Once more, Chaos Frank brings down the house!

Francis does it again:

New Chaos Q&A slams “Restorationists”, “Pelagians”, “Triumphalism”, Black-and-White Logic, Penance! Lauds edifying Criticism, recommends “Couldn’t-Care-Less Attitude”!

[UPDATE 09-FEB-17 18:27 UTC: Added/expanded commentary at end of post]

Whoever thought that we might get a break hearing from Francis for a day or two, is being proven wrong again today.

In the Feb. 9, 2017 edition of the Italian Corriere della Sera, Francis’ ideological twin, “Fr.” Antonio Spadaro, S.J., published today a long transcript of a question-and-answer session the “Pope” held on November 25, 2016, as part of a meeting with the superiors general of 140 male religious orders and congregations.

To summarize the gist: This latest Q&A is another doozy, a chaotic disaster with zingers and howlers that will make you roll your eyes, get angry, and even erupt in genuine belly laughter!

But first, the raw data. Here is a link to the full text in English translation, as provided by the Italian paper:

The headline used by the Corriere sounds almost harmless, compared to what it could have been.

As always, we have slogged through the entire text (so you don’t have to!) and picked out what we believe to be the most significant, most outrageous, and most hilarious parts of this latest Q&A with the world’s biggest blabbermouth.

Highlights/Lowlights:

  • “It’s good to be criticized… I have always liked this. Life is also made up of misunderstandings and tensions. And when criticisms make you grow, I accept them, and reply. The most difficult questions, however, do not come from religious congregations, but from young people.”
  • “It is currently one of the biggest problems we have in priests’ training. In education we are used to dealing with black and white formulas, but not with the grey areas of life. And what matters is life, not formulas. We must grow in discernment. The logic of black and white can lead to abstract casuistry. Discernment, meanwhile, means moving forward through the grey of life according to the will of God. And the will of God is to be sought according to the true doctrine of the Gospel and not in the rigidity of an abstract doctrine.”
  • “The Church must accompany the young in their journey towards maturity, and it is only with discernment and not abstractions that young people can discover their path in life and live a life open to God and the world. So I chose this theme to introduce discernment more forcefully into the life of the Church.”
  • “Then there are small new foundations that are really good and work seriously. I see that behind these good foundations there are sometimes groups of bishops who accompany and ensure their growth. But there are others that do not arise from a charism of the Holy Spirit, but from a human charisma, a charismatic person who attracts by means of their human charms. Some are, I might say, ‘restorationist’: they seem to offer security but instead give only rigidity. When they tell me that there is a Congregation that draws so many vocations, I must confess that I worry. The Spirit does not follow the logic of human success: it works in another way. But they tell me that there are so many young people prepared to do anything, who pray a great deal, who are truly faithful. And I say to myself: ‘Wonderful: we will see if it is the Lord!’. Others are Pelagians: they want to go back to asceticism, do penance. They seem like soldiers ready to do anything for the defence of faith and morals … and then some scandal emerges involving the founder … We know all about this, right? Jesus has a different style. The Holy Spirit made noise on the day of Pentecost: it was the beginning. But it usually the Spirit not make much noise, it carries the cross. The Holy Spirit is not triumphalist. The style of God is the cross that is carried until the Lord says ‘enough’. Triumphalism does not go well with a life of prayer. So, do not put hope in the sudden, mass blooming of these Institutes. Instead, seek the humble path of Jesus, that of evangelical testimony. Benedict XVI put it perfectly when he said that the Church does not grow by proselytism but by attraction.”
  • [on the real Virgin Mary one should be devoted to:] “Not the Madonna at the head of a post office that every day sends a different letter, saying: ‘My children, do this and then the next day do that.’ No, not that Madonna. The real Madonna is the who generates Jesus in our hearts, a Mother. This fashion for a superstar Madonna, who seeks the limelight, is not Catholic.”
  • “What is the source of my serenity? No, I don’t take tranquillisers [sic]! Italians give some good advice: in order to live in peace we need a healthy couldn’t-care-less attitude. I don’t mind admitting that what I am experiencing is a completely new experience for me. In Buenos Aires I was more anxious, I admit. I felt more tense and worried. In short, I was not like I am now. I have experienced a sensation of profound peace ever since the moment I was elected. It has never left me. I live in peace. I cannot explain it.”
  • “There was talk in the General Congregations of the Vatican’s problems, there was talk of reforms. Everyone wanted them. There is corruption in the Vatican. But I’m at peace. If there is a problem, I write a note to St. Joseph and put it under a statue that I have in my room. It is a statue of St. Joseph sleeping. And now he sleeps on a mattress of notes! That’s why I sleep well: it is the grace of God.”
  • “The Gospel should be taken without tranquillisers [sic]. This is what the Church Fathers did.”
  • “If the superior is constantly reproaching, it doesn’t help create the radical prophecy of religious life.”
  • “And there is no need to become a cardinal to feel like a prince! It’s enough to be clerical. This is the worst thing in the organization of the Church. Monks and friars can help with the testimony of a more humble kind of brotherhood. They can give the testimony of an inverted iceberg, where the tip, i.e. the summit, the head, is turned upside down, and is at the bottom.”
  • “Once it happened that a nun bursar fainted and a sister said to those who came to help: ‘Waft a banknote under her nose and she is bound to come round!’. It’s funny, but should also give us pause for thought.”
  • “On the subject of sexual abuse: it seems that half of those who commit abuse have themselves been victims of abuse. Abuse is thus sowed in the future and this is devastating. If priests or religious are involved it is clear that the devil is at work, who ruins the work of Jesus through those who should proclaim him. But let’s be clear: this is a disease. If we are not convinced that this is a disease, we cannot solve the problem. So pay attention when receiving candidates for the religious life and ensure that they are sufficiently emotionally mature. For example: never accept in a religious community or diocese a candidate that has been rejected by another seminar or another institute without asking for very clear and detailed information on the reasons for their rejection.”
  • [on religious communities becoming more “outwardly-projected”:] “The Church was born as outgoing. It was closeted in the refectory and then came out. And it must remain in the outside world. It must not shut itself off again. Jesus didn’t want this. And ‘outside’ means what I call the outskirts, both existential and social. The existential poor and social poor impel the Church to go beyond its confines.”

The craziness of all this defies comprehension. Here are some brief observations:

So Francis says he has always liked to be criticized. Really now? He does not act like someone who accepts criticism with humility. Quite the contrary. He rams through his “reforms” with an iron fist, and whoever gets in the way will be a casualty. Those who point out, even just privately, that he contradicts the Faith and ask him to either retract or at least clarify that he did not mean to contradict the Faith, are ignored, humiliated, and punished. The pertinacity of this man could not be more evident.

Once more, Bergoglio condemns “black and white” thinking, which he finds to be “abstract” and “casuistic”. He prefers instead the color of grey — all fifty shades of it — which he claims allows us to “discern” the complexities of life so that we can offer “the true doctrine of the Gospel and not … the rigidity of an abstract doctrine.” But of course it is precisely the rigidity of “abstract” doctrine that is the true doctrine of the Gospel. This is the truth our Lord preached as a necessary part of genuine mercy. It is this rigid truth which our Lord communicated to the woman at the well when He told her that “he whom thou now hast, is not thy husband” (Jn 4:18). It is this rigid truth which made Him admonish the repentant adulteress with the words, “Go, and now sin no more” (Jn 8:11). It is this rigid truth which made St. Paul the Apostle warn the Corinthians not to keep company with public sinners: “But now I have written to you, not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, or a server of idols, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner: with such a one, not so much as to eat” (1 Cor 5:11). Francis’ idea of “moving forward” by “discerning” God’s will in “grey” areas is nothing but a smoothed-over endorsement of subjective do-it-yourself morality where the only fixed standard is that there is no fixed standard. This is what he calls “conscience” but it is false. In real Catholic moral theology, conscience consists precisely in applying the unchanging moral principles to concrete cases to determine whether an act is morally licit or not.

Apparently unaware of the irony, Francis then cautions against movements led by a “charismatic person who attracts by means of their human charms” — a perfect description of himself and his program of “reform”.

Next, the Vatican’s Chief Apostate denounces those “restorationists” and their evil “rigidity”. For some reason, “restoration” is endorsed only when it’s in reference to (allegedly) restoring early Christian practices, as Paul VI disingenuously did when promulgating his “New Mass” in 1969. Amusingly, Francis cannot help but admit the relative success in terms of producing vocations that the “restorationist” (semi-traditionalist) orders and movements in his sect have been experiencing, but he immediately shoots that down as actually quite dangerous and anti-Holy-Spirit: “When they tell me that there is a Congregation that draws so many vocations, I must confess that I worry. The Spirit does not follow the logic of human success: it [sic] works in another way.” So you see, the man who just the other day complained about a veritable “hemorrhage” of vocations now reminds his sheeple that lots of vocations are only a sign of “triumphalism”, and of course we can’t have that! “Now thanks be to God, who always maketh us to triumph in Christ Jesus, and manifesteth the odour of his knowledge by us in every place” (2 Cor 2:14). On Sep. 14 of every year, even the Novus Ordo Sect celebrates a Feast of the Triumph of the Cross, but perhaps Mr. Bergoglio can replace that soon with a Feast of the Outreach & Inclusion of the Cross or something less offensive.

Francis then has the shameless audacity to label those who practice asceticism and penance as “Pelagians” — a reference to the fifth-century heresy which says that salvation is obtained by works apart from God’s grace. (This is actually the heresy he continually preaches, when he keeps emphasizing the corporal works of mercy for all religions, yet never mentions the necessity of faith or grace.) Penance is exactly what all of us must do in order to obtain, maintain, and increase our justification, with the assistance of God’s grace: “Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of penance…” (Lk 3:8); “And going forth they preached that men should do penance” (Mk 6:12); “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” (Acts 2:38). To call works of penance Pelagian is itself a heresy, condemned by the Council of Trent:

CANON VII.-If any one saith, that all works done before Justification, in whatsoever way they be done, are truly sins, or merit the hatred of God; or that the more earnestly one strives to dispose himself for grace, the more grievously he sins: let him be anathema.

CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.

CANON XXV.-If any one saith, that, in every good work, the just sins venially at least, or-which is more intolerable still-mortally, and consequently deserves eternal punishments; and that for this cause only he is not damned, that God does not impute those works unto damnation; let him be anathema.

CANON XXVI.-If any one saith, that the just ought not, for their good works done in God, to expect and hope for an eternal recompense from God, through His mercy and the merit of Jesus Christ, if so be that they persevere to the end in well doing and in keeping the divine commandments; let him be anathema.

CANON XXXI.-If any one saith, that the justified sins when he performs good works with a view to an eternal recompense; let him be anathema.

CANON XXXII.-If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life,-if so be, however, that he depart in grace,-and also an increase of glory; let him be anathema.

(Council of Trent, Session 6, Canons on Justification)

Francis then tops off his heretical depravity by disgracefully insinuating that those who do pentitential works and want to defend the Faith are likely to produce scandal: “They seem like soldiers ready to do anything for the defence of faith and morals … and then some scandal emerges involving the founder….” This is a new low, even for Francis!

No doubt, the best line in the entire Q&A text is this: “What is the source of my serenity? No, I don’t take tranquillisers [sic]! Italians give some good advice: in order to live in peace we need a healthy couldn’t-care-less attitude.” See, that’s it! In case anyone was tempted to think that the source of his tranquility is godly, he clarifies that he really just doesn’t give a flip! And that’s exactly how he’s been behaving, too.

Fully unaware once again of his own style of leadership, Francis warns that “[i]f the superior [of a religious congregation] is constantly reproaching, it doesn’t help create the radical prophecy of religious life.” Of course, if there is one man in the Novus Ordo Church today who is constantly reproaching others, it would be Jorge Bergoglio, “radical prophecy” or not. It is no accident that there exists now a handy Francis insult generator based on the epithets he’s been cranking out on a near daily basis for the last four years.

This should suffice in terms of commentary. The interview text released by Corriere della Sera today contains lots of the same old Francis blather but also some new zingers that are sure to be remembered for months to come! Simply add them to your ever-growing file of Francis pronouncements.

Always keep in mind, folks, that what Francis does is much more than just stupid. It’s deliberate, and deliberately evil.