The Trump Outrage Competition

I wonder who will win the Trump Outrage Competition.

Will it be the racist Black Supremacist a la Black Lives Matter, who abet civil strife and excuse criminal behaviour to the point of fomenting insurrection?

Will it be the countless Blacks, and all those who pretend to be ashamed to be White, listening to utterly, utterly obscene rap “songs”?

Will it be the millions of wannabe feminists reading books like “Fifty shades of Grey”, and fantasising about a Trump grabbing their… Ryan day in and day out?

Will it be the members of the party who gave the US those wonderful examples of morality: John, Robert and Ted Kennedy?

Will it be the fans of the other wonderful example of spousal loyalty, Martin Luther King?

Or will it be the wife of the serial rapist, who has herself harassed and morally lynched the many victim of her inordinately, violently horny husband not because of spousal loyalty, but because of her unquenchable thirst for power?

The Trump Outrage Competition Participant should explain to us whether they think Kennedy, or MLK, or Bill Clinton, or Robert or Ted Kennedy were fit to be President, or presidential material.

I have seen some show of hypocrisy at my age; but what I have been experiencing in the last few days really has no precedent in rotten hypocrisy.


Faith In The Time Of Cardinal Cupich

As the years go by and the Evil Clown continues his work of destruction, some weak souls may be led to question their own faith and convictions. If this blog has one aim, it is to reinforce the resolve of all those who may be wavering, and to make even stronger those who don't.

This is, for sure, an unprecedented crisis. However, V II was also an unprecedented rebellion. As the events catapult us in a bizarro world of atheist social activists at the top of the Church, and one day not far from today deciding her course and future – at least barring Divine intervention – , it becomes increasingly more clear to me what monstrous rebellion V II was, and how harshly we are being – justly – punished for it.

The chaos of today has not been brought about by a Pope Francis, just out of the blue. It has been brought about by V II.

We are reaping today what we have sown in 50 years of madness. In half a century the dumb, arrogant, blasphemous illusion of a Church going along with the world has presented a bill so steep that we will need who knows how long, perhaps several generations yet, to pay it.

I used to hope that the Lord, in His Mercy, would allow us to be saved from the abyss. But it is increasingly more clear that this will not happen; and, at least for what I can see, perhaps should not happen.

If Francis were to die tomorrow, and were to be replaced by a “safe V II” Pope, what would be the consequence? What would a hypothetical JP III do that would prevent, one day, the election of a Francis II? Nothing, absolutely nothing! We would have more V II rubbish; which, in time, would unavoidably lead to the appointment of a faithless, lewd old man like Francis. A new, “moderate” V II Pope would mean more World Youth Day, more Assisi gatherings, more ecumenism, more pacifism, more search for easy popularity, more Korans thankfully accepted as gift, more pope concerts and mega-masses, more watering down of truth, more of all we have seen from John XXIII until 2013. The slippery slope that begins with a John XXIII must perforce end with a Francis, or worse.

No, I don't think the Lord will save us from the worst. It seems to me that this is not God's plan. It seems to me that the savage arrogance of V II must now be paid in full. It seems to me, in other words, that the absolutely lunatic times the Evil Clown is preparing for us are allowed by God to show us the utter lunacy of the rebellion of V II. Unless we are made to eat all the excrements that Francis and, very probably, his successors will dish us we will never understand the monstrosity of Vatican II in the first place.

A Benedict XVII, a Paul VII, a John XXIV would do nothing different than their predecessors. There were Assisi gatherings under Ratzinger, too; and even if they were less open in their arrogance and provocation, the fundamental stupidity at their root was exactly the same. Francis is V II on steroid. Or better said, John XXIII was the entry drug and Francis is the heavy drug. I am afraid we must brace ourselves for a crack cocaine Pope like Cupich one day. However, coming back to marijuana can't be the solution. Desintoxication is the only solution.

We are being punished for 50 years of rebellion and unbelief. Every Consistory of the Evil Clown should make clearer to us how atrocious a punishment we are getting and, therefore, deserve. Unprecedented rebellion will be paid with unprecedented ravaging of the Church, perhaps until very little of it has remained.

But do not despair: all those now triumphant heretics and perverts can be crushed by Our Lord with a mere thought and, unless they repent, will pay a terrible price for their rebellion. All this could, if God so wills, end tomorrow. However, when this punishment ends it is not for us to establish. Our duty is to stay faithful to the Chuch of our Fathers. We must brace ourselves for much worse times than even these ones, because there is simply no forecasting the extent of this descent into madness.

Every Consistory made by the Evil Clown makes the scale, the sheer enormity of the punishment we have deserved clearer to me. It's as clear as the sun, as undeniably simple as two and two: the severity of the punishment is there to make us realise the severity of the offence, and the punishment will go on and become more and more severe until the consciousness of the gravity of the offence has become sufficiently spread.

Collective punishment and collective atonement for 50 years of rebellion. This is, I think, the lot of our generation.

The realisation of this, and the serene suffering of this well deserved punishment, offers the key to keeping your faith in the time of Cardinal Cupich.



The Besieged Question Their Generals’ Morality

"Wait! Our General isn't Padre Pio! We can't possibly be defended by him!"

“Wait! Our General isn’t Padre Pio! We can’t possibly be defended by him!”


It is August 1683.

Since 14 July, Vienna has been under siege by a massive Ottoman army. The defenders’ only hope is now the relief army commanded by the King of Poland, Donald III Trumpiesky.

Trumpieski isn’t an easy guy. A lover of women and wine, he knows how to grab a tit or two. He is also very much in demand by the, ahem, ladies (who, actually, in these cases, never are) and, being endowed with more testosterone than the average and a certain candor about his shortcomings, he did not make any secret of it.

As the relief army was approaching Vienna and preparing to risk everything , the news reached the besieged that Donald III Trumpiesky had admitted, eleven years before, to trying this and that with (very willing) non-ladies. He might, they said, have grabbed one ass or two unasked. He is said to have spoken about married women on whom he – counting on their availability – made, as they said in Poland in those day, “a move”.

The citizens of Vienna were outraged. “We will not tolerate this”, many of them began to say. “Someone who has said lewd things eleven years ago can certainly not be our general today”, others were saying. “How do they dare to talk about tits, asses and you-know-what among men?” others added. “When have men ever done things like that?”

“We must affirm and celebrate every scullery maid’s ass out there”, said Paulus Quislingus Ryan, who was commanding the Vienna garrison and was already suspected of working for the Ottomans. “I am so embarrassed by King Donald III Trumpiesky”.

The most outraged were those who had been very tepid up to then. It is as if they thought they would be better off surrendering to the Ottomans, but never had the guts to say so openly. Now they started to bark very loud, with all the outrage of Offended Morality. They felt so superior, they were almost dizzy.

They got their way.

Kind Donald III Trumpiesky was asked to retire his army. Vienna was left to its – chosen – destiny.

On 12 September 1683, the army of General Paulus Quislingus Ryanus was utterly defeated. As recently happened in Perchtoldsdorf, the inhabitant of Vienna were savagely slaughtered. The daughter and wives of the Moral Apostles, among whom many of those women who had been so vocal in their accusations to Trumpieski, were raped before the eyes of their husbands and sons, before being killed. Countless were beheaded as the invader Ottoman prepared to march against the very heart of Europe. The history of Europe changed forever.

Paulus Quislingus Ryanus became a consultant for the Ottomans.


Or, perhaps, it did not go that way.

Perhaps the inhabitants of Vienna were smart enough to recognise the danger they were facing, and did not care a straw about the moral fortitude and degree of saintliness of their generals. The general was there, and he was there to try to save their backsides. How many scullery maids he had grabbed in his day was utterly, but also utterly, utterly, utterly darn freaking irrelevant.

They weren’t stupid, the inhabitant of Vienna. They knew they did not have the luxury of debating the moral fortitude of their generals and decide they don’t like the pick.

This is why they won, and saved their backsides, and weren’t raped and beheaded by their enemies.

One wonders how many US citizen, as we write the year 2016, are as smart now as they were then.


The Lepanto Trilogy

The Lepanto Trilogy 

The “Usque Quo” Reblog

The “Usque Quo” Reblog

Eating And Drinking Their Own Damnation

I read around about more and more Dioceses issuing “instructions” about Fornicationis Laetitia which, in so many words, instruct sacrilege.

We see here the way the Evil Clown and his satanical helpers are proceeding: first you open the door for sacrilege in “exceptional” cases, then the exceptions become less and less exceptional, then you end by “a bit of bread can do no harm”.

There is nothing new, or genial, or even intelligent in this. It’s how it’s always done. Abortion and euthanasia were/are also promoted in the same way.

What surprises here is the stunning amount of Reprobates that must be walking on this vale of tears as I write this.

Reprobates are, by definition, those of whom the Lord has decreed, from all eternity, that they will freely choose to reject the graces offered to them. It is already established that they will rot in hell forever. However, it is also already established that they will be the ones meriting their horrible destiny.

The Lord has decreed that there be such. There is nothing you or I can do to change this, though of course it is our duty to collaborate with Grace to help the Elect (and hopefully, ourselves with them) toward salvation. But reprobates will be reprobates.

The apocalyptic events we are living seems to me like a movie the Angels and Saints are watching now, and all humanity will be watching one day; the movie showing how an astonishing number of sinners choose to damn themselves by doing, for reasons of pure love of self, what they jolly well know to be sacrilegious. Yes, these reprobates will choose to lie to themselves by saying that if the Bishop says they are fine (hey, it’s so difficult to be a proper Catholic, you know?) then who are they to judge? But again, they will think in this way exactly because they are Reprobates! I do not think there is one sinner who went to hell without a long list of excuses for his behaviour. However, he jolly well knows that they are excuses, no matter how hard he tries to persuade himself. The route of easy excuses has always been the route to damnation. Francis is nothing new in this, nor his being Pope has any bearing on the blatant promotion of sacrilege in which he is engaging.

Try to watch the movie from this earth, and observe the terrifying scene of so many adulterers marching toward hell together with their priests and bishops; with the cardinals in tow and, leading them all, the Pope. Certainly, the one or the other will repent in time and avoid the abyss; but vast majority of them will, thinking logically, not make it.

This Pope and those Reprobates are the sides of the same coin: Providence has disposed that a disgraceful generation be punished with a disgraceful clergy, the former and the latter helping each other to go to hell.

The amount of evil coming out from the mouth of the very Pope is a pretty good indicator of the scale of Reprobation in our generation. If it is decreed that so many will choose to damn themselves, it is fitting that this damnation be merited by them; and that, therefore, the reprobates be allowed to avail themselves of ample means to choose, with their actions and excuses, to damn themselves in huge numbers. This combination of widespread immorality and easy sacrilege is exactly what will damn many of them; together with countless priests, bishops, Cardinals and, methinks, the Evil Clown himself.

A strong, solidly Catholic clergy would allow many, even in corrupted times, to see the light by the grace of God. It appears this generation will, in great part, not have this grace. Reprobates must be very many, as we hear a Pope saying “she who is now he”.



The Sins Of The Fathers

The older I become, the more I see the truth of the sins of the fathers being visited upon the sons in the world around me.

It isn't an individual law, of course. A great sinner might give birth to a great saint, and nothing is impossible to God's great mercy (the real one). However, we can see this truth working in our society at large, all the time.

The parents divorce out of selfish desires, and their offspring are certainly more likely, as a whole, to grow up scarred, unbalanced, and more likely to divorce themselves. The single mother did not care to have a husband at home before starting a (real) family, and her offspring will grow up without a father role and a father's love, and will be more likely to end up unhappy, unfulfilled, perhaps in jail. Violent, drunken, drug-addicted parents produce a high number of children who, as adults, will show the consequence of the scars with which they grew up.

These might appear extreme cases; but it works in subtler ways, too. The said single mother is, oftentimes, a girl whose mother taught her poppycock about “believing in love”, “following your heart” and such like nonsense instead of the hard realities of life. The non-churchgoing “believer” is, very often, the product of parents who did not “believe” in “forcing” their children to go to Mass (however, they forced them to go to that infinitely less important place, school). The young criminal from a middle class background was, very often, spoiled rotten as a child.

Collectively, as Catholics, we see the same process at work. The unbelieving generation of today is the product of the betrayal of Christ seen since the start of V II. A generation of casual believers could only beget a generation of atheists and heathens. If you taught your daughter that perverts are “born that way”, don't be surprised if your granddaughter has a “wife” and asks you to “affirm” her.

Still, do not think that people learn. They keep making the same mistakes. The sanctimonious idiots who do not want to vote Trump because they are oh so pure are actively contributing to the Orwellian world the liberal cohorts have in store for them and their children; but like the divorcing parents, they put their own selfish feel-good interests before the material and spiritual welfare of their offspring.

Evil wins not only because of evil people, but in great part because of the selfish, hypocritical, childish idiots unable to observe the reality in front of their own nose, and willing to put their own little grievances at the service of their worst enemies. They are like a man arming the criminal who will exterminate them and their entire family, because he hates the sheriff. They set the graces they have (among which the freedom to be Catholic in peace, and the freedom to defend themselves) at naught, because their petty grievances make them feel good and morally superior.

They will bitterly regret their folly when these freedoms are gone.

Or perhaps they will just find another pet peeve, and another way to more surely ruin their children.




Pope Francis The Trannie


In this picture we see one evil, lewd clown surrounded by two perverted females.




It is now clear there is no limit to the level of satanic confusion this lurid, lurid man will promote abusing his white habit. I cannot avoid thinking that construction works are now ongoing in hell, preparing an extra pit for this abominable man. 

From the usual aeroplane nonsense, I picked this for your entertainment: 

Then (the man) got married, he changed his civil identity, got married and wrote me a letter saying that for him it would be a consolation to come with his wife, he who was she, but him! I received them: they were happy…

Stupid, evil Francis chooses to even emphasize the satanic liar of the gender theorists he has criticised only days before. I think the man meant “but [now is] him!”, but the sense does not change: to Francis a formed “she” is now a “he”. In addition, he calls the two perverted females “married”. No, he is not stupid. I mean, he is stupid; but he is not so stupid that he does not understand what confusion his words engender in all those still so slow of understanding that they do not understand how evil he is. 

Evil man. Needs to be exorcised.

The rest of the confused phrase it just as atrocious: hey, the two perverted were “happy”, what do you want more in life? And why is the Catholic priest so evil that he admonishes the sinners?


Please, Lord, free us from this evil, lurid man.   


The One World Religion Of Peace


“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword”.


If you look at the message the Evil Clown has sent to the Roman Jews (and by extension to all the other Jews) in occasion of various festivities of their false religion, this phrase will immediately strike you as non-Catholic: 

“I am particularly glad to convey my warmest wishes to you and the Jewish community of Rome. My sentiment extends also to Jewish communities throughout the world, in the hope that the upcoming festivities may be harbingers of abundant blessings to all. My the Almighty grant peace and the tireless wish to promote it. In His eternal mercy, may He grant hope and serenity in our times and strengthen the cordial bonds of friendship between us”.

Why, exactly, is this phrase non-Catholic? Because it is clear here that Francis does not profess any faith in the Christian God. 

Firstly, he wishes that the festivities “may be harbingers of abundant blessings”. By whom, one asks himself? By Christ? Why did he not say so? Oh, it’s because they do not believe in Him?  You don’t say!? It appears here that some minimum common, ahem, Godnominator is referred to. Some deity vaguely “acceptable” to both religions, in a way, a “one size fits all” deity vaguely intent in distributing blessings on infidels. But you see, this is exactly not Christianity. This is exactly the contrary of what Christianity is supposed to be. 

Secondly, you have this omnipresent, obsessive reference to “peace”. To Francis, peace is like parsley: you can put it everywhere and never make a mistake. More so, to Francis peace is clearly the substance of every religion: religions are there (all of them) to “tirelessly promote” peace. In the measure in which they do it, this attracts “abundant blessings” from the “deity” that is clearly not Christ. To Francis, peace is the be-all and end-all of every religion, the defining moment, that which makes all of them good. To a cretin like Francis, even Islam promotes peace. 

The Evil Clown’s fake religion betrays Christ at every step. He can’t open that lurid mouth of his without insulting Our Lord in some way: directly or indirectly, and through the attack to His doctrine or His sacraments. 

Usque quo, Domine? 






Reblog: Our Lady Of Quito/ Our Lady Of Good Success


Reblog: Our Lady Of Quito/ Our Lady Of Good Success


Satan’s Dykes



You read news like this one and you truly wonder how intense Satan’s activity has become in the once Christian West. Say a prayer for this good Christian couple; and also pray that they may convert to the Only Church if they are not already (I do not think they are). They might still win, though I doubt it. 

However, I do not blame for this exclusively the openly evil people.

I blame all those people (many of them hypocritical, cowardly churchgoers, and people who call themselves “Catholic”) who have said for years that we must not “obsess” about homosexuality, and have produced for them a number of excuses and invitations.

The sins of the fathers shall be visited upon the sons. Many of those fake Catholics will pay the price, in their own children, of the evil they have cowardly allowed.

God shall not be fooled. Not by the evil dykes, and not by their many enablers from all conceivable corners. 



Petty Old Man



Have you read the Evil Clown’s intentions for October?

The first one is: 

“That journalists, in carrying out their work, may always be motivated by respect for truth and a strong sense of ethics”

 Fallen from grace, uh? 

Once the adoration of the Great Wheelchair-Embracing Wonder has passed, Francis finds it fitting to let us know that they are a big peeve of his.

No, really. This is the way he thinks, and this is the way he lets you know he is peeved. If you don’t understand this, it’s probable you have been fooled by him in many other ways already.

Petty old man. 



The Donald Can Still Lose



It is now several days after the first debate, and I see contrasting signals. I will not publish all links, but I think the relevant information will be available with some research.

I agree wholeheartedly with Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich.  The first said (can’t find the link) that Trump “won” because after the debate it was clear that everyone sees him as a legitimate contender, as Presidential material. The second stated that Trump had a long-term win  because whilst the Hillary clan can feel well about her performing as they had hoped, Trump had the better arguments on the issues. 

In the last days I have made the following observations: 

Trump could have destroyed Hillary, and he didn’t. I think in part he was afraid of appearing too aggressive, and been seen as not enough “Presidential material”. However, from what I have seen and read I think hubris played a part: Trump had just neglected to properly make his homework, as one must do if he want to profit of all the occasions given to him, or create them when they are not given to him by a scandalous “moderation”. Can’t imagine the Gipper failing to prepare because he thinks his personality will carry the day anyway.  

As to the polls, it seems to me that, in general, they are less encouraging now that they were before the debate. Whilst I discount most of the polls, even the ones I like most (because I like the methodology and found the results consistently serious and trustworthy) and follow most closely, Rasmussen and LA Times, gives mixed signals: LA Times indicates a consolidation of Trump’s advantage, but Rasmussen indicates the train has stopped, at least for now. 

My impression is that Hillary’s warship was badly taking in water and had a broken helm the morning of the debate, and is now at least in a position to float and manoeuver again. USS Trump got very near, but failed to finish USS Crooked. 

As to “who won”, the question is badly posed. Crooked Hillary is a glib serpent with 30 years’ experience in politicking, Trump is – his mastery of the screen notwithstanding – navigating new waters. Again: as long as Trump is seen as a credible candidate, he wins, because exactly this is what everyone says is the biggest obstacle for him. Every debate and every TV appearance help Trump to become “normality”, and he is well on its way to gather full support form the Republican voters. However, I am amazed at the bad faith of all those pretended professional journalists who think that the Trump camp can steer a sudden, spontaneous, worldwide conspiracy to manipulate all the instant internet polls, and only the two or three thousand picked by them, with a widely overrepresented Democratic component, reflect reality. Still, there’s no ground for rejoicing: Trump isn’t pulling away, which is exactly what he would have done if he had been better prepared – and a tad more assertive – on Monday. 

Another – and last – element I find worrying: I have read an article (can’t remember the link) about the voter registrations. They do not show any dramatic surge in those states with many disaffected, non-voting, old-ish Whites. This indicates, I think, that no Trump landslides are to be expected in states like Pennsylvania or Ohio, though Trump might well take the first and he is doing quite well in the second. As the registration deadlines in th evarious states approach, this is an opportunity that will be lost.

Mind, I am not pessimistic. I still think Trump can win, and win in a landslide. I think that the polls, in general, tend to underrepresent his vote in the same way as they regularly failed to catch his audience during the Primaries. However, it seems to me that Trump is, once again, being his worst enemy out of excessive security and undue cockiness. He must learn the lesson from the first debate fast, because he only has other two occasions, which I think will attract a smaller audience than the big novelty of the first debate.

The man has a huge talent. But Donald Trump keeps being his worst enemy. 







Declaration Of Fidelity To The Church’s Unchangeable Teaching On Marriage And To Her Uninterrupted Discipline.


Declaration Of Fidelity To The Church’s Unchangeable Teaching On Marriage And To Her Uninterrupted Discipline.

Even NYT Writers Start Seeing That Francis Has Failed


Look! Black shoes! This must be good for the Church!


When was last time you heard about the “Francis effect”? Yep, and you now know why: even the secular press knows it did not work. 

The article is, as you would expect by a libtard publication like the NYT – the author works for “First Things”, though; more about this later – entirely centred around secular issues. In line with the forma mentis of your average IYI (“Intellectual Yet Idiot”) reader, The Church is seen like a party, or a product, or a firm: where an “innovator” who seems “in line with the times” steps in and “revitalises” the ailing organisation. And this leader does such wonderful things as living in a luxury hotel, wearing black shoes, shooting selfies, and other such like stupid things very much liked by a stupid age. 

The article, showing the great ignorance of his author in matters of Catholicism, (but we are talking of Libtards here) even absurdly criticises the Pope because 

Francis has also shied away from big changes on doctrinal matters. Instead of explicitly endorsing communion for the divorced and remarried couples, he has quietly urged them on with a wink and a nod. 

(Yes: you can facepalm here. No, really. It’s ok). 

The secular mind sees the secular Pope at work; it sees him trying to make of the Church something similar to the Democratic Party; it sees, also, that he is failing miserably. 

The secular mind cannot understand the Church more than the devil can like holy water. They just do not get that the Church – as an organisation – prospers when she opposes the world, and withers when she cozies up with it. If they knew this simple truth, they would never invent strange and absurd expressions like the “Francis effect” and mean that it would be good for the Church as an organisation.

The Catholic mind understands the folly of all this. But hey, they are “homophobic”, so they don’t count.

As the author points out, very rightly, Francis has failed miserably even in the other – and originally, we were told, the most important – reason for his appointment: the reorganisation of the inefficient, corrupt Vatican apparatus. We knew that already, because we know that South American dictators tend to be extremely stupid wreckers of everything they touch. But it’ s nice to see that some libtard notices that, too.     

However, the obviously Catholicism-free author must have heard, at some point, something about Catholicism at First Things, because he seems to have a very confused idea of how the Church works. Examining the cause of the continuing decomposition of the Church in the US, he writes something that has always been a mainstay of this little effort:

 Francis has built his popularity at the expense of the church he leads.

The cult of man damages the Church of God. Francis, in his vanity and folly, presents himself as the good guy in opposition to the bad guys of the sixty generations before his. It can work for him, for a while, until people understand what a phony the man is. But it will never be any good for the Church. This is now apparent, and the “Francis effect” thingy has gone the way of “reading Francis through Benedict”. 

The author, who is so blind that he sees something positive in Francis “paying his own hotel bill” and “eschewing the red shoes”, still has some ideas left of what Catholicism is: 

Those who wish to see a stronger church may have to wait for a different kind of pope. Instead of trying to soften the church’s teaching, such a man would need to speak of the way hard disciplines can lead to freedom. Confronting a hostile age with the strange claims of Catholic faith may not be popular, but over time it may prove more effective. Even Christ was met with the jeers of the crowd.

So, is this author Catholic after all, and just too servile to the NYT to write like one? I don’t know, and I am not interested to know. What interests me here is that even the entirely secular outlook of this article must see Francis’ dismal failure.

The Church is the enemy of the world. Francis is the friend of the world. Francis is the enemy of the Church.

And he has failed. 

Even Libtards see it now. 


%d bloggers like this: