FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: The Beginning of the End for Bergoglio and His Men?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Stumbled on this.

Interesting, but right now, I'm so overwhelmed with certain things, including my book launch, that I haven't been following recent Papal events as clearly as I'd ideally like.

So I ask: how true is all this? What do Fishies think?

The Desperate Hours - the Beginning of the End for Bergoglio and His Men?


In the last two days these events have transpired:

1. The Pope and his close allies have started to promote the narrative that opposition to the agenda of Amoris Laetitia is part of a vast right-wing conspiracy. The conspiracy involves American bloggers, English and Italian journalists, dusty Catholic periodicals, the leading Catholic media company, cyberattacks by quasi-anonymous "trolls" and those who spread "fake news." They're all part of the "right-wing propaganda machine."

2. The Pope used an incredibly vulgar metaphor to describe his opponents (or those who he identified as spreading "fake news"). In an interview he said they are either sexually excited by, or like eating...sh*t. Needless to say, this shocked many faithful Catholics. It wasn't a mistranslation.

3. In the same interview, the Pope apparently confirmed that Amoris Laetitia sanctioned communion for the divorced and remarried. This is notable in that while he has now said much the same thing in a quasi-private letter and now in that interview, he has refused to say it "officially." Indeed, one of his men threatened to "de-cardinalize" four cardinals who asked the question through official channels.

4. A well-known and respected Rome-based journalist and Vatican "insider" claimed that the Pope is asking various allies to defend Amoris Laetitia.

5. The Pope and/or his allies signaled through the anonymous site Pope news (reputed to be another sock-puppet of the Pope's "mouthpiece" Antonio Spadaro, or the equivalent) that he has lost the support of EWTN. The broadcast network is now apparently part of the right-wing conspiracy.

6. Three of the Pope's leading opponents (and yes, I think it's fair to describe them as that) - Cardinals Burke and Bradmuller and Bishop Athanasius Schneider - made a joint presentation in Rome. Schneider spoke of a "schism" that was already a de facto reality, and likened the current "climate of fear" within the Church to that of the Soviet regime of his earlier days. It's probable that they are attempting to line up support for a "correction" of the Pope. The Pope fears this.

In my last blog post I made a Humphrey Bogart reference, likening the Pope's "mouthpiece" Spadaro to Bogart's paranoid Captain Queeg in The Caine Mutiny. Bogart also starred in a film called The Desperate Hours about a family taken hostage by a desperate criminal (Bogart). It was a near thing but the criminal was finally defeated. I assume the "desperate" applied both to him and the members of that family.

Are we in the final reel of The Desperate Hours?

The Pope seems desperate and unhinged. Some of his allies (Spadaro, at the least) seem desperate and unhinged.  At precisely the same moment that Spadaro was commenting on the Pope's alleged patience and serenity, the Pope was lashing out at his "enemies," calling them sh*t eaters.

The Pope.

They're desperate. Does this mean a bright morning for the Catholics and the Catholic Church is about to dawn? No. Sorry to say it but desperate men sometimes win. Or even if they lose they manage to do a lot of damage. Hitler was defeated, but ask Europe whether that process was pleasant.

And no, I'm not equating Bergoglio with Hitler. Hitler was a mass-murderer but as far as I know he didn't care one way or another about anyone's soul.

Bergoglio does. He wants to drag you with him to...well, you know very well where he wants to drag you to. You won't let him. And you will do all you can to prevent him from dragging others there.

But be on your guard. Cornered animals fight hardest when they are injured.

Desperate hours indeed.   


Link: http://mahoundsparadise.blogspot.co.uk/2...nning.html
Sure hope so!

Bergoglio and Hillary Clinton attack "fake news" (a.k.a. independent citizen journalists exposing the different facets of the new world Luciferian agenda) at just
about the same time.

My my, it is like they are reading from the same George Soros script or something........

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powe...042e43667f

Surely just a coincidence.

I read something the other day on social media where someone commented in response to a recent photo of Pope Benedict. I can't remember exactly how he worded it, but it was to the effect of, "I never would have thought this a year ago, but now that it's becoming increasingly likely that Pope Benedict is in fact the true Pope and the only Pope currently..."

I found that comment intriguing in light of recent events. I'm starting to find myself swayed by that line of thinking as well....
(12-09-2016, 11:48 AM)PrairieMom Wrote: [ -> ]I read something the other day on social media where someone commented in response to a recent photo of Pope Benedict. I can't remember exactly how he worded it, but it was to the effect of, "I never would have thought this a year ago, but now that it's becoming increasingly likely that Pope Benedict is in fact the true Pope and the only Pope currently..."

I found that comment intriguing in light of recent events. I'm starting to find myself swayed by that line of thinking as well....

That is the conclusion Ann Barnhardt came to earlier this year, as are many others:

http://www.barnhardt.biz/2016/06/19/voce...-stranger/
(12-09-2016, 04:43 AM)Roger Buck Wrote: [ -> ]The Desperate Hours - the Beginning of the End for Bergoglio and His Men?

2. The Pope used an incredibly vulgar metaphor to describe his opponents (or those who he identified as spreading "fake news"). In an interview he said they are either sexually excited by, or like eating...sh*t. Needless to say, this shocked many faithful Catholics. It wasn't a mistranslation.

Link: http://mahoundsparadise.blogspot.co.uk/2...nning.html

Also, that is not the first time Bergoglio has used such an obscure and perverse terminology, either.

https://akacatholic.com/francis-desensit...erversion/
(12-09-2016, 01:06 PM)BC Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-09-2016, 11:48 AM)PrairieMom Wrote: [ -> ]I read something the other day on social media where someone commented in response to a recent photo of Pope Benedict. I can't remember exactly how he worded it, but it was to the effect of, "I never would have thought this a year ago, but now that it's becoming increasingly likely that Pope Benedict is in fact the true Pope and the only Pope currently..."

I found that comment intriguing in light of recent events. I'm starting to find myself swayed by that line of thinking as well....

That is the conclusion Ann Barnhardt came to earlier this year, as are many others:

http://www.barnhardt.biz/2016/06/19/voce...-stranger/

Thanks for the link!

(my face after reading it -  Confused)
                                                                              Just my own feeling, but I think Francis may have reaffirmed the ban on homosexual oriented priests the other day in an attempt to keep support for the 4 Cardinals from growing.
(12-09-2016, 03:34 PM)Eric F Wrote: [ -> ]                                                                              Just my own feeling, but I think Francis may have reaffirmed the ban on homosexual oriented priests the other day in an attempt to keep support for the 4 Cardinals from growing.

It's hard to take such a ban as anything other than cynical posturing if it is not accompanied by concrete actions to suspend and probably laicize those already ordained as priests and bishops who defile their office with sexual misdeeds. The ancient canons required this; somewhere along the way we started giving very wide latitude to clerical malfeasance. The ancient Church taught, as St. Paul taught, that men who dare to receive ordination should be above reproach. It opens the Church's salvific mission open to ridicule and undermines its saving mission to have so many clergymen fooling around. A ban is fine in itself, but there is a not-insignificant number of men already ordained causing scandal.
We know what Catholic teaching is on mortal sin, adultery, the need to have a firm purpose of amendment for a valid confession, and reception of the Sacraments while continuing to sin. More importantly, God knows, and He won't allow His Church to teach otherwise. If it gets to the point where the Pope tries to do so, He'll handle the matter.
(12-09-2016, 04:51 PM)aquinas138 Wrote: [ -> ][quote='Eric F' pid='1330294' dateline='1481312094']It's hard to take such a ban as anything other than cynical posturing if it is not accompanied by concrete actions to suspend and probably laicize those already ordained as priests and bishops who defile their office with sexual misdeeds. The ancient canons required this; somewhere along the way we started giving very wide latitude to clerical malfeasance. The ancient Church taught, as St. Paul taught, that men who dare to receive ordination should be above reproach. It opens the Church's salvific mission open to ridicule and undermines its saving mission to have so many clergymen fooling around. A ban is fine in itself, but there is a not-insignificant number of men already ordained causing scandal.

I would imagine there are some bishops who would like to do that, but if they did, they would be unable to staff their parishes. If my diocese had 30 more good priests, then the ones who weren't so good, many of whom I suspect are homosexuals, then the ones my former bishop didn't push into retirement would probably be encouraged to retire or loaned to other dioceses that want them. As it is, priests are stretched way too thin. They simply cannot be stretched any further.  I've seen what happens when priests are truly stretched too far. It doesn't end well. The bishops either have to wait it out and get new priests, which my diocese is doing very well at these days, or they have to close a bunch of parishes. To a good bishop, closing parishes really should be a last resort. It is much easier for a parish to recover from a bad priest than it is for a parish to be re-established.
Pages: 1 2