The “Francis Effect” Is Both Unavoidable And Wanted

Who am I to judge?

It makes one smile how the tepid conservative want us to be excited with Francis' innovations but take offence when the liberals do exactly the same, though in their case with much more reason.

The idea that Francis simply speaks freely because “that's the way he is” and we like him a lot for that, but then fetch our Catholicism somewhere else from more credible sources just does not work. Francis is the pope Bishop of Rome, and if he spreads confusion the result of this will be… confusion. How surprising, eh, no?

It is entirely logical and entirely predictable that Francis' stupid utterances be now used and abused everywhere. Of both the use and the abuse Francis is the first responsible, because he is the one who systematically made them possible in the first place.

If a Pope is allowed to put in his mouth such unspeakably stupid words like “who am I to judge?” without drowning in ridicule, why should a Catholic legislator not feel entitled, or at least be tempted, to play the same little cheap game? “Because this just isn't Catholic!”, you will answer. Fine. But someone should tell the Pope, and you should say the same when the Pope says it, too.

The newly-born “Francis effect” is nothing but the tidal wave of stupidity, superficiality and heresy now unavoidably following the earthquake of Francis' utterances. This tidal wave will impact with immense violence all the Catholic shores, causing vast damages everywhere and the loss of countless souls.

The Francis Effect is wanted, and it is wanted exactly in those liberal quarters Francis does so insistently pander to. What is surprising is only the lack of shame of the man, who keeps drugging the patient he is supposed to heal with massive doses of modernist heroine, lest he might recover from his addiction to the church of nice and the “salvation guarantee”.

If you want to put it a different way, the entire situation is like Obama going around smoking joints, and with his supporters saying he is being “instrumentalised” by those in favour of the legalisation of light drugs.

Sow Francis, reap heresy, homosexualism, abortion, and every other disgrace.

This, and no other, is the reality of the “Francis effect”.

Mundabor

 

 

Posted on November 14, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 8 Comments.

  1. Well said. Pope Francis wants to be all things to all people -the leader of the Church of Nice. He will offend no one other than those who actually believe the Faith. He reminds me of the Dalai Lama – generic religion when it’s needed and Buddhism when it’s needed. What do these men actually believe?

  2. Not looking to say “I told you so” but I, and many others, saw this man for what he was as soon as he was elected….and I said so on this site. Yes, we all hoped for a deliverance from what had been, but I’m pretty sure most of us, upon hearing who he was and reading up on him, saw what was to come.

    This man is an extension, and I’m sure a plant, of Vatican 2. He is the next in line to further destroy the Church. And please friends…..whoever does not fully believe that Vatican 2 was a concerted effort to destroy the Church (though they can never succeed as hard as they try)….READ, READ, and READ some more about the history and masterminds behind Vatican 2. No….Vatican 2 is not about a bunch of misguided people who felt that the Church needed to “get with the times”; it was a master-step in the attempted destruction of the Church. Research Ms. Bella Dodd….see who she was and then see what she had to say about the future of the Church (and she said this before Vatican 2 ever existed).

    Keep the Faith and stay strong.

    • This is a sweeping generalisation that does not consider the basic workings of human nature. It is obvious among the few who were malicious there must have been the many who were simply stupid. This is how human nature is, and the history of most revolutions. I refuse to think, say, that Joseph Ratzinger wilfully made the work of the devil even for one second in his entire life.
      M

  3. Possibly so (although I don’t think that they were stupid…most men in that position are far from stupid), but the intent to destroy the Church was its sole purpose. If any man who had anything to do with that debacle wants to claim “stupidity” as their excuse for going along with it, then it will be between him and God.

    • Well yes, the effect was highly destructive, but malice and stupidity can’t be put on the same plane. Whether it is enough to avoid hell I don’t know – particularly considering the mess of the post-conciliar years – but the distinction is important. The peasant from Brandenburg can’t be said to be as guilty as Hitler.
      M

  4. And lastly….why would I think that Ratzinger is any less at fault then this guy? Ratzinger, if he were of the Church, would have stood up and spoken out. He let the Pius X society back in (although they never should have been out to begin with), but what stand did this man ever take for a return to what is right? What world leader did he ever condemn for supporting abortion for example…not one. He failed. Sorry my friend….I see these people for what they are…they never would have been elevated to the position they were if they weren’t in step with the “program”. If ever we see a Pope who returns to the Faith, we will all know it.

    • I see the limits of Benedict all too clearly. But if you can’t see the difference between Francis and Benedict it is not I who has lack of discernment.

      Benedict was often weak, Francis is almost always wicked.

      M

  5. Oh, the difference is night and day no doubt. My point is, where was Benedict ever truly at in a spiritual sense? You give him more credit than I do in that regard. But in terms of Francis….yes, Benedict on his worst day wasn’t as bad as this man is.

%d bloggers like this: