Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Abortion Supporter Among New Members of the Pontifical Academy for Life

Update: According to the Catholic Herald, one of the new members of the PAL is an explicit supporter of abortion: “Pope Francis has appointed 45 new ordinary members of the Pontifical Academy for Life, according to a statement on the Vatican website. They include Nigel Biggar, who has said that he thinks the limit for legal abortion should be 18 weeks.”

Today, the Vatican’s Press Office announced that Pope Francis has appointed (sometimes re-appointed) 45 new Ordinary and 5 Honorary Members of the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAL). As we had earlier reported, the pope had dismissed all the PAL members at the end of last year. There were speculations that he would later repopulate the PAL with new members who would go more along with his laxer progressive agenda of reform with regard to moral issues such as the protection of life and marriage.

OnePeterFive was especially concerned that some of the outspoken papal critics who had been previously members of the PAL would not be re-appointed. The following persons have, in one way or another, expressed objections to the papal agenda for the liberalization of the Church’s moral teaching on marriage and on natural life, as it was discussed during the two Synods of Bishops on Marriage and the Family, and as it was finally presented in Amoris Laetitia:

  • Cardinal Carlo Caffarra. He co-authored the Five Cardinals Book and signed the dubia sent to Pope Francis;
  • Cardinal Willem Eijk. He signed the 13 Cardinals Letter and co-authored the Eleven Cardinals Book;
  • Cardinal Elio Sgreccia. He wrote a preface to a book written by Cardinal Ennio Antonelli defending the traditional Catholic teaching on marriage;
  • Professor Josef Seifert. He wrote a detailed critique of Amoris Laetitia and asked for its clarification;
  • Professor Robert Spaemann. He gave several interviews strongly opposing parts of Amoris Laetitia and supporting the Four Cardinals’ dubia.
  • Professor Wolfgang Waldstein. He signed the Declaration of Fidelity with regard to the Catholic teaching on marriage.
  • Dr. John Haas, President of the National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) in Philadelphia who had made a corrective statement after Pope Francis’ troubling claims about contraceptives and the ZIKA virus.

A brief, but incomplete, review of the new members shows us that some of these papal critics have been, indeed, removed from the PAL. Among them are: Professor Robert Spaemann, Professor Wolfgang Waldstein, and Professor Josef Seifert. All these three professors have given their Catholic witness with regard to the confusing and potentially grave effects of the post-synodal exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. Cardinals Carlo Caffarra (one of the four dubia cardinals) and Elio Sgreccia have been re-appointed, but it would have been understandably difficult for Pope Francis not to have re-appointed them again. As we already reported, Cardinal Willem Eijk also has been re-appointed.

One troubling new member of the PAL is Professor Anne-Marie Pelletier (France) who is a strong supporter of the pope’s more liberalizing agenda with regard to marriage and the family. She had been a speaker at the controversial May 2015 Day of Studies in Rome as organized by the French, German, and Swiss Bishops’ Conferences.

Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, the President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, posted the following statement on his twitter account:

“Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, President of the Academy, commented on the [papal] appointments, saying that “with these appointments Pope Francis has formed a College of academics of the highest professional standing that will offer to the Catholic Church and to the whole world a deep and wise vision in the service of human life, especially life that is weakest and most defenseless. The Academicians named by the Holy Father come from 27 countries around the world and are outstanding in diverse fields of human knowledge. Among them are a number of non-Catholics, either belonging to other religions and non-believers, a sign that the protection and promotion of [natural] human life knows no divisions [sic] and can be assured only [sic] through common endeavor.” With respect to the appointment of Honorary Members, Archbishop Paglia noted that, “They represent the history of the Academy and a passion for [natural] human life for which we must all be grateful; it is thanks to the earlier work of so many illustrious men and women that today, with the appointment of new Academicians, our institution continues its service to life with renewed energy.” [emphasis added]

This extended quote might give us a fuller idea as to where Pope Francis wishes to lead the ecumenical Pontifical Academy for Life. It seems that some of our earlier concerns were not unfounded.


H/T Edward Pentin Twitter

108 thoughts on “Abortion Supporter Among New Members of the Pontifical Academy for Life”

    • This is in the spirit of obfuscation and so called gradualism or -quite frankly- diabolical cunning, and as with marriage, here too permanent and irreversible changes are meant to be sneaked in.

      I remember very well Bergoglio’s revelation that Catholics are not rabbits, or Archbishop Forte’s account of Bergoglio’s superb Jesuitical cleverness:

      “Archbishop Forte has in fact revealed a “behind the scenes” [moment] from the Synod: “If we speak explicitly about communion for
      the divorced and remarried,” said Archbishop Forte, reporting a joke of Pope Francis, “you do not know what a terrible mess we will make. So we won’t speak plainly, do it in a way that the premises are there, then I will draw out the conclusions.”

      “Typical of a Jesuit,” Abp Forte joked, attributing to that suggestion a wisdom that has allowed the maturation necessary to conclude that Amoris Laetitia, as Abp. Bruno Forte explained, does not represent a new doctrine, but
      the “merciful application” of that [the doctrine] of all time.”

      Of course, it has already been explained, regarding population control and abortion promoters invited to the Vatican as experts, that this is simply an openness to all perspectives.
      Yet it is rather obvious to any morally sound person that there exist perspectives which show a complete lack of proper discernment, error and inherent evil. Inviting these perspectives to present themselves as valid, expertly and worthy of respect is also evil.

      • PlushGrizzly, I wish I could give you 10,000 up votes for your post. You have nailed it. Damn straight! Yes, exactly, it is what is happening. Diabolical cunning.

        Complete and utter lack of proper discernment. “Openness to all perspectives” … valid, expert, worthy of respect … it is diabolical evil directly from the very pit of hell.

      • Yes, he is a great deceiver. But, it is his seduction that worries me the most.
        He seduces people’s sense of compassion and empathy, so as to entice acceptance of the most
        diabolical aspects of human nature – the flesh. And in this great seduction, which the culture has widely accepted, and rather easily, Francis vilifies, demonizes those who keep to God’s Laws and the Church’s teachings. He plays to man’s vain sentimentalities, in order to change Church teaching. It is clever, and done with such fervent zeal, that it once frightened me.

        He frightens me no longer. Our Lady has seen to that.

        • He is worse than the worst heretic, but anyways he is acknowledged by all as the true Pope, beyond dispute, except by myself.
          Am I a schismatic when I say that the true Pope is Benedict ?

          • In ordinary times, perhaps, but not now. St Vincent Ferrer backed what turned out to be an antipope and was still a Saint, and he lived in an extraordinary time of confusion.

          • I am not able to answer that question.

            Pope Francis sits in Peter’s Chair. That is just the way it is.
            Just stay faithful to the teachings/Dogmas of the Church and never mind the great chaos that surrounds the Church, would be my humble advise.
            I know no other way.

          • Benedict wrote that he would resign “in such a way that the See will be vacant.” There are those who point to various indications that Benedict believed he would continue to exercise some elements of the “Petrine ministry,” and that this invalidates his resignation. But HE DID NOT EXPRESS ANY SUCH NOTIONS IN THE LETTER OF RESIGNATION. Thus, he ceased to be Pope at the appointed time. He may be a former Pope who holds unsound ideas about his own resignation, and who wears white, and is still called “your holiness,”, but he is without question a former Pope.

          • And Jesus Christ himself set up Peter as the Primary Vicar of Christ and John (his beloved disciple) as Vicar Emeritus. Peter would have an active ministry, and John would have a contemplative ministry. And throughout 2,000 years of history, we can point to active/ contemplative and primary/ emeritus popes.

            Does it matter what Benedict thinks? What Francis thinks? What every single Cardinal and/or Bishop thinks? Even if every single Catholic in the entire world thinks Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus Benedict is “proper” and “acceptable” the only thing that truly matters is what God decrees.

        • All true. This man is a clear and present danger to every Catholic child, born and unborn. He has now appointed an open advocate of child murder to a Pontifical Academy. Will no one with authority in the Church call him out?

  1. Stop carbon dioxide emissions!! Fight global warming!! I mean priorites, people…….let’s get our priorities straight.

    What a shambolic papacy. We have the pope we deserve. It’s perfectly clear, by now, that the absolute worst examples of humanity in Francis’ eyes, are “rigid” faithful, traditional Catholics who disdain the zeitgeist and who believe unreservedly the eternal teaching of the Catholic Church on moral issues and attempt to live it out, often at the cost of great personal sacrifice. Congratulations folks,……you’ve earned the unmitigated contempt of the successor of Peter.

    Is this The Twilight Zone? How in the name of goodness does an advocate of legal abortion become a member of the Pontifical Acadamey for Life? I’m at the point now where just the sight of this loathsome individual’s face, makes me want to vomit!

    • I’m praying and sacrificing right with you. (Being a Type 1 diabetic makes fasting difficult. )

      But yeah, I’m in the bathroom with you, and many others, I’m sure, being violently ill!

      BUT, we got the leadership we deserved!

      • Monday, June 12 was the beginning of the Apostles’ Fast (aka Petrivka – St. Peter’s Fast). Monday, Wednesday and Fridays are days of fast; Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays and Sundays are exempt. It goes to June 28 inclusive.

        I know the Latin Church has ember days, but imho it would be great if both Eastern and Western Catholics observed the Apostles’ Fast and offered it up for Pope Francis, that God will touch his heart.


  2. Thanks to all who said a prayer for my mother, who entered her last moments on earth yesterday. I was told a couple of hours ago that she died around midday UK time, with our father and some of her nine children around her. She was conscious but in no pain and slipped away without any discomfort. She was wearing her Scapular, held in her hands a Rosary, and was given the Last Rites before she died. Thank you friends for any prayers and Masses said for the soul of Agnes Monica Carter, a Catholic who loved Our Lord greatly, and my mama.

    “I will be with you always, and my Immaculate Heart will be your comfort and the way which will lead you to God.” Our Lady’s words to the children at Fatima on June 13th 1917. Mother was always devoted to Our Lady of Fatima and to the Immaculate Heart. Dear Blessed Mother, lead her to your Son!

    Nine children. Open to life. And now a Pope who praises abortionists and appoints to the Pontifical Academy for Life “academics” who support the murder of children.

    Vengeance is thine, dear Lord.

    • I am so very sorry for you loss, Comrade Joe. Your mom would have been pierced to her very soul if she had known what Francis has done (is doing, and will continue to do until Our Lord and Our Lady stop him.) May you be comforted in your sorrow and suffering. Yes, vengeance is the Lord’s and He will not with-hold his justice.

    • My sincere condolences Benedict.
      Your lovely mama Agnes Monica Carter, I believe, has deserved to be with God. And right now, she prays for us all!
      May her soul rest in eternal piece.

    • I am very sorry to hear of your loss. I will remember your mother in my Rosary today. You and your family will be in my prayers as well.

    • I am sorry to hear that. When all is said and done, there is no better way to leave this life than the way you describe your dear mother did. I will remember to pray for her soul. May she rest in peace.

    • What a great grace to have a mother who led such a life and died such a holy death. You know of course she is now praying up a storm for you and for all of us still in this “valley of tears”. May God grant us all such a death, in Jesus’ Name. The bitter contrast between your mother and our current “atmospherics’ in the Vatican couldn’t be more stark.

    • Your mother was just remembered in my rosary. I lost my mother in 2007, and I still miss her every day. I’m very sorry for your loss.

    • Vichnaya jema pamyat! May her memory be eternal!

      Is June 12 or June 13 the date of her death?

      Philadelphia is 5 hours behind GMT.

        • Yes, I know. 😉

          The reason why I was asking is because Mom (she’s 84) and I went to Divine Liturgy this morning for my birthday. Father has 7:30 am daily Divine Liturgy at our sister parish. So your mum may have passed away during the Divine Liturgy our time.

          O God, rest Your servant and place her in Paradise, where the company of the Saints and the Just radiate as light. O Lord, rest Your departed servant and forgive all her transgressions.

          +Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit

          We praise the three-fold radiance of the Divinity, saying with devotion: “Holy are You, Eternal Father, Co-eternal Son, and Divine Spirit. Enlighten us who faithfully serve You, and deliver us from the eternal fires of hell.”

          Now and forever and ever. Amen.

          Hail, Most Pure One, who for the salvation of all has borne God in human flesh. Through you mankind has gained salvation, may we also find Paradise, O pure and blessed Mother of God.

          Parastas, Verse 6

          • Beautiful Margaret, thanks so much. And thanks to all for your condolences. I am in good spirits, very confident that mum is now praying for me and for all of us from Heaven.

          • You’re welcome. (I hope you like my response to Tanyi Tanyi ????) Have a safe trip back to Norfolk.

  3. The regular 1P5 commentators are on a roll today.

    Francis’ Priorities are perfectly in order. Worship the god of the New World Order and its pagan agenda (i.e., global warming, open borders, sustainable development, population reduction, etc.). Next, make the commandments “ideals”, “guidelines”, and “suggestions” (as long as it’s not too much trouble to keep them). Finally, discourage anyone from converting and becoming truly and historically Catholic vis a via Ecumenicalism ….. as in je suis Lutheran; as in je suis Hindu; je suis Muslim; and je suis the new One World Religion.

    Why should it surprise any of us that Francis has appointed someone who supports abortion to the Pontifical Academy for Life. And if truth be told, there are many “Catholics” who embrace and cheer the “progress” of sacraments for those living in adultery, the ten commandments as suggestions, birth control for all (finally! why did it take so long?), abortion (well, I would never have an abortion, but I whole-heartedly support your right to kill your unborn baby!), and all of the other liberal social justice (socialism at its best) agenda.

    Okay, just in case someone misunderstand, sarcasm off tag.

    I had no idea I was conservative and traditional for holding and professing 2000 years of Catholic teaching and history. Why knew?

  4. Pontifical: relating to the Pope. Let’s be blunt. This Pope has appointed to his Pontifical Academy For Life a man, Nigel Biggar, who advocates the legal murder of unborn babies at any time before they reach eighteen week old. What a scandal. It doesn’t matter if all the other members are Saints. Where is the outrage from the clergy? When is enough enough? Not to oppose evil is to condon it. The Vicar of Christ condoning the appointment of an advocate of child murder to “his” commission? Some action is imperative.

    • Where is the outrage from the clergy?
      Well give them a little time for the news to be reported. I am sure then we will hear outrage and reproof. (Or maybe not.)

      Not to oppose evil is to condone it.
      I can hear it now: we would condemn a man for what he thinks and what he believes. Where is the “Christian charity” in that? Catholic Church doctrine has not been changed (not yet).

        • To be fair, we don’t know what (if anything) is happening behind the scenes or what conversations have happened behind closed doors in private.

          On the other hand, when a man’s livelihood depends on remaining silent, it will be a rare man who speaks out.

          • It will indeed be a rare man who speaks, likes Saints John Fisher and Thomas More. I do not know if I would have their courage when the moment came. I am just a “bad Catholic” who is heartbroken that I feel I know the truth, particularly as I near life’s end. If you fail to acknowledge the principle of non-contradiction in you search for truth, the whole theology of the Church becomes meaningless.

      • Catholic teaching has always been that we MUST oppose the sin (evil) but not condemn the sinner. There IS a difference.

    • The synod fathers should never ever have signed off the controversial synod document which had Kasper’s finger prints all over it.

  5. More depressing news from the Vatican that discourages one to the core.
    In the church circles I frequent, these increasingly regular scandals are largely ignored or excused, and not discussed out of some misguided deference to the papacy.
    Or is it that a blissful cloud of unknowing prevails?
    One has the feeling of dwelling in a parallel universe, a stranger in one’s church.
    Where posters of Francis outnumber those icons of saints.
    We live in interesting times

    • It’s hyper effeminacy that causes people to not want to face up to the hard facts, on this issue and many others in the Church of our time.

    • You have reflected my thoughts. In spite of sending quotes and articles of the evil prelates in the Vatican and around the globe, my bishop chooses to do nothing – no, instead, he and his appointees align themselves with the enemy.
      Today is Our Lady of Fatima’s feast day – how she must weep for this corrupt leadership in the Church and the blindness and indifference of Catholics.

  6. “When God wants to punish people for their sins, He first allow the priests to fall.” (St. Vincent Ferrer)
    Good priests are like the ramparts that protect the people from God’s punishment. In order for the people to be punished, firstly there should be crashed the ramparts.
    This is how it St. Vincent explains in his famous sermon De fine mundi:
    “But here comes the question: Does this God permit only because of the sins of the clergyman. And I say no, but also because of the sin of the people, but for you to understand this, I give such an example.
    – Let’s say that some city is well established and that it has around the towers for its defense, and that the city rebelled against its king. So the king set up catapults around the city and prepared his bombards and other battalions and buildings to take over the city. Tell me, where the King will start knocking first with the bombing, whether the people or the towers and the walls will he bombarding first? And what kind of guilt have the towers and the walls so they need to fall? Surely, because they protect the people who rebelled against their king. Therefore, to do justice to his people, first he must knock the towers and the walls.
    That’s what God wants to do with his people in this world because they rebelled against him with their sins, as I said, because no one wants to repair.”

      • I agree. But, such spiritual food is necessary and can make a big difference for the faithful ones inside ‘the city’.
        Because many are becoming desperate, and they should not be. There are collectively punishment which people, nations deserves, and we all make a part of them. But even then in the most difficult times for a whole nation(s), our Lord and His Mother do not forget no one of their faithful children.
        I wish we all would be, think and act as citizens of Nineveh…

        • Jesus Himself told us that the “innocent” would suffer along with the “guilty.” But, then, who of us is without sin? How many of us have publicly cried out against the collective sins of our communities and nations? By failing to do so, we tacitly give approval to those sins and, therefore, participate in them. So, if this is part of God’s wrath, we all are deserving of the punishment.

          • No one except our Lord and His Mother are completely innocent. Jesus Hinself asked the woman who had called Him good, ‘Why do you call me good? Only God is good.’

          • Yes, but no one is innocent with the exception, perhaps, of newborns. Thus, everyone is in need of conversion, repentence and the need to make reparation. You’ve mentioned our Lady. Did you know that St. Luis de Monteforte, when hw was promoting True Devotion to Mary, punched a couple of men who were heckling him? :-,)

          • Oh be sure that I like Luis de Monfort very much!
            And I can for sure appreciate his mentality. 😉
            But again, if we are talking about innocence of people living on earth, which is not the innocence of the holy ones in Heaven, the saints and angels, and especially about the Most Holy God and His Mother Holy Virgin Mary, then as you said in your post the words of Jesus Himself “that the ‘innocent’ would suffer along with the ‘guilty’.”…
            Anyway, I’m sure we are on same waves, only the frequency is a bit different. 😉

          • Newborns need the Sacrament of Baptism to wash away original sin. After baptism, then they’re innocent and pure.

          • Yes, Margaret; note that I was responding to Ivan with his apparent definition of innocence, which I interoreted as no or very few and minor personal sins. I also said ‘ perhaps newborns’. Your point, however, is right on and was intended I’m my earlier replies to Ivan. Thanks for reaffirming/reinforcing the doctrine of original sin.

          • I thought that’s what you meant, but I wanted to clarify it for the benefit of those who may be new to 1P5.

            True story: A fellow I know had a baby son and he said that babies were pure. I asked him when the baby would be baptized. His (false) reasoning was that since babies are pure ergo they don’t need baptism. We had a heated argument on the necessity of Baptism.

            Eventually, I “won” the debate. The baby WAS baptized, not because of me but more likely pressure from his and her families.

          • Sounds like Protestant or Modernist thinking to me 🙂 I know many evangelicals who don’t get “baptized” (they don’t use the form given by Jesus) until they’re adults and “know” what they’re doing. And, I’ve asked, if the person dies before being baptized? Retrurned look of non-comprehension. Duh!

  7. Professor Robert Spaemann (b. 1927),
    Professor Wolfgang Waldstein (b. 1928), and
    Professor Josef Seifert (b. 1928).

    Could it be that Pope Francis is just doing a generational changeover to people of the age more like that of Cardinal Muller, for example, and changing the balance of the Academy away from German-speaking lands? (and from ‘Ratzingerians’?). Isnt that a reasonable generational process?
    Given that he’s kept Cards. Eijk and Carrafa, I dont see a big conspiracy here; nor is the Amoris-Laetitia framework the best explanation here. (But yes, it might be the case that some new members are more liberal, but thats probably representing the theological tendenz of theologians in their 60s rather than these selected Ratzingerians who are around about their 90th (!) birthdays.
    By being so desperate to make an Amoris Laetitia black-hats versus white-hats story, where there are more obvious explanations available, you do not do the real issues attending A.L. justice, and you make it easy for middle of the road intelligent observers to dismiss you.

    • I think the Vatican’s line on this appointment is: Nigel Biggar supports Church teaching on euthanasia, and is therefore a valuable though non-Catholic voice in that particular area. Euthanasia

      • As you say, “I think the Vatican’s line on this appointment is: Nigel Biggar supports Church teaching on euthanasia, and is therefore a valuable though non-Catholic voice in that particular area. Euthanasia is indeed the next big pro-life issue to come upon us. ”

        Indeed, as I read someone else put it:

        “What is abortion other than the euthanasia of the unborn?

        Since Pope Francis obviously doesn’t take the same strong stance on abortion that previous Popes took and actual Catholics take, what can we expect from him when the topic swings to the snuffing of the already born?

        More “dialogue” and “accompaniment”?

      • Nigel Biggar does not support Church teaching on euthanasia. His 2004 book ‘Aiming to kill: the ethics of suicide and euthanasia’ classifies those who have suffered severe and irreperable brain damage as non-persons and therefore as having no moral entitlement not to be killed. His opposition to the legalisation of euthanasia is on purely pragmatic grounds.
        calbizian is mistaken about the date of Josef Seifert’s birth: he was born in 1945 not 1928, and so could have served a further 5 year term.

        • Happy to recognise that I was wrong on Josef Seifert re dates. The 1945 date makes him 72. Still eligible, but if they are doing a generational renewal, reasonable to ask him to step aside.
          Worth noting that, unlike Robert Spaemann, Josef Seifert’s main significance is as a buddy of Ratzinger. J.S. does philosophy but much of it not particularly related to life issues, whereas Spaemann’s natural law stuff is large, ongoing and very relevant. So I can see a case for JS standing down to give a space to a thinker with more direct academic work on the topic. (a Luke Gormally for example).

        • I have no reason at all to disbelieve this, but please cite the relevant passages from Biggar’s book if you get a chance. I don’t have access to it and would very much like to have further, firm information.

          • See the quotation from the review of the book by Professor David Albert Jones in Edward Pentin’s article on the PAV appointments. I don’t have a copy of Biggar’s book to hand but it is well known among bioethicists in the UK that he regards human beings who have suffered irreparable brain damage and who can no longer think as non-persons and so lacking a claim not to be killed. Whoever recommended Biggar for the PAV was either ignorant of his views or perverse. He can’t really be the sort of theologian favoured by the present Pope – he thinks the Iraq war was a just war.

            Luke Gormally (ex-member of PAV, 1996-2001, corresponding member; 2001-2016 ordinary member).

          • Thank you for responding. In re-reading Pentin’s article, I see that this information is based on David Jones’ review (of Biggar’s book) in New Blackfriars. The manipulation of language used to distinguish between human beings who have- and have not- suffered extreme brain damage is of interest to me. Just to clarify, that is why I prefer to read the original words of ethicists such as Biggars. His book is prohibitively expensive, so right now I will be content to rely on Jones’ and your interpretive key(s).
            I am in complete agreement with all that you’ve written about this appointment. Again, thank you for the response.

          • As background information, you might think it worth knowing that Professor David Albert Jones is not a hostile reviewer of Professor Biggar. David’s own doctorate is from the Oxford University Theology Faculty (though supervised by Biggar’s predecessor, Professor Oliver O’Donovan, a rather more impressive evangelical theologian) and David has a friendly relationship with Nigel Biggar. Biggar’s appointment to PAV is grossly in breach of PAV’s proper terms of reference. David Jones is himself an orthodox Catholic moral theologian who specialises in bioethics and an obvious candidate for appointment to PAV. To choose Biggar as the ONLY UK ordinary member of PAV is astonishing.

            Luke Gormally.

      • I dont have a strong view on whether the Muellian 60 somethings are better than the 90 somethings (they probably are not, but the liberal ones among the boomers might also make the most noise and be most visible; thats a look and see question). They are only ‘better’ in the sense that the 90ish people have served their terms of life, and institutional/generational renewal makes it reasonable to stand them down in favour of someone younger. And as an explanation that makes perfect sense and is more obvious than ideological differences.

    • OK.

      So you don’t mind Chapter 8?

      How about Paragraph 3 where he states that:

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

      Now, if “not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium” just exactly HOW are they going to be settled?

      By an appeal to experience, individual opinion and personal conscience?

      Indeed, I find Paragraph 3 to be the most hideous passage in the whole 260-page-long rag. It’s ramifications are devastating, FAR more devastating than even the horrific opening of the rail to adulterers if that were possible. I can only see it as the “religious deception” of CCC Paragraph 675.

    • We should not be trying to rationalize false ideas – God’s word is the same yesterday, today and forever.

  8. There are many facets to the Pope’s strategy to bridge the yawning gap between the various beliefs of the “faithful” and what is set out in Church teaching. This is but one step.

  9. The cardinals and bishops need to do something about this pope.Please!!!!I feel like our faith is demonically under attack. Our faith is being attacked from within.Please ,please,WAKE UP! OUR CHURCH IS BEING HIJACKED .Please,please.Wake up to what this guy is doing.

    • But why are WE, the faithful, not joining forces and DEMANDING that they take action to return the Church to orthodoxy? How can we complain about the clergy, of any rank, when we do nothing?

  10. Archbishop Paglia said: “The Academicians named by the Holy Father come from 27 countries around the world and are outstanding in diverse fields of human knowledge. Among them are a number of non-Catholics, either belonging to other religions and non-believers, a sign that the protection and promotion of [natural] human life knows no divisions [sic] and can be assured only [sic] through common endeavor.”

    Is it important for the Church to accommodate the views of abortionists and non-Christians in order to ensure the protection and promotion of human life? Should not the teachings of Jesus and his Church suffice? Is this not the message that should be conveyed without compromise? Jesus did not compromise; he taught with authority.

  11. Anyone still want to give Benedict XVI the benefit of the doubt as he sits silently nearby while all of that is going on? Anyone . . . ? Bueller . . . ?

    Qui tacet consentire videtur.

  12. Lamentations 2:14 Nun. Thy prophets have seen false and foolish things for thee: and they have not laid open thy iniquity, to excite thee to penance: but they have seen for thee false revelations and banishments.

    Jeremiah 14:14 And the Lord said to me: The prophets prophesy falsely in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, nor have I spoken to them: they prophesy unto you a lying vision, and divination and deceit, and the seduction of their own heart..

  13. Since Abortion is like a direct violation of Natural Law…… and therefore against God himself….. Why would Pope Francis appoint someone who believes in a different view ? It’s not as if Pope Francis can just speak Ex Cathedra about this changing the whole entire Thing. Even if there is a tiny change, It has to be in line what The Church Fathers, Sacred Scripture, and all the other popes have said in the past.

    If Pope Francis is actually trying to change Abortion…. then…… He’s going to crash himself into a wall.


Leave a Comment

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

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...