There is increasing talk about “synodality” and average weather conditions. Now it is an exceptionally cringe and lazy joke, of the kind seen on the eccentric and less frequented corners of the internet, to remark that synodality begins with syn.
Bad, but not, as we have seen, inapt.
It may, at first, appear odd that synodality was chosen as the word to mask doomed attempts to change dogma in the Church, because synod means nothing more than meeting. That makes synodality mean something like meetingly, and so (the other one we hear) the synodal path means the way of the endless meeting.
It only later becomes clear that, because of its infinite flexibility, it is an ideal motte-and-bailey of a word.
For instance, suppose a German bishop whispers to you, “Would you like to venture down the synodal path with me?” You either do, or you raise your hand to smack him upside the head. It’s then he retreats to a simpler meaning of the word and says, “Whoa there, big fella! I only meant we should meet and talk about this odd desire.” In or out: the word works.
Synodality and its cousins, then, allows its hearer to swap in whatever meaning he finds most comforting, which affords its speaker an opportunity to see how far he can push things.
With all that in mind, let’s examine what the man in charge of the Vatican said recently. “There is no going back on the process of synodality,” he said.
Now “the process of synodality” could mean something banal, like continuing the recent spate of interminable soul-draining stultifying time-eating unread-report-generating meetings. Or it could mean, to those of a certain bent, the continuing dismantling of all that is True and Beautiful.
In this most current case, “synodal process” was applied to the climate. Not in any metaphorical sense: he meant the weather. Doubtless the cold and brutal winter we are still living with (as I write, the temperature is a fine and breezy 36 F in mid April) will, after the data is suitably processed by Science, be announced to have been part of “One Of The Hottest Years On Record”. But never mind that.
The man in charge said it is a sin—not syn—to “not take care of the climate”. And that not taking care of the climate is a “form of paganism.” This is most curious.
Specifically, it is reported he said, in response to a priest’s questions of how minor variations in the earths pseudo-mean artificially defined mean temperature could be tied to evangelization:
“[N]ot taking care of the climate is a sin against the gift of God that is creation.”
“In my opinion, this is a form of paganism: it is using those things that the Lord has given us for his glory and praise as if they were idols,” he continued.
“I think not caring for creation is like idolizing it, reducing it to an idol, detaching it from the gift of creation. In. [sic] this sense, caring for the communal home is already ‘evangelization’.”
Perhaps the most charitable reading of this is that the speaker, like many in rulership positions, defers too readily to Experts. Experts have decreed that we only have a short time left to save the earth from a climate “catastrophe.” They say that a small increase in a weirdly defined global temperature composite is an “existential threat”, which is clearly false.
Too, they have been saying these things since at least 1971—regular readers will recognize this is one of my favorite radio clips from WLS in 1971:
At this late date, there’s little excuse taking Expert’s word for anything. In any subject. But especially “climate” Experts, given how poor a track record they have.
Even ignoring that, it’s difficult to understand how treating the “climate” with indifference, acting as if, as it were, like the air we breathe, is a form of “paganism.”
Rather, worshiping the weather, treating man like he is not part of creation, that he is, instead, a cancer upon face of the earth, is as pagan as it gets.
Even if you don’t believe that, there is nothing any person can do to worship the climate. Nothing beyond the quelling the ordinary sins of greed and envy and inuring yourself to material discomfort, which are always good ideas.
How hitting the streets and warning people about a possible few tenths of a degree increase in some arbitrarily defined temperature at some far future date aids evangelization is a complete mystery, though.
Buy my new book and learn to argue against the regime: Everything You Believe Is Wrong.
Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal click here; Or go to PayPal directly. For Zelle, use my email.
“Synodality” is just the takeover of religion by the unreligionist, and in particular the displacement of Christianity by satanism. The past attempt to impose a neopagan Nazi church in Germany and the current plan to erect a homosexual one, as well as the creation of a puppet Orthodox church by Stalin and the state-controlled Patriotic Catholic Church in Red China, are all forms of the same thing. The goal in each case is summed by the pseudo-religion scene in George Lukas’s “THX 1138”, where the protagonist is told by an obviouly fake video deity to work hard, obey the state, buy more and be happy.
synodality begins with syn
I think you mean synodicity? the the earlier form synodpetitudeinous
spelt it wrong,
They are like hippos but they wear a mitre
Synodality is just “congressional church”—but Vatican II already did that. So how is Synodality anything new?
Of course, we in the Eastern Church (not meaning the Heterodox) have utilized our synods to govern sui juris for centuries. The difference being is that our decision making was never instigated or involved the laity and was always directed upward to Rome, which had the final say. This was an ideal situation for us, allowing the maintenance of our tradition and insulation from the scandals that beset the Western Church. It was always about subsidiarity
Like all of the heretics going back to the Protestants, the Modernists claimed they were offering renewal in the form of a return to an earlier, i.e., Eastern, age of the Church, but they were wholly ignorant of what that actually means. Like Cranmer, et al., did, the Modernists took the words (and prayers), but left the theology behind in the gutter, as a cover for their revolution.
Vatican II, that unholy council, was the triumph of the March of the Experts. It was the council of experts. What do experts want, ultimately? Acceptance and control. They want The World. The heretical and evil Novus Ordo ecclesiology, taken to its perverse extreme in the “Synod on Synodality” has been the result.
Briggs: “It only later becomes clear that, because of its infinite flexibility, it is an ideal motte-and-bailey of a word.”
Thank you for linking “motte-and-bailey”, a term often encountered and just as often forgotten — which is the motte and which is the bailey? The wiki entry offering a fascinating diversion — as wiki entries often do — into medieval architecture, fortresses, castles, civil wars, sieges, masonry construction, architectural restorations — reminds me somewhere in my stack of books to read is Viollet-le-Duc’s Annals of a Fortress, a fictionalized history of military fortification development in France — and I get to thinking, once again, if it is too late to begin construction of a medieval style castle, gothic, with masonry vaulting, gargoyles, drawbridges, motes, all that stuff, built entirely by hand, completed before The Troubles begin.
So I didn’t get to finish your essay here, Briggs, though I’m sure it’s a fine one, as usual, something about the dad-gum climate, but your mottes and baileys got me dreaming of castles in air, pouring boiling oil on a besieging mob of blue-haired whales, leading a sortie out the portcullis and across the drawbridge of a company of armored knights mounted on huge warhorses, galloping thunder, pennants fluttering, lances gleaming, trumpets… trumpets, what? — screaming? bleating? trumpeting? Well, have to leave it there, looking for a word to describe the thrilling sound of the trumpets, charging into battle, fully armored, while spurring on a massive war horse in full kit, too; not the sort of thing one does every day, unfortunately. Off to prune the spruce trees.
Tattooed, topless go-go dancer fired, really a “he” pretending to be a “she.” And fired? That wouldn’t happen in our more enlightened times fifty years later. We’d give the weirdo a job entertaining pre-schoolers at the local library.
WLS HAS to be your favorite
Two hilarities for the price of one
Does the tattooed, topless go-go dancer, a “he” pretending to be a “she,” also work as an example of the motte and bailey fallacy?
A passable (apparently) presentation (allusion) of a go-go dancer, until the underlying falsity (fallacy) is discovered/uncovered. Then it no longer works.
Still wrong, it’s
Vatican II is a good thing if they let people think for themselves
It never did protestants any harm!
If you want something doing, do it yourself
Bergoglio is verily a satanic monstrosity. How he is not dead boggles the mind. His existence makes one almost no longer believe in a Divine Providence.
That was a very rich post. Motte and Bailey, which I’ve never heard of as a fallacy or a fortress and both are super interesting. The whole post was really funny but of course the clip sent it over the edge. Just fantastic. And someone in the comments mentioned Lucas’s first movie THX 1138. I’ve watched it recently I feel like it’s where we’re headed without divine intervention. But I have feel pretty hopeful about that also.
Synodality is the modernist-faux-catholic from of Congregationalism. Vote for or against Doctrine because it is our churchism.
ST GELASIUS I 492-496
Errors Once Condemned, not to be Discussed Again *
[From the epistle “Licet inter varias” to Honorius, Bishop of Dalmatia, July 28, 493 (?)]
161 (1) [For] it has been reported to us, that in the regions of the Dalmatians certain men had disseminated the recurring tares of the Pelagian pest, and that their blasphemy prevails there to such a degree that they are deceiving all the simple by the insinuation of their deadly madness. . . . [But] since the Lord is superior, the pure truth of Catholic faith drawn front the concordant opinions of all the Fathers remains present. . . . (2) . . . What pray permits us to abrogate what has been condemned by the venerable Fathers, and to reconsider the impious dogmas that have been demolished by them? Why is it, therefore, that we take such great precautions lest any dangerous heresy, once driven out, strive anew to come [up] for examination, if we argue that what has been known, discussed, and refuted of old by our elders ought to be restored? Are we not ourselves offering, which God forbid, to all the enemies of the truth an example of rising again against ourselves, which the Church will never permit? Where is it that it is written: Do not go beyond the limits of your fathers [Prov. 22:28], and: Ask your fathers and they will tell you, and your elders will declare unto you [Deut. 32:7]? Why, accordingly, do we aim beyond the definitions of our elders, or why do they not suffice for us? If in our ignorance we desire to learn something, how every single thing to be avoided has been prescribed by the orthodox fathers and elders, or everything to be adapted to Catholic truth has been decreed, why are they not approved by these? Or are we wiser than they, or shall we be able to stand constant with firm stability, if we should undermine those [dogmas] which have been established by them? . . . .
Doctrine never changes but, for example, the Globohomo-Sect in Germany believe sodomy is an action that should be blessed rather than a sin crying to Heaven to be excoriated.
You remind me of my granny, Joy. She also thought “Romans” couldn’t think for themselves. She went to Civilized & Enlightened services twice on Sunday and after Evensong sat at the supper table still in her fancy hat with her heart extra specially black throwing barbs at her heathen grandchildren. Maybe I became Catholic just to spite her. Do you have a granddaughter, Joy?
The official of the NSF cited in the 1971 WSL radio clip was correct: the Earth’s temperature was substantially warmer 6,000 years ago. In fact, the Earth has been substantially warmer for 99% of the last 240 million years.
Question: who’s fault is that? Answer: not mankind. Maybe it was God’s fault, Mr. Pope, sir, your hole-iness. Yet here you are, railing against God, taking umbrage about His Creation, proposing to alter Creation as if you were God. I’m afraid your reach is beyond your grasp, Pseudo-pontiff. Ditto the Jesuits; nothing new there.
Saint Peter, bar the gates. We don’t want these Pharisees messing with Heaven. Bad enough they’re screwing things up down here.
Faith, No, do you? Had you been reading you would know.
Take notice of the fundamentalists and the militant “[faithful catholics]” at your peril. You’ll end up in a muddy creak without. paddle…
It’s politics hiding behind a cloak, a black one. Just as the Pope is doing politics when he talks about climage.
Justin Welby is doing politics too, on another matter. Bad move.
As for Catholic? who cares if your’e a catholic. If you tell the truth, you’ve got no worries.
Thanks for the feedback but I’m nothing like your depiction. Ask Briggs what I look like, he knows. He asked, nay insisted on finding out…I refused, he insisted again. Ask him!
Meanwhile I was writing a response to Swordfish, a straight man married with children, on another post.
Regarding climage, it’s no secret what my views are on that matter. I’ve been avoiding commenting on the topic as I don’t think or didn’t think it was wise, for personal reasons
Thought Christians were safe with Christinas, but no. Most calling themselves christians on line are political activists. The sort that hold banners with Jesus’ name
Those who wish to get really real about Antipope Francis and his Novus Ordo Antichurch should regularly read the Novus Ordo Watch site and the WM Review site, along with the akaCatholic site.
Popes must be Catholic. But as a pertinacious and public heretic—indeed the most public heretic in the history of the world—Francis has abundantly proven that he’s not Catholic. Indeed he’s shown that he hates actual Catholicism with the white-hot hatred of a thousand burning suns. Hence, for example, he seeks to completely obliterate the actual (“traditional”) Roman Rite. Therefore, because Francis isn’t actually Catholic (recall that baptism is a necessary but insufficient criterion of actual Catholicism; one must also hold the actual Catholic faith, as explained by Pope Pius XII in his Mystici Corporis encyclical), he can’t possibly be an actual pope. One cannot be the head of a body of which one is not a member.
Recognizing this is a matter of logic, of seeing objective reality, not of legal authority. One need possess no legal authority whatsoever to simply recognize reality. One need not be a traffic judge to recognize a speeder. One need be a traffic judge only to convict the speeder. But the factual reality of speeding was pre-existent to the legal conviction. As for Francis, any future legal judgment will simply be an affirmation of the present reality, which is this: assuming he ever actually held the papacy at all, he’s long since automatically fallen from office because of his pertinacious and manifest heresy spitting in our faces daily.
Much has been spoken of the dangers of not following a true pope. It’s time to speak of the dangers of following a false pope. We must, at last, pull our heads out of the sand. We must finally get real, really real, no matter how uncomfortable the demonic really real reality of Francis really is.
Here’s a place to start for those who haven’t heard much of the origins of the global warming alarmism.:
Nothing’s changed much in the general argumentation.
Most people I’ve ever asked or spoken to don’t believe it’ happening, which was not the same for the pandemic with a real disease which killed millions.
The general public have a good BS meter, it seems, another reason not to worry.
no link again, The Great Global Warming Swindle:
see this video posted the other day. Its nothing new with Pope’s it’s just that ‘they’ never had internet before to moan and complain about him.
So you’re all protestants “logically”
Jeremiah. Go to NOW (Novus Ordo Watch) and ask Mario Dirksen what he would say to a person who came to his town and asked there the Catholic Church is.
He has not maintained the bonds of unity in Worship, Doctrine and Authority and, thus, he is not Catholic.
He is as autocephalic as some others in here
Judging from her tone I imagine that Joy would look like Estelle Parsons in Bonnie and Clyde.
No, Joy. I am not a protestant but Calvin was. He is now in Hell so he is not one to follow but you are as obedient to his and Luther’s authority as Catholics are to legitimate authority.
You imagine your own self independent minded and logical but you are just a typical example of a deluded proddy and there have been scores of millions of your ilk – who judge God and His word – as somehow insufficient for your imagined worthiness.
Jeremiah. You may not know who it is you are trusting:
The presentation of Calvin’s criticism of Trent was to be expected.
Proddies were invited to the council and, had they accepted, they could have offered up for discussion any of there myriad complaints but they refused to stand for their claims because, obviously they saw what happened to Luther when he debated a catholic and got his clock cleaned and they were fearful of being similarly publicly humiliated.
They didn’t show-up for the council but hid in their liberal lairs lobbing heretical hand grenades at a council of peacefully assembled Christians –
C’est la vie
As regards the Wold Boar, Martin Luther, it appears more likely than not that he entered a seminary after he killed an acquittance during a duel, after which a silent thunderstorm erupted.
According to his major biographer, Theobald Beer, Luther was a gnostic follower of the ghastly nasty gnostic heretic, pseudo-Hermes Trismegistus.
Luther hated Saint Augustine and taught that Jesus was a compositium – a combination of good and evil. Further, Luther taught that Jesus is sin and that He fornicated.
” I showed your comments Prior to todays’ to someone here and they said,”
“That’s a female, obviously”
I thought the same. A lot of people daren’t post as themselves.
However, I didn’t think you were Calvinist, you’ve been gloating about being a catholic for a while now.
I notice by this priest’s reckoning, I’m correct with the depiction so far.
He and I agree on describing the Roman Catholic faith.
See another protestant here, talking to a protestant about your faith:
AS for the personal attacks, well they speak more about you than anything.
We agree on who is saved, too…everybody
God Loves Everybody, even the ones you hate, Mick
If your belief in God leads you to hate anybody then they are a false belief.
Hatred has nothing to do with God
Excuse plurals editing errors in last line and the vid is a protestant interviewing a priest, both in America this time.
Now you really must leave me alone and stop behaving like a troll. The best thing to do is just not to read my comments.
Here it is, sorry:
Sedevacantists are simply Catholics who refuse to bury their heads in the sand. They’re simply Catholics who see and accept the stark reality spitting in our faces daily, the reality that the Novus Ordo Antichurch currently led by Antipope Francis cannot possibly be the actual Catholic Church, which is once again in the catacombs.
The Church is indefectible. Therefore the Novus Ordo Antichurch, currently led by the blaspheming, idol-worshipping heretic Jorge Bergoglio (stage name, Pope Francis), cannot possibly be the actual Catholic Church.
As for the embarrassingly shoddy Salza/Siscoe book against sedevacantism, it’s been refuted at Novus Ordo Watch and elsewhere. For example, see this video on Youtube by Fr. Cekada:
Dead on Arrival: True or False Pope
JA. To be Catholic one must maintain the bonds of unity in worship, doctrine, and authority.
Mario Derksen does not, he is not in union with his Bishop or Pope.
Because Derksen and his ilk reject the legitimacy of every Papacy since Pius XII, there is not one Cardinal alive created by subsequent Popes who exists, thus, no possibility on a conclave.
Enjoy the space
Dear Joy. I don’t hate anybody. I love everybody in the true sense; that is, I pray for everybody and desire for them the salvation God intended they’d experience when He created them.
God created us for His Gory and our happiness and we can not be happy unless we are in the presence of His glory for all eternity.
Of course, I do not expect you to understand this because you are not a Christian and you do not accept the Bible as inerrant and so why would I think you’d understand poor lil’ me?
As is so often the case with a liberal, you accuse others of what you yourself have been doing- trolling Catholics on a blog operated by a Catholic.
Start your own blog and pontificate as a protestant and you will see/hear very few trolls.
I don’t go to protestant blogs trolling but you come here trolling catholics and christians and it you do not like informed responses to your rants then stop them but I am not going to be passive in the face of your protestant perversions because of the Sacrament of Confirmation that is a duty I have promised to fulfill.
Dear Jeremiah. I’m afraid you have let your own self be misled.
Mick, such unity must be maintained with the actual Catholic Church, and thus not with the Novus Ordo Antichurch currently led by Antipope Francis. To be united with Antipope Francis and his Novus Ordo Antichurch is to be at war with Christ and his actual Catholic Church.
Mick, all of the hollow arguments on that and other anti-reality (anti-sedevacantist) sites have been copiously refuted at the Novus Ordo Watch site, the WM Review site, the akaCatholic site, and elsewhere.
Wake up. It’s time to get real; really real.
“Mick”, you are a classic sadist masquerading as a masochist
Your sick kind of idea about love will do for hate until that comes along
Peole who love do not say,
“burn in hell for eternity”
“your country’s going to hell”
“they are damned forever”. your quote from some ordained person who met with your approval;
“you’re satanic” or words to that effect;
and on and on.
That’s pure hate…you are in the wrong, again.
If your beliefs lead to you hatred of someone it is a false belief.
You clearly have no problem hating, like every other tom dick or harry, but that’s not God’s problem and he never gave you or I permission to talk in those condemnatory ways that you do.
Not only that, but your notion of the doctrine of hell is out of line with pretty well every ordained person or lay person I’ve heard from in recent years *(since taking note). Those who actually believe it exists can’t justify logically, let alone spiritually, or argue that anybody is actually there. At least they’re thinking. While we’re on the topic go and look up the meaning of the word hell and where it comes from.
The problem is that is takes away the rule from fear which has been the evil tool of choice for so many of the church’s members.
If you want to believe it then go ahead but don’t make it everybody else’s problem. It’s yours to work out.
God’s ultimate justice is what happens. That is my belief.
I read the first two lines and no further, if I left some other gem out, that’s hard lines.
I don’t care to listen or read. Just know that when you attempt your excommunication from a church *the Roman Catholic church, to which I don’t belong, you are actually doing an injury to yourself in the effort to achieve whatever it is you hope for.
What you think is of no concern since you’re not my judge, God is my judge. Since you can’t tell take news from reality, it’s hardly surprising your’e so easily triggered to call down fire from heaven.
So stop behaving like a troll, do as I requested, cease and desist.
I will pray for you
Joy. When a troll arrives at a blog whose owner is Catholic and then proceeds to troll Catholics and Christians with her personal opinions which attack the Divinely Revealed truths of the Faith and then tells others not to troll her one can only smile because it is so self-righteous, duplicitous, self-serving, solipsistic and stupid.
I am not trolling you. I am responding to your antichristian inanities and, yes, I am having a bit of fun with you the last few hours by speaking of Hell but because you are so haughty you are blind to what is happening.
You claim you can say what the bible means and what doctrine means but you allow that liberty only for your own self which means you think your personal opinions and errors about Holy Writ are normative for all other people.
Joy’s personal opinions, proclivities, politics, perversions and preferences are the rule of faith?
If you can say what The Eucharist or Church means then I have the same liberty to say what hell means and, of course, you walked tight into the trap when I said Calvin was in Hell.
I knew you’d object that I was judging another
Of course you did not see the trap but walked right into it because you are who you are – a heretic who can not think logically.
I am the last person who would follow what your orders.
It is you who began the trolling here and it is you that must stop it.
Please act like an adult woman – if you are one – instead of a jejune jackanape and stop the trolling of Catholics. and Christians.
Cease and desist
Dear Jeremiah. You think there has been no Pope since the death of Pope Pius XII which means there can never be any future conclave.
If you think waiting for Godot was a drag, try waiting for a conclave 🙂
Maybe Mario Derksen can hold a conclave in his garage but I don’t think the Diamon brothers would be too keen on that; maybe you should have John Lane and Mario Derksen arm-wrestle to see which one has the authority in all this
Dear Jeremiah. Please read Saint Vince of Lerins “Commonitory” in which he teaches that God allows prelates to teach novelties to test if we love Him.
It is a test. You are filling.
To pass the test, one must adhere to the faith once delivered – and that includes a Pope.
You have failed as a Catholic and you and your ilk are the Neo-Orthodox, schismatic heretics who say they don’t need a pope.
Of course, because schism is proximate to heresy, you, like the Orthodox, have your own heresies.
IF you had faith, you’d let the Church decide the matter of an individual Pope, but you have lost the faith and so Mario Derksen et al are your authority.
Remind me, where in Tradition does the Catholic Church teach that some layman has the authority? O, that’s right. That is a protestant tradition, isn’t it?
Vatican 1 infallibly teaches the permanence of the Papacy and you deny that teaching which means you are a rank heretic.
Maybe Mario can give you a dispensation for that view.
Realists (sedevacantists) don’t claim to have all the answers. We only claim to have the right diagnosis, not the cure. We leave this to God to solve as He wills. At this point, direct divine intervention will no doubt be required. Such is the really real reality of today’s putrefaction.
There’s no getting around the stark reality spitting in our faces daily: Jorge Bergoglio is a pertinacious, manifest heretic, indeed the most public heretic in the history of the world. As such, he’s not a Catholic. But popes must be Catholic. Thus Bergoglio cannot possibly be an actual pope. Nor can the organization he leads be the actual Catholic Church, since the actual Catholic Church cannot defect from the faith. But the Novus Ordo Antichurch clearly has defected from the faith. Thus it cannot possibly be the actual Catholic Church.
Man up, Mick. Accept reality, no matter how uncomfortable it is. Seek truth above all, not comfort.
Dear Jeremiah. You were learnt to flee novelty, right?
Show me in Tradition where sedevacantism has ever been an orthodox response to trouble.
Don’t bother, you can’t.
You and yours are just as novel as the Pontiffs you personally reject. in fact, with your private judgement you are neo-protestants. O, you may walk and tradition but y’all are protestants rhetorically wearing Fiddlebacks.
C’est la vie.
I am not interested in the siren call of sedevacantism but I am not at all surprised you being your appeal to a blog run by a catholic because you have chosen to spread the bad news, your novel Gospel.
Sedevacantism is simply the recognition and acceptance of objective reality; namely, the reality that one cannot be the head of a body of which one is not a member.
Jorge Bergoglio (stage name, “Pope Francis”) has made it crystal clear that not only is he not a Catholic, but that he hates actual Catholicism with the white-hot hatred of a thousand burning suns. Bergoglio is therefore no part of the Catholic Church. It follows that he cannot possibly be an actual pope. One cannot be the head of a body of which one is not a member.
At the core of today’s prevailing madness is a war against reality. This takes many forms, such as the idea that Steve can become Eve if he simply wills it so. Another manifestation of this war against reality is the refusal to accept that, as a rabid anti-Catholic, Jorge Bergoglio cannot possibly be an actual pope (nor can the Organization he leads possibly be the actual Catholic Church). One cannot be the head of a body of which one is not a member.
Mick, stop participating in today’s mad war against reality. Stop propping up Antipope Francis and his Novus Ordo Antichurch. Take off your blinders. Pull your head out of the sand. It’s time to get real; really real. One cannot be the head of a body of which one is not a member.
This is Bergoglio’s favourite painting: https://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2014/05/update-on-white-crucifixion.html
Among other blasphemies, it contains the Talmudic acronym YESHU for Jesus Christ which means
“may his name and his memory be blotted out.”
Bergoglio has co-written books with Rabbis and they have written the forewords to many of his books. If you think Christianity is the religion he subscribes to, you are gravely mistaken. His behaviour only makes sense when you look at it through the lens of the Talmud.
The entire new religion founded by Paul VI at Vatican II only makes sense through this lens. No wonder Paul VI is often pictured wearing an Ephod, a symbol of the Jewish high priests. The new religion aimed at no less than the total destruction of what was left of the Christian world and it has achieved just this. Rather than separation of Church and State there is in reality union of Synagogue and State. Even transgenderism comes from the Talmud.