The article published on The style of the Court it's very interesting. Bear in mind, in the terminology used, that the author is a sedeplenist.
Of Marco Tosatti
Dear friends and enemies of the style of the Court, today Super Ex really writes things to ponder and meditate on, and to be discussed. Because his article addresses what appears to be a mystery, an oddity: that is, the migrant obsession of the reigning Pontiff; and given the quantity, and the repetitiveness of interventions, I really think it can be used at this point, and less and less in a joking tone, of the term obsession. Read Super Ex carefully.
Bergoglio's immigrationism is a heresy, taught by Carlo Maria Martini.
This is the thesis. Let's see how it unfolds.
Because it is heresy? Because it doesn't blend, as one might believe at first glance, on absolute ignorance of the facts. It is not simple ignorance and crass superficiality.
Can we really believe that Bergoglio doesn't know what's behind today's immigration? Impossible! African bishops have often denounced it, inviting the children of Africa not to be deceived, not to leave their land, their family, their roots, to go to a secularized Europe, in which they will find themselves marginalized, exploited, at the mercy of a materialistic and nihilistic culture that will reduce them to "cellularized" automatons night and day.
It's truly impossible that Bergoglio doesn't know that minor migrants end up, in large part, sexually exploited, how about 7 o 8 women on 10. It's impossible that he doesn't know that human flesh trafficking generates astronomical profits, for African and Western traffickers, and which is driven by countless interests of the various mafias. Which, well before “Capital Rome”, they understood, with Raffaele Cutolo (founder of the New Organized Camorra), the criminal potential present in uncontrolled migratory phenomena.
It is truly impossible that Bergoglio did not understand that a good portion of immigrants end up, after passing through the drug market, in Western prisons, after leaving the women and children of Africa alone (it is clear or not that the majority of those who flee, that is, young and strong men, they abandon women to poverty and desperation, children, elderly people who remain?).
No, Bergoglio knows everything well, as well as his friends, George Soros and Emma Bonino, who are anything but naive naive people. That's why he can't hear us, not even when the complaints come from the judiciary (see the statements of the Catania prosecutor Carmelo Zuccaro).
And then? And so the heresy espoused by Bergoglio is a sort of communist utopia: he dreams of universal brotherhood, multicolored, where borders no longer exist, culture, roots, different religions…
The first dogma of this utopia is absolute ecumenism: all gods are equal, and Christ is not “the way” at all, the Truth and the Life”; the second is Rousseau's optimism: there is no original sin, men are all naturally good, and the sin lies in whoever first put a "fence" on his properties (“enclosure” is the word used by the proto-communist Rousseau; Bergoglio would say "wall").
Remember Marx? He wanted to build the perfect world, in which social classes and private property would no longer exist, police, prisons, keys, doors… Heaven on earth.
It's called utopia, and every utopia is built precisely on the idea that evil is not saved by God, but by men. Bergoglio's world is not that of fairy tales, as it might seem, where everything goes, all you need is a magic wand (which in this case is the word “welcome”); no, it is that of utopia: the multi-ethnic world, multicolored, multireligioso, without walls, porte, keys, too bad...it's the dream of a man who, as is very evident in many other aspects, he has no transcendent vision, but immanent of existence.
Let's get to the second point: the Jesuit Martini as Bergoglio's teacher (regardless of the negative opinion that the former archbishop of Milan had of the Argentine cardinal, considered culturally too crude and temperamentally unreliable).

Martini was a standard bearer of ecumenical dialogue pushed to excess, that is, to moral and religious indifferentism, and in particular of dialogue with Islam (although in certain circumstances I also understood the dangers of this). He was the ideologue of an "interracial" society, intercultural and also interreligious", going so far as to praise immigration in itself and to hope for a "multi-cultural and multi-integrated society" (“Avvenire”, 10 February 1990).
Come? Through gestures of various types (how to wash the feet of foreigners on Holy Thursday, something that Bergoglio repeats continuously), Carte's affirmation of the "rights of the migrant", the praise of the opening of all borders, e, listen, listen to the utopian-Marxist component, the call for the suppression of the prisons themselves, in the name of overcoming evil, of guilt, of sin through dialogue! (interview given to the periodical “Un’ora d’aria”, treated by the Red Brigades members of the “San Vittore” prison, “Avvenire”, 2 March 1988).

If we were to reread some of the Catholic press from the 1990s we would find the same actors as today: for example Caritas which praised the Martelli law and the Turco-Napolitano law, and who signed appeals together with the communists of Arci and the Manifesto, for a “multicultural and multireligious society”.
It was obvious, At that time, that there was no real migrant urgency, but only a dream, an immigrationist ideology. That same ideology that, today it serves as a Trojan horse for the destruction of both the West and Africa itself.
Source: http://www.marcotosatti.com/2018/06/19/limmigrazionismo-e-uneresia-dice-super-ex-e-martini-lha-insegnata-a-papa-bergoglio/