I was interested in this article from the UK’s Catholic Herald in which Bishop Sorondo (pictured here) continues to defend communist China.
You may remember Argentinian Bishop Sorondo is the Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Science and Social Science. A few weeks ago he issued a statement saying that China was the country best implementing Catholic Social teaching. When he was challenged about human rights abuses–particularly the hideous practice of cannibalizing the body parts of prisoners for transplants–Bishop Sorondo has doubled down and defended the Chinese again, saying they are really not so bad.
But what caught my attention in Bishop Sorondo’s statement was this paragraph from the Herald’s report:
Bishop Sorondo said that “ideological political groups” were trying to obstruct the Vatican’s engagement with China. These groups “for various reasons do not want to understand that the Church, the United Nations, and the people of the earth must follow the evolution of a country with a population of 1,300 million and 31 million Christians, which is becoming one of the most important protagonists of the new world scenario that is passing from the Atlantic to the Pacific, like it went from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic in the past.”
I wonder what he means by “new world scenario”? Is the bishop talking about the globalist “New World Order”? It seems rather chilling to me that he links “the Church, the United Nations and the people of earth” saying we must all follow the Chinese who are “one of the most important protagonists of the new world scenario.”
Many things are lost in translation and we would not want to take the words out of context. It could be that by, “new world scenario that is passing from the Atlantic to the Pacific like it went from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic” the bishop simply means that there is an Eastward shift in the world’s center of attention and that Asia will eventually become the “brave new world” that America once was.
On the other hand, is Bishop Sorondo referring to a globalist new world order led by the Chinese with the Catholic Church and the United Nations as active partners? Is this why he is so eager for rapprochement with the Chinese?
Forgive me for being alarmist and perhaps even a bit of a conspiracy theorist, but if the agenda is for the Catholic Church to hold hands with the United Nations and China and to walk together into some wonderful globalist society, then it would explain some other weird things that are going on.
For any globalist order to exist there cannot be any one religion that is exclusive in its claims. The thing which makes Catholicism or any religion exclusive is dogma. For there to be a global religion it must be syncretistic and latitudinarian. That is to say, everyone must be able to follow their own beliefs with an understanding that “everyone is climbing the same mountain, but taking different paths.”
Is this why Pope Francis is so intent on “breaking the idols of truth.” A few days ago at CRUX John Allen said this breaking of the old dogmas was the hallmark of Francis’ papacy.
More broadly, what we get is a full-blown, oracular statement of Francis’s underlying aim: He’s determined to smash the “truth-idols” he believes have taken hold of both the Church and the wider world, fueling a judgmental “culture of the adjective” that always leads with someone’s failures rather their underlying “faithful truth.”
This idol-smashing drive accounts not only for Amoris, but so much else about this papacy – from the kinds of bishops Francis is appointing, to why he keeps talking to an Italian journalist with a history of playing fast and loose with his words, to his sidelining of Vatican departments which, over the years, have seen their roles precisely as defending “abstract truths,” such as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
For Catholics this smashing of religious dogma and moral absolutes would allow for increasing diversity in the different cultures and local settings. We have already seen in the various interpretations of Amoris Letitia for example, that what goes in Malta is different from that in Philadelphia and what happens in Germany is different from Washington. Furthermore, Fr Spadaro’s comment that this is the “new paradigm” would indicate that this “flexibility” should be the new norm not only for the issue of divorce and remarriage, but for other moral questions.
Are the moral rules for Catholics different than the doctrinal ones? Should we expect that the “new paradigm” should apply to doctrinal matters also? There is no reason why not. Already liberals “re-interpret” not only Scripture but the cardinal doctrines of the faith. The resurrection is re interpreted as “even after his tragic death the disciples of Jesus continued to be inspired by his wonderful words.” The incarnation becomes, “Jesus of Nazareth was so fully human that he reveals to us what God is like.” You get the idea.
Of course, for a new world order to flourish it will need a new world religion, and while the architects of a new world order could make up their own, it would be much better to simply take over an existing one. That is what Henry VIII did in the sixteenth century and it is exactly what the Chinese did with the creation of the Catholic Patriotic Association.
If my hunch is right then what is developing is very much worth watching. Whether there is a nefarious Vatican-United Nations plot to develop a new world order with a new world religion is for those who love conspiracy theories to sniff out, but at very least a dogma free form of Catholicism would hold hands perfectly with those who would love to see a global order where every one not only has the opportunity to live in harmony and peace…
…but will be forced to do so.
These first two weeks in April I am having a drive to recruit more Donor Subscribers to the blog. Please go here to learn more about why this is necessary and think about whether you can help.