Category Archives: Traditional Catholicism
And it came to pass the late, notorious Cardinal Barbarin might have been not only a through-and-through bastard (we knew that already) but a Satanist to boot.
But…. is it?
The betrayal of Christ implicit in every word of these social justice warriors, apostles of “peace” and seamless garment bigots is a massive, self-evident one. It is a betrayal every single one of them must certainly be aware of. Why should it be so absurd that this betrayal stems from real hatred of Christ?
Also, think this: many of these social justice apostles are homosexuals. I fact, I have often maintained that pacifism, environmentalism, social justice activism and the like are a very good indication that the religious in question is a sodomite, because the loss of faithfulness to Christ and the sense of his own disgusting hypocrisy forces him to find self dignity and purpose in something completely detached from Him, something popular with the world and apt to make him look good by it. From utter betrayal of Christ to worship of Satan the step is, particularly for a religious, not such a terribly long one.
Let us, then, reflect on a wider, more disquieting fact.
Barbarin was made bishop by Paul The Weak, and Cardinal by John Paul The Earth Kisser. How many like him might he have helped to become bishops and cardinals? How many bishops and cardinals are today, like he was before, seamless garment subversives with a penchant for Satan?
Could one of them have actually become…. the Pope?
Not saying it has to be so. It will likely not be so. But I struggle to see fundamental differences between Barbarin and Bergoglio. Therefore, it is not beyond the pale that the hatred for Christ both very obviously harbor(ed) might have reach that level of hatred.
Shocking, I know.
Like V II is shocking, and has been from the very start.
Prison Planet has the Story of the murder and attempted massacre by two shooters, at least one of whom one of those people they call Transgender. These are people who, belonging to one sex, think they belong to the other. It’s a bit like a cat believing that he is a dog; but worse, because cats tend to have lower intelligence than humans.
The assassin in question, motivated by pure hatred, shows all the madness of modern times. The girl says she is “super suicidal”, but she was not locked in some place where she could be helped to grow out of her madness or, at least, kept where she cannot harm others.
Last time I looked, an astonishing percentage of these extremely disturbed people committed suicide. It does not take a genius to realise that people with this sort of derangement and suicidal thoughts can very easily harm others.
Instead of “affirming” them, a sane Country would actually care for them in the only way you do with lunatics: by putting them in a safe place, where they cannot harm themselves and others and are offered help to recover sanity if at all possible.
One day, I am sure, sanity will prevail over political correctness. But make no mistake, countless of these people will kill themselves, or kill others before they do, before we start thinking again like normal people, and in the same way as all generations before us did.
For now, reflect on how the Western Societies both sides of the Pond have helped the young woman to destroy her life and the life of an innocent, thankfully being too dumb to do all the damage she wanted to do.
We live in mad times. There is no more definitive proof of this than transgenderism, closely followed by the atheist superstition called climate change.
“I’m aware of some state and federal investigations going on regarding Cupich. Hopefully they will pan out, but I’m not at liberty to tell the details yet.”
This is from a reliable source, in answer to a question about the future of Cardinal Cupich, published on Renew America.
I did not know about the investigation. I am glad to know that even in this rotten state of affairs there are people in the Vatican willing to investigate a powerful member of the Heretic Homo Mafia currently keeping the Church as hostage.
I have no doubt that such an investigation will be threatened from all sides, and that Francis will do all he can to quash it. However, after the Vigano’ episode it can be that the Evil Clown has become a tad more prudent in how he carries out his satanic work.
We have come to this: that Cardinals push an obviously evil homo agenda, and we have no hope, no hope whatsoever that the Pope may do anything at all against it. Actually, we know with absolute certainty, repeated countless times in public declarations of all sorts, that that the evil Cardinal was made such exactly to push this agenda!
Depressing, I know. But this blog does not exist to depress you. This blog exists to help you get a proper assessment of the reality on the ground, and live your life in faith drawing the proper conclusions from the assessment you have made.
Ten, twenty, even fifty years of Francischaos, if it goes on for that long, are but a stain in a garment that remains, in its essence and purpose, exactly as sacred and immaculate as it always was. It is not only a quantitative considerations (Francis is nothing more than a blip in the radar screen if compared to 2000 years of Christianity; it is not even that if you look at it sub specie aeternitatis). It is the fact that the sacred function and divinely decreed establishment of the Church are so much superior to any problem in her governance.
How diminished is the dignity of the Papacy if he burps at the table?
The dignity of the man is certainly impacted; and you will call him, and rightly so, a boor. But the dignity of the Papacy, how is it impacted? It isn’t.
The same goes for the Church. Nothing in Her function and sacred establishment is changed by God allowing that She be run by an evil clown and his minions. Their burping does not affect Her. She keeps teaching you and guiding you through the immense patrimony left to us so that we can make good use of it. She is just as indefectible as She always was. Francis and his guy are merely trying to scratch a huge block of granite with a fork, or to deface it with spray paint. By all their scratching and defacing, the immense block of granite will always be there, unchanged in its nature and function.
Too many people look at the paint and think that the granite must be broken, or that it will never survive continued years of scratching. This is wrong. What is divinely instituted does not die because of a Commie from Argentina, or a homo abetter from the USA. The Lord who instituted an indefectible Church will, in His own time, care that everything is back in its proper order: perhaps through the ordinary work of men (as in the investigation against Cupich), perhaps with a more overtly divine intervention; perhaps today, perhaps tomorrow, perhaps after we have all died. But we know this: that the Bergoglios and Cupichs of the world will all be confounded, and that God will not be mocked.
Look at the present day with your eyes wide open. Do not seek an easy escapism in home-made, absurd “solutions” that are merely being in denial.
Look at the magnificence of the Church, and reflect on the Omnipotence of God instead, and thing will fall i place as you gain the right perspective to correctly evaluate the years we are living.
Bergoglio is there, scratching with the fork. Cupich is there, spraying paint like there is no tomorrow.
There is, in the end, nothing they can do against the huge block of granite.
Edward Pentin (who, by way of his job, is forced to read the rubbish we carefully avoid) has sent this tweet about the Satanic Synod. I have put a snippet above.
This gives you the scale of the devastation that is currently ravaging the Church; a devastation that is getting worse almost by the month, and which is aided and abetted by all members of the hierarchy who do not denounce the root of the problem: the Pope.
I will not comment on the single statements above, because there is really no need for it with any Christian. Let me, instead, focus on another issue that is, perhaps, not so evident to many.
This is the fruit of the failure to denounce Pope Francis as a heretic and ask from him that he recants or be deposed. All the members of the hierarchy who have not done this are part of the problem, not of the solution.
Francis has always hated Catholicism. He has hated it with a passion. He has hated it, I think, even more because of the obvious problem of scrounging an entire existence out of an organisation he so seriously loathes.
Now that he is Pope, he is abusing his role and power to demolish the Institution he hates as much as he can; without caring for, or worrying about, any divine punishment, because obviously he does not believe in God, and probably never has.
But do not think that I make of him the only culprit. I have insisted often here, and will continue to say, that this monstrous individual has been aided and abetted every step of the way by all those who, under the pretence of “prudence”, have renounced to draw the consequences from the behaviour of this evil individual.
At which point will the SSPX, and the Bishops and Cardinals, ask for the forced removal of this disgrace?
What if Francis declares God a “She”, but he does not do so in a formal document?
What if Francis instruct us to pray to the Father, the Son and Holy Allah, but he does so in a letter to some Muslim Imam?
What if Francis introduces an eleven commandments, “Thou shall worship Manitu”, but he does so talking with journalists in an aeroplane?
When will this stop? Can the above mentioned individuals (this includes the SSPX) not see the deep damage that is done by allowing Francis’ new “Our father”, or his heresies about the capital punishment, to get into official teaching texts like the Catechisms?
Dear bishops (this includes the SSPX) and Cardinals:
the house is burning, and it is time to take a hard look at the fire.
Yes, the building will never be destroyed. But this is not a reason to let the fire ravage the building.
This disgraceful era (which, bar a Divine Intervention, has all the look of going on for several more decades, as is it clear that evil people are raping the Church unopposed) will be remembered less for the heretical Popes as for the complicit Bishops and Cardinals; because their cowardice and inaction will be remembered long after the very name of the heretical Popes have been forgotten by all but historians and history buffs.
The house is burning, and the smoke of Satan is charring the Church.
Our shepherds react with “prudence”, and faint meowing, and professions of truth that do absolutely nothing to deal with the problem.
It is like having a violent bully at home, and going around the house telling people about the virtues of niceness whilst the furniture is being destroyed all the other occupants have black eyes. For heaven’s sake, Bishops and Cardinals: tell the bully that he needs to stop or he will be kicked out on the street!
Nothing less will suffice, if this generation of Church prelates is to be remembered as Catholic in any meaningful way.
We live in time when one has to write blog posts stating what, in all generatiosn before us, would have been considered so obvious as to be not even worth discussing.
But no, we live in the time of the prudent Bishops.
The obesity “epidemy” in Albion continues unabated, and for those – like me – born and bread in saner times and in a saner environment it is a shocking phenomenon to behold.
As I write this, I sit near not one, but two women whose shape I would, if I had ever seen it as a child, defined as monstrous, circus-like deformity. Both of them, surely, comfortably above 300 pounds; one surely in her Twenties, the other in her early Thirties at the maximum. Intently browsing their phones. Apparently, blissfully unaware of their own monstrous deformity.
Unless things change, these are two early graves just sitting near me. First, the knees will give way, further reducing mobility. Diabetes will soon become a real danger. In time, other organs, mostly likely the heart, will strike in protest of the abuse they are subjected; unless, again, diabetes comes first.
The issue here is not only the, no doubt, vast stupidity of the two hippos sitting near me. There is a larger, societal phenomenon at play here. The Zeppelins have been raised in an environment that constantly makes excuses for them, helping them to blame everything under the sun but the only culprits: themselves.
Where I come from, such monstrosities did not exist. Why? Because the social shame of reducing oneself in such a shape would be enough to prevent even the thought of it happening or, put it another way, because children began throwing stones and yelling insults at you in the street when you got to half that monstrous, gluttonous weight.
We live in a world where impulse control is never demanded. Be it study, food, sex, or sexual perversion, everyone is allowed by “experts” and “scientists” to do whatever he or she pleases: gettting out of school a functional illiterate, resembling a ball fish, having children out of wedlock, sleeping with people of the same sex, even deciding one is not a person of his own sex is all, nowadays, “affirmed”. What a stupid mockery of civilisation we are becoming.
The social implications of the comedic fatness of the two female elephants I am now beholding (without even having to pay the ticket at the circus; and I confess my fun at imagining them dancing to the music of Ponchielli, like the hippos in the famous scene of the first Walt Disney’s “Fantasia”) go beyond this. It is my firm persuasion that the two human tractors very likely feel, no matter how loud they protest normality, “different” and “victimised”. They also must know, at some unconfessed inner level, that they are just unable to control their impulses. They will, therefore, very likely take the side of other people like them, whom they will defend in order not to accuse themselves: perverts and failures of all sorts will be excused because “it is not their fault” and “they are just that way” (implied: “just as I am, so don’t dare to judge me”). If I want to be allowed to give unrestrained way to my impulses, I must take side with those who do the same with them. This is, by the way, the main reason why perverted priest clamour for communion for adulterers.
Discipline (of all sorts) is intrinsically conservative and right wing. Licence (of all sorts) is intrinsically subversive and left wing. Conservative minds instinctually recognise this, though they often fail to make the thought explicit, or are hindered by the “guilt” of being “judgmental”. Mind, though, that in more Christian times no-one had a problem with “judging” clearly wrong behaviour.
The de-Christianised world in which we live has written off gluttony just as it tries to write off discipline, order, and sacrifice. Everything must be reduced to the minimum common denominator of the dumbest, laziest, most gluttonous, most perverted ones. The two battleships near me, both avidly typing on their phone as I write this, are the perfect embodiment of such a society.
When this happens, everything goes down the drain: not only health but, at a deeper level, family (which requires discipline and self sacrifice) and religion (which requires exactly the same).
The defence of monstrous, morbid obesity is left wing. It is irreligious. It is subversive on all possible religious and social levels.
Make it stop.
Let’s go back to sanity in everyday stuff, and one day we will go back to sanity in the most important things.
The intrumentum laboris for the Amazonian synod is out, and it atrocious. Married priest as the de facto standard option are in the cards.
Now, occasionally there have always been married priest. If an Anglian so-called vicar converts to Catholicism and receives the Holy Orders, there you have your married priest. But this was always meant to be the exception, with priestly celibacy as the time-honoured and, at this point, sacrosanct standard case.
The Amazonian Synod clearly wants to introduce the standard of the married priests through the Amazonian back door: start first with a remote region where – you say – is it difficult to find priests (is it? When has a strong Church believing in Catholicism lacked brave missionaries?) and then allow this new praxis to extend to the other region courtesy of corrupted, faithless bishops.
This is clearly what this Amazonian stuff was meant to be from day one: a backdoor, the proverbial (alleged extreme case to make very real bad laws.
We thank for this not only the Evil Clown and his evil minions. We thank for this all those Bishops and Cardinals who think that waiting for Francis’ death is the best, most “prudent” course of action, and all those faithful of little faith who actually side with the hierarchy as they do nothing but faintly meowing every now and then.
This kind of evil could not happen with only one evil man. The main culprit has been aided and abetted, for years, by the ” prudent” behaviour of all those – be they clerics or laymen – who have let this happen without demanding that the problem be removed, thinking that time alone would cure all ills.
Enjoy the married priests, then, dear “prudent” faithful of little faith.
You have helped to make it happen.
Pope Francis has released a document negating the entire “gender identity” stuff: that is, the literally lunatic thinking according to which one who is born a man can decide that he is a woman, or a cat, or a plant, one of the three….
Do not think for a moment that Francis is “being Catholic” on this. The man is and remains a bloody heretic.
The message from the document is that gender identity is something so obviously absurd that even Pope Francis understands it. And this is a guy with a very feeble grasp on pretty much everything.
When I was at school, they made us learn the principle of non contradiction: if something is white, it cannot be black at the same time, because this would contradict its being white. This rather elementary stuff was used as a fundament of logical thinking, in the same way as simple additions like 2 + 2= 4 are in the end the basis of mathematical thinking.
The gender identity ideology is the statement that what is white can be also black at the same time (or it can be a woman whilst having men’s chromosomes). It is exactly the same as saying that two and two can be five whenever you feel like it, and take some hormones trying to change an obvious reality.
It is lunacy. Such lunacy, in fact, that not even stupid Francis falls for it.
And it came to pass Cardinal Burke and a couple of others released a statement repeating some obvious truths of the Church, but stopping short once again of doing what they have to do: condemn the Pope’s statements as heretical, and pose him in front of the choice between recanting those statements or being accused of pertinacious heresy.
If a teacher goes around saying that two and two is five, it does not help much if another teacher confirms that it is four. This, people know by themselves easily enough. The problem, in this case, is exactly that the teacher cannot count.
Burke & Co. keep going around the problem, and refusing to see it.
A Penny Catechism can be had for very little money. Cardinals should do more than repeating it.
The duty of Burke and the other Cardinals is to address the problem of a heretical Pope , not merely make the right noises.
Once again, it seems to me that Cardinal Burke is adopting a strategy that gives him the maximum of visibility with the minimum of risk. Not only does he fall way short of the mark. He also falls short of the standard he himself set when he first released the Dubia.
From those who appear more Catholic it is expected more. From those who wet their lips (and make themselves beautiful for it) it is expected that they whistle. From those who say they would act it is expected that they do exactly that.
What we have here, unfortunately, is merely more meowing.
Good news from the old U S of A.
Militant atheist have lost again. The words “in God we trust” may remain on US bills and coins.
Yes, dear, in God we Trust. Not in atheist busybodies wanting to purge every aspect of religious experience from our life, because they have death inside them.
Particularly sad is that, among the “petitioners”, there were nine children. Little souls (see what I am doing here?) conditioned to reject God from a very early age, and instrumentalised by their own bigoted parents into something they cannot well understand. But hey, who would be so cruel as to displease children?
I notice here that this extremists position is, in fact… the EU one. Our nannies in Brussels loathe every Christian expression in coins and banknotes, as our very dear brothers and sisters of the religion of peace could feel offended by it. They are doing exactly the same as the American bigots, but with the added PC slant.
As the United States keep having a common sense approach to basic life things, we in poor old Europe keep sliding towards, I am afraid, a bloody civil war one day.
And this is, my friends, because… we do not trust in God anymore.
An extremely dangerous movement is now underway, meant to oblige priests to violate the seal of Confession.
Do not say that this is all a posture, as paedophiles would not confess their crimes.
Firstly, they might.
Secondly, this mentality is an invitation to have priests arrested because of the evil deeds of anti-Christian activists.
Imagine your average activist perv going in the confessional with his smartphone on recording. He “confesses” a child rape, and his phone records the conversation. The priest obviously does not violate the seal of confession. The pervert goes to the police with the evidence of a crime, as the crime would consist in not reporting to the police, irrespective of the veracity of the confession.
This is likely the greatest attack brought against the Church in centuries.
Do not expect the bishops to do more than some faint meowing, and Francis to go through some obligatory lip movement before he resumes his communist propaganda.
Help us, Lord. Please help us sheep abandoned by our shepherds; though we have been culpable every step of the way, too.
President Trump has just disappointed myself and every other rational thinking person by “endorsing” sexual perversion.
We knew Trump was never the Crusader in matters of sodomy; but this is a betrayal for several reasons.
Firstly, Trump knows that you cannot separate the aspect of Christianity that bring him votes from those who might actually cost two or three. This here might actually backfire, as some Christian voters, particularly in the Southern States, could actually stay home in 2020 just for this.
Secondly, it creates a disquieting image of a man ready to say what is convenient to be said, thus undermining his stance in all the issues on which he is right.
Thirdly, it cast a horrible shadow on Trump’s own personal faith. You support Jerusalem or Sodom. You can’t has both.
Shame on you, Mr President.
And build the damn wall.
Pope Benedict’s resignation would be valid, then dubious, then value again, in a matter of hours. Says, apparently, the same theologian.
I wish we would focus on the real problem on the ground (hint: heretical Pope and cowardly shepherds) rather than wasting time on this absurd non-matter.
Benedict has clearly wanted to renounce his role as the man in charge. He has stated several times that Francis is Pope. He has actually even praised Francis, and may the Lord forgive him for it.
The man has quit. In darn Latin. As officially as can be. In front ov the entire planet. He has set up a schedule and a plan, and according to this schedule he has, again very publicly and symbolically, flown away in helicopter from the Vatican. Cameras followed him live, sending these highly symbolic footage all over the world.
But Benedict is a cerebral guy. He is, also, steeped in Italian culture, where even children know that Dante condemned (though Dante himself never mentions him by name) Celestino V for his abdication. Being the gregarious, too clever by half “intellectual” that he is, he uses a figure also well known in Italy, the one of the Emeritus. The Emeritus is the one that does not have the job anymore (because he has retired) but keeps the rank and honour (because it is deemed fitting that he should). Therefore, when a high ranking Government officer (say: a General) retires, it is said that he a “retired General”; but when a Professor retires he is not called a retired Professor, he is called Professor Emeritus. It’s the way it is, and Benedict did not want to be treated in a lesser way: both because of the profession, way more prestigious than the one of a Professor, and because he did not want to look like a Celestine.
Good Lord, is it difficult?
The fact that he keeps the title “Pope” is also not relevant. Besides the reasons just mentioned, in Italy every Prime Minister and every President of the Republic is called “Mr President” for the rest of his natural life. Again, this is an obvious tribute to the office once held. No-one would say that the fact that Mr Renzi is called Presidente means that there is something fishy with the appointment of his successors.
Where is Benedict reneging on his own abdication? Where is his official statement that Francis is not the legitimate Pope? Have we really sunk to such level of embarrassing childishness, that we try to deform every little hint, every little non-statement of Benedict as reason to doubt what the man himself has told the world?
When I talk about religion with my friends, none of whom obviously knows that I write this blog, I accurately avoid mentioning Bennyvacantists. The matter is so embarrassing to me, that I fear if would cast a shadow on all Catholics, besides causing a lot of laughter in the solidly down-to-earth Italian culture.
The guy who recites the Angelus in St Peter Square is the Pope.
It is time to stop with this embarrassment. Having a heretical Pope is bad enough, but it is neither new nor church-shattering. Francis is the fitting Pope for a very stupid, godless age. Let us put an end to the stupidity and godlesness of the age, and you will see God will grace us with proper Catholic Popes again!
On the day Benedict dies, I will be very curious to know who, according to Bennyvacatists, is now Pope, and why this is so. As the man is 92, I doubt I will stay curious for very long.
“What the Pope said about not knowing anything is a lie. […] He pretends not to remember what I told him about McCarrick, and he pretends that it wasn’t him who asked me about McCarrick in the first place.”
These are the words of Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano’ , immediately replying to the assertion of the Evil Clown that he did not know about the proclivities of Cardinal McCarrick.
It is, truly, rather amusing that a person notorious for his serial lies would change tack on the matter and, instead of just refusing to answer, would go on record officially contradicting the Archbishop. Does he think he will be believed?
Not happening. This is the price you pay when you go around lying like there is no tomorrow for six years. People laugh at everything you say. You would think the old scoundrel should know that by now; but in Francisland, facts are mere options.
Just as a snippet: it has been reported (search this blog, or the Internet) that this guy, in an interview to a Spanish language magazine, a) lied to his own mother (who was financing his studies) saying to her he was studying medicine when he was in the Jesuit seminary, and b) boasted about it, himself!
Imagine the guy! By the by, already this gives the lie to the “pious Bergoglio family” legend.
Back to our comedian: one is tempted to think that Francis calculates that his word, as the word of the Pope, must be taken in more consideration than the word of an Archbishop.
Sadly for the Evil Clown, this is not the Cuban Communist Party. Every person with a functioning brain knows the difference between an obvious mythomaniac and a man who is paying a heavy price for choosing to tell the truth, for the good of both his own soul and all of us.
It would have been better for the Evil Clown if he had continued to shut up about this.
By opening his lewd mouth and lying again, he has made his likely destination in hell just that tad darker and deeper.
In 300 years, when the Church has come back to normality, Francis will be, in all probability, nothing more than a little blip on the radar of the average Catholic, there with Pope Elton and Pope Dalai (who came after him) in a small parade of horrible Popes only remembered in proverbial expressions and after-dinner lore. Single men tend to be forgotten unless they are of the stature of a Julius Ceasar; epochs tend to impress themselves more firmly in the collective imagination.
What will, then, people remember in 300 years, when gathered around the table in the kitchen? Pope Francis? I doubt they will remember one single thing he did, though they will probably recall his name as one of the “bad Popes”. What they will remember from school, is the age of unprecedented Church corruption that marked the Age of Insanity. Will they blame the single evil Pope? Hardly. Not many people can, today, mention even a handful of the Renaissance Popes. They will blame the bishops and cardinals for allowing the decay to happen and the rot to set in.
They will be right.
As Francis becomes more than a passing disgrace, insists in not dying and appoints more Cardinals, it becomes more likely that these years will be seen as the onset of a disgraceful age. There is no way that the bishops and remaining halfway Catholic cardinals can be excused for their inaction, as this becomes way more than a wayward Pope whose problem will die with him ( as in Formosus’, or Honorius’ case), but a Pope who created a systemic disruption, one able to survive his own demise.
The time for action is now, not after Francis has died. No single bishop, not one, can hide anymore behind the lame excuse of waiting for the problem to solve itself. The evil plant is expanding, and will spawn a Pope Cupich or a Pope Tagle one day.
The bishops and cardinals must act now. They must be reminded constantly that they have no excuses. They are at the real root of the problem festering.
We need twenty more Open Letters, coming from all corners of Catholicism.
This crisis is a crisis of collective governance, not a crisis of mad individuals.
Let us make clear something at the start: you write a blog, you will be insulted. I have a fairly thick skin, and I have always been blessed with a sovereign contempt for the attacks of people of mediocre intelligence; therefore, most of the time I smile about it, and take it as a confirmation that I am doing something right.
What, however, strikes me as odd is the fact that those who choose to insult me do not have, on many occasions, any sense of proportions, or any respect for the language.
I object to be called hyper-trad, as there are around people with much, much stronger views about Traditionalism than me. One example: I do not advocate that people skip Mass if they do not have a Traditional Mass within reasonable distance. If I am hyper-trad, what are they: super-duper-hyper-mega Trads?
The expression hyper-polemic also leaves me quite perplexed: one does not need to go around the internet for long in order to find sites with much stronger expressions than the ones I use; but I assume that for some people, it is enough to smash “hyper” on their article and the job is done.
But the worst is to say that I have veered towards Sedevacantism. I can comfortably say that at least 80% of the insults I get (might be more) are, in actual fact, because I didn’t.
This indiscriminate use of hyperbole is a betrayal of the language, besides being factually wrong.
Insult me as much as you want, it’s (still) a free Internet. But please, take the time to read around a bit before you call me hyper-here, hyper-that, and even Sedevacantist!
Words have lost their meaning. Facts are irrelevant. Everything is digital nowadays.
Trump is a danger to women.
The Russians have decided the 2016 election.
Building walls is unChristian.
But heavens, making of me a Sedevacantist is as “fake news” as it gets.
Still, I was mildly bemused, and actually had to chuckle when I discovered that the person who insulted me in such a way proceeded, immediately thereafter, to take the pain to translate (approvingly!) an entire blog post of yours truly: the hyper-trad, hyper-polemic Sedevacantist!
When even those who insult you feel the need to invest a decent amount of time to let the world know what you think, one can be bemused indeed.
I struggle to understand the criticism to the recent, “pro-life” Alabama law. Let me explain why.
This is not a law banning abortions. It merely restricts it to a strict standard. Nor is it meant as a one-off death blow to Roe vs Wade, because it still makes it possible to perform abortions if the life of the mother is “in danger” (cue thousands of girls saying they are thinking of committing suicide, et voila’….). What, I think, this and similar laws are meant to, is to chip away at abortion “rights” one bit at a time, paving the way for a decision of the Court that does not need a perfect law to be made: the decision, namely, that the US Constitution does not guarantee a right to abort.
The Supreme Court does not need a perfectly coherent law to discard Roe vs Wade more than it needed a perfectly coherent abortion legislation to issue Roe vs Wade. The issue is an issue of principles, not of technicalities. If the principle is coherently stated, there is nothing to prevent the Supreme Court to decide about its conformity to the Constitution. Actually, not even that is needed. Judge Roberts came out with the idea that Obamacare is a tax all of his own!
Certainly, everything can be made better. But give me ten or twelve sub-optimal laws knocking at the Supreme Court door than a perfect one.
The Supreme Court has, in the past, gone with the times. There is no doubt that an onslaught of abortion-limiting laws would create the social environment for a ground breaking decision. Laws like the Alabama one send in the sky a test balloon, and contribute to the societal changes the Supreme Court will, one day, ratify.
A better law still would be one that bans abortion qua abortion: that defends life from conception, does not make any exception for rape or incest, criminalises the mother for killing her baby, does not allow any health excuse* and, in everything else, gives the unborn the same degree of protection as the born baby.
But we are not there. Such a law would likely not be passed anywhere, not even Alabama. You chip away at abortion one piece at a time, and throw the Supreme Court a beautiful pitch.
It is for them to smash that ball out of the ballpark.
*mind, this excludes the case where a surgical intervention is necessary to save the life of the mother and, as an unwanted but inevitable result of the intervention, the child dies. This is, medically and technically, not an abortion.
In recent days, two Cardinals and one Bishops (actually, they are among the usual suspects when it is about trying to defend, albeit timidly, orthodoxy against a heretical Pope) have renewed calls for the Evil Clown to “clarify Church teaching” concerning his heresies.
Firstly, the men clearly have not received the memo, in form of the “no hay otra interpretacion” letter which, in fact, abundantly clarifies where the Evil Clown lies on the matter of communion for divorced and, by extension, on the matter of what he thinks of heresy. Therefore, it seems to me that the intervention of these prelates is a bit of a talking to the wind, or to the wall. They are clearly not talking to Francis, who obviously ignores them.
Secondly, it is almost fun – in a somewhat depressing way – that all three Orthodoxy Musketeers take stand against the open letter of the theologians inviting the bishop to take action against a heretical Pope.
This is like saying that it is good for bishops and cardinals to wet their lips; however, they should never whistle! How this follows any kind of logic is beyond me.
Words have a meaning if they are underpinned by facts. Words that are meant to remain only words are useless. Any bishop, any cardinal must know this. It is as if in their vision of things, Popes could go on for 70 years spreading heresies and it would be fine for a couple of bishops and cardinals to invite them to “clarify Church teaching” (which never happens) thinking that the request itself, not the clarification, is the answer to the problem.
One of the effects of Vatican II has been to create an awful lot of prelates who think they are journalists. They analyse and invite. They comment and reflect. They love to read their name in print. What they never do, what they think they have no duty to do, is, actually, act.
Words, without facts, are rather empty. You need to do what you say needs to be done. A Bishop or Cardinal is not called to give commentaries about the faith. He is called to actively defend it; in season and out of season, and with no respect for authority when this authority defies God.
He is not one who comments about those in power. He is one of those who actually have it.
You would think this simple concept would be clear after 2000 years of Christianity. Instead, prepare yourself for the next lame interview in which a prelate thinks that wetting his lips is the same as whistle.
The law recently passed in Alabama meant to restrict the legal right to abort – a law clearly meant for a test in the Supreme Court – has leftists of all shapes in a state of hysteria.
It is a bit, albeit on a smaller scale, like watching the movie of Trump election again: countless Libtards inordinately whining and screaming as a reaction to their impotence to stop the tide of common sense.
I have bad news for the poor, deranged feminists of both sexes: their evil struggle is doomed in the long term.
The advancements of technology make it more and more difficult to deny the personhood of a baby in the womb. The very vocabulary says it: I did not use the expression “a future baby in the womb”. The baby is here, as a baby, when he is in the womb.
“Baby on board”.
Compared to this, expressions like “reproductive rights” sound exactly what they are: a profoundly evil spin of the murder of a baby (see what I am doing here?), in the womb of his mother, with her consent.
It is sad that technology, not faith or common piety, should help people to discard their genocidal thinking. But in a world without faith, even a picture can do a lot. Let those who cannot think, see.
The fight of the abortionists (every supporter of abortion is an abortionist) against God’s children is doomed to fail at some point. God willing, this or next Presidency will see the SCOTUS overturn Roe vs Wade. At that point the dam will break, and in fifteen years at the most reason will have made big inroads in Europe, too. It is difficult to criticise America’s “imperialism”, commercial or otherwise, when you kill your own children.
Abortionist Libtards are on the wrong side of God. Not a good place to be.
You have probably seen them, the “prayer rooms” in airports and other institutions. I have been in one. Not to pray in it, but to see how it was done.
Naked walls. Not one crucifix in sight. Not even a cross. The people praying were all Muslims, easily recognisable from their rythmic allah chanting and being all in the same directions.
These multifaith prayer rooms are a fraud. They are mosques by another name. They comply with the standards of interior decoration for a mosque, but not with those for a church. They are clearly uninviting places for prayer for anyone but Muslims.
A Catholic does not pray together with people of other faiths. But apparently everybody else also finds it unappealing to pray in a naked room, with the rhythmic soundtrack of the Mohammedan religion.
These multiprayer stuff should be put to an end. In traditional Christian Countries, I would actually expect to see a chapel. But if this does not work, better have nothing than a mosque in disguise. It creates a position of privilege for a minority.
It is not for, say, an airport to provide for the prayer needs of the Mohammedans.
The SSPX has issued a statement on the letter, mentioned here many times, calling for the Bishops to invite Francis to recant his many heresies or depose him. The letter is very critical. I think it is, also, a big mistake.
The Society obviously points out to the many heresies of this Pontificate. They stress the point that Francis is the result of a movement, V II, that has been going on for decades. But then they condemn the letter based on the argument that the chances of success are non-existent, and the recipient Bishops not instructed enough and not willing to act anyway.
With this reasoning, my question to the SSPX is why they, themselves, think that they should exist in the first place. The probability of the College of Cardinals (much less the Bishops of the world) converting to Traditional Catholicism are even smaller than the probability of them accusing the Pope of heresy.
If it is enough to pray and do nothing, awaiting for God to change the situation, then the SSPX might as well disband and explain to all their followers that ” it is highly probable, even certain, that the vast majority of bishops will not react” to their invitation of throwing away Vatican II’ s innovations.
Not can the SSPX say, in their defence, that they act hoping that future generations will come back to sanity; because this is exactly what the signatories of the letter are doing.
The basic principle, that utterly escapes the authors of the letter, is that things are done because they are right. The probability of success is neither here nor there. I cannot imagine Athanasius, or the French Partisans fighting against Nazi occupation, or many fighters in many wars, physical and spiritual, thinking of the “probability of success” as the decisive element to decide whether to fight or not.
When Archbishop Lefebvre refused to shut down his seminary, or when he appointed his bishops, he did so because it was the right thing to do. This was the guiding light behind decisions that were, in a way, new in the history of the Church. But if we look at the world, though, we can’t certainly say that the SSPX has been ” a success”, as almost fifty years later the Church has become only more corrupt. Shall we, then, say, concerning the SSPX, that “the failure of such an initiative has ridiculed the author (Lefebvre) and his cause” ?
You do what you have to do. If the result is zero in this day and age, heaven will still notice the action. Besides, all these initiative are like a leaven that, by God’s grace, will bring results one day.
One day, history will record that courageous voices were raised to demand action for the astonishing spectacle of a heretical Pope. They will know that not everybody was silent, and not everybody was ready to accept the inaction of the Bishops as acceptable. They will know that the signatories of the letter, together with all their sympathizers, wanted to expose the shame of their bishops’ inaction for all future generations to see. They will know that such initiatives want to give a testimony that the Church is indefectible and, whatever the troubles, those staying true to the true faith will always be there.
This is, once again, the reasoning underpinning the very existence of the SSPX. That they criticise it, and even go as far as to say that this initiative “might ridicule the authors and their cause”, is deeply unfortunate and should, if you ask me, be cause for deep embarrassment inside the organistion.
The SSPX should not criticise this letter. They should have been the ones who issued it.
Not with any hope of “success”, of course. But in order to give testimony to future generations of the fight of the faithful, and the shame of the hirelings.
I have written this blog for almost nine years now. I have (obviously) not made a penny out of it, but I hope that the thousands of hours spent at the keyboard will, one day, help me – with God’s grace – to obtain the grace of all graces.
I can see the end of this blog on the horizon. I can see it in the fact that more and more conservative voices, big or small, are being silenced, even it if is the big ones who make the headlines.
I can also see it in the decision, made once and never changed, that I will blog anonymously or I will not blog. If you don’t get why, at this point I think you are too thick to even merit an explanation.
I also thought – until recently – that WordPress would protect my freedom of speech. Not so sure anymore. When manosphere blogs are shut down – it does not matter here whether you agree with them or not – conservative Catholics cannot be very far away. I have, therefore, come to the conclusion that, at some point, WordPress will silence me; and at that point it will likely be the end of my blog experience, unless I find a way to make it work on another platform. I have thought of some short term measures, but this post is principally meant to investigate long term possibilities.
SHORT TERM MEASURES
I have downloaded on my anonymous email a complete backup of my site. Whilst I don’t know how to use it, in case of need I do not doubt that other people would.
However, I encourage my readers to do the same, archiving as much as they can of my site.
For example, if you receive my blog posts via email, you may think of not ever deleting them and potting them in a folder somewhere in the cloud, where it will not get destroyed next time your hard drive dies. Or, like me, you have an email provider that keeps the emails forever, which also helps if it really works that way. If the manure hits the ventilator, there will be people able to put many posts on the internet again, on platform that cannot be easily assailed.
If any of my readers is technically gifted and knows how to “mirror” my site (I do not even know what that means exactly), he should feel free to do so if this allows my site to be easily “recovered” in case of sudden and total censorship.
Basically the idea is this: that if my site is closed, the content will pop up in dozen of other sites around the Internet; all the thousands of posts in it and possibly the comments, too. It is a sort of preventative measure.
LONG TERM MEASURES
If my blogging activity is to continue after WordPress were to shut down this site, I would need to have a place that guarantees complete anonymity.
Complete means complete.
Therefore, and just to make an example, no credit cards whatsoever, or anything that traces a payment back to me. I might make a partial exception for Bitcoin or other virtual currencies, meaning that if I can buy a domain and make it work by paying only in virtual currency, I trust that this would be safe enough.
You all know how my WordPress site is organised and the way in which I use it.
I am grateful for any suggestion about alternative platforms which:
1) Are extremely serious about freedom of speech.
2) Allow me to set up my place, without technical knowledge (WordPress was excellent in this), either for free or paying in virtual currency. I would be glad to find sites that allow payment with vouchers and gift cards. Bear in mind, however, that a lot that is allowed in the US is not allowed here in Europe (e.g. anonymous credit cards, anonymous phone numbers). Already requiring a phone number kills the entire exercise (which is why my blog is on WordPress and not Blogger): a stupid SJW in the provider’s office and you are doxxed already. Yes, I am a mistrustful guy.
3) Have the same format as this blog: one blog post after the other and the possibility to read them in a series and order them by months etc, rather than a “Twitter” format where one only has a “window” were to write, but no proper blog organisation of the virtual space, or a discussion forum rather than a proper blog.
WordPress has tremendous advantages: totally free and totally anonymous, and with an easy to set up, convenient blog format. I am slowly starting to look for something like WordPress, but with a passion for freedom, for the case that WordPress shuts me down.
What alternatives are there?
Thanks to all that would like to contribute and add suggestions and alternative ways of doing this.
The time might come, in this generation or in the next one, when it is necessary to fight again for it, possibly on American soil.
Enjoy this emotional, beautiful reflection from a man that certainly (from what I know of him) is not one of those I would invite for dinner; but here he does it beautifully.
I have written yesterday some instructions for use, for those who want to navigate these incredible years and arrive at the shore of salvation without too much damage inflicted on their soul.
It might be good to add further steps for those who have already executed the little action plan outlined yesterday.
My personal suggestion would be to stay near three authors who have greatly helped to make Catholic theology accessible to the masses: Fulton Sheen, Ronald Knox and Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange.
A visit to any online store will reveal a wealth of publications from these authors. The first two are more colloquial and less difficult to follow, the third will generally be more suited to people with a grounding in philosophy or accustomed to more complex reasoning. You really can’t go wrong with any of those, but my suggestion would be to absolutely not miss the following:
Sheen: Life of Christ. He is the author of many other interesting books (I have read The World’s First Love, the Priest is not His Own and Mother of the Saviour, I think I am forgetting something), but I think that Life of Christ is a must. If I were to suggest a book about Christianity to a potential convert, this one would be it.
Knox, a convert from Anglicanism, was another one with a gift for making complex things easy. The Creed in Slow Motion and The Mass in Slow Motion are books I thoroughly enjoyed. Easy to read and difficult to forget, they are fare that can be easily tackled by adolescents.
Garrigou-Lagrange is a bit different from the other two. Of the books from him I have read, I would say that only Life Everlasting can be called “accessible”. This one is, I think, also a must-read. However, those inclined to more complex readings will enjoy “Providence” and “Predestination” immensely. If, then, they are willing to plunge again in the philosophy studies of their earlier years (or want to give it a bite), “Reality” will give him hours of high-level enjoyment. He also authored other books, ( I have read “Christian perfection and Contemplation” and “Our Saviour and his love for us”), but I’d say that the other two books make for more “essential” reading. Prepare yourself for frequent repetitions of the main concepts in the various books.
Note that all of these authors reflect the strictest Pre-Vatican II ideology, albeit I am told that Sheen was not as critical of V II as, I think, he should have been. Still, you will find his writings unimpeachable.
Before I close, I would like to also publish, with thanks, a link sent by a reader as a comment to my last post. The link has a useful, very extensive list of “safe” Catholic readings. You may want to browse the list and pick from there what you think most suited to your tastes and interests.
Dear reader, we may be living in disgraceful times, but the Good Lord in His Mercy has also given us a wealth of information, easily available and readily digestible, to guide us through life. No generation before us ever had the access, the money, and the time to profit from these sources as we do now.
Francis can make all the mess he wants. He will be no excuse for anyone who is lost. Never could a Pope inflict as little damage to his sheep as one living in the age of the Internet and mass literacy.
I write a good number of posts about the antics of the disgraceful Pope currently defacing the Church. A Leitmotiv of my reflections is the, in my eyes very obvious and banal, consideration that it is not for me to say who is the Pope. I tend to be a rather down-to-earth guy, not inclined to conspiracy theories and fantasy solutions to real problems.
The sun goes up in the East; water is wet; Francis is Pope.
Whatever Francis does, he is still Pope until something happens (he dies, hopefully soon, or he is deposed) that makes him stop being Pope. And yes, even the one whom some insist in considering the “true Pope” (an old man of 92, therefore condemning the position to total failure, and actually to sedevacantism, in a very short time) disagrees with them. It does not get more absurd than this. It is an escape from reality, that does not become less real if you make a 23 hours documentary about it.
It seems to me that these escapists are all linked by a common reasoning: this Pope is so atrocious that he cannot be Pope. Therefore, I must go finding a Pope whenever I can and hey, look, there is an old guy over there who still dresses in white! He thinks and says out loud that Francis is the one in charge, but why would I care? He gives me the balm I so urgently need. Screw reality and common sense. He is my guy.
If you ask me, what these escapist Catholics all fail to understand is the magnitude of the betrayal of Vatican II. When they realise the scale of the offence to God that the event (actually, the “movement”) represented, you will have no problem at all to understand why Francis is Pope! Francis is nothing more than the living warning, the poster boy of what happens when the clergy (and the faithful who have , in their greater number, accepted or embraced the “movement”) deforms and defaces the Church. From the monstrous, satanic behaviour of the Pope you understand the monstrous, satanic behaviour of the movement that caused him to become Pope.
Francis is, at the same time, punishment and medicine. He is punishment for the arrogance of both clergy and faithful (collectively intended). He is medicine, because every day he persuades some of the more reasonable member of the V II troops that the man is actual evidence that V II was rotten at its very core, and the work of the devil.
No, it is not for me to figure out who is Pope. I know who is Pope, as does all Christianity. But it is for me to reflect how things could come to the point that a man like this one was made Pope. There is only one answer: Vatican II, the most successful subversive movement within the Church in 2000 years, and the work of the devil through and through.
Do not worry for the Church: the Church can withstand fifty Francis. Even the most powerful heretic can only scratch at truth like a child would do with a block of granite. Truth is indestructible, and the Church will, however deformed, continue to preach this truth even if the Pope (and the next twenty Popes) are heretics. But rather, it is reasonable to think that when both clergy and faithful are fed up with heretical Pope, things will start to change.
We are being given a medicine.
Will be swallow and start a process of healing, or make of it Sedevacantist poison?
In another open show of Modernism, the Evil Clown has reiterated that the capital punishment was right in the past, but is wrong now.
Stupid old man is, very possibly, thinking that the first part will shield him from the rage of Catholics: “See? Both Pius XII and my ‘umbleness can be right at the same time!”
Very stupid position, as this is not the way the Church thinks. If Pius was right, Francis must be wrong. Pius, on the other hand, was right because he has stated what the Church has always believed. Case open and shut, then; actually, not even open.
It is refreshingly surprising how this man keeps not getting that, however perverted his ideology, he damages it himself by pushing it so hard all the time. In other words, even if you were just as bad as Francis, you would understand that it is better for your evil project to take a rest every now and then, and be Catholic for a short month or two. Not this guy, whose emotional intelligence reaches kindergarten age at best.
Thank you, Evil Clown, Unholy Father, for being such a childish, petty heretic. You help us in making people with a brain see your evil mind in all its ugliness.
We await eagerly the next shot in your own foot.
The armies of evil have used incrementalism to achieve their goals again and again.
“Give us civil partnerships and we will not touch your marriage”. After a few years, you are the Ku Klux Klan if you deny to every sort of inverted people their parody of a marriage.
Same with divorce. Difficult at first, then easier, then on demand.
We should work in the same way, eroding the enemy’s field a step at a time. This is why the “heartbeat bill” is a positive step.
Yes, I know: the unborn child born of rape, or incest, is no less innocent than all the others, and such laws obviously invite a flood of false rape accusations. But the idea here is to chip at abortion from every possible way, to have people talk about it, and to try to have this and other bills sent to the Supreme Court to, hopefully, overturn Roe vs Wade one day.
It would be wrong, I think, to insist on ideologically pure legislation that does not get approved. We should learn from the strategic stance of our enemies. Even if this law actually is a law about… abortion, it is clearly a law that will undermine it.
The same should be done on so-called homo marriages, civil partnerships, and the like.
Demolish the evil one little step at a time; chip away at it; make it part of the conversation; and when the time comes, strike the definitive blow.
I would like to say two words about the controversy raised by a Mr Akin’s answer to the letter, mentioned here many times, inviting the Bishops to declare Pope Francis a heretic and depose him, unless he recants from his many heresies.
The point that Mr Akin makes is that Pope Francis cannot really be called heretical, because the tenets of the faith he so manifestly denies are (merely!) infallible doctrines as opposed to dogmatic truths. AKA Catholic does, as always, an excellent and very charitable work of dissection of this point.
My point is, building on his reflection, a different one.
No other generation of Catholics (at least before V II) would have even dreamed of having such discussions when deciding what the appropriate course of action is. Nor would they have cared of what this or that canonical text says. They weren’t blind. Therefore, they could look at reality when reality was staring them in the face.
When Pope Marcellinus sacrificed on the altar of Roman gods, they did not wonder what canon law states should exactly happen in that exact case. They did not quibble about the fact that Marcellinus had not denied any formal dogma, “merely” contravened a commandment. They did not try to walk around, above, below and through reality trying to find a way allowing them not to call reality for what it is.
They had faith. They acted on it.
I have stated many times here, and repeat today, that I do not care a straw for the technical, canonical law definition of what a heresy is, because this is not what my salvation depends upon. Heretic is who heretic does, and in the common parlance and common sense (and in reality, which is so much broader than the quibbles of theologians) Francis is a heretic, because he goes head on against the truths of the Church.
On this, I think we all agree, Mr Akin included. It follows that the letter to the Bishops makes perfect sense, because it is a perfectly realistic reaction to a reality plainly in front of us.
The absurdity of the legalistic denial that Francis a heretic is easily demonstrated. Let us imagine that Francis would promulgate a modification of the canonical rules on heresy, stating that a Pope can only be proclaimed a formal heretic if he solemnly proclaims his heresy dressed in a Muslim garb, on a Friday, from the top of a Minaret, at least 100 feet high. Let us, further, imagine that Francis would proclaim that Muslims and Christians worship the same God, and he did so solemnly, dressed in a Muslim garb, from a Minaret, 90 feet high. Would then Mr Akin, and all the other FrancisQuibblers, say that Francis is, therefore, not a heretic according to this or any other definition?
Reality comes first. A heretical Pope is staring you in the face, with a middle finger raised against you. If you don’t see this you are part of the problem.
The first duty of the bishops is towards Christ and His Church. Even if the instruments of canon law did not allow (which AKA Catholic shows not to be the case) to act in case of manifest heresy, the obligation to act would exist anyway. The Church has always acted according to the principle that where the legal instruments at the disposal of the clergy are not sufficient to do what is necessary to do for the good of the Church, ecclesia supplet, as we have seen in the case of the SSPX or, more to the point, in the case of Marcellinus.
That such discussions take place in the first place is a grave indication of the degradation of the sensus catholicus all over the West.
We will be remembered as the people who allowed a clearly heretical Pope to be manifestly heretic day in and day out, for years, whilst discussing his intentions, his translators, his moods, the atmospheric conditions inside aeroplanes, the cultural differences with Argentina, his grasp of English, Italian, Latin, and Spanish, and his digestion.
Open your eyes, for heaven’s sake.
A heretical Pope is staring at you, his face full of hate for us and the Church, with his middle finger raised against you.
This is no time for quibbling.
I write often about the responsibility the faithful bear for the current situation. I think about this, in fact, every time I inflict a V II Mass on myself.
So many people on the Sanctuary, you could make a football team out of them. Uncaring chatting before the beginning of Mass, and the Church treated as if it were the village hall. Children allowed to behave as they please, spending their time with colouring pencils when they do not cry, or scream, or walk about, or talk to their parents, completely oblivious of being in a sacred space, and assisting to a sacred rite. In Summer, flip flops, sandals, and bermudas like there is no tomorrow. I could go on, but I think you all know what I am talking about.
The sense of the sacred has been put in the hearts of men by God Himself. Even the Heathen have it. Any person with a honest approach to his faith should, when attending a modern, typical V II Mass, instinctively know that there is something fundamentally wrong going on. These are people with no desire for the sacred in their life, and no desire to transmit anything of it to their children.
Similarly, the fact that there is a lot missing should be noticed very fast by everyone who ever cared to read the Gospels, and to compare their message with the insipid homilies he hears every week. There, a strong message about right and wrong, sin and obedience, hell and heaven. Here, “the joy of Christ” as the modern kool-aid meant to make you forget everything else.
No, it seems to me that the modern pewsitters are accomplices of their clergy in their unfaithfulness. They are fed rubbish, and want more of it. It is not that they don’t know any better. It is that they sense the obligations and inconvenience this better would create for them and prefer the Kindergarten-cum-village-hall, and the priest avoiding the real issues.
The laity has, globally speaking, no excuses. They are part and parcel of the current problem. Perhaps a tenth has a longing for the old time religion; the other nine tenths want the kindergarten. Their children will think that, once grown up, there is no reason to attend kindergarten, and the attendance will plummet again whilst the circus tries to become more entertaining and more of a kindergarten.
No generation like ours has had the opportunity to inform itself about sound Catholicism. People with a degree or superior education have no excuse for not investigating their religion when they themselves are experts about lawn mowing, souffle baking, or whatever requires them to actually get some specialist knowledge. There is simply no excuse for the perpetuation of an offensive Mass and of a watered-down religion. It is, for the most part, what the pewsitter want.
Were it not so, we would have seen change a long, long time ago.