Daily Archives: June 2, 2014
From the Pope of Fatima, our beloved Pastor Angelicus, Venerable Pius XII:
Suppose, dear friend, that Communism was only the most visible of the instruments of subversion to be used against the Church and the traditions of Divine Revelation … I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. … A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God … In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them, like Mary Magdalene weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, “where have they taken Him?”
Pius XII, from the book Pius XII Devant L’Histoire
The quotation is, read in 2014, chilling.
The “suicide of altering the faith” (“suicide” i shere a rhetorical expression, as you all know, then the Church is indefectible) is in full swing, and it takes exactly the path feared by the great Pope.
The Faith is altered – not in her official expression, but in what is taught and implied and suggested and interviewed and off-the-cuffed day in and day out – in the insisted proposition of a Christ who does not judge, does not punish, does not demand loyalty, and does not call for evangelisation.
The liturgy is altered in the banalisation and de-sacralisation brought about by the Novus Ordo, and made much worse by the liturgical abuses which now even Popes commit repeatedly, unashamedly, under the sun.
The theology is altered in that as it is told that it will not change, the very Pope considers the call for communion for adulterers the product of “profound and serene theology”. The “subversion to be used against the Church and the traditions of Divine Revelation” is now at work from the very top.
The soul is altered in that Catholics are asked to de-Catholicise themselves, in an orgy of accommodation to every other people, culture, religion, immorality, even sexual perversion. They are asked to accommodate themselves to the sinner, lest his life becomes uncomfortable in his sins.
The civilised world (how beautifully politically incorrect, this one) is now rapidly denying its God. Churches are disappearing, as entire Countries are populated by people who have lost the very concept of sin, or scandal, and dare to call themselves Christians nevertheless. The legislation has been sliding towards heathenism now 40 years, but the slide has now become an avalanche as sexual perversion is falling upon the West, with a virulence that threatens the most basic freedoms of its inhabitants; inhabitants who in turn have now become too stupid, fat (actually: obese), and lazy to understand the value of freedom of opinion.
As the Pope himself considers it fitting to hide the Saviour from the very people he is called to evangelise (and no, do not believe to anyone telling you that uh, ah, oh, it must have been a coincidence, surely?), we are not very far away from a Pope declaring to the press that every religion is equal, and Christianity must accept to be on par with every other, and equally legitimate, way to express our love for God yadda yadda…
I doubt Francis will ever be as blasphemous as that, but if he can appoint a sufficient number of Cardinal his successor may well do it. There is, for example, probably almost nothing that a Maradiaga would not be able to say or do once he has become Pope.
Read the Pastor Angelicus’ words again. They are truly prophetic.
Let us pray that this punishment may end soon.
We wanted the chocolate without thinking of the consequences. Now God is force-feeding us with so much of it we are becoming obese, and severely diabetic. A fitting punishment for our sins of presumption, for believing we are too good for Catholicism, and that the Church must be made new to bend it to our love for chocolate.
But it’s not chocolate. It merely has the same colour.
It always strikes me as odd that those most fixated on the opportunity, or necessity, for adulterers to receive Communion are those least likely to believe in Transubstantiation.
But then I reflect that to them the value of communion is not in what it is, but in the way they are seen by the community; that is, in a matter of pure egotistic self-righteousness.
Those who blaspheme the sacrament when it is about Christ, proceed to deify it when it is about them.
All normal, then.
And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.
For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,
And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.
Our Lord beholds Jerusalem, and cries. He is not simply sad, or disappointed. He is afflicted to the point of crying.
He proceeds, then, to tell why, and he make a chilling prophecy: this mighty city will be besieged, and after the siege it will be completely destroyed, with not even children being spared.
Why is this? Because “thou knewest not the time of thy visitation”.
If one believes in the Gospel (and I am sure there are around Catholics who do not; or do not really; or do only when it is convenient to them) you must realise that the extremely clear words of Our Lord mean very simply that Jerusalem has not recognised the Lord, and therefore it is be destroyed and countless suffering inflicted upon its inhabitant, as a fitting punishment for their collective wickedness.
Note here the absolute absence of gandhi-like good-ism. The punishment will be terrible. The destruction thorough. The sins of the fathers will be visited upon the sons. Not even the children will be spared.
Now, if you are a “progressive” “c”atholic you will obviously think that Jesus was anti-Semite, or otherwise very prejudiced; or, more probably, you will say that this is not what Jesus really said, and some evil Evangelist or racist compiler must have caused the whole mess. But if you are a good Christian, you will simply know that the Scripture isn’t questioned, because God would never allow supposed evil Evangelists or racist compilers to transmit to us an adulterated Truth.
There can, therefore, be no doubt that the Jews are punished for not recognising Christ. They are punished in the harshest, and I mean truly harshest of ways.
In 70 A.D. the Romans besiege Jerusalem. The prophecy is fulfilled to the word. It is a short siege, and in the same year in which it started the siege ends with the conquest of the city.
The Romans, fed up with the continuous rebelliousness of the Jews more than 130 years after Pompey had put the place under de facto Roman domination, went on the job with Roman thoroughness. They made the point particularly forcefully by breaking the strongest taboo of the Jews, on which their entire religion hinged: they destroyed the temple, brought the spoils to Rome, and celebrated the feat with a solemn procession over there, as clearly seen in the reliefs of Titus’ Arch in Rome.
There could have been not only no worse military defeat, but even no worse religious humiliation for the Jews, whose entire religion was made to pieces in front of their very eyes as the Temple was reduced to rubble and ruins.
I have already written how the renting in two of the temple veil spells the symbolic end of the Old Covenant, opening the sancta sanctorum whose function of sacred space has now clearly ended. But in this post I would like to stress out another one or two inconvenient truths:
1. The untold humiliation is prophesied by Jesus, and
2. It is declared by Him the fitting punishment for not recognising Christ.
These are the crude facts. There is no fluffing around. They may be embarrassing for wannabe political correct “c”atholics who are little more than heathens, but it is what it is.
Judaism has no reason to be. It is past “sell by” date, big time. The point has been made from Jesus and the Roman legions so clearly, that only the professional blind can refuse to see it.
Whilst there can be (obviously) birth or (less obviously) invincible ignorance, there is no valid motive for being a Jew. No more than there is for being a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Sikh. We Christians may look at Judaism as certainly, and for obvious reasons, nearer to Christianity than Islam or Hinduism; but Judaism is nevertheless a different religion and, just to leave out any doubt, a false one.
There is only one way, and it is Christ. Not recognising Christ led the Jews to untold suffering. They follow a wrong religion. They are conversion material. That’s it. There’s no way you can get around this.
Would I expect Francis to go to Jerusalem and say all these things to the Jews? Well, not necessarily. The Pope is also a Head of State, and the rules of diplomacy demand that he, whenever in his official role of Head of State, behaves according to the rules of diplomacy.
But then again this was a visit officially considered as “purely religious”, but with meetings with the heads of both the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority. Therefore, it wasn’t so “purely religious” after all.
If you ask me, a Pope could, and perhaps should, meet everyone: Jews, Hindus, Sikh, and the like. But he should meet them to bring Christ to them, not to hide Christ from them. If this is not possible for whatever reason, then there should be no meeting, because the evangelisation should be the priority, and if there can be no evangelisation there can only be confusion, and the further spreading of the diffused heresy that everyone is fine where he is, provided he is a nice chap with a good heart.
I wonder if Francis ever stopped to ponder over Jesus’ words above. If he did, he will have to recognise that the Jews were met with a horrible punishment and untold humiliation because of their refusal to recognise Christ.
One wonders what the punishment of a Pope will be who, in the very same place, does pretty much the same.
Garrigou-Lagrange in action..
One of the differences a Southern European notices with the Anglo-Saxon attitude is the different approach to hell. In this respect, Anglo-Saxons tend in my experience to belong either to the extreme “hell is probably empty” (heretical) faction, or else to tend towards a Puritanical view of a general carnage which only a few manage to escape.
In Southern Europe we traditionally had a different approach, thinking rather that whilst the matter of salvation is serious, the fear of The Lord, the nearness to the Sacraments and a loving trust in the Blessed Virgin’s help would help, in the end, very many to avoid the worst. This is, I think, the reason why Catholic societies are seen as too rigid and hypocritically harsh from Anglo-Saxon liberals, whilst they are considered scandalous places full of sinners who just don’t care and are left alone by a permissive and…
View original post 733 more words
The Borat Reblog
Another day, another terrifying Attila The Hun exercise. We are now informed that Francis thinks that the poor are at the heart of the Gospel.(translation in English available).
Slowly, the question whether he is a communist must be coupled to the other question whether he ever had an inkling in life of what Christianity is about.
I would say Christianity is about the redemption through the sacrifice of our Lord, who died for us to open to us the doors to Paradise; doors through which, though, we must still walk ourselves, meriting – with His grace – to go through them one day.
Nothing of this is to be found in the extremely clear-cut, blanket statement of the Pope.
You may think that this is just a way of saying, or that – for the 453th time – Francis has been misunderstood.
I answer to this: open your eyes.
View original post 704 more words