Category Archives: Bad Shepherds
And it came to pass TMAHICH met, as the Vatican news agency reports, representatives of the Proddie community to which the late buddy of his, Tony Palmer, belonged before going to meet (or not, as the case may be) his Maker.
During this meeting Pope Francis made, as usual, some stunning affirmations, notable for their decidedly anti-Catholic character.
The main one: we sin when we focus on our differences.
I wish his grandmother had slapped him in the face as a child. I wish his spiritual director at the seminary had kicked his ass all day long. I wish he had become just another of the potheads leaving the priesthood in the Seventies. Alas, the second and third have not happened, and the first did not, if it really happened, had any lasting result.
The missionaries, preachers, theologians, and simple priests sinned all this time, then, by defending Catholicism against heresies. The countless martyrs who decided to suffer death or persecution in order to “focus on the differences” rather than going along with the world were, according to this nincompoop, sinning. Oh St Thomas Aquinas, you must be one of the greatest sinners of all! Oh St Thomas More and St John Fisher, what great sinners you were!
In charity, one must say that this man might be an alcoholic, but we must wait to see whether something is leaked about it. He might also, for all we know, still smoke marijuana (he already admitted he did so as a young man; another good example given to the youth. What a cool pothead our Pope is…). I am by now persuaded he is not stupid, and whilst obviously not very intelligent he seems to be rather cunning.
He must be evil, then.
He is most certainly not Catholic.
The rest of this possibly grappa-fueled or marijuana-driven speech goes along the same lines, so I will spare you the revolting details.
The devil divides us, you know; but we must be smarter and just overlook the differences. This is worse than Protestant, as you will find that even Protestants do not generally simply overlook the differences. Wrong as they are, they at least believe their wrongness is right. They do not say that they in the end just do not care. Francis, the Pope, does!
This is satanical. This is the same as saying that the specificity of Catholicism is just an obstacle to the understanding among Christians; a pastime for quibbling Theologians; an occasion of sin! It is so sad, that he can't have his sorry ass kicked all the way from the faggot-run hotel to Termini Station! It would be so good for his soul! It would be, perhaps, his only chance to redemption! Alas, as a Pope he enjoys physical inviolability. Which makes of his redemption a very arduous task.
This is an Apprentice Sorcerer who has already miserably failed his apprenticeship. Screwtape will not be happy with him at all.
This man is of the devil, and I thank God that He at least gives us the opportunity to spot it so easily, if we but stay by His teaching and the teaching of the Church. Had he been smarter in his doings, the deception would have been easier. As it is, no informed Catholic has any excuse.
There is no way you can love the Church and side with this man, knowing what he is saying.
This man is, clearly, the stuff of reprobates. Which is why they love him so much, and applaud him whilst he insults Catholics and Catholicism every day.
But you, dear read, you keep strong in the Faith of our Fathers. You know better than to follow a heretic, blaspheming, socialist, sacrilegious pothead just because he is dressed in white, and embraces wheelchairs.
The shocking news, published on Rorate, of the suspension a divinis of some FFI priests looking for a new religious order is a faithful mirror image of the “mercy” of this Pontificate. A Pontificate which is rapidly distinguishing itself for the brutal illegality of his main actor as much as for the obvious ignorance – or worse – of all things Catholic. And no, for the umpteenth time: a Pope is bound by the rules as long as he does not – if he is allowed in the first place, of course – change them. He is a Pope, not a Satrap.he is bound by the rules as long as they are there. He is the one who is supposed to behave exemplarily in the first place.
Mr Beria – or shall I say Father Volpi – is acting with the brutality of a Soviet Communist Party enforcer, and to think that Francis is not behind all of this is just as brainless as to think that Stalin was in the dark about Beria’s work.
“Soon, soon!” were the words of the Bishop of Rome to the old couple who had given several of their sons to the Order, and asking in so many words when the persecution would end. How Francis must have hated them! How he must have rejoiced in saying to them those words, and thinking “just you wait!”! I wonder if there is still one sensible reader of this blog who has doubts whether The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History (TMAHICH) is entirely appropriate.
It is clear what, in the mind of this man, those words meant: soon, soon will we subject your sons and all their confreres to the most brutal Soviet-Style reeducation camp. Soon, soon will we make them understand that resistance is futile. Soon, soon will we make clear to them that they have nowhere to run, and nowhere to hide. Woe to the bishops who should dare to give them asylum. Woe to those Friars themselves who should entertain such thoughts and dare to act on them: they will be ruthlessly suspended. This, by the by, mere weeks after a dissenting nutcase has been allowed to call himself a priest in good standing again, and has thanked the Bishop of Rome by making a shameless apology of Fidel Castro.
Truly, this Pope is beyond contempt. Truly, he is the ISIS of the Church. Truly, he is the enemy of everything still remaining within the Church that is still orthodox after 50 years of relentless devastation.
And the bullying, the bullying is breathtaking. No confrontation whatever with the SSPX, who would expose him as a little, stupid child with a running nose in no time, if he dared to sound the charge against them. Instead, Stalinian reeducation and unprecedented enforcement of heterodoxy over an entire order; persecution delivered from a mind of which the only thing that can be said for sure is that mercy does not live there; with Catholics, at least.
The Francis Archipelago is now working full steam. After the FFI and Lovieres Plano, others will follow as the Humble Bishop keeps persecuting orthodox bishops like there is no tomorrow. Bishop Finn could, in fact, be the very next.
The Church goes out of every persecution stronger and more confident in the end. However big the damage this man can make (and it can be a huge damage, if the Lord in his wrath keep punishing us with his presence), the end of the campaign is written already: Satan’s complete and utter defeat.
We laymen – bloggers, commenters, fathers, teachers, friends, sons and daughters – must denounce the evil intentions of this godless man as loud as we can: frankly, openly, brutally. Shock your friends at the pub, and let them smile at first when they hear you saying what a disgrace this Pope is. They will smile, I assure you. But just a few phrases of reasoned arguing will get the smartest among them thinking. God works in mysterious ways, but he certainly never measures a priest from the number of followers he has, or indicates to us that the vast majority must be, on the whole, right.
The God of Athanasius, and of Archbishop Lefebvre, is watching us. He wants to see whether we swim with the stinking tide of a pontificate smelling of sheep (and therefore, actually, of shit), or dare to say that true is true and wrong is wrong; and the Pope can smoke whatever he pleases, but he won’t change reality.
The Francis Archipelago is now in full operation. Pray the Lord that we may see it become a relic of the past, like the Gulag one.
But still, reflect that this event is not a matter of if, but only of when.
From one of the latest ramblings of the humble Bishop of Rome:
This is the man who made of his entire pontificate a show of his own alleged goodness, mercy, and revolutionary intent. A peacock if even there was one.
This is the man who makes no mystery of wanting to remake the papacy in his own image. Albeit he is very right in this: that his extreme boastfulness brought him extremely far from the Truth.
Christians are called to “be authentic with the truth of reality and of the Gospel,”
… says the man who is the very embodiment of falsification of the Gospel, and perversion of the Truth.
Can you believe this guy? Who is this: Francis The Self-Effacing Pontiff?
“The vain say, ‘Hey, look, I’m giving this check for the church’s work,’ and they show off the check; then they scam the church from behind,” he said.
The vain says: “Look: I am hopping on the bus and use a Ford Focus”, and they show off the bus ticket and the car. They they scam the Church from behind.
& Co. & Co. & Co… Follow the link to read a new high in papal hypocrisy.
By the by, this is another prime example of Francis’ use of the homily generator.
What a clown.
I am extremely thankful to the “Eponymous Flower” for their sterling work concerning what is happening in Paraguay.
There, you have a very conservative Bishop (uh? It reminds me of the FFI), who is therefore very successful (the analogy continues) and shames his peers by showing how it’s done (interesting!).
Someone accuses Bishop Livieres Plano of misconduct of various kind (where have I heard this?), and he is suddenly removed whilst savage rumours about his past and integrity emerge (Father Manelli anyone?).
The Vatican communiqué talks, ominously, of “unity of the Church”. At this point, yours truly has no doubts anymore.
The Bishop is, like Father Manelli and the FFI, a “threat to the unity of the Church” because he is an orthodox Catholic, shaming the clowns around him.
