Climate Change: Pope Francis Says World Headed For ‘Suicide’

PopeFrancisMikeJournalists Pope Francis talks to journalists during a press conference  he held aboard the flight  on the way back to Italy,
Monday, Nov. 30, 2015.

Its “now or never,” the Pontiff says

Pope Francis said the United Nations’ conference on climate change that began in Paris on Monday may be one of the last opportunities for countries to take steps toward avoiding an environmental catastrophe.

“I am not sure, but I can say to you ‘now or never’,” he said when asked if he thought the Paris summit would be a turning point aboard the papal plane on Monday, Reuters reports. “Every year the problems are getting worse. We are at the limits. If I may use a strong word I would say that we are at the limits of suicide.”

Pope Francis, who pushed for Catholics to pay attention to climate change last year, pointed to rising sea levels and Greenland’s melting glaciers as evidence of a need for nations to act during a conference with reporters on a flight back to Rome after his six-day visit to Africa.

“I am sure that the (Paris delegates) have goodwill to do something. I hope it turns out this way and I am praying that it will,” Francis said.
Visit Time, Pope Francis Says World Nearing Climate Change ‘Suicide’

Comment

Can you believe this? The world is in turmoil, killings, terrorism, bombings, Christians wiped out in the Middle East; the Church is in turmoil, with apostasy widespread, and the Pope is worried about the weather?  Share your thoughts – mine are unprintable.

69 responses

  1. No scientist me, but I have read people like Popper on the philosophy of science.

    What strikes me as most odd about the whole anthropogenic climate change phenomenon is how its proponents have consistently tried to make the facts concur with their hypothesis rather than vice-versa which is the very essence of scientific discovery. For the history of scientific discovery is nothing other than the continual slaying of beautiful hypotheses by inconvenient and, to this extent, ugly facts.

    So scientists should be supremely comfortable with facts. They should positively rejoice when their hypotheses afe challenged because it is in the rough and tumble of hypothesis–challenge-to-hypothesis that science actually develops. But the history of the theory of anthropogenic climate change (note that it used to be called ‘global warming’, but that expression had to be abandoned after the earth ceased heating up more than twenty years ago) is littered with episodes of the facts being deliberately skewed in order to fit the hypothesis (remember the infamous hockey-stick graph anyone?). This is, to say the least, anti-scientific. And then there is the very ugly war directed against those scientists who do not toe the line (remember David Bellamy, anyone?). It seems to me that scientists–and, if I may say so, other academics and thinking human beings in general–should be extremely comfortable with those who dissent from their hypotheses as long as the dissent is based on fact.

    No, I may be no scientist, but I fear our political masters and their scientist acolytes are not telling it as it is. The earth’s climate has always known variations, as the ice-fairs on the Thames during the Maunder Minimum demonstrate. But that was long before the industrial revolution. So the question arises: if we have had very significant fluctuations in temperature before we started emitting all that carbon, how can we be sure that that it is the carbon driving the climate change now? Do not the sun and ocean currents also come into it, and to what extent? I have never heard these questions anwered to my datisfaction.

    As for Pope Francis, he is as impressionable as he is impetuous. Above all, he wants to be popular, and this is a disastrous trait in one called to be a prophet. Ergo, it is inconceivable that he should not go with the flow on this issue which must surely warm his populist heart to the core as the head of the Roman Catholic Church finds himself aligned for once with the Western intelligentia.

    I am honestly convinced that future teachers of theology are going to have a field day with Francis. They will use him to demonstrate not just the difference between the private opinions and the magisterium of the Pope, but, far more impirtantly, the fact that the ‘ecclesia docens’ is also a function of the ‘ecclesia discens’. If the reigning Pope does not do his homework, the authority of his teachings is bound to be compromised.

    Francis may turn out to be providential if he helps Catholics to understand a very important fact: the Pope is not an absolute, but the privileged and authentic interpreter of a tradition which transcends him. He is himself an expression of this tradition and is bound by it, so that any attempt to subtract himself from it causes him to precipitate from the realm of the magisterium to the world of private opinion where ie is just one citizen among many others.

    Cardinal Newman once said that lightest word of a bishop was heavy. How I wish the current Bishop of the Catholic Church understood this.

  2. Another popular myth about ‘climate change’ is that it’s caused by ‘too many people in the world’. What next from Francis? The green light for contraception, sterilisation and abortion?

    In the past I’ve often argued that the Church….’will always be at odds with worldly ways, otherwise She endorses the same errors and follies as the world does’….Oh, dear.

    • WF,

      It is just getting more and more unbelievable. What is very interesting in that article from Damian Thompson, however, is that HE is also on the wrong track: “I think the Pope is right about condoms and Aids;” and, thus, once again, he demonstrates that his reputation as a “traditionalist” is well wide of the mark. Yet more evidence that a liking for the TLM of itself is not evidence of a real, live authentic, orthodox Catholic – not even one who writes for the Spectator.

      What is very telling, too, as this Pope shows himself to be the worst ever pope in history, over and over again, is the absence of our previous papolatrists, those who would rush to defend him no matter what he said, blaming the “translation” or the “media” for misrepresenting him. They’ve gone to ground now, big time. That, really, says it all about how bad the situation is at this time – even the diehard papolatrists have given up defending him. Always something to be glad about, as Pollyanna would say (and did!)

      • There is NO way Pope Francis can be called “the worst ever Pope in history”, come on!!! As for those who admire him and are loyal to him, we haven’t gone to ground, we’ve just given up on YOU! Bye!

          • MM,

            That’s a very good question – which will never be answered by “Perplexed” because the very best he could come up with would be the name of some pope whose sins of impurity are on public record. He could never, EVER, in a million years name any pope who savaged the Tradition of the Church, mocked and ridiculed those who are rightly attached to it; take it from moi, he will NEVER be able to name a pope who undermined Christ’s teaching as does Papa Francis, day in and day out.

            Not in a million years. Popes who were sinners, well, we’ve had no shortage of them. We don’t give a thought as to the nature of Papa Francis’s sins (we refuse to dwell on his stated enjoyment of the sensual tango, including when performed at the end of Mass in the sanctuary; nope, forget about that…) because, well, there was never any guarantee from Our Lord that popes would be sin-free. No, our complaint about Pope Francis is that he doesn’t appear to have a Catholic thought in his head, and if he does, then they don’t reach his lips according to the microphones on the planes carrying him on his various very long journeys from one continent to the next on his celebrity jaunts…(oh dear… think: emissions! … tut tut)

      • Francis is one of the Best Popes the world has ever had,. This can be seen from the amount of foam around the mouths of the Pick& Mix brigade.

        • Dano/Danny Coll

          That’s a really ignorant, silly thing to say. Like, Hitler must have been one of the best leaders ever in the world, which can be seen by the “amount of foam around the mouths of the Pick & Mix Brigade”.

          Are you really that ignorant? Or just having a laugh?

  3. Francis should cease this transparent chasing of celebrity and worry instead about saving souls, rather than the environment.

    At times I wonder if even some of the gerrymandering cabal which delivered him to the Throne of Peter must be aghast at the way his pontificate is panning out.

    If there is a silver lining to this cloud it is, as Editor identifies, that the silence from Francis’ former defenders is defeaning. And surely his antics are – time and again – proving the SSPX correct as to the state of emergency existing in the Church.

    Every time he opens his mouth, it is only ever to muddy the waters of Catholic teaching and / or attack faithful Catholics. It is never to teach or inspire. You would get more sense out of a jibbering drunk on a night bus.

    As regards condoms, anyone who has so much as glanced at the data knows full well that the badly affected (wrt HIV) parts of Africa are overwhelmingly non-Catholic areas which have been ploughing ahead with condom use. Areas with Catholic majorities are relatively unaffected by HIV, due to the traditional, sensible, restrained sexual behaviour prevailing in those societies. Public Health Experts and Statisticians agree with the Church that the solution is behavioural and value based, not “piece of latex” based. But of course, Francis only cares for looking good in the secular spotlight.

    Even in the UK, we can see how hopeless condoms are, with homosexual men in particular affected by massive rates of HIV and other diseases. Where exactly is the effect of these miracle-condoms, where are their big successes? There are none – the Emperor has no clothes!

    And again he attacks those who, he claims, think they know the truth. Strange, I have never felt Jesus Christ was at all ambiguous or vague in what he taught us. Goodness knows what Francis makes of Him.

    Rorate sums Francis’ latest rambling interview, with his ducking questions etc, up with this gag:

    “Master, is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause?”
    Our Lord Jesus Christ: “There’s hunger in Judea, so I won’t answer that.”

    • GS,

      “Master, is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause?”
      Our Lord Jesus Christ: “There’s hunger in Judea, so I won’t answer that.”

      Brilliant! Absolutely spot on, superbly brilliant!

  4. This ‘pope’ really is such a goat’s a#se. Isn’t there anything we laity can do (other than pray) to get him booted out of office….?

  5. Yes, the Church is in very serious trouble under this Pope. Someone somewhere needs to play the fraternally rebuking part of St. Paul with this errant Peter!

    • Prognosticum,

      Thank you for the links provided, an interesting read indeed. Christopher Booker is right to be sceptical about climate change. But how easy it is for people to be caught up in it.

      http://www.vigilantcitizen.com/sinistersites/sinister-sites-the-georgia-guidestones

      This link show the Georgia Guidestones with a version of 10 commandments, one of which being getting the world population down to 500 million or less people living on this planet. It seems to tie in with Maurice Strong’s ideas. Very little imagination is needed to think about how to reduce the world’s population.

      A pity Pope Francis is jumping on the climate change bandwagon, especially when he shows contempt to Tradition and Dogmas of the Catholic Church.

      A 5 minute prayer said by the Pope and Bishops in Consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary is the only option to be carried out.

  6. Man made Climate Change?. Could it be that all the creatures of God, the sun, moon, stars, planets, the wind, the oceans, the mountains, are in rebellion not against God, but against man, and not for burning fossil fuels, but for man’s rebellion against God?. In that sense and only in that sense I suppose one could say man made climate change, but who pray tell among the enlightened (laugh) gathered in Paris after alighting from their fuel guzzling air conditioned jets, would be even remotely open to any such suggestion?. Correct, you got it in one, zilch.

    • Sacred Scripture certainly supports your view. Just look at Genesis’s account of the natural consequences of original sin.

      A friend of mine, a priest, insists that unrepented and unconfessed serious sin can have megative effects on bodily health. Fascinating as it goes, but I suppose that the evidence could never be more than anecdotal.

  7. Man-made climate change has been proven to be a man-made fraud for years, whose real agenda is fully aligned with the New World Order tyranny, but now I think we need to deal with man-made doctrine change – which, thanks to this Pope, is the real crisis facing humanity. Actually, the change is to no doctrine at all, which completes the Marxist deconstruction of the Catholic Church into just another Protestant sect.

    • I really don’t think Papa Francis needs any help from Marx – in fact, I think he, Papa Francis, could teach HIM a thing or two about how to destroy the Catholic Church in few well chosen gaffes. On planes.

  8. “…the Pope is worried about the weather? Share your thoughts – mine are unprintable”
    Mine either…

    • Lionel,

      I popped into The Remnant website just now and what Pope Francis said about the Catholic Truth bloggers (and other “fundamentalists”) is just incredible. Evil, I believe is the word he used… Click here to read it for yourself.

      Here’s one quote: “We Catholics have some — and not some, many — who believe in the absolute truth and go ahead dirtying the other with calumny, with disinformation, and doing evil.”

      “They do evil,” said the pope. “I say this because it is my church.”

      WOW – and here’s me thinking it’s Christ’s Church. And the Archbishop of Glasgow who confirmed me (he had a good excuse for slapping me on the face, I bet Archbishop Tartaglia wishes I’d apply to him for conditional Confirmation!) forgot to tell us it was evil to defend the Faith. In fact, I explicitly remembering him telling us we had a DUTY do defend it, and to believe it, every word.

      Goodness me, how we’ve been misled…

      • No, I think he meant… but, of course, who I am to judge… you are good people who have just gone side-ways. You’ve nothing to be ashame of.

      • Editor

        To be fair to Pope Francis, his words were seriously taken out of context.

        He actually said, and I was standing beside him, “it’s ma baw”.

      • I bet Archbishop Tartaglia wishes I’d apply to him for conditional Confirmation

        Absolutely hilarious Editor! 😀

  9. Westminster Fly gave that link to the interview on the plane (3rd post here) and I have read several times over Pope Francis’s ‘reply’ to the reporter’s simple and straightforward question about condoms and aids. Am I missing something here, or is the reply complete gibberish? My suspicion that this Pope is certifiable grows stronger by the day.

  10. This, I am afraid, is just Francis being Francis. What he knows about truth or Catholic moral teaching would probably not fill the back of a fag packet, but there he blows with a twenty-something foot ploom of liberal verbage.

    I repeat what I said in my opening post: here we are in the realm of purely private opinion and some very sloppy thinking.

    • Prognosticum,

      Spot on. The Pope has such a high opinion of his own private opinions and such a low opinion of Catholic Tradition and teaching, that he has opted to foist the former on us at every opportunity. Tragic.

  11. Whilst I do not think Pope Francis is (one) of the worst office bearers ever, I also do not think he is evil.
    He is however amongst the most ill informed – on scientific matters- and the subject of very mendacious advice.
    We need look no further than that practising Catholic blogger Marc Morano for proof.

    http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/09//24/special-report-unholy-alliance-exposing-

    This gallery of crooks will hopefully one day be exposed for the criminals they are. That the leaders of the One True Faith should turn to them for guidance is a crime against humanity.
    Now in our second week in Paris, and Mrs Aprodite and I can attest to the benefits of Global Warming – God bless it.
    It cures the common cold.
    It cures arthritic big toes.
    It cures stiff left knees.
    It cures stiff necks.
    It cures eases arthritic hips.
    It ripens the red grape.

    On the down side, it caused the resident Cyprian mosquito to develop a liking for green tinged blood.
    The local Palm trees are a nuisance however, as the sunbeds need to be moved regularly as shadows block out the sun.
    I was after some advise, dear editor, the Merlot bottle(s) say “best served at room temperature”
    Would that be Scottish or Cyprian room temp. do you think?

    Missing you all.

    • W4,

      What could be more evil than to denounce objective truth? Or did you mean that Francis himself is not evil, but perhaps in the service of evil? And I’d be curious to know what Pope you think was worse than the present one (if that’s what you meant by “office bearers”).

    • Waterside4,

      Your response to the use of the word “evil” is understandable in this context, because, today, “evil” is used only in connection with terrorism, murder, theft etc. and the image is one of a demon with horns. Preferably red, which, unfortunately, is my favourite colour…

      However St Thomas Aquinas defines “evil” as “the absence of the good we [have a right to] expect.

      If we don’t have a right to expect a pope to uphold the Catholic religion, end of, well, then, you are right. We cannot use “evil” with reference to his exercise of his office.

      If, however, we DO have a right to expect every pope to uphold and teach and defend and spread the Catholic religion then, what we are witnessing today, IS, indeed, “evil” – and it comes straight from Hell.

      That’s not to make a definitive judgment on the soul of Papa Francis. We truly do not know the state of the man’s soul or mind. Only God knows that. But – just as we could opine that Dr Harold Shipman was a very bad doctor, given that we have every right to expect doctors not to murder their patients, so we can assert with confidence, that Papa Francis falls very far short of the good that we have a right to expect from a man who accepted the papal office.

      PS – I’d hazard a guess and say BOTH Scottish and Cyprian room temperature, depending where you are at the time, when you are in a room, if you get my drift…

    • Waterside4,

      Your list includes some popes who have spouted heresy or supported heretical positions. It’s not even an exhaustive list. That’s entirely different from what is going on now. We have a pope who is questioning – or more accurately, condemning – the very concept of absolute truth, and who is mocking those of us who adhere to it, and to the Tradition of the Church as “fundamentalists” – get Googling again, if you have time to spare, but you won’t find one anywhere close to Worst Pope in History as Papa Francis.

      Pope Francis, take my word for it, is easily the worst pope in the entire history of the Church. Trust me on this… 😯

  12. The sometimes controversial animal rights charity, PETA, has named Pope Francis as their “person of the year”.

    According to PETA, Pope Francis was chosen for asking the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics and other citizens of the world to respect the environment and treat animals with kindness.

    http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2015/12/01/pope-francis-named-peta-person-of-the-year/?utm_content=buffer788d1&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

  13. While NASA photos show that ice is expanding both in the Arctic and Antarctic the Climate experts tell us that the Ice is melting in Greenland. Of course at both poles the ice is constantly melting in parts then refreezing. Since there has been not increase in world climate they tell us that we should go back to 1850, we have increased temperature of one degree since then so we are half way to the destructive 2 degrees. Since India, Africa and third world countries depend on fossil fuels they are promised help by the West, who still have not found the answer yet to supposed carbon emissions. Those paid professionals on Hurricane Watch, and you get good money by joining this fraud, have found that hurricanes rather than increasing over the years are decreasing. In the Catholic Church it is the members of Cafod who are promoting this ignorance in their holier than thou and caring for the poor agenda. Yet the truth is that this is a Capitalist agenda to keep the third world in check by laying down conditions of help and promoting their agenda on human rights. The One World Cafod talks about is One Government. Was it the Greeks who said that those whom the Gods want to destroy they first make made. When you go from the topic to Syrian and Mr Cameron’s fantasy army to defeat the murderous band called ISIL, then his insistence with that of Obama that Syria will be reconstructed according to his ideas, and the Syrians who support Assad can get lost, you just wonder if you should take a sleeping draught and stay in bed all day, there is such stupidity going on. Maybe somone should suggest that to Pope Francis. It would help us all.

    • G.K.Chesterton was notoriously absent-minded and on one occasion had to send a telegram to his wife saying: Am in Market Harborough STOP Where should I be? STOP

      Well, one of my sources in the Eternal City has informed me that last night at approximately 7.05 p.m. (Western European Time), Pope Francis sent the following telegram to God: It is the Feast of the Immaculate Conception STOP Am in front of St. Peters STOP Am watching a son et lumière show about polar bears and the weather STOP What SHOULD I be doing? STOP

  14. whatever he binds on earth,is bound in heaven, so hey your problems are with GOD not with his clergy !

  15. Danny Coll

    Pope Francis has made nothing binding, so I’m afraid you’re a little misinformed on that score. Besides this, you really should read up on the limits to Papal Infallibility as defined by an infallible Church Council. It will save you future embarrassment.

    The problem today with most modern Catholics, your good self included, is that they know absolutely nothing about the faith they claim to profess. Consequently, they generally assert that Our Lord promised the Pope permanent protection from error. He did no such thing, as a cursory glance through Papal history will conclusively prove. You need to study the teaching of the Church, Danny.

    • You talk of an infallible “Church Council” but which one?,there are hundreds.A Cursory glance through papal history conclusively proves What?. More Importantly,I know absolutely everything about the faith I profess.It was given to me, not by the Church, but by the words of Jesus Christ.It is so straightforward,and simple,that some poor souls struggle with such simplicity, convinced,that there must be so much more to it.

      • Danny,

        Papal Infallibility – always believed by Christians from the earliest times – was eventually defined, with it’s extent and limits, at the First Ecumenical Vatican Council in 1870.

        As for your separation of Christ from His Church – that’s a real giveaway. It is not possible to have a true relationship (whatever that means) with Christ, outside of His Church. He tells us this in the Gospels, e.g. “He that hears you, hears Me” and St Augustine said “I would not believe in the Gospels, if I did not first believe in the authority of the Catholic Church”.

        So, back to the drawing board for thee, Danny…

        • I do not separate Christ from my Church, but my faith is in Christ, A very true relationship, which you obviously find difficult to comprehend. Simplicity really can be a difficult concept,for so many people,which is where my Church comes into it.The Church is there, to offer guidance,understanding and nurturing of our faith. But to state that if all the clergy were wiped out in the morning, and all church property razed to the ground,that I could not continue a true relationship with Christ………….Well come on, isSimplicity really that difficult ?

          • Danny Coll,

            You confuse simplicity with ignorance, perhaps wilfully so. Do not attempt to hide your spiritual sloth behind simplicity, that’s what the Protestants at the Reformation done and look where it led them.

            We all have a Confirmation duty to study our Catholic Faith in order to defend it against error. You clearly know nothing of the Traditional teaching of the Church, and by the sound of it you don’t want to know. Best just stay simple, eh? Well, that one won’t wash with Our Lord at your judgment.

            I wish my conscience would allow me to play the simplicity card, life would be so much less stressful. But I can’t lie to myself, my cross is to defend the Faith with patience in the face of so much simplicity in these days of mass apostasy.

            • The Protestants at the Reformation were disenchanted Catholics,dismayed at the saying’s and doing’s of the pope and clergy of that time. If the Internet and these forums were available to them, they would be using them, exactly the same way as you are, yet your tone seems to dismiss them, as some type of bad thing…………..Pot?…………Kettle?

              • Danny Coll,

                In fact, you will find upon investigation that those disenchanted Catholics you speak of at the Reformation wanted a New Mass in English, a married clergy, rejected Transubstantiation and therefore refused to kneel to receive Communion, prefering instead to stand with their hands outstretched. They tore high altars, tabernacles and pious objects from their churches and rejected all Traditional Papal teaching. Sound familiar?

                Aside from that, Martin Luther, among others, married a nun while the apostate Fr. John Knox became a bit of a letch. I doubt very much if they would have found this blog to their liking. Perhaps they would not have been so inclined to split from the Church, however, had it turned as accommodating as it has since Vatican II.

                • If Fr John Knox became lecherous, this would be due to him taking the example of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, Cardinal Beaton,and others of the Church of that period. The Church at that time was neither Holy nor Sacred Luther, Knox and others were brave in the stance they took.They wanted mass in a language all could understand………can’t see God having a problem with that. Married Clergy? Can’t recall any sacred prohibition (although not my own preference) Transubstantiation, I personally have no problem believing this,though others find consubstantiation easier to get their head round

                  • Danny Coll,

                    If you have no problem with the works of excommunicated heretics or with those in the Church today whose faith does not extend to believing in Transubstantiation, then you really should not be identifying yourself as a Catholic. No Catholic who has the fullness of the Catholic Faith could write what you have written.

                    As for clerical celibacy, there are numerous formal Church prohibitions against it, most recently those of John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

                    It seems to me that while you came on this blog criticising us for not obeying the Pope, who you indirectly asserted was permanently infallible, the ensuing debate has revealed that it is in fact you who reject Papal authority, as did Luther, Knox and all the other Protestant revolutionaries.

                    This exchange is now at an end, for I see that you have no interest in truth or doctrinal orthodoxy.

                    • “my cross is to defend the Faith with patience” obviously, only until your defence collapses under the weight of your false cross.

                    • Danny,

                      Instead of throwing out Smart Alec comments which are, in fact, meaningless, why not answer Athanasius properly?

                      What is the “false cross” which you think Athanasius is carrying?

                    • Yes, Littleflower. He was Fr. John Knox prior to his apostasy, and you will know that the priestly mark can never be removed from the soul. Once a priest, always a priest.

      • Danny Coll

        Sorry, I assumed that you would know which Council had defined Papal Infallibility so I omitted naming it. It seems you don’t know your faith as well as you claim when such basic knowledge escapes you!

        Also, the cursory glance through Papal history was to prove to you that Popes can sometimes be personally bad, even deviant, individuals, regardless of the dignity of the office they hold. This knowledge should disabuse you of the utterly false notion that everything Pope Francis says and does is good and wholesome.

        The fact is that this Pope has done more damage to the Catholic Faith by his careless statements and behaviour (I’m giving His Holiness the benefit of the doubt) than any other Pope since the foundation of the Church. Your sensus fidei should be telling you that. The very fact that you come on here spouting blind obedience to him is therefore extremely worrying. We are only obliged to obey the Pope when the Pope himself is faithful to the deposit of faith handed down through Tradition. There is, after all, a higher authority than the Pope, and that is Almighty God.

        We Catholics don’t just follow what one Pope says, we follow what all the Popes through history have continuously taught. So if one or two or three Popes deviate from that age-old teaching in a way that harms the faith, then we are obliged, say the Saints and Doctors of the Church, to respectfully disobey in favour of the Tradition teaching, in which doctrinal orthodoxy is certain.

        I think Editor said enough on the other matter – your separation of Christ from His Church – which is a classic Protestant error.

        • Athanasius

          I didn’t know John Knox had been a priest, and am doubly shocked by him! Thanks for the info.

  16. Danny Coll,

    The Remnant Newspaper has written to pope Francis asking him to either change course and behave as Our Lord wished when tasking St. Peter to “Feed my sheep”, or to resign from office.

    The letter carries an appendix describing in well-researched detail the need for the letter to have been written.

    The initiative is linked to a petition from the faithful.

    Given your homespun philosophy that if all the clergy were wiped out it would make no difference to your personal relationship with Our Lord, it would be interesting to learn whether you, having read the following link would be for or against signing the petition:

    http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2198-the-year-of-mercy-begins

  17. I don,t have to follow the link When the Holy Spirit installs a Pope, who am I to tell the Spirit He is wrong ?

    • Dano/Danny Coll,

      Well, obviously, then, all the pre-Vatican II popes were wrong. Plain and simple. Most especially Pope Saint Pius X who condemned just about everything that Pope Francis believes .

      So, how to explain that. Would you say that the Holy Spirit picked Pope Pius X but then later changed his mind about his infallible teaching and picked Pope Francis to put it all right?

      Before you reply, recall some very basic attributes of God: He is immutable, unchanging, unchangeable… which is why He left us a determined body of doctrine which applies to all people in all times and places until the end of the world.

      You need to read Pascendi, Pope Saint Pius X’s landmark encyclical on the errors of Modernism (and Papa Francis is a manifest Modernist) but I’m not wasting my time putting the link on here when you think you know it all and didn’t feel the necessity to visit the link posted by Leprechaun. Arrogance?

      It is very basic Catholic theology that the Holy Spirit is not guaranteed at a conclave. Hence the Holy Spirit would be responsible for all the bad popes in history. Nope. Can’t be the case. There is only one, limited, guarantee promised by Christ, and that is that no pope will pronounce any erroneous teaching to be infallible and binding on the faithful. That’s all. There’s no guarantee that any particular pope (not pointing elbows or anything) won’t spout baloney on planes to journalists or talk nonsense in interviews with atheists.

      The Holy Spirit is never “wrong”. That’s evident in the way that the Catholic Church continues to uphold true doctrine and morality, despite the manifest evil wishes of the senior hierarchy of our times. So, in summary, it’s not the Holy Spirit Who’s wrong, it’s Papa Francis. Get over it 😀

  18. A couple hundred years ago, it was right to send 6&7 year old children up chimneys. no one including the clergy raised objections to this practice.This practice no longer occurs, because life evolves. God created an evolving world, and an evolving Church Some would gladly go back to the kids up the lum. others to the inquisitions, but most of us are happy moving forward with God and his Church.Time travels in one direction only. Get over yourselves, and deal with it !!!!!!!!!

  19. Dano,

    Sending children up the chimneys was an unsavoury aspect of Protestant Britain, as was child prostitution at that time. That’s why it’s imperitive to oppose the looney liberals in the true Catholic Church today who are deluded enough to want to imitate the rebellious folly of the 16th century heretics.

    As for evolution. A baby grows into a child, and a child into a teenager, and a teenager into an adult. But the person remains the same, merely reaching the potential that God placed in him. In other words he develops; he does not become a different species, which is what evolution ridiculously asserts both in human and doctrinal terms! You need to look into the theory of evolution a little more, comparing its mythical claims against established scientific fact, before making further uneducated, dangerous comments like this in the public domain.

    To suggest that Divine Revelation is subject to alteration with changing times, which in essence is to suggest that Divine Revelation is neither immutable nor infallible, is both heresy and blasphemy against the Almighty. Remember the words of Our Lord: “heaven and earth may pass away but my words will not pass away.” God does not change His teaching and laws to accomodate a rebellious generation. “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever.” That is the certainty of our holy religion in the most tumultuous times of human history, like this apostate era.

  20. I was horrified beyond words to see the way St Peter’s is being used to promote the climate change hoax, which emphasises the need to de-populate the world.
    https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/sacrilege-catholic-leaders-react-to-vaticans-climate-change-light-show

    Pope Francis is on a list on a website showing how poorly he is thought of by people who know the truth about the global warming scam.http://www.wnho.net/global_warming.htm

    At least there are pro-life people who are speaking out about this abuse of St Peter’s. Why don’t more bishops and priests join in? There must be some who are appalled, apart from Father Z who quotes Scripture, “The Devil goes about like a roaring lion” to show his thoughts on the matter of projecting a picture of a lion on the front of the holy shrine of St Peter’s.

    To think this horror show took place on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception just beggars belief.

%d bloggers like this: