Let's defend the Truth

A)  The text of the speech by J.M.Bergoglio:

“…I will ask – and perhaps I will get this to the President – the Congregation for Divine Worship to explain properly and in depth what I said rather briefly on preaching in the Eucharistic Celebration, as I do not have sufficient theology or clarity to explain it now. But we must distinguish clearly: preaching at a Liturgy of the Word is one thing, and this can be done; but the Eucharistic Celebration is something else: here there is a different mystery. It is the mystery of Christ’s presence, and the priest or the bishop celebrates in persona Christi….
This question … touches on the problem of the permanent diaconate. Some might say that the “permanent deaconesses” in the life of the Church are mothers-in-law [he laughs, they laugh]…..
Sister Teresina, have a little patience because it just came to mind what had escaped me regarding the other question, on “what women’s consecrated life can do”. It is a point which you must take up again, which the Church too must look at again. Your work, my work and the work of all of us, is one of service. Very often I find consecrated women who perform a labour of servitude and not of service…. This is the criterion: a work that involves service and not servitude! When you Superiors are asked for something that is more servitude than service, have the courage to say ‘no’. This is a rather helpful point, because when a consecrated woman is asked to perform a work of servitude, the life and dignity of that woman are demeaned. Her vocation is service: service to the Church. But not servitude!
Now I’ll respond to Teresina: “What, in your opinion, is the place of women’s apostolic religious life within the Church? What would the Church be lacking if there were no longer women religious?” Mary would be missing on the day of Pentecost! There is no Church without Mary! There is no Pentecost without Mary! But Mary was there, even though she may not have spoken… I have said this, but I like to repeat it. The consecrated woman is an icon of the Church, an icon of Mary. The priest is not an icon of the Church; he is not an icon of Mary; he is an icon of the Apostles, of the disciples who were sent out to preach. But not of the Church or of Mary. When I say this I want to make you reflect on the fact that “she” the Church is feminine; the Church is woman: it is not “he” the Church, it is “she” the Church. But she is a woman married to Jesus Christ; she has her Bridegroom, who is Jesus Christ” (Address to the International Union Superior General (UISG) – Paul VI Audience Hall – Thursday, 12 May 2016)

B) References to Scriptures:

“Mary said, ‘You see before you the Lord’s servant, let it happen to me as you have said.’ And the angel left her” (Luk 1:38)

“And Mary said: My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour; because he has looked upon the humiliation of his servant. Yes, from now onwards all generations will call me blessed” (Luk 1:46-48)

C) Comment:

Bergoglio is prey to complete and utter confusion. A true and utter confusion, which is also used on purpose to not give the opportunity to fully comprehend his true thoughts to those who listen and read his speeches.

His speaking is not in line with the teachings of Christ who said, “Let your speech be “yes, yes” and “no, no”, because the rest comes from evil”. The talk of Bergoglio is not “yes, yes” and “no, no”. So his talk comes from evil. It is the word of Jesus.

Bergoglio is never linear when he speaks. He says one thing, then says the exact opposite, then returns later on the subject to change it further. In doing so, the confusion is total.

This way of doing and of communicating of Bergoglio, manifest on one hand the clear and manifest inability of the man Bergoglio to accomplish what he was asked by his master. On the other hand, there is a voluntary action of his spirit that does not let Bergoglio speak in a linear way but makes him speak ambiguously, to never ever let openly understand his language, his project.

In the speech above, Bergoglio answers to some questions that have themed the role of women in the church. Bergoglio begins to speak of the possibility that the woman might openly preach in church. Before he says and lets you intuit it, then he almost denies it, “because I have no theology and clarity enough to explain it now,” he says. When has Bergoglio ever had theology and clarity?

Bergoglio is, at the same time, an icon of inconsistency and of inability.

The intent of exploiting the role of women in the church is clear. Bergoglio knows that this is dangerous ground, on which he will find strong opposition. This is why he says and then retracts, advances but immediately retreats. He probes the ground and then beats a retreat.

Previously Bergoglio has already stated that “the woman, in the Church, is more important than bishops and priests“, with the clear intention of creating a climate of confusion, of hostility and competition between the man and the woman in the church. At the Last Supper on Holy Thursday, when Jesus instituted the Eucharist, Mary was not physically present. Mary, living Tabernacle, while containing and living the Eucharistic Sacrifice in the first person, is called by the Father to cover a different role. A role not more or less important than the man’s, just different. Men and women have equal dignity before the Father, but they are called to cover different roles in the Church and the society.

Now Bergoglio would like to open to women priests but doesn’t have the courage to do it openly. In his speech Bergoglio first speaks of the priest, who embodies the Persona Christi (letting believe to want to deny the possibility to the woman to celebrate Mass); but then he speaks of the woman in the church as an icon of Mary, unlike the priest (textual words of Bergoglio), “is not an icon of the church“. But shortly before, Bergoglio, talking about the priest, had said that they embody the Persona Christi.

The contradiction and confusion is total. If the priest embodies the Person of Christ, how at the same time can we say that the priest is not the icon of the Church, that is the Mystical Body of Christ? The Persona Christi is as one with the Church. The two concepts cannot be separated.

Here the inconsistency and inability of Bergoglio are manifesting.

Mary, Mother Church, proclaims herself Servant, Handmaid of the Lord. Maria does not yearn for top positions. Maria wants to be the faithful servant of the Father. And by Her virtue of being Servant, Handmaid, Maria has been called by the Father to become Mother. Through Her spirit of service to the Church, Mary has become Mother, Mother Church.

However, Bergoglio deceitfully invites the woman to rebel against the service, wanting to distinguish between the spirit of “service” and that of “servitude”. Who loves, serves regardless and independently from the type of service to which one is called. There is not a type “A” and type “B” service. Service is service. Mary is Servant for Love. Who loves, serves. And those who serve, love.

Bergoglio embodies the spirit of the evil one that tempts the woman again, as the ancient serpent tempted Eve. The evil spirit, in a sneaky way, playing with words, indeed invites the woman to rebel against God.

Mary never rebelled against God, even though Bergoglio, on other occasions has tried to let believe otherwise (read: Madonna was human and perhaps wanted to say to the Lord: “Lies! I was deceived!“)

Bergoglio doesn’t know Mary. Bergoglio and Mary, The Woman, are two eternal strangers. They do not know each other. They are one extraneous to the other. Therefore, Bergoglio knows which Spirit dwells in Mary, as Mary knows well the spirit that is in Bergoglio.

The woman that in the Church of Christ wants to be perfect, must follow the example of Mary, the humble and faithful Handmaid; and renewals every day her own “yes” to God’s call, so that “yes” bears fruit and not appearance.

The Woman of God does not aspire to appear.

The true and holy Woman of God live to be and to let be.