Theologian warns of ‘End of the Catholic Religion as We Have Known It’

Now THERE is a prophet!

Theologian warns of ‘End of the Catholic Religion as We Have Known It’

Preparations for the 2023 “Synod on Synodality” are in full swing. Yes indeed, in October of next year a considerable number of Novus Ordo bishops will convene in the Vatican to have a 3-week meeting about meetings, so to speak.

The long “synodal process” began a year ago and is currently somewhere between the diocesan phase and the continental phase. Exciting stuff! The whole thing is basically a bureaucratic and blather-laden process to find a way to change Catholic teaching and practice with some semblance of legitimacy. Doctrinal novelty can be ascribed to the “Spirit” who speaks to the “People of God” (cf. Apoc 2:29) and, in any case, blows where He wills (cf. Jn 3:8); as well as to a proper discernment of the “signs of the times” (Mt 16:3). The latter is a principle that came in vogue with the apostate Second Vatican Council and which, in the final analysis, denies the Catholic dogma that Divine Revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle (see Denz. 2021).

When our Blessed Lord told the Pharisees to understand the signs of the times, He was speaking during a time of revelation. He wanted the Pharisees to realize that He, Jesus of Nazareth, is the true Messias foretold by the prophets, so he told them to look at the signs testifying to Him. In other encounters, we can see our Blessed Lord pointing to some of these signs: “Search the scriptures, for you think in them to have life everlasting; and the same are they that give testimony of me” (Jn 5:39); “Jesus answered them: I speak to you, and you believe not: the works that I do in the name of my Father, they give testimony of me” (Jn 10:25).

When St. John the Baptist sent his disciples to Jesus to ask Him if He was the Messias, He confirmed it by pointing to the signs:

Now when John had heard in prison the works of Christ: sending two of his disciples he said to him: Art thou he that art to come, or look we for another? And Jesus making answer said to them: Go and relate to John what you have heard and seen. The blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise again, the poor have the gospel preached to them.

(Matthew 11:2-5)

Against the false teaching of “Pope” Francis, “Saint” John Paul II, and Mark Shea concerning this passage, we must be clear that the Baptist was not himself in doubt about Jesus of Nazareth being the Christ. Rather, he wanted to help his disciples overcome any remaining uncertainty, lest they keep clinging to the Baptist rather than to Him whom the Baptist had been sent to point out: “He must increase, but I must decrease” (Jn 3:30).

Since the official convocation of Vatican II in 1961 — see “Pope” John XXIII’s constitution Humanae Salutis — we have been hearing about the “signs of the times”. That is actually itself a sign of the times of sorts, testifying to the frightful fact that we are now in a “post-Catholic” period, one in which a new revelation has been introduced, contrary to “the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). No wonder John XXIII wanted the council to be a “New Pentecost”! For indeed we have seen not only a new revelation but a whole new religion — a new church with a new theology, a new catechism, and new sacraments, not excepting even a new “Mass”.

That Francis is currently giving a catechetical series on discernment is no accident. “Discernment” is his key to unlocking the new revelation. Throughout his pseudo-pontificate, the man more correctly known as Jorge Bergoglio has touted the Spirit’s “surprises” and “newness”, along with theologians’ “creative fidelity”; while denouncing “nostalgia” and sterile attachment to the past. These are clear dog whistles for those who know to hear them.

Vatican II took place from 1962-65. From today’s point of view, that was half an eternity ago. While the council is ground zero for the new religion, providing its theological foundation, the pseudo-Catholic hierarchy of our day seems poised to take things beyond the council now and take another leap forward — ever closer to the abyss, that is. In fact, ever since Bergoglio began squatting in the Vatican guest house, it has been evident that “theological development” is now running at a much faster pace.

That is where the Synod on Synodality comes in. Under the guise of wanting to be an oh-so humble “Listening Church”, the foundations are being laid for an even greater doctrinal revolution.

Of course that is not what is being said officially. Today’s Neo-Modernists are smooth talkers and would never concede that the goal of the synod is a doctrinal revolution according to the dictates of woke theology.

For example, “Bp.” Robert Barron is on recording stating:

Whatever Pope Francis means by “synodality,” he quite clearly doesn’t mean a process of democratization, or putting doctrine up for a vote. He means, it seems to me, a structured conversation among all of the relevant ecclesial players—bishops, priests, and laity—for the sake of hearing the voice of the Spirit.

(Robert Barron, “What is Synodality?”, The Word on Fire)

That may sound eminently moderate and profoundly spiritual, but it’s really just window dressing. As with the two Synods on the Family, Francis will try, by whatever means necessary, to get his novel and godless agenda approved by the Synod on Synodality so he can claim that he is merely following what the “people of God” have “discerned” the “Spirit” is saying. He has already made clear that he wants “a ‘different Church’, a Church open to the newness that God wants to suggest….”

In the event his scheming fails — as it did to a significant extent at the Synods on the Family — he will present himself at the conclusion of the synod as the great guardian of orthodoxy who “transcends” such silly human categories as liberal and conservative, progressivist and traditionalist. He will then proceed to upbraid both camps for being so insufferably political, while making clear that he, the moderate-centrist shepherd of all, has come to put them back on the straight path, freeing them from all their silly political maneuvering. We’ve seen it before!

Afterwards, however, Francis will try to find other ways to get his revolutionary ideas introduced and accepted, just as he did with Amoris Laetitia and the continual appointments or promotions of ultra-liberal “bishops” throughout the world (just think of such characters as John Stowe of Lexington, Kentucky, Jean-Claude Hollerich of Luxembourg, or Hermann Glettler of Innsbruck, Austria). Bergoglio knows that in the end, a de facto change in practice is much more significant than an official change on paper.

The recent past confirms that Francis’ synods have the potential for explosive results. We recall the double synods of 2014/15 on the family. They ultimately resulted in the blasphemous post-synodal exhortation Amoris Laetitia (2016), in which the false pope essentially gives the green light for adultery — albeit only in “individual cases”, of course (wink, wink).

Likewise, the 2019 synod on the Amazon region gave the world not only idolatrous worship in the Vatican but also the exhortation Querida Amazonia (2020), in which he observed: “…[I]f we enter into communion with the forest, our voices will easily blend with its own and become a prayer…” (n. 56). An “ecological spirituality” — complete with its own “Ecological Way of the Cross” — is quite in vogue now.

Just as conservative Novus Ordos and recognize-and-resist traditionalists were (quite rightly) apprehensive about the Synods on the Family and the release of Amoris Laetitia, so people are now getting nervous that the Synod on Synodality will revolutionize theology even further, especially regarding sexual morality and the role of women in the church.

Considering the least nine-and-a-half years of Bergoglio’s reign of error, their fears are not unfounded. Indeed, what guarantees of orthodoxy can they realistically expect from a “Pope” who is able to pen the following lines with a straight face?

A constant tension exists between fullness and limitation. Fullness evokes the desire for complete possession, while limitation is a wall set before us. Broadly speaking, “time” has to do with fullness as an expression of the horizon which constantly opens before us, while each individual moment has to do with limitation as an expression of enclosure. People live poised between each individual moment and the greater, brighter horizon of the utopian future as the final cause which draws us to itself. Here we see a first principle for progress in building a people: time is greater than space.

(Antipope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, n. 222)

No one could make this up. The Vatican II Church has become a laughing stock and a madhouse.

How true, then, ring the following words of a prominent Catholic theologian, which can be considered a veritable warning to the world:

From surface appearance it would seem that the Lord Christ is abandoning His Church. The thoughts of many are being revealed. As one priest used to say, to excuse his own liberalism, which, in the bottom of his heart he knew was wrong, ‘for the last few decades the tendency in Rome has been to favor the liberals.’ That is the policy now. We can only do what we can to avert an ever more complete disloyalty to Christ.

…This is going to mark the end of the Catholic religion as we have known it.

The theologian in question is Mgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, who died in 1969. The quotes are from his personal diary, written in 1962.

He was speaking about what he had witnessed at the Second Vatican Council.

Image source: Shutterstock (TTstudio)
License: paid