Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Hey, what’s one more at this point…

richard-rohr.jpg

Another Heresy from Richard Rohr

Consider yourself blessed if you’ve never come across the name or theology of “Fr.” Richard Rohr, one of the Novus Ordo Sect’s most dangerous Modernists in the United States. Officially a “Franciscan priest”, Mr. Rohr — ordained in 1970 in the doubtfully valid Novus Ordo rite of Paul VI — is a master of syncretism, mixing traces of Catholicism with lots of New Age and Modernist “spirituality” that he administers to people at his “Center for Action and Contemplation” in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

We have exposed Rohr and the dangers of his false theology and false spirituality before in the following post:

Rohr’s satanic New Age agenda also includes “retreats” in the desert where, so he boasts, oftentimes men will strip naked and jump over a fire. As Rohr himself relates:

We often have camp-fires, and I know some of you have been at these where it happens, so you know what I’m talking about. Always, always, there’s some guys — I mean, is it in their hard wiring? — they’ll strip and have to leap over that fire, burning their balls. . . . I don’t know what it is. They’re the “real” men, who can leap over the fire, naked.

(“Fr.” Richard Rohr, OFM; quoted in Stephanie Block, “Coloring Outside the Lines”)

Of course, Rohr is in full communion and good standing with the apostate Vatican II Church, which only takes serious action against people actually suspected of being Catholics (see example here).

On July 11, 2014, Richard Rohr used his Twitter account to disseminate a favorite Modernist heresy: the idea that grace is inherent in nature. Here is Rohr’s actual tweet, from his Twitter handle @RichardRohrOFM:

In case you cannot view the embedded tweet, Rohr says: “Grace is inherent to creation from the very beginning.”

This is unmistakable heresy, condemned by various Popes through the ages, and definitely a consequence of Modernism, which Pope St. Pius X rightly called the “synthesis of all heresies” (Encyclical Pascendi, n. 39). It is a damnable error resurrected once more by some proponents of the Nouvelle Theologie, the “New Theology”, condemned as crypto-Modernist by the Catholic Church in the 1930s-1950s and effectively endorsed by the Novus Ordo Sect at Vatican II in the 1960s and ever since (for an academic treatment of the Nouvelle Theologie by one of its heretical proponents, conceding also the Catholic pre-Vatican II opposition to it, see Jurgen Mettepenningen, Nouvelle Theologie – New Theology: Inheritor of Modernism, Precursor of Vatican II).

Reality Check: Rohr’s Thesis is Heretical

  • Pope St. Pius V, Bull Ex Omnibus Afflictionibus (1567):
    • “Absurd is the opinion of those who say that man from the beginning, by a certain supernatural and gratuitous gift, was raised above the condition of his nature, so that by faith, hope, and charity he cherished God supernaturally.” —CONDEMNED (Denz. 1023)
    • “The integrity of the first creation was not the undeserved exaltation of human nature, but its natural condition.“  —CONDEMNED (Denz. 1026)
    • Note: St. Pius V condemns the above errors as “heretical, erroneous, suspect, rash, scandalous, and as giving offense to pious ears.” (Denz. 1080)
  • Pope Clement XI, Apostolic Constitution Unigenitus (1713):
    • “The grace of Adam is a consequence of creation and was due to his whole and sound nature.” —CONDEMNED (Denz. 1385)
    • Note: Clement XI condemns the above error as “false, captious, evil-sounding, offensive to pious ears, scandalous, pernicious, rash, injurious to the Church and her practice, insulting not only to the Church but also the secular powers, seditious, impious, blasphemous, suspected of heresy, and smacking of heresy itself, and, besides, favoring heretics and heresies, and also schisms, erroneous, close to heresy, many times condemned, and finally heretical, clearly renewing many heresies respectively“ (Denz. 1451). In addition, on August 28, 1718, in his bull Pastoralis Officii, Pope Clement decreed the excommunication of all who refused to adhere to his Apostolic Constitution Unigenitus (source).
  • Pope Pius VI, Bull Auctorem Fidei (1794): “The doctrine of the synod [of Pistoia] about the state of happy innocence, such as it represents it in Adam before his sin, comprising not only integrity but also interior justice with an inclination toward God through love of charity, and primeval sanctity restored in some way after the fall; in so far as, understood comprehensively, it intimates that that state was a consequence of creation, due to man from the natural exigency and condition of human nature, not a gratuitous gift of God, [is condemned as] false, elsewhere condemned in Baius, and in Quesnel, erroneous, favorable to the Pelagian heresy.” (Denz. 1516)
  • Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Humani Generis (1950): “Others destroy the gratuity of the supernatural order, since God, they say, cannot create intellectual beings without ordering and calling them to the beatific vision.” (n. 26; Denz. 2318)

The above references to “Denz.” are to the 1954 edition of Henry Denzinger’s The Sources of Catholic Dogma, available for free as online text here, or to purchase in hardcover here.

The reason why this particular heresy is so popular today is that if sanctifying grace is inherent in created nature, and not a gratuitous gift of God (i.e., freely given by God as an undeserved “add-on” that elevates and perfects nature), then it follows that man cannot lose this grace through original or mortal sin, as it is part of his nature, and he would then retain it as long as he remains man (i.e. always). In this way, then, Eternal Life would be “owed” to all human beings on account of their humanity, and so all would ultimately go to Heaven, and hell would be empty. Sound familiar?

This damnable heresy of course also then implies that Christ’s Redemptive Sacrifice on Calvary was useless and had no real, propitiatory purpose or effect, since original sin then did not, according to this heresy, deprive us of sanctifying grace. Which is exactly what many of today’s “Catholics” believe, such as “Archbishop” Robert Zollitsch, who declared in an interview in 2009 that he doesn’t believe Christ died to atone for our sins and appease the just wrath of Almighty God but only in order to show solidarity with human suffering:

The most famous modern-day “Catholic” theologian who defended the heresy that denies the gratuity of the supernatural order was Fr. Henri de Lubac, a French Jesuit quite revered and esteemed in the Novus Ordo Church (in fact, Antipope “Saint” John Paul II made him a “cardinal” in 1983). His book Surnaturel (“Supernatural”) got him in trouble with the Vatican’s Holy Office and Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani and Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange in particular. He was silenced by the Jesuit Superior General and several of his books were ordered withdrawn from theological libraries.

The denial of original sin, which follows from this heresy, is also a popular and recurring theme among Modernists. You won’t be surprised (or perhaps you will) to find out that another well-known Modernist who came to “re-think” original sin is Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, the man who claimed to be “Pope Benedict XVI” from 2005-2013:

No wonder Richard Rohr is in such good standing with the Modernist church.