There is a joke going around: the Chinese are a bit embarrassed about being received in the Vatican because Bergoglio is too much of a Communist. A cliché, indeed, but every cliché reveals a bit of truth and more than a bit here we have a load of it: there must be a reason: if the Argentine Pope has been adopted by the left as the last hope of repainted Marxism; if he refuses to meet Mike Pompeo, the U.S. Secretary of State; if he shows a disgusted face with Donald Trump, like he did with the former President of hìs own country, Macri; if he sends the Bishop of Hong Kong to the doghouse; if he doesn’t want to see even a painted picture of Matteo Salvini and blatantly humiliates him while having no problem with South American dictators giving him gifts of surreal Crucifixes on hammers and sickles.
Bergoglio had fame as a leftist priest, affiliated with the Liberation Theology of Romero - but that’s not quite right. Bergoglio if anything, is a pastor of the barricades, close to anarchistic positions: Il Messaggero three years ago wrote something (never denied) about his support, even financial for the galaxy of social centers; to the rabble-rouser Casarini * he said: “carry on [with the good work] brother” and for the NGOs trafficking illegal immigrants he finds nothing but unconditional and rambling praise.
He went as far as justifying - if not excusing – the Charlie Hebdo Islamic
terrorist killers with his delirious, blasé remark about those that should be
punched in the face if they insult your mother. That his Marxism appertains to
Karl or Groucho is a more nuanced issue, perhaps unknowable. He is not a social
Pope but a militant one. Biased like the one-way militia are. But can a Pope allow
himself to be so recklessly one-sided? Always tardy, pained, when addressing
the massacres of Christians all over the
world but enthusiastic and almost menacing [to Christians] if he has to side in
favor of other religions, even in their antithetic and devastating aspects for
Christianity.
Bergoglio lets slide and doesn’t ever condemn episodes when churches and statues - symbols of Christian sanctity - are devastated, but lashes out as soon as he hears complaints about the emblematic sacredness of Islam. There are those who intimate: after Ratisbonne, Ratzinger was taken out, to the sound of terrorist attacks and pyres. Imams then imposed a Catholic leader to their liking, after the blackmail of widespread, never-ending massacres. Also this is, probably, a cliché but there is also a bit of truth here - or at least of plausibility that seems to emerge.
His blatant discourtesy to foremost American diplomats is made even more blistering by his offensively, specious motivation: the Vatican does not get involved in electoral campaigns. A puerile thing, that would never have happened under Wojtyla if it is true that the anti-Communist, anti-modernist and anti-capitalist (in his own way) Polish Pope met with both left-wing and right-wing dictators, from Pinochet to Castro: but then, in private, took them to task, dictating his conditions. Bergoglio doesn’t even worry about hiding his emotions: according to ideological identity, he shows contempt or complacency.
This snarly but weak, moody Pontiff ignores financial questions until they explode in all their dramatic contradictions – but contradictions, that he, was the first to cultivate; he appoints and kicks out, but it is he who decides the appointments or someone for him, and if they have proven to be perverse or disastrous, the responsibility is primarily his. Instead he always behaves like the overlord who ditches all that is subject to him.
Theologically [speaking] it is difficult to find anything of substance. His encyclicals go on about climatic “Third- Worldism” that is close to the childishness of Greta or Carola**; the great internal reforms to the Vatican machine have remained pious intentions; the Church as a community of the faithful is imploding in a message of solidarity (charitable, yes) but with no air, no concreteness, no greatness. And no authority. A reduction to a bare minimum that conservative prelates cannot accept, while the progressives look silently on.
But if the progressive priests are Don Biancalani*** or the lynch-mob on Twitter hoping for Trump and Salvini’s violent deaths, if they have the nerve of the Cardinal Papal Almoner who helps the parasites in the social centers to steal electricity from the community, well then, there is nothing to rejoice about at all. The Church is not an NGO and is it neither a social assistance agency.
The fact that its Supreme Pontiff ended up on a flag in the place of Guevara should even worry the Catholics who take pleasure in it.
It is not necessary to be tough cardinals, strongly conservative like Cardinal Robert Sarah to understand that the Church is a Barque being set adrift by a helmsman who doesn’t seem to be the least concerned about it at all.
_________
*Casarini https://www.imolaoggi.it/2020/04/11/migranti-bergoglio-scrive-a-casarini-grazie-per-quello-che-fate/
Original source for the article by the
secular journalist Max del Papa: https://www.nicolaporro.it/un-papa-marxista-che-manda-la-chiesa-alla-deriva/
Translation:
Contributor Francesca Romana
[This opinion piece, as all others we post, does not necessarily reflect the view of the blog.]
