Monthly Archives: October 2015
This blog is written by someone who is not a theologian. But then again this someone does not say that he is a theologian. Therefore, everyone can make his own decision whether the blog is worth reading or not.
This blog is also written by someone who is not entirely stupid, or actually ignorant of Catholic things. So much so, that many suspect him of being, actually, a Catholic priest. Of the Catholic sort, I mean.
This blog also does not have any heterodox material published. What you read in this blog has hands and feet. It is solid, time-proofed, no-nonsense, Traditional Catholic fare.
This blog is written by someone who does not earn any money from it, does not ask for donations or memberships, and is content with the readers’ prayers for him if and when they, in their charity, feel so inclined.
This blog is also written by someone who does not ignore a huge elephant in the room just because this particular elephant is dressed in white, drinks mate, and insists on black shoes.
Perhaps it is not so bad that this blog is written by someone who is not a theologian.
In the last day or two, we had another example of the extremely poisonous heresy and blasphemy of the Evil Clown.
Like all Modernists do, the man takes elements of truth, puts them in the Great Heretical Mixer, and takes out of it a product obviously meant to mislead the faithful. In the last case, the new religion of the Impotent Hen Goddess is clearly the final product.
Francis quotes Paul and states a well-known principle: God loves each one of His creatures.
Then, he puts all this in the Great Heretical Mixer. What comes out of it is the following:
Firstly, God’s omnipotence is a way of saying. God is omnipotent in all that is not uncomfortable to us. But in all that is serious, and concerns us very directly (which is: is ability to send us to hell and leave us there forever; to avert which the entire Christian religion actually exists) God’s omnipotence becomes (get ready for this) impotence. Do not be fooled. Do not believe that this is meant to be understood in a traditional Catholic frame. Nothing that Francis says is meant to be understood within a Catholic frame, so this one here isn’t, either. What Francis wants to sell you is a weak, unmanly, literally impotent god unable to harm you in any way whatsoever.
This emasculation, banalisation and neutralisation of God is seen in the second blasphemy: the Hen-Goddess. Forget the Rex Tremendae Majestatis. Forget any fear of the Lord. Forget, obviously, any fear of hell. From now on, your image of God will be that of a hen protecting her brood. Again, the image of the hen is not new. What is new (in a Pope at least), is the intention of using the image to tell you nothing could ever send you to hell. In case some Pollyannas still do not get that this is what Francis really wants you to take home, he says it explicitly: “the most wicked and the most blasphemous person is loved by God with the tenderness of a father”. Note that the blasphemous wicked is pretty much the prototype of the one who sends himself to hell, but no mention of this from the Evil Clown. Clearly, Francis is telling you this: there is no way on earth you could send yourself to hell, because the Impotent Hen Goddess loves you and will never do this.
I see in this blasphemous nonsense principally one of many off-the-cuff loads of bovine excrement coming to us before, during and – if God has so decreed – after the dratted Year of False Mercy. The Year of False Mercy will have the Impotent Hen Goddess as its own leitmotiv, as Francis and his minions repeat us every day that we must rejoice that Christianity is now largely superfluous, and reduced to a mere historical record of why there is no need of any religion anymore. The Impotent Hen Goddess cannot but love you unconditionally and without any consequence for you. Blaspheme as much as you like. It won’t affect you in any way.
This, my friend, is the message you are supposed to take home. This and no other.
However, I see in this message – and in the many that will follow – another matter of significance: an impotent Pope, unable to have the Bishops dance to his tune and the Catholic Religion shaped in his own masonic image, takes refuge in petty off-the-cuff homilies in which he states – without explicitly saying it – always the same message: I am the good one, they are the bad ones; I am the merciful, they are the Pharisees; I get the “spirit” of the Law, they are stuck with its “letter”.
Let me say it once again: I could read a sermon of, say, St John Bosco using the same images and not have a problem with it whatsoever. You see, St John Bosco was a saint, not a heretic. His contemporaries knew he was not a heretic because the man was extremely serious in warning you of exactly the contrary of what Francis keeps telling you: that God can well punish you forever, and there will be no way back if he does.
But this one, who is a heretic, never does the Catholic thing. I have written a maximum of four posts – if at all – about sound Catholicism coming out of the mouth of the man. If he says anything Catholic it is because of an official occasion, in a prepared statement, when he really cannot avoid it. All the rest is socialism, incoherent blabber, spite, pettiness, heresy, blasphemy, or all of this together.
Like the God that can “slap you on the wrist at the most”, or this new Hen Goddess which, I have no doubt, will lay a great many heretical eggs during the Year of False Mercy.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Which is why Francis is, besides being a heretic, such a fool.
Oh, the Liberal Priest-slash-religious!
How good-hearted, how caring, how sensitive he is!
He will meet the sinner “where he is”, will let him feel that he is “not judged”, and will “accompany” him wherever he goes (even the “gay sauna”, perhaps?).
But then one wonders…
How comes the same sensitive priest refuses to meet Catholics, lets them feel “judged” and calls them “haters”, refuses to “accompany” them, and blocks them on Twitter? Yes, he mean that one, the screeching Jesuit. But many others, too.
I got it.
Adulterers, dissenters and perverts are the only people these priests (-slash-religious) want to “accompany”. Catholics are just avoided.
Very possibly fag.
And it came to pass Ross Douthat had a generally excellent article (which you will google without difficulty) on the Final Relatio, and repeating concepts yours truly – and more and more others, thanks be to God – are now repeating: the Catholic side won, the heretics were defeated, and the proceedings were influenced by the fact that the Evil Clown himself (he did not use that terms; I think he used “pope”) bats with the heretics.
Now, if it is Yours Truly writing all these simple facts, not many notice. But if it is the New York Times, there will be some big waves.
Promptly, the heretical squad reacted to such a scandalous truthful writing. The whining and bitching went up to the sky (or down to hell), and a squad of heretical, whining, bitching teachers reminded Mr Douthat that being called a heretic can have consequences for those so called.
I am afraid the risk is very little. Which is exactly where the problem lies.
Not only truth cannot change, but truth has just been reaffirmed – in the weak, PC way so typical of V II – even after three weeks of massive papal pressure and relentless Vatican PR propaganda. It is now the time to start using the “H” word far more often, and start demanding that heretics be silenced, defrocked, and cast in the rubbish bin of Catholicism.
The scandal caused by these wayward, evil people has now made it to the mainstream secular press. We must keep the pressure. We must call a heretic a heretic. We must make this the narrative, that heretics are heretics. Not that heretics have won, which they haven't, or that they are winning, which they aren't.
We must toss the “H” word around liberally whenever appropriate. We must question the right of heretics to be priests, bishops, cardinals, teachers and, if push comes to shove, popes. When we do so, and the Catholic blogosphere and fora are inundated of people using the “h” word without qualms, the weak bishops will be encouraged to be less weak, and we might hear stronger words of orthodoxy.
The situation is so, that it is not reasonable to expect from our weak V II bishops that they lead the counteroffensive against heresy. It is clear by now they are willing to stop it in its tracks, but they are not willing to go over it with the steamroller. The laity must rise in the defence of orthodoxy and start attacking heresy. At some point, more and more bishops will find the guts to follow.
Aiutati, che Dio t'aiuta. Help yourself, and God will help you. We help yourself by helping our weak bishops to stand out for orthodoxy, not by writing around that they have caved in to heresy – which is not true – and that they are in a Catholic Alamo surrounded by heretics playing the de guello. If you keep spreading this lie, at some point it will become the truth, because if you concede victory to the defeated at some point the defeated will start claiming victory in all seriousness, you will believe him.
We have won. They have lost.
It wasn't a victory that will be sung in the centuries to come.
Let's start working on one.
Firstly, let me say that out of the last four wars, Italy has lost only one. And the one it has lost, it has lost because the US were on the other side. Like, well, pretty much everyone else. I will also notice, en passant, that the great Erwin Rommel absolutely loved Italian soldiery.
Having extracted this little pebble from my patriotic shoe, I will move to the important part of this blog post: politics.
I know, I know: there should be no compromise in the fight against heresy. But if we do not understand how politics works, of course we do not understand what is happening.
Out of 40 years of experience I can tell you that the Vatican politics is very, very Italian. Not, mind, XXI-Century Italian. Rather, it is very much XX Century Italian, Democrazia Cristiana-style. This kind of politics was difficult to understand for an Anglosaxon or a German, which is why neither ever understood how it worked.
This kind of politics had no harsh confrontations. No big proclamations of victory, defeat, joy, or disappointment. It was based on the principle that – in a world dominated by long-term professional politics – all the actors would have to live together for a long time, and would therefore never cross certain invisible boundaries, certain unwritten but very real rules of behaviour. In this world, the winner never humiliated the loser, and actualky he would never run the risks of pushing big – the precondition for winning big – in the first place. Victories could be clear, but they were hushed, and never total. Defeats could be clear, but they were never humiliating, and never total, too. The knives were never out. A great contrast with, say, even the Italian political landscape that came later, starting from the Nineties.
The Vatican works – like it or not – like the Democrazia Cristiana. All actors want to be there – like it or not – for the long term. Their way of winning and losing is – like it or not – different from yours. It has no proclaims, no great announcements. It is an internal matter as much as a public one. Everyone knows what has happened, and this is enough for them. They will say it. They won't shout it. The texts will state what is what. But they will never go full gas in one direction or another. Those politicians will also not seek the destruction of the enemy, because they fear consequences for themselves. But they will go for the victory on the point anyway. They will still draw a line you can't cross. But they won't go for your jugular. Not even if you are a Communist. I never liked the system. But I was also never blind to it.
Today's earthly Church, my friends, isn't Sparta. This is a black, red and purple Democrazia Cristiana, at all levels; and the head of the party is on the wrong side.
Foreigners don't get this. They don't get the Italian corridors. They don't even get when Italians – or people who think like them – are being smart. For decades, they thought Italy – the most stabile political system in Western Europe for 50 years – was an unstable country because of mere exteriors to which Italians did not gave any big importance, like the well-known fact that Italy often changed its Primo Ministro. Fools. They measured the Italian Metric system with their Imperial tools, and were surprised they did not get anywhere.
The very same is happening now. Those who got – or lived – a system akin to the Democrazia Cristiana and the soft Italian politics of the time immediately “get” what has happened, because they know how the system works. They know who has won. They know how they have won. They know that the losers very well know who has won. They know that there will be no steamrollers, and no parades. Remember, the enemy is in charge of the party, and the party grandees are no heroes at all. They are in for the long term.
The others are, it seems to me, struggling to understand. Like Germans after the football match, they will complain that the victory wasn't a sonorous 3-0. They do not get that at the Synod, the players got together and decided that it would be a 1-0 victory, limited but clear enough, and all three points for them; but no 3-0 or 4-0, because the manager sides with the other team, and they do not want to lose their contract. Like it or not, this is the way it works in the age of V II. This Church has no Spartans. I thank God she still has, at least, smart Democristiani. Democristiani, by the way, can, if push comes to shove, screw you all right anyway. But they will use a lot of Vaseline, and will say to the press it was just a suppository, inserted in full harmony with your wishes, and in a spirit of collaboration and fraternal mutual help.
Now don't get me wrong. I understand what has happened, but I do not approve of it. To remain by the football metaphor, I think heresy should be dealt with in the same way as Germany dealt with Brazil, pounding at them to the point of complete humiliation and annihilation.
At the same time, I do not live in a fantasy world. I must understand how these things work if I want to understand what is happening. Most certainly I cannot call the outcome of the Synod a defeat purely because the roaring anti-heretical wording was missing.
It wasn't a defeat. It was a victory. It was even a clear victory. It even took away all the crap of the Instrumentum Laboris. What it wasn't, was the 3-0 or, which would have been ideal, the 7-1. The Synod reminds me of the old Italian catenaccio: ugly to look at, more than vaguely cowardly, universally despised. And very, very effective.
Stuff the beautiful game. Bring home the victory. That's all that counts.
But please understand that we live in V II times. Do not pretend to think that Pius X is Pope. A heretic is Pope. This isn't the First Crusade. This is the Democrazia Cristiana. It will not turn into Sparta overnight. But it isn't the Communist Party, either.
You may – and I most certainly do – criticise the weakness of this soft approach, and say that heresy does not deserve this soft approach. You may – and I most certainly do – point out to the dangers of such a policy, which leaves the heretics defeated, but still strong and still dangerous. Heavens, how long will the Evil Clown live? How many Cardinal and Bishops will he appoint? By all means, decry all this!
But what you cannot do is to transform this victory in a perceived defeat, thus contributing to its transformation in a real defeat, just because you are not happy with what has happened.
A scant, dirty, 1-0 victory.
After a lot of ugly play, and shameless catenaccio.
And the three points home.
The WSJ obviously understands zippo of Catholicism. But I trust they can print a quote right.
Cardinal Wuerl himself admits defeat, and say the final Relatio has not even a recommendation that communion may be given to adulterers. The WSJ – who understands zippo of Catholicism – goes on to add Francis could do it, but again I do not my Catholicism from Muslims, either.
The facts on the ground are very clear. Cardinal Pell, Cardinal Mueller, Cardinal Burke have also confirmed the fact. Their criticism concerning the ambiguity of the text is extremely welcome, but nowhere they say that the heretics got their way.
In this time of rampant media manipulation,min which reality is shaped by emotionalism and perceptions, it is duty of every blogger, priest or layman, to state the facts as they are:
1) The text does not make ANY concession, NONE WHATSOEVER, to the heretics.
2) The text does so in that usual fluffy, PC obsessed, “nice” way we have been seen continuously since 1963 at the latest.
The events of the last days remind me of one of the main cultural differences between Italy and Germany. N Italy, when the national football teams wins an important game 1-0, with a penalty on the 90th minute, after a horrible, dirty game full of tricks, everyone rejoices. Why? Because victory was achieved. In Germany, everyone complains about the overplayed players, and the horrible game. Why? Because they have very lofty standards, and victory – no matter how scant – is not enough. And because they aren't the solar chaps that we are, of course.
What shall I say. Some people just can't win well. It is more important to them that they feel miserable, and announce the imminent end of the world.
We live in unbelievable times. Therefore, I will have to explain the obvious lest someone has missed it.
The Church has, with St Paul, always believed that adulterers are not allowed to receive communion.
As this is what the Church believes, there are no instruments at disposal of anyone by which they could say that this has been changed.
If the Archangel Gabriel were to come down from heaven this afternoon, shortly before dinner time, and tell you “Good afternoon. God above has just told me that adulterers can now receive communion”, of course you would not believe him.
If a pope – I obviously do not mean this unspeakable ass; I mean a solid, orthodox, pious, prestigious pope – were to wake up one morning and say “God has appeared to me, and He has told me adulterers can now receive communion”, you would immediately call him a heretic, no matter how good he appeared until the evening before.
If a pope – any pope; see above – were to write twelve encyclicals, eighteen papal Bulls, thirty-four motu proprio and ninety-seven apostolic exhortations declaring that adulterers can receive communion and implementing several measures to have the novelty enforced, you would call the pope a heretic, all his documents heretical and not to be believed, much less obeyed, and all those who obey him in this heretics and traitors.
The simple fact is: truth can never change. Therefore, adulterers can never receive Communion.
You might, in the future, hear all sorts of strange stories. For example, if the Evil Clown issues a document following this Synod, he is most certain not to explicitly say that adulterers cannot receive communion. He is also most likely not to repeat in it the Athanasian Creed, or the Our Father.
Guess what? The Athanasian Creed will still be in place, and will not be tacitly abrogated because Francis hasn't mentioned it. The Our Father will still be in force as both prayer and dogmatic statement, because he is both. Communion for adulterers will still be forbidden, because this is what the Church has always believed.
It is astonishing that I have to write such obvious blog posts.
But somehow I think it might help in the times we are about to face.
If you want to decry the end of the Church, this is not the place for it.
If you think that the heretics have now managed to subvert Catholicism into a Kasperite sect, this is not the place for you.
If you get a kick out of defeatism, get your kicks somewhere else.
If you think that 75% of the bishops endorse Kasperism, or are even ready to tolerate it, this is not the blog for you.
If you are one of those who want to give the heretics a victory after they have been defeated – in this battle, of course; they are not extinct – I suggest not only you refrain from commenting, but you avoid this blog altogether.
Go help Satan somewhere else. Not here.
I am very mindful not only of what I write on my blog, but of the way my readers feel when they read it.
I will not allow this stupid self-demolition to make its way in my blog.
If you are one of the blokes mentioned above, this is not the blog for you.
From now on, moderation will be inspired by the chap you see above.
Once again, Francis proves a very bad loser. Like last October, when he could not refrain from snide remarks addressed at his bishops, the Evil Clown could not hold his tongue and had to vent his anger at his own guys, culpable of being so unbearably Catholic.
The man conceded defeat, extremely ungraciously, with the following words:
[The Synod had] “laid bare the closed hearts which frequently hide even behind the Church’s teachings or good intentions, in order to sit in the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superiority and superficiality, difficult cases and wounded families”.
The old man’s gall must have been about to explode. That’s what orthodoxy does to heretics.
This moment of extreme bitching is truly the litmus test of what has been going on during this pathetic, chaotic, amateurish Synod: Pope tries again and again to break the walls of Catholicism, fails, and is angry. His reputation as “Great Innovator” is now clearly in tatters. He looks like a failure of Jimmy Carter proportions. He has nothing else to do now than keep trying to salvage what he can of his oh so loudly trumpeted revolutionary papacy.
Make no mistake, the man will make further attempts. In fact, I think the next great Heretical Offensive has already started. But this time, my impression is that the battle will not be about changing the rules – which the man is not able to (try to) do together with the bishops, and is not willing to (try to) do alone – but about trying to create an effeminate, emotional, unofficial “parallel church” that does not need to have the rules changed, because the “Spirit” of the rules allows to break them anyway.
We must stay vigilant. The man is Pope, and Popes are dangerous and powerful even when they are so astonishingly incompetent, and stupid to boot, like this one. But I am so glad the man is so obviously incompetent.
The war is raging on. But Francis got a second message that he is facing a rather difficult task. The bishops have run circles around him once again, and whilst they have not dared to openly denounce the heresy it appears heresy has found no ways in. The Evil Clown has to live with it, and finds it difficult.
If I were asked to give him a suggestion, it would be the same one of some day ago: he should wait a while, resign, fly off to Argentina, and hope he gets forgotten.
Alas, I do not think this is what he will do. What I think he will do is keep trying to destroy the Church in any way he can, short of risking deposition and defrocking. He will keep trying, and keep losing, and keep digging his own grave. Because he is stupid, and ignorant, and incompetent, and too stubborn for his own good.
I do not think he will be successful, though I am sure many battles are in front of us. With every failed attempt Francis loses more credibility, and more and more naive supporters abandon him. His own bishops trust him less than a Palestinian used car dealer. They will keep a close watch on everything he does, and he knows it by now very well. If I understood the Bishops properly, and if I have properly interpreted the side events (the 13 Cardinals letter, say; a clear indication that many do not fear the evil wolf, and many of those are among his own key people) deposition and defrocking are still very much in the cards, if the man dares to cross the line of open heresy. The man must know it, and be afraid of it. If it were not so, by this time you would have had Luther beatified.
Francis keeps losing, and he keeps bitching. His pontificate continues on its way to utter ridicule and self-destruction. He is going absolutely nowhere, but he is making a lot of noise as he does so.
Poor stupid old man. I am pretty sure even Satan thinks him a useless ass.
The day after the end of this mess, I am very worried that justified concerns about the weakness of the text may lead well-intentioned commenters to score self goals and, actually, involuntarily help the enemy.
Texts are texts. We consider them for what they say, not for what other people will pretend that they say. And we read them from a Catholic perspective, because this is what we are.
The reality on the ground is this: the text does not say that adulterers can be readers at Mass. It does not say that adulterers can be godfathers at Catholic baptisms. It does not say that adulterers can be teachers at Catholic schools. It does not say that adulterers can receive communion. It does not in any way approve of gradualism. It does not in any way modify or deny Familiaris Consortio.
All these things (the wrong readers, godfathers, teachers) can happen as a heresy-driven pathology and, factually, I am sure they do happen in places. But they happen because there is heretical will at play, not because the Relatio says so. The Relatio does not say any of this in the least. It is even very clear in the necessity to avoid scandal. It is also clear (if rather short) in the rejection of gradualism. But again, a text is not there to explain Catholicism to unbelievers. It merely needs to mention what believers already know. It’s a Relatio for Catholics, not a “comprehensive guide to orthodoxy for German heretics”.
Cry “defeat against heresy” too much, and this becomes a very dangerous self-fulfilling prophecy. We have not been defeated. We have won. They have lost.
When the heretics try to distort the text beyond recognition, as that scoundrel Schoenborn did yesterday, we do not help him in doing so. We reiterate Catholic teaching, and we defend a proper, Catholic understanding of texts that must be read in a Catholic perspective.
The story here is that at the Synod, Kasperism has been defeated, and it has been defeated on both counts of adulterers and perverts. There will be attempts to manipulate this text, but this is nothing new: heresy is always manipulation of texts, and there has never been any need of this final Relatio to promote any of them. We do not help the heretic to manipulate the text, but we denounce the manipulation and the heresy. Least of all we help Francis to try to introduce novelties based on what the synodal text does not say, but we help him to say that it does.
We must read and have the text read in the proper, Catholic way, that corresponds not only to the real meaning of the text, but to its only possible key of interpretation.
This, we do for two reasons:
A) We insist on Catholics reading text as Catholics, not heretics. What the heretic imagines by reading a text is his problem. Better said, that he is a heretic is his problem. The Gospel is full of phrases that have been manipulated by heretics (divorce, “brothers of Christ”, “do not judge”, and so on). That’s what heretics do. As the Americans say: don’t be that guy!
B) We are aware that a huge media effort is already underway to present a new “church of mercy”. We do not help the heretics to state their argument. On the contrary, we point out that this fantasy church is a heretical construction.
Do not play in the hands of the enemy. Condemn the weakness of the text. Blame the Synod Fathers for not having the guts to openly smash heresy. But do not say that these texts open the door to heretical activity or changes. Not only they don’t, but if you say that they do you help the heretics in their wicked purposes.
The texts that I have seen up to now are weak, but sound. The heretics have not got the text that they wanted.
We decry that the Relatio is weak, but we do not make it unsound. Because if we do so, we create exactly the narrative that the Heretics want, and give them ourselves an interpretation of the texts that is exactly the one they want.
We have won, for heaven’s sake. It’s a 1-0 victory after a horrible and very dirty game, but a victory it is.
Do not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I have removed this blog post from the top position in which I had “pinned” it. I have done so with a much lighter heart than when I had pinned it, and I think today should be a day of thanksgiving for every Catholic, reflecting what kind of nuclear explosion was feared until only weeks ago.
I invite all sincere Catholic to focus, for one day, on the good news that the Heretics have not made any breach in the wall; and every discussion about how much the walls are damaged, the moat thin and the soldiers on the ramparts demotivated, weak or traitors should not detract us from the fundamental fact, that this dawn sees Satan and Francis defeated.
No, it’s not the victory I was dreaming of. But those were dreams.
In real life, boy, this has been the best outcome I would have dared to hope for. Only yesterday morning I was fearing the presence of phrases which, whilst factually mentioning heresy as part of the discussion, legitimise it as a Catholic position. In the paragraphs I have read yesterday there is nothing of the sort, and they were the most controversial. The final Relatio is even far more conservative than what I was fearing yesterday morning, when the danger of nuclear explosion seemed already largely (if not definitely) gone.
It’s a weak wall. It’s a thin moat. But they leave no entrance.
84. The baptized who are divorced and civilly remarried are to be more integrated in the Christian communities in the various possible ways, avoiding every occasion of scandal.The logic of integration is the key to their pastoral accompaniment, so that they be aware not only that they belong to the Body of Christ, that is the Church, but that they may have a joyful and fruitful experience. They are baptized, they are brothers and sisters, the Holy Spirit pours gifts and charisms in them for the good of all. Their participation can be expressed in various ecclesial services: it is therefore necessary to discern which of the different forms of exclusion currently practiced in a liturgical, educational, pastoral, and institutional role that can be overcome. They should not only not feel excommunicated, but they should live and mature as living members of the Church, feeling her as a mother that welcomes them always, takes care of them affectionately, and encourages them on the path of life and Gospel. This integration is necessary for the Christian care and education of their children, who must be considered what is most important. For the Christian community, taking care of these persons is not a weakening of their own faith and testimony regarding matrimonial indissolubility: rather, the Church expresses precisely in this care her charity.
85. Saint John Paul II offered an all-encompassing criterion, that remains the basis for valuation of these situations: “Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage. Finally, there are those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children’s upbringing, and who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid.” (FC, 84) It is therefore a duty of the priests to accompany the interested parties on the path of discernment according to the teaching of the Church and the orientations of the Bishop. In this process, it will be useful to make an examination of conscience, by way of moments of reflection and repentance. Remarried divorcees should ask themselves how they behaved themselves when their conjugal union entered in crisis; if there were attempts at reconciliation; what is the situation of the abandoned partner [“partner” in the original Italian]; what consequences the new relationship has on the rest of the family and in the community of the faithful; what example does it offer to young people who are to prepare themselves to matrimony. A sincere reflection may reinforce trust in the mercy of God that is not denied to anyone.
Additionally, it cannot be denied that in some circumstances, “the imputability and the responsibility for an action can be diminished or annulled (CIC, 1735) due to various conditioners. Consequently, the judgment on an objective situation should lead to the judgment on a ‘subjective imputability'” (Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration of June 24, 2000, 2a). In determined circumstances, the persons find great difficulty with acting in a different way. Therefore, while holding up a general rule, it is necessary to recognize that the responsibility regarding specific actions or decisions is not the same in every case. Pastoral discernment, while taking into account the rightly formed conscience of persons, should take these situations into account. Also the consequences of the accomplished acts are not necessarily the same in every case.
86. The path of accompaniment and discernment orients these faithful to becoming conscious of their situation before God. The conversation with the priest, in internal forum, concurs to the formation of a correct judgment on what prevents the possibility of fuller participation in the life of the Church and on the steps that may favor it and make it grow. Considering that in the same law there is no graduality (cf. FC, 34), this discernment must never disregard the demands of truth and charity of the Gospel proposed by the Church. In order for this to happen, the necessary conditions of humility, reserve, love for the Church and to her teaching, in the sincere search for the will of God and for the desire to reach a more perfect answer to the latter, are to be guaranteed.
84. The baptized who are divorced and civilly remarried are to be more integrated in the Christian communities in the various possible ways [let’s integrate whenever possible; let’s also draw a line in the sand, because we aren’t the freaking Presbyterians; hence, “possible” ways], avoiding every occasion of scandal [this “frames” the discussion: every occasion of scandal is to be avoided. All that follows must be read within this frame. This is how you read a text in its context, because you aren’t a heretic].The logic of integration is the key to their pastoral accompaniment [the priest wants you to go back to the fold], so that they be aware not only that they belong to the Body of Christ, that is the Church, but that they may have a joyful and fruitful experience [hey, we aren’t torturing you here: chastity also means living a better life]. They are baptized, they are brothers and sisters, the Holy Spirit pours gifts and charisms in them for the good of all. [ they aren’t heathens. They have obligations coming from their baptism, but also the graces that come with it. It’s not that help from heaven is not available, if they ask]. Their participation can be expressed in various ecclesial services: it is therefore necessary to discern which of the different forms of exclusion currently practiced in a liturgical, educational, pastoral, and institutional role that can be overcome. [there must be no scandal; but by all means, dear priest; whatever can be done, please do. It is meritorious for the adulterer to even clean the toilets of the chancery. Whatever can be done, by all means. Whatever can’t be done, tough shit; see above, “avoiding every occasion of scandal”]. They should not only not feel excommunicated [no, they aren’t excommunicated], but they should live and mature as living members of the Church [you got to mature, which means grow, which means change; you are now immature, and not ready], feeling her as a mother that welcomes them always [ do not go around saying that the Church excludes you: it’s you who have excluded yourself), takes care of them affectionately [ mama is always ready to take you back], and encourages them on the path of life and Gospel [but mama does not simply meet you “where you are”. Mama wants you to follow the path and life of the Gospel; so no excuses, please]. This integration is necessary for the Christian care and education of their children, who must be considered what is most important [Do not even think that you can call yourself “out” and neglect the Catholic education of your children!]. For the Christian community, taking care of these persons is not a weakening of their own faith and testimony regarding matrimonial indissolubility [we take care of you; we invite you on the path to repentance; but hey, we will not allow scandal be given, see above]: rather, the Church expresses precisely in this care her charity [because you see, in doing so we are being truly charitable].
85. Saint John Paul II offered an all-encompassing criterion, that remains the basis for valuation of these situations: “Pastors must know that, for the sake of truth, they are obliged to exercise careful discernment of situations. There is in fact a difference between those who have sincerely tried to save their first marriage and have been unjustly abandoned, and those who through their own grave fault have destroyed a canonically valid marriage. Finally, there are those who have entered into a second union for the sake of the children’s upbringing, and who are sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably destroyed marriage had never been valid.” (FC, 84) [ we omit here to mention the following paragraphs, because we are wussies; but you know they are there, and we are not in the least saying they are now overcome by a new discipline; so no, Mr Heretic, this will not wash]. It is therefore a duty of the priests to accompany the interested parties on the path of discernment [ the priest will have time for you…] according to the teaching of the Church [… but know that he will not create a new religion for you] and the orientations of the Bishop [this is the worst and wussiest paragraph of all, I know. But we are Catholic bishops, and cannot write a text assuming that the bishop is a heretic. The bishop can only think as the church does. That’s the only way the Church can work. Nor can the bishop give scandal, etc.]. In this process, it will be useful to make an examination of conscience, by way of moments of reflection and repentance [dear adulterer, reflect that the problem it’s you sleeping on the wrong mattress here; not the Church being “cruel”]. Remarried divorcees should ask themselves how they behaved themselves when their conjugal union entered in crisis; if there were attempts at reconciliation; what is the situation of the abandoned partner [“partner” in the original Italian]; what consequences the new relationship has on the rest of the family and in the community of the faithful; what example does it offer to young people who are to prepare themselves to matrimony. [ We differentiate, but we aren’t blind. Let’s make a comparison with Nazism. We know that every Nazi is not Hitler. You also have the Doenitzes and Raeders. You may even have the occasional Speer and Rommel. There are fifty shades of Nazi. But Nazis they all still are]. A sincere reflection may reinforce trust in the mercy of God that is not denied to anyone [reflect sincerely on your sins, and also realise that God is merciful to those who repent].
Additionally, it cannot be denied that in some circumstances, “the imputability and the responsibility for an action can be diminished or annulled (CIC, 1735) due to various conditioners [we are wussies here again, and therefore we repeat a general concept of criminal law worldwide, and of ecclesiastical law besides, that you already know, just because it sounds good. It’s also in the CCC. But no one ever said you can use it to receive communion. So nice try again, but this won’t wash, either]. Consequently, the judgment on an objective situation should lead to the judgment on a ‘subjective imputability'” (Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration of June 24, 2000, 2a). [ that’s again a general principle, a way to interpret legislative texts; it is also in all juridical systems; for example, if you are not compos mentis, you are not subjectively imputable, etc.] In determined circumstances, the persons find great difficulty with acting in a different way [see, I am not saying it will be easy to “act in a different way” and leave your concubine]. Therefore, while holding up a general rule […but do not think that I will throw away the rule just because of this! Remember, there is a general rule! I am repeating it here just in case you think I have forgotten it!], it is necessary to recognize that the responsibility regarding specific actions or decisions is not the same in every case [No, it isn’t. It can never be. It’s another general principle. You may be less culpable than another. Not all adulterers are the same. We all know that.] Pastoral discernment, while taking into account the rightly formed conscience of persons [there can be no discernment without a rightly formed conscience, so first know what it is expected from you and then talk], should take these situations into account [and be assured I will not treat you like the serial rapist who left his wife]. Also the consequences of the accomplished acts are not necessarily the same in every case [no they aren’t. Some beat their wives to almost death. Some go away with a motorbiker. Some are just very stupid. Some are cock-driven. All are adulterers.].
86. The path of accompaniment and discernment orients these faithful to becoming conscious of their situation before God. [ in case you don’t get it, I repeat it once again: you must realise that you are in mortal sin. I am just too much of a wussie to tell you so, but you get my drift all right] The conversation with the priest, in internal forum, concurs to the formation of a correct judgment [once your conscience is well formed, you can form a correct judgment on your situation and know in your heart that you are in mortal sin…] on what prevents the possibility of fuller participation in the life of the Church [… which is exactly what prevents you from receiving communion] and on the steps that may favor it and make it grow [ = abandon the situation of adultery. I know, it’s hard. Tough shit again. See above, “no scandal”]. Considering that in the same law there is no graduality (cf. FC, 34), [do not even think of applying the dratted graduality here: you leave your concubine, and that’s that] this discernment must never disregard the demands of truth and charity of the Gospel proposed by the Church [truth and charity of the Gospel as proposed by the Gospel are what counts. Your discernment must discern exactly this. Unless you discern this, you are not discerning. Stuff Cupich.] In order for this to happen [ in order for you to get to think in the right way], the necessary conditions of humility,[ the Church is not wrong; you are] reserve [ do not go around saying that you are shacking up, because you give scandal; which is an “upgrade” from Bormann to Hitler, see above], love for the Church and to her teaching [you must love the Church and her teacfhing; then you start to get it right; it’s your bitchy attitude that is the problem], in the sincere search for the will of God [you must forget what is convenient for you, and think of what God wants for you] and for the desire to reach a more perfect answer to the latter, are to be guaranteed [if you do not do all of this, you are wasting your priest’s time; but the priest will always be there for you if you do].
Oh well, that was long.
Final Report Out. Ambiguity Galore And V II Waffle Aplenty. No Nuclear Explosion. Kasperites Lose Battle. War Rages On.
I have just read (several times) on Rorate the translation of paragraphs 84-86 of the final relation of this disgraceful Synod.
My first reflections:
- It is an ambiguous document. However, pretty much all V II is made of ambiguous documents. par for the course. Crucially, no revolution or atomic explosion.
- Kasperism is defeated, at least for now. If I were a Kasperite and were to try to state that my position has been vindicated by this document I would look pretty stupid. However, if I were a Kasperite I would at least notice that my position has not been crushed to the ground. The emotional, fluffy V II language allows me to fight another day and try to score more points in the future.
- This is what the Italians call muro di gomma, a “rubber wall”. Actually, it could serve as a very good definition of the word. It is an orthodox text, but a very weak one. It is a text that tries to contain only so little orthodoxy as necessary, in order not to humiliate the Pope or, said otherwise, in order not to start a major conflict with him. At the same time, it is a text that clearly stops Francis in his tracks again. I do not think this is a sound strategy. I think it a very dangerous one. But I notice that Francis gets stopped again and again. May the Lord free us of him soon.
- It has become apparent in the last hours (I have posted on the matter) that the battle in the coming months and years will not be based on texts, but emotions and perceptions. It will be the typical, retarded media battle of the XXI Century. You see already that ass Schoenborn trying to let the text say what it clearly does not say. I have read the ass this afternoon with terror, and then I realised the idiot was probably only trying to spin a defeat again. Check. Prepare for a lot of this in the years to come.
- I am not justifying the bishops. I think every Bishop who votes such a document should feel ashamed, and be shamed. Not, mind, because he has voted a heretical document; but because he keeps accommodating heretics (including the Pope) out of desire to avoid a major conflict that is possibly coming anyway.
- I can, however, understand (not approve; understand) the thinking. The thinking goes like this: “The man will be six feet under in just a few years; we will waffle him to death as many times as he likes, and put the nails in his coffin; then we will pick a Pope with a brain”. Very comfortable, admittedly rather clever, but very risky strategy. The man will appoint more bishop and cardinals. He has caved in several times already. At some point, he might decide to go nuclear. The man is stupid. Never underestimate the stupidity of the stupid. It could make them do very stupid things.
- Francis has lost again. If everything he can get is ambiguous waffle of the kind V II document have always had and will always have he is well and truly screwed, and I mean screwed as in screwed. At least for now. But again, he is still the Pope. The level of confrontation will depend on the level of exposure and personal risk he chooses to take on himself. Up to now, there is no indication he has the guts to defy the Church and risk losing everything, including job and pension. Up to now. You can never tell what an idiot will do if he feels assured of victory.
Just in case you are wondering…
I will sleep well tonight.
Make no mistake: the war rages on. A sizeable minority of prelates are openly heretics, and eretico numero uno has just given them a platform. They will keep spinning, whining and, I think, losing, but they must not be underestimated. The most dangerous thing that can happen now is complacency. We must not only stay vigilant, but be very much on the offensive in the coming battle: the “Mercy Orgy” that Francis wants to ram down your throat.
Before I close, a last but, I think, necessary observation.
Some of you may say that this phrase, or that phrase; when looked at in a certain light; or read from certain angles; or with the magnifying glass (yes, there…); or from a heretic; could allow the heretic to say that his position was approved.
This is a logical non-starter. By definition, the heretic says that he is right based on fragments taken out of context. That’s what heretics always did, always do, always will. The adulterer who wanted to persuade himself that he can receive communion has already found in his degraded mind a thousand arguments and, in Germany at least, a priest ready to justify him (400 last time I looked; might be more in the meantime). The new document is of no help to him. He knows that the bishop, or even the Pope, who were to be his accomplices are as much heretics as he is. No one can read the document and say that it endorses Kasperism. But most of the readers would say that it is ambiguous and extremely delicate in its formulations; ambiguous to the point of shame; as if it was very aware that Kasperism has a lot of calluses, which should not be touched lest the Kasperites (and Francis first) start to scream. Alas, if you don’t trample the calluses of heresy you can’t say you have done a halfway acceptable job in defending the faith.
This morning, I was very afraid that Francis has decided for the massive confrontation, for which he would have had many occasions and many angles (say: abolish at the last moment the single paragraph vote; or the 75% majority; or any other kind of trick). There were horrible noises coming out. When I calmed down, I realised that the noises where coming from the usual den of iniquity: the Vatican press office, and the liberal b@st@rds a la Schoenborn. I think I was right.
The Atomic Mushroom was not to be today. Francis has obviously caved in again. He had his nose smashed against the rubber wall, again; and has decided that he will live with it, again. But it is clear that he wants to go on, and senses that to stop now would make of him the Greatest Failure Ever, and Clown Of The Millennium. Hence, the next Mercy Offensive now clearly upon us.
Go to sleep (if you live in Europe) and prepare yourself for the battles to come.
Many of those, I am afraid, before we get to our judgment; and may our battles be counted in our favour.
It is astonishing what these heretics are able to. The video below explains what has been happening in the last few days (yours truly isn’t there and can’t read everything, so he gets some information a tad late).
Whilst the situation seems to be different every time you look at it, some things are clear:
- The shameless deception about what is happening in the Synod continues.
- The Synod Fathers have had insufficient time to read the document. Many of them will not understand it properly.
- now the commission of ten it’s not going to work on it. “Experts” will do it. One is reminded of the V II “periti”, at the same time the accomplices of heresy and the convenient excuse for everything that should go massively wrong for the heretics.
- The voting is absurd, if it allows a final vote of a text thatincludes the paragraphs that have been refused. I am assuming here the final vote will only be on the paragraph that have been approved, but with these scoundrels you never know what they might be capable of. Any vote that does not have a vast majority would make of any document an absurd piece of toilet paper, as explained here. Note that Mr Ferrara does not trust the electronic vote, and neither do I.
- However the outcome, a “mercy offensive” in big style is going to be launched. Francis will accompany all the way. The Year Of False Mercy will offer more excuses for a sustained, long-term offensive.
And now, to the really important part. Ferrara himself states that the Instrumentum Laboris was “ripped off to pieces”. There was, obviously, strong opposition. At this point Francis had a choice: cave in, or try to force the hand of the Bishops again. it seems very much to me that he has chosen the second way.
At some point, the bishops will have to realise that a massive confrontation cannot be avoided anymore. That all calls of “unity” and “harmony” must be thrown out of the window when satan calls you to “harmony” with heresy.
The moment to stand up for Christ is now. This farce must be stopped.
The Synod Father must reflect that, realistically, the Poles and others will, ahem, raise hell if a poisoned document is voted. Those who are accomplices now will be called to give account later. Those who do not have the gut to stand up for Christ when it gets really tough are unworthy of their cassocks.
There is only one thing to do now:
Time to walk out!
Time to walk out!
Time to walk out!
This is not even about the final report.
This is about the massive heretical spin now being put on the event, and the announcement of a kind of “listening church”. A “process” by which the Church will be now “listening”, and many other absurd things you will watch in the video.
Many thanks to and prayers for those who, like Michael Matt, remain on the side of Christ.
As I write this, the final document is circulating and the Synod Father are digesting it.
It says here that father Lombardi has stated that the Synod father are satisfied with the text. Which probably means they aren’t.
What I find notable in the article is the “inclusive” cut that will probably be given to the text.
Let us imagine a paragraph states: “A minority of Fathers is of the opinion that we should give communion to adulterers, but the majority rejected the proposal”. Rinse and repeat concerning homos, decentralisation of the Church, or whatever you like. Do you vote the paragraph down? These are the crude facts, not a matter of opinions.
Of course, such a document would be stating that heretical discussions are taking place within the Church; discussion in which heresy is not called by name, and is treated like a legitimate “minority opinion”. But again, this is the simple truth. This is what happens when you debate with heretics and accept them as interlocutors.
It would have been better to walk out of the Synod when it was clear that it was being used to even propose a heretical platform – no matter how clearly in the minority – than to have the media the world over repeat that the Church is discussing whether to change doctrine.
Prepare yourself for a long V II waffle full of double-edged swords – say: “the Synod Fathers are persuaded of the necessity for the priest to do all he can to allow adulterers to become able to receive communion”, which can be read in both a perfectly orthodox and a perfectly heretical sense – and pray that it does not get worse than that.
If Sunday Evening arrives and there is no atomic mushroom in the Catholic skies, I for myself will go to sleep more relaxed, and dream of Pope Pius XIII in better serenity that I had in the last months.
But I still think it was a big mistake not to walk out of a Synod of Heresy.
I have very much liked this article, that has in my eyes a rather intelligent analysis of what is happening at the Synod.
The article seems instructive to me because of two interesting considerations:
- Kasper has 10% if you are very optimistic. If you water down Kasperism to make it appear less heretical, or save face to the bishops in their own dioceses, you might arrive to 20%. We are, I add, talking of degenerate Westerners for the most part. Basically, heresy is spread, but not rampant, and can’t be shifted to the people irrespective of how much you try to make it palatable.
- The “gay” gambit was a way to “go extreme” and then, if necessary, ditch the pervs against approval for the adulterers. A fag pawn, so to speak.
As to 1, I reflect on this:
A) Jesus Himself had 8.33% Very Bad Apples.
B) The “numbers” at the Synod are skewed in favour of heresy (both in number and in “weight”: Marx, Cupich, Kasper, 7 of the ten relators) because of the personal invitations made by Francis. I doubt the percentage is the same in the world at large. The world at large has more Burkes and less Cupichs than Francis would want you to believe.
C) The Church is not a democracy. You can’t “change” Her with a majority vote. There are barriers to heresy that cannot be measured in noses. The Kasperites are far weaker in their position than a 10% vote share would make them in every “democratic” organisation.
As to 2, this has always seemed a reasonable position to me, then at least in Germany the huge problem of flight from the Kirchensteuer must dwarf – perverted cassocks aside – any “concern” about 0.5% or so of the Catholic population. The German bishops and clergy are a bunch of simoniacal unbelievers. Some of them are certainly perverts. But the kar-ching is, if you ask me, most certainly the first care of all the others. You have much more to gain from pleasing the huge numbers of “c”atholic adulterers, than the much smaller number of perverts and their close relatives.
In the Anglo-Saxon world, however, it might well be different. There is no Kirchensteuer, but there are certainly an awful lot of perverted cassocks! This is where it made sense for Kasper & Co. to try to co-opt the Rosica and Cupich of the world for their own interest.
The latter had nothing to lose.
They don’t believe in God anyway.
I write this on Friday afternoon, when the draft of the final documents should be already in the hands of the bishops. Apparently, it will be a 100 page work. In 100 pages – however thickly or thinly written – there is plenty of opportunity for the smuggling of heresy. Therefore, the Synod Father had better read very attentively, talk to each other, and remain in contact with their colleagues in the motherland.
We – and they – are now facing the last battle of this Synod. If this one goes badly wrong, a lot of damage can be sill caused. Not because of the prescriptive, much less juridical value of the document in itself – which will not amount to much -, but because the Kasperites will try to exploit every possibility buried in the text for the future battles. Battles which, as I am sure you realise, did not finish yesterday morning.
What would have been the best way to go into these battles? Of course, you know my answer: the kicking of the Synod in its nether regions through a massive, open, very vocal walkout.
