The war for the future of the Church is coming to a head with a decisive battle at the upcoming Synod on Synodality, where Freemasonic infiltrators will attempt to strike the final blow to what they perceive are the last vestiges of the Roman Catholic Church under the guise of synodality.
In this article, I am going to show you why the Bergoglians (Modernist supporters of “Pope Francis”) insist this Synod from hell is necessary. The entire Bergoglian agenda has been building up to this, but I think there is a key document from 2014 that faithful Catholics may have overlooked that will explain exactly how and why Bergoglio is going to use this Synod to attempt to destroy authentic Catholicism.
To set the stage, recall that earlier this year the German bishops totally jumped the gun and began to push forward with their agenda to “ordain” women and approve homosexual “marriages.” Interestingly, the Vatican rebuked this effort, leading some conservatives in mainstream Catholic media to think somehow Bergoglio was going to draw the line and quash this heretical movement.
Notice in the article linked above, however, that Bergoglio did no such thing. What the Vatican’s statement actually said was that “Any eventual changes would have to be part of the universal Church’s own synodal path.”
Fast forward to last week, when German Cardinal Gerhard Müller, certainly no tin-hat conspiracy theorist, declared the Synod to be a “hostile takeover” that threatens to end Catholicism. Why would he feel the need to openly proclaim such an urgent and explosive message?
Rather than call another general council of the world’s bishops like Vatican II, the Bergoglians are going to use the mechanism of a Synod. There are several reasons for this, which is absolutely fundamental to understanding why the Synod itself must be rejected as a diabolical con-job.
The Modernist Understanding of “Church”
To understand the Modernist’s need for a Synod, we must remember that the underlying ideology of Modernism simply requires it. As usual, Pope St. Pius X explains all of this in his 1907 encyclical on Modernism, Pascendi Dominici Gregis.
It truly is amazing how everything we are witnessing in the Church today was predicted and can be understood if one takes the time to understand Pascendi.
The saintly Pope foretells why the Bergoglians need a Synod to destroy the Church. The key is understanding the Modernist idea of “the Church.” Pius explains:
“What, then, is the Church [according to the Modernist]? It is the product of the collective conscience, that is to say of the society of individual consciences which by virtue of the principle of vital permanence, all depend on one first believer, who for Catholics is Christ [emphasis original].” Pascendi, para. 23.
This concept of vital permanence or vitality refers to the Modernist notion that religion comes from within man and not from some external, outside source of revelation. Any need to find God comes from the subconscious within each person and gives rise to “faith.”
From this erroneous premise, the Modernist then takes the next logical step. Pope St. Pius X explains the Modernist point of view:
“In past times [according to the Modernist] it was a common error that authority came to the Church from without, that is to say directly from God; and it was then rightly held to be autocratic. But his conception had now grown obsolete….For we are living in an age when the sense of liberty has reached its fullest development, and when the public conscience has in the civil order introduced popular government…It is for the ecclesiastical authority, therefore, to shape itself to democratic forms, unless it wishes to provoke and foment an intestine conflict in the consciences of mankind.” Ibid.
In other words, the perception that external authority (i.e. from God) governs the Church is an outdated concept, according to the Modernist. And just as civil society moved away from hierarchical forms of government to institute democratic replacements, so too must individual consciences now guide the Church.
If this is the Modernist view of Church authority, then we can easily see where the Bergoglians are heading with the Synod on Synodality: divorcing the Church from the objective authority of God and replacing it with a perceived democratic rule of the individual consciences of its members.
The Modernist Idea of the Sensus Fidei
These warnings from Pope St. Pius X over a century ago gained concrete form with the 2014 Vatican document Sensus Fidei in The Life of The Church.
Amazingly, this document, produced by the International Theological Commission, was printed with the permission of its President Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the same Cardinal Müller cited above for his concerns about the Synod destroying the Church!
In the 2014 Sensus Fidei document, the Commission essentially turns the Church’s understanding of authority on its head. Rather than guiding and teaching the faithful, the infiltrators in the hierarchy claim to be guided and taught by the faithful. The document states quite openly:
In matters of faith the baptized cannot be passive. They have received the Spirit and are endowed as members of the body of the Lord with gifts and charisms ‘for the renewal and building up of the Church’, so the magisterium has to be attentive to the sensus fidelium, the living voice of the people of God. Not only do they have the right to be heard, but their reaction to what is proposed as belonging to the faith of the Apostles must be taken very seriously, because it is by the Church as a whole that the apostolic faith is borne in the power of the Spirit. The magisterium does not have sole responsibility for it. The magisterium should therefore refer to the sense of faith of the Church as a whole. The sensus fidelium can be an important factor in the development of doctrine, and it follows that the magisterium needs means by which to consult the faithful (Emphasis added). Para. 74.
The authors of this little gem of a time bomb anticipated the objection that consulting the faithful in the matter of doctrine is nothing more than an opinion poll. They attempted to distinguish what they are doing with the Synod from resorting to public opinion. The problem is that they don’t do a very good or convincing job of that.
