Tag Archives: Pope Francis

CDW’s head-on collision with TLM: Humor

The henchmen of Pope Francis, all really very nice people, incredibly nice – so nice that it’s overwhelming: nice nice nice nice nice!!! – these henchmen claim that they own The Bridge, Christ Jesus, The Bridge between heaven and earth, and claim that they own The Pontifex, Christ Jesus, The Bridge Builder, who rightly called Himself The Way, and even claim that the Sacrifice of the Mass, the Last Supper united with Calvary, is not an expression whatsoever of the Roman Rite [absolutely a statement of its invalidity in their eyes]… these henchmen of Pope Francis feel entitled with all their claims to drive all over the Way they claim they own, feel entitled not to pay attention to anyone on The Bridge, feel entitled to smash into anyone in their way, feel entitled to FEEL THE POWER, these henchmen of Pope Francis, I say, are, instead, similar to the gnat-like idiot-car in the video above coming up against a real vehicle, you know, the TLM. Guess who wins in the end? See the video above. Rather humorous, really.

Anyway, here’s the deal: I’m a priest and I’m actually extremely busy doing priest-stuff, providing people the sacraments and the benefit of the sacramentals. I had an exhaustive day yesterday (18 December, 2021) sprinting about in multiple counties, getting groceries for the elderly, multiple sessions of Confessions, Holy Mass, lots of sacramental work altogether. I dropped after getting home from the church late at night…

So, I’m so very sorry. I apologize. I didn’t get a chance to begin to start to study any official statements from the CDW or any chance after that would-be study to begin to start to consider any official statements from the CDW. But I did play some YouTube commentaries about the CDW aggression over the blue-tooth speakers of Sassy the Subaru while I raced about all over WNC. My listening was often cut because of being out of WiFi range in the back ridges of these Blue Ridge, Smoky Mountains. So, what the CDW did, whatever that is, is all a rumor to me right now.

If there is any truth to the commentary, what the CDW has done is to make for a head-on collision with the letter I received from my bishop just yesterday. He sent it before the CDW statement was unleashed to the world over the internet. My bishop’s letter was annulled by the CDW even before he sent it. Obviously, the bishops were not consulted by the CDW.

If there is any truth to the commentary, I have plenty of questions, particularly about the CDW annulling the universal law of the Church (Canon Law), stomping on the rights of priests regarding the Holy Sacrifice, that is, without this smackdown being approved in forma specifica by the Holy Father. I have heard of plenty of cases over many decades in the past where this lack of specific approval to individual points annulled the legal force of whatever idiotic decree, especially draconian life-long penalties. I’m no Canon lawyer, but something seems rotten somewhere. We need some honest Canon lawyer. And I don’t just mean a traddy. Too many “traditionalists” are mere panderers. We’ve seen that recently. Way too many. They go on something like this: “Yes, well, it’s not approved quite exactly correctly but we don’t want to talk about that because we want to be nice and maybe they’ll be nice to us in return so I won’t really give you honest legal commentary but hide the truth from ye all, you know, to be nice.” I don’t want that. This is too important. Just the facts. True men of Tradition are NOT afraid to speak the facts. True men of Tradition don’t play politics with the Sacrifice of the Mass. I think Taylor Marshall’s term for this is fake-traddies playing “patty-cake” with the enemies of the Church. Brutal, but true.

Also, if the commentary has any truth to it, what was done seems maliciously set on purposely causing a situation that can be called “odious.” That’s a technical term, actually. If some bit of disciplinary legislation even from the supreme legislator (the Pope) is odious to the faithful (and I will ask the faithful over the next couple of weeks), then the bishop has full rights to exercise Canon 87 in favor of the salvation of souls. But the bishops have to be up to the task for the sake of the salvation of souls. That’s what the Church is supposed to be all about, right? The. Salvation. Of. Souls. In the video above, what this would mean is that our friend in the truck would just push the idiot-car right off The Bridge altogether and keep moving. Canon 87. But, of course, it is already threatened that there will another idiot-car, and another, annoying, but perhaps effective when there are dozens of idiot-cars, thousands, millions… But…

But… No. That’s when the truck revs up a bit. I’m sure you understand the analogy. Christ Jesus and His Sacrifice will not be killed off a second time. Jesus, once risen from the dead, will never die again.

I think I have too much fun. It’s just that I already know that Christ Jesus, Divine Son of the Immaculate Conception, Divine Son of our dearest, dearest Mother, has conquered. And He will come to judge the living and the dead and the world by fire, judge those who are occupied with the cura animarum, who are tasked with the salvation of souls, who are tasked with not insulting the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Today, I will have no time to read anything from the CDW. I’m literally sprinting from now until nightfall with actual priestly things to do: Adoration, Confessions, Masses, Communion Calls, Last Rites, over multiple counties, in multiple churches, in people’s homes, in nursing homes…

Also, I refuse to have my joy in Christ Jesus dragged down by anyone, much less anyone who is set on insulting the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, who is set on insulting Christ’s own priests. Is that what they are doing? Eventually in these next weeks I’ll be able to read what the CDW has written, I guess, somewhere on the internet.

But lemme tell you: Christ Jesus, the High Priest, takes note when His Sacrifice is smacked down, and when His own priests are smacked down by those who should know better. Sure, His priests might be thrown into dumpsters all around the world, but then they get to go to heaven. Jesus always wins. Again, I refuse to have my joy in Christ Jesus dragged down by anyone.

BTW: It seems to me that when it comes to Holy Mass, anything that is done is done within an ecumenical Council, not by way of rumors on the internet. When does all this take effect? Now? When the Acts of the Apostolic See are published? The CDW has already amended the 16 July 2021 motu proprio of Pope Francis. Who’s the legislator? What is this legislation? What?

Meanwhile, I’ll be doing my best to run away from the fake-liturgical-police:

The one thing the haters don’t have at all is humor. They are joyless, odious. That cannot be the case with those who remain with the Sacrifice of Jesus. No. Let us retain our joy in the Holy Spirit. Jesus has conquered. Let’s stand with Him in His trials. Let’s hear with great joy from the Eternal Judge: “Enter into the joy…”

7 Comments

Filed under Humor, Liturgy, Pope Francis, Priesthood

Sine Dominico? Non possumus! Without Sunday Mass we cannot live! Some questions.

From the other day inside our parish church:

Speaking of Rorate, this from Rorate caeli:

URGENT – EXCLUSIVE – “The Roche Christmas Massacre”: CDW Instruction on Traditionis Custodes to be issued next week

  • “RORATE has learned, and can confirm, that the instruction of the Congregation for Divine Worship (Prefect: Archbishop Arthur Roche) on the application of the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes is to be published next week. (Unless some extraordinary measure prevents the publication of the already approved text.) The instruction will try (among other things) to impose over the global Church, by violent and illegitimate will of the legislator, the blueprint established for the Diocese of Rome by its Cardinal Vicar months ago regarding all Sacraments other than the Holy Eucharist. “

That’s a kick in the face to the Church of all ages from “the vision of Pope Francis” and his tyrannical “synodal church”, whatever that is. I’ve heard people right around the world citing “the vision of Pope Francis” really a lot, people who should know better, who themselves despised at one time a similar phrase – “the spirit of Vatican II” – since it was a tool to manipulate people, bully people into going against Christ Jesus and His Church. When parts of that get-together were found to be too orthodox, that phrase was quickly changed to… “The spirit of Vatican II and whatever we want to emphasize in what happened after Vatican II.” Talk about overly comprehensive and ambiguous and bullying unto tyrannical persecution. Why cannot what happened after Vatican II include Ecclesia Dei and Summorum Pontificum? Pfft.

Sacred Revelation has it that we are to be one with the Body of Christ, Jesus the Head, we the members, right now and into heaven, not mere dialectic units always smashing down the Body of Christ and never quite being resolved into the unity of the One Body of Christ, ever ancient, ever new. Jesus wants us to be one with Him instead of forever being in an ongoing dialectic that ignores Christ Jesus, His doctrine, His morality, His Revelation, His Commandments. There is no revelation “from below”, from our fallen human nature in whatever stupid dialectic. There is only Revelation from above. We’ve forgotten the Prologue of Saint John’s Gospel. I wonder why that is. “The Light shone in the darkness, but…”

The martyrs of the past rejected this tyranny when it came from outside the Church, specifically from Diocletian, the most bloodthirsty and vicious of the demon-possessed Roman Emperors. Diocletian’s objective in torture, imprisonment and murder was to stop the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Even Wikipedia has this great comment to make:

  • “Non possumus” is a Latin, Catholic, religious phrase that translates as “we cannot”. It originated with the martyrdom of the Martyrs of Abitinae [in Africa], who were murdered in AD 304 when Roman Emperor Diocletian prohibited Christians under penalty of death to possess the Sacred Scriptures, convene on Sunday to celebrate the Holy Eucharist, and erect premises for their assemblies. The phrase was not intended to express incapacity but, on the contrary, absolute moral determination to obey the Catholic Faith. The full sentence of the phrase is “sine dominico non possumus” (“we cannot [live] without Sunday”). It expresses the necessity of Sunday and the Holy Eucharist for Christianity. (W)

We immediately recall, of course, Padre Pio’s version of this call to die in witness of the Lord Jesus:

  • “It would be easier for the world to survive without the sun than to do without the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.” (Padre Pio)

Yet, people are citing the tyrannical, myopic “vision of Pope Francis” as a great example of dialogue and pastoral sensitivity. Since when is constantly jerking people around all of a sudden “listening” and the full expression of desiring the salvation of souls? Is Canon 87 not a part of the Code of Canon Law?

  • Can. 87 §1. A diocesan bishop, whenever he judges that it contributes to their spiritual good, is able to dispense the faithful from universal and particular disciplinary laws issued for his territory or his subjects by the supreme authority of the Church.

Since when is it considered the sine qua non of pro bono ecclesiae to destroy souls by not working for that which contributes to their spiritual good?

2 Comments

Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis

Donkey genitals, stallion emission, she-camels and she-donkeys in heat, viper’s brood, vixen-bitches, white-washed tombs

Quite a number of priest-friends scattered throughout the world, at different times, in different places, appraising my blog, concluded that what I write is spot-on but that I should watch my mouth, that I should be respectful. “Great!” thought I, thinking of Jesus and John and Ezekiel and Jeremiah… who can’t be said to be disrespectful at all:

Let’s start with Ezekiel 23. That chapter is about God criticizing the political correctness of religious leaders to the ways of the world. Those in Jerusalem, male leaders all, are spoken about as being a woman lusting after handsome young men, foreigners. That woman, let’s just say, a homosexualist as the whore of the world, is described in this way:

  • “She lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.”

That’s God telling the faithless religious leaders west of the Jordan river to F*** Off if that’s what they want. Yep. That’s inspired revelation about what God thinks about any one of us abandoning the faith so as to be politically correct with faithlessness. I suggest not telling the Holy Spirit that He is inappropriate, or that He’s an old meanie and ought to be a man of consensus. Read Ezekiel 23. Are you afraid? Lefties hate the Scriptures.

How about Jeremiah 2:23-26? That’s a hoot, surely about our own days:

  • “How can you say, ‘I am not defiled; I have not run after the Baals’? Look at your behavior in the valley; acknowledge what you have done. You are a swift young she-camel galloping here and there, a wild donkey at home in the wilderness, sniffing the wind in the heat of her desire. Who can restrain her passion? All who seek her need not weary themselves; in mating season they will find her. You should have kept your feet from going bare and your throat from being thirsty. But you said, ‘It is hopeless! For I love foreign gods, and I must go after them.’ As the thief is ashamed when he is caught, so the house of Israel is disgraced. They, their kings, their officials, their priests, and their prophets…”

The tradition about Jeremiah’s death was that he was stoned to death by his co-religionists. Yep. The faithless church leaders of today would say that he deserved everything he got for not being a man of consensus, and then they will turn around and read from the Book of Jeremiah at Holy Mass, congratulating themselves for building shrines to the prophets.

Do we really have to be pedantic with citation of John the Baptist and Jesus? If I have to I will. It’s all hope filled encouragement from the Greatest Prophet and the Son of the Living God for those who suffer under faithless religious leaders, after all. But surely this is enough to make some religious leaders angry enough to examine their consciences and repent from what they do to promote ____fill in the blank___ (such as experimentation, research, development, and testing on purpose-murdered babies ripped alive from the womb to rip their organs from them while still alive as so to make money on “vaccines” while murdering a large percentage of the earth’s population, etc.)

5 Comments

Filed under Pope Francis

UPDATE: Pope Francis dissing the Immaculate Conception [trolls and more trolls]

[[The original post follows. Scroll down for the UPDATE.]]

A note on time-lines: While in feverish preparation for the Amazon Synod and the world-wide promotion of idol worship of the most blood-thirsty idol-goddess (Pachamama) and the release of the Wuhan virus and then it’s papal sanctioned abortion-tainted fake-remedies, Pope Francis decided that it was a perfect time to reject the Immaculate Conception. Here’s the essential paragraph of the Pope’s address to the employees of the Holy See and Vatican City State in the Paul VI Audience Hall on Friday, 21 December 2018:

  • “So who is happy in the crib? Our Lady and Saint Joseph are full of joy: they look at the Child Jesus and are happy because, after a thousand worries, they have welcomed this Gift of God, with so much faith and so much love. They are “overflowing” with holiness and therefore with joy. And you will tell me: of course! They are Our Lady and St. Joseph! Yes, but we don’t think it was easy for them: saints are not born, they are made, and this is also true for them.”

That’s true for Saint Joseph, who was sanctified post-reception of original sin, and also daily saying yes to God’s grace in difficult circumstances. Dearest Mary also daily saying yes to God’s grace in difficult circumstances grew in sanctification throughout her life, but was sanctified at the moment of her conception, never tainted with original sin or, for that matter, any personal sin later in life. Meanwhile, John the Baptist was in reception of original sin in his conception, but was freed from this before his birth during the visitation of Mary to Elizabeth.

Here’s the deal: I’m not judging the soul of Pope Francis. I don’t see his soul. I don’t have the beatific vision. I have no standard of comparison by which, by Whom to judge that which I cannot see. But I must, we must judge that which is presented on the outside. It’s judging external matters: is this statement consonant with the truth or is it not? I’m not judging the soul of the guy who’s driving against traffic in my lane, but I am judging what is external, that he is going to cause a head-on-collision and I need to make a judgment about external circumstances in order to avoid him. If Pope Francis rejects the Immaculate Conception, I’m not going to judge his soul, but I am going to judge that what he says is incorrect.

By the way, just to be clear: Just because I criticize something that the Pope says doesn’t mean that I am against him personally. No. I’m not judging his soul, merely what he presents externally.

There is probably no one in the world who prays more for Pope Francis than myself.

How can I be so sure of that? Because I not only very frequently include Pope Francis in public prayers, and not only in the Roman Canon of Holy Mass (the Eucharistic Prayer), but also and primarily because I offer Holy Mass for him. No other intentions. Just him. A lot. Who does that? I do. I offered Holy Mass for him on none other than 8 December, Feast of the Immaculate Conception. That Holy Mass was the main parish Mass in the parish church at 12:00 PM. Yes.

P.S. For the second year in a row, Pope Francis cancelled the traditional pilgrimage to the other side of the Tiber River to the statue of the Immaculate Conception at the Spanish Steps. Then he secretly went there just after 6:00 AM, just to make sure no one was there. Is this because of Covid? Let’s take a look at this picture, taken just days before 8 December 2021, that is, 1 December 2021:

Lots of masks and social distancing there, yes sir-ee, sooooo careful!

And yet he brutally smashes down everyone in Vatican City and on his trips to ensure everyone gets the abortion-tainted fake-vaccine. Taking that vaccine is like taking a machete to the wombs of Mary and Elizabeth, extracting Jesus and John, taking out their organs, murdering, researching, developing and testing babies-as-cash-cows for what? Big-Pharma?

And that‘s how the Pope confirms his brethren in the faith?

Tell us, Pope Francis, why is it that Mary and Joseph are joyful?

Answer: because they escaped from you.


UPDATE:

On 13 December 2021, I put up the above post about Pope Francis dissing the Immaculate Conception. I did that based on a Christmas address to the workers of the Holy See / Vatican City State. Just before Mass, I saw some alarming comments in the moderation queue. With no time to answer them I just took the post down until such time as I could take a closer look. It’s surprising to see – from my stats program (now with fully eight algorithms – how very many can break into the admin section of the blog and take a look at what’s going down behind the scenes despite otherwise impossible passwords. There were three comments rolling in from the same troll:

  • (1) This is a flat out lie. Pope francis over and over has AFFIRMED the IC. Just do a one minute google of Pope Francis Immaculate conception. It’s easy so you are culpable.
  • (2) Those who bear false witness should not receive communion until they repent.

The third comment was filled with proof texts of his Google search. Just below I’ll take a look at just those proof texts that he himself provided.

Before doing that I should like to note that much of that post above was about not judging the soul of Pope Francis or anyone else for that matter, but that we must judge what someone presents, particularly the Pope, so as to understand if what is presented is in accord with the faith… or not. This is an obligation of the faithful inasmuch as any of us is able to do this in our daily circumstances.

Meanwhile, I was judged as guilty of mortal sin, condemned, unable to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and receive Holy Communion (see (2) above). Hmm… It sets my heart to palpitations. Flowers for the Immaculate Conception (Palpitations, edition)

Alright, let’s jump into to this guy’s Google search. I gotta think that there’s more than this across the years, and there is a risk that he’s cherry picked these as proof-texts, but that’s fine with me. There’s more at play when it comes to clear teaching, such as the correct maxim: “Bonum ex integra causa sed malum ex quocumque defectu.” A thing is good if it is integrally so but it is evil by whatever defect. So, we already have a defect as presented in the original post above. But let’s see if there are any more provided by the troll himself. I’ll assume he is sincere and did not provide skewed texts:

  • 2015 – Today the Feast of the Immaculate Conception leads us to contemplate Our Lady who, by unique privilege, was preserved from original sin from the very moment of her conception. Even living in a world marked by sin, she was not touched by it: Mary is our sister in suffering, but not in evil or in sin. Instead, evil was conquered in her even before deflowering her, because God had filled her with grace (cf. Lk 1:28). The Immaculate Conception signifies that Mary is the first one to be saved by the infinite mercy of the Father, which is the first fruit of salvation which God wills to give to every man and woman, in Christ. For this reason the Immaculate One has become the sublime icon of the divine mercy which conquered sin. Today, at the beginning of the Jubilee of Mercy, we want to look to this icon with trusting love and to contemplate her in all her splendour, emulating her faith.
    • [My comment: Sounds great! Yay! But my question is about the timing of the Immaculate Conception. Does “conception” mean, you know, when sperm enters egg and FLASH, there is conception, there is life? Pope Francis is ambiguous about when conception occurs. Think not?Let’s continue with his other comments. But keep this on the back burner…]
  • 2019 – Today we celebrate the solemnity of Mary Immaculate, which takes place within the context of Advent, a time of expectation: God will accomplish what he promised. But on today’s feast day we are told that something has already been accomplished, in the person and the life of the Virgin Mary. Today we consider the beginning of this fulfilment, which is even before the birth of the Mother of the Lord. In fact, her immaculate conception leads us to that precise moment when Mary’s life began to palpitate in her mother’s womb: already there was the sanctifying love of God, preserving her from the contagion of evil that is the common inheritance of the human family.
    • [So, we are narrowing down on the time frame of the Immaculate Conception: before birth. So, sometime in those nine months between what science calls conception and her birth. Let’s see: Pope Francis has it that the Immaculate Conception takes place at the time of… of… palpitation. Seriously? This recalls the heart-beat anti-abortion legislation which limits abortion to a time before palpitation, because the legislature cannot yet get this limitation all the way back to actual conception. At this point, review statement at the very top of this post from 2018, where it seems that sanctification for Mary is what happens after birth.]
  • 2020 Today’s liturgical feast celebrates one of the wonders of the history of salvation: the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary. Even she was saved by Christ, but in an extraordinary way, because God wanted that the mother of his Son not be touched by the misery of sin from the moment of conception. And thus, for the entire course of her earthly life, Mary was free from any stain of sin, she was “full of grace” (Lk 1:28), as the angel called her. She was favoured by a unique action of the Holy Spirit so as to always remain in perfect relationship with her Son, Jesus. Indeed, she was Jesus’ disciple: his Mother and disciple. But there was no sin in her.
    • [So, this adds nothing to the previous weirdness about conception taking place… um… long after conception… you know… as “the thing” for those pre-palpitation weeks wasn’t, like, alive.]
  • 2021 The angel calls her “full of grace”. If she is full of grace, it means Our Lady is void of evil: she is without sin, Immaculate. Now, at the angel’s greeting, Mary — the text says — is “greatly troubled” (Lk 1:29). She is not only surprised, but troubled. To receive grand greetings, honours and compliments sometimes brings the risk of provoking pride and presumption. Let us recall that Jesus is not gentle with those who go in search of greetings in the squares, adulation, visibility (cf. Lk 20:46). Mary, instead, does not exalt herself, but is troubled; rather than feeling pleased, she feels amazement. The angel’s greeting seemed too grand for her. Why? Because she feels “little” within, and this littleness, this humility attracts God’s eyes.
    • [Again, this adds no nuance to the timeline as to whether Mary’s conception takes place at… conception… or just sometime before birth, like at palpitation.]

Just to be clear: Pope Francis is trolling the Immaculate Conception. I find that disgusting. I am indignant. It’s certainly necessary to correct the record: Mary is perfectly transformed in grace from the first scientific moment of her conception, you know, the whole Joachim and Anne thing. Get it? Not at palpitation or sometime before or even after birth: at her conception.

Let’s review: Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocumque defectu. A thing is good if it is integrally good, but is evil if it suffers any defect whatsoever. Pope Francis is increasingly less ambiguous. His clarity of defect is becoming ever more integral. Say a good thing, say a bad thing, say a good thing, say a bad thing, say a good thing, say a bad thing… The kids don’t like it:

You know, like on the plane: In one breath: abortion is like hiring a sicario (a hitman); in the next breath: giving pro-abort-politicos Communion is a pastoral decision by pastors who cannot be mistaken in pastoral decisions. That means abortion is just fine. That means that the Most Blessed Sacrament means nothing. What a crock.

Pope Francis needs to be called out. This is for his own good.

To “protect” Pope Francis from being called out is not for his own good.

2 Comments

Filed under Immaculate Conception, Pope Francis

Legal Positivism vs Natural Law and Divine Law: It’s a license to kill.

Law describes rights and duties with an eye to Truth. Man’s law should be consonant with Natural Law and respect Divine Law.

Any old law enacted by man is not consonant, does not respect truth simply because it is enacted as law by man, as if all men were infallible. Legal positivists shriek:

  • “Because legislation was passed by a legislature or decreed by a tyrant it is to be praised by God Himself! It is law, and therefore it is good!”

That’s called legal positivism. We meet up a lot with that these days, also among priests and bishops who refuse to use their brains, who think that they embrace the faith in rejecting reason, who are so entirely aware that what they do is going against Natural Law and Divine Law that they become nervous: “Don’t make me think! It’s the law! Just follow it!”

One priest scolded me when he said that unless I comply with whatever, there may come a time when I will be forced to go against my conscience, and I should just get over whatever objection and comply, you know, because it’s the law, and they can hurt you.

No, no one can hurt me. It is all of eternity which makes up the background of my decisions for integrity. A few years (presumed!) on this earth with a lack of integrity, haunted at every moment of every day by that darkness of a decision to make lack of integrity the center of my life, is not somehow better than all of eternity in heaven. And this is the point of legal positivism: fear of doing what is right because of consequences in this world. What a bunch of freakin’ cowards.

Law should reflect Truth’s splendor. The splendor of Truth is a good moral life. Law is all about morality: Do not murder! Do not bear false witness! Do not steal! Do not commit adultery! That’s Natural Law and is also revealed to our dark and fallen human nature by God.

But what if human legislation passes law against Natural Law and Divine Law? Then that law is not law at all says Saint Thomas Aquinas. Evil law, not being law, is not to be obeyed or disobeyed, but is to be simply ignored as it is nothing. But when I say this self-evident fact, it is met instantly with the statement that only I think like that in the whole world and everyone else goes along to get along so why don’t I just go along to get along?

How about this: Because I love Jesus, who said, “If you love me, keep MY commandments.” He didn’t say that if we love Him, we are therefore to keep whatever law that was legislated by human beings over against God.

  • “You mean we actually have to think and use our free will and say: “I am the king’s good servant, but God’s first” and then face the consequences?

Yes, that’s exactly what what I’m saying. I’m saying that the cowardly legal positivists should love Jesus. Even the kids are fed up with the blah-blah-blah of the legal positivists:

Here’s what you get with legal positivism, which is not so very positive:

“It’s the law!” they shriek, yes, also those “conservative” positive legalist priests shriek this, again and again, no matter what the stupid and evil law happens to be: “It’s the law! It’s the law! It’s the law!”

One of those legal positivists was the archbishop present at the beheading of Thomas More. But it’s not a thing of the past. It never is. It is with us today. All around. Do God’s law out of love of Jesus and you’ll find out right quick where people stand. It’s surprising who stands with legal positivism over against God.

3 Comments

Filed under Free exercise of religion, Politics, Pope Francis

Altars and Confessionals? Nope. Notre-Dame de Paris opts for Liberté Egalité Fraternité

The fire destroying the roof and spires of the Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris didn’t hurt the side chapels with their windows and paintings and Altars and Confessionals:

But those are now set to be destroyed for light shows and murals and the glorification of man, so that Liberté means the freedom of being rid of God, Egalité means all become gods, Fraternité means being the mirror image of the ones who wield raw power, who manipulate – in all their self-congratulation – the “dialogue” of Hegelian-Rahnerian dialectic synodality favoring environmentalism.

Murals depicting various cultures will be displayed along with light shows mocking not only God, but the very ones who are to be thereby sealed into cynical boredom with “religion”, an estimated 12,000,000 souls per year. Remember this light show on the front of the Basilica of Santa Maria sopra Minerva in Rome depicting a demonic destruction of the Church?

Or how about this one on the Basilica of Saint Peter, you know, so as to have hope in the new religion of environmentalism? Cute! But what about Jesus and Him crucified?

Just makes you want to go to Confession in repentance of one’s sins and then attend the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in thanksgiving, doesn’t it? It’s all about Jesus, isn’t it? No, nothing about Jesus. Not at all.

The destruction of the altars in Notre-Dame for the sake of this crapola is an attack on the Sacrifice of Jesus, He, the Son of the Living God, who came into this world to stand in our place, the innocent for the guilty, taking on the punishment we deserve for original sin and whatever other rubbish sin, so that He might have the right in His own justice to have mercy on us, granting us the wherewithal in His grace to do what is right, being united with Him, and so be on our way to heaven. But, no…

  • “Away with the Altars! Away with the Son of God! No more Holy Sacrifice of the Mass! No more forgiveness of sin! No more Confessionals! It’s not about Jesus! It’s about us! Me!”

Side “chapels” in Notre-Dame de Paris will be dedicated to cultures. I bet Pachamama will figure prominently, as will Xi’s genocidal Communism, as well as Germany’s same-sex marriage “culture”. Not just a few fallen cultures, not just some idol worship, not just some idolatrous lust, but – Hey! – with light shows you can depict as much diverse hell as desired a hundred different ways every hour of every day!

The real crime was not any arson of Notre-Dame de Paris in 2019, but the purposed mockery of God and Jesus’ Little Flock with the post-arson hatred of all that is good and holy.

  • When you see the Abomination of Desolation being caused to be established on the Holy of Holies where it must not be by divine mandate, then know that…
  • When the Daily Sacrifice comes to an end, then know that…

Any rich person out there reading this? How about transporting those Altars with their relics and those Confessionals to someone who can preserve them, use them? There are plenty of cancelled priests right now also in Paris who would rejoice to be set up with an Altar and Confessional from Notre Dame.

I’m guessing, though, that the Altars will pave the sewers of Paris, and the Confessionals will be saved as kindling to burn the saints at the stake, you know, while the light shows continue, while no one goes to Holy Mass, while no one goes to Confession, while no one gets to know Jesus, while no one is on their way to heaven…

What am I upset about the most? The destruction of the Altars and the Confessionals teaches people the lie that Jesus doesn’t count any more, that He is gone, to be forgotten, that we’re the ones now, we’re gods, we’re our own saviors. So sad all of this.

Go to Confession while you can. Go to Holy Mass while you can. Say the Rosary while you can.

UPDATE: Since Notre Dame is owned by the State, the Church should give up anything to do with that building. How can one tolerate sacrilege by continuing to use the same space? How can it be consecrated when sacrilege continues non-stop?

14 Comments

Filed under Pope Francis, The Blah Blah Synod™

*Everyone’s infallible* (Pope Francis)

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is dialectic.png

In the following analysis some things have to be made clear:

  • Infallibility is a negative. Thus, Peter and his successors (specifically, explicitly in that capacity, will not be able to fail in correctly teaching a matter of faith or morals to the universal Church that is at the same time pronounced to be already contained in Sacred Revelation (which revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle). We call that an ex-cathedra statement, an infallible pronouncement.
  • Infallibility is not universal. The Pope can do this alone, with a Council present, whatever, but the key is his personal participation, without which there is no infallible statement, not even in an emergency get-together during sede-vacante circumstances. Agreement with an infallible statement is desirable, but that agreement does doesn’t make anyone infallible. The two subjects – (1) the Pope; (2) everyone else – don’t go together: if you have to agree with someone else, you yourself are not infallible. Any statement aggrandizing agreement with anything infallible is simply poetic, emphasizing the importance of the agreement, but not who is personally infallible in limited circumstances.
  • The purpose of infallibility is founded on the fact that not everyone is infallible, quite the opposite.
  • Infallibility is not a positive charism by definition. The Pope is simply not failing in a particular teaching in extremely limited circumstances. It has nothing to do with being inspired. It’s just that he’s not going to be wrong.
  • Infallibility is a guarantee of not failing in correct teaching to the end that eternal, immutable, absolute truth is not changed (because it cannot be changed). We’re too soft before the glory of God’s truth, too cowardly, too wimpish, to see that it is Peter himself, personally, who is the one who is expendable. If he is going to be wrong in what he is going to pronounce, he himself will not be able to make that pronouncement. He will be incapacitated, drop dead of natural causes (an act of God), be martyred, whatever, but he is the one who is expendable before the judgment seat of God. It’s not a matter of Peter first of all making an incorrect pronouncement, and therefore someone coming to the rescue by saying that he didn’t really do that as Peter, because then he would have to be taken out of office by a group claiming their own infallibility…. blah-blah-blah. No. Peter cannot make an incorrect infallible statement. It can’t happen in the first place. I mean, sorry, but this isn’t rocket science: infallible does not mean fallible. Pope Francis has said a lot of wrong things, but never in the circumstances of infallibility. Get it? He’s just been speaking as some guy. , but definitely not as the successor Peter on a matter of faith and morals to the universal Church that he is simultaneously pronouncing to be already present in Sacred Revelation. Hasn’t happened.
  • Infallibility doesn’t grant the successor of Peter any special positive charism such as being more inspired, always more holier than thou. No. He’s just another knucklehead like all the rest of us, with exactly the same potential to appreciate Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, not one bit more, not one bit less. We can all be stupid, including the Pope. When we are in a dispute – see Matthew 18 – we bring that to the only one who is infallible – see Matthew 16 – and we pray he’s going to be correct on what he says, because if he’s going to be wrong, well, bye bye. That’s no statement on anyone’s personal holiness. It has nothing to do with that. Infallibility is just about not being wrong, and that the very person of the successor of Peter will be stopped from being wrong in the first place.

So, as they say, let’s get into this. Months after his election to be the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of Peter, Jorge Bergoglio, granted an interview to fellow Jesuit Antonio Spadaro (August 2013), at the end of which we see what the Pope intends with his usage of the phrase infallibile in credendo for the kick-start of the Synod on Synodality, structuring and concluding, by the way, what that synod is all about. That all the baptized are infallible in their believing is rank heresy. But let’s take the entirety of the end of this interview. I wouldn’t want to be accused of taking anything out of context. And, by the way, this interview was dutifully recorded. You can peruse the whole interview at the Jesuits’s America. [[my comments in bold and double brackets below.]]


[[Spadaro speaks in the first person:]] I keep my questions focused on the theme of the church and I ask Pope Francis what it means exactly for him to “think with the church,” [[sentire cum ecclesia]] a notion St. Ignatius writes about in the Spiritual Exercises. He replies without hesitation and by using an image.

[[Francis:]] “The image of the church I like is that of the holy, faithful people of God. This is the definition I often use, and then there is that image from the Second Vatican Council’s ‘Dogmatic Constitution on the Church’ (No. 12).”

[[Excursus of Father George: Number 12: “The holy people of God shares also in Christ’s prophetic office; it spreads abroad a living witness to Him, especially by means of a life of faith and charity and by offering to God a sacrifice of praise, the tribute of lips which give praise to His name. The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One, cannot err in matters of belief” [in credendo falli nequit = might be unable to be deceived in believing, subjunctive and necessarily *reflexive* in meaning in this context]. “They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples’ supernatural discernment in matters of faith when ‘from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful’ they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals.” [This is a stupid statement as this has never happened, is not now happening, and will never happen upon this earth. It’s also a license to kill to say that we have shown such agreement, do so now, and will do so in the future. See the opening comments above. All of this positive inspiration and agreement has nothing to do with infallibility. ] “That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth.” [But not granting infallibility to everyone.] “It is exercised under the guidance of the sacred teaching authority” [which by definition means that no one is infallible but the Pope.] “in faithful and respectful obedience to which the people of God accepts that which is not just the word of men but truly the word of God.” [That recalls 1 Thessalonians 2:13 – ‘And we continually thank God because, when you received the word of God that you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as the true word of God— the word which is now at work in you who believe.’ But people accepting something and the Pope pronouncing infallibly are two different things. Where is there not division on faith and morals? A few verses before, in 1 Thessalonians 1:9, we read that they “turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God.” But now we have a Pope who turns people away from the living and true God to idols. What the hell is that? What kind of agreement is anyone to have with that. None. There can never come a time in this world when everyone is in agreement with any doctrine of the Church. What are the stats today, like 80% do not believe that the Most Blessed Sacrament is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus? Isn’t that also because the Pope trashes worthy reception of Holy Communion? And how many want same-sex marriage? Blah-blah-blah. Pfft.]]

[[Francis continues:]] “Belonging to a people has a strong theological value. In the history of salvation, God has saved a people. There is no full identity without belonging to a people. No one is saved alone, as an isolated individual, but God attracts us looking at the complex web of relationships that take place in the human community. God enters into this dynamic, this participation in the web of human relationships. “[[But this doesn’t make people individually or together infallible.]]

[[Francis continues:]] “The people itself constitutes a subject. [[But individuals cut themselves off by mortal sin and heresy and all are responsible with individual free will, so, what is he talking about?]] And the church is the people of God on the journey [[Revelation is absolute and is closed.]] through history, with joys and sorrows. Thinking with the church, therefore, is my way of being a part of this people. And all the faithful, considered as a whole, are infallible in matters of belief, and the people display this infallibilitas in credendo [[his own, made-up phrase]], this infallibility in believing, through a supernatural sense of the faith [[that’s NOT infallibility, but he insists on this to open the possibility of new revelation, right?]] of all the people walking together. [[So, let me get this right: individuals are not infallible at all, but everyone is infallible together, so no one assents to anything with an act of the will, but that act of the will is communal, made for them even against their consent.]] This is what I understand today as the ‘thinking with the church’ of which St. Ignatius speaks. [[That’s not what Saint Ignatius meant by sentire cum ecclesia.]] When the dialogue [[meaning contradictory statements, Hegelian dialectic…]] among the people and the bishops and the pope goes down this road and is genuine, then it is assisted by the Holy Spirit. [[Hegelian-Rahnerianism! We’re all divine and correct in our division and disagreements because we call that unity and agreement!]] So this thinking with the church does not concern theologians only.” [[Such condescension to the great unwashed, and yet, it doesn’t matter what we think at all. It’s the great dialectic conglomeration which counts. This is not the way of Jesus. Not at all. Not one bit.]]

[[Francis continues:]] “This is how it is with Mary: If you want to know who she is, you ask theologians; if you want to know how to love her, you have to ask the people. In turn, Mary loved Jesus with the heart of the people, as we read in the Magnificat. We should not even think, therefore, that ‘thinking with the church’ means only thinking with the hierarchy of the church. [[I mean, whoever thought that? Also, Mary loved Jesus with an Immaculate Heart, much different than with my black and beady heart.]]

[[Spadaro, then Francis again:]] After a brief pause, Pope Francis emphasizes in a very direct manner the following point, in order to avoid misunderstandings: “And, of course, we must be very careful not to think that this infallibilitas of all the faithful I am talking about in the light of Vatican II is a form of populism. No; it is the experience of ‘holy mother the hierarchical church,’ as St. Ignatius called it, the church as the people of God, pastors and people together. The church is the totality of God’s people.” [[Again, I ask, when was there ever a time when the totality of God’s people accepted to be inspired and to agree on anything? The vast majority of people disagree with the “hierarchical Church” on just about everything. Is that disagreement what he wants to canonize? Hegelian Rahnerianism?]] “I see the sanctity of God’s people, this daily sanctity,” the pope continues. “There is a ‘holy middle class,’ which we can all be part of, the holiness Malègue wrote about.” The pope is referring to Joseph Malègue, a French writer (1876–1940), particularly to the unfinished trilogy Black Stones: The Middle Classes of Salvation. Some French literary critics have called Malègue the “Catholic Proust.” [[That’s so condescending. Just. Wow.]]


My final comments: Blah-blah-blah. I’m tired of this. You get the idea. You can read the entire interview over there. Here’s the deal: One will never get anywhere if the methodology is itself heretical, a divinized Hegelian dialectic, always contradictory and divisory, Hegelian Rahnerianism. There will always be heaven and there will always be hell. The twain shall never meet. The dialectic is not fruitful just by claiming it is. Pope Francis thinks that everyone is infallible in their believing. This is heretical. It’s sets up a heretical methodology from which nothing but heresy can come, from which nothing but immorality can come.

But, I’m not infallible. But neither is the Pope when he doesn’t speak ex-Cathedra. And with this he’s not.

7 Comments

Filed under Pope Francis, The Blah Blah Synod™

Vax mandates: bishops writing religious exemptions for priests?

Maneuvering by the present secular Biden Administration continues by way of the U.S. Department of Justice regarding “vaccine” mandates even as many countries right around the world are locking down or even shooting anyone unvaccinated. Any win for the Administration from the Supreme Court will have immediate repercussions and strengthen attempts at further “vaccine” mandates already pushed by the Center for Disease Control.

In many places, religious exemptions are being rejected by secular authorities due to hierarchical religious authorities promoting or even requiring the “vaccine”, including Catholic bishops, archbishops and cardinals throughout the USA and right around the world, even to the point of rejecting seminarians or dismissing and even suspending priests if they do not go against their consciences so as to go along to get along.

My co-alumnus of the Pontifical Biblical Institute, Archbishop Mark Coleridge, rejected the conscience-rights of all his priests, that is, for everyone but himself:

  • “I will not consider conscientious objection to receiving the vaccination as a valid exception set out here. I fully respect the rights of conscience, especially when formed in the Catholic understanding. But I too have a conscience, and it is not just legal obligation but conscience which has led to my decision.”

In other words, he has, with full knowledge and consent, gone against the rights of conscience when formed in the Catholic understanding and demanded that his priests commit this grave sin as well.

Pope Francis obviously condones this behavior as he makes highly emotional attacks on those who reject the mandates, calling out those priests and bishops and cardinals who reject reception of a “vaccine” as being suicidal and murderously careless about the lives of others. Not only is he not reprimanding those (arch)bishops who do such violence against the consciences of their own seminarians and priests, but the Holy Father is likely to mandate the “vaccine” for all priests just as he’s already done for all in Vatican City and for all bishops and priests he meets in his travels.

Thus, secular authorities already have precedents in abundance to reject any attempt by a Catholic priest to avoid the “vaccine” based on a religious exemption. It is imperative that the (arch)bishop of any (arch)diocese which has pushed the “vaccine” put his signature to a religious exemption specifically for his priests, and then another for the laity. Otherwise he has stolen and trampled upon everyone’s conscience.

  • “But Father George! Father George! Why would you ever want a religious exemption?”

That’s what a priest asked me the other day. He admitted I was sincere when I said that the “vaccines” are from the living organs of babies purpose murdered for research, development and testing to get you that vaccine, and that Jesus said what you have done to the least of these you have done to me. It’s like taking a machete to Mary and Elizabeth to extract little Jesus and little John the Baptist for our own benefit. Time is not a moral criterion, making a directly wrought evil for some specious hope for good somehow irrelevant morally because it happened a while ago and we can attempt to “distance” ourselves from that. Really? How successful have we been in distancing ourselves from original sin? Not at all. Do we also say that our redemption wrought by the New Adam is irrelevant because of time going by?

Stupid bishops. This is not rocket science. What you promote is evil. And you know it. Why do you do it? Go to Confession. Do penance by writing exemptions for your priests and for Christ’s faithful.

Galatians 2:11, because Ezekiel 23:20 is about what you look like to God when you prostitute yourselves to the nations. It’s important for your eternal salvation. Hint: Ezekiel 23 is all about your political correctness. No, go ahead. Read it. Let’s go Brandon!

And if any bishop is offended by that innocent rap song… no, really, read Ezekiel 23:1-20. It’s all about you. It’s God inspired word telling you to F*** off. Yep.

  • “But Father George! Father George! You’re so disrespectful! Stop it!”

That’s not me. You should be careful of calling Sacred Scripture inspired by the Holy Spirit disrespectful. You know what’s worse than that citation? It’s called being mocked unto scorn unto being ignored. Try this from those you refuse to lead:

When Archbishop Mark Coleridge says “F*** Catholic Conscience” and so many bishops join him right around the world, their collective Blah-Blah-Blah is simply rejected. They are all irrelevant. Entirely. The most obscure cancelled priest who is faithful to Jesus is more important to the salvation of the world than all those bishops put together. Those who “F*** Catholic Conscience” militate against the salvation of souls. I would not want to be them at the judgment.

But, again, this is the kind of rebellion that they want. They want people to become cynical. But this is what they do not understand. Clarity in the appraisal of their failure is an act of charity to them and the entire Little Flock of Jesus. It is not cynicism if I don’t care if their feelings are hurt. It’s called charity. I want them in all charity to go to heaven. But they need clarity in that charity. Clear enough for them? We pray they see the clarity in all its charity and themselves stop entrenching in their rigid cynicism. Hail Mary…

2 Comments

Filed under Coronavirus, Free exercise of religion, Pope Francis

Blah Blah Synod™ vs ideology, division?

Ideology is an idea to which one attempts to change the logic of reality, so that even though reality does not change, one’s perspective of control over reality becomes more self-congratulatory with the adrenaline of power cutting off reason from charity. Ideology is a frustrating lack of wisdom.

The Blah Blah Synod™ proclaims that it is against ideology. That must mean that The Blah Blah Synod™ is instead all about Jesus: if we love Him, we will keep his commandments. That demands humility, a listening to the truth of just how it is we stand before the Living Truth, Jesus. That requires pristine Christology, true Christian anthropology, and assent to the morality explicated to us by Natural Law and Divine Revelation and the guidance of Holy Mother Church. If this is what The Blah Blah Synod™ is all about, perhaps I am wrong to be so satirical. However…

The Blah Blah Synod™ also makes in known that it is against division by Division-Shaming™ those who stand with Jesus as He Himself brings to us the sword of division, the sword of truth: “You’re divisive!” the masters of The Blah Blah Synod™ shriek, “You’re divisive!” Being against division means that The Blah Blah Synod™ is itself ideology, spitting in the Face of Him who is unity if we but stand with Him. Truth is not admixed with falsehood. Truth is divided from lies. The gates of heaven are closed to liars, those who hate Jesus with all their heart and soul and mind and strength, you know, because He is the unmanipulatable living Truth.

  • “But Father George! Father George! You’re being divisive! That’s THE mortal sin, like, the only sin there is, and stuff! We need to cut you off, Father George! You’re doing great damage!”

But the last word from the last verses of the last book of the Sacred Scriptures, the Apocalypse:

  • “Let the unrighteous continue to be unrighteous, and the vile continue to be vile; let the righteous continue to practice righteousness, and the holy continue to be holy” (Apocalypse 22:11).

5 Comments

Filed under Pope Francis, The Blah Blah Synod™

Canon Law favoring Traditionis custodes? Lane-splitting and one of my Hier-stehe-ich moments

Just a bit of lane splitting is going on here. But that would never happen with Canon Law would it?

Hours after this was published yesterday – “I’m stunned you say *Traditionis* custodes is evil” – a long conversation with a superb Canon Lawyer ensued about there being no doubt about what the law intends to be done practically, which is quite a separate issue, he said – merely playing the devil’s advocate here (which is very helpful) – it’s a separate issue from anything that might be theologically evil in the law. Thus, his argument ensued: regardless of any theological evil in the law, the clear practical demand put upon you to offer Holy Mass is not in itself evil, even if the rite is limited to the Novus Ordo.

My response, in summary, was this: “I can’t stand [it]. I think every word [he] writes is false, including ‘and’ and ‘but.'” What is paraphrased here was met with a poker face. So I added that for me to act upon a practical law based upon theological evil is to give that theological evil my fiat, something more than any “silence gives consent.” A slight nod indulging my disability of scrupulosity in this matter was performed, encouraging me to continue.

If I were to accept offering Holy Mass only according to the Novus Ordo because of my being forced to bow down to Traditionis custodes in its practical application — and even prescinding while doing this from any criticism of theological error regarding the Ancient Rite (that it is invalid in se – in itself – as a rite of Holy Mass) — I would be accepting the Novus Ordo in it’s celebration as that which is also invalid as a rite of Holy Mass. If you invalidate the consecrations of the Ancient Rite wrought by a validly ordained priest, you invalidate the consecrations of the Novus Ordo as well. Any dissing of the Sacrifice of the Mass which is itself brought about by the consecrations, by the Lex orandi, the Law of Praying, in one rite also disses that Sacrifice, that Lex orandi, those consecrations, in all rites. See the reasoning in “I’m stunned you say *Traditionis* custodes is evil”.

I don’t want to have anything to do with Traditionis custodes. There is no amount of lane-splitting that is going to convince me that it is somehow good to follow this law in any way. It is an insult to Jesus, to His Sacrifice, to the members of the Body of Christ since the time of the Last Supper until today. I just can’t go there. Ain’t gonna happen.

4 Comments

Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis

“I’m stunned you say *Traditionis* custodes is evil”

So, my rejection of Traditionis custodes has stunned some nice people (far away from my parish, mind you). The way I see it, Traditionis custodes is an evil law, and therefore, as Saint Thomas Aquinas says, is no law at all, and is not to be obeyed or disobeyed, just ignored, for it is nothing.

  • “But Father George! Father George! I’m stunned! How can you say anything from the Great Pope Francis is evil?! He’s the Pope, and you’re not! Pope Francis is infallible in everything he says and does and thinks and emotes about! How dare you!? How dare you!?” How dare you!? I’m stunned!”

Well, there are any number of reasons why Traditionis custodes is evil. I will give just two examples here, as they suffice to demonstrate the evil nature of that “document,” papal as it may be, even if that is stunning for the less clever amongst us.

Shock Disbelief GIF - Shock Disbelief Stunned - Discover & Share GIFs

1. THE “THROW-JESUS-OUT” EVIL

“Art. 3. § 2. […] the faithful adherents of these groups may gather for the eucharistic celebration (not however in the parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes).”

While Jesus is happy to be with His Little Flock for the Sacrifice of the Mass in times of persecution at a “Mass Rock” or at a “Priest Hole” (a secret chapel a Catholic family might construct in their home), or in a bunk in Dachau or Auschwitz, it is inappropriate for any bishop even of Rome to throw Jesus off His own altar and out of His own church just to be politically correct.

In the case of my parish, we would have to move to the filthy slimy community center of the town. Vomit, vomit. I can’t do it. I can’t throw Jesus out just because I’m offering the Ancient Rite of Mass. It’s not right. It’s evil. Ain’t gonna happen, except in the case of a persecution under Cromwell, or Stalin, or Hitler, or Mao.

There are some in the world at large who have gone against Pope Francis in both the letter and spirit of the motu proprio, and have declared such law to be null and void in their (arch)dioceses or their territorial entities. Interesting. Stunning even. They have a “reason.” I wonder if anyone else can have a reason to cast aside Traditionis custodes entirely. Let’s move on:

Simon Cowell Face Palm GIF - Simon Cowell Face Palm - Discover & Share GIFs

2. THE “ANCIENT-RITE-IS-NOT-MASS-AT-ALL” EVIL

LETTER OF THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS TO THE BISHOPS OF THE WHOLE WORLD, THAT ACCOMPANIES THE APOSTOLIC LETTER MOTU PROPRIO DATA “TRADITIONIS CUSTODES” Official translation Rome, 16 July 2021

[[[ At the end of paragraph six and the beginning of seven, we see that the lex orandi, the law of prayer, is common to whatever rites of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, such as the “ordinary” and “extraordinary” forms of the Roman Rite (as Benedict XVI called them), for, he insisted the Sacrifice of the Sacrifice of the Mass is the lex orandi.]]]

“Benedict XVI declared “the Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and newly edited by Blessed John XXIII, as a extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi”, granting a “more ample possibility for the use of the 1962 Missal”. [6]

“In making their decision they were confident that such a provision would not place in doubt one of the key measures of Vatican Council II or minimize in this way its authority: the Motu proprio recognized that, in its own right, “the Missal promulgated by Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite”. [7] The recognition of the Missal promulgated by St. Pius V “as an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi” did not in any way underrate the liturgical reform, but was decreed with the desire to acknowledge the “insistent prayers of these faithful,” allowing them “to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass according to the editio typica of the Roman Missal promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as the extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church”. [8]”

  • [6] Benedict XVI, Letter to the Bishops on the occasion of the publication of the Apostolic Letter “Motu proprio data” Summorum Pontificum on the use of the Roman Liturgy prior to the reform of 1970, 7 july 2007: AAS 99 (2007) 797.
  • [7] Benedict XVI, Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “ Summorum Pontificum”, 7 july 2007: AAS 99 (2007) 779.
  • [8] Benedict XVI, Apostolic Letter given Motu proprio “ Summorum Pontificum”, 7 july 2007: AAS 99 (2007) 779.

APOSTOLIC LETTER ISSUED “MOTU PROPRIO” BY THE SUPREME PONTIFF FRANCIS «TRADITIONIS CUSTODES»

[[[But then, in Art. 1 of Traditionis custodes itself, we read that the Ancient Rite is not part of the lex orandi, has no claim to validly present the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and therefore is no Mass at all.]]]

Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.

[[[My comment: If the consecrations are not now valid for the Ancient Rite, bringing about the Holy Sacrifice, then they never were valid, nor are any consecrations valid for any rite of Holy Mass, whether Novus Ordo or any other Latin or Eastern Rite liturgies. None. This is evil. Therefore it is not a law. Stunning, isn’t it? It’s not rocket science. But still, some nice people insist that they are stunned:]]]

It’s like the papabile guy, the The String Puller For All®, telling me that Jesus being crucified was a kind of failure on His part. That’s what Judas thought, right?

4 Comments

Filed under Humor, Liturgy, Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Francis

Blah Blah Synod™ coming to your parish

Yeah, sure, like I got plenty of time as a priest to throw all doctrine and morality to the winds so as to open up a lot of blah blah blah dialectical materialism propaganda promoting the denial of the validity of the Traditional Latin Mass, the viability of demon idol worship, the protection of same sex unions for their precious styles of mortal-sin-orgasm, the desecration of the Blessed Sacrament thrown to the pigs, fake-non-repentance-absolutions, etc., etc., etc. Yeah, sure I have time for that… … NO! I don’t have time for words structured to profane the Eternal and Living Word of our Heavenly Father.

Did you notice? The Living Truth, Jesus, has no place in all this blah blah blah. None.

Meanwhile, yesterday, I found out more about what the USCCB wants of us priests regarding this heresy of blah blah blah, that is, the Synod on Synodality. Pages and pages of blah blah blah all about blah blah blah.

It wasn’t a good time for me to get that in my inbox. No siree. I was up at 1:00 AM to do chores, offer Holy Mass up at church, then take a parishioner to a Veterans Administration hospital hours away, a whole day on my as-always-epic-day-off. Getting back just at nightfall, just trying to finish the Breviary before conking out… riiiiiiiing… riiiiiing…. “[name] is in the ICU, Father.” “I’m on my way.” That was in the neighboring town 15 miles away one way. Last rites. I was destroyed by the time I got back, but really happy as a priest. This is what I live for. Totally. I love it. I did get a bit upset though… thinking on the way back about all the blah blah blah that those ecclesiastics are dreaming up for priests who are actually busy with the Lord’s Little Flock. But… blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. That’s it from them. How I would like to reprimand them, like, out loud for God and the world to witness, as a kind of vengeance for the souls of the Lord’s Little Flock.

Just then, while driving on the dark back road past Vengeance Creek (a real place), I just up and laughed out loud all alone in my car – except for my guardian angel – laughing out loud kind of like this:

Image result for gifs three men laughing

The cause of the laughter? It’s because of a Jesuit, actually, you know, way back in the day, who came to mind, surely the work of my guardian angel:

From the letters to Saint Ignatius by Saint Francis Xavier, priest
(E Vita Francisci Xaverii, auctore H. Tursellini, Romae, 1956, Lib. 4, epist. 4 [1542] et 5 [1544])

Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel

  • “We have visited the villages of the new converts who accepted the Christian religion a few years ago. No Portuguese live here—the country is so utterly barren and poor. The native Christians have no priests. They know only that they are Christians. There is nobody to say Mass for them; nobody to teach them the Creed, the Our Father, the Hail Mary and the Commandments of God’s Law. I have not stopped since the day I arrived. I conscientiously made the rounds of the villages. I bathed in the sacred waters all the children who had not yet been baptized. This means that I have purified a very large number of children so young that, as the saying goes, they could not tell their right hand from their left. The older children would not let me say my Office or eat or sleep until I taught them one prayer or another. Then I began to understand: The kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these. I could not refuse so devout a request without failing in devotion myself. I taught them, first the confession of faith in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, then the Apostles’ Creed, the Our Father and Hail Mary. I noticed among them persons of great intelligence. If only someone could educate them in the Christian way of life, I have no doubt that they would make excellent Christians. Many, many people hereabouts are not becoming Christians for one reason only: there is nobody to make them Christians. Again and again I have thought of going round the universities of Europe, especially Paris, and everywhere crying out like a madman, riveting the attention of those with more learning than charity: “What a tragedy: how many souls are being shut out of heaven and falling into hell, thanks to you!” I wish they would work as hard at this as they do at their books, and so settle their account with God for their learning and the talents entrusted to them. This thought would certainly stir most of them to meditate on spiritual realities, to listen actively to what God is saying to them. They would forget their own desires, their human affairs, and give themselves over entirely to God’s will and his choice. They would cry out with all their heart: Lord, I am here! What do you want me to do? Send me anywhere you like—even to India.”

Hahaha. I love the saints. But instead, we have the The Heresy of Blah Blah Blah™. I’m sick of it. I don’t have time for it. I think good old Saint Francis Xavier would’ve about taken the head off any priest or bishop who would instead tell him that he should be concerned about blah blah blah blah blah, and not concerned about Jesus and the sacraments. Lemme tell you. People know all about blah blah blah. That’s all they get. From their priests they want Jesus and the Sacraments, no blah blah.

And if anyone thinks this is disrespectful of The Blah Blah Synod™, know this, I’ll have a reprimand for you along the lines of Saint Francis Xavier. After all, the saints are not to be heroes that we put on a pedestal and say they’re great and I’m great for saying they’re great. That would get us condemned by Jesus for building the tombs of the prophets while we kill the prophets in this way, giving ourselves a license to kill.

Instead, the saints are to be invoked that we might strive to follow their example whatever the cost to ourselves.

Will I get in trouble with, say, the USCCB or the Holy See for saying the Synod on Synodality is the Heresy of Blah Blah Blah™? Maybe. Just more blah blah blah.

6 Comments

Filed under Humor, Pope Francis, The Blah Blah Synod™

People giving up freedom

https://youtube.com/shorts/CY6lXRvTbxY

You might have to copy that link and paste it in the URL Address Bar…

1 Comment

Filed under Coronavirus, Free exercise of religion, Law enforcement, Politics, Pope Francis

Dear Pope Francis: I’ll deny Joe Biden Holy Communion. It’s divine law, not human prudential policy.

Divine Law is truthful and just and charitable, all at once, by definition. And it is divine law that people who do not discern the Body and Blood of the Lord are not to receive Holy Communion (see below). But people don’t get that. Sending people to hell with a complacent conscience is uncharitable. Let’s be specific: that objectively monstrous people like Joey Biden who effectively picks his teeth with the ribs of aborted babies while he comes up to receive Holy Communion is just plain wrong, and it’s gotta stop. I don’t care what the bishops have to say about it, it’s divine law:

  • 1 Corinthians 11:27 — “So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.”

And then there’s this:

  • “But Father George! Father George! You’re hurting Joey’s feelings on purpose! We know! You’re an old meanie! The most important thing, like, ever, is feelings, not eternal life or eternal death, heaven or hell, but feelings! And you are hurting feelings! Bad! Bad! BAD!”

Well, the Holy Spirit inspired those words of Saint Paul. If I needed a reprimand to get myself on to heaven I hope people would give it to me even if it hurt my feelings. But judging that I’m uncharitable for not judging the subjective state of someone, but rather their objective state from what they themselves obstinately and publicly and scandalously present most contentiously is a little bit weird. It’s a great charity to help someone turn to the Lord who needs to do that.

I’m not saying that Pope Francis said what Joey Biden said Pope Francis said about Joey being a good Catholic and that Joey should continue to go to Holy Communion. After all, Joey Biden spoke without a teleprompters. But Joey said what he said, and it’s out there, and it’s putting enormous pressure on the bishops in these USA to just throw 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 right out the wide open windows while the smoke of Satan enters in.

The effect is the same if Francis says nothing to correct what Joey said. But, truth be told, Pope Francis already declared himself on the matter in the recent plane trip when he condemned abortion then instantly allowed “pastoral” decisions of pastors to allow pro-abort politicians to receive Holy Communion, calling any denial of Holy Communion to such monsters mere ideological politics. In other words, abortion doesn’t matter. Joey Biden’s soul doesn’t matter. It’s all mere politics and ideology. Don’t expect Pope Francis to be making any correction. Joey Biden said exactly what Pope Francis wanted him to say regardless of whether or not Pope Francis said it.

I suggest that Pope Francis ought not say that 1 Corinthians 11:27-29 is – even though inspired by the Holy Spirit – the mere rubbish of rigid ideological politics as he effectively said in the plane interview. True, it will be said with their own false judgment that these verses are not written for our salvation and therefore in their own minds are not inspired. (They’re wrong on that: it’s all inspired, all for our salvation.) Or they’ll say that we’re all more clever today anyway, so it doesn’t matter. after all, we’re all infallible.

At any rate, I’m lucky to have such a small parish. Our parking lot couldn’t fit all the vehicles in Joey Biden’s entourage. Our little church could hardly fit in those of his entourage. But there’s plenty of room in the penitent side of the Confessional for him alone. And I’m still a Missionary of Mercy. About whatever undeclared excommunication he would have picked up I can absolve.

When Joey converts, we need him to go back to the Vatican and reprimand Pope Francis for not reprimanding him.

7 Comments

Filed under Eucharist, Pope Francis

Analysis: Time, times, half a time, 1,260 [no longer 1,290] + 45: Daniel cited by Jesus then Apocalypse

That video made me sick to my stomach, literally. Uggh. One might have noticed “something” was happening in 2019 when, on 15 April, an *accidental fire* destroyed “Our Lady”, Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris. Six months later, in October of the same year, 2019, a number of significant attacks that are ramping up their devastation of the faith were set in motion. It’s all quite Apocalyptic. But before we start, let’s take note of some Sacred Scripture.

Note that references to times and seasons or years have particular vocabulary inscaped with the meaning of appointed times and seasons. In Greek, you might recall that chronos refers to mere chronological time and that kairos refers to a more theological, appointed time, such as the high feast days, or a jubilee year. But they can overlap, and they do so here. One kairos, two more of the same and another half of a kairos is, here, three and half chronological years. Numbers of days are mentioned in case anyone would otherwise be tempted not to come to a conclusion also about chronological time. Let’s take a look. Don’t just breeze over it. Be there with Daniel as he watches, then with Jesus as He instructs, then again with John as he watches. Let awe and holy fear take over your soul:

  • Daniel 7 — 9 While I was watching, thrones were set in place, and the Ancient One sat on his throne. His robe was as white as snow, and the hair on his head was as pure as wool. His throne was ablaze with fiery flames, and its heels were a burning fire. 10 A stream of fire surged forth and flowed out from his presence. Thousands upon thousands served him, and myriads upon myriads stood before him. The court was in session, and the books lay open. 11 Then I continued to watch because of the arrogant words that the horn was speaking. And as I watched the beast was put to death. Its body was destroyed and thrown into the fire to be consumed. 12 As for the other beasts, they lost their dominion, but their lives were prolonged for a season and a time. 13 As the night visions continued, I beheld approaching on the clouds of heaven one like a son of man. He came before the Ancient One and was presented to him. 14 Dominion and glory and kingship were conferred upon him so that all peoples and nations of every language would become his servants. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will never pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. 15 I, Daniel, experienced great anguish of spirit, and the visions that flashed through my mind truly terrified me. 16 Therefore, I approached one of those who were standing there and asked him what all this truly signified. He in turn revealed to me what all these things meant, 17 “These four great beasts represent four kingdoms that will arise from the earth. 18 But the holy ones of the Most High shall receive kingly power and possess it forever and ever.” 19 Then I expressed my desire to know about the fourth beast, since it was different from all the rest, and terrifying to behold with its iron teeth and bronze claws, and trampling underfoot and devouring its victims. 20 I also wanted to know about the ten horns on its head, and why the other horn sprouted, before which three of them fell, the horn that had eyes and an arrogant mouth, and whose appearance was more imposing than that of the others. 21 As I watched, this horn was waging war against the holy ones and prevailing over them, 22 until the Ancient One came and pronounced judgment in favor of the holy ones of the Most High, and the time came when the holy ones gained possession of the kingdom. 23 This is the explanation he offered: “As for the fourth beast, it signifies a fourth kingdom on earth that will differ from all other kingdoms. It shall devour the earth, trample it underfoot, and crush it to pieces. 24 As for the ten horns, from this kingdom ten kings shall rise, and another shall arise after them. This last king will be different from the earlier ones, and he will overcome three kings. 25 He will insult the Most High and oppress the holy ones of the Most High in his stubborn determination to change the sacred seasons and the law. They shall be given into his power for a time, two times, and half a time. 26 Finally the court will sit in judgment, and his power will be taken away, with his sovereignty completely destroyed forever. 27 Then kingship and dominion and the splendor of all the kingdoms under the heavens will be given to the holy people of the Most High, whose kingdom will be everlasting, and all dominions will serve and obey him.” 28 Here the account ends. I, Daniel, was greatly disturbed by my thoughts, and I turned pale, but I kept these things to myself.
  • Daniel 12 — 1 “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 Those who are wise[a] will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever. 4 But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.” 5 Then I, Daniel, looked, and there before me stood two others, one on this bank of the river and one on the opposite bank. 6 One of them said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, “How long will it be before these astonishing things are fulfilled?” 7 The man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, lifted his right hand and his left hand toward heaven, and I heard him swear by him who lives forever, saying, “It will be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.” 8 I heard, but I did not understand. So I asked, “My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?” 9 He replied, “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end. 10 Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand. 11 “From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. 12 Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days. 13 “As for you, go your way till the end. You will rest, and then at the end of the days you will rise to receive your allotted inheritance.”
  • Matthew 24 — 1 As Jesus left the temple and was walking away, his disciples came up to him to call his attention to the buildings of the temple. 2 He thereupon said to them, “Do you see all these? Amen, I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another; every one will be thrown down.” 3 As he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached and spoke to him when they were alone. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” 4 Jesus answered them, “Take care that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars. Do not be alarmed, for those things are bound to happen, but the end is still to come. 7 For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are only the beginning of the labor pains. 9 “Then you will be handed over to be tortured and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of my name. 10 At that time, many will fall away from the faith; they will betray and hate one another. 11 Many false prophets will appear and lead many astray, 12 and with the increase of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But whoever endures to the end will be saved. 14 And the good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the entire world as a testimony offered to all the nations. And then the end will come. 15 “Therefore, when you see the abomination of desolation, about which the prophet Daniel spoke, standing in the Holy Place (let the reader understand), 16 then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, 17 the one who is standing on the roof must not come down to collect what is in his house, 18 and someone who is in the field must not turn back to retrieve his coat. 19 “Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing infants in those days! 20 Pray that you will not have to take flight in the winter or on a Sabbath. 21 For at that time there will be great suffering that has not been equaled since the beginning of the world until now, and will never again be duplicated. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no one would be saved; but for the sake of the elect they will be shortened. 23 “Therefore, if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ,’ or ‘There he is,’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will arise, and they will perform great signs and wonders that are impressive enough to deceive even the elect, if that were possible. 25 “Remember, I have forewarned you about this. 26 So if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out there. If they say, ‘Behold, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For just as lightning comes from the east and is visible even in the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28 Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather. 29 “Immediately after the distress of those days, ‘the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give forth its light; the stars will fall from the sky and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.’ 30 “Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and all the peoples of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he will send forth his angels with a trumpet blast, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. 32 “Learn this lesson from the fig tree. As soon as its twigs become tender and its leaves begin to sprout, you know that summer is near. 33 In the same way, when you see all these things take place, know that he is near, at the very gates. 34 Amen, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. 36 “As for the exact day and hour, no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 37 For as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 In the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and being given in marriage, up to the day that Noah entered the ark. 39 They knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and swept them all away. “That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Two men will be out in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and the other will be left. 42 Therefore, keep watch, for you do not know the day when your Lord is coming. 43 “But keep this in mind: if the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 Therefore, you must also be prepared, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him. 45 “Who, then, is the faithful and wise servant whom his master has put in charge of his household to give its members their food at the proper time? 46 Blessed is that servant if his master finds him doing so when he returns home. 47 Amen, I say to you, he will put him in charge of all his property. 48 “But if that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is detained,’ 49 and he proceeds to beat his fellow servants and eats and drinks with drunkards, 50 the master of that servant will return on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know. 51 He will punish him and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. [Also see Mark 13 & Luke 21]
  • Apocalypse 12 — 1 A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. 2 She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth. 3 Then another sign appeared in the sky; it was a huge red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and on its heads were seven diadems. Its tail swept away a third of the stars in the sky and hurled them down to the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman about to give birth, to devour her child when she gave birth. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. Her child was caught up to God and his throne. 6 The woman herself fled into the desert where she had a place prepared by God, that there she might be taken care of for twelve hundred and sixty days. 7 Then war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels battled against the dragon. The dragon and its angels fought back, 8 but they did not prevail and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. 9 The huge dragon, the ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, who deceived the whole world, was thrown down to earth, and its angels were thrown down with it. 10 Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say: “Now have salvation and power come, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Anointed. For the accuser of our brothers is cast out, who accuses them before our God day and night. 11 They conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; love for life did not deter them from death. 12 Therefore, rejoice, you heavens, and you who dwell in them. But woe to you, earth and sea, for the Devil has come down to you in great fury, for he knows he has but a short time.” 13 When the dragon saw that it had been thrown down to the earth, it pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. 14 But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle, so that she could fly to her place in the desert, where, far from the serpent, she was taken care of for a year, two years, and a half-year. 15 The serpent, however, spewed a torrent of water out of his mouth after the woman to sweep her away with the current. But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth and swallowed the flood that the dragon spewed out of its mouth. 17 Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus. 18 It took its position on the sand of the sea.

Pedantically, then:

  • The duration of the persecution:
    • a time, two times, and half a time [three and half years = 42 months = days = 1260 days]. Daniel speaks of the power of the last king, when there will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. Jesus puts it this way: For at that time there will be great suffering that has not been equaled since the beginning of the world until now, and will never again be duplicated.
    • 1,290 days [three and half years + 30 days] Daniel speaks of 30 extra days for the time allotted to the horror of the ending of the Daily Sacrifice and the setting up of the abomination of desolation. Jesus decrees that these extra days are cut short: And if those days had not been cut short, no one would be saved; but for the sake of the elect they will be shortened. So, were back to 1,260 days.
    • 1,335 days [three and half years + 30 days + 45 days = 44.5 months]. So, with Jesus, let’s knock off 30 days to 1,260 days, but then add 45 days = 1,305 days = 43.5 months.
  • The signs the persecution has come about:
    • When the power of the holy people has been finally broken [surely verified by the following two signs]
    • From the time that the Daily Sacrifice is abolished
    • and the abomination that causes desolation is set up
  • Other signs of the persecution mentioned by Jesus:
    • “For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. You will hear of wars and rumors of wars. Do not be alarmed, for those things are bound to happen, but the end is still to come. For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are only the beginning of the labor pains. “Then you will be handed over to be tortured and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of my name. At that time, many will fall away from the faith; they will betray and hate one another. Many false prophets will appear and lead many astray, and with the increase of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold.

So, let’s take a date such as 27 October 2019. We’ll say why in a bit:

  • 27 October 2019 + 1260 days [42 months] = Easter Sunday 9 April 2023
  • 27 October 2019 + 1260 days + 45 days = 1,305 days [43.5 months] = 7th week of Easter: Wednesday, 24 May 2023

As a side note, it’s quite impressive that if the days had not been shortened by Jesus, we would start with 27 October 2019 + 1,290 days + 45 days = 1,335 days = 44.5 months: The Vigil of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist, Friday, 23 June 2023.

So, what’s up with 27 October 2019 that makes it so important so as to be a baseline date for this?

  • Russia, having spread her communist errors to China in previous decades [remember Fatima and all Pope’s refusing to consecrate specifically Russia specifically with all the bishops in a specific ceremony with the effect that Russia would spread her errors throughout the world?]… Russia saw the fruit of their labor with the Chinese Communist Party weaponizing a virus, releasing it upon the world at the 7th CISM World Games, a kind of military olympics organized by the Conseil International du Sport Militaire, which took place in October of 2019 in Wuhan, China. Here’s the account. The release would have had to have happened just a few days before the ending of the games so that sicknesses and death wouldn’t happen in China but would be brought elsewhere by the militaries of the world. Quite brilliant in a very evil sort of way, really. October 27, 2019: perfect.
  • At the same time, the Amazon Synod was taking place in throughout October of 2019 at the Vatican. Pope Francis, having worshipped a demon idol, caused that Abomination of Desolation to be established in the Holy of Holies where it must not be, that is, on the Papal Altar of Saint Peter’s Basilica, the Altar of Jesus’ Sacrifice. That happened at the closing Mass of the Amazon Synod, that is, on October 27, 2019.
  • The demon idol, Pachamama, Demon Consort of the Sun God of Mexico, Central and South America since time immemorial, with untold millions and millions of human beings having their hearts ripped out in sacrifice to her, this Pachamama was effectively put on par with Jesus, both being, then, mere symbols of whatever irrelevant cultures that come and go like the wind. This structures a dialectic by which the daily Sacrifice, the Sacrifice of the Mass, is brought to an end. It is a declaration that the Sacrifice of Jesus, the Lex orandi, the Law of Prayer, is invalid, and also therefore invalid as a source of the Lex credendi, the Law of Believing. Thus, Traditionis Custodes was put into motion. This can be demonstrated with many statements of Pope Francis through the years about cultures and symbols: only the New Order of Mass can be a valid vehicle to bring various symbols and cultures to the fore, such as the hellish demon Pachamama on the altar of Jesus’ Sacrifice.

Of course, Covid-19 was used as an excuse to close churches throughout the world even while liquor stores stayed open. This closing of churches is not over yet. Even while the Ancient Rite, the Traditional Latin Mass is attacked by Pope Francis most of the Novus Ordo crowd are simply happy to close down their churches and even mock the faithful while disrespecting Jesus. But, again, more on this later. There’s much more to say about how the closure of churches is probable. The conditions of Daniel and Jesus are being fulfilled with the Abomination of Desolation and the ending of the Daily Sacrifice [of the Mass].

Time line of the Synod on Synodality:

  • 2021 Saturday October 2 to 2022 April – Beginning of the second anniversary of the Synod on the Amazon: Diocesan consultation with the baptized “infallible in believing”, with all syntheses from bishops conferences, etc.
    • However, that closing date of 2022 April has been extended until August 15, 2022. After all, the drafting of the Instrumentum laboris, the Working Document, is already written, right?
  • 2022 April August to 2022 September – drafting of the Instrumentum laboris, the Working Document.
  • 2022 September to 2023 March – Continental consultation: group of Bishops Conferences and the General Secretariat.
  • 2023 April to May (before June) – drafting of second Instrumentum laboris, which is then sent out.
  • 2023 October – celebration of the Synod on Synodality.

However, if we apply the shortening of the time mentioned by Jesus also to this Synod, the consultation and continental consultation and the drafting of the second Instrumentum laboris (surely already written) will be prompt and will simply be voted on forthwith, that is, by beginning of Holy Week at the start of April 2023. It would just be a matter of faxing back and forth prearranged approval and the sending of an already arranged invitation for the bishops to show up in Saint Peter’s Square for Easter Sunday 2023.

In my little narrative in my own very little and very dark mind and beady black heart, the celebration of the Synod will start on Easter Sunday, 9 April 2023 with an attempted infallible, ex-cathedra pronouncement on a “Different Church”, a “Synodal Church”, always dialectical as time goes on in different circumstances with different cultures, but with everyone always infallible, with doctrine and morality changing according to the times, all of this a direct rejection of the founding of the Church personally by Jesus with the very person of Peter (meaning Peter, in his person, is the one who is expendable before the Truth.) What is desired with a “Different Church” is a total rejection of Jesus’ Church. That Peter is infallible and that everyone is infallible are so different as make them categorically “other”.

But Jesus is Himself the Church. He is the Head of the Body, we are the members of that Body. We go to the Father through, with and in Jesus by the Lex orandi, the Law of Praying, the Sacrifice of Jesus, that is the source of the Lex credendi, the Law of Believing. Pope Francis has already rejected the validity of Jesus’ Sacrifice in the Ancient Rite of Mass, and therefore has also rejected Jesus’ Sacrifice as the source of our believing. I don’t want Francis’ fake church. I want Jesus as my Church. Nothing more. Nothing less. No one more. No one less. Jesus is ever ancient, ever new, the Divine Son of the Living God. He is Truth. His Truth, spoken by the Father, cannot be manipulated, changed, redirected. No. Jesus is Jesus and it is Jesus I want.

In my own dark humor, Pope Francis will attempt to pronounce on an “Everyone-is-Infallible-Church” for all the world to see, on the loggia of Saint Peter’s Basilica, on April 9, Easter Sunday, 2023, with George Soros paid-for crowds packing Saint Peter’s Square all the way down to the Tiber River. All media broadcasters will be there. The entire world will be watching the end of the Catholic Church with glee. But then…

In my bad and evil imagination, just as Pope Francis opens his mouth for the pronouncement that everyone is infallible, a lightning bolt will smash the loggia asunder killing Pope Francis and all cardinals who are present. This will be the end of the persecution.

Remember, the worst persecution is not bloodshed, as I imagine most every single person killed with a bloodletting persecution in all those horrific genocides will go to heaven.

But the worst persecution is bad priests, bad bishops, who lead people to hell. That’s by far the worst persecution. That’s the end of the 1,260 days of the worst persecution the world will ever know. But that same day, in disappointment with the failure of Pope Francis, China will release the kill-virus piggybacking off the present “vaccine”, killing off untold numbers right around the world for the next 45 days, giving us just a handful of days to prepare for the celebration of Pentecost 2023. As Daniel says, blessed is the one who waits for and endures to the end of those following 45 days.

But I have to write more about why I think that the phrase in the preparatory document of the Synod on Synodality referring to all the baptized as infallible in credendo “infallible in believing” is so very heretical in its purposed “context”. Stay tuned.

Meanwhile, “keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus” and go to Confession while you can. If you can, do something:

Please share this post. I’d like some criticism so that I can sharpen the arguments a bit more. After all, I let my imagination get ahead of me plenty of times. But then again, there is this:

Yep. Pray the Rosary.

3 Comments

Filed under Coronavirus, Pope Francis

Black Elk sets the record straight: He’s Catholic, not some pagan to be used by Catholics with an axe to grind

I was alerted to the existence of one of those, you know, merely half-converted good pagans who is Catholic and pagan at the same time. Am I wrongly bashing Pope Francis for his pushing of Pachamama and tolerating the leopard/jaguar demon and his pushing of same sex unions etc., all for the sake of synodizing, being a man of consensus?

The good pagan we’re talking about is, instead, no half-converted pagan, but rather Black Elk of the Great Sioux Nation of the first nations peoples. He died ten years before I was born and, when he wasn’t traveling, lived not all that far from where I grew up. I stomped around his stomping grounds many times indeed as a little kid and then later as a seminarian. So, the mention of Black Elk caught my interest.

Black Elk is quite old when he’s writing the account above. In fact, the circumstances of this account of his is that he’s just been given the Last Rites and Viaticum. So, this account is like his last testament. He’ll live quite a bit longer. But he calls this his “LAST WORD”. That’s significant. Let’s see how pagan he really is, or NOT.

Right up top Black Elk says:

  • “A white man made a book and told what I had spoken of olden times, but the new times he left out. So I speak again, a last word.”

In other words, the white man guy rejected what the native American guy believed later in life. That the white guy hated Catholics is obviated by that fact and by the quote from Saint Peter cited below.

An example of that kind of racism is, in my opinion, Dances with Wolves, a reading of pop-psychology into an anthropologically-speaking “pure” culture. This is using people as ideological slaves for one’s own ends. Bad, that. Black Elk didn’t like it, not one bit. He thought that this fallen-away-from-the-truth-Catholic was a dog and a pig (see the quote below).

Black Elk directs his white readers (that author specifically) to read 2 Peter 2:20-22. Here’s that passage. If you think I’m strong in my posts against Synodal demon worship, read these words from Pope Peter himself. Dogs can be a bit weird in what they eat. Pigs, however, are symbols of Satan:

  • 2 Peter 2:20 “If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. 22 Of them the proverbs are true: ‘A dog returns to its vomit,’ and, ‘A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.'”

Pope Francis and those California bishops? A bunch of dogs eating their own vomit and pigs wallowing in the mud after being washed?

To use Black Elk as a promotion of demon idol worship is… um… wrong.

But if you want me to be fair, you know, a white man speaking about white people who are dogs and pigs… it’s the white people who have wrought more genocidal murder on the unborn, just born, elderly, and also for racist reasons, not just Margaret Sanger and Hitler, but Stalin et alii. As I’ve often said, the white abortionists I’ve talked to over the years all said that they worship a different god. Pagans, all. And that’s what this is all about, all this demon idol worship. It’s to mock Christ while abortionists go to Holy Communion.

So, what happened today, 29 October 2021 over in the Holy See? No, really, tell me. Who’s the pagan?

I guarantee that Black Elk, had he been in that Church in California with the worship of the leopard demon of darkness, he would have ripped that stupid costume off that person and reprimanded the bishops and priests there. Yep.

4 Comments

Filed under Pope Francis

Synod Mass: Let’s worship demons together!

You’re better at being calm and carrying on, dearest Taylor.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is wp-16351826480533539486382689168974.png

The leopard demon god is the violent demon god of darkness, all that is not light, diametrically opposed to the Light of the Nations. What in hell is the leopard violent demon god doing in the sanctuary of Jesus’ Sacrifice? Jesus wants to get us out of the grasp of the violent demons of hell. But, this hell… For me, if that came to my parish… well…

I can only imagine how this will soon disintegrate into direct desecration of the Most Blessed Sacrament. Oh, I forgot, it already has. Remember the Most Blessed Sacrament being inserted into the belly of the Pachamama idol as if it were a monstrance? Ain’t gonna happen in my parish on my watch.

And don’t think Pope Francis condemns this as liturgical abuse. He’s the worst offender, placing the Pachamama, the Abomination of Desolation, on the altar of Jesus’ Sacrifice, the Holy of Holies.

I’ll just say it: this is all demon worship and I’m not going to have anything to do with it. It’s all straight out of hell. I’m not going to judge these souls, or the bishops (so many at that synodality Mass), but I will say this: objectively speaking, the stuff they are doing will bring them straight to hell. It is objectively mortally sinful. But God is the judge of all that is subjective. I’m not. But, objectively speaking, it’s from hell.

To any bishops reading this: I’m a priest of Jesus Christ, not of your damn demons. I will live and die as a priest of Jesus Christ. I’m not going to preside over your damned demon worship.

This is why I also love the ad orientem worship of Christ Jesus in His Sacrifice during the Traditional Latin Mass. We’re facing Jesus together, not putting on some damn show. At Jesus’ Sacrifice on Calvary, demons are cast down to hell. But this theatrical blasphemy of synodal hell portrays the demons winning, as Jesus is no longer important. Jesus has been conquered by the demons… isn’t that the message here?

Moreover, Saint Michael the archangel, defend us in… oh, I forgot, that prayer is forbidden in some places. And you wonder why Saint Michael is forbidden?

3 Comments

Filed under Pope Francis

“Priest-bloggers who think they know better than the Magisterium…” (as if that were an accusation and threat)

“Priest-bloggers who think they know better than the Magisterium…” That’s a phrase that I’ve heard recently – multiple times in fact – both as an accusation and a threat. There are many ecclesiastics in far-flung places for whom I’m not any kind of favorite. I feel a rant about to happen. My keyboard is eager to get the job done.

Firstly, let’s define our terms:

  • Priest: This is a guy whose been ordained into the very priesthood of Jesus so as to recite in Persona Christi Jesus’ wedding vows to His Bride the Church: This is my body given for you in sacrifice, my blood poured out for you in sacrifice, and then to provide the sacraments which issue from this sacrifice, instructing and leading the Lord’s Little Flock to the Lamb of God. It’s all about Jesus, or should be, for any priest.
  • Blogger: This is a guy who writes at least occasionally on the internet. For me, somewhere on the autism spectrum, weirdly, I think best in sorting out the details of whatever difficulty through a keyboard. For the broad picture, I think best in slumber and in prayer… and in pacing to and fro in the upper stacks, those dark caves of library of the Pontifical Biblical Institute, whether in Rome or Jerusalem, or in the lowest reaches (truly caves) of the École biblique et archéologique française de Jérusalem (down the steps, then again, and again, where lightbulbs hanging on wires are long dead). But the details? Definitely through a keyboard for people to see and smack me down.
  • Priest-bloggers: I hate the “hyphenated” priest thing, you know, priest-anthropologist, priest-psychologist, priest-marxist, priest-sociologist, priest-liturgist, priest-theologian, priest-synodologist, or even any priest-exorcist, priest-gardener, priest-dog-owner, priest-HALO-jumper, priest-gun-slinger[!], priest-whatever… A priest is a priest is a priest. Any hyphenation is an insult to Christ’s priesthood. So, this priest-blogger thing is an insult right off the bat.
  • Who think they know better than: Yes, well, that would be silly, wouldn’t it, if anyone were ever to communicate if they didn’t think they could add something to the conversation? But priests have a vocation and mandate to speak and teach and instruct in such manner that what they have to offer is to get their own little selves out of the way so that the Truth of Christ Jesus might shine through. I remember in the seminary I was told that I wasn’t allowed to believe anything that the Church teaches except by having this filtered through “theologians” who know the conditions of the world. The intent of that was that I was to accept that what the Church really wants is contraception, abortion, and women priests. I, um… rejected that. So, can a priest-blogger, or whatever, “speak prophetically” as they themselves say, you know, with parrhesia? Let’s see:
    • “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,” he said. “Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us responsible for this man’s blood.” But Peter and the other apostles replied, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:28-29). Yep.
    • “When Cephas came to Antioch, however, I opposed him to his face, because he stood to be condemned” (Galatians 2:11). Yep.
  • Magisterium: This word means “Teaching Authority.”
    • Infallible interventions of the Supreme Magisterium of the Church have the authority of Christ that those interventions will not fail in representing correctly in some way some article of faith already present in some way in Divine Revelation.
    • The ordinary Magisterium of the Church is often up for dispute as to whether any teaching is infallible. But there are various statements, say, in Paul VI’s encyclical letter Humanae vitae which belong to the deposit of faith in such manner that we call them infallible, expressing quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est… expressing that which everywhere, always by everyone is believed, is entirely consonant with Sacred Revelation and the Natural Law, and may well be expressed explicitly in Sacred Revelation.
  • “Someone-did-something”-Magisterium”: Let’s add this other term that people use interchangeably with “Magisterium”. Sorry for citing Ilhan Omar about September 11, 2001. I couldn’t resist.
    • That someone who did something could be anyone from some desk jockey on his first day in some office in the Holy See who gives an impromptu interview, or the Pope himself on a plane ride or while making jokes in the Paul VI Audience Hall or while publishing some exhortation to dialog like Amoris laetitia or a motu proprio like Traditionis custodes… and then everything in-between, none of which is infallible, such as the opinion piece of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that “vaccines” are to be voluntary, you know, like, kind of, or most of the time (meaning any forced “vaccine” is fine and dandy if you can think of an excuse to impose it, regardless of science and justice, regardless of tolerating even murder of the innocent). None of this has any great authority.

We are obliged in conscience to use also our God-given conscience formed by natural law, by Sacred Revelation and the rare interventions of the Supreme Magisterium of the Church such as the canons of the Council of Trent. We are obliged in conscience, in view of that, also to consider whether some monstrous commentary contravening everything by which our consciences are to be formed is just plain wrong and likely malicious and a sin to follow. For my part, as a priest who tries his best sentire cum ecclesia, indeed, to believe wholeheartedly and with great enthusiasm and joy quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est, I pray that I would never ever contradict or obfuscate or insult religion or the Church. Let’s see:

  • Canon 1369: “A person who in a public show or speech, in published writing, or in other uses of the instruments of social communication utters blasphemy, gravely injures good morals, expresses insults, or excites hatred or contempt against religion or the Church is to be punished with a just penalty.”

This legislation has been used unjustly against many a priest who, instead, is given to correcting blasphemers, reprimanding those who gravely injure good morals, responds aptly to those expressing insults (as did Jesus and John the Baptist and all the prophets and saints), and rightly tamps down hatred or contempt against religion or the Church. Sometimes a priest must correct those “officials” working in the Holy See, those whom some call the Magisterium, because they, in fact, stand condemned, are misleading the Lord’s Little Flock, scandalizing a multitude of souls, and are simply the most immoral monsters you might every meet in this sorry world. Should we multiply examples? And these people are “the Magisterium”? Those who insist that anything and everything including sin that goes on the Holy See is all good because it’s, like, the ♬ Magisterium ♬, stand rightly condemned by, ironically, Canon 1369, and they should receive a just penalty whether they be priest or (arch)bishop. I’ve always held, in jest, kind-of, that a just penalty is burning at the stake.

Perhaps this is my difficulty: I’ve been in Rome waaaay toooo looong, and know that not all in the Holy See are good angels, nor are they the best students of the Angelic Doctor. I’m not impressed that “someone did something” in the Holy See. It has to be put to the test of quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est, you know, all that which is condemned by Pope Francis under the rubric of entrenched rigidity that he says proclaims “We’ve always done it this way” as if that were also an accusation and a threat. Pope Francis, in article one of Traditionis custodes, rejects Lex orandi, Jesus’ Sacrifice in the Ancient Rite, and thus rejects that Sacrifice in any rite, and also rejects entirely the Lex credendi issuing from that Sacrifice. Yes, well, we, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church have always prayed with the Sacrifice of the Mass and we’ve always believed the same way. The Sacrifice doesn’t change, the the believing doesn’t change. Yep. That’s the way it’s always been. That’s the way it is now. That’s the way it always will be. And I do know better than the magisterium of Pope Francis.

The accusation is usually: “You’re divisory!” Yes, well, exactly. I’m with Him who came with a sword of division, separating the good from the evil, the sheep from the goats, those wanting to go to hell from those in Jesus’ Little Flock who want to go to heaven and don’t need the harassment of those wanting to go to hell. Division? It’s merely confirmed by Jesus’ sword of Truth, but is put to that sword by the offenders-against-Truth themselves. In their lust to be men of consensus they are happy to smack down those who are with Jesus instead of siding with those men of consensus. “Peace! Peace! All is unity!” the false prophets say. Are we to be ministers of unity and peace? Sure, but only through the sword of division and the violence by which heaven is stormed, the mercy of proclaiming the Living Truth of the Son of God… come what may. Just try sticking to the truth with charity and you’ll immediately see how violent things can get against you. The “men of consensus” are all cowards.

  • “By what authority do you do such things, Father George? You’re nothing! Nobody! We don’t have to listen to you! You’re not the Magisterium! You’re just a priest-blogger!”

The answer has been on the About page of this blog the whole time:

  • “Views are my own. The motive is to discern a just mercy. This is as difficult as looking on Him whom we have all pierced through, men of race and tribe and tongue and people and nation (see Apocalypse). Any “authority” on the part of this priest is merely proportionate to the degree with which reasoning is reflective of natural law and divine revelation. Parrhesia involves speaking the truth for the common good even at risk to oneself. Be joyful. This same disclaimer applies to my priesthood and my place in the hierarchical church. Anything written on this blog has nothing to do with representing the priesthood in general, or this parish, or this diocese, or this Bishop’s Conference, or the Holy See. Get it? It’s just my personal opinion. I hope that’s clear.”

So! Great! Let’s bring up some examples with which it is clear that I think I “know better than the Magisterium.” This is too easy:

  • Pope Francis blessing and adoring and causing the Abomination of Desolation to be enthroned on the Holy of Holies, the Altar of Jesus’ Sacrifice, on 27 October 2019: the pachamama demon idol to whom people are sacrificed. That’s really evil in the “magisterium” of Pope Francis. If ecclesiastics indiscriminately hold up the Magisterium, let them praise the demon-idol pachamama. I do know better than that execration. I do “know better than the magisterium” of Pope Francis. Yep.
  • The motu proprio Traditionis custodes of Pope Francis is an evil law, and therefore, as the Common Doctor says, is not a law at all, and is not to be obeyed or disobeyed; it is to be ignored as it is simply nothing at all. It is evil since it has it that Jesus is to be thrown out of His own parochial churches simply because it is the Ancient Rite of Mass that is used. Traditionis custodes is evil since it says that the Ancient Rite of Mass is invalid as the Law of Praying – Lex orandi – meaning that Jesus’ Sacrifice in the Mass is not valid any longer, meaning that it is not a source of the Law of Believing – Lex credendi, that is, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est. Pope Francis lays the ground work with this heresy and insult to Christ Jesus for free-for-all anti-doctrine and anti-morality of the everyone-is-infallible Synod on Synodality. Here’s the deal: I do “know better than the magisterium” of Pope Francis. Yep.

Examples could be multiplied ad nauseam, truly to the point of vomiting. There are web-sites which specialize in such lists, which just to scroll through the items – scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll – is so horrible that for the sake of the elect the time of this persecution of the faith by the ecclesiastical powers that be is to be shortened, thanks be to God.

Seriously, does any priest or (arch)bishop back up the ♬ Magisterium ♬ of Pope Francis, or that magisterium of opinions of office workers in the Holy See, from the guy on probation to the Pope? Really?

5 Comments

Filed under Pope Francis

TLM never abrogated? New Mass never promulgated? Wait! What? Morris Albert guest appearance!

The other week I had a many hours conversation with a priest friend on the famous “Day Off”. These are often over the top, intense exchanges on all things spiritual, philosophical, theological, liturgical, political, ecclesial, the usual solving all the problems of the Church and the world all at once.

This time around it was all about what is commonly held to be the so called abrogation of the TLM, the Traditional Latin Mass, as well as the so called promulgation of the Novus Ordo, the New Ordo of Mass. After all, the full implementation of Traditionis custodes is afoot, though this action of suppression is more likely to be that which is expected to be delivered with a jackboot in some (arch)dioceses.

“Read it aloud,” my priest friend suggested. Every few sentences I would stop and make an exasperated comment about ambiguity, lack of logic, and complain about the strong emphasis on the mere feelings of Paul VI which he categorized as “desire” (see “placet” in the Latin). In fact, the entire document is not about abrogation of the TLM, but the mere desire of Paul VI that the Novus Ordo Missae be received. He said nothing whatsoever about any promulgation. It’s a statement of feelings. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Of particular mention is the last paragraph before the dating and signing. Stare at the logic. It’s not what you might expect:

  • “The effective date for what we have prescribed in this Constitution shall be the First Sunday of Advent of this year, 30 November. We decree that these laws and prescriptions be firm and effective now and in the future, notwithstanding [“non obstantibus”], to the extent necessary, the apostolic constitutions and ordinances issued by our predecessors and other prescriptions, even those deserving particular mention and amendment.”

But what is it that he has prescribed? It’s found in the immediately preceding paragraph about Paul VI’s desires of expectations:

  • “After what we have presented concerning the new Roman Missal, we wish [that’s a simple desire, not legislation: “placet”] in conclusion to insist on one point in particular and to make it have its effect. When he promulgated the “editio princeps” of the Roman Missal, our predecessor St. Pius V offered it to the people of Christ as the instrument of liturgical unity and the expression of a pure and reverent worship in the Church. Even though, in virtue of the decree of the Second Vatican Council, we have accepted into the new Roman Missal lawful variations and adaptations, our own expectation in no way differs from that of our predecessor. [Paul VI’s wish, desire, expectation…] It is that the faithful will receive [part of any promulgation is any reception, which is up in the air as of his writing and still today] the new Missal as a help toward witnessing and strengthening their unity with one another; that through the new Missal one and the same prayer in a great diversity of languages will ascend, more fragrant than any incense, to our heavenly Father, through our High Priest, Jesus Christ, in the Holy Spirit.”

I’m sure there are apoplectic knee-jerk reactions to that (“But we know what he means!”). So, let’s take a closer look at that very official closing paragraph:

  • “The effective date for what we have prescribed in this Constitution [his sharing of a wish] shall be the First Sunday of Advent of this year [1969], 30 November. We decree that these laws and prescriptions [actually, just his sharing of a wish] be firm and effective now [how rigid, especially about what he feels about wishes!] and in the future, notwithstanding, to the extent necessary, the apostolic constitutions and ordinances issued by our predecessors and other prescriptions, even those deserving particular mention and amendment [note the logic of that usage of “notwithstanding”, “non obstantibus” (see the parsing below)].”

Here’s the deal: This is simply a statement that Paul VI wishes, desires, expects, has feelings about… everyone everywhere and all the time knows of his wishes (his laws and prescriptions merely having their final referents in his wishes), so that while those mere wishes are known, all the apostolic constitutions and ordinances issued by his predecessors and other prescriptions, even those deserving particular mention and amendment, all retain their force. Just because something is not held to stand in the way doesn’t mean that it is abrogated. Yep. Stunning, isn’t it? And just because Paul VI has a desire doesn’t mean anything is promulgated. Yep. Stunning, isn’t it?

Anachronistic to all this is “Feelings” which debuted four years later, but perhaps might have been inspired by Paul VI’s feelings.

2 Comments

Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis

Henry V – The Daily Eve of Saint Crispin’s Day. Bonus: layman’s prophesy

Not only is every day the eve of Saint Crispin’s Day – Yes sir-eee – but it is more so as the days wear on:

  • What’s Biden going to do next?
  • What’s Pope Francis going to do next?
  • What are the bishops going to do to hurt unvaxed priests next?
  • What are politicos going to do to hurt church attendance next?

A great family travelled some hundreds of miles for Mass at Holy Redeemer this past Sunday. We had a great conversation afterward. We spoke quite frankly about pro-life matters. I shared with him my own little prophesy. He then shared his. I’ll get to my own imagination in a later post, but here’s a quick paraphrase of what he said:

  • People in general and Catholics in particular are going to be really upset as it becomes ever more evident that the “vaccines” are not “vaccines” but are all part of the great reset and are hurting not only health but also consciences. And they will leave the Church.

What’s the response of the politicos and weak priests and bishops who have been leading people to hell? The words are voiced with effeminate brow-beating, bullying: “We were men of consensus then, and we are men of consensus now. We’re with Joey-Baby still today.”

Over against them I say with Henry V (full inscape of the words intended): “And now [those] [in]bed shall think themselves accursed they were not here and hold their manhoods cheap while then he speaks that fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s Day.”

Of course, the “fighting” of which I speak is that of praying the Holy Rosary, of preaching the truth, of providing the Sacraments. That’s all. And that’s what’s needed. And it hits them broadside, unexpected, stunning them, as faith is that which is least expected as it is entirely unknown to them. “What’s happening?” they ask, stunned. Then hopefully they convert, a win-win. But compromise with the very Person of Jesus, also in the least of the brethren, begs for entrenchment as rationalization. Prayers from the monsters to God, begging for humility, is necessary. Yikes!

3 Comments

Filed under Free exercise of religion, Politics, Pope Francis