Posted on 09/14/2018 4:43:15 AM PDT by marshmallow
That’s all very nice.
You won’t find me there.
It’s full of evil people.
The Pope is going to unveil a new rainbow cross.
It attracts sexy boys, has a low carbon footprint, and make the popes ass look smaller. Its a miracle!
The Pope says that cleaning up ocean plastic can save your soul.
He speaks as an abuser himself. I await the revelation that “Pope” Francis abused kids too. It’s only a matter of time.
I’ve been saying this for five years on occasional blogs. No one seems interested except those who disagree. Since you now provide a nice opening, I will repeat a few short points.
The most important fact is that Wuerl and McCarrick got Bergoglio elected. They strategized and, at the conclave, rallied the Cardinals. The reason for several votes is the choice was moving to Ouellet. He interrupted and said essentially, “Brothers, I’m honored, but if you elect me I will decline.”. They then gave O’s block of votes to B. That is the only thing that pushed Bergoglio into electable range. Prior, he was not seen as papabile except by Wuerl and McCarrick and their group.
note - No money, no blackmail, no bribery, no graft, was involved in this papal election (these men are savvy and super smart; do you really think they need to stoop to such barbaric methods?)
Bergoglio was elected to move the Church in the “progressive” direction. The Cardinals who gradually moved to support Bergoglio were motivated by a shared vision. No need to document it, you’ve seen it play out for years.
Not only do they believe the Church needs to get with the times and update old ideas - another anticipated benefit is the Church regaining status and prominence! The Church has slipped in the worldly scheme of things. If a Cardinal telephones someone in govt, media, education, religion and says, “Jump!” no longer does the recipient say, “How high?!”
Don’t believe this is only about power, it’s about effecting the good goals and Christian aims of the Catholic faith.
You don’t know anything about the Jesuits. That’s OK, most people don’t. There is no “rule” that a Jesuit may not be elevated to the papacy. You are probably referring to the words of the founder saint that it’s not recommended for them to be bishops because they have a different charism. But it was never forbidden.
Jack: "I won't go to your church. Your church is just full of hypocrites.Jill: "There's always room for one more."
Then another may go if they believe that something is there for them.
I have all that I need.
Seems like you are talking about each other, and both sides are guilty.
Ok. I need to clean up my act because I used bad words to describe the people who committed and covered up the molestation of kids for decades.
The Pope, like every good communist decides that the blame is everyone else’s fault but his. I’m a little tired of listening to my spiritual leaders talk about illegal immigration, Muslims, social justice etc...
The Catholic Church is largely run by sickos. We need a good house cleaning starting at the top.
“Put the Catholic Church back on the map.”
- a cardinal who lead the campaign for B.
I know enough. Ignacious didn’t want them to be Bishops. He left a convenient little loophole that says they aren’t supposed to aspire to be Bishops, but if they’re asked that’s ok.
They can break their vow, if such a circumstance arises. Wow.
There is that video clip of Bergoglio and his extremely weird “friend” Luigi C., the gay activist anti-mafia priest, sort of rough-handling an upset little boy.
It’s very short and you never can tell with film. This was the little kid afraid to tell a crowd that his father died.
Really? So why don't you POST the LINK to the video?
Yes, that may be the blessing in disguise in this mess.
Those who want a revolution in the Church, and organized to elect Bergoglio, became so confident that they are now exposed, as is their agenda.
One question that those revolutionaries will never answer is why they simply didn’t leave the Church. My guess is that they like the power and the cushy lifestyle that the upper tiers of Church hierarchy offer them. And if they happen to be active homosexuals, they can enjoy the atmosphere of the bathhouse that they have created.
I don’t think the bishops can fix this. It is up to the laity to drive these creeps out of the Church.
Whether there was blackmail and/or bribery involved remains to be seen.
I strongly suspect that financial malfeasance played a large role in Bergoglio’s election.
"The pontificate of Francis can, perhaps, best be understood as a political project. His election at the conclave in 2013 was—unbeknownst to the world at the time—the result of a campaign planned out in advance by four radical cardinals who saw then-cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio as the perfect vehicle for the revolution they wanted to launch within the church. (The story of how Cardinals Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Walter Kasper, Godfried Danneels, and Karl Lehmann formed “Team Bergoglio” is detailed in Austen Ivereigh’s worshipful biography of Francis, and even though the cardinals subsequently denied the account, their protestations are supremely unconvincing.)And on and on. You can read the rest at the Weekly Standard link above."As the Catholic News Agency reported at the time, this politicking wasn’t simply a matter of bad taste: The apostolic constitution, Universi Dominici gregis, expressly prohibits cardinals from forming pacts, agreements, promises, or commitments of any kind. Oh well.
"During his time on Peter’s throne, Francis has worked to dismantle many orthodox positions in an attempt to radically reorient the church toward -- by total coincidence -- the long-held preferences of those four radical cardinals. For instance..."
Here's what I can't figure out. There are men in positions of authority who know what we know. Abp Carlo Maria Viganò, Cardinal Raymond Burke, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Cardinal Gerhard Müller (wherever he is now): they know, and they know a great deal more.
Why do these, the best, hold their cards so close to the vest? What keeps them from saying what they know? Heck: what keeps Pope (possibly emeritus) Benedict from saying what *he* knows? Is Gänswein keeping him on Ambien and a short leash?
I can't help thinking I must be missing some fairly huge chunks of dispositive information here. I'd be willing to lay down in front of a Francis-freight train for any of the gentlemen mentioned above, if it would save their lives and help save the Church. Why don't they just spill all they know?
Or am I seriously in the wrong about what I think I "know"?
Priests take a vow of obedience, so they are in a hard place.
The RCC has faced several bouts of severe corruption during its 2,000+ year history. Perhaps it is time that the laity become more involved in its administration. We need to rethink the amount of power— which is not the same thing as religious authority— that rests in the hands of the Curia.
Or maybe they are all cut from the same cloth...some may be more on the edge of the cloth, but all from the same cloth.
Believe it or not, I a sympathetic to many of the arguments that traddies make.
What always turns me off is the holier than thou attitude that many of them have.
JPII and Benedict were/are holy men, but they were not perfect as Popes. We may not fully understand how they decided to handle internal corruption, which it is now clear they were aware of.
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.