Monthly Archives: November 2015
I have written just a few days ago about the perception of the Catholic Church as the Barque bringing safely to the other shore the bad swimmers – and even the outright lazy seamen – provided they still make, sinner as they all are, the quantum of effort required of them. I have no illusion that the average Catholic in even very pious past times was not the type his contemporary Calvinist or Puritan would have considered an example. I have also no doubt that in past, more Catholic times most of the worst sinners were still Catholic enough to understand themselves as the sinners, rather than thinking they are the spotless victim and the Church the oppressive stepmother. Sixty years, and how the times have changed!
In Federico Fellini’s “Le Notti di Cabiria” we see the traditional Catholic religiosity at play: a small group of prostitutes goes in pilgrimage to the Sanctuary of the (if memory serves; don’t bet your pint) Divino Amore. There, among the huge mass of faithful – we understand the meaning of true “inclusiveness” here: the prostitute in the shrine, elbow to elbow with the saintly girl, with the chaste mother, and with the countless simple popolane – Cabiria asks the Blessed Virgin to give her the strenght to abandon her sinful life, and to choose a path of hope and wholesomeness. It will not be so easy at first, and the poor woman will be utterly betrayed in her naive hopes. But Providence – the same Providence who led her to visit the shrine – is at work in the darkest hour, and God turns even the wickedness of a most evil man to a good end, if we cooperate with His grace.
At the end of the movie – after a scene among the most celebrated in the history of cinema – we leave the cinema in tears, with the implicit, but still clear message that the young woman – betrayed and robbed, and almost killed, but now with a new hope in herself – will find the strenght to cooperate with Grace and reform herself.
We note here the following: Cabiria does not blame the Church for her sinfulness. She does not decry her “exclusion”. She does not call for a change in doctrine allowing her to receive communion. She does not consider the country “prostitutephobic”. Sinner among sinners, but more gravely a sinner than most (at least in those more innocent times, in which fear of the Lord was far more widespread), she realises in what need she is, and her supplication to the Blessed Virgin tells us that she already begins to really understand. As we all know, there is understand and then there is really understand.
Is Cabiria, then, “excluded”? No, of course she isn’t. The Church that succors all sinners does not leave her out. Fellini shows her to us in the middle of the multitude, from the saintly to the very sinful and from the very simple to the educated, all together in their tight spaces, all pretty much packed and pressed together as it was so common in those times; and still, not willing at all – least of all the good girl, and the chaste wife – to even imagine that the prostitute should be denied her moment “in front” of the Blessed Virgin. And there she is, the prostitute, in the middle of them; asking the Blessed Virgin for the strenght to change herself, rather than demanding that the entire world (and the truth) may change so that she may think she does not have to.
How different this attitude is from today’s. Today, we are right by default. We are all little wannabe-gods, and do not notice the folly of it. We are right by default. Therefore, if we are at odds with the Church, it follows that the Church must be wrong. Because lurv. Because “inclusion”. Because “mercy”. Because heresy. Because Satan.
Today, a person can publicly severe his ties from the Church because his being at odds with the Church makes, in his logic, the Church obviously wrong. It pains me to say so, but I have the impression that this attitude puts one in a worse position before God than the one of the shameful prostitute. I do not doubt both will receive a terrible punishment. But who, pray, will God punish more severely: the miserable wretch unable to overcome her weakness or the willful, vocal rebel against Him?
There aren’t many Cabirias nowadays. Not even in Catholic Countries, such as they still exist. There are, however, a lot of Eltons, Elton’s helpers, and Elton’s Priests. Heck, we even have Elton’s Cardinals, and something very similar to Pope Elton. Which is why, by the way, the real Elton is such a fan of the Evil Clown. Similia similibus solvuntur.
No, the allegedly oh so oppressive Church of pre-Vatican II did not “exclude”, at all. Her arms were always ready to embrace. She called prostitutes to mix themselves among the faithful, to take part in the same pilgrimage of the good girl, to stay in prayer near the chaste wife. But it was an embrace calling to repentance, not to rebellion. It was an invitation to embrace Truth, not to deform it. It was a reminder of the infinite worth of every soul, not a celebration of a sordid life.
