An Evangelii Gaudium Primer (or Understanding Robert Francis Prevost's Having Made Jorge's Magna Carta His Very Own)

So, Robert Leo Prevost/Leo XIV wants to make Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s Evangelii Gaudium the cornerstone of his own false “pontificate.”

Fine.

Thus, this primer serves as a reference resource to refresh one’s recollection about the revolutionary nature of Evangelii Gaudium and how it is, like almost everything else in the conciliar religion, incompatible with Catholicism, as “Pope Francis” “papally canonized” every one of the Jacobin/Bolshevik ultra-progressive Modernist shibboleth that he had learned in the 1960s and began to spout with abandon until his “election” on Wednesday, March 13, 2013.

I. Disparaging Catholicism by the Use of Strawmen

One. of the enduring themes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s false “pontificate” was “worldliness,” by which he dismissed, disparaged, ridiculed and rejected everything to do with Catholic Faith, Worship, Morals, including personal piety, as taught and practiced from time immemorial until the old Rosicrucian Sillonist, Angelo Roncalli/John XIIII, stepped out on the balcony of the Basilica of Saint Peter on November 28, 1958, as he took his place as the first in the as of yet ongoing line of antipopes.

The following passage from Evangelii Gaudium about “worldliness” described the late heretic’s disparagement of the Catholic past that he rejected early in his youth:

93. Spiritual worldliness, which hides behind the appearance of piety and even love for the Church, consists in seeking not the Lord’s glory but human glory and personal well-being. It is what the Lord reprimanded the Pharisees for: “How can you believe, who receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?” (Jn 5:44). It is a subtle way of seeking one’s “own interests, not those of Jesus Christ” (Phil 2:21). It takes on many forms, depending on the kinds of persons and groups into which it seeps. Since it is based on carefully cultivated appearances, it is not always linked to outward sin; from without, everything appears as it should be. But if it were to seep into the Church, “it would be infinitely more disastrous than any other worldliness which is simply moral”.

94. This worldliness can be fuelled in two deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of gnosticism, a purely subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas and bits of information which are meant to console and enlighten, but which ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.

95. This insidious worldliness is evident in a number of attitudes which appear opposed, yet all have the same pretence of “taking over the space of the Church”. In some people we see an ostentatious preoccupation for the liturgy, for doctrine and for the Church’s prestige, but without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact on God’s faithful people and the concrete needs of the present time. In this way, the life of the Church turns into a museum piece or something which is the property of a select few. In others, this spiritual worldliness lurks behind a fascination with social and political gain, or pride in their ability to manage practical affairs, or an obsession with programmes of self-help and self-realization. It can also translate into a concern to be seen, into a social life full of appearances, meetings, dinners and receptions. It can also lead to a business mentality, caught up with management, statistics, plans and evaluations whose principal beneficiary is not God’s people but the Church as an institution. The mark of Christ, incarnate, crucified and risen, is not present; closed and elite groups are formed, and no effort is made to go forth and seek out those who are distant or the immense multitudes who thirst for Christ. Evangelical fervour is replaced by the empty pleasure of complacency and self-indulgence.

96. This way of thinking also feeds the vainglory of those who are content to have a modicum of power and would rather be the general of a defeated army than a mere private in a unit which continues to fight. How often we dream up vast apostolic projects, meticulously planned, just like defeated generals! But this is to deny our history as a Church, which is glorious precisely because it is a history of sacrifice, of hopes and daily struggles, of lives spent in service and fidelity to work, tiring as it may be, for all work is “the sweat of our brow”. Instead, we waste time talking about “what needs to be done” – in Spanish we call this the sin of “habriaqueísmo” – like spiritual masters and pastoral experts who give instructions from on high. We indulge in endless fantasies and we lose contact with the real lives and difficulties of our people.

97. Those who have fallen into this worldliness look on from above and afar, they reject the prophecy of their brothers and sisters, they discredit those who raise questions, they constantly point out the mistakes of others and they are obsessed by appearances. Their hearts are open only to the limited horizon of their own immanence and interests, and as a consequence they neither learn from their sins nor are they genuinely open to forgiveness. This is a tremendous corruption disguised as a good. We need to avoid it by making the Church constantly go out from herself, keeping her mission focused on Jesus Christ, and her commitment to the poor. God save us from a worldly Church with superficial spiritual and pastoral trappings! This stifling worldliness can only be healed by breathing in the pure air of the Holy Spirit who frees us from self-centredness cloaked in an outward religiosity bereft of God. Let us not allow ourselves to be robbed of the Gospel! (Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

In other words, those who point out the doctrinal errors of other and who are not "open" to "questioning" their own beliefs and practices, no matter how sure there are of them and how deeply ingrained in the history of the Church they may be, are "worldly" Catholics who are "neo-Pelagians" and "preoccupied" with an "ostentatious liturgy" that does not correspond to the "concrete needs" of the people, especially "the poor."

Although the entire text of Evangelii Gaudium is the work of Antichrist, one sentence from the passage just cited stands out as a proof of the abject heresy that emanates from the mind of Jorge Mario Bergoglio:

In some people we see an ostentatious preoccupation for the liturgy, for doctrine and for the Church’s prestige, but without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact on God’s faithful people and the concrete needs of the present time. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

Preoccupation for the proper and fitting worship of God in the ineffable Sacrifice of the Cross offered in an unbloody manner at the hands of a sacerdos?

Preoccupation with doctrine, which was entrusted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to His Holy Catholic Church to be safeguarded eternally and taught infallibly.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio made it eminently clear in the text of Evangelii Gaudium that the Catholic Church has taught error and sanctioned erroneous traditions and practices that have "ignored" the plight of the "poor."

This is heretical and blasphemous, running counter even to the plain words of Sacred Scripture to which Bergoglio claims to be so devoted:

[1] I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: [2] Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. [3] For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: [4] And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. [5] But be thou vigilant, labour in all things, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill thy ministry. Be sober. (2 Timothy 1: 1-5.)

[11] And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors, [12] For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: [13] Until we all meet into the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ; [14] That henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive. (Ephesians 4: 11-14.)

[1] But speak thou the things that become sound doctrine: [2] That the aged men be sober, chaste, prudent, sound in faith, in love, in patience. [3] The aged women, in like manner, in holy attire, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teaching well: [4] That they may teach the young women to be wise, to love their husbands, to love their children, [5] To be discreet, chaste, sober, having a care of the house, gentle, obedient to their husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

[6] Young men, in like manner, exhort that they be sober. [7] In all things shew thyself an example of good works, in doctrine, in integrity, in gravity, [8] The sound word that can not be blamed: that he, who is on the contrary part, may be afraid, having no evil to say of us. [9] Exhort servants to be obedient to their masters, in all things pleasing, not gainsaying: [10] Not defrauding, but in all things shewing good fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things:

[11] For the grace of God our Saviour hath appeared to all men; [12] Instructing us, that, denying ungodliness and worldly desires, we should live soberly, and justly, and godly in this world, [13] Looking for the blessed hope and coming of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, [14] Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and might cleanse to himself a people acceptable, a pursuer of good works. [15] These things speak, and exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee. (Titus 2: 6-15.)

[6] And this is charity, that we walk according to his commandments. For this is the commandment, that, as you have heard from the beginning, you should walk in the same: [7] For many seducers are gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh: this is a seducer and an antichrist. [8] Look to yourselves, that you lose not the things which you have wrought: but that you may receive a full reward. [9]

Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine, the same hath both the Father and the Son. [10] If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him, God speed you. (2 John 1: 6-10.)

These very words of Holy Writ proved the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio to have been an enemy of Christ the King and thus of the souls He redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross.

To criticize those who are concerned about sound doctrine is the work of Antichrist, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio was in life and will ever remain in a death a hideous a figure of Antichrist.

Pope Saint Pius X prefaced Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, with the following introduction as he explained his duty to defend the integrity of the Holy Faith from the profane novelties of the Modernists:

1. One of the primary obligations assigned by Christ to the office divinely committed to Us of feeding the Lord's flock is that of guarding with the greatest vigilance the deposit of the faith delivered to the saints, rejecting the profane novelties of words and the gainsaying of knowledge falsely so called. There has never been a time when this watchfulness of the supreme pastor was not necessary to the Catholic body, for owing to the efforts of the enemy of the human race, there have never been lacking "men speaking perverse things,""vain talkers and seducers," "erring and driving into error." It must, however, be confessed that these latter days have witnessed a notable increase in the number of the enemies of the Cross of Christ, who, by arts entirely new and full of deceit, are striving to destroy the vital energy of the Church, and, as far as in them lies, utterly to subvert the very Kingdom of Christ. Wherefore We may no longer keep silence, lest We should seem to fail in Our most sacred duty, and lest the kindness that, in the hope of wiser counsels, We have hitherto shown them, should be set down to lack of diligence in the discharge of Our office.

2. That We should act without delay in this matter is made imperative especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; but, what is to be most dreaded and deplored, in her very bosom, and are the more mischievous the less they keep in the open. We allude, Venerable Brethren, to many who belong to the Catholic laity, and, what is much more sad, to the ranks of the priesthood itself, who, animated by a false zeal for the Church, lacking the solid safeguards of philosophy and theology, nay more, thoroughly imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the enemies of the Church, and lost to all sense of modesty, put themselves forward as reformers of the Church; and, forming more boldly into line of attack, assail all that is most sacred in the work of Christ, not sparing even the Person of the Divine Redeemer, whom, with sacrilegious audacity, they degrade to the condition of a simple and ordinary man.

3. Although they express their astonishment that We should number them amongst the enemies of the Church, no one will be reasonably surprised that We should do so, if, leaving out of account the internal disposition of the soul, of which God alone is the Judge, he considers their tenets, their manner of speech, and their action. Nor indeed would he be wrong in regarding them as the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church. For, as We have said, they put into operation their designs for her undoing, not from without but from within. Hence, the danger is present almost in the very veins and heart of the Church, whose injury is the more certain from the very fact that their knowledge of her is more intimate. Moreover, they lay the ax not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fibers. And once having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to diffuse poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic truth which they leave untouched, none that they do not strive to corrupt. Further, none is more skillful, none more astute than they, in the employment of a thousand noxious devices; for they play the double part of rationalist and Catholic, and this so craftily that they easily lead the unwary into error; and as audacity is their chief characteristic, there is no conclusion of any kind from which they shrink or which they do not thrust forward with pertinacity and assurance To this must be added the fact, which indeed is well calculated to deceive souls, that they lead a life of the greatest activity, of assiduous and ardent application to every branch of learning, and that they possess, as a rule, a reputation for irreproachable morality. Finally, there is the fact which is all hut fatal to the hope of cure that their very doctrines have given such a bent to their minds, that they disdain all authority and brook no restraint; and relying upon a false conscience, they attempt to ascribe to a love of truth that which is in reality the result of pride and obstinacy.

Once indeed We had hopes of recalling them to a better mind, and to this end We first of all treated them with kindness as Our children, then with severity; and at last We have had recourse, though with great reluctance, to public reproof. It is known to you, Venerable Brethren, how unavailing have been Our efforts. For a moment they have bowed their head, only to lift it more arrogantly than before. If it were a matter which concerned them alone, We might perhaps have overlooked it; but the security of the Catholic name is at stake. Wherefore We must interrupt a silence which it would be criminal to prolong, that We may point out to the whole Church, as they really are, men who are badly disguised. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Our true popes have explained the duty of the refutation of error and heresy whenever it was required of them to do so. They were unflinching in this duty.

Pope Saint Pius X was warning about the likes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his fellow fiends within the counterfeit church of conciliarism, starting with the now relatively unseen and perhaps even long-forgotten Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodrigues, who was quite at the forefront of the first few Bergoglio’s arbitrary reign of terror as his straw men “Pelagians,” “Gnostics,” and Pharisees within his false religious sect and their fellow travelers (see Commissar of Antichrist Speaks, part one, Commissar of Antichrist Speaks, part two, Commissar of Antichrist Speaks, part three, and Commissar of Antichrist Speaks, part four) and Victor Manuel Fernandez, who emerged triumphant as Jorge’s chief aide-de-camp from 2016 and thereafter. So was Pope Gregory XVI when he wrote the following at the beginning of Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832:

4. We come to you grieving and sorrowful because We know that you are concerned for the faith in these difficult times. Now is truly the time in which the powers of darkness winnow the elect like wheat.[3] "The earth mourns and fades away....And the earth is infected by the inhabitants thereof, because they have transgressed the laws, they have changed the ordinances, they have broken the everlasting covenant."[4]

5. We speak of the things which you see with your own eyes, which We both bemoan. Depravity exults; science is impudent; liberty, dissolute. The holiness of the sacred is despised; the majesty of divine worship is not only disapproved by evil men, but defiled and held up to ridicule. Hence sound doctrine is perverted and errors of all kinds spread boldly. The laws of the sacred, the rights, institutions, and discipline -- none are safe from the audacity of those speaking evil. Our Roman See is harassed violently and the bonds of unity are daily loosened and severed. The divine authority of the Church is opposed and her rights shorn off. She is subjected to human reason and with the greatest injustice exposed to the hatred of the people and reduced to vile servitude. The obedience due bishops is denied and their rights are trampled underfoot. Furthermore, academies and schools resound with new, monstrous opinions, which openly attack the Catholic faith; this horrible and nefarious war is openly and even publicly waged. Thus, by institutions and by the example of teachers, the minds of the youth are corrupted and a tremendous blow is dealt to religion and the perversion of morals is spread. So the restraints of religion are thrown off, by which alone kingdoms stand. We see the destruction of public order, the fall of principalities, and the overturning of all legitimate power approaching. Indeed this great mass of calamities had its inception in the heretical societies and sects in which all that is sacrilegious, infamous, and blasphemous has gathered as bilge water in a ship's hold, a congealed mass of all filth.

6. These and many other serious things, which at present would take too long to list, but which you know well, cause Our intense grief. It is not enough for Us to deplore these innumerable evils unless We strive to uproot them. We take refuge in your faith and call upon your concern for the salvation of the Catholic flock. Your singular prudence and diligent spirit give Us courage and console Us, afflicted as We are with so many trials. We must raise Our voice and attempt all things lest a wild boar from the woods should destroy the vineyard or wolves kill the flock. It is Our duty to lead the flock only to the food which is healthful. In these evil and dangerous times, the shepherds must never neglect their duty; they must never be so overcome by fear that they abandon the sheep. Let them never neglect the flock and become sluggish from idleness and apathy. Therefore, united in spirit, let us promote our common cause, or more truly the cause of God; let our vigilance be one and our effort united against the common enemies.

7. Indeed you will accomplish this perfectly if, as the duty of your office demands, you attend to yourselves and to doctrine and meditate on these words: "the universal Church is affected by any and every novelty"[5] and the admonition of Pope Agatho: "nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning."[6] Therefore may the unity which is built upon the See of Peter as on a sure foundation stand firm. May it be for all a wall and a security, a safe port, and a treasury of countless blessings.[7] To check the audacity of those who attempt to infringe upon the rights of this Holy See or to sever the union of the churches with the See of Peter, instill in your people a zealous confidence in the papacy and sincere veneration for it. As St. Cyprian wrote: "He who abandons the See of Peter on which the Church was founded, falsely believes himself to be a part of the Church."[8]

8. In this you must labor and diligently take care that the faith may be preserved amidst this great conspiracy of impious men who attempt to tear it down and destroy it. May all remember the judgment concerning sound doctrine with which the people are to be instructed. Remember also that the government and administration of the whole Church rests with the Roman Pontiff to whom, in the words of the Fathers of the Council of Florence, "the full power of nourishing, ruling, and governing the universal Church was given by Christ the Lord."[9] It is the duty of individual bishops to cling to the See of Peter faithfully, to guard the faith piously and religiously, and to feed their flock. It behooves priests to be subject to the bishops, whom "they are to look upon as the parents of their souls," as Jerome admonishes.[10] Nor may the priests ever forget that they are forbidden by ancient canons to undertake ministry and to assume the tasks of teaching and preaching "without the permission of their bishop to whom the people have been entrusted; an accounting for the souls of the people will be demanded from the bishop."[11] Finally let them understand that all those who struggle against this established order disturb the position of the Church.

9. Furthermore, the discipline sanctioned by the Church must never be rejected or be branded as contrary to certain principles of natural law. It must never be called crippled, or imperfect or subject to civil authority. In this discipline the administration of sacred rites, standards of morality, and the reckoning of the rights of the Church and her ministers are embraced. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

It is the conciliar revolutionaries, including Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who have never cared about sound doctrine and who have promoted every novelty while daring to diminish and change both the expression and meaning of what is being represented, albeit falsely, as the Catholic Faith.

Here is but one final proof of this found in Evangelii Gaudium wherein Jorge Mario Bergoglio finally makes "official" the conciliar "teaching" that the Old Covenant God made with Moses has not been revoked and is till perfectly valid:

247. We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an important part of the sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf. Rom 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes 1:9). With them, we believe in the one God who acts in history, and with them we accept his revealed word.

248. Dialogue and friendship with the children of Israel are part of the life of Jesus’ disciples. The friendship which has grown between us makes us bitterly and sincerely regret the terrible persecutions which they have endured, and continue to endure, especially those that have involved Christians.

249. God continues to work among the people of the Old Covenant and to bring forth treasures of wisdom which flow from their encounter with his word. For this reason, the Church also is enriched when she receives the values of Judaism. While it is true that certain Christian beliefs are unacceptable to Judaism, and that the Church cannot refrain from proclaiming Jesus as Lord and Messiah, there exists as well a rich complementarity which allows us to read the texts of the Hebrew Scriptures together and to help one another to mine the riches of God’s word. We can also share many ethical convictions and a common concern for justice and the development of peoples. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

This is abject heresy:

It [the Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord's coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Therefore, it commands all who glory in the name of Christian, at whatever time, before or after baptism, to cease entirely from circumcision, since, whether or not one places hope in it, it cannot be observed at all without the loss of eternal salvation. Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not to be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people, but it should be conferred as soon as it can be done conveniently, but so ,that, when danger of death is imminent, they be baptized in the form of the Church, early without delay, even by a layman or woman, if a priest should be lacking, just as is contained more fully in the decree of the Armenians. . . .

It 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. (Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, February 4, 1442.)

28.That He completed His work on the gibbet of the Cross is the unanimous teaching of the holy Fathers who assert that the Church was born from the side of our Savior on the Cross like a new Eve, mother of all the living. [28] "And it is now," says the great St. Ambrose, speaking of the pierced side of Christ, "that it is built, it is now that it is formed, it is now that is .... molded, it is now that it is created . . . Now it is that arises a spiritual house, a holy priesthood." [29] One who reverently examines this venerable teaching will easily discover the reasons on which it is based.

29.And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine Savior was preaching in a restricted area -- He was not sent but to the sheep that were lost of the house of Israel [30] -the Law and the Gospel were together in force; [31] but on the gibbet of his death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees, [32] fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, [33] establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race. [34] "To such an extent, then," says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, "was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom." [35]

30. On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head in His Church. "For it was through His triumph on the Cross," according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, "that He won power and dominion over the gentiles"; [38] by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God's anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been united to this Mystical Body. (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)

Judaism is a dead religion in which no one can have any hope of pleasing the true God of Divine Revelation or of saving his immortal soul. It has been rejected and superseded and belongs to the kingdom of the adversary, something that, among others, Pope Saint Pius X, William Thomas Walsh, and Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton noted with great clarity:

POPE: We are unable to favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise.The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.

HERZL: [The conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us, was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?

POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.

HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].

POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own, but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.

HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:] Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]

POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have not done it yet.

HERZL: But, Holy Father, the Jews are in a terrible plight. I do not know if Your Holiness is aware of the full extent of their tragedy. We need a land for these harried people.

POPE: Must it be Jerusalem?

HERZL: We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—for only the secular land.

POPE: We cannot be in favor of it.

[Editor Lowenthal interjects here] Here unrelenting replacement theology is plainly upheld as the norm of the Roman Catholic Church. Further, this confession, along with the whole tone of the Pope in his meeting with Herzl, indicates the perpetuation of a doctrinal emphasis that has resulted in centuries of degrading behavior toward the Jews. However, this response has the “grandeur” of total avoidance of that which Herzl had intimated, namely that the abusive reputation of Roman Catholicism toward the Jews was unlikely to foster conversion. Further, if, “It took three centuries for the Church to evolve,” it was that very same period of time that it took for the Church to consolidate and launch its thrust of anti-Semitism through the following centuries.

HERZL: Does Your Holiness know the situation of the Jews?

POPE: Yes, from my days in Mantua, where there are Jews. I have always been in friendly relations with Jews. Only the other evening two Jews were here to see me. There are other bonds than those of religion: social intercourse, for example, and philanthropy. Such bonds we do not refuse to maintain with the Jews. Indeed we also pray for them, that their spirit see the light. This very day the Church is celebrating the feast of an unbeliever who became converted in a miraculous manner—on the road to Damascus. And so if you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with churches and priests to baptize all of you. (Marvin Lowenthal, The Diaries of Theodore Herzl.)

From the later words and acts of Simon bar Jonas, it is plain that his conception of the Messiah, as he advanced toward manhood, was that of the vast majority of the Jewish people. Few could imagine the Holy One coming to suffer in atonement for the sins of the world, much less for the sins of Israel. Everyone knew that Moses had been punished for disobedience, that the Babylonian captivity had been the penalty for connivance with idolatry. Yet the old sense of sinfulness had yielded to a certain proud complacency, born in part, no doubt, of an awareness of very real virtues. The Jewish leaders forgot that they were a Chosen People not through any special excellence of their own, but through God's favor to Abraham. This sort of smugness easily takes possession of classes long established in wealth and power.

The doctrine of original sin in particular had been almost wholly forgotten in Israel. True, it still stood boldly forth on the first pages of the Book of Genesis. This makes it all the more astonishing that no one preached it, and hardly any believed it. Perhaps their recent sorrows had made the Jews forget the primal tragedy which was the beginning of human history. Perhaps the vision of towering wheat fields had little by little come to blot out of their minds the memory of the tree of knowledge, the locked garden, the flaming sword. A future woven out of hopeful dreams had become more real than a past as aching and tangible as the rocks of Judea.

It is a curious fact that this sort of idealizing is sometimes the very stuff of which materialists are made. It is because they love this world, its satisfactions and its power, that they turn away from its imperfections to an imaginary world in which they want those gratifications to be fully realized – but in the flesh, in the here and now. Only a mystery of grace could turn such mundane aspirations into a spiritual hope. (William Thomas Walsh, Saint Peter the Apostle, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1948, pp. 24-25.)

It is highly important to understand that this process is quite complex. The terminus a quo, the undesirable condition, from which men are removed in the process of salvation is basically sin, the status of aversion from almighty God. A man is said to be saved, absolutely and simply, when he is taken out of the condition of original or mortal sin and brought into the status of the eternal and supernatural life of grace. Ultimately that process in achieved and perfected when the person saved comes to possess the life of grace eternally and inamissibly, in the everlasting glory of the Beatific Vision. There is genuine salvation, however, when the man who has hitherto been in the state of original or mortal sin is brought into the life of sanctifying grace, even in this world, when that life of grace can be lost through the man's own fault.

There is, however, a definitely social aspect to the process of salvation. In the merciful designs of God's providence, the man who is transferred from the state of original or mortal sin into the state of grace is brought in some way “within” a social unit, the supernatural kingdom of the living God. In heaven that community is the Church triumphant, the company of the elect enjoying the Beatific Vision. On earth it is the Church militant. Under the conditions of the new or the Christian dispensation, that community is the organized or visible religious society which is the Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ on earth.

We must not lose sight of the fact that people in the condition of aversion from God, in the state of original or mortal sin, belong in some way to a kingdom or an ecclesia under the leadership of Satan, the moving spirit among the spiritual enemies of God. Hence the process of salvation involves necessarily the transfer of an individual from one social unit or community to another, from the kingdom Satan to the true and supernatural kingdom of the living God. (Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation In Light of the Recent Pronouncements of the Holy See, published in 1958 and reprinted in 2006 by Seminary Press, Round Top, New York, pp, 134-135.)

This is important to emphasize as anyone who is unbaptized, a condition that applies to Jews and Mohammedans and pagans, belongs to an ecclesia under the leadership of Satan, which predisposes them to a hatred of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, His Holy Cross and His Holy Church and predisposes them as well to wage wafare against all to do with Our Lord, His Church, His Divine Revelation and even the binding precepts of the Natural Law. Amorality must be the result of such hatred.

Monsignor Fenton explained that the Jewish ecclesia had ceased to exist with Our Lord's death on the wood of the Holy Cross, and that Saint Peter, our first pope, sought to bring them out their adherence to false beliefs that could only wind up damning them for all eternity:

This intrinsically social aspect of salvation is brought out in the account, in the Acts of the Apostles, of the end of St. Peter's sermon on the first Christian Pentecost and of the results of that sermon.

Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their hearts and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren?

But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.

And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation.

They therefore that receive his word were baptized: and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.

And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles and in the communication of the breaking of bread and in prayers. [Acts, 2: 37-42]

According to the inspired word of God in the Acts of the Apostles, St. Peter exhorted the men who listened to him of that first Christian Pentecost to “save themselves from this perverse generation.” Furthermore, we are told that the individuals who “received his word” received the sacrament of baptism, and that they were “added” to the number of the disciples of Christ who had been with St. Peter and the other disciples before he delivered his sermon. The society of the disciples of Jesus Christ, the organization which we know now as the Catholic Church, continued with this great number of new members, to do exactly what it had been doing since the day of Our Lord's ascension into heaven.

We read that the group, composed as it was of these new converts who had come into the Church as a result of St. Peter's Pentecost sermon and of the disciples who had entered the group during Our Lord's public life, was “persevering in the doctrine of the apostles and in the communication of the breaking of bread and in prayers.” And we read the same sort of account of the activity of the original band of disciples that returned to Jerusalem immediately after the Ascension.

Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount that is called Olivet, which is nigh Jerusalem, within a sabbath day's journey.

And when they were come in they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Batholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus and Simon Zelotes and Jude the brother of James.

All these were persevering with one mind in prayer, with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. [Acts 1. 12-14]

Both the text and the context of the Acts of the Apostles assure us that the people who heeded St. Peter's injunction to save themselves from this perverse generation entered the true Church of God, the kingdom of God on earth. They entered the Catholic Church.

Now, if St. Peter's words on this occasion meant anything at all, they signified that the individuals to whom he was speaking were in a situation which would lead them to eternal ruin if they continued in it. They were described as belonging to a “perverse generation.” They were told to save themselves by getting out of it. The institution into which they would enter by the very fact of leaving “this perverse generation” was none other that the society of Our Lord's disciples, the Catholic Church itself.

The clear implication of St. Peter's statement is that the Church, the kingdom of God, was the only institution or social unit of salvation. Not to be within this society was to be in the perverse generation within which a man was faced with eternal and entire spiritual ruin. To leave the perverse generation was to enter the Church.

In other words, the clear teaching of this section of the Acts of the Apostles is precisely that given by Pope Leo XIII in the opening passages of his encyclical Humanum genus. The central point of this teaching is that the entire human race is divided between the kingdom of God, the ecclesia, and the kingdom of Satan. To be saved from the kingdom of Satan is to enter the kingdom of God. In this context it is not difficult to see how, by God's institution, the Catholic Church, the one and only supernatural kingdom of God on earth, is presented as a necessary means for the attainment of salvation. By God's institution the process of salvation itself involves a passage from the kingdom of Satan into the ecclesia.

Now, for the proper understanding of this doctrine, especially in view of the teaching on this subject contained in some recent books and articles, it is imperative to understand the religious condition of the people to whom St. Peter delivered his sermon on that first Christian Pentecost. Again, the Acts of the Apostles contains essentially important information.

This book describes them in general with the statement that “there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews, devout men out of every nation under heaven.” The homelands of these men are enumerated in the statement attributed to the multitude itself.

And they were all amazed and wondered saying: Behold, are not all these that speak, Galileans?

And how have we heard, every man, our own tongue wherein we were born?

Parthinians and Medes and Elamites and inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia,

Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers from Rome,

Jews also and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians: we have heard them speak in our own tongues the wonderful works of God. [Acts 2: 7-11.]

According to the text of the Acts, a great many of these people were pilgrims, men and women who had come to Jerusalem to celebrate the great Jewish feast of Pentecost. Our Lord had died on the Cross only a little over seven weeks before St. Peter delivered that sermon, and many of the people who listened to St. Peter must have been on their way to Jerusalem at the very time Our Lord died. They had begun their pilgrimage as an act of worship in the Jewish religion at the very time when the Jewish religion was the one approved especially by God and when the Jewish politico-religious commonwealth was actually the supernatural kingdom of God on earth, the ecclesia of the Old Testament.

These people as individuals probably had nothing whatsoever to do with the persecution and the murder of the Incarnate Word of God. They had started on their journey as members of God's chosen people, the people of His covenant. Their journey to Jerusalem was made precisely in order to worship and honor God. They were truly devout individuals.

Yes, seven weeks before, the religious body to which they belonged had ceased to be God's ecclesia. The Jewish politico-religious social unit had definitively rejected Our Lord, the Messias promised in the Old Testament. This company had hitherto enjoyed its position as God's ecclesias or His congregatio fidelium by virtue of the fact this it had accepted and professed its acceptance of the divine message about the promised Redeemer. In rejecting the Redeemer Himself, this social unit had automatically rejected the teaching God had given about Him. The rejection of this message constituted an abandonment of the divine faith itself. By manifesting this rejection of the faith, the Jewish religious unit fell from its position as the company of the chosen people. It was no longer God's ecclesia, His supernatural kingdom on earth. It became part of the kingdom of Satan.

While the great Jewish social unit was rejecting Our Lord and thus repudiating its acceptance of the divinely revealed message about Him, the little company of the disciples, organized by Our Lord around Himself, retained its faith. It continued to accept and to obey Our Lord and to believe the divinely revealed that centered around Him. Thus at the moment of Our Lord's death on Calvary, the moment when the old dispensation was ended and the Jewish religious association ceased to be the supernatural kingdom of God on earth, this recently organized society of Our Lord's disciples began to exist as the ecclesia or the kingdom.

This society was the true continuation of Israel. The men who were within it were the true sons of Abraham, in that they had the genuine faith of Abraham. This society was the new association of the chosen people. Its members were, as St. Paul called them, the elect or the chosen of God.

It must be understood, incidentally, that this society was actually God's supernatural kingdom on earth in a much more complete and perfect sense than the old Jewish commonwealth had ever been. The old Israel had constituted the pople of the covenant. According to God's unfailing promise, the Redeemer was to be born within that company. Yet conditions had never been such that a man had to be within this company in order to attain to eternal salvation. (Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation In Light of the Recent Pronouncements of the Holy See, published in 1958 and reprinted in 2006 by Seminary Press, Round Top, New York, pp, 136-139.)

It cannot get any clearer than the following sentence in the selection from Monsignor Fenton's masterpiece of Catholic theology just quoted:

By manifesting this rejection of the faith, the Jewish religious unit fell from its position as the company of the chosen people. It was no longer God's ecclesia, His supernatural kingdom on earth. It became part of the kingdom of Satan. (Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation In Light of the Recent Pronouncements of the Holy See, published in 1958 and reprinted in 2006 by Seminary Press, Round Top, New York, p. 139.)

Obviously, the conciliar “popes,” each of whom has been a Judaizer, do not accept such clear reiterations of Catholic truth. Conciliarism is a corrupt misrepresentation of the Catholic Faith. It is really that simple.

II. Intent on Making an Indelible Impression on the Minds of Catholics Who Have Felt "Rejected" by the Catholic Church

Bergoglio expressed his desire for a permanent state of revolution as a "state of mission." This is quite accurate as he is certainly on mission to make and implement revolutionary changes that will further tickle the itching ears of the people, who are always the alleged objects of "concern" in the rhetoric of revolutionaries:

25. I am aware that nowadays documents do not arouse the same interest as in the past and that they are quickly forgotten. Nevertheless, I want to emphasize that what I am trying to express here has a programmatic significance and important consequences. I hope that all communities will devote the necessary effort to advancing along the path of a pastoral and missionary conversion which cannot leave things as they presently are. “Mere administration” can no longer be enough.[21] Throughout the world, let us be “permanently in a state of mission”.[22] (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio may have spoken randomly, haphazardly at the Casa Santa Marta most days when he was behind the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River until he was hospitalized before his death.

However, he knew precisely what he wanted to do, and he knew that most people do not read long tomes such as Evangelii Gaudium. He knew full well that the mainslime media would "run" with the text of Evangelii Gaudium and report its essential highlights, exciting the masses no end to dream the wildest dreams imaginable of "reforms" that many within their midst have been clamoring for decades in other to reaffirm themselves in their own "goodness" despite living in what are, objectively speaking, states of Mortal Sin. Jorge Mario Bergoglio wanted people to "make a mess" in their dioceses, you see, and to demand adherence to his, Bergoglio's, revolutionary program of ceaseless change in the name of "serving" the needs of the "people," especially the "poor," without any "barriers" or preconditions. This is the work of sheer demagoguery.

Thus it is that the counterfeit church of conciliarism has made the Catholic Faith, the one and only unifying force on earth, a source of endless division and conflict, a source of bitterness and scorn as families and friends are divided. The divisions are such that many "conservatives" and “traditionalists” within the conciliar structured displaced their anger at Bergoglio to vent against Catholics who adhere to the canonical-doctrinal teaching of the Catholic Church that those who defect from the Catholic Faith in one thing defect from It in Its entirety and cannot hold ecclesiastical office legitimately within the ranks of Holy Mother Church.

Indeed, Evangelii Gaudium was published in the Acts of the Apostolic See in December 2013, making it an official document of what the "recognize while resist" crowd thinks is the Catholic Church.

The late Mosignor Joseph Clifford Fenton, who was the editor of the American Ecclesiastical Review from 1943 to 1963, wrote a scholarly article about the binding nature of encyclical letters, papal allocutions and other published documents of the Successor of Saint Peter that is appended at the end of this primer for those interested in understanding the fallacy of the "resist while recognize" position, which makes a mockery of the infallibility of the ordinary magisterium of the Catholic Church and reduces the papacy to but a nominal figurehead whose occupants can stumble their way through allocutions and encyclical letters by contradicting her defined teaching on numerous points, something that is as false as the "hermeneutic of continuity" itself.

III. Invoking the Words of Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI

The section from Evangelii Gaudium below makde it clear that almost everything in what is thought to be the Catholic Church had to be changed:

26. Paul VI invited us to deepen the call to renewal and to make it clear that renewal does not only concern individuals but the entire Church. Let us return to a memorable text which continues to challenge us. “The Church must look with penetrating eyes within herself, ponder the mystery of her own being… This vivid and lively self-awareness inevitably leads to a comparison between the ideal image of the Church as Christ envisaged her and loved her as his holy and spotless bride (cf. Eph 5:27), and the actual image which the Church presents to the world today... This is the source of the Church’s heroic and impatient struggle for renewal: the struggle to correct those flaws introduced by her members which her own self-examination, mirroring her exemplar, Christ, points out to her and condemns”.[23] The Second Vatican Council presented ecclesial conversion as openness to a constant self-renewal born of fidelity to Jesus Christ: “Every renewal of the Church essentially consists in an increase of fidelity to her own calling… Christ summons the Church as she goes her pilgrim way… to that continual reformation of which she always has need, in so far as she is a human institution here on earth”.[24]

There are ecclesial structures which can hamper efforts at evangelization, yet even good structures are only helpful when there is a life constantly driving, sustaining and assessing them. Without new life and an authentic evangelical spirit, without the Church’s “fidelity to her own calling”, any new structure will soon prove ineffective.

An ecclesial renewal which cannot be deferred

27. I dream of a “missionary option”, that is, a missionary impulse capable of transforming everything, so that the Church’s customs, ways of doing things, times and schedules, language and structures can be suitably channeled for the evangelization of today’s world rather than for her self-preservation. The renewal of structures demanded by pastoral conversion can only be understood in this light: as part of an effort to make them more mission-oriented, to make ordinary pastoral activity on every level more inclusive and open, to inspire in pastoral workers a constant desire to go forth and in this way to elicit a positive response from all those whom Jesus summons to friendship with him. As John Paul II once said to the Bishops of Oceania: “All renewal in the Church must have mission as its goal if it is not to fall prey to a kind of ecclesial introversion”.[25] (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio was very correct to have invoked the words of Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI as the second conciliar "pontiff" did much to change "things," starting with the revolutionary documents he helped to shepherd through the "Second" Vatican Council and, of course, the very Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Montini/ Paul VI even made symbolic points by doing such things as genuflecting before the schismatic and heretic Greek Orthodox Patriarch Athenagoras and by taking off the Papal Tiara and placing it on an altar, an act that was meant to convey the conciliar teaching that the "pope" is not a monarch but a fellow pilgrim whose position is seen principally in terms of "service," not governance. Subsequent "popes" have each done much to change what they thought to be the "papacy" (see Whittling Away At The Last Catholic Bastion), Bergoglio's often expressed desire to change it in an even more revolutionary way than had been done in fifty years or so before he became the conciliar sect’s universal public face of apostasy.

For the present, however, it is important to point out yet again that Jorge Mario Bergoglio's efforts to teach that the structures that have existed from time immemorial for the proper governance and functioning of the Catholic Church had "failed" because they were the products of sinful men who sought to "protect" the Church from the "outside world," thus making it "too closed-in on itself," were anticipated and condemned by Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943:

63. Hence, this word in its correct signification gives us to understand that the Church, a perfect society of its kind, is not made up of merely moral and juridical elements and principles. It is far superior to all other human societies; [117] it surpasses them as grace surpasses nature, as things immortal are above all those that perish. [118] Such human societies, and in the first place civil Society, are by no means to be despised or belittled, but the Church in its entirely is not found within this natural order, any more than the whole of man is encompassed within the organism of our mortal body. [119] Although the juridical principles, on which the Church rests and is established, derive from the divine constitution given to it by Christ and contribute to the attaining of its supernatural end, nevertheless that which lifts the Society of Christians far above the whole natural order is the Spirit of our Redeemer who penetrates and fills every part of the Church's being and is active within it until the end of time as the source of every grace and every gift and every miraculous power. just as our composite mortal body, although it is a marvelous work of the Creator, falls far short of the eminent dignity of our soul, so the social structure of the Christian community, though it proclaims the wisdom of its divine Architect, still remains something inferior when compared to the spiritual gifts which give it beauty and life, and to the divine source whence they flow.

64. From what We have thus far written and explained, Venerable Brethren, it is clear, We think, how grievously they err who arbitrarily claim that the Church is something hidden and invisible, as they also do who look upon her as a mere human institution possessing a certain disciplinary code and external ritual, but lacking power to communicate supernatural life. [120] On the contrary, as Christ, Head and Exemplar of the Church "is not complete, if only His visible human nature is considered. . ., or if only His divine, invisible nature. . ., but He is one through the union of both and one in both . . . so is it with His Mystical Body" [121] since the Word of God took unto Himself a human nature liable to sufferings, so that He might consecrate in His blood the visible Society founded by Him and "lead man back to things invisible under a visible rule." [122]

65. For this reason We deplore and condemn the pernicious error of those who dream of an imaginary Church, a kind of society that finds its origin and growth in charity, to which, somewhat contemptuously, they oppose another, which they call juridical. But this distinction which they introduce is false: for they fail to understand that the reason which led our Divine Redeemer to give to the community of man He founded the constitution of a Society, perfect of its kind and containing all the juridical and social elements -namely, that He might perpetuate on earth the saving work of Redemption [123] -- was also the reason why He willed it to be enriched with the heavenly gifts of the Paraclete. The Eternal Father indeed willed it to be the "kingdom of the Son of his predilection;" [124] but it was to be a real kingdom, in which all believers should make Him the entire offering of their intellect and will, [125] and humbly and obediently model themselves on Him, Who for our sake "was made obedient unto death." [126] There can, then, be no real opposition or conflict between the invisible mission of the Holy Spirit and the juridical commission of Ruler and Teacher received from Christ, since they mutually complement and perfect each other -- as do the body and soul in man -- and proceed from our one Redeemer who not only said as He breathed on the Apostles "Receive ye the Holy Spirit," [127] but also clearly commanded: "As the Father hath sent me, I also send you"; [128] and again: "He that heareth you heareth me." [129]

66. And if at times there appears in the Church something that indicates the weakness of our human nature, it should not be attributed to her juridical constitution, but rather to that regrettable inclination to evil found in each individual, which its Divine Founder permits even at times in the most exalted members of His Mystical Body, for the purpose of testing the virtue of the shepherds no less than of the flocks, and that all may increase the merit of their Christian faith. For, as We said above, Christ did not wish to exclude sinners from His Church; hence if some of her members are suffering from spiritual maladies, that is no reason why we should lessen our love for the Church, but rather a reason why we should increase our devotion to her members. Certainly the loving Mother is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed on all; in the evangelical counsels which she recommends; in those heavenly gifts and extraordinary graces through which, with inexhaustible fecundity, [130] she generates hosts of martyrs, virgins and confessors. But it cannot be laid to her charge if some members fall, weak or wounded. In their name she prays to God daily: "Forgive us our trespasses"; and with the brave heart of a mother she applies herself at once to the work of nursing them back to spiritual health. When therefore we call the Body of Jesus Christ "mystical," the very meaning of the word conveys a solemn warning. It is a warning that echoes in these words of St. Leo: "Recognize, O Christian, your dignity, and being made a sharer of the divine nature go not back to your former worthlessness along the way of unseemly conduct. Keep in mind of what Head and of what Body you are a member." [131] (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)

Holy Mother Church has no need to engage in a "self-examination" as she is perfect, without any spot of error or taint of any kind.

As a true revolutionary, however, Jorge Mario Bergoglio contended that the Catholic Church had erred in order to justify his own schemes of revolutionary change that had been condemned solemnly by the infallible teaching authority of Holy Mother Church:

These firings, therefore, with all diligence and care having been formulated by us, we define that it be permitted to no one to bring forward, or to write, or to compose, or to think, or to teach a different faith. Whosoever shall presume to compose a different faith, or to propose, or teach, or hand to those wishing to be converted to the knowledge of the truth, from the Gentiles or Jews, or from any heresy, any different Creed; or to introduce a new voice or invention of speech to subvert these things which now have been determined by us, all these, if they be Bishops or clerics let them be deposed, the Bishops from the Episcopate, the clerics from the clergy; but if they be monks or laymen: let them be anathematized. (Constantinople III).

7. It is with no less deceit, venerable brothers, that other enemies of divine revelation, with reckless and sacrilegious effrontery, want to import the doctrine of human progress into the Catholic religion. They extol it with the highest praise, as if religion itself were not of God but the work of men, or a philosophical discovery which can be perfected by human means. The charge which Tertullian justly made against the philosophers of his own time "who brought forward a Stoic and a Platonic and a Dialectical Christianity" can very aptly apply to those men who rave so pitiably. Our holy religion was not invented by human reason, but was most mercifully revealed by God; therefore, one can quite easily understand that religion itself acquires all its power from the authority of God who made the revelation, and that it can never be arrived at or perfected by human reason. In order not to be deceived and go astray in a matter of such great importance, human reason should indeed carefully investigate the fact of divine revelation. Having done this, one would be definitely convinced that God has spoken and therefore would show Him rational obedience, as the Apostle very wisely teaches. For who can possibly not know that all faith should be given to the words of God and that it is in the fullest agreement with reason itself to accept and strongly support doctrines which it has determined to have been revealed by God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived? (Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)

In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

Not least among the blessings which have resulted from the public and legitimate honor paid to the Blessed Virgin and the saints is the perfect and perpetual immunity of the Church from error and heresy. We may well admire in this the admirable wisdom of the Providence of God, who, ever bringing good out of evil, has from time to time suffered the faith and piety of men to grow weak, and allowed Catholic truth to be attacked by false doctrines, but always with the result that truth has afterwards shone out with greater splendor, and that men's faith, aroused from its lethargy, has shown itself more vigorous than before. ( Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925.)

For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)

Giving voice to the desire of many of his fellow revolutionaries over the past forty-eight years since the end of the "Second" Vatican Council on December 8, 1965, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, including that of his chief Commissar and ideologist, Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez Jorge Mario Bergoglio wanted the counterfeit church of conciliarism's diocesan "bishops" to undergo a "missionary conversion," which meang to cease acting in any way wherein "the voice of the faithful" was not considered in matters of governance and pastoral praxis:

30. Each particular Church, as a portion of the Catholic Church under the leadership of its bishop, is likewise called to missionary conversion. It is the primary subject of evangelization,[30] since it is the concrete manifestation of the one Church in one specific place, and in it “the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of Christ is truly present and operative”.[31] It is the Church incarnate in a certain place, equipped with all the means of salvation bestowed by Christ, but with local features. Its joy in communicating Jesus Christ is expressed both by a concern to preach him to areas in greater need and in constantly going forth to the outskirts of its own territory or towards new sociocultural settings.[32] Wherever the need for the light and the life of the Risen Christ is greatest, it will want to be there.[33] To make this missionary impulse ever more focused, generous and fruitful, I encourage each particular Church to undertake a resolute process of discernment, purification and reform.

31. The bishop must always foster this missionary communion in his diocesan Church, following the ideal of the first Christian communities, in which the believers were of one heart and one soul (cf. Acts 4:32). To do so, he will sometimes go before his people, pointing the way and keeping their hope vibrant. At other times, he will simply be in their midst with his unassuming and merciful presence. At yet other times, he will have to walk after them, helping those who lag behind and – above all – allowing the flock to strike out on new paths. In his mission of fostering a dynamic, open and missionary communion, he will have to encourage and develop the means of participation proposed in the Code of Canon Law,[34] and other forms of pastoral dialogue, out of a desire to listen to everyone and not simply to those who would tell him what he would like to hear. Yet the principal aim of these participatory processes should not be ecclesiastical organization but rather the missionary aspiration of reaching everyone. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

This is the language of revolutionaries.

Revolutionaries are always determined to force those who do not agree with their ideological predilections to undergo a "purification of memory." This is straight out of George Orwell's 1984, which itself was meant to describe not only conditions in the prison camp by the name of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics that were being replicated, albeit on an incremental basis, in so-called Western democracies when the book was published in 1948.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio wanted his "bishops" and their chancery staffs to divest themselves of whatever monarchical trappings they may have retained in order to enter into "dialogue" with everyone, including going forth into new "sociocultural settings." His process of "discernment, purification and reform" is nothing other than Vladimir Lenin's and Mao Zedong’s programs of "re-education" and "rehabilitation."

There is a way to describe Jorge's process of "purification, discernment and reform:" Ideological brainwashing and reprogramming.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio was unconcerned about what he termed a few passages later with the transmission of what he called "disjointed doctrines." He was concerned about "reaching everyone." His "outreach," however, was premised upon a false gospel that has no regard for doctrinal truth or the patrimony of the Holy Faith. His plan for the "missionary "purification" of his "bishops" so that they would not be doctrinal "police officers" but rather "gentle" shepherds stood in great contrast to these stirring words written to the bishops of his day by Pope Pius VI in his first encyclical letter, Inscrutabile, December 25, 1775:

5. For the same reason you should undoubtedly always give special attention to the beauty of the house of God and the splendor and dignity of objects dedicated to the divine service. Such beauty and splendor often greatly inspire the faithful, and draw them to the veneration of sacred realities. It would be very improper for the bishop's house to be cleaner and furnished more tastefully than the abode of holiness, the palace of the living God. It would make no sense to see holy vestments, adornments for the altar and all the furniture in the church worn out with age and torn or dirty, while the bishop's table is well laden, the priest's clothing very clean and finely coordinated. St. Peter Damian expressed this well: "It is an accusation which brings great confusion on us that some men both offer and lay the Lord's Body on a dirty altar cloth and that they fearlessly place the Body of the Savior in a vessel which no lord, worm though he is, would put to his own lips!"[7] But We know that you are far from committing this sin of negligence of which the holy cardinal accuses those who spend the goods acquired by the Church "not in buying books or ornaments and utensils for their churches" but for their own use as "necessary expenses."

6. We thought it useful to speak to you lovingly on these matters in order to strengthen your excellent resolve. But a much more serious subject demands that We speak of it, or rather mourn over it. We refer to the pestilent disease which the wickedness of our times brings forth. We must unite our minds and strength in treating this plague before it grows rife and becomes incurable in the Church through Our oversight. For in recent days, the dangerous times foretold by the Apostle Paul have clearly arrived, when there will be "men who love themselves, who are lifted up, proud, blasphemous, traitors, lovers of pleasure instead of God, men who are always learning but never arriving at the knowledge of truth, possessing indeed the appearance of piety but denying its power, corrupt in mind, reprobate about the faith."[8] These men raise themselves up into "lying" teachers, as they are called by Peter the prince of the Apostles, and bring in sects of perdition. They deny the Lord who bought them and bring upon themselves swift destruction. They say they are wise and they have become fools, and their uncomprehending heart is darkened.

You yourselves, established as scouts in the house of Israel, see clearly the many victories claimed by a philosophy full of deceit. You see the ease with which it attracts to itself a great host of peoples, concealing its impiety with the honorable name of philosophy. Who could express in words or call to mind the wickedness of the tenets and evil madness which it imparts? While such men apparently intend to search out wisdom, "they fail because they do not search in the proper way. . . and they fall into errors which lead them astray from ordinary wisdom."[9] They have come to such a height of impiety that they make out that God does not exist, or if He does that He is idle and uncaring, making no revelation to men. Consequently it is not surprising that they assert that everything holy and divine is the product of the minds of inexperienced men smitten with empty fear of the future and seduced by a vain hope of immortality. But those deceitful sages soften and conceal the wickedness of their doctrine with seductive words and statements; in this way, they attract and wretchedly ensnare many of the weak into rejecting their faith or allowing it to be greatly shaken. While they pursue a remarkable knowledge, they open their eyes to behold a false light which is worse than the very darkness. Naturally our enemy, desirous of harming us and skilled in doing so, just as he made use of the serpent to deceive the first human beings, has armed the tongues of those men with the poison of his deceitfulness in order to lead astray the minds of the faithful. The prophet prays that his soul may be delivered from such deceitful tongues.[10] In this way these men by their speech "enter in lowliness, capture mildly, softly bind and kill in secret."[11] This results in great moral corruption, in license of thought and speech, in arrogance and rashness in every enterprise.

7. When they have spread this darkness abroad and torn religion out of men's hearts, these accursed philosophers proceed to destroy the bonds of union among men, both those which unite them to their rulers, and those which urge them to their duty. They keep proclaiming that man is born free and subject to no one, that society accordingly is a crowd of foolish men who stupidly yield to priests who deceive them and to kings who oppress them, so that the harmony of priest and ruler is only a monstrous conspiracy against the innate liberty of man.

Everyone must understand that such ravings and others like them, concealed in many deceitful guises, cause greater ruin to public calm the longer their impious originators are unrestrained. They cause a serious loss of souls redeemed by Christ's blood wherever their teaching spreads, like a cancer; it forces its way into public academies, into the houses of the great, into the palaces of kings, and even enters the sanctuary, shocking as it is to say so.

8. Consequently, you who are the salt of the earth, guardians and shepherds of the Lord's flock, whose business it is to fight the battles of the Lord, arise and gird on your sword, which is the word of God, and expel this foul contagion from your lands. How long are we to ignore the common insult to faith and Church? Let the words of Bernard arouse us like a lament of the spouse of Christ: "Of old was it foretold and the time of fulfillment is now at hand: Behold, in peace is my sorrow most sorrowful. It was sorrowful first when the martyrs died; afterwards it was more sorrowful in the fight with the heretics and now it is most sorrowful in the conduct of the members of the household.... The Church is struck within and so in peace is my sorrow most sorrowful. But what peace? There is peace and there is no peace. There is peace from the pagans and peace from the heretics, but no peace from the children. At that time the voice will lament: Sons did I rear and exalt, but they despised me. They despised me and defiled me by a bad life, base gain, evil traffic, and business conducted in the dark."[12] Who can hear these tearful complaints of our most holy mother without feeling a strong urge to devote all his energy and effort to the Church, as he has promised? Therefore cast out the old leaven, remove the evil from your midst. Forcefully and carefully banish poisonous books from the eyes of your flock, and at once courageously set apart those who have been infected, to prevent them harming the rest. The holy Pope Leo used to say, "We can rule those entrusted to us only by pursuing with zeal for the Lord's faith those who destroy and those who are destroyed and by cutting them off from sound minds with the utmost severity to prevent the plague spreading."[13] In doing this We exhort and advise you to be all of one mind and in harmony as you strive for the same object, just as the Church has one faith, one baptism, and one spirit. As you are joined together in the hierarchy, so you should unite equally with virtue and desire.

The affair is of the greatest importance since it concerns the Catholic faith, the purity of the Church, the teaching of the saints, the peace of the empire, and the safety of nations. Since it concerns the entire body of the Church, it is a special concern of yours because you are called to share in Our pastoral concern, and the purity of the faith is particularly entrusted to your watchfulness. "Now therefore, Brothers, since you are overseers among God's people and their soul depends on you, raise their hearts to your utterance,"[14] that they may stand fast in faith and achieve the rest which is prepared for believers only. Beseech, accuse, correct, rebuke and fear not: for ill-judged silence leaves in their error those who could be taught, and this is most harmful both to them and to you who should have dispelled the error. The holy Church is powerfully refreshed in the truth as it struggles zealously for the truth. In this divine work you should not fear either the force or favor of your enemies. The bishop should not fear since the anointing of the Holy Spirit has strengthened him: the shepherd should not be afraid since the prince of pastors has taught him by his own example to despise life itself for the safety of his flock: the cowardice and depression of the hireling should not dwell in a bishop's heart. Our great predecessor Gregory, in instructing the heads of the churches, said with his usual excellence: "Often imprudent guides in their fear of losing human favor are afraid to speak the right freely. As the word of truth has it, they guard their flock not with a shepherd's zeal but as hirelings do, since they flee when the wolf approaches by hiding themselves in silence.... A shepherd fearing to speak the right is simply a man retreating by keeping silent."[15] But if the wicked enemy of the human race, the better to frustrate your efforts, ever brings it about that a plague of epidemic proportions is hidden from the religious powers of the world, please do not be terrified but walk in God's house in harmony, with prayer, and in truth, the three arms of our service. Remember that when the people of Juda were defiled, the best means of purification was the public reading to all, from the least to the greatest, of the book of the law lately found by the priest Helcias in the Lord's temple; at once the whole people agreed to destroy the abominations and seal a covenant in the Lord's presence to follow after the Lord and observe His precepts, testimonies and ceremonies with their whole heart and soul."[16] For the same reason Josaphat sent priests and Levites to bring the book of the law throughout the cities of Juda and to teach the people.[17] The proclamation of the divine word has been entrusted to your faith by divine, not human, authority. So assemble your people and preach to them the gospel of Jesus Christ. From that divine source and heavenly teaching draw draughts of true philosophy for your flock. Persuade them that subjects ought to keep faith and show obedience to those who by God's ordering lead and rule them. To those who are devoted to the ministry of the Church, give proofs of faith, continence, sobriety, knowledge, and liberality, that they may please Him to whom they have proved themselves and boast only of what is serious, moderate, and religious. But above all kindle in the minds of everyone that love for one another which Christ the Lord so often and so specifically praised. For this is the one sign of Christians and the bond of perfection. (Pope Pius VI, Inscrutabile, December 25, 1776.)

Although Pope Pius VI was writing about the Judeo-Masonic pseudo-philosophies of naturalism that had been let loose in the world and were building up to create the first government in the history of the world that professed no official religion (even the pagans of yore had an official pietas, usually that of some pagan "gods" and/or the cult of an emperor), that of the United States of America, whose false founding principles came to serve as one of the fundamental building blocks of conciliarism's embrace of "separation of Church and State” (see Clothes Do Not Make Any Man a True and Legitimate Successor of Saint Peter, part one) the open, undisguised warfare against Christ the King that motivated the forces of the French Revolutionaries and all subsequent social revolutionaries thereafter, his words nevertheless apply just as equally to the likes of the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez, and Victor Manuel Fernandez, men who are imbued with the principles of the twin, interrelated revolutions of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry that contributed to the rise of Modernism.

Moreover, Pope Saint Pius X explained the absolute necessity for bishops, starting with his own duties as the Vicar of Christ on earth, to oppose the very Modernist principles that have been advanced by the counterfeit church of conciliarism and that serve as the very foundation of Evangelii Gaudium:

1. One of the primary obligations assigned by Christ to the office divinely committed to Us of feeding the Lord's flock is that of guarding with the greatest vigilance the deposit of the faith delivered to the saints, rejecting the profane novelties of words and the gainsaying of knowledge falsely so called. There has never been a time when this watchfulness of the supreme pastor was not necessary to the Catholic body, for owing to the efforts of the enemy of the human race, there have never been lacking "men speaking perverse things," "vain talkers and seducers," "erring and driving into error." It must, however, be confessed that these latter days have witnessed a notable increase in the number of the enemies of the Cross of Christ, who, by arts entirely new and full of deceit, are striving to destroy the vital energy of the Church, and, as far as in them lies, utterly to subvert the very Kingdom of Christ. Wherefore We may no longer keep silence, lest We should seem to fail in Our most sacred duty, and lest the kindness that, in the hope of wiser counsels, We have hitherto shown them, should be set down to lack of diligence in the discharge of Our office. . . . .

55. But of what avail, Venerable Brethren, will be all Our commands and prescriptions if they be not dutifully and firmly carried out? In order that this may be done it has seemed expedient to us to extend to all dioceses the regulations which the Bishops of Umbria, with great wisdom, laid down for theirs many years ago. "In order," they say, ''to extirpate the errors already propagated and to prevent their further diffusion, and to remove those teachers of impiety through whom the pernicious effects of such diffusion are being perpetuated, this sacred Assembly, following the example of St. Charles Borromeo, has decided to establish in each of the dioceses a Council consisting of approved members of both branches of the clergy, which shall be charged with the task of noting the existence of errors and the devices by which new ones are introduced and propagated, and to inform the Bishop of the whole, so that he may take counsel with them as to the best means for suppressing the evil at the outset and preventing it spreading for the ruin of souls or, worse still, gaining strength and growth". . . .

56. Lest what We have laid down thus far should pass into oblivion, We will and ordain that the Bishops of all dioceses, a year after the publication of these letters and every three years thenceforward, furnish the Holy See with a diligent and sworn report on the things which have been decreed in this Our Letter, and on the doctrines that find currency among the clergy, and especially in the seminaries and other Catholic institutions, those not excepted which are not subject to the Ordinary, and We impose the like obligation on the Generals of religious orders with regard to those who are under them.

57. This, Venerable Brethren, is what We have thought it Our duty to write to you for the salvation of all who believe. The adversaries of the Church will doubtless abuse what We have said to refurbish the old calumny by which We are traduced as the enemy of science and of the progress of humanity. As a fresh answer to such accusations, which the history of the Christian religion refutes by never-failing evidence, it is Our intention to establish by every means in our power a special Institute in which, through the co-operation of those Catholics who are most eminent for their learning, the advance of science and every other department of knowledge may be promoted under the guidance and teaching of Catholic truth. God grant that We may happily realize Our design with the assistance of all those who bear a sincere love for the Church of Christ. But of this We propose to speak on another occasion.

Meanwhile, Venerable Brethren, fully confident in your zeal and energy, We beseech for you with Our whole heart the abundance of heavenly light, so that in the midst of this great danger to souls from the insidious invasions of error upon every hand, you may see clearly what ought to be done, and labor to do it with all your strength and courage. May Jesus Christ, the author and finisher of our faith, be with you in His power; and may the Immaculate Virgin, the destroyer of all heresies, be with you by her prayers and aid. And We, as a pledge of Our affection and of the Divine solace in adversity, most lovingly grant to you, your clergy and people, the Apostolic Benediction. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Popes Pius VI and Saint Pius X were concerned about uprooting errors, charging their bishops to be insistent upon doing so, which was why Jorge Mario Bergoglio was intent on changing even the nature of the papacy in conciliar captivity as he believed that such "witch hunts" had harmed" the "credibility" of the Catholic Church.

IV. "Purification" Even for the "Papacy" in Conciliar Captivity

Specifically, this is what Jorge Mario Bergoglio wrote concerning the further "reform" of what most people think in the world is the papacy:

32. Since I am called to put into practice what I ask of others, I too must think about a conversion of the papacy. It is my duty, as the Bishop of Rome, to be open to suggestions which can help make the exercise of my ministry more faithful to the meaning which Jesus Christ wished to give it and to the present needs of evangelization. Pope John Paul II asked for help in finding “a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation”.[35] We have made little progress in this regard. The papacy and the central structures of the universal Church also need to hear the call to pastoral conversion. The Second Vatican Council stated that, like the ancient patriarchal Churches, episcopal conferences are in a position “to contribute in many and fruitful ways to the concrete realization of the collegial spirit”.[36] Yet this desire has not been fully realized, since a juridical status of episcopal conferences which would see them as subjects of specific attributions, including genuine doctrinal authority, has not yet been sufficiently elaborated.[37] Excessive centralization, rather than proving helpful, complicates the Church’s life and her missionary outreach.

33. Pastoral ministry in a missionary key seeks to abandon the complacent attitude that says: “We have always done it this way”. I invite everyone to be bold and creative in this task of rethinking the goals, structures, style and methods of evangelization in their respective communities. A proposal of goals without an adequate communal search for the means of achieving them will inevitably prove illusory. I encourage everyone to apply the guidelines found in this document generously and courageously, without inhibitions or fear. The important thing is to not walk alone, but to rely on each other as brothers and sisters, and especially under the leadership of the bishops, in a wise and realistic pastoral discernment. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

Little progress?

In actual truth, great "progress" has been made in changing the public face of what most people, Catholics and non-Catholics alike think about the "papacy."

The late Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI meant to establishe a precedent when he resigned from what he thought was the Chair of Saint Peter on Monday, February 11, 2013, the Feast of the Apparition of Our Lady of Lourdes. The old German “new theologian” thus served as a perverse kind of Saint John the Baptist when he wrote about the need for the papal primacy to be exercised in a way that would be consistent with his own mythological view, debunked may times on this site, on how he believed it had been exercised in the First Millennium before the Greek Schism of 1054:

How, then are the maximum demands to be decided in advance? Certainly, no one who claims allegiance to Catholic theology can simply declare the doctrine of primacy null and void, especially not if he seeks to understand the objections and evaluates with an open mind the relative weight of what can be determined historically. Nor it is possible, on the other hand, for him to regard as the only possible form and, consequently, as binding on all Christians the form this primacy has taken in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. . . .

After all, Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, in the same bull in which he excommunicated the Patriarch Michael Cerularius and thus inaugurated the schism between East and West, designated the Emperor and the people of Constantinople as "very Christian and orthodox", although their concept of the Roman primary was certainly far less different from that of Cerularius than from that, let us say, of the First Vatican Council. In other words, Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of primacy than had been formulated and was lived in the first millennium. (Joseph Alois Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 198-199)

Perhaps inspired by his handpicked prefect of the so-called Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Karol Joszef Wojtyla/John Paul II became the first conciliar "pope" to speak of a "rethinking" of the "Petrine Ministry" after over twenty years of little "papal" acts that whittled away at the notion of the papacy as a monarchy (the taking off the Papal Tiara by Montini/Paul VI, who also genuflected before Athenagoras, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople; "episcopal collegiality" as envisioned by the "Second" Vatican Council and practiced by the conciliar "popes;" Luciani/John Paul I's "installation" service as opposed to a coronation; endless acts of "papal" inferiority when visiting Talmudic synagogues and Mohammedan mosques and Protestant churches; Ratzinger/Benedict's removal of the tiara from his "papal" coat of arms, replacing it with a mitre). Wojtyla/John Paul II wrote the following in Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995, a heretical document that is the antithesis of Pope Pius XI's Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928:

Whatever relates to the unity of all Christian communities clearly forms part of the concerns of the primacy. As Bishop of Rome I am fully aware, as I have reaffirmed in the present Encyclical Letter, that Christ ardently desires the full and visible communion of all those Communities in which, by virtue of God's faithfulness, his Spirit dwells. I am convinced that I have a particular responsibility in this regard, above all in acknowledging the ecumenical aspirations of the majority of the Christian Communities and in heeding the request made of me to find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation. For a whole millennium Christians were united in "a brotherly fraternal communion of faith and sacramental life ... If disagreements in belief and discipline arose among them, the Roman See acted by common consent as moderator".

In this way the primacy exercised its office of unity. When addressing the Ecumenical Patriarch His Holiness Dimitrios I, I acknowledged my awareness that "for a great variety of reasons, and against the will of all concerned, what should have been a service sometimes manifested itself in a very different light. But ... it is out of a desire to obey the will of Christ truly that I recognize that as Bishop of Rome I am called to exercise that ministry ... I insistently pray the Holy Spirit to shine his light upon us, enlightening all the Pastors and theologians of our Churches, that we may seek—together, of course—the forms in which this ministry may accomplish a service of love recognized by all concerned".

This is an immense task, which we cannot refuse and which I cannot carry out by myself. Could not the real but imperfect communion existing between us persuade Church leaders and their theologians to engage with me in a patient and fraternal dialogue on this subject, a dialogue in which, leaving useless controversies behind, we could listen to one another, keeping before us only the will of Christ for his Church and allowing ourselves to be deeply moved by his plea "that they may all be one ... so that the world may believe that you have sent me" (Jn 17:21)? (Karol Joszef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995.)

Little has been done?

What had been done from 1963 to 2013 and at Bergoglio proposed to do during his own antipapal reign was contrary to the very Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church, something that the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council, infallibly guided by the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, taught solemnly under the authority of Pope Pius IX:

1. And so, supported by the clear witness of Holy Scripture, and adhering to the manifest and explicit decrees both of our predecessors the Roman Pontiffs and of general councils, we promulgate anew the definition of the ecumenical Council of Florence [49], which must be believed by all faithful Christians, namely that the Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff hold a world-wide primacy, and that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, the prince of the apostles, true vicar of Christ, head of the whole Church and father and teacher of all Christian people.

To him, in blessed Peter, full power has been given by our lord Jesus Christ to tend, rule and govern the universal Church.

All this is to be found in the acts of the ecumenical councils and the sacred canons.

2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

3. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one Supreme Shepherd [50].

4. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.

5. This power of the Supreme Pontiff by no means detracts from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the apostles by appointment of the Holy Spirit, tend and govern individually the particular flocks which have been assigned to them. On the contrary, this power of theirs is asserted, supported and defended by the Supreme and Universal Pastor; for St. Gregory the Great says: "My honor is the honor of the whole Church. My honor is the steadfast strength of my brethren. Then do I receive true honor, when it is denied to none of those to whom honor is due." [51]

6. Furthermore, it follows from that supreme power which the Roman Pontiff has in governing the whole Church, that he has the right, in the performance of this office of his, to communicate freely with the pastors and flocks of the entire Church, so that they may be taught and guided by him in the way of salvation.

7. And therefore we condemn and reject the opinions of those who hold that this communication of the Supreme Head with pastors and flocks may be lawfully obstructed; or that it should be dependent on the civil power, which leads them to maintain that what is determined by the Apostolic See or by its authority concerning the government of the Church, has no force or effect unless it is confirmed by the agreement of the civil authority.

8. Since the Roman Pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole Church, we likewise teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful [52], and that in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment [53]. The sentence of the Apostolic See (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54]. And so they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman Pontiff.

9. So, then, if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the Churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema. (Chapter 3, Dogmatic Constitution of the Church, Vatican Council, July 18, 1870.)

This is not a matter of just happening to "do things a certain way" because "we have always done things this way." This is a matter of absolute fidelity to the teaching of Holy Mother Church, To propose "things" that are opposed to the very Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church and the nature of Papal Primacy is to depart from the teaching of Catholic truth and to imperil one's very salvation.

Bergoglio's desire to shift decision-making powers even on doctrinal matters to the level of the national "episcopal" conferences was the realization of the goals of his fellow revolutionaries and made prophets out of them for daring to assert what I was taught by a conciliar presbyter when riding from Emmaus, Pennsylvania, to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Karol Jozef Wojtyla/John Paul II's liturgical extravaganza at Logan Circle there on Thursday, October 4, 1979, the Feast of Saint Francis of Assisi, as he envisioned a day where "Rome was nothing more than a clearinghouse for the ideas and liturgies developed at the local level." While such has been the case on a de facto basis for a long time now, Bergoglio put his "official" seal of approval on that which about which he had discoursed for decades prior to becoming “Pope Francis.” After having felt what he believed to have been the "stinging wrath" of "Rome" during his time as conciliar "archbishop" of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio desired to institutionalize this devolution of power on a de jure (a matter of law) basis.

Once again, of course, Bergoglio's desire for even more "episcopal collegiality" and more decentralization of power from Rome to the national "episcopal" conferences and local dioceses was at the very heart of Modernism, something that Pope Saint Pius X pointed out in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:

It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From all that has preceded, it is abundantly clear how great and how eager is the passion of such men for innovation. In all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to be reformed, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology: rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to be harmonized with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the capacity of the people. Regarding worship, they say, the number of external devotions is to be reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head. They cry out that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized The Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must be likewise modified. The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, and are to be more encouraged in practice. They ask that the clergy should return to their primitive humility and poverty, and that in their ideas and action they should admit the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, gladly listening to the teaching of their Protestant masters, would desire the suppression of the celibacy of the clergy. What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed by them and according to their principles? (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Yes, I know that some of you are wondering why I am bothering to point out the obvious. As I have pointed out in the past, I am aware that some readers are reading this site for the first time and are not familiar with past articles. This is especially the case now as Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV has chosen to make Evangelii Gaudium his very own, and the words written here apply now equally to him as they did to Bergoglio himself when he issued the document on my sixty-second birthday in 2013, the Feast of Saint John of the Cross and the Commemoration of Saint Chrysogonus.

V. Disjointed Transmission of a Multitude of Doctrines to be Insistently Imposed

Repeating themes that he had expressed numerous times before in the past eight months before the issuance of Evangelii Gaudium to throw doctrine fidelity under the bus by once again making a false distinction between "core" or "essential" truths to those that are supposedly not part of the "core." He was even bold enough to misappropriate Saint Thomas Aquinas to present him as a perjured witness in this regard:

34. If we attempt to put all things in a missionary key, this will also affect the way we communicate the message. In today’s world of instant communication and occasionally biased media coverage, the message we preach runs a greater risk of being distorted or reduced to some of its secondary aspects. In this way certain issues which are part of the Church’s moral teaching are taken out of the context which gives them their meaning. The biggest problem is when the message we preach then seems identified with those secondary aspects which, important as they are, do not in and of themselves convey the heart of Christ’s message. We need to be realistic and not assume that our audience understands the full background to what we are saying, or is capable of relating what we say to the very heart of the Gospel which gives it meaning, beauty and attractiveness.

35. Pastoral ministry in a missionary style is not obsessed with the disjointed transmission of a multitude of doctrines to be insistently imposed. When we adopt a pastoral goal and a missionary style which would actually reach everyone without exception or exclusion, the message has to concentrate on the essentials, on what is most beautiful, most grand, most appealing and at the same time most necessary. The message is simplified, while losing none of its depth and truth, and thus becomes all the more forceful and convincing.

36. All revealed truths derive from the same divine source and are to be believed with the same faith, yet some of them are more important for giving direct expression to the heart of the Gospel. In this basic core, what shines forth is the beauty of the saving love of God made manifest in Jesus Christ who died and rose from the dead. In this sense, the Second Vatican Council explained, “in Catholic doctrine there exists an order or a ‘hierarchy’ of truths, since they vary in their relation to the foundation of the Christian faith”.[38] This holds true as much for the dogmas of faith as for the whole corpus of the Church’s teaching, including her moral teaching.

37. Saint Thomas Aquinas taught that the Church’s moral teaching has its own “hierarchy”, in the virtues and in the acts which proceed from them.[39] What counts above all else is “faith working through love” (Gal 5:6). Works of love directed to one’s neighbour are the most perfect external manifestation of the interior grace of the Spirit: “The foundation of the New Law is in the grace of the Holy Spirit, who is manifested in the faith which works through love”.[40] Thomas thus explains that, as far as external works are concerned, mercy is the greatest of all the virtues: “In itself mercy is the greatest of the virtues, since all the others revolve around it and, more than this, it makes up for their deficiencies. This is particular to the superior virtue, and as such it is proper to God to have mercy, through which his omnipotence is manifested to the greatest degree”.[41] (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

What a despicable little pest Jorge Mario Bergoglio was then and remained so until he died.

Bergoglio attempted once again in the passages from Evangelii Gaudium just cited above to posit a false, nonexistent "distinction" between the love of God and fidelity to the precepts contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith were beneath contempt and may very well have given him a special place in the torments of the lowest reaches of Hell as he never repented from any of this false teaching before he finally died on Easter Monday, April 21, 2025.

Saint John the Evangelist taught us very clearly that:

Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God. And every one that loveth him who begot, loveth him also who is born of him. In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the charity of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not heavy. (1 John 5: 1-3)

Father Frederick William Faber reminded us that to love God we must hate what He hates, and He hates heresy:

The love of God brings many new instincts into the heart. Heavenly and noble as they are, they bear no resemblance to what men would call the finer and more heroic developments of character. A spiritual discernment is necessary to their right appreciation. They are so unlike the growth of earth, that they must expect to meet on earth with only suspicion, misunderstanding, and dislike. It is not easy to defend them from a controversial point of view; for our controversy is obliged to begin by begging the question, or else it would be unable so much as to state its case. The axioms of the world pass current in the world, the axioms of the gospel do not. Hence the world has its own way. It talks us down. It tries us before tribunals where our condemnation is secured beforehand. It appeals to principles which are fundamental with most men but are heresies with us. Hence its audience takes part with it against us. We are foreigners, and must pay the penalty of being so. If we are misunderstood, we had no right to reckon on any thing else, being as we are, out of our own country. We are made to be laughed at. We shall be understood in heaven. Woe to those easy-going Christians whom the world can understand, and will tolerate because it sees they have a mind to compromise!

The love of souls is one of these instincts which the love of Jesus brings into our hearts. To the world it is proselytism, there mere wish to add to a faction, one of the selfish developments of party spirit. One while the stain of lax morality is affixed to it, another while the reproach of pharisaic strictness! For what the world seems to suspect least of all in religion is consistency. But the love of souls, however apostolic, is always subordinate to love of Jesus. We love souls because of Jesus, not Jesus because of souls. Thus there are times and places when we pass from the instinct of divine love to another, from the love of souls to the hatred of heresy. This last is particularly offensive to the world. So especially opposed is it to the spirit of the world, that, even in good, believing hearts, every remnant of worldliness rises in arms against this hatred of heresy, embittering the very gentlest of characters and spoiling many a glorious work of grace. Many a convert, in whose soul God would have done grand things, goes to his grave a spiritual failure, because he would not hate heresy. The heart which feels the slightest suspicion against the hatred of heresy is not yet converted. God is far from reigning over it yet with an undivided sovereignty. The paths of higher sanctity are absolutely barred against it. In the judgment of the world, and of worldly Christians, this hatred of heresy is exaggerated, bitter, contrary to moderation, indiscreet, unreasonable, aiming at too much, bigoted, intolerant, narrow, stupid, and immoral. What can we say to defend it? Nothing which they can understand. We had, therefore, better hold our peace. If we understand God, and He understands us, it is not so very hard to go through life suspected, misunderstood and unpopular. The mild self-opinionatedness of the gentle, undiscerning good will also take the world's view and condemn us; for there is a meek-loving positiveness about timid goodness which is far from God, and the instincts of whose charity is more toward those who are less for God, while its timidity is searing enough for harsh judgment. There are conversions where three-quarters of the heart stop outside the Church and only a quarter enters, and heresy can only be hated by an undivided heart. But if it is hard, it has to be borne. A man can hardly have the full use of his senses who is bent on proving to the world, God's enemy, that a thorough-going Catholic hatred of heresy is a right frame of mind. We might as well force a blind man to judge a question of color. Divine love inspheres in us a different circle of life, motive, and principle, which is not only not that of the world, but in direct enmity with it. From a worldly point of view, the craters in the moon are more explicable things than we Christians with our supernatural instincts. From the hatred of heresy we get to another of these instincts, the horror of sacrilege. The distress caused by profane words seems to the world but an exaggerated sentimentality. The penitential spirit of reparation which pervades the whole Church is, on its view, either a superstition or an unreality. The perfect misery which an unhallowed touch of the Blessed Sacrament causes to the servants of God provokes either the world's anger or its derision. Men consider it either altogether absurd in itself, or at any rate out of all proportion; and, if otherwise they have proofs of our common sense, they are inclined to put down our unhappiness to sheer hypocrisy. The very fact that they do not believe as we believe removes us still further beyond the reach even of their charitable comprehension. If they do not believe in the very existence our sacred things, how they shall they judge the excesses of a soul to which these sacred things are far dearer than itself? (Father Frederick William Faber, The Foot of the Cross, published originally in England in 1857 under the title of The Dolors of Mary, republished by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 294.)

Yes, each truth of the Holy Faith must be insisted upon with firmness by a pastor of souls. A truly good shepherd, of course, seeks to instill such a love of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church in the faithful that they will desire from the depths of their very hearts to be faithful to His teaching as taught infallibly by Holy Mother Church. This is as simple as teaching a person to put to memory and pray the Act of Faith:

O my God, I firmly believe that Thou art one God, in three Divine Persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost: I believe that Thy Divine Son became Man, and died for our sins, and that He will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe these and all the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches, because Thou hast revealed them, Who canst neither deceive nor be deceived. Amen. (The Act of Faith.)

It is the case furthermore that Jorge Mario Bergoglio's efforts to slay yet more straw men by referring to "disjointed doctrines" was premised upon his belief that men are incapable of learning the Faith in sustained, orderly manner, which is why he believed that it is the affective part of man that must govern pastoral work, not a sound catechesis based upon such thoroughly understandable works as Canon Francis Ripley's This Is The Faith, the Baltimore Catechism and Father Joseph Deharbe's Small Catechism are excellent for children of all ages and are even superb even for adults who need the Faith explained in a clearly understandable manner.

Far from being "disjointed," such a systematic instruction in the Faith provides solid support to the graces received--or, in the case of a catechumen, about to be received--in the Sacrament of Baptism and will provide a foundation to last the storms of every cross that comes the way of a believing Catholic in God's Holy Providence. To suggest that the beauty of the Catholic Faith is somehow in conflict with a firm and sure knowledge of her doctrines is to crown Christ the King anew with a crown thorns compose of the overweening pride and arrogance of those who want to make of It their own personal plaything, communicating to others that Its truths are as malleable as Playdough.

Bergoglio's own insistence on his Modernist method of sense perception led him to make the nonexistent distinction between "essential" and "non-essential" truths and to misapply Saint Thomas Aquinas's teaching on the hierarchy of virtues and vices in realm of moral theology to the realm of doctrine even though Pope Pius XI, who was very conversant with the teaching of the Angelic Doctor, pointed out was false on its face. Although phrased differently, this is the exact same approach taken by a certain heretic for whom he has expressed much admiration and respect, Martin Luther.

As readers are prone not to remember points made in various commentaries, permit me to cast this conciliar shibboleth aside once again by calling upon Pope Pius XI to explain to that are no such things as "fundamental" and "non-fundamental" doctrines:

Besides this, in connection with things which must be believed, it is nowise licit to use that distinction which some have seen fit to introduce between those articles of faith which are fundamental and those which are not fundamental, as they say, as if the former are to be accepted by all, while the latter may be left to the free assent of the faithful: for the supernatural virtue of faith has a formal cause, namely the authority of God revealing, and this is patient of no such distinction. For this reason it is that all who are truly Christ's believe, for example, the Conception of the Mother of God without stain of original sin with the same faith as they believe the mystery of the August Trinity, and the Incarnation of our Lord just as they do the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, according to the sense in which it was defined by the Ecumenical Council of the Vatican. Are these truths not equally certain, or not equally to be believed, because the Church has solemnly sanctioned and defined them, some in one age and some in another, even in those times immediately before our own? Has not God revealed them all? For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. But in the use of this extraordinary teaching authority no newly invented matter is brought in, nor is anything new added to the number of those truths which are at least implicitly contained in the deposit of Revelation, divinely handed down to the Church: only those which are made clear which perhaps may still seem obscure to some, or that which some have previously called into question is declared to be of faith. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)

As will be seen in a moment, Jorge Mario Bergoglio attempted to redeem his teaching that there are "core" truths of the Faith that need not be taught by saying that no truth must be denied. This is a neat trick for man whose recent embrace of the "hermeneutic of continuity" is in and of its very heretical nature opposed to the truth of the very Nature of God and has been condemned solemnly by the authority of the Catholic Church

VI. The Apostle of Newness

In most, although not in all, matters, the late, non-lamented Jorge Mario Bergoglio told us everything he believed within the first year of his becoming the sixth in the current line of antipopes on March 13, 2013, Wednesday of the Fourth Week of Lent. Even Jorge’s fictional “God of surprises” phrase made its first appearance during the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo Easter Vigil travesty on Saturday, March 30, 2013:

We stop short, we don’t understand, we don’t know what to do. Newness often makes us fearful, including the newness which God brings us, the newness which God asks of us. We are like the Apostles in the Gospel: often we would prefer to hold on to our own security, to stand in front of a tomb, to think about someone who has died, someone who ultimately lives on only as a memory, like the great historical figures from the past. We are afraid of God’s surprises. Dear brothers and sisters, we are afraid of God’s surprises! He always surprises us! The Lord is like that. . . .

On this radiant night, let us invoke the intercession of the Virgin Mary, who treasured all these events in her heart (cf. Lk 2:19,51) and ask the Lord to give us a share in his Resurrection. May he open us to the newness that transforms, to the beautiful surprises of God. May he make us men and women capable of remembering all that he has done in our own lives and in the history of our world. May he help us to feel his presence as the one who is alive and at work in our midst. And may he teach us each day, dear brothers and sisters, not to look among the dead for the Living One. Amen. ( 30 March 2013, Fake, Phony, Fraud Abomination of an Easter Vigil.)

We should all know by now that Jorge’s “God of surprises” is, as the Google-deplatformed Call Me Jorge pointed out in 2015, a Hasidic phrase that he has employed to signify an unconditional acceptance of those who sin against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, whether by means of natural or unnatural vice, as well as “reforming” the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s “Petrine Ministry” into an office that could be accepted by Protestants and the Orthodox as one among equals.

Indeed, the “God of surprises” was a phrase Jorge Mario Bergoglio used to puresue his unrelenting deconstruction of the vestiges of recognizable Catholic dogmatic theology, moral theology, Scriptural exegesis, ecclesiology, Patristics, pastoral theology, and worship. Although Bergoglio’s demonic work was but a continuation of the work that been undertaken by Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII on October 28, 1958, and advanced since then by Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI, Albino Luciani/John Paul I, Karol Josezf Wojtyla/John Paul II, and Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, he did believing Catholics the great favor of removing all pretense from his open belief in and support for dogmatic evolutionism. Now, however, many Catholics believe that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV will be a "moderate" successor of Bergoglio. A "moderate" revolution, though, is still a revolution, and the first rebel was Lucifer himself.

Principally, however, the man who was alaways soentirely unsurprising in his projection onto God his own Modernist beliefs used the phrase “God of surprises” to indemnify hardened sinners in the name of a false concept of “mercy” that excludes any exhortations to them whatsoever to reform their lives lest their immortal souls perish in the flames of hell for all eternity.

Nothing that Jorge Mario Bergoglio did in his twelve years, nineteen days as the conciliar sect's universal public face of apsotasy was in the least bit surprising to him as was steadfast in pursuing an agenda that he desired to use to eradicate the last remaining vestiges of Catholicism from his own false religious sect that claimed to be Catholic Church but is in fact her counterfeit ape.

It is also unsurprising that the lateSenor Bergoglio referred once again to the “God of surprises” in his general audience of Wednesday, August 23, 2017, the Feast of Saint Philip Benizi:

We listened to the Word of God in the Book of Revelation, and it says thus: “Behold, I make all things new” (21:5). Christian hope is based on faith in God, who always creates novelties in man’s life, He creates novelties in history and He creates novelties in the cosmos. Our God is the God that creates novelties, because He is the God of surprises. (We Are People of the Spring More Than the Autumnn.)

For this to be correct, of course, the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, must be capable of mutability, of constant change and evolution, and the Catholic Church’s Divine Constitution must be eminently unstable and subject to adaptation to meet the “modern needs” of men. Bergoglio’s predecessor, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, was forever htalking about the needs of “modern men” to justify his own embrace of novelty and innovation, an embrace he put into formalized terms in his infamous Christmas address to his conciliar curia on December 22, 2005:

It is precisely in this combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels that the very nature of true reform consists. In this process of innovation in continuity we must learn to understand more practically than before that the Church's decisions on contingent matters - for example, certain practical forms of liberalism or a free interpretation of the Bible - should necessarily be contingent themselves, precisely because they refer to a specific reality that is changeable in itself. It was necessary to learn to recognize that in these decisions it is only the principles that express the permanent aspect, since they remain as an undercurrent, motivating decisions from within.

On the other hand, not so permanent are the practical forms that depend on the historical situation and are therefore subject to change. (Christmas greetings to the Members of the Roman Curia and Prelature, December 22, 2005.)

Those were constantly trying to find some degree of “difference” between “Pope Francis’s” “God of surprises” and “Pope Benedict XVI’s” “innovation in continuity” were consigned to constant frustration as the two deceased antipopes simply used different terms to refer to the same condemned Modernist precept of dogmatic evolutionism.

It was no "suprise," therefore, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio wrote about "newness" in Evangelii Gaudium:

38. It is important to draw out the pastoral consequences of the Council’s teaching, which reflects an ancient conviction of the Church. First, it needs to be said that in preaching the Gospel a fitting sense of proportion has to be maintained. This would be seen in the frequency with which certain themes are brought up and in the emphasis given to them in preaching. For example, if in the course of the liturgical year a parish priest speaks about temperance ten times but only mentions charity or justice two or three times, an imbalance results, and precisely those virtues which ought to be most present in preaching and catechesis are overlooked. The same thing happens when we speak more about law than about grace, more about the Church than about Christ, more about the Pope than about God’s word.

39. Just as the organic unity existing among the virtues means that no one of them can be excluded from the Christian ideal, so no truth may be denied. The integrity of the Gospel message must not be deformed. What is more, each truth is better understood when related to the harmonious totality of the Christian message; in this context all of the truths are important and illumine one another. When preaching is faithful to the Gospel, the centrality of certain truths is evident and it becomes clear that Christian morality is not a form of stoicism, or self-denial, or merely a practical philosophy or a catalogue of sins and faults. Before all else, the Gospel invites us to respond to the God of love who saves us, to see God in others and to go forth from ourselves to seek the good of others. Under no circumstance can this invitation be obscured! All of the virtues are at the service of this response of love. If this invitation does not radiate forcefully and attractively, the edifice of the Church’s moral teaching risks becoming a house of cards, and this is our greatest risk. It would mean that it is not the Gospel which is being preached, but certain doctrinal or moral points based on specific ideological options. The message will run the risk of losing its freshness and will cease to have “the fragrance of the Gospel”.

41. At the same time, today’s vast and rapid cultural changes demand that we constantly seek ways of expressing unchanging truths in a language which brings out their abiding newness. “The deposit of the faith is one thing... the way it is expressed is another”.[45] There are times when the faithful, in listening to completely orthodox language, take away something alien to the authentic Gospel of Jesus Christ, because that language is alien to their own way of speaking to and understanding one another. With the holy intent of communicating the truth about God and humanity, we sometimes give them a false god or a human ideal which is not really Christian. In this way, we hold fast to a formulation while failing to convey its substance. This is the greatest danger. Let us never forget that “the expression of truth can take different forms. The renewal of these forms of expression becomes necessary for the sake of transmitting to the people of today the Gospel message in its unchanging meaning”.[46] (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

There are several dimensions to these passages that bear a brief mention or two before turning to the final two sections for today's segment in this series of drudgery and woe.

First, while it is true that preaching must be adapted to the abilities of the hearer to understand, it is not true that certain themes cannot be repeated as, to quote the Angelic Doctor himself, repetition is the mother of learning ("Repeticio est mater studiorum"). When times call for a bishop or priest to preach about a certain error or to condemn sins that are being promoted under cover of the civil law and are so readily found in the midst of the world as to be a source of constant temptation for Catholics, he must preach according to the circumstances. Anyone, such as, oh, say, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who does not believe that such circumstances exist today is delusional.

Second, Jorge Mario Bergoglio was attempting in these passages to claim that an insistent discussion of certain evils (e.g., contraception, abortion, "gay marriage") will turn people away from the Faith, a claim that denies the inherent power of truth to attract souls for the love of God. The moral teaching of the Catholic Church has never "become a house of cards" prior to the dawning of the age of conciliarism as Catholics had eloquent preachers such as Saint John Mary Vianney, the Patron Saint of diocesan priests, who did his fair share of condemning in his priestly life, which is precisely why he spent up to eighteen hours daily in the confession hearing the confessions of souls who were inspired by his preaching to get straight with God before they died, and Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, the Patron Saint of Moral Theologians, and countless others.

Third, Saint Thomas Aquinas, far from diminishing the truths of the doctrinal or moral order, sought to explain the Faith in his own preaching in terms that his hearers could understand without doing anything at all to make it appear as though eternal, immutable truths had changed or were even capable of change. This is what the Angelic Doctor, the Patron Saint of Theologians, sought to do when he preached in the simple, unlearned ways of the Neapolitans even though his was the most brilliant mind in the history of Holy Mother Church.

Conciliarism and its current exponent, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, have communicated that everything about the Catholic Faith is up for grabs.

How could Bergoglio have claimed that Catholics cannot continue to do "things" in the ways that they have always been done when to do so he had to deny the very Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church and thus contradict his contention that no truth of the Holy Faith is be denied by the "new evangelization"?

He could not and did not do so successfully.

VII. Slaying More Straw Men by Raising the Spectre of the Confessional as a "Torture Chamber"

As he has done in the past, Jorge Mario Bergoglio tried to present himself as a voice of "love" and "moderation" to distinguish himself from those priests/presbyters who would use the confessional as a "torture chamber:"

44. Moreover, pastors and the lay faithful who accompany their brothers and sisters in faith or on a journey of openness to God must always remember what the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches quite clearly: “Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors”.[49] Consequently, without detracting from the evangelical ideal, they need to accompany with mercy and patience the eventual stages of personal growth as these progressively occur.[50] I want to remind priests that the confessional must not be a torture chamber but rather an encounter with the Lord’s mercy which spurs us on to do our best. A small step, in the midst of great human limitations, can be more pleasing to God than a life which appears outwardly in order but moves through the day without confronting great difficulties. Everyone needs to be touched by the comfort and attraction of God’s saving love, which is mysteriously at work in each person, above and beyond their faults and failings.

45. We see then that the task of evangelization operates within the limits of language and of circumstances. It constantly seeks to communicate more effectively the truth of the Gospel in a specific context, without renouncing the truth, the goodness and the light which it can bring whenever perfection is not possible. A missionary heart is aware of these limits and makes itself “weak with the weak... everything for everyone” (1 Cor 9:22). It never closes itself off, never retreats into its own security, never opts for rigidity and defensiveness. It realizes that it has to grow in its own understanding of the Gospel and in discerning the paths of the Spirit, and so it always does what good it can, even if in the process, its shoes get soiled by the mud of the street. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio could not name one straw man priest or presbyter within his false religious sect who used the confessional or the "reconciliation room" as a "torture chamber."

Padre Pio of Pietrelcina used the confessional to upbraid women who were not dressed modestly and those who concealed secrets when making their confessions. Did this turn his confessional into a "torture chamber"?

A good confessor prays before hearing confessions that he might be given the wisdom to hearing each case justly, without favoring the rich or despising the poor while begging for prudence in difficult cases and to avoid being either too lax or harsh in his treatment of the penitent and the penance assigned according to the nature, number and circumstances of the sins confessed. It is priestly or presbyteral laxity in the confessional or the "reconciliation room" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism that is commonplace today, not what Bergoglio claimed gratuitously was harshness and severity.

Moreover, Bergoglio used the passages above once again to disparage the "security" that is part of the Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church by claiming that it is "rigid" and "defensive" to do so, teaching that one must get "soiled in the mud of the street" as one discerns what he think is the prompting of God the Holy Ghost. Bergoglio's claim in this regard was also self-serving as it was patently clear that he was using himself, "a slum priest," as the example to be followed in order to meet "the people where they are" to love them without demanding that they reform their lives and renounce their sins in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance.

The only spirit prompting Jorge Mario Bergoglio, however, was far from holy. He was and remains the Master of Lies and Prince of Darkness.

VIII. Doors Wide Enough for Pro-Abortion, Pro-Perversity Politicians and for Unrepentant Sinners

47. The Church is called to be the house of the Father, with doors always wide open. One concrete sign of such openness is that our church doors should always be open, so that if someone, moved by the Spirit, comes there looking for God, he or she will not find a closed door. There are other doors that should not be closed either. Everyone can share in some way in the life of the Church; everyone can be part of the community, nor should the doors of the sacraments be closed for simply any reason. This is especially true of the sacrament which is itself “the door”: baptism. The Eucharist, although it is the fullness of sacramental life, is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak.[51] These convictions have pastoral consequences that we are called to consider with prudence and boldness. Frequently, we act as arbiters of grace rather than its facilitators. But the Church is not a tollhouse; it is the house of the Father, where there is a place for everyone, with all their problems. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

As has been noted before on this site, all efforts on the part of well-meaning "conservative" and traditionally-minded Catholics in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism to seek to use conciliarism's 1983 Code of Canon Law to ban pro-abortion politicians from receiving what they think is Holy Communion in the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service have just come to a grounding halt, not that these delusional efforts had any chance of succeeding after over.

Indeed, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, quite unlike Karol Joszef Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who passively accepted the fact of pro-abortion Catholic politicians without ever seeking to discipline them, actually went out of his way to reaffirm the likes of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi time and time again while undermining anyone in his own “hierarchy,” including “Archbishop” Salvatore Cordileone of the San Francisco and one of the “bishops” he deposed, Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, who dared to, in Cordileone’s case, forbid Pelosi from the reception of what purports to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service or, in Strickland’s case of saying that he would do so (in addition to his other “offenses” such as opposing the sodomite agenda, especially by going to Los Angeles, California, to denounce the Los Angeles Dodgers for giving the cross-dressing advocates of perversity who go by the name of the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” a “community service award” at the same time a team of two “bishops” who had protected sodomites, appointed by the then Joseph Francis “Cardinal” Prevost, was under “investigation prior to his removal five months later.

This the hour of darkness in the life of the Church Militant on earth in her mystical burial as she lives out mystically the very life of her Divine Founder, Mystical Bridegroom and Invisible Head, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio's welcoming embrace that he has extended to Catholics living in objective states of Mortal Sin, especially by means of Amoris Laetitia, March 19, 2016, and Fiducia Supplicans, December 18, 2023, to approach what is thought to be the Most Blessed Sacrament without having first sought what is thought to be sacramental absolution in the conciliar structures plays very well to the sentimentally-minded and to those who have absolutely no intention of reforming their lives. That embrace, however, is from the devil as the Catholic Church teaches that those who receive Our Lord in Holy Communion sacrilegiously make an offering of their Communions to the devil himself.

Jorge's "loving embrace" has also been anathematized by the authority of the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent:

If it is unbeseeming for any one to approach to any of the sacred functions, unless he approach holily; assuredly, the more the holiness and divinity of this heavenly sacrament are understood by a Christian, the more diligently ought he to give heed that he approach not to receive it but with great reverence and holiness, especially as we read in the Apostle those words full of terror; He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself. Wherefore, he who would communicate, ought to recall to mind the precept of the Apostle; Let a man prove himself. Now ecclesiastical usage declares that necessary proof to be, that no one, conscious to himself of mortal sin, how contrite soever he may seem to himself, ought to approach to the sacred Eucharist without previous sacramental confession. This the holy Synod hath decreed is to be invariably observed by all Christians, even by those priests on whom it may be incumbent by their office to celebrate, provided the opportunity of a confessor do not fail them; but if, in an urgent necessity, a priest should celebrate without previous confession, let him confess as soon as possible. (Session XIII, Council of Trent, Chapter VII, " On the preparation to be given that one may worthily receive the sacred Eucharist," October 11, 1551.)

CANON XI.-lf any one saith, that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be anathema. And for fear lest so great a sacrament may be received unworthily, and so unto death and condemnation, this holy Synod ordains and declares, that sacramental confession, when a confessor may be had, is of necessity to be made beforehand, by those whose conscience is burthened with mortal sin, how contrite even soever they may think themselves. But if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or obstinately to assert, or even in public disputation to defend the contrary, he shall be thereupon excommunicated. (Canon XI, Session XIII, Council of Trent, October 11, 1551.)

What was that some defenders of Bergoglio were saying a few days ago about a "continuity" between the "Second" Vatican Council and the Council of Trent? (See Continuously Denying The Catholic Faith). If this is "continuity," then I hate to see what rupture looks like.

Please, spare me the song and dance that most young Catholics today, having never been taught about Mortal Sin, are not truly responsible for their actions and hence can approach what they think is Our Lord in Holy Communion with a clear conscience. Most Catholics engaged in vice against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, whether or unnatural, or who practice contraception or who have participated in abortion and/or have publicly defended a woman's nonexistent "right" to kill the very fruit of her womb know full well that the Catholic Church teaches that their actions are morally wrong. Indeed, most, although not all, such people have stayed away from what they think is Holy Mass precisely because they want no part in any religion that is going to tell them how to live their lives. These people have been told now by Bergoglio that they are welcome back without any precondition, that the only thing that matters is for them to "encounter" Our Lord. Bergoglio is not interested in the reformation of the lives of such people. He is interested only in seeking the "pastoral conversion" of those who are tied to the "past."

Some may argue that Jorge Mario Bergoglio wrote forcefully against abortion in a later passage in Evangelii Gaudium when the truth is that he did no such thing whatsoever. The grounds upon which Bergoglio opposed the execution of innocent human beings in the wombs of their mothers were purely naturalistic without any reference to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law or the Natural Law. His "opposition" was couched in the framework of "human rights" rather than the immutability of the binding precepts of the Fifth Commandment.

Here is the passage that some of those grasping at straws to find ways to redeem Evangelii Gaudium are citing to herald the "pope's" supposed opposition to abortion:

213. Among the vulnerable for whom the Church wishes to care with particular love and concern are unborn children, the most defenceless and innocent among us. Nowadays efforts are made to deny them their human dignity and to do with them whatever one pleases, taking their lives and passing laws preventing anyone from standing in the way of this. Frequently, as a way of ridiculing the Church’s effort to defend their lives, attempts are made to present her position as ideological, obscurantist and conservative. Yet this defence of unborn life is closely linked to the defence of each and every other human right. It involves the conviction that a human being is always sacred and inviolable, in any situation and at every stage of development. Human beings are ends in themselves and never a means of resolving other problems. Once this conviction disappears, so do solid and lasting foundations for the defence of human rights, which would always be subject to the passing whims of the powers that be. Reason alone is sufficient to recognize the inviolable value of each single human life, but if we also look at the issue from the standpoint of faith, “every violation of the personal dignity of the human being cries out in vengeance to God and is an offence against the creator of the individual”.[176]

214. Precisely because this involves the internal consistency of our message about the value of the human person, the Church cannot be expected to change her position on this question. I want to be completely honest in this regard. This is not something subject to alleged reforms or “modernizations”. It is not “progressive” to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life. On the other hand, it is also true that we have done little to adequately accompany women in very difficult situations, where abortion appears as a quick solution to their profound anguish, especially when the life developing within them is the result of rape or a situation of extreme poverty. Who can remain unmoved before such painful situations? (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

Holy Mother Church has no "position" on abortion.

She is Divine Repository of all that is contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith. She is the infallible teacher all that is contained in the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, whose precepts, though knowable by reason, she teaches authoritatively and in a manner that binds all human consciences at all times and in all places and under all circumstances.

Opposition to the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn is based upon our fidelity to the Fifth Commandment's firm prohibition against the direct, intention taking of any innocent human life.

Moreover, all of Jorge Mario Bergoglio's Marxist programs for the "redistribution of income" to produce the more "just world" as a means to "help" the "poor must ignore the simple fact that there can never be true justice in society as long as sin, that which caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer unspeakable horrors in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and that caused His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart to be thrust through and through with those Seven Swords of Sorrow, is promoted under cover of the civil law and is propagated through the various nooks and crannies of what passes for popular culture. He is oblivious to the simple truth expressed by Silvio Cardinal Antoniano in the Sixteenth Century that was quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929:

The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 30, 1930.)

This is the language of Catholicism.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio's language was that of Modernism.

IX. Jorge Mario Bergoglio's Efforts at Self-Vindication and Exaltation

48. If the whole Church takes up this missionary impulse, she has to go forth to everyone without exception. But to whom should she go first? When we read the Gospel we find a clear indication: not so much our friends and wealthy neighbours, but above all the poor and the sick, those who are usually despised and overlooked, “those who cannot repay you” (Lk 14:14). There can be no room for doubt or for explanations which weaken so clear a message. Today and always, “the poor are the privileged recipients of the Gospel”,[52] and the fact that it is freely preached to them is a sign of the kingdom that Jesus came to establish. We have to state, without mincing words, that “there is an inseparable bond between our faith and the poor”. May we never abandon them.

49. Let us go forth, then, let us go forth to offer everyone the life of Jesus Christ. Here I repeat for the entire Church what I have often said to the priests and laity of Buenos Aires: I prefer a Church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets, rather than a Church which is unhealthy from being confined and from clinging to its own security. I do not want a Church concerned with being at the centre and then ends by being caught up in a web of obsessions and procedures. If something should rightly disturb us and trouble our consciences, it is the fact that so many of our brothers and sisters are living without the strength, light and consolation born of friendship with Jesus Christ, without a community of faith to support them, without meaning and a goal in life. More than by fear of going astray, my hope is that we will be moved by the fear of remaining shut up within structures which give us a false sense of security, within rules which make us harsh judges, within habits which make us feel safe, while at our door people are starving and Jesus does not tire of saying to us: “Give them something to eat” (Mk 6:37). (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013.)

The Catholic Church has never abandoned the Spiritual or Corporal needs of anyone, rich or power. She has been given unto her the fullness of graces to minister to the spiritual and corporal needs of all. To contend that "the poor" have been neglected prior to the dawning of the age of the counterfeit church of conciliarism is to show oneself a practitioner of the same methodology as every other revolutionary who has been inspired by the devil to use some particular group, usually the "poor," as the "cause" to which others must join him in other to right alleged wrongs.

In the case of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, of course, the "poor" and those at the "margins" have suffered injustices over the centuries because of the Catholic Church's "web of obsessions and procedures," which is why he made straw men out of priests and presbyters in the conciliar structures he believed wanted to "stay in their sacristies" and bask in the protection of their "clericalism." Bergoglio believed that every Catholic, whether in the religious life or in the laity, must not be "shut up within structures that give us a false sense of security, within rules made by harsh judges, within habits that make us feel safe."

Pope Pius IX, writing in his first encyclical letter, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846, condemned contentions that would produce men such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio over the course of time:

7. It is with no less deceit, venerable brothers, that other enemies of divine revelation, with reckless and sacrilegious effrontery, want to import the doctrine of human progress into the Catholic religion. They extol it with the highest praise, as if religion itself were not of God but the work of men, or a philosophical discovery which can be perfected by human means. The charge which Tertullian justly made against the philosophers of his own time "who brought forward a Stoic and a Platonic and a Dialectical Christianity"[2] can very aptly apply to those men who rave so pitiably. Our holy religion was not invented by human reason, but was most mercifully revealed by God; therefore, one can quite easily understand that religion itself acquires all its power from the authority of God who made the revelation, and that it can never be arrived at or perfected by human reason. In order not to be deceived and go astray in a matter of such great importance, human reason should indeed carefully investigate the fact of divine revelation. Having done this, one would be definitely convinced that God has spoken and therefore would show Him rational obedience, as the Apostle very wisely teaches.[3] For who can possibly not know that all faith should be given to the words of God and that it is in the fullest agreement with reason itself to accept and strongly support doctrines which it has determined to have been revealed by God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived?

8. But how many wonderful and shining proofs are ready at hand to convince the human reason in the clearest way that the religion of Christ is divine and that "the whole principle of our doctrines has taken root from the Lord of the heavens above";[4] therefore nothing exists more definite, more settled or more holy than our faith, which rests on the strongest foundations. This faith, which teaches for life and points towards salvation, which casts out all vices and is the fruitful mother and nurse of the virtues, has been established by the birth, life, death, resurrection, wisdom, wonders and prophecies of Christ Jesus, its divine author and perfector! Shining forth in all directions with the light of teaching from on high and enriched with the treasures of heavenly wealth, this faith grew famed and notable by the foretellings of so many prophets, the lustre of so many miracles, the steadfastness of so many martyrs, and the glory of so many saints! It made known the saving laws of Christ and, gaining in strength daily even when it was most cruelly persecuted, it made its way over the whole world by land and sea, from the sun's rising to its setting, under the single standard of the Cross! The deceit of idols was cast down and the mist of errors was scattered. By the defeat of all kinds of enemies, this faith enlightened with divine knowledge all peoples, races and nations, no matter how barbarous and savage, or how different in character, morals, laws and ways of life. It brought them under the sweet yoke of Christ Himself by proclaiming peace and good tidings to all men!

9. Now, surely all these events shine with such divine wisdom and power that anyone who considers them will easily understand that the Christian faith is the work of God. Human reason knows clearly from these striking and certain proofs that God is the author of this faith; therefore it is unable to advance further but should offer all obedience to this faith, casting aside completely every problem and hesitation. Human reason is convinced that it is God who has given everything the faith proposes to men for belief and behavior.

10. This consideration too clarifies the great error of those others as well who boldly venture to explain and interpret the words of God by their own judgment, misusing their reason and holding the opinion that these words are like a human work. God Himself has set up a living authority to establish and teach the true and legitimate meaning of His heavenly revelation. This authority judges infallibly all disputes which concern matters of faith and morals, lest the faithful be swirled around by every wind of doctrine which springs from the evilness of men in encompassing error. And this living infallible authority is active only in that Church which was built by Christ the Lord upon Peter, the head of the entire Church, leader and shepherd, whose faith He promised would never fail. This Church has had an unbroken line of succession from Peter himself; these legitimate pontiffs are the heirs and defenders of the same teaching, rank, office and power. And the Church is where Peter is,[5] and Peter speaks in the Roman Pontiff,[6] living at all times in his successors and making judgment,[7] providing the truth of the faith to those who seek it.[8] The divine words therefore mean what this Roman See of the most blessed Peter holds and has held.

11. For this mother and teacher[9] of all the churches has always preserved entire and unharmed the faith entrusted to it by Christ the Lord. Furthermore, it has taught it to the faithful, showing all men truth and the path of salvation. Since all priesthood originates in this church,[10] the entire substance of the Christian religion resides there also.[11] The leadership of the Apostolic See has always been active,[12] and therefore because of its preeminent authority, the whole Church must agree with it. The faithful who live in every place constitute the whole Church.[13] Whoever does not gather with this Church scatters.[14] (Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)

These words, written by the pope who was hated and the object of assassination plots by the very kinds of Masonic revolutionaries with whom Jorge Mario Bergoglio had associated throughout his entire life as a conciliar presbyter, are a complete refutation of the two passages form Evangelii Gaudium cited just above. They are also, however, just another refutation of the "recognize while resist" movement whose adherents must constantly find ways to excuse blatant apostates and blaspheming heretics as legitimate "popes" whose teaching and practices they believe can be rejected after undergoing scrutiny by them.

Au contraire, Pope Pius IX taught in Qui Pluribus that legitimate Roman Pontiffs have provided the truth of the faith to those who seek it.

How can anyone who understands Jorge Mario Bergoglio's statements that contradict the Holy Faith and opens the doors wide to the embrace of error and sin reconcile this with Pope Pius IX's assurance that the Roman Pontiff will always provide "the truth of the faith to those who seek it"?

Moreover, Pope Pius IX taught in Qui Pluribus that the "whole Church must agree" with the leadership of the Apostolic See.

Holy Mother Church is both infallible and indefectible.

Pope Pius IX also used Qui Pluribus to dissect and condemn other manifestations of revolutionary beliefs and methods found throughout the text of Evangelii Gaudium, including the two passages cited just above:

13. You already know well, venerable brothers, the other portentous errors and deceits by which the sons of this world try most bitterly to attack the Catholic religion and the divine authority of the Church and its laws. They would even trample underfoot the rights both of the sacred and of the civil power. For this is the goal of the lawless activities against this Roman See in which Christ placed the impregnable foundation of His Church. This is the goal of those secret sects who have come forth from the darkness to destroy and desolate both the sacred and the civil commonwealth. These have been condemned with repeated anathema in the Apostolic letters of the Roman Pontiffs who preceded Us[15] We now confirm these with the fullness of Our Apostolic power and command that they be most carefully observed.

14. This is the goal too of the crafty Bible Societies which renew the old skill of the heretics and ceaselessly force on people of all kinds, even the uneducated, gifts of the Bible. They issue these in large numbers and at great cost, in vernacular translations, which infringe the holy rules of the Church. The commentaries which are included often contain perverse explanations; so, having rejected divine tradition, the doctrine of the Fathers and the authority of the Catholic Church, they all interpret the words of the Lord by their own private judgment, thereby perverting their meaning. As a result, they fall into the greatest errors. Gregory XVI of happy memory, Our superior predecessor, followed the lead of his own predecessors in rejecting these societies in his apostolic letters.[16] It is Our will to condemn them likewise. (Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)

Once again, you see, this described and condemned the entire life's work of Jorge Mario Bergoglio of which Evangelii Gaudium could be said to be his "Little Red Book of Sayings,” his magna carta and also his last testament.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s Evangelii Gaudium was thus a clarion call to build up what Saint Pius X condemned in Notre Charge Apostolique, the One World Ecumenical Church:

We fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism, so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men become brothers and comrades at last in the "Kingdom of God". - "We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind."

And now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

The Catholic Church does not give us encyclical letters or apostolic exhortations full of confusion, full of mixture of truth and error.

Pope Pius XI explained in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, that Catholic Church brings forth her teaching to men with ease and security, not with confusion and admixture of truth and error:"

For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)

Although I will continue working on the rest of this review of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s “apostolic exhortation” after this part is posted, I think that having reached the halfway point of my revision of what I wrote at the end of 2013 is a good place to pause and to call upon the Abbot of Solesmes to teach us about the holy bishop, Saint Ubaldus:

In order to honor her Eternal High Priest, the Church presents to him this day the merits of a Pontiff who, after his mortal career, was admitted into a happy Immortality. Ubaldus, here on earth, was the image of our Lord Jesus Christ. Like his Divine Master, he received the holy Anointing of Priesthood; he was a Mediator between God and man; he was the Shepherd of a flock; and now, he is united with our Risen Jesus—the great Anointed the Mediator, the Shepherd. In proof of his influence in heaven, our Ubaldus has had given to him a special power against the wicked Spirits, who lay snares for our perdition. It has frequently happened that the simple invocation of his name has sufficed to foil their machinations. It is with the view of encouraging the Faithful to have recourse to his protection that the Church has fixed this day as his feast.

Let us now read the account she gives of the virtues of the saintly Bishop.

Ubaldus was born at Gubbio in Umbria, of a noble family. He was, from childhood, formed, in the most admirable way, to piety and learning. When grown up, he was frequently urged to marry; but nothing could shake his resolution of leading a life of celibacy. On being ordained priest, he divided his fortune between the poor and the Churches, and entered among the Canons Regular of the Order of St. Augustine. He established that Institute in his own country, and was for some time a most fervent observer of all its regulations. The fame of his virtue spread far and wide. Pope Honorius II compelled him to accept the charge of the Church of Gubbio; and, accordingly, he was consecrated bishop.

Having taken possession of his see, he changed little or nothing of his mode of life; but he began to apply himself more than ever to the practice of every virtue, in order that he might the more effectually, both by word and example, procure the salvation of souls, for he was a pattern of the flock in all earnestness. (1 Peter 5:3) His food was scanty, his dress unpretending, his bed hard and most poor. Whilst always hearing about, in his body, the mortification (2 Corinthians 4:10) of the Cross, he every day refreshed his spirit with prayer, in which he seemed insatiable. The result of such a life was meekness of so admirable a nature, that he not only bore the worst injuries and insults with patience, but he even treated his persecutors with surprising affection, and showed them all possible kindness.

During the last two years of his life, he suffered much from sickness. In the midst of the most acute pains, whereby he was made pure as gold that is cleansed in the furnace, he ceased not to give thanks to God. Finally, on the holy feast of Pentecost, after governing for many years, and in a most laudable manner, the diocese that had been entrusted to him, he slept in peace, venerated for his holy life and miracles. He was canonized by Pope Celestine III. God has given him a special power for driving away unclean spirits. His body, which has remained incorrupt for several centuries, is honored with much devotion, by the faithful of the city of Gubbio, which he has more than once rescued from the calamities that threatened it. (Matins, The Divine Office, Feast of Saint Ubaldus, May 16.)

O blessed Pontiff! be thou our protector against the spirits of hell. They are devoured by envy at seeing how Man, that lowly and feeble creature, has become the object of God’s predilection. The Incarnation of the Son of God, his Death on the Cross, his glorious Resurrection, the Sacraments which give us the life of Grace—all these sublime means, whereby the infinite goodness of God has restored us to our lost dignity, have excited the rage of the old enemy, and he seeks revenge by insulting, in us, the Image of our Creator. At times, he attacks man with all the frenzy of angry jealousy. To mimic the operations of Sanctifying Grace—which, so to speak, makes us the instruments of God’s good pleasure—Satan sometimes takes possession of our fellow creatures, and makes them his slaves. Thy power, O Ubaldus, has often manifested itself by rescuing these unhappy victims of the devil’s jealousy; and holy Church, on this day, celebrates the special prerogative conferred on thee by our Heavenly Father. Relent not in the exercise of thy charitable office. And yet, O holy Pontiff, thou knowest that the snares of the wicked spirits are more injurious to the souls than to the bodies of men. Have pity, then, on the unhappy slaves of sin, who, though the divine Sun of the Pasch has risen upon them, are still in the darkness of guilt. Pray for them, that they may become, once more, Children of the Light, and share in the Easter Resurrection which Jesus offers to all. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Feast of Saint Ubaldus, May 16.)

I will save Dom Prosper Gueranger’s reflection about the life, holy priestly virtues, and exemplary witness to the point of martyrdom in defense of the Seal of the Confessional of Saint John Nepomucene until tomorrow, Saturday, May 17, 2025, the Feast of Saint Paschal Baylon, or the Fourth Sunday after Easter, May 18, 2025, and the Commemoration of Saint Venantius when my commentary about the new Washington State Law to make it a crime for Catholic priests and conciliar presbyters to refuse to violate the Seal of the Confessional. This an outrage that should unite all Catholics no matter where they stand along the vast expanse of the ecclesiastical divide.

Now, before I return to the work of editing the rest of my old commentaries about Evangelii Gaudium, may we continue to use these glorious days of the month of Our Lady, the month of May, to beg her especially through her Most Holy Rosary, for the restoration of a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter so that, the Principle of Unity, have been restored, Catholics may be once again united in all things for the honor and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity as the consecrated slaves Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through His Most Blessed Mother’s very own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Ubaldus, pray for us.

Saint John Nepomucene, pray for us.

You are here

An Evangelii Gaudium Primer (or Understanding Robert Francis Prevost's Having Made Jorge's Magna Carta His Very Own)

Support Christ or Chaos