This cannot be tolerated. He must be removed, his work destroyed, his sheep reeducated to the NuChurch of Vatican II. He must be, if possible, personally destroyed. We have already seen this movie. This is a remake in great style.
Given the precedent of the FFI, I allow myself to consider, until evidence to the contrary emerges, the orthodox Catholic Bishop the good one, and The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History (TMAHICH) the villain. If anything, because I have the villain’s disgraceful acts in front of my eyes every day. In these cases, my suggestion to the “there are things we do not know” Apostles is the same as always:
But let us imagine that the Bishop Livieres Plano is truly bad. Let us imagine – just for the sake of reasoning, poor man… – that we are here in front of another Maciel.
Why, then, the appeal for to the “unity of the Church”, a clear indication that the Bishop was removed because he refused to dance the Tango of Vatican II together with all the other bishops?
Why would in this case Francis not appoint substitutes (the provisional one, and then the definitive one) who are every bit as conservative and orthodox as the disgraced man, in order to show that the problem lies merely in his personal conduct? The substitute is, from what we know, one in the mould of Archbishop Cupich. I foresee a brilliant career for him as long as Francis is Pope. Particularly if he is a pervert. But no, the kind of appointment clearly show the accusation of misconduct were, even if proven true, just a “happy” coincidence in the effort to remove sound Catholicism from the Church.
Then there is one last thought I would want to share with you.
Has anyone ever examined the long past of Francis as Bishop and Archbishop? What about a visitation, and thorough going through archives, press, testimonies, and street gossip? Are we sure no episodes of a questionable nature can be found? Is this not the man who was once found with marijuana in his luggage? (I wish I could find the link). How many priests has a bishop or archbishop? How easy is it to accuse him first, and disgrace them in the meantime? How would Francis like the Manelli treatment applied to him and his tenure in Argentina as rector of a seminary, bishop and Archbishop?
Do not be fooled. This is another instalment of the Stalinian purge Francis is executing. When Francis is done with this, the TLM and orthodoxy will get out of the window of the diocese as fast as practicable.
The man is an utter disgrace, a damn clerical Che, and a tool of Satan.
Let us pray the Lord every day that He may, in His mercy, free us from this horrible, if utterly deserved punishment.
The Extraordinary Synod is rapidly approaching, and there is now no day without an interview of some Bishop or Cardinal, taking the one or the other side.
In the middle of all this turmoil, one thing is clear: whether Francis will dare to break taboos or not, he is causing the breaking of taboos to be discussed; freely, openly, as a matter of course.
Already it is discussed whether the canonical process of annulment should be (official word) “streamlined”. Already, “streamlined” might mean that the bishop, or a structure set up by him, should decide about annulments in a “non-juridical” way. Already, some say that not even this is necessary, but a prayerful “sit in” with the priest should at least achieve what many concubines, in the end, want: village respectability.
The pattern is well-known and has been long experimented: some total revolutionary (Kasper) proposes the totally revolutionary solution of tolerating but not accepting communion for concubines and assorted adulterers, meaning: having the sacrilegious praxis become everyday fare. After this, a “moderate” (Scola) will come out, proposing among other things (Mundabor’s commentary: what a slimy b@st@rd!) a thinkable solution for annulments that is every bit as savagely diabolical, but has the merit of sounding more moderate; because you see, the idea is not to violate the rules; merely to make a mockery of them in the first place.
Suddenly, nothing is sacred anymore. The way how to slaughter a sacrament is a subject of discussion, debate, essays, interviews, books. Suddenly, Truth is perceived as fighting for its existence.
In the meantime, Francis enjoys the lío. Catholic against Catholic, Cardinal against Cardinal. The open confrontation is, certainly, obligatory for the right side; but still, the very fact that such a confrontation exists will confuse countless Catholics, and persuade countless non-Catholics that there is no point in converting. If even Cardinals quarrel with each other about the Truth, what is Truth? And is this most un-Christian of all Pilate-like slogans not, itself, ceaselessly promoted by TMAHICH, with his insisted criticism of “excessive doctrinal security”? Can a slogan ever be more meant to promote lió than this, apart from the “who am I to judge” nuclear device?
Is this enough lío for you?
Are you still trying to read Francis through, of all people, Benedict?
I bet it is enough for TMAHICH. He is, for all the world to see, the Pope who “breaks taboos” and “paves the way for a new era”. Not for him, very probably, to be the one who lets the bombs explode. He will, very probably, be happy with being the one who made the explosions thinkable in the first place, put the bombs in place, and armed them. He does not need to be the one who orders the explosions in order to be loved by countless infidels for the rest of his life. He will be on the safe side avoiding the biggest detonations. Nothing better than reaping the fruits of a revolution without the dangers of real armed combat. The perks, I suppose, of being a shameless and faithless Pope.
Reading Francis through… what?
Believe me, TMAHICH can be best read through Saul Alinsky, or Karl Marx, or Hans Küng, and I doubt he is one bit better than any of them.
He is sowing strife and controversies, breaking taboos, attacking sacraments, insulting the Blessed Virgin, disfiguring Christ, perverting the most basic rules of Christianity, without even the risk of a major revolt.
He will, I think, very publicly stop those who want to detonate the bombs. The excited Pollyannas will hail him as the saviour of Catholicism, whilst the mainstream idiots – bar very few, extreme idiots – will buy the “prudent moderniser Pope” without a second thought.
How do you like lío?
It is there now; dished in front of you every day; pickaxing at Catholicism every day God sends on this earth.
Please. Please. Please.
Free us from this scourge.
I generally devote to Father Nicholson the attention I dedicate to the blathering Dumbos: zero. I would love to continue with this, in my eyes, very sensible praxis; but Father Nicholson has left such a pool of stinking piss all over the floor, that the very pungent smell compels me to say a word or two about this disgraceful, intellectually challenged man, a disgrace for the habit he wears.
As many of you will know, Father Nicholson has not only compared the SSPX to satanists; he has maintained that the SSPX-promoted reparation mass for the black mass in Oklahoma is… worse than the black mass itself!
Stop here, and calm yourself. Do you generally get angry at the senseless blathering of a child? Thought not…
Let us first see where Father Dumdum is leading us here.
The Pontiff Emeritus has lifted the excommunication on people who are, in their acts, worse than Satanists; the Vatican has structures devoted to the dealing with people worse than Satanists; the Vatican has declared that these people, worse than Satanists, are in communion, though they embarrassingly (for them) tend to call this communion “imperfect”; a Cardinal has received people worse than Satanists only a few days ago, and released a very gentle communiqué about the matter.
I could go on, but you get the gist: Father Nicholson is just plain thick.
But let us now try to start a journey in the workings of this child's brain, and discover the reason for his extremely stupid affirmation, and childish pooping outside of the WC.
The man is, at his core, a Nazi. Better: he is a Nazi child. In his little mind, obedience to the Pope is all that matters, and there is nothing demanding from us a higher allegiance, on earth or in heaven. This is 100% Führerprinzip, and Father Nicholson has devoted to it all the scarce neurons at his command; with the smelling result I have just described.
These people may be stupid, but they are dangerous. Particularly so, when the clerical garb they wear induces other not-too-bright people to give credence to their absurd blathering. This is the most extreme form of clericalism you can find; a de facto deification of the Pope perfectly identical to the Nazi de facto deification of Adolf Hitler. This is purest heresy.
If I do not say an angel, but a Pope comes to him and tells him things in contrast with truth, not only Father Nicholson believes him like the dumdum he is; but he also accuses everyone who happens to side with 2000 years of Christianity of being… worse than Satanists!
Boy, this is one who has to be sent back I do not say in the seminary, but in the kindergarten.
Father Nicholson is the perfect Nazi. Hitler would be very proud of him.
Satan is, I am sure, rather pleased too.
Pray for Father Dumbo. He is in great need of it.
Another example of the battle lines now forming in preparation of the Extraordinary Synod arrives from Rorate Caeli.
On the one hand, an abysmal failure of a bishop; one of those who have reduced the once very Catholic Belgium into a wasteland with perverted wannabe marriages and euthanasia. The man – who, if we are honest, looks like a crossing between a fag and a eunuch; like so many of his rosy, puffy, harmless colleagues – reflects on the crisis all around him, and the thought that he might be the problem does not enter his mind. No, more of him and of those like him is the solution. A church more accommodating, more complicitous, more superfluous than he himself already is. If the Bishop is a fag, he is a very stupid one.
Thankfully, not every bishop thinks in the same manner; at least, not all the times.
From Germany, of all places, comes a rather convincing reply; unusually blunt for a bishop; more than unusually blunt for a German bishop; and rather rare considering that this is an open, direct challenge to what a colleague of his has stated only days ago.
They aren’t all atheists, then, these Western bishops. They aren’t all obsessed with being popular, and in the graces of TMAHICH. Some of them do have some fear of the Lord left. Some of them do understand that to be silent is to be an accomplice. Some of them still think a Bishop than a stupid marketing man, peddling an even more stupid product, with an extremely high content of saccharin, in which the public is not interested.
How many of them are there around in Western Europe? Clearly the minority. Perhaps a tiny one.
The skull of the others will pave the ways of hell. A hell in which they clearly do not believe.
Look at Bishop’s puffy, self-satisfied, smug fag-face and make your own estimate about the odds in his sad case. Which means, of course, that it is a work for mercy to pray for his conversion and repentance; fag-face and all.
Read here on the Eponymous Flower how Francis is treating the FFI.
I leave you to the link to get the facts.
I point out, like a commenter did, that Francis said “soon, soon!” to the elderly devout couple asking them when the situation of the FFI would come to an end. Not only there is no “soon”, but it is clear the aim is the maimimg of the organisation, leaving am amputated body full of reactionaries meant to be “re educated” to Francis’ mantra of, erm, well, mercy.
This is the man we and the Church are dealing with. A commenter asks whether Francis is the ISIS of the Church, and another assents. How could any sensible Catholic who is not blind disagree? God is punishing us with the scourge of Francis, so that we pay the price of 50 years of rebellion. He sends us this unbelievably shameless man so that even the retarded and the Pollyannas may – at the latest, when their nephews are persecuted, or raped by Muslim fanatics – understand the madness that is still going on, now raging undisturbed in the very heart of the Vatican. May God free us from this disgrace, from this shameless little apprentice Peron with no respect for the Blessed Virgin, Our Lord, or His Church. Readers ask me: what does TMAHICH stands for?
The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History.
The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History.
The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History.
The founded rumour reaches us that Francis has asked the list of the bishops ready to give a home to those willing to leave the FFI.
Reflect one second if this is not a very reasonable suspicion. Reflect whether such a behaviour would be, through and through, like him.
A Chinese reeducation camp is the nearest alternative this man has in store for devout Catholics, of course barring laicisation. The rumour may or may not be true – considering both the source and the gravity of the accusation it rather probably is – but truth or not truth, the extreme reasonableness of the suspicion makes the difference rather limited in practice. If he is not doing it, he is certainly the type who could do it. This kind of extreme mercilessness is just the kind of thing you'd expect from TMAHICH, talking all the time about “mercy” when it is convenient to flog Catholicism.
This is the time to say “enough” and to write to the SSPX – where true Catholicism lives – asking to be admitted to be able, one day, to be a Catholic priest as God commanded. May it be true that we are being punished with many bad priests for our arrogance and rebellion, I still do not think God wants to deprive the faithful of the few priests who really take things seriously.
Certainly, for many an FFI friar it will be an unpleasant experience to realise that the SSPX was right all along. Sure, the one or other may feel martyrdom is the way God has called him to.
But I cannot avoid thinking that all of them, without exception, became FFI friars because they realised they had a vocation to be sound and faithful Catholic friars and priests, uphold Catholic thinking, defend the Truth, be a shepherd to the sheep.
Up to the SSPX, then; hoping to be considered worthy of admission or affiliation.
The SSPX is where sound Catholicism is.
Bishop Tobin is the last in a long series of puttanelle who suddenly start reflecting whether the Church of Christ hasn’t, perhaps, betrayed His message and done everything wrong these 2,000 years. May he repent and obtain forgiveness when he dies; and I hope for Bishop Tobin that, if he dies unrepentant, God is more lenient than I think He will be.
Dr Peters has already written a rebuttal of the many points in which the Bishop piddles out of the WC and leaves a mess all around. I suggest you go there and read his extremely diplomatic, but very clear reply in its entirety.
What I would like to point out today is the utter and complete betrayal of Christ and His Church that is put in place every time a bishop, of all people, tries to explain to us the problems in behaving like the Church has always behaved; a behaviour made the more repulsive when this is made taking as excuse a warped reading of the Gospel. Nor can his apparent contradictions fool anyone about his subversive intent and the fact that this is the usual Modernist/V II style. “Of course we uphold Church teaching, but….”.
The Devil can quote the Gospel for his purposes, and it is not difficult to take it in isolation and let it say whatever we want to; which, by the way, is the reason for thousands of different Protestant congregations, all claiming to follow the same Scripture.
Every child used to know that; which is why they went to Catechism first and to Doctrine later, where they would be given a coherent and organic exposition of the Truth; this, in turn, would allow them to avoid the danger of reading the Gospel and raping it for their own purposes.
Not so in the new world of our purple puttanelle.
They will take a verse or two in isolation – say: Jesus’ condemnation of the extremely rigid formalism of Jewish Sabbath observance; clearly reflected in the understanding of Sunday in all Catholic Countries – and wonder whether, in light of his extraordinary discovery, rules should now make any sense at all. Perhaps should we, then, decide that public adulterers could receive communion? Look, the Jews were wrong! It follows that the Church is wrong too, right?
There is only one word for the Bishop’s behaviour: prostitution. And no, I do not care if there are far worse bishops that Tobin around. Battle lines are been formed here, and no bishop can claim to remain neutral. On the side of Christ, or on the side of Satan. Bishop Tobin has chosen Satan’s, and the fact that he did abundantly shows the extent of the problem.
Ask yourself whether the bishop would have expressed himself in such terms during Benedict’s pontificate, and you will see very clearly the poison in his soul.
This, my friends, is another one looking for Brownie points by TMAHICH.
The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History is on record with saying that the Church is not a glorified NGO.
Unsurprisingly by such a circus tool, a glorified NGO seems to be exactly the vision he has of the Church: an organisation in which everything – from his homilies and off-the-cuff blatherings to his foreign travels to his verbous documents and interviews – is meant to trumpet the Church as the Force For Social Advancement, whilst the concept of salvation is dismissed as automatic achievement and, therefore, largely irrelevant as is repentance, conversion, & Co.
This NGO mania is so advanced, that the Church administration should now be reorganised to better serve the purpose. One is truly reminded of those Multinationals' restructuring at the core of which, they assure us, is the desire to be nearer the wishes and thinking – and purses – of the customer.
A “congregation for the Laity” should now be created. We already have, to my knowledge, a pontifical council with that name, but this here is clearly a promotion. Actually, I thought the Church Herself, and her organisation of bishops and priests and deacons, exists for the laity, so that the Congregation is a bit as if the British Government created a “ministry for the government”; but such are the times we live in.
This congregation would occupy itself with poverty, peace, justice and all the issues that sound so well in the ear of the world. It will be, so to speak, the spearhead of Pope Robin Hood. It will fill the void until now existing between papal rhetoric and papal administration.
I have no doubt the head of this new dicastery has been already selected by the Pope; and if he will not be one so utterly, as the Italians say, impresentabile as Maradiaga, it will probably be a slightly more presentable version of that unworthy prelate.
This will be a powerful man; at the centre of the attention, and rather well positioned to take Francis' place when he dies or resigns.
Say hello to “Glorified NGO”, then. In a world in which salvation is a given and giving public scandal is worthy of a Papal pat on the back, the only issues that count will be the exclusively worldly ones.
Let me stress it once again: this is The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church Hystory. He has, in fact, deserved an acronym just for him: TMAHICH.
It's Tuesday, and the news aggregators report the tsunami of headlines concerning the Unholy Father's latest scandal.
Francis is “inclusive”; he signals a “shift”; he indicates sex outside of marriage is, even, “not a sin”. Things like that. A lot of them.
As always, the planet is now divided in two. The first group are the Pollyannas and the stupid (often the same people) believing that Francis is being “merciful”, without explaining to us why it seems not that the concubines have repented of their real sins, but rather that the Church has repented of her alleged ones. The second are all other, those with a functioning brain and the will to use it, who see what is all too plain and executed completely under the sun: the pickaxing of Catholic teaching in favour of a new sentimental, shallow, and very stupid imitation Christianity in which poverty and social justice are the only real problems, and sin is the preserve of mafia bosses and rosary-counting faithful.
No one can say with a straight face that this umpteenth tsunami of headlines is not exactly what Francis wanted. It is too obvious, and it has happened too many times, to allow any such behaviour. This is a Pope clearly acting with malice aforethought, perfectly aware of what headlines each and every of his antics will generate.
Some people seem to think if they blind themselves and refuse to see the very obvious evidence, this will be counted for them – or at least not against them – when they die.
They are sorely mistaken, because they are being his accomplices and enablers.
I am reliably informed that since the very worthy Father Finigan has left, two novelties have surfaced.
1) The new parish priest (Father Fisher) can celebrate the Traditional Mass, but he won’t.
2) The “Tablet” has made his reappearance.
I do not doubt that many of you miss Father Finigan, and I agree with you such a one is not easy to replace. But there is, in my eyes, a great difference between a substitute without the talent of his predecessor – which is excusable – and one who undermines his work – which isn’t -.
The Tridentine Mass goes out just as, rather symbolically, the “Tablet” gets in. You can, dear parishioner, now avail yourself of a number of excuses as to why what is happening is not bad; or not so bad; or not very bad. You can say to yourself that the new man (Father not-much-of-a-Fisher) does not want to celebrate the Tridentine Mass because he feels he would not be as good as his predecessor. Or you may tell yourself that perhaps he has an unpleasant cough, that would – for the moment at least – suggest it is better to cough exclusively in vernacular. Perhaps you may want to examine the possibility that Father has a lisp, and thinks this stands in the way of a worthy pronounciation of the words, among others, “Dominus”, “Agnus”, “Miserere” and, obviously, “corpus”. The possibilities are endless.
The same applies to the sudden reappearance of the “Tablet”. Perhaps Father Finigan didn’t consider it an obscene rag from and for the enemies of Catholicism, but was simply allergic to that particular paper? Could it be that the “Tablet” has now become orthodox? What if Father Fisher is, in a very cunning and Francis-like move, selling the Tablet again in order for his parishioners to understand how bad it is? Or perhaps his bishop has threatened him with horrible persecution – like, say, beating him with a feather – if he does not sell the magazine?
The last line of defence might, as so often, be: “but he is so nice”. Nice people, so this reasoning goes, can’t be bad priests. Everyone knows that. Father is nice; therefore, everything must be OK, eh? no?
Or, my dear parishioners, you can decide that you will not swallow any strange story; that you will look at reality straight in the eyes; and that these changes so soon after the new man’s arrival can only mean one thing: Father Finigan’s parishioners are going to be slowly, but surely subject to a parish reeducation camp, that will only be considered concluded when the “Tablet” sells well, dissent is fashionable and so lío, and Francis is the best Pope e-v-a-h!
What to do, my dear parishioners?
Look long and hard for a TLM solution suitable to you. If you can afford to travel some distance, consider it. Do not exclude any possibility. There are two SSPX possibilities in London only, of which Wimbledon should be feasible for many. You may want to consider it even if you were a NO parishioner. One day, you might remember how you decided to attend the TLM when… it went away, and may the Lord reward you richly!
You may, in all cases, not have any suitable Tridentine alternative and realise now you have lost the one you loved. I feel with you for your loss. But TLM or no TLM, I suggest that you do this: make the choice, today, that you are not going to attend in a parish that offers the “Tablet” for sale. Not once. Starting from this very moment.
Nothing good can come, in the long term, from a priest who not only tolerates, but reintroduces the “Tablet” after his worthy predecessor removed it. Nor can you lull yourself in the hope that by “staying” and “fighting your battle”, the parish climate will change. How many “Tablet”-like priests do you know who have been converted by his own parishioners? How probable is it that he will change his ways? How probable that the parishioners will slowly change theirs?
My advice to you, my dear parishioners, is that you immediately stop attending in Blackfen, with no ifs and no buts; that you look, and keep looking, for TLM options in the months and years to come, availing yourself of that possibility as soon as you reasonably can; that you draw a line in the sand, and decide that the time of nice and smiling priests siding with the world has come to an end, and you will not attend anymore in a parish that sells the Tablet, for the good of your own soul and of the souls of those entrusted to you.
Take courage, my dear parishioners. Don’t cling to a past now gone. Father Finigan is now rather far away, and the “Tablet” is smiling at you from the shelf instead.
Is this parish, the same but now another, the place where you want to attend? Is this the priest you want to entrust with the task of guiding you towards salvation?
The TLM is out. The “Tablet” is in. Or I could put it in another way: Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. You have the truth of this in front of you. It is being, in fact, being rubbed under your nose as I write this.
One life, and after that the judgment. Do not entrust people who offer to you the “Tablet” to read the task of guiding you on your way to Purgatory. From their magazines you will know them. Do not be deceived by the gradualism with which he will go at his work: orthodox homilies perhaps, and here and there a hint of former times. This is one who sells you the Tablet, and can celebrate the Tridentine Mass but won’t.
Let Father answer for it when he dies.
As to you, I suggest that you keep your distance from both the magazine and the priests who sell it.
I do not think the couples married by the Unholy Father are the first who have behind them a rather turbulent past; I do not know, either, how a conservative priest (say, a SSPX priest: just to be sure there is no “mercy” bollocks) would react when a couple of concubines were to tell him they want to marry in the church.
For example:would he require that they live separately whilst they undergo marriage preparation? How long would the preparation have to be? And Co.
These questions are not for me to answer: ask your friendly, sound priest. Marriage is a complicated field.
What I do know is that most certainly a Pope should not even dare to think to marry such concubines himself, for the simple reason that by doing so he would send a clear message that it is more or less okey-dokey for people to live in sin and scandal. Hey, we can marry at any time; the Pope himself might marry us, nowadays!
And this is, I think, exactly the message the Unholy Father wants to send: in the age of mercy we aren't so strict, eh? What's a bit of scandal among merciful friends, no? If one fornicates and lives in scandal and undermines marriage and “seeks the Lord” (whatever that means) who am I to judge?
The result of this – I do not know whether stupid, atheist or satanic – attitude is that more couples will now feel authorised to live in sin before marrying, feeling that the Pope himself dismisses this little peccadillo with a smile and a wink. The pressure will be particularly strong among less observant Catholics, those who do not have a clear idea of the gravity of the fact and will now have an inducement to downplay it. They will feel encouraged by Francis to go down the same path, which is certainly grave matter, and put themselves at risk of damnation.
This is how, in this as in so many other matters, “mercy” becomes its exact contrary: complicity with Satan.
One of the women married on Sunday recognised half of this truth. She thought she would never be married by the Pope, because she isn't a good Catholic. Yes, of course she isn't; and yes, of course she doesn't deserve it. But the woman then proceeds to blind herself from the other eye, stating, in a perfect non sequitur, that it is so wonderful that the Pope marries her anyway. “I thought I was bad, but the Pope marries bad people; therefore it is not the Pope who encourages being bad, but it is I who am good and the Pope who is oh so wonderful”.
This kind of illogical thinking will be, starting from today, the thinking of many. It will be very easy for them to choose the broad and inviting path of sin, when the Pope himself shows the way.
Nor can the very stupid argument be made – yes, I have read that too – that as we are all sinners there's nothing to be so excited about. That we are all sinners is exactly the problem, and a Pope is certainly not there to encourage us on this path. Actually, I though his job was exactly the contrary: to help us lead lives as deprived of sin as we can manage, with fear of the Lord and love for his commandments. How stupid of me.
On Sunday, the Unholy Father has put another bomb under the chair of Matrimony, teaching his sheep to not take seriously the commandments of the Church, and undermining marriage as he downplays concubinage.
Beware of the wolves. Particularly when they say to you they are merciful.