Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Liberation Theologian Boff: “Francis is One of Us”

On 25 December 2016 the Brazilian Leonardo Boff, one of the most prominent theorists and operatives of Latin American Liberation Theology, gave a candidly revealing and manifoldly informative interview to the German regional newspaper Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger. Due to his confident, if not presumptuous, openness, the 78-year-old Boff (b. 14 December 1938) speaks about several matters of moment which we otherwise would not so easily hear about.

For example, he reveals the following:

    • How and why Pope Francis did not meet Boff in Rome, as planned, on the day before the second Synod on the Family in 2015 – because the pope was angry at the Thirteen Cardinals’ Letter and was trying to quiet the situation (and himself?) ahead of the Synod;
    • How Cardinal Walter Kasper recently told Boff that Pope Francis has some “big surprises” planned;
    • How Pope Francis intends to allow the Catholic Church in Brazil to permit married priests, as his friend Cardinal Claudio Hummes has been requesting now for some time;
    • How Pope Francis had requested from Boff material for the writing of his own encyclical Laudato Si and how the pope thanked him afterwards;
    • How Boff considers Pope Francis to be “one of us,” meaning one of the supportive sympathizers with liberation theology.

In the following, therefore, I shall translate parts of this important interview. The words of Leonardo Boff will speak for themselves. Important to note in this context, however, is that Boff himself was publicly criticized and silenced in 1985 by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger – then the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) – for his unorthodox writings that boldly go quite far against Church doctrine. Thus, in 1992, he both formally left the Franciscan Order to which he had belonged and he also then publicly left the Catholic priesthood.

Q: Liberation Theology of Latin America – one of whose most prominent representatives you certainly are – has now received new honors [and encouraging support] from and through Pope Francis. [Is there now to be] A rehabilitation also for you personally, after your years-long struggles with Pope John Paul II himself and with his highest defender of Doctrine, Joseph Ratzinger, who later became Pope Benedict XVI?

Francis is one of us. He has turned Liberation Theology into a common property of the Church. And he has widened it. Whoever speaks today of the poor, also has to speak of the earth, because it, too, is now being plundered and abused. “To hear the cry of the poor,” that means to hear the cry of the animals, the forests, of the whole tortured creation. The whole earth cries. Also, says the pope – and he thus quotes one of the titles of one of my books – we have to hear simultaneously the cry of the poor and the cry of the earth. And, for sure, both need to be liberated. I myself have dealt in the recent past with this widening of the Liberation Theology. And that [this environmental dimension] is also the fundamentally new aspect in Laudato Si.

Q: ….which is now in the “ecological encyclical” of the pope promulgated in the year 2015. How much Leonardo Boff is in Jorge Mario Bergoglio?

The encyclical belongs to the pope. But he has consulted with many experts.

Q: Has he read your books?

More than that. He asked me for material for the sake of Laudato Si. I have given him my counsel and sent to him some of what I have written. Which he has also used. Some people told me they were thinking while reading: “Wait, that is Boff!” By the way, Pope Francis directly told me: “Boff, don’t send the papers directly to me.”

Q: Why not?

He said: “Otherwise, the Sottosegretari (the employees of the Vatican administration, editors [of the Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger]) will intercept them and I will not receive them. Rather, send the things right to the Argentine Ambassador [at the Holy See] with whom I have a good connection, then they will safely land into my hands.” For that, one needs to know that the current Ambassador at the Holy See is an old friend of the pope from his time in Buenos Aires. They have often drunk together mate [a special drink from Argentina, a sort of tea]. Then, one day before the publication of the encyclical, the pope had someone call me in order to thank me for my help.

Q: A personal meeting with the pope is still outstanding?

He [Pope Francis] has sought a reconciliation with the most important representatives of the Liberation Theology: with Gustavo Gutierrez, Jon Sobrino, and likewise with me. I have said to him with respect to Pope Benedict – respectively Joseph Ratzinger – “But that other is still alive, after all!” He did not accept this. “No,” he said, “Il Papa sono io” – “The pope, that is me!” We were welcomed to come. That is where you see his courage and his decisiveness.

Q: Why then has your visit not yet worked out?

I had received an invitation and I even had already landed in Rome. But just that day, immediately before the beginning of the [second] Synod on the Family in 2015, 13 cardinals – among them the German Cardinal Gerhard Müller – rehearsed a rebellion against the pope with a letter addressed to him which then, o surprise!, was published in a newspaper. The pope was angry and he told me: “Boff, I have no time. I have to establish calm before the synod begins. We will see each other another time.”

Q: But also with the hoped-for calm, that did not really work out, either, did it?

The pope feels the sharpness of the headwind from his own ranks, especially coming from the U.S. This Cardinal Burke, Leo Burke, who now – together with your retired Cardinal Meisner from Cologne – has already written another letter [to the pope]; he is is the Donald Trump of the Catholic Church (laughs). But, unlike Trump, Burke has now been neutralized within the Curia. Thanks be to God. These people really believe that it is up to them to correct the pope. As if they are above the pope. Something like this is unusual [sic!], if not unprecedented in the history of the Church. One may criticize the pope, one may have discussions with him. That is what I have often done. But, that cardinals publicly accuse the pope of the spreading of theological mistakes or even heresies, that is – I think – too much. That is an affront with which a pope cannot put up. The pope cannot be judged, that is the teaching of the Church.

Q: With all your enthusiasm for the pope – what is it with these Church reforms which so many Catholics have expected from Francis; but where, in fact, not so much has yet happened?

You know, as far as I understand, the center of his interest is not any more the Church – and certainly not the internal operation of the Church – but, rather, the survival of humanity, the future of the earth. […] I believe that there is a hierarchy of problems for him. When the earth perishes, all the other problems have also been taken care of. But, with regard to the questions within and about the Church: wait and see! Only recently, Cardinal Walter Kasper, a close confidant of the pope, told me that soon there will be some great surprises.

Q: What do you expect?

Who knows? Perhaps a diaconate for women, after all. Or the possibility that married priests may be again engaged in pastoral care. That is an explicit request from the Brazilian bishops to the pope, especially from his friend, the retired Brazilian Curial Cardinal Claudio Hummes. I have heard that the pope wants to meet this request – for now and for a certain experimental period in Brazil. This country with its 140 million Catholics should at least have 100,000 priests. But, there are only 18,000. Institutionally, this is a catastrophe. No wonder that the faithful now go in droves to the Evangelicals and the Pentecostals, who fill this personal vacuum. If now all these thousands of already married priests might again exercise their office, this would be a first step toward an improvement of the situation – and, at the same time, it would be an impulse [and a sign] that the Catholic Church now loosens the fetters of obligatory celibacy. [my emphasis]

Q: If the pope were to make a decision in this sense and direction – would you yourself, as a former Franciscan priest, also again undertake priestly duties?

I personally do not need such a decision. It would not change anything for myself because I still do what I have always done: I baptize, I give Christian burials, and if I happen to come into a parish without a priest, then I also celebrate Mass together with the people.

Q: Is it very “German” to ask whether you are permitted to do that?

Up to now, no bishop whom I know has ever either criticized it or forbidden it. The bishops, on the contrary, are happy and tell me: “the people have a right [sic] to the Eucharist. Just keep doing it!” My theological teacher, Cardinal Paulo Evaristo Arns – who just died a few days ago – was, for example, of a very great openness. He went so far that, when he saw married priests sitting in the pew during Mass, he had them come to the altar and he then concelebrated the Eucharist with them. He did it often and said: “You are, after all, still priests – and you will remain so!”

[End of translation]


In the context of this blunt interview – and with Boff’s apparently newly discovered “orthodox” criticisms of those people who now even dare to criticize a pope – it might be worth recalling and reading what Leonardo Boff had earlier said, back in 2001.

For, in that 2001 interview with the Internet site Communità Italiana, he also spoke bluntly concerning both Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger himself – then Head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Pope John Paul II – and Ratzinger’s own putatively provocative defense of certain traditional positions and doctrines of the Catholic Church:

What I can say is that the dominant tendency in the Vatican under this pontificate [of John Paul II] is highly fundamentalist. A Cardinal like J. Ratzinger who publishes an official [Vatican] document in which he says that the only true Church is the Catholic Church and that the rest are not even churches, that the only legitimate religion is the Catholic religion and that the others have no faith (they are only convictions and beliefs) – he commits religious terrorism [sic] and is in grave theological error, as well. [my emphasis]

The poignancy – and irony – of these Boff comments increases when one considers that, in 1970 in Munich, it was Cardinal Ratzinger himself who was one of the committee of select professorial guides of Leonardo Boff’s own doctoral dissertation de Ecclesia: concerning “the Church as Sacrament” in light of some of the world’s purported experiences. The main title of Boff’s dissertation, in German, was: Die Kirche als Sakrament im Horizont der Welterfahrung.

In the larger context of this recent 25 December 2016 interview with Leonardo Boff, we also would like to remind our readers of the work of the Vatican specialist, Dr. Sandro Magister, who has repeatedly pointed to the possibility, even the probability, that Pope Francis himself will grant Brazil the permission to allow for married priests. We also remember that we ourselves earlier reported how – right after the publication of the 13 Cardinals Letter by way of Dr. Magister himself – there also came trustworthy reports about Pope Francis’ own outburst of anger over that polite, but firmly orthodox, initiative of the cardinals. Thus in his confident bluntness, Leonardo Boff now unexpectedly confirms the earlier work of journalists, both of Dr. Magister himself and, in a small way, of mine own.

264 thoughts on “Liberation Theologian Boff: “Francis is One of Us””

  1. This truly confirms everything we have learned so far, Cardinal Burke and the other faithful Cardinals said to Remnant that the formal correction will take place in January, pray for the Church.

    • Actually, Burke said only that it would be after the Christmas season.

      I don’t see any rational basis for a private correction. The heresy is public and the retraction must of necessity be public.

    • Oh no, I am surprised. This is graver than I thought. Yes, it was grave already, but such a close relationship with Boff is very very troubling to me.

      You fellows have no idea how difficult it is to be a Brazilian Catholic. These bishops (Claudio Hummes, Evaristo Arns) are very well-regarded by the clergy in general – I will not say laity because the Brazilian laity doesn’t care for bishops for some decades now, and I always felt bad for having reservations about them. Now that I know that the recently deceased Evaristo Arns is regarded by Boff as a teacher, I hope I will not feel as bad anymore.

      This is truly world shattering.

    • Me neither.

      I told several friends of mine to prepare for the worst because it will happen and it will accelerate.

      Now I have to tell them (some of whom played ostriches regarding this situation) I told you so.

      The one time when I hate being right.

  2. As a protestant watching from afar, I’m in a bit of an awkward situation: I agree with some of the changes proposed (namely, the abolition of the requirement of pastoral celibacy), but must protest on account of the motivation. He argues like a Zwingli, rather than a Luther. He suggests: “This is more practical”, “This is more popular”, “This is more progressive”; but does not ask the most important question: “Is this Scriptural?” or (without Sola Scriptura) “Is this correct doctrine?” None of the questions of practicality or popularity matter in the slightest while the Catholic theology reinforcing the practice is intact.

    • “As a protestant watching from afar, I’m in a bit of an awkward situation: I agree with some of the changes proposed (namely, the abolition of the requirement of pastoral celibacy)”

      The Church has been down that road before. It didn’t quite work-out.

    • Yeah, well, God Himself values virginity and celibacy. As is evident from the Scriptures whenever this discipline is taken upon oneself for the sake of God. The Temple priests fasted and abstained from Sex for awhile before administering to the Ark of the Covenant. Even David and his men had to ritually abstain from sex before warfare and could not even touch the Blessed Bread unless they had been celibate for several days. Catholic Priests must consecrate and administer to the Sacrament of the Eucharist, something far greater than the Ark. So yours and Boff’s proposals are simply backwards and unscriptural.

  3. Boff is and always was a strong supporter of the Party of Workers in Brazil, which buit the hugest scheme o corruption in the history of humanity! Boff writes regularly to a leftist media and is always defending criminals already jailed by corruption. He left the Church because he would like to get marry and got actually. He never had vocation to be a priest nor a Catholic at all. He is too much concerned with temporal issues and approachs instead of espiritual and transcendent ones. Boff is flesh, not spirit. I am very sad with Francisco!

  4. Francisco should go away and not use surreptitious strategies in order to conceal his inner hidden projects to make changes in the very Truth brought by Christ Himself. His acts have been shameful and not would neve be expected from a real shepherd of God! Christ save His Church it is all I pray.

  5. Liberation theology is just another expression of Communism. It is particularly attractive to those who viw the things of this world as more important that those of God. The fact that Pope Francis is an advocate of this position is hardly surprising. Most of us have known this all along. We must pray for his conversion or removal during this year of the 100th anniversary of Our Lady of Fatima.

      • How many of you have read any of his books ? none, right ? You do know that the early Christians had female deacons, married priests, and held goods in common, do you not ?

        • Do you know what female deacons did? Thought not.

          Do you know why we don’t have married priests anymore? Perhaps not.

          Do you really want to surrender your goods to a common fund? Go ahead.

        • Female deacons ended once nuns orders were established. John.paul 2nd and Pope Benedict condemned Liberation theology. Francis Will cause a schism unless corrected on this and disgrace of Amoris Latita.

      • That we should take good care of God’s creation but not worship it. Worship is what we owe and give to God. God creations are for our good and moderate use.

        • Thank you Michael, that’s what I thought, so this carbon footprint stuff is a way to worship creation instead of Creator and it seems to me a way to get contraception and abortion even worse then it is now.

  6. My thoughts, prayers, small daily sacrifices are offered up for Cardinal Burke and cardinals and bishops in support of this very daunting task about to take place with the formal correction.

    May God protect them in all ways.

    I hope Cardinal Burke knows he is in the prayers of thousands on earth, and his greatest alley, our Lady, holds him very close to her heart.

  7. ” . . . the center of his interest is not any more the Church – and certainly not the internal operation of the Church . . .”

    This is what makes me think that Bergoglio is indifferent to fomenting a formal schism. The unity of the Church is a matter of indifference to him and he will sacrifice that unity to achieve his aims.

    • I wouldn’t say he was indifferent. Almost seems like he takes delight in it. Like a nasty little boy who likes pulling the legs off his sisters dolls.

  8. Does anyone know the source of the reference of Cardinal Ratzinger saying “the only true Church is the Catholic Church and that the rest are not even churches, that the only legitimate religion is the Catholic religion and that the others have no faith”?


    • He doesn’t say that verbatim, but I’m sure the reference is to the CDF Declaration, “DOMINUS IESUS”
      OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCH”, written when Cardinal Ratzinger was the Prefect.

      • Even then Ratzinger was modernist enough to say the word “subsists” instead of the good old fashioned word IS. Way too subtle for most Catholics but the Catholic Church IS the Mystical Body of Christ, outside of which NO ONE can be saved. See? That’s not so hard after all.

        • Except, of course, as St Thomas Aquinas teaches – following St Paul in Romans: whilst no-one is saved outside of the Catholic Church (Body of Christ) there are some who WILL be saved who are not formally members of her (or indeed, pace Aquinas, even those who, in conscience, choose to leave her). Implicit Faith IS required – as a bare minimum – says Aquinas but that Implicit Faith is NOT formal membership of the Catholic Church with an Explicit Faith (if circumstances prevented it, for example.) And likewise, St Paul is very clear: the following of one’s conscience according the the lights of Natural Law will ‘acquit’ some (and condemn others) on the Day of Judgement.

          All that said – I’m not sure why that would require you to go from IS to SUBSISTS.
          I think you could maintain IS and then just add on the caveats above – as the Church happily did for 700 years since Aquinas and, arguably, 2000 years since St Paul. Whilst we’ll all have been saved through the mediation of Christ’s Body the Church here on earth – and will, therefore, in a sense all be Catholic in Heaven – we will also see people in Heaven who weren’t formally Catholics during their lives here on earth.
          (Please God we shall get to Heaven ourselves, of course! The pervasive opinion of the Fathers and Aquinas is that most of us Catholics don’t make it – let alone anyone else!)

        • I’ve heard people say that before, but today, with everything happening the way it is, with the Catholic Church being hollowed out of every Divine truth and replaced with human sentimentality, with us on the verge of public schism, dont you think that Card Ratzinger had a prophetic insight at that moment of writing Dominus Jesus because he knew what was coming……that the true Church of those who hold to the true Apostolic Faith will in fact be found to be relatively “few” and they have all this time subsisted in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is being crucified right now. What we wait for is the Resurrection, where those Catholics accepting and tied to participation in the Divine life of Christ in fact “rise” with Him – albeit to persecution for a time but protected by the Madonna (looks like).

  9. The problem with the left is that they take legitamate problems such as the distribution of wealth in south america ( the wealthy have it all), then the repair they want is worse than the problem was. Likewise in the Church we have a free fall in faith and Mass attendance so they want to fix it by increasing the same types of changes that caused the problem in the first place.

    As far as opening the preisthood to marriage, that is trully a doctrine that can be changed, but again it will just make the problem worse. It also will not give the conservative bishops and cardinals any additional amunition to fight the liberals with. I pray that they can be stopped but I think the problem must become bad enough for people to realize that the Church must be completely returned to pre Vatican II, even the conservative Church of Pope John Paul was in free fall. All the changes after Vatican II are the cause of the modern and ongoing destruction of the Church.

    As has been prophesied by so many saints, it will get worse but God will step in so that the faith is not completely destroyed. We will see who are the truly faithful Catholics in the years to come. At this rate the only Catholic Churches left will be run by Traditiornal societies such as FSSP and similar. The liberal bishops will destroy everything else as they did with the anglicans.

    • The problem is not the documents of Vatican II. It is the hijacking of the Catholic faith according to the phony “spirit of Vatican II” that began in the 1960s.

        • We’re all getting thoroughly tired of the phony ‘nothing wrong with the documents’ tripe! Read Sacrosanctum Concilium. The whole of the mess that is the new Mass is in there.

          • Do you consider the revised Lectionary a bad thing?
            “No other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.” This norm was violated a million times.
            Is this horrible: “30. To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes. And at the proper times all should observe a reverent silence.” No mention of clowns or balloons.

          • Do you consider the revised Lectionary a bad thing?

            I’ve come to conclude that it’s a greatly inferior thing to the old lectionary.

            But you’re right: Sacrosanctum Concilium expressly calls for an expanded lectionary, so this one can’t be blamed on Bugnini, or adventurous liturgists in Amsterdam or Seattle. This is definitely one instance where the Pauline Missal respects the wishes of the Council Fathers (in the main, if not perhaps in every detail).

          • OK, so I admit, I might have used a bit of hyperbole in my statement… 😉


            If you read past Popes on Islam for example, the differences are shocking. And that is the thing. Just reading the document is one thing, but reading the document after reading the many past papal pronouncements on the dogma of extra ecclesiam nula salus begs the question “Which/who is right?” At the same time we are saying “BOTH!”…yet both seemingly cannot be.

            Should Church teaching not be clear? {CCC 1697}

            Even Pope Benedict has stated that EENS was “abandoned” after Vatican 2. What does that even mean? The Church cannot “abandon” dogma! Yet documents like NA beg for weakening of the teaching of the faith.

            In a number of statements from V2 documents we have ambiguity that tears at the mind, that seems to stand starkly in contrast with past teaching, yet always we are called to maintain the “hermeneutic of continuity”. To read Nostra Aetate without having read the weighty balance of past Church teaching is a very dangerous thing indeed. And THAT is the problem with Vatican 2 documents. They CAN be read in accordance with past Church teaching but alone they beg novel interpretations AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE SEEN FOR 50 YEARS.

            Nostra Aetate is a troublesome document.

          • Lumen Gentium affirmed “outside the Church there is no salvation.”

            Theologians like Rahner could be said to have “abandoned” ‘outside the Church there is no salvation’ but the Magisterium never has.

            Heretics can twist practically anything if they want to.

          • I THINK the point B16 was making is that since V2, there has no longer been common teaching to that effect, meaning that in practice EENS has been junked.

            I would agree, concurring 100%.

            As a Protestant, knowing nothing of Catholic doctrine, I understood the Catholic Church to be a big fat bureaucracy of femmy guys spouting off universalist gobblygook in order not to anger anybody and thus in so doing make sure as many people keep sending in their weekly offerings as possible.

            Now that I am a Catholic, I realize that though that is not the TEACHING of the Church, that does indeed to be a pretty fair assessment of what many prelates have out the Church to be.

          • What folks like you need to remember is that you have been holding the line for folks like me. Honestly, when I look at the Church today, I am so thankful for those who have not just quit or caved in, for those who teach their precious children the truth, who love Jesus, are not afraid to use His name in public and who have kept the faith.

            How many Catholics have seen the internal threats t the faith that exist and have just plain quit and become “Evangelicals”?

            THANK YOU.

      • Even Card. Kasper admitted the documents of Vat. II were purposefully ambiguous, to appease the liberal faction present at the Council.

    • “The problem with the left is that they take legitamate problems such as the distribution of wealth in south america ( the wealthy have it all), then the repair they want is worse than the problem was. Likewise in the Church we have a free fall in faith and Mass attendance so they want to fix it by increasing the same types of changes that caused the problem in the first place.”


      Just like all the “solutions” Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have for solving the ills of Cabrini Green and Camden, NJ.

      Their cure for a gunshot wound in the leg is a gunshot wound to the guts. Ditto this Marxist/Freemasonic Pope.

    • I myself, dont have an issue with married priests (from my understanding its not doctrine but if you can help me understand that it is then I have no choice but to submit to the will of the Church). I do have an issue with the Holy Father pushing for such a thing as I, honestly, don’t trust him, meaning that I think he would push for it only because it fits, in some way, to whatever his grand plan is….and I am not confident it is a plan that honors the teachings of our Faith.

      For most of my life I thought that the faith was in crisis because my generation (born in the 80s) simply were the issue. Yet since, AL I have discovered that these issues range way back before my time inside and outside the Church. This has truly been shocking to me as it has become evident that many of our prelates either dont know the faith, dont care to know it, and expect the faithful not to know it. Many care not for theology and apologetics and therefore render themselves incapable of explaining anything to the faithful concerning the Faith. And this is embarrassing. The faithful are essentially taught, by way of AL and other documents, that faith (as in what Abraham demonstrated) is idealistic, that the saving power of grace—only works for some people, and that God just may not provide a way out of any situation. Thus if we truly consumed these teachings we have no reason to pray, we have proven that there is only an idealistic power in prayer and fasting and that the whole of Church Tradition, worked only for a specific era…..I cant even call such thinking Protestant….its simply not Christian

    • As a Ukrainian Greek Catholic whose pastor is a married priest, I’ll say this right off the bat:.

      If the Latin Church wants to have married priests, then they should adopt in toto ALL the rules and regulations that Eastern Catholic married priests must follow. Otherwise, DON’T DO IT!!!!

      First of all, the constant tradition of both East and West is that a man who is ordained celibate CANNOT MARRY. What the Eastern Catholic Tradition DOES allow is for married man to be ordained to the priesthood. Here’s how it works:

      The man MUST obtain the free consent of his wife first. If she says NO, that’s the end of it.

      True story:. When my pastor was a seminarian, a lady with 5 children came knocking on the door and asked to see the bishop. The bishop came and the lady said to him: “Bishop, I want my husband back.” An investigation occurred and it was found that the wife had not consented to her husband entering the seminary. Consequently, he had to leave.

      However, if the wife does consent (as was the case of my pastor), then both husband and wife undergo formation – he in the seminary and she receives a separate formation.

      Also, the priest “must fast and *abstain* until the time appointed for the Sacrifice.” I.e. no marital relations the night before the priest offers the Liturgy. So if he has Liturgy on the weekend, 3 weddings and 2 funerals in the space of 7 days…Well, you get the idea. (I guarantee you that South American women would be up in arms about this one.)

      When the wife of a priest dies, THAT’S when celibacy kicks in (Cf. Ephesians 5: 21-33). Christ has ONE spouse and that is the Church.

      There’s other rules and regulations that apply only to married priests and not celibate priests.

      So to repeat what I said before:

      If the Latin Church wants to have married priests, then they should adopt in toto ALL (I.e. NO exceptions) the rules and regulations that Eastern Catholic married priests must follow. Otherwise, DON’T DO IT!!!!

      • In the Roman Catholic Church, Canon Law, NOW, requires perfect, perpetual continence of ALL clerics–married or celibate, deacons, priests, and bishops.

  10. Will these horrible old men please just go away – forever? I thought we had gotten rid of these 1970s creeps, but they’re like Mick Jagger and don’t know when to leave it alone. They think they’re so cool strumming their guitar chords with their peace signs bouncing on their scrawny chests. Unfortunately, they’ve been revived by another old fly in amber, and they’re all trying to bring back things that were discredited 40 years ago.

    • From my vantage point as a relatively new convert, the more I get to see of the Catholic Church, the more convinced I am that these “Mick Jaggers” as you so eloquently call them are by no means the exception, they are the rule.

      • Keep the Faith! My friend Mary Ann (she died 3 years ago today) often told me: “You’re God’s little soldier.” [I’m 5’3″.]) Well, she was right. We’re His soldiers, so when the going gets tough, the tough have to keep going with His grace.

        O holy Apostle and Protomartyr Stephen, pray to God for us sinners!

      • The golden oldies actually were on their way out – until March of 2013. Young orthodox men were coming in, but that’s grinding to a halt with the Francis bishops.

      • I think Isabel is referring to the “hippies” in the church like Mr. Boff, and all of the sycophantic liberals parading around the church, thinking themselves so grand. Bergoglio, Kasper, Schonborn and their ilk.

        • Thank you. If that were the case, I agree with her.
          As a matter of fact I was wondering the whole time where and what role Leonardo Boff Plays in the thinking of Bergoglio. And violá! Suddently L. Boff surfaced and everything is clear!

  11. How truly non-shocking are any of this obdurate heretic’s statements, how truly expected. Boff should get the stating the Obvious Award for the year when it comes to describing Pope Francis as “one of us”

    Furthermore, from Pope Francis’ Christmas screed/threat to the Curia:

    “All this is to say that the reform of the Curia is a delicate process that has to take place in fidelity to essentials, with constant discernment, evangelical courage and ecclesial wisdom, careful listening, persevering action, positive silence and firm decisions. It requires much prayer, profound humility, farsightedness, concrete steps forward and – whenever necessary – even with steps backward, with determination, vitality, responsible exercise of power, unconditioned obedience, but above all by abandonment to the sure guidance of the Holy Spirit and trust in his necessary support.”

    Gee, I wonder what he could ever mean with steps backwards…hmm, could he mean married priests and women ‘deacons’? I’m laying my money on yes being the answer to that. And, of course, ‘positive silence and firm decisions’ for all who dare to doubt the almighty and wise Francis (as in dubia supporters.)

    • Father RP, thank you for remaining with us here.

      Without our priests, this would be so much harder to bear.
      And so many our worried now, I know.
      if only they knew, how much we need them.

    • Question for you, and I’m not sure you have an answer, but let’s see what you think anyways. So, let’s say the pope does make some allowance for women “deacons’? How do we, as laity, respond to that, especially if we start seeing that in our parishes? Or how do priests such as yourself respond if a bishop assigns such a “deaconess” to your parish?

      • If that happened in our parish, I’d be out of there like a shot even if the Latin Mass is 2 hours away.

        I’d also point out to the girl what women deacons did in the past.

        • I’m realizing I’m incredibly fortunate that the closest TLM parish is only a 20 minute drive from home, and thus I won’t have to deal with such a situation. Still. I do some volunteering at a parish run by Redemptorists, and this province is… well… let’s just say they would do well in Germany…

      • I would be interested to hear Fr. RP’s response to this as I am afraid that mine is not repeatable in polite company….

        • Should a priest, pastor of a church faces this occurrence, I would imagine it is such an enormous responsibility with enormous consequences, no matter which way you go.

          Sometimes, in situations as these, one may not truly know what one will do, until that moment, with great prayer always and especially prudence.

          So much to consider, to weigh………to bear.

          Dear God, may a priest never be called to make such a decision.
          Dear Blessed Mother, please protect and watch over our priests.

    • “Gee, I wonder what he could ever mean with steps backwards …”
      Maybe back to before Vatican II? Now there’s an encouraging thought.

    • “…responsible exercise of power, unconditioned obedience,…”

      There you have it Fr. RP – “unconditioned (sic) obedience” straight from the goat’s mouth. On the Vatican website they have corrected it to “unconditional obedience”, but the error amounts to the same thing however it is spelt or misspelt. He could intend to mean “unconditional obedience” to the Holy Spirit, which would be fair enough in normal circumstances, but as he believes himself to be an oracle of the Holy Spirit, it would still amount to saying “unconditional obedience to me and my plans.”

      I guess he thinks he is the incarnation of this “god of surprises” and so is assuming divine prerogatives to himself. Strange how he never seemed to be particularly obedient to either of his predecessors, but rather briefed against them when it suited him.

    • Wow. That’s quite a lengthy agenda. Just wondering where salvation of souls ranks, not to mention defense of Christianity against islamic aggression.

  12. Bergoglio- this Imposter- must go, and the sooner the better. With every passing day, his heterodoxy just continues to burst at the seams. Can anyone now seriously doubt that he is not a heretic? No one can validly become a pope much less stay a pope if they do not believe the Catholic faith.

    • Unfortunately I doubt that PF will go. Hopefully the 4 Cardinals will soon make their clarifying statement so that it relieves those true Catholics of the pain of somehow trying to juggle being in communion with the Pope within the current Papacy which itself is not in communion with the teachings of the Apostles. Once that clarification is public, they will in a sense be saying that the true Church subsists in the Catholic Church but a choice needs to be made to remain in that Church. So at that point, millions of Catholics will most likely stick with the Pope because they believe it is the safest thing to do. I hope I am wrong. I’m sure the Cardinals dont wish this on anyone, but they cant stand by and see the destruction continue, and it will continue. Then the true Church can exist and purify itself and none of that will be easy either.

  13. Considering all the evidence we have thus far (and mounting), we very well may be in the state of verifiable, ‘sede vacante.’

    • A Council will have to be called soon, especially if PF continues to ignore the Dubia, as the state of confusion & lack of understanding as to what is happening (has happened) within the CC among the general faithful cannot be allowed to fester anymore. The present incumbent of the See of Peter will have to be made realise he cannot fulfil his Liberation Theology & take the people with him. Russia needs to be consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary & the Third Secret of fatima revealed in full. He is not going to carry out these necessary actions & we won’t have peace until they are fully met. I hope the four Cardinals & their supporters will stick to their guns so that Our Lady’s wishes are accomplished.

      • Reports are coming out that the signers of the dubia will first approach the pope privately for a “correction.” We will likely not know what is happening behind closed doors for awhile.

        • That’s OK, so long as the outcome will be made known. We don’t have to know the exact conversation, just the end result. If AL is going to be implemented across the CC & thus becomes part of the Magisterium then that position will have to be publicised.

          • I don’t think this Pope will EVER make a formal pronouncement in the future on AL.

            In a sense, he already has. He has already made clear his support for Lutheran theology and “Synodal Church”/Eastern Orthodox polity and ecclesiology.

            Thus for everyone to just “accompany each other in dialogue”, all “in the Spirit”, naturally, is the way he’ll leave it.

            In other words, do whatever {the hell} you want, because doctrine is “rigid” and not “pastoral” enough.

            Jesus always “includes”! Jesus never “excludes”!

            His successor{-s} will have to clean up the mess.

            If he lives another 2 or three years, “no stone will be left unturned” under the Temple of God. The Roman pagan Caesars would be in awe of the man…

          • The Dubia are just the tip of the iceberg so if he still persists in his obstinacy & the formal correction is issued & also ignored, then a council must surely follow. If at that stage the pro PFs are in the majority then there will be a schism & we must prepare ourselves for such an outcome. However, let’s take it one step at a time & let no-one say that formalities weren’t adhered to.

          • I agree. The process will take time. And we must have patience.

            Any process that excludes a PUBLIC correction is treason to the teaching of Christ and the Church, however. I was shocked to read Brandmüller’s suggestion that what the Pope will get is a “private” correction, but I am hoping that was merely a difficulty in translation that lends to the notion that a private correction would be the only correction given.

            We need CLEAR stands and teaching and any correction must ultimately be public, especially after the making public of the dubia.

            Up till now we have seen many, many years of effeminate, false “mercy”, truth dodging and ignoring of reality from the Princes of the Church of Nice. In worldly terms, I’d expect Burke and the rest to cave in the “spirit of collegiality” or some such BS, but this time I don’t think so.

            Oh, and I don’t mean Nice, France! 😉

          • Having made public the Dubia & confirming that a formal correction will be made after Christmas, the four Cardinals have no choice but to go with it. Turning back or caving in is not an option. The world’s Catholics are awaiting the pope’s response to the Dubia or alternatively his resignation.

          • I agree 100%, but if they for some reason chose to go only with a “private” correction, the results would be catastrophic.

            Since I have for the most part no faith in the men that lead the Church, I hope for a true act of the Holy Spirit in supporting them through this endeavor.

          • If the Four Cardinals want to follow the Biblical model of correction, then they must issue the correction in private, and if (and when) it is not accepted, and acted upon (i.e. AL clarified) then they must make it public. This is surely what they have in mind, and it is indeed the correct approach.

            Matthew 18:16-17 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church”

          • I am sure that is what the four Cardinals will do, but they must make known the result of the ‘correction’. Leaving us in the dark will not suffice & may lead to even more consternation. They have publicly revealed the Dubia they sent him on September 19 which by mid-November he hadn’t replied to & intimated that he wouldn’t. This being the case they had little to lose by confirming they would be issuing a formal correction – first privately (as in Dubia) &, if again ignored, a public press conference to inform us of the next step(s) to be taken.

          • I think they satisfied the gospel’s requirement of a private correction by submitting the dubia in private.

            Now that the public discussion has begun, it is just silly to carry on any of it in “private.”

            Bergoglio will correct his heresy in public, or not at all.

          • Agreed that a retraction must be public, but the “correction” itself may end up being private.

            In other words, if the cardinals approach the pope in some kind of private meeting and he later answers the dubia correctly, we would probably never know exactly what was stated in the private meeting.

            This is apparently what Cardinal Brandmuller has in mind.

            I do not believe that will end up being the scenario however, as I don’t believe the pope will respond or correct.

            I do believe that they will be working privately to get the pope to clarify. If he does not, then there will be some kind of public correction.

          • I do not for a moment however believe that Bergoglio, being the vile little coward that he is, will agree to a private meeting with even one of the Four Cardinals if he knows its purpose is to correct his heresy.
            Unless of course he plans to confiscate the correction before thy can publish it, or forbid them under pain of excommunication from making it public.



        We KNOW the teaching of the Church.

        What there is is the aiding, encouraging and promoting of heresy.

        To repeat: THERE IS NO CONFUSION.

        • I’m afraid in un-catechised Europe there is great confusion, but hopefully if the Dubia is answered or the formal correction issued there will be less confusion. No point in sticking one’s head in the sand any more – priests & laity just don’t know which way to go at present. That may be clarified very soon for them.

        • I hear you well. Often it is said that there is a lot of confusion in the Church, and that the pope needs to clarify things. In reality there is deliberate spread of heresy, and deliberate obfuscation of Truth. The populace is gradually conditioned to accept falsehood and to live in hypocrisy. God’s law is now oppressive patriarchy and an impossible (unrealistic) standard. How else can we all be united in rejection of truth (which is divisive) and celebration of mediocrity in global Sodom but via social engineering by psychopaths?

        • There is no confusion for those who have “eyes to see and ears to hear” (Holy Scripture). I’d bet that the average NO Catholic in the pew doesn’t have a clue as to why this is so serious.

  14. “Any fraternal correction proposed to the Pope must be presented in camera caritatis” @vatican_en

    It seems Cardin Burke was not speaking for all the four Cardinals when he spoke of issuing a formal correction to PF if he continued to ignore the Dubia. I hope he won’t lose his nerve at this critical point. The faithful have a right to hear PF’s answer to the questions posed in the Dubia.

    • I see cracks in the whole process, too.

      Frankly, it smells of gutless effeminate capitulation, but that remains to be seen.

      At this point I can only remain holding my previous position that this is a significant development that will proceed, albeit slowly, to eventually purify the Church.

  15. This man speaks with impunity for he has a powerful friend now. Married priests will not solve the problem of people leaving the Church; only the Truth will draw souls and the watering down, the confusion, the concern for things of this world will only continue to send hurting souls away. Seeking to remake the Catholic Church into a protestant one will not work as the experiments resulting from VII have shown.

  16. In the ’80’s I was an aspiring Protestant missionary. I studied history, environmental science, and received a Masters in Theology with some emphasis in Liberation Theology. Ironically, it was what I considered the Catholic Church’s soft-on-Liberation Theology and Pope St John Paul II’s religious indifferentism that kept me away from even taking the Catholic faith seriously at all. It was the interest and pursuit of Liberation Theology by a leader in the Evangelical group I was working with in South Africa that contributed to my leaving that organization.

    I admit it; I hate Communism.

    For those of us who eventually studied the doctrines of the Catholic faith and converted to now see what we see and hear what we hear, it is very troubling. Horrific even.

    We have been taught that the Church is fundamentally different in essence and in practice from Protestant groups.

    I am ready to say that the former applies, while the latter does not. The Church is no different than the Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists and other liberal institutions whose human administration has been corrupted by secular Marxist and Freemasonic thought and values.

    Within the Church there are those who have not yet given up, but across the board, it is very, very hard to see any apparent difference between the liberal mainline {dying} and faithless Protestant groups and the administration of the Catholic Church. If this is not the Crucifixion of the Mystical body of Christ I have utterly no idea what else it could be.

    • Instruction on Certain Aspects of the ‘Theology of Liberation’ | CDF, August 6, 1984. –

      The present Instruction has a much more limited and precise purpose: to draw the attention of pastors, theologians, and all the faithful to the deviations, and risks of deviation, damaging to the faith and to Christian living, that are brought about by certain forms of liberation theology which use, in an insufficiently critical manner, concepts borrowed from various currents of Marxist thought. (My emphasis)


      • Yes, I have read that.

        The truth can always be found in the Magesterium, but we have in modern Catholicism a tendency to gross verbosity, the piling on of words on paper that are not enforced in the discipline of the Church. In short, in the past, the documents were often concise, to the point, and dare I say it…black and white. Now, in recent years? We court danger identified in Proverbs 10:19.

        Yet the truth is there.

        The Catholic Church is bursting to the brim with members devoted to Marxism and Freemasonry and heresy of all sorts {Modernism}, the purveyors of which are simply allowed to exist peacefully. I see it in local parishes. We see it in prelates like Kasper and Marx and Daneels, good friends of the Pope!

        There is what might be called the “paper Church” which is the Church of the Magesterium, the Church that has TRUTH that is affirmed by some. Then we have the “Church” that people see and hear, the “Church” that the lost see and hear, the “Church” that drives away the seekers of Truth.

        So it is all fine and well and good {and truly it is fine, well, and good!} that there is some document “somewhere” that affirms the truth, but it is utterly horrific and disgusting to boot that the Church is so permeated by enemies of the faith that oftimes the documents sit in a corner like the Law that was hidden in the Temple; ignored, forgotten.

        We desperately need a new “Helcias” the Priest and a new “Josiah” the King to renew our attention to the Magesterium AND TO ENFORCE IT.

        For to ignore the application of truth is to deny it.

        2 Kings 22:

        “16 Thus saith the Lord: Behold, I will bring evils upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof, all the words of the law which the king of Juda hath read:
        17 Because they have forsaken me, and have sacrificed to strange gods, provoking me by all the works of their hands: therefore my indignation shall be kindled against this place, and shall not be quenched.”

        • You speak the truth. The Church is not composed of “documents” but of the baptized, priesthood of the Faithful. Without faithful Catholics and prelates (the pope notwithstanding), the documents upon which contain the doctrines, dogmas, and Divine Revelation remain meaningless. Documents do not go to Heaven or Hell in the afterlife…people do.

          I have had enough of this “pope.”

          • Al, I beg you, in the name of Our Lady of Sorrows, PLEASE do NOT give in to sedevacantism. Our place is at the foot of the Cross with Our Lady and St. John – the only Apostle there. Remember: St. Peter denied Our Lord three times and fled. One day the crisis in the Church will end. Will pray for you tonight.

          • Margaret, no need to fear! I am not giving into anything. I am merely stating what I believe will transpire. The schism, unfortunately, will most likely happen. The heretical cardinals/bishops will side with Francis, while the faithful ones will side with their own. Only one side can be the true Church. Those who have bought into the past fifty years of the “Spirit of VII” will officially become the heretical Church right along with all the Protestant denominations. The great apostasy, I fear, is upon us. Cardinal Burke and his brothers wish to avoid this, but I do not think they can. Far too many prelates and clergy (along with two to three generations of Catholics) remain so poorly catechized, I do not know how anyone on this side of Heaven can turn it around. Yes, God will work all this out. In the end, the divisions in Christ’s one, true Church will all work itself out. Maybe not in our lifetimes, but He will work it out.

          • “Maybe not in our lifetimes, but He will work it out.”

            It wasn’t for those in Hebrews 11, either!!!


            CCC 675

            “Hold Until Relieved”.

        • Couldnt agree more! There’s no point in keeping encyclicals like museum pieces. The really BIG stuff which could have won some battles into the future was Pope Benedict’s workshop with the Bishops on the subject of Conscience. How foundational a subject is that ! And the reason it didnt get publicity because it was such a dynamite subject. But this whole Revolution which has notched up a peg in Rome these days and which has even installed “the terror” amongst the Bishops Cardinals and employees at the Vatican, has been seriously brewing not only since the French Revolution but certainly from the early Christian Church when the early Church Fathers battled Gnosticism. This is exactly what I’ve been reading up on over the past few days. I figure the BIG temptation for Bishops and Priests right now are the 3 temptations that Satan offered to Christ : power, popularity of the masses, and material security/well being by having a place in the Church structure. This is the temptation spoken of by Bishop Fulton Sheen regarding the Antichrist and his church:
          The pre-Communist Russian belief is that he will come disguised as the Great Humanitarian; he will talk peace, prosperity and plenty not as means to lead us to God, but as ends in themselves. . . .
          . . . The third temptation in which Satan asked Christ to adore him and all the kingdoms of the
          world would be His, will become the temptation to have a new religion without a Cross, a liturgy without a world to come, a religion to destroy a religion, or a politics which is a religion–one that renders unto Caesar even the things that are God’s.

          In the midst of all his seeming love for humanity and his glib talk of freedom and equality, he will have one great secret whichhe will tell to no one: he will not believe in God. Because his religion
          will be brotherhood without the fatherhood of God, he will deceive even theelect. He will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of theChurch, because he, the Devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notesand characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine
          content. It will be a mystical body of the Antichrist that will in allexternals resemble the mystical body of Christ. . . .

          . . . But the twentieth century will join the counterchurch because it claims to be infallible when its visible head speaks ex cathedra from Moscow on the subject of economics and politics, and as chief shepherd ofworld communism.

        • What did St.Francis of Assisi say would happen – describes it perfectly………………

          The Prophecy of Saint Francis of Assisi
          “There will be an uncanonically elected pope who will cause a great Schism, there will be diverse thoughts preached which will cause many, even those in the different orders to doubt, yea, even agree with those heretics which will cause my Order to divide, then will there be such universal
          dissension and persecutions that if those days were not shortened even the elect would be lost.” (source: The Reign of Antichrist by Rev. R. Gerald Culleton)

          Shortly before he died, St. Francis of Assisi called together his followers and warned them of the coming trials saying:

          1. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase.

          2. The devils will have unusual power, the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation a man,
          not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour to draw many into error and death.

          3. Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it.

          4. There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the
          immense mercy of God.

          5. Then our Rule and manner of life will be violently opposed by some, and terrible trials will come upon us. Those who are found faithful will receive the crown of life; but woe to those who, trusting solely in their Order, shall fall into tepidity, for they will not be able to support the temptations permitted for the proving of the elect.

          6. Those who preserve in their fervour and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent
          men from the face of the earth. but the Lord will be the refuge of the afflicted, and will save all who trust in Him. And in order to be like their Head, [Christ] these, the elect, will act with confidence, and by their death will purchase for themselves eternal life; choosing to obey God rather than
          man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy.

          7. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days JESUS CHRIST WILL SEND THEM NOT A TRUE PASTOR, BUT A DESTROYER.”

          (source: Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi, Washbourne, 1882)

          • Reading the Washbourne text where this prophecy is published (and it is included in the section of words considered authentic and from the Seraphic Father rather than doubtful or simply ascribed to the saint) I notice that there is a footnote:

            “Mark of Lisbon [a 16th century Franciscan historian] and others think that this prophecy received its accomplishment in the great schism which desolated the Church after the election of Urban VI, in the year 1378. But it may also partially refer to other calamities which have befallen the Church in the latter ages.”

            Whilst Washbourne and others are satisfied that the text is from St Francis, I would be interested to see what the opinion is of St Francis scholars since Washbourne – since it was published over a century ago.

        • You have known me here. My comment was to object the out of place and inaccurate portrayal of the great and saintly Pope St. John Paul II. Especially as regards Marxism and Communism someone would be hard pressed to find the said pope failing.
          the piling on of words on paper that are not enforced in the discipline of the Church.
          And you wrote this even after the evidence of the picture I posted with my comment??

          In 1985, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, directed at that time by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI), silenced him for a year for his book Church: Charism and Power. – Leonardo Boff – Wikipedia

          • I said what I said. Maybe I was confusing in some way.

            I grant you that Boff and even Liberation Theology were chastised. But as Boff says, he continues to do what he does…with the blessing of prelates. Where is the consistency of discipline in the Church? Many, many words have passed the lips and pens of Popes and prelates and still Boff is there doing what he does and many others as well, along with their abortion-supporting and socialist allies who are communed and treated as First Class citizens by the Popes and prelates.

            Possibly you think I am saying JPII supported Boff. I am not saying that and neither did I say it above. I didn’t say JPII blessed him.

            I think you are very sensitive to JPII. I get that now as a Catholic, knowing what he did when the Church was in THAT era of chaos {it is always in crisis…}. But from the outside, I saw him as a religious indifferentist, a universalist.

            JPII clearly did MUCH good for the Church and the Kingdom, but also clearly, he did not “destroy the High Places”. He left alone much evil and did not in the Spirit of Phineas or Mathathias destroy the evil that polluted the Church. Or maybe there was just too much evil in the Church for one Pope to confront? That is a likely reality.

            And now we have a bishop ordained by JPII reigning as Pope; Jorge Bergoglio.

            I do not mean in any way to disparage JPII, but I cannot pretend this all isn’t very troubling.

            We desperately need a Warrior Priest, a Warrior Pope, frankly, one who has the guts of Bergoglio, except to stand for the perennial Magesterium of the Church and to deny and fight every enemy.

            The words are all there on paper, waiting for the Man to implement them.

          • Our Lady of Good Success says a Prelate will come who will restore the spirit of the Clergy. But it’s not tomorrow.

          • From your comments, I have come to have a great admiration for your fighting spirit, which is even more impressive given that you are a new convert. My consistent comment has been that many stumble upon the rock that is the great and saintly Pope St. John Paul II and I did not want you to be one of them.

          • Thank you and I appreciate your concern to present the truth about John Paul II as he is at times unjustifiably attacked among some circles. But not all critique of his pontificate is malicious or without substance. He was human after all. Much great good was done during his pontificate.

      • Off-topic to the article, but on-topic for JPII.

        As I worked my way through this I thought of you.

        Note how the many words of Pope St John Paul II are so relevant to the issues today and how so many in the Church reject them! It’s not as if we must go back into antiquity whereby Modernists could dismiss such teaching as “outdated” as the Protestants do. There is utterly no defense for attacking clear teaching. We have both antiquity and many relevant teachings from the pontificate of JPII to support us against those who would weaken the Church’s doctrines on the indissolubility of marriage.

        • I saw the work of Andrew Guernsey. Good stuff. God bless him and his work. I have said before that during this crisis, each one of us in the body of Christ has his/her work to do and by God’s grace, let’s do it be it exalted or humble.

          • I sincerely hope that orthodox prelates have long ago learned {well, OK, that ship sailed…} WILL learn quickly that purely affirmative leadership is not adequate leadership, and that in the future strong action will be taken against those ordained who deny doctrinal truth AND against notorious heretics among the lay faithful. It is not even enough to sanction without following up and demanding enforcement or the words become empty.

            If I have one searing criticism of the leadership {Popes and prelates} of the last 50 years it is simply that however orthodox they may have been, the DID NOT DEFEND the faith. They may have explained it, but they did not engage the Enemy and destroy him. They “asked nicely” if he would “please leave us alone”. To which he answered: “Not on your life”. And they ran away or pretended the fight wasn’t serious.

            The rotten fruits of this policy are well-demonstrated not just in Pope Francis, but in the utter sea of doctrine-deniers that exist among the priests and prelates and indeed, “faithful”.

            One small example of the type of hideous evil that exists everywhere in the Church today because of this pathetic history of non-leadership follows. I’m sure you know many more. But this is a snapshot for a convert like me. It utterly scandalous. I am asked by my “orthodox” friends to forget it. I can’t.

            Some time back there was a funeral in the local parish. The local Deacon told a crass joke about the Rosary which is an insult to the Virgin Mary, and the visiting priest actually PRAYED IN THE NAME OF THE DEAD MAN.

            These and many other disgusting acts by this Deacon were reported to the new, soft-spoken, “gentle”, “nice”, “Conservative” Bishop.


            The Deacon remains engaged in his vile “Protestant” “ministry” and the Priest has been invited to return.

            I say all of this is a perfect set of examples and a direct result of the lack of true, fatherly leadership by ALL the Popes since Vatican 2. Every one of them.

            We must pray that this theological and spiritual paradigm is destroyed by the next Pope. It is not enough to have a doctrinally sound Pope. He must be a true father, a true leader and today, a true general of the Lord’s Armies as many have been in the past.

            Because what the last 50 years of Popes have given the Church overall in cultural legacy is pseudo-Anglicanism. Fragmented and variable teaching under a loose common central administration that spouts nice ideas and, Francis excluded} generally-sound “orthodox” ideals. Fiddling while the house burns.

            While orthodox teaching still exists {as mere words somewhere on paper}, in the “streets” the Catholic Church is whatever anyone wants it to be. THAT is what the Catholic Church looks like to the word at large.

            I am so blessed to have found a parish where I don’t have to constantly fight without any support from the Bishop. But what about those who do not have such options? They must be many.

          • The crisis in the Church has its origin c. The French Revolution, via the secret societies and the spirit of the Antichrist has been present since the apostolic times. It is a mistake to think the crisis within the Church arose just in the last 50 years or so – that’s a naive and simplistic analysis and conclusion. And no we are not in agreement that Popes St. John Paul II and Emeritus Benedict XVI did nothing to defend the Faith. That’s the mistaken and unfair accusation from certain circles within the Church that I was hoping you would not be corrupted with and hence my first reply post to you that started this conversation. One will hear those certain circles attack the pontificates of Popes St. John Paul II and Emeritus Benedict XVI saying for example that “they erred in judgment and ‘promoted’ the likes of the now Pope Francis” but I still haven’t seen in those same circles them saying that Popes St. John Paul II and Emeritus Benedict XVI likewise ‘promoted’ the 4 Brave Bishops [who are Cardinals] behind the dubia.

            If you followed closely the Synods on the Family, you will surely recall, if you wanted to, that controversial items now in AL were rejected according to the rules of the Synod. This is remarkable given that the Synods were stacked and rigged. Again to be fair to Popes St. John Paul II and Emeritus Benedict XVI, those certain circles and now you, ought to investigate and include in your analyses the appointment history of the Synod Fathers.

            Let me close by saying Pope Francis hasn’t supported his erroneous teaching from any of post-conciliar popes nor from the Vatican II Council teachings, the council which is also attacked by those certain circles within the Church.

          • I think we might disagree only on what constitutes “defense” of the Church, in that I believe Catholic leaders since World War Two have possessed a common trait; they have forgotten how to fight. They present vacillation in the face of evil as confrontation to evil and/or religious indifferentism as Christian charity. They’ve lost their fire and their brimstone. And yes, historically Catholic leaders including POPES have often possessed both!

            I cannot blame others for my own views. I’ve read and made observations myself. Don’t forget, I also observed the Church from outside and can say wholeheartedly I found no evangelist in John Paul II, no calling from him to repent and convert. His creation of the “New Evangelization” was hollow and quiet, barely noticeable to me and any others who lived as the lost. “Ecumenism” is always vapid and weak and lack force and power. And I personally know no other person in my Protestant circles who EVER claimed they were called to or drawn to the Catholic Church because of the preaching and teaching of Pope John Paul II. At best he was a “positive” representation of the Catholic Church, by did he ever convict us of our sin, call us to repentance and true faith in Christ? Not hardly. Good grief, the Church is still trying to define the New Evangelization in the few areas where the concept hasn’t flat died out from lack of interest yet.

            I also do not believe the Church all of a sudden took a dive after Vatican 2. I do not agree with those among us in the Traditionalists circles who assert that. But that does not mean the Church hasn’t been profoundly impacted by terrible changes in the last 50 years. Yes, both can be true. To suggest all has gone downhill “since Vatican 2” ignores the great good that has been done by Pope, certain prelates and many faithful but also denies historical fact and ignores the fact that 8% of the original set of bishops was called a “devil” by Jesus Himself and that troubles have always existed from there on! No, the Church has had its internal struggles from the beginning and always will. Christ promised us “troubles” and “scandals”. Thus I put no Pope on a pedestal as some I believe very naively do, and I’m afraid you appear to have made this mistake vis a vis Pope St John Paul II. But hey, it’s certainly NOT the worst mistake a Catholic can make and doesn’t even rank very high in the available options of mistakes a Catholic CAN make! 😉

            I agree that Pope John Paul II did GREAT things for the Church but I also know from my years as a Protestant and now even more so from my study as a Catholic that he had his serious weaknesses too. If the only thing Pope John Paul II did wrong was to kiss the Koran, it would still be a monstrous evil, an horrific act of weakness and injection of chaos into the life of the Church. And NOBODY had to “corrupt” me into believing that.

            Having said that, I cannot and don’t even WANT to ignore the MANY great things he did for the Church. Put another way, I believe that when the Church finally claims victory in the war against heresy on the current issues involving the nature of sin, sexual and marital and gender issues, some of the main weapons used to win that war will be the writings of Pope St John Paul II.

            As for bishop-making, I am well aware of the good ones and the bad ones ordained by JPII.

            One name on his list comes to mind however that I really wish he’d thought twice about and passed over… 😉

          • We agree where we agree and disagree where we disagree.
            If I claim this is my mission [] and believe and know it to be from God, do you think I would then go on to spare Pope St, John Paul II the Great?

          • I’m not sure what you mean. I’ve read your stuff and it is great.

            But I have not read anything that indicates you have seen or admitted any weakness in JPII, especially in regards to evangelization, and I sense from you that if anyone does note any weakness, you are critical of them personally.

            My wife and I just had an interesting conversation. She said that her feelings toward Catholicism in general were made more positive by JPII but when I asked her directly if she ever felt any call to conversion from him she laughed and said not at all and in fact felt she was just fine where she was as far as he was concerned. Ditto for me, too. Remember, that was the message we got as Protestants. We can study his writings and possibly come up with a different perspective, but the lost rarely sit down and read documents of an opposing faith {tho ultimately that is in fact how I came to the Catholic faith and why I am so frustrated by it; the Church I see most everywhere does NOT seem to reflect the written doctrines and dogmas at this time in history}.

            Anyway, the lost are generally drawn by the clarity of the message, and in JPII vis a vis evangelization, the public message was vague indeed.

            Put another way, I dare say many people who aren’t even Christian and certainly not even Baptists can tell you the basic message taught by Billy Graham.

            Pope John Paul II?

            Not so much. In fact, even Catholics and Catholic academics continue to argue over it!!

            THAT, my friend, is {and has been} a huge problem for the Catholic Church.

          • Thank you regarding your positive comments about my writings.
            While noting that there are those who are termed, “generation of Pope John Paul II Catholics”, your wife’s perspective is interesting.
            Btw the measure of “defense of the faith” has now shifted to meaning “the number of conversions under one’s pontificate”. Conversions have never been a measure of a person success before God. If that were the case, the Our LORD failed miserably whilst we know he did His Father’s will.
            A positive thing about our exchange: now I have someone else to pray for, your beloved wife.
            Pray that our 2017 be full of our love for God, his Church, and defense for his Person and Word, and love for neighbour shown in abundant apostolic fruit.
            God bless and yours and keep up the good fight in that wonderful fighting spirit of yours that has left a deep impression on me.

          • Thank you, and TRULY, may you and yours have a very blessed New Year!

            I think ’17 is going to be a doozy and I have great hope for our precious Church this year!

  17. Folks:


    This Pope was NOT known as a Lib Theo proponent when to be so would have gotten him jailed or worse.

    Now when it is “cool” and safe to be so?

    He’s got Boff and Gutierrez struggling to keep up with him!!!

    • It is as though he was led by an unholy spirit, to safely get to where he is now, to do the worst possible damage as an opportunist, an intellectually and morally inferior person. He himself could not have planned it so well. His is truly a “god” of surprises.

      • It is.

        And THAT is the reason I actually find myself praising God for him

        What this man has done is EXPOSE the ROT that has been festering in the Church for decades.

        By his rash and outrageous acts and words, he has attracted the slime of the prelature to rise up from the unholy muck and proclaim their allegiances to doctrines disparate from that of Catholic Truth. He has shed light on the essence of heresy and Modernism that has corrupted the Church and befouled and wrecked Her message for so long.

        Before Francis IT WAS ALL THERE. He didn’t “cause” anything to happen, but he sure has fomented its raising up. He has given it confidence. False confidence in my opinion.

        I believe in my heart that this is part of a process of purification. We are seeing the CLEAR demonstration of the SCHISM that already exists and has existed in the Church for many years. JPII and B16 did what they did, but they did NOT root out the evil and eject it. They did much good, but they did NOT purge the Church of those who have endeavored to change Her teaching. As happened so often in the Chronicles of the Kings in Holy Scripture, they “did not destroy the High Places”. They did good…but they did NOT destroy the evil!

        For crying out loud…JPII made Bergoglio a Bishop, and that in spite of his reported excesses and mental issues!

        In the end, it must be. The enemies of the Church are now aligned and smiling, looking straight into the camera. Let us see who is the next Pope. Let us see what new beginnings the “Correction” triggers. Let us see the hand of God doing what is so hard to imagine in the face of the softness, fearful faithlessness, effeminacy and heresy of so many of the current prelates and priests and “faithful”.

        I believe that we are entering a new era, and one that all true Catholics have been waiting for for so long.

        In the meantime, we must read the Scriptures. Study the Magesterium. Pray. Do good. Teach our children and grandchildren. Live for Jesus Christ.

  18. Jorge Bergoglio has got some surprises ready to be revealed at an opportune moment? They are not surprises to him, only to us, and yet, he wants to call them the fruit of the Holy Spirit, the workings of his god of surprises.
    It is clear that the god of surprises is really him and his buddies. All liars. These people are so rotten, there should be no wonder they refuse to believe in a just God. No wonder standards of Catholic morality are too high for them. Bergoglio calls them unrealistic ideals.

    If they were to meet a God-fearing Catholic, such as my earthly father, they would experience a real surprise! Here is man who hates sin, who sacrificed his career, because he would not compromise with communists, he would not deny Jesus Christ. He refused to use “realities of life” as an excuse for unfaithfulness. His yes was always yes, and his no was always no. We, his children, were taught to distinguish black from white. He taught us not to make a mess of our lives, falsely claimed to be all made up of shades of grey.

    Bergoglio despises such people. He attacks them mercilessly. It is because they are living proof that he himself is a fake. When he claims to love and serve humanity, while making us really small and incapable, he is really just excusing himself.

    God makes us capable of great things, when we empty ourselves of our false ideals, and allow Him to fill us with His Spirit. Bergoglio does not know this, because he is wretched, godless humanist.

  19. “You know, as far as I understand, the center of his interest is not any more the Church – and certainly not the internal operation of the Church – but, rather, the survival of humanity, the future of the earth. […] I believe that there is a hierarchy of problems for him. When the earth perishes, all the other problems have also been taken care of.” – Boff

    We have a pope who serves the world, instead of God’s created souls.

  20. “140 million Catholics should at least have 100,000 priests But, there are only 18,000.”

    There obviously are not 140 million Catholics as he claims. Having a Catholic population doesn’t depend on the number of priests, the number of priests is dependent on the Catholic population. Vocations to the priesthood come from families that practice the Catholic faith.

  21. These exposés of Bergoglio’s long history of radicalism have a way of exposing examples of putrid corruption tolerated by JPII and BXVI. The next Catholic Pope must depose hundreds of bishops.

    • Good observation. I have wondered this for a long time.

      What gives the Catholic Church the “smell” of Anglicanism is the existence of large numbers of such bishops.

      Can you imagine a Pope actually deposing the herds of them that exist?

      I cannot.

      The only thing I CAN imagine is a truly orthodox Pope who stands for Christ and commences a program to TEACH the faith and require all the ministries and institutions of the Church to adhere to the faith who is then met with staunch resistance to that program and schism from the heretics, no doubt enough of them leaving to call their own “Council” where they would of course elect their own “Pope”.

      Could such a “Pope” BE the Antichrist?

      The components of this eventuality already exist:

      1} heretical bishops in large numbers
      2} brazen willingness on the part of such bishops to flaunt their novel doctrines
      3} a sense of empowerment
      4} uncatechized and faithless Catholics in the millions

      #3 is a recent addition created by this Pope. I cannot imagine the heretics willingly crawling back into the slime from which they have emerged under this current Pope. I think the cat is out of the bag and it ain’t goin’ back in.

      Put another way, I don’t think a future Pope will HAVE to depose such bishops. I think they will feel strong enough to assert the truthfulness of their own “Catholic Church” and just move on.

      Heck, the Germans are already just about there!

  22. Spiegel: Now Even Pope Supporters Are Distancing Themselves

    Perhaps the Holy Ghost (not the God of Surprises) is entering the fray at last. Keep up the prayers.

  23. He’s one of them. Their name is Legion. Like swine, they desecrate the sacred. The Church in South America dwindles away, and they have no idea why.

  24. Strange how these people now are claiming that the pope cannot be judged.
    What they have completely missed is that we are all obliged to be obedient to the faith as revealed through tradition.
    If popes are not obedient, then they must be corrected, just as anyone else.
    What is wrong with the Catholic world when this fundamental principle is so completely ignored or rejected?
    Its straight out of the Baltimore Catechism.

    • Cardinals have addressed dubia before, and Popes have been fraternally corrected, anyone from St Peter, St Marcellinus, Pope John XXII and dubia have been repeated addressed to the Vatican and the require clarification issued. Mr Boff seems arrogant and a gross hypocrite.

  25. “Burke has now been neutralized within the Curia. Thanks be to God. These people really believe that it is up to them to correct the pope. As if they are above the pope. Something like this is unusual [sic!], if not unprecedented in the history of the Church. One may criticize the pope, one may have discussions with him. That is what I have often done. But, that cardinals publicly accuse the pope of the spreading of theological mistakes or even heresies, that is – I think – too much. That is an affront with which a pope cannot put up. The pope cannot be judged, that is the teaching of the Church.”

    Hard to imagine a more rank hypocrisy. These men have spent 4+ decades missing no opportunity to “correct” Paul VI (regarding Humanae Vitae), John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, having no respect whatsoever either for the Petrine ministry as such, or for the men who bear it on their shoulders. Suddenly in 2013 they are filled with such a grossly exaggerated “respect” for the Petrine ministry that they utterly misrepresent the Catholic doctrine of papal infallibility, distorting it so badly that it is consistently described by them in terms similar to those used by the most vehemently anti-Catholic Protestant groups.

    At this moment, on the eve of the 500th anniversary of Luther’s revolt, we hear Cupich, Papamanolis, Tobin, Kasper, Pinto, Boff, and many others speak about the papacy much as Luther did. Except the goal has changed; no longer to destroy the papacy by attacking it, but to destroy it by using it as a weapon.

    “The pope cannot be judged” is a perversion of everything the Church teaches about the ministry of Peter, whose legitimate authority over his brothers in the episcopacy is for the express purpose of safeguarding the apostolic witness to the teaching of Christ, having no authority whatsoever to change the content of the teaching of Christ.

    The steward holds the keys, but the house does not belong to him. When the Master of the house returns, to whom alone both keys and house properly belong, he will ask the steward — and indeed, every one of us — to give an account of himself.

  26. Pope Francis’ comment, “Il Papa sono io!” ( The Pope, that is me!) is not correctly translated into English. It is the very strong statement in Italian, particularly with the pronoun io at the end of the sentence, I AM THE POPE! If any of these proposals are true, there will be a schism in the Catholic Church.

    • That is a very good point. It’s not just a statement of fact, that is, “I am the Pope,” but more like an irritated proclamation, “The Pope is ME!”

      The man is a megalomaniac and unfit to be pope.

      • As a Catholic, I never thought I would dislike any pope. Sources in the Vatican who have daily contact with him say, that despite the public persona of an kindly grandfather type who smiles and kisses babies, he is the most autocratic pope in centuries! Although he speaks of mercy and forgiveness, he goes after his perceived enemies with a vengeance that would rival any Borgia pope. Apparently, those who maintain Catholic tradition and orthodoxy are his greatest enemies. At this point, all we can do is pray for a short pontificate.

  27. Anyone who has been honestly following Francis has seen how he has been spreading Russia’s errors- Marxism- through out the world. Boff only confirmed it.

  28. I’ll only comment on Boff, who gives the interview. He opposed previous popes, now agrees with this one. It reveals himself as his own pope; not a liberation but a protestant deformation. Thankfully we have the sure path of scripture/tradition/magisterium rather than boffism.

  29. So if this is the case the next pope can contradict Francis and change everything. The gates of hell would have prevailed. I do not think this is going to happen. At the very least Francis will want to avoid schism.

  30. Worry not. The Gates of HELL will not prevail. Christ’s Vicar cannot change sacred teaching. The rest is merely white noise. Pray and follow your Lord.

  31. This individual lifts the veil.
    The nonsense transpiring and receiving approbation during the Bergoglian era was going on all along during Paul VI, JPII and Benedict. But they did nothing effective about it.
    We need to think long and hard how we got here.
    Sandbox ecclesiology.

  32. What would the gates of hell prevailing look like? The Magisterium binding Catholics to something false or evil? If that’s what it looks like, then we’re about as close to that as we’ve ever been, from my admittedly incomplete knowledge of Church history. The enemy has the low ground, the high ground, and both our flanks. We’re surrounded.

    At this darkest hour, I think the Lord is about to pull off a HUGE victory.

      • There will be no explanation. They don’t give much more than a pert rebuke. We see it rendered on a weekly basis. You know, the Rigorist Pharisee routine. They have access to a secret wisdom reserved only to the select special few clerics who actually understand Roman Catholicism — while we groundlings are ignoramuses. Special people — like Leonardo Boff, Walter Kasper, Jorge Mario Bergoglio… ad infinitum.
        The abandonment of catechesis in the aftermath of “the” council leaves few of us with the knowledge, wits or courage to challenge them. That Pope Bergoglio would render this clown Boff the time of day is the definitive judgement on this pontificate.
        These individuals are dangerous frauds.

  33. I read this yesterday. Unfortunately, I thought about it today within the framework of gospel science (i.e., cleaning out the inner demons and having them come back seven-fold). Just figuring, but if the current pope continues what he is doing, he will probably get canned. Then the next problem arises. When a priest becomes a bishop, he receives extraordinary graces to assist him in his ministry. For the necessity of the Church Militant, God infuses supernatural grace at each step of the man’s heavenly ladder. IF this pope gets canned, the boundaries of grace he held before become vacant. If they become vacant, what will this pope become? Will he go back to Latin America and rally all the vast horde of currently fallen-away Catholics into a new brand of religion? Libertine “Catholicity”? The boundaries of grace will be filled with something very dark because at this point, the current pope will not stop to humble himself. Something like a fallen or fallen angel with a trajectory that isn’t happy going down alone.

    • I would gladly pay for the one way ticket, and I’m not jesting.
      Fraudulence will bear its own kind of fruit.
      The Teutonic/Latin axis sure is scary.

    • I don’t see him rally any sort of horde. The advocates of Liberation Theology are loud but have presided over collapse in Latin American. There is already the

      Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church, of Bishop Juan Duarte-Costa where priests can marry and bishops are elected. It is a small element now, and ironically developed a conservative trajectory as Archbishop Hélder Câmara and the Brazilian Bishops tried to wreck and frustrate the good work of the Brazilian military government. They now say that numbers don’t matter as they are set to become a minority in Brazil. Let him go and do whatever whatever he wants.

  34. Pope Benedict pointed out the Fact that the Catholic Church is the one true faith that All salvation comes through. He also openly supported Ab Sarah having priests face the east during mass……… I think it is time for Pope Benedict and Majority of Cardinals to Reject Cupich, de Kessel, Radcliffe’s , Boff, Riosica and Farrel apostasy along with shaky Francis in promoting Homosexual agenda and communion for those living in Sin once and for all . ….. Otherwise a schism along the lines of dying Protestant Anglicans and not so united Methodist or dying church of Christ is inevitable.

  35. It is abundantly clear that this Pope has his own agenda that has little or nothing to do with the Holy Spirit and yes as faithful Catholics all of us are free to judge him if he teaches heresy. If what Boff says is true, that Francis no longer care about our Church and is more concerned about the earth, than he should step down. As a Catholic I need and want a Pope who understands what his job is, to preserve the teachings and traditions of our precious church. Let the rest of the world and us do our part to take care of the earth.
    Cardinal Burke and others who love our Church are making sacrifices to preserve it and they have my admiration. More importantly they have my daily prayers.

  36. “But, that cardinals publicly accuse the pope of the spreading of theological mistakes or even heresies, that is – I think – too much.”

    Telling the truth is not “too much.”

  37. What about cloister convents and monasteries? He hasn’t attacked those things … yet. If priests are to be married then why not nuns? Take the whole idea of St. Paul re: celibacy out of the pic. Celibacy is a gift, matrimony a Sacrament.

    The Pope needs prayers for sure. The 13 Redcaps are our saints for the times. I do wonder what Pope Emeritus has to say about these things … but we may never know in this life.

    • Good afternoon Akira88,

      Joseph Ratzinger–BXVI has spoken— . Ratzinger and Bergoglio are kindred spirits and knowing that reality sheds a light on the current purported Pontificate of Francis the likes of which would otherwise have remained in the darkness and not made any sense, as it relates to the overall silence of Ratzinger; in the midst of this completion of the auto-demolition of the human elements of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, which has been a full throttle, auto-demolition since Ratzinger and his fellow Periti convened with the Council Fathers in circa 1962-65. The truth is hard but it remains as it is. In caritas.

      Find link attempted above, below:

      • I more than likely will have read the links before you see this post, Mark. I’m hoping it doesn’t make me cry but am thinking it will. (sigh)

    • Oh no? Start here, then google something like “Pope new rules for cloisters”
      This did not get the attention it deserved, but it is the beginning of a new effort to eradicate religious life as it survives. If he has his way there will be no more contemplative communities in fifty years. He will finish the Roman Catholic contemplative tradition as “the” council has all but eradicated apostolic religious life.
      You can’t pursue the Bergoglian agenda with an emphasis on “faith and works.” He is a protestant, “sola fide” — “faith alone” — then go off and do what lets you feel good.
      Just remember to water the lawn and don’t exhale too much.

      • The environmental emphasis reeks of new age.

        If what you’re telling me is true (and there is a sick feeling in my stomach that what your saying is true) the spiritualities like the Benedictines, Carmelites etc … are going to have to go underground to survive.

        So many of the Rules emphasize “obedience” but what is to be done when obedience contradicts these Rules that have sustained throughout the centuries as well as having been hailed by Popes … by the Church? So many of these orders have produced exceptional Saints.

        Gosh. What do our poor religious do ….

        • Most of the surviving communities have fresh in their memory the catastrophe they endured in the rapid push for “renewal” in sixties and early seventies. Some metamorphosized into something their founders would not have imagined, others made reasonable adaptations that were good but remained faithful to their charism. Others yet hunkered down and went deeper into that charism.
          Those who are surviving and gaining vocations will endure. They know what they have faced and will sneak by the Jesuit thought police, but this crew is far more vicious than anything seen previously.
          I never met a faithful Discalced Carmelite who couldn’t outwit a foolish priest.
          Father Hunwicke offered this insight into the general situation yesterday:
          “Our Holy Father will provide further proofs of the truth of an observation made in 1944 by the late, great Anglican Benedictine mystagogue, Dom Gregory Dix (1901-1952).
          “Old men in a hurry to realise their dearest dreams can be very short-sighted.”
          That is rich!

          • There were a couple things that jumped out, maybe because they seemed vague.
            Here;s one: “The new norms also encourage communities of the same spirituality, such as Franciscans, Benedictines, Carmelites, etc., to centralize into one federation, however, the specifics of these federations haven’t yet been defined.”

            This next one is quite bothersome since he’s throwing out “Pius XII’s Apostolic Constitution” instead of building on it – if indeed any building needs to be done.

            “More specifically, he said the articles containing norms and dispositions found in Pius XII’s 1950 Apostolic Constitution “Sponsa Christi,” the Statuta Generalia Monialium, the Congregation for Religious’ 1950 “Instruction Inter Praeclara,” the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life’s 1999 Instruction “Verbi Sponsa” on the contemplative life and enclosure of nuns, are also derogated.”

            He seems to be instituting this “reform” for women in these orders that don’t really need to be reformed but to maintain and remain diligent in executing their duties.

            Religious men and women in these orders live structured tough lives. When he mentions “listlessness” in the orders it sounds fairly insulting.

            How to remain a Catholic in good standing with this Pope seems somewhat tenuous. He seems to have little to no tolerance (nor understanding) of the common person who is trying to remain Catholic in this very liberal sinful world. He seems to lack an understanding of the beauty of the tradition and the meaning which draws many closer to the Church.

            Maybe the “reforms” will turn out the way they’re supposed to. Francis may be a Pope the way Obama has been pres., but he’s the Pope for this time – good or bad. How not to be driven to the edge of being a Catholic in schism with the Church because of the Pope is the quest, it seems.

          • There is no rationale for the asceticism characterizing religious life in the perspective of “sola fide” – protestantism. The Bergoglians will see religious life eliminated in the long run. In the short run you have the ruins of religious life at the hands of their V2 predecessors all around. The current move is the clean-up job. And then you have the Jesuits, whom Ignatius would expel from his mouth, the storm troopers of the “franzneukirche.”

          • Probably I am not the best person to whom to address the question. I often sense that don’t have a pastoral bone in my body – that said, in my better moments I find that I do.
            We have to be mindful that what we are experiencing, which is indeed deeply grave, is within the Providence of God. Within His design this will be brought to good. When, where and how we do not know.
            Don’t get down on yourself for being offended by the bad behavior and
            teaching of those who should know better. There is righteous anger, and it is not misplaced in the face of the demonstrations of bad behavior and bad teaching – no matter who is performing on stage. If they aren’t living up to the grace of their office don’t deny it. They are only infallible when they are upholding the authentic Magisterium – when they aren’t upholding the perennial teaching of the Church, they are wrong – no matter who they are. How do you know? Read the Catechism.
            But most of all, prayer. Holy Mass in the best setting you can find, daily
            if possible. I find the Liturgy of the Hours to be indispensable, but not
            everyone can schedule it. Daily rosary, scripture – just read the readings for the Mass for the day and give them a few minutes of reflection. Read the lives of the saints. Engage any other devotional practices that uphold you.
            Remember you are not on your own. The Holy Trinity has known each one of us and held each one of us lovingly in His design from before time. All reality is before His eyes past, present and future, before time and without time. Christ is closer to us than we are to our own self. The Blessed Virgin and all the Saints are constantly advocating for us without ceasing.
            Discouragement is the work of the Adversary. Turn in trust in Jesus Christ – He provides enough courage for each day.

          • Thank you for the spiritual direction. It’s hard to come by these days.
            (If I didn’t know better, I’d say you sound like a Catholic Prst.)

          • Nope. Oddly enough a leftist abbot named Francis cut me off at the pass! Let’s keep praying.
            God bless you.

  38. The Church will be divided in two currents” those favoring Jesus will follow Jesus, those favoring Boff, will follow Fidel Castro.

  39. Forgive my ignorance for I am only asking. Didn’t Our Lord say that the abomination of desolation was going to stand on holy ground? When Peter was rebuked for “having thoughts of men, and not of God” was not that a prophetic figure that one day, another Peter, Petrus Romanus was going to fail in the same manner (thinking politically, denying Christ with his actions, etc.) Is it not fit that this was allowed to happen so all the faithful who are perspicacious enough can prepare for the great tribulation ahead and the subsequent intervention of God in the world’s affairs? I think we should prepare for great events: numerous conversions, the conversion of Israel, the seventh apparition of Our Blessed Mother in Fatima, the destruction of Liberalism and all Heresies (including Islam) and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary followed by beginning of the great era of peace. This is not a disgrace, it is a sign. This year the anniversary of Noah’s Flood (17 of Iyyar) falls on May 13, the 100th anniversary of the First Apparition of Our Lady at Fatima. On February 13 it will be the 12th anniversary of the death of Sr. Lucy of Fatima.

  40. Boff is a demon. A very very holy priest and theologian who died a few years back, the reverend John Duggan in New Zealand was well conversant with the errors of Boff and said his ideas seeped into the church and are destroying catholic culture worldwide. No heretic he knew causes a greater challenge- not luther noone


Leave a Comment

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

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...