The Joke's on Those Who Think That Blaspheming Bergoglio is a True Pope, part two

It is no secret that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a naturalist who speaks about various “problems,” real and imagined, in a mostly Judeo-Masonic manner with a few gratuitous references to Sacred Scripture and/or God when he addresses secular leaders. The false “pontiff” is also notorious for almost never makes any references to the Holy Name of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. This is indeed quite ironic as he is forever telling Catholics within the structures of his false religious sect to “preach Christ” even though he absolutely refuses to so when he finds himself in “mixed” company.

Part one of this two-part series focused on the Argentine Apostate’s June 14, 2024, address to pro-abortion, pro-sodomite “comedians” that was really a “papal” pep rally to encourage the Americans (Caryn Elaine Johnson, Stephen Colbert, and Jimmy Fallon) to keep up their “good work” in attacking former President Donald John Trump in order to “defend” the demigod of
“democracy.” At no point in that address did “Pope Francis” admonish the attendees for their support of baby butchery and sodomy, nor did he exhort them to please true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Holy Trinity and to speak at all times as befits redeemed creatures.

This commentary concerns Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s June 14, 2024, address to the leaders of the so-called “Intergovernmental Forum of the G-7” about artificial intelligence. It was the first time that the visible head of disunity and division within the counterfeit church of conciliarism addressed the G-7 leaders. Senor Jorge’s appearance certainly will not be the last as he has been very consistent in his support for a “new world order” based on the principles of “human fraternity and solidarity,” not upon Christ the King and His Holy Catholic Church.

It is not the purpose of this commentary to dissect the entirety of Bergoglio’s address to the G-7 leaders but to comment on several passages revealing his anthropocentricism, omission of Original Sin, Modernist/Sillonist worldview, and his abject refusal to explain that the only answer to the misuse of technocratic skills and devices is for the men who develop and employ them respect the limits in the nature of things created by God and recognize that they must give Him honor and glory in all that they do while attempting foster to do nothing to impede their own salvation nor that of their fellow men.

Esteemed ladies and gentlemen,

I address you today, the leaders of the Intergovernmental Forum of the G7, concerning the effects of artificial intelligence on the future of humanity.

“Sacred Scripture attests that God bestowed his Spirit upon human beings so that they might have ‘skill and understanding and knowledge in every craft’ (Ex 35:31)”. [1] Science and technology are therefore brilliant products of the creative potential of human beings. [2]

Indeed, artificial intelligence arises precisely from the use of this God-given creative potential.

As we know, artificial intelligence is an extremely powerful tool, employed in many kinds of human activity: from medicine to the world of work; from culture to the field of communications; from education to politics. It is now safe to assume that its use will increasingly influence the way we live, our social relationships and even the way we conceive of our identity as human beings. [3]

The question of artificial intelligence, however, is often perceived as ambiguous: on the one hand, it generates excitement for the possibilities it offers, while on the other it gives rise to fear for the consequences it foreshadows. In this regard, we could say that all of us, albeit to varying degrees, experience two emotions: we are enthusiastic when we imagine the advances that can result from artificial intelligence but, at the same time, we are fearful when we acknowledge the dangers inherent in its use. [4] (Participation of the Holy Father Francis at the G7 in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024.)

Interjection Number One:

First, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s quotation from the Book of Exodus is intellectually dishonest and taken somewhat out of a fuller context of why God created man out of the dust of the earth.

Here is the Douay Rheims translation of verse thirty-five from the Book of Exodus:

And hath filled him with the spirit of God, with wisdom and understanding and knowledge and all learning.  32 To devise and to work in gold and silver and brass,  33 And in engraving stones, and in carpenters' work. Whatsoever can be devised artificially,  34 He hath given in his heart: Ooliab also the son of Achisamech of the tribe of Dan:  35 Both of them hath he instructed with wisdom, to do carpenters' work and tapestry, and embroidery in blue and purple, and scarlet twice dyed, and fine linen, and to weave all things, and to invent all new things. (Exodus 35: 31-35.)

It is interesting that the Argentine Apostate, who is known to manipulate the words of Holy Writ as well as to take the writings of the saints and about them entirely out of context to omit the words “wisdom and knowledge and all learning.” Wisdom presupposes a due subordination on the part of the creature to the moral laws ordained by the Creator in the use of the ingenuity with which he has been endowed. Man must live and work within the limits that exist according to his nature as man and the order things as created by God as he uses his ingenuity and inventiveness to give God honor and glory at all times in all things and to be of service to his fellow man in his temporal and spiritual concerns. At a minimum, of course, mere contingent beings who did not create themselves and whose bodies are destined one day for the corruption of the grave must never use their gifts to plot harm to themselves or to others.

This having been noted, however, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s use of verse thirty-five from the Book of Exodus makes it appear that man has been filled with the God’s Spirit principally for the work of this world and not to give Him honor and glory by living in a way as, in the present economy of salvation after Our Lord’s Redemptive Act for which the Old Testament was a preparation, befits redeemed creatures.

Bergoglio spoke as a naturalist before other naturalists, as a rationalist before other rationalists, as a Mason before brother Masons, not as a Catholic seeking to elevate men’s minds from the merely natural to the supernatural.

Second, although artificial intelligence does not a grave threat to mankind, these dangers can be mitigated only when contemporary men come to realize their own finite nature and that they will be held to account at their Particular Judgment for their stewardship of the gifts they have been given and how they have used to advance of hinder the temporal and spiritual good of themselves and others. The threat of artificial intelligence is real, but it is a threat only because most men alive today do not live as Catholics who are mindful to work out their salvation in fear and in trembling, a truth that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is incapable of admitting, perhaps even to himself.

All right, let us proceed to the next selected excerpt from Master Mason Jorge’s address to his fellow lodge brothers at the G-7 meeting:

After all, we cannot doubt that the advent of artificial intelligence represents a true cognitive-industrial revolution, which will contribute to the creation of a new social system characterised by complex epochal transformations. For example, artificial intelligence could enable a democratization of access to knowledge, the exponential advancement of scientific research and the possibility of giving demanding and arduous work to machines. Yet at the same time, it could bring with it a greater injustice between advanced and developing nations or between dominant and oppressed social classes, raising the dangerous possibility that a “throwaway culture” be preferred to a “culture of encounter”.

The significance of these complex transformations is clearly linked to the rapid technological development of artificial intelligence itself. (Participation of the Holy Father Francis at the G7 in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024.)

Interjection Number Two:

Here is an appropriate quotation from Sacred Scripture about the idiocy Bergoglio referred to as “the democratization of access to knowledge”:

And the Lord God took man, and put him into the paradise of pleasure, to dress it, and to keep it.

