Author Archives: Mundabor
We have recently learned that, if you asked the text writers at the CDF how they call people in favour of killing a baby in his mother’s womb, they would (shrug their shoulders and) call them “pro-choice”.
I would love to ask the same people whether their would call the architects of the Holocaust “pro-final solution”. Because you see, if the wilful murdering of innocents can be called being “pro” something , they would not have a problem, surely?
We are, as always, in front of one of the biggest tragedies of our time: the adoption of the language of the enemy in order to look “moderate”.
The enemy uses words with positive connotations to mean something intrinsically wrong or evil. As a result, in the long run in becomes impossible to effectively criticise with arguments what we cannot even criticise with words.
This is, as I have often written – but I will keep doing this, because it is one of the most important fronts of the culture wars – bound to end up in defeat.
Any criticism of sodomy starting with the word “gay” will not force anyone on the other side of the argumet to think; because, by using the word “gay”, the criticism has been already devalued and made to sound whiny and petty. But use, and explain, the real word, and the argument will suddenly appear to the reader to have a different force, quite a new energy. Similarly, it is utterly senseless to go on around the dangers of having “undocumented” immigrants if you have already castrated your argument from the start.
Now, why does the CDF (or even Breitbart!) use the wrong words? Because they want to appear moderate, or measured. In the meantime, your adversaries will call you racist, white supremacist and all sort of insults for merely disagreeing with them, and they will not care one straw for your attempts to appease them and show them that no, you are quite the reasonable guy.
You know what? They have the better strategy, and you are being a fool.
We need to react to this by ditching all language conventions that are remotely stinking of leftism; from the horrible “they/them” instead of “he/him” when you don’t know the sex (not “gender”) of the person you are talking about, to the use of stupid leftists fake words like gay, polyamorous, transgender, Latinx, undocumented, reproductive rights, pro-choice, and the like.
The Culture War can’t be won when one side keeps bombing, and the other side keeps appeasing.
Also, use liberally those words that actually mean something: bitch, bastard, concubine, illegal, etc. Make them feel the heat. Soon you’ll see more and more will start getting out of the kitchen.
And for heaven’s sake, stop trying to be nice.
They aren’t, and so shouldn’t you.
Predictably, after the decision of the CDF, the German Homonazis and Kirchensteuerwhores are now starting to defy the rules and proceed to their homemade “blessings”; to which, as I have already reported, seems that no-one wants to take part.
Some people may think that Francis is displeased by this, as defying the authority of a Vatican congregation is a slight to him, too or, at least, it makes him look “backward” and “homophobic”. I beg to differ.
Francis isn’t interested in being seen as an enforcer. He is interested in being seen as a disrupter. “Hagan lio” is the best expression of his forma mentis.
A man who deeply hates the Church, Francis has no interest in Her well-being or in Her reputation; whilst, clearly not believing in Christ, he has no issues with the open defiance of His teaching, either. If he is a closeted homo himself, the Germans will please him; if he isn’t, the damage made to the Church will please him anyway.
On the other hand, Francis is, like every bully, a coward. It is not for him to push hard the boundaries of what he can get away with it. Faced with the choice between 50% lio without risk of deposition and 90% lio with risk of deposition, he will always choose the former. In fact, he likes it when other people do the lio-ing for him, allowing him to watch, from a distance, the damage to an institution he clearly hates.
Therefore, the situation in German will not improve as long as Francis is Pope; and even after he dies – no, he will not resign; that was another of his thousand lies – it will take a long time for every Pope who is not a tough guy to set this right.
My advice to all my German readers: get out of the Kirchensteuer now. And no, you will not cease to be a Catholic.
This bunch of Kirchensteuer prostitutes will only get the message when it hurts in their pockets; the Kirchensteuer is an obsolete, un-Catholic system anyway.
Get out now, and let Father Juergen (or Father Wilhelmina, as the case may be) know why you do it.
It was only a small number of years ago (in 2003), that the Presbyterians had their first officially sodomite “bishop”. I can easily imagine that, at that time, a “trannie bish” would have ben unthinkable to the very people who, actually, supported Robinson
However, once you go down the road of “affirming” perversion, where do you end?
Let us see the stages: first “specially ordered” freak show guy in 2006; first mutilated “priest” allowed to remain “such” in 2007; first officially enrolled freak show guy in 2012; and now, in 2021, the 2006 freak show guy is the first “freak bish”.
The link is posted only because, otherwise, you might not believe anything in this blog post; and I must confess that I, myself, who have zero esteem for our proddie non-brothers and non-sisters (also because, these days, you just don’t know) in the faith, had to do a double take and stop at the enormity of the situation.
Also please note – in a further piece of evidence of the degeneracy of modern times – that the author of the linked article, who is very supportive of the novelty, refers to the freak show guy (or girl; whatever that person is) as if they were two people. Which is strange because even a schizophrenic guy, or gal, is, in fact, always only one person.
There was a time when I, in my naivete and inexperienced, was actually angered at such news, because I thought that they would be harming the faith and leading people astray. In the meantime, though, “such news” have become so outlandish that I am persuaded that, rather, they serve to help the good people to stay away from such organisations; it being, at this point, evident that only a person whose heart and mind has been deeply, deeply corrupted can accept this senseless parody of Christianity as the real thing.
Make no mistake: him, and her, and they, and them, and xir, and all that rubbish, will go straight to hell unless they manage to get their pronouns right before they kick the bucket.
I have just written about the obvious justice of hell.
Honestly, this one here is another great example of it.
How many times have we seen it? “Progressive” priests and prelates (what I think about their motivation is here) organise a schismatic event in that most schismatic of Countries, Germany. The homo event is promoted by the Diocese. How many people show up? Frankly, it was clearly only the perverts and their closest accomplices.
This must be atrociously embarrassing, at least for people who are still capable of embarrassment. In fact, it is the natural consequences of Catholic thinking still being, in some way, still present among Germans.
Consider this: the Germans are an extremely, atrociously gregarious people. They don’t really “do” independent thinking. They will, as a whole, go with what other people think, or with what they are told by people they see as in a position of authority. The inability to accept a position that makes one isolated in the group is quite scary, and – besides having been encouraged since the time of the Denazification – has a strong tradition in Germany. Your average Georg Zimmermann has a very, very strong dislike for being, on a hot issue, the only one with a contrary opinion in the room; which is what, for example, would greatly please many Italians.
So, let us look at the ingredients here: the German government, the local parish, even the local Diocese tell you that perversion is good and must be supported if you want to be a good Christian/good human/part of the group. Still, German Catholics refuse to take part to this game. If you have lived in Germany, and know how scarily gregarious Germans are, this gives you all the measure of how much Catholics must feel betrayed by their own priests and Bishops.
Now please mind this: whilst both the parish priest and the bishop might well be homosexuals themselves, in Germany there might be a simpler explanation for this pandering to the public opinion: the notorious Kirchensteuer. These prelates might, as a rule, simply be looking for a paying public for their impious, godless circus, thinking that by being godless more people will want to pay the price of admission. However, it can also be easily said that a priest, or prelate, that reduce himself to such a state is clearly giving Satan a huge opening, and who knows where that will end; in many cases, methinks, it ends in sodomy.
Still, what we keep seeing is this: that even the atrociously gregarious German Catholics refuse to follow their “betters” (the civil and religious authorities) and do not collaborate with the worst of the anti-Christian propaganda pushed by both.
I don’t know how long this will go on. But boy, it is good to see that, as we write the Year of the Lord 2021, the homo agenda of the German Bishops is going absolutely nowhere.
The pertinent question, then, is not whether an empty hell is something desirable—which it obviously is—but rather whether it is something “possible to obtain,” given what we know about human freedom and man’s proclivity to sin.
This statement appears in this article, dealing with the “dare we hope” hoax.
Let us leave the hoax of the empty hell aside. Let us focus, instead, on whether it is desirable that there be an empty hell. Is it desirable – even more: obviously desirable – that hell be empty?
Well, if you ask me: obviously not.
Let me first make a statement that is, I think, pretty much unquestionable. It is our job, whilst here on earth, to try to conform ourselves to God’s will. Once it is evident, and a certainty of the faith, that God considers an empty hell something wrong, why would I think differently? Who am I to decide that it would have been obviously desirable that God had done things differently from the way he did them? Am I getting something right, that God has obviously missed?
Look: call me ignorant, or theologically inadequate, but I am fully persuaded that whenever the Church shows me the truth of something willed by God, it is not my job to decide what my preferences – obvious or not – are. It is clear – actually, obvious – that whatever God has established and willed is perfect in its own way, and could not have been done in any way better.
Yeah, man. I know. We can jokingly say that we wish that fornication wasn’t a sin, or that tiramisu were good for your health and prescribed by the doctor. But we say it in jest. We know that whatever God has established is good and holy. In some ways, we even understand why; and, to stay by the example, the poisonous effect of fornication on marriage, carried out both before and after said marriage, is too evident to even discuss it, if we only stop for a moment and think seriously about it.
When we are serious about it, we know that everything that God has made is good and holy, and that this includes hell, even if – quod Deus avertat! – we, ourselves, were to merit to land down there!
Do you think that the saints, in heaven, think that it would be “obviously good” if hell was empty? Do you think that their full alignment to God’s will makes an exception when it is about their own relatives and friends who have merited to be sent the other way? What do the saints think, “God is such a nice guy, but that thing with Hell was a tad too much, if you ask me”?
This cheap “goodness” at the expense of God is not really good, though it is certainly cheap.
Plus, let us stop and reflect on the desirability of hell, even in what our little minds can understand.
If hell were empty, would not any infinitely grave atrocity (like the infinitely grave offence to God caused by, say, a life of mockery of Him and a death in the refusal of Him) end up in another God’s mockery, inasmuch as the sinner could boast that he ate his cake and had it, and that he mocked God by escaping the Divine punishment he himself has merited?
And if hell were empty, what values would all our sacrifices have? Isn’t the fear of the Lord such a fundamental part of our (God-willed) way of being Christians? If we all end up in Paradise and our good life only makes a difference in our degree of beatitude, why would not only any fornicator, but any child rapist be worried?
Are you the one who will say to the raped child that he should not for a moment think that his rape would deserve – even if the rapist dies in perfect hate for and mockery of God – anything less than heaven for his torturer? It seems to me that this cheap good-ism leads to absurd consequences, and this is what even my little mind can readily understand. Imagine how much, of the goodness and wisdom of hell, my little mind can not even begin to fathom!
No. It is not desirable that hell be empty. It is not desirable that hell be empty because we know that God has willed that it be not, and we know that there be nothing less than desirable in what he has willed.
If we can wish that God had done things differently, where does it end? Should we wish that God had not condemned sodomy? Should we wish that God had allowed concubines to have access to the Sacraments? Do you see the permanent rebellion that this thinking encourages?
Hell is right as it is.
Because God did it so.
You know that feeling, when you read about powerful prelates espousing some strange, distinctly non-Catholic cause, and something inside you knows that things aren’t right?
Yes, I mean those powerful Bishops and Cardinals. The “concerned” ones. The ones who speak “for the poor”. The ones who are always ready to espouse the easy causes.
Then you remember the curas villeros in Argentina, who disappear in the dirty slums of Buenos Aires to get the most disgusting sexual favours from all sorts of desperate perverts. At that point, you start to connect the dots, observing that the advocacy for the “downtrodden” can, very easily, hide a predatory desire for people either already totally corrupted, but which the “social work” gives easy opportunity to approach; or else, the ability to attack the vulnerable and to blackmail them because of the important position the powerful “social worker” slash priest slash prelate has in that already very corrupt environment; a position that can be the difference between, say, getting a decent job or remaining destitute.
There seems to be a common theme, is it not. A lot of these “social workers” appear to have had different motives than simple social work. How many of those corrupted curas villeros has the then Archbishop of Buenos Aires protected? How many are, like that archbishop, zealous apostles of the “social work” of the priest themselves? What is it, that these powerful men are hiding?
Could it be that all that social preaching is just a huge covert operation to allow an entire mafia of perverted priests and prelates to protect each other and climb the ranks of the Church through the net they have created; some of them, in time, becoming powerful and continuing to serve the same mafia-style organisation of which they are part, to which they have been linked all their lives, and which could destroy them if they stopped working for the “group”?
Am I being a conspiracy theorist here?
I don’t know.
I might be right.
I might be wrong.
But then I read this, and I know what to think.
On 2 May of the Year of the Lord 2021, Father Z published a blog post about St Catharine of Siena. I will try to link to the article here, but it seems not to work.
The blog post is, like every other one of the same author, very interesting. It would appear that this saintly woman “travelled widely” and “was enormously influential”.
How does this, pray, square with the usual feminist narrative of women who were treated, more or less, like dirt, and certainly as radically “inferior beings”, before “emancipating” themselves? Well in one word, it doesn’t. Letting aside the issue of the travels (which already demolishes a good part of the narrative), it is the fact of her enormous influence that gives the lie about the role of the woman in the pre-emancipation age. This would never be possible if Catherine had been considered, qua woman, unable to exert influence. You will find no child, bar Jesus, able to exercise such “enormous influence”; and even Jesus chose to exercise his influence later in life.
It appears clear that the, undoubtedly, very manly and very “patriarchal” Christian society of the time was extremely ready, eager even, to be influenced by a woman who was also – besides being woman – very young!
Watch with me the feminist edifice of lies crumble in front of your eyes, leaving behind a huge cloud of smoke and debris everywhere.
It is extremely wrong, and the result of the stupidity of our times, to make women’s position and human dignity directly related to her voting rights, or to her ability to parrot men in this or that activity. It is like thinking that cats will be inferior to dogs until they are finally allowed to bark.
Intelligent women have always been influential. However, their influence was exerted in a different way than the one proper of men, and was used (when a good, positive one) in perfect harmony with the special graces that God has given specifically to women. It appears, as we read in the blog post, that men of the past perfectly understood this. I wonder how many men, today, can think with the same lucidity; though they have, no doubt, smartphones vastly exceeding the computation ability of their ancestors.
Also, it is not known to me that St Catharine of Siena, who was “enormously influential”, ever used her influence to advocate for women’s vote, or women’s emancipation, or the right of women to become part of the Imperial armed forces, or priestesses, or deacons, or lectors at Mass. It is, in fact, not known to me that this saintly woman ever thought that there was anything fundamentally wrong with the societal structures of her time.
But no, we are to listen to Hillary Clinton and (*if* she is a biological female, of course; which is said in jest, but not so much…) Michelle Obama. They clearly know better than St Catherine.
Modern Western societies are deeply, deeply intoxicated with feminist poison. Yes, even many males who think themselves conservative. They might think of themselves in that way, but every quisque de populo in a factually independent, largely self-administered city (“Comune”) in Italy in, say, the XII or XIII Century, would have actually laughed at hearing these people defining themselves as manly, or even “conservative”.
They would, in a word, laugh at people with such smart phones, but unable to get the basics of the God-given order themselves.
The attempt to completely destroy the integrity of the vote on a National scale might be doomed to fail, as Senator Manchin appears to have put another nail in this particular coffin. It’s not the first time he does it, and I can well imagine that his position allows others (like Sinema in AZ) to stay in the shadow without being forced to speak against it, if they want to save their job.
Simply put, the Democrats’ hold on the Senate is, at least in some matters, much weaker than the 50+VP official position makes it look.
You know that I, like many in Europe, look at the United States as a luminous example of Western Civilisation and a Country that – still – can teach liberty to everybody else. But there is no denying that this liberty – and, in fact, the very way in which America sees itself – has been under constant, massive attack since Michael Brown at least (very possibly, since Occupy Wall Street; which was different, but equally Marxist), and that this is going to stay with us for some years.
The main issue, as I see it, is education and his cascading issue, language. The Country has allowed a cabal of Marxist to take control of vast part of the education system in the US. In time, this has created a wave of nutcases that are, already, numerous enough to cause trouble. In pure Marxist style, these people do not – in their vats numbers – openly support Marxism (some do; Black Lives Matter before they got smarter is a point in case). What they do, is supporting proxy causes that they can then use to push a covert, Marxist agenda. They use language to push their agenda. They take horrible things and give them a new facade.
Every time that you hear words like “racism”, “social justice”, “oppressed”, “reparations”, and the like, know that these words are pronounced either by a closeted Marxist or by a person to dumb to understand he is working for them.
How have conservative reacted to this? Very badly. Actually, as stupidly as they could.
In their pathetic, effeminate efforts to look “nice”, the milquetoast Conservatives (that is: the majority of them) ended up adopting their enemies language, at which point they make their victory in the issue inevitable. To make a point, “civil partnerships” and so-called same sex “marriage” have started to win when conservatives have started to say “gay” instead of homosexual, sodomite, deviant, or the like. “Perv marriage” doesn’t really sell well.
If you adopt the language of your enemy, you adopt his underlying ideology. When that happens, you will have to cede terrain one bit at a time.
Let us go back to Senator Manchin. He can oppose the prospective legislation because there are enough people calling it a fraud. If Conservatives were to start saying “I hate voter suppression, but…”, this would, in time, be the end of this battle, too. You don’t espouse the narrative of your enemies because you want to look understanding or inclusive. You counter it from the first centimeter, and never give up one inch of ground.
Conservatives need to ban from their vocabulary words – when used in the sense of the enemy – like “gay”, “Lgbt”, “voter suppression”, “of color”, “gender”, “transgender”, and many others.
Gay means debonair, happy. LGBT means assorted perverts. “Voter suppression” means “attempted ballot fraud”. “Of colour” means “non White”. “Gender” means a language tool, or sex. “Transgender” means “transsexual” or “freak show”, and so on.
When our side starts using the language of their opponent, we lose. When they don’t, and call a spade a spade, there is hope.
Banish from your vocabulary any word meant in the wrong way and only use it in the proper way.
“You seem very gay today, Mark!”
“I am not gay!”
“You mean that you are not a sodomite? I know that!”
Let’s take back our values, one word at a time.
The campaign for the recall of Mr Nephew, aka Gavin Newsom, is now officially underway, and scary things are happening.
A man who think he is a woman, a pathetic wreck of a human being known as Bruce Jenner, wants to run for the Republicans. Atrociously, some people seem to enjoy it. I truly wonder what they have instead of a brain, or where their conservatism has gone.
The aim of the political involvement of Conservatives is to make a Conservative vision of life prevail, not to defeat the Democrat candidate.
A “candidate” that, like Bruce Jenner, is diametrally opposed to everything that is decent and wholesome in life can never, ever, be celebrated as someone who “takes the wind away” from the Democrats’ sail. This would, in fact, happen exactly because the Republicans have become just as bad as the Democrats. Make no mistake: if that man manages to get traction, this will cause incalculable damage to Conservaism as the institutional party will show that, in order to defeat the devil, they are ready to become like him.
Just to be sure that we are on the same page here: if, say, a cannibal runs to become Governor of Illinois with the Republicans, I do not care a straw about his view on criminality, taxes, racial relationships, even cannibalism! He is the enemy, full stop.
Will the Republicans understand this? Or will they – first the institutional branch, then some of the grassroots – sell their souls to the devil because they want to win?
If you want to win, you need to be with Christ, because without Christ you lose even if you win.
Will the entire Republican party become a freak show, in order to defeat the party of freak shows?
We will soon know.
You better pay attention, Trump and DeSantis.
Christ is watching. He will not be amused by any freak show antics.
And stop calling the man “she”, you idiots.
Have a look at the video below. It shows a fight at an airport terminal, fittingly outside of the shop of “Urban Decay”
It appears no charges will be pressed. I assume that there was criminal activity involved, or that none of the attackers were White whilst all of the victims were, as they say, “of colour” ( = non-White to you and me). But it’s just me, and you can correct me if I am wrong.
What I want to point out here is that it was some time before someone intervened. A huge guy on the left actually does, and on the right not even the personnel seems to want to intervene much. At least one personnel of the airport seems to be White, which makes it perfectly reasonable for him, in the Country of the Chauvin Trial, to happily look at the events, lest he be accused of having mistreated some drug addict who then sues him whilst he gets prosecuted and given to the woke mob as breakfast.
I do *not* blame anyone who did not intervene, particularly if White.
The modern Samaritan would have to pay much attention to how he handles the wounded man; the way he tries to help him would be closely scrutinised by lawyers, and by the Anti-Samaritan woke mob. His choice of transport, the time of his decision, and the way he handles the wounded man during the transport would be, if the wounded man were to die, extremely closely examined by all sorts of wrong people: lawyers chasing money, journalists chasing headlines, Marxists chasing mayhem, and looters chasing goods.
In modern time, the Marxist Mob would, in case of tragedy, blame the helpers (particularly if White) at the airport for “killing” or “maiming” the, likely, drugged or criminal poor boy, who “couldn’t breath”, was a “gentle giant”, Obama’s wished-for son, a man with a “brilliant future”, one who wanted to just discuss some things with his friends, and one who (attacker or attacked) did not even ask the Samaritan to do anything. Hey, we were discussing stuff like we always do in the ‘hood, why had the guy to put himself between me and my homies? No’ what Im say’g, dog?
Just a few days ago, a White policeman shot a Black “girl” (let me translate this for you: a monstrously violent, clearly out of control, typically obese young, brainless woman of easily 200 pounds, possibly much more) who was, in her blessed innocence, about to stab another girl, probably to death. This almost became the next woke crusade, and only the extremely compelling evidence that the White policeman actually saved the life of the attacked girl (for which I have not noticed any woke personality thanking him!) forced the idiots, captained by a hugely talented retard called, for not very clear reasons, LeBron, to backpedal pretty fast. But hey, we live in such times that the woke mob goes for the lynching, rioting and looting even with the video evidence squarely against them. Imagine what times are coming!
It’s hard to be a Samaritan nowadays. Particularly if your wounded man might be involved in criminal behaviour, or if the Samaritan act involves helping a potentially criminal victim from his certainly criminal “friends”.
I do not blame those who did not intervene. I would not do it myself, either.
These are hard times for Samaritans.
Martin Luther King’s “dream” always appeared to me a very fair one. Being judged by the integrity of one’s character rather than the colour of one’s skin seems a very fair, very decent, and very Christian standard of behaviour.
Not so for the New Racist; the White-hating, race-baiting apostles of a Racial War; a war they have, by the way, no hope whatsoever of winning without the acquiescence of the discriminated against, that is: the Whites. This is a deeply racist thinking and behaviour, which informs everything the Race Warriors do.
One of the most atrocious manifestations of this extremely dangerous and toxic behaviour is the instruction given by Coca Coca that 30% of the billed hours of law firms working for them should be for non-White professional work, of which the half Black.
The “architect” of this astonishingly, openly discriminatory policy , the Black Chief Counsel at Coca Cola, was politely (and with the usual golden farewell ) defenestrated a couple of days ago. The staggering incompetence of this alleged “lawyer” makes me think that this guy is , like Michelle Obama and countless others, another poisonous fruit of that racist tree hypocritically called “affirmative action”. I will also assume that, as it is often the case, the $12m severance compensation is the price for the guy not suing, telling the world exactly which idiots had supported his bonkers ideas and with which words.
Coca cola has put its foot in the dog-poo several times in the last months, and has backpedalled every time: “don’t be too White” Orwellian training, opposition to Georgia election integrity law and, now, the blatantly racist KKK tactics of its Chief Counsel have been backtracked or reneged in more or less subdued but clear ways. They have clearly seen that it hurts; and when it starts to hurt, at some point heads will roll.
Heads have , in fact, rolled. But not the executive ones. Prople of staggering incompetence and breath taking racism still warm the extremely well paid chairs of Coke’s Board in Atlanta.
I really hope that this does not end at making the virtue-signalling incompetent racist counsel the only casualty. What has happened here is a total failing of basic rules of Christian decency, redolent of a very sad phase of American history.
The buck should stop at those who, at Board level, have approved of the Counsel’s initiative, the Orwellian brainwashing exercise, and the criticism of the legislation in Georgia.
Dear reader, Coke may be an American icon, but it is working against the values you hold dear.
You should not consider them your friend merely because, this time, they have espoused a racist initiative too many.
This is a new, but very promising youtuber I was alerted to by Whatfinger News.
I think she deserves some support and publicity for the work she is doing.
I add to the video a simple observation: if “Luther” ate Caribbean food, there would be no lack of leftists decrying the “stereotype”.
As to the UK, I would say that whilst the Country in general has nothing similar to the race baiting that is going on in the United States, it’s not for the BBC’s lack of trying. Rather, the Country has a fairly practical, no-nonsense outlook about the matter, the higher education system has not been entirely corrupted yet, and too many people call a spade a spade for race baiting to seriously work. In fact, you can say that, whilst the US is witnessing an increase in Marxist-oriented people, the United Kingdom, which has known Marxism from much nearer, is slowly but surely getting away from it.
And yes: amazingly, in a Country without a past of slavery or (Democrat) Ku Klux Klan, Blacks in this country have a jail population percentage that is a multiple of their general population percentage.
Most police is unarmed.
It’s not easy, down here, to start the discussion about “systemic racism”. People know that the reason of the disproportionate presence of Black jail inmates is the disproportionate readiness to violence among Blacks, fuelled by an army of baby mamas incessantly producing the criminals of tomorrow, and paid by the taxpayer because Christianity was not good enough. These are facts of life that observant people – people with a job, a mortgage and a dog – get very fast, because they do not allow political correctness to shut their eyes and numb their minds.
Enjoy the video.
The verdict on the Chauvin trial has been reached, and it is: guilty on all counts.
I think this is a sad, sad day for the United States. Most of all, this is a day that marks the end of policing in the United States as we know it.
The message has been sent, very clearly, that every policeman in the Country can be ruined if exceptional circumstances cause the dead of a drug addict criminal by overdose, and this policeman has been, in some way, less than totally orthodox, or just unlucky.
Brace yourself for police forces all over the Country interested in one thing and one thing only: avoiding becoming the next Chauvin.
The intimidation has also reached unprecedented scale, up to that unspeakable bitch, Maxine Waters. This is another message for jurors all over the Country: you will not be protected, and will be thrown to the lions unless you do what the Marxist mob demands of you.
It is, in fact, a dark day for the United States. In the last months, and for the first time in my life, I have felt that there is *more* democracy in Europe than there is in the US; then the farce that has happened in lieu of elections in November is not worthy of a First World Country, and has exposed a level of corruption at high levels of politics and judiciary that I firmly believe does *not* exist in Europe.
Let’s hope the appeal corrects this. But the damage done will, once again, be very difficult to remedy.
For the series “this is that”, another couple of examples of total deformation of the Christian message promoted by Marxists and Socialists (including Francis) in order to push their agenda. Both example come from a horrible, fake Catholic publication not graced with a link.
The first is the Beggar Jesus, a statue of several year ago who has now spawn a series of follow-up statues. This is clearly meant to make people of simple mind and lazy formation think that 1) they have to give money to the beggar stretched on the park bench, or 2) that the beggar in question is Anonymous Jesus, back on earth on a mission from God, or such like.
Reality is, very obviously, different. The beggar is, usually, as different from Jesus as you can imagine. In most cases, it is easily observable that he is: 1) a drunkard, 2) a drug addict, 3) a lazy ass, 4) a madman, or 5) a combination of two or more of the above. Here in the UK, “mad beggar” does not stay around for very long; therefore, 4) is only a temporary situation, and you mostly deal with the other varieties. These “gentlemen” (and, at times, “ladies”) beg from you money for their vices, because the food issue is taken care of by the Church and countless charities. In fact, in London, last time I looked, 50% of the food donated to food banks went to waste for lack of people willing to eat it. But hey, Marxist will use anything and everything to subvert the traditional order and morality.
Therefore, they will let you know that beggar = good, and you = bad.
Check your work privilege, you commuting pig….
