« Starlink phase 2 | Main | "...Tucker Carlson Criticized for Saying 'Russia Poses No Threat to the United States At All'" »

13 November 2019


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


John Merryman

I do not wish to meet you in a battle of apologetics. Your opinion on the validity of Christian theology is interesting but irrelevant. My post is not about that. It is about the survival of the Catholic Church in the presence of a pope who does not seem to accept basic teachings.


Cesaere Borgia's father perhaps?


Alexander the Sixth? Not a heretic, a bad man but not a heretic, mish murtad.

Seamus Padraig

Yeah, but Pope Frank is not lashing out at Wall Street in this case; he's lashing out at the Holy Doctrine. There's a huge difference!


We quibble perhaps on the definition of heretics - and outward rejection of Catholic dogma by a string of the middle ages popes - post 2nd Lateran Council. Barbara Tuchman covers this papal conduct in March of Folly - 1470-1510 where indeed the papacy went to the highest bidder on far less than exemplary religious conduct.

Did they publicly announce their rejection of Catholic dogma like Martin Luther in order to to be labeled a heretic; or did they publicly reject Catholic dogma by simply ignoring it. Tuchman cites the era of Catholic popes Sixtus IV, Innocent III, Alexander VI, Julius II Leo X and Clement Vii.


Interesting. Some of the signatories too. I would like to defend Pope Francis, and I surely will fail. It's the first thing that came to mind.

It seems that the Pachamama may be somewhat connected with the Spanish Christianization of South America. The indigeneous Pacha was merged with Maria the mother of Christ?

Pacha, time and space, all embracing spirit, being wedded to the Earth Mother, the mother that gave her child, Maria. Pacha was a pantheist all-embracing spiritual principle. It was then merged with Maria, or Mama, maybe deliberatly, by the Spanish missionaries??? Maybe they even originally used the word Pacha since it felt helpful in their mission??? They had to learn their language. No?

Even for the missionized this may have made sense, pacha they understood, Maria, the mother, the good news she brought into the world by giving birth to Christ could be added.

Admittedly, when I read the article and tried to understand what may have been on Pope Francis mind, or why he choose to do this, he may be more aware of the history of the Church then some of his critics, he definitivelly is more aware of history of the Catholic Church in South America then his critics.

Arbitary example from European Church history, popped up on my mind:
a persistant rumor has it that the Chartres Cathedral was built on a Celtic/Druid holy space, a well. Apparently it was filled in during the 17th century but restored again in the early 20th. Around this well there is this myth of a "virgo paritura", a virgin about to give birth to a child.

That may be provocative part of the Pachamama too? No?

Would one find something about the myth or the "virgo paritura" in the writing of the School of Chartres, that led to the twelfth-century renaissance? Vague traces? Or was it later created by heritics? But I digress.

Pachamama and the mythical "virgo paritura" of old times in the land of the Gauls feel somewhat related anyway.


Strictly I found other traces of some type of amalgamtion, or odd pantheist relicts--to my own surprise at the time, I have to admit--in the larger European Catholic space.

Religous syncretism? Here mor arbitrarily it's social and political role (in time and space?), with thanks to the Wikipedians:



Obviously, it must be a bit shocking to the more delicate Catholic souls, to see such images instead vs let's say the images of the great masters and their copists with the child and instead ...

Not sure what Benedict XVI thinks about this, but somewhat sure he may not let us know.

The history of Catholic Mariology:

Seamus Padraig

As far as I know, the official justification for the coup is that Morales' vote count was said to be fraudulent by the opposition. I don't know if that's true or not; that's just the only justification I've heard.


If pomp, rituals and formalities prevail over the spirit and essence of Christianity, well then, a schism is most welcome. Let the formalists don their gilded chasubles and keep on invoking God’s blessings, drivel.


I hesitated to weigh in on such an emotive issue - I used to audit a very old and exclusive men's club and they had three basic rules: no women or discussion of women; no discussion of politics; and no discussion of religion. Most of the old boys talked business or golf and had a nice snooze in a comfy chair after lunch, snug in their retreat! However, as a lapsed member of a 400-yr plus Protestant family tradition, I have some thoughts on the topic at hand. The protestant schism was in reaction to the corruption of the Church of Rome namely, the sale of indulgences - basically taking large sums of money in exchange for a written promise that the payer would go to heaven. Note the Catholic Church survived this and the many other corruptions caused by the weakness of men. But it is in doctrinal matters that the protestants continue to differ from Catholics - and the cult of the Virgin Mary and the worship of the Saints are such major differences. Protestants consider both to be pagan and therefore heretical.

