Category Archives: Bad Shepherds
I could not trust my eyes as I first saw that Cardinal Brandmueller has given another interview about the Dubia.
Seriously, can you believe this guy?
I have not paid the man the compliment of reading further once I realised what the Cardinal has not done: officially correct the Pope and demand that he retracts or faces the call for a council meant to depose him. But I have perused the article in order to be sure that the correction is not contained therein. I intend to treat every future interview from either him or the other still living kitten in exactly the same way. It's more attention that they deserve.
At this point, it seems fair to me to say that Cardinal Brandmueller is quite happy with his actual position: trying to pose as the orthodox guy and trying to live the rest of his life getting as much press exposure as he can out of his ridiculous, unanswered, half-baked attempt at orthodoxy, even as he has no intention of doing the only thing that would justify him approaching a journalist. He is, truly, like the man who wetted his lips and never whistled, but wants to be praised for his whistling courage anyway.
This behaviour is extremely vain. Vain and shameless. Vain, shameless, and utterly inexcusable.
The Cardinal should, once it is clear that even at his age he is too cowardly to really do anything, at least have the decency to shut the Francis up and live the probably short rest of his life in shame, rather than seeking publicity as if he was a star of conservative Catholicism or even a halfway decent Prelate.
Such a cowardice, and such a vanity, and at such age.
Really, it is no surprise that this disgraceful V II generation has led us to utter chaos.
Two days ago I wrote a blog post stating, without any evocation, that I wish to see Francis dead in 2018. Resigned if needs be. But ideally, dead. Not – it is worth repeating this – because of personal animosity against the man, but because of the evil he is inflicting on the Bride of Christ, and the sustained spitting in the face of the Bridegroom his papacy daily represents.
Only two years ago, such a post would have been followed by a handful of angry comments about my lack of charity, the sweet Peter on earth and such like rubbish. Mind, I would have deleted the comments, but they would have been there in the first place.
This time, nothing. After two full days.
Your humble correspondent draws from this the rather linear conclusion that this papacy has now become such an obvious disgrace, such a permanent threat to Catholic orthodoxy, that the number of those who recoil at the idea of wishing the death of the Evil Clown is dwindling rapidly as his work of destruction becomes evident to the most obdurate Pollyannas around.
By the by, I also notice that for months now I do not recall receiving one single comment stating that Francis is well-intentioned but badly advised, or surrounded by wolves, or suck like nonsense.
This Pope is so stupid, and at the same time such an enemy of the Church, that he is possibly unwilling to see that he has gone too far, and made his relentless attacks on Catholicism so transparent, so evident as to deny their very aim: the deception of the faithful.
Still, the dumbass is so stubborn, and so childish, that he cannot refrain from his constant heretical propaganda. He truly seems a child continuing his tantrums out of sheer spite, and to show to himself that he can (he has, in fact, very weak parents; or bishops as the case may be).
When there is nothing to keep a spoiled brat in check there will be a lot of noise, confusion, and broken toys. But every protestation of the parents notwithstanding – that the child is merely “vivacious”, or “strong-willed” – everyone around clearly understands that this is a spoiled brat, and a stupid child, not kept in check by his weak, disgraceful parents.
Let me say it once again: this man has gone so far in his War on Catholicism that I am rather ready to run the risk of a Tagle or Schoenborn becoming Pope than having this old, lewd ass further defacing Holy Mother Church.
I seem to remember that Winston Churchill once made a joke to friend, at a funeral, reflecting that it is never those whom we wish dead who die.
But then again, at times he must have had his wish, must he not?
Alas, Francis is Pope. Has he, therefore, magisterial authority in whatever he pleases? Let us see.
Your Mathematics teachers at school was in possession of all the qualifications and requisites to teach math. He was, to all intents and purposes, a math teacher, the one with the task to teach you how mathematics works. The teacher had the authority to teach you. You listened to what he said and learned the wisdom he imparted because he was the one tasked with the duty of doing so.
The teacher has, in his own sphere of competence, a magisterial authority, an authority to teach, which is why you attend his lesson.
If your teacher had said to you that 2+2=5, would you have said that this is what the teacher says and therefore it must be true, and that you are bound to believe it, or even that everyone in your class must submit and give assent to what the teacher says?
Why not? Because the teaching authority of the teacher can never contradict the truths of the subject matter he is supposed to teach. His teaching authority only applies within the confines of the truths he exposes. The mathematics teacher cannot make a new mathematics, much less demand that you accept it as in any way binding. A math teacher who teaches falseness about mathematics does not change the rules of mathematics, he merely shows that he is a very bad, incompetent, ignorant teacher and should lose his job (also note here: he will still be a mathematics teacher, no matter how incompetent, until he gets fired).
The same basic logic applies to the wrong teaching of a Pope. Yes, the Pope has a magisterial authority. He has the right and duty, like the teacher, to teach the truths of the faith to all Catholics. But exactly as in the case above, the truths he teaches also mark the boundaries of his magisterial authority. A Pope trying to teach you that “in certain cases” adulterers can receive Holy Communion is even more absurd than a teacher trying to persuade you that “in certain cases” two and two can be five. He has no authority to teach falseness. There is no magisterial authority once a pope has put himself outside of the truths which this magisterial authority serve.
This is basic logic (and Christianity) and there is no need of any encyclical letter or solemn pronouncements stating this. The principle of non contradiction demands that it be so, and even before that Christian obedience does. To think that truth can be changed (by anyone, even by Saint Padre Pio; much less by an Argentinian boor) is nothing short of blasphemous even before being absurd.
No, Francis has no magisterial authority to teach anything that is wrong. This is absolutely obvious and as clear as the sun.
The huge scandal here is not that Francis has “changed” anything. Two and two will never be five. The huge scandal is that we have a Pope trying to persuade us that this is the case.
Oh, the irony! The pope who, more than anyone else, seeks approval among the people is the one who is most ignored by Catholics, non-Catholics and… tourists alike!
The attendance figures from 2013 to 2015 are here, and they are shocking. The figures shop a drop almost as big as the drop in donation for the Clinton foundations. The people of the peripheries just can’t stand this man.
From 50,000 to 16,000 in two short years until 2015 (with the novelty effect built-in at least in the 2013 figures) already speak a clear language. The figures for 2016 are told to be around 10,000, only 20% of the first Francisyear. This 2017 which now goes to an end was very probably even worse.
No one is interested in a Pope who “doesn’t pope”. It’s full of comedians on TV and they at least are funny. A clown with a dour face and a hypocrisy that can be smelled one mile away is of no interest but to those who go for circus attractions and freak shows. Heck, by the numbers of tourists visiting Rome at pretty much every time of the year, one wonders how the figures can be so low.
But then one knows Francis, so this is par for the course.
In these difficult days, I see around me two ways in which some bloggers and commenters try to escape reality.
1) They say that Francis is not the Pope. Wrong. Francis is the Pope because the entire Church, the entire Church hierarchy and the entire planet see him as the Pope. He is not even challenged. Not even by the one (Benedict) who according to some is the real and only Pope. The surreal consequence of this is the decision that the one the entire world sees as Pope should not be it, whilst the one some of them say is the only Pope says that he is merely a retired emeritus, and Francis is in charge. A challenge to a throne without even a challenger simply does not exist; it is fantasy, not fact.
Reality matters. However sad and unprecedented this situation is, we face it without thinking that we can decide who is, or isn't, Pope.
2) They downplay Francis' heretical acts and statement, because they are ready to bend over backwards and produce themselves in the most bizarre contortions in order to avoid stating another facts staring at us in the face: that we have a heretical Pope.
Reality, again, matters. The discussion whether Francis is in formal or material heresy is, if you ask me, less important than the agreement on the fact that should be universally acknowledged: that this Pope fosters error and must now – by the bishops and cardinals – be forced to recant it or deposed.
If Francis' heresy is formal, then he has factually made himself unworthy of and factually resigned his office together with his membership of the Church; but this renounciation would still have to be declared in order to depose him, and until that moment he would still be the holder of the office. In the same way, if a POTUS is found in the act of committing a multiple murder he certainly deserves impeachment, but he is still in office until the impeachment is voted, declared and made operative.
If, on the contrary, Francis' heresy is material, then the preliminary stage would be a last offer to recant his error, albeit such a possibility could be offered, in theory, also to a formal heretic.
The situation is, if you ask me, as clear as the sun, because it appears in front of our eyes with all the evidence of hard facts: a heretic seats on the throne of Peter. Still a heretic, and still sitting, with no challenger in sight. This has happened in the past, will happen in the future, is very sad, and has probably never happened with such virulence (even Honorius could have been weakly defended; Francis is indefensible) in the entire history of the Church. Still, here we are, confronted with facts, not our fanciful and very Protestant interpretation of them.
A heretic seats on the throne of Peter, and we were never given assurance that this would not be the case. His heretical energy and hate for the Church is unprecedented, but do is the rebellion of Vatican II. The most astonishing betrayal of proper theology and abandonment of proper governance must perforce lead to the most astonishing explosion of heresy from the top and abuse from the bottom. This is what V II looked like from the very start; it merely needed sixty years for the ugly face of heterodoxy to completely emerge.
I am merely a layman. No Pope has ever depended on my opinion to decide whether he is really Pope, and it is perfectly right this way. Do not escape from reality. Use it as you would for everything else. Apply common sense and Church Teaching. The Church will get out of this as she has from all the rest.
Every single time Francis does something atrocious, there is the one or other theologian explaining to us that Francis has not proclaimed a new dogma, or abolished Canon 915, or the like.
Yeah, well, interesting as an intellectual curiosity. Still, I think that the approach is totally wrong, and that we must stop circling around the real problem. If there is a hurricane going on, I am not really interested in the way the ozone layer reacts to it, nor am I reassured by the newly imparted knowledge. There is a hurricane going on, this is what counts.
Canon 915 is not just another canon. It reflects perennial teaching of the Church. Therefore, the prohibition of Canon 915 cannot be changed, sabotaged, or otherwise circumvented by anyone, and be him the Pope.
Every article reassuring you that Canon 915 has not been touched actually sends these messages: a) that it could be made, legitimately, hollow at some point in future and: b) that the Canon is being sabotaged but hey, don’t worry, it’s still there!
This is, emphatically, not the case in point. The point is that the Church prohibits communion for adulterers, and Francis is going against this prohibition. Therefore, any discussion about the matter should begin and end with the obvious recognition that no one, not even a Pope, can change iota unum in the matter of communion for adulterers. All the rest is, again, walking around the huge elephant in the room, pretending not to see it.
Which leads to the second matter: heresy. I am not at all interested in the discussion about whether Francis is a formal heretic in the strict sense of the matter. For me, and for every God-fearing Catholic on the street, heresy does not begin when a dogma is officially put in question or denied, or there is an attempt to change it ex cathedra. Heresy is, in the common parlance of God-fearing Catholics, the willed promotion of heterodox thinking and the working in order to subvert what the Church has always believed, irrespective of whether a dogma has been touched or not. Pope John XXII is, rightly, considered a heretical Pope because he promoted such a thinking, even if the contrary belief of the Church had not been declared a dogma yet.
It follows from this that Pope Francis is a heretic and must be seen as such by every God-fearing Catholic; that every one of his actions meant to sabotage the Depositum Fidei in any way, shape or form must be condemned in the strongest terms, and refused obedience; and that we, the God-fearing Catholics, must demand that our Cardinals and Bishops grow a pair already, react to Francis’ endless provocations, and demand that he recants his heretical statements or face deposition.
Which, if it does not happen, does not cause the end of the world, nor the end of the Catholic faith. It merely causes the age to plunge into a deeper state of confusion, analogue to the one experienced in the time of Honorius, A situation of confusion from which, if the Bishops and Cardinals do not intervene, God will free us at some point, when the justly meted punishment for the madness of Vatican II has been recognised, and its evil acknowledged and repented.
A heretical Pope is still the Pope. Honorius was still the Pope. Marcellinus was still the Pope. Liberius was still the Pope. John XXII was still the Pope. There is no Church record stating that they were no Popes during the time of their heterodoxy. Not even the ecumenical council caused by Pope Honorius’ heresies stated such a thing.
But a heretical Pope is a Pope that should, now, be forced to change his ways or deposed (as happened with Marcellinus and John XXII, and did not happen with Honorius and, in a different way, with Liberius); failing which the bishops and cardinals who have refused to act (talking to you, Cardinal Burke!) will pay the most horrible price for their cowardice.
Catholics lived with a heretical Pope before. They are living with a heretical Pope now. Shit and Pope Francis happen. It is not for us to decide who is and is not Pope.
