It is reported by Rorate Caeli (with the text to prove it) that the Evil Clown is going to refer himself as the “Bishop dressed in white” of the famous “third secret” of Fatima.
The mind boggles. And, actually, laughs a bit, too.
In my eyes one of the following is happening:
1. The Blessed Virgin appeared to Francis and told him he is the Bishop dressed in White.
No, really. Just kidding…
2. Francis has no idea what he is talking about.
This is the most probable. It's also very, very frequent.
3. Francis wants to style himself as a sort of martyr in waiting.
This is, however, too stupid even for him.
I'll go for 2. then.
See blog post title.
Pope Francis will be in Fatima on Saturday for the obvious celebration of the centenary of the first apparition of Our Lady to the three children. Whilst it was obvious the man would travel, I cannot avoid finding his presence in Fatima an insult to the Blessed Virgin.
Reading about an anti-Catholic Pope insulting Catholics and Catholicism from one of the places not only most sacred to millions of them, but most closely linked to the sanely conservative Catholic movement will be the last unreal episode in an unreal papacy. Brezhnev himself, coming to preach communism, would not have been a worse insult than this old lewd man, who will preach something very similar to Brezhnev anyway.
Francis will fly to Fatima and will, for the umpteenth time, spread his satanical “gospel according to Juan Peron”.
Countless faithful bloggers, and a handful of journalists, will counter word for word.
It is a safe bet that no bishop or Cardinal will have anything to object.
It may seem to the superficial that the man is getting his way, but I disagree. The strategy is dumb. Francis can never win with a frontal attack against two thousand years of tradition. He can deceive those who want to be deceived, and try with unconfessed uneasiness to tell themselves that they will be fine when they die, because they are following the Pope. But they all know, to the last one, what is truth and what is lie.
Also, the voices of opposition to this shameless circus are countless, and getting better known to the mainstream as the scandal increases. Some of them will tire, some will die, some might even move to the dark side of FrancisChurch. But the others will go on, and they will see Francis to his tomb all right.
This will never be a winning strategy. It is too blunt, too obvious, too damn stupid. It is a wrecking ball impossible not to notice. It is unavoidable that, in time, the wrecking ball be destroyed and the reconstruction started.
If Francis had been smart, he would have used a much lighter, subtler approach, leaving it to his successors to continue the insidious work of destruction. But Francis is dumb, vain, and petty. He wants the limelight for himself. He does not even seem to care of the contempt of Catholics, because they are people he despises. He cares for the applause of his own buddies: the atheists, the wordly, the adulterers, the leftists, the perverts, the dirty souls of all varieties. So what if his work will fail one day. This does not seem one believing in life after death. He is not concerned with what happens after he has died. He wants to drink from the chalice of easy popularity as long as he lives.
Francis in Fatima is, firstly, an offence to the Blessed Virgin. Secondly, it is a spit in the face of orthodox Catholics. But it is also a surreal joke, an utterly ridiculous freak show made of clowns dressing in black, purple, red and white.
Dumb, vain, and petty. You can only destroy so much with such an attitude.
Make no mistake: the Chuch will swallow this clown whole.
I cannot – no one can – follow on my own the breathtaking pace of Francis stupid statements and acts. I have stumbled – why, you will discover if you read to the end – upon an oldish post from the Eponymous Flower. In it, a joker answering to the name Enzo Bianchi went on record with the following, barely believable statement:
“In the Church there are good intentions, but about there are unreal expectations about women: The model Maria, Virgin and Mother, can not be the reference point for the advancement of women in the church. The fashionable, subliminally alleged idea that Mary was more important than St. Peter, is a stupid idea, just as the wheels of a car would be more important than the steering wheel.”
First, let us counter the insult to the Blessed Virgin with the Litany of Loreto.
After we have recited it, and have calmed ourselves, let us try to reason about what this joker is trying to achieve; possibly, without damaging our coronaries.
The “advancement of women in the Church” is here the main point. Our understanding of, well, everything must be subordinated to it. Even (Lord, give me strength!) the way we see the Blessed Virgin as the model for every woman.
The revolutionary premise is not even hidden. It is the same as if I would say “the model Christ cannot be the reference point for the advancement of social justice in South America”. It is a complete denial of any Christian understanding before one even starts reasoning about Christianity.
Religion must shape our lives, not – as this man thinks – the contrary. Mary is the model for every woman exactly because the Church has always said so. in this, the “advancement of women” is neither here nor there, which is not at all casual considering how little “emancipated” (and therefore, in Mr Bianchi’s a-Christian view, “non-advanced”) Mary was.
This madman reflects the madness of our times: our stupid new idols become the new religion; after which, we start revisiting and criticising the Real Thing according to our new fashion.
There has never been any need for “emancipation”, which is exactly why Mary never felt any need or desire for it. Go one centimetre into thinking that Mary’s life, social standing, and general place within the family was wrong and you can’t call yourself a Christian, because what you are saying is that Christianity has, for two thousand years, promoted a wrong social model, striking hard at the very core of human existence, by way of the very life of the Blessed Virgin.
Our joker and wannabe “fake monk” says it even more openly, declaring his enmity with Christianity with explicit words:
“We are not yet able to take unequivocal equality between men and women seriously. The path of the Church is still very far, because even all the men are at the decision-levers, while women are restricted to low services”
If the Church is “still very far” for Mr Bianchi’s new religion (“unequivocal equality”, meaning “treating women as if they had a prick”; and you must be blind in order not to see what this has done to them), the Church and Christianity have been a fraud these two thousand years. This is a frontal attack on Christianity, and an open insult to the evidently, in this perspective, weak and wrongly submissive Blessed Virgin.
I rest my case.
You may ask: “Mundabor dear, why do you care for jokers like this wannabe monk, when you could be drinking tea whilst listening to beautiful Christmas carols?” My answer would be : 1) because this joker not only writes in several secular newspaper; 2) because the same clown is very officially a “consultor” of the Pope, via the Pontifical Council for the Sabotage of Catholicism in any Way we can (official name could be slightly different); 3) because the man now even openly vilifies the apparitions of Fatima.
Francis The Evil Clown is evidently looking for new ways to insult the Blessed Virgin, the Church, and Christianity as a whole, and finds that all the rubbish continuously coming out of his mouth is not near enough. Therefore, he surrounds himself with “consultants” helping him to demolish the Church as much as he, and they, can. These people then proceed to tell you that the Blessed Virgin isn’t a model of their new religion, and that Fatima must have been a swindle because hey, the Blessed Virgin did not collect the necessary number of PC points by not mentioning the Holocaust; which, you understand, it’s the new litmus test for saintliness.
So much for the Evil Clown, of whom some not exceedingly intelligent woman once commented on this blog that he must be fine, “because he is devoted to the Blessed Virgin”. Go figure.
Denial of Christianity. As a consequence, insult to the Blessed Virgin. As a consequence, attack to Fatima.
From their “consultants” you will recognise them.
The usual Rorate Caeli has the integral text of Cardinal Policarpo's prayer for the consecration of Pope Francis' Pontificate to Our Lady of Fatima.
There is so much sugar it would spoil every coffee. If I read it again, I'll have to get a medical check for diabetes, so I suggest you inflict the exercise on yourself only once.
The Blessed Virgin thought it fitting to show to the three children of Fatima (operative word here is children) a horrifying vision of hell, which became famous worldwide and helps faithful to keep away from hell to this day and, no doubt, for many days to come. If you read Cardinal Policarpo, there's so much luuuv you think you are in a hippy commune, but no warning about the horrible punishment of hell, and the concrete danger it represent for everyone of us and all those we love.
I dare to doubt the Blessed Virgin will be much pleased with a Cardinal only able to pick on the good parts of the apparition to make of it another exercise in popularity quest, which is the very negation of the true charity the Blessed Virgin had for the children when she showed them the vision of hell.
