Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Josef Seifert: Does Pure Logic Threaten to Destroy the Entire Moral Doctrine of the Catholic Church?

Editor’s note: In June 2016, Josef Seifert, a famous Austrian philosopher and friend of Pope John Paul II wrote an article in a German journal called, “The Tears of Jesus over Amoris Laetitia”. From our report:

In it, he [Seifert] compares the words of Our Lord in the Gospel to those found Pope Francis’ post-synodal apostolic exhortation.

Seifert reaches the inescapable conclusion, “How can Jesus and His Most Holy Mother read and compare these words of the Pope with those of Jesus and his Church without crying? Let us therefore cry with Jesus, with deep respect and affection for the Pope, and with profound grief that arises from the obligation to criticize his mistakes!”

Now, in a new paper released under an open license so that it might be published by anyone, anywhere in the world, Seifert tackles a larger question: whether a key logical conclusion drawn from Amoris Laetitia will bring the whole moral doctrine of the Church crashing down.

Does pure logic threaten to destroy the entire moral doctrine of the Catholic Church?

Josef Seifert
August 5, 2017
Aemaet Bd. 6, Nr. 2 (2017) 2-9


The question in the title of this paper is addressed to Pope Francis and to all Catholic cardinals, bishops, philosophers and theologians. It deals with a dubium about a purely logical consequence of an affirmation in Amoris Laetitia, and ends with a plea to Pope Francis to retract at least one affirmation of AL, if the title question of this little essay has to be answered in the affirmative, and if indeed from this one affirmation in AL alone pure logic, using evident premises, can deduce the destruction of the entire Catholic moral teaching. In a Socratic style, the paper leaves it up to Pope Francis and other readers to answer the title question and to act upon their own answer.

Amoris Laetitia has no doubt created much uncertainty and evoked conflicting interpretations throughout the Catholic World. I do not wish to present this entire controversy here nor to repeat – or develop further – the position I have defended on this matter in previous articles (See Josef Seifert, “Amoris Laetitia. Joy, Sadness and Hopes”) I might still do this in a reply to some critical comments I have received from my personal friend Buttiglione, with whom I agree on almost all other philosophical matters, and others.

There is a single affirmation in AL, however, that has nothing to do with a recognition of the rights of subjective conscience, by reference to which Rocco Buttiglione seeks to demonstrate the full harmony between the moral magisterium of Saint John Paul II and Pope Francis, against Robert Spaemann’s and other assertions of a clear break between them. Buttiglione argues that, regarding their contrary teaching on sacramental discipline, Pope John Paul II is correct if one considers only the objective content of human acts, while Pope Francis is right when one accords, after due discernment, to subjective factors and missing conditions of mortal sin (deficient knowledge and weakness of free will) their proper role and recognition.

The assertion of AL I wish to investigate here, however, does not invoke subjective conscience at all, but claims a totally objective divine will for us to commit, in certain situations, acts that are intrinsically wrong, and have always been considered such by the Church. Since God can certainly not have a lack of ethical knowledge, an “erring conscience,” or a weakness of free will, this text does not “defend the rights of human subjectivity,” as Buttiglione claims, but appears to affirm clearly that these intrinsically disordered and objectively gravely sinful acts, as Buttiglione admits, can be permitted, or can even objectively be commanded, by God. If this is truly what AL affirms, all alarm over AL’s direct affirmations, regarding matters of changes of sacramental discipline (admitting, after due discernment, adulterers, active homosexuals, and other couples in similar situations to the sacraments of confession and eucharist, and, logically, also of baptism, confirmation, and matrimony, without their willingness to change their lives and to live in total sexual abstinence, which Pope John Paul II demanded in Familiaris Consortio from couples in such “irregular situations”), refer only to the peak of an iceberg, to the weak beginning of an avalanche, or to the first few buildings destroyed by a moral theological atomic bomb that threatens to tear down the whole moral edifice of the 10 commandments and of Catholic Moral Teaching.

In the present paper, however, I will not claim that this is the case. On the contrary, I will leave it entirely to the Pope or to any reader to answer the question whether or not there is at least one affirmation in Amoris Laetitia that has the logical consequence of destroying the entire Catholic moral teaching. And I must admit that what I read about a commission convened in order to “re-examine” Humanae Vitae, an Encyclical that put, like later Veritatis Splendor, a definitive end to decades of ethical and moral theological debates, has made this title question of my essay a matter of extreme concern to me.

Let us read the decisive text (AL 303), which is being applied by Pope Francis to the case of adulterous or otherwise “irregular couples” who decide not to follow the demand addressed in the Encyclical Familiaris Consortio of Saint Pope John Paul II to such “irregular couples”. Pope John Paul II tells these couples to either separate entirely or, if this is impossible, to abstain entirely from sexual relations. Pope Francis states, however:

Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God (Relatio Finalis 2015, 85) and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal (AL 303).

From the previous as well as from the later context it is clear that this “will of God” here refers to continuing to live in what constitutes objectively a grave sin. Cf., for example, AL 298, Footnote 329:

“In such situations, many people, knowing and accepting the possibility of living ‘as brothers and sisters’ which the Church offers them, point out that if certain expressions of intimacy are lacking, ‘it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers’.”

In Gaudium et Spes, 51, from which the last quote is taken, the thought is taken as an invalid objection against the moral demand never to commit adultery or an act of contraception. In AL it is understood in the sense explained above, as a justification, even known to correspond to the objective will of God, to continue to commit objectively speaking grave sins.

In other words, besides calling an objective state of grave sin, euphemistically, “not yet fully the objective ideal,” AL says that we can know with “a certain moral security” that God himself asks us to continue to commit intrinsically wrong acts, such as adultery or active homosexuality. I ask: Can pure Logic fail to ask us under this assumption:

If only one case of an intrinsically immoral act can be permitted and even willed by God, must this not apply to all acts considered ‘intrinsically wrong’? If it is true that God can want an adulterous couple to live in adultery, should then not also the commandment ‘Do not commit adultery!’ be reformulated: ‘If in your situation adultery is not the lesser evil, do not commit it! If it is, continue living it!’?

Must then not also the other 9 commandments, Humanae Vitae, Evangelium Vitae, and all past and present or future Church documents, dogmas, or councils that teach the existence of intrinsically wrong acts, fall? Is it then not any more intrinsically wrong to use contraceptives and is not Humanae Vitae in error that states unambiguously that it can never happen that contraception in any situation is morally justified, let alone commanded by God?

Must then not, to begin with, the new commission on Humanae Vitae Pope Francis instituted, conclude that using contraception can in some situations be good or even obligatory and willed by God? Can then not also abortions, as Mons. Fisichella, then President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, claimed, be justified in some cases and ‘be what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal’?

Must then not from pure logic euthanasia, suicide, or assistance to it, lies, thefts, perjuries, negations or betrayals of Christ, like that of St. Peter, or murder, under some circumstances and after proper “discernment,” be good and praiseworthy because of the complexity of a concrete situation (or because of a lack of ethical knowledge or strength of will)? Can then not God also demand that a Sicilian, who feels obligated to extinguish the innocent family members of a family, whose head has murdered a member of his own family and whose brother would murder four families if he does not kill one, go ahead with his murder, because his act is, under his conditions “what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal”? Does not pure logic demand that we draw this consequence from this proposition of Pope Francis?

However, if the title question of this paper must be answered in the affirmative, as I personally believe to be the case, the purely logical consequence of that one assertion of Amoris Laetitia seems to destroy the entire moral teaching of the Church. Should it not, therefore, be withdrawn and condemned by Pope Francis himself, who no doubt abhors such a consequence, which, if the title question needs to be answered affirmatively, iron and cool logic cannot fail to draw from the cited assertion of Pope Francis?

Thus I wish to plead with our supreme spiritual Father on Earth, the “sweet Christ on earth,” as Saint Catherine of Siena called one of the Popes, under whose reign she lived, while she criticized him fiercely (if Pope Francis agrees with this logical conclusion, and answers the title question of this essay in the affirmative) to please retract the mentioned affirmation. If its logical consequences lead with iron stringency to nothing less than to a total destruction of the moral teachings of the Catholic Church, should the “sweet Christ on Earth” not retract an affirmation of his own? If the mentioned thesis leads with cogent logical consequence to the rejection of there being any acts that must be considered intrinsically morally wrong, under any circumstances and in all situations, and if this assertion will tear down, after Familiaris Consortio and Veritatis Splendor, likewise Humanae Vitae and many other solemn Church teachings, should it not be revoked? Are there not evidently such acts that are always intrinsically wrong, as there are other acts, which are always intrinsically good, justified, or willed by God? (See John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor. See also Josef Seifert, “The Splendor of Truth and Intrinsically Immoral Acts: A Philosophical Defense of the Rejection of Proportionalism and Consequentialism in ‘Veritatis Splendor’.” In: Studia Philosophiae Christianae UKSW 51 (2015) 2, 27-67. “The Splendor of Truth and Intrinsically Immoral Acts II: A Philosophical Defense of the Rejection of Proportionalism and Consequentialism in ‘Veritatis Splendor’.” In: Studia Philosophiae Christianae UKSW 51 (2015) 3, 7-37.) And should not every Cardinal and Bishop, every priest, monk or consecrated Virgin, and every layperson in the Church, take a most vivid interest in this and subscribe this passionate plea of a a humble layperson, a simple Professor of Philosophy and, among other subjects, of logic?

Josef Seifert is the founding Rector of the The International Academy of Philosophy in the Principality of Liechtenstein, holder of the Dietrich von Hildebrand Chair for Realist Phenomenology at the IAP-IFES, Granada, Spain, and elected by Saint Pope John Paul II as ordinary (life-long) member of the Pontifical Academy for Life (a charge that ended with the dismissal of all PAV members by Pope Francis in 2016, and the failure to be re-elected as member of, a profoundly changed, PAV in 2017).

Email: jmmbseifertXYZcom (replace ‘XYZ’ by ‘12@gmail.’)


The Text is available under the Creative Commons License Attribution

3.0 (CC BY 3.0). Publication date: 08.05.2017.

255 thoughts on “Josef Seifert: Does Pure Logic Threaten to Destroy the Entire Moral Doctrine of the Catholic Church?”

  1. Dear God! It’s all there, plain, for all to see. The blind are wilfully blind. How can Francis not answer one simple request: follow the logic of what you have said to where it could, and probably will, lead and tell us if you want to continue the way you are leading the Church.

    What would Francis say: “Oh, don’t be such a gloomy Gus! It’s all good. The world is full of good people who want to walk with God so let’s go! There are situations which we will look at through the lens of ‘everyone wants to do the right thing’ so lighten up – nothing bad will happen. God will love us all and bring us all to Heaven with Him.”

    Trouble is, God will NOT bring us all to Heaven. In His Infinite Mercy He has laid down 10 little ‘rules’ which fit our fallen nature like a glove. Bend the knee. Obey. Submit to One Who knows us better than we do ourselves. Love Him. Worship Him. Oh, Dear Blessed Mother help us!

    I’m getting to the place (if I have not passed it already) where I don’t think I can take any more of this. I agonize over my own loved ones who keep their faces averted because they are living good lives and don’t want to HEAR it!!!!! I’m lacking, very lacking, in trust of HIM who will do it all. So Rosaries.

    • Don’t despair Barbara. God has a way of pulling off astonishing reversals. If you don’t knwo the site already, go to and look for the sermons on God’s Astonishing Reversals. There is another mighty reversal coming. Do not despair! This is what the enemy woudl have you do!
      We are all in this together and must pray for each other. Be of good spirit and stay close to Mama Maria and the great victory will be ours.

    • Perspective, my dear. Rather than agonizing of this mess, see it for the opportunity to make of you a saint! He CHOSE you to be here at this time to help Him. Yes! Many Rosaries!

    • Rosaries. A good plan. Do not despair and continue to trust in Our Lord’s promises. No matter how dark it may seem, how eclipsed the truth seems to be, the truth remains and Our Lord still has everything in the palm of His hand.

      • Every Divine Mercy Chaplet that is recited is a Rosary that could have been prayed. The devil is more cunning than you can imagine!

      • When I learned of the devotion I was uneasy with certain aspects. It was obvious that in practice the Chaplet would end up replacing the Rosary. The image of ‘Jesus’ troubled me and struck me as an inferior occult depiction of the traditional picture used in the Enthronement of the Sacred Heart in homes. An elderly traditional Vincentian priest refused to enthrone that image and in a country
        farmhouse in the mid-1980s refused to celebrate Mass until the picture was removed from the room. He told me that the SSPX had the same policy. Later I learned that the devotion was popular in charismatic circles and, by contrast, disdained in SSPX chapels, thanks to their informed priests. Some of her diary messages were disturbing from an orthodox point of view and have attracted
        theological objections.

        ─ “and the host came out of the tabernacle and came to rest in my hands and I, with joy, placed it back in the tabernacle. This was repeated a second time, and I did the same thing. Despite this, it happened a third time…”

        ─ “For your sake I will withhold the hand which punishes; for your sake I will bless the Earth.”

        ─ “And know this, too, My daughter: All creatures, whether they know it or not, and whether they want to or not, always fulfill my will… My daughter, if you wish, I will this instant create a new world, more beautiful than this one, and you will live there for the rest of your life.”

        ─ “That is why I am uniting myself with you so intimately as with no other creature.”

        ─ “I see your love so pure, purer than that of the angels, and all the more so because you keep
        fighting. For your sake I bless the world.”

        ─ “I wept like a child that there was no saint in our midst. And I said to the Lord, ‘I know your
        generosity, and yet it seems to me that you are less generous towards us.’ And I began again to weep like a little child. And the Lord Jesus said to me, ‘Don’t cry. You are that saint.’”

        Pope Pius XII placed the devotion on the Index of Prohibited Books. Then, during John XXIII’s
        pontificate the devotion was condemned by the Holy Office on 19 Nov 1958, as having no supernatural nature, the Feast of Divine Mercy was prohibited and it was forbidden to divulge images and writings that propagate the devotion. On 6 Mar 1959, it was again condemned.

        Later, after Pope Paul VI abolished the Index on 14 June 1966, Pope John Paul II approved and promoted the devotion. Fr P Scott SSPX wrote: “for it is very much in line with his encyclical ‘Dives
        in Misericordia’. In fact, the Paschal Mystery theology that he taught pushed aside all consideration of the gravity of sin and the need for penance, for satisfaction to divine justice, and hence of the Mass as being an expiatory sacrifice, and likewise the need to gain indulgences and to do works of
        penance.” This replaces what the Sacred Heart asked of St Margaret Mary and is a prelude to today’s diabolical Francis Mercy.

        • I’ve wondered what the point of this devotion would be if we have the Devotion to the Sacred Heart. Sounds like a trojan horse

    • Pax vobiscum!

      In the end, when it is all over, when we face God at the judgment, we’ll see ourselves as we truly are, as we’ve spent a lifetime becoming. At that point many will realize they don’t want God. Hell will look attractive to them. It will “fit”. But the others will look at themselves in the Divine Mind and realize they’ve never really wanted anything else but the One Who Is, who made them for Himself.

      Yet until that day, perhaps it’s time to be like a Medieval peasant and watch the pagentry of the world go by as we till our “hides” (our plots of ground), the soul-gardens of our spiritual nourishment, ever saying our prayers, and not worrying about the great lords and ladies and all the ins and outs at court.


  2. What Professor Seifert has proposed here is what I first thought about when we thought Amoris Laetitia was coming. But what he warns of is what we have known for some time has been the purpose of the exercise from the beginning. Certainly Cardinals Kasper, Danneels, Hume, Martini, Lehman and all the alumni of the Sankt Gallen “Mafia” who elected Jorge Bergoglio, have been pressing for precisely this; the imposition of an entirely different religion, the worship of an entirely different god – in fact, an entirely different *kind of god*. These are men who have never in their entire ecclesiastical careers made any secret of their desires to entirely overthrow the Catholic religion from the institutions of the Church.

    Professor Seifert’s logic above is flawless of course, and it is precisely this reason that they have chosen this particular issue – the granting of Holy Communion to people in adulterous liaisons – their most important one. This is precisely the reason that Communion for the “divorced and remarried” has been the central focus of the insistence of the German episcopate and the entire “liberal Catholic” world for 40 years. It has never had anything to do with the ostensible pastoral needs of Catholics in this situation. It has always and only been about displacing once and for all the last vestiges of the ancient Catholic Faith from the Church. Bergoglio was to be their tool to accomplish – at the 11th hour, since they were nearly all about to be disqualified from voting in a Conclave (let us not forget that Kasper was mere days away from being over the limit) – what had been blocked by the two “conservative” popes since Paul VI.

    The “god” proposed by Amoris Laetitia, by the entire Kasperian/liberal Catholic ideology reminds me of the Last Battle. If that god were the real God, it would overthrow everything we believe in, everything we hope for, the very notion of what goodness is.

    “And then,” said the King, “the Horse said it was by Aslan’s orders. The Rat said the same. They all say Aslan is here. How if it were true?”
    “But, Sire, how could Aslan be commanding such dreadful things?”
    “He is not a tame lion,” said Tirian. “How should we know what he would do? We, who are murderers. Jewel, I will go back. I will give up my sword and put myself in the hands of these Calormenes and ask that they bring me before Aslan. Let him do justice on me.”
    “You will go to your death, then,” said Jewel.
    “Do you think I care if Aslan dooms me to death?” said the King. “That would be nothing, nothing at all. Would it not be better to be dead than to have this horrible fear that Aslan has come and is not like the Aslan we have believed in and longed for? It is as if the sun rose one day and were a black sun.”
    “I know,” said Jewel. “Or as if you drank water and it were dry water. You are in the right, Sire. This is the end of all things. Let us go and give ourselves up.”
    “There is no need for both of us to go.”
    “If ever we loved one another, let me go with you now,” said the Unicorn. “If you are dead and if Aslan is not Aslan, what life is left for me?”
    They turned and walked back together, shedding bitter tears.

    • “as if the sun rose one day and were a black sun”

      I witnessed Monday’s total eclipse on the grounds of the Knights of Columbus in De Soto, Missouri (St. Rose of Lima council). The sky was a deep midnight blue, and the solar corona of course a flaring white. Where the solar disk ought to have been was a black hole in the sky, the blackest thing I’ve ever seen. It was unworldly, in multiple senses.

    • Good grief it is dead obvious.

      Traditional views of every one of the following has been under attack in the Catholic Church for decades:

      EENS, homosexuals, indissolubility of marriage, suicide, Limbo, presumption of God’s mercy, adultery, “remarriage”, just war, contraception, Real Presence, responsibility of the prelature/Pope to defend the faith, religious indifferentism, Islam, Protestantism, Luther, Communism, death penalty, relationship of husband and wife in marriage, unity of the Faith/”synodalism”, inerrancy of Scripture.

      I apologize if I missed one.

      Or more…

    • It always surprises me that Cardinal Hume was a member of the St Gallen group. I would however point out that he died in about 2000 so had no hand in the promotion of Pope Francis in the two subsequent conclaves. I had dealings with him over the promotion of abortion and other evils at the Hospital of St John & St Elizabeth in London of which he was President. He was furious at what was going on and supported orthodoxy. Quite unlike his successor Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor who was prominent in the St Gallen group and actively canvassed for the election of Pope Francis. We are told that Cardinal Cormac is now seriously ill and we should therefore pray for him. I think he will need our prayers.

  3. “…moral theological atomic bomb that threatens to tear down the whole moral edifice of the 10 commandments and of Catholic Moral Teaching.”

    Our Lord’s Divine and Revealed Laws were written for eternity. Pope Francis is playing with fire and running free.
    There is nothing to stand in his way or the way of his comrades; except the Truth.

  4. “…. come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits,
    while yet not fully the objective ideal (AL 303)..”

    Geez, everyone is so worked up…you’d think these rules were chiseled in stone or something …

  5. As I have said before and is so much more succinctly presented by the good Professor, if AL is true then there was no need for Christ to be crucified. All of Christianity is utterly a lie and a sham and we should all stop.

    Our Pope, with this exhortation is calling us all to give up on Christianity and to live as we please. That’s the situation we’re in. Those are the stakes of this situation. Lord, grant us the grace to never, ever leave you. Grant us the grace to stand unwavering for the truth, and bless those who do.

    • Your post plus all his homilies and other statements and “shyness” to responding to the Dubia makes me question, If I were to ask him does he agree with the Creed what would he say? Is God omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent…what would he say? Is Christ both God and man…what would he say? Was/is the Blessed Mother sinless? Is Christ the founder of the universal Church?

      • Francis, like with the dubia, wouldn’t answer you. But, if he did and was truthful, which is unlikely, he would answer resoundingly, “No!”, to all your “dubia.”

    • I hear what you’re saying loud and clear. It’s regrettable that there are many in the hierarchy who have rejected the Church’s Traditional teaching on The Garden of Eden and the Fall of Man (where Adam and Eve failed the probationary Commandment which was NOT to approach nor dialogue with the snake wound around the tree of the knowledge of good and evil).

      They really do believe that man was descended from apes – rather than the Truth which was that God created man spontaneously and instantly – with the purpose of freely coming to know Him, to love Him and to serve Him and to share in His creativity and His gift to man to bear offspring (aspects of which the devil grew insanely jealous of).

      If they believe that we descended from apes – then it is no wonder that they refuse to believe what happened in the Garden of Eden – and therefore do not understand nor accept the critical need for the Coming of The Christ in order to rebuild the broken bridge which leads to Our Father in Heaven – and to forgive the sins of the TRULY repentant.

      • Amen amen amen!

        I am profoundly convinced that, by not forbidding discussion of the doctrine of evolution as it concerns the origin of man, Humani Generis made a big mistake, an unforgivable mistake, even THE mistake that eventuates in the AntiChrist.

        Consider, St John is known for irony, and the beast from the sea with seven heads, that “opens his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven”— well that sounds like seven sea monkeys, discussing whether Jesus, his mother (his tabernacle), and the saints, were sea monkeys themselves. And from Humani Generis til now, Francis is the seventh pope who thinks he’s a sea monkey…

        But the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, not the beasts from the sea.

      • Peter Wilders, who occasionally posts on the Remnant website, has been saying and writing articles about evolution for years for the Remnant. He’d upvote you 100 times if he saw your post.

  6. Very difficult to refrain from hyperbole. But very glad the writing is on the wall for Francis. And make no mistake, the kingdom will be taken from him sooner rather than later.

    • I sincerely hope you are right.

      And more, I hope there is clarity in that action.

      Certainly this whole episode has adequately exposed the heretics for who they are. A future Pope will have no problem identifying the Judas’s in the Catholic Church.

      • IF we are Blessed enough to be given an orthodox Catholic Pope, and the key word here is IF, he will have to ‘Drain the Swamp’……..BIG TIME. In all actuality however I do think it will be Our Lord God Himself that will do the majority of the Swamp Draining.

  7. This Paragraph:

    “Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God (Relatio Finalis 2015, 85) and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal” (AL 303).

    is the one that I pointed to when AL first came out and said pretty much what the good professor above is saying: These guys are actually saying that God wills that some people continue committing seriously sinful acts…this is pure evil.

    Seriously, no euphemisms here, the above passage from AL is Satanic in it’s logic and completely Evil.

          • You are welcome 🙂 Also take a look at Fr Martin’s interviews with Bernard Janzen available from Triumph Communications. Foretells much of what we see now.

          • I have all 8 books of the interviews, Vatican, The Jesuits, and The Keys of This Blood. Imho, Malachi Martin (who was one of the few who actually read the Third Secret) put the Third Secret – which he was bound under oath not to reveal – in paraphrased form in TKOTB, specifically in the chapter entitled The Judas Complex.

            Example: Instead of calling a spade a spade (credit to the Remnant here), you’d call a spade “a manual earth-moving implement”.

            That chapter alone is worth the price of the book.

          • Bang on Margaret. I remember his 1992 interview with Bernard Janzen and the question he received about the possibility the cardinals electing a heretical pope. His answer is instructive in that Jesuit sort of way. I can hear his voice right now “You know…. they have elected men in the past who had heretical ideas. 2 or 3. They have never yet elected an apostate. An apostate”. Here is a man who read the 3rd secret, who confirmed on air that part of it was to do with a “pope” who would be “under the control of satan” and answers a question about a heretical pope with an answer about an apostate. Thoughts? This is a man who in 1997 predicted that these events are not 20 years away. We are now 20 years since those last 2 interviews with Art Bell and he has accurately predicted the collapse of the institution (not the Mystical Body of course) and the capture of the central office of the Church to use it for their nefarious ends. He also said that he would feel free to reveal the 3rd secret “if there was a total collapse at the center”.

