A Flip for every Flop…
The Contradictions of Jorge Bergoglio
Francis is clearly the most blatant Modernist of all the Novus Ordo Antipopes. He perfectly embodies the spirit of Vatican II and is the veritable incarnation, as it were, of the conciliar document Gaudium Et Spes. Like the Modernists and other innovators condemned by the Church, his chief characteristics include audacity and love of novelty. The following two passages taken from magisterial documents are very applicable to the entire frame of mind advanced by the Second Vatican Council and embodied fully by Jorge Bergoglio:
As for the rest, We greatly deplore the fact that, where the ravings of human reason extend, there is somebody who studies new things and strives to know more than is necessary, against the advice of the apostle. There you will find someone who is overconfident in seeking the truth outside the Catholic Church, in which it can be found without even a light tarnish of error. Therefore, the Church is called, and is indeed, a pillar and foundation of truth. You correctly understand, venerable bro-thers, that We speak here also of that erroneous philo-sophical system [of Lammenais] which was recently brought in and is clearly to be condemned. This system, which comes from the contemptible and unrestrained desire for innovation, does not seek truth where it stands in the received and holy apostolic inheritance. Rather, other empty doctrines, futile and uncertain doctrines not approved by the Church, are adopted. Only the most conceited men wrongly think that these teachings can sustain and support that truth.
(Pope Gregory XVI, Encyclical Singulari Nos, n. 8; underlining added.)
It is impossible to approve in Catholic publications a style inspired by unsound novelty which seems to deride the piety of the faithful and dwells on the introduction of a new order of Christian life, on new directions of the Church, on new aspir-ations of the modern soul, on a new social vocation of the clergy, on a new Christian civilization, and many other things of the same kind.
(Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of Ecclesiastical Affairs, Jan. 27, 1902; see Acta Sanctae Sedis 34: 401-415; underlining added.)
As frequent visitors to Novus Ordo Watch know, we have been exposing Francis’ Modernism on a daily basis. But every so often, Francis says and does something that seems outright Catholic. What is going on here?
To make sense of this, we have to understand Modernism and its tactics. A man who sometimes acts as a Catholic and sometimes as a Modernist, is a Modernist, not a Catholic; because while a Modernist can act as a Catholic and still remain a Modernist, a Catholic cannot act as a Modernist and still remain a Catholic. Think of it as filling a cup with both a toxic substance and with water. You can add water to poison, and it will still be poison; but you cannot add poison to water and it will still be water. This is not possible. Hence Pope Leo XIII made this very point: “There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition” (Encyclical Satis Cognitum, n. 9).
It will not do, therefore, to point out that on occasion Francis acts like a Catholic, such as when he “excommuni-cates” someone, or when he says we must preach the Gospel, or when he insists on being faithful to the Church. This is simply an old trick of the Modernists, one St. Pius X exposed long ago:
In their writings and addresses they seem not unfrequently to advocate doctrines which are contrary one to the other, so that one would be disposed to regard their attitude as double and doubtful. But this is done deliberately and advisedly, and the reason of it is to be found in their opinion as to the mutual separation of science and faith. Thus in their books one finds some things which might well be approved by a Catholic, but on turning over the page one is confronted by other things which might well have been dictated by a rationalist.
(Pope St. Pius X, Encyclical Pascendi, n. 18)
It is no wonder that in 2007, the 100th anniversary of Pius X’s encyclical against Modernism, the Vatican was deafeningly silent on the occasion, when usually such anniversaries are explicitly mentioned and commemorated.
Pope Pius VI, denouncing the innovators of his day, who can perhaps be considered Proto-Modernists, was even more explicit regarding their tactics of equivocation and confusion:
In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, the innovators sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith that is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation….
Moreover, if all this is sinful, it cannot be excused in the way that one sees it being done, under the erroneous pretext that the seemingly shocking affirmations in one place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of leaving it up to the personal inclinations of the individual – such has always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it.
… [The heretic Nestorius] expressed himself in a plethora of words, mixing true things with others that were obscure; mixing at times one with the other in such a way that he was also able to confess those things which were denied while at the same time possessing a basis for denying those very sentences which he confessed.
In order to expose such snares, something which becomes necessary with a certain frequency in every century, no other method is required than the following: Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements that disguise some suspected error or danger under the veil of ambiguity, one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed to Catholic truth is camouflaged.
(Pope Pius VI, Bull Auctorem Fidei , introd.; underlining added.)
It is simply refreshing to hear such fine and reasonable words from a genuine Pope!
Along these same lines, Pius VI’s predecessor Pope Clement XIII likewise pointed out how dangerous even just a slight alteration in expressions of the Faith is and how it can lead to spiritual ruin: “…diabolical error, when it has artfully colored its lies, easily clothes itself in the likeness of truth while very brief additions or changes corrupt the meaning of expressions; and confession, which usually works salvation, sometimes, with a slight change, inches toward death” (Encyclical In Dominico Agro, n. 2).
With all this in mind, let us now take a look at some of the contradictions Francis puts forth, with the long-term goal of pushing the liberal, Modernist agenda forward at full throttle, yet while also throwing a few crumbs to the “conservatives” in his religion from time to time, in order to effectively keep the charade of the Novus Ordo Religion going:
Francis’ Flip Flops: Some Examples
Francis on Spiritual Harassment and Imposing Morality
Flip: Francis says the Church can only offer opinions, priests cannot impose morality on people, that would constitute “spiritual harassment”:
Flop: Francis tyrannizes the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate simply over their preference for the 1962 Missal, imposes very strict rules on order:
- Why Francis Punished the Franciscans of the Immaculate
- Vatican Rejects Calls for Removal of “Apostolic Commissioner”
Francis on the Importance of Doctrinal Orthodoxy
Flip: Francis says Catholic universities must be uncompromisingly and unambiguously Catholic, adhering fully to Church teaching and never diluting their Catholic identity:
Flop: Francis tells LCWR nuns not to worry if they get a letter from the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith about a doctrinal issue, saying: “Explain whatever you have to explain, but move forward”; he derides those who “long for an exaggerated doctrinal ‘security’, those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists” and says that we must “always leave room for doubt” regarding what God has revealed:
Francis and False Religions
Flip: Francis says: “‘Anyone who does not pray to the Lord prays to the devil.’ When we do not profess Jesus Christ, we profess the worldliness of the devil, a demonic worldliness”:
Flop: Francis encourages Muslims in their adherence to their false religion by telling them to expect “abundant spiritual fruit” from their observance of Ramadan and to cling to the Koran so that their “faith” will help them to “move on”; he also says the Christ-rejecting Jews have a valid covenant with God and are still God’s Chosen People:
- Francis on Ramadan and the “Abundant Spiritual Fruit” it supposedly brings
- Francis telling Muslims to read and find Solace in the Koran
- Francis endorsing the Jewish religion as valid
Francis on Preaching the Gospel
Flip: Francis asks Austrian “bishops” to increase their evangelizing efforts, asks missionary familes to “evangelize with love”, speaks of religious’ “commitment to preach the Gospel”:
- In Address for Ad Limina Visit of Jan. 31, 2014
- In Audience with Members of Neo-Catechumenal Way
- In Sunday Angelus of Feb. 2, 2014
Flop: Francis condemns converting people by convincing them they ought to become Catholics:
- Francis says “No One Owns the Truth”, rejects Proselytism
- Francis says “No, no, no!” to convincing People to Convert
- Francis never encourages any Non-Catholic to become Catholic (on the contrary)
These are just a select few samples of Francis speaking out of both sides of his mouth. (Atila Sinke Guimaraes has uncovered a number of internal contradictions in Francis’ document Evangelii Gaudium alone. See here.)
This doublespeak tactic, as said above, is not new, and it has been used by every Novus Ordo Antipope (in other words, since John XXIII). It’s just that Francis is the most outspoken, most talkative of them all, so the examples that can be given are all the more numerous. This deceitful strategy has worked well in the propagation of the Modernist Vatican II Religion because it gives each side (liberal and “conservative”) something to focus on, something to emphasize, something to cling to. Ultimately, of course, the goal is the complete eradication of Catholicism, and with those who are still stuck in the New Church, they have almost entirely succeeded.
As regards preaching the Gospel, Francis’ contradictions can actually be resolved by coming to understand that when he says “preach the Gospel” or “evangelize,” he means something quite different from what the Catholic Church traditionally means by the term. For Francis, “preaching the Gospel” means being nice to your fellow-man, giving him food to eat and clothes to wear. In other words, he has reduced the Gospel to a practice of the corporal works of mercy, with the add-on of telling people how great God’s mercy is so they can live a life that is “fully” and “authentically human.” That’s the Vatican II gospel, the false gospel of man.
This false gospel we must reject with all our might (cf. Gal 1:8-9; Mt 24:11; 2 Thess 2:10-11), clinging instead to the True Gospel as proclaimed by the true Catholic Church, now eclipsed since the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958:
Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.
(2 Thess 2:14)
Thus saith the Lord: Stand ye on the ways, and see and ask for the old paths which is the good way, and walk ye in it: and you shall find refreshment for your souls. And they said: we will not walk.
It is not possible to heed these exhortations except by being a genuine Roman Catholic, abandoning the false Vatican II Church and embracing the Catholic Church of Pope Pius XII and his predecessors.
Image sources: Shutterstock/ Shutterstock
Licenses: paid / paid
Be the first to start a conversation