/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>668986

>The Catholic leaders cite eight specific questions they seek to have answered concerning suspect events that led to the resignation of Pope Benedict, the first papal abdication in 700 years.

>“Specifically, we have reason to believe that a Vatican ‘regime change’ was engineered by the Obama administration,” say the petitioners, in their January 20 letter to President Trump.

>“We were alarmed to discover,” their letter notes, “that, during the third year of the first term of the Obama administration your previous opponent, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and other government officials with whom she associated proposed a Catholic ‘revolution’ in which the final demise of what was left of the Catholic Church in America would be realized.”

>The letter includes links to documents and news stories underscoring their claims. It first directs attention to the notorious Soros-Clinton-Podesta e-mails disclosed last year by WikiLeaks, in which Podesta and other progressives discussed regime change to remove what they described as the “middle ages dictatorship” in the Catholic Church.

>Regarding the Podesta e-mails in question, The New American reported last October:

>“Podesta, a longtime Clinton adviser/confidante and hand-picked top activist for left-wing funder George Soros, revealed in a 2011 e-mail that he and other activists were working to effect a 'Catholic Spring' revolution within the Catholic Church, an obvious reference to the disastrous 'Arab Spring' coups organized that same year by the Obama-Clinton-Soros team that destabilized the Middle East and brought radical Islamist regimes and terrorist groups to power in the region.

>"The Podesta e-mail is a response to another Soros-funded radical — Sandy Newman, founder of the 'progressive' Voices for Progress.

>"Newman had written to Podesta seeking advice on the best way to 'plant the seeds of the revolution' in the Catholic Church, which he described as a 'middle ages [sic] dictatorship.'

>“Approximately a year after this e-mail discussion, which was never intended to be made public, we find that Pope Benedict XVI abdicated under highly unusual circumstances and was replaced by a pope whose apparent mission is to provide a spiritual component to the radical ideological agenda of the international left.

>"The Pontificate of Pope Francis has subsequently called into question its own legitimacy on a multitude of occasions."

>“We remain puzzled by the behavior of this ideologically charged Pope, whose mission seems to be one of advancing secular agendas of the left rather than guiding the Catholic Church in Her sacred mission,” they say, expressing the thoughts of millions of Catholics around the world stunned by Pope Francis’s left-wing ideology.

>>668986

I know a lot of Trads have been pushing this but I don't see a smoking gun as yet. Not saying there isn't one, but I don't see one as stands.

Makes sense considering Francis makes a heretical statement every other week

>inb4 pranks bro!!

>>668986

/pol/-tier garbage. The Pope is the de facto leader of 2.2 billion Catholics. You can't just "force" him to resign.

>>668994

I think I wouldn't be surprised if many politicians are under fabricated blackmail.

As in drugging someone up and putting him among children in sexual context, for example.

>>668994

>muh /pol/

To what end was the National Security Agency monitoring the conclave that elected Pope Francis? We know now that Obama/Hillary/Podesta/Soros were very much against a Catholic Church with its "medieval values" it's anti-liberalism. etc.

The NSA spied on the future Pope Francis before and during the Vatican conclave at which he was chosen to succeed Benedict XVI

>The information gleaned was then reportedly divided into four categories — “leadership intentions”, “threats to financial system”, “foreign policy objectives” and “human rights”.

>According to US State Department cables released by WikiLeaks in March this year, the US embassy to the Holy See drew up a profile of him, describing him as a “wise pastor” who had been praised for his “humility”.

What a coincidence that the head of the Vatican is now more congenial towards international Leftist politics. Just a coincidence of course.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/10415228/US-spied-on-future-Pope-Francis-during-Vatican-conclave.html

>– International monetary transactions with the Vatican were suspended during the last few days prior to the resignation of Pope Benedict. Were any U.S. Government agencies involved in this?

>Why were international monetary transactions resumed on February 12, 2013, the day after Benedict XVI announced his resignation? Was this pure coincidence?

>Was this pure coincidence?

PURE COINCIDENCE

Benedict wasn't that conservative. Sure, compared to Francis and the progressive SJW cardinals, but not compared to pre-V2 popes.

OP, where are the sources?

I checked "neonnettle" for sources, it provided none.

Then, it referenced "gloria.tv", but that article is from 2017.

https://gloria.tv/article/DbyFpcQKRK7i4jp3sei1peUS8

Where are the sources? Is it Christian to just drop calumny like that?

>>669070

go here, http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/3001-did-vatican-attempt-to-influence-u-s-election-catholics-ask-trump-administration-to-investigate

sources at the bottom of article

>>669074

>An Open Letter to President Donald Trump (20 January, 2017)

ok, so this is also from 2017. where exactly is the smoking gun here?

>>669076

They're just asking questions and pointing out suspicious "coincidences" involving Obama/Hillary/Soros, Wikileaks, the NSA spying on the conclave and the Vatican's financial limitations being lifted upon Benedicts resignation; did you read the article? What smoking gun are you looking for?

There's no indictment here just things to think about.

>>669088

OH OK, so it's not just a re-post so you can attack the Catholic Church? Gee willickers, I'm sure thick

>>668989

Sedes were right all along

False prophet anyone? Starting to lean towards Catholicism strangely enough

Will we see the head of the Deep State serpent crushed in our lifetimes?

>>669163

I think we might…

But another serpent will reveal itself elsewhere.

Who cares? Benedict XVI was a globalist and wasn’t even a true Pope anyway

There hasn’t been one since 1958. The ‘Catholic Church’ has been compromised since then

https://novusordowatch.org/sedevacantism/

>>669167

I just want these heathens to GTFO and stop sabotaging the people's efforts to make America Christian again.

>inb4

Freedom of Religion was done with Christians in mind, as they were the vast majority of all religious folks. Many of the founding fathers found Freemasonry to be pure cancer.

>>668986

Purge of the Southamerican jesuit clique and undoing of the damage they inflicted on the Church when?

you know, I'm not a fan of Francis, but I don't believe he's the liberal pope the left wanted

>everything I don't like was set up by the deep state

This is borderline /leftypol/ levels of stupidity.

>>669208

/thread

>>669208

>the church is scandal free and never had bad popes ;^)

Epig, simply epig

>>669469

*I mean crows. It's a crow.

>>669470

I thought crows and ravens were the same thing.

>>669475

No, ravens are larger, but both ravens and crows belong to the family of crows.

I switched up the words because English is not my mother tongue.

>>669031

Trump's platform wasn't that right wing, especially in comparison to pre-1960s politics, and yet (((journalists))) were still calling it annudah shoah. It's almost as though continual revolution is the manifesto of progressivism, the new order must always be more depraved than the last, and it always needs to come right now.

>>669094

If you think politicians pressuring the Vicar of Christ to resign and throwing their weight behind a soft-neomarxist as his successor isn't of concern to Catholics you really are thick

>>669449

>NO NO NO NO NO

<Take a look at this pic that says under a preponderance of evidence it's actually pretty likely

Brainlets take note, theological liberals wanting to oust the pope for a more liberal one doesn't discredit the idea of outside politicking to help them. In fact, to those who give it even cursory thought, it enhances the idea, since liberals don't ever operate in isolation (how could they? They need support, and everyone belonging to an organic and functional community hates them).

International liberal cooperation and support in the name of advancing poz is the norm, progressives without big time financial and media support are a joke (literally local laughingstocks, if you don't live in the near area or browse mongolian basket weaving forums, you haven't heard of them). To try to appeal to an isolated bunch of liberal Cardinals without foreign political backing is idiotically naive, and even worse is appealing to a lack of "substantial" effects on US politics (as if the American people not having a vested interest in the affair had ever dissuaded the American government's meddling).

To be honest it's this type of posting which pisses me off most about this board, and it really is endemic, smug pricks without an argument, or who present one which is so feeble that it is obvious he hasn't spent even a moment considering it.

>>669197

Don't worry. The next one they pick will be more liberal. Then the one after that.

>>669575

Neat