The second is the Illegal Immigrant Angel. Yes, my dear reader. Straight to you from the “this is that” Commie Theatre, we now have the Illegal = Angel comparison. Why a criminal trying to illegally enter a foreign country should be equated to an angel is something only a person deeply perverted in his sense of elementary decency (and, probably, perverted in other things, too) can fathom. As for myself, I frankly can’t, because it’s so gratuitous. If an illegal immigrant is an angel, then a bank robber is also an angel (Robin Hood anyone?). At this point, even Salvador Allende can be an angel, and I don’t know how many people have lived who were such bastards as that one.
No doubt, there will be those, among the easily impressionable and Low IQ crowd, who fall for this easy emotional trap; particularly when they watch CNN and other subversive outlets. The problem is, it’s difficult to fight against the combined might of low intelligence and emotionalism. Those people want to do what makes them feel “good”, and the rubbish from the MSS is just the food they crave. Therefore, you only have to cry “Black Lives Matter”, and you will soon buy several houses at north of a million dollar each.
“This is that” is here to stay.
There are just too many idiots around.
Helen McCrory had just died of cancer, aged 52. Your prayers are, I am sure, appreciated by the angels in heaven.
One of the most famous actresses in the UK, and married to an even more famous actor (Damian Lewis), her death is very sudden, in the sense that very few people knew, and the news was kept from the public until the moment of death. Her young age makes this even more worth of a reflection or two.
The first reflection: modern “science” and the “miracles” of medicine do not allow anyone to escape his appointment with his Maker. Not even if a lot of money is available. One day, we will be called, too. That moment has been already set in stone. Every day, we march towards it.
The second reflection: I do not know whether the lady died at peace with the Lord, at least in the sense in which anybody can know, or hope, that anybody died at peace with the Lord. But I notice this: whether she was Christian or not, this does not seem to interest anybody, nor does it seem that she was interested in letting other people know. Religion has just flown out of the conversation. People die, they’re gone, everybody says how “courageous” they were, but they’re… gone.
It’s like saying that Rin Tin Tin was courageous. Look here, pal. The issue here is whether Mrs McCrory had an immortal soul, or not. If she had, forget “courageous” as there are other issues at stake now. If she (absurdly) hadn’t, then everything is absurd and meaningless, even “courage” at the end of an absurd sting of existence allowed to us, in this absurd perspective, to try to perpetuate our DNA.
The third reflection: apart from some Catholics, no one seems interested anymore in knowing in which state one’s soul has likely departed from this vale of tears. I think the milquetoast “Christians” have this bizarre idea that everybody goes to heaven, unless he is Stalin, whilst the Atheists prefer to blather about “courage”; something very strange, by the way, seen that undergoing three years of chemotherapy is seen as “brave”, but refusing to undergo it is “brave”, too. Everybody is so brave, and left the world such a better place. One wonders how the world has not become paradise on earth yet. Oh wait, I know why. But they don’t.
Fourth reflection: the chariteees. It seems that nowadays if you are not involved with a charity you are a selfish bastard. Charity work is the way irreligious people, and certainly a lot of atheists, define their own “goodness”. Even when the charity is serious, and not just a part of the immense, corrupted, charity machinery currently thriving in this Country, it does show a completely earth-bound thinking. Inevitably, not only was McCrory involved with a couple of charities, but this is seen, if you read around, as the other quality defining her (besides being, of course, an actress). “Wife and mother” is purely a factual event, that we don’t talk much about because very much, you know, old school. “Actress and charity worker” (which means: power woman and oh so sensitive) are, today, the defining traits of the deceased.
I do not know what Mrs McCrory thought about her immortal soul. If she believed in God, sin, and the like, it would have been very good not to keep this private as a help to others who might be in the same situation. If she did not believe in anything of that, well, I am sorry to rain on your parade but 400 years of charity work would not save her from hell, and the tributes that will now pour in are but a hollow, horrible theatre enjoyed by Satan alone.
A famous actress dies at 52, and it seems this is no encouragement to some serious reflections anymore.
But hey, famous and oh so good. And so courageous.
It seems to me that, if she had the real courage, it was the courage of looking at eternity in the face and make sure that she enters it reasonably prepared.
Strangely, this type of courage is not considered anymore.
The Fake Mercy Stormstroopers are now, apparently, carrying out a joint effort to get rid of the Latin Mass. Unfortunately, there is a problem: you can’t get simply get rid of the Latin as if it were a church song from the Seventies. .
The Tridentine Mass has enjoyed growing popularity in the last decades. The increase in the number of masses is not something that the Vatican did not want to prevent. Of course they did. The V II Church was simply forced to yield – as little as they could, but to yield – to its irresistible pressure, because of factors the Vatican cannot control: first , the SSPX; second, the intrinsic superiority of the Tridentine Mass.
There is nothing Frankie boy and his troops of gay pirates and merry clowns could or can do against each of these two factors. This, and only this, is why the Tridentine Mass was able to get out of the catacombs and take place, again, at the very heart of the issues involving the Church. Had it not been for these two factors, the TLM would have long ceased to exist, at least for a generation or two.
The gay pirates of years past understood that it is unwise, from their twisted perspective, to give the SSPX such a great gift. The gay pirates of the present seem noticeably thicker. Still, the situation on the ground remain what it is, and does not change with the varyjng degree of stupidity of said gay pirates.
The bottom line is this: the Tridentine Mass is nitroglycerine that, if not handled with extreme care, can explode in the face of nuchurch with devastating consequences. This was well understood in the past.
It is surprising that it should not be so now. But hey, if the Gay Pirates think that they are smarter than God, they may do their worst and we will see how this ends.
“There is a huge problem in the Church. Active homosexual activity by priests and the secrecy of this sin must be revealed, and the holy priesthood must be restored to what Jesus said it ought to be,” Vasek said.
“The dark, secret cover-up of homosexual behavior has been under the radar for many years. Now the darkness is coming to light,” he added.
These are the words of the whistleblower in the sordid story of Bishop Hoeppner, who was just removed from his job.
The long, detailed article is quite interesting.
I do not know whether Bishop Hoeppner was a “conservative”, as V II bishops go. It seems to me that he has all the marks of the leftie. Still, I do not think he is justifiable in any way.
The information we have up to now shows that, whilst Hoeppner does not seem to have that horrible affliction himself, he wasn’t shy in covering those who had; actually, several of them. What also grates me a lot is the admission, from the Bishop, that he knew he was breaking the rules. Quote:
Bishop Hoeppner admitted in the deposition he understood himself to be violating Church norms, but said he did so to maintain confidentiality.
Well, Frankie blathers so much about clericalism, now he has found a real example of it. That the Bishop also pressured the whistleblower to recant his accusation might or might not be true; that he though he could go out of his way to defend several homosexual priests and put him in a position to offend again really shows the arrogance of these people.
You might say that some of the episode had happened many years before. I ask you who, of you, believes that a homosexual priest with a past of abuse (and be that in 1815) can be “reformed” and stay at his place, happily cured after a pretend session with some counsellor.
My humble take: he may or may not be reformed, and I am being extremely generous here. Still, the priestly office will have to go.
The only way to free the Church from the scourge of homosexual priest is to get rids of all priests with deep-seated homosexual tendencies. It does not matter whether the episode was 3 or 300 years ago. “Homo” must mean “you go”.
A priest who is afflicted by such a terrible deviancy should not have been a priest one day in his life. Therefore, to say that the priest has been spotless for 29 years (if you believe that, I have a bridge on sale) is still admitting that the guy has been a priest 29 years too many. Still, we have here a Bishop (possibly, one who calls himself a conservative one; I await more info) not only not incensed that this tainted priesthoods happened, but (with variation) going out of his way to allow this to happen for longer.
This is why we have this tragedy within the Church. Not even Bishops are horrified. Best case, they are incurably naive, unforgivably arrogant and utterly unfit for the job. In the worst case… well, you know what the worst case is.
I am awaiting to see the further developments of this story. But I still wonder: for one who gets caught, how many have behaved exactly in the same way? How many are behaving like this today? How many people, every Sunday, go to mass and receive communion from a priest of whom his very Bishop knows he is homosexual and, as such, simply unfit for the priesthood?
There must be no understanding for Bishops who cover homosexual priests, with or without allegations of abuse.
Homosexuality makes a priest unfit for office. That’s all there is to it.
This swamp needs to be drained, and I don’t care how many (in case) “conservative” bishops need to go down for this.
“Mercy is made tangible, it becomes closeness, service, care for those in difficulty. I hope you will always feel you have been granted mercy, so as to be merciful to others in turn”.
This is a tweet sent out by the Evil Clown himself.
It’s difficult to find a single word that is right.
Firstly, the usual “this is that”. Mercy “becomes” something that it is not, namely a) service and b) with an obvious social work tinge. In Francis’ atheist world, everything must be deformed, and forced to serve his social justice agenda.
This is bad enough, but what follows is worse: the encouragement to the faithful (I am, here, wildly assuming that there are faithful who read Francis and take him seriously) to commit a huge sin of presumption, assuming that mercy is always extended to them, no matter how adulterous, sinful, or evil they are.
This is no Christianity. This is a UN religion made of slogans, and stupid ones at that, meant to make people feel good even as they are indoctrinated to the new “good” their own masters want for them: socialist thinking.
Read again the text of the tweet and you will clearly see that there is nothing Catholic in it. It is something that a politician or a new age writer might have written. It is something with which a TV show host might try to look good.
It is something you might find in a fortune cookie.
This is, in reality, what we have. The fortune-cookie pope. Catholicism-free, with a total lack of shame, and wanting to show you (the Catholics) his longest finger every day.
Keep assuming, Frankie dear.
You will see how that ends.
Instead of trying to remember the exact issues on which Hans Kueng held heretical positions, it is easier to just think of a controversial one; then you know that, on that, he most likely dissented from the Church. Kueng was, in a way, the parody of the dissenting theologian. Monty Python could have drawn inspiration from him.
The man has now died, and it is difficult to think that, in his last hours, he has changed his mind and recanted all of his many heresies. If this was the case, the matter should be widely publicised, so that everyone knows what this “brilliant thinker” himself thought about his entire work as a theologian when it really mattered.
If, as it is far more likely, the man has not repented, well then the guy is in hell, and no two ways about it; no doubt, in the company of many of his colleagues of the roaring Sixties and Seventies.
Mind my words here: it is uncertain whether the man is in hell, merely because it is uncertain whether he has repented. But if he hasn’t, it is certain that he is now rotting in hell. Not to believe this means not to believe what the Church teaches. God’s mercy operates, in Salvation matters, whilst one is alive. When a man has kicked the bucket, God’s mercy will certainly give him, in hell, a lesser punishment than he has deserved; still, He will not allow a man like Kueng to mock him eternally.
Kindly spare me the “heart in the right place” appetizer, the “de mortuis nil nisi bonum” steak and the “how can you be so cruel” tiramisu’. When a pig dies he does not become a lamb. He becomes pork. And when the pig is full of toxins, the public must be warned to stay away from those sausages.
Dead Kueng, if unrepented, is not one tiny bit better than living Kueng; and both of them are, in a word, shite.
I have long thought that he lost the faith decades ago, and – like many others – embarked in a huge ego trip as a result of that, his ego being the most precious thing remaining to him after losing the faith. I can, in faith, not think that an intelligent man (which Kueng certainly was) may delude himself into thinking that Christ is our Lord and Savour, but he allowed the Church that He founded to betray the faithful for 20 centuries, until the likes of Kuengy boy came out and told us what He really meant. This is something that an intelligent, rational man would never think, or say.
No. Hans Kueng lost the faith, and started worshipping… Hans Kueng. When this happens, there are a lot of issues allowing one to look good with the world, and feel quite a special one: papal infallibility, women’s “ordination”, “peace”, abortion, contraception, and many others controversial topics will stay open in front of such a man, and will only await for him to edify a monument to himself among the applauses of the heretics, the atheists, and the conformists.
Hans Kueng met his maker, and the thought makes me shiver. I think it’s fair not to deny to him, bad as he was, your “eternal rest”.
But if he has not repented, I cannot imagine a prostitute, and be she so hardened, that was judged by Her just Judge as harshly as this one.
Let this be your leading thought when you read about him in the worldly press.
Church Militant has an interview to Archbishop Vigano’, dealing, inter alia, with an issue that is very near to me: the collective madness engendered by the Chinese Virus and the sacrifice of common sense and elementary freedoms that it caused.
It is true: power, by its nature, seeks to enlarge itself and become tyrannical. But in this case and, at least, looking at Europe, it seems evident that the tyranny was bottom-driven, and many Government simply gave to their citizen the tyranny they – and the media amplifying their message – were asking for.
People I always knew as sensible suddenly were ok with being put on indefinite house arrest. Collectively speaking, it was shocking, to me, to see entire Countries ask for North Korea, and countless businesses embrace the shutdown of their own activities. Madness developed in a sort of mad hivemind, constantly reinforced by media riding the news for all it was worth and, so to speak, hyping the very hype that was going around.
The Effeminacy was the most shocking event. Men who should be willing to fight and die to defend freedom asking for less freedom. Grown men of 30 afraid of boarding a train. People blathering all day about tolerance denouncing their neighbours to the police.
The failing was not only a civic one. It was a religious one, too. Bishops practically asking their governments to shut them down for as long as possible amidst the plause of the V II troops. Mass seen as an inconvenience, and those who claimed for it as evil. Countless people professing their faith in Christ sacrificing Him to childish fears.
Our democracies, and our religious freedom, are now rotting from the inside. Give it another couple of years, and there is no saying what kind of emergencies might be invented to crush our freedoms. The Marxist troops are waiting on the sidelines, eager to seize power with the usual train horses.
Racism emergency. Climate emergency. Immigration emergency. Social Justice emergency. Everything and anything can, and might well, be used to push the new Marxist Experiment By Another Name. Grown men, desirous to “look good” and signal virtue, will go with the flow. The mass media will sell the hysteria as a necessity, nay, a given.
Religious freedom will suffer first. The concerned soi-disant Christians will heartily approve as they applaud, literally, themselves, as happened in Britain every Thursday at 8pm last year. More than pathetic. Utterly alarming.
What can we do against this? We need to make our voice heard as much as we can. We need to start the long march of reason against madness. We need to call out the pansies among us, so that, one day, it will not be cool to become a frightened girl in order to get more “likes” on Facebook.
Perhaps we can still escape the Soy Tsunami that threatens us. But it will be hard work, cost symphaties, perhaps friends.
Friends we really do not want to have.
For four years, Melania Trump graced the world with her beauty and class. She has been, from the start to the end, an exemplary representative of that exclusive breed, the First Lady (we will soon have a First Male Lady; but this is for later…). The attempt to smear her with a sneaky phone recording backfired miserably. People do recognise class.
Alas, all that is gone.
Jill Biden, First lady by virtue of clear voter fraud, should have never seen the White House again unless in postcards or documentaries. Alas, she now gets to embarrass everyone.
The comparison with the vulgar singer who wants to be called “madonna” (small M, just to be clear) is very apposite, because the level of vulgarity and sheer desire to be transgressive at their age (“madonna” is in her Sixties, Grandma Jill is almost Seventy!) clearly shows.
Once again, and as I have done very often in the past, I see in this both a sign of changing times and a warning from above.
I am pretty sure that, in the past history of the United States, there has been the one or other First lady who wasn’t so much of a lady. However, a basic sense of decency, respect for the office, and general fear of the Lord would prevent any of these women from giving such a public show of poor taste, with a strong hint of sluttishness (or desire to appear such; because, nowadays, “transgression” is all), as the First Non-Lady just did.
The loss of Christian values will show everywhere: then the Lord, in His Goodness, does not allow the Christian feelings to be dimmed without all sorts of visual warnings showing up. Tattoos, blue hair, nose rings and, of course, general “transgressive” clothing have all one thing in common: the desire to defy the traditional, God-given, God-willed order.
This is particularly evident to people like me; who, having grown up in a different, and saner, cultural environment, must now watch a sort of two-, or two and a half-, generational “jump” from a still Christian society to one where the only sin is… trying not to sin.
I don’t need to tell you how the female looks in that dress. At 69, it is a sad, sad spectacle, both for the person and the office.
But then again, these are the people who stole a Presidency. As in the case of tattoos or blue hairs, God is warning us, with visual signs, that something foul is afoot.
This is, by the way, the mother of a drug-addict who slept with his own sister-in-law and is rumoured to have molested the latter’s daughter.
It looks like that apple did not fall far from the tree, at all.
Every First of April, when I reflect on what to write for April’s Fool, I am confronted with the increasing difficulty of writing something wittily absurd about Francis.
We have now come to such a level of absurdity in real life, that every joke about the next impossible stunt that Francis could be mocked with is very, very difficult to find. The man is such a factory of absurdities that the reality of his pontificate has long surpassed anything that could have been considered a joke only a few years ago.
In the last weeks only, we had “clericalism is a perversity” and the openly homo man appointed to a Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors.
Both of them would have made for excellent April Fool’s stunts only one year ago, and both of them would have been impossible to think, and no joke to be seen anywhere, until 2013.
Imagine the April Fool’s line “Pope Francis appoints homosexual man to commission meant to protect children”. Just one year ago, it would have been so hilarious you would have split your coffee over the keyboard! The other one, “Pope says clericalism is perversion”, would have been an excellent mockery of Francis favourite Marxist play, “this is that”. Impossible, of course, and therefore so funny…
Alas, with this guy reality has gone far beyond the joke a long time ago. I discovered that it is, in fact, not easy to make fun of a clown.
The matter is, though, not a very funny one, even if we try to take these things with some sense of humour in order to protect our liver. Each one of Francis’ heretical, perverted, or Marxist stunts is another whip lash against Christ. In fact, it is not easy to picture Francis happily whipping Our Lord, like the Roman soldiers so brutally did in reality, and as realistically rendered in the movie, “The Passion of the Christ”. Only, the Soldiers weren’t Christians, Francis is actually supposed to.
It always incenses me when, after the latest stunt of this monstrous individual, some follower of the religion of niceness writes some inane comment about it not being nice to write these things about a Pope.
Today we remember Christ humiliated, flagellated, and crucified.
Do you care for Christ? Do you care for the Church? If you do, I bet you will be very angry!
If you don’t, I question your love for Christ and His Church.
I am awaiting, like everyone else, more details on the story. However, it appears that the Italian edition of the Corriere della Sera had news about a Carabinieri raid in a so-called “sauna” just outside of the Vatican. The news previously reported (I could read the article myself, yesterday night before going to sleep; the article has now disappeared) clearly mentioned the arrest of several high-ranking officers of a “Foreign Entity”, among them the one of an 84 years old Argentinian Citizen whose domicile was given, rather revealingly about the “Foreign Entity”, as the Casa Santa Marta.
All information now gone. Nothing in the Corriere’s English version. All other Italian outlets also silent.
I smell a rata here.
The article in Italian I have read (but, foolishly, did not save; I must have had some confidence in journalistic integrity!) mentioned the arrest in connection with (IIRC) massive quantities of cocaine, illegal immigrants used as male strippers, and a disquieting collection of huge dildos made available for rent to the “patrons” of the “establishment”.
I do not want to make accusations before all facts are known.
However, I wonder how many 84 years old Argentinian Citizens are living in the Casa Santa Marta right now.
I know what you’re thinking.
But, perhaps, a friend of the same age? It’s possible, but he would have to be a priest; a priest, presumably, still active at 84. Possible, yes. But, difficult. Or someone whom “our guy” keeps in the Casa Santa Marta even if he is not a priest. Also possible. But then again, if the mysterious Argentinian had been just a friend, would the article have been made to disappear so rapidly?
We have preguntas that need respuestas here.
I don’t want to say anything more. For now. But I know what you’re thinking.
I am not really shocked; but, let me be clear here….
neither are you.
I really shouldn’t be doing this at my age. To wake up in the morning and discover that the Evil Clown is now on record with saying that “Clericalism is a perversion” really ruins my breakfast and disrupts my digestive function.
The issues are, indeed, very grave. Homosexuality IS a perversion, whilst Clericalism is simply a matter of bad behaviour in different gradations.
Once again, we see the usual cheap trick of this mentally challenged old, lewd man: the usual variation of “this is that”, made to downplay an issue and direct the attention away from it.
Now, let us look at reality in the face here: who would, and he a Pope, try to downplay and normalise perversion, unless he is not a pervert himself?
With all his stunts and alleged shows of wit, this disgusting old man is showing more and more, every day, what his inclinations are.
Pervert is who pervert does, Frankie.
The only people you are fooling are the ones who are fools, or more than fools, like you.
I am a Catholic. I believe all that the Church believes, and I profess all that the Church professes.
It is not even about me trying to find a way, or some mental artifice , through which I can persuade myself that Church teaching can be reconciled with what I believe. If the Church believes it, I do. If she doesn’t, I don’t. There is no need for any compromise, adjustment, or reconciliation.
I know that there can never be a true conflict between the Depositum Fidei and my conscience or ethical values. If this is the case, it is a sure indication that I need to conform my values to the ones of the Church, because what the Church has always and consistently taught is true, and I am the one who needs to get in line with said truth.
Therefore, it can not be said that the Church has a death grip on my mind, much less that I need to wrestle free of it. To state something as impious as this means to, ipso facto, state the allegiance to a truth and a system of values not in line with those of the Church and, therefore, of Christ.
Or put it in this way: my mind and my thinking have merit only inasmuch as they conform to the teaching of the Church. Outside of that, they harbour rebellion. Therefore, I can only hope, and I sincerely wish to everyone, that the Church will keep a solid grip on my mind until, and including, the moment of my death.
The devil is always at work, you know. He wants us to persuade ourselves that we need to wrestle our minds free from the Church’s “death grip”; that we are better; that the Church oppresses us, or humanity at large.
O Lord, please allow me to die – even if it is now – without such thoughts even crossing my mind.
I wish to live, and die, in your loving grip, which the Church so beautifully expresses.
You may think that the antics at the Vatican are the greatest danger of our time. For many people, it will certainly be so, at least for now.
However, for many others, particularly in Anglo-Saxon Countries, the greatest danger isn’t what a pope who may, or may not, be a pervert tries to do against Christianity. It is what countless teachers and professors are doing every day to obliterate Christianity from their own Country and from the public discourse in general.
Look no further than here. In the Country of the First Amendment, a university tried to force own of its own professor to kowtow to the mantras of gender madness, or risk losing his job. Dr Meriwether was protected, for now. How long this goes on is, at least in Anglo-Saxon Countries, anyone’s guess.
I said countless times and repeat it here again: we can’t win this by being nice, or “sensitive”.
When I see that even right-wing publications like Breitbart use wrong words, like “gay”, or refer to trannies according to their imaginary sex, I know that this is going to be a very difficult battle. We need to say things out loud, and to demand that others who share our values do the same.
Actually, I remember reading an article from a right-wing publication (can’t remember if it was “Breitbart”) about that trannie from Pennsylvania that Biden got into his administration, without even being informed that that monstrous woman looking like a trannie was, in fact, exactly that! So, let that sink in: even a right-wing publication had some editor considering it not prudent to actually put on ink that the man in question was a man posing as a woman!
This, ladies and gentlemen, is why we keep fighting a rearward battle.
Whenever you read an article from a “conservative” outlet giving in to some mantra of gender theory or PC, please use the comment box to correct it immediately.
You will be read by hundreds.
It does have an effect.
Mr Pentin has a detailed article about the way the German Bishops are defying Church doctrine and try to make their own protestant “mini me” church of Heresy at home, whilst pretending that they are still Catholic.
The issues are many and all of them known. What, however, struck me most in the article is the revealing statement of Bishop Baetzing (the leader of the heretical movement). The statement is framed as follows:
Bishop Bätzing said he was “convinced” we are living in a “time window in which we can really change something,” and that “we have to use it.”
It seems clear enough to me. The Bishop is saying that as long as Francis is in power, they can and should push as hard as they can. If the man kicks the bucket (which, at his age, can be any day), you don’t know what happens next.
It seems, to me clear enough what is happening: Francis is culpable of either direct or indirect complicity with these heretics, by either sending signals to them that they should push their agenda forward and nothing will happen to them, or by refusing to do anything after the Germans have decided to give it a try and push anyway.
This is another example of how Francis acts against the Church. It is not only what he does, it is what he refuses to do.
Some observer might even comment that Francis did not feel strong enough to contrast Ladaria on the CDF answer to the “dubium” (he is evil and of mediocre intelligence, but not entirely dumb: he knows that he is still on time to die humiliated and deposed, in a Jesuit cell, forgotten or despised by everyone, and not one journalist in sight! He will, therefore, avoid going into waters that he deems to hot for his liking). Therefore, what he does now is to take every occasion and every pretext to oppose the people he hates (that is, my dear readers, all of you).
I suggest that my readers are not discouraged by what they read daily on the Catholic “press”. It behooves every one of us to take a bird’s eye approach and evaluate the events of these years from a broader perspective. Twenty of forty years of such a mess will likely be forgotten when, in 800 years, the Church is still going strong and all his opponent of today have long become dust.
This Baetzing guy will be totally forgotten in I don’t say 800, but possibly 8 years. Francis will be remembered, if he does, as one of those “bad Popes” people actually know nothing about besides the fact that they were bad. What, I think, will be remember is that, in the XX and XXI century, there was a people of great turmoil and of great corruption, like the Church had never been before, and from which the Church recovered, as always, in the Lord’s good time. Same as we, today, only vaguely care to know the details about the big mess in the X and XI Century. Even the Western Schism is, today, but a note in Church History.
This will, I think, help to put the Baetzing guy, and all those like him, in the proper perspective.
The Evil Clown has appointed an openly homosexual man to the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors.
Read that again, slowly, and please recite the Prayer to St Michael the Archangel.
The evil of this is a double whammy: the only he appoints an openly pervert man to an official position, he does so with an office that involves minors. And no, having been abused as a child is no excuse for homosexuality; not ever, most certainly not when the guy in question defends his perversion.
I have the adrenaline pumping so high right now that I will have to keep this post short. But one question I would like to pose: how long before Francis comes out as a homo himself? And will he give a blessing to himself after it?
You may say that this is the appeaser reaction to the CDF’s decision concerning these people. It might be true and a tribute to PC might be all (atrociously much anyway) that there is to it. Still, we all know how much these deviant people are attached to their own depravity. Could, therefore, not be that Francis had a homo-induced emotional reaction himself? Is that so remote a possibility? What would a homosexual pope do differently than what this man is doing?
Francis can’t die a day too soon, and that day will be a day of thanksgiving and, as much as readonably possible, hope.
A man goes on a mad rampage in Boulder, Colorado, and kills ten people. One of them, a policeman who died trying to protect the public. A Catholic, and father of seven. This is seven orphans and a widow now, in addition to all the other suffering the man has inflicted.
The Catholic father of seven, and all the other victims, have died. The mass murderer will live a long life, surrounded by the care of social workers, keeping the right to see people, likely to “see” women (mass murderers never have scarcity of women wanting to sleep with them; don’t ask…) , and rant at pleasure against racism or inequality if he wants to.
This man should be hanged.
When you have freed yourself from all the debris that political correctness and institutional do-goodism have deposited in your brain, you will see that capital punishment makes deep sense, that it is just right; you will, instinctively, see it as the natural, obvious, common sense punishment for murder.
Then you will remember that this is, in fact, what the Church has always believed, and what she has practised at all times as long as the times were, well, Chrstian.
God will, in His own time, establish perfect Justice. But this does not mean that we should not call for justice on this earth. The hurt for what has happened in Boulder is exacerbated, in all right-thinking minds, by the institutional, built-in injustice created by the rampant do-goodism of these godless times.
Pray for the father, for the widow and for the orphans, and, in your charity, help them I you can.
But also pray for a world where real Christian principles, and not their sugary deformations propagated by the enemies o Christ, are followed and lived.