Francis dumps Truckloads of Heresy and Error in Address to Ecumenical Audience in Bahrain

Shared churches, ecumenical martyrs, and much more!

Francis dumps Truckloads of Heresy and Error in Address to Ecumenical Audience in Bahrain


Never at a loss for words, the apostate Bergoglio had plenty to say to his ecumenical audience

In our last post, we demonstrated Jorge Bergoglio’s apostasy in his speeches to Muslims in Awali, Bahrain. Under his stage name “Pope Francis”, he preached to them not Jesus Christ but, instead, transcendence and fraternity, which alone, he claimed, could save us:

Right after his speech to the Muslim Council of Elders on Nov. 4, the false pope rushed to an ecumenical meeting with “other Christians” to pray for peace and blather some more about “Christian unity.” Interestingly enough, since there were no Moslems being addressed this time, Bergoglio suddenly remembered that the “the Most High” — the term he used to refer to God when speaking to the followers of Islam — is really God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

During his ecumenical meeting (see video here), Francis shared the stage on equal terms with Eastern Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew I, whom he considers a fellow-shepherd in the Church of Christ, just like his Russian colleague Kirill:

Francis even kissed Bartholomew’s pectoral cross (see here), thereby signaling, more vividly than words ever could, that he accepts his authority as a bishop in the Church established by Jesus Christ — which is a heretical lie. (He did a similar thing years ago with the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, a layman, when he consented to receive a “blessing” from him.)

The so-called Eastern Orthodox bishops have valid orders, that is, they really are bishops. However, they are excommunicated from the Catholic Church, which is the only Church founded by Jesus Christ. As public and declared heretics and schismatics, they do not validly hold any office in the Church and are not permitted to administer the sacraments. Much less do they have a mission from our Blessed Lord to preach or convert anyone. It is they themselves who are in need of conversion, conversion to the only true religion established by God Himself, from which their ancestors broke away in the 11th century (some of them subsequently, others even before).

That is the traditional Roman Catholic position, which was taught and believed until the usurpation of the Chair of St. Peter by the Modernists, beginning with Angelo Roncalli in 1958 (“Pope John XXIII”), who kicked off the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), which revolutionized all of Catholicism, especially the doctrine on the Church (ecclesiology). Without this revolution in ecclesiology, they would have never been able to approve of or engage in ecumenism:

The traditional Catholic rejection of ecumenism, however, does not mean we should consider non-Catholics to be evil or malicious, or be in any way unkind to them. What it does mean is that we cannot act as if they were part of the true Church and on their way to Heaven:

But God forbid that the sons of the Catholic Church ever in any way be hostile to those who are not joined with us in the same bonds of faith and love; but rather they should always be zealous to seek them out and aid them, whether poor, or sick, or afflicted with any other burdens, with all the offices of Christian charity; and they should especially endeavor to snatch them from the darkness of error in which they unhappily lie, and lead them back to Catholic truth and to the most loving Mother the Church, who never ceases to stretch out her maternal hands lovingly to them, and to call them back to her bosom so that, established and firm in faith, hope, and charity, and “being fruitful in every good work” [Col 1:10], they may attain eternal salvation.

(Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, n. 9)

This is true not merely for infidels, who are not baptized, but also of those who already profess to believe in Jesus Christ but are outside his flock, the Roman Catholic Church, whether on account of apostasy, heresy, or schism:

Even on the plea of promoting unity it is not allowed to dissemble one single dogma; for, as the Patriarch of Alexandria warns us, “although the desire of peace is a noble and excellent thing, yet we must not for its sake neglect the virtue of loyalty in Christ.” Consequently, the much desired return of erring sons to true and genuine unity in Christ will not be furthered by exclusive concentration on those doctrines which all, or most, communities glorying in the Christian name accept in common. The only successful method will be that which bases harmony and agreement among Christ’s faithful ones upon all the truths, and the whole of the truths, which God has revealed.

(Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Orientalis Ecclesiae, n. 16; underlining added.)

The Pope could not have been more clear: Compromising even on a single dogma for the sake of “unity” or “peace” is not permitted.

In fact, in 1949 the same Pope Pius XII informed his bishops that in “ecumenical” discussions with Protestants, the goal must be the conversion of the non-Catholic to Catholicism; and he warned that

…care must be taken lest, in the so-called “irenic” spirit of today, through comparative study and the vain desire for a progressively closer mutual approach among the various professions of faith, Catholic doctrine — either in its dogmas or in the truths which are connected with them — be so conformed or in a way adapted to the doctrines of dissident sects, that the purity of Catholic doctrine be impaired, or its genuine and certain meaning be obscured.

…

Therefore the <whole> and <entire> Catholic doctrine is to be presented and explained: by no means is it permitted to pass over in silence or to veil in ambiguous terms the Catholic truth regarding the nature and way of justification, the constitution of the Church, the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, and the only true union by the return of the dissidents to the one true Church of Christ.

(Pope Pius XII, Holy Office Instruction Ecclesia Catholica on the Ecumenical Movement, sec. II)

Against this clear doctrinal background, let us now review the substance of what Bergoglio had to offer when he addressed Protestants and Orthodox, as well as his own people, in Awali this past Friday.

The false pope began by talking about the miracle of Pentecost before saying:

Brothers and sisters, … “by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body” (1 Cor 12:13). Sadly, by our divisions, we have wounded the Lord’s holy body, yet the Holy Spirit, who joins all the members together, is greater than our divisions according to the flesh. Consequently it is right to say that what unites us far exceeds what divides us and that, the more we journey according to the Spirit, the more we will be led to desire and, with the help of God, restore full unity among us.

(Antipope Francis, Address at Ecumenical Meeting and Prayer for Peace, Vatican.va, Nov. 4, 2022)

These words reflect the false ecclesiology of Vatican II. The idea is that on account of a valid baptism (which many Protestant denominations possess, insofar as they stole in from the Catholic Church), all the baptized are part of, and united in, one and the same Mystical Body of Christ, even though they be divided as regards Faith, worship, or government. Francis has affirmed this error countless times, which is indeed the doctrine of the false council, but which is diametrically opposed to the prior Catholic teaching:

The idea that the Church founded by Christ consists of baptized people professing different beliefs, not sharing the same worship, and not being guided by the same pastors who are themselves led by the Supreme Pontiff, we could call the “divided church” heresy. But St. Paul was clear: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph 4:5). The “church of the living God [is] the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15), and this is not surprising since she “is subject to Christ” (Eph 5:24), who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6). Although Francis loves quoting Scripture, these particular verses did not make it into his ecumenical address. Shocker!

In 1943, in his encyclical letter Mystici Corporis, Pope Pius XII settled the question of who is and who isn’t a member of “the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church” (n. 1):

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. “For in one spirit” says the Apostle, “were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free” [I Cor., XII, 13]. As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith [Cf. Eph., IV, 5]. And therefore if a man refuse to hear the Church let him be considered — so the Lord commands — as a heathen and a publican [Cf. Matth., XVIII, 17]. It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.

(Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Mystici Corporis, n. 22; underlining added.)

Pius XII makes it clear that baptism alone is not sufficient to be a member of the Church; rather, one must also “profess the true faith” and remain in communion with the Supreme Pontiff and the other members of the Church, something heretics and schismatics don’t do. Of course this is not merely the teaching of Pope Pius XII. Rather, it has been the Catholic teaching since time immemorial.

Ahead of the First Vatican Council (1869-70), Pope Pius IX beckoned Protestants to return to Catholic unity. He explained:

Sustained by this hope, and roused and urged by the love of our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave his life for the whole human race, We cannot refrain Ourselves, on the occasion of the future Council, from addressing Our Apostolic and paternal words to all those who, whilst they acknowledge the same Jesus Christ as the Redeemer, and glory in the name of Christian, yet do not profess the true faith of Christ, nor hold to and follow the Communion of the Catholic Church. And We do this to warn, and conjure, and beseech them with all the warmth of Our zeal, and in all charity, to consider and seriously examine whether they follow the path marked out for them by Jesus Christ our Lord, and which leads to Eternal Salvation. No one can deny or doubt that Jesus Christ himself, in order to apply the fruits of his redemption to all generations of men, built his only Church in this world on Peter; that is to say, the Church, One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic; and that he gave to it all necessary power, that the deposit of Faith might be preserved whole and inviolable, and that the same Faith might be taught to all peoples, kindreds, and nations, that through baptism all men might become members of his mystical body, and that the new life of grace, without which no one can ever merit and attain to life eternal, might always be preserved and perfected in them; and that this same Church, which is his mystical body, might always remain in its own nature firm and immovable to the end of time, that it might flourish, and supply to all its children all the means of Salvation.

Now, whoever will carefully examine and reflect upon the condition of the various religious societies, divided among themselves, and separated from the Catholic Church, which, from the days of our Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostles has never ceased to exercise, by its lawful pastors, and still continues to exercise, the divine power committed to it by this same Lord; cannot fail to satisfy himself that neither any one of these societies by itself, nor all of them together, can in any manner constitute and be that One Catholic Church which Christ our Lord built, and established, and willed should continue; and that they cannot in any way be said to be branches or parts of that Church, since they are visibly cut off from Catholic unity. For, whereas such societies are destitute of that living authority established by God, which especially teaches men what is of Faith, and what the rule of morals, and directs and guides them in all those things which pertain to eternal salvation, so they have continually varied in their doctrines, and this change and variation is ceaselessly going on among them. Every one must perfectly understand, and clearly and evidently see, that such a state of things is directly opposed to the nature of the Church instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ; for in that Church truth must always continue firm and ever inaccessible to all change, as a deposit given to that Church to be guarded in its integrity, for the guardianship of which the presence and aid of the Holy Ghost have been promised to the Church for ever.

(Pope Pius IX, Apostolic Letter Iam Vos Omnes; underlining added.)

A few years earlier, the Holy Office under the same Pius IX had written an important letter to the Catholic bishops of England, warning them against false conceptions of Christian unity being promoted by an association that had been formed to reconcile Catholics, Orthodox, and Anglicans in a kind of ecumenical super-church. The letter is so rich in doctrinal content that we must quote from it at length. Although the position being refuted is not exactly that of Francis and Vatican II, it is similar enough:

The Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, to whose scrutiny the matter has been referred as usual, has judged, after mature consideration, that the faithful should be warned with all care against being led by heretics to join with them and with schismatics in entering this [ecumenical] Association. …

The principle on which it rests is one that overthrows the divine constitution of the Church. For it is pervaded by the idea that the true Church of Jesus Christ consists partly of the Roman Church spread abroad and propagated throughout the world, partly of the Photian [Orthodox] schism and the Anglican heresy, as having equally with the Roman Church, one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. To take away the dissensions which distract these three Christian communions, not without grievous scandal and at the expense of truth and charity, it appoints prayers and sacrifices, to obtain from God the grace of unity. Nothing indeed should be dearer to a Catholic than the eradicating of schisms and dissensions among Christians, and to see all Christians ‘solicitous to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace’ (Eph. iv.). To that end, the 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. But that the faithful in Christ, and that ecclesiastics, should pray for Christian unity under the direction of heretics, and, worse still, according to an intention stained and infected by heresy in a high degree, can no way be tolerated.

The true Church of Jesus Christ is constituted and recognised as such by those four ‘notes,’ belief in which is asserted in the Creed, each note being so linked with the rest as to be incapable of separation. Hence, the Church Catholic, truly so called, must be luminous with all the high attributes of unity, sanctity, and apostolical succession. The Catholic Church therefore is One, in the manifest and perfect unity of all nations of the world; that is, the unity of which the supreme authority and more eminent principality of blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and his successors in the Roman See is the principle, the root, and indefectible origin. She is no other than that Church which, built on Peter alone, grows up into one body knit together and compacted in unity of faith and charity; which blessed Cyprian in his 45th Epistle heartily acknowledged, where he addresses Pope Cornelius: ‘that our colleagues may firmly approve and hold to thee and thy communion — that is, alike to the unity and charity of the Catholic Church.’ It was the assertion of this same truth that Pope Hormisdas required of the bishops who abjured the schism of Acacius, in the formula approved by the suffrage of all Christian antiquity, in which they ‘who agree not in all things with the Apostolic See’ are said to be ‘put forth from the communion of the Church Catholic.’ So far from its being possible that communions separate from the Roman See can be rightly called or reputed Catholic, their very separation and disagreement is the mark by which to know those communities and Christians that hold neither the true faith, nor the true doctrine of Christ, as Irenaeus (lib. iii. contra Haeres. c. 3) most clearly showed as early as the second century. Let the faithful, then, jealously beware of joining those societies to which they cannot unite themselves and yet keep their faith unimpaired; and listen to S. Augustine, who teaches that there can be neither truth nor piety where Christian unity and the charity of the Holy Spirit are absent.

A further reason why the faithful ought to keep themselves entirely apart from the London Society is this, that they who unite in it both favour indifferentism and introduce scandal. That Society, at least its founders and directors, assert that Photianism and Anglicanism are two forms of one true Christian religion, in which the same means of pleasing God are afforded as in the Catholic Church; and that the active dissensions in which these Christian communions exist, are short of any breach of the faith, inasmuch as their faith continues one and the same. Yet this is the very essence of that most baleful indifference in matters of religion, which is at this time especially spreading in secret with the greatest injury to souls. Hence no proof is needed that Catholics who join this Society are giving both to Catholics and non-Catholics an occasion of spiritual ruin: more especially because the Society, by holding out a vain expectation of those three communions, each in its integrity, and keeping each to its own persuasion, coalescing in one, leads the minds of non-Catholics away from conversion to the faith, and, by the journals it publishes, endeavours to prevent it.

(Pope Pius IX, Holy Office Letter Apostolicae Sedi Nuntiatum; italics given; underlining added.)

How could anybody read this clear and sensible doctrine and think it compatible with the drivel spewed by Francis?

In 1928, Pope Pius XI condemned the growing ecumenical movement that was beginning to woo Catholics. Again, the stark contrast to the teaching of the Vatican II Church could not be more visible:

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. Controversies therefore, they say, and longstanding differences of opinion which keep asunder till the present day the members of the Christian family, must be entirely put aside, and from the remaining doctrines a common form of faith drawn up and proposed for belief, and in the profession of which all may not only know but feel that they are brothers. The manifold churches or communities, if united in some kind of universal federation, would then be in a position to oppose strongly and with success the progress of irreligion. This, Venerable Brethren, is what is commonly said.

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

With just a few modifications, this condemns almost verbatim the ecumenism of Vatican II.


Jorge Bergoglio hard at work…

Returning to Francis’ address on Nov. 4, he claims that “it is right to say that what unites us far exceeds what divides us….” This has long been a favorite saying of ecumenists, but not only is it not true, it is also a sophism rejected in essence by Pope Pius XII.

In the 1949 Holy Office instruction from which we quoted earlier, Pius XII directs the world’s bishops to “be on guard lest, on the false pretext that more attention should be paid to the points on which we agree than to those on which we differ, a dangerous indifferentism be encouraged, especially among persons whose training in theology is not deep and whose practice of their faith is not very strong” (Ecclesia Catholica, sec. II).

