After Francis' interview with "Vida Nueva" / Monsignor Viganò: "Let's get ready for a crescendo of unprecedented provocations"

Your Excellency, finally motus velocior we often say about Francis' attitude aimed at liquefying what little remains of Catholic doctrine and marrying the thought of the world. The most recent chronicles confirm it, including the umpteenth interview, this time. What is your assessment of him?

World Youth Day, celebrated this year in Lisbon, confirmed the acceleration of Bergoglio's plan to provoke a schism. His latest appointments, which to define as provocative is an understatement; the utterances of the future Cardinals, aimed at confirming the "Bergolian revolution"; the presence of James Martin to promote the acceptance of LGBTQ ideology among young people; the recent utterance of Bergoglio to a transgender: "God loves us as we are, go ahead" [ here ]: all that was missing was an interview in which the Argentine "confessed" to an editorial staff of kneeling and cheering journalists to complete the picture [ here ].

The adoring tone of the interview is beyond embarrassing: which, for someone who claims to detest hypocrisy and servility, would sound tragic were it not grotesque. The cloying courtesy of journalists goes so far as to define Bergoglio "as a village priest used to treating everyone in the same way, or a woman who goes out of her way from dawn to dusk to support her family". However, the prone lyricism of Vida Nueva has the drawback of highlighting the apparent spontaneity of the interviewee's words, dropped like time bombs waiting to see them detonate.

From the interview it appears that Bergoglio expected everything less than becoming pope. But history says something very different…

I am amazed by Bergoglio's literary gifts: the evocative evocation of how surprised he felt at the election does not reconcile with what we now know happened at the 2013 Conclave and confided by a Cardinal elector but unable to reveal it publicly. And in presenting himself as a speculum totius humilitatis he speaks of himself as a "victim of the Holy Spirit and of Providence", as if to impute the misfortune of this "pontificate" to God himself, and not to the manipulations of the deep church with the Mafia of San Gallo, and of the deep state with the emails of John Podesta and Hillary Clinton.

The first time bomb: «The Synod was Paul VI's dream. When the Second Vatican Council ended, he realized that the Church in the West had lost its synodal dimension". A way to confirm the subversive nature of the collegiality of Vatican II, as a counterbalance to the Petrine Primacy solemnly and infallibly proclaimed at the First Vatican Council by Blessed Pius IX. Thus we learn that the episcopal collegiality theorized by the innovators in Lumen Gentiumit had to avail itself of the Synod of Bishops as a parliamentary body on the model of civil forms of government. In essence, the application in the ecclesiastical sphere of the Masonic principle spread by the French Revolution to overthrow the Catholic Monarchies. "It is a question of moving forward to recover that synodal dimension that the Church of the East has and we have lost", Bergoglio affirms. But this "synodal dimension" is a term of modernist newspeak for not admitting the deliberate subversion of the Papacy as a monarchical form of authority. This is an attack on the divine institution of the Church, perpetrated by the one who should instead defend it from heretics. We are witnessing the demolition of the supreme teaching and governing authority of the Roman Pontiff, the bond of Catholic unity, by the one who sits on the Throne of Peter and who acts and is obeyed by virtue of the authority recognized by the Roman Pontiff. It is like seeing the fire chief ordering his subordinates to pour petrol into the bush and set it on fire, after having had the tanks emptied and the water reserves drained.

Yes, in the worrying sequence of Bergoglian "reworkings of reality" there is also a recollection of the Synod of 2001, when Bergoglio evokes this episode: "Then the cardinal in charge of coordination came, examined the papers and began to say: 'This is not you vote… not even this”. I replied: "Eminence, this is out of the groups..."". And the naive listener thinks: «You see how good Bergoglio is, who wants the base to tell the Bishops what the real problems of the faithful are, etc. etc.”, to then discover that what had then “come out of the groups” was presented as such, no more or less than what happened farcically at the Synod of the Family, for which the documents were prepared by Bergoglio's circle and by him previously approved; and even more evidently at the Synod of Synodality, for which the questionnaire sent to the Dioceses, parishes and groups was formulated in such a way as to exclude certain questions and to orientate the answers in the desired direction. When Bergoglio reassures «But things have been “purified”. We have made progress and, today, everything is voted on and listened to», we must understand that the obstacles previously represented by the CDF or by other Congregations have been eliminated either with the appointment of perfectly aligned heretics or with the exclusion of the Roman Curia from any role of coordination for the benefit of the "national churches" or of the Episcopal Conferences, all occupied by heretics and corrupt enslaved in Santa Marta. When Bergoglio reassures «But things have been “purified”. We have made progress and, today, everything is voted on and listened to», we must understand that the obstacles previously represented by the CDF or by other Congregations have been eliminated either with the appointment of perfectly aligned heretics or with the exclusion of the Roman Curia from any role of coordination for the benefit of the "national churches" or of the Episcopal Conferences, all occupied by heretics and corrupt enslaved in Santa Marta. When Bergoglio reassures «But things have been “purified”. We have made progress and, today, everything is voted on and listened to», we must understand that the obstacles previously represented by the CDF or by other Congregations have been eliminated either with the appointment of perfectly aligned heretics or with the exclusion of the Roman Curia from any role of coordination for the benefit of the "national churches" or of the Episcopal Conferences, all occupied by heretics and corrupt enslaved in Santa Marta.

“We also have the example of the Synod on the family. From the outside, Communion for the divorced has been imposed on us as a major theme. In this case there was that of wave psychology, which was trying to expand. But, fortunately, the result went much further… much further». So beyond - I would say - to arouse the formal protest of some Cardinals and numerous Prelates, priests, religious and theologians, in the face of the departure from the traditional doctrine on the subject of adultery, public concubinage and the family. Let us not forget the fraudulent operation with which some of Bergoglio's henchmen went to steal from the mailboxes of the Synod Fathers the book on the errors of Amoris lætitia in which they denounced the interference in the progress of the Synod by the progressives.

Even in areas where the dissent of the faithful and of the Pastors to the current Vatican regime is greatest, such as Africa for example, the key roles have been entrusted by authority to people who enjoy Bergoglio's support, even if wholly inadequate to fill certain positions of great responsibility.

It therefore seems that the affirmation «In the Synod the protagonist is the Holy Spirit» serves to give an aura of authority to the decisions taken by Jorge Mario, which have absolutely nothing divine, and indeed show themselves as intrinsically opposed to the Catholic Magisterium .

Yes, it happens when a reporter from Vida nuevahe provocatively asks: «This Synod on synodality seems to cover everything: from proposals for a liturgical renewal to the need for more evangelizing communities, passing through a real preferential option for the poor, a real commitment in terms of integral ecology, welcoming LGBTQ collectives. Has it ever been thought of giving it the form of Vatican Council III?». We would be horrified even to hear the hypothesis that a Synod could deal with very delicate topics – liturgical reform and the evangelization of communities – and others completely unrelated to the purposes of the Church, such as «a real preferential option for the poor, a real commitment in terms of integral ecology, welcoming of LGBTQ collectives». And yet, these are the topics addressed at WYD 2023, these days,woke . And they are the themes - obsessively repeated by the media, in schools, in the workplace, in politics - of the 2030 Agenda and the Great Reset, both ontologically incompatible with the Catholic Religion because they are intrinsically anti-Christian and anti-Christian.

Bergoglio's answer is disturbing: «Things are not ripe for a Third Vatican Council. And it's not even needed right now since Vatican II hasn't even started yet. This was very risky and had to be paid for. But there is always that fear that creeps among us by the "old Catholics" who already at Vatican I defined themselves as "repositories of the true faith"».

We understood that Bergoglio's main purpose is to sow division and destroy. His modus operandiIt's always the same. First of all, it artificially provokes a "debate" on issues that cannot be the subject of controversy in the Church, having already been defined by the Magisterium: on the one hand the ultra-progressives and on the other the conservatives. Traditional Catholics, as I've explained earlier, haven't been following these Newchurch delusions for a long time, and they are perfectly fine with it. Then he arranges for what he wants to obtain – a doctrinal, moral, disciplinary, liturgical modification – to be proposed by an ostensibly neutral mediator who tries to find a compromise while in reality pandering to the progressive side. At this point Bergoglio, from above and as if he were only then discovering that there is a question to be clarified on which an authoritative pronouncement is needed, imposes a change that seems less serious than what the ultra-progressives had asked for, but which remains inadmissible for a Catholic, at that point forced to disobey. And his disobedience instantly becomes heresy or schism, simply by recalling the errors of the old Catholics at Vatican I.

But here lies the most treacherous deception: the doctrinal deviations of the old Catholics are simplistically dismissed by Bergoglio as a claim to be "repositories of the true faith" - something that every heresiarch has always tried to defend - while the old Catholics have shown that they share with the the Bergoglian church has many more heresies than it has truths in common with the traditionalists, starting with the female priesthood. And it is surprising that Bergoglio does not remember that the doctrinal demands of the old Catholics began well before the First Vatican Council, for questions of papal appointments of Bishops in the Netherlands, but soon showed their assonance with the modernists,

We have therefore understood that the identification of an enemy - in this case "the rigid", i.e. the Catholics faithful to the immutable Magisterium - is the corollary of the deification of the Revolution in the Church: the Synod is the work of the Holy Spirit and Bergoglio is a victim of Providence . So either we accept apostasy as willed by God – which is absurd, as well as blasphemous – or we end up ipso facto in the circle of Bergoglio's enemies, thereby deserving the condemnation reserved for heretics and schismatics. Strange way of understanding the parrhesia and inclusiveness of the church of mercy.

The interview also takes up the theme of the "rigid" so disliked by the pope...

"Francis is in no way unaware of the resistance to the reform he is preparing to carry out," comments a journalist. And he quotes the words of a priest "who has one foot in the Curia and the other in his diocese": "I am concerned about the rigidity of young priests", Bergoglio says. And it seemed to you!

Let the reader reassure himself, astonished that Bergoglio has not yet ventured into one of his monologues against the priests who are not traditional, but even vaguely conservative. The rigid ones, in fact, in regards to which he has woven an unrivaled series of insults and insults since the first days of his "pontificate". The provocation of the priest "who stinks of the smell of sheep" – I imagine in jeans and tennis shoes – is jumped at by the actor, who promptly replies: «They react like this because they are afraid of a moment of insecurity we are experiencing and that fear won't let them walk. We have to remove this fear and help them." A psychoanalytic approach that leaves you amazed, in truth, and which betrays the will to reprogram the Clergy, rightly concerned about a "moment of insecurity" that has been going on for the past sixty years, so as to induce him to give in to the innovations and deviations of the Council. But the words of pharisaic understanding immediately change into accusations and insinuations: «On the other hand, that shell hides a lot of rot. I have already had to intervene in some dioceses in various countries with similar parameters. Behind this traditionalism we have discovered serious moral problems and vices, double lives. We all know of bishops who, needing priests, resorted to people they had kicked out of other seminaries because they were immoral". Behind this traditionalism we have discovered serious moral problems and vices, double lives. We all know of bishops who, needing priests, resorted to people they had kicked out of other seminaries because they were immoral". Behind this traditionalism we have discovered serious moral problems and vices, double lives. We all know of bishops who, needing priests, resorted to people they had kicked out of other seminaries because they were immoral".

One must be amazed at Bergoglio's determination to eradicate the unmentionable Greek vice from conservative seminaries, but at not wanting to see it even in the face of the complaints of the victims of the serial predator McCarrick, harasser of seminarians and young clerics, together with the lavender mafia of his minions, created cardinals and promoted to the top of Roman dicasteries. And it does not seem that this new Pier Damiani of Santa Marta deems the former Jesuit Rupnik, whose excommunication he has revoked for the very serious crimes and unspeakable sacrileges he committed, worthy of his arrows. If you want to see Rupnik in chains in a cell in Castel Sant'Angelo, put the Roman hat on his head.

This indulgence of Bergoglio towards his protégés – which includes a long list of Jesuit brothers, united by heresy on the doctrinal front and sodomy on the moral one – is perhaps not explained by the fact that when he was master of novices the Was Argentino behaving in a way not unlike that of the ex-Archbishop of Washington? Qui legit intelligat .

Let us therefore forget the words of Our Lord in the Gospel: "Come, good and faithful servant, for you have been faithful in a little" (Mt 25:21), and let us listen to the "victim of the Holy Spirit": "I do not like rigidity because it is a bad symptom of inner life. The pastor cannot afford to be rigid. [...] Someone recently told me that the rigidity of young priests arises because they are tired of current relativism, but this is not always the case". And here we find the typical cliché of the 19th century anticlericals repeated: whoever shows himself to be virtuous is a Pharisee who hides unclean vices, while whoever seems vicious and immoral is actually good and just needs acceptance.

Here then are the "blessed Imeldas" - I suppose you are referring to the blessed Imelda Lambertini, a Dominican nun who died after miraculously receiving the Holy Eucharist brought to her in flight by the Angels - that is, the priests of an unreal and irreverent model of ostentatious nun religiosity, who do " the face of a saint", to be put before "normal seminarians, with their problems, who play football, who don't go to the neighborhoods to dogmatise". Better a good layman than a bad priest, the priest-eaters of the past summed up with less hypocrisy, knowing full well that the paradox had to serve to stigmatize the majority of the good and not the minority of the bad.

The comment from the editorial staff of Vida Nueva is disturbing : «Once those priests identified as "rigid" have been ordained, how are they accompanied to enter Vatican II? Because, deep down, they suffer from not being able to welcome what comes…».

In fact, it seems to hear a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China talking: how to reprogram these priests, to force them to accept the innovations of the Council? With blackmail, with authoritarianism, with intimidation and above all by showing them what happens to those who don't give in. Making them "soften": "There are people who live trapped in a theology textbook, unable to get into trouble and keep theology going". To "get into trouble", as Bergoglio states, one must not be heretical or corrupt, but faithful to the Magisterium, "trapped in a theology manual". And he concludes with one of his pearls of wisdom: "Stagnant theology reminds me that stagnant water is the first to be corrupted, and stagnant theology creates corruption."

The solution proposed by Bergoglio goes in the direction of a secularization of clerical training institutes: «We must emphasize a humanistic training. Let us open ourselves to a universal cultural horizon that humanizes them. Seminaries cannot be ideological kitchens. Seminaries must train pastors, not ideologues. The problem of seminaries is serious».

It should be remembered that the "humanistic" disciplines are umanæ res et litteræ , and that the "humanization" of a secular and universal education has nothing to do with it. Without saying that if a seminary does not provide intellectual and doctrinal formation - hastily defined as "ideological cuisine" - the new priests will have nothing new to teach the world, thus making themselves useless and superfluous.

Bergoglio demonstrates once again that he denounces the behavior of others as reprehensible, at the very moment in which he himself adopts it. Regarding the need to privilege the relationship of the Bishop with his flock, he does not realize that his words sound mocking when he states: «You already see that in the new appointments of bishops - not only in Spain, but throughout the world - I apply a general criterion: once a bishop is residential and assigned, he is already married to that diocese. If you look at another [if you hope for a transfer], it is "Episcopal adultery". Whoever seeks a promotion commits “episcopal adultery”». Yet Bishops who are loved by their faithful - such as Msgr. Joseph Strickland in Texas - are subjected to intimidation and apostolic visits, with the aim of removing them, forcing them to resign.

Yes, inevitable. “For November, before the United Nations Climate Summit is held in Dubai, we are organizing a peace meeting with religious leaders in Abu Dhabi. Cardinal Pietro Parolin is coordinating this initiative, which will take place outside the Vatican, in a neutral territory that invites everyone to meet». Because – we understood it – the important thing is to meet, to walk together, “in a neutral place” even if the road taken leads towards the abyss. And we know well that "neutral" means ostentatiously non-Catholic, in which there is no room for Our Lord: Bergoglio's eagerness to appear in all the events openly hostile to Christ would be enough to understand how completely alien, extraneous, incompatible he is. and heterogeneous with respect to the role it covers.

Let's get ready for a crescendo of unprecedented provocations: time bombs ready to explode to sow disorientation, confusion, division. But let us also prepare ourselves for the awakening of consciences, first of all of the faithful and of the clergy, but - heaven forbid - also of some Bishops, in the face of such enormities, in defense of the Church of Christ. Very soon we may have by our side brave honest and good people who can no longer indulge the ravings of a faithless, hopeless and charityless sect of heretics.

Good riddance Bishop Synod of Synodality, getting clear of you was the best thing I ever did!

You sound like another apostate from Catholicism, Martin Luther, who stated the papacy was "the true Anti-Christ". And like Martin Luther, you appear to be proud of your apostasy.

God is in control. During ww2 and ww1, mao and stalin, God’s plan will happen.

Of course, man has free will. If the jews didn’t want to go into the promised land, well, they can wander the desert for 40 years then go in. Free will.

Don’t care to follow God’s plan? Enjoy 400 years egyption slavery.

Enjoy communism, nazism, socialism...

Abortion begets perversion begets persecution. Enjoy your free will. But you will not rest but suffer until you repent and follow God’s plan.

Covid was the funny one. We trusted science more that living our neighbor,....shut down churches and trusted science. Few died overall except the vax, science died and now we trust nothing....until we repent and trust God again and love.

Nothing is as it seems with Pope Francis, but rather all is important except actually saving souls.
Drama and sleight-of-hand as substitute for prayer and leadership.

His papacy is the

victim of the Holy Spirit and of Providence

Does he really just throw that crap out there without considering the theological timebomb it represents? The Holy Spirit may inspire and guide, but it never holds one hostage.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.