The adeptness at weaving opposing ideas into a preferred synthesis that appears to make sense but really doesn’t is fascinating (as well as disturbing). For example, this article paraphrasing pope Francis:
In the Old Testament, the pope said, God called Abraham and began to form a people that would become a blessing for the world. “With great patience — and God has a lot of it — he prepared the people of the ancient covenant and in Jesus Christ constituted them as a sign and instrument of the union of humanity with God and unity with one another.”
Pope Francis described as “dangerous” the temptation to believe that one can have “a personal, direct, immediate relationship with Jesus Christ [who the Catholic church considers to be God] without communion with and the mediation of the church
Essentially he’s saying God had a direct relationship with man (Abraham) to prepare people for Jesus, who would be able to bring more people towards a direct relationship with God. But now, to have relationship with God, we first have to go through a direct relationship with “the church” – a fictional entity describing a group of people who apparently all agree on a so-called constitution by Jesus, headed by two popes (black + white popes).
In other words we can only have a direct relationship with God indirectly – via a made up third party, controlled by men. Anything else is “dangerous”.
That’s double-speak at its best!