The Heretic-in-Chief has just issued another motu proprio, the thirtieth such so-called “Apostolic Letter” of his so-called “pontificate” of six-and-a-half years. (By comparison, Benedict XVI issued a total of thirteen over the course of nearly eight years.)
Given the Latin title “Aperuit illis” so as to appear Churchy, the Letter establishes the Novus Ordo Third Sunday in Ordinary Time as the “Sunday of the Word of God.” To be clear, the “word” in this case isn’t the Word, but rather Sacred Scripture.
According to Francis, he is establishing this newly themed hoedown…:
[… in response] to the many requests I have received from the people of God that the entire Church celebrate, in unity of purpose, a Sunday of the Word of God.
Many requests? I’m calling B.S. on this one; that’s short for Bergoglian Shizzle.
In any case, he goes on to state:
This Sunday of the Word of God will thus be a fitting part of that time of the year when we are encouraged to strengthen our bonds with the Jewish people and to pray for Christian unity. This is more than a temporal coincidence: the celebration of the Sunday of the Word of God has ecumenical value, since the Scriptures point out, for those who listen, the path to authentic and firm unity.
Let’s give credit where it is due; at least he’s plainly admitting that this latest liturgical invention is meant to encourage, at least in part, more ecumenical-interreligious group hugging.
What really stands out here, however, is the ludicrous notion that this initiative allegedly devoted to honoring Sacred Scripture is going to be ordered toward strengthening our bonds with the Jewish people; the truth is that the Word of God serves to indict them!
On this note, I have an idea: Since Bergoglio is so keen on satisfying the many requests he receives from the people of God, maybe we should bombard the Unholy See with appeals asking that the following be used as one of the readings for the new Sunday of the Word of God:
And the Jews, seeing the multitudes, were filled with envy and contradicted those things which were said by Paul, blaspheming. Then Paul and Barnabas said boldly: To you it behooved us first to speak the word of God: but because you reject it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the Gentiles. (Acts 13:45-46)
Not a chance, of course, but that’s just it. You see, Jorge has a long track record of skipping over those biblical texts that make him uncomfortable, while twisting whatever remains to say whatever he wants them to say in support of whatever novelty he may have in mind.
He states:
God’s word has the power to open our eyes and to enable us to renounce a stifling and barren individualism and instead to embark on a new path of sharing and solidarity.
Always with the newness, this guy! What he really means to say is that the word of the God of Surprises brooks no quarter to any ‘one true religion’ talk, but rather leads to a new path. It’s a safe bet that this effort to stress appreciation for Sacred Scripture will be used to this end by Bergoglio moving forward.
This latest motu proprio masterpiece weighs in at over 4,000 words. For those who can stomach it, reading the text in full is purgatorial. I’ll provide just a few more highlights (if you will allow.)
As for the rite that Jorge has in mind for this new production, he writes:
The various communities will find their own ways to mark this Sunday with a certain solemnity. It is important, however, that in the Eucharistic celebration the sacred text be enthroned, in order to focus the attention of the assembly on the normative value of God’s word.
It’s anyone’s guess what enthroning the sacred text will end up looking like in the various communities. In any event, this is a two-birds-with-one-stone proposition inasmuch as it serves to highlight our supposed bonds with both the Jewish people and self-identified Christian heretics.
With regard to the former, synagogues feature an ark (like a large tabernacle) that serves as a repository for the Torah; i.e., these first five books of Sacred Scripture are enthroned there. Above the ark one will find a flame that is called the ner tamid (the eternal light). It is common in the services of the Jews for the Torah (which is written on scrolls) to be removed from the ark and processed about the synagogue for veneration by the assembly prior to its reading.
Clearly, all of this served, prior to the coming of the Messiah, to prefigure the adoration that is owed to the Word made flesh, Jesus Christ, who dwells among us in the Blessed Sacrament.
As for the heretics, while no similar practice commonly exists (at least insofar as I am aware), the Bible, though misappropriated and misunderstood, is the centerpiece of their false religion.
It is for these religiously indifferent reasons that Francis desires the sacred text to be enthroned; it certainly isn’t because he has any genuine reverence for the Bible.
Francis goes on to say:
…we urgently need to grow in our knowledge and love of the Scriptures and of the risen Lord…
True enough, but let’s be clear: Authentic knowledge and love for the Scriptures is not a source of unity with Jews and Protestant heretics; it convicts them of their errors and is the antidote to their false religious practices.
Elsewhere in the motu proprio, Bergoglio attempts to group Catholics together with Jews and heretics as if we are biblical brothers in arms – in spite of the fact that the latter two are at war with the Church established by Christ the King – by citing the Vatican II document, Dei Verbum, which states:
…the Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures as she has venerated the Lord’s body.
Nonsense. The Church does not venerate Sacred Scripture in the same manner as she does the Body of Our Lord; i.e., the veneration given to Scripture does not compare to the adoration given to the Blessed Sacrament.
There are more dubious ideas to be found in Jorge’s latest motu proprio, but at this we have arrived yet again at a point that has been made in this space many times over:
Francis is a flaming modernist heretic to be sure, but there’s little in his act that is truly original – he’s really nothing more than the current Generalissimo of the Conciliar Revolution, his every faithless effort aimed at carrying its war against the Holy Roman Catholic Church to its logical end.
I have to wonder what the Mossad has on this guy. It must be some doozy stuff for him to be constantly carrying the water for the Jews.
“Francis is a flaming modernist heretic to be sure, but there’s little in his act that is truly original – he’s really nothing more than the current Generalissimo of the Conciliar Revolution, his every faithless effort aimed at carrying its war against the Holy Roman Catholic Church to its logical end.”
Which is why every single Vatican II “pope” is a flaming modernist heretic…and therefore, no pope of the Catholic Church.
The guy is a complete synagogue of Satan stooge.
The Novus Ordites have elevated the reading of Scripture to almost a sacrament. They have the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. They believe that at both time in their worship service, Christ is made present for the people. It’s nonsense.
Yep.
It must be awkward at the Verecchio household with Mrs. Verecchio being a very committed Jew. I wonder if she reads the articles?
I’m willing to bet that she understands more Catholic doctrine than the ‘Lord-Lord’-ing you!
I’m certain the Americans do have the goods on him since Operation Condor.
As Neumeyer has been discovering down south, there are sure signs that he didn’t join the Jesuits for any holy reasons. But to be fair, the order itself was long gone long enough to attract his sort…
But I doubt any intelligence agency has been telling Francis to institute any ‘Word of God’ days… this is likely the sort of faithless tripe he comes up with all on his own. He’s probably not got much to do, so these little projects allow him his ‘fun.’ What do we imagine he does with his time? Pray in front of the Blessed Sacrament?
Prophecy has it that the Jews (some of them) will convert to the Catholic faith at the end of time. As Catholics, we should consider this fact when we witness the evil they are presently engaged in and have been engaged in since Christ walked among them.
It appears that the Heretic-in-Charge does not know that Jews are not Christian. Maybe someone should inform him.
I can’t think of anything less your business and mine than this.
Speak intelligently.
I’ll try to remember to give you credit when I say Bergolio shizzle.
Is he a heretic? Or is he an apostate? My understanding is that a heretic is someone who rejects a matter of faith, an apostate rejects it wholesale. Couldn’t the case be made Francis is an apostate? Or does he hug the line so Jesuitically he can’t quite be called an apostate. Cunning little brain he has, if so, with all the nonsense he emits.
Who would be surprised to see mass conversions of Jews or Muslims or any other group, should the Lord decide to call them more directly, as we near the edge of time. Has anyone found it interesting that Fatima is the only Islamic name in Portugal, referring to Muhammad’s favorite daughter? And that the Angel of Peace himself prayed in the typical Islamic posture, a prone position? God calls who He will, and anyone of any group will answer when He calls, unless they are rejecting him. The only one I will be surprised to see in heaven is myself.
“Couldn’t the case be made Francis is an apostate?”
He’s a Marxist. So, yeah.
Let us not forget that it was a Saint who started this ridiculous nonsense—“St. John Paul II” of unhappy memory.
Roncalli and Montini were the appertif. Wojtyla was the piece de resistance.
Dear mothermostforgiving,
Ah’ but you indeed have it backwards. Look at the contingencies. The false church of Antichrist existed prior to Wojtyla, yes, as he was not the first apostate in faux succession, and as apostates to the One True Church cannot be at once apostates and also members of the Church, as this yields contradiction. He who is not a member of an organization cannot at once be the leader of that same organization to which he does not belong. This is an utter absurdity. Simple, as proper reasoning, yes. Thus, they cannot be true as Holy Roman Pontiffs, regardless of what they say, do, how they dress, or whomever or how many pay homage to them as though they were Blessed Peter’s Successors. Amen. Wojtyla’s roll play as vicar of Antichrist followed the existential manifestation of the false church, established by the False Prophet, while at once masquerading as the One True Church, established by the Son of God made Man, upon Blessed Peter as the Rock. Amen.
Speaking of contingencies, the singular as true Vatican Council infallibly proclaimed in its 4th and final session on 18 July, 1870, the following in chapter 4, paragraph 7: ( https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum20.htm )
“This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this see so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine.”
As a child who has attained the age of reason and has been taught about contingencies would know, there simply is no contingency given in this proclamation, rather, this is an explicit proclamation yielded by the Council Fathers without contingency, about the actual state of being, of the person of Blessed Peter and his Successors. Period and end. Where there is no contingency, there can be no exception, as that is objective reality as it is, truth thus. God bless you and yours’. In caritas.
“Wojtyla’s roll play as vicar of Antichrist followed the existential manifestation of the false church, established by the False Prophet…”
Please enlighten us, In caritas, as to whom this “False Prophet” was/is.
Hello mothermostforgiving,
The False Prophet of the Book of the Apocalypse was to herald, as to yield the clarion call of the person of Antichrist and prepare his way, as the true Prophet, John the Baptist, the one whom The Christ commanded: never before nor ever again will there be a man such as he, was to prepare the way for The Christ. Amen. Alleluia. As the Almighty Godhead works the Mystery of His Church which He created, analogically, we then look throughout the history of the Church, for the antithesis of The Baptist, to understand whom the False Prophet would be. Amen. As The Baptist baptized The Christ, as to demonstrate the only entry into the One True Church, as established by The Savior of the world, so the False Prophet would prepare the world as the kingdom of Satan, for the entry of the Antichrist. Amen. The False Prophet prepared the kingdom of Satan, as this world, for the Antichrist by establishing his false church, all dressed up Catholic, while at once perfectly devoid of all things Christ Jesus. Amen. This of course required the true Bishops, as true priests, who had lost the Holy Faith, to participate in this inversion of Truth, while then at once creating the, “whore of Babylon”, once the See of Blessed Peter, the false church of Antichrist. Just as Judas the Iscariot betrayed Christ Jesus with the kiss, which our Blessed Dominus Deus freely received, as it was the free will assent of the Iscariot and as prophecy must be fulfilled only in its time, so our Blessed Lord and God allowed for the betrayal, writ large, the likes of which the world had never before seen, nor ever would see again. Amen. Alleluia. God bless and keep you. In caritas.
“Wojtyla’s roll play as vicar of Antichrist followed the existential manifestation of the false church, established by the False Prophet…”
As you have written it, JPII “followed” (a verb in the past tense indicating that an event occurred) “the existential manifestation of the false church,” (meaning that the “false church” actually came into existence) “established by the False Prophet” (here again, “established” is a verb in the past tense indicating that something came into existence) “by the False Prophet”—-i.e. the “False Prophet actually brought into existence a false church PRIOR to Wojtyla’s enthronement as JPII. So, the False Prophet is a human being (right?) and therefore had/has a name (right?). WHAT’S HIS NAME?
Dear mothermostforgiving,
Continue to reason it through to its utter conclusion, by the grace of God alone. Amen. The prophet Daniel warned us in 9:27 that, “…there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation…” and that would be the time when, “…the victim and the sacrifice shall fail…”. The early Church Fathers proclaimed in unanimity, thus we must give this our assent of faith, that the, “abomination of desolation”, was the Antichrist as foretold by Daniel and the failing of the, “victim and the sacrifice”, was the loss of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass from the face of the earth, in the time of Antichrist. Amen. Is it reasonable to think that the False Prophet and the person of Antichrist would tell the world who they are explicitly? That would be as reasonable as expecting Lucifer to show us his hideous nature plainly, as all would run from him then, yes. Further, did most know who The Christ was when He walked the earth or was He murdered by those who should have known Him? Saint Paul warned us in 2 Thess 2, that the man of sin, as the son of perdition, the Antichrist, would be the one, “Who opposeth, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God shewing himself as if he were God.” Further, the blessed Apostle John, the one whom the Christ especially loved, told us in his First Epistle, chapter 2, verses 22-23, specifically who Antichrist is: (22)”Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son.” (23) “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also.” Amen.
Finally, mothermostforgiving, look to the, “Solemn Promulgation”, of, “Lumen Gentium”, on November 21, 1964. Specifically understand paragraph 16. Amen. Alleluia. God bless you and yours’. In caritas.
No soup for you!
No straight answer for you!
Even when you ask a second time:
No straight answer for you!