A recent article appeared on the site entitled Settimo Cielo (Seventh Heaven) which is operated by Sandro Magister, a well-known ﬁgure in the Novus Ordo conservative world. The article is written by a certain Roberto Pertici, professor of contemporary history at the University of Bergamo in Italy.
Pertici starts out with this statement, as bold as it is true:
“At this point in the pontiﬁcate of Francis, I believe it can be reasonably maintained that this marks the twilight of that imposing historical reality which can be deﬁned as ‘Roman Catholicism.’ ”
The article makes many interesting points, and provides a good analysis of how Bergoglio is systematically dismantling Roman Catholicism. I recommend that you go to this site and read the article. It is entitled “Bergoglio’s Reform was Written Before. By Martin Luther.” How appropriate.
Pertici seems to be an outsider to the Catholic Faith, at least from the way he writes. I think, though, that this makes his testimony all the more weighty, since he is not bogged down by some of the prejudices that affect the Novus Ordo conservative.
The greatest insight which he has, I believe, is that Bergoglio is the ﬁrst of the Vatican II “popes” to be truly implementing Vatican II. Bergoglio said this very thing just after his election. I think that the author is right in saying that the previous Vatican II popes saw problems in the total implementation of the principles of the Council, for fear of a lack of continuity.
While Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI were radical modernists, they understood that at least the appearance of continuity with the past was essential to the success of the Council. They had enough Catholic theology in them to know that an obvious breach of doctrinal, disciplinary, or liturgical continuity would mean the ultimate death of the Council historically. For this reason they were inconsistent Modernists. While John Paul II, for example, was an ecumenical maniac, he nonetheless here and there urged some Catholic doctrine, and condemned some deviations from the Faith. Benedict XVI perceived the problem of lack of continuity, which prompted his 2005 speech to the Curia which warned against a “hermeneutic of rupture” regarding the Council. He also tried to eliminate a sense of liturgical rupture by saying, falsely and insanely, that the traditional Mass had never been suppressed, and that the traditional Mass and the New Mass were really one Roman Rite. In 2007, he permitted the traditional rite to be celebrated. Yet at the same time, true to his Modernist pedigree, he permitted the use of birth control devices, which is actually an equally radical departure from Catholic morality as what Bergoglio’s Amoris Lætitia proposes. Nor did he back up from all the outrageous statements which he made as a theologian and as the head of the Congregation for Divine Faith, notably that the Jews still had a valid covenant with God, apart from the New Testament. This is heresy.
Benedict also reinstated some of the traditional pomp of the papacy, which makes Novus Ordo conservatives salivate, and overlook the radical nature of his Modernism. All of the pre-Bergoglio “popes” of Vatican II, however, understood the necessity to spoon-feed the Modernist changes to the people, lest the changes seem too abrupt, which in turn would risk a schism. Bergoglio has no care of schism, and repudiates the slow approach of his predecessors.
Pertici’s point, that pre-Vatican II Roman Catholicism is coming to an end, is exactly on the mark. It survives only in a handful of people around the world, who reject the poison of Vatican II.