After nearly two months, the wait is finally over. In an interview with the Italian newspaper, Avvenire, Francis has addressed the dubia.
As all but those who live in either fear or abject denial will affirm, Francis provided his answers to each of the five questions that are posed therein. [NOTE: English translation courtesy of Andrea Tornielli at Vatican Insider.]
Without specifically mentioning the dubia by name, Francis said with respect to criticism of Amoris Laetitia:
The Church exists only as an instrument for the communication of God’s merciful plan to the people. During the Council, the Church felt it had the responsibility to be a living sign of the Father’s love in the world. In the Lumen Gentium, it went back to the origins of its nature, the Gospel. This shifts the axis of Christianity away from a certain kind of legalism which can be ideological, towards the Person of God, who became mercy through the incarnation of the Son. Some still fail to grasp the point. They see things as black or white, even though it is in the course of life that we are called to discern.
It is perfectly clear, if it had not been already, that Francis has no intention whatsoever of giving simple “yes” or “no” answers to the dubia; that would be far too “black and white” for his tastes.
Make no mistake, however, he did provide his answers. The wait is well and truly over.
For those who are as yet unable to discern Francis’ public response to the dubia, please allow me to make it easy for you:
RESPONSA AD PROPOSITUM DUBIA
CONCERNING CLARIFICATION OF THE TEACHING
CONTAINED IN “AMORIS LAETITIA”
Dubium 1: It is asked whether, following the affirmations of “Amoris Laetitia” (nn. 300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the Sacrament of Penance and thus to admit to Holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person “more uxorio” (in a marital way) without fulfilling the conditions provided for by “Familiaris Consortio” n. 84 and subsequently reaffirmed by “Reconciliatio et Paenitentia” n. 34 and “Sacramentum Caritatis” n. 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” found in note 351 (n. 305) of the exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live “more uxorio”?
Responsum: Yes. Such things are not black or white. We are called to discern.
Dubium 2: After the publication of the Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” (cf. n. 304), does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 79, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?
Responsum: No. Such things are not black or white. We are called to discern.
Dubium 3: After “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 301) is it still possible to affirm that a person who habitually lives in contradiction to a commandment of God’s law, as for instance the one that prohibits adultery (cf. Mt 19:3-9), finds him or herself in an objective situation of grave habitual sin (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration, June 24, 2000)?
Responsum: No. Such things are not black or white. We are called to discern.
Dubium 4: After the affirmations of “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 302) on “circumstances which mitigate moral responsibility,” does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 81, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, according to which “circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice”?
Responsum: No. Such things are not black or white. We are called to discern.
Dubium 5: After “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 303) does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 56, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, that excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and that emphasizes that conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object?
Responsum: No. Such things are not black or white. We are called to discern.
The time is now at hand for “cardinals and bishops to make clear that the Pope is teaching error.” Francis has been given the opportunity, by way of a public challenge issued by senior cardinals, to confirm the true Faith in the face of the heresies that he himself disseminated throughout the Universal Church in Amoris Laetitia, and he has refused.
His unwillingness to formally address the dubia directly and plainly changes nothing of the objective reality that is staring us squarely in the face.
Even if others in Catholic media are afraid to say it aloud, at least thus far, I am not:
Francis has judged himself a formal heretic. He is, therefore, an antipope.
I hit my wife in the head with an axe. Have I committed mortal sin-?
Responsum: No. Such things are not black or white. We are called to discern.
Yes, Louis, YOU have had the courage and even “discernment” to recognize the objective heresy of Mr. Bergoglio, for some time. However, the question remains, will Card. Burke et al, acknowledge that they have been answered and also acknowledge what this answer demands?
The idea of truth as objective is simply that no matter what we believe to be the case, some things will always be true and other things will always be false. Our beliefs, whatever they are, have no bearing on the facts of the world around us. That which is true is always true even if we stop believing it and even if we stop existing at all.
Well, he has stated that the ‘Fab Four’ are willing to take the next step of correction & really they have little to lose in doing so. Even if they are excommunicated & lose their red hats by by taking this initiative they will be affirming their loyalty to Christ & the First apostles whom they have been honoured in being called their successors.
As I understand the Dubia it is by this way Tradition corrects a pope & if he ignores the chance of rectifying a grave/heretical situation then he excommunicates himself & the Cardinals have to elect his successor from among them. In this way, no one Cardinal can be held responsible for calling PF a heretic as he would have done that job for them.
Maybe we fail to appreciate that the Cardinals are laying a ground to call for a Ecumenical Council to determine if PF is a Catholic or not?
Clean the swamp. Lock him up.
“During the Council, the Church felt it had the responsibility to be a living sign of the Father’s love in the world. In the Lumen Gentium, it went back to the origins of its nature, the Gospel” I think Francis is 100% right, what he is saying is that Vatican II gave us “another Gospels”, one that is different from all the Popes and Councils before Vatican II.
Make the Vatican great* again.
*”great” aka “Catholic”
“Francis has judged himself to be a formal heretic. He is, therefore, an antipope.”
And this comes on the day that we celebrate, “The Dedication of the Churches of Saints Peter and Paul”.
Is Francis a heretic? Yes–it’s as clear as Black and White.
Louie, Is the typed response above the actual Francis reply? Is there a site one can find those responses authenticated.?
Today is the anniversary of the death of Padre Pio’s investigator, Father Luigi Villa who wrote extensively on criminals in the Vatican. His Chiesa Viva site and association to Our Lady of Good Success explains in detail the infiltration of the Church. Our Lady said as much at La Salette. The Seat of the Antichrist. The Great chastisement is the loss of faith. We are living it in this era, manifestly, since Roncalli. In past era’s Luther 1517 emerged, 200 hundred years later 1717 the “300” anniversary of Masonry and 300 years later the 100th anniversary of Fatima 2017.
The numbers suggest 153, the number of fish in the sea- at that time, the number of known Nations – at that time and the number of Hail Mary’s in Her Rosary. That cannot change.
Eternal rest grant unto Fr Villa (and Sara) O Lord let perpetual light shine upon them, may their souls and the souls of the faithful departed rest in peace. Amen.
I wonder in your new sedevacantist chapels will the new mass be said? So I can go to a Pius XII sedevacantist chapel but will only be able to hear the old mass but if I go to a Benedict XVI sedevacantist chapel I will be able to hear the new mass?
Francis has ab initio made it clear that he rejects the objective truth, God’s laws and the laws of nature. His “Non Serviam” couldn’t be more clear. He has wrought nothing but the most egregious evil and attacks against the fundamental tenets of the One Holy Faith and moral law given to us by God Made Man and His Apostolic Church.
Is this a joke?
We can only hope that they are laying the ground to call a Council. Or perhaps they have planned another way of trying to deal with the serious problem at hand. I would think that they have the thought the situation through, and have made plans contingent on the response (or non-response) of Francis.
” In the Lumen Gentium, it went back to the origins of its nature, the Gospel. ”
The modernist makes the claim he wants to restore the Church to its pristine state. A major problem is that the modernist heretic reads into the Gospels only what he wants it to say, and ignores what the Gospels actually say.
For example, instead of excusing the sinner and confirming him in his sin, allowing him to commit sin and remain in the Church, the ACTUAL GOSPEL says we are to shun the unrepentant sinner:
2 Thessalonians 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.
Matthew18:17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.
The Church as it exists in its distorted heretical form now actually teaches the opposite of the Gospels. Jesus was actually quite strict in observance of the law; very “black and white.”
There is no place in the Gospels where unrepentant sinners are welcomed into the Church; it thoroughly heretical idea which needs to be jettisoned.
Jesus clearly encouraged the sinner to amend his ways as was the case with Zacheus:
Luke 19:1-10 1And entering in, he walked through Jericho.
2 And behold, there was a man named Zacheus, who was the chief of the publicans, and he was rich.
3 And he sought to see Jesus who he was, and he could not for the crowd, because he was low of stature.
4 And running before, he climbed up into a sycamore tree, that he might see him; for he was to pass that way.
5 And when Jesus was come to the place, looking up, he saw him, and said to him: Zacheus, make haste and come down; for this day I must abide in thy house.
6 And he made haste and came down; and received him with joy.
7 And when all saw it, they murmured, saying, that he was gone to be a guest with a man that was a sinner.
8 But Zacheus standing, said to the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have wronged any man of any thing, I restore him fourfold.
9 Jesus said to him: This day is salvation come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham.
10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
Francis is actually teaching the Protestant version of salvation: just have faith, you don’t have to stop sinning, don’t bother trying – keep sinning because it doesn’t matter Jesus loves you andwill look the other way.
A lie from the father of lies.
Michael F Poulin
Hey, Francis, discern this!
Ganganelli, you need to read. Then you may see some of the following. Then Pray without ceasing. The Gospel of the last Sunday of Pentecost. Take your directions from that. Like St Athanasius he fled the abomination of desolation standing in the Holy Place, was invited back, stayed away but when Rome found the Faith again, the rest is well documented. On your flight like the great Saint, take the Fr Martin translation of the Latin Vulgate, note the commentaries where the heretics in Luther’s time tried to dissolve Christ from the sacraments. Note Zacharias, chapters 9 and especially 12. Note Maccabees reference to women in the sanctuary before the arrival of Christ. Finally to get some current perspective, pick up St Malachy’s reported visions on Petrus Romanus. Reading the signs of the times you might wonder if that person “will feed his flock(s) among many tribulations; after which the seven hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people.”
Is Petrus Romanus poisoning his flock? Have there been earthquakes in Churches since Assisi and the death of a man, at the blasphemous effigy of Christ crucified bowing down to flames- near Brescia, and the death of a man, Benedictine Church on the way to Rome and others pending no doubt.
If you discern all of that, then soon there may not be a papacy. If that occurs then perhaps that was the “Plan” all along. Destroy the Church’s teaching authority, its sacraments, assimilate the priesthood into other false beliefs, what do we have then? Just buildings? Take up the traditional reference material, Rosary and brown scapula and pray. The angelic Shepherd is the Pope of Fatima [Pope Pius X11]. Follow Her instructions and your faith He will find, when He comes. Angus Dei qui tollus pecata mundi, miserere nobis. He will be looking for lost sheep scattered [by wolves/ apostate bishops]and their lambs I suspect.
Welcome to reality Mr. Verrecchio.
Papal Coronation Oath — Some still fail to grasp the point.
“I vow to change nothing of the received Tradition, and nothing thereof I have found before me guarded by my God-pleasing predecessors, to encroach upon, to alter, or to permit any innovation therein;
To the contrary: with glowing affection as her truly faithful student and successor, to safeguard reverently the passed-on good, with my whole strength and utmost effort;
To cleanse all that is in contradiction to the canonical order, should such appear; to guard the Holy Canons and Decrees of our Popes as if they were the divine ordinance of Heaven, because I am conscious of Thee, whose place I take through the Grace of God, whose Vicarship I possess with Thy support, being subject to severest accounting before Thy Divine Tribunal over all that I shall confess;
I swear to God Almighty and the Savior Jesus Christ that I will keep whatever has been revealed through Christ and His Successors and whatever the first councils and my predecessors have defined and declared.
I will keep without sacrifice to itself the discipline and the rite of the Church. I will put outside the Church whoever dares to go against this oath, may it be somebody else or I.
If I should undertake to act in anything of contrary sense, or should permit that it will be executed, Thou willst not be merciful to me on the dreadful Day of Divine Justice.
Accordingly, without exclusion, We subject to severest excommunication anyone — be it Ourselves or be it another — who would dare to undertake anything new in contradiction to this constituted evangelic Tradition and the purity of the orthodox Faith and the Christian religion, or would seek to change anything by his opposing efforts, or would agree with those who undertake such a blasphemous venture.”
I was reading Fr. Villa’s works early this morning (midnight and beyond) and much throughout today, not realizing that today was the anniversary of his death. Wow. Thank you for the insight, Simple Shepherd.
The quote from Francis which is from 11/18/16 – today – Louie has linked above:
Here is the link again.
Quote from today.
Is it me or is the conciliar church fast asleep? This man has been a manifest heretic since 2013 when Evangelii Gaudium n. 247 said, We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked.” Meaning of course, that they don’t need to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. Essentially a dual track to salvation. This is more egregious than LA and yet hardly anyone ever raised an issue. Truly the missionary spirit is dead in the conciliar church and she doesn’t really believe the Gospel. This was nothing other than a form of apostasy and denial of Christ as the only savior. He cannot be the pope and probably never was since he was a heretic even before taking office. LA is just one more proof. When will we all wake up?
Pardon my dyslexia, I meant AL, not LA.
No, it’s not you, fast ferrari. The conciliar Church is snoring bigtime. If you want to be looked at like an alien from outer space, just mention evangelization. This new church is the church of do-goodism. It’s the time of year that all the Thanksgiving baskets and Christmas presents are being prepared for the less fortunate, and that’s a wonderful thing, but don’t dare suggest enclosing a prayer card or you’ll never be asked to help out again! Why, that’s downright hateful. Making people comfortable in their sin is the real mercy, not saving their souls. There’s no Hell, you know. The missionary spirit is not only dead – it’s unchristian! Heaven help us.
As Louie has said, “All roads lead to Fatima.”
Here is a new article on TIA which sums up Fatima briefly, with kudos to Fr. Gruner mentioned in the article:
Louie writes: “Francis has judged himself a formal heretic. He is, therefore, an antipope.”
It took awhile, but I’m very pleased to see your understanding of the crisis has reached this level of frankness and honesty. If “Catholics” had any understanding of the Catechism and unchangeable Church teachings–including the direct words of our Blessed Lord and the Apostles–they would have long ago demanded the immediate removal of this manifest heretic. And why don’t they understand? This all flows from the anti-council, Vatican II. I’m so tired of Satan seemingly winning.
Louie – I have for sometime suspected that Francis is the antipope of several prophecies (check out Yves Dupont and his book Catholic Prophecy for a multitude that day the same thing). However I just want to clarify your logic in declaring him an antipope – are you saying that by this act of not denying heresy he is then a formal heretic and therefore looses the pontificate as per St Robert Bellermine’s theory? Or have you suspected that he was already an antipope and this recent revelation confirms your suspicions? My personal suspicion is Benedict is still Pope in the eyes of God (even if in his head he has somehow convinced himself) and Francis is the antipope fortold of, and is undoubtly warned of in the hidden part of the 3rd secret. Beyond being a simple antipope the question then becomes is he the false prophet of Apoc 13 which Frere Michel concluded is intergral to the 3rd secret (Sister Lucy cited Apoc chapters 8 to 13 for the secret). If he is not the false prophet then Francis is the one to open up the Church to receive him.
And you know what St Paul said about a different Gospel to the one he preached.
He still has to be judged as such by his peers for it to count.
The papal coronation ended with JPII. Paul VI was the last to be crowned. The pope is simply “inaugurated” and there is no coronation ceremony.
Papal coronation was the ceremony of the placing of the papal tiara on a newly elected pope. The first recorded papal coronation was that of Pope Nicholas I in 858.
In the Coronation rite of the Pope, which took place by imposition of the tiara with three crowns, says: “Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns and know that thou art the father of princes and kings, to direct them on earth, the Vicar of our Savior, Jesus Christ, to Whom be honor and glory for ever and ever.”
JP1 opted not to be crowned and to have a less formal “solemn Mass to mark the start of his ministry as Supreme Pastor” and JPII followed, saying: “Paul VI had left his successors free to decide whether to wear the papal tiara. He went on: “Pope John Paul I, whose memory is so vivid in our hearts, did not wish to have the tiara; nor does his Successor wish it today. This is not the time to return to a ceremony and an object considered wrongly, to be a symbol of the temporal power of the Popes.” So, according to JPII, all of the popes since Pope Nicholas I in 858 were “wrong” in using the tiara as a symbol of the temporal power of the popes. Another tradition hated by the Modernists.
The only difference between Francis and Paul VI, JPII, and Benedict is that he has not been afraid to announce to the world the Conciliar Church had abandoned and replaced the true Catholic religion with that of the synthesis of heresies, Modernism, and he is committed to entrench it into everything his predecessor’s failed to succeed in doing.
His heresies are no worse than those contained the documents of Vatican II and subsequent encyclicals from all the popes since then. Just one example is JPII’s encyclical “Ut Unum Sint”, “On commitment to Ecumensim”, which itself is a heresy. Here he teaches both the heresy of ecumenism and reiterates the Council’s teaching of the heresy that the Catholic Church merely “subsists” in the greater Church of Church.
Vatican II taught that one doesn’t need to belong to the Catholic Church to be saved so what’s the problem with him saying one need not believe in Jesus Christ to be saved?
Why do you think the Novus Ordo eliminated the Good Friday prayer: “Let us pray also for the perfidious Jews: that our God and Lord would remove the vail from their hearts that they also may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Why do you think the Novus Ordo eliminated the Good Friday prayer: “Almighty and everlasting God, who savest all, and wouldst that no one should perish; look on the souls that are led astray by the deceit of the devil” that having set aside all heretical evil, the hearts of those that err may repent, and return to the unity of Thy truth.”
Why do you think the Novus Ordo eliminated the Good Friday prayer: “Almighty and everlasting God, who ever sleekest not the death, but the life of sinners: mercifully hear our prayer, and deliver them from the worship of idols; and join them to Thy holy Church for the praise and glory of Thy Name.”
They were eliminated because the Modernists deny that only through Jesus Christ and His, one, true Church can man be saved and deny the perennial teaching of the Church that all religions outside of Catholicism are from the Devil?
The “Person of God, who became mercy through the incarnation of the Son”?
God did not become mercy through the incarnation of the Son. God does not “become” anything as He is not some changing entity but is and will always be the same.
Where does he come up with these bizarre statements?
Yesterday, Friday, November 18, 2016 was the Feast of the Dedication of the Basilicas of Saints Peter and Paul and on this date in 1907, Pope Saint Pius X issued his motu propia “Praestantia Scripturae” to impose a penalty of excommunication upon those who dared to contradict “Lamentabili Sane” (Syllabus Condeming The Errors Of The Modernists) issued on July 3, 1907 and “Pascendi Dominci Gregis” (On The Doctrine Of The Modernists) issued on September 8, 1907.
This a penalty that applies to every Conciliar pope because all of them defended and promoted the Modernist heresies that were promulgated in Vatican II and all have written documents that further promote them.
Please take the time to read them if you have not as they expose exactly why the Conciliar Church has led us into error.
Well said, Catherine.
Thank you for all of your excellent comments, Catherine.
Pope Paul VI stated it clearly in his closing speech to the Second Vatican Council on December 7, 1965:
“The religion of God has come face to face with the religion of man. Was there a clash, a battle or anathema? There could have been, but there was none.”
The speech is on the Vatican’s website if you care to read it.
Jorge is an anti-pope. THANK GOD that we have gotten to this first plateau on this site. Now we next need to see what ratzinger actually is and work backward from him. If we defame mr bergoglio, as we have to, then we have to defame all of the vat2 scoundrels as anti-popes. Fr Ratzinger, not very long ago, lauded mr bergoglio….remember that when you think that Fr Ratzinger is a “good guy”. He is the same degenerate that jorge is, only a lot more refined.
If Francis is an anti-Pope, then the Society of St. Pius X should have nothing to do with him and not pursue any sort of “regularization.”
Bergoglio has BEEN an anti-pope since before he was elected. Bp Fellay, if he continues to be a nancy, will make the SSPX obsolete in short order. When people like Burke have a stronger voice than the SSPX, than you know that the SSPX is asleep at the switch. This guy Bp Fellay needs to wake up already.
“Even if others in Catholic media are afraid to say it aloud, at least thus far, I am not:
Francis has judged himself a formal heretic. He is, therefore, an antipope.”
The only way one could rationally reach this conclusion is if Pope Francis made an explicit statement contrary to one of the items identified either in the censors / the dubia … or he made an explicitly heretical and then separated himself from the Church by forming his own or joining a schismatic or heretical sect.
Barring that an individual needs to make a judgement – and that’s above our pay grade.
While God may know the state of Pope Francis’ soul – we do not.
Keep the Faith and be patient – this is going to take a while!!!
We never know the state of anyone’s soul….and yet MANY have been declared heretics regardless. Knowing the state of anyone’s soul pertains to their eternal resting place (and is strictly the duty of our Lord) but NOT how they should be dealt with on earth. If francis says that heaven doesnt exist (for example), and I call him (as a simple layman) a stone-cold heretic, please explain to me how I am wrong for doing that. When has the Church ever said that I need to be a Doctor, Saint, or master theologian of the Church to declare a heretic a heretic? That isnt above my pay grade.
