text:
Francis: "I am Not Afraid of Schism" -- and other Bergoglian Nuggets from latest Q&A
Alright, everyone, you know how the game works. After a Francis trip finishes, the aircraft prepares for departure: Everyone gets in and sits down, the door closes, and the Bergoglian mouth opens. By that time, you'd better have your seatbelts on, because anything is possible. We've seen it a few more times than we care to remember. Today was another such day. On the return flight from his latest Africa trip (visiting Mozambique, Madagascar, and Mauritius), during which he proclaimed that it was "necessary" for hordes of unbelievers to reject Jesus Christ and His Holy Gospel, the Jesuit apostate the world mistakenly believes to be the Pope of the Catholic Church provided the usual in-flight entertainment by holding a press conference during which he candidly answered questions from the journalists traveling with him. A full English transcript of the "papal" Q&A has been released by the Vatican:
"Pope Francis' in-flight press conference: full text" (Vatican Media)
The following news reports present various highlights from the in-flight presser:
"Ideological fixation, not 'loyal criticism,' feeds possibility of schism, pope says" (Catholic News Service)
"Pope Francis says he welcomes constructive criticism" (Catholic News Agency)
"Pope Francis Defends Himself and Discusses 'Schism'" (National Catholic Register)
"On American critics, Pope says he doesn't want a schism but he's not afraid of it" (Crux)
"Pope: we have fewer children because we are too attached to individual well-being" (Vatican News)
"Francis warns of ideology 'infiltrating' some quarters of US Catholic Church" (National Catholic Reporter)
"Pope says he prays U.S.-led schism can be thwarted" (Reuters)
"Pope to UK: Obey UN resolution to hand over Chagos Islands" (Associated Press)
"Pope Francis on plane: 'I am not afraid of schisms. I pray they do not happen.'" (America)
We will now go ahead and look at some of Francis' more explosive remarks and comment on them accordingly. (All quotations are taken from the Vatican's English transcript; any underlining is added.) First, regarding the question of the youth. Francis lamented that Europe "has grown old" and does not have enough children, whereas "Africa is full of life". As for the cause, he said: "I think – this is a personal opinion of mine - that well-being is at the root. Being attached to wellbeing...." There can be no doubt that this is indeed one of the reasons, though we notice that the talkative Jesuit was utterly silent on the mortal sin of contraception, which, in addition to infanticide ("abortion"), is obviously the immediate reason for the shortage of births. This would have been a perfect opportunity for him to draw attention to this great evil, but instead he was silent. This is not surprising, as we recall the attitude towards the issue he had displayed a number of plane interviews ago: "God gives you means to be responsible. Some think that — excuse the language — that in order to be good Catholics, we have to be like rabbits. No. Responsible parenthood." This revolting and contemptuous statement, together with his outlandish claim that sexual sins are "the least serious of all sins", tells us what this mean really believes. Any lamentations about the disappearing European youth are just crocodile tears. Second, Bergoglio turned to one of his favorite topics, that of so-called "xenophobia". He says:
I read on the newspapers of this xenophobia, but it is not only an African problem. It is a human disease, like measles… It is a disease that enters a country, enters a continent, and we build walls. But walls leave only those who built them. Yes, they leave out many people, but those who remain inside the walls will be left alone, and in the end, they will be defeated by great invasions. Xenophobia is a disease. It is a disease that is "justifiable", for example, to maintain the purity of the race – just to mention a form of xenophobia from the last century. And very often, xenophobia rides the waves of political populism. I said last week, or the one before, that sometimes in some places I hear speeches being given that sound similar to those made by Hitler in '34. It's as if they wanted to return to the past in Europe.
This is nothing but the cheap political rhetoric of a leftist demagogue. The building of border walls and fences is a prudent and necessary response by nations being overrun by people who have no right to enter them. What Francis always leaves out of consideration is the fact that even with a very secure border, even with walls or fences, anyone can still enter a country in principle -- he just has to do it legally, that is, he must go through the official port of entry and ask for permission to enter. Admittance may be given or denied -- just as it would happen at your own front door. It's not a difficult concept. Next, let's look at what Bergoglio said about religious unity:
Differences between the religions are not to be cancelled out, that we are all brothers is to be underlined, that everyone needs to speak. This is a sign of the maturity of your country. Speaking yesterday with the prime ministry, I remained surprised at how they, you, have worked at this reality and live it as necessary in order to live together. There is an intercultural commission that gathers together… The first thing that I found yesterday when I went into the bishop's resident [sic] – this is anecdote – was a bouquet of beautiful flowers. Who sent them? The Grant Imam. We are brothers, human brotherhood is the foundation and respects all beliefs. Respect for other religions is important. This is why I tell missionaries not to proselytize. Proselytizing is valid for the world of politics, of sport – I root for my team, for yours – not for a faith. But, Holy Father, what does evangelization mean to you? There is a phrase of St Francis that has greatly enlightened me. Francis of Assisi used to say to his brothers: "Bring the Gospel, if it is necessary also with words". That is, to evangelize is what we read about in the book of the Acts of the Apostles: testifying. And that testimony provokes the question: 'But why do you live like this? Why do you do this?' And then I explain: 'Because of the Gospel'. Proclamation comes before [sic -- must mean after] testifying. First live like a Christian and if they ask you, speak. Testifying is the first step and the protagonist of evangelization is not the missionary but the Holy Spirit who leads Christians and missionaries to bear witness. Then questions will come or won't come, but what counts is the witness of life. This is the first step. It is important to avoid proselytism. When you see religious proposals that follow the path of proselytism, they are not Christian. They are looking for converts, not worshippers of God in truth. I want to take this opportunity to emphasize your interreligious experience which is extremely beautiful. Your prime ministry also told me that when someone asks for help, we give the same hope to everyone, and no one is offended because we feel like we are brothers. This unifies the country. It is very, very important. At the events, there were not only Catholics, there were Christians from other confessions, and there were Muslims, Hindus, and all of them were brothers. I saw this even in Madagascar and also in the interreligious meeting for peace of the young people, with young people of different religions who wanted to express how they live their desire for peace. Peace, brotherhood, interreligious co-existence, no proselytism, these are things that we must learn to foster peace.
So here we see the usual Bergoglian claptrap. The genuinely Catholic reality, however, is quite different. The idea that false religions must be "respected" is a tenet of Freemasonry and Liberalism and was roundly condemned by Pope Leo XIII:
Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to Masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Custodi di Quella Fede, n. 15; underlining added.)
Pope St. Pius X, too, has a good spanking for his pseudo-successor:
As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. (Pope Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique; underlining added.)
The 19th-century catechist Fr. Michael Müller put it succinctly when he stated: "It is impious to say, 'I respect every religion.' This is as much as to say: I respect the devil as much as God, vice as much as virtue, falsehood as much as truth, dishonesty as much as honesty, Hell as much as Heaven" (The Church and Her Enemies, p. 287). We must certainly respect people who are unhappily caught up in a false religion -- but that is a far cry from respecting the false religions themselves. We cannot respect any religion except the Roman Catholic one, for it alone is from God. The other religions are from the devil. That is the timeless and true Catholic position, not the poppycock spouted by Francis. What about Bergoglio's remarks regarding evangelization? Of course, he could not refrain from beating up once more on his favorite whipping boy, that ugly and triumphalist "proselytism". He contrasts it with "witnessing", which he claims is true evangelization, but the fact of the matter is that Francis is simply trying to reduce the Gospel to little more than the practice of the corporal works of mercy (feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, etc.) plus attending bad liturgy. Pitting witnessing against proselytism is devious but to be expected of a demagogue like him. He points to the Acts of the Apostles, but this is ironic because the Acts most certainly do not back up his idea of living a certain way and then waiting until people ask you about the reason for it before you preach Jesus Christ and His Holy Gospel to them. For example, if we turn to the second chapter of Acts, what do we find? Just after the Holy Ghost descended upon the Apostles, they went out and proselytized:
But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: ... Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you, by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which God did by him, in the midst of you, as you also know: This same being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the sorrows of hell, as it was impossible that he should be holden by it. For David saith concerning him: I foresaw the Lord before my face: because he is at my right hand, that I may not be moved. For this my heart hath been glad, and any tongue hath rejoiced: moreover my flesh also shall rest in hope. Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life: thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. Ye men, brethren, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David; that he died, and was buried; and his sepulchre is with us to this present day. Whereas therefore he was a prophet, and knew that God hath sworn to him with an oath, that of the fruit of his loins one should sit upon his throne. Foreseeing this, he spoke of the resurrection of Christ. For neither was he left in hell, neither did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised again, whereof all we are witnesses. Being exalted therefore by the right hand of God, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath poured forth this which you see and hear. For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly, that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart, and said to Peter, and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call. And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation. They therefore that received his word, were baptized; and there were added in that day about three thousand souls. And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of bread, and in prayers. And fear came upon every soul: many wonders also and signs were done by the apostles in Jerusalem, and there was great fear in all. And all they that believed, were together, and had all things common. Their possessions and goods they sold, and divided them to all, according as every one had need. And continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they took their meat with gladness and simplicity of heart; praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord increased daily together such as should be saved. (Acts 2:14,22-47)
Astonishingly, we find here that not only did the Apostles preach the Gospel using words, they actually used "very many" such words, and the result was not the augmentation of members on a sports team but baptized converts who "were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of bread, and in prayers." And, as if to really whack Bergoglio over the head, the sacred text even notes that because of this first Apostolic effort at proselytization, "there were added in that day about three thousand souls." Was God perhaps "looking for converts"? And to think that St. Luke, the author of the Acts, even numbered those converts. As though someone were counting! We also recall the example of St. Francis of Assisi -- yes, that same Saint Francis the apostate Bergoglio outrageously invoked in defense of his anti-proselytism bunk --, who, upon his visit to a Mohammedan ruler in 1219, used words to preach the Gospel to him. Here is what transpired:
The Sultan Meledin asked him who sent them, and for what purpose they came? Francis answered with courageous firmness: "We are not sent by men, but it is the Most High who sends me, in order that I may teach you and your people the way of salvation, by pointing out to you the truths of the Gospel." He immediately preached to him, with great fervor, the dogma of One God in Three Persons, and the Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind. (Congregation of the Oratory of St. Philip Neri, The Life of S. Francis of Assisi [New York, NY: D. & J. Sandlier & Co., 1889], pp. 197-198)
Let's face it: Had this happened in our day, "Pope" Francis would have been the first to condemn St. Francis in no uncertain terms for his outrageous proselytism and for not respecting the "necessary differences" between Christians and Muslims! In fact, he would have probably told the Saint of Assisi that he is not even a Christian because he is "looking for converts, not worshippers of God in truth"! Pitting the making of converts against having new "worshippers of God in truth" -- as though these two ideas stood in contradiction to each other -- is despicable but par for the course for the Jesuit blasphemer. Is anyone still fooled by this man? The Apostles were sent to preach the Gospel to every creature -- not to live for decades in every community, hoping that someone will eventually ask them a question: "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" (Mt 28:19-20). That is the divine mission. And we can see from our Blessed Lord's own public ministry that He most certainly preached the Gospel -- He used words! -- and did not simply give drink to the thirsty and waited for people to line up in astonishment trying to talk to Him about His reason for doing so. It's not like you have to be a Catholic to help those in need, anyway. When Francis proposes this sort of thing, it sounds impressive and charitable on the surface, but it is really just the stepping stone to a blending of all religions under the specious pretext that at the end of the day they all teach the same thing anyway: treat others as you would like to be treated (cf. Lk 6:31). But that is a horrendous falsehood! That is not the essence of the true religion (although it is a necessary part of it), nor will the mere practice of the Golden Rule lead to salvation without Faith (see Heb 11:6), hope (see Rom 8:24), or love of God (see Lk 10:25-28), for all of which God's supernatural grace is necessary (see Eph 2:8). In addition, St. John the Evangelist warns us: "And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and he is now already in the world" (1 Jn 4:3). With his interreligious efforts, what Francis is aiming at is very similar to Sillonism, which St. Pius X described as "a religion ... more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men become brothers and comrades at last in the 'Kingdom of God'. – 'We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind' [the Sillonists say]." Indeed, Francis continually puts forth a false notion of brotherhood or fraternity, just as the Sillonist movement did in the early 20th century:
The same applies to the notion of Fraternity which they found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting. (Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique; underlining added.)
Francis pretends to have a devotion to Saint Pius X, but the truth is that he hates his guts. Antipope Bergoglio also talked about communication, truth, and fake news, emphasizing the importance of transmitting facts and distinguishing them from opinion. Which is quite hypocritical of him, since he just promoted his own former communications director, "Mgr." Dario Viganò (not to be confused with Carlo Maria Viganò), who, in the first half of 2018, was found to have doctored a letter from Benedict XVI in order to make it appear as though he was saying something that he really wasn't -- a classic case of manufacturing fake news, made worse by the fact that the culprit was the Prefect of the Secretariat for Communications, after the Vatican had just made combatting fake news one of its priorities. Francis had no choice but to dismiss him, which he did only begrudgingly, and then he immediately appointed him to an "advisory" role in the same department -- a new position he was creating just for him so he could be retained in communications after all. And now, this past Aug. 31, Francis promoted Vigano to the position of Vice Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Christopher Altieri rightly speaks of the "nine lives of Mgr. Dario Edoardo Vigano." But not enough. The Frankster made his most explosive comments in this press conference towards the end. New York Times reporter Jason Horowitz asked:
On the flight to Maputo you acknowledged being under attack by a segment of the American Church. Obviously, there is strong criticism from some bishops and cardinals, there are Catholic Television stations and American websites that are very critical. And there are even some of your closest allies who have spoken of a plot against you. Is there something that these critics do not understand about your pontificate? Is there something that you have learned from your critics? Are you afraid of a schism in the American Church? And if so, is there something that you could do – a dialogue – to keep it from happening?
Francis' answer was long, naturally. We will dissect it and intersperse our comments throughout:
First of all, criticism always helps, always. When someone receives criticism, that persons needs to do a self-critique right away and say: is this true or not? To what point? And I always benefit from criticism. Sometimes it makes you angry…. But there are advantages.
Oh yes, no doubt Bergoglio is a big friend of criticism. He is so receptive of candid feedback that he has refused an audience with the "dubia cardinals" for years, and he has gone out of his way to ensure the "cardinals" that he considers a threat will not have any opportunity to speak with him even outside an audience. Francis is the one who sees to it that any attempted dialogue will remain a monologue. So much for that "culture of encounter" he always raves about. Continuing with Francis' words:
Traveling to Maputo, one of you gave me that book in French on how the Americans want to change the Pope. I knew about that book, but I had not read it. Criticisms are not coming only from the Americans, they are coming a bit from everywhere, even from the Curia. At least those that say them have the benefit of the honesty of having said them. I do not like it when criticism stays under the table: they smile at you letting you see their teeth and then they stab you in the back. That is not fair, it is not human. Criticism is a component in construction, and if your criticism is unjust, be prepared to receive a response, and get into dialogue, and arrive to the right conclusion. This is the dynamic of true criticism. The criticism of the arsenic pills, instead, of which we were speaking regarding the article that I gave to Msgr Rueda, it's like throwing the stone and then hiding your hand… This is not beneficial, it is no help. It helps small cliques, who do not want to hear the response to their criticism. Instead, fair criticism – I think thus and so – is open to a response. This is constructive. Regarding the case of the Pope: I don't like this aspect of the Pope, I criticize him, I speak about him, I write an article and ask him to respond, this is fair.
Here Bergoglio's hypocrisy is on full display. The fact is that he is not willing to receive and speak with those who want to bring their genuine concerns and criticisms to him. And since he is the "Pope", they need his permission before they can see him and have a discussion with him. When "Abp." Carlo Maria Vigano forced the issue by accusing Francis of grave wrongdoing in a series of public letters last year, even then Francis did not respond, once again hiding behind sanctimony.
