Bergoglio contradictions

The Bergoglio revolution streamrolls its way through the College of Cardinals - Sunday 20th-Saturday 26th of May

The world's 'humblest' attention whore certainly got his money's worth this week, because he was all over the headlines.

We were informed that Bergoglio has named 14 new cardinals, from 11 countries. I don't know much about any of them, apart from Ladaria, the CDF prefect, who will now be made cardinal. I do get suspicious of anybody who Bergoglio thinks worthy of being a cardinal, knowing the sort of types with whom he surrounds himself. With this set of appointments, I am quite certain that more than half of all cardinals eligible to vote for a new pope will have been appointed by Bergoglio.

This is obviously cause for concern, and I am not alone in worrying about this. In The Silence Of The Cowardinals Creates More FrancisCardinals , Mundabor makes the valid  point that the dubia cardinals have helped facilitate this, bu vacillating on their correction. With every new cardinal, Bergoglio gets closer to making his mark on the church more long-lasting, and the cardinals lose any numbers they might have been able to marshall.

At least those 4 cardinals tried, is all I can say about that. It was always going to be a tough call to expect manhood from a bunch who for at least 60 years has been selected and promoted on effiminacy.

As if that wasn't enough, the world's most well-known sodomy pusher had the galls to tell a victim of clerical sexual abuse that God had made him a sodomite, and that he was happy for him to remain that way; Bergoglio, as one would expect, taking the time to add spiritual abuse to the sexual abuse that the man had received. Of course, he didn't use the word sodomite, but 'gay', as is par for the course for the perverted. I'll not waste your time dissecting that, as common sense should suffice to realise just how absurd and evil this notion is. It gets even more absurd in the context of something else which the most hypocritical pope in history said. You see, he came out and said later that homosexuals cannot enter seminary. Gloria.tv reported it thus:

If bishops’ have “the slightest doubt” that a young man is homosexual, it’s “better” not to let him enter the seminary, Pope Francis said in a closed door meeting with the Italian bishops.

This was enough for one of the commenter's to respond:

It seems, they only let them enter if their homosexuality is certain

Indeed, given the amount of statements and actions that Bergoglio has made in favour of homosexuality, one cannot draw any other conclusion.

There is something else troubling about this episode, on top of the obvious one of having a pope pushing the sin of sodomy when it is obvious to many that he is more than likely himself a sodomite. The problem I have is that this episode rather perfectly demonstrates the kind of nonsense which we have come to expect from NOChurch.

If homosexuality is a gift from God, then it can only be good. If this gift is good, and God wills it that way, then it is difficult to see why sodomites should be excluded from the seminary. I accept that we can find a way around it, but I would much rather have Bergoglio explaining how something can simultaneously be a gift from God, yet be something that ought to be denied service to the wider Church. Instead, those who defend this kind of waffle are left trying to reconcile two evidently irreconcilable statements, and yet claiming that the errors are on the part of those who cannot make sense of it.

Possibly in response to this, Cardinal Müller took the time to inform us that homophobia does not exist, and is a totalitarian invention. I naturally agree with this sentiment, but if it is at something Bergoglio has said, it would be only fair to drag Bergoglio's name into it. Another example of avoiding the widest elephant in the room could be seen with Arhbishop Chaput accusing Cardinal Marx of inserting “a lie” into the intercommunion debate. Again, this is just picking at low-lying fruit, when there is a very clear target in sight.

It is utterly sickening watching grown-up men playing the part of teenage girls talking on social media behind their friends, behind inuendos and smileys. It is obvious that all the confusion we have right now is because of Bergoglio, yet even the few who address these problems seem hell-bent on pretending that they do not originate from the pervert-in-chief. They really ought to man up or shut up because they are hardly doing anyone any good. In 20 years, nobody will remember a speech they held in a place probably torn down by them to in reference to a cardinal who will probably long have been brought down by scandal. If they were to speak directly against the most dangerous man against the faith today, in clear unambiguous terms , chances are they would at the very least get a not-too-dishonourable mention.

The zionists continue to kill Palestinians in Palestine. As I mentioned last week, the U.S. moved its embassy to Jerusalem, and protests which had begun even before then have only got more heated. The victims among the Palestinians have piled up as the Israelis continue to shoot practically anything that moves, in full knowledge of the fact that the U.S. will cover up for any crimes they commit. In Gaza Massacre Exposes Western Hypocrisy on Russia’s ‘Annexation’ of Crimea, the Ron Paul Institute re-printed an article on precisely this point.

Not to get left behind by the anti-Russian propaganda train, the Swedish something in charge of civil readiness something (blah blah blah) printed a pamphlet on  disaster preparation or some such thing. In something which would be a strong contestant for the fakest news of the year award, the pamphlet told us that...

So perverted they insist on soiling the nativity scene at St. Peter's Square, not just their apartments - Sunday 10th to Saturday 16th of December

The big issue of the week was without a doubt the blasphemous and distasteful horror show that Bergoglio's Vatican decided to label a nativity scene and parade in front of everyone to see.

It is as though their perversions run so deep that Bergoglio's gang cannot keep their homo-eroticism to themselves but must parade it to everyone. The overriding concern form me is: Just what is so unedifying about the miracle of Christmas that it requires other stuff to complement it? Yes, I know there is such a thing as a Neapolitan nativity scene, in which more characters than those central to the nativity are displayed, but those are done in good taste and the Holy Family is never obscured, nor are one's sensitivities offended. In Bergoglio's nativity scene, what we have is a set in which one struggles to locate the Holy Family amidst the rubble floating in front, above, below and to the side of them.

Nobody objects to the corporal works of mercy, but "to everything there is a season" and surely nobody believes that Bergoglio and his gang pulled this stunt innocently? No, they must have known what an offence it would cause and how it would detract from the Christmas miracle! Then we have the homosexual themes of it, which, coming as it does from Montevergine, stretches far deeper than what one might have first thought, as we were informed by Lifesite News. The sexual deviancy part of it was well highlighed by Fr. Ray Blake in a piece which made my comment-of-the-day:

A more real concern, which one blogger highlighted was the 'clothing the naked' scene, he highlighted it with the caption, "I was at Cocco's (Cardinal Cocopalmero) place partying and the next thing I woke up here", The naked figure does indeed look more like someone from a gay gym or party, rather than an emaciated beggar forced to sell even his clothing, which is unfortunate in the Roman Church which is torn by gay scandals and homo-eroticism.

The best take on the nativity scene was by the sedevacantist Novus Ordo Watch in "The Frankie Horror Picture Show: A Look at the Vatican’s harrowing Nativity Scene". They analyse almost every piece in some detail and point out more than anything else the lack of joy in the figures. Enough of that sordid mess, because the fallout from Bergoglio's suggestion to ammend the Pater Noster rumbled on.

Over at AKA Catholic, Louie Verrechio had an exclusive of what Bergolio's new prayer would look like:

The Bergoglian Pater

Our Father, who art full of surprises

Known by many names

Thy Bible strange

Thy doctrines change

On Earth we make our own Heaven

Give us a break from all you said

And forgive us our trespasses

As we give illegals free-passes against us

And worry us not about tradition

But deliver us a pizza

It was obviously in jest, but it's a good summation of what Bergoglio thinks we ought to be doing in stead of praying to God for our eternal salvation, and using the Church to help us get there.

Fr. Hunwicke also had his take on it, and compared Bergoglio to a spoilt toddler brat - in an insult to spoilt brats everywhere:

What repeatedly ... it seems, almost daily !! ... irritates me about PF is his endless propensity to treat the Depositum Fidei, the Universal Church and what she has inherited from the Apostles or from the generations since, as something which is at his disposal to change, to criticise, or to mangle in any way that appeals to his personal whimsy at any particular moment. He is like a toddler who has been given toys to play with ... a big, boisterous and wilful child who likes to play with them rather roughly; whose commonest phrase is "I want ...". If anyone suggests that he should perhaps handle them rather more gently, he throws a tantrum.

Finally, Mundabor in his anti-Bergoglian manners titled his piece "Our Pope, Who Art An Idiot", which pretty much summed up the content of his piece, and of Bergoglio's general behaviour. His most telling piece follows:

As pretty much always, the problem with Francis is that he does not believe in God. Not believing in God, he thinks that the church is a purely human construct. He also clearly believes that this human construct has done pretty much everything wrong before electing him Pope.

That article also made it to my comment-of-the-day.

"The Dictator Pope" continued to propagate, and once again, I must bring in Fr. Ray Blake for his thoughts on this one, in another piece which made it as the day's comment:

I finished that book, 'The Dictator Pope', a few days ago. There was very little that was new in it but it is shocking when scandals are brought together in a catalogue of vice. This is certainly not a book I would recommend most people reading, especially those who are easily shocked.

It portrays a picture of an arbitrary self-seeking princeling with few virtues and practically every vice. For those who hear confessions regularly it gives an insight into the cup which is clean on the outside but full of corruption on the inside.

One of the things that the book shows is just how fake Bergoglio's popularity is. I have long maintained that Bergoglio's popularity is an invention of the fake media. The book more or less confirms this, showing that attendance figures from Bergoglio's general audiences have declined very starkly. It is so bad, that we were informed that they have stopped counting (or at least publishing) these numbers to avoid further embarassment for the attention-whore-in-chief. True to form, this one also made it as a comment of the day.

An interview with the author was published,...

Pages

Subscribe to Bergoglio contradictions