life is free.
"It is well known that orthodox minded Catholics have felt considerable consternation with Jorge Mario Bergoglio, known to the world as Pope Francis. On issue after issue, year after year, Catholics have had no shortage of occasions to feel perplexed, alarmed, and alienated - justifiably so.
There's been his positioning on the issue of remarriage and Holy Communion, for example, or his punitive attacks on the traditional liturgy. Even if non-Catholics may be indifferent to those matters, anyone of good will would also be troubled by his oblivious stance vis-a-vis Islam, his kowtowing to the Chinese Communist Party, his subservience to the globalists (whose "new world order" he condones), and so forth.
Let's also not forget about his accommodation of priestly pederasty during his Argentinian days and, as Pope, his calculating association with and elevation of prelates known for their own similarly egregious deviancy. It is baffling that he gets little to no bad press about this. Our society's overlords, normally keen to seize upon any occasion to attack Christianity, have rather curiously refrained from pouncing on his - the Pope's! - record on this front; that they turn a blind eye to this giant bulls-eye is worth pondering. Evidently this Pope is off limits. After all, Bergoglio is their man - not the 'Vicar of Christ', a title he himself has tellingly shelved.
But cataloguing all his misdeeds and deviations from the deposit of faith, and from common sense and common decency, is not my aim here. My intent is to briefly mention a couple of reservations circulating about the legitimacy of Francis' papacy - and to share a firm conclusion I unexpectedly and belatedly reached about Bergoglio.
Many Catholics have wondered: is Francis a heretic? Several well-respected scholars and religious have formally claimed so. If any Pope were indeed an explicit heretic, he would automatically forfeit the Papacy, and place himself outside the Christian fold. I have some views on the subject, but I wish to explicitly distinguish the question of heresy with the conclusion I have reached about Bergoglio - because it does not depend on any particular issue, or any of his statements or actions.
There is also the matter of the St. Gallen Mafia, a group of high-ranking cardinals vehemently opposed to Benedict XVI, named for the town in Switzerland where they regularly met. According to a recent autobiography by the late Belgian Cardinal Daneels, one of its members, they maneuvered in advance to install Bergoglio. Such manipulative scheming, if true, would automatically invalidate the outcome of the conclave.
Both these issues do appear to be massive red flags but even they may be cast aside, because there is a more germane consideration - one that led me to believe, with moral certainty, that Bergoglio is not really the pope.
He is an anti-pope because Benedict XVI did not validly renounce the Papal office as required by Canon Law - the most recent 1983 version of which he himself helped craft. Therefore there should never have been a conclave following his surprising February 11, 2013 announcement known as the Declaratio. This would be the case even if someone other than Bergoglio had been chosen, and even if Bergoglio hadn't done and said all the things he's done and said.
My xomment: I have said similar things many times. Glad to see others are catching on.
Capri sun recall
Heinz is recalling over 5,000 cases of Capri sun because an employee screwed up and got claning solution in them. This type of thing happens on occasion in Mexico. Usually when there is something not 100 perent right with a produt in Mexico, they'll do a buy one get one and sell it off anyway, IF it is not a hazardous problem. No oregano in the spagetti sauce? BUY ONE GET ONE. I have figured this out, usually it is worth it. a lot of kids drink capri sun, if they get one of those pouches and the kid is young enough, the kid is likely to drink it anyway and then the potty won.t stop, soap will clean you RIGHT OUT.
now demanding the FBI retrun items they never should hae taken. Yes, this was far worse than watergate. Trump has pointed out what I have said frequently all along - there is so little respect for law and order in Aerica now at the government level that the United States now defines the term "banana republic, and Trump did not miss that, he is saying it openly.
But she will "win" because she's the "candidate!" Trump took that area 70-30 and probably by more. How can Liz win by stating she stands against everything Trump stood for? Easy answer: She cannot. If she "wins" it will only prove just how synthetic everything is, the will of the people WILL NOT be heard.
By actual stats, as of August 15, Liz has 28 percent support, while her opponent has 57 percent support with 10 percent undecided and 5 percent missing. So to make it "plausible" "they" will give Liz ALL of that 10 +5 percent, bringing her up to 42 percent, and then they'll steal 8.5 percent from the other guy to squeak her a win.
In this 1 minute 30 second video, he efficiently states exactly how doctors are going to be forced to comply with corrupted medical orders, AND exactly what the Pfizer shot will do.
I never heard of this guy, but he's BANG ON. It is very surprising to see someone nail the current situation with such accuracy.
You know what a scheister is, and Albert Bourla has it written all over his face. You know damn well he never got a SINGLE real shot, but heck, the idiots out there will gobble this up and go in for the all new and improved clot. And bluetooth update. And the next update probably includes WIFI as well. And after that comes the CPU and full integration.
We all know the guidestones said. 8 billion people down to 500 million. Know what that means? It means the full round of shots can have approximately a 93 percent fatality rate and still be perfectly "acceptable". What will I believe? What was written on the guidestones, or what Bourla says about his shots?
2.844 sec, (5)