According to Marco Tosatti, the book, Sodom, by Frederic Martel convicts Bergoglio of knowing about McCarrick

The sham synod on "child abuse" is about to take place. As heinous as child sexual abuse is, it is not the problem, it is the result of the problem. The problem is homosexuals -- sodomites have been ordained to the priesthood and elevated into the episcopacy, cardinaliate and perhaps even the papacy itself. Those who have "same-sex attraction" and are ordained and quietly and prayerfully offering up their sufferings and ministering faithfully while renouncing their predilection, remaining chaste and affirming church doctrine are an entirely different matter, and, nobody should know because they are not "gay." These men are not LGTBQ, they are men who are predisposed to sin as any other, you and me. There are no "gays" in heaven. Let that be clear. The Bishop of Rome, or whatever he and his ilk are, refuse to deal with the fundamental problem. Sex between a man and a boy is a crime. Sex between two men, particularly one with power over the other, may not be a civil crime but it is a spiritual crime and it is against God. 

Our job is to maintain the pressure on Bergoglio and his filthy minions in whatever way possible.

You must withhold your Bishops collection contribution and the collection plate. Buy your priest groceries or fix his car, slip him $20. If the church roof leaks, hire the contractor and pay for it. If the church hall needs a floor waxed, go rent a machine and do it yourself. Give the money to the poor and good causes directly. Otherwise, starve them all. But be prepared for these episcopal sodomite and clericalist rats to then close your parish and sell the land to keep it going.

Prayers is necessary but it is not all.

Pray as if all depends on God, work as if all depends on you.


From Marco Tosatti's blog.

http://www.marcotosatti.com/2019/02/17/clamoroso-sodoma-martel-scrive-che-il-papa-sapeva-di-mccarrick/

Sodom, the book by Frederic Martel we have been dealing with in recent days, reserves sensational news. According to the author, in the English version of the text, and we offer here our translation, Pope Bergoglio was really informed by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò of the past of predation towards seminarians and young priests, but he did not consider the fact so important. And consequently not only did he relieve him of the restrictions that Benedict XVI had imposed on him (whose existence was confirmed, as well as by Viganò, by Cardinal Marc Ouellet) but he also used him as an advisor for appointments in the United States (the promotion of Kevin Farrell to Camerlengo and entrusting Blase Cupich with the organization of the summit on child abuse are the more recent confirmations, if ever they were needed) and he used him as his personal representatve both in the United States (with Obama) and abroad in China, Armenia, Iran and Cuba.

In our opinion, this is a case of an extraordinarily interesting “friendly fire”; because if there is someone of whom Frederic Martel speaks well, when not enthusiastically, in his long work, it is really Pope Bergoglio. Martel, as we know, was helped and hosted by prelates in the Vatican, to carry out his task. In a television interview, he mentioned at least four high prelates close to the Pope who favored and encouraged him. He said he had met the Director of Civiltà Cattolica, Antonio Spadaro sj several times; in the book there is an interview with Spadaro, and an interview with Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, the great director of the Synods (more or less pre-arranged) about the family and the young. He is a “famiglio” of the Pontiff, a man of his trust. So we have to believe Martel, particularly because he puts the central phrase in quotes. Here is the little song we have translated:

<… cardinals and bishops of the Roman Curia and  the American episcopate who, according to him, took part in this huge cover-up: it is an endless list of names of prelates, among the most important in the Vatican, who were thus “outed”, whether right or wrong. (When the Pope dismissed the allegations, his entourage indicated to me that Francis ‘was initially informed by Viganò that Cardinal McCarrick had had homosexual relations with over-age seminarians, which was not enough in his eyes to condemn him’).

If Martel writes the truth – and there is no reason to believe the opposite, since he is certainly not a conservative homophobe Pharisee moralizing and hypocritical – some considerations are required.

The first: even though  the seminarians were not under age, if a person hierarchically in a high position, and who can decide the fate of one of his subordinates, sexually harasses him, it is no longer a question of sex between consenting adults: there is a form of violence. Now we know that this fact does not seem important to the Pontiff. Or at least, not so important, at least not to favour and use the abuser until this bond becomes too embarrassing, and then sacrifice him to the public opinion.

Second: it is months and months that the Catholics are waiting for an answer: Did Viganò lie, or not? It seems that according to Martel, and according to the entourage of the Pontiff he has told the truth.

So why not admit it? Why not to say, as a man and a Christian, “it’s true I was warned, but I thought it was not so serious. I was wrong in my judgement, forgive me”.?

Such behaviour would have a very different effect from the savage reactions with which the Pope’s hand and pen men, assisted by obliging mass media, were unleashed in the aggression of the person of Viganò, trying to ascribe the responsibilities of the ascent. and of the glory of McCarrick to previous popes, trying to deny that Benedict XVI had imposed the restrictions that could be imposed on the state of affairs, and that these restrictions had in fact been cancelled by Pope Bergoglio. Let us not forget that the Nuncio Viganò wrote to card. Parolin, Secretary of State, a letter asking whether the sanctions against McCarrick should be considered abolished. Without ever receiving an answer …

A final consideration regards the cynicism implied by the Pontiff’s reaction.

To lighten a dramatic theme, those of my age remember the political manifestations of the ’70s. Paraphrasing a slogan very used in those times, we can say: “It is the Pope – who taught us – to harass a priest – is not a crime (or a sin, if you are rigid and Pharisaic)”.