A bizarre news hit the internet yesterday. The Dutch Bishops have not celebrated, as is their custom, the anniversary of the election of a Pope. The explanation given for this is even more bizarre: no time.
The Dutch Bishops taken together are, as we all know, a bunch of heretics. They should have all the interest in the world to support Francis. They should be cheerleading for him day and night.
Instead they have, literally, “no time for Francis”.
Whilst it is difficult to know what is going on here, one can make a reasonable hypothesis: that Francis has made such an ass of himself that even those who are, like him, on the side of the demons prefer to keep their distance.
It’s like being a South-American Dictator that is such an embarrassment to his own generals, that they try to distance themselves from him even as they enrich themselves under his rule.
Admittedly, there might be other explanations (from sheer laziness, to virtue-signalling because they are so busy “helping the poor” to, methinks, unwillingness to cancel the meeting at the Gay Sauna). But realistically, the one I have mentioned above seems the most realistic.
A heretical Pope despised by his fellow heretics gives the measure of this man’s epic failure.
We are truly living in the age of the delicate violet.
It is as if any notion of manliness had gone away together with the last vestiges of Christianity.
Truth is now taboo. Being sensitive violets is all that counts, and this obligation to poisonous sensitivity at the expense of Faith encompasses everyone and everything. Even children, who are in the age when truths is most easily absorbed and imprints itself most clearly in our consciousness, must not be spared. No, their faith must be perverted at a very young age, courtesy of the Evil Clown.
It is not difficult to say to a young orphan that if his atheist father died in his atheism he is most certainly in hell. It is an “if”, not a “when”. It preserves the faith – for the good of the child second, and of the Faith first – and encourages him to pray, as every Christian should, for the soul of his father; in the hope that one day he might discover that his father did not, in fact, die in his atheism.
What was done to this child is cruel. He was inoculated with the germ of atheism, and the Pope himself was the one with the syringe. What unbelievable rubbish, what atheist nonsense, what negation of Christ for the sake of… what? Of not making a child cry? Poppycock. For the sake of spreading atheism among all Catholics. Then if Francis is right, Jesus is a liar, Christianity does not make any sense, and Christ died on the Cross for those who deny and insult Him to the last, like the evil robber on the Cross.
What a nasty piece of work this man is. His hatred for everything Christian has now become totally unhinged. It is as if he wanted to show us that the more we criticise him, the more heresy he will spread, just because he can.
Besides, this comes from a man who has just released an Apostolic Excrementation going on and on about the evil of Pelagianism, but is obviously too thick to understand that to maintain that a man goes to heaven without faith, simply because he is “a good man”, is as Pelagian as a heretic can be.
Every hen loves her little ones. Stalin loved his daughter. Goebbels loved his family. But human love without faith does not merit heaven, then he who rejects Him Who is the Way, the Truth and the Life cannot claim acceptance by Him because of lesser, and utterly natural, and by the way God-given, good traits in his character. Works without faith do not save.
This unhinged, evil man must be exposed for what he is: an atheist subversive only interested in showing to the liberal and atheist crowds, whose approval he craves, that he is one of them.
Die soon, Francis, and may the Lord have mercy on you. Though for some reason I have the impression that your pit will be the deepest in hell.
There is an article on Antonio Socci’s blog that got me thinking. The article was published yesterday, April Fools’ Day, and when I read it I thought of an April’s fish; particularly for the use of the Italian adjective, “farlocco”, normally a jocose way of saying “fake”, or “pretty dumb”, and would have caused a smile after the announcement of the “fish”.
However, I write this on the afternoon of the 2nd, and the post is still up there with no “Fish” whatsoever.
The article is long and smart, but the part that interests me is Socci’s assertion that a non-Italian Cardinal got very angry, contacted other Cardinals, then contacted the Pope and, also on behalf of those other Cardinals, let him know that his statements exposed him to the danger of being deposed.
This would be, if confirmed, quite the bomb. However, yours truly observes the following:
- What kind of Cardinals are those who ran to the phones for a quotation in an atheist newspaper, but do nothing for an entire encyclical signed by the Pope? It seems unlikely that the Cowardinals would shut up (even the four, after some meowing) following the official proclamation of an alternative morality, but would be suddenly up in arms for the quotation of a 94 years old in an atheist newspaper. Unless…
- Unless even Cowardinals are humans, and some of them might even believe in God, and be afraid for their eternal destiny; hence this short outburst of reason; which, by the way, was put to rest when the Vatican denied not even that Francis might believe in heresies, but merely that he would say so openly to a journalist. Still…
- … the perhaps most interesting fact is in the rumor itself: this is a Pope who might have been called by a Cardinal more or less kindly threatening him with deposition, and the facts makes headlines, and no one finds it absurd or the fruit of fantasies. This Pontificate is so discredited that rumors of threats of deposition are seen, whether true or not, as perfectly realistic.
How the humble have fallen!
The Pope who, first after the middle Ages and Renaissance, uses methods of open intimidation and condones – nay: promotes – corruption is the one who dares to call us “mafiosi”.
If you think that Francis is not actually calling faithful Catholics like that, you haven’t been attention in the last five years. Francis uses his many public utterances for the relentless smearing and insulting of all those who criticise him.
In the latest months this has obviously included a wider public than us – as the guy has managed to even be implicated in the cover-up of the responsibility of bishops abetting paedophilia -, but generally, it is fair to say that we remain his first and favourite shooting target.
As is often the case, Francis forgets in today’s rant what he has said yesterday. Only some days ago he was waxing
lyrical effeminate about this strange god who just can’t avoid forgiving everything to us no matter what our sins; but those who are today’s targets of Francis’ bile will “end badly”, which can only be a reference to the lack of said forgiveness, i.e.: hell. The old, lewd guy is clearly looking for new ways to insult us, and he has now escalated to “mafiosi”, probably because he felt that way on the day. I consider it a promotion, and an insult to wear with honest pride (the good, not the perverted or the presumptuous one). To be called a “mafioso” by Lewd Francis is like to be called “deplorable” by Crooked Hillary.
