“Repubblicagate”: Who is The Culprit?


The Emperor has no Mozzetta.

The Emperor has no Mozzetta.

Let’s keep this short: the culprit is Francis, and no other.

It’s very easy to see why.

1. Not even an old incapacitated nincompoop would shut up after the interview instead of immediately saying, very loud, “this interview does not reflect our conversation”. There is no way in hell Francis can escape his responsibility on this. He even received the draft of the interviews, for heaven’s sake. What was he doing, watching the photos of Ms Chaouqui? 

2. Many have tried to depict Scalfari as the old man in his dotage. Very wrong. Firstly, it is clear to everyone who is not gaga that Scalfari isn’t. Secondly, it makes sense that Francis would demand that the interview would be made without a recorder or a stenographer. A recorder would have implied Scalfari does not trust the words of a Pope, and a stenographer would have recorded all the inordinate rambling of the man. Notice when Francis rambles we only get the doctored versions, in which charitable souls try to give some sense to the rambling nonsense. If we read the literal transcription of a 30 minutes Francis’ performance, I think the entire planet would be rolling on the floor, laughing.

3. Francis received a draft, and gave the green light to it. This has been admitted from Vatican sources, who had to invent the pathetic excuse it is not clear whether he read it after Repubblica had to say – confronted with the brazen attempt to deny reality – that he bloody well did. There can be no excuse. There is absolutely nowhere to hide. The emperor has no clothes. Period.

4. Scalfari is a journalist. He knows his trade. Whatever was agreed between the two, he will not reveal unless, perhaps, attacked personally. If Francis says “please no recorder, but do not say it was on my request”, Scalfari will make the interview with no recorder, and will not say this was on Francis’ request. Don’t insult your intelligence thinking – or worse, saying – he forgot his recorder home and is unable to take notes.

5. In part, Francis’ interview echo scandalous affirmations already made by him, and which he merely confirms (“And I repeat it here”). How many times is this man misunderstood, and since when has he become unable to read?



What has happened is that 1) Mueller has insisted that the interview be removed as far too obscene, as reported by the media, when he was informed – to his surprise – that it was still on the internet site, and b) Francis had to see it was better for him to have the thing taken down now, than for it to be left on the Vatican site as a permanent monument to his own heresy and incompetence.

He has nowhere to hide.

I have already said, and I repeat it here (see how it works?) that there is crushing evidence that Francis approved the interview, and there is no evidence Hitler ordered the Holocaust.

If you are so dumb as to think Francis did not want this interview as published, you can as well believe Hitler did not want the Holocaust as happened.





Posted on November 17, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 10 Comments.

  1. Pope Pius XII was the last Pope who seems to me who knew the lay of the land in regard to his job description. His public and probably private actions appeared dignified and fitting to the situation. Maybe it would be well to stick to Italians . Proven track record and all that.

    • I agree. With the right Italians, though. Not many of those around. Piacenza is the best I can think of now. Just demoted, so his cards wouldn’t be good.


  2. One has to agree.

    The only other possible explanations are that Francis was too trusting, too lazy or too dim (or a combination of all three) to read the draft text before publication. Even so, he should have responded immediately to correct it, unless he was too trusting, too lazy or too dim (or a combination of all three) to read the article once published and to authorise its publication on the Vatican site.

    Not good.

    • I’d act to the three “unbelievably stupid”.
      Before and after the publication.
      Which he isn’t. Not in the sense of being gaga, I mean.


  3. Actually, there is another possibility which is far more dangerous for the Church. It is that Francis is not any of the above and knew exactly what he was doing. May God forgive me for thinking this if it is untrue.

    If I was a fallen Catholic on my death bed, I would not want a soothing confessor who smoothed over my sins and made me feel good before death. During my last moments, I would want a priest who led me to a full awareness and genuine repentance, a perfect or imperfect contrition, for all my sins. When I meet Christ I would thank him for such a priest and for the grace to given to me to listen and to hear him.

    The Pope should be a model for priests and all Catholics.

    • I am trying to be charitably here, but it can be that he just doesn’t know Catholicism and tries to promote that form of Catholicism that perverted minds have taught him in the seminary.

      Still, even so it becomes difficult to think that in a lifetime of clerical activity he was so impervious to Catholicism as to arrive at the ripe age of 77 years simply ignoring what is what.

      Chi va con lo zoppo impara a zoppicare, we say in Italy, “he who walks with the lame learns to limp”. Bergoglio has been walking with adulterous wives, infidel rabbis and other questionable people for too long.


  4. radjalemagnifique

    After the removal of « The » interview, here comes the rehab of rosaries, if I understand well this article. (I merely guess, because I’ve not learnt Spanish.)



    • I don’t think it’s rehabilitation, I’d rather say it’s Modernist tactics. If he loved the rosary, he would not insult those who count them.

      Still, I have read and rather understood the article, and I would say the idea is good! Can’t imagine it came from him, but evidently he is trying to listen to some “Pelagians”.


    • radjalemagnifique

      My comment was sarcastic.

  5. Scalfari the ex-Catholic seems to know much more about real Catholicism that Jorge.

%d bloggers like this: