Author Archives: Mundabor
The details of the Germanwings tragedy have now emerged, and they make for a chilling reading. The 28-years old co-pilot profited of a bladder-pause of the captain, locked him out of the anti-assault cabin and slowly, coldly flew the aeroplane to his and everyone else's death during eight minute of lucid evil.
Was he mad? Of course not. Madmen aren't allowed to fly aeroplanes of Lufthansa companies. Was he depressed? No sign of that, and depressed people tend not to kill 149 other people, either. Did he have one of those strange things like Asperger's syndrome, which apparently make some people insensitive to other people's suffering? Can't imagine this wouldn't be noticed in a pilot.
The newspapers, unable to find answers to the simplest question, will obviously say “lucid madness”, and that's that.
I call BS on that, and have another answer: Satan.
The modern world, so PC and inclusive of every bastard, avoids and even ridicules the mention of Satan. Things must have a perfectly clear medical reason, and this medical reason must exculpate the perpetrator as thoroughly as possible. Unless he is a right-wing one, like Breivik.
Satan was at play? Come on, Mundabor: you don't believe that, surely?
I do, I do!
It is utter senseless wordliness to think that the devil does not try to find a way in a man's consciousness – and conscience – and move him to commit horrible acts: child abuse, murder, rape, sodomy, and the like. He must find a way first, and then he will do with his victim what he can.
At times, Satan will manage to instill in such men – or women – a great desire to do harm, preying on their hate, or envy, or vanity. Charles Manson's, Waco's, Breivik's and other tragedies of the sort can be only explained in this way.
It is very reasonable to suppose that we are here in front of another of such satanic “bingo” experience, as for what I know pilots are regularly tested as to their psychological fitness. And please notice the cold-blooded system of slowly losing altitude, and the obvious result that only in the very last seconds the passengers realised – or rather, started to realise – what was happening.
Two days ago I posed the question of whether the flight gave the people the time to die prepared. It would appear the window was very, very limited, and who knows how many were taken in Satan's net. Looks like a chilling, satanic bingo to me.
We can reason away the presence of Satan in the world at our heart's content, but we do so at our own risk. We can attribute atrocious acts invariably to momentary loss of reason, but we show with this attitude that we are the ones who refute to reason. Satan is there, working in the shadow, and throwing his nets.
Let us profit from events like this tragedy to be reminded of Satan's workings. Let us not hide the reality of satanic influence behind worldly considerations. Souls are at stake.
As abundantly seen the day before yesterday.
I am informed that Utah might reintroduce execution of capital punishment via firing squad, as the extremely sophisticated poisons needed to execute people in a way halfway satisfying your typical faggo-liberal Latte-sipping whino become scarce.
Obviously, the pansy army has reacted calling a firing squad “barbaric”.
Please look at the implications. If a firing squad is barbaric, then every foreign military operation of the US is “barbaric”, the “American Sniper” was a top Barbarian, and everyone who carries a firearm is basically a savage. See where they are going?
There is nothing wrong with a firing squad. Honest, truthful, manful way of executing someone. Is it painful? Rarely for long, I would say, and in many cases only for an instant. But a propos pain: how many murderers take special care that their victims die an absolutely painless death? How many can say to the judge: “look, Your Honour: I went to extraordinary expenses to buy the best poison that money can buy; the one that would give my victim an absolutely non-barbaric death! Could I please receive the same courtesy from the taxpayer? I know it's expensive but cut me some slack, I am dying here…”
My hunch is that they aren't very numerous, and your garden variety death row inhabitant is not very averse to inflicting pain, either. But I digress…
Execution is meant to have the convicted killed. Get over it. You do not want to get executed? I do not think is a very difficult thing to do.
In Mundabor's Utah, things would run like in the good old times: civilians (men and women) get hanged, whilst soldiers and people executed by the army get the firing squad. Easy peasy.
Is, then, execution by hanging “barbaric”? Were the Papal States barbaric? Were they unable to find anything more “civilised”, like giving people some poisoned herbs in Socrates style (no great fun, that, I bet), or giving them a warm bath with complimentary wrist-cutting in Seneca fashion? Did they want to save the expense of the bullet? Or did those wise men of the past not think, instead, that hanging is just a perfectly adequate and functional way of execution, and perfectly fitting for the purpose?
“But Mundabor! Mundabor! Some of them do not die instantly! They will slowly suffocate for thirty or more seconds!”
Get a grip, and grow a pair. When you or I die (of a stroke, or heart attack) our farewell from this vale of tears might be not a bit less painful. It might,min fact, be a lot more painful, and for a much, much longer time! Is God, then, barbaric? Should we all, then, receive an injection to avoid the danger of pain, before a cruel God inflicts us some pain far worse than any hanging, let alone firing squad?
As far as I am concerned tell me where to sign for thirty or forty second of pain (or whatever it is God in His wisdom decides to send me) if they allow me the grace of final repentance. Who knows how many, who had mocked the priest offering them the crucifix, saved their soul in the gasps of death? Who is better off, that man or the one who got his neck bone snapped instantly, and died unrepented?
It is nothing less than astonishing that wussydom is so prevalent nowadays that hanging, or even the firing squad, are considered “barbaric”. What a bunch of limp-wristed pansies.
Ask Pope Blessed Pius IX how a criminal should be executed.
He will have no hesitation.
We do not know much, as I write this, about the tragedy in the French Alps, where a Germanwings Airbus crashed killing all the 148 (it seems) on board. We do not know whether a distress signal was launched or at least attempted. We do not know whether any of the victims knew they were about to die, at all.
Here is hoping they knew. I always wondered how many atheists there were in WWI trenches during a massive attack, and I always thought they must have been rather scarce. The same must, I think, happen in an aeroplane about to crash. Actually, the latter even must concentrate the mind even more wonderfully.
Here is hoping they knew; and that they had the time to recommend their souls to their Creator, to Whom their life belongs, before having to give said life back to Him.
What a tragedy in the tragedy to think that many of those onboard (what is the atheist percentage in a European aeroplane these days? How many public adulterers, on average, in the seats of an aeroplane in the Age of Mercy, without the slightest hint of repentance? How many women with an abortion on their conscience, pushed away in the remotest region of their consciousness without ever dealing with the harsh truth of the matter?) could have simply smashed to their death without the slightest warning of what was about to happen. Chilling. Far more chilling, in fact, than the tragedy itself, then the loss of life is a very trivial matter when compared with the loss of soul.
Which leads me to another, far more chilling consideration. Every day is Germanwings Tragedy Day. In the fat, sated, spoiled Old Continent very many must die every day simply surprised by death: in their sleep, in sudden car or street accidents, of aneurism, of a sudden stroke, or in the many other ways in which we can be suddenly summoned to our judgment completely unprepared. And now let us reflect how many must, in your average European city bustling of people going about their business, live in mortal sin without even the slightest hint of preoccupation. This, my friends, is another big, big Germanwing tragedy happening every day.
Pray for your dear ones. Pray for your not-quite-so-dear ones. Pray for those you don't know. Pray for criminals, drug addicts, child rapists, killers, communist, and sodomites. Pray that they may receive the grace of all graces: the grace of final repentance.
As for us, I have taken the habit of reciting the Act of Contrition (the old one) every day. It helps one to realise one's caducity and keeps the mind gently, but frequently, on what really counts in life. What really counts in life is that we and those we love avoid damnation. In comparison, nothing else really counts.
Every day is Germanwings Tragedy Day. It is only that the BBC prefers to ignore the fact.
An obscene initiative was taken in Bologna, in which, among other things, “ceremonies” of “de-baptising” were held. But not only that. Desecrations and blasphemies beyond imagination. Satanical. Utterly satanical.
I cannot find anymore a blog post I read this morning about the – thankfully – vigorous reaction of Cardinal Archbishop Caffarra. But I have found this, in Italian. I do not go into details. Again: things have happened which I do not even want to repeat. I will leave it at that before I get angry. If you read Italian, be prepared for stuff that will test your coronaries.
Here, I would like to make some consideration about those who have chosen to commit such an impious act as the attempt to completely separate themselves from a most vital sacrament as the baptism. I say attempts, of course, because the idea of debaptising oneself is as smart as the idea of proclaiming oneself an elephant.
Many of them – who knows how many – have performed the “ceremony” in utter spite of Christ who gave them the sacrament of Baptism. Others – hopefully, many – may have done it in utter ignorance of what the Sacrament is, and thinking that they are doing nothing more than giving back, so to speak, the party card. Oblivious, as many in Italy are, that the Church is vastly more than a shop meant to promote Jesus, and that when you separate yourself from the Church you are refusing Jesus.
Still, still… ignorant or not ignorant, I cannot imagine anyone, irrespective of his degree of ignorance and confusion, who would have an inner shudder, a deep uneasiness, a sense of sacrilege in doing something like that. And I do not mean merely in a day in which the most satanical things have happened. I mean always (this de-baptising thing has been going on for many years now in Italy).
I feel pity, I feel sadness and compassion for the stupid wretches. Even if they do this only out of ignorance and stupidity, this ignorance still has a rebellious arrogance in itself that may well, alone, seal their fate.
The militant faggot has chosen Satan already, and at the moment of death will, on discovering his fate, probably react with anger and acrimony at the “homophobic” and “repressive” God. But the idiot who just wasn’t idiot enough that he would escape hell must be very surprised on discovering, with sudden and devastating terror, that such an inclusive, tolerant, open chap like himself is now doomed forever.
Unicuique suum. To each his own. Those who – with different degrees of evil and stupidity – have decided to proclaim themselves elephants (or not baptised anymore, which is possibly even more stupid) will, bar an always welcome repentance, receive each his own.
I doubt there will be great fun in it.
For the umpteenth times, The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History, known among friends as TMAHICH, exhibits himself in another senseless, anti-Catholic rant against Capital Punishment. I would call him stupid, but Francis isn't stupid, though he certainly is not a genius. He is an evil enemy of the Church, and a man of average or less than average intelligence believing himself a messiah of the poor.
I read around heavy cannon fire to this latest act of sabotage. I found this one particularly beautiful.
But this is not the object of this post. The object of this post is whether I should go on writing the same things, which all my readers (or almost all of them) already know.
The answer to this is: yes, I will. I will if it bores you to death. I will if you feel the sudden impulse to throw your tablet from the window of your train. I will if you feel the urge, on the same train, to cry: “Aaaarrrgghhhh! Not AGAIN!” on reading the last post about TMAHICH's one thousand times repeated stupid or evil statement.
I have to do it, because he does. I have to keep talking of the same old issues, because he keeps doing the same. I will not start a series of blog posts about, say, the works of mercy and us and pretend Francis can simply be ignored. Francis can't be ignored, because he is the Pope who keeps being Satan's most valuable ally day in and day out. I know you are fed up. You do not even imagine how much I am. But if the man keeps sending his bombers, we Catholic bloggers will have to keep giving them some good Flak.
As long as Francis keeps sending down bombs, we must fire our cannons. He does not tire, nor should we.
Let us see who is more stubborn. This thing might backfire when the flak becomes too much to bear (remember the planned carpet bombing of the Sacrament of Communion in October? He aborted the mission all right when the flak caused too much losses), but in any way he should never take us by exhaustion.
If I die before Francis, at least I will have the consolation of departing this wasteland and vale of tears knowing that I remained at the cannon to the last. If, as it is far more probable, he dies before me, this is one gunmen who will see the big, fat, humble white bomber going down in smoke with no little satisfaction, and waving his helmet in the air.
Let's see, then, who is more stubborn.
Please don't throw your tablet out of the train's window.
It damages the environment. Pretty much the only thing which, if you listen to TMAHICH, will send you to hell, in the company of all those rosary prayers and doctors of the law.
Every now and then, the Unholy Father says a word or two about abortion. It never is a real frontal attack, because apparently we all know he is a son of the Church so why talk like a Pope; but at least it is something.
The problem with that is that the radical Neopagan ideology of the man makes his words sound hollow – or rather, appear hypocritical and no more than a fig leaf – even when he happens to say something which, in itself, is right.
Francis has been aggressively promoting the new “religion of mercy” for months now, and more aggressively so since the slap he got in October. This new, continuously promoted alternative religion has no place for God's justice, at least for the almost totality of people of whatever faith and none. If God cannot be imagined as doing more than slapping us on the wrist, every kind of crime will ultimately be unpunished. If atheists are saved if they follow their conscience, faith as a necessary ordinary requirement – together with work – for salvation is completely forgotten. If God is “in love with us”, the relationship between the Creator and His creatures that is so emotionally evoked is not the one of a loving, but when necessary severe father, but the one of a sixteen years old girl upon beholding the young man of her dreams.
Besides being profoundly heathenish, this thinking kills babies.
In this kind of New Age, “We Are All So Wonderful And Unconditionaly Loved” pretend religion there is no sanction whatever for being Stalin, much less for the murder of an unborn child. Everything is wonderfully aimed at a wonderful final destination upon reaching which we will know in what wonderful ways God wonderfully provided for all the people we have aborted, or gassed, whilst following our conscience or, more simply, whilst being a tad naughty and getting a slap on the wrist. God, who is so madly in love with us, will always forgive us everything, so why worry? And actually, who is everyone to judge?
This is what kills unborn babies. This refusal to put a woman in front of the atrocity of what she is about to commit, and to the terrible pain of hell that following one's “conscience” can easily lead to, is all Satan needs in order to whisper to the mother that there is nothing to be worried about, her murdered baby “will be fine” because “God is Lurv”, and she will obviously be fine because she follows her wonderful conscience where the Spirit leads her.
In the age of mercy, an holocaust of unborn children produces nothing but… mercy. If Hitler had been a woman he could have imagined all those millions Jews happily basking in the grace of God, and would have died believing himself a saint. On a smaller scale, many feminist and dissenting nuns do exactly the same; only, they do not dispose of their own Vernichtungsmaschine and must be content with accompanying – morally or physically – young mothers to the slaughterhouse of their own babies.
Francis does, in a slightly subtler way, exactly the same. His blabbering about a mercy deprived of justice is an open invitation to every kind of selfish cruelty, an “all you can sin” buffet without even the digestion problems, a new religion that makes a mockery not only of God, but of the very concept of religion.
Next time Francis says a line or two about abortion, use it to be reminded which side's work he is making.
I stumbled upon a rather good article about the obscene celebration of sexual perversion to which St. Patrick's Day Parade has been, well, perverted by, oh well, perverts and those who are accomplices in their sin crying to heaven for vengeance.
However, it seems to me that in this way no battle will be ever won. The way I see it, this article and the many contributions like this have one serious shortcoming, that should be addressed.
You will notice that the “P” word is never spoken. Sexual perversion is a serious matter, which, by its own very nature, cannot be reduced to simple “immorality” as the one caused by the weakness of human nature. I wonder how many would write that child abuse is immoral and, well, premarital sex is also immoral. Some sins cry to heaven for vengeance, and some not. Some sins go with our nature, some sins go against it. We must make this distinction, or we will give the impression that sexual perversion is just on the same level as common human weakness, or that all grave sins are much of a muchness. They aren't. Hell isn't a common room, either.
Words convey messages. If the message is to be strong, the words used to convey it must be strong, too. I do not expect a priest to write “faggot” in his article, but if words like “gay” and “LGBT” are used in in implicit acceptance that they are the proper way to describe perverted people, then I do not see how we can persuade anyone that is not already persuaded.
The garden variety homo (or dyke, trannie, and all the circus tools of the sort; perverts all of them) never hesitates in employing a very emotionally charged, inflammatory language against you; and if you answer to his accusations of “homophobia” without telling him that he is just a pervert who would, in better times, have gone to jail for his perverted scandal*, then we are going to go absolutely nowhere; because we will be perceived, and rightly so, as people afraid of their own argument, and therefore unable to oppose more than a meowing to the roaring of Satan's lions.
They insult us. We answer by adopting their own language, and being oh so attentive not to hurt their feelings. No battle was ever won sounding the trumpet of the enemy.
The “P” word must come back in the debate about… perversion. There is no other way of tackling the issue than by saying loud and clear what the issue is. Similarly, the word “gay” and expressions like “LGBT” must be refused legitimacy and be used only in an ironic or mocking way (yes, mocking; mockery wins wars), never calling perverts the way the want to be called, but always calling them what they are.
Refuse to do so, out of a misguided sense of “charity” or politeness, and it will not be long until the very use of the word “pervert” will make you persecuted. A persecution which you will have called on yourself out of your own desire to be polite with people with no desire at all to be polite to you.
The Italian says: “chi agnello si fa, il lupo se lo mangia”, or “he who makes himself a lamb, the wolf eats him”.
Perverts are wolves. Be a lamb with them, and you will be eaten.
*In some European Countries the homosexual scandal, not sodomy in itself, was a criminal offence.
Make no mistake: the just announced Extraordinary Holy Year of Mercy will be a feast of heresy and sabotage of everything Catholic. A disgraceful Pope who is probably realising that he will not manage to get his lewd ways in October is preparing, in case he loses at the Synod, a typically Bergoglian petty revenge: the ceaseless trumpeting of an effeminate, wimpy God crying all the time that we do not realise how much he loves us, and from which every thought of justice and punishment for men's sin has been surgically removed. Unless you are a Catholic, of course; in which case you are dead inside, have no mercy, refuse God, & Co. All this, of course, ad maiorem Francisci gloriam.
This is a holy year created for an extremely unholy purpose: sabotage. Nothing good will come of it, at least in the intentions of his promoter.
I will dedicate the year to an insisted trumpeting of the Justice of God, and to an increased reminding of my readers of the realities of death and judgment, and of the hell that could follow them. A hell in complete contrast to this kind of wimpy teenager boy continuously sending flowers and love letters to the girl of his heart and basking for days in a little smile of his beloved; which is, in short, how Francis wants us to think of God.
Someone should explain to Francis the meaning of words like dies Irae, dies illa, or Rex tremendae majestatis; and then ask him whether he thinks they find any application outside of Mafiosi, child rapists, and observant Catholics.
This Unholy Year is another major campaign in Francis' war on Catholicism. It will be a simple counteroffensive if his army is defeated in October, and the total war if things go nuclear at the Synod.
One day, this man will get to know that God is both mercy and justice.
As things look now, I don't think he will like that day.
Both Dolce & Gabbana (the two fags who created the brand of the same name) expressed themselves against so-called “gay marriage” and other modern ills, calling in vitro children “synthetic” and in general defending the only family that can be called such.
Invariably, Eltonia Joan (whom the world knows as Elton John) got a tantrum, and I can picture him whilst shredding all his – certainly numerous – Dolce & Gabbana clothes whilst insulting the two with a very high pitched voice, wowing never again to look like a fag clown in Dolce & Gabbana's, but only in other people's clothes.
What do we learn from this queenfight? That there are degrees of evil exactly as there will be degrees of punishment in hell. The ones, if they die in sodomitical mortal sin, will be damned. The others, if they die not only in the same mortal sin, but having vocally furthered even a mock sacrament and the adoption of the little ones by their own ilk, will truly desire that they were never born.
As Eltonia Joan abandons herself to her latest tantrum, the reality of hell is as concrete and inescapable as it always was. May the one or the other repent and go back to sanity one day, there should be no illusion that the modern inhabitants of Sodom will be punished as harshly as the biblical ones. Perhaps more so, then Eltonia & her oh so “gay” partner can't even claim they do not know what God's position on the matter is.
Fags call for the boycott of fags. This is not going to be pretty. Perhaps Dolce & Gabbana will backpedal like the Barilla family (another set of prime candidates for hell, if you ask me) already did. Perhaps they won't, and who knows, this controversy may spark in some fag some serious reflexion about right and wrong.
I will stop short of praising two open promoters of a perverted lifestyle like Dolce and Gabbana, because it would seem to me the same as praising Hitler for not gassing Italians qua Italians. Still, I can't avoid noticing that Italy is, as we write the year of the Lord 2015, a country where even scandalous fags have a higher probability of having a modicum of common sense within them, whilst the likes of Eltonia are treated by heroes by an entire Country, desirous to send itself to hell with the express train.
Satan is having a big party. But I doubt he dresses as badly as Eltonia Joan.
You know those old people who keep talking of their own impending demise merely in order to hear others assuring them they still have long years in front of them? Well, one of them is Pope.
It is now rather “officially unofficial” that TMAHICH does not think of resigning. Not in the least. The “my pontificate will not be long” blabber had only one aim: to play the old man with his thoughts now oh so directed to heaven, whilst – if you ask me – a more worldly Pope may never have darkened the magnificent doors of the Vatican City.
Resigning? The Humble Pope likes the perks of the job all right. His ego has expanded more than his circumference. Who knows, perhaps the expansion of the second will put an end to the expansion of the first?
I am a tad disappointed as I would have preferred further hints at a possible future resignation. Just to make my day a bit better, you see. But honestly, I would not have believed them in that case, either. An excuse to feel forced – in all humbleness – to keep wreaking damage would be easy to find anyway.
No, the Unholy Father was just being coquettish. Look at me, the humble old man. Look at me, the one who is not about career at all. Look at me, the Great Mercy Reformer. But most of all: look at me.
I do not wish him a long pontificate, and therefore cannot wish him – now that it is clear he wants to die in office – a long life. I am reminded of Schopenhauer rather dry mot d’esprit when the old woman to whom he was forced to pay a pension died: obit anus, abit onus. “The old (woman) dies, the burden goes away”.
Those same words I hope I will write, on this blog, rather sooner than later; because if you love the Church for tea and not only as an empty slogan you cannot, you most certainly cannot wish for this pontificate to go on for another day; nay, for another hour. Not, of course, out of hate for the man; but out of love for the Church.
Still, it is consoling to think that the Lord has Francis on an “at will” employment contract. He can fire Francis anytime, and without any notice period at all. Bam. Gone. Next.
I will submit to His wisdom in this, and will do my best to live with the punishment God has sent us every day.
But I think it’s clear what I desire for the Church: that the old man dies, and the burden goes away.
Pray that the Lord, in His own good time, frees us from this scourge.
It’s hard enough to have to endure such a Pope to also have to deal with the coquettish remarks, and shattered hopes.
Please take the comparison below only as drink comparison. That wine is used in the Consecration is not relevant here.
With V II the Church gave us, together with many other mistakes, a second-class Mass. Second-class, not sinful. Second-class, not something that would be even a grave matter to attend.
Speaking of drinks (and letting aside the sacramental aspect at the Mass) we were accustomed to wine. One day, the Church told us wine is a drink for stuffy old people, and Coca Cola is the new drink the Church gives to you: bubbly, fizzly, young, dynamic, in tune with the new times, good for young and old, and apt to have many more people get at the table.
Coca-Cola is sugary, superficial, vastly inferior to wine in everything, pretty much of a child’s drink compared to it. But it can never be a sin to drink Coca-Cola; particularly so, when the Church gives it to you as the standard drink.
Now, I wish for the disappearance of Coca-Cola as Church drink, and to the return of wine – in its good time – as the only drink at the table. But I can never consider the drink the Church gives me a poison, though I will always say that as a drink it is vastly less, for lack of a better word, thirst-quenching or nourishing than the wine.
I have never made a secret of my position. I have stated very often on this blog that I attend the NO mass regularly. I even tour the land attending at Masses here and there to get the temperature of average Catholic parishes out in the V II wasteland.
Why, then, do I support the SSPX without any criticism? Because the SSPX deserves my support without any criticism. What they do is too important for all of us for me to start nitpicking on something in which, I am absolutely sure, many within the SSPX also disagree. In the matter of mass, the SSPX – or at least some of their members – do show some siege-mentality. Frankly, I do not care. It’s not that there is a precedent, because the situation of the true Church offering you Coca-Cola instead of wine, and prescribing that as the standard drink, is new.
I can fully understand those priests who refuse to celebrate the Novus Ordo because they consider the drink an offering that they feel they should not be forced to offer. They are, to keep the simile, like the waiter who thinks that for him to serve coca-cola instead of wine is unworthy of the tradition of the great restaurant he has the pleasure to serve. But this is very different from the very same waiter picketing the restaurant and saying to the would-be clients that the coca-cola is poisoned. I like a lot that there are waiters not wanting to serve the cola, because their understanding of the role of a waiter does not allow them to do so. But I will never call for the boycott of the restaurant.
Padre Pio prayed he would be allowed to die before being forced to celebrate the New Mass (he never was, before you ask, as he obtained an exemption like many other old priests), which gives you the idea of how seriously he saw both his obligations as a priest and duty of obedience on one side, and the Mass of the Ages on the other. I would, however, never countenance the attitude of those who think that Holy Mother Church gives them a poisoned drink. This is very dangerous thinking which easily leads into Sedevacantism.
Cure yourselves of Sedevacantism. Learn to respect the Church as the Church that God has given us, with all Her troubles; and if this Church gives you cola to drink, then by all means do not consider it sinful to drink it: it is the drink the Church gives you.
Very strong must be the man who can propose a pure “Radical Traditionalist” (“Rad Trad”) position without colouring this position with the perception of the NO mass as poisoned, or sinful. This is a very slippery slope. When you start sliding down that slope, Sedevacantism is what you’ll find at the bottom of it; and believe me, you don’t want to have your ass down there when you die.
