jump to navigation

Isn’t this straight up Calvinism? June 29, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, different religion, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, the struggle for the Church.

Mystery quote of the day:

“What is reconciliation? Taking one from this side, taking another one for that side and uniting them: no, that’s part of it but it’s not it … True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: ‘This is your sin, and I will sin again’. [if said/thought in the context of sacramental confession, such thinking would render the confession invalid and leave one in a perilous state. This reeks of protestant/Calvinist self-serving error to me] And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us. “

I’m genuinely asking, because this kind of Christology is deep and fraught with a minefield of easy-to-make errors, but I thought it was Calvin’s novelty to tremendously exaggerate – to the point of heresy – St. Paul’s statements regarding Christ’s taking on our sins and blow them up to Christ literally becoming sinner in some kind of corrupting transference.  I thought the Catholic understanding was that St. Paul was speaking figuratively in II Corinthians, and that the Catholic understanding was that Christ took on our sins, to expiate them, but did not become the sinner for us.  Francis seems to be taking the much more literal, Calvinist interpretation, which I thought had been condemned.

It should be noted that this claim of Jesus becoming a replacement sinner for us is very widespread among the protestant evangelical/televangelist community of which Francis is so fond.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church  – not the most ideal source, I know – seems to reject the idea of Christ literally becoming a sinner in favor of a more figurative understanding:

603 Jesus did not experience reprobation as if he himself had sinned.405 But in the redeeming love that always united him to the Father, he assumed us in the state of our waywardness of sin, to the point that he could say in our name from the cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”406 Having thus established him in solidarity with us sinners, God “did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all”, so that we might be “reconciled to God by the death of his Son”.407  

The context was a meandering homily (is there any other kind) at the Santa Martha June 15 2016.

Coupled with the following statement regarding the Lutheran take on justification (and the role of the arch-heretic Luther as a whole), it seems like a a wide acceptance of protestantism at work:

I believe that the intentions of Luther were not wrong. He was a reformer. Perhaps some methods were not right, but at that time, when we read the story by [Ludwig von] Pastor – a German Lutherans who converted and became a Catholic – we see that the Church was not exactly a worthwhile model: it was corruption, worldliness, attachment to money and power. Therefore, he protested. He was intelligent and took a step forward and justified why he did it. Today we are unified as Protestants and Catholics on the doctrine of justification in agreement, and on this very important point, he was not wrong. He made a medicine for the Church, then he consolidated this medicine to a discipline, to make it a way, a belief. And then Zwingli, Calvin had these principles behind them: ‘ cuius regio eius religio.’

That’s completely contrary to what the Church has solemnly proclaimed for centuries, that Luther was a heretic, a man so riven by sin and scruples that he completely mangled the conception of justification in order to try to justify his inability to refrain from grave sin.  That is entirely how he arrived at “justification by faith alone.”  The non-binding 1999 Joint Declaration is an abomination and stands in clear contradiction to 2000 years of Catholic Doctrine on the subject, and is painfully at odds with the Council of Trent.  It’s crafting was some of the best evidence yet of the kinds of evil the ecumenical movement is capable of.

Pope Francis will take part in a protestant event starting the year of “celebrations” over the 500th anniversary of Luther’s revolt against Christendom.  Virtually everything wrong, evil, and cancerous about Western Civilization – in its battered remains – can be laid at Luther’s feet.

As for Francis lamenting the perceived corruption of the 16th century Church – physician, heal thyself.


1. tg - June 29, 2016

PF going to that celebration is wrong on so many levels. I don’t see any anger out there from any bishop about this.

2. NickD - June 29, 2016

There’s no resolve to lead a sinful life afterwards. Our Pope is getting closer and closer to formal heresy

NickD - June 29, 2016

Should read “sinless”

3. Gc5341 - June 29, 2016

Pope Francis goes out of his way to make friends with protestants. Luther was a heretic who led many souls to hell. Our Holy Father apparently has no fear of God or hell. Francis works hard to compliment Luther. It’s more important to be friends with the world than it is to save souls. Pray for Francis to have a chamge of heart. Always trust in Our Lord and God Jesus Christ.

4. Gary - July 4, 2016

Francis is as dangerous to the Church as Obama is to America.

5. Should I Even Bother? A Catalog of Recent Atrocities from the Bishop of Rome | A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics - July 5, 2016

[…] is not Catholicism, however.  It is straight up protestantism, as we saw last week.  In order to continue his great project in remaking the Church in the light […]

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: