[ 0 → 4] Tradcast Express. [ 30 → 38] Speaking on February 9th, Cupich argued that France's so-called apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia [ 38 → 43] forces a paradigm shift in Catholic practice and is therefore revolutionary. [ 44 → 50] Well, that's actually quite true, but of course Cupich is not condemning that, he is gung-ho about it. [ 50 → 56] The full transcript of the pre-tent cardinal speech was published on February 9th at La Stampa's Vatican Insider [ 56 → 57] under the title, [ 58 → 60] Pope France's Revolution of Murder, [ 60 → 65] Amoris Laetitia as a New Paradigm of Catholicity. [ 65 → 69] The whole thing is riddled with so many errors, heresies, and even blasphemy [ 69 → 72] that we can't cover all of it in this little podcast here, [ 72 → 75] but let me at least touch on some of the highlights. [ 76 → 79] Cupich says that Amoris Laetitia rejects, quote, [ 79 → 85] an authoritarian or paternalistic way of dealing with people that lays down the law, [ 85 → 90] that pretends to have all the answers or easy answers to complex problems, [ 90 → 95] that suggests that general rules will seamlessly bring immediate clarity [ 95 → 99] or that the teachings of our tradition can preemptively be applied [ 99 → 105] to the particular challenges confronting couples and families, unquote. [ 105 → 110] In other words, human situations are way more complex than God ever envisioned, [ 110 → 115] who obviously didn't have the 21st century in mind when he ignorantly and bigotedly decreed, [ 115 → 117] thou shalt not commit adultery. [ 118 → 120] Well, good thing we've got Club France, [ 120 → 122] to straighten it all out for us. [ 123 → 126] Now, what does Mr. Cupich recommend as part of that New Paradigm [ 126 → 128] based on France's Infernal Document? [ 129 → 131] You guessed it, accompaniment. [ 131 → 133] But not just any accompaniment. [ 134 → 136] No, it is accompaniment that is, quote, [ 136 → 142] marked by a deep respect for the conscience of the faithful, unquote. [ 142 → 146] And he said that we cannot pretend to have a general rule [ 146 → 149] that's just going to apply to every single case, [ 149 → 150] and so, [ 150 → 155] therefore, you first need to get to know the individuals and walk with them. [ 156 → 160] Yeah, you know, kind of like how St. John the Baptist first sat down with King Herod [ 160 → 163] and, with a deep respect for the man's conscience, [ 164 → 168] walked with him, talked with him about his irregular situation, [ 168 → 171] and then invited him to consider a suggestion or two [ 171 → 175] about what would be the even better thing to do in his particular case. [ 176 → 178] Yeah, that's not really how it happened, is it? [ 179 → 180] But then, [ 180 → 183] not to worry, because Blaze the Merciful has discovered [ 183 → 187] that God's revelation did not end with the death of the last apostle, [ 187 → 189] as the Catholic Church dogmatically teaches, [ 189 → 193] but is still ongoing and apparently has now found its oracle in [ 193 → 195] adulterous couples. [ 195 → 198] The phony Archbishop of Chicago says, quote, [ 198 → 203] Doctrine can develop as a result of the Church's merciful accompaniment of families, [ 204 → 207] because God has chosen the family as a privileged place [ 207 → 210] to reveal all that the God of mercy, [ 210 → 213] mercy is doing in our time, unquote. [ 214 → 218] In other words, the Church owes an apology to the English King Henry VIII [ 218 → 220] and all the Catholic martyrs then, [ 220 → 224] because if the Church had only begun that merciful accompaniment a bit sooner, [ 225 → 227] then we could have avoided the whole Anglican schism [ 227 → 230] and the fierce persecution of the Church in England. [ 231 → 233] But no, a lot of blood was spilled [ 233 → 236] and a lot of people were persecuted, imprisoned, and died [ 236 → 238] because, if we use novel sort of logic, [ 238 → 240] the Church just, [ 240 → 241] wasn't merciful enough yet. [ 243 → 244] Cupich argues that, quote, [ 244 → 248] Doctrinal development is about remaining open to the invitation [ 248 → 252] to see our moral teachings on marriage and family life [ 252 → 256] through the lens of God's omnipotent mercy, unquote, [ 256 → 258] implying, of course, that for 2,000 years, [ 259 → 260] the Church got it all wrong, [ 260 → 263] teaching that forgiveness can only come with proper contrition, [ 263 → 267] and this contrition implies the sincere desire to amend one's life. [ 268 → 269] Cupich, being the little devil, [ 270 → 271] he is, tries to make you think [ 271 → 274] that by adhering to traditional Catholic teaching on this, [ 275 → 277] you're denying God's omnipotence, [ 277 → 278] when what you're really doing [ 278 → 281] is simply adhering faithfully to what God has revealed, [ 281 → 284] the conditions for forgiveness are. [ 285 → 287] But let me say some more about this curious claim [ 287 → 291] that God is revealing himself to man through the family. [ 291 → 294] Cupich got that straight from Francis, from Amoris Laetitia, [ 295 → 297] and he echoes it in his speech. [ 297 → 298] Cupich says, quote, [ 298 → 300] God has chosen the family, [ 300 → 303] as a privileged place to reveal how God acts [ 303 → 307] and relates to humanity and the world, unquote. [ 307 → 309] Well, there's just one little problem with that. [ 310 → 310] It's false. [ 311 → 312] And you know what? [ 312 → 314] I don't even have to prove it false [ 314 → 318] because Cupich never makes any effort to prove it right to begin with. [ 318 → 321] He just asserts it and refers to Amoris Laetitia, [ 321 → 323] which doesn't prove it either. [ 323 → 326] In any case, I guess what Mr. Cupich is saying here [ 326 → 328] is that we can wreck our marriages [ 328 → 329] and fail to raise our children properly, [ 330 → 331] and then say, [ 331 → 334] well, hey, that's God revealing himself in families today. [ 336 → 339] Such blasphemous claptrap is unbearable. [ 340 → 343] All of this, by the way, is based on the old modernistic view, [ 343 → 346] which derives ultimately from the German idealist Georg Hegel, [ 347 → 350] that history is the continual self-communication [ 350 → 352] or self-revelation of God. [ 352 → 356] In his 1950 landmark encyclical against resurgent modernism, [ 356 → 357] Humani Generis, [ 358 → 360] Pope Pius XII denounced, quote, [ 360 → 366] a certain historicism which attributing value only to the events of man's life [ 366 → 368] overthrows the foundation of all truth, [ 369 → 373] an absolute law both on the level of philosophical speculations [ 373 → 376] and especially to Christian dogmas, unquote. [ 377 → 379] Now that's a real pope speaking. [ 380 → 381] Back to Cupich. [ 381 → 383] Yes, there's more, lots more. [ 383 → 385] He elaborates on his idea about conscience, [ 385 → 390] a very distorted version of which is the golden calf of our times. [ 390 → 393] Our modernist would-be cardinal says the following [ 393 → 396] about the discernment of married couples and families, quote, [ 397 → 401] their decisions of conscience represent God's personal guidance [ 401 → 403] for the particularities of their lives. [ 404 → 408] In other words, the voice of conscience, the voice of God, [ 408 → 413] could very well affirm the necessity of living at some distance [ 413 → 417] from the church's understanding of the ideal, unquote. [ 417 → 420] Wow, this is blasphemous. [ 420 → 425] First, no, conscience cannot affirm the necessity of sinning. [ 425 → 428] Notice how Blaise is euphemistically calling it [ 428 → 432] living at some distance from the church's understanding of the ideal. [ 433 → 434] Really, really cute. [ 435 → 435] It's called sin. [ 436 → 439] And with regard to holy purity, mortal sin. [ 440 → 444] Second, there's blasphemy here because Cupich the seducer is claiming [ 444 → 446] that conscience is the voice of God. [ 446 → 449] And therefore he's saying that God can command you, [ 450 → 450] to sin. [ 451 → 454] That's entirely in line with Amor's Laetitia, granted. [ 454 → 457] But it sure isn't in line with the teaching of Jesus Christ [ 457 → 459] or the real Catholic Church. [ 459 → 462] Or, I might add, the nature of God. [ 463 → 467] Third, no, the voice of conscience is not the voice of God. [ 467 → 471] If you want to know what the voice of God says about morality, [ 471 → 473] well, turn to Exodus chapter 20, [ 473 → 476] beginning with verse 1 and ending at verse 20. [ 477 → 479] Something about 10 commandments, [ 479 → 480] Mr. Cupich. [ 480 → 483] Not 10 suggestions or 10 ideal situations, [ 483 → 485] but 10 commandments. [ 486 → 487] After giving these commandments, [ 487 → 489] Scripture notes in verse 18, [ 489 → 489] quote, [ 490 → 503] So if you want to hear the voice of God [ 503 → 505] about what we ought and ought not to do, [ 505 → 506] Mr. Cupich, [ 506 → 508] that's where you're going to find it. [ 508 → 509] Not in your discipleship, [ 509 → 511] distorted idea of personal conscience, [ 511 → 513] which is ultimately nothing but [ 513 → 515] do whatever you want, [ 515 → 517] just make sure you have a really good reason for it. [ 518 → 521] Now, Cupich bases his false notion of conscience [ 521 → 524] on a text from Vatican II's pastoral constitution, [ 524 → 525] Gaudium et Spes, [ 525 → 528] which in turn cites a radio address [ 528 → 529] from Pope Pius XII, [ 529 → 532] given on March 23, 1952. [ 533 → 534] Now, needless to say, [ 534 → 537] Pius XII did not say or imply [ 537 → 538] that conscience is the voice of God. [ 538 → 542] He merely said that the voice of God [ 542 → 544] echoes in a true conscience, [ 544 → 546] since conscience is the application [ 546 → 549] of the moral law given by God [ 549 → 551] to a particular human action. [ 552 → 554] The Cupich version of conscience, [ 554 → 554] on the other hand, [ 555 → 557] is this absurd and destructive idea [ 557 → 559] that God speaks to each individual [ 559 → 562] to tell him what the right thing to do is [ 562 → 563] in his particular case. [ 564 → 565] And that could be totally at odds [ 565 → 568] with those rigid rules promulgated at Mount Sinai. [ 568 → 570] This is blasphemy. [ 571 → 574] And this blasphemy is called situation ethics. [ 574 → 576] Now, interestingly enough, [ 577 → 578] Pius XII, in the very address [ 578 → 580] that is cited in Gaudium et Spes, [ 580 → 582] and that Cupich basically relies on, [ 583 → 586] condemns the Cupich notion of conscience entirely. [ 587 → 589] Speaking of the attack on sound morality [ 589 → 591] that situation ethics poses, [ 591 → 592] Pius XII said, [ 592 → 593] quote, [ 593 → 595] The first blow against the edifice [ 595 → 597] of Christian moral norms [ 597 → 598] would be that of separating [ 598 → 599] them, as is intended, [ 600 → 602] from the constrictive and oppressive vigilance [ 602 → 604] of the authority of the Church [ 604 → 606] so that, freed from the [ 606 → 608] sophistical subtleties of the [ 608 → 610] casuistic method, morality is [ 610 → 612] restored to its original form [ 612 → 614] and returned to simply the intelligence [ 614 → 616] and determination of the [ 616 → 617] individual conscience. [ 617 → 620] Everyone sees what disastrous consequences [ 620 → 621] this would lead to, [ 622 → 624] such a devastation of the [ 624 → 626] very foundations of education. [ 626 → 628] The divine Redeemer has [ 628 → 629] entrusted his revelation, [ 630 → 632] of which moral obligations form an essential [ 632 → 634] part, of course, not to [ 634 → 636] individual men, but rather [ 636 → 638] to his Church, to which [ 638 → 640] he has given the mission to lead them [ 640 → 642] to embrace that sacred deposit [ 642 → 643] with fidelity. [ 644 → 646] Unquote. Yep, that's [ 646 → 648] bad news for Blaise the Bombastic. [ 648 → 650] The voice of God was not [ 650 → 652] given to each individual in conscience [ 652 → 654] as though every decision we make [ 654 → 656] about morality is God's very [ 656 → 658] speaking through us. No, [ 658 → 660] the voice of God was given to [ 660 → 662] the Church in divine revelation [ 662 → 664] and this Church teaches [ 664 → 666] Christ's true moral precepts [ 666 → 667] until the end of time. [ 668 → 669] And one of those precepts is, [ 670 → 672] thou shalt not commit adultery. [ 672 → 674] Not, it would be better if you [ 674 → 676] didn't commit adultery, or I wish [ 676 → 677] you'd not commit adultery, or [ 677 → 680] adultery is not the ideal of Christian [ 680 → 682] marriage, or adultery is [ 682 → 684] almost a marriage, or most [ 684 → 686] people shouldn't commit adultery, but let's have [ 686 → 687] a look at your circumstances first. [ 687 → 689] No, it's simply, thou [ 689 → 691] shalt not commit adultery. [ 691 → 693] By the way, what's amazing is [ 693 → 695] that these ideas about how we just [ 695 → 697] need to allow people to make their own [ 697 → 699] conscientious decisions [ 699 → 701] because they're so mature now, [ 701 → 703] somehow that always only ever [ 703 → 705] applies to sins against [ 705 → 707] the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. [ 708 → 709] But what's good for the [ 709 → 711] goose is good for the gander. If you can [ 711 → 713] invoke personal conscience regarding [ 713 → 715] fornication or adultery, [ 715 → 717] why not also for, [ 717 → 719] you know, murder, or [ 719 → 721] rape, detraction, calumny, [ 722 → 723] blasphemy, and especially [ 723 → 725] the politically correct [ 725 → 727] Francis sins like failure to [ 727 → 729] recycle, or using too much [ 729 → 731] air conditioning, marginalizing [ 731 → 733] the vulnerable, not opening your [ 733 → 734] door to the migrant. [ 736 → 737] Don't you hate logic? [ 738 → 739] Alright folks, enough of this, [ 739 → 741] we need to wrap it up here. You know, [ 741 → 743] Cupich spends a lot of time here [ 743 → 745] in this speech talking about how there is [ 745 → 747] so much complexity in family life, [ 748 → 749] and there are so many singular [ 749 → 751] circumstances now that weren't [ 751 → 753] there before. Well, you know, [ 753 → 755] that may all be true, but it's [ 755 → 757] ultimately irrelevant because [ 757 → 760] it still cannot justify [ 760 → 762] evil acts. [ 762 → 763] Adultery and fornication [ 763 → 765] and the unnatural kind are evil [ 765 → 767] in themselves. There is [ 767 → 769] not a single circumstance in the [ 769 → 771] world that could justify [ 771 → 773] them. If you could convert the [ 773 → 775] entire world in an instant [ 775 → 777] and ensure that all people, [ 777 → 779] would go to heaven if only you [ 779 → 781] committed a single sin, doesn't even [ 781 → 783] matter which sin, you would not [ 783 → 785] be allowed to do it. [ 785 → 787] All the circumstances in the world [ 787 → 789] cannot make an intrinsically [ 789 → 791] evil act a good act. [ 792 → 793] Let me close with [ 793 → 795] a word of warning to Mr. Cupich. [ 796 → 797] You keep preaching this false [ 797 → 799] gospel, sir, and when the Lord [ 799 → 801] calls you to judgment, you will find [ 801 → 803] yourself in very complex, [ 803 → 805] concrete circumstances. [ 805 → 807] Tradcast Express is a production [ 807 → 809] of Novus Ordo Watch. Check us out [ 809 → 811] at Tradcast.org, and if you like [ 811 → 813] what we're doing, please consider making a [ 813 → 815] tax-deductible contribution at [ 815 → 817] NovusOrdoWatch.org [ 817 → 817] slash donate.