This blog has always represented a line of Traditionalism (the advocating of the abolition of the New Mass, and the return to the TLM as the only Mass) as opposed to Radical Traditionalism; you have never read here that it is sinful for you to attend the NO, let alone gravely sinful. I utterly disagree with all those who say (and I do not care who says it) that if you cannot have a TLM to attend to you are free from Mass obligation, because… the Mass the Church that Christ founded on Peter gave you is just not good enough, or even sinful, or even gravely sinful. Sheesh!
I do not refuse the food that Holy Mother Church dishes on my table.
Do you? Do you?
If you have a valid Mass you can attend to, you have a Mass obligation. If you only have clowns dancing on the sanctuary and earthen vessels and strange “consecration” formulae and all that, well the doubt is more than justified, and I gather there were not a few of these masses in the worst phase of the “Springtime”. But do not come on this blog and tell me that you know Christ is there in the miracle of Transubstantiation, but you are too fine a Catholic palate to drink of His blood.
This issue cannot be escaped. If the Church is the Church, and the Consecration is valid, and the Transubstantiation takes place we do not refuse – or condemn – what is given to us. If we do, this means that we say that the Church is not the Church, or the Transubstantiation does not take place, or it takes place but it’s not good enough for us; because we want miracles made our own way, thank you very much.
Let others argue about this as much as they please. Let other pewsitters allow their pride to have the better of themselves, and their desire for purity to lead them to the rejection of what their Mother gives them. I live in a very simple world, a world in which my sensus catholicus not only rebels, but recoils shivering from the very idea that a layman would know that the Body and Blood of Our Saviour are dished to him, and answers: “no thanks, I think something very wrong is going on here. Actually, my mother is trying to poison me”.
Radical Traditionalism can be dangerous, and is not for many. Those strongly rooted in the Church will cope with it all right (and they will have to travel as far as they need to to have a TLM, obviously). Still, all too easily a well-meaning grievance can be turned – by the devil, who is always looking for ways to turn you away from the Church – to an outright refusal of what the Church offers worldwide; and it is then only a matter of time before the Church herself is, coherently with these premises, refused Herself. Once again: not every Rad Trad reasons in this way. But it can’t be denied that the emotional and the passionate can be easily swayed against the Church, and flipped around by the devil like pieces of a domino play, or like those old spring-laden toy soldiers you could make to keep marching the other way undeterred. You don’t want to be that toy soldier.
This blog is very, very critical of what goes on within the Church nowadays. But this criticism is always due to the fact that she is the Church. It can never be that the criticism leads one to refuse the very premise of his criticism.
The waiter has good reasons to refuse to serve the Coca-Cola in the restaurant. But we, the children at the table, will drink it whenever it is necessary or fitting that we do so.
The comment box is closed. You can call me “intolerant”, and thanks.
The Persecution Reblog
Originally posted on Mundabor's Blog:
… there appears to me to be a paradigm growing regarding Summorum Pontificum/Universae Ecclesiae and the TLM, that while it may be permitted by bishops/powers that be/Pope for a priest “raised,” if you will, in the Novus Ordo environment, to offer the TLM on occasion, it most certainly will not be permitted for such priests to offer the TLM exclusively.
This interesting reflections appeared on the always interesting “Blog for Dallas Area Catholics”.
On personal reflection, it seems to me that this cannot be a uniform key of reading the events. I say this because of the following reflections:
1. To my knowledge, the FFI offered many Masses in the Novus Ordo before the Great Persecution started. They were, though, becoming increasingly more critical of V II. There is also, from what I have read around, an interesting episode of the FFI allowing the…
View original 422 more words
Two years ago, the name of the new Pope was announced, and the now famous mozzetta-less, “good evening” speech with the “what am I doing here”-face took place.
If you use the calendar function of this blog on the right hand column and go back to March 2013, you will notice that whilst yours truly had an immediate allergic reaction to the rhetoric of poverty and humbleness, I tried to give the new man the benefit of the doubt, and kept doing it until the doubts dispelled and showed me – because I wanted to see the good in a Pope, but not at the price of blindness – what kind of shipwreck of a Pope we had been given by the Cardinals.
The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History (TMAHICH) was, on that evening, just starting his own work of destruction. Just a couple of weeks later, a huge liturgical abuse showed what kind of man we were dealing with, but even that was just a small appetizer compared to what was about to happen. In these two years, it is fair to say that this Pope has left nothing unattempted to show his hatred for sound Catholicism.
As we mark the second anniversary of the day of infamy, we must remind ourselves that this little, vain clown is but a fleck of dust on the sleeve of the Church. The Church that withstood the Arian heresy will be able to deal with a bunch of homos, commies, Kirchensteuer prostitutes and assorted heretics, led by a tango-lover, lewd, faithless old man who should have smoked less marijuana when he was young.
In this day of infamy, let us renew our prayers to the Lord that he may soon put an end to this disgraceful pontificate and, if it pleases Him, grant us a return to sanity in His own time.
The text below is part of a comment I have received, from the faithful reader Akita:
What of all the children who would suffer because the Church, who should be their protectress, enables divorce and remarrying, saying their remarried parent is A-Okay–nothing to see here folks! All the poor, faithful abandoned spouses! It’s utter insanity and chaos looming.
If all the above comes to pass, (and I’m not kidding myself that homosexuals in drag and the divorced and remarried have not already received Holy Communion by renegade priests) and doctrine does change, because praxis changes, how is the deposit of faith maintained?
Okay, it has not happened yet, and I am praying mightily against modernism, but it’s as if all of Catholicism is holding their breath, waiting for the results of the next Synod.
I found this very interesting, and would like to make an observation or two as to how we should react in the unfortunate, but not inconceivable case that the SHTF.
A) The Church cannot say that it is fine to divorce and remarry. Individual priests, bishops and even Popes may say that, but they would be heretical and sacrilegious. If many of them say so, many of them are heretical and sacrilegious.
Mind: no matter how many priests, bishops or Popes are heretical and sacrilegious, the Church teaching does not change. The teaching of the Church cannot change more than 2+2 can make 5. Bad teachers do not get to rewrite the rules and facts of their subject matter,
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:18)
Amen quippe dico vobis, donec transeat cælum et terra, iota unum, aut unus apex non præteribit a lege, donec omnia fiant.
The iota (i) was the smallest letter in Greek and Hebrew. “Not one iota” means “not the smallest thing”.
This, my friends, we must keep in mind every day and every moment. Not.One.Iota.
B) I am under no illusion in many countries (Germany, says) sacrilege happens every Sunday, en masse. Does this change anything in the Eucharist? No. Not one iota. Will God punish the priest and (un)faithful insulting Him in this way? Bar repentance, most certainly. Has the doctrine changed? No. Not one iota. Has the doctrine changed if thousands of priests do the same? No. Not one iota. Has the doctrine changed if, every Sunday, every single faggot and dyke breathing in Germany stands in line to “receive” Communion? No. Not one iota. Will the faggots and dykes, and the priests abetting them, and all those accessory to their sins with their own “inclusiveness” be punished for that according to God’s justice? Bar repentance, most certainly.
C) The concept of “doctrinal change” is non-existent. It is an oxymoron. When orthodox priests and cardinals say to the press that to change the discipline means to change the doctrine means simply this: that you cannot claim that you are following the doctrine if your praxis gives the lie to your claim. The rules of mathematics cannot change. Neither can Church doctrine.
D) The Deposit of Faith is maintained as it was always maintained: by transmitting to those who will come after us the truths we ourselves have received from those who came before us. Tradidi quod et accepi, “I have transmitted what I (myself) have received”.
In concrete, the one or other will notice that his priest is not interested in avoiding sacrilege as much as he reasonably can, and subscribes to the “radical Neo=Paganism” (bishop Athanasius Schneider) of the new Religion of Mercy. Means allowing, time for another parish, I would say. If you are 104 years old, have stopped driving during the Reagan administration and have no means to drive or be driven to a sound parish, offer it up to the Lord but do not stop attending Mass if you reasonable think the consecration is valid.
Many others will notice that their priest remains steadfast. The beauty of the Deposit of Faith is this, that it can’t be tampered with. You can’t twist it to let it say what you want it to say, like political slogans and tenets. No one who is vigilant can ever be deceived; actually, only those can be deceived who want to.
The doctrine can never be changed. There can never be an issue of “the Church has changed her doctrine”; this talking is BBC hogwash. What can happen, is that even inside the Church heresy and desecration are ripe, and clergy abandon Doctrine to follow heresy.
Let those who feel inclined to do so reap what they sowed. But we, dear readers, we will transmit what we ourselves have received.
It may be our lot to die in the middle of a paganised world, and with the daily sight of a raped Bride in front of us. If this is so, then let us die in the faith of the Lord, and in the sure knowledge that the rape will not remain unpunished.