A reader alerted me to this, I think, sacrilegious event, and Father Z now has a blog post.
Of course, the treating of dogs in the same way as humans is not new, and it has been going on in parallel with the degeneration of Christian feeling for a while. Many of you will remember the film “A Fish Called Wanda”, the exhilarating scenes with Michael Palin (k-k-k-.. Ken!) is trying to kill the old woman, and the “dog funerals” she organises. But those were clearly Anglicans, and the mockery of their mockery of the Liturgy did not escape the attentive observer.
Some decades later, some Catholics have clearly acquired the same mentality. The woman describing herself as the “mother” of the dog (I can hear Rick Santorum here: “If she says she is the mother of the dog, then she is the mother of the dog…”) is just as appalling as the behaviour of the priest.
Christians are simply forgetting, or refusing to acknowledge, Christianity. The new religion of niceness demands that no one be denied anything, not even a dog motherhood fantasy. An implicit promise of eternal life of the “mother” together with her “son” cannot be denied in such an event, and the priest appears not at all interested in avoiding public confusion. Most of all, it seems to me, the new religion demands that the “participants” take part in the circus, because it would be unkind to “hurt” the poor grieving “mother” in her bereavement.
Methinks, these people think, in their delusion, that they are being nice and therefore Christian. Wrong. Niceness wasn't born with Christianity. They are transforming Christianity in their own version of a heathen cult. A cult made to measure to suit the fantasies of everyone.
Dogs have no immortal soul. You can't be the mother of dogs. This is not Christianity.
This episode happened in Belgium, the country at the satanical forefront of the euthanasia March.
It seems fitting that the same Country that puts humans to sleep like dogs should also treat dogs like humans.
Empathy is defined as, for what interests us:
the psychological identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another.
I can vividly picture Rick “Judas” Santorum sitting at a table together with rather nervous “advisers” after Judasgate. They were, no doubt, the same people who had previously advised him to “open” to the “LGBT community” and “broaden his appeal”.
They therefore sit all there, and ask themselves: “how can we explain Judas to Christians in a way that makes him look acceptable?”
Apparently, they could not come out with anything better than “empathy“. This means that they are telling us that when Rick “Judas” Santorum is confronted with sexual perverts of the most atrocious sorts, and of the most hardened variety, what he does is not to admonish the sinner, or be concerned about the danger of hell for others. He does not think his duty as a wannabe leader to state very clearly – for the benefit of the pervert, and of everyone else – what terrible consequences this behaviour has.
No. When confronted with such a behaviour, Rick “Judas” Santorum has nothing better to do than to vicariously experience the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of these perverts.
Congratulations, Mr Santorum. You have shot yourself straight in the balls for the second time in a row. You deserve your advisors, and they deserve you. Who knows, Judas possibly felt empathy for the plight of the Pharisees. It's a pity such delicacy of character was so long overlooked.
Now the leftists shoot at you because you aren't still quite like them, and the Catholics are disgusted by you because you are, well, Judas.
I have suspected for quite some time that modern democracies select boneheads, and quite shameless ones at that. There will be rare exceptions; but they will be, as stated, rare.
Rick “Judas” Santorum isn't one of them.
The Traditional Catholic Priests has one (actually, two) posts about St Athanasius.
St Athanasius did not declare the Pope deprived of his office. He did not start any “Athanasian” church. He did not care about precedent, either.
St Athanasius did the Catholic thing, and kept doing what had always been done to the end; irrespective of how mad, or weak, or evil the Pope of the day was.
We look today at those years and see a coherent development: Satan tries to destroy the Church. Faithful Catholics react. Satan loses.
However, in those times things were certainly not so linear. For many years, actually a couple of decades, vast part of Christianity must have looked like a nuclear wasteland, the air full of Arian nuclear fallout. It was, certainly, not so easy in those days to believe in the Indefectibility of the Church as we do now.
We do now. We know now. We can now look at two thousand years of history and see the Church surviving every crisis.
Whatever happens in October, do not lose faith. Most importantly, do not expect that a solution must arrive very soon. We may face many years, and perhaps decades, of nuclear wasteland. We live nowadays in times of instant response and instant information, but the Lord does not seem to think in this way. When the Blessed Virgin of Quito says that she will intervene when everything seems lost, this certainly does not mean “a couple of days after a devastating announcement”.
This is not how it has worked in the past. In the past faithful have been expected to live in die in their faith, no matter what; and to trust in the Divine Help for the church on earth, when God finds it fitting.
If the Kasper hits the Synod, we may be asked to do the same: live and die in our battle.
But how better our situation will be than the on in which the contemporaries of Athanasius found themselves.
Athanasius famously said that if the world was against him, then he was against the world. He had no precedent. Never had a crisis of such magnitude presented itself in the life of the Church.
We have at least this big precedent, and we must prepare ourselves as October nears; then never was the good Roman saying si vis pacem, para bellum as fitting as it is in this situation.
If the world goes against us, let us answer like Athanasius.
I must have written (indirectly, at least) about the initiative in the UK of the hundreds of priests who have signed a petition to urge the Synod Fathers not to sell out in October (no matter what pressure they get from the Evil Clown; that’s not in the petition, but take it from me).
A similar initiative has been launched in the USA in the last weeks. Father Z has the story and the updates.
The updates make for very interesting reading. As the number of priests rapidly swelled to 775, as I write this to the 775 priests only correspond four bishops. With around 40,000 priests in the US, we are moving towards 2% of the priests. But if we consider that there are around 440 bishops (including the retired and the auxiliaries, none of them prevented from signing the petition) we see that bishops have been very slow to join the campaign and below 1% at the time of writing. More interestingly, we see that when there is an initiative meant to draw a line in the sand concerning Our Lord’s teaching, US priests are, on the whole, (bad as their average quality probably is) around double as zealous as their own bishops, who are supposed to be the successors of the Apostles; and one wonders of which one many of them are the successor.
It will be interesting to follow this statistics as October nears. Of course, the petition does not mean that those who do not sign are Kasperites, but it certainly means that very many of those who sign are not going to comply with whatever nonsense is going to come out of the Synod. It might also mean that many priests or bishop do not see the danger of a nuclear explosion in October, which is frighteningly naive even assuming it is not disingenuous.
We must intensify our prayers that Francis will not push the nuclear button in October. But the more priests and bishops show him what is what, the better it is for everyone.
A new religion is infiltrating itself in the mind of effeminate Anglos. This is a religion in which everything that is not nice in any way, shape, or form is suddenly bad; nay, un-Catholic. One example is the idea that it would be bad to despise; nay, that we should be ashamed of despising anybody.
It is a mystery to me how these people (not they, of course; their forefathers) could defeat the Nazis. If they had to try again they would be defeated in no time, and would swear they must dialogue with Hitler, and of course not despise him or Nazism; because you see, this is so very bad, and we are good Christians, aren’t we now.
The contrary is, actually, true. Despise is simply the contrary of appreciation, or admiration. Therefore, we not only can, but we must despise what goes against God’s plan for us, or what evidently makes the work of the devil.
To think differently means to live in a fluffy world in which nothing bad exists, Satan is merely a bit naughty at times, and we are oh so appreciative of everyone; because you see, Cardinal Kasper would be a wonderful man, if only he could… no wait, I am saying something not appreciative about him. let me stop here, lest anyone should say that I despise the man. *
It would be simply amazing to me (if I had not lived now many years in the midst of this new religion) that anyone could call himself a Christian and not make an obvious, public show of contempt for the enemies of Christian society. But then again I am a Christian, so there…
We see this everywhere in Christian Scripture, which is certainly not dripping niceness: “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?” isn’t generally said to people for whom one feels a keen appreciation. On the contrary, one clearly despises those of whom he talks in that way. Or is it whipping people outside of the temple the sign of a keen appreciation of their, no doubt, very high qualities we still do not know, because we have not practised dialogue with them for long enough?
Do these “religion of niceness” people ever read the Gospel? When was the last time they did?
The Old Testament is the same, only at times it is harsher.
Of the ungodly the Psalmist says: “As a dream when one awaketh; so, O Lord, when thou awakest, thou shalt despise their image”. This does not mean that God falls asleep, of course; but that in His good time he will show the ungodly how much he despises them. Of course He does. God loves everyone antecedently. It does not mean that he refrains from having a clear opinion of Stalin.
Or try this: “the Lord will abhor the bloody and deceitful man”. I can almost hear the priests of the Religion of Nice here, inviting God to reflect on how good a Christian he is. I have made only a couple of example. He who reads the Bible will find infinite others. In addition to that, two thousand years of burning heretics and of Crusades, or hatred for lie and love for Truth, speak a clear enough language.
It goes without saying that the despise of despicable people does not mean that we wish them hell, or are moved by blind hatred of other sort. We do not love our enemies in the sense that we actually make love to them. We love our enemies in that we wish them salvation and realise the immense worth they have for God as immortal souls. But we certainly should despise what is despicable, and should hate what is hateful.
If we love truth, we despise the lie. If we love Christ, we despise His enemies. If we love the flag, we despise those who betray it. If we avoid doing so, then our fidelity to truth, Christ, or the flag can very well be questioned, because even St Francis wanted to teach the Muslims with the sword.
What kind of spineless girls have we become, and what kind of rape have we perpetrated against our religion, if even despise should be beyond the pale of the Christian.
* For the record: I do despise the man. Big time. I find him utterly despicable. If it depended on me, he would die at the stake.
Not nice at all, I know. But you see, this is how the Church dealt with the likes of Kasper in more Christian times.
Tomorrow is the Fifth of May. In Italian, Fifth of May is “Cinque Maggio”. This is also the title of one of the most famous poems ever written in Italian, from the great, great Alessandro Manzoni.
Manzoni’s brilliant work poses face to face the extreme greatness of the man, and the even greater power of Providence. A Providence that, after giving to us in Napoleon a clear sign of God’s infinite power, also made of him a wonderful example of late conversion, marking a stunning triumph of Faith over one of the most stunning men ever existed.
Manzoni is a man whose heart wrenching poetry (and prose) still drives me to tears decades after first knowing his works, and no matter how often read. He is, also, an always strongly Catholic man. In the death of Napoleon he sees a picture going – great as the man was – way beyond the man, and into the infinity of God.
In a world accustomed to only pay attention to worldly matters, it is good to remember, today, that Napoleon was great not only in his military and political achievements, but in the keenness of his thinking as a de facto Catholic convert, or I should say revert; a man who, when his military and political adventure ended, directed his brilliant mind to God, with the for him usual results.
We can answer Manzoni today and say that yes, it was true glory.
But it was a glory that was always the reflex of a far greater one.
And so it goes: an US group mindful of freedom of expression organises a “Mohammed cartoon contest”, with no less than $10,000 for the winner.
In Europe no such initiative would be allowed, because Europe is not really free. It is, rather, a conglomerate of democracies in which the citizen decide in which way they want not to be free, and controlled by a Benevolent Nanny.
The US are, though, rather free, in the sense that at least they still take freedom of expression much more seriously than us (as for the freedom of religion, the jury is out). They organise, then, the context.
Alas, they also learn that in XXI America, the religion of peace is coming to their own homes, with two Muslims starting to peacefully try to kill as many citizens as they can before being killed themselves.
Note here the following:
1) You can’t make anything that displeases the peaceful Muslim brother without running the risk of being killed.
2) The security did not engage in “dialogue”. They gunned the two bastards down.
3) The event took place in Texas. I am not the only one to think this is one of those places where a number of people take their freedoms seriously and are, therefore, armed. It’s difficult to make a massacre of people armed. Much better if they are all harmlessly sitting there, like European sheep ready for the slaughter.
The US got another demonstration of the “religion of peace”. One wonders how many more lessons they will need.
I used to admire Rick Santorum. Many are the blog posts I wrote about him during the 2012 campaign. On that occasion, Santorum put up an excellent fight and remained, to my knowledge, a stalwart defender of Catholic values to the end.
But the brilliant run in 2012 obviously went to his head. Santorum must now think he is in with a real chance in 2016. Values against ambition: this is where the devil gets in.
It is clear Santorum is allowing the devil to get in, have a coffee, eat some scones, get invited for dinner, and stay for the night.
Only a couple of weeks ago I have written a blog post about the obvious way this man was – blinded by the prospect of either the Presidency, or a place at the table of the very powerful – sending very clear signals of surrender to the homo lobby. For everyone who had eyes to see – not everyone had: read the comment section of that post for an example – it was crystal clear that Santorum was preparing to sell out to make his candidacy more “popular”.
We now have this, and the blatant disregard for the very basics of Catholic thinking is even more evident. You, my dear readers, have read about Santorum’s treason before, and therefore saw this coming. Many others, still lulling themselves into the stupid idea that once a Catholic, always a Catholic, will now have to increase their mental contortions. Many more will, hopefully, open their eyes.
Santorum has betrayed. He has prostituted himself to the dominant ideology. He makes the work of Satan. The more so, because as a former outspoken Catholic he will lead many of the stupid – of the “isn’t Francis a very misunderstood Pope”, or “he hasn’t said anything wrong unless he sleeps with one of them in public” crowd – to defend him.
I can’t wait to see his candidature go down in flames, and will rejoice when it does. Sad as it is to see the most powerful Country on Earth run by godless people, it is even worse when these godless people fake allegiance to Catholicism. On the contrary, from a Catholic point of view it is fitting that the Republicans loses this election, and every other election, until they defend conservative values again. No one should be fooled into voting a traitor, so that the at least honest enemy may not win. Our worst enemies are the traitors within out camp. Unless that is understood, we will never have decent people at the helm.
Rick Santorum has very publicly made himself an accessory to the worst sins. He “accepts” and “welcomes” everyone as he is, no matter how perverted he is. He uses the usual slogans of the Wormtongues – the “compassionate” lie, the “respectful” rubbish and the “complex” deception -. He puts himself square on the side of those who have, all these years and among the protests of Catholics, pushed for “acceptance” of sexual perversion. He has become one of their allies. He has sold his values to his dream of power. He stinks of church of nice to the sky. He is infinitely worse than every liberal a la Clinton, because he used to be one of ours and adds the betrayal to the offence.
I have written several times that I do not know to what extent the one who is an accessory of another’s sin is, exactly, punished for his act. I do not know, I mean, to what extent the accomplice of the sodomite will share the punishment of the sodomite in hell. But it seems pretty safe for me to say that the one who makes of himself a public accessory to such a degree of depravity is in mortal sin and should repent at once, say so publicly, run to confession and never again even think of his betrayal with anything else than a very keen sense of shame, for as long as he lives.
Rick Santorum has prostituted himself to a dream of power that will probably die together with his own integrity. Pity and despise is what he deserves. He will make inroads among the fake Catholics, but the orthodox Protestants – who, say what you want, won’t be fooled by his words – who have largely contributed – in votes and money – to his ascent in 2012 will abandon him, big time.
Meet Rick Santorum, the newly enrolled prostitute of the perverts’ lobby. He has made his bed. Let him lie in it.
It is a grey morning as I write this. Too cold for the season, and without the usual promise of warm you would expect. But it is the first day of May.
No, I am not talking of Labour Day here. I am talking of the beginning of the month of Mary.
I cannot tell you with words how the habit of directing my prayers and humble attention – such as it is true attention, which is not always the case – to the Blessed Virgin is helping my spiritual and, actually, my everyday life. It is as if the words “our mother in heaven” would take a different meaning every year.
The daily Rosary is, I think, the main factor in all this. I have written often enough about the importance of the daily Rosary so I will not expand on this. May, as the month of Mary, is an ideal opportunity for a serious proposal to start praying the Rosary daily, for those of you who still don't do it. It's the best investment you can make not only for the future of your soul, but for the present of your daily life.
It's the month of Mary again. Which means we are one month of Mary closer to death. Let us not waste these little occasions, and let us take inspiration from these little events in our life.
Make this day the day you resolved to start the recitation of the daily Rosary, and stick to it.
You will never regret it.
Whenever I read about the next absurd statement from the Unholy Father I think “is there no limit to the stupidity of this man?” But then I reflect that in the end no one can be so stupid, and that behind the stupidity is clealry a plan. The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History can not also be The Most Stupid Jerk In Humanity.
Francis now invites the faithful to kneel in veneration in front of the poor. This is the umpteenth sign of where Francis wants to lead the Church: away from God, and in the nether regions of earthly cares and social issues; which, in his case, clearly means socialism.
There is no way even an idiot could so relentlessly push a godless agenda. The idiot in question would ask around what is to do, and would rely on people he knows as orthodox. There is no way anyone could push his agenda with such evil consistency without wanting it. There is nothing like one thousand coincidences.
Francis wants you to forget God, and to substitute Him with a purely earthly religion of social justice – with the thinnest varnish of spirituality for added effect – for the sake of being adored by the stupid masses as he avoids the duty of being, actually, a Pope.
The attack to the Catholic religion happens along three main lines: the environment, the social justice issues, and the “mercy” drive.
With the first he wants you to believe that men could, in fact, destroy the earth (a blasphemy, and typical of atheists) unless you put yourself in the hands of Big Government (a Socialist mainstay). With the second, he pushes the hatred of the poor against the rich (not his rich friends; the others) and again directs you to forget God and focus on Socialist ideals. With the third, he encourages you to think that the Church, and actually the entire Catholic religion, is wrong and in need of being remade according to… Castro.
Do not be fooled by the tale of the naive Pope. You have had no excuses for a long time now.
And you know what scares me most in all this? It is the chilling realisation of how angry God must be with us, to inflict such an evil scoundrel on us as the Pope.
Serves us right, in the end. For too long we have thought that Catholicism was in need of repair. Now we got the sledgehammer served, in order to make us understand that there was nothing wrong with the Church as it was, and we can't do better than God. We (Catholicism at large) wanted V II, and we will now have to have Francis rammed down our throat. If we didn't like God's work, let's see how we enjoy the wreck we have creted. We must now live with this evil clown, and can only hope many will get to see the light before tey die. Because if they don't, I truly wouldn't want to be them when their day comes.
In this more and more heathenish Country one hears with increasing frequency about “Memorial Services”. I understand this as something that can, but does not have to, have anything to do with God. It may simply be people who meet in the favourite park of the deceased and therein “offer” something heathensh, like a song; thus, of course, putting themselves centre stage.
Now let us think one minute. If these are religious services of sort – heavens, even made by Anglicans – then it still means that, in some corner of their mind, the participants know that this life is and happens in the shade of the next one. It is bad they do not want us to know (otherwise they would call it “Mass”), but at least they know.
If, however, the “service” is a kind of godless “tribute”, then it is fully absurd. If there is no God and no afterlife everything is utterly, perfectly nonsensical. We are born, struggle to stay alive, strive to reproduce, and at some point end, and nothing in this has any sense or purpose beyond mere animal survival. Not even our DNA code is the real winner, because it most certainly does not know it is.
If there is no God, the only acceptable kind of remembrance is: “the poor brute was born, lived, then died into nothingness, like everyone else; no one knows how, no one knows why, and no one can make any sense of it”. Playing a guitar song in his favourite spot is just as absurd as the rest, an emotional, childish desire to please not the deceased, but oneself.
At these services, the “goodness” of the deceased will most ceretainly be praised. Which is absurd again.
If at the end of life is nothing, there's nothing saying that Stalin was worse than St Francis. Good and bad are, then, purely subjective, and goodness is only a possible survival strategy for the weak. If there is no God, there is simply no goodness, only survival and self-satisfaction. Stalin, then, was really, really good at the most elementary need of the animal called human. I wonder how many of the emotional participants to heathenish “memorial services” get this. But then again I do not think they get an awful lot anyway.
Modern Brits make a lot of things that have lost their meaning. They go to Church because it's Christmas, but they don't believe in the Christian God. They have a Queen whose only function is to kiss children, open kindergartens, and generate tourism revenue, but they do not see the absurdity of the entire exercise. They wear crosses that are merely decorative. They say 'o my God' and do not believe in Him. They kill unborn children, and are mad at the idea of the fox hunt. They obsess about their health system, and their souls have cancer. They must “celebrate” everything, even deaths, to avoid thinking of it.
And they have “memorial services” instead of, well, a proper Mass.
And it came to pass Yours Truly was at Mass, and happened to be seated near a couple with a beautiful Cocker Spaniel.
The dog was extremely well, and I mean by that extremely well trained. Almost motionless, and absolutely quiet, he seemed to show a reverence for the Mass that you would look in vain in many of your gray-haired, tambourine-loving Mass attending humans.
Similarly, you noticed one obvious fact: the owner of the dog had taken responsibility for the behaviour of the one entrusted to their care, and it was very clear they had allowed to dog to Mass only when sure the dog knows how to behave. Let me stop here.
Long live the orthodox doggie. Congratulations to his owners. We live in times in which dogs surpass humans in reverence.
That worthy man of God, the Traditional Catholic Priest, has a very interesting post outlining the long path to the priesthood used for many, many centuries before the usual “reforms” of V II. Father points out that the system is still in place, intact, not only by the SSPX, but also by traditionalist orders in what the Vatican calls “full communion with Rome”.
We see here at work something that is one of the very marks of V II: the dumbing down of pretty much everything.
The Church founded by Our Lord on Peter obviously developed Her own customs, procedures and ordnances in time, no doubt with the assistance of the Holy Ghost. This development was not a betrayal of the original “simplicity”, but rather the unavoidable consequence of the growing ability to better reflect in exterior acts, procedures, clothes & Co. the reality of the Church, and make Her work more efficient and more easily recognisable.
The “second Christians” (I call in this way, and forgive the joke, those who came after the extremely famed “first Christians”) weren't less Christian, or more interested in ceremony than their predecessors; nor were they lovers of useless pomp, procedural complications, or expensive vestments. They were, very simply, aware that things could be done better, and this is what they set up to do.
The entire process ended up in an edifice that made the Church not only better suited to pursue Her mission, but highly recognisable in all Her dealings.
Enter V II, and the desire – naive, or evil – to simplify everything. The dismantling of all those “complicated” parts of Church life – from the ecclesiastical career, to the Liturgy, to the dress code, to the devotional life to mention only some – have now been put in pace and “tested” for several decades. Result?
1. A massive crisis of vocation. If the priest is one of us, there's no reason why anyone among us should become a priest.
2. A tragic decline in mass attendance due, in part, to a dumbed-down, second-class liturgy.
3. Priests (or nuns!) who are often not even recognisable as such on the street, which again goes hand in hand with many of them barely recognising themselves as priests as opposed to, say, social workers. Again, this results in decline of attendance.
4. Massive loss of faith as the obvious result of people not even being taught to pray because hey, it's so arid and structured.
What do we learn from all this? Dumb down the way you do things, and you'll become dumb yourself. Priests who lose sight of their role become dumb priests. A liturgy that tries to be “easy” and “accessible” becomes a dumb liturgy. The “simplification” of the way the personnel looks leads to them becoming both invisible and ashamed of being seen for what they are. The encouragement to “spontaneous” prayer becomes the loss of the habit of praying.
V II has dumbed down not only the priesthood, but everything else. As a result not only the priestly vocations, but everything else suffered.
In time, more and more within the Church will discover this simple facts of life. Not, however, before the impious generation who brought us this mess, and possibly the one after, are six feet under. It is necessary that the punishment for our stupidity be paid according to the Lord's will before sanity goes back again.
We, dutiful sons of the Church, see and denounce the dumbing down. We are a minority now, but we are the spearhead. In time, our descendants will put a remedy to this.
A report – translated by Rorate here – about the way German priests (and deacons) see themselves and live their faith makes for shocking reading. Yours truly finds that this merits a little rant.
I thought every priest was supposed to recite the prayers of the Breviary every day, in all their parts. Turns out many of these unworthy men cannot even manage to pray every day; a feat of which children of only one or two generations ago would have been ashamed at the age of six; no, make it five.
Almost as shocking – but then, necessarily flowing from the above – is that many go to confession once a year or less; and I wonder how they can have have zeal for their work as confessors, if they themselves think it too much to do more than the bare minimum themselves. This, apart from the fact that I thought the factual expectations on a priest were more like once a month, or more often. My bad, of course.
I am tempted now to go to confession next time I am in Germany, and ask the priest when it was the last time he went to confession himself. Should be fun.
It goes on. Priests who do not believe in priest celibacy (about half!), or suffer “loneliness” (perhaps they thought a mistress would be found?), or have various problems of “immaturity” with their sexuality; which, whatever that means, isn't good in a priest, at all.
This is a huge scandal, as it shows to what extent a big part of the German clergy – at the roots, not only at Kasper level – has become the world. Not only these people have lost any pretence that they are the enemy of the world; they actually complain that they cannot be enough like it.
I pity and despise them, because a priest who has chosen the habit and finds himself whining about his “loneliness” whilst he does not even have the time or the guts to be with Christ in the confessional, and in prayer, and in the life of sacrifice he is supposed to live is one who has betrayed the flag a long, long time ago, and is now unable to even remember how it looked like.
May the Lord have mercy of these poor bastards, living a huge lie as they enjoy their financial comfort and can afford the luxury of whining about their “loneliness” (a luxury I have never found in good priests). They have made their bed.
I have never seen a good priest that looked lonely in the least. Their vocations and their love of the Lord fills their life; they are surrounded by the esteem and love of many parishioners of all ages; they have a busy life because they don't skimp their duty concerning prayer or sacramental life; and their spiritual dimension fills and completes their earthly life to the point that they must, in most cases, find the idea of “loneliness” not only absurd, but a luxury for priests with too much time, and too little faith.
I pity and despise these German caricatures of priests. A man is supposed to make his choices like a man, and live with them as a man should. They have chosen to be priests. No one promised them a harem.
Wimps. Cowards. Sissy boys. Complaining – probably with grey hair – about their “loneliness” instead of being ashamed of a life of betrayal and scrounging at the cost of the Church, a life of betrayal of some of the most fundamental duties of a priest, to the point of not praying! Is it a surprise these people do not care for the Sacraments?
How do these people find the face to appear in front of their parishioners? I tell you how: by becoming their allies in the desire to make the Church wordly and sold to the world, so that their betrayal may not be noticed as they march toward a comfortable retirement. A retirement in which, no doubt, they will whine about their – comfortable – loneliness.
A priest made his choice, and made this choice in a definitive way. He chose to die to the world, to be Christ's soldier, to live and die in His shadow. That he now should not even find the time to pray, complain about his own – comfortable – life, and not even find the time to go to confession is despicable beyond words.
And they ruin others as they ruin themselves.
They ruin others as they ruin themselves.