Good New Is That Francis Is NOT A Modernist. But That Is The Only Good News…


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Couldn’t pass up this one today, folks.

As we are heading toward another attempt to “change the post-conciliar church” teaching on the intrinsically disordered, I decided to do this post in order to get all my dear readers to start thinking.

I am also putting this up because of the post I read on one of the mainline Catholic blogs reminding the faithful about the fate of Honorius I.

Yes, the dots are beginning to be connected and a future council – Council of Econe has a good ring to it, will be needed to clean up this FrancisMess. So I decided to start sorting out the trash, so that when the time comes, we can throw it in the proper recycling bin.

Now to the matter at hand…

As my loyal and long time readers know, your humble blogger does not agree with the diagnosis that all the current problems with Western Society and specifically the Catholic Church is due to the heresy of Modernism.

Or at least, the manner in which the heresy of Modernism was defined in the Papal Encyclical on the Doctrines of the Modernists, i.e. Pascendi Dominici Gregis

I have begun making my case in the post titled A Genuine Post-Modernist Bishop Of Rome. Please consider this a continuation of this thread.

Now, I know what most of you are thinking…

And don’t panic, so please come back off the ledge…

Your humble blogger has not gone rouge, nor has he lost his ONE TRUE FAITH.

What your humble blogger has come to realize, through long periods of reflection, meditation and discernment, while writing this blog I should add, is that the ROOT CAUSE of the current cultural war that is raging within, and destroying the post-Conciliar church is,… wait for it…. on account of the rebellion against Modernism.

Or to put it another way, the FrancisChurch has completely rejected Modernism!

To be more precise, FrancisChurch’s IDEOLOGY has completely rejected the neo-Modernist (crypto-Modernist) IDEOLOGY of the post-conciliar church.


Shocking…. you might say….


Got a better explanation for the FrancisChurch assault on Familiaris Consortio?

Didn’t think so…

So what does the above mean?

Simply, the above means that when Francis says that he is NOT A MODERNIST, he is making an OBJECTIVELY TRUE STATEMENT.

And one which the future Council of Econe will no doubt corroborate.

You heard it here first…

What Francis, the bishop of Rome isn’t telling you though, is that he is in fact a POST-MODERNIST.

Now this might appear to be a trivial point, you might say…

You also might ask: Would not the Modernist Heresy, or the heresy that is a synthesis of all heresies, include the post-Modernists?

And didn’t Pope St. Pius X write this in his historic Encyclical:

39. It may be, Venerable Brethren, that some may think We have dwelt too long on this exposition of the doctrines of the Modernists. But it was necessary, both in order to refute their customary charge that We do not understand their ideas, and to show that their system does not consist in scattered and unconnected theories but in a perfectly organised body, all the parts of which are solidly joined so that it is not possible to admit one without admitting all. For this reason, too, We have had to give this exposition a somewhat didactic form and not to shrink from employing certain uncouth terms in use among the Modernists. And now, can anybody who takes a survey of the whole system be surprised that We should define it as the synthesis of all heresies? Were one to attempt the task of collecting together all the errors that have been broached against the faith and to concentrate the sap and substance of them all into one, he could not better succeed than the Modernists have done. Nay, they have done more than this, for, as we have already intimated, their system means the destruction not of the Catholic religion alone but of all religion. With good reason do the rationalists applaud them, for the most sincere and the frankest among the rationalists warmly welcome the modernists as their most valuable allies.

Given the above, how can a Catholic, namely your humble blogger, make the above statement then?

The reason is a technical one.

But one that is of the utmost importance.

What needs to be understood is that post-Modernism IS NOT a part of Modernism, i.e.  a part of the heresy of Modernism.

Shocking observation… yes?

Well, not if you think it through.

What post-Modernism in fact is, is the negative case to Modernism. Post-Modernism is in fact the negation of Modernism.

Maybe this is an unconscious factor in Francis’ “affinity” for the SSPX? Enemy of my enemy… as the expression goes. But I digress…

But instead of making a positive case for the refutation of Modernism, post-Modernism goes FULL OUT NIHILIST. And I don’t mean just a little NIHILIST.

And just to provide a brief definition: (see here)

Nihilism -is a philosophical doctrine that suggests the lack of belief in one or more reputedly meaningful aspects of life.

What post-Modernism in fact is, is the NIHILISTIC BELIEF SYSTEM that make the claim that there are no meaningful aspects of life.

And just in case you dear reader need an independent, corroborating fact to support the above HYPOTHESIS, I refer you back to Pascendi Dominici Gregis. Please observe that the term NIHILISM does not appear once in this Papal Encyclical.

Don’t take my word for it. Please go to the link above, clink on the search function and start typing NIHILISM.

What you will find is that the field goes red after you type the third letter I in NIHILI

And why might this be, you ask?

Well, most likely because St. Pope Pius X was an very well formed and highly educated man, as were the men around him. He distinguished the difference between the state of the existence of something and its lack of existence.

Case in point, EVIL being the lack of the existence of GOOD.


Now, getting back to the technical point raised earlier.

The reason one cannot make the claim that Francis is a Modernist is that Francis rejects Modernism.

The reason Francis rejects Modenism isn’t based on his Catholic Faith, which contains a positive refutation of Modernism, e.g. Pascendi Dominici Gregis.

No siree…

The basis upon which Francis rejects Modenism is through his post-Modernist IDEOLOGY. 

What Francis is saying in fact is that there are no TRANSCENDENTAL OBJECTIVE “meaningful”, read GOOD aspects of life. 

Let that sink in….

And by using the term “meaningful”, we are speaking of the GOOD, TRUE aspects of life that our Catholic Faith defines.

And how can we be certain that the above is in fact a OBJECTIVELY CORRECT observation?

The manner in which we can be certain is by observing that in his various speeches, conversations, interviews, musings at the Domus Saencte Maerta, and other off the cuff comments of Francis, i.e the Francis “magisterium”Francis questions… wait for it…. still waiting…. Francis questions…


… Catholic Church magisterial teaching. In one form or another.

Except for that part of the Magisterium he needs in order to keep him in the seat of the bishop of Rome, naturally.

Now think about this for a minute or two.

Having read the above, please go to the top of the page and watch (re-watch) the short Stephen Hicks video and meditate on the CONTENT and how it relates to Francis, the bishop of Rome.

Doesn’t it explain Francis to a “T”?


Breaking: Polish Bishops Ready With Document Supporting Dubia. Francis Trying To Hold It Back… (w/Update)


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

According to (original here):


Italian newspaper Il Giornale on 17 October quotes rumors that a “part of the Polish Church” was preparing a document supporting Dubia on the controversial document Amoris Laetitia of Pope Francis. According to reports, the text is not yet published “only because of the direct intervention of Pope Bergoglio”, but “sooner or later” will be issued. Among the Polish hierarchies and faithful Francis does not have many followers.

UPDATE 07:20 19 October 2017

… and it now apears that Francis can’t even get his German Kirchensteuer sponsored FrancisChurch to come to his aid.



Not Catholic


The story and commentary is on the LMS Chairman’s blog HERE: (emphasis added)

Pro-Pope Francis’ petition launched

A German-based petition praising Pope Francis has been launched, signed by a handful of bishops and about 100 theologians and others.

The text of the petition itself is vague: it simply expresses support for Pope Francis’ ‘initiatives’ and ‘leadership’. It is interesting, therefore, that despite appearing first on the website of the German Bishops’ Conference — which suggests some kind of official endorsement — so few German bishops have added their names. Indeed, the episcopal signatories one does find are either retired or are auxiliary bishops. It adds to the sense that even quite liberal bishops, who have dioceses to consider, are a bit concerned about the crisis, and are wary of simply throwing themselves into battle on the liberalising side. Every now and then a bishop makes a statement of enthusiasm for a liberal interpretation of Amoris laetitia — the other day it was Cardinal Barbarin’s turn — but these remain very much the exception, not the rule.

The signatories are, indeed, obscure and marginal figures. Cynics might say: just like the signatories of the Filial Correction. If so, this is a remarkably poor showing for something supported by the German Bishops’ Conference machinery, ostensibly in support of the Pope. It is obvious what limits the ability of the organizers of the Filial Correction to get big names: the very real danger of losing one’s job. What is their excuse? Where are all those hundreds of theology professors in Church-supported institutions? Is it too much to ask them simply to ‘support the Pope’?

Instead we find figures who are notorious for their dissent against Papal teaching, who presumably look at Pope Francis’ pontificate a purely tactical light. This isn’t an upsurge of Ultramontanism; as soon as there’s another pope they’ll be back to demanding an independent Church in Germany, as they did under Pope Benedict.

One of the signatories has actually been excommunicated, and by Pope Francis himself, as recently as 2014. As 1Peter5 notes:

Martha Heizer — the President of the Austrian grass-root organization “We Are Church” (Wir sind Kirche) — was excommunicated by Pope Francis in May of 2014 for having, together with her husband, “celebrated” repeatedly Holy Mass in their private home and in the presence of guests.

This makes a mockery of the criticism of the Filial Correction for being signed by Bishop Fellay, Superior of the SSPX. Bishop Fellay’s big crime, in canonical terms, was being consecrated bishop without the mandate of the Holy See, back in 1988, for which the penalty is excommunication. But Pope Benedict lifted that excommunication in 2009. Fellay and Heizer are clearly moving in very different directions, vis-a-vis canonical regularity.

We should, of course, support the Pope. I commend to readers the prayer recommended by the Bishops of England and Wales, in the official book of authorized devotions, the Manual of Prayers, last revised in 1953. In England and Wales it can be added to the Prayers After Low Mass in celebrations of the Extraordinary Form. (I have added the current Pope’s name, obviously.)

For the Sovereign Pontiff

V. Let us pray for our holy Father the Pope.

R. The Lord preserve him, and give him life, and make him blessed upon earth, and deliver him not up to the will of his enemies.

Let us pray.
O Almighty and eternal God, have mercy on thy servant Francis, our Pope, and direct him according to thy clemency into the way of everlasting salvation; that he may desire by thy grace those things which are pleasing to thee, and perform them with all his strength. Through Christ our Lord.

R. Amen.

Why FrancisMedia Is Telling You – Nothing To See Here, Move Along… (w/Updates)


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Busy time here at the happy homestead and your humble blogger doesn’t have too much time to post…

So today, a republication of a post from Michael Snyder of the Economic Collapse blog. In a post that appeared on ZeroHedge (see here), Michael provides some very good background material relating to a theme your humble blogger has been focusing on lately. That theme is the funding source that the Internationalist Leftists are engaging in their battle with Western Civilization and the Catholic Church in particular.

In a recent post titled What Will Be Left Of FrancisChurch Once Government Money Stops Flowing?, your humble blogger asked. In that blog, a short series of write-ups tried to shed some light on the “dominance hierarchy” that exists in this funding arm of the Internationalist Left. And as we have mentioned, it is the German BIG FAKE MEDIA Foundations that are at the top of the heap. These Foundations then funnel funds (and the influence those funds provide) into the US Foundations. And the US Foundations are in part funded also by the BIG FAKE US MEDIA Corporations. 

The reason that this is significant is that this BIG MEDIA not only provides financial support to the Internationalist Left, but also provides them with the MEDIA COVER needed for their various nefarious activities.

“Nothing to see here folks, move along…”

A good case in point is the situation that has come to light with the recent Clinton/Obama/FBI/Russia scandal. Yet looking at the FAKENEWS FrancisMedia, one would never know that something was amiss. Here is a Gateway Pundit post describing just this:

For a more detailed analysis of this situation, here is Stefan Molyneux’s take on this “matter”:

So the question then arises, how is this possible?

Well, the answer is provided by our Internationalist Left Funding Dominance Hierarchy. It is this “construction” that allows BIG MONEY to flow to these criminal organizations, fronted by a host of purported paragons of virtue signalling.  Yet when these Leftist fronts are uncovered, the BIG MEDIA Foundation, through their MEDIA arms put the kabosh on the stories.

And if anyone of these MEDIA Companies goes, rogue, like FoxNews does from time to time, then the entire force of FAKE MEDIA OUTRAGE is brought down on them and they are browbeaten into submission. Or they are paid a visit...

So today, Michael Snyder focus the disinfection sunlight on one, VERY IMPORTANT part of this racketeering organization, and that part that provides the MEDIA COVER for the Internationalist Left.

What is of utmost importance is to connect the dots between the MEDIA SILENCE and the LACK OF PROSECUTORIAL ACTIVITY on the part of the law enforcement establishment.

Kind of like, nothing to see here, move along…

And one final thought, if you CUT THE CORD and throw away your TV, they can’t control you…

PS One more order of business. Found a new source of apparently REAL commentary. His name is Lionel and he is a trial lawyer by day, or rather when he is not producing his videos. His latest video is titled: Hillary Caught in Yet Another Trap While #MSM Are Ordered to Stand Down and Ignore. This video can be found here.

Note bene: Great discussion about the origins and use of the social construct “conspiracy theory”, from a trial lawyers perspective at about the 29:00 minute mark.

PPS I am posting this video. It is a must see. I will not post tomorrow, so please consider this the extended weekend post.


Have a nice weekend…

UPDATE 1:15 19 October, 2017

More commentary. Very poignant and proper conclusions are drawn: Quickly becoming a failed state.


UPDATE 2: 01:30 19 October, 2017

More Truth to Power stuff, and the best explanation I’ve heard to date about the ESSENSE of problem that the Rinos have with President Trump:

Numquam Ponenda est Pluralitas Sine Necessitate!


How The Elite Dominate The World – Part 3: 90% Of What You Watch On TV Is Controlled By Just 6 Giant Corporations

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

How much is your view of the world shaped by what you see on television? 

On average, Americans spend more than 150 hours watching television every month, and it is called “programming” for a reason.  If you allow anyone to pour ideas and information into your mind for five hours a day, it is going to change how you look at reality.  Everyone has an agenda, and every single news program, television show and movie is trying to alter your views.  Sadly, our society has become absolutely addicted to media, and the mainstream media is completely dominated by the elite. 

In fact, about 90 percent of the programming that comes through your television is controlled by just 6 gigantic media corporations.  Most of us are willingly plugging ourselves into this “propaganda matrix” that is completely dominated by the elite for several hours each day, and that gives them an enormous amount of power over the rest of us.

In Part I and Part II of this series, I discussed how the elite use money as a tool to dominate the planet.  Today, we are going to talk about how they use information.  If you control what people think, then you control a society.  And through their vast media empires, the elite are able to shape how we all think to a frightening degree.

Just think about it.  What do we talk about with our family, our friends and our co-workers?  To a large extent, those conversations are about movies, television shows, something that we just saw on the news or a sporting event that just took place.  The reason why we talk about certain things is because the mainstream media gives those things attention, and other things we ignore because the mainstream media does not make them seem to be important.

The mainstream media literally sets the agenda for our society, and it would be difficult to overstate the power that is in their hands.  And as I mentioned above, the mainstream media is almost entirely controlled by just 6 colossal corporations.  The following list of these 6 corporate giants comes from one of my previous articles, and this is just a sampling of the media properties that they each own…


  • NBC
  • Telemundo
  • Universal Pictures
  • Focus Features
  • USA Network
  • Bravo
  • CNBC
  • The Weather Channel
  • Syfy
  • Golf Channel
  • Esquire Network
  • E!
  • Cloo
  • Chiller
  • Universal HD
  • Comcast SportsNet
  • Universal Parks & Resorts
  • Universal Studio Home Video

The Walt Disney Company

  • ABC Television Network
  • ESPN
  • The Disney Channel
  • A&E
  • Lifetime
  • Marvel Entertainment
  • Lucasfilm
  • Walt Disney Pictures
  • Pixar Animation Studios
  • Disney Mobile
  • Disney Consumer Products
  • Interactive Media
  • Disney Theme Parks
  • Disney Records
  • Hollywood Records
  • Miramax Films
  • Touchstone Pictures

News Corporation

  • Fox Broadcasting Company
  • Fox News Channel
  • Fox Business Network
  • Fox Sports 1
  • Fox Sports 2
  • National Geographic
  • Nat Geo Wild
  • FX
  • FXX
  • FX Movie Channel
  • Fox Sports Networks
  • The Wall Street Journal
  • The New York Post
  • Barron’s
  • SmartMoney
  • HarperCollins
  • 20th Century Fox
  • Fox Searchlight Pictures
  • Blue Sky Studios
  • Beliefnet
  • Zondervan

Time Warner

  • CNN
  • The CW
  • HBO
  • Cinemax
  • Cartoon Network
  • HLN
  • NBA TV
  • TBS
  • TNT
  • TruTV
  • Turner Classic Movies
  • Warner Bros.
  • Castle Rock
  • DC Comics
  • Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment
  • New Line Cinema
  • Sports Illustrated
  • Fortune
  • Marie Claire
  • People Magazine


  • MTV
  • Nickelodeon
  • VH1
  • BET
  • Comedy Central
  • Paramount Pictures
  • Paramount Home Entertainment
  • Country Music Television (CMT)
  • Spike TV
  • The Movie Channel
  • TV Land

CBS Corporation

  • CBS Television Network
  • The CW (along with Time Warner)
  • CBS Sports Network
  • Showtime
  • TVGN
  • CBS Radio, Inc.
  • CBS Television Studios
  • Simon & Schuster
  • Infinity Broadcasting
  • Westwood One Radio Network

If nobody tuned in to their “programming”, they would not have any power over us.

But according to a report put out by Nielsen, Americans are plugging into “the matrix” more than ever before.  The following is how our daily use of media breaks down by device

  • Live TV: 4 hours, 31 minutes
  • Time-Shifted TV: 33 minutes
  • Radio: 1 hour, 52 minutes
  • DVDs: 8 minutes
  • Video Game Consoles: 14 minutes
  • Multimedia Devices (Apple TV, Roku, etc.): 13 minutes
  • Internet on PC: 58 minutes
  • Smartphone: 1 hour, 39 minutes
  • Tablet: 31 minutes

When you total those numbers up, it comes to 10 hours and 39 minutes.

In essence, Americans are spending most of their waking hours plugged in to something.

And if you only add together “live television” and “time-shifted television”, Americans are spending an average of more than five hours each day just watching television.

Of course many of us spend countless hours on the Internet as well.  It has been estimated that 54,907 Google searches are conducted, 7,252 tweets are posted, 125,406 YouTube videos are viewed, and 2,501,018 emails are sent out every single second.

You may have guessed this already, but most of the news and information that we consume on the Internet is also controlled by the elite

Overall, the top 10 publishers — together owning around 60 news sites — account for 47% of total online traffic to news content last year, with the next-biggest 140 publishers accounting for most of the other half, SimilarWeb found.

The biggest online news publisher for the U.S. audience was MSN, owner of, with just over 27 billion combined page views across mobile and desktop, followed by Disney Media Networks, owner of ESPN and ABC News, with 25.9 billion.

This is why the “alternative media” is so important.  All over America and all over the world, people are waking up and realizing that they aren’t getting the truth from the mainstream media, and they are hungry for truly independent sources of information.

The only way that we are ever going to be able to throw off the insidious system of control that the elite have established is by winning the information war.  We are literally in a constant battle for hearts and minds, and the good news is that we have made a lot of progress.  Over the past decade we have “red pilled” millions upon millions of people, but we still have a long way to go.

Faith in the corporate media is dwindling, and the elite are deeply concerned about this. 

The Internet has allowed ordinary people like us to communicate on a mass scale, and this has never been the case before in human history.  We have a window of opportunity to fight back against the elite, and we must not let this opportunity pass us by.

We are literally engaged in a battle for the future of this planet, and let us never waver in our pursuit of victory.

*  *  *

Michael Snyder is a Republican candidate for Congress in Idaho’s First Congressional District, and you can learn how you can get involved in the campaign on his official website. His new book entitled “Living A Life That Really Matters” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on

Post-Modernist “FrancisDialogue” All The Rage…


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One for the “Can’t make this stuff up” file.

Over at the Zero Hedge website, we get a post pertaining to the Dubia.

Actually, it’s another Dubia.

This Dubia was submitted to the self appointed “el comandante” of the “Catalan Republic”, one Carles Puigdemont by the Prime Minister of Spain, Mariano Rajoy. Cutting to the chase, Prime Minister Rajoy kindly asked “el comandante” Puigdemont if he would be so kind as to clarify whether the legislative act passed by the Catalonian parliament, post the “non-binding referendum” of October 1 was a declaration of independence or not.

A couple of weeks later, and there is still no clarity.

Apparently, the two sides are engaging in FrancisDialogue!

What is ironic about this situation though, is that Francis is on the wrong side of this “lio”. Just as a friendly reminder, Francis is a fervent backer of the European super nanny state, the one and same that vehemently condemned the actions of the Catalonian “commander in chief”. Sort of… in a post-Modernist sort of way.

The reason I am bringing this up to your attention is that this is just another example of the post-Modernist mindset in the wider Visibilium Omnium.

And speaking of post-Modernist mindset and “el commandante”, or rather the scion of the “el commandante” blood line, I bring you young Justin Castro Trudeau. (see video above)

And while we are speaking of youth, anyone notice who is most likely going to be the next Prime Minister of Austria? (see here) And Sundance’s take HERE.

Like I said, can’t make this stuff up, folks.

Original ZeroHedge post here.

Catalan Leader Defies Spain, Sends Evasive Reply To Rajoy Activating Second Ultimatum Deadline

The Catalan stand-off has been extended until Thursday as both sides hold their ground.

After days of expectation and talks with his separatist allies, Catalan leader Carles Puigdemont stood by his decision to keep his region’s declaration of independence from Spain “in suspension” despite a demand for clarity from Spain prime minister Rajoy, effectively challenging the central government to follow through on promises to forcibly take control of the region by sending an evasive reply to the central government’s Article 155 notification, which on Wednesday began the process of suspending home rule in the region.

The Spanish Prime Minister’s office was seeking a simple “yes” or “no” reply by 10 a.m. on Monday on the question of whether Mr. Puigdemont had or had not declared independence last Tuesday. Anything other than “no”, the First Minister was warned, would lead to the activation of the so-called faced the use of Article 155 of the Spanish constitution. This article is the so-called “nuclear option” which allows Madrid to dissolve the regional government and call fresh regional elections. The central government can also take over the local police force and television channels.

Eventually, Puigdemont chose more obfuscation and defiance: his four-page reply, obtained by Catalan radio stations Catalunya Radio and RAC1 and released by The Spain Report, neither confirmed nor denied he had proclaimed a new Catalan republic last week, but said the declaration remained “in suspension” and proposed two months of dialogue arguing that the Spanish people and Europe will only understand “dialogue, negotiation and agreement.” He did not say what he would do if talks did not take place by the middle of December.

The full letter is below.

“The situation we are living through”, the letter begins: “is of such transcendence that it demands political solutions and replies that are up to the job”. Both “the majority of society” and Europe would only understand a solution based on “dialogue, negotiation and agreement”.

Puigdemont says he was “surprised” by the central government’s decision to begin the process of suspending home rule, and that his proposal of dialogue was “sincere” and “honest”, not “a demonstration of weakness”. He also argued that despite “violent police action”, “more than two million Catalans” entrusted the regional parliament with a “democratic mandate to declare independence”.

Most “no” voters stayed at home on October 1 and opposition parties refused to take part in an illegal referendum campaign. 90% of those who voted chose “yes”. “The priority of my government is to seek the path of dialogue with all intensity… The suspension of the political mandate that came out of the ballot boxes on October 1 demonstrates our firm will to seek a solution and not confrontation.”

Furthermore, in addition to again not replying clearly to the Article 155 notification, and demanding dialogue with the central government, Puigdemont made two specific requests of Madrid.

  • First, he asked the Spanish government to lift “the repression of the people and government of Catalonia”. That means he would like sedition charges against the chairmen of Omnium Cultural, Jordi Cuixart, and the Catalan National Assembly (ANC), Jordi Sánchez, and Catalan Police chief Josep Lluis Trapero, dropped. He also says fundamental rights in the region have been violated, the Internet and media outlets “censored” and public accounts frozen. He makes a second mention of the “brutal police violence against a peaceful civilian population” on October 1.
  • The second thing Mr. Puigdemont wants is a meeting with Mariano Rajoy, “that allows us to explore the first agreements” pleading to “let us not allow the situation to deteriorate further.”

* * *

In response to Puigdemont’s non-confirmation – and non-denial – Spanish Prime Minister Rajoy said that Puigdemont’s response was a step toward Article 155, while Deputy Prime Minister Soraya Saenz de Santamaria said the Catalan government now has until its second deadlin, at 10 a.m. on Thursday, to disown its claims to a mandate for independence, and that Catalonia can still avert next steps by Spain.

“It is not difficult for Puigdemont to return to a sensible position” by then, said the Deputy PM, framing the Article 155 process as seeking to return legal government to the region rather than suspend home rule, one which aims to ensure regional self-govt is excercised according to law. She also said that Spain regrets that Puigdemont didn’t reply to PM Rajoy’s demand and that the second deadline of Spain’s demand is now activated.

