Daily Archives: September 7, 2016

Poverty And Abortion

I know you know it, but let us put to sleep this rubbish of fighting poverty as a way to fight abortion, shall we?

In Communist Countries (at least the European ones) everyone knew he would have the means to raise a child, courtesy of Big Commie Brother. Abortion was very popular, and extremely high in the best (less badly) functioning Commie Country of them all: East Germany, where even Communism is made to work (badly).

In Countries like Italy every cat and dog knows that the South makes more children than the Centre, and the Centre more children than the North. Mind, this is no rural society anymore. Children are not “needed” in any economic way. Still, the birth rate is in inverse order to the prosperity of the relevant section of the Country.

The phenomenon of choosing to have no children to enjoy a “better life” is not typical of poor societies, it is typical of rich ones. No children = Mercedes is a powerful motivator to contraception or abortion in wealthy Countries, not in poor ones. Weekends out, good holidays in exotic places, restaurants, free time activities: these are the incentives to abortion. A child does not cost much, and it is not a human right to have a $100,000 education which, by the way, might well fill his brain with rubbish anyway. Superior education has never been a privileged way to heaven, and children are born exactly to do one thing: get to heaven at the end of their lives.

In history, most people in most Countries have been poor. Certainly not desperate, but poor. But you know what? They believed in God and family. They made children not only because there was limited access to contraception (it is always possible to avoid pregnancy; don't let me go into the details…), but because they considered children the joy and purpose of their lives. This is nothing to do with poverty. This is to do with faith, sound instincts, and sound reasoning. Again: only a small part of the population (the farm owners) would (more or less) need children. All the others did not have any need for them. If you were a smith, a carpenter, or a cheese monger you could easily and cheaply hire apprentices and save the cost and inconvenience of raising a child. If you were a daily labourer, the wage of your child would barely cover his cost. If you were a doctor or lawyer or pharmacist or accountant (yes, Italy has invented the modern accountant many centuries ago; and yes, I am very proud) you did not need children at all, and were possibly independently wealthy to begin with.

In the history of Christianity, the idea that you need to raise the standards of living to decrease abortion has never been there. This is SJW rubbish, not Christianity.

The age of unprecedented abortion is the age of unprecedented wealth.

Everyone who tries to smuggle to you the lie that “social justice” fights abortion is a deluded Socialist wolf trying to pass for a Christian sheep. On the contrary: it is the very concept of “social justice” that creates dissatisfaction, resentment and, ultimately, abortion.

There.

I had to say it.

This social justice crap really makes me sick.

M

 

Corruptio Optimi Pessima: Has The Smoke Of Satan Entered The SSPX?

Whoever trusts this man is an idiot, or much worse.

The details Bishop Fellay let transpire about the possible new agreement seem, for what we know, a trap only an idiot or a sellout could try to smuggle as anything approaching a satisfactory solution.

Go to Rorate Caeli and listen to the video.

The potential agreement in short:

– A bishop is appointed. This bishop will be picked by the Evil Clown among a terna chosen by the SSPX. As I understand it, we are not talking of existing SSPX bishops, but of people from outside, with the chosen ones becoming members of the SSPX before being made bishops.

– This bishop would then have sweeping, life-threatening powers. He could let in anyone he wants, thus rapidly infiltrating the Order. He could, very possibly, sell or donate or transfer assets. He could, in a way, let the Society live or die, remain orthodox or become FeancisChurch, at his pleasure.

– As the bishop is, so to speak, an “adopted son”, this guarantees his orthodoxy. Therefore, there is nothing to fear irrespective of how vast his power will be.

This. Is. Not. Acceptable.

First of all, a preliminary consideration, and one who requires some strong words. Francis is a slimy, godless rapscallion. No one with a brain trusts a slimy, godless rapscallion. Anyone who tells you – Fellay not excluded – that an agreement must be accepted which is depending in any measure on trusting a slimy, godless rapscallion is trying to sell you out.

Any agreement, any agreement at all, can only work if FrancisChurch has no power and no influence whatsoever on the Society. If you say it's unrealistic, I say “who cares”. No doctor has prescribed this medicine. The SSPX will keep thriving without any agreement and without any reconciliation.

Reconciliation can wait. Truth must never be abandoned.

The agreement is fundamentally flawed because of the Trojan Horse it introduces within the Society: a man factually from outside, on whom the destiny of the Order depends. A man who can, alone, make or destroy the Society. The SSPX is too valuable to all of us for a risk like that. This risk would be unacceptable even if the bishop were Padre Pio, because you don't know what would happen after him. This would also be unacceptable because the destiny of the order cannot be put in the hands of one man. Even the saintliest man can be duped by evil Vatican schemers. As it is now, the way the SSPX trains and recruits his priests avoids this risk. Also, there are various safeguards meant to prevent a sellout (see below). But when people start coming from outside, invited by one who came from outside, without further checks and balances, all bets are off.

This solution, as it has been outlined, is not acceptable. It is the work of the devil. If Bishop Fellay dares to present something like that – and there are so further safeguards about the assets, the new admissions, the running of the seminaries, etc. – he has lost face, showed himself as a traitor and sellout, and must be made to go. I am saying here that if the proposal is the one outlined not only the measure should be rejected, but bishop Fellay should be made to renounce his position.

Huge caveat: this presupposes that there are no further guarantees and safeguards than the ones in the video. However, if there are, bishop Fellay should have talked at length about it – again: way of admission of new members; who controls the assets; how decisions are taken, etc. – instead of telling us that rubbish about the good pope Francis who wants the good of Traditionalism.

This little blog has always been extremely appreciative of both Fellay and the society. But not for one moment will I hesitate to attack this man with all the energy with which I attack the Evil Clown himself, if he is truly preparing to sell out in the manner described above.

Every agreement must keep the SSPX utterly and completely immune from every germ coming from the Vatican. If Francis wants this in order to bolster his “diversity” credential, it's his choice. But no Fellay will let us believe that we must trust – let me say this again, because there is an awful lot at stake here – a slimy rapscallion like Francis.

The stakes are immense. The FSSP and the other traditional orders – nay: every Summorum Pontificum mass – exist merely because the SSPX is out there. Once the SSPX has been infiltrated and destroyed or made unrecognisable, all other congregations and simple TLM masses would fall like dominos. Too much is at stake for any idiot – much less a smart guy like Fellay – to bet the farm of Christ on Francis' utterly ridiculous supposed good faith.

— ——-

We were informed years ago that the members of the SSPX will have to approve with absolute majority any agreement. This is, therefore, not in the hands of Fellay and a few others.

It is now time to sound the alarm on the blogosphere, in newspapers, on Internet fora, in every Catholic outlet. Please contact any SSPX member you know and express your concerns. Please make the ordinary SSPX members know that this is – if no further safeguards are there – an extremely dangerous situation, in no way corresponding to the bishop's very naive – or disingenuous – words.

There should never be any agreement that allow the Vatican any measure of influence or control of the Society. Not until the Vatican keeps resembling a homosexual brothel. Until the situation improves, the only acceptable “reconciliation” is the one by which the SSPX continues exactly as it is now, with no possibility whatsoever of infiltration, and Pope Francis may in return brag about how “diverse” he is. You don't open yourself to even the risk of infiltration, is all.

Pray for the society, that they may not be devoured by the wolves.

And remember the saying: corruptio optimi pessima.

M

 

Muslims Are Infidels Who Believe In A Different God

It isn't difficult.

For a Christian, Christ is God and the Holy Spirit is God.

If anyone says that the God of the Muslims is the same god than God, he denies both the divinity of Christ and the divinity of the Holy Ghost. One can only hope that this unfortunate person simply does not know what he is talking about, because otherwise his punishment will be, if he dies unrepentant, both fearful and eternal.

As a Christian, I cannot agree with a Muslim that he believes in the same god as we do. I can concede to him that, in his misguided ignorance and wrong belief, he thinks that he believes in the same God. I will, with prudence and charity, make him aware of his fateful mistake, which is exactly why Christians properly call Muslims infidels. But I will never, ever, as a Christian, state that his is a right statement.

We only need to read the Athanasian Creed to fully understand the enormity of the blasphemy of equiparating in any way the false god of the Muslim to God.

And the CatholicFaith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance.

We cannot in any way downplay the Trinity without denying it. We cannot pretend to momentarily forget both the Son and the Holy Ghost because the Father bears, it would appear, some resemblance to the false god of the Muslims.

And in this Trinity none is afore or after Other, None is greater or less than Another, but the whole Three Persons are Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.

The Three Persons are Co-Equal. The Son and the Holy Ghost are just as great as the Father. They aren't appendices of a father who would, then, be the most important part, and the same for both religions. If there is no place for Son and Holy Ghost, clearly there can never be the same Father. We can't just ignore two of the Persons, distort the third up to the point of making it unrecognisable, and make an equivalence with an imposture. It would be like saying that Muslims have the same traffic lights we have even if they have no use of both the amber and the green, which they consider both evil. In fact, in that case not only the traffic lights would be different, but even the red would have a different nature and function.

I could go on with this until tomorrow morning, as Christ as Lord (that is: as God) is so much an integral part of Christianity that every attempt to deny it and maintain the deity of Islam as the same god must seem absurd at every step. I believe that God became man and died to redeem us. They think it an unpardonable sin to believe exactly the same thing. How on earth can anyone think that we believe in the same God? How can a god be the same as God, whose believers maintain that he “has no son?”

Then let us look at our beliefs and theirs. The Mohammedans believe in a grotesquely sensual heaven, in which the elect, erm, go at it the whole time with dozens of women, eat like pigs and and drink like fish (yes, they drink too!), and are surrounded by servants and untold luxury all the time. How on earth can this be the same god as the Christian one? This is a deity for goat-rapists, drunkards, gluttons and slave drivers, bearing no resemblance to God.

Again, one can go on ad infinitum. However, I will conclude with a couple of quotes from Our Lord Himself:

Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

Heavens, what more does one need… To say of God that he is merely a “prophet” isn't being nice, it's being blasphemous, it is being insulting to God. It is a blaspheming, and therefore despising, of the Son that can only be, ipso facto, despising of the Father. You can't just say:” the Son and Holy Ghost I refuse; but I'll get the Father, thank you so much….”

Therefore, Muslims despise not only the Son and the Holy Ghost. They despise the Father, too!

We.do.not.believe.in.the.same.God.

Period.

M

 

%d bloggers like this: