TrapCast Express
TrapCast Express, it's Friday, August 3rd, 2018.
If Pope Francis was looking for a way to get everybody to stop talking about the McCarrick sex abuse scandal for a while, well, he succeeded.
Yesterday, August 2nd, Chaos Frank decreed an official change to the Novus Ordo Catechism concerning the morality of capital punishment.
From now on, the papal pretender says, the death penalty is inadmissible.
Why? Because human dignity. What else? God's law has nothing to do with it.
Francis' decree orders that the so-called Catechism of the Catholic Church, Article No. 20,
be replaced with the following text.
In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state.
Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens,
but at the same time do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.
Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that the death penalty is inadmissible,
because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,
and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.
So that's the latest and greatest on capital punishment now from the Vatican II Church.
And I say latest and greatest because this is now the third formulation of Article No. 2267 in the Novus Ordo Catechism.
The first one was published in 1992.
Then came the second.
It was published in so-called Typical Edition in 1997, and now it's 2018, and they changed it yet again.
If you're interested in all the details about this, go to our blog at novusortowatch.org slash wire
and click on the post released August 2nd, entitled
Francis Makes Official Change to Catechism, Death Penalty Now Universally Inadmissible Because an Attack on the Human Person.
Yes.
Inadmissible is the key word here, and the normative text for the new teaching is, of course, in Latin,
and the phrase rendered inadmissible is non posse admitti in Latin,
which literally means cannot be admitted.
Now, the idea that the death penalty cannot be admitted is complete nonsense, of course.
You see, Francis deceitfully invokes the Gospel here when the truth is that in the entire New Testament,
nowhere is capital punishment forbidden or even declared imprudent.
In fact, it is actually endorsed.
Here are some scripture passages you can look up.
Matthew 15, 3-4, Mark 7, 10, Luke 23, 39-41, John 19, 11, Romans 13, 1-4, and Hebrews 10, 28-29.
So, if anything is inadmissible here, it's Francis' novel teaching.
The Catechism of the Council of Trent, first released in the 16th century,
and happily used by the Catholic Church until Vatican II, taught this, quote,
Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death,
by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent.
The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder,
is an act of paramount obedience to this commandment, meaning the Fifth Commandment, which prohibits murder.
The end of the commandment is the preservation and security of human life.
Now, the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of crime,
naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage,
and violence.
Hence, these words of David,
If only the Catechism of Trent had known about human dignity!
But hey, good thing we've got that Jesuit from Buenos Aires now explaining to us what the gospel really teaches.
You know, one of the most ironic things about this is that,
although it's always claimed that we cannot use capital punishment because of human dignity,
because man was made in the image and likeness of God,
when you look at when God himself first decreed that murderers were to be put to death,
he explained that this was to be done because man is created in his own image.
Turn to Genesis 9, verse 6.
Quote,
So here you can see that the Vatican II Church has made the very reason God gave
for introducing the death sentence into the reason why it ought not to be administered.
It's absurd.
Now, there's another problem here.
Well, it's a problem that we don't know about.
It's a problem for those who believe Francis is Pope.
This new teaching meets the requirements for being taught by the universal ordinary magisterium.
And the universal ordinary magisterium, according to traditional Catholic doctrine, is infallible.
In 1870, the First Vatican Council declared, quote,
Further, by divine and Catholic faith, all those things must be believed,
which are contained in the written word of God and in tradition,
and those which are proposed by the Church, either in a solemn pronouncement
or in her ordinary and universal teaching power, to be believed as divinely revealed.
Unquote.
And you can find that in Denzinger, number 1792.
But if Francis is Pope,
and the Novus Ordo bishops are the Catholic bishops,
then they are now teaching in union with him
that the death penalty is inadmissible
and that this is divinely revealed
because, remember, the new text says
that this teaching is based on the gospel.
Let me quote it again.
The new text says, quote,
Consequently, the Church teaches in the light of the gospel
that the death penalty is inadmissible
because it is an attack,
on the inviolability and dignity of the person.
Unquote.
So there's your evidence.
Either what Francis teaches here is infallibly true,
and then you could still believe he is the Pope,
at least on that account,
or else, if it is false,
then you know he cannot be a valid Pope
because God has promised infallibility
to the papal office in a matter such as this.
So, can you guess what the reactions to this have been?
In the whole spectrum, by way of summary,
in the whole spectrum of the Vatican II sect,
from ultra-liberal to hyper-traditionalist,
you find every kind of reaction.
On the far left, you have the sodomite lobby saying,
well, if Francis can change teaching on the death penalty
because human dignity,
well, then he can obviously also change teaching
on homosexuality because dignity.
And you know what?
On that point, they're right.
If you can suddenly discover something in the gospel
that contradicts what was taught for 2,000 years prior,
well, then all teaching can potentially be revised.
Just say there's a new awareness now
about human dignity or whatever, right?
Or we've done more research on homosexuality,
and there you go.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
And then you have Bergoglio worshipers
like Mark Shea and the folks at WherePeterIs.com.
I was about to say WhereIsPeter.com.
And they're all, you know, celebrating and pointing out
that this is a genuine development of doctrine.
And then you have others saying that
this is nothing to get worked up over
because the new teaching doesn't really change anything
from what was said before
or only, you know, just some minimal nuance.
And then you have,
you have those who realize and admit
that Francis has just done something impossible
or at least impermissible.
That is, he has now outlawed all capital punishment
as a matter of principle.
And so they're contrasting that with
basically what the catechism used to teach.
That's how Edward Penton put it in one of his tweets,
I thought was hilarious.
And then you have those who are saying
that Francis is rejecting dogma
and is therefore,
a heretic.
Now, one of our next blog posts
is going to look at those reactions in some depth.
So stay tuned for that.
But, oh yeah, there's one reaction
I must mention right now.
And that is what was written by
the chief rhetorician of the Recognize and Resist camp,
Mr. Christopher Ferrara.
His Fatima Perspectives column installment number 1221,
is entitled,
The Reversible Magisterium is No Magisterium.
And in that installment he says,
quote,
The Magisterium Cannot Contradict Itself.
Unquote.
And so far so good, you might say,
except when you turn to his book,
The Great Facade,
which was first published in 2002
and in a second edition in 2015.
Ferrara writes there, quote,
Let us consider an actual example
of a teaching of the ordinary magisterium
that was later found to be false
and actually reversed by a pope.
Unquote.
And if you have a copy of the book,
you can verify that for yourself.
It's page 151 of the 2015 edition
and it's on page 192 of the 2002 edition.
Ferrara then goes on to claim
that the Council of Florence taught error
concerning the matter of the sacrament,
the sacrament of priestly ordination.
And then that was later corrected
by Pope Pius XII.
But that's simply not true.
If you look at what Pius XII says
in his Apostolic Constitution,
Sacramentum Ordinis of 1947,
by no means does he concede
that Florence taught error
and that he's now correcting it.
But that's a whole other can of worms
that we really can't get into now.
I just wanted to point out
that Ferrara is contradicting himself.
All right.
Back to Francis.
Chaos Frank.
By revising the catechism like that,
he's actually shooting himself in the foot.
But that won't matter to him
because his goal
is the destruction of all Catholic principles
in the minds and souls of men.
See, a church that gets the Fifth Commandment wrong
for 2,000 years is not credible.
A church that doesn't know
what the gospel really is,
what the gospel really teaches
on human dignity or anything else,
only to discover it 20 centuries later
cannot be taken seriously.
A church that can change one teaching
can change all of them.
Even if that doesn't enter
into people's minds right now,
the premise for this has been laid
and sooner or later people will draw
the conclusion that follows
with necessity from it.
And so who knows
what that god of surprises will come up with.
But I have my suspicions.
I can tell you what I think
will be the next thing to be considered
inadmissible.
Ready for this?
Life in prison.
Yeah, you think I'm kidding?
Don't underestimate the Frankster.
He's already gone on record more than once
saying that life imprisonment is immoral,
that it is nothing but a hidden death sentence.
Look it up online.
You can find it even on the Vatican website.
On October 23rd, 2014,
in an address to the delegates
of the International Association of Penal Law,
Francis said,
quote,
a life sentence is just a death penalty
in disguise, unquote.
The man is a naturalist.
He does not believe in or care about
the supernatural destiny of man.
For him,
if you have no more opportunity for happiness
in this natural temporal life,
then life is pointless.
And that opportunity for happiness
is taken away both by the death penalty
and by life in prison.
And while this might seem somewhat noble at first,
perhaps it is a damnable heresy
because it denies the true purpose for our existence.
It denies the reason why God created us to begin with.
By the way,
if the death penalty is contrary to human dignity,
what about the eternal death penalty of hell?
Oh, wait.
Francis doesn't believe in that either.
Remember?
To wrap this up,
here's my advice.
Don't revise what you believe about the death penalty.
Revise what you believe about Jorge Bergoglio.
Tradcast Express is a production of Novels Ordo Watch.
Check us out at tradcast.org.
And if you like what we're doing,
please consider making a tax-deductible contribution
at novelsordowatch.org slash donate.