a Deeply Defective Encyclical

It has become a sad and painful realization that not all the popes of Holy Mother the Church have been holy.

Only during the tumultuous and deeply troubling pontificate of Francis did ordinary Catholics have any motivation to question the personal sanctity or the competence of any pope. In our efforts to find precedence, we have, of course, subsequently come to learn that Pope Honorius was anathematized in 680 A.D., condemned as a heretic and excommunicated — forty years after his death! If we looked further, we found the inexcusable moral turpitude of the Borgia Pope Alexander VI which brought the papacy and the administration of the Church into nothing less than disrepute. In modern times we have the widespread dissension, division, and disaffection, occasioned by Pope John XXIII in convening of the Second Vatican Council for no pressing or apparent reason — and whose prescient last words  — which went unheeded — were: “Stop the Council!” ¹ The destructive aftermath, of course, is clear to everyone, and the Church is still — after more than 50 years — reverberating with that monumental collapse and everywhere we look it is crumbling. It will not be destroyed, but it may be torn down to its foundations.

In a climate of spiritual license we now find current popes canonizing virtually all their immediate predecessors — a scandalous state of affairs given the utter mediocrity of Paul VI (who surrendered the sacred Papal Tiara — the Triregnum used by all popes since the 8th century — and all it signified) to the Buddhist U Thant who presided over the U.N. —  and which was never to be worn again), and the outrageously blasphemous “ecumenical” convergence of all the world’s “spiritual” leaders at Assisi in October 1986 called for by John-Paul II  in pursuit of the Second Vatican Council’s emphasis on the non-denominational avenue to salvation open to every adherent of every religion, however primitive and profane — whether or not it so much as acknowledged Christ’s sole, unique, and absolutely necessary Sacrifice on the Cross.

In Francis, however, we find the papacy going beyond “ecumenism” — even beyond religion itself. In his present and deeply defective encyclical, “Laudato si” we find the present Pope, Francis, issuing encyclicals on the environment and economics!

But it is imperative to understand that Christ also recognized a greater and more pressing need still:

An economist’s job description, on the other hand, is explicitly temporal and material: to research and analyze economic issues; it precisely pertains to the world, matter, money, and financial assets. Pope Francis, by contrast, has an individual right, as do all men, to an opinion on economic issues — but even as Pontiff he possesses no authority in them since he has no credentials for them.

To better understand the incongruity, let us ask: Would you go to Warren Buffet for “spiritual advice on moral matters?” And, conversely, “Would you go the pope for “economic advice concerning your retirement options?” Really? It is a matter of competency and invested authority. Would you attend a seminar featuring Warren Buffett on the topic of “saving your soul and going to Heaven”? Would you go to one featuring Pope Francis on “efficiently organizing your work strategy and finances”? You would cock your head in bewilderment and politely decline both. Say it is not so! Or do we have a deal for you on ocean-front property in Nebraska!

• Our Holy Mother the Church

• Our Holy Mother, Mary

... and now ... to our incredulity, a third  — we find foisted upon us, a third: “our holy Mother Earth”...?

Indeed, Pope Francis, in his encyclical, Laudato si, insists that we:
 

Yes, Saint Francis of Assisi wrote the beautiful Canticle of the Sun from which Pope Francis selectively draws in this encyclical  — but he egregiously neglects (with most “progressive” bishops and clerics, to say nothing of the stultified laity) to mention even once Saint Francis’s stern admonition in closing that same Canticle:

“Woe to those who die in mortal sin!
Happy those she finds doing Your most holy will.
The second death can do no harm to them.”
 

Pope Francis, on the other hand,  absurdly asserts that,“to commit a crime against the natural world is a sin against ourselves and a sin against God”

It is worthwhile noting that he is quoting — ecumenically of course — “His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew” (On Earth as in Heaven: Ecological Vision and Initiatives of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew) the worldwide leader of the Orthodox Churches — which are not in communion with Rome. Prior to the Second Vatican Council, popes quoted from Christ, His Apostles and His Saints within the Catholic Church.)

It is not only a ridiculous but a blasphemous notion. We cannot sin againt “Mother Earth” any more than we can sin against a stone: it is not a person created in imago Dei, and it certainly is not a deity, except in pagan religions, New Age Theology, and Wicca — and, it would appear, the present papacy.

How far Saint Francis’s spiritual vision is  ... from Pope Francis’s economic vision: With great urgency, he insists that “The system of production and distribution of food must be radically rethought.” (We do not know what school of theology this derives from; very likely Jesuit in origin, for the Jesuits, once so fiercely loyal to the Church and the papacy are now, by and large, today’s modern apostates within the Post-Modern Church that Pope Francis appears intent on constructing, even as he “deconstructs” the Church of the Ages). The Holy Father is not aptly named, after all. “Francis: re-build my Church, which as you can see is falling into ruin.” Thus Christ spoke to Francis of Assisi in 1206. He did not direct Francis to reform feudal economics.

If much of this is reminiscent of New Age thought and the culture of the 60's, we are at least inclined to wonder at the correspondence, yes?

We pray for Pope Francis, that God lead him and guide him in His ways — and not the ways of the world, for we have greater authority to which to appeal than “His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew.”  As Catholics we have the unimpeachable witness and admonishment of two:
 

In our humble — and perhaps even mistaken opinion — the last truly holy and absolutely faithful Pontiff was Pope Pius X (the veritable bane of the liberal and “progressive” mind-set that permeates our Post-Modern Church) . We do not assert that the Seat of Peter expired after his death. We are not Sedevacantists —  yet. Whether or not it has been heroically Catholic in the last 50 years is, in our opinion, very questionable. The Church has suffered much and terribly as a consequence of Vatican II. But just as Pope Pius X sat upon the Cathedra that Honorius and Alexander stained, another Pope of heroic Catholic sanctity may await us and restore what had been — once again, in our opinion — illicitly expropriated from us. In that sense we are, indeed, Faithful to the Sacred Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Holy see in Rome when it is exercised as such in conspectu Dei, and in complete continuity and agreement with that 2000 year Deposit of Faith — which is susceptible to being (illicitly) ignored or prescinded from to the ends of man, but from which no one can deprive Catholics, and which none can abolish.

Remember the admonition of Saint Paul to Saint Timothy: