Not surprisingly, Jorge Mario Bergoglio (Francis) doesn’t even pretend he is supposed to defend the Teachings and Traditions of the Christian Faith.
On 13 September 2024, during the Interreligious Meeting with Young People in Singapore, he criticized the position of remaining in one’s “comfort zone”.
That would be a fair comment if he didn’t follow up with the usual humanist stance of adhering to whatever religion you like. It is not always worded like that but that is the impression this kind of statement leaves.
One of the things that has impressed me most about the young people here is your capacity for interfaith dialogue. This is very important because if you start arguing, “My religion is more important than yours…,” or “Mine is the true one, yours is not true…,” where does this lead? Somebody answer. [A young person answers, “Destruction”.] That is correct. All religions are paths to God. I will use an analogy, they are like different languages that express the divine. But God is for everyone, and therefore, we are all God’s children. “But my God is more important than yours!”. Is this true? There is only one God, and religions are like languages, paths to reach God. Some Sikh, some Muslim, some Hindu, some Christian. Understood? Yet, interfaith dialogue among young people takes courage. The age of youth is the age of courage, but you can misuse this courage to do things that will not help you. Instead, you should have courage to move forward and to dialogue. [Emphasis mine.]
It’s not really moving out of one’s “comfort zone” if “[a]ll religions are paths to God”. Of course, no one asks which family and culture they are born into. In this sense, an individual’s path to God can differ greatly from another. What Francis said is not something a Christian by any definition should say. It is conveniently ambiguous and tacky at best.
By the way, many popes have warned if not condemned such positions. For example, from the encyclical “Mirari Vos” by Pope Gregory XVI published on 15 August 1832 about liberalism and religious indifferentism:
Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. … This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. “But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,” as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly “the bottomless pit” is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws—in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty. [Emphasis mine.]
A more forceful example is the “Syllabus of Errors” by Pope Pius IX published in 1864. This is a list of 80 points which are condemned. Five points pertinent to the subject, not to state there aren’t others, are reproduced below.
15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true.
16. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation.
77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.
78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship.
79. Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism.
This is not a surprise considering that Francis’s predecessor Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) was the same although he was subtler, his messages veiled by his pseudo-academic waffle. This has been briefly covered here at Opinyuns but merely one example is provided here.
Below are excerpts from his speech at the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center of Washington DC on 17 April 2008:
Interreligious prayer services during the national feast of Thanksgiving, joint initiatives in charitable activities, a shared voice on important public issues: these are some ways in which members of different religions come together to enhance mutual understanding and promote the common good. I encourage all religious groups in America to persevere in their collaboration and thus enrich public life with the spiritual values that motivate your action in the world. Americans have always valued the ability to worship freely and in accordance with their conscience. … The task of upholding religious freedom is never completed. New situations and challenges invite citizens and leaders to reflect on how their decisions respect this basic human right. … The transmission of religious traditions to succeeding generations not only helps to preserve a heritage; it also sustains and nourishes the surrounding culture in the present day. … May the followers of all religions stand together in defending and promoting life and religious freedom everywhere. By giving ourselves generously to this sacred task—through dialogue and countless small acts of love, understanding and compassion—we can be instruments of peace for the whole human family. [Emphasis mine.]
Being civil to those of other religions is one thing. Even some dialogue is not necessarily wrong provided no prayer or any form of worship is involved. But not only does Ratzinger promote “religious freedom”, “freedom of worship” and “freedom of conscience” as a “human right”—these are all modern humanist ideas and terms and once you are familiar with them, you will easily spot them—he also considers promoting them a “sacred task”.
Be sure to subscribe to our mailing list so you get each new Opinyun that comes out!
Comments