Cabiria’s life was entirely wrong, and she was clearly bound for hell. But in those times a strong and charitable Church took care that the moral compass was not entirely lost, that the needle would still be visible, and point to repentance and redemption. Elton’s life is a moral bankruptcy much worse than Cabiria’s. He has trampled the compass and crushed it to little pieces amidst anti-Catholic cries of joy. He will have no other compass than the one made by himself, whose needle points firmly towards hell. He will consider it perfectly normal to say out loud that not he, but the Church is wrong. Fool.
Cabiria’s problem was big enough, but Elton is so deep in the dung he does not even smell the stink anymore. Cabiria could still see a bridge she did not have the strength to cross; Elton has destroyed the bridge, and now looks at the ruins with joy.
It would still be less bad to be a Cabiria, than an Elton.
Two falls from the stairs in two days. Three in around six weeks. And these are, of course, only those in front of the cameras. Who knows what happens after a belly-expanding meal and a generous glass of grappa.
Pity poor Francis: Catholics all over the planet can’t wait for this papacy to end. Cries of heresy fill the blogosphere pretty much every time he opens his mouth. Even mass publications clearly start to see in him a huge problem. Soon even Patheos will deny having ever supported him. Is the man not enough persecuted? No, there’s clearly more.
Stairs don’t like him much, either.
Until not long ago most people were, in a way, simply educated. As a result, in what concerns big matters they would allow their betters, and their forefathers, to decide for them. The farmer of 1910 trusted what his forefathers had believed in matters of religion with the same natural, sound attitude with which he trusted them in matters concerning the way to run his farm. Likewise, he knew that he was simply educated, and that wiser or better learned people than him should be entrusted with the running of things above his pay grade.
All this collapsed in the Sixties. For the first time in history, the young generation could feel, and was universally recognised as, better educated than their parents. They compared their undoubtedly higher degree of conventional education with the one of their simply educated parents, and felt that the world was run by the wrong people, in the wrong way. Inebriated by a feeling of superiority – also fuelled by the many things their parents did wrong; their petty superstitions first and foremost – they started to throw away the baby together with the bathwater.
Suddenly, everything had to change. The dawn of a new age required a new thinking. Everything those old people were doing was simply old, and wrong. A vast exercise in collective hubris started to take place, and the very humility of the older generation, up to then a virtue, was now seen as a part of the problem, and the direct result of their lack of education and self-consciousness.
The older generation, made of simple people, often did not have the resources to articulate their thoughts. They saw their children where better educated, and had often undergone great financial deprivation to achieve that result. The rebellious and condescending attitude of their children was, in the end, exactly what they had worked so hard for. The rebellious son sounded rather stupid, or even evil to their ears; but hey, “they have studied”, would they say to themselves, and not without parental pride. The young began to win the war for the hearts and minds.
Here, the biggest catastrophe ensued: the Church, who should have remained a bulwark against this folly, decided to make friends with those who were – as it was abundantly clear by then – her enemies. The slogans of renewal were soon incorporated in the thinking and acting of our hierarchy. Predictably, the revolutionary process took its course even within the Church. The Aggiornamento never stops at Kerenski: at some point, you will get Lenin.
If the Church had opposed Her wall of timeless wisdom to the arrogance of those young people – who thought an accountant was vastly more qualified to decide what is right and wrong than a peasant – things could have been stemmed rather easily, and much of the revolutionary wave would have been stopped; but the attitude of the Church starting with John XXIII told the world exactly this: that the young accountants were now the leading force, and the old peasants had to change with the times; as the Church Herself was, in so many little and great things, doing.
When the time of a generational battle came, the Church hierarchy decided to side with the wrong side; possibly thinking, in the best cases, that in this way the revolutionary wave would have been domesticated, or asphyxiated in the warm embrace of a Church too strong and too dominant to be seriously damaged by them. However, it is clear by now that in many cases utter and totally willed complicity with evil was at work.
The new generation thought they knew better. Actually, they started to think they can decide (as opposed to learn) what is Right and what is Wrong. This attitude is, of course, vastly more arrogant and vastly more ignorant than anything their less educated parents ever were; but it is a vastly known phenomenon that people with a thin varnish of knowledge are those who think themselves smartest, and most educated.
As human things always go, the evil seeds of one generation became poisonous plants in the following one. The new generation started to reject everything even their “revolutionary” parents considered taboo. The first generation of destructors had still grown up with a sound foundation, the second did not have even that. What followed is a moral vacuum filled with the cheapest sentimentalism imaginable, the deification of “love” in whatever form, even perverted lust, and the astonishing confusion between goodness and allowing anyone to do anything with himself, including planned annihilation.
“Would you be happy if YOUR love was outlawed?”, said the message outside a well-know Londoner shop chain after Obergefell. This astonishing senseless piece of childish stupidity would have had the allegedly uneducated peasant of 1910 laughing out loud, but the allegedly far better educated young people of today are unable to even see what functional retards they have become, what total absence of thinking lies behind this emotional, brainless fluff unable to even recognise the possibility of anything like good and bad, provided they can sacrifice on the altar of the new god of their functionally retarded minds, Lurv.
The West has created, in only two generations, an army of stupid oxes utterly unable to think logically, without any concept of morality, without the slightest idea of right and wrong, and manipulated at will by a bunch of proto-communists who hate everything that is sacred, and in many cases certainly side with Satan. How more intelligent, and how less prone to manipulation were their peasant ancestors: who, though not educated, had firm coordinates concerning right and wrong, justice and injustice, true love and veritable abomination, the law of God and the sinfulness of man.
The modern Functional Retard has a degree in something often useless even in real life, and almos always utterly unusable to get to heaven. In this Country, he is not unlikely to be even unable to spell. But he thinks he is well educated, and able to decide what it right, or wrong, or “love”.
Retards with a useless degree, prepped for hell in huge numbers. This is what the last two generations have given us.
The Chuch hierarchy, collectively considered, has been an accomplice every step of the way.
Yours Truly’s little effort has been, in the past and actually at times even now, vastly criticised for using that kind of language that would be inappropriate during an afternoon tea with the vicar and the vicar’s wife. Some even got to the point of reminding me that I should not use words like “sodomite” (and colourful reminders of what a sodomite, actually, does) “because of the children”. As if this were a blog for children, or for vicar’s wives.
It has been, also, constant preoccupation of this effort to express the view that the enemy (be it your activist sodomite, the modernist priest down the road, or a cardinal, or the Pope; than the Pope is no exception, at all) must be mocked, ridiculed, and reduced (figuratively, of course) to finely ground dust, then mockery and ridicule are extremely effective weapons; that we must be far more assertive in our language, and not be afraid of expressing ourselves the contempt and disgust our collective forefathers always had for, say, perverts; and that more in general the heresy rampant within the Church must be called with its own name, and very loudly so, if we want to have results.
Slowly but surely, Yours Truly’s effort is being vindicated. Within the obvious boundaries set by the constraints of bigger, or even printed publications, I see this attitude getting more and more widespread.
Here, one publication states that the Pope bats with the heretics; there, another publication has on its cover the Pope riding a wrecking ball, launched on a church already vastly in ruins; elsewhere, even blogging priests are starting to pepper their blog posts with “God save us all” expressions when dealing with issuing concerning this astonishingly disgraceful papacy.
The last commendable step comes from the American Catholic, who are on record with these word:
We are led by fools and worse than fools. May God forgive them, and may He, through us, stop them!
Let me translate for you what this means: we are led by idiots and heretics. We hope they manage to repent one day, and avoid the damnation they are most certainly marching towards; and we also hope that we, with God’s grace, will be the ones who stop their idiocy and heresy.
Oh, but why do I waste time explaining this.
You got it already.
I read around of people saying they might, or will, lose the faith if Francis releases some heretical document, let alone tries to proclaim some heretical wannabe “dogma”.
The logic is absurd. Let me explain why.
The Truth of God and His Church does not rest on the Pope's authority (or infallibility). On the contrary, the authority and infallibility of the Pope derive from, and depend upon, the Truth that sustains them. Truth is an unchangeable, unassailable fact. It is nothing to do with human error, or heresy, or whatever other abomination a Pope may sully himself with.
You don't say that you don't believe in the exactness of mathematics because your teacher of math is an idiot. Rather, you know your teacher is an idiot exactly because he is at odds with an unchangeable fact, the rules of mathematics.
The Pope is not, nor was he ever supposed to be, the Truth. Christ is. And note the expression, that God does not have the Truth, but He is the Truth. As a result, Truth is as unassailable, unchangeable and eternal as God is.
Your Pope may be an illiterate in all matters of Catholicism, but then you'll know you have an astonishingly illiterate Pope. Or he may be in conflict with Truth, and then you'll know you have to deal with a heretical Pope.
Truth cannot contradict itself. The rules of mathematics cannot change to please your stupid teacher. They must remain identical, unchangeably true to themselves exactly as the God who made them. If the teacher tries to teach you different rules, he has no authority on you even if he has been invested with the role of teacher. The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to the Pope.
Is your belief in the exactness of the rules of mathematics strong? Quite, I would say. If the stupid teacher tried to persuade you of what you know can only be wrong you would immediately recognise the teacher as an idiot, because you would not doubt for a second the rules in which you believe.
How, then, would you doubt God's Truth, which belongs to an order infinitely superior to even the rules of mathematics? Why would you doubt God's Truth, whilst you unquestioningly believe in rules that are merely a derivative product, a pale reflection of God's immutable Truth?
Let Francis and his minions go to hell in any way God allows them to.
But you, you will keep the faith.
Pity Pollyanna. She is having a horrible time. First the Synod weeks, and the obvious pressure from Francis to have the Bishops embrace heresy. Then the bitchy rant at the final address. Then the Hen-Goddess new religion and, unless I am forgetting something, another Scalfari impromptu-interview.
Pollyanna is devastated. She had told you the man Scalfari was very old, and sooo unprofessional he would not even use a recorder. Old, half-commie, atheist gaga! Who would trust him?
Turns out, Francis does! Again, and again! Actually, it seems Francis trusts the man every time something extremely heretical should be attributed to him, minus the smoking gun! The atheists who get saved following their own conscience, the reprobates who are destroyed rather than suffering in eternity, and now the ways to be paved to allow adulterers to receive: all come from the trusted pen, and the switched-off recorder, of the old gaga to whom Francis keeps coming back!
Pity, pity poor Pollyanna! She must be suffering as atrociously as the adulterer who won’t give up adultery, but want to receive communion!
Sniff!! Pass the Kleenex, fast!
As the Year Of False Mercy is approaching, I took pity myself, and have decided to help Pollyanna keep deluding herself. This, I find very charitable, and the height of mercy.
I therefore suggest to Pollyanna the adoption of the following lines:
1. Francis hates Scalfari. Francis’ is a cunning plan to expose Scalfari’ mendacious assertions. I mean, Francis a heretic? Who would believe that? (Here Pollyanna must laugh out loud, undeterred from the fact that no one else around her does).
2. Francis is meeting Scalfari again and again because he wants to convert him. This is also why he is such thick friends with every heretic in red or purple. What a cunning strategy!
3. This interview never took place. Nor did the other ones. Lombardi is an accomplice of Ms Chaouqui in trying to expose and demolish Francis’ papacy, saying the interviews really took place. They didn’t, I’m telling ya! Francis is simply too good to humiliate Lombardi! His goodness is being abused by evil people! Bad, bad wolves all around! We must protect the Pontiff from them! (A lot of emphasis on these phrases, please. Exclamations galore. It discourages thinking).
4. Francis wants to initially cause scandal, and appear a heretic. When Catholics stand up for Truth, Francis will intervene and say: “see? You got it now! This was the best way to let you understand the beauty of orthodoxy!” Oh, the ways of the Lord! The Ho,ply Ghost is working for us through Francis as I speak!
5. Francis wants Satan to believe he (Francis) is on his (Satan’s) side. This way, Satan will become complacent, and will start making a lot of mistakes. At this point, Francis will launch a huge attack against heresy. I am sure of this. No, really. My cousin’s best friend is persuaded, too. And boy, he is smart…
6. Francis is infallible. Always. Therefore, he cannot be wrong. Don’t be a bad Catholic. We follow Peter!
7. Francis makes us uncomfortable. This is good. It means that we need to reflect on where the Church is going. “Do you still not get it?”
8. The Holy Ghost must have great surprises in store for us. This is so exciting!
9. I am sure Francis has everything sorted. He is the Pope. He knows best. Who am I to judge?
10. Don’t be so angry. “Be like a little child!”
Well, I have done my best.
It required a great effort. It comes handy I love Kafka.
But no, it did not work.
Pollyanna simply cannot be rescued anymore.
I could abuse Winnie now and say that, well, seldom was so much owed by one billion plus to less than three thousand.
Of course, I do not believe that heresy at the Synod was stopped in its tracks by the petition. But I think that there are voices that weigh more than other voices, and a type of shouting that goes straight to the heart of the matter. Steve Skojec informs us of rumours that the walkout petition reached the ears of the pope. Which does not mean that the Pope cares for Catholicism, of course. It means that people smarter than him have used the petition as a useful argument to persuade Francis – or to give him a way to save face by being persuaded – that it was wise to cave in to Catholics… again.
Now, these are rumours. They do not say, in themselves, anything new. We knew already that Francis would do whatever he can to promote heresy, if he could be sure he will get away with it. Conversely, we knew also that Francis has a strong record of backpedaling when he sees the wall approaching, and starts to realise how hard that wall will be.
But notice this: less than three thousand have punched so much above their weight, that I have still not recovered from the shock.
Masses do not make history. Individuals do. At times, a spark will go out that ignites a great fire; this happens because everything was ready, and only the spark failed. But you still need that spark, without which nothing would happen. And you, dear readers, should be willing to be part of it.
The petition had less than three thousand signatures. But even those less than three thousand were good enough to become matter of serious conversation, and a valid proxy for the nuclear explosion that would have very probably followed any proclamation of heresy at the Synod.
Traditionalist Catholics aren’t a mass. The Catholic masses did not even notice, or barely registered, that the Synod took place. Traditionalist Catholics are elite troops. They are Christ’s Special Forces. The S.W.A.T. The GSG9. The Spetsnaz. The NOCS, or Decima Flottiglia MAS. A bunch of them have managed to cause great disturbance within the very room where the Evil Clown incessantly brays. Of course they weren’t the decisive factor in heresy being stopped. Only in movies a bunch of people win wars. But they certainly were a factor, and a factor of astonishing proportions compared to their tiny number.
The Church does not work in numbers. Catholic Truths are so solid, and the thirst of men of good will for them is so strong, that deception will never work as long as there are strong men and women ready to stand up in defence of Christ, wherever the danger may come from.
My rosary today is for those 2,800 who have accomplished such a successful mission. I will try not to think of what would have happened if the signatures had been 30,000, or 100,000, because it would utterly ruin my day. But I am so thankful for the 2,800, and the way the Lord helped those who help themselves.
Masses do not make history. Individuals do. In blogs, fora, and more private occasions, they stand up for Christ without “ifs” or “buts”. They influence many, because this is what strong people always do. Look at how much could so few achieve. You are not called to be a silent spectator. You are called to act, and to – with God’s grace – punch above your weight.
Many other battles are in front of us. There will be other petitions like this one. The heretical asymmetrical warfare and subversion tactics have only just begun.
Be one of those individuals. Join Christ’s Special Forces.
Since the end of the Synod (actually, even before the Synod was ended) we have seen what Francis’ plan would be: when he saw that he could not get his way with the Final Relatio at the Synod, he decided to let the door be and try to let heresy enter the Church from the window.
Since Saturday last (the day of the vote on the Final Relatio) we had, if memory serves:
a) The bitchy address at the end of the Synod, accusing Christians of Phariseeism, whilst the new Pharisees are the merciful… well, Jews, following the law of Moses.
b) The Hen-Goddess religion
Yours truly has reported about all of these. There might have been more. It is difficult to keep pace.
The aim is clear: make a mess. Create a climate of confusion and shouted “mercy”. Proclaim the advent of a new “Spirit” and of a new “church”. Say that all that was believed is old, and we now believe something new. Little by little, the dumb masses will follow.
I foresee a massive amount of such interventions.
We react to them by calling heresy with its name, and by calling heretics those (starting with the pope) who defend it.
On no account can we go around saying that the heretics have won (which they haven’t), or will soon win (which they hopefully won’t, particularly if you don’t help them), or that the Final Relatio allows them to behave like heretics (which it doesn’t).
If we do so, we attract and truly call those very ghosts we want to exorcise.
Rather, we stick to the facts:
The Final Relatio does not leave any door open to sacrilege. It’s a weak document, not a stupid, much less a heretical one.
No one has, before, during, or after the Synod, any right to behave as if this were not the case.
The heretical will behave like a heretic because he is a heretic, not because he now has a justification in some document that he did not have before. Heretics have given sacrilegious communion for many years now, and it is absurd to think that a Synod that does not allow them to do so will now allow them to do so. They behave like heretics because they are such, and this is all you need to know.
We must call heresy “heresy” without any undue, and frankly now slowly satanical, regard for any kind of clerical habit. We must say to the world that heresy dresses in red, in purple and in white.
We are going to be subject to a massive bombardment of False Mercy rhetoric. We must take out Big Bertha and react in kind. But please no defeatism, and no absurd cries of Hannibal ante portas. if we do so, we will open to Hannibal the very way to the gates of Rome that he is seeking.
I read around of people who claim that they have become better Christians after their conversion. Good for them. But let us enlarge the issue and pose the question: do Catholics, in general, behave better than other Christians?
No, is the short answer. They most certainly don't. I wouldn't bet my pint, but I would say the contrary is the case.
My take is that, historically – say: before the XX Century – your average Puritan, Calvinist, or Presbyterian led a noticeably more (rigidly) Christian life than your average Catholics. Whilst I wasn't there, I seem to understand this from history, from reading novels, and from observing the unavoidable consequence of rigid Protestantism, coherently lived.
The young John Henry Newman was shocked, when he visited Rome as a young rising star in the fake Anglican mini-firmament, of the immorality he found there. If you think the Victorians were rigid, just imagine how England under the rule of Cromwell must have been. If you think that Christian rigidity is a value in itself, Calvin's Basel must look to you like earthly paradise.
No, I do not think Catholics are better Christians. I think they are smarter ones.
A Catholic knows that he sits on the Barque of Peter. He is aware of his sinfulness, but he knows that to throw himself overboard means almost certain death in the perilous, tempestuous sea of concupiscence out there. He may be a bad swimmer, but he is on the barque. The barque will, if he does not stage a mutiny and does what is required, still save him from hell, imperfections and all.
The Calvinist, or the Puritan were, in my eyes, on average far better swimmers. Rigidly trained, and proficient in the sport. Tough guys, able to face the waves of concupiscence with an energy the average chap on the Barque could not even fathom.
But you see, this tough Calvinist guys weren't nearly as smart as their naughty Catholic counterparts.
They were there out in the cold sea,swimming like crazy, dealing with the cold, dangerous waves all their lives, stupidly relying on their own swimming ability to get to the shore. Fools! Who knows how many have perished, who snubbed or insulted the barque! Who knows how many of the others have reached the shore safely who were not only very bad swimmers, but even lousy crew members!
Catholics aren't the better Christians. They are the smarter ones. They do not refuse God's vessel, and therefore can hope of reaching the shore even knowing what lousy swimmers they are, and how fast they would drown if the barque weren't there to ferry them to the all-important destination: purgatory.
Forget all the “Joy of Being a Catholic” rhetoric. Forget all that emotional fluffy stuff.
We are Catholics because we know the sea out there is darn cold, and would swallow us whole. We know better than to try to get to the other shore alone. We are, if we are smart, positively terrified by it.
Pity those rigid Calvinists and Presbyterians, no matter how good swimmers they are. How many, how many of them will perish!
I for myself will stay on the barque.
I might be a lousy swimmer. But I prefer to be a smart guy.
Why do you call it Sacrilegegate?
Because of this interview.
But you do not believe Scalfari, surely?
Of course I do. And so should you, too. Already in the past Scalfari has been accused of being gaga, but he most certainly isn’t, and his gaga interviews with the Pope, or articles written after talking to him, have been published by the Vatican and/or have been never corrected by Francis.
Has Father Lombardi not stated the interview is not reliable?
Not really. Lombardi has timidly meowed that Scalfari is not reliable. He has not dared to deny the Pope has said what Scalfari reports. Besides, Lombardi is the last one to know what happened, and Francis truly does not give a fig for what he says.
Do you want to say the Pope is a heretic?
Of course I do. I wonder how you cannot see it by now, unless because of a firm will to be blind to reality and impervious to reason. The man is unofficially heretical all the time. He is the prince of heretics.
But why does he not proclaim heresy officially?
Because he is afraid of losing his job. Unemployment is a tough business in Argentina, and as a defrocked ex-priest with a colossal history of failures he would be rather unemployable. The Holy Ghost could also strike him dead before he does it, though I doubt he himself has this concern.
OK, I get this. But why does he not shut up, then?
Because he is a heretic, and hates the Church and Her Sacraments. He will spread heretical slogans as much as he can. He is also getting his petty revenge against the bishops who do not allow him to do what he would like to do. He is also the Pope, so he knows he will enjoy a great degree of protection and goodwill until he crosses the line of formal heresy; which he will, rather probably, never do.
How can you be so sure?
Oh, I am not sure, at all! You can never know what a petty old man can do! He will, in fact, do whatever he thinks he will get away with! I merely trust he is afraid of this step, or the Holy Ghost will strike him dead first.
Could there not be some genial master plan behind?
No, there couldn’t. The Church isn’t such that you fool her by being cunning. Heresy will always be revealed, and you will never fool (real) Catholics. Francis is just an astonishingly incompetent old ass throwing the toys out of the pram in the only way he is still allowed to: off-the-cuff homilies and unrecorded interviews. The man does everything that a perfect idiot would do, because he is just that.
Do you think Satan has an ally in him?
Satan certainly won the jackpot with him, but I think the man is an atheist, so he does not believe in hell, at all. Or else he is sold to Satan all right. Most certainly he does not side with Christ.
But would Satan’s man not be smarter than that?
Il diavolo fa le pentole, ma non i coperchi. Even when God allows Satan to have his own pope, He does not allow him to have a very smart one. In this we see Providence at work.
What shall we do now?
We call the heresy out. We call the man a heretic and an enemy of Christ. We destroy his own standing and his papacy utterly and completely. We mock and ridicule him all the time. We call him an ass, an idiot and an evil man. We put his papacy in the tritatutto (look what it means).
And it came to pass the woman symbolising Francis' desire to “modernise” the Church and make her more, well, sluttish was arrested yesterday by the Vatican Gendarmeria.
The accusation is a heavy one: to have leaked – together with a tit-less Monsignore – enough classified information about the Vatican finances to give material for not one, but two books of imminent publication.
If Chaouqui is found guilty – we don't know, of course; how could we? We do not judge… – this will be a kind of first: the shameless woman so shameless put by Francis in a public, influential position was so ungrateful, so scheming, so atrociously Jesuitical that she was heavily contributing to the demolition of the man who did, or should say made, her in the public eye.
It seems to me that the Lord is having His own fun at demolishing the papacy of this extraordinarily incompetent man. But thinking of this, a Divine intervention is certainly not necessary.
The man manages to self-demolish himself well enough.