Loyalty Misunderstood

We write today the 25 July and as I pen this Monsignor Ricca, Bishop Bergoglio's sodomite lunch buddy, is still at his place. A pontiff who insists on the need for saints wearing jeans seems unable to understand the need for priests not practising sodomy. I do not know about you, but I find it rather rich. It is as if for Bishop Bergoglio saying and doing belonged to two different planets, without any need for the actions to conform to the words.

In the unavoidable reflection caused by this astonishing behaviour, one cannot avoid thinking of the precedent – during Bishop Francis' Buenos Aires time – of the Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires, Monsignor Sucunza. The latter was the obvious cause of a trial for adultery and divorce, and was constantly and stubbornly protected by Bergoglio without any consideration for the scandal he gave.

What I think happens here is that the Bishop of Rome has a rather disquieting understanding of loyalty, according to which when someone has become part of his own circle, he will protect him whatever his failings and the scandal they cause. This will, in turn, ensure him blind loyalty from the people of his entourage.

Now, loyalty is very good if it is founded on virtue and shared values. It becomes a pure power machine if it is based exclusively on personal allegiance, and looks past whatever failings.

Even Don Vito Corleone would have understood that Monsignor Ricca is untenable and must go, and no kind of loyalty from his picciotto can justify sustained and grave harm to the greater cause. Bishop Bergoglio, whose greater cause is vastly bigger than Don Vito's, should have immediately put the interest and reputation of the Church – besides basic decency – before every personal consideration.

Very obviously, Bishop Bergoglio does not think that way. His system of power – and perhaps a very, very twisted notion of what is right – seems to require that whoever is perceived as one of his own men – like Sucunza, or Ricca – is protected for as long as humanly possible, without any consideration for the consequences.

The permanence of Ricca in his post is a scandal that become worse with every day, and throws a sinister light about the basic moral structure – and the not very basic power thinking – of the one who should be, before all things, servus servorum Dei.

A scandal is a scandal is a scandal. A sodomite is a sodomite is a sodomite. No amount of twisted thinking can justify what is happening. If you ask me, what is happening shows the true face of Bishop Bergoglio more than anything else we have seen – and we have seen a couple already – from him. The brazenness of this behaviour will perhaps silence the clericalists, but it will scandalise all those who do not confuse loyalty to Peter with Fuehrerprinzip and outright Papolatry.

Every day the Bishop of Rome allows Ricca to stay, this scandal enlarges and the credibility of the Church is undermined.

You find excuses for this behaviour if you want to. I find the way this man behaves truly beyond the pale. Every priest or bishop or cardinal who would dare to behave in this way would be bombarded with criticism like it's Dresden in February 1945.

Bishop Francis leave a sodomite, appointed by him, in his place undisturbed.



Posted on July 25, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 6 Comments.

  1. Exactly where is “his place”?–At the Vatican Bank, at the hotel, or patiently waiting at a special little lunch table? For sure we know it is most probably NOT at a confessional! Perhaps the Bishop of Rome wants to humble the Papacy by wallowing in the gutter before the whole world.

  2. BF’s record so far seems to give the impression that the great moral evils like abortion, homosexuality that plague our times are in the end no big deal. Is this why people like Elton John hold him in the highest regard while many serious Catholics see the Church plunging further into crisis by the day? I hope I am wrong but so far hardly a whimper about specific evils. Lots of gushing platitudes about peace, joy and love but really nothing of substance on the pressing evils of our times. Are these not strange times when openly sodomite worldlings have nothing but praise for a Pope?

  3. Let me respond to your posts re: Ricca/Francis situation, just a little bit.

    1. Was Francis not given a sanitized file about Ricca before he made the appointment? (Whoever did this of course should be sent to administer the souls on some underwater island in the Mediterranean.)

    2. Has Ricca not submitted his resignation? If so can we wait for Francis to return to Rome before demanding that he accept it? It appears that Francis is concentrating on the youth convention and other things pertinent to his visit to Brazil, rather than dealing with various matters back at the Vatican.

    3. If Rico has reformed and confessed his sin and is now living a celibate life does he have to be dumped along with all other sodomite (your term , Mundabor) clergy? Then in rural areas we would be attending communion services on Sunday and not Mass.

    • 1. Whether the file was sanitized does not exept Francis from action. He knew at the beginning of July. He hasn’t acted.

      2. If Ricca has – as some sources say – submitted his resignation last Saturday, it is the most scandalous that the Bishop of Rome refused to accept it immediately and went to Rio instead. And for heaven’s sake, let’s stop the “concentrating on the youth”. Francis is not a moron, he can think about two subjects at the same time. The scandal is there, now.

      3. Yes, he has to be dumped along with all other sodomite clergy. He will repent at leisure after he is defrocked. A homosexual cannot be a priest, much less a sodomite.
      Would you send your children to play in the parich playground knowing a homosexual hovers over there?

      If the Church cares that the priests are good, God will send her good priest. If the standards are such that a sodomite will do, a sodomite is what we’ll get.


  4. PS whatever happened to the new encyclical Lumen Fidei? It seems to have come and gone with hardly any reaction. Was it all rather underwhelming?

    • I do not think it was anything making history, but I do not remember the encyclicals of Benedict having a bigger echo.

      I think the first real Francis’ encyclical will be read in the kindergartens.


%d bloggers like this: