Daily Archives: January 9, 2014
Thanks to Magdalene Prodigal for this short video illustrating the life of the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate.
Their persecutor is the same who mocks “Pelagians” who count rosaries (“don’t laugh…”) with modernist nuns who can’t even manage to wear the habit.
The two videos above tell you everything you need to know about the state of the Church with this unspeakable papacy.
Decide for yourself which one should incur the ires of the Vatican, and which ones only praise and encouragement.
Like many others, I have noticed today that the “Ars Orandi” blog has been “removed”.
I can’t imagine Google arrives to such a point of content censorship, but it’s very difficult to understand what is happening.
My take about possible scenarios, for what it’s worth:
1. Perhaps someone objected to the many beautiful pictures, possibly claiming a violation of copyright. I do not know whether Mr Werling takes his pictures directly from google as I do, but I had one or two unpleasant experiences with the issue. It’s not always easy to know what rights are attached to a picture, at least I do not know how to do it. If there’s no “copyright” sign or other warning I assume it’s public domain. When writing from a tablet app you can take a picture and put it in the post (saving it beforehand, of course) without reading anything pertaining to the picture.
If this is the issue, I hope the blog will soon be back, without the pictures if needs be. The pictures are beautiful, but what we want is actually the written content.
2. The same applies for the many beautiful texts from Dom Gueranger’s books. I have always assumed this was public domain. I quote from books myself without any qualm, but mention the source and link when possible. I have always assumed this is more than sufficient. Mr Werling does the same without fail. I actually think he helps to sell Dom Gueranger’s books. If the copyright issues are so massive this is scary; does it mean we must pay much attention to every text we publish on the blog, even when we mention the source?
3. If I got it completely wrong with the copyright matter and there are other issues, I can only wish to Mr Werling that he soon finds the time or the motivation – or, if it was Google’s fault, the platform – to continue his beautiful work.
If there are issues with Google and Mr Werling decides to start a new blog, I will be happy to publicise the new address, link to it frequently and contribute as I can to make it as popular in the Google ranks as it used to be. A comment in my comment box from anyone who finds Mr Werling’s new blog will be enough. I am sure many others will do the same and help the new blog – if there will be any such – to rapidly reach the popularity it deserves.
As I am there, I allow myself to do something I have done far too seldom up to now: thank Mr Werling for his beautiful work all this time. Whenever I clicked the blog and got immersed in all that wisdom and beauty, I could not avoid thinking someone up above must be very, very pleased with Mr Werling’s work.
Let’s hope the blog is up and running again soon, anyway.
It is apparent to everyone with some sense of observation that the German bishops are going to lead the Modernist charge in the assault to Catholic Truth, in particular – but not only – with their new “pastoral”* approach to Communion for public adulterers. The German bishops know that it has worked in the past, when their liturgical abuse of “altar girls” was sanctioned by Paul VI. They also know as big contributors to the Vatican safe they enjoy a position of factual privilege other bishops’ conferences do not enjoy. Lastly, they clearly perceived when a Pope is able to say “who am I to judge” the sky is the limit.
Some observers, commenters and bloggers wonder if the Bishop of Rome, the Lamb-carrying Francis, will be able to face these people with the necessary strength.
I for myself prefer to wonder whether Francis is willing to resist them, and my answer to this is an emphatic: no, he isn’t. From what transpires up to now he isn’t in the least. On the contrary, he must secretly welcome the “modernising” lio they represent.
Please reflect: one of the most outspoken among the German Bishops, the aptly named Marx, is one of his eight, erm, gangbangers. I can’t think Francis chose him for such an elevated appointment because of his (cough) conservative credentials. Others, like Maradiaga, are probably even worse. Francis is actively promoting and giving a stage to revolutionary prelates.
Secondly, please reflect how probable it is that one who gave himself the example with a huge liturgical abuse only very few weeks into his pontificate, expresses himself in a heretical way more often that I eat pasta, and has in general no problem whatsoever with being seen as an “innovator” will now suddenly get the conniptions because the German bishops want to practice what he ceaselessly preaches.
Thirdly, please reflect that Francis is not so stupid that he thinks he can simply impose sacrilege on Catholics by simply ordering its abolition. The jury is out whether the man is simply extremely and culpably deluded or positively evil, but there can be no doubt that he is a Jesuit. Whatever abuse and sacrilege he wants to have introduced, he will mask it under the appearance of “merciful” leniency for priests who have “pastoral” concerns. In the end, if the bishops are in good faith and follow their conscience, who is he to judge?
Francis talks every day ending in “y” about the need not to be rigid or legalistic or, in one word, orthodox. He has been positively and willingly preparing the ground exactly for the kind of action the German bishops are now taking. It is extremely convenient for him to first promote a renovation in abstract (the invitation to make lio); then indicate he is actually not in favour of the measure suggested; and finally capitulate, out of his own good, wheelchair-loving heart, to pretty much every sacrilege. Then he will say what he actually always says: let us not be legalistic, let us focus on mercy, let us be pastoral, & bla, & bla. He does it already all the time, so it won’t even be a surprise for anyone.
In the end, I strongly suspect a “solution” will be reached by which the Church rules are upheld in principle, but they can be ignored – out of pastoral concern, and mercy galore – in practice. Like saying “in principle one should not smoke dope, but we leave it to the local churches to be pastoral if they have a lot of potheads who pay to us an awful lot in Kirchensteuer“. Bearing in mind that to receive unworthily is gravely sacrilegious, and smoking pot isn’t.
Be under no illusion: such a solution will satisfy each and every Pollyanna, and we will read a lot of blog posts with titles like “Did Pope Francis really change Church teaching in matter of Holy Communion?”, whilst the mainstream media will praise the man – “doctrinally conservative” but “pastorally revolutionary” – to the skies. Again, this is a man able to say “gay” when he means “homosexual”, so what do you expect. From their words you will know their minds.
The assault is coming. The leader of the royalist troops is a decade-long friends of the rebels.
Bar some extraordinary intervention from above, don’t ask me who will win this battle.
* Nota bene: “pastoral” by such priests always means “heretical”
The news of John L. Allen Jr’ s departure from one of the most horrible rags on the planet is the stuff of nice jokes around the Internet.
Mind, it is not that Allen can be considered in any way acceptable for a sound Catholic; it is that his colleagues are such nutcases that one is tempted to think God uses that rag to show us a complete collection of reprobates, so that we may be warned.
Rex monoculus in terra caecorum, my forefathers used to say: in the land of the blind, the one with one eye is the King. Allen used to smuggle himself for a reasonable Catholic voice merely because he worked in the madhouse. Put him in the middle of other confused wannabe Catholics unfaithful to the Magisterium and he will emerge for what he is: just another confused wannabe Catholic unfaithful to the Magisterium. He has occasional bouts of reason, showing he is not entirely bad. But seriously, in any decent Catholic publication he would fly out of the window in no time.
The atrocious rag for which he wrote up to now (no, I will not grace them with a link) will, though, have a problem. He was the token sane man in their psychiatric hospital; the one who brought them the traffic from the world of people who actually think, and their only link with sanity. With Allen gone, the place will become the editorial equivalent of Animal House, without even a John Belushi to attract the visitors.
The NCR needs another monoculus, fast. They certainly can’t afford to be seen by everyone for what they are: a bunch of ridiculous nutcases making the work of the devil day in and day out, and on their way to hell.
I wish them, editorially speaking, death as a magazine and Internet presence.
My wish has now come, very probably, nearer to fulfilment.
The picture above comes from a Puffington Post blogger.
The blogger must be three, four at the most.
Two of her comments:
“This specific lamb also makes him the HAPPIEST POPE IN THE WORLD. Just look:”
“All we know for sure is that the baby lamb and the pope will never forget this glorious day”.
I know this must be a blog for little children; but really, there should be a limit to this sugary nonsense; otherwise the children will grow up stupid.
Children should never be allowed near the PuffPo anyway.
The ridiculous outfit commonly going under the name of “Church of England” is considering changing its rite of Baptism.
The reason openly adduced for this is that as many parents do not go to church anymore, they are not properly informed about the meaning of certain words and the theological relevance of certain phrases.
Sin, for example, might be expunged. You see, the poor parents might feel insulted by the idea that they are sinners. Then, there is the thing with the submission to God; which, we are informed, is a sensitive issue; particularly with women, because Anglican women are even more allergic to any form of submission than Anglican men. Who does He think he is, this God, to demand submission of them? Pah! He should just try to get it from them, they will show Him as they did their husbands! Submission! Really?!
What is extremely funny to Catholics is, actually, perfectly natural to Anglicans. A wordly religion will adapt to the world without seeing anything strange in it. Today the very concept of sin is to be kept away from the customers faithful as if it dirtied them; tomorrow, the Cross might well go if they find it offends their sensitivity; the day after tomorrow, every mention of Christ will be expunged, less the family members of Muslim or Buddhist or other persuasion or of no persuasion at all feel offended by such an intolerant, “judging”, and clearly homophobic man.
The saddest thing of them all is that even Anglicans who care for God – and who rightly protest against the planned changes – are unable or unwilling to see what abject submission to the world their own shop incarnates and witnesses day in and day out. In this case, this abject submission is proclaimed quite openly, as the most natural of things. “Look – they say – we can’t ask a woman for submission, can we now? You got to be joking! Have you ever met our wives?”.
The so-called Church of England, an outfit that bears its absurdity and ridicule in its own name, capitulates to the world in the most natural manner. Which is what they have done since they were born, and the very reason for their existence.
We Catholics are living very sad times; but we know that the Depositum Fidei will, like a block of granite, resist every attempt at domestication. The Church and Her Truth will never die and will never be defeated. Not even a drunkard, homosexual, paedophile, communist Pope could change anything in the way the faithful – notice the word: faithful – understand and transmit Truth.
This is not so by the Anglicans and every other Protestant outfit out there. The storms of fashion and popular approval will always, at some point, sweep them away. What has become of the Quietists? Have you ever met a Puritan? How many Methodists or Quackers of young or middle age do you know?
The Anglicans will be the next to go.
Good riddance. There is no need for any religion of wordliness.