|
False Prophet Bergolio Chimes in to Save Doomed Psychiatry Racket
October 2017
Jorge Bergoglio, the man currently calling himself "Pope Francis", has claimed in a recent series of interviews to have had weekly sessions over a period of six months in the late 1970s with a female Jewish psychoanalyst, almost certainly a secular Jew, that is to say, an atheist. Of course this comes as no surprise to those who have known for some time that Bergoglio is a puppet of international Jewry, but the revelation raises serious questions about just how compromised the man at the head of the Catholic church really is.
 |
| Above: The day before the Pope-sought-therapy story broke in mainstream media outlets, Bergoglio meets with key representatives of the spiritually bankrupt and dead religion of Judaism, including the Chief Rabbi of Rome (above), representatives of the Conference of European Rabbis, the Rabbinical Council of America and the Commission of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel. |
Let's assume that the story is true.
If these "sessions" were indeed the "professional" arrangement Bergoglio would have us believe they were, then presumably they were a private affair between the psychoanalyst and himself.
Which begs the following questions: were the sessions recorded? Were notes taken and a file kept? And just how much of what transpired between Bergoglio and the Jewish hireling to whom, we are told, he entrusted his mind in the comfort of her own home, was duly passed on to, shall we say, interested parties.
And perhaps the most critical question of all, did same interested parties decide on the basis of the information thereby obtained, that Bergoglio (then head of the Argentinian Jesuits) would make an excellent candidate for a future Pope, that is to say, an excellent candidate for blackmail and manipulation?
In fact, the reported version of the story that bounced about in the Jewish propaganda echo chamber a few weeks ago (the NY Times, the Post, the Guardian etc) has all the hallmarks of a psyop, and reads frankly like a vulgar advert for the hideous psychiatry racket, with "psychoanalysis" serving as the introductory soft-sell, and the hapless Bergoglio as the "celebrity" endorsement.
Moreover it is the entirely predictable response to critical and inevitably fatal blows delivered to the credibility of the psychiatric enterprise in recent times, blows coming from the level of reason and hard facts, not tawdry, journalistic meaninglessness.
I have given up hoping for a final draft on that copy.
But if, for all that, Bergoglio is telling the truth about his psychoanalytical encounter, then it is doubtful whether he had any real say in the reporting of the fact. More probably it was simply conveyed to him in one way or another that the information would be "leaked" to the press and he decided it would be better to beat them to the post, so to speak, with suitable ommissions and apologetics, of course.
Alternatively, he may have simply been led unwittingly into the subject by his suitably informed and instructed interviewer (a high ranking representative of the so-called "social sciences" we note) in the hope that he would take the bait, which of course he did. The rest could then be left to editing.
In any case, the story is yet another indication of the growing desperation of international Jewry who, notwithstanding the continuous efforts of compromised politicians around the world to divert attention away from the fact, know the game is increasingly up as far as the man of independent mind on the street is concerned, especially in key nations that have not been brainwashed beyond all hope.
This would explain why same Jews feel increasingly compelled to resort to ever more risky and self-revealing measures to save their more cherished and profitable modes of operation and mind control, in this case, psychiatry. And of course puppet Bergoglio could be counted on, one way or another, to provide a timely endorsement for their foul racket. Whether that was willingly or wittingly in this case, or under duress or manipulation, really hardly matters does it? Nor does it matter, as far as the intended effect of the story is concerned, if it is wholly true or not.
The story also highlights perhaps, the importance of forgiveness if we are to be free of the oppressive and satanic method of control that is political blackmail, a method now rampant in western political circles (truth be told) due largely to our widespread moral degeneracy and the lamentable disappearance of basic codes of honour and decency from our corridors of power and jurisprudence. I need not go into the reasons for that.
Forgiveness in relationship, properly understood, is not a matter of mere sentiment, but a very practical and sensible policy. It is essentially a strict refusal to identify ourselves or others with past actions or habits that have fallen short of our best natures or hindsight better judgement, but have been sincerely and intelligently disavowed since. In this way we free ourselves of the destructive compulsion to seek to justify past mistakes - a policy which effectively binds us to them. Keep in mind that there is no greater block to the healing process in relationship than the refusal to acknowledge wrongs and errors. (Which of course, is not to say that all past actions are unjustifiable.)
