An article on the generally good (for what I can read) Crisis magazine states some rather preposterous things, like the rhetorical question whether we should have asked St Thomas Aquinas to exercise more. Once again, the Western society is so secularised that it does not even get how much it has lost the sense of faith.
St Thomas Aquinas was a great saint, and a man of extremely strong will (the episode of him being locked in a room in the family’s castle, and the other famous episode with the prostitute introduced therein to persuade him to abandon his plans to become a priest, are abundant demonstrations of it). The man wasn’t your run-of-the-mill saint, who might be heroic in fighting temptations but is often overcome by it. All we know of him tells us this was a ferociously disciplined man, and a man of both overflowing holiness and overflowing intelligence. It is simply preposterous to think that he would not have his appetite for food, or any other of his appetites, under control. Whilst the man was certainly big (as abundantly reported, in very colourful words, by one who was demonstrably very fat, G.K. Chesterton, and (cough…) very probably never met the man in person), it is plain dumb to think he would sit in front of just another real (not dumb) ox and would be unable to restrain his food intake. I am not informed about the daily diet of the man, but elementary sensus catholicus tells me this: if the man had seen a serious problem in his eating habits you can bet your last shirt he would have starved himself to Obama levels all right. Those ones weren’t the times, and that one wasn’t the man, to take the sin of gluttony lightly. In the man’s case, I can’t avoid thinking he considered his less than attractive physical appearance a blessing in disguise, a lesson in humility, and in general a help to a saintly life. Even the tale of the “ox” might have been vastly exaggerated, as in the middle of thin people you become an “ox” much more rapidly than among the “minorities” in, say, 2017’s London (ask me how I know).
Alas, modern times are stupid. People don’t understand anymore than once upon a time, people behaved (and believed) in a far more intelligent manner than today; that they had a great fear of the Lord and a very keen sense of sin; and that they might have perceived as very sinful what many later saw as venial sin or not a sin at all.
There, we already have out of the way the first platitude of the day: Saints weren’t gluttons, period. If they were big, of even fat for ancient standards (certainly much different from the disgusting accumulation of big fat waves of people unable or almost unable to walk in their Thirties or even Twenties we see today), it was because the Lord in His wisdom had decreed so, but heroic virtue can’t live together with stuffing one’s pie hole to the point of disgusting obesity.
He who tells you otherwise is destroying in front of you the concept of heroic virtue, trying to persuade you that you might be a saint in the making, or trying to make you believe sinners who actually kept sinning all their lives went straight to heaven.
Famously, Padre Pio ate almost nothing, and it was clear his rounded figure was a straight demonstration for all living around him that he was sustained by God. But Padre Pio wasn’t obese in any of the sense commonly used today. He was a well-rounded man, like a Pius IX or a JP II; and this as he was aging, again *almost without even eating*. There was, most certainly, no hint of gluttony in him, as there could be no succumbing to a deadly sin if there is to be heroic virtue.
Which leads us to the crux of the matter: gluttony.
Saint Thomas Aquinas, and many sensible people of his and of all ages, would not eat too much simply because of the sinfulness of the habit. A concept, this (the sin of gluttony), that has all but disappeared in an age which wants to justify and “scientifically” explain everything, from sexual perversion to evil tendencies to morbid obesity.
I grew up in Italy, in a time when the concept of gluttony was alive and kicking. I have seen people berated, humiliated in front of everyone because of their gluttony. I have seen ridicule, mockery and outright condemnation surround them, from children and adult alike, and I am talking of people who in today’s US would not even attract attention. I have not seen many people who were fat for half-moderate US standards, and I have seen none (zero, zilch, nada, nothing. Not.A.Single.One.) that were fat in the way millions of US and UK teenagers and young adults are fat today.
