"Bergoglio, of course, was a different animal who lacked any appreciation for history or the civilizational heritage of Christianity—not to mention an understanding of Christian faith itself."
This statement corresponds to Bishop Chaput's saying "He had no direct involvement in the Second Vatican Council and seemed to resent the legacy of his immediate predecessors who did; men who worked and suffered to incarnate the council’s teachings faithfully into Catholic life."
Looked up Jesuits view on Christianity and it says "Jesuits view Christianity as a faith grounded in love for Christ and a commitment to St. Ignatius of Loyola's vision of seeking God in all things, all while actively serving others and promoting justice. They believe that God is present in everyday life and encourage finding Him in various experiences. Jesuits also emphasize the importance of interreligious dialogue and seeing the presence of God in diverse cultures and religions, while maintaining a strong faith in Jesus Christ."
No correlation here with regard to appreciation of history, heritage of Christianity, or teaching faithfully into Catholic life.
It's like it was expected once Bergoglio assumed his role of Pope, those that supported him years ago were okay with this knowing what was expected such as avoiding furthering Catholic beliefs, downplaying sexual candor, (see Vigano and influence of Bertone & Parolin) and in my opinion bringing traditional Catholic teachings/progress to a halt through half truths and little substance.
What the Church needs going forward is a leader who can marry personal simplicity with a passion for converting the world to Jesus Christ, a leader who has a heart of courage and a keen intellect to match it. Anything less won’t work.
At least they are asking rhe right questions. I think higher of them now, I had lower opinions about their choice of Francis before this note. It appears that they know now that Francis was a mistake
The problem is, “they” who made the mistake are mostly either dead or aged out of having any influence this time around. Plus, in stark contrast with his two predecessors, Bergoglio ruthlessly appointed Bishops and Cardinals in his own image. Better (too) late than never, I guess?
Ratzinger was a way better, if not perfect Pope.
It was a travesty to push him aside.
Live by the jab, die by the jab. https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/memento-mori-tuesday-april-22-2025
Conspiracy theory? https://www.irishcentral.com/roots/history/st-malachy-prophecy-pope-francis.amp
"Bergoglio, of course, was a different animal who lacked any appreciation for history or the civilizational heritage of Christianity—not to mention an understanding of Christian faith itself."
This statement corresponds to Bishop Chaput's saying "He had no direct involvement in the Second Vatican Council and seemed to resent the legacy of his immediate predecessors who did; men who worked and suffered to incarnate the council’s teachings faithfully into Catholic life."
Looked up Jesuits view on Christianity and it says "Jesuits view Christianity as a faith grounded in love for Christ and a commitment to St. Ignatius of Loyola's vision of seeking God in all things, all while actively serving others and promoting justice. They believe that God is present in everyday life and encourage finding Him in various experiences. Jesuits also emphasize the importance of interreligious dialogue and seeing the presence of God in diverse cultures and religions, while maintaining a strong faith in Jesus Christ."
No correlation here with regard to appreciation of history, heritage of Christianity, or teaching faithfully into Catholic life.
It's like it was expected once Bergoglio assumed his role of Pope, those that supported him years ago were okay with this knowing what was expected such as avoiding furthering Catholic beliefs, downplaying sexual candor, (see Vigano and influence of Bertone & Parolin) and in my opinion bringing traditional Catholic teachings/progress to a halt through half truths and little substance.
Well said.
Oh, shit:
https://x.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1914717374718058647/photo/1
Vatican laundry accidentally mixes reds with whites
Perhaps only showing their true colors.
I assume this is part of the interregnum process. LOL.
YOUR WORDS REPEATED:
What the Church needs going forward is a leader who can marry personal simplicity with a passion for converting the world to Jesus Christ, a leader who has a heart of courage and a keen intellect to match it. Anything less won’t work.
Ratzinger fits that bill fwiw.
fit
Good article by the way.
I guess nobody told that guy “don’t speak ill of the dead” 😁
I have never seen so much of that! For anyone, let alone a pope.
From Vigano - a thorn in Bergoglio’s side: https://x.com/gatewaypundit/status/1914319270458122656?s=46
At least they are asking rhe right questions. I think higher of them now, I had lower opinions about their choice of Francis before this note. It appears that they know now that Francis was a mistake
Be careful what you assume. Francis appointed 80% of the Cardinals in play.
The problem is, “they” who made the mistake are mostly either dead or aged out of having any influence this time around. Plus, in stark contrast with his two predecessors, Bergoglio ruthlessly appointed Bishops and Cardinals in his own image. Better (too) late than never, I guess?