In the present, very confused situation, I think it is important to put Francis’ papacy in the proper perspective.
An Antipope is – and this is the only meaning the name ever had – a person who claim he is the Pope – and is believed by many – in opposition to one who is generally seen as being the Pope. Basically, an Antipope is someone who has a widely approved claim to the throne of Peter instead of another person generally seen to be the legitimate Pope.
Therefore, for it to be an Antipope there is the need for two men in white, with competing claims: one who is seen as being the legitimate Pope, and claims his right to be Pope; and one who is not seen to be the legitimate Pope, but claims that the first one is not a legitimate Pope and he himself is.
If there were an alternative Conclave in Berlin, and Cardinal Woelki were to be elected “Pope” by this alternative conclave, and were to be seen as the Pope by the clergy of Germany, Austria Switzerland and many others in Catholic gaga land, then Woelki would be seen as an “Antipope”, claiming that not Francis, but he, is the legitimate Pope. Of course, we would call him “Antipope”, but the Austrians and Germans would call him “Pope”, and Francis “usurper” or something like that. Not even in this scenario Francis could be seen as an “Antipope”. Antipope could only be the pretender to the throne, never the man already sitting on it.
Francis can never be an Antipope. There is (barring children playing with toys) no self-styled Pope questioning the legitimacy of Francis to be Pope. Benedict does not question that Francis is the Pope. Gaenswein does not even hint that Francis is not a legitimate Pope. No (sane) Bishop or Cardinal around questions Francis’ role as the legitimate Pope. The SSPX has no doubts as to who is Pope. Even most Sedevacantists say that he is not Pope, but they could never say that he is an Antipope: because they would have to tell us who the legitimate Pope is, and being Sedevacantists they claim that there is no one around.
Francis is the Pope. Unpleasant as the fact is, it is a fact. As they say in the US: deal.
Now, we can create all sorts of fantasy scenarios and conspiracy theories. We can fantasise about Pope Rapunzel. We can create a bespoke fantasy world perfectly suited to our discomfort. But it is just that: fantasy, willed self-deception, and escape from reality.
Francis is Pope. No alternative council and alternative conclave elected a pretender to the throne of Peter. Therefore, there is no Antipope around. Francis is the Pope elected under the normal way, and universally recognised. He could never claim that he (Francis) is not the Pope, and that he (Francis) should be the Pope instead. The only conclusion to that is that Francis is the legitimate Pope, with no competing claim anywhere (among the sane of mind, I mean; the children playing with alternative papal elections aren’t even worthy of the mention).
Now, once we have come to grips with the facts, we must find a way to interpret facts we know in light of the truth we know. This is not difficult. It only requires to stop dreaming, and look at reality instead.
The Holy Ghost has never promised us that the like of Francis would never be Pope. The Pope is elected by the Cardinals. If the Cardinals are stupid, or evil, or faithless, or a mixture of that, it is not unlikely that the Pope will end up reflecting those who elected him. The Cardinal must pray the Holy Ghost for inspiration to elect a good Pope, but there is no guarantee that they will do so, much less that God will force them to do so. Cardinals aren’t remote-controlled toys in God’s hands. Gos respects their own free will. Like everyone of us, they can choose between good and evil and can be more or less pious, more or less inspired in their decisions. God allows evil, and he does so with a providential aim: that out of every evil he allows, good may come out.
God allows evil, and God punishes. Can anyone tell me why the Church as a whole, and we as collective entity, have not deserved Francis? How many have praised all the rubbish of Vatican II for 60 years? Shall we call it, erm, 95% percent? How many call JP II oh so good as a Pope, who allowed Assisi 1986 to happen, nay: to be even thought of? Shall I make you the list of all the ways in which the Church has encouraged heresy and apostasy in the last 60 years? Shall I even begin to tell you all the ways in which the Church has betrayed Her Master in almost all aspects of Catholic doctrine – from the doctrine of war to the doctrine of wealth, from capital punishment to subsidiarity to the social kingship of Christ -? Seriously, there’s no time for that. Buy yourself Iota Unum, and reflect on how much has happened after that and before Francis; and then you will rather wonder how Francis was so long in coming!
The reality is very simple: Francis is Pope, and God is punishing us by giving us exactly the Pope we have deserved. A wise, perfect, all-merciful punishment for our stupidity and arrogance. A punishment so obvious that is astonishes me there are still people who think they are being “duped”, and deprived of a fantasy papacy they think they entitled to. A punishment that allows us to wake up to the reality of serious Catholicism by way of forced, brutal comparison with this obscene clown.
It’s impossible not to see the pattern here. It is as if God would tell us: “You do like heresy, don’t you? Well then, how do you like this? Enjoy the “springtime of the Church” in its full blossoming! Savour the Aggiornamento to the full! Have another serving of ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue!”
It’s so obvious, so evident, so brutally clear, that I do not think anyone is authorised not to see it. And the reason Francis has happened is evident every day even three years after the beginning of his pontificate: silent Bishops, silent Cardinals, fluffy priests all around! An obviously heretical Pope is met by nothing more than “discomfort” by most faithful and most bloggers, so devoted to the golden calf of the saintly Pope that they prefer to betray their religion rather than criticise the heretic! Not only has the Catholic world at large fully deserved Francis, but it keeps deserving him day is and day out as almost daily provocations are met with no more than vague mumbling and effeminate claims of “confusion” from the vast majority of the faithful!
God will free us from this scourge – possibly, in form of successors the likes of him – only when we have been punished enough and – very likely – have reacted to the shock with a work of regeneration, rediscovery of Catholicism, and utter refusal of heresy and blasphemy.
Are we there? No. Expect this circus to go on for a while, then.
Do not take refuge in a fantasy world. Do your bit to improve the real one instead.
As Brexit completely dominates the news here, I thought I would make a couple of Frexit scenarios.
Make no mistake, we'll have Frexit one day. We only don't know when, and what damage will be done in the meantime. However and as they once told us at university: certus an, incertus quando, or “certain if, uncertain when”. I can see the following Frexit scenarios:
First scenario: the Cardinals finally read the job description and start criticising the Pope as a darn Castroite nutter with no faith, no shame, no clue, and no brain. He is peeved and, in an attack of rage, resigns. Probability: extremely low.
Second scenario: in the silence of the Cardinals, the Bishops organise a massive revolt. Generous donors allow a council in some friendly Country (Poland, Hungary). The Pope is deposed as heretic. He is put in front of the choice between resignation and schism, and he chooses resignation because he has always avoided a fight where he wasn't the bully. Probability: makes the first scenario sound likely.
Third scenario: Francis stages an elopement with – as it would turn out – the lurv of his life: Tucho Fagnandez, or Monsignor Ricchione come to mind. The Pope resigns. The world is astonished. The couple is happy. Who are we to judge? Probability: ask Tucho Fagnandez.
Fourth scenario: Francis gets bored of Rome. He is fed up with all those unbearable couple who are, actually, married (“or so they think”, he says to himself), people who actually pray the rosary, clerics who actually believe in God. He decides to go back to the Buenos Aires slums; where the priests stink of sheep and male prostitutes, people aren't married but hey, they have fidelity, and everyone praises him when he says he doubts the existence of God. Probability: barely existent.
Fifth scenario: Francis is caught in a “gay sauna”. His explanation that he wants to lose weight is enthusiastically accepted by the Pollyannas, but fails to persuade everyone else. He chooses to resign. Then announces he will move to Cuba, where Raoul Castro will teach him Catholicism. Probability: honestly, I don't want to know.
Sixt scenario: Francis gets a stroke, and his tongue remains paralysed. No one understands what he says on the aeroplane, so there can be no scandal headlines. Francis is utterly peeved. He resigns and moves back to his Jesuit seminary, where he can smoke dope with the three remaining seminarians and force them to listen to him for hours on end. Probability: let's not put limits to Providence.
Seventh scenario: Francis receives a visit from the Grim Reaper, and his soul is brought to the destination appointed for it from all eternity. He does not need to resign. Probability: very high.
There. I have my Frexit scenarios.
One will be allowed to dream once in a while.
Many a disheartened commenter writes on soft-traditionalist blogs and vents a sense of total disorientation, veering on despair, for what is happening during this satanical Papacy. Everytime I read them, I am persuaded that at the root of this is the lack of proper historical perspective.
Those who are well rooted in History know that the Church has already gone through terrible trials: from the Arian heresy to the Great Schism and from the French Revolution to the Western Schism, the Church has looked on the brink of destruction many times already. Muslim hordes swept through Christian Africa once, and for more than a century they seemed rather unstoppable. The Heresy of Luther torn Western Europe into two, and factually obliterated Catholicism in… Poland! If we think that Francis is an epochal catastrophe, what would St Benedict think, who had to cope with the aftermath of the dissolution of the Roman Empire in Italy?
The historical perspective allows us to see the sad events we are living in their proper context. Granted, never could a Pope make so much damage than today; but never was it so easy, for all those who care for truth, to find it and become extremely adept at it no matter what the Pope says. For the first time in history, an immense number of Catholics is vastly better educated than the Pope, and can spot his lies from one mile away. The same social media which spreads Francis' heresies like wildfire also give witness of an extremely strong reaction to them. Only those who want it will be deceived.
For those well rooted in History, Francis could never be a reason to doubt the Church, Her Indefectibility, Her being protected by the Holy Spirit, Her being Mater et Magistra. Francis may think he is a great innovator, but he will be remembered as nothing more than a particularly smelly fart in the history of the Church. We have to live with the stink. But we know that seen in the historic perspective, this stinky fart will soon dissolve in the air.
There are no excuses for doubting that Our Lord made His Church indefectible. There are no excuses for believing the lies of the Protestants. Get a better historical perspective of our times if it helps you to understand, but never doubt and never instil doubts in others.
No matter for how long Francis keeps farting.
I would like to intervene in one of the last two or three controversies ignited by the Evil Clown (I think we also have the “Luther was right” in the meantime. Satan is strong in this one…) and agree with Pope Dope at least in this, that the Church should apologise to perverts.
She should apologise for the homosexual priests who have perverted the teaching of the Church as they tried (and still try) not only to confuse the faithful, but to find candidates to satisfy their perverted lust.
She should apologise for the weakness of not calling homosexuality a grave depravity nearly as often as she should, and for falling back to sensitive language like “intrinsically disordered”, which does not convey the idea of impending hell nearly as good as “perverted”.
She should apologise for a culture of “niceness” that is the most cruel, most uncharitable approach in the face of souls in danger of hell.
She should apologise for Pope Francis, a godless, entirely secular hater of the Church who does not care for their salvation because he does not even believe in his own (or else is a closet Satanist; at this point, no one would be surprised).
Yes, the Church should apologise to homos. She is allowing them to go to hell (and, unless they repent of their sins of sodomy, to hell they will go, as there is no invincible ignorance of natural law) just in order to look good with the enemies of Christ, even as a lewd buffoon leads, unwittingly or not, Satan's charge.
Mind: everyone who sends himself to hell has no right to be excused because the Church has left him alone. But this does not make the stain on the earthly Church smaller. Actually, it makes it bigger.
The Council of Europe is another of those blasted organisations scrounging an existence out of the stupidity (or ignorance) of the people of Europe.
This useless organisation, costing us half a billion euro a year, has recently severely criticised Poland. Why? But of course, because Poland is pro-life, and might get an improved anti-abortion legislation.
Promptly, the “human right” bitches start barking, and demand that Poland decriminalise abortion, remove conscience protections for doctors and medical personnel, and enact mandatory comprehensive sexuality education.
This already shows us that “human rights” is only the thinnest cover for “abortionist propaganda”. Interestingly enough (and very tellingly) the “criticism” of the “Commission” was partly base don a report from (wait for this) International Planned Parenthood Federation.
Really? Half a billion euro a year of our money for this Planned Parenthood sponsored rubbish?
Now, the Council of Europe profits from this: that he common man on the street thinks they are, in a way, “EU”. They aren’t, but it’s just the other side of an evil coin: the idea that you need European Nazi Nanny to conform all European citizens to the way their better think they should be.
Well, you know what? Poland called Bullobama and reacted very vigorously, and without any ceremony, to the abortionist bitches.
Now that the EU is coming under rigorous scrutiny, and the right of these arrogant scroungers to tell all of us what is right and wrong begins to be questioned, it is a good time to also question the existence of this most useless of useless “European” organisations, the Council of Europe.
Poland doesn’t need any “human right watch”. Europe does not need all these human rights activist bitches. If Planned Parenthood wants to go on doing their satanic work, they should do without the cover of the European Council, and without the money of European taxpayers.
I am fed up with seeing murder and perversion sponsored with taxpayer’s money. I am fed up with busy-bodies telling us what is “torture” and what is “racism”. I am fed up with idiots thinking they can tell us whether we can have a crucifix in our classrooms. Make all of them unemployed, and save the money. Then suggest to the unemployed bitches they get their money from Planned Parenthood and continues their work in Afghanistan, or Saudi Arabia, or any other Muslim Country of their choice.
Time to get rid of these scrounging bitches. All of them.
I have not written a single blog post about Brexit. The main reason is that I had other, more directly Catholic issues to cover; the other reason is that I never thought the Brexit camp could win. Even when, some ten days ago, the polls started to indicate a Leave lead, I immediately thought the “scare” would cause a rebound of “remain” vote intentions in the following days. This punctually happened, to the extent that the financial markets – with the big actors commissioning their own polls, more accurate than your average newspaper will be able to afford – were already putting a lot of money where their polls were.
The surprise was, therefore, big. Nor was it only the weather (dismal in the strongerst “remain Country”, London; acceptable of beautiful in large part ps of “Leave” territory) which helped. The extent of the “Leave” victory makes abundantly clear that weather can be no excuse.
What helped is the resilience, self-confidence and sheer balls of a Country ready to dare what, before today, no other EU Country would have dared to do.
Hats off to the British people. Yesterday, they showed us the stuff out of which Empires are made.
I easily predict that this is a mortal stab wound, from which the EU will never recover. Surely, this evil institution will go on another decade or two, increasingly lacerated by internal strife and the stupidity of its ruling classes, who I'll go on exasperating the common people until even the Germans dare to revolt. But the writing is on the wall.
This day will be remembered in one thousand years. It is the mortal wounding of the most pernicious, subtle, dangerous project of subversion of democracy ever attempted. Not only this vote changes Britain forever. It changes the EU Countries forever.
Mind my words: in the next 10 or 15 years Brexit will prove not only a triumph of national sovereignty against the dictatorship of bureaucrats, but it will also prove such a success for the British economy (particularly if Scotland does us the favour and freaks off already) that will put to shame the undemocratic, anti-Christian, nannying EU elephant.
Yesterday, the Brits have shown that a remainder of those qualities that made their wonderful Empire (self-reliance, tenacity, and sheer courage) still runs through the Country's vein.
They should be proud.
Today it's a new dawn. It truly is the start of a new era. A day that will be remembered in one thousand years.
Hat offs to this nation of proud islanders. They may not fully realise it, but yesterday they have, inter alia, mortally wounded the biggest and most dangerous anti-Christian threat on the European soul.
The “Creative Minority Report” alerts us to this exceptionally bad piece of sheer prostitution, in which we are told that in a Country of 320 million a candidate chooses to hold events where the attendants could be less numerous than the press, in order for this selected, exalted company to see the Real Bitch (compare here) and then go around evangelising the people about the exceptional human qualities of the candidate.
I immediately asked myself how these hacks and whores do not mention the big crowds left out of these intimate events.
Oh wait… that must be because there aren’t any…
Compare, please, with Donald Trump’s full venues, thousands of supporters at a time, big queues, and even a business of t-shirts and Trump accessories following him everywhere.
The scale of immorality is astonishing.
I bet these are the same people who push for “hate laws”.
After Fox News asked the Evil Clown to resign, another brilliant article was published by “The Week”. Title: “Forgive Pope Francis for his sins against reason”.
Oh dear, oh dear…
I remember only two/three years ago, when Francis said pretty much the same stupid things (the Angry Blessed Virgin, the Non-multiplication of the fish and loaves, God who can only slap us on the wrist, the non-Catholic God, proselytism is nonsense… the list is endless….) and he was considered a great communicator. Other considered him, even, an Evil Genius, cunningly subverting the Church in subtle ways.
Only a few bloggers, among which yours truly was perhaps one of the most vocal, dared to say what appeared evident already: the man has nothing genial in him, though he certainly has a lot of evil in him. He is just plain stupid, and just plain ignorant. He is embarrassing to everyone but himself, because he is too stupid and too ignorant to even see how embarrassing he is. His talking and thinking never showed more depth than your average semi-illiterate peasant who thinks himself smart, wants to remake the world and is the joke of the village. Only, this particular semi-illiterate peasant saw himself propelled – by a mixture of circumstances, certainly driven by God’s desire to allow us to be punished for our lack of faith and obedience – to a position light years above his legitimate pay grade.
I am sure many journalists saw this all right, and quite fast. But it was difficult, then, to say that the Great Wheelchair Hugger truly walks, swims and quacks like a very stupid duck. It would also have disturbed the narrative of “novelty” and “tolerance” and “reform”, which surely helped to sell.
Today it’s different, though. Why is that? If you ask me, largely because the faithful Catholics have shouted their criticism for very long, and the world has started to notice. At some point the narrative of the “oh so popular Pontiff” was untenable: too many were noticing the Pope was popular only among the wrong crowds, and the Catholic world was completely dominated by critics of various kind. When it’s clear enough that the Pope is very unpopular among his own people, the narrative has to crumble. As, by the way, yours truly consistently predicted it would happen.
“Maybe even a little stupid”.
How many mainstream outlet would have expressed themselves in this way about Francis in 2013 or 2014? Is the “red nose Pope”, the “selfie Pope”, the “thumb up Pope”, the “who am I to judge” Pope much less stupid? Not really. The cretin was there pretty much from the start, for everyone to see.
It wasn’t fashionable to say it then. It is becoming pretty fashionable to say it now.
Breitbart has excerpts from a book about to be published by a member of Hillary' security detail when she was Monica's First Rival.
It makes for rather entertaining reading.
First Bitch at the White House?
Oh well… why I am not surprised?
Robert Mickens, the hack fired by (even) the Tablet for wishing death to Pope Benedict, and afterwards hired by an unspeakably un-Catholic “catholic” rag, outed himself as a pervert.
Yep, you got it right.
These people spend years of their useless lives criticising every piece of Church doctrine, but they do not tell you that they do so because they have espoused the cause of perversion instead. Unspeakable hypocrisy.
Why does Mickens out himself now, then? I don’t know, because every fag is, in some way, unstable. Perhaps he was about to be outed by others. Perhaps the burden of his own hypocrisy weighted too heavily on him. Perhaps he had just had an attack of egomania. Perhaps the Orlando massacre persuaded him he now belongs among the martyrs and saints.
I have written many times, and got an additional confirmation today, that very many of those who criticise Church doctrine (be they clergymen or journalists) do so for their own private, unconfessed reasons, which very often are Mr Micken’s reasons.
Scratch the dissenter, and you are likely to find the fag.
I was a lapsed Catholic. Moved by the obvious disinterest which priests around me showed in Catholic values and Mass attendance, badly catechised, and surrounded by a more and more secular world, I started to lose the habit of thinking with the Church that had been rudimentally transmitted to me as a child. Slowly, other things went out of the window, due to the influence of the secular values when one stops seeking the nourishment only the Sacraments can give. I preferred to consider abortion a terrible evil I would not have the courage to avoid, and preferred to leave it at that. I refused, or rather neglected, to think rationally about the necessary consequences of being a Catholic. I was the socially conservative version of the Cafeteria Catholic. I was disgusted by fags; but mainly only out of common decency, rather than of deeply felt religious values.
In all this, never one day, never one minute did I lose the faith in God. Feeling abandoned by the platitudes of the V II Church and not yet acquainted with Traditionalism (a movement I really discovered only in 2005, thanks to the Internet), I spent countless hours with “do it yourself” exercises, with up to seven different Bibles on my table, trying to understand and deepen the faith about which I felt so strongly, if confusedly, and which made me despise the secular priests of questionable virility I saw around me and on TV, and the shallow rhetoric of poverty and social justice that had nothing supernatural in it.
Faith is the biggest grace I ever received, and never losing faith for one second is, in itself, a grace in the grace. I feel as if a good God would patiently wait, through my Years Of Stupidity, until I finally found the fountain of pure water, Catholicism as it was always intended and had never been taught to me. Coherent, logical, manly, as beautiful and as hard as a diamond.
I confess that I suffer of “excessive doctrinal security”. I could, if it depended on me, depose Francis, defrock him, and send him to die at the stake without flinching; and I would be ready and proud to be called at my own judgment there, on the spot, whilst the Argentinian’s corpse is still burning, and the smoke still rising high in the Roman sky.
Faith is a grace, that I have obviously not deserved. But I think it my duty to make use of it, and help others along the way.
And I want you to see it, this faith. I want you to feel it, I want it to jump on you unexpectedly, like a lion. You may disagree with me, hate me, mock me. But my faith, you will not be able to deny or even ignore.
It is a grace. Fully undeserved. Given to a wretched sinner, concerned about his own salvation more than it’s comfortable to him. Given to him, I think, so that he may use it to help others.
However, even if I had not been graced with a strong faith, and had gone through periods of doubt – something up to now always spared to me, but common to even many saints in form of perceived distance of God from them, or of punishing spiritual aridity – never would I dare to present my doubts, my trembling and wobbling faith, as something desirable, or that makes me more “complete” than the one who never had such doubts.
“Never doubted God? You’re missing something, my boy’!”
Who would be such an idiot as to express himself in that way? Someone without faith, of course. Someone who cannot avoid thinking in totally secular terms, and likes it, and wants you to think in the same way. Someone who thinks so much in terms of moral relativism and pensiero debole, that he boasts of his own lack of faith.
Someone, in short, like this one.