On 27 October 2024, the “final” session of the Synod on Synodality concluded. With the release of the synod’s final document, one of the most significant events in the Church’s history occurred.
Oh thank you for this! What a thoughtful and meticulously written essay. Thank you for highlighting the “low points” of Bergoglio’s evil false papacy (dark pope prophesied by St. Malachi) and for explaining in plain terms the present “synodal” slaughter of the Magisterium.
The Church has been destroyed and replaced by a synodal church as you said, which we must avoid with our very souls at stake. The faithful Catholics must cling tightly to the traditions we carry deeply within our hearts. We have no “head” to shepherd us, besides the Good Shepherd Himself (Come Lord Jesus! In glory!)
Bergoglio, the anti-Christic false successor of St. Peter (who himself acknowledges that he is not the Vicar of Christ) has handed the Church over to the wolves and waywards, just as Christ was handed over to the Jews by Pilate. Bergoglio is the worse kind of traitor (and he is fond of Judas Iscariot… it is sick and twisted).
To say that any religion you choose is a “language” leading to God is a satanic lie. Bergoglio completely denies the supreme truth of Jesus Christ being God, who said “No one comes to the Father except through me,” and the Holy Eucharist, which Christ gave us and requires us to partake in order to get to Heaven. Denying Christ = anti-Christ.
We are at the end of time. The Bride of Christ’s passion has been completed.
Now we await the Second Coming and can urgently note its imminence… and the preceding Warning… especially in light of the Garabandal prophecy the Blessed Virgin Mary gave to Conchita regarding an “important synod”; Melanie of La Salette’s message that Rome would become the seat of the anti-Christ; and Pope Leo’s message that Satan would have more power for the next 100 years (which has expired).
Mary said the cup of inequity is overflowing. Indeed it is, and many souls will be lost in this synodal stupidity.
Thank you again for the article. I have saved it to my Home Screen with its own button so I can refer back to it whenever I want.
The whole synodaling process was created by Montini as a result of Lumen Gentium. LG usurped the role of the Supreme Pontiff by contradicting the Universal, Ordinary Magisterium of the Church (which the Vatican Council of 1870 defined as "infallible"). The Church has always taught that jurisdiction and authority of the bishop is derived from the Supreme Pontiff. LG says that jurisdiction and authority derives from a bishop's "ordination". One is in error, thus making it NOT CATHOLIC (for the Church is perennially prevented from teaching error, as per Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas).
You don't get the synodally synoding "synod of synodality" without LG and Montini. Yes, The Argentinian is throwing the authority structure of the Church away. However, 1) that started with LG and Unitatis Redintegratio, 2) was implemented by Montini/Paul VI, and is now finally realized by The Argentinian. The cool thing is, none of that is Catholic, and none of it is possible with the Catholic Church (see Pope Gregory XVI's Mirari Vos). That means the Conciliar church is not the Catholic Church, and neither is the synodal church. It also means The Argentinian's precious synod has absolutely no authority whatsoever.
Radical, thank you for your post. I am especially appreciative of your tone in this piece. Controversy in the Church leads us to use heated, insulting rhetoric that confuses some Catholics. I think it’s unnecessary & appreciate being spared. I pray for you — to continue with your research & informing us so we may be prepared, but also for you to keep your heart, mind, & soul for God. I have seen, personally, how righteous, holy anger over Mother Church’s Passion can ruin a person, making them perverse, leading them into apostasy. I know it is very difficult work. It doesn’t help that we’re like little children having to figure this out on our own, so God bless you. We’ll be taking what you’ve told us to our priest, a Canon Lawyer, to further understand. ❤️
The old joke/anecdote comes to mind from a labour camp: Each day after work, a zek piles his gear in a wheelbarrow and heads to the dormitory. The guards scour the wheelbarrow each day, rifling through his clothes, lunch pail, checking the wheels, the handles, the underbelly, etc (finding nothing). Years later after being freed, the zek encounters one of his old guards who asks, “What were you stealing? What was your gig?” The zek smiled and answered, “Wheelbarrows.”
You’re exactly right. It wasn’t the wording of the Synodality document per se, it was the methodology. The document was the wheelbarrow.
Very, very interestingly --- our Lord supposedly told Luz de Marie at the end of September that on October 2 the anti christ would be given power by the world elite ---- and here we have the false prophet forerunner of the anti christ -- symbolically giving the chair over to satan
This article about "synodality" is truly an excellent one. But I do not understand the reasoning behind the final sentence: "Did Pope Francis, through this gesture, signal that he is handing over papal and Magisterial authority to the anti-Christ, anti-Catholic god of synodality?" Would you like to explain it - a little bit? Thank you in advance!
Hi Robert! Thank you for reading and interacting. I, and other commentators, felt that it was no coincidence that Pope Francis decided to venerate the Seat of St. Peter at the final leg of the Synod on Synodality. I would go as far as saying it wasn't even about venerating the Chair, but rather a symobolic gesture to show that henceforth the authority of the Seat of Peter will be replaced by "synodality" as the new authority in the Catholic Church. In other words, the end of papal authority and the beginning of synodal "authority".
I see. But my question was inspired by the mention of the anti-Christ: where is that final adversary of Christ to be found in your interpretation? If I am too direct, please, excuse me.
You could have saved yourself a lot of trouble by noting the difference between the two ordinary magisteriums... There is the ordinary non universal magisterium of the Pope and there is the ordinary universal magisterium of the pope. There was also the same two for the pope and bishops together. The ordinary non universal (aka ordinary) magisterium of the pope is his day-to-day teachings which are his pastoral teachings derived from Catholic thought. It is to be received respectfully but it is not infallible. The ordinary universal teaching of the pope is when he specifically states in an encyclical or other statement that he is speaking ex cathedra.
Theologians define "ordinary Magisterium" as the "ordinary" means which the Faith is explained and taught. This includes EVERYTHING from sermons, interlocutions, letters, etc., including encyclicals. The difference between this and the Ordinary Universal Magesterium is the "universal" aspect of it. For instance, when Pope Pius XI was speaking to an association of Italian midwives, that is his "ordinary Magisterium". When he published Mystici Corporis, which was to the Universal Church, it became part of THE ordinary, universal Magesterium.
The Vatican Council of 1870 defined that the Chair of Peter WILL NEVER deviate from the Faith. "Never" is quite a word. We can, thus, be assured that when a valid Successor of Peter speaks as pope, using his "authentic Magisterium", he is absolutely trustworthy and absolutely safe to believe. Only a valid pope has that assurance. Imposters, diocesan ordinaries, etc do not have that assurance.
I think he was very helpful — I’ve avoided all Synod-synod-synod news of late. Mary, how does what Radical say compare to what P. Kwasniewski has said? I don’t read him, but has he said anything about the final document. @RadicalFidelity, can you counter what Mary says? or verify? if you are incorrect, will you issue a retraction or another follow-up post? I would appreciate it! (Thanks, Mary!)
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. Christus vincet! Christus regnat! Christus imperat!
Oh thank you for this! What a thoughtful and meticulously written essay. Thank you for highlighting the “low points” of Bergoglio’s evil false papacy (dark pope prophesied by St. Malachi) and for explaining in plain terms the present “synodal” slaughter of the Magisterium.
The Church has been destroyed and replaced by a synodal church as you said, which we must avoid with our very souls at stake. The faithful Catholics must cling tightly to the traditions we carry deeply within our hearts. We have no “head” to shepherd us, besides the Good Shepherd Himself (Come Lord Jesus! In glory!)
Bergoglio, the anti-Christic false successor of St. Peter (who himself acknowledges that he is not the Vicar of Christ) has handed the Church over to the wolves and waywards, just as Christ was handed over to the Jews by Pilate. Bergoglio is the worse kind of traitor (and he is fond of Judas Iscariot… it is sick and twisted).
To say that any religion you choose is a “language” leading to God is a satanic lie. Bergoglio completely denies the supreme truth of Jesus Christ being God, who said “No one comes to the Father except through me,” and the Holy Eucharist, which Christ gave us and requires us to partake in order to get to Heaven. Denying Christ = anti-Christ.
We are at the end of time. The Bride of Christ’s passion has been completed.
Now we await the Second Coming and can urgently note its imminence… and the preceding Warning… especially in light of the Garabandal prophecy the Blessed Virgin Mary gave to Conchita regarding an “important synod”; Melanie of La Salette’s message that Rome would become the seat of the anti-Christ; and Pope Leo’s message that Satan would have more power for the next 100 years (which has expired).
Mary said the cup of inequity is overflowing. Indeed it is, and many souls will be lost in this synodal stupidity.
Thank you again for the article. I have saved it to my Home Screen with its own button so I can refer back to it whenever I want.
May God bless and keep you, for all eternity!
The whole synodaling process was created by Montini as a result of Lumen Gentium. LG usurped the role of the Supreme Pontiff by contradicting the Universal, Ordinary Magisterium of the Church (which the Vatican Council of 1870 defined as "infallible"). The Church has always taught that jurisdiction and authority of the bishop is derived from the Supreme Pontiff. LG says that jurisdiction and authority derives from a bishop's "ordination". One is in error, thus making it NOT CATHOLIC (for the Church is perennially prevented from teaching error, as per Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas).
You don't get the synodally synoding "synod of synodality" without LG and Montini. Yes, The Argentinian is throwing the authority structure of the Church away. However, 1) that started with LG and Unitatis Redintegratio, 2) was implemented by Montini/Paul VI, and is now finally realized by The Argentinian. The cool thing is, none of that is Catholic, and none of it is possible with the Catholic Church (see Pope Gregory XVI's Mirari Vos). That means the Conciliar church is not the Catholic Church, and neither is the synodal church. It also means The Argentinian's precious synod has absolutely no authority whatsoever.
Excellent!
Radical, thank you for your post. I am especially appreciative of your tone in this piece. Controversy in the Church leads us to use heated, insulting rhetoric that confuses some Catholics. I think it’s unnecessary & appreciate being spared. I pray for you — to continue with your research & informing us so we may be prepared, but also for you to keep your heart, mind, & soul for God. I have seen, personally, how righteous, holy anger over Mother Church’s Passion can ruin a person, making them perverse, leading them into apostasy. I know it is very difficult work. It doesn’t help that we’re like little children having to figure this out on our own, so God bless you. We’ll be taking what you’ve told us to our priest, a Canon Lawyer, to further understand. ❤️
The old joke/anecdote comes to mind from a labour camp: Each day after work, a zek piles his gear in a wheelbarrow and heads to the dormitory. The guards scour the wheelbarrow each day, rifling through his clothes, lunch pail, checking the wheels, the handles, the underbelly, etc (finding nothing). Years later after being freed, the zek encounters one of his old guards who asks, “What were you stealing? What was your gig?” The zek smiled and answered, “Wheelbarrows.”
You’re exactly right. It wasn’t the wording of the Synodality document per se, it was the methodology. The document was the wheelbarrow.
Sedevacantists notice more than you think. In general terms , only Catholics left.
Yes… great apostasy . in Technicolor
Very, very interestingly --- our Lord supposedly told Luz de Marie at the end of September that on October 2 the anti christ would be given power by the world elite ---- and here we have the false prophet forerunner of the anti christ -- symbolically giving the chair over to satan
This article about "synodality" is truly an excellent one. But I do not understand the reasoning behind the final sentence: "Did Pope Francis, through this gesture, signal that he is handing over papal and Magisterial authority to the anti-Christ, anti-Catholic god of synodality?" Would you like to explain it - a little bit? Thank you in advance!
Hi Robert! Thank you for reading and interacting. I, and other commentators, felt that it was no coincidence that Pope Francis decided to venerate the Seat of St. Peter at the final leg of the Synod on Synodality. I would go as far as saying it wasn't even about venerating the Chair, but rather a symobolic gesture to show that henceforth the authority of the Seat of Peter will be replaced by "synodality" as the new authority in the Catholic Church. In other words, the end of papal authority and the beginning of synodal "authority".
I see. But my question was inspired by the mention of the anti-Christ: where is that final adversary of Christ to be found in your interpretation? If I am too direct, please, excuse me.
You could have saved yourself a lot of trouble by noting the difference between the two ordinary magisteriums... There is the ordinary non universal magisterium of the Pope and there is the ordinary universal magisterium of the pope. There was also the same two for the pope and bishops together. The ordinary non universal (aka ordinary) magisterium of the pope is his day-to-day teachings which are his pastoral teachings derived from Catholic thought. It is to be received respectfully but it is not infallible. The ordinary universal teaching of the pope is when he specifically states in an encyclical or other statement that he is speaking ex cathedra.
Theologians define "ordinary Magisterium" as the "ordinary" means which the Faith is explained and taught. This includes EVERYTHING from sermons, interlocutions, letters, etc., including encyclicals. The difference between this and the Ordinary Universal Magesterium is the "universal" aspect of it. For instance, when Pope Pius XI was speaking to an association of Italian midwives, that is his "ordinary Magisterium". When he published Mystici Corporis, which was to the Universal Church, it became part of THE ordinary, universal Magesterium.
The Vatican Council of 1870 defined that the Chair of Peter WILL NEVER deviate from the Faith. "Never" is quite a word. We can, thus, be assured that when a valid Successor of Peter speaks as pope, using his "authentic Magisterium", he is absolutely trustworthy and absolutely safe to believe. Only a valid pope has that assurance. Imposters, diocesan ordinaries, etc do not have that assurance.
I think he was very helpful — I’ve avoided all Synod-synod-synod news of late. Mary, how does what Radical say compare to what P. Kwasniewski has said? I don’t read him, but has he said anything about the final document. @RadicalFidelity, can you counter what Mary says? or verify? if you are incorrect, will you issue a retraction or another follow-up post? I would appreciate it! (Thanks, Mary!)