Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

A Legacy Co-Opted: What Really Lies Behind Changes to John Paul II Institute?

Image: modified screengrab of the current website for the Pontifical John Paul II Instittue in Washington, DC 

Today in Rome, Pope Francis issued the sixteenth Motu Proprio of his pontificate, Summa Familiae Cura. The apostolic letter, dated for promulgation today –exactly one year after five dubia were presented to the pope concerning his exhortation Amoris Laetitia — establishes a new educational institution. Called “The Pontifical John Paul II Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences,” it will replace the original (and similarly-named) John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family. The latter was founded by the late Cardinal Caffarra at Pope John Paul II’s request after the conclusion of the 1980 Synod on the Family; that synod also gave rise to the apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio. 

It was upon the occasion of that founding that Sister Lucia of Fatima responded to a letter from Caffarra requesting prayers for the new undertaking, telling him that “the final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family.”

“Don’t be afraid,” she went on, “because anyone who operates for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be contended and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue… however, Our Lady has already crushed its head.”

Pope Francis signed today’s apostolic letter remaking the institute during his apostolic visit to Colombia on September 8th, only two days after the cardinal — who was recently described by Vatican watcher Sandro Magister as the “driving figure” behind the dubia — passed away unexpectedly in Bologna at the age of 79.

Caffarra’s concerns as expressed in the dubia were shared not only by Cardinals Raymond Burke, Walter Brandmueller, and the late Joachim Meisner — the other three so-called “Dubia Cardinals” — but by many of the faithful throughout the world. Nevertheless, Francis writes in Summa Familiae Cura that the synods of 2014 and 2015, which culminated in the writing of Amoris Laetitia, have “led the Church to a renewed awareness of the family gospel and the new pastoral challenges to which the Christian community is called upon to respond.” Francis goes on to cite his own exhortation, saying, “The welfare of the family is decisive for the future of the world and that of the Church.”

Citing paragraph 32 of Amoris Laetitia, the new motu proprio continues:

The anthropological-cultural change, which today affects all aspects of life and requires an analytical and diversified approach, does not allow us to limit ourselves to pastoral and missionary practices that reflect forms and models of the past. We must be conscious and passionate interpreters of the wisdom of faith in a context in which individuals are less sustained than in the past by social structures, in their affective and family life. In the clear purpose of remaining faithful to the teaching of Christ, we must look with the intellect of love and with wisdom of realism to the reality of the family today, in all its complexity, in its lights and in its shadows.


Co-Opting Catholic Teaching on Marriage and Family

The retention of the name of Pope John Paul II on the newly-reconfigured institute has already raised suspicions that his reputation on life and family issues will be used to provide cover for a heterodox agenda. Such concerns are not without merit. Over the past year we have witnessed certain prelates — those who are actively advancing the most radical re-interpretation of the Church’s teaching on the family — transparently co-opting the work of popes Paul VI and John Paul II to this end.

In August, 2016, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia — a vocal advocate for Communion for the “remarried” who was responsible for inviting homosexual couples to the 2015 World Meeting of Families — was chosen by Pope Francis to head up the Pontifical Academy for Life, as well as the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family. Paglia — who was later discovered (without consequence) to have been responsible for commissioning of a homoerotic mural featuring his likeness in his Cathedral in Terni-Narni-Amelia — told Vatican Radio upon news of his appointment that he believed the pope wanted him to continue the “new course” that came from the synods, as well as from Amoris Laetitia. Having taken over the institute founded by Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Caffarra, Paglia said, “I understand the pope’s [Francis] own wish for a kind of acceleration of the nearness of the Church and for the breaching of borders — with reflection, courage, and creativity.”

In October, 2016, Cardinal Walter Kasper — one of the driving forces behind the recent synods on the family and the exhortation that followed — drew upon Familiaris Consortio 84 to justify the controversial concessions in Amoris Laetitia that would allow those living in objective grave sin a chance to receive the Sacraments without a change of life. Kasper argued that when John Paul II decided to allow “remarried” Catholics to receive the sacraments if they lived as brother and sister, this, too, was “in fact a concession.” Pope Francis, Kasper said, merely “goes a step further, by putting the problem in a process of an embracing pastoral [approach] of gradual integration.”

Also that same October, we learned that Monsignor Pierangelo Sequeri would be the new president of the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family in Rome. Sequeri had acted as consultor for the the two synods, and went on to help with the drafting of Amoris Laetitia. Simultaneously, news broke that Archbishop Denis Hart of Melbourne, Australia, “shocked students and staff” by announcing that the Melbourne campus of the John Paul II Institute would be closing in 2018. In a statement on the Institute’s website, it was admitted that there was no looming financial crisis and that student needs were being met.

In November, 2016, the entire membership of the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAL) — another creation of Pope John Paul II, now also under Archbishop Paglia — was dismissed, including those members, like Professor Josef Seifert, who were appointed to their positions for life. At the same time, the statutes were re-written in such a way that members would no longer be required to sign a declaration stating they would uphold Catholic teachings on life. The requirement that members be Catholic was also dropped. By June of 2017, the pope had appointed 45 new ordinary members of the emptied-out PAL, some of whom were, by Paglia’s own admission, non-believers, and at least one of whom was a known supporter of abortion up to 18 weeks of gestation.

In May, 2017, Italian journalist and Vatican watcher Marco Tosatti revealed information he had received that a “secret commission” had been formed to “examine and potentially study changes to the Church’s position on the issue of contraception as it was explained in 1968 by Paul VI in the encyclical Humanae Vitae.” In June, 2017, Italian Catholic historian and author Roberto de Mattei verified the existence of the commission, revealing that yet another person involved with the John Paul II Institute — a professor at the institute named Monsignor Gilfredo Marengo — would be in charge of the work. Marengo was “nominated by Pope Francis,” according to de Mattei, “to ‘re-interpret’ the encyclical Humane Vitae by Paul VI, in the light of Amoris laetitia, on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the former’s promulgation, which falls next year.” De Mattei also brought to light the involvement of Monsignor Sequeri, the aforementioned newly-appointed president of the John Paul II Institute in Rome.

De Mattei went on to give valuable insight into the thinking of Monsignor Marengo, who suggested in a piece at Vatican Insider in September, 2015, that Catholics should abandon “a conception of the doctrinal patrimony of the Church as a closed system, impermeable to questions and provocations of the here and now, in which the Christian community is called to justify its faith, through its proclamation and testimony”. In another article, de Mattei revealed that Marengo had asked if “the polemical game – the [contraceptive] pill yes – the pill no, like today’s – Communion to the divorced yes – Communion to the divorced no – is only an appearance of discomfort and strain, [which is] much more decisive in the fabric of ecclesial life.” Marengo went on in that article to say he believed that the way the teaching of Paul VI [in Humanae Vitae] is defended creates problems for today’s Catholics. To illustrate his point, Marengo cited Pope Francis, who said, “we have presented a too abstract theological ideal on marriage, almost artificially constructed, far from the concrete situation and the effective possibilities of families as they really are. This excessive idealization, above all when we have reawakened trust in grace, has not made marriage more attractive and desirable, but quite the opposite.”

By July of 2017, the Humanae Vitae commission’s existence was being summarily denied by Archbishop Paglia. However, Monsignor Marengo admitted in an interview with Vatican Radio that a “research group” looking into Humanae Vitae did exist, although he insisted that it was “a work of historical-critical investigation without any aim other than reconstructing as well as possible the whole process of composing the encyclical.”

But as Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register asked earlier this month, “Why make all the effort to deepen and study something that will not fundamentally change?” Pentin also noted the “unprecedented level of access” to the Vatican Secret Archives given to commission members. That kind of access, says Pentin, has not even been granted to those researching the much-maligned pontificate of Venerable Pope Pius XII during World War II, despite years of requests made to that end. “All of which,” writes Pentin, “amounts to a concern that the commission is being used as a cover: to look at the scientific and historical character of the document, but with the ultimate goal of presenting the Pope with enough information for the encyclical’s dissenters to say: ‘Times have changed — Humanae Vitae needs to be interpreted in the light of conscience, according to the complexity of people’s lives today.'”

So what does the pope himself think? We have at least two significant clues.

In an interview in March of 2014, Francis was asked to comment on Humanae Vitae. Specifically, he was questioned on whether the Church could “take up again the topic of birth control”.

“It all depends,” the pope responded, “on how the text of ‘Humanae Vitae’ is interpreted. Paul VI himself, towards the end, recommended to confessors much mercy and attention to concrete situations.” He also said, “it is a matter of going into the issue in depth and to ensure that the pastoral ministry takes into account the situations of each person and what that person can do. This will also be discussed on the path to the Synod.”

In 2016, he said in response to a question about contraceptive use during an outbreak of the microcephaly-causing Zika virus that couples in affected areas could licitly “avoid pregnancy” by making recourse to a “lesser evil”. By way of example, the pope cited an apocryphal story alleging that Pope Paul VI had allowed nuns in Africa to use contraceptives if they were likely to be raped. Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi later clarified that in his answer, the pope was indeed speaking of the use of “condoms and contraceptives” for the purposes of “avoiding pregnancy”. “The contraceptive or condom,” Fr. Lombardi said, “in particular cases of emergency or gravity, could be the object of discernment in a serious case of conscience. This is what the Pope said.”


Summa Familiae Cura — A Clue From the Past?

As we have seen, over the course of a very short time, progressive forces within the Church have moved rapidly to take over trusted institutions or appropriate the reputations or work of those who have held the line on Catholic teaching to advance the cause of undermining the Church’s teaching on human sexuality and marriage.

The question is: where does the re-imagining of the John Paul II Institute fit in?

Like many, I was struck by the sudden and unexpected nature of today’s motu proprio. The sudden changing of the name, structure, and focus of the Institute, especially so soon after its founding president’s death, seemed very odd.

Also odd, to my ears at least, was the wording of the new title. The “Pontifical John Paul II Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences“. Sciences? Which sciences? The question of science, as it most commonly intersects with Church teaching at present, relates to the perceived supremacy of the empirical over the theological, as well as the “evolution” of doctrine based on a notion that modern man knows so much more than those who came before him that he has the wisdom to change what cannot be changed.

More to the point, it made me think of contraception, the acceptance of which within ecclesiastical circles follows that exact line of thinking.

So as I sat down to research this article, I followed the hunch. I was able to locate an online copy of the Schema for a Document on Responsible Parenthood  — the so-called “majority report” of the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control, given to Pope Paul VI in 1966. It was the leaking of this document that led many to believe that Pope Paul VI would affirm that contraception and Catholic teaching on Marriage and fecundity were compatible. It was also the reason that so many were shocked by what Humanae Vitae ultimately said.

There is much of relevance in the document, itself now half a century old, that resonates in the present moment. “[B]ecause of the complexity of modern life,” one early section says, sounding eerily familiar, “the concrete moral norms to be followed must not be pushed to an extreme.”

But it was when I made it to the second part of the text, on “Pastoral Necessities,” that I almost jumped out of my chair. Under the heading Chapter II: Further Consideration; Application of the Doctrine of Matrimony to Different Parts of the World , the first paragraph reads:

It seems very necessary to establish some pontifical institute or secretariat for the study of the sciences connected with married life. In this commission there could be continual collaboration in open dialogue among experts competent in various areas. The aim of this institute (or secretariat) would be, among other duties, to carry further the research and reflection begun by the commission. The various studies which the commission has already done could be made public. It would be in a special way for this institute to study how the doctrine of matrimony should be applied to different parts of the world and to contribute to the formation of priests and married couples dedicated to the family apostolate by sending experts to them (cf., Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, II, c.1, par.52). [emphasis added]

There it was. The exact language from the new title of the John Paul II Institute that felt so awkward to me in the first place — “Marriage and Family Sciences” — taken directly from the document that sought to prompt Pope Paul VI to open the door for Catholics to use contraception.

It is of course possible, but I find it very difficult to believe that the parallel semantics between these two documents is a complete coincidence. I have been suspicious for years that the synods were an attempt to continue the work that was originally thwarted by Humanae Vitae.

This so-called “majority report” was the playbook. It was supposed to clear the obstacles for a new era in the Church, where it could shed those “pastoral and missionary practices that reflect forms and models of the past” (as Pope Francis writes in today’s letter) in light of “the exigencies of human nature” and “the progress of the sciences” (as the earlier document intones).

But Pope Paul VI rose to the occasion. Perhaps he heard the voice not just of the indeterminate “spirit” we hear so much about, but the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Trinity Himself. He drew a line in the sand that all the disobedience and subterfuge in the world couldn’t erase. People could do what they wanted in the bedroom, and bishops and priests could wave it away in the confessional with a wink and a nod, but the Church’s teaching on contraception didn’t actually change.

And then, adding insult to the injury of defeat, came thirty five years over the space of two pontificates — those of John Paul II and Benedict XVI — where the line was held on the Church’s fundamental teaching on contraception. They had to wait thirty five years before they had another shot at finishing the job. Many of those who led the revolt in the 1960s never lived to even see the day. Others, as we know, conspired.

And at last, it appears they may once again have their chance.

Amoris Laetitia has sought to separate the culpability for grave sin from extra-marital sexual acts in a way that has opened the door to not just sacrilege, but the crumbling of the entire moral edifice of the Church. The acceptance of contraception, of its very nature, would be even worse, but it unmistakably follows from the same line of thinking. It divorces sexual intimacy from procreation. It is the fundamental weapon that destroys the very purpose marriage and dismantles the family, if it does not prevent the family altogether. It has already led to a global pandemic of selfish, hedonistic, and destructive pursuits. It has ushered in an age of fornication, adultery, pornography, masturbation, sodomy, and all manner of deviancy. For if the marital act can be rendered sterile at the couple’s whim, no other act of sexual pleasure, now decoupled from being open to life, can be logically forbidden.

Contraception tears down the very boundaries and barriers that protect true human love. It strikes at the very heart of what it is to be a family, and makes every marriage that succumbs to it a lie. And as the family goes, so goes mankind.

If you don’t think there is an active attempt to revisit the great defeat for the enemy that was Humanae Vitae, listen again to the words of Sister Lucia of Fatima.

“The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family.”

Sister Lucia also told us to pray for the triumph of the Immaculate Heart. We should take her very seriously. For although we know the enemy will not win in the end, the devastation they are wreaking is even now leading souls to hell. And they won’t stop until she crushes them.

192 thoughts on “A Legacy Co-Opted: What Really Lies Behind Changes to John Paul II Institute?”

  1. PLEASE NOTE: Experience teaches that any article that favorably mentions Pope John Paul II invites all manner of critical comments from traditional Catholics, from mentions of the ecumenical events at Assisi to the Kissing of the Koran. I am going to ask that you please refrain on this particular article from piling on with these arguments we’ve all heard a thousand times and derailing the larger discussion that we should be having about what’s happening here. Please also remember that we are united on this issue with many Catholics who have a different different understanding of post-conciliar history in our collective opposition to the concentrated campaign to undermine the Church’s teaching on marriage and human sexuality. I want them to be able to participate in the discussion here without being run out of town on a rail.

    I will be moderating comments on this one more aggressively than usual in the interest of fruitful discourse.

  2. When the Synods on the Family were first announced, a few people who were paying close attention frowned and asked: “Could it be–I know it sounds impossible–that the Pope himself favors the Kaspar approach?” And these people were shamed and ridiculed into silence, because he is the Pope, and popes don’t do such things.

    Now that we know beyond any shadow of a doubt that Jorge Bergoglio does agree with giving Holy Communion to “remarried” adulterers, where is the outrage? Where is the admission that something is wrong–in fact, very, VERY wrong?


    Try to tell people today that Bergoglio is planning to overturn the conclusions of Humanae Vitae, and they will hand you your tinfoil hat. Why? Because he is the Pope, and popes don’t do such things.

    Fool me once . . .

    • “…Because he is the Pope, and popes don’t do such things.” – Right on!
      We should be. indeed a biggest fools, if we should not believe that in the deepest bottom of the hell could be some bishops… And yes, even those who we call the first among the same.
      Such people (not the real faithful ones!) who won’t believe at any chance that bishops, or cardinals, or, yes, even including the pope, validly or less elected, can do things which deserves the ultimate penalty, simply are – papolatrists. They have just a little, or even less than little real faith.
      The papolatry is for a years highly underestimated. Papolatry is not just an accidental thing, caused by the true love, correct obedience, even less by the true faith. It is caused by a deliberate deception, by exaggerated obedience, which is just one of the many tools of the enemies against the Holy Church, and surely against the pope himself too. Systematicaly leading people in the direction about over-estimation of obedience to the man, while at the same time diminishing, or often times totally avoiding the real obedience to God, and His laws.

      This specific deception, the enemies of the Church have deliberately and systematically carried out for the decades. In various ways, using among other things, the lies and exaggeration and improper (almost blind) obedience to the man! (Nothing should be questioned when it comes from the pope!?)
      Most of the popes, even those from the very recent past, were certainly not proponents or supporters of papolatry, but, that was not up to him! They were not asked for permission by the enemies of the Church, they just did it. Slowly, carefully and continuously. Sometimes using carrots and sometimes a bat, which means intimidating, blackmailing and the like.
      They (the enemies) did their seductive work even in the times of the better popes, as a preparation for the time when ‘the man’ from their own camp will be putted on the ‘right place’.

        • We can call it so, or give thousand other names to it. But the real problem is, people DO NOT think about that in a way they should. And others who understand the situation,… well, let’s say not all, but some of them are just too lazy to take some effort to (keep) try to explain it to people. Because, this is such important matter. Because there are so many ‘undereducated’ Catholics.

      • That is the million dollar question, now isn’t it. It all depends upon who you ask.

        According to “official” Church hierarchy and leadership, Francis is Pope of the Catholic Church.

        According to “recognize and resist” folks, Francis is pope but he is to be opposed and resisted with every fiber of one’s being. (For all intents and purpose, the See of Peter might as well be vacant.)

        According to the “Barnhardt view”, Benedict XVI is pope and Francis is not pope. (Benedict did not properly resign; his resignation was based on substantial error; thus Benedict is still the pope.)

        According to the “sedes”, there is no pope — the See of Peter is vacant and has been vacant.

        I was asked a question: do I trust Francis with my soul as I would trust my soul to Jesus Christ and to St. Peter? Would I follow wherever he leads?”

        My answer: “Absolutely not! I wouldn’t trust Francis to teach 3rd grade catechism.” So whatever that makes Francis to me, I hear in him the snarl of a wolf and not the voice of a Shepherd.

      • Only God knows that answer.
        I just think of him as a fallen bishop who happens to have the title of pope, and who, for the sake of his own dignity, needs to hear first hand from his cardinals in the form of a correction.

        I am beginning to pity Francis more and more, for he is looking like a childish rebel at best, and as enemy of the Church, at worst.

        • He has caused so much hurt insult and confusion my heart is no where near feeling pity. I pray constantly for his abdication and the election of a true Catholic pope like Cardinals Sarah or Burke

      • As far as we know, he is pope. It’s possible that a future pope or council will determine he was not a true pope, but until such a time, we need to act prudently and assume that he is. That makes the work all the harder, but what else shall we do? I’m not willing to take the step to separate myself from the church by making judgements she has not.

        • I chuckle every time I read {or say} this meticulous explanation, as even in print the pleading of the mind and the yearning of the soul just ooze from every word…

          • My goodness how much I would love to just yell out “Heretic! Pretender! Anti-pope!” But that would do nothing but please my pride. Well that and I really don’t think he’s an anti-pope… This whole thing is insane. About twice a week I have to stop myself and ask “Ok, when did I switch over to the crazy dimension where nothing makes sense anymore?” The fact that we actually have to say the above irritates me. Just about every time I do I sigh, after which I just have to remind myself to keep praying… aside from that, there’s little I can do. And perhaps it’s the most effective thing. The only thing I can really affect is whether or not I become a saint and achieve heaven. So, that’s what I do, and try to help others along the same path.

          • Say your rosary and you will save your sanity and your soul. Historically, we were overdue for a bad pope. Just stick with settled dogma and warn others who are less knowledgeable.
            “This too will pass.”

        • What else shall we do? That’s a fair point. Surely it’s the approach all faithful Catholics should take; at least, there can’t be more than a handful competent to do anything else.

      • Please check out !!!!! Listen to him share the prophesy and our positions as lay Catholics! Very helpful????????????????????????????

      • One needs to bring to mind what Cardinal Mario Ciappi revealed in 1995 about the 3rd. SECRET of FATIMA : He said, ” IT IS WRITTEN, AMONGST OTHER THINGS , IN THE 3RD.,SECRET OF FATIMA, THAT THE GREAT APOSTASY IN THE CHURCH WILL START FROM THE TOP”. Now does anyone need further clarification as to why “pope” Bergoglio has and is acting in this highly IRREGULAR and IRRESPONSIBLE way? Our Lady foresaw all this coming in these latter times, and that’s why She came to forewarn us about the horrible things to come, especially in the Church.

  3. Thank you Steve. I am novus ordo and do get turned off by attacks on John Paul and Benedict. I agree with everything you wrote here. I asked my dad, a pro life obstetrician, years ago, why, when we go to pray at abortion clinics, do dozens of gay people show up and he said, It is all part of the wider attack on marriage and the family. This really is, as Cardinal Caffara related, a concerted attack on marriage and family from the pope on down.

    Many of us who are not as focused on liturgy as the “trads” are …do never the less get it. We are totally open to life and Church teaching; we oppose contraception, sterilization, abortion, sodomy and yes it is time to stand shoulder to shoulder because who even knows how much time we have left. Liturgy aside, our beloved Church is under attack and we lay people need to be be vociferous in her defense.
    Thanks for your awesome website.

        • I think we just have to be careful of not offending each other in this regard.
          That’s all. Not saying that was the intent, but I know the term ” trads” can be seen in negative light.

          The Magisterial teachings are in grave jeopardy. And regardless, of who attends what Liturgy, many have a great fidelity to Christ’s teachings. I am guilty of this myself at times, assuming otherwise. And that is so wrong headed and full of blatant pride.
          Mea Culpa on me.

          So, I understand the comment.

          • Agreed Steve. There’s another time for that debate and I, myself, am new to that particular debate but on this, its quite clear who is in the wrong. One thing I will mention is that I believe there is an underestimation of how many youthful Catholics actually want the Church to hold true to Her Doctrine (delivered to us by God through Sacred Tradition and Scripture). I believe there are far more of these Catholics than there are one’s who simply choose not to honor their fidelity to the deposit of faith. Its just that the loudest ones, are the ones who want the Church to teach those things in agreement with their pride or simply cease to exist. After reading many parts of “The Mystical City of God”….we need to understand the power of constant sincere prayer….as through this comes the strength to say and do what needs to be done. Our opponents. sad to say…our brethren who have made themselves apostates dont take this seriously and privately mock it….let us put this spiritual weapon back into this fight regardless the circumstances

          • We are ROMAN Catholics! We hold today what everyone, always and everywhere, held and believed before Vatican II. There were only two kinds of Catholics then: (1) those who sat in the pews with us, and who believed exactly as we did, and (2) those who had left the one, true Church. We aren’t “trads.” We hold the traditional Faith, traditional doctrine, traditional morals, and attend the Mass of All Time, which has never been abrogated, despite propaganda to the contrary. We had to attend the Novus Ordo until Summorum Pontificum was issued .)There were great efforts to the contrary, as developed by Msgr.Bugnini (a Freemason) who was assigned to do so by Pope Paul VI. Bugnini was assisted in his efforts by six Protestant ministers and two Catholics. And voila! the Novus Ordo Mass was forced upon all Catholics- -the man-centered, protestantized, deficient, happy-clappy Novus Ordo. (There is a saying that a camel is a horse, built by a committee. It bears relationship to the Novus Ordo service–a Mass built by a committee!) I don’t attend the Novus ordo unless I have to–which means if I am traveling and the traditional Mass is not available.

          • It really is a two-way street, isn’t it? Great and holy men such as Cdl Sarah have pointed out as much as you have CS, so I think you may have a point.

            In that sense, it seems that that the term “trad” carries the risk of devolving into a counter version of what Steve warns us above about JPII criticism.

            I haven’t given it much thought before, but it seems like we can validly ask how much it contributes to the present conversation about the HV comission, can’t we?

    • I’m a convert to the Catholic Church after many years in Methodist, Evangelical, Charismatic and Lutheran places and found my home in the Holy Catholic Church! I am in the sincere belief that we are in the last days. Prophesy is so very clear…. we cannot know the day or our, but the season YES! And it points to that so hold on to the Truth to the end…..!????????????????????????

    • “…why, when we go to pray at abortion clinics, do dozens of gay people show up..” It is all part of a wider attack on marriage and family”

      Yes, and homosexual couples want to adopt , so abortion is against their agenda .

      • Thanks Eugene, that is sweet of you. He was a wonderful man, gone to his just reward. He used to say, “Obstetrics is ruined for Catholics”
        but he stuck with and appreciated the Church’s teachings. He would roll in his grave to see what they are doing today in Rome. I miss him and speak to him often in my heart.

  4. Veritatis Splendor 33.
    “Mention should also be made here of theories which misuse scientific research about the human person. Arguing from the great variety of customs, behaviour patterns and institutions present in humanity, these theories end up, if not with an outright denial of universal human values, at least with a relativistic conception of morality.”

  5. This article is a nice complement to the one in LifeSite news. It was nice to see the document from the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control in this article, and it was nice to also see Cardinal Caffarra’s address outlining the DNA of the now defunct institute. We must go deep – to original sources – in this battle for truth.

  6. Looking for the papal answer to the Dubia? With the repurposing of JP2’s institute you just got it shoveled at your feet – in spades

    Now, we are being told, step in it and sink in the official institutionalizing of A.L. But, be warned, no Dubia will be tolerated asking pesky questions of the papal document resulting from the upcoming Synod on the Youth – a confab, to be sure, that (bet my final Peter Pence dollar) will raise the ante of the revolutionary hand that was A.L.

  7. So there will be debate about how doctrines will be applied in different parts of the world? There will be a “modernization” of thinking and contraception will be an “issue of conscience” and we have seen divorce and adulterous couplings have become? Decentralization of authority and “making up the rules as we go” ? Welcome to the Protestant Church, my friends!

    • The stated goal of the pro-homo ‘Catholic” organisation , Dignity International has been to change the Church’s teaching on homosexuality from within, not to leave as Martin Luther did, and that this would be eventually be accomplished ‘officially’ by a pope. So here we are.

  8. Contraception erases lines and eases the crossing of boundaries, like the ‘sons of god’, of old, lusting after the ‘daughters of man’, issuing forth giants of disorder which had to be destroyed by deluge.

    We are there once more, line-erasing and boundary-crossing. Is the Francis papacy our deluge?

    If so, where’s the Ark?

    • The ark is the family. The First institution instituted by God. I’m not saying leave the Church, but pass on the faith in the family so that when the Immaculate Heart does triumph, which she will, then we will have sons and daughters ready to come forth.

    • Well if married men and women can start engaging in the marital embrace without being open to life, solely for the sake of pleasure, then how can that be considered a sin for anybody else, in any form, in any state of marriage?

      Hmmm…..gee….I wonder what taboo will be normalized next….it’s just hard to tell….

  9. I used to think the photo of Bergoglio and Emma Bonino making goo-goo eyes summed up the situation. Then there was Spadaro-Figueroa-Bergoglio’s calling the pro-life movement a movement of “hate.” Now, on the very anniversary of the dubia, the dismantling of the greatest (in Rome) obstacle to the dynamiting of Humanae Vitae. Watch for Bergoglio’s flying monkeys to start attacking Humanae Vitae within weeks.

    • Ah, what a nice unholy trinity, Imbroglio-Bonino-Pannella Giacinto Detto Marco (may He rest in hell fire, of course)! I just ask, in the light of La Salette prophecy, what should that hideous antichrist dressed in white do any more, to show everybody he is the right guy!!! {Rome will lose the faith to become the see of the antichrist}

      • “Ah, what a nice unholy trinity, Imbroglio-Bonino-Pannella Giacinto Detto Marco (may He rest in hell fire, of ”

        We should pray for the salvation of everyone, even the most despicable evildoer, we shouldn’t hope that they are in hell.

  10. So now Bishops Bill Wright and Vincent Long Van Nguyen of Australia say that gay marriage is o.k.. I won’t be surprised to see it legalized. These bishops are doing the devil’s work.
    It looks like Humanae Vitae is slowly being watered down. “And as the family goes, so goes mankind.” O.L. of Fatima
    ora pro nobis. This was a very thorough piece Mr. Skojec. God bless you.

  11. I am a Sacred Masters student nearly at the end of my study. This is truly sad and very hard on incredibly dedicated and skilled faithful professors and teachers. Two of my tutors were among the 45 scholars.

    They follow the moral theology inspired by Servais Pinckaers. Read everything you can by him. If you can pick up The Pinckaers Reader and go to the essay 12 at page 236. ‘Revisionist Understanding of Action in the Wake of Vatican II’. That essay is very helpful to understanding the trajectory of change in moral thought. Pincakers also has a short concise readable text which explain how we got where we are and what needs to be done.

    But as it stands today, the moral life is where the great division is playing out. It is a radical shift toward man and away from God. It denies the truth of God’s grace.

    The Church is undergoing a massive purification; it had to happen and it seems to have been coming for centuries but now only flowering at the very top of the Church.
    The important things is not to despair, to remain faithful, never to leave..but in saying that to not participate in overt infidelity or consent to it actively or passively. We need to find that place in the desert.

    • Yes, it is sad to see evil attaining such power. But in the larger picture, it is being widely exposed via courageous people and websites like 1P5. This is very good. This is why the tools of evil call us ‘cancers’ and seek to destroy our influence. They are afraid. They are very afraid. On the cusp of total victory they see it can be taken from them. And it will. The Immaculate Heart is incoming. ❤ To quote JP2, “Be not afraid!”

    • What gives me hope is that life flows into the Body of Christ through people like you. Death and sin is expunged bcause by their nature they do not reproduce; they destroy themselves from within. Life regenerates. Always. And you are an example of the future wave of faithful Catholics who will ultimately prevail through our current trial.

      They will lose. We will win.

    • I don’t see the purification happening yet. The progressives at levels are still here. In fact many Good Catholics have left their parishes.

  12. I might add that Pope Benedict’s little book on Conscience is an important text.

    Love Pope Benedict XVI and JPII. I think if Benedict dies before Francis Sauron’s Eye’ will get rather feverish about the Latin Mass.

  13. So the wrecking crew …sorry, “research group” looking into Humanae Vitae will be engaged in “a work of historical-critical investigation without any aim other than reconstructing as well as possible the whole process of composing the encyclical”. Nice to see the pope looking to learn lessons from how the Church operated in previous periods of history, albeit only the 1960’s.

    Perhaps once this particular “historical-critical investigation” is completed, the same team could thoroughly research a few other encyclicals. Quanta Cura, E Supremi and Pascendi might be good places to start.

  14. Thank you Steve for the thoroughness of this article and also for the call to unity. One
    schism is enough in the Church. Division drains and distracts from our one belief in the family, marriage and the
    Eucharist. In St Paul’s words let’s give encouragement to each other and be at peace among ourselves for
    this is what God – Beauty so ancient and so new – expects us to do.

  15. Francis took this action on the 1st year anniversary of the dubia because:

    a) he forgot what day it was
    b) he is sending a not-so-subtle message
    c) he will double down on his agenda
    d) all of the above

  16. Well done for “joining the dots”, Steve. Locating the Schema for apostasy was a good catch, and the similarities in semantics very revealing. Seifert’s analysis of the potential fall-out from A-L is already proving to be prophetic.

    Rumours are that the formal correction of Amoris laetitia is very close. This is just one more reason why it is necessary.

        • Deacon:

          Get this from the link:

          “It will not openly confront Francis but will take the form of letter or document signed by Cardinal Burke and other prelates, who in a magisterial way will correct those parts of Amoris Laetitia that contradict the Catholic Faith.”

          Meaning it is another handwash, another pile of Burkean BS that will satisfy his desire to pretend he stood up for the faith but in reality, it is just another scrap of wipe that will produce nothing.

          Is this really what we have been waiting a year {50 years} for?

          • I do understand your suspicions, but I think they are far more likely to get wider support for it if it attacks the teaching rather than the man.

            If it does actually get issued, it will be perceived as an attack on the man by the sociopath who signed AL anyway, not to mention his sycophants.

            As you say, though, we will wait and see.

          • Cardinal Burke’s words are very reminiscent of those of Pope John XXIII from his “Address on opening up to the world”, to the effect that [at the time of the opening of VC II] the Spouse of Christ preferred to employ the medicine of mercy, rather than that of harshness, and that she was going to meet “today’s needs” by demonstrating the validity of her doctrine, rather than by renewing condemnations.

            We all saw how well this worked out …

          • Yes, I guess you make some good points. After all, the salvage of the Barque of St peter from the depths it has sunk is going to go on a long time after Bergoglio is dead and gone.

            But the prelates MUST in my opinion begin a new paradigm where individual men are held responsible for their actions and teaching, and when they step out of line are immediately called out for it. THAT has not been done since at least V2.

            You say:

            “If it does actually get issued,”…

            Isn’t is pathetic that we both are thinking even now in terms of “IF”???

          • Since Vatican II the Church has effectively abandoned the methods of teaching and defending the Faith which came down to us from the apostles:

            “2 Tim 3,16 *All Scripture divinely inspired is profitable to teach, to REPROVE, to CORRECT, to instruct in justice:

            17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished unto every good work.”

            As joannesromanus also noted, the unwillingness to condemn or reprove error has been disastrous for the integrity of the faith, and yet St Paul specifically encourages St Timothy to do it. Yes, they do need to be called out for it, because not only are the spewers of heresy bound for hell, failure to call them out leads all the ignorant and those of ill will into the belief that it doesn’t really matter what you believe.

            Heresy is a sin against faith – and it is faith by which we are justified in the first place – it is a sin which leads to eternal damnation. It is probably more lethal than most “sins below the belt”, but our prelates are too timid to mention the “H-word”. As you rightly say, we need a new paradigm where attacks on the faith are dealt with seriously again. I don’t see this changing anytime soon, but it needs to.

      • May it happen please God.
        But it will be ignored by Francis most Cardinals and Bishops but it will be on record that apostasy has been promulgated by PF

    • It’s been another two years and no formal correction has been done. Part of the process would be for Pope Francis to admit to the evil being done. Not just to ignore it.

  17. I believe that part of this effort is to “re-write” history — that is, to imply to future generations that JPII intended to construe marriage this way, and that it was not just Pope Francis and some rogue bishops. Else, why name the new institute by the same moniker?

    • Exactly. But they did not count on the internet. The truth is getting out as soon as they make a false move. Hence their acceleration of actions. How great will be their fall!

    • They will use John Paul’s name for their own purposes. But just as Cardinal Burke and Cardinal Sarah have titles but no real job, now John Paul will be used to promote their agenda that tells us that marriage is WAY too hard so we are going to mercifully let you remarry, contracept, live in ‘irregular’ situations and by the way, please approach the altar at your convenience as your conscience should be clear. We have told you so.

    • The “Moniker” added a word in case one missed it. That is the gauntlet tossed to the ground to rub it in. That word was “Science”!!! Science is: a: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method and b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena :natural science. These are things man uses to try to understand…..this is the fallacy… God is NOT science. This is where it will get uglier and receive more push back from those who truly do not understand. Sad….

  18. It is absolutely no coincidence that Bergoglio decides to spring this ‘new Motu Proprio’ on the anniversary of the Dubia. Seems to me it’s kind of an ‘in your face’ moment that he’s reveling in. And no! ‘Popes don’t do that’!! True enough, but he sends his henchmen out to do it for him as not to dirty his hands.

    • He also signed it on Our Lady’s birthday, September 8th.
      Is it any wonder he got a black eye two days later. “Anyone who insults my mother deserves a punch.” Indeed.

  19. Please how do I join in the battle for the enthronement of the virtues and gospel values on marriage and family life? Seven years ago I had a vision of a great need for the catechesis and recatechesis of the family. It was such a deep desire to see the family reeducated on the catholic faith and morals especially on issues bordering birth control and Christ’s teaching on marriage. Nowadays I see the reason why I was having this dream and desire. Please I need advice on how to start. I need to fight for God before these people lead more souls astray. Thanks.

  20. Thank you for the excellent research, Steve. As a 2011 graduate of the Institute I am…well…just a TAD embittered about Francis’ decision. Of course, it comes as no surprise given some of the following moves taken by Francis with regard to the Institute:

    -the fact that the Institute was basically not invited to the 2014 and 2015 synods in any capacity
    -the closing down of the Melbourne session of the Institute
    -the sudden replacement of the Institute’s leadership (Paglia and Sequeri)
    -the last minute decision for Francis himself to replace Cardinal Sarah as the official presenter to the Institute in Oct. 2016
    -the Oct. 2016 address in which Francis gently chided the Institute for promoting a “too abstract/theological/idealized” version of marriage and family that doesn’t correspond to the realities of modern family life
    -the continual oblique jabs in AL, homilies, speeches, etc. at the essential task of the Institute which fully presents the Church’s heavily theological-Christological claims about marriage and family

    However, I do enjoy Francis’ hilarious attempt to make one of the longer names in Catholic academia (The Pontifical John Paul Institute for Marriage and Family Studies) JUST THAT MUCH LONGER (The Pontifical John Paul II Theological Institute for the Sciences of Marriage and Family).

    Francis, you are TOO much, sir! Quite funny!

  21. I looked at the url of the the majority report document. It referred to a seminary so I did a little research. I guess it belongs to Fr Luke Dysinger who teaches at St John’s Seminary in California.

  22. Do people think they can follow Francis to hell and hope to be saved? Francis defies what St. Thomas More died to preserve. Notice the differences. First, St. Thomas more is a saint, Francis is not. Second, St. Thomas More died because he lived for God. Pope Francis lives for the praises of men. He’ll get it, but it won’t save his soul or anyone else’s. If the world is around long enough, one day, Francis’ treachery will be known by all.

    The founder of the Legionaries of Christ was once thought to be a living saint. I’m sure there are those who knew otherwise early on who must have found it infuriating that someone they knew to be evil was considered to be so holy. Eventually, however, he was exposed for the evil, licentious man he was. So the same will be with Francis.

    Someday, Francis will die. No doubt George Soros, if he doesn’t kick the bucket first, will bus in a ton of paid mourners to make it look to the world that Francis really was “the people’s pope.” That doesn’t really matter. Eventually, this turmoil will come to an end and the Church will rise victorious. St. Thomas More will still be remembered as a great saint of the reformation. Henry VIII and Martin Luther will still be remembered as heretics. Francis will be known for the wolf he is, and some saint who may as of yet be unknown will be seen as a great defender of the Faith who helped the Church to victory during its persecution from within.

  23. What really lies behind changes to the JPII Institute?

    The same thing that lies behind Amoris laetitia. The same thing that lay behind the phony Synods on the Family. The same thing that lies behind the daily ridiculing of faithful Catholics. The same thing that lies behind the ridiculous encyclical on air conditioning, Laudato Si’. The same thing that lies behind the all out assault of the Traditional liturgy.

    One word; faggotry.

    The Church has been hijacked by homoheretics.

  24. Steve: Your last sentence is what is so important: this pontiff and his friends are leading themselves and others to hell. I’m sick of having to defend truths preached in the Bible and interpreted over the last 2000 years– by men who were infinitely more intelligent that current people. (Yes, look it up, folks: IQ is decreasing over time.). Those backwards medieval people….were more intelligent than we are.

    I’m not interested in keeping people from sacraments or tradition or Humanae Vitae: I’m worried about the souls of so many people being put in mortal jeopardy. Those who accuse of being hateful and rigid the people who are fighting against Francis are ignorant and, even worse, selfish. They don’t care about their fellow men–they care about it being acceptable or cool to be Catholic. They care about themselves!

  25. Everything is being corrupted and turned upside down and inside out. Truth is in hiding and Christ is not preached: that is the condition of our Church in this sad age. The false ‘c’hurch will not stand! But so many souls are being snatched up into confusion or sin….how long, O Lord?

    • Good is called evil now; evil is called good. Confusion is of the devil, who seems to be gloriously reigning. God does not cause confusion. How long, O Lord, indeed!

  26. By the way, Steve, you are quite the ratter.

    Jack Russell Terriers and Dachshunds the world over should stand in awe at your ability to wriggle down the scummiest hole to dig the rattiest rat out of his cave.

    That document “Chapter II: Further Consideration; Application of the Doctrine of Matrimony to Different Parts of the World” doesn’t just smell like a rat! It IS a rat!

    Now, if the Cardinals could only see the portly Rat that stands before them…

    Possibly St Michael is polishing his armor.

    • You know, something I cut out of this article because it distracted from the main point was this:

      The second paragraph in the section [of the majority report] brought to mind two another relevant piece of papal writing:

      Universal principles and the essential values of matrimony and married life become actual in ways which partially differ according to different cultures and different mentalities.

      This language, in its own way, is immediately reminiscent of the conclusion of Amoris Laetitia 3:

      Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For “cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle… needs to be inculturated, if it is to be respected and applied”.

      Then of course, that paragraph goes on to recommend the delegation of such things to…wait for it…LOCAL EPISCOPAL CONFERENCES.

      • Yes, another squealer!

        The “synodal church”.

        This stuff is all such old stuff to those of us who grew up in the mainline liberal Protestant “denominations”, except even the evangelical groups now affirm much of this rot as well.

        I remember when I was in Protestant post-grad seminary preparing for missionary work, naturally we studied syncretistic religions. It is this I see exactly in the Pope’s new direction. As Pope he can simply sit back and hand-select whatever choice morsel of somebody else’s false relgion he likes, to serve whatever purpose he has in mind.

        Sexual practices and “re-marriage”, synodal Church ecclesiology, all mixed up in the pot of Jesuit “inculturation” but all naturally combining toward one result; the destruction of the faith and morals of the Catholic Church.

        This now is no longer something to question. It is patently obvious.

      • So in plain spoken language (so hated by the Pope and his friends), the Church is incapable of changing the world or at least of being unchanging but rather must conform itself to local customs and norms. And by customs I fully believe him not to mean incorporating some bizarre attire or architectural structure but means things like polygamy and cohabitation/having children and waiting fifty years to get married.

      • Steve, these words are the complete opposite of Cardinal Sarahs recent talk regarding the Mass. I found his words like a living stream. I can’t believe it but I keep saying to myself “This is not Catholic!” I am still bouncing back and forth in the PTSD stages from disbelief to anger.

      • Steve, this delegating of key decisions to bishops’ conferences is another aspect of Para 32 of “Evangelii Gaudium” from 2013. In that para, Francis was plainly flying a kite to see how many people would object to the insane notion of delegating doctrine to bishops’ conferences. Hardly anyone apart from Cardinal Muller protested, even though such delegation would instantly destroy church unity.

        • Yup.

          Remember his effusive fondness for Eastern Orthodox chaos, I mean, polity.

          Truly this man Bergoglio has a love affair with anything that isn’t Catholic.

          Hence, his adoration for the “synodal Church”.

          Which, of course, isn’t Catholic.

          He seems to quite despise the hierarchy of the Church and it seems to me that if he was to start posting here he’d be banned for sedevacantist tendencies.

  27. The alchemist’s motto, adopted by the Rosicrucians and later by Freemasonry comes to mind: Solve et coagula – destroy, then rebuild [according to your own fantasies]. Kyrie eleison!

  28. This development represents a predictable synthesis of Laudato Sii with Amoris Laetitia:
    Global warming “science” + family “science”.
    There can be no doubt about where this is going or who is responsible.

  29. That Mons. Marenga believes that it is ‘excessive idealization’ that has made marriage less attractive is a stunning statement. Has he missed the last fifty years and not seen the devastation that the culture of death has had on the world and the church? So now they will close down and ‘reconstruct’ Humanae Vitae in Marengo’s words. I have seen the word ‘reconstruct’ a few times regarding his comments and one has to see that reconstruction is in essence…rebuilding. But in order to rebuild one has to tear down first.Then they will ‘teach’ all their minions the new regime and will send them out to all the margins of the world to do their bidding. Spare us o Lord from these people. What are good priests going to do? That all of this demolishing happened so soon after Cardinal Caffara’s death speaks to the arrogance and the steely resolve they have to change the church into their image. And hence….the Remnant. Cardinal Sarah’s sacking can not be far off. Steve thanks for this clear synopsis of events up to today.

    • This notion of marriage as ‘excessive idealisation’…

      Lets unmask this.

      The Tradition is being put through the mincer of Hegel and Kant. What emerges are two self-enclosed and distinct realms. (Now we are closer to Islam in this respect but I digress). The Transcendent Realm is where the truths of the Faith abide…they are ideals in the Transcendent Realm. The other realm is the categorical realm where we get on with the business of living and ordinary human life. Two separate spheres. Dualisms proliferate; faith and reason, truth and the moral life.

      So one can have great Faith in the transcendent sense but it will have little effect in the moral life in the categorical sense apart from the projects of history which involve you in your day to day life. This is why political projects which were formerly prudential matters in the Catholic sense have been elevated to moral issues commensurate with objective moral issues such as abortion.

      It appeals to us primed as we are by the world. But the Faith is not Hegel’s Spirit of the World.

      What is so clear on all these changes as being ‘irreversible’ by Francis is irrational. The whole framework of the project is that progress and change means that there is no permanence in the categorical sense. Everything proclaimed is quickly yesterday’s news. For this reason it can’t be sustained and will quickly become irrelevant once the world has the Church cut to its own cloth. In the end to prove its own project it will have to disavow Christ; which logically is what it does by placing man’s categorical realm as the only place of relevance and concrete reality over and above the ‘ideals’ of the Faith. It won’t avoid persecution.

      This is not the Church of Christ.

  30. When you couple this pope’s determination to both destroy doctrine and disregard the Bible with the secular media crushing dissent with “progressive” causes, I’m telling everybody now (I can’t believe I’m saying this….even two months ago I would have called somebody saying this a kook) to buy these books while you can:
    1. A traditional version of the Catholic Bible. Hell, even the NAB will suffice at this point;
    2. City of God by Augustine (sure to go out of print soon);
    3. Faithful Roman Missal
    4. The Baltimore Catechism set
    5. Books by CS Lewis, Belloc, Chesterton, Greene, Waugh, St. Thomas More, Bishop Sheen. In the near future I’m certain that all of these authors works will be either out print by force or choice of those who own the publishing rights, won’t be sold by any dealers or will be outlawed;
    6. Holy water, holy candles, rosaries….just seem like a good idea to have handy.

    I’m just thinking of what I’m going to need to pass on the faith to my children…

    • But, if one is going to buy a copy of the New American Bible, one should make sure that it is a copy of the original 1970 edition, and NOT the 1986 or 2006 “revisions,” which loaded Sacred Scripture with inclusive language that does not belong in the first place, far above and beyond that which the committee which worked on the translation was able to sneak in in the first edition.

      Besides Douay-Rheims, two other excellent “traditional” English-language versions of the Catholic Bible are the translation by Msgr. Ronald A. Knox and the original Revised Standard Version with Catholic notes.

  31. The duplicity is what is so shocking. Clearly, these people had a plan and an agenda to overturn the magisterium of Popes St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI from the beginning. The utterly despised St. JPII and Benedict and they plotted for years the approach they would take if the every got the chance. They tried to get Bergoglio elected in 2005 but failed. They must have thought that their opportunity was forever lost. But then, somehow, Bergoglio emerged from the conclave in 2013. They truly mist have thought it was a miraculous divine intervention.
    They knew that the key to everything was communion for he divorced and “remarried.” They knew this was the most sympathetic case -the abandoned woman with six kids to feed who’s new “husband” would leave her and the kids if she refused him sex, resulting in their destitution and even starvation. But they also knew that opening the door to her would demolish Humanae Vitae and also open the door for every from of sexual deviant.
    It’s over. Humanae Vitae is already a dead letter. It is impossible to say that an active adulterer can receive communion but that an active contracepter cannot. Likewise, an active homosexual will be able to “licitly” receive communion. At first, there will be a pretense that such circumstances will be rare and only in conjunction with a priest’s permission but soon all restrictions will be abandoned.
    Again, it’s over. Only a divine intervention can stop it. And if no divine intervention comes, on an issue that is so central to the faith – implicating three of the 7 sacraments, then what are we to think? There are only two options: either God has in fact abandoned his Church or he is on their side.

  32. I’m late to the party (as usual) but I just thought I’d say what has probably already been said: The fact that this was released on the very day the dubia were issued one year ago is an answer to the dubia and that answer is to strong arm Amoris Laetitia into every possible avenue of theology in the Church.

    This is the destruction of the Institute and to keep JPII name on it is a mere cover and a direct insult and mockery of him by Pope Francis who knows very well that JPII rejected what he has accepted and is now ramming down everyone’s throat.

    For all the AL doesn’t change anything crowd, then why was it necessary to detonate the JPII Institute on Marriage and the Family and replace it with that which no longer limits itself to the Truth but is now progressive in the way that AL is (progressing to Hell)?

    • “The fact that this was released on the very day the dubia were issued one year ago is an answer to the dubia and that answer is to strong arm Amoris Laetitia into every possible avenue of theology in the Church.”

      It also highlights the brutal, debased, unmerciful and perverse mind of the man who remains hiding behind a wall of silence in order to forge apostasy into an irreformable dogma of the faith.

    • I don’t think so.

      It is a novel buzzword designed to engender respect while at the same time signalling pervasive secularism.

      And, as Steve has noted, follows a previous document.

      Which is the attempt to form a “counter-Magesterium”.

      One bad document breeds another.

      Similar to the Bergoglian Method of quoting yourself.

      This approach was one of the first things that concerned me after I converted. I saw that modern Catholic documents always seem to heavily quote Vatican 2 docs using liberal interpretations. Previous documents of the Magesterium SHOULD BE as valid as later docs, right? since…teaching doesn’t change.

      Except…when the modernists want it to.

      I suspect this was one of the reasons the Synod of Pistoia was condemned for both clearly affirming heresy and for promoting ambiguity. An ambiguous document left alone later becomes cited for support of a position that is antithetical to the Magesterium, which it might not say explicitly but does possibly infer. Then THAT secondary document becomes a document cited as firmly supporting a CLEAR heresy.

      We are watching that process at work, and NOBODY is shutting it down.

      • I, too, have observed that method of quoting oneself. I’ve mentioned it, myself, for example … oh, never mind.

        I saw the quote from the 1966 document, of course. I went back to read it again, more carefully, just now, so as to double-down in my response to you. Except, now I’m not so sure. It really does read as though it might have been deliberately ambiguous so as to trick faithful Catholics who are ever prompt to assume the best of their leaders.

        How has it come to such a situation that I can even think that?

        • “I, too, have observed that method of quoting oneself. I’ve mentioned it, myself, for example … oh, never mind.”


          Others have made the assessment that MANY documents of V2 were specifically and intentionally written to foster heretical interpretations in future years. A long term plan if you will. A plan Bergoglio is using and building on now.

          A good book on the subject is “In the Murky Waters of Vatican 2” by Atila Sinke Guimaraes.

  33. Here it is of interest to note that the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family – of which many are graduates at one level of another – has long been a thorn in the side of the Kaspers of this day and age. Cardinal Caffara, when he was simply the priest given the task of heading up the Institute, was famously protected by Pope John Paul II after the former came under attack from members of the episcopate when he openly criticized them for their failure to implement the teaching of Humanae Vitae. It was said at the time that it helped to have friends in high places! Indirectly, therefore, the Pope who made him a bishop gave us the courageous man who fought until his recent death for the truth about marriage and the family.

    The fact that the Institute is now a thing of the past, along with the Franciscans of the Immaculate, the Knights of Malta, Professor Seifert’s position in Granada, and probably many other things that were bullwarks against the culture of stupidity, should not surprise anyone. In some areas (for example the embracing of Balthasarian ideas in the Washington session) it had lost its way, as the late and faithful Professor William E. May once noted. The same thing happened to the International Theological Institute in Austria, whose Grand Chancellor just happens to be one Cardinal Christoph Schoeborn. His attempt to make the ITI the “flagship” for the culture of stupidity has castrated that bulwark too. Alas, self-castration seems to be the order of the day as fickle men desperately try to hold onto their silly little ideas.They are desperately lonely in their silly little ideas. They are trapped by their delusional hope of being loved by the world, and of creating a eutopia where Humanae Vitae is no more. Yes, they hate Pope Paul VI’s infallible teaching. How sad they are; and how desperate they are becoming as they grow older without anyone to hand their silly little ideas on to. No one wants their truthlessness or their 1960’s religion. As they become desperate – aware that the correctio is coming – they are pumping out more and more manifestos of despair. Yes, desperate men are dangerous but they need prayers and sacrificies for the salvation of their souls. Would graduates and students of the Institute in question rather have scholarly and faithful schools of learning – or the salvation of one soul? Maybe Our Lord is asking them to suffer the pain of seeing it all torn down so that He can bring about the the salvation of souls.

  34. Till proven otherwise, JPII is a saint for a reason. Let’s start with the occupation of Poland by first the Nazis and then the Russians. He saw the danger of both forms of national socialism first hand. The virulent national socialism coming out of Argentina should be noted within that context.

  35. I wonder how many ways Bergoglio has to signal his love of heterodoxy before absolutely everyone says, “Ya know what? This guy’s a *******!” I purposely leave the last word blank because I don’t want to force a conclusion on anybody. I must say, though, that his actions have drawn this Catholic to finally say “Something is dreadfully rotten in la Città del Vaticano!” I never dreamed a pope could be this bad.

    • Actually now we have an infallible sign. The rotten fruit of AL is that adulterers are told they can stay in adultery and receive Holy Communion. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit and a bad tree cannot produce good fruit. Jesus’ infallible words. But the great apostasy prevent most people from even noticing. So expect the likes of Irma and Maria and all sorts of chastisements to come, even nuke war from maniacs like North Korea.

      • To say nothing of earthquakes, like the very recent ones in Mexico and in Finland – and of continued brutality and murder committed in the name of the false “god” Allah and the false “prophet” Muhammad all over the world.

    • “I never dreamed a pope could be this bad.”

      I’ll go you one further.

      I was taught as dogma in RCIA that a Pope COULDN’T be this bad.

      At some point I’d like to see a good, prayerfully presented and scholarly analysis of the theoretical:

      “Just how bad it needs to get before the Church isn’t the Church anymore”.

      I seriously think we have more people than ever re-evaluating the NO and seeing the holes in it, and more and more Catholics are seeing just how “Episcopalian” or “Methodist” is the active functioning of the Church today.

      Truly, as I’ve noted before, I think one semi-decent, mostly Catholic Pope who was willing to staunchly hang on to even the most rudimentary dogmas of the faith would preside over a rapid split, with the Germans and many others declaring same NOT Catholic and themselves as the “True Catholic Church” of which in fact they’d likely be the majority in the entire developed world.

      And the split would occur.

      Who would get Rome?

      In a ways, I have to ask, “Who wants it?”

      The entire Vatican and every square inch of the grounds and buildings needs to be exorcised and every single room, closet, toilet, artifact, vestment, and relic re-consecrated from the “Who-Know’s-What-We-Know-What” they’ve been used for.

      Heck, I’d be happy with a nice Eastern-aspect seashore location maybe on Corsica or something with a stone chapel and some decent digs for the Pope and I bet a decent Pope would be, too. And he could ACTUALLY live that Low-Carbon-Footprint life of prayer and study and judgment and allow the world to come to him if they need to which in these days of high Technology they pretty much don’t. Every now and then he could sneak out and pop up in a parish somewhere and On-The-Spot laicize any priest who is fiddling with the Sacrament or the teaching.

      Give the Germans their godless, faithless, faggot-infused and promoted false relgion of pseudo-mercy and give the rest of the world the “still small voice of God”.

      I think LOTS are listening for that voice!!

  36. If statutes are re-written in such a way that members are longer required to sign a declaration stating they would uphold Catholic teachings on life, how can an institute hope to stand and remain strong? It reminds me of the saying, if a house is divided against itself, how can it stand?

  37. Dear Steve Skojec, I think you are right, and you have expressed the subject very deeply and clear.

    What the Bishop of Rome has done with the Institute has, once again, the mark of the bad style and the subterfuges common now at the Vatican. Everything to promote a pretentious ideology which is destructive and lacks intelligence and humility. They want to be above JPII The Great and Benedict XVI, but they won’t. They have a petty idea of the family, of society and of History, but they want to change all because of their Adamism.

    In Spain, we also had our Zapatero, who destroyed the country. He was an Adamist too.

  38. This Pope is such a Hypocrite! He said that Trump is not Pro-Life, yet Pope Jorge selected 2 Pro-Abortion Advocates (Biggar and LeBlanc) to be members in the Pontifical Academy for Life.

    Can’t win with a Hypocrite sitting in the Chair of Peter.

  39. I may have a poor memory. I seem to remember that the Church’s reasoning for opposing contraception was that it violated the natural law. Contraception prevented the sex act from achieving its natural, God-given end. I always wondered if that reasoning made chewing gum a sinful act.

    So, just as in the case of Amoris Laetitia, I am somewhat sympathetic with the Pope’s point of view but I really hate the way he goes about doing it. He is supposed to be this simple man of the people, a humble and forgiving man, open and transparent in all he does. Yet he sneaks a huge change in Church practice into a footnote of Amoris Laetitia. He refuses to answer questions that good and honest Cardinals raise and then punishes them for raising the question. Instead of proclaiming his beliefs out loud for all to hear as the first Pope did on Pentecost Sunday, he is sneaky, dare I say Jesuitical in the way he goes about getting his beliefs placed into practice. He is a bully to anyone who tries to question any of his actions. And I won’t even mention the Anschluss he accomplished with the Knights of Malta.

    He sees what has happened to the churches of the Anglican Union who have long since gone down the same path he wants to take and, instead of learning from what happened to those churches, he is hell-bent (pun intended) on making the same mistakes. I guess I have become a Catholic Deplorable for even making these comments but I simply do not understand what he is trying to accomplish. What little explanation he does give is, well, less than honest.

  40. Well since this was mention in the article – that a man and women should live as brother and sister and not engage in sexual intercourse. I believe this was a first step in making their situation normalize. The problem with this notion is that marriage is more than just having sex. It’s also about raising your kids together. So in this situation who is the primary person in this irregular situation going to raise the kids. If they raise the kids together as well than they are stillooking committing adultry. Frankly John Paul II should have told them to separate and end their union.


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...