Category Archives: Bad Shepherds
I could not believe my eyes when I saw the video above and (in case you can’t play the video) Father Martina in the same screen as the “Fox News” writing.
Let us leave aside for the moment the fact that the people of Satan will take the side of Satan. The issue I have today is with those who give them a platform.
Why on earth is Fox News interviewing this effeminate tool in the first place?
I would understand if MSNBC would do the same; but still after their liberal drift, Fox is supposed to represent (and still get their money from) a certain mindset, opposed to fake Catholicism, effeminacy, and monstrous deformation of Catholicism.
A liberal news outlet might think that this man (I am being generous here), having some official function within the Church, can speak for Her. But the likes of Fox News must know that this man cannot speak for Catholicism, whatever his official rank, and should have looked elsewhere for their interviewing needs.
Millions of people, out there, are either generically Catholic or non-Catholic Christians: is this face the one that Fax wants to present to them as speaking for Catholicism? have they done their research, even one bit, before inviting him? Why have they not looked for one of the thousands alternatives to present a different angle, from a local parish priest to a bishop to anybody else who is not this guy?
This, millions of casual lookers and generic Christians look at this and think that Catholics are, by and large, against the reopening of their churches. They also think that their average testosterone content have gone down dramatically in recent decades.
Fox, wake up.
This guy represents Catholicism like he represents manliness.
You should know better.
Really, Francis has no shame.
You can say what you want of the late John Paul the Not-So-Great, but sympathy with Francis’ SJW causes was not one of his shortcomings.
If Francis had a shred of decency, he would push his Socialist message without trying to hijack his predecessors, however faulty they were at times in their understanding of Catholicism.
But Francis has no decency at all; and he either does not see that everybody else sees it, or else he sees it and he does not care. This is the attitude he has always had: the arrogance of lying to your face, realising that you understand it, but still doing it, because he is the pope (small p, out of respect for the decent ones).
When I first read, years ago, of the alleged habit of some Argentinians of lying openly, shamelessly, and boast of it, I thought it was one of those exaggerations that people create when they describe a stereotype, or a character trait, in too vivid a colour. In time, the repeated, arrogant statements of this man have persuaded me that there must be something in it; because if this were not the case, a man like Francis would exercise at least some prudence in spreading his lies.
Does it work? Er, well, no!! But again, I think Francis is long past caring whether something he wants to say works; whether he is believed by decent people or not; whether he is considered a honest guy or a first-class scoundrel.
He can bark, therefore he does. He abandons himself to his hatred for us, and spits us and our religion in the face, hoping to rile us even more as we see how shamelessly he lies. He probably enjoys the anger that follows. It makes the petty tyrant in him feel satisfied, contented, alive. He will very likely lie to you, insult you, and provoke you to his last day.
I have stopped a long time ago to be seriously angered by this guy. One day he will die and go to his judgment, and so will everyone of us.
As I think of how horrible his own last days promises to be, I resolve to make mine good enough to get to the right side.
The man has no shame, but he should not get (much of) your attention because of it. Consider him one of those disgraces that stay with you, in some ways or other, no matter what: like a flies, or a mosquitoes.
This particular mosquito will stop harassing you soon enough.
I am informed now, via Vox Cantoris, that the Evil Clown invites me to fast today. I wonder, when was Thursday a day of fasting?
Oh wait! This is another ecu-maniacal initiative of this stupid guy! What he would not do to dilute the Christian message and accustom you to think that there is one big community of “believers” all over the planet!
But you see, Evil Clown of my boots: if faith is not the true one, it is simply evil! Therefore, your invitation to Catholics to pray together with infidels (something that we cannot do! Not even together with Proddies, come to that!!) is nothing more than a scandalous invitation to consider all religions (the true one, and all the others) as pretty much the same thing!
Thanks, but no thanks, not-so-dear Evil Clown.
Today, I will pray for your death instead.
In fact, I will “implore God to help Humanity overcome this time of evil popes and lack of faith”, by taking you out of the game and to the presence of the Rex Tremendae Majestatis in which you, very obviously, do not believe.
There. Thank you!
And as to the fasting, today I will feast both at lunch and dinner (the joys of lockdown, you see), in honour of this day.
Look, it has already happened that the public authorities show hostility to Catholicism. In the end, the children of Fatima were detained in 1917 (August, if memory serves) exactly in order to prevent them from seeing the Blessed Virgin appearing to them!
This time, though, things are fundamentally different. It is not only that 3,500 soldiers have been mobilised, just days after the 1st May celebrations were allowed! It is that all this happens with the consent and complicity of the Bishops!
When Pius XIII becomes Pope, I hope he does not allow a single one of these world-worshipping little cowards to stay in charge. What we are witnessing is the almost complete emasculation, the almost complete (so-called) church-of-england-isation of Holy Mother Church; and truly, only Her indefectibility will save Her from the extinction to which, otherwise, this bunch of spineless homos would condemn her.
I don’t know what is next. Very probably, the Bishops applauding the arrest of those who might dare to show up, soldiers and all.
I really wouldn’t be surprised.
Let us say, you are a Bishop who hates Christ, for reasons known to you and, possibly, to a restricted number of other men only.
You are obviously terrified at the idea of masses resuming more or less regularly, and faithful Christian receiving on the tongue, as even the Bishops’ Conference of your own Country says you should be allowed to do.
What do you do?
Why, you show yourself oh so concerned for the health of everybody, of course! This allows you to create rules that no one else has and a fuss without precedent, which then makes it easier to justify banning Communion on the tongue.
You might release instructions like this one:
- The faithful who present themselves for communion on the tongue will be denied communion.
- Those who want to receive in the only way allowed (the Protestant/ V Ii one) get the following instruction: “Once you leave your pew/chair you will proceed single file (maintaining 6 feet apart) to the distribution point,” Stika wrote. “Immediately before you reach the distribution point you will remove your protective face mask placing it in your pocket and sanitize your hands with 70% alcohol-based sanitizing gel/solution (which will be on a small table directly in front of the distribution point). “Standing on the floor-marked X (or kneeling at the 6-foot marked locations along the communion rail), you will extend your arms and hands toward the priest/deacon with the palm of your non-writing hand facing up and completely flat supported by your writing hand,”
You will, of course, look like a total fag, which will possibly not displease you at all. Still, you will achieve your trifecta of virtue signaling, antagonising the true faithful, and enmity with Christ.
“But Mundabor, Mundabor!” – You might say – “This is too dumb even for satire! No bishop would be as thick as that!”
You would think that, wouldn’t you?
I have bad news for you: read here.
Follow the link to the Mass of the Evil Clown, held in the House of Sodomy.
The money quote is, as recognised by the outlet itself, this one:
“In recent days many people have lost their jobs; they have not been re-employed, they are working illegally … We pray for these brothers and sisters of ours who suffer from this lack of work “.
In one phrase, one can isolate everything that is wrong with this guy. Let us go in order:
- Francis’ preoccupations are never spiritual, they are worldly. When he pretends to be interested in soul, it is just an excuse to push his worldly agenda. So he can say that the poor are exploited, or he can say that those who exploit the poor will go to hell (notabene: the God of Mercy does not help the class enemy…). In the end, though, it is always the same message of social justice warrior in white.
- Francis complains about circumstances he has contributed to create. A Pope reminding the faithful that no one does, but God has decreed so, would encourage quite a different climate than the present inordinate panic. But hey, Francis is the enemy of capitalism, as is a sustained lockdown. Still, he never misses an occasion to whine.
- Francis is confused, because he does not think straight. As long as the lockdown is not consigned to the dustbin of history, it will not be possible to say that anyone is not re-employed. People can’t be re-employed when it is not legal for their employers to actually make them work. But hey, these subtleties are too much for Karl Francis.
- Francis conflates several issues, in order to subtly helps two causes of his at the price of one. In this case, he puts together the unemployed and those who work illegally. That illegal work is something that takes away jobs from honest people, he does not stop to reflect. In Francis’ world, you as a law abiding citizen have no rights.
He does do all the time. It really is all he knows. And why does he do this? Firstly, out of social hatred and social envy, as befits a Commie. Secondly, because his social grievances help him to look good, which he clearly craves above all else in his old age. Thirdly, because having lost the faith decades ago (if he ever had it, of which I doubt) the constant pounding about social issues helps him feel good. Pretty much everybody wants to feel he is doing some good. Every Stalin can look, in some moment of lucidity, at his cruelty and say to himself “I am changing the world, I am making it a better place”. Exculpation and excuse at the same time, social issues are what allows Francis to feed his ego whilst he thinks well of himself.
You will notice this pattern at work all the time. Think of this blog post the next time you read about a homily of his.
More likely than not, you will be able to make exactly the same considerations.
One of the most pernicious side effects of the Chinese Virus has been the sidelining of the religious experience, with the consent, complicity and active collaboration of great part of the Catholic clergy.
Punctually, the bill for this disgraceful behaviour is presented to the faithful. If Mr Pritzker, the Democratic Governor of Illinois, has his way, it will be a year before church building function normally again.
The Governor obviously hides behinds “the experts”. “Hey, it’s not me – he is almost saying -. I loathe these abortion-hating people; but I would not dare to go against them if it were dangerous for my career. However, the Catholic Church has been very zealous in approving the closure of their own churches, and the social marginalisation of the Mass for just as long as we want. Why would I not profit of such a brilliant situation as this one”?
And in truth, how has anyone expected this to go any differently? These are people who never allow a crisis to “go to waste”, and this crisis can certainly be milked for all it’s worth to help detach from the Church countless faithful; particularly after it has become clear to politicians of all colours that the Catholic clergy themselves seem intentioned to do just the same!
It’s open season on the Church, say many US Bishop. How is a Democrat Governor supposed not to shoot? Do you think someone in favour of killing babies in their mothers’ wombs will suddenly have a religious experience when he sees that the churches are closed, and his enemies locked at home?
Obviously, this poses an obvious and very unpleasant question: why would the Catholic higher echelons support their own marginalisation? The answer is, in my eyes, very saddening but also very evident.
It is because they hate Christ and His Church themselves. It is because they are either perverted, or in an illicit sexual relationship, or atheists. It is because they hate themselves for having to lie every day about their nature and their lives. Granted, the attempt to escape the contradiction by diverting the attention of their parishioners to topics like “poverty” and “social justice” may make them feel better for a while, which is why so many do it (if you want to know a priest who has lost his faith, look for a priest concerned about “social justice”). Still, by all their talk, they still know that, in the end, they are hypocritical scroungers living at the expense of an organisation they hate, but with no balls to out themselves as Church haters and seek a new life.
All these despicable individuals (starting from the Evil Clown, down to most bishops and, no doubt a great number of priests) have jumped on the Great Crisis Bandwagon, allowing them to get some relief from their duties, feel good with themselves as they pretend to “protect” their faithful, and harm an organisation they hate. They will, make no mistake, be in no hurry to get back to normality again. It’s for your safety, you know.
This crisis has shown this: that, generally speaking, our clergy has become the enemy of our religious freedom, and of our sensus catholicus before that. They want to make of Catholicism something you practice when people who don’t care a straw for Christ say it is “safe” for you to do so. They want to make the Church and the Sacrament as irrelevant for you as they are for them.
We need to wake up to this assault and denounce the bishops and priest who keeps blabbering about safety instead of doing their job.
Enough with the enemies in our midst.
I do not want to link to the hideous website, but it appears the Evil Clown has, semel in anno, said something quite right: a good shepherd is distinguished by his flock.
Quite so, Father Castro, quite so!
This is why the shepherds of the V II nuChurch have been steadily losing ground in all Western Countries, whilst the small but dedicated orders of Traditionalists (all of them, but particularly the heroic troops of the SSPX) keep thriving.
It is part and parcel of human nature to, in time, detect the phonies. It was, therefore, unavoidable – if very sad – that millions of people realised that the priest talking to them in a slightly too high-pitched on the Sunday was not a man of God, and could not give them the nourishment they wanted. The amount of people who have – sadly – abandoned the Catholic Church, or at least Catholic liturgy, by keeping a solid, if vitiated, faith – think of Sarah Palin, or Mike Pence – is a testimony to that.
In fact, I wonder how many of these people have abandoned their attendance to Catholic Mass simply in order to keep a faith they were afraid of losing; something, mind my words, very wrong from a theological standpoint, but very real from the vantage point of a poorly catechised Catholic.
Pope Francis can’t even get the people to see him as a tourist attraction in St Peter. He has failed even as a curiosity object and popular “moving landmark”. That he dares to make such comparison shows that he likely does not even read beforehand the homilies others write for him, or he would have asked that the subject be changed. Unless he is really so dumb that he does not understand what an indictment of his work his very words are.
In the meantime, the SSPX keeps thriving (sorry, Mr Voris: you lose), Francis keeps blabbering, and the faithful keep suffering. But the truth of the matter is this: that the bad shepherd will only be allowed to scatter their sheep as long as the Lord allow them to. in the end, not one sheep will be lost that is supposed to go back to the fold.
Francis’ diabolical hate for the Church is infinitely sad, but ultimately useless.
I normally don’t like to intervene in inter-Catholic squabbling. My reflection on this is that the anticlerical element will use everything it can to smear Catholicism as a whole, claiming that we are a bunch of sectarian fanatics.
In the case of the (new) attack of Church Slandering against the SSPX, I have not intervened for the additional reason that doing so would make it look like the accusations of Church Slandering have some merit and deserve to be discussed; which they haven’t, and don’t.
However, once the SSPX issues a statement on the issue, I think it proper to call your attention on it. The statement can be found here. There is nothing to add.
As a last observation, I would like to inform my esteemed readers of a policy I have: whenever one slanders the Society, he is banned either immediately, or after a warning shot. For the future, I think I will dispense with the warning shot.
The use of the word “schism” in connection with the SSPX will also likely get one banned, then life is too short for people with little understanding and a big mouth.
I am late to this party; but the party does not want to end, and it might be useful to spend a word or three on this.
Some Bishops reported that the Evil Clown was “displeased” that James Martin, aka “Martina”, used the meeting of the two months ago to promote his sodomitic agenda. Others deny or disagree.
In my view, the truth is in the middle; or rather, both sides are right.
Francis will say what his counterparts want to hear. This is what he always does and will always do. A man able to say “soon, soon!” to the parents of a persecuted FFI friar will obviously not have any qualm in saying to visiting Bishops a couple of words that makes them believe that he is actually not actively helping Martina to push his agenda. This makes the poor nincompoops happy, and avoids the awkward moment for Pachamama pope.
The real news in this is not what Francis may or may not have said. It is the fact that, after seven years of speaking out of three corners of his mouth, there should be any Bishop who gives any importance to what this evil man blathers.
A short internet search will reveal to everybody that the meeting between Pachamama and Martina happened on the 30 September. The alleged conversation with the Bishops happened in February, which means that the Bishops and Pachamama Guy were talking of something that had happened more than four months before.
You would think that, if the matter had had any relevance to Francis, he would have made known his opinion before February? Even if Francis expressed his disapproval in strong term to the Bishops, what value does this have, if this disapproval is four months late and expressed in private conversation? It would clearly mean that Francis himself does not attach any importance to anybody exploiting him for his purposes.
Make a mess!
Francis is a born liar. He lies just as easily and automatically as you breath. He does not attach any value, or dignity, or manliness to his words. To him, a man is as good as his Socialist credentials. It is really dumb to believe that anything that he says in a private conversation would have any value to him. If you were to say to Francis that the earth is flat, he would answer to you that there might be some merit in what you say, just to avoid the awkward situation. Why wouldn’t he? He lies about everything anyway!
This is the guy who boasted of lying to his mother, who was sending money to him, about studying Medicine whilst he was paying his studies in the Seminary (which, by the way, tells you a lot about the lack of Catholicism in the allegedly oh so pious home of Mother Bergoglio). If one is able of lying to his own mother about what the money she sends him – and, no doubt, the fruit of her sacrifices – is being used for, what would he not lie about? If he is able to even boast about it, what does this say about the attitude of this scoundrel?
I report less and less about what the man says in his almost daily heretical exercises in bloviation. The fact is, once you understand a guy is – as the common parlance goes – full of shit, you cannot give any value to any word he says, period.
Francis is – besides being a heretical pope, who would have been deposed and trialled for heresy a long time ago if our Bishops and Cardinals had some testosterone in them – a compulsive liar with no self-respect, no decency and, quite possibly, homosexual tendencies. How any Bishop can give any value to anything he spouts is beyond me.
Francis is a cancer that has now spread to the very limbs of the Church. To excise this cancer will require the amputation of one or more limbs. But this does not make this amputation less necessary, if we want to avoid that the cancer, albeit never terminal for the patient, keeps spreading everywhere for who knows how long.
The Bishops and Cardinals need to move and force this guy to retract everything (it would be a long retractation), or be deposed and trialled for heresy. This should be the daily issue of conversation among them.
What the old, lewd liar might have said to some of them is really neither here nor there.
I have just seen a moving picture, and I would like to share it with you.
The link to the article is here.
Look at our beloved Francis, basking in the warm support of Reverend Gonzalo Aemilius, his new secretary.
The Reverent is impeccably dressed as a priest, in a traditional cassock and – to show reverence to Francis – dark brown shoes. But just because he is so impeccably dressed, you don’t need to think that he is a desk man; a boring, cold apparatchik, who loves to work in some obscure bureaucracy role. No!
This man has worked with “street kids” in – I suppose – the streets of Uruguay. This is sooo good!!
I invite the readers of this blog – who all know better than to be judgemental about our Sweet Peter on earth – to reflect that, whilst some priests working with “street kids” in the poor quarters of Buenos Aires, and knows as curas villeros, could, according to several reports, use their position to seriously abuse vulnerable poor children, the same can certainly not be told of Uruguayan religious working with the same street kids. We all know that Uruguay is different, and no priest would, over there, ever try to use his role to engage in homosexual acts with children and minors, away from the eyes of his bishop, or from the scrutiny of decent faithful.
Rather, please focus on the posture and attitude of the cassock-wearing priest. His warm, smiling attitude is indicative of full support, both physical and spiritual, offered to the Holy Father.
Francis, who is seen almost giggling, and clearly enjoying his little, innocent “magic moment”, understands the spiritual vicinity of the Reverend, and signifies by his expression all his satisfaction at this budding bromance.
Oh, how many battles will be fought together! How many discussions about the many qualities of the street kids will be held! How many fashion tips will be exchanged!
Pope Francis The Humble has been such a gift for the Church.
It is beautiful to see that he is, now, also in almost direct contact with street kids.
I think that soon after his departure, he will be canonised by the new Pope. Particularly, if the latter turns out – as we all hope – to be a progressive like Tagle, or Cupich, who both understand what the church needs to remain relevant in the XXI Century.
Please look at the picture again.
Isn’t he so, so very happy?
Cardinal Dolan has, recently, again refused to excommunicate New York State Governor Mario Cuomo for his murderous – even for abortionists standards – abortion law. His reasoning: If Cuomo is not going to be moved by excommunication, what’s the use?
This logic is very interesting. Let us apply it to other situations of life.
If a thief, or a murderer, or a paedophile, want to continue thieving, or murdering, or raping children, what’s the use of jail sentences? If an adulterer lives in public sin and wants to continue to do so, what is the use of withholding communion and confession?
You might think that Cardinal Dolan is utterly and completely stupid, or that he has forgotten the basics of what he learned, many years ago, in seminary. I disagree with you. Let me give you my take.
Cardinal Dolan has lost his faith a long, long time ago. He does not believe in God. Therefore, he does not believe in the Sacraments. Therefore, he does not believe in the importance of withholding them when necessary, for the sake of the salvation of the person involved and in order to give the faithful reassurance that their pastors take the Sacraments seriously and are still are able to defend the faith.
When even a Protestant pastor publicly calls for a Cardinal to do his job, you know that something has gone terribly wrong. God forbid, this man were to become Pope. We would have a pathetic attempt at a comedy show instead of a Pontificate. Thankfully, it is improbable that a US American be made Pope. For now.
Dolan is sold to the world. He is a mediocre politician with no faith, no morals and no decency. His logic is self-defeating and a travesty of Catholicism. His inaction shames the entire Church. The shame is so obvious and evident, that even heretics must call him to… orthodoxy.
Who made this tool a Bishop? John Paul The Not-So-Great. Who made him Archbishop and Cardinal? Benedict The Coward.
The issues in the Church surely predate Francis. This guy is a perfect example of them.
I had never heard, until yesterday, of Father Mitch Pacwa, SJ. He has a show on EWTN. Whilst a Jesuit, he appears to, actually, be a Catholic.
Father Pacwa went strongly against Pachamama, and did not not mince words. If you copy and paste the link, you will get the show itself. I have not listened to the entire show, but our part starts at around 31:30, when Father speaks of his experiences in Peru. What he refers is an astonishing mixture of Paganism as the main actor and a pseudo Christianity with, so to speak, a walking part.
Make no mistake, this mixture must be known to Francis, as more and more testimonies from South America are emerging that confirms that the cult of pachamama is spread over there. It can, certainly, be that the idolatry takes different forms regionally. But there can be no doubt that something that is adored as an idol in some parts will be adored as the same idol in other parts, and that Francis very well knows that.
So there we have it: we have a pope that openly, publicly, unashamedly promotes pagan idols, and apologises to its followers when good Christians actually remove the idols from a church.
If this does not deserve the stake, I don’t know what does.
Also, please reflect on this: Father Pacwa describes a hierarchy composed of “gods of the mountains” first, “pachamama” (goddess of the earth) below them, and Jesus, Mary and the Saints below Pachamama. Is such a hierarchy not perfectly consistent with the beliefs of a man who refuses to genuflect in front of the Blessed Sacrament, denies the Divine nature of Our Lord whilst on earth, and – most recently – denies His bodily Resurrection? Actually, it seems to me that the behaviour is in line with this idolatry, and the only thing that speaks against it is that this man appears to have no faith at all, and the Pachamama stuff might just be the way he chooses to anger you like the stupid child he is.
It is an unreal time, in which the pope himself encourages and practices the adoration of pagan idols, and must be told to “knock it off” by, of all people, a Jesuit.
Father Pacwa makes another observation: the prayer to Pachamama appeared on the internet site of an Italian mission organisation (imagine that!) was very probably there without the knowing of the Italian Bishops, and was the work of some, as he himself says, apparatchik trying to smuggle pagan idolatry in the middle of Catholicism. I thought the same when I read the prayer some time ago. Still, it now behooves the Italian Bishops to apologise, remove every trace of the idolatrous prayer and very public state that this will not be allowed to happen again.
We are talking of open idolatry here, not of some prelates saying something which, on a bad day, might be interpreted in the wrong way.
The Society of St Pius X has issued a statement about the Synod on the Amazon.
It is, no doubt, the strongest statement ever come from the SSPX concerning the troubled times we are living. They also state:
On Sunday, November 10th, 2019, each priest of the Society will celebrate a Mass of reparation, and in each chapel, the Litanies of the Saints, taken from the liturgy of the Rogations, will be sung or recited to ask God to protect His Church and to spare it from the punishments that such acts cannot fail to draw down upon it. We urge all priest friends, as well as all Catholics who love the Church, to do the same.
I invite all the faithful to participate to this initiative.
The statement of the SSPX is very apposite. Still, I allow myself to explain here what else I would have wanted from this statement, and what I hope future statements will contain.
- An open accusation of Francis as an apostate or, at least, a heretic, and
- The call for an imperfect Council declaring that he has deposed himself.
I do not think for a moment that behind the choice of not doing this may be the fear of losing whatever “privileges” Francis has accorded to them. No follower of the SSPX could ever care a dried fig whether Francis recognises the Sacraments imparted by the SSPX or not. In my eyes, the SSPX is fearful that, if they start with this Crusade, they will stump it, as every Bishop and Cardinal who dares to say half a word against Francis will be accused of being a “schismatic” like those pesky Traditionalist people. In short, it might colour the entire movement with the kind of tinge that the mainstream avoids.
Still, it seems to me that extreme times call for extreme measures. If no other Bishops and Cardinals call for the events mentioned above (Bishop Gracida, in a way, does; but he has fixated himself on the Conclave. This is a dead end of dubious chances, and impossible to push through without the real argument, which is Francis’ heresies and, at this point, open apostasy), then I think that it is for the SSPX to do it and put themselves, as people used to say, “at the head of the movement”.
I understand that this would not be something going on from inside the Hierarchy (whilst the SSPX has valid orders, they certainly are not a part of the Church command structure). Still, at this point I would prefer a call for an imperfect Council from the SSPX, even if not followed or attacked and discredited for the very reason that it comes from them, to no call at all. And if you think that Cardinal Burke and Brandmueller could wake up from their King Theoden-esque slumber – and actually do something more than some encouraging talk and some praise for people with far more courage than them – I have a bridge on sale that I would like to offer to you first, but you have to act fast.
We live in disgraceful times. In front of such an apocalyptic pope, I think that the following generations of Catholics, and the Saints and Angels above, will be pleased with every call to depose this satanical guy, no matter how little the chances of success.
It would be very sad if history would record this pontificate in the same way as the one of Honorius: open heresy, and no action.
In case of Honorius, the action came after his death. In case of Francis, I doubt even that. One reason more to shoot with every available weapon at this Pontificate, and the SSPX would certainly be a massive tank in itself.
We are informed that, at the closing Mass of the Pagan Synod, the statues of Pachamama were not present. This, apparently, because a number of Bishops and Cardinals told Francis that they would refuse to participate if that had been the case.
You would think this good news. I am not so sure.
To tell the Pope that you refuse to participate to Mass with him is a very serious step. It does not fall far from stating that the guy is not in communion with you. It certainly indicate very grave differences with the Pope (or, in this case, the pope; and may he die today).
It is clear that, in this case, the matter of contention is not one of the hundreds of heretical statements made by the Evil Clown. It is, specifically, the presence of the pagan idols of Pachamama and the adoration offered to them.
Therefore, a number of Bishops and Cardinals considers the Pachamama incidents such grave episodes of idolatry, that they cannot be in the Church if the pagan idols are present.
Very well, then. Who these Bishops and Cardinals think responsible for these statues? Do they think that all happened because of evil people who did not inform the Pope that these are pagan goddesses adored by savages? Do they think that Francis is kept isolated from the outside world, and is not responsible for the idolatry? Do they think that it was not Francis, but his evil twin who asked the Italian Government for help in the recovery (if such took place; it is not difficult to get some more statues from Bolivia in all that time; and I would have expected the statues to show permanent signs of their very long bath) of the wooden idols?
This can mean only one thing: a number of Bishop and Cardinals know perfectly well that these statues represent pagan deities, and that pope Francis encourages and takes part in their idolatry. But they don’y say anything in public about this.
The awareness of such a gross violation of the First Commandment, and the silence in front of it, is a shame just as big as Francis’ idolatry; just as Francis knows what he is doing, and still acts, the Bishops and Cardinals know what he is doing, and still remain silent. They are accomplices in his idolatry.
They will have to answer one day, with him, of his violation of the First Commandment.
I remember the days when pope Francis’ scandals were emerging in the matter of, say, one a week.
Ah, blessed times of innocence!
Nowadays it is much, much worse than that.
Michael Voris has cared to make an extensive list of all the scandals which came to light in the last weeks alone, and they are… a lot!
Besides the obvious lack of faith of this satanical pope, what I find really staggering is the degree of incompetence of the man.
Francis always reminds me of one of those Central and South American governments that were not uncommon in the Seventies and Eighties. They were, as a whole, glaring examples of thieving attitude, arrogance and economic incompetence.
Francis has taken everything from them. He just does not manage to do anything right. It does not make sense to try to ascribe the chaos he has engendered to some astute plan. There is nothing astute in looking a cretin every day that God sends on earth. No, this is just another example of an idiot put an the top of a big organisation by thieving bastards, and in cahoots with them, helping his clique of sodomites and thieves to do whatever they want, from sodomy to embezzlement to heresy. As in the governments I mentioned before (but I could make other non-Southern American examples of staggering, thieving incompetence: Taylor in Liberia, or Mugabe in Zimbabwe also come to mind), there is no intention or desire to even try to run things properly. It’s party time, and the clique in charge will party to the end, probably thinking that, with the Cardinal appointments made by Francis, the party ill have no end.
Similarly, criticism is countered with aggressive attacks (as in those Governments mentioned above). It’s not their fault, it’s us being Catholics, and actually normal.
Even an idiot like Francis must, at this point, recognise that he just cannot do jack without botching everything. His plan to remake the church in his image only had sense (in its own perverted logic) if the man had had the ability to introduce change “on the sly”, in a very subdued and gradual manner, boiling the frog of popular piety in a very slow way.
But this is not Francis.
Francis is arrogant, impious, and ignorant. But most of all, he is – by God’s grace – so damn stupid.
The idea that he can transform Catholicism into a sort of Santeria cult openly, publicly, and get away with it is too dumb for words. One must be blinded by Satan to even think of that.
Francis is one blinded by Satan, who never had a properly functioning brain to begin with. Satan’s fool, this is who Francis is.
The day will soon come when he discovers it; and who knows, he might even like it, then I want to be on record with stating that I do not consider satanism beyond the reach of such an evil, stupid mind.
Francis’ downfall is certain. We are seeing it even on this earth, as he demolishes himself and his disgraceful papacy day by day.
The recent open apostasy of Pope Pachamama, with a pagan deity brought around in procession, makes every discussion about the validity of the Conclave even more superfluous, useless and counterproductive than it ever was. I see in this obsession the remnant of those papolatrous instincts unfortunately spread among converts, particularly in the Anglo Saxon world.
The Holy Ghost has never promised that the Pope would be a holy man. Therefore, when confronted with a monstrous Papacy like Francis’, one does not have to conclude that he could never be Pope. If a guy like John XXII – whose abstruse theological convictions put him square at variance with the words of Our Lords in the Gospel – could be validly elected Pope, so can Francis.
