Skip to main content

Might WWIII & Francis's Amoris Laetitia really be about Rejection of "God's own Governance of the World" that is Natural Law?

 Breaking the Ten Commandments: Discover the Deeper Meaning: Eric  Butterworth: 9780871593399: Amazon.com: Books

 7 Bible verses about Breaking The Ten Commandments

 Volodymyr Zelensky is dancing in heels #shorts - YouTube

Volodymyr Zelensky is dancing in heels ...

Above: Ukrainian President Zelensky (2nd from left) and... other men perform a homoerotic skit on Ukrainian television. 

The modern secularist, or at least the educated modern secularist, needs to be brought up to the level of the ancient pagan before he is likely to take Christian revelation seriously.  He needs a renewed understanding of the nature on which grace builds and apart from which faith, revelation, and the supernatural falsely seem to float in mid-air, without a foundation in reason or reality.  He needs natural theology and natural law -- natural theology and natural law grounded in the truths even the pagans knew, natural theology and natural law as articulated and defended within Scholasticism, within Thomism -- and he needs it now more than ever.  - Catholic Philosopher Edward Feser [http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2013/09/natural-law-or-supernatural-law.html]

Catholic pundit Ann Barnhardt asked why the Western globalist elite such as Joe Biden and Francis seem to want war with Russia. Here is part of her speculation:

Now, let’s look at why a KGB agent with a history of murdering his political opponents, and who dumped his wife and took up with a gymnast, and is clearly addicted to facial mutilation, is being painted as a “Christian fundamentalist theocrat tyrant dictator”.

Putin has said the following things:

-Sodomy should not be publicly glorified, promoted or displayed.
-Children should not be exposed to or propagandized into sodomy.
-Children should not be trafficked and sold to sodomites under the guise of adoption (which is what ALL “gay adoption” is.)
-Men and women should get married to each other and have children.

That’s it, really. These points aren’t even exclusively Christian. Every one of these points falls under the Natural Law, which is why even atheists and pagans, up until just a few years go, almost universally held these items as givens.

If you are old enough, stop and think about YOUR perception of sodomy, say, thirty years ago when the big push in the media was just beginning.

Now just stop and consider where we are today. Speaking against sodomy is already criminalized as “hate speech” and “discrimination”.

And, to the point of this essay, the Sodogarchy (aka Globohomo) are literally, right now, as I type this, agitating for NUCLEAR WAR, first and foremost in EUROPE, which is, of course, the center of Christian Civilization, with Rome being the visible central locus of the One True Church. In order to install Sodogarchy as the dominant cultural milieu, Christianity must not only be infiltrated, but completely memory-holed. Every reminder of even the existence of Christianity must be PHYSICALLY destroyed.  The Church MUST be destroyed in every sense, both spiritually and physically. [https://www.barnhardt.biz/2022/03/07/this-isnt-world-war-three-it-is-far-far-worse-this-is-world-war-sodomy/]

What is natural law?

The Mosaic website's Dr. Mark Latkovic who is professor of moral and systematic theology at Sacred Heart had this to say about what natural law is:

The Natural Law: "Written Upon Our Hearts"

God's universal standard of right and wrong is rooted in our human nature and knowable through reason and a well-formed conscience.

Let's face it. On the subject of morality, our world is really confused. Virtue is vice and vice is virtuealthough we don't use the language of virtue and vice much anymore. But we do talk a lot about rights. (Oh do we talk about rights!) That's not always a bad thingby no mean—particularly when we link rights with duties. But the Catholic Church also has had guardianship of an older language: the language of natural law.

Unfortunately, the terms "nature" and "law" aren't looked at favorably these days. When our secular culture hears law, they primarily hear "no." When they hear nature, they hear only "environment."

But the Church uses these terms in a much different sense in her moral teaching, even if that teaching may involve a firm noeven an absolute noto a particular evil such as abortion or euthanasia.

What is Natural Law?

When she speaks of "natural law," the Church indicates to us that it is a moral law whose principles pertain to free human nature. This is the same law that St. Paul said God has "written in our hearts" (cf., Rom 2:15).

So natural law is both a "supernatural" reality and a "natural" one. St. Thomas Aquinas indicates this twofold character when he defines natural law as "nothing else than the rational creature's participation of the eternal law" (Summa Theologiae, I-II, Q. 91, a. 2). By eternal law, St. Thomas means God's wise and loving plan for all of his creation. Thomas also calls it "Divine Providence."

Natural law, then, is our way of sharing in God's own governance of the world by means of human reason. Put another way: God has made all men and women with a particular nature one that can both reason and will and, when reasoning about practical matters, we can look at our actions and ask, "Is this act in accord with the highest moral standard of all: that of God's eternal law?" [https://mosaic.shms.edu/the-natural-law-written-upon-our-hearts]

In 2016, even the Francis friendly Catholic Insight website seemed to be saying that Amoris Laetitia might be about trying by sleight of hand of get around "natural or divine law":

However, one must be cautious here, for in the whole preceding section of this lengthy missive, Newman is at pains to make clear that the Pope and the Magisterium, and we may add the whole body of revealed doctrine, along with all the Church’s laws and edicts, are there to be the primary guide for our conscience. As the Declaration on Religious Freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, declares, one is bound to seek the truth, and once one is aware of a conclusion of natural or divine law, as revealed and defined by the Church, one is bound to hold and keep it.

As may have been expected, the Holy Father in Chapter 8 gives no permission to deliberately violate divine or natural law.  What he does seem to do in Chapter 8 may be reduced to two things:

First, he offers some freedom to Catholics to discern whether certain disciplinary laws, particularly about marriage, fail in some cases to reveal the objective truth of their situation (e.g., the validity, or not, of the first marriage).

Second, he suggests that even in clearly non-marital situations, some people may not be fully culpable for breaking the moral law.

To those in the first case, those in ‘irregular situations’  that may approximate marriage, the Holy Father exhorts them to examine their conscience, for example, the state of their ‘first marriage’, their own level of guilt in the breakdown, who was hurt, and so on.  However, they (and we) must beware that they are not justifying grave evil for the sake of some temporal good.  Although the guilt in any marital separation may vary, we cannot take these words to mean that one can self-administer one’s own personal annulment (nor, on the other side, can one in the interior and secret realm of conscience ‘make’ oneself married to another).  The Pope’s words here are somewhat ambiguous and easily misinterpreted, and I hope that clarification is offered to those in such situations, that they quickly seek a decision in law for the state of their new ‘union’ before joining as ‘man and wife’.  We must recall that if an annulment is not an infallible decree (the marriage may still be ‘real’), far more fallible is our own hazy and rationalizing conscience.

To those in the second category, here is the rub:  Adultery and fornication are grave objective moral evils, and we are bound to avoid them, even if it means great sacrifice or even death, as the untold number of martyrs in the Church’s calendar attest.  For these acts to be ‘mortal sins’, however, one must carry them out with full knowledge and deliberate consent.  One may therefore be ignorant of the moral law, and the Pope quotes Saint Thomas on this in I-II, q. 94., a. 4, but Thomas is speaking principally of pagan cultures who have not had the fullness revelation, or any revelation at all.  This would be difficult to justify in our modern era, where almost everyone has access to the Church’s teaching, especially if they are coming to a Catholic Church for the sacraments. [https://catholicinsight.com/conscience-and-amoris-laetitia/]

Moreover, Austen Ivereigh at Crux reviewing a book by Massimo Borghesi called "Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Una Biografia intellettuale" which shows that much of Francis's thinking comes from Fr. Gaston Fessard who was apparently a historicist or relativist.

Ivereigh claims that Fessard is "anti-Hegelian."

As usual, Ivereigh is wrong.

Back in 1950, Thomist Jules "Icaac was accusing Fessard of identifying this quasi-science of thought with the science of the real order, or metaphysics. That is what Hegel does."

"The executive function of the dialectic, as Isaac interpreted Aquinas, uses the law of thought in a concrete instance of thinking or arguing. Because Fessard used these laws not as laws of arguing, but as laws of the development of historical events, he is again accused of Hegelianism." ("Gaston Fessard S.J., His Work Toward A Theology of History," by Mary Alice Muir, 1970, page 30)

Sadly, Fessard realized that Hegelianism is historicism or relativism.

He hoped to save Hegel's dialectic thought from relativism with his confused twisting of Aquinas, but instead it appears that he became a soft Hegelian historicist and relativist.

It appears that Francis is a historicist and relativist if his thinking comes from Fessard.

As the scholar Fr. Edmundus Waldstein shows this "soft" historicism, that its proponents deny is Hegelian, but is Hegelian relativism despite the denials, brought us subjectivist Bernard Haring's "moral" theology, endorsed by Francis, which denies intrinsically evil acts.

Fr. Waldstein, O. Cist., at sancrucensis.wordpress.com, gives an overview of why Francis praised dissenter Haring and why Amoris Laetitia promotes allowing intrinsically evil acts: 

"In a discussion with the General Congregation of the Society of Jesus, the Holy Father praised Fr. Bernard Haring for having helped overcome a decadent scholastic moral theology that had been fixated on negative commandments, and opened up a way for moral theology to flourish. Now, Haring’s moral theology is a great example of what it might mean to begin processes as opposed to occupying spaces." (Dubia and Initiating Processes, December 7, 2016, sancrucensis.wordpress.com)

Waldstein, O. Cist., explains:

"This is a soft version of certain strands of modern historicism, indebted to Hegel. Having abandoned nature, and an objective teleological order, Hegel and some of his followers give to history a role analogous to that played by nature in classical philosophy.... Haring is proposing something similar for the life of the Church."

"I call this sort of historicism “soft” since its proponents would not all be willing to affirm the dark core of Hegel’s account of the good. But by adopting historicist terms they tend to draw conclusions that imply the basically subjectivist, modern account of the good, and the account of freedom that follows from it. Thomas Stark has shown how these problems play out in the theology of Cardinal Kasper." [https://sancrucensis.wordpress.com/2016/12/07/dubia-and-initiating-processes/#more-5361]

Even Amoris Laetitia supporter Jeff Mirus in a March 7, 2017 article for Catholic Culture.com said anyone who would praise Haring "as one of the first to give Catholic moral theology new life in the twentieth century must be ignorant, confused, or subversive."

In the beginning of the post, titled "Pope Francis and Bernard Haring: The literally infernal cheek of dissent," Mirus said:

"Pope Francis praised...Fr. Bernard Haring, for being one of the first to try to revive an ailing moral theology following the Second Vatican Council."

The article presented some of the moral theologian's dissenting heretical teachings:

"In his 1973 book Medical Ethics Haring defended sterilization, contraception and artificial insemination...According to Haring, under difficult circumstances, we may engage in a process of discernment which leads to the commission of intrinsically evil acts."

The Kasper proposal agenda which became Amoris Laetitia is in significant segments about allowing intrinsically evil acts such as adultery and implicitly homosexuality. Fr. Z said at his website on April 16, 2016:

"'Homosexuality' was the bigger issue with the Kasperites... This is still the Kasperite strategy."

The Kasper agenda and Amoris Laetitia's unavoidable logic is:

It follows that if unrepentant adulterers can receive Holy Communion, then unrepentant homosexuals can receive the Eucharist, too.

This relativism it appears brought us Amoris Leatitia's "spreading of heresy" and it's denial of intrinsically evil acts such as adultery, contraception and sodomy which EWTN's World Over Fr. Gerald Murray, Josef Seifert and the Filial Correction so clearly show to be the fruits of this papal document.

Does Francis believe that there is no "possibility of an objective basis for truth" and that there is no objective meaning or reality? (Dictionary.com definitions of nihilism)

Austen Ivereigh at Crux reviewed a book by Massimo Borghesi called "Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Una Biografia intellettuale" which shows that much of Francis's thinking comes from Fr. Gaston Fessard.

Ivereigh claims that Fessard is "anti-Hegelian."

As usual, Ivereigh is wrong.

Back in 1950, Thomist Jules "Icaac was accusing Fessard of identifying this quasi-science of thought with the science of the real order, or metaphysics. That is what Hegel does."

"The executive function of the dialectic, as Isaac interpreted Aquinas, uses the law of thought in a concrete instance of thinking or arguing. Because Fessard used these laws not as laws of arguing, but as laws of the development of historical events, he is again accused of Hegelianism." ("Gaston Fessard S.J., His Work Toward A Theology of History," by Mary Alice Muir, 1970, page 30)

Sadly, Fessard realized that Hegelianism is historicism or relativism.

He hoped to save Hegel's dialectic thought from relativism with his confused twisting of Aquinas, but instead it appears that he became a soft Hegelian historicist and relativist.

It appears that Francis is a historicist and relativist if his thinking comes from Fessard.

As the scholar Fr. Edmundus Waldstein shows this "soft" historicism, that its proponents deny is Hegelian, but is Hegelian relativism despite the denials, brought us subjectivist Bernard Haring's "moral" theology, endorsed by Francis, which denies intrinsically evil acts.

Fr. Waldstein, O. Cist., at sancrucensis.wordpress.com, gives an overview of why Francis praised dissenter Haring and why Amoris Laetitia promotes allowing intrinsically evil acts:

"In a discussion with the General Congregation of the Society of Jesus, the Holy Father praised Fr. Bernard Haring for having helped overcome a decadent scholastic moral theology that had been fixated on negative commandments, and opened up a way for moral theology to flourish. Now, Haring’s moral theology is a great example of what it might mean to begin processes as opposed to occupying spaces." (Dubia and Initiating Processes, December 7, 2016, sancrucensis.wordpress.com)

Waldstein, O. Cist., explains:

"This is a soft version of certain strands of modern historicism, indebted to Hegel. Having abandoned nature, and an objective teleological order, Hegel and some of his followers give to history a role analogous to that played by nature in classical philosophy.... Haring is proposing something similar for the life of the Church."

"I call this sort of historicism “soft” since its proponents would not all be willing to affirm the dark core of Hegel’s account of the good. But by adopting historicist terms they tend to draw conclusions that imply the basically subjectivist, modern account of the good, and the account of freedom that follows from it. Thomas Stark has shown how these problems play out in the theology of Cardinal Kasper." [https://sancrucensis.wordpress.com/2016/12/07/dubia-and-initiating-processes/#more-5361]

Even Amoris Laetitia supporter Jeff Mirus in a March 7, 2017 article for Catholic Culture.com said anyone who would praise Haring "as one of the first to give Catholic moral theology new life in the twentieth century must be ignorant, confused, or subversive."

In the beginning of the post, titled "Pope Francis and Bernard Haring: The literally infernal cheek of dissent," Mirus said:

"Pope Francis praised...Fr. Bernard Haring, for being one of the first to try to revive an ailing moral theology following the Second Vatican Council."

The article presented some of the moral theologian's dissenting heretical teachings:

"In his 1973 book Medical Ethics Haring defended sterilization, contraception and artificial insemination...According to Haring, under difficult circumstances, we may engage in a process of discernment which leads to the commission of intrinsically evil acts."

The Kasper proposal agenda which became Amoris Laetitia is in significant segments about allowing intrinsically evil acts such as adultery and implicitly homosexuality. Fr. Z said at his website on April 16, 2016:

"'Homosexuality' was the bigger issue with the Kasperites... This is still the Kasperite strategy."

The Kasper agenda and Amoris Laetitia's unavoidable logic is:

It follows that if unrepentant adulterers can receive Holy Communion, then unrepentant homosexuals can receive the Eucharist, too.

This relativism it appears brought us Amoris Leatitia's "spreading of heresy" and it's denial of intrinsically evil acts such as adultery, contraception and sodomy which EWTN's World Over Fr. Gerald Murray, Josef Seifert and the Filial Correction so clearly show to be the fruits of this papal document.

Does Francis believe that there is no "possibility of an objective basis for truth" and that there is no objective meaning or reality? (Dictionary.com definitions of nihilism)

The relativist and nihilist Michel de Certeau believed in all of the above.

In simple words, de Certeau's theology denies objective truth.

The Francis considers him the most eminent modern theologian. Francis said:

"For me, de Certeau is still the greatest theologian for today." (onepeterfive.com, March 8, 2016, "Pope Francis Reveals His Mind to Private Audience")

De Certeau in his greatest book "Heterologies" said:

"It is not Mr. Foucault who is making fun of domains of knowledge... It is history that is laughing at them. It plays tricks on the teleologists who take themselves to be the lieutenants of meaning. A meaninglessness of history." ("Heterologogies," Pages 195-196)

Historian Keith Windschuttle shows that the Pope's favorite modern theologian is a radical who thinks that there is no outside reality. Windschuttle wrote:

"Of all the French theorists... de Certeau is the most radical. He is critical of the poststructuralist Foucault for his use of documentary evidence and of Derrida for the way he privileges the practice of writing. For de Certeau, writing is a form of oppression... he argues... writing itself constitutes the act of colonisation..."

"Like both structuralist and poststructuralist theorists, de Certeau subscribes to the thesis that we have access only to our language and not to any real, outside world..."

"De Certeau claims that writing can never be objective. Its status is no different from that of fiction. So, because history is a form of writing, all history is also fiction." ("The Killing of History," Pages 31-34)

Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis's Amoris Laetitia.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost - Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

- Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

"[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See."
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)


Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said "the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church."
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

- "If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

- "Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 -  LifeSiteNews, "Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers," December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows "sexually active adulterous couples facing 'complex circumstances' to 'access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'"

-  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

"The AAS statement... establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense."

- On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

"Francis' heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents."

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes:  

- Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: "212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted...Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden" [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

- Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times "Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003": http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

- Tucker Carlson's Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written" according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1
 
- A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1
 
What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: "Anitfa 'Agent Provocateurs'":
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God's Will and to do it.
 
Pray an Our Father now for America.
 
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic , he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him , or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

Wernz-Vidal: "One cannot consider as Schismatics those who Refuse to Obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person Suspect or, because of Widespread Rumors, Doubtfully Elected"

    Pope Francis is tottering on the precipice of Hell. None of this means he isn't the pope, and such talk among the laity is scandalous in its own right. Not a single cardinal in that 2013 conclave has come out and said the election was rigged and Bergoglio isn't the pope, that he is in fact an anti-pope . If he is, a future pope can declare that, when Jorge Bergoglio will no longer be a pope. But if the very men gathered in conclave haven't made that public accusation,  anyone who is suggesting that better take into account that they too will have to give an account of themselves to Almighty God when they die . Such talk adds to the scandal of the "little ones," the simple, even potential converts, who, when they hear big-mouth Catholics on social media saying he's not really the pope, draw back from approaching the Church. Do any of us desire to stand in front Our Blessed Lord as the Supreme Judge and explain why, in our desire for more c

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk