Confusion And Hate For The Rules.
Of the many questionable quirks of our Not-So-Holy Bishop of Rome, there are two that grate me again and again. Therefore, today I will write a blog post about both of them for the sake of my liver.
To Francis, nothing is what it is. Everything is, actually, something else. This is never this, it is always that. To love means to play the guitar; to pray means to have a walk, and the like.
You can find these absurd statements everywhere in his off-the-cuff blabbering exercises. The last example is taken from here: “fasting” is “giving someone a caress”. Er, well, no. Fasting is fasting. If on a certain day there is an obligation to fast, giving 20,000 caresses to all the inhabitants of the favela will not cause anyone to comply with the obligation to fast. Why? Because fasting is fasting, and caressing is caressing.
This is different, but akin to, another way Francis has to confuse Catholics: Francispeak ©.
This kind of confusion may seem harmless, but it isn’t. If this is always that and that is actually that other, there are no clear obligations to do anything anymore. If “loving” is “reaching out” every adulterer is loving; if “praying” is “doing good” every atheist is prayerful; if “fasting” is “caressing” every sodomite is fasting, and so on. Again, these kind of outlandish comparisons where everything is something else are everywhere, and whilst the examples of the day might be due to coincidence, the confusion this engenders isn’t. This is, I think, worse than what Amerio called circiterisms. This is deliberate dismounting of concepts, so that the values they represent may be dismantled or at least discounted. The one just mentioned, for example, clearly discounts the act of fasting, intended as fasting. Because hey, if you fast but aren’t “charitable” (which Francis himself never is; but this is because to him “charity” means “subservience to the values of the world”) you are only a hypocrite.
2. Hating the “regular guys”.
It is evident that Francis hates regular people, who have rules and follow them, with all his strenght. At regular, but extremely short intervals he warns us against those people who “follow the rules”, and always ends up calling them “hypocrites” in one way or other. To him, the person who follows the rules just out of love for the Lord, fear of the same or even innate goodness does not exist. Such a character never appears in his examples. It’s always the “hypocrites”. They pray but they pray by rote. They follow the rules but they don’t believe in God. They appear good but they are Pelagians, & Co. On the other hand, homosexual priests are very highly regarded by him. To them, the “who am I to judge” rule applies.
Last example is in a phrase like this: “These hypocritical people are good people, they do whatever they are told to. They seem good!”
It’s always like that with this man. If you follow the rules, he will suspect you of hypocrisy. What does this say of the way he follows the rules, I will leave to your sound judgment.
And it’s not once, or twice. It’s again and again and again. Confusion about the most elementary concepts obviously leads to confusion about the most elementary rules; which is par for the course for one who does not like people who adhere to them.
Read the linked article, and see what kind of twisted thinking the man has: “share your bread with the hungry, this is the kind of fasting that the Lord wants!”
No! No! No! The kind of fasting that the Lord wants is the fast! the fast! What’s so difficult in that?
Confusion, and hate for the rules. Clearly two of the items on Francis’ agenda.