Moving beyond the term "papolatry" to the realisation of the subversive element

I've used the term "papolatry," as have others, to describe the almost idolatrous nature of the treatment of the current Bishop of Rome and his sycophants promotion of his every word and breath being from his "god of surprises." We see it in the case of priests on Twitter, the Vatican's own press (more on that tomorrow), and people such as Austin Ivereigh, parroting every word of Bergoglio's as if it was the new divine revelation and we are too stupid to get with the party. 

The word, papolatry, is of Protestant origin and used as a smear on Catholicism. The point of using it, at least on my part, is to show how we have ascribe to the pope that which the Protestants have accused us of doing.

A reader, Mr. Benjamin Van Dyck, has written in the combox about the term, "papolatry" and more. It is a comment which I am going to publish because it is a salient and profound assessment of the current situation.

I thank Mr. Van Dyck for his wisdom.

I do not use the term "papolatry" because it was conceived in Protestantism. Besides, the sycophants of Pope Francis are not actually adoring him as a god, but irrationally extending pontifical infallibility beyond the criteria posed by His Divine Majesty. It has been the typical modus operandi of the subversive elements within the Church whenever they had the Pope under their sway. When the Pope contradicted their agenda, however, this 'extended papal infallibility' of theirs disappeared like snow before the sun. Very 'convenient' for them.

There is some kind of confusion of terminologies going on throughout the internet. I see words like "ultramontanism" and "clericalism" employed to describe the tyrannical behaviour of the present Pope of Rome and his yes-men, while these words were originally used as synonymous with Catholicism, and specifically the teachings of the First Vatican Council. People must stop doing this, because the enemy of "ultramontanism" and "clericalism" is sitting right there upon the august Apostolical See, abusing his authority to push forth his ecclesiastical hippie revolution.

I am convinced that God has permitted Pope Francis to be unleashed on the Church so that the Ratzingerian paradigm of equilibrium between so-called 'conservatives' and 'progressives would be shattered irrevocably. I remember well how stagnant this situation was in the days of Benedict XVI as Pope, and how the Ratzingerians insisted on the impossible pretense that the errors of Paul VI were not inherently erroneous, and that the texts could be reconciled with the Apostolic Tradition. They would even refuse the Roman Mass to those who were unwilling to burn this grain of incense to 'Mother Synthesis' on the altars of Hegel. Pope Francis, since his election, has been painfully embarrassing them to the point where those who continue to write seriously about the Ratzingerian "Hermeneutics of Continuity", read as if their articles are pieces of intended satire.

Let the Princes of the Church recognise the divine visitation, and attack the problems within the Church at their root; the invisible coup d'état wrought by Judeo-Masonry during the Second Vatican Council. Let them finally admit that "Dignitatis Humanae", "Nostra Aetate" and "Amoris Laetitia" must be condemned as objectively saturated with the depraved spirit of the maçonnerie, instead of continuing to insist that they be "read in the light of Tradition", which is impossible. When one shines the light of Tradition upon them, hideous devils are seen, not continuity. Francis is but the bitter fruit of a bitter tree.

Benjamin Van Dyck.