Vatican Preacher Pasolini: Christ ‘Reveal[s] to Each Person His or Her Own Truth’

Advent meditation for Leo XIV and the Roman Curia…

Vatican Preacher Pasolini: Christ ‘Reveal[s] to Each Person His or Her Own Truth’

False prophet in a Capuchin’s habit: Roberto Pasolini, OFM Cap.

The Capuchin Modernist Rev. Roberto Pasolini (b. 1971) is the current ‘Preacher of the Papal Household’. Jorge Bergoglio, aka ‘Pope Francis’, chose him last year to replace the insufferable Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa, who had turned 90 that year, and who had held the position since 1980.

Pasolini’s appointment has been controversial from the beginning. The reason? It won’t come as a surprise to most, but he has been caught preaching some unorthodox ideas concerning homosexuality.

The Italian web site Informazione Cattolica did some research on the new preacher of the ‘papal’ household and discovered a talk he had given in Varese, Italy, on Feb. 2, 2024, entitled Omosessualità e Vita Cristiana (“Homosexuality and Christian Life”). A video of it was available on YouTube until it was subsequently removed by the uploader (what appears to be a copy of it can be found here).

The most troubling part of Fr. Pasolini’s statements, as heard in the video, concerns the presence of gay couples in the Old Testament. Fr. Pasolini specifically refers to the relationship between Jonathan and David. Regarding the New Testament, he discusses the relationship between the centurion and his sick servant, for whom the Roman centurion appeals to Jesus to heal. During his presentation, Fr. Pasolini displayed slides featuring biblical passages that he claims address homosexuality, but he made no mention of the passage from the Letter of Jude (chapter 1, verse 7), which is the last New Testament reference to sins against nature. This passage is particularly severe, as it explicitly condemns Sodom and Gomorrah to eternal fire for their immorality and unnatural vices.

(Salvatore Carloni, “Ma cosa insegna sull’omosessualità il nuovo predicatore della Casa Pontificia Roberto Pasolini?”, Informazione Cattolica, Nov. 12, 2024; translation by ChatGPT.)

That should tell us all we need to know, for now, about this Capuchin ‘biblical scholar’, who, thanks to Francis, is now the only man in the world authorized to preach to the head of the Vatican II Church, currently ‘Pope’ Leo XIV. We may surmise he will remain in that role for decades.

In any case, for quite some time now it has been the custom for the ‘papal’ preacher to give spiritual talks (sermons, meditations) to the ‘Pope’ and the Roman Curia during Lent and Advent, usually on Fridays, and Leo XIV has retained this custom.

This past Friday, Dec. 19, Vatican News published the full text of Pasolini’s meditation for the Third Week of Advent. It can be accessed below, along with an accompanying report, and there is also the full video available:

As can be seen in the video, a good number of prelates attended the spiritual talk, and Leo XIV was seated in the audience front and center.

In what follows, we will make some critical observations concerning the ‘papal’ preacher’s meditation, which is saturated with ideas and wording typical of the Nouvelle Theologie (‘New Theology’).

First, note that Pasolini’s third Advent meditation was entitled “The Universality of Salvation: An Unconditional Hope”. This alone is enough to raise eyebrows, for salvation is not universal and hope is not unconditional, at least not if understood in the sense that many are bound to understand it.

The Redemption is universal, in the sense that Christ died for all and therefore all are able to benefit from this Redemption. In that sense, yes, salvation is offered to all. But although all have been redeemed and God desires that all be saved (see 1 Tim 2:4), tragically, many choose not to be saved: “For many are called, but few are chosen” (Mt 22:14); “Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able” (Lk 13:24).

Similarly, hope is unconditional only in the sense that no matter how sinful our life has been up to this point, we can be forgiven and attain to true holiness if only we use the means God has appointed to that end. Hope is not unconditional in the sense that everyone can or will obtain salvation no matter what they do or believe.

Once again we are dealing with needless ambiguity. The speaker could express himself clearly but he chooses not to. He deliberately uses lingo that lends itself to being misunderstood.

Speaking of the Magi’s journey to Bethlehem, Pasolini says:

Their movement affirms a decisive truth: to encounter the face of God made man, it is necessary to set out on a journey. This is true for every believer, but it takes on particular weight where faith is intertwined with the responsibility to protect, guide, and discern. Without a desire that remains alive, even the highest forms of service risk becoming repetitive, self-referential, incapable of surprise.

So here we see some favorite Bergoglian buzzwords: encounter, journey, self-referentiality, surprise.

Throughout this meditation, we encounter (ha!) some typical concepts and verbiage so beloved by the Neo-Modernists (cf. Pope Pius X, Pascendi, n. 3). He extols questioning, doubt, and restlessness; and he frowns upon answers, certainties, and securities. We can see what target he is fixated on by looking at what examples he uses to contrast with the point he’s making:

For the Church, this risk takes on particularly delicate contours. It is possible to know the doctrine well, to preserve tradition, to celebrate the liturgy with care, and yet remain static. Like the scribes of Jerusalem, we too can know where the Lord continues to be present—in the peripheries, among the poor, in the wounds of history—without finding the strength or courage to move in that direction.

Peripheries, the poor, and even the “wounds” of history — Francis would be proud! Except the preacher forgot the environment — you know, the cry of the earth and all that.

Now, it is perfectly legitimate to say that one’s spiritual progress may be stagnating in spite of knowing the Faith, in spite of defending tradition, and, if one is a priest, in spite of offering Holy Mass reverently. After all, one can know sacred doctrine well, defend the Faith, and even celebrate Holy Mass with great decorum and reverence while at the same time being involved in the most heinous sins. That much is clear. So the point he’s making is not illegitimate in itself.

However, Pasolini’s decision to single out these three things (rather than others) reveals his bias, for it is clear that he is taking aim at traditionalists and conservatives in the Novus Ordo structures, however few and far they may be. Let’s not kid ourselves: If there are three things in the Vatican II Church, overall, of which one does not see a whole lot, it would be (1) people knowing doctrine well; (2) people preserving tradition; and (3) priests celebrating the Novus Ordo meal service with reverence. And yet, these are the things Pasolini thought needed mentioning as being opposed to that ‘journey’ he is preaching.

Notice he did not say: “It is possible to focus constantly on temporal problems, to build bridges to the marginalized, to be non-judgmental, and yet remain static.” No, his mind was centered on things that are usually associated with traditionalism, and which the Neo-Modernists are thinking they have overcome: doctrinal fidelity and liturgical purity. (Here one is reminded of ‘Pope’ Francis’ frequent denunciation of proselytism, or his taunting of priests wearing cassocks — as if the big problem in the Novus Ordo Church were cassock-wearing proselytizers!)

Another cringeworthy passage from the Pasolini reflection is the following:

Kneeling before the humble and poor sign of the child, the Magi discover that access to the other—different, fragile, unexpected—always comes from below, never from above. It is in lowering oneself that distance is bridged and diversity becomes habitable. It is not a matter of renouncing one’s identity, but of surrendering it, opening it to the mystery that the other brings with him.

Can it get any more ‘Vatican II’ than this? Pasolini takes the journey of the Magi to the Christ Child and makes their encounter with the Son of God not simply about them and Him, or about the Gentiles (whom they represent) finding salvation, but about people in general encountering ‘the other’ and his ‘mystery’.

If this sounds so bad it could have come straight from Jorge Bergoglio himself, that’s because it did — kind of:

The Church esteems the ways in which God works in other religions, and “rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for their manner of life and conduct, their precepts and doctrines which… often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men and women” [Vatican II, Nostra Aetate, n. 2]. Yet we Christians are very much aware that “if the music of the Gospel ceases to resonate in our very being, we will lose the joy born of compassion, the tender love born of trust, the capacity for reconciliation that has its source in our knowledge that we have been forgiven and sent forth. If the music of the Gospel ceases to sound in our homes, our public squares, our workplaces, our political and financial life, then we will no longer hear the strains that challenge us to defend the dignity of every man and woman” [Francis, Ecumenical Prayer Service, Riga, Latvia, Sep. 24, 2018]. Others drink from other sources. For us the wellspring of human dignity and fraternity is in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. From it, there arises, “for Christian thought and for the action of the Church, the primacy given to relationship, to the encounter with the sacred mystery of the other, to universal communion with the entire human family, as a vocation of all” [Francis, Lectio Divina, Pontifical Lateran University, Rome, Mar. 26, 2019].

(Antipope Francis, Encyclical Fratelli Tutti, n. 277; underlining added.)

Where Francis cites mention of the “sacred mystery of the other”, he is quoting himself, as the footnote (given in parentheses above) shows.

So Pasolini is using this Bergoglian drivel about the ‘sacred mystery of the other’ in his Advent reflection. This shows once more how in the Vatican II Church, Christ is slyly being dissolved into generic man, man in general.

