Human beings have a pronounced capacity to permit themselves to get lost in the “trees” without ever seeing the “forest” that surrounds them. It is far easier to look at the “tree” directly in front of you than it is to realize that a forest of similar-looking trees may make navigation out of it quite difficult.
This is what many Catholics, no matter where they fall along the vast expanse of the ecclesiastical divide in this time of apostasy and betrayal, do as they permit themselves to be agitated by all manner of “conservative” talk show hosts an columnists and “talking head” commentators who claim to be “experts” in identifying and “solving” various problems. These commentators are, of course, ignorant to the fact that each supposed crisis upon which their listeners of readers depend upon them for “guidance” and “hope” is but the remote consequence of Original Sin and the proximate consequence of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by Martin Luther’s Protestant Revolution and then institutionalized by the ruse and institutionalization of Judeo-Masonry’s true dictatorship of naturalism. Thus it is that most Catholics in the United States of America permit themselves to get all caught up in the mania of the circuses called elections that are little other than contests between two competing classes of organized crime families, differing only on the extent to which the civil state should control our daily lives. That people still fall for these circuses at this late date is remarkable. However, it is what it is. (See, for example, Rand Paul Channels Lee Atwater, Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney et al.)
Similarly, many “conservative” and traditionally-minded Catholics who are as of yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism in the mistaken belief that they represent those of the Catholic Church jump up and down for joy whenever one of their “bishops” shows up at an abortuary once a month to pray the Rosary or issues some kind of “pro-life” statement.
To applaud a conciliar “bishop” for going to a local abortuary once a month to pray Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary while he offends God in a horrific liturgical rite every day and promotes false doctrines and helps to further undermine the innocence and purity of the young by means of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments is laughable. Those who offend God in these ways can help to restore the foundation of a a just social order as it is only Catholicism that can provide such a foundation, something that the conciliar “bishops,” steeped in the errors of Judeo-Masonry, completely reject as the concept is entirely foreign to their poisoned minds.
There are very few conciliar “bishops,” most of whom believe that the imposition of the death penalty is proscribed by the binding precepts of the Fifth Commandment and that to be “pro-life” one must be opposed to it, who would be so bold as to say openly, if they even believed it privately, that no one who supported the direct, intentional taking of any innocent human life at any time for any reason as a matter of moral principle could be described as “pro-life” as such a person is simply less pro-abortion that one who supports unrestricted baby-killing on demand.
It is also the case that “conservative” and “traditionally-minded” Catholics in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism hold out “hope” when confronted with the reality of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s defections from the Catholic Faith, trying to hang their hats, proverbially speaking, of course, on any hook that their “pope” can give them so as to say, “See, ‘Pope Francis’ is ‘pro-life.’ He’s not so bad after all.'”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio may be a blaspheming heretic and an apostate. He may even think that the taking of innocent preborn life is abhorrent. However, Bergoglio bases his opposition in conciliarspeak, using his own Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013, and the “Second” Vatican Council’s Gaudium et Spes, December 7, 1965, as reference points. By so doing, of course, the Argentine Apostate is simply following the path charted by the soon-to-be “canonized” Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II (see “Canonizing” A Man Who Protected Moral Derelicts, which was published on April 6, 2010) and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.
Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio knows that a few bones thrown to “pro-life” Catholics now and again will incline them to accept his plans for the “reformation” of what is thought to be the Catholic Church, especially as he makes it possible for those engaged in lives of unrepentant sin to receive what is purported to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service and to be fully incorporated into pastoral life as an “outreach” to those said to be living on the “existential peripheries.”
This is what “Pope Francis” did yesterday when addressing members of an Italian pro-life organization, Italian Movement for Life:
“Human life is sacred and inviolable”, he emphasised. “Every civil right is based on the recognition of the first, fundamental right, the right to life, which is not subject to any condition, of a qualitative, economic and certainly not of an ideological nature. Just as the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’ places a clear limit guaranteeing the value of human life, today we must also say ‘No to an economy of exclusion and inequality’. This economy kills. … Human beings are themselves considered consumer goods to be used and then discarded. We have created a ‘throwaway’ culture which is now spreading. In this way life too is discarded”, continued the Holy Father, quoting from his apostolic exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium”.“One of the most serious risks of our age is the divorce of economy and morality, the separation between the opportunities offered by a market which has every technological novelty at its disposal and the basic ethical norms of human nature, which are increasingly neglected. Therefore it is necessary to reaffirm our solid opposition to any direct offence against life, especially when innocent and defenceless, and the unborn child in its mother’s womb is the quintessence of innocence. Let us remember the words of Vatican Council II: ‘Therefore from the moment of its conception life must be guarded with the greatest care while abortion and infanticide are unspeakable crimes’”.“I remember once, a long time ago”, he added, “I participated in a conference with doctors. After the conference I greeted them and while I spoke to them, one of them called me to one side. He had a package and he said to me, ‘Father, I want to leave this with you. These are the instruments I have used to carry out abortions. I have encountered the Lord and repented, and now I fight for life’. He gave me all those instruments. Let us pray for this good man”.“Every Christian has the responsibility of this witness to the Gospel: to protect life with courage and love in all its phases. I encourage you to do this, always with an attitude of closeness and proximity, so that every woman feels considered as a person, listened to, welcomed and accompanied”.“We have spoken about children: there are many of them! But I would also like to speak about grandparents, the other side of life! Because we must also care for grandparents, because children and grandparents are the hope of the people. Children and young people, because they lead the people ahead; and the elderly, because they hold the wisdom of history, they are the memory of the people. Protect life in a time in which children and grandparents enter into this throwaway culture and are regarded as disposable material. No! Children and the elderly are the hope of a population!”He concluded, “The Lord supports the activities you carry out as Help Centres for Life and as a Movement for Life, in particular the project “One of Us”. I entrust you to the heavenly intercession of the Virgin Mother Mary and impart a heartfelt blessing to your families”. (Bergoglio Receives the Italian Movement for Life.)
The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
247. We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an important part of the sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf. Rom 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes 1:9). With them, we believe in the one God who acts in history, and with them we accept his revealed word.
248. Dialogue and friendship with the children of Israel are part of the life of Jesus’ disciples. The friendship which has grown between us makes us bitterly and sincerely regret the terrible persecutions which they have endured, and continue to endure, especially those that have involved Christians.
249. God continues to work among the people of the Old Covenant and to bring forth treasures of wisdom which flow from their encounter with his word. For this reason, the Church also is enriched when she receives the values of Judaism. While it is true that certain Christian beliefs are unacceptable to Judaism, and that the Church cannot refrain from proclaiming Jesus as Lord and Messiah, there exists as well a rich complementarity which allows us to read the texts of the Hebrew Scriptures together and to help one another to mine the riches of God’s word. We can also share many ethical convictions and a common concern for justice and the development of peoples. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013.)
There is no “partial credit” in Catholicism. One either holds to the totality of everything contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith or he does not. Those of you not as of yet convinced of this have got to take seriously the following words of Saint Francis de Sales and Pope Leo XIII:
With reference to its object, faith cannot be greater for some truths than for others. Nor can it be less with regard to the number of truths to be believed. For we must all believe the very same thing, both as to the object of faith as well as to the number of truths. All are equal in this, because everyone must believe all the truths of faith–both those which God Himself has directly revealed, as well as those he has revealed through His Church. Thus, I must believe as much as you and you as much as I, and all other Christians similarly. He who does not believe all these mysteries is not Catholic and therefore will never enter Paradise. (Saint Francis de Sales, The Sermons of Saint Francis de Sales for Lent Given in 1622, republished by TAN Books and Publishers for the Visitation Monastery of Frederick, Maryland, in 1987, pp. 34-37.)
The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. “There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition” (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).
The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. “No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic” (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88). (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)
How is this not clear?
August 1, 2013: Bergoglio’s Silence on Abortion in Brazil Gets “Rewarded”
As noted just above, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s silence about abortion during “World Youth Day,” a silence he justified in Interview One by saying that there was no “necessity” to speak about the issue as young Catholics know what the Catholic Church teaches bore pretty immediate rotten fruit.
Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, a sixty-five year-old Marxist who fought with various Marxist guerilla groups in her youth, rewarded Bergoglio for his discreet “silence” on this “delicate” issue about which the conciliar “bishops” in Brazil said next to nothing and did even less than that as follows:
August 1, 2013, became a day of mourning in Brazil’s history. On this date, reneging on the pledge she made during the presidential campaign, President Dilma Rousseff sanctioned the law opening the gate for the “killing of the innocents.”
Not only are her hands red with blood, but also the hands of those who favored the veiled and hasty way this law was approved by the two houses of the Congress. Particularly to blame are Minister of Health Alexandre Padilha and PT (Workers Party) House representative Iara Bernardi. But also culpable are the members of both Houses who voted for the bill, alleging that the word “abortion” had not been used in the text. . . .
Petitions with thousands of signatures were delivered to the Archdiocese of Rio de Janeiro requesting the Bishops to ask Pope Francis to say a word against the law of abortion during his stay in Rio, and to exhort President Dilma to veto it. I don’t know if the Bishops transmitted the request. What I do know is that Pope Francis did not say a word against the abortion law in his multiple public appearances. If he had done so, I believe Rousseff would not have sanctioned the law.
The Brazilian Conference of Bishops, in its turn, did very little. Millions were expecting it to pressure the President to veto the project. Instead of asking for a total veto, it only requested a partial veto. It received nothing.
The Conference of Bishops in Brazil has been a voice that lulls to sleep the good reactions of pro-life Catholics and the hand that extinguishes the flame of their enthusiasm.
The indignation of millions of Catholics did not find an echo in the voice of the religious authorities. One word from the Pontiff in his long, spectacular stay in Brazil would have sufficed to save the lives of millions of voiceless innocents.
The Pope, who has spoken so much about protecting the poor, in this case forgot to say a word to save millions of poor innocents from a criminal death. This omission occurred at the very moment when the situation was ideal for him to act – he was the center of attention of the country and the world. This omission took place during his visit to the country with largest number of Catholics in the world… (Doors Open for Abortion in the World’s Largest Catholic Country.)
What the writer of this article did not understand or accept is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not “Pope” Francis and that, save for any Eastern rite bishops who are members of the conciliar “episcopal” conference in Brazil, the men posing as ordinaries of dioceses in Brazil are not true bishops and are one with Bergoglio in having placed themselves outside of the Catholic Church by virtue of their adherence to one condemned proposition after another (see Mr. John Lane’s Concerning A SSPX Dossier on Sedevacantism, Gregorius’s The Chair is Still Empty and Why SSPX Priest Fr. Raphael Trytek became a Sedevacantist.)
It is clear that Antipope Francis has cleared his own kind of “pathway” that will indemnify his “bishops” worldwide, including right here in the United States of America, who prefer his false concept of “love” and “charity” to use of prophetic warnings that Successors of the Apostles must give to those in public life who support grave evils that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.
Consider the case of Sean “Cardinal” O’Malley, O.F.M., Cap., who has wrapped himself up in Bergoglio/Francis’s sanctimony over “service to the poor” in the name of building up the Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II’s mythical, Judeo-Masonic “civilization of love”:
SAN ANTONIO — A U.S. cardinal who is an adviser to Pope Francis is responding to concerns among some Roman Catholics that the pope hasn’t spoken out enough against abortion.
In a speech Tuesday to the Knights of Columbus, Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley said Francis emphasizes love and mercy to show what underpins church teaching. Francis does so to “open hearts” in an increasingly secular world, the cardinal said.
“We oppose abortion, not because we are mean or old-fashioned, but because we love people. And that is what we must show the world,” O’Malley said. “We must love all people, even those who advocate abortion. It is only if we love them that we will be able to help them discover the sacredness of the life of an unborn child.”
Francis has made few direct remarks about abortion, marriage and other contentious social issues since his election five months ago. Many Catholics have welcomed the shift in focus as rejuvenating for the church, while others worry that the pope isn’t doing enough to combat abortion. Francis’ immediate predecessors as pope, Benedict XVI and John Paul II, made the abortion issue a priority in their pontificates.
O’Malley spoke in San Antonio at the annual meeting of the Catholic men’s organization. He is one of eight cardinals the pope has appointed to advise him on governing the church and reforming the scandal-plagued Vatican bureaucracy.
“The Holy Father is showing us very clearly that our struggle is not just a political battle or a legal problem, but that we must evangelize and humanize the culture, then the world will be safe for the unborn, the elderly and the unproductive,” O’Malley said. “If we are going to get a hearing in today’s world, it will be because people recognize that authenticity of our lives and our dedication to building a civilization of love.” (Boston cardinal: Antipope talks about love more than abortion.)
Sean O’Malley, who is one of Bergoglio’s Commissars, remains what he and his fellow conciliar revolutionaries, including Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis have been, namely, a fool, a man who falls perfectly in the following description that Pope Saint Pius X, quoting Pope Gregory IX, used to describe Modernists:
The Modernists completely invert the parts, and of them may be applied the words which another of Our predecessors Gregory IX, addressed to some theologians of his time: “Some among you, puffed up like bladders with the spirit of vanity strive by profane novelties to cross the boundaries fixed by the Fathers, twisting the meaning of the sacred text…to the philosophical teaching of the rationalists, not for the profit of their hearer but to make a show of science…these men, led away by various and strange doctrines, turn the head into the tail and force the queen to serve the handmaid.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
Catholics oppose each of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, Sean O’Malley, because we love God as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through His true Church. We oppose abortion because the direct, intentional taking of any innocent human life is proscribed by the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.
We show forth a true love for others only if we will their good, the ultimate expression of which is the salvation of their immortal souls as members of the Catholic Church only if we first love God and are willing to defend His Commandments as they have been entrusted to and explicated by Holy Mother Church without fear of the consequences.
Catholics are not dedicated to a “building a civilization of love.”
Pope Saint Pius X explained that we must endeavor to restore the Catholic City, not some Judeo-Masonic “civilization of love” wherein we are supposed to contend there is a dichotomy between showing “love” for others while opposing with vigor all unjust laws, no matter how pointless it may appear to do so:
But, on the contrary, by ignoring the laws governing human nature and by breaking the bounds within which they operate, the human person is lead, not toward progress, but towards death. This, nevertheless, is what they want to do with human society; they dream of changing its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future City built on different principles, and they dare to proclaim these more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon which the present Christian City rests.
No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker – the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
Catholics dp not seek to “humanize” the culture. We seek to Catholicize it.
Sean O’Malley, who gave us the travesty recounted nearly a year ago now in Antichrist’s Liturgical Presiders and oohed and ahhhed all over the late Edward Moore Kennedy after this egregious pro-abort and pro-pervert died on Tuesday, August 25, 2009, the Feast of the Beheading of Saint John the Baptist (see Another Victim of Americanism; Behold The Free Rein Given to Error; Behold The Free Rein Given to Error; Unfortunate Enough to Be A Baby; Unfortunate Enough to Be A Baby; Beacon of Social Justice?; Spotlight On The Ordinary; What’s Good For Teddy Is Good For Benny; Sean O’Malley: Coward and Hypocrite: More Rationalizations and Distortions?). is not interested in this at all. Neither, of course, is Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis.
Pope Leo XIII used very strong language to condemn those who do not condemn unjust laws without any degree of hesitation or reservation:
10. But, if the laws of the State are manifestly at variance with the divine law, containing enactments hurtful to the Church, or conveying injunctions adverse to the duties imposed by religion, or if they violate in the person of the supreme Pontiff the authority of Jesus Christ, then, truly, to resist becomes a positive duty, to obey, a crime; a crime, moreover, combined with misdemeanor against the State itself, inasmuch as every offense leveled against religion is also a sin against the State. Here anew it becomes evident how unjust is the reproach of sedition; for the obedience due to rulers and legislators is not refused, but there is a deviation from their will in those precepts only which they have no power to enjoin. Commands that are issued adversely to the honor due to God, and hence are beyond the scope of justice, must be looked upon as anything rather than laws. You are fully aware, venerable brothers, that this is the very contention of the Apostle St. Paul, who, in writing to Titus, after reminding Christians that they are “to be subject to princes and powers, and to obey at a word,” at once adds: “And to be ready to every good work.”Thereby he openly declares that, if laws of men contain injunctions contrary to the eternal law of God, it is right not to obey them. In like manner, the Prince of the Apostles gave this courageous and sublime answer to those who would have deprived him of the liberty of preaching the Gospel: “If it be just in the sight of God to hear you rather than God, judge ye, for we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.” (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)
Hey, Sean O’Malley, step right up and meet Pope Pius XI, will ya, fella?
Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother’s womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 30, 1930.)
August 2, 2014: Hope Y’Al Had a Good Ramadan
Jorge Mario Bergoglio commemorated the end of the Mohammedan month-long “Ramadan” observances. Although itt is usually the case that the “president” of the “Pontifical” Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue, Jean-Louis “Cardinal” Tauran, who just loves to issue messages such as “Happy Diwali” and “Happy Vesakh,” “Happy Ramadan and, to paraphrase Timothy Michael Dolan, “Happy Whatever” (see Have a Happy and Happy Vesakh, No, I Mean, Happy Diwali, Wait, Wait, Wait, Is It Ramadan Time Now?–Oops, Let’s Try Again, Ah, Yes, Happy High Holy Days, Right? for just two examples of this madness), Jorge chose to be the star of the show once again.
Here is the message that Bergoglio sent to the Mohammedans at the end of Ramadan:
To Muslims throughout the World
It gives me great pleasure to greet you as you celebrate ‘Id al-Fitr, so concluding the month of Ramadan, dedicated mainly to fasting, prayer and almsgiving.
It is a tradition by now that, on this occasion, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue sends you a message of good wishes, together with a proposed theme for common reflection. This year, the first of my Pontificate, I have decided to sign this traditional message myself and to send it to you, dear friends, as an expression of esteem and friendship for all Muslims, especially those who are religious leaders.
As you all know, when the Cardinals elected me as Bishop of Rome and Universal Pastor of the Catholic Church, I chose the name of “Francis”, a very famous saint who loved God and every human being deeply, to the point of being called “universal brother”. He loved, helped and served the needy, the sick and the poor; he also cared greatly for creation.
I am aware that family and social dimensions enjoy a particular prominence for Muslims during this period, and it is worth noting that there are certain parallels in each of these areas with Christian faith and practice.
This year, the theme on which I would like to reflect with you and with all who will read this message is one that concerns both Muslims and Christians: Promoting Mutual Respect through Education.
