It has become customary, beginning perhaps with the promulgation of E Supremi by St. Pius X, for a pope’s first encyclical to be understood as something of a programmatic statement, an indication of his focus and the general direction that his papacy might be expected to take in the years ahead.
This trend continued with the putative popes of the conciliar church right up to Francis, with the Apostolic Exhortation (so-called), Evangelii Gaudium, serving this purpose. Though it is reasonable to expect the same of Leo, we need not wait any longer.
In his address to the College of Cardinals on May 10, Leo set forth a brief, but very specific road map for his reign, stating:
I would like us to renew together today our complete commitment to the path that the universal Church has now followed for decades in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. Pope Francis masterfully and concretely set it forth in the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium…
He went on to mention a handful of themes taken from Evangelii Gaudium, as well as the first two articles of Gaudium et Spes, the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World of Vatican II.
In this article, we will focus on the latter, and the impact it might have on Leo’s “papacy” moving forward.
Before we look at the conciliar text itself, one notes Leo’s mention of “the path that the universal Church has now followed for decades.” In other words, don’t expect any change in direction. This means more ecumenism, more interreligious dialogue, more bowing down before the Jews, and most germane to the topic for today, more humanism.
As mentioned, Leo made specific reference to the first two articles of Gaudium et Spes. I will not repeat those articles here for the simple reason that they merely serve as an introduction to the voluminous text (some 36,000 words) that follows.
This tell us that Leo sees his reign over the counterfeit church as founded in some large measure upon the entirety of Gaudium et Spes, the central theme of which is the soaring dignity of almighty mankind. For example:
According to the almost unanimous opinion of believers and unbelievers alike, all things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown. (GS 12)
Even nominal Christians find this idea objectionable inasmuch as the Creator is the indispensable center and crown of the created order, apart from whom all things cease to exist. Thus it is toward Him and His glory that all things on earth should be related.
Far from condemning the “almost unanimous” self-centered opinion of “believers and unbelievers alike,” however, the Council cites it approvingly, and perhaps worse, it goes out of its way to validate the opinion of the latter, unbelievers, as if the Catholic Church and the world at large would do well to consider the viewpoint of men who reject Christ, or perhaps do not believe in God at all.
As an aside, readers will recall Leo’s statement from the loggia on the day of his election: We want a synodal church.
And what exactly is a synodal church? It is perhaps best described a “listening church,” one that prefers to seek wisdom from every corner of the secular world, including those that reject and oppose Christ, as opposed to teaching in His name.
Don’t blame Bergoglio. He was merely following the conciliar example of taking heed of man’s opinion, including that of unbelievers.
Gaudium et Spes also provides this gem:
Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear. (GS 22)
In truth, Christ reveals, not man to man himself, but rather does He reveal the Father. As Our Lord said, “He that seeth me seeth the Father also,” which is why we refer to Jesus as the fullness of Divine Revelation, and not the fullness of human revelation.
More nefarious still is the corrosive, mission-killing proposition set forth just a few sentences later:
For by His incarnation the Son of God has united Himself in some fashion with every man. (ibid.)
The error here is both obvious, and yet subtle.
Addressing the Monophysite heresy that denied the human nature of Christ, the Council of Chalcedon (451) stated very simply, among many other things, the Eternal Son of God has “taken up our nature and made it His own.”
As St. Thomas Aquinas writes, “Christ united human nature to Himself.” Not the other way around.
Man did not assume His nature, i.e., the Eternal Son, “by His incarnation,” did not impart His divine nature to us. It is baptism that unites us to Christ, whereby “the Holy Ghost enters the soul and makes it like to Himself” (Pope Leo XIII, Divinum Illud Munus).
As for the broader implications of the incarnation concerning every man, we can say that the infinite love of God for all of humanity – that is, His love for every human person – has been made evident in a profound way. This is very different than falsely teaching that He “united Himself” with every man simply by virtue of the incarnation.
Lest anyone protest the accuracy of the English translation, the Latin text provides the word univit, which is not only translated accurately as “united,” it can even mean “combined into one.”
The conciliar phrase “in some fashion” provides little clarity, perhaps purposely. One cannot use this as an escape hatch in order to suggest: Well, the Council isn’t specifically saying that in uniting Himself with each man, each man is united to His divine nature!
For Christ to unite Himself with man in any way would necessarily entail uniting His divine nature to every person for the simple reason that His divine nature cannot be separated from Himself. He is one divine Person with two natures.
I do not think it possible to overestimate the danger of this conciliar error.
John Paul II, citing GS 22 numerous times, did a masterful job of giving voice to its logical conclusion when he wrote in his own inaugural encyclical:
This man is the way for the Church – a way that, in a sense, is the basis of all the other ways that the Church must walk – because man – every man without any exception whatever – has been redeemed by Christ, and because with man – with each man without any exception whatever – Christ is in a way united, even when man is unaware of it: “Christ, who died and was raised up for all, provides man”-each man and every man – “with the light and the strength to measure up to his supreme calling.” (Redemptor Hominus, 14)
The above appears under the absolutely condemnable heading: “For the Church all ways lead to man.”
Man is the way for the Church… Based on its behavior, one must admit that this expresses the conciliar church’s focus and orientation very well. For the Catholic Church, however, Jesus who said, I am the way, is the only way for the Church. All roads lead to the fulfillment of all things in Him.
The Council’s defenders will be quick to point out that Gaudium et Spes also states: “Jesus Christ is the chief way for the Church. He himself is our way ‘to the Father’s house’ and is the way to each man.”
This is typical conciliar behavior, dispense what can be construed as truth right along with a dose of pure poison. St. Paul twice warned us about the consequences of such an admixture: A little leaven leavens the entire lump.
John Paul II shows us precisely where the Council’s failed logic leads:
Jesus is the chief way for the Church. But Jesus united Himself with each and every man simply by virtue of the incarnation. As such, each and every man has been divinized, even if he is unaware of it. Therefore, man is the way of the Church.
In a false belief system such as this, baptizing is little more than putting icing on an already divine cake, and teaching is reduced to merely letting unbelievers know that they are already united to Christ. This effectively negates the mission of the Church as given by Christ, which explains the behavior of the conciliar church and men like Paul VI, JPII, BXVI, and Francis, e.g., their focus on dialogue and the utter absence of any call to conversion.
It also gives us a rather good idea of what we can expect from Leo, namely, more of the same.
In another post in the very near future, we will take a closer look at Evangelii Gaudium, the map upon which Leo has vowed to follow on the bumpy road ahead.