Francis lives in a contradiction-indifferent space. He does not show any interest today in what he has said yesterday. He does not seem to understand that after the age of, say, seven, a boy is expected to show some coherence in what he says. He seems to see the Vatican as a huge pram, out of which he can throw toys with almost daily frequency in the presence of journalists.
I make an easy predictions: many mafiosi, even among those who are in hell, will suffer less than this disgraceful caricature of a Pope if he does not repent.
And I will not even call him “pope mafioso”. The man is such dirt that it would almost look like a compliment.
Five Years tomorrow, and even the professional pessimists could hardly have imagined such an aggressively anti-Catholic Pontificate from one who is, hands down, the most disgraceful, heretical, clearly atheist, church-hater Pope in History.
However, the dominant trait of this Pontificate is, if you ask me, the stupidity of the man.
Atheist he may be. A Church-hater, too (Many Jesuits, possibly almost all of them, very probably are). Perhaps a closeted homo. Certainly a hard line socialist. But what remains, in my eyes, as the most dominant trait of this Pontificate is the explosive mixture of ignorance, arrogance and stupidity that became its mark from the start.
This (initially) shocking aspect of this Pontificate is also the most encouraging one for those who care for Catholicism.
Too arrogant to admit he is doing all wrong, too ignorant to grasp the historic resilience of Catholicism, and far too stupid to go about his work of destruction with any subtlety, Francis has long been the worst enemy of his War on Catholicism. Five Years later you must be a homo, a commie or an atheist to like him. Francis has “six-pound-note” written so large on his forehead, that he is now an embarrassment for the most hardened Pollyannas.
Five years of unspeakable arrogance, ignorance and stupidity later, the game is up. The sheep understand that this is a wolf, not a shepherd. Francis’ project has utterly and completely failed, in that he will “lead astray” only those who were determined to get lost anyway. No-one with some Catholic goodness in his heart will ever by deceived by this old, lewd nincompoop.
This is the only silver lining of the present situation: a jackass is, undoubtedly, Pope.
But at least all the world can see it.
The election in Italy have been, if not a real earthquake, a rehearsal for the real thing. The leftist coalition that gave us perversion and euthanasia legislation has been defeated in a humiliating way, and only 3% separates the right coalition from the 40% giving right to an absolute majority. This will not fail to make them bold, as the implicit threat of new elections must be now very scary to everyone else.
Not for many years has the Country been so intolerant of the lies and politically correct madness of the ruling oligarchies. The EU and the Euro are officially in trouble, if not dead yet. Things are going better, slowly.
But it would be wrong to believe that this is the turning of the tide for our Catholic values, and it remains to be seen whether there will be the numbers and the political will to reverse at least the latest stupid legislative measures. I honestly will not hold my breath.
Still, something is changing. One step at a time, a sane desire for old values and the “old religion” might well follow the rejection of the mantras of modern PC thinking (= more Muslims, more globalisation, more Brussels).
In all this, however, an element is impossible to ignore: the Italian voters have shown Pope Francis the longest middle finger he could imagine, the coalition obviously supported by him trounced big time, and voted by non Catholics only.
Matteo Renzi may well be the biggest political loser of this election.
But the biggest loser of them all is a Pope told to take a hike, by Catholic voters, in Italy.
The new, predictably atrocious CDF letter concerning how bad we Catholics are and how getting out of the bed with either the right or the left foot in the morning signifies an implicit desire for salvation must not – after we have stopped laughing – make us forget other and very important issues.
In other words, Francis must not be allowed to deflect from his scandalous support for Bishop Barros, his shameless assault on the coffins of the Papal Foundation and his wholesale delivery of the Church in China to a ruthless, anti-Christian Communist regime.
This may seem obvious, but it isn’t. The man’s relentless offences to the Church and the Catholic religion must not allow him to distract the attention from other issues, including those which even the all-forgiving secular world considers taboo.
Hammer the guy with blog posts related to the Barros scandal until he can’t say ” Neo-Pelagian” anymore and see this helping our cause in the other issues, too.
Let him feel how pleasant life is between the hammer of the Catholic world and the anvil of the secular one.
He is so humble, he will cope well.
The dreaded news is among us again: new Cardinals and possibly a new Encyclical Letter coming. There is little doubt the new document will cause further division and schism (and there is no deterrent for Francis from doing so, seen that Amoris Laetitia caused no more than some extremely hypocritical meowing). There is even less doubt that the new appointments will further disfigure and ravage the Church.
Whilst we do not know when and in which way the Lord will put an end to this situation, every round of red hat appointments makes it reasonable to suppose that this crisis will get deeper, and will last for longer, than we hoped. Realistically, and bar some great surprise and gift from Up Above, the crisis will continue in this virulent form for many years.
Mind, I do not think that Francis’ successor will be as stupid as he is. What I truly fear is that we might be heading toward a Smart Heretic, one in the mould of Schoenborn; one, I mean to say, who will further Francis’ agenda without any of the latter’s boorishness, intemperance, and outright ignorance whilst being mindful at all times to project a reassuring, staid, “moderate” leadership (after Francis, even saying the Lord’s Prayer or genuflecting in front of the Blessed Sacrament will be considered “moderate” by the mainstream press) unavoidably perceived as solid, reassuring, “catholic” (small c). This would cause the disease to become more insidious as it remains just as virulent.
I wonder here if the Divine Plan has not already decreed a double whammy as a punishment for V II: fifty years of descent into madness, followed by 50 years of raving insanity, or which Francis is only Stage 1. If we consider what insolent rebellion to God Vatican II became, I would call even such a punishment merciful.
If this is the case – and I admit it is a very depressing case – what are we to do? Those who have followed this blog for some time already know the answer: we keep living in the true faith, and keep being determined to die in it. We should be determined to live (and to die) striving to be Catholic Water Lilies in the sea of mud that is the Vatican II Church, doing our best to collaborate with Grace and do our part in the salvation of the Elect, among whom we hope to be, one day, called ourselves.
Eternity is very, very long; and heresy is very, very stupid. How many decades this crisis will go on has no bearing, none whatsoever, on how we are supposed to react to it. In the end, my days are already counted and the day I will go to my judgment is already established, whether this crisis ends tomorrow or in 200 years. Similarly, the eternity awaiting me – hopefully on the right side of the fence – will not become shorter or longer because of Francis.
The crisis we are living is terrible. The thought of Francis making it worse with every Consistory is just as ugly. But all this pales in front of eternity, and this crisis gives us the opportunity to fight the good fight in the ways Providence has decided for us.
If you have not done it already, I suggest you prepare yourself for 45 more years of drunkenness.
Not many seem to have noticed it in the midst of the rampant paedo scandal, but Mao-Tse-Francis has, last week, done something extraordinary.
In an interview to in Italian newspaper, he has openly admitted that a number of Catholic blogs call him a heretic. The statement was followed by the usual insults, but what interests us here is the message sent by this extraordinary admission.
Mao-Tse-Francis is admitting, as a fact of life, that many orthodox Catholic bloggers consider him a heretic. This is such an admission of total failure as a bigger one can not easily be given, short of open confession. It should have crossed the mind of this nincompoop that, by the very admission of the phenomenon, he is admitting its sheer scale. No Pope would be concerned with isolated nutcases. But in this case the phenomenon – nay: the movement ) is so strong that even he finds it impossible to ignore.
It is such a complete loss of face for a Pope to have to admit that he is widely – and in particular among the right kind of Catholics – considered a heretic that every other heretical Pope, if endowed with a properly functioning brain, would accurately avoid the subject. Not so Francis: firstly because he is stupid, and secondly because he is such a little bitch that he could not resist insulting us. Which is the other message sent out with his admission.
Too much of a heretic to avoid a mass insurgency, too stupid to shut up about it, and too petty to resist the temptation to insult us.
This last interview is an accurate picture of this Pontificate.
The way FrancisChurch is unraveling under our eyes is, whilst depressing in consideration of the man’s obvious wickedness, still consoling in that, as often stated, oportet ut scandala eveniant.
This article links three of Francis’ closest collaborators to a year long, relentless cover-up activity, and all three wear a red robe: Cardinal Maradiaga, Cardinal Errazuriz and Cardinal Ladaria. Astonishingly, Cardinal Ladaria is the new head of the CDF.
Read the article for the sordid details.
Note that three out of these three men were promoted by Francis to position of higher responsibility in full knowledge of the polemics and accusations surrounding them. This is, again, a behaviour that can be explained only if we assume that all three major components of Francis character were present in turbocharged fashion:
- arrogance, and
Even an extremely wicked and arrogant man would, if in possession of a modicum of intelligence, have known better than to surround himself with an entire line of smoking guns. Not so Francis, who – being stupid – actually proceeded to shoot himself in the black boots multiple times and even dared to factually dismantle and make impotent Benedict’s effective reforms meant at countering clerical abuse.
Again, this is the same unbearable insolence, the same unspeakable arrogance of the man who, asked about the “gay mafia”, mocked them asking them where this gay mafia would reside and whether they would wear an identification badge. His insolence and stupidity was already evident with such assertions; what surprises now is not their existence, but their scale.
Make no mistake: Francis is never going to overcome this. The scandals will never leave him, and who knows what other smoking guns are about to emerge. His pontificate and his reputation are well and truly screwed among both Catholics (we knew that) and worldly people (this is a new development).
Francis has nuked his own Pontificate.
Can’t say it’s very sad to see the atomic mushroom go up in the sky.
'Unble Paedoabetter Francis pretends the world has not noticed what a piece of Obama he is and keeps lecturing us about opening our hearts and such like saccharine nonsense.
I am not buying it.
This guy has now irretrievably compromised himself and the only think he deserves is to be covered in righteous mud until he either resigns and hillaries off to Argentina – provided they want him; there might be some hut free in the midst of his curas villeros – or else kicks the bucket and goes wherever the Lord's Justice has decreed fitting for him.
It is bad enough to have a man engaging in a shameless cover-up of child abuse to protect his friends.
It is even worse to see the same man lecturing us about how we should become more like him.
May your days be short, Mao-Tse-Francis. And whilst I really wish you salvation with all my heart, I can't avoid thinking that there is a very deep, extremely stinky, excruciatingly hot hole being dug in hell as I write this, just for you.
Today is the fifth anniversary of that fateful day, in which Pope Benedict XVI announced his intention to abdicate at the end of the month and make way for a more vigorous Pope.
Benedict's Pontificate had been, Summa Summarum, more Catholic than JP II's, particularly because of the historic Summorum Pontificum. Therefore, I then believed in the honest, straight narrative of a Pope who feels that his strength is leaving him and, remembering the last sad tears of JP's Pontificate, decided to make way for a more energetic man, confident that the Conclave he was about to leave would lead to the election of a man continuing on his path, a Benedict XVII so to speak.
This reading still makes, if you ask me, the most sense. However, the past five years have not helped the man to rise in my, or many others', estimation. Actually, if I were the man I would now be rather scared for my salvation.
Benedict The Emeritus has disappointed in many ways. One can mention here:
1. The at least two interviews – two were really brutal and I have written about them; there were other minor occasions – in which Benedict approved of Francis' work and expressed himself in glowing terms concerning his Pontificate.
2. The failure to do what he said he would do: retire to a life of prayer and contemplation. It seems nowadays not even nonagenarian Popes can resist the temptation of frequent interviews and photo-ops, with or without Bierkrug.
3. The failure to condemn Pope Francis when it became clear that the pontificate was steering towards aggressive heresy. In particular, his silence concerning Amoris Laetitia and the many heresies and blasphemies therein contained – something a theologian like him must see with extreme clarity – is most shocking from one who claims to still keep the title of former Pope, and therefore maintains that he is still way more than just another bishop.
4. The strange neo-Catholic thinking and reference to his, apparently, imminent salvation (about which doubts are more than justified). That a Pope who decided to abdicate does not approach his impending death, at least publicly, with fear and trembling tells you all you need to know about V II and the massacre of sound Catholic thinking.
I certainly forget a lot.
In general, the man gives the impression of being not a leader, but a follower. In true German fashion, he has marched to the drum of V II without much regard for the ruins he saw around him. When it became clear to him that Francis' course was a much more brutal incarnation of V II that he could ever imagine, he decided to toe the party line and promote this new, inspired version of V II, instead of using his unique position to try to give witness for proper Catholicism.
Granted: countless bishops and Cardinals have done the same. But much fewer have given glowing interviews about Francis, and no one of them has insisted on being called Pontiff Emeritus.
Benedict is, I think, about to get into history as a tragic, pathetic figure. Too weak to be an effective Pope, too naive to see Francis coming as a result of his many disgraceful episcopal and cardinalatian appointments, too cowardly and gregarious to denounce the disaster unfolding under his eyes, and even praising Nero whilst Rome burns.
Now, in his last legs, the recent, disquieting public announcement of his own impending salvation; which is what V II does to you if you allow it to work on you for 60 years.
Some of the events I had forgotten, some others I did not know.
Boy, this is impressive, and not in a good way.
Kudos to Fr Ray Blake for the guts.
I would like to tell you that the way Francis is, with his own hands, destroying his pontificate fills me with sadness. Alas, I never was the one for the soppy phrases.
I have been saying for years now that, once clear that this Pontificate is of the devil, it is good for the papacy and for the Church that this pontificate implodes. What I was not expecting is that this Pope – whom I have never considered a genius anyway; rather the contrary – would be so unbelievably dumb to shoot himself in the gonads with the energy he is showing, for all the world to see.
Francis is, basically, attacking his own pontificate on several fronts. His Chinese wholesale of the entire Church in China to his favourite people – the Communists – comes at the exact same time that he is exposed as a gross liar – raise his hand who believes that Cardinal O'Malley, not Francis, is lying…. – and a shameless protector of his friends, just as the number of powerful homos within the hierarchy becomes larger and more embarrassing.
I dare here to formulate three hypotheses, and I would be very surprised if no one would apply:
1. The man is stupid, childish and arrogant; to the point that he does not even understand that his homo antics and his erotic attraction for socialism, environmentalism and income redistribution will end up destroying his papacy.
2. He is a homo, blackmailed by other homos into espousing the perverts' agenda, and possibly also encouraged – provided he needs any encouragement – to further an anti-Catholic agenda in other matters to make the homo plan more easily digestible.
3. He has other secrets, not of perverted nature, and he is blackmailed by the homo lobby into number 2 through them.
Be it as it may, this papacy is now rapidly becoming Francisgeddon, as I do not remember a single name of a world personality who, once targeted by the entire planet for being an a better of pedophilia, managed to get out of trouble by crying “Environment!” Or “Inequality!”
Paedophilia is the last taboo of the taboo less society.
Francis has doomed his Pontificate with his very own hands.
First of all, some historical perspective.
The ingerence of the secular power in the appointment of bishops is not new. Everyone who remembers his history lessons at school knows that for several centuries political power (and particularly the Sacred Roman Empire) proceeded to appoint bishops either without opposition from Rome, or with Rome's collaboration. If memory serves, the famous episode of Canossa relates, in fact, to this very question.
Coming to more recent times, we know that the Austro-Hungarian Empire (the last successor of the Sacred Roman Empire of the Germanic Nation) had a one-time “veto right” on the appointment of a Pope until that Empire lasted.
If we look at today, we know that in Countries like Germany the appointment of at least certain Bishops still requires – again, if memory serves – the seal of approval of German political authorities.
In short, it's not that either bishops are appointed by the Pope without any external influence, or the Church is dying/a fraud/not indefectible, etc.
However, what is happening in China is something completely different from the above mentioned situation.
Here, we have a communist government trying to create its own, domesticated, pro-regime church, and we see with astonishment the Vatican, literally, siding with the devil, accepting his candidates and asking orthodox bishops of the Catholic Church to step down and make place for regime puppets.
The deeply Christian countries of Europe could found their power in the appointment of bishop with the deeply Christian mission with which they felt, and were, entrusted. The Habsburgs had their veto right in consequence of their unimpeachable tradition as defenders of the faith. Even the German rules – possibly applicable in other Countries – certainly never had the purpose of allowing a Communist government to control the Church of that Country!
What is happening in China goes beyond the realm of the mediocre political decision, and clearly enters the realm of the satanical. It is not only the scale of the Country, but the ideology governing it that makes it so: an officially atheist hierarchy should have the say in appointing Christ's bishops! Again, this is beyond merely insane.
This is, once again, Francis working for Satan. Once again, the man shows his hatred for the Church by demolishing everything Catholic every time he can. The idea of defending Catholic thinking is so extraneous to him that even giving a Communist regime a huge influence over the Church in China does not faze him at all.
Satan is the Father of Lies. Francis is a petty liar. They seem to work well together.
The latest production of the Evil Clown's Catholicphobic mind is a new document giving instructions on how to better ruin Catholic faculties and other institutes of higher education, and make sure that Catholicism is substituted, for as far as practical, with the new mantras of the secular world: social justice, environmentalism, redistributionist rubbish.
The rhetoric is deafening, with a repeated call to baldness in… not being Catholic. It is, in fact, as if Francis were saying to his main audience (those who hate Catholicism) : “see? I am still your darling! I might protect a bishop enabler of child abuse whenever I like the man, or the man is loyal to me; but please look at the big picture: I am as environ-mentalist as Al Gore, as Socialist as Bernie Sanders, and every bit a bitch as Angela Merkel! You gotta love me!”
Thankfully for us, the propaganda is so open, so shameless that it does not need an intelligent reader to understand what is going on. Basically, Francis is doing the work for us and exposing himself as a faithless subversive without any need for long explanations.
This man cannot die one day too soon. Let us hope that the Lord, who is punishing us in the most fearful way for enabling 50+ years of V II-ism, will soon put an end to this utterly obscene Papacy and give us a successor that is, at least, recognisably Catholic.
And it came to pass the Unholy Father had to spout his own dumb, banal lies about “fake news”, as it seems there is no political issue about which this cretin thinks that the world does not have to listen to him. As expected, the stupidity of the man is mind boggling.
Fake news need discernment to be uncovered, he says. How do you discover fake news? Simple, says Sherlock: they are those news who are divisive and sow discord.
This is dumb – and.. fake news! – even for Francis' standard! Being controversial or difficult to cope with for some says nothing about it being truthful or fake. If I say that Pope Francis spreads and promotes sacrilege and heretical thinking, this may be controversial, but it is certainly not fake!