Now, sensible societies always had a sensible approach to the matter. Older people and some ugly women were allowed to verge on the fat. Provided they remained able to conduct their daily life, walk, work, go up stairs, play with their children, people were not considered gluttons. Wise men like Cicero are often portrayed as portly. Saintly men like Pius IX certainly were. Omo de Panza (man of belly) meant, in Catholic Sicily, the man’s man, the manly man. But every sensible person must see the difference between the famous actor Aldo Fabrizi in his old-ish age (pictured above; pretty much as fat as it went in those years) and people forced to go around in a wheelchair in their thirties, or who are about to massacre their knees in their twenties, because they just can’t stop eating. There has always been a distinction between a natural roundness, particularly with age, and disordered obesity, particularly at a young age. Everyone could pick the difference. Everyone understood the difference between what is reasonable and what isn’t. Everyone felt free to condemn the latter.
Don’t tell me it was “cruel”. I won’t have any of that sensitive faggot shit. It worked. Therefore it was salutary, not cruel. Now we have people dying in what should have been their prime, and after having attracted on themselves all kind of disease and discomfort for many years; but we are too stupid – or too sensitive in that faggoty way mentioned above – to tell them to **eat the Obama less and exercise the Obama more**, and in case (money allowing; no, not necessary) invest in a dietologist that might make things even better, or faster, or smarter for them. Much less we tell them gluttony is a sin. No: nowadays people with $1,000 smartphones die of junk food, gluttony and utter stupidity, but woe to the one who tells them some straight facts about life.
Let their stupidity kill them instead. Don’t you know it’s the sensitive thing to do?
No sense of sin. No common sense. No desire to improve the lot of other people if it makes us, or them, feel “uncomfortable”. It’s no surprise people seriously ask (and be it in a rhetorical way) whether a great saint should have been asked to eat less and exercise more.
We need to go back to the basics. We need to understand that 1) a strong religious feeling and 2) strong societal condemnation are extremely effective weapon in the “war on fat”, an expression unknown in those Countries who had 1) and 2).
As St Thomas Aquinas very well knew, Gluttony is a deadly sin.
That’s all you need to know.
The SSPX-Vatican agreement seems now (not for the first time, actually; and we know how it ended before) very near.
However, this time the situation is different, in that the Church is led by such a demonic, heretical, and bullying individual that some question (among them professor Roberto de Mattei) whether such an agreement is really the best way to go in the current situation.
I must say I am with New Catholic on this, and think that what is good in itself should be regarded as good irrespective of the circumstances in which this good takes place.
However, I have a number of caveats, which are the same I have expressed several times on this blog. They are as follows:
a) The agreement should be made from a position of complete mistrust, and actually utter contempt, for the Evil Clown.
b) Therefore, it should be structured in such a way that the assets and legal position of the SSPX as an institution are completely insulated from the paws of the ‘umble ‘eretic, Pope Uriah.
c) It should be (but of this I have no doubt) accompanied by the strongest desire to keep following the truth no matter what the Evil Clown says, or orders, or spits about. Finally,
d) it should be (but of this I have no doubt, either) accompanied by the firm resolution to be just as critical of FrancisChurch after the agreement as before.
The way I see it is this: you don’t refuse something good for Catholicism merely because it comes from a man who is bad for Catholicism. However, this clearly assumes that the agreement is such that the bad guy cannot hurt the good guys.
The agreement allows the SSPX to expand like a cancer in Francischurch’s body. This, my friends, is jolly good.
What advantages Francis has in inviting this cancer is in my eyes not difficult to fathom. I see a maximum of three of them.
a) Firstly and most importantly, credentials of “tolerance”, which will allow him to push his heretical agenda even further;
b) perhaps, the suppression of Summorum Pontificum and of the FSSP and other traditionalist bodies as he would claim there is, now, a legitimate outlet for Traditional concerns;
c) also possibly, the attempt to bully the SSPX into submission like he has just done with the girls at the Cowards of Malta.
I see a) as the first motivator and the only realistic aim for Francis. I suspect the agreement with the SSPX would be followed by a “mercy offensive” that would see Kasperism more or less officially embraced. However, not the SSPX would have to answer for this, but Francis. Francis can attempt any and every heresy every day, and it is not realistic to demand from the SSPX that they should reject a historic victory out of a misplaced sense of responsibility for the evil actions of other people.
The b) scenario is, ultimately, possible with or without agreement, any day. Ask the FFI. But also here, I do not think the SSPX should have a set of genitals for themselves, another one for the FSSP, a third one for the institute Of Christ The King Sovereign Priest and other ones for the Papa Stronsay priests, etc. If these institutions are ordered to disband, it is their damn duty to refuse and go the way the SSPX did in the Seventies; protecting their assets as they can, but their integrity first. Once again, you can’t avoid a good outcome out of fear that cowards will accept to be bullied. Not even sovereignty was enough to allow the Cowards of Malta to resist, and this was a protection around ten orders of magnitude bigger than any SSPX “rebellion”. Cowards will be cowards. It is not the job of the brave to be held hostage by their cowardice.
The c) is, in my eyes, completely unrealistic. I doubt there are people outside the SSPX who distrust not only Francis, but the entire V II Church more than they do. They breath it, eat it, drink it every day. A priest who accepted to be suspended a divinis the day of his consecration isn’t likely (bar something very short of demonic possession or total loss of faith) to accept to be sodomised “in obedience” by the very people against whose heresies he vowed to fight the good fight for his entire life.
Again, the SSPX are no Cowards of Malta. This is Sparta.
Heretics will be heretics. Francis will be evil, very probably, for as long as he breathes. Whatever evil deed he wants to do, he has abundantly showed he will do not only out of calculation but also out of a whim, out of spite, out of long held grudges, or out of pure arrogance, and there is no way we can rely on him to behave rationally.
He has his own motives in pursuing this reconciliation. We have ours. If this reconciliation is made the proper way (see above) I see no reason to refuse it.
By weary of Greeks bearing gifts. Look attentively into the horse. Then make of the horse a war machine against the Greeks.
We shall see who is smarter, who is Catholic, and who has the Lord on his side.
It has been reported that on the fateful election night, Hitlery Clinton lost it to such an extent that a) she had to by physically restrained when she attacked John Podesta, b) she crashed an extremely expensive bottle of champagne against a TV megascreen and c) she then started to sob ceaselessly until the following morning.
Not quite the same, but rather similar must have been the reaction of the Evil Clown on being informed, not many days ago, that the centre of Rome had been populated with around 200 posters openly mocking his clown pontificate.
How do I know this? Very simple: from Sancta Martha they informed us the Pope didn’t make a big deal out of the incident.
I had to smile.
This is a man whose rancor and pettiness shows up every time he opens that heretical mouth of his. A man who never misses an occasion to insult everyone who disagree with him. A man who remembers supposed slights many years later (it has widely speculated that his enmity with the FFI has its roots in confrontations he had with them when he was bishop in Buenos Aires).
Therefore, allow me to smile at the idea of the “serene Pope” upon knowing about the posters. He must have fumed like a chimney stack. I am inclined to think he is still doing it. I doubt he crashed any bottle of expensive bubbly (too much of a peasant for it, anyway), but I would bet my pint he must have behaved in a frightful way, not dissimilar from Hillary’s in that fateful night.
Smoke away, Evil Clown.
Every faithful Catholic must hate you, and hope that the Lord free us of your disgraceful presence soon.
Disclosure: I don’t care for American Football.
It seems to me a sparse sequence of very short plays, followed by interminable babbling, with a lot of interruptions in the middle. Then you get more babbling, and some more babbling, before you get more appeals of the decisions of the referees. And they never stop talking. They never ever stop! It drives me mad! It’s the greatest mystery to me how there could be people who prefer this endless stream of interruptions to baseball or (as you call it) soccer.
“Oh, but those two and a quarter second are very intense, Mundabor!”. Yeah, right.
[Add there all the reasons why I am wrong]
[No, I still haven’t changed my mind]
The Superbowl Number 51 (Latin: LI; but you know that) is upon us (actually: you), and I am perfectly willing to ask you to consider boycotting it, or as much of it as you can (namely: the advs and the entire intermission including Lady Whore).
The matter is not whether Lady Whore will stage some kind of obscenity, protest, or both. The matter is that the NFL has abandoned every pretense of political neutrality by ramming their own political agenda down the throats of people who, perfectly rightly, would want to keep politics out of it when they watch the interminable blabbing and endless stream of interruptions. You know all the single events, so I won’t get into the details. My aim is to get you to become angry enough to say: “stuff it, I will go for a walk/watch a movie/ do something else instead”.
If all fails and you can’t stay away from the endless babbling, I implore you to get a half hour break and cut all the part of the big intermission.
All of it. Cut the head of the hydra. Say “no” to every and any product that would like to enter your home before and in the wake of Lady Whore. They have picked the wrong product to place their ads. Then say to everyone in your circle of acquaintance that you are fed up with this (actually, do it now!), and have therefore given the thing a very wide berth.
You might say that your refusing to watch has no influence unless you are one of the Nielsen-surveyed viewers, but I would disagree. Perceptions are shaped by the bigger reality around us just as much as by the official surveys. As the Superbowl becomes less and less popular and more and more controversial, this will be “picked up” by sponsors and advertisers until the NFL feels it where it hurts: the wallet.
Even if you are a fan of the endless blabbering and countless interruptions, challenges, and referee consultations, please consider that unless the NFL’s politically correct drive is stopped you might see all the rubbish rapidly going down the food chain: college football very soon, then the local or regional series. The point will come when your son won’t be able to watch a game of his high school without some kind of rubbish protest going on.
I suggest you fight for sanity now, and walk the dog instead.
Every Roman (and most Italians) knows him, “Pasquino”, the fictional “Pope critic” (actually every anonymous poster of criticism) in the Piazza Pasquino, just outside Piazza Navona. Every Roman (and most Italians) is also familiar with the “Pasquinate”, which you might call “Pasquinades”: short, funny, rhymed statements written in Roman dialect, affixed on the basis of the statue by strictly anonymous amateur funny Roman dialect poets.
Romans now woke up to a different, modern-times Pasquinata.
However, this time the “Pasquinata” was not affixed merely on the statue; rather, several dozen posters have been (illegally; another Roman tradition…) affixed in strategic point in the center of Rome. Enough, actually, for the important press agency ADN Kronos to report the news.
Not only is the “Pasquinata” funny. It shows once again that opposition to the Evil Clown will continue unabated, and will grow more fierce as Francis keeps ravaging the Church.
Poor Francis! he wanted to be remembered from history as the Great Innovator, but he must now discover that more and more people are ruining the party.
He will be remembered as the picture in the poster instead: a boorish, arrogant, grumpy old commie hating the Church and everything it represents.
Well done, “Pasquino”!
May you find new inspiration, again and again, for as long as Francis – and, it is to be feared, his successors – play fast and loose with the teaching of the Church.
Barely believable, involuntarily comic interview given by Cardinal Mueller, and reported by One Peter Five.
It is as if the entire exercise took place in a parallel universe, in which those parts of reality we don’t like can simply be excluded at leisure and no one has to give any explanation for it.
Cardinal Mueller’s parallel universe is made this way: Pope Francis is orthodox, but for some strange reason we can’t fathom some bishops insists in interpreting him in the wrong way.
This is like the mother of the mass murderer who, as her son is clearly an angel, pretends to not understand the reason for all the police cars and the sirens outside.
Cardinal Mueller does earn a limited amount of brownie points because he reaffirms Catholic teaching in fairly clear words. But honestly, I don’t think he deserves more than a half chocolate cookie, considering that as the head of the CDF his jobs description includes correcting heresy when officially proclaimed, not denying that heresy has been proclaimed and then proceeding to criticise those who follow exactly the heresy that has been officially proclaimed. It makes me smile to think that this one here is supposed to be the heir to the Inquisitors. I can picture them looking at him from heaven, and shaking their heads.
Now, we know Francis is a ruthless scoundrel, and Cardinal Mueller would get his marching order very fast if he dared to be a full-time Catholic rather than go on mini-break every time Francis is involved in the discussion. Still, the man is deluded if he thinks he can go on with this kind of somersault for very long.
It is in the logic of heresy – and very much so in the bullying nature of Francis – that error be advanced one step at a time. At some point, Cardinal Mueller will be required to either endorse the heresy of Amoris Laetitia in the terms dictated to him by Francis, or go. Francis will not allow for very long to be contradicted by his own “orthodoxy enforcer” in an indirect way. It will be Francis way, or the highway.
This is what every bully does: he bullies only those he feels strong enough to comfortably intimidate and overcome, and targets his victims one at a time. Francis isn’t following any cunning plan. He is merely being his bullying self.
Francis was initially afraid of his bishops and backpedalled at the time of the first Synod. Then he saw he could get bolder, and proceeded to proclaim Amoris Laetitia. Then he started to whisper to Argentinian bishops that the heretical reading of it is the only possible one. Then he started encouraging bishops (Malta, Germany) to openly proclaim heresy as the new standard of orthodoxy. Only an idiot can think that this evil clown will stop there, and that he will not at some point – when he feels he is strong enough for it – demand that heresy be proclaimed and enforced centrally, from the CDF itself.
Cardinal Mueller has produced himself in a triple somersault, and we would be tempted to appreciate the skill if the exercise weren’t almost entirely useless. He is doing nothing else than proclaiming his own blindness in front of blatant papal heresy, even as he indicates to the Evil Clown who the candidate for the next phase of bullying and demolition is: himself.
We live in an age of cowardice, opportunism, and careerism only mildly mitigated by vestiges of fear of the Lord, or perhaps by fear of what would happen if Francis were to suddenly kick the bucket (it is allowed to daydream) and a halfway Catholic pope were to be elected in his stead; but this careerism is ultimately useless.
Triple somersaults will not work. Cardinal Mueller’s blindness is at the same time the reason why his words will remain heedless and more and more bishops will conveniently side with heresy, and the reason why he will land in Francis’ sights at some point. It would be better for him to choose the Church and his own salvation instead.
As it is now, his very willed blindness still makes of him merely the useful idiot of the enemies of the Church.
I have read many a beautiful article from “Sundance” at the Conservative Treehouse (and I will always be grateful to him for the most intelligent guide and preparation to the November election I could find anywhere). But this here must be the best of them all. I invite you to not only read this passionate article in its entirety, but to make of this site a favourite of yours.
In days like this (after the nomination of Judge Gorsuch has been announced) I think with particular terror, and a very strong gratitude towards up above, to what would have happened if Hitlery had won.
It is not only that Scalia would have been replaced by some trannie liberal, a catastrophe in itself. It is very likely that Judge Ginsburg would now be resigning, too; preparing the ground for a double whammy of biblical proportions and aliberal domination of the Suprme Court for decades to come (the Astonishingly Ugly Dyke is merely 57!). Nor would a Senate majority polluted by RINOs have helped much, without the strong backing of a fiercely combative conservative President threatening annihilation of the Judases, and of a now victorious sane electorate ready to make every vote in the Senate count.
If Hitlery had won, we would now not be staring at a precipice, but plunging into it.
This is why I will never forget, nor forgive, all those Sanctimonious Judases of the #NeverTrump sort, who were perfectly willing to send the country (and with it, likely the West) to the dogs in order to show us how virtuous they are.
They chose to play Hitlery’s game then, they will be branded as Hitlery’s accomplices now. And no, I don’t care a straw if they are now applauding the candidate they have made everything possible to… make impossible. It is known that victory has many fathers.
Victory has also many bastards; and such they will remain.
I refuse I do not say to accept, but even to acknowledge the approval of these people to all the achievements with which Trump will bless his country in the next eight years. Their job now is to shut up, publicly repent, accept that they are called bastards and traitors (which is what they are, even if repentant), and hope to make for themselves, in many years of militancy, a new virginity.
But please, spare me the approval of oily opportunists ready to run to the help of the winner after they have done everything they could to plunge the country in its gravest crisis ever; condemning a generation of their own fellow citizen, and their very children, to the “fundamental transformation” Obama & Hitlery would have inflicted on them all.
They are no less Judases now than they were then. The only difference is that they have lost, and are now trying to recycle themselves as winners.
Judases, traitors and bastards now, just as in the first day of the #Never Trump hash tag.
We will not forget, and we will not forgive. Never again should it be allowed to this kind of people to betray their own side and hope to get away with it after the election.
Let this be an education for future political battles. It shall never happen again that such Judases think they can say “I told you so” if their side loses, and “we have won” if their side wins.
Traitors deserve to be spit in the face whether you win or lose after their treason.
There is a kind of Catholic Bishop and priest I dislike – and despise – very keenly. They are the “I am with you” fake Catholic priests, who agree with truth in that feeble “don’t get me wrong” way and then proceed to throw so many bones to the other side that you wonder what the heck they have going on in their brain.
The blogger priest ranting at orthodox Catholics at the non-catholic blogging channel is one of those. The bishop who plays with denial of hell is another one.
The latter has now given an interview in which he, once again, shows his true (false) colours. He does not openly condemns the Church on sexual perversion, but then again he does, stating that if any priest does not precede his statement of Catholic faith with feel-good waffle according to his own precious wisdom, then the priest in question is “disordered”.
Notice the double whammy here: he accuses priests in the very same strong terms with which the Church condemns perversion, even as he downplays the very strength of the accusation he makes.
You see, if a priest can be “disordered” in the same way a pervert is, perversion can’t be so bad after all, can it now? But “don’t get him wrong”, the man “agrees with you” in full on what the Church say, right?
There is much more wrong that the man says in the interview, but I don’t have the time. What is clear here is that the man is frantically padding down the stream of FrancisChurch, or I should say that he is frantically licking all the boots he can to advance his career.
The Bishop shouldn’t be worried. His mixture of fake orthodoxy and authentic subversion make of him a perfect candidate for a red hat one day; and he is young, he can wait. The important thing is to never stop exercising that tongue, and reward can’t be too far away.
Obeying all the commandments, all of them…’ Yes, it’s true, but this paralyzes you too, it makes you forget so many graces received, it takes away memory, it takes away hope, because it doesn’t allow you to go forward.
No, this is not “fake news”.
This is the possibly drunken, possibly drugged, but also very possibly possessed Evil Clown, reported verbatim using Vatican Radio as a source.
Seriously, people, I am fed up with this. Normally you shouldn’t question the profession of a Pope’s mother, but this is not a normal Pope, and I can’t avoid wondering how probable it is that the Lord would allow such a scourge to be born out of saintly, or even halfway good parents.
This is becoming so obvious, so embarrassing even for wannabe Catholics, so openly evil, that I don’t think there is an insult this man hasn’t merited.
This man worship sins. He must be so filthy inside that he cannot avoid proclaiming his perverted beliefs. His rambling, drunken rants go here and there without a sure purpose, until they land where the man always has them landing: countless variations of the leitmotiv of how sweet sin is, how useful being sinful is, how being a sinner makes you a better Christian, and all that rubbish he always seems to be revolving around.
Make no mistake, this is a serious hijo de puta. No, I mean a serious one. And it is really the time that we start crying it from every nook and cranny of the blogosphere, lest the simple and the idiots (who are many) may not be deceived by this bastard, or may be deceived only when they have made the conscious decision to do so.
This man should be targeted with foul tomatoes every time he dares to put his filthy mug out in St Peter’s square. He should be the daily object of derision, insult and mockery. He should be taken away from the sight of children. We are not even at Luther level here. We are slowly verging toward open Satanism, as this thinly veiled adoration of sinfulness clearly seems to indicate.
Francis’ words show once again to every thinking Catholic some elementary facts.
The first is that the offence to God caused by Vatican II is so great, that a devastating punishment is now being inflicted on all of us.
The second is that the Catholic feeling is now so dimmed, reduced to such a thin varnish under the omnipresent, all-powerful religion of niceness, that such words from a Pope cause nothing but polite disagreement and soft critical remarks (let me say it once again: this is one figlio di puttana. There. This is Catholicism for you. Extreme times require extreme measures).
The third is that the Lord is doing us, even as he punishes us as we have richly deserved, the great grace of putting us in front of such an obviously evil creature, that everyone who still has a shred of Catholicism in himself can see very clearly, through the white habit, the black soul of this deeply evil man. I think often with great horror what bigger punishment, and bigger danger, a more subtly evil Pope would have been. This idiot here wouldn’t cheat a well-instructed seven years old. This is a great grace.
Always remember: the battle is won already. Our Lady has already crushed Satan’s head. The final victory is ours already now, Francis or no Francis. But this does not mean we are justified in not fighting the battle, however assured the outcome. Join the fight, and spread among your fellow Catholics the news of an unhinged, satanical, utterly evil Pope who must be kept away from the sight of children.
Please, Lord, make him die. Make him die soon. Make him die before the utter devastation he is inflicting to the body of your Church is so bad that it needs decades and decades to be healed. Lead him – even him! – to heaven, allowing him the grace of final repentance, if this is Your will.
But in Your Mercy, please free us from this unhinged, utterly evil, satanical man.
In a stunning show of disinformation, a most certainly homosexual journalist reports that an obviously defrocked former Catholic priest has dug his hole yet several feet deeper by pretending he is “married” to another pervert.
The certainly homosexual author of the article does not care to mention that the Church defrocks perverts like this one. (caution: disgusting pics!). Instead, the entire article treats the matter as if the man were just another presbyterian fudge-packer, whose open show of sexual perversion shows how the times are changing. Only the last line inform the (most certainly leftist, and liberal, and therefore functionally retarded) reader that the faggot “lost his job”, actually more than 30 years ago, as if he had made redundant by the Post office or something of the sort.
I do not know who is worse: this disgraceful disgusting individual clearly fully owned by Satan, or the fake news hack who considers it beyond the pale to spend three words saying what happens to priests found to be perverts and why.
They might repent, the fags wannabe bridegrooms and the fag wannabe journalist.
But I can’t avoid thinking they will find rich company in hell.
Every day that God sends on Earth I am afraid of looking on Canon212 , fearing very much that Francis has made himself heard with another heretical, blasphemous, perverted, communist, or otherwise stupid initiative and/or statement. I am sure millions share my feelings, though only a tiny part of them visits the Catholic blogosphere regularly.
Like many of my readers, I ma of the opinion that whilst the absolute number of Catholics who read Catholic blogs is relatively small, the influence they have is huge.
Let us imagine that you are the usual Catholic; one, that is, with a thin varnish or Catholicism covered by a thick layer of ignorance, with on top of that the cherry of lazy disposition (the usual Catholic is generally Catholic enough to know, or at least sense, that if he were to deepen his knowledge of Catholicism some uncomfortable truths would be unearthed, which now lay comfortably hidden beneath the thick strata of ignorance). As you hear, here and there, about Francis’ “novelties” and “refreshing approach” to all matters Catholic you are curious, or vaguely disturbed, or outright uncomfortable, and go browsing on the Internet to know what is what. That’s where you find… us, the countless bloggers and commenters.
Suddenly you, usual Catholic of the garden variety (thin layer of doctrine buried under thick layer of ignorance) have no doubt anymore about what is what. A Pope despised and considered heretic by faithful, well- educated, well-instructed Catholics is what.
You may, being one of the garden variety, not really deepen the matter (see above: “uncomfortable truths”, of which you have already read enough in one internet seating to last you a long time). However, one thing you know: Francis is as much Catholic as Tony Blair is Labour. Yes, literally and legally a member of the group and (at the one or other time) its head; but certainly one who does not represent the grassroots and, in general, the very group he belongs to. Now, Garden Variety Catholic may dismiss the Labour grassroots without any trouble; but he has enough sensus catholicus to know that when countless faithful Catholics throw stones at the Pope, the face is irretrievably gone.
Francis, a man whose mother’s profession is more and more mysterious to me, senses this very well. Whilst certainly not a genius, he has enough brain to understand that this pesky Catholics are ruining his party. Instead of Johnny going away at the same time as Judy, he sees the Catholic public opinion (the serious one; the people the other listen to in order to decide what is what) has gone away with the faithful bloggers, and the only thing he can do is motivate a record number of Catholics to vote for Trump whilst even the effeminate Europe slowly but surely rejects – and despises – his socialist, globalist, anti-Catholic propaganda.
We are, literally, ruining his party, and even if Monsignor Ricca dances with him (which he might well do) he has no reason to smile; which is why he becomes more and more bitter, obnoxious, boorish, and outright despicable by the month. The dream of the historic papacy is gone. What remains now is a wrecking ball papacy, out of spite, arrogance, boorishness and utter and complete evil.
In the presence of astonishing cowardly bishops it is clear that Francis will not be challenged during his disgraceful papacy. He will go on wreaking havoc inside the Church like a Castro on steroids; but we will, at least, ruin his party, and deny to him credibility and dignity both in life and in history.
And as we are no cowardly “Knights” of Malta, or pussycat bishops, there is absolutely nothing he can do about it.
Gotta love President Trump. (“President Trump”. How sweet the sound!)
He is posed the usual stupid, liberal question by ABC and promptly turns the tables on the interviewer, reminding him and millions of Americans that the MSM do not cover the March for Life, scheduled for today.
This man is unbelievable. Every time you start to wondering why he would do something (for example: be interviewed by ABC, examine Mitt Romney as Secretary of State) he shows soon after that there was a very clever design behind it (expose ABC as biased, expose Mitt Romney as a buffoon who would do anything for personal recognition).
The Washington March for Life is today (the UK is up 20 May). This time, the White House is on the right side. I can barely believe these words as I write them. Trump’s victory was such a tectonic movement, that the aftereffects will be felt for many years now.
Remember the Sanctimonious Judases? Those who said yes to a liberal supreme court for decades, the oppression of the people’s liberties (particularly first and second amendment), the threatening of their own religious freedom, the explosion of debt and illegal immigration, just in order to feel oh so pure themselves? I am almost sorry that these scumbags are going to profit from Trump Presidency, too. But they, that’s the way it goes: a good presidency profits those who have not deserved it, too.
How the times have changed. The United States are rapidly becoming a Country so vastly engaged in ending the insanity of our times, that they will make Francis’ Vatican look like North Korea.
Gone is the Obama presidency. Almost forgotten are the Sanctimonious Judases (don’t worry: I will remind you of them every now and then, so that their memory may live in shame forever). Go will, one day, this satanical papacy.
The times, they are a changin’.
I hope and know that the March for Life will be a great success this year. And this year, people will be made to pay attention, because the great President Trump wil force the nation to do so.
Boy, I wish he were Pope.
In a rather funny turn of even (albeit I must admit everything these people do and say turns out to be funny in a tragic way) the march of the wymyn has been sharply criticised by trannies and assorted freak shows.
We discover things we would have have never imagined at the heart of the feminist movement.
They are too White.
They “exclude” freak shows (yes: they are disgusted themselves!)
They believe absurd things like, for example, that “a vagina is essential to womanhood”. Tranniephobia!!!
I mean: really? Don’t these fat, ugly, white feminist (and their cats) understand that the Trannies are fighting exactly the same “civil right” fight the Suffragettes were fighting 100 and more years ago? Where will it end if the “oppressed” of yesteryear do not show solidarity with the “oppressed” of today?
Come on, fat White feminists! Show us your mettle!
We want to see a colourful collection of trannies and assorted freak shows, in the first very row, at every one of your marches. We want you to organise yourselves according to strictly political correct criteria (White women out! Black trannies in!). We want to see you give the oppressed the lead, instead of patronising them with your White Angry Privilege!
As for myself, I will continue to believe that if the Blessed Virgin did not feel oppressed, so shouldn’t they; that women as a sex have – with the complicity of weak men – been working at the ruination of their own lives for now more than one hundred years; and that the weak men, as a sex, of our generation are the main cause – and at the same time the fitting punishment – for the feminist madness we are living.
As for myself, besides remaining of my opinion, I am glad to be in the company of this man, however politically incorrect he may have been:
“The women’s suffrage movement is only the small edge of the wedge, if we allow women to vote it will mean the loss of social structure and the rise of every liberal cause under the sun. Women are well represented by their fathers, brothers, and husbands.”