Saturday, December 28, 2019

Which of the words don't you understand?

For those of you who are having difficulty sorting out the propaganda from the truth of what actually took place, get back to me and I'll try to explain it using crayons.

Pope Francis announces retrieval of indigenous statues

The Holy See Press Office has provided a transcription of Pope Francis’s remarks concerning several indigenous statues, stolen earlier this week and thrown into the Tiber River. The Holy Father spoke off-the-cuff following the liturgical prayer that opened the afternoon session of the 15th General Congregation of the Synod for the Amazon.

Pope Francis' words
Good afternoon. I want to say a word about the statues of the pachamama that were taken from the church of the Transpontina – which were there without idolatrous intentions – and were thrown into the Tiber.
First of all, this happened in Rome, and, as Bishop of the Diocese, I ask pardon of the persons who were offended by this act.
Then, I want to communicate to you that the statues which created such attention in the media, were retrieved from the Tiber. The statues were not damaged.
The Commander of the Carabinieri desires that you should be informed of this recovery before the news is made public. At the moment, the news is confidential, and the statues are being kept in the Italian Carabinieri Commander's office.
The Commander of the Carabinieri has expressed his desire to follow up on any indications that you would like to give concerning the manner of publication of the news, and any other initiative you may want to take in this regard: for example, the Commander said, “the exhibition of the statues during the Holy Mass for the closing of the Synod”. We’ll see.
I have delegated the Secretary of State to respond to this.
This is a bit of good news. Thank you. 

25 October 2019, 19:26


Tancred said...

People don’t understand because Francis is deliberately ambiguous.

Robert Semrad said...

Perhaps you'd be so good as to reveal to us which of these words are, as you say, "deliberately ambiguous"? Also a tidbit of information you may find helpful in the future....people. almost always, terrible at judging another's intentions. Please explain to us how it is that you know he is doing what you say he is deliberately. It would be similar to me saying that you are, in your post, not being genuine. That way, if I were to say it, we both, neither of us would know what we were talking about....we both would be committing the mortal sin of calumny....mortal for sure, because it is being done against the only person on earth who is literally, second in command, under Jesus Christ. Think, man, think.

Tancred said...

There are so many examples where Bergoglio engages in various subterfuges and dishonest poses. Whether he's destroying the Franciscans of the Immaculate by unleashing openly Masonic clergy, or kneeling before Muslims to wash their feet, but claiming he can't kneel before the Blessed Sacrament because of painnful sciatica.

Why does Bergoglio give interviews to the Freemason Scalfari, despite the fact that Scalfari deliberately misinterprets his words, but then neglects to check his Masonic pal, despite having plenty of snotty sleights at faithful Catholics?

How should we interpret that stuff?

He sits in a semi-circle around an idol to which sacrifices of children were once offered, how fitting...

Robert Semrad said...

You conveniently skipped over by it is again....
Perhaps you'd be so good as to reveal to us which of these words are, as you say, "deliberately ambiguous"?

Tancred said...

What's not deliberately ambiguous about his Scalfari interviews, or his, "Who am I to Judge" or any of his other flying press conferences after promoting sodomy in various places while he's on tour?

A lot of times he's not ambiguous at all. LOL

Kathleen1031 said...

Robert Semrad, how can you deny the evidence of your own senses? The man is a Jesuit, who has long mastered the art of saying just enough to distort everything, but not what would make it easy to identify him as a heretic. He knows exactly how far he can go.

It is really amazing to see otherwise good Catholics accept without hesitation his anti-Catholic and really, anti-God words and actions. How can you not see it, and why do some see it and not others? You are defending an apostate. How can you not know that. The man is not teaching Catholicism, and he is punishing people who hold Catholicism as true. How can you possibly defend Pachamama worship in the Vatican garden, and all we have seen for 7 arduous years. Robert, how! He is about to issue something that says homosexuality is normal. Will that be enough to wake up sleeping Catholics, or does that virgin or child sacrifice at the altar have to happen first.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your private opinions and list of assertions, all of course dashed off without any supporting evidence.
Well done.

Tancred said...

Thanks for the creepy, passive-aggressive whinging.

geoff kiernan said...

This Pope, ambiguous???? impossible!!!
Let me say he has raised ambiguity to an art form. He could well be Pope Ambiguous I.
Ambiguity/Confusion is not a gift of the Holy Spirit.

Peter Watson said...

If Pope Francis chooses to be ambiguous, it might be an invitation to people to think for themselves and develop informed views/convictions instead of being the allowing themselves to be the objects of passive spoon feeding. After decades of indoctrination from the authoritarian Pole and the unctuous Bavarian, it's a refreshing change for those who prefer not to be infantilized.

Michael Dowd said...

In the hands of anti-pope Bergoglio ambiguity is a means of lying with impunity, e.g., Bergoglio admirers, such as Robert Semrad, will interpret his words as sincere. Others, such as Kathleen1031, will consider all Bergolian statements concluding that he is engaging in intentional obfuscation.

Tancred said...

He’s the Freemason’s favorite pope.

geoff kiernan said...

Come on Pete... A fanciful attempt to legitimize the illegitimate.
Kathleen nails it and Michael even more so.

Don’t follow Francis into the Pit said...

Someone here is actually attempting to defend Francis? One that needs crayons and the other sees unicorns? Are you kidding me? LOLOLOL I really shouldn’t laugh. Because it is so tragically sad. But I can’t help myself. Sorry. LOLOLOLOL

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

Humanum Genus (April 20, 1884) | LEO XIII


To the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and
Bishops of the Catholic World in Grace and
Communion with the Apostolic See.

The race of man, after its miserable fall from God, the Creator and the Giver of heavenly gifts, "through the envy of the devil," separated into two diverse and opposite parts, of which the one steadfastly contends for truth and virtue, the other of those things which are contrary to virtue and to truth. The one is the kingdom of God on earth, namely, the true Church of Jesus Christ; and those who desire from their heart to be united with it, so as to gain salvation, must of necessity serve God and His only-begotten Son with their whole mind and with an entire will. The other is the kingdom of Satan, in whose possession and control are all whosoever follow the fatal example of their leader and of our first parents, those who refuse to obey the divine and eternal law, and who have many aims of their own in contempt of God, and many aims also against God.

What Kingdom do you say Francis belongs to?

Anonymous said...

"After decades of indoctrination from the authoritarian Pole and the unctuous Bavarian, it's a refreshing change for those who prefer not to be infantilized."

You gotta be joking! This is the kind of garbage you'd get in the Episcopal Church, not the Roman Catholic Church, which up until nearly seven (ugh!) years ago had (despite their faults and grevious mistakes in judgement and governance), Pope who actually taught the Catholic Faith (mostly as it has been handed down thru the ages).
If JP II were still alive, and Bergoglio still a Cardinal-Archbishop, I think he would quickly be under investigation for the things he promotes. Same under Benedict.
I would much prefer a Pope who looked and acted like a Pope, however authoritarian or unctuous he might be, rather than a Pope whose theology could have come from any Protestant "seminary", and who dresses, speaks and looks like he would fit in more with a bunch of elderly Italian men in my old neighborhood, who would sit around in t-shirts and black or grey pants,smoke cigars, drink wine or beer, belch a lot and play boche or cribbidge at the neighboring Italo-American club called the "Illustrissimi Fratelli di Cristoforo Colombo".

Damian M. Malliapalli

JBQ said...

@Robert Semrad: You are certainly not "ambiguous". You speak "loud and clear". It is called disinformation and the Russians brought it to an art form. PW could not have said it any better unless you just used a different computer.----The Pole was shot for his beliefs. He took on first the Nazis and then the Bolsheviks. He was run over by a German troop truck. His entourage was heavily infiltrated with Russian spies among even the bishops.----What war did Jprge fight? Unless it was the battle of the 20 max items in the local grocery store line, he would have to go with being a bouncer at a gay bar.

PW said...

Popeye of the good ship USS Lollipop is always good for an entertaining cosmeticized hagiography of JP the Grate. Nothing ambiguous about your version of sacralized fiction.
I hope someone nominates you for the Booker.

John the Mad said...

Crayons??? I have 30 years of experience working on Indigenous matters and have a great respect for Indigenous culture and Indigenous people who have suffered much.

The Pachamama idols clearly represent a pagan South American Goddess. Why would the people in the Vatican gardens prostrate themselves before a mere mother earth allegory? And why would anyone ask permission of a mere allegory before doing anything? Catholics don't do that. What was the figurine of the impressively rampant male doing there on the blanket? Did Saint Francis ever write an ode to male erections? (Just an elbow, eh? Give us a break.)

I like your blog, but you are the one who has accepted spin as fact. If you need further explanations from me please come with a copy of the decalogue. We'll start with the first of the ten. Crayons not needed.

Saint Michael Archangel defend us in battle agains the wickedness and snares of Satan.

Ootn'boot said...

Upper Canada! No wonder your moniker is John 'the Mad.'

Glendalough said...

Did you not know that ambiguity is not his role. His role is to confirm the brethern in The Faith as handed down to him,not to offer his own opinions. Check it out for yourself.

Tancred said...

I didn’t post this, John.

John the Mad said...

Ouch. Me bad.

Well, It certainly explains the uncharacteristically sarcastic tone, that led to my (sometimes characteristically sarcastic) response.

I apologize to you Tancred.


Tancred said...

I’m not usually that snarky.


Happy New Year!

Barnum said...

Nothing ambiguous about Gaybriel's written tantrums, is there?

Here is what JB thinks of those reaching out from the peripheries to be touched by the God of surprises:

Tancred said...

He’s tried to reachable his attack on that poor Chinese woman by appealing to feminism. Oy veh!!