Tag Archives: Jorge Bergoglio

‘Pope’ Francis joked about Christ’s crucifixion

On March 13, 2013, Argentinian Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio was elected pope. The next month, in April 2013, G. P. Putnam’s Sons published the book Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words.

The book was well received, and currently has an impressive rating on Amazon, of 4.6 out of 5 stars, from 74 customer reviews. 74% of the reviews gave the book a maximum 5-stars rating.

The book is actually an English translation of a Spanish-language book that was published in 2010, titled El Jesuita: Conversaciones con el Cardenal Jorge Bergoglio, SJ (The Jesuit: Conversations with Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, SJ), which was jointly authored by Sergio Rubin and Francesca Ambrogetti.

What readers of the English-language Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words don’t know is that the editor(s) deliberately left out a passage contained in the original Spanish-language El Jesuita.

On pages 26-27 of the English-language Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words, Bergoglio’s interviewer said: “But the main emblem of Catholicism is a Crucified Christ dripping blood . . .”, to which Bergoglio replied:

“The exaltation of suffering in the Church depends a great deal on the era and culture. The Church has represented Christ according to the cultural environment of the time. If you look at Eastern icons, Russian, for example, you realize they have very few images of a sorrowful crucifixion. It’s more common to see the resurrection. On the other hands, if we look at the Spanish Baroque period or the icons of Cuzco, Peru, we find images of Christ with His patience torn to shreds, because the Baroque era emphasized Jesus’ passion. White Crucifixion, by Marc Chagall, who was a Jewish believer, is not cruel but hopeful. Pain is depicted there with serenity. To my mind, it’s one of the most beautiful things he painted.”

Below are scans of pp. 26-27 of Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words, provided by Call Me Jorge blog. You can verify this by seeing pp. 26-27 on Amazon, here. I painted the red squares around the relevant passage.

↓ Click image to enlarge ↓

Note that in the English-language Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words, Bergoglio’s comments on the subject (the main emblem of Catholicism is a Crucified Christ dripping blood) ended with the sentence “To my mind, it’s one of the most beautiful things he painted.”

Not so in the original Spanish-language El Jesuita. There, Bergoglio continued by laughingly telling a story about how a Catholic priest succeeded in getting an unruly Jewish boy to behave. Pointing at the crucifix, the priest tells the boy if he doesn’t behave, “the same thing” will happen to him as the Jew who was crucified.

Here’s the story told by Bergoglio, on page 42 of the Spanish-language El Jesuita:

Trata acerca de un chico judio a quien echaban de todas las escuelas por indisciplinado hasta que otro judio le recomienda al padre un “buen colegio de curas”. Y lo anima diciendole que, seguramente, alli lo van a enderezar. El padre acepta el consejo. Es asi como pasa el primer mes y el chico se comporta muy bien, no tiene ninguna amonestacion. Tampoco tiene problemas de conducta en los siguientes meses. El padre, ganado por la curiosidad, va a ver al rector para saber como habia logrado encarrilarlo. “Fue muy sencillo”, le responde el sacerdote. “El primer dia lo tome de una oreja y le dije senalandole el crucifico: ‘Ese era judio como vos; si te portas mal, te va a pasar lo mismo.'”

Below is Google Translate‘s translation of the above passage into English:

It is about a Jewish boy who was thrown out of all the schools by undisciplined until another Jew recommends the father a “good school of cures”. And he encourages him to say that, surely, there they will straighten him out. Father accepts advice. This is how the first month goes by and the boy behaves very well, he has no admonition. He also has no behavior problems in the following months. The father, won by curiosity, goes to see the rector to know how he had managed to put him in charge. “It was very simple,” the priest replied. “On the first day I took him by the ear and I said pointing to the crucifix: ‘That was a Jew like you; If you behave badly, the same thing will happen to you.'”

Below are scans of pp. 41-42 of El Jesuita (provided by Call Me Jorge blog). I painted a red box around the passage that is in both Call Me Jorge and Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words, and a blue box around the passage that is in Call Me Jorge but deliberately left out of Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words.

↓ Click image to enlarge ↓

Anyone who would make our Lord’s suffering and death on the cross a butt of jokes is neither Catholic nor Christian, and most certainly not the Pope of the Catholic Church. Jorge Bergoglio is an anti-pope and a despicable man.

H/t John Molloy

See also:

~Eowyn

Advertisements

Pope Francis ‘grieves’ over death of Fidel Castro who persecuted Catholics & lived in luxury while Cubans starved

On November 25, 2016, Cuba’s longtime dictator Fidel Castro finally died at the ripe old age of 90.

Reuters reports the next day:

Pope Francis said the death of Cuba’s revolutionary leader Fidel Castro was “sad news” and that he was grieving and praying for his repose.

Francis expressed his condolences in a Spanish-language message to Fidel’s brother, President Raul Castro on Saturday.

The pope, who met Fidel Castro when he visited Cuba last year, said he had received the “sad news” and added: “I express to you my sentiments of grief.”

pope-francis-meets-fidel-castro

The dictionary defines “grief” as sadness, pain, or great sorrow over a loss.

Below is a glimpse of the kind of man Fidel Castro was, for whose death Pope Francis, real name Jorge Bergoglio, “grieves”:

  • Though baptized as a Catholic and educated in schools run by the Jesuits, the same religious order as Bergoglio, Castro was an avowed atheist who persecuted the Catholic church during his reign, sending priests to re-education camps and restricting the celebration of Christian holidays. Castro was reportedly excommunicated under an anti-Communist decree by Pope Pius XII in 1962.
  • Forbes magazine reports that despite the warm reception given Pope Francis last fall, the Cuban government not only continues to persecute Christians, a new report by Christian Solidarity Worldwide warns of “an unprecedented crackdown on churches across the denominational spectrum,” which has fueled a spike in reported violations of freedom of religion or belief to 2,300 cases of violations in 2016 from just 40 cases in 2011. Many of the government’s crackdowns “involved entire churches or, in the cases of arrests, dozens of victims.”
  • While pretending to be for the common people, Fidel actually lived a life of luxury and debauchery, according to a book by Castro’s longtime bodyguard Juan Reinaldo Sanchez, The Double Life of Fidel Castro: My 17 Years as Personal Bodyguard to El Líder Maximo. As recounted by the New York Post: “With his shaggy beard and rumpled, olive-drab fatigues, Fidel Castro presented himself to the world as a modest man of the people. At times, he claimed he made just 900 pesos ($43) a month and lived in a ‘fisherman’s hut’ somewhere on the beach. But Castro’s public image was a carefully crafted myth, more fiction than fact. While his people suffered, Fidel Castro lived in comfort — keeping everything, including his eight children, his many mistresses, even his wife, a secret . . . . Castro . . . made a personal fortune offering safe haven to drug traffickers, bedded a bevy of women over the decades, and once threatened his own brother, Raul, with execution when the brother lapsed into alcoholism in the ’90s . . . . Castro kept 20 luxurious properties throughout the Caribbean nation, including his own island, accessed via a yacht decorated entirely in exotic wood imported from Angola . . . . [Castro’s 5 sons with his second wife] grew up in hidden luxury on an estate outside Havana. With its orange, lemon, mandarin, grapefruit and banana trees, the estate resembled a veritable garden of Eden — especially if one compared it with the notorious ration book that all Cubans had to use to buy food. . . . Each member of the family possessed his or her own cow, ‘so as to satisfy each one’s individual taste, since the acidity and creaminess of fresh milk varies from one cow to another.'” Meanwhile, the Cuban people lived in deep poverty — of crumbling houses, food rations, and teen prostitution. Political opponents were executed by the thousands by firing squad, or sentenced to decades of hard labor.

To call Jorge Bergoglio “Pope” is a travesty.

See also:

~Eowyn

Editor of ‘First Things’ religious journal declares Pope Francis a failure

First Things is an ecumenical, conservative religious journal founded in 1990 by Richard John Neuhaus, a prominent intellectual and Lutheran minister who converted to the Catholic Church and entered the priesthood shortly after the journal’s founding.

Published by the New York-based Institute on Religion and Public Life, with a circulation of approximately 30,000 copies, the influential journal is inter-denominational and inter-religious, representing a broad intellectual tradition of Christian and Jewish critique of contemporary society.

First Thingscontributors include many well-known intellectuals and religious figures such as George Weigel, Michael Novak, William Bennett, Peter L. Berger, David Horowitz, Ralph McInerny, Cardinal Avery Dulles, and bishop Charles J. Chaput. So it is significant that the journal’s current literary editor, Matthew Schmitz, in an op/ed published in the New York Times on Sept. 28, 2016, declares Pope Francis a failure.

Schmitz arrived at the assessment using, as his yardstick, “the Francis effect” — whether Francis’ papacy has increased the number of Catholics, as measured, for example, by Mass attendance. Alas, in the United States, despite the (liberal) media’s hailing of Francis, Mass attendance not only has not increased since the former Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio became Pope in 2013, attendance had actually decreased. And it’s not just in the U.S. but also in Italy, where the Vatican is located.

Schmitz concludes that the (seeming) popularity achieved by Francis/Bergoglio is a personal one, at the expense of the Catholic Church.

Below is Schmitz’ op/ed in its entirety.

Pope Francis hides the Crucifix meeting Israeli rabbis

Pope Francis hides the Crucifix meeting Israeli rabbis

About the above pic, see “Pope Francis is ashamed of the Cross, knows better than the Gospels“.

Has Pope Francis Failed?

By Matthew Schmitz • New York Times • September 28, 2016

When Pope Francis ascended to the chair of St. Peter in March 2013, the world looked on in wonder. Here at last was a pope in line with the times, a man who preferred spontaneous gestures to ritual forms. Francis paid his own hotel bill and eschewed the red shoes. Rather than move into the grand papal apartments, he settled in the cozy guesthouse for visitors to the Vatican. He also set a new nondogmatic tone with statements like “Who am I to judge?

Observers predicted that the new pope’s warmth, humility and charisma would prompt a “Francis effect” — bringing disaffected Catholics back to a church that would no longer seem so forbidding and cold. Three years into his papacy, the predictions continue. Last winter, Austen Ivereigh, the author of an excellent biography of Pope Francis, wrote that the pope’s softer stance on communion for the divorced and remarried “could trigger a return to parishes on a large scale.” In its early days, Francis’ Jesuit order labored to bring Protestants back into the fold of the church. Could Francis do the same for Catholics tired of headlines about child abuse and culture wars?

In a certain sense, things have changed. Perceptions of the papacy, or at least of the pope, have improved. Francis is far more popular than his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI. Sixty-three percent of American Catholics approve of him, while only 43 percent approved of Benedict at the height of his popularity, according to a 2015 New York Times and CBS News poll. Francis has also placed a great emphasis on reaching out to disaffected Catholics.

But are Catholics actually coming back? In the United States, at least, it hasn’t happened. New survey findings from Georgetown’s Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate suggest that there has been no Francis effect — at least, no positive one. In 2008, 23 percent of American Catholics attended Mass each week. Eight years later, weekly Mass attendance has held steady or marginally declined, at 22 percent.

Of course, the United States is only one part of a global church. But the researchers at Georgetown found that certain types of religious observance are weaker now among young Catholics than they were under Benedict. In 2008, 50 percent of millennials reported receiving ashes on Ash Wednesday, and 46 percent said they made some sacrifice beyond abstaining from meat on Fridays. This year, only 41 percent reported receiving ashes and only 36 percent said they made an extra sacrifice, according to CARA. In spite of Francis’ personal popularity, young people seem to be drifting away from the faith.

Why hasn’t the pope’s popularity reinvigorated the church? Perhaps it is too soon to judge. We probably won’t have a full measure of any Francis effect until the church is run by bishops appointed by Francis and priests who adopt his pastoral approach. This will take years or decades.

Yet something more fundamental may stand in the way of a Francis effect. Francis is a Jesuit, and like many members of Catholic religious orders, he tends to view the institutional church, with its parishes and dioceses and settled ways, as an obstacle to reform. He describes parish priests as “little monsters” who “throw stones” at poor sinners. He has given curial officials a diagnosis of “spiritual Alzheimer’s.” He scolds pro-life activists for their “obsession” with abortion. He has said that Catholics who place an emphasis on attending Mass, frequenting confession, and saying traditional prayers are “Pelagians” — people who believe, heretically, that they can be saved by their own works.

Such denunciations demoralize faithful Catholics without giving the disaffected any reason to return. Why join a church whose priests are little monsters and whose members like to throw stones? When the pope himself stresses internal spiritual states over ritual observance, there is little reason to line up for confession or wake up for Mass.

Even Francis’ most ardent fans worry that his agenda is overdue. When he was elected, Francis promised a cleanup of the Vatican’s corrupt finances. Three years on, he has started to retreat in the face of opposition, giving up an outside audit and taking powers away from his handpicked point man. Francis has also shied away from big changes on doctrinal matters. Instead of explicitly endorsing communion for the divorced and remarried couples, he has quietly urged them on with a wink and a nod.

Francis has built his popularity at the expense of the church he leads. Those who wish to see a stronger church may have to wait for a different kind of pope. Instead of trying to soften the church’s teaching, such a man would need to speak of the way hard disciplines can lead to freedom. Confronting a hostile age with the strange claims of Catholic faith may not be popular, but over time it may prove more effective. Even Christ was met with the jeers of the crowd.

-End of Schmitz’ op/ed-

See also:

~Eowyn

Pope’s personal secretary: Popes Benedict XVI & Francis form an ‘expanded’ papal office

To call this confusing is an understatement.

In a recent speech, the personal secretary of Pope Benedict XXVI, Archbishop Georg Gänswein, said that Benedict and his successor, Pope Francis, are not two popes “in competition” with one another, but represent one “expanded” Petrine Office with “an active member” and a “contemplative member.”

Pope Benedict XVI’s real name is Joseph Ratzinger; Pope Francis’ is Jorge Bergoglio.

In Latin, Petrine Office is munus petrinum. The word “Petrine” is defined by Oxford Dictionaries as:

  • Relating to St. Peter, the first pope who was appointed by Christ, or his writings or teachings.
  • Relating to the authority of the Pope over the Church, in his role as the successor of St. Peter.

In other words, in this context, “Petrine” means papal, which means that according to Archbishop Gänswein, although Benedict had resigned in 2013, nevertheless he and Francis are an “expanded” papal ministry, whatever that means.

Archbishop Georg GansweinEdward Pentin reports for the RCRegister that on May 20, 2016, speaking at the presentation of a new book on Pope Benedict XVI’s pontificate at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, Archbishop Georg Gänswein said that Pope Benedict XVI did not abandon the papacy like Pope Celestine V in the 13th century but rather sought to continue his Petrine Office in a more appropriate way given his frailty.

The new book, Oltre la crisi della Chiesa. Il pontificato di Benedetto XVI (Beyond the Crisis of the Church, The Pontificate of Benedict XVI), is by Roberto Regoli.

Archbishop Gänswein, prefect of the Pontifical Household and the personal secretary of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, said: “Therefore, from 11 February 2013, the papal ministry is not the same as before. It is and remains the foundation of the Catholic Church; and yet it is a foundation that Benedict XVI has profoundly and lastingly transformed by his exceptional pontificate.”

Archbishop Gänswein also confirmed the existence of a group who had fought against Ratzinger’s election in 2005, but stressed that that had “little or nothing” to do with the latter’s resignation in 2013.

Gänswein said the election of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger to be Pope “was certainly the outcome of a battle,” referring to Regoli’s account of “a dramatic struggle” that took place in the 2005 Papal Conclave between a pro-Ratzinger group called the Salt of the Earth Party comprised of Cardinals Lopez Trujillo, Ruini, Herranz, Ruoco Varela or Medin, and a liberal, pro-Bergoglio group called the St. Gallen group that included Cardinals Danneels, Martini, Silvestrini or Murphy O’Connor — a group Cardinal Danneels jokingly referred to as “a kind of mafia-club”.

Cardinal Danneels 2015-09-26Godfried Danneels is a pro-homosexual Belgian cardinal and former archbishop of Brussels who calls same-sex marriage a “positive development“– which means he approves of homosexuality and homosexual sex that both the Bible and the Catholic Church’s Catechism abjure. Danneels   calls on the Catholic Church to recognize a “sort of marriage” for homosexuals. Despite his heretical advocacy for homosexuality and his cover-up in 2010 of a sex-abuse case involving a fellow bishop — Danneels’ uncle, Roger Vangheluwe, Bishop of Bruges — Pope Francis gave Danneels a place of honor at the all-important Synod on the Family last October.

In an interview with the RCRegister last November and EWTN Germany, German journalist Paul Badde confirmed the existence of the St. Gallen faction, and named German Cardinals Kasper and Lehmann as members.

But Archbishop Gänswein insists that Pope Benedict resigned because it was “fitting” and “reasonable,” being “aware that the necessary strength for such a very heavy office was lessening. He could do it [resign], because he had long thought through, from a theological point of view, the possibility of a pope emeritus in the future. So he did it.”

Others, however, say Benedict had been pressured to resign. One of the latest came last year from a former confidant and confessor to the late Cardinal Carlo Martini who said Martini had told Benedict: “Try and reform the Curia, and if not, you leave.”

Despite his resignation, Pope Benedict XVI continues to view his task as “participation in . . . a ‘Petrine ministry’.” Gänswein said: “He left the Papal Throne and yet, with the step he took on 11 February 2013, he has not abandoned this ministry” — something “quite impossible after his irrevocable acceptance of the office in April 2005.“ Instead, Benedict “has built a personal office with a collegial and synodal dimension, almost a communal ministry” as  “cooperatores veritatis“, which means ‘co-workers of the truth’.”

This is why Benedict XVI has not given up the papal white cassock or his papal name of Benedict — unlike Pope Celestine V who reverted to his name Pietro da Marrone. Nor has Benedict, according to Archbishop Gänswein, “retired to a monastery in isolation but stays within the Vatican — as if he had taken only one step to the side to make room for his successor and a new stage in the history of the papacy,” enriching the papacy with “his prayer and his compassion placed in the Vatican Gardens.”

Archbishop Gänswein’s extraordinary but cryptic remarks have led to speculations of a rift with Pope Francis, as well as the From Rome blog asking if the two rival factions had made a pact during the Conclave of 2005 that elected Cardinal Ratzinger as Pope Benedict XVI, in which Bergoglio and his “St. Gallen group” consented to Ratzinger’s election on the condition that after a fixed number of years, Pope Benedict XVI would resign, and Bergoglio would then be elected Pope at the next conclave.

See also “The Illegitimate Pope: Election of Jorge Bergoglio as Pope Francis was contaminated by lobbying in violation of papal laws”.

~Eowyn

Pope Francis says Trump is not Christian for wanting to build a border wall

Yesterday, Feb. 18, 2016, while jetting back to Rome from his 6-day visit to Mexico, Pope Francis, whose real name is Jorge Bergoglio, decided to inject himself into America’s presidential race by criticizing Donald Trump for his stance on illegal immigrants.

Trump had said, if he’s president, he would have a stricter policy on illegals, including deporting more illegals than what the Obama administration is doing (or not doing), as well as building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Jim Yardley reports for The New York Times that on board the papal airliner, ever tone-deaf to his own hypocrisy, the pope said in response to a reporter’s question about Trump:

A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the Gospel. As far as you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man [Donald Trump] is not Christian if he has said things like that.”

If wanting to build a wall to demarcate the borders between one’s country and another’s is not Christian, then all Christians should tear down the walls of their respective houses and apartments because those walls are simply a country’s border-walls writ small.

Watch and listen for yourself:

That would make Pope Francis and the more than 800 clerics and officials who reside in the Vatican, not Christians because the Vatican is surrounded by 40 ft-tall walls.

Vatican City is a walled enclave of approximately 110 acres and a population of 842 within the city of Rome. The smallest internationally recognized independent state in the world, it is an ecclesiastical or sacerdotal-monarchical state ruled by the Bishop of Rome – the Pope.

Here’s a scale model of Vatican City which is in the Vatican Museum:

Vatican City scale model

And here’s a pic of the Vatican’s massive walls from the outside. One must ask: “Are these walls in the Gospel?”

Vatican wall1

While in Mexico, Pope Francis also repeated his call made in 2015 that Americans be more welcoming toward migrants from Central and South America.

Once again, Bergoglio is oblivious to the hypocrisy and irony. For one, the Vatican has a very restrictive policy on immigration, which allows only a very select few who meet strict criteria to be admitted as residents or citizens. And while lecturing Europeans to take in the hordes of overwhelmingly Muslim “refugees” and “migrants,” the Vatican itself had taken in but ONE refugee family of 4, who are Serbian Catholics. (See “Pope lectures U.S. on taking in ‘migrants’ while Vatican is protected by 40 ft. tall walls“)

For his part, moments after the news of Francis’ remark about Trump not being a Christian, Trump responded with the following statement:

“The Mexican government and its leadership has made many disparaging remarks about me to the Pope, because they want to continue to rip off the United States, both on trade and at the border, and they understand I am totally wise to them. The Pope only heard one side of the story — he didn’t see the crime, the drug trafficking and the negative economic impact the current policies have on the United States. He doesn’t see how Mexican leadership is outsmarting President Obama and our leadership in every aspect of negotiation.

For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful. I am proud to be a Christian and as President I will not allow Christianity to be consistently attacked and weakened, unlike what is happening now, with our current President. No leader, especially a religious leader, should have the right to question another man’s religion or faith. They are using the Pope as a pawn and they should be ashamed of themselves for doing so, especially when so many lives are involved and when illegal immigration is so rampant.”

See also these other incidents of hypocrisy:

H/t FOTM‘s Lana and MomOfIV

~Eowyn

Pope Francis is ashamed of the Cross, knows better than the Gospels

In Mark 16:15-16, 19-20, it is written that the resurrected Christ instructed the 11 apostles:

“Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned…. After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was taken up into heaven and He sat at the right hand of God. Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere….”

But Jorgé Bergoglio, whose job title is Pope Francis, knows better than the Gospel of Mark.

On December 10, 2015, as reported by NBC News, the Vatican’s Commission for Religious Relations with Jews issued a major new document pronouncing that God had never annulled his covenant with the Jewish people, and so Catholics should not try to convert Jews: “The Church is therefore obliged to view evangelization to Jews, who believe in the one God, in a different manner from that to people of other religions and world views.”

God never annulled his covenant with the Jewish people.

Really?

Once again, Jorgé Bergoglio pretends to know better than the Gospels, specifically Luke 22, when Jesus in the Last Supper consecrated bread and wine into His body and blood, and said to the apostles:

“This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my Blood, which will be shed for you.”

Jorgé Bergoglio also knows better than St. Paul, who clearly wrote in his letter to the Hebrews 8:13:

“In speaking of a new covenant, He makes the first one obsolete.”

Not only does Jorgé Bergoglio know better than St. Paul and the Gospels of Mark and Luke, he’s also ashamed of the Cross — the symbol of the most important truth of Christianity, which is that the Second Person of the Triune Godhead humbled Himself by becoming incarnate, was grievously tortured, and allowed Himself to be nailed to a cross to die, all in reparation for the sins of humanity, beginning with the first sin of Adam and Eve in that first garden.

A part of every pope’s uniform, including Pope Francis’, is the pectoral crossa cross that is worn on the chest, suspended from the neck by a cord or chain.

Pope Francis I

But Pope Francis is so ashamed of our Lord Jesus Christ that he concealed his pectoral cross from Jews by stuffing it into his fascia or waist sash.

  1. On Jan. 16, 2014, Bergoglio concealed the cross when he hosted a delegation of 15 Argentine Jewish leaders at a kosher luncheon in the Vatican (Catholic Family News):

Pope Francis lunch with Jews at Vatican Jan. 2014

  1. In May 2014, Bergoglio visited Israel, along with Jordan and the West Bank. Here he is on the red carpet at Ben Gurion International Airport near Tel Aviv, with the cross stuffed inside his waist sash. Note, however, that an accompanying cardinal displayed his cross.

Pope Francis at Ben Gurion International Airport, May 25, 2014

3. On May 26, 2014, Bergoglio paid a courtesy call to the two Chief Rabbis of Israel in the Heichal Shlomo Center, next to the Great Synagogue of Jerusalem. Once again, he concealed the cross by stuffing it inside his waist sash.

Pope Francis hides crucifix

L to R: Israeli Sephardi Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar, Pope Francis, Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi David Lau, during a visit to the Heichal Shlomo Center in Jerusalem on May 26, 2014. (Photo by Vincenzo Pinto, AFP)

L to R: Israeli Sephardi Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar, Pope Francis, Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi David Lau, during a visit to the Heichal Shlomo Center in Jerusalem on May 26, 2014. (Photo by Vincenzo Pinto, AFP)

Israel Meir Lau, Chief Rabbi of Israel from 1993 to 2003, said that “Crucifixes are an insult to Jews. The cross is against the Jewish religion and the sight of the cross is forbidden for a Jew.”

For that matter, the Talmud teaches that Jesus was a bastard, a fool, a conjurer and a seducer, who was conceived during menstruation (primitive peoples regard menstruation and a woman in menses as unclean), was crucified, buried in hell, and set up as an idol by his followers. (See Rev. I.B. Pranaitis, The Talmud Unmasked: The Secret Rabbinical Teachings Concerning Christians)

Pope Francis really should heed these words of Jesus:

“But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.” Matthew 10:33

“For he that shall be ashamed of me and of my words…: the Son of man also will be ashamed of him, when he shall come in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” Mark 8:38

H/t Ann Barnhardt and Norvus Ordo Watch

See also:

~Eowyn

Despotism: Bishop adviser to Pope Francis claims papal infallibility over climate change

First, a Vatican insider — Archbishop Salvatore “Rino” Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization — threatened to “automatically excommunicate” Catholics who commit “verbal violence” (whatever that means) against Pope Francis, whose real name is Jorge Bergoglio.

Now, another Vatican insider and close adviser to Pope Francis — Argentinean Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, Chancellor of both the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences — invokes papal infallibility for Bergoglio’s pronouncements on the pseudo-science of man-made climate change.

Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo at Acton Institute conf., 12-3-2015

As reported by John-Henry Westen for LifeSiteNews, at an Acton Institute conference at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome on Dec. 3, 2015, Bishop Sorondo said that Pope Francis’ declarations on the gravity of global warming as expressed in the encyclical Laudato Si’ are magisterial teaching equivalent to the doctrinal teaching that abortion is sinful. Sorondo said Bergoglio’s “judgement [on climate change] must be considered Magisterium – it is not an opinion.

The Catholic Church maintains there are several concepts important to the understanding of infallible, divine revelation: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Sacred Magisterium. The infallible teachings of popes are part of the Sacred Magisterium. As the authoritative Catholic Encyclopedia defines it, “Infallibility means more than exemption from actual error; it means exemption from the possibility of error.”

However, not all teachings of popes are infallible.

To begin, papal teachings must be based on, or at least not contradict, Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture. As defined by the (first) Vatican Council of 1869-1870papal infallibility is “a divinely revealed dogma” that “the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra . . . is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals….”

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, papal infallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching. The conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are:

  1. The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians — as spiritual head of the Church universal.
  2. When, in his capacity as spiritual head of the Church universal, the teaches some doctrine of faith or morals.
  3. When the pope “wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way“.
  4. When it is clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church, that is, “to demand internal assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck (naufragium fidei)” via “a literally universal promulgation”.

By equating Pope Francis’ teachings on abortion being sinful — which is a long-held doctrine of the Catholic Church — with his views on the alleged empirical phenomenon of global warming/climate change, Bishop Sorondo in effect is saying those views are “final and irrevocable” absolute truths. But empirical science is the opposite of absolute, being porous and always open to new and dissenting evidence. By claiming papal infallibility over climate change, Bishop Sorondo is also demanding that all Catholics assent to those views “under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck”.

All of which would explain the heated exchange between Sorondo and other participants at the conference, including:

  • Journalist Riccardo Cascioli, who maintained Catholics can follow their individual consciences on theoretical scientific matters like climate change. To that, Sorondo responded, “If you were a scientist and had a serious (difference of) opinion,” then you could follow your conscience, “but since you are a journalist it is better you follow the opinion of the Pope!”
  • Acton Institute founder and President Father Robert Sirico, who rightly pointed out there are other experts or scientists with different opinions on the matter of global warming. Sorondo responded, “But don’t follow them, follow these. Just like in philosophy, there are many philosophers… But the Magisterium of the Church follows the philosophy of the being, the person. There are many who say the person does not exist – the Pope does not follow them…. I say it is Magisterium.”

Father Joseph Fessio, SJ, the founder of Ignatius Press who obtained his doctorate in theology under Joseph Ratzinger (who later became Pope Benedict XVI), told LifeSiteNews:

Neither the pope nor Bishop Sorondo can speak on a matter of science with any binding authority, so to use the word ‘magisterium’ in both cases is equivocal at best, and ignorant in any case.”

 

All of which is most ironic since Pope Francis refuses to abide by the General Instruction of the Roman Missal — the Catholic Church’s instructions governing the celebration of Mass. N. 274 of the Roman Missal says:

During Mass three genuflections are made by the priest celebrant: namely, after the showing of host, after the showing of the chalice and before Communion.

Ann Barnhardt was the first to notice this: On March 14, 2013, when Jorge Bergoglio said his first Mass as Pope Francis, he did not genuflect in accordance with the Roman Missal‘s specification. In the video of that Mass below, the consecration of the host into the Body of Christ happens at the 51:47 mark; the consecration of the chalice or wine into the Blood of Christ happens at 52:32.

To this day, an official explanation as to why Pope Francis does not genuflect at the consecration has not been offered. While the Church makes exemptions for priests whose health makes genuflecting or kneeling difficult or impossible, that is not the case with Pope Francis who often has been seen kneeling.

Indeed, if you do a “google” search for images of Pope Francis kneeling, you’ll find plenty. Here are two:

Pope Francis kneelsPope Francis kneels1

See also:

~Eowyn