Luther as gospel witness? It’s actually far worse!

luther-communionThe recent document from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity offering “Resources for the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity” is causing quite a stir mainly thanks to its treatment of Martin Luther.

The money quote most often cited reads as follows:

Catholics are now able to hear Luther’s challenge for the Church of today, recognising him as a “witness to the gospel” (From Conflict to Communion 29).

As horrifying as this is, let’s be honest: Exceedingly few people (other than so-called “traditionalists” – aka Catholics – who already know better) even read this garbage, and far fewer still put any real stock in it.

In other words, rank and file under-nourished Catholics, the majority of whom can barely articulate the basics of their own faith, aren’t going to immerse themselves in the writings of Martin Luther just because the self-deluded ecumaniancs in Rome published an obscure document singing his praises.

Besides, most of them likely receive all of the Protestant theology they can handle right in their very own parishes (that is, those that still bother showing up for Mass.)

Now, that’s not to say that these ecumenical texts are entirely without value; in reality, they are quite valuable inasmuch as they provide insight into how the madmen in Rome intend to lead even more souls to perdition in the months and years ahead.

Remember, those running the show in Rome these days are no longer concerned with the salvific mission that was given to the Church by Jesus Christ. Theirs is a more earthbound mission; one that is entirely humanistic.

Their words and deeds are, therefore, far more political in nature than Apostolic.

With this important distinction in mind, the more observant among us will notice that official Vatican statements (like the document under discussion here) often contain hints as to what lies ahead.

In other words, one will sometimes find “seeds” planted in these texts that are rather like “trial balloons” meant to test the ecclesial (political) climate on some point or another.

For instance, the controversial quote about Martin Luther (above), for all of the attention it has been receiving over the last few days, is really nothing new; it was taken (as indicated) from the 2013 Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity document cited in parenthesis, “From Conflict to Communion,” which reads:

Implicit rapprochement with Luther’s concerns has led to a new evaluation of his catholicity, which took place in the context of recognizing that his intention was to reform, not to divide, the church. This is evident in the statements of Johannes Cardinal Willebrands and Pope John Paul II. [7] The rediscovery of these two central characteristics of his person and theology led to a new ecumenical understanding of Luther as a “witness to the gospel.”

NB: The footnote found in the excerpt above references a lecture from Cardinal Willebrands that dates back to 1970, and a letter of Pope John Paul II from 1983, wherein Luther’s “catholicity” and pure “intentions” were “recognized.”

How these modernists managed to judge the interior disposition of Luther’s soul from their vantage point some four centuries later is anyone’s guess. The important point, however, is that these were the “seeds” that blossomed into Luther’s anointing by Rome as a “witness to the gospel” in 2013; only to be repeated just last week.

While it took several decades for the Willebrands and Wojtyla seeds to so germinate, we must admit that, in our day, the process is moving at a much faster pace.

In the three years since Rome first professed Luther as a “witness to the gospel,” we have been treated to such rotten fruits as Francis condemning proselytism as “solemn nonsense” and “poison,” his public apology issued “as Bishop of Rome and Pastor of the Catholic Church, for the non-evangelical behavior on the part of Catholics” toward Protestants, and, of course, his recent visit to Lund kicking off a year-long celebration of the Protestant revolt.

With all of this having been said, the questions we should be asking now are simply these:

What kinds of “seeds” have been scattered in this most recent document from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, and most importantly, into what might we expect those seeds to blossom?

The answer is perhaps as predictable as it is lamentable; it is, in a word, intercommunion.

In fact, if we look a bit more closely at the ecumenical document issued back in 2013, we will find that the seeds of intercommunion were planted therein in any number of places; not the least of which is its very title: “From Conflict to Communion.” [emphasis added]

Again – bear in mind that these men are political animals; they are Apostolic in neither makeup nor mission.

For them, “communion” (small “c”) and “Communion” (capital “C” – as in “Holy Communion”) are one and the same thing.

The Eucharist is little more than an expression of the “unity” that, in their view, already exists between the Protestants and the Catholic Church.

Note, for instance, the following excerpt taken from the 2013 text:

While the Council of Trent defended the practice of adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, it took as its starting point that the primary purpose of the eucharist is the communion of the faithful. The eucharist was instituted by Christ to be consumed as spiritual food. (From Conflict to Communion – 150)

First, note very well that the word “Eucharist” in this text, like that of “communion,” is not capitalized (neither in English, nor in Italian).

Secondly, be certain to note very well the blatant and deliberate distortion of the dogmatic teaching of the Council of Trent which most certainly did not state “that the primary purpose of the eucharist is the communion of the faithful.”

For the record, in setting forth “the ancient, complete, and in every part perfect faith and doctrine touching the great mystery of the Eucharist,” the Council of Trent took as its starting point (to use the parlance of the 2013 text):

“…the Eucharist, considered as being a true and singular sacrifice … a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires.” (See Council of Trent, Session XXIII, Chapter I)

Fast forward to the present…

In the recently published Resources for the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity for 2017, under the heading, “Ecumenical Challenges*” (we will examine the asterisk momentarily), we find:

Another challenge is the frustration that many people feel, especially those who have laboured for a long time at the grassroots level, when they cannot see any progress in ecumenical matters. This frustration is felt most sharply when it comes to sharing the Lord’s Supper across confessional boundaries, known as Eucharistic sharing.

The asterisk for this portion of the document points to the following statement:

* This text is reproduced under the sole authority and responsibility of the Council of Churches in Germany (ACK).

The level of duplicity in Rome in our day is almost beyond belief! It is without any doubt whatsoever, diabolical!

While this may appear to be a disclaimer that in some way distances Rome from the sentiments that are being expressed, don’t be fooled – among the members of the Council of Churches in Germany (ACK)  is none other than the Roman Catholic Church!

In other words, make no mistake about it: The ecumaniacs in Rome, up to and including Francis, are determined to eliminate the frustration that they themselves feel by the lack of Eucharistic sharing between Catholics and Protestants.

(Note, in this case, the modernists chose to capitalize “Eucharist;” i.e., there can be no doubt that they mean to speak of Protestants being invited to Holy Communion in Catholic churches at Holy Mass!)

This particular seed, just like the ones ordered toward the veneration of Martin Luther – the same that were initially sown so long ago – is not singular in nature, but rather is it part of a multi-faceted campaign to prepare the faithful for the program of intercommunion that has already been decided upon.    

You may add to all that has been highlighted herein the entirely staged Q&A session that took place at the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Rome on Sunday November 15, 2015.

There, as readers may recall, Francis was addressed by a Lutheran woman who said that she and her husband “regret being divided in faith and not being able to participate together in the Lord’s Supper.”

He ultimately responded by saying:

One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Talk to the Lord and go forward. I dare not say more.

Many (including the present writer) understood this to be a “go ahead” to take Communion at Mass. (For a more in-depth treatment of this exchange, see my post HERE.)

Two months later, it was reported (and never denied by Rome) that a delegation of Lutherans were offered Holy Communion at a Mass held in St. Peter’s Basilica following a meeting with Francis. (For more, see LifeSite News HERE.)

Then, just last month, Cardinal Kasper, in an interview with the newspaper of the Italian Episcopal Conference, Avvennire, said:

“I hope that the next declaration opens the way for shared Eucharistic communion in special cases.” (For more, see LifeSite News HERE.)

One may recall that Francis made a little joke back in 2015 when the Lutheran woman spoke of her frustration at not being able “to participate together in the Lord’s Supper” with her Catholic husband, saying:

When asked about sharing in the Lord’s Supper, it is not easy for me to answer you, especially in front of a theologian like Cardinal Kasper!

If Amoris Laetitia has taught us anything, it’s that this is no joke; indeed, far from it.

Kasper’s modernist wishes are Jorge’s commands; even when they fly in the face of the Divine Law. They are, after all, birds of a feather.

So, what exactly does the recently published document from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity portend?

Barring an act of Divine intervention (that includes first and foremost either the conversion, the death, or the official deposition of Francis), intercommunion is effectively going to receive Rome’s “official” stamp of approval in the not-too-distant future.

If this article helped shed light on the darkness emanating from modernist Rome, please consider helping us continue our efforts in the New Year:

aka focus

Latest Comments

  1. Tom A January 9, 2017
  2. Theresa January 9, 2017
  3. OldTradCat January 9, 2017
  4. Johnno January 9, 2017
  5. Johnno January 9, 2017
  6. The Papal Subject January 9, 2017
  7. The Papal Subject January 9, 2017
  8. OldTradCat January 9, 2017
  9. Tom A January 9, 2017
  10. Tom A January 9, 2017
  11. mpoulin January 9, 2017
  12. Gwaredd Thomas January 9, 2017
  13. VCR January 9, 2017
  14. Paul Morphy January 9, 2017
  15. Evangeline January 9, 2017
  16. prisca ann January 9, 2017
  17. JMoore January 9, 2017
  18. Katherine January 10, 2017
  19. Katherine January 10, 2017
  20. philip johnson January 10, 2017
  21. my2cents January 10, 2017
  22. pearl87 January 10, 2017
  23. Paul M January 10, 2017
  24. my2cents January 10, 2017
  25. Tom A January 10, 2017
  26. Paul M January 10, 2017
  27. Lynda January 10, 2017
  28. Rushintuit January 10, 2017
  29. Rushintuit January 10, 2017