Daily Archives: June 9, 2016

Girls, Playing With Dolls


I have written some time ago that our Cardinals resemble a bunch of girls, playing with dolls. 

We had another explanation recently, as it emerged that in the recent interview given about the SSPX (I have written about it here) Cardinal Yogurt found the way to kick Tucho “Tina” Fernandez (yes: this chap here; and yes, I think that, too…) in the shins about the latter’s statement, more than one year ago, that the Papacy could be moved away from Rome and the curia run by way of video conferences or, for all we know, tweets and wheelchairs. Cardinal Yogurt waits one year, substitutes Bogota’ for Medellin, and calls Tucho “Tania” Fernandez a heretic. 

Again: girls, playing with dolls. 

The most astonishingly heretical document in the history of the Church has just been published under his watch as the (deputed) guardian of the theological edifice of the Church, and this man has nothing better to do than to give interviews in which he profits to settle scores with  his enemies within Francis’ entourage like Tucho “Tara” Fernandez . And by the way, I can’t avoid the suspicion that he whispered himself the saucy details to some journalist, as obviously the matter had not been picked the first time.  

We should find a name for this girl, too. I don’t know what the accepted feminine equivalent of “Gerhard” is, and I doubt he would like “Tucho”.

“Gerda” Mueller might well work. He has certainly deserved such a beautiful name. 





Coke Francis?



Enough of this stuff, and you will call every normal Catholic a heretic whilst you celebrate the most dangerous among them yourself.

Francis has just called Pope JP II (together with every one sane person who knows the first three things about marriage, or Catholicism, or life in general)  not catholic and heretical; and at this point, the use of cocaine cannot be excluded anymore. The arrogance of the man is clearly going to the point where loss of the sense of reality appears too evident to dismiss one of its obvious causes – let me tell this to you once again: cocaine – out of hand. We are now firmly beyond outlandish, but we know that the man is not clinically mad. 

This, from the man who, in four months’ time,  will travel to Sweden to celebrate the most successful Heresiarch in the history of Christianity.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Or you might say that this is, simply, loss of the sense of reality. 

Let me tell you an episode.

Many years ago in Germany a football trainer, Christoph Daum, who was slated to become the trainer of the German National Team, was addressed by sarcastic comments of Uli Hoeness, the well-known Bayern Munich grandee, which implied that the man was unworthy of the job because he made use of cocaine.

Mr Daum then proceeded to sue Mr Hoeness for libel. Mind: in many Countries (and, I am pretty sure, in Germany too) the demonstration that the accusation is true makes one not culpable of libel. Therefore, many thought and said (and yours truly thought too, and said as much) that Mr Daum could not possibly be a cocaine user, because he could not possibly be so stupid as not to know that Mr Hoeness’ defence team would not have any problem in showing his cocaine addiction, if there were one. In Italy, in the same situation, a test would have been like the “amen” in the church. 

The polemics went on some time, and the pressure on the man grew. The police was probably thinking of (or had started, or were about to start, I can’t remember) investigations. At some point, the man announced that he would voluntarily (officially at least) allow a cocaine test on his hair. He doubled down by saying that he did so because he had an absolutely clean conscience.   Again, one would have thought that, if he had known he was a cocaine user, he would have started some sort of prudent backpedaling, instead of once again stressing his absolute innocence. Everyone knew at this point the truth would come out in a matter of just a few days. 

It turned out the man was found to be a heavy consumer of cocaine and lost his face and his job, whilst the entire Country (and yours truly with it) wondered what level of lucid madness might have moved Mr Daum to first sue Mr Hoeness (which practically made his undoing guaranteed from the start), and then keep lying when he should have known better than anyone else.

The answer given by doctors was enlightening: Realitaetsverlust.

The man has (partially) lost the sense of reality, apparently a common effect of the use of cocaine. Facts and consequences of the fact did not present themselves to him with the usual clarity. He could appear normal to those around him, but causal links had started to go down the drain, and were substituted for an imaginary reality in which obvious, and easily demonstrable lies will never be recognised as such. The man wasn’t mad, or stupid (he actually disappeared to Florida with a ticket bought before the day the results would be made public, evidently having adapted to reality at least in that). Simply, the heavy use of cocaine impaired his sound judgment, not allowing him to see obvious logical links everyone else could see. 

How could Christoph Daum sue Mr Hoeness and think he would not be exposed as a liar? How can Francis slap JP II in the face and think that people will not compare Catholic rules with his own ramblings? How could Mr Daum openly, insistently, shamelessly proclaim his innocence with the very act with which he condemned himself as a shameless liar? How can Francis accuse every normal Catholic out there of being a heretic just for believing in Catholicism, even as he himself praises the worst heretic of them all, and think that he will not be exposed as the greatest hypocrite and liar in Church history?

One possible answer is the same as for Mr Daum. And at this point, this answer is not outlandish at all, and would explain a lot of what the man has kept saying in public in the last years.  

Maybe. Maybe not.

But the events give one pause. 



%d bloggers like this: