Freedom is a right of every person: each individual enjoys the freedom of belief, thought, expression and action. The pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings.
The error was immediately obvious to even moderately well-formed Catholics: God most certainly does not will the diversity of religions; rather, He permits it. As for His will according to that which He ordains to be – that is, His will expressed via precept, operation, and counsel – this is clearly expressed with regard to religion in the First Commandment, to which we will return momentarily.
Readers may also recall the breathless headline that ran at LifeSite News in March:
As those who took the click bait quickly came to the realize, however, Bergoglio simply told Bishop Schneider and the other bishops present, “You can say that the phrase in question on the diversity of religions means the ‘permissive will’ of God.”
On April 3, though I am just now getting around to posting about it, “Francis” as he is known and adored by enemies of the Catholic Church worldwide, offered the following so-called catechesis:
Why are there so many religions, how come there are so many religions? With Muslims, we are descendants of the same Father, Abraham: 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 [sic] 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.
This, my friends, is all the clarification anyone needs, and it contains more than one error. First and most obvious is the claim that all religions look to God. Clearly, they do not.
Less noticeable, perhaps, but even graver still was his spin on the voluntas permissiva of God, the meaning of which he perverted in order to accommodate his own heretical designs: “He wanted to allow this situation.”
There is none so linguistically deceptive as a modernist!
For the record, the original Italian text reads, Egli ha voluto permettere questa realità, which is accurately translated above. Had His Hereticalness wished to teach the truth, his catechesis could have consisted of the far simpler statement alone: Egli permette questa realità; that is, “He allows, or permits, this reality.”
The difference is as profound as it is subtle.
With regard to the voluntas permissiva of God, we must affirm that He wills to allow. This is eminently obvious inasmuch as God cannot at once not will to allow and yet allow. When He allows, therefore, He wills to do so. St. Thomas Aquinas explains God’s will further:
Or it may be said that permission and operation refer to present time, permission being with respect to evil, operation with regard to good. Whilst as to future time, prohibition is in respect to evil, precept to good… (STI, Prima Pars, Q.19, A.12)
With regard to religion, the Catechism of the Council of Trent (aka the Roman Catechism) teaches:
When it is said: Thou shalt not have strange gods before me, it is equivalent to saying: Thou shalt worship me the true God; thou shalt not worship strange gods.
In giving the First Commandment, God was very clear – He has given mankind the precept to worship Him alone, while prohibiting the worship of strange gods; that is, the practice of false religion.
With all of this in mind, it is clear that the Bergoglian treatment breaks down on the two fronts mentioned. First, he declares that the many false religions of the world, Islam included, do not worship strange gods, saying of them, “They always look to heaven, they look to God.”
Secondly, in saying “He wanted to allow” these false religions, he speaks of God’s permissive will in the past tense – something that Aquinas, notably, does not do; he speaks only of present time and future time with respect to God’s will (as in the citation above).
Bergoglio’s linguistic maneuver is a diabolically shrewd way of subtly suggesting that the permissive will of God vis-à-vis the “diversity of religions” is tantamount to a precept for future time, an expression of what “God wants” to be. In truth with regard to the “diversity of religions,” however, it is simply the case that God presently permits that which He prohibits for all time.
The first error – that all religions look to God – is how Bergoglio justifies the second error; namely, that God wants this.
Now you know why Bergoglio did not hesitate to tell Bishop Schneider, “You can say this means the ‘permissive will’ of God.” He was comfortable doing so because his twisted definition of the voluntas permissiva of God effectively keeps the heresy alive!
All of that aside, let us not forget that, according to Bergoglio, God wills false religions in the same way that He wills “color, sex, and race.” This is heresy, plain and simple, and the captains of the conciliar church-of-man are utterly ill equipped to confront it.
Now, for the really bad news: Jorge isn’t breaking new ground here; he is simply taking the church-of-man further along the course that was set by his predecessors, one that was mapped out for all of them by the Almighty Council.
It is for this reason that the call to enter the Church ceased in the 1960s, the same reason why John Paul the Great Ecumenist had no problem communing with heathens, and why Benedict XVI denounced proselytism well before Francis ever hit the scene.
Each one of them held firm in the belief that all religions look to God; it’s just that Jorge Bergoglio is willing to proclaim as much far more plainly.
Bottom line: The institution that is pleased to present itself to the world as the Catholic Church in our day, going all the way back to the time of the Council, is just what Archbishop Lefebvre said it is, little more than a counterfeit church.