Posted on 08/30/2025 6:36:07 PM PDT by ebb tide
When Robert Francis Prevost was born on September 14, 1955, it was just over five years since Pope Pius XII had published his Humani Generis, which remains one of the most forceful papal condemnations of the errors that still seek to undermine the Catholic Church. The final error that Pius XII condemned in that encyclical was “false irenism”:
“Let the teachers in ecclesiastical institutions be aware that they cannot with tranquil conscience exercise the office of teaching entrusted to them, unless in the instruction of their students they religiously accept and exactly observe the norms which We have ordained. . . . finally, let them not think, indulging in a false ‘irenism,’ that the dissident and the erring can happily be brought back to the bosom of the Church, if the whole truth found in the Church is not sincerely taught to all without corruption or diminution.”
As we can glean from the context, false irenism seeks to diminish or alter the Catholic Faith for the sake of drawing heretics back into the Church. Somewhat surprisingly, Paul VI provided an even clearer definition of false irenism in his 1964 encyclical Eccelsiam Suam:
“An immoderate desire to make peace and sink differences at all costs (irenism and syncretism) is ultimately nothing more than skepticism about the power and content of the Word of God which we desire to preach.”
Thus, fitting this definition within Pius XII’s Humani Generis, we can see that this false irenism seeks to achieve peace and unity among Christian religions through the process of diminishing the differences between religious beliefs. In practice, this false irenism has been one of the most common tools wielded by the proponents of the Vatican II revolution to implement false ecumenism.
Protestants put their private interpretations of the Bible over the authority of the Church, which was established by God to safeguard divinely revealed truth. So what separates us on the level of belief is not merely one or more points of doctrine but the primary basis for believing that doctrine.
To see an alarming example of false irenism and false ecumenism in practice, we can look to Pope Leo XIV’s recent message to the participants in the ecumenical week in Stockholm:
“While the Catholic Church was not represented at that first gathering, I can affirm, with humility and joy, that we stand with you today as fellow disciples of Christ, recognizing that what unites us is far greater than what divides us. Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has wholeheartedly embraced the ecumenical path. Indeed, Unitatis Redintegratio, the Council’s decree on ecumenism, called us to dialogue in humble and loving fraternity, grounded in our common baptism and our shared mission in the world. We believe that the unity Christ wills for His Church must be visible, and that such unity grows through theological dialogue, common worship where possible, and shared witness in the face of humanity’s suffering.”
With these few words, Leo XIV appears to confirm that he is committed to prolonging the errors condemned by Pius XII, which have offended God, and led countless Catholics to lose the Faith, for over six decades. To better appreciate this, four problematic aspects of Leo XIV’s message deserve attention: false humility, lack of respect for orthodoxy, the fallacy of a shared mission with Protestant sects, and a willingness to scandalize the faithful.
False Humility. In this passage, Leo XIV used the words “humility” and “humble” to describe how he — and by extension the Catholic Church — should approach discussions with heretics. True humility, though, requires us to see God and His Catholic Church as they are, and ourselves as we are in relation to God. To lower the Catholic Church for the sake of putting it on the same level with heretical religions is blasphemous. We and the Protestants are not “fellow disciples of Christ,” as Leo XIV expressed it: Catholics follow the religion that Christ established, and Protestants perpetuate man-made religions that lead souls away from the religion established by Christ. If we actually love our Protestant neighbors, true humility calls us to be willing to charitably tell them that they must abandon their false religions.
Lack of Respect for Orthodoxy. When Leo XIV said that “what unites us is far greater than what divides us,” he was presumably referring both to baptism and shared Christian belief. As nice as this sounds, though, it belies the reality that the difference between the unadulterated Catholic Faith and even most similar non-Catholic religions is immense. Pope Leo XIII explained this well in his 1896 encyclical on the unity of the Church, Satis Cognitum:
“But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith. ‘In many things they are with me, in a few things not with me; but in those few things in which they are not with me the many things in which they are will not profit them’ (S. Augustinus in Psal. liv., n. 19).”
Protestants put their private interpretations of the Bible over the authority of the Church, which was established by God to safeguard divinely revealed truth. So what separates us on the level of belief is not merely one or more points of doctrine but the primary basis for believing that doctrine. In attempting to understate the differences between the true Faith and heretical religions, Leo XIV engages in the type of behavior that Pius XII condemned in 1950.
It seems that the greatest risk of the Leo XIV papacy is that he would be “good enough” to convince otherwise sensible Catholics that the crisis is over, while leaving untouched the foundational errors of false ecumenism, irenism, and religious liberty.
Fallacy of Shared Mission with Protestant Sects. By stating that the Catholic Church and heretical religions have a “shared mission in the world,” Leo XIV again put the Church established by Our Lord on the same level as those sects that are opposed to the true Church. We know the true mission of the Church from the final lines of St. Matthew’s Gospel:
“And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” Matthew 28:18-20)
Non-Catholic religions may indeed baptize souls, but they do not teach them to observe what Christ commanded. As such, it is a fallacy to suggest that the Protestant sects share the mission of the Catholic Church.
Willingness to Scandalize the Faithful. We can also see that Leo XIV encouraged Catholics to worship along with non-Catholics: “unity grows through theological dialogue, common worship where possible, and shared witness in the face of humanity’s suffering.” However, as Pope Pius XI clearly wrote in his 1928 encyclical on religious unity, Mortalium Animos, Catholics cannot take part in “the assemblies of non-Catholics”:
“Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. “
Certainly this has been abandoned in practice since Vatican II, but Pius XI’s words remain true. If, as Leo XIV stated, we should dialogue with non-Catholics and worship together “where possible,” why would anyone think that they must be Catholic?
Of course Leo XIV did not invent any of these erroneous beliefs, and perhaps he does not fully understand the theological implications of his own platitudes. As he expressed in his ecumenical week message, he simply follows the path taken by his predecessors:
“This mission has grown stronger through recent ecumenical milestones. In 1989, Pope John Paul II became the first Roman Pontiff to visit Sweden and was warmly welcomed at the Uppsala Cathedral by Archbishop Bertil Werkström, Primate of the Church of Sweden. That moment signaled a new chapter in Catholic-Lutheran relations. It was followed by the joint commemoration of the Reformation in Lund in 2016, when Pope Francis joined Lutheran leaders in common prayer and repentance. There, we affirmed our shared journey ‘from conflict to communion.’ This week, as you dialogue and celebrate together, I am pleased that my Delegation is able to be present as a sign of the Catholic Church’s commitment to continuing the journey of praying and working together, wherever we can, for peace, justice and the good of all.”
All of these ecumenical gatherings since Vatican II have tended to diminish the importance of the Catholic Church and obscure the need to belong to it. For this to be sponsored and promoted by the putative authorities of the Catholic Church is gravely sinful and scandalous.
The far better course would be for all sincere Catholics to finally renounce the errors condemned by Pius XII that have become so prevalent today. In so doing, we would be rendering one of the most faithful and charitable services possible to the Church and Leo XIV.
However, as bad as this false ecumenism and irenism are, who will condemn them today? To criticize these errors is to call into question not only Francis but also Vatican II, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, which many serious Catholics have no intention of doing. This refusal to condemn the errors that Pius XII and his predecessors condemned has yielded a unique type of religious indifference, which we might term “the heresy of accepting seemingly benign heresies because we adore the pope who promoted them.” This heresy is everywhere today, and those who openly reject it are often excommunicated from Catholic circles.
For this reason, it seems that the greatest risk of the Leo XIV papacy is not that he would simply fail to unwind Francis’s disastrous initiatives, or promote some of his own. Rather, it seems that the real danger is that he would be “good enough” to convince otherwise sensible Catholics that the crisis is over, while leaving untouched the foundational errors of false ecumenism, irenism, and religious liberty. He could “free the Traditional Latin Mass,” correct Fiducia Supplicans and Amoris Laetitia, grant permission for the Society of St. Pius X to consecrate new bishops, and censure the most heretical bishops, but he would still be perpetuating the errors which have undermined Catholic teaching for over sixty years if he maintained the false irenism he recently displayed.
If, then, serious Catholics remain unwilling to condemn the “benign heresies” promoted by Vatican II and John Paul II, then perhaps it is better for Leo XIV to sustain the most visible aspects of the crisis. In that way, we might not be deceived into thinking the cancer is cured merely because the most painful symptoms have temporarily subsided. But the far better course would be for all sincere Catholics to finally renounce the errors condemned by Pius XII that have become so prevalent today. In so doing, we would be rendering one of the most faithful and charitable services possible to the Church and Leo XIV. If we are not willing to do this — by insisting that it is an error to put Catholicism on the same level as Protestantism — why would we bother remaining Catholic? Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
Ping
Bookmark
“Protestants put their private interpretations of the Bible over the authority of the Church”
The basis of the entire article is to support the above.
Protestants do not maintain that private interpretations are always true. But a private interpretation impacts only a few. As in the entire article, the “Church” authorities often make the same errors the individual does and those errors of the “Church” mislead the many.
BTW, both Catholics and Protestants are seduced by Irenism...the tendency to want to be all inclusive and welcoming sinners without teaching that their sin is sin.
See tagline. The context was if someone claims to be a prophet. The Apostle Paul said to not automatically poo poo on it if someone claims to be a prophet (don't suppress the Sprit or scorn the gift of prophesy in v. 19-20). But at the same time, the next verse (v. 21) says to not just automatically believe whatever the alleged prophet says. Test what's taught, and if true believe it.
So if a person or group claims to be "established by God to safeguard divinely revealed truth", test what they say. Particularly if they claim to be the successors of the apostles. Test what they say against the teachings of the apostles. Don't automatically believe them just because they claim to have divinely inspired authority.
That goes for the RCC and its leaders, Orthodox and its leaders, as well as Protestant denominations and their leaders. So how do you test teachings? What do you test against? Answer: the basis of truth comes from the teachings of the apostles -- Scripture. True "apostolic successors" promote the teachings of the apostles -- Scripture.
bkmk
PM
Heady stuff. Here’s a thumbnail from Grok:
Briefly summarize the errors presented by Pope Pius XII in his Humani Generis.
In Humani Generis (1950), Pope Pius XII addresses errors and theological issues threatening Catholic doctrine. Key errors summarized briefly:
1. Relativism and Modernism: Rejection of absolute truth, promoting the idea that doctrine evolves with human experience, undermining Church teachings.
2. False Exegesis: Misinterpretation of Scripture by prioritizing historical-critical methods over Church tradition and magisterial guidance.
3. Denial of Original Sin: Questioning the reality of original sin and its transmission, contrary to Catholic teaching.
4. Polygenism: Speculation that humanity descended from multiple ancestors, conflicting with the doctrine of monogenism (descent from Adam and Eve).
5. Rationalism and Scientism: Overemphasis on human reason or science to explain divine mysteries, sidelining faith and revelation.
6. Existentialism and Immanentism: Philosophies reducing religion to personal experience or denying God’s transcendence.
7. False Ecumenism: Compromising Catholic truth for unity with other religions without proper adherence to doctrine.
8. Rejection of Scholastic Theology: Dismissing Thomistic theology as outdated, risking loss of doctrinal clarity.
Pius XII emphasizes fidelity to Church tradition, magisterial authority, and the harmony of faith and reason to counter these errors.
“do you think that I have come to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division; for henceforth in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three; they will be divided, father against son and son against father ...” Luke 12: 49-53
Loyalty to Jesus is even more important than family unity (14:26) and peace is possible only if we embrace Him in faith (John 14:27). “and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But those that endure will be saved.” Mark 13:13
How does the Catholic Church believe in unity when others reject the Word of God, especially in the summit of the Faith, the Sacrament of the Eucharist? (CCC 1324)
While we can have Hope that all will find and accept the fullness of God’s Truth, Our Catholic Faith should not accept compromise for the sake of unity.
Is it your opinion that one must be Catholic (as you see it) to be saved?
If not, what exceptions do you hold?
If so, what reason(s) do you use?
Pretty simple questions.
Your questions:
Is it your opinion that one must be Catholic (as you see it) to be saved?
I believe in the Words (Truth) of Jesus and passed down by the Apostles and the Catholic Faith. I believe that Jesus gave us the Catholic Church, Mass and 7 Sacraments for our Salvation. Jesus will determine when we die whether we will be saved. The Catholic Catechism teaches in ccc 830-856 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or remain in it,” CCC846
If not, what exceptions do you hold?
Read above and CCC 830-856
If so, what reason(s) do you use?
The Truth of Jesus in the Catholic Church for our Salvation. ccc 1129, 1889, 1816, 980
Pretty simple questions.
Thank you!!
The following is what I wrote this past week to the Bible study small group I lead.
(Quote)
“ I looked at several RCC sites to get confirmation of my claim (last night) that Catholics say you must be RCC to be saved.
“I erred.
“Although there are a variety of views (from various sites) all of them say that some can be saved apart from their Church.
“Unfortunately, I was basing my statement on what my Catholic friends have said on forums I see.
“I apologize for my mistake.”
(End of quoted message)
This is one site I relied on for my retreat:
“Those also can attain to everlasting salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the gospel of Christ or his Church, yet sincerely seek God and, moved by grace, strive by their deeds to do his will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience. Nor does divine Providence deny the help necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God, but who strive to live a good life, thanks to his grace” (Lumen Gentium, no. 16). (Source: Catholic.com)
“This affirmation [no salvation outside the Catholic Church] is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience – those too may achieve eternal salvation.” (Catechism, 846) (Source: Catholic.com)
There were others, btw.
I want to thank you for confirming what I originally posed.
As you know, I reject the notion that one must be Catholic to be saved. I believe I am saved and eternally secure because of Jesus Christ.
So, do you hold that I am not saved?
This is not a trick question. I appreciate your answers before (herein)- they were what I hoped and expected to see.
Again, “Thank you!”
Which is a complete contradiction of the New Testament.
Now, the problem for Roman Catholics are the contradictions between this, Trent, Vatican 1 and then Vatican 2.
Vatican 2 undid the anathemas of Trent and Vatican 1 and Unam Sanctum as well.,..and this from the group that claims they have change.
oh the joy in OMCET today.
He will also have to admit his denomination says they and the Muslims worship and adore the same God.
Rome is so far off the mark on these issues.
Your comments:
As you know, I reject the notion that one must be Catholic to be saved. I believe I am saved and eternally secure because of Jesus Christ.
So, do you hold that I am not saved?
While many may have been told or believe that they are already saved. My understanding is that Jesus lets you know upon your death. Jesus told us we need to endure to the end. (Mt 10:22 and 24:13)
Since I am not God nor has he told me about anyone’s salvation, I don’t know if you will be saved upon your death. One can have Hope along with Faith and Charity (virtues)
I will hope and pray for your salvation with your acceptance of God’s Truth.
The Catholic Church teaches Purgatory as a necessary purification for souls who die in God’s grace but still imperfectly purified (Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC] 1030-1031).
Scripture supports this: “Nothing unclean shall enter” heaven (Revelation 21:27). After death, the soul undergoes particular judgment (Hebrews 9:27), and if not fully sanctified, it is purified in purgatory before entering heaven.
Let me ask you a question.
I assume that you were not raised as a Catholic.
How do you understand the words of Jesus in John 6: 53-54 that “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”?
No. I was ABSOLUTELY raised as a Catholic. Mass every Sunday, all of the sacraments as a child, CCD classes through the 10th grade, attended mass faithfully until I was 22 years old.
Thank you for asking.
We will disagree on our interpretation of the Lord‘s supper and its purpose.
I do not believe in transubstantiation. I take a symbolic view of the bread and wine.
I know we disagree on this.
We just disagree.
Jesus said he was a shepherd, a door (of the sheep), a rejected stone, the bread (of life), the bridegroom, light (of the world); these were all metaphors and symbols for a larger spiritual understanding. A simile comes to mind: He called himself a “hen”!
Jesus called the Pharisees “whitewashed tombs“ and “ a brood of vipers“— all metaphors. He called Peter a “rock” - said He’d give him “keys”; and called him “Satan” — all pictures designed teach larger truths.
I want to tell you this: I sincerely appreciate your replies today. Thank you.
…just saw this.
No. You need not pray for my salvation. I am already a child of God.
And eternally secure.
We can disagree.
I thank you your civil conversation and responses.
I too missed many Masses when I was in college and early adult years. Yet I never stopped believing in the Catholic faith. Yes, I saw many problems. My brother too and yet he cam back to Mass and confession (after 59 years) before he died.
I would be interested, if you care to share, why you left at 22 and why you believe that the Body and Blood of Jesus is symbolic?
Yes, Jesus spoke in many ways to provide us the information to help us get to heaven with parables, metaphors, etc. and gives us many graces and sent the Holy Spirit and delegated His Catholic church to teach us.
I pray for all that we seek God’s Truth and live it in our lives with Faith and Trust.
God Bless you and your family.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.