The compulsive urge to justify past sins (wrongs, mistakes, experimental flops etc.) is particularly destructive when it is our leaders (political, cultural and religious) who seek to legitimise or render socially acceptable their own past misdeeds or foolishness as a means of depriving blackmailers or political opponents of the power to use same against them. (And perhaps also as a means of appeasement.) Such a strategy may seem like a good idea to the ruthlessly ambitious and self-serving moral cowards and spiritual simpletons that resort to it, but the cure they seek is ultimately worse than the disease they wish to escape, as it tends to lock them and those that follow them (for whom they will have to answer) into error and resulting disorder.
In recent times we have seen high profile US politicians provide examples of its application in brazen attempts to mitigate the political consequences of past indiscretions of a homosexual nature, all at the expense of the moral vigour, fortitude and worth of many of their fellow countrymen, not to mention many in other countries too. We have also seen some of the resulting disorder - a timely lesson that, notwithstanding the antics of its leaders, a nation does well to remember that it is its moral character that ultimately constitutes its security, both in this world and in the world to come.
What is important to understand is that neither justification, nor condemnation is particularly helpful when dealing with error. Condemnation may serve to draw our attention to it, and we may need to face the consequences of past follies sooner or later (and perhaps also experience some healthy contrition) but we cannot move on from them in a truly constructive fashion until we are prepared to look at them simply and dispassionately and thus learn from them.
Such a dispassionate view of the past is more often than not the inevitable gift of Time to those of us with something of a private life, but the gift can be obscured for those that have foregone the God-given luxury of being nobody in particular. This is especially true for public figures such as Bergoglio who are much too dependent for the popularity they covet on a public image over which they have limited control, and which inevitably reduces them more or less to servants of those who shape the public's perception of them.
In the same series of interviews in which Bergoglio alleges his foray into atheistic psychoanalysis, he would have us believe he is an advocate of Jesus' teaching that a man cannot serve both God and money. One wonders then why in his hour of darkness he felt compelled to turn to a mere hireling of the utterly corrupt and pseudo-scientific field calling itself "social science", instead of to the men of God, who would no doubt have helped him quite free of charge as a matter of principle. (Keep in mind that Bergoglio has not disavowed the action, but rather affirmed it.) Perhaps the answer to that is all too simple. Firstly, Bergoglio is or was essentially a clueless atheist, despite his religious pretensions, and secondly, Bergoglio simply doesn't know any men of God of genuine spiritual maturity and understanding, at least none that he would be prepared to, in all humility, submit to and learn from. Apparently he reserves that kind of submission for Jewish quacks.
Clearly, he who a man deems fit to evaluate his mind, can also control it. Therefore if Bergoglio needed help with his own introspection he might have done well to recall and, critically, understand Jesus' sage instruction to his followers to call no-one teacher but Christ, by which He presumably did not mean a Christ-rejecting Jew. But then perhaps Bergoglio had simply forgotten Jesus' warning about the fate of the blind man who permits himself to be led by blind guides, otherwise he might have avoided the spiritual pitfalls of an ill-conceived self image.
Even when Bergolio appears to oppose his Jewish masters it is decidedly unconvincing. For example, in the aforementioned series of interviews (which we gather has been released in France in book form), Bergoglio makes a lame attempt to appear suitably opposed to International Jewry's plan for the moral degradation of traditionally Christian nations by merely stating the obvious, that homosexual "union" is not marriage at all as a matter of fact, just as a father is not a mother as a matter of fact, or words to that effect. (It is as well we have Bergolio for these lessons in elementary biology.)
Yet he nonetheless goes on to suggest state-sanctioned "civil unions" for homosexual couples as an alternative to marriage. (Are we to understand that he also endorses the adoption of innocent children into degenerate households presided over by perverts?) In fact Bergoglio effectively reduces the issue to mere semantics and word play, which of course is all he is capable of as the hapless pawn of those who control and manipulate him. He knows very well that the church does not and cannot approve of homosexuality under any circumstances, yet he bows to Jewish pressure by giving implicit approval to "civil unions" while downplaying the consequences of "sins of the flesh" as opposed to "sins of the mind"; as if the former can somehow be extricated from the latter, which of course it can't, for the simple reason that the former is a symptom of the latter.
 |
Jesus never once concerned Himself with what side of politics or a popularity contest He was on. He spoke the plain, uncompromising truth. Neither did He subscribe to the absurd notion that Truth "evolves" over time, a misconception apparently common among so-called social "scientists" and "engineers" of the present day, who would have us believe that corruption and degradation are "progress", and that degeneracy is "diversity".
In Jesus' time the law of the Pharisaical Jewish priesthood was known as "the tradition of the elders", in latter times up to present day same perversion of the Law by rabbinical idiots is known as the Babylonian Talmud. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees on a number of occasions for seeking to replace Holy Law (the law of wholeness) with man made doctrines and provisos, including a hangover from the time of Moses which served to undermine the sanctity of Marriage and Family by effectively permitting divorce based on mere whim (sexual or otherwise). Moses, who was an upright and Godly man, had grudgingly bowed to political pressure on the point, and fifteen hundred years later the Pharisees of Jesus' time were more than happy to exploit the fact as a means of getting Jesus on the wrong side of their legalistic nitpicking.
Jesus, however, never once concerned Himself with what side of politics or a popularity contest He was on. He spoke the plain, uncompromising truth. (In the case above for example, He explained that divorce is not acceptable to God except for reasons of sexual immorality.) Neither did Jesus subscribe to the absurd notion that Truth "evolves" over time, a misconception apparently common among so-called social "scientists" and "engineers" of the present day, who would have us believe that corruption and degradation are "progress", and that degeneracy is "diversity".
(I mean, when does one see the utter nonsense of all this - before or after the whole thing completely disintegrates?)
Let us be unequivocally clear. Homosexuality is not acceptable to God. It is in fact an abomination. Moreover, it is destructive and degrading (mind, body and soul) to both the individual and the society that partakes of it and permits it, which is precisely why it is not acceptable to Supreme Intelligence. Yes, we can choose to believe in skilfully concocted fantasies to the contrary, even unto the bitter end, but it won't make an iota of difference to the fact of the matter and it never will.
Similarly it matters not if we call homosexuality "civil union" or "marriage", or how apt we become at deceiving ourselves that Love and sin are compatible, or that Love and pleasure are the same thing, or that Love and desire are the same thing. In fact, to truly love is to be completely free of petty, personal desire, as anyone who has truly loved knows very well.
Can a man not love his brother without desire? Can he not have affection, even physical affection for him without desire? Or live with him and love him dearly without desire? Clearly Love and desire are not the same thing. Why then pretend that the issue here is Love? We do not define marriage according to our whims. In fact, we do not define it at all. God does by sanctifying it and by furnishing the means by which marriage can be consummated and made flesh.
Children are the completion of marriage since it is only then that the union is made tangible in the world. (Marriage without children is not in fact marriage in the fullest sense, but only, at best, the spiritual and psychological framework for one.) Thus marriage has three aspects: the spiritual, the psychological and the material, all three of which are essential to it. The spiritual takes place and is rooted in the Church of God, the marital vows provide the basis of the psychological aspect, and finally the marriage is made flesh by consummation, a feat entirely beyond the reach of homosexuals, we note. The Lord provides for great pleasure and joy in all three of these aspects working together, since the creation and nurturing of new Life in the world is particularly dear to Him. Thus are Marriage and Family inseparable institutions in truth. Just as both a man and a woman are required to conceive a child, so too is a man and a woman required to raise it, and ideally the same couple in both cases. The psychological and spiritual imperative is reflected by the material one, the one witnessing unequivocally of the other.
This is all so obvious. I mean honestly, this kind of knowledge is so basic to a human being, so fundamental, it is a grave indictment indeed of the essentially inhuman propaganda and conditioning that has permeated our culture for so long now, that we should need reminding of it at all.
Even our language has been corrupted.
Does the fact that the word "gay" has been stolen from carefree happiness and used to describe perversion change the nature of the latter? Similarly the misuse of the term "homophobia" has served for some time now to obfuscate the plain fact that the really significant victims of homophobia are not homosexuals at all but ordinary (heterosexual) men whose simple and creative interaction and affection for one another, so essential for the happiness of young men in particular, is undermined by the introduction of the unwelcome and unseemly doubts and complications of desire and disorder.
In other words, homosexualisation profoundly undermines simple, uncomplicated Brotherhood. And without such brotherhood gentlemen, what are we? And what are our nations?
|
Homosexualism is endemic in our society, thanks largely to our own shallowness and the mass media illusions and pseudoscientific conditioning that engenders it. The men who model for the "gay wedding" pictures that litter the net for instance, and the photographers who direct the shoots, are very expert at conveying to viewers just the "right" image. Yet it is only fools who permit themselves to be swayed by mere impressions, or by rainbows stolen from Paradise.
Please understand, it is not only homosexual activity at the physical level that is the problem here, but the spiritual and psychological disorder that underlies it, and which is characterised by a mind that fundamentally (often subconsciously) derides and demeans both chastity and marriage, the latter being the sanctity, life-long commitment and exclusivity of sexual relationship between a man and a woman, and nought else.
Like all disorders it has a self-perpetuating nature because it is almost impossible to understand what a poor substitute it is for order while one is lost in it. At best one can only be aware of its own inherent inadequacy. The good news however, is that there is healing in Christ for those who persevere and who have accepted the simple truth that there is no happiness or fulfillment to be found in disorder - only eternal craving, frustration and desolation.
That's the part you don't get to see in films, TV shows and fake news productions that are themselves the result of disorder.
|
The misuse of the term "homophobia" has served for some time now to obfuscate the plain fact that the really significant victims of so-called homophobia are not homosexuals at all but ordinary (heterosexual) men whose simple and creative interaction with and affection for one another, so essential to the happiness of young men in particular, is undermined by the introduction of the unwelcome and unseemly doubts and complications of desire and disorder.
 |
| White sepulchre: Bergoglio did not see fit to mention the name of our Lord even once in his spiritually sterile speech to the US Congress in 2015. He did however mention Moses. |
Oh, and for those like Bergoglio, who would have us believe that when Jesus said "Give to Caesar what is Caeser's, and to God what is God's" He was somehow advocating separation of Church and State (which is ludicrous), a brief lesson in Christian basics is in order here, like the Lord's prayer for instance, in which we pray together:
"Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."
I don't see any separation there, do you?
The people of God are the Church of God, not any particular organization. If then the people of God are separated from the State, what does that make the State? In fact, the people of God are both the Church and the State except in hell and its earthly reflections.
The upshot of all this is really quite serious. The Catholic church is currently being led not by the Vicar of Christ, but, sadly, by yet another stooge for the Jewish agenda and the discredited pseudoscience priesthood that serves it, an agenda which is essentially antichrist and includes most obviously (but is not limited to) the moral degradation, racial dilution and fragmentation and especially, de-christianisation of European peoples worldwide. Indeed, Bergoglio has been a notable proponent of irregular immigration into Europe and European peopled nations in recent times, yet another indication of who's holding his leash.
Meanwhile, as abomination upon abomination increasingly takes the place of holiness in our communities and homes, leaving them spiritually barren and desolate, some readers may wish to take note of the fact.
Blessed are you when people hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man. Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their ancestors treated the prophets. But ..... woe to you when everyone speaks well of you, for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.
Luke 6:22-23,26
Counterfeit charity and the invasion of Europe
Bergolio's repsonse to the so-called refugee crisis, otherwise known as the recent invasion of Europe, has been a telling one.
It has essentially consisted in appeals to Catholics around the world (especially Italians) to accept irregular/illegal arrivals into their countries more or less indiscriminately and with open arms.
Unfortunately, however, for those spouting the humanitarian rhetoric in which the recent invasion of Europe has been couched, similarly motivated non-government organizations (NGOs) have had to largely withdraw their boats and ships from the central Mediterranean amid accusations that they had been acting as little more than aiders and abettors of the human trafficking operations that have plagued the region in recent times and resulted in the deaths of thousands of people. Though the NGO fleets were ostensibly in the area for the purpose of conducting rescue missions for boat people in distress, cogent evidence has surfaced indicating an ulterior motive ....
Psychiatry: Science or Fraud?
It's 1972. Four mental health professionals, a psychology graduate, a pediatrician, a painter, a housewife and a psychology professor walk off the street into various psychiatric hospitals in the US pretending to be hearing voices. Immediately institutionalized by all the hospitals bar none they then return to their normal behaviour. Will any of the psychiatrists on the hospital staff spot the deception? What happens next will shatter any illusions you may have about psychiatry forever ....