Daily Archives: March 11, 2014

Pope Janus

Janus, Vatican Museums.

Janus, Vatican Museums.



The Bishop of Rome, Francis, gives an interview to one of the biggest daily newspapers in Italy, the Corriere della Sera.

If one wants to give interviews, there’s no doubt one has plenty of occasions for being a Pope and say a thing or two during it. If one wants to be a good Pope, he will easily find words that capture the attention of the public, enrage feminists and perverts, and show urbi et orbi that the Pope is, actually, Catholic.

My suggestion? Something like “the gender ideology is demonic”. Then the journalist asks again, and he covers him in brimstone. How about that? 

Still, this here being the Bishop of Rome the issue is accurately avoided. At the same time, there is an utterly Jesuitical opening to (heterosexual) people living in public scandal, because Francis is so concerned about their pensions and other “rights” (which they don’t have; nor should they). Follow the link above to have the details.

But again, it would not be Francis if he would only say the lefty and PC things. The impression I got in this fateful year is that in private, or in a small setting, Francis would say or imply everything that his interlocutor wants to hear, provided it does not reach a vast public. In the living room, he will be just as conservative as you like it. Quite the Jesuit, you see. 

I remember, for example, the encouragement in private to French MPs to defend marriage after he had shut up about it in public; the messages that the truth must said whole and the principles are not negotiable, a statement of astonishing hypocrisy if seen in the light of the following “who am I to judge” year; and other one or two little opening  to conservative minded Catholics that you will be able to find on my blog if you search hard enough.

The last example is from kath.net, where a priest reports that Francis told him the gender ideology is demonic.

These being words said in a private setting to a priest, these will only be read by those who are really inside – or interested in – the things of the Church. The great public will never know it.

So: when he is talking with a priest in private he is on fire, well knowing his interlocutor will like it very much. But when there is an interview with the Corriere in the programme, not a word. 

I wonder why?

Someone should remind Francis of his own words:

“There has been, throughout history of the people, this temptation: to chop a piece off the Faith”, the temptation to be a bit “like everyone else does”, the temptation “not to be so very rigid”. “But when we start to cut down the Faith, to negotiate Faith, a little like selling it to the highest bidder”, he stressed, “we take the path of apostasy, of disloyalty to the Lord.”


Well said.

Very true.


The Stupidity Of “Sensitivitee”

What's so difficult?!

What’s so difficult?!



Father Carota reports that two boys of Seven can be excellent altar boys for the Traditional Latin Mass. 

So: two smart children can learn how to say and do everything perfectly in a highly structured liturgy like the Traditional Latin Mass; but there are millions of people ready to believe that fifity or sixty years old men and women, many of them with professional qualifications or a degree, and all of them provided with smartphone, are not able to read from a Latin/whatever translation of the mass and get acquainted with the most beautiful thing this side of heaven. 

How could we come to the point that every nonsense must be believed merely because it looks “sensitive”? The answer is very simple: because in the effeminate society of today even men want to look like women, and it should not be said of them that they do not “feel” for the poor old things who would have the shock of their lives if they had to do some easy reading work.

This, apart from the fact that it is not really necessary to even know what the priest is saying: countless illiterate peasants have gone to heaven with far less knowledge of Latin than these old Sixty-Eighters can get in thirty minutes if they put in the exercise the same attention that they put in the instructions of their latest smartphone, or X-box, or tivo box, or whatever. But hey, the illiterate peasant never thought the world had to adapt to his whims, either.

Political correctness is always stupid. Political correctness is the way the leftists have found to make you accept things that would otherwise simply make you laugh.

Enough with the “sensitivitee”. I long for a time when the OF will mean Only Form, meaning the TLM, and old men and women will be told to move their spoiled ass and read a Latin missal like everyone else.






Confusion, And Bible Quotes.

I received a comment about Francis quoting the Bible, which apparently would make his observations not worthy of censure. I have already replied to the comment, but it's probably good to spend some words more on this.

Every Modernist, every Protestant, even every Atheist can quote the Bible. I can, actually, not imagine anyone who, interested in dismounting the Truth, would not find it convenient to do the same.

Protestants quote the Bible with every breath, and every televised pastor a' la Joel Osteen would sprinkle Bible quotes on his sermons to make a, well, perfectly Protestant – if at all – point. In my experience, bad Catholics do exactly the same. I have a rather extensive knowledge of bad priests, and have never found one who would be short of a Bible quote for his purposes.

This is less evident in traditional Catholic countries, where people are much better at recognising Catholic teaching than Bible quotes and bibliolatry is unknown, and are therefore less prone to be very impressed by; but it is decidedly more pronounced in traditionally – or rather, former – Protestant countries, where the Bible is surrounded by a mystical aura of automatic Truth dispenser, without considering that the Devil can quote the Bible with great ease. Still, and to make the point once again: no priest, however bad or outright heretical, could not do the same.

My religion is Catholicism, not the Bible. It's not the Bible that made Catholicism, but Catholicism that “made” the Bible, giving certain books and not others, certain letters and not others, certain Gospels and not others the rank of Scripture. Scripture which is then read in accordance with the Truth the Scripture is there to foster. Therefore, whilst the Bible is inspired, this does not mean it can be legitimately used for purposes that run contrary to that inspiration. Still, the sheer mass of the Scriptures will make it very easy for everyone with an agenda to find quotes fitting for his purposes.

It's a game everyone can play. Even the Bishop of Rome, who isn't an eagle by any standard.

If this were not so, then the Proddies – undoubtedly our betters at Bible quotes – would be right, and we wrong. Just the contrary is the case.

Coming back to the case illustrated a couple of days ago, Francis uses Bible quotes for what clearly is a dismounting- or discounting – of fasting; something that very well matches his dislike for every traditional practice, from praying by rote, to rosary counting, to the Traditional Latin Mass, and which therefore allows one to immediately understand where he is going. He uses a Bible quote for this. Big surprise. I have seen bad priests doing this since I was a child.

How can we, then, recognise when the Bible quote is used or abused? We do it by looking at the message the one quoting the Bible wants to convey. If the context is, as this is invariably the case by Francis: “those who respect the traditionally observed rules think they are good, but they may well be hypocrites” then it is clear the context is not one of defence of traditional Catholic values, but rather of its dismounting, or discounting.

This can be rather subtle in more refined bad priests than the Bishop of Rome; but it is particularly evident in his case, because his torrential blabbering and off-the-cuff heresies will always give a very clear indication of, as they said at school, what “the author wants to say”.

The author wants to say that fast, like every other rule, isn't important in the new “time of mercy” (I have written about that, too). Rather predictably, he does so by quoting the Bible. Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and countless other open heretics or very bad Catholics would do exactly the same. Again: Bible quoting is a game everyone can play, even atheists, as the now omnipresent “do not judge” mantra and the flippant abuse of the Golden Rule abundantly show.

Don't be deceived by the Bible quote. Look at the message the speaker or author wants to convey. If the message is wrong, no Bible quote will ever make it right.


Why The Novus Ordo Must Go

Mundabor's Blog

After the tragedy in Tuscany, you could have bet your pint that some alternative priest would have profited to put himself at the centre of the attention and at the same time show how little respect he has for the Mass.

The feat has been perfectly achieved in the Isola del Giglio (along whose coast the Costa Concordia ran aground). In order to make of the thing an exercise which would put the attention away from Christ to direct it on the usual “gandhism” of these occasions and, of course, on himself, the celebrant of Giglio’s main church thought it fitting to put on the altar the following offerings: a life vest, a rope, a rescue helmet, a plastic tarp and some bread.

This is not even Mass as a sacred ceremony. This is a macabre vaudeville without paying the ticket.

But if we reflect attentively, isn’t this what is…

View original post 411 more words

%d bloggers like this: