Bergoglio anti-doctrinism

He that is of a perverse heart, shall not find good: and he that perverteth his tongue, shall fall into evil

The words are taken from Proverbs 17:19:

He that is of a perverse heart, shall not find good: and he that perverteth his tongue, shall fall into evil

In fact, the whole of Proverbs 17 could be about the perverted man who we call pope, Jorge Bergoglio.

This piece grew out of spone spontaeous thoughts I had to the day's links on the 25th of October, yet another day in the long line of occasions Bergoglio has used to belittle Church teaching, this time indirectly by attacking those who defend it.

Given Bergoglio's latest cringeworthy rant against those who attempt to live by Christ's teaching, titled  “Beneath rigidity there is something else, there is often wickedness” by Vatican Insider, I must, somewhat reluctanctly, agree with Mundabor that Bergoglio is a "lewd old man". It is a tag he has used multiple times which I have not been keen on endorshing in the past but the man's incessant insults aimed at those who try to lead pure lives hints at grave moral deficiency in the man.

There is something deeply sinister about a man who seems to think that people who act virtuously are hypocrites, or that there is "often wickedness" in them. This seems to be a man attempting to justify his own perversions. At the very least, these words betray a most perverted outlook on life and virtue.

We are well within our rights to wonder whether Bergoglio's attack on chastity is not because he himself has issues with upholding sexual morality on a personal level.

It is something I have been disinclined towards, but now we must openly ask it.

If he does not have problems on a personal level, then his attack on morality is all the more bizarre and inexcusable and he is a fouler man for it.

Bergogio's attack on the Church and God's plan for marriage continued today, with the words:

At times we have proposed a far too abstract and almost artificial theological ideal of marriage, far removed from the concrete situations and practical possibilities of real families. This excessive idealisation, especially when we have failed to inspire trust on God’s grace, has not helped to make marriage more desirable and attractive, but quite the opposite.

I must ask again just who he is attacking, just what is so abstract with the idea that marriage is for life, just what is artificial about it when Genesis tells us that God made us man and woman, to which The Word Incarnate adds "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder".

That is not even the worst thing he has said this week. No, that award would have to go to his invention of a Novus Ordo heaven, of which he states:

What is the Kingdom of God?  Well, perhaps the Kingdom of God is a very well-made structure, everything tidy, organization charts all done, everything and the person who does not enter (into this structure) is not in the Kingdom of God. No, the same thing can happen to the Kingdom of God as happens to the Law: unchanging, rigidity…    the Law is about moving forward, the Kingdom of God is moving forward, it is not standing still. What’s more: the Kingdom of God is re-creating itself every day.

Granted, the week is not over yet, and there is more time for the man who Hilary White has apparently affecionately named "Pope Humblebrag" to outdo himself in more gibberish. Mundabor, without much effort, explains that the concept of an ever-evolving Heaven is a great absurdity.

This is from the same man who has admitted that he prays that people may fall into sin if they seem too sure of their virtue. Granted, we canot be sure if he actually prays, so we must take his comment with a good measure of salt, but what we do know for sure is that he was not ashamed to say that he prays for sins to befall other people, simply because those people seem to practice virtue. Mind you, this is the same Bergoglio who answers "Who am I to judge" when asked about the presumably sodomitical priest who he put in charge of his living quarters. Evidently, the man's capacity to judge only activates itself upon those who aim to follow the ways of God.

Dovetailing to my initial point: Bergoglio's attack on the Church's teaching on morality is incessant, as is his promotion of all manner of actual sins (discounting the many false sins he admonishes). He seems to have a special soft spot for sexual deviancy, and also seems to surround himself with perverts of all kinds. 

It is significant that he does not seem to believe that God's grace can help us overcome sins, and seems to assume that those who act virtuous are hypocrites with a hidden wickedness. Nor surprisingly, perhaps, this seems to be the sentiment of Martin Luther, the heresiarch that Bergoglio will be celebrating within a week. They say "great minds think alike", and the same would seem to apply to lewd heretics, a group to which Bergolio certainly seems to belong.

A man who speaks with such venom against those who are trying to follow the way of Christ in a very hostile culture cannot be a good man. Above all, he cannot be a man who aspires to good by way of Christ. Whatever notion of good such a man has would have to be a twisted one.

Whether Bergoglio he practices his evident lewdness or not (and with whom) we ought not really to speculate, but that his mind seeks to entertain all sorts of perverted notions is certainly not up for debate, not any longer.

...

Doctrine to a fool is as fetters on the feet, and like manacles on the right hand

A while back I had intimated that I would write a 3-piece exposé on Bergoglio and his agenda. When I opened the article which I had begun writing, I noticed that the timestamp read

2015-09-07 22:39:09 +0200

In other words, this is a piece which has been more than 1 year in the making; shameful stuff. One would think given such a revelation that it will be long. One would be wrong.

In fact, I have abandoned the original idea totally and only aim to highlight what I think is my input into the dreadful pontificate of a faithless ravenous incompetent duplicitous Argentinian Jesuit who manipulated his way into the top of the mediocrity-promoting NOChurch. Hmm, here I was thinking I would work up to that,  but evidently, hand me a keyboard and I can't stop writing what I really feel about Bergoglio, just like hand Bergoglio a microphone and he can't stop talking about how much he hates God's Holy Church.

Before I get too worked up, I thought I might try to explain why I never really got around to writing the piece, whose unfinished version I shall leave unedited in order to kind of hint at what I had in mind.

Basically, there are 4 primary reasons for why I abandoned the idea, although the struggle to abandon it was a long back-and-forth tale:

  1. However much it might seem the case, no faithful Catholic (and I do make a genuine attempt at being faithful) likes to write about Bergoglio and what the modernists are doing to the Church. It is disheartening, and frankly, a lot of us feel it distracts us from the real mission to which Christians are entrusted - that of proclaiming the Gospel. I genuinely would like to write about positive news, or at least positive things, of which there is no shortage. That being the case, we cannot simply ignore the errors being fed to the unsuspecting, which is why many faithful Catholics feel themselves reluctantly bound to write about the unfortunate Bergoglio pontificate.
  2. A growing realisation that no matter how many scandals and heresies Bergoglio spouts, far too many will refuse to see that he is an enemy of the Church. They either do not have the faith or the love for truth to learn about what the Church actually teaches. Embracing the whole of the Catholic faith is a daunting prospect, not least because it forces us to leave our comfort zones and actually engage in spiritual warfare, often to the detriment of our social relationships or economic opportunities. It is far easier to be a NOChurch Catholic with no idea that much of what one defends has been condemned by the Magisterium and actually is still condemned, though tolerated (even promoted) by people who have no authority to change what the Church actually proclaims (since the message comes from Christ) so settle for confusing the faithful either through misleading them or leaving them in ignorance.
  3. The fact that in most of the faithful Catholic circles (i.e., traditionalists) the idea of Bergoglio as an enemy of Christ and His Holy Church is now a mainstream opinion. In fact, it is a mainstream opinion even among believing Novus Ordo Catholics, who for the most part cannot bring themselves to make excuses for the man any more. When I originally planned to write this, those who had concluded that Bergoglio was an enemy were a small and shunned minority - basically Mundabor, a few others and I - even the Remnant couched its criticisms in soft gloves. Now though, there is no shortage of articles and writers listing Bergoglio's crimes against the faith, many of whom are more eloquent, learned and thorough than I am. Some of those articles are linked at the bottom of this piece. The gloves have truly been taken off,
  4. The sheer volume of the insanity coming from the man and his comrades in arms make it impossible for me to keep up, and would have made any article showing examples of his assult on Catholicism outdated nearly as soon as it was published.

With that out of the way, I would still like to think I can make a small contribution to the debate not by highlighting what Bergoglio is doing - his agenda, as it were - but in sifting out his overall strategy.

Now you might be wondering: Why write anything about this if you abandoned the plan? To this I answer that it is for 2 reasons:

  1. I would like to think of myself as a man who keeps his word, so if I write that I shall do something then I either do it or at the very least offer an acceptable reason for refraining.
  2. With Bergoglio on his way to this God-forsaking country for his heresy jumboree, I felt duty-bound to at least wrap this up, not least because I intend to write about the heresy fest, and anything I write about that will make more sense in lieu of what I have to write.

So here is my small contribution to the greatuer unpacking-Bergoglio debate. Basically, I have Bergoglio's actions down to a 3-pronged attack on the pillars of the Church:

  1. Attack the doctrines, dogmas and teachings of the Church
  2. Attack the defenders of the faith and the hierarchichal structure created by Our Lord, especially the papacy
  3. Attack the family

 Those are the 3 pillars upon which all of Bergoglio's actions are based, his 3-pronged armada aimed at the barque of St. Peter, our Holy Mother Church. In fact, with these in mind anything which seems odd, creepy, stupid or downright  perverse on his part soon begins to make sense.

I'll just pass over them in brief.

Attack the doctrines, dogmas and teachings of the Church

Whether it is in his promotion of adultery, his attack on the holy institution of marriage, sacrilege in the form of Holy Communion for lechers or non-Catholics, insulting the Blessed Virgin Mary,...

Pages

Subscribe to Bergoglio anti-doctrinism