>>17 Not sure if that's papal protocol or what, but you could certainly draw some silly implication from it if it's the latter. What's wrong with Bergoglio, it's much more interesting than Francis!
Or funny sounding, I'm not sure which. Bergoglio.
>>18 is almost not worth responding to, it gets a bit tiring enlightening people to another perspective and it seems
>>21 has already done so. I'm not really a fan of the vatican's history of decisions either, but I'm against ultimatums and sweeping generalizations even more.