A “dangerous Indifferentism” is exactly what we have been seeing since Vatican II, for all the ecumenical shenanigans have not led Protestants to become Catholic (nor were they meant to accomplish that), they have rather communicated to people that it does not matter what “Christian denomination” one belongs to because, at the end of the day, they are all more or less equal, at least in practice — and thus “good enough” for salvation.

Back in 1832, Pope Gregory XVI rebuked the Indifferentism that was beginning to infect souls, in no uncertain terms:

Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that “there is one God, one faith, one baptism” [Eph 4:5] may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that “those who are not with Christ are against Him” [Lk 11:23], and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore “without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate” [Athanasian Creed]. Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: “He who is for the See of Peter is for me” [St. Jerome, Epistle 57]. A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: “The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?” [St. Augustine, in psalm. contra part. Donat.].

(Pope Gregory XVI, Encyclical Mirari Vos, n. 13; italics and bold print given.)

All of this pre-Vatican II magisterial teaching is an utter smackdown for the ecclesiology of the abominable robber council of Vatican II.

Against all of the above, let us now review what else Francis said at his ecumenical meeting (all underlining added; all italics given):

Our presence here in Bahrain as a little flock of Christ, scattered in various places and confessions, helps make us feel the need for unity, for sharing the faith. Just as on this archipelago firm connections exist between the islands, may it be also among us so that we are not isolated but united in fraternal communion.

As we have seen from the traditional Catholic doctrine, there is only one flock of Christ, the Catholic Church. This Church has one Faith and therefore not sundry “confessions”. Francis is preaching a divided, disunited “church” that does not confess one and the same faith, and yet he makes reference to “sharing the faith” with others, when he just admitted they all believe different things.

Francis continues:

Brothers and sisters, I ask: How do we make unity grow if history, force of habit, commitments and distances seem to draw us elsewhere? What is the “gathering place,” the “spiritual cenacle” of our communion? It is the praise of God, which the Spirit stirs up in everyone. Prayer of praise does not isolate or close us in on ourselves and our own needs, but draws us into the heart of the Father and thus connects us to all our brothers and sisters.

Here Bergoglio is just making things up. He might as well have said that the “gathering place” of “our communion” is encounter, the corporal works of mercy, dialogue, fraternity, or the dreams of the young. The fact of the matter is that there is no communion, spiritually, between Catholics and non-Catholics.

A little further on in his heretical speech, Francis says:

It is good for you to persevere in the praise of God, so as to be all the more a sign of unity for all Christians! Maintain the fine habit of making your church buildings available also to other communities for the worship of the one Lord.

It seems hard to believe, but yes, Francis is encouraging Catholics (well, Novus Ordos) to share their churches with non-Catholics so they too can “worship … the one Lord” there using their own heretical liturgies, invalid “Eucharists”, and so on.

This fits perfectly with other similar things Francis has said and done, such as these:

Now keep in mind that this is the same Francis who just forbade the Traditional Latin Mass from being offered in parish churches (see Traditionis Custodes, Art. 3, §2). Once again, Francis demonstrates he has more in common with Protestants than with pre-Vatican II Catholics. This is only consistent, since he claims that Novus Ordo “Catholics” need Protestants, whereas he has no use for traditional Catholics:

Lest anyone should think that this idea of sharing churches with heretics and schismatics has its origin in the depraved mind of Bergoglio, however, we must make clear that it was “Pope” and “Saint” John Paul II (1978-2005) who came up with that in 1993 as a logical consequence of Vatican II ecumenism:

Catholic churches are consecrated or blessed buildings which have an important theological and liturgical significance for the Catholic community. They are therefore generally reserved for Catholic worship. However, if priests, ministers or communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church do not have a place or the liturgical objects necessary for celebrating worthily their religious ceremonies, the diocesan Bishop may allow them the use of a church or a Catholic building and also lend them what may be necessary for their services. Under similar circumstances, permission may be given to them for interment or for the celebration of services at Catholic cemeteries.

