The Bad Press Reblog
We were just given another example of how sheepish and easily controllable mainstream press is.
On his return flight from the Baltic Republic, Pope Francis simply ordered that questions about Vigano ‘ and his shameless silence about his accusations be avoided.
Journos all complied, obviously in order to avoid not being invited on the next occasion. Journalists who shut up on demand are no journalists.
The mainstream press has become a bunch of order takers, and they are surprised that their credibility and readership is in free fall.
The only acceptable behaviour for any decent outlet would have been to refuse to have journalists on the plane on such conditions, making clear that there is a huge elephant in the room and they will be interested in hearing what the Pope has to say when he addresses the issue of the huge elephant, and not before.
This way, they all…
View original post 60 more words
Archbishop McMahon of Liverpool has just given us a fitting example of the degree of incompetence, arrogance and outright stupidity currently plaguing the Church. Google this stuff, because I cannot put it here.
The argument of the man is that, as he celebrates the Mass “handed to him” from Paul VI, he is a follower of “Tradition”, too.
You couldn’t make it up.
First of all, words have a meaning. I cannot credibly say that I am, too, a Communist, because I think that “we all have values in common”. Nor can I say that I am, too, a Vegetarian, because I do like vegetables. If I did that, I would look just as stupid, manipulative and outright dishonest as the Archbishop does.
Secondly, the Archbishop defeats his very argument. If he can claim the respect due to tradition because he celebrates in a rite born the day before yesterday, how much more worthy of respect is the rite celebrated for two thousand years? Can the Archbishop please answer that? Pretty please?
Thirdly, the Archbishop does something I am, personally, really, really, really, r.e.a.l.l.y. tired of: he insults the intelligence of his readers, whom he evidently considers all minus habens to whom you talk as to children of three; apart from the fact that decent people tend not to intentionally deceive even children of three.
Fourthly, and perhaps most infuriating of all, the Archbishop does something very fashionable among his peers: he pretends to ignore the issue at hand. Catholics are not insistent on the Traditional Latin Mass because they think that, in principle, if it’s old it has to be kept. If that were the case, the mass would still be in Greek. The issue here is that a) the Traditional Latin Mass is the mass mandated in Quo Primum, and b) the Mass of Paul VI is not that, but merely a protestantised deformation of the Mass that should be celebrated instead of it.
Really, one wonders how these people are selected, as it seems that a staggering amount of – let us say it again – arrogance and stupidity is now a requirement for the job.
As we say in Italy: braccia rubate all’ Agricoltura, that is: arms stolen to (= that would be much better employed in) agricultural work.
Archbishop McMahon should not be Archbishop. He should be tilling the ground in some potato field near Liverpool; because he has made abundantly clear that he does not even begin to understand what the Traditional Latin Mass is, why Catholics like it, and what the meaning and value of Tradition is. In short, ha has showed that he does not understand the very basics of Catholicism, but he wants that we listen to his astonishing diarrhoea because hey, he is the Archbishop.
How this guy dares to show himself before his sheep is beyond me.
The Evil Clown will soon fly to Eastern Europe and, no doubt, he will make a big show of it, the aeroplane being one of his favourite ways to make himself beautiful and look like he really cares.
I reflect on this phenomenon, and cannot but conclude that the easiness with which the Evil Clown could transform his papacy into an Evil Flying Circus is due to the fact that others, before him, have done the same, even if with, admittedly, much better intentions.
Enter John Paul The Great Entertainer.
I remember those long tv broadcasts, with the waiting for the plane, then the plane getting bigger, approaching the landing strip, landing, preparing for the august guest to show himself to the world. The question was posed at intervals, but always in the air:
Will he kiss the ground?
This TV ritual, this semi pagan gesture no Pope before him had felt the need to make, truly marks the beginning of the Flying Circus. There was something so very off with it, so pagan/vegan/new age/Buddha boy/tree hugger/soy pope, that no one of his successors, not even Mr Wheelchair Lover Boy himself – who loves to kneel in front of infidels and perverts, but not in front of Christ – picked it up.
Still, all the cameras where there, the journalist in almost breathless expectation, as John Paul slowly went down the stairs of the aeroplane and, or so it always seemed to me, expressed to God his relief and gratitude that the plane had not crashed.
It’s a slippery slope, you see. The not very photogenic, and much more sober in style, successor of John Paul the Earth Kisser refrained from such gestures, but Wheelchair Lover Boy took up the habit in style, even if he changed the procedure.
And what do we learn from all this?
You make of the Church a Flying Circus, it’s just a matter of time before you get the Flying Clown.
No wonder they treat us like imbeciles. Many of us are.Kate R.
Thus writes reader Kate R. in a recent comment, and I think that she is right. I would like to also expand a bit and explain what I think is the real problem.
Dumb people have always existed. Mediocrity in everything has always been the guiding star of most people. Thinking has always been a business for which only a minority was ready. If you read books written in past ages, mocking the so-called “wisdom” of the time, you can have a good idea of what I am talking about. If you love Italian literature, Leopardi’s Zibaldone and Manzoni’s immortal I Promessi Sposi deal with the issue with brutal, but amusing, frankness.
However, there are two elements that differentiate this age from all ages that preceded it. They are the fact that 1) Modern Cretin has a university degree, and 2) Modern Cretin had no religious upbringing.
Once upon a time, a peasant knew he was a peasant. He could have thought that he possessed his own degree of smart thinking, with which he tried to impress the other peasants; but deep down, he knew that he did not know jack of pretty much anything beyond, perhaps, a modicum of technical/professional knowledge.
Also, yesteryear’s peasant lived in an environment that gave him, without even having to carry out the complex task of thinking, a whole set of predetermined, inescapable rules, pretty much all of them inscribed within a rigid Christian framework.
Therefore, a mediocre brain born in 1693 had two great advantages when compared with the mediocre brain born in 1993: he knew he was dumb, and he knew how to get to heaven.
This is not really happening anymore, and it is certainly not happening among the urban heathen populations of the XXI Century. They have acquired (like their peasant, or fishmonger, or blacksmith ancestor), a technical knowledge allowing them to work in their professional environment. But their brain doesn’t really know how to work properly. They feel educated and smart, though, which was not the case for their ancestors. You only need to tell them what “science” says, and they will swallow it hook, line and sinker, because doing otherwise would make them feel, well, exactly like their uneducated ancestors. They will believe in global warming, but will not believe in a Creator, and will be too dumb to simply grasp how infinitely illogical and, in a word, plain dumb both positions are.
Nor will they have the safeguard of a religion telling them to shut up, pray, and get on with the program of working towards Salvation. They will make their own rules, they will make of their own little, arrogant, dumb selves their own personal gods, and they will feel good and very sophisticated in the process.
This is the situation we are living in today; but today’s peasants are far easier to manipulate than yesteryear’s ones, because they can be easily allured with “science”. The woman who wants to be free to kill her baby in the womb will not stop for a moment – because she is *dumb*, and because she is *faithless* – and think that an abortion is killing her own baby in the womb. She will, very simply, await some stupid slogan like someone telling her that some evil man wants to threaten her “body”, or wait – if particularly dumb – for someone telling her that it is “science” that a baby in the womb isn’t really a human being…. et voila’, you have another dumb woman supporting abortion as she sips her $4.25 latte with her “sexually curious” female friend, possibly talking about marijuana, favourite bed practices, and vibrators. The same applies, of course, to their male friend, very stupidly hoping to get a piece of the action by wearing some senseless t-shirt with “the future is female”, or something like it, and not even understanding that women find such a behaviour pretty much as sexy as a drunken beggar vomiting on his pants.
This, my friends, is the reality of the Imbeciles of the XXI Century.
They are many, as they always were.
But this time, they are far more dangerous.
Look, it’s very simple: this will never stop for as long as Francis lives, and we will need to be lucky for it to stop afterwards.
Francis is raping the Church into a support mechanism for the Islamization of Europe. The last example is the monstrous mega puppet of “Little Amal”, whom nobody ever asked to go seeking her mother in Europe. In fact, nobody needed her mother in Europe, either.
Shitholes will have shit situations. The inhabitants of the shitholes should direct their effort towards making their shithole countries decent places to live in (and good luck doing that with the wrong religion), not crying help and conveniently recycling themselves as refugees every time the shit hits the fan; which, over there, is pretty, pretty often.
But no: we now have the tear story of the refugee girl, as Little Gretin is not not a girl anymore and something else has to be found to make dumb people feel all warm and fuzzy. Little Amal is not little, either. It is a huge circus apparatus meant to provide a photo op for the stupid. But look at Frankie, smiling as gives his hand to the monster, and joyfully inviting the invasion of the Continent, because inclusion.
Let me explain how Marxism works: the “oppressed” must be united against the “oppressors”. It is irrelevant whether the oppressed are compatible, as Communists will kill everybody who needs killing once the uprooting of the capitalist order has been achieved. From Muslims to perverts, and from poor to scroungers, everybody is enrolled.
It is abundantly obvious that to Francis, who clearly has no faith, the Church is merely a vehicle of that social conservatism that needs to be uprooted if the “oppressed” (as he sees them) are to win. He does not care a straw for Amal, or anybody like her. What he cares for is to contribute to the subversion of the capitalistic “system of production” as much as he can. I think, however, that sheer old hatred for the Church out of which he has scrounged his entire existence is also a part of the equation; then this one here is an old, lewd man, dominated by hatred.
Alas, the pictures seem to show a guy in reasonably good health, and we will see how the next months go in that respect. But seriously, we are now in mid-September and, if the medical situation is as bad as some have said, I would expect to see, so to speak, more of it by now.
We can hope.
And we most certainly should pray.
Father A is a guy who loves the Church. His vocation is sincere. He thinks that the patrimony of the Church is invaluable and that the Traditional Latin Mass is one of the most beautiful expressions of it. He suspects that Lex Orandi is Lex Credendi. However, he does not like conflict. He wants to have a life of prayer and of service to his sheep. He learns to cope with Vatican II, though he clearly doesn’t like it. He joins a seminary and, after eight years, becomes a priest. He waits for better times.
Father B is a guy who loves the Church. His vocation is sincere, and very strong. He thinks that the Church is going downhill, and he will not be any part of it. He thinks that the Traditional Latin Mass is not negotiable. He knows that Lex Orandi is Lex Credendi. He wants a life of service to Christ, and is ready to suffer whatever he has to suffer to do it. He joins a Seminary knowing that, after eight years, he will be excommunicated the very same day he becomes a priest. He wants to be part of the better times instead of waiting for them; but he also wants to be a part of the martyrs if this is the glory that God has in store for him.
Whom do you think, of the two, will react better when the tough times come?
Whom do you think, of the two, will make the better priest overall?
Francis is, at least, separating the wheat from the chaff.
We’ll soon know if love for Tradition is also love for Christ.
The Germans call it Salami Tactics. This is the idea that, if you want to reach a certain objective but are afraid of a strong backlash, you should go about it one little slice at a time. No single act will be, in itself, such that it unchains the big confrontation. But in the end, you will have sliced the entire salami anyway.
Famously, a guy who knew a thing or three about tyranny advocated exactly the same tactics – though he did not call it that way – in order to deprive people of that inconvenient thing, freedom. His name was Adolf Hitler.
The very same tactic is being used now to get rid of the Traditional Latin Mass.
The strong initial reaction to TC put us in a position of advantage. Still, only two months later, the first slices of salami are being cut. Look only at Paris and you will see exactly what I am talking about.
Will this tactic work? As always, it will if the other side allows it.
Make no mistake: polite disagreement will lead you exactly nowhere. Waiting for better times will only create worse times. Diplomacy does not work with people like Francis. If Francis dies without great opposition to TC, a Francis II will be far more probable than a Pius XIII or a Benedict XVII.
We need to understand that if we want to stop the nefarious effects of TC we need to go nuclear on every Bishop who moves to damage the TLM.
Please don’t give me the “if we do that we will give Francis the excuse to do even worse” routine. If you have not understood that Francis already wants to do worse I am very sorry to break it out to you, but I think that you are just plain dumb.
The salami of the TLM is being cut as we speak, one slice at a time. The strong, determined reactions seen in July are just not there anymore. We will, no doubt, read a lot of recommendations to “prudence”, we will hear that “this is not the right time”, that we need to keep a “cool head”.
Those who tell you so are, wittingly or not, being the useful idiots of Francis and his rotten band of salami slicers. Francis does not need prudence, he needs to be booed in the street. His Bishops don’t need prudence, they need insults thrown at them.
How to react?
This is very simple, if you ask me.
Forget diplomacy. Diplomacy never works with bullies. Confrontation always does.
Write to your Bishop and tell him very frankly that abolition of even one mass in his diocese means you will see in him an enemy of Christ. No donations, no money left in your will, not one penny in the donation box, you will let the diocese rot until the diocese becomes Catholic again. And don’t be afraid of telling such a Bishop that he makes the work of Satan, too. He likely does not believe in God anyway, but it can’t do any damage. From now on, all money and all supports goes to the SSPX, so that Francis can have all the damn division he wants pushed down his demonic throat, and welcome.
Keep being “prudent” instead, and watch as your masses are being closed one at a time, without even a serious conflict, at the most with a whimper, or the concession of some more time.
Next in line, of course, are the former Ecclesia Dei orders. They will be sliced at Francis’ pleasure because, having been born with the original sin of being alive not because the TLM has to be, but because they were graciously allowed to celebrate it, they have the caving in, the humiliation, the defeat and, if it be Francis’ pleasure, their destruction written in their very DNA; and if you thought that any of these orders have balls even remotely comparable to the SSPX, you will soon discover how sorely mistaken you are.
It is not realistic to hope that, once tested, the Ecclesia Dei orders will pass the test. They exist exactly because they never did. Their pathetic whimpering and disgusting repeated quotation of V II documents in their appeal to the French Bishops to, pretty please, tolerate them a little longer is just a request to be cut away one slice at a time as they await the miracle of Pius XIII; a miracle, mark my words, that they have not deserved, as they exist exactly in order to weaken the true Catholics, those who understood that JP II salami knife was hard at work and acted accordingly.
Naturally, there is a microscopically small possibility that all this pathetic, effeminate V II quoting (even of Amoris Laetitia, which is truly the height of boot licking) is only part of a clever plan meant to make Francis look bad, and these orders will rebel once they are ordered to close their seminaries or the like. I, for myself, consider this no more than wishful thinking and, in fact, an exercise in self-delusion until I am (please, God!) proven wrong.
Please reflect on this: in all probability, the Ecclesia Dei orders will not be closed down straight. They will simply be killed one slice at a time, with the consternation but oh so pious approval of the apostles of the Obedience Against Christ that makes these institutional Catholics feel so prudent and fuzzy inside.
And just in case you still haven’t understood it: I did not listen to all 59 minutes of the famous Taylor Marshall video that is causing so much discussion. Still, I have dedicated to it enough time to get away the message that he thinks the document is, even if limited to France, representative of an attitude, that is: the reaction of wet kitten hoping to be smashed against the Modernist Tree a bit later than next month. I have read the letter and, if this is his thinking, I think he is exactly right.
My prediction is that their wish will be granted: they will be smashed against the Modernist Tree fairly slowly, one kitten at a time, without fanfare, and with some good cat food occasionally thrown to them before the execution, because Francis loves the oppressed.
Please, God, make me be so wrong on this as I have never been in my life. But whatever happens, please never let me become one of those who disobey to You as they boast of their obedience to an evil man like Francis.
I remember noticing the issue first with Rush Limbaugh. I read the transcripts of his radio shows and the first thing I noticed was the endless, endless waffle. It was like Seinfeld, “the show about nothing”, with something thrown in after needing twenty minutes to get to the darn point.
Like many others, I have a fairly busy life. Not being retired, I – and many others with me – do not have one hour to devote to one simple issue. If the issue were very complex (say: Predestination) I would understand it if a video were long, but packed with content. But if the issue if a simple one (e.g. is this right, should Caius do that, was Sempronius wrong) then I’d say that less is most certainly more.
It often happens to me that I want to watch a video about a simple issue (e.g. a letter written to Francis) and, upon seeing that the video goes on literally forever (e.g. 59 minutes) I give up before starting.
Why are videos so long? The tendency to waffle a bit is natural, but again he who makes a video should know it, prepare a sort of bullet points list, and go on in proper order through them.
Perhaps it is because of the ads? Maybe so. But even in that case, wouldn’t it be better, for Mr Professional Videomaker, to produce more videos of ten or eleven minutes, but packed with content and which more people actually watch, then inflicting 59 minutes of waffle, alone or with Mr Waffling Guest, when most certainly ten would have sufficed to make the damn point?
I suspect in one hour I could read one and a half, perhaps two of those pre-V II encyclical letters actually full of content, and this would nourish me more than 20 hours of video waffling about one event happened yesterday.
You might say that I can simply not watch, and that’s that. Very true, and I actually don’t. But it seems to me that this is becoming endemic. It seems to me that it’s getting far too fashionable, and I am missing stuff which, if reasonably presented, would actually have been interesting.
I wish people would keep it short. I wrote this in a matter of minutes, and you will read it far faster than I wrote it. It makes the point in a, or so I think, fairly exhaustive way.
Or perhaps those interested in Catholic things are all retired people with a lot of time in their hands, and I am the exception.
The preliminary documents of the Hagan Lio synod are now ready and they are just as bad as expected.
The guiding principle of the operation seems to be: we want people who hate Catholicism and don’t accept the rules to have a say about both Catholicism and its rules, because inclusion. You can imagine the rest.
It’s as if the Chinese Communist Party would invite the Cato Institute to give their input about how to improve Communism. With the big difference that the Church does not need any improving, she merely needs to get start taking herself seriously and demand that the faithful and the world at large do the same.
This is, as you have already understood, Francis’ Mother Of All Hagan Lios, a planned, systematic two years of strife and controversy meant to confuse as many Catholics as possible as much as possible, whilst persuading dissenters and heretics that the church is a democracy they can reshape in their own image and resemblance.
How do we counteract this revolutionary movement? In the only possible way: by waging war against wayward clergy and subversive laymen. Shame them, insult them, attack their agenda at every step.
If Francis thinks that this is going to be the Sixties all over again, he is sadly mistaken. Too many Catholics have woken up by now, and sixty years of devastation have shown to every honest pew sitter what happens when you allow the hippies, the perverts, the atheists, the commies, the adulterers, and the Freemasons to have a say.
Francis, who might or might not see the end of the synod, probably thinks this will be his final giving of the bird to the Church he hates.
Let’s make the exercise as painful as possible for him and his motley crew of reprobates.
Bring it on, Frankie boy.
We will counter blow for blow.
You will not like it.
And it came to pass some very funny guy predicted that, for the Evil Clown’s trip to Slovakia, 300,000 people would show up. Being so confident in the power of this guy to attract crowds (how many pervs and trannies do you want to have in Slovakia?), the Slovakian authorities required proof of vaccination to get a ticket.
At that point you had two big problems compounding: a Pope who thinks and talks as if he had come out of a satanists’ club , and a deeply unpopular vaccine which does not vaccinate against anything, half the Slovakians clearly reject and, as a whole, seems to do more bad than good (forgetting, for a moment, the way in which at least one of them was “achieved”).
Let us look at the implications here. If the Slovakian authorities believed in the efficacy of the “vaccines”, they would never risk a super spreader event to satisfy the vanity of the old nincompoop. This clearly means that the “vaccines” don’t work, everybody knows it, they are only used to signal virtue and oppress the minority of sound thinking people, and their requirement can be waived at the first sign of inconvenience.
Oh, wait. Could it be that the Slovakian Authorities think that the man will, by way of his sheer saintliness, keep the virus away?
Sorry. Bad joke. Really bad. I take that away. Please delete last remark.
Also funny will be to see what happens next. Yes, more people will ask for a ticket now that Nazi Nanny has relented her grip. Yes, a lot of people will show up merely out of curiosity. Heck, there will be people who show up merely to let their Government understand that if they want things to work, they need to waive these stupid vaccine requirements. However, all of this will not be sufficient to hide another obvious facts: this clown pope is abhorred by Catholics. He is, at this point, nothing more than a circus attraction, a sort of freak show people see like they used to do with the Cannon Woman (they were very rare then; now they are everywhere) and the Bearded Woman (no scarcity of freak shows on the steeet nowadays, either).
As the Evil Clown flies his overweight backside to Slovakia, because “save the planet”, it will be interesting to see what tricks cameramen employ to make the crowd seem very big.
After all, we live in an age of such massive gaslighting that this will count as nothing compared to a vaccine that does not work, and this should be because of those who actually do not take it.
You couldn’t make it up.
But then again this is the age when even the pope is a sad joke.
Remember our boy in purple? Well, it turns out that his lurv wasn’t a “platonic” one. This means, the man has not left his post because his (unrequited) falling in love made him realise how unsuited he was. No, he actually shacked up with the woman. Concubinage. A Bishop.
Dear reader, you know already that, for this to happen, that woman must not be a paragon of feminine virtues. Alas, it’s worse than that. The (I need to say it; not because I think beauty is worth going to hell; but because beauty is, at least, beauty, and men are very sensitive to female beauty…) very mediocre looking woman has a baggage (married to an infidel, check; divorced, check; children in tow, check) and is an author of erotic-satanic literature besides a compulsive reader of erotic stuff.
What does this tell us? Well, it seems pretty easy to me: easy woman obsessed with sex wants the forbidden fruit and proceeds to entirely (cough) bewitch our boy bishop into leaving his job, his God, his dignity, and become the (make no mistake) cuckolded concubine of the experiment-happy woman.
My prediction: after destroying his life and ravaging his soul, the woman will proceed to extract from the guy every last drop of manliness; after which, she will sail off to her next “erotic adventure” with some other horny idiot who likes ugly women with transgression itches.
What do we learn from this? In my eyes, one thing or two:
The first is that this idea of “bishops who falls in lurv and has to, has to leave his job” is just not there. This here is purest stupidity and lust nourished straight by some demon.
The second is that the legend of the good girl who falls in love with the bishops and has to, has to pursue her romantic dream, because lurv, is another legend. Good girls leave men of God alone.
The third is that these people live in a deeply dysfunctional mind space. To think that this was the same guy to tried to let his betrayal look good tells you everything you need to know about the amount of self-deception going on there.
Quos Deus perdere vult, dementat prius, we say in the Beautiful Country. This one here seems a textbook example.
Enjoy your sex-obsessed ugly, the two children in tow and – easy prediction – the many lovers you’ll have to live with, Bishop.
Chances are your remaining life on earth will be a good preview of the main show awaiting you after death.
The Suffragettes Reblog
Today is the day feminists all over the world scream the usual nonsense about a fake “parity” that betrays the very essence of femininity.
Happily, this 2017 appears different from the more recent ones. Chewbacca is not the First Lady anymore, and we see timid signs of the rejection of aggressive “femancipation” calls. The new First Lady recites the Our Father at her husband’s rallies. Long may it last.
For Catholics, the matter of emancipation is fairly simple:
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.
Hhmmm…. St Paul on the one side, the secular culture on the other side. I wonder who is right?
We live in times of pernicious mixing of secular and religious values. For nineteen centuries, Christians have felt no need for “emancipation”. At some point, though, the movement gained such traction that it became ingrained in the Western…
View original post 760 more words
Mr Orban, the Hungarian Prime Minister, seems to have some quite remarkable issue.
The first one is that, whatever his personal failings may be, the guy is actually a Christian. I know, I know… I am trying not to be judgmental here, but yes, we have a problem.
The second one is that the guy isn’t a Globalist. I find this a big deal, because how can we tackle the challenges of this Century unless we shackle ourselves to China? Again, not being judgmental because we should be tolerant of everybody, but I am sure you see the problem here.
The third is that the guy does not want Hungary to mutate to another Afghanistan. This is another problematic stance, than history shows that wherever the religion of peace prospers, peace actually reigns supreme; in stark contrast to the continuous, extremely bloody civil wars going on in a multitude of Christian Countries. It is a mystery to me how Mr Orban can fail to see that. I think his obvious racism (no judgment; just fact) clouds his thinking.
You see, we have a number of stances here that do not really square with our open minded attitude. One could actually wonder whether open mindedness should extend to aiding and abetting of hatred, islamophobia, homophobia, tranniephobia, Sinophobia and Brusselsphobia. Plus, As already stated, he is also a racist. Not being judgmental here. ‘Course not. But CNN is never wrong, sooo…
I am, therefore, very happy to know that Pope Francis The Oh So Tolerant Wheelchair Hugger is trying to do all he can to try and avoid meeting said Mr Orban when he visits, next week or so.
You see, Pope Francis is tolerant. How can he, therefore, tolerate Mr Orban? That would be a contradiction in terms, actually a total fraud!
No. Tolerance demands that Pope Francis Of Pachamama does not get near the man if he can do that at all without causing a big diplomatic issue; and, if a meeting really can’t be avoided, that he meets the man in as fast, informal and insignificant a setting as possible; because you see, Francis cannot allow that his tolerance be tarnished by one whose values we do not tolerate. It would be a betrayal of the most important values of them all, tolerance.
So, dear readers: please praise together with me the Great Values of Tolerance, Inclusion and Openness To The Other, whilst refusing to even listen to those who claim that Christianity may have anything in it that is worth I don’t say merely tolerating, but actually listening to. Who has ever said that Tolerance should extend to the things we cannot tolerate? Come on, man!
I really hope I have persuaded you that my argument is sound. If I haven’t, I will have to call you intolerant, knowing that Pope Saint Francis of Tolerance is on my side.
Most of my readers will agree with me that, as a whole, Chinese men are not considered the epitome of rugged masculinity. However, there are signals that, in a couple of decades, this might be reversed and Chinese men actually might seem more masculine than their White counterparts.
The Chinese Government is now getting tired of the girlie boys that apparently dominate the entertainment industry over there and are, in part, “imported” by Countries like South Korea. This being a Communist dictatorship, I do not doubt that a mixture of moral suasion, censorships and actual arrests will follow the new change of course. Therefore, expect that, in the next years, young Chinese boys will have public male models that are, in fact, manly.
Contrast and compare, if you please, with the increasing frequency with which European – and, no doubt, North American – young males show in their tone, gesture, posture and general demeanour the devastating effect of the combination of androgynous culture and soy drinks. In fact, if you go around any big city in the United Kingdom, you will notice an alarming number of them, almost all in their late teens or early twenties.
Unless we wake up, this is the future. The waking up will, methinks, begin when women start to denounce the legend of toxic masculinity (masculinity isn’t toxic, at all; no one calls a bitch “toxic femininity”) and demand that men stop soyfying themselves in both the literal and figurative sense and finally grow some you-know-what. Just cutting the soy and getting acquainted with red meat would do a lot.
And so there we are, in this still young XXI Century, where Chinese men risk to become the next Clint Eastwoods and your average soyboy informs you of his pronouns “he/him”.
Even the Commies think straighter than us.
And it came to pass that the Supreme Court provisionally left alive a Texan law forbidding abortion from when a heartbeat is detectable, that is, around six weeks. Six weeks is good, then, unless and until technology advances, most women will discover too late that they are pregnant. One can also see a powerful argument in the collective imagination here: when a heartbeat is detected, how is this not a baby? I know, life begins at conception; but very many who don’t believe it will find it difficult to resist the heartbeat argument.
I have no illusion that this Texan law will survive the scrutiny to come, as I can’t imagine that jellyfishes like Kavanaugh and that traitorous other woman will find the fortitude to make the right choice here (a fairly easy one btw, as they could state that modern technology makes things known today that were, officially, not grasped in January 1973). Still, this decision is important.
It seems to me that there is a growing pressure against abortion, and that all these legislative measures officially doomed to fail are slowly but surely chewing the Nazi Wall away. In the end, the stolen 2020 elections have made clear to everybody in the most brutal way what everybody with a brain already knew: the important, society-changing decisions of the Supreme Court are eminently political. The Justices pretended that the Constitution gives the right to abort and to live in abominable circumstances because that was the perceived climate of the day among the urban elites and the press, and the Justices were either all too willing to go with it, or too cowardly to oppose it.
In the next years we might see something like that, but in reverse. As the pressure mounts to put some limit on the senseless genocide, the Supreme Court might, at some point, pick some excuse to do just that, whilst claiming to stay within precedent. In time, when the climate is further improved, Roe vs Wade could be ditched with some other argument picked to hide what the Justices very well know: the times, they are a’ changing’, again.
The Evil Side used this tactics to promote perversion and, at least in other countries, abortion.
I think we should use the same tactics to oppose both perversion and abortion.
A Bishop in Spain, who even fancied himself a conservative one, “retired” at the tender age of 53. The reasons? He “fell in love with a woman for the first time” and “wants to do it right”.
Let’s talk about this a bit, shall we?
Firstly: if a priest (even more so a Bishop) leaves the Priesthood and starts his little romantic tragedy with a woman, why is he allowed to draw a pension? Why is he not defrocked and deprived of everything, food, money, roof? And what the heck is a pension at 53?
Secondly: how can such children be allowed to become priests, let alone Bishops? Has he not been told in the Seminary that forever means for ever, and no circumstances of life allow exceptions to this?
Third: how does this guy, at his age and in his position, dare to put his personal feelings before his duties and before Christ?
Fourth: in which effeminate, perverted universe does a Bishop think that abandoning post and deserting Christ is “doing it right?” Right compared to what, peddling drugs?
Fifth (leading from fourth): in what deranged Francisplanet the guy thinks that all possible actions (double life, retirement) include his following his juvenile lurv, and no option includes abandoning the relationship, asking to be moved elsewhere, possibly to Chile, and, in general, behave like a damn man?
Sixth: how can this grown up boy think as if lurv were something that happens to one, like the flu? How many times has he consented to his desire and allowed it to grow to the point of depriving him of reason and manliness? A priest needs to cultivate his love for Christ and the Church, to which he has already consecrated, donated his entire life, to the point of getting a new name to signify the death of the old man. This guy has just no right to fall in love. He does not belong to himself anymore, but to Christ. His heart is not his own anymore, to give away as he pleases.
Seventh: how can this adolescent pussycat not recognise that there is nothing good, nothing holy, nothing chaste in a woman leading a man belonging to Christ to such a situation? Unless (which is nowadays unlikely) the love is unrequited and the poor woman is nothing to do with Boy Bishop falling in love all of his own, how can he think that anything good at all will come out of this? How can he not see that Satan has used the woman as a means to have both those souls for him?
Eight, and last: what king of age is this one, that points one to seven need to be made in the first place? But no, expect the usual celebration of lurv, and this little boy called courageous and the like.
If these are the “conservative” Bishop, it’s further demonstration that it is not enough for a priest to be V II “conservative”. One must be traditionalist.
Then traditionally, this whole post would not have been necessary.
Francis informs us that today is the world blabla day for the blabla care of blabla creation, or something of the sort I can’t even care to look up.
Without knowing the exact name, I think you know what this is about: the “new age” cult of the earth our atheist excrementator in chief loves so much, because it allows him to push his socialist agenda.
I think I will, for once, take the guy’s words at heart and suggest that you, my dear reader, care for and suitably celebrate this day so dear to Francis’ heart.
Get your internal combustion engine car and have a nice drive somewhere where God created natural beauty. Celebrate the cosiness of your house by switching on every light you have in it, thanking the Lord for the beauty of that nature that makes Sister Electricity possible. Have a nice dinner based on a huge Porterhouse steak as you think of all those cows happily grazing God’s green earth. Consider eating said Porterhouse in the garden, with your Brother Gas heather celebrating the great gift of fossil fuel.
What a beautiful way to celebrate, support and affirm God’s wonderful Creation in so many aspects! What a wise, exhilarating prayer of thanksgiving! Can there be any doubt that Frankie will be absolutely on your side, and – in spirit, of course – want to hug with you that 100 miles away tree that is, on this special day, so specially moving?
Think of this: with that belly, I am sure Frankie himself knows a think or three about Porterhouse steaks, with abundant potatoes to make his wonder at God’s gifts complete.
Yes, Frankie. You have persuaded me.
Creation really is a beautiful thing.
He will have his shortcomings (who hasn’t), but Bolsonaro really gets it. His latest appeal to Brazilian citizen to go on and arm themselves is the thinking of a person who puts individual rights before the tyranny of the government.
Jesus went around with a security detail, and if you don’t believe me you are welcome to read the Gospel when you have time. If Jesus did not have any need of arms for self-defence and still wanted his disciples to carry a number of them, how can it be doubted that being armed for self-defence is an obvious, natural right of every man?
Bolsonaro is the more remarkable because he was, himself, stabbed by a criminal who almost put an end to his life. He could, were he not Bolsonaro, go around crying that there must be a strong control on arms of all types in order to avoid what has happened to him. Still, this guy loves common sense instead of common places, and does not seek the easy popularity of those hypocrites who live surrounded by walls but consider them unchristian.
We need to recover common sense and start spreading the word:
The apostles went around armed. I want the right to do the same.
Another week, another rumour of (please, God!) resignation of Nobody’s Darling, Pope Francis The Godless. This time, there is a fact and a rumour.
Monsignor Marini, good guy and long-suffering liturgy specialist of our guy, has been made a Bishop. This is the sort of gifts that are made before going away.
The rumour is that Francis might be thinking of a motu proprio concerning the discipline of abdicated Popes, as in: can he call himself emeritus, how may he dress, etc. This has some people thinking, adding rumour to rumour, that Francis is preparing his own exit and wants it cleaner than the unspeakable mess caused by Ratzinger; a man who, wanting to pull a Celestino without getting the blame, invented the application of the emeritus stuff to the office of the Pope.
I am, personally, not interested in the motu proprio. Whatever Francis does, his successor may well undo. I would not read much into something that might just be the result of Francis just being tired that even Celestino still has much more prestige than him.
The appointment of Marini, though, is, to me, a much bigger affair, then it really looks like one of those appointments made before the farewell. I am always too optimistic, and the good Lord gave me a remarkable ability to see the glass as half full. But this is another one of those things – and a fact to boot – that make you think.
Mind, it can still be that we are all wrong, and that this is just a sort of confirmation bias, made worse by our long suffering under this man. But one after the other, these little signals start to add up…
Pray for the end of this Pontificate, and for a successor that God, in His Goodness, may shape into a decent Pope.
How valuable time is to us may be gauged by the fact that the Enemy allows us so little of it. The majority of the human race dies in infancy; of the survivors, a good many die in youth. It is obvious that to Him human birth is important chiefly as the qualification for human death, and death solely as the gate to that other kind of life. We are allowed to work only on a selected minority of the race, for what humans call a ‘normal life’ is the exception. Apparently He wants some—but only a very few—of the human animals with which He is peopling Heaven to have had the experience of resisting us through an earthly life of sixty or seventy years. Well, there is our opportunity. The smaller it is, the better we must use it. Whatever you do, keep your patient as safe as you possibly can,
Your affectionate uncle
This quote comes from “The Screwtape Letter” by C.S. Lewis, a book I was recently re-reading and which I suggest to everyone as a reading (Yes, I know he wasn’t Catholic…).
For those who don’t know, Screwtape is a “senior demon” in hell, and his letters are written to his nephew, Wormwood, whom Screwtape is tasked with “training” in the “art” of leading people to damnation. Wormwood tries to do his “best”, but he is inexperienced and frequently errs. Screwtape, who is more experienced in the subtle art of slowly leading people to hell, is his “mentor” whilst the latter is learning. The book is very funny at times, entertaining most of the times, and deadly (see what I am doing here?) serious at all times.
In the fragment above, C.S. Lewis gives us another of his brutal insights in the real business of life.
When I re-read those words, I was shocked at how different Lewis’ perspective – which is, actually, the proper Christian perspective – is compared to the way not only most people, but most people who call themselves Christians, see life nowadays.
This life is but a short moment. Time is, indeed, valuable both for Screwtape and us. However, I have more than a passing feeling that an awful lot of people who call themselves “Christians” on a sunny Sunday would lose their faith if they happened to lose a child in his early years. I don’t mean here that they would be devastated by the loss of the separation, which is a natural and obvious reaction. I mean that they would consider God unjust for taking their child away from them and, therefore, conclude that, God not being unjust, there must be no God. I myself once watched a guy on TV stating exactly the same: that he had lost his faith after losing his young daughter of, if memory serves, five. You might, or might not, also know of people who deemed themselves Christians and took their lives in cold blood after suffering the loss of a child. Please do not fabricate excuses for suicide: “depression”, “not her fault”, and the like. Cold-blooded suicides have no excuses. It’s Screwtape at work. If you think otherwise, you need to revisit your Catholicism, stat.
Not so our Christian predecessors; who were, actually, Christian. Many of them – very many, in those times – suffered the excruciating pain of the loss of a child. But their pain was, at all times, tempered by the sweet awareness that their beloved child, *invariably baptised* and died at two, three, four, six years of age, was most certainly in Heaven. Heaven is the only reason why we are born, and the only real goal we have in life, as everything else disappears into nothingness when compared to the infinite value of eternal life. Therefore, the only possible conclusion for a Christian is that God was very good to a soul He allowed to be born and to be happy with Him forever after a short sojourn on this Vale of Tears.
I might repeat this to you, but I think it’s faster it you read it again and again, until you have interiorised the concept.
If I ended up in hell, it would have been better for me if I had never been born, even if my damnation came after 120 years of a very happy life (which almost no one enjoys anyways). The child who died in his infancy would be graced by God with infinitely more than me.
But even if – as I certainly hope – I should end up in Purgatory, I very much doubt that I would be able to say that I had a better lot than said child: a life spanning one or two handfuls of decades, during which some Wormwood is “allowed to work on me”, is hardly a compensation for the risk of sending myself to hell. Plus, Purgatory is not a walk in the park, either. Bar a minority of really saintly people, the vast majority of us pays a steep price for the decades on the Vale of Tears. God’s ways are always good; but don’t think you had it better than the small child who died of leukemia at 5. You were likely worse off, by a distance.
The world does not understand this, because the world does not understand God. The world is angry at God for the people who live in “inequality”, and for the people who die young, and for the animals that die, and for the plants that die. The same world, however, does not hesitate in making people die in their mother’s womb. Loss of God always translates into madness.
Screwtape’s words above are a fairly strong reminder of real wisdom. We might do worse than reminding ourselves of it, then the world surrounding us tries to make us forget all the time.
“… spinelessly kowtowing to their liberal puppet-masters”
This is not Mundabor in the XXI Century. This is Monsieur Veuillot in the XIX. A guy lavishly praised by no less a great man than Saint Pius X.
Veuillot was criticising, very harshly for the times, a Bishop. However, I am pretty sure that the most liberal French Bishop in the XIX Century was infinitely more Catholic than the current Pope, then the latter is clearly not Catholic at all, unless in name and job.
As I have stated countless times, it is not only allowed, but fitting that laymen criticise the clergy when the clergy strays. It is our love for Christ and His Church which demands that it be so.
In fact, I will go further than this and I will say that, in these times of unprecedented straying of the earthly Church from Her proper course, it is fitting for the laymen to denounce the abuses with unprecedented harshness.
How else do you want to make the pewsitter aware of what is going on?
I have written a blog post some days ago, stating that those who, in the Sixties and Seventies, put on without a peep with the guitars in the church deserved to have their children badly catechised and confused by clergymen “spinelessly kowtowing to their liberal puppet-masters”. They did it because they found it easier to just shut up and obey.
This tells us that the laymen finds it fairly easy (not trying to justify them; just stating a fact) to, actually, shut up and obey. In order to wake them up from their slumber, they need the shock caused by harsh words.
I have, also, often stated the reason why my blog is so robustly worded. It is because this blog is not written solely for those who are already aware of the issues, but also for those who, surprised at Francis’ (or other clergymen’s) antics, go on the Internet to look around a bit and know a bit more, and – perhaps – stumble upon my blog.
Now, the garden variety (means: non-churchgoing, horribly catechised, contracepting, “gay-accepting”) Catholic layman stumbling upon my blog and starting to read around might criticise my lack of “kindness”, but – unless he is dumb besides being uncatechised – will not question my Catholic orthodoxy. The result of this should be, I am happy to report, that twenty minutes on my blog, likely together with some other browsing around thrown in in the mix, will leave this guy with a forever changed opinion about the papacy and its role, and about what staunch Catholics think about Francis.
This, my friends, is the best we can do. It is, likely, also the only thing we can do. We as laymen need, each according to his talents and possibilities, to do our little part.
We will be mocked. We will lose friends. We might find ourselves estranged from relatives.
But we will know that we are doing the right thing, and that we are accumulating savings on our Heavenly Bank Account.
The Language Reblog
We have recently learned that, if you asked the text writers at the CDF how they call people in favour of killing a baby in his mother’s womb, they would (shrug their shoulders and) call them “pro-choice”.
I would love to ask the same people whether their would call the architects of the Holocaust “pro-final solution”. Because you see, if the wilful murdering of innocents can be called being “pro” something , they would not have a problem, surely?
We are, as always, in front of one of the biggest tragedies of our time: the adoption of the language of the enemy in order to look “moderate”.
The enemy uses words with positive connotations to mean something intrinsically wrong or evil. As a result, in the long run in becomes impossible to effectively criticise with arguments what we cannot even criticise with words.
This is, as I have often written…
View original post 321 more words
Unavoidably (as he was the last one still missing from the roll call) Albino Luciani, who was elected Pope with the name John Paul I, will be canonised next year.
It must have seemed strange to the geniuses populating the Vatican corridors (and to Francis, who was never a genius, not even in jokes) that there should have remained *one* Pope who, having been elected during the Wonderful Age Of The Spirit Of Surprises, would not be another SpiritSaint.
Hence, we have now what is possibly the greatest string of canonised popes since the first fifty or so; popes who, it might be wise to remember, died, almost all of them, as martyrs. Today, as a contrast, people say that the future Pope Saint Benedict XVI could have been forced to abdicate with the threat of harm or death, as if this wasn’t very possibly the greatest shame in the world. Boy, how the standards have fallen….
But let us leave future Pope Saint Benedict XVI, whom the Redskins know as “Runs Before Wolfs”, aside, and let us reflect on what this means for us as faithful.
First, and as I have stated now many times, the centuries-long theological debate whether canonisations are infallible is now unavoidably, definitively, and brutally obviously settled: they aren’t. The blatant abuse of the instrument for obvious political reasons makes this evident even to my cat; albeit I am ready to bet that, out there, some hardcore Pollyanna is still ready to marvel at the quantity of Saints that V II produces (she might have her motives, though… Perhaps she contracepts? Queer son? “Catholic divorce”? Questions, questions…).
Second, this is a big, fat, Argentinian show of desperation. Francis and his minions notice that V II as an institution is on its way to become more controversial among Catholics than the EU is among Italians. The way they react is trying to get the authority argument out of the drawer (or should I say: the closet) and carpet bomb the faithful with V II canonisations, in a way saying: “You see? This movement is sanctioned by Heaven and wanted by God! How can you ever doubt it?”
It will work only with the hardened Pollyannas, and I fear that many of these Pollyannas will keep many of the Francisboys company in hell. All the others can well see through the canonisation noise and properly judge it for what it is: a propaganda machine. They have, by now, abundantly discovered that the Argentinian Emperor has no clothes and is, in fact, fat, lewd, arrogant, stupid, and with not a shred of faith in him.
Pius XII is Venerable. Pius IX is Blessed. Paul VI should be a Saint? Meaning: God would want you to know that Paul VI went straight to heaven, but doesn’t feel this necessary for those, and for so many others, saintly Popes? With the recent Popes all, with the partial exception of said JP I, also extremely controversial for their degree of Catholicism? How is this logical?
Mind, I don’t think this is a move Francis makes because he wants to become Pope Saint Francis The Ass. I don’t think he even believes in God! He does it because he wants to abuse the Church to promote his Marxist social justice agenda, and in order to do that he has to abuse the canonisation instrument. Nothing new under the sun, anyway. Pope Saint JP II The Buddha Lover did the same, albeit Francis does everything in that astonishingly stupid way that is so typical of his.
What do we do with this? As always, we apply proper Catholicism to an UnCatholic age. The carpet bombing of SpiritSaints is a fraud like everything Francis tries to sell you. We use this guy to actually improve and deepen our knowledge of Catholicism. We wait patiently (and it might well be that not so much patience is required now) that the guy goes to his punishment.
Popes come and go.
Truth remains, invincible.
This will be fun to watch, and I hope that we are kept informed about the developments of this story.
First of all, an obvious introduction: Francis does not write, much less thinks, everything he reads. Being a man in a public position, he has no time or inclination to prepare all the material he needs. Of course, others write it for him, with varying degrees of success. Francis will, then, add his own satanic salt and pepper every time he feels like it: aeroplane, Angelus, you name it.
It evidently came to pass that Francis has inadvertently read some prepared statement that was, actually, Catholic. Yes, the Mosaic law does not give Life. Yes, the Jewish law was superseded by the advent of Our Lord and his death on the Cross. Yes, the Jewish religion is a false one. Yes, the Jewish faith is an obsolete one. Yes, Jews believe in a false god, and their way leads to perdition.
Francis, I am sure, disagrees with what he has said. Most likely an atheist in his heart, when asked about religion he would likely answer that there is no need to convert anyone. After all, if one “seeks God”, who is he to judge? Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that the words pronounced by the Evil Clown were one of those accidents by which fate, or some good-intentioned soul, actually let something Catholic slip in what Francis is supposed to say. Being lazy, and not a little dumb, our hero either did not see the problem, or just did not bother to add his satanic salt to it.
Alas, this was bad, because in the Age Of Dialogue it is not acceptable that a Pope might even hint that the religion of an infidel might lead him to hell.
This is, my dear readers, where the fun begins.
Rabbi Arousi has, unwittingly, put a dagger into that corpse called interreligious dialogue. He is, from his perspective, absolutely right, because Frankie cannot eat his cake and have it. If the very foundations of Christianity are to be maintained, it has to be acknowledged that infidels must “repent, and believe in the Gospel”. I think a colleague of Francis had something to say on the matter (emphasis mine):
But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.
Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.
And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people
Besides the Predecessor, it has been the constant teaching of the Church that outside of the Church there is no salvation. It is not unlikely that even Francis knows that. So, how does this square with interreligious dialogue?
It simply doesn’t. The two are not compatible. The Church calls to conversion, not to inter-religious dialogue. The Church does not say “I am OK, you are OK”. The Church says “I hope to save my hide, but your chances of it are minuscule and, to all practical purposes, they are nearing zero unless you repent, because your ignorance is, reasonably speaking, not invincible in the least”.
The Rabbi has asked the Vatican for an explanation, as it is clear here (and I think the Rabbi is perfectly right in saying it) that the altar of interreligious dialogue has been desecrated by Catholicism. If the guy receives an official answer, it will be very funny to see how the officials writing it twist themselves into a pretzel trying to reconcile the irreconcilable.
Still, this is the religion they all belong to: the Church of Nice, the masonic outfit in which everyone who calls anybody god is a member of the club.
Stay tuned, and let’s hope we are kept informed about this. Still, whatever they say, remember that truth doesn’t change.
As to the Rabbi, I would like to relay an extremely important message to him:
The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the Gospel
This little effort has been operating for now more than eleven years.
During this time, we hope that our effort has given some consolation, some hope and some instruction to all our readers.
Our effort has always been free of charge. We have, in fact, paid out of our own pocket for every expense.
We don’t have powerful backers allowing us to operate. The Opus Dei does not finance us, because we love the Society of St Pius the Tenth. No NGO would dare to even think of giving us money because we all hate Francis. Bill Gates refutes to acknowledge our existence.
Before I go on with the important message I need to share with you today, I would like to once again introduce to you our editorial, all-White, all-Male, Arch-Patriarchy team.
He is the founder and driving force behind this blog. He has a PhD in Fake Catholicism. He loves chocolate, tiramisu’, and the Oxford Comma. He is a great fan of Padre Pio. He hates Jesuits.
He covers Francis and, at times, other Bishops and Cardinals. He has a degree in Heretics Bashing. His friends say that he is not an easy guy. He loves the Blessed Virgin. He hates Jesuits.
He collaborates with this blog whenever we need someone talking about his cat. He has been, at times, accused of being a closeted dog lover, which he has always refused to deny or confirm whilst deeply resenting the word “closeted”. He has no PhD. He loves cats. He hates Jesuits.
This is the guy who writes those “we have already won” posts. We ask him to intervene in bleak times, or whenever there is a need for some wider perspective. He does not like milk in his tea. He teaches Catholicism at the Providence School for Intelligent Cats, where Cat-owning Mundabor’s cat also attends. He thinks all his pupils are more Catholic than the Pope. He hates Jesuits.
Dear readers, after this short presentation of the team, we thought that we had to discuss with you an important issue. We would prefer to never touch this issue with you; alas, it has to be.
This blog can simply not afford to go on this way.
Your contribution is required in order for this blog to be able to continue. Your help alone will allow this blog to continue operations.
We are already short of our objective for this month, and we need your collaboration to achieve it. The age of the free blog is rapidly coming to an end. Will you help us?
We humbly, but urgently ask you to give a real contribution to this blog.
We accept your contribution in the following ways:
Masses for the grace of final repentance of any of our contributors, and yes, you get to choose…
Dear readers, we know that this is a lot to ask and we truly appreciate your effort. We hope that you will, in your charity, keep this initiative alive. But time is running short. Please consider donating at fixed times (like every Monday, or every First Friday), so that our effort can regularly benefit from your generosity.
Thanking you all in advance
The Editorial Team
Take a virtual drone and bring it high, very high over your head. Forget the issues of the day, the polemics, Traditionis custodes, all of it. Take your drone so high Francis that and his man are but almost invisible little dots.
Now take your virtual time machine and, from that elevation, look back 60 years. The two thousand years tradition of the Church is being severely disrupted. Condemned heretics are highly praised. Everything seems to have to undergo an aggiornamento that resembles a severe beating.
Stop here for a moment and, from your elevated position, reflect.
Would God stop this from happening? Why would He? If God had wanted an earthly Church that never strays, He would have had it run by angels. Instead, the first Pope denied Christ, only one of the first twelve bishops risked his life to be at the foot of the Cross, and another one was the one who had just betrayed Him.
Now, keep reflecting. How does God’s world actually work? The wicked can go on thriving for decades, and at times they die without any exterior signs of earthly punishment. However, on a huge number of occasions God actually allows a sinner to experience at least some of the consequences of his sins during life. Gluttony creates obesity, which creates diabetes, or heart issues and heart attacks, or destroys one’s knees. Alcoholism destroys the liver to the point that the person is immediately marked, visible as a drunkard. Marijuana clearly makes of one a pothead. Heroin and other heavy drugs destroy him in a far more devastating way.
Nor does it stop at the sinner itself, then the sins of the fathers are visited upon the sons. The bastard is accompanied, without any fault of his, by a stigma all his life, and he will likely have less chances and less guidance in life than the one born in a wedlock. The wicked, or faithless, wealthy man may be punished with a lazy, greedy, grasping, scrounging son, or by a drug addicted, gambling, degenerate one. The progressive mother “affirming” the same sex relationship of her son will be further punished by the deeply troubled, shellshocked nephews those two will “adopt” and, alas, raise. Wherever we turn, we see this law at play.
Why would, then, God do things differently with the Church? He will, methinks, allow the Church to stray. He will allow the Popes who made this mess possible to be celebrated after death, the heretical masterminds of the Council to be made bishops, even cardinals, and even Popes, and die praised by the world and the mainstream Catholics.
Still: He will cause a Church drunk on aggiornamento to show the signs of Her alcoholism, and the heroin of heresy will, at some point, show Her deformed and without teeth. He will, as he does with many a human, allow the course of wickedness to run to its end; and yes, he will punish the sons for the sins of the fathers, then if you can approve of guitars in church you have not deserved that your children get a solid grounding in Truth.
The big difference is that the Church is Indefectible. No matter how deformed, drunk, addicted She may become, at the appointed time She will be rescued. No Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI or Francis will ever manage to destroy her, no matter how hard they flirt with heresy and appoint horrible Bishops and Cardinals or – as is the case of Francis – openly hates both the Church and the faithful.
If you followed me up to here, you will easily understand what my conclusion is: the current mess is the unavoidable, willed, and utterly merited result of God ‘s punishment of both a Church which Her leading men are led astray and of a laity too lazy and comfortable, and too little attached to Christ, to give a damn about what was happening around them. Therefore, it is fitting that we suffer, then the sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the sons.
We can, of course, fight back; as we very well should , because this collective punishment is also our individual path to salvation and God has shown us where the battleground is. The weapons of this fight are the same as always: more prayer, more penance, more vocal support of true Catholicism.
It is, also, important that we train ourselves and instruct ourselves in proper, pre V II Catholicism. We have a wealth of information at our disposal, from encyclicals to books readily available on the Internet. No generation before our had so easy access to many centuries of Catholic apologetics as we do.
So, let the virtual drone get back on earth, in the midst of Francis excrementations, and prepare to get in the fight, knowing that our side has already won.
More rumours about Francis’ health and, at this point, we have another of those elements I was writing about weeks ago: like a Kremlin occupier, Francis sees leaks about his health going out in the open as his apparatchiks keep ignoring or denying everything.
More talk of severe and degenerative disease. Now, also the definitive information that the surgical intervention was not planned at all, and was, apparently, so urgent not even Parolin could be informed.
Antonio Socci, not new to bold claims but, certainly, with reliable informants inside the Vatican, is the one who detonated the last bomb. To make its impact bigger, he reports of a possible abdication in October, after one of those stupid Synods For The Demolition of Catholicism he so much likes.
Will we have three Popes playing cards in the Vatican Gardens? We shall see. However, if Francis were to resign, I think it would only be when he hasn’t much time left, and purely as a virtue signalling gesture: the last wheelchair, so to speak. A pity that Benedict did it before him, and this would smack of copycat gesture.
Still, let me tell you what I think: if Francis abdicates, this will be a good outcome. Yes, the next Conclave will be fraught with great dangers. Still, to me it appears much more likely that God would providentially act by giving us a better Pope – a Pope who gets better after becoming Pope – than by moving this obdurate hater of Christ to repentance and conversion. Of course, nothing is impossible to God. But we see very often that He intervenes in ways that are, when observed externally, ordinary .
God did not really convert Eltsin.
He converted Putin.
What sense can there be, in the eyes of the world, in kneeling in front of a piece of bread?
Such a question Francis asked himself yesterday.
In a way, he is right. An atheist finds it utterly absurd, even if he is properly informed about the Transubstantiation, that a piece of bread may, indeed, become the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord. To him, this is part of the big fraud he calls “pie in the sky when you die”.
Quite on the contrary, a Catholic finds it perfectly natural, and I should say unavoidable, to kneel in front of the Blessed Sacrament. It would be quite unnatural, and frankly absurd, for a Catholic to think that he could simply stand in the Presence of the Lord. It would smack of arrogance in such a way that most people would say that it is not even arrogance, it is unbelief.
As we all know, Francis does not kneel in front of the Blessed Sacrament. He is, however, perfectly able to kneel in front of Mohammedans, homos, homeless people, and such like.
I don’t think his is even arrogance. I think it is unbelief.
Like a sodomite wishing to get, as they say, out of the closet, Francis itches of desire to let us know that he does not believe any of it. Alas, he can’t, because he cannot be sure that even those jellyfishes we have as Bishops and Cardinals would not finally step up and depose him. He would, also, lose that little traction he still has among unintelligent Catholics, who would then realise that the concern about global warming is not Catholic, at all.
Therefore, Francis puts in these little provocations, meant to make you understand even as he avoids officially outing himself. He is saying that yes, he is an Atheist, as he is perfectly aware that everyone knows that he never kneels in front of the Blessed Sacrament. But he does not say the words as referred to him, you see. He only refers it to Atheists.
Of whom, as he is clearly indicating to you, he is one.