Skip to comments.Ann Barnhardt on Pope Francis
Posted on 03/15/2013 4:55:42 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Posted by Ann Barnhardt - March 14, AD 2013 10:34 AM MST
Let me start with a positive comment. Remember, this is the best I could come up with:
If we had gotten the pope we DESERVE, we would now have Pope Snoop Dogg.
And thus ends the positivity.
Francis, like his homeland of Argentina, is a total disaster. He has overseen the near-total destruction of the Church in Argentina. He hates and despises the Tridentine Mass, which is to say that he hates the Mass - let's not mince words, and is a rabid persecutor of anyone in Argentina who shows ANY signs of tradition. A priest in Argentina literally risks the end of his career if he wears a cassock in public. He has forbidden the Tridentine Mass in Argentina, which is an act of direct disobedience, specifically against the papal decree Summorum Pontificum, but embraces horrific "charismatic" and "Superfun Rockband"-type liturgical sacrilege.
Which brings us to his regard for the papacy, and the Church itself. He said yesterday in his bizarre little speech, again and again, that he was the Bishop of Rome, which is true, but in being the Bishop of Rome the pope is the head of the Universal Church, not just the city of Rome. Francis does not believe this, and even made a reference to the idea that the pope is "first among equals". This means that he regards the Church as a mere loose confederacy, and also that he thinks the Church is, or should be, a democracy. The proof of this is, again, his blatant disobedience to Summorum Pontificum. He will never do anything to clean up the sodomite infiltrators in the Church outside of Rome because he doesn't feel that the pope has any authority outside of Rome. Bottom line here: many bishops and archbishops have been kept in line over the past eight years because Benedict was relatively aggressive in booting out extremely bad bishops. Benedict was feared in a healthy way. This guy is basically the big green light to every Marxist-homosexualist to just go ahead and do whatever, because they know Francis will never remove them or even chastise them, because Francis doesn't believe that the pope has any universal authority and is merely the bishop of the city of Rome proper - at least that is the excuse that will be given when nothing is done about abuses and heresies **that Francis is sympathetic towards.**
BUT, like all insecure leaders who say that they reject authority and obedience, reports from Buenos Aires are that he is an iron-fisted totalitarian against traditionalists, precisely because he has no confidence in or respect for his own authority, and thus assumes that no one else does either, and thus wields power against his perceived enemies only from brute force. Again, this is TEXTBOOK 20th century Marxist worldview and psychology. It is also the diametrical opposite of the virtue of MEEKNESS, which is power under control.
Next, he is an "ecu-maniac", which is to say that he is in the "all religions are equal and can't we all just get along" camp. In Buenos Aires he knelt before and received the "blessing" of a Superfun Rockband Church "pastor", and even received "communion" from a Protestant. There are pictures floating around of that episode. This is terrifying. He clearly does not have a strong belief in or understanding of Our Lord, His Church, the Mass or the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist. But, as I have stated repeatedly, almost none of the men ordained in the 1960s, 70s or 80s do.
Next, he's a Jesuit. Now, I must disclose that I have a deep personal, seething, visceral hatred of Jesuits, but my hatred of them is a corollary to the fact that they long ago descended into truly evil heresies and apostasy. Jesuits, in addition to being a cult of sodomites who hate God, are also wait for it Marxists. Now Francis has in the past put up some token resistance to so-called "Liberation theology", which is just Communist Totalitarianism in religious drag, but he is huge, huge, huge on "social justice", which is merely code for Marxism. This guy's worldview revolves around giving people free stuff because it's nice, which as we have discussed is contrary to logic and reason, specifically in the subset of mathematics, and thus is contrary to Our Lord who is but FIRST the Logos, with the Divine Caritas (charity) proceeding out of the Logos. Bottom line, there will be zero positive assistance to the world from Francis with regards to the inevitable economic collapse. Not only will there be nothing helpful coming from him, he will almost certainly come out in favor of more debt, more "free stuff", and more rhetoric about how people are "entitled" to physical and service commodities (which are someone else's man-hours, remember) as "rights".
But Ann! He has gone on record against homosexual "marriage" and abortion!
Wow. Is this really how far we have sunk? The Roman pontiff is on record as being against sodomy and killing babies and we cite this as proof of ORTHODOXY? Really? I wonder if he also believes in gravity. Does belief in gravity constitute a conservative worldview now?
Benedict thought that between the "Natural Solution" (the passage of time yielding the death or retirement of the bad guys) and the appointments he was able to make over the last eight years that he had set up the College of Cardinals to elect a successor that was very much in the Ratzingerian camp. Benedict was wrong. Not only did they not elect a Ratzingerian, they elected the anti-Ratzinger. In the 2005 conclave Francis came in second to Ratzinger, which is to say that Francis was the "opposition". In what must have Benedict's mind reeling today, after eight years of purging and priming the College of Cardinals, the very men Ratzinger placed turned around and elected the anti-Ratzinger. This proves, as I have said all along, that playing prevent defense, namely the "natural solution" of waiting for the bad guys to die is UNSOUND. In war, you fix your bayonets, say your prayers, and you charge.
Tridentine Mass-goers and clergy, this guy will be on the warpath against us at some point. Prepare. Brace. He may attempt to undo Summorum Pontificum either directly or through intense passive aggression. Any hopes of reconciling the good guys in the SSPX is now totally over. Beyond that, the splinter factions will now claim that "they were right", and sadly even more schism will result, and more people will remain outside the Church. So sad.
We got what we deserved, and probably better than we deserve. God's chastisement of His people is sending them bad priests, bishops, and now, in all likelihood, a bad pope. What do you expect? Look around. The world is awash in staggering sin and blasphemy and no one will lift a finger to do anything about it. And, as my last essay on penance proved via my email box, no one is sorry or has any desire to make reparation to Our Lord for any of it. No one has the slightest comprehension of the notion of taking on the burden of guilt for sins that they didn't directly commit, which blows my mind because that is LITERALLY the ENTIRE POINT of the Incarnation. The mind reels at the collective obtuseness needed to miss that glaring point.
No one has the slightest comprehension of the idea of seeing Our Lord in agony and simply stepping over to Him and asking, "What can I do to help You? What can I do to make You feel better? Let me take some of Your burden. Let me go with You."
Nope. So long as we all leave Him alone in His Passion, He will leave us to our self-absorption and indifference.
Kyrie eleison. Christe eleison. Kyrie eleison.
Viva il Papa.
Sheesh Ann, let’s give him a chance. I like Ann’s passion for most things but this is over the top.
“blind leading the blind,” and “white-washed tombs, full of dead men’s bones.”
Oh, my goodness. How ugly! I’ve never heard of this person; her rant is filled with half-truths and lies.
Thank you for that link. And for your reasoned replies.
I fear my biggest turn off with Ann of late, is simply that she is so so so angry. We are all frustrated, and often angry at that which we can’t control or change. Yet so much of what I’ve read from her over the last 6 months or better is just wall to wall seething anger.
I think all those people who where saying the new holy father needed to be someone more progressive, more with the times are just plain stuck on stupid.
The word of God doesn't change with the times. Believe it or not at your own peril.
I for one am a broken sinner and I can never save myself except through my faith in Christ.
What really drives all these people nuts is in the dark still of night they are afraid God is real.
I feel this may be the last pope. Going to be an interesting time to be alive.
This whole rant is horrible. If you believe that the Holy Spirit leads the Church, then you believe that Pope Francis was chosen by the Holy Spirit. Those who want to try to discredit Pope Francis before he has even begun are not praying to God. Obedience to the Holy Father is part of your Catholic faith. Deal with it. You are treading on dangerous ground when you believe you know better then the Holy Spirit.
This was over the top & entirely inappropriate. We should be praying for our holy father, not bashing him.
She’s gonna have to walk this back.....or really have egg on her face.
I pray for her.
She referred to priests ordained in the 60’s , 70’s and 80’s pejoratively.
For the record, Pope Francis was ordained in 1958.
The Church is certainly not in trouble. It thrives in Africa, Latin America and Asia. The West, the US and Europe, is in trouble due to its rejection of the Church. the Church is not thriving in those places.
In Catholicism the thinking is “you are what you read”.
What are you reading?
The Catechism states that one is not safe when reading illogical, degrading untruthful material. That goes for general entertainment, and one is not to be fooled by the film industry’s rating system, BTW, it’s the theme that counts.
It’s not necessarily inappropriate to insult at a time like this. What it is is silly.
And it is meant to discourage.
One: If it detracts for the sake of cynicism, it does not come from a good place, and it is at least a waste of time, if not discouraging.
Two: The church is centered on faith. It is also, at the same time, centered on reason. It is the truth.
The hierarchy, if you take a moment to view the bio of anyone anybody is criticizing, there will be a moment of sobriety and a turning away from the detractors. People don’t give the average priest, much less, the hierarchy, attention of his education and works.
Three: Of course there are errant ways, as the Church is run by humans. Humility is a key. Peter denied Jesus three times, yet he was chosen After repentance, to lead the Church. that’s it.
the church is Bible based. Duh! Of course it is. Read a Missal, the daily readings of the mass (throughout the world it is the same day to day) and one will get a chronological and salient bible study. Most Catholics just don’t know that.
It is also based on tradition, like any family.
And it is based on the Magesterium - the divinely inspired teachings of the theologians.
Keeping away from criticism is recommended, while reading those who strive for truth is worthwile:
Catholic exchange website
The Missal (includes the Bible)
The encyclicals (Papal letters); esp Humanae Vitae
Popes JPII, esp Theology of the Body and BenXVI
“What can I do to help You? What can I do to make You feel better? Let me take some of Your burden.
Ann B is delusional. Jesus had plenty to say about her kind.
>>Why all the OCD over this one version of the Mass that almost paints him like the AntiChrist himself for not liking it?<<
Either you are not a Catholic or you were brainwashed after Vatican II. It is not “liking” one “version” or another; there is the Mass and there is the Novus Ordo. They are two diametrically opposed entities, much like matter and anti-matter.
In 1974, the bishop of Wilmington, DE told me that there was no room in the Church for people like me (I do not accept the Novus Ordo as a valid Mass). That prohibition continues today.
Not to put too bold a stroke on it, but it reminds me off-hand of how the formerly-feuding Pharises and Saducees made their amazing, unprecedented big-tent alliance just once in history, to oppose you-know-Who.
Card. Bergoglio, in 2007 after Summorum Pontificum, TLM within 48 hours
Forty-eight hours after Summorum Pontificum, then Card. Bergoglio arranged Holy Mass in the traditional Roman Rite.
Ann is so hardcore. She almost makes me want to be Catholic.
The rest of them, however...
Yes, and what Jesus says in no way confirms "catholicism," but rather warns against it.
Yet another stroke of brilliance!
Re the "health" of the church is duly noted. In fact, recently read the the catholic religion is now the "largest" religion in China. Can't source that and not sure all the details. I do know the distribution of the bible in china has been beyond anything one can imagine.
Re "you are what you read." Absolutely. I agree with that and raise you what you watch and eat and the company you keep is important (vital)
Here is my issue . . . Many conservatives, Christians sometime live too much in a cocoon. They have a narrow view of the world and a narrow view of competing view points. Because of your past knowledge of Ann, you and others dismiss her out of hand. There are plenty of people we disagree with, but you know once in a while they do say something from a perspective worth considering. Ex:Pat Caddel at CPAC. So yes, we should be very careful what we read, and yes criticism specially inside the church can be unhealthy. But when someone with reason sounds an alarm, maybe, just maybe it's worth considering, if nothing more than to validate our own thoughts
Reading your thoughts, very thoughtful and important and will always consider, we agree in principal. I was just grinding my teeth because so many here dismissed what a person had to say without reading what that person had to say. You and others actually did, but I was breaking an eye tooth because most we're not saying WHY she was being blasphemous.
well said and worth repeating. Criticism is not totally inappropriate (as you said) but it should be measured and specific. Ann's diatribe is way over the top. I learned long ago that those that exaggerate to make a point often have no point.
What do you make of this Scripture?
King James Version (KJV)
23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:
25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;