Would Cardinal Péter Erdő Make a Good Pope?

“Praise the Lord, O my soul, in my life I will praise the Lord: I will sing to my God as long as I shall be. Put not your trust in princes.”
–Psalm 145:2

I suppose it won’t matter how many times I reference that Psalm, people will continue to put their trust in princes (secular and ecclesiastical).

Have you also, following Bergoglio’s death, experienced the temptation to trust the more conservative princes of the Church, since one of them may be our next pope? This has caused some to lessen their caution and grow enthusiastic for a few of the less modernist cardinals, those potential dark-horse candidates for the Throne.

Alas, you may want to temper your enthusiasm if you had high hopes for a papabile conservative, like Peter Cardinal Erdo from Hungary.

Intro to Cardinal Peter Erdo

I’ve heard multiple folks (who possess good minds) suggest Cardinal Erdo might be a preferable candidate for the papacy as a relatively traditional prelate. Here again, however, we must wonder what “conservative” really signifies, before reaching excitement. This appears to be the case with Cardinal Erdo, who raises several red flags:

1. His “love for the post-Vatican II liturgy”
2. He possesses a “positive attitude toward the Orthodox church and keenly supports dialogue with non-Christian religions, emphasizing the value of Dignitatis Humanae”
3. His unwillingness to oppose the barbaric Traditionis Custodes
4. A failure to recognize the obvious trouble with the bizarre “Flame of Love” visions, which he granted his approval (more on this below)
5. Erdo has been described as “cautious, risk-averse, even timid” (as if we need more papal timidity during the height of this incredible fight against modernism)
6. He’s also inconsistent on the immigration issue, one that’s especially relevant since his homeland sits right across from numerous opportunistic Muslim invaders
7. He’s a Vatican insider who obviously did little or nothing to oppose Bergoglio’s anti-reign of terror

We cannot afford yet another pontiff who would flee from arduous tasks, praises Vatican II, and loves the Novus Ordo liturgy. While it’s possible for a weaker man to become a strong pope, we must keep greater vigilance in today’s dangerous ecclesiastical environment. By electing an ostensibly conservative man to the Petrine See, we could face much more elusive and scandalous obstacles than we endured with Bergoglio.

I won’t devote as much time to his other character elements. However, I would like to uncover a distinct problem regarding Erdo, one that I’m not sure many traditional Catholics have encountered.

What is that, you ask?

Cardinal Erdo granted his Imprimatur to a ridiculous devotion from his native Hungary, called the Flame of Love, supposed visions of Jesus and Mary given to Hungarian woman, Elizabeth Kindelmann. This has generated yet another cult following in the same vein as Luisa Piccarreta, though without as many references to kissing and suckling. I invite you to read some of it, but I’ll highlight what I thought was its worst.

Remember that this Flame of Love business received approval from Cardinal Erdo, a man some Catholic conservatives believe to be papabile. I must respectfully dissent on the grounds of obvious poor judgment on his part. The next section substantiates my criticism.

Problems with “Flame of Love”

The Flame of Love movement originates from the visions of the Hungarian woman and lay Carmelite, Elizabeth Kindelmann, who recorded them in her diary. This involved alleged communications with both Jesus and Mary, beginning in April 1962. Elizabeth lived until age 72, entering into eternity in 1985, after enjoying support for her visionary accounts from various local officials in Hungary.

What are the primary themes conveyed from Elizabeth’s visions?

They involve certain good (non-controversial elements) such as the Sign of the Cross, rebuilding Catholic families, blinding Satan, and so forth. The underlying theme for Flame of Love is the coming outpouring of Mary’s love on all of humanity, which will at long last halt the advances of the preternatural. Many adherents connect it with the Triumph of Mary, prefigured by the messages of Fatima.

At face value, this might appeal to many Catholics, assuming one only scratches the surface of the diary contents. It contains a lot about fasting on specific days, praying for the poor souls in Purgatory, and other laudable pious acts. Its message appears Catholic enough to cajole folks into taking it seriously. That is, provided you IGNORE these substantial problems with the Diary accounts.

1) The devotion positions itself to be better than the Holy Eucharist.

Page 32 of Elizabeth Kindelmann’s Diary: “Since the Word became flesh, I have never given such a great movement as the Flame of Love that comes to you now. Until now, there has been nothing that so blinds Satan.” (from Pseudo-Mary)

Just like the so-called Divine Will visions, we see the private vision make itself out to be the equal if not greater than what’s revealed in Holy Scripture. According to whatever spoke to Elizabeth, this “Flame” would be a greater movement than the Holy Eucharist, Pentecost, and everything else instituted by God since His Incarnation.

This is exactly what Divine Will, Divine Mercy, and Flame of Love all do. They create caricatures of specific components of the Catholic religion (God’s Will, His Divine Mercy, etc).

2) The Flame of Love spirits have the unmitigated nerve to add words to the Hail Mary prayer.

It goes like this:

“Hail Mary, full of grace . . . pray for us sinners, spread the effect of grace of thy Flame of Love over all of humanity, now and at the hour of our death.”

Here, we’re not merely adding a supplementary prayer to the conclusion (like the Fatima prayer after each Rosary decade). This insertion interferes with the very rhythm and meaning of one of the Church’s most ancient and fundamental prayers. Does Cardinal Erdo approve of radical changes to prayers like this? What about massive upheavals to the liturgy or changing the words of consecration at Mass? 

This is becoming a tiresome motif among bad visions and devotions from the 20th century. They attempt to alter the Catholic religion. Divine Faustina Mercy, for instance, sought to transform the liturgical calendar by replacing the Octave Sunday of Easter with “Divine Mercy Sunday”.

Flame of Love, Divine Mercy, and Divine Will (Piccarreta) all impose themselves onto the religion with massive novelties. The same folks who endorse one, often approve all the others as well. You can see from this Flame of Love fan site, that its adherents enjoy cross-pollinating this devotion with Divine Faustina Mercy. The Hungarian devotion even has the approval of the staunch Divine Faustina Mercy devotee, Fr. Chris Alar.

3) Elizabeth Kindelmann’s Diary suggests Jesus and Mary blessed the evil Second Vatican Council.

Diary Page 87: “Once Satan is blinded, the decrees of Vatican Council II will be fulfilled in an extraordinary way.” (Pseudo-Mary)

Well, it’s hard to argue, I suppose. Noone can doubt the extraordinary misery that emanated from Vatican II. Perhaps whichever demon was speaking to Elizabeth, pretending to be Jesus and Mary, might have helped fulfill some of that council’s revolutionary warfare and destruction. Elizabeth received this particular vision two weeks after the beginning of the council.

Did Cardinal Erdo read and approve these messages about Vatican II, that wicked council, which attacked the liturgy, confused doctrine, and led to a collapse of religiosity?

Page 91: “By my flame of love, I will place the crown of success on the Holy Council.” (Pseudo-Mary)

Was that a diadem of Satan then?

Also, page 49 refers to “participating at Mass.” Remember how the council perpetrators and other modernists kept pushing the misconception of “active participation,” particularly in Sacrosanctum Concilium, the liturgy-wrecking document. The traditionalist scholar, Carol Byrne, among others, has shown how “active participation” was a modernist invention, based on a mistranslation of Pope St. Pius X’s Tra le Sollecitudini.

4) The rest of the Diary language is sometimes less coherent than Luisa Piccarreta’s ramblings.

In some places, the theology is bogus or erroneous, whereas other sections read as if they were written by Japanese video-game designers struggling to convert their game text into English. 

I’ll share several selections, but this is only a sliver of how bad it is.

Page 64: “All will join in one gigantic prayer of petition. You do not need to stand in line or have an appointment.” (Pseudo-Jesus)

• Since when does Jesus use words like “gigantic”? Do you remember reading that one in the Scriptures?

Page 44: “My flame of love . . . leaps out to you with explosive power.” (Pseudo-Mary)

• So, will this flame explode people as well?

Page 68: “I can no longer contain the Flame of Love in my heart. Let it leap out to everyone.” (Pseudo-Mary)

• This kind of reminds me of Sister Faustina’s diary where she thought the Eucharist leapt out of the tabernacle.

Page 83: “Love, filled with repentance, intoxicates me. Let everyone’s repentant love intoxicate me.” (Pseudo-Jesus)

• If you run a web search on the definition of “intoxicate”, it produces the following: “to cause (someone) to lose control of their faculties or behavior.” Now then, let’s apply that. Does Jesus Christ ever lose control of His Divine faculties? I’ll allow the reader to reflect on that without further commentary.

Page 109: “All who deny this outpouring of grace have a grave responsibility.” (Pseudo-Mary)

• That sounds like it should say “have committed a grave error.”

Page 78: “Taking your food without any taste is a sacrifice which is tasty for me. We harvest together.” (Pseudo-Jesus)

• I’ve never heard Jesus talk about tastiness elsewhere. The closest I can think of is “O taste, and see that the Lord is sweet,” but that’s hardly the same context or usage.

Page 67: “Only a mother can understand my anguish. How many of my children will be condemned? I collapse beneath the weight of this sorrow.” (Pseudo-Mary)

• I could be wrong but this strikes me as a subtle suggestion that Mary would have collapsed at Our Lord’s Crucifixion. Protestants perpetuate this blasphemous myth all the time. Either way, since we know the real Mary did NOT collapse at Calvary, the epicenter of all sorrow, why should we believe she would collapse from sorrow over condemned souls?

5) Flame of Love steals metaphors from the saints, repurposing them toward its convoluted narrative.

The Flame of Love’s “Unity Prayer” includes the line: “may our glances profoundly penetrate one another.” To familiar ears, it may remind you of St. Alphonsus Ligouri’s phrasing for the Fourth Station of the Cross, where Jesus meets His afflicted mother. 

This leads me to suspect Elizabeth may not have “envisioned” any of these things, but simply recalled them from other elements of Catholic piety. This is a common concern when evaluating the legitimacy of private revelations. Then, the very name of the devotion may call to mind St. Alphonsus Liguori’s other famous phrase, “Darts of Love” which also alludes to the fire of God’s love.

All in all, the devotion perhaps attempts to recreate and re-fashion some important elements found throughout Scripture and tradition. This may be what Cardinal Erdo found compelling (though, I don’t know for sure). The concept of love corresponding to fire finds representation, for example, in this part from Solomon’s Canticle:

“Put me as a seal upon thy heart, as a seal upon thy arm, for love is strong as death, jealousy as hard as hell, the lamps thereof are fire and flames.”

Then, St. Anselm likened this to the Blessed Virgin, who bore Jesus in her arms, like, “fire carrying fire.” St. Ildephonsus contended that

“The Holy Ghost heated, inflamed, and melted Mary with love, as the fire does iron; so that the flame of the Holy Spirit was seen, and nothing was felt but the fire of the love of God.“

So, we can identify several examples of a legitimate “flame of love,” (just as we can appreciate genuine Divine Mercy) without resorting to this sloppy, Hail-Mary-changing new mess. We can beg the Holy Ghost to enkindle in us the fire of His love without re-wording prayers or boasting bold claims about being the “greatest movement.”

6) Flame of Love even insists we shouldn’t evaluate this apparition the way the Church always does.

Page 44: “No need for this miracle to be authenticated. I will authenticate the miracle in each soul. All will recognize the outpouring of the Flame of Love.” (Pseudo-Mary)

. . . and there you have it: everyone will judge the revelation for themselves; independent of Church hierarchy. What might possibly go wrong? Maybe that’s why Cardinal Erdo approved it. There’s no stopping this one, anyway, I suppose.

7) Flame of Love received approval from none other than the odious Antipope Bergoglio of very unhappy memory.

Bergoglio approved it just three months into his antipapal encroachment.

Further Background Behind “Flame of Love”

Toward the end of the visions, Pseudo-Mary supposedly instructed Elizabeth to find 12 priests to spread this devotion. I suppose she got to “play Jesus” and recruit 12 disciples. What another jolly novelty: a woman fulfilling a man’s role in this post-Vatican II feminist epoch!

Elizabeth’s diary received translation into Spanish by the Jesuit, Fr. Gabriel Rona. then later into English. I haven’t discovered any obvious problems with Fr. Rona specifically, and I notice he drew connections between the Flame of Love devotion and the messages of Our Lady of Fatima. You can evaluate his take on Fatima for yourself, but I notice it conspicuously omits any mention of a tribulation or the consecration of Russia. 

Perhaps he examined those topics elsewhere.

However, like other modern apparitional interpretations, his account focuses almost exclusively on the final Triumph, yet nothing of any intermediate chastisement. This is a common theme nowadays: skip the Passion and the Cross to reach the glory (a tired old Protestant perspective of redemption).

Who else has approved the Flame of Love diary and movement?

In 2009, Cardinal Erdo reported that his commission found her writings free from error. Given what I’ve shared with you, this approval raises serious questions regarding Erdo, a possible future pontiff, who would have charge of approving apparitions at the highest Church level. Would a possible Pope Erdo continue the ugly trend of endorsing dubious apparitions while simultaneously suppressing legitimate ones?

His track record suggests he may.

Furthermore, the Flame of Love movement has received enthusiastic approval from other alleged conservatives within the hierarchy, making Erdo far from its lone adherent. In 2013, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput (Philadelphia) granted an imprimatur to the bizarre English translation. The popular “charismatic exorcist,” Fr. James Blount promotes this devotion extensively as well.

If the fruits of this movement, as Cardinal Erdo claims, are so wonderful, then what precisely have they been? Modernism? Lukewarm Catholicism? Syncretism? Bergoglian Synodalism? Those have been the sad circumstances wherever the Flame of Love has spread (Latin America, the U.S., Canada, etc.). In light of that, I recommend we cease fanning the flames of false devotions and return to sound doctrine and the authentic Catholic religion.

Yet all of this is a staunch reminder of something more important . . .

Stop Trusting the Prin-Chippy-Boos! Trust the Real Jesus and Mary

The Latin for “put your trust not in princes” goes like this: nolite confidere in principibus (pronounced “prin-chippy-boos”). For some reason, I believe this pronunciation helps us understand the problem. Why on earth would anyone trust something like a prin-chippy-boo, and hasn’t it become so much more obvious in our contemporary environment?

While I have no problem hoping for a miracle, that God would bless His Church with a great pope, we must not invest blind faith into the matter. This is especially because the earthly selection of popes still rests in the hands of so many anti-cardinals (Tucho et al.). Moreover, God may permit them to chastise the true Church with yet another antipope.

Let us, instead, detach from the world, brace ourselves for the strong possibility of another antipope (even one disguised as a conservative), and trust the real Jesus and Mary.

Pray the Rosary every day, all 15 decades, and include intercessory prayers for prelates, like Cardinal Erdo. He’s not beyond snapping out of it.

Also, consider reading Yves Dupont’s seminal work on Catholic apparitions as an alternative to pursuing so many modern apparitional facades, which possess scarcely any continuity with authentic Catholicism. We don’t need to waste time or risk suffering scandal from such absurd movements as the so-called Flame of Love.

Plus, call me crazy, but its name sounds like this crummy “rock” song by Neil Young . . .