Francis on Prophets of Doom

Fatima Perspectives ^ | July 11,2015 | Christopher A. Ferrara

[ebb tide]

In Evangelii Gaudium Francis declared (quoting John XXIII) that “We feel that we must disagree with those prophets of doom who are always forecasting disaster, as though the end of the world were at hand.”

Just over a year-and-a-half later, however, Francis declared in Laudato Si’ that “Doomsday predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain.”

A change of position? Perhaps an outright self-contradiction? It is neither. The two statements relate to different sorts of prophet. The first statement, echoing the truly fatuous optimism of John XXIII, scoffs at traditional Catholic “prophets of doom,” including a long line of Popes before Vatican II, who warned of the coming destruction of our entire civilization because of its rejection of Christ and the authority of His Church.

For example, in his encyclical Evangelii Praecones (1951) Pope Pius XII — in line with Pius XI, Pius X, Leo XIII, Pius IX, and Pius VII — summed up the prophecy of doom that Francis, joining John XXIII, belittles:

Venerable Brethren, you are well aware that almost the whole human race is today allowing itself to be driven into two opposing camps, for Christ or against Christ. The human race is involved today in a supreme crisis, which will issue in its salvation by Christ, or in its dire destruction.

Francis will have none of that sort of thing, which would mean that men must actually believe in Christ and obey His teaching as expounded and defended by the perennial Magisterium in order to avoid not only loss of their souls but the raining down of divine wrath upon the whole human race. It would also mean that the world is threatened by enemies of Christ, who must be opposed. Not exactly music to the ears of someone who prayed at the Blue Mosque in Turkey and feels himself competent to declare that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.” It does not seem that Francis thinks that Christ or His Church have a single enemy in the world.

On the other hand, while Francis scoffs at “prophecies of doom” uttered by his own predecessors, he is all ears when it comes to doomsday scenarios propounded to him by atheist, pro-abortion, climate change fanatics who advocate population control and “reproductive rights,” such as Jeffery Sachs and the screwball Francis appointed to the Pontifical Academy of Science, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber.

Heeding the advice of such people, Laudato Si’ employs the word “crisis” 23 times, “destruction” 10 times, “destroy” 9 times, and “danger” or “dangerous” 9 times, “threat” 6 times and “threatened” 3 times. These dire expressions do not concern the consequences of apostasy and sin in the world, but rather “global environmental deterioration.”

So, there is no contradiction at all. Francis is completely consistent. Hence he thinks nothing of prophecies of doom relating to the eternal fate of souls, but is quite concerned about “the increasing use and power of air-conditioning” (Laudato Si, ¶ 55). Now that’s a threat we have to take seriously!

Ironically, a Pope who scoffs at the predictions of his own predecessors about the terrible consequences of society’s rebellion against Christ is actually a sign of the coming fulfillment of the very prophecies at which he scoffs.

Thus does the Third Secret of Fatima continue to unfold before our eyes.

[D Rider]

Speaking of a false prophet...

[Vermont Lt]

The Vatican has wonderful observatories. Perhaps they see something coming we don’t see.

[Mrs.Z]

The Vatican has wonderful observatories. Perhaps they see something coming we don’t see.

Another Exo Vaticana fan. 8^)

[Vermont Lt]

I picked up that theory on a wacko conspiracy web site.

It must be true.

Ha ha.

[SkyPilot]

Do you worhship this man?

[ebb tide]

Do you worhship this man?

"worhship"?

I only worship God, the Blessed Trinity.

Who do you worship? Calvin or Luther?

[SkyPilot]

No, just Jesus Christ. Is there something else?

[ebb tide]

Yes. You forgot God the Father and the Holy Ghost.

But that’s your problem, not mine.

[DanielRedfoot]

Do you mean like Global Warming alarmist there Frankie???

Allow me to give you some advice there Papa.
When foreign dignitaries start publicly handing you Communist Crucifixes, you might be failing miserably at your job, and most certainly messed your calling.

[SkyPilot]

Yes. You forgot God the Father and the Holy Ghost. But that’s your problem, not mine.

I don't deny the Trinity. It's in the Bible.

So how is that "my problem."

Moreover, it is interesting that invoking the Salvation of Christ Jesus sparks your ire.

Matthew 19:25-26, Romans 8:38-39, Romans 10:9-10, Philippians 3:4-11, and Hebrews 7:25 back up what I said.

However, where in the Bible does it say that only the Catholic Church can interpret Scripture? (1.CCC 100, "The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church)

Where in the Bible does it say the Church is Infallible? (1.CCC 2035, "The supreme degree of participation in the authority of Christ is ensured by the charism of infallibility.)

Where in the Bible does it say the Roman church is necessary for Salvation? (1.CCC 846, "How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation.)

Where in the Bible does it say Grace is merited? (2.CCC 2027, "Moved by the Holy Spirit, we can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life, as well as necessary temporal goods.")

That is your problem, and not mine.

[metmom]

The pope is at it again.

[daniel1212]

Now that’s a threat we have to take seriously!

If you are a RC. that is just what you are to do (eph. mine throughout):

It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock...the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors . - VEHEMENTER NOS, an Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.

"The intolerance of the Church toward error, the natural position of one who is the custodian of truth, her only reasonable attitude makes her forbid her children to read or to listen to heretical controversy, or to endeavor to discover religious truths by examining both sides of the question . This places the Catholic in a position whereby he must stand aloof from all manner of doctrinal teaching other than that delivered by his Church through her accredited ministers."

The reason of this stand of his is that, for him, there can be no two sides to a question which for him is settled; for him , there is no seeking after the truth: he possesses it in its fulness, as far as God and religion are concerned. His Church gives him all there is to be had; all else is counterfeit... (John H. Stapleton, Explanation of Catholic Morals, Chapters XIX, XXIII. the consistent believer (1904); Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor Librorum. Imprimatur, John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York )

To such some trad. RCs add:

when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed ; when we love the Pope, we do not say that he has not spoken clearly enough, almost as if he were forced to repeat to the ear of each one the will clearly expressed so many times not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ; we do not place his orders in doubt, adding the facile pretext of those unwilling to obey – that it is not the Pope who commands, but those who surround him; we do not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority ; we do not set above the authority of the Pope that of other persons, however learned, who dissent from the Pope, who, even though learned, are not holy, because whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope.

The Bishops form the most sacred part of the Church, that which instructs and governs men by divine right; and so he who resists them and stubbornly refuses to obey their word places himself outside the Church [cf. Matt. 18:18]. But obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces. - (Pope Saint Pius X, Allocution Vi ringrazio to priests on the 50th anniversary of the Apostolic Union, November 18, 1912, as found at http://www.christorchaos.com/?q=content/choosing-ignore-pope-leo-xiii-and-pope-saint-pius-x

I say with Cardinal Bellarmine whether the Pope be infallible or not in any pronouncement, anyhow he is to be obeyed . No good can come from disobedience. His facts and his warnings may be all wrong; his deliberations may have been biased. He may have been misled. Imperiousness and craft, tyranny and cruelty, may be patent in the conduct of his advisers and instruments. But when he speaks formally and authoritatively he speaks as our Lord would have him speak, and all those imperfections and sins of individuals are overruled for that result which our Lord intends (just as the action of the wicked and of enemies to the Church are overruled) and therefore the Pope's word stands, and a blessing goes with obedience to it, and no blessing with disobedience . - Life of Cardinal Newman, Vol. 2; Chapter 26. The Deadlock in Higher Education (1867); http://www.newmanreader.org/biography/ward/volume2/chapter26.html

Which applies to bishops as well.

to scrutinize the actions of a bishop, to criticize them, does not belong to individual Catholics, but concerns only those who, in the sacred hierarchy, have a superior power; above all, it concerns the Supreme Pontiff, for it is to him that Christ confided the care of feeding not only all the lambs, but even the sheep [cf. John 21:17]. - Est Sane Molestum (1888) Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.novusordowatch.org/est-sane-molestum-leo-xiii.htm

To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teaching, of submitting with docility to their judgment, and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation. Thus, it is an absolute necessity for the simple faithful to submit in mind and heart to their own pastors , and for the latter to submit with them to the Head and Supreme Pastor....

Similarly, it is to give proof of a submission which is far from sincere to set up some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them; and in some ways they resemble those who, on receiving a condemnation, would wish to appeal to a future council, or to a Pope who is better informed.

On this point what must be remembered is that in the government of the Church, except for the essential duties imposed on all Pontiffs by their apostolic office, each of them can adopt the attitude which he judges best according to times and circumstances. Of this he alone is the judge. It is true that for this he has not only special lights, but still more the knowledge of the needs and conditions of the whole of Christendom, for which, it is fitting, his apostolic care must provide. - Epistola Tua (1885), Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage_print.asp?number=403215&language=en

Assent of mind and will (though one may internally disagree, public dissent is disallowed) is required even to encyclicals.

20. Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent , since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me";[3] and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians. - PIUS XII, HUMANI GENERI, August 1950; http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

2. The authority of papal encyclicals is understood as being "undoubtedly great. It is, in a sense, sovereign. It is the teaching of the supreme pastor and teacher of the Church. Hence the faithful have a strict obligation to receive this teaching with an infinite respect. A man must not be content simply not to contradict it openly and in a more or less scandalous fashion. An internal mental assent is demanded. It should be received as the teaching sovereignly authorized within the Church." - Encyclicals: http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/encyclicals/docauthority.htm

Which assent of mind and will is required to more than just formal doctrinal definitions on faith and morals, but to social teachings which are based on them.

The "Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church" (2005) states,

80. In the Church’s social doctrine the Magisterium is at work in all its various components and expressions. … Insofar as it is part of the Church’s moral teaching, the Church’s social doctrine has the same dignity and authority as her moral teaching. It is authentic Magisterium, which obligates the faithful to adhere to it. - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html

They have the duty of observing the constitutions and decrees conveyed by the legitimate authority of the Church. Even if they concern disciplinary matters, these determinations call for docility in charity. - Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2037.

And it is evidenced that the popes last encyclical (http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html) is intended to teach what the Church's moral teaching demands as regards ecology and economy.

For the pope presents his teaching as based upon Catholic teaching. Francis first invokes Pope Saint John XXIII who fifty years ago wrote an Encyclical which addressed his message Pacem in Terris to the entire “Catholic world” and indeed “to all men and women of good will,” as a precedent for this Encyclical.

Next he invokes Pope Paul VI who in 1971 referred to the ecological concern as “a tragic consequence” of unchecked human activity:

Then Francis calls upon Saint John Paul II who In his first Encyclical warned that human beings frequently seem “to see no other meaning in their natural environment than what serves for immediate use and consumption”.

And next he cites predecessor Benedict XVI as having likewise proposed “eliminating the structural causes of the dysfunctions of the world economy and correcting models of growth which have proved incapable of ensuring respect for the environment.”

Then he enlists Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew as speaking in particular of the need for each of us to repent of the ways we have harmed the planet, for “inasmuch as we all generate small ecological damage.”

Next Saint Francis of Assisi is appealed to as the patron saint of all who study and work in the area of ecology,

Francis proceeds to invoke church teaching as foundational to his concerns.

The development of the Church’s social teaching represents such a synthesis with regard to social issues; this teaching is called to be enriched by taking up new challenges.

He next cites "THE WISDOM OF THE BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS" regarding about the relationship of human beings with the world, and as how the "originally harmonious relationship between human beings and nature became conflictual" (cf. Gen 3:17-19). And that "the unbridled exploitation of nature by painting him as domineering and destructive by nature...is not a correct interpretation of the Bible as understood by the Church."

He proceeds to invoke the story of Cain and Abel, and numerous other texts for support. And how "The work of the Church seeks not only to remind everyone of the duty to care for nature, but at the same time “she must above all protect mankind from self-destruction”"

And that "In our time, the Church does not simply state that other creatures are completely subordinated to the good of human beings, as if they have no worth in themselves and can be treated as we wish." And how The Catechism clearly and forcefully criticizes a distorted anthropocentrism...

Francis further calls upon Saint John Paul II as teaching, stating that “God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favouring anyone”.

Moving on, under New biological technologies, he states that the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that experimentation on animals is morally acceptable only “if it remains within reasonable limits..." and goes on to "recall the balanced position of Saint John Paul II."

Francis does on to invoke Benedict XVI as affirming "there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago”

And how the Church set before the world the ideal of a “civilization of love”. And imagines "the Eucharist is itself an act of cosmic love.."

Finally, 172 references in this encyclical cite church teaching and prelates for support.

Although RCs censure evangelicals for seeking to ascertain the veracity of RC teaching by examination of Scripture as their supreme authority, even holding that one must have faith that Rome is authoritative and infallible (which premise is supposed to be the basis for RC assurance of Truth) to even validly know what Scripture consists, yet the fact is that RCs themselves engage in interpretation of their supreme authority. Such as what magisterial level many teachings fall under and thus the degree of required assent, as well as the meaning of such.

This results in disunity, with Rome today being an amalgamation of liberal and conservatives, and with those who dissent in part from V2 teaching and those who profess assent to all. Therefore you have the above teaching requiring implicit assent to basically all public papal teaching, and at the least forbidding public dissent, some of which comes from your own comrades who invoke it in refuting the "recognize but resist" stance of other conservative RCs.

And which you must reject or explain away (unless you will reject modern popes) in order for you to deny that you are bound to give assent of mind and will to social teaching, including the latest papal encyclical, and not to engage in public dissent. Although (unlike infallible teaching) you may internally disagree.

[caww]

Recently on his tour Pope Francis kissed the vial containing the dried blood of Naples patron saint Januarius, which Cardinal Sepe then declared had partly liquified. ...Pope Francis said that since the blood had only partly liquefied, they must all do more 'to win the saint’s full affection'......... and spread the Gospel.

There is so much bibbity-bobbity-boo statements from Francis that it's understandable why some catholics are opposing what he's stating...here he draws attention to "win this dead saint's affection"....(through his blood)...then tacks the Gospel onto his statement as an afterthought.

Though the catholic church clearly states they must follow their Popes lead...it seems to me not all catholics believe this to be true rather it "depends" on their approval if or not the appointed Pope agrees with what they believe.

I say this because there are many negative comments regarding Francis by catholics these days....so the question does remain ...Do they really follow and obey the Popes teachings???....seems to me they think and believe they have a choice.

[Just mythoughts]

Before one jot or tittle of the New Testament ever got placed on plant fibers or animal skins Christ said Mark 13:22 for false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and show signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.

23: But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.

Matthew 13:22 Christ was quoting Moses the law giver found in Deuteronomy 13:1 and is reiterated by Paul in IIThessalonians 2:9 even him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

10 And with all deceive lenses of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

11. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

12. That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

No Christian denomination is labeled.

[Just mythoughts]

Stupid auto-correct is biblical illiterate.

[Iscool]

Francis does on to invoke Benedict XVI as affirming "there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago”

Puttin' it right out there up front...Francis is selling modern Catholics on the rise of the anti-christ...To welcome this one world singular global authority with open arms...And who is it to lead those Catholics to the anti-christ but the false prophet...

To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teaching, of submitting with docility to their judgment, and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation. Thus, it is an absolute necessity for the simple faithful to submit in mind and heart to their own pastors , and for the latter to submit with them to the Head and Supreme Pastor....

Is this what God actually tells us??? Heaven forbid...God gave us the instruction manual with God as the author...He told us to search the scriptures to know what he teaches, not to put our trust in other men...

There's not a Catholic out there who is going to be able to recognize the anti-christ when he shows up...His/her only recourse will be to ask a priest, who will have to ask a bishop who will have to ask his higher authority, 'IS THAT REALLY JESUS'??? And he'll be told, YES, it is...

[daniel1212]

Though the catholic church clearly states they must follow their Popes lead...it seems to me not all catholics believe this to be true rather it "depends" on their approval if or not the appointed Pope agrees with what they believe. I say this because there are many negative comments regarding Francis by catholics these days....so the question does remain ...Do they really follow and obey the Popes teachings???....seems to me they think and believe they have a choice.

Most do the latter, depending upon their interpretation of their sources, while censoring evangelicals who search the Scriptures in order to ascertain the veracity of Catholic teaching, which faithful RCs are not to do.

[caww]

....”faithful RCs”....

How do they even determine who the faithful are?

[CynicalBear]

>>Yes. You forgot God the Father and the Holy Ghost.<<

Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Evidently you didn't know. But that’s your problem, not ours.