But it is for us to acknowledge an obvious, factual situation and ask that our shepherds do their darn job already.
There are rumours around that a “prestigious” Cardinal (believe me: no such thing in the Year of the Lord 2018) would have become angry at the Evil Clown to the point of raising his voice in a heated exchange. The Cardinal is, it is further rumoured, one who voted for Bergoglio in 2013. The Cardinal would have told the Evil Clown that he wasn't elected to break everything (I assume “sfasciare tutto” is the expression used because it is common in Italy; the raising of the voice also lets me and other deduce the Cardinal was Italian; because hey, we do voice raising pretty well…).
Yours Truly does not think that this is the beginning of the Big Explosion, albeit I would be extremely glad to be proven wrong.
Whoever this Cardinal was, he had no guts to publicly rebuke Francis for Amoris Laetitia. He is, therefore, a wet kitten all right, raising of voice or no raising of voice. He is also, always if we believe the rumour, someone able to vote a semi-Unknown – but through and through V II – Cardinal as Pope in 2013, which is an even worse sign. Finally, he might be one of the many people disappointed that only homos and rabid third-worldists make a career in the Vatican; career being, clearly, the only religion left within the Leonine Walls these days.
There is, therefore, no reason to reasonably hope that Francis' days may now be counted, and the ultimatum given to him of either recanting AL or facing an extraordinary council behind the corner.
However, the episode tells me – and, I think, many others – this: that when the Barque gets a sane Pope again, help might come from unexpected corners, from people whom we rightly despise, from unlikely defenders of the faith. The ways of the Lord, and all that.
It would be wonderfully ironic if, one day, the bomb under Francis' humble chair were to be detonated by godless careerists disappointed for their lack of advancement together with – hopefully – people inspired by the Divine Intervention to put an end to their shameful – and I might be inventing a word here – kittendom.
No, I do not think that any kitten revolt is in the making. But it is consoling to see that some kitten can at least raise their voice.
In these difficult times, we must remember who we are and what we stand for.
I believe in God, the Father Almighty. I do not believe in Francis, the Lewd Commie.
What I believe is perfectly rational, and logical, and holy. What I am living is the consequence of sixty years of V II madness, something I – and we all – knew already.
It would be worse than childish; it would be satanical to start doubting what has been transmitted to us, merely because something is happening that been, also, believed for a long time.
When the ecclesiastical authorities approved the apparition of the Blessed Virgin in Quito, they were fully conscious of the danger that always surround the (earthly) Church. The devil incessantly works to undermine not only your own salvation, but the Christian institutions here on earth: from priests to bishops and from cardinals to popes, Satan looks for those whom he may devour; and by devouring those he may hope (in a way) that many others may come to him through loss of faith and unbelief.
Do you want to be devoured by Satan? No?
Man up, then, and realise that it is our own collective stupidity that has given us all this; a stupidity that begins with John XXIII and ends with the many poisonous fruits of V II, from the openly, now officially heretical Francis to the openly, now officially cowardly Cardinal Burke, the wet kitten meowing about the end of the world instead of doing the only thing he should do: officially denounce the Pope as heretic and demand that he either retract or be deposed by an imperfect Council. But then again this is one who thinks that the SSPX is “in schism”, go figure…
Many will, very obviously, be damned, to whom it was given to be born in these disgraceful times. I have no intention of being counted among them. Do you? No?
Well then, repeat to yourself every day, and every hour, that you will not squander the immense grace of having been, through God's mercy, introduced to proper Catholic instruction even in these disgraceful times. Pray for strength and solid faith, and work on it every day of your life. Do not waiver. Stand firm like a rock against the waves of heresies coming from Francis and his bunch of atheists and homos.
The Christmas now rapidly approaching reminds us that the wonderful, luminous truth lies in that manger, not in the satanical madness of an old, lewd boor.
From what you can read in the link above, it is going to have a nice mixture of what we already know (the arrogance and repression of every Catholic voice and impulse, the astonishing lack of every sense of shame and coherence), what many of us have already suspected (the habitual vulgarity and the explosions of bad temper), and what is new but not surprising (the open opposition of his Jesuit superiors and colleagues, when some of them were still Catholics, to him as a person and to him becoming a Bishop).
It is very consoling to this old heart to see that what was seen, only a couple of years ago, as the unforgiving rant of some bitter bloggers is now becoming a mainstream topic, at the point of having books exclusively centered on the peculiar traits of the Evil Clown being published in several languages.
You are welcome.
As they say in Italy, il tempo e’ galantuomo: time is a gentleman, in that it takes care that everyone is treated fairly. But it is not so, that I – and those who, like me, exposed the crass nature and innate vulgarity of this man – have particular divination instincts.
The reality was there, staring at us in the face. Every Italian mother tongue could easily recognise in the “#azzo” (this is an extremely vulgar Italian word) video the nonchalance, the naturalness of use of the man who is accustomed to pronounce such words often; like you would see in, say, a coarse daily labourer trying to engage in “clean” conversation and failing miserably as his habit has the better of him. It was also not difficult to realise that, among civilised people, refusing to show up at a concert where he was to be the main guest, the host, and the people the invitees where there to see without any warning is the obvious mark and business card of the vulgar boor.
It was all there. One only needed to be willing to see.
I have, by the way, suspected for a long time the Catholicism and general morality of Bergoglio’s parents.
It can, obviously, always be that good parents are tested with a son going totally astray notwithstanding their honest effort. But it is far more probable that negative traits so ingrained in this man (from the obviously extremely vulgar disposition to the great propensity for shameless lies: “soon, soon!”) are the product of either parental environment or careless child raising. Being Italian, I know that demographics: the lowly educated, coarse, vulgar, resentful blue or very low white collars who have been, for decades, the hunting ground of the Communist Party. I have been to school with their children, and I have observed the parents (who were, I am happy to say, so shockingly different from mine). You could easily see that those particular apples had not fallen far from their respective trees. You could also, growing up, easily notice that decent parents never had vulgar sons, only vulgar parents had. You could also see that past the age of mandatory schools (where they almost invariably failed to take advantage of the excellent education system Italy provides to everyone, irrespective of social condition; a trait vastly different from Anglo-Saxon Countries) they rapidly fell behind as those properly raised started to spend countless hours on Latin, Greek, History, Philosophy and other disciplines that, actually, teach you to think, and behave like a decent man, why the sons of the Communist-voting proletariat became exactly like their fathers and mothers, vulgarity and lack of skills included.
I wonder whether some of the coarse, vulgar, bullying, resentful school comrades on my childhood should not have entered a Jesuit seminary instead.
Who knows. In time, they could have become the Pope.
100 years ago, a Communist organisation took control of a Country (and of a huge one at that) for basically the first time in history as the Parisian “Commune” can certainly not be counted as seizing control of a Country.
Communism is – like his bastard little brother, Socialism – the fruit of a godless mentality that does not see reality for what it is – the fruit of the Fall, with all its attending problems – but, rather, for what it should become if the toy called planet earth were, so to speak, repaired and made to work as it always should have. This is the thinking of children, and of godless adults.
Inequality is not a bug, it is a feature. People having the most varied inclinations and the widest differences of willingness, intelligence, resilience, and appetite for risk, it must follow that they will range – in a completely sinless, utterly justified way – on an extremely long staircase concerning their degree of security, prosperity and quality of life.
Poverty – which is the aspect of inequality leftists cry about the most, though I am pretty sure few of them have ever experienced it – is also, as Our Lord taught us, always going to be with us. It must be so, because poverty teaches humility, encourages to prayer, and helps look heavenwards in all one's endeavour; whilst in some circumstances also being the deserved consequence of laziness, profligacy, entitlement mentality, and general wrong thinking.
War is, also, the result of the Fall. It is childish – nay: it is outright stupid – to think that bad guys will disappear from the earth only because nations gather together in a forum that is nothing more but the collection of all rubbish regimes on the planet. The bad guy will never be “history”, and there will always be need of good guys ready to fight and die to stop him.
You can't “make poverty history”. You can't put an end to wars. As Communism is on its way to becoming history at least as an ideology able to run entire Countries – Socialism will possibly always be with us, because stupidity will – poverty has, unsurprisingly for every Catholic, not only remained but it has been generously multiplied by those same people who claimed they would put an end to it. Sanity wins in the end, albeit sometimes at the price of countless millions of victims.
We, the smart set, do not try to make poverty history. We work towards making Communism history. And with Communism, we want to throw in the rubbish bin of history all that nonsense about inequality, “war no more”, and all the thinking that comes from forgetting God. We want, most of all, purge Catholicism from this cancer.
Make Pope Francis history.
Poverty, war, and godless people will always be with us.
If you make an internet search for “GracePointe”, you will find a lot of articles about the leader of this supposed (and soi-disant) “megachurch” “embracing” the satanic values of the XXI centuries and accepting, or welcoming, or whatever that rubbish is, sexual perverts.
Fast forward two years, and the Proddie outfit is rapidly unraveling. And I do not mean merely that they are stagnating or have some attendance problems. I mean the halving of the attendance in just two years and the necessity to sell the church, move to rented space and reduce other expenses merely to stay afloat.
This is a rather remarkable work of destruction accomplished in merely two years. I think this supposed “pastor” deserves the compliments of every atheist and enemy of Christ in the Country, as he has successfully shown out to take a (even if wrong) Christian organisation and shred it to pieces.
Unfortunately for the atheists, though, the success is only apparent. There is no evidence that even one person lost the faith because of this disgraceful “pastor”. Rather, it appears that half of this Proddie community discovered, once seriously challenged, that they are Christians after all and will not put up with this rubbish. As things go in life, it is more likely that this will generate more interest in serious Christianity in those who left this already progressive “church” rather than make them drift outside of Christina worship.
The truth is that there is nothing like a “progressive Christian”. Christianity does not “progress” at all and is, therefore, the very essence of conservatism. Fashionable adjectives do not hold sway over the truth, merely over the confused minds of half-witted conformists and social cowards.
Some people, who have clearly lost their faith, may try to be loved by the world and embrace its sins and perversions. But it will backfire rapidly. This “pastor” had the only effect of forcing his sheep to choose between Christ and the world. Half of them woke up already, others will do so in future. Those who remain will be those who hate Christ for condemning sin.
Who knows: some of those who went away might, in their quest for sound Christianity, end up by converting to Catholicism. Sadly, this is more likely to happen because they encounter sound Catholicism on the Internet and in books, rather than because of the work of some diocese around them.
If the Catholic Church had remained strong, these would have been decades of miraculous catches of faithful. The Only Church would have cleaned up as many of these Proddie outfit surrendered to the world and the desire to be seen as good not in the eyes of God, but of their relatives, friends, neighbours and colleagues. Alas, the Church’s nets are in a lamentable state of disrepair, and the catch will be meager.
We all knew that Father Jeanine Martin, Society of Fags, is one of those to suspect whom of being homosexual is like suspecting Stalin of being Communist. However, even so it is difficult to even imagine the lows that these low existences can reach.
Father Martin did it recently, by reposting on his Facebook page an article speaking of (and forgive me for having my adrenaline going through the roof now) the “Queer Jesus”.
It boggles the mind. Please consider saying your rosary today in reparation of this unspeakable blasphemy.
It is fair to say that even if Francis' papacy were, in everything else, the very epitome of orthodoxy, the mere presence of this extremely worrying, creepy, utterly disgusting “man” in the Vatican would be enough to mar his entire pontificate. However, it is even fairer to say that, if Francis' papacy were orthodox, this man would have been defrocked a long time ago. A destiny, mind, which I think will catch up with him at some point in his disgraceful life, because this man has leant so much out of the homo window that every future Pope with a modicum of integrity will not want to have the man going around calling himself a priest in good standing, ever.
A prayer to Saint Michael is full in order, too.
An exorcism would be, in fact, even better, but I somewhat doubt Father Elton Martin, Society of Fags, would agree to it. Can't wait for the Church to get rid of this filth.
There is no day now without some heretical bishop of priest expressing his more or less veiled approval for sacrilege and heresy of all sorts. Beside their lack of faith in God, what surprises me of these people is their lack of foresight.
Things change. The tide could turn pretty fast. Even if the tide turns pretty slowly, every bishop now in his Forties can get in a lot of trouble, risking excommunication and defrocking – and therefore, destitution – in his old age.
Pius XIII will come one day. And when it comes the implacable Internet, which forgets nothing and delete nothing, will be the undoing of countless careerist Judas now competing against each other in sycophancy towards Francis and his powerful collaborators. If you are 85 and atheist (these people clearly all are) you may think there is a high probability that the party will last for at least as long as you breathe. If you are 48, or 54, the matter looks altogether differently.
A bit of knowledge of history and sound thinking should teach these people that, the revolution being so vast, the counterrevolution will – when it unavoidably comes – be just as brutal. When the time comes to restore the dignity and credibility of the Church, the number of bishops and faggy Monsignors to be defrocked will be considered utterly irrelevant. The pendulum always swings the other way with the same energy as it did it in the opposite direction.
Granted: we might all die before things really improve. We might. But how probable is that? Francis' mad course is accelerating the reaction, and all signs indicate he might become more and more unhinged in the future. Many are the risks in relying in an 83 years old guy who is ruining his own faction day in and day out. Ask Ceaucescu how safe he felt in 1987, nay, in the summer of 1989!
When sanity comes it will come more or less fast.
But there can be little doubt that it will fall on these people line a ton of bricks.
Food for thought, heretical bishops and faggy Mobsignors….
The sad events in Las Vegas (a prayer for the victim is here in order) will, no doubt, move the abortion-cum-sodomy complex to try another push for gun control. I can easily imagine that the stupidest among the already stupid US bishops will follow them.
What neither the first nor the second group of intellectually and/or doctrinally challenged people realise is that the Country is now not only solidly marching in a pro gun direction, but is also less and less ready to swallow the aggressive fake narrative of the Nazi Libtards. This will, like all other recent occasions, translate in another defeat for them and another victory for freedom. The more controversy they create, the harder they will lose.
Ask the NFL.
Ideally, for us, we would have our most stupid US bishops embrace the seamless garment lie. When they do so, the Catholic population will realise, from their utter stupidity, how stupid their silence towards, or defence of, Amoris Laetitia is, then a bishop who can't make a difference between abortion and the natural right to defend oneself is clearly too dumb to be trusted in everything that has not been shouted for 2000 years before him.
Scream at pleasure, dear Libtards. Make some lio. Have the entire body of dumb V II, Amoris Laetitia bishops link their wagon to yours.
It will open the eyes of a lot of people.
There are rumours around the Evil Clown will excommunicated some of those pesky Catholics who write on magazine and blogs. As you know, excommunications can only be personal, and cannot be – in order to be real excommunications – applied to entire categories of people.
Therefore, if Francis were to excommunicate “all the intolerant bloggers” or any such rubbish, that would be no more than the usual horse manure.
However, the Unholy Father might excommunicate people by name, picking one or two dozen of the most valiant defenders of Truth. Oh, what a honour! What a feeling! What a crowning of one's journalistic or blogging career!
Dear Evil Clown, when you come to that point – because you are so unbelievably dumb that you might really do it – please, in your charity, remember me!
You don't need to know my real name. My pen name will, I am sure, suffice.
Oh, to wake up in the company of the likes or Archbishop Lefebvre! With nearly not as much merit or saintliness of course, but with the wonderful feeling of being treated by FrancisChurch like he was treated by V II Church!
In your dumbness, Unholy Father, please give me this gift! I will carry it as a badge of honour, as a “Catholic deplorable on steroids” medal, as the greatest glory of my blogging existence!
Ah, I am too insignificant, I am afraid. Others would get this privilege.
But it was beautiful to dream.
The, despite the various arguments surrounding the question, the fact of the matter is that the Priestly Society of St. Pius X is in schism since the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre ordained four bishops without the mandate of the Roman Pontiff.
If these are the friends of the Church, I almost prefer the enemies.
I had written just this morning about Cardinal Burke’s kitten-itis. It now seems that the V II-itis of the man is far more serious than expected.
Words like the ones mentioned above could be (not logically, but as a matter of fact) understood if coming from the likes of Father Jeanine Martin, Society of Fags. But coming from a man who should really know better, like the Cardinal, they are a real shame.
Truth can never be in schism. If Pope Francis were to attempt to proclaim a false dogma and a part of the clergy were to appoint his own (orthodox) bishops, would Cardinal Burke have the guts to say to them that they are in schism? Actually, I now think he would!
What a sad trajectory for a man that only two years ago was seen as a hope of future restoration of sanity. This guy is V II through and through, and he seems to get worse with the time.
With his most recent piece of rubbish, that “doctrine does not come before mercy”, Francis has once again showed what an ignorant ass he is.
Of course doctrine comes before mercy. Doctrine tells us what (real) mercy is, how it is recognised, and how it is properly exercised.
To admit that there be a mercy that does not depend on doctrine is tantamount to say that everyone can define mercy his own way, and put it in contrast with doctrine. This is, then, exactly like saying that everyone can make his own religion as he goes along, which is what this cretin is doing.
Catholicism is based on immutable truths, not feelings. We instruct ourselves in the proper way of understanding truth. Doctrine is nothing more than taught truth. Everything is understood in its light, because everything is understood in the light of that immutable truth which doctrine, as the word itself says, teaches. Doctrine, not Mercy, tells me what the place of properly intended mercy is. It tells me, in fact, what is real and false mercy.
What an embarrassingly ignorant, stupid pope we have.
Now four and a half years in his Pontificate, Pope Francis has irreparably ruined his reputation and legacy, sinking in a pit of moral relativism, outright assorted heresies and social activism with a strong Communist streak from which he will never be able to emerge. You see this, well, everywhere, with only the usual suspects still cheerleading for a man who is becoming more embarrassing by the day.
The Correction, if seriously made, would have nuked this papacy. But even without it the failure is staggering. If even three years ago you would find a minority of voices criticising Francis, the Catholic Resistance movement has now become so massive that even the notoriously lethargic and disconnected FrancisChurch PR machinery acknowledges, in so many words, that they have lost the war for the hearts and minds of the average Catholic. What they have is the adulterers, the homosexuals, the atheists, the leftists of all sorts, and some Muslims.
On noticing that the message was causing widespread resistance, a smarter guy would have toned down the rhetoric a lot, being content to only disseminate an error here and there amidst many episodes of orthodoxy.
Francis is, sadly for him and luckily for us, not a smart guy. He is stubborn, petty, childish and, most of all, stupid. Therefore, as he saw his Pontificate deflate like a soufflé gone wrong he did not put his foot on the brake, but on the gas pedal, showing the typical attitude of the three-years-old who wants to impose new ball game rules on his companions because he has the ball.
Interview followed interview. Outrage followed outrage. Insult followed insult. Heresy followed heresy. As Francis saw his initial patrimony of good will evaporate he reacted like an idiotic child would: more logorrhoea, more outrage, more insults, more heresy.
Well done, Evil Clown! You have managed to let even the slow-witted understand what an enemy of Christ you are.
I am afraid we might not be so happy with the next V II job holder. But one can always hope that after this unmitigated disaster the Cardinals will be inspired to go with a safer pair of hand; and, by God's grace and a bit of conversion, this one might prove a pleasant surprise in the end.
Being the tolerant, flexible guy I am I understand that someone who is poorly instructed and is not graced with a strong faith may recur to the services of a psychoanalyst . This is the common knowledge, “what people do”, particularly if they have the resources.
However, a person with a better degree of instruction will understand the profoundly subversive (or plain disgusting) roots of Freudian thinking, the system of belief behind most of modern psychoanalysis.
Similarly, a person with a well-rooted faith will, without needing any instruction about the workings of psychoanalysis, automatically look to his faith, not to a strange professional , for the solution of the problems afflicting him.
It is, therefore, quite revealing of the man that Bergoglio would, without any shame, candidly confess that he has himself, whilst in a position of authority within his Jesuit order, recur to the services of such a professional.
Besides the obvious question of how the heck a person with a vow of poverty decides he can spend the money of his Order – which appears the most likely scenario – for pastimes like this one (certainly not cheap in Argentina, just as everywhere else), the more direct question is: how on earth can a man who has supposedly gone through several years of theological studies and spiritual exercises even think of sitting on a psychoanalyst 's couch?
The answer is obvious: because he never had any spiritual mind, and never had any serious theological formation, probably despising even the little that could make its way into his rarher thick cabeza.
This here is the reality of Jorge Bergoglio: a faithless, boorish ass so ignorant that he does not even understand how he embarrasses himself exposing his utter lack of any spiritual attitude or theological formation.
By the by, this admission of visiting a psychoanalyst might explain his abstruse reasoning about the “need for security” and such like claptrap: I bet my pint some guy told him that religious faith is for people wanting to cling to security, and he now spouts that out day in and day out to insult those who, unlike him, actually believe in God.
When this unspeakable ass dies is not one day too soon.
In an unprecedented attack to everything that is Catholic, the Evil Clown has inflicted on the Catholic world a 450-page book (even the title goes on forever) which, from what has transpired up to now, reads like a Manual For Heretics.
The espousing of a completely secular mentality is so complete, so extreme, so obvious that it cannot but take the breath away even of those who, like us, have been denouncing this disgraceful Pope as heretical for years.
Now even the semblance of decency is going away. Francis is more and more uncomfortable even with trying to save appearances. This is all-out heretical attention whoring.
What times are we living in. A reigning Pope openly, brazenly attacking Catholicism at every step! Are there words too strong to condemn him?
I reflect on all this, and wait to calm down. And then I think: why shouldn't he?
That he is a heretical bastard, we knew. That he is a damn Proto-Commie, we did not have any doubt. That he hates everything Catholicism represents, was abundantly clear. And where is the resistance? How many bishops and Cardinals have denounced his heresies? Who among the hierarchy has ever challenged him? Would this latest book have been published if the Four Kitten had officially condemned Amoris Laetitia many months ago?
Take a damn communist bastard and make him Pope. Then let him to on unpunished and unchallenged for four and a half year. What you have is the situation we are living today.
Every time that this Pontificate reveals itself as even more monstrous than we had thought possible the day before, the vastness of the insult to God caused by Vatican II reveals itself in an even more sinister light. The scale of Francis' madness teaches us the scale of the V II's madness. It also condemns in increasingly stronger terms the weakness and complicity of all those (Burke and Ratzinger not excluded) who still pretend that there is something good in damn Vatican II.
Francis is the deformed, grotesque creature generated by a blasphemous revolutionary movement. This revolution is, now, also eating his children, with an immense number of Sixty-Eight Catholics clearly marching towards hell in front of our terrified, but still lucid eyes.
We are living an Age of Madness, a fitting punishment for the madness of our forefathers' revolt and our own added sinfulness. If the heretical whore on the Throne of Peter does not persuade you of the utter wickedness of the entire Vatican II movement, you are prime Reprobation material. If you still think that those cowardly bishops and cardinals are being good, or even courageous, because of their faint meowing you aren't much better. Accomplices and enablers, all of them.
Thank the Lord that, in His Mercy, He is making it so easy to understand what is happening. Sad and maddening as the situation is, draw some consolation from the obvious unmasking of the lies, from the official outing of the heresy.
The time has come, long ago already, for a Council that deposes this miserable, vulgar, unspeakable bastard and puts a Catholic Pope in his place. This is what should happen, whether it does or not. The Church will survive in both cases, so don't take refuge in strange fantasies to explain why the Pope is not deposed. The Pope is not deposed because the Lord is punishing us – but also instructing us – with a deformed head of the deformed church V II has created.
Cardinal Murphy O'Connor has departed this vale of tears during the weekend. The Evil Clown himself, who isn't very fast in remembering the plight of persecuted Christians, was not slow at all in letting us know how saddened he is.
He bloody well knows why.
CMOC was a prominent member of the so-called St. Gallen Mafia, the group of prominent prelates who helped Bergoglio to position himself for the 2013 Conclave. No, I do not think for a second that this made the election invalid, and only in kindergarten can children believe that this kind of positioning does not take place all the time (and even more intensely so in the past, when “transition Popes”, expected to reign for only months or maximum a year or two, made the positioning and PR game a permanent one; and I will ignore the bribes and exchange of favours out of the charity of my heart).
What I am thinking is this: that this powerful man, once able to influence papal election, is now dust.
What is worth, now, the knowledge of being one of the Big Whigs? What has remained of the satisfaction of knowing that one's own prestige and influence with the wrong people has led to the desired outcome even without him taking part in the Conclave? What use is the knowledge that a Pope himself will express one's sadness at one's demise, when the Judgment will be faster than that?
CMOC had, of course, all the time in the world to repent, as his knowledge that he was dying of cancer put him, by God's grace, in a much more favourable position than, say, Cardinal Meisner, who appears to have simply dropped dead, without even seeing it coming. (Like Saul Alinsky. Just saying…).
However, the great grace of knowing that one's last hour is approaching is only useful if one has the right faith. If one thinks that there is no God at all, or a kindergarten version of one (as Meisner clearly indicated in interviews before he died), then this grace will be of little and, very possibly, of no use at all.
Now everything is gone. Gone are the events with heads of state and government; gone is the life of prestige and comfort; gone are the interviews and the obsequience of the Catholic masses. The Cardinal stood naked in front of his just Judge.
Thousand battles could he have fought, and he shunned all of them. Where he has now gone, no one is fooled by pomp and interviews. Where he has gone, he is one of the greatest failures of the Church in the last decades.
Pray for the poor bastard, because one day we will stand, just as naked, in front of our just Judge.
But seriously, do all you can to get there in a better position than this one.
A red hat was never a “get out of hell”-card.
And it came to pass I was informed from the Remnant about the real nature of the savage rants of the papal men (and, in some cases, women; though apparently they prefer not to speak about their own sexuality) against conservative Catholics.
No, it's not the rumbling people in the pews, at least not directly. It's not even the conservatively oriented priests, as much as a V II priest can call himself “conservative”. Let us read:
“But certainly, we see the multiplication of websites, blogs, and Twitter accounts that tend to move public opinion and react in lively and often in a violent and fundamentalist way. These realities create a bubble within themselves…It is found everywhere. I do not say it is a majority phenomenon, but it is something that is present in the life of the People of God today.”
No. It's all those pesky bloggers, the Blessed Virgin's warrior ants, assaulting heresy one blog post at a time, no matter how little read. You put all the warrior ants together, and they are enough to easily peeve our already easily peeved Jorge “Che” Bergoglio.
As I have written many times, every warrior ants on its own is utterly insignificant; but together, they can be rather formidable. Whilst not millions, they will shape the impressions of millions; because every confused Catholic who goes around on the net seeking for information about the latest Communist papal rant will find… us.
He will find the thousands of utterly insignificant, but absolutely angry Mundabors opening the guy's eyes about the times in which he is living. The guy will possibly not become an observant Catholic after that (but hey, perhaps he will!), but he will go to dinner without any more doubts about who is Catholic, the commie Pope who wants to Muslimise Europe or the angry warrior ants who oppose him.
And still, still…
As it becomes clear that our work is getting more and more effective, I invite you not to look at numbers.
The Blessed Virgin does not care about how many readers you have. She cares about how much will and energy to fight for Christ you have.
But to know that, together with many others, you are peeving Jorge “Che” Bergoglio is also a satisfaction.
Homosexuality is not a sin. Why? Because it is not an action. It is not something that you do or omit to do.
Homosexuality is something one is. One is homosexual, paedophile, incestuous, attracted to animals, etc. But the tendency in itself is not a sin.
The tendency in itself is a perversion. The tendency is perverted (Latin: per, which often means “wrong”, as in the English, Latin-derived word perjury, and versio, “direction”.
A pervert has his inclinations and desires going in the wrong direction: towards people of the same sex, relatives, children, animals.
So no, homosexuality is not a sin in itself. Homosexuality is a perversion in itself.
The perversion will then predispose to the sin, and will do so in a very violent way. When the devil has taken hold of a soul to the extent that the perversion has festered, has consolidated its presence within the person, then it is obvious that the devil has taken a strong bridgehead. This will create a very strong tendency to commit acts – with the mere thoughts, to which the pervert assents, or with physical action like sodomy – which are sins.
How strong this is can be observed continuously, when the pervert declares that he is that way, or was born that way. What the man is saying is that his assent to the perverted thoughts has become so strong that he is even unable or unwilling to dissociate it from the essence of what he is, from the way he defines himself.
This is a very strong sign of Reprobation, as it shows that the man is, so to speak, Satan's occupied territory and only God's grace will be able to motivate him to get out from the path to hell very clearly laid before him.
Therefore, Bishop Kohlgraf of (soon) Mainz is deceiving and betraying his flock when he simply states that homosexuality is not a sin without saying what it is and what it does to a soul.
The Evil Clown has expressed the desire to meet the mother of the Italian homo murdered by another homo because of his – real or alleged – relationship with a Trannie.
There is enough material here to vomit for a quarter of an hour. Still, this cretin has it known that he wants to meet the mother of the victim.
Notice here that there is nowhere any trace of condemnation of sexual perversion: not from Francis and not from the mother. Therefore, Francis does not want to meet her as a heroine of the fight for mental sanity, but far more likely as a part of the normalisation of sexual aberration this non-judging nincompoop seems to be pushing all the time.
There is something extremely disquieting and decidedly creepy in the attitude of this man towards perverts. It is as if he would surround with as many of him as he can (besides Ricca we can easily mention Martin, Rosica, Paglia and “Tucho” Fernandez as very easy suspects; I leave it to you if you want to add Coccopalmerio, too) and, when he cannot, he would try to be as near as he can to them by proxy, like the young man in love who likes to chat with the mother of the beloved one.
This man is truly creepy, and it might be even creepier that not many seem to notice anymore.
We live in times in which a Pope seeking the vicinity of perverts is not even news anymore.
I am often led to reflect about the impact that a bad Papacy has on our Western culture, and I would like to spend two words on my reflections.
Like everyone working in the UK, I have a good deal of heathens under my colleagues and acquaintances, and it is perfectly evident to me that Francis is irrelevant to them: they barely know who he is and they do not care about what he says.
Then there are the atheists; who, coming from a Western background rather than from Sri Lanka of Pakistan, very well know who Francis is and in what he differs for his predecessors. However, they do not care about him, either. They think of him and his antics as an evidence that the Pope thinks like them, but even they know all too well that this is not what the Church teaches. They dismiss both as false, and the thing ends there.
The instructed Catholics are horrified by the man. They do not drink that kool-aid at all. They only differ in the degree of public criticism of the Evil Clown: very timid or even cowardly for most, assertive and combative in some. But the horror is the same.
Last, the tepid, wannabe, thin-varnished, hearsay Catholics. They certainly use Francis as an excuse for their becoming even more tepid and even more wannabe than they already are, but this seems to me more the willed acceleration of an erosion process that would be underway anyway, than a change of direction of any sort. Yes, the weakness of the Church may one day cause the disappearance of Catholicism from Countries like Italy of France; however, this would happen not directly because the Pope orchestrated it, but rather very indirectly because the dechristianised people of Europe want it that way in the first place, and being dechristianised don’t even care whether the Pope agrees with them or not.
In short, it seems to me that a bad papacy creates a sort of chameleon effect: it disappears in the background of the atheist, perverted Western world, and exactly in virtue of this disappearance it has little effect on the world at large. The largest impact of a bad papacy is, if you ask me, rather in this: the dismissal and refusal of the role of the Church, of her mission to be an enemy of the world.
Francis is hugely damaging in that he prevents the Church from being a strong force for Catholic truth. But as for actual, active damage, leading people who wish to be good towards a bad life, it seems to me that he does not have this power.
Catholicism stands like a huge block of granite against this idiot, continuously scratching at it with a fork as he shouts “look at me, comrades!”. Only people who hate the granite will ever be impressed, and not even many among them.
If you become like the world you disappear in it. Irrelevance is the price of acquiescence.
Pope Francis has stated he is “saddened” by “perfect Catholics” who criticise others.
This is a typical straw man argument. There are no perfect Catholics who say that whoever is not perfect must be criticised. The object of the criticism simply does not exist, and is chosen to make people who do exist look bad.
What does exist is Catholics who, whilst sinners, strive to live a Catholic life and justly criticise overt and covert attacks to it. Francis cannot put it that way, however, because it would reveal the fundamental soundness of the criticism.
This very mediocre, very emotional, completely unintelligent line of attack is perfectly in line with this Pope: a stupid, ignorant, arrogant man who hates Catholicism and all who love it.
It is a blessing that our heretical Pope is at least a dumb one. I start to fear what might happen if his successor were one like him, but with a better brain.
Please, Lord, save us from an evil worse scourge than an ass as Pope.
Cardinal Tettamanzi is not among us anymore. Where he is, God knows. However, there is something that even we can know.
If Catholicism is true, everyone who dies unrepentant of wilful grave sin goes to hell. The metre for what is sin does not reside in his own conscience, but in the Truth that God established. Therefore, believing ourselves the most ardent followers of the Lord will be of no avail to us, if our actions and our entire ideology go against this Truth and, therefore, against Our Lord. Methinks, Luther might have died believing himself the greatest Christian since St Paul. You know where he is now if he did.
Cardinal Tettamanzi is a prominent (both because a Cardinal, and because of his own particular sins) representative of the generation that betrayed the faithful in the most cynical way since the Church was founded. Whether he considered himself “charitable” is neither here nor there now. Whether he adhered to and defended the Truth is – unless he seriously repented before death – everything that counts.
You could put it in a more cynical way and say that if God allows a generation of traitors, opportunists, cowards and outright sellouts to save themselves en masse, then Francis is not far from the Truth; he is, in fact, much nearer to it than all those generations of Catholics warning us of Hell since time immemorial. If even the greatest generation of traitors ever to sell their faithful leads to almost general salvation, we as normal pewsitter are really, really safe and hell does not need to bother anyone whose nickname is not “Stalin”.
However, we know from the teaching of time immemorial that we, the normal pewsitter, are not safe at all. Therefore, the likes of Tettamanzi must be in the greatest danger of eternal damnation, all of them, to the last slimy traitor.
Even among the bad, Tettamanzi was one of the worst. The successor of Martini in Milan, he was the more cautious version of his predecessor, a bit like a strong poison diluted in water. His leftist leanings were so obvious that Comunione e Liberazione (a then powerful, wannabe Conservative organisation) could not stand the man. He was invited to the Sham Synods even if above the standard age of 80, and punctually leant his support to sacrilegious communion for adulterers. The picture is clear then: another sellout and Judas of the worst sort.
Do I wish him salvation? Individually, poor bastard, I do. But he belongs to a group at very great risk of salvation, so we only need to switch our brains on to know that the probability of damnation of the likes of him is very high.
Unless, that is, Catholicism has lied to us for 2,000 years…
and Francis is right.
One of the many ways in which you can see that Francis is just plain stupid is his insistence in producing blabbering videos. It is like having in front of you a child who insists in putting himself at the centre of th stage and tries to attract attention in any way he can. By the way, such a child is not unlikely to turn out a homo when he grows up.
This “Me, Myself and I” papacy is counterproductive even from Francis' perspective, as what we have here is a man whose childish behaviour hampers even his own evil designs. I think the man is not stupid enough that he does not notice it, but he is certainly stupid enough that he does not care.
I also wonder how many people watch these videos who are not already completely sold to Francis' agenda, like homosexual priests and communist or environmental activists. Normal Catholic can't see the man anymore out of sheer visual overkill, and sound Catholics are repulsed by the very thought of the man, much less an entire video.
The stupid Pope can't resists doing things he himself must see are stupid. Like the above mentioned child, he will insist in putting himself in front of you and try to attract your attention. He just can't avoid it, even if he sees that people laugh at him.
Very stupid and rather faggy, eh? no?
No, I do not mean to say that the Pope is a homo himself – though he may well be, and none of my readers would be surprised – ; rather, by inverted Papacy I mean a papacy which inverts the logical order of things, “'and of thinking.
The Church is meant to use earthly events (happy or sad) and the natural phases of this life to remind you of eternal life. From war to pestilence and from birth to death, but also with to sacraments that mark the rhythm of our earthly journey (again: birth, marriage, holy days, adulthood etc.) the Church indefatigably leads us from the earthly to the heavenly, helping us to live and understand every phase of our path in the broader perspective of our eternal destiny.
Not so in this Inverted Papacy, where we continuously note a compkete inversion of priorities, and the instrumentalisation of everything that is sacred, with a view to pursuing earthly goals.
Jesus is constantly depicted as a pacifist, an environmentalist or a social justice warrior ante litteram; the heavenly dimension is constantly reduced to the earthly one, and the latter is made a paradigm for the former: not being an environ-mentalist is to betray Jesus, building walls is unchristian, the Blessed Virgin is a poor unemancipated woman, and such like rubbish.
Francis has brought the supernatural down to earth and has dragged it in the mud of his political ideology. He seems to enjoy the exercise very much. This does not surprise us at all when we reflect that the man has no supernatural interests at all, and his enviro-commie-ideology based on social envy and social hatred is his true interest.
If you made an atheist bouncer, with a propension for Communism, the Pope, what you would have is a man pretty much thinking like Francis.
If the man were also stupid, you would have one talking like him, too.