Monthly Archives: December 2013
Believe it or not, these words come from a Pope:
The Gospel does not tell us anything: if she spoke a word or not… She was silent, but in her heart, how many things told the Lord! ‘You, that day, this and the other that we read, you had told me that he would be great, you had told me that you would have given him the throne of David, his forefather, that he would have reigned forever and now I see him there!’ Our Lady was human! And perhaps she even had the desire to say: ‘Lies! I was deceived!’
We are being punished with a Pope who does not read the Gospel, does not recite memorised prayers, and does not believe in what has been handed down to him. In fact, one can make a rather convincing case that we have a Pope who does not believe in God; certainly not in your grandmother’s.
The last example of this sad state of things emerged whilst I was on holiday, with my teeth happily sinking in the panettone. Still, I do think I should spend some words on this, lest a bus should knock me down and put an end to this vale of tears and I were to be told, in the other world, that I have remained silent about this episode in this one.
The way I always understood it, the Blessed Virgin is a perfect example of complete trust and utter obedience. In fact, it is this trust and obedience that has been not only extolled during the centuries, but brought as example to, among others, countless girls and young women in their formative years. It should be the most obvious thing on this planet that the Blessed Virgin does not doubt, does not complain, and does not feel betrayed by God. Therefore, the very idea that the Blessed Virgin may ever have had the desire to say “Lies! I was deceived!” strikes me as impious and utterly offensive of the Blessed Virgin.
When the Archangel Gabriel appears to her at the Annunciation she poses one very natural question, a question born of the obvious circumstances but certainly not out of doubt; and upon receiving the answer she promptly and unquestioningly accepts God’s will: a decision, by the way, which clearly puts her reputation on the line, and which requires a courage and – let us say it again – an unquestioning abandonment to God’s will, the like of which is barely imaginable in these times of widespread licence, when even Popes think they should not “judge”. Mary, therefore, accepts without questioning something apt to put her reputation in the gravest danger. She says: “Fiat”, not: “wait a minute”, or “mom told me never to trust what angels say”, or: “wow, just wow”. She also does not react with: “dear angel, at least promise me that there will be no suffering”, or: “I accept only if my son is going to live a splendid life and become the Roman Emperor, or such like”. She is the blessed Virgin, you see. Not a freaking Jesuit.
She simply obeys: she accepts God’s will without “ifs” or “buts”. Wonderful obedience, absolute trust, spotless abandonment to God’s will.
She is also, as Francis might or might not remember, free from original sin; which, linked to her own saintliness, makes it rather illogical to even think she might have had a doubting mind concerning everything God sent her way.
We see this in the Gospels pretty much everytime Mary is mentioned. She is told by Simeon in very plain words that a sword will pierce her heart. This is one of the “seven sorrows of Mary”, of which Francis must also have lost memory; a devotion meant to help the Neopelagian faithful to remember that Mary had the cross constantly in front of her. She is woken up in the middle of the night and must flee her own home in great haste, with a little baby, going towards an uncertain future in a foreign land (yes, this is another one of the seven sorrows). She must undergo a most painful search for her missing son (yet another one). Never do we find in the Gospel even a hint that Mary may have ever entertained a shred of doubt, revolt, disagreement, feelings of anger, disillusionment, or complaint about her own lot.
Mary keeps all in her heart. She does not forget Simeon’s words, and which mother could! She is Love, Obedience, Trust itself. Not only the Gospels, but two thousand years of Catholic Tradition tell us so. Actually, I doubt even Protestants would see things differently, at least if they still have a shred of sound Christian thinking left in them.
Not so for our humble Pope, Francis The Little. Completely oblivious of everything from Catholic dogma to the Gospels to Catholic tradition, he reshapes the Blessed Virgin according to his own fantasies in the same way as he has done it with pretty much everything else.
As I have already stated, Francis probably does not believe in God. If he does, it does not appear to be the God in which Catholics believe, and in fact it appears to be a God perfectly fine with, among other things, Jews not believing in the Divinity of His Son. If Francis does believe in the God of the Catholics, then he simply cannot think, and does not know what he says.
Francis therefore either does not believe, or doubts, or just doesn’t know jack. As a consequence, he proceeds to adapt everything Christian to his own confused way of thinking. As he doubts or does not believe himself, “excessive doctrinal security” is a problem. If he has doubts, everyone must have doubts. Even the Blessed Virgin!
In Francis’ world, unquestioning trust in God and perfect obedience are suspiciously Neopelagian, or Promethean, or whatever stupid adjective he can concoct to describe it. To him, Francis-ness is next to godliness, and it is the measure of humble orthodoxy. Whatever deviates from Francisthought must be corrected and made new; again: not stopping in front of the Blessed Virgin herself.
Francis’ Blessed Virgin is a woman from whom the whole essence of the Blessed Virgin has been removed, in order that both him and the women of the favela may not be challenged with an example too different from themselves. Francis’ fantasy creature feels – “perhaps”, he has the goodness to add, albeit only concerning the most absurd statement; relativism doubts even its own rubbish – betrayed, short changed, even lied to; she feels she was encouraged to undertake her task under false pretences; she thinks she has been advisedly deceived.
Once again, this man boggles the mind. His insolence is breathtaking. His ignorance will become the stuff of legends.
At times I think Francis might have an alcohol problem. This would explain his absurd and confused statements, together with his uncontrolled, confused, rambling way of talking; this would provide not an excuse, but at least a cause for all the unspeakable rubbish the man continues to spit out of his very humble cuff. And in fact, if any normal Catholic in possession of a normal Catholic instruction were to say not one half, but one fifth of what Francis has been saying since March his sobriety and his sanity would be openly questioned by those around him. Most certainly, no sensible Catholic would want to attend Mass in the church of a parish priest like that.
Alas, I do not think the man has an alcohol problem. His problem is his extreme form of Jesuitism, his being so much in love with himself he forgets even the most elementary decency, his strong Peronist ideology clearly shaping his Catholicism in the most minute details, his vast ignorance of even his own vast ignorance, and his boundless arrogance now fueled by a position in which every off-the-cuff statement is saluted as a daring innovation rather than another alarming example of scandalous ignorance.
The entire secular world is telling Francis he should feel free to make Christianity new, and he has the, ahem, humbleness to think he is just the man for the job; he seem to believe he is the man compared to whom even the worst antics of V II will be considered merely an appetizer. I have never heard a public man so persuaded he is just what the doctor ordered for the welfare of humanity; not even Berlusconi in his worst day would think he can tamper with the Blessed Virgin.
Francis is alternative to Catholicism. Almost every week we get new evidence for this. Should we be surprised he has even created a fantasy Blessed Virgin?
Pray for the man, and pray that he may stop being such a disgrace. One way or the other.
The Seven Sorrows Reblog
I am not a mother (neither a woman, come to that), so I can’t really tell.
Still, I can imagine. I can imagine that I am a mother in the bliss of newly found maternity, a joy without equals.
But then I imagine that when the child is just a few days old, I am informed by a very reliable person that this child is going to undergo great suffering and a painful death. How would it feel? A short time later, I must leave my home in the middle of the night, precipitously fleeing those who want to murder the child. Some years of relative tranquillity go by (during which, though, I have never forgotten the fateful words of Simeon) and one day, I discover that through a misunderstanding my twelve years old child is missing, somewhere in a great city far away from me. Then I…
View original post 607 more words
Please take this article from the Los Angeles Times with due care. It is very easy to write “Vatican observers”, and the article is the usual mixture of facts and wishful thinking. The author might, as far as we know, not even know what Christianity exactly is, and be writing about it with the same competence with which these people write about, say, the Polar Bear. After all, this is the Los Angeles Times, merely a byproduct of toilet paper.
Still, notice how Francis’ attitude (the facts) encourages all kind of speculation (the wishful thinking). I doubt Francis will ever dare to openly go against … Francis concerning the nuns, and he has a very elementary interest in preserving orthodoxy at least concerning the worst nut cases, so that this may serve him as fig leave and persuade the Pollyanna he is an orthodox Pope after all. Still, it cannot be denied his “hippie” message cannot but encourage the very kind of wishful thinking we read on the columns of the toilet paper press.
I think this is deliberate. Francis knows he will keep his fig leave, and knows the liberals will love to believe he is about to get rid of it or, if the evidence speaks against this, would so much love to do it but alas, cannot act because of the baddy machos in the Vatican. Note the article also follows this reasoning: if Francis does something they don’t like, it is in order not to “alienate supporters of the previous Popes”, which explains the “puzzle” of why he isn’t a raving Liberal lunatic. Obviously, Francis will allow the nuns to go on with a high degree of freedom, whilst still formally keeping them “censored”.
The Pollyannas will be delighted. “look what a good Pope we have”, they will say, “the mad nuns are still undergoing an Apostolic Visitation!”
Francis confuses the Catholics and stirs the most unrealistic – and evil – expectations in the wrong crowds, all the time increasing his personal approval rates.
We have the wrong Pope.
The Eponymous Flower has an interesting excerpt concerning another interview given by Archbishop Mueller.
Mueller states a couple of things that should go without saying, if we were not living in such disturbing times.
I leave it to others to reconcile the common sense of Mueller’s statements with the vague idea of giving more “doctrinal authority” to the Bishops’ Conferences. It is clear to every sound thinking Catholic that the thing cannot be done without causing grave damage to the very idea of the Church. Bishops’ Conference have no, and can never have any, doctrinal authority, and to introduce a principle of “local doctrinal authority” means to question and severely damage the principle of the One Church altogether.
Note that the Archbishop states the Bishops’ Conference already have some kind of “doctrinal authority” when, say, preparing catechism books; but it is clear here that this is not the autonomous exercise of a home-made authority, but merely the local implementation of universal rules. It is not a coincidence that, say, catechisms are never infallible.
Next October will be a time of great trial for the Church, provided of course the Extraordinary Synod still takes place. I can’t imagine that anything good at all could come out of it.
We should, I think, pray that this Synod never takes place.
Funny, but truthful, observation from a former LCWR president, who is upset at the fact that Archbishop Sartain, the man with the task of trying to make of them something vaguely resembling Christians, is going to attend to their next meeting in Florida; whereby attending the event here means “following all of it”.
Now, I cannot imagine an orthodox Catholic group having any problem with an Archbishop attending the one or other of their meetings or conferences. It would, methinks, be a good way to show to the hypothetical Archbishop some sound orthodoxy. Just think how much said Archbishop would probably learn from, say, FSSP priests. A win-win, really.
The matter is different, though, when a group of people not even recognisable as Christian – much less Catholic – are informed said archbishop is going to be there during the entire exercise. Clearly, the nuns are afraid the Archbishop…
View original post 246 more words
The SSPX has now released the anticipated details about the 2014 Rosary Crusade.
All details here.
I will not repeat the very useful and complete information you will find on the site. Still, please note the following:
1. As Francis invites you not to pray by rote, and ridicules those who count rosaries, it is the more important we react to this devotional barbarism by increasing our efforts not only to pray the Rosary, but to reestablish Tradition.
2. From the site:
The three-fold object of this Rosary Crusade for the good of the entire Catholic Church is:
To implore from the Immaculate Heart of Mary a special protection for the traditional apostolate;
For the return to Tradition within the Church;
For the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the consecration of Russia.
The insertion of the consecration of Russia will certainly be welcome to many of us, and might persuade the one or the other to join this crusade who are not the best fans of the SSPX.
3. The tally and reporting have been made as easy as possible, with several formats that can be used for the purpose, and with the possibility to send only one tally by email in June.
The aim is 5 million rosaries. Just think: all that rosary counting!
This is more than enough to let the heart of a good Catholic rejoice.
Keep calm, and count your rosaries.
Many thanks to all those who have written (or thought) nice things during the Christmas days. I have replied to many of them but the exercise was getting a tad repetitive.
You are in my unworthy prayers.
My dear little one,
I write to you in a very difficult moment of your very young life, because even if you cannot read I think there are some things of which you should be informed.
In just a few minutes your young and tender life – a God-given gift, full of bliss and promise – will be abruptly, unnaturally, and cruelly put to an end. I am very sorry to tell you that if you have already developed small legs and arms , and are already almost looking like a little child, you will be torn to pieces whilst still living, and you will be extracted from your mother’s womb one piece at a time.
Your rests will be discarded. You will not be considered a person, so you will not be buried.
Talking of your mother, she has by now persuaded herself – in conscience – that you…
View original post 1,432 more words
The morning after, and conservative Catholics are trying to come to terms with what has happened. I have been around on the Internet, and I see a despondency almost pleased of itself. “We are doomed!”; “Lord, have mercy!” and similar expressions are very easy to be found. Do you want my take?
Get a grip.
The world has not ended, and it is not as if Schoenborn or Meisner had been made Pope. This Pope might be bad or very bad as the case may be (I have almost abandoned hope that he might be only mildly bad, though you never know), but he will not be the undoing of anything, least of all our Holy Mother Church.
The Church who survived Liberius and Benedict IX, John XXII and Alexander VI, Leo X and Paul VI will also survive Francis, no matter how bad or how long his pontificate. Countless…
View original post 382 more words
I have read somewhere that it is a Jewish tradition on one of their festivities to say “next year, in Jerusalem!”, thus renewing in a beautiful manner their hope to be reunited in the Holy Land.
Whilst I do not need to tell you that the religion is the wrong one, I always thought the mentality right. There is a hoping against hope that is moving in its childish stubbornness, a clinging to the desire for better times that refuses to give up. I like that.
Looking at the present situation, I cannot avoid making this traditional Jewish attitude my own in these days leading to Christmas, and to resolve to express the same wish every year, to the end of my days if needs be:
Next year, a good Pope!
A very Merry Christmas to you, dear readers, and to your beloved ones. May our present troubles be a help, with God’s grace, to our salvation. Pray in particular for Pope Francis: that he may become himself the good Pope for whom we long.
As the Year of Our Lord 2013 is slowly leaving us it might be good to revisit, as a perennial warning, one of the most ominous loads of bovine excrement served to the faithful by the joyful nuChurch of Francis, The Humble Guy.
This video is an eloquent testimony of the state in which our stupid prelates have reduced the One True Church.
Faithful to the motto oportet ut scandala eveniant, I invite you to post this madness on your blog, or on your facebook page, or to send it to your friends so that they know what they must think the next time one of these nincompoops wants to teach us some strange novelty.
You might also want to pick your own very special prelate for individual shaming, and warning to the other faithful.
After two runs (which were difficult enough to stomach), in my view the clear winner is the athletic, enthusiastic chap at 2:41 to 2:44. His dope must have been of the first quality. I hope there was a time when he was worthy of the habit, but as things are now I think he should be stripped of it stante pede.
Can’t imagine any of the apostles making such an ass of himself. Denying Christ in a moment of weakness, yes. Being fearful of persecution, of course. But making a pathetic clown of himself and the Church he is called to represent at that age just to please a bunch of idiots and try to show them he is cool and modern? No.