Tag Archives: Pope Francis

Judaeo Catholic = Religion. Islam? No. Pope Francis can’t dialogue with Islam.

Thomas Aquinas and Réginald Marie Garrigou-Lagrange and Cardinal Giuseppe Siri have noted that Judaism and Catholicism are but one religion with the same (univocal) Divine Revelation. The Messiah to whom Israel and Judah looked forward is the Divine Founder of the Catholic Church.

Meanwhile, Islam is a Judeao-Catholic heresy. Islam is not a religion but rather error. Error has no rights. Muslims have rights. We are to respect their persons, but not their fake religion. We can offer to dialogue with them as did Pope Benedict XVI in his famous Regensburg Address. But they will say that they cannot dialogue because our logic, our reason, our common sense, our respect for the dignity of the human person is not at all the way Allah thinks. Therefore, no dialogue on any level is permitted.

When Abraham was to sacrifice his son as recounted in Genesis, this was about an immediate resurrection from the dead, an un-slitting of the throat of the boy. If Abraham believed that all his progeny would come through Isaac alone, he had to believe that God would immediately raise Isaac from the dead. Young Isaac, a symbol of the innocent sacrifice that would take away original sin, was not at all innocent, having been subject to original sin like all of us. So, a ram, a symbol of the Lamb of God to come was sacrificed as a temporary symbol instead. Then, Jesus, the Lamb of God, the Messiah, the Suffering Servant, worthy of standing in our place before our Heavenly Father, the Innocent for the guilty, arrived. Catholics are 100% with the Jews on the clear logic of this account in Genesis.

Meanwhile, Islam, the Qur’an, perverts this demonically. Muhammad has it that Abraham was to sacrifice his son not in view of any promised progeny, nor did it have to be this or that son, legit or illegit. For Islam, Abraham was to sacrifice his son merely as an offering to a bloodthirsty Allah. This is not about justice regarding sin, or any propitiatory sacrifice, nor about any symbolism regarding the Messiah to come and what that Messiah would do for us by standing in our place, taking on the punishment of death that we deserve for sin, original and whatever else. It is simply doing what all fallen peoples do in false religions, sacrificing children as bribery of, in this case, hateful “obedience” to a hateful Allah. The bowing the forehead to the ground thing of Islam is about the submission of Abraham’s son to Allah wanting that Abraham’s son get his head cut off, just to do it. Why do you think kids are the ones who are always strapped up with suicide-murder bomb vests?

Try to dialogue with that and you will be killed. Let Islam consecrate Vatican City to Islam and they will rejoice. But that’s not dialogue. Such confusion only brings about discord, you know, wherein children get killed. It’s not right:

death boy gaza

It’s gotta stop. But free speech is being attacked both by secular society and…


Filed under Interreligious dialogue, Missionaries of Mercy, Pope Francis

Update late 2019: Conclave validity review: Francis may not be Pope

amazon synod

You have heard that it was said: the conclave is invalid because so many of the electing Cardinals manipulated the election with quid pro quo dealings, bringing upon themselves automatic excommunication and therefore invalidating their voting. Thus, Pope Francis is not Pope.

Then you have heard that it was said: the conclave was valid because none of those automatic excommunications had external effect on voting because those excommunications were not declared, you know, because the only one able to declare such excommunications on the public record, thus affecting voting, is the Pope. But that’s the point, there is no Pope. That’s what the election, the conclave, is all about. Thus, it is said, the election results were illicit but not invalid. Pope Francis is Pope.

But I put forward this question: The mind of the legislator, the previous Pope, is surely well aware of the declaration thing for automatic excommunications, and that is precisely and exactly the reason why he is obviously overriding such universal canon law for the very specific circumstances of a conclave. Duh! Pope Benedict is not a stupid man. The automatic excommunications, even if not immediately known, invalidate the vote if they are of such a number to affect the outcome. An investigation is necessary.  Pope Francis is Pope, or he is not Pope.

I’m not a canon lawyer and I’m well aware of those canon lawyers who go apoplectic when non-canon-lawyers make such commentary. But I would ask them to go easy on me since, in fact, I’m only asking a question, with sincerity, willing to be guided. But I am willing to ask the question. I think it is a valid question. Disabuse me of my ignorance.

So, after I wrote this, I spoke with a canon lawyer on the “day off”. He said that it may be that such a specified automatic excommunication may have to “determined” and somehow manifested in the Conclave itself. And now we’re wading into canon lawyer territory and hypothetical conditions inside a given conclave. So…


Filed under Pope Francis

Dear Pope Francis: Stop soliciting sin. Mocking God, leading between grace & sin is a crime. It needs to stop now.

pope francis--

I’ve commented at length on this question and it’s full context just recently here:

Pope Francis sums up his heresies

I’d like to comment just a bit more on his imperative command that “the pastors must lead their flock between grace and sin, because this is evangelical morality.” Let’s see that paragraph again:

  • “But they say: the Pope is a communist… Ideologies enter into doctrine and when doctrine slips into ideology that’s where there’s the possibility of a schism. The pastors must lead their flock between grace and sin, because this is evangelical morality. {I pastori devono condurre il gregge tra la grazia e il peccato, perché la morale evangelica è questa. // Los pastores deben guiar al rebaño entre la gracia y el pecado, porque ésta es la moralidad evangélica.} There’s the ideology of the primacy of a sterile morality regarding the morality of the people of God. Instead, a morality based on such a pelagian. ideology leads you to rigidity, and today we have many schools of rigidity within the Church, which are not schisms, but pseudo-schismatic Christian developments that will end badly. When you see rigid Christians, bishops, priests, there are problems behind that, not Gospel holiness.”

For my response in what I hope is a dialogue instead of my just getting smacked down, I would like to use the woman caught in adultery at the beginning of John chapter 8, what with Jesus evangelically forgiving her and, we cannot deny, evangelically commanding her NOT to sin again.

This has always been my practice of mercy in the Confessional as a priest and Missionary of Mercy. If someone, a penitent, is in fact repentant and has a firm purpose of amendment of life according to the Good News, there will be an absolution immediately provided. One may sincerely try to live in grace. But one may fail. But one may return to the Confessional for more needed guidance and understanding of what repentance and amendment of life practically entails. But one may also then be ready for absolution and that is then provided.

Such is entirely different from what Pope Francis proposes here with his talk of leading the flock between grace and sin, with the operative word being merely leading, always leading, but never putting such a soul face to face, heart to Heart with Jesus, always and only between grace and sin, so that the dialogue, the process is the soul having arrived, with there being nothing beyond the dialectical ideology of thesis and anti-thesis. Grace is no longer a friendship with Jesus, walking with Jesus, heart to Heart with Jesus. Grace is instead an ideological goal, and idea, a “horizon statement” to which one never arrives. “Go ahead, adulterous woman, go ahead and sin again! Go ahead, sin and then go up to receive Holy Communion! Never actually repent!” That is what Pope Francis is saying.

And now we know what that not so ambiguous footnote in Amoris laetitia certainly means: active adulterers are to be encouraged to continue their adultery and to go to Holy Communion. 

Good thing Pope Francis called Amoris laetitia a dialogue in the opening paragraphs of that screed. But here he clarifies that supposed ambiguity. It’s now certain what he means.

The presumption in all of this is that all penitents are incapable of living a moral life, a life of grace, that Jesus’ love and Jesus’ truth, that Jesus’ friendship, that Jesus Himself is powerless before sin. This presumes that we are all lost, all going to hell, and we’re just somehow trying to please everyone and be praised ourselves for just going along with sinfulness and encouraging everyone to do the same. What a dismal, dark, anti-evangelical view. To me, it seems like a blasphemy against what Saint Paul describes as the Body of Christ, the Head of the Body and the members.

The technical word for encouraging people to remain in sin, when used specifically for a Confessor who is “guiding” a penitent in this way, is solicitation. This is a crime in Canon Law, the code of law of the Church.

In other words, the priest is encouraging a penitent to continue sinning in whatever way. This turns a possible sin of weakness into a sin of real corruption, but even worse. The sinner who was guilty of a sin of weakness is now encouraged to purposely go ahead and sin. This is a direct mockery of God and a sin against the Holy Spirit.

Pope Francis is encouraging all the priests in the world and all penitents – everyone in the world – to mock God and sin against the Holy Spirit. Talk about being Promethean and Pelagian and self-referential and self-absorbed…

Never letting Jesus’ little flock get close to Jesus, always keeping that little flock in a life of sin, telling them with jaw-dropping condescension that they can never actually live a life of grace and morality and friendship of Jesus, taking away their hope altogether, creating in this way an ideology out of the person of Jesus, making Jesus a mere “horizon statement” a mere “ideal” that we can never really reach, all of this is, objectively, a sin against the Holy Spirit.

Dear Pope Francis, what you are doing is Pelagian: You are forcing people to think that they have to trust in their own strength which they do not have, and so lead them to frustration and, losing hope and giving up, lead them to a life of sin, but, oooh!, always trying harder with the strength they do not have, which none of us has. How cruel of you, Pope Francis. Instead we are to lead people to humility, to know that they, that we have no strength of our own, and that we are therefore to depend on the strength of Jesus, not in the sense that Jesus just helps us out and we continue to depend on our strength that we do not have, but rather in the sense that amidst all our weakness Jesus will draw us up into His strength, His love, His truth, so that however weak we are of ourselves, we can still live in grace, by grace, heart to Heart with Jesus, always carrying the cross but always looking to Jesus. He’s the One. He’s the only One. Not us! But Jesus!

Meanwhile, Jesus, putting His own life on the line, standing in our place, the Innocent for the guilty, forgives our sin, and then we, seeing His great love, with humble thanksgiving and in reverence before Him and in all good friendship, we are open to hearing His reprimand to us, ever so lovingly given: “Do not sin again!” He tells us that not just as some sterile command for a sterile morality, as Pope Francis thinks, but with grace, that is His presence, with the indwelling of the Most Holy Trinity, having us be Tabernacles of the Holy Spirit, offering our bodies as living sacrifices so different from this fallen world, so different from our fallen flesh, so different from the fallen angels, we being living sacrifices of purity of heart and agility of soul, aflame with love of God and self-sacrificing love of neighbor. Jesus who is alive, who is love, who is truth, is the Jesus I know, before whom I am thankful. He has forgiven me so much. Thank you, Jesus. I promise not to sin again.

And, yes, this priest loves to go to Confession.

Go to Confession!

And that means you too, Pope Francis.

I’ll be your very own Missionary of Mercy if you like.


Filed under Confession, Missionaries of Mercy, Pope Francis

Vatican Gardens St Michael purposely failing against Satan, mocking Jesus

Saint Michael Vatican Gardens.png

There are things you just don’t want to see and so don’t see. I thought it was good that a statue of Saint Michael the Archangel was installed in Vatican Gardens a while back. The pictures I saw at the time were fuzzy and from odd angles. I thought it was all a bit “soft,” but, at least St Michael was there, thought I. But I didn’t see what was actually going on. Because of all the idiocy going on in Vatican Gardens these days, I wanted to write a post contrasting the presence of Saint Michael with this other rubbish. But what I saw was not good. Now I know that it’s all a piece. In that presentation of Saint Michael…

  • Saint Michael misses the mark. Instead of piercing a spear into Satan, he contorts himself, going out of his way kind of pole-dance with the spear, ending up piercing – whoops – his own right foot. A bit sadomasochistic, that. Meanwhile, the left foot is… playing footsie… with the genitals of Satan…
  • Saint Michael is presented homoerotically, so that his erect penis is holding up the garment otherwise slipping off his rather sleek look-at-me body. Apparently, he’s so narcissistic that this is why he misses the mark. Or, I guess, that’s on purpose. He’s posing with his friend, Satan. Why hurt Satan when he is the vehicle to present oneself narcissistically?

Because of these two things, there is only one consistent interpretation of the rest of the presentation. The pierced hand of Jesus is reaching out from the gates of hell with the phrase “Non prevalebunt” from “The gates of hell will not prevail against her (that is, the Church)” has the wounds of Jesus as the subject of the verb. But in this context, that can only mean that the demonic Jesus and His useless redemption of us will not prevail against Satan, or against Satan’s friend, Saint Michael. Sigh.

My advice is this: Don’t mock Saint Michael like this. You will NOT get away with it. Mockery will catch up to you.

Update: A priest friend wrote in that Benedict XVI was the inspiration for the initiative for a statue of Saint Michael conquering Satan. But then he was gone as Pontiff. My priest friend was hoping that no one would get the idea from what I wrote above that Benedict was in any way to blame for this fiasco. He’s NOT to blame!


Filed under Pope Francis

Pachamama male-consort-idol

The day before the Amazon “Synod” officially started, there was a pagan worship of idols ceremony in Vatican Gardens. It was bad enough, thought I, that demonness Pachamama idols were displayed for worship, an idol to which children up to puberty are sacrificed in the Amazon. But then I saw one report on some sort of Pachamama consort, another idol that was also displayed directly next to the Pachamamas. I had no idea what he was talking about since everything I had seen about the incident only showed the Pachamamas, but no consort. Maybe I didn’t want to see it. Just too disgusting. Apparently the picture of the consort was rare because it was so very incredibly disgusting. Was it that the POV of the photographers and videographers of the event was such that  the Pachamama Idol Consort was just out of view, perhaps blocked by someone’s shoulder or head in front of the cameras? But that was on purpose. Any picture of the carved idol Consort would be just too damning.

In these months and weeks I’ve been too busy to research much of anything of the idiocies over in Rome, what with Mass and Confessions and Adoration and Hospitals and Nursing Homes and going on Communion Calls, cumulatively putting on thousands of miles in this vast territory of my parish in these months. I’m supposed to be a Missionary of Mercy in these back ridges of Appalachia, right? The days are very long and I have little time for demon worshippers in Rome.

But then, in looking up I think it was boat picture for a post on Pachamama, I saw it, the Pachamama Consort. The picture I saw wasn’t from a private individual, but from Catholic News Service.

It’s said that Pope Francis was caught off guard, that he was confused, an elderly imbecile who didn’t know what to make of all this, even that he was trying to be benevolent by remaining there for the entire and very lengthy ceremony in the Vatican Gardens. No. I don’t buy that. You can’t stare at the male-consort-idol next to Pachamama demonness idols to whom children are sacrificed for so long and not stop the idol worship ceremony, and not walk away from it… immediately…

  • And you don’t then bless the Pachamama idol. And you don’t then allow Pachamamas into a Church near the Vatican.
  • And you don’t then threaten severe prosecution of those upstanding individuals who threw the idols into the river.
  • And you don’t then have Pachamama brought in procession. And you don’t then have a worship ceremony of Pachamama in Saint Peter’s Basilica.
  • And you don’t then have Pachamama set upon the altar in Saint Peter’s for the closing Mass: the plant that is a zillion times more representative of Pachamama than any idol, the bowl having an Inca pictogram of Pachamama etched on the side.

Don’t leave the Church, just don’t follow Pope Francis in his promotion of idols.

UPDATE: By the way, this is a typical Marxist way of behaving. When I was in a parish of an openly and viciously Marxist priest in Eastern Nicaragua, taking note of things, I saw some artwork in his rectory, a painting of Jesus crucified. Jesus, our dear Savior, was also depicted with a ridiculously oversized, well, you know. Typical Marxism.

God will not be mocked.

Jesus will come to judge the living and the dead and world… by fire… Amen.


Filed under Pope Francis

Pope Francis sums up his heresies

I’m only getting to this now as I’m busy with actually being a priest. I think it’s criminal that I or any priest has to waste time answering idiotic statements of Pope Francis, who has totally lost any objective claim to personal honor with the presentation in the Vatican Gardens of the Pachamama Idol and her male-Consort Idol. I make these comments below in a terrible rush early Sunday morning before the 6:00 AM Holy Hour of Adoration with Confessions up in church. My emphasis. [My comments.]

/// The full mid-flight papal presser question of Jason Horowitz (NYT) and answer of Pope Francis that I’m using as the basis for this was posted by Edward Pentin of the NCRegister on Tuesday Sep 10th, 2019 at 3:33 PM. ///

Jason Horowitz: On the flight to Maputo you acknowledged being under attack by a segment of the American Church. Obviously, there is strong criticism from some bishops and cardinals, there are Catholic Television stations and American websites that are very critical. And there are even some of your closest allies who have spoken of a plot against you. [Wow. I never heard of that. Is that baiting by the NYT?] Is there something that these critics do not understand about your pontificate? Is there something that you have learned from your critics? Are you afraid of a schism in the American Church? And if so, is there something that you could do – a dialogue – to keep it from happening?

Pope Francis: First of all, criticism always helps, always. When someone receives criticism, that person needs to do a self-critique right away and say: is this true or not? To what point? And I always benefit from criticism. Sometimes it makes you angry…. But there are advantages. Traveling to Maputo, one of you gave me that book in French on how the Americans want to change the Pope. I knew about that book, but I had not read it. Criticisms are not coming only from the Americans, they are coming a bit from everywhere, even from the Curia. At least those that say them have the benefit of the honesty of having said them. I do not like it when criticism stays under the table: they smile at you letting you see their teeth and then they stab you in the back. That is not fair, it is not human. [I use my name. You say you don’t like “Yes men’, Pope Francis, but +Christophe Pierre is demanding proofs of submission to the anti-Christ things that you do on a continual basis.]

Criticism is a component in construction, and if your criticism is unjust, be prepared to receive a response, and get into dialogue, and arrive to the right conclusion. [And there’s the fraud. Your dialogue partner is always wrong and will always have to change his mind, right?] This is the dynamic of true criticism. The criticism of the arsenic pills, instead, of which we were speaking regarding the article that I gave to Msgr Rueda, it’s like throwing the stone and then hiding your hand… This is not beneficial, it is no help. It helps small cliques, who do not want to hear the response to their criticism. Instead, fair criticism – I think thus and so – is open to a response. This is constructive. [That’s seems to be a blatant lie, Pope Francis. Why don’t you answer the Dubia?]

Regarding the case of the Pope: I don’t like this aspect of the Pope, I criticize him, I speak about him, I write an article and ask him to respond, this is fair. [Like the Dubia Cardinals? Pfft.]  To criticize without wanting to hear a response and without getting into dialogue is not to have the good of the Church at heart, it is chasing after a fixed idea, to change the Pope or to create a schism. This is clear: a fair criticism is always well received, at least by me. [That’s not true. You smash people down. You don’t confirm your brothers in the faith.] Secondly, the problem of the schism: within the Church there have been many schisms.

After the First Vatican Council, for example, the last vote, the one on infallibility, a well-sized group left and founded the Old Catholic Church so as to remain “true” to the tradition of the Church. Then they developed differently and now they ordain women. But in that moment they were rigid, they rallied behind orthodoxy and thought that the council had erred. [Such playing with language, turning words into their reverse meaning. The ‘Old Catholics’ (self-referentially inconsistent) were ultra-filthy-filthy liberals, rejecting what was always the truth of papal infallibility in matters of faith and morals.] Another group left very, very quietly, but they did not want to vote. Vatican II had these things among its consequences. Perhaps the most well-known post-conciliar split is that of Lefebvre. In the Church there is always the option for schism, always. But it is an option that the Lord leaves to human freedom.

I am not afraid of schisms, I pray that there will be none, because what is at stake is people’s spiritual health. [So, Pope Francis, why don’t you ever confirm your brothers in the faith?] Let there be dialogue, let there be correction if there is an error, but the schismatic path is not Christian. [And forever dialectical destructive one sided obliteration of the faith is not dialogue, is not teaching, is not confirming one’s brothers in the faith.] Let’s think about the beginnings of the Church, how it began with many schisms, one after the other: Arians, Gnostics, Monophysites… [And now we can add dialectical materialism and idol worship.] An anecdote is coming to mind that I would like to recount: it was the people of God who saved [the Church] from the schisms. The schismatics always have one thing in common: they separate themselves from the people, from the faith of the people of God. And when there was a discussion in the council of Ephesus regarding Mary’s divine maternity, the people – this is history – were at the entrance of the cathedral while the bishops entered to take part in the council. They were there with clubs. They made the bishops see them as they shouted, “Mother of God! Mother of God!”, as if to say: if you do not do this, this is what you can expect… The people of God always correct and help. [And the whole world is crying out for Jesus, the Divine Son of the Immaculate Conception, and you, Pope Francis, give them the demon-goddess Pachamama and her male-Consort in Vatican Gardens. What the hell are you doing, Pope Francis? Are you possessed.]

A schism is always an elitist separation stemming from an ideology detached from doctrine. [That sums up about 100% of what you do and say, Pope Francis. You will never say, with Jesus, to the adulterous woman: “Do not sin again,” will you? And why is that? Are you so much better than Jesus? You don’t trust His grace?] It is an ideology, perhaps correct, but that engages doctrine and detaches it… [But one can believe and be united with Jesus, but that’s exactly what you don’t believe. You think that truth and belief are mutually exclusive.] And so I pray that schisms do not happen, but I am not afraid of them. This is one of the results of Vatican II, not because of this or that Pope. For example, the social things that I say are the same things that John Paul II said, the same things! I copy him. [No, you do not. Look at what you’ve done to entirely destroy the JPII Institute for Marriage and the Family. The bigger the lie, the more believable it is, right?]

But they say: the Pope is a communist… [Yep. I say that. Objectively, that’s what you present. If it walks, talks and acts like a communist…] Ideologies enter into doctrine and when doctrine slips into ideology that’s where there’s the possibility of a schism. [It’s right at the top.] There’s the ideology of the primacy of a sterile morality regarding the morality of the people of God. [Being forgiven, walking with great peace and joy in the grace of our Lord, being introduced by Jesus to purity of heart and agility of soul and profound love of God and neighbor is not sterile. For you to insult those who are tabernacles of the Holy Spirit in such comprehensive terms may edge on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, Pope Francis. You should be careful of pushing such insults of the Holy Spirit.] The pastors must lead their flock between grace and sin, because this is evangelical morality. {I pastori devono condurre il gregge tra la grazia e il peccato, perché la morale evangelica è questa. // Los pastores deben guiar al rebaño entre la gracia y el pecado, porque ésta es la moralidad evangélica.} [“Must.” There it is. So violent. Being lukewarm is the best, you say? The Lord will vomit such out of His mouth, as He said. Always sin and merely pretending one is in friendship with God. How very self-referential, self-absorbed, Promethean, Pelagian…] Instead, a morality based on such a pelagian [For Pope Francis, Jesus is Pelagian.] ideology [For Pope Francis, Jesus is an ideology.] leads you to rigidity [For Pope Francis, Jesus is ‘rigid’.], and today we have many schools[!] of rigidity within the Church, which are not schisms, but pseudo-schismatic Christian developments that will end badly. [There is the school of Pope Francis. That will certainly end badly. Jesus will come to judge the living and dead and world by fire, including your Pachamama and her male-Consort-Idol.] When you see rigid Christians, bishops, priests, there are problems behind that, not Gospel holiness. [They are all damned sinners! Pope Francis is soooooooooo hooooooooooly!] So, we need to be gentle with those who are tempted by these attacks, they are going through a tough time, we must accompany them gently. [How very condescending. Vomit here. Pope Francis claims the moral high ground. He’s so nice! So balanced! But actually, this is exactly when things become violent. When we read of the martyrs who refused to offer worship to idols, we read of the ever so nice and balanced and judicious authoritative figure who begs in all reasonableness that the martyr-to-be simply offer a bit of incense and then all will be nice. But the martyrs went to their death, and, just to say, that authoritative figure who is claiming the moral high ground, and reason, and niceness, is the very one who will instantly and with great violence torture those martyrs to death, burning them alive, cutting them to pieces. Historically, we are at a time when we will start to see such persecution of those who witness to the love and truth of Jesus. More and more are on the run, such as Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, such as Father Paul Kalchik.]

The purpose of writing all this isn’t to make people have doubts or become cynical. It’s to say that not all are attacking the faith. There are so very many who are still believers. Just because the Pope is personally attacking the faith… well… who cares? That’s too bad for him. But no one needs to think that that’s more important than his own individual person before Jesus. What he says and does is not ever done as something infallible. No. And so, we pray for him, that when he turns, he will confirm his brothers in the faith.


Filed under Pope Francis

On saving idol worshippers

From a second century author…

  • “To make sure that none of us is lost, we must repent from the bottom of our hearts. Since we have been commanded to go out and rescue idolaters and to instruct them, is it not even more important to save souls who already know God? If we are all to be saved, we shall have to help one another and support the weak in their struggle to live a good life. When one of us does wrong, it is for the others to warn him and persuade him of his error.”

But those faithful to Jesus are called idol worshippers because they insist Jesus is Divine and sinless, our only Redeemer and Savior.


Filed under Pope Francis

Challenge to Nuncio + Christophe Pierre

Recently the Apostolic Nuncio to these USA, during the general assembly of the bishops, demanded concrete signs of submission to the “magisterium” of Pope Francis. I took that as a bullying threat because, well, there is no such thing.

Here’s the deal: No Pope has his own magisterium. His teaching is to be the teaching of Jesus, and of Jesus’ Church throughout the ages. For instance, if a Pius IX or a Pius XII pronounces something ex-Cathedra, say, about the Immaculate Conception or about the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, that’s nothing different from what the Church has always believed. I would never reduce such teaching merely to the idiosyncratic wierdnesses of some particular individual Bishop of Rome. No. This is Catholic teaching of the ages.

Pope Francis has never pronounced anything in an ex-Cathedra manner. Moreover, the thing most pushed for compliance, for submission, is Amoris laetitia. But Pope Francis called that a dialogue in it’s opening paragraphs. It’s means nothing on the level of teaching or “magisterium.”

If such pressure is given – and the pressure is a green light to not give believing priests assignments, and eventually to dismiss them from the clerical state – it can only refer to insisting on submission to the most unorthodox interpretations.

Thus, I guess it’s being demanded to put Pachamama idols on our altars with the Holy Sacrifice of Jesus. I guess we’re supposed to put Pachamama consort idols of a fully sexually erect man up on the altar as in the Vatican Gardens pagan worship ceremony at which Pope Francis blessed the idol. I guess we’re supposed to say that Jesus sinned against His mother. I guess we’re supposed to say that women with more than two children are rabbits (my mom had four children). I guess…

Should I go on?

My challenge to you +Christophe Pierre, is to come up with a list of things to which we bishops and priests must adhere so as to be counted among the supporters of Pope Francis.

You would think this would be about Jesus.

But no. This is all self-referential. Prometheam. Pelagian. Self-absorbed.

I will not submit to idiocy. I am a Catholic priest. I am priest of Jesus Christ. A priest forever in the line of Melchizedek. I will not submit to Satanic idiocy.

P.S. One might speak of the magisterium of JPII and, for instance, that saints efforts with the JPII Institute for Marriage and the Family. But all that is only hailed because it is reflective of that which is Catholic. It is Catholic. It is the magisterium of the Church. Nothing that Pope Francis has been vomiting out has anything to do with such doctrine, such morality, such integrity, such honesty, such honor.

If there’s no honor, there’s no obedience from me.

Hier stehe ich. Ich kann nicht anders. Gott helfe mir. Amen. And Amen.


Filed under Missionaries of Mercy, Pope Francis

Listen up Pope Francis! We Will Rock You! [Queen] A Pachamama Special.

We Will Rock You [Queen]

Buddy, you’re a boy, make a big noise
Playing in the street, gonna be a big man someday
You got mud on your face, you big disgrace
Kicking your can all over the place, singin’

  • We will, we will Rock you!
  • We will, we will Rock you!

Buddy, you’re a young man, hard man
Shouting in the street, gonna take on the world someday
You got blood on your face, you big disgrace
Waving your banner all over the place

  • We will, we will Rock you! (Sing it!)
  • We will, we will Rock you!

Buddy, you’re an old man, poor man
Pleading with your eyes, gonna make you some peace someday
You got mud on your face, big disgrace
Somebody better put you back into your place

  • We will, we will Rock you! (Sing it!)
  • We will, we will Rock you! (Everybody!)
  • We will, we will Rock you!
  • We will, we will Rock you! (Alright!)

Dear Pope Francis:

Pachamama idol worship is the epitome of self-referential, self-absorbed, Promethean Pelagianism and leads to the biography of (1) boy, (2) young man, (3) old man so well described above.

We all love you, Pope Francis. We would all like to encourage you NOT to find your relativistic version of Jesus Christ, but to be found by Him who is the Divine Son of the Immaculate Conception, the Sinless Son of the Living God, the Almighty, the Judge of the living and dead and the world by fire, the living Truth who is not to be mocked, and cannot be manipulated with mind game dialectics. We want you, Pope Francis, to be found by Jesus, the ROCK of our Salvation. “And the Rock was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:4). We will pray for you to Jesus, our Rock. In other words:

  • We will, we will Rock you!

Remember that The Rock said of you: “You are Peter (Rock!), and upon this rock I will build my Church.”

Remember also that The Rock said to you: “When you turn again (after your denial of the Rock three times), it is then that you are to confirm your brothers in the faith.”

For my part, I’m your Missionary of Mercy, not your Missionary of Syncretism.

“Hier stehe ich. Ich kann nicht anders. Gott helfe mir. Amen.”


Filed under Missionaries of Mercy, Pope Francis, Song analysis

Pachamama and Psalm 115

USCCB > Bible

Psalms, chapter 115

1Not to us, LORD, not to us

but to your name give glory

because of your mercy and faithfulness.a

Why should the nations say,

“Where is their God?”*

Our God is in heaven

and does whatever he wills.

Their idols are silver and gold,

the work of human hands.

They have mouths but do not speak,

eyes but do not see.

They have ears but do not hear,

noses but do not smell.

They have hands but do not feel,

feet but do not walk;

they produce no sound from their throats.

Their makers will be like them,

and anyone who trusts in them.

*The house of Israel trusts in the LORD,

who is their help and shield.

The house of Aaron trusts in the LORD,

who is their help and shield.

Those who fear the LORD trust in the LORD,

who is their help and shield.

The LORD remembers us and will bless us,

will bless the house of Israel,

will bless the house of Aaron,

Will bless those who fear the LORD,

small and great alike.

May the LORD increase your number,

yours and your descendants.

May you be blessed by the LORD,

maker of heaven and earth.

*The heavens belong to the LORD,

but he has given the earth to the children of Adam.

*The dead do not praise the LORD,

not all those go down into silence.

It is we who bless the LORD,

both now and forever.


* [Psalm 115] A response to the enemy taunt, “Where is your God?” This hymn to the glory of Israel’s God (Ps 115:1–3) ridicules the lifeless idols of the nations (Ps 115:4–8), expresses in a litany the trust of the various classes of the people in God (Ps 115:9–11), invokes God’s blessing on them as they invoke the divine name (Ps 115:12–15), and concludes as it began with praise of God. Ps 135:15–18 similarly mocks the Gentile gods and has a similar litany and hymn (Ps 135:19–21).


Filed under Pope Francis

Threaten all you want Pierre: I will be faithful to Jesus and the Church


Later in the address…

  • “While we can reflect on this communion in a theological way, we ought to examine it practically, namely by measuring to what extent we as individuals  and our local churches have received the Magisterium of Pope Francis. […] The pastoral thrust of this pontificate must reach the American people, especially as families continue to demand of dioceses and parishes the accompaniment envisioned by Amoris laetitia.”


And that’s a green light for bishops to smash down priests who simply want to be priests of the Catholic Church, of Jesus, faithful to the Sacred Scriptures, Sacred Tradition and the constant and infallible Magisterium of the Church. This is bullying, and a signalling of a new inquisition in which faithfulness and goodness and kindness and actual mercy and truth is punished.

What a joke. Pfft. The grace of Jesus, friendship with Jesus, is stronger than threats, stronger than our weakness, stronger than marginalization and torture and death. What a joke. I mean, look at the hellish betrayal of China by the Holy See. What do we expect? Of course it will be our turn. As the Master, so the disciple.

Look, people: This isn’t things falling apart. As a friend in Rome said: “Finally! A persecution! It means that Jesus loves us, that He hasn’t forgotten us. Finally we have the gift, the privilege to witness to Jesus.”


Filed under Missionaries of Mercy, Pope Francis

Francis, globalist first, pope second

pope francis armenia return

Recently, during an airplane presser, Pope Francis revealed what he desires for the total and blind obedience of the Church, of everyone, to the United Nations. Total. Yep. This text is prepared by the Holy See and is published on their own website[My comments below]

QUESTION: Jean Luc Mootoosamy (Radio One, Mauritius) – “The Prime Minister of Mauritius thanked you for your concern regarding the suffering of our fellow citizens who have been forced to abandon their own Archipelago by the United Kingdom after the illicit separation of this part of our territory before independence. Today on the island of Diego Garcia, there is an American military base. Holy Father, the Chagossians who have been in forced exile for fifty years want to return to their land. The United States and the United Kingdom will not allow this to happen, notwithstanding a United Nations resolution from last May. How can you support the Chagossians’ will and help the people of Chagos to go home?”

ANSWER: POPE FRANCISI would like to repeat what the Doctrine of the Church says about this: [What he says now is total bullshit. What he says is not at all the doctrine of the Church. What a blatant lie. Just. Wow.] When we acknowledge international organisations and we recognise their capacity to give judgment, on a global scale – for example the international tribunal in The Hague, or the United Nations. If we consider ourselves humanity, when they make statements, our duty is to obey. It is true that not all things that appear just for the whole of humanity will also be so for our pockets, but we must obey international institutions. That is why the United Nations were created. That’s why international courts were created. [It’s better that one man die than that a whole nation perish, right? No, that’s not right.]  Then there is also another phenomenon which, however, I say it clearly, I do know whether it is relevant here. When the liberation of a people comes about (a people obtains independence) and the occupying State has to leave – many independence processes have taken place in Africa – from France, from Great Britain, from Belgium, from Italy – all of them had to leave, some [of the countries] have matured well – but there is always the temptation to leave with something in in the pocket: Yes, I give freedom to this people but I take some crumbs with me… I give freedom to the country but from the ground up, what’s underneath remains mine. This is an example, I do not know if it is true, but I want to say: there is always the temptation… I believe that international organizations need to propose a process of accompaniment, recognizing the predominant potentials, what they were able to accomplish in the country, recognizing the good will to go away and helping them to leave totally, in freedom, with a brotherly spirit. It is a slow cultural process for humanity and these international institutions help us a lot, always, and we need to go forward strengthening the international institutions: the United Nations, that they might take in hand once again their role; that the European Union might become stronger, not in the sense of domination, but in the sense of justice, of fraternity, of unity for all. [To use the vocabulary of Freemasonry.] I believe this to be one of the important things. And there is another thing that I would like to take the opportunity to say after his intervention. Today geographical colonialization does not exist – at least not many…. But there are ideological colonializations that want to enter into the popular culture and change those cultures and homogenize humanity. It is the image of globalization like a sphere, all of the points being equidistant from the centre. Instead, true globalization is not a sphere, it is a polyhedron where each people preserves their own identity but it united to all of humanity. [That’s the spirit of syncretism demonstrated by lifting up, say, Pachamama.] Instead, ideological colonization seeks to cancel the identity of others to make them equal and they come at you with ideological proposals that are contrary to the nature of that people, the history of that people, against the values of that people. [But that is exactly how you are smashing down the Catholic Church, Pope Francis…] And we must respect the identity of peoples, this is a premise to defend always. The identity of the people’s needs to be respected and thus all types of colonialization will be cast out. [So, Holy Father, please respect my belief that Jesus is God, that He is sinless, that He is our Redeemer and Savior, the Divine Son of the Immaculate Conception, that He is the One, the only One.]

Before giving the word to EFE – which is a privilege, it is “old”, it is 80 years old – I would like to say something more that struck me about the visit. What struck me about your country is the capacity for religious unity, for interreligious dialogue. Differences between the religions are not to be cancelled out, that we are all brothers is to be underlined, that everyone needs to speak. This is a sign of the maturity of your country. Speaking yesterday with the prime ministry, I remained surprised at how they, you, have worked at this reality and live it as necessary in order to live together. There is an intercultural commission that gathers together… The first thing that I found yesterday when I went into the bishop’s resident – this is anecdote – was a bouquet of beautiful flowers. Who sent them? The Grant Imam. We are brothers, human brotherhood is the foundation and respects all beliefs. Respect for other religions is important. [Islam is not a religion as it does not render what is due in justice to God, our obedience by way of Jesus’ perfect obedience on the Cross.]  This is why I tell missionaries not to proselytize. Proselytizing is valid for the world of politics, of sport – I root for my team, for yours – not for a faith. [Islam proselytizes by the sword.]  [… see the rest there…]

////////// And yes, Pope Francis, I’m your Missionary of Mercy. You had said you don’t want “Yes men”. I’m just obeying you. I always pray for you and get the parish to pray for you.


Filed under Missionaries of Mercy, Pope Francis

Shooting Burning Pachamama

Today was the infamous “Day Off.” I was at the hermitage. I looked over the LifeSiteNews translation and review of the Amazon Synod notes. I prayed a bit. Then, as one might do on a day off, I indulged in some recreation.

What with all the explosions and drownings and burnings and such, I thought I might add my own version to the meme.

Above is my two to the body, 1 to the head drill. I think this one was out 21 feet. I made this to fit on legal size paper. Not too bad, though I was pretty slow as the practice is getting a little more sparse with the cheap ammo at Walmart taking a hike. That doesn’t help anyone, actually.

Anyway, burning the demon Pachamama was next on the list to do:

The traffic you hear is in town, in Brevard, passing by a friend’s house where the burning took place.

This is in no way done so as to insult anyone in the Amazon. It is to make a commentary on idol worship.


Filed under Pope Francis

Church in Amazon gone


I can’t imagine any believing seminarian in the Amazon being able to survive this, not because he doesn’t have strength in Jesus but because these monstrous marxists are in charge. How very sad. I wonder which region is next to be destroyed.

I am the Pope’s good servant, but Christ’s first.


Filed under Pope Francis

Pope Francis’ Papacy in tatters

The flag remains as we must pray for Pope Francis, not with any Pachamama “prayer” but with a Hail Mary…

The flag will remain in tatters because that’s the truth of this Papacy.



Filed under Pope Francis

Pachamama Pimped (I’m not buying her demonic services from anyone)

amazon synod

Condescension about the tribesmen of the Amazon region? It’s said that they can’t live chastely, because, you know, they are equated as persons with ejaculation, of whatever kind and style, the “sacrament” of, it seems, so many in filthy, filthy Rome. In other words, they have no free will, no capacity for natural moral law. But the manipulators of the Amazon Synod (or the prestidigitators as Cardinal Siri called analogous manipulators), are they not talking about themselves?

The locals of the Amazon shouldn’t be offended by my comments, but rather with the Europeans and those in Rome who are playing them for themselves. I’m indignant on behalf of the locals in the Amazon Region. Those who hate God and neighbor in REPAM and the Brazilian bishops conference who forbid the evangelization of these peoples should be rejected by the locals of the Amazon Region.

So, with all the Pachamama news going on – and it always gets worse, much worse – I did something I don’t recommend anyone do. I Google-Image searched for Pachamama. That was a mistake. Pachamama is simply the slut of the Andes’ demons, so that what is in her womb is, in this superstition scenario, a demon.

The more I learn about Pachamama, the more I am horrified the the Immaculate Virgin Mother of God has been compared to and even equated with this demon goddess.

Amoris laetitia had a section dedicated to pastoral care for prostitutes, which no one paid attention to or made excuses for because they couldn’t wrap their “pious” minds around it. It was just too horrible to think that it could possibly be true. Whilst I lived in Rome for so very many years I would meet South American priests from Pachamama territory who would say precisely and with no ambiguity what the prevailing pastoral practice is; even admitting that they would “visit” the prostitutes themselves. Yep. Here’s a post I wrote about this with it’s own update:

Update: There is some pretty heavy interest in high places right now over some of the more controversial posts I’ve put up about the past couple of Synods. If I had to write an apologia about this, I would just say that my opinions are on behalf of those who suffer much in this world, who are marginalized and kept suffering it seems to me on purpose. That unnecessary suffering really just needs to stop, and stop now.

peep show

Original Post: It seems that paragraph 49 refers to prostitution to avoid poverty. Communion for active prostitutes has been part of pastoral praxis by some for decades and a continuous side debate for some of the liberation theology / arm-chair moral theology crowd. So:

49. Here I would also like to mention the situation of families living in dire poverty and great limitations. The problems faced by poor households are often all the more trying.36 For example, if a single mother has to raise a child by herself and needs to leave the child alone at home while she goes to work, the child can grow up exposed to all kind of risks and obstacles to personal growth. In such difficult situations of need, the Church must be particularly concerned to offer understanding, comfort and acceptance, rather than imposing straightaway a set of rules that only lead people to feel judged and abandoned by the very Mother called to show them God’s mercy. Rather than offering the healing power of grace and the light of the Gospel message, some would “indoctrinate” that message, turning it into “dead stones to be hurled at others”.37

36 Cf. Relatio Finalis 2015, 15.
37 Concluding Address of the Fourteenth Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (24 October 2015): L’Osservatore Romano, 26-27 October 2015, p. 13.

I mean, what does that mean in light of footnote 351 other than to provide, say, Communion for active prostitutes? The solution, it seems to me, isn’t to argue for decades about Prostitutes going to Communion, but rather to open safe houses which can immediately set about finding jobs and shelter and education.

Who throws dead stones of doctrine at anyone? Is the reference to priests like me?

Does this throwing stones reference (coming not long after paragraph 27 in which the adulterous woman of the Gospel of John is mentioned) mean that Jesus was a fool damned by our Heavenly Father for telling the adulterous woman to “sin no more,” Himself stoning this woman into marginalization from the faith by His damnable indoctrinated doctrine-stone of “sin no more”? That’s not what the document says about Jesus, instead reporting in paragraph 27 that, “alone with Jesus, she meets not condemnation but the admonition to lead a more worthy life (cf. Jn 8:1-11).” In other words, the Gospel lies that Jesus told her to “sin no more,” which would inescapably imply that she knew she had in fact sinned (both objectively and subjectively), and that the condemnation is only avoided by taking in the forgiveness with repentance and a firm purpose of amendment. All that, for the document, is simply a heap of indoctrinated stones to throw. So, instead, the document insists that Jesus said that she is to live a more worthy life, inescapably implying that her life was already worthy, but just needed to be, you know, more worthy.

And that leads us back to paragraph 49, where the worthiness of adultery by prostitution, while not as worthy as a life which doesn’t include prostitution, is nevertheless so worthy that it is to be rewarded by such casuistry with, say, Holy Communion.

Look: Just open a safe house. I’ve worked in such places, offered confessions and Holy Mass in such places, given Holy Communion to prostitutes galore in such places. I’ve even ended up in a wheelchair and crutches because of such places. Really, I’ve been there, done that. Just get them the help they need. Don’t just say have a nice day with Holy Communion at a street Mass in the red-light district and not provide for them. Do provide for them both physically and spiritually.

Just call me the dumpster priest. But don’t try to make me take up a program that will keep prostitutes in prostitution. To hell with that.

And, by the way, you know all those people steeped in Tradition, that is, those Legion of Mary people? You have to know that I’m one of them, and you have to know that they started out by evangelizing at brothels.

Or is this really about thinking that prostitutes can’t repent? A prostitute once told me that a clergy guy (Episcopalian I think) would walk into her room for quick sex, first taking his clergy collar off, then unzipping himself, as if the collar in the back pocket would make what he was doing out front somehow moral. When she asked him about his visits to herself later (after she was converted from prostitution), he said that he didn’t think that people like her could possibly ever convert. Is that the message that we have here?

I would like to ask someone, but it seems that speaking with parrhesia isn’t to be met with answers of parrhesia. But if I’m wrong on that, I sure would appreciate an answer.

And, oh, by the way, this paragraph 49 cannot refer to something like thievery either for the mom or the boy, can it? We have better theology of private property than that.

I mean, I just can’t believe that this paragraph was written or published. Prostitutes are always in grave danger of disease, damage, dismemberment, and death by physical force or despair along. Get them out of the situation immediately. Don’t argue about their subjective guilt. If you want a lack of mercy and hurling stones, THAT kind of sophistry that keeps them in their prostitution is example number one.

Addendum about the recommendations of the Amazon Synod:

We’ve been hearing there’s a thing about ordaining uneducated men to the priesthood just for Mass, but not granting them faculties for Confessions. That’s consistent with the idea that these people cannot sin because, you know, they are pristine pre-original sin Garden of Eden people. Pfft.

I gotta wonder if the proposed deaconettes (sacramentally impossible) will do dances with pachamamas as part of an Amazonian Rite of Mass, and if that will turn into the shrine prostitutes we read about in the Old Testament. Remember, there’s no sin! (That’s sarcasm for the secularites reading this.)



Filed under Missionaries of Mercy, Pope Francis

Pachamama explodes

Leave a comment

Filed under Pope Francis

Priest burns Pachamama


Filed under Pope Francis

Pachamama thrower reveal


Filed under Pope Francis

Amazon organ transplants: follow $$$

MAFIA OMERTARemember all that insistence on protecting “contactless” tribes, and purposely not evangelizing anyone among those Amazonian groups, with one bishop even bragging that he never baptized any indigenous individual in the Amazon, ever? Could there be an ulterior motive other than hatred for God and neighbor for all that ensuring that there are no eyes seeing what is going on, really, in the Amazon, say, like, money?

The killing of children from just-born to, say, puberty, was also defended and praised, by a bishop, who said that all cultures kill children. He misses the point that that is why we all need salvation from our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus. Since God is not god for the “chosen” bishops of the Amazon, there must be something else going on.

One thing is for sure, no matter what stupid show they all put on with Pope Francis in front of the whole world, doing whatever it takes to protect the “contactless” tribes from prying eyes, these guys to NOT worship the demon-goddess Pachamama any more than than they have ever woshipped the living God. There’s something else going on here.

Let’s zero in on the killing of children being absolutely protected as a sacred right of indigenous peoples, it being so sacred because, wait for it… their superstition is sacred. The reason for killing of kids in the superstition is that, for instance, if a set of twins is born, surely one is bad and evil and therefore has to be killed immediately, and if it can’t be decided which one is the evil one, then both are killed. Etc.

There’s a hint about all this in that the kids are buried alive in shallow graves, and not just babies, but also infants, youngsters, up to about puberty when these children could start to effectively defend themselves. If public, the village slowly walks away as the dirt starts to be piled on, and then… If private, well, then…

Having set the scene, please be patient. I have an anecdote to tell you. I’d like to catch these bastards.

  • When speaking of the dangers of organ transplants some years ago in Rome with a priest from lower-mid-Nigeria, out in the outback a bit, he mentioned a superstition that had gripped the hearts and souls and minds of the locals. He said that a certain watering hole was held to be mysteriously evil and bad. People going to fetch water would disappear. It would always be at a time when there was a strange and mysterious wind. People were frantic of the gods being angry with them at the watering hole, but they had to get water, you know, at the watering hole behind that patch of forest which had grown up because of the water. Then that priest told me of seeing Leer Jets at the same time as the strange and mysterious wind, at the same time people would disappear. Let’s say a rich guy goes to an ad hoc clinic in a city where his own crack doctors stand at the ready, waiting for the delivery of organs for whatever he needs. No matter the time constraints – 24 hours for a kidney, 4-6 hours for a heart. You can just bring the donor alive and you’re good to go. Gotta have a match, of course. Sure. Lot’s of people disappear.

Now, back to the “contactless” tribes in the Amazon. Are we so naive to think that huge money has nothing to do with what’s happening? How many hundreds and hundreds of milions of dollars have been stolen from Peter’s Pence. Pfft. It’s all about “power.”

But our Lord sees all. He will come to judge the living and the dead and the world by fire. Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. Maranatha!

Am I wrong? Could be. I’ve been in 26 countries, some very remote, among some who were cannibals. For some months I wondered if I also would be turned into “long pig” as they call their human meals. I’ve seen pretty much all there is to see. In my experience, all you need to do is get hold of air traffic control and radar for smaller planes buzzing around the Amazon and you’ll find out the answer.

P.S. In a previous post I mentioned proof that Pope Francis agreed with the worship of Pachamama. I was reprimanded by someone who was there, who said that Pope Francis is older and not so quick to think in such situations where he is caught off guard and was just perhaps trying to be nice. However, as we saw in the days and weeks following, Pope Francis entrenched. I can’t just his soul, but I can judge that his words and actions concerning Pachamama that he insists upon are not of God, and I can say that he is the one who is doing these things and saying these things in support of Pachamama. Whatever about knowing the interior motivations, we must judge the exterior of what someone presents. Pope Francis’ agreement – on the exterior – is to be condemned.


Filed under Missionaries of Mercy, Pope Francis