Some of those in the delusional world of Motumania keep contending that Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s Stalinist repression of traditionally-minded Catholics who are as of yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism stands in stark contrast to the relative “freedom” that is said to have existed during the “pontificates” of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI. This is an assertion that needs a bit of attention as it based on utterly false premises.
First, Wojtyla/John Paul II, who will “canonized” in just forty-one days, imposed very strict conditions for Catholics to attend “approved” offerings or stagings of the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition.
Consider the terms established by “Blessed Pope John Paul the Great” when he issued Quattuor Abhinc Annos , October 3, 1984:
a) That it be made publicly clear beyond all ambiguity that such priests and their respective faithful in no way share the positions of those who call in question the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970.
b) Such celebration must be made only for the benefit of those groups that request it; in churches and oratories indicated by the bishop (not, however, in parish churches, unless the bishop permits it in extraordinary cases); and on the days and under the conditions fixed by the bishop either habitually or in individual cases.
c) These celebrations must be according to the 1962 Missal and in Latin.
d) There must be no interchanging of texts and rites of the two Missals.
e) Each bishop must inform this Congregation of the concessions granted by him, and at the end of a year from the granting of this indult, he must report on the result of its application. (Quattuor abhinc annos, October 3, 1984.)
I was in Rome a few days after the Paul Augustine Mayer, O.S.B., the pro-prefect of the then-named Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments signed this “indult,” which was not made public until October 10, 1984. Indeed, I had met with “Archbishop” Mayer, who was a true priest, in offices on the Via della Conciliazione the day before the indult was made public, commenting on that meeting a few hours later when I was received by Silvio Cardinal Oddi, then the prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy (Wojtyla/John Paul II had taken the adjective “Sacred” out of the names of each of the conciliar congregations earlier that year). Cardinal Oddi said to me in very emphatic terms, “I want the Mass of Saint Pius V back! The Pope wants the Mass of Saint Pius V back! We will get the Mass of Saint Pius V back!” Cardinal Oddi explained that there was much opposition to what the “pope” wanted to, that he had to move cautiously and with conditions. He made it clear, however, that it was the mind of the “pope” for the “old Mass” to return.
The “pope,” however, made it clear that the “old Mass” could not be offered or staged in normal parish settings and that anyone who doubted the doctrinal validity of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service did not qualify to assist at an “indult” Mass.
This limited “indult” was resisted by most of the world’s conciliar “bishops.” Many of these “bishops” were appointees of the infamous, notorious Giovanni Montini/Paul The Sick
Moreover, many of the world’s conciliar “bishops” even resisted Wojtyla/John Paul II’s Ecclesia Dei Ad Afflicta, July 2, 1988, which noted, correctly if one believed the Polish Modernist to have been a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter, that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre had acted in a schismatic manner by his own of disobedience to the “Roman Pontiff” and for failing to accept the “Second” Vatican Council and the Novus Ordo liturgical service as an expression of the “universal magisterium” of what purpoted to be the Catholic Church:
In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience – which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy – constitutes a schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)
4. The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, “comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth“.(5)
But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops. It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church.(6) (Ecclesia Dei Ad Afflicta, July 2, 1988.)
What was Wojtyla/John Paul II’s “living tradition”?
The same thing as Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s philosophically absurd and dogmatically condemned “hermeneutic of continuity” that a lot of Motumaniacs believe is the “gold standard” of “orthodoxy” in contradistinction to the Jacobin/Bolshevik ways of Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
Wojtyla/John Paul II, Ratzingber/Benedict and Bergoglio/Francis are as one in rejecting Pope Saint Pius X’s reiteration of the [First] Vatican Council’s condemnation of the “evolution of dogma” that Pope Pius XII himself condemned in no uncertain terms:
Hence it is quite impossible [the Modernists assert] to maintain that they [dogmatic statements] absolutely contain the truth: for, in so far as they are symbols, they are the images of truth, and so must be adapted to the religious sense in its relation to man; and as instruments, they are the vehicles of truth, and must therefore in their turn be adapted to man in his relation to the religious sense. But the object of the religious sense, as something contained in the absolute, possesses an infinite variety of aspects, of which now one, now another, may present itself. In like manner he who believes can avail himself of varying conditions. Consequently, the formulas which we call dogma must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. Here we have an immense structure of sophisms which ruin and wreck all religion.
It is thus, Venerable Brethren, that for the Modernists, whether as authors or propagandists, there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church. Nor, indeed, are they without forerunners in their doctrines, for it was of these that Our predecessor Pius IX wrote: ‘These enemies of divine revelation extol human progress to the skies, and with rash and sacrilegious daring would have it introduced into the Catholic religion as if this religion were not the work of God but of man, or some kind of philosophical discovery susceptible of perfection by human efforts.‘ On the subject of revelation and dogma in particular, the doctrine of the Modernists offers nothing new. We find it condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX, where it is enunciated in these terms: ”Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the progress of human reason’; and condemned still more solemnly in the Vatican Council: ”The doctrine of the faith which God has revealed has not been proposed to human intelligences to be perfected by them as if it were a philosophical system, but as a divine deposit entrusted to the Spouse of Christ to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence also that sense of the sacred dogmas is to be perpetually retained which our Holy Mother the Church has once declared, nor is this sense ever to be abandoned on plea or pretext of a more profound comprehension of the truth.’ Nor is the development of our knowledge, even concerning the faith, barred by this pronouncement; on the contrary, it is supported and maintained. For the same Council continues: ‘Let intelligence and science and wisdom, therefore, increase and progress abundantly and vigorously in individuals, and in the mass, in the believer and in the whole Church, throughout the ages and the centuries — but only in its own kind, that is, according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same acceptation.’ (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
Anyone who does not see that Wojtyla/John Paul II’s “living tradition” and Ratzinger/Benedict’s “hermeneutic of continuity” stand condemned by the authority of the Catholic Church is either willfully blind or simply intellectually dishonest.
The supposed “freedom” that existed in the Wojtyla/John Paul II and Ratzinger/Benedict years was a delusion, one that continues to propagated by those who contend, contrary to all of the objective evidence, that there is some kind of “space” between their beloved “Pope” Benedict XVI and “Pope” Francis.
Moreover, many “conservative” men who tried to pursue a priestly vocation during the supposed “freedom” of the Wojtyla/John Paul II-era were blocked by local “bishops” and their vocations directors and/or thrown out of seminary for being too “rigid.” Legion also are the stories of “conservative” pastors and curates and consecrated religious being sent for psychiatric reprogramming during when it is alleged by some that the “wheat and cockle” grew together freely.
As has been noted on this site several times in the past, it was only through extraordinary efforts that “conservative” pastors whose heads had been placed on the chopping blocks by “bishops” who were of the exact same mindset as that of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez and Reinhard Marx and Walter Kasper had their pastorates saved by Vatican intervention.
One such case involved the now retired Father Robert Mason, who was ordained in 1956, whose resignation as pastor of Our Lady of Lourdes Church in Massapequa Park, New York, was demanded by “Bishop” John Raymond McGann in March of 1983 during a Stalnist purge of four “conservative” pastors. It was through the personal intervention of the aforementioned Cardinal Oddi that Father Mason’s pastorate was preserved as those of us who assisted him, including this writer, believed that we were serving the good of souls. (That episode was unfolding at the precise time that “The Nine” were confronting Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in the very community, Oyster Bay, where I was living at the time. I was at the wrong battle station.)
Additionally, many members of the laity were thrown out of parishes for daring to question pastors or curates on various matters, including the use of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, as some of them even had their names read from the pulpits as “public sinners” to be shunned.
The “freedom” to hold to Catholic Faith and Morals as much as was possible in the conciliar structures under Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II hinged totally on the sufferance of the local “bishop,” something that I noted in Still Hunkered Down a In Mindanao (And In The Wrong Church). The soon-to-be “Saint John Paul the Great” kept, appointed and promote a variety of Stalinist miscreants in his nearly 9,666 days as the universal public face of apostasy. He also helped to able morally corrupt “bishops” while turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to the pleadings of the sheep for help (see “Canonizing” A Man Who Protected Moral Derelicts).
Finally, the “freedom” under Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI to “enjoy” the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition came at the price of being silent as this German Modernist by way of the “New Theology” blasphemed God by personally esteeming the symbols of false religions and entering into and calling temples of false worship as “sacred,” to say nothing of his promoting doctrines that are inimical to the Sacred Deposit of Faith and that have been condemned by the authority of Holy Mother Church as circumstances required her to do so. Some “freedom.” Ratzinger/Benedict merely sought to “pacify the spirits” of traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciliar structures as he attempted to institutionalize his interpretation of the conciliar revolution.
Ratzinger/Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum was designed from its outset to condition traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciliar structures to make their “peace” with the “Second” Vatican Council once and for all. He even formally undid the terms of the original 1984 indult to permit universally what had been granted on an ad hoc basis by Paul Augustin “Cardinal” Mayer, the first president of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, namely, an admixture of elements from the Novus Ordo liturgical service into the Missal of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII:
It is true that there have been exaggerations and at times social aspects unduly linked to the attitude of the faithful attached to the ancient Latin liturgical tradition. Your charity and pastoral prudence will be an incentive and guide for improving these. For that matter, the two Forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching: new Saints and some of the new Prefaces can and should be inserted in the old Missal. The “Ecclesia Dei” Commission, in contact with various bodies devoted to the usus antiquior, will study the practical possibilities in this regard. The celebration of the Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI will be able to demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage. The most sure guarantee that the Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be loved by them consists in its being celebrated with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives. This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this Missal. (Letter to the “Bishops” that accompanies the Motu Proprio Summorum)
So much for the supposed “stability” of Summorum Pontificum.
Alas, one who lives by the belief that doctrine can be reinterpreted according to the circumstances of the moment must be expected to die according to the inexorable logic of this absurd, condemned proposition. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is no less a conciliar “pope” than was Ratzinger/Benedict. He rules the roost now. Stalinism is back in style, not that it was out of style universally prior to March 13, 2013.
The Catholic Church has never permitted an admixture of truth and error to be promoted under by “bishops” and “priests” and consecrated “religious.” Holy Mother Church knows that error exists in the world and in the souls of sinful men. She does not countenance this error nor permits it to “grow freely” from Catholic chancery offices and pulpits. Holy Mother Church knows that she must tolerate he cockle of error in the world and in the souls of her sinful children. She does not and cannot as part of her Divine Constitution tolerate it as part of a theological, liturgical, moral and pastoral “free-for-all” and look other way as God is offended and souls are harmed, both temporally and, more importantly, eternally. If this is so, Saint Athanasius should have had a “live and let live” attitude concerning the Arians and Saint Dominic de Guzman should have simply prayed the Holy Rosary that Our Lady gave him to “encounter” the Albigensians rather than to seek their conversion.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s ascent to power in the structures of the countefeit church of conciliarism represents the triumph of the ultra-progressive, Jacobin/Boshevik conciliar revolutionaries over their supposedly more “moderate” Girondist/Menshevik confereres. This is the hour of triumph for the likes of the Americans such as Roger “Cardinal” Mahony of Los Angeles Tod Brown of Orange, California, Robert Brom of San Diego California, John Quinn, the long retired Patrick Flores of San Antonio, Texas, the late Joseph “Cardinal’ Bernardin and one of his chief proteges, the retired Joseph Fiorenza of Galveston-Houston, Texas, the late John Fitzpatrick of Brownsville, Texas (a pioneering supporter of Saul Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas, the late John Cardinal Dearden and several of his proteges (Thomas Gumbleton, Joseph Imesch and the late Kenneth Untener),the retired Lawrence Soens of Sioux City, Iowa, the retired William Franklin of Davenport, Iowa, the late Francis Mugavero and his late “auxiliary,” Joseph Sullivan, of Brooklyn, New York, the late John Raymond McGann of Rockville Centre, New York, the infamous Robert Lynch of Saint Petersburg, Florida, Peter Rosazza, a retired “auxiliary” of Hartford, Connecticut, the now retired Matthew Clark of Rochester, New York, Emil Wcela, a retired auxiliary of the Diocese of Rockville Centre, New York, the retired Howard Hubbard of Albany, New York, the retired Daniel Pilarczyk of Cincinnati, Ohio, the late Thomas Kelly of Louisville, Kentucky, the morally disgraced Daniel Leo Ryan of Springfield, Illinois, Michael Sheehan of Albuquerque, New Mexico, the late John Roach of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, Minnesota, the late Raymond Hunthausen of Seattle, Washington, the late Walter Sullivan of Richmond, Virginia, the late William Donald Borders of Baltimore, Maryland, the retired Theodore Edgar McCarrick and his successor, Donald Wuerl, of Washington, D.C. (and of Wuerl’s entire Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, apparatus), the 101 year-old Archbishop Peter Leo Gerety, who is the second oldest true bishop in the world, Jerome Hanus of Dubuque, Iowa, and among so many others, the notorious Rembert George Weakland, of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. That is quite a rogues gallery of conciliar robber barons, each of whom, whether “living or deceased,” has had his “vision of church,” completely vindicated by Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
The current cast of revolutionaries that has been assembled by the Argentine Apostate includes Reinhard “Cardinal” Marx, who was elected recently to head the conference of conciliar “bishops” in the Federal Republic of Germany. Marx, who is one of Jorge’s Commissars, showed us last year precisely what he thinks of the nasty old “no church” Bergoglio had berated just a few days beforehand:
According to the Prelate, Benedict XVI is a theologian who ‘has never stopped being curious about and admiring everything God made.’ in the same way, he stressed, man must continue to discover the Gospel as the novelty by antonomasia: ‘The traditionalists venerate the old, they are guardians of a museum. We must not, however, guard the richness in a museum; we must not look for a restoration, but instead for a rebirth, for a renewal of the faith and Catholic life, a renewal of the Church as a whole and of each individual.’ The Catholic faith is ‘the greatest adventure of the human spirit, but it is also demanding and wants to take us farther.’” (As found at: Reinhard Marx’s Museum.)
Yes, there must be change, constant change, something that is the antithesis of Catholicism.
Among those things that Marx believes must change is any belief in Hell and Purgatory:
(Munich) The Archbishop of Munich and Freising, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, has proclaimed Christianity without hell and purgatory, only with more paradise, so to speak, a Christian spa. Cardinal Marx belongs to the eight-member Cardinal advisory which Pope Francis appointed on 13 April to advise him on the management of the Church. Cardinal Marx represents Europe. Marx is also the Chairman of the Commission of the Bishops ‘Conferences of the European Union (COMECE) and in the spring of 2014 a contender for the presidency of the German Bishops’ Conference.
Cardinal Reinhard Marx held a spiritual talk on 9 November in Erding, Bavaria, a spiritual talk on “Resurrection”. Here, the Cardinal tried to explain the Christian doctrine of resurrection: “Every person is a unique, eternal thought of God, who must be thought of to the end and can not disintegrate into nothingness.” And further: “If God wanted everyone from all eternity and love, you everything can’t be over in death”.
But then the Cardinal faltered. The Christian belief in the resurrection depends, says Archbishop Marx, “that we believe God is possible.” God’s existence only as a “possibility”? As the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising himself puts it, the Cardinal continued by saying, if you trust the words of Christ, “Then the hope is justified that our death opens a gate to something indestructible.”
Today, said the Cardinal, many have a “cramped relationship” to death and the belief in the resurrection has become “weak”. “We need to see everything, to touch everything, to understand it.” The Church must oppose to that “strong rites and symbols” laying out the coffin in the church, such as at a Requiem for a deceased. Children also should not deter you from confrontation with death, for example, the sight of a deceased person, but must enable them to encounter them and accompany them in this. “Therefore, the Church, and we can witness to that, that at death a change takes place and we are not before a cold nothingness,” Marx said. The practice of the Church must make the hope of the resurrection visible, reports the Archbishop.
The resurrection says the Cardinal, that God gives us the assurance that He will transform and lead us with His help to the end, “but without moralizing and without a hell of torture, imprisonment and a burning oven”. The Church caused this with pictures like that of purgatory and hell, fear of death. Not only that, the Church must “repent” for this scaremongering images that a malicious invention will be obvious to Catholics, Cardinal Marx. In the Cardinal’s words, “and for that we need to repent.” And you wonder where the Cardinal actually lives. After half a century of the abolition of the sign of hell, the problem is not the belief that there is a hell, but that many Christians no longer believe in the existence of hell and purgatory.
Finally, the Cardinal proffered a logical conclusion to universal salvation: Because Jesus went about not to enumerate sins, but to pledge every man to healing and salvation. “The Church must completely drive out fear ,” emphasized Cardinal Marx. To imagine what would come after death, the person needs images, “but this must be images of confidence, hope, images and help to continue on, even if they can not give us a definitive answer.” What the Archbishop did was give the impression that the Church has not allowed in its two thousand year history, a great show to salvation, redemption and salvation of souls. (Commissar Marx Corrects Our Lord and Abolishes Hell and Purgatory.)
No apostasy here, huh?
To contend as Reinhard “Cardinal” Marx does is to make a mockery of the very words of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and the defined doctrine His Holy Catholic Church received from Him and has transmitted infallibly without any stain of error by the guidance of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost:
 Therefore fear them not. For nothing is covered that shall not be revealed: nor hid, that shall not be known.  That which I tell you in the dark, speak ye in the light: and that which you hear in the ear, preach ye upon the housetops. And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father.  But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. (Matthew 10: 26-30.)
 Wherefore you are witnesses against yourselves, that you are the sons of them that killed the prophets.  Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. You serpents, generation of vipers, how will you flee from the judgment of hell? Therefore behold I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you will put to death and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city:  That upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just, even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar. (Matthew 23: 26-35.)
 Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels.  For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat: I was thirsty, and you gave me not to drink.  I was a stranger, and you took me not in: naked, and you covered me not: sick and in prison, and you did not visit me.  Then they also shall answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister to thee?  Then he shall answer them, saying: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to me.
And these shall go into everlasting punishment: but the just, into life everlasting. (Matthew 25: 26-46.)
If anyone says that the fear of hell, whereby, by grieving for sins, we flee to the mercy of God or abstain from sinning, is a sin or makes sinners worse, let him be anathema. Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Session VI, January 13, 1547.)
Since the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has, following the sacred writings and the ancient tradition of the Fathers, taught in sacred councils and very recently in this ecumenical council that there is a purgatory, and that the souls there detained are aided by the suffrages of the faithful and chiefly by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar, the holy council commands the bishops that they strive diligently to the end that the sound doctrine of purgatory, transmitted by the Fathers and sacred councils, be believed and maintained by the faithful of Christ, and be everywhere taught and preached. The more difficult and subtle questions, however, and those that do not make for edification and from which there is for the most part no increase in piety, are to be excluded from popular instructions to uneducated people. Likewise, things that are uncertain or that have the appearance of falsehood they shall not permit to be made known publicly and discussed. But those things that tend to a certain kind of curiosity or superstition, or that savor of filthy lucre, they shall prohibit as scandals and stumbling-blocks to the faithful. The bishops shall see to it that the suffrages of the living, that is, the sacrifice of the mass, prayers, alms and other works of piety which they have been accustomed to perform for the faithful departed, be piously and devoutly discharged in accordance with the laws of the Church, and that whatever is due on their behalf from testamentary bequests or other ways, be discharged by the priests and ministers of the Church and others who are bound to render this service not in a perfunctory manner, but diligently and accurately. (Decree Concerning Purgatory, Session XXV, December 4, 1563.)
These “ultra-progressive” Modernists live in a delusional world all of their own, unable to see that most Catholics today do not fear Hell or the just judgment of God upon their immortal souls at the Particular Judgment or even that there is a Purgatory. The conciliar revolutionaries constantly have to slash at straw men in order to demonstrate themselves to be “friends” of “the people,” who have been robbed of the sensus Catholicus very thoroughly by their false doctrines and sacramentally invalid liturgical rites.
Indeed, a now deceased dentist was aghast when I told him nearly eleven years ago that I was offering up the pain of the root canal procedure that he was performing on me (a procedure that he botched and required the tooth to be extracted two years later) to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary to be dispensed as she saw fit, hoping that some of the merit that I stood to earn from a right disposition in making this offering would be applied to the Holy Souls in the Church Suffering in Purgatory.
“Purgatory!” the dentist screamed. “I thought they got rid of that.”
I then told him that two of his patients who I thought at the time to be priests could verify that the existence of Purgatory is a defined teaching of the Catholic Church. Evidently being on a first name basis with the putative clerics, he said about one of them, “You mean (first name omitted) believes in Purgatory?”
I told him that, yes, his friend believed in Purgatory. And it is my prayer that the dentist saw the truth of this matter after this death. How many Catholics in the conciliar structures will have their own misconceptions about Purgatory reaffirmed now that Ratzinger/Benedict has made it a subject of fuzziness and uncertainty that is in need of further study?
Most Catholics never give either a thought as they go about their daily business.
Sadder still, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is making all thought of Hell as so much fantasy, save, of course, for those terrible traditionlists, as he greases the skids for souls to go there by reaffirming them in lives of sin and by promoting doctrines and practices contrary to the Sacred Deposit of Faith and thus harmful to the eternal and temporal good of souls.
Consider these additional examples from Jorge’s busy work of destruction and deconstruction in May and June of last year:
May 12, 2013: Deconstructing the Lives of Catholics Killed by Faithful Mohammedans:
Demonstrating his 1970s “street priest” mentality, Jorge Mario Bergoglio “canonized” the martyrs of Otranto, Italy, without once mentioning that they had been killed by Mohammedans as he does not believe that past religious “conflicts” were “necessary”:
Today the Church holds up for our veneration an array of martyrs who in 1480 were called to bear the highest witness to the Gospel together. About 800 people, who had survived the siege and invasion of Otranto, were beheaded in the environs of that city. They refused to deny their faith and died professing the Risen Christ. Where did they find the strength to stay faithful? In the faith itself, which enables us to see beyond the limits of our human sight, beyond the boundaries of earthly life. It grants us to contemplate “the heavens opened”, as St Stephen says, and the living Christ at God’s right hand. Dear friends, let us keep the faith we have received and which is our true treasure, let us renew our faithfulness to the Lord, even in the midst of obstacles and misunderstanding. God will never let us lack strength and calmness. While we venerate the Martyrs of Otranto, let us ask God to sustain all the Christians who still suffer violence today in these very times and in so many parts of the world and to give them the courage to stay faithful and to respond to evil with goodness. (Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo Liturgical Travesty and Abomination in which Fake, Phony, Fraud “Canonizations Took Place, May 12, 2013.)
Echoing the likes of George Walker Bush and Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro here in the United States of America, each of whom went out of their way to refer to Mohammedanism as a “religion of peace,” something that will be explored once again in tomorrow’s commentary, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis omitted the fact that it was a Mohammedan, Mehmet the Conqueror, from Turkey who led forces that invaded Otranto, Italy, on July 28, 1480. No, no. To do that would be jeopardize the “progress” made in “inter-religious dialogue” with so-called “moderate” Mohammedans and to inflame the passions of those who are faithful disciples of the teaching of the hideous false prophet Mohammed, people who are responsible for the displacement of over two-thirds of the Christian population of Iraq since the the unjust, unconstitutional and immoral American invasion and occupation of Iraq on March 20, 2003 (see The mass exodus of Christians from the Muslim world).
Francis the Manichean must live in a world of the “light” of the “newness” of conciliarism as he disparages the “darkness” of the “past” that preceded it. And he had a ready audience in the thousands upon thousands of members of the “lay ecclesial movements” (Catholic” Charismatic Renewal, Opus Dei, Focolare, Cursillo, the Sant’Egidio Community, the Shalom Catholic Community, the Chemin Neuf Community, the International Community of Faith and Light, Regnum Christi, Communion and Liberation, the Emmanuel Community, the Seguimi Lay Group of Human-Christian Promotion, and, among many, many others, the Neocatechumenal Way) who believe that their particular brand of apostasy helps to “build up” what they think is the Catholic Church in “newness” as they follow the “spirit” into the “light” of a transformed church that goes “out of itself” to create structures of “unity in multiplicity.”
Yet it is that God the Holy Ghost has not changed. He guides the Catholic Church today as He did on Pentecost Sunday: to remain completely faithful to the Sacred Deposit of Faith revealed by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ without any shadow of alteration or change, without any possibility of error or ambiguity, without any concession to anything “new” that is a contradiction of a single article contained within that same Deposit of Faith.
May 16, 2013: No Need to Get Serious About Things, You Know
Jorge Mario Bergoglio used an address Caritas International on May 16, 2013, session to berate those who want what they think is the Catholic Church to take herself “too seriously”:
VATICAN CITY (CNS) — The Catholic Church needs to revive its loving and tender side, which gets lost when the church becomes too serious, Pope Francis said.
The church has ended up with “deviations, sects and heresies when it got too serious, that is, when it took things here too seriously and it forgot about embracing and tenderness,” he told representatives of Caritas Internationalis — the umbrella organization of national Catholic charities around the world.
The maternal, tender side of the church is a value “that the mother church cannot lose,” he said.
The pope made his comments during a 45-minute informal meeting with Caritas Internationalis’ executive committee, its secretary-general, Michel Roy; and its president, Honduran Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga of Tegucigalpa.
Regional presidents of the Vatican-based umbrella group presented summaries of the situation in their regions. Roy also presented the pope with a small basket of bread to symbolize the more than 1 billion people who go hungry in the world and to highlight a new campaign Caritas will launch this year to fight world hunger.
The pope talked about 15 minutes off-the-cuff in Spanish, responding broadly to questions representatives had posed earlier. He touched on four points in his remarks: the crises plaguing the world, love, development and spirituality.
“A church without charity doesn’t exist,” the pope said, thanking Caritas for its “dual dimensions” of social action and mystical, spiritual dimension.
“Caritas is the church’s caress to her people,” showing tenderness and understanding toward their needs, he said, according to partial translations supplied by Vatican Radio and the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano.
“The search for truth and the study of the Catholic truth are other important dimensions of the church which are carried out by theologians” and transmitted through catechesis and exegesis.
“Caritas is the love inside the mother church that approaches, embraces and loves” people, he said. (When church is too serious, it loses its loving, tender side, Bergoglio says.)
Tell you what, Jorge, we don’t take you very seriously as you try to posit a false dichotomy between Holy Mother Church’s obligations to teach the immutable truths contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith in all of their Holy Integrity and “caritas” as true love wills the good of the other, the ultimate expression of which is the salvation of his immortal soul.
It is not “charitable” to leave unrepentant sinners without correct or, worse yet, to reaffirm them in their sins.
It is not “charitable” to let heretics poison the minds of Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
It is not “charitable” to reaffirm adherents of false religions in their falsehoods and/or to give even the slightest impression that those false religions are pleasing in the sight of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity.
It is not “charitable” to engage in “inter-religious prayer” or to treat places of false worship as “sacred” in the eyes of God.
Catholics believe in the Spiritual Works of Mercy, Jorge. Here is a little review for you:
To instruct the ignorant.
To counsel the doubtful.
To admonish sinners.
To bear wrongs patiently;
To forgive offences willingly;
To comfort the afflicted;
To pray for the living and the dead.
Catholics also believe that there are nine ways that they can be accessories to the sins of others:
1. By counsel.
2. By command.
3. By consent.
4. By provocation.
5. By praise or flattery of the evil done.
6. By silence.
7. By connivance.
8. By partaking.
9. By defense of the ill done.
Conciliarism is by its very false nature uncharitable as it makes a mockery of the authentic, immutable teaching that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by making it appear that it is somehow opposed to tenderness and mercy to follow these words that Saint Paul wrote in his Second Epistle to Saint Timothy:
 I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine.  For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears:  And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.  But be thou vigilant, labour in all things, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill thy ministry. Be sober. (2 Tim. 4: 1-15.)
As we know all to well, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis does not take this kind of “stuff” seriously. That was in the past. Saint Thomas Aquinas was just too “serious.” So were all those who attended Holy Mother Church’s true general councils, especially the Council of Florence, the Council of Trent and the [First] Vatican Council as they put the Church into a “box” wherein she is alleged to have lost her “tenderness” and “mercy” and “charity for the poor.”
Well, here is what the Apostle of Charity, Saint Francis de Sales, had to say on the matter:
The declared enemies of God and His Church, heretics and schismatics, must be criticized as much as possible, as long as truth is not denied.
It is a work of charity to shout: “Here is the wolf!” when it enters the flock or anywhere else. (Saint Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life, part III, chap. 29)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not take seriously, for example, the Catholic Church’s consistent condemnations of his own beliefs and actions, which are those of the conciliar revolution itself, as he promotes propositions that are contrary to right reason and Divine Revelation.
May 16, 2013: Making the Edict of Milan Into a Witness for Dignitatis Humanae
It was on that same day, May 16, 2013, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio attempted to make the Edict of Milan into a witness for Dignitatis Humanae, December 7, 1965:
Vatican City, 16 May 2013 (VIS) – The Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I, is visiting Milan, on the occasion of the 1700th anniversary of the Edict of Milan, signed by Constantine and Licinius, respectively the emperors of the western and eastern parts of the Roman Empire, in 313. The treaty granted freedom of worship to Christians throughout the Roman Empire, putting an end to religious persecution.
For his visit, Pope Francis, yesterday afternoon, sent a message—through Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone, S.D.B., to Cardinal Angelo Scola, archbishop of Milan, with greetings to the Patriarch, the participants in the commemoration, as well as to the entire city, “for the importance given to the memory of the historic decision that, decreeing religious freedom for Christians, opened new paths to the Gospel and decisively contributed to the birth of European civilization.”
In the text, the Holy Father expresses the desire that, “today as then, the common witness of Christians of the East and West, sustained by the Spirit of the Risen One, will agree to the spread of the message of salvation in Europe and the entire world and that, thanks to the foresight of civil authorities, the right to publicly express one’s faith will be respected everywhere, and that the contribution that Christianity continues to offer to culture and society in our time will be accepted without prejudice.” (Jorge’s message commemorating edict of Milan.)
Only a few points need to be made about his typical concilarspeak elegy in behalf of the heresy of “religious liberty.”
First, the See of Constantinople was united to the See of Saint Peter at the time of the Edict of Milan. It has been in schism from the See of Saint Peter since 1054 (yes, we are facing not only the prospect of the quincentennial of Martin Luther’s posting his ninety-five theses on the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, on October 31, 1517, but the prospect of the celebration of the Millennial anniversary of the Greek Schism in forty-one years if God does not intervene prior to that time). It is thus blasphemous and a distortion of history to contend that “Christians of the East and West” give a “common witness” today as they did seventeen hundred years ago as the Orthodox hold to various heretical propositions and are in schism from the Catholic Church. And, yes, Jorge, Catholics are supposed to take this very, very seriously.
Second, the fact that there is a “prejudice” against Christianity in Europe today is the precisely the result of the Protestant Revolutions’s overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King that paved the way for the triumph of the Judeo-Masonic naturalism and thus of the religious indifferentism of the modern civil state. Error and moral decay must follow in the wake of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ King. Yet it is that conciliarism exalts both separation of Church and State and “religious liberty” even though our true popes have warned us that men and their nations would fall into the abyss if such falsehoods became the foundation of governments and the basis of social life.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio thus does not take too seriously the condemnations and prophetic warnings about separation of Church and State and religious liberty that have been referenced many times, including in May of last year in Memo To Timothy Michael Dolan: Catholics Never Say “We Used To Say”.
Third, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis distorts history by claiming that the Edict of Milan ushered in the conciliar concept of “religious liberty.”
The Edict of Milan, which was issued by the Emperor Constantine in 313, granted toleration to Christianity in order to stop the persecution of Christians. It was the death-knell of paganism in the Roman Empire as Emperor Theodosius made Christianity the state religion of the empire sixty-seven years later, in the year 380. Holy Mother Church was able to emerge more freely from the catacombs following the Edict of Milan, which foreshadowed her replacing the empire as the very foundation of kingdoms and as the sole of means of human sanctification and salvation.
Each of the six men who have served as the “Petrine Minister” of the counterfeit church of conciliarism has distorted both the truths of the Faith and those of history in order to rationalize their own condemned falsehoods and pastoral practices. They have shown that they did not take truth seriously at all, which is why they must believe that it must be “sought” even though the fullness of Divine Revelation is part of the very Constitution of Holy Mother Church.
May 19, 2013: It’s Back to Newness Again
Reprising what he said in his Easter Vigil monologue on Saturday, March 30, 2013, Jorge Mario Bergoglio returned to the theme of “newness” on Pentecost Sunday, May 19, 2013, as a way of conditioning Catholics to be open to “God’s surprises,” a theme to which he returned several times during the summer of last year:
1. Newness always makes us a bit fearful, because we feel more secure if we have everything under control, if we are the ones who build, programme and plan our lives in accordance with our own ideas, our own comfort, our own preferences. This is also the case when it comes to God. Often we follow him, we accept him, but only up to a certain point. It is hard to abandon ourselves to him with complete trust, allowing the Holy Spirit to be the soul and guide of our lives in our every decision. We fear that God may force us to strike out on new paths and leave behind our all too narrow, closed and selfish horizons in order to become open to his own. Yet throughout the history of salvation, whenever God reveals himself, he brings newness and change, and demands our complete trust: Noah, mocked by all, builds an ark and is saved; Abram leaves his land with only a promise in hand; Moses stands up to the might of Pharaoh and leads his people to freedom; the apostles, huddled fearfully in the Upper Room, go forth with courage to proclaim the Gospel. This is not a question of novelty for novelty’s sake, the search for something new to relieve our boredom, as is so often the case in our own day. The newness which God brings into our life is something that actually brings fulfilment, that gives true joy, true serenity, because God loves us and desires only our good. Let us ask ourselves: Are we open to “God’s surprises”? Or are we closed and fearful before the newness of the Holy Spirit? Do we have the courage to strike out along the new paths which God’s newness sets before us, or do we resist, barricaded in transient structures which have lost their capacity for openness to what is new?
2. A second thought: the Holy Spirit would appear to create disorder in the Church, since he brings the diversity of charisms and gifts; yet all this, by his working, is a great source of wealth, for the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of unity, which does not mean uniformity, but which leads everything back to harmony. In the Church, it is the Holy Spirit who creates harmony. One of Fathers of the Church has an expression which I love: the Holy Spirit himself is harmony – “Ipse harmonia est”. Only the Spirit can awaken diversity, plurality and multiplicity, while at the same time building unity. Here too, when we are the ones who try to create diversity and close ourselves up in what makes us different and other, we bring division. When we are the ones who want to build unity in accordance with our human plans, we end up creating uniformity, standardization. But if instead we let ourselves be guided by the Spirit, richness, variety and diversity never become a source of conflict, because he impels us to experience variety within the communion of the Church. Journeying together in the Church, under the guidance of her pastors who possess a special charism and ministry, is a sign of the working of the Holy Spirit. Having a sense of the Church is something fundamental for every Christian, every community and every movement. It is the Church which brings Christ to me, and me to Christ; parallel journeys are dangerous! When we venture beyond (proagon) the Church’s teaching and community, and do not remain in them, we are not one with the God of Jesus Christ (cf. 2 Jn 9). So let us ask ourselves: Am I open to the harmony of the Holy Spirit, overcoming every form of exclusivity? Do I let myself be guided by him, living in the Church and with the Church? (Super Duper Apostate at Pentecost: Newness, harmony and mission.)
The past was “bad” as it did not follow the “spirit.”
The present is “good” because it is following the “spirit” and overcoming every form of exclusivity, a pantheistic view of God that is identical to the cosmology of none other than another Jesuit, the heretic named Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., who believed that we were all in the process of becoming the “Omega Point.” In other words, de Chardin was a theological Darwinian who believed that everything about the world was evolving. Theology, philosophy, liturgical ceremonies and even God Himself was in the process of “becoming” as human beings evolved ultimately to develop the consciousness of God, described by the pantheist de Chardin as the “Omega Point.”
How best to describe this nonsense of the “closed-in” and “self-referential” Church that is barricade against “newness” and the “harmony of the Holy Spirit” as “every form of exclusivity” is overcome over the course of time?
Gee, let me think of a way.
I have got it.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis is very intent on tearing down all remaining “bastions” or barricades of the “past” that have, despite the best efforts of his predecessors, remained standing in the aftermath of the “Second” Vatican Council and its “new theology” and “new liturgy” and “new orientation” towards the world and other religions.
As the “past” is by definition “bad,” Bergoglio/Francis must do everything imaginable to avoid mentioning the evils perpetrated against the Catholic Faith by heretics and infidels, which is why, as mentioned earlier in this review, that he omitted any mention of the fact that the eight hundred martyrs he “canonized” on Sunday, May 12, 2013, the Sunday within the Octave of the Ascension in the Catholic Church (and, ironically, Ascension “Thursday” in the Diocese of Rome even though it was observed as the so-called “Seventh Sunday of Easter” inside the walls of the Vatican–see Motu Madness Merry-Go-Round, which I believe describes my own personal experience on the matter when in Rome almost exactly twenty years ago now). Bergoglio/Francis could not mention Mohammedans as he does not believe that “past” religious conflicts were necessary and he does not want to anything to antagonize any his beloved partners in the madness known as “inter-religious dialogue.”
May 22, 2014: Francis Do-Right Says Do Good, and “We Will Meet You There”
Although he has not used the words “universal salvation,” Jorge Mario Bergoglio used his May 22, 2014, session of the Ding Dong of Apostasy at the Casa Santa Mara to say that those who “do good” have God’s favor, and that we will meet them “there,” wherever “there” happens to be, that is:
(Vatican Radio) “Doing good” is a principle that unites all humanity, beyond the diversity of ideologies and religions, and creates the “culture of encounter” that is the foundation of peace: this is what Pope said at Mass this morning at the Domus Santae Martae, in the presence of employees of the Governorate of Vatican City. Cardinal Bechara Boutros Rai, Patriarch of Antioch of the Maronites, concelebrated at the Mass.
Wednesday’s Gospel speaks to us about the disciples who prevented a person from outside their group from doing good. “They complain,” the Pope said in his homily, because they say, “If he is not one of us, he cannot do good. If he is not of our party, he cannot do good.” And Jesus corrects them: “Do not hinder him, he says, let him do good.” The disciples, Pope Francis explains, “were a little intolerant,” closed off by the idea of possessing the truth, convinced that “those who do not have the truth, cannot do good.” “This was wrong . . . Jesus broadens the horizon.” Pope Francis said, “The root of this possibility of doing good – that we all have – is in creation”:
“The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart: do good and do not do evil. All of us. ‘But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.’ Yes, he can. He must. Not can: must! Because he has this commandment within him. Instead, this ‘closing off’ that imagines that those outside, everyone, cannot do good is a wall that leads to war and also to what some people throughout history have conceived of: killing in the name of God. That we can kill in the name of God. And that, simply, is blasphemy. To say that you can kill in the name of God is blasphemy.”
“Instead,” the Pope continued, “the Lord has created us in His image and likeness, and has given us this commandment in the depths of our heart: do good and do not do evil”:
“The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”
“Doing good” the Pope explained, is not a matter of faith: “It is a duty, it is an identity card that our Father has given to all of us, because He has made us in His image and likeness. And He does good, always.”
This was the final prayer of Pope Francis:
“Today is [the feast of] Santa Rita, Patron Saint of impossible things – but this seems impossible: let us ask of her this grace, this grace that all, all, all people would do good and that we would encounter one another in this work, which is a work of creation, like the creation of the Father. A work of the family, because we are all children of God, all of us, all of us! And God loves us, all of us! May Santa Rita grant us this grace, which seems almost impossible. Amen.” (Culture of encounter is the foundation of peace.)
Jorge Mario’s religion is based solely on his own idiosyncratic beliefs about God and His Sacred Deposit of Faith. This point cannot be emphasized too strongly or repeated frequently enough. His is essentially a pagan religion that projects onto God the attributes that he wants Him to have. In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes that God is exactly like him. How is this not saying that he believes himself to be like unto God?
For the rest, please just review Francis Do-Right.
May 30, 2013:
Embarrassed by the imprecision with which Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has used to speak extemporaneously at his morning gabfests as he takes the world his daily Ding Dong School Of Apostasy, officials in the Occupy Vatican Movement took to explaining why the currently governing “Petrine Minister” does not want his daily “homilies” published verbatim:
Vatican City, May 30, 2013 / 09:50 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The Vatican is not publishing the full text of the Pope’s daily homilies because it wants to avoid giving them a level of authority that is not intended.
“We must insist on the fact that, in all of the Pope’s activities, the difference between different situations and celebrations, as well as the different levels of authority of his words, must be understood and respected,” Vatican press office director Father Federico Lombardi said May 30.
He explained that while the full text of Pope Francis’ public events is made available, the daily homilies are only summarized because of “the character of the situation, and the spontaneity and familiarity of the Pope’s remarks.”
Pope Francis, he added, wants to retain the familiar atmosphere that characterizes the daily Mass, which is typically attended by a small number of the faithful. “For that reason,” Fr. Lombardi said, the Pope has specifically requested that the live video and audio not be broadcast.
Another contributing factor to the decision is the fact that the pontiff is not a native Italian speaker, the press director said.
The demand from the public for the full version of the Pope’s daily homilies in the chapel of Saint Martha’s House has been high.
So, in order to respect both the circumstances and the requests from the public, the Vatican decided to have its news outlets attend and summarize the essentials of the homily.
After “careful consideration,” Fr. Lombardi said in his May 30 statement, “it seems the best way to make the richness of the Pope’s homilies accessible to a wide audience, without altering the nature of his remarks, is to publish a detailed summary, rich in direct quotations that reflect the genuine flavor of the Pope’s expressions.”
“L’Osservatore Romano undertakes this responsibility every day. Vatican Radio, on account of the nature of the medium, offers a shorter synthesis, including some of the original sound, while CTV offers a video clip corresponding to one of the audio inserts published by Vatican Radio,” he explained. (Vatican explains availability of Super Duper Apostate’s daily Ding Dong School Lessons.)
In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis cannot be trusted to stay within the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s accepted confines of Modernism, which is why his daily “homilies” have to be “polished up” by the Keystone Kops who work out of “Father” Federico Lombardi’s “spin room” in the Vatican press office before they are sent out for public consumption.
The mere fact that “Father” Lombardi saw fit to issue yet another statement to explain why verbatim transcripts of his brother Jesuit’s Ding Dong School lessons is yet another proof of how the man who is thought by most people in the world, Catholics and non-Catholics alike, has been diminished into nothing other than that a garden variety conciliar presbyter who is prone to say whatever comes into his mind and try to make it fit somehow into the context of what he thinks is the Catholic Faith. For a fuller discussion, see Francis At The Improv.)
Indeed, Berggolio told us six months ago that “all these things come to me somewhat randomly” (see “Who Today Will Presume To Say She Is Widowed?”).
June 7, 2013: “I didn’t want to be pope.”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio met with students attending Jesuits schools in Albania and Italy, telling them that “I didn’t want to be pope.”
Pope Francis has revealed that he never wanted to be pope and that he’s living in the Vatican hotel for his “psychiatric” health.
Francis got very personal Friday as he met with thousands of children from Jesuit schools across Italy and Albania. Answering their questions one by one, Francis told them the decision to become a priest had been difficult for him and that he had suffered “moments of interior darkness” when “you feel dry, without interior joy.”
But he said he went ahead because he loved Christ.
One of the most touching moments came when Teresa, a bright-eyed redhead no more than six, asked Francis flat out if he had wanted to be pope.
After joking around, Francis replied: “I didn’t want to be pope.” (Francis tells Jesuit students, ‘I didn’t want to be pope’).
June 10, 2013:
News was reported of a meeting that Jorge Mario Bergoglio had on June 6, 2013, with the presiding board of the Latin American and Caribbean Confederation of Religious Men and Women. It was during this meeting Bergoglio mocked those “restorationists” who count the number of Rosaries that they pray:
I share with you two concerns. One is the Pelagian current that there is in the Church at this moment. There are some restorationist groups. I know some, it fell upon me to receive them in Buenos Aires. And one feels as if one goes back 60 years! Before the Council… One feels in 1940… An anecdote, just to illustrate this, it is not to laugh at it, I took it with respect, but it concerns me; when I was elected, I received a letter from one of these groups, and they said: “Your Holiness, we offer you this spiritual treasure: 3,525 rosaries.” Why don’t they say, ‘we pray for you, we ask…’, but this thing of counting… And these groups return to practices and to disciplines that I lived through – not you, because you are not old – to disciplines, to things that in that moment took place, but not now, they do not exist today…
The second [concern] is for a Gnostic current. Those Pantheisms… Both are elite currents, but this one is of a more educated elite… I heard of a superior general that prompted the sisters of her congregation to not pray in the morning, but to spiritually bathe in the cosmos, things like that… They concern me because they ignore the incarnation! And the Son of God became our flesh, the Word was made flesh, and in Latin America we have flesh abundantly [de tirar al techo]! What happens to the poor, their pains, this is our flesh… (Universal Public Face of Apostasy: on Traditional groups: “Pelagian current. It’s like turning back 60 years! They count rosaries… Please, don’t laugh.”)
Bergoglio is a mocker and a deceiver. See Francis The Blind.
June 12, 2013: Bergoglio continues the mockery of traditionalists
The obsessive Modernist from Argentina continued his rants against traditionalists just six days after he had done so to the group of alleged leaders of religious communities from Latin America:
Pope Francis continued, the law of the Spirit, “takes us on a path of continuous discernment to do the will of God” and this can frighten us. The Pope warned that this fear “brings two temptations with it.” The first, is to “go backwards” to say that “it’s possible up to this point, but impossible beyond this point” which ends up becoming “let’s stay here”. This, he warned, “is the temptation of fear of freedom, fear of the Holy Spirit.” A fear that “it is better to play it safe.” Pope Francis then told a story about a superior general who, in the 1930’s, went around compiling a list of regulations for his religious, “a work that took years.” Then he travelled to Rome to meet a Benedictine abbot, who, upon hearing all he had done, replied that in doing so he “had killed his Congregation’s charism”, “he had killed its freedom” since “this charism bears fruit in freedom and he had stopped the charism”.
“This is the temptation to go backwards, because we are ‘safer’ going back: but total security is in the Holy Spirit that brings you forward, which gives us this trust – as Paul says – which is more demanding because Jesus tells us: “Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law”. It is more demanding! But it does not give us that human security. We cannot control the Holy Spirit: that is the problem! This is a temptation.”
Pope Francis noted that there is another temptation: that of “adolescent progressivism”, that de-rails us. This temptation lies in seeing a culture and “not detaching ourselves from it”.
“We take the values of this culture a little bit from here, a little bit from there , … They want to make this law? Alright let’s go ahead and make this law. Let’s broaden the boundaries here a little. In the end, let me tell you, this is not true progress. It is adolescent progressivism: just like teenagers who in their enthusiasm want to have everything and in the end? You slip up … It’s like when the road is covered in ice and the car slips and go off track… This is the other temptation at the moment! We, at this moment in the history of the Church, we cannot go backwards or go off the track! “
Pope Francis concluded : the track “is that of freedom in the Holy Spirit that makes us free, in continuous discernment of God’s will to move forward on this path, without going back and without going off-track”. Let us ask the Lord for “the grace that the Holy Spirit gives us to go forward.”
Mass was concelebrated by Cardinal João Braz de Aviz, accompanied by priests, religious and lay staff of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life. (Universal Public Face of Apostasy At Abominable Liturgical Service That Pleases Only The Devil: True progress is in trusting the Spirit.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has striven to position himself as a “reasonable” revolutionary, one who does not want to go “back” as do the poor “restorationists,” steeped as they are in their Pelagianism, and one who does not want to go “off-track” as do the “ultra-progressives even though he is one!There is a word that describes those who create such a false dichotomy: demagogue.
Far from being humble, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis boasts on almost daily basis of his being a “reasonable” Catholic, a man who follows the “spirit” in complete fidelity to the “freedom” that the “spirit” brings to “move” with the times without becoming part of the times.
June 14, 2013: Dr. Welby Pays A House Call to Mr. Bergoglio
Jorge Mario Bergoglio received a fellow non-Catholic and non-bishop, Dr. Justin Welby, the false claimant to the title as the Archbishop of Canterbury, which was the primatial see of the Catholic Church in England until the time over King Henry VIII’s declaring break from Rome over the issue of divorce that the conciliar revolutionaries are seeking to “finesse” in just the same manner that the Orthodox did five hundred years before Martin Luther just ignored the plain words of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to sanction the debauchery that has plunged the formerly Catholic world of Europe to the brink of demographic elimination.
Here is an excerpt of what Mr. Bergoglio said to Dr. Welby:
Your Grace, Dear Friends,
On the happy occasion of our first meeting, I make my own the words of Pope Paul VI, when he addressed Archbishop Michael Ramsey during his historic visit in 1966: “Your steps have not brought you to a foreign dwelling … we are pleased to open the doors to you, and with the doors, our heart, pleased and honoured as we are … to welcome you ‘not as a guest or a stranger, but as a fellow citizen of the Saints and the Family of God’” (cf. Eph 2:19-20).
I know that during Your Grace’s installation in Canterbury Cathedral you remembered in prayer the new Bishop of Rome. I am deeply grateful to you – and since we began our respective ministries within days of each other, I think we will always have a particular reason to support one another in prayer.
The history of relations between the Church of England and the Catholic Church is long and complex, and not without pain. Recent decades, however, have been marked by a journey of rapprochement and fraternity, and for this we give heartfelt thanks to God. This journey has been brought about both via theological dialogue, through the work of the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission, and via the growth of cordial relations at every level through shared daily lives in a spirit of profound mutual respect and sincere cooperation. In this regard, I am very pleased to welcome alongside you Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster. These firm bonds of friendship have enabled us to remain on course even when difficulties have arisen in our theological dialogue that were greater than we could have foreseen at the start of our journey.
I am grateful, too, for the sincere efforts the Church of England has made to understand the reasons that led my Predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, to provide a canonical structure able to respond to the wishes of those groups of Anglicans who have asked to be received collectively into the Catholic Church: I am sure this will enable the spiritual, liturgical and pastoral traditions that form the Anglican patrimony to be better known and appreciated in the Catholic world. (Francis the Anti-Campion Welcomes Fellow Layman Welby.)
Justin Welby is a layman who belongs to a false church.
Jorge Bergoglio/Francis is a layman who belongs to a false church.
Well, I guess they really do have “respective ministries” as they serve the same master, the devil himself.
Profound mutual respect and sincere cooperation”?
“Theological dialogue” has been more “difficult” than was foreseen at the start of ecumania?
It is of the nature of heresy and error to mutate into that which has no tenuous, attenuated relationship whatsoever to the Deposit of Faith.
Rank unbelief in the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is very common among the Anglican “clergy.”
“Ordination” of women in the worldwide “Anglican Communion” and of “women” as “bishops” in its Episcopal branch could have been foreseen very easily by one who was possessed of the sensus Catholicus.
Why the surprise, Jorge?
Ah, the “surprise” comes precisely as part of the tearing down of the Catholic bastions that Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI before him have said is a necessary step in the “renewal” of what they contend is the Catholic Church.
Note also the very weak support that Bergoglio/Francis gave to Ratzinger/Benedict’s Anglicanorum Coetibus, November 9, 2009, as a means merely to make the “the spiritual, liturgical and pastoral traditions that form the Anglican patrimony to be better known and appreciated in the Catholic world” even though those traditions have no right from God to exist and are indeed hideous in His very sight.
The passage of time does not confer legitimacy on that which has its very origins from the devil in a rejection of the Catholic Faith and the authority of the Catholic Church. Has the passage of time conferred legitimacy on the “Anglican Book of Common Prayer”? If not, then why should it receive “protection” in the counterfeit church of concilairism that presents itself to the world as the Catholic Church? Please see Francis The Anti-Campion.)
It was revealed eight days later that Bergoglio and Welby were in agreement on the need to avoid “homophobic behaviour” (see Two figures of Antichrist find common ground in talks at the Vatican.)
Yes, the “pleasant side of man.”
Ain’t it grand.
June 15 2015: What “Gay Marriage” Bill?
Jorge Mario Bergoglio meet with French Parliamentarians just two months after they had passed a “gay marriage” bill. He said not one word about their moral crime, extolling the secular authorities in the eldest daughter of the Church, France, who have nothing but contempt for the history of Catholic and its devotion to the Social Reign of Christ the King:
I am pleased to receive members of the Senate and national Assembly of the French Republic this morning. Over and above the different political sensibilities which you represent, your presence demonstrates the quality of the relationship between your country and the Holy See.
This meeting is, for me, an opportunity to highlight the relationship of trust which, on the whole, exists in France between leaders of public life and those of the Catholic Church, be it in at a national level, be it at a regional or local level. The principles of secularism which governs the relations between the French State and the various religious denominations should not imply that there is a hostility towards the religious reality, or an exclusion of religions from the social sphere and the debates which enliven them. One can rejoice in the fact that French society is rediscovering proposals made by the Church, which, among other things, offer a certain vision of the person and his or her dignity in light of the common good. The Church desires, therefore, to offer its own particular contribution to the deeper questions which demand a more complete vision of the person and his or her destiny, of society and its destiny. This contribution is collocated not only in the anthropological and social sphere, but in political, economic, and cultural spheres as well.
As elected officials from a nation towards which the eyes of the world are often turned, I believe it to be your responsibility to contribute in an effective and consistent way towards improving the lives of your citizens whom you know through the numerous local contacts you cultivate, and which help you to better know their needs. Your duty is certainly technical and juridical, and involves proposing, amending and abolishing legislation. However, it is also necessary to instil something extra in them, I would say a spirit, a soul, that does not limit itself to reflecting the modalities and ideas of the moment, but which also confers upon them the indispensable quality that elevates and dignifies the human person.
I therefore extend to you my warmest encouragement in fulfilling your mission, always seeking the good of the person and promoting fraternity in your country. (Francis the Illusionist meets French parliament members.)
Yes, the best that Bergoglio could do was to speak in Judeo-Masonic terms about the purposes of a legislature to respect the role of “religions” in the public process, explaining that secularism, which was referred to variously as “healthy secularity” or “healthy laicism” by both Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, should not be implicitly hostile towards what he called “the religious reality” even though barbarism is the only thing that can result from any nation’s embrace of separation of Church and State.
Pope Saint Pius X put the lie to conciliarism’s embrace of “separation of Church and State:
3. That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man’s eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man’s supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men.Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. “Between them,” he says, “there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.-“Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur.” He proceeds: “Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them…. As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. — “Civitates non possunt, citra scellus, gerere se tamquam si Deus omnino non esset, aut curam religionis velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere…. Ecclesiam vero, quam Deus ipse constituit, ab actione vitae excludere, a legibus, ab institutione adolescentium, a societate domestica, magnus et perniciousus est error.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)
As was his wont throughout his priestly life of absolute fidelity to Christ the King, Pope Saint Pius X minced no words when addressing himself to the injustice done both to God and to the nation of France itself by the law of separation. Our sainted pontiff decried the effect of French laws on marriage, family and the education, and he stated in no uncertain terms that at the separation of Church and State is a “thesis absolutely false.” Something that is false in 1906 does not become “true” at a later point by the invocation of a “hermeneutic of continuity” (or “living tradition”) or by Francis the Illusionist’s simply ignoring that which he believes was wrong to begin with as it was part of the “no church” of the past.
Paragraph Three of Vehementer Nos, which has been cited on these pages so many, many times in the past, makes it clear that the Roman Pontiffs “have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State.” That the conciliar “pontiffs” have embraced and promoted this falsehood is just another proof of the fact that they have not been true and legitimate Successors of Saint Peter as Vicars of Christ cannot teach that which has been condemned in the past. See also Francis The Illusionist, part one.
June 19, 2013: Why Can’t We All Just Get Along?
Showing that he is a graduate with advanced degrees in the Rodney King School of “What Can’t We All Just Get Along?”, Jorge Mario Bergoglio once again decried “disunity” among Christians as being something that must be “solved” even though the answer rests in the unconditional conversion of non-Catholics to the true Church:
Unity is beyond all conflict. Unity is a grace that we must ask of the Lord so he may save us from the temptations of the division, from internal struggles and selfishness, from gossip. How much damage gossip does! How much damage! Never gossip about others, never!. How much damage divisions among Christians, being partisan, narrow interests causes to the Church,! Divisions among us, but also divisions among the communities: evangelical Christians, orthodox Christians, Catholic Christians, but why divided? We must try to bring about unity. Let me tell you something, today, before leaving home, I spent 40 minutes more or less, half an hour, with an evangelical pastor. And we prayed together, seeking unity. But we Catholics must pray with each other and other Christians. Pray that the Lord gift us unity! Unity among ourselves! How will we ever have unity among Christians if we are not capable of having it among us Catholics,…in the family, how many families fight and split up? Seek unity, unity builds the Church and comes from Jesus Christ. He sends us the Holy Spirit to build unity!
Dear brothers and sisters, let us ask God to help us to be members of the Body of the Church always deeply united to Christ, help us not to hurt the Body of the Church with our conflicts, our divisions, selfishness: help us to be living members bound to each other by a single power, that of love, which the Holy Spirit pours into our hearts (cf. Rom 5:5). (Audience: Unity in the Body of Christ.)
Pray for the conversion of non-Catholics to the true Faith, something that one never hears from the lips of the conciliar apostates.
June 22, 2013: The Fiftieth Anniversary of the “Election” of Giovanni Montini/Paul the Sick:
Bergoglio used the fiftieth anniversary of the “election” of the doctrinally, liturgically, morally and pastorally corrupt enable of Marxism, Giovanni Montin/Paul VI, to praise his predecessor-in-apostasy’s “vision” that there was no “conflict” between what is purported to be the Catholic Church and Modernity:
Finally, looking at Pope Paul VI’s love of mankind, Pope Francis said this is also linked with Christ. “It is the same passion of God that compels us to meet the man, to respect him, to recognize him, to serve him,” Pope Francis said.
He then quoted extensively from his predecessor’s address at the close of the Second Vatican Council: “Secular humanism, revealing itself in its horrible anti-clerical reality has, in a certain sense, defied the council. The religion of the God who became man has met the religion (for such it is) of man who makes himself God. And what happened? Was there a clash, a battle, a condemnation? There could have been, but there was none. The old story of the Samaritan has been the model of the spirituality of the council. A feeling of boundless sympathy has permeated the whole of it. The attention of our council has been absorbed by the discovery of human needs … But we call upon those who term themselves modern humanists, and who have renounced the transcendent value of the highest realities, to give the council credit at least for one quality and to recognize our own new type of humanism: we, too, in fact, we more than any others, honor mankind.” (Francis the Talking Apostate recalls Paul the Sick.)
Giovanni Montini/Paul the Sick’s vision of reality was skewed by his sympathy for Marxism and his embrace of Modernism. This is what led him to believe that no clash had occurred between secular humanism and the proceedings of the “Second” Vatican Council as the latter was simply a canonization, if you will, of the former. Paul the Sick’s approach to “the world” was one of pure Judeo-Masonry. So is Bergoglio’s.
Montini/Paul the Sick wanted to emphasize the “pleasant side of man.”
Ah, yes, “the pleasant side of man, rather than the unpleasant one.”
An attitude that “was very much and deliberately optimistic.”
A “wave of affection and admiration” that “flowed from the council over the modern world of humanity.”
We can see very well the “fruit” of this Judeo-Masonic spirit.
Millions of Catholics have fallen into rank unbelief.
Men and their nations have embraced one moral evil after another.
A quiet, creeping Socialism has overtaken the entirety of western Europe and the Americas, including the United States of America.
Hundreds upon hundreds of millions of innocent human beings have been killed by means of contraception, surgical abortion, vital organ “transplants” based upon the medical industry’s manufactured myth of “brain death,” and the rank power of the civil state in the execution of political dissidents.
The innocence and purity of the young have been undermined by the rot of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments that began in earnest in formerly Catholic schools during the false “pontificate” of Giovanni Montini/Paul the Sick that has broken down the natural psychological resistance of children to that which is indecent. This systematic reprogramming in behalf of impurity and indecency has paved the way wide open for Catholic youngsters to embrace “rock and roll,” immodesty of dress, impurity of conduct, indecency of speech, mutilation of their own bodies and the worship of sensual and material pleasures as representing the ultimate end of human existence.
Conciliar officials have “liberated” Catholics from any resistance to the horror of perverse acts against nature by rejecting what is called “homophobic behaviour,” something that Justin Welby attributed Bergoglio/Francis as saying when they privately at the Casa Santa Marta on Friday, June 14, 2013 (see Two figures of Antichrist find common ground in talks at the Vatican.)
Yes, yes, yes.
“The pleasant side of man, rather than the unpleasant one.”
An attitude that “was very much and deliberately optimistic.”
A “wave of affection and admiration” that “flowed from the council over the modern world of humanity.”
Yes, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, there is so much to celebrate about the life and the work of Giovanni Montini/Paul VI fifty years after his election as the second head of the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
June 27, 2013: “Masquerading Christians”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio the Demagogue returned to insult routine (at least Don Rickles cracked a smile when he insulted his targets; yes, I know, he’s still performing, but I haven’t watched television in eleven years now) to disparage those “rigid” Catholics who “masquerade as Christians:”
There are people who “masquerade as Christians,” and sin by being excessively superficial or overly rigid, forgetting that a true Christian is a person of joy who rests their faith on the rock of Christ. Some think they can be Christian without Christ; others think being Christian means being in a perpetual state mourning. This was the focus of Pope Francis’ homily at morning Mass on Thursday.
Rigid and sad. Or happy but with no idea of Christian joy. These are two – in a sense opposite – “houses”, in which two categories of believers live and which are both seriously flawed: they are grounded in a Christianity made of words and fail to rely on the “rock” of the Word of Christ. Pope Francis identified both groups in his comments on the Gospel of the day, the famous passage from Matthew of the houses built on sand and rock.
“In the history of the Church there have been two classes of Christians: Christians of words – those” Lord, Lord, Lord “- and Christians of action, in truth. There has always been the temptation to live our Christianity not on the rock that is Christ. The only one who gives us the freedom to say ‘Father’ to God is Christ, our rock. He is the only one who sustains us in difficult times, no? As Jesus said: the rain falls, rivers overflow, winds blow, but the rock is safe, words, the words take flight, they are not needed. But this is the temptation of these Christians of words, of a Christianity without Jesus, a Christianity without Christ. And this has happened and is happening today in the Church: being Christians without Christ. “
Pope Francis went on to analyze these “Christians of words,” revealing their specific characteristics. There is a first type – which he defined as “gnostic -“who instead of loving the rock, loves beautiful words “and therefore lives floating on the surface of the Christian life. And then there’s the other, who Pope Francis called “pelagian”, who leads a staid and starched lifestyle. Christians, the Pope ironically added, who “stare at their feet“:
“And this temptation exists today. Superficial Christians who believe, yes, God, yes Christ, but not ‘everywhere’: Jesus Christ is not the one who gives them their foundation. They are the modern gnostics. The temptation of gnosticism. A ‘liquid’ Christianity. On the other hand, there are those who believe that the Christian life should be taken so seriously that they end up confusing solidity, firmness, with rigidity. They are rigid! This think that being Christian means being in perpetual mourning. “
Pope Francis continued that the fact is that there “are so many” of these Christians. But, he argued, “they are not Christians, they disguise themselves as Christians.” “They do not know – he added – what the Lord is, they do not know what the rock is, do not have the freedom of Christians. To put it simply ‘they have no joy “: (Francis the Flexible at Daily Liturgical Abomination and Ding Dong School: Resting our faith on the rock of Christ.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio fashions himself as being in neither one of the self-made, self-serving “extremes.” The man of “humility” and “service to the poor” is trying to sell himself as one who has the “true” spirit of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, one that is “flexible” enough to provide the “freedom” to “move” with joy as the “spirit” guides Christians where he will.
After all, why should we be in any kind of mourning for our own sins and those of a world gone mad as a result of its immersion in an ocean of sin and a cascade of ever-mutating errors?
Why should we seek to do reparation by bowing our heads as we pray before Our Divine King in His Real Presence by praying our Rosaries of reparation as requested by Our Lady in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal?
Why should we be theological and liturgical “bitter clingers,” so to speak, as we reject the apostasies, heresies, blasphemies and sacrileges of conciliarism?
June 28, 2013: Just One Among Equals
Bergoglio met with a delegation from the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople on Friday, June 28, 2013, the Feast of Saint Irenaeus and the Commemoration of the Vigil of Saints Peter and Paul within the Octave of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist:
I am particularly pleased to greet you with a warm welcome to the Church of Rome, which is celebrating its patron saints Peter and Paul. Your presence in this circumstance is a sign of the deep bond that unites the Church of Constantinople and the Church of Rome in faith, hope and love. The beautiful custom, which began in 1969, of exchanging delegations between our Churches for their patronal feast days, is for me a source of great joy: fraternal encounter is an essential part of the journey towards unity. I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to Your Holiness Bartholomew I and the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, who wanted to once again send a high level delegation. I remember with fraternal affection the gesture of exquisite attention shown to me by Your Holiness Bartholomew, when you honored me with your presence at the celebration of the beginning of my ministry as Bishop of Rome. I am also very grateful to Your Eminence, for your participation in this event and I am happy to see you again on this occasion.
The search for unity among Christians is an urgency which, today more than ever, we cannot ignore. In our world, hungry and thirsty for truth, love, hope, peace and unity, it is important for our own witness, to be finally able to announce with one voice the good news of the Gospel and to celebrate the Divine Mysteries of the new life in Christ! We know very well that unity is primarily a gift from God for which we must pray without ceasing, but we all have the task of preparing the conditions, of cultivating the soil of the heart, so that this extraordinary grace can be received.
A fundamental contribution to the search for full communion between Catholics and Orthodox is offered by the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue, co-chaired by Your Eminence, Metropolitan Ioannis, and by my venerable brother Cardinal Kurt Koch. I sincerely thank you for your valuable and tireless commitment. This Commission has already produced many common texts and is now studying the delicate issue of theological and ecclesiological relationship between primacy and synodality in the life of the Church. It is significant that today we are able to reflect together, in truth and love, on these issues, starting with what we have in common, but without hiding that which still separates us. This is not merely a theoretical exercise, but one of getting to know each other’s traditions in order to understand, and sometimes also to learn from them. I refer for example to the reflection of the Catholic Church on the meaning of episcopal collegiality, and the tradition of synodality, so typical of the Orthodox Churches. I am confident that the effort of shared reflection, so complex and laborious, will bear fruit in due time. I am comforted to know that Catholics and Orthodox share the same conception of dialogue that does not seek a theological minimalism on which to reach a compromise, but rather is based on the deepening of the one truth that Christ has given to His Church, which we never cease to understand better as we are moved by the Holy Spirit. For this, we should not be afraid of encounter and of true dialogue. It does not take us away from the truth, but rather, through an exchange of gifts, it leads us, under the guidance of the Spirit of truth, to the whole truth (cf. Jn 16:13). (Francis the Flexible to Orthodox delegation from Ecumenical Patriarchate.)
Bergoglio did not say anything new here. All he was doing was repeating what Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI had written in Principles of Catholic Theology in 1982 that found its way into the supposedly “unofficial” Ravenna Document twenty-five years later on the ninetieth anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal.
Then again, synodality and collegiality among heretics is quite logical.
June 30, 2013: Do not succumb to a “nostalgia for the past”
Closing out the month of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, Jorge Mario Bergoglio used his Angelus address to condemn those who “succumb” to a “nostalgia for the past” as though there are large numbers of Catholics in the conciliar structures who have such a nostalgia. As we learned just recently, that is, about a month ago now, that anyone, especially the young, has such a “nostalgia” bothers him to the point of obsession.
This is what the current antipope said on June 30, 2013:
his Sunday’s Gospel (Lk 9:51-62) shows a very important step in the life of Christ: the moment in which, as St Luke writes, “[Jesus] steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem. (9:51 )” Jerusalem is the final destination, where Jesus, in his last Passover, must die and rise again, and so to fulfill His mission of salvation.
From that time, forth, after the steadfast decision, Jesus aims straight for the finish line, and even to the people he meets and who ask to [be allowed to] follow Him, He says clearly what are the conditions: not having a permanent abode; knowing how to detach oneself from familiar affections; not succumbing to nostalgia for the past.
Jesus also said to his disciples, charged with preceding Him on the way to Jerusalem to announce His coming, not to impose anything: if they do not find willing welcome, they are [simply] to proceed further, to move on. Jesus never imposes. Jesus is humble. Jesus extends invitations: “If you want, come.” The humility of Jesus is like this: He always invites us. He does not impose.
All this makes us think. It tells us, for example, the importance, even for Jesus, of conscience: listening in his heart to the Father’s voice, and following it. Jesus, in his earthly life, was not, so to speak, “remote-controlled”: He was the Word made flesh, the Son of God made man, and at one point he made a firm decision to go up to Jerusalem for the last time – a decision taken in His conscience, but not on His own: with the Father, in full union with Him! He decided in obedience to the Father, in profound intimate attunement to the Father’s will. For this reason, then, was the decision was steadfast: because it was taken together with the Father. In the Father, then, Jesus found the strength and the light for His journey. Jesus was free. His decision was a free one. Jesus wants us Christians to be free as he is: with that liberty, which comes from this dialogue with the Father, this dialogue with God. Jesus wants neither selfish Christians, who follow their egos and do not speak with God, nor weak Christians, without will: “remote-controlled” Christians, incapable of creativity, who seek ever to connect with the will of another, and are not free. Jesus wants us free, and this freedom – where is it found? It is to be found in the inner dialogue with God in conscience. If a Christian does not know how to talk with God, does not know how to listen to God, in his own conscience, then he is not free – he is not free. (Francis the Flexible: Sunday Angelus Disinformation Program.)
As has been demonstrated on this site on numerous occasions, Jorge Mario Bergoglio was merely repeating what Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI had written in Principles of Catholic Theology in 1982 and later found its way into the text of supposedly “unofficial” Ravenna Document twenty-five years later.
Just one among equals with fellow heretics.
There is a definite and quite specific purpose for Francis the Flexible’s relentless campaign of demagoguery against those who have a “nostalgia” for the past.
As has been demonstrated by his refusal to live in the Apostolic Palace and to ask for “blessings” from members of the laity, including children, and his rejection of what he believes to have been the “Renaissance prince” trappings of our true popes, Francis the Flexible is preparing to jettison the doctrine of Papal Primacy, at least in a de facto manner, in order to bring the heresy of “episcopal collegiality” to its ultimate conclusion while at the same time seeking to accommodate the schismatic and heretical Orthodox, who have long desired the conciliar “popes” to proclaim the office of the papacy to be nothing other than that of a “first among equals.”
Quite unlike the conciliar revolutionaries, Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, whose feast we celebrate today, Tuesday, March 18, 2014, defended every one of Holy Mother Church’s doctrines, suffering exile in the manner of his contemporary, Saint Athanasius of Alexandria, at the hands of the Arians for doing so:
Cyril of Jerusalem was given to the study of the Holy Scriptures from a child, and so learnt therein that he became an eminent champion of the orthodox faith. He embraced the monastic institute in perpetual continency, and all hardship of living. He was ordained Priest by holy Maximus, Patriarch of Jerusalem, and undertook with eminent success the task of preaching the word of God to the faithful and of instructing the catechumens. Thus did he compose those truly wonderful Catecheses, wherein he has embraced, clearly and fully, all the teaching of the Church, and stoutly defended every one of her doctrines against the enemies of the faith. His treatment of these subjects was such that he has overthrown therein, not only the heresies which had then come into being, but, by a kind of foreknowledge, even those which were to arise in later times. Of this an instance is his contention for the real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the wondrous Sacrament of the Eucharist. After the death of holy Maximus, the bishops of the province chose Cyril in his place.
In his office of Bishop he had for the faith’s sake, like his blessed contemporary Athanasius, to endure many wrongs and sufferings at the hands of the Arian sect. The Arians could not bear that Cyril should steadfastly withstand their heresy. They assailed him with calumnies, deposed him in a pretended council, and drove him out of his see. To escape their rage he fled to Tarsus in Cilicia, and as long as Constantius lived he bore the hardships of exile. After his death and the accession to the imperial throne of the Apostate Julian, Cyril was able to return to Jerusalem, where he set himself with burning zeal to deliver his flock from false doctrine and from sin. He was driven into exile a second time under the Emperor Valens. But when peace was restored to the Church by Theodosius the Great, and the cruelty and insolence of the Arians were restrained, Cyril was received with honour by the Emperor as one of Christ’s most eminent soldiers, and was restored to his see. With what earnestness and holiness he fulfilled the duties of his exalted office was made manifest by the flourishing state of the church of Jerusalem at that time, of which a picture hath been left for us by holy Basil, who dwelt there for a while when he went to worship at the holy places.
Tradition hath handed down that God Himself crowned with signs from heaven the holiness of this venerable Patriarch. Among these signs is numbered an apparition of a cross, more resplendent than the beams of the sun, which appeared at the beginning of his Patriarchate. Not only Cyril himself, but heathens and Christians alike were eye-witnesses of this marvel, and Cyril first gave thanks to God therefore in the church, and then sent news thereof by letter to the Emperor Constantius. A thing no less wonderful came to pass when the Jews were commanded by the profane Emperor Julian to attempt the restoration of the temple which had been destroyed by Titus. A great earthquake arose, and great masses of fire broke forth from the earth and consumed all the works, so that the Jews and Julian were dismayed and stayed their hand, all the which it can be proved that Cyril had foretold. A little while before his death he was present at the second Council of Constantinople; herein was condemned the heresy of Macedonius, and once more the Arian heresy. After his return to Jerusalem he died a holy death in the 69th year of his age and the 35 th of his episcopate. The Supreme Pontiff Leo XIII. commanded that his office and Mass should be celebrated throughout the universal Church. (The Divine Office, Matins, Feast of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem.)
Why does any Catholic fear losing anything, including friendship and the favor even of relatives, for fleeing from the heretics of conciliarism as we recognize them to be apostates who are incapable of holding office legitimately in the Catholic Church. Should not the example of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem inspire us to be more courageous no matter what it might cost us?
Although those in the “resist while recognize” camp still try to discredit what Mario Francesco “Cardinal” Pompedda said nine years ago was a “canonical doctrine” of the Catholic Church (that a heretic cannot serve in the See of Saint Peter), one specious argument after continues to be urge continues to be swatted down, which is what happened recently with the The “Bad Popes” Argument.)
Praying to Saint Cyril of Jerusalem as we prepare for the great Feast of Saint Joseph tomorrow, let us ask Our Lady, especially through her Most Holy Rosary, to use these days of Lent to defend the Faith in word and in deed as we seek to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves of her Divine Son, Christ the King, through her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, pray for us.