The Jesuit Pope Endorses “Same-Sex Civil Unions”

The Jesuit Pope Endorses Same-Sex Civil Unions, PDF format

During an interview in a documentary on the life of Francis I, entitled Francesco, which premiered in October 2020, the Jesuit Roman pope caused a worldwide stir when he advocated civil unions for homosexual couples. 

  “Homosexual people have the right to be a part of the family.  They’re children of God and have a right to a family,” he said.  “Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it.”  Then he added: “What we have to create is a civil union law.  That way they are legally covered.  I stood up for that.”[1]

  Traditionalist Roman Catholics were horrified, claiming this was a departure from official Roman Catholic doctrine – that Francis had actually changed Roman Catholic teaching.  Meanwhile, “progressive” Roman Catholics rejoiced at the pope’s words.  True Christians, of course, knowing that sodomy is a great sin, reject sodomite “marriages” and “civil unions”, for such “unions” are merely stepping-stones to “marriages”.

The Official Romish Doctrine

  Let us see precisely what the official Roman Catholic doctrine is on this issue:

 According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, homosexual inclinations are “objectively disordered”, homosexual acts are “contrary to the natural law”, and those who identify as gay or lesbian are called to the virtue of chastity.[2]  In a nutshell, Rome teaches that homosexual tendencies are not sinful but homosexual acts are.  It is therefore officially opposed to so-called “gay marriage”.

  In 2003, under the leadership of Romish cardinal, Joseph Ratzinger (the future pope, Benedict XVI) and at the direction of the pope at the time, John Paul II, the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – the Inquisition – stated: “The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions.  The common good requires that laws recognise, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society.”

  It added the following: “Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity.  The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.”[3]  It also called support for sodomite unions by politicians “gravely immoral.”  “Not even in a remote analogous sense do homosexual unions fulfil the purpose for which marriage and family deserve specific categorical recognition.  On the contrary, there are good reasons for holding that such unions are harmful to the proper development of human society, especially if their impact on society were to increase.”[4]

  What, then, was Francis doing, calling for civil unions for sodomites?  To understand this, it is necessary to understand the serpent-like subtlety of the Jesuit pope. 

As Archbishop, Bergoglio (The Future Francis) Favoured Sodomite “Unions” But Not “Marriages”

  In 2010, while he was still the Romish archbishop of Buenos Aires in his home country of Argentina, Francis (then known by his name, Jorge Bergoglio) opposed efforts to legalise sodomite “marriage”.  He said: “At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children.  At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God.  At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved on our hearts.”  And: “Let us not be naive: this is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan.  It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a ‘move’ of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”[5] 

  No matter how biblical he sounded, do not be deceived: the pope of Rome does not worship the true God, or follow His Word.  As Rome is Satan’s greatest counterfeit “church”, and as Satan appears as an angel of light, his devil-led ministers, posing as ministers of righteousness,  can at times sound quite biblical (2 Cor. 11:13-15).  The point of quoting this is merely to show that he took an anti-sodomite-“marriage” position.

    At the same time that he rejected sodomite “marriages”, however, he supported the idea of civil unions instead, as a kind of compromise, according to his biographer Sergio Rubin.  And it would appear that this is what Francis was referring to in the 2020 documentary when he said, “I stood up for that.”  He stood up for sodomite civil unions, while opposing sodomite “marriages”.

  According to Manuel Fernandez, the Romish archbishop of La Plata, Argentina, who is a long-time theological advisor to Francis, before he became pope of Rome Bergoglio “always recognised that, without calling it ‘marriage,’ in fact there are very close unions between people of the same sex, which do not in themselves imply sexual relations, but a very intense and stable alliance.  They know each other thoroughly, they share the same roof for many years, they take care of each other, they sacrifice for each other.  Then it may happen that they prefer that in an extreme case or illness they do not consult their relatives, but that person who knows their intentions in depth.  And for the same reason they prefer that it be that person who inherits all their assets, etc.  This can be contemplated in the law and is called ‘civil union’ or ‘law of civil co-existence,’ not marriage.”[6]

  Surely this archbishop could not be so naive as to expect anyone with any intelligence, or knowledge of human nature, to believe such claptrap!  Here is a man who is a leader in the institution which has been exposed as being riddled with sodomite priests from top to bottom – and he wants us to believe that men with sodomite inclinations are able to live under one roof for years, sharing each other’s lives intimately, and yet not fall into the sin of sodomite sexual relations.  He wants us to believe that this is the kind of “civil union” Francis had in mind!  Just two men, attracted to those of the same sex, living together under the same roof in perfect innocence and purity, sharing each other’s lives very intimately.  Pull the other leg, Fernandez.  No man of normal intelligence would believe such a yarn.

As Pope of Rome, Francis Speaks with the Forked Tongue of the Jesuit

  As Roman pope, Francis has at times spoken in a way which indicates support for the only true type of family.  For example, he is on record as having said: “It is painful to say this today: People speak of varied families, of various kinds of families”, but “the family [as] man and woman in the image of God is the only one.”[7]  And in his 2013 book, On Heaven and Earth, he stated that laws “assimilating” sodomite relationships to marriage were “an anthropological regression”, and that if sodomite couples “are given adoption rights, there could be affected children”, for “every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help them shape their identity”.[8]

  However, from the early months of his papacy in 2013 it was very clear that Francis was going to be taking a decidedly “progressive” stance on various issues.  He said categorically, “I have never been a right-winger.”[9]  The evidence of the truthfulness of this statement has continued to stack up throughout his reign.  It is evident he has spoken with a forked tongue on this issue; a Jesuitical tongue.  Note the following:

  In 2013 Francis said: “Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?”   John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter said that Francis was “doing no more than rephrasing the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which denounces homosexual acts but says homosexual persons are to be treated with ‘respect, compassion and sensitivity.’”[10] Maybe so.  But other statements were to follow, and they were not so innocent-sounding.  That’s the trouble with Francis: he is a master at speaking in such a way that his words are capable of more than one interpretation.

  In July 2013 Francis told reporters that if “someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”[11]  This time, the National Catholic Reporter’s Jimmy Akin rushed to Francis’ defence, stating that taking Francis’ statements together, “what emerges is a portrait of individuals who have same-sex attraction but who nevertheless accept the Lord and have goodwill, as opposed to working to advance a pro-homosexual ideology.”[12]  Again, maybe.  But maybe not.  It could also be argued that what emerges is a portrait of a pope who gives deliberately ambiguous statements, open to more than one possible meaning.

  In the documentary, Francesco, there is an account of Francis encouraging two Italian homosexuals to raise their three adopted children in their parish church.  One of the men said that this was very beneficial to their children.[13]  Apparently one of the men, Andrea Rubera, went to a papal mass and gave Francis a letter explaining that he and his partner wanted to raise the children as Roman Catholics but did not want to cause the children any trauma.  A few days later Francis telephoned him, said he thought his letter was “beautiful” and urged the two sodomites to introduce their children to the parish.[14]  A very strange response indeed from the man who is supposed to uphold official Roman Catholic teaching regarding sodomy and sodomite “marriages” – as well as official Roman Catholic teaching regarding true marriage!  He just ignored his own “church’s” teaching.  He treated it with utter contempt.

Francis’ Words in the Documentary Were Edited – So What Did He Actually Say?

  It emerged that some of Francis’ remarks in the documentary were the result of editing distinct phrases from a papal interview and then presenting them as a cohesive whole.  The film-maker, Evgeny Afineevsky, claimed that Francis made the comments calling for civil unions laws directly to him; but Jesuit priest Antonio Spadaro, director of the influential Jesuit publication, La Civiltà Cattolica, stated that the comments actually appeared to come from a 2019 interview of Francis, conducted by Mexican journalist Valentina Alazraki.  They were not contained in the published version of the interview, and were not seen by the public at all before Francesco was released.  In addition, an analysis of the transcript of the interview showed that other papal comments in Francesco were compiled by heavy editing of the 2019 interview by Alazraki.[15]

  Then along came the Mexican broadcaster, Televisa, which said that the Vatican actually held back the footage from the 2019 interview conducted by Valentina Alazraki, in which Francis called for civil unions for sodomite couples!  “Someone at the Vatican gave us the part that we did broadcast, and later they gave the rest of the material to someone else.”  This missing footage then appeared in the documentary Francesco.[16]  The plot thickens.  Or perhaps we should say, some very murky waters just got a whole lot murkier.

  The interview was recorded with Vatican-owned cameras, and afterwards the Mexican broadcaster was given the footage – but not all of it.  And so it came to pass that when Alazraki’s interview was released by Televisa on 1 June 2019, Francis’ remarks on civil unions were not included in the published version, and were not seen by the public until the 2020 release of the documentary Francesco.

  Obviously the Vatican knew that Francis’ comments would explode like a bomb, and did not want the world to hear them – until the time was right.

  Thus it was reported: “While the pope did say those words on camera, he did not say them in that order, or use those phrases in immediate proximity.”[17]

  Here, then, are Francis’ words, taken from an excerpted translation of his comments during the 2019 interview:

 “I was asked a question on a flight – after it made me mad, made me mad for how one news outlet transmitted it – about the familial integration of people with homosexual orientation, and I said, homosexual people have a right to be in the family, people with homosexual orientation have a right to be in the family and parents have the right to recognise that son as homosexual, that daughter as homosexual.  Nobody should be thrown out of the family, or be made miserable because of it.”

  In the past, Francis has encouraged parents and relatives of children who have claimed to be homosexual not to ostracise or shun them.  And Roman Catholic leaders said that this was what he was referring to in the interview, rather than tacitly endorsing the adoption of children by sodomite couples.  This would appear to be the case.

  “They asked me the same question another time and I repeated it, ‘They are children of God, they have a right to a family, and such.’  Another thing is – and I explained I was wrong with that word, but I meant to say this: When you notice something strange – ‘Ah, it’s strange.’ – No, it’s not strange.  Something that is outside of the usual.  That is, not to take a little word to annul the context.  There, what I said is that they ‘have a right to a family.’  And that doesn’t mean to approve of homosexual acts, not at all.”[18]

What Did Francis Mean in the Documentary?

  Did he then really depart from official Roman Catholic doctrine?  Did he endorse sodomite “marriage” with his remarks about civil unions?  Many, not only Roman Catholics but Protestants and Evangelicals, claimed that he did.  But this is very obviously incorrect.  He was not speaking about sodomite “marriage”, but about civil unions.  It is important that the Lord’s people properly read and understand what is going on, and do not simply rush into print claiming “the pope of Rome has changed Roman Catholic teaching and supports sodomite ‘marriage!’”  

  We should learn some important lessons from this.  Firstly, the media lies and distorts the truth, and we must be aware of this at all times.  What one reads may or may not be the whole story.  Secondly, Francis did not endorse sodomite “marriage”. 

  Thirdly, however, he did endorse sodomite civil unions!  And thus he did indirectly endorse homosexual acts contrary to official Roman Catholic teaching, his denial above notwithstanding.  He spoke as a Jesuit, with Jesuitical subtlety and forked tongue.

How Liberal and Traditionalist Roman Catholics Interpreted His Words

  His remarks were understood by liberals and traditionalists in diametrically opposite ways.

  A spokesman for the United Nations’ secretary-general, Antonio Guterres – a devout Roman Catholic – described Francis’ remarks as “a very positive move”.[19]  As Francis is a globalist, an internationalist, a Communist and a UN supporter, Guterres’ praise hints at what Francis intended to achieve by his remarks.

  And James Martin, editor of the Jesuit publication America, praised Francis’ comments, saying they were “a major step forward in the Church’s support for LGBT people.”  “The pope’s speaking positively about civil unions also sends a strong message to places where the Church has opposed such laws,” he said.[20]  “It shows his overall pastoral approach to LGBTQ people, including those who are Catholic, and sends a clear message to those bishops and Church leaders who have opposed such laws,” he said.[21]  Clearly he was ecstatic.  And who better to know what the Jesuit pope was really meaning than a fellow-Jesuit?  This has been the Jesuits’ direction for a long time now[22] – to gradually move the Roman Catholic institution away from its traditional doctrines until sodomy, and sodomite “marriages”, are fully accepted – even though at this stage all this is still contrary to official Popish teaching.

  Traditionalist Roman Catholics, however, were outraged and demanded clarification from the Vatican.

  The archbishop in hiding and a staunch opponent of Francis, Carlo Maria Viganò, declared that “the approval of civil unions is in clear contradiction of the Magisterial documents of the Church”, and, “The [Vatican] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has already unequivocally clarified that in no case may a Catholic approve of civil unions, because they constitute a legitimization of public concubinage and are only a step towards the legal recognition of so-called homosexual marriages.”[23]

  A powerful American cardinal, Raymond Burke, said that Francis had created “confusion and error among Catholic faithful.”  He said, “They [Francis’ remarks] cause wonderment and error regarding the Church’s teaching among people of good will, who sincerely wish to know what the Catholic Church teaches.”  He assured Roman Catholics that the statements by Francis were not binding on Roman Catholics, and that neither Scripture, Rome’s tradition, nor the official catechism of the Roman Catholic institution support same-sex activity, let alone civil unions.

  Another cardinal, Sean P. O’Malley of Boston, said, “We do not serve people well by falsely claiming that we can change the Decalogue.”  And Thomas Tobin, bishop of the diocese of Providence, Rhode Island, addressed his comments to his people, saying, “The pope’s statement clearly contradicts what has been the long-standing teaching of the Church about same-sex unions.  The Church cannot support the acceptance of objectively immoral relationships…. the legalization of [homosexual] civil unions, which seek to simulate holy matrimony, is not admissible.”[24]  

  It is no easy matter for any Roman Catholic priest or bishop to contradict his pope, which gives an indication of the depth of feeling Francis’ remarks stirred up.

  A Roman Catholic publication tried to downplay the remarks as follows: “The pope’s remarks did not deny or call into question any doctrinal truth that Catholics must hold or believe.  In fact, the pope has frequently affirmed the Church’s doctrinal teaching regarding marriage…. It is also important to note that a documentary interview is not a forum for official papal teaching.  The pope’s remarks were not presented in their fullness, and no transcript has been presented, so unless the Vatican offers additional clarity, they need to be taken in light of the limited information available about them.”  Furthermore: “Pope Francis’ statements in ‘Francesco’ do not constitute formal papal teaching.  While the pope’s affirmation of the dignity of all people and his call for respect of all people are rooted in Catholic teaching, Catholics are not obliged to support a legislative or policy position because of the pope’s comments in a documentary.”[25]

  While all this is true, Francis well knew his remarks would be understood by millions to be endorsing sodomy.  But he went ahead and uttered them anyway.  They may not change official Popish doctrine, a documentary may not be the forum for official Popish teaching, and Papists may not be obligated to support what he said; but the fact remains that the pope of Rome said them.  This is vastly significant, and we shall consider the reasons why shortly.

How the Vatican “Clarified” Francis’ Remarks… Eventually

  Adding to the uncertainty, for many days the Vatican obstinately refused to respond to the controversy.  No official statement was issued to set the record straight.  Just…silence.  The supposed “misunderstanding” of Francis’ words was not corrected.  Which indicates that they were not, in fact, misunderstood at all.

  Finally, days after the controversy erupted, the Vatican broke its silence and dispatched its powerful secretary of state, the cardinal Pietro Parolin, to “clarify”.  As expected, he said that Francis’ remarks did not pertain to Roman Catholic doctrine regarding marriage as a union between one man and one woman, but to provisions of civil law.  And Franco Coppolo, an archbishop and apostolic nuncio, posted the following on Facebook: “Some statements, contained in the documentary ‘Francesco’ by screenwriter Evgeny Afineevsky, have provoked, in recent days, various reactions and interpretations.  Therefore, some helpful points are offered, with the desire to present an adequate understanding of the Holy Father’s words.”  He stated that the content of his post was provided by the Vatican Secretariat of State to apostolic nunciatures, which they were to share with bishops.

  According to this post, Francis had affirmed that “it is an incongruity to speak of homosexual marriage”, but that he defended same-sex civil unions.  “The Holy Father had expressed himself thus during an interview in 2014: ‘Marriage is between a man and a woman.  The secular States want to justify civil unions to regulate various situations of co-existence, moved by the demand to regulate economic aspects between people, such as ensuring health care.  These are co-existence pacts of a different nature’…. Therefore it is evident that Pope Francis has referred to certain state provisions, certainly not to the doctrine of the Church, re-affirmed numerous times over the years.”[26]

  All this is true.  But the question remains: why did Francis say what he said?  What is he up to?

What is the Jesuit Pope Up To?

  We must discern the sinister and diabolically subtle method Francis the Jesuit is using when it comes to this issue:

  It’s very obvious that same-sex civil unions are just a legislative and cultural stepping stone to eventual same-sex “marriage”.  They are a tacit approval of such unions, and thus of gross immorality.  This is why LGBT activists immediately began to use Francis’ words to claim his support for their cause, and to push for more and more “rights” and privileges.  “Bergoglio’s words have already been received by the gay lobby worldwide as an authoritative support for their claims.”[27]  And here’s the thing: Francis knew they would be.

  So what is he doing?  He is gradually seeking to soften up the “Church” of Rome on the subject of sodomy.  With typical Jesuit subtlety, he does not come out and forcefully contradict official Roman Catholic doctrine on the subject; he would take too great a risk if he did that.  But he nudges the Roman Catholic institution in that predetermined direction, little by little.  The end goal is the complete change of Romish doctrine from officially condemning homosexuality to officially endorsing it.  He knows it will take time, patience and subtlety; but he is chipping away, little by little, at traditional Romish doctrine on this point.  He makes statements which may be interpreted in more than one way.  Liberal Roman Catholics immediately take his words to mean that he supports and endorses sodomy.  They come out and say so, and Francis does not contradict them.  But at the same time orthodox Roman Catholics are either scandalised, or they do their level best to fit his words into official Roman Catholic doctrine on the matter, which is as difficult as trying to fit a square block into a round hole.  They claim that “what the pope really meant was…”  Why do they do this?  Well, this is what they want their pope to have meant. 

  But then he makes another statement – and still another.  Each one seems just a little more liberal, a little less traditional, a little less orthodox; a little less Roman Catholic.  But many traditionalist Romanists still keep hoping against hope that he was taken out of context, or that he was misquoted, or that he meant something else.  After all, he is the pope of Rome, the defender of the Roman Catholic faith!  He couldn’t possibly have meant what it sounded like he meant…could he?

  Viganò was absolutely correct when he wrote: “After all, experience teaches us that when Bergoglio says something, he does it with a very precise purpose: to make others interpret his words in the broadest possible sense.  The front pages of newspapers all over the world are announcing today [after the documentary was released]: ‘The Pope Approves Gay Marriage’ – even if technically this is not what he said.  But this was exactly the result that he and the Vatican gay lobby wanted.  Then the Vatican Press Office will perhaps say that what Bergoglio said was misunderstood, that this was an old interview, and that the Church reaffirms its condemnation of homosexuality as intrinsically disordered.  But the damage has been done, and even any steps backwards from the scandal that has been stirred up will ultimately be a step forward in the direction of mainstream thought and what is politically correct.  Let us not forget the nefarious results of his famous utterance in 2013 – ‘Who am I to judge?’ – which earned him a place on the cover of The Advocate along with the title ‘Man of the Year’” (italics added).[28]

  Yes, Francis knew what he was doing.  He knew how the media would report his words in the documentary.  He knew that even when the Vatican backtracked a little from what he had said, another little step would have been taken in the direction of the world’s ideology – precisely as desired by Francis and the Jesuits.

  That there is a “gay lobby” in the Vatican – often referred to as the “lavender mafia” – is a reality, as I have shown elsewhere.[29]  Viganò was again 100% correct when he wrote: “there are cardinals, bishops, monsignors, priests, and other clerics who belong to the so-called ‘lavender mafia.’  Some of these have been investigated and condemned for very grave crimes, almost always linked to homosexual environments.  How can we think that a clique of homosexuals in the command post does not have every interest in pushing Bergoglio to defend a vice that they share and practice?”[30]

  And there is something else which Francis appears to be seeking to achieve by statements such as these: to actually provoke a schism within the worldwide Roman Catholic institution.

  Many would consider this very far-fetched.  But it is a real possibility, which has become increasingly clear to many orthodox Romanists as the Francis pontificate has unfolded.  One of these is the archbishop in hiding, Carlo Maria Viganò.  Although he is tragically blind to Gospel truth, devoted to Roman Catholic teaching and practice, he has discerned much concerning the forces at work in Rome and in the world today.  I have written much about this man, and the reader is referred to those articles so that I do not have to repeat myself here.[31]  But let me quote at some length from his own statement after the documentary came out:

 “But pay careful attention: these words [of Francis] simply constitute the umpteenth provocation by which the ‘ultra-progressive’ part of the [Roman Catholic] Hierarchy wants to artfully provoke a schism, as it has already tried to do with the Post-Synodal Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, the modification of doctrine on the death penalty, the Pan-Amazon Synod and the filthy Pachamama, and the Abu Dhabi Declaration which has now been reaffirmed and aggravated by the Encyclical Fratelli Tutti

  “It appears that Bergoglio is impudently trying to ‘raise the stakes’ in a crescendo of heretical affirmations, in such a way that it will force the healthy part of the Church – which includes bishops, clergy, and faithful – to accuse him of heresy, in order to declare that healthy part of the Church schismatic and ‘the enemy of the Pope’ [remember that those who, for him, constitute “the healthy part of the Church” are traditional Roman Catholics – who are in truth just as lost in false religion as liberal Roman Catholics].

  “Jorge Mario Bergoglio is trying to force some Cardinals and Bishops to separate themselves from communion with him, obtaining as a result not his own deposition for heresy but rather the expulsion of Catholics who want to remain faithful to the perennial Magisterium of the Church.  This trap would have the purpose – in the presumed intentions of Bergoglio and his ‘magic circle’ – of consolidating his own power within a church that would only nominally be ‘Catholic’ but in reality would be heretical and schismatic.”[32]

  “If canonically it is unthinkable to excommunicate a Catholic for the mere fact that he wishes to remain so, politically and strategically this abuse would allow Bergoglio to expel his adversaries from the Church, consolidating his own power.  And I repeat: we are not talking about a legitimate operation, but of an abuse that, despite being an abuse, no one would be able to prevent, since ‘the First See is judged by none’ – prima Sedes a nemine judicatur.[33]

  Is this at all plausible?  Yes, it is, as I have written about before.[34]  Rome always seeks to identify with the world – and the world has moved on from the moral standpoint which Rome once proclaimed.  The world has embraced abortion, sodomy, radical environmentalism, illegal immigration, and so much more; and if Rome hopes to be relevant in the world of today, it believes it has to bring itself into line with the world.  This is what it has always done in the past.

  Now there are really only three ways to accomplish this.  The first is by gradually changing its own doctrines to allign itself with the world’s thinking.  And Viganò’s analysis notwithstanding, I believe this would be its much-preferred method of proceeding: no schism; no split; no need to cast any Roman Catholics out; but to gradually get them to go along with the new papal direction.  And so Francis, the Jesuits, and other radical “progressives” within the hierarchy who now rule the roost, keep on subtly pushing the boundaries; moving the goalposts just a little bit more to the left, inch by inch; and even attempting to convince Roman Catholics that such changes are not contrary to official doctrine, and should be enthusiastically embraced by all Romanists everywhere.

  If Francis and the Vatican succeed in this, the vast Roman Catholic institution would remain united, which would be the best possible result as far as they are concerned.

  However, the second means of accomplishing the objective of alligning Rome with the world of today is that if things do not go as planned, and orthodox Roman Catholics refuse to accept this new papal direction, they will break away from Rome and form a new “church”, leaving liberal/progressive/Communist Roman Catholic leaders in total and absolute control of the Vatican.

  Or there is a third means of accomplishing the objective of alligning Rome with the world of today: that if things do not go as planned, and orthodox Roman Catholics refuse to accept this new papal direction and begin to forcefully fight back against the Jesuit-instigated plan, even accusing Francis of heresy, Francis will then declare all traditionalists “the enemies of the pope”, schismatics, so that they can be expelled from the “church”. 

  All this becomes even clearer when Viganò goes on to explain:

 “This deception [on the part of Francis] draws on the support of the globalist elite, the mainstream media and the LGBT lobby, to which many clergy, bishops, and cardinals are no strangers.  Furthermore, let us not forget that in many nations there are laws in force which criminally punish anyone who considers sodomy reprehensible and sinful or who does not approve of the legitimization of homosexual ‘matrimony’ – even if they do so on the basis of their Creed.  A pronouncement by the bishops against Bergoglio on a question like homosexuality could potentially lead civil authority to prosecute them criminally, with the approval of the Vatican.

  “Bergoglio would thus have on his side not only the ‘deep church’ represented by rebels like Father James Martin, S.J., and those who promote the German ‘Synodal Path,’ but also the ‘deep state.’”

  Too far-fetched?  Not at all.  In fact, it makes a lot of sense.  Anyone who knows how the Jesuits have operated ever since their inception will clearly see that such a plan is entirely within the realms of possibility.  The fact is that in the modern world the Roman Catholic religio-political machine is going to lose relevance and clout on the international scene unless it embraces the ideologies of the world today.  This is what it has been doing since the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s; but under the Jesuit pope Francis it has accelerated as never before.  He embraces everything embraced by the New World Order internationalists: Jesuits, Freemasons, Communists, etc., etc.  Not surprisingly, since the Jesuits have always been behind these.  He is the darling of powerful people and organisations who support the New World Order.  For he is working alongside them for precisely the same goals. 

What Does the Bible Say?

  Sodomy is a sin.  The only hope for sodomites is to repent and turn to the Lord, forsaking their sin (Rom. 1:26,27).  Sodomite “marriage” is not marriage, and can never be marriage; for marriage is the union of a man and a woman (Gen. 2:24).  A “civil union” is evil as well, for not only is it not marriage, but it is a legal endorsement of the abomination (Lev. 18:22) of sodomy.

  The Papal system, ironically, has been filled with those who commit this vile abomination for many centuries, even though its official position has been to condemn it.  It has piously spoken up in favour of true marriage and condemned sodomy, even while countless numbers of its priests and monks have been sodomites.  Now, as the world has moved away from all morality and has accepted, endorsed and legally protected the act of sodomy, the Jesuit Order in control of the Vatican has decided to move with the times and endorse what the world endorses.  But it has to move cautiously, for multiplied millions of its people still reject sodomy outright. 

  This is what Francis is up to.  A gradual softening process is underway.  Time will tell where all this will end.  But powerful camps are forming, and a clash is inevitable if the Jesuits persist in following this course.

November 2020

Shaun Willcock is a minister, author and researcher.  He runs Bible Based Ministries.  For other articles (which may be downloaded and printed), as well as details about his books, audio messages, pamphlets, etc., please visit the Bible Based Ministries website; or write to the address below.  If you would like to be on Bible Based Ministries’ email list, to receive all future articles, please send your details.

Bible Based Ministries
info@biblebasedministries.co.uk
www.biblebasedministries.co.uk
This pamphlet may be copied for free distribution if it is copied in full


Worldwide Contact for Bible Based Ministries:
Contending for the Faith Ministries
695 Kentons Run Ave
Henderson, NV 89052
United States of America
BBMUSAorders@gmail.com

 

 

ENDNOTES:

[1].  “Pope Francis Calls for Civil Union Law for Same-Sex Couples, in Shift from Vatican Stance.”  Catholic News Agency, October 21, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[2]. “What Did Francis Say about Civil Unions?  A CNA Explainer.”  Catholic News Agency, October 21, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[3]. Document issued by the Vatican on June 3, 2003; quoted in “Redemption”, The Moynihan Letters, 22 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[4]. “Pope Francis Calls for Civil Union Law for Same-Sex Couples, in Shift from Vatican Stance.”  Catholic News Agency, October 21, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[5]. “Redemption”.  The Moynihan Letters, 22 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[6]. “Argentine Archbishop and Pope Francis Advisor Says ‘Civil Union’ Not Mistranslated in Documentary.”  Catholic News Agency, October 22, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[7]. “Pope Weighs In on Civil Unions for Gays.”  Catholic League, October 21, 2020.  Quoted in “Redemption”, The Moynihan Letters, 22 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[8]. “Pope Francis Calls for Civil Union Law for Same-Sex Couples, in Shift from Vatican Stance.”  Catholic News Agency, October 21, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[9]. “Pope Francis Endorses Same-Sex Civil Unions.”  WND, October 21, 2020.  www.wnd.com.

[10]. “Pope Francis Endorses Same-Sex Civil Unions.”  WND, October 21, 2020.  www.wnd.com.

[11].  “Pope Francis Endorses Same-Sex Civil Unions.”  WND, October 21, 2020.  www.wnd.com.

[12].  “Pope Francis Endorses Same-Sex Civil Unions.”  WND, October 21, 2020.  www.wnd.com.

[13]. “Pope Francis Calls for Civil Union Law for Same-Sex Couples, in Shift from Vatican Stance.”  Catholic News Agency, October 21, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[14].   “Pope Says Same-Sex Couples Should be Covered by Civil Union Laws.”  Daily Maverick, 22 October 2020.  www.dailymaverick.co.za.

[15]. “Pope Francis’ Homosexuality Comments Heavily Edited in Documentary, Vatican Has No Comment on Civil Unions.”  Catholic News Agency, October 22, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[16]. “Mexican Broadcaster: Vatican Held Back Pope Francis’ Words on Same-Sex Civil Unions in 2019 Interview Footage.”  Catholic News Agency, October 23, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[17].  “Pope Francis’ Homosexuality Comments Heavily Edited in Documentary, Vatican Has No Comment on Civil Unions.”  Catholic News Agency, October 22, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[18].   “Pope Francis’ Homosexuality Comments Heavily Edited in Documentary, Vatican Has No Comment on Civil Unions.”  Catholic News Agency, October 22, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[19].  “Pope Says Same-Sex Couples Should be Covered by Civil Union Laws.”  Daily Maverick, 22 October 2020.  www.dailymaverick.co.za.

[20]. “Pope Francis Endorses Same-Sex Civil Unions.”  WND, October 21, 2020.  www.wnd.com.

[21]. “Pope Says Same-Sex Couples Should be Covered by Civil Union Laws.”  Daily Maverick, 22 October 2020.  www.dailymaverick.co.za.

[22]. Shaun Willcock, The Jesuits, Their Pope, and the Plan to Fundamentally Change the Roman Catholic Institution.  Available as a free download from the Bible Based Ministries website.

[23]. “Viganò: The Pope and the Gay Lobby in the Vatican, Intentional Ambiguity.”  Quoted in “The Plan,” The Moynihan Letters, 23 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[24]. “Catholic Leaders Issue Sharp Warning on Pope After He Embraces Gay Unions.”  The Western Journal, October 24, 2020; reprinted by WND, www.wnd.com.

[25].  “What Did Francis Say about Civil Unions?  A CNA Explainer.”  Catholic News Agency, October 21, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[26].  “Vatican Secretariat of State Provides Context of Pope Francis Civil Union Remark.”  Catholic News Agency, November 1, 2020.  www.catholicnewsagency.com.

[27]. “Viganò: The Pope and the Gay Lobby in the Vatican, Intentional Ambiguity.”  Quoted in “The Plan,” The Moynihan Letters, 23 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[28].  “Viganò: The Pope and the Gay Lobby in the Vatican, Intentional Ambiguity.”  Quoted in “The Plan,” The Moynihan Letters, 23 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[29]. Shaun Willcock, Sodom on the Seven Hills.  Bible Based Ministries.

[30]. “Viganò: The Pope and the Gay Lobby in the Vatican, Intentional Ambiguity.”  Quoted in “The Plan,” The Moynihan Letters, 23 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[31]. See the following articles by Shaun Willcock, all available as free downloads on the website: 1) Top-Ranking Vatican Insider Accuses Francis I of a Cover-Up; 2) Vindicated: Vatican Insider who Accused Francis I of a Cover-Up; 3) An Archbishop in Hiding and a Pope Denying Everything.

[32]. “Archbishop Viganò’s Remarks on the New Film in Which Pope Francis Endorses Homosexual Civil Unions.”  LifeSiteNews, October 21, 2020.  Quoted in “Redemption”, The Moynihan Letters, 22 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[33]. “Viganò: The Pope and the Gay Lobby in the Vatican, Intentional Ambiguity.”  Quoted in “The Plan,” The Moynihan Letters, 23 October 2020.  MoynihanReport@gmail.com, Urbi et Orbi Communications, New Hope, Kentucky, USA.

[34]. Shaun Willcock, The Jesuits, Their Pope, and the Plan to Fundamentally Change the Roman Catholic Institution.  Available as a free download from the Bible Based Ministries website.