(Crusader Will): Random Testing – Part Two: High Level Fallout




It’s almost as if the internet

were designed for end-time’s main onset.

There’s a deep Malaise in Bloggerland

that print media cannot withstand.

Local authorities may keep mum,

but gags on truth we can overcome.

Although Francis sows confusion,

the record will break the illusion.

Let’s broach these errors to date,

that the pew-stalled dare not contemplate.



We open with Laudato Si

which critics call far from error-free.

From St Francis Francis got the name,

if not this encyclical’s chief aim

(backing ecological myths

spread by neo-pagan re-truth smiths.

So this I’ve nicknamed Lousy Data.

This makes me persona non grata,

like Lord Monckton, whose analysis

caused it some kudos paralysis).



Random-testing critics’ reactions

highlights the underlying factions

in ideological debates

this encyclical incorporates.

Teilhard de Chardin, Karl Marx, Al Gore

get, says one wit, a Francis rebore.

But scientific error’s no base

for any valid doctrinal case,

such as made here, to view earth-ethics

as a new eco-religious mix.



Off-the-cuff’s one thing; but: pre-planned?

Such would prove things at root underhand.

The frantic Francis pace that’s churned out

word/deed pile-ups shows “well-planned” no doubt.

Still, picking out from background onslaughts

on priest-a-shuttle “bad-mention” courts

does not wrestle obscurity

from shepherds’ names, nor impurity

from the motives for their great pretence

that they act in our dumb-sheep defence.



The Synod (family-themed) which proved

the battleground Lucia was moved

years earlier to call the “last”,

had chief contenders reacting fast

(most laymen left adrift on the tide) –

if few took on the other side,

or claimed debate-finality;

all was interim view-parity.

But much unthinkable was aired,

whose contrariness many shared.



Faith’s juggernauts ran on well-oiled cogs,

however ballistic grew the blogs.

Among hushed pew-folk suspense just hung,

even as the prelate-balance swung:

cardinals at odds; bishops caught “out”;

priests spurred to rule-bends. Full hard-truth rout!

But few, purple-robed, backed lay-disgust.

Many saw shattered a life-time’s trust.

Do-something’d Francis did nothing till:

Pledged post-Synod sifts from through-the-mill.


Forth lumbered Amoris Laetitia.

Sounds like (but proves less than) “glitzier”:

marriage and Eucharistic error,

joyfully loved but striking terror

into some Churchmen as Church fellows

spread these errors world-wide. Truth’s bellows

pound shrinking ear-drums, but it’s the Host

the hordes want to desecrate most.

The Four whose pope tight-lips their “Dubia”

might as well rot in darkest Nubia.



Part Three will be published tomorrow.

Prophecies (from the Book of Truth) fulfilled – Part 3


7. Twisting the Truth

B of T


“The division between the loyal followers, those who accept My Father’s Book, the Most Holy Bible, and those who want to change the Truth, is about to become wider. One half will not deviate from the Truth. The other half will twist the Truth. They will do this to suit their own political and personal motivations, which will be hidden behind a couched language. The Truth will soon be declared to be a lie and God will be accorded the blame.”  (November 21, 2012 )

Prophecy Fulfilled:

The Book of Psalms actually states: (TRUTH)

 “What is man that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man that thou visitest him? Thou hast made him a little less than the angels, thou hast crowned him with glory and honour: And hast set him over the works of thy hands.”Psalm 8:5-7 )

More errors/twisting:

  • (Homily Pope Francis delivered during the Holy Mass he celebrated at the Chapel of Santa Marta.) The Holy Father commented on the first Reading of the day, taken from the Book of Wisdom (2:23-3:9), which states that “God created man for incorruption and made him in the image of his own eternity”. “He made us and he is our Father,” Pope Francis said. “He made us beautiful as he is beautiful, more beautiful than the angels, greater than the angels”.
  • “…the twisting of Matthew 19:3-9 from Our Lord’s condemnation of the Pharisees’ toleration of divorce into a condemnation of present-day Catholic as Pharisees for defending Christ’s teaching against divorce!) See: Remnant Newspaper 12 Sept. 2016
  • Audience Address of September 7, 2016, a discussion of the eleventh Chapter of Matthew wherein John the Baptist, in prison, sends his disciples to ask Jesus if he is the promised Messiah.John”, says Francis, “was anxiously awaiting the Messiah and in his preaching had described him [sic] in bold colors, as a judge who would finally install the reign of God and purify his people, rewarding the good and punishing the wicked.” But, according to Francis, Jesus had “launched his public mission with a different styleand John suffers… because he does not understand this style of Jesus and wants to know if he really is the Messiah or should we wait for another.” That is, Francis suggests that John the Baptist was disappointed with the “style” of Jesus and therefore dubious about His Messianic pedigree. See:  Remnant Newspaper 12 Sept. 2016
  • Francis begins his twisting of the Gospel by noting that earlier in Matthew’s account (Matthew 3:10), according to Francis, when John’s disciples inquire of Jesus whether he is the Messiah: …Jesus, in fact, says: “Go and relate to John what you have seen and heard: the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are purified, the deaf heard, the dead rise gain, the poor have the Gospel preached to them. And blessed is he who shall not be scandalized in me (Matt 4-6).Here the intention of the Lord Jesus becomes clear: He responds that he is the concrete instrument of the mercy of God, who encounters everyone, bringing the consolation of salvation, and in this way manifests the judgment of God.

Note, first of all, the conflation of God’s mercy with His judgment, as if His mercy simply is His judgment and there is no judgment or condemnation. Note also the subversive implication that John, not expecting this merciful Messiah, suffered with doubt because Jesus was healing the sick, raising the dead, and preaching the Gospel to the poor as opposed to simply rewarding the good and punishing the wicked as John had prophesied.

Francis thus sets up a false opposition between John’s prophesy of the coming Messiah and Jesus’s works of mercy, when in fact there is no opposition at all. He twists Christ’s miracles into a “style” that John supposedly could not comprehend: the beneficiaries of the miracles “recover their dignity and are no longer excluded, the dead return to life, while to the poor is announced the Good News”—as if John somehow objected to this!

See:  Remnant Newspaper 12 Sept. 2016

  • Having set up a non-existent opposition between John’s supposedly false expectations and the contrary “style” of Jesus, Francis then delivers his misleading conclusion, which involves heavy censorship of Chapter 11 combined with an out-of-context citation to the Psalms:

The message that the Church receives from this account of the life of Christ is very clear. God has not sent his son into the world to punish sinners, nor to annihilate the wicked. To them instead he [sic] invites conversion so that, seeing the signs of his divine goodness, they can find their way back. As the Psalm says: “If Thou, LORD, shouldst mark iniquities/O Lord, who could stand?/But there is forgiveness with Thee/That Thou mayest be feared (Psalm 130:3-4).”      …

The real message of Chapter 11, read in context, is the same message as the Psalm, read in context. It is the same message of the Gospel as a whole: God forgives those who believe and repent, failing which they will be condemned for all eternity. The same Christ who forgives the repentant also condemns the unrepentant to eternal damnation.

Contrary to what Francis says, therefore, Christ has come precisely “to punish sinners” and “annihilate the wicked,” not merely to forgive those who repent. As the very Credo of our religion declares: “He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.” And, as Our Lord Himself made clear in the Gospel (Jn 5:22-28), it is He alone who issues that terrible judgment immediately upon death and again on the Last Day:

  • For the past three-and-a-half years, Francis has presented precisely the Modernist caricature of the non-judgmental Jesus described by Pope Saint Pius X in his condemnation of the Sillon movement for “peace and justice” in France, …

“True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors.”

  • Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. …. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body.…
  • Francis’s thematic concealment of the justice of God by confusing it with His mercy appears in his personal manifesto Evangelli gaudium, where we read the following outright false declaration: “To understand this reality we need to approach it with the gaze of the Good Shepherd, who seeks not to judge but to love.” On the contrary, God is the just judge, who judges all men by the will of the Father at the very moment they die, sending many into the eternal fire of which He spoke more often than of Heaven.  Nor is there any opposition between His love and His judgment.

…The rhetorical device of the false opposition—hiding one truth by opposing it to another—is basic to Francis’s method, which constantly opposes “mercy” to “the law”, “pastoral practice” to doctrine, and discernment” of “concrete situations” to “the general rule.The same rhetorical device is basic to Modernist theology.

The Second Part of the Prophecy…

The Truth will soon be declared to be a lie and God will be accorded the blame.” 

  • This can be easily overlooked…but that is actually what pf did and thereby fulfilled this prophecy PERFECTLY when Pope Francis suggested that God “was unjust with his son”, because “he sent him to the cross.”

This occurred on December 14, 2016 in an audience in the Paul VI hall with patients and staff of Rome’s Bambino Gesù Children’s Hospital. The controversial comments were an answer to a question put to him by ( ) a nurse…, who asked why children suffer. The Pope replied:

“I have no answer to this question. Nor has Jesus given an answer to these words. There is no answer to this question, all we can do is look at the crucifix and let it give us the answer”. The Pope added: “is God unjust? He was unjust with his son, he sent him to the cross, if we follow this logic then we have to say this. …”

The Truth as taught by the Catholic church

 – ‘The commentary of the Pope contradicts with the Church’s understanding of Jesus’ self-giving act on the Cross.  God is not “unjust” for sending His Son to the Cross – to the contrary, the Church teaches that one of the attributes of God is that He is Just.

Likewise, the Church teaches that Jesus voluntarily laid down His life out of love for us – His dying on the cross was not a result of an unjust decision by the Father, but rather an expression of His love for us.   Our Blessed Lord said that as the Good Shepherd, he voluntarily lays down his life for the sheep….  John 10: 14-18:…

Finally, we also recall here St. Paul in Philippians chapter 2: 5-11:

‘For let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. For which cause God also hath exalted him, and hath given him a name which is above all names: That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth: And that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father’.

(See article at: https://veritas-vincit-international.org/2016/12/30/pope-francis-god-was-unjust-with-his-son-he-sent-him-to-the-cross/)


Also see:


The God of ‘Surprises’

I cringe whenever I hear this phrase, uttered very often by you know who.
Does he think people are so dumb? (Apparently so!!)

When he talks about being open to the Holy Spirit, he’s implying that everything a priest or bishop or himself does or says, is as a result of the Holy Spirit working in a new direction. We know this is utter nonsense. It is just a way of justifying sin in a new way – making out that all our doctrines and teachings have been wrong for 2000 years – that we got it all wrong – in fact Jesus must have got it all wrong and what the evangelists wrote isn’t what they really meant!

The phrase “the God of surprises” or “the Holy Spirit surprises usis a cover up for the evil intent of the changes which he himself (NOT the Holy Spirit)  is planning to introduce.

This man, Bergoglio, has made many inferences about change, and all his desires for change: for Lutherans and other Protestants, the divorced and remarried, homosexuals, women priests,  etc. Well, guess what? He is well on his way.

Firstly, last year (2015) he issued the new annulment reforms, which the committee was still in the process of formulating. But he went right over them and just announced it according to what he wanted. The Synod was meant to have a say in this, but he hasn’t even announced this yet.

Today, (21st January, 2016) I read how he has given a directive to Robert Cardinal Sarah about changes to the Maundy Thursday foot washing ceremony. As if this is a surprise! Each year since 2013 he has done his own thing. The ceremony by the Pope is meant to symbolize Christ washing the feet of his apostles, – teaching them how to serve their flocks. It is meant to be for “faithful” (read practising) “People of God”. We might all be God’s children – he created us, but we are not all “People of God”. We need Baptism for that.

He denigrated it to a ceremony where anyone is invited – Moslems, women, etc. He took it to new heights by having it in a prison, not in a beautiful, sacred place where the highest honour can be given to our Lord and King. What an insult! Now, any and every priest, (except those who will DARE to disobey) can (or will have to) do the same, because it is now law. I can see what is coming this year – women (who can never be priests), practising homosexuals (who are not repentant and don’t intend to be). The recent Vatican Pope Video should give us a clue.

Poor Cardinal Sarah – he was given the document to announce! I feel he is a good bishop, but he is trapped in his position as prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. He needs a lot of prayer. He needs to get out of there. Better to be sacked like Cardinal Burke.

Bergoglio, will start with these (small) things and then proceed very quickly to changing the Mass and the Sacraments. In fact, why do we even need Sacraments?! He will do it by stealth, and you will be surely told of all the wonderful reasons that these changes are necessary – and it will sound good – in human terms, of course.
Don’t you know? It is the Holy Spirit working, who is working in the world today to change sin into something seen as good. In fact, there is a spirit working – but it is not the Holy Spirit!

The good thing is that these changes exclude the Extraordinary Form (Traditional Latin Rite). Our dear, good popes John Paul II and Benedict, knew what they were doing when instigating the Motu Proprio, etc.

Get ready for a wild ride this year. There will be no limits and almost everyone will welcome all the changes with open arms, and those who don’t will be too afraid to say a word.

See a less emotional article at: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com.au/2016/01/the-inevitable-takes-place-pope-francis.html?m=1

The English translation of the Vatican declaration can be seen in full at the Rorate Caeli link listed above.

Excerpts from Vatican Information Service:

“After careful consideration”, he continues, “I have decided to make a change to the Roman Missal. I therefore decree that the section according to which those persons chosen for the Washing of the feet must be men or boys, so that from now on the Pastors of the Church may choose the participants in the rite from among all the members of the People of God. I also recommend that an adequate explanation of the rite itself be provided to those who are chosen”.

To manifest the full meaning of the rite to those who participate in it, the Holy Father Francis has seen fit to change the rule by in the Roman Missal (p.300, No. 11) according to which the chosen men are accompanied by the ministers, which must therefore be modified as follows: ‘Those chosen from among the People of God are accompanied by the ministers’ (and consequently in the Caeremoniale Episcoporum No. 301 and No. 299 b referring to the seats for the chosen men, so that pastors may choose a group of faithful representing the variety and unity of every part of the People of God. This group may consist of men and women, and ideally of the young and the old, healthy and sick, clerics, consecrated persons and laypeople.
This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Disipline of the Sacraments, by means of the faculties granted by the Supreme Pontiff, introduces this innovation in the liturgical books of the Roman Rite, recalling pastors of their duty to instruct adequately both the chosen faithful and others, so that they may participate in the rite consciously, actively and fruitfully”.

The original Vatican declaration can be seen at :

“ Decreto della Congregazione per il Culto Divino e la Disciplina dei Sacramenti sul Rito della “Lavanda dei Piedi”, 21.01.2016”


Francis And His Errors: “Jesus came into the world to learn how to be a man…”

[Francis said:]

Even though Jesus is God, He “is annihilated, He humbled Himself and became a servant. This is the glory of the Cross of Jesus”. [He added:] ‘Jesus came into the world to learn how to be a man, and by being a man, walk with men. He came into the world to obey, and He obeyed. But he learned this obedience from suffering.” (Homily at Domus Sanctae Marthae , September 15, 2014 – Original complete Spanish text.

The new website (run by a group of priests with permission of their bishops ) at
en.denzingerbergoglio.com/jesus-came-into-the-world-to-learn-how-to-be-a-man/#Francis  answers Francis’ comments very thoroughly.

Answers include Fathers of the Church, Catechism of Catholic Church, Scripture, as well as our dear good Popes Pius XII, John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

Below is a summary  – a taste – of the contents of their replies.

Click on the link above to read their post in full.

Teachings of the Magisterium

Table of contents
I – Was Christ obedient only in suffering?
II – In journeying with mankind, was Christ’s intention that of simply lowering Himself or of elevating man?
III – The correct interpretation of Philippians 2:8: “He humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross”

I – Was Christ obedient only in suffering?

Sacred Scripture
– My food is to do the will of the one who sent me
– “I do not seek my own will”
– Christ came down from heaven to do the will of the Father
– Jesus’ works are all from the Father
Catechism of the Catholic Church
– All the works, wonders and signs are proof of His obedience to the Father
– The Word made flesh willed humanly in obedience to his Father all that he had decided divinely
– “I have come to do your will, O God”
– Jesus was also obedient in moments of glory

II – In journeying with mankind, was Christ’s intention that of simply lowering Himself or of elevating man?

Saint Irenaeus of Lyons
– The Son of God became man so than man might participate in divine filiation
Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
– That elevate us to the divinity
Liturgy of the Hours
– To make us sharers in the divinity
Saint Thomas Aquinas
– Christ came to manifest the truth and free man from sin
Catechism of the Catholic Church
– The Word became flesh so that thus we might know God’s love
– Jesus is the model for the Beatitudes and the norm of the New Law
John Paul II
– Christ came to reestablish the truth in the relationship between man and God…
– … to free mankind from the slavery of sin, evil and death
– God has elevated humanity to a superior destiny of intimate union with Him
Pius XII
– Christ came into the world to glorify the Father and give himself as a victim

III – The correct interpretation of Philippians 2:8: ‘He humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross’

Saint Thomas Aquinas
– Christ’s humility reflects His majesty
Benedict XVI
– From the splendor of divinity, Christ chose to descend to the humiliation of ‘death on a cross’ to then manifest Himself in the splendor of his divine majesty
Theodoret of Cyrus
– A path overflowing with love and justice to liberate man
Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
– Christ underwent death in His flesh to offer Himself for us through death to the Father
Benedict XVI
– Jesus’ death stems from his free choice of obedience to the Father’s plan of salvation
John Paul II
– Through the suffering of the Cross Jesus Christ has returned to the love which was betrayed by Adam through sin
– The mystery of the Incarnation and Redemption expressed in Philippians 2:8

Judging Francis

See who judges Francis…

• Sacred Scripture

• 38 Popes (see summary of what Pope Benedict tells us in excerpt below)

• 10 Ecumenical Councils

• 7 Fundamental Texts

• 15 Roman Congregations

• 18 Fathers of the Church

• 13 Doctors of the Church

• 8 Synods and Episcopal Magisterium

• Other Documents and Saints

Benedict XVI…

…judges Francis’ idea that spiritual direction is a charism of the laity

Priests have the munus docendi, the task of teaching – they must answer the fundamental questions about what we must do in order to do good

An essential part of the priest’s grace is the task of putting others in touch with God
Christ tends his flock through the Pastors of the Church

Every priest is called to help the penitent to walk on the demanding path of holiness

Listening to the confessor’s advice is important for the spiritual journey of the penitent

In the saintly priest, the Christian People recognize the voice of the Good Shepherd

…judges Francis’ idea on adulterine unions

The trials of Christians are indeed numerous, but they must be faithful to God in their marriage

Materialistic ideologies tell us it is absurd to observe God’s commandments

The only joy that fills the human heart comes from God: the cross of Christ

The Church has received from its Founder the mission of showing people the way to true happiness: fidelity to the words of Christ

…judges Francis’ idea on family

An institution of natural law based on the marriage between a man and woman

 Marriage has value as a natural institution and as a Sacrament Raised to the dignity of a Sacrament, marriage confers greater splendor and depth to the conjugal bond

The Lord is the centre and heart of the family

 The family is a necessary good, fruit of the love and total self-giving within marriage

 Today the essential characteristics of Sacramental marriage are misunderstood

Today the crisis of the family impresses upon children an erroneous typology of the family

The natural structure of marriage is the union of a man and a woman – this principle comes from human nature itself and not only from faith


Read Pope Benedict’s teachings in the complete articles in a comprehensive new website at:


Questions raised from Francis’ statements

The following are some of the questions raised from the Bishop of Rome’s various statements.

For full list see: http://en.denzingerbergoglio.com/queries-and-doubts/
• Can good-will replace theology?
• What is the family for the Church? Any type of union?
• The holy anger of Jesus is only pretence?
• Do Catholics and muslims worship the same God?
• Sects no longer exist, and now everyone is the ‘church’?
• Can youth be formed with neither God nor religion?
• Can a Pope defend communist ideas?

• The divorced and remarried are not excommunicated…but, do they enjoy God’s friendship?
• When the Church becomes closed, she becomes an ailing Church, she falls ill! The Church must step outside herself. To the outskirts of existence, whatever they may be?
• Francis says that there is no explanation for suffering. Is that true?
• Ecumenism justifies leaving out Jesus Christ in order to pray with Jews and Muslims?
• Can Catechesis be compared with yoga or zen?
• Can anybody be chosen as godparents? What does the Church think of divorce?
• The blasphemous crucifix of Evo Morales should not offend Catholics?
• Did Jesus rebel against the Father’s will on the Cross?

• What should a Catholic think about the Encyclical Laudato Si´?
• The Church and the Papacy can be transformed into something democratic, horizontal?
• To offer thousands of rosaries is a bad thing?
• Equality is the source of justice and happiness?
• The multiplication of the loaves was only a symbol?
Communism is good? It is concerned about the poor? It has similarities with the Church’s social doctrine?
The Eucharistic fast…a dictatorial burden?!
• Good vibes, positive energies, prayers – all the same thing?

Sins are a motive for joy and salvation?
• The Church learns about God’s will from the people? Her teachings on the family must be adapted to the times?
• Did the Virgin Mary rebel against God?
• What did Saint Paul really say about boasting of our sins?
• “Who am I to judge him?” Is homosexuality a sin?
• Can the Holy Spirit counsel good with evil?
Mercy takes away the gravity of sin?
Society has nothing to profit from the Church’s teachings? What is the much touted ‘culture of encounter’?

• It is impossible to find God with entire certainty?
Holy Communion is no longer the reception of the Body and Blood of Our Lord?
• Alms-giving is preferable to divine worship?
• To look for doctrinal clarity is outdated?
• Having a large family is a sign of irresponsibility?
• The Church should be reduced to a small minority?
• How should the other Christian churches be considered? Are their priestly ordinations valid?
• Is it impossible to know where to encounter God?
• Happiness…Where is it to be found?

• Is Fraternal Correction Good or an Evil?
The Church no longer needs to convert anyone?
• Does the Old Covenant still exist and is Judaism a valid way of salvation?
• God is not omnipotent?
• Did the Church stop looking to Jesus Christ?
• Is it necessary to reform the Church and to reduce the precepts?
• All religions lead to God?
• The Church should not attempt to form the consciences of people?
• Contemplative communities are spiritually sick since they do not go out?
• Are souls punished with annihilation?

• Is salvation guaranteed to all who belong to God’s people?
• Is material charity the most important thing in the Church?
God never condemns, and always pardons?
• In the end, do all go to Heaven?
• Is peace possible without Christ?
• Caution with evil is no longer necessary?
• Should the teaching of Morals be silenced?
Christ will not judge anyone at the Final Judgment?

The Church no longer excludes the divorced in second union from the Eucharist?
• Does the Church still teach the existence of eternal condemnation?
• The Church has no solution for the crisis of the family?
• Is Ecumenism the harmony of all Christian Faiths?
• Can anyone interpret God as he wishes?
Absolute truth does not exist?
• Is there a Catholic God?
Youth who live together shouldn’t be encouraged to marry?
• Is conscience totally free? Can one do evil so that good may result from it?

• Is conscience the last word on what is good and evil?
• Does everyone have a right to receive the Sacraments?
• Should the Gospel be adapted to contemporary culture?

FP appoints a new Doctor of the Church- such as has never been seen before.

In March of this year (2015), Gegory of Narek was announced by Francis to be a new Doctor of the Church. Usually, Doctors of Church are saints that are well known.

Other Doctors of the Church include St Gregory the Great, St Jerome, St Augustine – all well known because of their writings on doctrine. Others include St. Basil,  St. Gregory Nazianzen, and St Therese of Lisieux.

Who is this guy? You might be surprised to learn that he is not a saint, and does not have any special skill regarding Doctrine. He is a member of the Armenian Catholic Church (Oriental Orthodox) – this church is not in communion with Rome. They are schismatic. They are  “Non-Chalcedonian”. This means that they reject the Council of Chalcedon held in 451.

This Council’s  principal purpose was to assert the orthodox Catholic doctrine against the heresy of the time. The Armenian church rejected the teaching of the two-fold nature of Christ.

They reject the teaching as stated in the document of this Council  “We teach . . . one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, known in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation”.

Read the whole story here: http://biblefalseprophet.com/2015/03/06/gregory-of-narek-christological-heresy-now-implicitly-incorporated-into-the-church/#comment-9075

(Reply by Fr Joseph Chaffee-Greek Orthodox priest 16 Sep 2015 )

“They believe that Jesus Christ had only one active free will, the Divine, while His human free will was basically “shut off” at conception. By denying (him) an active human will,(…) they deny Him the capacity of being able to be tempted in every way we are, as the Scriptures declare He was. This dehumanizes Christ and denies His full incarnation. It also takes away all the constant praise in the Scripture for His “obedience”, even unto death, for obedience implies the subjugation of one will (His human will) to another (His divine will–which is one and the same with the Fathers).”

A person who rejects an infallible dogma cannot be considered Catholic!

He is, in fact, a heretic – now formally enshrined as a Doctor of the Catholic Church.