Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us

                November 30, 2013


Jorge and Oscar's False Gospel of False Joy

Part Three

by Thomas A. Droleskey

One of the few advantages of commenting on selected passages of Jorge Mario Bergoglio's Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013, is that there will never be a need to waste much more of my good Catholic time on this hideous heretic as this compendium of his collected sayings, each of which are straight of the cliche factories of Jesuit provincial houses and universities, seminaries, novitiates, schools and parishes in the 1970s, provides one-stop shopping for all of your Modernist needs.

What more needs to said that hasn't been said hundreds of times before, especially since all Jorge Mario Bergoglio keeps doing is repeating himself endlessly? Why feed this insanity with attention that it no longer deserves?

Indeed, someone inside the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River appears particularly interested in the articles that have been on this site suing the month of November that ends today. I really do hope that the person who is accessing this site in the Vatican will purchase the book of commentaries about Bergoglio that I am compiling as this should also make for interesting reading during lulls at the Casa Santa Marta.

There is hardly a single aspect of the Holy Faith that was left untouched in the text of Evangelii Gaudium, including the very governing structures of Holy Mother Church and the nature of Papal Primacy itself.

VI.  Giving Marching Orders to Conciliar "Bishops:" Undergo Missionary Conversion

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 (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), Jorge Mario Bergoglio wants the counterfeit church of conciliarism's diocesan "bishops" to undergo a "missionary conversion," which means to cease acting in any way wherein "the voice of the faithful" is 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 26, 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 wants 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 Tse-Tung'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 is unconcerned about what he termed a few passages later with the "transmission of what he called "disjointed doctrines." He is concerned about "reaching everyone." His "outreach," however, is 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 will not be doctrinal "police officers" but rather "gentle" shepherds stands 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, 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 Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez, 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 is why Jorge Mario Bergoglio is intent on changing even the nature of the papacy in conciliar captivity as he believes that such "witch hunts" have harmed" the "credibility" of the Catholic Church.

VII. "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 26, 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."

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who meant to established a precedent when he resigned from what he thought was the Chair of Saint Peter on Monday, February 11, 2013, the Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes, 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 time, on how he believes it was 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 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 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 Wojtyla/John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995.)

Little has been done?

What has been done thus and what Bergoglio proposes to do further is contrary to the very Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church, something that the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council, infallible 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 is the realization of the goals of his fellow revolutionaries and makes 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 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 has put his "official" seal of approval on that which about which he has discoursed for decades. After feeling what he believes to have been the "stinging wrath" of "Rome" during his time as conciliar "archbishop" of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio desires 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 is 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 Bergoglio is the best poster boy in behalf of the truth that the canonical-doctrinal principle of sedevacantism applies at this time.

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

Repeating themes that he has expressed numerous times before in the past eight months, seventeen days, Jorge Mario Bergoglio used the following passages in 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]

What despicable little pest Jorge Mario Bergoglio is.

Bergoglio attempts 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 are beneath contempt and will give him a special place in the torments of the lowest reaches of Hell if he does not repent of his blasphemous heresies before he dies.

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" is premised upon his belief that men are incapable of learning the Faith in sustained, orderly manner, which is why he believes 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 catechist, 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 leads 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 "hermeutic 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

IX. The Apostle of Newness

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 26, 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 is 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 can Bergoglio claim that Catholics cannot continue to do "things" in the ways that they have always been done when to do so he must 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 cannot.

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

As he has done in the past, Francis The Liberator 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 26, 2013.)

Name your straw man priest or presbyter, Jorge, in your counterfeit church today who uses 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 common place today, not what Bergoglio would claim is harshness and severity.

Moreover, Bergoglio used the passages above once again to disparage the "security" that his 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 is also self-serving as it is patently clear that he is 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, is far from holy. He is the Master of Lies and Prince of Darkness.

XI. 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 26, 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 these delusional efforts had any chance of succeeding after over Forty Years Of Emboldening, Appeasing And Enabling Killers (see also part two and part three).

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.

This is the hour of triumph, albeit temporary for such forces of darkness such as the late Joseph "Cardinal" Bernardin, the late John "Cardinal" Dearden, the late Richard "Cardinal" Cushing and the very much alive, although retired, Roger "Cardinal" Mahony and his pals, the equally retired William "Cardinal Levada and "Archbishop" George Niederauer, both of whom refused to discipline the pro-abortion, pro-perversity Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi. Also chuckling at this time are two other Mahony pals, Tod Brown, the retired "bishop" of Orange, California, who did even slap the wrists of the pro-abortion Loretta Sanchez, and Sylvester Ryan, the retired "bishop" of Monterey, California, who enabled the career of the pro-abortion Leon Panetta, a former Congressman, former Director of the Office of Management and Budget, former White House Chief of Staff in administration of former President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and former Secretary of Defense in the administration of President Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro.

This is also a great hour of personal triumph for the man who retired in 1986 as th conciliar archbishop of Newark, New Jersey, Peter Leo Gerety, a friend of all things lavender.

Gerety, who is still alive at the age of one hundred one years, helped to implement the conciliar revolution in the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey, distinguishing himself as an "anti-poverty" bishop (he was consecrated on June 1, 1966) and who worked in conjunction with one of his priests, Monsignor James T. McHugh, later the conciliar "bishop" of Camden, New Jersey, and of my former home diocese of Rockville Centre, New York, in the implementation of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. Gerety suspended the late Father Paul Wickens, who was a fierce opponent of such instruction, which he knew to be in direct violation of Pope Pius XI's prohibition against it, contained in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929, established Saint Anthony of Padua Church in West Orange, New Jersey. Gerety also hounded and harassed any priest or presbyter deemed to be "conservative" and enabled the careers of pro-abortion politicians in the Garden State.

This is also an hour an triumph, albeit temporary, for the likes of the retired Theodore "Cardinal" McCarrick, who was Gerety's direct successor in Newark in 1987, and Donald "Cardinal" Wuerl, who succeeded McCarrick as the conciliar "archbishop" of Washington, District of Columbia, and who has continued McCarrick's policy of not refusing what purports to be Holy Communion to each of the egregious pro-abortion, pro-perversity officials serving in various capacities in the Federal government of the United States of America, starting with the Vice President of the United States of America himself, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and including, of course, House Minority Leader Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi, Secretary of State John F. Kerry, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and, among others Senators Barbara Mikulski, Robert Menendez, Christopher Murphy, Jack Reed and Thomas Harkin.

Also "home free" now are the likes of New York Governor Andrew Mark Cuomo, who has been sanctioned not one bit by Timothy Michael "Cardinal" Dolan for his support of the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn and for his championing "gay marriage" in my native state, Connecticut Governor Daniel Malloy, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley, California Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr., and Illinois Governor Patrick Quinn. Everybody's getting' a free pass with Jorge, well, unless, of course, those "sourpuss" "restorationists," whom Jorge excoriated once again in the text of Evangelii Gaudium, three days ago now.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio's welcoming embrace that he has extended to Catholics living in objective states of Mortal Sin 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 the 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 immutabilityof 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 26, 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 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 is that of Modernism.

We must cleave to the unchanging and unchangeable Catholic Faith for which Saint Andrew the Apostle, the brother of Saint Peter, gave up his life, detailed below in an excerpt from the readings in the Divine Office for today's feast in his honor, as follows:

The Apostle Andrew was born at Bethsaida, a town of Galilee, and was the brother of Peter. He was a disciple of John the Baptist, and heard him say of Christ, Behold the Lamb of God, whereupon he immediately followed Jesus, bringing his brother also with him. Some while after, they were both fishing in the Sea of Galilee, and the Lord Christ, going by, called them both, before any other of the Apostles, in the words, Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men. They made no delay, but left their nets, and followed Him. After the death and Resurrection of Christ, Andrew was allotted Scythia as the province of his preaching, and, after labouring there, he went through Epirus and Thrace, where he turned vast multitudes to Christ by his teaching and miracles. Finally he went to Patras in Achaia, and there also he brought many to the knowledge of Gospel truth. Aegeas the Pro-consul resisted the preaching of the Gospel, and the Apostle freely rebuked him, bidding him know that while he held himself a judge of his fellow men, he was himself hindered by devils from knowing Christ our God, the Judge of all.

Then Egeas, being angry, answered him, Boast no more of this thy Christ. He spake words even such as thine, but they availed Him not, and He was crucified by the Jews. Whereto Andrew boldly answered that Christ had given Himself up to die for man's salvation; but the Pro-consul blasphemously interrupted him, and bade him look to himself, and sacrifice to the gods. Then said Andrew, We have an altar, whereon day by day I offer up to God, the Almighty, the One, and the True, not the flesh of bulls nor the blood of goats, but a Lamb without spot and when all they that believe have eaten of the Flesh Thereof, the Lamb That was slain abideth whole and liveth. Then Aegeas being filled with wrath, bound the Apostle in prison. Now, the people would have delivered him, but he himself calmed the multitude, and earnestly besought them not to take away from him the crown of martyrdom, for which he longed and which was now drawing near.

Come short while after, he was brought before the judgment-seat, where he extolled the mystery of the cross, and rebuked Aegeas for his ungodliness. Then Aegeas could bear with him no longer, but commanded him to be crucified, in imitation of Christ. Andrew, then, was led to the place of martyrdom, and, as soon as he came in sight of the cross, he cried out, O precious cross, which the Members of my Lord have made so goodly, how long have I desired thee! how warmly have I loved thee! how constantly have I sought thee! And, now that thou art come to me, how is my soul drawn to thee! Welcome me from among men, and join me again to my Master, that as by thee He redeemed me, so by thee also He may take me unto Himself. So he was fastened to the cross, whereon he hung living for two days, during which time he ceased not to preach the faith of Christ, and, finally, passed into the Presence of Him the likeness of Whose death he had loved so well. All the above particulars of his last sufferings were written by the Priests and Deacons of Achaia, who bear witness to them of their own knowledge. Under the Emperor Constantine the bones of the Apostle were first taken to Constantinople, whence they were afterwards brought to Amalfi. In the Pontificate of Pope Pius II his head was carried to Rome, where it is kept in the Basilica of St Peter. (The Divine Office, Feast of Saint Andrew.)

Not exactly the conciliar "spirit" of "dialogue" and "encounter.

Well, part four of this series will appear tomorrow or Monday, although I might have a "diversion" on a lighter topic tomorrow, the First Sunday of Advent: Timothy Michael Dolan.

Pray your Rosaries.

Accept the difficulties of the moment.


The Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph in the end.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, 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 Andrew the Apostle, 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.

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?


© Copyright 2013, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.