Fernadez Defends Marxist Theology While Prevost Advances the Anti-Christ Spirit on Pentecost

Again and again throughout the post-conciliar/ Synodal era, Catholics must hear the same nauseating garbage about openness, accompaniment, encounter, dialogue, and inclusion.

When one looks at the insipid drivel that passes for theology in the new Synodal religion, it is not surprising that according to a recent survey by the Allensbach Institute, only 28 per cent of Germans currently believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

We know of course that in Germany the Synodal Pandora’s box has been opened to its full extent with the so-called “Synodal Way”, and that it is way beyond being closed up again by the heresiarchs in Rome.

Looking at just two more recent examples of the “best” the Synodal Church has to offer, and you will realize why these sort of statistics are becoming common place.

The recent remarks regarding Liberation Theology, made by the effeminate in-house pornographer of the Vatican, Víctor Manuel Fernández, serves as a perfect example of this new anti-Catholic religion that is destroying the faith of millions.

Speaking at the Pontifical Urban University in Rome on May 12, the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith openly questioned the 2006 doctrinal notification against Jesuit theologian Jon Sobrino, a notification approved under the authority of Benedict XVI.

This controversy may seem obscure or academic, but it concerns matters at the very heart of the Faith: Who is Christ? What is theology? Is Catholic doctrine received from Divine Revelation, or is it reconstructed from political and social experience?

Liberation Theology emerged in Latin America in the 1960s and 1970s amid widespread poverty, revolutionary agitation, and Marxist political movements. Certain theologians attempted to reinterpret Christianity through the lens of class struggle and socio-economic liberation.

While concern for the poor is deeply Catholic and rooted in the Gospel, many forms of Liberation Theology went far beyond authentic Christian charity. They absorbed Marxist categories into theology itself. Sin became “structural oppression”, salvation became political liberation, and Christ was often reduced to a revolutionary figure or social reformer.

All errors that were repeatedly condemned.

Under Joseph Ratzinger, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued important warnings in the 1984 instruction Libertatis Nuntius and the 1986 instruction Libertatis Conscientia. These documents acknowledged the Church’s duty toward the poor while condemning the infiltration of Marxist ideology into Catholic theology.

The Vatican’s concern was legitimate. Marxism is fundamentally materialist, atheistic, and revolutionary. It interprets history through conflict and power rather than through sin and grace. Once those categories enter theology, the supernatural order ultimately begins to crumble.

In 2006, the Vatican examined works by Jon Sobrino and found “notable discrepancies with the faith of the Church,” especially concerning Christology — that is, the doctrine of Christ Himself. The notification warned against treating “the Church of the poor” as the theological foundation of Christology in place of the apostolic faith handed down by the Church. The Church does not derive her doctrine from sociology, class experience, ethnicity, or historical struggle. She receives Revelation from God through Scripture and Sacred Tradition, interpreted authentically by the Magisterium.

But of course, along came the pervert and promoter of all that is heretical in the Synodal Church. Fernández now suggests that the Vatican’s previous doctrinal oversight was overly restrictive because it treated “contextual theology” with suspicion. He defended theological approaches rooted in “pastoral experience,” “motherhood,” and “the suffering of the poor.” He also lamented that theology developed “in the context of the poor” was viewed as “dangerous.”

Although he wants to throw his little modernist handbag around pretending not to know why it is dangerous, Liberation Theology indeed is: dangerous to doctrinal clarity, dangerous to Christology, and dangerous to the supernatural character of Christianity.

Fernández tries to deceive and mislead by pretending that Rome had objected merely to compassion for the poor. Consider Saint Vincent de Paul, Saint John Bosco, or Saint Damien of Molokai, who did not need Marxist analysis or “contextual theology” to serve the suffering.

Fernández again abuses his position to introduce the false and dangerous idea that theology may legitimately arise from multiple “starting points” shaped by historical experience. This is in opposition to Catholic theology which already has one, and one only starting point: Divine Revelation.

Once theology begins “from the experience of the poor,” there is nothing to stop another theologian to begin from the experience of race, sexuality, nationalism, feminism, or political revolution. Doctrine then becomes fluid, fragmented, and captive to contemporary ideological movements. Which we tragically are already seeing.

The modernist theological method substitutes anthropology for theology — man for God. Instead of asking, “What has God revealed?” Synodal post-conciliar theologians ask, “What do contemporary experiences demand?”

This inversion has inevitably led to doctrinal instability and the destruction of faith.

Sadly, these statements come not from a private or amateur theologian but from the supposed prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith itself. The old Holy Office protected the Church from doctrinal confusion and under figures such as Cardinal Ottaviani, theological innovation was measured carefully against the perennial teaching of the Church.

But let us move on to our second example. We cannot talk about the mortal destruction the Synodal heresy is causing, without putting the spotlight on the latest perversion of truth coming from Pope Bob from Chicago.

In his Pentecost Regina Coeli address delivered from the balcony of the Apostolic Palace, Leo XIV offered a reflection centered on the Holy spirit “opening doors” — the doors to God, the Church, and the human heart. This was of course only code for themes now familiar in post-conciliar ecclesiastical language: dialogue with the modern world, openness, inclusion, fraternity, and welcoming “everyone” into the Church.

The “Pope” stated that the Holy Spirit opens the doors of the Church “so that it can welcome and receive everyone, even those who have closed the doors to God, to others, to hope, to the joy of living.” He also repeated language associated with the pontificate of Arch-heretic Bergoglio, describing the Church as one with “doors open to all.”

Yes, the Church welcomes sinners in order to convert them. But No, that is not what Bergoglio was saying then, nor Prevost now.

Both these dangerous men’s language emphasizes welcome while remaining vague about repentance, doctrinal conformity, moral transformation, or submission to the Kingship of Christ.

Again and again throughout the post-conciliar/ Synodal era, Catholics must hear the same nauseating garbage about openness, accompaniment, encounter, dialogue, and inclusion. Never a much-needed word about sin, judgment, penance, conversion, asceticism, doctrinal obedience, or the necessity of the true Faith for salvation.

Bergoglio and Prevost’s “church” is merely a spiritual “home” where everyone should feel psychologically comfortable, and not the Mystical Body of Christ, outside of which there is no salvation. The purpose of their “church” is to affirm men in their present sinful condition, not to sanctify them.

One of the many passages in Leo XIV’s address which should make your hair stand on end, was his statement that the Holy Spirit helps us “to find [God] in Jesus and not only in the observance of a law.”

Yes, Catholicism is not a dead legalism, but this diabolical rhetoric creates a false opposition between personal encounter and obedience to divine law.

Traditional Catholicism has never separated love from law. Our Lord Himself declared:

“If you love me, keep my commandments.” (John 14:15). A concept that the Synodal Church seems wholly allergic to!

One cannot contrast mystical union with moral obedience: obedience is precisely the path to union with God. To the detriment of souls’ eternal destinations, these perverters of truth want their followers to believe that doctrine, discipline, and moral law are obstacles to authentic spirituality rather than its necessary framework. And people lap this nonsense up, because it suits their sinful nature.

Decades of minimizing dogmatic clarity and moral seriousness in favor of therapeutic pastoral language has had devastating pastoral consequences in the conciliar Synodal Church.

Leo XIV also stated that without the “Spirit”, the Church becomes “fearful before the challenges of the world, closed in on itself and incapable of entering into dialogue with changing times”. Again the dominant assumptions of Synodalism: that the “church” must continually adapt herself linguistically and pastorally to modernity.

Prevost and Co. would do well to remember this famous quote by Chesterton: “The Catholic Church is the only thing which saves man from the degrading slavery of being a child of his age”. The Church flourishes not when she mirrors the world’s values, but when she stands against them.

And what would any address of these modernist heretics be without shoving inclusion down our throats?

Perhaps the most repeated phrase in the speech was the aspiration to “build a Church where everyone feels at home.”

Explain to us Robert F. Prevost, what does this mean in practice? Does it mean the repentant sinner discovering mercy through confession and amendment of life? If so, Catholics rejoice. Or does it mean a Church that minimizes uncomfortable truths in order to avoid alienating modern sensibilities? We know he means the latter. The slogan of “welcome” functions as a substitute for evangelization and conversion.

A man persisting publicly in grave sin should not feel “at home” in his rebellion. He should feel called to repentance. The Church is a hospital for sinners, yes — but hospitals exist to cure disease, not normalize it.

Leo XIV also spoke repeatedly about fraternity among peoples and nations, the real Masonic mission of the Synodal Church, saying that all can speak “the one language of love.”

Please pass me one of those brown airline bags so I can throw up. All these globalist puppets can do is speak in universal and vague ethical language understandable to the secular world: peace, fraternity, inclusion, solidarity, dialogue.

You know who else preached what Prevost and his predecessor preach? The French Revolution also preached fraternity — while persecuting the Church and enthroning human autonomy. Similarly, Prevost and his secular globalism speaks endlessly of unity and inclusion while rejecting divine law. The Synodal Church is just the latest incarnation of the One Revolution set in motion in the Garden of Eden, and also seeks the overthrow of the Kingship of Christ. Understand that, and all becomes clear.

The Spirit who descended at Pentecost inspired the Church throughout the centuries to define dogma, condemn error, preserve reverence, and guard the Deposit of Faith from corruption.

The spirit flowing out of the Synodal Church is the anti-Christ spirit that seeks war with Almighty God.

Our Lady, Co-redemptrix, pray for us…

Our Lady, Mediatrix of all Graces, pray for us…

Viva Christo Rey!

ALSO READ:

Welcome to the Pariah State of Grace

Heterodox Theologians Once Again Accidentally Admits the Synodal Abomination is a New Religion

A Friendly Reminder that the Synodal Church is a Big Club, and Catholics Aren’t Part of it!

Planned Futuristic “Monastery” Is Nothing but a Monument to Rebellion Against God

The Sin That Not Only Damns Souls but Also Undermines the Catholic Counter-Revolution