ASKING WHAT POPE FRANCIS BELIEVES
If report is true, according to news from Rome quickly taken up by especially traditional Catholics and released on the 9th of this month through La Repubblica, Pope Francis does not believe in the divinity of Christ.
Here’s one report https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVz8CGkRieo
It may be that Eugenio Scalfari, the pontiff’s long time journalist friend, has misreported and exaggerated what got said in the course of private, unrecorded conversation. Scalfari who founded La Repubblica is an elderly (95yr) atheist. The Vatican has described Scalfari’s claim as a “personal and free interpretation” of what was said…
…But this does not constitute the more complete rebuttal that might have been expected from the institution which regularly works to cover for the by now almost routine puzzles and gaffes deriving from Francis. For example, a year or so ago Scalfari reported the Pope did not believe in hell, another claim the Vatican rejected, though perhaps more accurately so as it’s known the Pope does believe in the devil. But why for years now has Francis been interviewed (now for the ninth time) by someone liable to misreport? Are these “errors” a means of giving leaks that convey the real Francis’s credo?
With the latest controversy, traditionalist Catholics feel they have found serious confirmation of their opinion Francis is simply an anti-Pope who should step down. While we may not have the full truth in this case – and in fairness Francis has referred to Christ as “true man and true God” as in a Christmas Eve homily of 2013 – it’s still likely here that “there’s no smoke without fire”.
Pope Francis is, uniquely for his position, a Jesuit, and the direction of modern Jesuit thought like that of Teilhard de Chardin has long been suspect of various heretical, universalist and materialist/Marxist doctrinal swerves. This has been seen in South American Liberation theology and troubling policies like the excessive compromises with communist China. Traditionalist surprise about, for example, papal openness to Fr James Martin, himself an American Jesuit, and LGBTQ claims fails to take into account how this development may well owe something to the neo-marxist basis of Queer (as opposed to gay) theory and theology (1). Regardless, years ago Jesuit writer, Fr Malachi Martin, (d.1999) exposed not only many Vatican irregularities but accused fellow Jesuits of lack of adequate belief in Christ’s divinity.
A low or confused papal Christology would only be consistent with another earlier Francis controversy in which an audience was told that claims to any personal or direct relations with Christ are “dangerous temptations”. For Francis, the way to communicate with God is through the church, or perhaps he really meant Mary because qualities and attributes of divinity are liable to be directed by him away from Christ and onto Mary. He even told natural disaster victims in the Philippines they could take their pain to her calling her “Mum”.
That Francis’ beliefs would need to be ultra-flexible and “imaginative” on issues like divinity and Sonship is almost guaranteed by his unexpected and radical rapprochement with world religions, especially the agreement made earlier this year with Ahmed-al-Tayeb, the leading Imam of Sunni Islam. I regarded this as odd and commented on it critically earlier this year. (See St Malachy’s Last Pope ringing down the curtain?” https://wp.me/p4kNWg-oM).
This October’s Amazon Synod at the Vatican has itself raised controversy with the Pope attending a ceremony in which indigenous people worshipped the Earth goddess, Pachamama, a figure to whom they regularly sacrifice as a true and living deity rather than treat as just a symbol.
If there is truth in the charges of papal heresy, it’s unlikely the Pope Francis totally rejects Jesus’ divinity. By the sound of it Francis holds a highly original and ultimately unbiblical version of it which renders Christ wholly and only man while on earth, but lets him be divine before and/or after life. This cannot however be called strictly Christian. To the extent such belief would confound distinct notions of a unique eternal Sonship, it is even biblically associated with Antichrist teaching. “This is the antichrist, the one who denies the father and the son” (1 Joh 2:18)
Christians are supposed to believe, and Francis maybe doesn’t, that Christ is “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn (or pre-eminent) of all creation for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created….for in him the whole fullness of God was pleased to dwell….( 1 Col 15, 19 ).
Belief in divine incarnation has always constituted a mystery, one rendered unnecessarily difficult through its various definitions against Greek philosophy; but it can be more consistently and plausibly described in other terms (as in even two of my metaphysical poems “The Hidden God” and “A Divine Rejection” https://wp.me/p2v96G-wZ )
PREPARING THE GREAT APOSTASY?
The trouble with this latest controversy around papal beliefs is that no matter what the precise truth of it, its existence and widespread broadcast creates uncertainty and confusion in the world, and even in the churches, which can be biblically illiterate in a secular age.
I have never bought into the sensational claims of those would-be visionaries who go to youtube and elsewhere to declare that Pope Francis is the Antichrist or the False Prophet who supports that person’s cult, but I would concede that this theoretically last Pope according to the prophecy of St Malachy, could be preparing the way to a/the false messiah and the coming of the great lie.
If Christians weren’t so opposed to and dismissive of anything astrological it would be rather clearer to them what is going on and that includes traditionalist Catholics who never liked the trends begun by Pope John the XX111 and his Vatican council. There is a connection between back then and now. Once again a free-wheeling Sagittarian has assumed the top job and this time with truly global and historic effects given a natal sun conjunct the Galactic Centre (important for events in religion) and at the end of the approx 2100 year long Piscean era which began around the time of Christ’s birth and is rather obviously identical with St Paul’s “dispensation of grace”.
Things are coming to a climax. As with the earlier case of the February agreement with the Imam and world religious leaders, the celestial signs point to the significance of this latest development along the way to collapse. For example…
First, to mention Francis’ own pattern, he was born with a not altogether helpful for a Pope aspect of Neptune opposite restrictive, sceptical Saturn. Positively Neptune is anything to do with Christ, ideals, compassion and mysticism while negatively it is confusion, lies and addictions. As to when the Francis news was launched….
- On 9th October transiting Neptune at 16.33 Virgo was almost perfectly conjunct Francis’ natal 16.30 Saturn in Virgo releasing and reflecting distortions, misunderstanding and whatever about Christ.
- The sun that day was at 15 Libra. This meant that for Christianity (as represented by the Pentecost chart for Christianity’s birth in AD 30) the sun was suitably conjunct Bischoff (Ger. Bishop). Society would receive a report about a notable bishop – Francis calls himself “Bishop of Rome” in preference to Pope.
- I have no exact time for release, but the moon was almost certainly in late Aquarius to supply shocks and surprises, and also perhaps to conjunct the late Aquarian factors of the pattern most likely to indicate the Antichrist as mentioned in my February article cited above.
- In Revelation, the second Beast or prophet of the Antichrist is one who speaks like a dragon (Rev 13: 11). Interestingly, on Oct 9th Jupiter, strong in its own sign of Sagittarius, sign of religion and doctrines, at 19 degrees was conjunct asteroid Drago (Dragon) in the chart for Christianity. This would suggest facilitation of an Antichrist doctrine – if Francis is guilty as charged. The dragon always threatens the church. In the chart for Christ’s birth, and in line with the way conjunctions are either very for or against something, asteroids Church and Drago are conjunct at 8 Taurus. Their ongoing argument was, as it were, released by the challenging way that on 9th October Mercury (any news) was at 8 Scorpio.
- It’s ironic and almost amusing but the sort of thing that helps certify astrology, that the Pope was reported to say amid the controversy that he likes creating some confusion (because it’s creative). He shouldn’t do this as biblically it’s said God is not a God of confusion, but we may accept Francis was telling the truth here. Natally he has the confusion asteroid Chaos in often confused and confusing Pisces at 11 degrees which means in perfect opportunity aspect to his natal Mercury (any media or newspapers) at 11 Capricorn in his house of the audience.
FACILITATING IF NOT MAKING ERROR
Taken altogether this latest piece of papal controversy is an event that belongs with surprising, controversial Uranus in Taurus. This month at 5 Taurus, Uranus sets up tension square to Achristou at 5 Aquarius in the Pentecost/Christianity chart. I have found Achristou to work like “astrospeak” for dark side and antichrist issues.
Francis’ own Achristou asteroid is conjunct his Mars in Libra at 19 and 20 respectively. This week the full moon opposite there at 20 Aries attends and may possibly enlarge upon the controversy.
As said, conjunctions are very for and against something. One can hope that Achristou is not an Antichrist factor and that Francis would sooner oppose than support any Antichrist doctrine. But from now on it will be an uphill battle for Catholics, especially traditionalists, not to believe something is going wrong with the papacy.
And for those of us who are not Catholics, it can only seem ever more peculiar that Catholics choose to remain with a branch of Christianity they recognize to be so exceptionally scandal ridden, confused and even traitorous (as in the case of China’s Catholics, betrayed into communist hands by the same pontiff that should be defending them). Beyond a certain point, to stay around risks being undermined and contaminated and the relevant prophetic principle is always “Come out of her my people lest you partake in her sins…and suffer her plagues” (Rev 18:4).
NOTE 1) I have stressed in various articles like The Muddle of Christopher Yuan’s Holy Sexuality (https://wp.me/p6Zhz7-3o) that non-essentialist, materialist queer theory and theology is inconsistent with Christianity in a way revisionist gay theory and theology need not be. It would be ironic but not unexpected from a Jesuit background if papal acceptance of LGBTQ increasingly inclined to Queer.