The apostasy of Francis stares us in the face. Francis now openly mocks us with it, because he has seen that the likes of Burke & Co. are such cowards that they will never react with a call for an Imperfect Council.
Notice the dynamics here: Pope Francis provokes Catholics only one step at a time, because his innate cowardice suggests to him that he should not try to do what could prove fatal to him. Every time, he sees that no reaction comes. Every time, he is emboldened to do more, because he hates all of us and there is no end to the humiliations he wants to inflict on us all.
Pachamama is the fruit of the cowardice of Bishops and Cardinals on Amoris Laetitia. Without the latter, we would never have had the former. At the same time, Pachamama is such an open, obvious instance of pagan idolatry, that all discussions about Amoris Laetitia must be overshadowed by this new scandal; which is so obvious, so much in-your-face, so openly insulting that every doubt about the real intentions of this Pope must be rejected even more strongly than before.
Bishops and Cardinals: Pope Pachamama is provoking and humiliating you as he spits in the face of that Christ he hates.
Will you finally man up?
It appears from here that Pope Francis allows the Vatican to run a deficit of around 23% budget.
Well congratulations, Frankie dear. This is not Venezuela yet, but you are well on your way.
I have wondered for a long time whether Socialists can count. After mature reflection, I have come to the conclusion that they (probably) can, but they do not allow irrelevances like facts, numbers, or common sense to stay in the way of their ideology, their caprices, their and their own friends’ desire for waste or personal enrichment, and their own general childishness.
It is normally fine until there are other people whose money can be expropriated. If there are any complaint, shout out loud and expropriate more. Rinse. Repeat.
It’s a complex problem. Rich liberal donors apparently do not like to donate money for causes that aggrandise the Pope and his bunch of homo prelates. They will normally donate to the Church only if they can aggrandise themselves.
They must profit something that can be seen. Big. Famous. Shiny. The renovation of St Patrick’s Cathedral in New York amassed more than $100m in a matter of hours. That was an easy fundraising. But the game becomes much more difficult if what is necessary to finance is a bunch of anonymous Monsignors, many of them actually given to sodomy.
Then there is the other problem: Francis, like every socialist idiot, likes to play statesman.
He launches big “reforms” that go nowhere but cost money. And he travels a lot, which is not as cheap as it used to be, because the Italian Government does not subsidise them anymore.
Then he does other stupid things like forbidding the sale of cigarettes within the Vatican (note here: smoking is not a sin; promoting heresy is), forcing his people to actually walk a couple of hundred metres to buy the cigarettes in nearby Italy, where the Italian Government will cash in the tax money. A small example, but very much indicative of the great stupidity of Francis.
Mind: he will not go bankrupt. The Church’s resources are potentially unlimited. But if people do not want to give money to socialist, Banana Republic dictators, these dictators take the money from somewhere else.
I suspect that, at some point, Francis will target the one or other conservative order just in order to plunder their coffers, with the thin excuse of some “reform” or other.
Lying, cheating and stealing is what socialists do.
Francis is, whilst (unfortunately) being also the Pope, no exception.
LifeSite News has a long and very detailed article about the cover-up of sexual abuse in a Vatican pre-seminary.
One Bishop and two Cardinals are implicated in this story. But my blog post is not about this. I note the following:
1. The molester: (obviously) homosexual.
2. The “victim”: homosexual.
3. The whistleblower: homosexual.
4. Reports of several relationships of sexual nature among the pre-seminarians.
5. The Vatican appears to say, inter alia, that the investigation was stopped because the people involved were of same age. It does not say (and it does not appear anywhere) that the investigation led to both parties being kicked out because homosexual.
6. The homosexual alleged aggressor, actually, now ordained a priest.
Summa summarum: an Astonishingly sordid story, in which the sordidness of it all is treated by the Vatican as ordinary administration.
This, if you ask me, is a bigger story than the alleged cover up itself. Then in my culture, a 13 years old homosexual boy cannot really say that he was “abused”. At 13 you are old enough to kick anyone in the balls, and many a boy is almost as bis as his homosexual aggressor. A homosexual 13 years old was, more likely, just plain horny. To this I add the bitchiness, primadonna attitude and general lack of reliability of anyone who (like the whistleblower) has the effrontery to present himself as a decent guy when he was a homo trying to become a priest, and no qualms about that.
Also, my hunch is: forget the “victim”. The Italian prosecutors are investigating, but frankly, the underwriting remembers boys and girls sexually active at that age in school time, and I personally don’t buy the “abuse” story. The age of consent in Italy is 14, and for very sensible reasons. Let us stop pretending that 13 years old boys can just be cowed into sodomitic submission. That’s not how life and common sense work.
No, the underlying story here is much, much bigger: homosexual tendencies and outright sodomy are considered business as usual in the Vatican of Francis and Coccopalmerio.
That this is not shouted out loud from every roof (and the attention is misplaced on a likely rather horny 13 old homoboy, of whom it is in question if he was even 13 at the time), is the most astonishing feature of this story.
God cannot allow Himself to be scorned with impunity. Now if the pains of hell were not eternal, the obstinate sinner would persevere in his revolt, since no adequate sanction would repress his pride. His rebellion, we may say, would have the last word, would be the triumph of iniquity.
These words are from Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange’s “Life Everlasting”, one of those books I go back to again and again and that remain fresh, insightful and instructing after many readings (either because I forget things, which I do, or because it throws a fresher light on what I already know).
The reflection below strikes me anew every single time as absolutely logical, but often neglected in conversation. It is a simple point, that cannot be refuted.
You certainly have, as I did and still do, come across Sunday Theologians who improvise a theology of niceness for reasons peculiar to their own but, generally, fruit of the desire to have things their own way. They invariably reject eternal damnation as not being good enough for their lofty spirit.
Memorise this simple argument and keep it in store for when the circumstances require its use.
This is how we remain Catholics and work (with God’s grace) towards salvation in these atrocious times: absorbing the religion of our fathers as best as we can, and using the knowledge so acquired both for our salvation and, when prudence allows, for the instructions of those in more or less dire need of it.
Catholicism is all there already. There is nothing to know which we need Francis, or any other bishop or cardinal. Conversely, not making an effort to learn what we know to be true is not likely to be treated kindly when we die, then a bad pope is no excuse for being a bad Catholic.
We work on our salvation with fear and trembling whatever Francis goes around blathering.
It’s getting cold again in this part of the world. Another summer will soon be gone, and the Evil Clown is still in place.
I reflect on the years that have led to this, and what I always think is this: it was the fault of Cardinals and Bishops, from day one.
The Cardinals elected* a man whom they either did not know (desperately trying to be charitable here) or knew to be evil and, at the very least, Catholicism-free. They also clearly followed the counsel or suggestions of Cardinals of whom they had to know that they had nothing holy in them. The decision to offer Francis the Keys is unjustifiable however you look at it.
Francis is obviously vain, and not very deep. He starts with the easy platitudes and the easy gestures on day one. This alone should have alerted our shepherds about the real goings inside the mind of the man. Many were accomplices, I know. But how many just chose not to see?
It got worse pretty fast, as Francis started to preach a strange fake gospel made of a lot of socialism mixed with a lot of social envy. Almost no one, among our supposed shepherds, reacted.
It was, therefore, not a surprise when Francis started the brutal persecution of a staunchly Catholic order, the FFI; for petty personal reasons, certainly, but also to send a signal of what will happen to those who are not in his graces. Again, no reaction.
The heresies came pouring in. For a long time, only on aeroplanes, with the entire world wondering whether there is some strange virus in the their AC, or whether the poor man just cannot stand altitude. All sorts of excuses were fabricated. Again, no condemnation.
Is it not the most natural, obvious thing in the world that a vain, stupid, impious, devilish man like Francis would feel encouraged by the cowardice he saw all around him? Francis is evil, but he is not so reckless that he risks a heresy trial. Like every bully, he is first and foremost a coward. When the Bishops condemned the instrumentum laboris of the synod on the family (the first attempt to make heresy official), Francis backpedalled like a professional athlete, before starting a systematic work of covert, or overt, oppression of Catholics. Before he kicks you in the teeth, Francis wants to be sure he will be able to do so with impunity.
Amoris Laetitia came, and the heresies were now, in the immortal words of Yes, Prime Minister, “officially official”. You would think that now, surely, a strong reaction would follow?
What we heard was… crickets, but this time, they were special crickets, in the form of four Cardinals mounting the greatest grandstanding operation known to man, just to fold like the cowards they all are when they were required to, actually, act. God forbid, the last eighteen months of their lives should be marred by a slight decrease in the comfort they have become so accustomed to. The youngest one of them, Cardinal Burke, is now considered “persecuted” because his extremely comfortable Roman existence lost some of the extremely comfortable perks. I wonder what St Stephan thinks of him.
It went, predictably, downhill from there. Once the bully is assured that he can bully everyone with impunity, his insolence will keep growing.
The current phase is the one of spitting on several sacraments at the same time, as even priest celibacy is put into question and Catholicism is, so to speak, invited to learn from the tattooed savages of the forest. There is some moaning here and there, but make no mistake: this is just because Francis has not yet officially put his seal of approval on the new heresies. Let him make so, and watch some faint, respectful meowing as the only reaction.
This is where we are now: homosexual Cardinals, rampant heresies, and Cardinals and Bishops living a comfortable existence and doing, as a whole, nothing.
Many of them, on day, will be gnashing their teeth in hell.
And if Cardinal Burke is not terrified for his eternal destiny, and for the destiny of his small band of grandstanding cowards, he is the greatest fool alive.
- The Holy Ghost does not elect the Pope. The Cardinals do. It is a blasphemy to think that God would choose an evil man to lead His Church. Disabuse yourself of this blasphemy, if you want to understand what is going on withing the Church.
And so I am sitting at a McDonald’s, eating my meal in peace. The paper cover of the plastic tray tells an ominous tale: unless we do something, the Amazonian Forest will be destroyed in five years’ time, and that forest produces 20% of the world’s oxygen.
Impressive, uh? This isn’t today, though.
This was in 1995.
24 years later, the same rubbish is propagated everywhere, going from mouth to mouth, or from screen to screen, because of a chain of people who are either tragically ignorant, or on the look for some purpose in life, or trying to promote an anti-Capitalistic agenda, or simply scrounging an existence out of people’s stupidity.
In times as stupid as these, however, you can expect the Cretin in Chief to be at the head of the movement. Firmly determined to dethrone the Dalai Lama as the King Of Platitudes, Pope Francis calls for international action on the Amazon wildfires .
The guy can’t even be bothered to genuflect in front of the Blessed Sacrament, but the world must do his bidding every time he wants to look good with the world’s press. What a fraud.
In the meantime, smart people prefer to stick with the facts.
We truly live in an age of superstition. Every fake announcement about the planet is eagerly welcomed from an avid army of simpletons whose only desire is to look less stupid with their peers, or to go with the mainstream opinion, or to have some occasion for virtue signalling. They are being manipulated by a tiny minority of subversives, seeking to fundamentally change the ways of the West and to put an end to Capitalism as we know it. Some days ago (google it) a study in England suggested that in order to achieve the necessary reduction in CO2 emissions electric vehicles may not be enough, and the ability of the people to use their own private transport may have to be curtailed. Yes, this is truly where this madness is going.
Stupid people desperately try to look intelligent. Pope Clown desperately tries to look good. Climatologists without scruples desperately try to scrounge more decades of subsidies, tenures, and honours. Socialists desperately try to fundamentally change the way we live.
In the meantime, God’s creation continue to exist, unfazed by these cretins, for as long as He will see it fitting for the universe to exist.
A horrible, Catholicism-free soi-disant “c”atholic publication (no link!) informs us that the “Executive Director” of the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops has written to the Governor asking him to stay the execution of an inmate.
Firstly, some questions: who the heck is the “Executive Director”? Is he a Bishop himself? Apparently not, as the article calls him simple Michael Sheedy. What kind of a job does this guy have? Why do Bishops need an “Executive Director”, and (apparently) a layman at that? How many useless layers of administration are Florida Catholics paying for? And why no Florida Bishop can be the face of this (wrong) initiative and sign the letter himself, instead of hiding behind an administrative layer and a layman?
How did the Church in Florida survive before V II, Bishops’ Conferences, and all that bureaucratic stuff? Pretty well, you say? Ouch…
After dealing with the daily absurdity of the Church in the XXI Century, let us go in medias res.
The letter makes excuses and tries with the sob story, as it is always done in these cases. Difficult childhood, and all that. I couldn’t stop crying…
A murderer is a murderer. I this case, the horrid un-Catholic publication is actually forced to tell us that Mr Bowles, the murderer, confessed to not even one, but six murders, for which he is collecting death sentences like there is no tomorrow (actually, for him, there might be no tomorrow…).
The letter has stupid platitudes like: “Each of us is more than the worst thing we have done,” and fake science (the new god of the godless) like: “Neuroscientific research has found that such traumatic experiences severely affect a child’s developing brain, and thus affect subsequent behavior.”
Each one of us is, as an immortal soul, more important than the Universe himself. This makes his willingly committed crimes worse, as they offend God’s creation both as a grave rebellion to His commandments and as the destruction of six lives, each of which more important than the Universe itself. The establishment of God’s justice here on earth should, actually, literally cry to heaven for the execution of a man culpable of such acts. Alas, Nucatholics do not care for God’s justice, and do not even know what sins crying to heaven for vengeance are. They worship human life. And they worship human life because they do not believe in heaven.
Instead of praying that this man may meet his punishment at peace with the Lord, they pray that his miserable life may continue until its natural end. If this is not worshipping the world’s idols, I don’t know what is.
As to the pseudoscience: sorry, buddy, it’s not in the Gospel. We don’t remake our religion according to pseudo-scientific “research”. We believe in God, the Father Almighty, and all that. You can keep your golden calf of the “scientific research”. As for me and mine, we will follow the Lord.
For a Catholic, the case is open and shut, and shows that even the most evil man has the possibility (as this man has: a great grace!!) to escape hell by dying at peace with the Lord. Divine Justice and Divine Mercy at work at the same time. Satisfaction (for justice served) and Consolation (for mercy asked for). Beautiful.
But no, this requires believe in hell and heaven, and in the righteousness of the Capital Punishment. Something clearly beyond the reach of the Florida Bishops, who need to worship at the altar of the world and produce themselves in a triple somersault to try to explain to us why a six time murderer should not be executed.
Pathetic and un-Catholic; but most of all, stupid.
What will the Governor do? I don’t know. Nowadays politicians are not recognisable from bishops, and vice versa. He will do, I think, what he thinks it’s better for him in political term. Unless he is a Catholic with the capital C, in which case he will do what every real Catholic would do.
Pray that Mr Bowles may die at peace with the Lord.
And for the conversion to Catholicism of the Bishops of Florida.
A non-catholic publication has a non-catholic article about the Amazon Synod. No link, obviously.
The picture, however, says it all.
The caption: “Isidoro Jajoy, a shaman from Colombia’s Inga tribe, blesses people in Bogota Aug. 14, 2019, during a preparatory meeting for the October Synod of Bishops for the Amazon. (CNS/Manuel Rueda)”
Very near to the “shaman” is what can only be a nun, in a reverent gesture as she is receiving the so-called “blessing” from multi-coloured Isidoro.
My take is that all the present, including the nun, are Catholics ready and willing to have a representative of some savage cult – who, in order to remove all doubt, is also dressed like a savage – give them some sort of “blessing” in order to experience the alleged connection with the earth of the cult of the savages, or something of the sort.
It is too appalling for words, and no polite words can really describe the prostitution of Christianity that is happening here, and which the nun in the foreground so crudely and shamelessly represents.
These people are selling our religion to the cult of earth, the approval of the world, and the rituals of savages. They are led by a number of bishops, and you can be assured that neither the nun, nor the other present, nor the bishop or bishops at the event will offer any apology for this act of implicit apostasy – or, at best, religious synchretism – that comes from thinking that a savage cult can improve Catholicism in any way, shape or form. And may their ignorance be a partial excuse for the uninstructed people out there – some of whom might simply not realise the meaning of what they are doing – the nun and the bishops certainly do not have any.
I’ll put in a polite way.
Where is the Inquisition when you need them….?
Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia appears directed towards prompt retirement once the age limit has been reached.
Honestly, I can’t wait.
There was a time when Chaput resembled a decent Catholic and was, actually, often quoted for saying the right thing. Many bloggers, including yours truly, wrote appreciatively about him.
But Chaput was one of those strange V Ii animals who, with age, start to resemble a chameleon. Very much a Benedictite during Benedict’s reign, he began to amp up the social justice tone soon after Francis became Pope. The first one or two times I had a “what the heck is going on” moment. Later, I understood that this one was merely another product of the V II school of thought, with a finger permanently in the air, and all too ready to follow the wind.
I don’t know what excuses the Archbishop told to himself, but it is clear now that they did not obtain the hoped result. Francis veered so much to the left that no amount of heroic contortionism could suffice for the red hat.
The fact is, that whilst Chaput was one of those contortionism specialists V II so lavishly produces, at heart he was still a Catholic. He would dab in leftist political issues and indulge in the rhetorical talking points of the secular society, but he would not compromise on the basics of his own religion. Therefore, he became one of those “neither flesh nor fowl” Archbishops who manage to please only the press with their easy headlines (most recently, against “gun violence”; as if guns were violent…) even as they enrage good Catholics and are considered mediocre helpers by the bad ones.
No red hat, then, for Archbishop Chaput. Not even as token “conservative” (as far as Francisconservatives go) so that Francis can prove that he cares for (fake) “pluralism” of opinions.
We have no need for bishops who confuse Catholics picking and choosing what they want to defend of the tradition handed down to us. They perpetuate the confusion, are a very poor help for people to keep their faith, and largely give the impression that even those who appear “conservatives” need to bow to the tenets of the new world religion, like those of social justice whining, illegal immigration and gun control.
I for myself prefer that Francis has no token “conservatives” who conserve very little and very badly. Let him show his ugly face to the world in the open. When God wills, this test will pass; but those like Chaput do not do anything to help the recovery of sanity, they merely spread more confusion.
Good riddance, Archbishop Chaput.
It’s so sad the contortionism didn’t work.
The satanic America Magazine has gone full homo with an article titled, if you can believe it, “the Catholic case for Communism”. No link.
I have perused the extremely stupid bloviations of the author of the article (may the Lord have mercy on him, though I have my doubts) and would like to make a point or three of my own in the time I have at my disposal.
- There is no “good communist”. Even in the case where a person might think he is moved by the desire to help the suffering world, Communism is godless at its very roots. Therefore, a person who embraces communism has been infected by the same evil. If I want the end of the suffering of the baby seal but do not believe in God, I am not good, in that I lack the fundamental ingredient of true goodness. What I have is merely… fluffy feelings. A Communist, who embraces a demonstrably evil, ideologically godless movement, is much worse than that.
- The desire to see the end of economic inequality is not goodness, it is envy. God has made rich and poor, and Christianity has never condemned the rich qua rich. The desire to put an end to economic disparity is, again, a godless endeavour. By the grace of God you are born rich. By the grace of God you are born poor. By the grace of God you are given those opportunities that allow you to, if you so wish, improve your condition. But always, a Christian recognises that he must not desire other people’s stuff. To all of us, God gives those graces that are good for us. We do not resent the graces given to others, we are grateful for those given to us, be they material (like financial prosperity) or immaterial (health, beauty, intelligence, resilience, inventiveness etc.). Communists are envious people first, second, third, and last.
- Communists are no labourers for peace, nor are they agents of economic justice. To depict them in this way shows a complete ignorance of the root of both true peace and true justice: Christ. Communism has brought death and devastation without end. It had to be so, because a godless “religion” must perforce transform itself into a killing machine as its devotees will have all the determination of the Christian without any of God’s goodness. In Italy we had one of the most atrocious examples, as it is proven beyond doubt that, towards the end of WWII, Communist partisans killed as many anticommunist partisans as they could, in order to make a Communist revolution easier in the unstable phase that would follow the end of the conflict. Make no mistake, those partisans killing other partisans did so because they followed their godless religion, and “wanted a better world”. Come to that, you can say the same of Dr Goebbels, too…
- Catholicism and Communism do not have a “complicated relationship”. They are, literally, like the devil and the holy water: totally antithetical. To even suggest otherwise indicates a total lack of faith in Christ. The continuous attempt of the article to minimise the evil of Communism and try to discover similarities is the work of the devil.
I could go on for much longer, but firstly I do not have the time, and secondly even perusing the damn article made my blood boil, so I will leave it at this.
Communism is of Satan.
Those who don’t see it are of Satan, too.
I was reading this article about a tele-conversation between Jordan Peterson and FrancisBishop Barron. let me tell you first that I am not a fan of the first, and keenly dislike the second.
In the interview, Bishop Barron says something extremely disquieting, unworthy of a priest and outright creepy. Speaking of the way to assist the sinner and help him to repent, the FrancisBishop states:
“We have to accompany people all the way down [to the bottom before they can ascend],”
I have checked this part in the video, and he does not retract, or even correct, the statement. Actually he doubles down, in that he makes clear that he really intends this damn “accompaniment” in the damned Francis sense.
It is impossible to stress strongly enough how utterly and completely wrong this is. This is the satanic vision of a Church that sees Herself as a kind of gentle nurse, staying with you as you sink in a pit of drug addiction, alcoholism, sexual perversion or whatever that is, perhaps gently encouraging you to “grow out” of your way, but still making clear that the nurse is there watching you as you insert the needle.
Just a second after Peterson had (with a surprising petulant voice, I must say) complained that the Church “does not give hell” anymore to the faithful, Barron replies with a concept that is the most apt to accompany the sinner all the way to hell under the pretence of mercy; after which, every pretence to also give some strong warning can only be a travesty, as in the nurse who watches you as you insert the needle and then says to you that what you have done is… quite suboptimal.
Let us keep the metaphor alive, and let us say that the role of the Church is to slap the drug addict in the face, so hard that his head goes round and round for a good quarter of an hour; then have the slap followed by a vivid description of hell; then round everything up with another massive slap, ad abundantiam, so that the message remains.
This is why the Church excludes from communion public concubines and those in mortal sin. It’s Her way to make your head go round and round for a quarter of an hour, so that you get the message.
I am sick and tired of these damn, effeminate nurses. When I was a little child, we children were intimidated at the mere sight of the priest, walking around in his cassock, tall and solemn like he is Pharaoh. Why were we? Because we knew that the man was the very embodiment of what we knew to be unshakeable truths of life: death, judgement, and the atrocity of hell.
As we grew up, we had around us priests we did not wear a cassock, would or could not be seen as the embodiment of any authority, and probably did not believe in hell, either. We did not respect these weak, little men. We saw them as useless losers, unable to even do their job. We knew they were expected to be leaders of men. We saw that they had reduced themselves to … nurses.
A priest cannot escape giving his sheep a strong warning about hell. Hell must be the cornerstone of everything he does, because helping his sheep to avoid it and the only reason why he has the job in the first place. By all means, let him talk a lot about Incarnation, Redemption, Salvation, and the life of grace. But let him always, always point out to the only thing that counts in life: avoiding hell.
Barron is not part of the solution. He is part of the problem. He should stop brown-nosing Francis and, as they say, get a pair. Perhaps, one day he might, who knows, even become a worthy bishop.
A pretend “catholic” magazine (no link) has an article of pathetic excuses as to why Francis is so terrorised of his own people that he is not planning to visit Argentina any time soon.
In pure hack style, an entire people is insulted in order to prepare you for the news that they hate the Pope: egocentric, arrogant, bloody know-it-all is how they are introduced to you before telling you what they think of the Evil Clown. What they think is highly predictable: leftist, and “even” (on which planet do these people live!) “not Catholic enough”.
You don’t say…
These people are, obviously, uninformed, the hack hurries to let us know. They haven’t read his documents. No shit, Sherlock! As if a practical, working man had time to read the endless blabla of the Evil Clown to know what a tool he is, and his almost daily proclamations weren’t enough.
And woe one of the practical, hard working people should tell him something imprecise. It makes the entire nation uninformed, see?
At this point the attempts to defend Francis are becoming almost more ludicrous and pathetic than Francis himself. So many people have leant out of the window defending his subversive work, that they are now forced to desperate attempts at PR for a man that no PR agency in the world could ever save from ignominy. Nor does Francis understand the lesson, and tries to soften the tones or dial down his own anti-Capitalistic, anti-Catholic propaganda. No, he is just as arrogant and self-centred as the fake catholic hack accuses the Argentinians to be.
Francis’ Pontificate has had, up to now, two distinct phases.
The first is the Wheelchair Phase: basking in the approval of the masses with stupid gestures like paying for his own hotel and embracing every wheelchair in sight. This could not go on for long, because – as your humble correspondent predicted years ago – at some point the stupidity of the man would be enough to squander the immense patrimony of goodwill given to a Pope.
When this happened, you saw the other Francis, and the Pram Phase started. Uncaring of the ferocious criticism levelled at him from theologians, professors and simple people, the man reacted by increasing the frequency and the tone of his anti-catholic interventions. It is fair to say that by 2016 we were clearly in phase 2.
But this man is truly, truly stupid, and a third phase might be coming upon us soon, courtesy of his immense childishness and lack of intellect: the Amazonian Phase. In this phase, we are supposed to go looking for savages, asking them what their cult of the forest and their dialogue with the trees can teach us about God, that Christ somehow forgot to tell us. There must be, deep within the forest, a Special Revelation that wasn’t revealed to us up to now, and that we will all have to follow lest we are deemed “ossified”. What wonderful new tenets this Second Revelation will bring is easy to see already: married priests, rabid anti-Capitalism, faggotry all around, and a general understanding of sexual matters very much in line with the one of the above mentioned tree-worshipping savages.
Please, God, make the man die soon. No, not resign, because after the traumatic experience of the Three Tenors I doubt we could survive the Three Popes without extensive, collective brain damage.
Please, make him die. Repentant, if You so decree, and I wish him salvation with all my heart still. But please, make him die.
Please, make him die today.
I think many have learnt the lesson already.
I have written just yesterday a post wishing, like so many times in the past, that the Lord may take out the Evil Clown as soon as may be.
Alas, it wasn’t to be yesterday. But we can hope.
In the meantime, yesterday the news was published of the appointment of seven (read: seven) women to the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life.
I understand the Congregation now has 16 members; of whom five Cardinals, fours Bishops, and seven women.
This will be fun.
Pope Evil never ceases to show how much he hates the Church. Every day, he thinks how he can demolish a piece of what She is, and substitute it for a piece of FrancisChurch, a satanic mixture of arrogance, incompetence, corruption, social envy, faithlessness, homosexuality, paedophilia and, clearly, feminism.
If this man could become a dervish, or a shaman, he would do it.
Just to spite you.
What can the remaining faithful do against this scourge?
Remain faithful to the truth that has always been taught. Nourish yourself from the immense patrimony of Church tradition. Pray every day that this disgrace may cease to do damage today, by death or conversion (whichever comes first, but please today). Add this latest innovation to the list of things that need to be reverted back to sanity when the Evil Clown finally (as they say in Italy) stretches his paws. Do not accept compromises and and keep fighting every future Pope who, under the pretence of getting rid of the most extreme forms of FrancisMadness, keeps some of his “innovations” in place and continues the wrecking of the Church, albeit in a more intelligent way than this idiot is doing. Pray more, and do penance. Reflect that this man is the way given to you by Providence to actually, by His Grace, save yourself by way of sheer contrast, no matter how many will merit hell by following him.
Most of all, reflect that his V II predecessors, including JP II, carried the germs that have now given us this satanic disease.
This madness will have an end when the root of the problems is eradicated, and the root is the Second Vatican Council.
Every day, our Lord shows us the slippery slope originated by thinking that the truth can be “updated”, and that the Church can or should be “adapted” to the times.
You start with John XXIII, you end exactly where we are now.
If this cretin is to have a function, it should be this: the mass realisation that such a scale of evil would never have happened, if V II had not opened the door for it in the first place.
Die soon, Pope Feminist.
The only good you do is an involuntary one, and it is to remind Catholics of the beauty of the faith you have betrayed.
Athanasius is a pious Bishop in the time of the Arian heresy. The controversy is raging, and our Athanasius is deeply afflicted by it.
He would like for this to stop. Alas, it seems that even the Pope is on the wrong side. Certainly, the vast majority of his peers are. Some say, ninety percent.
What is a pious bishop to do? Denounce the heresy and go against the Pope?
He would be excommunicated, don’t you know? He would be forced to go into exile. He might even be killed!
And the schism, the schism! The Church would be torn asunder! And for what? There is obviously no chance of prevailing. An open conflict would only consolidate the heresy, make it even more official!
The numbers are just not there, says the good, pious bishop to himself. It will never work. He would only be doing the work of the devil.
And then there is the matter of the disobedience. He would be disobeying the Pope! How can a Bishop disobey the Pope? This can’t be right, surely? Surely?
And so our good, pious Bishop Athanasius kept praying, and did nothing. Well, he uttered here and there some words about this or that issue; but in the essentials, he did nothing. The unity of Mother Church must be preserved, you see.
Let us put everything in the hands of the Lord.
He will sort it out.
Say it again?
Are you sure?
You are saying that Athanasius did, in fact, exactly the contrary of what I have stated?
Openly fighting heresy, not fearing excommunication, exile, threats to his life? Appointing his own Bishops? Not looking at all at how many were on his side, because Christ was on his side? Not caring one bit whether the fight between right and wrong would cause a schism, because it is infinitely preferable that the Church is right than that the Church is united in heresy?
Are you sure?
Oh well, I suppose the book I have just read, History of Arianism, Francispress, 2019, foreword by Cardinal Cupich, must have been somewhat inaccurate….