But what a consolation to many the ability to pray to the universal mother and to the Saints of their locale and trade. It seems to me that people need to be able to identify with the object of their worship and what stronger identification than to the mother of G-d or to a Saint who you could identify with? So, it seems to me that the Pachamama is also a universal mother, one from the native religion of the Americas. Again, as an outsider to the Church, and a non-believer, why not encourage people by recognizing their local version of the universal mother, and recognize her as an aspect of the Virgin Mary?

The creator has many aspects and I fear adhering to strongly to literal interpretations of doctrine as do many protestant cults can obscure the deeper meanings of things spiritual. Seeking heretics is a good way to find disagreement and conflict and would Christ the founder of our common religion really want that?


As I understand it the name Easter is derived from Oestra, a pagan goddess of Spring and rebirth after death. The early Church was always careful to adapt its celebrations to the older festivals of Midwinter, Spring and Autumn. The external symbols of these now Holy Days are invariably pagan in origin. Mistletoe, Trees and Fire for Midwinter/Christmas, Eggs and Bunnies for Spring/Easter, Skulls and candles for Autumn/Halloween/All Souls Day. My then Parish Church was but one of many to be the latest building to occupy what was originally a pagan site. The specifically Catholic Church grew out of the Seven Ecuminical Councils and the Pentarchy, it has survived since then and will continue so to do.


Addressing only the incident re Pachamama -- I clicked the link, read the story, studied the photos.
My background thought was that the Church has incorporated very many "pagan" practices -- it has Catholicized them: not likely that Jesus, born in Bethlehem, was born under a pine tree decorated with candles, but that symbol and Northern European pagan festival has become intricately linked with the celebration of the birth of Jesus.

Francis planted a tree while an indigenous woman explained that in her culture planting a tree reconnects with Mother Earth.
Trees are a dominant symbol in the religions, myths and literature of almost every culture.

I have no problem with Francis participating in THAT "pagan" ceremony.
What struck me as ludicrous in the photos was the clerics dressed in long black robes w/ red sashes and beanies.
What important cultural relationship does their garb represent? Nuns have shed their habits and dress just like the People of God that they vow to serve.

I have many problems w/ Francis: I wish he would make more forceful statements condemning involvement in wars and also in economic wars -- equally destructive of God's creatures.



Are you Catholic? If so are you aware that "Pantheism" is a specif condmened heresy?



Catholics would say that they revere the mother of Jesus but not more than that. Thgey would also say they do not worship the saint. You may be a heathen but you are a heathen who has retained full measure of anti-Catholic disdain.



I am in favor of divesting the Church of the trappings of medieval monarchy, including the fancy vesting and liturgy. they should sell off the treasures warehoused in the Pontifical palace. Married and women priests should be allowed. this does not mean that Francis is not embracing heresy


"Nobody had seen a pope resign until Benedict."

My conspiracy theorist friends say that Benedict was blackmailed into resigning. If Benedict can be forced to resign, Francis can be forced to resign.

At any rate, Poland seems to call itself "Catholic" when it rejects Islam. Poland does NOT seem to be following Francis, who would tell them to invite Muslim invaders and give them welfare.

If a Polish army calls itself "Catholic" while fighting clearly non-Catholic foes (such as the European Union, George Soros, and their Muslim friends) it doesn't really matter who the Pope is. It only matters that "Catholic" is the battle-flag flying over the Polish army.

Various newspapers are reporting on Polish Catholicism with various sentiments:



The Beaver


Correct me if I am wrong .
Didn't that schism within the Catholic church happen a long time ago ? and that's why the Eastern Catholics have their own bishops whilst for the Roman Catholics, the pope is their bishop.



There have been a number of schisms in Christianity. IMO we should not want more.



Since you do not like the idea of organized religion at all, there is probably not much future for you as a convert to Catholicism.


"None of them were HERETICS!"

Possibly because none of them actually cared enough about the dogma to try to make changes. People obsessed with power can usually accommodate any theory that gives them leverage.

Diana C

As one of those dreaded Evangelical Protestants, I fear making any comment in regard to a current scandal in regard to the Catholic Church. I find so much about the Catholic Church beautiful and inspiring. It is quite sad to me when there is a scandal occurring in the Catholic Church, just as I feel sad when scandals occur in many forms of Protestant churches.

I put my hope, however, in "The Church Universal and Invisible." And I hold fast to the belief that "All things work together for the good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." And I always pray that I am one of those who are called.

In regard to this current problem, I do what some of us "heretics" often do: We leave it to God, in complete faith that God, in all persons of the Trinity, will still be in charge of everything .

As a Protestant, I am always turning to certain stories included in the New Testament that assure me that I, who may be viewed as flawed since I was not raised in the Catholic Church--though I believe I was raised in Christianity if I take the word "catholic" to mean "universal"-- am still acceptable to God. Some here have seemed to dismiss Protestants, and that seems unkind and "un-Christian" to me.

Much of the New Testament is concerned with welcoming ALL people, including all the "Gentiles" into the Faith. So many stories of Christ before his Ascension show him helping those who believed in him who were--as in the stories of the Centurion of Capernaum and the woman of Canaan who wished only to be like the dogs who ate scraps under the table, and many other examples--not considered worthy by the Jewish establishment.

I will pray for the Catholic Church, but I will view myself as the little lost lamb whom Jesus took the trouble of finding though his flock was already large.

At the Pentecost, the Holy Spirit gave the disciples the gift of "speaking in tongues," so they could go out to all parts of the earth and preach the "Good News."

I will pray that the Pope is trying to do that and that more lost sheep can be brought back into the fold.


An honest question, from a non-Catholic, albeit a Christian (Orthodox, for purposes of full and fair disclosure):

How does removing a Pope for false teachings comport with Papal infallibility?


Will the Holy Father repent as he is being urged to do, or will he resist?

God has used various individuals throughout mankind's history, from the pious to the most heinous human being ever conceived. From the penitent to the cold blooded murdering, adulterer, lying, stealing, human beings to guide mankind's footsteps. God listens to and hears prayers, whether he chooses to answer them and when he does, he answers them in his way.

There will be many prayers, sack cloth and ash included asking, pleading for the divine hand to guide and instruct Pope Francis.

English Outsider

"The connection is solely between God and you."

I may be reading you wrong, but the danger is that that leads to the atomised individual, downplaying the significance of community or fellowship to the extent of rejecting the living connections with the past and even rejecting anything more than a millenarian concern for the future.

Not at all suggesting that's your line, but it might indicate that there are parts of what make us tick that are not included in your relationship with God. The Churches, for all their faults, do try and get the lot in.

Not that I can talk. As Dave Schuler indicates above the Church is leaving many of us fast - why should our Clergy be immune from the infection of modish Progressivism? - and in any case its language is for many of us a language we no longer speak. It could be that the Pope - certainly many modern theologians - attempts to translate that language into the language that we do now speak. That attempt should perhaps not be confused with apostasy, though I must confess it looks like it often enough to me.


"Pope Francis" is not even a regularly elected Pope, because of the violations committed during his election. Also, cardinal Danneels, who was a very close associate to Bergoglio, confessed (before his death) of a plot to undermine Pope Benedict XVI and forcibly replace him with "their man".

Card. Danneels' confession is found in his official biography, published in French and Dutch language and can be found on Amazon here (only digital copy is available by now):

A plot to elect a pre-chosen person in a Conclave is punished by the Catholic Church with immediate and automatic excommunication latae sententiae (no pronunciation needed).

Adding to this, the Canon (which regulates the internal law of the Catholic Church) says that a Pope cannot resign forcibly, meaning that Benedict XVI is still the only lawful and actual Pope because he was purposefully forced to leave his seat, never actually renouncing his title or papal emblems (not even the white robes...!).
Very recently (2018-2019), Benedict XVI himself (despite his old age) has been publishing new books with is old papal signature Benedictus P.P. XVI which can be used only by the ruling Pope. In doing so, he publicly stated himself as the actual Pope.



The two things are unrelated.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad