Tags
#fakenarratives, #fakenews, chastity belts, Chlamydia trachomatis, Cryptosporidium, Cultural Marxism, Deconstructionism, Dr. Curt Doolittle, Father Anthony Cekada, Fox News, Francis Effect, FrancisChurch - In Liquidation, Frankfurt School, FSSP, Genderism, George Soros, Germany, Giardia lamblia, Gonorrhea, Great Cardinal, Havana, Hemorrhoids, heretical pope, Herpes simplex virus, hippies, HIV, Holy Year of Mercy, Human immunodeficiency virus, Human papilloma virus, Humanism, Isospora belli, Jacque Derrida, James O'Keefe, Jesuits, Jesus Christ, Joseph Ratzinger, Jozef Pilsudski, Keynes, Keynesian Economics, Kirill I, Krakow, Law of Unintended Consequences, messeging, Mexico City, Microsporidia, Miracle on the Vistula, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Nassim Taleb, neo-modernism, Neo-Pagan, Net Neutrality, new springtime, New York Times, Nigel Farage, Pagan Christians, pathological, Poland, Polish Bolshevik War 1920, Pontifical High Mass, Pope Pius VI, President Andrzej Duda, Project Veritas, r/K Selection Theory, Raymond Burke, Refugee Resettlement Watch blog, Republic of Poland, retained foreign bodies, risk event, Roman Curia, s "c"atholicZombie, s "theological structuring", s ABC News, s ABERRO AGENDA, s aberro-sex agenda, s AIDS, s Ambiguity, s Anal Cancer, s Ann Corcoran, s anorectal traum, s Archbishop of Warsaw- Praga, s Associated Press, s Austria, s Benedict XVI, s Bergoglio, s Big Gender, s Bio-History, s Boris Johnson, s BREXIT, s Card. Muller, s Cardinal Burke, s Cardinal Kazimierz Nycz, s cardinal Walter Kasper, s Catholic Church, s Chapel of the Holy Trinity, s Pope Francis, Saul Alinsky, sCatholic Church in Poland, Sexually transmitted diseases, spirit of Vatican II, SSPX, St Thomas Aquinas, sustainability, Synod 2014, Synod of Filth, Syphilis25, Tags anal fissures, Tags Black Lives Matter, Team Bergoglio, The Remnant, The Scholasticum, theological deconstructionism, Thomism, Tradition, TransRational, Truth, Unjust ruler, Vatican II, Work of Human Hands, Zombie, ZombieBishop, ZombieChurch
Over the last couple of days, your humble blogger has been posting on the subject of #FAKE NARRATIVES. And just as a quick refresher, fake narratives based on #fakenews create a VIRTUAL REALITY that is then used in a GASLIGHTING PROCESS to convince the gullible viewer that what he is seeing is in fact real.
The problem with virtual realities is that they are not sustainable. The reason being that they do not conform to OBJECTIVE REALITY. And as has been pointed out time and again, eventually… 2+2 must equal 4.
The PROCESS by which the various virtual realities meet objective reality is through what we have labeled as the CONVERGENCE PROCESS.
So over the last few days, we have been identifying some of the CONVERGENCE PROCESSES that are playing themselves out in real time. One is what is known as the OBAMAGATE where the VIRTUAL REALITY is being played out by Special Council Mueller while the OBJECTIVE REALITY is being defined by the three Congressional Committees and the Inspector General.
Another CONVERGENCE PROCESS has played itself out this past Sunday in Italy where the VIRTUAL REALITY had the populist 5 Star Movement locked in a tie with the major post-Communist Leftist party, namely the Partito Democratico (PD) at roughly 28% of the vote respectively. And when this VIRTUAL REALITY was reconciled with OBJECTIVE REALITY, namely the Italian voters, it turned out that 5 Star Movement had 32% while the PD didn’t even get 19% of the vote. Needless to say, this threw the entire post election government forming process into a unknown scenario since the most votes were, unexpectedly received by the Center Right coalition represented by Matteo Salvini, Giorgia Meloni and Silvio Berlusconi.
And finally, another instance in which this CONVERGENCE PROCESS is presently playing itself out, and one first identified many, many months ago by your humble blogger is what can be called the Jordan Peterson PHENOMENON. Since November and December of 2016, this blog has observed and chronicled the intrinsic Catholic nature of the subject matter of the clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson’s lectures and various talks. Dr. Peterson’s work can be viewed as the OBJECTIVE REALITY that he is attempting to discern while the post-conciliar FrancisTheology of Death ™ would be the VIRTUAL REALITY that is heading head long into a collision with OBJECTIVE REALITY. The support for the above HYPOTHESIS would be that this intrinsic Catholic nature of Dr. Peterson’s work is now being recognized by individuals and publications who specialize in the theological and ecclesiastical sub-set of the Visibilium Omnium. (see here, here and here just to mention three)
So today your humble blogger transitions to the ECCLESIASTICAL side of the Visibilium Omnium and shine the disinfecting sunlight onto the above identified VIRTUAL REALITY.
Over at Father Z’s blog we find a post titled Pew Research Center looks at Pope Francis’ numbers 5 years into his pontificate. Drilling into the source document of this post, namely the Pew Research poll, we find the following table:
So all in all, Francis is relatively “popular”, i.e. more popular than Pope Benedict XVI but less popular than Pope JPII “the great”.
Yet we know from our sensory data, i.e. observations from the crowd sizes at the FrancisEvents at St. Peter’s Square, that the crowd size estimates taken by the Vatican officials are running at less than 30% of those crowds that were present for similar events under the previous two Pontiff’s.
So it would appear that there is a disconnect.
Further, in that same research post, we get the following graphs:
The above graph could be understood to represent what could be called the “internal” components of the research results. And these internals are showing the following:
- During the period from 2014 to 2018, the percentage of US Catholics who have a Favorable opinion of Francis decreased from 85% to 84%, while those US Catholics who have an Unfavorable opinion of Francis increased from 4% to 9%.
- During the period from 2015 to 2018, the percentage of US Catholics who say Compassionate ( 94% to 94%) and Humble (91% and 91%) describes Francis did not change.
- During the period from 2015 to 2018, the percentage of US Catholics who held the position that Francis is a Major change for the better dropped from 69% to 58%, while those who say that Francis is a Major change for the worse increased from 3% to 7%. (Those claiming that Francis is Not a major change also increased from 17% to 26%.)
So those are the raw data points. But when looking at these numbers on a percentage change basis, we are a witness to quite an important PHENOMENON. Here is the table with the percentage change figures:
Several observations about the above percentage change table.
First, over the time period measured, the general satisfaction with Francis’ tenure at the bishopric of Rome can be characterized by strong evidence of “dissatisfaction”.
Among those who were “favorably disposed” toward Francis in 2014, we see a slight decrease of this favorability ratings (-1%) and a larger drop in the opinion that Francis is a “change agent for the better (-16%).
Among those who presently view Francis’ reign as unfavorable, that number more than doubled (+125%) and those who saw Francis as a “change agent for the worse”, well this group increased by the most (+133%).
The second observation is with respect to the absolute values represented in this poll. If we return to our post titled What Terrifies FrancisChurch, Whether They Know It Or Not… (w/Update), the following passage appears:
“When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas. It would literally take the amount of time comparable to the age of the universe for this size group to reach the majority,” said SCNARC Director Boleslaw Szymanski, the Claire and Roland Schmitt Distinguished Professor at Rensselaer. “Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame.”
So if we were to assume that those respondents to the Pew Research poll who hold an unfavorable opinion of Francis (9%) and who think that his bishopric of Rome is a major change for the worse (7%) are those who can be classified as “committed opinion holders”, then what we are seeing is the approach to that 10% tipping point that the researchers from the SCNARC identified.
Concluding, it is unfortunate that we have no data about what proportion of those 9% of the respondents who hold an unfavorable opinion of Francis or those 7% of respondents who think that this bishopric of Rome is a major change for the worse, can be classified as “committed opinion holders”.
However, we can observe the reaction by the decision makers behind the Sacred Vatican Walls to any developments that arise from within this “dissatisfied opinion holders” subset of the Faithful. Here are just three recent examples:
The Escalating War Against Orthodox Catholicism
Buzzfeed Does A Hit Piece on Father Z
For conservatives, sowing confusion
Therefore, what can be observed is that the threat of Tradition to the status quo, post-conciliar FrancisChurch is being treated so seriously, that the powers that be have reached out to the mainstream #fakenews, corporate owned media to try and shore up their #FAKENARRATIVE.
Yet, these desperate actions also contain an embedded SIGNALING EFFECT. What is being signaled is a demonstrable weakness of the post-conciliar position. An example of this is a very powerful cardinal instructing the Faithful not to call him, TeamFrancis and Francis himself HERETICS.
A further sign of the weakness is the overt threats that appear almost daily. Here is one of the latest ones, a threat that Francis is getting ready to change the Traditional Calander and Lectionary to destroy the Traditional Latin Rite.
And then there are the young…
And finally, this:
So all in all, looks like the “young (at heart)” FrancisChurch is rapidly heading toward its tipping point…
Wonder if the Cardinals are watching?
Richard Malcolm said:
Another small data point:
Astonishing.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
And how’s this for astonising!
Card. Sarah at University of Toronto, Dr. Peterson’s home turf. The Card. lecture gets sold out so they have to find a bigger venue. Now it will be held in the Cathedral!
It’s like the Holy Spirit is trying to show us the right path.
Far be it for me to claim something is the work of the Holy Spirit, but a good case can be made…
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/livestream-of-cardinal-sarah-speaking-in-toronto-monday-at-7-p.m
LikeLike
Richard Malcolm said:
I just saw that you’d already tweeted on this one – and the Cardinal Sarah lecture. (I also see that Mark Thomas did so as well, and as usual, his objection was offbase there, too – the full video of the liturgy shows plenty of empty seats, though the camera angles make you work to get a good view).
Let me say this about Cardinal Sarah. I know the staff at one of the most prominent Catholic retail booksellers (located in a certain basilica) in the country. Cardinal Sarah’s two big books have sold out at least a dozen times each over the past year; they are among the biggest sellers they have. The staff marvels at it. Meanwhile, despite aggressive advertising for Pope Francis books, including a big permanent display table at the very front door and various online promotions for web sales, they simply do not sell very many Francis books at all. They just stay stacked and collect dust.
Just more anecdotes, one may say. But reasonable evidence to support the conclusion that Pope Francis’s popularity, such as it is, is for the most part a mile wide and an inch deep. And that Cardinal Sarah really does seem to have acquired a substantial following.
LikeLike
Mark Thomas said:
“Michael Dowd said…”I have a thought for you to consider Mark. Given the great popularity of Pope Francis why do you need to continue to defend him?”
Hello, Mister Dowd.
The defense of a person doesn’t depend upon one’s popularity. We are called as Catholics to defend the truth — always and everywhere. As Catholics, we are a family. We defend our Pope. We defend each other.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches:
2477: “Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty: of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
2479: “…everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect.”
===============================================================
As a Catholic, God has called me…called you…to defend, in this case, Pope Francis. Mister Dowd, that is why I defend His Holiness Pope Francis.
By the way, Pope Venerable Pius XII, for example, is viewed by many as “Hitler’s Pope.” Pope Venerable Pius XII enjoyed, and continues to enjoy, great popularity among millions of Catholics.
Mister Dowd, despite his popularity, should we cease to defend Pope Venerable Pius XII?
===============================================================
Again, a person’s popularity level doesn’t have anything to do with the question as to whether we should defend a person when he or she is attacked.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
LikeLike
Richard Malcolm said:
I’m really looking forward to your defenses of Honorius, Stephen VI, John XII, Benedict IX, and Alexander VI, which are surely overdue at this point.
LikeLike
Mark Thomas said:
Mister Malcolm, what does your post have to do with nonsense, against which he should be defended, that has been spread against His Holiness Pope Francis?
LikeLike
Richard Malcolm said:
I’m just trying to determine if there is any action by a pope you won’t defend – or even praise.
LikeLike
Mark Thomas said:
DM said…”The “Holy People of God”? “Who even uses this ridiculous phrase?”
1. The Holy Catholic Church.
2. The ancient Divine Liturgy.
Just prior to Holy Communion, the Deacon says: “Let us be attentive.”
The priest says: “The Holy Gifts for the Holy People of God.”
DM, you are unaware that the phrase “The Holy People of God” is an ancient Catholic liturgical text?
DM, you are unaware that the Catholic phrase in question is based upon Sacred Scripture?
Example: Douay-Rheims Bible, Book Of Deuteronomy, Chapter 14, verse 2:
“Because thou art a holy people to the Lord thy God:”
===================================================
DM, why do you term as “ridiculous” the Catholic phrase “Holy People of God”?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
LikeLike
DM said:
I term your use of it as ridiculous because no one uses that phrase in everyday conversation, ever, with the exception of only the most radical of the Novus Ordo modernists. So please stop.
LikeLike
Mark Thomas said:
Everybody knows that the Holy People of God view His Holiness Pope Francis favorably. On the local level, at parishes near me, I have heard one person after another praise our holy Pope Francis.
Pope Francis is a great Culture of Life Pontiff…has promoted life, condemned abortion, the homosexual lobby, Masonry…insisted that marriage is between a man and woman only…insisted that Catholics keep Sunday holy…
…promoted Confession repeatedly…warned repeatedly about Satan…promoted Indulgences…
…even the likes of Rorate Caeli, who despise His Holiness, acknowledged that Pope Francis’ Social and economic teachings are traditional.
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/06/truth-be-told-pope-francis-more-often.html
“…the positions stated by Pope Francis on economic and social matters are much closer to the Traditional Catholic position on the economy and the State than not. Indeed, it can be said unhesitatingly that this is one area in which the Pope will find mostly allies in Traditional Catholics.”
========================================================
Okay…we know that Pope Francis has time and again promoted the True Religion.
We know that His Holiness Pope Francis enjoys great popularity among the Holy People of God.
We required a poll to inform us of that?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
LikeLike
DM said:
The “Holy People of God”? And just who would that be, Mark? The vast majority of so-called Catholics who support homosexuality and every other sin you can think of, and thus would approve of a modernist worldling like Pope Francis? Who even uses this ridiculous phrase? I guess Mark only considers people holy if they are papolatrists like himself.
LikeLike
Michael Dowd said:
I have a thought for you to consider Mark. Given the great popularity of Pope Francis why do you need to continue to defend him?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ritter derImmaculata said:
I agree about the approaching 10% ‘tipping point’ but I’m also not very surprised at this:
>So all in all, Francis is relatively “popular”, i.e. more popular than Pope Benedict XVI but less popular than Pope JPII “the great”.
I’ve heard the argument made that JPII was worse in some respects yet he was popular, pretty sure you could just about make a poll on the popularity of any pope and it would be 70+ by default, most people just don’t think about the man in white, his ideas or ideas in general. There’s no indication that many people care or even that an orthodox pope would have good ‘ratings’ with the masses, he would be labeled anti-semite, racist, bigot, hater and all the usual stuff we hear from the ‘free press’ about people we absolutely should not support (for our own good).
See:
LikeLike
Aqua said:
It struck me, after watching your Jordan Peterson video link, that Professor Peterson is like Socrates. He has a full grip on the truth without, perhaps, divine revelation and the Grace of God to arrive at the fullness of Truth. After ancient Socrates prepared the philosophical ground, then came Jesus into the pagan world; faith and reason were fully met out of which the Church was born. Peterson is highly convincing. Those who disagree are powerless to stop him. Like Socrates, he is hated for that.
Jordan Peterson reminds me of Bishop Fulton Sheen. If our Bishops had an ounce of the intellectual bravery and capacity of Peterson, and the devotion to Christ of Bishop Sheen, there would be no Pope Francis. And if there were a Pope Francis, he would be rocked back on his heels and the Church and our world would be a different place.
Perhaps those days are coming. Perhaps Jordan Peterson is Socrates in a modern drama waiting a future divine intervention of Grace in the world.
I am inspired by Peterson’s unalloyed, fearless defense of intellectual truth. I pray for Peterson’s conversion to the one, true faith. May God protect him from the secular wolves.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
HI:
Yes. There is an appropriate analogy there. I often thought that Christ came when he did not because of anything the Jews did, but because human development, i.e. Greece had advance to the point where the masses could understand God’s instructions to his creation.
I’ve often thought about why Christ spoke in parables whereas the Prophets spoke in specific rules. It must have been the stage of development of abstract thinking that made the coming of Our Lord possible.
Anyways, Faith and Reason is what make Catholicism the ONE TRUE FAITH.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wanda said:
As the scandals continue to rack up, it becomes increasingly difficult to support this Pope. We now know he dismantled the CDF individuals in charge of rooting out the corruption and punishing offenders. His support of Barros was suicidal. That alone would have taken down a secular government. Anyway, they continue their assault; see this report: French Sisters Persecuted by the Vatican.
https://gloria.tv/article/agexWu1EHfYF3a9zntVMiC2eT
LikeLike
Michael Dowd said:
I don’t think the Pew poll means much. It appears very much like our last Presidential polling to increase despondency; in the case of Francis to not show a decrease in popularity. The Pew poll looks too pat. We would have to see the actual numbers of Catholics polled by liberal, conservative, traditional categories. My guess is the reality is much worse than Pew indicates. As you pointed out Sam, the numbers who show up in St Peter’s square has dwindled dramatically, a number of negative books have come out and the trend on the conservative blogs is down significantly.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
Yes. Definately fake polls.
Could also be that which Ritter mentioned above. People just don’t care and don’t want to say they don’t like the pope. It’s like saying you don’t like apple pie. Confirmation bias is the technical term.
What is key is that the Cardinals get it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ana Milan (@ana_milan999) said:
I notice a decided amount of Catholics at last waking up. Both the Barros affair & betrayal of Chinese Catholics has made a great impact with apparently second thoughts being given to the outcry by laity, see “Vatican-China deal is a very long way off if it’s even done at all” by Fr. Michael Kelly@international.la-croix.com.
LikeLiked by 1 person
S. Armaticus said:
China is really connecting with the US Catholics.
LikeLike
Mark Wauck said:
Too bad there’s no breakdown on those responses according to demographic criteria, like: age, sex, frequency of mass attendance, agreement with church teaching, amount of financial contributions, etc. Then we might see some REALLY interesting data points. But I’ll bet that Church leaders already have some of those answers, and aren’t eager to share them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
S. Armaticus said:
With a very high level of certainty we can say that those 7% and 9% respectively are individuals who have a good idea of what is happening in the Church. And these people want change.
And that is why I think that we are getting to that 10% tipping point.
LikeLike
Mark Wauck said:
My belief, too.
LikeLike
Richard Malcolm said:
Even allowing for the detachment from Church news by most Catholics, and the still-robust papalotry which has been at work for so many decades, I must say that 7% and 9% are profoundly depressing numbers to me.
LikeLike
Michael Dowd said:
I don’t believe the numbers in view of the reality “on the ground” as they say.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Richard Malcolm said:
Based on what I see and hear, I doubt they’re a whole lot higher than that, I’m afraid.
LikeLike
Richard Malcolm said:
Mass attendance rates would, indeed, be helpful.
As we know, according to CARA – which seems most reliable on this – American Mass attendance rates are something around 20-24% now. So what do those who actually do attend at least once per week think? This cohort, indeed, will be disproportionately influential.
LikeLike
S. Armaticus said:
I think something is afoot, just by the Francis attacks on the Trads. They must be seeing something. I don’t think you can see it on the surface since Catholics aren’t really the revolutionary types.
Maybe it’s the collections?
LikeLike