1. A return to Archbishop Ganswein.
The world is always in a state of being tested ; God is testing everyone at every moment to see if they deserve to be rewarded or punished. For this God placed us in this planet. Not for us to enjoy or worship this world but to undergo a test. No other humans are undergoing this test. So we can be certain there are no other creatures in the other worlds. Only we are undergoing this test. Unless, of course, there are other Adams and Eves somewhere else. In which case it would be interesting to know if they passed their test unlike our Adam and Eve. But the probability that there are other human being tested in other planets is almost non-existent.
Of course, no one can prove this. But we are thinking that God is not the type to do unnecessary things. One human race is trouble enough. Wise persons do not do unnecessary things. That is why we have so many unnecessary things and inventions. We even have spaceships to go nowhere.
It is this fact, that we are always being tested by God, that what Archbishop Ganswein is important. Because he is giving us a hint on how to pass the present test that the Church is undergoing; a test we must pass under pain of condemnation. Our salvation is at state at every test. We cannot afford to fail the test. And every hint that will help us pass counts.
2. Archbishop Ganswein’s syllogism.
The Archbishop gave a syllogism with a major, a minor and a conclusion. The major is clear as is always the case. The minor is debatable. The conclusion can be a logical conclusion or a ‘non-sequitur.’
In the very confused present situation in the Church, the conclusion we make will either save us or condemn us. See, that this is not a child’s game. It is very serious business. And as mentioned, every hint we can get to know the right answer will be a great help. The Archbishop did not give us the answer because he did not want to spoon feed us. He gave us the major. Hinted at the minor. And left the conclusion for each of us. After all, salvation is a very personal matter. No one may give us the right answer to the test of God. Each one has to pass the test.
3. Archbishop’s major.
His earth shaking major statement is that Pope Benedict did not really resign. This revived the on going debate on the two Popes. Some very learned writers are probably saying; ‘I told you so.’ Others are saying; ‘this cannot be.’ While the Vatican is probably in panic. See the confusion. This is a test and how do you pass a test which is so complicated that probably needs five doctoral degrees to pass?
God is giving the test. Pope Benedict, through Archbishop Ganswein is merely giving us hints to the right answer. Let us see Archbishop Ganswein’s major statement; that Pope Benedict did not really resign.
We have mentioned that in Ascetical Theology, it is clear that no one…..absolutely no one may resign from doing God’s Will. You cannot say; ‘I resign in carrying my cross,’ or ‘I resign in doing Good Works,’ or ‘I resign in seeking holiness,’ or I resign in adoring God.’ Or whatsoever. It sounds ridiculous. No holy person or one merely seeking holiness will ever resign doing something spiritual.
The idea of resigning is too worldly to be mentioned in the realm of the spiritual. As St. Paul would say; ‘only those ruled by the flesh will ever say ‘I resign.’ Never by one ruled by the Spirit.
Popes never resign as shown by the last five Popes. If there is one who resigned it is just a way of saying things……as used in describing Pope Celestine and recently Pope Benedict. But see how complicated things became. Now, they are saying what is true…..that he really did not resign; which is held by many serious writers.
That is the rule in the spiritual life. No one may resign any step in the spiritual life. You walk forward up to the end or you don’t make it. Imagine saying ‘I resign being your husband or your wife.’ ‘I resign being a man.’ ‘I resign staying in the state of grace.’ ‘I resign being of the brown race.’ And we can go on being more and more ridiculous.
4. A proof from the Gospel of Matthew.
The apostles were in a boat toss by a storm. They were in danger of sinking. The Church had always been like a boat in danger of sinking. Then Christ appeared walking on the water. Peter saw Christ. He left the boat and went to Christ. Now wait there.
It says Peter left the boat to go to Christ. What for? To ask for help because the boat was sinking. He went to Christ to pray; this is the main duty of a Pope.
This was what Peter said when he was faced with the problem of the Greek widows. He said the Pope’s job is not to serve at table but to pray, meditate on the Words of God and to preach.
When Peter left the boat to go and pray to Christ, did he assign somebody to take over the boat? No. Did he tell the apostles in the boat to hold a conclave and elect a Pope because he is leaving the boat for a while? No. ‘Hey, Peter would probable drown in this storm let’s elect his successor. ‘
No. Peter left the boat for a while to pray to Christ to help and then return to the boat with Christ and safely reach the shore.
See, it is possible for a Pope, just like Peter, to leave the seat of Peter for a while to pray for help when the boat is in danger of sinking. But that does not mean he resigned. He just left to pray. He returned with Christ who guided the boat safely to shore. What happened before with Peter is what is happening right now. And Pope Benedict is acting exactly like Peter, the first Pope.
Just as Peter did not resign when he left the boat to go to Christ, Peter did not resign when he stayed in the roof top to pray without going down to feed the Greek widows.
So based on Divine Revelation and Ascetical theology, the Pope cannot resign like an ordinary CEO. It is a mortal sin for a Pope not to do God’s Will by resigning. Maybe God told him to resign. God will never command anyone to resign doing his expressed Will. So much for the major of the syllogism.
5. Let us go to Mary and Martha. If Benedict is Mary, the contemplative , Francis can be Martha the active worker. If Benedict is St. Peter, Francis can be the deacons.
Mary represents the contemplative life; and Martha the active life. Archbishop Ganswein is presenting the two as working in one papal office. This cannot be, because the two belong to two different levels of spirituality. Mary is in the contemplative and spiritual level. Martha is the natural level, the realm of the corporal works of mercy.
While Mary is contemplating divine truths, Martha was cooking. You cannot be cooking and contemplating; you cannot put them side by side because they are two different levels.
In Ascetical theology one must be Martha first before he can become Mary. The two cannot be done at the same time. Mary is the better part. Martha the inferior part. Francis should be inferior to Benedict, then.
The same goes with St. Peter and the deacons. The role of St. Peter is contemplating the Word of God and preaching. The deacons were feeding Greek widows. Both again are in two different levels. They cannot work side by side. Though the qualification of both are almost identical.
Even if they are in the same level of spirituality, still, we cannot have two Popes. To be Pope and to be a deacon are two completely different entity.
6. Because Benedict behave like theGospel Pope and Pope Francis do not even behave like Martha or the deacons, the conclusion is a ‘non-sequitur.’ We cannot have two Popes in one papal ministry. The conclusion is that Benedict is still the Pope. Pope Francis by his behaviour is going against the teachings of Christ by saying you can be saved even if you do not have Faith. He goes against the Apostles by becoming pleaser of man rather than of God. And he goes against the teaching of Pope John Paul II on ‘Mercy.’
There is no other way to describe him except that he had gone against all the teachings of the magisterium. Cardinal Arinze had already described him as guilty of liberalism and a heretic and declared a ‘sede vacante.’ He had been described by so many names but the most appropriate is that he has gone against the last 12 Popes.
With Pope Francis in full swing introducing his private Protestant sect, the church of mercy, all the bishop’s conferences are in complete turmoil and confusion. Most reaction is quiet complacent agreement to his ideas. St. Paul described it as ‘great apostasy.’
Archbishop Ganswein, in his talk, was giving Pope Francis a graceful way out for the salvation of his own soul. But Francis shows strong intentions to continue in his unpapal behaviour and just announced he had no intention of resigning an office he really does not have.
7. We must make our decisions based on right conclusions. What if the Pius X group who celebrate the Mass well, unite themselves to the church that does not believe in transubstantiation, like some Jesuits and Dominicans. What if the Orthodox Church of Russia who has the right doctrines on sexuality joins the Roman Church whose seminarians go on homosexual orgies on Fridays.
Don’t they read the news. The Vatican church is going against the Catholic Church’s teachings on just war, on capital punishment, on celibacy, on the True Presence, on infallibility, on the rosary. Why, this is not the Church of St. Augustine and St. Thomas of Aquinas. It is more like the sect of Martin Luther and Zwingli.
8. What do we do next? Still look for hints that will either confirm or debunk the minor and conclusion of the syllogism. By now, we are leaning towards the conclusion that we have two Popes but one is probably inferior to the true pope. How did the Church handle that problem before, since it had happened more than 40 times. Having occurred so many time in the history of the Church, she must be an expert in detecting one. Well, no exactly. In fact, no cardinal, bishop or priest could pick the real pope from the anti-pope those times. No one.
The two easiest way of detecting a true pope is first, by analysing prophecies. The other is by using the four visible signs mentioned in the Nicene Creed. Most bishops during those times knew neither.
So it is suggested that the two tests be used again. First, prophecies. Judas was the type of bishops who turn traitor to the Faith. And we have had Judases all through the history of the Church; and we can have more today because both Judas and the whole priesthood of the Old Testament went against Christ, except for one or two.
Cardinal Arinze, Burke and Brand Muller had described Pope Francis as on on the verge of heresy. They could be biased being their confrere. Let us see someone earlier who do not know Pope Francis, Robert Hugh Benson.
Robert Benson’s apocalyptic novel is worth mentioning. Benson wrote this book ‘Lord of the World’ because if he preached this topic no one would listen though he was a brilliant preacher. So he wrote this book in the form of a novel. And, indeed, many read it including Pope Francis who gave a homily on it.
Benson wrote of an anti-pope that would exist at the time referred to by John Newman as ‘the infidelity of the future.’ Both were referring to St. Paul’s ‘great apostasy.’ Benson calculated it to be around the year 2000.
Here we are getting his hints that will narrow the scenario of Archbishop Ganswein. Benson’s anti-pope was a Catholic priest who became an apostate and joined the anti-Christ Felsenburgh, purportedly the head of the U.S. who acts as if he owns the world. Both this president and the anti-pope work hand in hand to destroy the Catholic Church. It reminds us of the uncanny mutual admiration between Obama and Pope Francis, both having leftist leanings among other things. And the name of the anti-pope in Benson’s work was Francis.
Benson’s narration is based on prophesies from Scriptures and the writings of the Fathers of the Church. With Chesterton and Belloc they described the Church of today. With all those hints we should be able to make a very intelligent stand that will enable us to withstand the judgement seat of God.