Just when I thought I had heard it all.

"And I have no right to expel anyone from the Church. Not only that, my duty is always to welcome. The Church cannot close the door to anyone. To no one.”

I was about to object to the statement that he has no right to expel anyone from the Church, but then it occurred to me that he's technically correct, since he's a non-pope and a non-bishop.  Of course, given the premise that he believes, that he's the actual pope, what an outrageous statement, more or less a denial of the dogmatic teaching of Vatican I.

As for not closing the door to anyone, I guess he made an exception in locking Traditional Catholics out of their churches, preventing them from offering the Tridentine Mass.

Jorge praises and encourages pretty much every "form of religious expression," participating in pagan rites, but then makes a notable exception for Traditional Catholics expressing themselves.  Voodoo rituals?  No problem.  Tridentine Mass?  Forget about it.

  Just when I thought I had heard it all.

I was about to object to the statement that he has no right to expel anyone from the Church, but then it occurred to me that he's technically correct, since he's a non-pope and a non-bishop.  Of course, given the premise that he believes, that he's the actual pope, what an outrageous statement, more or less a denial of the dogmatic teaching of Vatican I.

Is Jorge secretly a sedevacantist?

Budist Dolly lama is a pedophile too. 

Well... yeah. The story in the news is nothing new. He's always been terrible. He only got positive attention because he came of age and prominence at the same time as Mao's China and their desire to annex Tibet.

What does this have to do with the topic, though?

Is Jorge secretly a sedevacantist?

Yes, his idea of Pope in not the Catholic concept of Pope. He refers to himself as "Bishop of Rome" but not "Vicar of Christ", which he says is only a "historical title." That Bergoglio dude is crazy nuts!

He is being true to the new religion at least. The only dogma is there is no dogma. The only morality is there is no morality. Nothing is true, everything is permitted.

Right, the old "Liberty to all except for the enemies of Liberty."  I've run into a handful of SINCERE Novus Ordite Modernists over the years who thought it's no big deal if I wanted to be a Traditional Catholic and sincerely believed in "to each his own".  But most are hypocrites, where they tolerate everyone except Trad Catholics.  They're find with тαℓмυdic Jews, radical Muslims, Orthodox, schismatics, heretics and infidels, animists, etc. ... no problem with any of these and joint ecuмenical worship are encouraged ... but not Traditional Catholics, and it's forbidden to go to Trad Catholic Masses.  That's a sign of the diabolical intent there ... where as the SINCERE ones are at least true to their principles even if their brains have turned to mush.

but not "Vicar of Christ", which he says is only a "historical title." 

And there you have it. He admits that he is not, and also that he does not, what is delineated below:

Vicar of Christ
(Latin Vicarius Christi).

A title of the pope implying his supreme and universal primacy, both of honour and of jurisdiction, over the Church of Christ. It is founded on the words of the Divine Shepherd to St. Peter: "Feed my lambs. . . . Feed my sheep" (John 21:16-17), by which He constituted the Prince of the Apostles guardian of His entire flock in His own place, thus making him His Vicar and fulfilling the promise made in Matthew 16:18-19.

In the course of the ages other vicarial designations have been used for the pope, as Vicar of St. Peter and even Vicar of the Apostolic See (Pope Gelasius, I, Ep. vi), but the title Vicar of Christ is more expressive of his supreme headship of the Church on earth, which he bears in virtue of the commission of Christ and with vicarial power derived from Him. Thus, Innocent III appeals for his power to remove bishops to the fact that he is Vicar of Christ (cap. "Inter corporalia", 2, "De trans. ep."). He also declares that Christ has given such power only to His Vicar Peter and his successors (cap. "Quanto", 3, ibid.), and states that it is the Roman Pontiff who is "the successor of Peter and the Vicar of Jesus Christ" (cap. "Licet", 4, ibid.). The title Vicar of God used for the pope by Nicholas III (c. "Fundamenta ejus", 17, "De elect.", in 6) is employed as an equivalent for Vicar of Christ.

Fanning, W. (1912). Vicar of Christ. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved April 12, 2023 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15403b.htm 

Reminds me of Voltaire’s (the king of Masonic “tolerance”) response to those who criticized him as hypocritical for not extending tolerance to the persecuted Catholics:

”In order to be the beneficiary of tolerance, you must have once extended it to others.”

Those who are familiar with the terrifying deathbed scene of this sophist will remember that God is not mocked.

Abbe Barruel’s account of Voltaire’s death gives the horrific details, but this account gives the general idea:

“When Voltaire felt the stroke he realised would end his life, he was overpowered with remorse. He at once sent for a priest and wanted to be reconciled to the church. His agnostic flatterers hastened to his room to prevent this from happening, but it was only to witness his ignominy and their own. He cursed them to their faces as his distress was increased by their presence. He loudly exclaimed, “Begone! It is you who have brought me to my present condition. What a wretched glory is this which you have produced for me!”

Voltaire was tortured with such an agony that he gnashed his teeth in impotent rage against God and man. At times he pleaded, “O Christ, O Lord Jesus!” then again, “I must die, abandoned of God and man!” As his end drew near his condition became so frightful that his agnostic associates were afraid to approach his bedside. They still guarded the door that others might not know how awfully an enemy of God was compelled to die. Even his nurse couldn’t tolerate the scene of horror. Such was the end of a man who had a high intellect, excellent education, great wealth and much earthly honour – but without God.“
https://bibleguidance.co.za/Engarticles/Deathbed.htm