Yes Malachy he is the biblical false prophet of these end times !. He will try to make all religions as 1 together then after the Antichrist makes his appearance on the world scence as the the great peace maker during the soon WW3 francis will lead all who follow him to the antichrist much like a anti John Baptist. He is the destroyer prophesised by St Francis Assisi. Also as the name you use the prophecies of St Malachy.
” If francis says that heaven doesnt exist (for example), and I call him (as a simple layman) a stone-cold heretic, please explain to me how I am wrong for doing that”
Nothing is wrong at all. Some people just prefer to call him an “objective heretic”(same as ALL Vatican II Popes) not a “formal heretic” yet till the Church (a Pope or Council) formally declares him to be a heretic like what was done for Pope Honorius. According to the standard set by St. Paul any person who knows the Gospels can call out a heretic a heretic, regardless the status or honor of the heretic, even he is one of the Apostles or an angel.
Louie called out a heretic. Ive been doing the same with these masonic v2 clown popes for almost 4 years now. It doesnt take a council to declare a blatant public heretic a heretic.
The question now is how do we get a true pope as we know that all the cardinals are v2 heretics and are probably not even priests to begin with. What a damned mess. This is when we need legit bishops (sspx, sedes) to step up.
The author of the site you are posting on has proclaimed we have no pope (I fully agree with him). What say you….im just curious as to how you spin what Louie said.
It counts for me.
If a future Pope teaches anything contrary to the Catholic Faith, do not follow him.
Pope Pius IX
A quick reading of the Syllabus of Errors will reveal how far the Vatican II church has strayed from Catholicism: Pantheism, Naturalism, Rationalism, Indifferentism false Tolerance of other Religions, Socialism, Communism, etc., are all embraced and promoted by these false shepherds. Benedict said it: Vatican II was an”anti-syllabus” which then leads to the conclusion that the counciliar church is anti-Catholic, anti-Christ and its members are anti-bishop and anti-popes. You don’t need to be a Saint or a Doctor to come to this conclusion. This false religion teaches the opposite of what has been taught for centuries.
Good advice. That’s why we can’t follow Bergoglio.
It counts to God and to all of us who believe in Jesus Christ and the Truths revealed by Him.
Francis is merely continuing the Protestant heresies promulgated in Vatican II only on steroids.
No sane person wants hell to exist. No sane person wants evil to exist. But hell is just evil eternalized. If there is evil and if there is eternity, there can be hell. If it is intellectually dishonest to disbelieve in evil just because it is shocking and uncomfortable, it is the same with hell. Reality has hard corners, surprises, and terrible dangers in it. We desperately need a true road map, not nice feelings, if we are to get home. It is true, as people often say, that “hell just feels unreal, impossible.” Yes. So does Auschwitz. So does Calvary.
Francis may recognize SSPX tomorrow.
“May I tell you now a few words on the international situation? It seems to me that there is food for thought there and a conclusion to be drawn for us from the events we are now living, events with a truly apocalyptic character.
You know what is happening: the invasion of false religions, especially by Islam, not only in France, but also in England, Belgium, in Germany, threatens us. Two years ago, 100,000 Turks marched in the streets of Munich, shouting mottos against Germany and Christianity. These facts are a warning. This is what we can expect if our governments take no care and let Christendom be invaded by Moslems. It is not without reason that Pope St. Pius V and other Popes wanted to stop the tidal wave of Islam; otherwise Christendom would have already disappeared.
Another remarkable event: those movements, which, we must acknowledge, we do not always understand fully, those exceptional movements behind and now through the iron curtain. On the occasion of these movements, we must not forget the Masonic plans published by Pope Pius IX. More than a century ago, they spoke of a world government imposing the Masonic ideas. They were made public by Jacques Crtineau-Joly upon orders of Pope Pius IX.
We must not forget also the prophecies of the most holy Virgin Mary. She warned us: without the Conversion of Russia, without conversion of the world, without prayer and penance, communism shall invade the whole world. What does that mean? We know very well that the goal of the secret societies is a world government, with Masonic ideals, i.e. the rights of men, equality, fraternity and liberty, understood in an anti-christian sense, against Our Lord. These ideals would be promoted by a world government, which would establish a kind of socialism for all countries and then a congress of religions, encompassing all religions, including the Catholic Religion, in the service of this world government, as the Russian Orthodox are in the service of the soviets. There would be two congresses: a universal political congress, which would control the whole world, and this Congress of religions, which would support this world government, in a mercenary way.
These things threaten us. We must prepare ourselves. Faced with this, what should we do?
In his encyclical on Free-Masons, Pope Leo XIII said: “They want to utterly destroy all Christian institutions. This is their goal.” They are getting close!
And we, we must build them again! We must stand up against this destruction. This is what you are doing, and I congratulate you. I shall never congratulate you enough. I am sure of telling you what God, what Our Lord, what the most Blessed Virgin want to tell you: continue, continue to do what you are doing.
Everywhere schools, priories are springing up. Parishes are multiplying in many countries. Everywhere churches are being acquired for Tradition. We must build again the Social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ in this Christian world, which is disappearing.
You shall tell me: “But, Monseigneur, this is the fight of David against Goliath!” yes, indeed, I know. But in his fight against Goliath, David won the victory! How did he win the victory? By a little pebble which he took from the torrent. What is this little stone, which we have? Jesus Christ! Our Lord Jesus Christ! We shall say with our ancestors from Vende: “We have no other honor than the honor of Jesus Christ. We have no other fear in the world than to offend Jesus Christ!” They went to their death to defend their God singing this! We also, let us sing with courage, wholeheartedly: “We have no other love than Our Lord Jesus Christ, no other fear than to offend Him!”
We shall pray to the most Blessed Virgin to help us in this fight. For this purpose, in a few moments, after the Holy Mass, we, the five Bishops here present, shall get together and renew the consecration of the world and of Russia to her Immaculate Heart.
We are convinced that the most Blessed Virgin, our good Mother who is always in the heart of the fight, encourages us. She came on earth to request that we fight, fearlessly, because she is with us.
Consecrating our families, our persons, our cities, our countries, our homelands, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, we are convinced that she shall come to our help and that she will manage to make us come with her one day in Eternal Life.”
If Francis does recognize the SSPX, that his business. It is up to Fellay and the SSPX to announce: “Thank you, Francis, but we don’t recognize YOU!!!”
Yes, I agree. I would go further and say the elevation of individual conscience over the Kingship of the Lord was one of the seeds of destruction sown even before Vatican II.
There are two Ways, one of Life and one of Death, and there is a great difference between the two Ways.
Mons Fellay gave a Conference in a Masonic Hall two years running to his Faithfull in the South Pacific. He was trying to explain how deceptive, duplicitous Rome was, in his meetings with various officials. Francis told him to do his job and Francis would do his job. It was more akin to a corporate relationship. As if each departmental manager had his “role” to play. Mons Fellay this year, was handed Fr Villa’s works on Masonry and the infiltration reaching back decades before Vatican 2, plus historical documents that condemned Judeo-masonry by French Mons Jouin, dated the 8 December 1930 To quote an excerpt from Mons Jouin article – Masonry has this agenda.
“TO FIGHT AGAINST PAPACY IS A SOCIAL NECESSITY AND CONSTITUTES THE CONSTANT DUTY OF FREEMASONRY.” (Masonic International Congress held in Brussels 1904, page 132 of the report. )
The City of Good and of Jesus Christ is the Catholic Church; for over 19 centuries, according to the teaching of the Roman Pontiff, She repeats to the world Her immutable creed:
And the Holy Pope says;
Further, in his letter to the Italian people dated December 8, 1892, Pope Leo XIII writes:
“Let us remember that CHRISTIANITY and Freemasonry are essentially incompatible, to such an extent, that to become united with one means being divorced from the other. Let us, therefore, expose Freemasonry as the enemy of God, of the Church and of our Motherland “
Question arises, have the last four popes belonged to masonic lodges?
Is Francis an active member, blaming his predecessors for the predicaments and dilemma’s he finds himself in one wonders.
Thank you for all these wonderful quotes, containing such clarity…moved me to read his book :” Spiritual Journey “, which is very convincing.
I think the evil of freemasonry is discounted by most Catholics. I personally think that every v2 false pope has been influenced by (and is likely a member of) the masons.
The typed in responses are the Pope’s reaction to the criticisms of A.L. Stated in the excerpt from the interview at the beginning of this thread. Not the formal response. Louie is placing them in the context of the questions submitted by the Cardinals.
ps. Nice job Louie
There is a difference between an opinion and a fact.
The opinion is that Pope Francis is a formal heretic and lost the office of Pope.
The fact is that nothing has occurred that enables anyone to act according to the opinion.
Anyone can venture an opinion.
Only the Church authorities can provide us the confirmation that it is a fact. only the Church can issue a judgment that a Pope has lost the office of the papacy due to heresy.
Barring Pope Francis saying something explicitly heretical and separating himself from the Church – then we have to wait for those in authority within the Church to do their duty.
A heretical Pope retains his office as long as he is being tolerated by the Church:
“It is more probable that the Supreme Pontiff, as concerns his own person, could fall into heresy, even a notorious one, by reason of which he would deserve to be deposed by the Church, or rather declared to be separated from her. … The proof of this assertion is that neither Sacred Scripture nor the tradition of the Fathers indicates that such a privilege [i.e., being preserved from heresy when not defining a doctrine] was granted by Christ to the Supreme Pontiff: therefore the privilege is not to be asserted.
“The first part of the proof is shown from the fact that the promises made by Christ to St. Peter cannot be transferred to the other Supreme Pontiffs insofar as they are private persons, but only as the successor of Peter in the pastoral power of teaching, etc. The latter part is proven from the fact that it is rather the contrary that one finds in the writings of the Fathers and in decrees: not indeed as if the Roman Pontiffs were at any time heretics de facto (for one could hardly show that); but it was the persuasion that it could happen that they fall into heresy and that, therefore, if such a thing should seem to have happened, it would pertain to the other bishops to examine and give a judgment on the matter; as one can see in the Sixth Synod, Act 13; the Seventh Synod, last Act; the eight Synod, Act 7 in the epistle of [Pope] Hadrian; and in the fifth Roman Council under Pope Symmachus: ‘By many of those who came before us it was declared and ratified in Synod, that the sheep should not reprehend their Pastor, unless they presume that he has departed from the Faith’. And in Si Papa d. 40, it is reported from Archbishop Boniface: ‘He who is to judge all men is to be judged by none, unless he be found by chance to be deviating from the Faith’. And Bellarmine himself, book 2, ch. 30, writes: ‘We cannot deny that [Pope] Hadrian with the Roman Council, and the entire 8th General Synod was of the belief that, in the case of heresy, the Roman Pontiff could be judged,’ as one can see in Melchior Cano, bk. 6, De Locis Theologicis, last chapter.
“But note that, although we affirm that the Supreme Pontiff, as a private person, might become a heretic … nevertheless, for as long as he is tolerated by the Church, and is publicly recognized as the universal pastor, he is still endowed, in fact, with the pontifical power, in such a way that all his decrees have no less force and authority than they would if he were a truly faithful, as Dominic Barnes notes well (q.1, a. 10, doubt 2, ad. 3) Suarez bk 4, on laws, ch. 7.
“The reason is: because it is conducive to the governing of the Church, even as, in any other well-constituted commonwealth, that the acts of a public magistrate are in force as long as he remains in office and is publicly tolerated” (Fr. Paul Laymann, S.J., Theol. Mor., bk. 2, tract 1, ch. 7).
If objective truth exists, then your statement makes no sense. At some point, the faithful must be responsible, even if the hierarchy is wholly corrupt.
ABS thinks he called the Dubia bluff and is going to rely on his media support and authority.
The Cardinals, rightly, threw their cards on the table and then he simply left the table with his cards and cash and they are left looking at each other wondering – Now what do we do ?
If a handful of Cardinals thinks the Catholic Church (say nothing about the world) is going to accept their judgment that he is teaching error, they are wildly wrong.
Don’t get me wrong, ABS hopes they do, but he does not think they will.
No, pearl87, it’s for someone else to worry about – not us. I’m alright Jack. I got me a Latin Mass.
Do an honest check of the source of that dodgy quote, and you will see that it is completely bogus. There is absolutely no proof that Pius IX said anything of the sort, even though it has been falsely attributed to him.
It is similar to the kind of thing that Salza and Siscoe keep spinning, like their infamous “quote” from Pope Adrian IV, which has been demolished, but still gets airtime. Anything to keep their book “relevant”. Shameless.
It took The Papal Subject (TPS) a re-read of ABS’s comment for The Papal Subject (TPS) to realise that ABS was referring to himself in the third person.
At first, The Papal Subject (TPS) could not work out what was being said, because The Papal Subject (TPS) knows that people who refer to themselves in the third person are either two years old, or insane.
ABS reminds The Papal Subject (TPS) of someone called I Am Not Spartacus (IANS) who liked to do the same thing on various comment boxes around the internet.
The Papal Subject (TPS) still cannot work out why anyone would do this.
“Yes there are two paths you can go by
but in the long run
there’s still time to change the Road you’re on (I hope so)”
– Led Zeppelin mocking the Faith in their song Stairway to Heaven.
I recognised Francis as an antipope back when Amoris came out. In hindsight, I should have seen it sooner.
Anyway, when the principle was in place, I looked back at Benedict, John Paul II and Paul VI and saw that they were all impostors for the same reason.
Benedict was cultured, JPII was charming and charismatic, Paul VI was abusing the good name of the Church and the apparent authority of the Papacy.
They got away with what they did and said in their own ways – things true Popes could not and would not do.
The conciliar church is not the Catholic Church, because only the Catholic Church has the necessary Four Marks which distinguish it from all other counterfeit sects.
I was very pleased to read your several references to Pope St. John Paul II and his Encyclical, “Veritatis Splendor” in refuting Francis’ “Amoris Laetatia”. There has been so much unsubstantiated Pope St. John Paul II bashing, but if one would read his Scripture filled Encyclicals, you would see a staunch supporter of the True Faith.
Those of us old enough to remember when Vatican II was in it’s wreckovation, Dioceses world wide were already making changes, ie. tearing out the altar stones and Communion rails, moving the Tabernacles to the side or separate chapel, the Sacred Body and Blood were being put in glass and pottery and worst of all, the Sacred Body and Blood were being put in unconsecrated hands, (see Redemtionis Sacramentum by Pope St. John Paul II). Nuns were taking off their habits and/or leaving the convents all together. In short, casting aside their sacred vows! The soutane (cassock) was abandoned for the black business suit. 2Tim 2:4: “No man being a soldier to God entangles himself in secular business.” It was a done deal before it was a done deal!
Pope St. John Paul II was elected in 1978, 13 years after the close of the Council. That horse was already out of the barn and made it’s way around the whole pasture, too late to close that door! Pope St. John Paul II issued a Church wide order to all priests that they should always wear their clerics in public. Let’s not forget the one line telegram, in Latin, sent to His Holiness the day he was elected, from the American Bishops! “The Bishop of Rome has no jurisdiction in this Republic.”
For those who are truth seekers, should read “The Man of the Century” by Jonathan Kwitny, His Holiness ‘ biographer, and “The Rhine Flows Into The Tiber” by Fr. Ralph M. Wiltigen, SVD. (There’s not one mention of Karol Wojtyla being there.) The schemas from the first session were changed by the time of the second session and it becomes evident that those from the Rhine had taken over the Council, led by Joseph Cardinal Frings advised by Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, chief periti of the Rhine Bishops, who subsequently became Benedict XVI.
Jonathan Kwitny talks about the road blocks put in front of Pope St. John Paul II from the moment of his election by his Cardinals, his “handlers”. You can see also in Windswept House, by Malachi Martin, pgs. 305-307, for a more graphic explanation of his handlers. Fr. Martin was very successful in getting out the truth in the disguise of fiction. Further in Windswept House, page 447, Fr. Martin hits us!
