A Synthesis of All Catholic Conspiracy Theories ...

Contained in Taylor Marshall's book, Infiltration.

Crackpot theories abound in Marshall's book - theories I've heard and even witnessed develop for years. Gratefully D.W. Lafferty writing for Where Peter Is, posted the first part of a series of articles more or less exposing the often dubious claims made by Marshall in his book.  It's great to read his interpretation of what he calls his summary of the grand conspiracy of Infiltration.

I am quite confident in asserting that, whatever Marshall says to the contrary, there is a grand conspiracy set forth in Infiltration, and the whole book is a contrived attack on Pope Francis. For the benefit of those who have not read the book—and I don’t recommend purchasing it unless you absolutely have to for the purpose of verifying its contents—I will provide a summary of the grand conspiracy that Marshall sets forth. I will be as generous as I can in my summary and not attempt to debunk any of the claims Marshall makes, since it is crucial to understand exactly what Marshall is saying before considering if it has any basis in truth. - D.W. Lafferty

As Lafferty states, he is providing a summary of what Marshall is saying - before considering if it has any basis in truth.  Whenever I've posted critiques, I often get friends responding with documentation and links to substantiate some of the claims made by the sources Marshall exploits in his book.  For instance, former Cardinal McCarrick and his association with the St. Gallen Mafia, sometimes cited  to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Pope Francis' election.  So Cardinals and bishops had confidential exchanges - before recent synods as well as in the past.  That's based in truth.  Statements made by the participants, if documented, are based in truth as well.  If and when they are incorporated into the conspiracy narrative - they get distorted and misleading, not to mention sensationalized.

I have trouble trusting most sources online.

Along with others, I've noticed many people buying into all of the anti-Francis stories online, as well as in books which purport to reveal the real Francis and his agenda.  A lot of the literature might be based on fact and/or personal experience, yet it is biased and contributes to the growing anti-Francis propaganda.  Now days, it is inevitable for many faithful Catholics to derogate Pope Benedict, and even St. John Paul II - just as they always did with St. Paul VI.  This type of propaganda has been circulated repeatedly until now.  Now it is considered true, simply because it has become embedded in the collective memory.  Not surprisingly, the conspiracies are sometimes repeated by fake locutionists, visionaries, and those who follow private revelations. 

Last evening I came across a post by Fr. Z on Pope Francis and his connection to Leonardo Boff.  He cites a Lifesite article: "The article drills into Boff’s view of Francis, and what Boff thought and thinks Francis is going to do to the Church. LifeSite cites and links various interviews Boff has given over the years."

Going to do to the Church?

Once again, an article might be based on facts - Fr. Bergoglio knew Boff, worked with him, and as Pope, evidently remains in contact with him.  In turn, Boff reveals their conversations along with his interpretation on what the Pope had to say.  Amazingly, Fr. Z considers this a great insight into understanding 'Bergoglio'.  The Lifesite article, again adds to the literature suggesting the Pope is a far-left heretic, and Fr. Z manages to confirm such suspicions with his endorsement.  Last night I was angry and posted on FB that the article is a faithless piece of crap and someone should report Z to his bishop.  Upon a more careful reading the post I noted everything is pretty much presented in an editorial manner by Fr. Z.  He never goes so far as to accuse the Holy Father, yet the commentary reveals the underlying 'hermeneutic of suspicion' - especially along the lines of the narrative, 'Francis is out to destroy the Church'.

Once again, nothing has changed in the conspiracy theory culture over the decades - connections are revealed to fuel the political agenda of many, to impute guilt, as well as to resist the Pope(s) and Vatican II. (E.g. Baysiders claimed Paul VI had a double - Fatimists claimed Lucia was replaced by a double as well.)  I'm not an expert, and to be sure, I don't personally know all the writers, but I've been around a very long time and I see bits of history repeated.  St. Oscar Romero for instance - the same doubts and accusations against him are repeated today, just as much as when he was alive.  It errodes trust and fidelity.  

It leads me to believe most North Americans and Europeans have little understanding of people in the Southern Hemisphere, especially Africa and Latin America.  Many resist the Pope's reaching out to the poor and accommodating migrants and refugees.  They justify doing so by calling him a Communist heretic - or at least insinuating as much.  It's evil. 

Crackpot theories.