On The Feast Of Christ The King (Old Missal)

Christ the King

 

Francis The Clown

 

 

Francis Admits Defeat, Bitches Around, And Promises To Keep Promoting Heresy

“Those damn Catholic bishops have fooled me again…”

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.

M

Synod: Do Not Snatch Defeat From The Jaws Of Victory

Help Him to help you.

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. 

M

   

The Day After: Back To Normal

The wall stands still. The moat is still there. Now let’s start the reinforcements and the dredging!

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.    

Deo Gratias. 

M

Final Report 84-86: The Text And Commentary.

First, the text. 

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.

—-

Then, the analysis, for what I can discern. This will be done by giving to the text what I find the obvious orthodox meaning of the phrases. We do not read ecclesiastical texts with the mind of a heretic, because we aren’t heretics. For a heretic, “do not judge” is enough to start a heresy.

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.

It’s very late, and I am very tired.

I hope this helps.

M