Atheist: Pope Destroying The West

Pope Francis

ROME, July 12, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – An atheist philosopher friend of Benedict XVI has strongly criticized Pope Francis, accusing the Holy Father of not preaching the Gospel but politics, fomenting schism, and issuing secularist statements aimed at destroying the West.

In a fiery interview published July 10 in Mattino di Napoli, Marcello Pera, who co-wrote the famous 2005 book Without Roots with then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, said he cannot understand the Pope who, he said, goes beyond the bounds of “rational comprehension.”

A philosophy professor, member of Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia party, and a former president of the Italian Senate, Pera said he believes the reason why the Pope calls for unlimited immigration is because he “hates the West” and is seeking to do all he can “to destroy it.”

He added that he does not like the Pope’s magisterium, saying it is “not the Gospel, only politics,” and that Francis is “little or not at all interested in Christianity as doctrine, in its theological aspect.”

“His statements appear to be based on Scripture,” he said, but “actually they are strongly secularist.”

Immigration has become a highly sensitive topic in Italy in recent months as thousands of refugees arrive every month, mostly from north Africa, placing considerable strain on local communities and services.

Pera’s comments also come after another conversation between the Pope and the atheist Eugenio Scalfari in which Francis allegedly told Scalfari to be “very concerned” about the summit last week of the G20 group of industrialized nations because they have “very dangerous alliances” and a “distorted view of the world.”

According to Scalfari, who is over 90 and doesn’t record his interviews, the Pope also said the G20 worried him because of the issue of immigration, saying the problem is “unfortunately rising in today’s world, that of the poor, the weak, the excluded, of which migrants are part.”  Some of the G20 nations have “few local poor but fear the invasion of immigrants,” he said.

In the July 10 interview Pera, went on to say that he believes the Pope isn’t concerned about the salvation of souls but only social well-being and welfare, and argued that if Europe were to follow the Pope’s position, it would be committing suicide. “The Pope reflects all the prejudices of South America against North America, against the free market, liberty, and capitalism,” Pera added.

On the issue of migration, the philosopher politician believes the Pope’s approach is not from the Gospel, and his words are designed to win easy applause from the United Nations.  His political vision on migrants and society, he continued, has “nothing to do with the Western tradition of political freedom and its Christian roots.”

Pera’s book with Cardinal Ratzinger, whose full title was Without Roots —The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam, warned of the dangers facing civilization if the West abandoned its moral and cultural history. The joint authors called on Western leaders to embrace a spiritual rather than political renewal, accepting the moral values of its Judeo-Christian heritage which would enable society to make sense of today’s economic, political and social challenges.

In this week’s interview, Pera said he believes the open doors approach to migrants that the Pope is advancing will lead to a “bad reaction” with no desirable solution. He said the Pope’s positions underline that he is not in “perfect harmony” with “conservative Catholics and the rest of the Church.”

He added that Francis is not only causing problems in politics over migration, he is also fueling a kind of schism within the Church.

Pera, whose 2008 book Why We Must Call Ourselves Christians contained a preface by Pope Benedict XVI, maintained that an “apparent hidden schism exists in the Catholic world” that the Pope is “pursuing with obstinate persistence and determination.”

But he said this “new course” being pursued by Francis does not convince him at all, and argued that it is “exploding the Second Vatican Council in all its revolutionary radicality.”

Pera further believes these ideas, which he thinks are devastating for the Church, have their origins in the Council. “That aggiornamento (updating) of Christianity secularized the Church, triggering a very profound change, even if it risked bringing a schism that was kept at bay in the years that followed,” he said.

He credited Benedict XVI and Pope St. John Paul II for saving the Church, “resisting and trying to mediate the new with tradition.” They did this in a “lofty way,” he said, but now Francis has brought all back into discussion: “human rights, all without exception, have become the ideal point of reference and compass for the Church” while the “rights of God and of tradition have almost gone.”

In an interview with the National Catholic Register in 2006, Pera warned against multiculturalism, saying it leads to the exact “opposite of integration, because it gives rise to separate communities, that are then reduced to a ghetto-like status and enter into conflict amongst themselves.”

He also said then that his diagnosis for Europe’s future was “not a happy one.”
“If Europe goes forward with its relativist culture, with the refusal of its own tradition, with its low nativity rates, with indiscriminate immigration, then Europe is going to end up Islamized,” he warned.

Referring to Benedict XVI’s comments in Without Roots, he said “the impression today is that Europe resembles the Roman Empire at its fall.”  Source

Comment: 

Well, we know he’s destroying the Church, humanly speaking – but the entire western world? Over to you… 

14 responses

  1. So even the atheists are turning against Francis, whose agenda – by now – is on a hiding to nothing.

    I very much liked the interview with Mr Pera and noted that he accused Francis of desiring to create division in the Church “with wickedness”.

    What excuse can Catholics (especially prelates) now have to remain silent, when even Francis’ atheist friends pan his pontificate? What will the watching world think of the Church, when it seems Catholics will meekly accept any nonsense from Francis, and it is left to well meaning atheists to speak up for the Gospel? The situation sounds like something out of a comedy show.

    Recently, the writer Charles Moore (an english convert) criticised the Papacy but very meekly, only suggesting that Francis was causing “slight” confusion. I have a lot of time for Mr Moore and his writing, but he should have given it to Francis with both barrels, in the style of Mr Pera. (to be fair to Charles Moore, he did describe the current Papacy as being “intellectually deficient”, but he could still have been much more direct and forceful).

    I think Marcello Pera is right about Francis hating the west. Recent evidence includes one of Francis’ sock puppets (Spadaro) writing an article attacking President Trump. It was such an idiotic piece it drew widespread scorn and writer Maureen Mularkey described it as indicating that “the pantomime is out in the open”.

  2. I’m confused about the alleged atheist beliefs of Mr. Pera, who is apparently the author of a book entitled “Why We Must Call Ourselves Christians,” not to mention the co-author, with Benedict XVI, of another book called “Without Roots —The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam.” Rather interesting titles for someone who professes not to believe in God!

    That said, I applaud his scorching of this monster sullying the Chair of Peter. It seems as though there are still strong elements in the secular world who are willing to speak out against Francis, even if his own clergy are largely silent. This reminds me of an old observation about the disappearance of Catholic devotion – esp. the Rosary beads – after Vat. II. The observation was that although the beads were disappearing in the Church, they were re-appearing in the secular world as part of hippie paraphernalia (“peace, love and beads”).

    So far, I believe the most telling condemnations of Francis’ agenda have come from this atheist, and from a rabbi!

    • RCA Victor,

      I thought the same as you, reading that article. Why would an atheist be writing books like “Why We Must Call Ourselves Christians”? It is very odd.

    • RCAVictor,

      I figured Mr Pera was someone who valued the contribution of the Church to civilisation and saw the need for Christian morality but who, for whatever reason, cannot bring himself to know God personally.

      I agree its a strange situation – but good on him for panning Francis in any case!

  3. I’d have to take issue, though, with this statement of Mr. Pera’s:

    He credited Benedict XVI and Pope St. John Paul II for saving the Church, “resisting and trying to mediate the new with tradition.”

    Naive, to say the least…..well, never mind saying the least: that is not only wrong, but completely ludicrous.

    • RCA Victor,

      Again, seeing “St John Paul II” made me think “some atheist”!

      I wonder if there could be a typographical error in that article? Maybe Pera isn’t really an atheist. It is all very odd.

      I do think that destroying the Church is obviously going to destroy what’s left of western civilisation, which depended on the Church in the first place.

  4. As Pope Paul VI said, ” the Church is in a period of auto-destruction”, and “the smoke of Satan has entered the Church”. He should know as he help make it happen. Look up St. Francis of Assisi’s prophecy about a Pope of the latter years (today?) when Christ supposedly said He would not send a pastor but a destroyer. ( http://www.catholictradition.org/francis-prophecies.htm ) . Makes sense to me. We seem to be here now. Judge for yourself. I suggest you get yourself to your nearest SSPX Chapel (http://sspx.org/en) to attend the Traditional Latin Mass of all times and dump the Novus Ordo Mess as it is severely deficient if not harmful to your soul. We did 20 years ago and have never looked back. Leave the liberal nut jobs to continue their wrecking by them selves.

    • Jim,

      Judge for yourself.

      That is precisely what we must NOT do. Read this article responding to a lady who shares your views, and read it right to the end – if you don’t see the light then, this is not the blog (or the Church) for you.

      Note, too, that it is not the position of the SSPX to question the validity of this or any other pope’s election. That has been made clear. It is also our policy here at Catholic Truth to delete all and any attempts to promote sedevacantism, so please take care. You don’t want to be banned from BOTH SSPX chapels and this blog, do you? 😀

  5. Jim Moriarty, in number 2 of St. Francis’ list he speaks of a pope “who is not canonically elected”. Can we say that of Pope Francis?

  6. Olaf, and Jim,

    I wish you people would pay attention. This business of canonical election of a pope and St Francis and applying it all to Papa Francis is really yawn yawn stuff at this stage.

    I put a link on another thread very recently, if not yesterday, only a day or two ago, in response to RCA Victor who didn’t realise the dangers of reading Ann Barnhardt; she has declared herself a francisvacantist, apparently. Numpty.

    Click here to read a demolition job on all this nonsense about the conclusions reached by Mzzzz Ann Barnhardt about the (very BAD) Pope Francis.

    Then, I truly recommend that you forget about this (and it truly is) nonsense. Pope Francis is the pope. None of us – not even Mzzzz Barnhardt has the authority to declare otherwise. Read the above linked article right to the end and if that doesn’t open your eyes to the truth, then this really isn’t the blog for you.

    Reminder: it states clearly in our House Rules section that we do not tolerate the promotion of sedevacantism or any other vacantism. We may discuss the issues arising from this dreadful pontificate, but that is IT.

  7. I can’t say I disagree too much with Pera, though he seems a bit confused about the role played by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. These two Popes, together with Paul VI, were Pontiffs who resisted moral relativism within the Church yet colluded fully in Modernist theological relativism. In other words, they upheld the Church’s moral teaching but played a strong role in undermining the faith.

    By the time John Paul II’s reign came to an end the liturgy of the Church was in turmoil, abuses having spread everywhere. Ecumenism had also reached in practice the point of completely obscuring the infallible dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Benedict XVI went some way to countering the liturgical issues but by no manner of means did he go far enough. Benedict was ultimately a Modernist at heart and remains so today.

    With the advent of Francis the radical Modernism of these previous Popes in the liturgical/doctrinal life of the Church finally spilled over into the moral sphere. Francis is the first to obscure the Church’s moral teaching in an attempt to put out his own radical message. The liberal governments of the world and all those immoral pressure groups, recognising their opportunity, have used this abandonment of duty on Francis’ part (to firmly and clearly uphold the Church’s moral teaching) to push through in law the most horrendous evils. They were afraid to act before because JPII and Benedict were able adversaries with a powerful voice in the world. But in Francis they have found to their great pleasure a silent ally, or at least a man who will never oppose the evil they propose.

    Pope Francis will obviously answer to God alone for his clear dereliction of duty, a duty to protect the innocent from moral corruption. All we can do is judge the tree by its fruit and know that Francis, whether he realises it or not, is helping big time to destroy Our Lord’s Church and with it Western civilisation. He cannot be excused by any manner of means for what he is doing right now, appearing to all intents and purposes to be preaching a new and worldly Gospel. I have the hardest time thinking of Pope Francis as fully Catholic, or even truly religious. He seems obsessed with the world and worldly politics, mostly Left leaning Socialism. God have mercy on him for God alone will be his judge. All we can do is pray for an end to this terrible crisis of faith and morals in the Church and the world.

  8. Forgot to say that despite all his personal errors, even material heresies, Francis is the canonically elected Pope and no subordinate has the authority or right to state otherwise. The Church will deal with these questions in the future, in more healthy times. It’s not our remit.

  9. Why did an Atheist write: “Why we Must Call Ourselves Christian”. Did he lose his faith in God somewhere between then and now?

    • Phil,

      I have just Googled to find his Wiki page but there is no mention of any religion – he is described simply as an “atheist”. There is a section on his writings under the heading Dialogue with Pope Benedict XVI, so the mystery continues. Like you, I wonder why he is writing books about Christianity, except, perhaps, to trace the Christian roots of Europe?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: