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

So I’ve taken a few days off from blogging, since it’s been busy at work and the hour (or two) I usually spend writing, has been cutting into my sleep time.

Yet that is not the entire story. Over the last few months – maybe longer, I have observed a CONVERGENCE within the mainstream Catholic blogs, or rather that which they write about. In fact, the army of these bloggers has become so large, whatever I would want to write about, has already been written about before I even sit down at my keyboard. So in most instances, this humble blogger has nothing to add.

What’s more, when they write about various aspects of the SHIT-SHOW that is the current bishopric of Rome, they have correctly identified the underlying PROBLEMS, and we all are singing from the same hyme-sheet. The FOCUS of these writers and bloggers is really “taking it to” the corrupt TEAMFRANCIS, which is under continuous assault as they sit inside the Sacred Vatican Walls.

The latest “best one” is here, followed by this one here. But I digress…

So much so, that the “TERROR”Francis, in an attempt to rebut the Catholic writer’s and blogger’s precise and prescient criticism, was forced to devote an entire FrancisDocument to this PHENOMENON, and his CDF even issued it’s own FrancisDocument (Placuit Deo) to… help the brother out.

As to the well deserved The TERRORFRANCIS moniker itself…

… as a friendly reminder before we start, this footnote here:

[73] Detraction and calumny are acts of terrorism: a bomb is thrown, it explodes and the attacker walks away calm and contented. This is completely different from the nobility of those who speak to others face to face, serenely and frankly, out of genuine concern for their good.

… comes from the guy whose “personal magisterium” is this HERE.

As to the part about speaking “face to face”, the 2 remaining Dubia Cardinals are still waiting…

Be that as it may, that is not the part that I want to highlight in this post.

This part begins here and is the following:

134.  Like the prophet Jonah, we are constantly tempted to flee to a safe haven. It can have many names: individualism, spiritualism, living in a little world, addiction, intransigence, the rejection of new ideas and approaches, dogmatism, nostalgia, pessimism, hiding behind rules and regulations. We can resist leaving behind a familiar and easy way of doing things. Yet the challenges involved can be like the storm, the whale, the worm that dried the gourd plant, or the wind and sun that burned Jonah’s head. For us, as for him, they can serve to bring us back to the God of tenderness, who invites us to set out ever anew on our journey.

Or to paraphrase one “Fr.” Antonio Spadaro: “2+2 doesn’t necessarily equal 4 on our ‘anew journey'”.

Drilling down into the above passage, your humble blogger would like to focus on the “spiritualism” bit.

Now, Francis appears to have discovered…, or rather should I say “discerned” a new type of “spiritualism” that’s not like the old spiritualism nor like any other forms of “spiritualism” that either exist or existed in the Catholic Church before.

For this new FrancisSpiritualism, he has “poster children” in mind:

142. Each community is called to create a “God-enlightened space in which to experience the hidden presence of the risen Lord”.[105] Sharing the word and celebrating the Eucharist together fosters fraternity and makes us a holy and missionary community. It also gives rise to authentic and shared mystical experiences. Such was the case with Saints Benedict and Scholastica. We can also think of the sublime spiritual experience shared by Saint Augustine and his mother, Saint Monica. (…)

So if one would stop reading at this point, one could mistakenly assume that Francis is Catholic. (No pun intended…).

Yet 12 paragraphs lower, we get this:

154. Prayer of supplication is an expression of a heart that trusts in God and realizes that of itself it can do nothing. The life of God’s faithful people is marked by constant supplication born of faith-filled love and great confidence. Let us not downplay prayer of petition, which so often calms our hearts and helps us persevere in hope. Prayer of intercession has particular value, for it is an act of trust in God and, at the same time, an expression of love for our neighbour. There are those who think, based on a one-sided spirituality, that prayer should be unalloyed contemplation of God, free of all distraction, as if the names and faces of others were somehow an intrusion to be avoided.

Hint, post-Modernists don’t believe in logic because they don’t believe in the LOGOS… (see here)

Moving on, what is clear is that Francis has a HIDDEN AGENDA since he is telling his readers that if you like “contemplative religious orders, you can keep your contemplative orders”, please refer to paragraph 142. If you don’t like contemplative orders, then please refer to paragraph 154.

But that’s not the HIDDEN AGENDA.

The HIDDEN AGENDA, as signaled by the Deus ex Machina Peirce/Ockham proprietary model, is this part here:

35. Here I would like to mention two false forms of holiness that can lead us astray: gnosticism and pelagianism. They are two heresies from early Christian times, yet they continue to plague us. In our times too, many Christians, perhaps without realizing it, can be seduced by these deceptive ideas, which reflect an anthropocentric immanentism disguised as Catholic truth.[33] Let us take a look at these two forms of doctrinal or disciplinary security that give rise “to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyses and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others”.[34]

So what we are seeing above is a pure case of “psychological projection”, or Francis defending himself against his own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in himself while attributing them to others.

Specifically, what Francis is doing is using the term “anthropocentric immanentism” that is defined by Pope St. Pius X (as Vital Immanence) in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis and flipping it against the “anti-immanentists”, i.e. the Faithful Catholics.

Here is how Salusbury F. Davenport explained this Modernist manifestation currently on display in the bishopric of Rome: (see here)

[Vital Immanence] is the wholly psychological process of the human consciousness unfolding itself, which has not the remotest likeness to the presence of a transcendent reality abiding within us. God as transcendent is lost to sight; no room is left for any kind of revelation; God is the permanent possibility of progress, He is ever projected as the ideal in advance of each successive stage of evolution and changes as the advance proceeds. (Immanence and Incarnation, p. 68)

So what Francis and his team are doing is confusing definitions.

They are implicitly making the claim that they alone know the “mind of God”, i.e. the “god of surprises”, while implying that their enemies, i.e. the Faithful Catholics are guide not by a transcendent reality abiding within  them, but rather motivated by base human needs, wants and/or desires. Those “neo-immanentists”, are driven, according to TeamFrancis by:

individualism, spiritualism, living in a little world, addiction, intransigence, the rejection of new ideas and approaches, dogmatism, nostalgia, pessimism, hiding behind rules and regulations”.

But just in case some Catholic theologian or one of those “terror bloggers” notices this slight of hand with the definition’s objective meaning and common usage, Francis and his team can always refer those critics to paragraph 2. of the “Joy of Terror Blogging” document which states:

2. What follows is not meant to be a treatise on holiness, containing definitions and distinctions helpful for understanding this important subject, or a discussion of the various means of sanctification. My modest goal is to repropose the call to holiness in a practical way for our own time, with all its risks, challenges and opportunities. For the Lord has chosen each one of us “to be holy and blameless before him in love” (Eph 1:4).

So what we are seeing is an attempt to “re-frame” the Catholic understanding of SPIRITUALITY.

This is being done for a reason, and the Peirce/Ockham model also has a HYPOTHESIS about that…

But for today, have a nice weekend…