 16 And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat:  17 But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.  18 And the Lord God said: It is not good for man to be alone: let us make him a help like unto himself.  19 And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam to see what he would call them: for whatsoever Adam called any living creature the same is its name.  20 And Adam called all the beasts by their names, and all the fowls of the air, and all the cattle of the field: but for Adam there was not found a helper like himself.

 21 Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, he took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it.  22 And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam.  23 And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.  24 Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh.  25 And they were both naked: to wit, Adam and his wife: and were not ashamed.

Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise?  2 And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat:  3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die.  4 And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death.  5 For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.

 6 And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold: and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband who did eat.  7 And the eyes of them both were opened: and when they perceived themselves to be naked, they sewed together fig leaves, and made themselves aprons.  8 And when they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in paradise at the afternoon air, Adam and his wife hid themselves from the face of the Lord God, amidst the trees of paradise.  9 And the Lord God called Adam, and said to him: Where art thou?  10 And he said: I heard thy voice in paradise; and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.

And he said to him: And who hath told thee that thou wast naked, but that thou hast eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat?  12 And Adam said: The woman, whom thou gavest me to be my companion, gave me of the tree, and I did eat.  13 And the Lord God said to the woman: Why hast thou done this? And she answered: The serpent deceived me, and I did eat.  14 And the Lord God said to the serpent: Because thou hast done this thing, thou art cursed among all cattle, and beasts of the earth: upon thy breast shalt thou go, and earth shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.  15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

o the woman also he said: I will multiply thy sorrows, and thy conceptions: in sorrow shalt thou bring forth children, and thou shalt be under thy husband's power, and he shall have dominion over thee.  17 And to Adam he said: Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat, cursed is the earth in thy work; with labour and toil shalt thou eat thereof all the days of thy life.  18 Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herbs of the earth.  19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return.  20 And Adam called the name of his wife Eve: because she was the mother of all the living.

 21 And the Lord God made for Adam and his wife, garments of skins, and clothed them.  22 And he said: Behold Adam is become as one of us, knowing good and evil: now, therefore, lest perhaps he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.  23 And the Lord God sent him out of the paradise of pleasure, to till the earth from which he was taken.  24 And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (Genesis 1: 15-24; Genesis 2: 1-24.)

Man has been succumbing to the temptation posed by the adversary to Eve—and through her to Adam—to possess same knowledge, power, and authority of God Himself. Artificial intelligence is simply the latest—and certainly the most advanced—means to do so, but it is up to man to respect the Omniscience that belongs to God alone. Jorge Mario Bergoglio nowhere referenced this truth as his focus is entirely anthropocentric despite his occasional and altogether gratuitous references to God.

Finally in this regard, Bergoglio’s use of the phrase “democratization of access to knowledge” is simply ideological gobbledygook as we live in the agent when more information is available to more people more readily than at any other time in human history. Yet it is that most people are more ignorant about true history, clueless about the very purposes for which they have been created, incapable of reading intelligently or of speaking clearly in their native tongue, something that is particularly true here in the United States of America where even many college graduates speak in double negatives and do not know how to write properly, and more steeped in their desire for sinning than perhaps ever in the past.

Obviously, these results are, as I have discussed so many times before on this site, precisely what our minders desire in order to control the masses who are steeped in ignorance and thus led astray very easily by demagoguery and the multiplication of bread and circuses designed to distract from the totalitarianism that has enveloped us all.

Father Frederick William Faber of the Oratory explained that contemporary education has succeeded only in multiplying the opportunity of sinning:

It is plain that some millions of sins in a day are hindered by the Precious Blood; and this is not merely a hindering of so many individual sins, but it is an immense check upon the momentum of sin. It is also a weakening of habits of sin, and a diminution of the consequences of sin. If then, the action of the Precious Blood were withdrawn from the world, sins would not only increase incalculably in number, but the tyranny of sin would be fearfully augmented, and it would spread among a greater number of people. It would wax so bold that no one would be secure from the sins of others. It would be a constant warfare, or an intolerable vigilance, to preserve property and rights. Falsehood would become so universal as to dissolve society; and the homes of domestic life would be turned into wards either of a prison or a madhouse. We cannot be in the company of an atrocious criminal without some feeling of uneasiness and fear. We should not like to be left alone with him, even if his chains were not unfastened. But without the Precious Blood, such men would abound in the world. They might even become the majority. We know of ourselves, from glimpses God has once or twice given us in life, what incredible possibilities of wickedness we have in our souls. Civilization increases these possibilities. Education multiplies and magnifies our powers of sinning. Refinement adds a fresh malignity. Men would thus become more diabolically and unmixedly bad, until at last earth would be a hell on this side of the grave. There would also doubtless be new kinds of sins and worse kinds. Education would provide the novelty, and refinement would carry it into the region of the unnatural. All highly-refined and luxurious developments of heathenism have fearfully illustrated this truth. A wicked barbarian is like a beast. His savage passions are violent but intermitting, and his necessities of sin do not appear to grow. Their circle is limited. But a highly-educated sinner, without the restraints of religion, is like a demon. His sins are less confined to himself. They involve others in their misery. They require others to be offered as it were in sacrifice to them. Moreover, education, considered simply as an intellectual cultivation, propagates sin, and makes it more universal.

The increase of sin, without the prospects which the faith lays open to us, must lead to an increase of despair, and to an increase of it upon a gigantic scale. With despair must come rage, madness, violence, tumult, and bloodshed. Yet from what quarter could we expect relief in this tremendous suffering? We should be imprisoned in our own planet. The blue sky above us would be but a dungeon-roof. The greensward beneath our feet would truly be the slab of our future tomb. Without the Precious Blood there is no intercourse between heaven and earth. Prayer would be useless. Our hapless lot would be irremediable. It has always seemed to me that it will be one of the terrible things in hell, that there are no motives for patience there. We cannot make the best of it. Why should we endure it? Endurance is an effort for a time; but this woe is eternal. Perhaps vicissitudes of agony might be a kind of field for patience. But there are no such vicissitudes. Why should we endure, then? Simply because we must; and yet in eternal things this is not a sort of necessity which supplies a reasonable ground for patience. So in this imaginary world of rampant sin there would be no motives for patience. For death would be our only seeming relief; and that is only seeming, for death is any thin but an eternal sleep. Our impatience would become frenzy; and if our constitutions were strong enough to prevent the frenzy from issuing in downright madness, it would grow into hatred of God, which is perhaps already less uncommon than we suppose.

An earth, from off which all sense of justice had perished, would indeed be the most disconsolate of homes. The antediluvian earth exhibits only a tendency that way; and the same is true of the worst forms of heathenism. The Precious Blood was always there. Unnamed, unknown, and unsuspected, the Blood of Jesus has alleviated every manifestation of evil which there has ever been just as it is alleviating at this hour the punishments of hell. What would be our own individual case on such a blighted earth as this? All our struggles to be better would be simply hopeless. There would be no reason why we should not give ourselves up to that kind of enjoyment which our corruption does substantially find in sin. The gratification of our appetites is something; and that lies on one side, while on the other side there is absolutely nothing. But we should have the worm of conscience already, even though the flames of hell might yet be some years distant. To feel that we are fools, and yet lack the strength to be wiser–is not this precisely the maddening thing in madness? Yet it would be our normal state under the reproaches of conscience, in a world where there was no Precious Blood. Whatever relics of moral good we might retain about us would add most sensibly to our wretchedness. Good people, if there were any, would be, as St. Paul speaks, of all men the most miserable; for they would be drawn away from the enjoyment of this world, or have their enjoyment of it abated by a sense of guilt and shame; and there would be no other world to aim at or to work for. To lessen the intensity of our hell without abridging its eternity would hardly be a cogent motive, when the temptations of sin and the allurements of sense are so vivid and strong.

What sort of love could there be, when we could have no respect? Even if flesh and blood made us love each other, what a separation death would be! We should commit our dead to the ground without a hope. Husband and wife would part with the fearfullest certainties of a reunion more terrible than their separation. Mothers would long to look upon their little ones in the arms of death, because their lot would be less woeful than if they lived to offend God with their developed reason and intelligent will. The sweetest feelings of our nature would become unnatural, and the most honorable ties be dishonored. Our best instincts would lead us into our worst dangers. Our hearts would have to learn to beat another way, in order to avoid the dismal consequences which our affections would bring upon ourselves and others. But it is needless to go further into these harrowing details. The world of the heart, without the Precious Blood, and with an intellectual knowledge of God, and his punishments of sin, is too fearful a picture to be drawn with minute fidelity.

But how would it fare with the poor in such a world? They are God’s chosen portion upon the earth. He chose poverty himself, when he came to us. He has left the poor in his place, and they are never to fail from the earth, but to be his representatives there until the doom. But, if it were not for the Precious Blood, would any one love them? Would any one have a devotion to them, and dedicate his life to merciful ingenuities to alleviate their lot? If the stream of almsgiving is so insufficient now, what would it be then? There would be no softening of the heart by grace; there would be no admission of of the obligation to give away in alms a definite portion of our incomes; there would be no desire to expiate sin by munificence to the needy for the love of God. The gospel makes men’s hearts large;and yet even under the gospel the fountain of almsgiving flows scantily and uncertainly. There would be no religious orders devoting themselves with skilful concentration to different acts of spiritual and corporal mercy. Vocation is a blossom to be found only in the gardens of the Precious Blood. But all this is only negative, only an absence of God. Matters would go much further in such a world as we are imagining.

Even in countries professing to be Christian, and at least in possession of the knowledge of the gospel, the poor grow to be an intolerable burden to the rich. They have to be supported by compulsory taxes; and they are in other ways a continual subject of irritated and impatient legislation. Nevertheless, it is due to the Precious Blood that the principle of supporting them is acknowledged. From what we read in heathen history–even the history of nations renowned for political wisdom, for philosophical speculation, and for literary and artistic refinement–it would not be extravagant for us to conclude that, if the circumstances of a country were such as to make the numbers of the poor dangerous to the rich, the rich would not scruple to destroy them, while it was yet in their power to do so. Just as men have had in France and England to war down bears and wolves, so would the rich war down the poor, whose clamorous misery and excited despair should threaten them in the enjoyment of their power and their possessions. The numbers of the poor would be thinned by murder, until it should be safe for their masters to reduce them into slavery. The survivors would lead the lives of convicts or of beasts. History, I repeat, shows us that this is by no means an extravagant supposition.

Such would be the condition of the world without the Precious Blood. As generations succeeded each other, original sin would go on developing those inexhaustible malignant powers which come from the almost infinite character of evil. Sin would work earth into hell. Men would become devils, devils to others and to themselves. Every thing which makes life tolerable, which counteracts any evil, which softens any harshness, which sweetens any bitterness, which causes the machinery of society to work smoothly, or which consoles any sadness–is simply due to the Precious Blood of Jesus, in heathen as well as in Christian lands. It changes the whole position of an offending creation to its Creator. It changes, if we may dare in such a matter to speak of change, the aspect of God’s immutable perfections toward his human children. It does not work merely in a spiritual sphere. It is not only prolific in temporal blessings, but it is the veritable cause of all temporal blessings whatsoever. We are all of us every moment sensibly enjoying the benignant influence of the Precious Blood. Yet who thinks of all this? Why is the goodness of God so hidden, so imperceptible, so unsuspected? Perhaps because it is so universal and so excessive, that we should hardly be free agents if it pressed sensibly upon us always. God’s goodness is at once the most public of all his attributes, and at the same time the most secret. Has life a sweeter task than to seek it, and to find it out?

Men would be far more happy, if they separated religion less violently from other things. It is both unwise and unloving to put religion into a place by itself, and mark it off with an untrue distinctness from what we call worldly and unspiritual things. Of course there is a distinction, and a most important one, between them; yet it is easy to make this distinction too rigid and to carry it too far. Thus we often attribute to nature what is only due to grace; and we put out of sight the manner and degree in which the blessed majesty of the Incarnation affects all created things. But this mistake is forever robbing us of hundreds of motives for loving Jesus. We know how unspeakably much we owe to him; but we do not see all that it is not much we owe him, but all, simply and absolutely all. We pass through times and places in life, hardly recognizing how the sweetness of Jesus is sweetening the air around us and penetrating natural things with supernatural blessings.

Hence it comes to pass that men make too much of natural goodness. They think too highly of human progress. They exaggerate the moralizing powers of civilization and refinement, which, apart from grace, are simply tyrannies of the few over the many, or of the public over the individual soul. Meanwhile they underrate the corrupting capabilities of sin, and attribute to unassisted nature many excellences which it only catches, as it were by the infection, by the proximity of grace, or by contagion, from the touch of the Church. Even in religious and ecclesiastical matters they incline to measure progress, or test vigor, by other standards rather than that of holiness. These men will consider the foregoing picture of the world without the Precious Blood as overdrawn and too darkly shaded. They do not believe in the intense malignity of man when drifted from God, and still less are they inclined to grant that cultivation and refinement only intensify still further this malignity. They admit the superior excellence of Christian charity; but they also think highly of natural philanthropy. But has this philanthropy ever been found where the indirect influences of the true religion, whether Jewish or Christian, had not penetrated? We may admire the Greeks for their exquisite refinement, and the Romans for the wisdom of their political moderation. Yet look at the position of children, of servants, of slaves, and of the poor, under both these systems, and see if, while extreme refinement only pushed sin to an extremity of foulness, the same exquisite culture did not also lead to a social cruelty and an individual selfishness which made life unbearable to the masses. Philanthropy is but a theft from the gospel, or rather a shadow, not a substance, and as unhelpful as shadows are want to be. (Father Frederick Faber, The Precious Blood, published originally in England in 1860, republished by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 53-59.)

Yes, much too much is made of natural goodness and human progress in the Judeo-Masonic and Pelagian world in which we live, especially right here in the United States of America. However, such "goodness" and "progress" are not the measure of personal sanctity or savlation, and they are not the foundation of social order nor of world peace. Our educational system does indeed multiply and magnify our powers for sinning, something that was discussed in early 2019 in Not With My Money (Not That I Have Any). The Judeo-Masonic farce of naturalism can never provide anything other than division, chaos, disarray and, ultimately, the destruction of nations and wars among them. We must, therefore, make good use of the Laver of Redemption, the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, in our own lives lest we be cast adrift into the errors that daily sweep away so many "good" people into the surging waters of turbulence caused by the promotion of sin under the cover of the civil law and as a matter of "civil rights."

All Jorge Mario Bergoglio can do is to speak about the “democratization of access to knowledge” while starving those who listen of him of the most important knowledge of all: the immutable truths of the Holy Catholic Faith.

We return now to the next excerpt from Bergoglio’s June 14, 2024, address to the G-7 leaders:

It is precisely this powerful technological progress that makes artificial intelligence at the same time an exciting and fearsome tool, and demands a reflection that is up to the challenge it presents.

In this regard, perhaps we could start from the observation that artificial intelligence is above all else a tool. And it goes without saying that the benefits or harm it will bring will depend on its use.

This is surely the case, for it has been this way with every tool fashioned by human beings since the dawn of time.

Our ability to fashion tools, in a quantity and complexity that is unparalleled among living things, speaks of a techno-human condition: human beings have always maintained a relationship with the environment mediated by the tools they gradually produced. It is not possible to separate the history of men and women and of civilization from the history of these tools. Some have wanted to read into this a kind of shortcoming, a deficit, within human beings, as if, because of this deficiency, they were forced to create technology. [5] A careful and objective view actually shows us the opposite. We experience a state of “outwardness” with respect to our biological being: we are beings inclined toward what lies outside-of-us, indeed we are radically open to the beyond. Our openness to others and to God originates from this reality, as does the creative potential of our intelligence with regard to culture and beauty. Ultimately, our technical capacity also stems from this fact. Technology, then, is a sign of our orientation towards the future. (Participation of the Holy Father Francis at the G7 in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024.)

Interjection Number Three:

Utter Modernism.

As seen from Chapters One and Two of The Book of Genesis, God Himself instructed Adam to make what he needed from the things of the earth and is something that is part of human nature, not because “we experience a state of ‘outwardness’ with respect to our biological being.” Jorge Mario Bergoglio is using the language of ideological junk science of evolutionism, not Catholicism.

Insofar as our relationship with God is concerned, suffice that the souls of the baptized are infused to the indelible seal of the very inner life of the Most Blessed Trinity. Bergoglio’s mention an “openness” to God contradicts the supernatural reality of a soul’s relationship to Him by means of baptismal innocence and he in-flooding of the supernatural virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity into our souls that are then cultivated and nourished by the Sacraments.

Furthermore, even though pagans and non-Catholics of one sort of another may be drawn to the true God of Divine Revelation during their lives the fact remains that is God Himself Who draws His rational creatures to Him by means of the actual graces that flow forth from every true offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass even though they themselves may not be aware at first of Who is doing the calling. It is of the nature of man to be drawn to His Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier, not some sort of interior impulse or outwardness that was described by Pope Saint Pius X as part of the Modernism:

However, this Agnosticism is only the negative part of the system of the Modernists: the positive part consists in what they call vital immanence. Thus they advance from one to the other. Religion, whether natural or supernatural, must, like every other fact, admit of some explanation. But when natural theology has been destroyed, and the road to revelation closed by the rejection of the arguments of credibility, and all external revelation absolutely denied, it is clear that this explanation will be sought in vain outside of man himself. It must, therefore, be looked for in man; and since religion is a form of life, the explanation must certainly be found in the life of man. In this way is formulated the principle of religious immanence. Moreover, the first actuation, so to speak, of every vital phenomenon -- and religion, as noted above, belongs to this category -- is due to a certain need or impulsion; but speaking more particularly of life, it has its origin in a movement of the heart, which movement is called a sense. Therefore, as God is the object of religion, we must conclude that faith, which is the basis and foundation of all religion, must consist in a certain interior sense, originating in a need of the divine. This need of the divine, which is experienced only in special and favorable circumstances, cannot of itself appertain to the domain of consciousness, but is first latent beneath consciousness, or, to borrow a term from modern philosophy, in the subconsciousness, where also its root lies hidden and undetected.

It may perhaps be asked how it is that this need of the divine which man experiences within himself resolves itself into religion? To this question the Modernist reply would be as follows: Science and history are confined within two boundaries, the one external, namely, the visible world, the other internal, which is consciousness. When one or other of these limits has been reached, there can be no further progress, for beyond is the unknowable. In presence of this unknowable, whether it is outside man and beyond the visible world of nature, or lies hidden within the subconsciousness, the need of the divine in a soul which is prone to religion excites -- according to the principles of Fideism, without any previous advertence of the mind -- a certain special sense, and this sense possesses, implied within itself both as its own object and as its intrinsic cause, the divine reality itself, and in a way unites man with God. It is this sense to which Modernists give the name of faith, and this is what they hold to be the beginning of religion.

8. But we have not yet reached the end of their philosophizing, or, to speak more accurately, of their folly. Modernists find in this sense not only faith, but in and with faith, as they understand it, they affirm that there is also to be found revelation. For, indeed, what more is needed to constitute a revelation? Is not that religious sense which is perceptible in the conscience, revelation, or at least the beginning of revelation? Nay, is it not God Himself manifesting Himself, indistinctly, it is true, in this same religious sense, to the soul? And they add: Since God is both the object and the cause of faith, this revelation is at the same time of God and from God, that is to say, God is both the Revealer and the Revealed.

From this, Venerable Brethren, springs that most absurd tenet of the Modernists, that every religion, according to the different aspect under which it is viewed, must be considered as both natural and supernatural. It is thus that they make consciousness and revelation synonymous. From this they derive the law laid down as the universal standard, according to which religious consciousness is to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and that to it all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church, whether in the capacity of teacher, or in that of legislator in the province of sacred liturgy or discipline. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

As a Modernist, Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes in everything—and I do mean every single thing—that was anathematized by Pope Pius IX and the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, April 24, 1870. This includes rejection of any and all anathemas, which were, of course, effectively “removed” by the Modernist homosexual named Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul the Sick in the wake of the heretical work of the “Second” Vatican Council, that condemn those who seek to reduce religious faith to the level of “vital immanence,” that is, of springing up from within the consciousness of the individual.

I return now to the next part of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s address to the G-7 meeting on June 14, 2024:

The use of our tools, however, is not always directed solely to the good. Even if human beings feel within themselves a call to the beyond, and to knowledge as an instrument of good for the service of our brothers and sisters and our common home (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 16), this does not always happen. Due to its radical freedom, humanity has not infrequently corrupted the purposes of its being, turning into an enemy of itself and of the planet. [6] The same fate may befall technological tools. Only if their true purpose of serving humanity is ensured, will such tools reveal not only the unique grandeur and dignity of men and women, but also the command they have received to “till and keep” (cf. Gen 2:15) the planet and all its inhabitants. To speak of technology is to speak of what it means to be human and thus of our singular status as beings who possess both freedom and responsibility. This means speaking about ethics. (Participation of the Holy Father Francis at the G7 in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024.)

Interjection Number Four:

The joke is on anyone and everyone who believes that this man is a true pope.

God has given man stewardship of the earth to care for his temporal needs and to give Him honor and glory in doing so. The earth was created to serve man’s needs, not man to serve the earth’s.

Ah, but the coup de grace is the way Jorge Mario Bergoglio referred to “humanity’s” “radical freedom” as the means for becoming an enemy of itself and the planet. What pantheism!

Original Sin disordered man’s relationship with God and hence with other, darkening his intellect, weakening his will, and overthrowing the delicate balance between his higher rational faculties and his lower sensual passions in favor of the other (concupiscence). Original Sin inclines us to the commission of Actual Sins, for which we, having been redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, must make reparation to God after having confessed them to and having received absolution from a true priest.

We have been made to know, love, and serve God, not the earth!

As noted earlier in this commentary, the only way that any legitimate development or invention can be kept within its proper bounds is for men who are concerned about pleasing God and the sanctification of their own souls to keep themselves conscious of the need of being in a state of Sanctifying Grace and recognizing that, no matter their own ingenuity, they are finite creatures who will never come to achieve what so many scientists and technological experts desires: the Omniscience, Omnipresence, and Omnipotence of God Himself.

Oh, as is ever the case, it goes worse:

In this way, it not only runs the risk of legitimising fake news and strengthening a dominant culture’s advantage, but, in short, it also undermines the educational process itself. Education should provide students with the possibility of authentic reflection, yet it runs the risk of being reduced to a repetition of notions, which will increasingly be evaluated as unobjectionable, simply because of their constant repetition. [11] (Participation of the Holy Father Francis at the G7 in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024.)

Interjection Number Five:

Hey, Jorge!

Repetition is the mother of learning, and this is how we are supposed to learn the basics of our Catholic Faith in our catechism lessons. We learn from rote, and it is from there that we deepen our knowledge with further study, reflection, and prayer all made possible by the graces that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ won for us during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s reduction of education to a technocratic level is at odds with this simply summary of the true purposes of Catholic education as provided by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929:

True education, wrote Pope Pius XI, must revolve around Our Lord as He has revealed Himself through His true Church: 

It is therefore as important to make no mistake in education, as it is to make no mistake in the pursuit of the last end, with which the whole work of education is intimately and necessarily connected. In fact, since education consists essentially in preparing man for what he must be and for what he must do here below, in order to attain the sublime end for which he was created, it is clear that there can be no true education which is not wholly directed to man's last end, and that in the present order of Providence, since God has revealed Himself to us in the Person of His Only Begotten Son, who alone is "the way, the truth and the life," there can be no ideally perfect education which is not Christian education. ( (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

(As a note of reference, it is important to bear in mind that the Popes of the Catholic Church, as opposed to the "pontiffs" of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, used the word "Christian" to refer to the Catholic Faith. The reason for this is simple: although Protestants say that they are Christians, they do not truly know Our Lord since they reject His true Church and dissent from multiple articles He has revealed and deposited in His true Church. They do not represent Christianity at all. Only the Catholic Church represents Christianity. She alone has the right to use the appellation of "Christian.")

All other education is imperfect and thus must become a means to inculcate the very errors that gave rise to the existence of state-controlled schooling. The killing of human beings in public schools is but the consequence of a world born and nurtured to full demonic maturity by a series of revolutions against the Holy Faith and, in due course, against all truth. The murder of souls leads to the murder of human beings by those inculcated in the pathways of violence, confusion and error.

Pope Pius XI, the great exponent of the Social Reign of Christ the King, noted in Divini Illius Magistri that the fate of nations depended upon the education of youth in the truths of the Catholic Faith:

From this we see the supreme importance of Christian education, not merely for each individual, but for families and for the whole of human society, whose perfection comes from the perfection of the elements that compose it. From these same principles, the excellence, we may well call it the unsurpassed excellence, of the work of Christian education becomes manifest and clear; for after all it aims at securing the Supreme Good, that is, God, for the souls of those who are being educated, and the maximum of well-being possible here below for human society. And this it does as efficaciously as man is capable of doing it, namely by cooperating with God in the perfecting of individuals and of society, in as much as education makes upon the soul the first, the most powerful and lasting impression for life according to the well-known saying of the Wise Man, "A young man according to his way, even when he is old, he will not depart from it." With good reason therefore did St. John Chrysostom say, "What greater work is there than training the mind and forming the habits of the young?" (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.) 

Man must always keep his mind his First Cause and Last End in all of his activities, whether he is acting individually or collectively with others in the pursuit of the common good of his nation. The state of a nation depends upon the state of souls, and the state of souls depends upon the extent to which individual citizens keep themselves in states of Sanctifying Grace and adhere completely to the Deposit of Faith, including the Church's immutable Social Doctrine on the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ, which does not worship at the altar of the false, mythological god of American "civil liberty."

The Church, therefore, must be free to pursue the entirety of the mission, including that of education, entrusted to her by her Divine Bridegroom, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, without any interference from the state. Parents, who form the domestic cell of the Church in their families, must be free to do so in the bosom of their homes.

Pope Pius XI noted this in Divini Illius Magistri:

Hence it is that in this proper object of her mission, that is, "in faith and morals, God Himself has made the Church sharer in the divine magisterium and, by a special privilege, granted her immunity from error; hence she is the mistress of men, supreme and absolutely sure, and she has inherent in herself an inviolable right to freedom in teaching.' By necessary consequence the Church is independent of any sort of earthly power as well in the origin as in the exercise of her mission as educator, not merely in regard to her proper end and object, but also in regard to the means necessary and suitable to attain that end. Hence with regard to every other kind of human learning and instruction, which is the common patrimony of individuals and society, the Church has an independent right to make use of it, and above all to decide what may help or harm Christian education. And this must be so, because the Church as a perfect society has an independent right to the means conducive to its end, and because every form of instruction, no less than every human action, has a necessary connection with man's last end, and therefore cannot be withdrawn from the dictates of the divine law, of which the Church is guardian, interpreter and infallible mistress.

This truth is clearly set forth by Pius X of saintly memory:

"Whatever a Christian does even in the order of things of earth, he may not overlook the supernatural; indeed he must, according to the teaching of Christian wisdom, direct all things towards the supreme good as to his last end; all his actions, besides, in so far as good or evil in the order of morality, that is, in keeping or not with natural and divine law, fall under the judgment and jurisdiction of the Church." (As quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.) 

Only a fool would contend that Pope Saint Pius X was wrong, that there is ever a moment when something we do in the "order of the things of the earth" can overlook the supernatural. Those "conservatives" who believe that they can devise plans to combat liberalism and statism and socialism of the likes promoted by the likes of the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “left” without seeking to restore the Social Reign of Christ the King are indeed very mistaken, plain and simple. They tilt at windmills as they refuse, for whatever reason, usually involving a dogmatic adherence to a political philosophy that they contend pridefully contains the ability to "resolve" social problems, to state this simple truth: all things must be restored in Christ the King, both individually and collectively.

Yet it is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio ignores the entirety of Catholic truth, and he even goes so far as to propose finding a “system of ethics” that would be “common” to people of different backgrounds, traditions, and, of course, religious “experiences.” In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio wants to create a system of “ethics” based on Judeo-Masonic principles of naturalism to replace the only means by which men can be united, Catholicism and nothing else:

Putting the dignity of the human person back at the centre, in light of a shared ethical proposal

A more general observation should now be added to what we have already said. The season of technological innovation in which we are currently living is accompanied by a particular and unprecedented social situation in which it is increasingly difficult to find agreement on the major issues concerning social life. Even in communities characterised by a certain cultural continuity, heated debates and arguments often arise, making it difficult to produce shared reflections and political solutions aimed at seeking what is good and just. Thus aside from the complexity of legitimate points of view found within the human family, there is also a factor emerging that seems to characterise the above-mentioned social situation, namely, a loss, or at least an eclipse, of the sense of what is human and an apparent reduction in the significance of the concept of human dignity. [12] Indeed, we seem to be losing the value and profound meaning of one of the fundamental concepts of the West: that of the human person. Thus, at a time when artificial intelligence programs are examining human beings and their actions, it is precisely the ethos concerning the understanding of the value and dignity of the human person that is most at risk in the implementation and development of these systems. Indeed, we must remember that no innovation is neutral. Technology is born for a purpose and, in its impact on human society, always represents a form of order in social relations and an arrangement of power, thus enabling certain people to perform specific actions while preventing others from performing different ones. In a more or less explicit way, this constitutive power dimension of technology always includes the worldview of those who invented and developed it.

This likewise applies to artificial intelligence programs. In order for them to be instruments for building up the good and a better tomorrow, they must always be aimed at the good of every human being. They must have an ethical “inspiration”. (Participation of the Holy Father Francis at the G7 in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024.)

Interjection Number Six:

Stop!

Put the true God of Divine Revelation first, Jorge, and teach men to be duly submissive to all that is taught by Holy Mother Church in their own personal lives and in the lives of their nations. Then again, one cannot teach what he does not know and he cannot give what he doth not have.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is looking to prevent men from having “heated arguments” about matters that are beyond debate either because they have been revealed by God and/or exist in the nature of things. What is trying do, get Biden to appoint him to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America?

Let me reprise Dr. Geoge O’Brien’s very cogent summary about why we live in a world of injustice and conflict:

The thesis we have endeavoured to present in this essay is, that the two great dominating schools of modern economic thought have a common origin. The capitalist school, which, basing its position on the unfettered right of the individual to do what he will with his own, demands the restriction of government interference in economic and social affairs within the narrowest  possible limits, and the socialist school, which, basing its position on the complete subordination of the individual to society, demands the socialization of all the means of production, if not all of wealth, face each other today as the only two solutions of the social question; they are bitterly hostile towards each other, and mutually intolerant and each is at the same weakened and provoked by the other. In one respect, and in one respect only, are they identical--they can both be shown to be the result of the Protestant Reformation.

We have seen the direct connection which exists between these modern schools of economic thought and their common ancestor. Capitalism found its roots in the intensely individualistic spirit of Protestantism, in the spread of anti-authoritative ideas from the realm of religion into the realm of political and social thought, and, above all, in the distinctive Calvinist doctrine of a successful and prosperous career being the outward and visible sign by which the regenerated might be known. Socialism, on the other hand, derived encouragement from the violations of established and prescriptive rights of which the Reformation afforded so many examples, from the growth of heretical sects tainted with Communism, and from the overthrow of the orthodox doctrine on original sin, which opened the way to the idea of the perfectibility of man through institutions. But, apart from these direct influences, there were others, indirect, but equally important. Both these great schools of economic thought are characterized by exaggerations and excesses; the one lays too great stress on the importance of the individual, and other on the importance of the community; they are both departures, in opposite directions, from the correct mean of reconciliation and of individual liberty with social solidarity. These excesses and exaggerations are the result of the free play of private judgment unguided by authority, and could not have occurred if Europe had continued to recognize an infallible central authority in ethical affairs.

The science of economics is the science of men's relations with one another in the domain of acquiring and disposing of wealth, and is, therefore, like political science in another sphere, a branch of the science of ethics. In the Middle Ages, man's ethical conduct, like his religious conduct, was under the supervision and guidance of a single authority, which claimed at the same time the right to define and to enforce its teaching. The machinery for enforcing the observance of medieval ethical teaching was of a singularly effective kind; pressure was brought to bear upon the conscience of the individual through the medium of compulsory periodical consultations with a trained moral adviser, who was empowered to enforce obedience to his advice by the most potent spiritual sanctions. In this way, the whole conduct of man in relation to his neighbours was placed under the immediate guidance of the universally received ethical preceptor, and a common standard of action was ensured throughout the Christian world in the all the affairs of life. All economic transactions in particular were subject to the jealous scrutiny of the individual's spiritual director; and such matters as sales, loans, and so on, were considered reprehensible and punishable if not conducted in accordance with the Christian standards of commutative justice.

The whole of this elaborate system for the preservation of justice in the affairs of everyday life was shattered by the Reformation. The right of private judgment, which had first been asserted in matters of faith, rapidly spread into moral matters, and the attack on the dogmatic infallibility of the Church left Europe without an authority to which it could appeal on moral questions. The new Protestant churches were utterly unable to supply this want. The principle of private judgment on which they rested deprived them of any right to be listened to whenever they attempted to dictate moral precepts to their members, and henceforth the moral behaviour of the individual became a matter to be regulated by the promptings of his own conscience, or by such philosophical systems of ethics as he happened to approve. The secular state endeavoured to ensure that dishonesty amounting to actual theft or fraud should be kept in check, but this was a poor and ineffective substitute for the powerful weapon of the confessional. Authority having once broken down, it was but a single step from Protestantism to rationalism; and the way was opened to the development of all sorts of erroneous systems of morality. (Dr. George O'Brien, An Essay on the Economic Efforts of the Reformation, IHS Press, Norfolk, Virginia, 2003.)

Well, the same applies for artificial intelligence and everything else.

All of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s misplaced concern for “human dignity” demonstrates yet again that the conciliar revolution is really about deifying man and demythologizing Our Divine Redeemer and His Catholic Church so that that One World Order long desired by Judeo-Masonry and was the cornerstone of Sillonism can become a reality, and this is why Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes that politics, not Catholicism, is the answer to controlling artificial intelligence with an “sound” ethical system that will truly unite men and their nations:

The politics that is needed

We cannot, therefore, conceal the concrete risk, inherent in its fundamental design, that artificial intelligence might limit our worldview to realities expressible in numbers and enclosed in

Our answer to these questions is: No! Politics is necessary! I want to reiterate in this moment that “in the face of many petty forms of politics focused on immediate interests [...] ‘true statecraft is manifest when, in difficult times, we uphold high principles and think of the long-term common good. Political powers do not find it easy to assume this duty in the work of nation-building’ ( Laudato Si’, 178), much less in forging a common project for the human family, now and in the future”. [17]

Esteemed ladies and gentlemen!

My reflection on the effects of artificial intelligence on humanity leads us to consider the importance of “healthy politics” so that we can look to our future with hope and confidence. I have written previously that “global society is suffering from grave structural deficiencies that cannot be resolved by piecemeal solutions or quick fixes. Much needs to change, through fundamental reform and major renewal. Only a healthy politics, involving the most diverse sectors and skills, is capable of overseeing this process. An economy that is an integral part of a political, social, cultural and popular programme directed to the common good could pave the way for ‘different possibilities which do not involve stifling human creativity and its ideals of progress, but rather directing that energy along new channels’ ( Laudato Si’, 191)”. [18]

This is precisely the situation with artificial intelligence. It is up to everyone to make good use of it but the onus is on politics to create the conditions for such good use to be possible and fruitful.

Thank you. (Participation of the Holy Father Francis at the G7 in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024.)

Final Comment:

Salvation in politics.

A certain former political science professor told his students that there is no salvation in politics as he urged them not to believe in the illusion of secular salvation. His name escapes me at this late hour.

Our true popes have told us otherwise:

27. There is over and above the absence of peace and the evils attendant on this absence, another deeper and more profound cause for present-day conditions. This cause was even beginning to show its head before the War and the terrible calamities consequent on that cataclysm should have proven a remedy for them if mankind had only taken the trouble to understand the real meaning of those terrible events. In the Holy Scriptures we read: "They that have forsaken the Lord, shall be consumed." (Isaias i, 28) No less well known are the words of the Divine Teacher, Jesus Christ, Who said: "Without me you can do nothing" (John xv, 5) and again, "He that gathereth not with me, scattereth." (Luke xi, 23)

28. These words of the Holy Bible have been fulfilled and are now at this very moment being fulfilled before our very eyes. Because men have forsaken God and Jesus Christ, they have sunk to the depths of evil. They waste their energies and consume their time and efforts in vain sterile attempts to find a remedy for these ills, but without even being successful in saving what little remains from the existing ruin. It was a quite general desire that both our laws and our governments should exist without recognizing God or Jesus Christ, on the theory that all authority comes from men, not from God. Because of such an assumption, these theorists fell very short of being able to bestow upon law not only those sanctions which it must possess but also that secure basis for the supreme criterion of justice which even a pagan philosopher like Cicero saw clearly could not be derived except from the divine law. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

Paragraph number twenty-eight above says it all:

They waste their energies and consume their time and efforts in vain sterile attempts to find a remedy for these ills, but without even being successful in saving what little remains from the existing ruin. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

Pope Pius XII amplified this theme in his last encyclical letter Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958:

4. If we weigh carefully the causes of today’s crises and those that are ahead, we shall soon find that human plans, human resources, and human endeavors are futile and will fail when Almighty God — He who enlightens, commands, and forbids; He who is the source and guarantor of justice, the fountainhead of truth, the basis of all laws — is esteemed but little, denied His proper place, or even completely disregarded. If a house is not built on a solid and sure foundation, it tumbles down; if a mind is not enlightened by the divine light, it strays more or less from the whole truth; if citizens, peoples, and nations are not animated by brotherly love, strife is born, waxes strong, and reaches full growth.

5. It is Christianity, above all others, which teaches the full truth, real justice, and that divine charity which drives away hatred, ill will, and enmity. Christianity has been given charge of these virtues by the Divine Redeemer, who is the way, the truth, and the life,[2] and she must do all in her power to put them to use. Anyone, therefore, who knowingly ignores Christianity — the Catholic Church — or tries to hinder, demean, or undo her, either weakens thereby the very bases of society, or tries to replace them with props not strong enough to support the edifice of human worth, freedom, and well-being.

6. There must, then, be a return to Christian principles if we are to establish a society that is strong, just, and equitable. It is a harmful and reckless policy to do battle with Christianity, for God guarantees, and history testifies, that she shall exist forever. Everyone should realize that a nation cannot be well organized or well-ordered without religion. (Pope Pius XII, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio doing the exact opposite of what both Popes Pius XI and XII exhorted Catholics to remember, namely, that Christ is King universally and eternally. The joke is really on anyone and everyone who thinks that he is a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter.

You know what also?

The joke is also on Jorge Mario Bergoglio as the final G-7 Communique reiterated its members’ support for “reproductive freedom,” meaning, of course, contraception, abortion, and perversity in all of its various forms and with respect to its ever-mutating agenda of evil:

We note the importance of strengthening alignment and collaboration across the global health financing ecosystem in support of country-led priorities towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC) informed by the Conclusions of the Future of Global Health Initiatives Process.

We commit to advancing UHC and investing in resilient health systems, primary healthcare service delivery, and a skilled health workforce – including through the WHO Academy, the G20 Public Health Workforce Laboratorium, and the UHC Knowledge Hub. In this context, we commit to further promote comprehensive sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) for all, and to advance maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health, especially for those in vulnerable circumstances.

We will continue supporting research efforts and leveraging emerging technologies, including the ethical use of AI, to develop new treatments and therapies, improve diagnostic tools and technologies, and address existing and emerging health challenges, while ensuring privacy and promoting interoperability. (G7 Apulia Leaders’ Communiqué.)

Obviously, Jorge Mario Bergoglio will say nothing to criticize the G-7 Communique’s support of moral evils as this is not what he chooses to speak about when he addresses world leaders. There is such a thing as natural unintelligence, and he is living proof of what that is!

On the Feast of Saint Juliana Falconieri

The saint whose holy life we celebrate today (Saints Gervase and Protase are commemorated), Saint Julian of Falconieri (whose Christian name is the same as Blessed Juliana of Liege, the great promoter of public acts of Eucharistic adoration), was the first woman religious of the Order of Servites. She devoted herself tirelessly to Eucharistic piety and in meditating upon the Dolors of Our Lady. The account provided in Matins for today’s Divine Office provides us with a glimpse into her life of sacrifice, service and love for Our Lord Crucified and His Sorrowful Mother:

Juliana was a daughter of the noble family of the Falconieri, and was born in the year 1270. Her father was the same who at his own costs so splendidly built from the foundations the Church of Our Lady of the Annunciation as it now standeth at Florence. Her mother's name was Reguardata. They were both well stricken in years, and, until the birth of Juliana, had been childless. From her very cradle she gave tokens of the holiness of life to which she afterwards attained. And from the murmuring of her baby lips was caught the sweet sound of the names of Jesus and Mary. As she entered on her girlhood, she delivered herself up entirely to the pursuit of Christian godliness, and so excellently shone therein, that her uncle, the Blessed Alexius, scrupled not to tell her mother that she had given birth to an Angel rather than to a woman. So modest was her carriage, and so clean her soul from the lightest speck of indiscretion, that she never in her whole life stared a man in the face, and that the very mention of sin made her shiver, and when the story of a grievous crime was told her, she dropped down nearly fainting. Before she had finished her fifteenth year, she renounced her inheritance, although a rich one, and all prospect of an earthly marriage, and made to God a vow of virginity, before holy Philip Benizi, from whom she was the first to receive the religious habit of what are called the mantled nuns.

She put herself for instruction under her daughter. Thus in a little while their number increased, and she became the foundress of the Order of Mantled nuns, to whom she gave a rule of life full of wisdom and godliness. Holy Philip Benizi, having thorough knowledge of her excellence, chose her above all living to whom at his death to leave the care not of the women only but of the whole of the Order of the Servants of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of which he had been the propagator and director. Juliana, who deemed ever lowly of herself, even when she was the mistress of the others, ministered to her sisters in the meanest offices of the work of the house. She passed whole days in incessant prayer, and was often rapt in spirit, and the remainder of her time she toiled to make peace among the citizens, who were at variance together, to recall transgressors from the ways of iniquity, and to nurse the sick, to cure whom she would sometimes even use her tongue to remove the matter that ran from their sores. It was her custom to afflict her own body with whips, knotted cords, iron girdles, watching, and sleeping upon the ground. Upon Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, she ate very sparingly some unpalatable food, upon Fridays she took nothing except the Bread of Angels, and upon Saturdays, besides the Holy Communion, only bread and water.

The self-inflicted hardships of her life brought upon her a disease of the stomach, whereby, when she was seventy years of age, she was brought to the point of death. She bore the daily sufferings of her illness with a smiling face and a brave heart. The only thing of which she was heard to complain was that, her stomach being so weak that she could not keep down any food, she was withheld by reverence for the Sacrament from drawing near to the Lord's Table. Finding herself in these straits she begged the Priest to bring the Bread of God, and, as she dared not take It into her mouth, to put It as near as possible to her heart. The Priest did as she wished, and, to the amazement of all present, the Divine Bread at once disappeared from sight, and at the same instant a smile of joyous peace crossed the face of Juliana, and she gave up the ghost. All were confounded until the virgin body was being laid out after death in the accustomed manner. Then there was found upon the left side of the bosom a mark like the stamp of a seal, reproducing the form of the Sacred Host, the mould of which was one of those that bear a figure of Christ crucified. The noise of this and other wonders got for Juliana a reverence not only from Florence, but from all parts of the Christian world, which so increased through the course of four hundred years, that Pope Benedict XIII. commanded an office in her honour to be said by the whole Order of Servants of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and Clement XII., a munificent Protector of the same Order, finding new signs and wonders shedding lustre upon her memory every day, numbered her among Holy Virgins. (Matins, The Divine Office, Feast of Saint Juliana Falconieri.)

May the peace of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and the love for Our Sorrowful Mother that were exhibited by Saint Juliana Falconieri keep us at peace in the midst of all the agitation of world that is the victim of its own iniquities, mindful that we ourselves need to call on Our Lady, especially through her Most Holy Rosary, to help us make reparation for the many ways in which our own sins have worsened the state of the world-at-large and the state of the Church Militant on earth, led as it is now by a man who, like his five predecessors, is at peace with the world as it is and always at war with the world that came before, the world of Christ the King and the due submission by men and their nations in all that pertains to the good of souls to His Holy Catholic Church.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Juliana Falconieri, pray for us.

Saints Gervase and Protase, pray for us.