The Astounding Heresies in Benedict XVI’s 2003 Book Truth and Tolerance (Christian Belief and World Religions)

*This is from my continuing study of Benedict XVI’s books. For those who don’t know, Benedict XVI is Joseph Ratzinger.

Truth and Tolerance (Christian Belief and World Religions) by “Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, 2003 (Ignatius Press, 2004)

Since there are so many heresies from Benedict XVI, I have limited myself to including only those heresies that are truly noteworthy.

HERESIES IN TRUTH AND TOLERANCE (CHRISTIAN BELIEF AND WORLD RELIGIONS):

-BENEDICT XVI TEACHES THAT CHRISTIANITY MAY NOT BE THE TRUE RELIGION

-BENEDICT XVI SAYS THAT ISLAM REPRESENTS GREATNESS

-BENEDICT XVI SAYS THAT THERE ARE PAGAN SAINTS

-BENEDICT XVI SAYS THAT SALVATION IS CONNECTED TO RELIGIONS

-BENEDICT XVI SAYS THAT ALL RELIGIONS ARE ON A PATH TOWARD GOD AND REPRESENT PROGRESS

-BENEDICT XVI DEFINING HIS TERMS AND REVEALING HIS TOTAL APOSTASY! RULING OUT EXCLUSIVISM AND ACCEPTING EITHER INCLUSIVISM OR PLURALISM

BENEDICT XVI TEACHES THAT CHRISTIANITY MAY NOT BE THE TRUE RELIGION

Before I quote this astounding heresy, I must remind all readers that heresy is a denial or a doubt of a dogma:

Canon 1325, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “After the reception of baptism, if anyone, retaining the name Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts something to be believed from the truth of divine and Catholic faith, [such a one] is a heretic.”

To be a heretic one does not have to hold: “Jesus Christ is not God.” If he holds: “Jesus Christ may not be God” he is a heretic. Likewise, to be a heretic one does not have to hold: “Christianity is not the true religion.” If he holds: “Christianity may not be the true religion” he is a heretic.

In the astounding heresy that will be exposed below, Benedict XVI makes reference to Ernst Troeltsch. Troeltsch was a complete apostate who held that Christianity is God’s true religion in Europe, but that God’s true religion is different in Asia, Africa, etc. According to Troeltsch, Christianity is God’s face turned toward Europe, whereas Hinduism is God’s face turned toward India, etc. On pages 163-164 of Truth and Tolerance, Benedict XVI acknowledges this belief of Troeltsch and explains how Troeltsch didn’t hold Christianity to be the universally true religion:

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, pp. 163-164: “At the beginning of the last century, Ernst Troeltsch formulated in philosophical and theological terms this inner withdrawal of Christianity from its original claim to universality, which could only rest upon a claim to be true. He had arrived at the view that cultures cannot be transcended and that religion is closely associated with these cultures. Christianity is then merely the side of God’s face that is turned toward Europe.”

With that in mind (so as to make it crystal-clear exactly what Benedict XVI is speaking about in the next quotation), here is Benedict XVI teaching that Christianity may not be the true religion!

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, pp. 176-177: “Has the claim of Christianity to be the religio vera [the true religion], then, been overtaken by the progress of enlightenment? Is it bound to step down from its claim and take its place in the Neoplatonic or Buddhist or Hindu view of truth and symbol, to content itself – as Troeltsch suggested – with showing the side of God’s face that is turned toward the Europeans? Will it even have to go a step farther than Troeltsch, who still thought that Christianity was the appropriate form of religion for Europe, whereas today it is precisely Europe that is doubting this appropriateness? This is the real question that the Church and theology have to ask themselves. All the internal crises in Christianity we can observe at present arise only in a quite secondary sense from institutional problems. The difficulties with institutions and with personalities in the Church ultimately arise from the enormous impact of this question. No one will expect this question, which is making such fundamental demands on us at the end of the second millennium, to be answered here in any way conclusively.”

Benedict XVI asks the question whether Christianity is bound to step down from its claim to be the true religion; and he says that “This is the real question that the Church and theology have to ask themselves.” So the Church must ask itself if it is bound to step down from its claim to be the true religion! He then admits that he cannot give an answer to this question in his entire book about the subject! “No one will expect this question, which is making such fundamental demands on us at the end of the second millennium, to be answered here in any way conclusively.” The fact that he cannot answer this question with a simple “no,” nor at all “conclusively” in an entire book about the subject, proves that that he is calling into question whether Christianity is the true religion. This is astounding apostasy.

Just imagine if someone said: “The Church has to ask itself if it is bound to step down from its claim that Jesus is God. This is a real question the Church must ask itself. I cannot give a conclusive answer to this question here.” This would clearly constitute heresy against the dogma that Jesus Christ is God. With this example in mind we can clearly see the malice of the above apostasy from Benedict XVI. He clearly indicates that Christianity may not be the true religion. He is not even remotely Catholic.

BENEDICT XVI SAYS THAT ISLAM REPRESENTS GREATNESS

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, p. 204: “In Hinduism (which is actually a collective name for a whole multitude of religions) there are some marvelous elements – but there are also negative aspects: involvement with the caste system; suttee [self immolation] for widows, which developed from beginnings that were merely symbolic; offshoots of the cult of the goddess Sakti – all these might be mentioned to give just a little idea. Yet even Islam, with all the greatness it represents, is always in danger of losing balance, letting violence have a place and letting religion slide away into mere outward observance and ritualism.”

He says that Islam, a false religion which rejects the Divinity of Jesus Christ and the entire Catholic Faith, represents “greatness.” This is apostasy. The Catholic Church officially teaches that Islam is an abomination and a sect of infidels. Islam represents infidelity, the rejection of the Trinity and darkness. It is also interesting to note that while speaking of the “marvelous elements” in Hinduism, Benedict XVI also mentions negative aspects such as the caste system, etc. He doesn’t mention the fact that Hinduism worships false gods among the negative aspects.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Basel, Session 19, Sept. 7, 1434: “Moreover, we trust that with God’s help another benefit will accrue to the Christian commonwealth; because from this union, once it is established, there is hope that very many from the abominable sect of Mahomet will be converted to the Catholic faith.”

St. Francis Xavier, May, 1546: “The evil [of Islam] was introduced by some Mahometan caicizes (ministers of religion), who came from Mecca in Arabia, where the accursed body of Mahomet is honored with great superstition.”

St. Francis of Assisi (+ c. 1210): [To the Muslims] “We have come to preach faith in Jesus Christ to you, that you will renounce Mohammad, that wicked slave of the devil, and obtain everlasting life like us.”

The Catholic Church dogmatically teaches that Muslims are infidels, which means unbelievers.

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312: “It is an insult to the holy name and a disgrace to the Christian faith that in certain parts of the world subject to Christian princes where Saracens [i.e., the followers of Islam, also called Muslims] live, sometimes apart, sometimes intermingled with Christians, the Saracen priests, commonly called Zabazala, in their temples or mosques, in which the Saracens meet to adore the infidel Mahomet, loudly invoke and extol his name each day at certain hours from a high place… This brings disrepute on our faith and gives great scandal to the faithful. These practices cannot be tolerated without displeasing the divine majesty. We therefore, with the sacred council’s approval, strictly forbid such practices henceforth in Christian lands. We enjoin on Catholic princes, one and all... They are to forbid expressly the public invocation of the sacrilegious name of Mahomet… Those who presume to act otherwise are to be so chastised by the princes for their irreverence, that others may be deterred from such boldness.”

BENEDICT XVI SAYS THAT THERE ARE PAGAN SAINTS

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, p. 207: “The fact that in every age there have been, and still are, ‘pagan saints’ is because everywhere and in every age – albeit often with difficulty and in fragmentary fashion – the speech of the ‘heart’ can be heard, because God’s Torah may be heard within ourselves...”

This is bold heresy.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia productive of eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

BENEDICT XVI SAYS THAT SALVATION IS CONNECTED TO RELIGIONS

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, p. 205: “There are kinds of behavior that can never serve man’s growth in righteousness and others that are always a part of man’s righteousness. That means that salvation does not lie in religions as such, but it is connected to them, inasmuch as, and to the extent that, they lead man toward one good, toward the search for God, for truth, and for love.”

This is bold heresy. Salvation is connected to, and found in, only one religion, the Catholic religion.

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (# 2), May 27, 1832: “Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.”

BENEDICT XVI SAYS THAT ALL RELIGIONS ARE ON A PATH TOWARD GOD AND REPRESENT PROGRESS

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, p. 44: “…the controversy between religions. We have been far more concerned to determine more clearly (and this is still rather inexact) the place of Christian faith and practice in the history of religions as a whole, by looking at the others to see ourselves and our own way more clearly. If, in looking at this question, what divides us from others has been emphasized, what unites us with them should not be forgotten: that we are all a part of a single history that is in many different fashions on the way toward God. For that was what turned out to be the critical insight: for Christian faith, the history of religions is not a circle of what is endlessly the same, never touching the essential thing, which itself ever remains outside of history; rather, the Christian holds the history of religions to be a genuine history, to be a path whose direction we call progress and whose attitude we call hope.”

Benedict XVI clearly teaches that “we are all” (the members of Christianity as well as the other religions) on the way toward God. This is simply an expression of the apostasy condemned by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos: that all religions are more or less good, since they all manifest, in various ways, that inner religious sense which leads men to God.

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 2), Jan. 6, 1928: “For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and the obedient acknowledgement His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little, turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who holds these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.”

BENEDICT XVI DEFINING HIS TERMS AND REVEALING HIS TOTAL APOSTASY! RULING OUT EXCLUSIVISM AND ACCEPTING EITHER INCLUSIVISM OR PLURALISM

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, p. 80: “Following these reflections on the relations between religion, faith, and culture, we can again take up the classification of possible solutions to the problem of religions, which we met before in the three concepts of exclusivism, inclusivism, and pluralism. Probably no one today takes the possibility of exclusivism in the sense of denying salvation to all non-Christians – which, by the way, was not even Karl Barth’s view… Essentially, then, in response to the question of the relation between Christian faith and the religions of the world, there remain the two possible solutions of inclusivism and pluralism.”

This is a very important paragraph. Benedict XVI explains that there are three possible solutions to the problem of religions: exclusivism, inclusivism, and pluralism. He defines exclusivism as “denying salvation to all non-Christians” – the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation. He rejects that, of course. His rejection of that dogma is heresy in itself; but I want to focus on the fact that after ruling out exclusivism Benedict XVI admits that the only other two possible positions that are left with regard to non-Christian religions are “inclusivism and pluralism.” Therefore, we know that Benedict XVI accepts one of the two or both or a combination of the two. But what are these two other possible solutions, inclusivism and pluralism? He gladly defines them for us:

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, p. 51: “Just as Barth is seen as the chief representative of the exclusivist position, so Rahner is reckoned to be the classical advocate of inclusivism: that Christianity is present in all religions, or (putting it the other way around) that all religions, without knowing this, are moving toward Christianity...”

Benedict XVI admits that Karl Rahner, the notorious apostate who advocated “anonymous Christianity,” is the classical advocate of inclusivism: that Christianity is present in all religions. Rahner held that all men are Christians but just haven’t figured it out yet. This, of course, is total apostasy which equates belief in Christ (Christianity) with Antichrist (the denial of Christianity).

1 John 2:22 – “Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son.”

Even those who deny Christianity, according to Rahner, are “Christians,” since all religions constitute a form of Christianity. Full awareness of faith in Christ is simply the most pure version of Christianity, according to Rahner. So now that we know what “inclusivism” is, what is pluralism?

“Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance, 2004, p. 52: “People in the pluralist position are of the opinion that the plurality of religions is God’s own will and that all of them are paths to salvation, or at least can be so, while an especially important, but by no means exclusive, position can be assigned to Christ in particular. There are here, as with the so-called inclusivist position, many variations, so that here and there the two positions seem almost to merge into one another. That is why there is no lack of attempts to reconcile these positions, among which may be numbered B. Stubenrauch’s brilliant book Dialogisches Dogma. But above all we must mention J. Dupuis as eminent advocate of an attempt at reconciliation, though of course the pluralists reckon him nonetheless as being clearly an ‘inclusivist.’”

Here we have the apostasy in clearly defined terms. “Pluralism” holds that false religions of the devil (which are created by Satan, according to Catholic Faith) are positively willed by God. “Pluralism” equates the Spirit of Truth with the spirit of lies, the devil. Pluralism is vile apostasy which holds God to be the author of false religions. The difference between this position and “inclusivism” is almost non-existent – a slight difference in expression being that the “inclusivist” apostate says that all of these false religions are actually part of one religion which is called Christianity, while the “pluralist” apostate admits that they are different religions but are all willed by God anyway. Benedict XVI himself sees almost no difference between the two, which is why he says that in many writings “the two positions seem almost to merge into one another” and that there has been a “brilliant book” attempting to reconcile the two positions. Benedict XVI even mentions the notorious apostate J. Dupuis as an eminent advocate of an attempt at reconciling these two versions of apostasy. Remember, Jacques Dupuis was the man who spoke at the now notorious Interfaith Conference in Fatima where the Hindus invaded the Church of Our Lady. Dupuis said that the dogmatic definition of the Council of Florence on Outside the Church There is No Salvation was a “horrible text.” Here we see him mentioned by Benedict XVI in the context of a respectable attempt at reconciling the two apostate positions.

So, whether it is “inclusivism” (the apostasy of Rahner) or “pluralism” (the apostasy of Dupuis) – we don’t know since Benedict XVI never tells us which one he holds, but he did tell us that it is one of the two positions or a combination of them – it is a fact that Benedict XVI is an apostate.

A HERETIC CANNOT BE A VALID POPE

It is a proven fact that Ratzinger (now Benedict XVI) is a non-Catholic heretic. The Catholic Church teaches that a heretic cannot be validly elected pope, since a heretic is not a member of the Catholic Church. Ratzinger, who is now Benedict XVI, is a non-Catholic antipope whose election was utterly null and void.

Pope Paul IV, Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, Feb. 15, 1559: “6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:-] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:

(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;

(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;

(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way…

(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power….

10. No one at all, therefore, may infringe this document of our approbation, re-introduction, sanction, statute and derogation of wills and decrees, or by rash presumption contradict it. If anyone, however, should presume to attempt this, let him know that he is destined to incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles, Peter and Paul.

Given in Rome at Saint Peter's in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1559, 15th February, in the fourth year of our Pontificate.

+ I, Paul, Bishop of the Catholic Church…”

St. Robert Bellarmine: “A pope who is a manifest heretic automatically (per se) ceases to be pope and head, just as he ceases automatically to be a Christian and a member of the Church. Wherefore, he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction.” (De Romano Pontifice, II, 30)

The Catholic Encyclopedia, “Papal Elections,” 1914, Vol. 11, p. 456: "Of course, the election of a heretic, schismatic, or female [as Pope] would be null and void."

Video: The Heresies of Benedict XVI

Watch on YouTube: The Heresies of Benedict XVI