Thursday, September 20, 2018

Pope in Denial: Classic Projection

Edit: this is the strategy of people who abuse their power. Notice the lack of any argument. He’s talking about himself.

While God’s holy Church is made up of sinners, it also has its share of hypocrites who love to cry “scandal” to point out the failings of others and make themselves appear pure, Pope Francis said at morning Mass.

“The devil doesn’t have anything to do with repentant sinners because they look to God and say, ‘Lord, I’m a sinner. Help me,’ and the devil is impotent,” the pope said Sept. 20 during Mass in the Domus Sanctae Marthae.
“But with the hypocrites he is strong,” Pope Francis said. “He is strong, and he uses them to destroy, to destroy people, destroy society, destroy the church.”
Link to Spirit...



TLM said...

Classic M.O. of an abusive man. It's all the fault of the victims and the faithful. To call a spade a spade he actually is abusive.

Anonymous said...

People who are guilty of great crimes (as Francis is) always paint themselves as the misunderstood victim. He has beein shooting his mouth off for two weeks, protesting in veiled terms, his innocence. The biggest shock though, was comparing his silence, to that of Our Lord Jesus Christ when he was mocked and subject to ridicule and taunts.
Whoa! Yod gotta be seriously sick, deranged, or more evil than I thought, Pope Francis, to liken yourself to what Jesus when through? You must have a big opinion of yourself, Francis. But you won't for long, when even more nukes come out from Vigano and other places, implicating you are your people even more.
Have a packed suitcase for a quick get away, Buddy Man....and tell your friends Maridiaga, Wuerl, Dolan,Tobin,Cupich,Marx, Parolin, to do likewise. They can follow you into exile. :)

Anonymous said...

Forgot to sign my name to the above...
Damian Malliapalli

Anonymous said...

His denial cannot mirror invincible ignorance.

His denial is chosen. He does not, in public, seek independent, orthodox, practicing Catholic opinions.


Peter W said...

The abdicated Benedict Ratzinger has said almost exactly the same things about the Dubia Bros and their schismatic camp followers like Schneiders, Morlino, Nickless & Co to say nothing of their schismatic echoes: 1Pt5, Rorate Caeli, Crisis Mag, Doutat, Weigel and their supine disciples

Anonymous said...

I rather be one of your so called "schismatics" following the list of names you gave, Peter, than be a loyal follower of heretic Francis and his slimy, sexual predator deviant crew.

Damian Malliapalli

DJR said...

Peter W said... "The abdicated Benedict Ratzinger has said almost exactly the same things about the Dubia Bros and their schismatic camp followers like Schneiders, Morlino, Nickless & Co to say nothing of their schismatic echoes: 1Pt5, Rorate Caeli, Crisis Mag, Doutat, Weigel and their supine disciples."

In the history of the Church, there have been times where even people who were later canonized did not recognize as valid a reigning pope. They were not "schismatics."

When Stephen VI declared one of his predecessors, Pope Formosus, an antipope and annulled all his ordinations, episcopal consecrations, and other acts, numerous priests and bishops ignored him and opposed him. Ditto for Sergius III.

Benedict IX held the papacy three separate times and attempted to depose what we would now consider to be a reigning pope.

The papal office has been taken by force, by bribery, and by murder.

Mere opposition to a reigning pope, or even questioning whether he is legitimately elected, does not make a person "schismatic."

And for the record, I recognize Pope Francis as a legitimate pope and will continue to do so unless at some future time the Church tells me he is not.

Something of which we are currently unaware may later come to light which could cause the Church to do such a thing. A person who denies that that is possible is an ignorant person.

A pollyannaish view of the history of the papacy is a false, unhistorical view.

Camper said...

Let me just ask some questions. Does "supine" really sound like a reasonable way to describe the followers who were described as supine? Could it be that they are really just thinkers who understand the tradition of the Church and the way to fix it now more than anybody else and certainly their opponents? Could the description of such followers as supine, along with the rest of the statement, be described as "demagogical", at all?

Peter W said...

The invectives against Francis are losing their edge. Even Zuhlsdorf is back to selling advice about holy water and subdeaconal tunic. Those playing the vested interest cards are conveniently avoiding Pentin's findings about the 'bans/suspensions' that are claimed to have been imposed on the deplorably corrupt McGarrick. Pentin has learnt from his reliable sources in the Curia that the restrictions on McGarrick were unofficial cautions. Furthermore, Benedict has now come out with a very strong criticism of Brandmueller, his fellow Dubia cardinals and their followers of using him as an ideological wedge between himself and his successor, Pope Francis.

All these sustained hate generated campaigns against Francis are being exposed for what they really are. If people want to engage in some legitimate and constructive advocacy then hold Francis and his advisers to task for not taking the reformist scalpel to the Roman Curia and for not addressing the catastrophic damage to thousands of abused Catholic women and men, their families and communities. As some are suggesting, even though Francis rails against clericalism, he is one of its standout examples.

Anonymous said...

"Even Zuhlsdorf is back to selling advice about holy water and subdeaconal tunic"

HAHAHAHAHA! I know, mostly everyone is getting back to business as usuall. Francis is planning a trip to the Baltic, the Vatican is about to sign away the Church in China, and Zuhlsdorf is back to pontificating on his blog. It seems like Vigano has been forgotten.

Bad mistake. Vigano was only the tip of the iceberg. The real crisis, the one Francis won't be able to shake or hide from (except by resigning), is right around the corner. Much worse than Vigano's brave attempts to reveal the truth. This one will bring Francis, and his whole Vatican's like an amoeba encircling it's prey and will trap Cupich, Farrell, Tobin, O'Malley, Maridiaga, Marx, and especially Francis in it's tentacles. Just watch :)
Damian Malliapalli

Peter W said...

Too much Ouzo on the Greek tour and way too much Grappa in Italy Damian. Vigano is an old clerical careerist tart who upset too many of the red hatted bottom crawlers in the Curia who enjoyed the protection of the now abdicated Benedict Ratzinger. For his troubles after the bleating letter to Benedict Vigano was promoted by removal to Washington. He self-harmed again by, against sound advice, setting up the photo op of the unfortunate Davis woman with Francis in Washington. That was all an attempt by the schismatic right wing of US Catholicism to play self-serving ideological wedge politics. It's all about power and control, both of which are slipping out of their hands. Hence, the volcanic rage, resentment and hostility towards Francis. It's all not only futile, its infantile and unproductive.

The ones who have most to fear are those who are all talk and no trousers when it comes to the real matters that need reform in the Church. Where Francis really needs to be called to book is on the level of transparency and accountability in Church governance especially in relation to clerical child sexual abuse. He's still unwilling to excise those Canonical norms that have protected and enabled clerical pedophiles in the Church. Neither Francis, his predecessors JP II and Benedict, both even more egregiously guilty than he in this regard, nor most of the world's bishops are willing to admit that they really do continue to believe that, like Innocent III, they are beyond the law.

Anonymous said...

Most of the problems regarding the pedophile/gay priests and the bishops who hid them/transferred/promoted them can be laid mostly at the feet of "saints" John Paul II and Paul VI.....the former especially.
Because he came from Poland, where the Soviet puppet regime there always tried to discredit priests, bishops, and even cardinals by whispering that they were secretly active homosexuals, drug addicts or criminals (and they were not), John Paul II to his discredit gave little or no credence to the warnings of others regarding many of his appointments as bishops....and his close friendship with the late, infamous pervert Fr.Marciel Maciel. The bishops he appointed who turned out to be gay perverts or supporters of gays came into the seminary/Church at the tail end of the 1950's-early 1960's (Bernardin and his crowd). These permissive bishops, embued with the "Spirit of Vatican II", either openly allowed for, or ignored, the influx of gays into their the USA and world-wide. Paul VI knew about it....did nothing. John Paul II chose not to believe it. Benedict XVI tried to weed them out (too little, too late). With Francis, it's back to the Paul VI days....knowing but doing nothing. Maybe even silently approving. This was the generation....1959-99 of hundreds/thousands of gay guys entering seminaries, getting ordained, and several hundred consecrated as bishops.
According to a report they are being weeded out now....since about 2002. But the fear is that since Francis, they're coming back.
Increasingly, secular magazines and newspapers across Europe (today, Der Spiegel in liberal Germany which should be Francis country) are calling for Francis to resign and labeling his pontificate a failure/disaster/catastrophe. Nineteen pages in Der Spiegel today, and countless anti-Francis articles across Italy, France, and Poland every week. Nothing pro-Francis!!
Ever hear the saying that "things get worse before they get better"? Well, even worse is coming for Francis. The "better" is when he finally throws in the towel and quits....which he will do. Bet on it. His latest disaster (and Cardinal Parolin's disaster), is Francis' sell-out of the Catholic Church in China to the Communists. He's practically letting the Communists pick the Catholic bishops. If you think the Vigano story was what Cardinal Zen and thousands of others are saying about Francis and Parolin over the Church in China.
They all want both of them out....Parolin...but especially Francis.
Some of what you say Peter is true. Very insightful. But Francis is and has been a disaster from day one. Time for him to go and have a Catholic take his place,
Damian Malliapalli

Tancred said...

Did Gaybriel just chastise Bergoglio?

Blotto said...

Your pejorative description of Archbishop Viganò leaves a lot to be desired, Peter W./Josef K./Bill O'Malley/Zuleika Dobson. Way past time to clean up your act. Daily rosary always helps.

Tancred said...

It’s the desperation of the sclerotic revolutionaries of 1968.

DJR said...

Peter W said... Furthermore, Benedict has now come out with a very strong criticism of Brandmueller, his fellow Dubia cardinals and their followers of using him as an ideological wedge between himself and his successor, Pope Francis."

You made the mistake of reading the headlines about the letters Pope Benedict sent last year as opposed to reading the letter itself.

In the letters leaked by Bild, Pope Benedict said nothing about what you allege. His only references are to his own pontificate, not the pontificate of Pope Francis, and he says nothing about the dubia cardinals, et cetera.

You can read the English translation of the letters here:

Camper said...

The world really has turned into a nightmare: cocaine in the Vatican, a ring of pedophiles and their protectors, and fabianism in government.

Tancred said...

If the reality is that pederasty is a secretive means of doing political business in the Western world, particularly progreessives, but their conservative fallguy partners as well, the media seems to be profoundly blind, deaf and dumb to it.

Kathleen1031 said...

Tancred, yes, is that the reality? One suspects this child/teen pederasty involvement may just be far bigger than the random manner we have thought, where a bishop just "lucked into" having a cute altar boy serve. We hear of "sex cults" in Hollywood and see the church has become a huge sex cult and we read about Podesta and "spirit meals" or some such, and a queasy feeling builds. How bad is this. If it were so, if it is an organized thing, the media would not out it or talk about it. The media adores homosexuality, and they will cover for perverts of course. If today's flavor is little boys, so be it. That's why Bergolio gets a pass, and so do his accomplices, otherwise known as Cardinals.
It is stunning that in 2018, this scenario is not crazy, it is considered reasonable.
I cannot imagine who would support this pope at all, but Catholics do. I think Peter is doing that here. But why? Are people still buying the mercy schtick? Is that it? What's the draw at this point. He's a disaster, the church he is infesting is dying.

Even if Bergolio did not know there was a limit put into place on McCarrick, there is no way he did not know McCarrick was a flaming homosexual predator, please. And it is no accident he has surrounded himself with homosexuals and pederasts, appointed them to the highest positions, embraced homosexuality, soon to be the hot topic of the "Youth synod", where they are going to have the audacity to further indoctrinate young Catholics into more LGBT-love, what the young people never asked for but they made sure they got. All the right people have been invited. Oh, these men are going to be there and enjoy some "youths". Are parents this clueless?