At the cost of stating the obvious, I will point out that feasts like this one (or like Corpus Domini, or the feast of Christ the King) are there to put certain fundamental aspects of Christianity and Catholicism very forcibly in front of the faithful. The Holy Trinity is, clearly, indispensable component of every Christian thinking.
Still, one wonders how the message can get through, be interiorised and really made their own by the faithful, if the same Trinity is downplayed by the same Not-very-holy Father.
To say that Mohammedans believe in the same God as Christians is to deny the Trinity. To think that Jews do not need to believe in it to be saved is to deny it in a more subtle way.
Francis clearly baptises in the name of the Priest, the Imam and the Rabbi. To him, it's all pretty much the same, and the Trinity is rather an afterthought, something Catholics happen to believe, but which should not be seen as an indispensable component to try to understand God.
The relentless effort to make Christianity acceptable to non-Christians unavoidably creates a mish-mash of blasphemies, errors and utter stupidity that must be unacceptable to Christ, if Christ's words have to have a meaning and a purpose.
The result of this madness is a “one-world” religion… without the Trinity. But hey, we don't want such small details to get in the way of the understanding among the peoples, or the understanding between the Pope and his best buddy.
Soon the time will come when the Trinity, the Transubstation, and all other Christian or Catholic specific traits will be utterly ignored, or treated as an innocent quirk of the “One religion”. We are OK, but they are OK too. We have our own way and they have theirs. Proselytism is a solemn nonsense. Convert the other? No, no, no!
Therefore, today we celebrate the feast of the Holy Trinity; which, if what Francis says has some sense, means to him the celebration of an optional belief Catholics seem very attached to, but not an indispensable component of the belief in the One World God.
It says here that O’Malley’s shares are booming, and Dolan’s ones are tanking.
There is probably some truth in this (it is a fact O’Malley was picked, and even Dolan might be a tad too conservative for Francis), but there might be a lot of wishful thinking, particularly considering the general tone of the article. When they have nothing to write, journalists can invent astonishing trends.
What one notices is that O’Malley’s Methodist stunt with the overweight wannabe priestess “who could hardly speak for hours afterwards” is clearly having the desired effect: he is now the darling of “progressives”, the forward-thinking prelate, and the cool man on Francis’ side.
At this point, one can only suggest that the Cardinal profits from the moment and visits the Synagogue in Buenos Aires with a photographer in tow (there was one there also by the Methodists, apparently) and gets an old Jewish blessing from Rabbi Skorka, with photos all over the planet in a matter of hours.
No doubt, many bloggers would hasten to explain to us O’Malley has not converted to Judaism, so it’s all fine.
Another man who has been pretty much everywhere in the news since March is Mister Skorka, the pro-homo Rabbi who is the best buddy of our own Bishop of Rome.
Skorka clearly enjoys his popularity, because he can’t stay away from journalists. His friend shines, and he will have some of the limelight for himself. That’s another “modest” and “unassuming” man, then. Dio li fa e poi li accoppia, says the Italian (“God makes them, and then He puts them together”).
Every time Skorka talks to journalists, he stresses how un-Catholic Francis is. Thinking, poor deluded man, that in so doing he makes him a service, but in reality giving a disquieting portrait of the Bishop of Rome; the more so because coming from his infidel Best Male Friend – after the death of the adulterous concubine of a Bishop, the female role must probably go the Chaouqui woman -; this must be very alarming for every sound thinking Catholic.
The last interview I came across is here. It contains several pearls of stupidity, which let us think the man will soon be asked by his buddy Jorge to have the kindness to shut up, at least when journalists are around.
Let us see some of them:
When Francis was Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, archbishop of Buenos Aires, he and Skorka co-wrote a book of dialogues on Judaism and Roman Catholicism titled, “On Heaven and Earth,” had a similarly themed TV show called “Bible, A Dialogue for Today,” and offered prayers from each other’s pulpits.
Fantastic. Not only the two wrote a book together meant to confuse Catholics, but even made a TV show for those with no intention of reading the book. To make it more confusing, they had the rabbi preaching from the pulpit, and the Archbishop from the Synagogue. This is pure Indifferentism. If this is evangelisation, I am a Rabbi. The real Rabbi is very proud. He can’t see the problem.
“There is overall a very deep respect for the other,” Skorka said. “His commitment with the Jewish people is total.”
I agree. His commitment with the Jewish people is total. His commitment to Jesus and to the conversion of Jews is, on the other hand, exactly zero. One can imagine Francis in Jesus’ time, “fully committed” to the Pharisees and expecting to be made an apostle (fat chance: there was Jesus around, not V II). I am sure he does not see the contradiction. Hey, he is “building bridges”. That man on the cross is so narrow-minded, with his message of universal conversion. He should not be so “obsessed” with conversion, eh? no? “Go ye therefore, and confuse all nations, making a TV show in the name of the Rabbi, the Archbishop and the Dialogue”.
More of this stuff:
Skorka said the pope is so comfortable with Jewish culture that as he vetted meals at the Vatican hotel to make sure the rabbi was given only kosher food, Francis joked he was the rabbi’s personal “mashgiach,” the Hebrew word for a supervisor in a restaurant or other business who oversees compliance with Jewish dietary laws.
Someone should tell Francis that Jewish dietary rules are not meant to keep the cholesterol level low, but are religious ones. If he helps Jews to follow them, he helps them to remain Jewish, and reinforces in them the opinion that this is right so.
I am OK. You are OK. Never mind Jesus.
The reference to the “mashgiach” is truly alarming: Skorka is saying that Francis is a real expert in kosher food. Not bad for one who doesn’t even know that atheists who die in their unbelief go to hell, and thinks individual conscience is the metre of right and wrong. If Francis should ever resign as Pope, “mashgiac” might be a good next step.
“When he speaks about evangelization, the idea is to evangelize Christians or Catholics,” to reach “higher dimensions of faith” and a deepened commitment to social justice, Skorka said. “This is the idea of evangelization that Bergoglio is stressing – not to evangelize Jews. This he told me, on several opportunities.”
More obscenities. Bergoglio makes clear to his circumcised friend that he has no intention whatever to convert him or any of his. Remember “Rehab”? Let’s refresh Francis’ words:
“Do you need to convince the other to become Catholic? No, no, no! Go out and meet him, he is your brother. This is enough. Go out and help him and Jesus will do the rest”.
Jesus can do everything, but Francis certainly doesn’t help him when a Rabbi (and, by extension, every non-Catholic) is encouraged not to convert by the very Pope. Actually, it is fair to say Francis positively and actively works against Jesus. At least if the word “evangelisation” is to have any sense; as in “lead people to believe in the One True Faith” rather than, as Francis clearly believes, “meet other people and let Jesus do the rest”.
Some people say with Francis more people are going to church. If it turned out to be true, methinks they do so safe in the certainty that no one will ask them to become Catholic.
Now let me see: how does the Catholic Encyclopedia describes religious indifferentism?
One has the impression the line was written just after reading the latest interview of Rabbi Skorka, or the “no, no, no!” exploit of the present Bishop of Rome.
It goes on.
A book has arrived. It is from… Hans Kueng!
One of the books had been sent and inscribed by the dissident theologian Hans Kung. “Both of us stood one very close to the other trying to read the German dedication,” Skorka said. “Something like, ‘You already did a lot, but the world expects from you to continue doing very important things.'”
You can picture the two, excited like two children on the morning of Christmas’ day (or should I say Hanukkah?) whilst unwrapping the gifts. “A book! Hans Kueng has sent us a book! What does the dedication say, Jorge? Eh? Eh?”. “He says I must continue to do very important things! Oh joyous day!”.
I’d have given them both a Baltimore catechism. But that one is the Pope, I’d have given it to both of them on the head first.
The rabbi said the pope is aware that some religious conservatives, inside and outside the church, are unsettled by his approach. Francis has said Catholic leaders have been driving people away by talking too much about divisive social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. The pope has dropped some of the more regal trappings of the papacy. He uses a Ford Focus instead of fancier cars in the Vatican fleet and wears only the most basic clothes.
Well if even he is aware, it means the noise is rather strong. Good. Note how the man considers the defence of life “divisive”, but finds so good that one uses a Ford Focus. A genius he ain’t, this one.
“He is receiving very, very harsh criticism from people who don’t like a pope without red shoes, and a pope who speaks to people in a very simple and direct language, and a pope who will transmit to people that he is close to them, that he in some way hugs them through jokes and through simple words and through simple expressions,” Skorka said. “The criticism he is suffering from is not new for him. He already had this kind of pressures and other kind of pressures during his serving as archbishop of Buenos Aires, so he knows exactly how to handle these pressures. He’s a very strong man and he will go ahead.”
Well, I must correct myself. Rabbi Skorka is a nincompoop. There is no other adjective for one that after seven months of heresies and assorted scandal, some of them just repeated by himself, thinks that “religious conservatives” have targeted Francis with “very harsh criticism” because of his lack of red shoes, or the like. This Skorka man may be a Jew, but if he opens his mouth he must know what he is talking about, or should keep it shut. He obviously doesn’t do either. To him, the fact that the Pope does not want to convert him is a good thing and makes of him a good Pope.
I think Skorka might be slightly confused. Perhaps what he wants to say is that Francis would be a good Rabbi.
Very fit on Jewish dietary rules. No intention of letting anyone defect to the followers of that narrow-minded Christ. Total commitment to the Jewish people.
Enjoy Francis, the Jesuit Pope.
Monsignor Ricca, the creepy scandalous sodomite at the head of the Vatican Bank: who is he to judge?
Maria Immacolata Chaouqui, a rather sluttish E & Y consultant now promoted to “adviser” of the Pope. St Catherine of Siena, she ain’t.
Rabbi Skorka, the infidel who is in favour of so-called same sex couples. Closest buddy evah.
Clelia Luro, who left her husband to become the concubine of a former Catholic bishop. Phone call every week. Recently passed away.
I wasn’t there, of course, and can therefore not give witness of what exactly has caused the last madness of the Bishop of Rome: the interview with Scalfari.
I am, though, old enough to try to make a hypothesis – as charitable as I can – of what I think led to the present meltdown in the Domus Sanctae Marthae. If you think I am not entitled to make such hypotheses stop reading now, or hold your tongue. Otherwise, this is what I think might have happened.
– Francis obviously doesn’t trust many people. He feels that the Vatican apparatus is his enemy, bent on blocking every initiative of his. They don’t know anything of the favela, you know. They listen to Beethoven, dress exquisitely, and eat like princes. Among them, he feels like a revolutionary peasant in the middle of the bureaucrats of the King he has just deposed.
– He thinks he knows everything better, though. He has a certain idea (heretical, and stupid; but this post is not about that) of how the Church must become: a confused, explosive mixture of Peron, Chavez and Che Guevara; a mixture of which he has persuaded himself, a long time ago, that it is something not only good, but even Christian. He knows the Vatican “machine” is out there to (to use the delightful expression of “Yes, Minister”) “house train” him, and he therefore decides to “do his own thing” without looking left or right.
– His pride therefore leads him to isolation. He has nowhere to turn among the soft-spoken, but extremely alert personnel of the Vatican. He fears encirclement, isolation and, ultimately, castration. He decides not to enter the Papal Apartments, and to live as far away as he can from the Vatican bourgeoisie. A self-appointed spiritual son of the favela, he knows they are his class enemies.
– Coherently with his Jesuit-born “all you need is luv” religion, he starts surrounding himself with strange people. People like the homosexual Ricca, whom Francis keeps near him – very near him, actually – even after a huge scandal erupts. Francis does not care much of what other people think, so he does not think it fit to send Ricca in the wilderness – as a layman, if you ask me -. At least, he does not care as long as they do not dent his ceaseless quest for approval and popular adoration, which is proving more and more the most evident weakness of this, in the best case, mediocre man. He must think – I am charitable again – that he is doing what the Lord (or at least the very confused image he allowed himself to have of Him) would want him to do and, blinded by vanity, must see the popular approval as the evidence that he is on the right track. Vox populi, vox dei: the battle cry of demagogues and vainglorious leaders since time immemorial.
– Francis ends up, then, with a very close circle of trusted friends, none of them prudent or expert, none of them fit in Catholicism, many of them certainly sycophants. It’s the eternal bane of power, that wants the boss relentlessly subject to flattery of all sort. If he is a man of integrity, he will deal with it brilliantly. If he is Francis, he will soon believe he is the one who will be remembered in the centuries for his groundbreaking revolucion.
– I think I might know who some of these friends are. If they aren’t exactly those ones, then they are people like them. People with an agenda, or people who do not know, or people who do not care. They become the inner circle of this lonely wannabe revolutionary, and help him to fabricate his own personal tragedy. He doesn’t see the pit, because he isn’t enough intelligent or humble for that, and like all those who aren’t very intelligent he believes himself extremely smart. This is why he puts a bomb under his chair every two weeks, and still thinks he is doing just fine.
– One of these people might just be Monsignor Ricca. Francis wanted to keep him near him as the head of the Domus Sanctae Marthae, and he evidently trusts his advice. Don’t laugh. Francis is just the type to ask a scandalous faggot what he thinks of his theological views. Faggot priests he has seen and tolerated enough and for long enough, and, in his own words, “who is he to judge?”.
– Another one of these people might well be Rabbi Skorka, his dear buddy from Argentina who, besides being a Jew (no, they do not believe in the same God as we. They truly don’t!) is in favour of perverted “unions”. Skorka was in Rome around the time of the interview. He is possibly Francis’ closest friend, or at least one of his closest friends. Francis is so confused concerning matters of religion, that this very Skorka said in an interview Francis watches that he eats kosher. I kid you not. Google it!***
– If this is the morning, how can the day be any better than what we have just seen? Is it so unrealistic to think that Francis receives the draft of the interview, has it open on his desk, knows that it will be read the world over, and asks for advice people like Ricca and Skorka, and perhaps these very two? What will, then, a faggot and a Jew say to him when they see him (unwittingly, perhaps; again, he is not a genius) demolishing the Catholic faith? Will they say to him “are you sure this is how you want to be seen?” Will they say to him “I am not sure this is very Catholic?” Or are they going to say to him “this is so beautiful, Jorge! The world will applaud you! This is the dawn of a new era of peace, dialogue, understanding among the people, luuuv, and you are the prophet who ushers this new Christian (!) vision!” ?
– Again: Francis might not have asked exactly Skorka and Ricca (though again, he might well have asked just those two: they were near enough, and are trusted enough). But if he has cut himself out of sound advice – as he must if he wants to pursue his revolutionary plan; and as abundantly showed by his decision to avoid the Papal Apartments – he must have around him an awful lot of sycophants, perverts and unbelievers; people seeking personal promotion and advantage, or perhaps even believing in their very badly formed conscience that they are doing the right thing, and working for “world peace”. You read Skorka’s words, and you realise besides a thin varnish of Christ put here and there by Francis there isn’t much difference between the two: peace, dialogue, understanding, love; more peace, more love, more dialogue. Individual conscience, no matter how badly formed, is the metre of everything. Are you a Jew? Eat kosher!
If this is true, it become not only clear, but unavoidable how the meltdown could happen: when a confused Peronist who would be astonished at reading the Penny Catechism decides he can do without the “leprosy” of the Vatican apparatus, the result can only be the decision to publish the Scalfari interview as we have all read it, and allow it to go around worldwide without a word of correction.
Word, by the way, for which I am still waiting: then up to now an awful lot of people has started saying the interview does not reflect the Pope’s thinking; only, not the Pope.
I know, I know. Some of you think this is a far too gentle reading of the events, and I understand these readers though I do not agree with them. I do not think he is willfully evil. I think he is very confused, very ignorant (and I mean brutally ignorant, as in “no knowledge of the very basics”: commandments, sins crying for vengeance, works of mercy, stuff like that…) and naturally arrogant, and the mixture of the three leads him to believe he is being a good Catholic.
A thin excuse I know, and the Pope is the last one who can be excused for not having a properly formed conscience. Still, I would say it’s still better than the malicious intent. At least one can hope he lives and learns.
Pray for our confused, ignorant and arrogant Pope. It’s the confused, ignorant and arrogant Popes who need our prayers the most.
*** Then people are surprised he considers proselytism nonsense…