The Heresy Debate

There is on the NCR a disquieting interview to the disquieting Austin Ivereigh.

In it, Mr Ivereigh tries to absolve Francis from the accusation of actively promoting the Kasperian heresy, but in doing so depicts a papacy that is every bit as heretical and subversive as he denies it is.

Take this phrase:

What do you think is the Pope’s general view of the synod?

It’s a misreading to see Pope Francis as seeking to impose a concrete solution to anything. He sees himself as initiating and overseeing a process, which is basically of the Holy Spirit. His own criteria for discernment are: If you get people together who are faithful to the magisterium, who speak boldly from their own experience and listen humbly to each other, and you give the process sufficient time for a proper discernment, then, if there is a convergence at the end of it, you can be confident that is of the Holy Spirit.

If this is what the Pope thinks, I ask for the privilege of being the one who sets fire to the stake. This would be a Pope who thinks: “let us call together who are orthodox today and, if they wake up heretics tomorrow hey, it's the Holy Spirit”.

In the same vein, the entire interview is made as if discussions about fundamentals of the Faith were something permissible, or even good. Read the rest on the interview there and you will see what the drift is.

If Francis is as bad as that, whether he is in favour of this or that particular heresy or sacrilege or abomination is merely an incidental problem, the byproduct of a general issue. If Francis is as bad as that, we simply have a Pope who considers Truth disposable, provided it is disposed of by people whom he considers “sound” before agreeing on some new heresy.

This is insane.

But mind, this is what a journalist says who is defending him from the accusation of promoting a heretical agenda!

Seriously, what has become of us? Is anyone still sober around Catholic magazines?

The Catholic discourse has decayed so much, it has fallen to such an abject level of ignorance that one cannot even recognise any element of Catholicism in it. This is like reading the magazine of the Chinese Communist Party, articles written by people who pretend to be communist for the benefit of people who pretend to read them.

There can be no debate about heresy, desecration, abuse of Sacraments, whatever goes clearly against the Depositum Fidei. There can be no good in a Pope thinking, even for a second, of proposing such a debate. There can be no way or mechanism or triple salto by which Truth can be changed. There can be no way a Pope thinks a madness like that and is not the enemy number one of the Church, and Satan's most helpful chess piece on the chessboard.

What has become of us.


Posted on March 9, 2015, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 15 Comments.

  1. I for one, am all for Dr. Ivereigh talking all he wants. He should be interviewed in all the heretical catholic mags on a rotating basis. I’m can’t even imagine what other knowledge he must possess.🙂 And I have a vivid imagination.


    • I am the more shocked because confusion here is so easily accepted as something that is understood, not even worth talking about.

  2. The same cr*p thinking that comes out of the E&W Bishops’ Conference, of which he was/is closely associated.

    Franciscus appears to be creating a Catholic Church franchise, where each ‘Conference is an independent operation as to theology and praxis, with central synods copying that of the CofE format.

  3. Mr. Iverleigh has a disturbing resemblence to Al Franken. So Bergoglio is wedded to a “process”….how delightful. Jesus Christ came to redeem mankind by sending the Holy Spirit to initiate a “process” at Pentecost.

  4. I left comment on the Pope’s facebook page,quoting the section of Isaiah that begins watchman what of the night….” and then stating that he as Pope had failed in all ways as a watchman. Yes I know he probably will not read it but others might.

  5. Yes, this paragraph leapt out at me too. Very revealing. To refresh my brain after reading this tripe I read some of the documents from the Council of Trent. So clear, so true, so thoughtful! Is there something sissified about this whole thing? Do real men sit around and talk about process? Forgive me, I’m a mere woman, and I know my place, but where are the priests who used to THUNDER!!! Where are the priests who will stand up and protest the theft of our Church by sissies?

    • Not many of those, I am afraid; instead, a lot of pansies around…

    • I could not agree with you more. Posted a negative comment elsewhere on Rabbit gate, disagreeing with some poor young guy who thought the Pope should be defended.

      I noted that my dear departed father (who was born in 1915) would say that Francis was talking like “an old woman.” My father would be describing busybodies and gossips, and sometimes said it to their faces! (Ah, for the days before feminism and political correctness.)

    • Sorry for your loss, and yes, I miss your father, too… we need more people able and willing to put an end to this petticoat environment…


  6. I am SO sick of people stating what the Holy Spirit thinks! Who made any of them the arbiters of the Truth of God in the third person of the Blessed Trinity?…even Francis? They cannot think they truly speak for God, and if they say that they do, that is a sure indication that we should not be listening.

    • My take is that when they lose the faith they start saying that their crap is what the Holy Ghost wants.

      If they believed in God they would be *terrified* of speaking of a “God of Surprises”.


  7. Kasper’s proposal = permission slip to adultery.

  8. “Articles written by people who pretend to be communist [or Catholic] for the benefit of people who pretend to read them.” – to pretend. There is an old phrase in English, ‘pretender to the throne’.

    Truth. The un-mistakeable point of the Church is to pave a way for Truth, despite the 359 degrees of lies carefully, methodically and painstakinglly plotted in the ‘world’. Why on earth do did previous Popes teach the necessity of Baptism in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost? Just something that was an unfortunate side-effect of the ‘beat of the age’. Imagine if a contemporary prelate stood up before Our Lord on the Way to Calvary and preached at Him His unnecessity…and then we all said…’ah, yeah, right.’

%d bloggers like this: