Lybian Massacre of 21 Christians: Crying Out And Staying Silent






TMAHIC* has condemned the murder of the poor 21 Coptic Christians. In this day and age this is, actually, news. Two things grate me of TMAHICH’s intervention:

1) Francis has condemned their murder by we do not know whom, in order to defend an unidentified religion. As condemnations go, this is a pretty easy one. As always, Francis refuses to see anything bad in Islam qua Islam. Hold on to your Korans!

2) Francis goes on to say that this episode should move us to “encourage each other in the ecumenical goal”. The first question here is: why? I do not know whether the poor martyrs were Catholic Copts (there are lots of them in Egypt) or not, but it is not to be seen how their martyrdom should speak in favour of ecumenism. The second question is why this man must use even a simple thing like the condemnation of such a barbarous massacre to push an agenda that he can, if he so wishes, push in many other ways.

My impression of this is that Francis’ approach is the one of the brain washer. He will not allow any occasion to go to waste to push his agenda, and whether this pushing is apposite or not makes no difference whatsoever.

Then there are these strange expressions we hear rather often, like today’s “cries out to be heard”. Cries out to heaven, you might think? Or cries out in the Christian community? Is this a heavenly, or an earthly perspective? Isn’t it natural for a Christian to call to heaven in such circumstances? To simply look up to heaven? When I read the phrase, I instantly missed that part. It is more than strange that Francis almost always keeps the ball very flat, and very far away from supernatural things; unless it is, of course, to condemn Catholics, in which cases there will be plenty of reference to their un-heavenly behaviour (many examples of that if you search this blog).

I do not know whether this intervention was drafted by another pen. If it was, the stupidity of the expressions therein contained makes clear Francis tampered with it.

And note this: the man who says that the massacre of these martyrs “cries out” is the one who stays silent about the religion that caused the massacre in the first place. Not much of a “crying out”, I would say.

Whenever this man says something safe, you can be sure it has been written by others. Whenever he touches the text, be assured he will make of it a breakfast’s pig.

I dread the next papacy.

But I still can’t wait for this one to end.



* The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History

Posted on February 18, 2015, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 6 Comments.

  1. He is hopelessly naive about Islam. It aims to destroy him, Vatican City, and the West. These lunatics are massing only a hundred miles or so south of Rome, openly declaring that they will infiltrate via the “poor” immigrants from North African, and this guy sits there and deifies illegal immigrants. Sick.

  2. Third secret of Fatima – Bishop dressed in white killed by a group of soldiers. Could it happen?

  3. Francis wants to promote his modernist idea about “blood oecumenism”. These poor copts weren’t Catholics. However, according to “blood oecumenism”, a totally new and phony modernist invention, martyrdom can exist in every religion (and a fortiori, in every pseudo-christian heresy). That means these martyrs deserve the same treatment than real Catholic martyrs have, i.e. they go to heaven immediately after their death.

    This false statment was condemned by pope Eugene IV during the concile of Florence. You’ll find a concise quotation in english, here for instance :

    That’s why Francis loudly insists on the fact that “their martyrdom speaks in favor of oecumenism”.

    • Last time I looked, every Christian who is killed because of Christ goes to heaven straight. I might be wrong, but I don’t think so.

      Credible Links will be read.


      P.s. Lots of Catholic Copts in Egypt, last time I looked. But I do not know about these ones in particular.

  4. They were “orthodox”, no catholic, according to the french newspapers.

%d bloggers like this: