The Liberation Theology Pope Proves Conquest’s Second Law

Posted on | October 18, 2014 | 204 Comments

Here are two sentences that caught my attention:

When word that [Cardinal Raymond Leo] Burke was on his way out [from the Apostolic Signatura] began circulating last month, it signaled that Francis would take major steps to reshape the church. It coincided with the selection of a new archbishop of Chicago, Blase Cupich, who Catholic progressives celebrated for positions like breaking with the American church hierarchy when it withheld its support for President Obama’s health reform law over questions of abortion and contraception.

The word you’re looking for is “schism.”

Papal infallibility relies on a pope being in full solidarity with the bishops of the church, and this week solidarity is not easy to find.

Decades of growing leftist influence within the Catholic Church, which John Paul II and Benedict XVI had temporarily suppressed, but could not ultimately stop, has now elevated an Argentine leftist to the papal throne. Catholic conservatives are and will continue to be purged from positions of influence. Conquest’s Second Law: “Any organization not explicitly and constitutionally right-wing will sooner or later become left-wing.” Catholics are seeing it confirmed.

This is now the Catholic church of the Berrigan Brothers, “Nuns on the Bus” and Dignity USA. Because conservative Catholics would not excommunicate the heretics when they had the chance, now the heretics are in control. The attempt to paint a smiley face on this disaster includes, e.g., an editorial about “how gay Catholics can lead the rest of the Church to a greater understanding of God’s truth.”

Ri-iiight. Your next pedophile priest scandal in 3, 2, 1 . . .

As a conservative Protestant, I have for years resisted the “road to Rome” solicitations of my conservative Catholic friends, mainly because of ancestral prejudice — coming from a long line of stubbornly independent-minded Calvinist types — but also because I knew something like this would happen to the Catholic church sooner or later. As far as I’m concerned Rerum Novarum is ample refutation of “papal infallibility.” It’s just bad economics and Quadragesimo Anno is arguably worse. If “Catholic social teaching” is divinely inspired, why is its fundamental economic theory so laughably wrong?

Seriously, my conservative Catholic friends, why do you think you now have a socialist Pope? And don’t deny try to deny the obvious truth: Francis is somewhere to the left of Bernie Sanders. You have a socialist Pope because, when you had a conservative Pope, nobody thought to hand him a copy of Human Action or The Mirage of Social Justice and say, “Here, learn something about how the economy really works.” Then get together a confab to produce a revision of “Catholic social teaching” that reflects actual facts.

Also, if you ever get another conservative Pope, excommunicate some heretics. Maybe burn a few of them at the stake, just to get the point across. But definitely excommunicate them. What’s the point of having a Pope, if he’s not excommunicating heretics?

<br />

Category: Catholics

Comments

204 Responses to “The Liberation Theology Pope Proves Conquest’s Second Law”

Political Rift » The Liberation Theology Pope Proves Conquest’s Second Law
October 18th, 2014 @ 8:50 pm

[…] Read more here: The Liberation Theology Pope Proves Conquest’s Second Law […]
Katie Scarlet
October 18th, 2014 @ 9:18 pm

Oooh boy.
Joan Of Argghh!
October 18th, 2014 @ 9:23 pm

The Catholic church is the mother of my faith, the one that fostered my love for Jesus, and I cannot scorn her. I can hold her leadership accountable however, and pray for her.

I’ve not found my way back to the Catholic Church and likely won’t, being happily found in the Anglican communion. The Calvinists did their best to convince me of many things, but they and I have had a pleasant detente after George McDonald warned me off of them. 😉
Nan
October 18th, 2014 @ 9:35 pm

Stacy, Stacy, Stacy, no idea where you got the sentence about papal infallibility relying on the pope being in solidarity with the Bishops; please remember that the Church is a top-down organization and it is the Bishops who must obey the Pope. Try educating yourself about papal infallibility first, then use the phrase; the pope speaks infallibly only on matters of doctrine and then only when he speaks ex Cathedra. The last infallible statement made was in 1950, when Pope Pius XII made the Assumption of Mary dogma; that means, that all Catholics must believe that Mary was assumed into heaven, body and soul, rather than dying on Earth. That was nothing new; that tradition had been around at least since the 6th century.

Papal encyclicals are not infallible writing nor is Catholic social teaching infallible, nor are synods; synods have some bishops and are a discussion but are at a lower level than an ecumenical council. Note that what the bishops decide isn’t germane. It’s what the pope decides. Here, we have a pope whose words are all translated for us as he doesn’t speak English. He has a different take on things.

Note also that while we’ve heard rumors of Cardinal Burke’s demotion and he has alluded to knowing he’ll be assigned to Malta, he hasn’t actually been assigned to Malta. If he ends up being reassigned, I believe that’s about optics; it will look like a change because if the new person isn’t Burke, he will appear warm and fuzzy, but the pope will not actually change doctrine.
Memento Mori
October 18th, 2014 @ 9:35 pm

Conservative Catholic here. I absolutely agree that the rot is there, only the delusional would deny it. However, I’m not quite so pessimistic. Francis was elevated to clean out the Curia – he has no mandate for these kinds of changes. With regard to the synod going on now that is attempting to soften the Church’s stance on Homosexuality, it was only able to get going by excluding the African Bishops entirely. Even so reports today are that Conservative Bishops were able to force changes in language and tone to the final document that rejects the changes the synod was attempting to make. So we certainly have a big fight on our hands but I don’t think its time to give up on us just yet.
Nan
October 18th, 2014 @ 9:35 pm

I’ll pray for your return to the True Church.
sophia zoi
October 18th, 2014 @ 9:48 pm

Start earning extra income with online work from home… Make extra $3000 every month by working for a few hours a day. You’ll need an internet connection and USA,CANADA,UK,AUSTRALIA or NEW ZEALAND residency and you are ready to start… You’ll get paid weekly [xyzwq0ik]…

>>>>>>> -> ???7?????
JadedByPolitics
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:25 pm

Quite simply this Marxist will be the downfall of the church proving St. Malachy correct.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:35 pm

Most Roman Catholics really don’t understand the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. Geisler and MacKenzie explain it, as well as its origins and the biblical and historical problems with it.

http://www.equip.org/articles/papal-infallibility-the-catholic-protestant-debate-over-papal-infallibility/#christian-books-2

The last statement made excathedra is far from infallible. Most such statements clash with scripture and for them to be true, God must contradict Himself. If God contradicts Himself, then there is no way to really know what God is trying to tell us in Scripture.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:37 pm

The RCC imploded doctrinally at the Council of Trent, placing themselves on eh wrong side. The only thing that’s happening now is the result of the slow rot that started during the Middle Ages. The RCC had the opportunity to reform itself and return to Christianity. It refused in conciliar fashion and is reaping what it sowed.
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:42 pm

Hi there Joan. Contented Calvinist here! We’re kind of big on the sovereignty of God. Everyone else, not so much. George MacDonald, eh? Strange guy, wrong about lots, but a dedicated Christian nevertheless. Glad to see you have a Body of Christ.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:43 pm

Not sure who George MacDonald is, but avoid Calvinists to the extent I can. I’m not Roman Catholic either.

The rolls for the true Church of Jesus Christ are held in Heaven, not in Rome. Saving faith places you in fellowship with Christ and so in the true Church of Jesus Christ. If your faith is in Christ, you can’t be a Roman Catholic anywayz. In spite of protests to teh contrary, the true faith of the RCC is not in Christ, but in teh Church as the channel and mediator of salvation. The only mediator between God and man is the man Jesus Christ. The point of the tearing of the veil was to witness to the fact that the believer has direct access to God through Christ. That was the day that the need for a Priesthood passed.
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:45 pm

Hey Memento, did you see that you can make lots of money working from home? Sheesh.
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:48 pm

No need to avoid me. Some people actually think I’m okay, on my good days!
Memento Mori
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:48 pm

🙂 I was just going to reply with congratulations on the nuanced theological argument that required me to rethink my positions.
JadedByPolitics
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:48 pm

At the end of the day everyone is reaping what they sowed and they have sowed evil.
Nan
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:51 pm

Your bias shows when you say Roman Catholic. Catholic is Catholic, whether Roman, Melkite, Maronite, Ukrainian, Ruthenian or what have you.

Please also show me the verse that says to follow Scripture alone.
Nan
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:53 pm

Right. It’s the Protestants who are the heretics here. The Catholic Church is the only church that Christ founded. All others were founded by men.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:56 pm

Sorry if you think it’s a bias. I will continue to use the term because it is descriptive of a certain group that I deal with.

I won’t argue sola scriptura. I will ask you what gives you the right to hold a doctrine that clashes with scripture, yet still call yourself Christian? That question gos to the heart of your problem, and deflecting in a direction that is irrelevant is the standard tactic of a Roman Catholic who has no desire to deal with the heart of the problem.

Save your pixels if your next response is that Roman Catholic doctrine is entirely biblical. It is not, and has shown repeatedly. Some of it is at direct variance with scripture and that is the problem.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 10:59 pm

Now you’ve descended to clownishness. The Eastern Orthodox will same the same of you, and they just as much of a right to make the claim as Roman Catholics do.

The reality is simple, you either deal with the real problem, or all you’re doing is the same sort of stuff this blog tags libtards on. Frankly, I have as yet to see any Roman Catholic, including one Bishop, capable of doing that.

Heresy is a word that doesn’t mean what YOU think it means.
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:00 pm

Hi Nan. So happy to see you are committed to a Body of Christ. As a Calvinist, I have elected to follow the 5 solas, one of which is sola scripture. I believe our High Priest is Jesus Christ, who mediates for us. But this belief is one I have chosen. Blessings to you.
Nan
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:02 pm

No, the problem is actually that you’re trying to demand that I follow your belief system. Note that in my reply to Stacy all I did was explain the Catholic teaching as he clearly misunderstood papal infallibility. I had nothing to say about any form of protestantism in that post; then you jumped in to try telling me that protestants know so much more than Catholics and that Catholics aren’t even Christian.

You’re operating from the assumption that whatever you say is valid and that whatever I say isn’t. That’s the true problem. I’m Catholic and have no reason to apologize for following the Church that Christ founded. I will pray for your conversion through the intercession of St. Thomas More.
Nan
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:04 pm

While you’re right on Jesus Christ being the High Priest, and that he mediates for us, do you also know that when priests are at Mass and in the confessional, they stand in persona Christi, so that actually He is the only mediator?
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:06 pm

To the contrary. You are welcome to believe what ever superstitions you wish. Since I am a Christian, however, you will pardon me if I accept scripture over the claims of some people that lost their way over 1000 years ago, amalgamating paganism and Christianity.

My conversion took place as a result of the Convicting power of the Holy Spirit who convinced me of the truth of the claim that Christ had on my life. You, for some reason, feel the need to engage in necromancy in response to a biblical truth claim. Your problem, not mine.

I belong to the Church Christ founded. It’s HQ is in Heaven, not in Rome.
Nan
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:06 pm

You haven’t talked at lenght to any Bishops I see.

Except that the Orthodox reject the primacy of Rome which is a biblical tenet.
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:07 pm

Well, Memento, I have to thank you, for not beating up on this poor benighted Calvinist! No one seems to like us anymore. Besides, there’s only about 60 or 70 of us left, everyone else having run off to Arminian megachurches. They do have better sound systems and light shows, I have to admit…
Memento Mori
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:09 pm

Actually, Trent sparked a cultural and Spiritual renaissance that lasted for hundreds of years. What is happening now is the result of the Church’s inability to deal with the modernist thought that has captured the world. All Christian faiths are looking down the barrel of the same gun.
Nan
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:10 pm

You can’t handle the truth so you blaspheme.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:11 pm

Alas, for you, I have talked at length with a Bishop and he was unable to deal with the issue at hand.

The Orthodox do not point to any biblical passage in support of their rejection of the primacy of Rome. They DO, however point to scripture when it comes to aberrant doctrine, and that’s why the reject the primacy of Rome. Most Orthodox that I have discussed the issue with don’t even Recognize the Roman Catholic Church as a legit expression of Christianity.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:14 pm

Actually, It didn’t. It cemented the heresy of the RCC. There were problems with the reformation, but the RCC didn’t deal with even one of the issues. They simply marked the entire thing as heresy and walked away to try to hold onto their temporal power.

The only dealing the Church need have with Modernism is rejection of it. Every group that has tried to “deal with it” has ended up falling into heresy themselves.
Memento Mori
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:15 pm

Not to worry Pragmatist. I feel your pain. When most people find out I am a traditionalist Catholic they look at me like a zoo animal. I feel like they are going to start throwing treats at me.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:15 pm

What is blasphemy in my post?
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:15 pm

Hi Quartermaster. Your conversion sounds very much like what I experienced. The comfort and assurance it gave is priceless, following the Good Shepherd. Blessings. One Body, One Head.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:17 pm

Indeed! Everyone is saved in the same manner, and that begins with the Holy Spirit working with a presentation of the Gospel. Romans 8:16 is one of the most important passages in all of scripture.
FenelonSpoke
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:20 pm

I find it deeply troubling that in a world where the faux Christian and true marxist and authoritarian Barack Obama and his ilk want to divide people into groups solely for power that this article is here, Stacy. Because as far as I’m concerned it’s “One Faith, One Lord, One Baptism”. This is not time to fight the Reformation again It’s the Christians agains the Statists. We better all hang together as Christians or most assuredly as Benjamin Franklin noted in another context, we will all hang separately. The people who hate Christ- and dear brothers and sisters, it’s not whatever Christian denomination you don’t belong to that hates Christ and the church universal, it’s the irreligious statists-don’t care what shingle you hand outside your church. I’m not a Roman Catholic. You want to pray for me? Pray that I be conformed to the image of Christ more each day and that what I do may bring glory to God whatever church I belong to. Because my faith is not in the church-ANY church. It’s in Jesus Christ, who died, rose and is coming again. There will be no denominations in heaven.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:20 pm

If rejecting doctrines that clash with scripture is heresy, then make the most of it. You’ll have a really hard time when you pull that nonsense when you meet Christ face to face, however. God takes a very dim view of taking His name in vain.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:22 pm

But, I’ve heard the good days are bad too. 🙂
PalmBayConservative
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:22 pm

heeheehee, Nan’s holding her/his own. =)
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:26 pm

Heh! “They do have better sound systems and light shows…” Not my experience.

And last I looked there are probably millions of Calvinists. With John MacArthur, JOhn Piper, and the Piper Cubs, and R.C Sproul, around and the movement has been growing for the last 20 years. I think it’s reached its peak however, as the refutations that get made about every 100 years seem to be taking their toll again.
PalmBayConservative
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:26 pm

I was going to chime in here, but seems like Nan has done it for me. Well said. (and 100% right)
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:28 pm

Whatever you believe. I still haven’t heard back on why my post further up is blasphemy. Since I’ve seen this “argument” before, it is very unlikely she will “Hold Her Own.”

I have met some Roman Catholics that really were Christian, but those have been very few, and very far between since to become such one must go against the teachings of the RCC to reach that status.
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:30 pm

I guess I’m the odd man out here in this discussion. My denominational affiliation I have already stated, but beyond that lies something more important, to me anyway. It’s what Jesus said. “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through (or by, if you prefer) me.” That is the basis of my faith, the bottom line. My denominational choice is the way that I approach Father God, through His Son, most effectively. I believe that all Followers can find Him, through different denominations. No particular one is “the” right one.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:30 pm

There are people that we can accept co-belligerents, but not as Christian. I can work with anyone that wants to walk the back and actually recognizes the problem. There are even a few Atheists who see the danger of where we are going.
Memento Mori
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:34 pm

At the risk of going further off topic I would just point out that Trent was the wellspring of the counter-reformation which was the trigger of Baroque culture and a popular spiritual revival led by people like Ignatius of Loyola and John of the Cross – which were the items I alluded to above and you pooh pooh’d. With regard to modernism, we live in the world (even though we are not of it) and so we need to engage the dominant thought at some level. As you noted no other group has managed to pull it off either. I just saw pragmatists post below and I tend to agree with it so I will let you have the last word.
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:35 pm

Yeah, I was just trying to be modest. Calvinism is not for everyone. But it was the doctrine that facilitated bringing me to Christ. Whatever doctrine that truly brings anyone to Christ is A-OK in my book. Calvinism just brings me comfort and encouragement, and strengthens my witness.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:35 pm

I agree. While I have very serious problems with Calvinist Soteriology, I can accept a Calvinist as a Christian and work with them on that basis. Anyone that is a true Christian became that by the same process as I did.

Some denominations have more problems than others and others must be rejected outright as they have crossed the line accepting sin.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:40 pm

Yeppers! A grenade in the living room.
pragmatist
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:45 pm

Really. I honestly did not think I was walking into the Reformation Wars. Go figure. I am all about the Body of Christ uniting against true existential evil that is staring us in the face. And we will have to fight, in this world. Which will be opposed by the “foolish wing” of Christianity, specifically Liberal Protestantism and Liberal Catholicism. They will be a burden.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:47 pm

To engage people that have rejected Christ and His claims is not a problem. Too often, however, when dealing with modernism, too many have fallen for its seduction rather than keeping their eyes on Christ and what he has taught. That has happened to the United Church of Christ, several Presbyterian denominations, and the United Methodists (UMC). Evangelical have beaten back the modernists in the UMC and have them on the ropes. Whether they are able to finish them off is the question. We’ll see at the next general Conference in 3 years.

The RCC, however, has refused to deal wither the modernists in their ranks and the Jesuits have been one of the main sources of spiritual septicemia in the RCC, and the Popes have refused to deal with it.
Quartermaster
October 18th, 2014 @ 11:49 pm

Alas, Roman Catholicism will always be a problem. I can accept them as co-belligerents, but that’s as far as it will go. It’s as far as it can go without some serious vetting of individuals. To do otherwise is unwise.