Dance, Dance, Eco Jorge, part two

There was a time back in early-1989, I believe, that I exchanged a few letters with a Catholic man in the Diocese of Fargo when I was serving as the diocesan director of communication for “Bishop” James S. Sullivan. The correspondent kept insisting that the purpose of the Catholic Church was social work, not the salvation of souls. I explained to him repeatedly that he was wrong before he finally wrote to say that he was right.

Well, this is the hour, an hour of darkness for Christ the King, when such a view, which is widespread among the Jacobin/Bolshevik wing of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and has been promoted with abandon in many parishes and dioceses throughout the United States of America and the rest of the world, is about as “official” as anything gets in the false religious sect that all but a handful of people in the world believe is the Catholic Church.

Look, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has prayed from the blasphemous Talmud. He had a Talmudist and a Mohammedan join the Greek Orthodox “patriarch” on June 8, 2014, Pentecost Sunday, for his infamous “day of peace” in the Vatican Gardens. He has continued the policy of predecessors in the conciliar “Petrine Ministry” of treating the clergy of Protestant sects as having a “mission” from Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Himself to “evangelize” in His Holy Name, calling them “ministers of the Gospel,” and specifically telling various Protestant leaders, including his late friend Tony Palmer, to whom he referred as his “brother bishop,” that he has no interest in converting them.

This is what he said to Protestant Brian Stiller one year ago this very month:

It’s fair to ask what kind of Catholic Church we as Evangelicals want to see. At lunch I asked Pope Francis what his heart was for evangelism. He smiled, knowing what was behind my question. His comment was, “I’m not interested in converting Evangelicals to Catholicism. I want people to find Jesus in their own community.  There are so many doctrines we will never agree on. Let’s not spend our time on those. Rather, let’s be about showing the love of Jesus.” (Of course Evangelicals do evangelize Catholics and Catholics do the same to us. However, that discussion we will raise another day.)

We spoke about how in our diversity we might find unity and strength. Borrowing from Swiss Protestant theologian Oscar Cullman, we reflected how “reconciled diversity” allows us to stand within our own understandings of how Christ effects salvation. And then we press on to deal with global issues like religious freedom and justice and other matters, which affect our wellbeing. (Lunch with Jorge. See also the post at Novus Ordo Watch Wire.)

Salvation of souls?

Taken for granted by those who embrace the heresy of “universal salvation,” noting, of course, that those who do believe in everything taught by the Catholic Church from time immemorial are the ones Jorge Mario Bergoglio chooses to castigate repeatedly by the use of various pejoratives and false analogies.

Moreover, the Argentine Apostate continues to “cook the books” in order to make sure that Catholics who are divorced and civilly “remarried” without the “benefit” of a conciliar decree of marital nullity will be able to receive what purports to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service. Jorge Mario Bergoglio has also reached out to those who persist unrepentantly in perverse sins against nature appointing “bishops” to his upcoming “synod of bishops” who are open supporters of “same-sex” “civil unions” and/or “marriage,” showing great empathy as well for those who have mutilated their bodies in futile efforts to have their genders surgically and chemically “changed.”

The entirety of Laudato Si, therefore, which bears an issuance date of Pentecost Sunday, May 24, 2015, communicates the lie that man must “act” to save the “planet” while strongly implying that one’s very salvation is directly connected to his concepts of the “stewardship” of the earth that require drastic action on the part of governments of the world, up to and including a world body to police human actions that are said to harm the environment.

To this end, you see, Bergoglio’s ghostwriters made sure to buttress the “necessity” of some kind of world governing body by citing several conciliar "Petrine Ministers," including none other than the retired Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s Caritas in Veritate, June 29, 2009:

6. My predecessor Benedict XVI likewise proposed “eliminating the structural causes of the dysfunctions of the world economy and correcting models of growth which have proved incapable of ensuring respect for the environment”. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, Laudato Si, May 24, 2015.)

Here is what “Papa Ratzinger” wrote six years ago now:

In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago. Such an authority would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good, and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth. Furthermore, such an authority would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for right. Obviously it would have to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums. Without this, despite the great progress accomplished in various sectors, international law would risk being conditioned by the balance of power among the strongest nations. The integral development of peoples and international cooperation require the establishment of a greater degree of international ordering, marked by subsidiarity, for the management of globalization. They also require the construction of a social order that at last conforms to the moral order, to the interconnection between moral and social spheres, and to the link between politics and the economic and civil spheres, as envisaged by the Charter of the United Nations. (Caritas in veritate, June 29, 2009.)

This is what I wrote six years about the passage from Caritas in Veritate cited just above: 

This is insanity. Each of the problems that Ratzinger/Benedict lists in his encyclical letter, including the rise of the unbridled marketplace that is defined by the pursuit of profit at all costs and the outsourcing of jobs, two of the many phenomena of the modern world that Ratzinger/Benedict rightly condemns in Caritas in Veritate, is the direct and inexorable result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolt and institutionalized by the rise of Judeo-Masonry. The multifaceted and interrelated problems and massive injustices that have arisen as a result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King cannot be resolved by some kind of utopian "world political authority" that is going to have "teeth" while at the same time respecting the Natural Law principle of subsidiarity enunciated by Pope Pius XI in Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931, as it respects the right to life and the rights of families and promotes "integral human development." In all Charity, my friends, the truth of the matter is that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is stark raving mad to believe that such a One World Government could provide a structure for order and justice in the world, and that is putting the matter mildly and as charitably as is humanly possible. Need one point out that one of the chief goals of Talmudic Judaism has been to create such a One World Government? 

Have we lost our minds? Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI clearly called for a "world political authority" to accomplish the following objectives:

1) To find "innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity."

2) "To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result;"

3) "to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace."

4) "to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration."  

The only thing that this "world political authority" would not be empowered to do is to permanently remove plaque from your teeth in one easy step. No such "world political authority" can do any of the things outlined by Ratzinger/Benedict in Caritas in Veritate.

Some of "Papa Ratzinger's reflexive apologists that Number 67 of Caritas in Veritate wrote six years ago that their "restorer of tradition" did not mean to support a "One World Government" because he did not use that precise term. Please tell me, though what a "world political authority" that would have the powers to do the things listed in Number 67 of Caritas in Veritate would be if not the equivalent of a "one world government?"

It is madness to believe that such a "world political authority" would respect the Natural Law right of subsidiarity and restore legal protection to the preborn and protects the rights of the family while at the same time opposing contraception. No "world political authority" can do any of these things. Men and their nations must convert to the Catholic Faith and to the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by the Catholic Church in order for there to be any chance at all of seeking to realize the common temporal good that is pursued in a due subordination to the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.

Bergoglio’s ghostwriters are indeed very clever as only those who are intellectually dishonest can fail to see that the Argentine Apostate is merely taking his predecessor’s own insane views to their logical conclusion. One had better believe that the leaders of the so-called “developed nations” will “run with the ball” Jorge has given them while ignoring his humanistic condemnations of population control and abortion with perfect impunity as they know that the man who claims to be the Successor of Saint Peter will never condemn those who seek to “do good” in order to “save the earth.”

Also of more than passing interest is the fact that the new ecocyclical references the theological, philosophical, moral, and biological evolutionist, the late Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., who was mentioned favorably by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI in a talk that he gave on July 24, 2009:

Though few might have cast him in advance as a "green pope," Pope Benedict XVI has amassed a striking environmental record, from installing solar panels in the Vatican to calling for ecological conversion. Now the pontiff has also hinted at a possible new look at the undeclared patron saint of Catholic ecology, the late French Jesuit scientist and philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.

Benedict's brief July 24 reference to Teilhard, praising his vision of the entire cosmos as a "living host," can be read on multiple levels -- as part of the pontiff's rapprochement with the Jesuits, or as a further instance of finding something positive to say about thinkers whose works have set off doctrinal alarms, as Benedict previously did with rebel Swiss theologian and former colleague

The potential implications for environmental theology, however, are likely to generate the greatest interest among Teilhard's fans and foes alike -- and more than a half-century after his death in 1955, the daring Jesuit still has plenty of both. Admirers trumpet Teilhard as a pioneer, harmonizing Christianity with the theory of evolution; critics charge that Teilhard's optimistic view of nature flirts with pantheism.

Benedict's comment came during a July 24 vespers service in the Cathedral of Aosta in northern Italy, where the pope took his annual summer vacation July 13-29.

Toward the end of a reflection upon the Letter to the Romans, in which St. Paul writes that the world itself will one day become a form of living worship, the pope said, "It's the great vision that later Teilhard de Chardin also had: At the end we will have a true cosmic liturgy, where the cosmos becomes a living host.

"Let's pray to the Lord that he help us be priests in this sense," the pope said, "to help in the transformation of the world in adoration of God, beginning with ourselves."

Though offered only in passing, and doubtless subject to overinterpretation, Benedict's line nevertheless triggered headlines in the Italian press about a possible "rehabilitation" of Teilhard, sometimes referred to as the "Catholic Darwin." That reading seemed especially tempting since, as a consummate theologian, Benedict is aware of the controversy that swirls around Teilhard, and would thus grasp the likely impact of a positive papal reference.

At the very least, the line seemed to offer a blessing for exploration of the late Jesuit's ideas. That impression appeared to be confirmed by the Vatican spokesperson, Jesuit Fr. Federico Lombardi, who said afterward, "By now, no one would dream of saying that [Teilhard] is a heterodox author who shouldn't be studied."

Teilhard's most prominent living disciple in Italy, lay theologian Vito Mancuso, told reporters that he was "pleasantly surprised" by Benedict's words and that they have "great importance."

Teilhard, who died in 1955 at the age of 73, was a French Jesuit who studied paleontology and participated in the 1920s-era discovery of "Peking Man" in China, a find that seemed to confirm a gradual development in the human species. Teilhard has also been linked to the 1912 discovery of "Piltdown Man" in England, later exposed as a hoax.

On the basis of his scientific work, Teilhard developed an evolutionary theology asserting that all creation is developing towards an "Omega Point," which he identified with Christ as the Logos, or "Word" of God. In that sense, Teilhard broadened the concept of salvation history to embrace not only individual persons and human culture, but the entire universe. In short order, Teilhard's thought became the obligatory point of departure for any Catholic treatment of the environment.

Yet from the beginning, Teilhard's theology was also viewed with caution by officials both of the Jesuit order and in the Vatican. Among other things, officials worried that his optimistic reading of nature compromised church teaching on original sin. In 1962 -- seven years after his death -- the Vatican's doctrinal office issued a warning that his works "abound in such ambiguities and indeed even serious errors, as to offend Catholic doctrine."

In 1981, on the 100th anniversary of Teilhard's birth, speculation erupted about a possible rehabilitation. It was fueled by a letter published in L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, by the then-Cardinal Secretary of State Agostino Casaroli, who praised the "astonishing resonance of his research, as well as the brilliance of his personality and richness of his thinking." Casaroli asserted that Teilhard had anticipated John Paul II's call to "be not afraid," embracing "culture, civilization and progress."

Responding to ferment created by the letter, the Vatican issued a statement insisting that its 1962 verdict on Teilhard still stands -- to date, Rome's last official pronouncement on Teilhard. (The statement was issued in July 1981, four months before then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI, took over as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.)

Across the years, Benedict has sometimes seemed to be of two minds himself.

In his 1968 work Introduction to Christianity, Ratzinger wrote that Eastern Christianity has a deeper appreciation for the "cosmic and metaphysical" dimension of Christianity than the West, but that the West seemed to be recovering that perspective, "especially as a result of stimuli from the work of Teilhard." He argued that Teilhard gave authentic expression to the Christology of St. Paul.

As pope, Benedict has occasionally used language that seems to reflect a Teilhardian touch. In his 2006 Easter homily, the pontiff referred to the theory of evolution, describing the Resurrection as "the greatest 'mutation,' absolutely the most crucial leap into a totally new dimension that there has ever been in the long history of life and its development."

Yet Ratzinger's ambivalence about Teilhard is of equally long vintage. In a commentary on the final session of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), a young Ratzinger complained that Gaudium et Spes, the "Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World," played down the reality of sin because of an overly "French," and specifically "Teilhardian," influence.

Overall, the impression is that Benedict finds much to like about Teilhard's cosmic vision, even if he also worries about interpretations at odds with orthodox faith.

Benedict's July 24 remark on Teilhard builds upon the pope's strong record on the environment, considered by many observers to be the most original feature of his social teaching. Most recently, Benedict devoted a section of his new social encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, to a call for deepening what he called "that covenant between human beings and the environment, which should mirror the creative love of God."

In her recent book Ten Commandments for the Environment: Pope Benedict XVI Speaks Out for Creation and Justice, Catholic writer Woodeene Koenig-Bricker described Benedict as "the greenest pope in history," arguing that he has not only made strong environmental statements but also put them into practice.

In that light, one wonders if Benedict's shade of green could eventually allow Teilhard to be named the patron saint of Catholic ecology de jure, as well as de facto. If so, July 24 could be remembered as the first stirring of an "evolutionary leap" in the late Jesuit's reputation and official standing. (

No true Successor of Saint Peter has ever spoken in such a way. And while there are some who still cling to the myth that “Pope Benedict XVI” has substantive disagreements with his successors, the truth remains that both men believe in the same essential evolutionary principles as the late Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J. Once again, there is No Space Between Ratzinger and Bergoglio: So Close in Apostasy, So Far From Catholic Truth.

Bergoglio explained his own views about the false ideology of evolutionism in Laudato Si:

18. The continued acceleration of changes affecting humanity and the planet is coupled today with a more intensified pace of life and work which might be called “rapidification”. Although change is part of the working of complex systems, the speed with which human activity has developed contrasts with the naturally slow pace of biological evolution. Moreover, the goals of this rapid and constant change are not necessarily geared to the common good or to integral and sustainable human development. Change is something desirable, yet it becomes a source of anxiety when it causes harm to the world and to the quality of life of much of humanity. . . .

81. Human beings, even if we postulate a process of evolution, also possess a uniqueness which cannot be fully explained by the evolution of other open systems. Each of us has his or her own personal identity and is capable of entering into dialogue with others and with God himself. Our capacity to reason, to develop arguments, to be inventive, to interpret reality and to create art, along with other not yet discovered capacities, are signs of a uniqueness which transcends the spheres of physics and biology. The sheer novelty involved in the emergence of a personal being within a material universe presupposes a direct action of God and a particular call to life and to relationship on the part of a “Thou” who addresses himself to another “thou”. The biblical accounts of creation invite us to see each human being as a subject who can never be reduced to the status of an object. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, Laudato Si, May 24, 2015.)

Although I will spend most of today, Friday, June 19, 2015, and tomorrow writing the first in what will be a lengthy series of commentaries on many of the passages included in the text of ecocyclical Laudato Si, suffice it to say for the moment that passages such as the ones just cited are based upon the belief in that which is untrue, evolutionism, which is nothing other than a means used by Darwinists and their successors to deny the Special Creation of man by God, thereby reducing man to but another “animal” who must “coexist” with other species in the name of “biodiversity.”

Indeed, I first saw the word “Biodiversity” in the manatee exhibit at the Cincinnati Zoo about six or seven years ago. “We’ve gone from “Coexist” on bumper stickers to “Biodiversity,” I said to Sharon and Lucy.

Guess what?

Jorge used the word several times in his ecocylical. Here is the first such instance:

24. Warming has effects on the carbon cycle. It creates a vicious circle which aggravates the situation even more, affecting the availability of essential resources like drinking water, energy and agricultural production in warmer regions, and leading to the extinction of part of the planet’s biodiversity. The melting in the polar ice caps and in high altitude plains can lead to the dangerous release of methane gas, while the decomposition of frozen organic material can further increase the emission of carbon dioxide. Things are made worse by the loss of tropical forests which would otherwise help to mitigate climate change. Carbon dioxide pollution increases the acidification of the oceans and compromises the marine food chain. If present trends continue, this century may well witness extraordinary climate change and an unprecedented destruction of ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us. A rise in the sea level, for example, can create extremely serious situations, if we consider that a quarter of the world’s population lives on the coast or nearby, and that the majority of our megacities are situated in coastal areas. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, Laudato Si, May 24, 2015.)

Bergoglio thus presents junk science as fact while constantly making the immutable truths of the Catholic Faith to be the stuff of fiction and fairy tales believed by old ladies who count the number of Rosaries that they pray each day. He even uses alarmist language in his ecocyclical to speak of a “doomsday” facing the world as a result of the “facts” he accepts so uncritically:

161. Doomsday predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain. We may well be leaving to coming generations debris, desolation and filth. The pace of consumption, waste and environmental change has so stretched the planet’s capacity that our contemporary lifestyle, unsustainable as it is, can only precipitate catastrophes, such as those which even now periodically occur in different areas of the world. The effects of the present imbalance can only be reduced by our decisive action, here and now. We need to reflect on our accountability before those who will have to endure the dire consequences.

162. Our difficulty in taking up this challenge seriously has much to do with an ethical and cultural decline which has accompanied the deterioration of the environment. Men and women of our postmodern world run the risk of rampant individualism, and many problems of society are connected with today’s self-centred culture of instant gratification. We see this in the crisis of family and social ties and the difficulties of recognizing the other. Parents can be prone to impulsive and wasteful consumption, which then affects their children who find it increasingly difficult to acquire a home of their own and build a family. Furthermore, our inability to think seriously about future generations is linked to our inability to broaden the scope of our present interests and to give consideration to those who remain excluded from development. Let us not only keep the poor of the future in mind, but also today’s poor, whose life on this earth is brief and who cannot keep on waiting. Hence, “in addition to a fairer sense of intergenerational solidarity there is also an urgent moral need for a renewed sense of intragenerational solidarity”. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, Laudato Si, May 24, 2015.)

Well, there is a doomsday facing us, certainly. However, the real doomsday that looms over us will be the result of the fact that men and their nations have plunged themselves into the abyss of idolatry and a whole array of what are Mortal Sins in the objective order of things, each of which is celebrated with abandon and protected by cover of the civil law.

Bergoglio’s “doomsday” scenario, however, will empower the statists and moral relativists even more than the voters themselves have empowered them by their ignorance and by permitting themselves to be immersed in an endless array of “bread and circuses” as their legitimate liberties are curbed in the name of “helping the poor” or “saving the earth.” We live at a time when leaders of the Judeo-Masonic civil state seek to curb legitimate liberties and eliminate all, not just some, private property rights while licentiousness is celebrated as a legitimate exercise of human liberty.

Lost in all of this, you see, is the fact Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s alarmism about the natural environment reflects his thoroughly naturalistic view of problems that exist in this passing, mortal vale of tears that will end at a time appointed by God from all eternity despite a section at the end of the ecocylical that speaks of the Holy Eucharist and the Mother of God (without, of course, any mention of Eucharistic adoration, which Jacobin/Bolshevik conciliar revolutionaries believe is “individualistic,” and without any mention of Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary, no less her Fatima Message or devotion to her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart). Bergoglio a Judeo-Masonic naturalist, a man who provides a slight gloss of Christianity to speak of the world’s problems in purely naturalistic terms that tickle the itching ears of men such as Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.

To be sure, as has been noted on this website in the past, there do exist real problems with pollution and the misuse of the world’s resources. These problems exist in large measure, however, because of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King that has been wrought by the Protestant Revolution in the Sixteenth Century and cemented in place by the various, interrelated forces of Judeo-Masonic naturalism since the Eighteenth Century. The overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King has given free rein to man’s fallen nature.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not see this as he sees the Protestant Revolution as having been a necessary “reformation of the Catholic Church that can serve as a foundation for a “spiritual ecumenism” that exists in an atmosphere of “reconciled diversity.”

Moreover, Bergoglio, as a true son of liberalism, whose end result must be totalitarianism over the course of time, seeks to repair social and world problems by structural means rather than exhorting men to convert to the true Faith and for nations to permit themselves to be governed by the Social Reign of Christ the King. Bergoglio really believes in structural reform as the means to change human behavior. This is why he is such a supporter of structural reform in the civil realm and it is why he assembled his Commissars back in 2013. He describes problems, both real and imagined, in this ecocyclical without identifying their root cause, Original Sin, or their chief proximate cause, the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King and the rise of the religiously indifferent civil state of Modernity that eventually must become the religiously hostile state.

Berogoglio’s proposed draconian “solutions” to environmental problems, both real and imagined, is thus based on the same essential mistake made by Karl Marx when the latter saw some of the real injustices that existed in industrial England in the Nineteenth Century.

Rather than recognize these problems as the result of Original Sin and the rise of a social structure that deified man and his wants, Marx further deified man by denying God’s existence and the necessity to curb man’s excesses by the collective power of the of the civil state. Marx’s dictatorship of the proletariat was designed to addressed what he believed to be the root cause of all social injustice, economic inequality, by the forcible confiscation and redistribution of wealth so that all would live in a state of relative economic equality to the benefit of all. Universal tyranny and universal poverty are what results from Marxism in theory and in practice, and despite all of Jorge’s gratuitous denials of being a Marxist, he is influenced by Marxist tenets to the very depths of his apostate being as he has been shaped theologically and politically by Jesuit “liberation theologians” and atheists such as John Schellnhuber, who was one of the presenters at yesterday’s press conference held in advance of the official release of Laudato Si and serves on the “Pontifical” Academy for the Sciences despite his believing a fervent advocate of radical “population control” methods, up to and including the depopulation of the earth from seven billion to one billion people. One is who one associates with, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio has voluntarily chosen to associate with Marxists no matter how much he denies that he is one.

Laudato Si is thus an alarmist screed that will be used by pro-abortion, pro-perversity statists to urge the “people” to do what the “pope” teaches has to be done to “save the earth.” Its text, which will be analyzed on this site despite my lack of enthusiasm about doing so, prescribes “solutions” that will only bring about the creation of a One World Governing system, if not a One World Government in name, that will one day demand that the lords of conciliarism shut down their false church to worship at its own altar of totalitarianism that will have no room for “coexistence” even with those such as Bergoglio and his allies who helped to bring it into existence.

As Dr. George O’Brien noted one hundred years ago now, Marxism is only the ultimate result of the Calvinist economic system of Modernity:

The thesis we have endeavoured to present in this essay is, that the two great dominating schools of modern economic thought have a common origin. The capitalist school, which, basing its position on the unfettered right of the individual to do what he will with his own, demands the restriction of government interference in economic and social affairs within the narrowest  possible limits, and the socialist school, which, basing its position on the complete subordination of the individual to society, demands the socialization of all the means of production, if not all of wealth, face each other today as the only two solutions of the social question; they are bitterly hostile towards each other, and mutually intolerant and each is at the same weakened and provoked by the other. In one respect, and in one respect only, are they identical--they can both be shown to be the result of the Protestant Reformation.

We have seen the direct connection which exists between these modern schools of economic thought and their common ancestor. Capitalism found its roots in the intensely individualistic spirit of Protestantism, in the spread of anti-authoritative ideas from the realm of religion into the realm of political and social thought, and, above all, in the distinctive Calvinist doctrine of a successful and prosperous career being the outward and visible sign by which the regenerated might be known. Socialism, on the other hand, derived encouragement from the violations of established and prescriptive rights of which the Reformation afforded so many examples, from the growth of heretical sects tainted with Communism, and from the overthrow of the orthodox doctrine on original sin, which opened the way to the idea of the perfectibility of man through institutions. But, apart from these direct influences, there were others, indirect, but equally important. Both these great schools of economic thought are characterized by exaggerations and excesses; the one lays too great stress on the importance of the individual, and other on the importance of the community; they are both departures, in opposite directions, from the correct mean of reconciliation and of individual liberty with social solidarity. These excesses and exaggerations are the result of the free play of private judgment unguided by authority, and could not have occurred if Europe had continued to recognize an infallible central authority in ethical affairs.

The science of economics is the science of men's relations with one another in the domain of acquiring and disposing of wealth, and is, therefore, like political science in another sphere, a branch of the science of ethics. In the Middle Ages, man's ethical conduct, like his religious conduct, was under the supervision and guidance of a single authority, which claimed at the same time the right to define and to enforce its teaching. The machinery for enforcing the observance of medieval ethical teaching was of a singularly effective kind; pressure was brought to bear upon the conscience of the individual through the medium of compulsory periodical consultations with a trained moral adviser, who was empowered to enforce obedience to his advice by the most potent spiritual sanctions. In this way, the whole conduct of man in relation to his neighbours was placed under the immediate guidance of the universally received ethical preceptor, and a common standard of action was ensured throughout the Christian world in the all the affairs of life. All economic transactions in particular were subject to the jealous scrutiny of the individual's spiritual director; and such matters as sales, loans, and so on, were considered reprehensible and punishable if not conducted in accordance with the Christian standards of commutative justice.

The whole of this elaborate system for the preservation of justice in the affairs of everyday life was shattered by the Reformation. The right of private judgment, which had first been asserted in matters of faith, rapidly spread into moral matters, and the attack on the dogmatic infallibility of the Church left Europe without an authority to which it could appeal on moral questions. The new Protestant churches were utterly unable to supply this want. The principle of private judgment on which they rested deprived them of any right to be listened to whenever they attempted to dictate moral precepts to their members, and henceforth the moral behaviour of the individual became a matter to be regulated by the promptings of his own conscience, or by such philosophical systems of ethics as he happened to approve. The secular state endeavoured to ensure that dishonesty amounting to actual theft or fraud should be kept in check, but this was a poor and ineffective substitute for the powerful weapon of the confessional. Authority having once broken down, it was but a single step from Protestantism to rationalism; and the way was opened to the development of all sorts of erroneous systems of morality. (Dr. George O'Brien, An Essay on the Economic Efforts of the Reformation, IHS Press, Norfolk, Virginia, 2003.)

It is indeed quite a supreme irony that Jorge Mario Bergoglio celebrates Protestantism while being influenced by a Marxist world view throughout the course of his adult life. He thus admires both the proximate cause of our current problems and its ultimate result. This is what one should remember about Laudato Si, the likes of which would have been unthinkable for a true pope to undertake, no less do so in such a philosophically ideological and theologically Modernist manner.  

Bergoglio is thus one with “mainstream” Protestant denominations that are dying off as a result of their inherent falsity, which has degenerated to the point of self-caricature by means of the worship of the earth and the indemnification of grievous sins as an exercise of “mercy,” “toleration,” and “love.”

Bergoglio continues to make such a mockery of any concept of even a generic brand of Christianity that non-Catholic naturalists of the “conservative” variety and evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants find further justifications for rejecting the claims of Catholicism as being the true religion. Hard-core, fire-breathing anti-Catholic evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants will be hardened in their belief that the Catholic Church is the “whore of Babylon” even though the counterfeit church of conciliarism is not the Catholic Church. Believe me, this is not idle speculation. We know lots of Protestant evangelicals and fundamentalists who believe that the Catholic Church has become part of the New World Order.

This is indeed the hour of darkness as “Eco Jorge” dances to the tune of those who use his support to attack the Sovereignty of God over men and their nations, a sovereignty that the counterfeit church of conciliarism denies as its lords have surrendered themselves to civil masters who desire to play God with the lives, liberty, and property of us all.

Do not despair. This is the time appointed for us by the good God in which to live and to work out our salvation as members of His true Church in this time of apostasy and betrayal. Our Lady will send us all of the graces that her Divine Son has won for us by means of the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death of the wood of the Holy Cross if we keep close to her by means of her most Holy Rosary and by spreading devotion to her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

Lift high the Cross!

Pray Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary.

Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart will triumph in the end!

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of Fatima, ppray 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 Juliana Falconieri, pray for us.