Instilling principles of apostasy in the young…

It Takes a Village: Francis announces “Global Educational Alliance” Kickoff at Vatican

“Pope Francis launches the Global Educational Alliance initiative to shape the future of humanity by forming mature individuals who can overcome division and care for our common home”, Vatican News reports on its web site today.

People’s alarm bells should be going off immediately when the apostate from Buenos Aires threatens to “shape the future of humanity”, because that means he is going to step up his destructive efforts of inculcating his apostate Masonic-Modernist principles into unsuspecting souls.

The Vatican’s report explains further:

The Vatican will host a meeting on 14 May 2020 in the Paul VI Hall to reflect on the theme “Reinventing the Global Educational Alliance”.

The Holy See Press Office announced that the Pope has invited representatives from various religions, NGOs, academia, and cultural and political leaders to attend, in hopes of endorsing the “Global Compact on Education”.

(Devin Watkins, “Pope calls for educational alliance to promote care for common home”, Vatican News, Sep. 12, 2019)

This is really bad news for humanity, because if there is one thing you can count on for something like this, it’s that it will be a Naturalist, lowest-common-denominator program that is highly subversive of the true Christian understanding of society, family, education, and the ultimate end of man.

To introduce and flesh out what this “Global Educational Alliance” is all about, Bergoglio released a written message today, which we reproduce here in full:


Dear Brothers and Sisters,

In my Encyclical Laudato Si’, I invited everyone to cooperate in caring for our common home and to confront together the challenges that we face. Now, a few years later, I renew my invitation to dialogue on how we are shaping the future of our planet and the need to employ the talents of all, since all change requires an educational process aimed at developing a new universal solidarity and a more welcoming society.

To this end, I wish to endorse a global event, to take place on 14 May 2020 on the theme Reinventing the Global Educational Alliance. This meeting will rekindle our dedication for and with young people, renewing our passion for a more open and inclusive education, including patient listening, constructive dialogue and better mutual understanding. Never before has there been such need to unite our efforts in a broad educational alliance, to form mature individuals capable of overcoming division and antagonism, and to restore the fabric of relationships for the sake of a more fraternal humanity.

Today’s world is constantly changing and faces a variety of crises. We are experiencing an era of change: a transformation that is not only cultural but also anthropological, creating a new semantics while indiscriminately discarding traditional paradigms. Education clashes with what has been called a process of “rapidification” that traps our existence in a whirlwind of high-speed technology and computerization, continually altering our points of reference. As a result, our very identity loses its solidity and our psychological structure dissolves in the face of constant change that “contrasts with the naturally slow pace of biological evolution” (Laudato Si’, 18).

Every change calls for an educational process that involves everyone. There is thus a need to create an “educational village”, in which all people, according to their respective roles, share the task of forming a network of open, human relationships. According to an African proverb, “it takes a whole village to educate a child”. We have to create such a village before we can educate. In the first place, the ground must be cleared of discrimination and fraternity must be allowed to flourish, as I stated in the Document that I signed with the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar on 4 February this year in Abu Dhabi.

In this kind of village it is easier to find global agreement about an education that integrates and respects all aspects of the person, uniting studies and everyday life, teachers, students and their families, and civil society in its intellectual, scientific, artistic, athletic, political, business and charitable dimensions. An alliance, in other words, between the earth’s inhabitants and our “common home”, which we are bound to care for and respect. An alliance that generates peace, justice and hospitality among all peoples of the human family, as well as dialogue between religions.

To reach these global objectives, our shared journey as an “educating village” must take important steps forward. First, we must have the courage to place the human person at the centre. To do so, we must agree to promote formal and informal educational processes that cannot ignore the fact that the whole world is deeply interconnected, and that we need to find other ways, based on a sound anthropology, of envisioning economics, politics, growth and progress. In the development of a integral ecology, a central place must be given to the value proper to each creature in its relationship to the people and realities surrounding it, as well as a lifestyle that rejects the throw-away culture.

Another step is to find the courage to capitalize on our best energies, creatively and responsibly. To be proactive and confident in opening education to a long-term vision unfettered by the status quo. This will result in men and women who are open, responsible, prepared to listen, dialogue and reflect with others, and capable of weaving relationships with families, between generations, and with civil society, and thus to create a new humanism.

A further step is the courage to train individuals who are ready to offer themselves in service to the community. Service is a pillar of the culture of encounter: “It means bending over those in need and stretching out a hand to them, without calculation, without fear, but with tenderness and understanding, just as Jesus knelt to wash the Apostles’ feet. Serving means working beside the neediest of people, establishing with them first and foremost human relationships of closeness and bonds of solidarity” [Address during a visit to the “Astalli Centre”, the Jesuit Refugee Service in Rome, on 10 September 2013.]. In serving others, we experience that there is more joy in giving than in receiving (cf. Acts 20:35). In this regard, all institutions must be open to examining the aims and methods that determine how they carry out their educational mission.

For this reason, I look forward to meeting in Rome all of you who, in various ways and on every level, work in the field of education and of research. I encourage you to work together to promote, through a shared educational alliance, those forward-looking initiatives that can give direction to history and change it for the better. I join you in appealing to authoritative public figures in our world who are concerned for the future of our young people, and I trust that they will respond to my invitation. I also call upon you, dear young people, to take part in the meeting and to sense your real responsibility for the building of a better world. Our meeting will take place on 14 May 2020 in the Paul VI Audience Hall in the Vatican. A number of seminars on related topics will take place in various locations and help us prepare for this event.

Let us seek solutions together, boldly undertake processes of change and look to the future with hope. I invite everyone to work for this alliance and to be committed, individually and within our communities, to nurturing the dream of a humanism rooted in solidarity and responsive both to humanity’s aspirations and to God’s plan.

I look forward to seeing you. Until then, I send you my greetings and my blessing.

From the Vatican, 12 September 2019.

(Source; italics given.)

Some considerable commentary is in order.

At the outset, Francis mentions his eco-encyclical Laudato Si’ to provide some background and context for his educational initiative, and this shows that the hoax of man-made global warming is an effective tool for motivating people to unite under the umbrella of “mere humanity”, where Divine Revelation is relegated to the level of subjective opinion and subordinated to the ideas of “enlightened” modern man. Thus all religions are effectively put on the same level, the true religion with the false ones, the true God with idols, Christ with Satan, Light with darkness (cf. 2 Cor 6:15-16). Francis himself confirmed this in a shocking way in January of 2016, when his first-ever “Pope Video” proudly championed a religious Indifferentism for the sake of “peace and justice”:

While all of humanity is indeed one in terms of the same nature being shared by all men, proceeding from the same single set of parents (see Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Humani Generis, n. 37) and from the same Creator God (see Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Humanum Genus, n. 34), it is nevertheless supernaturally divided into the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Satan.

It is the divine mission of the Church to bring all those under the dominion of the devil into the Kingdom of God, for God “will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2:4; cf. Mk 16:15-16; 1 Tim 3:15). It is not the task of the Church to create temporal happiness on earth at the expense of man’s supernatural end.

Temporal happiness is legitimate and important, but it must always be subordinated to the final goal, which is supernatural: the Beatific Vision. Pope Pius X taught: “No matter what the Christian does, even in the realm of temporal goods, he cannot ignore the supernatural good. Rather, according to the dictates of Christian philosophy, he must order all things to the ultimate end, namely, the Highest Good” (Encyclical Singulari Quadam, n. 3). This makes perfect sense, for what does it help if, having lived a prosperous and contented life for 80 or 90 years on this earth, we are then condemned to an eternity in hell? “For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?” (Mt 16:26).

Francis says his aim is to bring about a “broad educational alliance, to form mature individuals capable of overcoming division and antagonism, and to restore the fabric of relationships for the sake of a more fraternal humanity.” Such a thing, if it succeeds, will ensure that the little bit that is still left of Christian society will be fully and permanently stamped out.

“Every change calls for an educational process that involves everyone”, Francis states dogmatically and without any evidence. That is an idiotic statement to make, but most won’t notice because he immediately moves on to what he claims follows from this premise: “There is thus a need to create an ‘educational village’, in which all people, according to their respective roles, share the task of forming a network of open, human relationships.”

No, there is no such need. In fact, the idea of the “educational village” is downright dangerous, especially the way Francis envisions it, built solidly on Masonic principles, for he says it must be based on the ideas found in the blasphemous and heretical so-called Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together that he signed with Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Ahmad Al-Tayyib in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, on Feb. 4, 2019. (Henceforth we will refer to this as the “Abu Dhabi Declaration”.)

The false pope openly admits that he wants to “have the courage to place the human person at the centre” — as though man were his own end. This anthropocentrism — a fancy term meaning “man-centeredness” — is a hallmark of the Vatican II religion. The Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes of the abominable Second Vatican Council claimed that “all things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown” (n. 12), and in his closing speech for the fourth session of the council, “Pope Saint” Paul VI proclaimed unabashedly:

Secular humanism, revealing itself in its horrible anti-clerical reality has, in a certain sense, defied the council. The religion of the God who became man has met the religion (for such it is) of man who makes himself God. And what happened? Was there a clash, a battle, a condemnation? There could have been, but there was none. The old story of the Samaritan has been the model of the spirituality of the council. A feeling of boundless sympathy has permeated the whole of it. The attention of our council has been absorbed by the discovery of human needs (and these needs grow in proportion to the greatness which the son of the earth claims for himself). But we call upon those who term themselves modern humanists, and who have renounced the transcendent value of the highest realities, to give the council credit at least for one quality and to recognize our own new type of humanism: we, too, in fact, we more than any others, honor mankind.

(Antipope Paul VI, Address during Last General Meeting of Vatican II, Dec. 7, 1965)

Francis is simply developing the Vatican II religion a bit further — it’s “hermeneutic of continuity” all the way!

Bergoglio is clear that he is not interested in a mere quick solution to tackle a singular or temporary problem. No, he is laying the groundwork for long-term changes in education pertaining to every aspect of the human person. He claims that this will “result in men and women who are open, responsible, prepared to listen, dialogue and reflect with others, and capable of weaving relationships with families, between generations, and with civil society, and thus to create a new humanism.”

There’s that “new humanism” that Paul VI was also raving about. But what is humanism to begin with?

“Humanism is devotion to human interests or a system concerned with real or supposed human interests without reference to God or divine things; the belief in the self-sufficiency of the natural man, and of human values” (Donald Attwater, ed., A Catholic Dictionary, 3rd ed., [The Macmillan Co., 1958], s.v. “Humanism”, ii; underlining added). This fits Bergoglio to a tee: Humanity is what he is interested in, not God, or bringing souls to God.

This “new humanism” or “new humanity” talk isn’t new for Francis. At World Youth Day in Poland three years ago, Francis blathered at the unsuspecting youngsters:

People may judge you to be dreamers, because you believe in a new humanity, one that rejects hatred between peoples, one that refuses to see borders as barriers and can cherish its own traditions without being self-centred or small-minded. Don’t be discouraged: with a smile and open arms, you proclaim hope and you are a blessing for our one human family, which here you represent so beautifully!

(Francis, Homily at Campus Misericordiae, July 31, 2016; underlining added.)

Catholics do indeed believe in a new humanity, a new man; but not in a kind of dialoguing, open-minded, interreligious, non-discriminating, borderless man who listens to the cry of the earth while maturely weaving relationships. Rather, the Catholic “new man” is the man regenerated in sanctifying grace, beginning with baptism:

But you have not so learned Christ; if so be that you have heard him, and have been taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus: to put off, according to former conversation, the old man, who is corrupted according to the desire of error. And be renewed in the spirit of your mind: And put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth.

(Ephesians 4:20-24; cf. 2 Cor 5:17)

It is this new man that can truly and lastingly unite humanity in genuine fraternity and help it attain its supernatural end, for whereas “the fraternity of blood touches the likeness only of the body; the fraternity of Christ … conveys unanimity of heart and spirit” (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Reputantibus, n. 5).

Properly understood, one can even promote a genuine or Catholic humanism, but such is fostered not in some kind of global, multi-religious alliance, but in authentic Catholic schools. Pope Pius XI spoke of “that sane humanism, whose highest development was reached in the schools of the Church” (Encyclical Divini Illius Magistri, n. 87). That is obviously not the kind Francis has in mind!

No, for Francis, the “new humanity” is the Naturalist humanity of Freemasonry, in which all are united not in supernatural charity through the grace of Christ but in a Naturalist fraternity that seeks its end in this temporal world, rather than in the Eternal Creator: “Our response to a world at war has a name: its name is fraternity, its name is brotherhood, its name is communion, its name is family”, the Jesuit Antipope said at an address on July 30, 2016). The name of Francis’ response to war is thus clearly not Jesus Christ or anything supernatural but instead, “fraternity”, and this he emphasized again in the message released today, in which he referred to the apostate Abu Dhabi Declaration on human fraternity. By contrast, the Catholic position is that “the peace of Christ … is the only true peace” (Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Ubi Arcano, n. 37; cf. Jn 14:27).

Those who thought that the document signed in Abu Dhabi this February was simply an event of the past that would soon be forgotten, are finding themselves disappointed. Far from relegating this document to the status of simply one more signed declaration no one will remember in a few years, Francis is working to ensure that the principles expressed in it will be implemented effectively throughout his false church and far beyond. He has already met with an interreligious committee dedicated to the task and asked the United Nations “that a date between 3 and 5 February be proclaimed Day of Human Fraternity” (source). In other words, this madness is not going away anytime soon.

Our Blessed Lord does get a quick mention in Francis’ message, but not, of course, as the final end of man, or as “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6), but merely as a good example of how man can serve other men. In other words, the role Francis has assigned to our Blessed Lord in his “educational village” is that of the village idiot. Which is par for the course for Jorge Bergoglio.

Yes, the Argentinian Jesuit even mentions “God’s plan” at the very end of his text, but that is conveniently vague so as to allow, in itself, for a meaning of anything from “making the world a better place” to “the salvation of souls.” But the latter is clearly ruled out a priori since the initiative is interreligious and humanist in nature; that is, it has nothing to do with what God has revealed as His plan for mankind, namely, the salvation of souls through the only Redemeer, Jesus Christ, and the only Ark of Salvation He founded, the Catholic Church. And of course Bergoglio condemns proselytism anyway: “It is not licit to convince [others] of your faith; proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path”, he said on Oct. 13, 2016.

To ensure this “Global Educational Alliance” will receive the desired attention so as to harm the greatest possible number of souls, Francis put together a video message that Vatican Media has blasted around the globe:

As we have seen, the “global education” Francis is proposing is decidedly and explicitly non-Catholic, nay anti-Catholic, as it is based upon the principles of interreligious cooperation and fraternity expressed in the apostate Abu Dhabi Declaration. For that reason alone, what Francis proposes is an abomination and an attack on souls, the souls of children even! It is, in fact, an attack on God, who “hath made all things for himself” (Prov 16:4).

If we recall Pope St. Pius X’s 1910 condemnation of the Sillonist movement in Francis, one cannot help but notice a certain resemblance with the Bergoglianism our world is subjected to today:

…[T]hey dream of changing its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future City built on different principles, and they dare to proclaim these more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon which the present Christian City rests.

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker – 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.

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

Francis is busy building a village, and it is most certaily not the Catholic City.

By the way: “It takes a village” was also the rallying cry of Hillary Clinton — a disciple of Luciferian Saul Alinsky — who published an eponymous book in 1996 to instill the Communist idea that the responsibility of raising children lies with society as a whole, whereas the Catholic position is, of course, that the education and raising of children belongs first and foremost to the parents. Thus Pope Pius XI condemned the fact that in Communism “the right of education is denied to parents, for it is conceived as the exclusive prerogative of the community, in whose name and by whose mandate alone parents may exercise this right” (Encyclical Divini Redemptoris, n. 11).

The family is crucial in the true Christian education of the youth. Pope Pius XI underscored its importance:

The family therefore holds directly from the Creator the mission and hence the right to educate the offspring, a right inalienable because inseparably joined to the strict obligation, a right anterior to any right whatever of civil society and of the State, and therefore inviolable on the part of any power on earth.

…We wish to call your attention in a special manner to the present-day lamentable decline in family education. The offices and professions of a transitory and earthly life, which are certainly of far less importance, are prepared for by long and careful study; whereas for the fundamental duty and obligation of educating their children, many parents have little or no preparation, immersed as they are in temporal cares. The declining influence of domestic environment is further weakened by another tendency, prevalent almost everywhere today, which, under one pretext or another, for economic reasons, or for reasons of industry, trade or politics, causes children to be more and more frequently sent away from home even in their tenderest years. And there is a country where the children are actually being torn from the bosom of the family, to be formed (or, to speak more accurately, to be deformed and depraved) in godless schools and associations, to irreligion and hatred, according to the theories of advanced socialism; and thus is renewed in a real and more terrible manner the slaughter of the Innocents.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Divini Illius Magistri, n. 32, 73; underlining added.)

It is evident that what Francis is proposing with his initiative is, in the final analysis, a godless association. Yet “Catholics have always held that intellectual education must not be separated from religious and moral instruction” (A Catholic Dictionary, s.v. “Education”).

In 1890, Pope Leo XIII also spoke of the role of the family concerning Catholic education:

This is a suitable moment for us to exhort especially heads of families to govern their households according to these precepts, and to be solicitous without failing for the right training of their children. The family may be regarded as the cradle of civil society, and it is in great measure within the circle of family life that the destiny of the States is fostered. Whence it is that they who would break away from Christian discipline are working to corrupt family life, and to destroy it utterly, root and branch. From such an unholy purpose they allow not themselves to be turned aside by the reflection that it cannot, even in any degree, be carried out without inflicting cruel outrage on the parents. These hold from nature their right of training the children to whom they have given birth, with the obligation super-added of shaping and directing the education of their little ones to the end for which God vouchsafed the privilege of transmitting the gift of life. It is, then, incumbent on parents to strain every nerve to ward off such an outrage, and to strive manfully to have and to hold exclusive authority to direct the education of their offspring, as is fitting, in a Christian manner, and first and foremost to keep them away from schools where there is risk of their drinking in the poison of impiety.

(Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Sapientiae Christianae, n. 42; underlining added.)

All this is not to say, however, that civil society has no rights or obligations at all with regard to the education of the youth. As Pius XI explained:

…in the matter of education, it is the right, or to speak more correctly, it is the duty of the State to protect in its legislation, the prior rights, already described, of the family as regards the Christian education of its offspring, and consequently also to respect the supernatural rights of the Church in this same realm of Christian education.

It also belongs to the State to protect the rights of the child itself when the parents are found wanting either physically or morally in this respect, whether by default, incapacity or misconduct, since, as has been shown, their right to educate is not an absolute and despotic one, but dependent on the natural and divine law, and therefore subject alike to the authority and jurisdiction of the Church, and to the vigilance and administrative care of the State in view of the common good. Besides, the family is not a perfect society, that is, it has not in itself all the means necessary for its full development. In such cases, exceptional no doubt, the State does not put itself in the place of the family, but merely supplies deficiencies, and provides suitable means, always in conformity with the natural rights of the child and the supernatural rights of the Church.

In general then it is the right and duty of the State to protect, according to the rules of right reason and faith, the moral and religious education of youth, by removing public impediments that stand in the way. In the first place it pertains to the State, in view of the common good, to promote in various ways the education and instruction of youth. It should begin by encouraging and assisting, of its own accord, the initiative and activity of the Church and the family, whose successes in this field have been clearly demonstrated by history and experience. It should moreover supplement their work whenever this falls short of what is necessary, even by means of its own schools and institutions. For the State more than any other society is provided with the means put at its disposal for the needs of all, and it is only right that it use these means to the advantage of those who have contributed them.

Over and above this, the State can exact and take measures to secure that all its citizens have the necessary knowledge of their civic and political duties, and a certain degree of physical, intellectual and moral culture, which, considering the conditions of our times [1929], is really necessary for the common good.

However it is clear that in all these ways of promoting education and instruction, both public and private, the State should respect the inherent rights of the Church and of the family concerning Christian education, and moreover have regard for distributive justice. Accordingly, unjust and unlawful is any monopoly, educational or scholastic, which, physically or morally, forces families to make use of government schools, contrary to the dictates of their Christian conscience, or contrary even to their legitimate preferences.

This does not prevent the State from making due provision for the right administration of public affairs and for the protection of its peace, within or without the realm. These are things which directly concern the public good and call for special aptitudes and special preparation. The State may therefore reserve to itself the establishment and direction of schools intended to prepare for certain civic duties and especially for military service, provided it be careful not to injure the rights of the Church or of the family in what pertains to them….

In general also it belongs to civil society and the State to provide what may be called civic education, not only for its youth, but for all ages and classes. This consists in the practice of presenting publicly to groups of individuals information having an intellectual, imaginative and emotional appeal, calculated to draw their wills to what is upright and honest, and to urge its practice by a sort of moral compulsion, positively by disseminating such knowledge, and negatively by suppressing what is opposed to it. This civic education, so wide and varied in itself as to include almost every activity of the State intended for the public good, ought also to be regulated by the norms of rectitude, and therefore cannot conflict with the doctrines of the Church, which is the divinely appointed teacher of these norms.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Divini Illius Magistri, nn. 44-50; underlining added.)

Of course one always has to keep in mind that Pope Pius was speaking in the context of society as it was in the late 1920s, a far cry from where it is today. Certainly one can imagine that, were he alive today, the Pope would insist that our society have absolutely no role in the education of youth whatsoever!

With his “Global Educational Alliance”, Francis is taking another major step in preparing the way for the Antichrist. When he arrives, the world will be ready for him. He will find, for the most part, a world without the true Faith, without reason, without borders, without nations, without identity. It will be a world thoroughly imbued with the principles of Freemasonry, Communism, Naturalism, and Indifferentism. Francis is helping to make that possible quite effectively with concrete practical steps that will impact generations to come. “But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?” (Lk 18:8; cf. 2 Thess 2:10-11).

Jorge Bergoglio is a Naturalist. His stated goal is to “make the world a better place”. The Beatific Vision, eternal salvation, the supernatural end of man — all that is an afterthought for him, at best. He uses the supernatural as a tool for promoting his false gospel of man.

But what does God say about concocting a new gospel?

I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 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. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.

(Galatians 1:6-9)

“Pope” Francis will have a lot to answer for.

Image source: (screenshot) / Wikimedia Commons (cropped)
License: fair use / fair use

Share this content now:

No Comments

Be the first to start a conversation

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.