Although there were a number of topics covered in Jorge’s Most Outrageous Interview to Date ten days ago, that is, on Wednesday, February 17, 2016, Ember Wednesday in Lent, there are other subjects worthy of commentary, which is why this concluding segment is going to focus on two questions not covered in the first two parts.
Indeed, there are times when I ask myself why I should spend hours upon hours responding to Jorge’s apostasies and other ramblings given at one time when he moves to something else the next day like a carefree butterfly.
Moreover, Bergoglio loves to make a “mess of things.” As I noted on several other occasions, the the Argentine Apostate is a complete juvenile delinquent who delights in his role as the man who is finally razing the last bastions of recognizable Catholicism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. He is particularly pleased by the way his egalitarian “revolution of mercy” has upset the old ways doing thing inside the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River.
Even though I thought at first that he was a befuddled cipher when he emerged on the Balcony of Saint Peter on Wednesday, March 13, 2013, I came to realize within a day that this man knew exactly what he was doing, prompting to write the following on March 16, 2013:
I made a serious error when I said to Sharon on Wednesday afternoon as Francis The Talking Apostate made his first appearance on the balcony of the Basilica of Saint Peter.
What was this error?
It was in saying, "This man looks befuddled."
Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis is not befuddled. He is a revolutionary who knows precisely what he is doing, and he is doing it with lightning speed.
Although he has been the sixth in the line of false conciliar "popes" for about sixty hours as of this writing, he has moved with great speed to further "reform" the whole nature of what the conciliarists refer to as the "Petrine Ministry" as he has ditched the mozzetta, cast off his papal stole until just before he gave a blessing after first asking "the people" to pray for him, staged Protestant and Masonic Judeo-Novus Ordo liturgical service as he face his brother "apostates" in the conciliar college of "cardinals," thus breaking with Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's example of staging that travesty ad oriendum in the Sistine Chapel, preached at a lectern rather than sitting, permitting the "cardinals" to greet him as he stood up to shake their hands as though a true pope, which he believes himself to be, is an equal with his "cardinals," demanded that his "cardinals" wear black cassocks instead of their scarlet ones at his audience yesterday, Friday, March 15, 2013, and ridden a minibus with the "cardinals," thus again demonstrating that he is just one among equals.
Anyone who is the least bit shocked or surprised by what is happening now, nearly three years later, only has himself to blame for being snookered repeatedly by a man who is the epitome of all that the revolution begun by Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII and directed in its nascent stages by Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI. This all unfolding according to the “playbook” of the Jacobin/Bolshevik conciliar revolutionaries from the very beginning when the portly Roncalli appeared on the Balcony of Saint Peter on October 28, 1958, the Feast of Saints Simon and Jude after having taken the “papal” name of “John,” something that no one had done since Antipope John XXIII, which made Roncalli the second “John XXIII” in the actual fact of the matter.
Everything one wants to know about the agenda of Jorge Mario Bergoglio was summarized very well by the following paragraphs of Pope Saint Pius X’s Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:
It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From all that has preceded, it is abundantly clear how great and how eager is the passion of such men for innovation. In all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to be reformed, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology: rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to be harmonized with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the capacity of the people. Regarding worship, they say, the number of external devotions is to be reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head. They cry out that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized The Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must be likewise modified The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, and are to be more encouraged in practice. They ask that the clergy should return to their primitive humility and poverty, and that in their ideas and action they should admit the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, gladly listening to the teaching of their Protestant masters, would desire the suppression of the celibacy of the clergy. What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed by them and according to their principles? (Pascendi Dominici Gregis, No. 38)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio's agenda has been foretold to us by Pope Saint Pius X. Bergoglio has implemented much of that which was condemned in Paragrath 38 of Pascendi Dominci Gregis, and he is on a course to implement everything in those paragraphs that has thus far remained on the revolutionary “to do” list.
It is in this regard that a question from someone named Anne Thompson from the National Broadcasting Company here in the United States of America (we do not have television, and I do not recognize the names of various personages who serve as mouthpieces for the state and/or for the forces of naturalism controlling our law and popular culture) that was as emotionally loaded as the one that Philip Pulella asked about Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s well-known plans to build a wall on the American border with Mexico and to deport illegal immigrants to their native countries, which is why I will comment on it before providing Bergoglio’s answer:
Anne Thompson, NBC (USA): Some wonder how a Church that claims to be merciful, how can the Church forgive a murderer easier than someone who has divorced and remarried? (The Most Outrageous Bergoglio Interview.)
Brief Comment Number One:
There is no connection between the absolution given by a true priest to one who confesses the sin of murder and the very unsentimental fact that no power on the face of this earth can dissolve a sacramentally valid, ratified and consummated marriage. Anne Thompson thus “led the witness,” Bergoglio, who expressed his pleasure at receiving such a emotionally-loaded question:
Jorge Mario Bergoglio: I like this question! On the family, two synods have spoken. The Pope has spoken on this all year in the Wednesday Catechisms. The question is true, you posed it very well. (The Most Outrageous Bergoglio Interview.)
Brief Comment Number Two:
Bergoglio’s referring to himself in the third person as the “pope” reminds me of the time back on Friday, September 24, 1999, the Feast of Our Lady of Ransom, when baseball player Rickey Henderson, then in a stint with the New York Mets, exited the visitors’ clubhouse at the now-demolished Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and said to no one in particular as reporters looked on, “Rickey look for Rickey limo.”
That is all that I have to say for now before handing you back over to the Argentine Apostate:
Jorge Mario Bergoglio: In the post-synod document that will be published, perhaps before Easter – it picks up on everything the synod – in one of the chapters, because it has many – it spoke about the conflicts, wounded families and the pastoral (care) of wounded families. It is one of the concerns. As another is the preparation for marriage. Imagine, to become a priest there are eight years of study and preparation, and then if after a while you can’t do it, you can ask for a dispensation, you leave, and everything is OK. On the other hand, to make a sacrament (marriage), which is for your whole life, three to four conferences...Preparation for marriage is very important. It’s very, very important because I believe it is something that in the Church, in common pastoral ministry, at least in my country, in South America, the Church has not valued much.
For example, not so much anymore but some years ago in my homeland there was a habit, something called ‘casamiento de apuro,’ a marriage in haste because the baby is coming and to cover socially the honor of the family. There, they weren’t free and it happened many times this marriage is null. As a bishop I forbade my priests to do this. Priests, when there was something like this, I would say, let the baby come, let them continue as fiancées, and when they feel like they can continue for the rest of their lives, then they could go ahead. There is a lack there. (The Most Outrageous Bergoglio Interview.)
Brief Comment Number Three:
This is false and injurious to souls, a veritable denial of the efficacy of the graces won for us by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by the shedding of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday to help a couple “married in haste” to have a married life of true happiness rooted in a love of the Most Blessed Trinity and aided at all times by the intercession of Our Lady, Saint Joseph and all of the saints and their own Guardian Angels.
The phenomenon of weddings expedited by the conception of a child outside of marriage is neither new nor confined to South America. (My parents were married on June 2, 1951, in a simple nuptial service in the rectory of Our Lady of the North American Martyrs Church in Bayside, New York, five months, twenty-two days before my birth, and I was not three and one-half months premature.)
What is new in recent decades, however, is the acceptance of fornication as an inevitable fact of life, something that is the direct consequence of institutionalization of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments in almost every school in the world—public, private, religious, the ready availability of contraception, the obsession with sensual gratification and the glorification of sins against Holy Purity in every aspect of what passes for “popular culture.” There has been a complete loss of shame to the point that shamelessness in sin is the rule, not the exception.
The counterfeit church of conciliarism has aided and abetted this shamelessness as its schools have cooperated fully with the agenda Marxist and Judeo-Masonic program for the corruption of the young by means of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, which made its chief entrance into conciliar schools and religious miseducation programs courtesy of the cooperation of one Monsignor, later "Bishop," James T. McHugh, with Mary Calderone, the founder of the Sex and Information Committee of the United States (see Mrs. Randy McHugh's The McHugh Chronicles and her definitive Sex Education - The Final Plague). This has been done despite the explicit prohibition against such instruction found in Pope Pius XI's Divini Illius Magistri that was reaffirmed by the Holy Office on March 21, 1931:
65. Another very grave danger is that naturalism which nowadays invades the field of education in that most delicate matter of purity of morals. Far too common is the error of those who with dangerous assurance and under an ugly term propagate a so-called sex-education, falsely imagining they can forearm youths against the dangers of sensuality by means purely natural, such as a foolhardy initiation and precautionary instruction for all indiscriminately, even in public; and, worse still, by exposing them at an early age to the occasions, in order to accustom them, so it is argued, and as it were to harden them against such dangers.
66. Such persons grievously err in refusing to recognize the inborn weakness of human nature, and the law of which the Apostle speaks, fighting against the law of the mind; and also in ignoring the experience of facts, from which it is clear that, particularly in young people, evil practices are the effect not so much of ignorance of intellect as of weakness of a will exposed to dangerous occasions, and unsupported by the means of grace.
67. In this extremely delicate matter, if, all things considered, some private instruction is found necessary and opportune, from those who hold from God the commission to teach and who have the grace of state, every precaution must be taken. Such precautions are well known in traditional Christian education, and are adequately described by Antoniano cited above, when he says:
Such is our misery and inclination to sin, that often in the very things considered to be remedies against sin, we find occasions for and inducements to sin itself. Hence it is of the highest importance that a good father, while discussing with his son a matter so delicate, should be well on his guard and not descend to details, nor refer to the various ways in which this infernal hydra destroys with its poison so large a portion of the world; otherwise it may happen that instead of extinguishing this fire, he unwittingly stirs or kindles it in the simple and tender heart of the child. Speaking generally, during the period of childhood it suffices to employ those remedies which produce the double effect of opening the door to the virtue of purity and closing the door upon vice. (Passage and double-indented quotation as found in Pope Pius XI's Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
I) Can the method be approved, which is called "sexual education," or even "sexual initiation?"
Response: In the negative, and that the method must be persevere entirely as set forth up to the present entirely as set forth up to the present by the Church and saintly men, and recommended by the Most Holy Father in the Encyclical Letter, "On the Christian Education of Youth," given on the 31st day of December, 1929. Naturally, care must especially be taken that a full and solid religious instruction be given to the youth of both sexes without interruption; in this instruction there must be aroused a regard, desire, and love for the angelic virtue; and especially must it be inculcated upon them to insist on prayer, to be constant in the sacraments of penance and the Most Holy Eucharist, to be devoted to the Blessed Virgin Mother of holy purity, with filial devotion and to commit themselves wholly to her protection; to avoid carefully dangerous reading, obscene plays, associated with the wicked, and all occasions of sin.
By no means, then, can we approve what has been written and published in defense of the new method especially in these recent times, even on the part of some Catholic authors. (Henry Denzinger, Enchirdion Symbolorum, thirteenth edition, translated into English by Roy Deferrari and published in 1955 as The Sources of Catholic Dogma--referred to as "Denziger," by B. Herder Book Company of St. Louis, Missouri, and London, England, Nos. 2183-2185, pp. 597-598.)
It does not get any plainer than that.
Yet it is that the conciliar revolutionaries have miseducated several generation of young Catholics to place themselves openly in occasions of sin.
To make matters worse, though, Bergoglio actually advised couples to live in sin as “fiancées” until they were “sure” whether they should get married after the conception and birth of a child after wedlock.
To encourage a couple to live in sin is show oneself to be a mortal enemy of their sanctification and salvation. Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s concept of marriage is purely naturalistic. This apostate dispenses “advice” that could have come from twin sisters, both deceased, who were born in Sioux City, Iowa (where a certain thirteen year-old we know and love was born), on July 4, 1918, named Esther Pauline Phillips and Pauline Esther Phillips, better known in life as “Ann Landers” and “Abigail Van Buren,” respectively. Wait! Bergoglio is giving the sort of advice given by “Eppie” Lederer and “Popo” Friedman (their respective married names) if one remembers that none other than Ann Landers was at the bedside of the lavender-friendly Joseph “Cardinal” Bernardin when he was dying in 1996 (see Didn't He Show Us the Way, to which I respond: He sure did. The way to hell for all eternity.)
How do children learn to grow in purity so as to avoid the near occasions of sin and thus finding themselves in marriages of “necessity”?
By being taught to love God with their whole hearts, minds, bodies, souls, and strength.
By eliminating, as far as is humanly possible, the incentives to sin as found in popular culture (eliminating the television as a starting point, of course), refusing to expose children to the near occasions of sin represented by immodestly dressed relatives or friends, refusing to permit them to associate with playmates whose innocence and purity have been undermined by the culture and by "education" programs that serve in public schools to be instruments of promoting sin and that serve in conciliar schools as the means of justifying it. By keeping our children close to the Sacraments, which means, of course, getting them out of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, and making sure that the family Rosary is prayed every day with fervor and devotion.
Just take a look at the statement issued by the Holy Office on March 21, 1931.
Do we need "theft instruction" in order to keep our children from stealing. Do children, who are naturally curious, have to learn about the various forms of thievery available to them in order to know that it is wrong to violate the Seventh Commandment? Might such "theft instruction" actually serve as an incentive to the mischievous to steal?
The fact that the conciliar authorities in the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River have seen fit to defy the prohibitions against explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments because they are penultimate naturalists. That these hideous revolutionaries have had to ask the questions that they did is the direct result of their own defiance of Catholic teaching. This is not surprising as they are living and breathing apostates whose almost every word and action is in defiance of the Sacred Deposit of Faith.
Back to Jorge’s long answer to the question he found to his liking:
Another very interesting chapter is the education of children: the victims of problems of the family are the children. The children. Even of problems that neither husband nor wife have a say in. For example, the needs of a job. When the dad doesn’t have free time to speak to his children, when the mother doesn’t have time to speak with her children. When I confess a couple who have kids, a married couple, I ask, ‘how many children do you have?’ Some get worried and think the priest will ask why I don’t have more. I would make a second question, ‘Do you play with your children?’ The majority say, ‘but father, I have no time. I work all day.’ Children are victims of a social problem that wounds the family. It is a problem… I like your question.
Another interesting thing from the meeting with families in Tuxtla. There was a couple, married again in second union integrated in the pastoral ministry of the Church. The key phrase used by the synod, which I’ll take up again, is ‘integrate’ in the life of the Church the wounded families, remarried families, etcetera. But of this one mustn’t forget the children in the middle. They are the first victims, both in the wounds, and in the conditions of poverty, of work, etcetera. (The Most Outrageous Bergoglio Interview.)
Brief Comment Number Four:
Jorge’s comments in this section of his long answer to Anne Thompson is interesting on two counts.
First, his “advice” in the confessional to fathers and mothers is purely naturalistic. One will note that he did not mention that anything about encouraging parents to pray with their children, especially to pray Our Lady’s Holy Rosary as a family every day. Bergoglio’s emphasis is on playing, not praying. Quite telling, wouldn’t you say?
Second, the false “pontiff” used conciliarspeak to refer to “integrating” “wounded” families, which was his way of saying that there is no such thing as “irregularity” within the life of a parish, thus opening the way for “couples” engaged in perversity to be “integrated” with the official sanction of the counterfeit church of conciliarism after decades of de facto integration, if not of actual control in many diocesan chancery offices, seminaries, parishes, schools and other institutions. Jorge’s “et cetera” covers a lot ground, and that ground includes those involved in the sin of Sodom.
Anne Thompson then asked a follow-up question about whether divorced and civilly “remarried” Catholics who lack a conciliar decree of marital nullity can receive what purports to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service:
Thompson: Does that mean they can receive Communion?
Jorge Mario Bergoglio: This is the last thing. Integrating in the Church doesn’t mean receiving communion. I know married Catholics in a second union who go to church, who go to church once or twice a year and say I want communion, as if joining in Communion were an award. It’s a work towards integration, all doors are open, but we cannot say, ‘from here on they can have communion.’ This would be an injury also to marriage, to the couple, because it wouldn’t allow them to proceed on this path of integration. And those two were happy. They used a very beautiful expression: we don’t receive Eucharistic communion, but we receive communion when we visit hospitals and in this and this and this. Their integration is that. If there is something more, the Lord will tell them, but it’s a path, a road. (The Most Outrageous Bergoglio Interview.)
Brief Comment Number Five:
This was a long, circuitous answer that was couched in a form of doublespeak that bordered on Stengelese, noting the exception that the "Ole Perfessor," Charles Dillon “Casey” Stengel, amusing whereas Bergoglio is revolting.
The actual truth of the matter, of course, is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has set his false religious sect on a path of permitting divorced and civilly “remarried” Catholics to receive Holy Communion in a path of “integration,” meaning that this will be done quietly at first in some places before it is said to be an “integral” part of life in the conciliar sect.
The text of the upcoming post-synodal exhortation is likely to be equally opaque on this issue, but one thing is certain: King Henry VIII would have had his bigamous and adulterous “marriage to Anne Boleyn “integrated” into the conciliar structures if he were alive today.
Given the fact that much of the forthcoming exhortation has been ghostwritten by Bergoglio’s friend and protégé, “Archbishop” Victor Manuel Fernandez, who was the Marxist ideologue responsible for most of the text of Laudato Si, May 24, 2015, which means that it will be filled with every manner of rationalization to excuse and justify the sinful and aberrant as legitimate expressions of “love”:
The president of the Pontifical Council for the Family has confirmed that Pope Francis’ post-synodal apostolic exhortation devoted to the family will be published by the end of March.
Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia reportedly disclosed the news today at a conference with priests in Portugal, according to Il Sismografo, a semi-official Vatican news aggregator supervised by the Secretariat of State.
The Italian archbishop said the much-anticipated document, which summarizes the Pope’s conclusions of the two synods dedicated to the family, will be “a hymn to love, a love that wants to take care of the welfare of the young, to be close to wounded families to give them strength, a love that wants to be close to children as well as to all mankind in need."
Well informed sources have told the Register that the document, which observers believe will probably be released on March 19 — the feast of St. Joseph and the 3rd anniversary of the Pope's inauguration Mass — is in its third draft. They also say that the chief drafter is Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernández, rector of the the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina in Buenos Aires and one of Pope Francis’ closest advisers.
One reliably informed source, a recognized moral theologian who has seen the draft, said he was "deeply disturbed" by the text as it “calls into question the natural moral law”. A senior Vatican official said he had heard the draft was good, but that was "some time ago". He said he expects it to be similar to the Ordinary Synod's final report, almost all of which the synod fathers passed unanimously.
Many are looking to the post-synodal apostolic exhortation on the family to give clarification on where the Pope stands on the issue of Communion for remarried divorcees, and what it will say about other crucial moral and theological issues.
Earlier this week, Vatican analyst Andrea Gagliarducci reported that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has studied the draft and sent a long note with several doctrinal remarks, rumored to be 40 pages in length.
A senior Vatican source told the Register last week that the CDF has offered “all kinds of observations” on other documents as well during this pontificate, “but none of them are ever taken." The dicastery, like much of the Roman Curia, is largely left out of such processes and is considered to be “isolated”, according to sources. (Jorge Prepares to Make Holy Week a Mess.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio has about as much use for his conciliar church’s misnamed Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as he has for doctrine in general. “Pope Francis” has made it clear that he believes doctrines and other “rules,” including the Ten Commandments, stand in the way of the “mercy” that he believes must be shown to unrepentant sinners. It is all a farce.
Beyond the diabolically reprehensible nature of what Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes, says and does, though, any release of the post-synodal exhortation on Saturday, March 19, 2016, the Feast of Saint Joseph and the Commemoration of Saturday in Passion Week, would impinge on the singlemindedness that those who profess the Catholic Faith should be approaching Palm Sunday and thus the beginning of Holy Week on the very next day, March 20, 2016. This means that the focus of almost the entire Catholic world all across and up and down the vast spectrum of the vast ecclesiastical divide that exists in this time of apostasy and betrayal will be on the exhortation, not on spending time in meditation on how our sins caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer such anguish in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death.
Although there are some within the conciliar structures who are calling upon “Pope Francis” to change his ways or to “get his head on straight” (something that a person associated with the Society of Saint Pius X said to a friend of ours lately), Jorge Mario Bergoglio is doing as “Pope Francis” what he had done as “Father” Bergoglio and as “Cardinal” Bergoglio. He is now as he has been throughout the course of his wretched career as a lay Jesuit revolutionary.
Indeed, a 30 Days interview with Bergoglio from 2007, two years after he finished as the runner-up to Joseph Alois Ratzinger in the conciliar conclave of 2005, reveals the entirety of his agenda as “Pope Francis” was well-formed at a time he was a little over seventy years of age. Herewith are a few excerpts interspersed with comments of mine that were published on Thursday, March 14, 2013:
BERGOGLIO: Staying, remaining faithful implies an outgoing. Precisely if one remains in the Lord one goes out of oneself. Paradoxically precisely because one remains, precisely if one is faithful one changes. One does not remain faithful, like the traditionalists or the fundamentalists, to the letter. Fidelity is always a change, a blossoming, a growth. The Lord brings about a change in those who are faithful to Him. That is Catholic doctrine. Saint Vincent of Lerins makes the comparison between the biologic development of the person, between the person who grows, and the Tradition which, in handing on the depositum fidei from one age to another, grows and consolidates with the passage of time: «Ut annis scilicet consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur aetate». (30Giorni | What I would have said at the Consistory (Interview with Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio by Sefania Falasca)
Paradox and contradiction worthy of His Apostateness, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Antipope Emeritus. "One does not remain faithful, like the traditionalists or the fundamentalists, to the letter"?
Boy, have they got an apostate on their hands, a man who is as free with the teaching of saints such as Saint Vincent Lerins as the man who defeated him at the 2005 conciliar conclave. This is what Saint Vincent Lerins actually taught about Catholic Tradition:
"Do not be misled by various and passing doctrines. In the Catholic Church Herself we must be careful to hold what has been believed everywhere, always and by all; for that alone is truly and properly Catholic." (Saint Vincent of Lerins, quoted in Tumultuous Times by Frs. Francisco and Dominic Radecki, CMRI, p. 279.)
"But he appears so humble and simple," some might say.
I say, so what? Humility and simplicity without the Catholic Faith mean nothing. And Francis, The Talking Apostate hath not the Catholic Faith.
Q. Is this what you would have said at the Consistory?
BERGOGLIO: Yes. I would have spoken about these three key points.
Q. Nothing else?
BERGOGLIO: Nothing else… No, perhaps I would have mentioned two things of which there is need in this moment, there is more need: mercy, mercy and apostolic courage.
Q. What do they mean to you?
BERGOGLIO: To me apostolic courage is disseminating. Disseminating the Word. Giving it to that man and to that woman for whom it was bestowed. Giving them the beauty of the Gospel, the amazement of the encounter with Jesus… and leaving it to the Holy Spirit to do the rest. It is the Lord, says the Gospel, who makes the seed spring and bear fruit.
Q. In short, it is the Holy Spirit who performs the mission.
BERGOGLIO: The early theologians said: the soul is a kind of sailing boat, the Holy Spirit is the wind that blows in the sail, to send it on its way, the impulses and the force of the wind are the gifts of the Spirit. Without His drive, without His grace, we don’t go ahead. The Holy Spirit lets us enter the mystery of God and saves us from the danger of a gnostic Church and from the danger of a self-referential Church, leading us to the mission.
That means also overthrowing all your functionalist solutions, your consolidated plans and pastoral systems …
BERGOGLIO: I didn’t say that pastoral systems are useless. On the contrary. In itself everything that leads by the paths of God is good. I have told my priests: «Do everything you should, you know your duties as ministers, take your responsibilities and then leave the door open». Our sociologists of religion tell us that the influence of a parish has a radius of six hundred meters. In Buenos Aires there are about two thousand meters between one parish and the next. So I then told the priests: «If you can, rent a garage and, if you find some willing layman, let him go there! Let him be with those people a bit, do a little catechesis and even give communion if they ask him». A parish priest said to me: «But Father, if we do this the people then won’t come to church». «But why?» I asked him: «Do they come to mass now?» «No», he answered. And so! Coming out of oneself is also coming out from the fenced garden of one’s own convictions, considered irremovable, if they risk becoming an obstacle, if they close the horizon that is also of God.
This is valid also for lay people… (30Giorni | What I would have said at the Consistory (Interview with Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio by Sefania Falasca)
The danger of a self-referential Church?
Overthrowing all your functionalist solutions, your consolidated pastoral systems?
Coming out of oneself is also coming out from the fenced garden of one's own convictions, considered irremovable, if they risk becoming an obstacle, if they close the horizon that is also of God?
How is this not identical to what Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger, evoking the spirit of Hans Urs von Balthasar, wrote in Principles of Catholic Theology in 1982?
Does this mean that the Council should be revoked? Certainly not. It means only that the real reception of the Council has not yet even begun. What devastated the Church in the decade after the Council was not the Council but the refusal to accept it. This becomes clear precisely in the history of the influence of Gaudium et spes. What was identified with the Council was, for the most part, the expression of an attitude that did not coincide with the statements to be found in the text itself, although it is recognizable as a tendency in its development and in some of its individual formulations. The task is not, therefore, to suppress the Council but to discover the real Council and to deepen its true intention in the light of the present experience. That means that there can be no return to the Syllabus, which may have marked the first stage in the confrontation with liberalism and a newly conceived Marxism but cannot be the last stage. In the long run, neither embrace nor ghetto can solve for Christians the problem of the modern world. The fact is, as Hans Urs von Balthasar pointed out as early as 1952, that the "demolition of the bastions" is a long-overdue task. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, p. 391.)
Pope Pius VIII, writing in his one and only encyclical letter, Traditi Humilitate Nostrae, May 24, 1829, during his very brief pontificate warned us about those such as Hans Urs von Balthasar, Joseph Ratzinger and Jorge Mario Bergoglio, men who have sought to "raze" the foundations of the Church:
Although God may console Us with you, We are nonetheless sad. This is due to the numberless errors and the teachings of perverse doctrines which, no longer secretly and clandestinely but openly and vigorously, attack the Catholic faith. You know how evil men have raised the standard of revolt against religion through philosophy (of which they proclaim themselves doctors) and through empty fallacies devised according to natural reason. In the first place, the Roman See is assailed and the bonds of unity are, every day, being severed. The authority of the Church is weakened and the protectors of things sacred are snatched away and held in contempt. The holy precepts are despised, the celebration of divine offices is ridiculed, and the worship of God is cursed by the sinner. All things which concern religion are relegated to the fables of old women and the superstitions of priests. Truly lions have roared in Israel. With tears We say: "Truly they have conspired against the Lord and against His Christ." Truly the impious have said: "Raze it, raze it down to its foundations." (Pope Pius VIII, Traditi Humilitate Nostrae, May 24, 1829.)
Francis the Talking Apostate is busted. Unfortunately for him, though, he does not realize this.
Q, What should one do?
BERGOGLIO: Look at our people not for what it should be but for what it is and see what is necessary. Without preconceptions and recipes but with generous openness. For the wounds and the frailty God spoke. Allowing the Lord to speak… In a world that we can’t manage to interest with the words we say, only His presence that loves us, saves us, can be of interest. The apostolic fervor renews itself in order to testify to Him who has loved us from the beginning.
Q. For you, then, what is the worst thing that can happen in the Church?
BERGOGLIO: It is what De Lubac calls «spiritual worldliness». It is the greatest danger for the Church, for us, who are in the Church. «It is worse», says De Lubac, «more disastrous than the infamous leprosy that disfigured the dearly beloved Bride at the time of the libertine popes». Spiritual worldliness is putting oneself at the center. It is what Jesus saw going on among the Pharisees: «… You who glorify yourselves. Who give glory to yourselves, the ones to the others». (30Giorni | What I would have said at the Consistory (Interview with Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio by Sefania Falasca).)
Generous openness to what? The devil, that's what.
Quoting De Lubac on spiritual worldliness, which means ridding the Catholic Church of the belief that she alone possesses truth and has the sole right from God to teach, govern and sanctify men?
You want another example?
Sure, below you will find an an excerpt from an speech Jorge Mario Bergoglio gave upon the release of Father Luis Guissani's The Attraction of Jesus that was republished in yet another Communion and Liberation magazine, Traces, which is based in Argentina:
The book presented today, El atractivo de Jesucristo, is not a theological treatise, it is a dialogue of friendship; these are table conversations between Father Guissani and his disciples. It is not a book for intellectuals, but for people who are men and women. It is the description of that initial experience, which I shall refer to later on, of wonder which arises in dialogue about daily experience that is provoked and fascinated by the exceptionally human and divine presence and gaze of Jesus Christ. It is the story of a personal relationship–intense, mysterious, and concrete at the same time–of an impassioned and intelligent affection for the person of Jesus, and this enables Fr. Giussani to come to the threshold, as it were, of Mystery, to speak familiarly and intimately with Mystery.
Everything in our life, today just as in Jesus’ time, begins with an encounter. An encounter with this Man, the carpenter of Nazareth, a man like all men and yet different. The first ones, John, Andrew, and Simon, felt themselves to be looked at into their very depths, read in their innermost being, and in them sprang forth a surprise, a wonder that instantly made them feel bound to Him, made them feel different.
When Jesus asked Peter, “Do you love Me?”, “his ‘Yes’ was not the result of an effort of will, it was not the fruit of a ‘decision’ made by the young man Simon: it was the emergence, the coming to the surface of an entire vein of tenderness and adherence that made sense because of the esteem he had for Him–therefore an act of reason;” it was a reasonable act, “which is why he couldn’t not say ‘Yes.’”
We cannot understand this dynamic of encounter which brings forth wonder and adherence if it has not been triggered–forgive me the use of this word–by mercy. Only someone who has encountered mercy, who has been caressed by the tenderness of mercy, is happy and comfortable with the Lord. I beg the theologians who are present not to turn me in to the Sant’Uffizio or to the Inquisition; however, forcing things a bit, I dare to say that the privileged locus of the encounter is the caress of the mercy of Jesus Christ on my sin.
In front of this merciful embrace–and I continue along the lines of Giussani’s thought–we feel a real desire to respond, to change, to correspond; a new morality arises. We posit the ethical problem, an ethics which is born of the encounter, of this encounter which we have described up to now. Christian morality is not a titanic effort of the will, the effort of someone who decides to be consistent and succeeds, a solitary challenge in the face of the world. No. Christian morality is simply a response. It is the heartfelt response to a surprising, unforeseeable, “unjust” mercy (I shall return to this adjective). The surprising, unforeseeable, “unjust” mercy, using purely human criteria, of one who knows me, knows my betrayals and loves me just the same, appreciates me, embraces me, calls me again, hopes in me, and expects from me. This is why the Christian conception of morality is a revolution; it is not a never falling down but an always getting up again. (The Attraction of the Cardinal.)
It was all there, ladies and gentlemen.
All of the phrases we have come to learn by rote in the past nearly three years.
"One does not remain faithful, like the traditionalists or the fundamentalists, to the letter"?
“Fidelity is always a change, a blossoming, a growth.”
“That means also overthrowing all your functionalist solutions, your consolidated plans and pastoral systems.”
Everything about Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s agenda as “Pope Francis,” including his understanding of the “Christian conception of morality” as a “revolution,” was clearly spelled out in great detail in that one interview.
Those who are praying for a “Pope Francis” “reset button” to be pushed are monstrously deceived as Bergoglio has always been a Modernist to the core of his revolutionary being, and his mission is to convert “fundamentalist, Pelagian,” gnostic Catholics to Modernism, not to convert non-Catholics to the bosom of Holy Mother Church. His mission is that of Antichrist, not of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
How will Holy Mother Church be restored in the midst of this fast-breaking events?
Miraculously, something that a reader noted in an e-mail to me on March 6, 2013:
Ven. Elizabeth Canori-Mora (d. 1825)
"St. Peter then chose the new pope. The Church was again organized..."
"... the sky was covered with clouds so dense and dismal that it was impossible to look at them without dismay... the avenging arm of God will strike the wicked, and in his mighty power he will punish their pride and presumption. God will employ the powers of hell for the extermination of these impious and heretical persons who desire to overthrow the Church and destroy its foundation. .... Innumerable legions of demons shall overrun the earth and shall execute the orders of Divine Justice... Nothing on the earth shall be spared. After this frightful punishment I saw the heavens opening, and St. Peter coming down again upon earth; he was vested in his pontifical robes, and surrounded by a great number of angels, who were chanting hymns in his honor, and they proclaimed him as sovereign of the earth. I saw also St. Paul descending upon the earth. By God's command, he traversed the earth and chained the demons, whom he brought before St. Peter, who commanded them to return into hell, whence they had come.
"Then a great light appeared upon the earth which was the sign of the reconciliation of God with man. The angels conducted before the throne of the prince of the Apostles the small flock that had remained faithful to Jesus Christ. These good and zealous Christians testified to him the most profound respect, praising God and thanking the Apostles for having delivered them from the common destruction, and for having protected the Church of Jesus Christ by not permitting her to be infected with the false maxims of the world. St. Peter then chose the new pope. The Church was again organized..." (Prophecy of Ven. Elizabeth Canori-Mora (d. 1825) as recorded in Fr. Culleton's book The Prophets and Our Times, 1941 A.D. Imprimatur)
"After the three days of darkness, St. Peter and St. Paul, having come down from Heaven, will preach in the whole world and designate a new Pope. A great light will flash from their bodies and will settle upon the cardinal who is to become Pope. Christianity, then, will spread throughout the world. He is the Holy Pontiff, chosen by God to withstand the storm. At the end, he will have the gift of miracles, and his name shall be praised over the whole earth. Whole nations will come back to the Church and the face of the earth will be renewed. Russia, England, and China will come into the Church." (Prophecy of Blessed Anna Maria Taigi, 1769-1837 A.D., who was Beatified by Pope Benedict XV in 1920.)
Our days are indeed short. We do not know the day or the hour of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour's Coming for us at the end of our lives. To prepare for this terrible moment of our Particular Judgment is never easy. It is even more difficult in these days of apostasy and betrayal, which is why we must flee from any association with the counterfeit church of conciliarism
Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ gave us His Most Blessed Mother to be our Mother as she stood so valiantly by the foot of His Most Holy Cross as He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem us. He has instructed her to give Saint Simon Stock the Brown Scapular, which was worn with such great priestly dignity by Saint John of the Cross, a true son of Carmel, and to give Saint Dominic de Guzman her Most Holy Rosary and to give Saint Catherine Laboure the Miraculous Medal. He has let His Most Blessed Mother teach us through her apparition to Juan Diego that He wants the entirety of the Americas converted to His Social Kingship as she is honored publicly by men and their nations, and He has warned us through her apparition at La Salette in France of impending doom in the Church and the world as a result of the sins of men. And He has told His Most Blessed Mother to console us with her Fatima Message, which is why we really should be earnest in praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit.
Remember, every Ave Maria we pray helps us to prepare for the hour of our deaths as we seek to repair the damage caused by our sins and those of the whole world. May we be generous in praying our Rosaries as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, remembering, as true Charity demands, to pray fervently for the conversion of the conciliar revolutionaries before they die. We must never be unbent in our own sins, and we must never be unaware of how we must give God the honor and glory that are His due as members of the Catholic Church who have fled to the catacombs to seek to sanctify an thus save our immortal souls.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.