Psychopathy and the imminent end? By Caminante-Wanderer
However, the publication of the dialogue he had with the editors of the European Jesuit cultural magazines almost a month ago, and which was published June 13 by La civiltà cattolica, shows that the Supreme Pontiff's biggest problem is not his bad knee or his intestinal diverticula; it is something much more serious and affects the balance of his judgement.
In a nutshell, and the question does not respond to any anti-Franciscophobic animus: Is Bergoglio in his right mind? No matter how progressive someone may be, he cannot deny that some paragraphs of the conversation show a person who either shows obvious signs of senile dementia, perfectly understandable given his age, or that the script of his words was written by a serious enemy of himself or of the Church, or by some comedian.
What is certain is that a sane person who retains the good sense and prudence required by his function - and in this case no less than the supreme pontificate - cannot say what he says.
There is no point in wasting time refuting his assertions. That would have been done by those of us who were engaged in this task some years ago; now, when so much water has passed under the bridge, things are taken as they come. However, it is worth noting a few points:
1. The frivolity and superficiality with which he refers to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. He compares them to Little Red Riding Hood and the Wolf, and implies, as several media outlets (those that still pay any attention to him) have understood, that NATO provoked Russia into war. Regardless of whether this is more or less true, the Pope, as head of a state and supreme pontiff of the Church, cannot indulge in such expressions. They would be fine, in any case, for an after-dinner chat in a home for elderly priests, but not for the whole world to hear. This fact alone should lead the cardinals to think seriously about what they will do with this character who could get the Church into a major embarrassment.
2. Of particular interest to us is the answer to the third question, about the signs that the Pope sees of spiritual renewal in the Church. And the first thing to say is that we are faced with one of the most refined examples of institutional cannibalism we can find, that speciality of Bergoglio's that our friend Ludovicus described so well and which can be read here. He devours "restorationist" Catholics with the ferocity of a hyena and also preys on the Roman Curia, the classic enemy of any populist.
In this case, moreover, we see in an evident and hardly questionable way, symptoms of a dissociated personality. He speaks of bishops appearing in Europe or America, as if he were not the one who made them appear; as if he himself were not the protagonist and directly responsible for these episcopal appointments.
For example, let us read this paragraph: "An Argentinian bishop told me that he had been asked to administer a diocese that had fallen into the hands of these "restorers"". He is clearly referring to Bishop Carlos Domínguez and the diocese of San Rafael, the only one with an apostolic administrator and a "restorationist" profile. But Francis says that this bishop "had been asked". Who had asked him? Well, he himself, since there is no one else who can nominate bishops or apostolic administrators but the Pope of Rome, and even more so in the case of Argentina, whose management he has reserved for himself exclusively.
We are facing a serious psychological disorder, and it will be up to the professionals to diagnose whether it is a case of dissociative identity or depersonalisation.
3. In the same paragraph, the contempt he has for the American bishops is already evident. He says: "The number of "restorationist" groups - there are many in the United States, for example - is staggering". This only confirms what we have said several times on this blog: a proper hermeneutic for reading Bergoglio's decisions is to take into account his anti-Americanism.
And it accentuates my amateur diagnosis of personality dissociation: the same pontiff who is calling for a synodal church, in which all must be heard, lashes out against a group of church members, which he himself acknowledges is astonishingly numerous, and calls not only for them not to be heard, but for them to be cancelled.
4. It is the same psychopathic disorder that leads him to engage in a long elegy to Fr. Pedro Arrupe, s.j., with flowery mentions of Paul VI, without realising (or does he?) that in doing so he is only sullying the memory of John Paul II, who stripped Arrupe of his position as Superior General of the Society in 1981, because of the drift not only progressive but atheistic to which Bergoglio's admired "prophet" had led it.
5. To conclude this gleaning of famous phrases, Francis says: "To the president of the German Bishops' Conference, Monsignor Bätzing, I said: "There is a very good evangelical church in Germany". Is it possible that the supreme pontiff of the Catholic Church considers that there is a "very good" evangelical church? If the evangelical church is very good, and much more lax, understanding and welcoming of diversity than the Catholic Church, which still wraps itself in laces and bonnets, then why not become an evangelical instead of a Catholic? Why would a young man offer his life and his perpetual celibacy to God as a Catholic priest if it is just as good to be a good evangelical pastor, without having to carry any of those burdens?
What strikes me is that Fr. Spadaro, s.j., editor of the magazine, has decided to publish this "conversation". Chapter 9 of the book of Genesis narrates the following: Noah "drank of the wine, and was drunken, and was naked in the midst of his tent. And Ham [his youngest son], the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness, and told his two brothers standing outside. Then Shem and Japheth took the garment, and put it on their own shoulders, and walked backward, and covered the nakedness of their father, and their faces were turned, and they did not see the nakedness of their father. And Noah awoke from his drunkenness, and knew what his youngest son had done to him", and cursed him.
Spadaro has behaved like Ham. It would have been better for him to cover the nakedness of his father, or co-brother in St. Ignatius of Loyola, as Shem and Japheth piously did with their father Noah. I do not expect him to be cursed by Bergoglio; I expect him to be judged with justice by the Just and Terrible Judge; he and also the beodoo who undresses daily in Santa Marta.
An excerpt from the pontifical conversation: We said not long ago that the one who governs the Church is the Son of God himself, and he knows much better than we do how to do it.
The grotesque nature of this pontificate has accelerated so much in recent months that everything Bergoglio touches, he dirties. The synod, for example, which is a venerable institution of the universal Church, has become a masquerade that bishops put on in their dioceses pour la gallerie, and in fact, few Catholics know that in three months' time the continental phase of the synod on synods begins. It is not surprising either that, when Francis spoke out against tiptoeing, many parish priests opened the chests of their sacristies to dust off old apothegms.
That is why the more Francis talks about Vatican II and the more he insists on it, the more people will become suspicious of such an ill-fated event, because it will be associated with him and the pathetic outcome of his pontificate.
Therefore, perhaps it is advisable to be even more patient and pray to God to keep the Servant of His servants on earth for some more time so that, with his clumsiness, he may finish smearing all that needs to be smeared and his successor may have an easier task of returning everything to its right track; of "restoring" the Church to its true face that has been so much disfigured.
No comments:
Post a Comment