Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Hubris and Ineptitude meet Loquaciousness

Evangelii Gaudium Reloaded:
Francis’ Message to G20 Summit

One need not possess the charism of infallibility to be able to predict that no matter what happens in the world, Francis will have something to say about it. In fact, one can say that never before Francis did a single man who had so little to say, talk so much.

Thus it stood to reason that the “Pope” wasn’t going to let the world’s major economic powers meet for their annual G20 summit without butting in and gracing them with a few crumbs of his infinite wisdom: A few days ahead of the July 7-8 event in Hamburg, Germany, Francis had sent a message to the host nation’s chancellor, the Lutheran adulteress Angela Merkel.

The following video, produced by Rome Reports, gives a succinct summary of the essential points in Francis’ message:

We will now go ahead and quote the entire text of the English translation of Francis’ letter to Merkel (source: Vatican Radio), but not without adding our own critical comments and observations in between:

To Her Excellency
Mrs Angela Merkel
Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany

So far, so good — but that’s because he hasn’t said anything yet.

Following our recent meeting in the Vatican, and in response to your thoughtful request, I would like to offer some considerations that, together with all the Pastors of the Catholic Church, I consider important in view of the forthcoming meeting of the G20, which will gather Heads of State and of Government of the Group of major world economies and the highest authorities of the European Union.

So Francis is writing this message “in response to [Merkel’s] thoughtful request”? Fair enough — although we can be certain that Francis, being the unrivaled champion of unsolicited remarks, would have offered his profound counsel to the G20 regardless of whether anyone cared to hear about it.

In doing so, I follow a tradition begun by Pope Benedict XVI in April 2009 on the occasion of the London G20.  My Predecessor likewise wrote to Your Excellency in 2006, when Germany held the presidency of the European Union and the G8.

In the first place, I wish to express to you, and to the leaders assembled in Hamburg, my appreciation for the efforts being made to ensure the governability and stability of the world economy, especially with regard to financial markets, trade, fiscal problems and, more generally, a more inclusive and sustainable global economic growth (cf. G20 Leaders Communiqué, Hangzhou Summit, 5 September 2016).  As is evident from the Summit’s programme, such efforts are inseparable from the need to address ongoing conflicts and the worldwide problem of migrations.

In my Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, the programmatic document of my Pontificate addressed to the Catholic faithful, I proposed four principles of action for the building of fraternal, just and peaceful societies: time is greater than space; unity prevails over conflict; realities are more important than ideas; and the whole is greater than the part. These lines of action are evidently part of the age-old wisdom of all humanity; I believe that they can also serve as an aid to reflection for the Hamburg meeting and for the assessment of its outcome.

Notice that what he markets as “principles of action” has absolutely nothing to do with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which, if here were a real Pope, would be his job to promote — his only job, we might add. He is not ashamed to admit flat-out that what he offers is but “the age-old wisdom of all humanity” — in other words, he preaches the wisdom of the world, not the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But “the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God” (1 Cor 3:19); and “woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel” (1 Cor 9:16). Francis has been put on notice: “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” (Gal 1:8-9).

What Francis is preaching is reminiscent of “Sillonism”, the error of the French Le Sillon movement condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in 1910. In his Apostolic Letter to the French hierarchy the sainted Pope wrote:

…the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. OMNIA INSTAURARE IN CHRISTO [“restore all things in Christ”].

(Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique)

Francis is not interested in building the Catholic city, Christian civilization, at all. Rather, he is eager to promote the Masonic “new humanity”, which has dethroned Christ and is imbued with the nefarious ideals of the so-called Enlightenment, namely liberty, fraternity, and equality.

The same Pope Pius X, when he first ascended the pontifical throne in 1903, pointed out that as the successor of St. Peter, he had only one single duty with regard to a troubled world that had forsaken Christ — and it wasn’t preaching tenderness, solidarity, or encounter to them. On the contrary, St. Pius X told it like it is:

The desire for peace is certainly harbored in every breast, and there is no one who does not ardently invoke it. But to want peace without God is an absurdity, seeing that where God is absent thence too justice flies, and when justice is taken away it is vain to cherish the hope of peace. “Peace is the work of justice” (Is. xxii., 17). There are many, We are well aware, who, in their yearning for peace, that is for the tranquillity of order, band themselves into societies and parties, which they style parties of order. Hope and labor lost. For there is but one party of order capable of restoring peace in the midst of all this turmoil, and that is the party of God. It is this party, therefore, that we must advance, and to it attract as many as possible, if we are really urged by the love of peace.

But, Venerable Brethren, we shall never, however much we exert ourselves, succeed in calling men back to the majesty and empire of God, except by means of Jesus Christ. “No one,” the Apostle admonishes us, “can lay other foundation than that which has been laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (I. Cor., iii., II.) It is Christ alone “whom the Father sanctified and sent into this world” (Is. x., 36), “the splendor of the Father and the image of His substance” (Hebr. i., 3), true God and true man: without whom nobody can know God with the knowledge for salvation, “neither doth anyone know the Father but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal Him.” (Matth. xi., 27.) Hence it follows that to restore all things in Christ and to lead men back to submission to God is one and the same aim. To this, then, it behoves Us to devote Our care — to lead back mankind under the dominion of Christ; this done, We shall have brought it back to God. When We say to God We do not mean to that inert being heedless of all things human which the dream of materialists has imagined, but to the true and living God, one in nature, triple in person, Creator of the world, most wise Ordainer of all things, Lawgiver most just, who punishes the wicked and has reward in store for virtue.

Now the way to reach Christ is not hard to find: it is the Church. Rightly does Chrysostom inculcate: “The Church is thy hope, the Church is thy salvation, the Church is thy refuge.” (“Hom. de capto Euthropio,” n. 6.) It was for this that Christ founded it, gaining it at the price of His blood, and made it the depositary of His doctrine and His laws, bestowing upon it at the same time an inexhaustible treasury of graces for the sanctification and salvation of men.

You see, then, Venerable Brethren, the duty that has been imposed alike upon Us and upon you of bringing back to the discipline of the Church human society, now estranged from the wisdom of Christ; the Church will then subject it to Christ, and Christ to God. If We, through the goodness of God Himself, bring this task to a happy issue, We shall be rejoiced to see evil giving place to good, and hear, for our gladness, “a loud voice from heaven saying: Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God and the power of his Christ.” (Apoc. xii., 10.) But if our desire to obtain this is to be fulfilled, we must use every means and exert all our energy to bring about the utter disappearance of the enormous and detestable wickedness, so characteristic of our time — the substitution of man for God; this done, it remains to restore to their ancient place of honor the most holy laws and counsels of the gospel; to proclaim aloud the truths taught by the Church, and her teachings on the sanctity of marriage, on the education and discipline of youth, on the possession and use of property, the duties that men owe to those who rule the State; and lastly to restore equilibrium between the different classes of society according to Christian precept and custom. This is what We, in submitting Ourselves to the manifestations of the Divine will, purpose to aim at during Our Pontificate, and We will use all our industry to attain it.

(Pope St. Pius X, Encyclical E Supremi, nn. 7-9; underlining added.)

What is this if not the exact opposite of what Francis and his Vatican II Church have been doing?

From the clear and unmistakable words of Pope Saint Pius X, we now return to the apostate drivel of “Pope” Francis, but only to expose it further:

Time is greater than space. The gravity, complexity and interconnection of world problems is such that there can be no immediate and completely satisfying solutions. Sadly, the migration crisis, which is inseparable from the issue of poverty and exacerbated by armed conflicts, is proof of this. It is possible, though, to set in motion processes that can offer solutions that are progressive and not traumatic, and which can lead in relatively short order to free circulation and to a settlement of persons that would be to the advantage of all. Nonetheless, this tension between space and time, between limit and fullness, requires an exactly contrary movement in the minds of government leaders and the powerful. An effective solution, necessarily spread over time, will be possible only if the final objective of the process is clearly present in its planning. In the minds and hearts of government leaders, and at every phase of the enactment of political measures, there is a need to give absolute priority to the poor, refugees, the suffering, evacuees and the excluded, without distinction of nation, race, religion or culture, and to reject armed conflicts.

“Time is greater than space”. The man who complains about the supposed puncta inflata of Scholasticism utters something so inane that anyone with a modicum of intelligence is immediately repulsed by it. Taken at face value, saying that time is greater than space makes as much sense as saying that mountains are greater than freedom — not a whole lot.

In truth, this “principle” is typical Bergoglio-speak that rests on a Hegelian notion of reality, in which there is a “tension between fullness and limitation” (Evangelii Gaudium, n. 223). When he says that “time is greater than space”, Francis basically means that “it’s better to get some process going that may seem unsatisfactory at first but can eventually bring a solution, than to look for immediate results that do not ultimately solve the root cause”. Clearly, there were simpler ways for him to communicate that, but saying “time is greater than space” gives this rather banal insight a veneer of profundity and intellectualism.

The apostate Jesuit continues:

At this point, I cannot fail to address to the Heads of State and of Government of the G20, and to the entire world community, a heartfelt appeal for the tragic situation in South Sudan, the Lake Chad basin, the Horn of Africa and Yemen, where thirty million people are lacking the food and water needed to survive. A commitment to meet these situations with urgency and to provide immediately support to those peoples will be a sign of the seriousness and sincerity of the mid-term commitment to reforming the world economy and a guarantee of its sound development.

Unity prevails over conflict. The history of humanity, in our own day too, presents us with a vast panorama of current and potential conflicts. War, however, is never a solution. As the hundredth anniversary of Pope Benedict XV’s Letterto the Leaders of the Warring Peoples draws near, I feel bound to ask that the world put an end to all these “useless slaughters”. The goal of the G20 and of other similar annual meetings is to resolve economic differences peacefully and to agree on common financial and trade rules to allow for the integral development of all, in order to implement the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (cf. Communiqué of the G20 Hangzhou Summit). Yet that will not be possible unless all parties commit themselves to substantially reducing levels of conflict, halting the present arms race and renouncing direct or indirect involvement in conflicts, as well as agreeing to discuss sincerely and transparently all their differences. There is a tragic contradiction and inconsistency in the apparent unity expressed in common forums on economic or social issues, and the acceptance, active or passive, of armed conflicts.

So “unity prevails over conflict”. But does it? Depending on whether Francis means this in a descriptive sense (i.e. “does in fact prevail”) or a normative sense (i.e. “ought to prevail”), the statement is either false (because it obviously does not prevail in many cases) or an observation from Captain Obvious (of course unity is to be preferred over conflict).

Then, the Vatican’s Apostate-in-Chief maintains that “war … is never a solution”. This is one of those popular feel-good slogans that are expected to be taken as true simply because they are being asserted. No proof of their truth is ever offered, nor — and this is much worse — is it ever even demanded.

The truth is that war can be just and laudable, and sometimes it is not only a solution but the only solution, as when a nation must protect itself from an invading army, for example. Hence the Catholic Church divides war into just and unjust.

We’ll let a popular pre-Vatican II moral theology manual explain the basics:

1377. There are two kinds of war, just and unjust. (a) War is just when undertaken for a right cause (e.g., the independence of the nation); (b) it is unjust when undertaken for a wrong cause (e.g., the enslavement of a nation).

1380. War is not against the law of God. (a) Under the law of nature Melchisedech blessed Abraham returning from victory over the four kings (Gen., xiv. 18-20). (b) Under the written law, God many times ordered or approved of war, as can be seen from Exodus and following books in numerous places. (c) Under the New Law, John the Baptist acknowledged the lawfulness of the soldier’s profession (Luke, iii. 14), a centurion was praised by Christ (Matt, viii. 10), Acts, x. 2, speaks of the officer Cornelius as a religious man, and St. Paul lauds warriors of the Old Testament such as Gedeon, Barac, Samson, etc. (Heb, xi. 32-34). Our Lord Himself used physical force against evildoers (John, ii. 14 sqq.).

1381. Certain sayings of our Lord—for example, that those who take the sword shall perish by the sword (Matt, xxvi. 52), and that one should not resist evil (Matt, v. 39)—are not an endorsement of extreme pacifism, but are respectively a condemnation of those who without due authority have recourse to violence, and a counsel of perfection, when this serves better the honor of God or the good of the neighbor. Moreover, these words of Christ were addressed, not to states, which are responsible for the welfare of their members, but to individuals. The Quakers have done excellent service for the cause of world peace, but their teaching that all war is contrary to the law of Christ cannot be admitted. The spirit of the Gospel includes justice as well as love.

1382. War is not against the law of the Church. (a) The Church has never condemned war as such. She has always labored for the promotion of peace or for the lessening of the evils of wars that could not be prevented; but her official declarations and the writings of the Fathers and Doctors show that she recognized that recourse to arms by nations is not necessarily sinful. (b) The Church has put her approval on some wars as necessary and laudable. Thus, the Crusades, to which the salvation of Christian civilization is due, were promoted by the Church; military orders for the defense of the Holy Sepulchre were instituted by her, and she has raised to the honors of the altar soldiers like Sebastian, Maurice, and Martin of Tours.

(Fr. John A. McHugh & Fr. Charles J. Callan, Moral Theology, vol. 1 [New York, NY: Joseph F. Wagner, 1958], nn. 1380-1382)

Once again we see that the timeless and true Roman Catholic position is entirely different from what the Novus Ordo Sect has been preaching since that infernal Second Vatican Council of the 1960s.

Francis’ propaganda continues:

Realities are more important than ideas. The fateful ideologies of the first half of the twentieth century have been replaced by new ideologies of absolute market autonomy and financial speculation (cf. Evangelii Gaudium, 56). In their tragic wake, these bring exclusion, waste and even death. The significant political and economic achievements of the past century, on the other hand, were always marked by a sound and prudent pragmatism, guided by the primacy of the human being and the attempt to integrate and coordinate diverse and at times opposed realities, on the basis of respect for each and every citizen. I pray to God that the Hamburg Summit may be illumined by the example of those European and world leaders who consistently gave pride of place to dialogue and the quest of common solutions: Schuman, De Gasperi, Adenauer, Monnet and so many others.

And yet another poppycock slogan: “Realities are more important than ideas” — a truly unfortunate principle, considering that what it expresses is itself an idea. On top of that, it is an erroneous idea; in fact, it is one of the core principles of the false modern philosophical school of existentialism. “Existence precedes essence”, is another way to express the same notion. What it means is that in any given scenario, the concrete situation before us takes precedence over general ideas that might govern our assessment of it. A situation is to be evaluted according to its unique circumstances and exigencies and not in accordance with general principles (such as universal moral laws, for example).

In his landmark encyclical condemning the renascent Modernism of his day, Pope Pius XII also warned against existentialism:

Such fictitious tenets of evolution which repudiate all that is absolute, firm and immutable, have paved the way for the new erroneous philosophy which, rivaling idealism, immanentism and pragmatism, has assumed the name of existentialism, since it concerns itself only with existence of individual things and neglects all consideration of their immutable essences.

(Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Humani Generis, n. 6)

The same Pontiff also specifically condemned “ethical existentialism”, another term for situation ethics, precisely the kind Francis puts forth in his exhortation Amoris Laetitia on the joy of adultery.

Returning to Francis:

The whole is greater than the part. Problems need to be resolved concretely and with due attention to their specificity, but such solutions, to be lasting, cannot neglect a broader vision. They must likewise consider eventual repercussions on all countries and their citizens, while respecting the views and opinions of the latter. Here I would repeat the warning that Benedict XVI addressed to the G20 London Summit in 2009. While it is reasonable that G20 Summits should be limited to the small number of countries that represent 90% of the production of wealth and services worldwide, this very situation must prompt the participants to a profound reflection. Those states and individuals whose voice is weakest on the world political scene are precisely the ones who suffer most from the harmful effects of economic crises for which they bear little or no responsibility. This great majority, which in economic terms counts for only 10% of the whole, is the portion of humanity that has the greatest potential to contribute to the progress of everyone.  Consequently, there is need to make constant reference to the United Nations, its programmes and associated agencies, and regional organizations, to respect and honour international treaties, and to continue promoting a multilateral approach, so that solutions can be truly universal and lasting, for the benefit of all (cf. Benedict XVI, Letter to the Honourable Gordon Brown, 30 March 2009).

Here Captain Obvious speaks again: “The whole is greater than the part.” Every child who has ever had to share a candy bar could have told you as much. Exactly how this brilliant observation relates to the text that follows it, however, will have to remain a mystery.

I offer these considerations as a contribution to the work of the G20, with trust in the spirit of responsible solidarity that guides all those taking part. I ask God’s blessings upon the Hamburg meeting and on every effort of the international community to shape a new era of development that is innovative, interconnected, sustainable, environmentally respectful and inclusive of all peoples and all individuals (cf. Communiqué of the G20 Hangzhou Summit).

I take this occasion to assure Your Excellency of my high consideration and esteem.

From the Vatican, 29 June 2017

[Source: “Pope Francis: Message to G20”, Vatican Radio, July 7, 2017.]

What do you know, even the word “God” makes two brief appearances in the 1224-word “pontifical” message. In neither case, however, is there a reference to God’s Kingdom, His laws, His Church, or the purpose for which He created human life. Rather, in both cases God is merely invoked to lend some solemnity to the whole thing and remind Mrs. Merkel that what she’s reading is a message from the “Pope” and not from the U.N. Secretary General — since this is no longer evident from the content alone.

We have said this time and again: In Bergoglio’s religion, God is merely a bandaid to be applied as needed, usually to solve people’s problems, forgive their sins, and make them feel good. Other than that, Bergoglio has no use for God. He believes in man and the religion of man, just as St. Pius X warned over 100 years ago when he denounced that “enormous and detestable wickedness, so characteristic of our time — the substitution of man for God” (Pope Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique, n. 9).

Francis is happy to lead by example.