Bergoglio heresy

Bergoglio's fanks make a better case for his heresy better than his opposition could ever do - Sunday 15th of October to Saturday 22nd of October

They often say that one can tell quite a lot about a person based on who he has as friends, or fans, or allies. In that spirit, a bunch of heretics started a website in defence of Bergoglio. In their effort they condemn him more than the filial correction ever could.

Among the signatories we find heretics of all kinds, including a woman who was excommuniated under Bergoglio's pontificate. The fact that no diocesan bishops have signed is also significant, and the only bishops in favour seem to be auxillary bishops. If these are the kind of people supporting Bergoglio, there surely can be no doubt that his plans are diabolical. I just wish more of the heretics sign up, so that they can be exposed for all to see.

Sticking to the theme of Bergoglio's diabolical schemes, we have news that he has convened a synod in South America, which will discuss the lack of priests for the Amazonian region. It is expected that Bergoglio will use it as an excuse to introduce married clergy. St. Birgitta of Sweden had an approved vision in  which she sawthat any pope who abolishes priestly celibacy will spend eternity in hell, where he will be tormented by having ravens gouging his eyes out, or something to that effect. If Bergoglio does it, then we no longer need to doubt where he is headed.

Spare me the whole "priestly celibacy is a discipline nonsense"! The fact of the matter is that Christ laid out priestly celibacy as desirable and the Church has always held it as the norm. It is an apostolic discipline, of apostolic tradition, and like all other apostolic traditions they are binding on us Catholics since our duty is to pass on what has been received. Furthermore, it is ridiculous of Bergoglio to try to use this as an excuse for married  clergy (cause that has worked out so well for protestants, of course), given that he is always insisting that nobody needs to be Catholic in the first place. If nobody needs the sacraments to enter Heaven, then how come the Amazonians are in such dire need as to warrant a synod specifically for them? Are they the exception who cannot be saved apart from through the sacraments instituted for our salvation? Don't count on Bergoglio or his psychophants clearing up this particular contradiction!

Bergoglio's victims also continue to pile up, and this week it was the turn of the eminent Dr. Thomas Stark, who was teaching at the Heiligenkreuz Abby - free of charge, it must be added.

Then we had Bergoglio writing a letter to Cardinal Sarah, in which he humiliates him by ordering him to write to those he has spoken to insisting that the Vatican retains the authority over liturgical translations. In Bergoglio's letter, he makes it sure that episcopal conferences have the authority. It is unclear what exactly the Doctrine for Divine Worship is supposed to do once the bishops have finished their (mis)translations.

Let this act as proof that Bergoglio is not the clueless idiot he pretends to be! He clearly knows what is happening outside Vatican walls, and he can be decisive and clear whenever he feels it is in his diabolical interests. Then we also have the curious situation whereby the cardinal in charge of divine worship is clearly not in the loop with regards to what the pope wants his dicastery to do. In other words, to Bergoglio, the Congregation for Divine Worship might as well not exist, because he does not make use of it for its legitimate functions.

One more note: It is very obvious that Bergoglio was not the one who wrote the letter to Cardinal Sarah. It is simply too clear and to the point, not to mention logical, for it to have come from Bergoglio's mind. There is too much technical stuff for it, and my understanding if that Bergoglio does not even understand French, so I don't know why he would be writing to clarify a French term, which I understand was one of the ones cleared up.

 

A week of wonderful anniversaries - Sunday 8th to Saturday 14th of October

The major news this week were of course the 100th anniversary of The Miracle of the Sun at Fatima. Even I took the time to write down some thougths about this great and truly unique event.

Much was written about the Fatima anniversary, the best of which was by Roberto di Mattei on Rorate Caeli, in which he went through how 9 popes have failed to consecrate Russia ever since the Fatima apparitions.

In Poland they had a Rosary Crusade of sorts, although that particular Rosary Crusade was held in honour of the Feast of the Holy Rosary, some few days earlier. The Church in Poland encouraged the event and even senior of the governments got in on the act. It is very nice to see the Carholic faith flourishing in Poland, but I do fear that Catholicism in Poland has a nationalist strain to it which tends more to be a national marker than true discipleship. I hope I am wrong, because it would be terrible if the faith in Poland went the way of the faith in Ireland, where it seems more and more as though for the majority of the Catholics, the faith was something to mark them as not being loyal subjects of an occupying power. It's difficult to analyse the collapse post-Vatican II in any other way.

While it is always good to see Rosaries being prayed, there was a political aspect to the campain in Poland and that was the anti-immigration stance. The Rosary stations formed a perimeter around the whole country, in a symbolic gesture to the EU to leave Poland alone and stop forcing Islamisation upon it.

The aim of the Poles in wanting to protect their cultural, religious and even ethnic identity is very laudable and I very much support them in that. However, I cannot but point out that it is very hypocritical of the Poles to cry when their sovereignty is threatened while at the same time supporting the attacks on the sovereignty on others.

The truth is that Poland, according to polls, is the most pro-American country in the world. I do not have any direct memory of Poland's stance, but I would be extremely surprised, even shocked, if it was to turn out that Poland had been against any of the American misadventures in Muslim countries which have acted as the catalyst for what is commonly dubbed the "refugee crisis", a very misleading label, of course. The attacks that spring most to mind are those of Iraq, Libya and most recently Syria, although we should also remember Yemen and Afghanistan, from where many of the refugees who make it to Sweden hail, for some unkown reason.

It would be one thing if the Poles resisted for some other reason, but Poland resists, and I have to argue plays the victim card, precisely because its sovereignty was attached first by the Germans, then the Soviets and now lately the EU. Given that it is precisely soverignty, territorial and cultural integrity that the U.S. has been attacking the most, with Polands presumed backing if not encouragement, I would like to argue that the Poles have no recourse to the moral high ground in their stance against the EU. Nonetheless, I do stand with Poland on that particular issue, hypocritical as the country may be.

We had Trump repealing the contraceptive mandate, among others, from the Obama regime which came before him, something very much welcomed by all non-leftists. It is a bit of a scandal that it took so long. It was actually part of a series of administrative policies which the Trump administration took which were very encouraging. It was not all plain sailing though as they for some reason still continue to defend the homosexualisation, demoralisation and immoralisation of American society by insisting that homosexuals are a protected civil rights group as defined by the Civil Rights Act, in plain contradiction of the act. The U.S. bishops, as is par for the course, have been worse than worthless on this issue and many like it.

Staying on the topic of the U.S. and the aforementioned foreign aggressions, a very interesting piece was published on the Ron Paul Institute titled "US Violence Abroad Begets Violence at Home". A new study shows that the number of deaths caused by the U.S. since the Second World War, if I undrstand the piece properly. The number of countries the U.S. has attacked is staggering, and worth remembering is that not a single one of those nations actually attacked the U.S. or posed a threat to U.S. security - as if posing a threat was in any way a justification for attacking them, it must be noted. As I wrote on the day, we have become somewhat desensitised to American brutality: "It's what they do" thinks the world, and "It's what we do", Americans seem to think, but we owe it to the victims of this violence to remember them.

The context of his piece was the recent Las Vegas massacre, whose narrative, it must be admitted, grows all the more unbelievable.

We had an article by Jennifer Lahl on egg 'donation', written by a woman who had donated her eggs. She suffered adverse effects on which she had not counted and about which she had not been informed. It was a sad read, and one thing that struck me was how bad she felt at realising that the doctors saw her as nothing but a product to produce eggs, while of course, she was there in essence facilitating the treatment of children as products through IVF technologies. It just goes to show how much trouble a little abstract thinking can save us, especially when it comes to morality.

A week's summary would hardly be complete without a Bergoglio scandal, or a Bergoglio heresy, or not infrequently both. This time it is the death penalty, which Bergoglio says...

Pages

Subscribe to Bergoglio heresy