But here we are: what the Blessed Virgin thought children can not only stomach, but make their own and draw great spiritual profit from, the Cardinal thinks unfitting for adult Catholics, in a message that he certinly knew would get worldwide resonance.
Not only does the Cardinal avoid every explicit threat or even mention of hell; but if you read the last sentence, he produces himself in the usual exercise in V II doublespeak, with a phrase that – particularly in the sugary context – allows all those who so desire to read it in the sense that Mary does lead all to salvation, so we will be all fine.
If you want a good example of what nuChurch is, you need to do no more than to read the Cardinal's message.
Once, of course.
Some interesting interventions on my comment box led me to write my thoughts (purely subjective, of course) about the matter of the “Great Chastisement”.
Let me say first of all that I am not a prophet of doom, nor do I share the gloomy vision of the future I read around me in the comment box and elsewhere. I do not think Western clergymen are going to die in jail anytime soon (if they wake up, of course; which they most probably will), nor do I think in one or two generations Catholics will meet in catacombs. I have that sanguine attitude of your typical Southern European that does not negate a problem, but avoids painting the devil on the wall.
I was, therefore, asked how I think the “Great Chastisement” will take place if I do not go around talking of imminent nuclear catastrophes on a global scale, or the like.
In my eyes, when the priests abandon the right way of thinking, God punishes them by damning a greater, perhaps the majority of them. If it is true that a priest has a higher duty than a laymen, and will be judged with corresponding severity, I wouldn’t change my place with your average post V II, guitar-strumming, “modern” priest. Already this would be, if you ask me, a great punishment for the Church, albeit not at a level of “great chastisement”.
The matter becomes, though, more serious when we consider the effect bad priests (and bishops, and cardinals, and up) have on countless souls; souls which, whilst certainly helped to the error by the betrayal of the clergy to whom they have been entrusted, cannot get such easy get out of jail card and must accept a worrying degree of responsibility for their own betrayal. If, therefore, the role of the priests is to have an influence in the salvation of souls , it must perforce follow that an age of bad priests will have as consequence an age of damned sheep. Which makes sense, as in the end the sheep who insist in going astray can’t say they deserved so much better than the bad shepherds they got.
If I remember correctly, then Cardinal Ratzinger wrote something on the lines that when the bride of Christ behaves like a bad woman, the Bridegroom punishes her by inflicting disgraces like allowing heretical movements to wound her. Again, one sees a circularity in this, with the heretical sheep in the end deserving their heretical pastors and the relevant punishment.
If this is so (and I don;t think many will deny the fundamental soundness of the assertion bad priests = more souls lost), it seems to me that the great chastisement is happening every day, and has been happening for decades now: the great number of souls – on a planetary scale and for several decades, not in the relatively tiny number caused by this earthquake or that tsunami, or even the one or other war – who must have been lost because of the bad influence of Vatican II. It doesn’t need a genius to calculate that by more than two billion Christian souls (more than half the Catholic alone) the differential in damned souls between good church and bad church could (though no one can know with exactness; but just assuming good priests do make a difference) easily amount to several Holocausts.
This idea – which you find echoed rather incessantly in people like Michael Voris, constantly reminding his viewers of the great price paid in souls because of Church inaction – seems explained rather well here, and you will notice the prophetic words of Sister Lucia on the oncoming great attack on Catholic priests. Words more important, because the threats therein described seemed at the time not really realistic (yes of course there were ferments; yes of course there were strange around. There always are).
Therefore, yes, a great chastisement is certainly in place if we look at it from the proper, planetary dimension. But in the end, we are all judged the day we die, and there is no need of any more or less choreographic great show to persuade us such a chastisement has in the end come. Again, assuming – as it is reasonable to do – that good priests make a rather important difference in the economy of salvation than bad priests, then this difference must, on a planetary scale and in the course of several decades, vastly surpass every natural catastrophe or disease you can (reasonably) imagine.
Just my two cents, of course; but it seems to me this explains how one can consider the present situation as serious (which this blog incessantly does) without going around “promising” catastrophic events on a huge scale.
Fatima and Sacro Vergente Anno: Pius XII’s Consecration of “The Peoples Of Russia” to the Blessed Virgin
It is well-known that among the requests of the Blessed Virgin in Fatima was the consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart.
Less well-known is the fact that Pope Pius XII, Pastor Angelicus, also known as “The Pope of Fatima” for his relentless support to the apparitions, did consecrate “all the peoples of Russia” to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1950.
I am informed that this consecration is widely believed to be somewhat short of the Blessed Virgin’s request, though in all honesty it is not clear to me why it should. It is, though, evident from Sacro Vergente Anno and from further Vatican documents that the great Pope, Venerable Pius XII, had to take care of political considerations in the way he responded to the Blessed Virgin’s request. Therefore, during the “hottest” phase of the Cold War he had limited himself to consecrate to the Blessed Virgin the peoples of all world (not wishing the potential political repercussions of a more direct action); whilst in the comparatively calmer 1952 he felt the moment come to the consecration to the Blessed Virgin of the peoples of Russia so that their freedom (and the freedom of the Church) may be achieved.
I will publish below the relevant part of Sacro Vergente Anno, in the elaborate but extremely elegant Italian in use when people had a somewhat longer attention span and could read longer sentences without becoming dizzy. Following the original text I will write a personal attempt at translation.
I am grateful to all those who will send a message with some link pointing to:
1) an official translation of Sacro Vergente Anno or at least of the relevant passage, none of which I could find.
2) the facts as to why the consecration according to the wishes of Mary is widely considered not to have been completely complied with; perhaps it could be because it was a consecration of the peoples of Russia rather than of Russia itself, though this seems rather a quaestio de lana caprina to me.
In the meantime, enjoy another spectacular example of the work of a truly spectacular Pope.
Noi, pertanto, affinché più facilmente le Nostre e le vostre preghiere siano esaudite, e per darvi un singolare attestato della Nostra particolare benevolenza, come pochi anni fa abbiamo consacrato tutto il mondo al Cuore immacolato della vergine Madre di Dio, così ora, in modo specialissimo, consacriamo tutti i popoli della Russia al medesimo Cuore immacolato, nella sicura fiducia che col potentissimo patrocinio di Maria vergine quanto prima si avverino felicemente i voti, che Noi, che voi, che tutti i buoni formano per una vera pace, per una fraterna concordia e per la dovuta libertà a tutti e in primo luogo alla chiesa; in maniera che, mediante la preghiera che Noi innalziamo insieme con voi e con tutti i cristiani, il regno salvifico di Cristo, che è «regno di verità e di vita, regno di santità e di grazia, regno di giustizia, di amore e di pace»,(8) in ogni parte della terra trionfi e si consolidi stabilmente.
And therefore we, in order that Our and your prayers may be more easily answered, and in order to give you a special attestation of our benevolence, in the same way as a few years ago We consecrated the entire world to the immaculate Heart of the virgin Mother of God, so now, in a very special way, consecrate all peoples of Russia to the very same immaculate Heart, in the safe confidence that with the extremely powerful protection of the virgin Mary the wishes expressed by Us, by you and by every good person for a true peace for fraternal concord and due freedom for everyone and for the Church in the first place, may be answered as soon as possible; in such a manner that, through the prayer that We send up to Heaven together with you and all Christians, the reign of Christ, harbinger of salvation, which is “kingdom of truth and life, kingdom of sainthood and grace, kingdom of justice, of love and of peace”, may triumph and steadily consolidate itself everywhere on earth”
I have written already about the beautiful site of “The Age of Mary”. Among (many) other things, the site is notable for the best narration of the Fatima events I have been able to find on the Internet up to now. I would like to spend some words about this astonishing series of historical documented facts.
Let us first say very clearly that, no matter how impressive the miracles and apparitions, as a Catholic you are not obliged to believe anything of the entire story. As in every private apparition, no belief is required of the faithful; not even in the cases publicly endorsed by the Church as worthy of belief. I would be the last one to accuse a Catholic of being a lesser one because he doesn’t believe in the Fatima apparitions.
But please allow me to say why I am one of those who do. Some of the arguments can, no doubt, be applied to other apparitions (think of Lourdes).
1) The apparitions involved children. It is apparent how a child tends to change and inflate whatever exciting event has happened to him; nay, whatever event he is requested to repeat time and again. Nothing of the sort has happened here. Infinite times the children have been requested to tell the story; infinite times they have repeated it in exactly the same way. Hundreds of sceptical and atheist enquirers eager to expose the “plot” have never succeeded in finding contradictions, exaggerations, changes of descriptions, discrepancies of whatever sort. This is not normal, and doesn’t happen just because one child (or three) happens to be uncommonly fond of precision.
2) The apparitions involved children who were, without exception, illiterate. They couldn’t have written down a story, or an agreed version, to give coherence to their claims.
3) The apparitions established a clear hierarchy – at least in the eyes of the people – among the children. Only one girl, Lucia, speaks to Mary; the older of the two siblings, Francisco, doesn’t hear her, nor does he ever pretend to do so; but his younger sister, Jacinta, hears Mary’s every word. Come on, this is a recipe for strife, we are talking here of children between seven and ten! Nothing of the sort ever happened. No rivalries, no jealousies, no attempts to make oneself important as their notoriety grows, no fights for leadership, no races to get attention. This is not normal by any adult standard, let alone by a childish one.
4) The apparitions trigger a change in the children’s behaviour. A real, observable and lasting one. They start praying for long periods at a time, when before they used to cheat on their daily rosary obligations; they start to offer all their suffering to God with a zeal and simplicity you would find in a living saint, and only after a long and conscious effort; they start practicing such harsh penances that their relatives are worried. One child can, perhaps, fall in love for a short time with his own pious dispositions; another may indulge, every now and then, in an excess of zeal; but this was three children, out of three claiming to have seen Mary, completely changing their tune and starting to behave in what can only be called an extraordinary way. Try this with your nephews and see how it goes.
5) The plain simplicity of the entire story. A poor village in the middle of Portugal. Simple, illiterate children from simple and rather poor (though not destitute) families. Monotonous conversations of Lucia with Mary; just as monotonous responses of Mary to the children. There is no glitz here, no splendour, no poetry. A planned tale would have been intriguing, the events fascinating, the words spectacularly catching, unforgettable. Nothing of the sort happens here. Plain questions, plain answers, no concessions to the theatrical.
6) Orthodoxy. Several times both the angel and Mary speak to the children; they transmit a quantity of information. None of it is less than absolutely orthodox. Try to invent that as a group of three seven-to-ten-years-old children, and good luck to you. This of the orthodoxy is, to me, actually the first criterium of every claim of apparition. This is why I, like many others, despise the Medjugorje affair so much.
7) Public character. One of the unique features of the Fatima apparition is the utter public character of the entire matter. Never before had Marian apparitions been announced, and punctually delivered, in front of a plurality of people. Granted, not everyone could perceive the various phenomena; but enough of them could as to make the event a truly public display of miraculous activity. We do not know why not all were able to enjoy the extraordinary phenomena more than we know why Francisco was not allowed to hear, or Jacinta to speak. But this is what happened all along, with various people affected in various way, and a multitude of them affected forever.
8 ) Memory. Some of the apparitions contained longish conversations; all of them went above what a child can usually remember. Prayers are repeated to them a couple of times and their content is etched in their memory forever. Never they say that they can’t remember what was said, never they have hesitations. Still, at times they forget the implications (for example, they don’t reflect that Lucia won’t be killed, because Mary forecast a long life to her; but that Mary says so, they never forget), showing to be in normal “child mode” most of the times, in another stunning contrast to their behaviour related to the apparitions. These children are stunningly normal in their being children, and extraordinary in whatever pertains to the apparition.
Fatima is, truly, unique even among the Marian apparitions considered worthy of faith. It richly deserves the central place it has rapidly gained in the heart of Catholics. Not even 100 years after the events, you’ll rarely hear a Rosary recited without the “Fatima prayer”.
I invite you to read the entire story from the beautifully made Internet site (intelligently divided for you in easy-to-digest tidbits) and become aware of the unique nature of the extraordinary events in Fatima. Your belief in Fatima, once acquired, will make it so much easier for you to start what the Blessed Virgin so often recommended to the children: daily recitation of the Rosary.
I stumbled upon another Rosary site. Well, not only a Rosary site, really. This is a kind of one-stop-shop for many of the needs of the modern Cyber-Catholic. Modestly, there is no emphasis about who are the authors of this site but by clicking around it would appear that it is the brainchild of an association called Auxilium Christianorum. Massive kudos to them.
The site is divided in sections.
There is a Rosary section which very focused on the actual way of praying the rosary. Half a dozen of different traditions and methods of Rosary praying are described in detail. The influence of Simon of Montfort is particularly evident. The entire Rosary section is entirely built upon the pre-Conciliar Rosary structure. The “luminous” mysteries are completely ignored and whilst not less than eleven Papal encyclicals are reported, JP II’s Rosarium Virginis Mariae is spectacularly absent. I begin to think that there may be a message behind that, but I’m not sure which 😉 .
Basically, the entire section is vastly Vatican II-free, and so much better for it. Still, who has written this is well endowed with common sense, and very modern in approach. The “helpful suggestions” include to pray simplified versions of the rosary if one hasn’t time or is too lazy for the full five decades with all the trimming; to not neglect, in case, also to pray the rosary whilst driving (very easy, this, and can be done vocally; in the end a lot of people talk by driving all the time); or, as regards the new-ish and not uncontroversial fashion of wearing a rosary, to not have a problem in wearing is, but by taking it out to use it, in a bold public display of Catholicism. Also please note that these people are traditionalists, but not sedevacantists. The beautiful audio version in Latin (one of the many versions of the Rosary of this excellent site) is recited by none other than… Pope John Paul II! Still no “luminous” mysteries, though…. .
A second section of the site is dedicated to the “Little Office of the Blessed Virgin”, a simplified version of the Divine Office for the use of the laity. This version seems to be further simplifies inasmuch as the first two hours (matins and lauds) are supposed to change daily, which here seems to have been substituted for a standard version. Still, the material is considerable, well presented and available in both English and Latin. This is an excellent resource for all those who want to try to see whether the little office is a devotion for them, and the latin text is a welcome addition.
The third section is very modestly (and inappropriately, I would add) called Catholic Calendar, but it is so much more than that. It is a complete Catholic Almanac with a wealth of resources: saint of the day, daily reading of the Mass; daily reading from the rule of St. Benedict; Martirology; daily reading from the Imitation of Christ; daily reading from the “secret of Mary” (link to full version available); a beautiful “saint picture of the day” with reflections (today, 1st November, it seems to be from Gustave Dore’s “Paradise” after Dante, it is very beautiful), and a lesson of the Catechism of.. Trent (today, All Saints, unavailable and with other reflections instead). This is a source of massive Catholic wisdom and prayer, changing every day and made conveniently available within the same site.
The following section is the “Total Consecration to Mary” after the fashion of Simon of Montfort. The devotion and procedure for the consecration are explained in detail.
The last section is, like a jewel on the crown, the most complete and best presented description of the Fatima apparitions (and more: see Immaculate Heart of Mary part) I have ever read. The material is vast, but still very easy to read. Like all the others, this section too is extremely orthodox and you won’t find any trace of modern imbecility a’ la Vincent Nichols here. Statements like “War, disease, and natural disasters are punishments for sin” are prominently and unapologetically displayed. This site deals with Truth, not with popularity.
Summa summarum, this site deserves to become one of your standard Catholic links from today. Everything here is accurate, from the theology to the attention to practical matters to the very accurate (and I would say: professional) layout and presentation. It is joy to use and explore.
I look forward to many happy (and some less happy, but prayerful) hours in the company of this beautiful site.
A prayer for those who have created such beauty is more than in order.