Pope Spouts Feminist Propaganda…

PopeFrancispensivecropped(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis says there is still much to be done in order to give due recognition to women, both in society and in the Church.

Speaking on Wednesday during the General Audience in St. Peter’s Square, the Pope said that not only must the voice of women be listened to, but that it must also be given weight and authority.

Listen to the reprort by Linda Bordoni:  

Continuing in his Catechesis on the family, Pope Francis focused on the great gift that God gave humanity when he created man and woman and on the Sacrament of marriage.

Reflecting on the complementarity between man and woman, Francis said that the Scripture tells us that “God created man in his own image… male and female he created them” and that man and woman bear the image and likeness of God not only as individuals, but also together. 

He said that in God’s plan, sexual differentiation is not ordered to subordination, but to communion and procreation and he said that this reciprocity brings harmony and enrichment to the human family. 

But, pointing out that it also presents a constant challenge and that modern culture has opened new scenarios, the Pope pointed out that there is much work to be done in order to give women their due recognition.

The very way in which Jesus considered women – the Pope said – shines a powerful light on a long road still to be tread, a road upon which we have only taken a few steps. This road – Francis said – “is to be travelled with creativity and audacity”.

The Pope also touched on issues that have come to the fore thanks to new freedoms and new perspectives opened up by contemporary culture.

Asking himself whether the so-called “gender” theory that aims to annul sexual differences may also be an expression of frustration and resignation due to our inability to confront a problem, the Pope said that: “removing the difference is the problem, not the solution”.

And inviting men and women to speak more to one another, and to respect and love each other, Pope Francis also urged intellectuals “not to abandon this theme as if it had become secondary within their commitment to build a more just and free society”.

Nowadays – the Pope concluded – as we sense the responsibility to do more in favour of women, recognizing the weight and authority of their voices in society and the Church, we must also ask ourselves to what extent society’s loss of faith in God is related to the crisis of the covenant between man and woman. 

The challenge faced by the Church, and by all believers and families – he said – is to rediscover the beauty of God’s plan, the imprint of his image in that covenant.  Source

Comment

Why isn’t somebody in the Vatican telling the Pope that informed Catholic women detest the feminist propaganda that he is spouting?  “Due recognition”?  Whatever happened to taking the lowest place?  Is the Church nothing more than one more workplace with everyone battling for promotion? Answers when you’re ready, please and thank you…

70 responses

  1. Well the women who fancy themselves as priests will be pleased with the penultimate paragraph. And what ‘weight and authority of their voices’ is imagined in addition to the weight and authority they have always had as they formed and nurtured successive generations?

    • Christina,

      My own thoughts exactly, it is exactly as you say. I am truly scandalised by this pope. He is being led by the nose by the very enemies of the Church! It’s incredible.

  2. Yes, MM. I’ve just watched the BBC2 programme ‘This World’, examining ‘…..why Christianity is facing the greatest threat to its existence in the very place where it was born….’ I wept as I saw what is there being suffered for Christ and compared the situation of these victims of Islamists with that of the truly dreadful feminists in the western Church. How can this Pope involve himself in the insanity of these viragos while virtually ignoring his suffering flock, and, for good measure, praising Islam at every opportunity. I find myself hoping that he is mad rather than the alternative.

  3. Christina,

    It’s truly difficult to know what to think are the possible causes for this pope’s words and actions but given his approval of the sensual – who can forget that tango in his presence in the sanctuary of the cathedral in Argentina? Or this And now this shocker, I can’t help thinking that here we have, simply, not a “mad” pope, but one who is very much at ease in the modern culture, with all its permissiveness and enjoying – in fact – the secular spirit of the 21 century. Little wonder that he’s fallen for feminist propaganda, with so little liturgical or moral sense. Imagine! Imagine having to say that of a pontiff! Sad.

    And this at the very moment in history, when we need the opposite, a holy pope. Tragic.

    • And this at the very moment in history, when we need the opposite, a holy pope. Tragic.

      So we got the wrong Pope? Well isn’t it amazing that the Holy Spirit actually had the timerity to allow a Pope to be appointed without asking Editor’s opinion? Tragic.

      • Eileenanne,

        You appear to be falling into the error of papolatry – again. I have posted this piece by Dr William Marra RIP many times on this blog. Clearly you haven’t read it – or if you have, it hasn’t sunk in. Please, please read it – particularly the piece about the Holy Spirit choosing the Pope. Thank you.

        On Papalotry

        Editor’s note: This is edited transcript of a portion of the speech “Alternative to Schism” given at the Roman Forum Conference in August, 1995. In this presentation, Dr. Marra presents a clarification that will help Catholics to think critically and correctly, when confusing and contradictory statements emanate from even the highest authorities in the Church.

        Belief and Obedience

        My great teacher, Dietrich von Hildebrande wrote four outstanding books on the present crisis in the Church. Recently, his latest book, The Charitable Anathema was published. I wish we could mail a copy to Rome. A chapter in this book contains one of the most important lectures he ever gave to the Roman Forum. It concerns the difference between belief and obedience. He called it the critical difference. It was masterful.

        The point is this: if there is a problem on a question of truth, and there’s a big dispute, and finally Rome speaks (invoking its infallible authority) and says, “This statement must be believed de fide”. Then this is the end of the dispute. Roma locuta causa finita. Rome has spoken, the case is finished. That is the end of it. Therefore, we owe assent of belief to statements of truth.

        However, practical decisions of Churchmen, even the highest authorities; the Pope, bishops, priests are something quite different. We do not say, for example, that a command of a Pope or decision of a Pope to call a council is true or not. We can say that it is wise or not … it is opportune or not. Such a decision in no way asks us to assent to its truth. It asks us to obey the command or commands that pertain to us. This is what von Hildebrande meant by difference between belief and obedience. And we Catholics are never obliged to believe that a given command, or given decision of anyone, including the Pope, is necessarily that of the Holy Ghost.

        The Limits of Divine Protection

        There is a kind of papalotry going around. It acts as if no matter what comes out of Rome, it must have been inspired by the Holy Ghost. This line of thinking holds, for example, that if Vatican II was called, it means that the Holy Ghost wanted to call it. But this is not necessarily the case. Convoking Vatican II was a personal decision of John XXIII. He may have thought God was telling him to call it, but who knows? He has no special charism that guarantees he would recognize such a decision as coming from the Holy Ghost with theological certitude.

        We can say that the Pope has the power to call a council. We can say that the authorities in the Church can call upon the Holy Spirit to guarantee, in a very narrow set of cases, that what comes from this council is de fide. (And nothing in Vatican II was pronounced de fide, Ed.)

        The glory of the Church is that it has supernatural help to define truth. It has supernatural help to guarantee that its sacraments are efficacious and so on. But who said that the decision to call the council was protected by the Holy Ghost?

        Some Clarifications

        Let’s look at certain practical decisions of any Pope.

        A Pope could command the suppression of a religious order. That happened a few centuries ago, the Pope suppressed the Jesuits. He was a little premature, I think they should have waited. This type of suppression concerns obedience, not belief.

        For all practical purposes, Paul VI suppressed the Roman rite. We have no Roman rite. Pope Paul VI thought he had the liturgical power to do this. Von Hildebrande called it the greatest blunder of Paul VI’s Pontificate. So to suppress a religious order, to suppress a rite, to name a bishop is a matter of obedience, not belief, and it is not protected by the Holy Ghost.

        We have 2,600 (5,065 as of 2011- Ed) bishops in the Church. Does that mean the Holy Ghost picked all of those? That is blasphemy, friends. Do you want to blame the Holy Ghost for Archbishop Weakland?

        As already mentioned, to call a council is a practical decision of the Pope. A person may piously believe that God inspired it. But no one can say that this is an object of faith.

        Also, we must not believe that whoever becomes Pope is the man God wants to be Pope. This is a play on words that “this is the will of God.”

        Every theologian has always understood there are two senses to the will of God. The positive will of God and the permissive will of God.

        Now, we know that God positively wants holy people in the Church … “this is the will of God, your sanctification”. But when evil is done, this is through the permissive will of God. It is not something that God directly wills, but something that He permits when men exercise their free will.

        Before any conclave which elects a Pope, the electors are supposed to pray for guidance by the Holy Spirit. Now, if they are truly men of God, and they really pray, it is to be expected that the Holy Spirit will give them the right choice. But if they’re willful, ambitious, carnal men, and they are not truly opening themselves to inspiration, an unworthy candidate of their own choosing may be the result. That doesn’t mean that the man elected ceases to be Pope. That doesn’t mean that he loses the protection of the Holy Spirit when he teaches faith and morals. But it could be that this Pope will end up to be a disaster.

        Now how do I know this? Well, not because I know that any of the modern Popes have been a disaster, this is too controversial. But in Church history, there are many instances of disastrous Pontificates.

        We Learn From History

        Dr. John Rao is a good friend of mine. He is a professor of Church History. He is very unhappy with the so-called conservative people who, when they do their doctor’s degree in history, they will document all of the disastrous decisions of the past Popes. They will write about all the disastrous things that happened. But when it comes to the present situation, they’re mum. They believe that everything must be right. But if everything must be right and perfect in present Pontificates, then why do they write their doctoral dissertation on the disasters of Pope Honorius, Pope Liberius, Pope Alexander VI or anyone else?

        So, Rao insists that we learn from history, and that in no way can we say “ ‘X’ was elected Pope therefore that is the will of God”. No, it may be either the positive will of God or merely the permissive will of God. But it could be that the man selected to be Pope may be the worst candidate for the office.

        It is as if God says, “you carnal electors and you carnal people in the Church who did not pray enough will get what you deserve.” The Papacy is still protected, and will never teach with its infallible authority something as true that is false, but everything else is up for grabs. The given Pope might do every type of abomination … his personal life might be a disaster, he might be self-willed, and so on. It could be that he is a horrible person.

        He can also be a disaster for the faith even if he is a good person.

        The Papacy is not protected from such a calamity. And this is a point on which we ought to have a real dialogue with the so-called conservatives.

      • Where was the Holy Spirit when we ended up with Stephen VI? John XII? Alexander VI?

        You’re asking the Holy Spirit to take the blame for an awful lot.

  4. Our Lord Jesus Christ said that those who exalt themselves will be humbled.

    Also, if the Pope recalls (one must wonder…), the greatest woman to have ever lived was the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God.

    Enough said.

    • There is a difference between people (in this case women) exalting themselves, and others being encouraged to give them proper respect.

      • There is nobody in the land who would dare NOT to give women “proper respect” these days. It’s become a police matter. Progress? Not in my book.

        The feminist movement is led by mostly discontented married or co-habiting women and lesbians. As a single woman, I was NEVER treated disrespectfully and my gender did not prevent me obtaining employment and promotion.

        Those who have fallen for the “I’m being discriminated against because I’m a woman” mantra are useful idiots, nothing more. And that includes – above all – any pope who allows himself to follow such a vile culture instead of seeking to correct it and lead people to a more healthy attitude towards their fellow human beings. The feminist claptrap is divisive and has made men the enemies of women. The news yesterday of the rocketing suicide rate among men, speaks volumes about the damage which this stupidity is doing in society. I’d sooner negotiate with a man than a feminist any day – you can reason with a man…

    • DOTF

      Your quote from Our Lord is important and, for someone allegedly so humble, the scriptural exhortations to humility and seeking the lowest place, seems to have passed Pope Francis by.

      As does the connection between the evil feminist movement, contraception, abortion, priesthood (in the false belief that it represents power of the worldly variety) and the fact that it is nothing but a self-centred and self-promoting philosophy.

      The whole “equality” movement seems to have been embraced by Pope Francis who doesn’t, himself, understand that the only equality that really matters is equal access to the grace of God, which men, women and children enjoy, as St Paul reminds us: “In Christ there is no male or female” (distorted, of course, by the feminists to mean what they want it to mean, that, on this earth, we should all have the same access to the same jobs/vocations, same pay, same everything. Crackers.)

      Again, astonishingly, while what you say is correct about Our Lady, Pope Francis has a different view. He thinks she may have cried out in doubt at the foot of the cross: “Our Lady was human! And perhaps she even had the desire to say ‘Lies! I was deceived!”

      Our Lady of Fatima, pray for Pope Francis.

      • And, indeed, if Mary “may have cried out in doubt at the foot of the cross”, I believe it would have been as Jesus cried out in the garden, “Not my will but yours be done.”

  5. Don’t you women understand that our Holy Father is talking about YOU when he said “not only must the voice of women be listened to, but that it must also be given weight and authority. ” And your response is to spit in his face? How sad.

    • Zita,

      Wrong. The Pope is NOT talking about women like us, he detests women like us, he detests Catholic Tradition so all of us involved in seeking to restore Catholic Tradition have been rubbished in one way or another since the outset of his papacy.

      He must surely rank as one of the worst popes in history, if not the worst ever pope in history, unless, that is, you think popes who were sexually immoral are worse than a pope who causes doctrinal confusion, refuses to publicly uphold the moral law (who am I to judge ‘gays’?) and publicly praises dissenters like Cardinal Kasper?

      • “He detests women like us” — spoken like a true “faithful Catholic.” Shame on you. This is the Holy Father, the Vicar of Christ, you’re defaming. “Catholic Truth?” Please. This blog is scandalous. Shame. On. You.

        • Juliaf,

          “This blog is scandalous…”

          Not half as scandalous as this news of the Pope praising these known public dissenters, who haven’t a Catholic thought in their head. Notice that they are no longer under Vatican scrutiny, but no details given of their shocking anti-Catholic beliefs and certainly no retraction from them. Just “we understand one another better now…”

          In other words, another case of papal abandonment of his duty to teach and rule. Another “who am I to judge?” from this utterly scandalous pontiff.

          Don’t gimme “this blog is scandalous” – gerragrip.

          • Again, this is our Holy Father. Not some priest you have a disagreement with. This kind of talk is harmful to the faith and causes confusion. The Pope has said NOTHING out of line with Church teaching. You are twisting the truth to suit your own thoughts and agenda. Again, shame on you.

            • Juliaf,

              The Pope says things about the role of women that the movement for women’s ordination can use, and that gives them hope that they will get women priests some day (which they can’t). Take this, for example, from the blog report, his own words:

              “But, pointing out that it also presents a constant challenge and that modern culture has opened new scenarios, the Pope pointed out that there is much work to be done in order to give women their due recognition.”

              He doesn’t say what this means and it amounts to saying that the Church didn’t value women properly before. I don’t think you can say that – Our Lady and the great women saints are examples of the way the Church values women. He then said:

              “The very way in which Jesus considered women – the Pope said – shines a powerful light on a long road still to be tread, a road upon which we have only taken a few steps. This road – Francis said – “is to be travelled with creativity and audacity”.

              This is again giving the impression that big changes for women in the Church and society are possible. What can be mean unless he means that the liberals are right to ask for women priests and women to be in leadership roles in the Vatican. How does this square with being a wife and mother? He doesn’t speak specifically enough for a pope. He wants to be popular with everyone and that’s just not possible.

              • I don’t immediately think that his statements and your (Editor’s) assumptions connect. What I’m reading is someone who personally dislikes the Holy Father and his worldview. That’s not charitable, nor is it helpful. There’s a whole lot of “reading into” going on here. It’s upsetting that so-called “faithful Catholics” hate their Holy Father.

                • JuliaF,

                  You highlight the problem with Pope Francis perfectly. He has a “worldview” when he should, like his predecessors before the Council, have a view of eternity.

                  When was the last time you heard a Pope speak of Christ the King and re-state the infallible Catholic dogma “outside the Church no salvation”?

                  But you will have heard the Pope speak many times about human dignity and earthly peace and justice. Is this the primary duty of the successors of St. Peter? No, this is the politics of the world. It’s almost like the supernatural life of grace has given place to a kind of religious/political agitation to create a paradise on earth. Something very precious has been lost at the highest level, that’s for sure.

                  • Athanasius,

                    Well said, although I must add that this…

                    “Something very precious has been lost at the highest level, that’s for sure.”

                    must surely rank as the understatement of the century!

                    Well said!

                • JuliaF,

                  I’ve just written a lengthy reply to you which disappeared when I hit the wrong key so I’m afraid I’m going to make this one very short if not too sweet.

                  I do not hate anyone, and I am surprised that you would arrive at such a rash and uncharitable judgement. Nothing I have written here, or anywhere else, should lead anyone of good will to that conclusion.

                  I do not hate the Pope, but I do hate what he is doing, causing confusion into chaos just about every time he speaks.

                  Given that his “worldview” is more worldly than Catholic, I have every right to dislike it.

                  I hope you understand the necessary distinctions now.

                  • I never said hate. I said you dislike the Holy Father and his worldview. Nothing you’ve written disputes that. Just because he’s dissimilar in style from BXVI or JPII doesn’t make him any less the Vicar of Christ. We are all his flock. Know your role within the Church. Pray for clarity.

                    • Juliaf,

                      You most certainly DID say “hate”:

                      “It’s upsetting that so-called “faithful Catholics” hate their Holy Father.” (16/4/14 at 10.10pm)

                      It’s not about Pope Francis being “dissimilar” to Pope John Paul II or Benedict XVI – they were not faithful to Catholic Tradition either. What they didn’t do, though, was grab the nearest microphone at every opportunity and attack some aspect of Catholic Faith and morals at one level or another. Notably, they did not undermine marriage – they were hated by the secular media for their unfailing support for Catholic marriage and the unborn child, for example. Neither of them urged Catholics not to “obsess” about protecting the baby in the womb.

                      But, listen, if you are not worried at all by this pontiff’s behaviour and words, by his permitting a sensual dance like the Tango in his cathedral in Argentina, by his praise for the public dissenter Cardinal Kasper, by his refusal to condemn homosexual partnerships etc etc. then so be it.

                      That means you will only become irritated reading this blog not because WE don’t know our role within the Church but because YOU don’t know the role of the laity.

                      Oh and please avoid reading certain of the saints, like the laywoman Catherine of Siena, now a Doctor of the Church despite (or because of?) her very firm words to popes, including to one, “resign!” What temerity! And what about St Paul, saying he “withstood Cephas to his face because he was to be blamed”?

                      No, JuliaF, it’s thee, not me, who doesn’t understand the role of the laity. But don’t let us keep you. There comes a “wipe the dust off your feet and move on” moment and I believe this is it for thee and for me. We can’t help someone determined to stick to false beliefs. We are very plain speaking on this blog as time is short and it is important to waken up our fellow Catholics so that they, too, may help to restore the traditional Catholic Faith in all its glory. To those who are quite content with things as they are, we say “we really can’t help you. Goodbye”.

        • Yes JuliaF, it is spoken like a true faithful Catholic. I’m afraid it is you who are guilty of defamation. Please take the time to learn about the Catholic faith before you make rash and unChristian statements about people who do.

          P.S. Do tell if you agree with the teachings of the Holy Fathers/Vicars of Christ on contraception, divorce and remarriage, and homosexual activity.

      • Well, maybe you are right. Actually I believe when our Holy Father said that women should be listened to and given weight and authority, he was acknowledging the faithfulness of many women who suffer persecution in defending their Catholic Faith that they love.

        • …what I meant was, I was agreeing with you that maybe he detests women like (you) who misrepresent what he says.

          • Zita

            Can you give examples of women who have suffered persecution in defending their Catholic Faith? (Apart from the martyrs, that is – such examples are obvious.)

            • Sure. Years ago, I was a volunteer in prison ministry and I had to put up with Catholic women, even a couple of nuns who were influenced by feminist, new age and creation spirituality. I expressed concerns for the misrepresentation at times of Catholic teaching. At other times, they would give the Church teaching but then would try to justify contrary positions emphasizing that we are “to follow our conscience”. There was also abuse of Catholic liturgy etc. Anyway, one Sister and following her another lay female chaplain told me that they were informed that I could be a trouble maker. I endured a lot of verbal persecution at that time because I was faithful to the church’s teachings and concerned about abuses in Liturgy. I am just one example. But what is sad is that some well meaning people are going to the other extreme and have no respect the authority of our Holy Father.

              • Zita,

                What you say about those nuns and “female chaplains”(?) is precisely the way the Holy Father is behaving. He’s all over the place with the Faith, including liturgical abuse (Maundy Thursday washing of non-Catholic women’s feet).

                You are surely not unaware of the confusion Pope Francis has caused in many aspects of Catholic Faith and morals by his off-the-cuff ambiguous statements

                So far he seems to have promoted the heresy of universal salvation, condemned proselytism (the Church militant), refused to condemn the homosexual act (who am I to judge?), has permitted doubt to be cast on the indissolubility of marriage, condemned pre-Vatican II Catholicism as “narcissistic” and “Pharisaical”, etc., etc. Yes, Pope Francis is a huge worry for Catholics, a Modernist of the ilk condemned by his predecessor St. Pius X.

                It is a great mistake to believe that Popes cannot fall into grave personal errors, even errors that can be destructive to the faith of countless souls. There are historical precedents for this. Pope Francis is one such Pontiff. He is without question the very worst of the liberal Popes the Church has had since Vatican II, and I state that fact with the greatest respect to his office.

                No one on this blog hates the Pope; to do so would be to cut oneself off from the Church. But you can well understand why Traditional Catholics, that is, Catholics who know the Faith and the teaching of the Magisterium for 2000 years, are angry and upset at the mess Pope Francis is creating. His Holiness is far more concerned with worldly issues than eternal ones. It’s almost as if he thinks Our Lord came on this earth to found an earthly paradise, which is the complete opposite to what his pre-Vatican II predecessors said.

                My advice to you is that you read the Encyclicals of the pre-Council Popes, see the holiness, wisdom and zeal for souls in their writings, and then read the Encyclicals of the post-Council Popes, particularly Francis, and see the obsession with worldly issues and the absence of authoritative teaching. We all need to open our eyes to the crisis in the Church even at the level of the Papacy and do our Catholic duty accordingly. We must pray for the Pope but we are obliged by our Catholic Faith to resist his errors. That’s what Traditional Catholics do. This duty, however, should always be carried out with respect and charity.

                • Anasthasius and Editor, I have been around for a long time and have had to dicipher who to listen to and who not to listen to. I have encountered groups at least 30 years back, during a time of confusion about what was going on in our diocese and in our parishes, and at first some of people to be traditional and faithful to the Catholic Church. But in time, through the help of the Holy Spirit who guides us in truth, I was able to discern who to listen to and who not to listen to. May you be open to the inspirations of the Holy Spirit. Good bye now.

                  • Zita,

                    It’s a tad arrogant to claim the Holy Spirit’s guidance, not least when you are implying that we are doing work that is displeasing to God, and thus NOT guided by the Holy Spirit. That is the implication of your suggestion that you are being guided away from this blog by the Holy Spirit.

                    There are, however, other spirits at work in souls today – anything but “holy” spirits. You need to test the spirit guiding you against objective data. For example…

                    The Holy Spirit is not guiding anyone who is blind to the crisis in the Church, foretold by Our Lady in the 17th century (Quito) and twice in the 20th century (Fatima 1917 and Akita, 1973 ) and who refuses to denounce Modernism when it is staring them in the face, whether that be in their local parish through the shocking ecumenical events which have led to indifferentism, not missionary efforts, or a Pope who tells them that missionary efforts are “solemn nonsense” in direct contradiction to Our Lord’s final words on this earth, “Go out into the whole world, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”. Goodness, the Pope’s own friend, a Protestant “Bishop” died in a sudden, tragic accident with the Pope’s words ringing in his ears that he did not need to become a Catholic. And then this shocker

                    You think it’s worse that we highlight these scandals and comment on them in plain English, than that such errors are spreading throughout the Church, with even a pope casting doubt on the key dogma of the Faith that “outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation”? WOW! Doesn’t that fall into the category of the most grievous sin which is to deny the known truth? THE unforgiveable sin, in fact – that is, the sin against the Holy Spirit?

                    Anyway, thank you for popping in. Goodbye.

              • Zita,

                There is no-one here who lacks respect for the authority of the papal office, myself included. Arguably, I have more respect for his office that does Pope Francis himself. He’s shown himself much more partial to the title “Bishop of Rome” than to his role as Sovereign Pontiff.

                In fact, Pope Francis has not invoked the authority of his office, not once, since he became pontiff. From the outset, he has spoken off the cuff, expressing his personal views, right, left and centre, without their having any basis in Catholic Tradition. His outrageous and now notorious “who am I to judge” is a classic example. One that will – I have no doubt – haunt him at his judgement.

                Respecting the papal office – like respecting any other professional office – doesn’t mean we have to mince our words. I have no time for that silliness. Who would mince their words if given five minutes with a negligent doctor, lawyer, teacher or any other professional? If I met Pope Francis tomorrow, I wouldn’t mince my words and I certainly wouldn’t mince around him like some star-struck teenager. He’s doing immense damage to the Church and I would tell him that to his face, without any apology and, frankly, without using any title, except “Pope Francis”. Despite my concerns about his immediate predecessors, I had no problem referring to any of them as “His Holiness” or more usually “Holy Father” – I have not once applied either of those titles to Pope Francis. The titles don’t apply to the person – I know that; they are merely titles of the papal office, but I just cannot bring myself to use them in relation to Pope Francis. I’m just preparing for our face to face meeting, you see, and it would sound incongruous, one thinks, if one said: “Your Holiness/Holy Father, you are the worst ever pontiff in the history of the Church!” You’ll get my drift. One just couldn’t do that…

                Like many, if not most Catholics today, you appear to have fallen into the error of thinking that God chooses the Pope, that, therefore, everything he says and does is correct or at least above criticism. That’s a heresy. There are limitations to the scope of papal authority. We have a duty to educate ourselves in the matter of the extent AND the limits of a pope’s authority. Otherwise, we fall into the sin of actually idolising popes.

                If you’ve not done so, I recommend that you go to the Newsletter page of our Catholic Truth website (linked top of this page) and download the current, April, newsletter. Then scroll to page 10. If, after reading that, you can tell us with a straight face that God picked Pope Honorius 1, I will respond in three words: enough said – goodbye!

              • Zita

                I’m sure many of us – and not just the women – have experienced the kind of thing you mention, but I think it’s a little strong to call it persecution.

                As Pope Francis has made quite a few scandalous statements which I’ve no doubt the people you mention would agree with, I think they are the women whose “faith” he is acknowledging. I’d be very happy to be proven wrong.

          • Zita,

            Quote ANYTHING that he has said which we have distorted or misrepresented. Go on. Waiting. (Well, not exactly waiting right now, this minuet, but I’ll be back to read your response to this one as soon as I possibly can…)

            • Editor, Your very words in the title “Pope Spouts Feminist Propaganda…” are insulting and inaccurate in reference to our Holy Fathers words.

              • Zita,

                That is your opinion. Any editor chooses headlines to spark interest, discussion. If you choose to read anything more into this headline than that, then YOU are the one guilty of lack of charity. With respect…!

              • Zita,

                The Pope was spouting feminist propaganda when he said what he said, that’s a fact, so the headline is accurate. Time magazine put the headline “Pope Francis says Church must listen to women”

                What’s that if it isn’t feminist propaganda?

  6. Eilleenanne, I just do not get you. Are you also suffering from the “diabolical confusion” spoken about in the Fatima prophecy? Did you even read the above excerpt from dr. Marra’s writings? You come on here always in the same contradictory spirit. You don’t seem to even want to be disabused. I was where you’re at a few years ago but the difference seems to be that I wanted to learn the truth. My eyes and ears told me something was wrong in the Church and I searched for the cause with an open mind. I hope and pray the scales will fall from your eyes. People like you are part of the problem: good people who defend the indefensible and thus add to the confusion and prevent the cure, so to speak.

  7. And the ‘proper respect’ due to women is that of respecting them in their God-given roles, aiding and encouraging them to fulfil themselves in those roles – not in heeding the strident calls of those who would cast off their femininity, incidentally emasculating men and turning society on its head.

    • Christina,
      agreed that proper respect due to women “is that of respecting them in their God-given roles, aiding and encouraging them to fulfil themselves in those roles – not in heeding the strident calls of those who would cast off their femininity, incidentally emasculating men and turning society on its head.”
      The feminist movement chooses to deny that men and women are very different, not only physically but also spiritually and emotionally. Women are much more in tune with people emotionally, due, to the fact that the female brain is physically different to the male brain. Johnette Benkovic, of EWTN and “women of grace” fame has spoken on this subject in many of her lectures.
      These days, if a mother chooses to stay home and raise her own children, she is greeted with derision. Governments everywhere are desperate to get every woman working outside the home, and usually in male dominated jobs. Virtues such as modesty, chastity, etc are seldom spoken of anymore.
      I am very disappointed that the Vicar of Christ, rather than teaching, governing and sanctifying the faithful, as he is call to do by virtue of his sacred office is instead pandering to the spirit of the world and demeaning Christian virtue and practice.

      • Spiritus,

        Well said. The blindness which is preventing this pope from seeing the truth, and realising that he must lead the culture, not be led by it, is just amazing. We’ve had “Amazing Grace” – maybe time to put “Amazing Blindness” to music and send a copy to the Vatican. You write the music, I’ll pay the postage!

  8. Olaf, well said. I do so wish that Eileenanne would acknowledge WF’s post and state why she continues to hold views so at odds with those of Dr. Marta and of all Catholics correctly catechised concerning conclaves and papal infallibility.

    • Christina,

      Allow me to answer that. The reason why people like Eileenanne cling to their false beliefs about the papacy, is because they do not want to have to follow through the consequences of admitting the truth. I refuse to believe they are as stupid as their stubborn repetition of their nonsensical position might suggest.

      I see it all the time in people who are, e.g. “involved” in their parishes as readers, giving out Holy Communion etc. and other parish activities. The thought of being – like us – on the “outside” is not pleasant. Easier to go with the flow and join the Pope in castigating those of us guilty of nothing more than clinging to the Faith of our Fathers. It could be that Eileenanne is one of those “involved” (in the above superficial sense) in her parish or it could just be that she refuses to accept the Church’s teaching on the extent and limits of papal authority. I don’t know, but I do know that refusal to accept the known truth is a grave sin, and she has been given the known truth many times on this blog alone.

    • Olaf,

      “Clearly the Pope has never met any of the ‘old-time’ reverend mothers of my past acquaintance”

      Or hospital matrons, of old! Hospitals were probably much cleaner and better run when matron was in charge.

  9. it is disappointing – and tiresome – to see the Pope pander to secular sensibilities like this. He doesn’t seem to realise that pandering only begets more demands for pandering – It doesn’t sate the attention seekers he is indirectly addressing here.

    This kind of idiocy seems to have started with John Paul II, with his “girl altar boys” novelty; what has that achieved, other than to portray service as a feminine pass-time? Regarding this seemingly desperate need of the Conciliar Popes to pander to secular values – it truly makes one marvel to ponder “what are they thinking?”

    Anyone who knows anything about the Catholic Church realises that – rather than some feeble constituency on the peripheries – women are in fact the main pillar and the beating heart of the Church; and it has been thus ever since Our Ladys fiat.

    • Gabriel Syme,

      “…it truly makes one marvel to ponder “what are they thinking?”

      That’s the problem. They don’t think. That IS the problem, it seems to moi. And me.

    • Gabriel,
      you ask, in relation to “girl altar boys”.. “what has tat acieved, other than to portray service as a feminine pastime…” I am pretty sure that having girls on the altar has also contributed to a lack of priestly vocations. Many young boys in my former parish gave up serving Mass because they did not wish to do so with girls. The mixed company embarrassed them.

  10. I also get so angry with Pope Francis who is constantly betraying Our beloved Catholic Church. He reminds me of the soldiers constantly mocking Christ during his passion.
    It is so apparent that the faith is lost in our churches. In my local church there is no confessional booth, on the bulletin the priest states confession can be heard before mass and on request, I am in mass early and nobody is going to confession, but everyone attends communion!
    I try to attend the latin mass as much as possible and the difference is so apparent, they are like two different religions.
    I keep telling my husband I am going to stand in St Peters square with a petition for people to sign that we want Pope Francis to start being Catholic, ex-communicate heretics and reiterate Catholic Dogma and teaching or go back to Argentina!
    Keep up the good work Editor, we would be lost without our authentic Catholic web-sites.
    ps the Rosary is no longer an option to all Catholics!
    Yours in Christ,
    Chloe

    • Anne,

      Well said – and thank you for your kind encouragement of the work of Catholic Truth. Much appreciated.

      Now that you are a part of it, welcome aboard!

  11. I admit I have not read all the responses to date, so, perhaps someone has touched on this. I believe perspective is a major problem.

    Christ re-reminded us on Holy Thursday of the humility (not to be confused with humiliation), the privilege and the dignity of service, as opposed the elevation of one’s status. I believe He also made a distinction between service and servitude which is, in great part, a matter of perspective. For example, when asked to serve, some view the opportunity as a blessing and a privilege to share one’s God given talents, while others may see the same request as demeaning and below their ‘station’ in life.

    Motherhood is under attack. When I hear the term ‘forced birther’ and ‘incubator’ used to describe pregnant women, I cringe. Motherhood is a privilege and a God-given blessing. Women give birth to every individual in every generation. The potential of their influence is immeasurable. Many problems in society can be attributed to the perception that stay-at-home mothers are an inferior class when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. It is time Pope Francis accords the vocation of motherhood the honor it deserves, and recognizes the invaluable service of mothers in the home and in the community, and offers encouragement and support to those women who have bloomed where they have been planted. Women do not need to prove themselves to be males cleverly concealed in the female form! Dignity is accorded not to the perceived importance of the roles we play, but, to how well we perform any role we play,

    “Do not conform yourselves to this age but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and pleasing and perfect. For by the grace given to me I tell everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than one ought to think, but to think soberly, each according to the measure of faith that God has apportioned. For as in one body we have many parts, and all the parts do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ and individually parts of one another.” Romans 12:2-5

  12. Very well said LindainPA.

    I’ve never heard the terms ‘forced birther’ or ‘incubator’ but no doubt they’ll cross the pond soon. Disgusting, but very illuminating of the mindset of the feminazi and their handlers.

  13. I really don’t think the CT bloggers need worry about this. Pope Francis talks a lot, often incomprehensibly, but so far he hasn’t actually done much. I’m surprised he’s taken so long to get round to the feminist issue. But he’ll just talk about it, and get everyone jumping up and down. He is not going to institute the ordination of women. Pity.

    • Pew Catholic,

      He’s used feminist-speak before – this isn’t the first time. Still, it was a slow news day and I thought it might be worth reminding ourselves that here we have a pontiff in need of our unworthy prayers. Like there’s no tomorrow!

      As for “He is not going to institute the ordination of women. Pity”

      Watch it !

    • Therese,

      I wouldn’t laugh if I were you. I’ve met his wife. I told him when they were engaged that no good would come of it but he wouldn’t listen. Alarm bells rang for me, not so much when I discovered that her surname (i.e. maiden name) is Wright but when I found out that her first name is “Always”.

      As I say, he wouldn’t listen… 😀

      • Yeah…..it’s not often that Attila the Hen is wrong…..and I or one am never…ever going to suggest such……

        Did I ever tell you you about the time my wife beat me over the head with a 12 inch Bahco spanner…..rush off to B&Q….these are seriously heavy bits of kit….with sharp pointy bits…..I’m not joking….once the reverberations shook me to the souls of my feet……I said……enough….desist this instant….And she did…..my head bled for 5 hours, not copiously, but bleed it did

        We are still married 25 years later……she didn’t ever go to the Latin Mass back then….she does now…..

        There was only going to be one eventual winner…..obviously I’m far too modest to say that it was….Me…..

    • Gabriel Syme,

      I’ve just read that article and it’s fantastic. I love his plain speaking about Pope Francis which you don’t get in many places. I couldn’t help laughing in places. I will save it to read again. The videos and articles posted on this blog are really enlightening. Thanks for posting this one.

  14. On the subject of Feminism, reposting the following might be in order. Certainly, no Pope or prelate should be going within a country mile of offering anything remotely resembling a hint of support. There is no doubt that the description of this virulent strain of the errors of Russia as Marxist lesbianism is fully justified. The following lengthy article by the very informative Cornelia Ferreira is well worth reading. Here’s a flavour:

    “Now, for feminists, the bottom line is power. Jobs, careers or even ordination are not satisfactory enough. They want to control the world, making it the sinful matriarchal utopia that allegedly once existed. Recall that the Communist Manifesto called for the proletariat to become the ruling class. Ironically, seeking power has made feminists the useful idiots of Communist men! It was from Communist theories that feminist socialism emerged, says Ruether (Rosemary Ruether, a leading American ‘Catholic’ feminist), ‘as part of a comprehensive view of social progress’ that desired to ‘better’ society and religion by supplanting Christian civilization with superior primitive values. Based on these values, she says, feminists ‘sought to render Western biblical and social history non-normative, a passing phase of a larger scheme of social development that looked back to earlier origins.’[40]”

    “Religious feminism didn’t garner much support until after Vatican II, which opened the window to renewal, self-discovery and détente with Communism. In 1979, spiritual feminism became the self-proclaimed enemy of the Catholic Church by declaring that patriarchy ‘must be attacked with all the strategies at our command’. The first line of attack was to declare that women were ‘oppressed’ by the Church and needed ‘liberation’ from its patriarchy. ‘Patriarchy’ is the feminist term for the authority of the Church; another word for it is ‘heirarchalism’. Their spirituality of liberation, feminists say, must replace ‘the spirituality of domination grounded in patriarchy and hierarchy.’ A feminist ‘theology’ was developed as a branch of liberation theology, espousing revolution to achieve social reform in the Church. Equality for Christian feminists means the attainment of powerful positions in the Church, total freedom in faith and morals, and autonomous control over their bodies, i.e., freedom to practise contraception, abortion and perverse sexuality. Class differences and heterosexism are considered expressions of the sin of ‘patriarchal sexism.’[43] ‘Sexism’ is their word for the unequal treatment of women; it is the only sin and the ‘original sin,’ says Ruether.[44]”

    Here’s another useful read:

    https://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/feminism-is-a-heresy/

    • Leo

      Brilliant – I met Cornelia Ferreira at a couple of Fatima conferences in Rome, so was very interested to read that extract from her writings. I laughed at this sentence:

      ” Ironically, seeking power has made feminists the useful idiots of Communist men!”

      The feminists don’t seem to see the contradictions in their position. I once met a self-declared feminist who went on and on about men being the worst thing since sliced bread, and then broke down in tears on one occasion when something annoyed her. Her explanation? Hubby was away working on the oil rigs for…. two weeks and she missed him! Gimme a break.

      There wasn’t a straight face in the room!

      • I think the most cynical thing I ever heard with regard to feminism was the admission by a female colleague who was a staunch supporter of women’s ordination (and used to parade outside Westminster Cathedral with the pro-women priests group) that when this issue comes up in parish groups etc, that supporters had been advised to “turn on the taps” – i.e. to feign tears and distress in order to win sympathy for the cause. I kid you not.

        • Westminster Fly,

          I have no problem believing that about the feigned tears. They are so determined to win their case that they would resort to most things, I have no doubt.

%d bloggers like this: