Quid est veritas?
Effective Christian witness is not about bombarding people with religious messages, but about our willingness to be available to others “by patiently and respectfully engaging their questions and their doubts as they advance in their search for the truth and the meaning of human existence” (BENEDICT XVI, Message for the 47th World Communications Day, 2013). We need but recall the story of the disciples on the way to Emmaus. We have to be able to dialogue with the men and women of today, to understand their expectations, doubts and hopes, and to bring them the Gospel, Jesus Christ himself, God incarnate, who died and rose to free us from sin and death. We are challenged to be people of depth, attentive to what is happening around us and spiritually alert. To dialogue means to believe that the “other” has something worthwhile to say, and to entertain his or her point of view and perspective. Engaging in dialogue does not mean renouncing our own ideas and traditions, but the claim that they alone are valid or absolute.
The words above come from our Disgrace In Chief, Francis The Humble Wrecker, and the chap below is sorely missed. Let me explain why.
Tomas de Torquemada.
The excerpt above is the umpteenth example of the way this man thinks. Note the way the man slowly works his way from an innocuous start to an outright heresy.
In the first phase, he quotes Pope Benedict. It is clear that for Benedict you “engage” in order to patiently transmit the Truth you have, and your interlocutor hasn’t. Very simple, and very true. Going on, the Emmaus reference still seems to reinforce the concept: listen first, and then administer the Truth as the medicine for the patient.
Up to here it’s all fine to my eyes. St. Paul discussed openly with the people of Athens, but he discussed with them because he had the Truth they needed to know, and they believed the lie that he wanted to destroy. Again, very simple.
But would Francis stop at orthodoxy? You wish! Francis must always, always be the carrier of a new and different message, and make no mistake: this message will be either heretical or very strange. Always.
In this case, our man shifts the ground in instalments, until he lands in his beloved Francisland, where there are no “excessive (sic) doctrinal securities”, everyone is saved, and Christ is an embarrassment standing in the way of the understanding among the people.
Firstly, we are told the “other” has something worthwhile to say, but Bergoglio does not take position about where the worth would lie. Yes, everyone may have something worthwhile to say. No doubt about that. But when he starts to go against Christian truth he is clearly talking rubbish, and he must be told so. This, Francis doesn’t say, and his concept of evangelisation looks rather shaky already.
Then, Francis says you must “entertain his or her” – notice here the PC use of masculine and feminine; but this could be the translator’s fault – “point of view and perspective”, basically inviting you to play Jew, Muslim, Buddhist or whatever with your interlocutor for the sake of “dialogue”. “So, my dear Ahmed, you really think Christ is no more than a very smart and saintly guy? Interesting point, this! What an enriching perspective! Pray, give me some time to better absorb the point”. This is no evangelisation anymore. This is appeasement already, and of the worst sort.
Finally, he drops the bomb: you must not renounce your “ideas and traditions” (really? How very kind!), but you must renounce to the claim that they alone are valid or absolute!
At this point, my dear reader, I suggest you re-read the entire passage again, and let the way this man thinks and works sink in your consciousness. Understand that this one here is either very, very evil or else very, very deluded; a man whose unlimited vanity leads him to continuously, continuously insult Christian truth for the sake of the edification of his own humble monument; or else, Francis is one just on the side of the Enemy, and who thinks Christianity is the problem and he is the solution. At the end of a short “progression” (actually, regression) you have been led not only to renounce to the vocal defence and promotion of the Truth, but to renounce to the concept of its truthfulness altogether!
Francis’ frontal attack to – or stubborn ignoring of – Catholicism is so blatant, it leaves one speechless. You must renounce to the claim that your “ideas and traditions” are valid and absolute! You have your truth, they have theirs! Already the use of words like “ideas and traditions” lets a thinking transpire according to which an underlying truth expresses itself with several traditions: the one expresses it with the Jewish ideas and tradition, the other with the Muslim ones, a third with the Hindu, a fourth with the Christian; but as a Christian, you must accept your stance has no absolute validity.
It is a grave sin, they say, to slap a Pope in the face. In Bergoglio’s case, this goes to show that someone should have done it, and he should have done it soundly and repeatedly, before he was made a bishop. Now it is, I am afraid, a tad too late. V II has made this bed, and we will have to lie in it.
Whenever I read some antic of this man I am reminded of an immortal character in Alessandro Manzoni’s I Promessi Sposi. Manzoni called him vecchio malvissuto, or “an old man who has lived his life badly”.
Excellent analysis. I am forced to the conclusion that we are, most of us, “more Catholic than the Pope”.
Of this Pope, most surely.
But then again he prefers “bishop of Rome”, which is telling in itself.
Vatican 2 has made it clear that conversion is no longer a goal and not necessary for those outside of the Church….despite the fact that said notion is in fact one of heresy. Basically, almost everything that Francis says is heretical to some degree.
The Pope’s “get out of jail free card” (or so he and his supporters erroneously believe)….and his defenders will never get tired of telling you….is that the Pope is not trying to change Dogma but only speaking in the “spirit of Vatican 2” (the rogue Church’s master attempt to create a one-world, modernistic, non-Catholic church). Its not like these words are the simple thoughts of Francis expressed to a friend of his in some letter; no, these are heretical pronouncements made in full view of the Catholic world. That is formal heresy in my book, as we cant actually believe that Francis is simply “not knowledgeable” in the teachings of the Church. We Catholics, or whats left of us, need to start calling a “spade a spade” concerning this man. Always continue to pray, yes, but lets not remain silent…..no matter how “out of touch with reality” we may seem to be to others who are outside of the Faith. We have an obligation to do our best to spread the Truth and to refute the lies. Whether or not others listen is ultimately up to them of course.
As always Mundabor, keep of the good work….there aren’t too many voices of Catholic reason out there.
I disagree on the formal heresy. There are no formal pronouncements. As to the ignorance, I doubt many Jesuits know the very basics. His main fault in my eyes is most probably in his not wanting to reflect on what Catholicism is, rather than in – which might also be possible – being set in demolishing as much of it as he can.
I am fully persuaded there are many of these people who haven’t been seriously near a Gospel for decades. They do social work, you see…
Yes, this is true….but we both know that there never will be any formal pronouncement.
(Almost) all fine, then… 😉
The only thing we have to deal with with is a more or less deranged man thinking he knows better. He will not mount an open challenge to the Church. The only thing we have to do is to point out he is piddling out of the WC.
Or you might say: we keep calm and stick to Catholicism…
I heard more or less the same thing in a homily in my own parish a few months back. I don’t remember the whole thing, but the words “The Catholic Church may not have a monopoly on the truth” are not easily forgotten. It made my blood run cold at the time….but my pp does tend to be a bit “multi-faith” although otherwise fairly sensible and very kind….so I thought, oh well, that’s just him. To hear this from the Pope is most disturbing.
I notice these kind of heretics are invariably “very kind”, whilst the orthodox people are those who tend to have some rather sharp angle. I think the two go together in a meausre. If one wants to be kind, he will have to compromise with the truth at some point.
Yes, it’s a difficult one. I think a distinction needs to be made between telling the truth with kindness and perceived kindness in a politically correct sense. Too many of our priests seem to have lost the ability to do the former. Personally I prefer clarity…it’s quite possible to be clear about right and wrong whilst still being kind to the individual(s) concerned but I find it unhelpful when “kindness” is vague and blurred. It leads to confusion…which isn’t comfortable. Much better to know where you stand.
The problem starts because too many people think that “if I feel offended you haven’t been kind”, or “you shouldn’t have said what you said”.
Too often, how the recipient of the message “feels” is made to me the metre of wheter it was right or wrong to say it.
If you look at Mr Werling’s post, he complains he let people “feel like shit” and wonders whether this is Christian. Well if it’s done for the right reasons, of course it is; and if the person feels like shit, that might well be a salutary feeling.
The idea of absolute truth does seem foreign to many (possibly even this pope). A few years ago during a conversation with a friend about my faith he suggested to me, “surely there are teachings of the Catholic Church that you disagree with?” His surprise to my steadfast fidelity to Church teaching revealed the necessary contrast in our beliefs, allowing a true and meaningful dialogue. I guess I don’t see any benefit in the pope’s advice.
… that’s because you are a true Catholic…
Now if you were an atehist, that would be different. You could smugly say the Pope starts to see the light…
This is just a little FYI – . I found this to be refreshing after all of the garbage we have to hear… I hope you like it.also. – The One True Church http://www.catholicpamphlets.net/pamphlets/THE%20ONE%20TRUE%20CHURCH.pdf
“It is, therefore, not a matter of indifference what religion a man professes; he must profess the right and true religion, and without that there is no hope of salvation, for it stands to reason, my dear people, that if God reveals a thing or teaches a thing, He want
s to be believed. Not to believe is to insult God. Doubting His word, or to believe even with doubt and hesitating, is an insult to God, because it is doubting His Sacred Word. We must, therefore, believe without doubting, without hesitating.” – The One True Church
Click to access THE%20ONE%20TRUE%20CHURCH.pdf
Yes, I saw Mr Werling’s post. I thought it very sad. I can empathize with him…I have had similar thoughts recently. I wondered if I wasn’t more “happy-go-lucky” before I understood too much about what has happened in the Church…but I can’t go back…you can’t “unknow” things…and actually I wouldn’t really want to….truth is truth…and it’s better to know. I can understand why it might have all got a bit too much for him. Maybe he just needs a break. Fortunately one of my favourite saints was always St Philip Neri…so I don’t have too much trouble combining a serious religious side with a very silly side. As an SSPX priest said to me recently..”.the thing with the modern priests is that they are people-pleasers….nothing wrong with that, as long as it is not at the expense of Truth!” (Unfortunately in my experience it too often is 😦 )
Yes, at times it get a little too much. I prefer not to blog for a day or two whilst I recharge the batteries. Then is, again, a new plunge into a world made of Maradiagas…