(Antipope John Paul II via Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism, nn. 137)

What an outrageous sacrilege! What a blasphemy! It goes to show that, as bad as Francis himself is, the rot stems not simply from him but ultimately from Vatican II. That is why it would be a grave mistake to think that if only Francis were replaced by a conservative, all would be well. Far from it! It is no less the “conservatives” such as John Paul II and Benedict XVI (2005-2013) who had their hands in that council, and subsequently interpreted and implemented it.

By the way, let’s use some logic here. The idea of sharing Catholic churches with Protestants so they can worship God in accordance with their own beliefs, will inevitably also lead to the approval of church sharing with Muslims for their worship. After all, Vatican II teaches that “along with us [the Muslims] adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind” (Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, n. 16). So if “the worship of the one Lord” is the criterion that justifies sharing Catholic churches with Protestants, then there is no reason why that same criterion couldn’t apply also to Muslims just as much. “They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself…”, the false council says in the declaration Nostra Aetate, n. 3. In fact, in Nigeria, the diocese of Yola went so far as to build a mosque for their Islamic friends:

And so it all hangs together. Ecumenism is a monstrous concept that ultimately leads to the dissolution of the very foundations of truth, as can be seen in the Abu Dhabi heresy that claims God wills a diversity of religions. Never underestimate the force, and long-term triumph, of logic!

Returning now to Francis’ heretical speech of Nov. 4, the false pope doubles down:

For not only here on earth, but also in heaven, there is a song of praise that brings us together, sung by the many Christian martyrs of various denominations. How many of them have there been in these recent years, in the Middle East and throughout the world, how many! They now make up a single starry sky, guiding our way as we journey through the deserts of history. We have the same goal: all of us are called to the fullness of communion in God.

Here we see one of Bergoglio’s favorite doctrines: the so-called “ecumenism of blood”, that is, ecumenical “martyrdom”. Years ago he agreed that it might be heretical, but he also made clear he doesn’t care if it is:

In the magisterium of the Catholic Church, few dogmas are stated more clearly and forcefully than the impossibility of ecumenical martyrdom:

[This council] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.

(Council of Florence, Decree Cantate Domino; Denz. 714)

More on that topic can be found in the following prior posts:

Francis’ address continues:

Let us remember, though, that the unity to which we are journeying is a unity in diversity. It is important to keep this in mind: Unity is not “sameness”, no, it is unity in diversity. The Pentecost account relates that each person heard the Apostles speak “in his or her own language” (Acts 2:6): the Spirit does not invent a new language for everyone, but allows each to speak in other languages (cf. v. 4), so that everyone can hear his or her own language spoken by others (cf. v. 11). In a word, he does not imprison us in uniformity, but disposes us to accept one another in our differences. That happens when people live by the Spirit. They learn to encounter each of their brothers and sisters in faith as a part of the body to which they themselves belong. That is the spirit of the ecumenical journey.

This is blasphemy and heresy all in one. The apostate Bergoglio claims that the Holy Ghost disposes Catholics to accept heretics as “brothers and sister in faith” (!) and also “as a part of the body”, that is, as part of the Mystical Body, the Church! How much more heretical can it get? How much more blatantly can this abominable antipope deviate from the traditional Catholic doctrine?!

Francis continues:

Dear friends, let us ask ourselves how we are advancing on this journey. As a pastor, a minister, a member of the Christian faithful, am I open to the action of the Spirit? Do I see ecumenism as a burden, as a further commitment, as an institutional obligation, or as the heartfelt desire of Jesus that all be “one” (Jn 17:21), a mission that springs from the Gospel?

