As many of you know, Volpi in Italian means, literally, “foxes”. More probably it is the usual patronymic, from the Latin Vulpii, “(the son) of Vulpius”. Be it as it may, the man's name means “fox”. And a very, very ugly fox this one is. Fox is, as every Englishman knows, officially classified as vermin. Father Volpi is, of course, not vermin. He has an immortal soul. But I doubt this fox will – vermin, or not – manage to escape the hounds.
We are now reliably informed that even the Italian civil justice (which has improved in the last decades, but still is a rather Kafkaesque experience) is more rapid than the heavily modernised, poor-minded, environment-loving, Christ-oblivious, shower-installing apparatus of the Bishop of Rome. Which says not something but, actually, an awful lot.
What has – we are reliably informed – happened, is that the Fox has been condemned to pay the non indifferent amount of €20,000 as a compensation for the slander against Father Manelli.
Now, please understand how the Italian defamation laws work. If one is a public personage, the public criticism against him can go rather far. In doing this, however, it must be clear that the criticism is a political one, not a personal slander.
If one were to say: “Berlusconi is the prostitute of the tax-evaders”, it would be clear that Berlusconi is not being accused of prostitution in the proper sense of the world, and the criticism is a robust criticism of his political activity. But if one were to write: “Berlusconi has stolen from the secret funds of the Italian Home Office” he had better have reliable, at least anecdotical evidence of what he is saying, or else an awful lot of Elton John treatment will soon be in store for him.
Slander is a serious matter. No one can accuse someone of misappropriating the funds of a religious order just because he wants to massacre his reputation, on the way to the massacre of his order. This is something that completely destroys the credibility of the man making the slanderous accusations, and that makes him unfit to keep having influence on the man he has slandered and on his order.
Volpi will, if Francis has any decency left, be made to go. The hounds are very near to his throat.
Still, two considerations must be made.
1) it is doubtful whether Francis has any decency left. I would answer that in the negative. One who lives under the roof of a poof, and receives a Trannie and his “fiancé”, clearly does not know where decency lives. If Francis forces Volpi to go it will be because of opportunity, not decency.
2) it is even more doubtful – it is, actually, unrealistic – to think that when the hounds hunt down this very ugly fox the persecution of the FFI will end. The FFI is persecuted because Francis wants it so. Volpi is mot the main culprit; merely the very nasty, ugly executioner.
Therefore, if you think that the FFI is soon to be restored to normality I suggest you curb your enthusiasm. In order for this to happen, Francis must see a political advantage for him in rehabilitating them. I do not see why Volpi's behaviour would change anything in Francis' one.
The only hope that the persecution ends during Francis' pontificate lies in the common, universally spread knowledge that the FFI's persecution happened because of his will, and on his orders. Then, and not before, Francis will have a real, concrete interest to say he never had anything to do with it because he happened to be in the bathroom, or was about embracing wheelchairs, or was just conversing with some Trannie buddy of his.
The hounds might well kill this fox; but the persecution of the FFI will, I am afraid, soon go on unabated.
I am extremely thankful to the “Eponymous Flower” for their sterling work concerning what is happening in Paraguay.
There, you have a very conservative Bishop (uh? It reminds me of the FFI), who is therefore very successful (the analogy continues) and shames his peers by showing how it’s done (interesting!).
Someone accuses Bishop Livieres Plano of misconduct of various kind (where have I heard this?), and he is suddenly removed whilst savage rumours about his past and integrity emerge (Father Manelli anyone?).
The Vatican communiqué talks, ominously, of “unity of the Church”. At this point, yours truly has no doubts anymore.
The Bishop is, like Father Manelli and the FFI, a “threat to the unity of the Church” because he is an orthodox Catholic, shaming the clowns around him.
This cannot be tolerated. He must be removed, his work destroyed, his sheep reeducated to the NuChurch of Vatican II. He must be, if possible, personally destroyed. We have already seen this movie. This is a remake in great style.
Given the precedent of the FFI, I allow myself to consider, until evidence to the contrary emerges, the orthodox Catholic Bishop the good one, and The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History (TMAHICH) the villain. If anything, because I have the villain’s disgraceful acts in front of my eyes every day. In these cases, my suggestion to the “there are things we do not know” Apostles is the same as always:
But let us imagine that the Bishop Livieres Plano is truly bad. Let us imagine – just for the sake of reasoning, poor man… – that we are here in front of another Maciel.
Why, then, the appeal for to the “unity of the Church”, a clear indication that the Bishop was removed because he refused to dance the Tango of Vatican II together with all the other bishops?
Why would in this case Francis not appoint substitutes (the provisional one, and then the definitive one) who are every bit as conservative and orthodox as the disgraced man, in order to show that the problem lies merely in his personal conduct? The substitute is, from what we know, one in the mould of Archbishop Cupich. I foresee a brilliant career for him as long as Francis is Pope. Particularly if he is a pervert. But no, the kind of appointment clearly show the accusation of misconduct were, even if proven true, just a “happy” coincidence in the effort to remove sound Catholicism from the Church.
Then there is one last thought I would want to share with you.
Has anyone ever examined the long past of Francis as Bishop and Archbishop? What about a visitation, and thorough going through archives, press, testimonies, and street gossip? Are we sure no episodes of a questionable nature can be found? Is this not the man who was once found with marijuana in his luggage? (I wish I could find the link). How many priests has a bishop or archbishop? How easy is it to accuse him first, and disgrace them in the meantime? How would Francis like the Manelli treatment applied to him and his tenure in Argentina as rector of a seminary, bishop and Archbishop?
Do not be fooled. This is another instalment of the Stalinian purge Francis is executing. When Francis is done with this, the TLM and orthodoxy will get out of the window of the diocese as fast as practicable.
The man is an utter disgrace, a damn clerical Che, and a tool of Satan.
Let us pray the Lord every day that He may, in His mercy, free us from this horrible, if utterly deserved punishment.
Possibly homosexual priest promotes sodomy his entire life.
Francis receives him.
He concelebrates Mass with him.
He even kisses his hand.
(The priest is the one dressed like a layman, with a cross added)
Homosexual priest has given open scandal in South America for many years.
He is allowed to run three Vatican hotels, where religious of a certain kind can, more or less casually, meet other religious of a certain kind, undisturbed.
Francis lives under his roof.
He also promoted the man to an extremely high position, at the head of the Vatican Bank.
Francis is photographed with him in a very friendly attitude.
Perfectly orthodox priests from a very saintly family co-founds a perfectly orthodox religious order that becomes among the most successful within the Church.
He is slandered and confined at home, whilst Francis goes over his order with the steamroller.
Time to wake up.