Francis the Philanderer: For whom does he speak?

“Take this ring, the seal of your fidelity. With faith and love protect the bride of God, his holy Church.” – Excerpted from the Novus Ordo Rite of Episcopal Ordination

There’s an awful lot of talk these days about Holy Communion for the “divorced and remarried,” and it’s well that there should be.

For the last 50 or so years, in parishes all over the world, pastors of souls have largely been turning a blind eye to the reality of adultery as those in so-called “second marriages” or “new unions” routinely answer to cattle call to Communion.

Even though John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio (1981) and Benedict XVI in Sacramentum Caritatis (2007) reaffirmed the bi-millennial practice of the Church on the matter, the problem has only persisted if not gotten worse.

Then came the Bergoglian solution.

In Amoris Laetitia (cf para. 303), Francis states that adultery is at times “the most generous response which can be given to God,” and what’s more, one may even “come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking.”

“The Devil made me do it”  is one of the oldest excuses in the book (second only to “my wife made me do it”); so old, in fact, that it has become a cliché. Even so, like most clichés, it has a bit of truth to it as Satan is indeed the tempter of man who prowls about the world seeking the ruin of souls. (cf Genesis 3)

Notice, however, that Francis isn’t content to simply blame the Devil; rather, he takes it upon himself to play the Devil’s part  by lending credence to the blasphemous claim that “God made me do it!”

This is precisely the Evil One’s way; to deceive humankind into believing that partaking of that which leads to death is actually “good for food” – something that is of God Himself but is only “technically” forbidden by the precepts of Divine Law. (ibid.)

What, one wonders, compels Francis to go to such incredible lengths to provide cover for those who transgress the Sixth Commandment?

The Gospel according to St. John may hold at least part of the answer:

“For every one who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.” (John 3:20)

Lest his deeds should be exposed…

Perhaps part of the reason why Francis is so determined to shield adulterers from the light of God’s Law is that he himself is a philanderer; a man who has broken the seal of fidelity to the Bride that he is duty bound to love, and thus he hates the light.

In time, historians will write volumes detailing the innumerable ways in which Francis has sullied his pledge to the Bride of Christ, but each particular occasion may be understood in the broadest sense as a dalliance with the cult of man.

On March 24^th, our allegedly “Holy Father” once again brought shame upon Mother Church and us, her children, as he romanced his mistress in public.

In this instance, he was addressing a gathering of statesmen commemorating the 60^th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome – the event that “gave life to that political, economic, cultural and primarily human reality which today we call the European Union.”

Predictably, one of the central themes of Francis’ address concerned the pursuit of peace.

The way of peace, as every true son of the Church knows, is Jesus Christ; the Prince of Peace, and the enemy of peace is evil, the stock and trade of the Prince of this world.

For which Prince does Francis speak?

You tell me.

According to the mind of Francis, peace is the fruit of a purely human effort; one comprised of temporal initiatives like eliminating “poverty, unemployment, drug abuse and violence.”

Speaking with European Union leaders, Francis credited the “solidarity ratified” via the Treaty of Rome – an economic pact signed by six European nations – with bringing about “the longest period of peace experienced in recent centuries.”

He went on to suggest that wherever peace is lacking, hope – the theological virtue imparted by God in the waters of Baptism – can be found in an earthbound effort understood as “human development.”

He said:

“Europe finds new hope when she invests in development and in peace. Development is not the result of a combination of various systems of production. It has to do with the whole human being: the dignity of labour, decent living conditions, access to education and necessary medical care.”

Once again, Eden comes to mind; the place where Satan lured Adam and Eve into believing that they could obtain by their own effort that which comes from God alone.

Francis went on to quote the “Great Light” of his seminary years, Pope Paul VI, a philanderer in his own right, who said, “Development is the new name of peace.”

New indeed; as new as the New Springtime itself.

In spite of more than half-a-century of unprecedented “human development,” the world is still lacking in peace. (Our Lady of Fatima told us why!)

As such, Francis was compelled to pose a rhetorical question to his audience:

“So what is the interpretative key for reading the difficulties of the present and finding answers for the future?”

Pope Pius XI provided the Catholic answer thus:

“When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony.” (Quas Primas 19)

According to Francis, however, the answer lies in “the centrality of man, effective solidarity, openness to the world, the pursuit of peace and development, openness to the future.”

He went on to say, “Europe finds new hope when man is the centre and the heart of her institutions.”

So, according to Francis, it is man that must hold primacy in the “institutions” of this world; not Jesus Christ who reigns over all things in heaven and on earth!

If nothing else, he’s consistent.

As readers of this space may recall, at a 2014 Vatican sponsored economic summit, Francis boldly declared that man is “King of the Universe!” [This, by the way, is a direct quote.]

Francis closed his address by posing a challenge to his audience:

“As leaders, you are called to blaze the path of a new European humanism made up of ideals and concrete actions.”

As for the sorts of concrete actions he may have had in mind, Francis didn’t explicitly say.

Silence, however, can speak volumes.

For instance, Francis chose not to call the leaders in his presence to account for the grave offenses they are presently perpetrating against Our Lord in the name of “European humanism.”

In June of 2016, for example, the EU’s 28 member states approved a so-called “List of Actions to Advance LGBTI Equality” for the purpose of bolstering “social acceptance” of their sexual deviance.

How’s that for “concrete action”?

Or how about the European Parliament’s recently launched a campaign to promote abortion among adolescents; an initiative born of the “My Body, My Rights Conference” that was held less than eight weeks ago?

Sounds rather concrete to me.

Now, I’ll ask you once again:

For whom does Francis the philanderer speak; the Prince of Peace or the Prince of this world?