St Peter's Basilica

St Peter's Basilica

Subscribe to EverythingCatholicBlog

Search This Blog

Sunday, 30 October 2016

‘Pope’ Francis bans preaching, wants more people in hell!



Pope Francis waving to participants at the meeting with Lutheran pilgrims. - REUTERS
Francis near the effigy of the heretic Martin Luther which he enthroned at the Vatican



As Francis will travel to morrow to go and celebrate the arch heretic, Martin Luther, we must remember that millions of people are still regarding him as a ‘pope’! This is plainly unbelievable! How can a man who obvious have gone against all Catholic doctrines one way or another be called ‘pope’ by right thinking people?


The answer could be found in the fact that Francis’ religion frown upon preaching the Gospel. It is through preaching the Gospel that people hear the faith and convert to the true faith.


Novus Ordo religion prevents people from hearing the truth. They have done this prevention job for two generations now. This is why millions of people, totally brainwashed continues to say that Francis is a Catholic and his is ‘pope’!


Now, there is no hiding anything anymore. Francis has again warned that preaching is sin! Just imagine the dynamics! Francis actually uses the word ‘sin’!


From the man who does aways with sins such as adultery and fornication as belonging to a hopelessly outdated and rigid past, now comes the introduction of entirely new “sins”, such as supporting the death penalty, failing to recycle, or — the latest now — the “sin” of converting others.


We saw it a few weeks ago in Georgia, where Jorge Bergoglio — “Pope” Francis — denounced converting the Eastern Orthodox as a “great sin against ecumenism”, and we saw it again on October 13 of this year, the 99th anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima when Francis received in audience roughly 1,000 ecumenical (mostly Lutheran) “pilgrims” from Germany. The meeting was conducted in Italian and German, with translators present, and all the participants wore a colored scarf around their necks, either blue or yellow, to signify whether they were Lutheran (blue) or “Catholic” (yellow). Francis, of course, wore both. At the end of the audience, the papal impostor gave the people the usual Trinitarian blessing, but without making the sign of the cross — he was too busy holding the stupid scarf, and we know that the Cross just isn’t his thing anyway.


It was during this audience, by the way, that Francis denied the dogmatic teaching of the Council of Trent, and of course his outrages didn’t end there. Aside from uttering heretical claptrap about Lutherans and Catholics supposedly sharing the same faith and both being members of the Body of Christ, Francis also spontaneously answered questions given him by people in the audience. When Francis speaks off the cuff, he is at his best, so to speak, because it is then that we get the most authentic Francis: unfiltered, unscripted, unplugged — and sometimes unhinged, too.


What’s curious is that the Vatican has apparently suppressed any reports of the Q&A session, because a transcript of it is nowhere to be found on its web site, nor has one been provided by the Vatican news organs. Thankfully, the Spanish Religión Digital and the American Life Site have provided at least partial transcripts in Spanish and English, respectively, which can be accessed here and here.


Here is a question asked by a member of the audience and Francis explicitly used the opportunity to ban preaching!



Woman: Dear Pope Francis, my name is Henriette. I am from Magdeburg and am 15 years old. In our state of Saxony-Anhalt, about 80% of the people are without any religious affiliation, 13.9% of the inhabitants are Lutheran, and only 3.5% are Catholic. Most of my friends do not go to church and do not believe in God. They are happy, helpful, and truly good friends. Do I have to convince others of my faith, or is it enough that they are good friends to me?



Francis: The first question, the one that was posed in the context of the region having 80% of the population without a creed, is: “Do I have to convince these friends – good ones, who work and who are happy – do I have to convince them of my faith? What must I say to convince them?” Listen, the last thing you must do is to “speak.” You have to live as a Christian, like a Christian: convinced, forgiven, and on a path. It is not licit to convince them of your faith; proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path. You must give testimony to your Christian life; testimony will unsettle the hearts of those who see you. And from this unsettling grows one question: but why does this man or this woman live like that? And that prepares the ground for the Holy Spirit. Because it is the Holy Spirit that works in the heart. He does what needs to be done: but He needs to speak, not you. Grace is a gift, and the Holy Spirit is the gift of God from whence comes grace and the gift that Jesus has sent us by His passion and resurrection. It will be the Holy Spirit that moves the heart with your testimony – that is way you ask – and regarding that you can tell the “why,” with much thoughtfulness. But without wanting to convince.




Francis is certainly right on one point: Proselytism and ecumenism don’t go together. It’s one or the other; they are contraries. That he would prefer ecumenical feel-goodism over preaching the truth goes without saying — he wouldn’t be Jorge if he didn’t.


Francis has actually been very consistent in that: He hates evangelization. Sure, he always talks about “preaching the Gospel”, but he means without actually preaching the Gospel — which implies, of course, that the Apostles got it all wrong, because — horror of horrors! — they preached! “But they going forth preached everywhere…” (Mk 16:20). And so did not only the Apostles, but all Catholics until… Vatican II, where ecumenism made its great debut.


According to Francis’ reasoning, our Blessed Lord Himself must have been at fault, for He instituted the Great Commission from which all preaching and all evangelization and missionary activity take their origin:


Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.
(Matthew 28:19-20)



But hey, what’s a divine commission when compared to Jorge’s latest revelation from the “god of surprises”? Perhaps Christ should have also turned the Sermon on the Mount into more of a Time of Observation & Encounter on the Mount.


Curiously enough, when St. Paul exhorted St. Timothy to preach (!) the Word of God — clearly, St. Paul hadn’t gotten Francis’ memo — in the same breath he warned his spiritual son of false teachers who would corrupt the very Gospel he was being charged to spread:



Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: and will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.
(2 Timothy 4:2-4)


Watch the video of Francis banning preaching. 




Also the transcript of his speech banning preaching is here in Spanish and here in English.


Meanwhile, we need to pray for all those who insist that Francis is pope. It is only prayers that can save them now since their reasoning is totally gone!


With Francis banning preaching, it means he wants more and more people not to hear the truth so that they can wind up in hell.


Please protect yourself and your loved ones from Francis and his false religion sitting at the Vatican!


Presented By Malachy Mary Igwilo, On the Feast of Christ the King, 30th October 2016



Saturday, 29 October 2016

‘Pope’ Francis is far worse than Martin Luther!


Image for the news result


October 31 is almost upon us called officially “Reformation Day” in Martin Luther’s Germany — and the Novus Ordo Antipope Jorge Bergoglio will use the occasion to travel to Lund Sweden, to celebrate the 499th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation with his fellow-non-Catholics there in the Lutheran Church of Sweden — a so-called “Christian” denomination that is pro-abortion, pro-contraception, pro-sodomy, and has a woman ‘Archbishop’ as its head. It is only at the behest of the region’s “Catholics”  that Francis decided to stick around for another day while there, to celebrate “Mass” for the Feast of All Saints with them. Originally he was going to go straight back to Rome after paying his obeisance to the work of the world’s most notorious heretic, Martin Luther. (We saw a preview of this just the other day, when a statue of Luther was set up in the Vatican’s audience hall and Francis happily received a huge copy of Luther’s 95 Theses.)



On the eve of his trip to Lund, Francis agreed to the umpteenth interview, this time published by the Modernist Jesuit rag La Civiltà Cattolica, formerly a splendid Catholic publication established during the reign of Pope Pius IX. The interview was conducted by “Frs.” Ulf Jonsson and Antonio Spadaro, S.J., and published in the original Italian as well as in a working English translation. You can find both texts here and here.


From this interview you will see for sure that Francis is far worse than Martin Luther who he is canonizing and celebrating.


At least Luther did not pretend to be pope and he knows Catholic doctrines far more that Francis will ever hope to know! From the interview Francis shows himself to be an erratic non-Christian who is totally mad as far as being a Christian is concerned.



He knows nothing about the faith. If you ask him anything, you will see that he cannot answer without destroying the faith.



Here are some highlights of Francis interview that shows his muddled headed understanding of the faith:



(1) I remember well when Archbishop [!] Antje Jackelén came here to the Vatican in May 2015 on an official visit. She gave a very nice speech. … Then I was also able to greet her husband. They are truly pleasant people. Then as pope, I went to preach in the Lutheran Church of Rome. I was very impressed with the questions that they asked then: that of the child and that of the woman on intercommunion. Beautiful and profound questions. And the pastor of that church is really good!”
(2) “Luther took a great step by putting the Word of God into the hands of the people. Reform and Scripture are two things that we can deepen by looking at the Lutheran tradition.”
(3) “Continuing to dialogue and to study the issues clearly belongs to the theologians…. I have asked Patriarch Bartholomew if what was told about Patriarch Athenagoras was true, what he said to Paul VI: «Let the two of us go ahead and we will put the theologians on an island to discuss among themselves». He told me that it was a true remark.”
(4) “Personally, I believe that enthusiasm must shift towards common prayer and the works of mercy — work done together to help the sick, the poor, and the imprisoned.”
(5) “There is a policy we should have clear in every case: to proselytize in the ecclesial field is a sin. Benedict XVI told us that the Church does not grow by proselytism, but by attraction. Proselytism is a sinful attitude. It would be like transforming the Church into an organization. Speaking, praying, working together: this is the path that we must take. Look, in ecumenism the one who never makes a mistake is the enemy, the devil. When Christians are persecuted and murdered, they are chosen because they are Christians, not because they are Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans, Catholics or Orthodox. An ecumenism of blood exists.”
(6) “Every person is capable of becoming a terrorist simply by using the tongue. I don’t speak of the quarrels that are done openly, like wars. I speak about a sneaky terrorism that you do by throwing words like «bombs» and that do a lot of evil. … This terrorism is difficult to subdue.”
(7) “There are idolatries connected to religion: the idolatry of money, of enmities, of space greater than time, the greed of the territoriality of space. There is an idolatry of the conquest of space, of dominion, that attacks religions like a malignant virus. And idolatry is a false religion, it is wrong religiosity. I call religion «an immanent transcendence», namely a contradiction. But the true religions are the development of the capacity that humanity has to transcend itself towards the absolute. The religious phenomenon is transcendent and it has to do with truth, beauty, goodness and unity. If there isn’t this openness, there is no transcendence, there is no true religion, there is idolatry.”
(8) “I have an allergy to talking about spaces, but I always say that you see things better from the peripheries than you do the center.”
(9) “If the young don’t prophesy, the Church lacks air.”
(10)                    [Regarding what a person loses who does not believe in God:] “It is not losing something, but is about not adequately developing a capacity for transcendence.”
(11)                    “I see a healthy coexistence [between “Catholics” and Swedish culture] where each one can live their faith and express their witnessing living an open and ecumenical spirit. You cannot be Catholic and sectarian. We must strive to be together with others. «Catholic» and «sectarian» are two words in contradiction. This is why at the beginning I wasn’t planning to celebrate a Mass for the Catholics on this trip. I wanted to insist on an ecumenical witness.”
(12)                    “Don’t remain closed in rigid perspectives, because in these there is no possibility of reform.


So you have to pity the deceived people who claim to be Catholic calling Francis ‘pope’ ‘Holy father’ etc


Just pray for more conversions!


Presented by Malachy Mary Igwilo, on the Eve of the Feast of Christ the King, 29th October 2016

Thursday, 27 October 2016

Martin Luther Blessed and Canonized by John Paul II and Benedict XVI in 1999!





Image result for martin luther

While real Catholics are shocked that Martin Luther the grand heretic have been blessed and canonized by Francis by having his effigy erected at the Vatican, and also while Francis is preparing to travel to go and glorify Luther and celebrate his heresies at the 500th anniversary of his revolt, we should note that John Paul II the great apostate and the highly dangerous Benedict XVI already canonized and exonerated Luther in 1999 calling him ‘doctor of the church’ and signing a document that essentially say that Luther was correct in his heresy and the Catholic Church is wrong!



Right here before us, we are reminded that the evil religion at the Vatican and which occupies Catholic parishes and dioceses worldwide is completely evil that it seeks only to demolish the Catholic Church and enthrone evil!



Without a doubt the month of October (1999), will be remembered in the History of the Church. During this month two especially important events took place: the pan-religious meeting in Rome (Oct. 24-28) and the signing of the ‘Catholic’-Protestant accord on the doctrine of justification in Augsburg (Oct. 31). In my opinion, that was the center of the revolution of Vatican II.  I hope to analyze some aspects of this revolution now. Today, I will address the justification accord.




I will rapidly describe the ceremony. The date for the signing, October 31, 1999 was chosen with the intent to pay homage to Martin Luther by John Paul II and Josef Ratzinger his right hand man (who later falsely claimed to be Benedict XVI).



On the 31st of October in 1517 Luther fixed his 95 theses on the door of the Wittenberg Church, thus beginning the Protestant revolt. This first homage by these apostates and deceivers undoubtedly signifies that the present day direction of the Novus Ordo religion considers the act of Luther a praiseworthy gesture. It was a symbolic way of saying that Luther had reason to protest against Rome. And it was an indirect way of saying that Rome was wrong in condemning him as a heretic.



The city chosen was Augsburg. In this very city in 1530 Luther declared that his new religion was founded. Thus, the celebration of the act in Augsburg has as its presupposition the “legitimacy” of the Lutheran sect. Thus, this means accepting the errors taught by the heresiarch by Novus Ordo religion whose core members accepted the signing calling it historic. But this signing was historic in its evil!



The first meeting on October 31 took place in the Catholic Cathedral. There, prayers of repentance were said. Once again, an indirect statement of the culpability of the Catholics in condemning Luther. It is significant to observe that there is no report in the news of any acknowledgment of blame on the part of the Protestants. John Paul II and Benedict XVI heaped all the blame on the Catholic Church!



After this, a procession began from the Catholic Cathedral to the Lutheran Church of Santa Ana, where the most important act took place. Again, the act of greater relevance was conferred to the Protestants. Inside the temple were 700 invited guests and 2,000 participants. Those who could not fit in the building participated in the act on a large screen in the City Hall. A Protestant service consisting of prayers and songs began. Assisting were various ‘Cardinals’. During the religious service, Protestant ‘bishop’ Christian Krause, president of the Lutheran World Federation, emphasized the importance of the event. A common prayer followed in which ‘Catholics’ and Protestants renewed their baptismal vows.



Here, a small interruption is necessary. The validity of the Protestant Episcopal orders was an object of a serious controversy. Leo XIII solemnly declared that the ordinations of the Anglican confession were invalid, and therefore, the sacraments ministered there are without value. If this is true with regard to the Anglicans, something similar would apply to the other Protestant sects who accept bishops. It is absolutely certain that the declaration of Leo XIII is rigorously applied to the Presbyterian and Anabaptist sects, since they, by not admitting bishops, are “ipso facto” incapable of having valid episcopal ordinations. Thus the baptism that exists among the Episcopalians, of which the Lutherans are a branch, is a motive of very serious doubt. This is why, up until Vatican II, when the Catholic Church received a converted Lutheran, a new conditional Baptism was administered. Hence, there is an element of uncertainty in the Protestant baptism.



Therefore, the common renewal of the vows of Baptism made by ‘Catholics’ and followers of Luther in Augsburg that day ignores what was described above and takes as a consummated fact the “validity” of the Protestant baptism. This is equivalent to stating that the prior tradition of the Holy Church has no effect. This act carries a series of grave consequences:


(1) it supposes a true apostolic succession among the Lutheran bishops; it supposes the validity of their sacraments; 
(2) it leads one to accept as valid the “sacraments” of the more radical Protestant sects. 

Each of these consequences would be sufficient to declare a person or a movement heretical or suspect of heresy, were the old Code of Canon Law still in place. Incidentally, according to the Code, the simple participation in the same religious ceremony with heretics merited a very rigorous excommunication, an automatic excommunication, without need of any declaration by the authority.


Representing the direction of Novus Ordo Religion was ‘Cardinal’ Edward Cassidy, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. In his talk, he stated:

 “Our task is not only to continue with the building, but, unfortunately, we also have the duty of seeking to repair the damage that has been done to that building by the storms, conflicts and, at times, man-made earthquakes.”


The edifice to which the ‘Cardinal’ was referring is the Church founded on Christ. According to the words of Cassidy, the Catholic Church and Protestant Pseudo-Reform would be constructing together only one building. It is worth noting that in the metaphor employed by the ‘Cardinal’, the fundamental differences between the two religions can be considered as mere meteorological accidents that can cause danger, but not affect the unity of the building. It is, without doubt, a new conception of the Church founded by Our Lord.



After this, the secretary of the Vatican’s s0-called Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, ‘Bishop’ Walter Kasper, and the general secretary of the Lutheran World Federation, ‘pastor’ Ishmael Noko, signed the joint declaration and embraced each other. The news reports stated that the greater part of those present followed their example, with everyone embracing everyone.


The document on justification has, according to the same sources, the following key-phrase in paragraph 15:
“Together we confess that we are accepted by God and we receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts, empowers us, and calls us to do good works, not on the basis of our merits but only through grace and faith in the salvific work of Christ.”



Thus, the multi-secular discussion between ‘Catholics’ and Protestants hopes to be resolved by a magic formula: the introduction of the concept of grace, together with faith, as conditions necessary for salvation.



The classic position of Catholics is that faith is necessary for salvation, but in order to merit salvation, faith must be accompanied by good works that reflect the collaboration of the human will. The Protestants deny the contribution of free will for salvation. For them, only faith is necessary for salvation. The document of Augsburg introduces a new notion: grace. Now, faith along with grace would be sufficient for salvation. The value of good works is decidedly denied:


“We receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts, empowers us, and calls us to do good works, not on the basis of our merits but only through grace and faith in the salvific work of Christ.”



According to Protestant ‘bishop’ George Anderson, head of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, the person who introduced the concept of grace in order to save the accord - which was at one point on the brink of collapse - was ‘Cardinal’ Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI). “Without him we might not have an agreement,” said Anderson. Protestant theologian Joachim Track also enumerated the three fundamental concessions made by Ratzinger that permitted the document of Augsburg:



“First, he agreed that the goal of the ecumenical process is unity in diversity, not structural reintegration. This was important to many Lutherans in Germany, who worried that the final aim of all this was coming back to Rome. Second, Ratzinger fully acknowledged the authority of the Lutheran World Federation to reach agreement with the Vatican. Finally, Ratzinger agreed that while Christians are obliged to do good works, justification and final judgment remain God’s gracious acts.”


The introduction of the concept of grace, apparently an act of evil genius and a magic formula, could give the impression that the Protestants are being obliging since they would now admit that not only faith saves, but also grace saves.



However, this impression dissolves under careful analysis. In effect, what is at the root of the concept of “Faith alone saves” is that man has no merit to be saved except to believe - nothing more. Any other action that he makes does not merit him salvation. The “grace” of the document of Augsburg does not alter this concept but, on the contrary, reaffirms it. It states that grace does not depend on human correspondence: “Not on the basis of our merits but only through grace and faith.”



However, in everything that the Holy Church teaches, for man to merit salvation he must practice the virtues in a heroic way. If his actions are without value, he is condemned. The “grace” of ‘Cardinal’ Ratzinger does not depend on any human correspondence, which seems to be a concept foreign to Catholic doctrine and not much different from quietism.



In fact, the following quietist propositions were condemned by Pope Innocent XI in the Constitution Coelestis Pastor (November 20,1687):


“ No. 2. To wish to operate actively is to offend God, who wishes to be himself the whole agent; and therefore it is necessary to abandon oneself wholly in God.


No. 4. Natural activity is the enemy and impedes the operations of God and true perfection because God wishes to operate in us without us ….


No. 40. One can arrive at sanctity without exterior work.”


It is difficult not to find similarities between this new concept of grace and the quietist doctrine of Michael de Molinos.


Therefore, in order to give ‘Catholics’ the impression that the Protestants ceded something in order to sign the ecumenical accord, this notion of grace was prepared, but in reality it doesn’t seem to change anything in the Protestant doctrine. Moreover, the present day direction of the ‘Catholic Church’ draws closer to other errors analogous to Protestantism, such as quietism.



Even beyond the dangers pointed out here, the direction of the ‘Catholic Church’ seems to have the firm resolve of going forward with the union with the Protestants and of destroying the Catholic dogmatic edifice.



In my view, on this October 31, an important step was taken to define the tendencies of the current that directs the Vatican. The Augsburg accord, in itself, seems to be a revolution that opens a new phase of the broader Conciliar Revolution. We are, as everything indicates, in the face of an act that defy the promise of Our Lord Jesus Christ that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church. I am certain that we will see great things in the days ahead.



So whatever Francis is doing this week to celebrate Luther, we must all note that his fellow apostates, John Paul II did the same!



Presented by Malachy Mary Igwilo, on the feast of St. Jude 27th October, 2016



Monday, 24 October 2016

John Paul II, Vatican II and Condemnation of Galileo: The Devil is in the Details of this Idiocy!



Image result for galileo images

As we have read in the past, John Paul II of most unfortunate memory opened his foul mouth and pleaded that the Catholic Church be forgiven for ‘condemning’ the work of Galileo!


This ‘apology’ makes one wonder whether they henchmen of Novus Ordo religion has any brains at all. They pander on popular myths to make themselves popular!


But the question they fail to answer is ‘how was the Church wrong in condemning Galileo’? What did Galileo do to deserve censure from the inquisition?


At the end we see that Galileo was a heretic not because of his science but because of his theology! So the idea that the Catholic Church condemned Galileo for his science is a myth of idiotic proportions!



Notwithstanding these questions the evil document of Vatican II Gaudium et spes, ‘the Pastoral Constitution of Vatican Council II’, “deplored” the condemnation issued by the Inquisition against Galileo, in this way giving a powerful support to the revolutionary myths. The following paragraph is considered a mention to Galileo’s condemnation:



“The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are. We cannot but deplore certain attitudes, not unknown among Christians, deriving from a shortsighted view of the legitimate autonomy of science; they have occasioned conflict and controversy and have misled many into opposing faith and science” (GS n. 36b)



In one of the few footnotes of the 16 conciliar documents, Gaudium et spes recommends to the reader the then recently published work Vita e opera di Galileo Galilei [Life and Works of Galileo] by Pio Paschini (2 vols., Published by Editrice Vaticana, 1964). It was the way the myth makers at Vatican II found to say that the non-specific quoted text in Gaudium et Spes should be understood as referring to Galileo.



John Paul II, the Great apostate,  took the same path of reinforcing the revolutionary myth about Galileo when he criticized the attitude of the Church regarding the scientist on several occasions. First, he issued a vague critique on November 10, 1979 in the speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in which he established the commission to study Galileo’s case. Addressing the international scientific community, he stated:



“I desire that theologians, scientists, and historians, in a spirit of open collaboration, profoundly examine the case of Galileo and honestly recognized the errors of any party, and extinguish those suspicions that impede a fruitful concord between science and faith, between the Church and the world”



Second, on September 22, 1989, when visiting the city of Pisa, he issued an indirect acerbic critique of the past condemnation of the Church and said: “Galileo, an example for all, and also for the Church”



Third, during that same visit, he put aside the indirect allusions, and directly and rudely condemned the behavior of the Church. He said:


“Galileo Galilei, whose scientific work was in its beginning improvidently attacked, today is recognized by all as an essential step in the methodology of research, and generally as an essential step along the road of knowledge about the world of nature” .



This statement, considered “definitive” by the Vatican spokesman (Navarro-Valls, press conference, Corriere della Sera, March 30, 1990), raised the enthusiastic applause of revolutionaries and progressivists, and the chagrin of those charged with the impartial study. In fact, Cardinal Paul Poupard, head of the commission of studies on the condemnation of Galileo, admitted: “I don’t know if the commission still exists …. I believe that the task is over” .So the Great apostate, John Paul II went ahead to apologize for the non-existent assault on Galileo before his own commission discovers there is no need for an apology! 

He simply wanted to make an apology to impress the myth machine so that they can continue to attach the Church! Interesting for those who say john Paul II is a saint! 

What a mockery! 


But the game was not over with the apology!


The haste of John Paul II who “definitively” judged on the topic before the end of the scientific study, 'Cardinal' Poupard presented the final results of the research on October 31, 1992. Under such powerful papal pressure, it is not surprising that Poupard tried as much as possible to tailor the commission’s conclusions to fit the previous partial judgment of JPII. The 'Cardinal' stressed the “relative character” of the condemnation of Galileo and touched superficially on the essential points of the issue. 

He affirmed:


“The philosophical and theological qualifications, abusively attributed to the new theories regarding the centrality of the sun and the mobility of earth, were the consequence of a period of transition in the realm of the knowledge of astronomy, and an exegetical confusion regarding cosmology”



He concluded that those who condemned Galileo had committed a “subjective error of judgment.” He ended his statement with words that revealed he was working under pressure: “We need to recognize these errors as Your Holiness asked”.


We see here that this ‘cardinal’ had to bend to the pressure from JPII to make sure the outcome of the said study coincides with the myth of JPII about Galileo!


We see the devilish John Paul II’s religion, the Novus Ordo religion at work!


Now to clarify what really happened, what made Galileo face the inquisition, the blogger, Intriobo has published a great piece about the Galileo affair to help us all see the true picture and to prove that the Catholic Church does not condemn science. This piece also proves that the Catholic Church contributed immensely to the development of science and has NEVER worked against science. The piece also demolished the argument that the pope was wrong then and remained pope why not Francis remain pope despite his being wrong on many fronts?

Read:


The case of Galileo is one of the most exploited events in the history of the Catholic Church. It has been used to attack papal infallibility, as well as paint the Church in a bad light for being "anti-science" and backwards. Most recently, it has even become a point to attack Traditionalists on sedevacantism, because if the pope got it wrong then and was still pope, couldn't the same hold true today? I wish to set the record clear on Galileo, and demonstrate how advances in modern science (far from being a problem for Christianity as atheists would like us to think) actually help prove God's existence.


The Case of Galileo Galilei

 Galileo was born in Italy in 1564. He was an astronomer, physicist, engineer, philosopher, and mathematician who played a major role in the science of the 17th century. It was alleged that the Roman Inquisition had him condemned because he championed the heliocentric theory of Copernicus (i.e., the Earth revolved around the sun, as opposed to geocentrism, where the sun revolves around the Earth). Here are the facts you need to know:


We are indebted to the Church for the Copernican revolution in science. Copernicus delivered lectures in Rome by command of Pope Leo X, held a professional chair and published his treatise on heliocentrism by command of (and by the aid of) Pope Paul III. His work went forward to the world, bearing the sanction of the Holy See. 
The ignorance of the populace took scandal at what appeared to contradict plain statements of the Bible. (e.g., Ecclesiastes 1:5, "The sun also riseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to its place where it ariseth."). Yet, Galileo was left in peace.


The problem arose when Galileo tried to prove his theory from Scripture. He was warned in a letter approved by Pope Urban VIII which read, "You ought not to travel out of the limits of physics and mathematics; you should confine yourself to such reasoning as Ptolemy and Copernicus used. Theologians maintain that the interpretation of Scripture is their own personal care."
Galileo promised to abide by the warning, even as Pope Urban VIII was elevating those who held the Copernican theory to high positions; Galileo himself received a pension. Unfortunately, he soon broke his promise.


It was out of reverence for the Bible, and to prevent scandal to the weak, that the Inquisition came after Galileo at all. Interestingly, when the great scientist Johannes Kepler (a Protestant) wrote a book in 1596 to defend the Copernican theory and presented it to the Academical Senate of Tubingen, it was pronounced a "damnable heresy," and he was forced to take out the references to Scripture.


The condemnation of the Inquisition did not give a definition as to the true sense of Scripture. It was a condemnation of Galileo's "special errors"--whatever they may have been. It pronounced no dogma or explained no true meaning to the Bible.
The word "heresy" as used by the Inquisition, was not used in its specialized theological sense, but rather meant "any offense against the Church." This is proven by the declaration of the Pope stating, "The Copernican system is not condemned, nor is it to be considered heretical, only as rash." The works of Galileo were allowed to be published with the references to Scripture expunged. 

(The information above was condensed by me from The Doctrine of Papal Infallibility Stated and Vindicated by Bishop John Walsh [1875]).



The Popes Weigh In  That the Scripture does not contradict true science was made clear by Pope Leo XIII and Pope Pius XII. As they explain, the inspired writers explained things in terms commonly used at the time. We still say "the sun rises and sets," even though it is not scientifically accurate because it appears to be that way. 

Pope Leo XIII in Providentissimus Deus (1893) teaches:



"...we have to contend against those who, making an evil use of physical science, minutely scrutinize the Sacred Book in order to detect the writers in a mistake, and to take occasion to vilify its contents. Attacks of this kind, bearing as they do on matters of sensible experience, are peculiarly dangerous to the masses, and also to the young who are beginning their literary studies; for the young, if they lose their reverence for the Holy Scripture on one or more points, are easily led to give up believing in it altogether...If dissension should arise between them [science and scripture], here is the rule also laid down by St. Augustine, for the theologian: 'Whatever they can really demonstrate to be true of physical nature, we must show to be capable of reconciliation with our Scriptures; and whatever they assert in their treatises which is contrary to these Scriptures of ours, that is to Catholic faith, we must either prove it as well as we can to be entirely false, or at all events we must, without the smallest hesitation, believe it to be so.'


 To understand how just is the rule here formulated we must remember, first, that the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost 'Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable unto salvation.' Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers-as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us - 'went by what sensibly appeared,' or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to." (para # 18; Emphasis mine)




Again, Pope Pius XII reaffirmed his predecessor's teaching in Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943):



"The first and greatest care of Leo XIII was to set forth the teaching on the truth of the Sacred Books and to defend it from attack. Hence with grave words did he proclaim that there is no error whatsoever if the sacred writer, speaking of things of the physical order 'went by what sensibly appeared' as the Angelic Doctor says,speaking either 'in figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even among the most eminent men of science.' "  (para. # 3)


Modern Science Offers New Proof of God


Far from being an "enemy of religion," true science and the True Church cannot be in conflict for God is the author of both theological and scientific knowledge. The greatest philosopher in the history of the Church, St. Thomas Aquinas (rightfully called "The Angelic Doctor" [1225-1274]), admitted that the universe could have always existed. Philosophically, there was no way to prove that it was NOT eternal. He needed to appeal to Holy Scripture and Church teaching in support for a beginning of the universe. 



Prior to the 1920s, scientists had always assumed the universe was stationary and eternal. In 1917, Einstein applied his new General Theory of Relativity to cosmology, and found that it would not permit an eternal, static model of the universe unless he fudged the equations in order to offset the gravitational effect of matter. This was the beginning of what would lead to the "Big Bang Theory," accepted by all scientists today. The standard model describes a universe which is not not eternal in the past, but which came into being a finite time ago. Not only all matter and energy, but even time and space themselves came into being at the initial cosmological singularity out of nothing or ex nihil. This is exactly the teaching of the Church!! 


The Kalam Cosmological Argument (taken from a Mohammedan philosopher Al-Ghazali), is brilliant and has made discussions of God's existence come alive again in academia. (Let's remember that Aquinas used the pagan philosopher Aristotle's ideas that were judged sound by right reason. So too, we can do the same with an infidel). The argument states:

1. That which begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause


We know the truth of (1) from our experience and science. An atheist would be forced to admit of miracles should he deny (1). We know the truth of (2) from science (Big Bang). We know the truth of (3) from the logical deduction of (1) and (2). Moreover, this cause must be:



Outside of time and space, because they did not yet exist.
Of enormous power to create out of nothing (ex nihil)
A personal Being of infinite intellect because He created by means of an intelligent design 
 Doesn't that describe God?



Summary and Conclusion
The Galileo affair has nothing to do with a "papal error"
True science and true faith cannot contradict each other, as God is the author of science and has revealed the truth about Himself to His One True Church
 Modern science has given new proofs of God's existence
To adjust an old phrase, by "learning how the heavens go," maybe we can strengthen our Faith and devotion so we know better "how to go to Heaven."  



Presented by Malachy Mary Igwilo, on the feast day of St. Raphael, 24th October 2016


Related post of Interest:

Bearing false Witness: Debunking Centuries of anti-Catholic History