In this post your humble blogger will use a short example of events taking place in Washington DC and Northern Virginia courtrooms to illustrate the larger understanding of what is in fact the situation behind the Sacred Vatican Walls.
Although not apparent to the untrained eye, yet numerously expounded upon on the pages of this humble blog, the common denominator of the situation with the Mueller “witch hunt” and the Francis Vatican is… wait for it… still waiting… post-Modernism.
Why would post-Modernism be the common denominator between these two independent and unrelated situations, you might as dear reader?
Here is our official authority on post-Modernism to explain:
As we see from the above video, what we are dealing here with is the WAR ON COMPETENCE.
What is important to understand from the above is that if one ditches such objective, rational, empirical standards to build ones operational NARRATIVES, what will eventually happen is that these NARRATIVES will break down under scrutiny.
On the ECCLESIASTICAL side of the Visibilium Omnium, we can assume the same RESULT from the INCOMPETENCE exhibited by the current FrancisBrainTrust.
In other words, what is waiting for us Faithful Catholics in the not too distant future is that COMPETENCE will need to reassert itself. It will have to reassert itself for the simple reason that INCOMPETENCE ends in disaster.
Just like the Mueller Witch Hunt, which is happening in real time.
A good example of the COMPETENCE reasserting itself in the ECCLESIASTICAL sub-set can be observed here:
So as we can see in the above, it would appear that it’s just a matter of time until the situation will have to right itself, whether we are speaking about politics, law enforcement or the post-conciliar church.
Mueller Indicted A Russian Company That Didn’t Even Exist, Court Transcripts Say
This week, one of the Russian companies accused by Special Counsel Robert Mueller of funding a conspiracy to meddle in the 2016 U.S. presidential election was revealed in court to not have existed during the time period alleged by Mueller’s team of prosecutors, according to a lawyer representing the defendant.
U.S. Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey asked Eric Dubelier, one of two lawyers representing the accused Russian company, Concord Management and Consulting LLC, if he was representing a third company listed in Mueller’s indictment.
“What about Concord Catering?” Harvey asked Dubelier.
“The government makes an allegation that there’s some association. I don’t mean for you to – do you represent them, or not, today? And are we arraigning them as well?”
“We’re not,” Dubelier responded.
“And the reason for that, Your Honor, is I think we’re dealing with a situation of the government having indicted the proverbial ham sandwich.”
“That company didn’t exist as a legal entity during the time period alleged by the government,” Dubelier continued.
“If at some later time they show me that it did exist, we would probably represent them. But for purposes of today, no, we do not.”
The term “indict a ham sandwich” is believed to have originated from a 1985 report in the New York Daily News when New York Chief Judge Sol Wachtler told the news publication that government prosecutors have so much influence over grand juries that they could get them to “indict a ham sandwich.”
As predicted here on this humble blog of this even more humble blogger, Italy has a new anti-establishment government… or will have one in the not too distant future.
So today, we connect the dots again…
From the perspective of the Catholic, engaged in the fight for the Restoration of all things in Christ, the key to the changes in Italy are of a secondary consideration.
What is more important is how these changes affect the situation in Germany, that are of primary importance. As has been mentioned in numerous posts here, this humble blogger identifies Germany as the “ground zero” of the destruction of Western Civilization as we know it.
It is the German media foundations who are the ROOT CAUSE of the problem, spreading their home grown (Frankfurt School’s Critical Theory) Cultural Marxism to the rest of the Western Hemisphere.
These German foundations control the two (essentially ONE) major parties, who then use the public purse to spread the Cultural Marxism via their “soft power” operations.
The reason this is happening is that the German government is experiencing a 18 year boom due to the introduction of the Euro currency. The Germans can run a balanced budget if they so choose, due to the large trade surpluses generated by the German corporate sector.
The reason these huge Trade Surpluses are generated by the German corporate sector is due to the fact that the value of the German national currency, i.e. the Deutsche Mark is locked inside the Euro currency at a highly devalued rate.
The practical effect is that the Germans can export any given product, charge in Euros for that product, and since the Euro is much cheaper than the Deutsche Mark, they can sell much more of the given product. Hence, massive Trade Surpluses.
The cost of the these Trade Surpluses is bore by the weaker countries known as the Club Med. These countries that use the Euro currency have their products overvalued due to the opposite side of the above described effect, hence sell less of them, hence operate under constant Trade Deficits.
Nota bene: The difference between these Trade Surpluses and Deficits is what is known as the Target2 Balances.
Anyways, with Italy’s new government taking shape, one of the very few common positions is with respect to the Euro currency. In other words, this new incoming government will need to get rid of the Euro and bring back the Italian Lira. Once this happens, the Lira will need to be devaluated by 40+% for starters.
Needless to say, if the Italians leave the Euro, they not only will they regain their economic sovereignty, but they will create a problem for the Germans. The problem will be such that the German banks, ahem… Deutsche Bank, as well as the entire European Monetary System, i.e. the European Central Bank will need to realize the losses on Italian Debt.
Remember, they will “magially” become Lira denominated debt as opposed to Euro denominated debt OVERNIGHT!. Kind of like Cinderella at midnight… This denomination will open up a massive gapping hole in the ECB Balance Sheet.
This “new normal” will in turn create a situation where the ECB will need to “ask” their member Central Banks of the remaining Euro currency countries, to recapitalize the ECB to cover the Italian losses, or… the entire Euro banking system will come crashing down.
Led by Deutsche Bank…
And this will create a massive depression in Germany since the German state will need to recapitalize all these insolvent banks, at taxpayer expense while their new currency will revalued at a much higher rate, which in turn will mean less revenue for the central budget.
This in turn will affect not only the “soft money” targeted countries, i.e. South America, Africa and Asia, but even such national “programs” like the KIRCHENSTEUER.
Keeping the above in mind, here is the latest from the coalition talks taking place in Rome, via the Zero Hedge website: (see originalhere)
Italy’s 5-Star, League Reach Deal Clearing Way For “Anti-establishment” Government
Back on March 4, the Euro was spooked and Italian bonds tumbled, if only briefly, following the shocking outcome from the Italian elections which saw the eurosceptic 5-Star party and the anti-immigrant League party win an outright majority. The only thing that prevented an even more violent reaction was the market’s “expert” take that a joint Italian government between these two forces was highly unlikely.
Well, as of this moment, a coalition government between the anti-establishment 5-Star Movement and right-wing League party is no longer not only likely, but appears to be a virtual certainty after the two political forces reached an agreement on a government program, one which was catalyzed by Sylvio Berlusconi’s blessing late last week, greenlighting what may be the biggest shock in European politics since Brexit.
As the WSJ frames it, “the formation of a new government—which is expected in the coming days—between the two groups marks one of the biggest wins yet for the political insurgencies shaking Europe’s establishments.” The alliance between the two parties follows more than two months of bickering among political leaders following March elections that handed no clear majority to any single party or coalition.
And since both parties have, at their core, an anti-immigrant platform, Angela Merkel can pat herself on the back for yet another job well done, by unleashing the unprecedented anti-immigrant, populist revulsion wave which swept across Europe with the chancellor’s “open door” policy to admit over 1 million mostly Syrian refugees inside Germany’s, and Europe’s, borders.
As the WSJ details, the two parties struck a deal Sunday evening on a pact that would underpin a government coalition between the two.
Leaders of the two groups, however, are still negotiating the members of a government cabinet, including the prime minister. An announcement of those names should come early this week, according to weekend statements by leaders of both groups.
With the general agreement now reached, leaders of 5 Star and League will meet on Monday with Italy’s President Sergio Mattarella, who will guide the formation of a new government. And while the coalition must then win votes in both houses of parliament, that shouldn’t be a problem as the League and 5 Star together enjoy a comfortable majority in each house.
Meanwhile, as we described earlier, the coalition agreement includes measures such as a universal basic income for the unemployed, a rock-bottom flat tax and the revocation of a sweeping pension reform introduced in 2011.
* * *
To be sure, what happens next is unclear as Italy’s soon-to-be-governing coalition has made economic promises that seem incompatible with Europe’s fiscal rules and will be hard, if not impossible, to keep or even implement. These, as Reuters details, include:
slashing taxes for companies and individuals,
boosting welfare provision,
cancelling a scheduled increase in sales tax
dismantling a 2011 pension reform which sharply raised the retirement age.
Yet while these two pre-election adversaries spent the last few days trying to meld their very different programs into a “contract” of mutually acceptable policy commitments, what they have in common is that they are extremely expensive.
On the face of it their plans, which they say may also include a form of parallel currency, could push the budget deficit far above targets agreed with the EU, setting up a clash with the European Commission and Italy’s partners.
“We will need to renegotiate EU agreements to stop Italy suffocating,” League leader Matteo Salvini said on Saturday after a day of talks with his 5-Star counterpart Luigi Di Maio. Separately, 5-Star’s flagship policy of a universal income for the poor has been costed at around 17 billion euros ($20 billion) per year. The League’s hallmark scheme, a flat tax rate of 15 percent for companies and individuals, is estimated to reduce tax revenues by 80 billion euros per year.
That’s just the start of the new costs: scrapping the unpopular pension reform would cost 15 billion euros, another 12.5 billion is needed to head off the planned hike in sales tax. But the biggest wildcard is that the parties are considering printing a new, special-purpose currency to pay off state debts to firms.
It is entirely unclear how any of that can happen, or be approved, under existing the European framework.
“If implemented, it would be the biggest shake-up of the Italian economic system in modern times,” said Wolfgang Munchau, head of the London-based Eurointelligence think-tank.
* * *
But just how “anti-establishment” will the coalition be?
Well, prior to the election, 5-Star and the League both blamed the EU’s fiscal rules for Italy’s chronically weak growth and rising poverty, and promised to defy Brussels by spending more if they managed to enter government. However, since then the parties have used less strident tones, and a 5-Star official said on Friday any plans to raise the budget deficit will first be discussed with Brussels in a “courteous” way.
Furthermore, whereas the outgoing administration promised the fiscal deficit would fall this year to 1.6% of GDP from 2.4% in 2017, and then drop to 0.8% next year with a balanced budget in 2020, 5-Star leader Di Maio said that he would hold the deficit at 1.5%, having previously pledged to raise it above the EU’s 3% ceiling to allow extra spending on public investments.
His latest position is still not consistent with Italy’s commitment to balance its budget, and also out of line with the more confrontational stance of the League. “The goal to balance the budget has destroyed our economy,” said League senator Alberto Bagnai, a eurosceptic economist. Incidentally, the League wants to raise the deficit to 2.8% this year and to 3.0% in 2020. Bagnai said negotiation would be needed to find common ground on the matter with 5-Star.
* * *
To be sure, some of the parties’ negotiators now suggest a more pragmatic approach will probably prevail, by implementing their pre-election proposals only partially and gradually. In the face of voter disappointment, each group will be able to say it was forced to compromise with its partner. Even so, it is still unclear how all this will square with Italy’s commitments to reduce its budget deficit and its public debt, which at more than 130% of gross domestic product, is the highest in the euro zone after Greece.
Worse, growing signs of an economic slowdown will make the new government’s task even harder. Industrial output stagnated in the first quarter and business confidence fell in April to a 14-month low.
In fact, the only thing Italy may have going for it is that Italy’s borrowing costs are currently the lowest on record, despite the political storm clouds that are about to be unleashed. But that will only persist as long as the ECB is active in the market, soaking up any Italian bonds offered for sale.
Commenting on the Italian developments, Barclays over the weekend said that news of a coalition among the anti-system parties quickly brought investors’ attention back to Italy, and that should the economic policies disclosed in the campaigns be enacted, “this outcome would very likely be negative for markets and a direct challenge to the European fiscal compact.” To wit:
[The two parties] campaigned on a number of expensive fiscal promises, including the roll-back of the pension reform, the implementation of a universal income and a flat income tax. Altogether, these measures would cost about EUR100bn, according to our preliminary estimates.
Without offsetting fiscal measures, this outcome would very likely be negative for markets and a direct challenge to the European fiscal compact. While market positioning, decent growth and QE have cushioned Italy from an adverse market reaction thus far, growth needs to remain supportive for the fiscal position to be sustainable and prevent history from repeating itself
The good news for Italy, at least for now, is that the ECB’s QE continues to monetize virtually all Italian net bond issuance, making the likelihood of a crash remote. That, however is also the biggest problem facing Italy, because as we have shown previously, for well over a year, the only marginal buyer of Italian debt was the ECB.
As Citi said last December looking at the future of Italian bonds, it is “pretty likely that there will need to be an adjustment in prices” once the the ECB’s purchases of Italian bonds start to fade, resulting in an exponential jump in risks. Quote Citi:
To our minds, this remains one of the most significant political risks to € credit in 2018. Most likely the spillover on credit would be concentrated on Italian and other periphery names, banks in particular. The scenario of a full-on funding crisis is a much lower probability in our view, but would obviously have more systemic implications across the € credit market.
And, as we said last week, “a governing coalition between the Five Star and the League is all that would take to launch the first steps of this funding crisis.” The only question is when will the market react accordingly and “price out” the soothing effect of the ECB?
Just a friendly reminder: independent, unrelated OCCURRENCES form PATTERNS, which then create HYPOTHESIS, and after testing, turn into GENERAL PRINCIPLES. But I digress…
This above situation feeds very nicely into a wider PATTERN (I refuse to use the term “narrative”, even if one is grounded in REALITY) that this humble blogger has described asNormalization Process™ – Something Is Happening…, in a post under the same title.
So jumping across into the secular side of the Visibilium Omnium, we get this great video from Scott Adams which is embedded at the top of the page. In this video, Scott confirms that he too sees “something is happening” as do other individuals who inhabit … let’s call this the “persuasion” and “personal development” space. Just to cross reference this with the syntax of the FrancisChurch, these would be the FrancisGnostics and FrancisPelagians.
The reason behind the “something is happening” PATTERN, according to Scott Adams is due to: people breaking out of their mental prisons. He makes the claim that those things that used to hold us back, that limited what we thought we could do, what the danger was and what the opportunity was, that much of these were psychological. And that once we get to a new, as in more accurate understanding of how REALITY works and what people really think, we will have entered into a “GOLDEN AGE”.
What is also very important is that Scott rejects that which we can call the Enlightenment pseudo-science and the Modernists hyper-sensitivity binary opposites, and comes down on the side of… wait for it… a concept close to what this humble blogger defined as the organic growth model.
After reading this post, please go back and re-watch this video. It is quite the eye-opener and very much correlated with what has been written on this humble blog.
At the end of that post, we can read the following passage:
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.
One manner in which this passage can be INTERPRETED is that it pertains to a “prison of the mind” in which the post-conciliar church has cornered itself. This prison can be termed as the “prison of the spirit of the new springtime of VII”.
This specific passage pertains to the latest Mohammedan invasion of Europe and the Francis’ disastrous policy of promoting this form of human trafficking, to the detriment of Europe, Western Civilization and the Holy Roman Catholic Church itself.
The responsible, sober, realistic, sane clerics behind those Sacred Vatican Walls recognize this FrancisDisaster that is presently playing itself out for what it really is, and are now looking for a reasonable solution.
Or as Jean Piaget would say, the solution that will not kill them.
And according to Ed Pentin, that solution can only be ONE. This OPTIMAL solution is, and I quote: “the answer is Christ”.
Nota bene: There is so much to unpack in those four words when taking the wider CONTEXT into play. Those four words , a la Scott Adams can unlock a ‘MENTAL PRISON and can bring about a GOLDEN AGE’!
But there is a “problem” (for the post-conciliarists) with choosing this solution, and that is that this solution has downstream consequences. Here is the logical progression that follows “choosing Christ”:
Christ -> TRUE FAITH -> Indefectible Catholic Church
Yet the delusional (assuming no HIDDEN AGENDAS are at play), dare I say “less than sane” clerics behind the Sacred Vatican Walls are trying to “avoid” this solution at all costs. In other words, they still haven’t been able to break out of their “prison of the mind”.
And that prison can best be described as: they are POSSESSED by the “spirit of Vatican II”.
Yet the world is moving away from this TRANSRATIONAL “magical thinking” as per Scott Adams video. Which implies that it is only a matter of time until those decision makers in positions of authority will need to conform to the new, more RATIONAL reality.
And they most likely will need to conform at the next conclave.
Which is why the Dictator Pope, with it’s overt call for the College of Cardinals to “fix the Francis Problem” no later than by the next conclave is such a game changer.
One can say that Henry Sire’s Dictator Pope RIPS A HOLE IN the VIRTUAL REALITY that is the post-conciliar church and tries to release those trapped inside from their MENTAL PRISON.
PS And then there is this “Reconciliation themed” post which deserves a separate post but it’s so good, a preview is in order HERE.
I will put this up, please watch (or re-watch, whichever the case may be) and I will get back tomorrow with commentary.
But something is happening…
19 April 2018
… and one can say that the Restoration “is being televised” on EWTN!
We begin today’s part of this post with the following tweet screen grab:
When it appeared, there was much commenting…
Yet as “unrealistic” as the CONTENT of the post above might seem, and given the #fakenews narratives raging these days, one is excused to see this above information as a…. let’s call it a: statistical outlier.
Yet that which OCCURRED cannot UN-OCCUR, so an explanation is in order…
So we begin by reminding all the dear and loyal readers of the Deus ex Machina blog of the information that was presented on this blog on the 3rd of September 2016, in a post titled Satanic Council – The End Game w/Updates! Here is what the speaker, His Excellency Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the SSPX had to say at that time: (emphasis added)
We’ve (SSPX) been told that at the last meeting of the Congregation of the Faith, (circa May 2016) where they all meet together, all the cardinals and bishops which are members, we call that a plenaria, this is the full meeting, there was only one cardinal who said, ‘no, no. no, the Society must absolutely accept the whole council’. And other voices who said ‘these people do only one thing, (that is) to repeat what the Church has always taught’.
So you see, there is something on the move…
In that post, we were also informed that:
We (SSPX) have counted that there are between 26 and 30 cardinals (70 at last count) who have openly attacked these modern positions.And numerous bishops.
They (Vatican sources) say that to the point, that we (SSPX) have lost the monopoly on the contestation of the protest. Til just a few years ago we (SSPX) were the only ones to state publicly these (Modernist positions) (to be) wrong.
So back in Summer and Fall of 2016, there was already a “singularity of mind” within the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, i.e. in it’s Plenaria that:
At the time (circa 2013), I was not very happy about these things but with the time, with reflecting, yes they (CDF) are facing enormous problems and suddenly what appeared to be the problem (SSPX/Tradition) that is us, maybe it looks like a solution (Restoration of Tradition).
And what has brought about this SIGNIFICANT metamorphosis?
And here you have to understand something, which is very, very interesting. The excesses of the present pope have caused a startled reaction.It’s open now. It’s no longer hidden, or let’s say for people like were hiding themselves, now you have cardinals, you have bishops who have openly contradicted these new tendency, this new tendency of hitting the morals and even the doctrine.
Fast forward to April 2018 and the above EWTN video…
At about the 8:10 mark, Robert Royal says this:
I wrote a column this week on this at the Catholic Thing in which I regretted that because of the divisions that have gotten even worse under this papacy, when he puts out a document that’s largely good like this, we can’t read it without suspicions. We can’t read it without controversy…
And Raymond Arroyo asks: “Why is that”?
To which Royal responds:
Well, because one set of people read it one way and one set of people read it another way…
Where have we encountered this sort of OCCURRENCE before?
(…) Our Calvinist pastor (at the 38:14 minute mark), doing a 1 hour and 40 minute presentation about the Sermon on the Mount informs his listeners of the following:
I’m not sure how right he’s (Peterson) got the Sermon on the Mount. Now, the Sermon on the Mount is one of the most important passages in the New Testament. We got a lot of really important things from it. But what’s interesting about the Sermon on the Mount is that when commentators, even from similar theological positions approach that text, they go different ways.
Exactly, and that’s why we have 30,000 or so protestant sects in the world.
So what we see is the appearance of what we termed as the “post-Modernist INFINITE INTERPRETATION problem”, i.e. “infinite number of equally good interpretations”.
Yet we know that all interpretations can’t be “equally good”, because some interpretations can kill you. Think Universal Unitarianism!
So to JUDGE whether an “interpretation” is good or not good, we have been applying the Piagetian MAXIM which basically states that:
The manner in which one can discern which INTERPRETATION is better than the other is that the preferable INTERPRETATION is the one that will not kill you.
And to help JUDGE/DISCERN which INTERPRETATIONSwe can simply discard out of hand, we have been using that which we know through the “natural light of human reason from the things that are made” about REALITY.So using our understanding of the philosophical field of ONTOLOGY (study of the nature of REALITY). We defined the following categories and discard any INTERPRETATION that runs afoul:
The Natural sub-set – explained by the physical sciences,
The Supernatural sub-set – explained by theological science,
The Conscious sub-set (allowing His creation to understand the above two sub-sets – explained by the social sciences (psychology).
Enter Fr. Gerald Murray…
At about the 12:05 minute mark of the embedded video, Fr. Murray makes the following claim:
It seems to me that he (Francis – in his “joy of terrorist blogging” document) that he is talking about those who object to that which he wrote in the 8th Chapter of Amoris Laetitia, where its saying that in some cases, people who are in invalid second marriages just can be given Holy Communion, while remaining in those adulterous unions.
And for me, you cannot categorize obedience to the Ten Commandments as a defect. And it is not a museum to say that what Christ said 2000 years ago is what I believe today. In fact human structures are not the matter here, when it comes to the Sacramental life of the Church.
The Church has taught solemnly that the Seven Sacraments were given by Christ, so was the Moral Law, so was the Natural Law. That’s part of God’s creation.
And so, when I hear the pope more or less stigmatizing people who say ‘why are we changing what Saint John Paul II told us to do’, that’s not the way we should be doing things. If there are legitimate reasons why the pope thinks his point of view about giving Communion to the divorced and remarried can be defended on the basis of Catholic Doctrine and Tradition, state them so that we can have a dialogue.
Concluding, what we are witnessing is a CONVERGENCE of our understanding of “STRUCTURES” between the secular sub-set of the Visibilium Omnium, as represented by Dr. Peterson and the ecclesiastical sub-set, as represented by Fr. Murray.
From the above discussion, Fr. Murray is IDENTIFYING the same ONTOLOGICALREALITY, existing within the ECCLESIASTICAL STRUCTURES as Dr. Peterson is IDENTIFYING in the secular realm.
What both men are saying can best be explained in this Peterson clip HERE. It is the infamous Cathy Newman interview (9,000,000 views and still going strong), and at the 28:00 minute mark, there is this exchange:
CN: So your saying, like the lobsters, we’re hardwired as men and women to do certain things, to sort of run along tram lines and there’s nothing that we can do about it?
JP: No, I’m not saying there’s nothing we can do about it.
Because it’s like… in a chess game. There’s lots of things that you can do, although you can’t break the rules of the chess game and continue to play chess.
Your biological nature is somewhat like that. It’s set in the rules of the game. But within those rules you have a lot of leeway.
But the idea that… but one thing we can’t do is say that ‘hierarchical organization is a consequence of the capitalist patriarchy’. It’s like, that’s patently absurd.
It’s not a matter of opinion.
It’s seriously wrong.
And just like with the analogy of the chess game for explaining the limits of what is biologically determined and what constitutes the proper exercise of free will, Fr. Murray is explaining the rules for working out one’s salvation.
What Fr. Murray is saying is that there are limits in what a Faithful Catholic can do. Those rules are set in the Divine Law. The Faithful Catholic cannot break the rules of the “salvation chess game”, because those rules are defined by Our Lord himself.
Yet God has given us free will, just like he has given the chess player the free will to knock over the chess board when the game isn’t going his way.
Yet the chess player knocks over the chessboard as his own peril. Because in order to continue playing (i.e. the Piagetian Maxim), one MUST abide by the rules.
In in the case of the individual Faithful Catholic, the most continue playing in order to achieve the optimal Piagetian outcome: SALVATION.
Break the rules, no SALVATION!
But when the rules are disregarded on an INSTITUTIONAL level… then those organizations (caugh, cough… the post-conciliar church) have a bad Piagetian outcome: i.e. end up like the Universal Unitarians!
And the EVIDENCE suggests that a majority of the present College of Cardinals are getting it!
70 at last count, folks!
And this is the Deus ex Machina explanation for the veracity of the information above, wherein an American Friend of Francis suggests that: Cardinal Burke could be the next Roman Pontiff elected.
PS And please note the commentary of Fr. Murray about “the Truth as an idol”. It’s downright Petersonian!
Great video just appeared, produced by our Calvinist pastor, the same one who spoke with Dr. Jordan Peterson in the videos that your humble blogger embedded in our last couple of posts.
Our Calvinist pastor in this video does a magnificent job of presenting not only the case for Catholicism, i.e. that it is the ONE TRUE and ONLY FAITH, but also explains how Dr. Jordan Peterson’s academic work not only aligns but is also a precursor to acquiring the Catholic FAITH and entering the Catholic Church.
So without too much commentary, I will just put down some big picture framework schema to keep in mind when watching this video.
I. The Catholic Faith comes from two sources:
(1) as known through “natural light of human reason from the things that are made”
(2) as known through “divine revelation.”
II. These two sources are the basis for two of the three sub-sets that this blogger defined as ONTOLOGICAL REALITY (nature of reality)
The Natural sub-set – explained by the physical sciences,
The Supernatural sub-set – explained by theological science,
The Conscious sub-set (allowing His creation to understand the above two sub-sets – explained by the social sciences (psychology).
So what we see in the above is that the basis for our understanding of the NATURAL sub-set of REALITY is derived from that part of our FAITH that is known through “natural light of human reason from the things that are made”
The basis for our understanding of the SUPERNATURAL sub-set of REALITY is derived from that part of our FAITH that is known through “divine revelation.”
Therefore, at its ROOT, the Catholic Faith can be seen as the continuous RECONCILIATION between that which GOD made and that which GOD told us about what he made.
And the reason that God made us in His own image (gave us conscience) is because:
Question: Why did God make you?
Answer: God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next.
And the manner in which we “know” God is by observing that which He has made, that which He has told us, and RECONCILING the two.
III. The PROCESS that results from this perpetual RECONCILIATION is what is known as ORGANIC GROWTH. Here is how this blog defines it:
Organic Growth:reconciliation of reason with revelation, of science with faith and of philosophy with theology, SUBJECT TO: that source of our Faith that comes from divine Revelation.
So what we see is a system of CHECKS AND BALANCES that restricts our FAITH, that is firmly grounded in OBJECTIVE REALITY, from going off into the MAGICAL THINKING camp.
So simple and yet so elegant!
And finally, with respect to “INTERPRETATION”, i.e. that which we call TRADITION…
As Dr. Peterson observed, the post-Modernist observation that any text can be INTERPRETED in an infinitely unlimited number of ways and that ALL these INTERPRETATIONS are equal.
The manner in which to overcome the post-Modernist INFINITE INTERPRETATION problem is by using the Jean Piaget MAXIM that posits:
The post-Modernists are wrong because not all INTERPRETATIONS are equal and that there are some INTERPRETATIONS that are better (qualitatively speaking) then others.
The manner in which one can discern which INTERPRETATION is better than the other is that the good INTERPRETATION is the one that will not kill you.
This implies a “positivist” (objective and observable) methodology can be used to JUDGE the BEST INTERPRETATION, i.e. the one that will result in the best outcome. (creates the least suffering according to Dr. Peterson)
Therefore, since the CATHOLIC CHURCH has been around the longest (as an ongoing concern) and the only one that has a UNIVERSAL and SINGULAR DOCTRINE across the entire organizational entity during this time period, the Piaget MAXIM would strongly suggest that it has the BEST INTERPRETATION.
And that BEST INTERPRETATION is what we call capital “T”Tradition.
So concluding, without the two sides of our FAITH, Catholicism would be just another sect like that of this Calvinist pastor’s sect. Any INTERPRETATION that could be “discerned”, would just be based on some other fallen human being’s INTERPRETATION from centuries gone by.
But what’s worse, and this approach’s major problem is that there would be no mechanism that would allow any of this stuff to be grounded in OBJECTIVE REALITY.
And it is just this above situation that out Calvinist pastor explains in his video at about the 38:14 minute mark. Our Calvinist pastor, doing a 1 hour and 40 minute presentation about the Sermon on the Mount informs his listeners of the following:
I’m not sure how right he’s (Peterson) got the Sermon on the Mount. Now, the Sermon on the Mount is one of the most important passages in the New Testament. We got a lot of really important things from it. But what’s interesting about the Sermon on the Mount is that when commentators, even from similar theological positions approach that text, they go different ways.
Exactly, and that’s why we have 30,000 or so protestant sects in the world.
Below a post at First Things about the folly of youth written by Robert Royal. (see here –emphasis added)
Above CONTEXT for the post below provided by none other than Dr. Jordan Peterson.
When combined, a dynamic duo.
#youthsynod is the hashtag, so if you dear reader are on Twitter, please retweet.
See for yourselves, and comments in comm box appreciated.
Have a nice weekend!
God Save Them
It’s a verifiable fact that not all politicians are hypocrites. When they begin to worry, publicly, about what’s happening “to the children,” some are genuinely concerned. Public talk about young people, however, is often a form of ventriloquism – by which the opinions (or alleged opinions) of “youth” are used as a voice to advance things that people in authority already want to do.
When I was young, I would have found this sort of thing – adults acting like they needed to learn something from me – pathetic, indeed highly suspect. Maybe young people have changed deep down, but somehow I doubt it.
Listening to young people can be a good thing – depending on who’s doing the listening, and why. Fr. James Martin “listens” to young people with various sexual disorders, particularly at events like “IgnatianQ” conferences, which are sexual and gender diversity events organized now at Jesuit universities. They’re intended to make young people think that LGBTQetc. is just fine – even fine with Jesus Himself. And that people who think otherwise are bigoted, hate-filled, un-Christian.
If he were alive today, that ex-military man St. Ignatius would doubtless take vigorous – and very different – action than his latter-day descendants about these things, which are of as great moment as the Reformation he battled, perhaps greater.
He would probably do something very much like what Karol Wojtyla, now St. John Paul, famously did with his canoeing and hiking trips – meetings with young people, which included Mass, confessions, spiritual counseling. He “accompanied” by telling the truth of Catholicism. Not browbeating but, after clearly laying out the arguments, he would tell them “you must decide” the path you will follow. That actually worked. The accompaniment moved many young people – not to accept the unacceptable, but to saving truth and action.
The world desperately needs 10,000 such “accompaniers” – today, yesterday, every year, for decades to come. Manly men not afraid to talk about submitting to God’s will; compassionate but tough-minded women who won’t shrink from countering our sad culture, even sometimes within the Church.
There’s a planning session about the Youth Synod this week – and I’m here, for the next few days, in Rome. So far, I don’t have the impression that we’ll see much of that Wojtyla-type listening and acting. (As in the past, I may post some reports here if developments warrant.) What we already have is a lot of weak sociology, as we also saw before the two Synods on marriage. No one should be surprised if this event turns into something quite different than planned.
There have been surveys of course, and there’s to be participation of young people via Facebook. As is true for almost any public question these days, it’s not very hard to make survey numbers say almost anything you want. Religious surveys are particularly tricky because who you choose to ask – serious Catholics, nominal Catholics, the spiritually indifferent – makes a big difference in results, even before the interpretative spin starts.
The most salient fact here is that young people in developed countries have been effectively catechized – by the secular state, the media, popular culture, and public schools – to be skeptical about truth claims, but to believe firmly in two things: that science has refuted religion, and the sexual revolution.
There’s been a little pushback on the sexual revolution. Some Millennials have suffered from divorce or weakened families and seem to have taken flight to more stable views of marriage and parenting. But we shouldn’t be overly optimistic about this still early trend; Eros unbound continues to tear up the social fabric of developed nations.
Millennials say, however, that the most common reason they abandon religion is that they believe “science” (and the quite useful technologies it spins off) has proven faith is an illusion. This belief is, itself, of course, an illusion, conjured up out of quite weak reasoning: you don’t have to be a believer to know that faith and science – properly understood – are two different things, neither reducible or refutable by the other.
But to understand this distinction takes some careful thinking – and where now is that taught?
Love and mercy – the field hospital in the pope’s striking image – are two fine Christian realities, and they do an end run around reflex resistance to religion. But if they don’t then go on to the main event, aren’t bolstered by some hard thinking, they won’t long remain Christian – or even realities, as we’re seeing in the increased social brittleness and angry polarization around us.
Under the circumstances, there’s a strong temptation to believe that reducing the demands of love and mercy, by downplaying their Christian foundations, will draw people in. Thomas Jefferson, no stupid man, wrote to a friend in the 1780s, “I rejoice that in this blessed country of free inquiry and belief, which has surrendered its conscience to neither kings or priests, the genuine doctrine of only one God is reviving, and I trust that there is not a young man now living in the United States who will not die a Unitarian.” The latest Pew Survey says Unitarians are 0.3 percent of the U.S. population – maybe 600,000 in the whole world.
There is little to be expected from the liberal path, as not only Unitarians but the liberal Protestants know. The Synod has taken on a massive task under highly unfavorable circumstances. Sure, being “with” young people may keep the usual barriers down – at first. But the harder part is what comes next – the way, truth, life.
It will be a miracle if the Synod can make progress against so much resistance, not least in the Church Herself. But as every Christian should always remember: miracles do still happen. Pray. Hard.
But before we get to the “oh my!”, in good Thomist style and form, we begin today’s post with a definition.
Definition of fetish
1 a : an object (such as a small stone carving of an animal) believed to have magical power to protect or aid its owner; broadly : a material object regarded with superstitious or extravagant trust or reverence
b : an object of irrational reverence or obsessive devotion : prepossession
c : an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression
The “sighting” that I am referring to appears in the following passage from one of our favorite Catholic blogs and sources of REAL INFORMATION (DATA POINTS), OnePeterFive: (see here)
“It was a true surprise,” sources inside the Synod commented today with admiration, while they noted that “the relatio, which passed not without conflicts, found at the last moment a common base of support.” In the breathless hours of the final draft Cardinal Walter Kasper, cited the Summa of Thomas Aquinas, where he speaks about the “principle of prudence.” And in the relatio of the Germanic Circle he proposed the key word “discernment,” a word dear to the Jesuits and to Bergoglio. That evening Müller carried the book of Aquinas home with him. The next morning he accepted the compromise proposed by the progressives. [emphasis added]
The passage above describes part of the process by which the FrancisChurch and the homosexualist FrancisCardinal Schönborn scammed the Prefect of the CDF, one Cardinal Muller to a compromise over the text produced by the German Group, which later was verbatim pasted into the FrancisDocument “Joy of Adultery”, in order to get the Prefect’s approval of the wording of the said document.
What I would like to draw your attention to is the following part of the above passage: (emphasis added)
In the breathless hours of the final draft Cardinal Walter Kasper, cited the Summa of Thomas Aquinas, where he speaks about the “principle of prudence.”
Now hold that thought…
And please go and read the entire post (see here).
Now, whenever the name of, or reference to St. Thomas of Aquinas appears, your humble blogger has this instinctive reaction to go to the top of the Deus ex Machina blog, click on the page Why Thomism? and spend 5 to 10 minutes re-reading the essay. The reason being that it allows one to place himself in the proper mindset to read the rest of the offending document where the name of St. Thomas appeared. Like our post-Modernist adversaries like to say: CONTEXT is everything.
Now, so why is this proper mindset important?
The reason it is important is because we are dealing with two types of post-conciliar clerics, namely neo-Modernists and post-Modernists. One characteristic that applies to both these camps is that they consider themselves anti-Thomist. One can say, post-Thomist.
In other words, Thomism was suppressed never to raise its head never, ever and ever again at the cult gathering known as the Second Vatican Council. It was at this Council that the cult of fetish worshippers, thought that they were finally putting Thomism to rest once and for all. Here is the relevant passage: (with emphasis and added emphasis)
This propaganda (strategy that suppressed Thomism) was often crassly expressed, to a degree amazing in scholarly venues. But once it had succeeded in making an emotional connection, this crassness – as is the way with propaganda – only strengthened its power. Once this power had been demonstrated, fear of being its victim added to its strength.
Now that the party behind it has achieved dominance in the Church, and banished Thomist philosophy and theology from virtually every Catholic institution of higher education, this propaganda largely takes a retrospective form. The overthrow of the attempted Thomist monopoly on orthodoxy – the ‘razing of the bastions’ touted by Hans Urs von Balthasar – and the alleged enlightenment and freedom of thought that resulted from this overthrow, are presented as the great theological achievements of the Council.
The evils of the Thomists and their suffocating ideology provide the reason for dismissing their positions unexamined, and for proceeding as if the progressive movement that replaced them is in effect the whole of Catholic theology.
In other words, Thomism was not only stigmatized, but also weaponized against the Thomists.
Having this passage indelibly imprinted in my prefrontal cortex, I am always on the lookout for any reference to Thomism by the post-conciliarists since Thomism was supposed to be… well, like Polly, the Norwegian Blue in the Monty Python dead parrot skit. (see here)
So if the above is in fact the correct interpretation of post-conciliar epistemology (study of the nature of truth), and it most certainly is, then why the present fetish with Thomism in FrancisChurch?
A rhetorical question for the time being…
Now, if we are to believe some of the contemporary common wisdom, namely that ALL the present players behind the Sacred Vatican Walls are MEN OF THE COUNCIL, (see here) and if “From Ratzinger to Bergoglio, (is) just the next step in the logical “progression”, then why has Thomism been resurrected by the FrancisChurch and what purpose does St. Thomas’ work serve in this debate?
“The overthrow of the attempted Thomist monopoly on orthodoxy – the ‘razing of the bastions’ touted by Hans Urs von Balthasar – and the alleged enlightenment and freedom of thought that resulted from this overthrow, are presented as the great theological achievements of the Council.
The answer to this daunting question is provided in the concluding section of the seminal John Lamont essay, namely:
The key to the neomodernist capture of power is however also the reason for their failure to sustain a religious culture. Neomodernism is not like Protestantism, which contains ideas with a positive content as well as being a rejection of Catholicism. These ideas – justification by faith, and the like – are not correct, but they say something substantial, and have an appeal that can give rise to an important movement.
Neomodernism, however, on a religious level is a purely negative thesis. As a result it has no attractive force of its own, and ecclesiastical structures that fall into its grip eventually die away – a process now visible all over the world.
This is one thing that on the natural level permitted the survival of Thomism, despite the drastic measures taken to uproot it from the Church; unlike neomodernism, it has something positive and substantial to say.
Moreover, what it has to say is actually true. This is in no way a guarantee of broad success, but it ensures the continued existence of Thomism in the small constituency of good scholars who are concerned with the truth and in a position to discover it. Whether it will expand much beyond this constituency in the future is unknown, but there is no doubt that its future shows more promise than that of neomodernism.
But this is not the end of the story.
The question of “why Thomism” now turns to the question of “why Thomism now”?
IF:ALL the present players behind the Sacred Vatican Walls are MEN OF THE COUNCIL,
THEN: Thomism should be as irrelevant to them as it was to their philosophical IDEOLOGICAL forefathers at the Council.
The only logical explanation for why Thomism has now reestablished itself in FrancisChurch as the DOMINANT philosophical framework (if only as a rhetorical trick for the post-Modernist’s in charge) 50 short years after it’s suppression, is that it has been recognized as the only philosophical framework that is OBJECTIVELY TRUE by these purported MEN OF THE COUNCIL.
In other words, all the artificially made up alternative “philosophical frameworks” erected in the post-conciliar church are FALSE. And:
“As a result it (neo-Modernism and post-Modernism) has no attractive force of its own, and ecclesiastical structures that fall into its grip eventually die away – a process now visible all over the world.”
And just to finish off this thought with an excellent example, we go back to the OnePeterFive post for this passage:
When asked to explain a little further the concrete circumstances of the Müller-Kasper-compromise during the synod, the source says: “The day of the compromise were in fact really two. On one day, we, especially Müller and Kasper, mostly discussed Thomas Aquinas – who stood, in Latin, in the middle of the table of the Congregation for the Faith.”
The OPTICS of St. Thomas standing, in Latin, in the middle of the table at the CDF sounds much like: an object (such as a small stone carving of an animal) believed to have magical power to protect or aid its owner; broadly : a material object regarded with superstitious or extravagant trust or reverence.
Concluding, what is of the utmost of importance to understand is that which we are watching (the VIRTUAL REALITY) and that which is OBJECTIVELY REAL are not one and the same.
For something to be OBJECTIVELY REAL, it has to be OBJECTIVELY REAL on all the different levels of a given observable OCCURRENCE. In our case, it has to be REAL not only on the pastoral level, but it also has to be REAL on the doctrinal level, it has to be REAL on the theological level and at its ROOT, it MUST be REAL on the PHILOSOPHICAL LEVEL.
So if we look at this PHENOMENON through Ockham’s razor, the most likely explanation of the above continuously sighted references to Thomism by the post-conciliarist MEN OF THE COUNCIL is that:
A minority of at least 10% of this population has come to the UNSHAKABLE BELIEF that Thomism is the ONLY WAY FORWARD if the Institutional Church is to survive.
And this UNSHAKABLE MINORITY OF AT LEAST 10% OF THE POPULATION is forcing the existing power structures, i.e. FrancisChurch to conform!
“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.”
And this above passage quite nicely explains the current FrancisChurch’s fetish with Thomism.
Of late, there has been a video making the rounds of a young lady by the name of Lizzie Reezay. Lizzie has a YouTube channel which started out as a protestant apostolate channel. What in fact happened recently, and why I am bringing this story to your attention, is that Lizzie announced that she has converted to the ONE TRUE FAITH, hence the Twitter popularity of her video.
Now conversion stories are nothing new, yet what makes this story very interesting and most enlightening is that the PROCESS that Lizzie describes leading her to Catholicism is very well thought out, systematic and rational.
When looking at the wider picture, and in terms of what can be termed as a “Good Old Proselytization”, as opposed to the new “evangelization”, it would appear that where Lizzie starts here process (LIZZIE PROCESS) is the exact place where Dr. Jordan Peterson’s proselytization process (PETERSON PROCESS) leaves off.
So what your humble blogger will do today is begin a thread of analysis of the CONTENT the of Lizzies videos in which she explains the LIZZIEPROCESS, and tie it into the wider Restoration PROCESS that this humble blogger has taken upon himself to chronicle.
The first OBSERVATION that needs to be made is that just like with Ancient Rome, all roads eventually lead to Catholicism. And I mean the real Catholicism and not the post-conciliar protestant sect or the post-Modernist, crypto-materialist FrancisChurch sect cum ideology.
In the case of young Miss Lizzie, her conversion PROCESS came via what can be called literary criticism or to be more precise, Biblical criticism, i.e. “the scholarly “study and investigation of biblicalwritings that seeks to make discerning judgments about these writings”.
Pivoting back to Dr. Peterson, what we have noticed about Dr. Peterson is his very effective ability at converting individuals who have fallen into a nihilistic mindset and returning them onto a road of productivity and meaning. What has also been observed is that in many of these cases, the road back to productivity, meaning and normalcy is nothing more than the road to a religious conversion of some sorts. In the post titled The Power Of ONE WORD, we established how a search for MEANING, especially among the male population within Western Civilization, has brought fame and notoriety to Dr. Peterson. His Biblical Lecture Series is consistently sold out as are his appearances on his new book promotional tour.
What’s interesting about Dr. Peterson from the perspective of this post, is that through his clinical psychologist’s approach, he leads lost and disoriented individuals to a place where they are able to take, what Kierkegaard termed as the “leap of faith”.
In other words, these rehabilitated nihilists are brought to the point where they can believe in or accept something outside the boundaries of reason.
In turn, what Lizzie PROCESS does is that it can pick up these individuals at their point departure from NIHILISM, when they are making their “leap of faith” and bring them the rest of the way into the Catholic Church.
Without spoiling the story, it would appear that the end for Lizzie is presently the “Bishop Barron church”, but given her strong commitment to reason, logic, textual criticism and recognition that the TLM is the true form of worship, I have no doubt that she will find her way into one of the Ecclesia Dei communities or the SSPX where her journey will end.
So onto the video. I will transcribe and comment those parts that I think are important. I will begin today with only the first 5 minutes, since the video is quite long. But please watch the entire video, since it is quite informative.
As is only right and just, Lizzie begins by describing the PROCESS back to Rome. Here is how she explains the jump off point:
Lizzie Reezay: This is a process that took years and years of gradually opening my mind, reading different books, taking different classes that made me realize that I can’t accept the basic tenets of Protestantism.
The observation that I would make here is that Protestantism is a negative theology. John Lamont had a brilliant observation about one differentiating feature between Protestantism and neomodernism, in his Thomist Essay which was as follows:
Neomodernism is not like Protestantism, which contains ideas with a positive content as well as being a rejection of Catholicism. These ideas – justification by faith, and the like – are not correct, but they say something substantial, and have an appeal that can give rise to an important movement. Neomodernism, however, on a religious level is a purely negative thesis. As a result it has no attractive force of its own, and ecclesiastical structures that fall into its grip eventually die away – a process now visible all over the world.
One way to look at the above quote from Lizzie and view it through the Lamont template is as follows: it is not enough to have “substantial”positive content welded to a negative theology. Further, the positive content cannot be limited to “being substantial”, but it must also be “correct” in order for it to be sustainable. What Lizzie in fact is doing, is discarding the negative theology (anti-Catholic prejudice) while analyzing the “incorrect, yet substantial content” and finding that these basic Protestant tenets are… well, untenable.
Nota bene: If the “incorrect, yet substantial” content is untenable, just think what that implies for a “purely negative thesis” that is neo-Modernism and the chances for FrancisChurch or even the post-conciliar church to turn things around? I think the smarter ones among the cardinals, bishops and clerics intuitively suspect this. This could also be the basis for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Plenaria supporting the SSPX position in the post titled What Terrifies FrancisChurch, Whether They Know It Or Not… (see here).
Back to Lizzie…
So in the Church of Christ, we really emphasize being the early church and going by the bible.
So here we see the Archaeologist’s fallacy. Since no one lived in the times of the early church, no one can know with certainty how the early church looked. They had no tape recorders, remember? What we have is what is recorded, and that which is recorded rests inside the Catholic Church. This is what is known as Tradition and Lizzie figures this out. (further in the video)
But when I was in high school, I remember thinking that Church of Christ probably isn’t the right religion or the right Christian denomination just because there are 30,000 denominations, and some people argue that that number is lower. So if there’s 10,000 forms of Protestantism, whatever, just statistically it is extremely unlikely that the church that I was born into happens to be the right church. So even when I was in high school, I was open to being wrong and changing “religions” or my form of Christianity to correspond to the truth. Because they all can’t be true. There is one that is the truest form.
So here we see the most effective argument against any protestant, and especially the annoying Jehowah’s Witness who pop by from time to time. It is statistically impossible to identify the “truest form” of the false protestant sects since there are so many of them. What is important to note here is that the most compelling reason for why this is so (Lizzie did not mention this), is that the source documents for differentiating between the different protestant sects are Catholic documents.
And I will finish off with this next passage:
Honestly, history classes in school growing up made me hate Catholicism even more because we learned about how they would burn people like Juan Cuz Jan Hus* (?) , the way things were explained in history class, the Catholic Church looked like it hated science, they were really backward thinking intellectually and really violent and awful. I could make a whole video on the way our education system twists Catholicism, but that was just my perspective.
*h/t Chris Benischek
Here we see the propaganda of the Protestant sects. Since they cannot make a complete positive argument for why their sect is the correct one from the 30,000 some odd sects, what they do is “poison the well”. Yet “poisoning the well” only gets one so far, as per Lamont negative theology explanation.
And when one is an intrepid and intellectually honest individual searching for the “truest form”, i.e. the Truth, such as Lizzie, it will eventually become quite evident that this former position can’t be sustained.
In other words, Lizzie answers why FrancisChurch is a dying sect…
I will leave off here for today…
… but Lizzie’s got much more to say, so stay tuned.
Folks, we haven’t reached the Feast of the Epiphany and I already have enough material for a Restoration Round-up post! But one piece of information reaches a higher level of SIGNIFICANCE. Therefore, we interrupt the Predictions 2018 thread and present this information to you, my dear and loyal readers.
And as usual, before we get into the subject matter a few words about methodology. In order for any information to make it into a Restoration Round-up post, it has to contain an element of SIGNIFICANCE. In other words, the appearance of a new TLM mass in a parish church, even if it is a first in 50 years, in Anno Domini 2018 just doesn’t make the cut these days.
What makes the cut is information that is “significantly” UNIQUE or one that MOVES the Overton Window. And one that is UNIQUE and MOVES the Overton Window simultaneous is… well… is information (DATA POINT) worth a post in and of itself.
And this is what we are dealing with today.
So, just as a friendly reminder, the Overton Window is defined as:
… a concept in political sociology referring to the range of acceptable opinions that can be held by respectable people. “Respectable” of course means that the subject can be integrated with polite society. Respectability is a strong precondition on the ability to have open influence in the mainstream.
Getting started, we go over to Fr. Z’s blog. On this blog, the following post appeared titled: BOOK NOTES – What I’m receiving and reading about the “spirit of Vatican II”, the Devil, priests in history. (see here) In this post, Fr. Z’s readers are informed that he received information of a new book that came onto the market. The title of that new book can be seen here:
And here is what Fr. Z wrote about the title:
First, I love the title. Second, I love the fact that the title is over the name of a writer with “SJ”. Third, Bp. Paprocki. Fourth, I have an essay in it. What’s not to like?
Notice the warlike, combative optics?
But what I would like to draw your attention to, and one reason for which Fr. Z might like the title, is that… wait for it… is that it MOVES the Overton Window. The manner in which it moves the Window is that we are a witness to a member of the Catholic clergy, and a Jesuit no less, writing a book with a title in which the “spirit of VII” is presented in a negative light.
Further, and what makes the title very, very UNIQUE is that it juxtaposes “the spirit of VII” versus “the light of Truth”.
Oh, the irony…
But that’s not all.
If we recall a post that this humble blogger wrote titled:This Is YUGE: A Faithful Priest Knocks Out Francis …, which coincidentally was the most read post on the Deus ex Machina blog in 2017, we discussed what is known as FRAMING. Here is how it was presented:
Framing is the manner in which one structures an argument. It is used as a common persuasion technique since a proper framing of an argument can leave the opponent without any good “avenues of escape”.
And here is how we explained Fr. Weinendy’s FRAMING of his arguments in the post:
Fr. Weinandy offers us this gem of a passage wherein he sets out his position by incorporating the formula: clarity=truth=work of the Holy Spirit.
To teach with such a seemingly intentional lack of clarity inevitably risks sinning against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth.The Holy Spirit is given to the Church, and particularly to yourself, to dispel error, not to foster it.
So using the above FRAMING, what we see in the “Slaying the “Spirit” of VII” with “the Light of Truth” comparison is:
“Spirit of VII ≠ Truth
And once again, this is a member of the clergy and a member of the Society of Jesus that has put his name under a book with a title using this FRAMING.
And the proverbial cherry on the birthday cake is this. In the book, the forward is written by a Catholic bishop who IS the reigning ordinary in a US dioceses. In other words, Bishop Paprocki is someone with real executive power.
Concluding, what we are observing is a SIGNIFICANT move of the Overton Window. According to the Overton Window, any “respectable person” who decides to publicly hold a position that falls squarely into the “range of acceptable opinions”, is more than justified.
After the appearance of this book, any “respectable person” CAN hold the “acceptable opinion” that “the Spirit of VII” does not subsist in the Truth, i.e. is not Catholic.
And it is perfectly justifiable to hold this “mainstream” position.
To be precise, going forward, the “Spirit of VII” ≠ Truth NARRATIVE meets the “respectability” precondition, which give this NARRATIVE “the ability to have open influence in the (post-conciliar) mainstream”.
And speaking of the post-conciliar mainstream,… it gets even better.
Team Francis just sent confirmation that it holds this same position.
Confirmation of this FACT can be read below in the following Twitter exchange:
… thereby FRAMING his argument “without any good “avenues of escape”.
Leaving off on this note, all that is left to do is:
Let the debate begin!
PS Please hold this thought, since it appears to be highly SIGNIFICANT in the manner in which the Faithful Bishops and Cardinals responsed, or lack of, to the heretical “Joy of Sex” FrancisDocs. But more on that when enough EVIDENCE falls into the “Forced Schism” bucket . Sorry for the cryptic ending, but the bucket is only half filled right now.
Returning to our Predictions 2018 thread and our analysis of the Francis bishopric of Rome, a very significant post appeared on the Non Veni Pacem blog. (MUST READHERE) The post is titled: Pope Benedict adds more evidence that he doesn’t consider himself retired, nor does he think it possible.
In the opinion of this humble blogger, it is this blog that is presently doing the most important critical analysis of the period in Catholic history leading up to, encompassing and post the “abdication” of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI.
To be more precise, what the Non Veni Pacem blog is trying to establish is nothing short of the OBJECTIVE REALITY of the current situation in which there are two individuals, dressed in white, both residing behind the Sacred Vatican Walls. Objectively speaking, we know that this situation is not real in that there cannot be “two popes”. As even the neo-con George Weigel observes (OBJECTIVELY TRUE STATEMENT), there is no such thing as an EMERITUS POPE. (see here) So by simply making an assumption such as: Pope Benedict knows what George Weigel knows, one is required to obtain a thorough understanding and explanation of the “mindset” of Pope Benedict XVI, for the period leading up, encompassing and post his “abdication”. Bah, it becomes of the utmost importance.
The importance of these events are not limited to the Catholic Church either. There are reports of “perplexed secularists” appearing of late. (seehere) The reason behind the significance of this information relates directly to the “deconstruction” of Western Civilization by the post-Modernists. It goes without saying that these “perplexed secularists” see the Catholic Church as the foundational element of Western Civilization and of Her demise as nothing short of a “return to barbarism”. (seehere)
Concluding, what all Faithful Catholics need to understand is that the Church as founded by Our Lord must be recognizable. It must be recognizable EVERYWHERE, ALWAYS and BY ALL. Here is how the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia states this requirement: (see here)
The marks of the Church are certain unmistakeable signs, or distinctive characteristics which render the Church easily recognizable to all, and clearly distinguish it from every other religious society, especially from those which claim to be Christian in doctrine and origin.
That such external signs are necessary to the true Church is plain from the aim and the purpose which Christ had in view when He made His revelation and founded a Church. The purpose of the redemption was the salvation of men. Hence, Christ made known the truths which men must heed and obey.
He established a Church to which He committed the care and the exposition of these truths, and, consequently He made it obligatory on all men that they should know and hear it (Matthew 18:17). It is obvious that this Church, which takes the place of Christ, and is to carry on His work by gathering men into its fold and saving their souls, must be evidently discernible to all. There must be no doubt as to which is the true Church of Christ, the one which has received, and has preserved intact the Revelation which He gave it for man’s salvation.
Were it otherwise the purpose of the Redemption would be frustrated, the blood of the Saviour shed in vain, and man’s eternal destination at the mercy of chance.
Without doubt, therefore, Christ, the all-wise legislator, impressed upon His Church some distinctive external marks by which, with the use of ordinary diligence, all can distinguish the real Church from the false, the society of truth from the ranks of error.
These marks flow from the very essence of the Church; they are properties inseparable from its nature and manifestive of its character, and, in their Christian and proper sense, can be found in no other institution. In the Formula of the Council of Constantinople (A.D. 381), four marks of the Church are mentioned — unity, sanctity, Catholicity, Apostolicity — which are believed by most theologians to be exclusively the marks of the True Church.
I would just add, “by all Catholic theologians” in the place of “most”.
Given the above, what is becoming clear for all observers of this bishopric of Rome, both secular and clergy is that it lacks some if not all the marks of the Catholic Church.
And it is in FACT this “conundrum” that the Non Ven Pacem and the Deus ex Machina blogs are trying to reconcile.
IF the conclusions of the Deus ex Machina blog, as supported by the Non Veni Pacem blog is correct, i.e. as outlined in point 3) of the conclusion, i.e.
The Universal Catholic Church has been put under a State of Necessity by Benedict XVI at the time of his ascension to the Throne of St. Peter, i.e. April 24, 2005. The State of Necessity was “formalized” by Benedict’s “resignation that wasn’t”. The current state is that the Catholic Church is under Benedict’s “pontificate of exception”…
THEN the reconciliation between this period in Catholic history known as the Francis bishopric of Rome and the Catholic Church as instituted by Our Lord (and as defined by the Universal Magisterium) will be quite easy for the future Council of Econe.
All that that Council will need to do is declare the Francis bishopric of Rome as exierunt autem numquam. (Never having existed)