“It has never been easier for someone to avoid the Constitution being applied.”

She concluded that dialogue can only take place within the law, in parliament, and that Puigdemont cannot keep population in uncertainty.

As for Prime Minister Rajoy, in his response to Puigdemont – also in the form of a letter – he said that he says laments not getting a response from the Catalan leader on whether or not they have declared independence, and said he now expects a clear response in the coming hours before the new and revised Oct. 19 deadline.

And so, today’s Catalan showdown has been pushed back by another three
days as neither side appears ready or willing to back down.

Is Anyone Driving This FrancisMercy “2+2=5” Bus?


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today we pick up with the “2+2=5” meme theme one more time.

Your humble blogger is beating this dead horse because it’s… well… a very, Very, VERY, VERY important meme, since at its root, is in fact an explicit indictment of the entire FrancisBishopricofRome.

More over, what the “2+2=5” meme does is that it implicitly captures the ESSENCE of the entire Vatican II post-conciliar church.

Now seeing as how we mentioned the “E” word, and given that ESSENCES are one of the three elements that are at the root of the study by philosophy, i.e. the study of how knowledge is acquired, the other two being ABSOLUTES and UNIVERSALS, what we are dealing with is an issue at its philosophical level.

Or to put it in post-Modernist jargon, what we are dealing with is the meme “2+2=5” as a “philosophical” construct.

Aside, notice the quotation marks around the word philosophical?

And just to finish this introduction, the reason why the philosophical dimension… bah, PLATFORM is so important is that if the philosophy of this (FrancisChurch) or any endeavor is not  veracious, i.e. objectively true, then the endeavor is doomed to fail. The reason being that this questionable endeavor will not have universal properties, i.e. will not be applicable always, everywhere and to everyone. 

What’s more, if any endeavor does not possess universal properties, then it does not serve everyone equally. What it does, is it favors some at the expense of others. (see section titled PERIPHERIES below.) Therefore the endeavor is not equitable. Or as we Catholics would say, it is not JUST.

Yet we know that an UNJUST system can exist and for a limited time even be sustained. Think Soviet Union… The manner in which it is sustained is not through a natural equilibrium (One that exists in nature in and of itself), but rather through the WILL of individuals which that system favors.

In other words, we are dealing with a post-Modernist, cum neo-Marixst POWER construct.

And to finish off with an example, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, an institution that has maintained what could be described as “business continuity” since its founding in Anno Domini 33, has been able to maintain it’s “business continuity” because it has at its base,PHILOSOPHICAL PLATFORM based on OBJECTIVE TRUTH. The PRECEPTS of this PLATFORM exist in nature.

Or as we say here on this blog, exists in His creation.

And on this PLATFORM, 2+2 must equal 4, always, everywhere and to everyone.

So what can be inferred from the above is that the reason that the Catholic Church has maintained its business continuity is through a JUST system.

Which begs the question, how can one establish that a SYSTEM is  JUST?

And the answer,  that is commonly provided, is that a JUST system is one where all the participants perceive that their interests are overseen in a manner which does not favor any one individual participant.

To drill down into this thought, your humble blogger favors the NATURAL LAW explanation since your humble blogger sees NATURAL LAW as being that part of the SYSTEM that God created to govern His creation. Here is the Wikipedia definition: (see here) (emphasis and comment added)

For advocates of the theory that justice is part of natural law (e.g., John Locke), it involves the system of consequences that naturally derives from any action or choice. In this, it is similar to the laws of physics: in the same way as the Third of Newton’s laws of Motion requires that for every action there must be an equal and opposite reaction, justice requires according individuals or groups what they actually deserve, merit, or are entitled to.[citation needed] Justice, on this account, is a universal and absolute concept: laws, principles, religions, (Ed. note: there can be only one “religion” in this case) etc., are merely attempts to codify that concept, sometimes with results that entirely contradict the true nature of justice.

With respect to the latter, here we are speaking about the sects.

So now that we have a good grasp of what characteristics a SYSTEM, any SYSTEM needs to possess in order for that SYSTEM to be sustainable, I will post some screen shots, sort of as a weekend meditation exercise. They all originated on the Gloria.TV website and appeared within the last few weeks.

I hope my readers read through and REFLECT on them, and then ask themselves one question:

Is anyone driving this post-conciliar FrancisMercy”2+2=5″Bus?




































Oh My! “Joy Of Sex” Not Thomistic…


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

From Life Site News (see here)


Amoris Laetitia is ‘ambiguous,’ ‘not a Thomistic document’: Filial Correction signatory

ENGLAND, October 11, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Father Thomas Crean, O.P., one of the first signers of the Filial Correction, has had a thorough grounding in the philosophy and theology of fellow Dominican St. Thomas Aquinas.

After earning a B.A. in Philosophy and Theology at Oxford University, Crean took a Lectorate at Blackfriars, Oxford’s Dominican college; an S.T.L. from the St. Thomas Aquinas Institute in Toulouse, France; and a Doctorate in Sacred Theology from the International Theological Institute in Austria.

LifeSiteNews contacted Fr. Crean to settle a burning question: Is Amoris Laetitia, as Cardinal Christoph Schonborn has assured us, Thomistic?

LifeSiteNews: First, what school of Thomas do you follow?

Crean: I would sympathize most with what is called half-humorously and half-seriously “Thomism of the Strict Observance,” which emphasizes the tradition of the commentators, especially Cajetan and John of St. Thomas, as further mediated and developed in the 20th century by men like Gredt, Garrigou-Lagrange, Maritain, and Grenier. Maritain, especially at the end of his life, was closely connected with the Toulouse Dominicans.

LifeSiteNews: In what ways could Amoris Laetitia be interpreted as Thomistic? That is, why might Cardinal Schonborn think so?  

Crean: Two things come to mind. One is that it presents the moral or spiritual life as primarily a growth in virtue, by which we gradually respond less imperfectly to God’s invitation to life and happiness with Him, rather than as primarily conformity to commandments and the avoidance of sin.

The other, which is an aspect of the first, is that it speaks of the need for the virtue of prudence (“discernment”), in consequence of the infinite variety of situations in which human beings find themselves, a variety which means that a necessarily finite code of rules will never be sufficient for good action.

Apart from that, it also quotes St. Thomas on … 14 or 15 occasions, including some works less often cited, such as the commentary on Aristotle’s Ethics.

LifeSiteNews: In what ways could Amoris Laetitia be interpreted as not Thomistic?

Crean: Some of the quotations from Aquinas used in Amoris Laetitia are cut short in such a way as not to give a well-rounded view of his thought on a given subject or, more seriously, quoted out of context so as to give an impression that he thought the opposite of how he really did. Sometimes he is quoted when his words are only slightly relevant to the matter of hand, as if just to increase the number of times his name appears in the footnotes.

LifeSiteNews: What is your “Respondeo” (i.e. answer) to the question “Is Amoris Laetitia Thomistic?”

Crean: If by “Thomistic” one means a document written in the style of St. Thomas himself, or in the style of someone who has taken St. Thomas for his guide in theology, then Amoris Laetitia is not a Thomistic document.

St. Thomas’ work is characterized by conciseness and clarity, whereas Amoris Laetitia is expansive, and, on certain key points, ambiguous – at least if we are to judge by the conflicting interpretations it has received. Again, a phrase such as “time is greater than space” is reminiscent not of St. Thomas but of a certain gnomic, metaphorical style of writing which St. Thomas criticized in the works of Plato.

More important than style is content. Here we could consider either the content of Amoris Laetitia as a whole, or those places in it where St. Thomas is explicitly quoted, or at least referenced.

A grave danger to faith and morals

On the first point, I was one of 45 signatories of a letter about Amoris Laetitia sent last year to all the cardinals and Eastern patriarchs of the Church. … This letter said: “When it comes to (Amoris Laetitia) itself … there is no doubt that it constitutes a grave danger to Catholic faith and morals. It contains many statements whose vagueness or ambiguity permit interpretations that are contrary to faith or morals, or that suggest a claim that is contrary to faith and morals without actually stating it. It also contains statements whose natural meaning would seem to be contrary to faith or morals.”

This letter listed 19 passages of Amoris Laetitia (saying) either that they suggested heresies and other grave errors, or else that their natural (obvious) meaning … was heretical or gravely erroneous. Hence, given that St. Thomas has been declared the Common doctor of the church and presented as a model for theologians … I should not consider Amoris Laetitia to be a Thomistic document.

When it comes to the explicit use made of St. Thomas, we should look at the individual passages. Certain passages quote him accurately and aptly in support of themes in the exhortation. Paragraphs 102, 120, 123, 126-7, and 134 fall into this category. For example, they quote his remarks that marriage is the greatest of friendships, that there need be no limit to the growth of charity in this life, and that friendship involves considering another person as a being of great worth.  

At other times, Amoris Laetitia quotes St. Thomas accurately, (but) less aptly or even misleadingly. Thus Paragraph 146 cites (him) in connection with the statement that: “A family is mature when the emotional life of its members becomes a form of sensitivity that neither stifles nor obscures great decisions and values, but rather follows each one’s freedom.”

The reference is not apt, since in the passage cited, St. Thomas is not talking about families or great decisions, or even values or freedom. He is simply discussing whether the virtues co-exist with the moral virtues, and explaining that they sometime do and sometime don’t.  

Minor and major misuses of St. Thomas

In regard to misleading uses of St. Thomas, there are minor and major examples.

A minor example occurs in paragraph 99. Talking about family life, Amoris Laetitia quotes these words from the Summa: “Every human being is bound to live agreeably with those around him.” However, it omits the second half of the sentence, which is nisi propter aliquam causam necesse sit aliquando alios utiliter contristare (“unless it should be necessary for him for some reason to cause them profitable sadness at some time”).

Another example occurs in paragraph 148. This first cites Aquinas in support of the statement that excessive seeking of some pleasure can weaken that same pleasure, and also alludes to his teaching that pleasure in the marital act is compatible with observing the “mean” of virtue.

The references here are accurate, but one has the distinct impression in this section that St. Thomas is being pressed into support a more “optimistic” view of human sexuality than he in fact upheld. For example, he taught that the conjugal act in fallen human beings tends, even when legitimately exercised, to weaken the impulse of charity toward God (2a 2ae 186, 4). He also held that for a spouse to ask for the paying of the marital debt without the desire for procreation is always at least a venial fault (Supplement, 49, 5).

Seriously misleading passages

I come now to what I should respectfully consider to be more seriously misleading passages.

(The English version of) paragraph 145  (of Amoris Laetitia) states: “Experiencing an emotion is not, in itself, morally good or evil. The stirring of desire or repugnance is neither sinful nor blameworthy. What is morally good or evil is what we do on the basis of, or under the influence of, a given passion.” It footnotes the Summa, 1a 2ae 24, 1.

But what St. Thomas says here is that no emotion, abstractly considered, is either good or bad. Even hatred is not bad as such: it is good to hate sin. However, every actually existing emotion will always be either good or bad. This is true, independently of any actions to which they may give rise.

St. Thomas says: ipsae passiones, secundum quod sunt voluntariae, possunt dici bonae vel malae moraliter. Dicuntur autem voluntariae vel ex eo quod a voluntate imperantur, vel ex eo quod a voluntate non prohibentur (“The emotions themselves, inasmuch as they are voluntary, can be called morally good or bad. And they are said to be voluntary inasmuch as they are commanded by the will, or else because they are not checked by the will.”) There is a serious mistake in the text of Amoris Laetitia here, since certain emotions can rise by themselves to the level of mortal sin, for example, certain kinds of deliberate anger and sexual desire. It is dangerous to give the impression that only outward acts can be morally good or evil.

The Latin text of paragraph 145 is slightly different, but the net result is the same. On the one hand, it changes “the stirring of desire or repugnance is neither sinful nor blameworthy” to “perceiving a desire or repugnance beginning is neither harmful nor blameworthy,” which strictly speaking is true, since the perception itself would not be a sin. However, it retains the claim that moral good and evil lie only in outward action. And, bizarrely, it also quotes one of the objections in the Summa as if it were St. Thomas’ own teaching!

Next, paragraph 301. Here Amoris Laetitia states that people … can be living in irregular (e.g. adulterous) situations and may know the Church’s teaching on ‘the rule’, and yet may be unable to see the value of “the rule.” These people, Amoris Laetitia says, may possess sanctifying grace and may be unable to obey the rule without sinning.

It goes on: “St. Thomas Aquinas himself recognized that someone may possess grace and charity, yet not be able to exercise any one of the virtues well.” As Dr. Joseph Shaw has pointed out, this quotation is irrelevant to the question of whether one can be excused from obeying the divine law by an ability to see its value, or whether one can be obliged to disobey it to avoid some other sin. St. Thomas is simply talking of people who have repented of past sins, and who now live virtuously, but do so with some difficulty because of the effect that those past sins have left behind.

Hence Dr. Shaw wrote: “Aquinas is simply pointing out that impediments are more likely when the virtue has not been acquired by a process of training and habituation over time, but by an infusion of grace from God. This abstruse issue is completely irrelevant to the matter at hand, and makes me wonder about the intellectual integrity of the people advising Pope Francis at this point in the document.” A more relevant passage from the Summa would have been found in 1a 2ae 19, 6: “If erring reason tell a man that he should go to another man’s wife, the will that abides by that erring reason is evil; since this error arises from ignorance of the Divine Law, which he is bound to know.”

More serious because more plausible misuse

A more serious, because superficially more plausible, misrepresentation of the angelic doctor is found in paragraph 304. Amoris Laetitia is discussing the question of universal moral laws, in the context, of course, of invalid second marriages and the conferral of the sacraments, and it quotes a passage from 1a 2a 94, 4: “Practical reason deals with contingent things, upon which human activity bears, and so although there is necessity in the general principles, the more we descend to matters of detail, the more frequently we encounter defects …  In matters of action, truth or practical rectitude is not the same for all, as to matters of detail, but only as to the general principles.”

Although the argument at this point in Amoris Laetitia seems designed to be hard to follow, the impression is very strongly given that St. Thomas would have said that either sexual activity within a marriage not recognized by the Church as valid, or else giving Holy Communion to those who engage in such activity, cannot be objects of a universal prohibition. There can be, the text implies, only a defeasible presumption against such things. In fact, St. Thomas teaches, with the whole tradition of the Church, that there are indeed such things as intrinsically bad actions which generate universal prohibitions.

Thomas would have been horrified

On the question of the reception of the sacraments, Amoris Laetitia can hardly be considered Thomistic, (because) it does not quote the relevant text from the Summa: “Holy Communion ought not to be given to open sinners when they ask for it” (3a 80), or the identical teaching in the Scriptum (Super Sent., lib. 4 d. 9 q. 1 a. 5 qc. 1 co).

What then was the meaning of the passage from Aquinas quoted in Amoris Laetitia 304?

St. Thomas there spoke of certain ”general principles” that are the same for all. These include the commandments of the decalogue and any other precepts of divine law. In addition to these, there are “matters of detail,” i.e. certain rules of good action which human reason can work out for itself, such as “keep your promises” (and) “obey the law of the land” …

But these, though generally applicable, may in certain circumstances not serve as reliable guides to good action, because human reason cannot foresee all cases. For example, it may be necessary to break a promise to meet someone in order to deal with a medical urgency, or to break a speed limit to drive someone to hospital. It is fair to say that St. Thomas would have been horrified to think that any bishop would one day use this common-sense teaching in order to authorize Holy Communion for those publicly committed to illicit unions.

Finally, in a footnote to the same paragraph, Amoris Laetitia says: “In another text, referring to the general knowledge of the rule and the particular knowledge of practical discernment, St. Thomas states that ‘if only one of the two is present, it is preferable that it be the knowledge of the particular reality, which is closer to the act.’” It refers us to his commentary on the Nicomachaean ethics, Book 6, lecture 6, section 11. 

Again, it misrepresents Aquinas’ teaching, with potentially seriously consequences. St. Thomas is not here contrasting rules and ‘discernment’ but rather universal truths and more particular truths. He gives the example of one man who knows that ‘light flesh’ is healthy to eat, but not what counts as light flesh, and another man who doesn’t know the general principle about ‘light flesh’, but does know that the flesh of birds is healthy to eat. The latter person is a better guide about how to eat.

Hence, St. Thomas is not saying that a priest who thinks he can discern the presence of the Holy Spirit in Mr. Smith’s soul despite Mr. Smith’s invalid second marriage but has never heard about the principle of not giving Holy Communion to those in adultery is in a better position to judge what to do at the altar rails than a priest who knows the principle but can’t discern the Holy Spirit in Mr Smith’s soul. Rather, he is saying that a priest who knows the truth that one should not give Holy Communion to those in public adultery, but doesn’t know the more universal truth that one should not give it to those in public sin, is in a better position to decide what to do than one who knows that one should not give it to those in public sin, but who does not know that a second marriage counts as public sin.


In conclusion, although many and various passages from St. Thomas’ works are quoted in Amoris Laetitia, I cannot say that I believe that they give, as some readers might suppose … a reliable account of the angelic doctor’s teaching on married love, the emotions, universal moral prohibitions or the reception of Holy Communion by public sinners. Hence, given also what was said above about the content of Amoris Laetitia as a whole, and about its style, I should not be able to say that I considered Amoris Laetitia a Thomist document.

Richard Thaler, FrancisChurch And The Mamet Principle…


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Today we return to the “2+2=5” meme thread.

This meme, which came about through an initial twitter posting, striking what could be called a raw nerve on a subconscious level, has subsequently acquired a life of its own. Presently it is a common meme, circulating among the Catholic and non-Catholic blogo-sphere. This meme is actually part of a large Memetic Warfare PHENOMENON that is being fought in the social media. See a short introduction HERE.

It’s original authors, one “Father 2+2=5” Spadaro, BLTS.J., the Director of the Episcopalian-Jesuit Civiltà Cattolica FrancisPublication and the Grand Inquisitor FrancisPoliticalOfficer to the Francis court revolutionary soviet, has attained an unprecedented level of notoriety because of it.

One reason that this meme has become… well, a meme, is that it captures the “spirit”, if not the essence of the post-Modernist man, as he has evolved within the post-conciliar church. What is more important thought, is that this post-modernist man has also evolved outside the post-conciliator church. Today we see this post-modernist man in other areas of the Visibislium Omnium, as we have chronicled in previous posts.

One area where he is very easy to identify is in academia. Dr. Jordan Peterson has made quite a name for himself identifying and explaining this “spirit of post-Modernism” PHENOMENON. Here is one such video that I have been promoting to explain this PHENOMENON:

As for how to fight against this post-Modernist man, at about the 07:20 minute mark, Dr. Peterson has this to say:

With regards to the universities, I thought at one point that the best thing to do is the cut their funding by 25% and let them fight amongst themselves for the remnants. Because it would force the universities to decide exactly what’s important and what isn’t. 

So I would say the Humanities and much of the Social Sciences has turned into a post-Modernist neo-Marxist playground for radicals. The scholarship is terrible. 80% of Humanities papers are not cited once. ONCE. 

And so what that means is that they write papers for each other and they sell them to libraries. And that’s how the publishers make their money. No one reads them but the publishers can print them because the libraries have to buy them. And they are buying them with your tax money. And so all of you who are sitting here are funding a post-Modernist radical neo-Marxist agenda that has its roots in the university and your tax money is going towards that.  

And if you want proof of that, you just go online and look at the websites, especially of disciplines like women’s studies, which is pathological right to the core. But it’s not just women’s studies, it’s all the ethnic studies groups, it’ anthropology, it’s sociology, it’s social work and most of all, it’s education.

So to put Dr. Peterson’s lecture into our “2+2=5” memetic framework, the “2+2=5” post-Modernist influence extends through many disciplines outside of FrancisTheology and into what we would term: FrancisWomen’sStudies, FrancisEthnicStudies, FrancisAnthropology, FrancisSociology, FrancisSocialWork and FrancisEducation. Actually, it even goes into FrancisPhysics. If you don’t believe me, see here and here.

So the above is what could be called the lay-of-the-land in the post-Modernist part of Western Civilization. A better, more detailed explanation can be viewed in this video titled How to End Postmodernism by none other than Jordan Peterson: (PS. MUST WATCH)

And now for some good news.

Into this fray of what Dr. Peterson would call the post Hobbesian battleground of identity group warefare and the Rationalist (Thomist) reaction, stumbles the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.

Yesterday the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences named it’s 2017 winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics. The winner is… wait for it… a University of Chicago professor by the name of Richard H. Thaler. 

But Richard Thaler is not just another University of Chicago, i.e. Chicago School professor.

What Richard Thaler is known for is the very EVIL concept of Nudge Theory. Nudge Theory, if it was to be explained in the CONTEXT of Catholic doctrine, is founded on the premise that people have a fallen nature. This fallen nature in turn does not allow people to act rationally. And naturally, since these people are not rational, they can not know what is actually good for them.  This inability to act rationally (act in their best interest) allows EVIL neo-Marxist clerics social planners, such as Mr. Thaler and his EVIL sidekick Cass Sunstein, to create social policy whose goal is to “nudge” these irrational people into collectivist schemes constructed for them by this priestly class social planners. And since these functional Marxists can read minds know what is best for people, just like Francis, they can then design all sorts of governmental programs for these laboratory rats prols, ObamaCare being one case in point.

But as we know, God is all powerful and can even use EVIL as an instrument for the betterment of His creation. And so it is the case in this above described situation.

Proof is in the following passage (see original here): (emphasis added)

This year’s Laureate Richard Thaler played a crucial role in the development of
behavioral economics over the past four decades. He provided both conceptual and empirical foundations for the field. By incorporating new insights from human psychology into economic analysis, he has provided economists with a richer set of analytical and experimental tools for understanding and predicting human behavior. This work has had a significant cumulative impact on the economics profession; it inspired a large number of researchers to develop formal theories and empirical tests, which helped turn a somewhat controversial, fringe field into a mainstream area of contemporary economic research.

Reading between the lines, what is the case is that Richard Thaler has in fact transformed the Behavioral Sciences through the use of OBJECTIVE analytical techniques.

The manner in which this relates to what Dr. Peterson stated is that through the work of people like Richard Thaler, whether knowingly or not, the Behavioral Sciences have become less post-Modenist.

Once again, please keep in mind that the post-Modernists completely reject the structure of Western Civilization. This includes all forms of OBJECTIVE, scientific investigation. So when the likes of Richard Thaler “introduced” the scientific method into the Behavioral Sciences, he is by default undermined this post-Modernist notion that human behavior cannot be studied OBJECTIVELY.

So Professor Thaler has wittingly or not, forced the Behavioral Sciences onto the road of OBJECTIVISM.  If he and his adherents allow the FACTS and EVIDENCE to guide their further research, they will end up, eventually in a place such as that ended up by someone like, well Jordan Peterson. Now even if he doesn’t end up in the Rationalist (philosophical Thomist) camp himself, the PROCESS has begun.

And if we are to believe that which is known as the Mamet Principle, which can be stated as follows:

That which is learned, cannot be un-learned…

… then what we can state for certain is that:



And we now have another University of Chicago professor who just got awarded a Nobel Prize in Economics for exactly that.

What Will Be Left Of FrancisChurch Once Government Money Stops Flowing?


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Quick post today, but one that should start you dear reader thinking. I decided to do this post today since it puts some CONTEXT into much of the information that has been appearing in various, seemingly unrelated areas of the Visibilium Omnium.

But as we know, nothing is “unrelated”. This is the general principle behind the LEX AMRATICUS.

Getting down to the specifics, over the last few posts, your humble blogger has been trying to put across a rather interesting PROPOSITION.

That PROPOSITION is the following: by examining the sources and structure of the funding of FrancisChurch, one can better understand the strength of the forces of the evil one, forces that are lined up against not only the Faith, but against Western Civilization in general.

Below is a representation of the forces funding EVIL as your humble blogger sees them, starting from the most important and all the way down to the PAID useful idiots.

(1) At the top of this “dominance hierarchy” are the German Foundations. (see here) It is these foundations that have funded and continue to fund such social movements as the Frankfurt School and their Critical Theory (Cultural Marxism). It is these Foundations, specifically Media Foundations that also fund the German “Theological” School and support the globalist wing of the German Bishops’ Conference. Since the German State is effectively a totalitarian state, the domestic order is maintained at a very low cost. This allows for large soft power expenditures overseas. It is through these quasi-governmental agencies that the German State spreads its soft power internationally.

Note bene: The above explains the freak-out of the AfD party winning 13% of the recent general election in Germany. By having a real alternative to the German UNI-Party, the cost of controlling the electorate just increased. (see here)

(2) These German Foundations, as part of the German soft power apparatus are also supporters of the US Foundations. These US foundations draw most of their funds from global corporate interests such as Wall Street banks and Silicone Valley, et al. These latter foundations work locally to destabilize the societal structures in the US. (see here) Aside, what I have come to realize is that the US is the ground zero of the global destabilization effort. It is by far the largest drag on the resources of this “dark pool” of globalist funding. It is critical for the globalists to control the US and its military and nuclear arsenal, hence the freak-out over the Trump Presidency. What is also the case is that the exorbitant amount of US Foreign Aid allows these globalist Cultural Warriors to focus the Foundation resources on the US domestic population while the US State Department spreads and maintains the globalist fiefdom overseas.

(3)The German and US foundations in turn have shanghaied the United Nations global infrastructure. This is a money saving endeavor in order to limit the resources that they are spending on the subjugation of individual countries on the planet. (see here) The manner in which they are trying to put in place the NEW WORLD ORDER is through the ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. The means buy which they want to sell this to the local populations is through the buzz word “sustainable development”. And if that doesn’t work, the US Military is ready to “bring democracy” to the offending party.

(4) The operational elements of the UN are the NGO’s. These are quasi-private organizations that are attached to the UN to give them global access. They act as the intelligence networks in individual countries. The funding of these NGO primarily primarily rests with the Northern European governments who use them as their soft power projection into the global economic and legal space. 

Note bene: The above is the reason why the NWO is freaking out about Hungary and Poland. These countries are shutting down the government funding of these “internationalist”, in reality subversive organizations. This is also the reason behind the freak out over President Trumps slashing of the State Department budget and the Environmental Department budgets.

(5) The invisible, and outright subversive arms (operational) of this NEW WORLD ORDER are in fact the Geoge Soros’ of the world.  They pose as “private” ventures, but are in fact a network of state and UN funded crony “capitalists” promoting FAKE “global initiatives’. These globalists buy off local politicians. A good case in point is the European Union politicians, especially those from the small EU states who have what can be called national “inferiority complexes”. These politicians tend to be inept, incompetent and corrupt. They can’t balance a governmental budget, which makes them quite keen on taking backhanders and various other sorts of transfers in kind. What more do the Geoge Soros’ of the world need?

Note bene: For those not sure about the above structure, please watch carefully this film here. It is a documentary about what is now known as the ERM II crisis in the UK. This is the infamous Black Wednesday where George Soros “broke the Bank of England”. What is important to note is that according to the documentary, the Germans tipped off Soros that they would not intervene to support either the Pound Sterling or the Italian Lira. This signal allowed Soros to keep increasing his positions which eventually led to the Bank of England abandoning the currency peg. And the rest is history.  So the next time you hear that George Soros is a genius, well folks, he “has help”.

(5) And underneath George Soros are the smaller private Foundations and other sponsored organizations. These are what in the military are called the line units. The names are well know: Acorn, Open Society, Tides, Think Progress and the list goes on. They are partially funded by Soros and his Foundational backers. But a large part of the funding is drawn from direct governmental aid and support.

(6) And finally, we have what can be called the “boots on the ground”. These are the people whose economic livelihood depends on the above funding structure. Here is a good representative photo of what one such organization looks like:

What we see above is what can be called an operational workers soviet. It is the heart of one such commandeered organization, i.e. the US Catholic Church. These modern day revolutionaries represent the “brain trust” of this worker’s soviet. They represent an command structure- FrancisCardinal Farrel (Vatican), the Vatican political officer – “Fr. 2+2=5” Spadaro, the US first secretary – FrancisCardinal Cupich, the line units – Society of Jesuits and the media cover – National Schismatic Reporter. And lest we forget, the agitation and propaganda arm comprised of the workers intelligentsia that produces the little red books and the “2+2=5” logic Tweets are behind the front row.

I will end off here, but before I sign off, I will republish the Fr. Z post that provides insights into this above pictured gathering.

What is of critical importance to understand is that this entire revolutionary soviet plenary session was comprised of just 40 individuals. What is also critical to understand is that these 40 revolutionaries are all paid staff. Just like ALL the revolutionaries in the other subverted organizations that are working to subjugate the world population under the one world order. 

And if you don’t believe me, here and here is supporting evidence.

So closing, what is of utmost importance to understand is that the funding operations are in essence like the “new math”. What I mean by that is if the government support is pulled from under these revolutionary soviets, the entire construction collapses.

And the reason is, that just like in the real world, 2+2 must equal 4 Always, Everywhere and to Everyone.

Even in the governmental sector.

I would also like to mention a comment I received in the comment box. Here it is for your reading pleasure:

The article above about the “new” math reminds me of a college professor I had. He didn’t give partial credit for the work you did in order to get the answer. If the final answer was wrong, you got the whole problem wrong. His explanation was this: If you are an engineer and you design a bridge and get 99% of the calculations right, with only 1% error, the people that fall 1000 feet to the bottom of the canyon when the bridge collapses aren’t 99% dead, they are 100% dead!

They sure are.

And now, the Fr. Z post for more CONTEXT:

The recent Jesuit-run Boston College conference on ‘Amoris Laetitia’

The recent Jesuit-run Boston College conference on the reception of Amoris Laetitia in these USA seems to have been intended as a closed workshop on how to “struggle” (in the Cultural Revolution sense) against the Four Olds (in this case, Familiaris Consortio, Veritatis splendor, Humanae vitae, and the Principle of Non-Contradiction).  As a confirmation of same, I noted at LifeSite‘s article about it:

The dissident news service National Catholic Reporter (NCR) [aka Fishwrap aka National Schismatic Reporter] appears to have been given the exclusive privilege of covering the conference. Links about the event on Boston College’s website refer to articles on NCR’s website. On its website, NCR states that a “handful of press outlets have been invited to report on the proceedings, including NCR.”

Look at the line up of cadres and commissars who spoke.  Look at the Jesuit-run location.  Look at the planned and controlled coverage.  What could go wrong?

Now we see the lib catholic equivalent of Big Letter Posters from Fishwrap.  They have received their caps and booklets. It’ll be a constant harangue now of “Down with the Cow Demons!  Down with the Snake Spirits!  Down with Dubia Askers!”  Soon we will see their version of the Four Pests Campaign rev up against, “Converts who Have Opinions, Lovers of Tradition, Signers of Filial Letters, Upholders of Law”.

Let us go Down To The Countryside of “Lived Experience”.

We must now force the legalist Cow Demons to learn the wisdom of El Pueblo and their “lived experience” which overcomes the Four Olds.

Criticize!  RECTIFY!

Then again, how many people attended this workshop?

Here is a photo from Fishwrap of “participants”. (see above)

Tens of people!

Perhaps that was just the speakers and organizers.

Wait…. that was the attendance.  According to Fishwrap: “These panel presentations were stimulating and prompted an extraordinary amount of discourse among all 40 participants”.

I suppose some will question my choice of imagery.

Get back to me after the Struggle Sessions begin.

PS Just to remind you dear reader about another soviet homo-lobby workers meeting, this one in Rome before the start of the Bi-Sex Synods. That post was titled Optics: When realities collide! (see here)

PPS And just a friendly reminder of the 6th Principle of the Lex Armaticus:

6th Principle:

Stop giving these leftists money!


Schrödinger’s Cat Being Thrown Into The Post-Modernist Fray…


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Your humble blogger does a “connect the dots’ post today. And a lot of “dot connecting” going on out there.

But first a short introduction. A lot of “2+2=5” type of comments have been appearing lately, and not just in Catholic blogo-sphere. With respect to the mathematical error itself, one way in which the post-modernists are attempting to explain it away is through a Schrödinger’s Cat metaphor. I will not bore you with the story, since I don’t want to extend this post out too far, but you can read the background here:

Nuff said…

It is with a great deal of satisfaction that I open my browser daily and see lots and lots of interesting stuff of this nature being produced. No wonder the FrancisFolks simply hate the bloggers. And not just the Catholic ones.

Today we have a couple of posts to which I would like to draw your attention. The common thread among these post is the outrageous, yet very telling claim made by one “Father 2+2=5” Spadaro that God can make 2+2 equal 5, or whatever he wants it to be. The answer to this question is True, yet if we assume that as a general rule, we fall into the “capricious God” fallacy. And the problem with the “capricious God” fallacy is this: how in the heck are we supposed to “know Him” if He is capricious (irrational)? The simple answer is: We can’t.  Here is a more full explanation.

So anyways, we pick up with a post at Fr. Z’s blog, with some spectacular comments in the  commentary box.

I’m impressed!

In the post titled Boston College Amoris Laetitia Agitprop Workshop and Schrödinger’s Cat, Fr. Z writes this gem of a passage:

I just had a great conversation with a fellow who is a physicist.  We were talking about the work of another physicist who was part of the gravity team which was awarded the Nobel Prize.  He is trying to reunite physics and physika, Aristotelean principles properly understood. In any event, in the course of our chat the classic case of Schrödinger’s Cat came up.  Also, in our chat, in reference to the BC agitprop workshop I observed that, right now, those who are undermining Catholic teaching with ambiguity and chatter about “lived experience” have jettisoned the principle of non-contradiction.

Yes indeed.

An observation that many bloggers have been noticing for quite some time now.

Moreover, what might be the case is that the “2+2=5” tweet might have been employed as a strategic “tool” used to disarm the observations of the violation of the Second Law of Though, i.e. the PNC

Think about it, if 2+2 can equal 5, and on a regular basis, due to the FrancisDiscovery, i.e. the “god of surprises”, how significant can the violation of an arcane and long forgotten philosophical precept, such as the Principle of Non-Contradiction be?

Well, according to “Father 2+2=5” Spadaro and TeamFrancis, hardly any significance can be assigned to the violation of the PNC, is what they would want you to think.

Note bene: please read the comment box on this one. It is very insightful.

But back to the story. Over on another website, this one dedicated to the sub-set of human activity known in academia as “Education”, we get a post titled Mathematics – The New Social Justice! This post appears on a website named: Americas Education Watch.

In this post, the following can be read: (emphasis added)

All of you parents whose children are in the IB Program – are you aware that is a UN/UNESCO curriculum that is Marxist/socialist and in a very subtle way, and costs your schools millions in the long run and the worst of all, it is proprietary and must be accepted for what it teaches – nothing can be changed and textbooks come from them. It does not have to conform to our education curriculum.

One of the first things that really rocked me was in how our children were to learn math and the fact that it didn’t matter if the answers were correct or not, but how they had obtained their answers. So, what I had heard was true, 2+2 = 4 was not the only answer a person could have for this equation; 1+2 could equal 4, 5+4 could equal 4 – it was all ok, just the way you worked the problems and came to your answer was important.


And the author then does some “dot connecting” of her own. Here is that passage:

Many of us who are researching and complaining about how education has been “handled” for the past 10 years (it has been longer but has intensified in the past 10 years through the UN and their wacky “social justice” they apply to whatever as the need arises) understand what is behind this ugly race-baiting.


A recent article by D. Susan Berry “Common Core Rooted in Math Social Indoctrination” states, “While proponents of the Common Core claim that the new standards are focused on “college and career readiness,” more evidence is surfacing that a central purpose of the initiative is social justice and income redistribution indoctrination.

I agree, and as I stated in my 2 previous postings regarding the G20, Link, Link, the UN and all their supporters who believe they will someday rule the world, know their focus must be in indoctrinating our children to not only believe in “sustainable development”, but support it without question.

And what better way then through a post-modernist ideology masquerading as religion? But I digress…

And then the author concludes by naming one such supporter:

Sorry liberals and UN baiters, most Americans got past your race baiting years ago. We have learned to look at the person not the color of his skin. The next thing to come out will be the use of Math and other subjects as the basis for our distrust of Muslims.

For me, I read their Quŕan to understand where they are coming from!

Social Justice is what “they” are using to say capitalism has created the poor and inequality of the world. Those two items have been around since Moses and yet Pope Francis, the very Pope who shakes hands with Rick Warren acknowledging “Chrislam” states “inequality is the root of social evil”.

And I thought it was man’s fallen nature.

But let’s move on…


I for one will not share what I have worked for to survive for so many years with others unless I deem them needy which is called Charity, not social justice. I follow no lead or instructions of a socialist Pope who cannot even keep his own house but is looking away or participating in the indoctrination of our children through phony ideology and perception.

Concluding, and leaving aside the anti-Catholic Church comments, what I see happening is that it is not just the Catholic bloggers who are discerning the OBJECTIVE REALITY in which they find themselves.

And judging!

As we know from our favorite Anti-Forced Migration Support blog, Refugee Resettlement Watch, it is the multinational NGO’s and the big Foundations, working hand in hand with the United Nations who are behind this. Individuals like George Soros are just the front men. And people like Francis, the bishop of Rome are just the tools.

Which brings me to the best news of all. Over in the comment box of Fr. Z., we get this:

OK. I’m on board!

And after reading the above, and on top of the RadTrad Thomist blog coming on line recently, I have been left with a warm fuzzy feeling inside.

And this is good because I have a looooong week at work waiting ahead of me.

So Who’s Funding Francis? Same Old, Same Old…


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In a post from the 18th of January 2016, titled By Their Fruits You Shall Know Them, your humble blogger tried to shed some light on the funding side of FrancisChurch.

We led that post off with a video of some young FrancisIdeologue making the post-modernist claim that “3 x 4 can equal 11”. Now this video predates the infamous Spadaro post-modernist claim that “2+2=5”.

It’s not a coincidence, is it Dr. Peterson?

And the similarities don’t end there.

Today we get a report coming out of the Washington Free Beacon. It would appear that the usual suspects have been dipping their finger… or rather opening their collective checkbook in the current “revolutionary” environment that is all the rage in Washington D.C.

What is of interest though is that there is the BIG REVOLUTIONARY MONEY, but not a whole lot after that. It would appear as if the MONIED CLASSES are the only ones funding the revolution.

Which would mean that if the MONEY stops flowing, the TROUBLES end.

And that includes the Francis bishopric of Rome.

So the next time you are thinking about throwing something more than a dime into the collection plate, think real hare…

PS There’s better ways to fund your local church and clergy, while starving the local ordinary and his minders behind the Sacred Vatican Walls.

Via ZeroHedge (see here)…


Soros, Kellogg, Ford: Donor List Of AntiTrump ‘Resistance’ Group Revealed

The Center for Community Change Action (CCCA), a Washington, D.C.-based 501 (c)(3) progressive community organizing group and contributor to the anti-Trump “Resistance” movement, counts some of the most prominent American families among its impressive donor base.  Unfortunately, at least for those donors, their staggering contributions to the secretive group have just been revealed by The Washington Free Beacon and include massive multi-million dollar grants from George Soros, the Kellogg Foundation and the Ford Foundation, among others.

The Free Beacon has obtained the group’s unredacted 2015 tax forms that shed light on its funders, who provide millions of dollars in assistance. The group appears to rely heavily on a few major liberal foundations, organizations, and unions.

The Center for Community Change’s largest contribution was $3,000,000 from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, which was initially created by Will Kellogg, the food manufacturer and founder of Kellogg Company. The Ford Foundation, which was first created by the founders of the Ford Motor Company, added a $2,350,000 donation. The Open Society Foundation, a foundation run by liberal billionaire mega-donor George Soros, gave $1,750,000 to the Center for Community Change.

Other donors to the organization include the California Endowment, which gave $524,500; the Marquerite Casey Foundation, which gave $515,000; Fidelity Charitable Gift, which donated $505,100; and the National Immigration Law Center, which gave $316,000.

Of course, if you thought a $1.8 million contribution from a prominent, billionaire progressive like George Soros was a little stingy, you were right…that’s why he also contributed to CCCA’s various sister organizations, including a $1.5 million donation to their “Social Welfare” arm.

The Center for Community Change Action, the “social welfare” (c)(4) arm of the group, additionally relies on a handful of donors for almost all of its funding, according to its documents that do not include the privacy redactions.

Donors to its “social welfare” arm in 2015 included Every Citizen Counts ($1,750,000 contribution), a nonprofit that was created by allies of Hillary Clinton to mobilize Latino and African-American voters; the Open Society Policy Center ($1,475,000), another Soros group; the Sixteen Thirty Fund ($610,000), a progressive advocacy group; Center for Community Change ($150,000); Services Employees International Union (SEIU) ($150,000); Atlantic Philanthropies ($75,000); and the Tides Foundation ($50,000), the largest liberal donor-advised network, among other funders.

So what did CCCA spend all that money on? Well, if you guessed Black Lives Matter and “Sanctuary Campus” anti-Trump protests then you’re absolutely correct.

The Emergent Fund gives grants ranging from $10,000 to $50,000 and has provided financing to Black Lives Matter; the Center for Media Justice, which was created to “organize the most under-represented communities in a national movement for media rights”; the Muslim Anti-Racism Collaborative; and United We Dream, the largest immigrant youth-led organization in the United States.

The Center for Community Change later joined United We Dream for nationwide immigration protests leading up to Trump’s inauguration. United We Dream was additionally behind “sanctuary campus” anti-Trump protests across the country to protect undocumented students.

Unfortunately, despite their best efforts, it appears that all of CCCA’s progressive activism was about as effective as the $1.2 billion that Hillary spent on her 2016 campaign.