And we see here where Francis wants to have you: his criticism of “fake news” is nothing but an invitation to ignore the truest news of the last years: that we are plagued with a vulgar, short-tempered, impious, sacrilegious, Church-hating Pope doing all he can to damage Christ and His Church.
Is this controversial? You bet. But if you think that this is “fake news” you may be even dumber than Francis.
Nor does this astonishing dumb propaganda end here. The man also thinks that the role of the journalist is not merely to “break news”, but to spread news that further understanding and harmony among the people. Apart from the fact that not even a child of six is impressed by this bout of effeminate emotionalism, the consequence of the thinking is that a falsehood that encourages “harmony” (say: “Pope Francis is a wonderfully Catholic Pope and everyone loves him”) would be “good news” even if patently false. But once again, this is what the man wants: that journalists shut up about his endless gaffes and scandals because it promotes harmony.
I don't know if this man has become entirely senile because he has always been stupid and it is difficult to tell. But one must say that this level of stupidity does justify the question whether an already stupid man is being left by even that little quantity of grey matter he had.
Pope Entirely Demented would be, no doubt, a huge improvement on Pope Francis.
Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive…
The PR stunt of the “Francismarriage” on the aeroplane in Chile is revealing more and more elements which, alone, say a lot about this pontificate. What I remember on the spot is:
1. The two were concubines. No trace of repentance, living separated in preparation of the marriage, etc. Mortal sin as it lives and breathes. Isn't it fun?
2. The two had actually planned to marry, but an earthquake which took place in… 2010 prevented them for doing so. For more than seven years, you understand. Boy, these South American Earthquakes have quite the after effects. Cela va sans dire, the two did find the time – earthquake or no earthquake – to go live in sin and give public scandal. Cue a non-judgmental Francis not caring a straw for the Sacraments and for basic decency, as always.
3. The stunt was presented as a “spontaneous” act, but was in fact carefully planned. What a fake, hypocrite, dumb, reckless liar of a Pope we have! So fake that he lies to you in order to promote his image, so stupid that he doesn't realise his lies will be unmasked in a matter of days.
Really, how wrong can a person get something in one go? This is Guinness-worthy. The man has actually exposed himself as a cheap, stupid liar for the sake of two days' headlines! A seven – year – old with some smarts would be a better liar and, very possibly, a better Pope.
This Papacy has become like those cringeworthy spectacles in the circus of the last ocentury, those meant to make people be horrified and fascinated by the same horror they felt: the Cannon Woman, the Bearded Woman, the… Clown Pope!
I don't know for how long Francis' Horror Show will go on. But I tremble at the thought of the pit very probably prepared for this man in hell.
It has been asked in the comments whether the Papacy will ever recover from the damage Francis inflicted to it. In my eyes, when we have the right Pope the Papacy will recover very, very fast.
People feel the need for a spiritual guide. Not only Catholics, but many Christians around the world yearn for a reassuring figure guiding the, in the end, most reassuringly permanent institution in the world. Imagine a new Pius, or a new Leo, unapologetically doing what a Pope is supposed to do. We would have a Trump-like reaction: the MSM would insult the man every day, and countless millions – possibly billions – of people would emit a big sigh of relief and think to themselves: “finally!”
Also, the Papacy is not simply another political institution. Its foundation in Christ makes it more resilient to the vagaries of time and troubles of the last occupant. Whilst it undoubtedly is a political office, it is first and foremost a religious one. It is like a big statue made of silver, ready to shine again once a good polishing has been applied.
The recovery of the Papacy has never been my concern and, in fact, if it had been I would have never shot at the disgraceful behaviour of Francis the way I did all these years. My concern is, in fact, another: where is the Pius, or the Leo, we need to get out of this? In a world where a wet kitten like Burke is taken as example of orthodoxy and courage, how can the Papacy recover its attractiveness and prestige? A Pope Burke would, as things stand now, merely slow the decline as he is eaten alive by the enemies of Christ because of his sheer lack of testosterone. Benedict 2.0. If we are lucky.
We don't have any use for a Pope Burke. I can't see, in the natural order of things, any hope around me for a Pope Pius or Pope Leo.
I would gladly set for a Pope Donald, one who is tough and always ready for a fight, whatever his private shortcomings.
He would repair a lot of damage, all right.
And it came to pass the Evil Clown shot himself in the (black) boot for the,mlikely, 1547th time. When in Chile, the man defended his pal, Bishop Barros, in the usual intemperate, boorish words of his, openly accusing of slander any and all of his accusers. His words were so harsh his own chief abuse guy, Cardinal O'Malley, called them “inexplicable”. I think “sadly very explicable” is more like it.
Now, a Pope does not have to believe every accusation against every bishop. However, the kind of angry answer given by the Unholy Father (with the “is that clear?” conclusion that really says it all) is indicative of the scale of the problem we are facing here, and it is something you would never hear from Benedict.
It is, by the way, perfectly legitimate to suspect Francis of cover-up in clerical scandals whenever the culprit is a pal of his. This is a man who allows a notorious sodomite priest to run the very hotel where he lives, and promoted him to the top of the Vatican Bank!
Francis does not reason in terms of right and wrong, but in terms of friends and enemies; and, being the dim-witted man he is, he does not realise how evident this is to everyone else.
It would be better now for this old, angry, vulgar man to take his age as an excuse and just stay home, avoiding public utterances as much as his unmeasurable ego allows him. No trips, no interviews and, for heaven's sake, no aeroplanes! The time is coming fast when the expensive trips become so embarrassingly empty of faithful, and full of controversies, that not even his most ardent propaganda helpers will be able to conceal the utter failure of this radioactive Pontificate.
When your own Cardinal O'Malley calls your words “inexplicable”, basically saying that you are either a nincompoop out of control or an evil man, you know your Pontificate is on its way down and – hopefully soon – out.
And it came to pass that the Evil Clown married a couple on the airplane, between the safety announcements and a snack, to the delight of those idiots for whom a marriage is something that is better if it unusual, or “fun”, or in any way different.
The spouses were concubines, and at this point I wonder whether Francis would, if asked, refuse to marry any couple that are not already living in mortal sin. Obviously, there is no mention of the two showing any kind of contrition for their public scandal, much less living at separate adresses in preparation for their holy sacrament.
With Francis everything is like this: sacraments must be banalised, downplayed or outright attacked. Let's marry the concubines in the airplane; it is “fun” and it will make a couple of headlines!
Poor deluded ass. Poor arrogant boor. Poor, stupid chav* in white.
It is embarrassing even to us to see the man sink in a small, dirty puddle of indifference, ignored by the masses whose approval he so vainly seeks as he gets slapped in the face by newspapers thrown at him by, hopefully, faithful Catholics.
This man must be ridiculed and demolished in his reputation, if any left, without any mercy, and no matter how cringeworthy his pathetic search for attention becomes. He has deserves nothing but contempt. He deserves to have coins thrown on his coffin, the ultimate insult Italians reserve for corrupt politicians who have kicked the bucket.
The more shameful the descent into oblivion of this disgusting man becomes, the better the chance that, by God's grace, the Cardinals will give us some half decent Pope at the next attempt.
* 'Council House And Violent' . The magic of politically incorrect British English…
This is the astonishing picture of the epic failure of Francis in Chile.
Who is interested in an old, lewd, bitter ass spouting sugary nonsense or socialist drivel every time he opens that stupid mouth of his?
Who has any respect for someone constantly sabotaging the Sacraments?
When will the Vatican (and the endless choir of sycophants constantly licking his booths) admit that this old, lurid scoundrel not only does not attract, but positively repels the faithful?
This man is an embarrassment not only for the Church as a whole, but even to those who support his destructive agenda. Too vulgar, too lewd, too grumpy, too short-tempered to keep the lie of the “humble Pope” going.
The more he keeps traveling, the more we will see pictures like this one, which will couple well with the one of a more and more deserted Saint peter Square at home.
If you put a white cassock on an ass, don’t be surprised if after a while no one is interested in the show.
As we are living in unspeakably evil times, let us imagine that the unspeakably evil happens:
Saturday, 13 January 2017, Pope Francis solemnly proclaims ex cathedra the truth of the Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide Protestants tenets. He orders all Catholics to adhere to the new proclamation, which he very formally declares infallible in exercise of the Pope's Extraordinary Magisterium.
Can you say, then, that the Church is a fraud? Certainly not. The Church cannot be a fraud, because it is de fide that the Church is the Bride of Christ and if we declare that false we must declare the whole of Christianity false, which is an absurdity considering that the Church, sound theology and sound reasoning tell us the contrary.
Are works, in this case, not necessary anymore for salvation? Certainly not, as what was true yesterday must be true today and if I do not believe today what I believed yesterday it means that I have lost the faith, and that's that.
If, therefore, the Unspeakably Evil happens, what conclusion shall we draw?
That the Church still exists. With all her rules, traditions and institution.
And that the Sea is vacant.
This is the correct understanding of the situation. Any other interpretation leads ad absurdum, because it contradicts Catholic teaching either in one way (the Pope has the authority to change doctrine) or in the other (a pope who officially, solemnly proclaim heresy has not, ipso facto, made the sea vacant).
Obviously, such a Pope would still be, factually, sitting on the throne of Peter. But it would be only this: a de facto situation which is the fruit of abuse and usurpation, as if Napoleon had proclaimed himself Pope. We would have the duty to refuse obedience to both the usurper and everyone asking us to help him in any way, shape or form.
If the worst happens, there is still a simple, logical, coherent explanation fully in line with Catholic doctrine.
Do not lose your sleep, therefore, thinking what would happen if the Unspeakably Evil came to pass. The Church that has protected sixty generations before you will protect you, too. But she will demand that you believe in Her and in Her Truth, and in Her Bridegroom and His Promise, too. To abandon the Church when you have most need of Her (and She has most need, in a sense, to be defended by you) would be the height of pride and arrogance. But you will stand on the side of Christ and His Bridegroom, no matter what.
I have read somewhere today that the Evil Clown has invited the faithful to silence during Mass, because when one is silent one can “listen to his heart” and, more importantly, “to the Holy Spirit”.
I will gloss over the inanity and banality of the words, probably inedible by a smart child of five. What I would like to point out is the subversive message hidden behind the stupid platitudes.
If I can claim to have the ability to oh so emotionally connect to the Holy Spirit, it might not be long before I claim to “recognise” a message that goes against Doctrine. Being thus persuaded of the goodness of my heart and my Direct Line to the Holy Ghost, I can easily persuade myself of the legitimacy of pretty much everything, like living in adultery and even daring to sacrilegiously present myself at the Communion Line.
What Francis does – in that stupid, sugary, childish way of his – is to encourage his (un)faithful to the very epitome of the sin of Pride: thinking that, in the end, I know better than God.
As you laugh about the arrogance of this man and the travesty of Catholicism he peddles to the Reprobates, please reflect on the many similar ways in which your local priests might try to smuggle the same impious message.
Reality check: I cannot listen to the Holy Ghost like I listen to music, nor can you. The Trinity speaks to me through the Church given to me for my salvation. The Bride talks to me every day through her beautiful, bimillenarian message.
Do not listen to Francis. Francis is an ass, the only thing you can learn from him is how to become unbearably stupid, supremely boring and diabolically subversive. Listen to the Depositum Fidei instead, and learn to know and love Church teaching. Therein, not in your own delusions, lies the Holy Ghost.
Alas, Francis is Pope. Has he, therefore, magisterial authority in whatever he pleases? Let us see.
Your Mathematics teachers at school was in possession of all the qualifications and requisites to teach math. He was, to all intents and purposes, a math teacher, the one with the task to teach you how mathematics works. The teacher had the authority to teach you. You listened to what he said and learned the wisdom he imparted because he was the one tasked with the duty of doing so.
The teacher has, in his own sphere of competence, a magisterial authority, an authority to teach, which is why you attend his lesson.
If your teacher had said to you that 2+2=5, would you have said that this is what the teacher says and therefore it must be true, and that you are bound to believe it, or even that everyone in your class must submit and give assent to what the teacher says?
Why not? Because the teaching authority of the teacher can never contradict the truths of the subject matter he is supposed to teach. His teaching authority only applies within the confines of the truths he exposes. The mathematics teacher cannot make a new mathematics, much less demand that you accept it as in any way binding. A math teacher who teaches falseness about mathematics does not change the rules of mathematics, he merely shows that he is a very bad, incompetent, ignorant teacher and should lose his job (also note here: he will still be a mathematics teacher, no matter how incompetent, until he gets fired).
The same basic logic applies to the wrong teaching of a Pope. Yes, the Pope has a magisterial authority. He has the right and duty, like the teacher, to teach the truths of the faith to all Catholics. But exactly as in the case above, the truths he teaches also mark the boundaries of his magisterial authority. A Pope trying to teach you that “in certain cases” adulterers can receive Holy Communion is even more absurd than a teacher trying to persuade you that “in certain cases” two and two can be five. He has no authority to teach falseness. There is no magisterial authority once a pope has put himself outside of the truths which this magisterial authority serve.
This is basic logic (and Christianity) and there is no need of any encyclical letter or solemn pronouncements stating this. The principle of non contradiction demands that it be so, and even before that Christian obedience does. To think that truth can be changed (by anyone, even by Saint Padre Pio; much less by an Argentinian boor) is nothing short of blasphemous even before being absurd.
No, Francis has no magisterial authority to teach anything that is wrong. This is absolutely obvious and as clear as the sun.
The huge scandal here is not that Francis has “changed” anything. Two and two will never be five. The huge scandal is that we have a Pope trying to persuade us that this is the case.
It is, perhaps, fitting to add my two cents to what has already been written about Pope “Evil Clown” Francis approving a modified version of the Our Father for the poor French.
As pretty much always, the problem with Francis is that he does not believe in God. Not believing in God, he thinks that the church is a purely human construct. He also clearly believes that this human construct has done pretty much everything wrong before electing him Pope. Therefore, he proceeds to “improve” on her by proposing alternative teachings, and trying to shape her in the image and likeness of the only god he recognises: comrade Jorge Bergoglio. He did so already concerning communion, marriage, homosexuality, war, poverty, climate change, death penalty, illegal immigration, and countless other matters. Again: it is clear that this man thinks that the Church did everything wrong, from her very beginnings, until he appeared on the scene. This is the clear mark of the atheist.
It is, therefore, no surprise that not even the Our Lord should be spared by this unspeakable scoundrel.
Other have entered into more or less erudite conversations about the exegesis of the word “temptation” and the ways in which ne nos inducas in tentationem can be understood. I frankly don’t care.
What was good for my grandma, and for her grandma before her, is good enough for me. What the Church and the centuries have hallowed, no dirty Argentinian scoundrel is allowed to manipulate. The very idea that the Church may have got the very words of our Lord wrong for centuries is the most obvious evidence of unbelief that can be given.
Like every unbeliever, Francis hides behind various very small and very crooked fingers: historical “research”, literal meaning which “might be misunderstood” (heavens, what a cretin…), a feigned desire to do good, and such like rubbish. This is what every fake believer does as he discusses with you about what “research” tell them about, say, deaconesses, or the role of the priest, or the church’s attitude towards adulterers or homos. Fake research and fake science are always the refuge of true unbelievers.
A Pope tampering with the English translation of dogmatic statements accepted for many generations is a Pope showing that he simply does not believe that the Church has any function at all, and that God would allow the entire Western Christianity to be misled concerning his words; he shows, therefore, that he does not believe in God, as it is absurd to believe in such a mickey mouse god: clearly plagued with communication problems, not even able to make himself understood when he talks to his creatures, and obviously unable to enforce the most elementary standards concerning himself.
Pope Francis is clearly a dyed-in-the-wool atheist, and an extremely arrogant man. But he is also extremely stupid, as he is clearly unable to understand how his vanity and arrogance expose him as a boor, and a miserable ass dressed in white, for everyone who has any trace of sensus catholicus left in him.
Our Father, who art in heaven,
please free us from this scourge.
Please follow this link first and read the news about the (of course) anonymous Argentine theologian saying that what is wrong is wrong even if the Evil Clown says it’s right.
After that, let us reflect on the sorry state of the Church after 60 years of V II.
- The need to even state that a Catholic is not allowed to follow a teaching that does not correspond to the perennial teaching of the Church is depressing. I do not blame the theologian. I blame the Argentinian (and all other V II) priests who have practiced Papolatry all these years.
- Just as depressing is the fact that the theologian feels the need to clarify that it is absolutely false to think that “they must now endorse the Buenos Aires approach under pain of heresy”. Apparently, some people think that being a heretic, nowadays, is not endorsing heresy.
- Francis’ Amoris Laetitia statements are called “novel teaching”. Would you call 2+2=5 a “novel teaching?” I would call it rubbish, not novel teaching. Francis spreads and defends heresy and it is time that theologians, anonymous or otherwise, start calling an evil clown an evil clown
Lack of clarity leads to confusion. To say to a confused (and very ignorant, and sorely in need of instruction) Catholic that Francis is proposing a “novel teaching” is very dangerous, because it gives to heresy the dignity of teaching.
Let our yea be yea. let us heresy by its proper name. Enough with walking on eggshells.
The Age of Confusion will only end when clarity of speaking take its place.
I am now imagining what would happen if the Evil Clown were to, say, officially declare Consubstantiation the official truth of the church, with “no other interpretation”. Say, with a letter to a Protestant leader published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis.
Some would say that this is a publicly stated private opinion, and therefore does not really matter.
Others would state that Francis must be somewhat right, because there must be something that has been divinely revealed to Francis alone.
Some more still would say that Francis does not want to undermine the doctrine about Transubstatiation, but merely offer a pastoral interpretation of it.
Some others would say that the Sweet Peter on Earth is being badly advised by “the wolves”, profiting from his kindness of heart. He, himself, must be free of blame.
More still would say that the Pope was, really, talking off the cuff, though due to his advanced age he forgot to let us know.
We would be treated to “ten things to know and share”, at the end of which we would discover that everything is fine but the Pope should work on his syntaxis.
All the above would, obviously, call themselves “Conservatives”.
Cardinal Burke would give interview #327, stating that the end must be very, very near now; and doing, as always, nothing.
In these difficult days, I see around me two ways in which some bloggers and commenters try to escape reality.
1) They say that Francis is not the Pope. Wrong. Francis is the Pope because the entire Church, the entire Church hierarchy and the entire planet see him as the Pope. He is not even challenged. Not even by the one (Benedict) who according to some is the real and only Pope. The surreal consequence of this is the decision that the one the entire world sees as Pope should not be it, whilst the one some of them say is the only Pope says that he is merely a retired emeritus, and Francis is in charge. A challenge to a throne without even a challenger simply does not exist; it is fantasy, not fact.
Reality matters. However sad and unprecedented this situation is, we face it without thinking that we can decide who is, or isn't, Pope.
2) They downplay Francis' heretical acts and statement, because they are ready to bend over backwards and produce themselves in the most bizarre contortions in order to avoid stating another facts staring at us in the face: that we have a heretical Pope.
Reality, again, matters. The discussion whether Francis is in formal or material heresy is, if you ask me, less important than the agreement on the fact that should be universally acknowledged: that this Pope fosters error and must now – by the bishops and cardinals – be forced to recant it or deposed.
If Francis' heresy is formal, then he has factually made himself unworthy of and factually resigned his office together with his membership of the Church; but this renounciation would still have to be declared in order to depose him, and until that moment he would still be the holder of the office. In the same way, if a POTUS is found in the act of committing a multiple murder he certainly deserves impeachment, but he is still in office until the impeachment is voted, declared and made operative.
If, on the contrary, Francis' heresy is material, then the preliminary stage would be a last offer to recant his error, albeit such a possibility could be offered, in theory, also to a formal heretic.
The situation is, if you ask me, as clear as the sun, because it appears in front of our eyes with all the evidence of hard facts: a heretic seats on the throne of Peter. Still a heretic, and still sitting, with no challenger in sight. This has happened in the past, will happen in the future, is very sad, and has probably never happened with such virulence (even Honorius could have been weakly defended; Francis is indefensible) in the entire history of the Church. Still, here we are, confronted with facts, not our fanciful and very Protestant interpretation of them.
A heretic seats on the throne of Peter, and we were never given assurance that this would not be the case. His heretical energy and hate for the Church is unprecedented, but do is the rebellion of Vatican II. The most astonishing betrayal of proper theology and abandonment of proper governance must perforce lead to the most astonishing explosion of heresy from the top and abuse from the bottom. This is what V II looked like from the very start; it merely needed sixty years for the ugly face of heterodoxy to completely emerge.
I am merely a layman. No Pope has ever depended on my opinion to decide whether he is really Pope, and it is perfectly right this way. Do not escape from reality. Use it as you would for everything else. Apply common sense and Church Teaching. The Church will get out of this as she has from all the rest.
Every single time Francis does something atrocious, there is the one or other theologian explaining to us that Francis has not proclaimed a new dogma, or abolished Canon 915, or the like.
Yeah, well, interesting as an intellectual curiosity. Still, I think that the approach is totally wrong, and that we must stop circling around the real problem. If there is a hurricane going on, I am not really interested in the way the ozone layer reacts to it, nor am I reassured by the newly imparted knowledge. There is a hurricane going on, this is what counts.
Canon 915 is not just another canon. It reflects perennial teaching of the Church. Therefore, the prohibition of Canon 915 cannot be changed, sabotaged, or otherwise circumvented by anyone, and be him the Pope.
Every article reassuring you that Canon 915 has not been touched actually sends these messages: a) that it could be made, legitimately, hollow at some point in future and: b) that the Canon is being sabotaged but hey, don’t worry, it’s still there!
This is, emphatically, not the case in point. The point is that the Church prohibits communion for adulterers, and Francis is going against this prohibition. Therefore, any discussion about the matter should begin and end with the obvious recognition that no one, not even a Pope, can change iota unum in the matter of communion for adulterers. All the rest is, again, walking around the huge elephant in the room, pretending not to see it.
Which leads to the second matter: heresy. I am not at all interested in the discussion about whether Francis is a formal heretic in the strict sense of the matter. For me, and for every God-fearing Catholic on the street, heresy does not begin when a dogma is officially put in question or denied, or there is an attempt to change it ex cathedra. Heresy is, in the common parlance of God-fearing Catholics, the willed promotion of heterodox thinking and the working in order to subvert what the Church has always believed, irrespective of whether a dogma has been touched or not. Pope John XXII is, rightly, considered a heretical Pope because he promoted such a thinking, even if the contrary belief of the Church had not been declared a dogma yet.
It follows from this that Pope Francis is a heretic and must be seen as such by every God-fearing Catholic; that every one of his actions meant to sabotage the Depositum Fidei in any way, shape or form must be condemned in the strongest terms, and refused obedience; and that we, the God-fearing Catholics, must demand that our Cardinals and Bishops grow a pair already, react to Francis’ endless provocations, and demand that he recants his heretical statements or face deposition.
Which, if it does not happen, does not cause the end of the world, nor the end of the Catholic faith. It merely causes the age to plunge into a deeper state of confusion, analogue to the one experienced in the time of Honorius, A situation of confusion from which, if the Bishops and Cardinals do not intervene, God will free us at some point, when the justly meted punishment for the madness of Vatican II has been recognised, and its evil acknowledged and repented.
A heretical Pope is still the Pope. Honorius was still the Pope. Marcellinus was still the Pope. Liberius was still the Pope. John XXII was still the Pope. There is no Church record stating that they were no Popes during the time of their heterodoxy. Not even the ecumenical council caused by Pope Honorius’ heresies stated such a thing.
But a heretical Pope is a Pope that should, now, be forced to change his ways or deposed (as happened with Marcellinus and John XXII, and did not happen with Honorius and, in a different way, with Liberius); failing which the bishops and cardinals who have refused to act (talking to you, Cardinal Burke!) will pay the most horrible price for their cowardice.
Catholics lived with a heretical Pope before. They are living with a heretical Pope now. Shit and Pope Francis happen. It is not for us to decide who is and is not Pope.
But it is for us to acknowledge an obvious, factual situation and ask that our shepherds do their darn job already.