To criticize without wanting to hear a response and without getting into dialogue is not to have the good of the Church at heart, it is chasing after a fixed idea, to change the Pope or to create a schism. This is clear: a fair criticism is always well received, at least by me.
Riiight... It's just that no one has been fair to him lately, huh?
Secondly, the problem of the schism: within the Church there have been many schisms. After the First Vatican Council, for example, the last vote, the one on infallibility, a well-sized group left and founded the Old Catholic Church so as to remain "true" to the tradition of the Church. Then they developed differently and now they ordain women. But in that moment they were rigid, they rallied behind orthodoxy and thought that the council had erred. Another group left very, very quietly, but they did not want to vote. Vatican II had these things among its consequences. Perhaps the most well-known post-conciliar split is that of Lefebvre.
It is amusing that Francis, of all people, would pretend to be a defender of the First Vatican Council. We know what he told the Modernist Hans Kung about papal infallibility:
Hans Küng: Francis Allows Free Discussion on Infallibility Dogma
Bergoglio's attempt to draw a parallel between the Old Catholics of the 1870s and us Sedevacantists today who reject the Second Vatican Council is clever but without foundation (we cannot include the Lefebvrists in this because their rejection of Vatican II is indeed unjustifiable in principle, as they believe it came from a true Pope). The so-called "Old Catholics" did not hold the Faith as it had been "on the books" before Vatican I, as we Sedevacantists hold the Faith as it was "on the books" before Vatican II. Perhaps a future Novus Ordo Watch post will go into this in detail, but for now we must move on.
In the Church there is always the option for schism, always. But it is an option that the Lord leaves to human freedom. I am not afraid of schisms, I pray that there will be none, because what is at stake is people's spiritual health. Let there be dialogue, let there be correction if there is an error, but the schismatic path is not Christian.
Yeah, that "dialogue" option has been working out great, right? We know about Francis' attitude towards heresy (see here and here, for example), and we can see his attitude on schism isn't much different. In fact, we cannot help but recall that in 2016 the leftist German periodical Der Spiegel reported that Francis allegedly said: "It's not impossible that I will go down in history as the one who split the Catholic Church." An attitude of pastoral concern for the sheep sounds different.
Let's think about the beginnings of the Church, how it began with many schisms, one after the other: Arians, Gnostics, Monophysites… An anecdote is coming to mind that I would like to recount: it was the people of God who saved [the Church] from the schisms. The schismatics always have one thing in common: they separate themselves from the people, from the faith of the people of God. And when there was a discussion in the council of Ephesus regarding Mary's divine maternity, the people – this is history – were at the entrance of the cathedral while the bishops entered to take part in the council. They were there with clubs. They made the bishops see them as they shouted, "Mother of God! Mother of God!", as if to say: if you do not do this, this is what you can expect… The people of God always correct and help. A schism is always an elitist separation stemming from an ideology detached from doctrine. It is an ideology, perhaps correct, but that engages doctrine and detaches it… And so I pray that schisms do not happen, but I am not afraid of them. This is one of the results of Vatican II, not because of this or that Pope. For example, the social things that I say are the same things that John Paul II said, the same things! I copy him. But they say: the Pope is a communist… Ideologies enter into doctrine and when doctrine slips into ideology that's where there's the possibility of a schism.
Funny... A few days ago, Francis was telling the world that differences in religious matters "are necessary". What happened to that? And in Morocco, the same Bergoglian lips had proclaimed earlier this year that "being a Christian is not about adhering to a doctrine". So, which is it? Bergoglio talks about schism as though he were talking about a stained shirt. It's unfortunate, but what can you do? Schism happens. Whatever, move on. Not my problem. It's that couldn't-care-less attitude he's mentioned before. Lastly:
There's the ideology of the primacy of a sterile morality regarding the morality of the people of God. The pastors must lead their flock between grace and sin, because this is evangelical morality. Instead, a morality based on such a pelagian ideology leads you to rigidity, and today we have many schools of rigidity within the Church, which are not schisms, but pseudo-schismatic Christian developments that will end badly. When you see rigid Christians, bishops, priests, there are problems behind that, not Gospel holiness. So, we need to be gentle with those who are tempted by these attacks, they are going through a tough time, we must accompany them gently.
This pseudo-theological and psychoanalytical garbage is simply not deserving of any comment. Pelagianism? Oh yes, we know about Pelagianism. By the time Francis finally got his trap closed, "about an hour and a half" had elapsed, Vatican News reports. So many words were spoken, but did you notice which two were missing entirely? Francis did not mention Jesus Christ at all. Oh well, can't talk about everything! Image source: Getty Images License: Getty embedAnd four-sided triangles, too?
Francis: "I like the Lutherans who follow the True Faith of Jesus Christ"
Jorge Bergoglio says the darndest things, most of them incompatible with Catholicism. After the Jesuit pretend-pope gave an address to a mixed audience consisting mostly of young Novus Ordos and Lutherans on Oct. 13, 2016 in the Vatican, he engaged in a question-and-answer session with the youngsters. It was on that occasion that he pronounced one of his many condemnations of "proselytism", telling a girl who had asked whether she should try to convert her non-religious friends: "It is not licit to convince them of your faith; proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path" (source). We covered this in a blog post at the time:
However, there was another thing Francis said during his audience with these hapless youths, something that escaped not only us but, it seems, just about everyone else too. Asked about what he likes and dislikes about the Lutheran church, he answered: "I really like the good Lutherans, the Lutherans who follow the true faith of Jesus Christ. However, I do not like lukewarm Catholics and I do not like lukewarm Lutherans" ("Pope jokes in ecumenical meeting: Who is better - Catholics or Lutherans?", Rome Reports, Oct. 13, 2016; underlining added.) A video report by Rome Reports has captured the moment he said this and provided English subtitles. The fun begins at the 1:09 min mark:
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAJOIXq2Wv4&start=69&width=450&height=253[/embedyt]
The heresy implied in these words is so blatant that it defies belief that Francis actually said this so openly. As far as a refutation of this outrageous Bergoglian remark goes, it shouldn't be necessary to point out the obvious, but we might as well: There can be, and is, only true religion, one true Faith. God has revealed only one truth, one set of revealed teachings, contained in the Deposit of Faith given by Jesus Christ to the Apostles (see Jn 1:17; Jn 16:12-13; Heb 1:1-3), passed on through Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture (see 2 Th 2:14; 2 Tim 3:15-16). He established the Church to be the infallible and indestructible guardian of that truth, "the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15), "that henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive" (Eph 4:14). Any deviation from this true Gospel is necessarily a false gospel, one that leads to eternal damnation (see Gal 1:8-9; 2 Jn 1:9). Lutheranism is a set of heresies invented and/or propagated by Martin Luther in the 16th century. It is a perversion of the Gospel. It is therefore clear that it is absolutely impossible for someone to adhere to Lutheranism and to "the true Faith of Jesus Christ" at the same time. The one excludes the other. That is not to say that there aren't many Lutherans who are sincere in their errors, but sincerity in error is still sincerity in error -- it does not change the fact that the doctrines of Lutheranism are not the teachings of Jesus Christ but "doctrines of devils" (1 Tim 4:1; cf. Heb 13:9). That many Lutherans mean to adhere to the true Faith of Jesus Christ can readily be assumed but is irrelevant with regard to the fact that they do not in fact adhere to it. What Francis did in this ecumenical audience on Oct. 13, 2016, is confirm Lutherans in their errors (something he habitually does also with Jews and Muslims). He told them, essentially, that their heresies are the true Faith of Jesus Christ. That is a complete denial of the Catholic Faith. By contrast, Pope Leo XIII didn't exactly share Francis' belief that Lutheranism is just as much "the true Faith of Jesus Christ" as Catholicism is, as is evident from this Apostolic Letter to Cardinal Pietro Respighi. Francis has long had a love affair with Lutheranism:
Vatican claims Catholics can now recognize Martin Luther as a "Witness to the Gospel"
Francis celebrates Reformation with Lutherans in Sweden
Vatican releases Postage Stamp honoring Martin Luther
Finnish Lutherans given "Holy Communion" at Vatican
Francis on Shared "Communion" with Lutherans: "Life is Bigger than Explanations"!
Francis' favorite Exorcist is a Lutheran!
Thus, it is clear that what the Frankster said in that ecumenical audience regarding there being "good Lutherans" who "follow the true Faith of Jesus Christ" is not at all out of character for him. Here is a small sampler of what real Catholic Popes have said about the only true Faith, the only true religion. Addressing dissidents, Pope Leo XII exhorted "all of you who are still removed from the true Church and the road to salvation", hoping they would "sincerely agree with the mother Church, outside of whose teachings there is no salvation" (Encyclical Quod Hoc Ineunte, n. 9). Pope Pius IX condemned those who claim that "[t]he Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion" (Syllabus of Errors, n. 21) and warned against them who make no distinction "between the true religion and false ones" (Encyclical Quanta Cura, n. 3). Indeed, in his encyclical Nostis et Nobiscum, he rebuked those who try to draw Catholics into "Protestantism, which in their deceit they repeatedly declare to be only another form of the same true religion of Christ, thereby just as pleasing to God" (n. 6). That applies to Bergoglio to a tee! Upon convoking the (First) Vatican Council, the same Pope Pius IX addressed an apostolic letter to Protestants and other non-Catholics who, "whilst they acknowledge the same Jesus Christ as the Redeemer, and glory in the name of Christian, yet do not profess the true faith of Christ, nor hold to and follow the Communion of the Catholic Church" (Apostolic Letter Iam Vos Omnes; underlining added). Pope Leo XIII noted that "French Catholics ... have the happiness of belonging to the true religion" (Encyclical Au Milieu Des Sollicitudes, n. 7) and, in another document, emphasized the exclusivity of Catholicism as the only religion revealed by God: "...the Catholic religion ... is alone the true religion" (Encyclical Sapientiae Christianae, n. 34; underlining added). Pope Pius XI, too, referred to Catholicism as "the true religion of Christ" (Encyclical Casti Connubii, n. 115). In another place he stated clearly: "The Church is indeed conscious of her divine mission to all mankind, and of the obligation which all men have to practice the one true religion..." (Encyclical Divini Illius Magistri, n. 39). Pope Pius XII called "the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church" nothing less than the "true Church of Jesus Christ" and warned that "grave errors ... are being spread among those outside the true Church" (Encyclical Mystici Corporis, nn. 13, 8). Bergoglio is a Modernist and an an adherent of Vatican II ecclesiology, and so he considers Protestantism to be simply a different "expression" of the same Christian religion. He recently admitted that for him, Christianity is really not about adherence to doctrine, and shortly before he had proclaimed in Abu Dhabi that God positively wills the diversity of religions! "Indeed, Modernists do not deny, but actually maintain, some confusedly, others frankly, that all religions are true", wrote Pope St. Pius X in his landmark encyclical Pascendi (n. 14). His successor, Pope Pius XI, condemned "that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule" (Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 2). Thus we see once again the stark contrast between the true Catholic religion of the ages and the Novus Ordo counterfeit that began with the false pope John XXIII (1958-63) and has reached its present zenith in the man the world calls "Pope Francis." Image source: youtube.com (Rome Reports in English; screenshot) License: fair useTRADCAST 024 (12 APR 2019) Contents
Segment 1: Introductory comments; reading suggestions for new or potential converts; From the Jorge's Mouth: a critical review of some of Francis' recent utterances; modesty in dress and the beauty of femininity
Segment 2: The pop traditionalism and drive-by theology of the recognize-and-resist traditionalists: the Ultramontanism objection / Steve Skojec / Michael Matt / Christopher Ferrara / Roberto de Mattei
Total run time: 1 hr 24 mins
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvl5sZeKB4U[/embedyt]
Web Site: PapalEncyclicals.net
Book: Anthony J. Mioni, ed., The Popes Against Modern Errors (Rockford, IL: TAN Books, 1999)
Book: Fr. Felix Sarda y Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin (Rockford, IL: TAN Books, 1993). Also available online.
Book: St. Charles Borromeo, ed., Catechism of the Council of Trent (Charlotte, NC: TAN Books, 2009). Also available online.
Book: Fr. Francis Spirago, The Catechism Explained (Wentworth Press, 2016). Also available online.
Book: Cardinal Peter Gasparri, The Catholic Catechism (Toronto: Longmans, Green and Co., 1932)
Book: Bp. Louis LaRavoire-Morrow, My Catholic Faith (Kenosha, WI: My Mission House, 1958). Also available online.
Book: Fr. Anthony Alexander, College Apologetics: Proof of the Truth of the Catholic Faith (Charlotte, NC: TAN Books, 2012)
Book: Fr. Francisco Radecki and Fr. Dominic Radecki, Vatican II Exposed as Counterfeit Catholicism (Wayne, MI: St. Joseph's Media, 2019)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Now What?" — Being a Real Catholic Today
Novus Ordo Document: Francis, Address to Young People at Ecumenical Meeting (Sep. 25, 2018), Zenit
Novus Ordo Watch, "Francis denounces Converting the Orthodox as 'Great Sin Against Ecumenism'" (Oct. 1, 2016)
News Article: Bernadette Reis, "Pope sends greetings to the Jewish community of Rome", Vatican News (Sep. 18, 2018)
Book: Fr. Thomas Slater, A Manual of Moral Theology, vol. 1, 5th ed. (Burns Oates and Washbourne Ltd., 1925). Also available online.
Blog Post: "New Papal Utterance: 'Being Angry with Christ is a Kind of Prayer!'", Rorate Caeli, Apr. 9, 2019
Church Document: Pope Pius VI, Bull Auctorem Fidei (1794)
News Article: Carol Glatz, "Pope Francis: The Devil targets those who succumb to despair and negativity", Catholic Herald (Apr. 9, 2019)
Book: Rita Davidson, Immodesty, Satan's Virtue (Little Flowers Family Press, 2015)
Modesty Resources: Little Flowers Family Press / Pope Pius XI's Legislation regarding Modesty in Dress / Cardinal Joseph Siri's Notification concerning Men's Dress worn by Women / The Requirements for Modesty in Dress / Some Magisterial Directives
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Truth about Pope Liberius and the 'Excommunication' of St. Athanasius" (Apr. 12, 2016)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Case of Pope Honorius I" (July 12, 2016)
Novus Ordo Watch, "In Brief: The Facts on Pope John XXII" (Oct. 4, 2017)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The 'St. Paul resisted St. Peter to his Face' Objection" (June 14, 2018)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Ultramontanism Objection" (Jan. 18, 2018)
Catholic Encyclopedia: Entry "Ultramontanism" (1912)
Blog Post: Steve Skojec, "'That's Not Who We Are Anymore': Pre- and Post-Conciliar Catholicism Are Not the Same Religion", One Peter Five, Oct. 2, 2018
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Catholic Teaching on the Papacy"
Church Document: Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Immortale Dei (1885)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Pope and the Antichrist: The Great Apostasy Foretold by Cardinal Manning" (Apr. 23, 2015)
YouTube Video: "RESISTING FRANCIS to his FACE: Standing with Viganò", The Remnant (uploaded Oct. 22, 2018)
Article: Elizabeth Yore, "Anatomy of a Coverup: An Open Letter to Pope Francis", The Remnant (May 25, 2018)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Impossibility of Judging or Deposing a True Pope" (Mar. 15, 2016)
Article: Jason Morgan, "SEDEVACANTISTS IN LIMBO: A Response to Mr. Novus O. Watch", The Remnant (Mar. 21, 2019) -- Proof that original version contained heresy: SCREENSHOT (annotated)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Missing the Forest for the Trees: The Remnant on Schism and Sedevacantism" (Nov. 9, 2018)
Special Lenten Fundraiser 2019: Make a qualifying donation to Novus Ordo Watch by April 20 and get a reward!
Article: Christopher A. Ferrara, "Can the Church Defend Herself Against Bergoglio?", The Remnant (Sep. 17, 2018)
Novus Ordo Watch, "No, a True Pope CANNOT be Deposed: Reply to Br. Alexis Bugnolo" (Sep. 10, 2018)
Article: Robert Siscoe, "Dogmatic Fact: The One Doctrine that Proves Francis Is Pope", One Peter Five (Mar. 18, 2019)
Article: "Bp." Athanasius Schneider, "On the Question of a Heretical Pope", Rorate Caeli (Mar. 20, 2019)
Article: Fr. Anthony Cekada, "The Errors of Athanasius Schneider", Quidlibet (Apr. 6, 2019)
Blog Post: Christopher A. Ferrara, "Bishop Schneider's History Lesson", Fatima Center (Mar. 21, 2019)
Lecture: Roberto de Mattei, "Pope Francis Five Years Later: Continuity of Rupture in the Church", Life Site (Nov. 29, 2018)
Book: José Antonio Ureta, Pope Francis' Paradigm Shift (Spring Grove, PA: American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property, 2018)
Novus Ordo Document: Francis, Apostolic Letter Mitis Et Misericors Iesus (Aug. 15, 2015)
Novus Ordo Document: Francis, Apostolic Letter Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus (Aug. 15, 2015)
Church Document: Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Sapientiae Christianae (1890)
Article: Cardinal John Franzelin, "The True Sense of the Vincentian Canon" (1875)
Church Document: Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Casti Connubii (1930)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Francis Papacy Test" (Mar. 25, 2019)
TRADCAST: Complete Episode List
TRADCAST EXPRESS: Complete Episode List
Fun & informative podcast...
FRANCIS WATCH Episode 39
Adhering to Doctrine; Flagrant Adultery; and a Dream called Jesus
Listen on demand at any time -- free!
Great news, everyone: It is time again for the quarterly Francis Watch! Novus Ordo Watch is pleased to sponsor the phenomenal podcast program Francis Watch, in which host Stephen Heiner of True Restoration analyses with his sedevacantist guests, Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr. Anthony Cekada, the latest chaos perpetrated by Jorge Bergoglio, the man who claims to be the head of the Catholic Church under the title "Pope Francis". In this latest episode, Bp. Daniel Dolan fills in for Bp. Sanborn, who is traveling.
In this episode no. 39, which is one hour in length, His Excellency and Father discuss:
Some excerpts from Francis' new "apostolic exhortation" Christus Vivit
Francis' claim that God wills the pluralism of religions and his fake assurances to "Bp." Athanasius Schneider regarding an "orthodox" interpretation
Bergoglio's idea that being a Christian isn't about "adhering to doctrine"
Francis' claim that the Bride of Christ has been caught in "flagrant adultery"
An interview in which Bergoglio says that the sins of the flesh are "the least serious sins"
Francis' thoughts on a "dream named Jesus"
Bergoglio's Angelus remark that Christian suffering is "not sadomasochism"
Fr. Cekada's response to John Hunwicke, a Novus Ordo presbyter, on the validity of the new rite of episcopal consecration
A picture tells a thousand words: what the SSPX says contrasted with what the SSPX does
As an additional tidbit, Fr. Cekada reveals that he is currently working on a response to "Bp." Schneider's write-up on "heretical Popes", a monograph riddled with serious theological errors that is virtually begging for a solid refutation. As always, Francis Watch is not boring or dry but exciting, insightful, and informative -- with plenty of humor, so necessary to retain in our difficult times. Don't miss this episode of Francis Watch, and be sure to share it with friends, family members, and potential converts. The broadcast is available for streaming and download on-demand at any time. All episodes of Francis Watch ever produced are now available for free to the public at FrancisWatch.org. To learn more about the organization that produces Francis Watch, visit member-supported Restoration Radio. For more incredible facts about Jorge Bergoglio, "Pope Francis", please see our topical page:
What you need to know about the man who claims to be the Pope
It is our pleasure to be able to sponsor Francis Watch for the good of souls and for the greater glory of God. In this manner we try to fulfill in part our stated goal of helping to educate people in the true Roman Catholic religion and making people aware of how true Catholicism differs essentially from the fake Novus Ordo/Vatican II counterpart that is currently occupying the Catholic structures. Image sources: composite with elements from Wikimedia Commons (Benhur Arcayan) and istockphoto.com Licenses: public domain and paidNo, it's not an April Fool's joke...
Francis in Morocco: "Being a Christian is not about Adhering to a Doctrine"
It was bound to happen. On the last day of his two-day apostolic journey blather tour in Morocco, Jorge Bergoglio ("Pope" Francis) once again spoke his heretical mind. Whenever this man's lips part, there is no predicting what will come out of his mouth, and this time he had a few theological indiscretions prepared for his audience. At the Cathedral of St. Peter in Rabat, Francis addressed his own Novus Ordo clergy, as well as members of the so-called Ecumenical Council of Churches. Vatican Media has provided the following video of the meeting:
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzE8W0i0aHg[/embedyt]
A full transcript of Bergoglio's speech has been posted on the Vatican web site:
Francis' Address at Meeting with Priests, Religious, Consecrated Persons and the Ecumenical Council of Churches (Mar. 31, 2019)
The address is the typical mixed bag of truths, half-truths, and outright errors. We will highlight some of them. In all seriousness, Francis opines that "Jesus did not choose us and send us forth to become more numerous!" That is a direct denial of the Great Commission (see Mt 28:19-20); but of course Francis wouldn't be Francis if he didn't nevertheless affirm in his very next sentence: "He called us to a mission." But what does mission and preaching the Gospel mean for Francis? To him, its essence lies in "our capacity to generate change and to awaken wonder and compassion." If you can't recall the Gospel passage where Christ sends His disciples to generate change and awaken wonder and compassion, you're not alone. It only exists in the gospel according to Francis, and that is a false one (cf. Gal 1:8-9). The false pope proceeds to explain that whatever preaching the Gospel and being missionaries may mean, it is definitely not making converts of unbelievers:
We do this by the way we live as disciples of Jesus, in the midst of those with whom we share our daily lives, joys and sorrows, suffering and hopes (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 1). In other words, the paths of mission are not those of proselytism. Please, these paths are not those of proselytism! Let us recall Benedict XVI: "the Church grows not through proselytism, but through attraction, through witness". The paths of mission are not those of proselytism, which leads always to a cul-de-sac, but of our way of being with Jesus and with others. The problem is not when we are few in number, but when we are insignificant, salt that has lost the flavour of the Gospel – this is the problem – or lamps that no longer shed light (cf. Mt 5:13-15). (underlining added)
Ah yes, that ever-present scourge of "proselytism"! Francis never fails to warn his people against that great evil! Remember?
Francis: "Evangelization is not Proselytizing"
Francis: "Do you need to convince the other to become Catholic? No, no, no!"
Francis: "Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense"
Francis: "Never Proselytize in Schools!"
This time, the pretend-Pontifex even assures his listeners that proselytism "leads always to a cul-de-sac", a curious assessment for which he offers no rationale whatsoever, of course. The professional Novus Ordo apologists -- you know, the likes of Tim Staples, Jimmy Akin, Patrick Madrid, and Dave Armstrong -- will try to tell you that "proselytism" refers not to the making of converts as such but rather to the making of converts using dishonest, intimidating, or otherwise immoral means. That, however, is definitely not what Francis means, and we can prove it:
Jimmy Akin and the Definition of "Proselytism"
Francis: Converting the Eastern Orthodox to Catholicism is "Great Sin against Ecumenism"
Francis told Anglican Bishop not to convert to Catholicism
Two more Protestants affirm Francis "not interested" in converting them
Francis: No One owns the Truth, it is an Encounter with Christ
Francis doesn't care what Religion you are
Francis' denunciation of proselytism is nothing new, then, and it is not surprising that he should have brought it up again, given the opportunity. However, he did have something new for his listeners, too, something that is no less outrageous:
I believe we should worry whenever we Christians are troubled by the thought we are only significant if we are the flour, if we occupy all the spaces. You know very well that our lives are meant to be "yeast", wherever and with whomever we find ourselves, even if this appears to bring no tangible or immediate benefits (cf. Evangelii Gaudium, 210). For being a Christian is not about adhering to a doctrine, or a temple or an ethnic group. Being Christian is about an encounter, an encounter with Jesus Christ. We are Christians because we have been loved and encountered, and not as the result of proselytism. Being Christian is about knowing that we have been forgiven and knowing that we are asked to treat others in the same way that God treated us. For "by this everyone shall know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another" (Jn 13:35). (underlining added)
So here the Jesuit apostate from Buenos Aires informs the world that being a Christian, a disciple of Jesus Christ, is not about adhering to a doctrine. Really? Let's see. In his Apostolic Letter against the French Sillon movement, Pope St. Pius X taught:
No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness. ... We wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, prevailing within the Sillon and elsewhere. As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. (Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique; underlining and paragraph breaks added.)
All this is pretty clear. But since Francis also says that Faith "must be constantly nourished by the word of God", we will also take a look at the testimony of Sacred Scripture regarding the importance of doctrine in Catholicism:
And they were astonished at his doctrine. For he was teaching them as one having power, and not as the scribes. (Mk 1:22) Jesus answered them, and said: My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. (Jn 7:16) The high priest therefore asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. (Jn 18:19) And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of bread, and in prayers. (Acts 2:42) And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked them, saying: Commanding we commanded you, that you should not teach in this name; and behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and you have a mind to bring the blood of this man upon us. (Acts 5:27-28) Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son. If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him, God speed you. (2 Jn 9-10) I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: and will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. (2 Tim 4:1-4) Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. (2 Thess 2:14) I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. (Gal 1:6-9) Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them. (Rom 16:17) Which things also we speak, not in the learned words of human wisdom; but in the doctrine of the Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (1 Cor 2:13) These things proposing to the brethren, thou shalt be a good minister of Christ Jesus, nourished up in the words of faith, and of the good doctrine which thou hast attained unto. Till I come, attend unto reading, to exhortation, and to doctrine. (1 Tim 4:6,13) If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to that doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing... (1 Tim 6:3-4) Exhort servants to be obedient to their masters, in all things pleasing, not gainsaying: Not defrauding, but in all things shewing good fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. (Titus 2:9-10)
...But being a Christian is not about adhering to a doctrine, huh? Quick, someone call Catholic Answers and tell them to close down their offices. It's not about doctrine, it's all about an "encounter", an experience. Maybe the Vatican will soon change the name of its Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to Congregation for the Experience of the Faith. At this point, anything is possible. However, Francis isn't quite so consistent in his dissing of doctrine. Keep in mind that he is the same theological shyster who at other times will suddenly play zealous guardian of orthodoxy and feign concern about a re-emergence of the heresies of Pelagianism and Gnosticism (see Letter Placuit Deo, approved and ordered by Francis); when, of course, he is the true Pelagian (atheist is in Heaven because he was "good") and the real Gnostic (new doctrines from the "god of surprises"). In other words, being a Christian is all about doctrine whenever it suits him and his agenda. Of course it is true that to be a genuine disciple of our Lord Jesus Christ, we must do more than simply believe and profess His holy doctrine. To enjoy God's grace and ultimately make it to Heaven, we need not only Faith but also hope and charity, final perseverance (see Mt 7:21; Jas 2:14-26; Denz. 808). But that's not the issue because that's not what Francis was addressing: He didn't say that in addition to professing the truth we must also live it if we wish to be saved. Had he said that, we could take no issue with it. Instead, he said that "being a Christian is not about adhering to a doctrine." Yet that is precisely what it is, above all. For he who adheres to the true doctrine but does not practice it, although he is a hypocrite and on his road to damnation, is nevertheless a Christian, a member of the Catholic Church, albeit a lifeless one:
If any one saith, that, grace being lost through sin, faith also is always lost with it; or, that the faith which remains, though it be not a lively faith, is not a true faith; or, that he, who has faith without charity, is not a Christian; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Session VI, Canon 28; Denz. 838) For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy. Men may lose charity and divine grace through sin, thus becoming incapable of supernatural merit, and yet not be deprived of all life if they hold fast to faith and Christian hope, and if, illumined from above, they are spurred on by the interior promptings of the Holy Spirit to salutary fear and are moved to prayer and penance for their sins. (Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Mystici Corporis, n. 23)
Thus, he who retains Faith, even though he be in mortal sin, is still a Christian, still a member of the Church. (This important truth has immense repercussions for the visibility of the Church; otherwise one could not know who is and isn't a Catholic, since one cannot tell whether another is in the state of mortal sin or in the state of sanctifying grace.) On the other hand, possessing charity and hope without Faith, is not possible: "But without faith it is impossible to please God..." (Heb 11:6). Francis, then, has once again uttered a heresy, and quite an idiotic one at that. If Christianity isn't about doctrine, why do we have a Creed? Yes, yes, of course we are quite aware that one can spin Francis' words to mean all sorts of things, as in, "Let me tell you what Francis meant by this", but that's beside the point. The point is what he actually said, not what he should have said or could have meant. The false pope then turned to the topic of dialogue, talking about a "dialogue of salvation and friendship" to which we have supposedly been called, and exhorting his listeners to be a "living sacrament of the dialogue that God wants to initiate with each man and woman". In this context, Bergoglio asks: "How can we fail to think of Saint Francis of Assisi, who at the height of the Crusades went to encounter Sultan al-Malik al-Kamil?". That's a really great point, so let's recall exactly how that "encounter" went between the two and discover if beyond a "dialogue of salvation" in which he "generate[d] change" and "awaken[ed] wonder and compassion", St. Francis didn't also engage in some of that dreaded "proselytism" that always ends in "a cul-de-sac":
Clearly, if St. Francis were alive today, Bergoglio would be the first one to denounce him for proselytizing and spreading "religious supremacy", another concept he disses in the same speech: "Dialogue, then, becomes prayer... A prayer of intercession that says to the Father, 'Thy kingdom come'. Not by violence, not by hatred, not by ethnic, religious or economic supremacy...." If there is no religious supremacy, that means all religions are equal. But this is a betrayal of the Gospel, a most frightful betrayal of Jesus Christ, who is the only Way to Eternal Life (see Jn 14:6; cf. 2 Cor 6:14-18). In his landmark encyclical against Freemasonry, Pope Leo XIII warned:
...[T]he great error of this age [is] that a regard for religion should be held as an indifferent matter, and that all religions are alike. This manner of reasoning is calculated to bring about the ruin of all forms of religion, and especially of the Catholic religion, which, as it is the only one that is true, cannot, without great injustice, be regarded as merely equal to other religions. (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Humanum Genus, n. 16)
Yes, Catholicism claims religious supremacy. It alone is the true religion; all others are false. Francis preaches the fraternity and indifferentism of Freemasonry. Earlier this year in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, he had blasphemously declared that the "pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings." No wonder he considers all religions equal. To him, what matters is encounter and experience; the rest -- like doctrine, for example -- is unnecessary bells and whistles:
What is to prevent such experiences from being found in any religion? In fact, that they are so is maintained by not a few [Modernists]. 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. (Pope St. Pius X, Encyclical Pascendi Dominici, n. 14)
Francis is a true and proper Modernist and therefore inherently incapable of being the Pope of the Catholic Church. Image source: youtube.com (Vatican Media; screenshot) License: fair useNew Ratzinger article published...
Benedict XVI: No Mission to the Jews, just Dialogue
Instead of remaining silently retreated in his little safe house in Vatican City, "hidden from the world", as he had initially promised, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger -- a.k.a. "Pope Emeritus" Benedict XVI -- has once again inserted himself into the world of theological discourse. Although he speaks with much greater finesse and academic credibility than his boorish successor, the blasphemies he utters differ at best in degree, not in kind. The German theological journal Herder Korrespondenz just released its December 2018 edition. On the cover, pictured above, we see Benedict XVI next to the words Die Entgegnung -- "The Rejoinder" -- because in this issue the retired "Pope" responds to those who had blasted him for an essay published in the July/August 2018 issue of Communio, wherein Ratzinger had dared to assert that "[t]he [Novus Ordo] formula of the 'never-revoked covenant' [between God and the Jews] may have been helpful in a first stage of the new dialogue between Jews and Christians, but it is not adequate in the long run to express the magnitude of the reality in a way that is passably appropriate" (source; our translation). This "bold" proposal caused a ruckus among Ratzinger's more openly Modernist compatriots, who saw in it a first step to reneging on the de facto Novus Ordo dogma that the Talmudic Jews of our day are just fine where they are and salvation is all but assured them. The "Pope Emeritus" had suggested nothing of the kind, of course, and in fact his essay contained lots of erroneous, heretical, and even blasphemous material. We covered Benedict's initial write-up, as well as its background and effects, in an extensive article back in September. It is worth reviewing to properly understand the context in which the current post is to be read:
Benedict XVI and the Jews: New Ratzinger Essay on Judaism causes Controversy
Now the Antipope Emeritus returns to the scene with more blasphemy. In a brief, four-column monograph entitled Nicht Mission, sondern Dialog ("Not Mission but Dialogue"), published in Herder Korrespondenz (issue 12/2018, pp. 13-14), he reaffirms one of the central claims in his original essay, namely, that the so-called "substitution theory" (a.k.a. "Supersessionism") -- according to which the Catholic Church has replaced the Jews as the Chosen People of the New Covenant -- was never actually taught by the Church before Vatican II. As we showed in our powerful critique published in September, this is a preposterous claim to make. Let's review very briefly some concrete examples of where this was taught by the Church before the "New Springtime" of the Second Vatican Council was unleashed upon the world. For example, we read in Fr. Joachim Salaverri's work De Ecclesia Christi that "Christ not only preached a religious and universal Kingdom … but he also said that the religious economy of the O.T. [Old Testament] was going to be abrogated, and for it he substituted a new religious order" (Sacrae Theologiae Summa, vol. IB, n. 84; italics added). Pope Pius XI expressed this Supersessionist doctrine in his beautiful Act of Consecration of the Human Race to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which even Ratzinger himself acknowledged in his essay denying its validity: "Turn Thine eyes of mercy towards the children of the race, once Thy chosen people: of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior; may it now descend upon them a laver of redemption and of life" (source; underlining added). Under the same Pius XI, the Holy Office stated without equivocation that "the Jewish people ... were the depository of the divine promises up until the arrival of Jesus Christ..." (Decree Cum Supremae; underlining added). In the 19th century, Fr. Richard F. Clarke, S.J., wrote rather straightforwardly: "We ought to remember that Catholics are, far more than the Jews were, the chosen people of God…" (Clarke, "The Ministry of Jesus: Short Meditations on the Public Life of Our Lord", in Beautiful Pearls of Catholic Truth [Cincinnati, OH: Henry Sphar & Co., 1897], p. 542). In his encyclical letter on the Church, Pope Pius XII likewise enunciated the Supersessionist position:
And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine Savior was preaching in a restricted area — He was not sent but to the sheep that were lost of the house of Israel — the Law and the Gospel were together in force; but on the gibbet of his death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees, fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, establishing the New Testament in His bloodshed for the whole human race. "To such an extent, then," says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, "was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom." On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers…. But if our Savior, by His death, became, in the full and complete sense of the word, the Head of the Church, it was likewise through His blood that the Church was enriched with the fullest communication of the Holy Spirit, through which, from the time when the Son of man was lifted up and glorified on the Cross by His sufferings, she is divinely illumined. For then, as Augustine notes, with the rending of the veil of the temple it happened that the dew of the Paraclete's gifts, which heretofore had descended only on the fleece, that is on the people of Israel, fell copiously and abundantly (while the fleece remained dry and deserted) on the whole earth, that is on the Catholic Church, which is confined by no boundaries of race or territory. (Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Mystici Corporis, nn. 29-31; underlining added.)
We also see the replacement of the people of the Old Covenant by that of the New foreshadowed in the Old Testament itself; for example, in the supplanting of the elder brother, Esau, by his younger brother, Jacob. Having realized that his brother Jacob had received his father Isaac's unique blessing in his stead, Esau cried out, but to no avail:
Esau having heard his father's words, roared out with a great cry: and being in a great consternation, said: Bless me also, my father. And he said: Thy brother came deceitfully and got thy blessing. But he said again: Rightly is his name called Jacob; for he hath supplanted me lo this second time: my first birthright he took away before, and now this second time he hath stolen away my blessing. And again he said to his father: Hast thou not reserved me also a blessing? Isaac answered: I have appointed him thy lord, and have made all his brethren his servants: I have established him with corn and wine, and after this, what shall I do more for thee, my son? (Gen 27:34-37)
And, of course, we find very clear expressions of the substitution doctrine in the New Testament itself. Many of those scriptural passages and other Catholic proofs of Supersessionism can be found in the following post from 2013:
Bergoglio-Francis: Jews Still God's Chosen People
There is simply no excuse for this. Just as the New Covenant has replaced the Old, so the people who belong to the New Covenant have replaced the people who belong to the Old. It is a necessary corollary. What's beautiful about this is that in the people of the New Covenant, there is "neither Jew nor Greek", i.e. neither Jew nor Gentile, "[f]or you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:28). The New Covenant is no longer founded on a fleshly link but on a spiritual link, through Faith -- and even this much was foreshadowed in the Old Testament, as St. Paul explains in Gal 4:22-31. But this spiritual link through Faith is indeed required and not optional; that is, people must believe in the Messiah in order to be a part of this New Chosen People.
In his new monograph published in Herder Korrespondenz (p. 14), Ratzinger makes it seem as though the New Testament were merely one possible interpretation and application of the Old Testament, one that Christians have decided to embrace but the (apostate) Jews have not. He outrageously insinuates that either view is equally valid -- and this is by no means the first time he has put this forward:
It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ. And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts — yet it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him — that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about…. (Joseph Ratzinger, God and the World: A Conversation with Peter Seewald, trans. by Henry Taylor [San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2002], p. 209)
This is Joseph Ratzinger, ladies and gentlemen! This is "Pope Benedict XVI", so beloved by all those too disgusted with Francis to be able to see the apostasy this man too has been promoting for all these years! Remember that Christ Himself scolded the Pharisees for their stubborn unbelief, for their refusal to accept the clear scriptural testimony concerning Him: "And you have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him you believe not. Search the scriptures, for you think in them to have life everlasting; and the same are they that give testimony of me. And you will not come to me that you may have life" (Jn 5:38-40). Of course, if one can legitimately read the Old Testament as not pointing to Jesus of Nazareth as the Messias, then there is no obligation to convert to Catholicism, which then becomes nothing more than an opinion -- and all that remains for Catholics and Jews to do, at best, is to "dialogue" about their differences. Which is exactly what Ratzinger suggests:
The Gospel of St. Matthew ends with the commission given to the disciples to go forth into all the world and make all nations into disciples of Jesus (Mt 28:19). Missionary activity among all peoples and cultures, [that] is the assignment Christ has left to His followers. The point is to acquaint people with the "unknown God" (Acts 17:23). Man has a right to get to know God because only he who knows God can properly live his humanity. That's why the missionary mandate is universal -- with one exception: A mission to the Jews was not intended and not needed for the simple reason that they alone among all peoples [already] knew the "unknown God." With regard to Israel, therefore, there is no mission but [only] dialogue about whether Jesus of Nazareth is "the Son of God, the Logos" whom Israel and, without knowing it, [all of] humanity has been awaiting in accordance with the promises made to His People. To take up this dialogue once more is the task this hour puts before us. (Joseph Ratzinger - Benedict XVI, "Nicht Mission, sondern Dialog", Herder Korrespondenz, vol. 72 [Dec. 2018], p. 14; our translation.)
That such rubbish is considered top-notch Catholic theology in our day is a sad testimony to how far the Novus Ordo apostasy has advanced! A simple look at the actual text of the Great Commission shows what utter poppycock this German Modernist has put on paper behind the closed doors of Mater Ecclesiae monastery in Vatican City:
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 28:18-20)
Notice that Christ did not say, "Going therefore, acquaint all people with the true God, except for the Israelites, since they already know Him." No, He said to teach all nations His doctrine -- including that of the Most Holy Trinity -- and to baptize them, thus making them His true disciples. If the command to "teach ... all nations" were excepting the Jews, then so would the command to baptize them likewise except the Jews, for the verbs teach and baptize are given in the same command and in the same grammatical sense. But no, there is no exception for the Jews, of course. Ratzinger made it up. Fr. George Leo Haydock, in his popular Scripture commentary, for example, notes regarding this passage: "Teach all nations. In St. Mark we read, going into the whole world, preach to every creature, that is capable of it; not only to the Jews, but to all nations throughout the whole world, baptizing them, &c" (Haydock Bible, note on Mt 28:19; italics given; underlining added). Another commentator on Sacred Scripture writes: "...the old restriction of apostolic preaching, [Mt] 10:5f., is abrogated. Enrolment of disciples ..., baptism, religious and moral instruction are for Gentiles also" (Dom Bernard Orchard et al., A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture [London: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1953], n. 723f, p. 904; underlining added). The word "also" means "in addition to", "as well", and not "only". As if intending to refute Ratzinger directly, the same Bible commentary notes on the parallel passage, Mark 16:15: "The Gospel and the salvation which it brings are for all without exception" (n. 743e, p. 933; underlining added). "Without exception" means no exception for the Jews, either! Recall also that when Christ was being repeatedly petitioned by a Gentile woman, He told her: "I was not sent but to the sheep that are lost of the house of Israel" (Mt 15:24). Christ's own mission on earth was not to the Gentiles but to the Jews -- and it was a genuine mission, not a "dialogue"! Of course Christ redeemed all, Gentiles as much as Jews, but His own missionary activity was to the Jews specifically, whereas the mission to the Gentiles He left for the Apostles. This commission to include the Gentiles from the time of the Ascension on (in addition to the Jews) stands in contrast to the previous command given to the Twelve in Mt 10:5-6: "These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go ye rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." The Great Commission given just before His Ascension simply extends the original mission to the Jews, now to include also the Gentiles. It does not replace the mission to the Jews, neither is there any distinction made between preaching/converting and dialoguing. Benedict XVI's brazen idea that the Jews of our day need not be evangelized because they already know the true God is also quite mistaken, to put it nicely. The Jews, we recall, reject the idea that God is a Trinity. Thus they reject the true God as He revealed Himself in His essence, and hence it is true that they too do not know the true God, as Christ Himself said of them: "They said therefore to him: Where is thy Father? Jesus answered: Neither me do you know, nor my Father: if you did know me, perhaps you would know my Father also" (Jn 8:19). The apostate Jews do not worship the God of the Old Testament because the God of the Old Testament is the Most Holy Trinity. The fact that the Trinity was not clearly revealed -- although it is hinted at in the Old Testament -- until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ is irrelevant to the fact that the God "with whom there is no change, nor shadow of alteration" (Jas 1:17) has been a Trinity from all eternity. And thus the Jews too must come to know the true God, for "neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him" (Mt 11:27). This is serious business and cannot be pushed aside or relativized by appealing to any political or religious persecution of the Jews in history. St. John the Evangelist was quite explicit in his warning that "[w]hosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also" (1 Jn 2:23); and again: "Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son" (2 Jn 9). So Ratzinger wants to dialogue with the Jews instead of evangelizing them? Then one must ask why the Vatican does not extend its interreligious dialogue campaigns to the Jews. On the web site of the so-called Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue (PCID) we read: "It should be noted that the PCID does not have responsability [sic] for Christian-Jewish relations. These are the competence of the Commission for religious Relations with Jews, which comes under the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity" (source). It is a scandal in its own right that the Modernists in Rome habitually refer to Protestants and other heretics as Christians (for, properly speaking, they are not such, even if they mean to be), but to include Christ-denying Jews under that umbrella really takes the cake! But then again, why should the Vatican Modernists include the Jews in their never-ending, irrelevant, and utterly vacuous "interreligious dialogue" anyway? It's not like that dialogue has anything meaningful as its goal. In 2009, when as "Pope" Benedict XVI the same Fr. Ratzinger wrote a letter to all the Novus Ordo bishops in the world, he defined interreligious dialogue as "the need for all those who believe in God to join in seeking peace, to attempt to draw closer to one another, and to journey together, even with their differing images of God, towards the source of Light" (source). Precisely what that looks like can be seen on numerous occasions every year, for example, when the Vatican releases its greetings to Hindus and Buddhists on their respective feasts. Have a look here and here for a small sample. "Bp." John Wester's video-taped dialogue with former Methodist-turned-Buddhist Christopher Clowery is always a hoot to review as well. Let's be serious: We all know that Benedict XVI simply does not care if any Jews become Catholics -- whether that should happen by means of dialogue, evangelization, missionary activity, private revelation, or any other way. He does not believe in Catholicism to begin with, which is why he can simply make up "exceptions" to the divine missionary mandate and can blasphemously declare that the Old Testament does not unequivocally point to Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ. To make an exception for the Jews is not to show them any charity. Indeed, it is to except them from the only way of salvation (see Jn 14:6; Acts 4:12). Do not allow yourself to be fooled: Ratzinger is a Modernist through and through, no less than Jorge Bergoglio; he is just more polished and cultured than his successor. Unless they repent sincerely before the end of their lives, Benedict XVI and Francis will go to the same hell to which all unbelievers go who have been led there by their apostate theology. Image sources: herder-korrespondenz.de Licenses: Fair useNovus Ordo Watch for your ears...
left to right: Georg Gänswein, Jorge Bergoglio, Asia Bibi
In case you missed our initial announcement on November 12: We have published another full-length episode of our popular TRADCAST podcast program. As always, it is loaded with real traditional Catholicism, hard-hitting refutations of various errors, and razor-sharp analysis. Our content is typically challenging but is always delivered with a relieving touch of humor. TRADCAST 023 consists of two separate segments. In the first, we look at how Sedevacantists are truly the "last Catholics", those who believe exactly what was believed and taught until Pope Pius XII died and refused to change their religion afterwards. We contrast this with those who mean to be traditional Catholics but, because they insist on recognizing John XXIII and his successors as valid Popes, tinker with Catholic doctrine on the Papacy and Church authority in order to make it fit. We also talk about the Vatican's recent agreement with China, look at "Abp." Georg Ganswein's absurd contention that the Lutheran theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945) intercedes for us in Heaven, and review how the Catholic Faith is based on reason. This long first segment ends with a discussion of the Vatican's obsessive focus on environmentalism and Francis' shameful silence on the persecution of Asia Bibi in Pakistan. In the shorter second segment, we highlight some fundamental differences between the traditional Roman Catholic Mass and the "New Mass" of Paul VI, condemn Francis for his blasphemous claim that Christ's authority is rooted in the closeness He showed to the people, and we end by recommending the new book Contra Crawford. Listening to TRADCAST is like drinking from a firehose of information. As always, the podcast is interlaced with important insights, quotes from solid Catholic sources, and some much-needed humor! The total run time of TRADCAST 023 is 1 hour and 1 minute. Here's an idea: While you have the family over for the Thanksgiving weekend, why not listen together and discuss the show? Or how about hosting a virtual discussion with traditionalist or non-traditionalist friends using Google Hangouts or a similar conference tool? If you are interested in listening to older shows, you can do so using our complete episodes list; or listen to a sermon or an apologetics/catechism class with your friends and family as well. This makes for great conversation -- much more important than the usual family discussions -- and will open people's eyes about Francis and the Novus Ordo Sect! It's one way you can do evangelization the easy way. In any case, don't miss this TRADCAST and spread the word!
You can listen free of charge by playing the YouTube video above, or you can go to our TRADCAST 023 page, where you will find all the information you need for this show, including links to all the articles, books, blog posts, etc., mentioned in the podcast, and where you will also find ways to download this episode to your computer and sign up to be notified of new episodes by email. As always, TRADCAST is entirely free of charge. Listeners who would like to support this podcast with a tax-deductible donation, may do so here.
Annoy Francis -- listen to TRADCAST!
Image sources: Wikimedia Commons (PR Agência Brasil), Shutterstock, Flickr [Asia News] (collage, cropped) / Wikimedia Commons (cropped) Licenses: CC BY 3.0 BR, paid, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 / public domainTRADCAST 023 (12 NOV 2018) Contents
Segment 1: Introductory comments; giving up on Francis; anything but Sedevacantism; the last Catholics; Vatican-China deal; "Abp." Georg Ganswein canonizes Lutheran theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer; Faith, reason, and Modernism; the Vatican and environmentalism; Francis' silence on the Asia Bibi case
Segment 2: Thank you to our donors; the Roman Catholic Mass vs. the Novus Ordo "Mass"; Francis says Christ received his authority from the people; book recommendation: Contra Crawford by Dylan Fellows and Christopher Conlon
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64lk-DAumb4[/embedyt]
Novus Ordo Watch, "Anything but Sedevacantism! Analysis of a Curious Phenomenon" (Apr. 25, 2017)
News Article: "Provisional Agreement between Holy See and China", Vatican News (Sep. 22, 2018)
News Article: Edward Pentin, "Holy See Signs Provisional Agreement With China on Appointment of Bishops", National Catholic Register (Sep. 22, 2018)
News Article: Sandro Magister, "In the Match with the Vatican, China Calls the Shots", Settimo Cielo (Sep. 30, 2018)
Novus Ordo Document: Francis, "Message to the Catholics of China and to the Universal Church" (Sep. 26, 2018), Vatican.va
Church Document: Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Ad Apostolorum Principis (1958)
Book: Rod Dreher, The Benedict Option (New York, NY: Sentinel, 2017)
Article: "Abp." Georg Ganswein, "The 'Nine-Eleven' of the Catholic Church", Catholic News Agency (Sep. 11, 2018)
Novus Ordo Watch, "HERESY: Vatican 'Archbishop' Gänswein says 'No Proof' for God's Existence" (Dec. 26, 2016)
Church Document: Pope St. Pius X, Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907)
News Article: "The Vatican creates an International Observatory against Cyberbullying", Rome Reports (Nov. 8, 2018)
News Article: "Vatican Observatory hosting conference for meteorite care", Crux (Sep. 10, 2018)
News Article: "Church Worldwide Calls for Ambitious and Urgent Climate Action", Zenit (Oct. 26, 2018)
Novus Ordo Document: Francis, "Message for the World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation" (Sep. 1, 2018), Vatican.va
Article: Alexander Kissler, "Ein relativ katholischer Papst", Cicero (May 19, 2016)
Novus Ordo Watch, "A Perfect Example of Naturalism: Francis reflects on Death without mentioning Judgment, Heaven, or Hell" (Feb. 1, 2018)
News Article: Carlos Esteban, "Francisco, al Príncipe Federico de Dinamarca: 'El medio ambiente es el reto más importante de nuestra era'", Info Vaticana (Nov. 8, 2018)
Wikipedia entry: "Asia Bibi Blasphemy Case"
YouTube Video: "Pope Francis meets the husband of Asia Bibi, a Christian sentenced to death in Pakistan", Rome Reports in English (uploaded Apr. 16, 2015)
News Article: Sandro Magister, "Asia Bibi Sentenced To Death For Faith. But in the Vatican Her Case Is Taboo", Chiesa (Apr. 5, 2016)
News Article: "Pope prays for and with victims of religious persecution", Vatican News (Feb. 24, 2018)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Francis: 'It is not right to convince others of your Faith'" (Oct. 25, 2016)
"Pope" Francis, Tweet of Nov. 4, 2018 (Twitter/@Pontifex)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Holy Catholic Mass: How the Vatican II Sect transformed the August Sacrifice of the Altar into a Liturgical 'Happy Meal'"
News Article: Sr. Bernadette Reis, "Pope Francis at Mass: Jesus the icon of the meek and compassionate pastor", Vatican News (Sep. 18, 2018)
Novus Ordo Watch, "What you need to know about the man who claims to be the Pope'"
Book: Dylan Fellows and Christopher P. Conlon, Contra Crawford: A Defense of Baptism of Desire and Periodic Continence (Lulu Press, 2018)
Novus Ordo Watch, "A New Book defending Baptism of Desire and Blood: Contra Crawford by Dylan Fellows and Chris Conlon" (Nov. 8, 2018)
"It is a duty that we owe"!
It's funny how when it comes to matters of eternity, Francis takes great care in forbidding what he calls "proselytism" -- yet when it comes to his pet Naturalist causes typically associated with the political left, he is more than happy to proselytize, thus showing once again whose disciple he truly is (hint: not Christ's). St. John the Evangelist described people like Jorge Bergoglio thus: "They are of the world: therefore of the world they speak, and the world heareth them" (1 Jn 4:5). The only time Francis tells people to convert is when he means converting to something other than the true religion, the Roman Catholic religion. For example, he tells terrorists to convert... to nonviolence; he tells the Mafia to convert... to a non-criminal way of life; he tells the world to convert... to clean energy. He even has stood up for the rights of tradition -- indigenous pagan tradition, of course. Do you get the picture? Instead of looking for ways to promote the Social Kingship of Christ in nations to bring about a true and lasting peace (cf. Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Quas Primas, n. 1); instead of preaching the Ten Commandments and the sweet yoke of the Law of Christ; instead of refuting the philosophical and theological sophisms and errors of the contemporary world; instead of offering a world steeped in unbelief and sin the blessings of divine grace and true liberty -- Francis talks about "[a]ir quality, sea levels, adequate fresh water reserves, climate control and the balance of delicate ecosystems..."! "Mind the things that are above, not the things that are upon the earth", St. Paul exhorts us (Col 3:2). Bergoglio has no care for souls or the supernatural. He does not care about eternity because he claims the Last Judgment will be a big party and, in any case, the worst that could happen is that souls will cease to exist since "there is no hell"! With truth can these words of our Lord be applied to Francis: "Go behind me, Satan, because thou savorest not the things that are of God, but that are of men" (Mk 8:33)."In whose hands are iniquities: their right hand is filled with gifts" (Ps 25:10)
Life of Buddha: Francis gifts Manuscript celebrating Paganism to President of Myanmar
(image credit: Servizio Fotografico Vaticano / used with permission) (click image to enlarge)
Beware of 21st-century Jesuits bearing gifts! When Francis visited the Asian nation of Myanmar in late November, he gave, as is customary, a diplomatic gift to the country's president, who is the official host; and, being the guest, he received one in return. President Htin Kyaw, who is a Buddhist, gave Francis a set of porcelain wares and also a painting of the Lord Jesus Christ. "Pope" Francis, who claims to be the Vicar of Christ and head of "the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15), gave President Kyaw a Vatican-produced manuscript entitled Life of Buddha. We turn to Vatican Radio for the frightful details:
When Pope Francis met on Tuesday with the President of the Republic of Myanmar, Mr Htin Kyaw, the two leaders exchanged gifts. Pope Francis presented President Htin Kyaw with a manuscript, depicting the life of Buddha, the primary figure of the Buddhist religion. The manuscript features six scenes from the life of Buddha: the conversion of individuals, including King Bimisara, to the teaching of Buddha; the conversion of entire cities; and Buddha's own stay in the city of Rajagaha are all depicted. The pictures are accompanied by the texts in the Burmese language. The manuscript, which is typical of the sorts found in Myanmar, has been produced by the Vatican Library [!]. ("Pope Francis presents manuscript to Myanmar's president", Vatican Radio, Nov. 28, 2017)
So the "Pope" gave to a Buddhist a gift that confirms him in his Pagan errors. This is so contradictory that even President Kyaw was dumbfounded, as can be seen in the video clip provided by Rome Reports:
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ybV02QnyRQ[/embedyt]
More photos of the trip released by the Vatican are posted here. Some might object that just as the Buddhist president gave the "Pope" a gift that pays tribute to Christ, so Francis gave him a gift that pays tribute to Buddha. Isn't that a fair sign of mutual respect? What's the big deal? The big deal is that the Catholic Church isn't a human organization that plays by the rules of the world. The Catholic Church -- of which Francis claims to be the head -- is a divine institution with a divine mission, and that mission is not to esteem false religions for the sake of Christ receiving some esteem in return. Rather, the mission is:
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. (Mt 28:19-20) He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mk 16:16)
Francis claims to be the Vicar of the God who commanded this! Indeed, now and again Francis likes to talk tough about how we have to preach the Gospel always and everywhere and that the Good News is not something to be kept hidden in a museum (or under a sash?):
When asked in a new interview what specific mission he has for the laity, Pope Francis responded with a frequent appeal: to go outside of oneself and take risks in evangelizing, rather than staying stuffed up at home while the moths move in. "Sometimes I think the best business we can do with many Christians, is to sell them mothballs so that they put them in their clothes and in their lives and aren't eaten by moths," the Pope said in the interview, published Sunday. The interviewer, journalist Noel Díaz, had questioned the Pope about a comment he had made to him on a previous occasion to "tell the laity to come out of the caves." When asked about the comment and what mission he would give to the laity with that image in mind, Francis said that many times Christians "are locked up and they are going to get eaten by moths." "They have to go out, they have to go and bring the message of Jesus" to others, he said, explaining that the Good News is meant to be shared, not stored away. "The message of Jesus is to give it; so just as I receive it from him through a brother or sister, the grace comes to me and I give it," he said, stressing that Christians shouldn't "can" the message, trying to conserve it in a jar, because "it's not to save, it's to give." (Elise Harris, "Pope Francis to the Laity: Go out and evangelize, or buy Mothballs", Catholic News Agency, Jan. 29, 2017)
Here's another recent example:
Pope Francis said Tuesday that the Word of God isn't something that can be explained to people as a mere recommendation, or merely a good idea, but that it requires courage, prayer and humility to preach with honesty – and this is the only way it will have an impact. "The Word of God cannot be given as a proposal – 'well, if you like it…' – or like a good philosophical or moral idea – 'well, you can live this way…'" Pope Francis said Feb. 14. "No! It's something else. It needs to be proposed with this frankness, with this force, so that the Word penetrates, as Paul says, 'to the bone.'" ("Pope Francis: Don't preach the Gospel like it's a 'Recommendation'", Catholic World Report, Feb. 14, 2017)
In Myanmar, we saw this "courage", "force", and "frankness" in action: Not only did he not preach, even in the slightest, the Gospel of Jesus Christ to an unbelieving president, he did something infinitely worse: He explicitly confirmed the hapless soul in his soul-destroying Paganism! To underscore how evil this is, we turn to a Vatican-endorsed book written in 1886 against the then-emerging Liberalism, which was a foreshadowing of the errors of Vatican II. The work in question is Liberalism is a Sin by Fr. Felix Sarda y Salvany. It is a devastating refutation of the Novus Ordo religion, written roughly 80 years in advance. See what Fr. Sarda, with the explicit approval of Pope Leo XIII's Sacred Congregation of the Index, wrote about how antithetical to true Catholicism the Liberal attitude towards Buddhism is:
When [Sir Edwin] Arnold's Light of Asia appeared [a work promoting Buddhism –N.O.W.], not a few Catholics joined in the chorus of fulsome praise which greeted it. How charming, how beautiful, how tender, how pathetic, how humane; what lofty morality, what exquisite sentiment! Now what was the real purport of the book and what was its essence? To lift up Guatama, the founder of Buddhism, at the expense of Jesus Christ, the Founder of Christianity! The intention was to show that Guatama was equally a divine teacher with as high an aspiration, as great a mission, as lofty a morality as our Divine Lord Himself. This was the object of the book; what was its essence? A falsification of history by weaving a series of poetical legends around a character, about whose actual life practically nothing is known. But not only this, the character was built up upon the model of Our Lord, which the author had in his own mind as the precious heirloom of Christianity; and his Gautama, whom he intended to stand out as at least the divine equal of the Founder of Christianity, became in his hands in reality a mere echo of Christ, the image of Christ, made to rival the Word made flesh! Buddhism, in the borrowed garments of Christianity, was thus made to appeal to the ideals of Christian peoples, and gaining a footing in their admiration and affections, to usurp the throne in the Christian sanctuary. Here was a work of literary merit, although it has been greatly exaggerated in this respect, praised extravagantly by some Catholics who, in their excessive desire to appear impartial, failed or refused to see in Edwin Arnold's Light of Asia a most vicious, anti-Christian book! What difference does it make whether a book be excellent in a literary sense or not, if its effect be the loss of souls and not their salvation? What if the weapon in the hands of the assassin be bright or not, if it be fatal? Though spiritual assassination be brilliant, it is nonetheless deadly. Heresy under a charming disguise is a thousand times more dangerous than heresy exposed in the harsh and arid garb of the scholastic syllogism — through which the death's skull grins in unadorned hideousness. Arianism had its poets to propagate its errors in popular verse. Lutheranism had its humanists, amongst whom the elegant Erasmus shone as a brilliant writer. Arnauld, Nicole, Pascal threw the glamour of their belles lettres over the serpentine doublings of Jansenism. Voltaire's wretched infidelity won its frightful popularity from the grace of his style and the flash of his wit. Shall we, against whom they aimed the keenest and deadliest shafts, contribute to their name and their renown! Shall we assist them in fascinating and corrupting youth! Shall we crown these condemners of our faith with the laurels of our praises and laud them for the very qualities which alone make them dangerous! And for what purpose? That we may appear impartial? No. Impartiality is not permissible when it is distorted to the offense of truth, whose rights are imprescriptible. A woman of bad life is infamous, be she ever so beautiful, and the more beautiful, the more dangerous. Shall we praise Liberal books out of gratitude? No! Follow the liberals themselves in this, who are far more prudent than we; they do not recommend and praise our books, whatever they be. They, with the instinct of evil, fully appreciate where the danger lies. They either seek to discredit us or to pass us by in silence. Si quis non amat Dominum Nostrum Jesum Christum, Sit anathema ["If anyone does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema"], says St. Paul. Liberal literature is the written hatred of Our Lord and His Church. If its blasphemy were open and direct, no Catholic would tolerate it for an instant; is it any more tolerable because, like a courtesan, it seeks to disguise its sordid features by the artifice of paint and powder? (Fr. Felix Sarda y Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin, Chapter 18; some formatting changed.)
Francis is not in the least concerned for the salvation of Pagans. He does not seek that idolaters or other members of false religions be converted to the True Faith and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He is happy to confirm Pagans and other non-believers in their errors. Although he may not perhaps go so far as to say that all religions are equally good, he undoubtedly holds that all religions are good enough for salvation. But this is not a position a Catholic is allowed to hold, for it is nothing short of the heresy of indifferentism -- the idea that it ultimately doesn't matter what religion you are. In 1846, Pope Pius IX taught:
Also perverse is the shocking theory that it makes no difference to which religion one belongs, a theory which is greatly at variance even with reason. By means of this theory, those crafty men remove all distinction between virtue and vice, truth and error, honorable and vile action. They pretend that men can gain eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there could ever be any sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial. (Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Qui Pluribus, n. 15)
Notice that there is no talk here of not rejecting what is good and holy in other religions -- neither is there talk of "ecclesial elements" or of the Holy Ghost using other religions as means of salvation. In 1928, Pope Pius XI condemned "that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule" (Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 2). If this does not sound like what you've been hearing in the last 55 years from the "Catholic bishops", there is a reason for that: They do not believe it. There is only one conclusion: The "gospel" Francis wants to spread is not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ but a false, man-made gospel that makes void the Word of God (cf. Mt 15:6; Gal 1:8-9), even in its simplest fundamentals: "Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me" (Jn 14:6). By the way, Francis is not the first Jesuit to visit Buddhists this year. The Superior General of the (now grossly misnamed) Society of Jesus had a similar "encounter" in July. Remember?
Jesuit Superior "Fr." Arturo Sosa visits Buddhist Temple
The true Catholic Church is missionary in her very essence, always and necessarily preaching the true Gospel of Christ and seeking the conversion of all who are not yet in her fold. She preaches this Gospel in season and out of season: "But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness" (1 Cor 1:23). That Francis is not a part of that very Church founded by our Lord Jesus Christ, could not be more evident. Wisely did King David warn of those "in whose hands are iniquities: their right hand is filled with gifts" (Ps 25:10). Image source: Servizio Fotografico Vaticano License: rights-managedTypically a sign of demonic possession...
September "Pope Video" Shows People Walking Backwards
Francis always likes to talk about "moving forward" (see examples here, here, here, and here). No matter whether you're standing in the middle of a field, at the top of a mountain, or on the edge of a cliff, for Francis there is only one direction: forward! It is no coincidence that "forward" is one of the chief mottos of Marxists. Add to that Francis' repeated statements in favor of Communism (for example, see here and, more recently, here), the good time he had with Communist dictator Fidel Castro, the mentoring he received from Communist Esther Ballestrino de Careaga, and his delight in receiving a blasphemous hammer-and-sickle crucifix from Bolivian President Evo Morales, and a clear picture emerges. Apparently, however, the dogmatic call to move forward does admit of one exception for Francis, as can be seen in his latest "Pope Video", released on Sep. 1. In that video we actually see people literally walking backwards. At the 0:42 min mark, we can even see them entering a church backwards:
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fllasWmJEE[/embedyt]
Now obviously, the people in this video didn't truly walk backwards -- this effect was achieved by recording a clip of them walking normally and then playing it backwards. But that's not the point. The point is that this video deliberately shows people walking backwards. For those who may not be aware, walking backwards is a typical sign of demonic possession. In fact, the so-called "Law of Reversal" is a hallmark of Satanism. It is dangerous to be curious about the occult because one can open oneself up to demonic influence, and so for this reason we only share the following links with this disclaimer and with great caution. The only reason we make them available at all is that we need to offer documentation for our claims:
The Occult Law of Reversal
Backmasking -- playing media backwards
Demonic House in Indiana demolished
It is inconceivable that nobody involved in the production of this latest "Pope Video" is aware that walking backwards is a sign of demonic possession. Least of all Francis himself, who constantly talks about the reality of the devil (so that people like Jimmy Akin can say, "But look, he believes in the devil!"), has the education of a Jesuit, and is familiar even with such bizarre and evil concepts as coprophagia. Besides, this wasn't the first time that a "Pope Video" has included something bizarre with occult associations. Recall the odd use of mirrors in the May 2017 clip -- not to mention the promotion of idols in the very first "Pope Video". By the way, did you notice that the church in the video is a traditional Catholic church building? It's funny how for media productions like this, the makers always choose a gorgeous old-style church and never one of those modern space-ship temples that most people actually have as their parish church. This just as an aside. Francis has been publishing these monthly "Pope Videos" with his prayer intentions for the world since January 2016. These highly professional (and therefore no doubt costly) productions are each about one minute or so in length and typically contain something erroneous, heretical, bizarre, or just plain silly; or else they simply reduce the Catholic Faith to little more than a help-your-neighbor philosophy with a liturgy. As was to be expected, the September 2017 "Pope Video" is once again about the corporal works of mercy (rarely does Francis ever mention the spiritual works, which are superior to the corporal works because they chiefly pertain to the soul rather than the body), and the Catholic Faith is merely used as a prop to motivate people to engage in these works -- a very common theme in this "pontificate". Let's review what Francis says in that video message:
Parishes must be in contact with homes, with people's lives, with the life of society. They have to be houses where the door is always open so as to go forth toward others. And it is important that this going-forth follows a clear proposal of faith. The doors must be opened so that Jesus can go out with all of the joy of his message. Let us pray for our parishes, that they not be simple offices, but that animated by a missionary spirit, may be places where faith is communicated and charity is seen. ("Pope Francis' prayer intention for September: 'For parishes at service of mission'", Vatican Radio, Sep. 1, 2017)
What may seem at first glance to be a fairly uncontentious message, when viewed in light of the accompanying video and what else we know about Francis and his doctrines, reveals itself to be just more of the same false gospel of man he's been preaching from the beginning. Once we decrypt the above Bergoglian message, what we get is that we must constantly be engaged in some sort of activity, always interacting with people, lest we become -- heaven forbid! -- "self-referential". Yes, Francis talks about "going forth", but by this he does not mean the Great Commission of the Gospel (Mk 16:15), for the actual preaching and teaching of the Faith to unbelievers is something Francis adamantly rejects as evil "proselytism". Instead, what he has in mind is serving the poor, "caring for creation", and including the marginalized. He wants you to announce God's mercy, but not the true Gospel, which is a bit more than simply saying that God is merciful. Ultimately, all of the activity Francis proposes is oriented towards helping people in their temporal needs, to give them a better life in this world. Eternal considerations -- the salvation of souls -- are entirely eclipsed by this false naturalist gospel. Thus, do not be misled when you hear Francis talking about "missionary spirit" and the "faith [that] is communicated". Missionary activity for Francis is providing clean water, building shelters, caressing the elderly, hugging transvestites, and running a soup kitchen. The "faith" for Francis is declaring that God loves you and forgives you and is always there for you. That's it. It all fits on a Hallmark card. So, the latest "Pope Video" preaches Francis' usual gospel of man with ideas that no Atheist, no Pagan, no Protestant, no Jew, no Muslim would find objectionable. It's all about moving forward! Or backward, as the case may be.It's like drinking from a firehose of information...
In this episode we respond to Jimmy Akin, Christopher Ferrara, Michael Matt, and others
In case you missed our initial announcement on March 29: Our popular TRADCAST podcast program is back with a new, full-length episode! As always, it is loaded with real traditional Catholicism, hard-hitting refutations of various errors, razor-sharp analysis, and a touch of humor. In this latest epsiode, TRADCAST 017, we take a look at the self-contradictions in Christopher Ferrara's response to the sacrilegious Anglican liturgy that took place on March 13 at the Vatican; we respond to an anti-sedevacantist post on the so-called Catholic Truth Blog; we draw attention to the fact that Francis has directly contradicted Jimmy Akin on the issue of proselytism; we briefly talk about our fundraiser for 2017; and we once again refute the absurd theology of the recognize-and-resist camp in a response to Michael Matt's soliloquy against Sedevacantism in his Remnant Underground video "Papalotry RIP". The total run time of TRADCAST 017 is approximately 1 hr 23 mins. Here's an idea: Why not host a TRADCAST evening at your home and invite family, friends, or neighbors over to discuss the show? Perhaps as part of a Lenten gathering at which you also pray, discuss spirituality, and listen to a sermon? Makes for great conversation -- much more important than football or politics! -- and will open people's eyes about Francis and the Novus Ordo Sect! It's one way you can do evangelization the easy way. In any case, don't miss this TRADCAST and spread the word!
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAzYgKzzF9s[/embedyt]
You can listen free of charge by playing the YouTube video above, or you can go to our TRADCAST 017 page, where you will find all the information you need for this show, including links to all the articles, books, blog posts, etc., mentioned in the podcast, and where you will also find ways to download this episode to your computer and sign up to be notified of new episodes by email.017 TRADCAST (29 MAR 2017)
Segment 1: Four years of Francis; Anglican liturgy at St. Peter's Basilica; Chris Ferrara's use of Dominus Iesus to blast Anglicanism; response to Catholic Truth Blog's lamentation about conversions to Sedevacantism
Segment 2: Francis defeats Jimmy Akin on "proselytism"; a dilemma for semi-trads; response to Michael Matt's Remnant TV program "Papolatry RIP: Pope Ignites Counterrevolution"; controversy and good will.
Embedded – see below
YouTube Video: "Chris Ferrara on the Anglican Desecration of the Vatican - Rapid Response Team", The Fatima Center (uploaded Mar. 13, 2017)
Novus Ordo Document: Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dominus Iesus (2000)
Book: Christopher Ferrara & Thomas E. Woods, Jr., The Great Façade: The Regime of Novelty in the Catholic Church from Vatican II to the Francis Revolution (2nd ed., 2015)
Article: "Note on Dominus Jesus", SiSiNoNo (March 2003, no. 51)
Blog Post: "Convicted by a Sedevacantist", Vox Consolatoris (Mar. 10, 2017)
Blog Post: "Pope Francis Causing Catholics To Leave The Church – Can YOU Help Them?", Catholic Truth Blog (Feb. 9, 2017)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The 'Bad Popes' Argument" (Mar. 4, 2014)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Deflating Another 'Resistance' Myth: Can we reject Magisterial Teaching if it wasn't believed 'always, everywhere, and by all'?" (Aug. 11, 2015)
Church Document: Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Mystici Corporis (1943)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Sedevacantism: Have the Gates of Hell Prevailed?" (Dec. 27, 2015)
Collection of Church Documents: Denzinger's Enchiridion Symbolorum (1954 ed.)
Article: Christopher Ferrara, "Imploding Papacy Signals Triumph of Immaculate Heart", The Remnant (Mar. 6, 2017)
Novus Ordo Watch, "'Pope' Francis gives Interview to Italian La Repubblica" (Oct. 3, 2013)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Akin vs. Akin: Let's get Technical" (May 29, 2015)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Francis: 'I am a Sinner and am Fallible' - Interview in Die Zeit" (Mar. 8, 2017)
DONATE to Novus Ordo Watch / TRADCAST here!
YouTube Video: "PAPALOTRY, RIP: Pope Ignites Counterrevolution", The Remnant Underground (uploaded Mar. 9, 2017)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Is Francis a valid Pope? - Why it does matter" (Nov. 6, 2014)
YouTube Video: "Vatican Scandals: An Appeal to Pope Francis to Stop the Madness", The Remnant Forum (uploaded Dec. 19, 2015)
Novus Ordo Watch, "The Truth about Pope Liberius and St. Athanasius" (Apr. 12, 2016)
Novus Ordo Watch, "A Response to 'Bishop' Athanasius Schneider's Claims against Pope Liberius" (Nov. 25, 2016)
Book: Benedictine Monks of Solesmes, eds., Papal Teachings: The Church, trans. by Mother E. O'Gorman, RSCJ (Boston, MA: St. Paul Editions, 1962).
Web Site: TheCatholicArchive.com
Article: Rev. William Jenkins, "The New Ordination Rite: Purging the Priesthood in the Conciliar Church", The Roman Catholic (1981)
Image File: Abp. Marcel Lefebvre's handwritten Letter to Mr. Wilson (Oct. 28, 1988)
Novus Ordo Watch, "SSPX Bp. Tissier Reignites Debate over Validity of Novus Ordo Ordinations" (July 1, 2016)
Blog Post: Rev. Anthony Cekada, "SSPX Bishops on Bishops and 'Bishops'", Quidlibet (Nov. 28, 2013)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Why the Novus Ordo Rite of Episcopal Consecration is INVALID" (Nov. 5, 2013)
Novus Ordo Watch, "Fr. Frederick Faber on the Deception of the Antichrist" (Feb. 23, 2013)
Four Automatic Subscription Options for TRADCAST
TRADCAST on iTunes (subscribe using Apple iTunes)
TRADCAST on Stitcher (subscribe using Stitcher.com)
Guess what: a new interview!
Francis: "I am a Sinner and am Fallible"
Those who thought that since "Pope" Francis is on retreat this week, we wouldn't hear anything from him until he returns, will now have their illusions shattered: Tomorrow's edition of the German weekly Die Zeit features a substantial interview with the chief Modernist of the Vatican II Church. The full text of the conversation, which is only available to paid subscribers, was released electronically on Mar. 8:
"Ich bin Sünder und bin fehlbar" (Die Zeit / original German)
In order to remain within the legal guidelines of "fair use" of the copyrighted text, we cannot reproduce a lot of quotes from the interview here. We can, however, offer a bit of a summary and some select few quotations, and we can refer you to other English-speaking sources that talk about the interview:
"Pope Francis tells German newspaper that he is a sinner" (Deutsche Welle)
"Pope Francis signals openness to ordaining married men" (Crux)
"Pope Francis Expresses Openness to Ordaining Married Men in Some Cases" (National Catholic Register)
"New Papal Interview Addresses Cardinal Burke, Married Priests" (One Peter Five)
"Pope Francis has some ideas on how to fix the priest shortage" (EWTN)
The interview was conducted by Die Zeit editor-in-chief, Giovanni di Lorenzo, in late February at the Casa Santa Marta in Vatican City. Di Lorenzo clarifies at the outset that the entire text was reviewed, edited, and then authorized by Francis precisely as printed, both in the original Italian and the German translation (Francis understands German). So, let no one say that what it contains isn't what Francis "really" said, or that he only said it off the cuff without thinking. (The translation used in the excerpts below is provided by Novus Ordo Watch.) Throughout the interview, much of the conversation seems light-hearted, with plenty of laughter and humor expressed by Francis; and compared to some prior interviews in which the "Pope" set off real fireworks (like this one!), this latest one could be considered "not too bad". But then again, that's not saying a whole lot, precisely because this is only true in comparison with the rubbish he's said before. The interview, found on pp. 13-15 of the Mar. 9, 2017 edition of Die Zeit, is being promoted with a direct quote from Francis: "I am a sinner and am fallible" ("Ich bin ein Sünder und bin fehlbar"). Truer words have never been spoken, especially considering that the man is not a valid Pope. However, the actual title of the interview is a different quote from the man known previously as Jorge Bergoglio: "I also know Moments of Emptiness" ("Ich kenne auch die leeren Momente") -- words of Francis in reference to a crisis of faith. The first page on which the interview text is printed features a big photo of Francis in a pose reminiscent of The Thinker, exuding profound thoughtfulness. It is obvious that the photo was staged, since the final product of Francis' thought processes typically does not go beyond prattling on about some "god of surprises" who gives us "tenderness" and requires us to smile 24/7 while welcoming migrants and caressing the marginalized. In the interview, Francis talks about having been engaged at one point and emphasizes that he is a "completely normal person". He rejects the idea of making priestly celibacy optional, while signaling that ordaining married men -- the so-called viri probati ("approved men") -- is something he would be open to considering. Asked about "Cardinal" Raymond Burke being sent to Guam, Francis calls him "an excellent jurist", for whose work in dealing with a sexual abuse case in Guam he is very grateful. Later on he refers to him again and clarifies that he does "not see [Burke] as an adversary". This is curious because Burke has been at the forefront of internal opposition to Francis, not only by demanding that Francis reply to the five dubia presented to him concerning his teaching in Amoris Laetitia but also by threatening to "formally correct" him if he should fail to do so. Speaking about Sacred Theology, Francis fails to surprise when he endorses the historical-critical method of interpreting Scripture (aka "higher criticism"), which was developed by liberal Protestants in the 19th century. Historical criticism inevitably leads to a loss of faith as it tries to historicize the meaning of the sacred text (making it relative to the time it was written), thus distorting its genuine sense; and it seeks to reduce all supernatural occurrences and phenomena to the natural order. Pope Leo XIII condemned it as far back as 1893:
It is clear, on the other hand, that in historical questions, such as the origin and the handing down of writings, the witness of history is of primary importance, and that historical investigation should be made with the utmost care; and that in this matter internal evidence is seldom of great value, except as confirmation. To look upon it in any other light will be to open the door to many evil consequences. It will make the enemies of religion much more bold and confident in attacking and mangling the Sacred Books; and this vaunted "higher criticism" will resolve itself into the reflection of the bias and the prejudice of the critics. It will not throw on the Scripture the light which is sought, or prove of any advantage to doctrine; it will only give rise to disagreement and dissension, those sure notes of error, which the critics in question so plentifully exhibit in their own persons; and seeing that most of them are tainted with false philosophy and rationalism, it must lead to the elimination from the sacred writings of all prophecy and miracle, and of everything else that is outside the natural order. (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, n. 17)
In 1950, Pope Pius XII lambasted Modernist "Scripture scholars" for deconstructing the biblical text:
To return, however, to the new opinions mentioned above, a number of things are proposed or suggested by some even against the divine authorship of Sacred Scripture. For some go so far as to pervert the sense of the Vatican Council's definition that God is the author of Holy Scripture, and they put forward again the opinion, already often condemned, which asserts that immunity from error extends only to those parts of the Bible that treat of God or of moral and religious matters. They even wrongly speak of a human sense of the Scriptures, beneath which a divine sense, which they say is the only infallible meaning, lies hidden. In interpreting Scripture, they will take no account of the analogy of faith and the Tradition of the Church. Thus they judge the doctrine of the Fathers and of the Teaching Church by the norm of Holy Scripture, interpreted by the purely human reason of exegetes, instead of explaining Holy Scripture according to the mind of the Church which Christ Our Lord has appointed guardian and interpreter of the whole deposit of divinely revealed truth. (Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Humani Generis, n. 22)
The historical-critical method of Scriptural interpretation is controversial even among members of the Vatican II Sect. People interested in the debate may want to consult Mgr. George A. Kelly's The New Biblical Theorists: Raymond E. Brown and Beyond (Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Books, 1983) but should keep in mind that this is a Novus Ordo source. A little later in the interview, Francis demonstrates the effect higher biblical criticism has had on him when he refers to the story of creation in Genesis as a "mythical narrative" ("mythische Erzählung"). He goes on to claim that Adam was not evil when he first sinned, only weak -- whereas the first evil act, so he claims, was committed by Cain when he killed his brother Abel. Francis adds: "The rebellion against the work of God, against man as the image of God -- that's the devil's work." He does not mention anything about the devil's work being a rebellion against God Himself and His Law. Regarding Faith, Francis claims that for it to become mature and not remain "infantile", it needs to go through a crisis, thus once again encouraging doubt and a lack of Faith. He does not miss the opportunity to blast "Catholic fundamentalists" in the process:
When Jesus hears how sure Peter is [of his faith] -- this reminds me of numerous Catholic fundamentalists -- He says: "Three times you will deny me. But I will pray for you." Peter denied Jesus, he entered into a terrible crisis. And then they made him Pope! (laughs) ... (Interview, p. 15)
Actually, it wasn't "they" who made him Pope, but our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and only He (see Jn 21:15-17; cf. Denz. 1822). Minor detail. Talking about the fate of Judas Iscariot, Francis explicitly says that he does not claim he was saved, although he does not exclude that possibility either (in contradiction to Jn 17:12: "none of them is lost, but the son of perdition"). "Perhaps he did not ask for forgiveness, but he repented", Francis asserts -- while neglecting to mention that Judas' repentance was not of a supernatural kind (contrition) and therefore not able to procure for him forgiveness. A traditional Catholic Bible commentary makes this clear:
A fruitless repentance, accompanied with a new sin of despair, says St. Leo. (Witham) ... Although Judas conceived a horror at his crime, and confessed it, and made satisfaction to a certain degree by restoring the money, still many essential conditions were wanting to his repentance: 1. faith in Christ, as God, as a redeemer, as the sole justifier from sin; 2. besides this, there was also wanting hopes of pardon, as in Cain, and a love of a much injured and much offended God. Hence his grief was unavailing, like that of the damned. If Judas, says an ancient Father, had had recourse to sincere repentance, and not to the halter, there was mercy in store even for the traitor. (Haydock) (Haydock Bible Commentary on Matthew 27:3)
Towards the end of the interview, Francis addresses his critics, albeit in a general way: "I can understand it if some people do not like my way of dealing with things, that's totally okay. Everyone can have his opinion. That is legitimate and human and enriching." Asked about the posters in Rome that were critical of him as well as the spoofed Osservatore Romano edition that scorned him for refusing to respond to the dubia on Amoris Laetitia, the "Pope" said: "The forged Osservatore Romano, no [this was not enriching], but the Roman dialect of the posters was great. That wasn't written by some guy off the street but by someone who is smart." There are many other things in the interview which we cannot touch upon. However, there is one final highlight that deserves to be mentioned. Asked about the lack of priestly vocations particularly in Germany, Francis answers that proselytism is not the solution. Requested by the journalist to define what he means by proselytism, Francis responds that it means "the winning over of those of another faith" ("das Abwerben Andersgläubiger"). Precisely! And with this clarification, Francis has dealt a tremendous blow to incorrigible conservative Novus Ordo apologists like Jimmy Akin, who have continued to insist that when he condemns "proselytism", Francis is referring only to using undue pressure or deceptive means to entice another to convert -- he is not condemning the making of converts as such. Remember? Here's Mr. Akin in 2013:
6) Isn't proselytization the same thing as evangelization? Although the word has historically been used this way, in recent decades a new, technical meaning for "proselytization" has emerged in ecclesiastical circles. It is not the same thing as evangelization, and Pope Francis was not dissing evangelization in his remarks. 7) So what is "proselytization" in this new sense? Basically, it's trying to strong-arm people into the faith, putting undue pressure on them rather than allowing them to make a free choice for Christ. ... More recently ... the term has taken on a negative connotation, to mean the promotion of a religion by using means, and for motives, contrary to the spirit of the Gospel; that is, which do not safeguard the freedom and dignity of the human person. 8) So what did Pope Francis mean by his comments on proselytization? He and Scalfari were joking about converting each other in the interview, and Pope Francis assured Scalfari that he wasn't going to strong-arm him to convert to Christianity right in the interview. He said that employing such strong-arm tactics is "solemn nonsense, it makes no sense. We need to get to know each other, listen to each other." (Jimmy Akin, "Did Pope Francis just say that evangelization is 'nonsense'? 8 things to know and share", National Catholic Register, Oct. 1, 2013)
This interpretation, which we have refuted at greater length here and here, became even more untenable when Francis claimed that converting the Eastern Orthodox is a "great sin against ecumenism". But now we finally have it straight from the horse's Jorge's mouth: As we have said from the beginning, when he condemns proselytism, Francis means enticing people from other religions to convert and become Catholic. He does not mean using dishonest tactics to bring about conversions. We told you so! This new Francis interview is just the latest in a huge stack of conversations Francis has had with the press. It will surely not be the last one. Ironically, back in 2013 he claimed that he doesn't give interviews, and we all wish he had stuck with that resolution. Keep the popcorn handy, though: With his four-year anniversary coming up next week, you can expect lots more interviews with the man most people still believe to be the Pope of the Catholic Church.
Bergoglio attacks the Great Commission...
From the man who does away with sins such as adultery and fornication as belonging to a hopelessly outdated and rigid past, now comes the introduction of entirely new "sins", such as supporting the death penalty, failing to recycle, or -- the latest now -- the "sin" of converting others. We saw it a few weeks ago in Georgia, where Jorge Bergoglio -- "Pope" Francis -- denounced converting the Eastern Orthodox as a "great sin against ecumenism", and we saw it again on October 13 of this year, the 99th anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, when Francis received in audience roughly 1,000 ecumenical (mostly Lutheran) "pilgrims" from Germany (photos here). The meeting was conducted in Italian and German, with translators present, and all the participants wore a colored scarf around their necks, either blue or yellow, to signify whether they were Lutheran (blue) or "Catholic" (yellow). Francis, of course, wore both. At the end of the audience, the papal impostor gave the people the usual Trinitarian blessing, but without making the sign of the cross -- he was too busy holding the stupid scarf, and we know that the Cross just isn't his thing anyway. Snippets of the whole spectacle can be watched in this video:
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAJOIXq2Wv4[/embedyt]
It was during this audience, by the way, that Francis denied the dogmatic teaching of the Council of Trent, as we reported earlier, and of course his outrages didn't end there. Aside from uttering heretical claptrap about Lutherans and Catholics supposedly sharing the same faith and both being members of the Body of Christ (see transcript here), Francis also spontaneously answered questions given him by people in the audience. When Francis speaks off the cuff, he is at his best, so to speak, because it is then that we get the most authentic Francis: unfiltered, unscripted, unplugged -- and sometimes unhinged, too. What's curious is that the Vatican has apparently suppressed any reports of the Q&A session, because a transcript of it is nowhere to be found on its web site, nor has one been provided by the Vatican news organs. Thankfully, the Spanish Religión Digital and the American Life Site have provided at least partial transcripts in Spanish and English, respectively, which can be accessed here:
El Papa a los Luteranos: "El proselitismo es el veneno más potente contra el camino ecuménico"
Pope again criticizes 'proselytism': 'It is not licit that you convince them of your faith'
The absolute highlight lowlight of the Q&A session was clearly Francis' answer to the first question, asked by a 15-year-old lady who was presumably a Lutheran (wearing a blue scarf):
Dear Pope Francis, my name is Henriette. I am from Magdeburg and am 15 years old. In our state of Saxony-Anhalt, about 80% of the people are without any religious affiliation, 13.9% of the inhabitants are Lutheran, and only 3.5% are Catholic. Most of my friends do not go to church and do not believe in God. They are happy, helpful, and truly good friends. Do I have to convince others of my faith, or is it enough that they are good friends to me? (our translation; taken from video @ 28:34 min)
Here is Francis' answer:
The first question, the one that was posed in the context of the region having 80% of the population without a creed, is: "Do I have to convince these friends – good ones, who work and who are happy – do I have to convince them of my faith? What must I say to convince them?" Listen, the last thing you must do is to "speak." You have to live as a Christian, like a Christian: convinced, forgiven, and on a path. It is not licit to convince them of your faith; proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path. You must give testimony to your Christian life; testimony will unsettle the hearts of those who see you. And from this unsettling grows one question: but why does this man or this woman live like that? And that prepares the ground for the Holy Spirit. Because it is the Holy Spirit that works in the heart. He does what needs to be done: but He needs to speak, not you. Grace is a gift, and the Holy Spirit is the gift of God from whence comes grace and the gift that Jesus has sent us by His passion and resurrection. It will be the Holy Spirit that moves the heart with your testimony – that is way you ask – and regarding that you can tell the "why," with much thoughtfulness. But without wanting to convince. (Life Site translation; underlining added)
Francis is certainly right on one point: Proselytism and ecumenism don't go together. It's one or the other; they are contraries. That he would prefer ecumenical feel-goodism over preaching the truth goes without saying -- he wouldn't be Jorge if he didn't. Francis has actually been very consistent in that: He hates evangelization. Sure, he always talks about "preaching the Gospel", but he means without actually preaching the Gospel -- which implies, of course, that the Apostles got it all wrong, because -- horror of horrors! -- they preached! "But they going forth preached everywhere..." (Mk 16:20). St. Paul elaborates:
For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved. How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not believed? Or how shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear, without a preacher? ... Faith then cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of Christ. (Romans 10:13-14,17)
And so the Apostles preached, and not only the Apostles but all Catholics until... well, until Vatican II, where ecumenism made its great debut. According to Francis' reasoning, our Blessed Lord Himself must have been at fault, for He instituted the Great Commission from which all preaching and all evangelization and missionary activity take their origin:
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 28:19-20)
But hey, what's a divine commission when compared to Jorge's latest revelation from the "god of surprises"? Perhaps Christ should have also turned the Sermon on the Mount into more of a Time of Observation & Encounter on the Mount. Curiously enough, when St. Paul exhorted St. Timothy to preach (!) the Word of God -- clearly, St. Paul hadn't gotten Francis' memo -- in the same breath he warned his spiritual son of false teachers who would corrupt the very Gospel he was being charged to spread:
Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: and will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. (2 Timothy 4:2-4)
We know who in our day has turned unto fables and away from the Gospel. Let us also not fail to note the irony in Francis -- of all people! -- being the one to tell another to be silent: he whose endless stream of spoken and written words in just 3.5 years could fill an entire library; he whose compulsive moving of the tongue has produced truckloads of speeches, addresses, reflections, homilies, tweets, interviews, sermons, allocutions, encyclicals, exhortations, etc., ad nauseam, in just 43 months. Barely a day goes by when this man doesn't have something to say, something to complain about, someone to rebuke. But when a young woman asks him what to say to friends whom she loves but who are unbelievers, Francis has two words for her: shut up. Don't speak. Don't argue. Don't convince. - This says all you need to know. Apparently St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Albert the Great, St. Bonaventure, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Francis de Sales, St. John Chrysostom, and so many others -- they all just wasted breath and ink in their disputations, their treatises, and their sermons, all because they didn't know that it "isn't licit to convince others of your faith". Bummer! Yes, we are aware that one can preach a sermon with one's life, and that this is more powerful per se than the mere preaching of words, but the truth is that in most cases there isn't half a lifetime available to observe another's conduct; and in any case, preaching the Gospel through one's actions in no wise precludes doing so through words as well, especially not if we keep in mind that we have been commanded to do so by God Himself. Besides, the human condition -- original sin and its effects -- makes words especially necessary and, in any case, extremely useful. After all, "Faith ... cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of Christ" (Rom 10:17). Imagine the absurdity if the Apostles hadn't preached the truth of Christ but simply "encountered" the Jews and the pagans and invited them to observe: "Just look at how we live and what we do, how we interact with others, how we fogive and tithe, how we care for the sick, kiss the babies, and give a thumbs-up to the youngsters... Surely you will ask us eventually to tell you about what we believe, right? At least if you aren't so unlucky as to die beforehand!" With that kind of "preaching", the Church would be the laughing stock of the world and would still be confined to the outskirts of Jerusalem. Billions of souls would have never known Christ and would have died in original and mortal sin. Francis' intent is clear: He wants to suffocate and strangle the Gospel. He wants to stop conversions. He has shown this again and again in the past, as when he himself said he was not interested in converting Protestants, or when he affirmed Muslims in their errors, to cite just two of the many occasions of the last 3.5 years. Francis' answer to the German girl also proves once again that we at Novus Ordo Watch have been entirely right in identifying "proselytism" simply with seeking others' conversion, and not, as bogus-ordo apologists like Jimmy Akin like to claim, with using dishonest tactics or putting undue pressure on others to get them to convert. Francis himself, as he made clear in his response to the young questioner, understands proselytism to mean trying to convice another of one's own religious views. And this he rejects, he condemns, because he has no love for the truth, no love for Christ, and no love for souls: "...he that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mk 16:16). Perhaps we should also mention briefly that, of course, Francis sees no need to distinguish Catholicism from the Lutheran heresy, even for purposes of evangelization. To him, it's all the same, which is why he could take the girl's question about preaching the Gospel at face value. Francis believes that the true Gospel of the Catholic Church and the false Lutheran "gospel" are essentially the same. Yet, nothing could be further from the truth: "Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God" (2 Jn 9); "If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema" (Gal 1:9). Then again, perhaps Tom Hoopes will have to write another book so we can all find out "What Pope Francis Really Said". ;-)
Francis happily receives a special edition of the 95 Theses of Martin Luther. Original caption: "Pope Francis during his audience with the participants in the pilgrimage of Lutherans in the Paul VI Hall, Vatican City, 13 October 2016." ANSA/ GIORGIO ONORATI (ANSA via AP)
As though all this weren't bad enough yet, Francis had even more to say in the Q&A portion of the meeting: He divulged his belief that there are Lutheran saints and that Lutherans can "truly follow the faith of Christ" without becoming Catholics -- which perfectly echoes what we just said about Francis believing the Lutheran heresy is the Gospel. The following is our translation of an excerpt of Francis' answers from the audience based on the Religión Digital report linked above:
Who are the greatest reformers of our churches? I would say that the greatest reformers of the churches are the saints: those who follow the word of the Lord and put it to practice and walk on the path. This reforms the church. They might not be theologians -- some are great, some are small -- but they have a life full of the Gospel. These are the ones who reform the church. There are such people in both the Lutheran and the Catholic church; people with a saintly heart, that follow the Gospel. These are the ones who reform the church. Another question was: What do I like and dislike about the Lutheran church? I like Lutherans who truly follow the faith of Christ. I do not like lukewarm Catholics, nor lukewarm Lutherans. I do not like these.
It is clear from these comments that Francis believes Lutherans and Catholics belong to the same church -- which would only make sense if they also shared the same Gospel, as Francis heretically believes. There is no need to quote once again the true Catholic teaching which refutes all this nonsense. Readers who are new to our site will find the necessary information at our topical page on ecumenism and interreligious dialogue here. No doubt, everyone at the audience got Francis' core message: Catholic or Lutheran? It just doesn't matter. Simply "live the Gospel" -- which, to him, is nothing but forgiving one another, caressing the sick, and feeding the hungry anyway. From there it's not a very big step to the final apostasy -- the merging of all religions into a one-world religion under the Antichrist -- for what is distinctively Catholic or even Christian about such an idea of the Gospel? Could a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu, a Zoroastrian, a Sikh, etc., not also forgive, caress, feed? Of what significance, then, is Jesus Christ? This is what we have called Francis' Gospel of Man, and if you want a preview of where it's headed, remember the January 2016 "Pope Video". Francis' audience with the Germans Lutherans is hopefully a wakeup call to the last remaining conservatives in the Vatican II Church who always thought that ecumenism was just a means of getting people to convert to the Catholic Faith. It never was, it isn't now, and it never will be. Ecumenism doesn't aim at bringing about the conversion of non-Catholics to Catholicism -- it aims simply at promoting indifferentism by making other creeds acceptable, but always under the guise of plausible deniability. Welcome to reality. In a way, one may even say that ecumenism is basically an end in itself, at least de facto. Both sides always talk about "attaining unity" as ecumenism's goal, but since they have explicitly renounced the idea of unity as being able to be brought about only by non-Catholics becoming Catholics (thus joining themselves to the already-existing unity of the Catholic Church), and since the status quo in which both sides find themselves is not one of unity -- wherefore unity is mentioned as a supposed goal -- the only possible conclusion is that both sides are aiming for a kind of unity that reconciles both sides by means of a compromise, as we see, for instance, in the Lutheran-"Catholic" Accord of 1999, which is heretical. But any such "unity", based on compromise rather than conversion, is a contradiction of the only kind of unity acceptable to Catholic teaching, and hence a betrayal of the Faith.
Francis with a statue of Martin Luther in the Vatican on Oct. 13, 2016 (WENN US / Alamy Stock Photo)
The heretical buffoon that has illicitly and invalidly occupied the Chair of St. Peter since March 2013 is pushing everything to the limit. In vain does one look for new superlatives to describe the grotesqueness of the whole situation. And what do the "conservative" Novus Ordo adherents do? They wring their hands. They sit back and watch. They sign petitions. They hold conferences. They buy books by this or that "conservative bishop" to ease the pain for a while. They "recognize and resist". Whoop dee doo. None of it will keep the apostasy from advancing because the one thing that continually feeds it is people's recognition of these wicked impostors as legitimate Roman Catholic authorities. No one cares if anyone "resists" -- they all do that with regard to one thing or another anyway. Others try to kick the sedevacantist can down the road by making themselves believe Benedict XVI is the legitimate Pope, not Francis. They have forgotten that Benedict differs from Francis only in style, not in substance. All of this is a mere application of emotional bandaids, nothing more. At some point all must face the frightening but true diagnosis that is plain to see for all who are willing to look: Jorge Bergoglio is not the Pope of the Catholic Church, and the club he runs is not the Roman Catholic Church. For Heaven's sake, Martin Luther has now been enthroned in the Vatican! That's how far it's come. But of course we sedevacantists are the "Protestants" because we won't accept Luther as Pope. Words fail. Image sources: Getty Images / apimages.com / alamy.com Licenses: embed / rights-managed / rights-managed
Posts Tagged: Proselytism
Francis: "I am Not Afraid of Schism" – and other Bergoglian Nuggets from latest Q&A
Antipopes say the darndest things…
Francis: "I am Not Afraid of Schism"
— and other Bergoglian Nuggets from latest Q&A
Alright, everyone, you know how the game works. After a Francis trip finishes, the aircraft prepares for departure: Everyone gets in and sits down, the door closes, and the Bergoglian mouth opens. By that time, you'd better have your seatbelts on, because anything is possible. We've seen it a few more times than we care to remember.
Today was another such day.
On the return flight from his latest Africa trip (visiting Mozambique, Madagascar, and Mauritius), during which he proclaimed that it was "necessary" for hordes of unbelievers to reject Jesus Christ and His Holy Gospel, the Jesuit apostate the world mistakenly believes to be the Pope of the Catholic Church provided the usual in-flight entertainment by holding a press conference during which he candidly answered questions from the journalists traveling with him.
in Novus Ordo Wire Dario Vigano, Ecumenism, Francis, Freemasonry, Interreligious Dialogue, Pelagianism, Proselytism, Schism, Sillonism	0
Francis: "I like the Lutherans who follow the True Faith of Jesus Christ"
And four-sided triangles, too?
Jorge Bergoglio says the darndest things, most of them incompatible with Catholicism.
After the Jesuit pretend-pope gave an address to a mixed audience consisting mostly of young Novus Ordos and Lutherans on Oct. 13, 2016 in the Vatican, he engaged in a question-and-answer session with the youngsters. It was on that occasion that he pronounced one of his many condemnations of "proselytism", telling a girl who had asked whether she should try to convert her non-religious friends: "It is not licit to convince them of your faith; proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path" (source).
in Novus Ordo Wire Francis, Heresy, Martin Luther, Proselytism	0
TRADCAST 024 (12 APR 2019)
Segment 1: Introductory comments; reading suggestions for new or potential converts; From the Jorge's Mouth: a critical review of some of Francis' recent utterances; modesty in dress and the beauty of femininity
You can listen to the show by clicking the big play button in the embedded player above. Alternatively, you can choose right below from more listening/viewing options:
Alternate Show Links (Audio and Video)
in TRADCAST Blasphemy, Christopher Ferrara, Francis, Heresy, Indifferentism, Johannes Franzelin, Michael Matt, Proselytism, Roberto De Mattei, Steve Skojec, TRADCAST, Ultramontanism	0
Francis Watch, Episode 39: Adhering to Doctrine; Flagrant Adultery; and a Dream called Jesus
Fun & informative podcast…
FRANCIS WATCH
Listen on demand at any time — free!
Great news, everyone: It is time again for the quarterly Francis Watch!
Novus Ordo Watch is pleased to sponsor the phenomenal podcast program Francis Watch, in which host Stephen Heiner of True Restoration analyses with his sedevacantist guests, Bishop Donald Sanborn and Fr. Anthony Cekada, the latest chaos perpetrated by Jorge Bergoglio, the man who claims to be the head of the Catholic Church under the title "Pope Francis". In this latest episode, Bp.
in Novus Ordo Wire Anthony Cekada, Athanasius Schneider, Blasphemy, Christus Vivit, Daniel Dolan, Francis, Francis Watch, Heresy, Indifferentism, John Hunwicke, Naturalism, New Sacraments, Proselytism, SSPX	0
Francis in Morocco: "Being a Christian is not about Adhering to a Doctrine"
No, it's not an April Fool's joke…
Francis in Morocco:
"Being a Christian is not about Adhering to a Doctrine"
It was bound to happen. On the last day of his two-day apostolic journey blather tour in Morocco, Jorge Bergoglio ("Pope" Francis) once again spoke his heretical mind. Whenever this man's lips part, there is no predicting what will come out of his mouth, and this time he had a few theological indiscretions prepared for his audience.
At the Cathedral of St. Peter in Rabat, Francis addressed his own Novus Ordo clergy, as well as members of the so-called Ecumenical Council of Churches.
in Novus Ordo Wire Francis, Freemasonry, Heresy, Indifferentism, Proselytism	0
New Ratzinger article published…
Instead of remaining silently retreated in his little safe house in Vatican City, "hidden from the world", as he had initially promised, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger — a.k.a. "Pope Emeritus" Benedict XVI — has once again inserted himself into the world of theological discourse. Although he speaks with much greater finesse and academic credibility than his boorish successor, the blasphemies he utters differ at best in degree, not in kind.
The German theological journal Herder Korrespondenz just released its December 2018 edition. On the cover, pictured above, we see Benedict XVI next to the words Die Entgegnung — "The Rejoinder" — because in this issue the retired "Pope" responds to those who had blasted him for an essay published in the July/August 2018 issue of Communio, wherein Ratzinger had dared to assert that "[t]he [Novus Ordo] formula of the 'never-revoked covenant' [between God and the Jews] may have been helpful in a first stage of the new dialogue between Jews and Christians, but it is not adequate in the long run to express the magnitude of the reality in a way that is passably appropriate" (source; our translation).
in Novus Ordo Wire Benedict XVI, Blasphemy, Heresy, Interreligious Dialogue, Judaism, Proselytism	0
In case you missed our initial announcement on November 12: We have published another full-length episode of our popular TRADCAST podcast program. As always, it is loaded with real traditional Catholicism, hard-hitting refutations of various errors, and razor-sharp analysis. Our content is typically challenging but is always delivered with a relieving touch of humor.
TRADCAST 023 consists of two separate segments. In the first, we look at how Sedevacantists are truly the "last Catholics", those who believe exactly what was believed and taught until Pope Pius XII died and refused to change their religion afterwards.
in Novus Ordo Wire Asia Bibi, Blasphemy, Christopher Conlon, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Dylan Fellows, Feeneyism, Francis, Georg Ganswein, Heresy, Islam, Naturalism, New Mass, Papacy, Proselytism, Rod Dreher, Sedevacantism, TRADCAST, Vatican, Vatican I	0
TRADCAST 023 (November 12, 2018)
TRADCAST 023 (12 NOV 2018)
Segment 1: Introductory comments; giving up on Francis; anything but Sedevacantism; the last Catholics; Vatican-China deal; "Abp." Georg Ganswein canonizes Lutheran theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer; Faith, reason, and Modernism; the Vatican and environmentalism; Francis' silence on the Asia Bibi case
Segment 2: Thank you to our donors; the Roman Catholic Mass vs. the Novus Ordo "Mass"; Francis says Christ received his authority from the people; book recommendation: Contra Crawford by Dylan Fellows and Christopher Conlon
in TRADCAST Asia Bibi, Blasphemy, Christopher Conlon, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Dylan Fellows, Feeneyism, Francis, Georg Ganswein, Heresy, Islam, Jason Morgan, Naturalism, New Mass, Papacy, Proselytism, Rod Dreher, Sedevacantism, Vatican, Vatican I	0
Just this past Saturday, Jorge Bergoglio — the man who styles himself "Pope Francis" — told an audience of leading energy executives gathered in the Vatican that they must convert. That papal pretender was talking about a conversion to clean energy and not to Jesus Christ or Catholicism, stands to reason. He is, after all, a Naturalist, and his mouth speaks what is in his heart (cf. Lk 6:45; Lk 12:34), which is above all the temporal concerns of the natural world.
"In whose hands are iniquities: their right hand is filled with gifts" (Ps 25:10)
(image credit: Servizio Fotografico Vaticano / used with permission)
Beware of 21st-century Jesuits bearing gifts!
When Francis visited the Asian nation of Myanmar in late November, he gave, as is customary, a diplomatic gift to the country's president, who is the official host; and, being the guest, he received one in return. President Htin Kyaw, who is a Buddhist, gave Francis a set of porcelain wares and also a painting of the Lord Jesus Christ.
in Novus Ordo Wire Francis, Htin Kyaw, Indifferentism, Paganism, Proselytism	20
September "Pope Video" shows people walking backwards
Typically a sign of demonic possession…
Francis always likes to talk about "moving forward" (see examples here, here, here, and here). No matter whether you're standing in the middle of a field, at the top of a mountain, or on the edge of a cliff, for Francis there is only one direction: forward!
It is no coincidence that "forward" is one of the chief mottos of Marxists. Add to that Francis' repeated statements in favor of Communism (for example, see here and, more recently, here), the good time he had with Communist dictator Fidel Castro, the mentoring he received from Communist Esther Ballestrino de Careaga, and his delight in receiving a blasphemous hammer-and-sickle crucifix from Bolivian President Evo Morales, and a clear picture emerges.
in Novus Ordo Wire Communism, Francis, Naturalism, Proselytism	6
It's like drinking from a firehose of information…
In case you missed our initial announcement on March 29: Our popular TRADCAST podcast program is back with a new, full-length episode! As always, it is loaded with real traditional Catholicism, hard-hitting refutations of various errors, razor-sharp analysis, and a touch of humor.
In this latest epsiode, TRADCAST 017, we take a look at the self-contradictions in Christopher Ferrara's response to the sacrilegious Anglican liturgy that took place on March 13 at the Vatican; we respond to an anti-sedevacantist post on the so-called Catholic Truth Blog; we draw attention to the fact that Francis has directly contradicted Jimmy Akin on the issue of proselytism; we briefly talk about our fundraiser for 2017; and we once again refute the absurd theology of the recognize-and-resist camp in a response to Michael Matt's soliloquy against Sedevacantism in his Remnant Underground video "Papalotry RIP".
in Novus Ordo Wire Anthony Cekada, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Christopher Ferrara, Ecumenism, Francis, Jimmy Akin, Michael Matt, New Sacraments, Papacy, Proselytism, Richard Williamson, Sacrilege, Schism, Sedevacantism, SSPX, TRADCAST, William Jenkins	6
TRADCAST 017 (March 29, 2017)
017 TRADCAST (29 MAR 2017)
Segment 1: Four years of Francis; Anglican liturgy at St. Peter's Basilica; Chris Ferrara's use of Dominus Iesus to blast Anglicanism; response to Catholic Truth Blog's lamentation about conversions to Sedevacantism
Segment 2: Francis defeats Jimmy Akin on "proselytism"; a dilemma for semi-trads; response to Michael Matt's Remnant TV program "Papolatry RIP: Pope Ignites Counterrevolution"; controversy and good will.
Novus Ordo Watch, "Profanation in Rome: Anglican Liturgy celebrated in St.
in TRADCAST Anthony Cekada, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Christopher Ferrara, Ecumenism, Francis, Jimmy Akin, Michael Matt, New Sacraments, Papacy, Proselytism, Richard Williamson, Sacrilege, Schism, Sedevacantism, SSPX, TRADCAST, William Jenkins	7
Francis: "I am a Sinner and am Fallible"
Those who thought that since "Pope" Francis is on retreat this week, we wouldn't hear anything from him until he returns, will now have their illusions shattered: Tomorrow's edition of the German weekly Die Zeit features a substantial interview with the chief Modernist of the Vatican II Church. The full text of the conversation, which is only available to paid subscribers, was released electronically on Mar. 8:
"Ich bin Sünder und bin fehlbar" (Die Zeit / original German)
In order to remain within the legal guidelines of "fair use" of the copyrighted text, we cannot reproduce a lot of quotes from the interview here.
in Novus Ordo Wire Francis, Jimmy Akin, Proselytism, Raymond Burke	10
Bergoglio attacks the Great Commission…
From the man who does away with sins such as adultery and fornication as belonging to a hopelessly outdated and rigid past, now comes the introduction of entirely new "sins", such as supporting the death penalty, failing to recycle, or — the latest now — the "sin" of converting others.
We saw it a few weeks ago in Georgia, where Jorge Bergoglio — "Pope" Francis — denounced converting the Eastern Orthodox as a "great sin against ecumenism", and we saw it again on October 13 of this year, the 99th anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, when Francis received in audience roughly 1,000 ecumenical (mostly Lutheran) "pilgrims" from Germany (photos here).
in Novus Ordo Wire Ecumenism, Francis, Heresy, Indifferentism, Interreligious Dialogue, Martin Luther, Proselytism	10