This year’s theme is intended to underline the importance of education in the way we understand each other, built upon the foundation of mutual respect. “Respect” means an attitude of kindness towards people for whom we have consideration and esteem. “Mutual” means that this is not a one-way process, but something shared by both sides.
What we are called to respect in each person is first of all his life, his physical integrity, his dignity and the rights deriving from that dignity, his reputation, his property, his ethnic and cultural identity, his ideas and his political choices. We are therefore called to think, speak and write respectfully of the other, not only in his presence, but always and everywhere, avoiding unfair criticism or defamation. Families, schools, religious teaching and all forms of media have a role to play in achieving this goal.
Turning to mutual respect in interreligious relations, especially between Christians and Muslims, we are called to respect the religion of the other, its teachings, its symbols, its values. Particular respect is due to religious leaders and to places of worship. How painful are attacks on one or other of these!
It is clear that, when we show respect for the religion of our neighbours or when we offer them our good wishes on the occasion of a religious celebration, we simply seek to share their joy, without making reference to the content of their religious convictions.
Regarding the education of Muslim and Christian youth, we have to bring up our young people to think and speak respectfully of other religions and their followers, and to avoid ridiculing or denigrating their convictions and practices.
We all know that mutual respect is fundamental in any human relationship, especially among people who profess religious belief. In this way, sincere and lasting friendship can grow.
When I received the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See on 22 March 2013, I said: “It is not possible to establish true links with God, while ignoring other people. Hence it is important to intensify dialogue among the various religions, and I am thinking particularly of dialogue with Islam. At the Mass marking the beginning of my ministry, I greatly appreciated the presence of so many civil and religious leaders from the Islamic world.” With these words, I wished to emphasize once more the great importance of dialogue and cooperation among believers, in particular Christians and Muslims, and the need for it to be enhanced.
With these sentiments, I reiterate my hope that all Christians and Muslims may be true promoters of mutual respect and friendship, in particular through education.
Finally, I send you my prayerful good wishes, that your lives may glorify the Almighty and give joy to those around you. Happy Feast to you all! (Francis the Self-Caricaturist to Muslims for end of Ramadan: Promoting Mutual Respect through Education.)
So much for the First Commandment.
“We are called to respect the religion of the other, its teachings, its symbols, its values. Particular respect is due to religious leaders and to places of worship. How painful are attacks on one or other of these!”
Utter and complete blasphemy.
There comes a point when repeating oneself on these points becomes in and of itself a participation in the madness of the blasphemous heretics who dare to offend the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity, the one and only true God of Divine Revelation.
What new is there to say?
As my first and only witness against Jorge Mario Bergoglio let me bring forth Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, the founder of the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, the Redemptorist Fathers, forward to remind the blasphemer named Jorge Mario Bergoglio that his beliefs are hideous in the sight of the true God of Divine Revelation and mock the witness giving us by the martyrs who gave up their lives rather than even given the appearance of giving any esteem at all to false religions, false religious symbols and false places of worship, each of which belong to the devil:
But to return to the martyrs. The number of Christians who had received the crown of martyrdom, previous to the accession of Constantine, was almost incredible. Many authors calculate the number of those who had laid down their liv r es for the faith to have been nearly eleven millions! So that if this number were equally distributed in the course of one year, thirty thousand would be allotted to each day.
Oh, the beautiful harvest of holy martyrs that paradise has reaped since the preaching of the Gospel ! But, O God ! what will be, on the day of general judgment, the confusion of the tyrants and of all the persecutors of the faith, at the sight of the martyrs once so despised and so maltreated by them, when these celestial heroes shall appear in glory, extolling the greatness of God, and armed with the sword of divine justice to avenge themselves for all the injuries and cruelties exercised against them, as was foretold by David : The high praises of God in their mouths, and two-edged swords in their hands to execute vengeance upon the nations; to bind their kings in fetters, and their nobles in manacles of iron. Then shall the martyrs judge the Neros, the Domidans, and other persecutors, and shall condemn them; yea, as we read in the Gospel of St. Matthew, even to the exterior darkness, where there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth?
But it will be for us a subject of more profitable meditation to reflect upon another scene which the great day of general and irrevocable doom will present the despair of so many Christians who, having died in mortal sin, will behold with unavailing anguish the triumph of so many martyrs, who, rather than lose God, suffered themselves to be despoiled of all things, and underwent the most horrid torments that hell could suggest or tyrants inflict; while they, rather than yield a point of honor or forego a momentary gratification, despised the suggestions of divine grace, and lost their souls forever ! (Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, Victories of the Martyrs, Redemptorist Fathers, 1954 edition, pp. 32-34. Available also online at: Full text of “The complete ascetical works of St. Alphonsus de Liguori.)
The eleven million martyrs who gave up their lives between Nero in 67 A.D. and the time of the Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. refused to do what comes so easily to the conciliar revolutionaries. That is, the early martyrs and Holy Mother Church’s martyrs throughout the ages knew that one had to choose to endure all manner of bodily pain, including unspeakably wretched tortures, rather than to give even a momentary appearance of “respect” for false religions or esteeming their false symbols or treating their temples of false worship as anything other then dens of the devil.
August 7, 2013: Jorge Says “No, no, no!” to convincing another to become a Catholic:
Jorge Mario Beroglio is constantly proving him to be an an enemy of souls. This was very much on display in a video he recorded for Argentine youth on the Feast of Saint Cajeta. Bergoglio’s words and deeds stand in stark in contrast with the truths of the Catholic Faith and the very examples provided by the Apostles and millions of martyrs and countless missionaries that any reader with even a modicum of the sensus fidei can recognize it as coming from an apostle of Antichrist:
Pope Francis said, “Do you need to convince the other to become Catholic? No, no, no! Go out and meet him, he is your brother. This is enough. Go out and help him and Jesus will do the rest.
“Your heart, when you encounter those in greater need, will start to grow and grow and grow,” the pope said. “Encounters multiply our ability to love.” (Francis the Insane Dreamer, Rebel and Miscreant joins pilgrims — via video — at Shrine of St. Cajetan.)
So much for the Apostles, all but one of whom traveled to distant lands to seek with urgency the unconditional conversion of non-Catholics to the true Faith (Saint James
So much for the Fathers and the Doctors of the Church.
So much for the eleven million martyr during killed by the caesars and the minions between 67 A.D. and 313 A.D.
So much for the work of Saint Patrick in Ireland.
So much for the work of Saint Augustine of Canterbury in England.
So much for the work of Saint Boniface in Germany.
So much for the work of Saint Henry the Emperor in seeking the evangelization of Central Europe, including Hungary.
So much for the work of Saint Hyacinth in Bohemia, in his own native Poland and in parts of Russia.
So much for the work of Saint Francis of Assisi to convert the Mohammedans.
So much for the work of Saint Vincent Ferrer with the Jews and Mohammedans of southern France and in parts of the Iberian Peninsula.
So much for the work of Saint Francis de Sales with the Calvinists in Switzerland and France.
So much for the work of Saint Francis Xavier in India and Japan.
So much for the martyrdom of Saint Fidelis of Sigmaringen at the hands of the Calvinists.
So much for the martyrdom of Saint Josaphat at the hands of the Orthodox.
So much for the work and the martyrdom of the English Martyrs.
So much for the work and the martyrdom of the North American Martyrs.
So much for Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s being a member of the Catholic Church.
August 11, 2013: Another Shout-Out to the Mohammedans
After the Angelus prayer, Pope Francis departed from his prepared remarks to recall that this coming Thursday is the solemnity of Mary’s Assumption into Heaven and said on that day we will honour Her. He then said he wished to send greetings to Muslims, our brothers, throughout the world who have just finished celebrating the end of the holy month of Ramadan . Referring to his earlier message released to mark this event, the Pope said he hoped that Christians and Muslims will strive to “promote mutual respect, especially through the education of the new generations.” (Pope Francis greets Muslims and urges both Christians and Muslims to promote mutual respect.)
Bergoglio’s efforts to promote “mutual understanding through education” were praised on August 9, 2013, by “Archbishop” Kevin McDonald, who is the director of the office of “interfaith relations” of the “episcopal” conference of England and Wales:
(Vatican Radio) Muslims around the world have been marking the end of their holy month of Ramadan which concluded with the feast of Eid al-Fitr on Thursday. Pope Francis sent a personal message marking this special feast day, expressing his “esteem and friendship for all Muslims, especially those who are religious leaders.”
Focusing on the theme ‘Promoting mutual respect through education’, the message stresses the importance of thinking, speaking and writing respectfully about others and always avoiding unfair criticism or defamation. Families, schools, religious teaching and the media, it says, all have a role to play in achieving this goal.Underlining the importance of positive interreligious relations, the Pope says Christians and Muslims are called to respect the teachings, symbols, values and especially the leaders and places of worship of the other religion.
To find out more about the impact of this papal message on Christian-Muslim dialogue, Philippa Hitchen spoke to Archbishop Kevin McDonald, head of the English and Welsh bishops’ office for interfaith relations:
“I think it’s very significant because Pope Francis has emerged as an international figure, people are talking about him and he’s very much part of the landscape so I think the fact that he is sending a message in person has been very well received.…
At the Bishops Conference we circulate it to all dioceses and send it to a long list of Muslim contacts, but we also encourage priests at the local level to take it round to their mosques….so it has quite a wide circulation….
I think there is a lot of goodwill in England….we had this awful event of the killing of Lee Rigby and shortly after that, I and other religious leaders were invited to the local mosque and we had a very good meeting…..I felt there was a very real sense that we need to do something together…I think there’s an increasing number of people in this country who do have a sense that they need to nurture their young people in a different kind of way and to take steps to counteract any danger of radicalisation – the picture is mixed but there are a lot of positive signs…..” (Impact of Antipope’s message to Muslims for end of Ramadan.)
These men are delusional.
To quote John Joseph “Jackie Boy” Sullivan, these men are “out of their cotton pickins’.”
Here’s a reminder how all of that “mutual respect and understanding through education was working out eight months ago now:
The Egyptian defense minister has ordered the repair and reconstruction of all churches that suffered damage in the country’s violent demonstrations since the Egyptian military removed President Mohamed Morsi from power last month.
Defense minister Col. Gen. Abdel Fattah El-Sisi intends to fix the damage to Coptic churches at Rabaa Adaweya and Nahda squares, according to a report by the Mid-East Christian News.
Dozens of churches were attacked and burned in riots after thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of Cairo and other Egyptian cities to demand the end of what they call military rule, following the removal of Morsi on July 3. Many of Morsi’s supporters have voiced criticism at Egypt’s Christian minority for largely supporting the military’s decision to oust him from office.
“The Egyptian defense minister ordered the engineering department of the armed forces to swiftly repair all the affected churches, in recognition of the historical and national role played by our Coptic brothers,” read a statement that aired on Egyptian television.
Bishop Mousa thanked Sisi for his efforts to repair the damaged churches.
“We thank Col. Gen. Sisi for commissioning the brave Egyptian armed forces to rebuild the places of worship damaged during the recent events,” Bishop Mousa said on Twitter.
17 deaths were reported Friday after several days of violence that caused more than 638 deaths and 4,000 injuries in clashes between Morsi supporters and Egyptian military forces.
The Maspero Youth Union, a Coptic Christian youth movement, says there’s a “retaliation war” against the religious minority, which makes up around 10 percent of Egypt’s population, according to a report by AFP.
The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR), an Egyptian NGO, says at least 25 churches were torched this week, and attackers also targeted Christian schools, shops and homes across all 27 provinces. (Military Chief Vows to Rebuild Coptic Churches.)
It should be apparent that both Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and Jorge Mario Bergoglio consistently understate the full force of the Mohammedan fury that has been directed at Christian church, schools, shops and homes across the entirety of the country of Egypt. Neither adherent of Judeo-Masonry can bring himself to speak the truth as Obama/Soetoro is a Islamophile and Bergoglio is an apostate who believes that the less one “offends” adherents of false religions by esteem their symbols and their places of false worship, each of which is a den of the devil, is the more that their can be “dialogue” and “respect.” Bergoglio does not even believe that it is necessary to convert anyone, including Mohammedans.
The truth is, however, that even the lion’s share of Mohammedan “clerics” and those who follow them do not believe any of madness of “dialogue” and “encounter” as they take their false religion seriously.
This evokes memories of the time a Mohammedan imam walked out of an event staged at the Notre Dame Pontifical Institute in Jerusalem on March 23, 2000, as Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and the grand rabbi of Jerusalem shared the same stage with the imam during an “interreligious meeting.” The imam had the personal integrity to leave during the ceremony as he recognized that he was giving public credibility to what he considered to be two false religions, something that Wojtyla/John Paul II did consistently throughout his false “pontificate.”
August 22, 2013: No Peace Without Dialogue
Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the Insane Dreamer, Rebel and Miscreant, also believes that “dialogue” is what brings peace, not Christ the King, something that both Karol Wojtyla/John Paul and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI both preached in their apostate right, and thus it is time for the second recent statement of the currently reigning universal public face of apostasy:
Peace cannot be built without dialogue founded on meekness. Pope Francis said this on Wednesday morning, 21 August, to a group of students and teachers of the Japanese Seibu Gauken Bunri Junior High School in Tokyo, Japan, who had gathered in the Vatican’s San Damasus Courtyard. “All the wars, all the strife, all the unsolved problems over which we we clash”, the Pope said, “are due to the lack of dialogue”. Thus “when there is a problem” it is right to have recourse to “dialogue: this creates peace”.
With the young Japanese the Pope pointed out in particular the importance of “becoming acquainted with other people and other cultures”. This experience “makes us grow”. Indeed, “if we are isolated in ourselves”, he explained, “we have only what we have, we cannot develop culturally; instead, if we seek out other people, other cultures, other ways of thinking, other religions, we go out of ourselves and start that most beautiful adventure which is called ‘dialogue’”. Dialogue, however, the Pope warned, does not allow for closure and conflict, “because we talk to each other to find ourselves and not in order to quarrel”.
And in this perspective, Pope Francis concluded, there is the importance of “meekness, the ability to find people, to find culture peacefully; the ability to ask intelligent questions: “But why are you thinking like this? Why does this culture do this?”. Listening to others then speaking. First listening, then speaking. All this is meekness”. (There is no peace without dialogue.)
“Dialogue” “creates peace”?
This man is mad, and he keeps showing us that he is mad by repeating this nonsense of “peace” being built through “dialogue.”
Who says so?
Let’s look, yes, yet again, at what Pope Pius XI said about the constitutive elements of peace in the world and what can produce it:
45. When, therefore, governments and nations follow in all their activities, whether they be national or international, the dictates of conscience grounded in the teachings, precepts, and example of Jesus Christ, and which are binding on each and every individual, then only can we have faith in one another’s word and trust in the peaceful solution of the difficulties and controversies which may grow out of differences in point of view or from clash of interests. An attempt in this direction has already and is now being made; its results, however, are almost negligible and, especially so, as far as they can be said to affect those major questions which divide seriously and serve to arouse nations one against the other. No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road.
46. There exists an institution able to safeguard the sanctity of the law of nations. This institution is a part of every nation; at the same time it is above all nations. She enjoys, too, the highest authority, the fullness of the teaching power of the Apostles. Such an institution is the Church of Christ. She alone is adapted to do this great work, for she is not only divinely commissioned to lead mankind, but moreover, because of her very make-up and the constitution which she possesses, by reason of her age-old traditions and her great prestige, which has not been lessened but has been greatly increased since the close of the War, cannot but succeed in such a venture where others assuredly will fail. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)
Anyone with a modicum of the sensus Catholicus can see the the Catholic in this picture is Pope Pius XI, not “Pope Francis.”
August 31, 2013: Pietro Parolin Appointed to Replace Tarcisio Bertone
“Archbishop” [now “Cardinal”] Pietro Parolin was appointed by Jorge Mario Bergoglio to replace his former superior, Tarcisio “Cardinal” Bertone, as the Secretary of State for the Holy See in its conciliar captivity.
Parolin has made himself back at home again in the offices of the Vatican Secretariat of State. He, of course, was well-qualified this “position” after having served as a weapon of mass destruction within the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
Indeed, Pietro Parolin played the role of “diplomat” when serving as the conciliar church’s nuncio in Venezuela, treating the late Marxist tyrant Hugo Chavez with great respect as he attempted to tamp down overt criticism of the now-deceased thug on the part of some of the conciliar “bishops” in Venezuela.
One will see in the following interview that he gave to the “ultra-progressive” National Catholic Reporter a short while before his promotion eight months ago back to the Vatican that he is a supporter of “liberation theology, rejecting most gratuitously, of course, any Marxist models, and that he downplays the scandal of perverted clergy in his perverted and corrupted conciliar church:
What’s happening in the church since March 13, when Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio was elected as the new pope?
Parolin: I don’t believe anything new is happening in the church, in the sense that the new is also ordinary.
[The church] is always well-disposed to renewal?
Exactly so, always, because the principal protagonist in the church is the Holy Spirit
How do you interpret the ‘Francis phenomenon’?
What’s struck me, and I consider it a miracle of the election of Pope Francis, is the sudden change of climate that was felt immediately. Before, there was pessimism – unjustly, I would add, because Pope Benedict XVI did everything possible to reform the church, if we look, for instance, at his enormous commitment with regard to pedophilia.
Could it be said that the tension of facing pedophilia and corruption exhausted him?
Yes, I suppose so. We were focused on these problems, and it seemed that maybe the church didn’t have the capacity for renewal. All of a sudden, after the election and the first pronouncements of the pope, the situation changed completely and a new climate of hope took hold, of renewal, of a future that beforehand seemed irreparably blocked. I truly consider this a great miracle. The courage and the humility of Benedict XVI to take a step back moves in the same direction as the courage and humility of Francis to accept the papacy, and the new air that he’s brought.
What’s struck you the most about the papacy of Francis?
What’s struck me is that the perception of the church has been completely changed. From a church under siege with thousands of problems, a church that seemed, let’s say, a little sick, we’ve passed to a church that has opened itself up.
He’s revitalized it?
Exactly so, and now it’s looking with great confidence towards God’s future. That seems to me the most beautiful thing that’s happened.
What does it mean that the pope made his first trip to Brazil?
It’s a coincidence, because it had already been decided that World Youth Day would take place in Brazil. Correspondingly the pope, any pope, would be there.
Was it also a coincidence that Pope Francis chose the poor, and Brazil is the cradle of the Theology of Liberation?
On the Theology of Liberation, and I say this with all my heart because there was much suffering, things are much clearer now. Recent years, painfully, passionately, have served to make things more clear. The church, it’s true, has a preferential option for the poor, and it’s a choice the church has made at the universal level. But it’s also always clarified that it’s not an exclusive option, or one that excludes anyone.
But it’s preferential?
Preferential, yes, but that means the church is for everyone, the church offers the Gospel to all, but with a special attention to the poor because they are the Lord’s favorites, and also because we’ve learned anew that the Gospel can be embraced only with an attitude of poverty.
The simplicity proclaimed by Francis …
Pope Francis moves in this direction. The attention that he’s shown from the first moments of his pontificate puts this fundamental option at the center of the church, an option for everyone but with special attention to the poor.
That’s a reading that applies to the Latin and Caribbean faithful. What reading of it can be made among the African faithful?
There are differences. The Theology of Liberation has had fewer repercussions in Africa with respect to Latin America.
Also, in Europe, with the worker priests …
Yes, certainly, but not in Africa. Francis’ concern for the poor is good news for Africa, which is living with conflicts in various countries and situations of injustice. I think that the emphasis of the pope is also important for Africa, for everything that regards the theme of social justice and peace, which were considered in the last two synods for Africa held in the Vatican.
For the church, poverty is a human subject. But it’s also a classic theme for the Marxists …
The church must not assume Marxist categories, or class struggle. One of the points among the different problems that arose [with the Theology of Liberation] was the use of Marxist categories and the idea of class struggle that was proclaimed. The church always proposes, as the first step, the education of persons in the idea of solidarity, a solidarity that allows the problems of society to be overcome both personally and structurally. On the subject of poverty, the church has an enormous patrimony in its social doctrine.
What weight does the church give to corruption as the base of these problems?
The pope has drawn attention to it. It’s a theme that also concerns the church, because it knows that corruption damages the fabric of society and generates many consequences, such as those already mentioned. It’s important that there be a fight against corruption, above all in education, which is a fundamental arena for the church. [We need] education of the person toward legality, honesty, coherence between words and deeds, in such a way that people are capable of rejecting these temptations and know how to build a healthy, positive society.
Pope Francis has encouraged interreligious relations, at least among the monotheistic religions … what about Latin and Caribbean mixtures of beliefs?
On ecumenical dialogue among Christians as well as interreligious dialogue, the pope is following in the footsteps of his predecessors, for example John Paul II with his meeting in Assisi. Pope Francis is very clear that we have to move forward in this direction.
But what about Latin and Caribbean mixtures of beliefs?
The church follows the principle of St. Paul of taking note of everything and choosing what’s good and healthy. Everything that’s compatible with the Gospel can be taken up.
What view does the church take of the social suffering as a result of the economic crisis in diverse countries of Europe?
The church and all Christians, as the Second Vatican Council said, the fiftieth anniversary of which we’re now celebrating, takes upon itself all the dramas of the contemporary world. The church has issued an appeal that human suffering be considered in any solution to the crisis Europe is currently experiencing.
What’s happening with ‘savage capitalism’? John Paul II criticized it, Benedict XVI criticized it, and so has Pope Francis. Is this tendency still dominant in Europe?
It’s a worrying thing. The church continues to ask that in whatever needs to be corrected, human imperatives should take precedence over economic ones, the ethical and moral dimension. The human person must take precedence over the laws of the market. From there, a sense of love for the poor, of solidarity, of a truly human economy that helps people develop and doesn’t humiliate them or damage their dignity, is born. This is a fundamental concern for the church, and we’ve got all the papal encyclicals from Rerum Novarum of Leo XIII in 1891 up to Caritas in Veritate of Benedict XVI in 2009. (Parolin’s last interview before taking top Vatican job.)
Only a few pertinent comments need to be made about this very standard fare from the mouth of a believing conciliarist.
First, anyone who can claim that there is any kind of connection between Pope Leo XIII’s Rerurm Novarum, May 15, 1891, and such conciliar “papal” encyclical letters as Paul the Sick’s Populorum Progressio, March 26, 1967, which spoke of a “population” problem which was then an is now entirely nonexistent, and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s Caritas in Veritate, June 29, 2009, which called for an globalist “economic” overseer that would respect both national sovereignty and the principle subsidiarity even though such a entity is incapable of realizing either goal, is, to be put it most charitably, delusional.
Second, while it is correct to assert that the “Second” Vatican Council took “upon itself the dreams of the contemporary world,” it must be remembered that those “dreams” were Judeo-Masonic and were premised upon the fundamental and specific rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King and of the immutable teaching that Catholicism and Catholicism alone is the one and only foundation of personal and social order.
Third, to assert that Saint Paul the Apostle supported syncretism’s mixture of elements of the true religion with false religions, including outright superstition, is both heretical in and of itself and blasphemous.
St. Paul also exhorts us to “give thanks to God the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His beloved Son.” (Col. 1:12) Where it is manifest that as the true Faith of Jesus Christ is the only light that conducts to salvation, and that it is only in His Kingdom — that is, in His Church — where that heavenly light is to be found, so all false religions are darkness; and that to be separated from the Kingdom of Christ is to be in darkness as to the great affair of eternity. And indeed what greater or more miserable darkness can a soul be in than to be led away by seducing spirits, and “departing from the faith of Christ, give heed to the doctrine of devils”. (1 Tim. 4:1) St. Paul, deploring the state of such souls, says that they “have their understandings darkened, being alienated from the life of God, through the ignorance: that is in them, because of the blindness of their hearts”. (Eph. 4:18)
On this account the same holy apostle exhorts us in the most pressing manner to take care not to be seduced from the light of our holy Faith by the vain words and seducing speeches of false teachers, by which we would certainly incur the anger of God; and, to prevent so great a misery, He not only exhorts us to walk as children of the light in the practice of all holy virtues, but expressly commands us to avoid all communication in religion with those who walk in the darkness of error. “Let no man deceive you with vain words, for because of these things cometh the anger of God upon the children of unbelief; be ye not, therefore, partakers with them. For ye were theretofore darkness; but now light in the Lord; walk ye as the children of the light, . . . and have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness”. (Eph. 5:6)
Here, then, we have an express command, not only not to partake with the unfruitful works of darkness — that is, not to join in any false religion, or partake of its rites or sacraments — but also, not to have any fellowship with its professors, not to be present at their meetings or sermons, or any other of their religious offices, lest we be deceived by them, and incur the anger of the Almighty, provoke Him to withdraw His assistance from us, and leave us to ourselves, in punishment of our disobedience. (The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)
Saint Paul put the lie to Pietro Parolin’s blasphemous assertion about his teaching and to your support for Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis’s commitment to false ecumenism.
In other words, good readers, Pietro “Cardinal” Parolin, stands a very good chance of succeeding Jorge Mario Bergoglio as the head of the counterfeit church of conciliarism if Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ does not intervene before Bergoglio resigns or dies. Pietro Parolin is simply another human weapon of mass destruction to be found in a false church that is founded on a Modernist deconstruction and destruction of the Catholic Faith.
September 2, 2013: Happy New Year, Talmudists:
Just a few weeks shy of hosting his favorite pro-abortion, pro-perversity rabbi, Abraham Skorka, at the Casa Marta, Jorge Mario Bergoglio expressed his best wishes for a happy celebration of Rosh Hashanah three days in advance of its beginning on September 5, 2013:
(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis on Monday wished Jews around the world a sweet and peaceful year 5774, called for increased dialogue among the world’s religious communities and opposed fundamentalism in any faith. During his first private audience with an international Jewish leader since being elected Catholic pontiff in March, Francis asked World Jewish Congress (WJC) President Ronald S. Lauder to convey his New Year message to Jewish communities world-wide and said he also needed a sweet year because of the important decisions lying ahead. Using the Hebrew words for ‘Happy New Year’, Pope Francis wished a “Shana Tova” and asked the WJC to share that message with the Jewish people worldwide. Lauder presented the pope with a Kiddush cup and a honey cake.
At their meeting, which was held in an informal atmosphere at the Vatican, Lauder and the Catholic pontiff spoke about the situation in Syria and agreed to speak out against attacks on religious minorities, such as Coptic Christians in Egypt and against trends to restrict well-established religious practices such as circumcision. The pope specifically expressed concern about the bans on kosher slaughter in Poland and directed Cardinal Kurt Koch, the president of the Vatican’s Commission for Relations with the Jews, to investigate and host a follow-up meeting as early as next week.
Francis reiterated a statement made last June that “a Christian cannot be an anti-Semite” and said that “to be good a Christian it is necessary to understand Jewish history and traditions.” He added that Jews and Christians shared the same roots and that dialogue was the key to building a common future. Referring to the conflict in Syria, the pope called the killing of human beings unacceptable and said “world leaders must do everything to avoid war.”
After the meeting, Ronald S. Lauder praised the pope for his unwavering commitment to dialogue and said that “Pope Francis’ leadership has not only reinvigorated the Catholic Church but also given a new momentum to relations with Judaism. Never in the past 2,000 years have relations between the Catholic Church and the Jewish people been so good. The leadership of successive popes over the past five decades has helped to overcome a lot of prejudice. This allows us now to work together in defending religious freedom wherever it is under threat and whichever community is affected.” (Communication issued by the World Jewish Congress–World Jewish Congress.)
The conciliar “popes” and their “bishops” have said consistently that they are not interested in any organized program of converting the Jews as this would do “violence” to the new-found bond of “brotherhood” that they have forged with the Talmudic descendants of the ancient enemies of Christ the King.
September 6-7, 2013: Bergoglio: Expert at Slaying Straw Men:
Bergoglio/Francis spent two consecutive mornings, September 6 and 7, 2013 at the Improv, otherwise known as the Casa Santa Marta, slaying various straw men.
It was on Friday, September 6, 2013, that Bergoglio disparaged the Catholic past as representing nothing other than the “old wineskins” that cannot hold the “novelty” of the Gospel of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. He followed that up the next day, Saturday, September 7, 2013, by disparaging those who obey “laws” and practice certain devotions without knowing what they are doing or why they are doing them other than to engage in empty rituals that can never take them to “see Jesus.”
Here is a review of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s spiel about all of us crazy traditionalists representing the “old wineskins,” thereby misrepresenting and distorting the meaning of Our Lord’s speaking to us about not putting new wine into old wine bottles:
“It occurs to us: ‘But, Father, how? These were found on streetcorners, and you ask of them a wedding garment? This is wrong … What does this mean? It is very simple! God asks only one thing of us in order that we gain admittance to the feast: our all. The Bridegroom is the most important. The Bridegroom fills all! This brings us to the first reading, which speaks so powerfully of Jesus as the all – the firstborn of all creation. In Him were created all things, through Him and with a view to Him were they created. He is the center: the all.”
“[Jesus],” added Pope Francis, “is also the Head of the Body of the Church: He is the principle. God gave to him fullness, totality, in order that, in Him, all things might be reconciled.” If, therefore, the first attitude is celebration, Pope Francis said, “The second attitude is [that of] recognizing Him as the One.” The Lord, he went on to say, “asks us only this: to recognize Him as the One Bridegroom.” He is, “always faithful, and asks fidelity of us.” This is why when we desire, “to have a little party of our own, which is not that great feast, it does not do.” He went on to say that the Lord tells us that we cannot serve two masters: one either serves God, or the world:
“This is the second Christian attitude: to recognize Jesus as the whole, the center, the totality. But we will always be tempted to cast this newness of the Gospel, this new wine, into old attitudes … It is sin, we are all sinners. Only recognise it: ‘This is a sin.’ Do not say this goes with this. No! The old wineskins cannot hold the new wine. This is the novelty of the Gospel. Jesus is the bridegroom, the bridegroom who weds the Church, the groom who loves the Church, who gives his life for the Church. Jesus is the one who makes this wedding feast! Jesus asks us the joy of festivity, the joy of being Christians. He also asks of us the all: it’s all Him. If we have something that is not of Him, repent, ask for forgiveness and move on. May the Lord give us, to all of us, the grace always to have this joy, as if we were attending a wedding. And also have this faithfulness to the only bridegroom, who is the Lord.” (Friday’s Session of Ding Dong School at the Casa Santa Marta.)
Have a party, will ya?
Live it up.
Have a blast.
There is no need to do penance for one’s sins. That’s so Pharisaical and Pelagian, after all, don’t ya know?
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis drove home the necessity of shedding the “old attitude during the session of Ding Dong School Of Apostasy on Saturday, September 7, 2013, by disparaging those are attached to old devotions and “private revelations” that can never lead them to truly know Our Lord:
Citing the Letter of St Paul to the Colossians (1:21-23) the Holy Father talked about what the Apostle said: that Jesus reconciled us “in his body of flesh by his death – we reconciled us all – in order to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him; provided that you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast”. Jesus is the centre and he regenerates us and grounds us in faith. But “the pharisees instead put the law at the centre of their religiosity. And Jesus says of them: they are laying burdens on people’s shoulders”.
If Jesus is not at the centre, the Pontiff said, “other things are”. And today “we encounter many Christians without Christ, without Jesus. For example, those with the sickness of the pharisees and there are Christians who put their faith, their religiosity, their Christianity, in laws: I must do this, I must do that. Christians by habit”: who do what they do because they must, but in fact, “they do not know what they do”.
Pope Francis wondered: “Where is Jesus?… A command is valid if it comes from Jesus”. There are so many Christians without Christ, like those “who seek out only devotions, but no Jesus. There is something missing, my brother! Jesus is missing. If your devotions lead you to Jesus, then they are good. But if they stay where they are, then something is wrong”. There is another group of “Christians without Christ: those who seek out novelties, special things, they follow some private revelations”, meanwhile Revelation was completed with the New Testament. The Holy Father warned these Christians against the wish to go “to some kind Revelation spectacle, to feel new things. Take up the Bible instead!”. Among Christians without Christ the Pope then mentioned “those who make their souls, so to speak, smell sweet but have not virtue because they do not have Jesus”.
What then is the rule for being a Christian with Christ? And what is the “sign” that someone is in fact a Christian with Christ? It is simple, the Pope explained: “the rule is whatever leads you to Jesus is the valid, and only what comes from Jesus is valid. Jesus is the centre, the Lord, as he himself says”. As a “sign”, he said: it is simple. “ A man or a woman who adores Jesus is a Christian with Jesus. If you can’t worship Jesus, something is missing”. The rule is to “follow what comes from Jesus and do what leads to Jesus. The sign is to adoration of Jesus, prayer and adoration before Jesus”. (Saturday Morning at Ding Show School.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio packed a lot into those two consecutive sessions seven months ago now during his Ding Dong School at the Improv inside of the Vatican Walls.
The false “pontiff” wants us to believe that those who practice various devotions are in essence latter day Pharisees who think that they can win a hearing with Our Lord by what believes to be the “mere multiplication of prayers.” By doing this, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis is throwing out the entire Raccolta of Holy Mother Church’s indulgenced prayers. This makes one wonder if he, not unlike his octogenarian predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, believes in the efficacy of indulgenced prayers for the Poor Souls in Purgatory, if he even believes in Purgatory at all, that is(see From Sharp Focus to Fuzziness for Ratzinger/Benedict’s obfuscation of the doctrine of Purgatory).
To disparage personal devotions as presenting an obstacle to “finding” Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is to demonstrate fidelity to Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, Thomas Cranmer, John Wesley and each of the other Protestant Revolutionaries of the Sixteenth Century and thereafter. It is disparage all of the pious practices of simple and truly humble souls who sought to glorify the Most Blessed Trinity and to make reparation for their own sins and for those of whole world while praying for their own intentions and those of their loved ones and friends.
September 10, 2013, No Triumphalism
Even though almost no one Catholic alive in the conciliar structures today has ever heard of the word “triumphalism,” it is to chase out expel the “devils” and slay those straw men that Bergoglio continued his daily assaults upon them in September of last year, using his session of Ding Dong School of Apostasy on Tuesday, September 10, 2013, go after “triumphalism. This man has been and continues to be relentless in his obsessive desire to slay straw men and tilt at windmills in the belief that he is advancing his revolutionary agenda:
(Vatican Radio) Christians are called to proclaim Jesus without fear, without shame and without triumphalism . Those were the words of Pope Francis at Mass this Tuesday morning at the Casa Santa Marta. The Pope also stressed the risk of becoming a Christian without the Resurrection and reiterated that Christ is always at the center of our life and hope.
“Jesus is the Winner who has won over sin and death.” Those were the words of Pope Francis on Tuesday morning during his Homily at morning Mass. He was referring to the Letter of St. Paul to the Colossians in which the Saint recommends we walk with Jesus ” because he has won, and we walk with him in his victory “firm in the faith.”
This is the key point, the Pope stressed: “Jesus is risen.
” But, the Holy Father continued, it is not always easy to understand . The Pope then recalled that when St. Paul spoke to the Greeks in Athens he was listened to with interest up to when he spoke of the resurrection. “This makes us afraid , it best to leave it as is.” Pope Francis said.
Continuing his Homily the Pope recalled the Apostles, who closed themselves up in the Upper Room for fear of the Jews, even Mary Magdalene is weeping because they have taken away the Lord’s Body . ” …they are afraid to think about the Resurrection.” The Pope noted that “there are also the Christians who are embarrassed. They are embarrassed to “confess that Christ is risen.
Finally, said Pope Francis there is the group of Christians who ” in their hearts do not believe in the Risen Lord and want to make theirs a more majestic resurrection than that of the real one . These, he said are the “triumphalist” Christians.
“They do not know the meaning of the word ‘ triumph ‘ the Pope continued, so they just say “triumphalism”, because they have such an inferiority complex and want to do this …
When we look at these Christians , with their many triumphalist attitudes , in their lives, in their speeches and in their pastoral theology, liturgy , so many things , it is because they do not believe deep down in the Risen One . He is the Winner, the Risen One. He won.
“This, the Holy Father added, is the message that Paul gives to us ” Christ “is everything,” he is totality and hope, “because he is the Bridegroom , the Winner”. (No to triumphalism in the Church, proclaim Jesus without fear and embarrassment.)
Although this was not a new phrase for a conciliar “pope” to use as I heard Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II use it when I sat in the audience at McCormack Field House of The Catholic University of America in Washington, District of Columbia, on Sunday, October 7, 1979 the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary, as he addressed Catholic educators. One will notice from a review of the text of the speech on the Vatican website that the word “triumphalism” is not there. He used it, though. I heard it. It was the first time that I had ever heard the word used. The version on the Vatican site does not include another of Wojtyla/John Paul II’s deviation from its text that involved his joking about the fact that he “tried to be” a university professor Lublin, a self-effacing bit of humor that evoked a good deal of laughter and some applause.
Thus it is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s attacks on “triumphalism” are nothing new. As with almost everything else that comes down from his warped Modernist mind and out of his mouth or onto a computer keyboard, Bergoglio’s screeds about traditionally-minded Catholics are simply standard issue Jesuit revolutionary propaganda that was minted in the late-1960s and popularized in the 1970s before the “cold chill” from in from the “Polish ‘pope'” who, they believed, wanted to “stifle” theological discussion and academic freedom.
An inquiring mind, though, could ask the following questions of Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis about his triumphalist straw men.
First, Jorge, identify just one of these triumphalists. Just one. Name names. Be specific.
Second, name the speeches and identify the liturgy and the pastoral theology that supposedly prove your claim that triumphalists do not “believe in the Risen Jesus.”
Third, do you believe in the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary?
Fourth, do you believe in the Triumph of the Social Reign of Christ the King?
Fifth, if not, do you mean to condemn those who adhere to the immutable truths contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith and who defend the beauty of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition for the honor and glory that it gives to the Most Blessed Trinity in a fitting, reverent and, just by the way, valid and thus sacramentally fruitful unbloody perpetuation or re-presentation of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s offering of Himself on the wood of the Holy Cross to His Co-Equal and Co-Eternal God the Father in Spirit and in Truth?
If you do mean to condemn Catholics who believe in such things, then, please, get on the phone and write me an e-mail to send me your completely worthless Bull of Excommunication.
The putrid venom of this vile, ostentatious narcissist is just incredible to behold on a daily basis. Bergoglio is totally without any self-restraint. He is all impulse and showmanship as he seeks to prove himself better, more sincere, more humble, more caring, more just, more lovable and more “like us” than anyone who has ever been a true Successor of Saint Peter and even more sincere, more humble, more caring, more just, more lovable and more “like us” than any of his conciliar predecessors in his counterfeit church.
September 11, 2013: Bergoglio tells Eugenio Scalfari in a letter that unbelievers can go to Heaven
Presaging Interview Number Three, Jorge Mario Bergoglio wrote to the atheist founder and former editor of La Repubblica, Eugenio Scalfari, to explain to him that unbelievers can go to Heaven:
(Vatican Radio) Does God forgive non-believers? Does absolute truth exist? And is God merely a creation of the human mind?
In a lengthy letter to the former editor of the Italian daily ‘La Repubblica’, Eugenio Scalfari, Pope Francis shares reflections on these three questions and urges all non-believers to engage with Christians in an open and sincere conversation.
In the letter published on Wednesday, the Pope laments the impasse that has grown up over the centuries with those who see Christianity as ‘dark and superstitious,’ in opposition to the ‘light of reason’.
Quoting from the recent encyclical ‘Lumen Fidei’, the Pope stresses that, on the contrary, faith must never be intransigent or arrogant, but rather humble and able to grow in relationship with others.
Responding to the three questions posed by the Italian journalist and writer, the Pope says the key issue for non-believers is that of “obeying their consciences” when faced with choices of good or evil. God’s mercy, he stresses, “has no limits” for those who seek him with a sincere and contrite heart.
Reflecting on the question of absolute truth, Pope Francis says he prefers to describe the truth in terms of a dynamic relationship between each Christian and Jesus, who said, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life’. The truth of God’s love, the Pope insists, is not subjective, but it is only experienced and expressed as a journey, a living relationship with each one of us, in our different social and cultural contexts.
Thirdly, Pope Francis considers the question of God as a creation of the human mind, who will thus disappear when human beings cease to exist on earth. In my experience, he says – and in that of so many other Christians past and present – God is not merely an idea but is a “Reality” of infinite goodness and mercy, revealed to us through his son, Jesus of Nazareth.
Reflecting on the originality of the Christian faith in relations to other religions, the Pope stresses the role of Jesus who renders us all sons and daughters of God, therefore also brothers and sisters to each other. Our arduous task, he says, is that of communicating God’s love to all, not in a superior way, but rather through service to all people especially those on the margins of our societies.
Finally the Pope spoke of his deep respect and friendship for people of Jewish faith – especially those with whom he worked so closely in his native Argentina. Reflecting on the terrible experience of the Shoah, he said, we can never be grateful enough to the Jews who maintained their faith in God, thus teaching us too to remain always open to his infinite love. (Antipope’s letter to non-believers in Italian paper La Repubblica.)
Bergoglio has simply made it easier for the average person, both Catholic and non-Catholic alike, to recognize this what it is: the heresy of universal salvation that had been advanced by the late Father Hans Urs von Balthasar, who died before he could be given a cardinal’s red hat by Wojytyla/John Paul, and about whom Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, a student of Von Balthasar’s, said eight years ago was the “most cultured man” of the Twentieth Century (see Proud Of His Blasphemy And Of His Blaspheming Mentor). Bergoglio himself is a great admirer of Von Balthasar and of the “Communion and Liberation” movement that was created to champion his “contributions” to the “new theology” that was condemned by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950 (see Francis, The Talking Apostate).
As the “Petrine Minister’s” letter to Eugenio Scalfari was nothing other than rehash of the principal points, such as it were, that he thought he had made–along with his predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI–in Lumen Fidei, June 29, 2013, it will suffice to review several excerpts from the letter remind those reading this Bergoglio Year In Review series that Jorge Mario Bergoglio hath not the Catholic Faith in the slightest.
Excerpt Number One:
In particular, I think there are two circumstances which today cause this dialogue to be precious and necessary. This is one of the principal aims of the Second Vatican Council, convened at the behest of John XXIII as well as by the Apostolic Ministry of the Popes who, each with their own sensibility and help have since then continued in the course traced by the Council.
The first circumstance – that refers to the initial pages of the Encyclical – derives from the fact that, down in the centuries of modern life, we have seen a paradox: Christian faith, whose novelty and importance in the life of mankind since the beginning has been expressed through the symbol of light, has often been branded as the darkness of superstition which is opposed to the light of reason. Therefore a lack of communication has arisen between the Church and the culture inspired by Christianity on one hand and the modern culture of Enlightenment on the other. The time has come and the Second Vatican has inaugurated the season, for an open dialogue without preconceptions that opens the door to a serious and fruitful meeting. (Full Text of Francis’s letter to atheist Italian journalist Eugenio Scalfari.)
The Sacred Deposit of Faith, which includes the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and Natural Law?
“A lack of communications has been arisen between the Church and the culture inspired by Christianity on the one hand and the modern culture of Enlightenment on the other”?
Saint Paul the Apostle had something to say about this:
 Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?  And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever?
 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God; as God saith: I will dwell in them, and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  Wherefore, Go out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing:  And I will receive you; and I will be a Father to you; and you shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (2 Cor. 6: 14-18.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio was guilty of blasphemous heresy as he would have the misguided Eugenio Scalfari, who will turn ninety years of age this year and is a lifelong atheist, to believe that he was correct to have criticized the Catholic Church in his early career prior to the “enlightenment” represented by the “Second” Vatican Council.
This means that the Catholic Church had to “encounter” the “modern world” to “learn” more about it.
By asserting this, Bergoglio/Francis is saying that Holy Mother Church’s Divine Constitution is imperfect as she has taught us that her Divine Founder and Invisible Head has given her everything she needs to preach His Gospel in the world, about which she knows everything as she knows it is composed of frail men who are in need of converting to her maternal bosom.
In other words, Pope Pius IX was wrong when he condemned the following false assertion near the end of The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864:
80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.- -Allocution “Jamdudum cernimus,” March 18, 1861. (Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s blasphemous rejection of the “old church” and its “closed-in-on-itself attitude” about the world is nothing new. In his effort to make his own “yes church” attractive to Eugenio Scalfari, whose own atheism is the product of the Masonic anticlericalism in Italy that was condemned by true pope after true pope in the Nineteenth Century, Bergoglio, recalling the aims of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII, has merely repackaged Joseph Ratzinger’s own explicit rejection of the “era” of The Syllabus of Errors as well as the anti-Modernist declarations that were made by Pope Saint Pius X:
Let us be content to say here that the text [of Gaudium et Spes] serves as a countersyllabus and, as such, represents on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789. Only from this perspective can we understand, on the one hand, the ghetto-mentality, of which we have spoken above; only from this perspective can we understand, on the other hand, the meaning of the remarkable meeting of the Church and the world. Basically, the word “world” means the spirit of the modern era, in contrast to which the Church’s group-consciousness saw itself as a separate subject that now, after a war that had been in turn both hot and cold, was intent on dialogue and cooperation. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, p. 382.)
Does this mean that the Council should be revoked? Certainly not. It means only that the real reception of the Council has not yet even begun. What devastated the Church in the decade after the Council was not the Council but the refusal to accept it. This becomes clear precisely in the history of the influence of Gaudium et spes. What was identified with the Council was, for the most part, the expression of an attitude that did not coincide with the statements to be found in the text itself, although it is recognizable as a tendency in its development and in some of its individual formulations. The task is not, therefore, to suppress the Council but to discover the real Council and to deepen its true intention in the light of the present experience. That means that there can be no return to the Syllabus, which may have marked the first stage in the confrontation with liberalism and a newly conceived Marxism but cannot be the last stage. In the long run, neither embrace nor ghetto can solve for Christians the problem of the modern world. The fact is, as Hans Urs von Balthasar pointed out as early as 1952, that the “demolition of the bastions” is a long-overdue task. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, p. 391.)
The text [of the document Instruction on the Theologian’s Ecclesial Vocation] also presents the various types of bonds that rise from the different degrees of magisterial teaching. It affirms – perhaps for the first time with this clarity – that there are decisions of the magisterium that cannot be the last word on the matter as such, but are, in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. The nucleus remains valid, but the particulars, which the circumstances of the times influenced, may need further correction.
In this regard, one may think of the declarations of Popes in the last century [19th century] about religious liberty, as well as the anti-Modernist decisions at the beginning of this century, above all, the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the time [on evolutionism]. As a cry of alarm in the face of hasty and superficial adaptations, they will remain fully justified. A personage such as Johann Baptist Metz said, for example, that the Church’s anti-Modernist decisions render the great service of preserving her from falling into the liberal-bourgeois world. But in the details of the determinations they contain, they became obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at their proper time.
(Joseph Ratzinger, “Instruction on the Theologian’s Ecclesial Vocation,” published with the title “Rinnovato dialogo fra Magistero e Teologia,” in L’Osservatore Romano, June 27, 1990, p. 6, cited at Card. Ratzinger: The teachings of the Popes against Modernism are obsolete)
We can see how well the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s “encounter” and “opening” to the “world” has worked.
Having cast aside the Social Reign of Christ the King in favor of the heresy of “religious liberty” and separation of Church and State, which was condemned by numerous popes and termed a “thesis absolutely false” by Pope Saint Pius X in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906, the counterfeit church of conciliarism has made it more possible for the “world” to ignore what its civil leaders think is the Catholic Church and to decriminalize the chemical and surgical assassination of the innocent preborn, grant special “rights,” including that of a perverse concept of “marriage,” to those engaged in perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, to kill off the chronically ill, the disabled, the terminally ill and the elderly in the name of “compassion” and to increase its power over citizens while decreasing their legitimate liberties.
Some success story.
Excerpt Number Two:
The second circumstance, for those who attempt to be faithful to the gift of following Jesus in the light of faith, derives from the fact that this dialogue is not a secondary accessory in the existence of those who believe, but is rather an intimate and indispensable expression. Speaking of which, allow me to quote a very important statement, in my opinion, of the Encyclical: as the truth witnessed by faith is found in love – it is stressed – “it seems clear that faith is not unyielding, but increases in the coexistence which respects the other. The believer is not arrogant; on the contrary, the truth makes him humble, in the knowledge that rather than making us rigid, it embraces us and possesses us. Rather than make us rigid, the security of faith makes it possible to speak with everyone” (n.34). This is the spirit of the words I am writing to you. (Full Text of Francis’s letter to atheist Italian journalist Eugenio Scalfari.)
“Faith is not unyielding”?
The Catholic Faith is indeed most unyielding in the face of error and she makes no terms with it whatsoever:
These firings, therefore, with all diligence and care having been formulated by us, we define that it be permitted to no one to bring forward, or to write, or to compose, or to think, or to teach a different faith. Whosoever shall presume to compose a different faith, or to propose, or teach, or hand to those wishing to be converted to the knowledge of the truth, from the Gentiles or Jews, or from any heresy, any different Creed; or to introduce a new voice or invention of speech to subvert these things which now have been determined by us, all these, if they be Bishops or clerics let them be deposed, the Bishops from the Episcopate, the clerics from the clergy; but if they be monks or laymen: let them be anathematized. (Constantinople III).
These and many other serious things, which at present would take too long to list, but which you know well, cause Our intense grief. It is not enough for Us to deplore these innumerable evils unless We strive to uproot them. We take refuge in your faith and call upon your concern for the salvation of the Catholic flock. Your singular prudence and diligent spirit give Us courage and console Us, afflicted as We are with so many trials. We must raise Our voice and attempt all things lest a wild boar from the woods should destroy the vineyard or wolves kill the flock. It is Our duty to lead the flock only to the food which is healthful. In these evil and dangerous times, the shepherds must never neglect their duty; they must never be so overcome by fear that they abandon the sheep. Let them never neglect the flock and become sluggish from idleness and apathy. Therefore, united in spirit, let us promote our common cause, or more truly the cause of God; let our vigilance be one and our effort united against the common enemies.
Indeed you will accomplish this perfectly if, as the duty of your office demands, you attend to yourselves and to doctrine and meditate on these words: “the universal Church is affected by any and every novelty” and the admonition of Pope Agatho: “nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.” Therefore may the unity which is built upon the See of Peter as on a sure foundation stand firm. May it be for all a wall and a security, a safe port, and a treasury of countless blessings. To check the audacity of those who attempt to infringe upon the rights of this Holy See or to sever the union of the churches with the See of Peter, instill in your people a zealous confidence in the papacy and sincere veneration for it. As St. Cyprian wrote: “He who abandons the See of Peter on which the Church was founded, falsely believes himself to be a part of the Church . . . .
But for the other painful causes We are concerned about, you should recall that certain societies and assemblages seem to draw up a battle line together with the followers of every false religion and cult. They feign piety for religion; but they are driven by a passion for promoting novelties and sedition everywhere. They preach liberty of every sort; they stir up disturbances in sacred and civil affairs, and pluck authority to pieces.(Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
7. It is with no less deceit, venerable brothers, that other enemies of divine revelation, with reckless and sacrilegious effrontery, want to import the doctrine of human progress into the Catholic religion. They extol it with the highest praise, as if religion itself were not of God but the work of men, or a philosophical discovery which can be perfected by human means. The charge which Tertullian justly made against the philosophers of his own time “who brought forward a Stoic and a Platonic and a Dialectical Christianity” can very aptly apply to those men who rave so pitiably. Our holy religion was not invented by human reason, but was most mercifully revealed by God; therefore, one can quite easily understand that religion itself acquires all its power from the authority of God who made the revelation, and that it can never be arrived at or perfected by human reason. In order not to be deceived and go astray in a matter of such great importance, human reason should indeed carefully investigate the fact of divine revelation. Having done this, one would be definitely convinced that God has spoken and therefore would show Him rational obedience, as the Apostle very wisely teaches. For who can possibly not know that all faith should be given to the words of God and that it is in the fullest agreement with reason itself to accept and strongly support doctrines which it has determined to have been revealed by God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived? (Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)
As for the rest, We greatly deplore the fact that, where the ravings of human reason extend, there is somebody who studies new things and strives to know more than is necessary, against the advice of the apostle. There you will find someone who is overconfident in seeking the truth outside the Catholic Church, in which it can be found without even a light tarnish of error. Therefore, the Church is called, and is indeed, a pillar and foundation of truth. You correctly understand, venerable brothers, that We speak here also of that erroneous philosophical system which was recently brought in and is clearly to be condemned. This system, which comes from the contemptible and unrestrained desire for innovation, does not seek truth where it stands in the received and holy apostolic inheritance. Rather, other empty doctrines, futile and uncertain doctrines not approved by the Church, are adopted. Only the most conceited men wrongly think that these teachings can sustain and support that truth. (Pope Gregory XVI, Singulari Nos, May 25, 1834.)
In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)
For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
The Catholic Faith never compromises with error in the slightest as she has the only medicines, Divinely revealed truth and the supernatural helps she offers in the Sacraments, to help fallen man to root out sin in his life and to climb the heights of personal sanctity, which is the necessary foundation of order within souls and within societies.
Excerpt Number Three:
For me, faith began by meeting with Jesus. A personal meeting that touched my heart and gave a direction and a new meaning to my existence. At the same time, however, a meeting that was made possible by the community of faith in which I lived and thanks to which I found access to the intelligence of the Sacred Scriptures, to the new life that comes from Jesus like gushing water through the Sacraments, to fraternity with everyone and to the service to the poor, which is the real image of the Lord. Believe me, without the Church I would never have been able to meet Jesus, in spite of the knowledge that the immense gift of faith is kept in the fragile clay vases of our humanity.
Now, thanks to this personal experience of faith experienced in Church, I feel comfortable in listening to your questions and together with you, will try to find a way to perhaps walk along a path together. (Full Text of Francis’s letter to atheist Italian journalist Eugenio Scalfari.)
An antidote is hereby provided by Pope Saint Pius X:
14. Thus far, Venerable Brethren, We have considered the Modernist as a philosopher. Now if We proceed to consider him as a believer, and seek to know how the believer, according to Modernism, is marked off from the philosopher, it must be observed that, although the philosopher recognizes the reality of the divine as the object of faith, still this reality is not to be found by him but in the heart of the believer, as an object of feeling and affirmation, and therefore confined within the sphere of phenomena; but the question as to whether in itself it exists outside that feeling and affirmation is one which the philosopher passes over and neglects. For the Modernist believer, on the contrary, it is an established and certain fact that the reality of the divine does really exist in itself and quite independently of the person who believes in it. If you ask on what foundation this assertion of the believer rests, he answers: In the personal experience of the individual. On this head the Modernists differ from the Rationalists only to fall into the views of the Protestants and pseudo-mystics. The following is their manner of stating the question: In the religious sense one must recognize a kind of intuition of the heart which puts man in immediate contact with the reality of God, and infuses such a persuasion of God’s existence and His action both within and without man as far to exceed any scientific conviction. They assert, therefore, the existence of a real experience, and one of a kind that surpasses all rational experience. If this experience is denied by some, like the Rationalists, they say that this arises from the fact that such persons are unwilling to put themselves in the moral state necessary to produce it. It is this experience which makes the person who acquires it to be properly and truly a believer.
How far this position is removed from that of Catholic teaching! We have already seen how its fallacies have been condemned by the Vatican Council. Later on, we shall see how these errors, combined with those which we have already mentioned, open wide the way to Atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with that of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being found in any religion? In fact, that they are so is maintained by not a few. On what grounds can Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? Will they claim a monopoly of true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed, Modernists do not deny, but actually maintain, some confusedly, others frankly, that all religions are true. That they cannot feel otherwise is obvious. For on what ground, according to their theories, could falsity be predicated of any religion whatsoever? Certainly it would be either on account of the falsity of the religious .sense or on account of the falsity of the formula pronounced by the mind. Now the religious sense, although it maybe more perfect or less perfect, is always one and the same; and the intellectual formula, in order to be true, has but to respond to the religious sense and to the believer, whatever be the intellectual capacity of the latter. In the conflict between different religions, the most that Modernists can maintain is that the Catholic has more truth because it is more vivid, and that it deserves with more reason the name of Christian because it corresponds more fully with the origins of Christianity. No one will find it unreasonable that these consequences flow from the premises. But what is most amazing is that there are Catholics and priests, who, We would fain believe, abhor such enormities, and yet act as if they fully approved of them. For they lavish such praise and bestow such public honor on the teachers of these errors as to convey the belief that their admiration is not meant merely for the persons, who are perhaps not devoid of a certain merit, but rather for the sake of the errors which these persons openly profess and which they do all in their power to propagate.
15. There is yet another element in this part of their teaching which is absolutely contrary to Catholic truth. For what is laid down as to experience is also applied with destructive effect to tradition, which has always been maintained by the Catholic Church. Tradition, as understood by the Modernists, is a communication with others of an original experience, through preaching by means of the intellectual formula. To this formula, in addition to its representative value they attribute a species of suggestive efficacy which acts firstly in the believer by stimulating the religious sense, should it happen to have grown sluggish, and by renewing the experience once acquired, and secondly, in those who do not yet believe by awakening in them for the first time the religious sense and producing the experience. In this way is religious experience spread abroad among the nations; and not merely among contemporaries by preaching, but among future generations both by books and by oral transmission from one to another. Sometimes this communication of religious experience takes root and thrives, at other times it withers at once and dies. For the Modernists, to live is a proof of truth, since for them life and truth are one and the same thing. Thus we are once more led to infer that all existing religions are equally true, for otherwise they would not survive. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio rejects this, every bit of it, because he believes Pascendi Dominici Gregis represents the bad old “no church” that was unwilling to “encounter” and to “dialogue with” the “world of the Enlightenment.” He is an apostate.
Excerpt Number Four:
Of course a consequence of this is also – and this is not a minor thing – that distinction between the religious sphere which is confirmed by “Give to God what belongs to God and give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar”, distinctly confirmed by Jesus and upon which, the history of the Western world was built. In fact, the Church is called to sow the yeast and salt of the Gospel, and that is the love and mercy of God which reaches all men, indicating the definitive destination of our destiny in the hereafter, while civil and political society has the difficult duty of expressing and embodying a life that is evermore human in justice, in solidarity, in law and in peace. For those who experience the Christian faith, this does not mean escaping from the world or looking for any kind of supremacy, but being at the service of mankind, of all mankind and all men, starting from the periphery of history and keeping the sense of hope alive, striving for goodness in spite of everything and always looking beyond. (Full Text of Francis’s letter to atheist Italian journalist Eugenio Scalfari.)
No room for the Social Reign of Christ the King here. None whatsoever. And if there is no room for the Social Reign of Christ the King as it must be exercised by Holy Mother Church, then there is plenty of room for the devil to use his devices of “religious liberty” and separation of Church and State to advance his nefarious designs for men and their nations.
Far from the Modernist mind of Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis is the realization that the civil state has a positive duty, found in both the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, to pursue the common temporal good in light of fostering those conditions that are conducive for its citizens to realize their Last End, the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity.
September 11, 2013: Blaspheming Our Lady and Holy Mother Church:
Although Bergoglio’s letter to atheist Eugenio Scalfari took up several days’ worth of my time, I did manage to find the full English text of the false “pontiff’s” “general audience” address of Wednesday, September 11, 2013. There was, as per usual, a particularly deadly drop of poison contained in that “general audience” address. This one was so horrific as make it an extended commentary completely unnecessary.
Here is the deadly poisonous bilge found in Bergoglio address of seven months ago:
1. Above all a mother bears life, she carries her child in her womb for 9 months and then delivers him to life, giving birth to him. The Church is like this: she bears us in the faith, through the work of the Holy Spirit who makes her fertile, like the Virgin Mary. The Church and the Virgin Mary are mothers, both of them; what is said of the Church can be said also of Our Lady and what is said of Our Lady can also be said of the Church! Certainly faith is a personal act: “I believe”, I personally respond to God who makes himself known and wants to enter into friendship with me (cf. Lumen Fidei, n. 39). But the faith I receive from others, within a family, within a community that teaches me to say “I believe”, “we believe”. A Christian is not an island! We do not become Christians in a laboratory, we do not become Christians alone and by our own effort, since the faith is a gift, it is a gift from God who is given to us in the Church and through the Church. And the Church gives us the life of faith in Baptism: that is the moment in which she bears us as children of God, the moment she gives us the life of God, she engenders us as a mother would. If you go to the Baptistery of St John Lateran, beside the Pope’s Cathedral, inside it there is an inscription in Latin which reads more or less: “Here is born a people of divine lineage, generated by the Holy Spirit who makes these waters life-giving; Mother Church gives birth to her children within these waves”. This makes us understand something important: our taking part in the Church is not an exterior or formal fact, it is not filling out a form they give us; it is an interior and vital act; one does not belong to the Church as one belongs to a society, to a party or to any other organization. The bond is vital, like the bond you have with your mother, because, as St Augustine says, “The Church is truly the mother of Christians” (De moribus Ecclesiae, I, 30, 62-63: PL 32, 1336). Let us ask ourselves: how do I see the Church? As I am grateful to my parents for giving me life, am I grateful to the Church for generating me in the faith through Baptism? How many Christians remember the date of their Baptism? I would like to ask you here, but each of you respond in you heart: how many of you remember the date of your Baptism? A few people raise their hands, but many others do not remember! But the date of your Baptism is the day of our birth in the Church, the date on which our mother Church gave us life! And now I leave you with some homework. When you go home today, go and find out what the date of your Baptism is, and then celebrate it, thank the Lord for this gift. Are you going to do it? Do we love the Church as we love our mothers, also taking into account her defects? All mothers have defects, we all have defects, but when we speak of our mother’s defects we gloss over them, we love her as she is. And the Church also has her defects: but we love her just as a mother. Do we help her to be more beautiful, more authentic, more in harmony with the Lord? I leave you with these questions, but don’t forget your homework: go find the date of your Baptism, carry it in your heart and celebrate it. (The Church Is A Mother.)
For those of you keeping score at home, here is the syllogism:
If (a) what is said of the Church be said also of Our Lady and (b) all mothers have defects, including Holy Mother Church, then (c) Our Lady must have defects.
No, this is not a “stretch.” This does not do the false “pontiff” any kind of injustice. Words have meaning, including the words spoken by a false “pontiff.”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a despicable, blaspheming heretic. He is as proud as such heretics as Arius or Martin Luther or John Calvin. He thinks he knows it all even though he is only mouthing the same old blasphemous heresies that he learned during the days of formation as a lay Jesuit prior to his installation as a conciliar presbyter on December 13, 1969, the Feast of Saint Lucy.
First, yes, what can be said of Holy Mother Church can be said also of Our Lady.
Second, Our Lady is without any defects whatsoever as she enjoyed the gift of Perfect Integrity of body and soul as one of the doctrinal effects of her Immaculate Conception.
He would return to the work of blaspheming Our Lady yet again just three months later.
September 16, 2013: Francis Takes Up the Cause Once Again of Unmarried Couples:
Speaking once again to the priests and presbyters of the Diocese of Rome, Jorge Mario Bergoglio went so far on Monday, September 16, 2013, the Feast of Saints Cornelius and Cyprian and the Commemoration of Saints Euphemia, Lucy and Gemianus, at the Basilica of Saint John Lateran to say that things in what he believes, albeit erroneously, is the Catholic Church “have never better,” indicating that the “past” is the past and that there will be no “restoration,” including that of the family structure itself.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is possessed.
See for yourselves, although I will certainly offer a few interjectory comments now and again, based as they are on a report found on the Vatican Insider website as the Vatican Radio website provided a very sanitized version of the blasphemer’s gab session at the Basilica of Saint John Lateran seven months ago, noting that a transcription of the whole session might be prepared and posted at some later point:
“Sanctity is greater than scandal”. This was the message Pope Francis extended to Rome’s parish priests at a meeting in St. John the Lateran this morning, the Diocese of Rome’s weekly newspaper RomaSette reports. The Pope asked for this meeting straight after his election. The meeting took place between 10 and 12.30 and was introduced by Vicar Agostino Vallini, followed by a question and answer session between the Pope and the priests.
RomaSette said Pope Francis spoke with the parish priests and answered a wide range of questions, addressing the serious problems affecting the Church clearly but without pessimism. “The Church is not falling to pieces. It has never been better. This is a wonderful moment for the Church, you just need to look at its history. There are saints that are recognised by non-Catholics as well as Catholics – I’m thinking of Mother Theresa – but many men and women perform acts of holiness every day and this gives us hope. Sanctity is greater than scandal,” the newspaper writes. (Francis urges priests to give a helping hand to couples that live together.)
“This is a wonderful moment for the Church, you just need to look at its history.”
Sure, Jorge, you blasphemer, let’s take a look at the history of the Catholic Church.
No true pope of the Catholic Church has ever gone into the temples of false religions and reaffirmed adherents in their false beliefs.
No true pope of the Catholic Church has ever attempted to give “joint blessing” with the “ministers” of false religions.
No true pope of the Catholic Church has ever contradicted his predecessors or dared to put into question any article of the Catholic Faith.
No true pope of the Catholic Church has dared to claim that doctrinal truth can be understood differently at different times given the alleged inability of language to capture and express its varied aspects.
Pope Pius XII explained this latter point very clearly in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950:
In theology some want to reduce to a minimum the meaning of dogmas; and to free dogma itself from terminology long established in the Church and from philosophical concepts held by Catholic teachers, to bring about a return in the explanation of Catholic doctrine to the way of speaking used in Holy Scripture and by the Fathers of the Church. They cherish the hope that when dogma is stripped of the elements which they hold to be extrinsic to divine revelation, it will compare advantageously with the dogmatic opinions of those who are separated from the unity of the Church and that in this way they will gradually arrive at a mutual assimilation of Catholic dogma with the tenets of the dissidents.
Moreover they assert that when Catholic doctrine has been reduced to this condition, a way will be found to satisfy modern needs, that will permit of dogma being expressed also by the concepts of modern philosophy, whether of immanentism or idealism or existentialism or any other system. Some more audacious affirm that this can and must be done, because they hold that the mysteries of faith are never expressed by truly adequate concepts but only by approximate and ever changeable notions, in which the truth is to some extent expressed, but is necessarily distorted. Wherefore they do not consider it absurd, but altogether necessary, that theology should substitute new concepts in place of the old ones in keeping with the various philosophies which in the course of time it uses as its instruments, so that it should give human expression to divine truths in various ways which are even somewhat opposed, but still equivalent, as they say. They add that the history of dogmas consists in the reporting of the various forms in which revealed truth has been clothed, forms that have succeeded one another in accordance with the different teachings and opinions that have arisen over the course of the centuries. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)
Pope Pius XII wrote nothing new sixty-three years ago when he issued Humani Generis. He was merely reiterating the condemnations of the beliefs held by Bergoglio, Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, Albino Luciani/John Paul I, Giovanni Montini/Paul VI and Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII that had been issued by Pope Pius IX as he presided over the [First] Vatican Council and by Pope Saint Pius X in Lamentabili Sane, July 1, 1907, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, Praestina Scripturae, November 18, 1907, and The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910.
Things have never been better?
Average attendance at what most people think is the “weekend liturgy” at twenty-four percent in the United States of America, much less in the rest in the world?
Things have never been better?
Take a look, Jorge, at the statistics gathered from one of your own religious community’s revolutionary strongholds, Georgetown University:
United States data over time:
1965 1975 1985 1995 2000 2005 2013 Total priests 58,632 58,909 57,317 49,054 45,699 42,839 39,600 Diocesan priests 35,925 36,005 35,052 32,349 30,607 27,250 27,250 Religious priests 22,707 22,904 22,265 16,705 15,092 14,137 12,350 Priestly ordinations 994 771 533 511 442 454 511 Graduate-level seminarians 8,325 5,279 4,063 3,172 3,474 3,308 3,694 Permanent deacons na 898 7,204 10,932 12,378 14,574 17,325 Religious brothers 12,271 8,625 7,544 6,535 5,662 5,451 4,407 Religious sisters 179,954 135,225 115,386 90,809 79,814 68,634 51,247 Parishes 17,637 18,515 19,244 19,331 19,236 18,891 17,413 Without a resident priest pastor 549 702 1,051 2,161 2,843 3,251 3,554 Where a bishop has entrusted the pastoral care of the parish to a deacon, religious sister or brother, or other lay person (Canon 517.2) na na 93 314 447 553 428 Catholic population (The Official Catholic Directory) 45.6m 48.7m 52.3m 57.4m 59.9m 64.8m 66.8m Catholic population (self-identified, survey-based) 48.5m 54.5m 59.5m 65.7m 71.7m 74.0m 78.2m Catholic elementary schools — 8,414 7,764 6,964 6,793 6,122 5,636* Students in Catholic elementary schools — 2.557m 2.005m 1.815m 1.800m 1.559m 1.441m* Catholic secondary schools — 1,624 1,425 1,280 1,297 1,325 1,205* Students in Catholic secondary schools — 884,181 774,216 638,440 653,723 653,226 590,883* Mass Attendance
CARA Catholic Poll (CCP): Percentage of U.S.adult Catholics who say they attended Mass once a week or more (i.e., those attending every week).
— — — — 22% 23% 24%
Things have never been better?
Perhaps you and you predecessor, Jorge, think this all represents a “qualitative renewal.” I will tell you that this has been a quantitative renewal for the population of Hell and for the forces of the world, the flesh and the devil that have been unleashed against us in recent decades.
Things have never been better?
Do Catholics adhere to the immutable truths contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith?
Take a look, Jorge, at the statistics within the United States of America alone as gathered by the Pew Center for Religion and Public Policy:
As of 2012, about half of U.S. Catholics support same-sex marriage. This level of support has increased over the past decade, rising from 40% in favor in 2001.
Half of U.S. Catholics overall (51%) say that abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 44% say it should be illegal in all or most cases. Among white Catholics, 54% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases. By contrast, among Hispanic Catholics, 53% say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases. In the general public, 54% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 39% say it should be illegal in all or most cases.
Just 15% of U.S. Catholics say that using contraceptives is morally wrong. Greater percentages say contraception is either morally acceptable (41%) or not a moral issue (36%). Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week are more evenly split. About three-in-ten say using contraceptives is morally wrong (27%). Similar percentages say it is morally acceptable (33%) or not a moral issue (30%). (U.S. Catholics: Key Data from Pew Research.)
Then again, Jorge, you have made it clear that “little” things such as doctrinal and moral integrity do not matter as long as one is devoted to the “poor” and have “mercy” on others.
Things have never been better?
Eight dioceses in the United States have gone into bankruptcy to protect their corrupt officials in the wake of the systematic recruitment, promotion and protection of clerical predators.
The Catholic Faith in Ireland and Belgium has been eviscerated as result of clerical predators and the protection afforded them by the conciliar “bishops,” some of whom have been among the worst predators imaginable.
Catholics in public life feel free to support each of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, including willful murder and the sin of Sodom, with utter impunity, knowing that they will suffer no reprisal from the officials of what they think is the Catholic Church.
Immodesty of dress and indecency of speech is tolerated among the conciliar clergy and laity alike.
A total immersion in a culture of perversity has been fostered in diocese after diocese, parish after parish, school after school, seminary after seminary, university after university.
Things have never been better?
Sure, the “world” loves the conciliar “saints.”
Mother Teresa of Calcutta was a religious syncretist.
The soon-to-be “canonized” Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II make a mockery of what Catholics and non-Catholics alike think is the papacy, spreading religious indifferentism far and wide.
Countless millions upon millions of Catholics have been driven from their parishes, many millions out of the Faith altogether into the waiting arms of various Protestant sects and other millions into rank unbelief, as a result of the conciliar “renewal.”
Things have never been better?
Jorge Mario Bergoglio made it clear eight months ago that things are going to get a whole more better for cohabiting couples in the name of “mercy,” which is why Walter “Cardinal” Kasper’s address to the consistory of conciliar “cardinals” on February 21, 2014, was just a variation of a theme that Bergoglio already had established:
During the meeting, Francis talked about his experiences in Buenos Aires and asked the priests to pray for him as the 60th anniversary of his ordination approaches (on 21 September). Introducing the meeting, the Pope invited the sea of priests gathered in the basilica to cast their minds back to this “first love”, the first time they felt Jesus’ eyes upon them.
The priestly mission is hard work. “Being in contact with his flock is hard work for a priest.” Jesus inspires this hard work, calling priests to go out to the poor, proclaim the Gospel and go on. Of course “praying before the tabernacle and being close to other priests and the bishop” helps. Francis stressed the importance of remembering moments such as the start of one’s vocation, the entry to the seminary and priestly ordination: “Memory is the lifeblood of the Church.”
When asked how he would define himself now given that back in his days in Buenos Sires he simply referred to himself as “priest”, Bergoglio relied:”I really do feel like a priest. I feel like a priest, really, a bishop….That’s what I feel like. And I hank the Lord for this.” “I would be scared to feel more important, you know? That I am scared of, because the devil’s cunning eh? He’s cunning and he makes you feel like you are in power, that you can do this and that …but like St. Peter says, the devil prowls around like a roaring lion. Thank God I haven’t lost that yet have I? And if you ever see that I have, please tell me; tell me; and if you can’t tell me in private, tell me in public, but tell me: “Look, you should change! Because it’s obvious isn’t it?” (Francis urges priests to give a helping hand to couples that live together.)
Hey, Jorge, I’m telling you in public:
YOU ARE A TOOL OF THE DEVIL! YOU ARE A FIGURE OF ANTICHRIST. YOU HATH NOT THE CATHOLIC FAITH. CONVERT TO THE TRUE FAITH AND ABJURE YOUR HERESY. YOU MUST CHANGE AS YOU ARE LEADING SOULS TO HELL WITH YOUR HERESY, BLASPHEMY AND SACRILEGE.
The concluding part of the Vatican Insider report about session that Jorge Mario Bergoglio had with the priests and presbyters of the Diocese of Rome eight months ago made it eminently clear that the head of the counterfeit church of conciliarism wants to do away even with the fig leaf of the conciliar annulment factory in order to ratify illicit marriages according to the same formula used by the Orthodox, something that was near and dear to the heart of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI himself:
Francis concluded his meeting with the Roman clergy by addressing the issues surrounding the annulment of a marriage, a subject that was very important to Benedict XVI. Francis said proposals have been put forward and research is currently underway. The group of eight cardinals and the next Synod of Bishops will discuss this issue in October, Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano reports.
“The problem cannot be reduced to whether” these couples “are allowed to take communion or not because whoever thinks of the problem in these terms doesn’t understand the real issue at hand,” Francis said. “This is a serious problem regarding the Church’s responsibility towards families that are in this situation.” Francis reiterated what he said on the return flight from Rio to Rome after World Youth Day, saying he will be discussing the issue with the group of eight cardinals who will be meeting in the Vatican in early October. Francis added that the issue will also be discussed at the next Synod of Bishops on the Gospel’s anthropological relationship with individual people and the family, so that the whole Synod can look into this problem. “This,” Francis said “is a real existential periphery”. (Francis urges priests to give a helping hand to couples that live together.)
Two words describe the nonsense about the “Gospel’s anthropological relationship with individual people and the family” and of “existential periphery.”
Yes, two little words describe and summarize this revolutionary sloganeering quite nicely, thank you very much.
Those two little words are MORAL RELATIVISM.
September 17, 2013: Jorge and His Widowed Church
One of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s more noteworthy blasphemies was uttered on September 17, 2013, as he called the Catholic Church a “widowed church” who is in “search” for her Bridegroom, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:
Jesus has, “the capacity to suffer with us, to be close to our sufferings and make them His own,” said Pope Francis, who began his reflections with the encounter between Jesus and the widow of Naim, of which Tuesday’s Gospel reading tells. He pointed out that Jesus, “had great compassion” for this widow who had now lost her son. Jesus, he went on to say, “knew what it meant to be a widow at that time,” and noted that the Lord has a special love for widows, He cares for them.” Reading this passage of the Gospel, he then said, that the widow is, “an icon of the Church , because the Church is in a sense widow”:
“The Bridegroom is gone and she walks in history, hoping to find him, to meet with Him – and she will be His true bride. In the meantime she – the Church – is alone! The Lord is nowhere to be seen. She has a certain dimension of widowhood … and that makes me makes me think of the widowhood of the Church. This courageous Church, which defends her children, like the widow who went to the corrupt judge to [press her rights] and eventually won. Our Mother Church is courageous! She has the courage of a woman who knows that her children are her own, and must defend them and bring them to the meeting with her Spouse.”
The Pope reflected on some figures of widows in the Bible, in particular the courageous Maccabean widow with seven sons who are martyred for not renouncing God. The Bible, he stressed, says this woman who spoke to her sons “in the local dialect, in their first language,” and, he noted, our Mother Church speaks to us in dialect, in “that language of true orthodoxy, which we all understand, the language of catechism,” that, “gives us the strength to go forward in the fight against evil”:
“This dimension of widowhood of the Church, who is journeying through history, hoping to meet, to find her Husband… Our Mother the Church is thus! She is a Church that, when she is faithful, knows how to cry. When the Church does not cry, something is not right. She weeps for her children, and prays! A Church that goes forward and does rear her children, gives them strength and accompanies them until the final farewell in order to leave them in the hands of her Spouse, who at the end will come to encounter her. This is our Mother Church! I see her in this weeping widow. And what does the Lord say to the Church? “Do not cry. I am with you, I’ll take you, I’ll wait for you there, in the wedding, the last nuptials, those of the Lamb. Stop [your tears]: this son of yours was dead, now he lives.”
And this , he continued, “is the dialogue of the Lord with the Church.” She, “defends the children, but when she sees that the children are dead, she cries, and the Lord says to her: ‘I am with you and your son is with me.’” As he told the boy at Naim to get up from his deathbed, the Pope added, many times Jesus also tells us to get up, “when we are dead because of sin and we are going to ask for forgiveness.” And then what does Jesus “when He forgives us, when He gives us back our life?” He Returns us to our mother:
“Our reconciliation with the Lord end in the dialogue ‘You, me and the priest who gives me pardon’; it ends when He restores us to our mother. There ends reconciliation, because there is no path of life, there is no forgiveness, there is no reconciliation outside of Mother Church. So, seeing this poor widow, all these things come to me somewhat randomly – But I see in this widow the icon of the widowhood of the Church who is on a journey to find her Bridegroom. I get the urge to ask the Lord for the grace to be always confident of this “mommy” who defends us, teaches us, helps us grow and [teaches] us to speak the dialect.” (Reflecting on our Mother Church.)
“All these things come to me somewhat randomly.”
Whatever Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis thinks is the Catholic Faith comes to him randomly.
Holy Mother Church is not widowed.
Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ told us this Himself:
 And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them.  And seeing him they adored: but some doubted.  And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.  Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.  Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. (Matthew 28: 16-20.)
“Who today will presume to say” that the Catholic Church is “widowed”?
Only those who possesseth not the Catholic Faith.
Behold one Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
Blessed Peter Julian Eymard, who founded the Blessed Sacrament Fathers in the Nineteenth Century in France with the full encouragement of Saint John Mary Vianney, wrote a reflection on the Feast of Corpus Christi that is celebrated on the Thursday after Trinity Sunday (or ten days after Pentecost Sunday) that is very relevant to what was said by Bergoglio on Tuesday, September 17, 2013, the Feast of the Impression of the Stigmata on Saint Francis of Assisi, for reasons that will become clear in just a few moments:
Let this Feast therefore be one of joy, and let us expect from it the most abundant blessings. All the hymns and canticles of this solemnity express the thought that on this day our Lord will show Himself more gracious than ever. The Church, it seems, should have celebrated Corpus Christi on Holy Thursday, since the Eucharist was instituted on that day. But she could not have duly expressed her joy on that day of mourning; the Passion begins in Holy Thursday, and it is impossible to rejoice at the thought of death which predominates during the solemn days of Holy Week.
Corpus Christi was also postponed until after the Ascension because sad farewells had still to be bidden and a painful separation effected. It was put off until after Pentecost so that, filled with the graces and joys of the Holy Ghost, we might be able to celebrate with all possible splendor the Feast of the Divine Bridegroom Who dwells among us.
CORPUS CHRISTI is the most solemn Feast of the Church. The Church is the Bride of our Lord in all His risen glory, not of Jesus Christ at His birth or His death; when these last two mysteries took place the Church was not yet in existence. Of course she follows her Divine Bridegroom to the Crib and accompanies Him in His sufferings, but of these mysteries she has only the remembrance and grace. But Jesus Christ lives with His Church in His Sacrament.
People who have never set foot inside one of her churches think she is widowed. They look upon her as a corpse, and upon her temples as places where only death and suffering are spoken of. But today the very ones who never attend her solemn festivals will see her in all her wealth and beauty, in a natural attractiveness which God, her Bridegroom, will enhance with His presence. What magnificence in the processions as they pass by! What reverence in the faithful as they kneel down! ! The Church shows to everyone her Bridegroom in the radiant monstrance. Ah! Who today will presume to say she is widowed? Her friends are in adoration and her enemies tremble. Jesus shows Himself to all men; He gives His blessing. to the good; He looks on sinners with compassion; He calls them and draws them to Himself. The Council of Trent calls this Feast the triumph of faith, and rightly so. It is also the triumph of the Church through her Divine Bridegroom. (THE REAL PRESENCE.)
“Who today will presume to say she is widowed?”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
How can anyone believe that this man is a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter?
September 18, 2013: Interview Number Two Goes Public
Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s second interview, given to his fellow lay Jesuit, “Father” Antonio Spadoro, S.J., the editor La Civiltà Cattolica, on behalf of La Civilta Cattolica in Italy and America magazine produced more shock waves that were felt around the world.
In perfect continuity with his Modernist predecessotor, the now-retired Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Jorge Mario Bergoglio demonstrated once again that he is never above twisting the words of various saints to suit his own purposes, something that he attempted to do near the end of his interview with Antonio Spadoro:
I ask Pope Francis about the enormous changes occurring in society and the way human beings are reinterpreting themselves. At this point he gets up and goes to get the breviary from his desk. It is in Latin, now worn from use. He opens to the Office of Readings for Friday of the 27th Week in Ordinary Time and reads me a passage from the Commonitorium Primum of St. Vincent of Lerins: “Even the dogma of the Christian religion must follow these laws, consolidating over the years, developing over time, deepening with age.”
The pope comments: “St. Vincent of Lerins makes a comparison between the biological development of man and the transmission from one era to another of the deposit of faith, which grows and is strengthened with time. Here, human self-understanding changes with time and so also human consciousness deepens. Let us think of when slavery was accepted or the death penalty was allowed without any problem. So we grow in the understanding of the truth. Exegetes and theologians help the church to mature in her own judgment. Even the other sciences and their development help the church in its growth in understanding. There are ecclesiastical rules and precepts that were once effective, but now they have lost value or meaning. The view of the church’s teaching as a monolith to defend without nuance or different understandings is wrong.
“After all, in every age of history, humans try to understand and express themselves better. So human beings in time change the way they perceive themselves. It’s one thing for a man who expresses himself by carving the ‘Winged Victory of Samothrace,’ yet another for Caravaggio, Chagall and yet another still for Dalí. Even the forms for expressing truth can be multiform, and this is indeed necessary for the transmission of the Gospel in its timeless meaning.
“Humans are in search of themselves, and, of course, in this search they can also make mistakes. The church has experienced times of brilliance, like that of Thomas Aquinas. But the church has lived also times of decline in its ability to think. For example, we must not confuse the genius of Thomas Aquinas with the age of decadent Thomist commentaries. Unfortunately, I studied philosophy from textbooks that came from decadent or largely bankrupt Thomism. In thinking of the human being, therefore, the church should strive for genius and not for decadence.
“When does a formulation of thought cease to be valid? When it loses sight of the human or even when it is afraid of the human or deluded about itself. The deceived thought can be depicted as Ulysses encountering the song of the Siren, or as Tannhäuser in an orgy surrounded by satyrs and bacchantes, or as Parsifal, in the second act of Wagner’s opera, in the palace of Klingsor. The thinking of the church must recover genius and better understand how human beings understand themselves today, in order to develop and deepen the church’s teaching.” (A Big Heart Open to God, America Magazine.)
Would Jorge Mario Bergoglio want to name just one of the “decadent” Thomists who are said to have “corrupted” the teaching of Saint Thomas Aquinas?
Were the Fathers of the Council of Trent, who used Saint Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica to guide them as they conducted their deliberations under the infallible guidance of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, among these “decadent” Thomists?
Catholic doctrine is not a “formulation of thought.” It is a faithful, immutable expression of that which has been revealed by God Himself and that binds all people at all times in all circumstances without any deviation, alteration or change whatsoever.
It is Jorge Mario Bergoglio who corrupts Catholic teaching, including that of Saint Vincent of Lerins, who, far from teaching what the false “pontiff” contended he did, reminded us that we are to hold fast to Catholic teaching without any change whatsoever:
[56.] In like manner, it behooves Christian doctrine to follow the same laws of progress, so as to be consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age, and yet, withal, to continue uncorrupt and unadulterate, complete and perfect in all the measurement of its parts, and, so to speak, in all its proper members and senses, admitting no change, no waste of its distinctive property, no variation in its limits.
[57.] For example: Our forefathers in the old time sowed wheat in the Church’s field. It would be most unmeet and iniquitous if we, their descendants, instead of the genuine truth of grain, should reap the counterfeit error of tares. This rather should be the result—there should be no discrepancy between the first and the last. From doctrine which was sown as wheat, we should reap, in the increase, doctrine of the same kind— wheat also; so that when in process of time any of the original seed is developed, and now flourishes under cultivation, no change may ensue in the character of the plant. There may supervene shape, form, variation in outward appearance, but the nature of each kind must remain the same. God forbid that those rose-beds of Catholic interpretation should be converted into thorns and thistles. God forbid that in that spiritual paradise from plants of cinnamon and balsam, darnel and wolfsbane should of a sudden shoot forth.
Therefore, whatever has been sown by the fidelity of the Fathers in this husbandry of God’s Church, the same ought to be cultivated and taken care of by the industry of their children, the same ought to flourish and ripen, the same ought to advance and go forward to perfection. For it is right that those ancient doctrines of heavenly philosophy should, as time goes on, be cared for, smoothed, polished; but not that they should be changed, not that they should be maimed, not that they should be mutilated. They may receive proof, illustration, definiteness; but they must retain withal their completeness, their integrity, their characteristic properties.
[58.] For if once this license of impious fraud be admitted, I dread to say in how great danger religion will be of being utterly destroyed and annihilated. For if any one part of Catholic truth be given up, another, and another, and another will thenceforward be given up as a matter of course, and the several individual portions having been rejected, what will follow in the end but the rejection of the whole? On the other hand, if what is new begins to be mingled with what is old, foreign with domestic, profane with sacred, the custom will of necessity creep on universally, till at last the Church will have nothing left untampered with, nothing unadulterated, nothing sound, nothing pure; but where formerly there was a sanctuary of chaste and undefiled truth, thenceforward there will be a brothel of impious and base errors. May God’s mercy avert this wickedness from the minds of his servants; be it rather the frenzy of the ungodly. (Commonitorium, by Saint Vincent of Lerins.)
Far from proving what Jorge Mario Bergoglio desires, the full passage that follows text he cited, as found in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo breviary, contradicts him entirely and condemns everything that he, Bergoglio/Francis contended in his interview was true and necessary.
Saint Vincent of Lerins also stated in the Commonitorium that we must avoid all profane novelties of words, drawing upon the very words of Saint Paul the Apostle to Saint Timothy, which were, after all, written under the divine inspiration of God the Holy Ghost:
[60.] But let us return to the apostle. “O Timothy,” he says, “Guard the deposit, shunning profane novelties of words.” “Shun them as you would a viper, as you would a scorpion, as you would a basilisk, lest they smite you not only with their touch, but even with their eyes and breath.” What is “to shun”? Not even to eat 1 Corinthians 5:11 with a person of this sort. What is “shun”? “If anyone,” says St. John, come to you and bring not this doctrine. What doctrine? What but the Catholic and universal doctrine, which has continued one and the same through the several successions of ages by the uncorrupt tradition of the truth and so will continue for ever— “Receive him not into your house, neither bid him Godspeed, for he that bids him Godspeed communicates with him in his evil deeds.” 2 John 10
[61.] “Profane novelties of words.” What words are these? Such as have nothing sacred, nothing religious, words utterly remote from the inmost sanctuary of the Church which is the temple of God. Profane novelties of words, that is, of doctrines, subjects, opinions, such as are contrary to antiquity and the faith of the olden time. Which if they be received, it follows necessarily that the faith of the blessed fathers is violated either in whole, or at all events in great part; it follows necessarily that all the faithful of all ages, all the saints, the chaste, the continent, the virgins, all the clergy, Deacons and Priests, so many thousands of Confessors, so vast an army of martyrs, such multitudes of cities and of peoples, so many islands, provinces, kings, tribes, kingdoms, nations, in a word, almost the whole earth, incorporated in Christ the Head, through the Catholic faith, have been ignorant for so long a tract of time, have been mistaken, have blasphemed, have not known what to believe, what to confess.
[62.] “Shun profane novelties of words,” which to receive and follow was never the part of Catholics; of heretics always was. In truth, what heresy ever burst forth save under a definite name, at a definite place, at a definite time? Who ever originated a heresy that did not first dissever himself from the consentient agreement of the universality and antiquity of the Catholic Church? That this is so is demonstrated in the clearest way by examples. For who ever before that profane Pelagius attributed so much antecedent strength to Free-will, as to deny the necessity of God’s grace to aid it towards good in every single act? Who ever before his monstrous disciple Cœlestius denied that the whole human race is involved in the guilt of Adam’s sin? Who ever before sacrilegious Arius dared to rend asunder the unity of the Trinity? Who before impious Sabellius was so audacious as to confound the Trinity of the Unity? Who before cruellest Novatian represented God as cruel in that He had rather the wicked should die than that he should be converted and live? Who before Simon Magus, who was smitten by the apostle’s rebuke, and from whom that ancient sink of every thing vile has flowed by a secret continuous succession even to Priscillian of our own time,— who, I say, before this Simon Magus, dared to say that God, the Creator, is the author of evil, that is, of our wickednesses, impieties, flagitiousnesses, inasmuch as he asserts that He created with His own hands a human nature of such a description, that of its own motion, and by the impulse of its necessity-constrained will, it can do nothing else, can will nothing else, but sin, seeing that tossed to and fro, and set on fire by the furies of all sorts of vices, it is hurried away by unquenchable lust into the utmost extremes of baseness?
[63.] There are innumerable instances of this kind, which for brevity’s sake, pass over; by all of which, however, it is manifestly and clearly shown, that it is an established law, in the case of almost all heresies, that they evermore delight in profane novelties, scorn the decisions of antiquity, and, through oppositions of science falsely so called, make shipwreck of the faith. On the other hand, it is the sure characteristic of Catholics to keep that which has been committed to their trust by the holy Fathers, to condemn profane novelties, and, in the apostle’s words, once and again repeated, to anathematize every one who preaches any other doctrine than that which has been received. (Commonitorium, by Saint Vincent of Lerins.)
This should sufficiently prove that Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis entirely misrepresented the teaching of Saint Vincent of Lerins, which was only simply a reiteration of the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church, thus corrupting it for the purposes of seeking to justify the unjustifiable and to defend the indenfensible, the false religion of conciliarism.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has shown us consistently that he has a firm and abiding hatred for those who hold fast to the Faith of our Fathers, considering them to be “legalists” and “restorationists.” He could not resist denouncing his favorite straw men in his interview with Antonio Spadoro:
I ask, “So if the encounter with God is not an ‘empirical eureka,’ and if it is a journey that sees with the eyes of history, then we can also make mistakes?”
The pope replies: “Yes, in this quest to seek and find God in all things there is still an area of uncertainty. There must be. If a person says that he met God with total certainty and is not touched by a margin of uncertainty, then this is not good. For me, this is an important key. If one has the answers to all the questions—that is the proof that God is not with him. It means that he is a false prophet using religion for himself. The great leaders of the people of God, like Moses, have always left room for doubt. You must leave room for the Lord, not for our certainties; we must be humble. Uncertainty is in every true discernment that is open to finding confirmation in spiritual consolation.
“The risk in seeking and finding God in all things, then, is the willingness to explain too much, to say with human certainty and arrogance: ‘God is here.’ We will find only a god that fits our measure. The correct attitude is that of St. Augustine: seek God to find him, and find God to keep searching for God forever. Often we seek as if we were blind, as one often reads in the Bible. And this is the experience of the great fathers of the faith, who are our models. We have to re-read the Letter to the Hebrews, Chapter 11. Abraham leaves his home without knowing where he was going, by faith. All of our ancestors in the faith died seeing the good that was promised, but from a distance…. Our life is not given to us like an opera libretto, in which all is written down; but it means going, walking, doing, searching, seeing…. We must enter into the adventure of the quest for meeting God; we must let God search and encounter us.
“Because God is first; God is always first and makes the first move. God is a bit like the almond flower of your Sicily, Antonio, which always blooms first. We read it in the Prophets. God is encountered walking, along the path. At this juncture, someone might say that this is relativism. Is it relativism? Yes, if it is misunderstood as a kind of indistinct pantheism. It is not relativism if it is understood in the biblical sense, that God is always a surprise, so you never know where and how you will find him. You are not setting the time and place of the encounter with him. You must, therefore, discern the encounter. Discernment is essential.
“If the Christian is a restorationist, a legalist, if he wants everything clear and safe, then he will find nothing. Tradition and memory of the past must help us to have the courage to open up new areas to God. Those who today always look for disciplinarian solutions, those who long for an exaggerated doctrinal ‘security,’ those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists—they have a static and inward-directed view of things. In this way, faith becomes an ideology among other ideologies. I have a dogmatic certainty: God is in every person’s life. God is in everyone’s life. Even if the life of a person has been a disaster, even if it is destroyed by vices, drugs or anything else—God is in this person’s life. You can, you must try to seek God in every human life. Although the life of a person is a land full of thorns and weeds, there is always a space in which the good seed can grow. You have to trust God.” (A Big Heart Open to God, America Magazine.)
While it is true that we must use prudence to discern the will of God for us in our lives, something that can carry with it uncertainty and difficulty, it is untrue that we cannot know God’s will for us with what is called moral certainty.
Insofar as doctrinal truth is concerned, however, God has revealed Himself clearly. Doubt in Him and in His Divine Revelation is excluded by the First Commandment and has been formulated as a prayer that each of us should pray every day, the Act of Faith:
O my God, I firmly believe that Thou art one God, in three Divine Persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost: I believe that Thy Divine Son became Man, and died for our sins, and that He will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe these and all the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches, because Thou hast revealed them, Who canst neither deceive nor be deceived. Amen. (The Act of Faith.)
We do not need to “journey” to discover the truth about God.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio stressed the “experiential” aspects of “knowing” God and even Our Lady herself near the beginning of the published interview, serving as an apologist for conciliarism while at the same time attempting to turn Saint Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus, and Father Peter Faber, S.J., one of Saint Ignatius’s early successors as the Father General of the Society of Jesus, into witnesses in behalf of his false religion, conciliarism:
I ask Pope Francis what it means exactly for him to “think with the church,” a notion St. Ignatius writes about in the Spiritual Exercises. He replies using an image.
“The image of the church I like is that of the holy, faithful people of God. This is the definition I often use, and then there is that image from the Second Vatican Council’s ‘Dogmatic Constitution on the Church’ (No. 12). Belonging to a people has a strong theological value. In the history of salvation, God has saved a people. There is no full identity without belonging to a people. No one is saved alone, as an isolated individual, but God attracts us looking at the complex web of relationships that take place in the human community. God enters into this dynamic, this participation in the web of human relationships.
“The people itself constitutes a subject. And the church is the people of God on the journey through history, with joys and sorrows. Thinking with the church, therefore, is my way of being a part of this people. And all the faithful, considered as a whole, are infallible in matters of belief, and the people display this infallibilitas in credendo, this infallibility in believing, through a supernatural sense of the faith of all the people walking together. This is what I understand today as the ‘thinking with the church’ of which St. Ignatius speaks. When the dialogue among the people and the bishops and the pope goes down this road and is genuine, then it is assisted by the Holy Spirit. So this thinking with the church does not concern theologians only. (A Big Heart Open to God, America Magazine.)
Holy Mother Church is not defined by the Modernism found in Lumen Gentium, November 21, 1964.
The Catholic Church is a Divinely-founded, visible, hierarchical perfect society endowed by God Himself with the Four Marks of being One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. She has been endowed by her Divine Founder, Mystical Bridegroom and Invisible Head, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, with the charism of infallibly protecting and transmitting His Sacred Deposit of Faith and of being the instrument through which the Treasury of Grace is channeled into the souls of the men by means of the Sacraments He Himself instituted for our sanctification and salvation.
Here is a definition of the Catholic Church as founded in The Sources of Catholic Dogma:
The Church is a society instituted by Christ: a people one in faith, end, and things conducing to the end; subject to one and the same power, a society divine in origin, by end and things proximately serving, insofar as it pertains to its end, are human members, constituting one mystical body under Christ the head. The end of the Church is to pour forth salvation procured through Christ and the same time the benefits emanating therefrom upon all men of all ages; and especially to protect the doctrine of Christ by a living and authentic teaching authority and to propagate it complete and uncorrupted. (Henry Denzinger, Enchirdion Symbolorum, thirteenth edition, translated into English by Roy Deferrari and published in 1955 as The Sources of Catholic Dogma–referred to as “Denziger,” by B. Herder Book Company of St. Louis, Missouri, and London, England, Systematic Index, p. 12.)
The “people” must submit to Christ the King as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church. Ours is a hierarchical church, not a “democratic” church.
Furthermore, human beings choose for themselves where they are going to spend eternity. This choice is theirs to make, part of the free will that God gives to His rational creatures to choose for or against Him. It is a sign of His fundamental love for the free will with which He has endowed us to let us choose against Him until the point we die, whereupon He will not impose Himself upon us at death, permitting the suffer the fate of eternal hellfire and the loss of His own Beatific Vision for persisting in our sins and not approaching Him with sincere, contrite hearts.
Individual men are judged by God at the moment of their own Particular Judgments by the state of their own immortal souls at the moment of their death, not the state of anyone else’s soul, although we will be held to account for how our thoughts, words and actions contributed to or impeded the salvation of the souls with whom we come in contact, especially those related to them and/or over whom they may have exercised authority.
Ultimately, however, individual human beings choose where it is they will spend eternity, and not all too infrequently those who have chosen for Christ the King as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church have done while rejecting “relationships” with their own flesh and blood as they have proved themselves attached to a pure love of Him alone to the point of shedding their very blood, something that, to draw from the example of the saints whose feast we celebrate today, Saint Eustace, his wife and two sons did early in the Second Century A.D. So have millions upon millions of others during the past nearly two millennia.
Hermits have not lived in “relationships” with others. They were not “saved” by “relationships” with others. They were saved by dying in a state of Sanctifying Grace as members of the Catholic Church while they adhered to everything she taught as part of the Sacred Deposit of Faith. Some of these hermits, such as Saint Anthony of the Desert, have been raised to the altars of Holy Mother Church.
God does not “attract us” through a “complex web of relationships.” He calls us in the Baptismal font to Himself, infusing into our souls the Supernatural Virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity, thereby indwelling in our immortal souls by means of Sanctifying Grace until such time as we choose to expel Him therefrom by means of the commission of just one Mortal Sin.
It is frequently the case that persistent sinners are called back unto Him through the preaching of saints such as Saint John Mary Vianney or Saint Vincent Ferrer, O.P., or Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, C.SS.R., to name just a few, or by the exhortations of others.
This is without question.
However, Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not believe, as shall be demonstrated later, that it is necessary for men to remonstrate with each other. He is contending that God “attract us” and “saves us” exclusively through a “complex web of relationships.” This is false.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis’s answer to the question that Antonio Spadoro posed to him about the chief accomplishment of the “Second” Vatican Council reveals yet again that he is a completely unreconstructed conciliar revolutionary, a man who is just as committed to the propagation of his revolution just as fervently as was Martin Luther, John Calvin, Maximilian Robespierre, Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Elias Plutarco Calles and, among so many others, Fidel Castro:
“What did the Second Vatican Council accomplish?” I ask.
“Vatican II was a re-reading of the Gospel in light of contemporary culture,” says the pope. “Vatican II produced a renewal movement that simply comes from the same Gospel. Its fruits are enormous. Just recall the liturgy. The work of liturgical reform has been a service to the people as a re-reading of the Gospel from a concrete historical situation. Yes, there are hermeneutics of continuity and discontinuity, but one thing is clear: the dynamic of reading the Gospel, actualizing its message for today—which was typical of Vatican II—is absolutely irreversible. Then there are particular issues, like the liturgy according to the Vetus Ordo. I think the decision of Pope Benedict [his decision of July 7, 2007, to allow a wider use of the Tridentine Mass] was prudent and motivated by the desire to help people who have this sensitivity. What is worrying, though, is the risk of the ideologization of the Vetus Ordo, its exploitation.” (A Big Heart Open to God, America Magazine.)
This a mother lode of conciliar propaganda. A motherlode, to be sure.
It was ten and one-half years ago now that the young daughter of friend of ours told us that she was being taught at Christendom College, at which she had just enrolled but later left, that it was necessary to “read the Fathers and the Doctors of the Church in light of the ‘Second’ Vatican Council.” No, I am not making this up.
Indeed, as can be seen from the just-quoted comments made seven months ago by Bergoglio to Antonio Spadoro that Christendom College is being completely faithful to his own view of what the “Second” Vatican Council represented: “a re-reading of the Gospel in light of contemporary culture,” something that was condemned by the Third Council of Constantinople and condemned more proximately by pope after pope in the Nineteenth Twentieth Centuries and codified by Pope Saint Pius X in The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910:
These firings, therefore, with all diligence and care having been formulated by us, we define that it be permitted to no one to bring forward, or to write, or to compose, or to think, or to teach a different faith. Whosoever shall presume to compose a different faith, or to propose, or teach, or hand to those wishing to be converted to the knowledge of the truth, from the Gentiles or Jews, or from any heresy, any different Creed; or to introduce a new voice or invention of speech to subvert these things which now have been determined by us, all these, if they be Bishops or clerics let them be deposed, the Bishops from the Episcopate, the clerics from the clergy; but if they be monks or laymen: let them be anathematized. (Sixth Ecumenical: Constantinople III).
They [the Modernists] exercise all their ingenuity in an effort to weaken the force and falsify the character of tradition, so as to rob it of all its weight and authority. But for Catholics nothing will remove the authority of the second Council of Nicea, where it condemns those “who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical traditions, to invent novelties of some kind…or endeavor by malice or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church”; nor that of the declaration of the fourth Council of Constantinople: “We therefore profess to preserve and guard the rules bequeathed to the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, by the Holy and most illustrious Apostles, by the orthodox Councils, both general and local, and by everyone of those divine interpreters, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church.” Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV and Pius IX, ordered the insertion in the profession of faith of the following declaration: “I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and other observances and constitutions of the Church.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical’ misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. . . . The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way. (Pope Saint Pius X, The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910.)
They exercise all their ingenuity in an effort to weaken the force and falsify the character of tradition, so as to rob it of all its weight and authority. But for Catholics nothing will remove the authority of the second Council of Nicea, where it condemns those “who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical traditions, to invent novelties of some kind…or endeavor by malice or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church”; nor that of the declaration of the fourth Council of Constantinople: “We therefore profess to preserve and guard the rules bequeathed to the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, by the Holy and most illustrious Apostles, by the orthodox Councils, both general and local, and by everyone of those divine interpreters, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church.” Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV and Pius IX, ordered the insertion in the profession of faith of the following declaration: “I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and other observances and constitutions of the Church.” (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)
It is because Jorge Mario Bergoglio hates these “empirical formulations” whose expressions he does not believe were guided infallibly by the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, that he must warn against the “dangers” posed by the “Vetus Ordo (the “original” or “former” ordo) that is otherwise known as the “usus antiquior” or, more commonly, as the “extraordinary form” of the Roman Rite in the conciliar structures as he sees it as a direct threat to the “re-reading of the Gospel in light of contemporary culture.
A true revolutionary to the core of his being, Jorge Mario Bergoglio hates that which is seen in any way as impediment to the furtherance of the outermost reaches of his revolution, which is designed to take the “holy, faithful people of God” on a “journey” that can wind up in only one place: Hell.
The following passage from the section on Catholic morality only amplifies this point yet again:
“Instead of being just a church that welcomes and receives by keeping the doors open, let us try also to be a church that finds new roads, that is able to step outside itself and go to those who do not attend Mass, to those who have quit or are indifferent. The ones who quit sometimes do it for reasons that, if properly understood and assessed, can lead to a return. But that takes audacity and courage.”
I mention to Pope Francis that there are Christians who live in situations that are irregular for the church or in complex situations that represent open wounds. I mention the divorced and remarried, same-sex couples and other difficult situations. What kind of pastoral work can we do in these cases? What kinds of tools can we use?
“We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.
A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the priest to say the right thing. (A Big Heart Open to God, America Magazine.)
To use euphemisms to mask the horror of personal sin and/or to use the terminology of the homosexual collective is to offend God and to make a mockery of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour’s Agony in the Garden wherein He saw in His mind’s eye the sins of every human being from the beginning to the end of time, and this is what caused Him to sweat droplets of His Most Precious Blood as He feared in His Sacred Humanity in coming into direct contact with antithesis of His Sacred Divinity, sin itself. No, Walter Kasper’s address to the consistory of conciliar “cardinals” two months ago did not come out of nowhere. Bergoglio knew what Kasper was going to say, and he has praised him effusively ever since. Come on, Bergoglio was saying the same thing five months before Kasper gave his address!
John Henry Cardinal Newman, whose writing on the Passion and Death of Our Divine Redeemer is most inspirational no matter some elements in his other works over which scholars debate to this day, wrote the following about the horror of personal sin that Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis does not believe requires pastors to denounce sin firmly while promising mercy to those sinners intent on reforming their lives:
And now, my brethren, what was it He had to bear, when He thus opened upon His soul the torrent of this predestinated pain? Alas! He had to bear what is well known to us, what is familiar to us, but what to Him was woe unutterable. He had to bear that which is so easy a thing to us, so natural, so welcome, that we cannot conceive of it as of a great endurance, but which to Him had the scent and the poison of death—He had, my dear brethren, to bear the weight of sin; He had to bear your sins; He had to bear the sins of the whole world. Sin is an easy thing to us; we think little of it; we do not understand how the Creator can think much of it; we cannot bring our imagination to believe that it deserves retribution, and, when even in this world punishments follow upon it, we explain them away or turn our minds from them. But consider what sin is in itself; it is rebellion against God; it is a traitor’s act who aims at the overthrow and death of His sovereign; it is that, if I may use a strong expression, which, could the Divine Governor of the world cease to be, would be sufficient to bring it about. Sin is the mortal enemy of the All-holy, so that He and it cannot be together; and as the All-holy drives it from His presence into the outer darkness, so, if God could be less than God, it is sin that would have power to make Him less. And here observe, my brethren, that when once Almighty Love, by taking flesh, entered this created system, and submitted Himself to its laws, then forthwith this antagonist of good and truth, taking advantage of the opportunity, flew at that flesh which He had taken, and fixed on it, and was its death. The envy of the Pharisees, the treachery of Judas, and the madness of the people, were but the instrument or the expression of the enmity which sin felt towards Eternal Purity as soon as, in infinite mercy towards men, He put Himself within its reach. Sin could not touch His Divine Majesty; but it could assail Him in that way in which He allowed Himself to be assailed, that is, through the medium of His humanity. And in the issue, in the death of God incarnate, you are but taught, my brethren, what sin is in itself, and what it was which then was falling, in its hour and in its strength, upon His human nature, when He allowed that nature to be so filled with horror and dismay at the very anticipation. (Newman Reader.)
Insofar as Bergoglio comment that religion has “an opinion to offer” but “cannot interfere spiritually in the life of a person” is to reduce the true Faith to but an opinion, not Revealed Truth, and to place the primacy of the individual above all, including the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law. It also obliterates the Spiritual Works of Mercy that, I suppose, need to be enumerated yet again, especially for those who are accessing this site for the first time and are now “ready” to look at material they might have in the past dismissed as “schismatic” or “extreme”:
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.
The next passage from Bergoglio/Francis’s interview with Antonio Spadoro shows his demagoguery and apostasy at work as he draws upon pure, rank sentimentality to dismiss the horror of sin and the reality that no person can be truly “happy” while living in a state of sin from his mind filled with random revolutionary thoughts:
“This is also the great benefit of confession as a sacrament: evaluating case by case and discerning what is the best thing to do for a person who seeks God and grace. The confessional is not a torture chamber, but the place in which the Lord’s mercy motivates us to do better. I also consider the situation of a woman with a failed marriage in her past and who also had an abortion. Then this woman remarries, and she is now happy and has five children. That abortion in her past weighs heavily on her conscience and she sincerely regrets it. She would like to move forward in her Christian life. What is the confessor to do? (A Big Heart Open to God, America Magazine.)
What is the confessor to do?
He is to tell her that no one can be happy if he is sinning against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, explaining to her that it might be necessary for her to live chastely with her bigamous spouse for the sake of the children or to leave him altogether. The love of God comes before all else. And while the sin of abortion, which carries with it an automatic sentence of excommunication, can be forgiven by a priest in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance if he has reserved delegation to do so (something that is supplied in this time of papal vacancy), no priest can give Absolution for any sin unless the penitent is resolved to amend his life in its entirety, which includes sins committed by bigamous and adulterous couples. A good confessor does not assuage the conscience of the putative penitent mentioned by Bergoglio/Francis by telling her that she can just carry on with her “happy” life as long as she is “sorry.”
For Jorge Mario Bergoglio, you see, there are “fundamental” teachings,” thus making it incumbent, as he sees things in his own twisted way, for the “church’s pastoral ministry” not to “be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently” as he does not believe that all “moral teachings of the church” are “equivalent:”
The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently. Proclamation in a missionary style focuses on the essentials, on the necessary things: this is also what fascinates and attracts more, what makes the heart burn, as it did for the disciples at Emmaus. We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel. The proposal of the Gospel must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this proposition that the moral consequences then flow. (A Big Heart Open to God, America Magazine.)
This is what Pope Pius XI wrote concerning false dichotomies about “fundamental” or “essential” doctrines and those deemed to be “non-fundamental or non-essential that were being made by the ecumenists of his day:
Besides this, in connection with things which must be believed, it is nowise licit to use that distinction which some have seen fit to introduce between those articles of faith which are fundamental and those which are not fundamental, as they say, as if the former are to be accepted by all, while the latter may be left to the free assent of the faithful: for the supernatural virtue of faith has a formal cause, namely the authority of God revealing, and this is patient of no such distinction. For this reason it is that all who are truly Christ’s believe, for example, the Conception of the Mother of God without stain of original sin with the same faith as they believe the mystery of the August Trinity, and the Incarnation of our Lord just as they do the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, according to the sense in which it was defined by the Ecumenical Council of the Vatican. Are these truths not equally certain, or not equally to be believed, because the Church has solemnly sanctioned and defined them, some in one age and some in another, even in those times immediately before our own? Has not God revealed them all? For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. But in the use of this extraordinary teaching authority no newly invented matter is brought in, nor is anything new added to the number of those truths which are at least implicitly contained in the deposit of Revelation, divinely handed down to the Church: only those which are made clear which perhaps may still seem obscure to some, or that which some have previously called into question is declared to be of faith. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
Following the sins against the first three Commandments, which are sins against God Himself, the sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance must be denounced in order to exhort sinners to repentance and to force them to face the gravity of their sins while holding out to them the promise of God’s ineffable Mercy if they have a contrite heart and have a firm purpose of amending their lives.
Alas, it is because the conciliar “popes” sin wantonly, openly and repeatedly against the first three Commandments that they accept with great ease of mind sins against the Fifth, Sixth and Ninth Commandments.
What Jorge Mario Bergoglio did by speaking to Antonio Spadoro as he did seven months ago on Catholic morality was to undermine the work of every Catholic in the conciliar structures who has fought within his or her parish or within his or her parish or school or chancery office against silence about contraception, abortion and agenda of the homosexual collective.
At the same time, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio “canonized” the “consistent ethic of life” (seamless garment) that was championed by that friend of the lavender movement, the late Joseph “Cardinal” Bernardin, and countless other “bishops,” priests/presbyters and religious in the conciliar structures, including Roger “Cardinal” Mahony, the disgraced Rembert George Weakland, Howard Hubbard, Joseph Fiorenza, Michael Sheehan, George Niederauer and endless numbers of others.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio has validated the work of the National Catholic Reporter, which has long championed the cause of a “pope” such as he has shown himself to be.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has made the work of “conservative” Catholic newspapers and websites irrelevant.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has made the work of lay-run “canon law” organizations, several of which have petitioned the conciliar-occupied Vatican to penalize pro-abortion Catholics in public life, completely moot. Those who run these organizations are trolling for dollars under false pretenses as they have no “friend in the Vatican” to support them.
By what stretch of logic can anyone still fighting in the jungles of Mindanao seek to continue fighting delegations from their local parishes participating with parish banners in the local “gay pride parade”?
By what stretch of logic can anyone still fighting in the jungles of Mindanao write to their local chancery office or to “Rome” to complain about some presbyter’s speaking highly of the “gay lifestyle”?
By what stretch of logic does anyone think that notorious havens of the homosexual collective such as Most Holy Redeemer Church in San Francisco, California, Saint Brigid’s in Westbury, New York, Saint Francis Xavier Church and Saint Paul the Apostle Church in the Borough of Manhattan in the City of New York, New York, and, among so many others, Saint Joan of Arc Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota, will be in any way “disciplined” for “running” with their “pope’s” seal of approval upon their “work” of “inclusivity”?
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is being used by Antichrist to “welcome back” to the conciliar fold those who have been as “hurt” by the bad old “no church” as he has been. It is my belief that the heretic’s new interview will result in a swarm of unrepentant sinners into conciliar churches and, at the same time, embolden the anti-life, anti-family forces of statism in the world even more than have been in the past, resulting ultimately, I believe, in an active state-sponsored persecution of Catholic “restorationists” that will carry with it the full and enthusiastic support and cooperation of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his conciliar “bishops.”
We must be ready to suffer as much as our martyrs in the past have suffered. We must give up all, including close relatives and friends, if necessary, to remain faithful to the Catholic Church in this time of apostasy and betrayal.
Here is what Bergoglio/Francis said in his interview with Antonio Spadoro:
The dicasteries of the Roman Curia are at the service of the pope and the bishops,” he says. “They must help both the particular churches and the bishops’ conferences. They are instruments of help. In some cases, however, when they are not functioning well, they run the risk of becoming institutions of censorship. It is amazing to see the denunciations for lack of orthodoxy that come to Rome. I think the cases should be investigated by the local bishops’ conferences, which can get valuable assistance from Rome. These cases, in fact, are much better dealt with locally. The Roman congregations are mediators; they are not middlemen or managers.”
On June 29, during the ceremony of the blessing and imposition of the pallium on 34 metropolitan archbishops, Pope Francis spoke about “the path of collegiality” as the road that can lead the church to “grow in harmony with the service of primacy.” So I ask: “How can we reconcile in harmony Petrine primacy and collegiality? Which roads are feasible also from an ecumenical perspective?” (A Big Heart Open to Antichrist.)
In other words–and this is for those of you who want to “stay and fight” in the trenches of Mindanao, letter-writing campaigns to the conciliar-occupied Vatican are wastes of time, not that most of these efforts haven’t been wastes of time up to now, that is.
What Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis said to Antonio Spadoro about “censorship is directly contrary to the Catholic Faith as it is the obligation of the Roman Pontiff to assure Its integrity and purity free from any stain of error or diminution.
Pope Pius IX promulgated the [First] Vatican Council’s Decree on the Constitution of the Church, July 18, 1870, that puts the lie to the heresy of “episcopal collegiality’s” devolution of power to the local conciliar “bishops” and their national “episcopal conferences” that Bergoglio/Francis believes should be implemented even more fully than before, yes, to the point of ending what he considers to be “Roman censorship” when it is the duty of the Holy See to safeguard the integrity of the Holy Faith from all error:
8. Since the Roman Pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole Church, we likewise teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful , and that in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment . The sentence of the Apostolic See (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon . And so they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman Pontiff.
9. So, then, if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the Churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session Three, July 18, 1870.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not believe this. His very beliefs have been anathematized by a true ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, whose bishop-fathers were guided by the infallible protection of the very Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost.
So much for the belief of this hideous man’s spin doctors that he, Bergoglio, “cares” about doctrine. He does not. Jorge Mario Bergoglio propagates a false religion with false beliefs.
Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio used his interview last September with Antonio Spadoro to emphasize yet again the “need” to “redefine” the “Petrine Ministry,” something that he has done several times in the past six months and has become standard fare for the conciliar “popes” dating back to Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II’s formal articulation call for it in Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995:
The pope responds, “We must walk together: the people, the bishops and the pope. Synodality should be lived at various levels. Maybe it is time to change the methods of the Synod of Bishops, because it seems to me that the current method is not dynamic. This will also have ecumenical value, especially with our Orthodox brethren. From them we can learn more about the meaning of episcopal collegiality and the tradition of synodality. The joint effort of reflection, looking at how the church was governed in the early centuries, before the breakup between East and West, will bear fruit in due time. In ecumenical relations it is important not only to know each other better, but also to recognize what the Spirit has sown in the other as a gift for us. I want to continue the discussion that was begun in 2007 by the joint [Catholic–Orthodox] commission on how to exercise the Petrine primacy, which led to the signing of the Ravenna Document. We must continue on this path.”
I ask how Pope Francis envisions the future unity of the church in light of this response. He answers: “We must walk united with our differences: there is no other way to become one. This is the way of Jesus.” (A Big Heart Open to Antichrist.)
Once again, ladies and gentlemen, especially for those of you still attached to the conciliar structures who believe Jorge Mario Bergoglio to be a true and legitimate successor of Saint Peter, the “unofficial” Ravenna Document, October 13, 2007, carries “official” weight in the minds of conciliar officials, including the now-retired Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who referenced it several times, and his successor from Argentina. Anyone who attempts to dismiss the weight of such “unofficial” documents is being intellectually dishonest, a crime that is compounded further by seeking to mislead others about the extent to which a “pope” they seek to indemnify has defected from the Catholic Faith.
Papal Primacy is absolute. It is entirely irreformable. It is of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Himself.
The [First] Vatican Council stated this immutable doctrine very clearly:
1. And so, supported by the clear witness of Holy Scripture, and adhering to the manifest and explicit decrees both of our predecessors the Roman Pontiffs and of general councils, we promulgate anew the definition of the ecumenical Council of Florence , which must be believed by all faithful Christians, namely that the Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff hold a world-wide primacy, and that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, the prince of the apostles, true vicar of Christ, head of the whole Church and father and teacher of all Christian people.
To him, in blessed Peter, full power has been given by our lord Jesus Christ to tend, rule and govern the universal Church.
All this is to be found in the acts of the ecumenical councils and the sacred canons.
2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.
3. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one Supreme Shepherd .
4. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session Three, July 18, 1870.)
It is impossible to “re-define” Papal Primacy, to which the Greeks submitted freely in the First Millennium, whose true history has been deconstructed and misrepresented the revolutionary historical revisionists of conciliarism.
Ah, but more was to come in Interviews Three, Four, Five, Six, etc., in the months that followed.
September 26, 2013: Action, Not Contemplation
Speaking at the Casa Santa Marta on the day that is the Feast of the North American Martyrs in the United States of America, Jorge Mario Bergoglio once again disparaged contemplative prayer in favor of “action,” of “walking the street” with Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. He is really just an ecclesiastical agitator who believes that Our Lord caused “trouble,” which was one of his only insidious efforts to liken himself, a self-styled “trouble-maker” with the God-Man he blasphemes so easily:
Who is He? where does He come from? In remarks after the readings at Mass on Thursday morning in the chapel of the Domus Sanctae Marthae residence in the Vatican, Pope Francis focused on the question that Herod posed about Jesus – a question that all those who encounter Jesus eventually ask. The Pope said that the question is one, which, “one can ask out of curiosity,” or “that one might ask for safety.” He noted that, reading the Gospel, we see that “some people begin to feel afraid of this man, because he could have led them to a political conflict with the Romans.” One wonders, “Who is this man, who makes so many problems?” Because, the Pope said, “Jesus [really does cause trouble]”:
“You cannot know Jesus without having problems. And I dare say, ‘But if you want to have a problem, go to the street to know Jesus – you’ll end up having not one, but many!’ But that is the way to get to know Jesus! You cannot know Jesus in first class! One gets to know Jesus in going out [into] every day [life]. You cannot get to know Jesus in peace and quiet, nor even in the library: Know Jesus.”
Certainly, he added, “we can know Jesus in the Catechism,” for, “the Catechism teaches us many things about Jesus.” He said, “we have to study it, we have to learn it.” Thus, “We know the Son of God, who came to save us, we understand the beauty of the history of salvation, of the love of the Father, studying the Catechism.” Nevertheless, he asked, how many people have read the Catechism of the Catholic Church since it was published over 20 years ago?
“Yes, you have to come to know Jesus in the Catechism – but it is not enough to know Him with the mind: it is a step. However, it is necessary to get to know Jesus in dialogue with Him, talking with Him in prayer, kneeling. If you do not pray, if you do not talk with Jesus, you do not know Him. You know things about Jesus, but you do not go with that knowledge, which He gives your heart in prayer. Know Jesus with the mind – the study of the Catechism: know Jesus with the heart – in prayer, in dialogue with Him. This helps us a good bit, but it is not enough. There is a third way to know Jesus: it is by following Him. Go with Him, walk with Him.”
It is necessary, “to go, to walk along the streets, journeying.” It is necessary, said Pope Francis, “to know Jesus in the language of action.” Here, then, is how you can really know Jesus: with these “three languages - of the mind, heart and action.” If, then, “I know Jesus in these ways,” he said in conclusion, “I involve myself with Him”:
“One cannot know Jesus without getting oneself involved with Him, without betting your life [on] Him. When so many people – including us – pose this question: ‘But, who is He?’, The Word of God responds, ‘You want to know who He is? Read what the Church tells you about Him, talk to Him in prayer and walk the street with him. Thus, will you know who this man is.’ This is the way! Everyone must make his choice.” (The languages of knowing Jesus.)
So much for the simple fact that contemplative monks and religious brothers and sisters have help to support Holy Mother Church throughout the ages by means of their lives of hidden prayer before Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis made gratuitous references to prayer and kneeling in his September 26, 2013, session of his Ding Dong School Of Apostasy at the Casa Santa Marta inside the walls of the Vatican. He did this, however, by way of damning with faint praise as he stressed that it is necessary to “know Jesus in the language of action” and to “walk the street with him.” In other words, it is “necessary” for all without exception to follow his example as a self-styled “street priest,” a man who has contempt for the “no church” that was too “self-referential” to really get to know Our Lord, which is why Holy Mother Church’s teaching, he believes, was “incomplete” prior to the dawning of the age of conciliarism with the “election” of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII.
He is an apostate.
September 30, 2013: Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez: What we have now is not working
Just about a month away from delivering identical lectures in Irving, Texas, and Miami, Florida, the chief commissar, Oscar Andres Maradiago Rodriguez, made it clear the conciliar church’s constitution was not “working,” that it had to be torn up and written from scratch again:
The cardinals, who were appointed in April by Pope Francis and will confer with him for the first time at the Vatican on Oct. 1-3, were briefed to revise the constitution, known as Pastor Bonus, drawn up in 1988 by Pope John Paul, in a bid to give a great voice to bishops around the world.
But Cardinal Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga, the group’s leader, said as the meeting loomed they were planning to go much further that just changing “this and that.”
“No, that constitution is over,” he said in a TV interview. “Now it is something different. We need to write something different,” he added.
“In the past the Vatican has just revised existing rules so this is a rupture after a century of increasing centralisation,” said Gerard O’Connell, a Vatican analyst at the Vatican Insider. (Francis the Apostle of Antichrist to ‘rip up and rewrite’ Vatican constitution.)
There is, believe it or not, just a bit of contradiction and paradox in Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga’s comments.
You see, it was announced on that very day, September 30, 2013, the Feast of Saint Jerome, that Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII would be “canonized” on Low Sunday, April 27, 2014, which is the date on which the conciliar revolutionaries celebrate the “feast” of “Divine Mercy” that Wojtyla/John Paul II instituted on April 30, 2000. That day is but fifteen days away from today, Saturday, April 12, 2014, Saturday of Passion Week.
It is nevertheless the case, however, that the soon-to-be “Saint John Paul the Great” instituted a “constitution,” Pastor Bonus, June 28, 1988, that was truly revolutionary in its own twisted right as it permitted both diocesan “bishops” in the conciliar church and laymen to serve on the Vatican’s curial dicasteries. Moreover, Pastor Bonus was designed to to implement the heresy of “episcopal collegiality” in a practical manner by spelling out the relationship of the national “episcopal” conferences with the Holy See.
Thus it is that a “constitution” that is just twenty-six years old and had been promulgated by a man about to be elevated to conciliarism’s liturgical tables “is over,” that is now time for “something different.” “Saint John Paul the Great’s” “constitution” has become “outdated” in twenty-six years? Very remarkable.
Being somewhat logically minded, something that I know is a fault of mine (one of many), I found Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga’s comments to be a little paradoxical in another way as it was just a scant fifteen days prior to his own remarks that Jorge Mario Bergoglio had said the following:
The Church is not falling to pieces. It has never been better. This is a wonderful moment for the Church, you just need to look at its history. (Francis urges priests to give a helping hand to couples that live together.)
How can a “church” that is “not falling to pieces” and “has never been better” while enjoying a “wonderful moment” need a new “constitution.”
There seems to be little logic to be found in Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga’s comment that “we have to write something different” and Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis’s contention that what he thinks is the Catholic Church is not falling to pieces and has never been better. They have been doing something “different” now for fifty-five and one-half years. Whatever happened to Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II’s “springtime of the Church”?
Then again, quite of course, paradox and contradiction are part and parcel of the anti-Thomistic worldview of Modernists. It’s easy to say one thing one day and another the next without ever having acknowledged that one was wrong on the previous day. This is all possible when men such as Bergoglio/Francis and his stooges speak “randomly” (see “Who Today Will Presume To Say She Is Widowed?”) and then forget some, if not all, of what they have uttered before moving on to tacking the next mythical enemy.
There is no reversing this by human means. This is a chastisement.
Many Americans live in the mania of a world of “action,” thinking that “things will change” if “only do have a certain program” or “strategy.” Things are only going to get worse. Much worse. We are just beginning to see the depths to which the conciliar revolutionaries are capable of exploring. The masks are off now. There is no more charade or pretense to any semblance of the Faith of our Fathers. Everything must be “new,” “new,” “new.”
Yet the plain truth of the matter is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio also has a plan of action. This man has brought a wrecking ball with him from Argentina, and he is quite serious about knocking down everything even approximates the “familiar” but “closed in upon itself” and “self-referential” monarchical “no church” that he is literally hellbent on eradicating from human history down to its very last traces.
Holy Week 2014 begins with First Vespers this evening. There will be time enough after Easter Sunday to continue this series, which is being written to provide those who are interested with a reference guide to have available to help them to remember that we should be shocked at very little by this point. Those who are blind to the truth that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a heretic and thus cannot be a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter cannot say that they just did not know enough about the man to come that conclusion.
We have much for which we must make reparation. Let us use the coming days of Holy Week prior to the Paschal Triduum of the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour as ones of intense prayer, especially to Our Lady by means of her Most Holy Rosary, so that we can enter deep in the mysteries of our redemption, a redemption that was won for us at such a great price: the shedding of every single drop of Our Lord’s Most Precious Blood during His fearful Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross in atonement for our sins.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and the hour of our death. Amen.
Isn’t it time to pray a Rosary now?
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Sorrows, 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.