The Red Pope Strikes Again

BBC Radio 4 - Analysis, Is the Pope a Communist?

*Sigh* He’s at it again, the Red Pope, Francis I–this time with an 86-page encyclical to “Catholic leaders” calling for an end to private property, worldwide redistribution of wealth (by whom?), world government, open borders, etc. (https://neonnettle.com/news/12793-pope-francis-pushes-communism-for-the-good-of-all-)

What Bible did he get that out of? Don’t ask.

This shameful disservice to the world’s Roman Catholics–and everybody else, for that matter–looks like the best reason yet for equipping the church with the means of impeaching an errant and frivolous pope.

Who told him that envy was a virtue? Who encouraged him to use the church to push communism? Who wiped out any knowledge of modern history that he possibly could have obtained?

It depresses me to write about this, and it greatly troubled me to read it–and I’m not even Catholic. I’m glad my Aunt Betty, a wise and scholarly nun, isn’t here to see this.

May Jesus Christ Our Lord defend us.

12 comments on “The Red Pope Strikes Again

  1. Real Catholics have pretty much given up on this Pope, praying that God will have mercy on us and send us a Catholic Pope in the future. One Catholic blogger has noted that this encyclical was signed exactly a year after the introduction of a pagan idol (Pachama) into the Vatican, placed right on top of the tomb of St. Peter and acknowledge by this Pope in a ceremony. We’ve known for a long time that this Pope is a heretic. But with the release of the latest encyclical, in which he apparently quotes from the Koran and seems to accept all religions as equal, we have to acknowledge that he’s an outright apostate. Blessedly, encyclicals don’t carry the weight of doctrinal definitions. But the scandal he’s causing is terrible.

    1. Unfortunately, there’s nothing that can be done. The election by the College of Cardinals was a valid one (although there are some traditional Catholics who claim it wasn’t), and when the results of the election were announced, he was universally accepted as Pope. So even if the election was questionable, the universal acclamation afterward makes the papacy a valid one. That being so, there’s no way to get rid of this man (as Pope, that is) other than, say, discovering that he was never baptized and so no other sacraments that he received were ever valid, including his ordination to the priesthood. (And there might even be a way to get around that.) We’re stuck with him for now — to the anguish of devout, orthodox Catholics everywhere.

    2. He’s come very close to doing that. But he always hedges his heretical comments with so much ambiguous “context,” and manages to say the opposite of one of his heresies elsewhere, that he always manages to wiggle his way out of accusations.

      I’d originally said more than that, but I erased much of it since it was starting to step over the line — or take long strides or even do standing broad jumps over it — into detraction, which is a sin.

  2. I have serious issues with some of the things this pope has said and done, but I question the interpretation of this new encyclical by NeonNettle. There is so much Catholic bashing going on now, including our major media, that I will reserve judgment until I can see it for myself.

    1. I checked this article against another source and found no conflicts. It’d be great if the reports turned out not to be true. Meanwhile, I wouldn’t be able to read the original, so I have to rely on someone’s translation.

    2. I’ve read parts of bootleg English translations from two very trustworthy and devout Catholic sources, and I’ve heard summaries of a bootleg Spanish translation on a traditionalist Catholic podcast. They’re genuine. And they mostly reinforce a lot of what the Pope has been saying elsewhere in talks and interviews. There are actually few surprises, just confirmations of what we’ve already heard said or hinted at for quite a while.

      And again, the sources I’ve read or heard are from people who love the Church, not the ones who normally attack her or try to undermine her.

Leave a Reply