Has the Pope finally completely lost the plot? He cannot carry on governing the Church like this.

Not only in the Roman Curia are they wondering at this point whether Pope Francis is not entering a worrying state of senility, but also in the Curias of the entire world. Today we are looking at his last two outrages. First of all, it was learned that in a meeting with the Italian episcopate on Monday, May 20, he asked the bishops not to accept openly homosexual candidates in their seminaries because, he said, "C'è già troppa frociaggine." The Italian media cannot come out of their stupor; and not because what the Pontiff said sounds like discrimination, but because of the rudeness of the expression. The Spanish-language media has translated it as “There are already many faggots,” but the Italian expression frocio is much ruder and denigrating. It is an insult, and a strong insult. In the Argentine language, it would be something like “There are already many trolls” or “There are already many whores.”

There were Popes who were quite dirty-mouthed, and some saints too, like Cura Brochero (see here for a life of this most remarkable of priests). But one case is to use a more or less rude or vulgar expression in a conversation or in an outburst of anger, and quite another in a very high-level meeting. And it is one thing for a rural priest to use it and another for the Roman pontiff to do so.

The Pope with a statue of Cura Brochero.  Francis is no Cura Brochero despite his affectations of humility and closeness to the flock.

The second outrage has to do with the intemperate expulsion of the new La Plata Archbishop, Monsignor Gabriel Mestre, a man of Bergoglian stock. Everyone senses that the decision has to do with something that happened in Mar del Plata, his previous headquarters, and some ventured that it would be some sexual scandal, as the clergy has accustomed us to lately. However, if that had been the case, Francis would not have run to Mestre; He would have protected him. This is what he has done with all those who have made mistakes on sexuality. Let us think of Mr McCarrick or Bishop Zanchetta. The Pontiff does not pay attention to that type of peccata minuta; What infuriates him and provokes reactions like the one we met today is that he intends to challenge, even minimally, his power. Those are very serious sins.

Bergoglio is convinced that he is the Bishop of the world and the parish priest of Argentina. That is why, for him, Argentine bishops are nothing more than parochial vicars who must obey him in everything. And poor Monsignor Mestre, a mediocre and limited man like any other of Bergoglio's chosen ones, had his temper go to his head. This is what the most insistent versions repeat and have been published even in the major Argentine media.

The problem arose because since his assumption of the La Plata throne, Mestre attempted to elect his successor in the Mar del Plata seat himself, and this was the person who had been his Vicar General, Fr. Luis Albóniga. His claims had reached such a level that he himself appointed him as Diocesan Administrator of Mar del Plata at a sumptuous dinner that he gave to his intimates in the Archiepiscopal Palace of La Plata.

While Albóniga was a Diocesan Administrator, to the dismay of Albóniga and his protector Mestre, the Holy Father appointed Bishop Luis Baliña, Auxiliary of Buenos Aires, as Residential Bishop of Mar del Plata. Days after accepting the position, he resigned citing a health problem, although it is said that the reason was the rejection that caused his appointment among the Mar del Plata clergy.

At the time of accepting Baliña's resignation, the Pope appointed Monsignor Larrazabal, Auxiliary of San Juan, as the new Bishop. And here things got serious: it was already the third time that Abóniga's merits for the episcopal dignity were detracted.

Immediately, a smear campaign against Monsignor Larrazábal began, which would have been orchestrated, according to some versions, by Mestre and Albóniga, with the help of the Director of the newspaper, La Capital, a friend of both. The accusation was of the abuse of authority that had been committed by the new bishop against a woman. And the possibility began to resonate that Larrazábal would not enter office either, although he insisted that he would. Even the Nunciature issued a document clarifying that there was nothing that opposed his entering office, to which he even set a date. A public expression of obedience from the Diocesan Administrator Luis Albóniga was expected, but it did not occur. Finally Larrazabal gave in and resigned, continuing as a San Juan Auxiliary. Subsequently, the court declared him innocent of the accusation that had been made against him.

 In order to review the situation, the Pope appointed as his apostolic administrator his former novice, Monsignor Giobando, S.J., Auxiliary Bishop of Buenos Aires who, as soon as he arrived in Mar del Plata, transferred Father Luis Albóniga to Jujuy — 2,000 km. from Mar del Plata—, along with his friend Monsignor Fernandez.

Since his transfer, members of the young clergy and some ladies with a lot of free time and a spirit of sedition, tried to present the situation as a forced disappearance, an exile, or a kidnapping of Father Albóniga. And they did it with the help of the networks and the press media friendly to both the exile and Mestre.

The escalation culminated in the Chrism Mass, when an intervention with posters were displayed during the Holy Sacrifice, seeking answers about the canonical status of Albóniga. After this act, possibly sacrilegious, several important priests of the Diocese openly spoke out against the Papal orders channeled through the Apostolic Administrator. A public demonstration of the same anti-social style was being prepared for next Sunday's Corpus Christi procession.

And, in the midst of all this, Bishop Gabriel Mestre is called to Rome, reprimanded, admonished and reprimanded and, finally, thrown out by the Sovereign Pontiff.

 Some questions:

1. If things are as the versions indicate, the only reason Bergoglio would have had for removing Mestre is that he was, in effect, stirring up the clergy and the people of Mar del Plata in favour of his friend Albóniga, and against Papal orders.

2. If this were the cause, does it warrant, perhaps, deposing a newly appointed Archbishop of one of the most important sees in the country? This is an unusual act of tyranny; Literally, the Pope behaves like the priest of the world.

3. Once again, and this is the umpteenth time, the lack of capacity that Francis has to elect his bishops is demonstrated. By bypassing the usual channel, which is the opinion of the Nuncio, and acting according to his absolute will, he chooses the worst candidates who later bring him surprises of this type.

4. Some also believe that Mestre was contradicting many of the capricious decisions that Monsignor Tucho Fernández, his predecessor in La Plata, had made in relation to his clergy and his seminary. And we already know the intimacy and influence that exists between Tucho and Bergoglio. Firefighters do not step on the hose.

One more embarrassment of the Bergoglian era that scarecrow correspondents like Elizabetta Piqué and Algarañaz try to hide, but can no longer.

Source