Daily Archives: June 16, 2015
In another show of diabolical misinformation about the simplest facts of life we are, now and then, told, or rather suggested, that the Holy Family was in the same situation as the army of pimps, prostitutes, small criminals, their children and families, and other opportunists or simple scroungers (and, possibly, terrorists) who now wish to enter Europe without being in possession of the legal requirements to be considered refugees simply because… we are getting more and more stupid.
Let us clarify a point here: Jesus, Joseph and Mary were never “illegals”. They did not dodge any frontier post. They did not fake any distress call. They did not pay any criminal to smuggle them anywhere.
They simply moved from a territory under direct or indirect control of the Roman Empire to another territory under direct or indirect control of the Roman Empire. Exactly as Jesus did when going to and fro between Judea and Galilee. Exactly as St. Paul did when moving around the Mediterranean. Exactly as Christianity spread all over the Empire. There is clear indication in the Gospel – and there is obvious indication in the history books – that none of these movements was “illegal”.
Nor has Christianity ever taught that frontiers are illegals, or boundaries unjust. Those who tell you such rubbish are the third-worldist enemies of the West, aided by their Muslim brother in arms, all of them at war against Western culture and civilisation.
It always sends my adrenaline levels to the sky when I hear illegality preached as something not only good, but godly.
I wonder why Pope Tree Hugger never talks about these simple facts?
The Eponymous Flower reports of the utterly shameless behaviour of the new bishop of Taubate’, in Brazil, called Dom Wilson. The man is the chap in polo shirt whom you see in the photo at the top, because in the era of Francis aspiring bishops are photographed in clerical habit only if strictly necessary.
The polo-wearing bishop was, at his inauguration mass, shocked at those (no doubt, rosary-counting) faithful kneeling and expecting to receive on the tongue. Therefore, he asked them to stand up and receive on the hands, then elementary devotion and respect for the Blessed sacrament as practiced by countless generations before the Age of Hashish was obviously unbearable for his delicate V II sensitivity.
I do not know you, but I smell the fag here.
Still, this is not why I write this blog post.
I write this blog post because the well-known Spanish blogger Francisco Fernandez de la Cigoña called the bishop with the following words:
chulo de mierda.
My Italian allowed me to translate the last two words instantly, but I must admit I was taken aback at the first. No worries, though: a short search informed me that the word can be safely translated with that short, colourful sounding, English colloquial expression, “pimp”.
“Chulo de mierda” means, therefore, “shit pimp”; or, if you love the far more musical language of Dante, “pappone di merda”.
Yours truly is now pausing for a short moment, as he wonders whether this is the appropriate way to describe a
pimp successor of the Apostles.
On the one hand, it can be said that a bishop should not be grossly insulted. He stays in direct succession to the Apostles, & Co, & Co.
On the other hand, I would very much like to know in which other past age has happened that bishops (this here, and many others; one is even Pope) showed themselves so brazenly, so openly as enemies of Christ. In the past, a bishop might have loved wine or women; he might have been a bad example for the sheep entrusted to his care; he might have been corrupted, cowardly, scheming. But he certainly did not go out of his way to insult Christ, and the faithful with Him, with such shamelessly open hostility to Catholic thinking, devotion, and tradition.
The blogger in question puts it in this way:
If the bishop does not respect the faithful, why should the faithful respect their bishop? I am not subject fortunately, to this idiot and therefore am without fear of his shepherd’s crook to say what I think
And therefore, my dear readers, I wonder – and I ask you – whether absolutely unprecedented attacks to the Church moved against her by her own shepherds should not prompt, in us, answers equally unprecedented. I wonder whether, when we die, we will be praised for calling a chulo de mierda what he is, or for just shutting up because in the past, bishops used to behave – corrupted as they might have been – in a very different way. I wonder, lastly, whether there are other ways to forcefully put in front of the sheep the treason of their shepherds.
The sheep are rather dumb. Unless they receive a signal strong enough, they will follow the satanical shepherd to hell. Is this what we want? Is this our duty as Catholics?
I ponder on this, and reflect on the human nature and the lemming mentality of too many people, particularly the poorly catechised ones of this disgraceful generation. And I think that Señor Fernandez de la Cigoña would, ceteris paribus, enjoy a better seating place in Paradise than another man who has lived exactly like him, but always refrained from harshly criticising a bishop; minding, in fact, the rules of politeness over the first care of the Church, the salvation of souls.
More power to that emotional blogger, then. In his outrage I see sincere love for Christ and His Church. In the bishop’s behaviour I see open, public despise for both (which is, again, why I smell the fag; but I digress…).
We must be more vocal. We must call an idiot an idiot, and a pimp a pimp. The fact that he is a bishop does not make him exempt from the criticism; it makes him, in fact, vastly more pimp!
I so wish that other bloggers would take example from the beautifully emotional bloggers of the Mediterranean zone, and would begin to write such words like “idiot”, “pimp”, “whore”, and the like when confronted with such behaviour.
The sheep sense ridicule. They perfectly well understand when a Pope is openly called an idiot by those with credentials of orthodoxy. They might be shocked, but they will register the fact all right: faithful Catholics think the pope an idiot, and many of his bishops pimps and whores.
I think it would save a lot of sheep.
Remember Our Climate Dr Goebbels?
Some days ago I had, en passant, posed the question whether the man is a Catholic.
Turns out he is not a Catholic. Or a Christian, come to that. Not even a believer in some strange Oriental religion.
Atheists do not believe in Providence. They mock the very concept, as they mock the idea that there is a God.
Atheists do not believe that they will be judged after death. Therefore, they can shape their own “ethical” system as they believe. If they decide that billions of humans will have to be sacrificed to it, so be it.
Atheists tend to make of science a god; which is wrong even from an atheist – let alone scientific – point of view, but seems to be an irresistible tendency in the human being. For the Atheist the scientific matter – particularly if he has persuaded himself of his accuracy – is the Truth, and he will accept it… on faith.
This is the man on whom Francis has relied the most for his torrential encyclical vomit. A man without faith, without hope, and most certainly without charity has been hand-picked by this enormous ass to mislead countless Catholics into following what clearly is a purely atheist, worldly, Nazi agenda.
The tail is wagging the dog; or rather, the atheist is wagging the Pope.
Francis has now committed himself to a lie, and will – bar extraordinary favours from the Holy Ghost – continue his anti-crusade for as long as he lives. His reputation will be deservedly crushed when he is six feet under, but at this point I do think he does not care a bit of what happens after he dies. In his stupid quest for popularity he is being used, and fooled, by those with the most satanical agenda around.
What a stupid man this Francis is.
Use the encyclical as toilet paper, and let the media hype pass.
Unfortunately, the stupid pope will remain.
It seems the Evil Clown is now proceeding to a mini-purge of unwanted bishops. How he does it? he has them accused by his liberal Berias of mishandling the pedophile situation and forces them to resign unless they prefer to get fired. Bishop Nienstedt is the last of an already long series, and if you follow this blog you will have read of some of them here. But of others (Like Finn) I have not reported, because it is difficult to keep pace.
This is a very easy game. It isn’t difficult to accuse any bishop of not having done enough in a certain situation; particularly so, when the enough is defined by those who want to get rid of the bishop.
You will, I am sure, understand: a Pope flirting even with formal heresy, and spitting pure poison out of his lewd mouth day in and day out, cannot tolerate anything other than perfection from those he does not like. This is how things go nowadays.
St Joseph, please intercede for us to give Francis the grace of a happy death, fast.