Pope Francis: Rigid (traditionalist) priests lead immoral lives. From Pontifex Maximus to the Great Generaliser
Pope Francis meanly attacks priests who disagree with his idea of church.
In ten years of Pontificate, the Church has undergone a real earthquake. The ministerial priesthood has become Francis' main target, and with each passing day, Bergoglio shows how impatient he really is. Many ask, 'but is he happy being a priest?' There is no Holy Mass or liturgical event where the Pope smiles. It is unbelievable. In ten years of Magisterium, there is not a speech in which he has said: 'It is good to be a priest'.
With the favour of the press, therefore, Francis has gone out of his way to bash priests and their ministry. Whenever someone points out to the Pope that his 'idea' of the Church is not shared by everyone, he responds by saying: 'they are rigid'. The problem, then, is others. Imagine if Paul and Peter had spent their time insulting each other by saying that they are rigid. We would have very little to discuss today. Jorge Mario Bergoglio's theological background, however, is no different from that of the tik tokers and, therefore, the response cannot be different from theirs. "You don't agree with me? You are no longer my friend'. Or, just as magistrates and politicians are wont to do with the press, they turn to petty insinuation or slander.
Rigid priests
In yet another interview granted by Francis to the press, this nice aspect also emerges. "Freewheeling" the Pope, in Vida Nueva, says: "This rigidity is of good people who want to serve the Lord. They react this way because they are afraid of the time of insecurity that we are living, and this fear does not allow them to walk. We must remove this fear and help them. On the other hand, this armour hides much rot. I have already had to intervene in some dioceses in different countries with similar parameters. Behind this traditionalism, we have discovered moral problems and serious vices, double lives. We all know of bishops who, needing priests, used people they had thrown out of other seminaries for immorality.
I do not like rigidity because it is a bad symptom of inner life. The pastor cannot afford to be rigid. The pastor must be ready to face whatever comes his way.
Someone told me recently that the rigidity of young priests arises because they are tired of today's relativism, but this is not always the case. I ask the bishops to beware of this drift and to be clear that it is not only the 'blessed Imedas' who make the best priests. If one makes a 'saint' face and rolls his eyes at you, be wary. We need normal seminarians, with their own problems, who play football, who don't go into neighbourhoods to dogmatise... I needed to ask for reports from the women of the parishes, the curates and the brothers where the seminarians went..."
Cathcon: The Pope thinks it is normal to get parishioners to spy on priests
Q.- Once you have ordained these priests identified as "rigid", how do you accompany them so that they adhere to Vatican II? Why, deep down, do they suffer from not being able to accept what is coming?
Francis answered: 'There is a need for those pastors with a pulse, those priests who are alive and past middle age. They have the experience and patience to accompany them. Slowly, they are 'softening' them. When they see that the Council's reception is not a threat to the Magisterium, they are 'softening'. But it is not easy, because clericalism is always present.
There are people who live trapped in a theology textbook, unable to get into the issues and move theology forward. Stagnant theology reminds me that stagnant water is the first to corrupt, and stagnant theology creates corruption.
So, if you do not accept what Francis tells you, you are 'rigid'. Then, you are afraid. Then, you are actually hiding something underneath. In the end, there are moral problems. The generalisation fair is on our minds. And here we return to Francis' many stereotypes and his petty ways of taking out the enemy. A typically Jesuit method. A bit like what happens in regimes, if you disagree with the dictator he will do anything to discredit you. And the theme of re-education emerges clearly: 'There is a need for those pastors with a pulse, those priests who are alive and past middle age. Basically, there is a need for some 68-year-olds to keep you in check and obey the party leader.
In fact, think when you are sent to be the coadjutor (vice-parish priest) of a well-ideologised Sixty-eighter. Schedule the gastroenterologist twice a week and the psychotherapist five or six times a month, otherwise there is serious trouble.
Francis and the inability to listen
Is this really the case? Can all those who are critical of this pontificate be called 'traditionalists'? Have all those who criticise this modus agendi been kicked out of seminaries and ordained in other dioceses? Francis has always condemned chatter but he is the first to foment it. If you disagree with him, he is the one who creates the reputation of being 'immoral'.
Then Bergoglio should also explain to us what it means to be considered immoral. Because the seminarian who gets kicked out is immoral, that's fine. Kicked out on the basis of who knows what. The traditionalist priest is also immoral, who decides this is not known. Perhaps Bergoglio's friends are the ones in the bed of the immoral. To control, let's be clear.
Zanchetta, who harassed seminarians and liked to 'touch' them left and right, however, was not immoral. Francis ruled: 'it's all a conspiracy'. Marko Rupnik who loved to make his consecrated women naked and kiss them as he kisses the altar, also not immoral. Mauro Inzoli who used to take CL boys into his bedroom, he too was not immoral. Yes, it does seem that the judgement of immorality Francis uses it a bit as he likes. Just like when he chooses to promote 'immoral people' within the Roman Curia. They, however, are 'non-rigid immoral'. At least from the waist up.
Moreover, someone explain to Francis that he too, during his 'affiliation' to the happy Society (of Jesus), received a very harsh judgement from the psychologist who followed him. That assessment highlighted certain aspects that, reread with hindsight, make us seriously understand how it was the case to listen to a professional, rather than to put their hands on people's heads. Perhaps in that case too, the bishops thought about the fact that there was a shortage of priests?
These statements not only confirm what we have been saying for years, i.e. that Francis is convinced that all traditionalists are simply homosexuals to be eliminated because if not, they might even create a 'lobby' for us. Once again, therefore, in an interview in which he talks about 'welcoming transgender people', his position on who should become a priest remains very clear. Are you gay? 'OK but at home'.
But these words also do enormous damage to the Church. Imagine what a priest of upright doctrine faces in a parish. Think what the parishioners will think today. This too is a clear abuse. Francis attempts to psychologise what he considers the enemy. He has not even obtained a doctorate and he sets out to psychoanalyse seminarians. This is a mean way by which he wants to make people believe that those who have a clear idea are rigid as a consequence. If he is rigid, he is obviously hiding something. We already have a big problem in the Church with constant slander and innuendo, brothers who wage war against each other, and the Pope now offers this example? We are really fresh.
We ask ourselves, but wasn't it the time for the synod, the confrontation, the Church ready to welcome everyone? That is, someone explain the game to us because it is not very clear. If you preach the magisterium of all time, if you preach doctrine, if you preach a Church that is aware of the evangelical mandate, you are rigid and therefore you are to be kicked out. If you are ordained I will reduce you to the lay state on the pretext of immorality, if you are not even ordained so much the better, I will throw you out and let the devil take the hindmost.
There are certainly cases where an attitude of rigidity during formation can be revealing of other problems. But rigidity is not a one-way street, there are also those who are rigid on 'openness', 'modernist' and various other terms. Moreover, it is not specifically a question of moral issues but, very often, of lived experience, of experiences that have marked the person. However, these are evaluations to be made by experts, and individually not in a generic way by a chemicals expert (a reference to the Pope's training as a lab technician)
If, on the other hand, you start shooting off your mouth at the Church, the priests, the Curia, and carry on ideological battles, then we will gladly listen to you? How does it work?
On the commemoration of St John Mary Vianney, we took up the words of Benedict XVI in his letter of indiction for the Year for Priests. A year dedicated entirely to our ministry. A year of prayer. The Holy Father wrote: 'This touching expression allows us first of all to evoke with tenderness and gratitude the immense gift that priests constitute not only for the Church, but also for humanity itself. I think of all those priests who offer the Christian faithful and the entire world the humble and daily proposal of Christ's words and deeds, seeking to adhere to Him with the thoughts, will, feelings and style of their entire existence. How can we not emphasise their apostolic labours, their tireless and hidden service, their tendentially universal charity? And what can we say about the courageous fidelity of so many priests who, despite difficulties and misunderstandings, remain faithful to their vocation: that of 'friends of Christ', particularly called, chosen and sent by Him?".
What can I say, gone are the days when the Pope loved his priests, thanked them and grasped their difficulties and merits. Today, unfortunately, Bergoglio has chosen to wage war on them and turn the Church into a political and battlefield. Perhaps, however, someone has not explained to him that we are the future of the Church, he is heading for 87.
.jpeg)
Comments