PopeWatch: Your Lying Eyes

Facebook 0
Twitter
LinkedIn 0
Reddit 0
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon 0
WhatsApp
Email
Print

For any sentient Catholic who believes that the Lavender Mafia is not calling the shots in this pontificate:

 

A journalist considered one of Pope Francis’ “unofficial spokespeople” claimed in stunning remarks about Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s alleged sexual abuse of seminarians that the root problem is not homosexuality but clericalism, and also asserted that “No, McCarrick did not have homosexual relations.”

In a September 14 article written for La Stampa’s Vatican Insider, Andrea Tornielli regrets that “for weeks, the political-media groups and journalists who collaborated with former nuncio Carlo Maria Viganò in writing, editing, and then spreading his ‘memorandum,’ including the sensational request for the resignation of the Pontiff, have insisted that the problem in the Church is not child abuse but homosexuality.”

“But is this really the case?” the Italian journalist asked. “Is the root, the origin of the problem of abuse really to be found in the homosexuality of priests?”

While Tornielli admits that statistics show “that a large part of the violence against children sees male adolescents as victims” and while he points to the existence of “gay lobbies,” he nevertheless doubts that it is “right to focus it all on homosexuality.”

“An unprejudiced look at McCarrick’s sad story shows exactly the opposite,” the journalist then states. In light of the testimonies of the former seminarians of the Diocese of Metuchen and Newark, says Tornielli, there can be seen “a different story.” “Even for McCarrick’s case, in fact, the problem is clericalism, the abuse of power and conscience, which comes before sexual abuse and is committed by people – priests or bishops – who can never be considered equal to their victims,” the papal confidant explained.

For one who is close to the Pope, “the McCarrick disaster … is an obvious case of psychological abuse, abuse of power and conscience and sexual abuse. It has been treated for too long only as a case of homosexual practice.” Further commenting on this matter, Tornielli said: “No, McCarrick did not have homosexual relations. He harassed and abused seminarians in the name of his episcopal power, making them understand that going to the beach house with him (…) was an obligatory step to be better known to him and to land a priestly ordination.”

Tornielli is not the only influential person under this current pontificate who tries to steer the discussion away from the obvious fact that the majority of clerical sexual abuse is homosexual abuse. In nearly the same fashion, Cardinal Reinhard Marx – a member of Pope Francis’ Council of Nine – had his vicar general declare that “There are now, repeatedly, those claims that the studies (on clerical abuse in Germany) have shown that the abuse victims are mostly boys and the offenders mostly men.” “I wish to give a warning,” Beer then added, “not to draw – because of this observation – a direct connection between homosexuality and abuse.” In Beer’s eyes, such an approach would “constitute an unbearable discrimination of persons with homosexual inclinations. I explicitly reject that and I ask us all, not to follow here such slogans.” Marx’ second hand also claimed that “all experts say that these abuse cases are less, or not at all, about homosexual deeds or homosexual relationships, but, rather, that they are about an expression of an immature sexuality.”

 

Go here to read the rest.  Now who are you going to believe, the Pope’s spokesmen or your lying eyes?  Theodore Dalrymple (Anthony Daniels ) explained in 2005 how these type of obvious lies serve a purpose:

 

Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

Lies remain lies no matter what the title of the liar is.

More to explorer

16 Comments

  1. Coupla thoughts: 1st, This Tornielli chap seems to have a Clintonian definition of what constitutes “homosexual relations.” 2nd, This reflexive “don’t blame homosexuals!” (“not all homosexuals are like that” implied) is too reminiscent of the “don’t blame muslims (not all muslims are like that)” chorus that inevitably follows every act of islamic terrorism.

    All that’s missing is the handwringing about non-existent anti-muslim violence that’s always just about the break out!

  2. I agree Ernst. (it depends on what the meaning of “is” is). Yes, it is psychological abuse, abuse of power and conscience and sexual abuse committed by people who are sexually attracted to their same sex victims and act on it.

  3. It is the dishonesty at the heart of the Bergoglian project which makes it so noxious. It is an endless series of omissions, sleights of hand, contradiction of words by actions, weaponized spirituality and nearly-continual gaslighting. All of which serve only the process of remaking Catholicism into a flabbier version of progressive-leaning Lutheranism adorned with folk devotions.

    And the only one who has stood firm against any of this is a superannuated Italian bishop with no portfolio.

    Hell, the American bishops can’t even clear their throats to chide Bishop Malone of Buffalo. No wonder, then, that the chest-less bunch won’t say boo about the corruption of the Faith at the top.

  4. I swear, some Conservatives see Communism or Marxism the way Joe Montana saw Reggie White in the old Sega commercial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COn4JsX_Nu8

    Making people “confess” to things they know to be false is by no means an invention of the Bolsheviks, though — it is much older than that. And yes, I think it is almost 100% of what is behind the *DEMAND* that everyone agree that OF COURSE BRUCE JENNER IS NOW A WOMAN and that NO SENSE OF “MARRIAGE” EXISTS IN WHICH A MAN CAN MARRY A WOMAN BUT CANNOT MARRY ANOTHER MAN. The point of the demand is not really about Bruce Jenner or about marriage, but about breaking the minds of the masses so that nothing — not the fear of God, not the evidence of their own senses, not the principle of non-contradiction: NOTHING — is a higher authority than those calling the shots. This was presented quite well in an episode of Star Trek the Next Generation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjKQQpPVifY.

  5. “A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.”
    I don’t think liar is necessary, it helps, but emasculated seems sufficient.
    Dagger John, was once a Bishop of NY. What do we have now? Is it not Men who are for the most part effeminate?

  6. “Did you change the formatting of the blog? I no longer can read any of it on my phone.”
    If you haven’t already done so, try to change it to the desktop setting. It’s helped me before.

  7. “all experts say that these abuse cases are less, or not at all, about homosexual deeds or homosexual relationships, but, rather, that they are about an expression of an immature sexuality.”
    The anal stage of a child is between 2 and 5 years old.That is when he discovers his anus and plays with his feces. A sodomite is a case of arrested development at 2-5 years old.
    “immature sexuality” are sodomites reverts to the anal stage or “immature sexuality” and why are they allowed into the Holy Orders?
    There must exist some organization that fosters and promotes male children in their anal stage to be ordained into the Catholic Church. From the getgo, male children in their anal stage cannot be ordained to be the spiritual fathers of hungry souls.
    Defrock “uncle ted”

  8. No, McCarrick did not have homosexual relations

    Maybe it’s a translation error, and he meant McCarrick is not related to any homosexuals.

  9. “Right now, those who are implementing the Church’s social doctrine the best are the Chinese,” said Argentine Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo. “They search for the common good and subordinate everything to the general welfare.”
    Read: The Chinese subordinate the sovereign personhood of the human being to the state. The state is also called the general welfare.

  10. What it reflects is a poorly conceived, badly executed attempt to share the gospel with a self-marginalized subculture that’s been hijacked and subverted by those within the Church holding that fundamentally materialist anthropocentric world view you mentioned.

  11. I’m in a perpetual state of malaise. All of this talk makes me feel like vomiting. After watching EWTN last few weeks, and having to guide 35 children and grandchildren who look to me and their father for stable guidance about the evil being perpetrated within the True church I am at a loss to defend apparently what has been years and years if the sin. No wonder the destruction of Holy Mother Church at the hands of these deviant’s! No wonder the lives of 50+millions of babies! Who has time to defend the truths of the right to life while pondering how to cover up sin after sin at their filthy hands hands!! Where is Cardinal Burke? I know him! Why is he and the other Cardinal’s who speak truth “banned” and not invited and disinvited from diocesan activities? This is going beyond the pale of tolerance and acceptance by the faithful! I have told the children,” never stop receiving the Sacraments,”as ccd teacher’s speak and teach from the Catechism . And yet the very words that come from Rome are presented in our bulletins. Our teaching materials!! Mealy mouth diatribes “love” “acceptance” “tolerance” . An openly gay man who recently died in our parish. Full Mass with blathering homily and tributes by his “partner” What in the Name of God?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.