A group of conciliar churchmen have just published a text – similar in many respects to the Manifesto issued by Cardinal Muller back in February – with the intention of asserting Catholic truths in light of so many Bergoglian errors and outright heresies.
The nearly four-thousand word text entitled, Declaration of the truths relating to some of the most common errors in the life of the Church of our time, is cosigned by Cardinals Raymond Burke and Janis Pujats, Archbishops Tomash Peta and Jan Pawel Lenga, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider.
The text does indeed contain many truths. It is severely lacking, however, inasmuch as it names neither the primary enemies of said truths (the Second Vatican Council and its unwavering devotees – the heretic Jorge Bergoglio chief among them), nor does it dare to utter the word “heresy.”
Furthermore, it fails to explicitly identify, much less condemn, the specific erroneous propositions it intends to correct. For example, of the forty individual statements that make up the Declaration, more than half-a-dozen are aimed directly at the errors contained in AmorisLaetitia, and yet the authors of the text have not the spine to say so. In a similar way, the vast majority of the remaining statements are clearly meant to correct other Bergoglian heresies (e.g., regarding capital punishment), but the offending errors are never specifically mentioned with attribution to their humble author.
In an “Explanatory Note” accompanying the Declaration, the signatories approvingly cite Vatican Council II in the very first paragraph (as well as throughout the Declaration itself); as if it somehow provides a sure guide in these tempestuous times. Clearly these churchmen haven’t the wherewithal to identity the Council for what it truly is – the charter that guaranteed the very crisis they propose to address.
In addition to the Second Vatican Council, the Declaration cites traditional councils like Trent and the Fifth Lateran, but don’t be fooled. It also relies very heavily on the “wisdom” of such dubious sources as Paul VI, John Paul II, the so-called Catechism of the Catholic [sic] Church, the Credo of the People of God, and the 1983 Code of Canon Law.
Unlike the now well-known Open Letter that was signed by some nineteen theologians, the Declaration doesn’t call for anything that can be considered a remedial course of action aimed at defending the Church and her faithful from the Bergoglian wolf.
The Open Letter proposed:
Since Pope Francis has manifested heresy by his actions as well as by his words, any abjuration must involve repudiating and reversing these actions … If – which God forbid! – Pope Francis does not bear the fruit of true repentance in response to these admonitions, we request that you carry out your duty of office to declare that he has committed the canonical delict of heresy and that he must suffer the canonical consequences of this crime.
As for the Heretic-in-Chief, the authors of the Declaration by contrast, in addition to failing to name him, could only manage to muster up the gumption to offer:
A common voice of the Shepherds and the faithful through a precise declaration of the truths will be without any doubt an efficient means of a fraternal and filial aid for the Supreme Pontiff in the current extraordinary situation of a general doctrinal confusion and disorientation in the life of the Church. (See the “Explanatory Note”)
Of course, it goes without say that a feckless effort such as this would be incomplete without an accompanying petition that allows other conservative wannabe do-gooders to add their own name to the mix, which LifeSite News wasted no time in creating.
Look, I am pleased to presume goodwill on the part of the signatories; men who have at least the modicum of Catholic sense necessary to realize that something is dreadfully wrong, and in an unprecedented way. Even so, it must be said that these churchmen have evidently chosen to largely disconnect their collective intellect from the plain reality that has been staring all of us in the face for more than six years:
Jorge Bergoglio has long known damned well what the Church infallibly teaches with respect to the doctrines outlined in the Declaration. He is determined nonetheless to press forward with a contrary agenda – a false religion – which is nothing more and nothing less than the conciliar agenda, albeit on steroids.
As such, let’s be clear: This latest Declaration in no way provides “filial aid” to “Francis” (as he is known) or anyone else for that matter. In fact, given its reliance on the anti-Catholic sources mentioned above, as if they can provide the full light of truth, it represents nothing more than a danger to souls; one adorned in a traditional disguise that will only serve to further deceive the innocent.
Bottom line: The only declaration that is necessary at this point relative to the imposter Francis is one that makes it known to all of the faithful that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has of his own volition severed himself from the Body of Christ and, as such, he can no longer be considered a member of said Body, much less does he have any credible claim to being its visible head on earth, the Vicar of Christ. PERIOD.
