council of the Church has formally declared–that the VII council was “false” and that we have had “anti-popes” since it took place.”
You are correct. I have. (But please remember there are sedevacantist Bishops, Priests and other laymen and not only little ol’ me 🙂 ) There has been no council since VII, so obviously no council could declared VII false, or the conciliar popes to be anti-popes. Neither have any Cardinals, correct again, but bear in mind that all the Cardinals, to date, have sworn allegiance and obedience to pope Francis. They are all NO Cardinals. One might seem a bit more orthodox than another here and there, but they all bow, officially, to the teachings of VatII and the conciliar popes, so who would expect them to fire, or denounce their boss? Please God one of them will have the guts sooner, or later.
A crucial and central point of confusion seems to be whether I, as an ordinary Catholic layman, am capable of and entitled to the diagnosing of a heretic, even if he is “pope”.
My answer is an emphatic “yes I am”! (and so are you! 🙂 ) God has given me reason and an average intelligence. I have been taught the Faith by beloved Irish Nuns, Brothers and Priests long ago. I can read what Popes, Doctors of the Church, Saints, Scripture, Theologians, Catechisms and Sacred Tradition have taught over nearly 2000 years. When a heresiarch comes along and says something different to what the above have taught, I can recognise and appreciate the deviation from orthodox doctrine. So yes, if PaulVI is a mason, can I conclude he is a heretic? For sure! No doubt about it! Canon Law tells me so!
If I have read and understood Mortalium Animos, and Iam Vos Omnes and I see JPII cavorting with heretics at Assisi, putting budda on top of the Tabernacle and kissing the Koran whilst receiving a blessing from a witch doctor, do I spot a heretic? Sure I do! And so on with all of them including Francis. Numerous demonstrable, provable heresies from all of them. Now if you will concede just one single formal heresy from just one of these “popes” and then you read Cum Ex Apostolatus, how can you continue to recognise him as a true Pope? Please tell me and put me out of my misery because, before God, I simply can’t understand it. If VII taught one single heresy, how can it not be a false council?
Can a Pope, or a Council by his authority, teach heresy? The Holy Ghost, our God, will not allow it! Now dear Indignus, you said “Amen” to that and Pastor Aeternus confirms that, so, if you recognise VatII as a true Council and Bergoglio as a true Pope, you must believe every jot and tittle of VAII is infallible Magisterium and every formal teaching of Pope Francis to be binding on your conscience, under pain of sin. Not so? Black, or white. Yes, or no. There can be no middle ground. The Catholic Faith is absolute. Relativism is anathema. The NO – you are in, or out. Recognise&resisters are schismatics.
I accept that most of the company do not agree with me, but I simply can’t understand why they don’t. To me it seems so obvious. 🙂
By the way, Our Lady did submit to the Pope, but remember that She submitted to a true Pope. That was long before any conciliar popes came along.
Yes, I do know full well that there are plenty of good fellow Catholics who are living the Faith and battling for the Truth– as are most commenters here on Louie’s blog. We are all trying to be loyal to Our Lord and His Church – Amen.
Whether the reasons many have for not agreeing with my conclusions about what to do/declare concerning the current Pope and his official status are substantial – I’m not so sure. 🙂
___
Typo Correction Pope who recanted was John XXII not XXIII
A man of God does not sow confusion, but brings clarity to matters of Faith and morals. The truth is not complicated. It is easy to understand. Those who do not speak clearly are promoting falsehood, dissension.
yeah. making money off lying about your saviour, mr o’reilly.
That was my thought – what about the transfiguration?
Does Bergoglio believe Christ is the Messias? Can we say, based on his teachings, that Bergoglio teaches Christ as God? Or just a good social worker at an important point in history? The teachings of Bergoglio Inc. are that matter is what matters. But contrary to this, the Gospels are clear, very clear – the purpose of Christ’s mission was not to end ‘material distress’ in the mortal world; although He alleviated it for some – ‘but the dead raised went back to the tomb, the healed lost their health again…’ Christ teaches us to fear the enemy of the soul, not bodily enemies (not an easy teaching). Christ rescues our souls – the material has to wait till the ‘new heaven and new earth’!
–
‘But… the pope did say that “Jesus is Lord of the universe!’ He has also taught, that man is the lord of the universe (one of those interviews where he called Christian fundamentalists ‘terrorists’).
–
Bergoglio says, ‘The world proposes that we put ourselves forward at all costs, that we compete, that we prevail.’ He also proudly announces ‘we cannot go back!’ Is this an attempt to compete with and ‘prevail’ over a Church he himself teaches had a revolution in the 60s? How can Truth revolt against Himself? It would seem that Bergoglio thinks he is leading people towards a sort of post-Jesus of Nazareth messianism. Is it Catholic? Is it Truth?
and he is a master at sowing 2+2=5
Dear PeterLamb,
Since you’re relatively new here, we should explain that our use of “we” refers to the two of us–an elderly Catholic couple, posting together here.
(We were going to add “grandparents” to indignus famulus to help avoid this explanation in the future, but haven’t yet figured out how to do that.) We’ve been asked in the past if we are the Pope, or the Queen of England. 🙂 🙂
Thank you for your kindly attitude which shows a good deal of respect for opposing views, and is nice to see.
About the issue of declaring the Pope a heretic–it’s one we don’t get into beyond a very general point anymore, as it always led us to extremely long reading sessions, that end with a discussion impasse.
–We would like to point out an apparent discrepancy in your general argument. We notice in your reply -just above- you wrote concerning your ability to judge heretics:
“I can read what Popes, Doctors of the Church, Saints, Scripture, Theologians, Catechisms and Sacred Tradition have taught over nearly 2000 years.
Yet in a recent conversation with Sobieski, we notinced you wrote (regarding his links and references, we assume):
“St. Robert Bellarmine, Suarez, Fr. Cekada, Robert Siscoe, etc. get very complicated for a sheep farmer, so let us keep it simple and…..”
___
We were glad to see you can understand our point about it getting very complicated, as Suarez and Bellarmine were two that we found at one point a long while ago, being quoted by both sides in these arguments–and people were arguing that the same statement proved each of their opposing points—which left us feeling cross-eyed and frustrated– which is why we decided to stick to what we feel we DO understand well enough to comment upon, and are leaving these matters to a future council or Cardinals who take up the cause of dealing with Pope Francis that way.
___
It’s true that’s not likely to happen without a miracle. But we know God will step in at some point, because we certainly need a big one to fix this mess. In the meantime, because of said mess, we think it’s important we all assume everyone is sincerely seeking God’s will and Truth, and, and pray for a good, holy, Traditional Pope, who won’t feel it necessary to resign, and can restore unity.
=====
On a topic we’re happy to discuss, you ended with :
“By the way, Our Lady did submit to the Pope, but remember that She submitted to a true Pope. That was long before any conciliar popes came along.”
–Our Lady also promised that “In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph–the Holy Father will consecrate Russia to my Immaculate Heart, Russia will be converted, and a time of peace will be granted to the world.”
–Since we know the consecration has not yet been done, but obviously will be, as Our Lady never lies, we will have to HAVE a legitimate “Holy Father” to complete this work. If sede theories were true, and we haven’t had a true Pope since before VII, then wouldn’t there be no more living valid Cardinals to elect a valid Pope in the future? Wouldn’t the Papacy be effectively dead?
And if so, how can Our Lady’s prophecy come true?
-Have any thoughts on that?
🙂 🙂
Dear Indignus Famulus, I know the pain of family members abandoning the true Faith and moral law, whilst basking in the pseudo-religion touted by Pope Francis and the majority of heretical and apostate bishops and priests. At least, you have each other for mutual support and consolation. Your writing is very lucid, insightful, practical – and always in conformity to the Deposit of Faith. I think you both should set up your own website. It would be better, of course, if you could use your real names. God bless.