Enough With These Bishops!

May 17

Posted by

Vox Cantoris has a chilling post about a bishop of the Evil Clown's Satanical Club, who – I do not post the link here, but it is there – “floats” the idea that one of the Apostles might have been homosexual, and Mary Magdalene a Lesbian.

Apparently, The Gospels “don't say”, so “we don't know”.

I allow myself here to follow this brilliant logic and apply it to the bishop. The article doesn't say whether Bishop Córdoba is a child rapist, so we don't know. I am sure Bidhop Cordoba fully agrees with this thinking.

To say it with the words of the blog post's author, “It defies logic that someone would take the position that this man does and not be one”. I fully agree. Unless – and I am making a great effort here – the degree of faithless rottenness of Bishop Córdoba is such that he sees his satanical assertions as a smart political positioning in light of the new course under the Evil Clown. But no, I think the man is most probably a queen.

In case you should think the Evil Clown isn't wreaking havoc within the Church just because he will, if he hasn't smoked his communist brain completely, renounce to a nuclear explosion,

The argument used by this despicable piece of FrancisChurch are also enough to make the blood boil: besides being explicitly mentioned by Our Lord himself as the epitome of evil, godless behaviour – which should be argument enough for a Protestant – sodomy has been uniformly condemned by the Magisterium since the very beginning. That a Catholic bishop, of all people, should ignore path is fact and try to fabricate an extremely stupid biblical argument tells you what kind of evil men we have as bishops.

I will now try to bring my blood temperature to normal, reflecting that the satanical affirmations of this piece of work have certainly not escaped the attention of not only the Angels as a body, but the Apostles and Mary Magdalene in heaven. This, on reflection, is enough to conclude that things will take its course in due time, and I can sip my camomile tea in relative serenity.

Note, however, that Wikipedia seems to state that the man was made a bishop by Ratzinger, giving another example of the atrocious appointments of that nice but far too accommodating man, who was probably even blissfully unaware of what kind of venomous plants he was planting in the middle of Our Lord's garden.

The Church has never said that reprobates would not become bishops. This here stinks of reprobation like Francis' faggot priests stink of sheep.

M

 

Posted on May 17, 2015, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 11 Comments.

  1. S. Armaticus | May 17, 2015 at 11:38 am

    If you haven’t seen this, don’t open it until tomorrow.

    Wouldn’t want to spoil your nice Sunday. 🙂

  3. TCA | May 17, 2015 at 1:44 pm

    I cannot excuse a pope for appointing a sub-standard bishop, but it seems that sub-standard has become a requirement.
    It’s a trial of faith really, that a saint like JP2 could have been so bad at his job. Why would the Holy Spirit allow his cause to succeed, knowing it would canonize his errors and shortcomings as well?
    And what do popes do all day anyway? Push what I’m sure are very important papers around on their desks? Don’t they care at all about the quality of our shepherds?
    Souls are lost because of this. Because of V2 and its aftermath, I’m embarrassed to argue with my Protestant acquaintances . All my arguments are swept away is this sea corruption, weakness, and confusion.

    • Mundabor | May 18, 2015 at 4:42 pm

      The canonisation does not canonise the error. On the contrary, we hammer on the errors so that they are not “canonised” by the canonisation…

  4. arwiv | May 17, 2015 at 4:20 pm

    The simple fact that this bishop even showed up to speak at the conference in question is a scandal. Once again though, I do not give a pass to Benedict for elevating a man of such low moral character as this Cordoba to the bishopric. I know you disagree with me, but I personally hold Benedict in the same regard as the others….I fail to see the possibility that any of these popes dont always know exactly what they are doing. Benedict was obviously a lot more conservative in character then the current pope….and obviously much more sly as well, but I personally have no doubt that both had/have the same ultimate goals. When Benedict comes out and denounces the heresies of vatican 2 which he helped create I will change my opinion of the man….until then I cannot.

  6. Philip Lishman (@plishman) | May 18, 2015 at 5:03 pm

    Those who could say such a thing of the Apostles have never experienced contact with God. When you do, even for a moment, you look at all the other people around you in a different way, a way which transcends any sexual feeling.

    Look at them all, you think. They don’t know what they are. They don’t know even what they’re for! They’re helpless! They don’t realize that the very stability of reality itself is an illusion, fought for them by God moment to moment, and that, if he withdrew his hand for an instant, they would be overrun with disease, accidents, natural disasters and destruction.

    It is an overwhelming feeling, and with it you see them with only love – that variety of love known as caritas, not eros.

  7. Richard Eaton Freeman | May 19, 2015 at 11:32 pm

    I’ve heard this sort of thing from anti-Catholic bigots but never from a bigot bishop before. Another new low has been reached! It tells you much about heresy in high places that this foul blasphemy has little chance of harming the bishop’s career while a bishop who daringly does Catholic things is likely to get himself as the young Brando put it in “On the Waterfront” a “one way ticket to palookaville”.