Daily Archives: November 9, 2013
You might – or not, as the case may be – think at times this Papacy follows a double railtrack strategy: Francis expresses himself in a vague but popular way, whilst the likes of Mueller keep thing in check and within the boundaries of orthodoxy (say: communion for public adulterers, or Medjugorje).
Let us see the implications of this, and whether this is a realistic scenario.
If this is a strategy, then it clearly is a fully deceitful, utterly Jesuitical one. It means that, like Scientology, the Church lures people with an easy message, and gives them the real content once the targets are “hooked” to the dream they have been sold. The “modernising” Francis as the hook, and the – for Bergoglio's standards; I'd still send him the Inquisition, and the real one at that – “orthodox” and “precise” Mueller as the fisher does not work as a theory, because it goes against the basic principle of Christianity, based on a God who cannot deceive and cannot be deceived. Francis represents the Church as Christ's Vicar on earth. He will decide on how the Church reflects Truth. If he decides not to speak the truth, no amount of work made by his lieutenant – provided they are good enough, which by Mueller is most certainly not the case – will ever even begin to repair the damage, nor will it ever justify the initial deception.
If, therefore, you share the above mentioned position, you must believe that at the present time the Church's evangelisation strategy is based on a huge lie, on marketing built over the fundamental falsehood that the Pope willingly promotes a certain (modern, pleasant, unthreatening, hip) idea of the church so that the public may buy the ticket and enter the circus tent, where Mueller performs the lion-taming.
The second consideration is whether this is a realistic proposition. Francis has appointed a “gang of eight” in order to examine a more or less radical reform of how the Church is run, and some of them have already abandoned themselves to savage talk. He commits liturgical abuses without thinking twice. He has homosexuals and sluttish women in his entourage. He has a penchant for heretical talk. He mocks even those who pray for him. He says and repeats that atheists can be saved if they follow their conscience. This is not the behaviour of a sleek marketing man. Clearly, there is an ideology behind the behaviour and clearly, the behaviour is program itself rather than just a pleasant facade to lure people into… orthodoxy.
I do not buy the one with the sleek marketing man working in tandem with the smart educator. The facts I have been observing rather speak for an utter Modernist Pope whose heresies are, in part, kept in check by people less overtly heretical than him.
I would so much like to think otherwise, but that's what it is. Let Francis and his minions and helpers deceive the simple. As for myself, if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I will continue to call it a duck.
This article (http://www.dallasvoice.com/kinder-gentler-catholic-church-10161128.html) (apology for the mess: can't get the link to work) is a good example of why evangelisation works, and appeasement doesn't.
The deluded souls who make a show of their ignorance – and arrogance – in the article are all starting from the wrong premise: if the Church and I disagree, the Church has to change her tune.
They clearly don't know the first thing about what the Church is and how she works. The premise that the Church has to “evolve” is fundamentally Neo-Protestant.
It may be that the one or other of those interviewed – largely perverts, of course: nowadays journalists ask perverts what they think about Church teaching, and not in jest – know that the Church is the custodian of a Truth that cannot change, and pretend not to know it; but it is more likely that many of them think that the Church could change, but does not want to.
Now, if the Western clergy hammered Sunday in and Sunday out in the head of their pewsitters that Truth can, like God, never be changed, in time the concept would spread outside of the pew, in the civil society made of people who vote. But they don't, so it doesn't.
Instead, we have an insisted stressing of how the Church is changing under Pope Diana. This fuels – and cannot but fuel – the expectation of more “change” among people who think such a change is an option in the first place.
You can read the results in the linked article. Expect more appeasement, though, instead of more truth.
What will be the consequence of this mentality? Lapsed Catholics, circus Catholicism, abortion, so-called “gay marriage”, and the rest.
Under Francis, the Church is preparing a massive campaign of appeasement. As the article clearly shows, appeasement never works.