Meet The Papal Thieves

Father Z has it in English, and Kath.net has the original in German.

In the wake of the October Synod, around 200 copies of the well-known “Remaining in the Truth of Christ” are sent to as many bishop using the Italian postal service. Only two or three reach their addressees, all the others simply disappear.

Whatever you want to say of the Italian postal service: no, it isn’t as bad as that, at all.

Now a journalist, Manfred Ferrari, has information, and makes names: the books have obviously arrived to the Vatican post office, and have been stolen from there to prevent them from being handed to the Bishops.

The journalist makes the name of the person allegedly behind it: Cardinal Baldisseri.

This, my dear reader, is theft, and who has organised this is a thief. Let us see what Cardinal Baldisseri has to say about this, if he deigns to say a word after such a grave episode, and such grave accusations of what must be, even in Argentina (but perhaps not in Bergoglioland?), a very grave offence.

What kind of people these apostles of mercy are! Bullying hypocrites like Father Rosica; vulgar thugs like his Basilian confrere, Father Scott; and now apparently even thieves, not ashamed of stealing en masse from their own bishops!

But then again what do you expect when the Merciful In Chief is a man who brags of stealing a crucifix from the hands of a dead man, and considers such feat absolutely brilliant and worthy of a wink-wink of admiration.

What a walking canalisation these people are. And the brashness, the sheer arrogance of how they go on about their business, safe in the knowledge of the protection of their own disgraceful superiors, is what angers the most.

Whoever did this did not do it to help the line of the five Cardinals (read: Catholicism). Whoever did this must have been high enough to be able to order something like that and enforce obedience. Whoever did this either did it with Francis’ explicit approval, or he did it in the knowledge that upon knowing the facts Francis would have smiled on his “entrepreneurial spirit”.

A bunch of bullies, boors, and thieves. Starting from the very top. This is the Vatican as we write the year of the Lord 2015.

M

 

 

Rosicagate: A Useful Internet Source





I have found on the Internet this very useful reflection on defamation lawsuits. Mind, the language is very explicit.

This article is written by a U.S. Criminal defence attorney, and it is aimed at outlets based in the US. It is, I think, useful for every reader, but it should be of particular interest for bloggers of US based blogs.

By delving into the subject matter you will find interesting consideration about what is “libel”, and for example learn that the “a” word (“you are an a-word”) is, in general, opinion and not actionable. A second interesting takeaway is that a blogger generally does not answer for libellous comments on his combox. A third one is that the libel is seen in the contest of the article, say: the use of the expression “Father Rosica must be on cocaine” is allowed if the context makes clear this is an hyperbole or a way to express surprise, without the intention of letting his readers believe that Father Rosica, in actual fact, sniffs.

Similarly, rhetorical figures like (to make an example): “Father Rosica has already shown his tongue has an uncanny ability to reach the strangest places of people who can can help him to honours and favours” only express in a hyperbolic way the writer’s opinion that Father Rosica is an ecclesiastical ladder climber, ready and willing to host and praise excommunicated priests if he thinks they have friends in high places who can be useful to him.

Please click the link, get over the language, and educate yourself a bit over a matter about to become more frequently discussed in the months leading to the Synod.

There are further links there, that I will follow when time allows.

A prayer for this potty-mouthed but rather useful attorney is, I think, fully in order.

M

 

 

The Good, The Bad, And The Law: A Question For Father Rosica

You will not believe what he can say when he opens that mouth...

 

A Basilian, father Timothy Scott, the spokesman of the order for Canada, tweets “STFU” to a Cardinal. He retracts, but still…

Another Basilian, Father Rosica, threatens to sue a poor Catholic blogger for being Catholic.

This justifies a question for Father Rosica: should Cardinal Burke, then, sue Father Scott?

The question should be posed to him without accepting any deflection: “he did a horrible thing, for which he apologised”, doesn’t wash, because it’s not the answer. By the by, Rosica said he reserves the right to sue even if get apologies from Mr Domet for having reminded him of the Catholic religion, so that doesn’t wash twice.

Let us see the question again:

what does Father Rosica think: would it be right if Cardinal Burke sued Father Scott?

I hope at the next press conference hosted by Father Rosica someone will ask this and several other questions related to the man.

Enough with moneylenders in the temple.

M

 

 

Father Scott Removed As Basilian Spokesman

Dangerous bird…

 

Fr Scott, the man who tweeted the STFU to Cardinal Burke and retracted after abundant protest from Twitter readers, has resigned (or… was resigned) as spokesman of the Basilian Order in Canada.

I do not know how many Basilians there are in Canada, but certainly there are two too many: this one here and, of course, Father Rosica.

We had a positive development in this matter. Let us see what happens in the other one.

Who knows: Father Rosica might decide to come out as a Presbyterian after all.

M

Meet Francis, The Has-Been

Stunt time. It worked for a while.

Stunt time. It worked for a while.

 

Ex Magno Silentio has the bomb, and the Catholic News Service has the evidence: less than 10,000 people wanted to know what Francis has to say, or at least see the former celebrity. And that, on Ash Wednesday. Sad.

The key of what is happening is in the title itself of CNS’s article:

Pope: Liberty, equality can turn selfish, unfair without brotherly love”.

Here you have all the issues in one phrase: secular waffle, stupid slogans, vague appeal to feelings, and no mention of Catholicism.

Not surprising at all. The rubbish you can hear from this man day in and day out can be read from every leftist newspaper all over Europe, and from every liberal outlet the other side of the pond. And after receiving and abetting fags and trannies, he can now only get some headlines with dog-screwers.

This man will soon be an embarrassment even to Fr Rosica. People will deny having ever liked him. “Francis? No! I was saying from the start that there was something wrong with him!”

The hype has gone. The “Francis effect” is in front of our eyes, though it is not what was hoped.

Francis is officially out of fashion.

M

 

 

 

Conversion, Not Inclusion!




It is a well known fact that those preaching “inclusion” are the first ones to exclude those they don’t like. They are pretty numerous nowadays. There is the Canadian Basilian (like Father Rosica: they must learn thuggery in the seminary…) who offends Cardinal Burke most brutally for… being an orthodox Catholic; then we have the already mentioned Father Rosica, whose “mercy” apparently includes attacking poor family fathers for pointing out he has insulted the Holy Father and blasphemed Christ; let us not forget Cardinal Wuerl suddenly putting orthodox Catholics in the same boat as dissenters, and obviously Francis constantly reminding us how very bad unnamed good Catholics can be. All this, in the last couple of weeks or so.

It seems, therefore, to me that “inclusion” is now a favourite buzzword of people who want to kick Catholics out of the church, pretty much as it happened in Arian times. Starting, of course, from the Bishop of Rome himself, to whom stinking of perversion is apparently better than having an ordered life obviously committed to Catholic values.

But let see this word again: inclusion. Is inclusion really a value?

Does a flag include all the others? When you stand up and sing your national anthem, are you “including” everyone else? Does your rooting for a certain team “include” the rooting for their rivals? What about associations, circles, clubs of all kind: why do they exist in the first place?

The truth of the matter is that it is simply not possible to define us as something without automatically excluding all those who are something else. Those who tell you they “love everyone” do not really love anyone, but themselves. Those who say they are “world citizen” do not love their flag, do not love any flag.

To be Catholic is to have a certain set of beliefs. Automatically, this excludes those who do not share these beliefs or actively betray them. There can be no escape from this reality. There can be no “inclusiveness” of this sort, ever. Neither do New York Yankees fans “include” Red Sox fans in their rooting, or Lazio fans include Rom fans, or Chelsea fans Arsenal fans. You are either here or there. You can’t be and not be something. You must make a choice.

This express will of “overcoming differences” (seen very often in Francis, albeit in him it might be evil intent rather than simple stupidity) pretends to forget that pretty much everything is defined exactly by its differences with everything else. You can’t be Christian and Muslim. You can’t be Catholic and Protestant. You can’t be right and wrong.

The Church must never aim at including. The Church must aim at converting. You are different from me, and this is not ok at all! You are different from me, and I want you to renounce to the differences and become like me! You are wrong, and I want you to be right!

None of this can be “inclusive”. The club accepts those who are fit to become members and share the club’s values. It cannot be any differently.

Even the apostles of “inclusion” never dream of “including” Traditionalist in their (hopefully not lewd) embrace. They know very well that there are differences. They practice themselves what they condemn in us. They aren’t more “inclusive” than Chelsea or Yankee fans are of Manchester City and Red Sox fans. They write Tweets to you with “STFU”, not “we welcome and include your inspired and candid approach”. They want to shut you up all right. They might even sue you to keep you out!

No. Inclusion is a fable made to fool the gullible. It is always here or there.

We are here. Francis and his likes are there. There can be no inclusion.

I am against inclusion. I am one of the least inclusive chaps you’ll ever meet.

I want conversion, not inclusion.

M

 

 

The Mundabor Experience.


Extremely hard, and extremely beautiful. Catholicism.



We live now in an age in which a huge number of Catholics slowly begin to approach their grave. Many of them, who grew up in the Sixties, will go to their grave without ever knowing the old school Catholicism, the era not only of sanity, but of splendour that went to an end in 1958.

There is no doubt that hell is threatening many of these souls, letting Satan anticipate a harvest without precedents in the West in twenty centuries. It is, in fact, another sign of the madness of the times that many of those so endangered think that they will be fine, because they are such nice neighbours and do some “charitable” work without knowing what charity even is. Many others seem to think that people who have never been properly instructed can keep going against the teaching of the Church unpunished because hey, they did not have good priests; which lets one think that if this is true, the best thing to do is to have horrible ones.

No. Either this generation runs the concrete risk of being punished very hard, or all the preceding ones were wrong in caring about salvation – and about orthodoxy, and proper instruction – the way they did.

—–

Some might say that these scattered sheep must now be gathered with gentle, soothing words; with a softly-softly approach that does not cause them to reject the Church altogether; with a gentle reminder that says look, one should think whether our forefathers were perhaps right, and whether the modern thinking has brought the expected results after all.

I disagree.

In my eyes, the softly-softly approach is what has scattered the sheep in the first place, and it is therefore not smart at all to think that more of this will have any other result than to scatter them further. Conversion must be primed. It must be primed by a sort of fuse, a switch, an internal turmoil that suddenly stops the wrong thinking in its path and encourages, or forces, a person to think in a radically different way.

One thinks abortion is unpleasant, but hey, at times you gotta do what you gotta do. He supports abortion laws, and finds opposition to it unrealistic, unenforceable, or “dangerous for the women forced to abort illegally” (I seldom hear the argument of the “poor heroin addicts forced to drug themselves illegally”, by the way). Another thinks the condemnation of fornication is the residue of another time; a third thinks the Church is wrong on “the gays” and should “celebrate diversity” instead. I could go on and on.

Do you think such people, already dulled by years of wrong thinking, are going to be impressed – much less converted – by those inviting them to a kind of “slightly different approach”? No. What they need is a far more brutal experience. Something like, so to speak, the Mundabor experience.

The chap above sees photos of aborted foetuses; Or he hears abortion called murder; or he is told very clearly: you are a fool if you think you are not in grave danger of hell. He reads the brutal facts about Sodoms. He is confronted with serious warnings. Truth looks at him straight in the face.

Most importantly, he realises that all that he reads is nothing new; that it is, in fact, very old; that it is what his forefathers have always believed, what the West is largely founded upon. This new approach cannot be merely suggested. Suggestions rarely lead to 180 degrees change of direction. The new approach – which is the very old one – must be smashed on the face of the reader; with charity and compassion, yes; but smashed on his nose entirely anyway.

This is, I think, what has the best probability of starting, in time, a thinking process. Being knocked out of what is today called the “comfort zone” is, very often, a necessary condition for a real change of thinking. Let people be angry at first. Immediate conversions are extremely rare. But push down his throat a seed that will never be forgotten; that will stay there for years, abiding its time; and will perhaps start to germinate when, perhaps many years later, a traumatic event occurs: a bereavement, or loss of health, or of financial security. Something which leads one to look for a new basis of his existence. When the time comes, the seed will be there.

The preachers of old, who thundered about hell like there is no tomorrow, knew that people would – in most cases – not go home and start a new life. What they knew is that the shock would be remembered, and kept in storage until, with God’s grace, the time when it would be allowed to bear fruit.

This is why the Church has continued to lose Western churchgoers under Benedict. Benedict was no earthquake. He wasn’t the “old religion”. He did not move anyone to assist to Traditional Latin Papal Mass in awe – which he never celebrated – and he therefore did not move people to suddenly, brutally come in contact with a completely different reality: with the old, and therefore completely new to them, ball game.

Those who succeed are those who go all out. Padre Pio slapped people. Joan of Arc inflamed them. Savonarola – with all his excesses – still made them wish to be more like Christ. You can’t set people’s hearts in flames without a flamethrower. They will not experience a deep change in their outlook merely because of you politely suggesting they do so.

I will never forget my relief – confused non-practicing Catholic as I then was; with so much rubbish in my head I want to cry if I only think about it – at knowing, from Internet sites first clicked in the now distant 2005, that “the old religion” still existed! That there were, in fact, people around – laymen, people like you and I – talking like my Grandmas did, and like I had never heard one priest, not one, in my entire life talking!

I had been encouraged for so many years to downplay the Truth, from the very people who should have taught it to me, that it was like discovering an old food you told out of market has never being discontinued. It was people like you and me, going on the Internet and saying “stop being bamboozled by half words and half wishes! This.Is.The.Truth! And yes, I cannot deny that it was also my fault that I was lapsed. But I was never encouraged not to lapse, in a time when priests did not even care to tell you you must go to Mass.

I do not say to you that my change was immediate. The discovery set up a process that led to that pleasant thought – there is still, out there, that old religion! – being thought more and more often, and become in time a desire to know more of it; and, in time, a need to be nourished by it; and with, it the need to be again near it, in church, as it used to be as a child. It was some time before I even found the courage to go to General Confession, and many a time I attended Mass without Communion before that. I was also lucky, that the church was the Brompton Oratory. What a treasure a properly Catholic church is!

But you see: many times even a gradual process starts with some big discovery: that Catholicism, as it used to be, is still alive and kicking among the common people.

There is no way to sweeten this pill, unless it be by saying that membership is open to anyone who takes the club seriously. Truth must said whole, and the truth said whole will make you go “ouch!” before it sets you free.

This is why this blog is so blunt, and why I wish there were many more blunt blogs, particularly in the English speaking world. To awaken people from their one-world torpor, weak slogans and ambiguous words are not enough.

They will likely need a Mundabor experience.

M

 

 

 

From Miles Christi: Francis The Destroyer, An Anthology Of The Bergoglian Magisterium

 

 

No; you are not cool...

No; you are not cool…

 

Via Call me Jorge, I republish this wonderful work from Miles Christi,

Francis The Destroyer, An Anthology Of The Bergoglian Magisterium

This beautiful work is not a collection of comments or articles, but it has countless quotes from the man himself, all with references and Internet links. The document goes on for twelve pages. How much work went into it I do not even want to think. It is updated to 2 December 2014; which means, in two words, pre-Rabbitgate time.

In order to properly understand TMAHICH and his mentality I quote another pearl from this man, also mentioned by Call me Jorge:

It is not to be believed that every even partial attempt at collecting the immense amount of rubbish disseminated by this man day in and day out should take such an amount of work. This man would provide Romano Amerio with enough material for another Iota Unum every three months.
Truly, those who still keep believing in any kind of innocence or naivete of this man have nowhere to hide.
And no: the heretical and perverted statements of the man are most certainly not Magisterium. But yes, they are most certainly what he thinks.
Mundabor

Suspicious Christianity

Originally posted on Mundabor's Blog:

betende_haende_hi

 








This video is another example of all the wrong things going on in Francis’ mind.

Can you imagine a Pope of the past severing the hands of a child joint in prayer! It is disturbing to even think of a father doing this to his son, and no child with some sense of religion would do the same to another child. To Francis, this is worth doing before the cameras.

Disturbing.

Look at the video attentively. The child has his hands joint in prayer. Francis talks to him and seems to ask him whether his hands are incollate, which means “glued together”. The child insists on keeping his hands joint. At this point Francis proceeds to severe by applying a certain amount of gentle but unmistakable force. It seems clear to me the child still does not want to disjoint his hands, and it is only the force…

View original 592 more words

The Strategic-“Penitential” Retreat

Ariccia and its bridge. You can see the protections added to avoid suicides.

Ariccia and its bridge. You can see the protections added to avoid suicides.

 

You will ask why no nonsense from Francis was published today.

The answer is that it appears the man has gone in mini-retreat in Ariccia, a nice place outside Rome (note here: not Castengandolfo; that’s too much “Renaissance Prince”), with some of his bravi.

This one being a Jesuit, it is sold as a “penitential retreat”. Which, seen that we aren’t stupid, means that it is a strategic retreat to discuss in peace and without unwanted ears with his fedelissimi about what to do in the months to come.

 

 

I am often a tad too optimist, but I smell the pungent atmosphere of the film “The Downfall” here. Please consider that for one Cardinal Sarah who shoots with the cannon in all openness, there will be many who let their more discreet, but no less clear message come to the ear of the Unholy Father: you are playing with fire, and you won’t get away with it.

What to do, then? Continue with the “offensive of mercy” and hope both the bishops and the laity decide it’s the convenient thing to do, therefore they will support Francis? Or elaborate an elegant exit plan, by which the social issues and bla bla are slowly allowed to completely take the place of the Communion For Adulterers row?

We shall see.

Ariccia is very famous for two things: the porchetta and the bridge. The first is a traditional pork roast, of which the place is the undisputed capital. The second is a very tall, actually beautiful bridge, once notorious (and still known) for the suicides, and aptly called by the people “ponte dei suicidi”.

porchetta ariccia

I do not doubt Francis will sample with gusto from the first. As to the second, no, I do not wish that to anyone. Not even to Father Rosica, who might well be present at the retreat to explain to the Holy father how his lawsuit against poor Mr Domet will be a wonderful example of fight against “careerism, arrogance, hypocrisy, corruption and being too judgmental instead of merciful”.

The only thing I know, is that none of the present will get out of it one ounce more Catholic.

M

WordPress: The Multiplication of The “Followers” Explained

Click to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,496 other followers

This appears on my blog as I write this. It truly suggests the idea that 2496 people are following my WordPress blog.

Some time ago, the number of those who “follow” me multiplied from around 180 to around 1600, or the like, can’t remember the figures now. I thought it was a mistake or a technical glitch. It made me feel bad, because it sounded like bragging of a following that is just not there.

The new “statistics” page of WordPress allowed to shed light on the matter. It is clear that WordPress lumps together one’s followers on Twitter, Facebook, email and blog itself, if one uses the “publicize” app that allows automatic posting of one’s blog posts on other platforms. At the moment I have 213 readers who follow the blog directly, and 207 who receive email notifications. To this, WordPress happily adds 1707 Twitter and 370 Facebook followers. Now at least the figures make sense.

It’s a fine line between factual numbers and inflated ones. If I tweet fifty times a day with jokes about the Irish and also post my blog post, what are my followers on Twitter really following? My blog? I don’t think so. They merely find the blog posts on my twitter feed, and they can’t (as far as I know) shut them out if they want to read the jokes.

In practice, my tweets and Facebook postings are actually almost exclusively blog posts; therefore, in this case one can say the one who follows me on Twitter or Facebook does it exactly because he wants to read my blog posts; albeit there would be duplications and triplications here which WordPress might simply be ignoring.

Well, I had posted about this before, so I wanted to close this matter. It still seems a tad fishy to me. If “the Catholic religion has 1.1 billion followers” is counted in the same way, we are in deep trouble.

But hey: who am I to judge?

M

 

 

 

Francis And The “New Ways Ministry” Perversion: Pollyanna At Work Again

New Ways Papacy




The latest Pollyanna running around seems to be Andrea Gagliarducci, writing for a publication called Monday Vatican

This man Gagliarducci is admirable in that he has the face of trying, against evidence as big as Mount Everest, to persuade us that Francis is not a heterodox Pope, merely “naive”.

Example? The latest scandal of the homo group allowed to the Papal audience, called “New Way Ministry” or such like nonsense, with a clearly privileged position to boot. The man wants to persuade us that he is unable to see that Francis invited the perverts well knowing that they are perverts, and gave them places showing he would give scandal as much as he can, without too many risks for him; well knowing, too, that they would scream to … hell about their VIP tickets (which they are; near the Vatican authorities and the high prelates), followed by the Pollyanna running to tranquillise the scandalised masses, and persuading them that hey, the group is not called “Fags United”, so how can the Pope know? And they were not admitted to the baciamano, so they are, ahem, officially IPs, but not quite VIPs.

It goes always thus: Francis willingly gives scandal, and the Pollyannas persuade you he never ever wanted to do so; but you see, at times the man can be a bit… naive.

Naive? A Jesuit with 45 years of experience in corridor politics? Seriously, how stupid this Gagliarducci thinks we are?

I am, however, most angry at those who swallow this rubbish as if it was ambrosia, though. It truly is time to open one's eyes.

Enough with the Pollyanning. Let's start with the condemning. The promotion of the homosexual agenda tirelessly executed by Pope Francis cannot be met with stupid excuses. It must be met with explicit, vocal condemnation.

M

 

March For Life: Oh, The Embarrassment!

 

This is the 2013 one.

This is the 2013 one.

 

Watch here a video I found on my newly re-found Facebook page. I had seen footage of the latest march in Washington, but some parts of this throw, I think, an entirely different light on the entire matter.

Please also note the banners with the Blessed Virgin.

Imagine the embarrassment of the mainstream media at this footage. Huge crowds, Blessed Virgin banners, lots of families with young children. Tell the world of such a massive event? No! No! No!

Every damn “gay” parade would obviously get coverage, but not this, not this!

Heck, this is an embarrassment for the Bishop of Rome himself! All these people obsessed with abortion! Why did they not adopt an illegal immigrant instead?

Still: this is very, very encouraging. The more so, because it happens notwithstanding the neglect of the media and against the current “climate” in the Vatican, where even perverts are welcome.

And those banners of the Blessed Virgin, in Washington, in the middle of a very big march, they truly made my day.

M

Reblog: Abortion Procedure In Images (Alert! Graphic Images!)

Abortion Procedure

Happy “I Wasn’t Aborted”-Day, Wendy Davis!

Originally posted on Mundabor's Blog:

View original

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,507 other followers

%d bloggers like this: