Since the disastrous times of Pope Francis, there has been talk of the danger of “ideologies” in the Church. Surprisingly, however, when Francis and his cronies spoke and continue to speak of “ideologies,” they were referring to conservative and traditionalist Catholics—among whom they make no distinction, in their confused mindset.
And I say it is surprising because, precisely, it is the progressives, who politically are left-wing, ideologically linked to liberation theology, poverty, and currently to immigration and environmentalism, who accuse Catholics who are only trying to be Catholics of belonging to biased “ideologies” that create division in the Church.
These days, and ideologically linked to the above, the most reactionary progressives applies in the Church are also emerging from their caves (yes: the “et et” ; and, although it may seem paradoxical, one can be reactionary and progressive at the same time) who still live in the 1970s, frightened by the “Catholic turn” they perceive as “conservative,” and afraid that it will end their springtime and bring back the pre-Vatican II era . Sister Lucía Caram and the organizers of the Congress on Consecrated Life organized by Vida Nueva a few days ago, to cite just two examples, have been seen to be very concerned about this.
But these progressive dinosaurs are as blind as the aggressive media outlets of the Sánchez regime, who believe that Hakuna and the Sacristy of the Vendée are one and the same. Do you remember the mercenary Javier Ruiz’s “analysis” of Hakuna’s Christmas carols in Madrid’s Puerta del Sol, with Ayuso and Feijóo singing along? His analysis led these poor neoconservatives, who are the most active group in the Church today, to be labeled far-right. How blind! The neoconservatives, poor things, also very confused, are not reactionaries: they don’t appreciate the Church’s tradition, they don’t know it. They live perfectly happily in a post-Christian, apostate world, talking about theology of the body and similar topics; nothing about the supernatural or eternal life. They are controlled dissent for globalist agendas and the Wok movement, even though they are perceived on TelePedro as dangerous far-right extremists.
Continue reading at Infovaticana