For Bergoglio, however, it appears that Francis is a kind of stage name that goes along with the requisite costume, which is not to suggest that he eschews the power of the papal office, which he exercises with reckless abandon according to his personal views. As he himself insisted in a telephone call to the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires shortly after his election: “‘Oh come on, it’s Father Jorge,’ kind of referencing that it was not a time for official titles.” For Bergoglio, the name Pope Francis is just that—an official title, CEO for the chief operating officer of a corporation or El Presidente for the head of a Latin American banana republic. In his mind he is still the same liberal Jesuit he was before his election to the papacy. We know this because he has said so: “I have not changed my spirituality, no. Francis, Franciscan, no. I feel a Jesuit and I think as a Jesuit. I don’t mean that hypocritically, but I think as a Jesuit.” A neo-Modernist Jesuit, that is, not one of the great old Jesuits from the school of right reason who were formed in the generation before Bergoglio, like Father Vincent Miceli, SJ (1915-1991) or my mentor at Fordham, Father Francis Canavan, SJ (1917-2009).
Now, a Pope who insists he is still a Jesuit has a theological problem Bergoglio himself noted in the same linked interview: “That is a theological question, because Jesuits make a vow of obedience to the Pope. But if the Pope is a Jesuit, perhaps he has to make a vow of obedience to the General of the Jesuits! I don’t know how to resolve this…” I have an idea about how to resolve this: Simply reject the opinions of the liberal Jesuit who refuses to change his way of thinking or even the name on his passport to reflect his papal name. Also, mount opposition to his way of thinking whenever it threatens the integrity of the faith, as it has done again and again over the past six-and-a-half years. That, in fact, is what the faithful have been doing, forming a movement of resistance that now ranges far beyond the ranks of traditionalists. On the other hand, if “Father Jorge” should happen to do or say something consistent with his duty as Vicar of Christ, protector and defender of the Faith, then of course it must be accepted as such. No examples come to mind.
But it is not only Bergoglio’s abundantly demonstrated neo-Modernist antipathy to orthodoxy and orthopraxis that we must reject. There is also the man’s horrendous politics, which is the focus here.
First of all, being same neo-Modernist, Latin American Jesuit he was before his election, Bergoglio’s thinking is replete with the bromides of Liberation Theology and its rich-versus-poor demagoguery. Accordingly, Bergoglio has never met a communist or socialist dictator he doesn’t like or whose tyrannical acts he is willing to criticize. To recall a few salient examples:
- He held hands with Fidel Castro, a mass murderer who persecuted the Church and imprisoned an entire nation, like they were old friends.
- He accepted and brought home to the Vatican the infamous hammer-and-sickle crucifix presented to him by Evo Morales, a tyrannical devotee of the Chinese Communist state model who has been favored with no fewer than six private visits with Bergoglio at the Vatican. Morales was finally forced into exile in Mexico by a mass uprising of the Bolivian people after attempting to rig his “reelection” to an unconstitutional fourth term as dictator. When asked to comment on Morales’s ouster during one of his rambling in-flight press conferences (on the way back to Rome from Japan), Bergoglio refused to say anything because he hadn’t “studied” the matter.
- He administered a personal papal blessing at the Vatican on the very forehead of Nicholas Maduro, the socialist thug who destroyed the once prosperous nation of Venezuela, provoking an inflation rate of 8,000% and reducing the poor to rummaging for food in garbage cans while living large on the backs of the people from whose ranks he rose to oppress them. After local and international monitors determined that Maduro, like Morales, had rigged his own reelection, the opposition leader Juan Guaidó assumed the presidency in January of this year by a vote of the National Assembly. The bishops of Venezuela, the United States, the majority of EU countries and virtually all of Latin America sided with Guaidó. On Maduro’s side were Russia, Cuba, China, Turkey, the United Arab Republic… and Bergoglio. Bergoglio refuses to call for Maduro’s ouster but instead demands endless “dialogue” that leaves the tyrant in power to deploy the national army to block foreign aid to a starving populace while Guaidó’s support erodes.
- He betrayed the Underground Church in China to the butchers of Beijing, legitimating the puppet bishops and priests of Beijing’s pseudo-Church, the “Patriotic Catholic Association,” while never mentioning, much less condemning, its systematic genocide of the unborn under a regime of forced abortion. Quite the contrary, “I love China!” says Bergoglio.
On the other hand, being the leftist ideologue that he is, Bergoglio has been unsparing in his criticism of rightist leaders rising with the international tide of popular resistance to globalism and the mass illegal immigration of military-age Muslim males. While Bergoglio demurred from any comment on the Bolivian situation for lack of “study,” it does not appear that he had conducted any study of various national immigration crises and the policies adopted to address them before he issued his demagogic dictate to world leaders: “Builders of walls, be they made of razor wire or bricks, will end up becoming prisoners of the walls they build.”
This from a Pope who lives behind massive walls that dwarf anything Trump will ever be able to build, surrounding a city-state with Europe’s strictest immigration policy. And what about the prisoners of nations ruled by leftist tyrants? Not a word from Francis in more than seven years of coddling dictators who live in luxury while the people they oppress struggle to survive or seek to escape from their clutches.
Funny how the Man of the People, who lives in a fortress and enjoys the protection of a massive security detail, nevertheless likes to lecture everybody else about the need to tear down walls and build bridges... pic.twitter.com/IHJOVxPiXI— Michael J. Matt (@Michael_J_Matt) October 23, 2019
The only intolerable social injustices Bergoglio appears to perceive from his radically leftist perspective are on the right, including ill-defined income inequalities, consumerism, opposition to open borders in the United States and Europe, and capital punishment, which he opines must be abolished all over the world along with life imprisonment. Never, however, has he demanded the worldwide abolition of legalized abortion—not even the “partial birth” variety. But then, such a demand would render rather awkward his love affair with China. Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, the Argentinian crony and climate change fanatic Bergoglio installed as chancellor of both the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, has echoed Bergoglio's Sinophilia thus: “Right now, those who are best implementing the social doctrine of the Church are the Chinese.” All that was lacking in that astoundingly evil remark was the hissing of a snake.
Nowhere has Jorge Bergoglio’s noxious leftwing politics caused more damage than in Italy. While he lavishes communist and socialist dictators with personal audiences and kowtows to Beijing in betraying the Underground Church in China, Bergoglio has “repeatedly refused attempts by Matteo Salvini to schedule a private audience with him… due to his strong policy of prohibiting migrants from entering through the nation’s ports.” Meanwhile, Bergoglio’s Vatican apparatus and the Italian bishops have connived with President Conte to eliminate the pro-Christian government of Matteo Salvini’s League party (Lega). By forging a devil’s bargain with its avowed political enemy, the leftwing Democratic Party (PD), Conte’s center-right Five Star League (M5S), once allied with the Lega, was able to form a new government and thereby avoid a snap election that would only have restored Salvini and his party to power. The populist government the Italian people had voted into office was thus annihilated in a single session of Parliament. As Salvini later declared: “The only thing that unites them (M5S and PD) is their hatred of the League. The truth is that 60 million Italians are being held hostage by 100 parliamentarians who are dead scared of losing their seats [in a snap election].”
As the journal Foreign Policy observes (subscription required), Italy’s new government, led by Conte as President, is “blessed by the Catholic hierarchy.” The Italian bishops’ conference (CEI) is under Bergoglio’s thumb applied through his subaltern, Gualtiero Bassetti, made a cardinal by Francis in 2014 and appointed by him as CEI President. It was the CEI under Bassettti who approved the new Italian Missal in which Bergoglio’s ridiculous new translations of the Our Father and the Gloria appear, and it was the CEI that published a prayer to the Andean deity Pachamama during the run-up to Bergoglio’s sham synod on the Amazon.
As the piece in Foreign Policy rightly notes, Salvini’s explicitly Catholic nationalism, including his public display of the Rosary and invocations of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, was “in stark contrast with Pope Francis’s vision.” The author of the Foreign Policy piece, Mattia Ferraresi, describes this development as “Italy’s Great Schism.” Ferraresi’s approving description of the “schism” Bergoglio has provoked is a grim diagnosis, however inadvertent, of the pathology of Bergoglianism:
It is a tale of two Catholic churches. One is focused on social justice, welcoming migrants, helping the poor, protecting the environment, defending the virtues of the European Union, and building bridges rather than walls.
It proudly sports a cosmopolitan identity and talks about diversity and inclusion. It firmly opposes leaders like Salvini and U.S. President Donald Trump, whose ideology is one “that always ends badly—it leads to war,” as Pope Francis said in a recent interview with the daily La Stampa, adding that he’s concerned “because we hear speeches that resemble those of Hitler in 1934.” The poster child of this Catholic Church is Greta Thunberg, the Swedish environmental activist whose initiatives have been blessed by the pope.
The other Catholic Church stresses the importance of tradition and defending the so-called Judeo-Christian West from mass immigration, pledges to protect the traditional family, and fights permissive laws on abortion and LGBT rights. It is skeptical of a bureaucratic, highly secularized EU and believes that Christianity thrives in a world organized around nation-states as opposed to supranational organizations. This faction fears that the current Vatican leadership may eventually turn the church into a progressive NGO.
In short, the Bergoglian church of “social justice, welcoming migrants, helping the poor, protecting the environment, defending the virtues of the European Union, and building bridges” stands in opposition to the Catholic Church whose ancient traditions and immutable doctrines Bergoglio so clearly loathes. It is almost literally Bergoglianism versus Catholicism.
Nor does Bergoglianism stop at national borders. Bergoglio has big plans for the realization of his “vision” on a global scale. The charter for global Bergoglianism is the already infamous “Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together” which Bergoglio signed jointly with the “Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Ahmad Al-Tayyeb” in Abu Dhabi (the Abu Dhabi statement). Therein we read the primary tenet of the Bergoglian worldview:
Freedom is a right of every person: each individual enjoys the freedom of belief, thought, expression and action. The pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings. This divine wisdom is the source from which the right to freedom of belief and the freedom to be different derives. Therefore, the fact that people are forced to adhere to a certain religion or culture must be rejected, as too the imposition of a cultural way of life that others do not accept…
In private, but only under worldwide pressure from the Catholic faithful, Bergoglio told Bishop Athanasius Schneider that he (the Bishop) could tell people that “willed by God” means only the permissive will of God, what He tolerates, not what He positively wills. As for Bergoglio, he will say nothing of the kind in public. Quite the contrary, as the signers of the Protest against the Amazon synod (of which I am one) observe:
chieving the goals contained” in the Abu Dhabi statement. Representing the Holy See on the “Higher Committee” are Bishop Miguel Ángel Ayuso Guixot, MCCJ, President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, and Msgr. Yoannis Lahzi Gaid, no less than Bergoglio’s personal secretary.
Exactly what is the “Higher Committee” higher than? Evidently, higher than the Catholic Church in the mind of Bergoglio. Indeed, as the Higher Committee’s website reveals, the Committee has already approved for construction what would be the religious center of the pan-religious utopia of Bergoglio’s vision: the Abrahamic Family House, to be completed by 2020 on Saadiyat Island in Abu Dhabi. As the Committee’s website explains:
One of the first projects the Higher Committee will help guide is the Abrahamic Family House… A reflection of the Document on Human Fraternity, a church, mosque, and synagogue will share a collective space for the first time, serving as a community for inter-religious dialogue and exchange, and nurturing the values of peaceful co-existence and acceptance among different beliefs, nationalities and cultures.
The architect who was awarded the project enthuses that “There has never been a building that has the three faiths in one form. I wanted to see if we could make a building that has the unique experience of each of the faiths but to connect them all with the one device. And that is the garden.” As the linked article notes: “The mosque will be orientated toward the Kaaba in Makkah, the church’s altar will point east towards the sun, and the synagogue's podium and Torah will face Jerusalem.”
The aforementioned Bishop Ayuso Guixot, yet another of the neo-Modernist loons Francis with which Francis is stacking the College of Cardinals, was pleased to report that the Higher Committee “was working to broaden the number of faiths that could eventually be included.” Surely speaking as well for the man who has made him cardinal-elect, Guixot could not be more pleased with the construction of this New Rome for the pluri-confessional civic religion of the New World Order: “This endeavor is a profoundly moving moment for humanity. Although sadly [sic] evil, hatred, and division often make news, there is a hidden sea of goodness that is growing and leads us to hope in dialogue, reciprocal knowledge and the possibility of building – together with the followers of other religions and all men and women of goodwill – a world of fraternity and peace. I would like to thank the UAE for the concrete commitment shown on behalf of human fraternity.”
The Bergoglian pontificate now threatens to usher in the very fulfilment of the dire prophesy of Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique (1910), his condemnation of the utopian, pan-religious Sillon movement France.
And now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.
In fairness to Bergoglio, John Paul II also pursued the same fantasy, prattling on and on about an illusory “civilization of love” first mentioned by Paul VI. But Bergoglio has taken concrete steps to make this dystopia a sociopolitical and even juridical reality. Not only the Higher Committee and the New Rome abuilding Abu Dhabi, but also the authority of the United Nations figures into the plan for a Church that would be subjugated to “the reign of legalized cunning and force.”
In yet another exercise of his ludicrous Airplane Magisterium, Bergoglio had the audacity to declare that Catholic social teaching requires that all men obey, not the Church divinely commissioned to make disciples of all nations, but the United Nations Organization and the International Criminal Court in the Hague:
I would like to repeat what the Doctrine of the Church says about this: When we acknowledge international organisations and we recognise their capacity to give judgment, on a global scale – for example the international tribunal in The Hague, or the United Nations. If we consider ourselves humanity, when they make statements, our duty is to obey. It is true that not all things that appear just for the whole of humanity will also be so for our pockets, but we must obey international institutions. That is why the United Nations were created. That’s why international courts were created.
So, in addition to a Higher Committee presiding over all religions, there must be a Higher Government presiding over all nations as well as a Higher Tribunal with the power to subject the whole world to civil and criminal process.
If only it ended there. Bergoglianism further demands that all children on the planet be educated to assume their proper place in a globalist brotherhood of religious indifferentism. Thus Bergoglio has called literally for a “global village of education” that would produce generation after generation of drones for the One-World hive he is helping to construct, who will dutifully recite the mantras of globalism, including “diversity is our strength”:
We are all called to build a “global village of education.” What a beautiful expression! A global village of education, whose inhabitants generate a network of human relations, which are the best medicine against all forms of discrimination, violence and bullying… In this great village, education becomes the bearer of fraternity and creator of peace among all the peoples of the human family, and also of dialogue between their religions.
Before a vast gathering of students, teachers and families in Saint Peter’s Square, Bergoglio even borrowed Hilary Clinton’s appropriated African saying, demanding that the children repeat it like robots: “This makes me think of an African proverb, which says: ‘It takes a village to raise a child.’ Let us all say it together: ‘It takes a village to raise a child.’ All together: ‘It takes a village to raise a child.’”
Bergoglio’s “global village of education” will naturally require a “global compact of education” that “integrates and respects all aspects of the person, uniting studies and everyday life, teachers, students and their families, and civil society in its intellectual, scientific, artistic, athletic, political, business and charitable dimensions [and]… generates peace, justice and hospitality among all peoples of the human family, as well as dialogue between religions.”
So, the Higher Committee, the Higher Government and the Higher Tribunal would be joined by a Higher School System embracing the whole world, even if local schools, including suitably diverse and inclusive Catholic ones, would still operate within its network. Here too Bergoglio is promoting a concrete structure for the New World Order: the Vatican’s “Scholas Occurrentes” [Schools Meeting], an International Organization of Pontifical Right “that, through its network, encompasses half a million schools and educational networks. Its mission is to achieve the integration of all students worldwide through technological, sports and artistic proposals that promote education from the culture of encounter.”
The powers that be in public education are thrilled by Scholas Occurrentes. As a reported by Zenit, for example, one Alberto Carvalho, Superintendent of the Public Schools of Miami County, enthused that “This is an effort that is worthwhile, which brings together people from all over the world and symbolizes what is common to all, seeking solutions to the problems humanity is facing, and which is under the leadership of him who is one of my heroes — Pope Francis.” Symbolizing what is common to all, while setting aside what is not accepted by all, meaning of course the claims of the Catholic Church on men and nations. Under the leadership of Francis!
The Bergoglian program, were it to be accomplished, would be the Masonic dream fulfilled. That is why Bergoglio is a hero to people like Carvalho, middle management bureaucrats of the worldwide diversity and inclusion regime who think CNN is a reliable news source. But they are mere drones in the hive under construction by the movers and shakers of the great globalist enterprise, including the 4,000 elites who gathered at the recent World Government Summit in—where else?—Abu Dhabi. These elites see Bergoglio for what he is: a useful tool only because he wears the papal white, but otherwise a blathering mediocrity deluded enough to think he is a visionary who will change the world for the better but who has nothing to contribute to their plans beyond the office he abuses.
What, then, can be done about a Pope more interested in promoting a globalist dystopia than the salvation of souls, which he seems to take as a universal given without any necessary relation to the Church he afflicts as its earthly head? The answer is that if Bergoglio wants to be a globalist politician in a cassock, then he must be treated as such. Speaking metaphorically, we must vote him out of office, even if he cannot be removed as Pope.
And how can the faithful do that that? Quite simply, by supporting all the anti-globalist, anti-Islamicization, pro-Christian political leaders and parties that have emerged in opposition to what Bergoglio stands for and constantly abuses the papacy to achieve, including:
- Matteo Salvini and the League party in Italy;
- Marine Le Pen and the National Rally party in France;
- Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party in England;
- Tom Jozef Irène Van Grieken and the Vlaams Belang Party in Belgium;
- Viktor Orban and the Fidesz party in Hungary;
- Geert Wilders and the Party for Freedom in Holland;
- Jaroslaw Kaczynski and the Law and Justice Party in Poland;
- Norbert Hofer and the Austrian Freedom Party in Austria;
- the aptly named Jair Messias Bolsonaro and the inaptly named Social Liberal Party in Brazil;
- Jeanine Áñez Chávez and the Plan Progress for Bolivia Party in Bolivia (elected following the exile of Bergoglio’s socialist friend Evo Morales);
- Andrew Scheer and the Conservative Party in Canada;
- Donald Trump and the Republican Party in the United States.
Despite their obvious deviations from Catholic doctrine on the Christian constitution of states, these leaders and parties must be supported for no other reason than that their deviations, apocalyptically enough, are far less serious than those of the Pope whose leftist agenda they oppose.
Hence in Bolivia, for example, as Father Raymond de Souza reports: “the new interim president of Bolivia, Jeanine Áñez… took office holding an enormous Book of the Gospels, announcing that ‘the Bible was back’ in the presidential office. The hammer and sickle and Pachamama are no longer the accoutrements of the Bolivian president. How long before Jeanine Áñez is given a warm welcome at the Vatican?” The question answers itself.
And in Brazil, President Bolsonaro, who barely survived an assassination attempt aimed at preventing his election, rejects the entire globalist program to which Bergoglio is determined to commit the Church. Speaking at the United Nations this year, Bolsonaro did something Bergoglio would never dream of doing. He declared that the Law of the Gospel, not the UN, is the foundation of true justice in the world:
We are not here to erase nationalities and overrule sovereignty in the name of an abstract ‘global interest.’ This is not the Global Interest Organization! This is the United Nations organization. And so it must remain…. When it comes to matters related to climate, democracy, human rights, to the equality of rights and duties between men and women and many others, all we need to do is contemplate the truth, following John 8:32. “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”…
Over the past few decades, we let ourselves be seduced by ideologies that sought not truth, but absolute power… Ideology has invaded our homes and tried to dismantle what is the celula mater of any healthy society: the family. It has also tried to destroy the innocence of our children in an attempt to corrupt even their most basic and elementary identity: the biological one.
Ideology has invaded the human soul to rip it apart from God and from the dignity He bestowed on us…. And with these methods, ideology has always left a trail of death, ignorance, and misery wherever it went. I am living proof of this, I was cowardly knife-stabbed by a leftist militant and only survived by a miracle. Once again, I thank God for my life.
It was Bolsonaro who, in a speech delivered in 2017, said something Bergoglio would sneeringly deride as “fundamentalism” even though—nay, precisely because—it reflects the Church’s constant teaching on the Social Kingship of Christ: “God above everything. There is no such thing as a secular state. The state is Christian, and any minority that is against this has to change, if they can.” And it was Bolsonaro who, last May, signed an historic proclamation consecrating Brazil to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. The consecration ceremony was conducted by the traditionalist bishop Fernando Areas Rifan in the presidential palace, where a statute of the Virgin was permanently enshrined in a place of honor. During the ceremony, a co-signatory of the proclamation with Bishop Areas and President Bolsonaro, the cabinet minister Floriano Peixoto, declared: “This space and all our public buildings are places in which the Christian faith is professed.” If only one could say the same thing about the halls of the Vatican.
Likewise, before his government was ousted with the connivance of Bergoglio’s henchmen, Matteo Salvini dedicated Italy to the Immaculate Heart—the last thing Bergoglio would do. Before a huge crowd gathered in the Piazza del Duomo in Milan, Salvini “held up a rosary and kissed it. Looking up at a statue of the Virgin Mary atop the cathedral of Milan, he said, ‘I entrust Italy, my life, and your lives to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, who I’m sure will bring us to victory.’” Bergoglio and his inner circle were no doubt revulsed by the news. In fact, as LifeSiteNews reported at the time: “Vatican leaders outraged as anti-immigration politician commends Italy to Mary.” Bergoglio’s Secretary of State, Cardinal Parolin, babbled that “partisan politics divides, but God belongs to everyone. Invoking God for oneself is always very dangerous.”
Politics being the art of the possible, barring any violation of the Catholic conscience the world’s Catholic faithful must do everything possible in the political arena to oppose Bergoglio in his persona as a Latin American leftist hack. If Bergoglio had his way, all that passes for political conservatism in Europe, North America and Latin America would be expunged from public life and the faithful in every nation would find themselves at the mercy of ruthless secular dictatorships like the one the Democrat-controlled House is at this very moment previewing for America should Trump, God forbid, be removed from office or defeated in the 2020 election.
Therefore, down with Presidente Bergoglio! And up with every political leader, party and movement that rejects his idiotic politics. As for Pope Francis, if and when the actual Vicar of Christ has something to say in the domain of traditional Catholic teaching on faith and morals, the faithful will be only too happy to heed him. For that, however, they are still waiting.