With the benefit of hindsight we can now say that most Synod Fathers felt confident enough that the Kasperites would be clearly defeated, and therefore decided that the walkout – as a clearly extreme measure – was not warranted. However, as the Synod goes into its last days one effect of the failure to walk out is apparent: heresy was openly discussed, and presented to the world by prelates still in possession of their cassock at the end of it.
The likes of Marx, Kasper and Cupich got a stage to present their heresies. They were defeated, but they should not have been allowed to occupy the stage in the first place. They will now look for another stage, and then another one. In time, the idea of not even allowing debates about heresy will become more and more difficult to present.
Whatever the Synod votes, the document will not have any juridical effect. It will be, whether heretical or not, another statement in a world drowning in information. Bar enormous heretical novelties, it will be forgotten in 10 days. Is the sake of such a document worth the heretical scandal? No. The walkout, on the contrary, would have given this Synod a historical significance vastly superior than even the best outcome we can hope now.
The Bishops found themselves with a heretical beast in their room. Instead of going out and gas the place, they chose to stay and tame the beast. The beast is now apparently tamed, but it is still alive, and still dangerous. This is not the way you deal with dangerous beasts. This heresy should have been put to sleep, and this papacy with it.
Alas, this was too brave and too Catholic for cautious V II bishops. They preferred the typical Italian solution of the muro di gomma, the “rubber wall”, instead. The rubber wall is soft when you collide with it. It goes very gently with you. It wants you to know it is very concerned that you don't get hurt. But in the end, it does not let you pass.
Up to now, the rubber wall has served rather well.
But the steamroller would have been best.
Alarmed from a post on Father Z's blog, I have re-read the 4 English language reports, and added to them the 3 Italian language report and (being of excellent humour) the German one.
I repeat once again: the Heresy of Kasper has been soundly defeated. It has been defeated beyond the expectation of any concerned Catholic before the Synod. You can't tell me you did not sleep at night fearing what would happen, and are not very happy with the results up to now. (Of course, it ain't over yet; but this is a different pair of black shoes).
Still, I sense in some quarters a disappointment that suddenly the Church of V II has not died; as if the wonderful outcome of yesterday would authorise them to believe in the Rise of The Don Camillos, and the Death of The Kasperites. Unfortunately (cough), not one single Kasperite Synod Father has died. They are all still there. This is why the war still rages on.
Please read the reports attentively, and repeatedly. Only the German report dares to clearly, if subtly, support Kasperism. All the other reports are very sound in their rejection of Kasperism, but they are written by V II prelates. This explain the waffle, and the many references to pastoral care that sound weak and effeminate, and the way to look at the situation of adulterers and homos and try to bring them back to the fold.
It is true that Italicus B has a solid reaffirming of doctrine concerning reception of communion, followed by a reference to the internal forum that, whilst in the context of the just affirmed fidelity to doctrine, sounds stupid to say the least. It is obvious thar there is sensitive waffle aplenty, as in the suggestion of Anglicus D that “excluded” from communion be discarded in favour of “abstain” from communion. All of this waffle is in line with the reports of the first week. It is also to be expected by V II priests. It is, of course, a shame. But it is no endorsement of Kasperism in any way, shape or form. There is no revolution. There is no call for the “Spirit” to inspire Francis to adopt novelties. There is nothing of what kept you awake at night.
Heavens: only days ago many feared the Bishops would openly embrace heresy, and now even its sound rejection should not be enough? If you expected a charging Don Camillo, and everything else to you is a disappointment, I am afraid you had not the faintest idea of the precipice that stood in front of us.
I have had a blog post pinned at the top of this blog since the day the Instrumentum Laboris was published. Not out fear of V II ambiguous waffle (about which I never had any doubt), but out of fear of formal heresy proclaimed by a Pope and supported by his Bishops in one way or other. Praised be God, the second part has not happened and it is improbable that it will happen now. As to the first part, we shall see, but I am serenely confident.
It's amazing how easily dangers are forgotten once they are gone. This is like one who has run the risk of food poisoning and complains that the food does not taste as he wished. Yes, man. Yes, ma'am. It's V II food, it has always been crap. But it's not the poison you were fearing.
Pray many prayers of Thanksgiving instead, that we did not wake up one morning discovering that the Church Hierarchy has officially embraced heresy.
Pray, also, that the last days of the Synod may lead to the rejection of any new trick that the Evil Clown may be trying. But I see his space of manoeuvre as rather limited now. It will be, I hope, more like trying to push the waffle in an inclusive direction, than letting nuclear bombs explode.
We must stay vigilant, pray, and do penance. But we have no right to expect that the rejection of Kasperism will give us Vatican I overnight. As long as Francis is Pope, the emergency will be there and the war will be raging.
The battle of Kursk was won; but you still have 3.5 million Kasperite soldiers in front of you and Berlin is very, very far away.
This is the day the world wakes up to a simple reality: however bad the outcome for Catholicism, this Pontificate has gone down in flames.
If Francis renounces to the Great Heretical Push, no amount of senseless grappa waffle will manage to hide his complete failure as the Great Revolutionary Pope. Everything he has done and said in these two years, beginning from the name arrogantly chosen to show how different he was from all the others, will scream one thing and one thing only: buffoon.
Mind, not in the eyes of the sound Catholics (to them, he is a heretical buffoon: big difference), but in the eyes of his very own fan base: the perverts, the adulterers, the dissenters of all types. They will be enraged, and will call him a hypocrite, and a complete failure. I prefer “Jesuit” as more descriptive, but yeah, hypocrite and complete failure is very fitting, too.
Alternatively, we could see some last minute attempt to push his own agenda, just as the “failed pontificate” headlines start to appear everywhere. In this case, the failure would be disastrous. Even the secular press understands that if you plunge the Church in a crisis not seen in centuries you have failed miserably. The narrative of the Pope who risks splitting the Church in order to promote his own agenda has echoed several times, and the funniest of this all is that the secular journalists writing it seem to have no idea of what brutal indictment of the Pope in the eyes of a (true) Catholic this is.
Francis is now cornered, and has no way out. It is at this point entirely unrealistic to think that the bishops who crushed his homoerotic, adulterous push last year and this year will allow him to get away with the third attempt, however masked or presented. No, it is not realistic to think this will happen. Francis will be damaged goods if he caves in to his bishops, and destroyed goods if he goes nuclear against them. He cannot win this anymore, he can only choose in which way he goes down.
A Pope is not a politician. A politician can seem abandoned today, and very strong in one year's time. A Pope's standing is directly linked to his prestige as a beacon of truth. Francis has compromised his (supposed) orthodox credentials irretrievably, and this is a virginity which, once lost, can never be recovered.
The old nincompoop will, if he is good advised, attempt an orderly retreat by accepting in toto the rejection of the heresy of Kasper, renounce to every idea of Church breakup, and limit himself to his stupid, senseless waffle no one even listens to anymore. There some environ-mental gathering or other in the next weeks, he can go make an ass of himself there, and look for easy applause where his job is not in danger. Next year, he could then resign and fly off to Argentina. A halfway graceful exit would spare him the last humiliations, and he would have at least the hope of a Christian burial, provided he is interested in one.
Mind, I write this as everything could still happen. I write this as the man still has his finger on the nuclear button. He is clearly an incompetent, arrogant idiot, so there's no saying what stupid things he might attempt. But there is no doubt in my mind that something very bad to his papacy has happened today, and this disgraceful pontificate is now damaged beyond repair.
I can see the day even Michael Voris starts to criticise him.
That day, you'll know this obscene pontificate is well and truly finished.
I have compared a couple of times Francis' machinations concerning the Synod with the Battle of Kursk: a buildup many months long, followed by a huge confrontation of extreme importance.
I woke up this morning to discover that the last reports (those we should not have seen) of the circuli minores have been published, and now it's official: Francis has lost the battle for the Synod, and he has lost it big time.
From what I understand – I will read as time allows – there is a lot of sensitive waffle and V II rubbish, but the heresy of Kasper has been soundly defeated. Even the WSJ, whose journalists obviously understand zippo of Catholicism, got the message, which will now go around the world in a matter of hours.
The battle is won. The war rages on. Like Adolf, Francis is not going to fold just because he has lost big. Unlike Adolf, Francis is Pope. And unlike Adolf, he is stupid and therefore very unpredictable.
Possible war theatres in the next hours and weeks are the following:
1. The final Relatio ignores or gravely manipulates the reports, and paints a Francislike approach to heresy. Improbable, once the reports of the circuli minores have been published; but in the cards considering the stupidity and arrogance of the man.
2. The vote on the final Relatio is rigged, and the huge liberal uproar goes around the world because the like of Rosica explain to us that there was some problem with the electronic count. Improbable, perhaps; but how probable would you have considered an organised mass theft of books within the Vatican walls? The thieves of last year are the same people organising things this year. You have been warned.
3. Francis decides to simply defy the Church, and to allow himself his little “here I stand; I can do no other”-moment. He releases a document – however called – diametrically opposed to Church teaching in the name of mercy, or rather of Peron. The Grima Wormtongues applaud, finally discovering that yes, Jesus is rolling his eyes at Catholicism. Catholics are up in arms in no time. Civil war ensues.
4. Francis decides to keep quiet for a while. In December, at the start of the Year Of False Mercy, he comes up with some heretical stunt of his (say: “for the duration of the year of mercy only, adulterers and all my fag friends are allowed to receive communion”), obviously in the name of “mercy”; and then tries to counter the reactions saying “why are you angry? I extended the same “mercy” to the SSPX, too!”. The Grima Wormtongues praise the inclusiveness of the man. Catholics start the insurrection against heresy. Civil war ensues.
These are four possible scenarios I can well imagine. The man is stupid, so there's really no saying what he will do next.
We must remain very vigilant.
The war rages on.
Excellent post of Vox Cantoris about the homosexual cancer now afflicting the Church.
Two (at least) of my favourite issues are there:
- If a priest is so inclusive of homos, he might well be one. Cupich is a prime suspect.
- Christianity is not concerned of sensitivity when it is about warning people of hell.
It is nothing less than astonishing that these disgusting sin, even in my younger years not even mentioned in polite society, but chosen for expletive language in every society because of the obvious disgust it provokes, has become something we must find attention in even describing,lest any fag should feel “hurt”.
Oh, they are “hurt” all right. Only, they are hurt in some other place.
It is time to slowly start going back to sanity, call abomination for what it is, and confine every hint to sodomitical behaviour where it belongs: expressions of insult, mockery and disgust.
This rather mediocre article about the Synod has a very interesting part. I quote:
His [Archbishop Coleridge’s] own discussion group, Anglicus C, for instance, chose last Friday to postpone tackling the classic Kasper Proposal (readmission to Communion after a “penitential path”) so that they could look at it with fresher eyes yesterday (Monday) morning. Which they did. Result: not a single voice in support of Kasper. Indeed, a different question seems to have been raised among them: “A penitential path – to what?” And, to judge from the way the one group wanted to handle such questions, the overall support for Kasper in the Synod is “very, very modest indeed.”
Let me translate this for you: when it became clear that Kasper had lost, the dissenting bishops got a grace period in order to save face and have an excuse (the “fresher eyes”; for heaven’s sake, if you need a weekend of reflection to decide whether Christianity is right you have no right to be a priest..) to backpedal. Which, on the Monday, they eagerly did. If, as I have read today somewhere, Kasper has lost even in the Germanicus group (see above under “saving face”) it appears clear that the heresy of Kasper has been massacred in the Synod. Of course, Francis is still the Head Kasperite; but I think that he got the drift all right.
Actually, I think he started to get the drift at the latest on Friday afternoon. On Monday of that week he had received the letter of the Thirteen Cardinals and, it is reported, had got a hissy fit. Midweek the reports of the circuli minores had been almost unanimous in their generally explicit criticism of the Instrumentum Laboris. In the meantime, the Catholic world (the true one; not the clowns and the Grimas) had been alarmed and had started to, ahem, make a great lio worldwide. Even the mass media were criticising this very unintelligent, amateurish nincompoop; and I learned today that when the final proposal of relatio comes out there should be a vote on every single paragraph; which is a heavy blow for the heretical agenda and gives, on this point at least, the victory to the Thirteen Cardinals, or whoever they were.
If you ask me, Francis realised at some point – between Thursday evening and Friday evening – that the Kasperite solution would be defeated big time in the Synod. At that point, he stood in front of the choice whether to force the point on his own authority, putting himself at the head of a revolutionary vanguard of heretics, or cave in. I am by now fairly sure that, ever the Jesuit, he decided to cave in already last week. When the history of this Synod is leaked in more details, we will probably know that by the weekend the “theology on one’s knees” was on its knees, and was getting executed in the rather luxurious and – we are told – calories-rich Kasperbunker, Downfall-style.
At that point, I think, the Evil Clown started to reflect what he could do to save face, preserve his image as progressive Pope and idol of the anti-Catholic masses, and get out of this Synod as the Great Innovator and Pope Che he thinks he is. Being the ass we all know and despise, I think he decided, pretty much in a matter of days, to arm another ill-thought, badly planned, superficial, stupid heretical bomb, and an old favourite toy of his. This time, though, the bomb is, if possible, even more dangerous and destructive than the “theology on one’s knees”.
“I cannot force the entire Church to adopt the Heresy of Kasper”, thinks the genius. “But I can at least try to see whether I can devolve the matter to the individual Bishops’ Conferences! The Kasperites would have their way anyway, and those obnoxious Catholics would be told that the “doctrine is intact” and we are just having “a regionally differentiated pastoral approach”, or the like”.
The Evil Clown must have liked the number, because on Saturday (if memory serves) he let the bomb explode with great, great noise.
Alas, the man is stupid. Therefore, he hasn’t stopped to reflect, and has refused to be warned, that if he is not allowed to destroy the Church in a certain X fashion he will very probably not be allowed to destroy the Church in any other Y, W or Z fashion, too. In order to think in this very elementary logical way one needs a functioning brain, and a minimum of humility. Francis has neither, which is why we aren’t out of the worse yet.
It seems to me that as I write this, on the late evening of Wednesday of the third week, the Kasper proposal as a heresy adopted by the Church is dead and buried. However, the Kasper proposal as the result of the destruction of the very unity of the Church is very much alive, at least in the plans of the Evil Clown. By such an ass, it is truly impossible to forecast what he might not do. We could still be at the vigil of a Catholic nuclear conflict. Only, this one here would be fought with, if possible, even bigger bombs.
I have written on many occasions, and repeat it today, that the obscene spectacle of this old, lewd man trying everything he can to inflict as much damage to the Church as he can should not be further tolerated. It is high time that the bishops seize the moment and profit from the obvious isolation, patent incompetence and clearly heretical mindset of the man to completely destroy his papacy, burying it under a mountain of condemnation and ridicule.
A walkout of the Bishops as a reaction to this new, shameless, very obviously heretical, very public attempt to destroy the very unity of the Church would annihilate this papacy not only for our lifetime, but for all the centuries to come. It would inflict a terrible blow to the Cultural Marxists and assorted Modernists. Now is the time to put a factual end to a papacy which, I am fairly sure, many bishops have learned to fear and despise as a work of Satan as much as we do.
Time to walk out.
Time to walk out.
Time to walk out.