Monthly Archives: August 2017
Why did God make you?
God made me to know Him, love Him and serve Him in this world, and be happy with Him forever in the next.
There, Jorge; you stupid, old, lewd, godless ass.
In these few words from the Penny Catechism is contained all the “meaning of life”. Those who waste their time seeking for the purpose or aim of their existence aren't “youthful”, they are confused. They have, in fact, an outlook on life that does not put God front and centre , that does not make of salvation the pivotal point of their existence, that does not consider a life in love of and obedience to God the only possible calling for their existence.
There, in those few words, is all the “purpose and meaning of life” they will ever need to know. It is, exactly, the job of a Pope to confirm them in this knowledge; not to lead them away from it, even praising their ignorance and confusion.
This man is so unbelievably arrogant, ignorant, and stupid that every well-instructed eight years old could humiliate him, day in and day out.
Heavens, what an embarrassment.
Die soon, Pope Stupid.
We have had enough of your third-rate, godless blabber.
Imagine this: you have the parish priest visiting your home (I know, I know; but humour me here…). You ask Father to bless your home and family. Father then proceeds to say a blessing prayer, asking God to bless all the world's families and their homes.
I don't think you would be very happy. Actually, I do not think that you would say that the priest has asked the Lord to bless your home and your family. I note here that, once upon a time, most Italian families had a small frame hanging on the wall, with the words: “Signore, benedici questa casa”.
Questa casa, this home. Not ogni casa, every home. You want the Lord to bless you and yours, because you and yours are, to you, justifiably special.
Now, I have never seen a frame on the wall saying: “Lord, bless every home”. Nor have I ever seen a Catholic priest who, upon being asked to say a blessing upon one home and family, proceeds to ask the Lord to bless every home and every family.
Do I make sense here? Is this not the most obvious common sense?
Why, then, it should be said that, once the Blessed Birgin asked to consecrate Russia to her, the consecration of the entire world should be considered the fulfilment of that request?
Words mean what they say.
This home means this home.
Russia means Russia.
All the rest is Jesuitism.
And it came to pass I was informed from the Remnant about the real nature of the savage rants of the papal men (and, in some cases, women; though apparently they prefer not to speak about their own sexuality) against conservative Catholics.
No, it's not the rumbling people in the pews, at least not directly. It's not even the conservatively oriented priests, as much as a V II priest can call himself “conservative”. Let us read:
“But certainly, we see the multiplication of websites, blogs, and Twitter accounts that tend to move public opinion and react in lively and often in a violent and fundamentalist way. These realities create a bubble within themselves…It is found everywhere. I do not say it is a majority phenomenon, but it is something that is present in the life of the People of God today.”
No. It's all those pesky bloggers, the Blessed Virgin's warrior ants, assaulting heresy one blog post at a time, no matter how little read. You put all the warrior ants together, and they are enough to easily peeve our already easily peeved Jorge “Che” Bergoglio.
As I have written many times, every warrior ants on its own is utterly insignificant; but together, they can be rather formidable. Whilst not millions, they will shape the impressions of millions; because every confused Catholic who goes around on the net seeking for information about the latest Communist papal rant will find… us.
He will find the thousands of utterly insignificant, but absolutely angry Mundabors opening the guy's eyes about the times in which he is living. The guy will possibly not become an observant Catholic after that (but hey, perhaps he will!), but he will go to dinner without any more doubts about who is Catholic, the commie Pope who wants to Muslimise Europe or the angry warrior ants who oppose him.
And still, still…
As it becomes clear that our work is getting more and more effective, I invite you not to look at numbers.
The Blessed Virgin does not care about how many readers you have. She cares about how much will and energy to fight for Christ you have.
But to know that, together with many others, you are peeving Jorge “Che” Bergoglio is also a satisfaction.
It was very kind of Barbara Simpson to say that, with his astonishing requests on behalf of illegal immigrants and fake refugees, Pope Francis put his foot in his mouth again.
I am not so kind and will, therefore, succinctly give you my version of what is happening.
1. Pope Francis' statements are not unintentional gaffes. They are willed political statements.
2. Francis' political position is somewhere between Peron and Chavez/ Maduro.
3. He is fully aware of the disconcert he will cause among Catholics. He just doesn't care.
4. He does so because he hates and despises all of them.
5. As Francis wants the end of the Church in Europe as we know it, he works as he can to deChristianise and Muslimise it.
The points above may be shocking for some. But the facts on the ground have been confirming them for years now, and this keeps happening day in and day out.
This Pope hates the Church, he hates Catholics, and he hates you. He wants your world and system of values gone and will do as much as he can for all the time he still has.
Look at his continuing statements, and shameless attacks to the Christian West. There is no other explanation. It's happening in front of our eyes and he is even not shy in telling you so, then the man is even less subtle than he is intelligent.
This is the fitting punishment for the Second Vatican Council. A rebellious earthly Church will be punished with a rebellious Pope, so that all but the completely blind may see what rebellion leads to.
Francis is the way the Lord is using to put the error of our ways in front of us. The remedy is recognising the mistakes, correctly identify their root cause, vow to atone for them and go back to sanity.
No, Francis is not attacking you unintentionally. He does so aggressively, like the peasant and boor he is, certain of the impunity his role gives him.
I wonder if it would be a grave sin to throw foul tomatoes and sundry rotten vegetables at him, ad maiorem Dei gloriam.
Let us try to be logical, shall we?
There cannot be two Truths, or two Churches. It cannot be that the Tridentine Mass, proclaimed good for all times – with anathema attached against its enemies – by the Tridentine Council, was good once and it is not good now. It can never, ever be, because if this were the case it would mean that Truth changes and, therefore, Catholicism is a fraud and a joke. Heavens, this is so easy to understand even Francis must get it!
To be even clearer : if an extremely orthodox, “Pius XIII” type Pope were, after years of ruthless orthodoxy, to declare “authoritatively” that going away from the Tridentine Mass is irreversible, even then such a Pope would immediately lose all credibility and every half-instructed Catholic would be obliged to recognise the obvious falsity and error of his statements.
But a nincompoop like Francis, does he really think he will put an end to the controversy by throwing his non-existent prestige – nay: the despise of and laughter about him of all sane Catholics – behind the question?
The statement itself is too stupid for words. It attempts to put the Pope’s authority behind a process of continuing change: this is firstly the contrary of everything the Church believes and, to make things more absurd, a blank check towards every kind of future change.
It is, in fact, a call to a permanent revolution (which, if it is liturgical, must perforce involve all the rest: lex orandi, lex credendi) which is as absurd from a Catholic point of view as it is indetermined and vague, though clearly heretical, from a factual one.
The ass has brayed, and he now wants for his bray to be taken seriously.
Keep dreaming, Unholy Father.
We will keep being Catholics.
Father Martin truly does not want to stop. Like a girl whose sister has just stolen her best handbag, our indefatigable Father Liberace truly loses it.
Let us correct some of the rubbish the man spouts.
1. No, there is no “spectrum” in term of sexuality, as his clearly homosexual friends have told him. People can be more or less masculine, more or less feminine, but in the end they are either normal people or perverts. Tertium non datur. This is not only obvious to any sane person, but is, crucially, what the Church has always taught. There is no “spectrum” in Saint Paul, you damn girl. “Complicated sexuality” means “faggotry”.
2. The man (because he still has a Pimmel) stoops so low as to use the old, abused excuse employed by every homosexual on the planet: if my perversion disgusts you, you must be a latent homosexual yourself. Strangely, they never use the non-argument with paedophilia. However, if they use the argument with others concerning homosexuality they must accept that others use it with them concerning paedophilia.
The question is therefore: does paedophilia disgust Father Martin?
If not, he has obvious, open pedophile tendencies of his own admission.
If yes, he has obvious, latent pedophile tendencies of his own admission.
And please let us stop taking such stupid arguments as if they were worth one dog shit. Leave them to homo psychologists, and ask everyone who tries to use this rubbish with you, very straight, if he is disgusted of paedophilia (or incest, or bestiality; if you are talking to Francis you may throw in coprophagia as he appears to be quite the expert). See what face he makes. Be hard. Don't walk back.
The rest of the article is also rubbish, but there is a moment of involuntary comedy when he states he does not want to change church doctrine, and the evidence would be that a Jesuit approved his book.
Comedy gold. You couldn't make it up.
This man should be defrocked and, I think, one day he will be unless he dies or commits suicide beforehand. Too much he has (literally) exposed himself. He is like Saint-Just, one of those revolutionaries who don't get that they may get to ride a dangerous tiger for a while, but will be in the shooting list as soon as their own kind of revolution goes out of fashion.
Enjoy your moment of notoriety, Father Liberace.
At some point, your arrogance will catch up with you.
Possibly whilst you are still alive.
At times I struggle to see whether the Evil Clown is using figures of speech of his native Country, is talking the first nonsense that comes to his mind, or is just drunk.
The latest comparison between the people of Spring and the people of Autums is such an occasion. The stupid comparisons the – possibly drunken – man makes to insult us all mean the same thing: adulterers, infidels, perverts, and misfits of all sorts are the good guys. We, who try to live a Christian life and condemn those who give scandal (and even want to be right in doing that), are the bad guys, the (this is another one) chillies in vinegar or such like nonsensical comparison.
I love aceto balsamico, by the way, and make frequent use of it. For everything there is a season, even vinegar, and the season might actually be Autumn.
Someone should take the grappa bottle out of the man's hands.
Pope or no Pope, this one is now way past the point everyone else would deserve to be bitch slapped, big time.
Almost twenty years ago the Royal Slut, who had been giving scandal all summer – for the joy of the rubbish press – merely to show a very long finger to Queen and Country (particularly the former) died in an accident which was, in itself, the epitome of the arrogance of these people, thinking they can do without punishment what would cause me and you to go to jail very, very fast.
Make no mistake: during all the Summer of 1997 the woman had been treated by every sensible brain for what she was: a trollop slutting it around in wanton abandon of family, children, morality, conventions, and her role as still bearing the title (even after the divorce) of “Royal Highness”. The biggest Italian newspaper for women had made a famous reader survey, whose result famously was: she is a slut.
There you have it. From woman to woman. Pretty blinding obvious, too.
However, when she died something utterly knew to me happened: the sudden rise of a fishwives' religion.
Overnight, the woman became the object of what can only be called a cult; a cult feeding on the desire of what was already a large number of godless wordlings to feel good with themselves as the metre of what is right or wrong.
I realise now that this was the first phenomenon I witnessed of post-Christian mass hysteria, with an army of people without any moral compass instantly ditching obvious morality instances in order to make their own religion, for their own selfish enjoyment.
We saw the mass hysteria at work in other issues (global warming is a prime example), but I think the Royal Slut was the first of such astonishing magnitude. It was the horrible birth cry of a new generation of people, screaming their right to declare good what makes them feel good.
All this would have been impossible in former times. No generation before ours ever dared to proclaim the right to overlook moral instances formerly impossible to ignore. No generations before ours dared to excuse the slutting of the wife with the infidelities of the husband. Heck, you see Harry's photos and compare them with one of Diana's former lovers (I think it was the photographer, but it may have been the bedyguard?) and it gives you the creeps.
The tragic, highly illegal death of the Royal Slut was the first instance of a religion of self that has only been growing since. Twenty years later, many more Christians have died and many more “make me feel good with myself” cultists have started to vote.
Not good at all.
This is all you need to know about the “born that way” urban legend that has been going around for some time now, and was never believed by our far smarter progenitors.
God puts in every soul the right instincts and the right inclinations. At times, single individual decide to pervert these inclinations by repeatedly giving assent to, and persevering in, disgusting thoughts and desires. With the repeated assent to the perverted inclination, it becomes stronger. The pervert then starts to identify with it, and the “born that way” rubbish is born.
No one is ever innocent of his own perversion. It does not matter how bad the environment is, one is no less justified in being a homosexual than in being a sadist. Every homosexual is guilty of his own disorder, and he must pray and do all he can to recover the normality that lies in him, buried below thick strata of perverted excrement.
This is what the Church has always stated and not only it is in tune with the rest of Church teaching, but it also makes sense from a pragmatic, obvious, common sense approach to things.
And please don't come to me with the damn penguins, or dolphins, or whatever the heck that is with true or imagined homosexual animals. Penguins and dolphins are beasts. Humans have an eternal soul.
Cats screw their relatives. Can't wait for the “penguin faction” celebrating incest.
As to Father James Martin, some good investigative journalist could do some old-fashioned investigative journalism here. Not only it is as clear as the sun that the man is homosexual himself (he quacks like a fag, thinks like a fag and talks like a fag, so there…), a state of things incompatible with being a priest, but I am fairly confident that it would not be difficult to find evidence that the man actually engages in sodomitical acts, it being improbable that such impious, blasphemous arrogance stops at words.
This Father Martin isn't smart. He may have his field day now, but he is young enough to make it well possible that the tide turns in his lifetime, and he is exposed and defrocked. To get rid of the Sister Martin of this world we don't need Pius XIII; a Benedict XVII who is fed up with the guy will be more than enough.
Beware of fake priests.
Particularly when they have such a shrill voice.
The Remnant and the Jihad Watch have been the target of an attack from uber-Leftist, Nazi hate groups affiliated to George Soros and his net of satanical warfare on God. The minions of Satan tried to bully Paypal into closing the accounts of the two organisations.
It is extremely concerning that the account of the Gateway Pundit was, in fact, closed before the storm that followed “inspired” PayPal to think again. Still, this kind of event tells you without any doubt the kind of tactics these bile-filled Hate Groups are ready to employ. Also not surprising is the tactic of fake “journalism” employed to do so, a tactic perfectly in line with the Fake News dominating our media environment.
ProPublica clearly is an organisation meant to suppress every opinion different from their own with whatever means, legal or illegal. This sort of intimidation should attract the attention of some smart prosecutor in the US and lead to the banning of the hate group and the arrest of the people responsible for its intimidation tactics.
Fr Aidan Nichols has, for the first time, publicly criticised Amoris Laetitia, and the attack was devastating. Nichols, a well-known name in England, not only points his finger on the many errors and heresies in the notorious documents, but he also states a very obvious, yet certainly one to be said, fact: it cannot be said that the Pope was negligent or unguarded in his language, because the CDF warned him about the dangers and he simply chose to ignore the warning.
This, I add, in addition to the relentless work made by the Evil Clown in officially promoting the heresies; with the letter to the Argentinian Bishops probably the most blatant, official among them.
Father Nichols will now, sadly, be persecuted, and he will not even have the protection normally afforded to a Bishop. Please pray for him.
It is very sad to see that priests feel the need to publicly criticise the Pope and undergo certain persecution when not one of the bishops besides Schneider, and no darn Cardinal at all, dares to openly confront and condemn this evil man and the damage he is causing.
Father Nichols also theorised a procedure, sanctioned by Canon Law, to discourage heretical statements of future Popes; but I frankly find the endeavour futile, as a heretical Pope would block such ordinary ways. By definition, a heretical Pope can only be an extraordinary event; which will, then, require extraordinary measures outside of the usual legal ways and channels.
The Extraordinary Council generally seen as the remedy for such actions is just this: a counter-revolution for Christ against a revolutionary Pope. There can be no manual for such things, which makes it wise for such situations never having been regulated by Canon Law.
But this is just side news. That even the Catholic Herald publishes such a scathing condemnation is rather more relevant.
Pray for Father Nichols. And for Bishops and Cardinals willing to do their job already.
And it came to pass that yours truly was, some time ago, driving through a part of the Country that shall remain unnamed. At some point, the following sign appears: “red squirrels crossing the road”.
The writer of the official sign (put there by some local authority) did not come so far as to say “brake abruptly and disrupt traffic, or run the risk of being rear-ended, for a red squirrel”. However, it was clear he/she/whatever wished you to drive differently because of the possibility of the oh so precious red squirrel crossing the road. Now, we all know of the plight of the red squirrel (chased away from his habitat from the far bigger, and far more aggressive, grey squirrel). However, really, come on….
And then it dawned on me that the same Country in which you can read such passionate, and quite official, defence of the red squirrel allows 150,000 babies to be killed in the womb, quite legally, by their own mothers.
Does, I reflected, the author of the quite official street sign have a problem with the 150,000 killed babies? The statistically most probable answer is no, she hasn't, nor have their colleagues in the office for local roads and the protection of the red squirrel.
Long live the Red Squirrel. Alas, the baby will have to be disposed of.
We live in time of astonishing stupidity, that will be remembered in centuries to come as the epitome of moral suicide and logic's bankruptcy, whilst we were so proud of our smartphones, drones and communication systems.
The FrancisGame is very simple. It can be played by everyone no matter how stupid.
Actually, being stupid helps a lot.
First, you look good and oh so sensitive by encouraging and calling for a Muslim invasion of the Continent. When your own policy causes poor innocents to be slaughtered you look good and oh so sensitive by giving your solidarity to the victims of your own senseless enmity with the Christian West.
You look good before the massacre and after the massacre. Actually, there's no way not to look good and oh so sensitive.
The game is also future-proof, as the continued importation of Mohammedans will make the first phase more obvious and the second phase far more frequent.
Gotta love the FrancisGame.
The only ones who lose at it are the victims, their families and those who still care for our Christian heritage and civilisation.
Look at how many headlines mention Islam!
One would think the attackers were just nervous because of the heat
I am somewhat perplexed at the behaviour of otherwise excellent news outlets like, say, Breitbart. In their desire to expose the fanaticism of the Liberals, they end up publishing endless articles containing their antics. Basically, they give them a huge resonance box.
Does it help?
My first instinct is to say “it doesn't”: the space and energy should be better used to publish articles of those who say the right things, rather than endlessly giving a stage to the bad guys. I must say I am at times so put off by that that I instantly leave the page, and go reading somewhere else.
However, and for the sake of honesty, I must admit that Trump won the election, and this tactic of constantly rubbing liberal thinking under the nose of sanely thinking voters might, actually, have had the desired effect in the end, mobilising many who would perhaps have stayed home without the constant aggravation.
Still, aggravation it is. It also engenders the impression that the world out there be full of liberals, almost monopolising both the public discourse and the individual thinking. I would say that the exact contrary is the truth, with the liberal nutcases a very tiny minority of the population, but gaining traction because their ideas are endlessly spread from both friend and foe.
I personally do not react well to this kind of journalism. When some Liberal states something retarded I want to read the reasoned criticism and condemnation of it, not only the liberal madness in itself. This way I am both informed and nurtured. But I have no desire to be subject to an endless litany of liberal nonsense and a long list of dumb tweets every day, merely to be told for the millionth time that these people are dumb.
What do you think?
What effect does the tactic of Drudge or Breitbart have on you?