Hæc est autem scriptura, quæ digesta est:
Mane, Thecel, Phares — Daniel 5:25
Just when the latest statement by Jorge Mario Bergoglio had not yet finished causing scandal among the faithful and causing division among the Shepherds, behold, a new one is added, no less damaging, that tears yet another wound in the tortured body of the Church.
The dicastery recently published, with the date of 31 October 2023, its “Responses to some questions by His Excellency Monsignor José Negri, Bishop of Santo Amaro in Brazil, about the participation in the sacrament of baptism by transgender and homoaffective persons” (an unofficial English translation can be found here).
Beyond the hypocritical definition of “homoaffective people” – as if one could separate homosexual identity from the intrinsically sinful exercise of unnatural sexuality that defines it – this document represents a further departure from Catholic doctrine, not only for the questions it agrees to answer, not so much for the answers it formulates, but also and above all due to the effects that its interpretation in the media will have on the faithful – an interpretation that is significantly consistent with the so-called “inductive method” theorized by Bergoglio himself in another document on the study of sacred theology.
According to this theory – condemned by Pius XII – it is necessary “to start from the different contexts and concrete situations in which people find themselves, allowing oneself to be seriously questioned by reality, to become a discerner of the signs of the times.” It is no coincidence that all over the media, as of November 8, the headlines read, “The Vatican opens to trans and gays;” “Yes to divorced people as godparents;” “Trans people will be able to be baptized, a turning point for the Vatican.”
The document of the dicastery chaired by Tucho Fernández – the author of Amoris Lætitia and Heal Me With Your Mouth; The Art of Kissing – is obviously not moved by pastoral zeal for the souls of those who live in a habitual and public state of mortal sin so that they repent and convert, but rather from the desire to normalize their behavior, eliminating sodomy from the list of sins that cry out for vengeance in the presence of God, or leaving its condemnation to the merely theoretical level while effectively admitting those who practice it not only to the sacraments, but also to those functions – such as godfather at baptism, confirmation sponsor, or best man at a wedding – from which the Church has always excluded those who by the conduct of their personal lives publicly contradict the teaching of Our Lord.
A function which, in the role of godfather, becomes particularly eminent. We may therefore exclude any possible excuse based on an alleged misunderstanding of Bergoglio’s words – also because the precedent of “Who am I to judge” which earned him the cover of the LGBT magazine The Advocate (here) has already proven disastrous in its effects. These effects were clearly intended, then reiterated with repeated declarations and interviews, and have now been confirmed by this latest Vatican document.
“Opening the doors a little more” is in fact Bergoglio’s strategy. Anyone who claims that these unprecedented declarations are the result of improvisation and that they have no repercussions on the ecclesial body is either mistaken or in bad faith. They started long ago – in this case as early as December 7, 2014 – and demonstrate methodical planning, malicious intent, and a stubborn desire to harm souls, discredit the Church, and offend the majesty of God.
The attack on the traditional family and the open support of unions and sinful behavior of cohabitators, adulterers, homosexuals and transgendered people began with the  Synod on the Family, the dress rehearsal for the current Synod on Synodality. It was in conjunction with that meeting that Bergoglio chose to grant an interview to the Argentine newspaper La Nacion, anticipating the moves that we see him making today, moves that none of the Dubia submitted by the cardinals managed to avert:
In the case of divorced people who have remarried, we posed the question, what do we do with them? What door can we open for them? This was a pastoral concern: will we allow them to go to Communion? Communion alone is no solution. The solution is integration. They have not been excommunicated, true. But they cannot be godparents at baptism, they cannot read the readings at Mass, they cannot give Communion, they cannot be catechists. There are about seven things they cannot do. I have the list over there. Come on! If I tell all this, it seems that they are excommunicated de facto!
So let us open the doors a bit more. Why can’t they be godparents? ‘No, no, no, what testimony will they be giving their godchild?’ The testimony of a man and a woman saying, ‘My dear, I made a mistake, I was wrong here, but I believe our Lord loves me, I want to follow God, sin will not have victory over me, I want to move on.’ Any more Christian witness than that? And what if one of the political crooks among us, corrupt people, are chosen to be somebody’s godfather? If they are properly wedded by the church, would we accept them? What kind of testimony will they give to their godchild? A testimony of corruption? We must change things a little; our standards need to change.
These words, as annoying in form as they are deceiving in substance, contain Bergoglio’s entire subversive project, which finds timely confirmation in the latest document of the Vatican dicastery, which has replaced both in name and in functions the already-compromised Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, at the head of which an individual has been appointed who makes no secret of his total and absolute agreement with the views with the Argentine Jesuit, especially on matters of sodomy.