Here we see him advance an argument addressed and refuted directly by Pope Pius XI. But then that is not new for him:

Skipping ahead a little, we continue with the following words of Francis from his Nov. 4 ecumenical address:

After unity in diversity, we now turn to the second element: the witness of life. At Pentecost, the disciples are “opened up”, transformed, and go forth from the Upper Room. They will then go out to all the world. Jerusalem, which had seemed their point of arrival, becomes the starting point of an extraordinary adventure. The fear that had kept them at home now becomes a distant memory: henceforth they go everywhere, not to stand out from others, much less to revolutionize the order of society and the world, but by their lives to radiate everywhere the beauty of God’s love. Our message is not so much an address made with words, but a witness offered by deeds.

Here Francis does what he loves to do: water down the truth he doesn’t like by making it vague enough so that one could understand it to mean anything. The Apostles weren’t commissioned to “radiate everywhere the beauty of God’s love” — whatever that means — they were sent very specifically to preach the Gospel and convert the nations:

Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

(Matthew 28:19-20)

And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned.

(Mark 16:15-16)

Notice also how Francis takes pains to de-emphasize once more the idea that the Gospel is a doctrine that must be believed and therefore preached with words: “Likewise, this idea that Our message is not so much an address made with words, but a witness offered by deeds”, he claims. And yet, it is precisely after Pentecost that we see the Apostles preaching above all, indeed also conversing, exhorting, explaining, debating, refuting (for example, see Acts 2:14-40; 14:20-21; 19:8-9). Yes, of course they also healed the sick, etc., but these (often miraculous) deeds that accompanied their preaching were chiefly to give credence to their message, proving that they had indeed been sent by God and that the Gospel was true.

The preaching of the Gospel is so important that St. Paul wrote to the Romans:

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved. How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not believed? Or how shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear, without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they be sent, as it is written: How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, of them that bring glad tidings of good things!

(Romans 10:13-15)

Francis, however, greatly endeavors to rid the Gospel of its objective doctrinal content — which, of course, stands in the way of “Christian unity” — and instead make it mostly about corporal works of mercy. In that way, it will also be much easier later to merge everything into the super-church of “human fraternity”, where members of all religions will be united on account of their shared humanity, and doctrinal and liturgical differences will simply be relegated to the status of “religious traditions” that are acceptable as examples of diversity, as long as no objective truth claims are made about them. After all, God “wants a diversity of religions”, we have already been informed, so objective truth has no role to play, according to the apostate Bergoglian ideology.

In the final sentence of his ecumenical discourse, Francis hopes for ye another “new Pentecost” — apparently the last “new” one, that of Vatican II, isn’t fresh enough anymore:

Let us entrust to [the Holy Spirit] in prayer our shared journey, and beg the outpouring of his grace upon us, in a new Pentecost that will open new horizons and quicken the pace of our journey of unity and peace.

These words are just so much fluff, sounding pretty perhaps but ultimately signifying nothing, at least nothing Catholic. It is quite telling that although there is no consensus between the different parties on even so much as the goal of ecumenism, somehow the one thing they all agree on is that the goal is not conversion of the non-Catholics to Catholicism.

Ladies and gentlemen, in this post we have seen the stark contrast that manifestly exists between the Vatican II position on ecumenism on the one hand, and the traditional Catholic position from before Vatican II, on the other. We are talking about a substantial change in teaching and not merely about an accidental difference — for example, a mere shift in emphasis or additional clarification of the same doctrine — since the new teaching does not harmonize with the old. It does not build upon it, it does not refine it, it does not clarify it. Rather, it overturns it.

The significance of this radical disparity between the two positions cannot be overestimated: The facts are simply such that if the teaching of the conciliar and post-magisterium on religious unity were true, then the timeless traditional teaching would have to have been false. They cannot both be true because they are not compatible; they are mutually exclusive.

But if the Catholic Church’s traditional position on the matter were false, then it would follow that the Church misled countless souls for nearly two millennia on one of the most fundamental issues directly impacting their salvation — until the glorious 1960s came along and finally straightened things out.

In which case one would have to ask: If the Church could be wrong for 1900 years, why should she be right now?

Image sources: YouTube (screenshot) / Shutterstock (BY-_-BY)
License: fair use / paid

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.