Anathema sit Bergoglio - Chapter 4: Some blatant heresies
A clarification: indeed, heresies are found in all the topics addressed in this presentation. Here I will only reiterate a few that are particularly egregious, because they show the radical incompatibility between what Francis says and divine revelation.
For example, he proclaims “live and let live is the first step to peace and happiness.”[1] So, for him, it is not faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ that constitutes the first step toward peace and happiness, but the fact of living one’s life as one wishes, leaving others to do likewise. Thus he is telling us that true peace and true happiness are not gifts of God but the fruit of human endeavor. Note that this phrase is part of the Ten Commandments of Happiness, which he enumerated during an interview with an Argentine magazine in July 2014, during which Francis did not deign even once to name God or Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Here is a sentence from his first Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium:
«We should not think, however, that the Gospel message must always be communicated by fixed formulations learned by heart or by specific words which express an absolutely invariable content.» §129
You have read that right: no precise words and no invariable content. This is the quintessential modernist heresy condemned by Saint Pius X. To convince oneself, one need only read the encyclical Pascendi.
Here is another citation, taken from his interview with Father Antonio Spadaro:
«Yes, in this quest to seek and find God in all things there is still an area of uncertainty. There must be. If a person says that he met God with total certainty and is not touched by a margin of uncertainty, then this is not good.»[2]
Must one be reminded that the theological virtue of faith demands certainty and the unwavering acquiescence to God’s revealed truth, and to entertain a voluntary doubt in this regard constitutes a grave sin? Here is what the Catechism of Saint Pius X says:
Q: Are we certain of the truths the Church teaches us?
A: We are most certain of the truths the Church teaches, because Jesus Christ pledged His word that the Church should never be led into error.
Q: By what sin is the Faith lost?
A: Faith is lost by denying or voluntarily doubting even a single article proposed for our belief.[3]
Francis insisted on this point in a talk with Italian youth at Villa Nazareth in Rome on June 18, 2016. To a young man who asked: “Have you ever found yourself in a crisis of faith?” Francis replied:
«So many times I find myself in crisis with faith and sometimes even I had the nerve to reproach Jesus: But why do You allow this? and even when in doubt: But this will be the truth, or will it be a dream? And that as a young man, as a seminarian, a priest, a religious, Bishop and Pope. A Christian who has not felt this, ever, that has not gone through a crisis of faith, is missing something: a Christian who is satisfied with a little worldliness.»[4]
What Francis is saying to the youth is that doubting the truths of the Catholic faith is a good thing and those who do not do this are mediocre and worldly Christians. Imagine a catechist who would say to his students that he is constantly doubting what he is teaching them and that this seems to him not only beneficial, but also necessary, in order to become a good Christian. Well, here we have a so-called pope, supreme doctor of the Catholic faith, who says to the faithful something like this:
“Dear brothers and sisters, in order to become authentic Christians I encourage you to not hesitate to question your faith, taking example from me, as I have never ceased to do so through each of the many stages of my long life, and I continue to do so even now that I have become the Vicar of Jesus Christ. Moreover, I wish to point out that if you refuse to do so you will be among the weak and worldly Christians incapable of advancing toward the “existential peripheries” and of practicing the “culture of encounter.”
The conclusion is obvious, and it is distressing to see how practically no one is aware of it: Francis does not have the Catholic faith, because he teaches that faith and certainty are incompatible and that in matters of religion one must leave a place for doubt. But here is another counter-truth:
«To dialogue means to believe that the other has something worthwhile to say, and to entertain his or her point of view and perspective. Engaging in dialogue does not mean renouncing our own ideas and traditions, but the claim that they alone are valid or absolute.»[5]
Which is to say that, for Francis, Catholicism is only one “tradition” among others, and by no means the truth revealed by God Himself. Thus, Catholic dogma would be reduced to “one’s own ideas and traditions.” In other words, it is only a matter of opinions. It follows that religious truth would not be conceived as absolute, certain, invariable. He teaches afterwards, perfectly consistent with himself, that:
«Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.»[6]
It is always the same thing: religious truth, “unique and absolute” does not exist; one cannot attain truth with certainty; there are only “opinions” and these are all worthy of respect, to the extent that they respect the “inalienable dignity of the human person.” For Francis, the Christian who would seek doctrinal clarity and certainty would be taking the wrong path, and he who would remain attached to the past would miss the train of progress, enclosing himself in a static view of things. While this may seem surreal, it is exactly what Francis said to Father Antonio Spadaro in August of 2013, in his interview for the Jesuit magazine La Civiltà Cattolica:
«If the Christian is a restorationist, a legalist, if he wants everything clear and safe, then he will find nothing. Tradition and memory of the past must help us to have the courage to open up new areas to God. Those who today always look for disciplinarian solutions, those who long for an exaggerated doctrinal ‘security’, those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists -they have a static and inward-directed view of things.»[7]
Here is another falsehood, whose essence undermines the very existence of Christianity:
«Proselytism is a pompous absurdity with no sense. It is necessary to know one another, to hear one another, and to expand the knowledge of the world that surrounds us. It happens to me that after an encounter I want to have another because new ideas emerge and new needs are discovered. This is what is important: to know one another, to listen to one another, to expand the circle of thoughts. The world is crossed by roads that draw close and move apart, but the important thing is that they lead towards the Good.»[8]
Obviously, if there are only “opinions” in religious matters, what is the point of “proselytizing?” The important thing is to dialogue, to open oneself to the thinking of others, whatever it be, because this will help us to “expand the range of our thoughts.” Can you imagine for a moment what fruits the preaching of the Apostles would have had if they had spoken like this to the Greeks and Romans? To ask the question is equivalent to giving the answer.
According to Francis, the Church should not preserve the dogma of the faith unchanged and proclaim it to the world in order to convert it to Christ, but She must change her faith to adapt to a society that is no longer Christian:
«The world has changed and the Church cannot close herself in presumed interpretations of dogma. We must deal with social conflicts, old and new, and seek to give a hand to reassure, not stigmatize nor simply reprove.»[9]
And here Francis explains the same thing in other words: to have “credibility” today, the Church must sense the “aroma” of the men of our times and let himself be immersed in it. This is what is called being consistent with his own ideas.
«To find what the Lord asks of his Church today, we must lend an ear to the debates of our time and perceive the “fragrance” of the men of this age, so as to be permeated with their joys and hopes, with their griefs and anxieties (cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 1). At that moment we will know how to propose the good news on the family with credibility.»[10]
The contempt and hatred shown by Francis regarding the Church’s dogma and moral teaching are displayed in a special way in the following declaration:
«We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. […] The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.[11]
Here are two other citations which prove the radical religious indifferentism of Francis. In the first, he maintains that “the Spirit” (sic) acts in all religions, and in the second, he affirms that the religion of children has no importance, so long as they have enough to eat:
«Anyone who wants to bring into this world a family which teaches children to be excited by every gesture aimed at overcoming evil -a family which shows that the Spirit is alive and at work -will encounter our gratitude and our appreciation. Whatever the family, people, religion or region to which they belong!»[12]
«If there is a child that is hungry and has no education, what should matter to us is that he gets food and education. I don’t care if this education is given by Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox or Jews. What matters is that this child receives an education and ceases to be hungry.»[13]
You heard it right: the matter does not interest him. It could not be more clear. I ask myself: what more is needed to convince oneself that this man does not profess the Catholic faith at all, but a naturalistic humanism in perfect accord with that of Freemasonry?
Once again, let us try to imagine for a moment Saint Peter or Saint Paul explaining to their contemporaries that the religion they profess has absolutely no importance, and that the only thing that matters is that poverty be eradicated and everyone can satisfy his hunger. The actual situation is so absurd that one can hardly conceive that after more than three years of uttering such rubbish, the great majority of Catholics continue to consider this man as the legitimate Supreme Pontiff of the Church.
I can’t help but think of the story of Little Red Riding Hood with the little girl continuing to call “Grandmother” the one who is clearly a voracious wolf that wants only her death. And I also think of the incredible naïveté of those “conservatives” addressing numerous petitions to Francis, asking him to “get back in line” or “clarify his ambiguities” or “renounce” his pontificate. It is like imagining Little Red Riding Hood begging the wolf to be kind enough not to devour her, and imploring him to leave her grandmother’s house immediately…
[1] Replying to the Argentinean journalist Pablo Calvo on July 7, 2014 for the magazine Viva: novusordowatch.org/…/interview-no-11…
[2]www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[3] Catechism of Saint Pius X, Section on Theological Virtues - On Faith
[4] www.romereports.com/…/pope-francis-he…
[5] www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[6] www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[7]www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[8] Interview with Eugenio Scalfari on September 24, 2013
www.repubblica.it/…/le_pape_a_scalf…
[9] Interview with Joaquín Morales Solá on October 5, 2014 published in La Nación www.medias-presse.info/…/16245
[10] Address at the vigil of the opening of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops on October 4, 2014 www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[11] Interview with Father Antonio Spadaro www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[12] www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[13] Interview with Gerson Camarotti of Brazilian television in July 2013 novusordowatch.org/…/francis-not-car…
For example, he proclaims “live and let live is the first step to peace and happiness.”[1] So, for him, it is not faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ that constitutes the first step toward peace and happiness, but the fact of living one’s life as one wishes, leaving others to do likewise. Thus he is telling us that true peace and true happiness are not gifts of God but the fruit of human endeavor. Note that this phrase is part of the Ten Commandments of Happiness, which he enumerated during an interview with an Argentine magazine in July 2014, during which Francis did not deign even once to name God or Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Here is a sentence from his first Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium:
«We should not think, however, that the Gospel message must always be communicated by fixed formulations learned by heart or by specific words which express an absolutely invariable content.» §129
You have read that right: no precise words and no invariable content. This is the quintessential modernist heresy condemned by Saint Pius X. To convince oneself, one need only read the encyclical Pascendi.
