Common Core Theology From Pope Francis And Father Spadaro

Yesterday Father Antonio Spadaro, a close confidant of Pope Francis', released a tweet in which he opined "2+2 in theology can make 5 because it has to do with God and real life people".  As Mr. Olson (author of that article) points out, this statement constitutes a direct violation of the law of non-contradiction: that is, truth cannot contradict itself.

I'd urge all to read Mr. Olson's article closely.  He points out that Spadaro realized his tweet was going over like a lead balloon and issued another, essentially stepping from the frying pan into the fire: "GOD was made flesh and shows us that he is NOT only a MATHEMATICAL reason but that this original Reason is also LOVE #BenedictXVI"  He misquotes the Pope Emeritus who actually said at Auschwitz in 2006: "The God in whom we believe is a God of reason - a reason, to be sure, which is not a kind of cold mathematics of the universe, but is one with love and with goodness."  Spadaro set up a false contradiction between "love" and "reason".  Pope Benedict XVI, on the other hand, acknowledged that love can transcend reason but never contradict it.

We heard similar blathering from the newly-installed Cardinal Joseph Tobin, who took the reins at the Archdiocese of Newark.  He stated, "to believe in Jesus is not acceptance of a doctrine or a moral code, but of a person who lives now and is the source of life".  Notice the trick of setting up false dichotomies that seems now to be a perfected art form, starting at the Vatican.  The fact is that acceptance of Jesus does entail the acceptance of the doctrines and moral teachings of the Church.  If those "doctrines and codes" are not accepted, there is no belief in Jesus.  Why?  Because those "doctrines and codes" came to us from Jesus Himself.  Moreover, they are immutable because the God who bestowed them on us is Himself immutable.  Hear the words of Our Lord Himself.  I'll link to the Douay-Rheims Bible and invite you to peruse these passages:

• John 14: entire chapter
• John 15:10
• John 16:27
• 1 John 5:3
• 2 John 1:6

Notice the emphasis is on obedience, not "experience".  Too many Catholics are seduced by emotional experiences, thinking that these "experiences" have great significance.  They don't.

Getting back to Mr. Olson's article, we see a quote from Pope Benedict's address at Regensburg in which the Pope Emeritus refutes the errors that Spadaro is evincing.  After Benedict gave that address, many too umbrage at the address - including then-Cardinal Bergoglio.  By the way - after that "spit in the eye" he gave to the then-sitting pope, now Pope Francis has the nerve to sic his underlings on the four cardinals who delivered their dubia in proper canonical fashion?  How does that work?

Some might think my reference to "common core theology" to be a tad flippant.  I believe it's quite accurate, and may actually indicate quite a relationship between Spadaro's errors and the deliberate dumbing down of intellectual life that I suspect is the purpose of Common Core.  Perhaps that is a reason that too many Catholic educational institutions are adopting Common Core.  Perhaps they not only want to glom onto federal funding but they too want to facilitate the dumbing down of Catholic intellectual and moral life - to rob the Catholic in the pew of his/her rightful patrimony in the Faith.  Is this part of the "maturation" that we Catholics were supposed to undergo in the wake of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family?  It seems that a main purpose of all this "maturation" is to divorce Catholics from their moorings in the immutable teachings of Jesus, as handed down through the Church for these two thousand years, so that we will be easily manipulated by the "god of suprises" puppet as put forth by Pope Francis to cram all manners of heresy in our faces.  We cannot let that happen.

Father Spadaro Points Long Knives At Raymond Arroyo - Call Him Out On It

It was almost exactly three years ago when Father Thomas Rosica, a highly-placed Vatican official, threatened to sue the blogger behind Vox Cantoris (see right side-bar).  The latter had commented on public comments made by Rosica that betrayed Rosica's dissident perspectives on matters of Catholic doctrine.  Other faithful Catholic bloggers shone the light on Rosica's despicable attempts and he was forced to stand down lest he make the Vatican appear to be a bunch of vindictive fools.

Well, maybe it isn't just a matter of appearances at the Vatican and perhaps they failed to learn their lessons.  It appears that Father Antonio Spadaro has drawn his long knives and is pointing them directly at Raymond Arroyo of EWTN.  LifeSiteNews shows where Spadaro retweeted a call for EWTN to be put under interdict if they don't fire Arroyo.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe an interdict can be placed on any group of Catholics because of some willy-nilly whim.  Certain conditions must be present, one of them being the commission of a gravely immoral act.  No one in their right minds can pretend that the discussions in which Arroyo is participating constitute gravely immoral acts.  Perhaps the dissident lay Catholic who originally tweeted that nonsense doesn't know that (and maybe doesn't care), but certainly Spadaro should know better than that.  Like Father Rosica did three years ago, Spadaro is making himself appear to be the vindictive fool, resenting the light that is being shone on his misdeeds - not to mention ignorance of canon law.  But perhaps we're not talking merely of "appearance", but "fact".

As we did for Vox Cantoris three years ago, so again must we do for Raymond Arroyo.

Pro-Lifers, Support The Filial Correction Now!

Over the years I've come to respect Voice of the Family for offering a comprehensive and truly Catholic perspective it has given to the many moral and spiritual issues facing the world today.  By the way, Voice of the Family is not to be confuse with Voice of the Faithful; the latter is infested with dissidents.  Yesterday Voice of the Family released a post entitled "Why The Pro-Life Movement Should Support The Filial Correction".

I thoroughly concur with their conclusions that the pro-life movement will not succeed unless all Catholic clergy supports it.  At present, not all do.  Long before I started this blogging apostolate, I was (and still am) active in the pro-life movement.  Having been puzzled and yes, angered, by being stiff-armed by Church officials during various pro-life efforts, I realized that the hierarchy was infested by anti-life progressives.  I also knew that the Culture of Life could never be established until the infestation was removed from the Church.  Knowing that "light is the best disinfectant" I began this apostolate with the aim of informing the Catholic in the pews what was happening in our chanceries, at the USCCB, etc so that we would engage in remedial prayer and action.  I am honored to be just one of many such Catholics.

The article quotes Professor Josef Siefert's warnings that the moral ambiguities in Amoralis Lamentia threaten the entire basis of Catholic moral teaching.  Again I agree, but I'll add my hypothesis that this ambiguity is the effect desired by the authors of Amoralis Lamentia.  Actually it is more than an educated guess, for a high-ranking Vatican official was actually quite explicit about the deconstruction of Catholic moral principles.

That happened at a meeting this past week at Boston College.  A bevy of dissident Churchmen and "theologians" met to discuss AL  Also in attendance was papal confidante Fr. Antonio "2+2=5" Spadaro.  LifeSiteNews has reports of some of the bile that oozed from that gabfest.  Spadaro said, "it is no longer possible to judge people on the basis of a norm that stands above all."  There is a lot to unpack in this heretical statement.

• "No longer possible".  Spadaro admitted (perhaps unwittingly) that such evaluation was the norm for the past 2000 years, and therefore is breaking with Church Tradition
• If Spadaro allows for mutation of Church teaching, he is actually casting doubt on the very immutability of God Himself.  His Words cannot change for God cannot change.
• Spadaro's heresy is precisely the subject of Siefert's warning about AL undermining the entirety of Church moral doctrine.

Fellow Catholic pro-lifers, we must come to grips with the quagmire that is Amoralis Lamentia.  If our shepherd desert us and even turn on us in this matter of Church doctrine changing, our efforts to save babies will be horribly undermined.  Please heed John Smeaton's plea for support of the Filial Correction.  I already signed it and urge you to do the same.

I now speak especially to those few who still insist on viewing this papacy through rose-colored glasses.  Wake up!  Acknowledge the facts that are daily slapping us all in the face!  Your denials of the serious problems hinder the corrections that need to occur.  In a word, stop lying to yourselves.  It isn't pleasant to believe that the Chief Shepherd is not helpful, but the situation is what it is.  For the sakes of your own souls, please take off the rose-colored glasses. 

Does Father Spadaro Prefer Hell To Heaven?

This from Father Spadaro's twitter feed..

The welcoming of those young people who prefer to live together without getting married… https://t.co/fa7xr0TXZ4 pic.twitter.com/zYrsrfhvcl

— Antonio Spadaro (@antoniospadaro) February 26, 2017

That's tantamount to saying "the welcoming of those young people who prefer hell to heaven, and affirming their deadly decision".  To prefer the mortal sin of fornication over the Sacrament of Matrimony is the preference of damnation to salvation. We pray that all will repent, go to Confession and change their "preferences" before it is too late to do so.

One more question: after this scandalous tweet, will Father Spadaro be allowed to retain favor with Pope Francis?  The answer to that question will be very telling, and we'll see that answer in a very short time.

Concerns About This Papacy Increase

Holy Mother Church is under attack.  Not too many people will deny that for the evidence is irrefutable.  What is often denied, despite equally irrefutable evidence, is that many of these attacks are occurring with the approval, if not initiative, of the current pontiff.  I had hopes in the early stages of this papacy that such was not the case, but had to address the evidence as it was, not as I might have wished it were.

For that I and many others have been accused of "bashing the pope", "not having faith", "being a sedevacantist", etc.  So be it.  We pray for our detractors for I believe that many do love the Church; they simply cannot face the fact that not all popes are of the same caliber as some of the sainted ones.  In fact, Our Lord never promised us holy pontiffs.  He promised that no sitting pope would ever solemnly proclaim error - and that's it!

But let's recap the sorry history of this papacy to date; some others have done much of that cataloging for us.  We have, from last week, "The A-Z List Of Concerns With Pope Francis", courtesy of LifeSiteNews.   The blogger of "That The Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill" put up a post called "Pope Francis Little Book Of Insults" (each insult cited is a link that will take you to the context of that insult).  Earlier today Steve Jalsevac posted an article that details all the harm caused (so far) by the papal gaffe "who am I to judge".

He certainly has no problem whatsoever judging faithful Catholics, as evidenced by the "little book of insults".  A few days ago, in La Civita Cattolica, a publication that enjoys semi-official status at the Vatican, appeared an article co-written by Anthony Spadaro and Marcelo Figueroa entitled "Evangelical Fundamentalism And Catholic Integralism In The USA: A Surprising Ecumenism".  In it they basically trash all those faithful Christians who have the audacity to bring their faith and morals into the public sphere.  Now let's get real.  This blog and others have noted how the Vatican, under this papacy, has allied itself with many progressive and yes, anti-life persons while pushing for unbridled immigration and the population-control mantras.  It is precisely those faithful Catholics, vilified by Spadaro and Figueroa, who are sounding the alarm regarding these death-dealing policies and who are opposing them.  This is one clear reason why those two issued their temper tantrum.  I take it as a testament that we are doing something right in opposing them; else they wouldn't be gnashing their teeth and snarling so incoherently.  Again, I point out that this publication is under Vatican supervision.  Spadaro, one of the two authors, is also a Vatican official.  The contents of that article reflect current Vatican - and I mean papal - thought.

We need to have our ears and eyes wide open and to be praying for the Church, which is now being undermined by her highest leaders.

Possible Motives Behind Papal Malfeasances

Through Canon 212, I came across two posts.  One is by George Neumayr entitled "The Roots Of Pope Francis' Anti-Americanism".  The other is from a blog called The Deus Ex Machina and it's entitled "More Fog Lifting - FrancisPlan Becoming Clearer And Clearer".  They might seem unrelated but I think there is a common theme running through both.  Most progressives harbor deep hatred for western culture - that is, culture that largely originated in Europe from its Catholic roots and that spread throughout its various colonies.  The United States of America is one of those offshoots.  Owing to our constitutional republican form of government, we have certain safeguards that have helped retard the disintegration of our cultural roots as compared to Europe - but we aren't that far behind them.  The progressives are literally hell-bent on expunging from society any vestige of belief and obedience to God and His Roman Catholic Church.

Sadly, they see in Pope Francis an ally in the pursuit of their goals.  The US, again, remains as an obstacle to their plans.  Had Hillary Clinton won the White House last November, their juggernaut could have processed with lightning speed.  By God's grace, she lost and now the rate of decline has slowed somewhat.  Hence the pot-shots that the pope has been lobbing in President Trump's direction - and towards us who abhor the progressive agenda.

Other recipients of papal pot-shots are faithful Catholics, particularly those of us who sound the alarm about malfeasances coming from the Vatican.  In a development that is coming straight from the "niggers of the new age" department, we have been advised of a hit piece that appeared in Civilta Cattolica, a semi-official publication coming from the Vatican.  One of the two authors is Father Antonio Spadaro (a subject of many posts)   In that piece you can see the visceral hatred that Spadaro (and quite possibly the pope) harbor for those of us who shine the light on their shenanigans; Church Militant TV has particularly earned their scorn.  Rorate Caeli has the full text.  I think I'm not alone in opining that we faithful Catholic bloggers can take hit pieces like this as badges of honor.

I'd like to return to the "more fog lifting" piece for a moment.  Towards the bottom of the article we read that Pope Francis is "trying to engineer a schism in the Catholic Church...to drive the Catholics out of the post-conciliar church, thereby leaving all the physical assets and cash for the FrancisChurch".  This thought has occurred to me before.  One must admit that his "gaffes" are becoming too numerous, too blatant for any reasonable and honest person to believe that they are merely innocent blunders.  Of course Neumayr cannot say for certain just what is motivating the pope, but no one can honestly gainsay that there is some sort of ulterior motive behind Amoralis Lamentia, the way that faithful prelates are being treated, etc.

Do we have the honesty and intestinal fortitude to accept the truth that is literally slapping us in the face?

Papal Pornography

If one thought the papal interviews couldn't get much worse than what they had been, they regrettably err.  Today's is so depraved that parents may be advised not to discuss this in the presence of small children.  He whined and complained about the media (while giving an interview to the media - go figure), lamenting their tendency to report unpleasant news, "even if they are true".  He likens the reporting of "nasty" things to coprophilia.  If you never heard that term before, please be advised that until two hours ago, I never did either.  Apparently neither did the creators of the blogger platform on which I write this blog, for its spell-checker is prompting me to change it.  I will give the wikipedia definition now.

Coprophilia (from Greek κόπρος, kópros—excrement and φιλία, philía—liking, fondness), also called scatophilia or scat (Greek: σκατά, skatá-feces),^[1] is the paraphilia involving sexual arousal and pleasure from feces.

He went on to say that "since people have a tendency towards the sickness of coprophagia, a lot of damage can be done".

Coprophagia!  Another term, similar to the first but not quite identical.  What is that?  Again we look to wikipedia.

Coprophagia /kɒp.rə.ˈfeɪ.dʒi.ə/^[1] or coprophagy /kəˈprɒfədʒiː/ is the consumption of feces

So people "have a tendency" toward this, uh, dietary predilection?  Dear readers, when is the last time that was served at your dinner tables?  When was the last time you saw that featured at your favorite restaurants? When is the last time that crossed your minds?  I didn't think so!

Two things need to be discussed.  To liken journalism to a perverted sexual fetish is nothing short of the sin of slander against those journalists who take seriously their responsibilities to inform the public of current affairs.  One might think the pope is taking a swipe at those of us who shine the light on his evident designs to undermine Holy Mother Church in all manners possible.  It's worth noting that Father Spadaro accuses those who criticize Amoralis Lamentia as "being influenced by the devil".  Hmm.  Do I detect a coordination of talking points here?

But what is behind the pope's decision to use vulgarity?  As I mentioned earlier, I never even heard of these terms, and I'm not particularly naive.  Several others never did, either.  So what gives?  Who would even think to use terms that describe perverted practices?  One of my friends pointed out that such language would be quite familiar to the "gay community", that is, those who regularly engage in such perversions as part and parcel of their lives.  With whom is the pope surrounding himself?  One who lies with dogs arises with fleas.

This is the Vicar of Christ who is now not only spouting thinly-veiled heresy - now he's uttering vulgarity to boot.  As I said before regarding the cardinals and the dubia, let us pray that the course of this papacy changes and soon.

Correction - Today is not the first time such vulgarity spewed from the pope's mouth.  Almost word for word he uttered the same bile in 2013.  What is filling the mind of the Vicar of Christ?  Please, Lord, awaken us from this surreal nightmare!

Does The Pope Regard Traditional Catholics As Niggers Of The New Age?

Remember three years ago when Pope Francis asked "who am I to judge" when discussing the situations of gay people?  It sure sounds so nice and non-judgmental now, doesn't it?  Contrast that with this screed that he uttered against those Catholics who prefer the Tridentine rite (Extraordinary Form).  He speaks particularly derisively towards young people who prefer that rite over the Ordinary rite.  To wit: "Pope Francis told Father Spadaro he wonders why some young people, who were not raised with the old Latin Mass, nevertheless prefer it. And I ask myself: Why so much rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something, insecurity or even something else. Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid."

Let's unpack this.  Notice that he equates "preference for the Tridentine rite" with "rigidity".  Then "rigidity" is equated with "insecurity" and "not true love".  The pope is slandering those faithful Catholics who prefer the Tridentine rite, portraying them as "insecure", "rigid" and not possessing "true love".  What ever happened to "who am I to judge?"  Let's address that now.

When the pope uttered that now-infamous quote three years ago, he was applying that to people living in states of mortal sin.  With that, he avoided the task of rebuking sinner, of setting them on the path of salvation.  However, when it comes to those Catholics who do obey Christ and His Church, he is quite judgmental towards them, demonizing their piety.  In this LifeSiteNews piece, read what Anya Proctor has to say about her love for the Tridentine Mass.  Her insights are nothing less than wise and profound.  Do you think this young lady deserves to be belittled by the Vicar of Christ?  Yet such is the treatment meted out to her and to countless others as well.  Liturgyguy believes this screed by Pope Francis to be a direct insult to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.

Catholic Family News believes that we are being demonized as the new "deplorables" or as I've observed, this is more relegation of us to the status "niggers of the new age".

A Psychiatrist Examines Insults From The Vatican

Today's LifeSiteNews features an article written by Dr. Rick Fitzgibbons, a psychiatrist.  He read the article in La Civita Catolica (linked here, at the bottom of the page) in which the two authors are trash-talking the alliances between faithful Catholics and Evangelicals who share common concerns for western culture.  He brings his professional training and experience to bear as he detects issues of anger and control-seeking in the writings of the authors.

Might these issues be factors in some of the pope's own words?  Antonio Spadaro, one of the two La Civita authors, is close to the pope.  It isn't unreasonable to believe that the pope at least indirectly influenced the writing of that article.  Moreover, in yesterday's homily, the pope lobbed yet another insult against "Catholics who think they are perfect and scorn others".  Notice how once again the pope is fashioning a "straw man" out of Catholics who are trying to adhere to the Church's traditions, painting them as hypocrites who despise others.  In doing so, he attempts to hold us up to ridicule and scorn.  This is just the latest; in that first link to my article I link to other sources where the pope's slanderings of faithful Catholics are chronicled.

Yesterday a group of these evangelicals who were belittled by La Civita wrote an open letter to the pope, asking him for an audience so they could discuss these issues.  Now the pope is supposed to be game for ecumenism and dialogue, is he not?  Will he agree to an audience?  It would be grand if he did, but I'm not holding my breath.