Not so fast. The Reconquista hasn’t even begun.
Civilization may end with a bang or with a whimper (in adult diapers) https://t.co/VwK8Sl95qJ
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 20, 2024
DEPOPULATION PLAN: Professor Boyle states the end goal is population reduction. DARPA, the Pentagon, FDA, CDC, the CIA, Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, Ralph Baric, Peter Daszak, Anthony Fauci, the Rockefellers, Rothschilds and many others are all involved.
Here are Éric Zemmour’s thoughts on Pope Francis’ recent trip to Lesbos.
Host: The Pope’s trip to Lesbos has been unanimously praised.
Zemmour: A triumph, unanimity of the media, universal praise, on the right and left, on five continents. The Pope is a master in politics, in communication. He does honor to the legendary reputation of Jesuit Machiavellianism. He should give lessons to our poor President Hollande. Among those named François there should be a minimum of solidarity. His trip to Lesbos is faultless, the migrants are human beings not numbers: an incomparable example of humanism. He returns to Rome with three Syrian Muslim families: an unparalleled example of openness to the Other. We are all children of God, he affirms repeatedly, like an echo of Saint Paul’s famous remark: “there will be no more Greeks, no more Jews”.
Hats off to the tiara. “Too much”, as children say.
Note: The tiara must refer to the Papal headdress, but other than that I don’t know what Zemmour means except that he’s playing with images: “Hats off to the tiara” is comparable to “Congratulations to the Pope!”
Host: And besides his skill, what should we retain?
Zemmour: His skill turns against him. It’s the clumsiness of the skillful, as diagnosed by the great Christian writer François Mauriac. The children of God that he defends exclude those of Jesus Christ. Perhaps he hopes to convert them to Catholicism, but he should know that in Europe the numerous conversions go in the other direction. The Pope explains to us, not without a touch of irony, that the Christian families who were presented to him did not have their papers in order. We didn’t know that divine mercy was so legalistic. Or should we understand that religion matters little to him? That the Christian father has crossed Europe off?
He refuses to give priority to the defense of persecuted Christian refugees of the Middle East, and he abandons Europe to its Islamic destiny. The bridges that he wants to build always favor the most conquering civilization and the most vigorous demography. Francis condemns vehemently all the fences and walls, protections that the European peoples try to erect for their safety. But the distant predecessors of this Pope were happy in centuries past when the States and peoples of Europe defended with arms a Christianity threatened by the Ottoman invasions. Yet Pope Francis seems to be ignorant, or disdainful of this long and tragic European history. He’s an Argentinian and a Jesuit from South America, and we know he was, in the 1970’s, involved with Marxism. What does religion matter so long as there is the Revolution? What do the followers of Jesus Christ matter, so long as the wretched of the earth are the Messianic people? Europe, in the eyes of the Pope, is rotted from money, relativism, capitalism, gender theory, eaten away by the individualism that destroys families, and by the absence of children. Let Europe die, but save the principles. God’s will be done, even if God is called Allah. At least, these Muslims have strict family morals, and maintain a sexual morality that would not displease the Church fathers. Yes, Christian tradition gives women a place not found in Islamic customs. But even in the Vatican you cannot make an omelet without breaking eggs. The future of Christianity is in America, in Africa, and even in China, everywhere except in Europe. An old world must die so that the new can be born.
Continued:
“Francis is abdicating the mandate which Christ gave to Peter to confirm the brethren. Indeed, by his action he has divided them, led them into error, and encouraged the wolves to continue to tear apart the sheep of Christ’s flock,” Viganò stated, before calling on the pope to resign.
“In this extremely dramatic moment for the universal Church, he must acknowledge his mistakes and, in keeping with the proclaimed principle of zero tolerance, Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them,” the archbishop said.
Over the intervening years, Viganò has continued making ever more incendiary claims, leading many of his former admirers to part ways with him. He has not only rejected the authority of Pope Francis, but has also refused to accept the validity of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), an important ecumenical council highly commended by Saint John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.
In June, the Vatican’s doctrinal office, headed by Argentinean Cardinal Víctor “Tucho” Fernández, ordered the former Vatican diplomat to appear in Rome to undergo an extrajudicial penal trial for the crime of schism for having denied the legitimacy of Pope Francis and Vatican II.
The Code of Canon Law defines “schism” as “the withdrawal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or from communion with the members of the Church subject to him,” declaringthat a schismatic “incurs a latae sententiae [automatic] excommunication.”
I face this trial with the determination that comes from knowing that I have no reason to consider myself separate from communion with the Holy Church and with the Papacy, which I have always served with filial devotion and fidelity,” Viganò wrote in response.
“I could not conceive of a single moment of my life outside this one Ark of salvation, which Providence has constituted as the Mystical Body of Christ, in submission to its Divine Head and to His Vicar on earth,” he added.
Since it is not “theologically tenable” that the Church and the papacy are instruments of perdition rather than of salvation, he said, we must necessarily “conclude that the heterodox teachings conveyed by the so-called ‘conciliar church’ and the ‘popes of the Council’ from Paul VI onwards constitute an anomaly that seriously calls into question the legitimacy of their magisterial and governing authority.”