Here is another citation, taken from his interview with Father Antonio Spadaro:
«Yes, in this quest to seek and find God in all things there is still an area of uncertainty. There must be. If a person says that he met God with total certainty and is not touched by a margin of uncertainty, then this is not good.»[2]
Must one be reminded that the theological virtue of faith demands certainty and the unwavering acquiescence to God’s revealed truth, and to entertain a voluntary doubt in this regard constitutes a grave sin? Here is what the Catechism of Saint Pius X says:
Q: Are we certain of the truths the Church teaches us?
A: We are most certain of the truths the Church teaches, because Jesus Christ pledged His word that the Church should never be led into error.
Q: By what sin is the Faith lost?
A: Faith is lost by denying or voluntarily doubting even a single article proposed for our belief.[3]
Francis insisted on this point in a talk with Italian youth at Villa Nazareth in Rome on June 18, 2016. To a young man who asked: “Have you ever found yourself in a crisis of faith?” Francis replied:
«So many times I find myself in crisis with faith and sometimes even I had the nerve to reproach Jesus: But why do You allow this? and even when in doubt: But this will be the truth, or will it be a dream? And that as a young man, as a seminarian, a priest, a religious, Bishop and Pope. A Christian who has not felt this, ever, that has not gone through a crisis of faith, is missing something: a Christian who is satisfied with a little worldliness.»[4]
What Francis is saying to the youth is that doubting the truths of the Catholic faith is a good thing and those who do not do this are mediocre and worldly Christians. Imagine a catechist who would say to his students that he is constantly doubting what he is teaching them and that this seems to him not only beneficial, but also necessary, in order to become a good Christian. Well, here we have a so-called pope, supreme doctor of the Catholic faith, who says to the faithful something like this:
“Dear brothers and sisters, in order to become authentic Christians I encourage you to not hesitate to question your faith, taking example from me, as I have never ceased to do so through each of the many stages of my long life, and I continue to do so even now that I have become the Vicar of Jesus Christ. Moreover, I wish to point out that if you refuse to do so you will be among the weak and worldly Christians incapable of advancing toward the “existential peripheries” and of practicing the “culture of encounter.”
The conclusion is obvious, and it is distressing to see how practically no one is aware of it: Francis does not have the Catholic faith, because he teaches that faith and certainty are incompatible and that in matters of religion one must leave a place for doubt. But here is another counter-truth:
«To dialogue means to believe that the other has something worthwhile to say, and to entertain his or her point of view and perspective. Engaging in dialogue does not mean renouncing our own ideas and traditions, but the claim that they alone are valid or absolute.»[5]
Which is to say that, for Francis, Catholicism is only one “tradition” among others, and by no means the truth revealed by God Himself. Thus, Catholic dogma would be reduced to “one’s own ideas and traditions.” In other words, it is only a matter of opinions. It follows that religious truth would not be conceived as absolute, certain, invariable. He teaches afterwards, perfectly consistent with himself, that:
«Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.»[6]
It is always the same thing: religious truth, “unique and absolute” does not exist; one cannot attain truth with certainty; there are only “opinions” and these are all worthy of respect, to the extent that they respect the “inalienable dignity of the human person.” For Francis, the Christian who would seek doctrinal clarity and certainty would be taking the wrong path, and he who would remain attached to the past would miss the train of progress, enclosing himself in a static view of things. While this may seem surreal, it is exactly what Francis said to Father Antonio Spadaro in August of 2013, in his interview for the Jesuit magazine La Civiltà Cattolica:
«If the Christian is a restorationist, a legalist, if he wants everything clear and safe, then he will find nothing. Tradition and memory of the past must help us to have the courage to open up new areas to God. Those who today always look for disciplinarian solutions, those who long for an exaggerated doctrinal ‘security’, those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists -they have a static and inward-directed view of things.»[7]
Here is another falsehood, whose essence undermines the very existence of Christianity:
«Proselytism is a pompous absurdity with no sense. It is necessary to know one another, to hear one another, and to expand the knowledge of the world that surrounds us. It happens to me that after an encounter I want to have another because new ideas emerge and new needs are discovered. This is what is important: to know one another, to listen to one another, to expand the circle of thoughts. The world is crossed by roads that draw close and move apart, but the important thing is that they lead towards the Good.»[8]
Obviously, if there are only “opinions” in religious matters, what is the point of “proselytizing?” The important thing is to dialogue, to open oneself to the thinking of others, whatever it be, because this will help us to “expand the range of our thoughts.” Can you imagine for a moment what fruits the preaching of the Apostles would have had if they had spoken like this to the Greeks and Romans? To ask the question is equivalent to giving the answer.
