jump to navigation

Francis Fave Spadaro: Adultery Is a Moral Duty! December 7, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in different religion, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, Sacraments, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.

That’s plainly what his reasoning in an interview given in the amateur liberal Catholic website Crux points to.  Asked whether those persisting in extramarital unions would have to refrain from sex in order to receive the Blessed Sacrament, possibly Francis’ closest confidant and advisor Antonio Spadaro said, in some cases, they may be permitted to continue in adulterous acts and still receive the Blessed Sacrament, if they thought a “worse evil”would result.  In answering thus, Spadaro has elevated adultery to a moral duty, if some “worse evil” is to be avoided.

This is precisely the kind of anti-Christ illogic that flows from Amoris Laetitia’s direct assault on Church Doctrine, attempting to overturn Christ’s direct command with flawed, diabolically-inspired reasoning:

…..Fr Spadaro was asked whether he thought the divorced and remarried could receive Communion if still in a sexual relationship. Fr Spadaro’s answer was startling – partly because he seemed to think the answer was yes, and partly because of his reasoning.

He explained that sometimes the remarried could “be asked to take on the challenge of living in continence”. This is, of course, the only path to the Eucharist which Catholic doctrine allows. But Fr Spadaro asserted that “this option may not be practicable”. And he then said that someone might “believe they would fall into a worse error”. That is, not sleeping with one’s new partner would be worse than sleeping with them. Hence, it could be a moral obligation to sleep with them. [Folks, he HAS to say this, because Communion for adulterers is untenable unless they are allowed to continue the adultery.  I’ve said before, this is exactly like the contraception ploy of the late 60s, they present it as an rare exception accompanied by spiritual intervention, but know in the back of their minds this will be naught but a 100% removal of adultery from the list of practical mortal sins.  They won’t declare such, but that will be the effect.  And that is promotion of heresy without the slightest doubt.]

In short, a papal adviser has said that extramarital sex could be a moral duty.

This is more interesting, and more worrying, than any number of anonymous accounts and Tolkien-themed screenshots. The Church teachesthat God always gives us enough grace to follow His will. She also teaches that some acts – extramarital sex among them – are never justified, whatever the situation.

I don’t see how Fr Spadaro’s words can be reconciled with these well-established truths. (Unless he means to say “believes erroneously“, but nothing in his words indicates that.)

If Spadaro is saying this, if he believes this, then it is a virtual certitude that Franky George Bergoglio does, as well.  These two have been peas in a pod going back years, well into Francis’ Argentinian days, and there are few closer to the Bishop of Rome.

The other matter – could this be something said accidentally, because of a problem speaking English as a second language?  It’s a possibility, but what Spadaro puts forth is EXACTLY the point Francis has been driving at all along with his doctrine of false mercy, pitting Catholic Truth against a conception of mercy very appealing to the world, but extremely disconnected from the constant belief and practice of the Faith.  Logically speaking, given Francis’ obvious push to permit manifest adulterers, whether civilly remarried or not, to receive the Blessed Sacrament, and since abstaining from the marital act would almost certainly cause many of these second relationships to shatter, it is logically consistent for Spadaro to advance the notion that continued adultery would be a “moral duty” to avoid the “worse” evil of another divorce or breakup.  This is a total inversion of the Truth, of course, but also very revealing.  It reveals the intent is not merely to permit, out of some misguided sense of mercy (a “mercy” which would have the effect of putting millions of souls at the gravest risk of eternal hellfire), civilly remarried Catholics to receive the Blessed Sacrament, but it is to upend, or, more accurately, invert, the entire moral Doctrine of the Faith.

Some people have had the honesty and audacity to point this out for years.  Some are only just coming around to this realization.  But as the evidence accumulates, this veneer of “mercy” wears increasingly thin, and more and more people are realizing the consequences of what Francis is driving at. And with another synod in the offing for the coming year, we can expect the assault on the Faith ton continue.

Please pray for Cardinal Burke and his allies, that they will have the strength to drive the examination of Francis’ errors (can they be doubted as such any more?) to the conclusion God desires.  May God have mercy on our Church, and on us all.  We are in circumstances that are just unbelievable.

Good post on preparation for the coming spiritual war here at Non Veni Pacem.  I am gratified to see that Cardinal Burke is claiming that refusal to ask the dubia is being taken as admission of error.  I also agree with the thrust of the post, that the time is coming that those who reject the errors being promoted by the Bishop of Rome will be castigated by ostensible Catholics and that this schism will break out into the open, probably in the coming year.  We need to be getting ready for some real suffering NOW, because it is coming in a hurry.


1. Magdalene - December 7, 2016

We are seeing the construction of a false ‘church’ and it is not the Church founded by Christ. Indeed the Lord is not hardly ever mentioned from the Vatican these days.

I recently read this from “In Conversation with God”:
In these times of doctrinal confusion we must take particular precautions not to give away in the content of our faith, not even in the slightest degree! For if one yield ground on any single point of Catholic doctrine, one will later have to yield in another,
and again in another, and so on until such surrenders come to be something normal and acceptable. And, when one gets used to rejecting dogma bit by bit, the final result will be there reputation of it altogether…

(Mt 10:32): So everyone who knowledges Me before man, I also will acknowledge before My Father who is in heaven.

To add knowledge God before man is to be a living witness to His life and to His words… Do we lack the courage to speak to our friends about God? Are we restrained by human respect, by what other people think of us? Do we concern ourselves with the faith of
those who, in one way or another, God has placed in our charge?

Fr. Francis Fernandez

2. Sally Box - December 7, 2016

In my sermon notes from Sunday, there is a notation:
“Fr. riffs on Amoris Laetitia”

You know I walk a fine line with prudential judgements on a lot of non-essentials, so that to the casual observer I would look like so not a Trad, but I hope and pray that I don’t ever compromise on anything critical. Very good point, Magdalene.

skeinster - December 7, 2016

Hmmmm, wonder how I did that…

3. Margaret Costello - December 7, 2016

What “worse evil” would people be avoiding by continuing the mortal sin of adultery? Breaking up a sinful relationship isn’t evil, it’s a good thing. Living in low financial straits isn’t an evil either. The emo pain isn’t evil either. Is there some blackmail that says “I’ll kill you if you don’t continue having sex with me? Or I’ll kill myself if I have to leave this person?” If so, these people need an exorcist.

What is it about these people and their obsession with sex and emotionalism?

I’m glad to hear that Cardinal Burke is moving forward with this. God bless him for it:+)

God bless~

4. dthy - December 7, 2016

There is no greater evil than mortal sin, and there are saints, such as Maria Goretti, who have suffered martyrdom rather than allow another to destroy their purity. What would evil men such as Spadero say to these virtuous young women–accommodate the rapist, Christ isn’t worth dying for?

5. Mary Ann Parks - December 7, 2016

This should not be news. The Pope said the same thing in AL itself, in footnote 293, applying VATII words to married couples to unmarried couples. I pointed this out in an article immediately upon the publication of AL. Spadaro is just echoing the document.

6. tg - December 7, 2016

I can’t even comment anymore about these heretics. What I want to say and the names that I think in my head are probably sins.

Tantumblogo - December 7, 2016

You’re far from alone, TG. God bless you.

Brian Springer - December 7, 2016

As I said elsewhere, I’m hoping that this crazy situation is resolved by Christmas. So hurry up Burke et all! There’s no point in waiting any longer, just get on with the next step.

Tantumblogo - December 7, 2016

I think you are being optimistic. I expect this to really start to ramp up next summer, prior to the next synod. Right now, Burke is traveling around canvassing for allies and gauging the level of discontent with Francis in the hierarchy. He is probably trying to elicit firm commitments of opposition to Amoris Laetitia and Francis’ broader program of destruction. That will take some months. Then they will move to start concrete action. I expect public statements about forming an inquiry into the pope’s beliefs and actions starting in the spring, with the inquiry taking place in June/July. Then they may move to try to call a council. Lots o fireworks.

dthy - December 10, 2016

On this subject, I shouldn’t have called Spadaro evil. But will simply say they need to advise adulterers to repent.

7. Brian Springer - December 7, 2016

Obviously that wish of mine is too optimistic! There’s no way this is going to be over by Christmas. 🙂

Anyway, I agree with your time frame (I almost forgot about that synod). We’re still witnessing the battle lines being drawn at the moment, which leads me to believe that we won’t be seeing to much action until around Spring when hopefully we’ll see where the majority of our pastors stand.

Though I hope that if Burke is trying to get an accurate reading on the level of discontent with Francis, that he doesn’t back down when/if he discovers that there might not be enough of it to impede Francis’ agenda.

I’ve read on Ann’s site that many in the Curia are extremely dissatisfied with the Holy Father and are even wondering out loud if he’s an Antipope, but I haven’t seen much evidence to suggest if that’s really the case. I hope there’s growing opposition to him, but the fact that only four Cardinals have taken action so far (several others have weighed in by lending Burke et al. their support) leads me to believe that it might not be.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: