Category Archives: Good Shepherds
Cardinal Pell has just died, apparently after a hip operation (it seems reasonable to be, full anaesthesia at 81 is no walk in the park). May he rest in peace, and his martyrdom bring him great joy, one day, in heaven.
The man spent 13 months of detention, and the related worldwide humiliation, because of accusations that, once the details emerged, appeared patently absurd. Imagine what it must be, as an aged Cardinal, to face detention. I am not the only one, I am sure, to suspect that either the accusation or the prosecution were heavily influenced, or I should say motivated, by the fact that the Cardinal was one of the few who, actually, spoke like a Catholic.
But I am not writing about this. I am writing about something else.
A short internet stroll will persuade you or the venomous hate existing against Catholicism.
Get some Twitter comments about the Cardinals, and realise that all those bitter, venomous people insulting and slandering the Cardinal in life and in death would likely unconditionally support the presumption of innocence and the respect for court decisions, when the decisions regard people they like.
Not with Pell, of course. Venom as much as you want. Blank hatred.
Make no mistake: this is hate against the Church, exercised towards a target who, being Catholic clergy, is acceptable to the liberal crowd.
Of course, these are the people blathering about hate all the time.
They will have their reward, and I suspect that, for very many of them, it will be a different one than the reward of this courageous Cardinal.
Rest in peace, Cardinal Pell.
I am confident that, where you are now, there are no haters.
“Good God!” – exclaimed the good, pious woman upon seeing the cat threatening the freshly baked apple cake.
“Jesus!” – was the utterance of the pious Neapolitan man when hearing Naples had lost the game 4-0 again.
“Jesusandmary!” (one word: Gesummaria!”) was the usual expression of the southern Italian gentleman upon being told of something very bad that had happened.
“Maledetto….!” “Damn….!” (add to the word the usual suspects: cats, dog, communists, whomever or whatever wasn’t OK!). This one was everywhere.
A pleasantly unruly child would be described as “a little devil”, often without the slightest hint of disapprobation. Similarly, “you are diabolical” would be the compliment reserved for, say, someone who had made something really cool playing soccer.
“Dio Bonino!” (Good Lordy…) was, meanwhile, the cry of disapprobation of the Tuscan Italian man, because they love terms of endearment.
“Dannazione” (“Damnation”), would the poor guy cry, who had just hammered his finger instead of the nail. Mind, though, that I can prove to you, scientifically, that said man had no intention whatsoever of either sending to, or wishing, hell to absolutely anybody known or unknown to him. The expression simply meant to evoke something very unpleasant. Nowadays, a more vulgar and unfaithful world would simply says ” f-cking sh-t”; which, apparently, nobody considers a blasphemy and must, therefore, be somewhat ok.
Last, we have the one to rule them all: “Dio Mio”, same as the Spanish Dios Mio!
What do all these phrases have in common?
Likely that, for all of them, you would find Protestants willing to call them assorted blasphemies, or curses, or generally being a sin against the Second Commandment.
This makes the 60 million Italians I grew up amongst a bunch of blasphemers, too. At least if you are a Protestant or, in case of a tragic lack of understanding, if you are a Catholic who has uncritically absorbed all the Protestant rubbish about the Second Commandment (and I am afraid there is more than some, of those, in the US).
Alas, in authentically Catholic Countries people have, traditionally, not thought that way; and as they are the cultural cradle of Catholicism, I think you should take very good note of this.
Blessedly free from Protestants playing the well-known game called “holier than thou”, Catholics developed a culture in which a constant reference to God in one’s daily life translates in often mentioning God, as the One around Whom the entire life of a person revolves.
Therefore, sadness, disapprobation, surprise, but also joy and hope, were constantly linked to the Divine. If you often have God in your mind, you will often have Him in your mouth.
The evidence: the de-Christianisation of Italy has brought to the rapid disappearance of all of the expressions above. Including the one to rule them all.
Why do I say this? In order to achieve 2 aims:
1. point out to the Protestantisation of Catholicism in Countries with vast contacts to the “holier than thou” sects, and
2. give my own take on the potential cultural background of Father Pavone.
As to 1
You really need to relax. A priests known for being a good priest will simply not blaspheme. If he uses a word that he (perhaps) shouldn’t be using as a priest, you need to let it rest. If he says to you that he even went to confession (that’s an interesting one btw: as he did not intended to blaspheme there should be no sin at all, same as if I hammer my finger and the expression escapes me I don’t need to go to confession, and it is not even a venial sin), you really need to shut up.
As to 2.
I don’t know if Father Pavone (no name can be more Italian than this: Pavone means… Peacock in Italian.) grew up in a specifically Italian cultural environment. If he did, he will have heard his (likely very pious) aunts and grand aunts call the cat, dog, hamster, & Co. “damn” a great number of times. Note here that in Italian, there is no proper Italian translation for “Goddamn”. Better said, there is, and it is, simply, “damn”, “maledetto”. But, clearly, only God damns. Therefore, every “damned” means “damned by God”.
“Maledetto cane”, “maledetto vento”, “maledetto gatto”, “maledetta pioggia” and the evergreen, extremely well-known song, “maledetta primavera”, in which said primavera (Spring) is damnable exactly because, as the song explains, it makes you fall in love in one hour.
This expression, “maledetto”, was so omnipresent when Italy was Catholic, that movies meant for a children audience (John Wayne comes to mind) had it. I saw such movies at the parish cinema. Nobody ever said a word. Not a priest, not a parent. Nobody. And there you have it: John Wayne saying a word, that you may easily translate as “Goddamn”, in front of the children, in the presence of the priest, without this causing the slightest embarrassment in anybody.
Now, though I don’t live in the US, I understand that the cultural environment over there is (likely because of the nefarious influence of the above mentioned Protestant sects) different. Father Pavone, Italian Aunt or no Italian Aunt, must have been aware of that. However, our culture, our upbringing, our own cultural sensitivities will always emerge when we get emotional. This is why people tend to swear in their own mother tongue, confident that their interlocutor will get the message anyway.
Why do I say all this? Because to me, Father Pavone saying, say, “Goddamn Commies” (no, it does not mean that he is God; that has has cursed them; that he wishes them hell, or any of that nonsense; it means that he really doesn’t like those people) does not make it less Catholic, but more. In fact, it brings this courageous priest nearer to me, exactly as we feel that an angry Don Camillo is really on our side, even if he loses his temper for it.
I wonder if Don Camillo would, today, be defrocked.
Enjoy the video, and pray for Father Pavone.
I wish one twentieth of our Bishops were as Catholic as he obviously is.
Francis must have listened to the Beach Boys too much, because he seems to think that there is really something like “good vibrations”. In a pope, this is quite the disgrace.
Atheists “send” “positive thoughts” because they want to show you that they care for you, though they have no faith. New age (that is: very old) guys might send “good vibrations” because they think that this mysterious non-divinity, “the universe”, will relay the message.
Christians pray for the people they love because, their lives being centred in Christ, they believe in heaven providentially helping those they have been providentially inspired to pray for.
Heaven is central in the idea of praying. It is nowhere in the alleged “sending” of these “thoughts” or “vibrations”. The Christian praying for his dying friend is really helping him. The atheist sending good vibrations to his dying friend is helping only himself (to feel good with himself).
Francis, being an atheist, does not get all this. More importantly, he does not get (or pretends not to get) that a pope encouraging atheists to “send” him whatever it is that atheists can(not) “send” him is, in fact, encouraging them in their atheism and validating them in their unbelief.
Again: prayers work and are useful; happy thoughts do not work and are useless (unless for the wannabe happy-thought-postman to feel good with himself). Good vibrations only apply to motorcycles, old pickup trucks, and stuff like that.
Francis is fully devoted to this unbelief. He wants you to know, at every step, that he is fully in synch with their own way of thinking. He wants to let them know that they are quite fine in their atheism, and that he has no intention to make any attempt at conversion.
Everybody is wonderful in his own way, particularly if he barks for social justice, or thinks that God’s creation can be endangered by farting cows and car exhausts. These are the ones Francis likes the most.
There is no cell in this man, not one, that believes in Christ.
I am very much afraid that he will die in his unbelief.
Let’s see what good “happy thoughts” and “good vibrations” will do to him then.
Belgians are, according to a horrible magazine, running to “de-baptize” themselves (something they can’t really do; but the diocese will make a note of their desire to un-sacrament themselves, so it’s black on white when they die…) in droves. Their already very bad church attendance is also going down faster than Hunter Biden’s cocaine high.
I have written recently about post-couf Mass attendance. However, I also wonder: how is it that the anti-Catholic stance always seems to be more virulent where the Church is already massively lacking in charity, because trying to appease the world?
The answer to this is, I think, very simple: the world cannot be appeased.
There is no universe in which the local church takes the cowardly approach, and is not made to pay for her cowardice. In fact, I think that the Lord, in His wisdom, has decreed that this be expressly so, in order for the local church to be punished for not doing her job.
The article in the horrible magazine hints (perhaps out of anti-catholic spirit; perhaps just out of available information) that this desire to (try to) un-baptize oneself might have to do with the issues surrounding sexual degeneracy.
Say: young woman believes herself a lesbian, introduces her parents to her wannabe spouse, and the parents of the two dykes are now, suddenly and after a life of calling themselves Catholic, incensed that the luuurrv of their daughters cannot have a stamp of approval by the local church. How dare they, think the parents: One Love, and all that rubbish. As we live in an age of virtue-signalling, they then proceed to (try to) “un-baptize” themselves so that they can boast of this great feat on Facebook, harvesting the approval of their circle they so ardently crave.
Mind you here: if the Church in Belgium had been savagely thundering against abortion, sodomy, and euthanasia (the latter has now become a Belgian passion, like chocolate and waffles), then it would not be so expedient to seek (wannabe) “un-baptism” as a virtue signalling argument. Why? Because the virtue signaller seeks the approval of the mass of his friends. A brutal confrontation would make the argument simply toxic. Virtue signaller doesn’t like toxic. He prefers easy. His little Ukraine flag is there exactly because of the virtual certainty that all his friends think the same way.
In Belgium as elsewhere, the church needs to up the ante and massively raise the level of confrontation. This has a great effect and often works very well on this life (it always works well in the next). Why? Because, clearly, Christ wants it so, showing us countless examples of local churches picking up the fight and doing greatly in it, and local churches trying to avoid the confrontation and being crushed, but more slowly.
Nobody respect someone who makes an argument he is embarrassed of. On euthanasia, sodomy, and even abortion, the church counter-argument is so full of appeasements, so cowardly in its explanation, that it is not surprising at all that it gets rejected outright.
The Church in Belgium is like the boy who, fearful of a fight, ends up being the bitch of his bully.
When confronted with a bully, never try to appease him.
You are always, always better off picking up the fight.
What you see above is the interior of a brand new (consecrated in 2020) Orthodox Cathedral. It is very peculiar in that there are many glass mosaics, giving it a particular atmosphere within the frame of usual Orthodox sacred building style. The outside has been finished in metal, not stone, in an obvious reference to warfare, but it still looks very traditional. Can you imagine Francis promoting the construction of a Cathedral for the Armed Forces?
But this is not all. The Cathedral is built in what appears to be a huge “patriotic park”, well outside of Moscow but still easily reachable. From what I understand, you have there museums of the Great Patriotic War, armed forces exhibitions, and the like. It must be quite the one-day trip, or school trip. It is, likely, an ideal complement to the Museum of the 1812 War, just at the border of the Red Square.
But back to the Cathedral. Russians still build Cathedrals. Big, expensive ones. Made to look like Christian churches, not like shopping centres. Richly decorated in the tradition of Christian Orthodoxy. Proudly declaring the Christian faith of the Russian nation.
Francis must have the conniptions.
This building shows the excellent state of health of Russian Christianity, which we can compare to a boy who is growing healthy and strong and promises to, one day, become a great warrior for Christ. In just twenty years, Vladimir Putin has taken a still vivid patriotic spirit and has re-implanted in it the Christian Faith that had been, for one thousand years and until the savagery of Bolshevism, inseparable from the identity of the Russian nation. Much is there to do, of course, and you only need to remember that not only divorce, but abortion are still allowed in that Country. These things have to be seen in a historic perspective, and the re-christianisation of such an immense body as Russia is not something that can be done in a few years, or even in a generation. It was always so. The Roman Empire did not wake up entirely Christianised the morning after the Edict of Milan.
There is a strong, healthy, growing Christian spirit in Russia, and this growth is fostered by both the religious and the political power. Christian spirit and Patriotism grow together, are intertwined, are part of the way people understand themselves, of their entire way of being. It should be this way in every Christian Country and, in fact, it was this way until the Second Vatican Council slowly tried to transform Christianity in the Pacifist International.
But Christ is peace, not pacifism. War can, and should, be fought for the right reasons. The soldiers involved in it, and their relatives and dear ones, should see their role in it, their suffering and even their death, in a Christian framework.
Dulce et decorum est pro Patria mori. We forgot it. The Russians didn’t.
Take that, Francis, and bring it home to your trannies and degenerate priests.
You will never understand this stuff, because evil and rebellion dominate your heart.
The article linked here seems, judging from the colour, from a women’s magazine. It is dated November 2020, but I’d say the problem had been going on for decades before then: men are discriminated against in everything that is to do with marriage and children. The article mentions them, but what it does not mention (and should have done) is the great suffering of the fathers separated by their children, and the accusations of “rape” now thrown away like candies in the “wars of the roses” during divorce.
Let me give you a piece of my mind and tell you what I think should be done to put an end to this situation. I hope my readers will not be shocked by my responsible, enlightened progressivism. We cannot always be Old Conservatives. At times, we need to be courageous and ready to break conventional societal schemes, and our accustomed thinking. We need to break the boundaries of old thinking, and protect women again. We need to stop being old conservatives, and become Alt-Conservatives. This is, my friends, revolutionary.
The first thing I would do, is take active electorate away from women. Women can be elected to every political office, if they are voted in by men. This way, you never miss on Margaret Thatcher, but you cut off Liz Truss from the start. The restitution of decisions to men (as it has always been in the history of Western civilization) also takes the emotionalism and easy manipulation away from politics. Things are right or wrong. If they are wrong, no emotional rubbish can make them right. Abortion is wrong, and screw the coat hanger emotional terrorism. Illegal immigration is wrong, so spare me the picture of the illegal dead child. You get the drift. Patriarchy means this: the rules of the fathers. Patriarchy is good. Patriarchy works. Patriarchy is not only progressive, but revolutionary. Patriarchy is Alt-Conservatism in action.
The second thing I would do, is to take judgeship away from women. Heck, when I was born, a woman could not be judge in my native Country. Never had been able to. Were all generations before us stupid? No, they weren’t. They recognised that the wonderful traits of femininity – that constitute women’s peculiar sweetness, nurturing instinct, and loving nature – make women intrinsically not suited to be a judge. Historically, the introduction of women in the judgeship brought, inter alia, a sharp discrimination of men in divorce courts. Yes, pal, it’s because an awful lot of women are judges now. No, really. No, you are wrong.
The third thing I could do (if the first two are possible, the third will go without saying) is to abolish divorce. Divorce isn’t a Christian thing, nor should a Christian Country care for the customs of Muslims and Hindus. Even Protestants, not much more than 100 years ago, considered divorce pure poison. Catholics should not, ever, even entertain the idea.
Let a court decide whether the convivence is impossible, and – in that case only – allow a separation in which the parent who wants the child must be able to pay for him. No no-fault divorce. No no-fault anything, really. For better or worse means for better or worse.
Then – and I am getting, here, so progressive I am basically a fourth wave feminist – let us abolish DNA fatherhood tests. We go back, instead, to the old rule: the husband is presumed father. Husband, you say? Yes. Husband. This means that first there is a marriage, and after that there is the child. See how easy it is? This puts an end to unwanted fatherhoods, with the associated threats (happened to a friend of mine, who confided it to me merely because of our close friendship; I am sure it is way more frequent than people think). The old, time-honoured system of shutting one’s legs will be back in fashion in no time.
Cohabitation with children? Gone! Get that ring, young woman!
Before long, the proper order will be followed: first, a marriage that is the fruit of deep commitment, and then the primary scope of the marriage: procreation.
“But Mundabor, Mundabor!” – I hear you say – “how will this happen, if we have just said that men don’t want to marry anymore?”.
Wrong premise. Men want to marry because lifelong marriage and nurturing children is in their DNA, too. But they want to be the man in the relationship; they want to fulfil their God-given role (whether they believe in God or not) without knowing that they will lose fatherhood, economic security, and peace of mind. They need to have a deal that is fair to them.
Women get a much better deal, too. A women who does not long after a lifelong companion and father of her children is a woman gravely damaged by modern society. The progressive, revolutionary institution of the Patriarchy gives women the security of a lifelong commitment and security in raising children that corresponds to her deepest, most natural wishes, instead of creating an army of late thirty of early forty sluts going from one man to the next in the statistically very, very dumb hope that Mr Right will now, magically, appear on the horizon, bewitch her with his love for soybeans, cleaning the kitchen, and “sex and the city”, and fall in love with the 42 years old woman who had 14 men into her, as he finds both her emotionally damaged teen children so adorable it cannot be believed.
Whatever feminists tell you (not me; I am the real deal feminist), feminine women yearn for an order that gives the freedom to be women and mothers, even as it makes it desirable for men to be husbands and fathers. The other women (the unfeminine or brainwashed ones) need to be educated and, at any rate, cannot be allowed to count.
Do not tell me that this is a fantasy. This is (by and large) the world I grew up in. This is the world my grandmas and grand-aunts (which I remember fondly, all of them, and were ten time smarter than the nowadays aging sluts on the prowl) thought the only one possible, and a jolly good one at that.
Nor (please) should you be swayed back into Obscurantism by the usual argument about the pathology of marriage. Bad cases make bad laws. It is much smarter to have good laws and say to every boy and girl, with the great Friedrich Schiller:
Drum prüfe, wer sich ewig bindet, / Ob sich das Herz zum Herzen findet! / Der Wahn ist kurz, die Reu ist lang.
(Therefore let him test, who binds himself forever, / whether the heart finds itself in the heart! / Delusion is short, regret is long)
Life isn’t a simple affair. It never was and it never will be. Any attempt to escape the God-given challenges will cause us to end up with the ones prepared for us by the devil.
A new movie about Father Gabriele Amorth’s activity as an exorcist is in the making.
As I read the article, I was puzzled.
It seems to me that the age of Hollywood movies treating the Church in a halfway decent way is gone. Rather, any movie dealing with the Church would, in the current Hollywood climate, deal with paedophile priests (obviously without telling us that these priests are, in their absolutely vast majority, homos), or other ways that try to portrait the Church in an unfavourable way.
Therefore, I immediately started to think how you can deform and turn against the Church the activity of an exorcist. Well, I think it will be difficult.
Any movie dealing with exorcism in a serious way will have to forcibly recognise:
- The existence of God
- The existence of the Devil
- The reality of demonic possession
- The Church as the authority which can deal with it, and
- The courage, faith and dedication of the exorcists.
All the points above to straight against the current Hollywood narrative; in fact, they undermine it.
It will be very, very difficult to twist this against the Church without turning utterly ridiculous. Plus, the movie is going to be, from what I understand, explicitly linked to the life of Father Amorth. This means that a “fictional” character who, say, dresses as a woman in his free time or is secretly attracted to children – as, no doubt, many a projecting Hollywood screenwriter would be tempted to do – is just not going to be in the cards.
It seems to me that it will be very difficult to make a film on this subject and avoid millions of cinemagoers going out of the projection room without thinking that demonic possession is a real issue, and the Church is, with the brave men She trains for the purpose, the right institution to deal with it.
Still, it seems also difficult to think that this issues might be dealt with in a purely “un-woke” matter, as this nowadays exposes a big investment to the risk of a massive boycott. The idea that this will be 90 or 100 minutes of movie, without some kind of perverted twist in it, seems not in line with the times.
I think I will have to wait a year to see how this pans out.
Meanwhile, I’ll say a prayer for Father Amorth; a guy who would have eaten these Hollywood guys for breakfast and spit their rest from his mouth before having a thorough mouthwash.
Most of my readers are, clearly, North Americans. It is, therefore, fitting that I explain to them the cultural differences about abortion that I see on both sides of the Pond.
In Europe – and, to a certain extent, even in the United Kingdom – abortion is not seen as something that “empowers” anybody. It is not seen, by most at least, as a “conquest”. It is, also, not seen as the disposal of a “clump of cells”.
Your average European (particularly South European, but also North European) sees abortion as an embarrassing remedy to a grave life crisis. He will not deny that the fetus that is being legally disposed of is, in fact, a human life. He will simply reflect that he would prefer this emergency exit to be available to his daughter, and that he would not be strong enough to resist suggesting that course of action if his girlfriend (sex and marriage having been decoupled from the daily life of your average European decades ago) were to become pregnant.
Basically, it’s a choice dominated by convenience and cowardice, and people know it. This explains the remarkable absence of public debate about it pretty much everywhere this side of the Atlantic. It is, in fact, impossible not to notice that the demolition of Roe vs Wade is treated as “US news”, with nobody expecting a serious debate about abortion in Europe. Mind, it is my opinion that things will change in the years to come; but, for now, it is what it is: a sort of situation of convenience, of which it is conveniently, but silently agreed that the least it is said about it, the least discomfort for everybody. Tellingly, at Mass yesterday, after such a historic moment, the homily did not contain a single word about the Supreme Court decision. Unsurprisingly so, if you think how difficult it is to hear a priest even saying the word “abortion”, or discuss the evil of abortion, from the pulpit (you get to be content with vague words about life beginning at conception, or the like. But for heaven’s sake, let us never call the killing of a baby the killing of a baby! People might get upset!)
It is, therefore, with a certain degree of astonishment that I, as a European grown up in a Country where abortion does not have such a rabid ideological component, witness the feminist rage currently going on in the US. It is a shocking, hysterical behaviour that you would not see in Europe. The hundreds of rabid fanatics banging on the doors of public buildings would not be seen here. Similarly, you would not see the controversy framed as “stay away of my uterus”, as if a uterus had any rights over a human life. Instead, what you would see would be the usual, emotional tales of girls who have committed suicide, the gruesome stories about abortions made with ***the famous hanger*** (there is no mention of abortion without the unavoidable famous hanger), and the like. But the idea of “it’s my uterus and I decide whom it should kill” would, by and large, not be there.
To very many people in Europe, the arguments used must appear extremely evil, and shockingly so. They paint a picture of an extremely polarised Country, whose societal fabric has been torn apart by the satanic push for baby killing, sexual perversion and, now, institutionalised child grooming and child abuse.
Here, abortion is just something people prefer not to talk about; something one tries not to think about, like the number of men the wife slept with, or the daughter sleeps with, or (in the UK) the son sleeps with.
In time, the death of Roe vs Wade will produce results here, too.
We can, at least, build on the lack of satanic hysteria.
Please watch this short video, and reflect with me on what can be seen there.
I am a very emotional man. I know how it is not to be able to stop the tears. I could fully, fully understand Archbishop Gaenswein when he was overwhelmed by emotion when talking about Benedict.
I saw in the Archbishop’s emotion a man who was, at that point, reflecting on decades of work together with a man he, evidently, truly esteems. I saw that he, Gaenswein, was seeing in front of his eyes many moments of prayers, joy, sadness, hope, and engagement for the Church they both (certainly in a more or less imperfect way) love. And yes, you can be overcome by emotion in a moment like this one. And yes, I will not think worse of you, but better.
The video I posted is like a full breath of oxygen, and I have posted the German version so that the obvious sincerity of the man can be better appreciated.
God knows I don’t like these V II prelates, as a class. But when I watched the video, I knew that in the Vatican there is, still, more than homosexual Jesuits, homosexual non-Jesuits, and scoundrels of all other possible sort (normally, homosexual themselves).
This is a guy who sees a decades-long collaboration going to an end, perhaps very soon; and one who still has the innocence to be overcome with emotion as his long-term superior, collaborator and friend is about to depart.
Not a fan of the guy, at all.
But I never thought as highly of him as today.
Pray for Benedict. He is, I think, about to get through his most difficult hurdle.
May the Lord have mercy on him, and on us all.
Ah, Saint Bernardino of Siena!
This fearless Saint is still very well known in Italy. A bit like a household name. Not many know the details about him, but everybody has heard his name!
Francis too, methinks?
You see, Bernardino (or Bernadine as I think some would say in English) was very good at doing exactly that stuff that Francis lurvs!
The guy met sinners where they were at*. He would preach, for example, in the middle of Piazza del Campo in Siena, exactly where all those sinners congregated! So accessible, so down-to-earth! A cura villero ante litteram! How pleased must our Pontiff be with him!
And then, then….
… when the people had gathered….
… the saintly man would….
… in his charity….
thunder against sodomy like there is no tomorrow!
He would advocate for a strict enforcement of sodomy laws. He would advocate for the execution of public, unrepentant sodomites! He was, actually, so good at that, so passionate, so full of zeal for Christ, that he managed to enflame the audience with a sacred desire to see the laws (both of man and of Christ) enforced and this scourge, as far as possible, eradicated!
Blessed enthusiasm! God-given zeal! Is it a surprise that Bernardino is remembered as a great Saint, his fame in Siena only surpassed (possibly) by the great Saint Catherine?
The great man did not sit in his ivory tower. He did not spend his days and night closed in a room, lost in studying, writing, or contemplation. Such a guy would, certainly, not suit Francis.
No, Bernardino was the active guy, the guy who “accompanies” the sinner, who moves and lives right in the middle of the sheep! Francis must be a great fan of his, surely?
Surely… ? ….
Oh well, never mind….
* I find that final “at” very questionable grammatically. I suspect the influence of some Protected Minority in this. But this is the language our clergy uses…
EDIT: APRIL’S FOOL!!!
It is not easy for me to write this.
However, it has to be.
Everything else would be dishonest. And I do not want to be dishonest.
In the last weeks, particularly after the start of the war in the Ukraine, I started feeling a discomfort that grew with every day. I realised this:
I am always in the minority.
And this makes me angry.
And this makes me ugly.
And this makes me… unkind.
How can 95% of the Brits be wrong, and only myself and a couple of grumpy old men and women right? Could it not be that Ukraine is a freedom-loving democracy, abortion a necessary evil, and a homosexual person born that way?
Why – I asked myself -, why do I always have to be so angry, so isolated, and so unkind?
I look around me, and everybody is so kind. They are so accepting. They are so inclusive, and they are so included. A war breaks out, and they are all there, cheering each other wherever they can, happy to be part of a great group!
Me? I am always in the opposition. Always the angry guy. Always the inflexible guy. Always so unkind.
This, my dear readers, ends today.
I want to be liked; I want to feel part of a group. I want to feel good as I cry “slava Ukraina!” I want my goodness to be seen as I decry all sorts of social, racial, economic, and sexual oppression! I want to look in the mirror and think that I am changing the world!
Therefore, my soon-to-be former friends, I will close this blog, because it is full of people who are just unkind; who don’t understand the gays; who are not inclusive and accepting, and who are intolerant and should, therefore, have their bank account frozen, their mortgage defaulted, and their house repossessed. This will teach them, I am sure, to be as tolerant as I am.
There, I have said it.
This blog ends today.
Bishop Zanchetta (for you and me: Zangaytta) has just been convicted to more than 4 years for various failings connected, all of them, to him being a homo.
I have written just a short time ago about all the ways the Evil Clown promoted this guy, and even protected him after he had to officially fall from grace. Zanchetta is a wonderful example of the thuggish way of the not so holy “father”; and, for the record, by such a stubborn protection of a guy who has no business being a priest in the first place, I still suspect Francis of being a homo himself.
Let us now move our attention to Puerto Rico, where six out of seven bishops have endorsed the self-poisoning of their sheep to please stupid politicians, mad voters, and the world in general.
One of them refused. Bishop Fernandez Torres, who dared to disobey The Francis in such a gruesome way, was also very ready to sign religious exemptions for his sheep; because the guy is, as you have understood by now, actually a Catholic.
How do you think Francis reacted to this act of rebellion to the Most Humble Wheelchair Lover of Pacifism and Non Judgementalism?
Well, he removed him from his post, of course *
What do we learn from this? Something that we, unfortunately, knew already. Be a pervert, and Francis will do all he can to help you. But dare to actually be Catholic, and you will be dealt with in no time.
Whilst we are all accustomed to this evil, we need to denounce it again and again, lest this satanical individual thinks we have just got over it and consider his homoantics and his enmity with Catholicism a part of the landscape.
The only consolation in all this might be this: that Francis chose to act fast because he sees his time on this vale of tears rapidly coming to an end.
I wonder where Dante would put him.
Likely among the Sodomites.
*no link because wrong publication.
If you had any doubt about who is the moral leader of the Church, this article should remove every doubt. The guiding light of the Church is the SSPX, guided by Father Pagliarani.
The linked article makes very clear what is the difference between particularism and love for the Church. I have no doubt whatsoever that the SSPX could, if they wanted, obtain from the Church a sort of “Indian reservation”. This would be very much in the interest of Francis, who could say that Tradition is not being persecuting whilst continuing to persecute it.
The SSPX priest are a very, very tiny percentage of the total of catholic priests. Therefore, allowing them to “do their thing” whilst shutting down everybody else would still allow Francis to reach a great part of his objectives.
Thankfully, Father Pagliarani does not think in this way. The Traditional Latin Mass is a patrimony of the Church and a right for every faithful and every priest. Father Pagliarani’s combative words are balm for the ears of every good-intentioned Catholic.
Also please note the absence of any vindictiveness in Father’s stance. He does not want any priest to be deprived of the possibility to celebrate the Traditional mass, not even those who consider the SSPX, for some mysterious reason, “in schism”. His fight is a fight for the Church as a whole, not his own “parish” or those who are on his side.
A true priest and a true leader.
Schismatics, my foot. We should thank God that we have the SSPX!
The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (or at least some of his members) have shown very clearly that they like the thinking in the Italian Army.
As I have written here also in the past, the Italian Army has a so-called, not written anywhere, used ironically, but still very real “unofficial first rule”. The rule goes: gli ordini sbagliati non si eseguono, or “wrong orders are not carried out”.
It appears that this is exactly what happened in Kansas City, where the FSSP (or some of their members) showed very clearly and very publicly what they think of the motu proprio mockingly called Traditionis Custodes.
When I read the news of the new consecrations according to the Old Rite, the first thing I thought was “I hope their assets are well protected”. In fact, I cannot imagine that The Frankie will allow this obvious display of Catholicism to “go unpunished”. Therefore, the order – if, that is, the entire order is compact in its defence of the Kansas City consecrations – better be prepared for any of the countermoves coming from Rome, from the seizing of assets to the sudden deposition of the current leadership to a far more innocuous “visitation” to save Francis’ face until he dies (please, God: “soon, soon!”)
My second thought was, instead, “time is a gentleman”. In fact, if the Fraternity decides to resist an unjust order of the Pope, they will be in exactly the same position in which the SSPX was in the Seventies. I must say, I find it ironic, and quite funny within the very sad framework of the events; as if Jesus was telling us that there is no alternative to obedience to Jesus, and compromises in this will never be long-lived.
I will await the next months before I formulate a judgment as to the reaction of the FSSP to Traditionis Custodes, as I don’t remember any statement of the order making clear that Christ comes before Clowns. Still, it seems to me that something is moving, and the order might be put in front of the choice of either be split in two, or face the Evil Clown as one.
But the irony is evident here. Appeasement does not work with any bully.
At some point, there will have to be a fight.
A recently emerged news leads me to considerations which, if often made on this modest platform, would bear repeating every day.
Let us say, your life is just fine. You are 65; pretty much as healthy as a fish; successful; wealthy; smart; admired wherever you go.
You fall and knock your head somewhere in your hotel room. You think nothing of it, and go to sleep as if nothing had happened because, to you, nothing has happened.
Then you die in your sleep due to the consequences of the fall.
This is what happened – as it was confirmed, actually, yesterday – to the famed US comedian Bob Saget.
There is really so much to say here. The guy was, without any doubt, a celebriteeeee in his native Country and, I would say, beyond the US boundaries. He was raised a Jew, which means that, behind the success and fame, there was already a clock ticking fast there. He was also, as far as I can discern, fit as a fiddle. Finally, he was, if the rumours are true, a guy not averse to inordinate pleasures. Then he knocks his head, in a very last, forceful, memento mori moment. He shrugs it off as a “bad stuff happens” moment.
Then he goes to sleep, and he never awakens.
You can, of course, see it in the other way; that is, see it in the light of the improbable (make no mistakes: my pint is on him finding himself surrounded by strange, red guys with pointed tails, poking him and crying “surpriiiiseeee!”) but not impossible scenario in which Mr Saget is, for reasons it is not given to us to question, actually among the Elect. It is, in fact, fascinating to think how things might, in this improbable but not impossible scenario, have played out.
Perhaps the guy had had doubts for a while, unconfessed to others and even timidly recognised by himself. Perhaps he was, slowly, coming around to the idea that the public would have had to deal with Bob Saget The Convert. Perhaps he had been ruminating on this stuff for a while, unbeknownst to everybody around him. Perhaps the knock on his head was, on a man already so predisposed, the definitive wake up call; the reflection that, harmless as the accident was supposed to be, life can end at any moment, and the choice for Christ is made, there and then, with a full contrition, and a lot of tears. After which comes, with a never before felt serenity, and a new found sense of peace, the welcome rest, and a sweet sleep, and the road to Purgatory.
The Lord works in mysterious ways, and the Lord can call time on us at any time. I normally do not let a day pass without an Act of Contrition, then life has taught me that the day of the Lord does come like a thief in the night.
I would love that at least some of my readers would take this post as an encouragement, and decided to take the habit of reciting an Act of Contrition every day.
Together, if you can, with a Hail Mary for Yours Truly; also a sinner, and one who could be called to his redde rationem in three minutes time, on his way back to work.
The boat you see above is the Azzam, apparently the biggest motor yacht on the planet.
It is a beautiful, beautiful boat. Everything in it was made to be at the top, and you can imagine that its rich owner and his guests are not the kind of people who are easily satisfied.
It is, in everything, a magnificent boat.
Now let us imagine that for some strange concourse of circumstances (say: he is the brother of the owner’s mistress) some vulgar, extremely arrogant, spiteful guy were to become the captain of this vessel. The Captain would make the lives of all those around him miserable. He would likely surround himself with a crew a bad as himself. He would take any occasion to inconvenience the guests of the vessel.
If this happened, would anything change in the ship itself? Would Azzam become less magnificent just because of the captain who, due to unfavourable circumstances, is now in command?
No. The vessel would remain exactly the same; its beauty intact, its craftsmanship just as beautiful, its substance unchanged. With a bad captain and a bad crew, you would soon notice that the vessel looks more tired and is not in the shape it was designed to be. But the magnificence would remain the same.
Our captain is arrogant, stupid, does not understand anything of navigation, and hates the ship and everyone in it. Still, the magnificence of the vessel remains exactly the same and he will not be able to do worse than keeping it dirt and oily and greasy.
But the boat is still wonderful. And it is unsinkable.
Next time you hear this boor vomiting heresy out of his lewd mouth, think of the magnificence of the Barque, and that he cannot do anything to it besides leaving some grease, oil and dirt.
Bishop Mutsaert did it again.
His observations are very Catholic and very smart. Particularly intelligent is the reflection that, whilst Francis demands that those who want to celebrate the TLM declare their allegiance to the Second Vatican Disaster, the Novus ordo priests are not asked to accept the Council of Trent.
This would, in fact, be a very interesting game to play with Francis on the next aeroplane:
“Your Holiness, do you accept the Council of Trent?”
“Your Holiness, as you know, in Quo Primum your holy predecessor, Pope Saint Pius V, declared:
“Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other Churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world”.
He also solemnly stated:
“No one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Do you agree with the words of your holy predecessor?”
That would be, authentically, fun to behold and would rapidly become a “cult” video clip if filmed. My take is that you would see the unholy lewd guy change colour in the face, get all angry and flustered, and then precipitously interrupt the journalist and start screaming in panic, just like Don Abbondio did when Renzo wanted to marry Lucia in a “surprise marriage” against his will. After which, he would answer with some insults to the journalist posing the question.
Later, the Vatican PR machine would run to the “rescue” (actually: try to limit the damage) and assure us that the Evil Clown did not actually intend to mean what he says, but rather that bla, bla, and more bla.
This guy lives in a world consisting entirely of hypocrisy and deception. He lives in a huge pram, out of which toys are thrown incessantly. Lying and hating are in every cell of his. He is too evil to respect Catholicism, too far gone to realise how dumb he looks, and too arrogant to care for anything but his own little revenge of the day. His pettiness and record-shattering petulance are a typical mark of the old homosexual.
This guy is vulgar, ignorant, dumb, lewd, and evil.
And I suspect him of being a homo.
I suspect him of being a homo.
For those of you who don’t know, Sanremo is a beautiful city on the Italian Riviera, known as “the city of flowers”. If you are on holiday in Italy, you can do much worse than Sanremo.
Sanremo is, now, in the Catholic news because of a local Benedictine community. These brave Catholic monks have read Traditionis Custodes. Then they have looked at their own Constitution, which was approved by Rome. I suspect they have also made one consideration or two regarding the potential luciferian influence on a certain guy known to us all.
After these considerations, the monks have decided, before Christmas, that it’s not going to happen and they are going to go on as usual. In January, the Prior, Father de Belleville, reiterated the refusal and said the Monks are going to “remain faithful, whatever the cost”.
The monks have also issued an appeal to other similar orders, encouraging them to do the same.
Boy, it looks like the good monks are really Catholic! Francis will get the conniptions, no doubt about that!
This will be one to watch. Francis has likely thought that the TLM communities all over would just shut up and obey. If this does not happen, he will have to lose face (provided he ever had one) or enforce his tyrannical diktat. Then it might get really funny, because if the Friars remain hard (I suppose they will: a monk tends to be different from a politician, or a Bishop) there is no way Francis can force them, and any action against them will be doomed to fail.
What can Francis do? Smash them on the street? Him, the popeofmercy ™ himself, doing such a thing? It would not look good. Still, if he tries, the Monks will receive more support and money than they will ever need, in no time. Heck, they might even – depending from the legal framework governing their organisation – bring the monastery and all the real estate with them! That would be really fun!
The history of the Church shows us that, whenever a tyrant tries to persecute Her, there is always a minority of hardcore faithful who ruin the party for him. Whether Diocletian or Julian the Apostate, Henry VIII or Paul VI, there were always the St Lucia’s, the Moores, the Fishers or the Lefebvres of the day to make sure everyone – even the tyrant of the day – knows what is what.
I am trying to translate the lawful and righteous resistance of the good Monks in colloquial English, and one expression that comes to mind is “shut up, bitch!”; albeit I am absolutely sure that the good monks, whatever their thoughts on Francis’ canine tendencies, would never express themselves in that way. Never. Ever.
Never mind. I will do it for them. You are welcome.
Let us pray for the good monks. Gloria TV, which had the news (I can’t link now) will certainly report on the further developments and the coordinates for donations if the need arises.
Faithful, whatever the cost. An encouragement for us all.
Die soon, evil clown. Haste on your way to the place the Lord’s Justice has appointed for you.
May you enjoy it, and its delights, for all eternity.
I have now finished “Saint Padre Pio, Man of Hope” in the latest version of Renzo Allegri. I had bought it some time ago, but never came to reading it, likely because I found the Ruffin book (“Padre Pio, The True Story”) so well written that it would be difficult to surpass it.
All in all, I’d say that that the Allegri work is a good one, but the Ruffin one is a much better one and, if you want to buy a book about the life of Padre Pio, I would recommend the latter.
The difference between the two books I can easily discern (I have read the Ruffin years ago, though I keep coming back to it again and again for single parts) are the following:
- The Ruffin book gives a very vivid description of the environment in which Padre Pio found himself to operate. The explosive mixture of ignorance, superstition, arrogance, violence, poverty and corruption the saintly man had to endure is very vividly present to the mind of an Italian reader, who knows his people with their good and bad sides. However, without the description of all the, ahem, “quirks” of the local populace it is difficult to understand why the Holy Office would see Padre Pio with suspicion, or try to protect him from the fanaticism of the mob, or try to avoid the hysterical “cult” (and the frauds, with the awful “relic” business) that was developing around the saintly man. Renzo Allegri’s work says very little about it, and frankly describes it in a rosewater way that makes a reader wonder how the Holy Office could “persecute” Padre Pio (fact: Padre Pio had enemies and slanderers, but a lot of what was done from Rome was done to, actually, protect the man).
- The Allegri book is a revised version, modified in the last years, and it’s too much V II for my liking. You are told how good the future JP II was to Padre Pio (good for him!), and how devout Francis is of the guy! You don’t say, Renzo, old boy!! I must say, I vomited a little bit inside my mouth as I read that.
- The Ruffin goes in detail about Padre Pio’s opinion of the Aggiornamento. There are brutal sentences there. There are moving episodes. Not one word on this in the other book. You’d think the entire V II process did not make any impression, or cause any reaction, in the great Saint.
- The Ruffin book has several more instances of Padre Pio’s frank and very direct behaviour than Allegri’s one. One can clearly see that Allegri did not want to give his readers the sharpest angles of the everyday Padre Pio, the one who slapped people in the face, shouted in church, or threw sandals around the classroom (however, it has the delightful episode of the woman left by her husband…). I am Italian, and I assure you that a saint who slaps people in the face (when it has to be), shouts in church (when it has to be to get people to shut up: see above about the antics of the populace), and throws sandals around the classroom is as authentic, as unashamedly Italian, and as wonderfully tasty as Tiramisu’; but, in the case of a saint, it is obviously better still.
- Ruffin goes where Allegri does not: the militant anticommunism and anti-homosexualism of Padre Pio are not really mentioned. Big minus points here.
- Ms Pyle is mentioned, in the lesser book, only once. I don’t think this is a honest representation of a collaboration that went on for decades.
- The last chapters in Allegri’s book want to make the Church look bad for putting Padre Pio’s beatification on ice for ten years after his death, as if the Church had to be worried about beatifying great saints in double quick time so that their followers are not upset. I think this is unfair, and a worrying indication of a “santo subito”– mentality. Again, so very V II. We have seen where that goes…
Mind: I am not saying that the “man of hope” book is wasted money. However, to me this is the book you read *after* you have read the Ruffin, just to have a different perspective.
Be it as it may, delving into the life and times of this great Saint is always a very instructive, edifying, and unforgettable experience. It’s amazing that, in the midst of the godless XX Century, God gave us a Saint of such colossal, and I mean colossal magnitude.
A Saint who will help us, too, who have to live in the midst of the utterly mad, and utterly perverted XXI Century.
The verdict in the Jussie Smollett trial was, for me, no cause of joy. It seems apparent that the man will not face jail time. This, after having been found guilty of a crime punished with up to three years in jail.
What Smollett did was absolutely unconscionable. The danger of widespread riots and multiple homicides after his “accusations” was a real one. The guy’s actions represented a real and present danger for the pacific, ordered life in the United States, and possibly abroad (let us not forget that the Tottenham Riots in the UK were, also, sparked by alleged racial discrimination). Nor can it be said that the man did this “only” to save his job, or because angered that some “hate” message sent to him did not cause in his employers the reaction he hoped.
What counts is the behaviour and the danger it caused. If the reasons were purely petty, stupid individual ones, the punishment should be harsher. Imagine if every guy (using the word loosely in this case) threatened by unemployment should cause such a danger and get away with some social work and some hours of re-education camp!
However, you know and I know that, most likely, jail is not going to be the self-inflicted lot of this bitchy queen. As part of two, not one, protected categories (Black and queer), Smollett can count on a leniency that you and I would not receive (and rightly so, I add).
Who knows, guy might still manage to make some money with interviews and such, trying to leverage his belonging to two Favourite Tribes. Imagine that: little queer wants to avoid the boot, almost starts a riot, get out of it as a little Saint Fentanylius*.
The trial of Jussie Smollett will likely show that, whilst the truth emerged in this case (from what I read, the guy was so dumb it could not avoid detection), in XXI Century’s America you get a pass for being part of privileged, and feared societal groups.
Jussie Smollett belongs in jail. Alas, this is not the way justice works.
*George Floyd, of course…
I am now reading St Alphonsus Liguori’s Meditations Suitable For All Times.
The saintly man had a way of writing that is very intimate and familiar; it is like a friend talking to you. There is a warmth in his writing that is not easy to convey unless it is in the writer’s heart first. However, one trait of St Alphonsus immediately attracts attention: he is very, and wilfully, repetitive.
At the beginning, this may seem a bit disconcerting, with the same concept (the necessity to repent and convert now rather than waiting or hoping that one will get a chance of final repentance later) constantly hammered in basically every second page.
It might seem too much; but after a couple of hours of reading, one understands the logic behind it.
I read an exhortation to repentance now, and I may find it useful or well-written. In order to make a lasting impression, it will need to be crafted excellently. It might well be forgotten after a while.
The Saint’s constant exhortations do not work in this way. Being written always in different ways, but always repeating the same concept, the basic message etches itself in the reader’s consciousness surely and effortlessly. It’s basically unavoidable that the message “gets in”, whilst avoiding the boredom because the writing style is, actually, varied. The “Meditations” all have a different starting point – which is the object of the real meditation – but they all come, invariably, back to the same concept: get your house in order now, because you could drop dead before dinner time. After a while, one gets in the rhythm and understands, or embraces, the underlying message and the author’s unusual writing style. And no: it’s never boring. This is a saintly man pouring out in a beautiful language the love for Christ he has in his heart, not a V II priests rehashing common places about the “joy of Christ”.
This also makes the meditations useful if read in very little pills. Whilst I don’t think many people read them one at a time, they could actually be read in this way, at perhaps two or three minutes each, perhaps whilst waiting for the bus, or for the coffee to cool down a bit.
St Alphonsus, who was clearly a smart guy, knew it and put the principle into action.
As we write the Year Of The Lord 2021, you can go on Amazon and buy pretty much the opera omnia of St Alphonsus Liguori for (here in the UK) less than 3 pounds. St Alphonsus was a prolific writer, with both great depth of knowledge and great breadth of topics. I think he wrote about 30 works of varied length.
It had to be a rather well-heeled Catholic who, some 100 or 150 years ago, had in his library all the works of the great Saint. Most Catholics would, in ages past, call themselves happy if they had, in their simple homes, a Bible, a Missal, perhaps a life of the Saints, and the one or other devotional work. Very many could, surely, not afford even that. This, if they could read properly.
Today, everyone who has his priorities right can make the investment in a Kindle (or download the app for his already existing smartphone or tablet) and access all of Saint Alphonsus Liguori at less than the cost of a pint of Guinness.
I see in this, as I have written many times already, the work of Providence. In His Goodness, God has given us the ability to access, like no generation before us, the treasuries of the Church even as He allows – no doubt, to punish us for our aggiornamento arrogance – the Church to be corrupted like perhaps never before, and even persecuting – as in the time of Athanasius – Her faithful children.
In a way, it could be even said that this subtle Divine help is even nearer and more accessible than the traditionally used one. The factory worker in Milan around 1905 might have disliked the local priest – who might have been, in fact, unpleasant or outright obnoxious -, but the software programmer in Milan around 2021 will have no real barriers to the download of his St Alphonsus Liguori, and a short moment of inspiration will be enough to get all the material on his tablet; certainly an easier approach than entering a church full of people who consider you (very likely, rightly so) a dangerous subversive.
Every age has its challenges. Some have poverty, some have famine, some have war, some have pestilence, some have Communism.
We have Francis and his band of godless faggots.
I am not sure I would like to swap with a guy during the Black Plague, the French Revolution, the Biennio Rosso, or the Thirty Years War.
Count your blessings. Buy a Kindle. Start amassing a sensible Catholic library at little cost. Dedicate time to delve into it, and to grow in your Catholicism irrespective of the antics of that unspeakable ass.
And pray the Rosary. Pray the Rosary every day.
Francis is unable to do you any harm, if you only follow a short moment of inspiration.
Most people will think that, in Europe, there is no Thanksgiving and, in the obvious sense of the word, they are certainly right. However, feasts to celebrate the harvest were certainly well spread in Europe, and Catholic parts of Germany still have the Erntedankfest, which is basically the same thing.
What I think has happened is that these traditions were strictly linked to the agricultural world, and lost importance as the latter’s importance also declined.
It’s a shame, really, and it would have been wise for the Church to promote the celebration of the harvest outside of the rural, agriculture-linked world.
In my eyes, such a celebration would achieve the following objectives:
Firstly, it would focus the attention on food coming from God. Factories can’t produce wheat, and no amount of technology will cause an artificial seed to sprout and become a plant. Granted, Europe does not have the patriotic lore linked to the feast, but the fact remains.
Secondly, it would remind everyone that the availability of food is not a given. My generation grew up with tales of food scarcity (brutal at times) during the Second World War. We think we can have everything if we have credit on the card. This is not really so.
The feast could be accommodated to echo, or mimic, the dates of the feasts that were celebrated in the past, and could be a nice bridge to the upcoming Advent.
I don’t want to remake the liturgical calendar here; but I am sure these feast days were still there, and already had their own regional traditions. One would only have to rediscover them, like those traditional beers people knew were there but did not really drink anymore, before the idea to actually revive the tradition came.
Perhaps the one or other Bishop could take such an initiative, or the one or other Bishops’ Conference could appoint a day for regional celebration.
But what am I saying.
To our Bishops, what’s most most important is having you vaxxed, masked, and silenced. The idea of celebrating God’s grace would be a dangerous distraction to them.
So I’ll tell you what I’ll do. Today, I will not only take time to reflect on the many graces God has given and continues to give to me, starting from, actually, food. But I will also give thanks for having discovered the authentic Catholic Faith, notwithstanding my Bishops trying to keep it away from me.
Happy Thanksgiving to all my readers.
One of the signs of the stupidity and ignorance of our times is the total forgetfulness of what charity is. Charity is the love of neighbour that springs from the love of God, which comes above all things. It is love properly ordered and properly directed. It is love for neighbour going in the same direction as God’s love for him. It is not a childish, purely emotional “support” and “affirmation” for whatever it is other people are doing.
The mother “affirming” her homosexual son is not charitable. The father approving of her daughter living in sin with her boyfriend is not charitable. The colleagues at the office “supporting” the peer who has decided he “wants to be a woman” are not charitable. What they are is accessories in the sin of another.
An awful lot of people, nowadays, do not understand how easy it is to go to hell out of sheer, unadulterated, worldly, utterly godless, utterly uncharitable niceness.
No one should know this better than a priest, which is why the decision of the bishops of New Zealand, who not only allow, but force a priest to either “accompany” to hell a suicide or find another one who does it for them, is a very special kind of evil.
The situation is a sort or perverted echo chamber. The godlessness and demand for niceness of the (un)faithful is met with the acquiescence and complicity of cowardly and – unavoidably – godless priests. This in turn feeds more radical demands for “niceness”, which is met with more cowardice. In the end, you have priests and laity marching together to hell, but feeling very holy in the process.
I don’t know who is more culpable here (likely the priests, but you should ask a theologian); what I know is that the laity can’t be excused by the cowardice of their priests. Every adult person has the duty – particularly in this day and age, when literacy is so widespread, technical knowledge so easily acquired, and resources so readily available – to instruct himself about how things really stand; nor will anyone be able to say, on judgment day, that the rants of Father Shrill McFaggot and his calls to “accompaniment” rang so true. God gives to everyone enough sense to understand fake currency. Anybody who accepts the Devil’s currency to the end will have to spend eternity in the Devil’s economy.
Your grandma knew this. Your grand-uncle would have looked at you in a strange way – if particularly charitable, perhaps he would have slapped you – for even trying to defend this strange religion of niceness. Every illiterate peasant, 150 years ago, would have understood all of this without any difficulty. It is only today, in an age of unprecedented wealth and access to information, that people actually choose not to know it. This includes countless oh so dumb, and I mean d.u.m.b., PhDs with a total lack of common sense and basic decency.
The fake currency of niceness is all around us. Don’t be fooled by it, because it leads to spiritual ruin.
Father Altman seems to have taken some inspiration from a much worse man than he is, as he has delivered a nine minutes homily of, if you allow the immodest comparison, clearly Mundaborian tones. Again, away from me the idea of even beginning to compare myself to a man of such moral stature, but it’s a joy to me to see that this good man of God and myself share, at least, the same communication style.
Father Altman is refreshingly brutal. He points out that the rot is not just limited to Francis (follow the link and read what Father thinks of him…) , but extends to almost all US Bishops, with only one exception.
I invite you to follow the link and read for yourselves. In doing so, I invite you to reflect on the following:
First: Father’s outrage, which is certainly the fruit of careful deliberation, is the result of the countless provocations of the bishops in almost every aspect of daily life. Wet kitten on abortion, wet kitten on politicians who support it, wet kitten on perversion, on lockdowns and on vaccination, these useless “yes men” make the work of the devil at every step, shy away from every fight, and don’t miss any occasion to openly side with the world, against their own faithful. It is, therefore, only fitting that their betrayal be made brutally clear to everyone who has ears to hear.
Second: the location from which Father Altman delivered his sermon is highly symbolic, as it was the other side of the road from the location where the Bishops are gathering. There is no better way to give a very concrete, factual and visual representation of a new reality: the faithful have had enough, and they are now openly standing in front of their own bishops and accusing them of betraying their sheep and the faith.
A lion here, a lot of kitten there. Their mitre will become their millstone, because as bishops their responsibility is so much bigger than the one of the quisque de populo who, out of tepid faith or weakness of heart, start using the word “gay” to mean “pervert”, and has no heart to seriously confront his daughter about her giving scandal and living in sin.
May God bless Father Altman, and may all the kitten sincerely repent or pay the infinite price of their immense insolence.
It does not need a genius to understand that, following TC and the thuggish attitude of Francis and his Evil Minions (talking to you, Cardinal Roche) a number, perhaps dozen, perhaps hundreds of priests will ask the SSPX to be allowed in.
It is, of course, important that both the risk of infiltration and the risk of watering down are avoided. I remind you here that the FSSP was created exactly in order to suffocate the SSPX and make it die.
In my eyes, the solution to this is what I would call the Society Of Blessed Pius IX.
This Society should be 100% controlled by the SSPX, which would own all real estate, cash, investments, trademarks etc. and would have disciplinary power over the members of the SSPIX. This would take care of the issues above. Every sincere priest would find the change resembling paradise after dealing with his V II Bishop. imagine, homilies where you don’t have to carefully balance every word, and are allowed to say that people actually go to hell in huge numbers…
The SSPIX would start a big donations drive, which would, unavoidably, be wildly successful. This would lead to the establishment, in just a few years, of hundreds of new chapels to which the Vatican would have no TLM to oppose, because the old traditionalist orders have been castrated par ordre du mufti . These chapels would be a thorn in the side of the Francisthugs all over the West.
The priests of the SSPIX would be freed of all the rubbish they have to deal now. No parish committees and the likes. The priest celebrates mass, hears confession, administers the sacraments full time. Breviary scrupulously followed. Vespers and Co. The works.
The same chapels of the SSPX could be used whenever practical. Imagine many of these chapels offering 5,6,7 masses every Sunday, many with the confessional running, as in the good old times!
The Masses would be all full. People would come from far away. The news would spread like wildfire. Meanwhile, Father Oestrogen will mildly remind his 3, heavily tattooed sheep of how much better it is to smell like them, as their beloved Evil Clown says.
A separate structure would make it very easy to raise funds (because the assets are protected and the priests are already there), and to protect orthodoxy (because the membership in the SSPX is not diluted). It would allow a great increase, possibly a multiplication, of available TLMs in just a short time, and a vast increase in reach when the new structures are built. It would make it easier to slap (figuratively, of course; because we are so, so nice) Francis in the face every single day, as that unspeakable scoundrel so much deserves.
It seems a good idea to me.
I hope, and I think, that at some point something of the sort is going to happen; because when a SSPIX is established, I think they’ll have dozen of candidates in a matter of weeks, and several thousands in a decade or less.
The Vicariato di Roma has just announced that, during the 2022 Triduum, there will be no TL masses. Interestingly, this includes the Fraternity of Saint Peter, which goes to show what happens when you want to eat your cake and have it.
Why the Triduum? My take is that an awful lot of people go to Mass at Easter and Christmas that otherwise don’t, though at Christmas this year many once a year churchgoers will likely decide to pass. Come Easter, many of those once a year people might have decided to actually do the Latin thing. The result? Absolutely packed TL churches, whilst Father Sissy in the nearby NO Church preaches about inclusiveness and the greatness of Francis Of The Wheelchair. But perhaps I am wrong and there are other reasons.
Of course, of course this is only the start. The Triduum will come and go, and then more restrictions will be imposed, at least as long as Francis is breathing.
The question poses itself how to react to this. Frankly, if I lived in Rome my patience would be very hard at the breaking point here. I would be severely tempted to write to the Vicar and tell him that I will not attend a NO Mass, not ever, until the war against the TLM ends.
“Dear Evil Bishop, Your DisGrace, whatever,
Your edict moved me to approach, for the first time, an SSPX chapel. The very friendly, Catholic priest over there told me that the NO – which I had been attending up to then – is actually bad, and he suggested I only attend a Traditional Mass. I found his arguments for the TLM compelling and from now on will attend at an SSPX chapel or, as I live pretty far from their chapels, carry out the spiritual activities Father has recommended.
Your NO Mass, I will not touch anymore.
In fact, dear whatever, I am almost grateful for what you have done; because without it, I would never have discovered the beauty of the Catholic Tradition and the great zeal of the Society. I will pray for you, but let me tell you that your situation is pretty darn serious.
Best regards etc”
I am not sure this is the best course to follow (the attendance I mean, not the letter), but I sure wish His Whatever would receive many letters like this one from people who have actually decided that this is, in fact, the best course to follow.
One thing I know: after TC the rules of the game have changed, and we are called to protect the Mass of the Ages in ways not practiced before, because the attack of the Church on her own Mass is lacking precedents in exactly the same way.
Before ditching the TLM, we will ditch Cardinal Roche and the Vicar in the Tiber.
We won’t do either of course, but you get my drift.
Today, 13 October, is the anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun.
Days like this one are like a heavenly balm in an age like the one we are living. It is not that we would normally not believe in the miracle, and the Francis-induced state of worry causes us to believe in it. It is, rather, that we have always believed in it, and the recurring of the anniversary is like an old friend visiting us again, reassuring us of his friendship and affection for us, encouraging us to resist any feeling of despondency, and rejoice in a friendship that will, by God’s grace, never die, no matter the outer circumstances.
There is a reason why the Church gives us assurance about the legitimacy of believing in the one or other miracle. It is to make our faith nearer, warmer, more involving. It is as if the weary soul would receive a warm embrace, just when it feels like crying. God knows Francis and his band of evil people make us feel like crying at times.
Do not cry, good, faithful Catholic soul.
The Blessed Virgin is lovingly watching you. The same God who made you to be happy with Him forever will, if you ask Him fervently, give you all the graces you need to die on the right side of Truth.
On this day, try to pray your Rosary more fervently than usual, relax at home if you can; if you have the possibility, make yourself a good risotto, with a glass of a fine red wine. Cheer up, and do not give up to sadness.
Everything is under control.
One of the many, many flaws of the cabal currently fraudulently inhabiting the White House is the vulgarity with which they handle their demented front man. They cut his microphone, they ration his public appearances. They clearly want you to understand that whilst he is obviously demented, they are in control. Quite disquieting, really, as it makes of the Manchurian Candidate way more than fiction.
In the last days something happened which, whether you follow the space race or not, is quite a historic event: for the first time, 4 civilians went on a 3 days journey on orbit, without any professional with them, and came back safely, the mission a success. They also raised a lot for money for a hospital, because nowadays everything is done for charity or you can’t be good. Still, the money is, most certainly, good for the hospital.
mind: this is not Jeff Bezos swinging his (anyway not very controllable) willie, and his billions, sitting near some people who actually know what they are doing. This is 4 people, of whom no one is a professional astronaut, accomplishing the mission.
You can turn this any way you want: this is truly historic.
You would expect the handlers of Dementia Joe would recognise this. You would expect that the White House would release a communique with high praise for the men and women who did this, and the company behind it.
Alas, the driving force behind said company is currently not really in the grace of the White House, as the guy keeps exhibiting, in the last years, worrying signs of baseness. Also, the guy threatens more and more to endanger an awful lot of extremely well paid jobs from one of the most faithful paying customer of the Democrat party: unionised car workers. In fact, the same not-so-woke-anymore guy has just released a twitter storm against the attempt of said Democrats to bail out said workers with extremely high, barely disguises, totally shameless, taxpayers-funded subsidies. Ouch!
You would think that some decency still abides in Joe’s handlers. You would think that they would at least save appearances and to the right, patriotic thing.
But no. They are too vulgar for that.
Just too damn arrogant to even care how this makes them look.
We don’t know exactly who Dementia Joe’s handlers are.
But I can’t avoid thinking there are many Francistypes among them.
The Germans call it Salami Tactics. This is the idea that, if you want to reach a certain objective but are afraid of a strong backlash, you should go about it one little slice at a time. No single act will be, in itself, such that it unchains the big confrontation. But in the end, you will have sliced the entire salami anyway.
Famously, a guy who knew a thing or three about tyranny advocated exactly the same tactics – though he did not call it that way – in order to deprive people of that inconvenient thing, freedom. His name was Adolf Hitler.
The very same tactic is being used now to get rid of the Traditional Latin Mass.
The strong initial reaction to TC put us in a position of advantage. Still, only two months later, the first slices of salami are being cut. Look only at Paris and you will see exactly what I am talking about.
Will this tactic work? As always, it will if the other side allows it.
Make no mistake: polite disagreement will lead you exactly nowhere. Waiting for better times will only create worse times. Diplomacy does not work with people like Francis. If Francis dies without great opposition to TC, a Francis II will be far more probable than a Pius XIII or a Benedict XVII.
We need to understand that if we want to stop the nefarious effects of TC we need to go nuclear on every Bishop who moves to damage the TLM.
Please don’t give me the “if we do that we will give Francis the excuse to do even worse” routine. If you have not understood that Francis already wants to do worse I am very sorry to break it out to you, but I think that you are just plain dumb.
The salami of the TLM is being cut as we speak, one slice at a time. The strong, determined reactions seen in July are just not there anymore. We will, no doubt, read a lot of recommendations to “prudence”, we will hear that “this is not the right time”, that we need to keep a “cool head”.
Those who tell you so are, wittingly or not, being the useful idiots of Francis and his rotten band of salami slicers. Francis does not need prudence, he needs to be booed in the street. His Bishops don’t need prudence, they need insults thrown at them.
How to react?
This is very simple, if you ask me.
Forget diplomacy. Diplomacy never works with bullies. Confrontation always does.
Write to your Bishop and tell him very frankly that abolition of even one mass in his diocese means you will see in him an enemy of Christ. No donations, no money left in your will, not one penny in the donation box, you will let the diocese rot until the diocese becomes Catholic again. And don’t be afraid of telling such a Bishop that he makes the work of Satan, too. He likely does not believe in God anyway, but it can’t do any damage. From now on, all money and all supports goes to the SSPX, so that Francis can have all the damn division he wants pushed down his demonic throat, and welcome.
Keep being “prudent” instead, and watch as your masses are being closed one at a time, without even a serious conflict, at the most with a whimper, or the concession of some more time.
Next in line, of course, are the former Ecclesia Dei orders. They will be sliced at Francis’ pleasure because, having been born with the original sin of being alive not because the TLM has to be, but because they were graciously allowed to celebrate it, they have the caving in, the humiliation, the defeat and, if it be Francis’ pleasure, their destruction written in their very DNA; and if you thought that any of these orders have balls even remotely comparable to the SSPX, you will soon discover how sorely mistaken you are.
It is not realistic to hope that, once tested, the Ecclesia Dei orders will pass the test. They exist exactly because they never did. Their pathetic whimpering and disgusting repeated quotation of V II documents in their appeal to the French Bishops to, pretty please, tolerate them a little longer is just a request to be cut away one slice at a time as they await the miracle of Pius XIII; a miracle, mark my words, that they have not deserved, as they exist exactly in order to weaken the true Catholics, those who understood that JP II salami knife was hard at work and acted accordingly.
Naturally, there is a microscopically small possibility that all this pathetic, effeminate V II quoting (even of Amoris Laetitia, which is truly the height of boot licking) is only part of a clever plan meant to make Francis look bad, and these orders will rebel once they are ordered to close their seminaries or the like. I, for myself, consider this no more than wishful thinking and, in fact, an exercise in self-delusion until I am (please, God!) proven wrong.
Please reflect on this: in all probability, the Ecclesia Dei orders will not be closed down straight. They will simply be killed one slice at a time, with the consternation but oh so pious approval of the apostles of the Obedience Against Christ that makes these institutional Catholics feel so prudent and fuzzy inside.
And just in case you still haven’t understood it: I did not listen to all 59 minutes of the famous Taylor Marshall video that is causing so much discussion. Still, I have dedicated to it enough time to get away the message that he thinks the document is, even if limited to France, representative of an attitude, that is: the reaction of wet kitten hoping to be smashed against the Modernist Tree a bit later than next month. I have read the letter and, if this is his thinking, I think he is exactly right.
My prediction is that their wish will be granted: they will be smashed against the Modernist Tree fairly slowly, one kitten at a time, without fanfare, and with some good cat food occasionally thrown to them before the execution, because Francis loves the oppressed.
Please, God, make me be so wrong on this as I have never been in my life. But whatever happens, please never let me become one of those who disobey to You as they boast of their obedience to an evil man like Francis.