Daily Archives: November 2, 2013
“Would you really believe Pope Francis thinks that everybody can have his own idea of good and evil and thus justify what he does?” he asked.
“Is it really possible Pope Francis has an idea that would make being Christians, or believing in God, into nonsense?”
These not very intelligent words are from an Italian journalist, and are quoted here in the last desperate attempt to mask the Pope’s senseless heresies in front of the obvious unwillingness of the Pope himself to dispel them.
Yes, I believe it. Of course I do. It’s what he said. It’s in print. Never denied. Never corrected. Never apologised for. Verba volant, scripta manent.
What is happening here is utterly Orwellian. Words, and simple reality, don’t count anymore. Simple facts are turned into their contrary simply because one wants to. We have reached a form of denial that reeks of desperation. Let us see the facts instead.
Pope Francis expressed exactly the concept the Italian journalist says we could not “really believe” a first time in a long letter he sent to Eugenio Scalfari.
Then, he repeated the concept a second time during the notorious interview with the same man.
Then, he released no official denial or correction whatever after the interview went around the world, causing a wave of scandal and discontent Francis, in his blind quest for self-promotion, had not foreseen. Francis would not say he is awfully sorry he has confused the entire planet with his inordinate, utterly ignorant ramblings. He would not say it, because he is so humble.
Now we are informed that Francis would be worried that his words might be misunderstood. Wait a moment: would not this be the perfect time to ask that the text be changed? Would not this be the moment when I do not say the Pope, but a child of eight would have been able to understand that the interview cannot be published in the form proposed to him? Does this not prove that Francis, in fact, did read the draft of the interview before giving green light to the publication, and was very aware of its destructive potential?
Furthermore, we read:
These sentences led to a certain amount of criticism for the Roman Pontiff.
The Pope’s knowledge that he could be misunderstood is why – according to Socci – Fr. Federico Lombardi, director of the Holy See press office, was “told to maintain that the text of the interview had not been revised by Pope Francis and that it was penned by Scalfari after an informal chat.”
What? Following the criticism, someone told Lombardi to say Francis had not revised the text? Did Francis, then, lie? If he did not, how is the phrase to be understood? Who told Lombardi to lie about the degree of information of the Pontiff? Why would Lombardi say something so directly questioning the character of the Pope – an interview destined to be read worldwide is given the green light without the Pope even reading the draft: the behaviour of a perfect idiot by any human standard – unless the order came from Francis himself?
It goes on, in a frenzy of self-delusion. The entire load of excrement landed on the Osservatore Romano on the following day, but now we are informed Francis was – allegedly – displeased about that, too.
Yeah, right. Why would the newspaper of the Vatican publish an interview of the Pope after all? Seriously, how stupid are we supposed to be?
It gets even stupider than this. Francis is, then, displeased about the interview. He does not order the immediate removal of it from the Osservatore‘s site, and does not publish an extensive, perfectly clear, apology about what he said and clarification about what he should have said.
No. what happens is that he might have whispered in the ear of the newspaper’s director, very much en passant during a ceremony, that what the Pope says is not supposed to go on the Vatican newspaper; a fact which would, in the mind of these people, make all fine again. I quote:
[A] Video from Vatican TV shows that when Pope Francis went to visit the tomb of St. Francis of Assisi, he stopped by and had a one-minute chat with Vian.
According to Socci, “that is probably the moment when Pope Francis complained to Vian.”
So, Francis is seen talking with the man in public for… one minute, and we do not know what they said. This is enough. We can dream our dream of the orthodox Pope now.
Lies have short legs, and deluded fantasies have shorter legs still.
As for myself, I choose to believe the facts.
Pray for the Pope, that he may stop being such a disgrace; for the good of the Church, and of his own soul.