The Alternative Blessed Virgin
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.
Posted on December 31, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged Blessed Virgin, Pope Francis, Seven Sorrows Of Mary. Bookmark the permalink. 23 Comments.
I think the pope does not know Our Lady. Obviously he has never read Ven. Mary of Agreda’s “City of God” or he never could have made such a protestant statement about the Blessed Virgin. Maybe next he will say she was just another unwed teen as I myself have heard from a pulpit?
He ridiculed the rosary bouquet which shows he has no good understanding of the power of the rosary and the time and effort it takes daily to pray a complete one.
He is a South American Jesuit. You almost don’t need to say more than that. I must try to see that he cares for the poor in a true way. Also, he does not care for the most faithful and traditional Catholics…that also seems to be true.
But he did bring Our Lady a beachball from Rio…
I defy anyone to watch this clip and not understand the profound role of Our Blessed Lady in our salvation and her suffering with Jesus at Calvary. Today, I feel ashamed of our Pope.
Mary who suffered with Christ
This is the WORST thing the Pope has said. It is utter blasphemy. When I read it when it first came to light, I was sickened and completely shocked. You can bet con catholics defend it, I have seen it. This attack on Our Lady is straight from the devil himself. This Pope has no faith and has no idea what he is talking about. He does not know who Our Lady is nor does he know who God is.
Firstly, isn’t what His Holiness saying blasphemy? Did he not also say that Christ deceived? Secondly has that ‘Reading Francis through Benedict’ nonsense finally died off?
As to the first, I hesitated in using the word blasphemy because the way I understand it a blasphemy is an offensive expression directly (not indirectly or by implication) addressed to God. I might be wrong, though.
As to the second, I think we’ll have to wait. Apparently, the mere fact extremely confused former priests are not, ahem, re-frocked should be reassurance enough.
When Francis said what he said about the Mother of God, the mask slipped.
We all saw he is wearing the wrong shoes because he is “the guest without a wedding garment” in Matthew chapter 22.
But…could he not have meant that she was *tempted* to think that she was lied to, deceived..? I never thought that the fact that she was unstained by original sin meant that Satan would not tempt her. I believe this is what Pope Francis meant here.
I’ve been just as upset over several things the Pope has said as you have been and I’ve begun reading your blog regularly in the past few weeks. And yes, I wish that he’d stated this more precisely so as to remove any question of his meaning here. But I do not believe he is saying that she actually entertained such thoughts, but rather that she was tempted to thus doubt by the devil (yet resisted).
Why don’t you do what everyone else does in all other circumstances and just read what Francis said?
As to the temptation: once we know (as we all know, and he must know) that the Blessed Virgin knew as a fact she and her son would suffer, what basis would exist for kind of temptation?
If you belong to the “let us read what we think he should have said” crowd, you will find this blog very instructive.
For anyone seeking to see the real Pope Francis, buy and read Rosales and Olivera’s “Francis A Pope For Our Time”. These Pro-Francis authors show that Francis was heavily influenced not only by Peronism during his youth, but was under the direct influence of a communist teacher that he maintained a life long relationship with until her death. And when he was studying for the priesthood, he constantly read, besides his theological books, Peronist and communist literature. No wonder this man is so confusing to figure out!
I do not doubt it in the least. Peronist to the bone marrow, and it is truly no surprise he would gladly receive communist influences.
But our Holy Father DID read The Testament of Mary! That must of been his source.
That’s another explanation, in fact.
I was disquieted this season having read these ramblings of our Pope on Eponymous Flower a few days before Christmas. I had a feeling you were taking a well deserved rest from the burden of monitoring our Pope. This incident seems to be under the radar a bit, but is shocking none-the-less. That he tried to twist the words of JPII to mean that the spotless, trusting Theotokos had the pedestrian, banal sentiments of a dour frump leaves me very sad.
I can at least report after reading this on the internet I have tried to see whether it was mentioned in the Italian mass media. I could not detect anything. My impression is that the media use Pope Francis to fill the remaining two minutes of the news with trite banalities, but prefer to avoid his impious statements.
Thanks for sharing that link Maccuscuria. The tears are rolling down my cheeks. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.
Jesus himself proclaimed “My God, my god, why have you forsaken me?” on the cross. If Jesus feels that way in this extreme situation, then why shouldn’t his mother?
Jesus quoted Psalm 22 (it was customary in Jesus’ time, when the knowledge of scripture was very extensive, to quote a part of a famous psalm to mean the whole) to let us understand the extreme pain he was undergoing for our sake. His words express the fact that He was willing to undergo for us a suffering and desolation that even surpass our understanding, because being Divine his suffering was vastly superior to what a human may ever experience. Jesus’ cry is not, and never was, interpreted as anything similar to “Lies! I was deceived!”.
It is a sign of our times that a Pope may say things that let some Catholics cry, whilst other start thinking why the Blessed Virgin should not have thought that God deceived her. I am not addressing you personally, but heavens, we do live in disturbing times.
We can but hope that this silly billy will learn to emulate Our Lady’s silence, at least for a while, and give us a rest from his verbal ectoplasm. That’s my wish for the New Year. May you and your readers reap a holy and blessed 2014.
I will say this….I didn’t quite see the utter depravity of this man back in March….but I knew back then that this man was a bad choice to take over the pontificate. My worst fears, and more, are being realized it seems….on almost a daily basis. Let us read the words of St Robert Bellarmine in these trying times as to the validity of our pope. Seriously….enough is enough. Why do we “hope and pray” that evil men will suddenly become good men? This man is at the end of his life and has surely spent the majority of it against God….why do we keep hoping and praying for him? Because its Catholic? That is totally not Catholic. Pray for the ignorant who can still be saved…..this man has made his choice. Cast this man aside and call him what he is…..that is our duty as Catholics.
Mr Bergoglio is surely not some stupid man….he is a very intelligent man who has chosen his path, for whatever reason.
Well, as long as there’s hope there’s life, it is often said.
In this case, we must also pray for the Pope because it is so important that the Pope converts to, erm, Catholicism.
He is certainly hardened. But you never know.
I am not much for crying, but I made the mistake of watching the link to ‘The Passion’ at work on Monday, and cried at my desk at work. Yes, she knowingly consented to the Passion for our sakes. It shows how serious the errors of the past 50 years have been, that they could ‘deceive, if possible, even the elect.’
I wish a blessed new year to all readers here and I’m grateful for the camaraderie of fellow Trad Catholics in these interesting times!
(AKA Mary Kangas Jones at FB.)
Ah, another “end-timer” 😉
Personally, I prefer to wait for false messiahs and the Antichrist first.
Bergoglio doesn’t qualify as a false messiah, much less Antichrist.
Too stupid, too vulgar, too ignorant.
Wouldn’t fool a boy of ten, properly instructed.
I’m not bright enough to know what all of the quotes refer to, so I should not use them. I’m certainly not an end-timer! I just know that lots of people are confused or deceived by his speech, and many do such mental gymnastics to try to convince us that it’s all very correct. I have no patience for them. Reality may be a bit scary but it’s at least real!
Blessed new year to all, and thanks for the company.