Reply to Mr. Smith

 Matt SmythJanuary 5, 2022 at 9:53 AM

A very interesting reminder indeed. I guess you were aware that pope Benedict was also in favor of a word government (Caritas in Veritate 67)? Therefore, I'm not entirely taken aback by the recent decisions of the present pope in lockstep with global corporate governance. So this is how the world ends: the pope blesses Big Money and Big Pharma killing children with the help of their government henchmen. 
MS

I have to reply here because my comment section is on the fritz and I can't respond there.

You are right that this is now a well-established pattern of papal praxis:

The Holy Father appears to support this idea because he speaks often of a "new world," of a world in which nations live and respect one another in their proper and distinct traditions, of a world of concord and brotherhood in which peace will reign over all nations. Among world leaders, the Holy Father never speaks with the authority of Christ as His representative on earth. He never speaks of Christ the King! Never! The discourses delivered at the UN were entirely humanitarian and only by obligation were certain polite references made to Christ. The speech reeked with humanitarianism because its end was humanitarian.

This was Pope John Paul II whose praxis was described by Roman Amerio and it is right in line with the praxis of the modern papacy especially beginning with Paul VI.

Humanism it is because the modern Popes actualise their own agendas rather that to teach the fullness of the Faith once delivered and to promote and defend Tradition.

I think of the modern Papacy as La Costra Nostra (It is "our" thing accord to the modern Popes) vs a holy Res Publica (A public thing; i.e. the Faith of all once delivered and irreformable).

How does one distinguish between Masonry and The praxis of the modern Popes?

Both consider all men good and free to worship the God of their own choice and actualising that shared ideology is the way to bring peace to the world.