Skip to main content

Why do Francis Collaborators Sarah & Ganswein still have Vatican Jobs?

Does Francis allow anyone who he can't control and doesn't lick his boots to have any real power in his Vatican?

The answer is unequivocally:

NO. PERIOD.

The latest example of this fact is the head of the supposedly all powerful "Old Guard" Cardinal Angelo Sodano who many say controlled to a large extent Pope John Paul II and who even Pope Benedict XVI could only "sideline," but not get rid of.

Francis just got rid of him as if he were a limp, ineffectual rag doll.

Another example is Pope Benedict friend Cardinal Gerhard Muller who was a boot licker of Francis, but despite this because he apparently couldn't completely be controlled was unceremoniously like Sodano tossed out of the Vatican like a rag doll despite being Benedict's friend.

With the two examples above in mind, why do you think that Archbishop Georg Ganswein is Francis's caretaker of Pope Benedict

With Ganswein being a Francis boot licker like Muller, but having a Vatican job; why does everyone keep assuming that his loyalty is to Benedict and not to Francis when he has a Vatican job?

Like Ganwein it appears that Sarah wants to keep his Vatican job so he had to betray Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano according to Gloria.tv:

Cardinal Sarah told the authors of the May 7 appeal which warns that the coronavirus is exploited for promoting a one-world government, to cancel him from the list of signees.

Sarah wrote on Twitter (May 8) that "a Cardinal Prefect, member of the Roman Curia, has to observe a certain restriction on political matters; he shouldn't sign petitions in such areas"

Therefore, he asked the authors of the text not to mention his name, "From a personal point of view, I may share some questions or preoccupations raised regarding restrictions on fundamental freedom,
but I didn't sign that petition."

Promptly, Archbishop Viganò, the appeal's initiator, accused Sarah in a May 8 communique of “a grave wrong which he inflicted on the truth.”

Viganò writes that he had a May 4 phone conversation with Sarah, "The call was recorded and lasted 6 minutes and 25 seconds."

He transcribes Sarah's words. Sarah said, "It seems to me that this is a very serious matter. I think that this Appeal can do a lot of good, because it will make people think and take a position: I agree that it should be published as soon as possible."

Asked whether he would sign the appeal, Sarah replied, “Yes, I agree to put my name, because it is a struggle that we must wage together, not only for the Catholic Church but for all humanity.”

However, after the appeal's publication, Sarah told Viganò via SMS that a friend advised him not to sign the text.

These are Sarah's words: “Perhaps it would be better to withdraw my name this time. I am very sorry for this. You know of my friendship and closeness to you.”

Remember the Muller example in which boot licking isn't enough, but being completely under the control of Francis is the magic ticket to keeping ones job in the present Vatican.

Now, Cardinal Robert Sarah is a boot licker like Muller and probably because he is Black has a Vatican job with zero power, but obviously Francis doesn't have 100 percent control over him.

If you had a choice of deciding who is lying about Pope Benedict's contribution to Cardinal Sarah's new book whom would you trust more to tell the truth: Sarah or Ganswein.

Remember when as soon as the Sarah book made Benedict not appear to be totally under the control of Francis suddenly Team Francis's "Catholic" and secular media promoted the narrative that Benedict was being "manipulated" by the evil Sarah and others.

Now, who made Sarah look like a "manipulating" lying schemer?

Next, who has the most important job next to Francis in the Vatican who still has a job in the Vatican?

The caregiver of Benedict.

Might Benedict's caregiver Ganswein who everyone keeps supposing as we are supposed to suppose instead of being Benedict's friend be Francis' collaborator who may be "manipulating" him for his boss?

Might Team Francis be telling the truth for once?

Is Benedict being "manipulated" and might Ganswein be more a prison guard than a caregiver?

Might Benedict's caregiver Ganswein be the one "manipulating" Benedict with Francis pulling the strings behind the scenes?

Please pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Comments

Alexis Bugnolo said…
Some people are racists and want to treat others especially minorities like slaves. I pity those who accept slavery from such monsters.

And though I think your analsysi Fred is a sound one, I would point out that since the Vatican just signed a protocol with the Italian government for the Virus Mass, perhaps Sarah felt that his signature on such a document might cause the agreement to be broken by the government.

Popular posts from this blog

Bishops of Colorado gave an apparent Vaxx "Exemption" Letter & Stated: "Vaccination is Not Morally Obligatory and so Must Be Voluntary"

Today, the bishops of Colorado gave an apparent Vaxx " exemption" letter (21_8_Vaccine_Exemption_CCC_Fin...docx(20KB)) and stated that "Vaccination is Not Morally Obligatory and so Must Be Voluntary":  COLORADO CATHOLIC CONFERENCE 1535 Logan Street | Denver, CO 80203-1913 303-894-8808 | cocatholicconference.org   [Date]   To Whom It May Concern, [Name] is a baptized Catholic seeking a religious exemption from an immunization requirement. This letter explains how the Catholic Church’s teachings may lead individual Catholics, including [name], to decline certain vaccines. The Catholic Church teaches that a person may be required to refuse a medical intervention, including a vaccination, if his or her conscience comes to this judgment. While the Catholic Church does not prohibit the use of most vaccines, and generally encourages them to safeguard personal and public health, the following authoritative Church teachings demonstrate the principled religious

Does Francis's "Right-hand Man" Parra have a "Sexual Predation against Seminarians, Adultery, and even a Deadly Sex Game...[that] 'might even be a Scandal Surpassing that of McCarrick'"?

  Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra with Francis Today, the Call Me Jorge website asked "What could be so important that Francis interrupted his weekly adulation [Audience] session?": Pope gets a phone call during the Audience. Haven’t seen this before. Then he quickly leaves and says he will be back. pic.twitter.com/npCuPzdnxP — The Catholic Traveler (@MountainButorac) August 11, 2021 It was Abp. Mons. Edgar Robinson Peña Parra, Substitute for the Secretariat of State, who was involved in the recent scandal of mismanagement during the acquisition of a € 300 million building in London. Still no word on what the phone call was about . [http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2021/08/what-could-be-so-important-that-francis.html] Who is Archbishop Edgar Robinson Peña Parra ? Parra according to the Catholic Herald is Francis's "right-hand man"[https://catholicherald.co.uk/roman-curia-the-popes-new-right-hand-man/] In 2019, Life Site News reported that Parra alleged

Might it be Good for all of us & for Francis to Read about the "Gruesome Death of Arius"?

  I have read the letters of your piety , in which you have requested me to make known to you the events of my times relating to myself, and to give an account of that most impious heresy of the Arians , in consequence of which I have endured these sufferings, and also of the manner of the death of Arius . With two out of your three demands I have readily undertaken to comply, and have sent to your Godliness what I wrote to the Monks; from which you will be able to learn my own history as well as that of the heresy . But with respect to the other matter, I mean the death, I debated with myself for a long time, fearing lest any one should suppose that I was exulting in the death of that man. But yet, since a disputation which has taken place among you concerning the heresy , has issued in this question, whether Arius died after previously communicating with the Church ; I therefore was necessarily desirous of giving an account of his death, as thinking that the question woul