Category Archives: Good Shepherds
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.
The preliminary documents of the Hagan Lio synod are now ready and they are just as bad as expected.
The guiding principle of the operation seems to be: we want people who hate Catholicism and don’t accept the rules to have a say about both Catholicism and its rules, because inclusion. You can imagine the rest.
It’s as if the Chinese Communist Party would invite the Cato Institute to give their input about how to improve Communism. With the big difference that the Church does not need any improving, she merely needs to get start taking herself seriously and demand that the faithful and the world at large do the same.
This is, as you have already understood, Francis’ Mother Of All Hagan Lios, a planned, systematic two years of strife and controversy meant to confuse as many Catholics as possible as much as possible, whilst persuading dissenters and heretics that the church is a democracy they can reshape in their own image and resemblance.
How do we counteract this revolutionary movement? In the only possible way: by waging war against wayward clergy and subversive laymen. Shame them, insult them, attack their agenda at every step.
If Francis thinks that this is going to be the Sixties all over again, he is sadly mistaken. Too many Catholics have woken up by now, and sixty years of devastation have shown to every honest pew sitter what happens when you allow the hippies, the perverts, the atheists, the commies, the adulterers, and the Freemasons to have a say.
Francis, who might or might not see the end of the synod, probably thinks this will be his final giving of the bird to the Church he hates.
Let’s make the exercise as painful as possible for him and his motley crew of reprobates.
Bring it on, Frankie boy.
We will counter blow for blow.
You will not like it.
Francis informs us that today is the world blabla day for the blabla care of blabla creation, or something of the sort I can’t even care to look up.
Without knowing the exact name, I think you know what this is about: the “new age” cult of the earth our atheist excrementator in chief loves so much, because it allows him to push his socialist agenda.
I think I will, for once, take the guy’s words at heart and suggest that you, my dear reader, care for and suitably celebrate this day so dear to Francis’ heart.
Get your internal combustion engine car and have a nice drive somewhere where God created natural beauty. Celebrate the cosiness of your house by switching on every light you have in it, thanking the Lord for the beauty of that nature that makes Sister Electricity possible. Have a nice dinner based on a huge Porterhouse steak as you think of all those cows happily grazing God’s green earth. Consider eating said Porterhouse in the garden, with your Brother Gas heather celebrating the great gift of fossil fuel.
What a beautiful way to celebrate, support and affirm God’s wonderful Creation in so many aspects! What a wise, exhilarating prayer of thanksgiving! Can there be any doubt that Frankie will be absolutely on your side, and – in spirit, of course – want to hug with you that 100 miles away tree that is, on this special day, so specially moving?
Think of this: with that belly, I am sure Frankie himself knows a think or three about Porterhouse steaks, with abundant potatoes to make his wonder at God’s gifts complete.
Yes, Frankie. You have persuaded me.
Creation really is a beautiful thing.
This is a video, courtesy of a recent Father Z’s post, of the proclamation of the Dogma of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. You can enjoy, there, some footage of the great Pius XII.
However, this post is not about the great Pope. This is about a couple of considerations I want to make.
The first: the proclamation had a vast, worldwide echo. This is because the Catholic Church was respected and, actually, feared. The Pope enjoyed boundless prestige with everybody, even among Jews. This was a voice that compleed others to listen.
The second: the pomp and circumstance is brutal. This is not only a Church which is strong, but a Church which has no qualms whatsoever in showing it. From the march of the “600 dignitaries” to the Pope carried among the people at the chants of “viva la Madonna!”, to the elaborate ceremonial and the 36 cardinals who “make obeisance”, all screams glory seen, staged, not just reclaimed.
The third: the Italian Prime Minister, the great Alcide De Gasperi, is mixed among the faithful, literally a quisque de populo. This was, in fact, not about him. The Church made a Prime Minister assist to an important proclamation of Hers standing among the people. Mind, De Gasperi was a very Catholic, humble man, and he might have refused a more prominent collocation. But this does not change the picture: a Church asking everybody to be subject to Christ and answer to Him in the same way, powerful or not.
How strong, how conscious of Her role in the lives of men was that Church! How splendid, holy and, at the same time, reassuring must that Church have appeared to the people in the square, and to everybody else getting to watch the ceremony!
Compare with today, where people more and more disoriented, and clearly looked for a fixed point of orientation in their lives, for stable values and a grounded, meaningful existence, are confronted with a commie nincompoop blathering all the time about social justice, climate, and all sort of stupid grievance against stuff like gossip, consumerism or (this is from yesterday) “always want to excel”, as he refuses to bow in front of the Blessed Sacrament and misses no occasion to belittle Christ, the Blessed Virgin, the Sacrament and – of course – you, the Catholics.
It is good that we have this footage and a lot more beside like this one. It is a very visual, very direct experience of what the Church used to be, and what she will, one day, be again.
The devil is clearly at work in Australia. I wonder how many lawmakers who call themselves “Catholics” have voted this. May they rot in hell, together with all the others who supported this measure, unless they repent.
The mechanism is very simple.
- Guy (anti-Catholic activist, or deranged individual) self-denounces itself as a child rapist.
- Priest respects the seal of confession, as he must.
- Guy reports the priest to the police, and shows the recording to them (easy to do nowadays, every phone will suffice).
It does not matter whether the rape happened or not (nor, from a Catholic perspective, should it matter, either). The crime is exactly not having reported the self-accusation to the police.
So, deranged individual walks out more or less scot free and anti-Catholic activist runs, at most, the risk of a token sentence for false report; possibly not even that, because the fake rape is not what was reported to the police, whilst the failure to report is.
Father, however, risks three years in jail, for being Catholic.
I am very curious what the Australian Bishops will do now. Make no mistake, I blame them too. I am pretty sure they have done nothing more than meowing. I say this because, in my long life, I have never seen any Bishops’ Conference, not one at all, doing anything else but meowing.
It’s time to stop being so darn nice to the people who want us and the Church wiped out of this earth, and start seeing all those legislators and activists for what they are: enemies of Christ and agents of Satan.
From Rorate Caeli, the translation into English of the most brutal takedown not only of Traditionis Custodes, but of the Pontificate of the Evil Clown ever come from the pen of a bishop.
The author of the text below (which I report in its entirety for posterity, in case the good auxiliary bishop is forced to delete it) is Rob Mutsaert, Auxiliary Bishop of a Diocese in – of all places – the Netherlands.
To say that it’s brutal does not really convey the real dimensions of this. This is the defence of Catholicism of a man who has had enough of seeing everything that is Catholic watered down, insulted or fought against by Francis. I had to make a “double take” at times, and make sure that this was really signed by a Bishop, and it’s not the first of April, and the source is credible. This is real.
I suggest that you read the text below not once, but a couple of times, savouring every detail. You have my permission (I am joking, of course), to accompany this with some good cognac and chocolate. It is obvious that this text is not the result of a momentary anger, as it is very carefully crafted. It is also obvious that the very strong accusations levelled at Francis (all of them true, by the way) are worded in such a way that no doubt is left, in the mind of the reader, about what the author thinks of the Evil Clown.
By the way, the good Bishop does not call Francis, literally, Evil Clown, but he clearly shows both that he is a clown (second paragraph) and that he is evil (ninth paragraph). Also, note the insistence of the bishop on a simple concept: this is not a mistaken document. This is not some technical detail that was not carefully considered. This is the product of an evil mentality and of an evil ideology.
God willing, the future won’t be so bad after all.
Text below. Italics in the English text. Bold emphases mine.
Bp. Rob Mutsaerts
Auxiliary Bishop of ‘s-Hertogenbosch
Pope Francis promotes synodality: everyone should be able to talk, everyone should be heard. This was hardly the case with his recently published motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, an ukase [imperial edict] that must put an immediate termination on the traditional Latin Mass. In so doing, Francis puts a big bold line through Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict’s motu proprio that gave ample scope to the old Mass.
The fact that Francis here uses the word of power without any consultation indicates that he is losing authority. This was already evident earlier when the German Bishops’ Conference took no notice of the Pope’s advice regarding the synodality process. The same occurred in the United States when Pope Francis called on the Bishops’ Conference not to prepare a document on worthy Communion. The pope must have thought that it would be better [in this case] not to give advice any more, but rather a writ of execution, now that we’re talking about the traditional Mass!
The language used looks very much like a declaration of war. Every pope since Paul VI has always left openings for the old Mass. If any changes were made [in that opening], they were minor revisions—see, for example, the indults of 1984 and 1989. John Paul II firmly believed that bishops should be generous in allowing the Tridentine Mass. Benedict opened the door wide with Summorum Pontificum: “What was sacred then is sacred now.” Francis slams the door hard through Traditionis Custodes. It feels like a betrayal and is a slap in the face to his predecessors.
By the way, the Church has never abolished liturgies. Not even Trent [did so]. Francis breaks completely with this tradition. The motu proprio contains, briefly and powerfully, some propositions and commands. Things are explained in more detail by means of an accompanying longer statement. This statement contains quite a few factual errors. One of them is the claim that what Paul VI did after Vatican II is the same as what Pius V did after Trent. This is completely far from the truth. Remember that before that time [of Trent] there were various transcribed manuscripts in circulation and local liturgies had sprung up here and there. The situation was a mess.
Trent wanted to restore the liturgies, remove inaccuracies, and check for orthodoxy. Trent was not concerned with rewriting the liturgy, nor with new additions, new Eucharistic prayers, a new lectionary, or a new calendar. It was all about ensuring uninterrupted organic continuity. The missal of 1570 harks back to the missal of 1474 and so on back to the fourth century. There was continuity from the fourth century onwards. After the fifteenth century, there are four more centuries of continuity. From time to time, there were at most a few minor changes—an addition of a feast, commemoration, or rubric.
In the conciliar document Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II asked for liturgical reforms. All things considered, this was a conservative document. Latin was maintained, Gregorian chants retained their legitimate place in the liturgy. However, the developments that followed Vatican II are far removed from the council documents. The infamous “spirit of the council” is nowhere to be found in the council texts themselves. Only 17% of the orations of the old missal of Trent can be found [intact] in the new missal of Paul VI. You can hardly speak of continuity, of an organic development. Benedict recognized this, and for that reason gave ample space to the Old Mass. He even said that no one needed his permission (“what was sacred then is still sacred now”).
Pope Francis is now pretending that his motu proprio belongs to the organic development of the Church, which utterly contradicts the reality. By making the Latin Mass practically impossible, he finally breaks with the age-old liturgical tradition of the Roman Catholic Church. Liturgy is not a toy of popes; it is the heritage of the Church. The Old Mass is not about nostalgia or taste. The pope should be the guardian of Tradition; the pope is a gardener, not a manufacturer. Canon law is not merely a matter of positive law; there is also such a thing as natural law and divine law, and, moreover, there is such a thing as Tradition that cannot simply be brushed aside.
What Pope Francis is doing here has nothing to do with evangelization and even less to do with mercy. It is more like ideology.
Go to any parish where the Old Mass is celebrated. What do you find there? People who just want to be Catholic. These are generally not people who engage in theological disputes, nor are they against Vatican II (though they are against the way it was implemented). They love the Latin Mass for its sacredness, its transcendence, the salvation of souls that is central to it, the dignity of the liturgy. You encounter large families; people feel welcome. It is only celebrated in a small number of places. Why does the pope want to deny people this? I come back to what I said earlier: it is ideology. It is either Vatican II—including its implementation, with all its aberrations—or nothing! The relatively small number of believers (a number growing, by the way, as the Novus Ordo is collapsing) who feel at home with the traditional Mass must and will be eradicated. That is ideology and evil.
If you really want to evangelize, to be truly merciful, to support Catholic families, then you hold the Tridentine Mass in honor. As of the date of the motu proprio, the Old Mass may not be celebrated in parish churches (where then?); you need explicit permission from your bishop, who may only allow it on certain days; for those who will be ordained in the future and want to celebrate the Old Mass, the bishop must seek advice from Rome. How dictatorial, how unpastoral, how unmerciful do you want to be!
Francis, in Article 1 of his motu proprio, calls the Novus Ordo (the present Mass) “the unique expression of the Lex Orandi of the Roman Rite.” He therefore no longer distinguishes between the Ordinary Form (Paul VI) and the Extraordinary Form (Tridentine Mass). It has always been said that both are expressions of the Lex Orandi, not just the Novus Ordo. Again, the Old Mass was never abolished! I never hear from Bergoglio about the many liturgical abuses that exist here and there in countless parishes. In parishes everything is possible—except the Tridentine Mass. All weapons are thrown into the fray to eradicate the Old Mass.
Why? For God’s sake, why? What is this obsession of Francis to want to erase* that small group of traditionalists? The pope should be the guardian of tradition, not the jailer of tradition. While Amoris Laetitia excelled in vagueness, Traditionis Custodes is a perfectly clear declaration of war.
I suspect that Francis is shooting himself in the foot with this motu proprio. For the Society of St. Pius X, it will prove to be good news. They will never have been able to guess how indebted they’d be to Pope Francis….
(Published in Dutch at the bishop’s blog)
The SSPX took its stance about Traditionis Carnifices and it is, as expected, a devastating blow to the Church of Francis. I suggest that you read the letter in its entirety, because it is very instructive and Pagliarani does have a very entertaining writing style.
One aspect I would like to stress in a particular way, is that Pagliarani states that we are now done with the “Hermeneutic of Continuity”. Well, only six days ago I have written exactly the same, so it’s not that I wasn’t pleased.
The “Hermeneutic of Continuity” is the attempt to present you a cake made with cream gone off as something that you should learn to appreciate in a very selective way; either because it is said that the baker was actually good and the cream was, originally, not gone off, or because the cream was always bad, but there was also a lot of marzipan, and nuts, and strawberries that were actually good.
The reasoning, as I have said many times, does not work. It is, in fact, a way to perpetuate the problem instead of working towards its solution.
First of all: the cream was already going off at the time the documents were written. As Archbishop Lefebvre and others pointed out, the vague formulations of several of the Conciliar documents were such that they allowed heterodox interpretations of Catholics truths concerning several aspects of Church life and Church doctrine (you can find a detailed explanation everywhere, so let us cut it short here). It is good to notice, here, that the good Archbishop wasn’t even a hardliner. In fact, he signed all the documents, whilst a number of bishops actually refused to do so.
Secondly, and most importantly, once it has become clear that the documents of the V II have been abused to try to fundamentally change the way the Church thinks and operate, it is clear that the cake must be thrown away in its entirety. To put in a different way, this cake now stinks so much that it is criminally stupid to try to save any part of it.
Nor does this mean that we, who take this position, do not recognise the validity of the Second Vatican Council. Of course we recognise it, we aren’t Sedevacantists! We don’t go around believing that some magic potion hypnotised the Conciliar (Step) Fathers to do something that they did not want to do. We do not say that the Council was illegal, or invalid. We say that it was bad, and spread the seeds of heresy, and these heresies have now grown to become a horrible, poisonous Argentinian plant.
You can make another comparison with the “little shop of horrors”. At the time of the council, the plant was still very little; Archbishop Lefebvre and others did not trust it, but it could still have grown to become a normal plant. Fast forward six decades, and the plant has become a monstrous organism, asking to be fed blood in every possible way, with Catholic life eroded in every aspect and even with schism now officially underway in Germany.
This plant must be killed and incinerated. There is no way we can now try to keep “what is good in it”. There is nothing good in it. It has to go.
Of course, the many parts of Catholic doctrine that the documents reiterate will stay. The fact is, they were already there. There is no need for the documents of a purely pastoral council to repeat them. Therefore, the documents of the Second Vatican Council and the entire, damned aggiornamento experiment can be thrown away without any damage for anyone.
Vatican II has grown to become an evil plant. It really has to go. All of it.
One positive result of the evil clown’s brazen attack to the Mass of the Ages might be this one: that more and more people will now understand that the problem is, in the end, Vatican II itself.
John or Paul, John Paul or Benedict, in the end you end up with Francis. There is simply no way one can enter the slippery slope of Modernism and not end up with an atrociously deformed Church.
An awful lot of halfway attentive faithful will, after the motu proprio, finally realise that there is no scope whatsoever in trying to reconcile Modernism and Catholicism. Vatican II is the carrier of the extremely dangerous, mortal virus of heresy, and it must be completely expunged from the body of the Church if She is to become healthy again.
Francis has not come out, all of a sudden, from under a cabbage. He is the inescapable product of the heretical mentality that came before him and carried him to prelacy and papacy. This mentality, once it has started, will not stop until it is completely destroyed.
Vatican II must be eradicated in toto, and those who decry the motu proprio must finally understand that every pope, from 1958 on, was part of the problem. Yes, even their beloved Benedict, the man who was so good at pretending he cared.
The Hermeneutic of Continuity is now officially dead. Francis has amply demonstrated that there is no continuity between devil and holy water. When this mess has come to an end (very likely, not in our lifetime), the faithful who will support the restoration of the beauty and the dignity of the Church will understand that the cancer must be removed in its entirety.
From every evil, God makes a good.
Pray, and trust in God’s Providence.
In days like this one, even I can understand (emotionally, I mean) the reaction of the people stating that, at this level of evil, this guy cannot be pope.
However, this is exactly that: an emotional reaction. It is like a boy of 6 saying to his father “you are not my father” after the latter deprived him of the bicycle pending better school notes. The fact is: the guy is the father, and Francis is the pope.
Why is the guy the father? Because the law says he is.
Why is Francis pope? Because the entire planet says he is, and there is not even one cardinal, and not even the guy who supposedly should be the real pope, who says that Francis is not pope.
This is the reality under the sun. It sucks. It sucks in what can now be safely described an unprecedented way. But it is what it is. We can’t deny reality because we don’t like it, like boys of six deprived of the bicycle.
Besides, I don’t see much consolation even in the abstruse theory that Francis would not be the pope, but the pope would be a very old guy who approves of everything Francis does.
In difficult times it is, I think, important to keep our feet planted on the ground. Better still, it is important to stay planted in reality, but take refuge in Christ in the middle of the storm.
I am not one of those (mostly converts) strange Catholics who make all Catholicism hinge on the character of a Pope, with the consequence that a bad pope cannot be such, or they would stop believing in the Church. I grew up in Italy, where the fact that there have been very evil popes is known to every well-educated person. That this one here is more evil is a difference in the degree, not in the substance, of the fact.
If you look at the papacy in the decades before and after the Synodus Horrenda, what you see is chaos and corruption. There must have been an awful lot going on. Even if the records are scarce, it appears that the Popes were, largely, the instruments or even the leaders of warring bands and family clans that were little better than criminal organisations. This went on, in various degrees, for centuries. We as Church Militant have been in the manure before; this time it merely stinks more.
So, is Francis evil? The answer to this is, I think, obvious to every properly informed Catholic who wants to look at reality for what it is. Yes, the guy is extremely evil. He is, clearly, a tool of Satan.
But… does this evil… unpope him? No, it doesn’t. Francis may, with his actions, certainly make himself worthy of being deposed. You can question the ways of his election until the cows come home. But it is not you or I who decide whether he is, because of this, pope or not.
Let us go back to Pope Formosus. Formosus has been, after decades of controversies, definitely been condemned by Sergius III, who issued the definitive condemnation of Formosus and the definitive rehabilitation of Stephanus VI, the pope who carried out the synod. Therefore, we have the official stance of the Church: Stephanus VI good, Formosus bad.
Formosus papacy was, by Stephanus, retroactively declared null. Why was this? Because we are not a protestant sect and, until a synod or other official organ declares the pontificate null, the pontificate remains valid.
It’s not for you and me to decide that this horrible man is not pope anymore. What we can hope and pray for, is that such a decision is made by those who have to power to make such a decision. I for myself would welcome a trial of Francis’ after his death. As far as I am concerned, feel free to exhume his corpse and put in on a wheelchair, and I would not mind a bit how gory the details become (In fact, I always thought that Stephanus was what we today call a master communicator; so much so, that his synod survive in the memory today, after so much of that age is covered in darkness. Before newspaper and radio, tv and internet, twitter and facebook, Stephanus knew how to make news travel fast, and hit hard. Quite remarkable, that people don’t get the brilliancy of his policy, and focus merely on the macabre details).
Still, as I write this, the situation is the following one: the evil clown is pope and the church sees him as such. Until that changes, this is the pope we get, exactly as the contemporaries of Formosus got him as pope between 891 and 896, withotu even dreaming of saying: “No” I, the village baker, officially declare that Formosus is not the pope”. I actually think that, no matter how bad the situation is, it is the height of arrogance, and it endangers one’s salvation, to make of oneself a micro pope-maker and decide who is, and is not, the pope.
I would be overjoyed to see Francis toppled in life, for example via an extraordinary council, or excommunicated and declared a heretic after his death.
I would certainly be satisfied with a sensible, but representative minority of Cardinals declaring him a heretic, deposed, and in schism.
I would even, in my obedience to proper Catholic doctrine, believe Francis not the pope if the organisation I trust most in matter of theological decision, the Society of Saint Pius X, were to issue such a formal declaration.
But neither I, nor you, nor bloggers, nor journalists can decide who is, and is not, pope.
I am trying to gauge the consequences for the people having access to the TLM after the evil clown’s latest motu proprio.
I very much fear that the TLM that do not have a serious competition in (somewhat) nearby SSPX chapels will be closed down. Why? Because most bishops will simply not resist the pressure, will cave i to the Vatican and will close them down, quoting the need to be obedient to the evil pope.
How many are those? I don’t know. I have never seen a map with a comparison of locations of SSPX chapels and other TLM churches. It’s difficult to say how many faithful are left without a SSPX chapel at reasonable distance if (actually, when) those are closed.
However, I think this: that it is not naive at all to suppose that an awful lot of locations for traditionalist orders, (the likes of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter or other vetus ordo, but V II organisations) have been chosen exactly with regard to existing locations of SSPX chapels. Honestly, I doubt that much will happen with regard to these locations, even if these organisations aren’t anymore under Ecclesia Dei and can be targeted easily in future. It would be simply suicidal to shut them down and deliver the vast majority of their faithful to the SSPX.
The biggest issue, at least for now, appears the future (actually, the lack of future) of the diocesan TLMs. How many of those there are? I have no idea. Seen that they have been ostracised from the start, and that they seem to be very rare in my neck of the woods, I do not think that there are very many. However, it can be that in certain Countries there are more than in others, and certainly there will be losses in that respect.
The most interesting development until Francis dies (which I hope happens today, but I am not holding my breath) is, in my eyes, the future of the V II Traditionalist orders now orphans of Ecclesia Dei; particularly so, as Francis seems not to have any idea why they should exist in the first place or any justification for their existence. But again, these organisations exist to, more or less, ostracise the SSPX. If they die, the SSPX will thrive even more. If they live, not much will change for them. If I remember correctly, some traditionalist orders already celebrate both masses anyway, at least in some locations. I might be wrong, though.
Be angry at the evil clown, but in good cheer overall. In Italy we say that “the devil makes the pots, but not the lids”. This is a huge pot; but, like all pots that Francis makes, it has no lid.
In god’s appointed time, things will be adjusted.
The motu proprio is out and, to add insult to injury, it’s called Traditionis Custodes. Make no mistakes, this is another way how Francis is mocking you. The title, however, means “Butchers of Tradition”, and I find it far more appropriate.
The attack on the TLM is massive.
No new masses to be added. No new personal parishes.
All existing masses to be re-examined, means most discontinued.
The Novus Ordo as the unique form of the Liturgy. This openly contradicts Benedict XVI’s obvious statement concerning the Mass. and, also obviously, the original statement of St Pius V. It is, if you ask me, the most diabolical part of the document.
One priest, versed in Latin, in every Diocese where the Latin Mass is celebrated. He will have as task to tell the faithful who insist in attending how bad they are, and how much they displease Francis, the Butcher of Tradition.
This is seriously, seriously evil.
If you were one of those who have still insisted in not seeing the evil of this man, and this does not open your big, blue eyes, I am frankly worried for you.
I read around that Padre Pio was an example of obedience when he was suspended from saying Mass in public. This would be, I am told, in sharp contrast with the behaviour of Fr Altman; who would be, in this perspective, just another man conquered by pride.
I think a couple of words are in order.
Padre Pio was not forbidden from celebrating mass in public because he was suspected of being Catholic. He was, at various time, suspected of being a charlatan and suspected of having molested a woman. His acceptance of the measures taken against him was the perfect reaction of the Saint in the making. In time, truth came to light and everything was fine.
However, we also know that Padre Pio also threatened to refuse to celebrate the New Mass, no matter the consequences. We will never know whether he would really have done it, of course, because he was – like thousands of old priests who shared Padre Pio’s feelings – exempted from celebrating the New Mass with the usual excuse that he would be too old a dog to learn Protestant tricks.
Still, you can see where I am going with this: Padre Pio was a lamb when what was insulted or slandered was him personally, as a friar and priest, but had a quite different attitude when the offended part was Christ. The easy critics of Father Altman should keep this firmly in mind.
Besides, the argument is self-defeating. Most serious Catholics know the episodes of disobedience of, say, Saint Athanasius, Saint Eusebius and Cardinal Lefebvre. Athanasius was, in fact, excommunicated for refusing to obey an order deeply offensive of Christ. I would, therefore, very much know what the apostles of blind obedience think of the sainted people above.
They will not score many points with those who take Catholicism seriously. Blind obedience whilst forgetting Christ generates monsters like Nazism.
Better not, I say.
It is Tuesday today and it looks like the biggest gift to the SSPX in decades is coming on Friday, with restrictions to – the already restricted – Summorum Pontificum meant to keep those pesky Catholics away from the proper Mass.
It is difficult to understand why the Evil Clown would do this now, in the ninth year of his disgraceful Pontificate. One hypothesis is that he is simply stupid and, with the addition of age to it, can be more easily manipulated to do the bidding of his homosexual sponsors. The other hypothesis is that Francis was patiently awaiting for Benedict to die; but as Benedict seems not intentioned to do him the favour anytime soon, Francis wants to act now , lest the old man buries him, too.
In both cases, it would be another step towards the self-dismantling of the Vatican II Church, now on Her way to become even more disfigured than she already was.
I have not had access to a Tridentine Mass for many years now; but if I had had access to a Summorum Pontificum Mass and I had been deprived of one now, I would start paying a lot of attention to what the SSPX says about the spiritual dangers of attending the New Mass.
If, then, I decided to attend the New Mass after I have been deprived of the Tridentine one, I would pay attention that my V II Diocese does not get one penny, not one, from me anymore, whilst continuing to use the V II Church for my sacramental life. The money I would, then, have given to the V II Diocese, I would donate entirely to the SSPX, and more than that.
If, then, anybody would question me about why I attend at church without contributing to it, I would answer that it is because I have been deprived of the Tridentine Mass. Asked, furthermore, whether I do not think that I have an obligation to contribute to the upkeep of the Church, I would answer that I do, and I actually do, merely choosing a truly Catholic institution for the task. Actually, I would be tempted to become the one to whom the basket, out of experience, is not even handed to, in the hope that someone, at some point, actually asks.
Everything that happens, everything, is providentially ordained to, in the end, increase God’s glory. Everything, even the little, petty vengeful acts of the Evil Clown we must currently endure as Pope. Every little or big evil acts turns against those who perpetrated the evil, like a Divine Boomerang ready to land of Francis’ sanctimonious, lewd old head.
A man, this one, who consorts with, and openly supports, clearly homosexual priests promoting their perverted agenda, but insists in not kneeling in front of the Blessed Sacrament; and a man who, being clearly on the side of the Devil, loathes the Tridentine Mass.
He does not know it but, whatever he does, he will end up unwittingly working for the glory of that God, and of that Church, he so much hates.
Pray that the evil may not happen; but pray, before all, that God’s will be done.
We have already won.
It is difficult enough to see that a person with a clearly evil intent, and possibly a homosexual, is trying to damage the Church in all he can.
It is even worse to see a person who should be on our side, and – without the “possibly” – a former homosexual, attack the best that Catholicism has to offer in this fairly depressing climate, for reasons that are not easy to discern, but must have more than something to do with personal gripes, or old wounds.
Look, we all carry our wounds and we all can have, at times, personal difficulties with this or that person, with this or that organisation, that cloud our ability to interact with them in the proper way or appreciate to the full what they are doing for Catholicism.
However, I think that it is really the pits when personal insults exchanged on Twitter (a place I suggest to all my readers to avoid unless, perhaps, to follow news from organisations and people they like) are abused to colour the entire organisation with the smear of the loss of patience of one of his members.
For the record: I do tend not to insult people in a very harsh way (though, when it is deserved, I do not pull punches, either; if, say, a woman deserves to be called a very harsh expletive, we can disagree about the choice of words, but we will agree on the general message), but if Christine Niles is insulted by people who are really fed up with her and her sanctimonious wannabe crusade against the SSPX I for myself tend to side with the insulting party, not the insulted one; because for me, being the one who insulted first does not make the guy on the right side of the discussion wrong, but merely intemperate.
In the end, whoever engages in Twitter exchanges has to know that these exchanges can become extremely heated extremely fast, and they do not, as a whole, represent a person’s character as known to his friends, relatives and acquaintances. Really, Twitter gets out the worst of everybody at lightning speed.
How can it be that Niles and Voris don’t know this? How can it be that they don’t know that such exchanges – the medium being what it is and the discussion being what they are – will perforce happen?
Mind, the two of them are journalists, that is: professionals of communication. The (in most cases, I am sure) devout Catholics who engage with them generally aren’t. I understand the occasional slip from a non-professional more than the deliberated exploitation of it from the professional.
Therefore, to take some “SSPX loyalist” who loses his patience and is likely having a bad day and take it is an example of the SSPX values and aims is profoundly disingenuous and, in fact, dishonest. It is bad enough from the side of Niles, it is even worse from the side of Voris, who then uses a single episode to tarnish all the followers and supporters of the SSPX as “cult members” .
Utterly and completely unprofessional; and yes, Twitter will get the worst out of those two, too; but they are professionals, and should know better. Plus, Voris should really examine his past, and what baggage he may well still be carrying from it, before he crucifies other people’s much, much smaller, present faults.
It’s a mystery to me how Voris can think that writing that the “cult” is “a reason for Francis to blow up their idol of the Latin Mass” can win him serious Catholic souls as allies. I used to like the guy, but I now see in him a man who, probably for personal wounds of his own, has lost the plot and can’t see the forest out of the trees; the trees being, here, the SSPX supporters – even the angry or the emotional ones.
It is very easy to get emotional when people attack what you love – but the SSPX supporters still are, as every sensible person should be able to see, good people who love Christ and His Church.
Finally, a consideration about “racism”. I have been called racist names in my life. I can say, hands on heart, that whenever I knew that the offender did not intend to express any belief in my supposed racial inferiority, but was simply angry at me for his own (wrong) reasons, I never held the accusation of racism against him. I am, in fact – and by the grace of God – utterly unable to play the race card and use it against my opponent, whenever I know that the problem is simply not race.
I don’t think this is difficult to understand. But I think it requires some intellectual honesty, and the willingness to renounce to a weapon used all too often today.
Long live the SSPX, and his emotional supporters. Even their excesses and angry moments show me that they may be wrong in the moment, but are right in their hearts.
Good hearts get angry at times. May the Lord overlook their communication mistakes and reward their faithful zeal.
I would not believe this if the source weren’t very authoritative: a Priest of the SSPX was refused entry to a French jail to visit one inmate.
One can only imagine the security guards there at the entrance, saying: “What is this? Could this man dressed in this strange garb trying to introduce knifes, rifles, perhaps even small nuclear bombs below it? Can we run such a security risk? Mais non!”
You will think that no-one is as stupid as that. Well, there’s always one, isn’t it?
Unless the refusal to the priest to allow him to enter the jail was motivated by hatred for the Catholic religion; which, I am pretty sure, makes for discrimination on the base of religion and, possibly, a hate crime.
The jail authorities have apologised, after a mature reflection of, apparently, five days. Someone must, during those 120 hours, have remembered those strange men in black, many years ago, when priests were still straight, wearing that thing that was.. yes, a cassock! Alternatively, some superior of the couple of cheese-eating, small-time Social Justice Warriors (there were two involved), must have realised that this was about to become quite a merde situation, and decided to defuse it at once.
This time, everything went, er, “well”; but this tells us both how ignorant of the religion the French might have become (Let us be frank here: if the junior jailer was, say, a fairly recent immigrant from Maghreb he might, well, just not have known what to think of the strange guy) and/or how deep anti-Christian resentment runs in the Country (one would think that at least one of the two guys would have known that, in fact, there are, somewhere, priests in cassocks).
This used to be a Catholic Country. It has now become the poster boy for failed integration and the troubles of multiculturalism, and is not unlikely to become the battle ground (in abstract, or in concrete) of the culture wars that await us.
For the moment, though, it looks like the cassock isn’t a security concern.
So, is the Pope under demonic influences?
I think I will say a word or two about this. However, please consider that I am not an exorcist, and my thoughts are the fruit of common sense and the sensus catholicus in the middle of which I had the misfortune, but also the grace, of growing.
We are, all, at all times, under siege (and may it be a soft siege) of demonic influences. Sin tempts us from every side. Our fallen nature, whilst helped by the many graces God constantly pours on us, is still susceptible to attack. “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour”.
The devil walketh about, as a roaring lion, seeking to devour… me. I had better keeping this in mind, if I want to achieve salvation.
The common knowledge, and parlance, reflects this at all times. The image of the demon on one side and the angel on the other when a person is in front of a difficult, but right, choice is omnipresent. Even as children, we used to end our squabbles with the well-known nursery rhyme, “e mannaggia al diavoletto che ci ha fatto litigare; pace, pace, pace!” “Darn the demon (“little devil”) who made us bicker: peace, peace, peace!”. The little devil profited of our weakness and made us bicker. But we understood what’s happening, and chose to make peace instead. The temptation is always around us, the demons will try to use any way they can to gain entry in our soul.
It seems to me another of those proto-Protestant absurdities (for some reasons, I have noticed that a number of converted Protestants go from the refusal of the papacy to the exaggeration of both its role and the moral qualities of the current occupier of that role) that the Pope would, because of some sort of vaccine, be exempt from this kind of temptation and, happily protected by his white habit, be protected from demonic attack. Of course he isn’t. None of us is, why would he? If anything, it is reasonable to assume that, even in normal times, a Pope would be under a graver, more sustained attack than most others.
These, however, are not normal times. They are, in fact, so abnormal, that the earthly institution of the Church is now soiled and, even, disfigured like, very likely, never before in Her twice millenarian history, in which She was soiled and disfigured many times already. These are times in which we see countless Bishops and Cardinals under the same demonic attack, every day acting in a way that clearly shows us that the devil has made inroads inside them; not, mind, in the sense that they are now willing Satanists; but in the way that they, in the many way in which they betray their function and the Catholic Church, clearly bring water to the devil’s mill.
The Pope is, of course, not exempt from this. Paul VI was, in recent times, the first clear example of a Pope with something demonic about his actions. A Pope clearly able to see all the ways in which the Church is being attacked, and (with one big exception) unwilling to act about it clearly shows all the signs of being, all too often, influenced by the demon on one side of the shoulder rather than the angel on the other. The oh so saintly John Paul II gave us the abominations in Assisi, not once but twice. The one who asked us to pray that he may not flee for fear of the wolves likely did, as it becomes increasingly more evident, just that.
As to Francis, you know already what I am about to say: a man clearly without a shred of Catholic faith, and without any wish to even learn it, he is the most unworthy occupier of the See that we can, at least up to now, imagine. He is, so to speak, the turbocharged consequences of many demons whispering stupid things to the ear of many stupid, or utterly corrupt, or outright evil Cardinals. In a word, Francis is what happens when God wants to – as St Francis of Lerins said – “punish” us with a Pope.
Yes, of course a Pope can be under demonic influences; not, hopefully, of the “satanist” kind; however, socialism, communism, environmentalism, “inclusion”, and all sorts of pretend worldly do-goodism actually taking people away from God ***are, all of them, of Satan***, and Francis is very big on all of them.
I cannot see how anyone can deny this without denying the very reality around him.
“Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous”: Some Reflections On The Imprecatory Psalms
Like the quotation in the title? No?
The one in the picture here above? Neither?
What about this:
Pour out thy wrath upon the heathen that have not known thee, and upon the kingdoms that have not called upon thy name.
What do you say? Unchristian? You know this is called, and rightly so, “the word of God”, right?
Or perhaps you think these are single statements taken out of context? How about this:
Do unto them as unto the Midianites; as to Sisera, as to Jabin, at the brook of Kison: 10 Which perished at Endor: they became as dung for the earth. 11 Make their nobles like Oreb, and like Zeeb: yea, all their princes as Zebah, and as Zalmunna: 12 Who said, Let us take to ourselves the houses of God in possession. 13 O my God, make them like a wheel; as the stubble before the wind. 14 As the fire burneth a wood, and as the flame setteth the mountains on fire; 15 So persecute them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm. 16 Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O LORD. 17 Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish: 18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.
You have already understood that I could go on for very long, but I think I have made my point. Any search for Imprecatory Psalms will give you a wealth of quite robustly written, testosterone-laden but, crucially, Divinely ordained and Divinely inspired quotes to impress your friends at a party, if we will ever have parties again.
As you might have noticed, this little effort delights in distributing little Catholic red pills around, and in shocking and scandalising his new readers before it makes them, hopefully, think smartly about Catholicism for the first time in a long while. Therefore, I would like to spend some words on these beautiful, if nowadays studiously avoided, Imprecatory Psalms.
Preliminary consideration: do not think that this is all Old Testament “stuff”, and Jesus started “to do things differently”. The New Testament is the completion of the Old one, it is not in contrast to it. The truth remains the truth, and does not change with the Incarnation. The Old testament is as much the word of God today as it ever was, but now it is inserted in a completed, perfected frame of reference. If you have any doubt, have a thorough read of a Gospel of your choice and looks for the many times Our Lord expresses Himself on several occasions with such brutality, that every milquetoast PC guy of our times would not hesitate in calling him all sorts of vile names, obviously in the name of “lurv”, or “peace”. I have written often about this, so feel free to scour this blog for the fruits of my efforts.
Once made clear that this stuff is not “outdated”, let us reflect on why what we know must be right is, in fact, right. This will require, alas, the ingestion of a number of red pills that I have just here with me, and that I will proceed to give to you now.
You are welcome.
- The Imprecatory Psalms were seen as totally normally, and logical, in manlier times. But we now live in the Age Of The Concerned Man, and this man will look for a shallow “goodness” in all the wrong places. Yes, it’s the lack of testosterone. All that soy milk, and no red meat at all. Terrible. If you suffer from the soy milk affliction, I suggest the introduction in your diet of copious quantities of red meat, fairly rare – actually, dripping blood – for a while. Just for the experience, you know.
- The Imprecatory Psalm caused no scandal in times in which people got angry at those who offend God. Why? because they loved Christ. In modern times, people love themselves first, second, third and 237th, though they call this “tolerance”, “inclusion” and many other fashionable but hollow sounding names. However, they don’t love Christ. Imagine asking your garden variety parish priest around, say, 1931, whether the Imprecatory Psalms have a place in the Bible. Note: those priests didn’t drink soy milk, either.
- As we aren’t Proddies, we read Scripture within the frame of Catholic doctrine. It is obvious that the punishment called upon the wicked is not the fruit of an unguarded moment, or even of a Friday night escapade. It is, rather, the fruit of hardened, insisted, ideological enmity with God. It is, so to speak, what you know is going to happen to Reprobates who are quite bad even as Reprobates go. We pray for our enemies. I pray even for darned Francis. The Imprecatory Psalms describe, evoke and call for what happens when that fails.
- The Imprecatory Psalms are not personal. David is not calling for God’s vengeance upon his dishonest plumber, the mailman who keeps opening and reading his subscriptions, or the guy who stole his smartphone. His (and God’s) anger is (and shall, at the appointed time, be) directed at God’s enemies. Hostility against God makes the good man’s blood boil. See above: red meat. Also see above: love of Christ.
- With their very existence, the Imprecatory Psalms alert us to a simple facts: at times those who seem “rude” or “violent” or “hateful” are, actually, on the side of Christ. Those, on the contrary, who preach their fake gospel of lurv, inclusion and – most popular nowadays – “niceness”, are those who make the work of the devil. This is very interesting, because niceness has now – in parallel with the disappearance of the real article – become a veritable religion, with his very own priests. You have, I am sure, met many of them.
There. Five Red Pills to swallow with some water and digest calmly.
I think they will be very useful.
There is far too much soy milk around.