Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Condemned prior to Vatican II…

Christian Unity without Catholicism: Francis spews Ecumenical Bilge at General Audience

At his Wednesday audience of Jan. 20, 2021, the false pope in Rome, Jorge Bergoglio (“Pope Francis”), interrupted his current series of lectures on the subject of prayer and spoke about Christian unity.

This he did because every year from Jan. 18 through Jan. 25, the Novus Ordo Sect observes what it calls the “Week of Prayer for Christian Unity”. It is an ecumenicized version of the traditional Catholic “Chair of Unity Octave”, which was approved by Pope St. Pius X in 1909 and extended to the Universal Church by Pope Benedict XV in 1916. An octave is an observance of eight days, and it is called “Chair of Unity” in reference to the Chair of St. Peter, whose feast is celebrated on Jan. 18.

The divergence between the Catholic Chair of Unity Octave and the Novus Ordo Week of Prayer for Christian Unity is striking and reflects the essential doctrinal difference between the Roman Catholic Church and the Counterfeit Church of the Second Vatican Council with regard to the unity of the Church and the status of baptized non-Catholics. We will explore this subject a bit more before turning to Francis’ remarks at his general audience.

The perennial and only true Catholic position is this: The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ and therefore the only true religion; in and of herself, she always and necessarily possesses unity in Faith, government, and worship, for that is how Christ established her:

Not only must the true Church be one by an internal and spiritual union, but this union must also be external and visible, consisting in and growing out of a unity of faith, worship, and government. Hence the Church which has Christ for its founder is not to be characterized by any merely accidental or internal spiritual union, but, over and above this, it must unite its members in unity of doctrine, expressed by external, public profession; in unity of worship, manifested chiefly in the reception of the same sacraments; and in unity of government, by which all its members are subject to and obey the same authority, which was instituted by Christ Himself.

(Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. “Unity (as a Mark of the Church)”)

Since our Lord founded only one Church, the Catholic Church, as the means of salvation, it is necessary that whoever wishes to be saved must be united with this Church before passing from this life:

At all times the Roman Pontiffs, our predecessors, have been concerned, and we are very concerned, that Christians who have been painfully estranged from the Catholic Church should be invited to return to her as to a mother whom they have abandoned.

(Pope Benedict XV, Brief Romanorum Pontificum; translation by deepl.com)

Whoever is baptized but has left this one true Church for one reason or another, must return to her. (This includes those who possess a valid baptism but were brought up in heretical sects.) Hence Pope Pius XI wrote that “the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it” (Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 10).

Likewise, his predecessor Pius IX did not mince words when he stated: “Upon this longed-for return to the truth and unity of the Catholic Church depends the salvation not only of individuals, but also of all Christian society; and never can the whole world enjoy true peace, unless there shall be one Fold and one Shepherd” (Apostolic Letter Iam Vos Omnes).

This is not terribly difficult to understand. Yes, “This saying is hard…” (Jn 6:61) — the Roman Catholic Church lays claim to being the only true religion, established by the Son of God Himself, outside of which there is no salvation. She alone is “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15). Like her Divine Founder, she does not obscure or water down the truth to appear more attractive to unbelievers; instead, she boldly challenges those who are scandalized with the same Words of her Lord: “Will you also go away?” (Jn 6:68).

This was the clear and certain doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church until the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958. Afterwards, somehow the Modernists managed to usurp the Papacy by installing the first of (so far) six papal imposters, Angelo Roncalli (as “Pope John XXIII”). Roncalli called the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) to introduce radical changes to Catholic teaching and practice.

One of the most significant and obvious breaks with the prior Magisterium occurred when the council sanctioned ecumenism with heretical “Christian” (i.e. Protestant) sects, a somewhat elusive concept of “initiatives and activities planned and undertaken … to promote Christian unity” (Vatican II, Decree Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 4).

Since, however, it is not possible to engage in ecumenism with a Church that claims to be the only true one to which all who wish to follow Christ must convert, the doctrine underlying the claims to uniqueness — that “the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing” (Pius XII, Encyclical Humani Generis, n. 27; cf. Mystici Corporis, n. 1) — and exclusivity — “that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church” (Pius IX, Encyclical Quanto Conficiamur, n. 8) — had to be modified by the council. Since the fateful assembly was presided over and its documents promulgated not by true Popes but by imposters (first Roncalli, then Giovanni Montini as “Pope Paul VI”), the Holy Ghost did not prevent the council from teaching false doctrine.

The necessary doctrinal modification occurred in the 1964 conciliar “Dogmatic Constitution” Lumen Gentium, in which it is claimed that the one Church founded by our Lord Jesus Christ “subsists in the Catholic Church, … although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure” (n. 8; italics added). The key phrase is “subsists in.” Subsistence, it is true, is a narrower concept than mere existence; the nub, however, is the “in”. The false council teaches that the Church of Christ properly exists in the Catholic Church, with elements thereof also existing in other religions; whereas the true teaching is that “the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing”, as already quoted. Thus there is no longer that strict identity between the Church founded by Christ as His Mystical Body, and the Roman Catholic Church.

Is this a big deal? Yes, it is. If it weren’t, the Modernists would not have bothered to make the change. To understand just how absurd this novel ecclesiology is, consider this: How would a woman react if her husband, instead of telling people that she is his wife, told them that his wife exists in her — and then added that elements of his wife also exist in other women, with whom he has, however, only an imperfect relationship? What would that poor, utterly humiliated woman think of her husband? Could anyone really think that this is how our Blessed Lord would treat His Immaculate Bride?

The doctrinal alteration from is to subsists in, subtle though it may appear at first sight, gave the Modernists the necessary doctrinal underpinning for ecumenism. None other than “Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, better known in our day as “Pope Emeritus” Benedict XVI, admitted:

With this expression, the Council differs from the formula of Pius XII, who said in his Encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi: “The Catholic Church ‘is’ (est) the one mystical body of Christ”. The difference between subsistit and est conceals within itself the whole ecumenical problem.

(Joseph Ratzinger, “The Ecclesiology of the Constitution on the Church”Osservatore Romano, English edition [Sep. 19, 2001], p. 5; italics given.)

Touché!

Indeed, the novel subsistit in formula opened the way to ecumenism because it constitutes, as Ratzinger himself admitted in 1969, a “reduction in the claim of exclusivity” on the part of the Church (see his book Das neue Volk Gottes [Düsseldorf, 1969], p. 236). And the proof is in the pudding, because no one engaged in official ecumenical dialogue, whether on the Novus Ordo side or on the Protestant side, adheres to the idea that the Catholic Church alone is the true Church and all baptized non-Catholics must return to her. In other words, Vatican II deliberately relativized and thereby reduced the Catholic Church’s exclusive claim to being the sole true Church of Jesus Christ and means of salvation, in order to enable and facilitate ecumenism. The last 56 years have borne this out.

The difference the new teaching makes is also reflected in the change in name of the Chair of Unity Octave. Clearly, the “Chair of Unity” had to go since it implies that unity cannot be found except under the Chair of St. Peter. Thus it was replaced with the smoother-sounding “Prayer for Christian Unity”, which no non-Catholic could possibly object to. But, as one Catholic bishop observed a year before Vatican II began:

The unity of Christ’s Church — Holy, Roman, Catholic and Apostolic — has never been in question and admits of neither denial nor doubt. For this reason, we may not properly speak of the “re-union of the Church”; for this reason, too, appeals for prayers for “Church unity,” as these were made prior to the more exact emphasis on the “Chair of Unity” Octave, never rang quite true, either theologically or historically. The Church of Christ could never be other than one; however diminished by heresy geographically or wounded by schism historically, the Church always remained one.

(Bp. John Wright, “Reflections on the Current Ecumenicism”, American Ecclesiastical Review CXLV, n. 4 [Oct. 1961], p. 220.)

It is for this reason that a Holy Office instruction issued under Pope Pius XII in 1949 insists that when Catholics have theological discussions with Protestants, “by no means is it permitted to pass over in silence or to veil in ambiguous terms the Catholic truth regarding … the only true union by the return of the dissidents to the one true Church of Christ” (Instruction Ecclesia Catholica, n. II).

In the Vatican II Church, not only is this Catholic truth, as the instruction rightly calls it, veiled in ambiguous terms or passed over in silence, it is denied and contradicted outright.

In 2005, “Pope” Benedict XVI pointed out that the “Christian unity” for which he hoped “does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history”. Four years later he described ecumenism as “the effort to promote a common witness by Christians to their faith [sic]”. In 2012, he made clear that ecumenical “dialogue does not aim at conversion, but at better mutual understanding….”

Until Francis, there was perhaps no clearer repudiation of the traditional Catholic position on Christian unity than in 1993, when the so-called Balamand Declaration was released, which rejected “the outdated ecclesiology of return to the Catholic Church” (“Uniatism, method of union of the past, and the present search for full communion”, n. 30). This declaration was the work of the Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, and it was referred to approvingly by “Pope” John Paul II in his 1995 manifesto on ecumenism, the encyclical Ut Unum Sint (n. 60).

Still, Francis has eclipsed everything that went before him. He constantly rails against “proselytism”. In 2014 he told Protestants point-blank that he is not interested in their conversion to Catholicism. In 2016 he told a German girl during an ecumenical audience: “It is not licit to convince [others] of your faith; proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path.” That same year he also vividly reinforced the Modernist rejection of the true Catholic position when he claimed that converting a baptized non-Catholic to Catholicism is a “grave sin against ecumenism”. One could not express greater opposition to the traditional doctrine that the Catholic Church alone is the true Church of Jesus Christ — for which reason all must convert to her for salvation — than by labeling it a “grave sin” to seek to bring people into this Church. To say that the Divine Commission (see Mt 28:19-20) is in fact a mortal sin, is a most damnable blasphemy!

After over five decades of ecumenism, then, this is the scorecard: Although, as the Vatican’s “Cardinal” Kurt Koch lamented four years ago, there is no consensus among the different participants concerning even so much as the very goal of ecumenism, the one thing they can all agree on is that the goal is not the conversion of non-Catholics to Catholicism.

That is in diametrical contradiction to what Pope Pius XII’s Holy Office called “the Catholic truth” that “the only true union [can be achieved] by the return of the dissidents to the one true Church of Christ”. Therefore, one cannot speak of a doctrinal development. Rather, we are dealing with doctrinal corruption, since true development cannot contradict, only make more precise or flesh out, what came before.

But now, let us finally look at the “catechesis” Francis gave during his Jan. 20 audience on Christian unity. He begins thus:

In this catechesis, we will reflect on the prayer for Christian unity. In fact, the week of the 18th to the 25th of January is dedicated specifically to this – to ask God for the gift of unity to overcome the scandal of division between believers in Jesus. After the Last Supper, He prayed for His own, “that they may all be one” (Jn 17:21). This was His prayer before the Passion, we could call it His spiritual testament. Let us note, however, that the Lord did not command that His disciples be united. No, He prayed. He prayed to the Father for us, so that we might be one. This means that we are not able to achieve unity with our own strength. Above all, unity is a gift, it is a grace to be requested through prayer.

(Antipope Francis, General Audience, Vatican.va, Jan. 20, 2021; italics given.)

Here the papal impostor makes it clear that he holds a view that was explicitly condemned by Pope Pius XI in 1928:

And here it seems opportune to expound and to refute a certain false opinion, on which this whole question, as well as that complex movement by which non-Catholics seek to bring about the union of the Christian churches depends. For authors who favor this view are accustomed, times almost without number, to bring forward these words of Christ: “That they all may be one…. And there shall be one fold and one shepherd” [John 17:21; 10:16], with this signification however: that Christ Jesus merely expressed a desire and prayer, which still lacks its fulfillment.

For they are of the opinion that the unity of faith and government, which is a note of the one true Church of Christ, has hardly up to the present time existed, and does not to-day exist. They consider that this unity may indeed be desired and that it may even be one day attained through the instrumentality of wills directed to a common end, but that meanwhile it can only be regarded as mere ideal.

They add that the Church in itself, or of its nature, is divided into sections; that is to say, that it is made up of several churches or distinct communities, which still remain separate, and although having certain articles of doctrine in common, nevertheless disagree concerning the remainder; that these all enjoy the same rights; and that the Church was one and unique from, at the most, the apostolic age until the first Ecumenical Councils.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 7; underlining added.)

The fact is that Our Blessed Lord and Savior did not merely pray for unity but also obtained it: “In His last soul-stirring prayer he asked His Father for this unity and His prayer was heard: ‘He was heard for his reverence’ [Heb 5:7]” (Pius XI, Encyclical Ecclesiam Dei, n. 1; underlining added).

Thus, all of Christ’s true disciples are unified as one flock (the Roman Catholic Church) under one shepherd (the Pope). Nevertheless, the Church in her Magisterium has made clear that there is a legitimate way to pray for the future fulfillment of “one flock and one shepherd”, and that is if by that we mean that all false flocks and false shepherds disappear by conversion to the only true flock and true shepherd. Thus the very same Pius XI himself had composed the beautiful and well-known Act of Consecration of the Human Race to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, in which the Church prays: “Be Thou King of those who are deceived by erroneous opinions, or whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of truth and unity of faith, so that there may be but one flock and one Shepherd” (underlining added).

Francis continues:

Unity can be achieved only as a fruit of prayer. Diplomatic efforts and academic dialogue are not enough. These things are done, but they are not enough. Jesus knew this and opened the way for us by praying. Our prayer for unity is thus a humble but trusting participation in the Lord’s prayer, who promised that any prayer said in His name would be heard by the Father (see Jn 15:7). At this point, we can ask ourselves: “Do I pray for unity?” It is Jesus’s will but, if we inspect the intentions for which we pray, we would probably realize that we have prayed little, perhaps never, for Christian unity.

(italics given)

Notice that the apostate Jesuit emphasizes praying for unity, but not praying for conversions to Catholicism. Of course this only makes sense, since we have already seen that he doesn’t believe that “the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it”, as Pope Pius XI taught (Mortalium Animos, n. 10).

Instead, Bergoglio believes and teaches that Protestants, on account of a valid baptism, are themselves part of the Mystical Body of Christ! This the false pope made clear in an address given last year to a Lutheran delegation:

The Report of the Catholic-Lutheran dialogue group for Sweden and Finland, entitled Justification in the Life of the Church, rightly observes that “those who are already baptized can, together with their brothers and sisters, develop their opportunities for holiness, which come from their common justification in Christ. As members of one and the same mystical body of Christ, Christians are bound to one another and must bear one another’s burdens. Since Christ came to redeem the whole world, it is also a mission for the church and for individual Christians, both lay and ordained, to witness to the good news in the midst of their daily life” (No. 203).

(Antipope Francis, Address to the Ecumenical Delegation of the Lutheran Church of Finland, Vatican.va, Jan. 17, 2020; italics given; underlining added.)

That is diametrically contrary to the teaching of Pius XI that it would be “foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad” (Mortalium Animos, n. 10), as well as that of Pius XII, according to which “the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing” (Humani Generis, n. 27). It is, however, consonant with the new doctrine of Vatican II, according to which even the adherents of heretical sects belong to the Body of Christ on account of a valid baptism, albeit “imperfectly”:

For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. …[A]ll who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ’s body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.

(Vatican II, Decree Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 3)

The contradiction between the true Catholic position and the Novus Ordo counterfeit is plain to see.

Thus, when the Catholic Church prays “that all may be one”, she prays that the erring return to the unity which she already possesses; whereas when the Vatican II Sect prays “that all may be one”, it prays that all the baptized attain to some as yet unspecified “unity” that will somehow take shape and that does not consist in the conversion of non-Catholics to Catholicism.

But that is irreconcilable with the perennial Catholic teaching, as we have already seen:

Whether one approaches the question from the angle of Protestant ecumenism which envisions its objective as reunion of the Church, or from the Catholic angle which looks for reunion with the Church, the starting point must be the fact that “there is by one Church of Jesus Christ.”

Catholic Ecumenism looks out from a position of unity in possession; non-Catholic Ecumenism looks for unity not as yet possessed. Hence, their approach to the question is considerably different. The non-Catholic looks for theories and means of obtaining unity, while the Catholic aims to share a divinely-given unity which already exists.

(Rev. Edward Hanahoe, Catholic Ecumenism: The Reunion of Christendom in Contemporary Papal Pronouncements [Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1953], pp. 71, 76; italics given.)

Thus it is clear that Francis and his entire Modernist sect is promoting a non-Catholic idea of ecumenism or religious unity. Surprise, eh?

In the 1961 article from which we already quoted earlier, Bp. John Wright was simply expressing the perennial teaching of the Church as everyone knew it when he wrote:

Non-Catholic efforts at the re-union of Christians invariably start from the assumption that the Catholic Church is not the One True Church and that thus the union of Christian churches must be sought not in but beyond any existing Church, in some “Coming Great Church” toward the realization of which the ecumenical movement presses forward. On the other hand, the Catholic Church, as Karl Adam points out, precisely because of what she knows herself to be, must antecedently eschew any movements or theories of re-union along such lines and even forbid Catholics to take any public or private part in them.

(Wright, “Reflections on the Current Ecumenicism”, p. 226)

As we noted earlier, the fact that the doctrine of Vatican II and the subsequent pseudo-magisterium contradicts the traditional teaching proves that it is not a development but a corruption of it. What was true in 1961 cannot be false in 1964. Either the Catholic Church alone is the true Church to which all non-Catholics must convert in order to possess Christian unity, or this is not the case. It cannot be both, nor can it be one thing at one time and its opposite at another time.

But Francis isn’t done yet. In his general audience of Jan. 20, he also claims:

And yet, the world’s faith depends on it [the unity of Christians]; in fact, the Lord asked that we be one “so that the world might believe” (Jn 17:21). The world will not believe because we will have convinced it with good arguments, but if we will have borne witness to that love that unites us and draws us near, yes: it will believe.

This is false and quite dangerous. The Argentinian apostate is saying that unless this “Christian unity” of which he dreams (and which, again, does not consist in Protestants becoming Catholics) is realized, the world will not or cannot believe. That is outrageous! This claim, however innocent it may appear initially, would mean that the unbaptized have just cause not to become Catholic — simply because other people have chosen to separate themselves from the Mystical Body of Christ. Pope Pius XI took on that very objection when he warned:

All Christians, they add, should be as “one”: for then they would be much more powerful in driving out the pest of irreligion, which like a serpent daily creeps further and becomes more widely spread, and prepares to rob the Gospel of its strength. …But in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a most grave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 4)

Destroying the very foundations of the Catholic religion? That is precisely what Vatican II ecumenism has wrought and what “Pope” Francis is particularly good at.

It is also most certainly nonsensical to assert, as he does, that “good arguments” do not or cannot lead to conversions. They most certainly do, as Church history testifies even from the earliest days; and of course the Apostles themselves, having received the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, preached using reason and divine revelation: “And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation” (Acts 2:40; see also Acts 9:29; 17:17-18; 18:19).

In fact, the Holy Office under Pope Pius XII ordered that good arguments be used even for the conversion of Protestants to Catholicism, prescribing that in theological discussions “the whole and entire Catholic doctrine is to be presented and explained…” (Instruction Ecclesia Catholica, n. II).

Francis’ idiotic claim also runs afoul of the teaching of the First Vatican Council (1869-70) regarding the relationship between Faith and reason:

And, not only can faith and reason never be at variance with one another, but they also bring mutual help to each other, since right reasoning demonstrates the basis of faith and, illumined by its light, perfects the knowledge of divine things, while faith frees and protects reason from errors and provides it with manifold knowledge. Wherefore, the Church is so far from objecting to the culture of the human arts and sciences, that it aids and promotes this cultivation in many ways. For, it is not ignorant of, nor does it despise the advantages flowing therefrom into human life; nay, it confesses that, just as they have come forth from “God, the Lord of knowledge” [1 Samuel 2:3], so, if rightly handled, they lead to God by the aid of His grace.

(Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Ch. 4; Denz. 1799; underlining added.)

Man is a rational creature, and the act of Faith is a reasonable act. That is why St. Peter told his flock to be “ready always to satisfy every one that asketh you a reason of that hope which is in you” (1 Pet 3:15).

In addition to all the foregoing, it must be stated that Francis’ expressed concern over the divisions among “Christians” is not sincere but feigned. After all, on other occasions he declares that religious “differences are necessary” and that God has positively willed there to be different religions.

While visiting North Macedonia in 2019, his heretical mouth proclaimed: “Here, in fact, the different religious identities of Orthodox, Catholics, other Christians, Muslims and Jews, and the ethnic differences between Macedonians, Albanians, Serbs, Croats, and persons of other backgrounds, have created a mosaic in which every piece is essential for the uniqueness and beauty of the whole” (Meeting with Authorities, May 7, 2019; underlining added). False religions? How beautiful!

At the end of his Jan. 20 general audience address, he echoes that same sentiment, thus contradicting himself in the very same speech:

Then we will discover that the Christians of other confessions – with their traditions, with their history – are gifts from God, they are gifts present within the territories of our diocesan and parish communities. Let us begin to pray for them and, when possible, with them. We will thus learn to love and appreciate them. Prayer, the Council reminds us, is the soul of every ecumenical movement (see Unitatis redintegratio, 8). Therefore, may prayer be the starting point to help Jesus make His dream come true: that they all may be one.

(underlining added)

What is Francis saying here? He is making three distinct points, all of which are wrong. He is asserting that (a) heretics as such are gifts from God and (b) we ought to pray with them so that (c) we are no longer separated from one another but united. This is just bonkers, on all three counts.

Firstly, while individual people as such, including members of other religions, are indeed gifts from God per se, Francis is claiming that they are gifts from God precisely insofar as they are not Catholics, because he explicitly calls out what he euphemistically refers to as “their traditions … their history”. This sounds so sweet and innocent until one remembers that in some cases those “traditions” include celebrating sodomy as a sacrament or calling Holy Mass a blasphemy — and for some their “history” includes massacring St. Thomas More for refusing to recognize King Henry VIII as the head of the Church. So, yes, non-Catholics are gifts from God, but they are gifts from God despite their non-adherence to the true religion, not because of it. They are gifts from God insofar as they are people, not insofar as they are non-Catholics. Yet Francis claims that they are gifts precisely in not being Catholics. What does one say to such blasphemy?!

Secondly, no, we ought not to pray with heretics. We ought to pray for their conversion to the true Faith, and they in turn ought to pray for grace and light:

And let them not cease to offer most fervent prayers to the God of Mercy, that he may break down the wall of separation, that he may scatter the mists of error, and that he may lead them back to the bosom of Holy Mother Church, where their fathers found the wholesome pastures of life, and in which alone the doctrine of Jesus Christ is preserved and handed down entire, and the mysteries of heavenly grace dispensed.

(Pope Pius IX, Apostolic Letter Iam Vos Omnes)

…[T]he Catholic Church offers prayers to Almighty God, and urges the faithful in Christ to pray, that all who have left the Holy Roman Church, out of which is no salvation, may abjure their errors and be brought to the true faith, and the peace of that Church; nay, that all men may, by God’s merciful aid, attain to a knowledge of the truth.

(Pope Pius IX, Holy Office Letter Apostolicae Sedi Nuntiatum, Sep. 16, 1864)

Moreover, since acts of mixed worship have also been posed not rarely both within and without the aforesaid [ecumenical] gatherings, all are once more warned that any communication in sacred affairs is totally forbidden according to the norm of Canons 1258 and 731, § 2.

(Pope Pius XII, Canonical Warning Cum Compertum)

Thirdly, Francis’ stated goal is the unity of all who profess to be Christians. But why does he want them to be united in professing the same doctrine if, as he claims in the same breath, their diversity in belief and history is such a gift from God?! It is apparent that the left side of the Bergoglian mouth doesn’t know what the right side is saying. After over 50 years of Novus Ordo ecumenism, however, what should we expect?

Our Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ founded His Church to be “one fold” governed by “one shepherd” (Jn 10:16). The one flock is the Roman Catholic Church, and the one shepherd is the Pope — even if, in our day, the following words of Our Lord have seen their fulfillment also in the Mystical Body: “I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be dispersed” (Mt 26:31; cf. Zac 13:7). More on that here and here.

Although it is a great burden to labor under a long-term absence of the Supreme Pontiff, who is the visible head of the Church and shepherd of all Catholics, it is nevertheless a great consolation to know that one is not following a false shepherd, a wolf in shepherd’s clothing: “But a stranger they follow not, but fly from him, because they know not the voice of strangers” (Jn 10:5; cf. Mt 7:15).

Image source: youtube.com (screenshot)
License: 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.