          • I’m SO tired of people calling anything a conspiracy “theory”.
            That term was made up to make people who can see the truth look goofy to those who can’t.
            Hello, is anyone home…

          • I’m home sorta. Don’t quite understand your comment. I rewatched the Malachi Martin video again for 2:20.

          • I need to remember to be more clear in print – sorry! I meant that I am tired of people discounting Malachi Martin & other people & things as falling under the umbrella of “conspiracy theories” and so on. I can’t believe people are so blind (as in ‘nobody home’).????

          • Thanks for the clarification. I really respect the “whistle blower” effect of the former Jesuit. He really has it spot on. A website referred me to an Art Bell “final interview” in 1998 for 2:20. I heard most of it before but it clarified a few hazy areas.—-He did say in response that the Third Secret has nothing to do with a “comet”. His “look to the skies” evidently is involving the “three days of darkness” which are a final warning. This pope is so absolutely “goofy” that something has to be on the way. Most of his key advisors are gay and openly so.—–God does not condemn someone who is gay. They have to be celibate outside marriage just like heterosexuals. Father Mychal Judge of WTC fame and death as chaplain for the FDNY was known to be gay. There is also no doubt of his sanctity. The ways of God are very mysterious and beyond the comprehension of mortal man.—Thanks again. I thought that you were attacking him. Maybe, you can explain traditional attacks on the good reverend. Here in the Midwest, the traditional parish has links to the Syrian mafia and openly attacks with physical threats in print aimed at one of their own who runs a traditional blog. I figure that they are infiltrating the traditional movement in order to destroy it.—-This group hates Cardinal Burke even though he has been to their church. I have been physically threatened as well as has an ultra conservative man whose wife walked out on him and who has a son who is a traditional priest. I have my suspicions on why but can’t quite put my finger on it.

          • I have read also that the late Fr. Judge was “known to be gay” but this is some pretty tricky waters you’re steering into here. Who knows about his “sanctity”? Nobody. As the Catechism says : ” Basing itself
            on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave
            depravity,140 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts
            are intrinsically disordered.”141 They are contrary to the natural
            law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a
            genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they
            be approved.”

            I disagree with you completely, I don’t think Fr Judge could have considered himself homosexual anything and been “sanctified”.

          • Homosexuality is a tricky subject. Gay people do not wish themselves to be gay. If Father Judge had a gay orientation and did not act on his urges, then who are you to judge? Many heterosexual men are turned on by various indecently dressed women. They do not act on their impulses and therefore do not sin.

          • That’s a huge assumption you make there that “Gay people do not wish themselves to be gay”, some are quite happy to be gay and are convinced it’s how they were born, others adopt the lifestyle from what I have read on the subject. There are no psychological or medical studies that say anything conclusively about the condition of homosexuality, where or how it originates, if it’s genetic or an adopted behavior. We do know the Church teaches and has always taught that it’s inherently disordered. What makes someone a “homosexual”? Would a man enjoying broadway musicals and pink shirts be homosexual? A: NO. Only a man engaging in homosexual acts wiith another man or thinking about such things with lust would be a homosexual and the Church has already declared this to be inherently disordered. So there is no way for that person to engage in that behavor or think about it lustfully and NOT be in sin.

          • I enjoy Broadway musicals and “peach” shirts. As for psychological studies, the great Sigmund Freud had plenty to say. He is considered to be outdated by the radical left. The word “gay” itself was an attempt to put “a happy face” on the subject.—-Christ had plenty to say about the subject simply by not saying anything about it. The Jewish culture considered this to be very taboo. He would only say that He had come to fulfill the Old Testament.—-Joseph had a role to play in the Holy Family as did Mary as His mother. Both were giving people. They had a traditional Jewish view of the family.—That is the problem with homosexuality. It is a culture which is self fulfilling. The feminist movement which is based on self fulfillment is only acerbating a problem. The fact that we have a pontiff who refuses to condemn self fulfillment turns this into a crisis. There is also no doubt that he has a history of the acceptance of gay relationships.

          • Catholics shouldn’t be using the godless Freud to explain anything. He was a Jew who saw himself as being at war with Christian i.e. Catholic civilization. Please, Catholics need to stop internalizing the commands of their oppressors.

          • With all due respect, in this case, you don’t know what you are talking about. Science is a tool. It is not an oppressor.

          • Or is it the fact that Freud was Jewish that every word he spoke must be received from on high as ‘science’. Oh, my, we wouldn’t want to be accused of bigotry by not treating everything that comes out of a Jewish intellectual’s mouth as the wisdom of the ages.

          • Sounds right. The confusing part is that homosexuality is very complex on the part of the individual but simple as for analyzing the act itself.

          • He did not say it had “nothing to do” he was asked if it mentioned a comet, he said no because the 3rd secret does not mention a comet, it mentions “fire from heaven’ as does the message of Akita What does “fire from heaven” come from?A: A comet or a “comet planet” as Carlos Munoz Ferrada termed it.

          • I was surprised. He had stated on the Art Bell Show that if anyone actually told him the Secret that he would have to admit that the statement was true. He was asked and said that the “comet theory” was false.

          • He did say it was not related to a comet but he may not have known all the details after he left the Vatican to go to NYC. It’s an inbound system in our inner solar system. A comet planet is what Carlos Munoz Ferrada termed it. Saint Hildegard called it a comet.

          • Here’s what Art Bell asked him that is relevant. He asked Father Martin about the observatory set up in Arizona by the Vatican. He wanted to know why the Vatican was so interested in outer space. Father Martin became very quiet and strangely and noticeably agitated. That was the first time that I had heard him taken off his focus.—-He was very measured with his words even to the point that Art Bell noted how carefully the good father was in answering this question. There was no doubt in my mind that this was tied in with the Third Secret. Father Martin has been quoted on a number of occasions with the quote of “look to the skies”. I thought that this had to do with “the three days of darkness”. Now I would say, maybe not. There is definitely something out there that Father Martin has been alerted to.—–The conversation was quickly closed and Art Bell changed the subject. Father Martin then calmed down to his usual vociferous self. There was no further mention of this subject.

          • That’s good analysis, I will go back and listen to that part. They (Not Fr. Martin) can lie all they want to about why they have that device up there for, I have heard wack job protestants who claim to have spoken with the Jesuits up there that they’re looking for extraterrestrial life. That’s a possibility i suppose, we don’t know what the people who today call themselves Jesuits are doing except rarely is it anything good. Why has nobody within the Church ever been called to explain why they spent money on a telescope which we know they call “lucifer”. We get it, you worship satan but lets make them produce a statement about why money from the faithful was spent on this device. I already know the real answer, it’s to watch approaching (infrared spectrum visible only) heavenly bodies approaching from the south, in our solar system.

          • There is not much that you and I can do in the nature of “a great apostasy”. Father Martin emphasized that “it is the will of God” to allow it. I can only live my life in accordance with my own conscience. I realized quickly from various churches that I attend that the purpose of the liturgy has become one of brainwashing the participants. Therefore, I go to Mass but skip around to different churches. If you don’t go to the same one every week, you can pick up on gradual changes that are being implemented.—–Once I noted in two separate churches that the crosses were coming down and being replaced with murals of the Resurrection, I could see the graffiti on the wall. At our cathedral itself, the mosaics in the alcove way above the altar were redone. This is a Middle Ages type cathedral made of stone.—-A woman was brought in to give the design a feminine touch. A large swath of small marble tiles was removed. The art style of El Greco was used. He always centered Christ in the middle of his paintings and drew attention to the center. He also used vibrant colors to set off images.—–When the wrapping was removed, a “lavender angel” rose up to greet the faithful with the rest of the mosaic spinning around it. Once again, the graffiti on the wall told the real story of the agenda. Therefore my fair feathered friend, you just have to sit back, enjoy the ride, and laugh at the incongruities. Jesus the Christ is in control while we have an erstwhile pontiff who believes that he is.

          • The term was invented by a certain three letter organization, it’s a verbal trick to immediately dissolve credibility of the person labelled by the term.

    • I’ve been frequenting Confession because I hate cursing. But AL and the like push me. Listening to them speak makes me think they are Protestants. But when I listen closer they don’t seem like Protestants at all to me, they don’t even sound Christian…they sound as if they have an agenda given to them by the one who isn’t even worthy of mention.

      • What you should know about that apartment is that there are two entrances. One entry is in Vatican City. One of the portals is in Italy. There was no border crossing.—-The drugs came in from Italy. There was a Vatican police raid and the drugs were confiscated. The only punishment was that the Msgr. and bishop candidate was sent to a monastery.—-There was no tracing of the supply chain. There was no claim of an international incident. The entire episode just quietly went away.—-Many of the young participants came in from Italy. There was no investigation for sex trafficking across international borders. There was no identification of the participants. Everything and everyone just quietly went away.

        • Some of this I did not know but I expected it. Of course, it just quietly went away. Like some episode from the Sopranos. So no one goes to jail either. This just shows there is some type of diabolical relationship between the Vatican and secular powers because surely, some one should be tried in a court of law and questioned and cross examined and the like but nope.

      • The Pope cannot formally teach Heresy and hold people bound to that teaching, he is fully capable of teaching heresy via his opinion on things that are not part of his formal teaching that is binding. Paragraph 3 of Amoris Laetitia:

        3. Since “time is greater than space”, I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. 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.”

        This paragraph is why Cardinal Burke states that the teaching of Amoris Laetitia is not Magisterially biding, because the Pope appears to say that it isn’t and then says it’s anything goes for understanding this document and its implementation.
        We are in uncharted waters, so we should expect a bumpy ride.

        • I get the need for technical accuracy.

          But the overall thrust is one of semantic games and disingenuous.

          That is how it is taken by many Catholics and non-Catholics like.

          It is VERY hard to find even a sub-culture of “Yea be Yea and Nay be Nay” in the culture of the Catholic Church today.

          That IS the “bump ride”.

          • I get your frustration with the “games” — and I’m experiencing it myself, but something my first (and most memorable) theology teacher drilled into our heads was this: “Truth is a matter of semantics.” He would give passionate diatribes about how through the history of the Church fierce debates would we waged by theologians and council fathers on where to place a comma in a formulation, so important was precision in expressing divine truths.

            And the devil is the consummate legalist. He knows exactly where to find loopholes, which ambiguities can be most easily exploited, and how to send his minions running for precisely the kind of frustrating garbage we’re dealing with now, where they do things that are blatant, but can’t be nailed to the wall because of “technicalities.” At least, as long as they remain useful to him.

            He’s been doing this since Genesis 3. “I say to you that you shall not die…”

            We have to remember this is by design. We have to know the enemy, and come to expect his tactics, and how they tie the hands of those who, loving and serving God, are bound by the truth…and the law.

          • VERY good points, Steve.

            I guess it is that in a culture of duplicity, it becomes very difficult to tell who really means it and who doesn’t.

            In addition, when we have had decades of guys “getting along” one might just be a little bit justified in not leaping to the defense of someone who “sounds right”.

            A secular example is the constant use of the term “my good friend” or “my respected colleague” among politicians who ostensibly are at each other’s throats.

            Or are they?

            And thus the challenge for us in the Church is to trust men who HAVE NOT ATTACKED AND COMBATED THEIR BRETHREN for the heresies that have been so commonly advanced.

            I’d like to see an apostolate of Bishops arise, sort of like the “Catholic League” except among prelates TO DIRECTLY CONFRONT BY NAME and unflinchingly attack those among them who promote heresy.

            Laymen could join and support the effort.

            Bishop Schneider says schism already exists. Hardly a profound observation, but if it does, why not make plain those who have “schism-ed”!?

            We need clarity.

        • Fr: This you say here gets to the heart of the duplicity that runs through this entire pontificate.

          So he says one thing, defines it as such {letter to Argentine Bishops} but since it’s not actually “teaching”, it’s not in jeopardy of being assessed as “formal” heresy, but it has EXACTLY the same result of heretical teaching in encouraging novel and sinful approaches to handling issues that have been ruled on and approached differently in the past.

          Bumpy ride is an understatement of Biblical proportions!!


          • Yes, but he can still be brought up on charges of Heresy, even if it be ‘private’ or not formally taught but encouraged and or ignored.

        • In an interview in the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, Schonborn said that Amoris Laetitia is a binding doctrinal document.


          “All previous magisterial statements concerning marriage and the family now have to be read in the light of Amoris Laetitia, Schönborn stressed, and just as today the First Vatican Council (1869-1870) must be interpreted in the light of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965).” – Cardinal Schonborn

          • Francis not speaking doesn’t magically make him speak. That’s what you’re saying. Schonborn can mouth of about absurdity all he wants, that doesn’t mean Francis is speaking from the Chair of St. Peter.

          • So I guess this is a little game that Francis is playing with us. So since Amoris promotes heresies then we should put up with it?

          • No, of course not! Where do you get the idea I would be for that? We must oppose error. I simply said that Francis is NOT “speaking from the Chair.” If he was, he’d be guarded from error. His silence and allowing Schonborn to speak for him doesn’t somehow mean he’s speaking. That’s all I’m saying.

    • Dear Father. Let me just make sure that I read the quotation correctly. It is not saying essentially “close enough is good enough”. So if I commited a mortal sin but preceding it I fought the temptation for a while I just get upgraded to a pass mark (without repentance of couse) and proceed to the altar rail? Is this not an implicit denial of grace?

      • It’s saying well you can quit sinning all the way right now because (then you get to fill in the blank) so therefore as long as your wishing you could follow the Lord’s teaching here (but you really can’t because________) then the Lord is fine with you not following His commandments, and in fact doesn’t want you to because (then fill in the same reason you filled in above.)

    • Recently our Catholic lay ministry was informed that the “high ups” not clergy, but “nuns”, have permitted with full knowledge the foster care of “same sex couples”.
      Therefore, the lay ministry will be severing ties this particular order, as the provincial head supports this child abuse.

      Dear Father RP, if a person comes to you or comes to a lay ministry seeking counseling for a sin committed long ago, such as an abortion and is practicing homosexuality at present, would one ignore the present state of sin, hoping as time goes on the person will recognize this? For me, I find this a difficult approach, but perhaps I am too rigid here? ( and I am not being sarcastic).

      Naturally, I would want to form a relationship with this person, but how can I ignore the present state of her soul. How does God graces work when one is in mortal sin? How does one truly repent for one sin, while presently living in another? Some members of my lay community would disagree. And of course, each individual is unique, so perhaps there is not a “cookie cutter” answer to this.

      Because there is such confusion in the Church regarding this issue, would silence on my part be a sin of omission, regarding this issue I present?

      I have absolutely no idea around here who could give my guidance that I would trust.

      So confused!!!!!!!

        • I have been praying and all I know is that I do not have peace in denying truth. More prayer on my part is needed. Adoration today. I perhaps will follow your suggestion. Maybe it is unfair to put a priest in such situation to answer a hypothetical.

          • No, It is not unfair. Unfortunately many priests will give many different answers. Also, the way you are describing the situation may not be as clear as you think, because in conversations dynamics can change. I would say that it would be wrong (not sinfully so, but an error) to ignore what they are approaching you for and go straight to the Homosexuality, that would be imprudent. However, it would be wrong (perhaps even sinfully so) to avoid the homosexuality problem all together.

            What I would do is seek to council them about the abortion and set up more meetings, as it is normal for that simply for abortion alone. Then I would pray a Rosary Novena asking the Blessed Mother to open the door to the word of truth about the homosexuality and then address it after the novena was accomplished.

            If you believe that you won’t be able to have that conversation with them after the Novena because they are not going to stick around, then I would bring it up sooner. Simply invite them to consider the Lord’s plan for Human life and chastity (required for all, different meaning for different state in life) and tell them you are praying for them and that you love them in Christ and want to see them liberated from al that is holding them bound.

            It’s not up to you to heal every wound and convert every soul, however it’s up to you to say yes to the Lord and be willing to speak the Truth in Love when providence provides the occasion to do so.

          • “However it’s up to you to say yes to the Lord and be willing to speak the Truth in Love when providence provides the occasion to do so.”

            I shall take your counsel to prayer in Adoration later today.

            I am thinking my pride is getting in the way…………ugh.

          • Yes, it would be seriously sinful to avoid the Truth here.

            So. do….I “let it go” for a couple of sessions, hoping that some grace flows?
            And then bam, let the person know, ” Oh , by the way do you realize…………….?
            Of course, for anything I say, their priest will probably counter with something else.
            And of course, my lousy promotes Gay and Lesbian etc……even a rainbow dove sits on its site portraying the Holy Spirit. The seminary is polluted with thinking ” God me gay.”

            Years ago, I would not even had asked this question. Years ago, I would agree with you Father. Now…..not so much so. My silence from the start would be seen as
            agreeing with the lifestyle the woman is leading. Perhaps I need to remove myself altogether from this ministry and simply pray.

            Maybe I am not as strong as you, I know you are far holier, and have far more graces to handle these situations. I simple cannot sit and chat and chat with a woman, hearing about “her partner” and just smile. Can’t do it.

          • Don’t let yourself feel despair about the situation, nor feel rotten about yourself. This is the clergy’s role and difficult enough for the BEST of them. I’ve had loads of situations where prayer turned out to be the thing to do. (Not saying it for sure is for you, too; just thought I’d mention).

          • Thank you c2.

            I appreciate the feedback and hope I did not monopolize too much of Steve’s site with it.

            One can only speak the Truth, in love for Christ and His children……and then pray and pray.

          • You are strong in the Lord and no one is suggesting that you should sit there happily chatting while someone rejoices in their sin. As I said below, set up a different time to meet with them after you have prayed the Rosary novena, and if that doesn’t work then commend yourself to God and enter the breach with the Truth in Love. If they resist it, that is on them and you can continue to pray for them. The Truth you speak to them today can penetrate their soul and lead them to repentance and Salvation 10 years from now even though it may appear that they have rejected it.

            Perhaps you should reach out to Joseph Sciambra and seek his intercession and advice on how to speak to this person, or he might even be willing to do so?

          • The Lord will guide you and He is guiding you. This person came to you for a reason…put your trust in the Lord and not in yourself. He will work out everything for the Good for those who love Him.

          • Regarding the email alerts, for whatever reason the same happened to me. I just make a point to check the little notifications bubble that turns read with a number of notifications up at the top of the comments. It is a little annoying the emails stopped for whatever reason. :-

          • You should not have any peace in denying the Truth if you did it would be a sign that your intellect and will had been corrupted.

    • Ok, Fr. RP, but if we have a pope who is promulgating “pure evil”, what are we doing still tolerating this guy? Why is he still in office? “…The above passage from AL is Satanic in it’s logic and completely Evil.” Ok, but now what?

      WHEN is anything going to happen? We’re like pearl divers holding our breaths as we look about on the bottom for pearls, but there just aren’t any. Do we stay down till we drown?

      • Yes, that’s it.

        That IS the question.

        But wait…..

        “He’s not teaching heresy” because “A Pope cannot teach heresy”.

        It’s exhausting.

        • That’s exactly right. He can teach all kinds of heresy in his off the cuff ramblings, but it’s not ‘formal’ heresy you see. It has to be ‘from the Chair’ and if it’s not ‘from the Chair’ we are A OK!!! Doesn’t matter if the entire Church with every Cardinal and Bishop is going along with his ‘not from the Chair’ heresies, if they aren’t being taught ‘formally’ we can’t declare him a heretic. His ramblings are just his ‘personal opinion’ you see. And meanwhile, the Church is burning to the ground.

          Talk about hair pulling FRUSTRATION!!!

          • Yeah and I guess the clerics that have the power to do something can’t fight Satan, or at least they THINK they can’t. They have to KNOW that what he’s doing is shear EVIL. If we know that, they don’t? The Vatican (with HIM in it) needs an extensive overall EXORCISM.

          • The exorcism will come with revelation of the Third Secret of Fatima (I.e. the exact words of Our Lady which follow: “In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved…”). +Fr. Malachi Martin said that when it IS revealed, the churches will be packed with long lines of people for confession.

          • Recently our priest said that if people truly undestood what happens at confession there would be riots outside the churches, people fighting to get in.

          • You know, they’ve done that at abortion clinics, and they should do it at the Vatican. Repeatedly. Get Fr. R and his Doloran fathers over there. As far as I know they wouldn’t need special permission.

          • “He can teach all kinds of heresy in his off the cuff ramblings, but it’s not ‘formal’ heresy you see. It has to be ‘from the Chair’ and if it’s not ‘from the Chair’ we are A OK!!!”

            Who exactly is saying this?

          • I’m quoting Fr RP feom below:

            “The Pope cannot formally teach Heresy and hold people bound to that teaching, he is fully capable of teaching heresy via his opinion on things that are not part of his formal teaching that is binding.”

            What can we possibly say is going on if not this exactly?

            Granted, we cannot get the Pope to answer simple questions about the meaning of his own writing, but…

          • Francis is speaking from the Chair because he is not correcting Schonborn.

            In an interview in the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, Schonborn said that Amoris Laetitia is a binding doctrinal document.


            “All previous magisterial statements concerning marriage and the family now have to be read in the light of Amoris Laetitia, Schönborn stressed, and just as today the First Vatican Council (1869-1870) must be interpreted in the light of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965).” – Cardinal Schonborn

          • I believe the rule is Francis has to specifically say “I know my predecessor Piux IX said this (dogma of Immaculate conception for example) but I say it’s not so” Then, at that point he would be formally a heretic. But he literally has to say “I know my predecessor said…”
            Francis being a Jesuit wordsmith weasel likely won’t do that.

    • “These guys are actually saying that God wills that some people continue committing seriously sinful acts…this is pure evil.”

      Especially when you consider this from the Catechism:

      “It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.” (CCC 1756)

      I see no mention of “the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal” in the above citation from the Catechism.

      Yet, I guess that makes me a rigid, fundamentalist Pharisee who believes in absolute Truth.

      Catechist Kev

    • Like the King of France, make it known to My Ministers, that as they delay carrying out My requests, they will follow him into misfortune!

      • And Protestant.

        One of the good things I guess that has come from the current crisis for me at least is a clarification of the evils of Protestantism, for the passage above sums up the moral theology of all Protestant faiths. In the absence of a true Church that bears actual authority, it is every man for himself a la Judges 21:25.

    • Yes, the idea that someone can know with “moral security” that God is affirmatively asking them to continue to commit the grave sin of adultery is so shocking that when I first read it I thought it was proof that the Church is a fraud and that the whole Christian thing has been a bad joke from the beginning. My thought at the time was that the only way to save the faith after this paragraph would be to somehow have it retracted or overruled.

      • The Church and Christianity (which is the Church) is not a fraud, the Good Lord has allowed, according to His providence, that the Church should undergo the Chastisement that he foretold. Please remember that it was the Chief Priests, including the High Priest that demanded that He be crucified.

    • On August 8, 2017 Life Site News reported Card Burke: “Confusion, division, and error within the Catholic Church coming from shepherds even at the highest levels indicate that we may be in the end times,” and the times “realistically seem to be apocalyptic.”

      Josef Seifert asked; ‘Does pure logic threaten to destroy the entire moral doctrine of the Catholic Church?’ Others, reflecting these grave concerns, commented as follows.

      Fr RP Mod. Seriously, no euphemisms here, the above passage from AL is Satanic in it’s logic and completely Evil.

      Malachy Bernard. Re Art Bell/Malachi Martin interview 1998 ─ Is this not the “pope” “under the control of satan” we were warned about?

      Jafin Mod. Our Pope, with this exhortation is calling us all to give up on Christianity and to live as we please. That’s the situation we’re in. Those are the stakes of this situation.

      Pearl of York. As soon as I read Amoris Laetitia I grasped the desolate profundity of it. That it was coming from the pope seemed a nuclear strike–the end of the world as we know it.

      Susan Shelko. Francis is supposed to be the Vicar of Christ and whose Vicar is He Really? … What do we have here? The Church of Christ or the Church of Anti-Christ?

      standtall909. This man is raping the Church of Christ and NO ONE that has the power to do something about it is doing ANYTHING!!!

      AdonaiYeshua. … this is precisely the whole point of the concilliar church … the enthronement of the “abomination of desolation”.

      c2. Remember he’s Satan’s puppet.

      Could the subject of these comments be the False Prophet?

      • To me it is obvious that he is. He is surrounding himself with progressives of like mind while getting rid of traditionalists, he is aligning himself politically with the globalists and their agenda, he is formulating the beginnings of a one world religion in which there is no sin (except for those that offend the “social justice” mentality), etc., etc. Additionall, there have been other messengers who have recently assigned that title to him. “Wild ride” indeed.

        • Patti, others share your view and, of all the orthodox prelates, Bp Fellay is the one who has given the clearest analysis of the current situation.

          Bp Fellay, at the 2013 Kansas Conference, warned that Pope Francis is precipitating the Church’s decline and could herald the age of Antichrist. He described the situation as a real
          disaster and said Francis is making it 10,000 times worse.

          The Bishop noted that Sr Lucia referred to chapters 8 ─ 13 of the Apocalypse when asked about the Third Secret of Fatima and observed that Chapter 8 speaks of the coming of the Antichrist. He noted that Pope St Pius X said at the beginning of his pontificate that “the son of perdition” may already be on earth.

          He cited Card Luigi Ciapi, the papal theologian of all popes from Pope Pius XII through Pope John Paul II who said that the Third Secret warned the apostasy within the Church would begin at the top. Bp Fellay stressed the “end times” nature of Sr Lucia’s visions by referring to the famous 1957 interview with Fr Fuentes in which she stressed that “various nations will disappear from the face of the earth” and “the devil will do all in his power to overcome souls consecrated to God.”

          Insisting there is “definitely a material chastisement of the world in sight” the Bishop warned of a coming catastrophe and said these are “very scary times.” He concluded “… if you put
          everything together, it is clear that God has had enough of the sins of man.”

          Bp Fellay reiterated Sr Lucia’s plea for Catholics to recite the Rosary and to apply themselves to the Devotion of the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary as the last remedies God has given to mankind.

      • He might be the False Prophet, or he’s a trial run up to the real thing. I’m not certain. These are dangerous, unprecedented times.

  8. Dr. Seifert is a better man than I am, because he writes “with deep respect and affection for the Pope.” I have very little respect for him and no affection.

  9. So will the good professor (Dr. Seifert) be the next one to be excommunicated? Or will he just be fired from his current position or find that his contract will not be renewed? Or will the retaliation be a more subtle than that?

  10. Which of these situations is the moral teaching of the Catholic Church to be applied by Pope, Bishop and Priest?

    1. If the truth I speak will do more harm, speak the truth anyway. God understands the situation and circumstances of the penitent and knows how to bring good out of evil.
    Ex. Confessor tells the penitent the truth of what has been confessed, advising the penitent to do the right thing regardless of the consequences and knows how to bring good from evil.

    2. If the truth I speak will do more harm, say nothing. God understands the situation and circumstances of the penitent and knows how to bring good from evil.
    Ex. Confessor says nothing to penitent about the truth of what has been confessed but advises penitent about the mercy of God and the value of individual conscience before God of what has been confessed.

    3. If the truth I speak will do more harm, affirm the penitent and remove their guilt. God understands their situation and circumstances of the penitent and knows how to bring good out of evil.
    Ex. Confessor says nothing to penitent about the truth of what has been confessed but affirms the penitent’s situation and the value of individual conscience before God of what has been confessed.

    • I was praying before mass the other day & that was exactly what popped in to my head – guess the brain & heart just got overwhelmed & put it all in a nutshell.

      • There is just too much to list sometimes.

        I remember as a little tike playing in the ocean and I’d square off with a wave and push thru it. But occasionally the wave was way bigger than I thought and it would just overwhelm me, turning me upside down and most of the time dump me on the beach all sandy.

        That is the way I feel right now, except the stakes are a lot higher for the Church and lost souls than gritty teeth.

        • One thing that is obvious is that these Progressives or Modernists (whatever we call them) have the idée fixe that human beings are perfectible in the here and now – if only those “rigid” Trads would get out of the way. They have the fixed, irrevocable idea that sex isn’t that big a deal, and we don’t have to be held up to a super-high standard (as in Matthew 5:48). Which means, by definition, they don’t believe in theosis, the divinization of the human race that is brought about through the Most Holy Eurcharist. God, through His Son, is transforming us completely, as St. Thomas Aquinas wrote: “The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods.” (Opusc. 57, 1-4) [CCC 460], or as St Athanasius wrote, “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.” (De inc. 54, 3: PG 25, 192B) and [CCC 460].

          It’s as though the Modernists aren’t aiming for Heaven, but a sort of “Earthly Delight” Limbo in the here and now.

          We need to continue to engage them, as Josef Seifert is doing, (though of course as we are able, on our own, far lower, levels, such as OnePeterFive is doing so well within its own sphere).


    • Cannot tell you how many times throughout the day I say that to Jesus!! Most times the only thing I can muster is ‘Jesus PLEASE HELP US!’

  11. “…leads with cogent logical consequence to the rejection of there being any acts that must be considered intrinsically morally wrong, under any circumstances and in all situations, and if this assertion will tear down,…”

    There’s an old maxim that teaches us (contra AL) that when it comes to Our Lord’s laws it is not “all relative, man”, for when it comes to adultery, among other transgressions, it is said “be killed but do not transgress”.

    Sadly though, nothing of what is happening now is an accident or a fluke. It’s almost as if Prof. Seifert has answered his own question and has revealed a most bitter conclusion for us all to struggle with, namely that this is precisely the whole point of the concilliar church (or that regardless that’s we are headed for anyway).

    This is the enthronement of the “abomination of desolation”, i.e. the Non Serviam and is as diabolically motivated as it gets (literally).

    What is worse, the acknowledging that there may actually be something such sexual deviancy is not even an exclusively Judeo-Chrisitan, just ask Pliny the Younger what he thought about saturnalia.

    Now, there’s no question that the Lord set us straigtht on a lot of things, but if anything, this pontificate and AL just go to show how much sophistry and mental gymnastics are needed to not see the objective evil of our sins and the consequences of disoreñdered self-love.

  12. The article finishes with the words:

    “And should not every Cardinal and Bishop, every priest, monk or consecrated Virgin, and every layperson in the Church, take a most vivid interest in this and subscribe this passionate plea of a a humble layperson, a simple Professor of Philosophy and, among other subjects, of logic?”

    How can other humble laypeople subscribe to this passionate plea? Is there somewhere where we could sign up to this plea? Any suggestions?

    • This has been discussed over and over and I’ve never found a single plausible way laid out yet.

      Bishop Schneider says repeatedly that “it is the little ones who will save the Church”.

      That’s nice, and I am not saying laypeople SHOULDN’T do everything possible to save the Church but I admit I grind my teeth with this statement from time to time because tho it might be true at one level, it sounds so much like a copout on many others.

      Like “You lay people are the ones supposed to suffer, put your jobs and families’ security on the line while we ordained must lay low and safe cuz if we rose up and actually stood for the truth we would be in jeopardy of loseing our jobs and naturally we can’t have THAT.”

      I don’t want to accuse Bishop Schneider of holding to that line tho certainly it appears to apply to many quiet prelates.

      And then you run into the “conservative” Catholics who have sat back and simply watched all the chaos ensue over the last 50 years, complaining in private but all the while repeating the mantra “The gates of hell will not prevail…” while the diocese after diocese falls like the Reformation lands in Northern Europe in the late 1500’s.

      So who knows.

      I’ve emailed Bishop Schneider and asked for a concrete plan and what I get is “Pray”.

      So at this point, that’s what I do. Pray and vote with my feet and wallet. I attend a FSSP parish and I give my money to targeted ministries of that parish and other charities and starve the local diocese as I have utterly no confidence that money I might send to the diocese isn’t somehow going to wind up supporting the Gay New Ways Ministry, Abortion thru the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Council on Islamic-American Relations or some other damnable enterprise.

      • The CARDINALS are the ones with some real muscle to do something. I have said this before, but I really wish someone could tell me WHY they cannot do SOMETHING with this guy before he dismantles the entire Church!! Now there is a supposedly ‘secret’ (but not so ‘secret’ anymore) commission to study Humanae Vitae, and I’m sure for the purpose of ‘reinterpreting’ it. Can you just imagine the spin they will put on Paul Vl’s statement on contraception? I can just hear it: “No, he didn’t mean you can’t EVER use contraception’ because ‘discernment of individual situations’ has to be taken into account, and that is what he meant.” This man is raping the Church of Christ and NO ONE that has the power to do something about it is doing ANYTHING!!! The only thing Cardinal Burke seems to be doing is giving lip service to the ‘formal correction.’ I of course will NEVER EVER EVER betray my faith, but I have lost complete confidence in the entire hierarchy. They are WORTHLESS.

        • In my opinion the Church is currently acting no differently AT ALL from what I have witnessed in the United Methodist and Anglican and Lutheran sects.

          I get exhausted with Catholics pretending all is unique and somehow quite special to the Catholic Church and that there are no precedents for what is happening, as if the Lord’s promise to the Church makes everything “OK” because “we are special” and He is somehow gong to bail us out of the problems WE have caused. Tell that to the English, German, Scandinavian and Dutch Catholics in the late 1500’s.

          In fact, EVERYTHING we are observing has been done before by heretics and apostates in the Catholic Church in regional collapses and MANY of us converts have seen ALL of this before in the already-heretical sects of Protestantism. Same playbook to the letter.

          Where this is all going is exactly where it already is:

          Reams of “paper” theology from the “Magesterium” to make the “conservatives” feel good quoting St Pius IX, X, XI or XII all the while faggoty clerics and soft-on-sodomy prelates run the Church and average Joe’s on the street with just a modicum of personal integrity can’t even see a speck of “Christianity” in the whole darn organization. Because every time he turns on the TV he sees some abortion-praising “Catholic” politician who gets the pass from the bishops and God help us gets to “take” communion with the Pope in Rome. To “Joe” the Catholic Church is a total fraud and he has good reason to suggest it, too, while people like Burke run around kissing the ass of the Pope all the while proclaiming this or that statement is in error but the “Pope isn’t teaching heresy” you know. Oh, no, not THAT!

          What I see today in the Catholic Church IS NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT I SAW IN METHODISM:
          Gutless, faggoty caving in to every pervert that has ever humped his boyfriend’s best friend’s son.

          Bishop Schneider whines…”the little ones are going to save the church”!


          You know what, Bishop Schneider? It’s this little one’s job to save his family and be a moral Christian man no matter what the cost to him and it’s YOUR FRIGGIN JOB TO SAVE THE CHURCH NO MATTER WHAT THE COST TO YOU.

          I am sick of the whole “Catholic” culture. It is EXACTLY the same culture I left behind in Methodism.

          Makes me want to puke.

          We have the truth and we have fairies in lace and fancies prancy dancing around the world going to meetings and theological conferences and forums and the rest of the bureaucratic BS they live for. All this while Christians are butchered for being “average Joe’s” for Christ. And our prelates can’t decide if they should be armed to kill any ISIS bastard that walks down their street.

          And when is a Catholic prelate going to take a crowbar to that damned idol to Martin the Heretic Luther in the Vatican that this fatassed, fairy-friendly Lutheran Pope of ours set up for all the world to venerate?


          When that happens, I might start having a little tiny bit of respect for them.

          Until then they are all pathetic frauds in my opinion.

          And that is just my opinion.

          I’m waiting for somebody to give me one solid reason to change it. But I’m all ears.

          • Righteous anger, Rod, righteous anger. I think a few gallons of paint to that homoerotic mural at the Cathedral in Turein Italy would be a good start too — in addition to that crow bar to the statute of Luther in the Vatican. Jesus braided a whip and drove the money changers out of the temple. Paint and a crow bar are the modern day equivalents.

            Do you remember the janitor who destroyed the “flying Mary Poppins” that was hung from the ceiling at his church? (I think it was Disney’s Mary Poppins, but it could have been some other movie promotion.) The pastor profaned what was sacred and the janitor acted with heroic virtue. He was arrested and pleaded guilty to vandalism and trespassing.

            Yeah, I’m not sure “pray” and “pray some more” is going to cut it. I think it is called the “sins of omission” on behalf of the prelates. No reason to change your opinion.

          • I think it’s safe to say we have ALL been where you are on many many more than one occasion. I go back and forth from at least TRYING to trust Our Precious Lord that He has everything under control. I pray for it daily. Then I flip over to furious ANGER at what I see happening on an almost daily basis. Trust and Peace, Furious ANGER, back and forth, back and forth. Please Lord, get us off this DIABOLICAL ROLLER COASTER RIDE!! …….THANK YOU IN ADVANCE!!

          • Right on.

            I have no doubt at all about the doctrines of the Church. I also have no doubt about human nature and the weakness that accompanies it. It’s not that I think the Church is going to disappear. But I also don’t believe that God is going to just “bail us out” when He has given us clear direction as to what WE are supposed to be doing.

            North Africa and Islam should suffice to prove that point.

          • “But I also don’t believe that God is going to just “bail us out” when He has given us clear direction as to what WE are supposed to be doing.”

            Which is?

          • Each person in their state has responsibility for the work before them. We laypeople must live according to the commands of God, give witness to Jesus Christ in our places of work and business and homes. We can rattle the cages of the prelates but we CANNOT do what THEY are charged to do.

            Cardinal Burke and Sarah and the rest of them cannot do for me what I must do before God and WE CAN’T DO FOR THEM WHAT GOD HAS CALLED THEM TO DO.

            And now, for one of the “good guys” to tell me that it is the job of the “little ones” to fix the Church is frankly, infuriating.

            In point of fact, we have utterly no authority nor ability to fix the hierarchy and the structures that increasingly solidify the frequency of heresy and heteropraxy polluting the Catholic Church.

            THEY DO.

            When the fence is down on my ranch, it is not my neighbor’s job to fix it. In fact, he would be trespassing if he tried!


            Where was Burke and the rest of the “good guys” over the last 50 years?

            I’ll tell you.

            Doing good deeds and teaching nicely.

            BUT NOT FIGHTING. Condemning the heretics by name. Creatively attacking them everywhere and anywhere they may show up.

            If ever a fight was in order, it is to save the Church.

            But no, that wouldn’t be nice.

            I can care for my livestock just as nicely as can be. I can make sure it is fed and watered and doctored when sick. But if I don’t shoot the neighbor’s dog or the coyote or wolf that attacks it I suck as a rancher.

            Same goes for Catholic prelates. They have let wolves and coyotes in among their own fold and because it’s not “nice” to get in fights, they have’t defended the flock, and now we have one of the “stalwarts” telling the sheep to defend themselves! They suck at being ranchers of men.

            I’m not kidding when I suggest we need a new “military” order of prelates formed to drive out the faggots and the heretics among their own ranks. All one brave prelate would have to do is ASK and I bet he’d have financial support galore. Get five of them together to start such an apostolate and it would bring in support from all over the world.

            Is there a single Catholic prelate that can utter these words with ANY integrity?

            “For I thy servant have killed both a lion and a bear: and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be also as one of them. I will go now, and take away the reproach of the people: for who is this uncircumcised Philistine, who hath dared to curse the army of the living God?”

            They have no practice killing lions and bear and now they are faced with a 9 foot tall Philistine and they expect the SHEEP to fell him.

            God help us.

          • I actually think that there are pockets of laity that are doing superhuman work.

            Take the guy that runs this site for example. He’s not a priest but he is right in the thick of the war. Not EVERYBODY needs to be a warrior of course, but SOME need to be, and right now we have about zilch among the leadership.

            Think about it. What if we had an apostolate calling out every heretic or pervert prelate, condemning not willy-nilly but with the full Magesterium of the Church behind it. Good grief we have far more years and documents and tradition behind THAT sort of effort than the current crop of homos have defending the sodomy and heresy!

            And what would the Pope do?

            Who knows, but in all seriousness, what could he do if the aggressive action was 1} clearly defensible in doctrine and 2} public.


            And don’t stop there. I am pretty darn sure lay experts in investigations would be willing to serve to expose the perversions so prevalent today.

            St Peter Damian was NOT NICE in his war against sodomy in the Church in 1065. We need a prelate or two of the same combative stripe to lead today. And MANY laymen would rise to their assistance.

      • So, we should all do what you are doing. Whether or not architecturally perfect churches are immediately available or not, we need enough FSSP etc. so that we can all vote with our feet & wallets.

        • How is FSSP related to the “regular Catholic Church”? Is Vatican II accepted? Is Francis acknowledged as the pope? If you donate money, does it go back to the diocese and to the Vatican and/or to some not for profit that is against all that the Catholic faith stands for?

          Like Rod said above, he has concerns that donations would go to the UN sustainable development or open borders initiatives or abortion/ Planned Parenthood (in a sneaky round about way). How is this voting with feet and wallet? Are you still part of the rot?

          • FSSP is a Traditional Latin Mass apostolate in full communion with the Catholic Church. Their doctrine is traditional and sound. You don’t hear much quoting of V2. You hear a lot of quoting of Scripture and the Fathers and the Saints and the Popes from the Magesterium thru all centuries of the Church. So you don’t get modernist revisions of doctrines on the topics so commonly revised by many priests since V2. I LOVE our priests and the FSSP in general.

            I’m not 100% sure {I’ve read differing positions} where all the dollars go that are collected as general gifts and tithes. I assume they have certain responsibilities to the diocese tho they are not diocesan priests. The priests serve under a Superior General with the permission of the local ordinary.

            I have chosen to designate my giving to specific works in the parish {and other unrelated charities} until I find out for sure whether any $$ that might wind up at the diocese are going to be used to serve the Devil.

            Being in the world means being part of the rot, but we can minimize the depth our feet sink into it. That’s the best we can do.

          • Thank you. I appreciate the answer. So FSSP is in communion with the Catholic Church, celebrates the mass of the ages, but the focus of its teaching is on what is healthy and sound from a theological perspective — avoiding the V2 issues as much as possible. As an FYI, in my diocese, there is a certain percentage of all donations that goes directly and automatically to the diocese itself. How those funds are spent, I do not know. I “get” your last sentence about finding out for certain that donations are not being used to serve the Devil. I agree.

          • Big Problem: If the FSSP was ordered to change over to the New Mass tomorrow, they would comply. Otherwise, the FSSP is a solid alternative if the nearest SSPX Chapel is too far away. Father Gregory Hesse’s youtube video on the FSSP is worth a look.

          • By the way, we literally have many folks who have moved here because of our parish. They come from many states and somehow hear of the parish and visit and then move with their families.

          • I don’t know much about the FSSP and I am suspicious of just about anything and everything these days. (insert smile and wink/ I think the entire world has gone mad.) What I am having difficult with is this: there is a line in the Eucharistic Prayer that says something along the lines of “together with Francis our Pope, Frederick our Bishop, and all the saints ….”

            Meaning, we (the priest and the laity) are in communion, unity, and fellowship with the pope, the diocesan bishop, etc. I am NOT in communion, unity and/or fellowship with Francis. I want nothing to do with him, his god of surprise and/or his make a mess theology. He speaks; I flee from him.

            That prayer is a lie for me; I know it is a lie; and I am not comfortable lying like that anymore. To lie in prayer is to dishonor God. I am at the point where if Francis’ name is spoken in the mass, then I want nothing to do with that mass. In other words, I do not consent, I do not agree, and I am in opposition

            Shall I make a list … homoerotic murals on Cathedral walls, A Bridge … Too Far (Fr. James Martin’s book), cocaine fueled homosexual orgies at the Vatican apartments complete with police raid, the denial of hell, the devil, the resurrection and a host of other Church doctrines, worship with the Buddhists, universal salvation, the doctrine of annihilation of souls, sin boldly, do you want a serving of communion with your adultery?, etc.

            I could go on, but I am sure you get the idea. The Catholic Church is supposed to be the Ark of Salvation and instead she has become the Ark of Damnation. The Church is supposed to be the Bride of Christ and instead she has become the Whore of Babylon. She is supposed to be the pillar and foundation of truth and instead she speaks a multitude of falsehoods. Francis is supposed to be the Vicar of Christ and whose Vicar is He Really?

            If I have to sift and sort through Church teaching to try and figure out what is REALLY the true magisterium then what is the point of having a Church? If what is true now is 180 degrees different than what was true then, well the entire foundation has collapsed. I find no solace and no comfort in: “Church doctrine hasn’t changed” (yes, it has!), “these are the sins of individual men”, “pay Francis and Friends no heed”, and/ or “pope is just a title and office.”

            Something is seriously, seriously wrong here. Very little of this is Catholic and very little of this is even Christian. And I want nothing to do with it. No, I am not going to become a Protestant. I converted from Protestantism and there is nothing there that I want or want to go back to. What is being forced here is a choice between “heresy” and “schism”. I want neither. What do we have here? The Church of Christ or the Church of Anti-Christ?

          • Yep, personally can’t stand anything to do with the NuChurch; tell me its not fake & evil, & by design. I really can’t stand hearing PF’s name mentioned let alone all this ‘Holy’ Father stuff. It makes me feel physically ill.

          • God Bless You, c2. It is such a relief to know that others are having that same exact reaction/ response as I am having. I often feel alone in my thoughts and feelings. Yes, it is fake, it is evil and it is by design. Multiple prophesies have warned us of such a time.

            As for “Holy” Father ….. not so much. Perhaps if Francis repents and converts (a St. Paul moment, a blinding light and a voice from heaven/ Christ Himself, dear Lord, please if you will, a miracle, I ask) then perhaps Francis yet has a chance of sainthood and holiness.

          • God bless you too. My biggest pain is the souls…my own?? my loved ones’. Other peoples’.
            No you’re not alone at all. I thank God CONSTANTLY for knowledge, understanding, & for my TLM parish (which I only ‘found’ a couple years ago).

      • I was thinking of something immediate and concrete like setting up a petition on-line and get as many people as possible to sign. Various groups of theologians etc have made joint appeals to Pope Francis but what about some appeal from ordinary lay people where we could gather thousands of people signing up. Any ideas as to how this could be done?

      • “And then you run into the “conservative” Catholics who have sat back and simply watched all the chaos ensue over the last 50 years, complaining in private but all the while repeating the mantra “The gates of hell will not prevail…” while the diocese after diocese falls like the Reformation lands in Northern Europe in the late 1500’s.”

        What were we supposed to do, exactly? It’s not like we didn’t fight with our erring bishops and priests.

        • “It’s not like we didn’t fight with our erring bishops and priests.”

          Proof positive that I wasn’t talking about you!!


          Many people have done NOTHING. And I bet you have been seen as “going too far” or a troublemaker by the rank and file “orthodox” Catholics. You and all those like you who have tried to fight the spread of heresy. While others, so comfy in their “conservative” attitudes have done nothing.

          • Ok, I guess I was thinking of most of the committed Catholics in Tasmania. Of the ones I knew, there were few who simply did nothing. So my assumption was that most committed Catholics were doing something.

  13. If there is any good to be found in this disaster it may be that people will take a second look at the Vatican II documents and see how they can be used to prop up a heterodox position.

  14. I have used this argument regarding AL and other statenents by Francis along with those of Cdl. Kasper and his like. The moral doctrines and teachings of the Church are rooted in and elaborations of the moral teachings of God Himself in both the Old and New Testament, particularly the decalog and the Gospels. Gid Himself tells us He has written His law on our hearts. Therefore, there are absolutely no conditions or circumstances that justify intrinsically evil acts. All that God does is in eternity abd is an eternal act. Thus, it cannot be changed or contradicted. AL would not merely bring down the entire moral structure of the Church, but the very concept of a supreme, perfect, almighty and thrice holy God. If God could will that, under the proper discernment of subjective conscience (whatever that is), we commit acts He has expressly forbidden then He is not perfect since He can’t make up His mind. If He is not perfect then He must not be holy, almighty or suprene. Thus, He must not be God and Satan has the right and authority to overhtrow and supplant Him.

    This is the kind of thinking that Satan wabts snd Fran.
    cis and his ilk are promoting. All over the world we see this attitude and those who act on it. Tge Holy Spirit convicted the world of sin, but we, en masse, have acquitted ourselves with the help abd encouragenent if the modernist Church hierarchy. But there is a Just Judge and woe to those who do not fear Him.

  15. It’s really simple, folks! If the Church has been wrong about Communion for those living in serious sin for 2,000 years, then the Church is not whom she claims to be.

    And if the Church is not whom she claims to be, that raises the question of ….”what else is the Church is wrong about?”

    And if the Church has been wrong about Communion (and other things), then what’s the point of it all? Why are we even going to Mass? The answer is….there is no point!

    You see, this has all been done before. It’s nothing new and it’s called Episcopalianism. The result is empty churches, disbelief and the destruction of the faith. That’s why Bergoglio’s seminary in Buenos Aires is a mausoleum and that’s why Europe is currently converting to Islam. Once you simply start making stuff up and deep sixing the Church’s tradition, the whole structure simply collapses.

    I used to think that Bergoglio was a clown who couldn’t see this. Now I realize he is a homoheretic who hates the Church.

  16. The platform for all the heresy, semi-heresy and general confusion is Vatican II. We are fast progressing to a point where the Catholic Church as we know it faces extinction. The end purpose of Vatican II is the reconstitution of the Catholic Church as Masonic entity–The New World Order Church of Universal Salvation. Vatican II needs to be abrogated in it’s entirety.

  17. As soon as I read Amoris Laetitia I grasped the desolate profundity of it. That it was coming from the pope seemed a nuclear strike–the end of the world as we know it. Situational ethics enshrined. Nothing Catholic about it. More stunning was the great yawn coming from the bishops and Cardinals worldwide. Cardinal Burke’s initial mewlings about it not being magisterial was surreal. When the dubia were made known I held such hope that finally the sheep would find shelter. Our bleeding and shivering would be lovingly attended to. Alas, we still huddle as twilight descends on earth and lights go out in the West. Stay close to Our Lord and His Mother.

  18. When I first read AL I was troubled by the ambiguity regarding admission to the Eucharist, but I thought “The Holy Spirit stayed his hand. This will be a huge mess, but he has not formally taught error. The Church can recover from this.”

    But then I read the referenced paragraph again, and was dumbfounded. The idea that someone can know with “moral security” that God is affirmatively asking them to continue to commit the grave sin of adultery is so shocking that when I grasped the implications, I thought “That’s it. its over.” This is was proof that the Church is a fraud and that the whole Christian thing has been a bad joke from the beginning. My thought process has evolved to the point that I believe the Church (and all of Christianity) could possibly be “saved” if this paragraph were retracted or overruled.

    • Your feeling is quite common but there is another angle to consider: God is in charge. A man has said something foolish, heretical perhaps. If a man takes it back, what does it prove?

      God has a plan. The Church will not be surrendered at the gates of hell nor will it cease to be led by sinners until the end of time. All of this is part of the Divine Plan.

      Also, we get what we deserve. Lots of prophecies entail the idea that God is kindly obliging the people with what they want. How many of our brothers and sisters in the pews support gay “marriage”? Personally abhor/oppose abortion but hold a position that they cannot judge or that others should have the option? That divorce is no big deal? That penance isn’t necessary because there is no hell? Heck, my wife and I have a friend who was raised in the faith but quit the
      Church because her CCD teacher talked about hell when she was little and it scared her! IT SHOULD!!!

      My wife and I attend penance every three to four weeks and I know people think that penance/confession is unnecessary: my parish of about 1400 regular mass goers has three or four penatents on any given Saturday and they are the same people! 1 out of every 375 people!

      • I’am sure. I was always sure, when Catholics willingly do not use the holy sacrament confession and willingly do not penance, then they become just bigger sinners. Bigger and bigger, how more time they do not use THAT holy sacrament. If I look that kind of ‘being a catholic’ and that manner of confessing of the Catholic Faith, I saw it massively happens in the, especially west part of Europe, even LONG before the time of the FPF! So, we can conclude; we got what we deserved with Francis.
        Every Catholic should ask himself; is it so difficult to believe that our God is righteous, and that He cares about respecting of all His laws!? As we can see that in countless examples that He gives to us in the Scripture. Let’s just mention His righteousness in the beginning, the banishment from Eden, or other few from Genesis:
        “And Her, the firstborn of Juda, was wicked in the sight of the Lord: and was slain by him.”
        “And therefore the Lord slew him, because he did a detestable thing.(Onan)” (Genesis 38,7;10)

        So speak our God trough the words of prophet Sirach, about nothing else but, indeed about ,- The Confession of sin:
        “And they to whom she shall shew herself love her by the sight, and by the knowledge of her great works.
        The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and was created with the faithful in the womb, it walketh with chosen women, and is known with the just and faithful.
        The fear of the Lord is the religiousness of knowledge.
        Religiousness shall keep and justify the heart, it shall give joy and gladness.
        It shall go well with him that feareth the Lord, and in the days of his end he shall be blessed.
        To fear God is the fulness of wisdom, and fulness is from the fruits thereof.
        She shall fill all her house with her increase, and the storehouses with her treasures.
        The fear of the Lord is a crown of wisdom, filling up peace and the fruit of salvation:
        And it hath seen, and numbered her: but both are the gifts of God.
        Wisdom shall distribute knowledge, and understanding of prudence: and exalteth the glory of them that hold her.
        The root of wisdom is to fear the Lord: and the branches thereof are longlived.
        In the treasures of wisdom is understanding, and religiousness of knowledge: but to sinners wisdom is an abomination.
        The fear of the Lord driveth out sin:
        For he that is without fear, cannot be justified: for the wrath of his high spirits is his ruin.
        A patient man shall bear for a time, and afterwards joy shall be restored to him.
        A good understanding will hide his words for a time, and the lips of many shall declare his wisdom.
        In the treasures of wisdom is the signification of discipline:
        But the worship of God is an abomination to a sinner.
        Son, if thou desire wisdom, keep justice, and God will give her to thee.
        For the fear of the Lord is wisdom and discipline: and that which is agreeable to him,
        Is faith, and meekness: and he will fill up his treasures.
        Be not incredulous to the fear of the Lord: and come not to him with a double heart.
        Be not a hypocrite in the sight of men, and let not thy lips be a stumblingblock to thee.
        Watch over them, lest thou fall, and bring dishonour upon thy soul,
        And God discover thy secrets, and cast thee down in the midst of the congregation.
        Because thou camest to the Lord wickedly, and thy heart is full of guile and deceit.”
        (Sirach 1,15-40)

  19. You all realize that Hurricane Harvey is bearing down on Texas with Corpus Christi (the Body of Christ) in its sights? Is this somehow prophetic? Or some sort of foreshadowing?

  20. This is a good simple explanation of what’s going on. I disagree that Francis abhors tearing down the moral edifice, rather that is exactly his plan. Pleading the fifth amendment on the dubia shows that he does want to incriminate himself. As a pastor he is obligated to clear up things, but he refuses. Sins of omission are sins too. Freemasonry wants their religion of man implemented and Francis is productively doing so. The cowardly silence of the hierarchy is helping fuel these flames of hell called Amoris Laetitia.

  21. In answer to the rhetorical question posed in the title, yes the Church’s moral teaching is collapsing before our eyes. At a minimum, the teaching of the Church needs to be logical and cohere with its historical claims and understanding; that should be apparent, I think. At the moment, the teaching of the Church doesn’t cohere *officially*–although there has been a breach between teaching and practice for as long as most people can remember.

  22. God reward Dr. Seifert for contributing this agonizing analysis which demonstrates accurately the obvious consequences of “Amoris Laetitia.”
    In a certain sense it is mortifying that mental energy, depth reflection, craft and time need be applied to this lame text in order to demonstrate the conclusion to which any literate Roman Catholic with a high school diploma could arrive.
    Indeed, anyone with simple common sense.
    But isn’t this the “modus operandi” of the moles within the post-conciliar theological academy? This element is composed of narcissistic contrarians looking for their time in the limelight with the concurrent approbation of gnostic concupiscent elitists sporting a moral superiority complex. Good for nothing but erecting absurdities which distract us from fruitful embrace with the Mystery Who Comprehends Us.
    “Amoris Laetitia” is the papal finial on the confection of claptrap produced by clerical academics who regard themselves “scholars.” Tucho and Francis can take great pride in their vacuous poetics giving license for sin under the masque of “theological reflection” and “apostolic exhortation.” It caught everyone’s attention – to the detriment of one and all.
    Bravo and thank you for nothing.

  23. I believe it was St. Bruno who called a pope a heretic for far less. The argument that it wasn’t uttered in a formal matter is silly. That makes Our Lord’s Yes Yes and No No redundant as only a lawyer could tell you if the Yes was a Yes.

    Is our only defense against Pharisiachal legalism the line from a Man Of All Seasons? If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck its not a duck because the law doesn’t say so? Why have a pope if the law means nothing then until I decide and if a future decision is to be made? It makes the hierarchy redundant.

    St. Pius X on how to deal with modernists…
    “They want them [the Modernists] to be treated with oil, soap, and
    caresses. But they should be beaten with fists. In a duel, you don’t
    count or measure the blows, you strike as you can. War is not made
    with charity: it is a struggle, a duel. If Our Lord were not terrible, He
    would not have given an example in this too. See how he treated the
    Philistines, the sowers of error, the wolves in sheep’s clothing, the
    traders: He scourged them with whips!”

  24. Francis missed the boat and better not try to “walk on water” to meet the Lord. The “period at the end of the sentence” is what it is all about. The Russians would use “microdots”. Well if you analyze the three microdots above the i’s in “Amoris Laetitia”, you will find the true penultimate prime cause of all of the turmoil. Adultery and fornication are only smokescreens for the true cancer which is the acceptance of homosexuality as a good.—-Seminaries are now developing a “gay theology” for the new burgeoning culture of gay relationships. Gay interaction is notoriously promiscuous especially in the male variety. Therefore, sex as a “handshake” is now acceptable.—-One can call it a breakdown in morality or one can call it a freer expression of one’s inner self. The label of sin is totally lacking. There is no “go and sin no more” because there is no sin in the first place.—-There is no longer a need for a Redeemer. That is why in my Midwest archdiocese, the crosses are coming down in the sanctuary and murals of the Resurrection are going up. The gay infiltration of the priesthood is all but complete.—-This is not the priesthood of Babylon, Egypt, or even Rome. Sacrifice in return for gratuities from the gods such as good weather and fine crops are no longer needed. Priests are no longer of the Order of Melchizedek but MSWs who pass the unleavened bread at the “picnic table” in the meeting hall.

    • “Adultery and fornication are only smokescreens for the true cancer which is the acceptance of homosexuality as a good.—-Seminaries are now developing a “gay theology” for the new burgeoning culture of gay relationships. Gay interaction is notoriously promiscuous especially in the male variety.”


      AL is not only a smokescreen for the above but also for a priesthood that has been predominantly homosexual for longer than Catholics want to admit — at least as long as St. Peter Damian and “Liber Gomorrahianus.”

      • Thank you for your response. The difference now is the preaching that it is a good. There have always been gay priests who actually in many cases have done their work for God with sanctity. The Rev. Mychal Judge, OFM, was a hero and the first known death at the WTC. He was the chaplain for the FDNY. He was gay and also a saint.—-There is a difference today. My archdiocese actively recruits known gay candidates. They are of a different breed. They are essentially “mules” who have their own agenda of “infiltrating and destroying” the Church from within.

        • Rev. Mychal Judge, OFM, was not known for the practice of heroic virtue. Calling him a saint is a leap into utter fantasy. 3000 people died in the catastrophe of 9/11. He was simply doing his job.
          I recall after his death the ever so well meaning secular press extolling Fr. Judge’s complicity in the promotion of a “beefcake” calendar from the fire house he worked with across the street from St. Francis of Assisi Church.
          That is the repugnant memory I will carry of the “good” friar.
          Such an “open minded” priest. The open mind is much like the abandoned house — either empty or filled to the rafters in filth.
          Take your pick.
          Thank God I never had to get absolution from him.
          I did, however, profit supernaturally from confession with a very orthodox friar at St. Francis not all so long before 9/11.
          Life changing.
          Fr. Judge would not have provided that moment of conversion.

          • I have been to New York a lot for the St. Patrick’s Day Parade from the Midwest. like 7 or 8 times. I can’t place where St. Francis of Assisi lies. I do know where St. John the Baptist is near Penn Station. They have lots of friars and a shrine to Padre Pio.—-Strangely on my last visit, it appeared that they were shutting down and selling St. John the Baptist. I do know that they closed down a homeless dorm. It looked to me like they were shutting down the entire church.—-I support the Franciscans here in the Midwest because they helped my POW father (5 sons) when he needed help and no one else would be of assistance. Thanks for the clarification. There is a wonderful monk preacher and it appears that they are starting the process to shut him down and also to shut down the entire church and move the remnant to Chicago where their headquarters is.——The church is something out of Italy with statues all over the place. There is a wonderful organ and the environment is great. It looks like someone doesn’t like it and can’t figure out how to turn it into a meeting hall.—Since that is the case, you just shut it down. About two months ago, one of the monks was jumped in front of the church because he didn’t have a dollar and suffered a broken leg among other injuries. They are working with immigrants from the Caribbean and from parts of Africa. African-Americans do not like this and the Archbishop of this archdiocese made a major statement with Michael Brown about “systemic racism”.—–As you may know, Timothy Cardinal Dolan is from the Midwest. There was a modern statue of Elizabeth Anne Seton in St. Patrick’s Cathedral which replaced one of the side altars and kind of agitated me. He took it out and had a more traditional tribute to nuns put in its place.

          • St. John’s extended from 30th to 31st Street just the westside of 8th
            Avenue. St. Francis is just the eastside of 8th Avenue extending from 31st to 32nd. They are really just yards away from each other. I think Capuchins – like all of them – have less friars than they require, and it was determined by the Archdiocese and the friars to use the resources where they were more required. The Padre Pio shrine was really a
            wonderful site with precious relics – I remember especially his mittens.
            I lived all my life in metro New York, all my career worked in Manhattan and frequented St. Francis often. It was my life line during the week. I moved from the area seventeen years ago – just four months before 9/11. Last summer I had the opportunity to return and I visited St. Francis week or so before Gay Pride weekend. According to the parish bulletin St. Francis would be providing support for the festivities.
            It is no longer the spring of living water that I left behind.
            Our Church is in the hands of the aberrant, the disoriented, the heterodox, the nefarious and the cowardly.
            We need to pray for each other and for priests.
            On a positive note, I too was so glad to see reported on the web that the shrine to St. Elizabeth has been replaced with an altar for her that is in harmony with the other side altars. It was a good move!

          • Kind of a handy and sneaky way to get rid of the influence of Padre Pio. On one of my visits, I talked with one of the priests about donating to fix one of the banners on the outside of the church. I mailed in 25.00 and it went through the system. I then sent in a check for 500.00 which disappeared.—-One of the nuns, I believe Sister Carol whom I met, did a “background check” on me back in the Midwest. She then threw away or destroyed my check. I talked with the pastor twice on the phone to try and straighten out the problem. He claims that he had no idea where the check went.—-I went back and talked with the nun shortly and she was very hostile. I just faded away.

          • As I said, “Our Church is in the hands of the aberrant, the disoriented, the heterodox, the nefarious and the cowardly.”
            I should have added bitchy.
            You are a good and generous man.
            We live in a world, a country and a Church gone mad.
            Keep your hat on!

          • We either hang together or we hang separately as the saying goes. It is absolutely and totally unfathomable that the aberrants have taken over to this extent.

  25. Guys, you’re all forgetting that John Paul II did exactly the same thing with capital punishment for murder — and got away with it, thanks to his PR flacks in the Apologetics-Industrial Complex and a willing Card. Ratzinger in CDF. Don’t believe me? Compare any catechism from the 1970s with one published under JPII’s tenure. Compare what Aquinas and Augustine wrote about the morality of executing capital offenders with JPII’s rationale. Compare the current abolitionist revisionism with Genesis 9:5-6.

    Without going into a long argument, here’s the point: For centuries, the fundamental moral criterion was the inviolability of the divine image within mankind. Thanks to JPII (and, by extention, von Balthasar), the fundamental moral criterion is the state’s ability to incarcerate capital felons.

    IOW, JPII directly contradicted centuries of moral teaching while ex cathedra!

    Yes, I know he’s a saint. That makes it all the worse.

    Not for nothing did JPII eliminate the “devil’s advocate” from the canonization procedure.

    • John Paul’s teaching on capital punishment was not delivered “ex cathedra.”
      He raised the valid objection that in contemporary western societies the need to protect the citizenry from homicidal maniacs does not require capital punishment. Our mode and method of incarceration precludes its implementation.
      Its an argument that does require the most serious consideration.
      I’m not sure I can agree in all cases, but even so I don’t know if as a juror I could ever suggest the death penalty.
      It was not delivered “ex cathedra.”

      • James, do the research I suggested in my original post. JPII did far more than raise a valid objection. Here are his comments from his 1999 trip to the United States:

        “The new evangelization calls for followers of Christ who are unconditionally pro-life: who will proclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel of life in every situation. A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform. I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary.”

        Those comments contradict centuries of teaching from both Scripture and Tradition, and form the basis of an abolitionist approach that the Church never taught before JPII’s papacy.

        JPII laid the egg that Francis hatched.

        • “Modern society has the means of protecting itself…”
          He contextualizes his teaching for our epoch and for when society can indeed handle criminals in such a manner. It is not an absolute. Circumstances do matter in this teaching.
          And it is not delivered ex cathedra.
          I will grant you this… JPII did “play loose.”
          I venerate him, but increasingly regard him as less than genius, although I could never deny his virtue. The “the instrument” of the papacy was in the hands of a pro — a saint. We now have a three year old and his day care class armed with machine guns. They take advantage of every perceived loophole to take license.
          When I want I cheep thrill I imagine Ernesto Cardenal replaced by Jorge Bergoglio on his knees getting the finger pointing and pointed rebuke he so well deserves — at the very least.
          Soul slaying has its own consequences.

  26. came across this, looks quite interesting:

    came from:

    Thursday, August 24, 2017
    Lost Latin Gospel Commentary Found and Made Available Public Domain!
    This may be old news to some Gospel scholarship geeks, but I just came across this article this

    morning: the lost Gospel commentary of Fortunatianus of Aquileia, a mid-fourth century Italian bishop, has been found and translated into English. De Gruyter is making the English translation available in the public domain (! Thanks, De Gruyter!) here.

    Fortunatianus’ commentary is fascinating for a number of reasons, as he works in Latin from a pre-Vulgate (OL or Old Latin) translation of the Gospels. On the genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, he adopts the Levirate marriage solution to the Jacob-Heli problem, although mentions that “many” commentators prefer to see Matthew’s genealogy as that of Joseph, and Luke’s as that of Mary (which is my own preferred solution). In any event, it is intriguing to watch him work through many of the well-known interpretive cruces in the Gospels at this early stage in the Church’s history.

  27. We should aim to act so as to create a bridge to God, and sin prevents this. Guidance should be given that to reject sin is not a pointless and incomprehensible exercise required only because God is capricious, but because it has a rational basis in that it creates a spiritual link to God moment to moment,in this life.

    It maybe is a little like this: God will become known to you insofar as to do so contributes to the perfection of creation – that is, if to do so increases order in creation, which he loves. God also loves each soul though – his motive is love – so this is likely not the only circumstance: Being also merciful, God likely also makes himself known to certain weak souls in order to save them from imminent death, as an intervention, and bears the immediate consequences to the rest of his creation himself, as in forgiveness.

    Equally though, one may expect to be left to be victimised by spiritual forces which act to encourage sin by placing temptation in one’s way if to do so would increase order in creation by bringing about the destruction of a soul which has by its choices increased disorder in creation. This is experienced as mental illness.

    Accommodations with sin such as those proposed may or may not be forgiven, but they will militate against us forming a direct spiritual connection with God through which we will hear his voice personally and be given love and direction to greater holiness.

  28. This whole D&R and Holy Communion thing is truly a matter of God’s divine moral Creation, Revelation, and Law, and not a matter of discipline.

    We are created, redeemed and called to Trinitarian Covenant Communion of Life and Love. There is nothing more fundamental!

    In both the Old Covenant and New Covenant we are called to enter into and remain in this Covenant Communion of Life – if we should break off from or loose this Life we are to be reconciled or re-communioned, and then we may come and eat the Lamb in the Temple.

    This is fundamental and at the heart and center of each of these God’s Covenants.

    In the Old Covenant through Moses the People of God were called to this Covenant Communion Life and the eating of the Lamb. Only those in the Jewish Covenant communion could eat the Lamb. Various people and their relationships to the Living God and His Living People could eat or not eat the Lamb – the divine moral Revelation and Law of the Living God is found nicely in Exodus 12:43-50.

    First, those Jewish persons who had been circumcised into God’s Covenant Communion Life could eat the Lamb. A second group was the non-jewish gentiles; in this group there are resident/native aliens (Jewish converts) and the non-resident/native [foreigners-strangers-slaves] aliens (non-Jewish converts).

    How did one go from being being a non-resident/native alien to a resident/native alien – by circumcision they were brought into the Jewish Covenant Communion with the Living God and the Living People of God, just as those born into the families of the Jewish Covenant Faith (Circumcise the relationship || Sacrament of Baptism).

    If the Jewish person or jewish convert loss this relationship by deadly sin, they needed to be circumcised of their deadly sin(s) – and so the Lord Revealed and Taught right away (in Leviticus), the various Covenant Sacrificial Offerings to be witnessed in order to repair, purify and restore for the deadly and non-deadly sins and offenses (circumcise the soul/heart || Sacrament of Confession).

    The Living God made all this perfect and complete in the New Covenant in His Sacrifice (cf. Mt 5:7). There are the same parallel of persons: those born into Catholic Covenant families, those who were not but who come to enter into the Catholic Covenant People of God. Both the ‘native’ Catholic and the native Catholic convert may eat the Lamb as long as they remain in Covenant Communion with the Living God and His Living Household of God – why?, because these are no longer aliens, foreigners or strangers to God and His Household, but His citizens of His Covenant Communion (Eph 2:19).

    Both the ‘native’ Jew and the native Jewish convert may eat the Lamb as long as they remain in Covenant Communion by avoiding deadly, Communion-breaking, sins. If they break this Covenant Communion with the Living God and the Living People and Household of God they must have this Covenant Relationship restored or re-communioned before the may come and eat the Lamb in the Temple of God. How did the Lord say this was to happen – meditate upon the Book of Leviticus.

  29. Basically, Francis is equating the true and only God with the god of the mohammedans . A god who is pure will, who can break the moral law.

  30. If I had to read Amoris Laetitia all the way through to Paragraph 303, I’d end up either in a coma or in a straitjacket. Luckily for me, the god of surprises lived up to his title early on in proceedings with this nugget in Paragraph 3:

    ‘Since “time is greater than space”, I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium.’

    In other words, mortal man decides not only which questions relating to how he lives his life can be decided solely with reference to himself but also of course, gets to craft his own answers, possibly whilst being accompanied by those of an identical mindset. Once the decision has been reached, it can then be stamped ‘Approved by God’.

    So there we have it – a man-made religion, devoid of the Divine and ultimately leading any who would follow it into nothing more than the worship of Self.

  31. If God is pure will, if He can break the moral law and is illogical, then life will be hell on earth. Look at the mohammedans…pederasty, murdering your wife, sitting in squalor, blowing yourself up….well inshallah. Allah willed it. No need to repent. My sin didn’t cause these conditions. Who in the name of heaven would want to serve a god like that. Maybe Francis is attempting to get us used to the idea of worshipping a false god.

    • It is a disturbing thought but your concern is not unfounded. One need consider seriously if different understandings of God among the wider world religions, and indeed among “Christians” can allow us to think we are worshiping the same entity.
      Such a question could be seen as troubling to some in connection with world religions but not absurd. Such a question would without doubt be seen as scandalous and even “heretical” when posed in regard to the spectrum of adherents termed Christian.
      The question never arose in my mind until the current pontificate when I realized – no,
      acknowledged – that the range of notions about God within the Catholic Church – among the baptized – is rather frightening.
      Do all Catholics worship the same God?
      I wonder what notions come up when you ask a twenty, a thirty, a fifty and a seventy year old Who is the Most Holy Trinity.
      I wonder.
      “I am the Lord your God. Thou shall not have strange gods before Me.”
      There are a multitude of strange gods in the pantheon conjured up by contemporary Roman Catholic theologians. In fact, I think a many don’t even believe in a deity. Just something transcendent.
      As for mainline protestantism, it has already plunged over the cliff.
      We aren’t far behind.

  32. “And the fifth angel sounded the trumpet, and I saw a star fall from heaven upon the earth, and there was given to him the key of the bottomless pit. [2] And he opened the bottomless pit: and the smoke of the pit arose, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke of the pit.”

    ” .. Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen; and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every unclean spirit, and the hold of every unclean and hateful bird: [3] Because all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her; and the merchants of the earth have been made rich by the power of her delicacies. [4] And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues. [5] For her sins have reached unto heaven, and the Lord hath remembered her iniquities.”

  33. Apostolic Constitutions Book II Section 3 VII.
    Beloved, be it known to you that those who are baptized into the death of our Lord Jesus are obliged to go on no longer in sin; for as those who are dead cannot work wickedness any longer, so those who are dead with Christ cannot practice wickedness. We do not therefore believe, brethren, that any one who has received the washing of life continues in the practice of the licentious acts of transgressors. Now he who sins after his baptism, unless he repent and forsake his sins, shall be condemned to hell-fire.


Leave a Comment

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

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...