Posted on 09/27/2017 6:04:35 AM PDT by ebb tide
As the Filial Correction to which I am a signatory continues to gather support that now includes Bishop René Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of the Diocese of Corpus Christi, Pope Bergoglio is facing an unprecedented display of opposition from mainstream Catholics who are awakening to the astounding debacle of this out-of-control papacy.
Antonio Socci gives a surprising new indication of just how out-of-control Bergoglio is in his column of September 24, entitled What He Did He Wanted to Do as Pope Jesus II, the Demolitionist (translation mine). He begins by noting that in the just-published book-interview with Dominique Wilton, Bergoglio jokes that he chose the papal name Francis not as an act of superbia but rather of humility, because then he would have been able to call himself Jesus IIa reference to the common description of Saint Francis of Assisi as an alter Christus, another Christ. While this was only a joke, it was a very revealing one: the phrase Jesus II evinces an arrogant flippancy regarding both Our Lord and the great saint who is popularly likened to Him.
Socci believes that Bergoglio suffers from a dangerously acute case of that classically Argentinian egocentrism Bergoglio himself once remarked when he joked that an Argentinian commits suicide by throwing himself from the top of his ego. This, writes Socci, is a very big problem which a psychoanalyst attempted to resolvefutilelyyears ago (a reference to Bergoglios revelation to Wilton that he had undergone weekly psychoanalysis for six months with a Jewish psychiatrist). And this very big problem is immensely exacerbated by what Socci describes as ego-latria in the form of a planetary papolatry.
Bergoglio, says Socci, seems to want to re-found the Church and almost present himself precisely as Pope Jesus II, who pretends in fact to be more merciful than Christ respecting those living in adulterous second marriages and dares to pursue what his collaborators exultantly characterize as irreversible reform of the Church. But, Socci continues:
the Church belongs to Jesus Christ, not to the Pope. The popes are only its temporary custodians, not its owners . By definition, only the Law of God is irreversible, which is in Sacred Scripture and the constant Magisterium of the Church. The Popes are subject to that Law, they are not its masters. They must be like chauffeurs who bring the Bride (precisely the Church) to the encounter with the Bridegroom (Christ Himself). If the chauffeur wants to appropriate the Bride to himself and change the destination in an irreversible way, then he would be saying that he has substituted himself for the true Bridegroom. As if he were a Jesus II . ]
In fact, the mandate that Jesus gave to Peter and all his successors is not at all to change the Church (much less in an irreversible way) buton the contraryto conserve her (to conserve the depositum fidei, confirming the brethren in the faith) . The Popeby definitionis only a conservator, otherwise he is no longer the Pope. His ministry is to preserve intact the faith of the Church. Not to make of her a woman out on the street at the mercy of the world.
This Pope, Socci maintains, is in the process of attempting to change the Church from a supernatural institution whose mission is to save souls into a humanitarian agency which professes an entirely social and political religion, centered on mass immigration as the Summum Bonum, ecological catastrophism and an uncritical embrace of Islam. What Bergoglio is attempting is precisely the destructive process foretold by the atheist philosopher Feuerbach, who predicted that the Church would (per impossible) be destroyed through an irreversible transformation of Christianity into atheistic humanism, with the aid of Christians themselves, guided by a concept of charity that will have nothing to do with the Gospel.
And nowhere is Soccis most startling observationBergoglio seems intent on finding a way to eliminate or at least decommission the Roman Curia and even the College of Cardinals, both deemed non-essential by his right-hand man, Archbishop (the art of kissing) Tucho Fernandez, whom Bergoglio made a titular archbishop of a titular see as one of his first acts. This would leave the way open, in exceptional situations, for Bergoglio to name his own successor
rendering his revolution truly irreversible. Which possibility, believe it or not, Bergoglio is having studied on the pages of canon law.
By the way, whatever happened to the Humble Pope narrative with which this pontificate began? Perhaps the promoters of this con job on the Bergoglian PR team and their allies in the media have recognized that it has become too absurd to fool anyone except those who insist on being conned.
Is it possible, as Socci suggests, that we have underestimated the extent of the Bergoglian Debacle? God help us. God help His Holy Catholic Church. And may God deliver us and the Church from a Pope who is increasingly revealing himself to beone must say what has become obviousa clear and present danger to the Faith.
He’s an obtuse boor who will have accomplished nothing in his insignificant Papacy. Catholics don’t listen to this commie moron.
Really have to wonder if there was voter fraud at that conclave that elected the Argentine Marxist.
I just finished re-watching season 6 of Game of Thrones. I was again intriqued by home much the evil priest (called chief sparrow or something) looks like Francis. So much that I don’t think it was a coincidence.
The church is not a democracy. It’s a benevolent dictatorship. The people have no say. The pope is supreme.
If he cares, he’ll resign. I don’t expect him to. He’s too arrogant to admit he’s wrong.
I don't disbelieve this claim. It's entirely in character for the typical, egotistical South American El Lider Maximo who, upon attaining power, dismisses the Assembly or Parliament, proclaims himself leader for life, begins to eliminate all opposition and then anoints his own successor.
I’m still stuck at why Argentinians are conceited!
I don’t watch Game of Thrones but I thought Jonathan Pryce would be the man I’d cast and sure enough.
When he was elected Pope and took a very, very long time looking at the crowd below from the balcony before finally raising his arms in greeting, I had a very bad feeling.
How can a man of God stand there and profess something that directly opposes what Jesus Christ says?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.