[ 0 → 4] TrapCast Express [ 4 → 15] TrapCast Express, it's Wednesday, June 30th, 2021. [ 16 → 21] What is the greatest illness, the greatest sickness of human life? [ 21 → 33] That is the question Jorge Bergoglio, Pope Francis, posed this past Sunday, June 27th, during his Angelus Address. [ 33 → 46] He asked rhetorically whether it might be tuberculosis or perhaps the COVID pandemic, before saying, no, those are not the greatest illness. [ 47 → 50] What then is the greatest illness? [ 50 → 63] Ladies and gentlemen, ask yourselves how a Catholic has to answer that question, because there is only one answer, and of course, that answer is sin. [ 64 → 77] Sin is the greatest illness that has befallen man, because sin robs him not only of his physical life, but also of eternal life, [ 77 → 80] for which reason mankind needed a... [ 80 → 86] Now, that's how a Catholic would answer this question. [ 86 → 91] How did Bergoglio answer it, though, the man who claims to be the Pope? [ 92 → 93] He said, quote, [ 93 → 99] The greatest illness of life is a lack of love. [ 99 → 103] It is not being able to love, unquote. [ 104 → 107] Now, at first sight, that doesn't sound too bad. [ 107 → 109] At least he didn't say the greatest illness is... [ 110 → 112] You know, proselytism or something. [ 113 → 123] In fact, one could even make the argument that because sin implies a lack of charity towards God and often also towards our neighbor, [ 124 → 128] that what Francis said is basically the same thing, right? [ 128 → 131] I mean, sin is a lack of love. [ 132 → 136] However, while one can spin it that way, [ 136 → 140] such an interpretation leaves out of account the glaringly obvious, [ 140 → 147] obvious fact that Francis could have said that sin is the greatest illness, [ 147 → 149] but chose not to. [ 149 → 150] Why is that? [ 151 → 156] Why did he choose the rather vague formulation, lack of love? [ 156 → 158] Well, one can only speculate, [ 159 → 164] but let's just observe here that by using this obscure terminology, [ 164 → 170] he is leaving what he is saying open to several different interpretations, [ 170 → 175] and different listeners can understand the term in different ways. [ 176 → 179] A naturalist would have more of a problem with the concept of sin [ 179 → 182] than with the concept of a lack of love. [ 183 → 189] Any atheist psychologist will happily acknowledge that people can be lacking in love, [ 190 → 193] an idea which, depending on how one chooses to understand it, [ 194 → 197] allows enough room for anything from a saint who, [ 197 → 200] because he is not completely perfect, [ 200 → 203] has to go to purgatory for half an hour before he can enter heaven, [ 203 → 209] to a great sinner who nevertheless refuses to promote, ahem, [ 209 → 210] Pride Month. [ 212 → 217] Of course, Bergoglio draws no distinction between natural love and supernatural love, [ 218 → 221] between love of God and love of neighbor. [ 222 → 227] In his Angelus address, he remains entirely on the horizontal plane of the mundane, [ 228 → 229] talking only about love, [ 229 → 230] between, [ 230 → 231] and human beings. [ 232 → 237] Christ is mentioned only as the doctor who heals our affections. [ 237 → 241] Not a word is breathed about sin or eternity, [ 241 → 246] except to say that our sins are not an obstacle because Jesus goes beyond them. [ 248 → 252] Towards the end, Francis confirms that his concern is entirely mundane, [ 253 → 256] that is, focused on this world, when he says, [ 256 → 256] quote, [ 256 → 259] Love alone heals life. [ 260 → 260] Unquote. [ 261 → 263] Yeah, well, guess what, bucko? [ 263 → 265] Life is going to end. [ 267 → 273] Francis concludes his naturalist reflection by pronouncing the dogma of all dogmas [ 273 → 275] in our secularist world. [ 276 → 276] Quote, [ 277 → 278] Do not judge. [ 278 → 282] Do not judge the personal, social reality of others. [ 283 → 284] God loves everyone. [ 285 → 286] Do not judge. [ 286 → 290] Let others live and try to approach them with love. [ 290 → 291] Unquote. [ 291 → 297] Yeah, unless, of course, there are rigid clingers to the certainties of the past. [ 298 → 301] On such low lives, it's open season, right? [ 302 → 304] Speaking of rigidity, [ 305 → 314] the false pope has recently been blasting inflexible, intransigent, rigid Catholics left and right. [ 314 → 318] Just yesterday, for example, for the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul, [ 318 → 320] the papal imposter claimed, [ 320 → 324] that God had set St. Paul free from formal religious observance [ 324 → 328] and the intransigent defense of tradition. [ 329 → 333] Yeah, in his sermon for the Novus Ordo worship service, he said, [ 333 → 333] quote, [ 334 → 334] Unquote. [ 334 → 338] Formal religious observance and the intransigent defense of tradition, [ 339 → 343] rather than making him open to the love of God and of his brothers and sisters, [ 343 → 344] had hardened him. [ 345 → 347] He was a fundamentalist. [ 348 → 350] God set him free from this. [ 350 → 351] Unquote. [ 352 → 359] Throughout his homily, Francis used the word free or freedom as many as 38 times. [ 360 → 361] For example, he said, [ 361 → 362] quote, [ 362 → 367] How many chains must be shattered and how many doors long shut must be opened? [ 368 → 369] We can help bring this freedom, [ 370 → 375] but only if we first let ourselves be set free by the newness of Jesus [ 375 → 378] and walk in the freedom of the Holy Spirit. [ 379 → 379] Unquote. [ 380 → 382] Yeah, newness. [ 383 → 387] Watch out when Bergoglio talks about newness or novelty. [ 388 → 390] These terms do have their legitimate meaning, [ 390 → 395] but the false pope is notorious for stretching them beyond the correct meaning [ 395 → 399] in service of his political ecclesial ideology, [ 400 → 404] thereby making it appear as though his ideas were grounded in sacred scripture [ 404 → 406] when in fact they're not. [ 407 → 408] For instance, [ 408 → 410] it's certainly true that Christ, [ 410 → 411] Christ brought newness. [ 411 → 414] After all, it is the new covenant he gave us. [ 415 → 420] But this newness of the true gospel is handed on in the deposit of faith, [ 421 → 423] which is a tradition set in stone. [ 423 → 429] And to depart from that tradition under the pretext of the newness of the gospel [ 429 → 432] is to preach another Christ, [ 433 → 434] a counterfeit gospel. [ 435 → 437] In other words, [ 437 → 439] with respect to the old covenant, [ 439 → 440] the gospel, [ 440 → 441] has a newness to it. [ 442 → 446] The good news of Christ is the fulfillment of the Mosaic law [ 446 → 447] and the Old Testament. [ 448 → 452] But when Francis now tries to introduce newness, [ 452 → 456] it is not the newness of the gospel with respect to the old covenant. [ 456 → 460] It is the newness of heresy with respect to the gospel [ 460 → 462] we have received from the apostles. [ 463 → 469] That is why the real popes have always condemned innovation and novelty. [ 470 → 471] For example, [ 471 → 473] we can find such condemnation in the bull [ 473 → 476] auctorum fide of Pope Pius VI, [ 476 → 478] in the encyclical [ 478 → 480] Mirari Vos of Pope Gregory XVI, [ 481 → 482] and in the encyclical [ 482 → 485] Paschendi of Pope St. Pius X, [ 485 → 487] to mention just a few. [ 488 → 489] In fact, [ 489 → 490] in Paschendi, [ 490 → 491] Pope Pius X writes, [ 492 → 492] quote, [ 492 → 494] far, far from the clergy [ 494 → 497] be the love of novelty, [ 497 → 498] unquote. [ 498 → 500] That's paragraph number 49, [ 500 → 503] and in number 55, [ 503 → 505] the same pope urges his clergy [ 505 → 508] to combat novel terminology, [ 508 → 509] citing his predecessor, [ 510 → 511] Pope Leo XIII, [ 511 → 513] who said the following, [ 513 → 514] quote, [ 514 → 518] it is impossible to approve in Catholic publications [ 518 → 521] a style inspired by unsound novelty, [ 522 → 524] which seems to deride the piety of the faithful [ 524 → 529] and dwells on the introduction of a new order of Christian life [ 529 → 530] on the earth, [ 530 → 532] on new directions of the church, [ 532 → 535] on new aspirations of the modern soul, [ 535 → 538] on the new social vocation of the clergy, [ 539 → 541] on the new Christian civilization, [ 541 → 545] and many other things of the same kind, [ 545 → 545] unquote. [ 547 → 550] Now, what Pope Leo XIII said there [ 550 → 556] was originally published on January 27, 1902. [ 557 → 559] What do you think, ladies and gentlemen? [ 559 → 560] Have the, [ 560 → 561] have the Vatican II modernists [ 561 → 565] introduced a new order of Christian life, [ 565 → 567] a new direction for the church, [ 568 → 570] a new type of Christian civilization [ 570 → 572] based on religious liberty [ 572 → 574] rather than Christ the King since then? [ 575 → 578] To ask the question, of course, [ 578 → 579] is to answer it. [ 581 → 585] And as 1834 encyclical Singulari knows, [ 585 → 588] Pope Gregory XVI condemned the teachings [ 588 → 589] of Father Felicitas, [ 590 → 594] who was the forerunner of what was later called [ 594 → 596] liberal Catholicism. [ 596 → 600] Take a listen to how Pope Gregory lambasted [ 600 → 602] that false teacher, Lamennais, [ 602 → 605] and you will notice that one could apply these words [ 605 → 609] just as well to Jorge Bergoglio today. [ 610 → 610] Quote, [ 610 → 614] Acting as if he were sent and inspired by God, [ 615 → 617] he speaks in the name of the Trinity [ 617 → 620] and then uses scripture as a pretext, [ 620 → 623] for releasing the people from the law of obedience. [ 624 → 627] He twists the words of Holy Scripture [ 627 → 628] in a bold and cunning manner [ 628 → 633] in order to firmly establish his depraved ravings. [ 633 → 635] He does this in order that, [ 635 → 637] as Saint Bernard used to say, [ 638 → 640] he might spread clouds for light [ 640 → 642] or give poison for honey, [ 642 → 644] or rather, in the honey, [ 644 → 647] creating a new gospel for the people [ 647 → 649] and laying a different foundation [ 649 → 649] for the people. [ 649 → 652] from the one which is already laid. [ 653 → 653] Unquote. [ 654 → 654] Bam! [ 654 → 657] That's Pope Gregory XVI, [ 657 → 660] Encyclical Singularinos, number 5. [ 662 → 665] Like Lamennais, Francis is very talented [ 665 → 668] at reading his own ideas into sacred scripture [ 668 → 671] so as to make it appear as if his doctrine [ 671 → 674] was actually contained in the sacred text. [ 675 → 678] By the way, for his sermon yesterday [ 678 → 678] for Saints Peter and Paul, [ 678 → 682] it only took him four sentences [ 682 → 684] to mention the word encounter [ 684 → 686] right in the opening paragraph. [ 687 → 689] And later on, where he references [ 689 → 691] the gospel passage in which Christ gives [ 691 → 694] to Saint Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven, [ 694 → 696] Francis speaks of Peter receiving [ 696 → 697] quote, [ 697 → 699] the keys to open the doors [ 699 → 702] leading to an encounter with the Lord. [ 703 → 703] Unquote. [ 704 → 705] Well, I'm sorry, [ 705 → 708] but the kingdom of heaven is a bit more, [ 708 → 711] than just an encounter with the Lord. [ 711 → 712] And in any case, [ 712 → 715] there are different kinds of encounter. [ 715 → 718] In 2 Thessalonians 2.8, for example, [ 719 → 721] Saint Paul speaks about the Antichrist [ 721 → 722] when he notes that, [ 722 → 723] quote, [ 723 → 725] that wicked one shall be revealed [ 725 → 726] whom the Lord Jesus shall kill [ 726 → 728] with the spirit of his mouth [ 728 → 731] and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming. [ 732 → 733] Unquote. [ 733 → 736] And that encounter is not the kingdom of heaven. [ 736 → 737] I guarantee it. [ 738 → 741] All right, let's move on to some more [ 741 → 743] that Bergoglio had to say [ 743 → 744] in the last few days. [ 745 → 745] How about this one? [ 746 → 748] This is a headline from Crux [ 748 → 751] on June 28th. [ 751 → 753] Christians must see the world [ 753 → 755] through the eyes of the poor, [ 756 → 756] Pope says. [ 757 → 758] Yeah, of course. [ 759 → 760] Never mind seeing the world [ 760 → 762] through the eyes of Christ [ 762 → 763] or through the lens of the gospel. [ 764 → 767] No, it has to be man [ 767 → 768] because the Vatican's [ 768 → 771] Vatican II Church is anthropocentric, [ 771 → 773] which means man-centered. [ 774 → 777] God does play a role in it, of course, [ 777 → 779] but it's more like the role of a lackey [ 779 → 782] who should feel lucky that he gets a mention. [ 782 → 784] In the Vatican II Church, [ 784 → 786] God's job is to hear your prayers, [ 786 → 787] forgive your sins, [ 787 → 788] and make you feel good. [ 789 → 790] And he gets invoked [ 790 → 793] whenever Francis needs to give you a reason [ 793 → 795] to go along with his gospel of man [ 795 → 798] because God demands it, supposedly. [ 798 → 801] That's where that spinning [ 801 → 803] of sacred scripture comes into play [ 803 → 804] that we talked about earlier. [ 805 → 807] What does it mean [ 807 → 808] to see something through the eyes [ 808 → 810] of the poor anyway? [ 811 → 813] It's not like the poor [ 813 → 814] are all alike. [ 815 → 817] Some are religious, some are not. [ 817 → 819] Some are conservative, some are liberal. [ 820 → 822] Some are greedy, some are generous. [ 822 → 824] Some are holy, some are evil. [ 825 → 827] Some are of goodwill, some are not. [ 827 → 828] Some are Christian, some are Christian. [ 828 → 832] Some are pagans, some are capitalists, [ 832 → 833] some are communists. [ 834 → 836] I'll even go so far as to say [ 836 → 839] that some are rigid and some are not. [ 840 → 842] So what does Francis mean then [ 842 → 845] when he says that the perspective of the poor [ 845 → 846] is the perspective of Jesus? [ 847 → 850] Can one understand that in an orthodox way? [ 851 → 855] I'm sure one can, but one doesn't have to. [ 855 → 856] And that's the point. [ 856 → 857] See, [ 857 → 860] Bergoglio gives you the option [ 860 → 862] on how you want to understand it. [ 864 → 867] Now, if you read the text of the address [ 867 → 869] that Francis delivered to the Italian Caritas [ 869 → 871] on June 26th, [ 871 → 873] which is where he said these things, [ 874 → 875] you will notice that, of course, [ 875 → 877] he does mention the gospel [ 877 → 879] as one of three ways [ 879 → 882] on which to continue the journey [ 882 → 885] as the preferred Novos Ordo lingo goes. [ 885 → 887] But when you look closely, [ 887 → 888] at what he says, [ 888 → 890] it is once again all about man, [ 891 → 893] about the horizontal, the mundane. [ 894 → 896] It's all about this world. [ 896 → 898] It's not about the salvation of souls. [ 898 → 900] It's not about getting souls to heaven. [ 901 → 904] It's about alleviating temporal suffering. [ 905 → 908] And of course, yes, that is part of the gospel. [ 908 → 911] But it is only part. [ 911 → 912] And frankly, [ 912 → 915] it is the part that is of lesser importance [ 915 → 917] when compared with the primary, [ 917 → 920] which is the salvation of souls. [ 922 → 923] And so Francis says, [ 923 → 923] quote, [ 924 → 926] the way of the gospel shows us [ 926 → 930] that Jesus is present in every poor person. [ 930 → 931] Unquote. [ 932 → 934] And then, interestingly enough, [ 934 → 937] he does mention the last judgment, [ 937 → 939] but only in connection [ 939 → 941] with the corporal works of mercy, [ 942 → 944] whether we clothed the naked, [ 944 → 945] fed the hungry, [ 945 → 947] welcomed the stranger, etc. [ 947 → 950] So here we see illustrated [ 950 → 952] exactly what I said a few minutes ago, [ 952 → 955] that the supernatural is always used, [ 955 → 956] is always appealed to [ 956 → 959] whenever Francis needs to give you a reason [ 959 → 962] to go along with his gospel of man. [ 964 → 965] Francis is never concerned [ 965 → 967] about the last judgment. [ 968 → 969] He's even said years ago [ 969 → 971] that it's nothing to get too anxious over. [ 972 → 974] He's never concerned about the last judgment [ 974 → 977] except when he can use it, [ 977 → 979] to advertise his false gospel [ 979 → 982] of dogmaless humanitarianism. [ 983 → 984] Then, all of a sudden, [ 984 → 986] God's judgment becomes a topic. [ 988 → 990] You know what else Francis says in his address? [ 991 → 992] He says, quote, [ 993 → 996] man is the way for the church. [ 996 → 997] Unquote. [ 997 → 998] Let me repeat that. [ 999 → 1001] Man is the way for the church. [1002 → 1004] And here's the funny part. [1004 → 1005] He didn't come up with that himself. [1005 → 1007] He's quoting, [1007 → 1008] someone else. [1009 → 1011] Now, those of you who've been [1011 → 1013] in this battle for a while [1013 → 1015] will probably know whom he's quoting, [1015 → 1016] but many will not. [1017 → 1018] Ladies and gentlemen, [1019 → 1022] that idea that man is the way for the church [1022 → 1025] comes from John Paul II. [1026 → 1027] He proclaimed it [1027 → 1030] in his first encyclical letter in 1979, [1030 → 1032] Redemptor Hominis. [1033 → 1035] See, this problem, [1035 → 1036] this man-centered gospel [1036 → 1037] goes back, [1037 → 1039] much further than just Bergoglio. [1040 → 1043] This is all Vatican II. [1044 → 1047] All right, we'll end with one more nugget. [1048 → 1050] Francis has penned the conclusion [1050 → 1052] of a new book published by the Vatican [1052 → 1054] called Peace on Earth, [1054 → 1057] Fraternity is Possible. [1058 → 1059] Vatican News writes, quote, [1060 → 1061] war, the Pope believes, [1061 → 1063] can be abolished, [1063 → 1065] as was the case with slavery. [1065 → 1067] And then they quote him saying, [1067 → 1069] we must not give up the dream [1069 → 1073] of a world without wars, unquote. [1074 → 1075] Well, you know, [1075 → 1077] there are two ways [1077 → 1078] we can get rid of war. [1079 → 1081] One way is to imprison [1081 → 1082] the entire globe. [1082 → 1084] That will end all wars. [1085 → 1087] The other way is that [1087 → 1088] of the Prince of Peace [1088 → 1090] through the preaching of the gospel [1090 → 1092] and converting all nations [1092 → 1093] to the kingdom of Christ [1093 → 1096] so that all men will voluntarily [1096 → 1097] subject themselves [1097 → 1099] to the sweet yoke of the gospel [1099 → 1102] as Pope Pius XI laid out [1102 → 1103] in his beautiful encyclical [1103 → 1106] Quas Primus in 1925 [1106 → 1108] and which has, of course, [1108 → 1111] been rejected by the Vatican II Church. [1112 → 1114] So, to get rid of all wars, [1115 → 1116] there are these two alternatives. [1117 → 1119] Imprisonment of all people [1119 → 1121] or the social kingship of Christ. [1122 → 1123] And you can guess [1123 → 1125] which of these two [1125 → 1126] is out of the question. [1127 → 1128] For Jorge Bergoglio. [1129 → 1131] Tradcast Express is a production [1131 → 1133] of Novos Ordo Watch. [1133 → 1135] Check us out at tradcast.org [1135 → 1136] and if you like what we're doing, [1137 → 1138] please consider making [1138 → 1139] a tax-deductible contribution [1139 → 1142] at novosordowatch.org [1142 → 1143] slash donate.