Jorge Bergoglio published a book in January on (what else?) God's mercy. Entitled The Name Of God Is Mercy, it is more of the over-the-top emphasis on a false idea of "forgiveness" without amending one's life as it should be. Written as a rambling interview with journalist Andrea Tornielli, I wonder if someday the word "interview" will become synonymous with "apostasy." It is painful to read (which is why this post comes almost a year after its release), and has major errors to lead the members of his sect even further away from the truth. I will outline just two pertinent errors that permeate the false pope's book.
According to the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia: "Presumption is here considered as a vice opposed to the theological virtue of hope. It may also be regarded as a product of pride. It may be defined as the condition of a soul which, because of a badly regulated reliance on God's mercy and power, hopes for salvation without doing anything to deserve it, or for pardon of his sins without repenting of them." (Emphasis mine). Bergoglio's book engenders such presumption.
"Go and Sin No More"--after a while
The book starts from the principle that a human being converts progressively and that he has trouble living completely according to the Catholic morality. This contradicts the infallible teaching of Trent, "CANON XVIII.-If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema." Of course, no person goes from being a notorious sinner to a great saint overnight. Nevertheless, the book claims that because some see the Commandments (especially the Sixth and Ninth) to be "ideals" that are impossible to put into practice, the moral law applies to them in "degrees" according to how far they have "grown morally." This is rank heresy. This makes the Commandments subjective according to the whim (or bad conscience) of the individual as to "how much the law applies and he can follow."
Now you can see why Vatican II sect "communion" for adulterers can be permitted. They are not yet "fully moral" by giving up living in sin with their concubine. Yet, they are gradually going that way according to the dictates of their "conscience." Since they cannot fully live up to the Law of God, it is enough for them to try to do it partially, perhaps by having adulterous relations less frequently. This (allegedly) makes them "worthy to receive" their Novus Bogus communion cracker.
Do you see how the heretical Vatican II ecclesiology has invaded every aspect of Bergoglio's sect? Vatican II puts a false dichotomy between the "Church of Christ" and the Roman Catholic Church. The two are no longer one and the same. The Church of Christ is some mysterious entity which "subsists" in the Roman Catholic Church (and in other sects). This Church of Christ is present according to how many "elements" of it are present. To have all the elements (as The Roman Catholic Church) is best, but to have just some elements is good too and leads to salvation. Hence, Vatican II tells us of false sects that "... the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church." (See Unitatis Redintegratio, para. # 3).
Likewise, just as you can be "Catholic" partially or fully, so too you can be partially or fully moral. To be fully moral is best, but to be partially moral is good too, and you can receive "communion." This explains why in the Vatican II sect almost no one goes to Confession (which they call "Reconciliation"), but nearly everyone goes to "communion." Even though there's more evil prevalent than ever before, "sainthood" seems commonplace when they "come together as Church" to "celebrate Eucharist" as they like to intone (always devoid of definite articles!).
"Contrition"
On pg. 33 of Bergoglio's book, there is a case described of a priest confronting a Vatican II sect member who is on his death bed. The penitent declares to the priest that he would commit the sin (of fornication) again if he had the opportunity. Despite this statement, the priest ends up absolving the penitent, because (get this) he's sorry that he isn't sorry!
Can a priest absolve someone from sin who is regretful that he has no contrition (or even attrition), and has no resolve to stop an act he knows to be wrong? It's outright absurd to think that regret for not having contrition is a substitute for contrition or attrition! What does Frankie have to say? "It’s a good example of the lengths to which God goes to enter the heart of man, to find that small opening that will permit him to grant grace." Therefore the fact of regret for not having sorrow for sin and a firm resolve not to sin again is a partial step in the right direction, and is sufficient to receive absolution. Now that's a sorry state of affairs!
Absent from his book is any mention of the temporal debt due to remitted sin, and blotted out through the use of indulgences. There's no mention of the need to avoid the near occasion of sin, and of God's particular judgement of the soul at the moment of death. All of this will lead readers towards the sin of presumption; a sure road to Hell.
Conclusion
More heresy from the papal pretender is spread throughout his book. Don't waste your eyesight or money on this trash. Read something edifying from the true saints prior to Vatican II (i.e. no "St." Wotyla, etc.). Bergoglio wants us to think that God's mercy is so great, He keeps everyone out of Hell, even those who are only "partially sorry." If true, wouldn't God's justice keep everyone out of Heaven, for no one deserves eternal bliss who has sinned? Remember the sobering words of St. Paul in Philippians 2: 12, "Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but much more now in my absence,) with fear and trembling work out your salvation." Mr. Bergoglio's name is apostasy.
Blasphemoglio is a demon to lead the million souls chained in sin to hell!
ReplyDeleteIndeed he is, my friend!
Delete---Introibo
We need a catholic pope & Bishop Bawden needs to be invited to the imperfect council.
ReplyDeleteHe has stated he would step down if not elected.
Dominus Vobiscum
The time may soon be ripe for an imperfect general council (Please God!). As for Bawden, whether or not he shows is irrelevant. He is a dubious bishop at best, and an embarrassment. As for "stepping down," he was never "lifted up" from his Kansas farmhouse and pseudo-conclave.
DeleteEt cum spiritu tuo,
---Introibo
If there is an imperfect council he needs to be invited.
ReplyDeleteHe was 25 years ahead of the curve.Plus his videos are enjoyable as he is humble,insigtful,andintelligent.
It won't be my call if there's an imperfect general council. I can't imagine them wanting him. Getting a real pope back is what matters.
Delete---Introibo
I used to think the same way until I listened to him and read his material.
DeleteHe's not stupid nor is he deranged.I will agree to disagree but if there is an imperfect council at some point,I pray he is invited.
I can't wait to see the next sedevacantist pope to come down the pike. The other thirty were not "imperfect" enough I guess, but keep trying right guys? If you throw enough dung against the wall something is bound to stick. Sedevacantism is a definitely a disorder.
ReplyDeleteThere is no "Sedevacantist pope." You can't be a Sedevacantist if you acknowledge the existence of a pope currently reigning. These are "conclavists." They were through Bogus "conclaves," not by an imperfect General Council as the theologians pre-Vatican II taught.
DeleteSedevacantism is not the ideal state of the Church. However, if it is a "disorder," what is the cure? "Pope" Francis telling us there is no Catholic God, worshipping with heretics and infidels, and giving invalid "Sacraments" to adulterers?
No thanks. He's shown more disorder in less than 4 years than all the conclavists combined!
Ok, so why don't you organize your imperfect council and elect a pope? Go ahead, do it. What you need more time? Lol. You've had more than enough time. Call your friends Cekada, Sanborn, Dolan, Bawden, and Pivarunas and elect the next Roman Pontiff and prove you belong to the "true" Catholic Church.
ReplyDeleteThere are several reasons, not the least of which is the ability to all concur on how to proceed. It's never been done before. Their also must be a general recognition that Jorge Bergoglio is a fraud. As long as people such as yourself believe that the law of non-contradiction doesn't apply since 1964, and what was intrinsically evil we can now call "good," the Vatican II sect still holds sway.
DeleteThat's why.
---Introibo
Go ahead and laugh while your "pope" prays at mosques and synagogues and trashes the roman catholic faith on a weekly basis.
DeleteHe's not my pope.
DeleteNor anyone's pope! Unlike Trump, Mr. Bergoglio is incapable of assuming the office to which he was elected.
Delete---Introibo
Read this http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f100_Dialogue_21.htm
ReplyDeleteI'm aware that Pope Pius XII was not the most vigilant pope. However, he was not a notorious heretic who lost his authority as pope. Tradition In Action really wants to justify their recogize and resist position by casting aspersions (and even calumny) upon pre-V2 popes. They went so far as to accuse the Great Pope Pius IX of being a Freemason!!
Delete---Introibo
Introibo, thanks for this writeup. if someone recognizes Francis as pope, does that make the person a heretic? Also can we say there are saints in Novus Ordo religion given the fact that many there thought they are indeed in the Catholic Church?
ReplyDeleteDear Lord Belish,
DeleteMistaking the identity of the pope is not heresy. If someone in good faith believes that Bergoglio is pope, but is not in actual union with him (and rejects his errors and that of V2) like the members of the SSPX, they would not thereby be heretics. During the Great Western Schism many people followed an antipope in good faith. They remained Catholic.
The V2 sect MAY have some people in Heaven who honestly believed it was the Catholic Church. They cannot have saints with a capital S worthy of emulation. God would have to save the person through a miracle of grace. However, this is more and more unlikely and the need for conversion even greater. There is a duty to investigate. Once someone sees the difference between the True Church and the V2 sect, they cannot claim ignorance---esp. given the outrageous claims of Bergoglio. Just because someone THINKS they're in the True Church doesn't make it so, and unless enlightened by a miracle of God, they will be lost. Hence, the need to proselytize is greater upon us than ever.
---Introibo
Introibo- I am confused on an aspect of forgiveness. I have a close relative who did a great evil to me. I went to this person and confronted them about the evil they did to me and asked them why they did it. Their response to me was "I was a victim and I was going to make sure you were one too"! I was crushed. I waited a few more years, went to this person again, confronted them again about the evil they did to me, and I got the same response as before. I am wrestling as to how I can forgive a person who is saying they are not sorry after being confronted.
ReplyDeleteJoann,
DeleteThis sad individual cannot be forgiven by God without acknowledging they sinned, have contrition (or at least attrition in Confession) and a firm resolve to sin no more. As for you, simply try not to hold it against them and pray for their conversion. This is forgiveness from you. It is not necessary for you to take them back as a friend and confidant; especially when they have no remorse for evil committed and might hurt you again.
By praying for them, and wishing them no harm, you fulfill your duty as a Traditionalist. Wouldn't it be ironic if, due to your prayers, God grants this person the grace of conversion before death? They will be thanking you forever (literally)!!
---Introibo
Introibo - I should have told you this person died several yrs ago. I tried my hardest with this relative even to the point of taking her in my home for awhile and taking care of her. Each time I asked her why she did this evil to me her response was of such a vehement, spiteful nature that she was in essence telling me she wasn't sorry, but that she would do the same to all over again, as she said "I was a victim and I was going to make SURE you were one too". This person almost ruined my life. How do you forgive someone if they are not sorry for what they did? Even God doesn't forgive unless someone admits their sin and does Penance. I am not a super woman, I just don't know how to forgive some one if they wouldn't admit their admit sin. Now that she is deceased it is even harder as I tried when she was still living to get her to apologize and admit this grievous sin, but she refused. This has vexed for me for years. Sorry for the long dissertation. (By the way, this person left the Catholic Faith for the Jehovah Witnesses).
DeleteYou need not be a superwoman. When my father (and later my mother) were dying from cancer (colon and ovarian, respectively), the only three relatives I had abandoned us and refused to help in any way. I was in law school when my dad died, and going to school all night while staying up with him all night at home hospice, more than took its toll on me.
DeleteI have no contact with them. The memories hurt, but I try not to think about it and I wish them no evil. I pray for them. This is forgiveness. You took care of this person despite their evil deed and unrepentant ways. That's Christian Charity at its finest. Pray for their soul (maybe repented at the last moment, only God knows) and try to forget. It is not necessary to feel like forgiving them or to feel good about them. It's an act of the will, not the emotions. Pray for yourself that you may heal from those memories and fully move on. I've learned more from my enemies than my friends in the sense that they taught me how I DON'T want to be, and I become a better person as a result of doing the opposite!
You have forgiven them, unless you wish them in Hell. (I don't think you do). Don't let your emotions worry you. Pray for a feeling of peace. I think you confuse the fact that you're angry and hurt with not having forgiven. If you pray for their soul, and try to move on, you've forgiven them.
---Introibo
Introibo - Thanks so very much. You are right, I think because I am angry and feel hurt that I haven't forgiven her. I just don't understand how someone could be so callous as she was after being confronted 2 times by me. She appeared to have reveled in doing what she did to me. It is beyond my comprehension that anyone would react that way for committing such evil! Can you tell me the Traditional Catholic belief concerning forgiveness as I have read varying opinions, or point me to a good reliable source for reference? Thanks again!!
DeleteJoann,
DeleteYou might want to read and own (1) The Imitation of Christ by Thomas a Kempis, and (2) The School of Jesus Crucified by Fr. Ignatius of the Side of Jesus. When we consider what Our Lord endured to ensure our forgiveness, can we do any less? Read also the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant in St. Matthew 18: 21-35.
Finally, I would recommend you speak to an SSPV priest in Confession for guidance. They give great advice!
---Introibo
Joann,
DeleteYou might want to read and own (1) The Imitation of Christ by Thomas a Kempis, and (2) The School of Jesus Crucified by Fr. Ignatius of the Side of Jesus. When we consider what Our Lord endured to ensure our forgiveness, can we do any less? Read also the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant in St. Matthew 18: 21-35.
Finally, I would recommend you speak to an SSPV priest in Confession for guidance. They give great advice!
---Introibo
Introibo- Am I correct in concluding that forgiveness is an act of willingness? I think the reason I'm convoluted on the subject is that I think I have to "feel" forgiveness. I certainly never wished any evil on her. I feel anger and am very hurt though. (Does the anger and hurt go away at a point in time following forgiveness?) I put the whole mess in God's hands for Him to deal with. Is this forgiveness?
DeleteJoann,
DeleteYes it is forgiveness. Time heals all wounds. As I said, forgiveness is an act of the will, not the emotions. We don't have to feel "warm and fuzzy" like they try to tell you in the Modernist V2 sect. And you need not "cry on demand" like those phony "televangelists" of the 1980s---think: Jimmy Swaggert!
---Introibo
Introibo - I guess somewhere, probably from the Vatican II sect, I got the message "warm and fuzzy" equals forgiveness. Thanks so very much for the clarification.
Delete