Category Archives: Bad Shepherds
I read an article days ago complaining that 50% of those baptised as Catholics stop attending as young adults. I am surprised it’s not more. Looking at my experience in the UK, I can give to my readers some clues as to why.
Firstly, it is a very childish experience. The lack of solemnity and the dumbing down of the liturgy has made of the Mass an exercise for children. When the children grow up, they don’t want to be identified with that stuff anymore.
Second, it is a very child-oriented experience. You see here the anxious desire to keep the children Catholic. But if being Catholic is tailored to please children, young adults will feel put off by it. It will be dismissed as not suited to one’s degree of knowledge and learning, like a nursery is for a third grader.
Thirdly, it never teaches Catholicism. The homilies are such watered down feel-good drivel, that the same homilies could have been – bar a couple of sentences, when you’re lucky – made in an Anglican church. But their Anglicans friends don’t attend, so why would they?
Fourthly, it promotes the Church of Nice. The applauses for the mothers, and for the children, and for everybody who breathes contribute to this idea that we are all so good, we wonder why we need going to church.
Fifthly, it is ecumenical. Other sects are spoken of in a climate of nice approbation, whilst the present nod in heartfelt assent of how good not only us, but everybody else is. If we are all good, one wonders, again, what use it is to go to church.
Sixthly, it is inter religious. Every Assisi rubbish meetings will be praised to the sky. People sit in the pew, and think to themselves the inconvenience is for nothing.
Seventh, a lot of those who attend are clearly not interested. They attend exclusively so that their children can attend the local Catholic school, but it is evident from their – and their Children’s – behaviour that they really don’t care. They are simply making an act of presence, because the school requires them to attend.
Eight, and probably worst of them all: they worship at the altar of the world. Niceness is equated with being a good man. The grown children realise that in order to attend at the church of nice they don’t need to go to church. Plus, they still get a (faint) whiff of Catholic principles and tenets which, to them, are not nice at all. Their worship of niceness is very established by now. The Church – and attendance in church – will be seen as a repressive organisation, according to the same rules of niceness they have heard in church for so many years. Having to choose between an uninspiring Church which does not even know what it wants, and some ideal that lets them feel superior and very good with themselves, many young people will choose the latter.
In short: the church of Vatican II is killing herself.
How do we remedy to this? Going back to tradition, in everything. Liturgy, doctrine, prayers, punishments. How do we make damage? Happy clapping, thinking we are so good we don’t need a Church, refusing to state what is specifically Catholic with non-Catholics.
There, I think I have given some useful hint as to why we haemorrhage faithful. They have their fault, for sure; but the young faithful smell the fraud much faster than their parents.
Old, Fat, Bitter, Godless, Wannabe Hippy Ass Complains About The Young
“Indietrismo” is the new word some speech writer in the Vatican has coined to allow Francis to express his dislike for people who are, you know, Catholics.
It means “backward-ism”, and we understand that, in the eyes of Francis, is meant as an insult.
You see, not to put too fine a point on it, the old, lewd, fat, bitter guy is angry with the people who want to go back to Catholicism, back to proper liturgy, back to proper doctrine, back to precise and correct theology, back to actually practising the sacraments, back to proper prayer, back to doing penance, and back to all that other stuff that, actually – and to the chagrin of the old, lewd guy – makes a Catholic.
I find this backward-ism, in fact, really good. It seems I am not the only one, either. The SSPX has just consecrated a $42m church, which shows that the movement is in rude health.
It appears, in fact, that the people who want to go back to sanity are, in great part, young; whilst those who think that the Blessed Virgin might have felt betrayed at the foot of the cross are, in fact, old, fat, bitter, ignorant and very, very stupid like the Evil Clown itself. Hence, his complaining in the company of decrepit, dying Jesuits who think it’s 1969, and who have by now hopefully forgotten that they are atheists, heretics, homosexuals, or all of the above. No worries, though. They will be reminded soon enough.
Back is the new forward, whilst the decrepit heretics who think themselves progressives are those who want to bring us back to pre-Christian times, when people worshipped trees and totems and animals just as the Francistroops worship the climate, the forest, and retarded girls from Sweden.
The guy is losing, and he knows it. He is losing and it makes him angry. He has already understood that, when he is six feet under, he will be ridiculed just as much as he will be condemned. For a big, fat ego like the guy’s it’s a kick on the teeth even if he is an atheist. Hence, the bitterness.
We just had a coronation.
Let’s hope we’ll soon have a new one; and that, this time, the new king will be better than the old one.
The Chatty “Missionary”
Francis is, or so he says, part of a “mission” to end the war in the Ukraine. The mission is, says the Frankie, “not yet public”, which is why he makes public that there is a non-public mission underway.
You see, there is a reason why such missions are not public. The most likely is that the components of such mission want to reach an agreement among them before going public with both the mission and the proposal. This way, the peace proposal will have more weight and both warring parties might look at it attentively.
It is really like Francis that he could not shut up about the Vatican being part of such a mission, and would reveal to the world what must evidently stay hidden. But hey, he got to feel important on the moment.
Also, he peeved the Ukrainians who, predictably, said that they know nothing about it. Makes sense, of course, for the reasons explained above. Whatever is happening, is happening behind the scenes, with the participation of actors who are either powerful (like China, the US, Germany or the EU) and therefore with the power to contribute to shape the events, or useless dreamers (like religious leaders, the Dalai Lama, this or that Rabbi or Mufti), able only to feel good with themselves and signal virtue. In both cases, it is clear that Francis spilled the beans on something about which he should have shut up.
It really is like this guy. First, second, third and fourth most important thing in everything. Virtue signalling everywhere. What a great guy.
Independently from Francis, it is my opinion that it will be very difficult to move Russia to accept peace on anything else than their own terms. They have, in fact, made clear some days ago that even China will not sway them. They will do their own thing and will accept the peace they want at the time they want. At that time, they will of course allow everybody to validate Russia’s choice by calling it their peace plan.
If you now excuse me, I have to dash.
I am on a mission to save humanity from heresy.
The mission is now underway, but it’s not yet public.
Pachamama Good, Christ Bad. Or: Tough Guys, Clowns, And Cowards
An Italian Priest has been suspended a divinis for having dared to publish a 1300-Pages mammoth book about Francis’ heresies, with particular reference to Amoris Laetitia.
Don Tullio Rotondo, the courageous and, actually, Catholic priest, has been suspended by his own bishop.
This means that this was not, say, the CDF suspending Father for being heretical, something which would have been extremely fun to watch. It is, instead, his own pastor suspending him for being Catholic.
I wonder how many, certainly, heretical books have been published by religious in the Sixties and Seventies (and later, too) without the relevant Ordinary emitting the faintest peep. But no, in the time of “who am I to judge” Catholics are very, very rapidly condemned.
I cannot imagine the Bishop’s decision having been taken without some phone calls from the Vatican, giving him some useful hints as to what to do. I say this because I cannot imagine the Evil Clown reacting to the book with anything other than a tirade filled with expletives. But again, it’s very difficult to challenge the courageous Don Tullio to an orthodoxy contest when you are the heretic. Therefore, let us call the bishop (who, likely, desired nothing more than being left alone, as most of them do) and order him to kick the priest where it hurts.
This is so Francis it actually screams “c@zzo!!”
Sadly for the bishop – and the clown – this Don Tullio seems the kind of guy who embraces persecution in the name of Christ and it is, in fact, consoling that there are V II priests able to behave in this way.
Note here that Don Tullio does not say that Francis is not the Pope. He states – correctly so – that the guy spreads heresy. He does not flee from reality, he gives it a long, hard stare in the face, and then says what he sees.
I don’t think that Bishop Cibotti is being Ultramontanist. I think he is just being a coward. In fact, the suspension a divinis is not entering, from what I can see, the controversy. It is simply justified with Don Tullio’ alleged disobedience, seen that Don Tullio prefers to obey to Christ first. A tough guy, this one. I hope he keeps resisting. I also hope he will evolve his thinking and embrace Traditionalism.
But look: what is this to do with tolerance and inclusion? Why not choose peace instead of confrontation? Why this ossified reaction to a man simply following the Spirit?
The Bishop (a Francis appointment) knows why; he is just too coward to tell you.
The conclusion of all this is: Pachamama Good, Christ Bad. Clearly, neither Francis nor this Cibotti guy believe in the Judgment. If they did, they would believe in a very different way.
Further Proof Francis Is Just Plain Dumb
Pope Clown has made further modifications to the (don’t laugh) “synodal process”.
I think he might have done us a favour.
The new measures are more cosmetic “inclusion”, with the participation of women and lay men instead of bishops only, but with Francis making all decisions himself anyway. The result of this is that the synod becomes indistinguishable from a Sunday afternoon “meet the faithful” exercise, at the end of which Francis excrements at his pleasure; and will, therefore, be discounted even more by the faithful than a normal synod would have been.
Every idiot understands that religion is not dependent on what people, particularly lay people, think, or vote. A Catholic idiot understands it even faster than a non-Catholic one, because of the natural role of the hierarchy in the life of the Church.
The casual Catholic reader who is informed that a new “synod” (of which he never knew what it was in the first place) with the vote of women and laymen, has approved this and that, will forget in three seconds what it was all about and move to more interesting and relevant things in life like sports, politics, the history of the semicolon, or watching paint dry.
Francis is making his circus-church like the world. In this way, his circus-church becomes indistinguishable from the world and, basically, invisible. This is, in the current circumstances, the best that can be hoped for and allow for the perennial teaching of the Church to be spread more easily.
As the next measure, I suggest that Francis organises, together with women and lay people, a tombola, a karaoke, and a cooking contest.
We are almost there already, anyway.
The Monsters Among Us
When I read this article, and followed the link, I could not avoid thinking that the have become a civilisation of monsters. Of course, it’s they who are the monsters, but they still live among us.
It is so atrocious, on so many level. Words like “early onset gender dysphoria” can only be imagined by people who have taken leave from basic logic and, I would say, humanity.
A lot of people are monstrous here: the equipe of surgeons attempting the Frankenstein operation; the doctors who prescribed the hormone blocking drugs; the parents of the young mad guy who clearly approved of the hormone treatment and, finally, the madman himself, who, after reaching 18, certainly gave his consent to this mad, extremely tragic parody of God, where they all together (the mad boy, his monstrous parents and the monstrous surgeons) all try to remake reality according to their mad and extremely degenerate fantasies.
Let that sink in: young man dies because, when attempting to make a fake vagina out of his prick, it was necessary to perform a second – and fatal – operation to take the tissue from elsewhere when it turned out his chemically castrated prick was too little to make the fake vagina. The linked article says this is good, because you know, “girls” with “early onset” “gender dysphoria” really like to think they have a “vagina”.
However, the monstrosity goes further than this. The lawmakers who have allowed this, and the voters who are conscious of this and do not react (you would be surprised how many people, even here in Europe, have been unaware of this stuff, as it was pretty much a hush-hush exercise to please extreme minorities) need to accept the blame, too. But then again, these voters are guaranteed to be in favour of abortion and gender theory, both ranking high on the monstrosity scale.
It is no surprise the Russians consider us a bunch of perverted madmen. Whilst we are not – by far not – all like this, these are the “values” our societies are propagating, and this is the social order the Ukraine is protecting on our behalf ( whereby we do the paying, and they do the dying). The globalist, one-world, perfectly Christ-free cabal trying to run all of us is all in favour of this kind of rubbish. You need to be weaned off Christianity, you see. In order to do this, an entirely new set of “values” is necessary.
Enter “gender dysphoria”, and other monstrous world for a society of monsters.
Clown Bishop Overbeck Wants To Conscript You
As a rule, heretical Bishops try to disguise their heresies under a thin veneer of Catholicism, making it look like they are being actually orthodox, at least to those of low IQ, high ignorance, or high interest in believing what the heretical guy says.
Every now and then, though, someone comes around who is such a scoundrel, such a sellout to the world, such a worthless piece of Francis, that he does not even bother to conceal the fundamental heresy of his very being.
Today’s scoundrel is Bishop Overbeck, an individual about whom I have already written in the past.
As you will see if you follow the link, Overbeck does not mince words: the change the Church is living now is bigger than the Protestant heresy. One only needs to be able to make 2+2 to understand that this guy is very plainly saying “we are heretical, we are proud of it, and you will have to get along with our heretical programme”.
The first two statements are self-evident. The third one is made explicit by another bomb dropped by this clown: he explains that if you want to defend tradition, you need to ask yourself whether you are still within the Church. Because you see, clown bishop has decided that the Church is now fundamentally different, and you therefore cannot follow the church of yesteryear and think you are within the boundaries of Overbeck’s fantasy creation.
Of course I am in unity with the Church, you cucking fretin! It’s exactly you who have just put yourself out of it, you fumb duck!! You can go to hell without me!
(If you think these words are too gentle, let me know in the comments and I will reflect whether to make my anger more explicit).
Unsurprisingly, clown bishop is also an enemy of Russia. Makes sense: even the Schismatics over there are infinitely more orthodox than this tool here. In fact, I think I can class it, seeing the declarations, as not unlikely that this guy has some big skeleton in the …. closet (as in: closet), it being not probable that a man without such skeletons would declare his heretical mentality and intent with such open hatred for the Church as he/she/it did.
I would, here, normally appeal for the defrocking of the guy, so he can seek gainful employment by the Lutheran Church Of The Latter Day Faggots. Alas, he will not be defrocked. An appointment to Cardinal is way more likely than that, at least as long as Francis breathes. In fact, who knows, the little Judas might have tried to position himself for a red hat, a place in the – likely – last train going out of Francisstation.
There is a God, and He judges everything and leaves nothing unpunished.
It’s the only consolation on days like this.
Faggocracy In Action: Meet Bishop Stowe
How the heck these people are allowed to be bishops is beyond me. Why is this guy allowed to hire an openly faggoty fag guy to be “in charge of worship”?
And as we are there, we should pose the next question that comes to mind: what the heck is the “office for worship”? What need there is of all these “offices” made to procure comfortable jobs to one’s friends. Heck: who should be in charge of worship, if not, very directly, the bishop himself?
What does bishop Stowe do all day if he has no time to care for the worship of his parishioners? How were these things done in those blessed times before Vatican II, when parishes were more numerous and administration less bloated?
There is an entire Faggocracy that is getting fat with Peter’s pence. They have become so brazen now that they even hire their own, shamelessly, under the sun, and boast of it!
This guy Stowe needs to be defrocked and thrown on the street.
I think I know what his next job would be, but I don’t want to write it here because I am read by women.
And on the very odd chance that this Stowe guy is not homosexual himself, one wonders: what kind of kompromat does the faggot mafia have on him, to force him to take on one of their own in such a way?
Every time that someone asks you what, in the end, is wrong with Vatican II, answer mentioning this darn guy.
Boy, I miss the good old times. God has given me a different lot, and I had to grow up and live in a time of shameless “celebration” of sexual perversion, carried out by bishops!
Who made this clown a priest? Who made him a bishop? They will answer – or have answered – for this.
Nil inultum remanebit.
This is the only consolation.
Yes, I Am A Keyboard Warrior
Francis has once again barked against the keyboard warriors.
Don’t be a keyboard warrior, says Frankie. They displease him too much.
Frankie would want to go on peddling his environ-mental cum social justice fake gospel of globalism, without any fear of being outed, every day, as the pathetic clown he is.
Ridiculed at every step, exposed as peddler of catholic fake news, constantly reminded of what he should actually do as a job, Frankie must hate us with all the rage his failing health still allows him.
The very claim is contradictory. If being a keyboard warrior is bad, why does he invite the press on his trips? Are they not supposed to do exactly the same as the people Francis criticises?
Oh wait, the journalists are supposed to actually act as his propaganda outlet. They are not bad. Proper Catholics are!
I really wish that this boor had a bit of I don’t say class – he’ll never get there – but at least sense about it. We anger you, Frankie? At least be smart and don’t show it so openly! But no, the bitching must go on, because it makes him feel good on the moment, and who cares if he looks even dumber than everyone thought at the end of the rant.
Unscripted Francis then proceeds to shoot himself in the foot again, criticising us for defending what “has always been done this way”. That’s exactly the problem, Sherlock.
The keyboard warriors would not criticise him, if he defended Church tradition. They criticise him because he sabotages it, or at least tries, in that quite arrogant, unbearable, stupid way of his.
I am a proud Keyboard Warrior. Thousands, like me, fight their little fight for Catholicism with a keyboard, helping to confirm fellow Catholics in the faith – and, with God’s grace, perhaps even help the one or other getting nearer to it – and exposing, as well as they are able to, all the lies of the circus tools like Francis and his bunch of sycophants, heretics, and faggots. Francis certainly wishes we would limit our protests to friends and family.
Not happening, Bozo.
I really wonder now: is this man really so thick that he still has not understood that his little game is up, and has been for many years? Or, rather, he knows that everybody understands that the keyboard warriors are the Catholics, and he is the problem?
Whilst I think the man obtuse, he is not outright dumb. I can well imagine he knows perfectly well that the keyboard warriors have made him look a clown for many years now. Fact is, the guy just can’t deny himself the petty satisfaction of a petty rant.
Now with one foot in the grave, there is no sign whatsoever that this man is, in the very last stretch of a disgraceful existence, approaching anything remotely resembling conversion. He seems intentioned to die just as he has lived: hating us all, with a passion.
Go on this way, Frankie boy. Your day cannot be too far away now.
Methinks, on that day you will hate us all even more, and for all eternity.
I never cease to be amazed at how many people confuse charity with simply feeling good with themselves.
Francis is ill, and the rumour mill is, predictably, spinning. We hope he dies soon. Why do we do that? Because he has an extremely important function and public role, which he has abused in the most grievous way. He is a real and present danger to the faith of Catholic and to the reputation of the Church. Bar a miracle, he will remain so until the day he dies. It is perfectly legitimate – and I would add, the only decent thing to do – to hope that he dies today. Alas, it’s not happening, but here’s hoping.
What, I think, Christian charity commands that we owe Francis is: a) the wish for his painless death and b) the wish for his salvation. I have prayed for both on a number of occasions. Let’s hope I need to intensify my prayers soon.
However, on the second point one must soberly recognise that the man’s salvation is improbable. It is very rare that God allows someone who has been his enemy for many decades to repent and die at peace with Him. It must, realistically, be even rarer when the scoundrel in question has damaged the Church he had the duty to guide and protect.
This is why, in Catholic tradition, a lifetime of prayer has been traditionally seen as a sign of predestination, and a lifetime of enmity with the Church as a sign of reprobation. We can’t just say “we don’t know, God decides, we just need to shut up”. If this were the case, then a life spent in prayerful service to God would not be a better indicator of salvation than a life spent as a gang killer in Mexico.
I have just reposted an old post that dealt with another side of the same issue: if, to you, Francis’ continued destruction is more important to you than the welfare of the Church, do you really love the Church? What is more important, your emotional, feel-good false charity, or Holy Mother Church?
No. I hope he dies soon. I hope he dies today. I wish he were already dead as I am writing his. And yes, this guy looks like reprobation like no other person I know or knew of.
But I have prayed for his salvation anyway, because his soul has immeasurable value.
Wait A Little Bit Longer
Look at this article and observe the picture at the top.
Never have I seen Francis so fat. If you compare this picture to the man who was – disgracefully – made Pope eight years ago, you would think them two different persons if it was not for the insufferable smirk.
I look at the picture. and I tried to put myself in the shoes of his knees. There is no way two 85 years old knees can carry a man of such vast proportions.
Francis says his diverticulitis has come back; this is no surprise looking at his vast circumference. You fight diverticulitis by living of fruits, dried fruits, and (most importantly) vegetables. If you keep eating meat, you will keep adding problems. I don’t know how much refined carbs he heats, but those won’t help him much, either, particularly with all that insulin clearly swimming in his blood.
Francis has now gone to the hospital again; however, this time this looks like a respiratory infection that is not Covid (how could it? Come on: science…!!!), and which will keep him a couple of days out of combat.
I wish we could be spared his presence during the Holy Week; but I think I am being too optimistic.
Still: time is on our side.
The Church is never in a hurry, and she has buried countless kings and emperors.
I am sure she can bear to wait a little bit longer on this one.
We Lose Because We Are Weak
The US Bishops have released a document against self-mutilation because of “gender” madness.
If you read the text (I did in its entirety, but the link does not work) you see that the bishops say, in principle, all the right things. You are the sex you were born with, you can’t presume to get another sex, etc. Of course, they quote the Evil Clown.
Still, the document is gravely deficient, in that it is a) too sensitive and b) silent on the causes of the madness.
The language of the entire document is so timid it makes you cringe. There isn’t one paragraph in it that you would call forceful. It is as if the Bishop, once they have to speak, had decided to lower the volume as far as possible, lest they get heard and accused of “phobia”.
This is not the attitude of shepherds. It is, in fact, not even the attitude of believers. A shepherd needs to reassure and confirm the sheep. A document of this sort should be a strongly worded, proud document of firm proclamation of logic and faith. Instead, the documents claims to understand the “real problems” and “real suffering” of the gender madness bigots.
If you put yourself into a corner, you will be pummeled in it. The Bishop either don’t get it, or don’t mind being pummeled.
If a madmen comes to me and tells me he is an elephant trapped in the body of a man I don’t tell him that his is “real suffering”, much less that he has a real problem. I tell him that he needs medical help, because he is very, very unwell.
This is not what the Bishops do. They first implicitly espouse your point of view, then proceed to tell you that you are still wrong, for reasons they would so much avoid telling you but, unfortunately, must. This is, then, a big “fail”.
The roots of the issue are also completely ignored. The Bishop seem to pretend that a guy can “get” this “real problem” like one gets a cold.
This level of bigoted madness can only exist if a person has allowed Satan to camp into his own mind, make a huge tent, and reside there permanently until almost every vestige of sanity has gone.
Gender theory is the work of Satan. Until you say this, you haven’t said anything.
The Bishops don’t say it. It looks like those bigoted madmen are all “ill”. It looks like: hey, I know you got a bad disease, but your medicine isn’t the right one. Problem is: a flu does not send one to hell, gender madness does.
Do the bishops know it? If they know it, why they don’t say it?
Or is it so, that they don’t believe it in the first place?
Ah, now I think I understand….
Journey Into A Perverted Mind
One must say that Frankie is in great satanical form these days. On Friday (you will be able to find the link on the internet) he had another exercise in “this is that”, where he uses childish comparisons to sabotage the faith. Explaining to us that a lot of stuff that he does not like on earth “is hell”, he clearly implied that the “hell” of, say, poverty, inequality, you name it, is the only hell that needs to concern a human.
The outrage cause him to, actually, talk about humans who go to hell; but, this being the godless cretin he is, he decided to send an awful lot of good Catholics there. Let me quote:
“I go to church, I go to Mass, I am married, married in the church, and these people are divorced, sinners,” he asked, “Is your heart like this? (If so,) you will go to hell.”Francis
In a world that is being taken over by freak shows, the consolation of a good Catholic life brings a guy to hell. Note here, that the poor married-in-the-church-Catholic will still hope that the sinner dies at peace with the Lord. There is no hint of such an attitude in Francis. If your heart is like this (now), you will go to hell. It’s like watching an extremely cruel, petty child throwing a tantrum.
It does not end here.
These Catholics will go to hell because, though they live the sacramental life, “they have no room for God because they feel no need for him,”. There is no mention of hell for all those who feel no need whatsoever for God (like his late buddy Scalfari and all those like him), say so openly and give scandal, live filthy lives, and do not even live the sacramental life. No, in Francis’ world your avowed rejection of God leads to automatic salvation (because meeerccyyy), but dare for one second to take some comfort in your following the rules, and the guy will send you to hell before you can say “wheelchair”. This is a Thunberg level of cretinism.
It does not end here.
Continuing subversive statement made in the past, Francis continued to expand (the way a man with the intelligence of a toddler could) on his idea of “automatic absolution”, asking his priests to “please forgive everything, forgive always.”
Well, Francis, you genius. Can’t your little commie brain understand that, even with your absurd absolution criteria, the presumptuous guy who actually goes to confession (as the good Catholics Francis hates all do) still has a much bigger chance of salvation than the atheists, the filthy faggots, and the utterly evil trannies Frankie is so fond of?
How likely is one of the above mentioned pervs and atheists to die thinking that he does not need God? How many are those in percentage of the population? Does Francis pose himself these little, pesky questions before he basks in his – this, really, presumptuous – mass condemnation of decent Catholic people?
The conclusion of all this is as as follows: Francis has
- an utterly perverted mind, and
- A very stupid one at that.
Again, it’s like seeing an evil child trying to be smart.
The Synodal App.
It is known that there are, out there, mobile phone apps meant to facilitate “casual sex”, which I mean to signify people meeting for the only purpose of having sex. Unsurprisingly, a lot of this is driven by homos, for the simple fact that, irrespective of the sexual appetite of men, it will be extremely difficult to find women willing to engage in this kind of exercise. Therefore, these apps look like, largely, the preserve of sodomites. Still, one must also say that the level of horniness and brazenness of a heterosexual male using such apps goes way beyond what normal people would consider normal.
As it now turns out, a number of priests and seminarians have been exposed as using such (let us say it once again: largely homo-focused) apps.
Now, imagine this priest or seminarian, pretending to wanting to be a man consecrating his life to God’s service whilst being so obsessed with sex – and, likely, perverted sex – that he uses an app to find a way to satisfy his lust. What kind of priest will this be?
I tell you what kind of priest he will be: he will be the feminist, social justice, priesthood equality, ecu-maniacal, inter religious dialogue, Francis revolution kind of guy. This, if he is not all out as a Father Georgina type.
Put together enough of these disgraceful individuals, and you have a “synodal path” or, rather, the “Synodal app”. There, I have explained the way the church is going with the help of an app.
How do we get out of this? By ditching Vatican II.
Same as all other problems that plague the Church, the abandonment of proper liturgy and proper doctrine is at the root of this one. In fact, we might flip this coin and say that there is only one problem (the abandonment of proper liturgy and proper doctrine), and all the ailments of the Church come from there.
I am not a saint by any means, and cannot claim any realistic hope of going straight to paradise when I die. Still, the idea of using an app for “casual hookups” is quite disgusting even to a layman like me. The idea of a seminarian or even priest using such devices is simply revolting. But hey, the guy will be at the altar next Sunday at the latest, saying “peace be with youuuu” in a likely somewhat shrill voice.
V II and everything in it needs to be exterminated, and strong traditional doctrine robustly taught in seminaries, propagated among the faithful, and defended among the public.
You do this, you will see that priests are made of the right stuff and you have no hooking app issues.
Francis Encourages Illegality, But Complains About Its Consequences
It has been official for a long time, but it bears saying it again:
“May these voyages of hope never again turn into voyages of death,” [the evil clown] said.
Stupid guy (I keep liking “il cretino gloriosamente regnante”) is apparently not aware of a handful of things. Let us see if I can try and open his eyes on this.
- There are traffickers because people who want to do illegal things ask for their services.
- These people, who ask traffickers for their illegal services, are the instigators of criminal offences. They are not even accomplices. They are the driving force.
- They are, therefore, not innocent.
In fact, Francis should slowly realise that people like him, who keep encouraging people to try to get to Europe illegally, share the moral responsibility for tragedies like this one.
In this tragedy the culprits must be searched among those who plan a criminal offence and carry it out, those who facilitate it with their technical means (e.g. boats), and those who encourage the first and act as lead providers for the latter (the bleeding hearts like the Pope).
Therefore, let me rephrase the phrase for the benefit of this clown:
“May stupid leftists never again encourage people to become criminals and carry out their crimes to their deaths”.
Meet “Il Cretino Gloriosamente Regnante”.
Meet “Il Cretino gloriosamente regnante”, the gloriously reigning cretin.
It appears that everybody, literally left, right and centre, hates Francis. Why? Because he is a hateful guy, of course.
Petty, vindictive, childish, astonishingly ignorant, lying without shame (“soon, soon!”), and arrogant to the point of comedy, Francis manages to alienate even the Regressives within the Vatican. He has, obviously, brought all this to himself, because I do not know any other public figure enjoying it so much when he angers other people. It’s not only the boorishness, which is very marked in the man. It’s the special arrogance of doing whatever he knows will incense people merely to make a point, that is: to show that he can.
The linked article also points out to an aspect I had never reflected about: even the Regressive priests are angered at Francis’ constant insulting and berating of priests.
Then there are the bishops and cardinals, who have to watch the same total lack of decency, manners, and respect for common sense.
This all makes sense, of course. If you have followed Frankie for a while, you know all that is reported in the linked blog post can only make absolute sense. But I would like to add an additional point.
The Cardinals who have elected Bergoglio deserve all the manure that is now lavished on them. The Bishops who see incompetence promoted have, for too long, shut up when Francis was being incompetent to the point of being a danger for souls. The Regressive priests are getting a well-deserved prescription of the medicine they themselves spread around.
What goes around, comes around. You can’t betray your mission as priest, bishop, or Cardinal, and hope that the problem will not come back to bite you. It is, in fact, amusing and not a little consoling that those who have chosen to be part of the problem now discover that they, themselves, have a problem.
The moral is this: the push for a good, Catholic Pope must come from the very bottom, from the parishes, from the pews, and go up the hierarchy until things change.
You will not get to be all V II without getting a taste of your own medicine.
“El Lupo” And Hypocrisy
I remember the time when popes spoke little, but when they spoke they knew what they were saying, and their words were not casual. Even Paul VI, a very bad pope by any standard, was the kind of guy who would measure every word.
It started going downhill when JP II got all emotional when going out of planes, with his long, slow, elaborate “look how I kiss the earth” play that meant exactly nothing (unless signalling some sort of fashion-pantheism, though I am sure the man did not mean that) but made everybody feel sooooo good it became a media sensation. Benedict had a much soberer style, but we all know now that he did not have the cojones to play his part for very long. Los Lupos clearly won.
Enter Frankie Boy, the Humble Heretic himself. Frankie does not care for any kind of reflection, because he is not capable of any. He will enjoy his scandals and rejoice in his doubts.
It takes a particular kind of stupid, and a very evil one, to say, as the pope, that , “a faith that does not put us in crisis is a faith in crisis.” Last time I looked, Faith was not only a great grace, but something actually meant to take us out of every spiritual crisis and put us in a position to face every earthly one.
Francis, of course, wants to play intellectual, or pretend he is a brilliant spirit; he likely thinks his mediocre play with words will impress people, from which alone you understand how terribly ignorant and vapid this man is. I actually even doubt he had any clear idea of what he wanted to say, and merely repeated what some, likely perverted, Monsignor wrote for him, possibly after visiting the homo bath house. Still: however you turn it, this is just stupid.
True faith will never put anyone in any sort of crisis. On the contrary, faith is the greatest source of security and strength. What “faith” is, then, this man blabbering about, that it should “put him in crisis” and, at the same time, be something good, desirable, and worthy of boasting about?
It is, of course, the pretend faith of the hypocrite; of a person, that is, that has faith only in social justice, or environmentalism, or rubbish like that. It is the self-congratulatory celebration of one’s own socialist rebellion to Christ’s entirely anti-socialist views. It is the, again, self-celebrating “doubt” of the man who asks, thinking himself smart, “if there is a God, why social injustice, oppression, and poverty?”. That such a “crisis” can only come from lack of faith escapes the limited intelligence of this guy.
Francis always wanted to be Scalfaro, without having much of the latter’s shrewdness. Plus, at least Scalfaro was not a hypocrite, though if he is in hell, which I consider very likely, it does not profit him much now. Still, Scalfaro had this “free thinker” aura around him, which Francis envied so much. I am pretty sure he felt pretty good with himself as he put this last noose, Judas-like, around his neck, for a day now not really long in coming.
An additional motivation I suspect in the man. Francis might have had only a vague idea of what he wanted to say – apart from the word play sounding smart to the shallow, and making him look some deep thinker, at least in his fantasies – but I think that he knew his words would have angered Catholics and decided to say them for this very reason.
Dear Catholics: Francis hates you, and he spits in your face every time he can.
It’s a real tragedy most of you have not noticed it yet.
Parce Sepultis. But Not Too Much.
Parce Sepultis, they say in my native Country. However, when the sepultus is a public figure who has given great scandal, I would say that the matter must be looked at differently. Firstly, because we must fight against scandal, and secondly, because we must expose those who spread it, be they dead of alive.
The latter ( that is: dead) is the case of Bishop O’Connell, who was shot dead in his bed by the husband of a woman working for him. Quite the surprise, begorrah!
Day of the Lord, cometh, and thief in the night all come to mind.
O’Connell was, as it is by now printed everywhere, a serious heretic. He was a guy to whom my cat could have thought Catholicism, with great advantage for the bishop, but not without dangers for the spiritual health of the cat. He was, in short, radioactive.
The circumstances of his death are, shall we say, strange. As a rule, homicidal husbands of his female “coworkers” do not happen to find themselves in the bedroom of a bishop. Stranger things happened at sea, you will say. But this was not at sea. This was in a bedroom. Methinks, there was something that had to do with the bishop’s private life.
Why do I say this? Could this not have just been a home invasion gone bad, where the victim recognises the invader who stole the house key (but why did she have the key?) from the wife, etc? The problem, you see, lies in the fact that the man was clearly a heretic.
As I have often stated in this little effort, in case of a heretical priest, or prelate, the first place to look for the cause of his heresy is below his waistline. They know that they are unworthy priests, and they seek validation, approbation, and the courage to look at themselves in the mirror exactly the way this man did: promoting the normality of sexual perversion, blabbering about female ordination, and being on record that Francis “gets it”; which, really, says it all.
Bishop O’Connell “got it”, too. But it was a bullet in the chest, sent his way by, as it is very reasonable to assume in case of a “progressive” bishop, either his lover, or the husband of his lover.
Will we ever know the truth? Possibly, but not assuredly. A “progressive” bishop is a great asset for the all-conquering California Democrats. They, too, “get it”: the discovery that O’Connell was either a sodomite or, at his age, a bed athlete will seriously damage that particular brand of circus Catholicism. I will, therefore, not bet my pint on a serious investigation. Remember, this is a Country where elections get brazenly stolen, and laptops cancelled from official existence.
Then there is the personal aspect. Whether shot in his sleep, or not, this looks like a very rapid end. One doubt that an inveterate heretic like this tool (now late tool) would muster the presence of spirit for a perfect contrition. This means that, as I write this, the late Bishop O’Connell might well be in the company of a great number of V II Bishops, hating them greatly and being hated back with the same energy. If he is there now, I wonder if he still thinks that Francis “gets it”?
But we don’t wish him hell. We wish him purgatory. I am happy to say I managed, with great effort, to say three eternal rests for him.
And let’s hope his successor is a Catholic.
Preaching The Collapse
We are told that only 35% of US Catholics consider very important to pass their faith to their children.
Well I never…
Let us why this is, however, what the Vatican II Church herself goes preaching.
First: proselytism is bad, remember? This comes from Fat Clown himself. Who are US Catholics to judge him?
Second: how many couples who are raising children are, in fact, of mixed faith? If the parents have decided that there should be two truths, which are both OK, why would they change their mind when educating their children to the faith? Tell me again: how many homilies in the matter have you heard in the last 10 years?
Third: eee-cuuu-men-ism!!! We “promote” the “dialogue” and we “meet” the “other”. We have a pope (small p) celebrating Luther. We are, therefore, told, from the fat guy at the very top, that we shouldn’t be “rigid” about these things. Guess what? We won’t be.
Fourth: inter religious stuff! If even being a Muslim or a Jew isn’t a big deal, as apparently Jesus, dying on the cross, has canonised everyone who does not attend a Latin Mass, how can it be of any noticeable importance if one happens to be Catholic or not?
Fifth: the “abolition” of damnation. If an “eternal punishment” is outside of the “logic of the Gospel”, as, again, Fat Clown himself writes, why would anyone have any big interest in religion – any religion – at all? Eat, drink, fornicate, abort, and be merry! You’ll make it in the end, “everyone at his own pace”. If that’s not inclusive, I don’t know what is!
Sixth: inclusion. If being “accepting” of the other is very important, as so many prelates tell us: would it not be better to raise your child outside of a famously non-inclusive religion? One that will put Little Johnny in a difficult position with his “gay”, “non-binary” and even “transitioning” friends? Plus, will he not risk persecution at work, or the loss of opportunities?
I could go on, but I think you get the gist: the collapse of church attendance is preached the V II Church herself. The (very moderately) “faithful” are merely receiving the message that the Church has been relentlessly broadcasting from the pulpit, the newspapers and the magazines, the radio and the TV, even from papal airplanes!
You reap what you sow.
You sow unbelief, you reap Francis and his bunch of happy bastards.
Bishop Scheiße, And How To Counter His Poison,
Cardinal Müller has just told that tool Bätzing that he should have chosen a different career. Not every day, but by now fairly often we hear of (largely) catholic Bishops and Cardinals criticising some of their peers who, clearly, either have no idea what Catholicism is , or actually do have it but, sadly, hate the Church because of reasons of their own, generally linked to loss of faith, or to some perversion or other.
It seems to me that all these criticisms, if it remains at that, are nothing more than a fig leave with which Catholics are supposed to be reassured that there are still (broadly) Catholic Bishops around, whilst those very “broadly Catholic” Bishops intend to do absolutely nothing that is practical and factual in order to put an end to this state of things.
I will call this the “Dubia mentality”. First I emit some faint rumour. When nothing happens afterwards, I still do nothing, but I am fully satisfied that I am now seen as a champion of orthodoxy. It’s a nice life, really, enjoying all the perks or the Cardinal’s or Bishop’s life without having to do the hard part, that is: the real conflict.
When an individual like Bätzing blathers his heretical stuff (believe me, many a time I have renounced writing about it because the anger made it impossible to write about these pieces of shit without calling them much worse than “pieces of shit”), a Bishop or Cardinal commenting about it should not limit his disagreement to the criticism of the words; he should, instead, demand practical consequences from the behaviour, like the condemnation as heretic and defrocking of the offending prelate.
Of course, this will not mean that Francis will, overnight, stop being an enabler and protector of heretics. However, and very importantly, it will make it more difficult for him to continue his work, as it is evident that he is bringing the Church towards civil war.
Oportet ut scandala eveniant. When a bishop (a piece of shit like Bätzing, or some other piece of shit) comes out with some heretical statement or mentality, the scandal should be heard worldwide and consequences for it asked very loud.
Instead, we have all these polite prelates politely pointing out that Bishop Scheiße should have become a plumber, and it ends there. This allows the above mentioned Bishop Scheiße to keep doing damage, as it is abundantly evident by now that Francis broadly covers them and encourages them in their work of demolition, whilst pretending to be just a tad more on the “conservative” side, or actually slightly less heretical, than them.
It will never work. Pressure is exerted through massive outrage, and request for consequences. The request will stay in the air, will colour every discussion, and will unavoidably etch itself in the Catholic consciousness. Plus – and this is a not small bonus – the heretics will get to realise that Francis will not live forever, and an unexpected turn of events could see them smashed on the street, without a roof or a job, and unable to pay for the services of male prostitutes as some of them, no doubt, so much loved to do.
They Were Mistranslated
I must confess, I wasn’t aware of it until now.
It was only today that I opened my eyes.
I have, on this day, discovered the source of all the machismo that has plagued the world for so long. Of the mysoginy, the discrimination of women, the violence against women. Of the whyyyte sup-pre-ma-aaasseeee!
I now know why, and how, and when. I have to admit, I have been blind. I know, now, where the fault lies. I know who the culprit is.
He has caused so much suffering. So much hate. So much oppression. He has caused women to be considered second-rate for sooo long! He is at the root of all ray ciss mm; he is the creator of the dreaded Whyte Supremacyyy!
It was Saint Jerome!
Think with me, if you please.
The so-called Church of England has announced the creation of a commission to examine eliminating or toning down God as Father. Of course, Referring to God as a “he” has been a discrimination against wymyn, which was foundational to their oppression, for two thousand years. The Church of England (so-called) are really, really nice people, so they must be on the side of the Angels! In one word: they must be right.
Now, follow me closely: it was Jesus Himself who referred to God, many times but especially in the “Our Father”, as Father. Jesus is God. Therefore, this looks like God saying he wants to be thought of, and adored as, an omnipotent father figure.
Will I, therefore, blame Jesus?
No, I cannot do that. Blaming Jesus means not being Christian, and I want to be such an inkkk luuusive, femmm iiiinn iiiiist C-C-C-Christian! I cannot accept that God Himself was, well, wrong! Still, I will never doubt that I am right!!
How to get out of this situation? I thought long and hard, even if I realise now that both these words, “long” and “hard”, are symbols of male oppression!
I think I will blame the author of the Vulgata himself! You see: if Saint Jerome had properly interpreted the true s-s-s-s-spirit of Jesus’ words, he would never have adopted such a preposterously sexist translation for Our Person’s Words. He would have, instead, translated the word with Parent instead of Father!
“Our Parent, who are in heaven, hallowed be their name…”
See, how easy it is?
If St Jerome had been more considerate of the s-s-s-s-scientific meaning of Jesus’s words, he would have used a gender-neutral translation at the very least! I
In fact, as Jesus was clearly a “He”, I think s-s-s-s-science will soon conclude that, as a result, God might well be a she! Look, the Hindu do the same, and they are sooo kind to the cows!!!
Look: I do not want to advocate for Our Mother here, though I think that She would not be offended, at all! I am just saying that we need to understand the implicit bias of the male official translator of the Bible into Latin.
He was a male! All Apostles were! They had no access to the proper gender awareness and micro aggression seminars! They were, unavoidably, the product of an oppressive society!! Who knows, we might soon discover that there were, in fact, 24 apostles, of which 12 were women!
Look, I am just being logical, scien tttiii fiiiic here! No way would They (=God) allow such a blatant discrimination to happen! I am sure the wymyn wrote better Gospels, too! All the sensitiviteee, with none of the machismo!
There. I am persuaded now. It cannot have been any other way.
Thank Them, I realised all this in time….
On The Catholicity Of Catholicism
There is a chap here complaining (yes: complaining ) about African Bishops who happen to be Catholic. Let me quote him:
“There are many African bishops who are very comfortable celebrating Mass in Latin. They want to restore some imaginary past glory of Catholicism in Africa”.
First of all, congratulations to the mentioned African Bishops for being not only Catholic, but properly instructed. I doubt that many of our trendy, post-Faith Western Bishops would even be able (forget willing) to celebrate a Mass in the Tridentine rite.
But the issue I have is not even that: it is the very dumb quip about the “imaginary past glory of Catholicism in Africa”. Here, we see a grave issue with understanding Catholicism in the first place.
Catholicism is not regional, or tribal, or African. Catholicism is universal. It’s in the name itself!!
The glory of Catholicism that these worthy Bishops are clearly itching to encourage is not ethnic, or racial. It is the glory of Catholicism qua Catholicism.
In addition to that, the author of the dumb statement should be aware – and the more shame to him if he isn’t – that the issue of glory, beautiful and worth pursuing as it is, is not the main motivation of the proponents of the Tridentine Mass. What speaks for the Tridentine Mass is its character of most authentic, most deeply Catholic expression of the Liturgy, deprived of the protestantised deformations of the Novus Ordo; deformations which, unavoidably, end up deforming the faith.
Those Bishops clearly know it. This guy doesn’t. He thinks that the “glory of Catholicism in Africa” is their motivation. He does not understand the Tridentine Mass and the love for Catholicism of those who love it. He thinks, even concerning the Faith, in tribal terms.
This guy is active is a teaching position in some university. I wonder how many, like him, belittle and wilfully ignore vital aspects of the Catholic faith, like its universality and the absolutely central role of the Sacrifice of the Mass within it.
We need to start getting more critical of those who are supposed to teach us, and demand of them that they understand what they are talking about or, alternatively, stop sabotaging the Faith.
Snake Oil In A Stylish Bottle
One of the things that make my heart boil is the use of wrong, but good-sounding comparisons to advance an argument that is obviously wrong. Such a behaviour is a lie, it is a fraud masquerading as sensible reasoning.
Take, for example, the heretical claim coming from this Baetzing guy.
He tries to mask his poison behind a facade of common sense logic. The problem with that is that there isn’t any and he is willingly deceiving you.
No, Mr Holmes. The Church has no physical organs. It cannot ever die because it is Indefectible. Jesus has said nowhere that the teaching of the Church need to change or the Church will die.
On the contrary, the message of Jesus is extremely clear on the immutability of truth. If you love me, keep my commandments. There is none of that “change or die” rubbish in Catholicism. Truth is true forever, God – who is, as this genius should know, immutable – does not fashion a new truth for those who don’t like the old one.
This Baetzing guy, whatever his sexual tendencies (and I allow myself to have my suspicions here, because this level of deception shows that Satan is strong with him) is lying to his sheep, selling them snake oil in a stylish bottle.
Truth does not change. I knew it at six, this miserable con man tries to look smart at sixty and looks, to every proper thinking Catholic, like the fraud he very well knows he is.
This guy, and everybody like him, needs to be defrocked, because he is nothing to do with the One True Church.
Let him become a Protestant, and then he will be able to blather clever-sounding, but extremely stupid slogans as much as he likes.
Understanding Bloggers, Card. Roche edition.
Cardinal Roche has a problem with those Catholic bloggers who keep defending the Traditional Latin Mass. He admits, however, that our work is effective and influences Seminarians.
I think a couple of reflections are in order.
Thank you, Cardinal Roche, for your involuntary compliment. At times, I receive comments containing nothing but insults. Being told that I, in my little effort and together with many others, am effective and influence seminarians truly made by day. If I die today, I hope those at the Pearly Gates have the link.
But let us reflect a bit more. Traditionalists blog are, mostly, one-man-bands written by pensioners, housewives, or accountants at the Fish Administration. None of them (apart from Gracida) is a bishop. Plus, their audience tends to be very conservative, that is: exactly the kind of people who do not listen to everybody who wakes up one morning and decides to have his own doctrine explained to the people. Therefore, the Cardinal should start to wonder: 1. Why these blogs are so numerous and 2. Why conservative people would believe what they write.
The answers are very simple. The blogs are so numerous, and have so many followers, exactly because the problem of the New Mass is easily recognised in light of Catholic liturgy and theology.
Were this not the case, there would never be a numerous cohort of bloggers about this issue, nor a robust readership for their effort. As it is, both are in rude health.
The issue is, therefore, exactly the contrary of what the Cardinal states, to wit: a small bunch of insignificant Bishops and Cardinals dare to go against what an immense army of predecessors of theirs have defended, and demand that Catholics believe not in 2000 years of Catholic teaching (and hierarchy) but in what this soon forgotten Roche Guy tells them to believe.
It does not work. Of course it can never work. The sheep in the pew will always be easily duped by the priest talking about “joy” and “peace” and other easy slogans, but those who care (including serious seminarians) will always be a much tougher nut to crack.
Therefore, the Cardinal can be assured of our continued effort and influence of Seminarians; particularly if he has sone evil move in his sleeves, which is now being heavily rumoured.
This is the Church, not a sect. It does not change if its leader changes, it does not care for “the spirit of the time”, it does not pledge unalloyed allegiance to any human.
We have a sure way to understand what is going wrong, and that is Catholic doctrine, not the rants of a number of angry bloggers.
Pope About To Be Catechised
High time, you will say. I will agree.
It’s never too late, either. Even in his Mid-Eighties, the man might be forced to acknowledge some simple truths that he tried to escape all his life.
The occasion? His planned visit to South Sudan.
South Sudan criminalises homosexual acts, including so-called same sex marriage. Of course, so-called same sex marriage has the acts of sodomy built-in. It should, therefore, be punished as a criminal offence rather than simply not be recognised. It’s all very simple.
Now, when Francis flies down there, he will have to make a decision: if he recognises that the Government of South Sudan is merely punishing acts of sodomy, he will have to realise that this is in line with Catholic tradition and say so, because journos will likely ask. If he, however, states that such acts of criminalisation of sodomy are acts of criminalising homosexuality, he will ipso facto admit that he is at variance with Catholic faith and tradition.
I think the Government of South Sudan very well realised that the latter is the case. Therefore, they give him fair warning and very obviously state that they are willing and ready to teach the guy a thing or two.
I’d love to see Francis corrected openly and frankly by a Government. It would be another important signal, all over the world, that truth can’t change and two plus two remains four no matter how bad your math teacher is.
Francis, The Homos, And The Strawman
Frankie Boy has, once again, made an ass of himself trying to look all modern and worldly.
Homosexuality is not a crime, he says. But it is a sin, he says.
He is wrong on both counts. The ignorance of this man never ceases to amaze.
The crime thing is a straw man argument. I do not know of any Catholic Country (when such Countries still existed; V II saw to that that they don’t anymore) which criminalises homosexuality, that is: which trials and puts someone to jail for the mere fact of being a pervert.
In fact, I am positive that Catholic Countries traditionally only punished the act of sodomy, not the condition (that is: the sexual perversion) of homosexuality. You see: a condition is not an action, it is not something you do, it is something you are. May it well be that, say, the homosexual has sinned many times on his way to festering his perversion into the “born that way” fantasy; still, the law never punished the being, but always the doing, the acting upon the perversion. Similarly, the Church would call a homosexual that does not act upon his perversion still a pervert, but not – in this at least – a sinner.
In fact, I am pretty sure that another fact stays: that in Catholic Countries the act was, generally, only made a criminal offence when scandal was given. This means that the homo who took every care not to advertise his horrible condition would not be liable to criminal prosecution for the mere sinful act. This was so, if memory serves, even in the Papal States!
Francis does not know what he is talking about. But he knows that he wants to look all modern and understanding, even as he thrashes those horrible people, the Catholics.
Mission failed, Frankie boy.
Next time you want to insult Catholics, at least try to inform yourself beforehand.
Where Francis got his fantasy of the “crime”, he should say. If this is something that applies to Islam he should say that, too. He doesn’t.
Francis is clearly using a huge strawman argument here, likely in order to make the social order of our Catholic past past Catholic look bad.
I think he is not just merely, as we say in Italy, “giving air to his teeth”. No. Not him. Rather, Francis is deliberately trying to sabotage Catholic culture. That he fails in that, too, is due to the embarrassing ignorance this man continuously displays.
The same goes for the “sinful” stuff. Here, it seems to me that there is not only crass ignorance at play, but rather the refusal to accept the reality of sexual perversion, because “who is he to judge”.
This must, also, be seen in the light of Francis’ home-baked theology, that there is no sin a priest has no obligation to absolve for, even if there is no contrition and repentance. Therefore, homosexuality is now “downgraded” to something God will automatically forgive; so hey, keep sinning and say to your confessor “I have sinned, father, and I will sin again”. It’s all fine, saith the Francis. You are just a sinner like everybody else. You will be fine, because an eternal punishment is not in the logic of the Gospel. Plus, who are we to judge?
Failing The “Joy” Test
I keep reading about this thing with the “joy”. It looks like the church is a joy dispenser. You are Catholic, you have joy.
Here. Have some joy.
It wasn’t so when I was growing up. “Vale of tears” was more frequently mentioned than joy. In fact, people expected a lot of stuff (not only life in general, but parts of it like being in a marriage or having children) as something that, actually, will require sacrifice and cause suffering, possibly suffering extremely difficult to bear like the loss of a child. The downplaying of the sacrifice and suffering of life causes all sorts of issues, like people (and I have heard that more than once) losing the faith because of a horrible bereavement (like the above mentioned loss of a child).
They promised me joy. I got immense grief. Something’s very wrong here.
But let us stay on the joy part and let us charitably assume that all those priests who never mention the vale of tears mean, by joy, the serenity that comes from a robust hope and a solid trust in the proper working of Providence. Let us imagine that this “joy” is what causes a Catholic to walk through life knowing that Christ is in charge and will properly care for His sheep. In that case, I must lament that I have seen nothing of it during the p…p….p….ppppandemic.
Most priests have not only run to give in to the panic. Worse than that, they have amplified it, positively encouraging the sheep to obsess about it, and to keep obsessing when the world had moved on lest they look “uncharitable” or not obsessed enough with the fantasies of their sheep. I remember many months in which only myself and, at most, a couple of others dared to attend without a mask, when the world out there had largely got rid of them. This went together with the invitation to stay out of Dodge if you are single, so the family near you would not think you are intent on killing them because of your silly, selfish desire to do something as trivial as attending Mass, or with the constant parish newsletter reinforcement of how horribly, horribly bad the situation was.
“Please stay safe!!”
Thanks, I prefer to stay sane.
If all these people had had the “joy” that is so often mentioned, they would have taken sensible, reasonable precautions, but they would have gone on with their life, knowing that Providence arranges everything beautifully and going to Mass is more important to them than worrying about germs.
There was, at least in my neck of the wood, nothing like that. Those joyful people proved, when tested, extremely prone to shitting their pants, big time, and Father kept telling them their trousers can never be brown enough.
There isn’t much “joy” in going around with a diaper around one’s mouth, constantly worrying about germs, and thinking that your survival, or the one of those near you depends on a thin piece of cotton that will not stop a fart, but should suddenly stop a virus.
This “joy” stuff, as it is currently practiced, is quite pernicious. It gives people the wrong outlook on life, and does not equip them to deal with difficult times. It is, also, largely emotional and not adequate to cope with the reality of life, in which we need to constantly have in front of our eyes not only the reality of suffering, but the value and purpose of it, and the need to pray so that we get, of it, only the strictly necessary.
Still: it will not be a walk in the park. It was never supposed to be.
Sacraments And Language In The Time Of Francis (Part 2).
Horrible details are now emerging about the controversial December meeting of Francis with the seminarians, about which I have already reported.
We have now detailed news about:
1. The language he used, and
2. The “duty” of forgiveness.
It seems that, on that day, Francis might have had a couple too many fernet.
’The priest, the seminarian, the minister must be ‘close’. Close to whom? To the girls of the parish? And some of them are, they are close, then they get married, that’s fine”.
What a vulgar joke about a priest’s mistress, more vulgar because from a priest, most vulgar b3cause from the pope.
Just as gravely, several occurrences of “f” word really show the guy is a first-class boor. Try this:
“fucking careerists who fuck up the lives of others”
I have left the entire words, because I want this man’s vulgarity to be known in its entirety. No, don’t tell me “we don’t know”, or “it’s all rumours”. It is now confirmed that several, basically identical reports of the meeting exist. The guy was either at his boorish best, which is extremely grave, or he was drunk. Frankly, I don’t know what is worse.
The forgiveness part is, also, now confirmed verbatim.
From the linked article:
“if we see that there is no intention to repent, we must forgive all. We can never deny absolution, because we become a vehicle for an evil, unjust, and moralistic judgement”.
If you listen to Francis’ newly minter religion, a priest always has to give absolution, irrespective of even repentance and sincere proposit of not sinning anymore in future. If he doesn’t, he is judgmental and moralistic. The dirt that must reside in the mind of this man does not bear thinking
The gravity of this is immediately apparent. It makes one wonder what Francis thinks that Christianity is in the first place. This seems like the kind of thing that makes absolutely everything about religion useless, because if a Catholic has a right to absolution even without repentance, then it seems difficult to see why anybody else should be refused heaven. Plus, if the sacraments are a mockery, then the entire fabric of religion is a mockery, too. This is the kind of stuff a Pope who has long lost the faith – if he ever had it – would say.
Mind, Francis had already given hints of his attitude, and I remember him one mentioning that a faithful might say in the confessional “I will sin again” and still get absolution. But this is more explicit still.
Honestly, I think he might well have been drunk, or at least more than tipsy. I think it because I think that Francis was the same boor every day of his pontificate, but it is now the first time that he uses such language in an official occasion.
That the scandal was great is shown from the fact that, one month later, the story is still around. With right, people are now demanding from the Vatican an official explanation and an official reiteration of Catholic doctrine.
I also allow myself to say that this, once again, confirms a pattern of vulgarity I have already highlighted several times. Remember the Italian “c” word in St Peter’s square? As I often stated, this kind of word does not “escape” a person unless this person is accustomed to use it. A person, and he the Pope, who is able to repeatedly use very vulgar words in front of his own seminarians is, exactly, a person for whom the use of heavy profanities has become so normal, that he will use these utterances – either because propelled by alcohol, or by arrogance – as a matter of course.
If it wasn’t, at least in part, alcohol, then it was 100% arrogance. It was the sober, coldly evil – and childish at the same time – attitude of thinking “I will do this just to show you I can”. This is, again, vintage Francis.
May the Lord free us from this scourge soon, and inspire the Cardinals to give us a successor who at least tries to remedy as much of the damage as he can.
The Bishops you have appointed eagerly embrace the heresies of the day. The Cardinals you have appointed shut up when confronted with open, manifest heresy.
Your successor does exactly the same of what you wanted to do, but he has all the energy you never had. You thought he would listen to you, but he certainly doesn’t. In fact, he is at pain to always make clear how different he is from you.
The wave of conversions and vocations that your actions have spurned is gone. Your greatest “achievement”, which you never had the guts to properly enforce, is openly fought against, and you have to see with your own eyes as the attempt at total demolition become public.
Perhaps you thought, in some more honest hour, about how much you could have done, had you decided to die at your place. Perhaps you thought, when your conscience assailed you during sleepless nights, that an 85 years old should not be worried about what he can do for his health as much as what he can do for Christ.
Perhaps you bitterly regretted your step. Perhaps you begged God for forgiveness, for fleeing for fear of the wolfes. Perhaps you understood that those long years watching the demolition of even that little that you did right were a punishment, the amply deserved punishment for the sin of cowardice, for abandoning the post in the hour of the enemy’s assault. Perhaps your tears were bitter, and your sorrow sincere.
But then, why did you praise to the skies the work of your successor? Why did you give not only one, but at least two interviews in which you openly approved of the work of your successor; a circumstance the more humiliating, as your successor never made a mystery of what he thought of your work?
I understand that an open criticism of your successor would have caused a major uproar; but many other ways were open to you – from books to theological articles to interviews – to reiterate the true teaching without openly, undiplomatically pointing the finger to the one who betrayed them.
You did not do any of this. You swam with the flow.
It is easy to say “Jesus, I love you” on the deathbed.
It is far more difficult to show this love in deed, when it hurts.
May you be, one day, in the company of the angels. May the Lord have given you the strength to sincerely repent of both your desertion and your complicity with the work of your successor. May we all, one day, rejoice together in the company of Christ.
But if the 10 years-long punishment hasn’t opened your eyes, I frankly don’t know what would, and what would allow you to die a very eloquent, highly intelligent, very prayerful deserter.
You must be logged in to post a comment.