Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Spanish Archbishop Fires Professor Seifert for Amoris Laetitia Critique

To the joy and encouragement of many faithful Catholics, Professor Josef Seifert, a prominent Catholic philosopher, defender of life and a former member of the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAL), has published two essays containing a charitable and clear critique of the papal document Amoris Laetitia. Professor Seifert published his first, more detailed critique in August of 2016, and then, only recently, his shorter, more pointed one in which he speaks of the logic of a possible dissolution of any absolute moral law, should Pope Francis not revoke some premises and certain statements from Amoris Laetitia. With these two texts, he has made a lucid and charitable Catholic witness in defense of the traditional and infallible moral teaching of the Catholic Church for which he has for some time now had to suffer. In 2016, in response to Professor Seifert’s first essay, the Archbishop of Granada, Spain, where Professor Seifert had been teaching, excluded him from his teaching of seminarians in his archdiocese. Moreover, as of 31 August of this year, Archbishop Javier Martínez Fernández has announced that he decided, rather abruptly, to force Professor Seifert into retirement as a direct response to the Austrian scholar’s second critique of Amoris Laetitia. Without any discernable sign of mercy, the archbishop claims that Seifert’s essays are confusing to the faithful, and he publicly announces to have adopted for his own archdiocese the pastoral guidelines from the bishops of the region of Buenos Aires, Argentina. (OnePeterFive has reported on it here.) Significantly, Archbishop Martínez Fernández has just posted, on 3 September, on his diocesan website an article about Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernández’s own defense of Amoris Laetitia.

Please pray for Professor Seifert, that he may have the graces to deal with this great injustice, but also that Archbishop Martínez Fernández may realize that Professor Seifert has done a great service for the greater good of the Church and the salvation of souls by pointing out doctrinal errors and moral dangers stemming from Amoris Laetitia.

In his 31 August statement, the Spanish archbishop raises very serious and offensive charges against Professor Seifert without offering any reasons for them. He claims that Seifert’s article “damages the communion of the Church.” Since the Seifert essay only puts a question to the pope, who is asked to answer it, the article cannot damage the communion of the Church at all. Moreover, if the assertion in Amoris Laetitia that God can want a couple to commit an intrinsically wrong act of adultery, leads logically to the claim that God can also want, in some situations, contraception or abortion, then this assertion should be fittingly revoked by the pope. Since this is Seifert’s argument in his new essay, he greatly helps the Catholic Faith and does not at all damage the communion of the Church, which is a communion based on an ethical truth that has, for 2000 years, always held the opposite to this current affirmation in Amoris Laetitia, namely that God never can want men to commit an intrinsically evil act. Instead of damaging the communion of the Church, Seifert thus helps by putting it on the foundation of moral truth, which alone can guarantee this communion and thus unite the present Church with the past and perennial one.

The archbishop claims, without offering the slightest reason, that Seifert’s paper “confuses the faith of the faithful.” We find, on the contrary, that the article clarifies the raging confusion of the faithful through its clear distinctions and reasons. The Spanish archbishop also claims that Seifert’s paper “sows distrust in the successor of Peter,” while in reality it affectionately presents a moving and filial appeal to the successor of Peter as the “sweet Christ on Earth” – as he calls the pope in the words once used by St. Catherine of Siena – to revoke a specific statement IF he comes to recognize the grave and logical consequences of the above-mentioned assertion.

Moreover, Archbishop Martínez Fernández claims that Seifert’s paper “in the end, does not serve the truth of faith, but, rather, the interests of the world.” This charge is particularly puzzling. How does Seifert’s strong defense of the moral absolutes of “do not ever commit adultery!”, “do not ever use contraception,” “do not ever kill the unborn,” serve the interests of a world whose utilitarian thinking and morals violate worldwide these moral absolutes, to include among them Doctors without Frontiers, refugee camps, and Catholic hospitals?

When the archbishop states that the Diocese of Granada “has adopted, from its very beginning, the application of the pontifical text prepared by the Bishops of the Region of Buenos Aires [Argentina],” he keeps forgetting that he first sent to his whole clergy the statement of Monsignor Livio Melina as a guideline, which was concordant with that of Cardinal Gerhard Müller and with that of the Polish Bishops, namely, that Amoris Laetitia had not changed anything regarding the sacramental discipline from what has been said in Familiaris Consortio. Only later, in a radical reversal of his earlier guidelines, Archbishop Martínez Fernández unexpectedly then switched to the position now upheld by the Bishops of Buenos Aires who, in opposition to Pope John Paul II’s own teaching and 2000 years of the Church’s sacramental discipline, have decided to admit couples “in irregular situations” – after a period of ostensible discernment – to the sacraments. In proposing the guidelines of the Bishops of the Buenos Aires region as a binding and absolute law for his diocese, Archbishop Martínez Fernández has acted far more “papally than Pope Francis,” who has left to the Polish Bishops, for example, the full freedom of abiding by the sacramental guidelines set down by Pope John Paul II, and has also left it to individual bishops and bishops’ conferences to interpret Amoris Laetitia along the lines of Cardinal Müller, i.e., in full unity with the existing traditional guidelines.

In a word, it seems to us scandalous and a violation of the rights of an eminent Catholic scholar, philosopher, and personal friend of Pope John Paul II, that Archbishop Javier Martínez wants to dismiss him from a Catholic institution on the basis of false claims and false charges raised against one of the most deeply believing and faithful, and pope-loving Catholic thinkers, who had proven his loyalty to the papacy not only through his close collaboration with Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI, but also through his attempts to aid the Magisterium of Pope Francis by offering him, in deep reverence and charity, precious pieces of advice as to how to secure the unity of the Church based on the truth.

We now publish here below Archbishop Martínez Fernández’ public statement concerning this matter, in its entirety (our translation):

Concerning an Article Published by Professor Josef Seifert on the Post-synodal Exhortation of Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia

The Diocese of Granada deeply regrets the article recently published by Professor Josef Seifert on the Post-Synodal Exhortation of Pope Francisco Amoris Laetitia, because it damages the communion of the Church, confuses the faith of the faithful, and sows distrust in the successor of Peter, which, in the end, does not serve the truth of faith, but, rather, the interests of the world. The Diocese of Granada has adopted, from its very beginning, the application of the pontifical text prepared by the Bishops of the Region of Buenos Aires, recognized by the Holy Father, which is accessible to all on the website of the diocese.

Professor Seifert is one of the founders of the International Academy of Philosophy of Liechtenstein, an institution that has been rendering for decades a remarkable service to Christian thought, especially in Eastern Europe and Latin America. In recent years, Professor Seifert has been teaching at the Institute of Philosophy “Edith Stein” in Granada, which is currently the headquarters of this Academy in Granada. Professor Seifert stopped his teaching at the “Edith Stein” Institute as early as September 2016, following his first critical writing on Amoris Laetitia, published in German. And right now, concurring with the precise and fuller reasons for it, his retirement from the above-mentioned International Academy of Philosophy is now being processed.

Granada, August 31, 2017

93 thoughts on “Spanish Archbishop Fires Professor Seifert for Amoris Laetitia Critique”

  1. Absolutely appalling – and a clear violation of the Eighth Commandment by Archbishop Fernández: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”

    It’s clear what these modernists want – a Church stripped of Absolute Truth and to that end they have invented a false Christ, one who is presented as a limp-wristed dandy who came to tell us that every sin is now forgiven even if the sinner has no plans to repent and that somehow the Ten Commandments no longer apply and that there is no devil and no hell. Just be good little Marxist agitators and all will be right with the world.

    Scripture tells us what happens to these fakers and twisters of Truth when they die and face their own Personal Judgement: Luke 7:23 “Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!”

    • Modernism is falling (er, has fallen) into parody. It’s as though the Archbishop of Granada is wearing a sandwich board and walking about in
      public with it. The board says on the front: “The Catholic Church Is
      Sure…” and on the back it says, “…Not What It Used To Be!”

      Honestly, this is incredibly spiritually bad for the Archbishop of Granada. Is there no one to tell him? “You’ve just made yourself look like a closed-minded thug, and you made a guy you don’t like into a martyr and hero!” Truly, “sin makes you stupid.”

      A priest has an extra angel assigned to him, a bishop yet another one. An archbishop a third, making FOUR of them. Imagine how the cleric’s also accompanying devils are mocking the angels. With friends like those, the archbishop hardly needs enemies.



        • Yep, 4 specially assigned to the task, and his original Guardian Angel makes the total five (Catholic marriage gives the couple a third angel – one to help the couple’s original two Guardian Angels). But remember this, Margaret dear, a bishop and so on up are graced with higher grades of angels, too, angels up the Heavenly hierarchy, into the levels of Virtues and Powers, significantly powerful beings.

          We are not alone. 😀

          • I thought that St. Michael, in addition to his titles Guardian Angel of the Church and of the Holy Eucharist was also the Guardian Angel of the Pope.

            Maybe we should start invoking the intercession of the guardIan angels of the Pope.

  2. “The interests of the world”! So, being fired, being demoted, putting oneself under attack for speaking up is going after the interests of the world. And we know the world is very interested in chastity and morality of course. Absurd!

    • Aggiornamento, you know. “Bringing up to date.” Wasn’t that what Vat2 wanted? Seems it’s gotten what it was after. Salvation, on the other hand, not so much.


  3. He claims that Seifert’s article “damages the communion of the Church.”
    He, the spokesmen of the twisted truth means the ‘church’ which was mentioned by Archbishop Fulton Sheen:

    ‘They have the buildings, but we have the Faith.’ St. Athanasius

    Christ did not die on the Cross so that a batch of modernists could create a one world religion.
    Fundamental to this is the need to recognize that we are at war. The enemy, his name is legion – is not interest in taking away our buildings. He is interest in destroying our faith. But…
    The Catholic Church will survive – and lets be clear, it will survive because it is True and the Truth cannot die – it will do so even, if necessarily, with entirely different structures. That means also, if (when) the new church is false it will die away. This is of course ultimately true, but like the Lutheran and Protestant churches, it may take a time to do so. But now, this time, and in this case, rather several decades than centuries.

    • All true, very much so! But then, we’ve had Islam with us for almost a millennium and a half, and it is still pounding away on the door, insanely, murderously, wanting in – and now we have high-level Catholics, the highest, in fact, wanting to flood Europe with ’em.


      • Yes, I know. But islam and the islamists have never succeeded in the main task of their master,- to destroy the Church of Christ. Yes, they still keep trying that for 14 centuries, but they will never succeed. Besides, they are and were a way from the Church, they have called themselfs never Catholics. Not even Christians (as lutherans & Co), so they were not pretending they are the ones who represents the One who is the only One Triune God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. They were and will stay just a bunch of savages. Who, btw., can, and probably will serve to our Lord for one certain task, as the ancient Egyptians were used for the same purpose.

        • Hi Ivan, thanks!

          Very true, but then, they don’t have to call themselves Christians, do they? Not when the Christians themselves no longer believe their (own Christian) religion. From the Devil’s point of view, it was clever for them NOT to call themselves Christian, as once a “post-Christian” world was aborning, they could step up and pretend to be something quite different. Islam now, as it were, in itself constitutes an “aggriornameto”, to coin a phrase.
          I mean, I remember watching an interview decades ago, with a Saudi bigshot on 60 Minutes, I think, in which he was saying earnestly, “Oh, we believe in Jesus!” They’ve been setting themselves up as the logical development or follow-on to Christianity. Scary, creepy, and bizarre.

          If that is (or was) the plan, it seems to be working.

          According the book, The Hidden Origins of Islam: New Research into Its Early History by Karl-Heinz Ohlig, the “Muslims” started out as Christians, calling themselves Christian and using Christ and the Cross as their symbols. Apparently “Muhammad” is a title, not a given name, and it means “the praised one” and was used of Christ for centuries before “Islam” (which means “submission”) was created, toward the end of the Umayyad dynasty. (The Koran itself, and the words “Islam” and “Muslim” appeared about that time, or three generations after they were supposed to have been there.) The following Abbasid dynasts (who took over the Arab Empire in a bloody civil war not quite 100 years or so after the Umayyads established that empire), had always called the Umayyads vile heretics. Well, it makes sense to say that if the Umayyads had been Christian in the first place!

          But this “Christianity” was a Semitic belief that accepted Jesus as Messiah (Mahdi) but NOT as “Son of God”. These Christians were of a sect that didn’t accept that – they apparently saw Trinitarian Christianity as a “Greek” heresy foisted on the Church by the emperors. It is a fascinating book although very scholarly, thus Robert Spencer did a version of it for non-scholars titled “Did Muhammad Exist”.

          As for myself, I wonder what role the “Judaizers” played in the formation of a “Semitic Christianity” that didn’t accept Christ as God? It would seem to be something that fit. St. Paul didn’t hound them out of existence, they just regrouped. Or some strain of theirs survived to infect subsequent local churches.

          Anyway, long-story-short, Islam is very much a Christian heresy and it is still very much (far too much) with us today. In fact, it seems poised to take the rest of Europe from the Church. It swallowed up Christian Syria, Palestine, and the Levant in general, the birthplace of the Faith; it swallowed up Egypt, and hounds that land’s remaining Christians mercilessly. It swallowed up Christian, Latin-speaking North Africa and Augustine’s fellow Berbers. It swallowed up Anatolia, a very Western cultural land, and was only expelled from its two-pronged (East and West) attempt to conquer Europe by centuries of endless war.

          An today our “leaders” are playing right into their hands, sort of like going to Sweden for a meaningless photo op and the signing of documents that meant even less. Our Argentine pope revels in “virtue-signaling” photo ops and insane calls for open borders. Twilight Zone stuff. Only its all too real.


          • Hi Raghn, thank you for your interestingly way of pointing of those things.

            But now, it is important to be a Christian, which means to be baptized by water and in the Spirit and to have a Cross as a (more than just) a sign of the only true Faith established by only true God. So, it is important to be (called) a Christian.
            If we are talking about the ‘insiders’.
            Of course, for satan doesn’t make (much) difference how, when he will succeeded with his plan to take so many souls away with him to the Hell.
            In that time, 7 centuries after the time that Jesus Christ the Son of God was among the people, as a real man but than God-man, in flesh and blood, among the people, satan thought with his fallen, but still ‘clever’ mind that it will better to lead astray one savage, whom soul must be already heavily damaged by, at least many bodily sins, and then after mohamad also many other people using the first one as a tool…
            That one or another saudi dilettante says what ever at once, means also nothing, while we know (and islamist also knows) that they might and should lie whenever they think the lie could help them to achieve their goals.
            And besides that, their ‘believe’ in Jesus which is according their pagans and heretical believe just a prophet, and not Son of God. With that saying, every religion that even try or wish to be called Christianity, but doesn’t believe in God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, cannot, never be even close to be named as Christianity.
            While you said ” These Christians were of a sect…” But no, full stop. They were thus NOT the Christians.

            I don’t know this or other writings of herr Ohlig, and it could be true, or semi-true, or just one of a few if not many stories about how exactly islam was created. I don’t think there was no such person mohamad, but just the ‘title’ with the meaning ‘the praised one’. Even if that was the case (for those Umayyads), later was one who took that name for himself as his own name.

            However (it went in the very early phase of the raising of the pathological religion of blood and death), I’ll stick with the clear words of st. Bellarmin, st. Daniel Fasanella and Dante Aligieri, to mention just a few, who have explained in easy language what’s all about that so-called ‘religion-of-pacem’.
            In short,- it’s from satan himself.

            I can say I agree with that about islam which can be called as ‘Christian Heresy’, but only in the sense which means that any other pagan, heretical religion, which has arise after the Christ’s Resurrection and the Pentecosal, can be seen as ‘Christian heresy’. In certain way it is so, lucifer is for sure a fallen angel, but he was just one time a really stupid angel, just before his fall.

            And the last but not least, I know, it is quite difficult to not say it that way,… but… ‘our leaders’… I mean, if they were really our leaders, they would be the true followers of our Lord Jesus Christ. Because He is always one and the same.

          • I strongly suggest that you read The Great Heresies and Battleground, both by Hilaire Belloc. Belloc predicted the rise of Islam 40 years before it happened.

          • Read it!?! I’ve got it tattooed on the inside of my skull! 😀

            Belloc was a genius, of course; but he’s so wordy to read. He wrote like a professor lecturing. I love him, though, and he married an Irish-American woman too, so, what a guy. 🙂

            But if you want to understand Islam, to “get it” as to why it is the way it is, please read, The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis (2011)
            by Robert R. Reilly. Reilly is a great guy too. He eviscerated the whole “Gay” movement with his book, Making Gay Okay (2011), wherein it takes the “movement” apart and shows you all the maliciousness and evil of it.


          • You’ve got it tattooed on the inside of your skull? WOW. Your neurosurgeon must be tops. ????

            Also, thanks for the information. The first one sounds really interesting.

    • This sure looks like the “counterfeit Church” that Blessed Anna Katherine Emmerich spoke about. The VII church is not the Catholic Church I was raised in.

  4. Another hireling who prefers to maintain the outward show of unity with a man who sows error, confusion and sin rather maintaining unity with the Truth who is Our Lord Jesus Christ. It seems like the process of separating the goats from the sheep has begun.

    • Actually, the real separating is not yet begun, because they still occupied the chairs of our Church, and they still calls themselves (wrongfully) catholics. But, the situation with those heretics and lunatics, seducers and deceivers is so that they were never of plan to separate themselves form the Church (as lutherans & co). Therefore they will be separated by our Lord at the certain time. Until then, we should remain faithful. And now with extra bonus,- we will be persecuted. Which gives us the first-class ticket to Heaven.

  5. The moral sickness in the Catholic Church is wide and deep, leading pharisitically, to the denial of historic Catholic doctrine and public crucifixion by defamation of one of the Church’s preeminent and loyal theologians by the political archbishop. A theological Calvary awaits those who question Pope Francis.

    • Indeed it does, one they should rush to embrace! Christians are supposed to “take up their cross” and perhaps God is using this to see whether His clerics are willing to embrace Calvary on even this (relative4ly low) level. Apparently, there’s a lot of hesitation.

  6. In accusing Prof. Seifert of serving “the interests of the world”, this scandal-monger commits the classic projection tactic of the demonic Left throughout history. Accuse your opponents of exactly your own sins in an effort to distract and confuse others.
    How long, O Lord?

    • The Archbishop’s action and rationale is that act of a politician, not a shepherd. Seifert’s latest essay is remarkably concise and clear, while key passages of Amoris Laetitia are–and are deliberately–a muddle of self-contradictions. “Accuse your opponents of exactly your own sins” indeed!

  7. This open persecution betokens the desperation of the Bergoglio contingent. They have been doing a hard sell for awhile now, but no one’s buying. The limp-wristed theology of the likes of Fr. Martin and the spite emanating from the Spanish bishop will not help their lost cause. And it is a lost cause. ????

    • No kidding. If that prelate dumped him, they can’t possibly have had a very good relationship before this.

      With those tensions behind him, now all the good theologian has to worry about is getting excommunicated for actually being a Catholic {like many of us…}.

  8. Prof. Seifert has been fired for pointing out that the emperor has no clothes. I note that the archbishop makes no attempt to explain what he thinks is wrong with Prof. Seifert’s argument. That’s because the professor’s argument is logically unassailable. The sentence in AL that claims God may actually call people to continue to have sex with someone other than their spouse is scandalous and extremely damaging. It should be withdrawn, as Prof Seifert suggests.

  9. Poor sap.

    Possibly he could regain his position by donning a red scarf and spending a month or two in penance standing in front of the Colosseum singing the Internationale.

    At the very least this might enable him to gain an audience with the Pope where they could discuss fun stuff like healing with the mouth in “concrete situations” and the metaphysical implications of whether God lied to the Virgin Mary.

    Come to think of it, Cardinal Burke might give this plan a whirl so he can deliver that history-changing Correction to Pope Luther Saladin Dzhugashvili the First.

  10. They are like a gang of bandits, a mafia organisation. Loyalty to the Boss is put before anything. The truth? Hang the truth.

    That’s the Anti-Church of the Apocalypse. Why do you expect anything else?

    • “I saw also the relationship between two popes … I saw how baleful would be the consequences of this false
      church. I saw it increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city of Rome. The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great darkness… ” “I saw the secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church. Near them I saw a horrible beast coming up from the sea.” Ven Anne Catherine Emmerich

  11. You can spout heresy 24/7, you can espouse the virtues of sodomy and sodomite unions (like Fr. Martin), you can question Church moral teachings out the wazoo, you can campaign for women priests and women deacons, you can have a damn boyfriend, provided you’re discreet and don’t get caught smoking crack with him, you can even be a tree-hugging pagan and ya know what will happen to you? Not a damn thing!!…….*wink, wink*……

    But stand up for Catholic teaching and insist on the importance of Tradition and guess what? WHAM!!! They will whack you mercilessly. Mercy for all……………unless you question “the merciful one”. Then the axe falls.

    What faithless, canting hypocrites!!

      • Haha, I liked that. “So, sir, madam, what will you have for dinner? The boiled tasteless Anglican Communion is on special tonight, and the equally boiled Spaghetti Roma version is too.”

        Bon Appétit, right? 😀

        • It is, too.

          The Italian Branch of the Anglican Communion.

          Let’s not forget this Bergoglio fellow told Anglican Bishop Venables NOT to convert! “We need you there”, Bergoglio is said to have told him.


          To welcome US???

          • You know, RodH, I remember listening to a Scott Hahn tape (I think it was a tape now) many years ago in which he was talking about his conversion, and he told how a priest said to him those very words, “Don’t convert; we need you where you are”.

            WHAT is IT with the Vat2 Church that it doesn’t want converts? I see from an Ed Morrissey column at HotAir that Steve Bannon has taken the bishops to task about illegal immigrants, that they want them to fill up the Church’s collapsing membership and also to get money from the Feds. But the native-born U.S. Catholic stats are dire. Over the past 12 years, the number of “former Catholics” went from 19 million to 30 million. That’s staggering. 1 in 5 U.S. Catholics now is an immigrant from Latin America. The excellent John Zmirak tweets that last bit in the same article, and that 40% of U.S. Catholics leave.

            Is that crazy, or what?

            PS There’s also a quoted Tweet from Larry O’Connor that show he just doesn’t get it; he says if the Church wanted to increase membership, it would change its positions on positions “n homosexuality and abortion and woman priesthood and divorce and celibate priests” — clearly, grotesquely not realizing that were the Church to indeed change those positions in the direction the current pope seems to want, we’d have absolutely EMPTY churches altogether. It’s just insane.


    • Remember the old saying, Kiwi, “God always give ya enough rope to hang yerself. High.”

      The thing so many of these “Catholics” don’t get about working for the Devil is that Ol’ Hob always cheats his workers. Remember how cheating workers out of their fair pay is a crime that cries to Heaven (homosexuality is another one).

      Well, they’re going to be cheated. They’re being cheated now.

      Who says the devils don’t have a sense of humor?


  12. According to “The Poem of the Man-God,” based on visions from the life of Jesus Christ, by Maria Valtorta, Jesus taught specifically that a marriage between two believers is for life. I realize that this may be hard for some to accept, but no hardship should be too much to suffer for our eternal salvation.

    Also, according to messages given to “Maria Divine Mercy,” there will be a schism in the Church, and the true Church will have to “go underground.” There will be a false, modern church which will accept everyone and will be tolerant towards sin.

    • Caveat lector! There’s heretical opinions in the writings of Maria Valtorta. (Yes, I read it, and that’s why I’m against it.)

    • Both Valtorta and Maria Divine Mercy have been condemned. No Catholic should have anything to do with them.

      There are enough approved apparitions and prophecies (from whom these two have taken their material) saying the same thing. Why do you run after false and condemned mystics?

    • They have not responded. Have they?

      So unfortunate, but so predictable.

      They cannot handle or fear an 80 year old man with one lung, while a nurse in Utah knew how to stand and protect her patient in the face of a crazed policeman, while security forces looked on and did nothing.

      • If you think about it, though, the English bishops did nothing to stop Fat ‘Arry 8 from murdering the Church in “Mary’s Dowry”, otherwise known as England. Only one stood against the monster. That bishop’s name is now SAINT John Fisher. He received a Martyr’s Crown, but what did the others get? We don’t know. And somehow I think we don’t wanna know.


  13. ” the archbishop claims that Seifert’s essays are confusing to the faithful.”

    Ah, the irony – clearly, His Excellency’s problem with Prof. Seifert’s comments is that they were lamentably crystal-clear and not adequately confusing. Chaotic, ambiguous confusion is the undoubted aim of AL and all its magically-thinking adherents.

  14. With the sudden reversal of policies, one wonders if this archbishop may have had some pressure exerted from the outside to which he completely caved… *sigh* At this point, the appalling actions conducted by the powers that be are almost getting boring. Speak up and you get silenced… we get it. Now they need to do something really provocative so everyone can see just how awful they are… Oh wait, that coke fueled gay orgy wasn’t enough…

    • “At this point, the appalling actions conducted by the powers that be are almost getting boring.”

      Seriously, the shock factor is wearing off.

      One now need only ask the question: “Is this what the Catholic Church IS?”

      The Bishops need to meditate on this question.

        • Exactly. It’s NOT what the Catholic Church is, Susan. We laity are on the bottom of the hierarchy, obviously, but remember: when one of the mighty Cherubs rebelled against God, it was a lowly archangel who rallied the Heavenly Host with his battle cry, “Who is like unto God?”


      • Cocaine fueled orgy with the same sex = retreat at monastery

        Upholding and arguing for Church doctrine based on the words of Christ = termination of employment

        Reminds of Major League:

        What next? A series of fines for doing good deeds not related to the poor? Perhaps a bonus for heretical homilies or desecration of the Eucharist (oh, I mean the bread and wine that never hurts anybody…)

    • From a post I read from, a Catholic who lives in Spain, at lifesite on this same topic:

      “Ten priests & two laymen within the Granada Diocese were charged with sexual abuse of four altar boys between 2004 & 2007. One of them eventually wrote to PF who told him to go to the Archbishop. It transpired that on account of a statue of limitations of three years the court had to drop charges against eleven of the suspects but one priest was charged with continual sexual abuse. This abuse had been going on for years & either the Archbishop strangely didn’t know or turned a blind eye, but on receiving a ‘phone call from PF at the time he quickly reacted. It now is time for the payback & unfortunately Josef Seifert is the one who has to suffer, as backing AL is necessary for the Archbishop’s own survival.”

      Granted, the above post is speculative, but given the info and the drastic turnabout of the Archbishop one must consider all possibilities as possibilities.

      • It’s obscene. Dr. Seifert isn’t suffering, however being sent away from such a cesspit. We should send him a T-shirt: “I survived the Diocese of Granada! And with my honor intact!” I’m certain he’ll be offered a job soon by some Traditionalist institution.

        Let’s just see El Bergo respond to that with one of his patented nasty remarks.

        PS Bless you, Fr RP, for your wonderful posts.

      • They are all compromised Father RP.

        Every single one of them, in some way.

        There is no one I can trust who will put God first before the incestuous Church that has plagued this earth. And it is a plague!!
        Not a bishop, not a cardinal, and especially not a pope.
        I cringe when I hear people refer to Francis as the Sweet Jesus on Earth!
        They mock a great saint, who would have much to say on the matter, I imagine and sweet would NOT be a word she would use.

        Everyone wants to pray and hide behind their prayers it would seem.
        No one willing to stand for Almighty God, His Church, the martyrs and saints who gave their lives so that we may ” take” from Holy Mother Church.
        Takers!!! TAKERS!!! Everyone of them, who bask in their red hats, and pontifical MASSES and fine robes and food…………they take and give nothing back……not really. ( I am referring to prelates who were given so many graces)

        The force of Almighty God cannot be held back. My thoughts, of course, which seem rash and eccentric.

    • Re your last incomplete sentence: Whatever happened to the investigation about that incident? We haven’t heard anything in a few months.

        • As if the monks needed such a … wait, what was the Greek word for such? (The Greeks new everything.)

          Honestly, that’s the LAST place he should go. He should have been civilly prosecuted for violating his lease – I’m sure there was a caveat in the lease about inappropriate use of the property.


        • Homowhorehouse more like it.

          Somebody needs to investigate the joint they sent him to.


          Pope Pius V had the right idea.

  15. The present papacy will answer the questions put to it – but within the context (the processing) of the upcoming Synod on Youth. Will do so by radicalizing (deep-rooting) the points and positions of A.L. which were called into questions. That is, the *logic* underlying those points and positions. A.L.’s identified logic – now laid bare thanks to Prof Seifert, and countless others – will be used to introduce (proclaim, really) moral & theological novelties relative to *youth*. (A relevance which, in itself, is a novelty!)

    The initial questions will be answered by closing off their standing. Shut down because the (inevitable) new (second stage) questions (bound to be) generated from the ‘process’ and ‘report’ of the Youth Synod will overshadow the concerns raised by A.L. Overshadowed by the shock which the Final Report implies and proposes. The questions put to A.L. are simply no longer relevant.

    But . . .

    the *logic* of A.L. remains, which is the point. A.L. will hand off its *logic* to the Youth Synod (and its WYD laboratory) to root (bury) its radical novelty even deeper into the life of the Church – and its teaching authority which is the point. It is the logic of the thing (so aptly exposed by Prof. Seifert) which must be guarded and preserved.

    Now, the question . . .

    how will the Final Report of the Synod of Youth “go beyond” A.L.? How will its *Chapter 8* read? Better yet, how will a certain Archbishop’s *kissing lips* read it?

  16. Dear Professor Seifert,

    May you persevere in the Holy Faith and hear these words upon your departure from the mortal coil: “Well done good and faithful servant. Come, share your master’s joy.”

    As for Archbishop Martínez Fernandez, may he soon repent lest he hear the opposite upon his departure from the mortal coil.

  17. Would a spiritual cataract operation help this prelate see clearly? Or is he beyond help?

    Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

  18. Pope Benedict 16th and college of red hat Cardinals should declare a????Schism in the dying rc church in the west. Otherwise Francis Bergoglio and his apostate Jesuits will collapse the church in the west to the rump.rather than Rc church

  19. The actions and words of this servant of Satan, Archbishop Martínez Fernández, are deplorable in the extreme. He is fooling no one but himself. Our Lord judges men according to their deeds and justice will be served.

  20. Archbishop Francisco Javier Martínez Fernández

    « Veritas liberavit vos » (Jn 8,32

    « La verdad os hará libres libres »

    According to the Arch. Martínez Fernández’s emblem, Professor Josef Seifert is free, while the Archbishop is enslaved by his own wrong decision of 10/17/2017:

    The Archbishop of Granada, Spain, H.E. Msgr. Francisco Javier Martínez Fernández, has released a note to all the faithful of his archdiocese in which he adopts for his own archdiocese the highly objectionable directive on the implementation of chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia, issued
    by the bishops of the pastoral region of Buenos Aires. This is
    especially discouraging as Archbishop Martínez has in the past been
    known for his courage and orthodoxy.

  21. I am reminded of the response of Beato de Liebena to the Archbishop of Toledo Elephandius who was proposing the heresy of adoptionism back in the 8th centurry: “You are not a witness (testigo) to the faith but a testicle of the devil spreading seeds of heresy”

  22. I am reminded of the response of Beato de Liebena to the Archbishop of Toledo Elepandus who was proposing the heresy of adoptionism back in the 8th centurry: “You are not a witness (testigo) to the faith but a testicle of the devil spreading seeds of heresy”

  23. Classic projection by this archbishop.

    “confuses the faith of the faithful”

    Exactly what Amoris Laetitia does.

    ” and sows distrust in
    the successor of Peter,”

    Sow distrust in the unchangeable teachings of the Church. Now it is possible to “discern” that mortal sin is what God wants for you. Even Jesus told Peter at one point “get behind me satan.” The same is relevant now.

    ” which, in the end, does not serve the truth of
    faith, but, rather, the interests of the world”

    Francis’ version of Church indeed serves the world, which is why the UN, Freemasons and the worldly are so fond of him. Remember that it’s now a sin to use air conditioning (Laudato Si).

    When, O Lord, will You fix this?


Leave a Comment

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

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...