Sidebar
Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

The Man Who Had To Be Elected Pope

Mission accomplished. After four years of pontificate, this is the assessment that has been made by the cardinals who brought Jorge Mario Bergoglio to election as pope.

The operation that produced the Francis phenomenon arises from a long time ago, as far back as 2002, when for the first time “L’Espresso” discovered and wrote that the then little-known archbishop of Buenos Aires had leapt to the top of the candidates for the papacy, the real ones, not the figureheads.

It laid the groundwork at the conclave of 2005, when it was to none other than Bergoglio that all the votes were funneled from those who did not want Joseph Ratzinger as pope.

And it came into port at the conclave of 2013, to a large extent because many of his electors still knew very little about that Argentine cardinal, and certainly not that he would deal the Church that “punch in the stomach” spoken of a few days ago by his rival defeated in the Sistine Chapel, Milan archbishop Angelo Scola.

Between Bergoglio and his great electors there was not and is not full agreement. He is the pope of proclamations more than of realizations, of allusions more than of definitions.

There is however one key factor that meets the expectations of a historic turning point of the Church capable of making up for its emblematic lag of “two hundred years” with respect to the modern world that was denounced by Carlo Maria Martini, the cardinal who loved to call himself the “ante-pope,” meaning the anticipator of the one who was to come. And it is the factor of “time.” Which for Bergoglio is a synonym for “initiating processes.” The destination matters little to him, because what counts is the journey.

And in effect it is so. With Francis the Church has become an open construction site. Everything is in movement. Everything is fluid. There is no longer dogma that holds up. One can reexamine everything and act accordingly.

Martini was precisely the sharpest mind of that club of St. Gallen which engineered Bergoglio’s rise to the papacy. It took its name from the Swiss town in which the club met, and included the cardinals Walter Kasper, Karl Lehmann, Achille Silvestrini, Basil Hume, Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Godfried Danneels. Of these only two, Kasper and Danneels, are still at the forefront, rewarded and treated with the highest regard by Pope Francis, in spite of the fact that they represent two national Churches in disarray, the German and the Belgian, and the latter even fell into discredit in 2010 for how he tried to cover up the sexual misdeeds of one of his protege bishops, whose victim was a young nephew of his.

Bergoglio never set foot in St. Gallen. It was the cardinals of the club who adopted him as their ideal candidate, and he adapted himself perfectly to their plan.

Everyone in Argentina remembers him very differently from how he later revealed himself to the world as pope. Taciturn, withdrawn, somber in expression, reserved even with crowds. Not once did he let slip a word or a gesture of disagreement with the reigning pontiffs, John Paul II and Benedict XVI. On the contrary. He praised in writing the encyclical “Veritatis Splendor,” very severe against the permissive “situational” ethics historically attributed to the Jesuits. He had no qualms over condemning Luther and Calvin as the worst enemies of the Church and of man. He attributed to the devil the deception of a law in favor of homosexual marriage.

But then he sent back home, “to avoid mixed messages,” the Catholics who had gathered outside of parliament for a prayer vigil against the imminent approval of that law. He knelt and had himself blessed in public by a Protestant pastor. He forged friendships with some of them, and also with a Jewish rabbi.

Above all he encouraged his priests not to deny communion to anyone, whether they be married, or cohabiting, or divorced and remarried. With no fuss and without making this decision public, the then-archbishop of Buenos Aires was already doing what the popes at the time prohibited, but he would later permit once he became pope.

In St. Gallen they knew and were taking note. And when Bergoglio was elected, the world learned to recognize him right from the first moment for what he really was. With no more veils.

_________

This commentary was published in “L’Espresso” no. 13 of 2017 on newsstands April 2, on the opinion page entitled “Settimo cielo” entrusted to Sandro Magister.

Here is the index of all the previous commentaries:

> “L’Espresso” in seventh heaven

__________

One crucial moment of the calculated advancement of Jorge Mario Bergoglio to the papacy was the final document of the general conference of Latin American bishops in Aparecida, in 2007.

The main author of the document was the archbishop of Buenos Aires at the time, who still continues today, as pope, to recommend it as a valid program for the Church not only in Latin America but all over the world.

Curiously, however, in the paragraphs dedicated to marriage and family there is no reference in the Aparecida document to the “openness” that Bergoglio would later implement as pope, and was already practicing, de facto, in his diocese of Buenos Aires.

In the almost 300 pages of the document, only a few lines concern communion for the divorced and remarried, on which he gives this guideline, in paragraph 437:

“Accompany with care, prudence and compassionate love, following the guidelines of the magisterium (‘Familiaris Consortio’ 84; ‘Sacramentum Caritatis’ 29), couples who live together out of wedlock, bearing in mind that those who are divorced and remarried may not receive communion.”

And in the previous paragraph it states, concerning the support given to policies against life and the family:

“We must adhere to ‘eucharistic coherence,’ that is, be conscious that they cannot receive holy communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments, and health professionals (‘Sacramentum Caritatis’ 83; ‘Evangelium Vitae’ 74, 74, 89).”

This is what Bergoglio wrote in 2007. But his mind was already elsewhere: on the conviction – criticized by Benedict XVI – that “the Eucharist is not a prize for the perfect but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak,” comparable to the meals of Jesus with sinners.

With the practical consequences that he had already drawn as bishop and would later draw as pope.

(English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.)

This article originally appeared at L’Espresso. It has been reprinted with the permission of the author.

185 thoughts on “The Man Who Had To Be Elected Pope”

  1. “And it came into port at the conclave of 2013, to a large extent because many of his electors still knew very little about that Argentine cardinal”

    Seriously? Have these cardinals *still* not heard of the freaking internet??

    Reply
    • Oh yes, of course, all the cardinal electors should have said; O.K., let’s do a Google search on Bergoglio, and there we are sure to find a wealth of accurate information on which to base our deliberations.” Somehow, I think not!

      Reply
      • You’re kind of missing my point, though I admit to venting my spleen. Is there really any excuse in an age of modern communication, for not knowing much about a prelate? How do journalists manage to get info? Telephone etc. I’m only saying that if you’re going to – you know – elect a Pope, you might try some due diligence.

        Reply
        • I often wondered if the reason so many cardinals are remaining silent in their support of Cardinal Burke, is that they realize that they ” should have known better”, and are feeling guilty, or perhaps they knew and liked what they saw or heard of Francis, while archbishop. They goofed big time!

          Reply
        • I take your point. Most of the cardinal electors who helped to install Bergoglio were motivated solely by their antipathy towards Pope Benedict XVI.

          Reply
          • I appreciate the frivolity. It’s refreshing! But referring to the profound antipathy of many cardinals towards Pope Benedict, I suspect that some, at least, didn’t want to see past that. It was possibly a matter of; “Anyone would be better than Ratzinger.” There would have been nothing ‘Holy” about the spirit to whom they were docile.

          • And such an antipathy falls precisely within the prohibitions the Pope John Paul II listed in Universi Dominici Gregis

          • Am I mistaken, or does actively lobbying for the election of a particular candidate incur a latae sententiae excommunication? Because, if so, Carlo Maria Martini had cut himself off from the Church, and such would have been his status when he died.

          • A wolf like Martini needs no excommunication: He was excommunicated by the Holy Spirit at whatever age he became a reprobate.

    • He was fairly unknown so very little would come up. For example, when my diocese got a new bishop a few years ago I looked him up. There was very little about him. There’s still very little about him, and I can find nothing about his views on various points of orthodox faith. And I’m in a fairly important archdiocese (not a cardinalatial see though).

      Reply
        • I prefer to stay more or less anonymous as to my location and name on Disqus, for a variety of reasons. I’ll say it’s in the US. With a bit of research it’s not too hard to narrow it down to just a couple possibilities.

          Reply
    • 1) If I recall correctly, a few years back, a Vatican media outlet lifted a profile of a prelate from Wikipedia.

      2) A Bishop ought to know his priests and a pope the bishops (and cardinals). But they are all human. What is a pope to do really when for example, his nuncio/those around the pope have already gone over to the dark side but outwardly appear orthodox [after all the last person to know is usually the cuckold]?

      In one parish here on the islands, a priest would educate us [vs. remind us] on e.g., bowing before receving the Eucharist just because the Bishop was visiting. And after the Bishop left he would tell us during the homily how glad he was the Bishop was now gone. … All for show/appearances.

      3) How to ensure a pope/prelate is the Holy Spirit’s choice? Adopt how Matthias was chosen to replace Judas. And it started with vetted candidates put forward who fulfilled certain criteria and then lots were cast.

      Reply
  2. An opportunist, a schemer and a liar, as are the individuals who manipulated their confreres into electing an opportunist, a schemer and a liar.

    Reply
    • Yes, exactly. I felt a visceral current of true fear when reading it. I do not see that there is more than a hairs-breadth left now of belief that any of this is anything but an outright, absolute sedition. No more time or place to allow it might have even a small amount of well-meaning or delusion or accident in it. It is deliberate. All that is left is a choice between that, and mental illness.

      Reply
  3. Interesting. Thanks for the great article and background on the Pope. In reading some of his papal writings, it seems to me he is trying to please everyone by speaking out of both sides of his mouth, as they say. I’m reminded of something my grandfather would say “Never play fast and loose with the truth”. Might apply to this pontificate.

    Reply
      • This is so simple true! And it’s even worse. When has he tried to please Triune God really?
        Because of all this,… he is not just one of the bad popes. He is so untrue! He is so false! He is destroyer! He is FP!

        Reply
        • I agree his mission it seems is to destroy our holy church our RCC, I held out for a long time in his favour but that’s impossible now. Does he want a Protestant Jewish Muslim faith with some novus Ordo mixed in that’s is what it seems. Many say & I believe we were prewarned this would all happen. All we can do is practice the real Catholic faith & stand firm against Francis & his people even if this means a massive schism.

          Reply
          • “Does he want a Protestant Jewish Muslim faith with some novus Ordo mixed in that’s is what it seems.”
            You’ve said it. That’s exactly what he is doing today. But that plan is not from yesterday. And that plan is not just his own. We know from who that comes. From those who will destroy so many souls as possible, because he knows very good that he can not destroy the Church of Christ.
            It is just too obvious that they are those who try to make another church, one of this world to this world, for some humans, as they are, but without God.
            They keep just our buildings occupied, but they cannot take from me my Faith in our Lord the Son Jesus Christ, our Lord the Father, together with the Lord Holy Spirit. They are already in such state which is much more than just ‘schism’. Not we! But they are, all those heretics who are now finally exposed, because they are blind and deaf and with their harden hearts they stupidly think that they posses the power. But they are so deeply wrong, and they will get their deserved reward.

            We should remain faithful. And pray holy Rosary. A lot.
            Our Lady is a great sign in the sky that leads the Christian troops in the battle against Satan. She is a victory in all God’s battles. Especially at the end of time it will be a last resort given by God to the world. It is already prophesied in a secret revelation:
            “And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” (Rev 12,1)

            “Through Mary began salvation of the world, through Mary will be completed.” (St. Louis Marie Grignion Montfort)

        • I really don’t think PF believes in Sanctifying Grace?
          He then, must not truly believe in the Incarnation, in my way of thinking?
          How could he? For did not Christ die so that man could be redeemed?
          And then this “Spirit” that Francis talks about, is not the Holy Ghost, the Third Person of God. It is but a “new age” type of connotation, I fear.

          The signs are becoming more and more troublesome.

          He is really such a bad Catholic, and is to be feared. It is becoming harder to pray for him.
          I do feel bad about this. But, it seems he has become dead from within, and when I go to pray for him, I am left more anxious, more confused and less at peace.

          Reply
          • I’m afraid your thoughts are correct.
            He said once in a public presentation that the “Way of the Cross of Jesus” was a failure of Christ.
            You can find this presentation of him on internet.
            I cannot even pray for him as person. I pray for CHURCH of Christ. That’s my most important intention.
            Because the Church of Christ represents all of us who are a part of His Mystical Body.
            If I pray so, then I am sure that I am praying for right things and right people, all those who really belongs to Christ’s Mystical Body, our Holy Catholic Church.
            If you feel that way when you pray for that purpose, I suggest you to change your intention too.
            There is also one thing more, imagine, if BXVI is still the real one who should be called as a pope, which is not impossible,… than what is it worth to pray for him or those who are … what ever they are, but certainly are the biggest enemies of the Christ.
            And we know that enemies of the Christ are against Christ, and so they may be called the antichrists.

          • Thank you kindly for your response. I have’t the heart to look up this video whereby the pope has said such an awful thing as this.

            It is best to keep my eyes Above, and pray for Christ’s Church and all those who strive to follow Him in His Church. For an enemy of Christ is dead already.

          • CS, we can only pray that God’s will be done, whatever that is, for Pope Francis. Certainly, God’s will for the pope is not contrary to all that is good, true, and beautiful.

          • I think his goal is a “religion of man”; a hodgepodge of everything for the greater glory of humanity (which can’t even gets its act together sufficiently to stop killing one another).

            I’m not so sure he even believes in God let alone the Incarnation. Oh; but he nust — his mentor does.

      • He has said just enough orthodox sounding things that all the Francis Fanboys (and Girls) can latch onto and throw back at us when we reluctantly but dutifully point out the 1,234th instance of heresy

        Reply
        • The key phrase here is “orthodox SOUNDING”. The “best” or most believable lies are those that are mixed with truth. See his writings. Also re-read the VCIi documents. It is thus mixture that got modernism into the Church in the first place.

          Reply
          • The man’s a joke but not funny; complete mess. I’ve heard children make more sense. He’s either being directly manipulated by the Author of Lies & Confusion, or Satan is just sitting back & enjoying the show (or both…).

  4. And I still hear it said: “He’s being misrepresented.” “The press aren’t giving accurate translations of what he said.” “You nasty people are being mean to Pope Francis – you call yourselves Catholics, but all the world loves him and he’s done more for the Catholic Church than all the popes before him.”

    It really makes me wonder what it will take to wake people up? I guess if people are so stupid that they still listen to this fraud, then they deserve what he gives them. Perhaps there is something to Darwinism after all.

    Reply
    • I think the Pope’s faults are written in such bold type they are unmistakable. Those who defend him as you describe are more likely his allies who are wide awake and know exactly that they’re doing.

      Reply
      • I’ve thought about that myself. That maybe it’s really NOT denial or blindness, but maybe it’s corroboration with his anti Catholicism.

        Reply
      • That isn’t true in the cases I know of. I have friends, some who even attend Latin Mass, who are regular Pollyannas. I don’t believe these people are less than sincere Catholics. But their blindness staggers me.

        Reply
      • Actually the people I have in mind are not scheming malicious modernists – they are the kind of people who see Jesus’ face in toast, St. Padre Pio appearing in drying paint and the “hand of God” being manifested in cloud formations. You know, good old superstitious Catholics who pray the Rosary, adore the Blessed Sacrament, bait Protestants and send 1,000+ Whatsapp messages and holy images to my phone every day so that I have to keep the cursed thing on charge all the time.

        They are only “his allies” to the extent that he is the Pope and they worship him because of that. If they actually got it into their heads even 1/10th of the things he really says and does, their faith would be totally crushed. I suppose the pertinent question is: “How do you jolt such people out of their naivety and child-like trust in such an evil, manipulative human being without doing them serious mental/spiritual damage???”

        Reply
        • Sounds like several people I know. Its bloody hard. Usually keep my mouth shut because its very frustrating & I usually make things worse. Pray to Our Lady of Sorrows for their, & your, emotional / spiritual / intellectual clarity of all types, & to our Almighty Father for graces & (real) mercy, through Christ our Saviour.
          (Plus these people buy the “5 Minutes in Heaven” & “7 Minutes in Heaven” & “Touched by an Angel” & The Lady Who Talks to Angels” & “The Lady Who Talked to Angels for 9 Minutes in Heaven” & they are just dying for YOU to read them TOO!!!)
          (And the worst…”the Pope is SO nice!” which makes me want to claw my eyeballs out.)

          Reply
          • My personal favorite:
            “He is bringing SO MANY souls back to God!”
            (an actual Facebook response to something I said about the Pope) :-/

          • Whoever said/wrote that hasn’t read or cared about the actual statistics. The latest I saw was that for every person coming into the Church (either a newborn, a convert or returning) there are six+ that leave (Pew Research).

          • And sadly, many of those babies won’t be back, except maybe for a brief visit at First Communion time.

          • Yeah…I’ve stopped arguing with said person. She has a legion of Francis Fangirls (mostly, some boys) who dogpile on any negative comment about the Holy Father with an unbelievable level of snark. I’m reasonable certain she’s living in a state of grace, so I just let her be now.

        • You don’t.

          As long as they are not committing mortal sin but remaining in a state of grace, you let them be and pray that God will reveal the Truth to them. It’s far too hard to convince them.

          I was afraid my parents were going to be that way so I did not bring anything negative about Francis up around them. Then, as we were eating lunch before my flight home after Christmas, my dad finally asked my thoughts. I responded as charitably and truthfully as I could and to my overjoyed surprise, he agreed with me (as did my mom, though less vocally)!

          My wife and I don’t discuss such things.

          Reply
    • Perhaps there is something to Darwinism after all

      Nah. Secular protestantism (classical liberalism) + theological modernism = operation of error.

      Reply
  5. Our poor, dear Mother, the Bride of Christ! How She must ache to have been betrayed by those who claimed to love Her! If these men who accept the title of Cardinal do not love the Church, why do they stay? Pope Benedict warned us of “professional Catholics”. At the time, I thought he was mainly referring to lay people who worked for the Church in chanceries and parishes and were scheming to gain more influence with the hierarchy. How dreadful that those who are sons of Our Lady would betray the Lord and His Church by being scheming men themselves.

    Reply
    • They ‘stay’ because their mission is to destroy the Church. It’s that simple. They wouldn’t even think of leaving the Church until their mission is accomplished.

      Reply
      • Only thing is, they can never accomplished their mission in full meaning of their plan.
        No one can destroy the mystical Body of God himself.
        The enemy of Christ have right now maybe the best trump-card ever, but they all ultimately will fail.
        The question is only, who wil fail with them too, and who will resist and remain faithful till end.
        It will be not easy. It is already everything but easy. But who stick with his daily Rosary prayers, he makes a biggest chance to resist all evil.
        As our Lady already said exactly 100 years ago: “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph!”

        Reply
        • The enemies of Christ and His Church are from the same mold as Hitler. Like him, they and their “king” (Satan) will fight on even though the war was lost when Jesus gave up His spirit on the cross.

          Reply
  6. Clerics, in the past used to say the building is not the Church… now they say the
    Holy Eucharist is not a prize……did any Catholic think it was.? …ever?

    Reply
    • From start to finish Frankenpope’s theology is built upon demolishing straw-men. Evangelii gaudium, Laudato si, Amoris laetitia are all chock full of straw-men, false dichotomies and non sequiturs. The man is an affront to rational thought.

      Reply
  7. I thought it is forbidden to do any kind of planning ahead about who will be elected.
    Not that it hasn’t likely happened many times…

    Reply
      • The law regarding elections doesn’t invalidate an election based upon this kind of planning. Specifically, the law states that the election is valid unless the procedure outlined in the law is not followed. Maneuvering doesn’t have any specific penalty attached to it… unfortunately.

        Reply
    • It was NOT by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, it was by the political maneuvering of the modernists in the form of the club of St. Gallen. Therefore, the validity of his selection is questionable.

      Reply
      • “But this command I gave them, ‘Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people; and walk in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you.’ But they did not obey or incline their ear, but walked in their own counsels and the stubbornness of their evil hearts, and went backward and not forward. From the day that your fathers came out of the land of Egypt to this day, I have persistently sent all my servants the prophets to them, day after day; yet they did not listen to me, or incline their ear, but stiffened their neck. They did worse than their fathers.

        “So you shall speak all these words to them, but they will not listen to you. You shall call to them, but they will not answer you. And you shall say to them, ‘This is the nation that did not obey the voice of the Lord their God, and did not accept discipline; truth has perished; it is cut off from their lips.

        Cut off your hair and cast it away;
        raise a lamentation on the bare heights,
        for the Lord has rejected and forsaken
        the generation of his wrath.’”
        (Jeremiah 7,23-29)

        Reply
      • An election cannot conceivably be judged invalid on the grounds that it was not guided by the Holy Spirit!

        Aside from the absolute absence of evidence in any particular case, the notion that the Holy Spirit chooses the Pope is a superstition.

        Reply
        • Its not superstition to believe in the Holy Ghost nor in one’s guardian angel. Both guide, and both can be (stupidly) ignored.

          Reply
        • The Holy Spirit guides the Church. But there are those who have failed to respond.
          There are rebels in the Church, and fools who wear red!
          It is called free will.

          Reply
      • The Holy Spirit is always present to the Church. However, in casting their ballots for pope, the cardinal electors are free to disregard the guidance of the Holy Spirit!

        Reply
      • I think, unfortunately, that the election of Pope Francis was, in fact, valid. It’s validity is not determined by whether or not the Holy Spirit picked Bergoglio or not, because the Holy Spirit does not really pick the Pope.

        If He did, He’s got a lot of explaining to do for the 9th and 10th centuries and the Renaissance…

        Reply
    • What do you mean specifically by illegal? Are you referring to the pre-conclave puppeteering? ‘Cuz yeah, that was definitely illegal.

      Reply
  8. The more I read about the Pope in his prior existence as the unknown Archbishop of Buenos Aires, the more I begin to understand. It’s very simple: as a typical Modernist, he will talk out of both sides of his mouth. But, he will talk more out of his left. And Our Lord tell us that the left are the goats who are cast into everlasting fire. That’s why they are called the left. So, stay right!

    Remember, Bergoglio once said: put the indicator on right but turn left. Yeah: talk as the Orthodox, do as the Modernist.

    Reply
  9. One of the flow-on effects of this Pontificate is the situation of trust – who to trust? Who to listen to? Whilst we can consult the great deceased Popes of the past and various other deceased theologians, there’s still a personal judgment involved in choosing. then there’s the need for a prudential judgment too which legitimately follows Christ’s instruction to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves, and Jesus is not advocating reckless trust. Jesus set the Church up with a Pope because we need one. The Pope was meant to be our safety line to the Apostolic Faith. Without a Pope being a good Pope, we are without a necessary pillar of support. The only solution I think has to be we become Saints, living more in the spiritual realm than in this, so we become so sensitised to the inspirations of the Holy Spirit that He leads us to trustworthy Prelates. It’s still a fraught situation, really unsatisfactory.

    Reply
    • Remember well what Jesus said about His Church when Peter revealed his faith in Jesus as the Son of God. “The gates of hell will not prevail against it.” There will always be a remnant. There will be a correction of some type. It may not be in our lifetimes, but it will come in some way. It also may not happen as we might imagine. For example, the correction may take the form of the Second Coming and the Last Day. Hold fast to your faith!.

      Reply
      • I’m afraid, the correction will cost blood, and a lot of blood. The great corrector is already here: the multitudes from the Middle East who are just ready to pounce. The followers of the Bearded One from Medina, his last place..

        Reply
        • The correction will be for sure in the form of punishment. We, children of God are guilty for decades for so many things. We’ve turned our back to Lord for longer time. Especially we, western Christians. And, like in ancient time when God’s people deserves punishment, they’ve got it right by the most pagan people. Think here on Philistines, Babylonians, Egyptians …

          Reply
          • Yes, and this is what I fear too. God has at His disposal many ways, and I think this time it will be Muslims, with their strong discipline and zeal…as you say, before there were the Babylonians, Egyptians…and now I think it may be the Muslims. It is proficient to follow this possibility…

    • Pope Benedict XVI [as Cardinal Ratzinger]:
      “Maybe we are facing a new and different kind of epoch in the Church’s history, where Christianity will again be characterized more by the mustard seed, where it will exist in small, seemingly insignificant groups that nonetheless live an intense struggle against evil and bring good into the world — that let God in. … Some day the West will tire of secularism and spiritual loneliness. And they will discover the little community of believers as something quite new, as a hope that is there for them, as the answer they have always been looking for.”

      Reply
      • Wow, & thanks for posting –
        key words: “intense struggle”…

        &, “… they have always been looking for…” , because, we all want to be with God & truth, some just don’t know. Yet.

        Reply
        • C2, I cling tenaciously to these words of the Pope Emeritus, grateful for the acknowledgment that things *are* as bad as they seem and may get worse, but that we — or our Church Militant heirs — *must* and *will* be here when the smoke of Satan clears!

          Reply
    • Ah, yes, “extra SSPV/SSPX/Sanborn nulla salus”. Donatus tried it 1600 years ago. Didn’t work then, won’t work now. To love when all goes well is easy. To do so when times are hard is the real challenge.

      Reply
      • It is NOT the Church we decry. It is the intentional damage being done to her and the perversions foisted upon her with th e goal of rendering her incapable of savings souls — which is her primary mission given by Christ. It is the minions of the demon we oppose.

        Reply
    • Earlier than that in that it took time for Satan to get all his pieces in place. Even the 1962 editions of the Roman Missal and the Divine Office contain some modernist elements. The last pope untainted by the heresy of modernism was Pius XI.

      Reply
    • A new religion does seem to be trying to birth itself from within the Catholic Church for some decades, more than a century really. But it’s still the Catholic Church, with all the good that comes with it. Unfortunately, humans are involved, so there are problems. And of course Satan is attacking and we’re in, as Bishop Schneider puts it, the Fourth Great Crisis of the Church. But it’s still the Catholic Church.

      Reply
  10. I believed Pope Francis and many others simply view the Church as only a pure political institution. If this is the case may God have mercy. May we pray for his conversion and the sanctity of the Church, the living body of Christ.

    Reply
    • I cannot be sede, for I believe John Paul II truly was a Pope IN SPITE of Assissi. He truly loved Jesus Christ and pointed to him continually – he against the hatred of the modernists brought in a graceful Catechism, outlasted the mafia is the Vatican Bank and removed them, brought in the mandatum for colleges, rebuked liberation theology, wrote some of the finest encyclicals ever penned, and passed Universi Dominici Gregis which forebade the St Gallen Group if we would follow it! And Benedict likewise: he loved Jesus Christ, he saved the orthodox high ANglicans and brought back “The Mass” of the ages. I think we owe a debt of gratitude to Marcel Lefebvre therefore and I do NOT believe he would join up when Bergoglio is reigning!

      Reply
  11. This article is disingenuous, to say the least. To be deep in history is to realize that politics have often played a role in Papal elections, even in the election of Saint Pius X.

    While Francis is not a perfect Pope (what we need soon is another Pius XI!) these disenchanted rumblings sound eerily like the cries of Hillary supporters who cannot accept that Trump won, and who need a safe space in which to grumble.

    Reply
    • Francis is an awful pope who is doing everything he can (out of malice or ignorance, I’m not truly sure which if I’m honest) to destroy the catholic faith. This is a problem, a big one. Of course politics play a role in Papal elections. They’re elections. But to disregard the article and call it disingenuous simply because you don’t like the tone is rather silly, don’t you think?

      Reply
      • Well, awful or not, the fact is that a counterfactual (“What if Scola was Pope”) is not going to accomplish much. For better or worse, Francis is Pope, and short of going down the rabbit hole of Sedevacantism, we can’t really change that. Our time would be better spent answering this question: what, then, must be done?

        Reply
        • What’s to be done? He needs to be corrected and even deposed, that’s exactly what needs to be done. Why do you think there was a ‘conference’ in the middle of March on the very subject of ‘How to depose a sitting Pope?’ This guy does not even display general Christianity, let alone Catholicism, but the powers that be haven’t yet figured out how to effectively depose him. In the meantime, anyone who professes the Catholic faith cannot follow him. What true Catholic in his right mind would follow a ‘Pope’ that encourages humanism and pagan earth worship?

          And to reply to Jafin’s question about his motives being either malice or ignorance? No way can this guy be ignorant of the true Catholic faith. He knows all too well what the faith entails, but is purposely trying to destroy it. He’s made too many ‘proclamations’ that are truly Catholic to try and pretend he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. A mental illness maybe? I don’t know, but I do know that there are instances that professionals and churchmen have a hard time differentiating a mental condition with diabolic activity. He probably needs a full medical evaluation, both physical AND mental, but he won’t get it because the heretics he’s surrounded himself with LOVE what he’s doing, which tells me he knows exactly what he’s doing.

          Reply
        • He is not a true pope. He is antichrist. What can be done? First, pray and do penance. Second, educate our fellow “Catholics” on the authentic, orthodox doctrines and teachings of the faith. Third, make e our voices heard AND LISTENED to by the hierarchy to return to orthodoxy. And fourth, loudly and insistently demand the removal of Francis and his replacement with one who is truly faithful to Christ AND His Chucrch.

          Reply
          • “Children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come; therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be plain that they all are not of us. But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all know. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and know that no lie is of the truth.”
            (1 John 2,18-21)
            There are too many antichrists today. The safest way is trough Maria to Christ.
            “Through Mary began salvation of the world, through it will be completed.” (St. Louis Marie Grignion Montfort)

    • the problem, professore, is that the shepherd is a wolf. I think the article above is a fair evaluation of his papacy. Nihil novum of course…there were dreadful popes in the past. But precisely of these experiences, the Church learned a lot. And, now, due a smart trickery which has not a parallel in the (to me known) history we have this man in the charge of the barge of Peter. God save us!

      Reply
      • No. I have it in very good authority that Pius XI was not tainted by modernism. He may have been duped — after all most didn’t come out of the closet unril just before VCII But he wasn’t tainted. The oath against modernism was by his instigation.

        Reply
  12. Our Lord prayed earnestly and long that His flock be unified; that we be one as He and the Father are one. Francis has done more to create division in the Church than anyone before. Luther, Calvin and the anabaptists didin’t cause as much disunity because they left and other disaffected persons joined them. THIS, the current disunity and disarray is, at its very roots, satanic. The modernists have even stated publicly that with the previous revolt the protestors separated from the Church, “but we are staying…” Satan has recognized his mistake and has modified his strategy. He is well aware that if anything will destroy the Church it is destroying the underlying faith coupled with disunity. This is the goal of Bergoglio’s selection. And, unless God intervenes soon, Satan will achieve that goal. We all need to pray and do penance constantly and diligently for the purging of modernism and its supporters and adherents from the Church. Offer, at least in part, every Rosary, every Divine Mercy Chaplet, every valid Mass, every Communion for this intent and Francis’ conversion.

    Reply
  13. With Bergoglio, we have the end of the Alta Vendita’s stated aim to have one of their own, or someone aligned with them, as Pope.

    Apocalyptic times we live in Comrades.

    Prayer and penance.

    Reply
  14. We have a Pope in name only: PINO. Nothing he says about our Catholic faith can be considered binding. He speaks for himself, the St. Galen group, George Soros, and, if you will, the devil. But let us not lose heart. God would not have permitted this outrage if our greater good would not be the result. Have faith. This too will end. Pray for Pope Francis and ourselves that we maintain faith and sobriety during these difficult times.

    Reply
  15. Heretic Pope who deceived his way into power. But he doesn’t fool God. He will eventually fail and fall. No doubt.

    Reply
  16. The only reason that modernists talk ‘out of the right side of their mouths’ is to throw people off. Unbelievably, to a great extent, this has worked quite nicely for this guy. That’s how blind and living in denial some Catholics are, astonishing as it is.

    Reply
  17. Mark14:35-36. ” And going a little farther, he threw himself on the ground and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. He said, “Abba, Father, for you all things are possible; remove this cup from me; yet, not what I want, but what you want.” Jesus knows what we, who love Him, are going through.

    Reply
  18. THE bishops have erred. time for them the very same red hat cardinals to straighten out = the Mess they created.

    Reply
  19. The St. Gallen group and their like were already spoken about by Our Lord in Luke 16:8: . The master commended the dishonest steward for his shrewdness; for the sons of this world[a] are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light.

    Reply
  20. And, it’s just keep going…

    “Papalotry” is real
    http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/04/papalotry-is-real.html

    “Authoress of the Pope’s Stations of the Cross Meditations Was a Participant of the “Illuminiati” – Meeting of 2015″
    http://eponymousflower.blogspot.nl/2017/04/authoress-of-popes-stations-of-cross.html

    “Shame and Scandal: Logo for the visit of Pope Francis Egypt: the Cross and the crescent”
    http://tradicionalnalatinskamisa.blogspot.nl/2017/04/sramota-i-sablazan-logo-za-posjet-pape.html
    (For this one, please use google translate engine, cro-eng)

    Reply
    • The dots have connected, haven’t they? The picture has emerged, hasn’t it?

      From @the_greatstalin – http://disq.us/p/1hjf8mr :

      With Bergoglio, we have the end of the Alta Vendita’s stated aim to have one of their own, or someone aligned with them, as Pope.

      Apocalyptic times we live in Comrades.

      Prayer and penance.

      1) Masons celebrated Cardinal Bergoglio’s election to the papacy. Were they cheering one of their own?

      2) Some have pointed to Masonic signs and signals from Pope Francis before he became pope and after that. Some are chronicled here Torch of the Faithhttp://www.torchofthefaith.com/news.php?cat.1 , cf. e.g., in this article of theirs on Tue Mar 28, 2017 To God be All Gloryhttp://www.torchofthefaith.com/news.php?extend.1595.1

      3) And now we learn of an Illuminati meeting [they are not bothering to hiding themselves now as before] with a stated goal of preventing the Synods from reiterating established Church doctrine (and then they have the gall to tell us, ‘it is not a question of changing doctrine …’)!!!

      Cf. FREEMASONRY and the VATICAN: Synod Fathers believe the spirit of “the illuminati” is in the Instrumentum Laborishttp://torontocatholicwitness.blogspot.com/2015/10/freemasonry-and-vatican-synod-fathers.html

      For those not aware, the Illuminati is a secret society within a secret society. It runs Freemasonry [and others]. You can say that it is the brains, the spirit of freemasonry, and even some masons are unaware of this fact. Educated by the Jesuits and becoming a professor in canon law in 1773, Adam Weishaupt, a Jew, and son of a Rabbi, founded the “Order of the Illuminati” on May 1, 1776 [note the yearly celebration of this date worldwide and that it is on the dollar bill] and 6 years later, Weishaupt had succeeded in consolidating virtually all of European Freemasonry under his Illuminati.

      I will let the readers do their research and connect him with the bankers of his time.

      Cf. The Illuminati, the Pope, and the Secret Societieshttp://wp.me/p2Na5H-bT

      [Blessed Anna Katharina Emmerick] once said: I see so many ecclesiastics under the ban of excommunication! But they seem quite at their ease, almost unconscious of their state; and yet, all who join associations, take part in enterprises, or adhere to opinions condemned by the Church, are really excommunicated by that fact itself. I see such men hemmed in, as it were, by a wall of fog. By this we may clearly see what account God makes of the decrees, orders, and prohibitions of the Head of the Church and how rigorously He exacts their observance, whilst men coolly mock and scoff at them.https://ia800808.us.archive.org/13/items/TheLifeAndRevelationsOfAnneCatherineEmmerichComplete/TheLifeAndRevelationsOfAnneCatherineEmmerich.pdf

      Reply
      • As you said. And there are many dots, and they are certainly connected. I saw many of them already, since a few years ago. And I see more and more of them each day. The real battle is at its highest.
        Keep praying Holy Rosary.
        God bless you

        Reply
  21. Kasper and Daneels are a corrupting influence on the Pope, like Wormtongue and Saruman to Francis’s King Theoden.

    Reply
  22. “He knelt and had himself blessed in public by a Protestant pastor.”

    But he can’t kneel for Our LORD in the Blessed Sacrament

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...