Teilhardian Claptrap from the “Preacher of the Papal Household”

by Christopher A. Ferrara

September 6, 2016

During Vespers on the “World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation,” Father Raniero Cantalamessa, the aged Modernist who has been “Preacher of the Papal Household” for the past 36 years, uttered this gibberish during his so-called homily:

How long has the universe had to wait, what a long run-up it has had, to reach this point! It took billions of years during which opaque matter evolved toward the light of consciousness like the sap that slowly rises from under the ground to the top of the tree to flow into its leaves, flowers, and fruitThis consciousness was finally attained when “the human phenomenon,” as Teilhard de Chardin calls it, appeared in the universeBut now that the universe has reached this goalitexpects that human beings perform their duty and take on the task, so to speak, of directing the choir and to intone, in the name of all creation, “Glory to God in the highest!”

This, of course, is rank pantheism: the “universe” gave rise to human consciousness, not the personal Triune God by the special creation of Adam and Eve with their rational souls. So much for the Genesis account of creation and the infallible teaching of the Church on the descent of the whole human race from two first parents who fell from grace in Paradise. No, according to “the preacher of the papal household,” human consciousness just sort of bubbled up from “opaque matter” — a crude superstition worthy of pagan idolaters in the jungle.

And now, declares the “preacher of the papal household,” the universe
“expects” that man will lead the way in “caring for creation,” thus giving glory to “God.” Note the confusion between the universe and God, redolent of the heresy of Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677) which earned him excommunication even from the synagogues of the Netherlands. As Spinoza declared in his Ethics: “God, or Nature”, Deus, sive Natura: “That eternal and infinite being we call God, or Nature, acts from the same necessity from which he exists.”

“The preacher of the papal household” is spouting the evolutionary nonsense of the infamous Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin, whose theology is warmed-over Spinoza dressed up in pseudo-Catholic, semi-poetic musings disguised as a bold reconciliation of Scripture and the supposed “science” of neo-Darwinian evolution.

One need only recall the Holy Office Admonition of June 1962 regarding the writings of this theological and scientific fraud, who was implicated in the “discovery” of two fake fossils: Piltdown Man and Peking Man. As the Holy Office warned only weeks before the commencement of Vatican II:

Several works of Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin… abound in such ambiguities and indeed even serious errors, as to offend Catholic doctrine.

For this reason, the most eminent and most revered Fathers of the Holy Office exhort all Ordinaries as well as the superiors of Religious institutes, rectors of seminaries and presidents of universities, effectively to protect the minds, particularly of the youth, against the dangers presented by the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and of his followers.

After more than three years of the “Francis revolution,” however, it should come as no surprise that Francis, a liberal Jesuit formed in the Sixties, is also a devotee of de Chardin’s heretical babbling. In fact, it was Francis who rehabilitated de Chardin with a favorable reference in his “recyclical” Laudato si’, as I have shown here.

But such is the crisis in the Church today: yesterday’s condemned heretic is today’s “authority” in Catholic theology. This is what Lucia of Fatima meant by “diabolical disorientation.” Heresy is in, orthodoxy is out. The Vatican pursues worldly projects while ignoring man’s eternal destiny. We are exhorted to “care for creation,” but no one in Rome is exhorting us to care for the immortal soul, which even the pagan philosopher Plato knew is man’s most precious possession.

The Church is upside down and only God, through the intercession of His Blessed Mother, can set it right again — as the world will see in the light of Fatima.

Source: Fatima Perspectives – Perspective No.887

Articles: How Pope Francis Betrayed His Name

By Raymond Ibrahim

When Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio became the new Catholic pope in 2013, he chose the name of Francis to indicate that his pontificate would be one of mercy and compassion for the poor and needy.  Such is the reputation of his eponym, Saint Francis of Assisi: “the man of poverty, the man of peace, the man who loves and protects creation,” said Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, as to why he chose that name.

St. Francis (1182-1226) is indeed known for all those qualities.  But he was known for something else his modern-day namesake fails to live up to: unapologetically confronting Islam.

According to St. Francis of Assisi and the Conversion of the Muslims by Frank M. Rega:

Fully aware of the dangers, Francis was determined to go on a mission to the unbelievers of the Muslim nations.  The primary sources are in agreement that he was now ready to sacrifice his life and die for Christ, so there can be little doubt that the intent of his journey was to preach the Gospel even at the risk of martyrdom. (p. 43)

Along with saving souls, he sought to save lives as well – to help bring peace to the turbulent world he lived in, where Christians, responding to centuries of Islamic invasions and conquests of Christian lands, had gone to war with Islam in the Crusades:

Converting the Muslims by his preaching was the ultimate goal of Francis’ efforts, and a peaceful end to the war would be a consequence of their conversion.  In the words of scholar Christoph Maier, “Francis, like the crusaders, wanted to liberate the holy places in Palestine from Muslim rule.  What was different was his strategy. … He wanted their total submission to the Christian faith.” (p. 63)

In 1212, during the Fifth Crusade, Francis and a fellow monk (actually a friar, as St. Francis himself was –ed.) traveled to the Middle East and sought audience with Sultan al-Kamil – despite al-Kamil’s vow that “anyone who brought him the head of a Christian should be awarded with a Byzantine gold piece” (p. 57).  St. Francis’s contemporaries also warned him that Muslims “were a mean people who thirst for Christian blood and attempt even the most brazen atrocities,” (p. 34).  The determined friar continued their journey, only to experience the inevitable:

The early documents are unanimous in agreeing that the two Franciscans were subjected to rough treatment upon crossing Muslim territory.  The men of God were seized in a violent manner by the sentries, assaulted, and bound in chains.  Celano reports that Francis “was captured by the Sultan’s soldiers, was insulted and beaten” yet showed no fear even when threatened with torture and death. (p. 58)

Eventually brought before Sultan al-Kamil, the friars sought to “demonstrate to the Sultan’s wisest counselors the truth of Christianity, before which Mohammed’s law [sharia] counted for nothing: for ‘if you die while holding to your law, you will be lost; God will not accept your soul.  For this reason we have come to you.'”

Intrigued by the cheeky friars, “the Sultan called in his religious advisers, the imams.  However, they refused to dispute with the Christians and instead insisted that they be killed [by beheading], in accordance with Islamic law” (p. 60).

Perplexed, the sultan refused: “I am going counter to what my religious advisers demand and will not cut off your heads … you have risked your own lives in order to save my soul.”

During their disputation and in reference to “the centuries-old Muslim conquest and occupation of lands, peoples, and nations that had once been primarily Christian,” Kamil sought to trap the friars: if Jesus had taught Christians to “turn the other cheek” and “repay evil with good,” he inquired, why were “Crusaders … invading the lands of the Muslims?”

Francis quipped by also quoting Christ: “If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.”

Francis then explained: “That is why it is just that Christians invade the land you inhabit, for you blaspheme the name of Christ and alienate everyone you can from His worship” – a reference to Islam’s dhimmi rules, which, along with debilitating Christian worship, make Christian lives so burdensome and degrading that untold millions had converted to Islam over the centuries to ease their sufferings.

There are more interesting aspects concerning St. Francis’s encounter with Sultan Kamil, including those who find parallels in the modern world, such as sharia’s strict bans on blasphemy against Islam and evangelizing for Christianity (often seen as one and the same) and call for the execution of apostates from Islam.  They are discussed in this brief article.

For now, consider some important differences between St. Francis and his modern-day namesake, Pope Francis.

While the saint accused Islam of persecuting Christians and sought to bring them succor – to the point of putting his life on the line – Pope Francis refuses to confront Islam.  When he has the attention of the world, he habitually fails to condemn or even shed light on the nonstop Muslim persecution of Christians, including millions of Catholics.

Last year, he delivered a nearly hour-long speech before the United Nations.  Only once did Francis make reference to persecuted Christians – and he merged their sufferings in the very same sentence with the supposedly equal sufferings of “members of the majority religion” – that is, Sunni Muslims.  In reality, of course, Sunnis are not being slaughtered, beheaded, enslaved, and raped for their faith; are not having their mosques bombed and burned; are not being jailed or killed for apostasy, blasphemy, or proselytization.  That’s because the terrorists – whether al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, or ISIS – are Sunnis.  And before that, Francis issued his first encyclical – an important document meant to be relayed to the world’s Catholics – with no mention of persecuted Christians.

More recently, after a journalist asked Pope Francis about the slaughter of an 85-year-old priest in France and how he was clearly “killed in the name of Islam,” the pope disagreed and proceeded to offer a plethora of absurd and silly rationalizations in defense of Islam.  

Nor did St. Francis preach passivity before aggression:

A foremost expert on Francis and the Fifth Crusade, Professor James Powell, wrote: “Francis of Assisi went to Damietta [Egypt, where Sultan Kamil was] on a mission of peace. There can be no question about this.  We should not however try to make him a pacifist or to label him as a critic of the crusade.”  Another leading crusade scholar, Christoph Maier, was even more explicit: “Francis thus accepted the crusade as both legitimate and ordained by God, and he was quite obviously not opposed to the use of violence when it came to the struggle between Christians and Muslims.”  At one time Francis had remarked to his friars that “… paladins and valiant knights who were mighty in battle pursued the infidels even to death[.]” … Francis admired the deeds of such brave men because “… the holy martyrs died fighting for the Faith of Christ.” (p.70)

This is why those who know the true biography of St. Francis deplore his modern-day transformation into some sort of Medieval “hippie” – or, in Pope Francis’s words, “the man of peace, the man who loves and protects creation.”

In 1926, Pope Pius XI issued the following statement:

What evil they do and how far from a true appreciation of the Man of Assisi [St. Francis] are they who, in order to bolster up their fantastic and erroneous ideas about him, image such an incredible thing … that he was the precursor and prophet of that false liberty which began to manifest itself at the beginning of modern times and which has caused so many disturbances both in the Church and in civil society!

In the context of confronting Islam, Rega laments that “for the revisionists, the ‘real’ Francis was not a bold Evangelist, but a timid man, whose goal was to have the friars live passively among the Saracens [Muslims] and ‘to be subject to them'” (p.95).

A final important point: While St. Francis did not mock Muhammad – though apparently not enough to dissuade the pious from calling for his head – he unequivocally portrayed the Muslim prophet’s message as false.  Unlike the diplomatic Pope Francis, who never seems to preach Christ to Muslims, but rather confirms them in and validates their religion, the sincere saint was actually more concerned with the souls of Muslims, to the point of putting his own life on the line.  This used to be one of the concerns of all popes, the “vicars of Christ.”  But apparently not for Pope Francis.

In short, there’s a fine line between St. Francis’s compassion and Pope Francis’s cowardice – or worse, complicity.  When it comes to confronting Islam and standing up for the faith and persecuted Christians, Pope Francis woefully fails to live up to the brave friar whose name he appropriated.

Source: Articles: How Pope Francis Betrayed His Name

The Vatican Advisors on the Climate

This answers alot of questions. What could possibly go wrong? Is the Pope’s conclusions a surprise? Or did he merely get advisors who already agreed with his own beliefs? I think it is self-evident what went on here.


The Remnant Newspaper – Don Mario’s Moral Mafia

Written by  Christopher A. Ferrara

More than three years into the Bergoglian pontificate there is no mistaking its principal line of development, which is Francis’s grand obsession: the admission of unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages” to Holy Communion, the “Kasper proposal” he has been promoting almost from the moment of his election. To that end, Francis has relentlessly put in place a kind of moral mafia to carry out his design. Let us meet some of its soldiers.

First, meet Archbishop Vincenzo (“the Enforcer”) Paglia, head of the (now) ludicrously misnamed Pontifical Council “for the Family”:

chris phot 1.tif

It was Paglia who oversaw the pontifical council’s production of the first Vatican-approved “sex-ed” program in Church history—a document so disgustingly immoral that it has already provoked a petition from the faithful pleading with Francis to order its withdrawal (they might as well be petitioning a pile of cinderblocks). Note Paglia’s rainbow-colored glasses, which are quite in keeping with his sympathy for sodomy: “In the world there are 20 or 25 countries where homosexuality is a crime. I would like the church to fight against all this.”Paglia is just the man for Francis to place in charge of the Pontifical Academy for Life and the John Paul II Institute of Studies on Marriage and Family (as grand chancellor). Paglia replaces the relatively conservative heads of those dicasteries, who, having defended the teaching of John Paul II and Benedict XVI to the contrary, were blocking the road to Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages.”

Paglia openly advocates the “Kasper proposal”—that is, the Francis Proposal— for Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages.” During the Phony Synod on the Family, Paglia also oversaw publication of a book presenting arguments in a favor of the overthrow of all prior teaching to the contrary, especially that of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, in favor of Kasper’s bogus “penitential path” that would allow some unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages” to receive Holy Communion while they consider whether they will obey Church teaching regarding their continuing adulterous sexual relations.

Paglia declares that the new titles Francis has bestowed upon him mean that the Pope wishes him to “continue the new course which emanates from the Synod of Bishops and his encyclical [sic] Amoris Laetitia.” And what is this new course? What else: Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages.”

Next, meet Monsignor Pierangelo (“the Violinist”) Sequeri:
chris phot 2

Msgr. Sequieri, a liberal academic and musician who is often seen in clerical garb, replaces Monsignor Livio Melina as President of the John Paul II Institute (to serve under Paglia as grand chancellor). Melina had “defended the Church’s perennial teachingthat remarried divorcees who are not living as ‘brother and sister’ are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”

Melina had also bravely insisted  that Amoris Laetitia “does not change the Church’s discipline” and that “it continues to be the case that admitting to communion the divorced and ‘remarried,’ (apart from the situations foreseen by Familiaris Consortio 84 and Sacramentum Caritatis 29) goes against the Church’s discipline.” Naturally, Melina had to sleep with the fishes.

Next is the only American member of the moral mafia, a kind of equivalent to the Irish consigliere Tom Hagan in The Godfather. Meet Bishop Kevin (“the Jokester”) Farrell of Dallas:
chris phot gangser

Francis has just made Farrell head of his newly created super-dicastery: the Pontifical Council for the Laity, Family and Life which will absorb and thus remove any remaining roadblocks to Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages” still to be found in the Pontifical Council for the Family and the Pontifical Council for the Laity, both of which will cease to exist on September 1. (While the Pontifical Academy for Life will continue to exist, Paglia’s appointment as its head will remove any roadblock there, including the German philosopher Josef Siefert, who published a devastating critique  of Amoris Laetitia, calling upon Francis to correct its errors against the Faith.)

The squishy semi-conservative Farrell, equipped with the appropriate “keen sense of humor” is a suitably “pro-gay” prelate. Farrell installed as pastor of a Texas parish a homosexual priest  caught participating in a sexually explicit “gay” website. (This pervert was removed as pastor only after a public outcry.) Farrell clearly accepts as a given that there will be homosexual priests, formed and ordained as such with full knowledge of their “orientation.”  Citing remarks by Francis concerning “respect” for “homosexual persons,” Farrell declared: “The Church still has the expectation that priests must commit to a life of celibate chastity whether they are homosexual or heterosexual.”

Yes, if you are a homosexual priest, the Church still “expects” you to be celibate! Otherwise, no problem! So much for the Church’s constant teaching that “gay” men are unfit for ordination and must not be admitted to the seminary. But then as Francis so famously declared in the context of questions about the flagrantly homosexual priest he made head of his very household (Msgr. Battista Ricca, who was found trapped in an elevator with a young male object of his attentions): “Who am I to judge?”

One cannot overlook a minor but nonetheless significant player in the moral mafia: meet Thomas (“the Mug”) Rosica:
chris phot 7

The virulently pro-“gay” Rosica is the vicious and vindictive English language attaché of the Vatican Press Office whose lawyers bluffed a lawsuit suit against the publisher of the Vox Cantoris blog for telling the truth about him. Rosica is delighted with Farrell’s appointment, hailing it as “one of the most significant restructuring moves and appointments of his [Francis’s] Petrine Ministry” because “Bishop Farrell will have a very special concern for the implementation of Pope Francis’ landmark Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia.” That is, Farrell will have a “very special concern” for finding a way to permit Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages.”

It was Rosica who huffily declared during Synod 2016: “The jubilee of mercy requires a language of mercy, in particular in speaking about homosexuals or gay persons. We do not pity gay persons but we recognize them for who they are. They are our sons and daughters and brothers and sisters.” Farrell apparently agrees, which is why he staunchly defended Rosica when the latter “denounced a ‘cesspool of hatred’ in the Catholic blogosphere”—meaning lay bloggers who recognize that Rosica is a hissing snake-in-the-grass who needs to be exposed as an enemy of the Faith and driven out of any position of authority in the Church.

Farrell—as if there were any doubt—is fully on board with Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages.” As he said of Amoris Laetitia shortly after its publication: “Some feel Pope Francis does not go far enough in addressing the hopes of those in irregular marriages, others who feel it compromises traditional teaching. In my opinion, it reflects the call of Jesus to his church to continue his healing and saving mission.” Farrell “also warmly praised comments on Amoris made by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna, Austria, who was among the proponents of opening Communion to the divorced and remarried at the pope’s two Synods of Bishops on the family.”

That brings us to the next member of the mafia. Meet Cardinal Christoph (“the Clown”) Schönborn:

chris phot 4

Schönborn is Francis’s designated interpreter of Amoris Laetitia , meaning the one appointed to declare that the doctrine defended by John Paul II has “evolved” to contradict itself, so that the way is now open “in some cases” (meaning all cases eventually) to Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages.”

Then there is that famous but lower-ranked oracle of Francis. Meet Antonio (“the Mouthpiece”) Spadaro:
chris phot 5

As editor of Civiltà Catholica , Spadaro, Francis’s fellow liberal Jesuit and close confidant, was assigned the task of announcingthat the Phony Synod on the Family had already “‘laid the foundations’ for civilly remarried divorcees to be admitted to the sacraments” and that respecting Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages” Amoris Latetia“affirms essentially that all cases cannot be enclosed within a valid general norm for all, always and in every case.”

That is, some unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages” can be admitted to Holy Communion. But which cases are to be exempted from the “general norm”—that is, from the natural law?

That question brings us, finally, to the capo di tutti capi. Meet Jorge Mario (“the Merciful”) Bergoglio, alias “Father Bergoglio” as he called himself when giving telephonic permission to receive Holy Communion to a woman living in adultery:
chris phot 6

Francis insists that he is still Jorge Mario Bergoglio, having renewed his passport under that name. But, under the additional alias “Pope Francis,” Don Mario has dictated every move of his moral mafia according to the policy he reaffirmed in his remarks to a group of Polish Jesuits during his trip to Poland: sexual morality is not black and white, but gray. It all depends on the situation! To quote thetranscript of those remarks, which Don Mario authorized Father Spadaro to publish in Civiltà Catholica:

I want to add something now. I ask you to work with the seminarians. Above all give them that which they have not received from the Exercises [of St. Ignatius]. The Church today has need of growth in the capacity of spiritual discernment. Some plans of priestly formation run the risk of educating in the light of ideas that are too clear and distinct, and therefore of acting within rigidly a priori limits and criteria, and which prescind from concrete situations: “This must be done, this must not be done”….

It is necessary to form future priests not with general and abstract ideas, but with this aim of discerning spirits, so that they can help people in their concrete life. It is really necessary to understand this: in life not everything is black and white. No! In life shades of gray prevail. It is necessary then to teach how to discern in this gray area.

So, Don Mario has given his foot soldiers their orders: We must not have any clear and distinct ideas about sexual morality, but only unclear and indistinct ones, requiring “discernment of spirits” rather than telling people simply that they ought to amend their lives and cease committing sins of the flesh. It’s all a gray area. And where sexual behavior is concerned, there must be a least fifty shades of gray.

Regarding other matters, however, such as “inequality” and the death penalty, Don Mario still demands the sharpest of black and white distinctions: “This must be done, this must not be done” indeed!

Therefore—herewith the fulfillment of Don Mario’s grand obsession—there must be an opening to Holy Communion for unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages.” But for cohabiters as well! As Don Mario announces in Amoris Laetitia, for the first time in 2,000 years of Church history:

Hence it can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace. More is involved here than mere ignorance of the rule. A subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding “its inherent values”, or be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin.

No longer! Since when? Since Francis! He has decreed that it can no longer “simply” be said that Holy Communion must be denied to unrepentant public adulterers in “second marriages” (like his sister) or cohabiters (like his nephew) because some of them might be in the state of grace even if they know that the Church teaches that what they are doing is immoral. Who knew? Francis knew!

But which lucky few are to be exempted from “the rules” prohibiting adultery and fornication and rendering Holy Communion impossible for those living in adultery or simply “shacked up” without even a marriage certificate? That is for the newly trained masters of “discerning spirits” to find out as they navigate the vast new “gray area” of sexual morality Don Mario discerns where once there was just as much clarity as there is with any other moral teaching of the Church.

To his credit, Phil Lawler notes that Francis has written to Paglia giving him a “list of concerns” he wishes Paglia to address, but that “Conspicuously missing from the Holy Father’s list of concerns were the sort of clear-cut statements on abortion and euthanasia, divorce and contraception, that Catholics came to expect during the pontificate of St. John Paul II.” Given the overwhelming evidence, Lawler wonders whether “Pope Francis is deliberately moving away from the teachings of St. John Paul II on marriage, family, and life.” That is, he wonders whether Francis is deliberately departing from sound orthodoxy. That’s quite a concern for a “mainstream” commentator to express publicly regarding a Roman Pontiff.

Yes, this entire piece is an exercise in mockery. But mockery seems to be demanded in respect to this ongoing and ever-worsening mockery of a pontificate, which will surely go down in Church history as a grotesque anomaly in comparison to which even the pontificate of the anathematized Pope Honorius appears utterly benign.

Source: The Remnant Newspaper – Don Mario’s Moral Mafia

The Remnant Newspaper – Pope Maker: The Soros Syndicate

Written by  Elizabeth Yore

Over a decade ago, with typical hubris, George Soros bragged, that he “is the Pope’s boss, now.” It appears that his boast became a self-fulfilling prophecy in the Francis pontificate.

The two most powerful men in the world joined forces to form a curious and troubling alliance. One of them, often referred to as the most dangerous man in the world, the other, the Vicar of Christ.

Within a few short months of Argentine Bergoglio’s papal election, the Soros inner circle was firmly entrenched at the Vatican, calling the shots, drafting documents, setting the Soros political agenda with the power and moral persuasion of the Vatican. The global eco movement finally found their critical missing component, the voice of moral authority. The greenies can now deposit their feckless leaders, Al Gore, Leo DiCaprio and Michael Moore in the recycle bin.

As the recent WIKILEAKS Soros data dump demonstrates, the billionaire Soros’ tentacles entangle policies and create chaos in countries around the globe through his legions of operatives at his Open Society philanthropies. His money funds extremist groups seeking to topple capitalism, and promote radical environmentalism global order. His coterie of advisors spans the globe in positions of influence and power, carrying out his radical agenda.

Although Open Society funds radical Catholic groups, Soros was unable to capture the papacy as his ultimate prize in world domination because the two previous conservative Popes steadfastly opposed his radical agenda. Until now.
yore unUN Secy Gen Ban Ki Moon, George Soros and Jeffrey Sachs

The environmental movement desperately needed a new dazzling demagogue to bol ster its sputtering global warming cause and silence its critics under pain of criminal felonies or mortal sin.

On March 13, 2013, with the sudden and unexpected regime change in Vatican City, Soros and his UN operatives understood that the climate instantly warmed and opportunities abounded with the new leftist Argentine pontiff. George Soros could not have imagined a more perfect partner on the world stage, one he has been searching for his entire career: a major religious leader pontificating as the moral authority for the environmental, borderless countries, mass migration, and pro-Islamic movements.

UN Secy. Gen. Ban Ki Moon,
Bishop Sorondo and Pope Francis
your popeEnter, Jorge Bergoglio, the smiling, all merciful Argentine.  Within weeks of the Francis election, Soros’ collaborator, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon paid the obligatory courtesy visit to the new pontiff, and Moon knew something had dramatically changed at the Vatican. After his papal visit, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon announced to the world, “We discussed a need to advance social justice and accelerate the world to meet MDGs and the Sustainable Development Goals. (SDGs) We also talked about the need for all of us and the world to advance the dignity and human rights, especially for women and girls.”Shockingly, the newly elected Vicar of Christ seemingly blessed the radical pro-abortion MDGs and SDGs, but this was only the beginning of the Soros coup at the Holy See.

In the words of UN Foundation (another Soros beneficiary) Vice Chair Timothy Wirth, famously known for his condom tree at his previous State Department post said: “We’ve never seen a pope do anything like this. No single individual has as much global sway as he does. What he is doing will resonate in the government of any country that has a leading Catholic constituency.”

The friendly papal reception resonated among the global elites. Alleluia! Francis gave the green light to the controversial abortion laden, gender bending, feminist driven Millenium Development Goals(MDGs) and their offspring, the SDGs.

Jeffrey Sachs, Special Advisor to UN Secretary General on the MDGs also enjoys a 30 year long economic relationship as a Soros stalwart, close advisor and grantee of Soros’ millions. Sachs headed to the Vatican to craft the blueprint for the Vatican’s rollout of the theology of global warming.

Immediately, the UN, through its Soros-infused stable of experts, began to dominate the Vatican agenda by silencing and banishing any opposing views on the science of global warming. Happily for Soros and the UN, Pope Francis only wanted to “dialogue” with one side of the climate debate. 

The Soros Brain Trust at the Vatican-The Green Dream Team

George Soros                    Jeffrey Sachs                    Joseph Stiglitz

Jeffrey Sachs, Economist, Director of Columbia University’s Earth Institute, Special Advisor to the U N Secretary General, and long time Soros collaborator and beneficiary.

Since 1989, economist Jeffrey Sachs has served as Soros’ peripatetic globe trotting expert, promoting his controversial “shock therapy” by lifting currency and price controls, and various other fast paced tactics to introduce countries into the free market economy with mixed results. Sachs rebounded with the assistance of Soros and heads the Earth Institute at Columbia U and reconfigured his skill sets as the UN poverty czar directing the Millenium Villages project, with the assistance of $50 million from Soros. Now firmly transformed as a poverty expert, and environmental guru, Sachs built his fiefdom at the United Nations with Soros dollars and transformed into a poverty expert and environmental alarmist, as master of global warming catastrophe handwringing. 

Within three months of the Bergoglio election, Jeffrey Sachs, close Soros confidante, is featured as the premiere Vatican speaker, expert, author, and cheerleader of the Francis Eco Theology.    Sachs became a perfect fixture at the Vatican, with 10 Vatican addresses promoting the SDGs. Sachs orchestrated the Vatican environmental agenda, by building momentum and consensus for the SDGs. With the input of many other Soros acolytes at the Vatican, they wrote the Vatican’s radical climate change manifesto, Climate Change and Our Common Home in anticipation of the coup de grace, the Papal Encyclical, Laudato Si.

Seemingly overnight, the Holy See became Ground Zero behind UN Sustainable Development agenda as climate change gained new spiritual status as the Francis theology of environmentalism. 

Joseph Stiglitz, Economist, Soros Co-Author and Collaborator and Open Society Grantee, Member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences

He has been called the Soros economist and his point man. Not surprisingly, he and Soros co-authored books together. He is Joseph Stiglitz, who heads the Soros-funded Initiative for Policy Dialogue, which promotes the institution of “a new international currency” and of an international taxation system. Stiglitz also serves a key role in the Francis/Soros Eco Revolution as a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences (PASS) which housed and operates as the command center for the Papal Eco Plot. Stiglitz, like Sachs, serves as a long time Soros collaborator, consultant. Soros and Stiglitz often serve as co-panel members at major global conferences, and Soros provided seed money for another radical organization, Stiglitz’s Socialist International Group. Stiglitz and Sachs also co-wrote the Vatican’s radical environmental manifesto, Climate Change and the Common Good with other Soros allies.

Interestingly and significantly, Stiglitz also serves as the longtime economic advisor to Argentine President Cristina Kirchner and her husband, the former President, fellow Peronists along with Pope Francis.   

Successfully embedded at the Vatican lurk George Soros’ closest collaborators to carry out his radical leftist global environmental strategy with the blessing and assistance of the Holy See. Yet, more Soros acolytes populated the Vatican.

The Soros/Vatican Mission Control:  Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences

The Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences serves as the Vatican’s Academic Think Tank. Its Chancellor, Argentine Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, a radical progressive, was suddenly empowered to carry out his extremist agenda when his fellow Argentine Bergoglio assumed the Seat of Peter.

During 2013-2015, the Academy frenetically and effectively provided cover for the UN/Soros/SDGs plot that was hatched and implemented under Sorondo’s leadership as he opened wide the doors for the Soros allies.

Bishop Sorondo deflected criticism over the Vatican’s sudden and unusually cozy UN relationship. The testy Sorondo remarked in response to serious concerns that the Vatican was letting itself become a platform for the United Nations to promote its own agenda. Bishop Sorondo defended the UN and remarked, “the United Nations is not the devil. Rather, quite the opposite.” 

Sorondo seems to imply that the UN is on some mission from God. But, as the saying goes, the devil is in the details and the details include George Soros’ team.

The Soros Brain Trust of Sachs and Stiglitz led the papal revolt to promote the UN/Soros climate change agenda with the help of the other Soros benefactors.

The Soros/UN/ Cronyism at the Vatican

•  Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, Chancellor of the Vatican Pontifical Academy (PASS), sits on the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network Advisory Council with Ted Turner and Jeffrey SachsSorondo was recently honored by the UN Foundation, one of George Soros’ philanthropies, for his work promoting SDGs and Laudato Si. 

•  Jeffrey Sachs, longtime confidante and collaborator of Soros economic brain trust, co-wrote the Vatican document, Climate Change and the Common Good. Sachs spoke prominently at the Vatican PASS at least 9 times on the climate change catastrophe. Soros spent tens of millions funding many of Sachs’ UN development projects in Africa.

•  Partha Dasgupta, member of PASS, co-wrote the Vatican document on Climate Change and the Common Good. Dasgupta served on Sachs’ Earth Institute External Advisory Board, along with George Soros.

•  Peter Raven, Member of PASS, co-wrote the Vatican document on Climate Change and the Common GoodRaven collaborated with the population control radical Paul Erhlich’s research, which served as the basis for the controversial and discredited book, The Population Bomb. He, too, served on Sachs’ Earth Institute Advisory Board, along with George SorosRaven served on the executive committee of George Soros’ International Science Foundation for the USSR. 

•  Joseph Stiglitz, member of PASS, and long time collaborator of George Soros, co-author of books with Soros, received funding from Soros for the Socialist International, and long time economic advisor of the Argentine Socialist Presidents, Cristina and Nestor Kirchner.

•  Hans Schellnhuber, newly appointed member of PASS, co-wrote the Vatican document on Climate Change and Common Good. He is a German scientist and a member of FuturICT, an organization funded by George Soros. He is also a vocal and strident proponent of population control.

•  Naomi Klein,anti-capitalist Marxist and radical environmentalist who was invited by Pope Francis to lead a conference on the environment in June 2015. Klein is a member of a George Soros funded environmental group called 350.org. Klein has been outspoken about the need to overturn capitalism and like, Sachs and Stiglitz, spoke at and supported Occupy Wall Street (Soros Funded) demonstrations in October of 2011.

•  Emma Bonino, Pope Francis met with Bonino to the shock and horror of Catholics. She is a prominent member of Soros’ Global Board of the Open Society Foundations, his major funding philanthropy. Bonino, an Italian politician, is also known as Italy’s female abortionist who has personally performed thousands of abortions, although not even a medical doctor. Pope Francis called her a “one of Italy’s greats” which is akin to calling Kermit Gosnell, one of America’s greats.

Climate Change, not Catholicism, on the Vatican Agenda

Sachs and his Soros allies timed their work at the Vatican with strategic precision. On May 25, 2015, the Pope released his eagerly anticipated environmental exhortation, Laudato Si, which called for the passage of the SDGs. On September 25, 2015, the UN scheduled Pope Francis to address the United Nations General Assembly, urging approval of the SDGs, which fortuitously passed on that date.

Francis proudly boasted that he hoped his environmental encyclical, Laudato Si, would be used to promote the passage of the UN Sustainable Development Goals in September 2015, and followed by the passage of the Paris Climate Treaty (Cop 21) in December 2015. Jeffrey Sachs acknowledged that Pope Francis and his encyclical “Laudato Si made the adoption of both the passage of the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Sept. 2015 and the Paris Climate Agreement in December 2015 possible.”

An eleventh commandment is declared: Thou must reduce thy carbon footprint.

By the end of 2015, the Soros syndicate had delivered to its patron, George Soros, a 185 page global warming papal encyclical, passage of the SDGs, and most importantly, the green light to begin the implementation of the Paris Climate Treaty, global redistribution of wealth through carbon taxes on the industrialized world.

Mission Accomplished, Mr. Soros. 

Soros and Bergoglio–a match made in the celestial ecosystems. Their carbon footprints align on many political issues. George Soros is the largest landowner in Argentina (half a million hectares) with more than 150,000 head of cattle, and he also owns massive Argentine financial assets. Jorge Bergoglio, the first Latin American Pope, the Peronist Argentine with a deep concern for the struggling Argentine economy. Two sides of the Argentine peso, one native born pontiff with deep Vatican Bank pockets, the other, a global billionaire power broker with even deeper pockets.

Both love power and chaos; Francis known for his infamous refrain “make a mess, create chaos,” and Soros for his cryptic “discern the chaos and become rich.” Both men understand that they emerge more powerful when institutions and governments are destabilized.

Jorge and George, identical political globalist ideologues: environmentalists, pro-Iran, pro-UN, pro-Cuba, pro-Argentina, pro-mass migration, pro-borderless world, anti death penalty, and, anti-Trump.

George Soros is now the boss of Pope Francis.

It’s an inconvenient truth.

Source: The Remnant Newspaper – Pope Maker: The Soros Syndicate