 |
| Jesuit General Arturo Sosa Absacal left of Pope Francis: is the "Black Pope" spreading heresy? |
Memorandum against the "Black Pope"
The priest is Don Roberto Bertacchini and is a pupil of three priests of stature, the German Jesuit, Father Heinrich Pfeiffer, art historian at the Gregoriana in Rome, and the two Italian Jesuits, Father Francesco Tata, former religious prosecutor of Italy, and Father Piersandro Vanzan, Augustine connoisseur and leading author of the Roman Jesuit paper, Civiltà Cattolica . The reference to his Jesuit teachers is not without significance in the matter. Bertacchini was ordained priest in 2009 by the then Archbishop Carlo Ghidelli of Lanciano-Ortona.
Last week, as the Vaticanist Sandro Magister reports, Don Bertacchini sent both Pope Francis and Cardinal Gerhard Müller a memorandum. On six pages, the priest critically comments on a recent interview of the new General Superior of the Jesuit Order, who has been in office since October 2016. The Venezuelan Arturo Sosa Abasca stands very close to Pope Francis, himself Jesuit.
Does the Jesuit General Want a "Christianity without Christ"?
The Jesuit general had represented theses in the interview, which are "so serious that they can not be passed over without silence, without making one's self complicit." Bertacchini accuses the "Black Pope", as the Jesuit general is traditionally called, of speaking of "a Christianity without Christ".
Magister published Bertacchini's memorandum . Giuseppe Rusconi, the Swiss Vaticanista, published the interview where he criticized him last February 18. Arturo Sosa had reviewed the text and released it for publication.
Bertacchini's criticism is centered on the massive doubts expressed by the Jesuit General about the credibility of the Holy Scriptures. Arturo Sosa made fun of it. Rusconi addressed himself to criticism of the controversial papal Amoris laetitia . The words of Jesus were opposed to the admission of remarried divorced persons to the Sacraments. Sosa replied sloppily that nobody could know exactly what Jesus had said "really," because no one had "a tape recorder" with him.
According to Bertacchini, the Jesuit General says that the words of Jesus on the indissolubility of marriage are not a theological fixed point, but only the point of departure for the doctrine, which must then be developed "comfortably." In this way, however, the exact opposite could be represented, in other words the compatibility of divorce and Christian life."
Jesuit genius "too smart" to openly represent a heresy
Bertacchini emphasizes that Arturo Sosa Absacal SJ, "is too smart to fall into an obvious heresy, which in some respects is even worse. It is, therefore, necessary to follow the thread of his reasoning."
In an interview, the Jesuit General asked whether the evangelists were credible or not. His answer: One must distinguish. He thus implied, by way of a roundabout way, that it is not said, about the credibility of the Gospels. He thus questions the truthfulness of Jesus' whole doctrine of faith. The Jesuit had been careful to go into details. He remained general, but nevertheless offered a statement destructive in its core. If we consider that, in all his statements on marriage and the newly remarried divorced, Pope Francis never cited the words of the Lord on the indissolubility of marriage, the thrust of the Jesuit General would be clear. Bertacchini added:
"If the Pope does not quote these passages, it means that he has made a distinction and does not consider it authentic. They are therefore not binding. But all the popes have taught the contrary! So what? They will be wrong. Or they have said true things and taught for their time, but not for ours. "
The Jesuit General does not say it apertis verbis, but interprets it and lets it show through.
"This gives the Pope's a reading to the family pastoral, which deviates from the traditional doctrine."
Jesuit General: "We know today that Jesus never taught that marriage is indissoluble"
Sosa asserts nothing less than that
"We know today," that Jesus probably, probably almost certainly, never taught that marriage is indissoluble. The evangelists would have misunderstood this."
"On the other hand, the Sensus fidei tells us that the evangelists are credible. Our Jesuit General, however, rejects this credibility and even ignores the fact that St. Paul received this doctrine from the teaching as directly following Jesus, and passed it on to his congregations." (1 Cor 7: 10-11).
According to Bertacchini, the consensus of the Synoptics is "too clear" in the rejection of adultery. Moreover, St. Paul reaffirms this doctrine in the Epistle to the Ephesians and even strengthens it. He reaffirmed it by quoting the passage from the book of Genesis, which Jesus also quoted, and strengthened it because Christ loved the Church in an indissoluble way, so much so that he gave his life for it and beyond his earthly life. This faithfulness of the Lord is what Paul calls the model of marital fidelity.
There is, therefore, evidently a continuity between the pre-Easter and the post-Easter teachings. Equally obvious is the break with Judaism, which retained the possibility of the repudiation. Bertacching asks the following questions: "If Paul himself refers to Jesus for this break, what is the meaning of the Gospels? Where should this leap come from which determined the practice of the early Church, if not of Christ?"
It should be remembered that divorce was also permitted in the Greco-Roman sphere, and that a form of the concubinage existed, which could easily lead to a later marriage, like the life of St Augustine shows. The rejection of a abandonment, divorce, concubinage constitutes a cultural breach, a phenomenon which is decisive in the history of culture, what should it point back to, if not to Jesus? And if Jesus is the Christ, why should the faithfulness of the Gospels be doubted?
"Apart from this, if Jesus is not to have said these words, from whence comes the drastic commentary of the disciples in Matthew 19:10 (" then it is not good to marry at all?") Among these disciples was also the evangelist himself who does not strike a good figure. They understood late what Jesus taught them because they were then still dependent on the traditions of their time that Jesus criticizes. "From a historical point of view, the pericope Mt 19, 3-12 is credible in every respect," the priest said.
Bertacchini then goes into detail on the "dogmatic horizon" of the statements of the Jesuit General. In it, he expanded his criticism and extends it to a recent article in the Roman Jesuit journal Civilta Cattolica, with the Jesuit Giancarlo Pani, where the prohibition of female priesthood is questioned. Bertacchini criticizes the fact that the solemn gospel, which calls for infallibility, is questioned without hesitation. The priest criticizes this work of subversion with the aim of destroying safe dams.
What will Pope Francis do with the inscription of Don Roberto Bertacchini? What will CDF Prefect Müller do with it?
