The Wages Of Arrogance Is Ridicule

I would not believe these days if I were not living them myself. Luther himself, or Calvin, would certainly not believe a Pope able to make such a show of incompetence as the one we are experiencing. 

Let us see what is happening. I am, for the record, not pulling your leg.

1. Father Lombardi speaks with journalists on Thursday trying to stem the brown tide advancing his way. The Fishwrap reports him so:

Pressed by reporters on the reliability of the direct quotations, Lombardi said during an Oct. 2 briefing that the text accurately captured the “sense” of what the pope had said, and that if Francis felt his thought had been “gravely misrepresented,” he would have said so.

What is happening here is extremely obvious: the journalists still can’t believe a Pope could release such heretical statements, and ask poor Lombardi what is what. Lombardi can’t contradict the Pope, and the interview has now been out for the entire planet to read without Francis expressing one word of disagreement. In fact, the entire interview is posted on the Vatican internet site.  Again, if this weren’t enough of an attribution of paternity, the fact that Francis has-not-said-a-word of correction would speak worlds anyway.

Therefore, poor Lombardi gives an answer on the lines of “don’t nail me to any word, but I cannot deny at this point the interview reflects the Pope’s thinking, or he would have said so”.

Fair enough. Please also notice that it is inconceivable that Repubblica does not give Francis the draft of the interview asking him to give the green light. This would be obvious anyway, but the more so as it would now appear there were no recorders and no stenographers. If (cough…) someone is afraid that 5,000 words of confused, unconnected ramblings end up in an interview or in a recording, that one should bloody well care that the draft given to him afterwards carefully represents his thinking. Eh? Ah? No?

Just so you know, Scalfari is fully there with his head, and has been a journalist for many decades now. He knows his trade. I wish I could have more doubts about the other’s head, and less about his trade.

Everything is fine, or not fine, then. There were no recorders, but the Pope would have approved the draft, and can certainly open Repubblica and read the interview in the case – that you might believe, depending on what you smoke – he had not approved the text beforehand. Again, Lombardi said it himself: if the interview had not reflected the Pope’s view, he would have said so. But he didn’t, so it does. Francis has, therefore, taken paternity and accepted full responsibility at the latest when he has not reacted to the interview; interview which is now even on the Vatican site. 

What’s difficult in that?

—-

A lot, it seems.

2. Enter Cardinal Dolan, Guffawer-In-Chief and, like Francis, another one Obama likes a lot.

Dolan is every bit as sly as Francis, but he is far more intelligent. Even as heretical Pope, I think he’d make a far more refined one. The Cardinal waits, then, several days to see whether Francis objects to the interview. Nothing happens. After Lombardi has stated the obvious and it is clear Francis has taken full paternity of the interview, Dolan launches a huge torpedo in the direction – make no mistake on this – of the Holy Father himself, and says what Francis has stated cannot have taken place. Francis first accepted, and then retired in prayer. He accepted with no hesitation.

Francis had said (emphases mine):

“Rarely. For example when the conclave elected me Pope. Before I accepted I asked if I could spend a few minutes in the room next to the one with the balcony overlooking the square. My head was completely empty and I was seized by a great anxiety. To make it go way and relax I closed my eyes and made every thought disappear, even the thought of refusing to accept the position, as the liturgical procedure allows. I closed my eyes and I no longer had any anxiety or emotion. At a certain point I was filled with a great light. It lasted a moment, but to me it seemed very long. Then the light faded, I got up suddenly and walked into the room where the cardinals were waiting and the table on which was the act of acceptance. I signed it, the Cardinal Camerlengo countersigned it and then on the balcony there was the ‘Habemus Papam’.”

The question was whether it had ever happened to him to have a “mystical moment”. From Francis words it is clear he has a very vivid recollection that this “filling with great light” was one of the rare mystical moments of his life, the one that persuaded him to sign the acceptance. This wasn’t seventy years ago, folks. This was seven months ago. Less, actually. One remembers, does one not? Also, please do not kid yourselves into thinking this is a small detail: read the phrase again, the tension, the dynamic, the drama of the man “suddenly” getting up, walking into the room, seeing the act, signing it. Stuff for a movie, folks. “Life and Lio of Francis the Humble”. No, this isn’t a secondary detail. This is the attempt to envelop the election in a mystical light, an attempt now debunked by, of all people, Cardinal Dolan. What a shame. What a shame. What a shame.

So Cardinal Dolan’s revelations imply one of these:

1. The interview is one pile of rubbish, as seen from the “enlightenment” tale. Francis was happy with it.

2. The interview is accurate in the heretical part. Francis was happy with it. But it was also invented in the legend of the “mystical experience that persuades him to accept”. Francis was happy with that, too. He had not said it that way, you know; but gosh, it made him look good!… and so humble!  I can hear the music: Maaaagic… Moooments….

3. The interview is accurate and Francis agrees with what Repubblica wrote; but he is, ahem… old, you know… 

4. Francis makes the interview without recorder; he does not read the draft, but he approves it nevertheless; he has the interview printed and making an awful mess all over the planet, but still doesn’t read it. Everyone in the Catholic world knows exactly what he would have said and discusses it, only he doesn’t. Therefore, it’s all Pinocchio’s fault; or Breznev’s; or the Cheshire Cat’s. It must be so, then Francis is the Pope. Though he doesn’t like to say it, of course. Cheshire Cat is it, then.

—- 

In all four cases, Francis gets out demolished, and I mean, demolished. He can only get out of this case as:

1. An old man in his dotage;

2. a liar; and a massive one at that, as we are talking here of a “mystical experience” allegedly at the root of his decision to become Pope. A vainglorious one, too, embellishing his election – or willfully accepting to have it embellished – with “magic moment” mystical experiences. Can you imagine the Pontiff Emeritus even thinking of something like that…

3. a man of such an astounding superficiality and laziness that he does not even read the draft of an interview he knows will be read all over the world before giving it the green light, and does not even care to read the interview after it has made a mess all over the planet. I esteem my readers, though, and will not insult their intelligence asking them to believe this one. They should leave it to the conspiracy theorists, and assorted Pollyannas.

If you think there are other possibilities, let me know. I will exclude the hypothesis that he is willfully evil and a minion of Satan, and ask everyone not to make such hypotheses. Therefore, apart from the three mentioned above I see no other possibility in the realm of sensible discussion, though the usual spinmeisters will no doubt find some excuses. For example: extraterrestrials have kidnapped him between the 1 and the 5 October; the wolves have not allowed him to read the draft, because they have him prisoner in the Papal Apartments.. erm, no, wait!… ; the wolves have let every copy of Repubblica disappear from every newsagent on a one mile radius from the Vatican City. No internet, of course. No TV. Father Lombardi was beamed to an Argentinian favela, and threatened to move his office there if he speaks.

Please, let us stop kidding ourselves. Let us face reality. It’s one, two or three. None of them very complimentary, but 1 and 2 (well, erm … cough…) not entirely out of character.    

Francis has taken responsibility for the interview, as Father Lombardi himself had to see. Even if Dr Scalfari was, as they say, “high as a kite” or completely gaga, this would not change a iota in the fact the interview was published, made a scandal all over the planet, and Francis did not correct the draft before publication and did not say a word of correction after it. Francis bears full responsibility for what was published. Don’t shoot the pianist. 

——————————————–

You would not have expected this from Cardinal Dolan. He laughs always so much.

Gosh, the man can launch a torpedo. Still, this latest shame – the worst of them all, as the personal integrity of the Pope is concerned – is all Francis’ doing.

If this Francis gives another interview of the sort, even only one, it means he is very probably beyond redemption. Perhaps he is, though, still sensible enough to understand that he is making an ass of himself, and the  butt of worldwide jokes. At the same time, the now rapidly growing ridicule is perhaps our only chance to avoid things going really south. When the entire Catholic world laughs at Francis’ antics, perhaps we will see him put the foot on the brake. He seems very humbly attached to his reputation, you see.

The wages of arrogance is ridicule. One would hope the Bishop of Rome got it at last.

Mundabor

Posted on October 6, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 45 Comments.

  1. When the bishop of Rome appointed Ricca to his post, all the traditional blogosphere was sure that once his background was verified, Ricca would be relieved of his post. No such thing ever happened. Francis will have his way again with the revelations of this interview, and he will garner the adulation of the world. The spin on the mystical moment is that it really did happen, mystical light and overwhelming insight filled Francis on his god-ordained mission, just not exactly as reported as Republica says it did. There will be no fall-out whatsoever. The world loves sound-bytes. The world really believes our dear Pope Emeritus has a new found appreciation of his abdication because he now sees how charismatic Francis is (this lie penetrated the internet to the nth degree). And because Benedict had this revelation, the world’s wish that his papacy was irrelevant is confirmed. This is Orwell’s 1984 all over again.

    • Ouch, that’s an optimistic view 😉
      But you are right, the spinchampions will be able to think whatever suits them.

      M

    • There will be ‘fall out’ where it matters i.e. in the Church. If the election were tomorrow, knowing what they now know and even allowing for all the ‘fluffy stuff’, I don’t think that the Pope would stand a chance. He will be the last of his kind – no-one wants a boss who happily and mischevously makes spontaneity and unpredictablity the basis of their working life.

    • I begin to think that too.
      Many cardinals only wanted to bet left alone, and a Pope who would moderately be friends with the world.
      They now have Robespierre.
      I don’t think they will enjoy it.

      For once, the silence after his interview is rather deafening, with just very very few saying things like “refreshing” or “he teaches us how to brush our teeth”. Most keep an embarrassed silence.

      Francis is too much even for your average Neo-Modernist.

      M

  2. Heehee – “the brown tide”! I’m guessing it’s not a surging crowd of angry Franciscans, ah, eh, no?

  3. My own judgment falls between 1) and 2). That is, sometimes people’s recollection of very big moments cannot always be trusted. It’s well-known that eyewitness accounts of accidents or crimes can vary wildly. Maybe this is something similar. Perhaps the Bishop of Rome doesn’t clearly recollect that evening. (I guess it wouldn’t be proper to suggest a possibility #4 – “He was drunk at the time.”) However, his vanity wouldn’t permit him to honestly say, “You know, it’s all a blur to me now. I can’t remember exactly what happened or when.” People would find that a bit shocking, and might start looking at your Possibility #1 more seriously. So instead he thinks that this is what he SHOULD have done, and that gradually morphs into “This is what I MUST have done,” complete with self-serving embroidery about deep mystical visions and saintly levels of contemplative prayer. Over the months, he’s probably come to believe this fairytale himself, so he’s not consciously lying.

    • My personal impression is that he boasted with Scalfari of some mystical moment, being as chaotic as always as to its supposed unfolding.
      When he read the Repubblica account, he obviously recognised the rendition of Scalfari did not reflect truthfully his recollections as he had described them with his usual incoherent and disordinate rambling. But as he liked the rendition Scalfari has written an awful lot, he decided to leave it as it is, thinking he would get away with it. Thus, he said to Scalfari “fine, the draft faithfully reflects our conversation”, well knowing this was not the case.
      I can’t imagine he expected to be publicly contradicted by one of his cardinals, when it was too late to backpedal on the interview.

      M

  4. Mundabor,

    Thank you for the creation of your blog which shines so much light on the frustrating times in which Catholics are now forced to live. You and Benedict Carter and Paul Priest were the three that originally opened my eyes to what was going on in our Church. There were others, of course, but you were the stars and I can’t imagine where my faith would be today if I hadn’t stumbled across all of you on Damian’s blog so many years ago. You were ahead of the rest of us in figuring out what was going on there so let me just say that you have been proved royally right. We’re all long gone from there but a number of us follow this blog and are finding your analysis of Pope Francis’ interviews invaluable. Your readers are blessed that you know Italian because we don’t have to accept the excuse by others that it’s the English translation that’s distorting the Pontiff’s words. Please keep doing what you’re doing, knowing that your blog is helping so many of us to understand and come to terms with the present situation.

    • Thanks Annie!
      Though I must make a disclaimer: I have no mystical experiences before writing blog posts.
      Frankly though, if I had I wouldn’t boast of it with other people, either.
      There is something in this man I find more and more disquieting.

      M

  5. Sorry to step over the line, but obvious minion of Satan. I don’t know what’s worst, if this mystical experience is true or false. If it’s true, it sounds like eastern meditation. If it is false, it’s final proof that he can lie and say whatever he wants, and people will still adore him. Because no one will care about this. In fact, if pressed about it, people will use that as an argument against the heresy of the interview, and say that “the interview is probably fake”. They may even say that Francis didn’t say anything about the interview because “there was no need”. He is not obsessed about doctrinal security, you know. He has better things to do. In fact, they’ll say, the interview has not caused scandal at all, as it reflects exactly what the masses of catholics believe. Only among faithful catholics this has caused indignation, which is to say, among no one nowadays. Yes, this is 1984.

    • I liked “this is 1984”!

      He is an old man very much in love with himself, wanting too much to be loved, and who probably forgot the basics many years ago (clearly no idea of which are the dins crying to heaven for vengeance, what are the works of mercy, zero knowledge of the Gospel, no idea of pre-conciliar official documents, etc.).

      I think Satan uses him by deluding him he is such a terrific guy.

      Should be asked to lock himself in the Papal Apartments (Yes!) with a Penny Catechism and reemerge only when he has mastered it. The quality of his statements would improve dramatically.

      M

  6. felicitasperpetua

    Francis is no fool, in spite of his megalomania. His viveza criolla is still very much in evidence, but he is well past his prime and he knows that he only has a few years to leave his mark on the Church. The frantic pace of his advertisement campaign seems to be a prelude to equally frantic action. It is reassuring that the Vatican marketing department is showing signs of alarm at his recent escalation and may slam the breaks. If Fr. Bouchacourt’s (SSPX superior in South America) character analysis is correct, he will likely tone it down as soon as a personal cost is exacted.

    I believe this isn’t the first time Dolan takes a pot shot at his erstwhile ally. In spite of his uncanny resemblance to a certain Loony Toons character, the man knows how to work the media and curry favor with the elites and is obviously positioning himself for the next conclave. Dolan has just told the world that the Pope had lied in a way that puts Francis in the worst possible light. This act was disloyal, underhanded, blatantly disrespectful and very revealing the character of the man is at the head of the scismatic USCCB Church.

    I shan’t be praying for Francis’ early retirement or demise. The Lord knows better than us poor mortals. Yes, the current papacy is a punishment, but having a used car salesman at the Holy See would be an even greater one.

    • Agree on a Dolan. I was actually astonished. I had thought he would call and say “change that now before it comes back to bite you”.

      I do not know what the criollo thing is, could you expand a bit?

      Also, the SSPX thing is extremely interesting. Do you have some link? Even if it is in Spanish, on could try to fight with it.

      Thanks

      M

    • I, I think Dolan would be more insidious because more intelligent. This one here shouts “look at me! Look at how humble and social I am” from thirty wheelchairs away.

      M

  7. The million dollar question is whether or not the pope can hear/listen to the criticism of faithful catholics above the flattery the world is indulging him with. Some of these popular bloggers are drunk with the respite offered by the press not attacking the Church and think this is somehow a good thing. Others, I think have the mega-church disease. They look at the pope in the same way an evangelical looks at their pastor entertainers. A charismatic cult of the personality which is willfully blind to what is happening.

    • I really can’t say they are not attacking the Church.
      They are attacking the Church so much more, but using Francis as a weapon.
      The Obama video and all the enthusiastic tweets from Chris Rock & Co. clearly tell the tale.

      M

  8. He should have known better. How many cardinals were at the conclave? Over a hundred, right? It’s unreasonable to expect that ALL of them would keep quiet over such a sensational story. It was only a matter of time before some reporter would ask a cardinal, “What did you think when the Holy Father left the room before accepting the results of the election? Could you tell he’d had a mystical experience when he came back in and signed the paper?” Someone eventually would say, “Well, it didn’t happen exactly that way…” You can’t expect them ALL to lie, especially not the ones who didn’t even vote for him! So I think Cardinal Dolan was getting out ahead of bad news, and breaking the story himself, giving time and opportunity for some face-saving spin. Clever politicians do it all the time. It’s better than waiting for the inevitable exposure, which would look worse the longer it took to come out.

    • Excellently put, but should he not have called Francis and told him “you must correct this, it won’t work”? I can’t imagine Dolan warned Francis and the latter simply decided to ignore the warning. It would mean a real loss of reality.

      M

  9. “Dolan is every bit as sly as Francis, but he is far more intelligent. Even as heretical Pope, I think he’d make a far more refined one” Absolutely true! any rabid liberal Bishop from Europe or North America, though equally destructive, would have made a more refined and polite Pope… but Francis is a surgeon who operates on without anesthesia… he exudes underdevelopment, provincialism and cha cha cha through the pores

  10. If your familiar with CS Lewis’ ‘The Dark Tower’, the answer is easy. Francis has a double in ‘Othertime’ and there has been a transfer of minds across time-lines. He thought it happened.

    I prefer this explanation to having either a vain or dishonest Pontiff.

  11. felicitasperpetua

    “Viveza criolla” could be loosely defined as a combination of cunning/cleverness, opportunism and disregard for the rules. It is said to be endemic to areas of South America (Buenos Aires is said to be particularly stricken). The “criollo” (i.e. “native” part probably means that it may be either congenital or caused by exposure to contaminated water from an early age. The current sovreign pontiff displays many of the symptoms. Your reader from Buenos Aires will likely give you a much better definition.

    DICI has an English translation of Fr. Bouchacourt’s character sketch of Bp. Francis. Notably, he described him as “a man of consensus”.

    http://www.dici.org/en/news/cardinal-bergoglio-and-the-society-of-st-pius-x-in-argentina/

  12. radjalemagnifique

    Francis, be he Pope or Bishop, is nothing but a string puppet (a ‘Kasperle’). He has been put there by 98 % of the voting cardinals (Ref. Radio Courtoisie) who most certainly had been concerting before. So, the problem is : the immense number of the leading ‘spiritual’ forces of our present Catholic World are responsible for the heresies of Francis.

    This said, we seem to assist to a renewal of Vatican II if we believe Professor Roberto de Mattei, who intervened several times this last week on French Radio Courtoisie (Pr de Mattei speaks a perfect French) who said that before the beginning of Vatican II the progressive party had already concerted between them in order to « sabotage » (my own word) the traditionalist party. Following Pr de Mattei, there was one minority party (progressists) against another minority party (traditionalists) and the third party, the indecised, followed at least Pope Jean XXIII, a progressist himself.

    http://www.radiocourtoisie.fr/

    (An associative French radio, right and tradionalist winged.)

    Radja le Magnifique
    Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat !

  13. How is it possible that this lengthy interview was conducted with no stenography, electronic or otherwise – let alone rough notes on pencil and paper? It can’t be true. The article is presented as a verbatim record of interview – not as the personal recollection of the chat the author once had with the most powerful man on earth. An “after the fact reconstruction”? Horse—-. It seems to be Bergoglio speaking here, word for word. Now, I’m a young man with a reasonably sharp mind, and I could never attempt such a feat, with any degree of accuracy. Scalfari is months away from 90. While we’ve been bred through this conciliar age to distrust what we’re being fed, this goes a step further – it defies reasonable belief.. For such a process to procure a faithful representation of the Pontiff’s remarks would require a miracle befitting St Padre Pio.

    Either the interview is a lie, or the claim of no record is. This smells a lot like an escape route, and given the coverage it is now garnering I am growing convinced. Confusion is being sown (a trademark of this papacy), but there is no correction out of love for the faithful (another sad marker).

    Note also that Allen’s piece in the NCR references the great scandal of the “interview”: The Scalfari interview (set) off shock waves due to the pope’s candor on multiple fronts – calling the trappings of a royal court in the Vatican “leprosy,” complaining that too many church officials are “Vatican-centric,” and so on. Gee, I’d been sure there were some more controversial remarks in there..

    Why such deception, at every turn? Who is the father of lies, again?

    God bless you Mundabor, and all those not afraid to speak the truth.

  14. Mundabor:

    Viveza criolla (an endemicl argentine “virtue”)

    lack of respect for others and indifference to the common good in a framework of individual interests.

    political corruption, which extends in all institutions, in the form of perks, direct appropriation of public funds, favoritism, misallocation of state resources, etc.

    extreme individualism, with mistrust of others and little ability to partner and cooperate in community goals.(Interpersonal trust is a key component of social capital, which is crucial for economic development and proper functioning of democratic institutions.)

    Anomie or weakening of the common morality, and social deviance as behavior that departs from generally accepted standards in society.

    The habit of blaming problems on someone else, thereby encouraging paranoia and granting a permit to self-indulgence.

    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viveza_criolla

  15. [—
    I really can’t say they are not attacking the Church.
    They are attacking the Church so much more, but using Francis as a weapon.
    The Obama video and all the enthusiastic tweets from Chris Rock & Co. clearly tell the tale.
    —]
    Yes, I agree 100%, but I meant from the perspective of the 95% of Catholics who can’t see it. They think they have a pope that has finally said the right things to escape the ridicule of the MSM. Our very first “humble” pope who shuns prada shoes, and arcane practices of yesteryear. The MSM is putting him up on a pedestal which the MSM never does with popes. Guess who will be Time Magazines “Man of the Year”? He is practically a shoe-in. This is all in the hopes of encouraging him to take it further. They hoped they got a liberation theologian who would paralyze the Church with its socialist/marxist ideology… instead, we got something far worse.

  16. Here in Argentina Jorge Bergoglio was considered simply an average scoundrel, it’s really exasperating for us to see europeans minds trying to find the fifth leg in the cat when they try to “understand” who and what is Berglogio.. and elaborating complicated theories (it’s like killing fies with hand grenades)… the reality is quite simple to those who are accustomed to deal with people like him, he’s an average argentine scoundrel, indisciplined, envious, rebellious, childish, resentful and cynical.. what makes him dangeous is his current position: he’s like a monkey with a uzi…

    • I have seen things around other blogs…

      commenters who up to yesterday would have called themselves conservative googling for phrases out of context taken from saints of the past to justify Modernism… and these should be the awakened and alert ones…

      Francis is leading countless souls to perdition.

      M

  17. What troubles me most about this ‘mystic moment’ is that the Pope shared a personal encounter with God with an atheist knowing it would be splashed across the world media. To my mind, such encounters remain personal between God and ourselves unless they contain a wider message for humanity – such as Pope Leo XIII’s vision. The purpose of this disclosure appears to have been to authenticate his Papacy as somehow endorsed by the Holy Spirit.

    Am I being uncharitable?

    • EXACTLY!

      Unless one has a private revelation which, say, the Blessed Virgin asks to make public, or very special reasons to admit of them 9I think of Padre Pio’s vision of Pius XII in Heaven) his own private experiences should remain, well, private.

      Francis boasts (as in: boasts) of mystical experiences when talking of himself and his “spirituality”, and tries to give a patina of mysticism and sainthood to an event which then turns up to be… a fabrication, we do not from whom but certainly read and accepted by him.

      Congratulations, Holy Father.

      You have won the Jesuit Prize 2013.

      M

  18. St. Benedict's Thistle

    I just read more about this situation here: http://efpastormeritus.blogspot.com/2013/10/confirmed-errors-in-papal-interview.html

    I am very suspicious that Scalfari did not take notes of the interview, at the very least. Also, did no one with the Pope record the interview or take notes?

    To not take notes and/or record the interview is almost unheard of for interactions of this type. It would be the height of unprofessionalism for a journalist to refrain from doing so, especially in an interview with a pope!

    And to suggest that Scalfari would actually quote the Pope so extensively (using quotation marks) and then claim the interview was in its entirety a later reconstruction from memory, is too much to be believed. This is beyond the pale for a professional journalist, unless he also had perfect recall, and even then it would be foolish.

    This is simply unbelievable. And now Scalfari is taking the fall for it. Imagine that. An atheist is covering for the Pope! Will wonders ever cease?!

  19. Bergoglio achieved the Papacy through the “argentine way”, that is by means of friendism, favoritism, chicanery. scheming, servility , submissiveness… The “Viveza criolla” considers that anything achieved by dishonest, ilicit means is way more rewarding that something achieved by effort and entrepreneurship, think of the- here-legenday goal that Maradona scored with his hand (The hand of God as they call them).. it’s no wonder that the sociopaths argentines friends of Bergoglio celebrated and proudly told everybody that he had succesfully schemed against Benedict.. sadly in Argentina foul play is considered a virtue. It’s absolutely essencial to understand this if you want to deal with someone like Bergoglio, It’s important to understand that in developing countries like Argentina, the idea of “bad money” or “foul play” practically doesn’t exist, here anything goes, everything is relative, the “listen to your conscience” Mantra repeated by Bergoglio is not his invention, it’s a life style here… in Argentina there is no justification for not corrupting oneself to get ahead: ethical behavior will get you no respect here and those who score goals with their hands will be called Gods or.. Popes! he wants to turn the Church in a Southamerican-like Satrapy! Probably his panderers, those above him, who put him there have different plans and will knock him off the pedestal in some moment.. but I’m sure that in his revolutionary/socialist/provincialist mind he thinks he’s doing a revolution and sadly he thinks it is all his own doing.

  20. The mystical experience nugget would appeal to all those who dismiss the tenets of the Christian religion, Catholicism especially, but who insist that they are “spiritual” in that floppy, Age of Aquarius, brotherhood of man kind of way. Unfortunately, this could be applied to an awful lot of badly, or non-catechised, Catholics. Feeling the “lurve” is the 21st century assurance of personal salvation which Francis seems to be expert at drilling into, to wide acclaim. In bidding prayers at the Mass, usually at parishes top heavy with women “ministers”, Pope Francis always get a mention. Benedict, during all his pontificate, rarely featured. I suppose we get the popes we deserve, but I can’t help thinking that the cardinals must be getting more than a little twitchy at the thought that the reform tendencies of Francis include the demise of their own power base. That, if nothing else, will move them to action.

  21. St. Benedict's Thistle

    My apologies, Mundabor. I must have missed that link.

  22. I find the observations of Ms. Maria Victoria Alvarez fascinating. I have no grasp of the South American subcultures. What was the response of the average Jose to the ascendancy of Francis to the throne of Peter? Was there an outpouring of love and joy or was there an undertone of cynicism? When Benedict ascended to the papacy, I did not sense the average Franz was enthralled, but perhaps was a bit bemused that finally the Italians recognized the exquisite hum of the German intellect. Of course, the average Stasziu in Warsaw was ebullient with the acendancy of John Paul II as was the entire Polish diaspora. God Bless Us All!

  23. Viveza criolla appears to be the Latin form of the way of life engendered by socialist or otherwise statist regimes.

  1. Pingback: The Wages Of Arrogance Is Ridicule | FideCogitActio : omnis per gratiam

  2. Pingback: Before I remember to forget again… | FideCogitActio : omnis per gratiam

%d bloggers like this: