The Heretical and Scandalous Call for Reparations on December 12th

Here is the call from Cardinal Burke:

“Cardinal Raymond Burke is backing a France-originated call to prayer and reparation on Dec. 12 for the Pachamama idolatry that took place at the Vatican during the Amazon Synod, saying that “diabolical forces” have entered St. Peter’s Basilica that need to be “vanquished.”

“Something very grave happened during the special assembly of the Bishops’ Synod for the Amazon region. An idol was introduced into St Peter’s Basilica – the figure of a demonic force,” said Cardinal Burke during a short Dec. 8 interview with the French independent TV station, TVLibertés.

“Therefore reparation is necessary and also prayers, so that the diabolical forces that entered with this idol are vanquished by the grace of God, by Christ who wants St Peter’s Basilica to be purified of the sacrilegious act that took place during the Synod,” he added. [LifeSiteNews.com]

The claim is that Pope Francis gravely failed in faith by acts of sacrilege and idolatry, and that he erred gravely by permitting the use of Pachamama figures at the Synod and at a Mass. The term “Pachamama” means “mother earth”. This claim cannot be true, as it contradicts the dogma of the First Vatican Council:

“This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this see so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.” [Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, chap. 4, n. 7]

The dogma is that each Roman Pontiff has the divinely-conferred charism of truth — which other magisterial documents call immunity from error — and of a never-failing faith. And this gift to the Popes is for the sake of preserving the indefectibility of the Church. For if the Head of the Church fails in truth or in faith, then the Church would have defected, which is not possible. Thus, it is a dogmatic fact that Pope Francis cannot be guilty of these accusations. And the claim that he is guilty is heretical, since it assumes a rejection of the dogma of Vatican I that the Pope cannot err gravely, nor fail in faith.

The same can be said of the body of Bishops (as implied by Lk 22:32), that the body of Bishops cannot fail in truth or in faith, neither by grave error on doctrine or discipline, nor by grave failures of faith through apostasy, heresy, or schism, through idolatry, sacrilege, or blasphemy. So when the body of Bishops accepts a man as Roman Pontiff, he must be the one true Pope over the whole Church. Otherwise, the body would have defected by following a false head, and the Church, having defected in head and body, would no longer be indefectible. Since this is not possible, due to the prayer and promise of Christ in Mt 16:18, Pope Francis must be the valid Roman Pontiff, and he must not have erred gravely nor failed in faith by the use of pachamama figures, nor in any other way.

This makes the prayers for reparation on December 12th a type of prayer of the Pharisee: assuming that God agrees with your false accusations, self-exaltation, and denigration of others:

[Luke]
{18:10} “Two men ascended to the temple, in order to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a tax collector.
{18:11} Standing, the Pharisee prayed within himself in this way: ‘O God, I give thanks to you that I am not like the rest of men: robbers, unjust, adulterers, even as this tax collector chooses to be.
{18:12} I fast twice between Sabbaths. I give tithes from all that I possess.’
{18:13} And the tax collector, standing at a distance, was not willing to even lift up his eyes to heaven. But he struck his chest, saying: ‘O God, be merciful to me, a sinner.’
{18:14} I say to you, this one descended to his house justified, but not the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled; and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.”

The use of this December 12th prayer for reparation to accuse Pope Francis of grave failures of faith is heretical and scandalous. It is heretical as it assumes that the dogma of Vatican I is false. It assumes that Pope Francis is guilty of grave error against truth and of grave failures of faith, which is impossible due to the promise and prayer of Jesus: Mt 16:18; Lk 22:32. And it is scandalous as it proposes to draw the faithful into this heretical error by making them speak and act as if the Pope were guilty of error and sin which Jesus promised no successor of Peter could ever commit.

Then, to make this grave sin even worse, the prayer is to the Blessed Virgin Mary assuming that she accuses Pope Francis — he who is by the merits of Christ her faithful son — of the same false accusations, against dogma. Such an accusation against Mary, who is closest to Christ, is indirect blasphemy.

This day of reparation for the alleged errors of Pope Francis is also intellectually dishonest, as it assumes that the papal accusers are right, without them having to present any true theological argument. They simply speak and act as if he were guilty of whatever they claim, and induce others to do the same, when they have not presented their case by explaining how he could be guilty if the dogmas of the Church are infallibly true.

Guadalupe

Now the day of December 12th was chosen because it is the feast of our Lady of Guadalupe, who appeared to Juan Diego on a hill formerly used for pagan worship.

Why did the Blessed Virgin Mary appear to Juan Diego on a hill where the locals worshipped the goddess Tonantzin (“mother earth”)? Perhaps to indicate that anything true or good within the pagan devotion to Tonantzin was an implicit search for the Blessed Virgin Mary. Similarly, the Apostle Paul found that the local pagan religion at Athens implicitly (in ignorance) was a search for the One true Creator God:

{17:22} But Paul, standing in the middle of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are rather superstitious.
{17:23} For as I was passing by and noticing your idols, I also found an altar, on which was written: TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Therefore, what you worship in ignorance, this is what I am preaching to you:
{17:24} the God who made the world and all that is in it, the One who is the Lord of heaven and earth, who does not live in temples made with hands.

The Virgin, by appearing on that hill, thereby transfers and transforms the erroneous worship of Tonantzin to a veneration of herself as the Mother of Her Divine Son Jesus, through whom heaven and earth were created, and the Mother of us all. Those human persons who have fallen into the error of pagan religions may be seeking, by sincere error and ignorance, divine truth. The pagan religions may have some traces of truth, such as that the world was divinely created, and that people should worship. The worshippers can see in the true Catholic faith the fulfillment of their search, which was mostly fruitless in the pagan religions, and is now fulfilled beyond one’s imagination in Christ.

Burke and Schneider

Cdl Burke and Bishop Schneider are guilty of heresy and schism: heresy, by rejecting the dogma of Vatican I, and schism by putting themselves above the Pope, when they should be submitting their minds and hearts to his teaching and authority. I believe that Burke and Schneider are both automatically excommunicated for their longstanding rebellion against the Roman Pontiff. Moreover, by saying that the diabolical has entered St. Peter’s Basilica, Burke proposes that the indefectible Church has defected, and needs correction from himself and an auxiliary Bishop from Kazakhstani.

by
Ronald L. Conte Jr.
Roman Catholic theologian and translator of the Catholic Public Domain Version of the Bible.

Please take a look at this list of my books and booklets, and see if any topic interests you.

Gallery | This entry was posted in papal accusers. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to The Heretical and Scandalous Call for Reparations on December 12th

  1. louisdemontfort says:

    Thank you once again for speaking up in defence of the Holy Father. I pray for the day when all the accusations against Pope Francis will come to an end. Everyone please continue to pray for Pope Francis, the valid Vicar of Christ.

  2. Alex says:

    Let put it in that way: for cardinal Burke the pachamama figure made of wood that is not even 1 m high, is not only an idol but also possess demonic powers. The objective assessment though: pachamama doesn’t have electronics inside or anything that can affect humans other than their own psychic if they venerate it as a false idol. If the idol is nothing, as St Paul proclaims to the pagans, then all the “power” it draws is from the psychic of the peoples who accredit that power to it.

    Isn’t it too much power being credited to Satan by cardinal Burke? Isn’t it exactly what Satan would love most? Several cardinals and a dozen of bishops to be so much afraid of him that actually to enthrone him granting him control over their fears that he wouldn’t have otherwise?

    As if I hear of a witch hunt in the middle ages. But then the people had some excuse of being illiterate, of thinking earth is flat, and so on…oups, many ultraconservatives today support the flat earth theory and reject the proofs of existing planets, stars and space as a fake science…

    Jesus never preached what those guys preach, what cardinal Burke and his two-three collaborators preach! It is just absurd. Burn all books and turn all the churches to the east, and the world will be fixed in a blink of an eye… Maybe one crusade too instead of finding dialogue with other religions… You know what? That has already been tried and failed. And unless we are inside the antichrist reign, it will fail again.

  3. dom64verona88chrysostomos says:

    Mon cher ami,
    Il faut que les scandales se produisent, mais malheur à celui par lequel il arrive!
    Très humblement vôtre,

    Le pauvre pécheur que je sais être.

    Je continue de prier pour votre Mère.

  4. a says:

    Your interpretation of Vatican I’s definition of Peter’s never failing faith is erroneous.

    http://www.trueorfalsepope.com/p/refuting-fr-kramers-error-unfailing.html

    • Ron Conte says:

      It’s not an interpretation; it is what Vatican I explicitly taught. Discussing the opinions of Saints or theologians prior to Vatican I is irrelevant. After Vatican I, theological opinions cannot overrule or replace Conciliar teaching. “This gift of truth and a never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See”. That is a clear definitive teaching of the Council, which is not subject to the opinion of theologians before of afterward. The faithful are to believe what a Council or Pope teaches directly, and not only if their favorite theologians agree and tell them the same. Clearly, an apostate, heretic, schismatic, or idolator has failed in faith. And so according to Vatican I, no Pope can fail in faith by those sins.

    • louisdemontfort says:

      “And indeed all the Venerable Fathers have embraced this Apostolic doctrine, and the Holy Orthodox Doctors have venerated and followed it, most fully knowing that this See of Holy Peter remains ever free from all blemish of error, according to the promise of our Lord and Saviour, made to the Prince of His disciples ‘I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not, and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.'”
      (Pastor Aeternus, Blessed Pius IX.)

    • a says:

      Ron, you clearly didn’t read the article I linked which cites the views of post Vatican II canonists and theologians. You should really read Journet, who explicitly states that the question of whether a pope can fall into formal heresy isn’t a settled matter.

    • Ron Conte says:

      The dogma of an Ecumenical Council cannot be nullified by any set of theologians. Moreover, Manning cites Popes and Saints teaching the same thing for many centuries. So just as the set of “eminent” theologians today err gravely by rejecting Pope Francis, some in the past erred (to a lesser extent) by misunderstanding Vatican I.

  5. Matt Z. says:

    I do not know this while story and I am not accusing the Pope of heresy. But Pope’s can sin and allowing some false statue of some sort wouldn’t be a sin of heresy against faith but could be a sin against charity.

Comments are closed.