Well, this is new to Europe in modern times, but I can’t say I am surprised.
Firstly, please pray for the victim. In your charity, also pray for his killers, because we pray even for our enemies. And last but not least, pray that more and more of the latter may be killed before they carry out their evil intent.
I will make this fairly short, and not entirely sweet.
The blood of this priest – and the profanation of a Catholic Church; apparently the idiots held a short “homily” from the altar – is firstly on the hands of those stupid judges and lawmakers who allowed people obviously willing to fight their satanic jihad to go around looking for priests whose throats they might slit. It beggars belief that one may think a tag bracelet would prevent a would-be suicide attacker from planning a suicide attack. It is even more stupid that the bracelet was switched off every day for some hours, though I can’t think the result would have been any different if it had not.
Secondly, the blood of this priest is on the hands of all those who sing the song of the “integration” and of the “isolated incident”. They are the unwitting allies of the enemy, which is now clearly among us in forces. Even that idiot Hollande recognises now that we are at war. I doubt he understands the logical consequence of what he says, though.
Thirdly, the blood of this priest is on the Catholic clergy, starting from the Evil Clown. They are committing the most grievous sin of helping infidels to demolish Christianity in Europe in the name of a strange religion of forced multicultural acceptance of no matter whom, no matter what, which is nothing to do with Christianity.
Lastly, and I have to say this just so you don’t think this blog is like everyone else’s, this blood may well be on the hands of the murdered priest himself; who, if (and I don’t know anything about it; therefore, it’s a big if) he was one of the “inclusive” crowd, has now reaped exactly what he has sown. If (and let us say once again : if) he was one of those promoting this senseless demolition of our Christian continent, then it is better that his fate happened to him, rather than to some poor innocent who still has a functioning brain and a Christian attitude towards life.
Perhaps, when enough “inclusive” priests, bishops and cardinals have had their throat slit, those still alive will start thinking like Christians again.
Jihad is here, but we just refuse to see it.
We also refuse to see that the clergy, from the Pope down, are largely its (hopefully unwitting) accomplice.
As the latest figures from France abundantly show, the biological solution is on the march.
V II priests are disappearing to the tune of more than 700 a year. You can bet your hat the vast majority of them are of the fluffy V II sort. An increasing percentage of (limited) ordination concerns priests more or less obviously not of the fluffy V II sort. The SSPX figures are obviously not included.
A much smaller number of priests, but with a much higher percentage of decent Catholic priests (some of them of the conservative V II sort, and some of them of the non-V II sort): this is where we are headed.
France and Belgium are particularly striking examples because the rot over there is particularly advanced, but the dearth of priests always comes in proportion to the death of Catholic values. What is most reassuring is this: even after three years of Francis’ destruction work, there is no evidence of fags invading the Francis-seminaries hoping to scrounge a fully paid sodomitical existence at the expense of deceased donors. FrancisChurch just doesn’t find anyone to follow its destruction work, not even offering paid sodomy for life! Thank you, Lord, for sparing us at least this.
Good riddance, fluffy V II priests, and may the Lord have mercy on you (though in many cases I don’t think he will). You are about to self-extinct, and put an end to the very work of destruction from the inside you have perpetrated for many decades. The Lord in His mercy will care that the elect find good guidance anyway, so I am not worried for the coming great scarcity of traitors like you.
Let it be a challenge to find a priest. When it is found and it is a good one, it will do a lot of good.
It seems that “Rabbitgate” has caused the eruption of pent-up clerical frustration concerning this Pontificate. You see it not only in the blogs run by Catholic priests, but also in the homilies one hears (and I hear) around. In short, the healthy clergy are busy warning their sheep about the Pope.
A rather striking example of this is in the blog “Triregnum”, which has the translation of an open letter sent to the Pope. The author, a Parisian priest whom I suppose anonymous (but not so much, from the details he gives) expresses in a pithy way not only the confusion among his sheep but, more relevantly, the fact that even for a priest it is becoming more and more difficult to believe in the good faith of the man. A man believed by more and more of his colleagues more than just an embarrassment, rather an agent of evil.
This is how far we have gone. It is important that we do not run to the help of the Pope Peron by asking that he be left alone once he has backpedaled on his statements. In this case, the statements reveal the man, and the backpedaling reveals his hypocrisy.
Unless one distances himself from this Pontificate, one distances himself from the Church; because the first is the enemy of the second.
Many a priest, bishop, and Cardinal will go all the way in their desire to help Francis to destroy a church in which they do not believe. They might well become the majority one day. But it is consoling to know that there are still good priests – and be they polluted by V II ideology to some extent – who can still recognise what they have to deal with during this Pontificate.
May Francis’ reign be of short duration, and covered in shame afterwards. It seems to me there are many priests sharing this wish.
Nine attention whores who desecrated Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris in a “protest” occasioned by Pope Benedict's abdication have been acquitted.
This means, more or less, that it will now be possible to repeat such “performances” with very little fear of big trouble; like, for example, a real conviction with real jail time. As there is no scarcity for this kind of exhibitionist whores, expect these episodes to be on the increase.
I wonder what would happen if the very same whores did the same in a Parisian Mosque? Perhaps they should try? It would be interesting to see whether the judges put them in jail, or it has to be ritual beheading.
The persecution is coming. Fuelled, among others, by all those marshmallow Catholics always ready to have understanding for everyone and everything, and for whom being a Christian means firstly, secondly, thirdly and lastly to avoid any confrontation.
I am informed via Father Z's blog that in France the President has authorised a woman to marry a man.
Whilst this should be the normality in every country whose people can use their brain – even in France – in this case the matter is made somewhat unusual by the fact that one of the two happy people who are supposed to pronounce the oui ( or “je le veux”, or whatever it is) is without the shadow of a doubt either in a very advanced state of decomposition or – if from an atheist background, say, or works of mercy have been deemed a waste of time and money – reduced to very fine ashes these past two years.
Now, what makes our women-chasing hero, Monsieur Hollande, think that a bunch of bones, or a handful of ashes, may pronounce the words “I do?”. It is, apparently, a rather absurd law of 55 years ago, (ill) conceived to allow the “marriage” of betrothed people on occasion of a big tragedy that cost the life of hundreds.
I am no canonist, but I cannot imagine that the simple intention to marry one day in the future can reasonably translate into a marriage; not one inter vivos, much less one between a living bride and a long deceased corpse. Many are the marriages called off at the last minute, and with acute instinct the popular mind identifies in those very words, “I do”, the confirmation that the will to marry is actually there, thus wonderfully matching the common sense with the legal status; because if the magic words in the proper setting are not there I am sorry, dear lass, but you are as much unmarried as before.
Now, I will spare you the jokes about the great joy in the cemetery, and the Bridegroom inviting its entire population to a danse macabre after the ceremony. What concerns me is that something that 55 years ago was probably seen as a – strange and creepy – way to protect marriage is now probably seen as another way to extend marriage to pretty much everything under the sun.
In the same way as the UK wants the death of the EU as a political organism by allowing Turkey to become part of it, the secular society wants the death of the institution of marriage through “inclusion” of the most outlandish things, from the absurd concept of a dead bridegroom to the far more absurd concept of two wannabe brides or bridegrooms, to the future frontier of geometrically enriched (triangles, or quadrangles; the sky, or the circumference, is the limit) “marriages”.
I want to hope this marriage “par ordre du mufti” does not have any legal consequences of sort; but again this is France, so you never know.
It is also interesting to reflect where this might lead to. For example, there could be some business in matching deceased people. A company called, say, “happy coffin” might talk with the bereaved, who would then – based on the matching profile of the “couple” – decide that Aunt Agatha' and Uncle Freddy would have wanted to marry, if they had met; which, unfortunately, they didn't, but I am sure Monsieur Hollande is no man to be discouraged by this little detail. A letter to him, et voila'. The putative husbands will, rather probably, not be asked.
Therefore this little episode, in itself only the result of a monomaniacal and rather macabre bout of emotionalism of a non-widow, can well be considered another nail in the – erm, well, (cough) – coffin of marriage as God intended.
Which – whatever Monsieur Hollande, mad members of Parliament or a wannabe widow want you to believe – is the only one there will ever be.
The news has reached the Italian newspapers (the decent ones, at least; the others just ignore the facts) that the French government has abandoned the proposed new “family” (means: meant to destroy it) legislation, which would have allowed, among other things, “couples” of dykes to get a child in vitro.
For added fun, it appears the government ranks are now in full disarray on this, with some extremists wanting to go on with proposal without government support, and hoping to get a majority. So you have them losing and quarrelling, which is a rather interesting scenario.
Further battles (assuming this one will be definitively won, which for the moment appears probable to me) await the movement, which will now focus against the measures meant to cancel the concept of “sex is destiny” perverting even little children. Of course, other battles await, including the backpedaling on the abomination of so-called “same sex marriages”.
I allow myself to notice here again what I have written already on several occasion: the typical politician in a Western democracy is a coward ready to cave in at the first signs of popular rage. Hollande & Co. aren't so ideologised that they will put their career in danger for their convictions. You miaow, they roar. You roar, they miaow.
Evidently, Hollande & Co. have not believed the police numbers – impressive in themselves – but rather the pictures with the huge crowds in Paris and Lyon last Sunday. They know their political asses might one day be on the line, and they care for their own far more than they claim to fight for the emancipation of a faggot's sphyncter.
I hope this first, but highly significative victory encourages the decent Frenchmen that this madness can be reversed, and helps the movement to gain further momentum – no thanks to Francis – in the years to come.
You would not believe what is happening in France these days.
The woman who accepted to become the mistress of a man living with another concubine plays victim because another woman has now accepted to become the mistress of the same man. All three of them grown up – at least anagraphically – and with children.
The same First Concubine, who tried to play the forgiving partner for the sake of the five servants, the life of luxury, and the international prominence, has now been pretty unceremoniously kicked out. She was only the concubine, you see, so no big formalities here. Adieu, servants who cater to her every whim. Adieu, photo-ops at the side of the powerful husband (eh? Oh, sorry, mistake!). Adieu, meeting with the Obamas next month. She would have looked so good beside man-jawed Michelle O., her dear, dear friend! Their conversations on “how to house-train your husband” were so funny!
As to the Child President, he must have had with some trusted functionary a conversation of this kind: “look, Monsieur le President: it’s clear you can’t keep your little friend in your pants, and it is only a matter of time before another woman takes the place of this actress. It would, therefore, be much wiser to keep the palace free from concubines and mistresses of all sorts. When the time comes to take the next toy on board, the noise will be greatly reduced. You want to stand for re-election one day, n’est-ce que pas?”
The President – who is a child, but an ambitious one – realised these were wise words, and decided to henceforward become officially single, though with the – how banal – actress on the side. He now has the double advantage of getting rid of the old witch without having another one squatting on the Élysée palace and making his life miserable. That should make for a happy child for a while.
Oh, about the witch… It turns out Ms Trierweiler is affectionately called “Rottweiler” by those who know and, as far as it goes, love her, and her stern behaviour towards her man-child is now becoming universally known. Apparently, on one particular interview Monsieur Hollande made the big mistake of mentioning – as in: mentioning – his once lawfully non-wedded quasi-wife, Ségolène, and later complained with the interviewing journalist the Rottweiler would now make his life hell for that; and he said this in all seriousness, and allegedly bleaching as soon as he realised his faux pas. Granted, the rumours of great devastations and damage in the Palace from the angry she-dog in a horrible bout of Rottweilerhood have been denied, but the entire country seems to have considered the tale of 2.5 million Euro damage credible for a moment. Go figure.
I am, therefore, probably not the only one to think Madame Rottweiler will now submerge Monsieur le Président under a tsunami of unsavoury revelations, and … bite him as hard as she can. As the Bard said, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Particularly – though the Bard didn’t say this – when she is a Rottweiler.
So there you are: an angry Rottweiler now unceremoniously kicked out of the extremely luxurious kennel; a first-mistress-in-waiting who will not be allowed to be one, and is now also unceremoniously relegated to the role of First Booty Call; and, most tragically, a man who is called to lead a great Western power and is such a spineless child that he is terrified of his concubine, even to the point of paling for having pronounced in an interview the name of his once lawfully wedded wife.
This bunch of children, sluts, and witches is a perfect representative of the liberal society; people who play the good and tolerant whilst they destroy families, behave like children or sluts, live for the notoriety and power and fake prestige their bed companions give them, or are such spineless jerks they are afraid of their own mistress even as they control nuclear weapons.
Are you surprised these people reflect that kind of society always ready to attack Catholicism, and to glorify sexual perversion? What do you expect from a President like that: that he upholds traditional morality?
France is, hopefully, waking up to the kind of infinite ass they have sent to the Élysée Palace. One hopes for the future they will elect I do not say chaste men – not much hope of that in France, anyway – but at least men decent enough to know what is right and what is wrong, with some respect for Christian values, and possibly with some balls to boot.
Still, it’s a democracy, and in a democracy you just get what you deserve.
Enjoy the show, France. Enjoy the motherload of manure the Rottweiler will unload on your President, most of it very probably deserved. Enjoy the spectacle of the man you have put at the top of a Nuclear Power behaving like a capricious child, and he in his Sixties. Bask in the knowledge he was terrified of his mistress, and is possibly only looking for the next woman of whom to be terrified – pussies don’t change, you see; not at that age -. Wait for the next instalment of this Old Children Saga, showing you once again how rotten your society has become.
Still… perhaps there is hope. Perhaps the healthy part of France will in the next years manage to carry others on the right side. Perhaps this pit of insolence, stupidity, immorality and sheer childishness will serve to wake up some people, and wake in the French nation a new desire for at least basic decency. The Manif pour Tous is an excellent start, and it is branching out in other countries, like Italy.
For the moment, though, the French will have to cope with an angry Rottweiler, a Fitst Booty Call, and a Pussy President.
It won’t be pretty.
The French President, Francois Hollande, has a brand-new mistress. I mean, she is not so very brand-new as she is 41, but you get my drift.
Hollande must now, as they say, “decide” between his mistress and his wife; then apparently French Presidents cannot have both anymore, as they usually did in the past. Will he keep his 48 years old wife, who has already expressed her desire to keep her five servants, jet flights, and assorted perks of the lawful spouse of the elected Roi Soleil? Or will he go for the 41 years old mother of two, promoting her from her role of Madame Pompadour to the far more prestigious one of (future) Current Wife?
Ah, I forgot. Hollande's actual wife (I mean, as I write) has four children; but they aren't Hollande's; none of them; at least not as far as we know. Hollande himself has, though, his own children; but they also come from another wife; or another relationship; or whatever.
We live in a world of middle-aged promiscuous teenagers changing their official “partner” like others change cars; leaving a trail of broken families and wounded children behind them; not even feeling any need to apologise for their behaviour; without any idea of what it is I do not say chastity, but at least taking one's responsibilities and living like a responsible adult.
One begins to understand why so many of these people support and glorify sodomy. If you want to be able to do as you please without fear of criticism, you must allow your voters – straight or pervert – to do the same. ” Who am I to judge” is exactly the kind of comment the Hollandes of the world want you to make when you hear of their antics, and in order to do so every moral frame that would allow the moral judgment of the President and of those like them must be destroyed in the first place.
Middle-aged teenagers voted by middle-aged teenagers; none of whom apparently sees the least problem in that.
Welcome to XXI Century's Western Europe.
And it came to pass in France some smartass thought perversion makes for good business and, encouraged by the newly approved satanic legislation, decided to organise a fairy concerning marriage “for everyone” (note the attitude).
Now, what the organisers and those who booked the stands have neglected to think is that heterosexual people might not have a great enthusiasm for mixing themselves with pervs, and the pervs are very, very limited in numbers.Besides, fags hate fags.
The result? A catastrophe. Around 150 people have visited the fairy in total; the total of sales amounts to two rings, bought by a heterosexual couple. It appears the organisers have even hired some young people as “extras” to walk around the place and give the impression it’s not Fukushima after the accident.
What do we, the thinking people, learn from the episode?
1. The vast majority of people, even in a heavily secularised country like France, does not care a straw for perverts. What sways them in the wrong direction is all the screaming about “homophobia”, and the desire to feel vaguely “good”; but really, it appears most of them they do not care one Hollande.
2. If there were the courage to call a pervert a pervert, and this were made clearly and insistently instead of saying “who am I to judge”, this issue could be dealt with in just a few years. Then we could move on to the next interesting step: the destruction of the career of all those clergymen and politicians who have used sexual perversion to promote their own personal advancement.
Alas, it will not happen. As long as the perception is there that it pays to insult God’s laws, there will be no scarcity of people ready to do it from the parliamentary seat, the pulpit, or the Popemobile.
In a “shocking” story that is, we are assured, provoking “much emotion” in France – emotions rule our times: thinking is sooo overrated – a couple of vecchi malvissuti (“old people who have lived badly”: Manzoni was a giant…) has decided to send themselves directly in the hands of the devil with a carefully planned, coldly executed suicide. One of them – the wife, I gather – has even left an angry letter because hey, she should be free to take her life in the manner most agreeable to her, and who are we to judge…
If you think God will have pity on these idiots, you are sailing on very dangerous waters and are in danger of considering hell a place from which we will be kept out no matter how big our effort to get there. From there to Father Barron the step is but a little one.
We cannot know how God decides in the individual situation, but in His mercy he thought it fit to let us know what his criteria are. As God cannot deceive us, we know with absolute certainty that He will stick to them. This means, in clear words, that either the respective guardian angel managed to achieve a perfect contrition for his charge at the very latest moment – an hypothesis going far beyond any reasonable assumption, but that we examine in acknowledgment that He is the one who decides – or the two must, if God is God (and God is God) perforce be in hell, having shouted their arrival rather loudly. Make your own mind about the odds, and shiver.
Double suicide. Carefully prepared. With two letters left. I would not want to be the Catholic priest who, in such a situation, gives scandal and confuses the faithful by allowing – provided any such is asked – a Catholic funeral for the two, and dies one day without repenting for his folly.
Still, let us be clear here: the folly is becoming mainstream. Millions of Frenchies will now see as “unjust” that a man cannot terminate himself as if he were a hamster tired of the wheel, and will abandon the Christian front like it's 1940. They will demand “compassion” and ask that what God has given human folly may throw away, feeling terribly good in the process. Methinks, the attitude will be shared not only by atheists – which is coherent with being an atheist: if there is no God, even a Holocaust is a matter of choice and a man not intrinsically different from a hamster; merely more complicated – but even by people who believe themselves at least vaguely Christian, and seem to think God must have been utterly wrong in those old dark and judgmental times, times not yet enlightened by the compassion of societally accepted suicide and mass abortion.
The liberal press will go at this like the devil's whores they are. Perhaps even beyond France. Other like them – Cameron, Clegg and Miller come to mind – might profit to obtain other cheap points for themselves. We have seen it happening in Ireland already.
Everyone who supports even indirectly any form of euthanasia is clearly sinning gravely, and putting his salvation in grave danger. Yes, even if it is our son, or sister, or cousin. We must never tire to say so and pay the price – there is always a price to pay for siding with Christ: this is how the system works – and pray for those, particularly if loved ones, who mock or insult us.
One day, we will have our reward. Those who want to decide about life (abortion) and death (so-called euthanasia) and willfully die in their stupidity will, alas, get theirs.
One hundred years ago, such an event would have filled an entire community with unspeakable dread at the sight of the impious monstrosity committed. Nowadays, it's a competition for the one who has most understanding.
We live in times when fornication is considered clean, and ozone a pollutant; when the suicide, the most abominable criminal of them all, is looked at with sympathy, and the religion that condemns him condemned in turn; when countless people seriously think they are too good to accept Christ's moral standard.
The modern religion, aided and abetted in the highest places, can be reassumed in five terrible words:
Who am I to judge?
The French have staged another oceanic march against the abomination of so-called homosexual marriage. A march on that scale after the approval of the law is a clear indication that there are an awful lot of people who think it's time for the tough to get going. Monsieur (or I should say: Madame) Hollande is not in a good spot anyway, and he certainly doesn't need this. He might, in fact – unless the devil calls him to his HQ before the time – live to regret (and unless he repents, die to regret) what he has done.
What does the French example tell us? That whenever the perverts and their friends manage to have some legislative measure passed, we must not accept this as “a sign of the times” and resign to the new status quo, but rather start – everyone in our own little ways, and hopefully with the help of more organised structures in time – the fight against abomination now.
Abortion was taken away from the public spot for decades and considered, more or less, a given at least in vast parts of Europe, but the situation has now changed so much that even Pope Francis dares to speak against it. In the matter of Sodomarriage we must not wait for the next 40 years before reacting, but we must start reacting now. How probable success in our lifetime is, is utterly irrelevant, the all-decisive fact being that in this fight we are on Christ's side.
Which, incidentally, is also the winning one.
The infamous so-called same-sex marriage legislation has passed the last significant hurdle in France, and now only the ancillary legislation – whose approval can sadly be seen as assured – is required before the glorification of satanical sexual abomination becomes the law of the land.
Some of the French clergy have made a valid resistance to this, though – as always in the Vatican II Church – cowardice and doublespeak were everywhere. This particular battle was, then, fought and lost.
Or… was it?
It grates me no end that there is a mentality – both among the clergy and the laity – of despondency and resignation after their democracy has approved the last abominable measure; as if democracies were unable to reform themselves, or were able to survive if they don’t. This resignation takes several forms, from the loss of interest in the issue because “it is already decided” to more sanctimonious forms of passivity like the convenient “we must pray” (which we must do anyway, and won’t scare your MP in any meaningful way) or the apocalyptic thinking in the style of “the end is near”, another convenient way of doing nothing in the meantime.
On the contrary, the only way to face situations like this is to see this battle not as ended, but as just begun. From the pressure put on your MP to the active work among friends, relatives and acquaintances, to the active decision not to give financial support to initiatives even remotely linked to approval for abomination, (and possibly, to no other initiatives than those directly linked to the defence of true Christian values) to the boycott of those companies – like Starfags, erm, Starbucks – who support such abominations. The ways are endless, if the commitment is there.
As always, there will be a price to pay. You might well be required to not vote the stupid Conservative candidate, thus helping the outright idiot from Labour or Lib-Dem to be returned. This you do so that the stupid Conservative party understands they’ll not be able to get your vote by just being “least worst”, and you will screw them no matter the cost, because in battle nothing is so important as to punish the traitors on your side of the trench.
Similarly, the ridicule or outright hostility from your acquaintances will accompany you all the days of your life, and you will soon notice there will be those who prefer to avoid your company – though others will esteem you more, and start to think – and your openness will not make you very many friends. He who sees everything will reward you for his when the time comes.
Still, it is fair to say the laity are just the troops: the officers are supposed to be the clergy.
The clergy should be those who organise and direct the battle, not just in the vigil of legislative measures, but forever after. They should be those who gather the immense energy of the angry Christian laity and direct it like an arrow straight to the heart of the democratic system. Democracies are steered by organised minorities, with most voters only being a huge dumb ox no one pays attention to.
The Clergy must stop putting up a half-hearted fight until a decision is taken, and shut up or waffle about “pastoral work” afterwards. Catholics are born for combat. Perversion must be called perversion before, during and after a legislative process aimed at glorifying it. The life of the politicians supporting such measures must be made a living hell not only during the relevant debate, but forever after. The opposition to them must go on until their utter political destruction, and their approval of abomination must tar them in front of all Christians as long as they are in politics, or repent in a credible and very public manner. Every politician must know if he chooses the wrong side he will be made an example of, irrespective of the price to pay. The best deterrent against such policies is not a short fight that ends after six months, but a guerrilla warfare aimed straight at the genitals of the culprits, and going on without cease.
There was a left-wing political movement in Italy, well-known both for being rather extreme and, at the top, largely a product of well-educated sons of the upper middle class. The name of the organisation was Lotta Continua, “uninterrupted fight”. Their motto was “nulla restera’ impunito”, “nothing will remain unpunished”, the Italian translation of the nil inultum remanebit of the Dies Irae.
Whilst I could not disagree more with the political aims of Lotta Continua, I and many others like me always liked the determination and focus of their leadership. We – and our clergy – should really learn from these people, or better said remember what we and they should have known all along.
Is this happening? Not really. After a more or less spirited opposition, our well-fed clergy revert to business as usual and focus on what they love most: popular issues.
Pope Francis is widely reported to have harshly criticised the Argentinian government when they passed perverted legislation, but I have not yet read of a single word he said to make their life difficult after the legislation passed, that is, after the real battle began. How can a politician be afraid – let alone, terrified – of going against Christian values when he knows the end of the vote is very largely the end of the problem?
We must avoid this at all cost, then when we stop to oppose we start to be accomplices, and accessories through silence.
If the trumpet is silent, it is so much more difficult for the troops to regroup and prepare the next assault.
As the BBC has not prominently reported, a mass manifestation took place in Paris yesterday, with an estimated participation of 800,000 according to the organisers, and even the Police figuring around 400,000 attended.
These numbers are very important, because in this case no mass party or trade union was there to organise and provide money and logistics. There can, in fact, be no doubt the initiative was a great success, and I hope a lengthy battle will now take place over the latest pet cause of idiots and leftists after the sudden death of the global warming hysteria.
Predictably, the angle chosen by the aiders and abettors of child abuse at the BBC is to report that apparently France had, before yesterday, a slight majority in favour of making sodomy a perfectly accepted pastime, like fishing. I do not remember the BBC ever choosing this angle when either perverts or other pressure groups they support are themselves in the minority; but it must be my fault, no doubt.
Also please notice if such a mass gathering had taken place some, say, ten years ago with the exact opposite aim, you can bet your hat the BBC would not have allowed any child, dog or cat to remain uninformed, whilst the profile chosen on this occasion is very low to say the least. To the BBC, elementary defence of Christian values and popular support for basic sexual decency must be treated like Jimmy Savile’s decade long activities within the walls of the BBC: the people just do not have to be informed.
The reality on the ground, though, is that the common people (I mean by that people other than conservative Catholic churchgoers) are beginning to wake up: yesterday’s march in Paris united people as different as Christians, Jews, Muslims, Agnostics and Atheists, all with the common conviction that this madness must stop and we must go back to thinking with our brains rather than with the sphincter of a bunch of unspeakably disgusting people firmly in the clutches of Satan.
What happened yesterday in Paris is encouraging, because it shows mobilisation can be realised outside of the predictable conservative Catholic milieu, and be extended to people perhaps not religious but sane enough to wonder what kind of world they will leave to their children and grandchildren.
Kudos to our cheese-loving neighbours, then, and let us hope their effort will not remain unnoticed in the United Kingdom.
You would have thought the French are, when collectively considered, a bunch of adultery-practicing, Saddam-supporting, camembert- loving, socialist-voting football bad losers (cough… 2006 World Championship…) with totally unrealistic manias of grandeur and deserving to be (how was that? Oh yes) ” punished”. You could think that, and many among my countrymen would agree with you…
But you see, it turns out the Frenchies are not all bad. For example, the at least 70,000 who took to the streets to protest against the moral indecency and logical impossibility of so-called “gay marriage” only in Paris (there were more than 20,000 in Lyon, and another almost 10,000 in Marseille; the latter traditionally rather red) actually showed there is hope even for the French.
Particularly if you consider (as you should) that this kind of manifestation is in its infancy in Europe, and it will take some time before the population at large overcomes the diffuse sentiment that to protest against perversion “looks bad” and makes one appear “backward”. In time, I can imagine this kind of initiative to take some momentum, particularly if the Church shows one or three teeth, which here or there might almost be the case.
Also noticeable is the fact that the religion with soon the biggest number of weekly practicing faithful in France (I am talking of the Muslims, of course; say merci beaucoup to Vatican II and the wonderful “renewal” a bunch of cretins brought us, and continue to ignore the immense devastation it brought…) are also on the same barricade as the Christians. This might well prove extremely embarrassing for the gauche, particularly considering many of them certainly do not vote, ahem, for the Front National.
It is my conviction that the average French politician isn’t less of a, erm, salope (Gosh, it sounds so elegant in French…) than the average English one. If I am right, then, they will soon discover the threat posed to their career by the combined forces of left and wing voters, and will start to look for ways to backpedal on the issue without losing too much face. Cue the “man-made global warming” hysteria, which has seen so many brave defenders of the planet suddenly denying they were interesting in more than next weekend’s weather forecast…
When the bubble explodes, it can go rather fast; not as fast as environ-mentalism for sure, but the dynamics can be changed in a matter of a few years, and the theatre of operation switched to the offensive. Look at the battle against abortion in the US and Europe, and compare with ten years ago…
This, if the French bishops and priests pull together as a team, of course, instead of taking example from their football team during the last World Championship…
Bonne chance, anyway…
Interesting video of the always inspiring Michael Voris*, based on the concept of oath.
Think of it, one is surprised of how many people take an oath. Civil servants; military men; judges; jurors; witnesses…..
You would think that of all people, Catholics would be the one with the least difficulties in taking an oath. The granitic nature of Catholic teaching should make this so banal as to not even be matter of discussion, right? Unfortunately, we all know that this is not the case. This is not the case because heterodoxy has spread in many quarters of the Church; has been encouraged to spread by the very people who were in charge of avoiding its diffusion; and has now spread to the point that many Catholics do not even know that they have been fed with superficial common places in the best case and with heresy in the worst.
Yes, I do think that a demand of Pope Benedict to all the clergy to take an oath stating in no uncertain terms their total obedience to the Magisterium would create great difficulties. But this is not the reason to avoid it. In my eyes, the fact that it would create such an outrage is the reason why it should be done in the first place!
Alas: good as he is, Pope Benedict is no St. Pius X and we will not have any oaths during his pontificate; rather, we’ll have a mixture of admirable liturgical restoration – and great courage in starting to spreading the truth rather than politically correct soundbites – and accommodating episcopal appointments which help to perpetuate the grave situation we have today.
Until the situation improves – and it will be a long time before it does – the duty of spreading orthodoxy will fall, to a not little extent, on the shoulders of the laity. The more so in those countries (like England or France) where the clergy is – on average – below an acceptable level of decency.
Let us be prepared, then, and let us pay attention not only to the Magisterium, but to the news and debates surrounding the Church. It will make it more easy – when the occasion invariably occurs – to refute the lies, defend the truth and perhaps help the one or other soul on her way to conversion.
* al always, you might have to log in, which is fast and free.
ICN reports about the French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy coming to the defence of Catholicism in general and of Pope Benedict in particular.
Mr. Lévy’s assertions are of a certain importance due to his notoriety and reputation. Also please note that he is a Jew, but he does not indulge in the anti-Catholic self-victimhood so typical of some liberal Jews (to be clear: of those who don’t believe in God and are enemies of religion anyway).
His point about the desecration of Catholic cemeteries are in my eyes particularly relevant. In his words:
“In France there is much talk about the desecration of Jewish and Muslim cemeteries, but nobody knows that the tombs of Catholics are continually desecrated. There is a sort of anti-clericalism in France that is not healthy at all.”
I’d add that this unhealthy anti-clericalism is alive and kicking in the UK too and probably worse than in France. Here in Blighty you can build your notoriety on savage anti-Catholicism, though a strong attitude towards Islam (eg in Oriana Fallaci style) would be frowned upon and probably lead to security concerns.
Kudos to Monsieur Lévy then, as one of the so-called “intelligentsia” who has the guts to defend the Pope is not so easy to find nowadays. I’ll pray for him and for his conversion.
Those of you who understand French will certainly enjoy this hour-long documentary about French Traditional Catholics produced from France 3 and appeared on Gloria TV. The documentary is obviously not without faults, but one must say that the effort to understand French Traditionalism and accurately transmit its values to the viewers is, for a secular sender, remarkable.
There are small parts you won’t like (a stupid reference to alleged “Islamophobia” comes to mind; one also notices that secular people are unable to discuss Traditionalism without mixing it with the private opinions of Bishop Williamson), but in general I think that many lukewarm French Catholics who have seen this documentary have been left with a lot to think about.
Those who do not understand French (no subtitles, unfortunately) will enjoy the period footage of Archbishop Lefebvre and the beautiful music in the first part of the documentary.
He will also enjoy the masses. Both on the impressive footage from the Sixties and on the parts dealing with contemporary traditionalism, one can’t avoid noticing the numerical impact of an organisation numbering 150,000 in a country with around the same inhabitants as the United Kingdom. Since Vatican II France has been disgraced with bishops among the worst on the planet, but it is also the country where the reaction to “Catholicism easy” is strongest and best organised.
You’ll notice (and this is correctly put in evidence in the documentary) the strikingly low average age of the French Traditionalists. In addition, the entire editorial cut of the documentary makes at least an honest effort to portray them in their daily lives and as normal people rather than deluded nutcases, as the BBC or Channel Four would most certainly do.
These are young people, young mothers, families with children; they are listened to in the course of their daily life, in the kitchen, the reception room, at lunch, in a brasserie or bar; they smoke and drink beer, are dressed correctly but like everyone of us and are evidently not living in a parallel, alternative world like a hippy or an extremist biker. These are people with normal jobs and normal lives, whom every lukewarm Catholic could easily have as friends.
I recommend the viewing to the french-speaking readers, but even those who don’t will probably find the initial part – with the period footage and the music – rather interesting.