They claim that because the sensus fidei involves the faith, that resorting to it for developing doctrine is not really resorting to public opinion since obviously those without faith would not be participating in that process. Moreover, they argue that to participate as a member of the sensus fidei you must have certain dispositions such as active participation in the Church, listen to the Word of God, be open to reason, willingness to adhere the magisterium, and be holy. (See paragraphs 88-99, 118).
Now, does that convince you that these local Synodal meetings with pretty much any member of a parish invited to participate and give their opinions on the Church’s social teaching is anything other than a democratic opinion poll designed to achieve a certain predetermined outcome? Of course, the local Karen on her second “marriage,” who receives Holy Communion weekly, after contracepting her whole life thinks she is justified and holy because her priests have already told her so! Now, let’s ask what she thinks about homosexual marriage, okay?
In case there was any question that this Modernist view of the sensus fidei expects the Catholic faithful to interpret Holy Scripture and Tradition in order to change the Church’s social teachings, the concluding paragraph reminds us:
“By means of the sensus fidei, the faithful are able not only to recognize what is in accordance with the Gospel and to reject what is contrary to it, but also to sense what Pope Francis has called ‘new ways for the journey’ in faith of the whole pilgrim people.” Para. 127.
The entire charade is a cover to achieve one outcome—a change in Church teaching with the “blessing” of the sensus fidei, which the Modernist will then claim has magisterial and binding authority.
The Real Sensus Fidei
Why binding? Because the Modernists are misapplying a real Church teaching concerning the force of the sensus fidei. But this is all the Youtuber graduates from Stuebenville need in order to tell the rigid traditionalists they are nothing but schismatics if they don’t go along with the new program.
The sensus fidei, as the Church has always understood it, means the whole of the faithful cannot err if the whole of the faithful consent to a particular doctrine. As Fr. Ripperger notes in his book Magisterial Authority, the reason is because “it is impossible that the whole of Christ’s faithful would fall into error,” otherwise the Church would not be indefectible.
Pope Pius IX referred to this sense of the faith when defining the dogma of the Immaculate Conception in 1854. Likewise, Pope Pius XII referred to the sense of the faith in support of his definition of the Assumption in 1950. In each case, these faithful Popes referred to the faithful’s history of accepting these doctrines, over centuries, in support of their exercise of their infallible definitions.
In typical Modernist fashion, what the Bergoglians are attempting to do through the abuse of this concept of the sensus fidei is to use it as a mechanism for changing or modifying the Church’s official position on behavior that the magisterium has always condemned. In doing so, they will claim the faithful, after much discernment over the course of a few months, determined the Holy Spirit was actually perfectly fine with homosexual marriage, women priests and contraception all along. And just like the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, we can all be assured that these practices, in fact, are part of the deposit of faith. You see—this is not a democratic vote—it’s an expression of the sensus fidei!
Hopefully, you can see the difference between the traditional sense of the faithful versus the way the Bergoglians twist the meaning of the sense of the faithful. Pius IX and Pius XII did not need to call meetings to figure out what the faithful already believed or thought about Marian dogmas. They did not ask lay people to interpret the Gospels for them. Nor did they rely on the sense of the faith to “change” Church social teachings or “discover new ways” in the faith.
Now, what would really be interesting is if the Bergoglians made an effort to determine the sense of the faithful prior to Vatican II on homosexual marriage, women priests and contraception. But I suspect that won’t be happening. A few meetings over the course of a few months with self-selected participants will do the trick just fine.
The Battle to Save the Church
I hope it is clear by now why the Synod on Synodality and synodal path is not just a charade but the road to Church destruction. It must be defeated at all costs.
It is not just because the Modernists will attempt to impose heretical and intolerable teachings on the rest of us. It is because they are using the mechanism of the Synod to fundamentally transform the nature of the Church herself from a hierarchical one under the guidance and authority of God, to one subservient to man’s individual will and conscience.
The means or mechanism by which they seek to change the Church is just as important to them as the changes they seek to impose. Pope Pius X warned us about this. They no longer see the need to call a general council of the world’s bishops because the power to change the Church, in their Modernist eyes, comes from the people.
The Synod itself, we can therefore conclude, is evil, heretical and not Catholic. It is nothing more than a ruse designed to produce data that Bergoglio and his minions will use to declare fundamental changes to the Church’s social teachings and the Church’s authority structure.
Of course, we know that the real Catholic Church is indefectible, hierarchical in nature and that the Truth is consistent regardless of what Karen at the local parish believes her conscience is telling her about the positive elements of contraception or women priests.
We must not play this game. Do not become part of the problem by pretending this Synod on Synodality has any value or validity whatsoever. Stand for the Truth and be brave enough to fight back against the devil’s tricks, even when those tricky lies are told to you by a wolf in sheep’s clothing, or Karen who sits in front of you at Mass each week.