According to Francis, the Church should not preserve the dogma of the faith unchanged and proclaim it to the world in order to convert it to Christ, but She must change her faith to adapt to a society that is no longer Christian:
«The world has changed and the Church cannot close herself in presumed interpretations of dogma. We must deal with social conflicts, old and new, and seek to give a hand to reassure, not stigmatize nor simply reprove.»[9]
And here Francis explains the same thing in other words: to have “credibility” today, the Church must sense the “aroma” of the men of our times and let himself be immersed in it. This is what is called being consistent with his own ideas.
«To find what the Lord asks of his Church today, we must lend an ear to the debates of our time and perceive the “fragrance” of the men of this age, so as to be permeated with their joys and hopes, with their griefs and anxieties (cf. Gaudium et Spes, n. 1). At that moment we will know how to propose the good news on the family with credibility.»[10]
The contempt and hatred shown by Francis regarding the Church’s dogma and moral teaching are displayed in a special way in the following declaration:
«We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. […] The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.[11]
Here are two other citations which prove the radical religious indifferentism of Francis. In the first, he maintains that “the Spirit” (sic) acts in all religions, and in the second, he affirms that the religion of children has no importance, so long as they have enough to eat:
«Anyone who wants to bring into this world a family which teaches children to be excited by every gesture aimed at overcoming evil -a family which shows that the Spirit is alive and at work -will encounter our gratitude and our appreciation. Whatever the family, people, religion or region to which they belong!»[12]
«If there is a child that is hungry and has no education, what should matter to us is that he gets food and education. I don’t care if this education is given by Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox or Jews. What matters is that this child receives an education and ceases to be hungry.»[13]
You heard it right: the matter does not interest him. It could not be more clear. I ask myself: what more is needed to convince oneself that this man does not profess the Catholic faith at all, but a naturalistic humanism in perfect accord with that of Freemasonry?
Once again, let us try to imagine for a moment Saint Peter or Saint Paul explaining to their contemporaries that the religion they profess has absolutely no importance, and that the only thing that matters is that poverty be eradicated and everyone can satisfy his hunger. The actual situation is so absurd that one can hardly conceive that after more than three years of uttering such rubbish, the great majority of Catholics continue to consider this man as the legitimate Supreme Pontiff of the Church.
I can’t help but think of the story of Little Red Riding Hood with the little girl continuing to call “Grandmother” the one who is clearly a voracious wolf that wants only her death. And I also think of the incredible naïveté of those “conservatives” addressing numerous petitions to Francis, asking him to “get back in line” or “clarify his ambiguities” or “renounce” his pontificate. It is like imagining Little Red Riding Hood begging the wolf to be kind enough not to devour her, and imploring him to leave her grandmother’s house immediately…
[1] Replying to the Argentinean journalist Pablo Calvo on July 7, 2014 for the magazine Viva: novusordowatch.org/…/interview-no-11…
[2]www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[3] Catechism of Saint Pius X, Section on Theological Virtues - On Faith
[4] www.romereports.com/…/pope-francis-he…
[5] www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[6] www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[7]www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[8] Interview with Eugenio Scalfari on September 24, 2013
www.repubblica.it/…/le_pape_a_scalf…
[9] Interview with Joaquín Morales Solá on October 5, 2014 published in La Nación www.medias-presse.info/…/16245
[10] Address at the vigil of the opening of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops on October 4, 2014 www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[11] Interview with Father Antonio Spadaro www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[12] www.vatican.va/…/papa-francesco_…
[13] Interview with Gerson Camarotti of Brazilian television in July 2013 novusordowatch.org/…/francis-not-car…
