A broken clock is right twice a day, or so the saying goes. While it might hit the mark on rare occasion, in the end, it’s still broken, and the only question that remains is how many people will be misled before it becomes entirely evident to all but the most ignorant that the damn thing is perfectly useless.
Likewise, on very rare occasion, Pope Francis actually manages to sound like a Roman Pontiff who is serious about the business of leading the Holy Catholic Church according to the ways of the Faith that comes to us from the Apostles.
When this happens, so-called “conservative” Catholics like to bank the more orthodox sounding quotes in a virtual Pope Francis Defense Fund; its meager assets to be drawn upon as needed in an effort to refute the pope’s “traditionalist” (aka Catholic) critics.
The most over-drafted of the lot is perhaps the following: “It is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church.”
See, the Cotton Candy Catholics say, Pope Francis isn’t a liberal!
In a sense, they are correct, Pope Francis is not just a liberal; the Church would be in far better hands if he were. Unfortunately, however, he is something far worse and exponentially more dangerous; he’s a modernist.
The first time I publicly offered this informed opinion about the current Bishop of Rome was back in September of 2013, and I took a fair amount of heat for it. At the time, the pope’s “exclusive interview” with Anthony Spadaro, S.J. had just been published in America Magazine, and as I recall, it was quickly dubbed “The Interview” by many in the media.
Little did we know that Jorge was just getting warmed up.
Today, thanks to the volumes inchoate papal babble that has since entered the public record, few serious Catholics still question whether or not Pope Francis is a modernist; rather, the debate has shifted to whether or not one should acknowledge as much aloud.
As such, when attempting to decipher any given papal utterance, most especially those that intone a ring of orthodoxy, one does well to remain ever mindful of the Bergoglian tendency to “pervert the meaning and force of things and words” after the manner of the modernists who came before him. (cf Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis)
In the present case, let no one be fooled; when Pope Francis says “It is not possible to find Jesus outside the Church,” he most certainly doesn’t mean to invoke the dogma of the faith, extra ecclesiam nulla salus. In fact, he doesn’t even mean to speak of membership in the Holy Catholic Church.
During recent visits to Caserta, in separate addresses to the priests of the diocese and to a local Pentecostal community, Pope Francis made it entirely clear that he doesn’t consider the heretics to be “outside the Church” in any meaningful sense.
The problem is twofold; first, a faulty understanding of the gravity of heresy, and secondly, a faulty understanding of “the Church.”
As it concerns heresies like denying the Real Presence of Christ in the Most Holy Eucharist, denying the dogmas of the faith concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary, and denying the propitiatory nature of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, just to name a few, in the mind of Jorge Bergoglio these are but expressions of diversity; a diversity that he considers nothing less than a gift of the Holy Spirit.
As it concerns his understanding (more properly his misunderstanding) of the Church, Pope Francis plainly admits to wondering “what the unity of the Church would be.”
This departure from the dogma of the Faith that recognizes this unity to be a permanent feature of that perfect and visible society that is the Holy Catholic Church makes Jorge Bergoglio a material heretic.
Does this mean that he is a formal heretic? Perhaps he is, but given the indisputable fact that he “perverts the meaning and force of things and words,” there’s no telling what he means by “unity,” and so one cannot be entirely certain.
What we do know for certain is that the pontificate of Pope Francis is not unlike a broken clock; the only question that remains is how many people will be misled before it becomes entirely evident to all but the most ignorant among us that the damn thing is not only perfectly useless, but diabolically dangerous.
I for a long time gave much credence to the assertion, that a man who is never express in anything he says, often self contradictory, and at times even heretical in what he says, could not be deemed a heretic formally and simply, because he was a man who lacked such a respect for being definitive, that he would not pertinancious assert falsehood or truth.
However, if we step back from the logical analysis, and open up the Gospels, we can clearly arrive and the correct solution: such a man has no faith in Christ; because a man who cannot definitively say anything, whether by reason of lack of sanity of mind, or by reason of an impious willfulness, is not a man of faith, and therefore cannot be objectively considered to be a Christian. He is an atheist, he believes in nothing.
And that I believe is the conclusion that every Father of the Church would assent to, if they had had occasion to consider it.
No such man would have ever been considered a Catholic in ages past. We should do likewise, and the Cardinals should show themselves to be the men they should be. Otherwise, the whole catholic world can presume rightly that they themselves have no faith, and are not even Christians.
It is a de fide dogma of the Catholic Faith that the Church founded by Christ is unique and one. This unity is two-fold: (1) Unity of Faith, i.e. unified outward profession of and inward assent to all those truths proposed by the Magisterium of the Church for our belief (Rom. 10:10); (2) Unity of Communion, which includes Hierarchical Unity, i.e. unified subjugation to the authority of the Pope (Matt. 16:18-19), and Liturgical Unity, i.e. unified participation in the sacraments (Matt. 28:19-20; Mk. 16:15-18). (For an elucidation of this dogma, cf. Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical ‘Satis Cognitum’, On the Unity of the Church.)
To say that the Church of Christ encompasses those who are disunited, either in faith or in communion, is to deny the unity of the Church.
Such a one is a heretic.
Whether or not Pope Francis is, in fact, a heretic, and whether or not this heresy is merely material or also formal, I do not presume to know. But I feel it is high time for Bishops and Cardinals to put the matter to the test. The very unity of Holy Mother Church is at stake.
Who is so wise, as to know all things?
Thomas a Kempis
Our Unholy Father, Francis the Destroyer.
I look about society today and see the vale of tears brought upon by Protestantism and it’s lack of dogma on everything intimately related to the human condition–divorce and remarriage, contracepting for years with resulting barren-ness, a wink and a nod to abortion on demand, homo marriage, sci-fi reproductive technology with millions of souls left in a deep freeze never to know the light of day…all of these things are embraced by Protestants. These are matters of profound consequence. Jesus established His Church to give us succor in our time of need, to truly know him as the Way, the Truth and the Light, to prosper via the Eucharist and the Sacrament of Penance. He gave us His Mother and the prayer “Hail Mary”, a prayer so beautiful and simple it can be recited by the Catholic demented in deep senile decline. All of it rejected by the offspring of King Henry VIII, Luther, Zwingli , Calvin and the whole lot of renegades. So sad, so sad, so sad.
Francis has a perverted love of Protestantism.
I think it is worth revisiting what is at stake here: it is not “just” the Faith, it is what Aquinas calls “the preambles to faith”. These preambles comprise the reason upon which our faith is founded, such as the certain knowledge that there is a God. An obvious prerequisite to faith is belief in absolute truth.
By way of comparison, Pope Benedict XV (“fifteenth”) speaks of “absolute truth” in three separate paragraphs in just one encylical – Spiritus Paraclitus – as follows:
1) “After this preliminary account of St. Jerome’s life and labors we may now treat of his teaching on the divine dignity and absolute truth of Scripture” (#8);
2) “the effect of inspiration – namely, absolute truth and immunity from error” (#19);
3) “Those, too, who hold that the historical portions of Scripture do not rest on the absolute truth of the facts…are…out of harmony with the Church’s teaching” (#22).
Bergoglio, on the other hand, has this to say on the subject in his letter to an atheist:
“To begin with, I would not speak about ‘absolute’ truths, even for believers, in the sense that absolute is that which is disconnected and bereft of all relationship. Truth, according to the Christian faith, is the love of God for us in Jesus Christ. Therefore, truth is a relationship.”
This is a circular argument, even for believers. Truth is not the play-thing of Bergoglio. We must know what truth is before we can assert that “it is true that God exists” (let alone the Trinity). The Church does not try to make truth “user-friendly” to non-believers by simply calling it “love” or a “relationship”. The intelligent non-believer would call that “downright nonsense”.
Dear Louie, thank you once again. Your consistently sound reasoning is greatly appreciate by us, and we are sure, many others, always giving us food for further thought and study of the truths which bring us great comfort and hope..
It’s now very obvious what’s been done, and only a matter of “time”, as Our Lady promised, before her Immaculate Heart will triumph, and Scripture’s prophecies are fulfilled, so we would be wise to heed its counsels regarding time:
Rev. 22:10 ..”Seal not the words of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.”
Our Lady– also asked that the 3rd Secret of Fatima be revealed by a certain time- 1960, because “by then it would be evident”
Pope John XXIII read it, sealed it up, and opened The Council– deriding certain “prophets of doom and gloom” and praising the efforts of man- claiming they would lead to the fulfillment the mysterious plan of God.
We’ve lived through the disatrous failure of his “prophecy”, and are still experiencing the fulfillment of every word of Our Lady’s and the Scriptures which confirm them which seem to apply to the time between the Council and now:
Rev. 2:21) And I gave her a time that she might do penance, and she will not repent of her fornication.
2Thessalonias: Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, … And then that wicked one shall be revealed..whose coming is according to the working of Satan,.
.. And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying…  That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.
Ecclesiasticus 25:22 “There is no head worse than the head of a serpent.”
Rev. 17:10..and when he is come, he must remain a short time.
1 Peter 5:6 Be you humbled therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in the time of visitation..
1 Peter 1:6 Wherein you shall greatly rejoice, if now you must be for a little time made sorrowful in divers temptations.
Rev. 12:14 And there were given to the woman two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the desert unto her place, where she is nourished for a time and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
Peter 1:5 Who, by the power of God, are kept by faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time.
2Thes. 14] Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.  Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God and our Father, who hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation, and good hope in grace..
Rev.11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come..that Thou shouldest render reward to thy servants the prophets and the saints, and to them that fear thy name, little and great, and shouldest destroy them who have corrupted the earth.
1 Peter 4:17 For the time is, that judgment should begin at the house of God.
Your words here echo the Bishop of Akita who looked at the iniquity in the world around us, and approved the apparitions and their prophecies, including this one:
‘With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and the priests. The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, and bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their Confreres. The Church and altars will be vandalized. The Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.’
Our Lady also said:
“The demon will rage especially against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness”
Dear Roman watcher,
We’re still discussing what you wrote above, but finding it difficult to make the connection between the bulk of your reasons, which we do understand, and the conclusion that “he is an atheist”. (That may be due to our ignorance or your broader sense of the terms you use- we don’t know) We’d rather leave that judgment to a Church Council as you suggested on an earlier blog post.
The Pope may not think of himself as a “destroyer of the Church”, even in the sense that some of her enemies believe she must be destroyed somewhat in order to be rebuilt as they think God desires. But if that is the case, he has obviously disassociated his thoughts from his actions-for whatever reason. (theological schizophrenia?)
He seems to see himself as another Ronal Reagan, shouting “Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down that wall!” Only the Wall in question is what separates Truth from falsehood and thus Catholics from heretics and non-believers of any kind That wall is The Roman Catholic Church, prevailing till the end of time as promised by Our Lord.. So it seems to us he is less like an atheist, and more like the Anti-Christ, who knows God exists, and makes himself his arch enemy, by his thoughts, words and deeds. .
Well said Louie! Well said!
It will be interesting to see if any among the legion of neo-Catholic papaloters (and I count Voris as part of this troupe) shakes off the stupor and lowers the arm. Perhaps I’m naive, but I have to believe that, given what we’re seeing now, one or two of them is going to step out of line sooner or later.
Thank God that we have courageous individuals like Louie and John Salza who gave up fame, success, and income in the Church at large out of love for the Absolute Truth that our supreme pontiff spits on. May God have mercy on his sorry soul.
There is one thing that bergoglio affirmatively believes in…
“I believe that the devil exists”
How often have you ever heard bergoglio ever state anything so forcefully and with so much conviction?
And then he places in contrast with this devil a weak and effeminate Jesus who “always forgives us”…. actually NO! Jesus does not ALWAYS forgive us….
This is not the devil and this is not Jesus that bergoglio speaks of but rather a gnostic/New-Age ying-yang. It is an anti-Christ and an anti-anti-Christ
But what is missing is the Messiah born of Mary and who suffered and died for us on the Cross.
The gnostic battle of light vs. darkness ends with the two coming together and annhialating each other.
But this is NOT what the Catholic Church established by Jesus Christ teaches or believes. We believe in the Second Coming; in His triumphant return and the final victory over evil!
Fr. Thomas Rosica has written an article titled “Why in the Devil Does Pope Francis Speak So Much About the Prince of This World?” Please take a look and see if you think Rosica succeeds in answering this question.
The buffoon knows the devil really exsits – Iam sure they have nice little talks.
NO pope has said so much to confuse more Catholics . I personially am tried of this Bishop of ROME.
Dear Michael Leon,
As expected, this article is riddled with errors. Every concepts regarding the Devil and evil, accentuates only the positive and condemns all negativity. Positives consist of thinking only happy thoughts, which lead to inner peace and harmony.
Fr. R. writes, “In his homily..Pope Francis said: “A Christian can never be sad– even in times of trial when problems seem insurmountable. “In this moment, the enemy -the devil- comes, often disguised as an angel and slyly speaks his word to us.”
The ‘negative’ seems to be any kind of personal reflection which leads to (Francis’) sins of pessimism, bitterness, cynicism, negativity, disunity. “.. the Holy Spirit unifies and harmonizes the church. “Let us never yield to pessimism, to that bitterness that the devil offers us every day,” the pope said.
[So does he therefore dismisses Our Lady of Akita as another Devil in disguise? She said in direct contrast to all of that:
–“The demon will rage especially against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness”
— She warned of a deluge greater than the flood with fire falling from the sky leaving survivors wishing they were dead.] (sinful pessimism or reality?
— At Fatima she was sad because “many souls go to hell”.
What stands out the most: Not a single word from Fr. Rosica or the Pope about the need to repent of sin. The Pope portrays the (neo)-Jesus as ever ready to be our advocate and to forgive, “ready to defend us from the insidiousness of the devil, from ourselves, and from our sins.”
[What does that mean, defend us from our sins? excuse them without remorse? That would be consistent with the Pope’s other public defenses of unrepentant sinners receiving sacraments.]
Fr. Rosica relates: “The Pope recalled how Jesus’s first temptation by Satan was almost ‘like a seduction.’ Satan told Jesus to throw himself down from the Temple”.. [Our 4 different Bibles all say the first temptation (Matthew and Luke) was to turn stones into bread.] We wonder what Bibles they read? How does Papal PR man miss that glaring an error, and did the Pope actually say that?
Francis illustrates his point about the seriousness of temptation with a very concrete example of diabolical activity: gossip.
[Not abortion, homosexual sin, divorce, contraception, remarriage without annulment, murder, churchless-ness, the deadly sins, none of these.] Gossip.
and the terrible insidious way it grows and spreads to whole communities!
France teaches: “The devil cannot tolerate Jesus Christ and seeks in every way to disrupt the divine plan conceived concerning him.”
[Since we know Francis objects to talk of Church rules, dogma, doctrine, anything that identifies differences and keeps us separated from non-believers or heretics; but welcomes sacrilegious communions and unity without repentance, what are we to conclude about whom he really serves?]
Finally, for a well-deserved chuckle: these last four quotes are taken EXACTLY AS WRITTEN but totally out of context, and obviously not as intended by the author. We couldn’t resist listing them because of the irony of how they sound standing on their own:
1. “In the first months of his Pontificate in 2013, the evil one appeared frequently in the Pope’s teachings.”
2. “But there is also a Jesuit connection to the devil for Pope Francis.”
3. “When Pope Francis speaks so frequently about the devil, we could say that it’s a Jesuit connection
4. “Let’s face it: the devil is indeed playing an important role in Francis’ Petrine ministry.”
Luther and Calvin and Zwingli and Judas believed in the devil to.
Bergoglio (like JPII before him) is a very obvious, very public and very formal, material and every other kind of heretic, and he bathes in the swill of it with reprobate glee.
The following is a brief look at what constitutes Material and Formal Heresy:
“Canon 1325 brands as a heretic whoever, while still calling himself a Christian, pertinaciously (i.e. consciously) doubts or denies any de fide truth. Anyone to whom this applies is deemed not to be a Catholic if he manifests externally his heresy. (If it is purely internal, he has committed a mortal sin against the virtue of faith, but remains within the Church’s communion, and without censure. – Cardinal Billot, op. Cit. pp. 295 et seq.)…heresy committed through ignorance of the duty to believe all that the Church teaches is not considered formal.”
Can one raised in the faith, sufficiently enough to consciously decided to hate the Tradition/Truth of the Faith, a highly educated Jesuit and one claiming the See of Peter be ‘ignorant of the duty to believe all that the Church teaches’? No. Bergoglio, like his fathers in faith going all the way back to Roncalli, teach a new ecclesiology that denies the revealed Truth of Christ’s Church (out there for all to see for 2000 years); he teaches vice (who is he to judge when it comes to sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance(sodomy, abortion); he teaches the dissolubility of marriage – a direct denial of a fundamental Catholic Truth; he teaches that their is ‘no Catholic God’ – an outright lie and a public denial of Christ, His Church and His revelation as the only God of Faithful Catholics (Israel); instead he sublates this simple truth with the idea that God is little more than some sort of oxygen (universalism – which is condemned by previous (pre- ’58) popes)and that, because we all breathe it, we are all saved – again, a denial of Christ’s Truth that only through Him and becoming a member of His Bride, can we be saved. The True God is the God of Catholics, all others consciously or in ignorance reject God by refusing His Bride – the Catholic Church – (refuse the Bride you refuse the Bridegroom) – they are NOT a part of the Body of Christ. Bergoglio declares the fundamental mission of the Church – seeking converts – ‘solemn nonsense’, thereby denying the entire Apostolic Body and Mission; Bergoglio prays with false-religionists and encourages them in their falsehood – another direct denial of the Bridegroom and His Bride and a denial of the first commandment.
Bergoglio is yet another formal heretic perverting Catholic Truth and using the name of Christ to do so.
As Louie points out, the dollops of seeming orthodoxy that seem to come from Bergoglio in no way mitigate his heretical crimes. Heresy is heresy. Poison is poison – you can’t aquit someone because they mixed some water in their victim’s strychnine tea.
And also in the “It’s just a matter of time” category, we find out that no less than 3 cardinals will be present at the commemoration of this years SP anniversary.
Details here: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/07/three-cardinals-at-third-pilgrimage-of.html
“The International Pilgrimage of the tradition took place in 2012 with the declared aim of the traditional rite to gain greater visibility and return it to St. Peter’s Cathedral, the main church in Christendom for the first time. 2012 also had a certain hope that Pope Benedict XVI. could even celebrate the Pontifical Mass or at least attend. It was a hope that did not come true.”
Can’t wait for next year, already 😉
Who’s up for a Pop Quiz.
In an article in a newspaper in a formerly Catholic country, an interview was published with one Mister Hummes. The following question was posed to the interviewee:
Q: If Jesus were alive today, would he be in favor of gay marriage?
A: I don’t know, I formulate no hypothesis on this. Who must answer this is the Church in its entirety. We must take care not to raise issues individually, because this ends up creating more difficulties for us to reach a valid conclusion. I think we must get together, listen to people, those who have an interest, the bishops. It is the Church that must indicate the ways, and there must be a way for all.
And now for the quiz question:
Is Mr. Hummes:
a) An office from a Non Governmental Organization
b) A protestant cleric
c) A cardinal in the Roman Catholic Church
d) All of the above
Now I know what you are probably thinking, it must be either a) or c). Why? Because b) – a protestant cleric- would at least try to justify his answer by referencing a faulty interpretation of the “sola scriptura”.
The answer to the question can be found here: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/07/let-your-yes-be-yes-and-your-no-no.html.
All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
A light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken,
The crownless again shall be king
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien
Dear Indignus. Excellent analysis! It’s almost laughable isn’t it, but according to Vatican Radio bergoglio actually did say:
” how Jesus’s first temptation by Satan was almost ‘like a seduction.’ Satan told Jesus to throw himself down from the Temple “.
bergoglio also said that gossip is a form of murder according to CNA:
I think bergoglio’s constant obsession with gossiping (try googling “pope francis gossip”) has something to do with ecumenism. “Gossip” seems to be some sort of code word for him for “the sin” of criticizing those outside of the Catholic Church (and also one sect criticizing another). But I haven’t been able to find where he gets this from. Since we know that bergoglio is not an orginal thinker I assume he is plagiarizing some protestant ecumaniacal theologian — but I can’t find the source. Any ideas?
“Let’s face it: the devil is indeed playing an important role in Francis’ Petrine ministry.”
I use atheist in the sense the Greek Fathers did; an infidel, one who does not hold Christ to be His Master, who does not believe or think or act according to the Faith. Obviously, one must distinguish between objective judgements, judicial judgements and private judgements. You cannot arrive ad judicial judgements, without objective judgements, which must begin in the minds of individuals as private judgements. What I have said here above and in the past on this blog, presumes all that.
Anyone who wishes to give the Church another form or definition other than that given by Christ Her Divine Founder, is a destroyer of the Church, an enemy of the Church and of Christ, regardless whether he wishes to call himself a believer, a Catholic, or a lover of Christ or God…
Well if you call him Anti-Christ, then you surely cannot hold him to be head of the Church militant, since the Anti-Christ is, according to the Doctors and Fathers, the head of the mystical body of Satan, of the reprobate…an entirely other society of men….I think that in justice we ought not name him thus; he is certainly too stupid to merit the name, and has not worked any even fake miracles…
Here is an article that describes one of bergoglio’s infamous Santa Marta homilies and seems to sum up his “theology of gossip” titled “Meekness sows harmony in church; gossip sows division, pope says”.
From what I can figure out this bergoglian “theology of gossip” goes something like this…
After Pentecost there was One Church which was ***united*** by the Holy Spirit.
Then the disciples became envious of each other and started “gossiping” about each other. This caused ***division*** in the Church.
If we can just stop “gossiping” about each other and ignore all the dogma that ***divides*** us then we can become ecumaniacally ***united*** again through the Holy Spirit.
This would be the “new pentecost” where we all share a common “baptism of the holy spirit” and just forget about all that dogma.
Then we can all be ***united*** again and hold hands in a big circle (or maybe a polyhedron) and sing songs while the band plays their guitars and tamborines and speak in tongues and roll around on the floor together.
Aleluia! Alleluya! Allelujah! (Heck, we can’t even agree on how to spell aleluia?)
You love Jesus? Me too! And He loves you to. And we are all going to heaven. Even if you are an unrepentant adulterous homosexual pro-abortion atheist.
Except for those murderous gossipers with all of their dogma.
St. Peter preached at the REAL Pentecost, “Save yourselves from this perverse generation.” (Acts of the Apostles 2:40)
“The Strange Silences of a Very Talkative Pope”
Bergoglio has spent weeks behind the scenes cultivating relationships with the heads of the powerful “Evangelical” communities of the United States. He has spent hour after hour in their company at his residence in Santa Marta. He has invited them for lunch. He immortalized one of these convivial moments by giving a high five, amid raucous laughter, to Pastor James Robinson, one of the most successful American televangelists.
When no one knew anything about it yet, it was Francis who alerted them about his intention to go visit their Italian colleague in Caserta, and explained the reason: “To extend the apologies of the Catholic Church for the damage that has been done to them by obstructing the growth of their communities.”
As the Argentine he is, Bergoglio has experienced first-hand the overwhelming expansion of the Evangelical and Pentecostal communities in Latin America, which continue to take enormous masses of faithful away from the Catholic Church. And yet he has made this decision: not to fight their leaders, but to make them his friends.
This is the same approach that he has adopted with the Muslim world: prayer, invocation of peace, general condemnations of the evil that is done, but with careful attention to keep his distance from specific cases concerning precise persons, whether victims or butchers.
It’s that old buddhist devil known as ‘equanimity’ (also very important in schools of kabalah and most neo-pagan cults). It’s supposed to show how spiritually sophisticated one is – but the nuts and bolts of it are simply indifference – an utter lack of concern for the Truth of souls. That said, Bergoglio is simply the latest mascot for ‘Team Judas’ AKA murder the Bride.
since opinion is more important in the world of Aggiornamento than Truth, I would be interested to know how people really view contemporary so-called ‘catholicism’; do people see it, its liturgy and disciplines and doctrine, as authentic Catholicism? If so, why?
I think that famous theologian Barbara Streisand sums this up more clearly – “Feeeeelings, nothing more than feeeeeelings….”
And the Catholics in Mosul (those who are left) must be eternally grateful for the meaningful dialogue with their killers. Oops, looks like I’ll have to add pessimism to my Confessional list.
Birds of a feather flock together; therefore, what can we say about Bergoglio’s religion? Seems like he is comfortable with anyone who has an a priori rejection of truth, dogmatically asserted or intellectually expressed. Now that is a good definition of an atheist.
In the prior blog,GABBY (#46)a discussion on courageous prior missionary activity led us to research- when the Church changed its mission policies, and we discovered something we believe important enough to repeat in part here— the “social justice” of Vatican II was developed from the changes in “inculturation” policy– as evidence by the major reversal made by Pius XII in 1939:
Wickipedia describes inculturation
. in the Roman Catholic Church, referring to the adaptation of the way Church teachings are presented to non-Christian cultures, and to the influence of those cultures on the evolution of these teachings.” (that’s scary in itself)
In the late 1580′s in China–The emperor granted freedom of religion to Catholics. The Jesuit missionary, Matteo Ricci had adapted the Catholic faith to Chinese thinking, permitting “the cultic veneration of ancestors”, which he described as “a mere cultural practice”.
The Holy See disagreed, deeming the veneration “worship” and ” idolatry”, and forbade (it). The Chinese emperor felt duped and refused to permit any alteration of the existing Christian practices. “The Vatican policy was the death of the missions in China.”
Benedict XV (Pope 1914-1922- at the start and during WWI and when Our Lady appeared at Fatima) and Pius XII, began promoting local clergy “so the local cultures were better recognized.”
***THEN wickipedia reports:
“In 1939 Pope Pius XII, within weeks of his coronation, radically reverted the 250 year old Vatican policy and permitted the veneration of dead family members in China” The Vatican..stated that “Chinese customs were no longer considered “superstitious””.
Our question: Was this the real beginning of what led to Koran kissing, Buddha statues on empty Catholic Tabernacles/Assisi, Pope receiving the sign of Shiva, Hindus worshipping the “mother of all mothers” at the Fatima Shrine, Jews being told they have an unbroken Covenant and need not convert, all the way to what we see now–a Pope preaching against Catholics who follow what the Church always taught (unchanging Truth) that all outside her need to come home?
P.S. on Matteo Ricci and his approach to inculturation in China. It seems much like the current Pope’s approach to the Muslims -they worship the same God….
During his research he discovered that, in contrast to the cultures of South Asia, Chinese culture was strongly intertwined with Confucian values and therefore decided to use existing Chinese concepts to explain Christianity. He did not explain the Catholic faith as entirely foreign or new; instead, he said that the Chinese culture and people always believed in God, and that Christianity is simply the completion of their faith. He borrowed an unusual Chinese term, Lord of Heaven (Tiānzhǔ) which is based on the theistic Zhou term ‘Heaven,” to use as the Catholic name for God. (Though he also cited many synonyms from the Confucian Classics.)
This makes us wonder whether this was a genuine attempt to reach non-believers with the True God, in imitation of St. Paul using the “statue of an unknown god” in his missionary work; or if it was more an indifferentist corruption of the Faith motivated by ambition or misplaced empathy or something else..
In any event, it seems noteworthy that Our Lady’s requests for the Consecration of Russia (made in 1929) were being ignored by the Popes as they made began making dramatic reversals such as these, affecting how Jesus Mandate to “go teach all nations” was accomplished. If the Faith were being polluted with false religions, it would seem to us a sin that would cry out to heaven for vengeance, as the primary mission of the Church is to save souls.
Benedict XV’s Papacy began in 1914 as did WWI, Pius XII’s in 1939, with WWII.
Our Lady said “War is a punishment for sin”.
Bergoglio is not merely a Modernist–He is Modernism PERSONIFIED! If I have a clock that has stopped at 11 o’clock and I only look at it at 11 am and 11 pm, I could easily convince myself that this is a good running time piece. Louie’s analogy is perfect. Concentrate only on the words and actions of Bergoglio that appear Catholic (if you can find any!!), you might convince yourself that he is actually Catholic. But don’t count on him to get you anywhere on time–especially in eternity!!
More info on the situation in the Ciudad del Este in Paraguay.
Looks like the locals are not taking this laying down.
Link here: http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=22195
Hat tip to the SV site which we all know and love…. in the spirit of true ecumenism…. of course.
In 2004, Paraguay’s bishops wrote to Pope St. John Paul II to protest his appointment of Father Livieres, a priest of Opus Dei, to the diocese, but the Holy See held firm.
Bishop Livieres was the only bishop who publicly opposed the presidential candidacy of former bishop Fernando Lugo, who governed the nation from 2008 to 2012.
Opposition to Bishop Livieres among religious orders intensified when he forbade the “political or ideological instrumentalization” of their work and when he called for the proclamation of the Gospel to indigenous peoples.
Ten priests from his diocese, and 150 from across the nation, urged Pope Benedict XVI to remove the bishop after he sought to “renew ecclesial discipline.” Today, however, the vast majority of the diocese’s “young and numerous” clergy support him.
Bishop Livieres faced opposition from his brother bishops after he founded a major seminary and minor seminary in the diocese, thus ending the “monolithic scheme of priestly formation” at the national seminary.
Father Urrutigoity “came recommended by some cardinals with functions in the Holy See (one of them, elected a few days later Successor of Peter).” The Vatican, through the apostolic nuncio, and “with the consent of the excardinating bishop,” authorized the incardination.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith did not investigate the accusation against Father Urrutigoity because he was not accused of sexual abuse with a minor, but of an action involving an adult. The bishop is convinced of the priest’s innocence.
In time, Father Urrutigoity was subsequently appointed vicar general: he was the “almost unanimous” choice of clergy and laity who had been consulted.
Following the election of Pope Francis, Paraguay’s leading prelate, Archbishop Eustaquio Pastor Cuquejo Verga of Asunción, asked the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to open a new investigation into Father Urrutigoity despite the lack of any new evidence.
Bishop Livieres has also faced opposition for admitting new religious and lay communities into the diocese and for using a grant to fund the education of seminarians.
The diocese also stated that since 2004, the number of priests has risen from 79 to 140, even though 51% of aspirants to the seminary are not admitted. The number of baptisms rose from 9,543 (2004) to 21,556 (2013).
But the story takes a twist:
“The growth and strength of the people of God in Paraguay were cruelly mutilated” by the suppression of the Jesuit missionaries in the late 18th century, the diocesan statement concluded. “Those who are betting that history will repeat itself now in our diocese” may encounter the “surprise of discovering that, this time, the Bishop of Rome is an heir to those Jesuits calumniated and suppressed.”
Somehow, I think Francis would be the first to suppress those 18th century Jesuits. But I could be wrong. 😉
Oh, I almost forgot.
Msgr Ricca is still at the Institute for Religious Works.
Dear Roman watcher,
Thanks for the explanation of your use of “atheist”–which helped.
Regarding the remainder of your response, however, please allow us a correction, which points up a growing problem:
-You wrote: “Well if you call him Anti-Christ, then you surely cannot hold him to be head of the Church militant”…
If you will kindly look again, we in fact, made it a point not to CALL him anything,- deliberately prefacing our comments with the words..”We’d rather leave that judgment to a Church Council as you suggested on an earlier blog post”.
Attempting to further that point, we went on to say..”The Pope may not think of himself as a “destroyer of the Church”…..but if that is the case, he has obviously disassociated his thoughts from his actions-for whatever reason. (theological schizophrenia?) ”
Our comments were thus pointedly directed only towards the damage being done by his actions, without judging his internal disposition; thus we ended with: “So it seems to us he is….MORE LIKE .. the Anti-Christ.”..
– which was in contrast to your “atheist” comment, and very different from CALLING him The Anti Christ, as you claim in your above response..
This is not knit-picking or splitting hairs that don’t need to be split. It’s crucial to make and respect these distinctions in our own words and those of others which people import for discussion here on any matter, but especially regarding the Pope and issues of authority.
Those who wish to leave these judgments of personal intention to higher authorities and still manage to discuss the serious actions and affects of actions, are entitled to an accurate reporting of their views.
That is a matter of justice and charity frequently overlooked by the major media,– hence the modern day fear of recorded interviews -due to “editorial sound bites” and misreported quotes or those taken out of context, often deliberately to foster “political correctness” or other biases, or to flat-out lie with malice aforethought..
( which we are not at all suggesting applies to you respone)…
___ You are by no means the only one who slipped into this practice, and we aren’t making such an issue of it to attack you, but to point out the importance of recognizing this problem and exercising due care—and we include ourselves in this caution..
Actually, you have no way whatsoever of knowing whether or not Bergoglio is guilty of formal heresy; you can hazard a guess like anyone else. Even the link you referenced says “…the material element involved in being a heretic is conscious dissent from the Catholic rule of faith, while the formal element is the perverse state of the ***will*** which this entails.” Of course I realize that Mr. Daly attempts to get around this, but in fact Bergoglio hasn’t shown himself to be obstinate in will will respect to any specific heresy.
(Perhaps ironically, the insidious nature of modernism comes in to play here; as the great Encyclical points out, part of the nature of modernism is vagueness and shiftiness that obscures the true meaning of words; however, this element works against establishing pertinacity.)
But, if you or Daly claim to know Bergoglio’s will, with moral certainty, I’m afraid you are mistaken. It is entirely possible that he is more beset with “diabolical disorientation” than he is a willful heretic. It is entirely possible his heresy remains only in the material realm.
As the Catholic Encyclopedia says, “Heresy thus ***willed*** is imputable to the subject and carries with it a varying degree of guilt; it is called ***formal***, because to the material error it adds the informative element of ‘***freely willed***’.” And also, “The guilt of heresy is measured not so much by its subject-matter as by its formal principle…”.
Please don’t mistake this for any kind of defense of the man, which seems to be a conclusion sedevacantists very often jump to (thus reacting indignantly over a “defense” of a “false pope”). Whether or not he clings to known (to him) heresy with an obstinate will, he’s horribly grating in his public statements and a grave danger to the faith (at least to weak faith).
Generally, Mr. Daly makes numerous errors in his treatises about sedevacantism; here is one rebuttal:
Whoa, whoa, whoa …didn’t “Feelings” become famous in 1975 by Brazilian Morris Albert, a one hit wonder? Babs did a subsequent cover of the song with Julio Iglesias.
We disagree with your idea that ” he is certainly too stupid to merit the name”, O
On the contrary, he has shown himself to be highly aware and skilled in the use of both modern and historical propaganda techniques; says he fell in love with communism due to a communist teacher/hero who guided him, mentions having a voracious appetite for books, frequently cites historic events from memory, and launches into diatribes against anything traditional at a moment’s notice, hurtling words now frequently quoted and even memorialized on mugs.
Sorry, we can’t buy the “stupid” label, except in the sense that all belief in evil philosophies is a stupid decision. Still, it requires working intelligence to make the choice.
And as to your final comment .”and has not worked any even fake miracles”
(No offense intended to the family of Tony Palmer) but several poster has pointed out the lack of info about him, and we have seen no funeral announced.
Perhaps they made use of the modern “miracle of medicine” called Cryonics?
Believe it or not, they can freeze nearly dead people and unfreeze them after their bodies heal. (only another matter of “time”)
–mind you, we’re STILL not saying this Pope IS the false prophet or anti-Christ.
We’re saying the world is ripe for the deceptions that will one day fulfill Scripture, and today is as good (or evil) a time as any.
The respect payed for the dead in China, according to traditional confucian custom, is not an act of religion, because confucianism does not consider the dead gods. It is no more idolatrous that Catholcis who put Chicago sports club pennants on the graves of their dead fathers, or pennies on their tomb stones. If you read anything about China, go to the Cardinal Kung Foundation website and you will find that before V2 the Church was very strong in China, and certainly not involved in superstituous peddling.
AGAIN you made us laugh despite all this misery,
Thank you! 🙂 🙂
We are compelled by the sound reasoning to second this argument.
After all, what IS diabolical disorientation?
It is not something we heard mentioned before Fatima, and it was told to us by Sister Lucy through Our Blessed Mother, for the express purpose of warning the Faithful of something we would not likely otherwise be able to discern for ourselves under ordinary methods.
She cited it as the CAUSE of her greatest sorrow, tears, bleeding heart, and begged for our PRAYERS and personal sacrifices for those affected saying the Devil was going after consecrated souls in particular.
Most of us have family members or friends who seem caught in it as well.
This begs compassion and reservation of judgment more than at any other time in history.
“The Devil made me do it” is Flip Wilson talk, not Catholic teaching, however, Our Lady coming personally to announce this special problem, gives us reason to think twice about assumption of or degree of guilt, and wait for God.
Just judge the actions. There’s enough there to take a lifetime.
I think I’ll stick with the more obvious approach, that being that a ‘successor of Peter’ is aware of Popes of the ‘old church’ and all their magisterial teachings on Church and salvation. Bergoglio and his team openly despise the ‘old Church’ which means they are fully aware of what She teaches. ‘The popes and bishops of the Church have the solemn obligation to proclaim nothing other than the fullness of the truths of the Faith for the good of the sanctification and salvation of men unto eternity…’ Dr T Droleskey.
it’s certainly ‘out to the perpheries’ to suggest a so-called pope can be ignorant of the foundations of the Church’s mission and core teachings. It also renders St Paul’s warning about anathematizing ‘ we or angel of heaven if we/they should preach a different doctrine’ pointless. But then making Catholicism pointless is point, isn’t it.
Dear Roman Watcher,
According to the link below, what you refer to is the 49 day temporary ritual, akin to prayers for the dead mixed with superstition. However it incorporates the false belief that physical items offered on earth can benefit the soul in the afterlife. It is the next stage that becomes actual idolatry, as they believe the objects on earth become animated with the soul of the deceased.
After a family member’s funeral, Chinese families set up a home altar for the purpose of ancestor worship. The altar normally include a portrait or photograph of the ancestor, a commemorative plaque and cups for offerings. Altars are usually taken down after 49 days, the period during which the deceased is believed to be undergoing judgment. This belief is influenced by the Mahayana Buddhist idea of the Bardo, an intermediate period between death and rebirth. After the 49-day period, the deceased is worshipped along with all the other ancestors of the family.
Regular Ancestor Worship
After the home altar is taken down, the ancestors are believed to dwell in commemorative tablets. Ancestral tablets are pieces of wood inscribed with the name and dates of the deceased. They are kept in a small shrine at home and in the clan ancestral temple. Incense is lit before the tablets daily and offerings of food and prostrations are presented twice a month.
I am not at all surprised by the pendulum approach for the manipulation of the masses. Somebody has a contradiction meter out there and when there seems to be too much contradiction noise rising, a traditional doctrine will be released to balance, satisfy, and shut down any further conflict. The game is to watch the movement of proclamations, interviews, suppressions, encyclicals, the voices that shout over the rest. In a short time the real picture appears with the lines are drawn for the directions of the new ecclesiology. There are absolutes especially in ecumenism, no traditionalism, and religious freedom. The rest of the tenets of the faith fall into lesser levels and are ready for proclamation when needed. This movement has little to do with the Church as such. It has to do with power and control in general. When a good person steps forward and delivers the goods of the faith, the world can be changed. I do not believe the same is true for evil. Evil thrives on activism and deceit. I am not sure if all this is being orchestrated by this Pope no more than I believe that what is going on in the USA is being orchestrated by one President. I look at the previous conclave and wonder what really went on behind those locked doors. I might say the same for almost every conclave since PPXII. I just was much too convenient and fast. I have had questions about the past papacies. What exactly did happen to John Paul I? What exactly did happen to the Vatican State? We do not expect that modernists are just standing around anymore than the masons are bidding their time. The Church is the target of them all, Satan behind the curtain. For only the Church can hold back the tide against truth, culture, humanity, history, Natural Law, and morality. The point is not to get rid of the Church, that would be too obvious, but to create a doctrine of no doctrine. All doctrine devolves into personal belief at the control of the present moment’s musings. So, I am not at all surprised that now and then the Pope will say something extraordinarily dogmatic, but be sure it will have nothing to do with his absolutes. The father of lies speaks in half truths.
In her protection of the Faithful, the Church has to contend not only with the actual written or oral tenets of false religious beliefs, but also with how they are put into practice by their adherents.
As evidenced by the aftermath of Vatican II, to some degree, we can all see how greatly those practices can distort the intention of the original documents (or so it is often claimed by those who support VII).
Right on target! Satan is the key and also the reason we will likely not be able to connect all the dots. So while your efforts are much appreciated, please don’t let them drive you to distraction, like St. Thomas trying to explain the Trinity.(which would have been more impossible yet)
The Devil makes paths that lead to nowhere, taking delight in sabotaging even his most devoted followers. Evil is Absence of Good.
We all are. That’s why our frustrations make such great sin-offerings.
Our Lady is collecting those and using them to increase the force with which she stomps on the head of the snake.. Picture it.
Dear Roman watcher,
Thank you for the reference, we took a look at it. We were not claiming the Faith was not strong in China, -as that was only the opinion of wickipedia, which we said we were quoting. However, there is no evidence pointing in either direction on that web site you mentioned, and we would not expect to find discussion of traditions carried on privately in homes, which should not be a part of the Faith but which they learned from their elders and priests, on such a site.
So the questions remain unanswered. We do see evidence that such occurrences were and still are common among converts to Catholicism in South America, where voodoo-like practices are part of every day life.
After the October Synod, the great schism will occur as everyone will have to choose the Truth or Francis and his one world religion. This is when the Akita prophecy is fulfilled – cardinal against cardinal, bishop against bishop. We already see a smattering of that now with the few faithful cardinals exposing the errors of Kasper.
I doubt it, actually I think more people will just fall away into secularism…. Look what happened when JP 2 was made a “saint ” … Nothing but crickets
I didn’t really follow all of that. Anyway, I am quite comfortable calling Francis a bad pope – which he certainly is – rather than declaring that he’s not the pope.
“Just judge the actions. There’s enough there to take a lifetime.” – a melancholy LOL to that!
“The Devil made me do it” is Flip Wilson talk in the sense *he* used it, but “The Church does not judge internals” remains a rule of the Church.
St Peter and St Paul warned us that false people trying to pass themselves off as legitimate would be known by their false doctrine. We are, St Paul instucts us, to basically banish them from the company of the Faithful; we are not to pretend that there is concord between Christ and Belial: “And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever?” The answer is absolutely none. To pretend there is a portion to be shared or a concord to be had is antichrist.
May we ask what you mean by “the great schism”?
Do you actually think the Church will split into two separate entities?
This is exactly what a friend of ours told us a couple of years ago, and he is in a religious order. He says it’s coming, too.
We just wonder how would something like that play out in reality?
Indignus, instead of assuming you know everything, why not write the webmaster at the Foundation I cited, and ask him. Being the nephew of the late Cardinal, he certainly knows well the local traditions among Chinese Catholics. When I cited that website, I certainly assumed you would write him, since you want to know the truth. To say that something is not proven, and to refuse to do the research, is something a Catholic ought never fall into…
I am concerned that to Bl. Catherine Emmerich, Our Lord said that a Remnant would be preserved when the misguided clergy go and found their world-church. And that this remnant would rebuild Christ’s true Church. That seems to mean that perhaps a schism will break out under Bergoglio and that only a few Catholics will refuse his new world religion. This also seems likely given the fact that only 3-4 cardinals have criticized Bergoglio in public since his election. A lot of Catholics would be nearly psycologically incapable of an act of faith, given that they are addicted to the notion that obedience trumps all other virtues. We need to emphasize that we are Catholcis not Nazi’s, and that obedience to even ecclesiastical superiors is quite a limited virtue, and its limits are dogmatic faith, founded upon Scripture, Tradition and the infallible magisterium, not on non-infallible councils and synods, many of which throughout the ages were condemned and abandoned by the Church.
“obedience” must be be to a legitimate authority in matters that do not oppose the unchanging Deposit of Faith and morality.