“It’s just possible that from the very beginning of his pontificate, it was already all over. It’s possible that the seeds of apostasy had already been down and were already flourishing. It’s possible that Christ had already given up on this version of the churchly organization. It’s possible that, like Peter, this Pope was chosen by the Holy Spirit more for his weakness than for his strength. More for his lack of understanding than for his wisdom. More for his love for Jesus than for his understanding of what sort of Kingdom Christ intends His creatures to build. Perhaps the Almighty has had enough of all the corruption, in other words. Enough of this generation. Perhaps we’re all destined to be replaced by a new generation. Another race of Catholics. A better, truer, cleaner, race. It’s just possible that the Slavic Pope is in truth the last Pope of these Catholic times. And it’s just possible that he knows it. That he has known it all along.”
That’s what it means to be a Truth seeker, opening the mind, pushing aside preconceived ideas and allowing the Holy Spirit to teach!
Remember the cry of scandal from so many bashers regarding the Assisi Interfaith Meeting? With all the accusations, columny, conjectures, no mention was made to find out the truth. In The Man of the Century, pg 551, Mr. Kwitny records as follows:
“Back in May 1986, John Paul, having already cast lines to animists, Lutheran’s, Jews, Anglicans and Orthodox, had decided to become the first Pope to hold a broad, multifaith religious event. The long-range goal remained to BRING ALL HUMANITY into the one True Church which he was determined to keep pure, but in the meantime, the Pope was going to encourage other religious people of good will to work together in their own ways to cultivate human spirituality.”
Those that took time to get to know Pope St. John Paul II knew his sincerity, honesty, and whole hearted pursuit to the True Faith. You can see that at the end of “Windswept House” and how they had rallied around him and gave him the benefit of the doubt in terms of his motives.
He, like his namesakes, St. John and St. Paul, had the love of St. John and the chutzpah of St. Paul. He did not pull back his skirt in feigned piety. Pope St. John Paul II was the B-52 bomber pilot holding the stick of a crippled plane, trying to guide it safely home, not letting go, allowing God to say when it’s over!
It is totally unfair and unwarranted to call him John Paul the Great Ecumenist and to put him in the same category as Benedict the Abdicator. Don’t forget, this is the same man who summoned all the Cardinals and Bishop Gregory of the United States to Rome and took them to task for playing a shell game with the pedophile priests whose files sat for YEARS on the desk of Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect for the Doctrine of the Faith, and still were on his desk when he became Pope Benedict XVI! Pope St. John Paul II’s remedy was not to make them see a shrink or to put them in another diocese or parish, and certainly NOT to kneel down and cry and pray with the victims and victims’ families! He rather said that they should be removed from the priesthood and turned over to the police. What they did was a crime and they should be punished for it. To which Bishop Gregory replied that he and the American Bishops would take that under advisement at their meeting in September that year. True to the statement previously reported by Michael Davies regarding the American Bishops’ statement that the Bishop of Rome has no jurisdiction in this Republic, they only agreed to take what Pope St. John Paul II gave as an order, under advisement. Francis has done nothing with this issue in spite of even the United Nations getting on his case.
The evidence that I have presented to you in this defense of Pope St. John Paul II is so overwhelming that anyone who reads it must surely consider his, Pope John Paul II’s, canonization as the only true assessment of his character and his performance as our Pope. We should be praying to him. Not denigrating him! Truly he’s worth a whole truck load of Francises or Benedict XVIs!
I think Benedict XVI was toppled & turfed out; it was a coup d’etat. I think he was a good enough theologian to know what he was doing – he co-operated with the st gallen conspirators, but only up to a certain point. No doubt it did not please Antipope Bergoglio that Benedict continued to wear the papal attire. They could force him out, but they couldn’t force what clothes he chose to wear. Nor could they stop Ganswein from dropping his bombshell. I’d say that was one more sign that he did not freely resign, but it was part of the palace coup. They had decided quite abruptly that his time was up and they could no longer stand him being Pope. They were “the wolves” that he was afraid of. We have substantiated evidence of their plot, ever since Cardinal Martini told him he would have a ‘limited’ pontificate. Notice he never spoke, like John Paul II did, about the future of the pontificate. In fact that’s why John Paul II passed Universi Dominus Gregis, which clearly nullifies “latae sententiae” the conspiracy. So I think there are SEVERAL grounds the resignation is questionable and several grounds the subsequent election, part of the same coup mind you, is even more dubious. St Robert Bellarmine makes it perfectly clear that a heretic is not even a Catholic, so therefore he cannot be validly elected Pope. Yes, I think the whole matter must be seen in its entirety – that the sudden resignation (he had travel plans, by the way) and the subsequent election are BOTH parts of the same OVERTHROW and SUBSTITUTION of a thorough modernist for one who had shown himself a friend, in the end, to Holy Tradition.
Theological Essay of Fr Paul Kramer: http://radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/…
Well, that’s about as tortured a piece of contradictory drek as I have ever seen to defend the heretic.
The church teaches that by Divine Law, a public pertinacious (aka formal) heretic is already judged by God, with no further declaration necessary. It’s automatic. He’s had hundreds of warnings, not just the required two. It’s over. He has fallen from office.