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


Today’s post will be a consolidation effort to tie in many of the themes that your humble blogger has been writing about over the last few months. This effort is being undertaken to provide a bird’s eye view of the contemporary STRUCTURE of belief systems that exists in OBJECTIVE REALITY. It should also provide a map of the battle sites and a why the battles are being fought… and where they are being fought.

Your humble blogger is doing this to provide CONTEXT to the video above.

Nota bene: I have embedded a video from the 4th of July 2017 for your viewing pleasure. The individuals can be considered as conservative Catholics. Please listen closely and pay attention to the broadcast, so that you can get a good idea as to where they stand with respect to the crisis in the post-conciliar church. I will return to this video at the end of the post.

And this:

Oh my! It don’t get any better than this! But I digress…

Before we get to the video, a short consolidation is in order…

If one was to ask this humble blogger how he sees the lay of the land in terms of BELIEF SYSTEMS, the picture in the minds eye would look like this above. Going through the individual elements, here is how they can be characterized:

I. Indefectible Church– This is the pillar of the post-conciliar church. The Indefectible Church has been kept inside the post-conciliar church in order provide the post-conciliar church with legitimacy. A good example of this can be seen in the situation with the Bologna School. This organization makes the claim that post-conciliar church is a break with the past Roman Catholic Church. Yet even Francis is unwilling to officially make this the claim of the post-conciliar church, since that would create a legitimacy problem.

Currently the visible element of the Indefectible Church is the Ecclesia Dei Commission, yet the Indefectible Church can also be seen in places like those Traditional orders that Francis is suppressing, or the Diocese of Lincoln, the Diocese of Madison and more recently the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.

The Indefectible Church’s philosophical framework is Thomism. The Indefectible Church is founded on the Divine Law, as known through “natural light of human reason from the things that are made” (NATURAL LAW) and through “divine revelation.” (NATURAL MORAL LAW). The NATURAL LAW is understood through the scientific method, while the NATURAL MORAL LAW is understood through the interpretation using TRADITION. This knowledge we have about these two elements of ONTOLOGICAL REALITY is what is known collectively as the Deposit of Faith which in turn is contained in the Universal Magisterium.

II. The post-conciliar church is the religious sect (IDEOLOGY44:00 minute mark wherein Dr. Peterson informs about the futility of creating a new religion and defines the secular definition for what constitutes a religion) that grew out of the Indefectible Church. The main characteristic that would place any element within this category is that these people/organizations have partial acceptance (fragmented religion, using same symbolic under-structure but only tell part of the story)  of the Catholic Deposit of Faith (by definition an IDEOLOGY), while being inside the formal organizational structures.

The post-conciliar church’s philosophical framework is Phenomenological. Phenomenology is the study of the structures of experience and consciousness. Therefore, this “philosophy” is based on the third pillar of the ONTOLOGICAL REALITY, the existence of human conscience. But while ONTOLOGICAL REALITY uses the conscience to understand the external OBJECTIVE REALITY (Natural Law and Natural Moral Law), the phenomenologists use conscience to examine and understand: “experiences and conscience itself”.  Therefore this school is exactly analogous and represents that which in the Church is known as the Modernist heresy (Vital Immanence), as defined in the Papal Encyclical Pascendi Domini Gregis.

III. The third group of entities in the diagram above are the different post WWII “movements” such as the Focolore, the German gov. funded Sant’Egidio and those whacky Neocatechumens, etc. These post-conciliar sects conform to the Catholic Magisterium to a varying degree, which allows them to be considered “post-conciliar catholic”, yet they have created separate organizational structure (parishes, seminaries, schools, governance, belief systems, etc.)

What is also TRUE about these sects is that they have not separated formally from the post-conciliar church. The reason for this organizational structure is that these sects need the post-conciliar church to supply them with their adherents (members) and funding to a varying degree.

IV. And finally, the protestant sects. These sects do not differ from those in Category III (post-conciliar sects) in terms of where they fall on the BELIEF SYSTEMS continuum, but they have formally separated for the Catholic Church.

Now that we have an understanding of the lay of the land, we can move over to a post containing an interview with one of Francis’ ghost writers, one Archbishop “Tucho” Fernandez. Here is what he has to say about the above BELIEF SYSTEMS STRUCTURE and how Francis sees the “evolution” of this structure going forward:

Would it be possible to have a pope without Vatican or away from the Vatican?

“The Roman Curia is not an essential structure. The pope could even go and live away from Rome, have a dicastery in Rome and another one in Bogota, and perhaps link-up by teleconference with liturgical experts that live in Germany. Gathered around the pope, in a theological sense, is the College of Bishops in order to serve the people.”