A vivid example of that can be found in ‘Pope-Saint’ John Paul II‘s reference to the Nativity of Our Lord as the “feast of man” in his first Christmas message: “Christmas is the feast of man. … For it is humanity that is elevated in God’s earthly birth. Humanity, human ‘nature’ is taken into the unity of the Divine Person of the Son, into the unity of the Word in whom God eternally expresses himself” (Urbi et Orbi, Dec. 25, 1978).

There is no question that human nature was ennobled by the Incarnation — that much is traditional Catholic teaching:

…God condescended to assume the lowliness and frailty of our flesh in order to exalt man to the highest degree of dignity. This single reflection, that He who is true and perfect God became man, supplies sufficient proof of the exalted dignity conferred on the human race by the divine bounty; since we may now glory that the Son of God is bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh, a privilege not given to Angels, for nowhere, says the Apostle, doth he take hold of the Angels: but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold [Heb 2:16].

(Catechism of the Council of Trent, Creed, Article III)

However, the Vatican II religion has gone far beyond this truth, to the point of practically worshipping man himself, never more obviously than under ‘Pope’ Francis (r. 2013-2025), who preached liberation theology and a false ‘Gospel of Man’, so to speak:

Here we would do well to recall also ‘Pope-Saint’ Paul VI‘s closing speech for the Fourth Session of the Second Vatican Council (Dec. 7, 1965), in which he begged proud, unbelieving man to please “recognize our own new type of humanism: we, too, in fact, we more than any others, honor mankind” (source; underlining added). Apparently the false pope was thinking that council’s refusal to condemn the unbelieving world would win the Church some brownie points:

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.

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

Only a fool would think that one can ‘caress’ the declared enemies of Christ to repentance!

Wisely had Pope St. Pius X warned in his inaugural encyclical that “the distinguishing mark of Antichrist [is that] man has with infinite temerity put himself in the place of God” (E Supremi, n. 5), with reference to 2 Thess 2:4: “…he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God.”

Alas, we must return to Pasolini. Still reflecting on the Magi’s visit to Bethlehem, he asserts:

For the Church, this twofold movement—rising and bowing down—is essential. She is called to move, to go out, to encounter people and situations that are distant from her. But she is also called to know how to stop, lower her gaze, and recognize that not everything belongs to her or can be controlled. Only in this way can the gift of salvation become universal: to the extent that the Church accepts to leave her own securities and look with respect at the lives of others, recognizing that even there, often in unexpected ways, something of the light of Christ can emerge.

It is unbelievable how the ‘papal’ preacher takes the Magi’s search for, and adoration of, Jesus Christ and makes it into the Church’s outreach to, and quasi-adoration of, sinners. Pasolini claims the Church must “leave her own securities” — by which, naturally, these people usually mean anything that safeguards her supernatural patrimony, especially the Faith and the sacraments (cf. Hans Urs von Balthasar’s project of “razing the bastions”, seconded by Joseph Ratzinger) — and respect the sinful lives of sinners! After all, so the Neo-Modernist appears to imply, the sinner may just have something of the light of Christ to give to the Church! What must be going on behind a Capuchin forehead to come up with such blasphemous piffle?!

When they arrived in Bethlehem and found the Christ Child, Pasolini tells his audience, the Magi found not only God Incarnate but also… themselves:

In the face of Jesus, God made man, the Magi glimpse that the same dignity is also promised to their lives. If God reveals himself as King in that child, then human life is also called to a greatness that does not come from power, but from care and service. If God has chosen to dwell in our flesh, then every human life carries within itself a light, a vocation, a value that cannot be erased. The gifts offered by the Magi thus become a mirror: they speak of God, but they also reveal what man is called to become.

With the visit of the Magi, the mystery of Incarnation shows all its universal force. We did not come into the world merely to survive or to pass the time in the best way possible. We were born to attain a greater life: that of children of God. The Magi set out in search of a star and found Christ; but by seeking Christ they also found themselves. They discovered that, despite coming from afar and without knowing the Scriptures, a light shone in their humanity, waiting only to be recognized and brought to light.

Perhaps the Church is called, today more than ever, to do this above all: to offer the light of Christ to the world. Not as something to be imposed or defended, but as a presence to be offered, allowing each person to approach it through a journey similar to that of the Magi. They set out from a desire, they embarked on a journey, they encountered questions and uncertainties, and only at the end did they recognize Christ and, in front of him, discover themselves too.

From this perspective, the mission does not consist of forcing the encounter, but of making it possible. Offering light means safeguarding the space for searching, allowing desire to set itself in motion, accompanying without anticipating the answers. Thus, the encounter with Christ does not erase the humanity of those who seek him, but brings it to light and fulfils it.

…

A Church that offers Christ’s presence to everyone does not appropriate his light, but reflects it. She does not place itself at the center to dominate, but to attract. And precisely for this reason, she becomes a place of encounter, where everyone can recognize Christ and, before him, rediscover the meaning of their own life.

This perspective forces us to rethink many of our missionary habits. We often imagine that evangelizing means bringing something that is lacking, filling a void, correcting a mistake. The Epiphany points to another way: helping others recognize the light that already dwells within them, the dignity they already possess, the gifts they already hold. It is not we who “give” Christ to the world, as if we had exclusive rights to him. We are called to make his presence visible with such clarity and truth that everyone can recognize in him the meaning of their own existence.

This does not relativize the truth of Christ or reduce the Gospel to a generic appreciation of humanity. On the contrary, it takes seriously the catholicity of the Church in its deepest meaning: to guard Christ in order to offer him to everyone, with the confidence that beauty, goodness, and truth are already present in every person, called to be fulfilled and to find their fullest meaning in him. The true light of Christmas “enlightens every man” precisely because it is able to reveal to each person his or her own truth, his or her own calling, his or her own likeness to God.

This would be the most eloquent sign of a Church faithful to her vocation: not to keep the light for herself, but to let it shine so that the new life already planted in the heart of every man and every woman, may finally germinate and bear fruit.

(underlining added)

One could write an entire separate post on just this conclusion of the meditation, but we will come to an end now. Suffice it to say that Pasolini is a typical Novus Ordo Modernist. He does not preach the Gospel, he preaches the New Theology.

In this particular meditation for the Third Week of Advent, the ‘papal’ household preacher is putting forward a doctrine closely aligned with that of Karl Rahner (1904-1984), whose concept of the “supernatural existential” seems to be reflected here: the idea that there is (however little) supernatural grace unconditionally and indelibly present in every individual, a fact which Christ by His Incarnation revealed to man; and now the task of the Church is to kindle it, to make it grow, to help it achieve its full potential. It is nuts!

In any case, it runs afoul of the Catholic doctrine of original sin, according to which we all are, since the fall, “by nature children of wrath” (Eph 2:3) in need of a Redeemer — not to disclose to us how God-like we already are, but that we “may be converted from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God” (Acts 26:18):

“Original sin” is the hereditary but impersonal fault of Adam’s descendants, who have sinned in him (Rom. v. 12). It is the loss of grace, and therefore of eternal life, together with a propensity to evil, which everybody must, with the assistance of grace, penance, resistance and moral effort, repress and conquer. The passion and death of the Son of God has redeemed the world from the hereditary curse of sin and death. Faith in these truths … belongs to the inalienable treasury of Christian revelation.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge, n. 25)

That it is a novel doctrine Pasolini is preaching is confirmed by the fact that even he admits that his “perspective forces us to rethink many of our missionary habits”. Does the man really think that 1900 years of missionary activity had it all wrong? That Christ ought not to be proclaimed, but that instead the ‘encounter’ with Him is to be ‘made possible’ by helping them to ‘journey’? How does he think the Apostles would ever have made so many converts so quickly if they had offered drivel about journeying, encountering, and welcoming? “But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, and unto the Gentiles foolishness” (1 Cor 1:23).

The Gospel message is really not all that complicated, as we see in Acts 2, where St. Peter preached his first sermon, with immediate results: “…and there were added in that day about three thousand souls” (Acts 2:41). Perhaps it was precisely St. Peter’s preaching of divine truth with such credibility and conviction — one might say he preached certainties with security — that made his message all the more appealing.

But enough already. The Modernist tripe is intolerable.

In an address to Jesuits given on Sep. 17, 1946, Pope Pius XII remarked:

Much has been said, but not enough after due consideration, about the “Nouvelle Théologie” [“New Theology”], which, because of its characteristic of moving along with everything in a state of perpetual motion, will always be on the road to somewhere but will never arrive anywhere. If one thought that one had to agree with an idea like that, what would become of Catholic dogmas, which must never change? What would happen to the unity and stability of faith?

(Pope Pius XII, Allocution Quamvis Inquieti)

Indeed, what would become of them?

Since Vatican II, we have seen just what does become of them. And Roberto Pasolini isn’t helping.

Image source: YouTube (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.