This is indeed the kind of courageous commentary that is missing from Church clerics, more’s the pity. It’s as though the voice of the Bride if Christ has been silenced.
In other words, it’s a wussy declaration.
Are these “declarations” a ploy to make the Faithful believe there is hope in correcting Francis? How do you correct an Imposter? How do you make a fake church a True Church, especially when those doing the correcting don’t believe Francis and the Novus Ordo Church are fake?
The blind leading the blind. Both fall into the pit.
No, the Bride of Christ is not silent to those who have ears to hear. The modern world has rejected Christ and therefore hears nothing except the chatter of their own tongue. They are deaf. Those who look to modernists to hear the Bride of Christ speak will only hear silence since the modernist hierarchy are all modernist heretics themselves, both the progressivist ones like Kasper and the conservative ones like Burke. Two sides of the same heretical coin.
Well, of course they won’t zero in on Vatican II as the source of the evil. That would be the blasphemy of all blasphemies to those of their ilk. Let’s face it: VII is their god. And who was it that enthroned with a profound ( a word he was so fond of using) finality Vatican II as god of the VII cult?
John Paul II gave us “the so-called Catechism of the Catholic [sic] Church, the Credo of the People of God, and the 1983 Code of Canon Law.” He also gave us Assisi, universal salvation (no one’s in hell), a sodomy-ridden hierarchy (which he refused to do anything about), and the deification of man–wonderful, adorable, oh so full of dignity MAN.
This man was, in my view, the absolute worst of the VII “popes” in that his long pontificate pushed the VII poison all the way to its completion, i.e. the destruction of the faith. What was needed was a Karol Wojtyla to fix the mess that God had allowed to infect the Church: piety, triumphalism, contempt for the world and the things of the world in favor of the eternal things of Heaven, indefectibility, etc. I hope that someone capable will produce a definitive piece on the enormity of the sin, blasphemy and rottenness which this man, JPII, unleashed on the world.
The “Controlled Opposition” represented by the likes of Burke and [Anti]-Athanasius Schneider goes at it again to confuse further the conservative conciliar church catholics, who are still clinging to the “new church” and lead them to believe that by confirming some of the truths of the “Catholic Church”, they are in fact setting things straight and never mind all the poison that is being shoved down their throats by ALL the Conciliar Church churchmen including ALL their so called “supreme shepherds”. The only service that we should see in all of these faint voices of so called resistance movements (including those within the Traditional Catholic Circles) is to draw the attention one more time that, with Bergoglio, the situation has definitely moved, with his perpetual pertinacity, from the forum of material heresy to the irreversible domain of manifest and formal heresy. Thus no doubt to any eye that sees with the clarity of the True Faith, Bergoglio has chosen with his own free will to separate himself from the Mystical Body of Christ, and in the least is no longer Catholic. Thus no longer should any member of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church call him pope. The Head of the Church is Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, Who is now suffering with us on the Cross, and all we can do is stand behind Our Blessed Mother at the foot of the Cross suffering with Her IN SILENCE awaiting His death and 3 days later His Resurrection.
Our Lord did not mince any words when He called all these Pharisees: “you brood of vipers”. These same Pharisees were saying to Him when He was dying on the cross, “If you are truly the Son of God, why don’t come down and save yourself”.
God have Mercy!
Louie, Louie, Louie…
There you go again….stating the plain Truth without guile or qualification. “Truth” remains TOTALLY foreign to the Modernists. The only thing worse would be Latin…..even though it’s still the official language of the Church.
Could this be the swan song of the Catholic heirarchy’s very own version of the Laurel and Hardy tandem? How much longer must we endure this mockery upon mockery? Please, Lord, spare us.
You are assuming the goal is simply to respectfully point out to Pope Francis some errors that they have identified, and to hope he will clarify and ask pardon for having promulgated something which is in conflict with the teaching of the Church.
There may be several reasons for their declaration; not the least of which is a response to the faithful who have begged the bishops to do something, and also to clearly state the teachings of the Church, as many Catholics are quite confused. Unfortunately true teaching of Church doctrine is not something you see regularly in most Catholic Churches. My Novus Ordo friend says it would be an affront to the partners of Catholics who may accompany a Catholic to Church. She says a priest who spoke of those kinds of controversial things could be let go or something to that effect.