So what Francis sees going forward, as explained by his closest adviser, is a “decentralized” church, comprised of various “post-conciliar movement”.

To this end, the Curia is the major problem for Francis. So Francis wages war with the Curia. Furthermore, the Indefectible Church is a problem for Francis, so he wages war with the Indefectible Church. In contrast to the Curia and the Indefectible Church, the post-conciliar sects are not a problem for Francis, in fact they appear to be a solution. So Francis is very kind to these folks.

Moving on, here is how Francis, as per his ghost writer, sees the end game: (see here)

What is the most popular message inside and outside the Church?  

 In the case of Francis, I believe that his constant invitation, with words and gestures, to return to the Gospel‘s original freshness and to its heart made of mercy and justice for the weakest, will not be forgotten. At the same time, the call for a stripped Church, more joyful and able to open up to dialogue and service, will not end. Even if somebody in the future will try to go back in this regard, I believe that Francis’ great and irreversible reform, which has already been achieved, consists in the fact that a reversal will hardly be accepted. Who would ever think that after Francis, a papacy of condemnations parading power and wealth, that is not willing to dialogue with everyone, that ignores the weak of this world, could ever flourish? 

So what we see in the above is the good Archbishop making the claim that: Francis’ INTENT with respect to his “reforms”, is that they should be IRREVERSIBLE.

Further in the same interview we get this:

The various reforms of the Roman Curia bodies are still on their way. How important are structural reforms?   

These reforms are very important, but they are also the most “reversible”. Another Pope can come and create a huge Curia. In addition, the people who will be in these bodies will be decisive. But I believe that Francis was able to “de-idealize” the Vatican Curia – as well and forever, which should be seen only as an organization at service of the Pope, that does not replace the Pope or the bishops.

So what we see in these interviews is that the focus of the Francis “IRREVERSIBLE” reforms is the CURIA and the INDEFECTIBLE CHURCH.

The problem that Francis has is that whatever he does, the next bishop of Rome could come along and reverse it.

The only means by which Francis thinks that he can make these FrancisReforms permanent is through what is known as “moral suasion” or “the “appeal to “morality” in order to influence or change behavior”.

And this, like everything else that Bergoglio touched, has been one big EPIC FAILURE!

Yet, the #fakenews media is still on side, so there still is OBAMA HOPIUM!

So Francis plods along with his two prong strategy of:

the SoapBubblePapacy™ using the #fakenews media and the #fakenews catholic media to keep him “popular”,


appeal (pander) to the largest constituency within the universal post-conciliar church, namely The POOR. A la Evita Peron!

Given the above, what we have witnessed over the last five years is the systematic  implementation of this FrancisStrategy.

Which leaves one big question, how OBJECTIVELY permanent is this FrancisStrategy in FACT?

The answer to that question comes by way of Ed Pentin and Patrick Coffin and a 4th of July 2017 broadcast. In the above video, at the 24:00 minute mark, we get this exchange:

Patrick Coffin: One thing that Catholics of a certain stripe do is that they look at a Magisterial document as it is like unto holy writ. That it’s unchangeable, that it’s immutable. I can think of a couple of examples that it’s shown not to be the case. One of them is in the description of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, with respect to Capital Punishment, which was amended in light of Evangelium vitea. Also the treatment of lying, the description there was in a subsequent edition amended. It was edited under the direction of John Paul II. I wonder if some of Pope Francis’ magisterial might be subject to similar future amendments?


Ed Pentin: Well that could come. Pope Francis’ successor could easily put those things right.

Someone told me that … his successor could put a lot of this stuff right in a month! But others are concerned that it could take a generation to actually put some of what Francis has done back into what they would consider more orthodox direction.

So the answer to time needed to fix the FrancisProblem is from ONE MONTH to ONE GENERATION!.

But there doesn’t appear to be any question that the FrancisDocuments need fixing.

And then we get this gem, which in the humble opinion of this even more humble blogger, is a good representation of where the ‘mind of the post-conciliar” church is at present.

In a question that Patrick posed at the 35:25 minute mark, this was the exchange:

Ed Pentin: Well, I also think it’s (clash of Civilizations) here in the Vatican. They don’t also want to talk about the clash of the Civilizations because they don’t want this to happen. There’s a feeling that if you talk about this, it might happen. (The exact definition of Magic Thinking)


And also I think it’s because the answer has to be Christ. And going back to Christ and going back to the TRUE FAITH and the Catholic Church. And I think perhaps there’s a wish to avoid that, to avoid realizing that. And I think that’s the only answer.


And with that little bit of OBJECTIVE REALITY, I wish all my dear and loyal readers a pleasant weekend!