Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: White smoke at Vatican  (Read 13645 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: White smoke at Vatican
« Reply #130 on: May 09, 2025, 06:43:17 AM »
On NOW, poster Eduardo Montañero made an excellent observation:


What red blooded, Catholic man could occupy the same table with that reeking pervert over the course of an entire multi-day event? No greater example of guilt by association than this.

I've been saying he looks like a sodomite from the start.  Look at his High School picture and the one where he's pawing JP2.

Re: White smoke at Vatican
« Reply #131 on: May 09, 2025, 06:48:22 AM »
Mindless (and faithless) "Trads" are all going gaga over the fact that he wore traditional vestments and there was some Latin used at his "Mass" ... in addition to the name Leo.  I really didn't think most people would be this shallow and stupid.  Of course they're filtering out the female lectors and his pushing Synodal Church by some kind of bizarre cognitive dissonance.

I thought I was the only one who realized this guy looks like a sodomite ... until Brother Nathanael just posted along those lines.  Look at his High School picture.  Since his family is around, someone should ask if he ever dated a girl.  Those types like a bit of smell and bell.

We also have both Sarah and Burke hailing his election, proving once and for all that they were never going to be part of the solution, as these were the best hopes of Trad, Inc. ... the Great White Hope and Great Black Hope.  When the best of the best can do nothing but issue few mealy-mouthed "uncertainties" in the face of clear, obvious, abject heresy, that tells us what we need to know.

I thought it would take a Sarah to fool the Trads, but I was giving them too much credit.  All it evidently takes is his talking about Synodal Church in Latin and wearing traditional vestments while sitting there listening to female lectors.
I knew as soon as I saw he was towing the Francis line on ordo amoris.  Was arguing with a couple (novus ordo, but anti open borders) Catholic friends about this and eventually realized I wasn’t gonna get anywhere. 
and yeah I get I’m Orthodox so I’m commenting from the outside looking in here but I do care because of the political impact and the fact that he has influence on over a billion people including millions of Americans 


Offline AnthonyPadua

  • Supporter
Re: White smoke at Vatican
« Reply #132 on: May 09, 2025, 07:16:26 AM »
. He, also, has a reptile mouth which is a jew trait.
A lot of people have this due to teeth extractions and braces pushing the upper and lower jaws backwards.

Re: White smoke at Vatican
« Reply #133 on: May 09, 2025, 07:20:44 AM »
Although I consider myself a sede I admit that I was momentarily caught up in the conclave, the beauty of the spectacle, the anticipation of looking at that balcony, hoping against all odds some miracle might occur...
and then it took all of about 15 minutes of research once the name was announced to find the following about the creep:
1. Protected pedophiles check
2. Advocated for infinity immigration to the West with all the murders, rapes, assorted crimes and
the misery and taxes that it brings..check
3. enforced communion in the hand check
4. like a true coward and Judas to the faith he remained silent while Bergoglio spread heresy after heresy check
5. Encouraged everyone take the poisonous aborted fetal tissue jab without any regard for their health or soul check
6. in behalf of Jorge he hand selected fellow apostates to be bishops check

Points 1 and 5 alone makes him a criminal worthy of a life sentence in prison but 2, 3, 4, 6 classify him as a demon in human form. 

In the coming months I'm sure this list will be greatly expanded

Re: White smoke at Vatican
« Reply #134 on: May 09, 2025, 07:26:05 AM »
Jone in Moral Theology said that there is a slight possibility that a confession over the telephone might be valid:



Interesting. If I'm reading/understanding that correctly, it sounds like it is conditional and in cases of necessity.  I take that to mean that the penitent would still need to follow up with in-person confession.