T -64: The Way of the World

Tags

Alex Tsipras, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, George Santayana, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, Greece, Greek crisis, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, Nicolas Maduro, Objective reality, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, rules, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II, Venezuela, Virtual Reality, Zero Hedge blog

Today we change from our theme of the circular nature of what leftists understand as gradualism or the novelty of Francisgraduality as per Secret Synod of 2014 as we have explained (see here), and turn to the theme of the circular nature of history. For my regular reader, you will no doubt recognize this as the theme of the Visibilium Omnium, et Invisibilium post (see here) And you are correct. The following passage from this post is of major relevance:

The reason that I am drawing your attention to this passage [from the Credo] is due to the fact that when we recite the part about the  …Maker […] of all that is, […] unseen, we are dealing with all the “processes” in the natural law that govern the behavior of us fallen human beings.

The reason why the above passage explains our assertion of the circular nature of history is that just as in the Santayana observation at the top of the page, the “processes” contained in natural law – et Invisibilium are universal. A better term here would be “omnipresent”. In other words, they hold in all time and in all spaces. Therefore, if the above is true, and it is true, then the question becomes one of conforming to these universal processes. Actually, the issue is really to what degree any entity possessing free will, regardless of whether we are dealing with a single individual or an organization consisting of two or more individuals, conform to the omnipresent processes contained natural law.

As a rule of thumb, we can infer that the higher the degree of conformity in the actions of the entity to natural law, the more positive will be the result. And vice verse, the lesser the degree to conformity, the worse the results. We can also infer a general principle that the degree of non conformity is positively correlated to the degree of negativity of results. For a visual representation, think of the actions of a sinner and how they relate to that sinner finding himself on the heaven/purgatory/hell continuum.

Not only can we infer that this general principle holds in the spiritual realm, but we can also infer that this same general principle holds in the here and now. In the post titled Visibilium Omnium, et Invisibilium, we superimposed a situation that is playing itself out in the post conciliar church, and the Vatican specifically onto an economic analysis of the situation that is playing itself out in Greece presently. We can readily see that a parallel process very similar in nature is playing itself out in both these instances.

Today we take this analysis of the situation in Modernist Rome derived from the above post and try to project it into the future. We see that although the consolidated financials of the Vatican are fine, as we have laid out in our post titled Giving an Accounting to Peter (see here), we have also observed evidence of the disintegration of the universal church, or at least that part that contributes to the Vatican budget under the contributions made pursuant to Canon 1271 of the Code of Canon Law. We have also made the observation that whereas the Vatican City State is consistently operation in the black, the Holy See operates in the red. And by using the Holy See’s results as a proxy for that part of the Vatican that is the descendant of the “new springtime of the spirit of Vatican II”, we see that this will not end well.

Given the above, we now look to find an example of “non-conformity” in the area of national fiscal policy and economics that is more advance than that of Greece. (see here) The reason that we are doing this is to see not only what the future of Greece holds, but also to ascertain how a parallel process could look with respect to Modernist Rome. And as good fortune would have it, this sort of post-Greece situation is playing out with another regime that Francis is close to, i.e. the one in Venezuela. For reference, please see our Road Kill post. (see here)

The below comes from the ZeroHedge website and is titled Venezuela Increasingly Looks Like A War Zone (see here). I think that this post will provides a good indication of the process going forward for both Greece and the Vatican under their anthropocentric/socialist regimes. Also please keep in mind, that the country whose economic situation is the closest to that of Greece in the Eurozone (the Euro currency regime) is non other than Italy, so the comparison is timely to say the least.

And now on to the ZeroHedge post and it is…

FOR THE RECORD

Venezuela Increasingly Looks Like A War Zone

Over the years, we have repeatedly poked fun at the transformation of Venezuela into a “socialist utopia” – an economy in a state of terminal collapse, where the destruction of the currency (one black market Bolivar is now worth 107 times less than the official currency’s exchange rate) and the resulting hyperinflation is only matched be barren wasteland that local stores have transformed into now that conventional supply chains are irreparably broken.

Just this past Wednesday we showed a clip of what is currently taking place inside Venezuela supermarkets, noting that “the hyperinflationary collapse in Venezuela is reaching its terminal phase. With inflation soaring at least 65%, murder rates the 2nd highest in the world, and chronic food (and toilet paper shortages), the following disturbing clip shows what is rapidly becoming major social unrest in the Maduro’s socialist paradise… and perhaps more importantly, Venezuela shows us what the end game for every fiat money system looks like (and perhaps Janet and her colleagues should remember that).”

Unfortunately, while mocking socialist paradises everywhere is a recurring theme especially once they have completely run out of other people’s money to burn through, what always follows next is far less amusing – completely social collapse, with riots, civil war and deaths not far behind.

That is precisely what the video shown below has captured. In the clip, a demonstration against Venezuela’s poor transportation services quickly turned violent. End result: one person dead from a gunshot wound, more than 80 arrested and four shops looted on the Manuel Piar Avenue in San Felix.

What is most distrubing is how comparable to an open war zone what was once a vibrant, rich and beautiful Latin American country has become.

This is just the beginning: with the ongoing collapse of the economy, the resultant acts of social violence will only deteriorate and claim more innocent lives, until the “socialist utopia” ends as it always does: with the arrival of a military coup or a full blown civil war.

T -115: Visibilium Omnium, et Invisibilium

Tags

Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Cardinal Wuerl, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, Objective reality, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, rules, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II, Virtual Reality, Zero Hedge blog

Today we continue with re-posts of articles outside of our specific area of interest, i.e. issues dealing with the Stealth Sex Synod of Bishops of 2015 and the wider Catholic Church. And just to remind you dear reader, we are 98 days away from the commencement of the Stealth Sex Synod, that will begin deliberations on the morning of the 5th of October Anno Domini 2015.

Today your humble blogger ventures into a Greece based theme, or to be more precise,  a theme based on the crisis that is presently raging in Greece due to dire economic situation in which that the country has found itself. This crisis in turn is due to BAD DECISIONS that former government officials and politicians have taken over the course of the past 10 years. We will focus today on the personalities of the individuals who are the players in this present Greek economic drama. Our intent is to observe behavioural traits and decision-making characteristics of these individuals and try to infer some general principles.

After reading the below, I would just ask the readers to “overlay” these observations expressed in the below post onto the players that will be driving the Stealth Sex Synod process in three months time. The similarities in the personal traits of the Catholic hierarchs should be very recognizable from the description of the players in this Greek economic drama.  And the observable similarities should not come as a surprise since we are dealing here with fallen men.

And one more thought. I would like to draw your attention to the Credo (see here). For those who do not have access to the proper Catholic Mass, the Credo, or as it is more commonly refered to as the “profession of Faith”,  is recited either by the priest (low mass) or by the priest and Faithful (high mass). The Credo begins with the following text:

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and of all that is, seen and unseen.

The reason that I am drawing your attention to this passage is due to the fact that when we recite the part about the  …Maker […] of all that is, […] unseen, we are dealing with all the “processes” in the natural law that govern the behaviour of us fallen human beings.

What I mean by this is the following. Pride is a human trait with original sin at its root. Yet, through the excercise of intellect and free will, the fallen human can choose to be “guided” by pride, or he can resist as the Catholic Church teaches. The decision that this fallen human takes will naturally have consequences. The fallen human who allows himself to be guided by pride will no doubt find himself in objectively worse situations than the fallen human who makes decisions based on this understanding of his predicament and battles with this weakness. The reason that the above is a true statement is that the part of the natural order that God created, i.e. all that is unseen, is not compatible with incorrigible human behaviour.

And now to Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog and via the ZeroHedge blog, and the post titled: (see here and here) [comments and emphasis added]

Europe’s Controlled Demolition

I have plenty to say on the topic of this essay. But the most important thing I think is that I know the EU [Modernist church] is blowing up itself by trying to exert far too much influence on the very member nations [national episcopate conferences] that made its existence possible. Brussels [Modernist Rome] is a blind city. To see it blowing itself to smithereens makes me very happy.

The flipside is that it will take a lot of pain, and probably even the very wars the EU was originally founded to prevent, to figuratively burn it to the ground. But that, if you’ll alow me, is for another day:

Loads of good words published today on EC President Jean-Claude Juncker [Francis] and the Greeks, and the crop gets creamier, there’s fake Nobles winners [fake theologians and eccunamist] and all joining in, but this is not a new issue, guys, and the lot of you are quite late to the game.

Moreover, y’all Krugmans and Stiglitzes fully missed something that happened while Juncker was ‘speaking’ yesterday: Jean-Claude changed the entire game in one brilliant move. The Greeks I was with, including in Syntagma Square, didn’t notice it either.

What changed is that after Juncker’s speech [the Lineamenta], the discussion is no longer about data or numbers or facts [or doctrine] anymore (but who understands that?), because he never mentioned them.

It’s instead now about fear and fight and flight [of not being “relevant”] and various other base instincts, you name them. And that’s not a coincidence. The reason he [Francis], and the EU [Marx & co.] as a whole, resort to this ‘message’ (and no, these guys’ spin teams are not stupid) is to a substantial extent that it’s simply all they have left.

Whatever they had to present in the way of numbers, data etc. [doctrine] has already been rejected by the Greek government [Church Magisterium] 100 times. Since their data have since the start been diametrically opposed to what Syriza [Tradition] stands for and was elected on, which they knew, that should be no surprise, and indeed never was for the Troika.

If you saw Juncker yesterday [Francis lately], and it doesn’t even matter whether he was inebriated or not (does he perhaps wake up drunk, like Yeltsin?), accusing Tsipras of lying -for which he offered no proof- while telling big fat obvious lies himself (“we never asked for pension cuts”) -for which ample proof to the contrary is available-, y’all should realize that a bit more scrutiny of the man is obviously warranted.

I’ve written this story a hundred different times before already: the EU [Moderist Rome] is an organization led by people with, let’s define this subtly and carefully, sociopathic traits (Antisocial Personality Disorder), simply because the EU [Moderist Rome] structure self-selects for such people. As do all other supra-national organizations [secular Modernist Rome included], and quite a few national ones too, but let’s stick with Brussels [Modernist Rome] for now.

That such people are selected is due in great part to the less than transparent democratic [rational] acts and procedures in Brussels. Which allow for ever larger numbers of the same ‘sort’ of people [think homo-lobby?] to accumulate. No coincidence there either.

Many of you will say that you can’t s ay that kind of thing, you can’t call Juncker [Francis] a sociopath. But the fact is, I can. Who can not say it are Tsipras and Varoufakis, not in public. But I wouldn’t even want to guess at the number of times they’ve done so in private. And it’s high time we lift the veil on this. We are being governed by sociopaths, and that’s by no means just a European [Vatican] thing.

And besides, in general it’s not something that we should refrain from talking about. The reason we do is, I bet you, is because we don’t know how to recognize the traits and characteristics. But in fact, that’s not hard. Just plucked this off the interwebs in 2 seconds flat:

Profile of the Sociopath
• Glibness and Superficial Charm.
• Manipulative and Conning.
• Never recognize rights of others, see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. …
• Grandiose Sense of Self. …
• Pathological Lying. …
• Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt. …
• Shallow Emotions. …
• Incapacity for Love, Compassion
• Need for Stimulation.

[YES TO ALL THE ABOVE]

Anyone want to tell me that does not describe Juncker [Francis]? Still, the big problem with sociopaths -and do note how I subtly steer away from the term psychopath- is that you can not have an effective negotiation with them. Because once you’ve reached a conclusion -which’ll be hard fought and take forever-, they’ll just renege on it and come back with additional conditions. And then claim you are the one who did that.

Check Juncker [Francis]. Check the 5 month history of Greece negotiations [post Synod] with the Troika. And note that that’s exactly what they accuse Syriza of. [Here we see a parallel with statements where Francis makes remarks against gender and with in a matter of days has public audience with unrepentant sexual deviant] They claim Tsipras suffers from the very disorder they do. That too is typical. It’s a pattern, an MO, it’s how these minds function.

The main one for me is the lack on empathy, compassion [pasty-faced Christians]. That got 1000s killed in Ukraine, and in the Mediterranean, and now in Greece [here the parallel is souls lost]. All deathly dramas Brussels could have prevented, and chose not to. In Brussels and Berlin, it’s more important that countries [clerics] toe the line than that their citizens actually survive [hell].

Europe [Catholicism] has moved, at a very rapid clip, from a union of 28 different sovereign states [doctrine based on the teaching of Our Lord], each with their own governments and political views and directions, to one where a top heavy bureaucratic structure, hand-puppeted on by a mere handful member states and systemic banks, dictate what each member state, both its politicians and its citizens, may do or not do. [Here the parallel is a Roman nomenklatura and German interests funding the Vatican] Or think. Electing a left wing government [Card. Burke at the last Synod], for instance, equals asking for trouble.

[And from here on, I will allow you dear reader to make the necessary corresponding comments…]

There is no democracy left in Europe, people have no direct say anymore, there’s just a two-pronged dictatorship: there’s Merkel and Hollande, who in the Greek crisis have proven themselves to be mere tools to vested interests, and I’m being extremely kind now, and there’s Juncker and Tusk and Dieselflower, who are really just inconsequential sociopathic wankers that could at any moment be replaced by other hammers and screwdrivers.

In that light, it can only be a fitting irony that it was Juncker in his speech yesterday who said:

“Playing off one democracy against 18 others is not an attitude which is fitting for the great Greek nation.”.

He could have easily followed up with:

Because that’s what we in Brussels have a monopoly on.”

The EU is a club led by people with mental disorders, that panders to special interests. It’s not a union of sovereign nations that hold meetings on how to find common ground. That common ground is now supposedly a given, and no matter what any nation thinks about that matters one bit anymore. Unless it’s Germany or France, and even then. The EU has superseded the nations that formed it. And that can never have been the idea of the people of these nations. As I started writing a few hours earlier today:

It won’t be a surprise anymore that I am not a fan of the European Union. That is to say, I like the idea but not the execution of it, and certainly not the clowns who execute it. However, what happened yesterday is something that even I couldn’t foresee. The Troika volunteered to self-immolate, though the three-headed beast is undoubtedly too full of hubris to understand what it did. Good.

Still, I’m looking at this, thinking: really guys? You really think deliberately sparking chaos in an EU member state on the eve of a democratic referendum is something that will help your case in the long term? Have you thought this through at all? I’m guessing the overriding notion is that threatening and bullying as a model has worked for Brussels so far; but I’m also guessing that the approach has its limits.

Like with many things, there may well be a gaping hole between what can be considered legally justified and what morally justified. But be that as it may, you can’t rule over 28 different sovereign nations with no morals whatsoever. That’s coming back to bite you in the face.

For the ECB to freeze ELA for Greek banks is the biggest blunder it has ever made, and arguably the biggest one it is capable of making in its present mandate. For one thing, it’s a purely political move, and the ECB has no place in politics, or politics inside the ECB.

That the Eurogroup added to the insult a refusal to grant Greece a one-week extension so preparations for the referendum could be executed in peace, tells us loud and clear what it thinks about democracy: it’s a mere afterthought.

Bullying sovereign nations gets old, fast. What you guys are at the moment doing to Greece, you won’t be able to repeat against Italy or Spain. They’ll have you for breakfast.

The EU, which is made up of 28 democratic and sovereign nations, is being run like some absolute kingdom, ostensibly led by a 24/7 drunk. How long do you think that can last?

The very minimum the ECB should have done this week is to issue an explicit guarantee for all Greek bank deposits up to and including the July 5th referendum. To make sure there would be no bank runs and line ups at ATMs leading up to the vote, which merely represents the purest form of democracy. That is hasn’t speaks volumes. And it can’t possibly have been a monetary deliberation; what happens now is far more costly for the bank, and for European taxpayers, than such a guarantee.

I love that the EU does this, and the Troika with it, because they ensure their own demise. What I don’t like is the people who will fall victim in the interim, starting with the ones here in Greece. If this is the best the EU can do on a human scale, it has no reason to exist. And everyone better get out while they can.

Europe can form a great union, peaceful and prosperous and happy. It has many many wise and smart people who can make that work. But those people are not in Brusssels, where the decisions are being taken. And there’s a reason for that.

In closing, a final thought for those who have gotten to this point. As per Proverb 16:18

“Pride goeth before destruction: and the spirit is lifted up before a fall.”

This must be the case with Brussels as with Modernist Rome.

It can’t be any other way.

And we can rest assured that the above is the case since we recite it at every Mass:

Credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium.

T -116: When Words Have No Meaning

Tags

Antonin Scalia, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Cardinal Wuerl, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, Objective reality, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Rod Dreher, Roman Curia, rules, SCOTUS, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Torquemada, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II, Virtual Reality

Today is another busy day, so I have selected a very interesting article for your review. (see original here)

I have reproduced this piece in light of a statement that Justice Antonin Scalia made in the recent Obamacare case dissent in the King v. Burwell case where the SCOTUS majority decided that federal subsidies were available on state Obamacare exchanges, even though the text of the so-called Affordable Care Act said that such subsidies were only available on “State” exchanges. (see here) Here is the text

“Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State,’” he wrote.

“Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved.”

So what we are left with is an activist court that in just making stuff up. And if they can make stuff up regarding “State” exchange, then they can make stuff up about aberro-unions, a decision that came out the next day.

And if the US Supreme Court can make stuff up, why should this be an issue for Francis and the Synod Manipulators? After all, they have been making stuff up for 50 years now.

I will leave off here. Please read the below at your leisure.

The Emergence of Orwellian Newspeak and the Death of Free Speech

“If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none. Let him forget there is such a thing as war. If the government is inefficient, top-heavy, and tax-mad, better it be all those than that people worry over it…. Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information. Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy, because facts of that sort don’t change.” ― Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

How do you change the way people think? You start by changing the words they use.

In totalitarian regimes—a.k.a. police states—where conformity and compliance are enforced at the end of a loaded gun, the government dictates what words can and cannot be used. In countries where the police state hides behind a benevolent mask and disguises itself as tolerance, the citizens censor themselves, policing their words and thoughts to conform to the dictates of the mass mind.

Even when the motives behind this rigidly calibrated reorientation of societal language appear well-intentioned—discouraging racism, condemning violence, denouncing discrimination and hatred—inevitably, the end result is the same: intolerance, indoctrination and infantilism.

It’s political correctness disguised as tolerance, civility and love, but what it really amounts to is the chilling of free speech and the demonizing of viewpoints that run counter to the cultural elite.

As a society, we’ve become fearfully polite, careful to avoid offense, and largely unwilling to be labeled intolerant, hateful, closed-minded or any of the other toxic labels that carry a badge of shame today. The result is a nation where no one says what they really think anymore, at least if it runs counter to the prevailing views. Intolerance is the new scarlet letter of our day, a badge to be worn in shame and humiliation, deserving of society’s fear, loathing and utter banishment from society.

For those “haters” who dare to voice a different opinion, retribution is swift: they will be shamed, shouted down, silenced, censored, fired, cast out and generally relegated to the dust heap of ignorant, mean-spirited bullies who are guilty of various “word crimes.”

We have entered a new age where, as commentator Mark Steyn notes, “we have to tiptoe around on ever thinner eggshells” and “the forces of ‘tolerance’ are intolerant of anything less than full-blown celebratory approval.”

In such a climate of intolerance, there can be no freedom speech, expression or thought.

Yet what the forces of political correctness fail to realize is that they owe a debt to the so-called “haters” who have kept the First Amendment robust. From swastika-wearing Neo-Nazis marching through Skokie, Illinois, and underaged cross burners to “God hates fags” protesters assembled near military funerals, those who have inadvertently done the most to preserve the right to freedom of speech for all have espoused views that were downright unpopular, if not hateful.

Until recently, the U.S. Supreme Court has reiterated that the First Amendment prevents the government from proscribing speech, or even expressive conduct, because it disapproves of the ideas expressed. However, that long-vaunted, Court-enforced tolerance for “intolerant” speech has now given way to a paradigm in which the government can discriminate freely against First Amendment activity that takes place within a government forum. Justifying such discrimination as “government speech,” the Court ruled that the Texas Dept. of Motor Vehicles could refuse to issue specialty license plate designs featuring a Confederate battle flag. Why? Because it was deemed offensive.

The Court’s ruling came on the heels of a shooting in which a 21-year-old white gunman killed nine African-Americans during a Wednesday night Bible study at a church in Charleston, N.C. The two events, coupled with the fact that gunman Dylann Roof was reportedly pictured on several social media sites with a Confederate flag, have resulted in an emotionally charged stampede to sanitize the nation’s public places of anything that smacks of racism, starting with the Confederate flag and ballooning into a list that includes the removal of various Civil War monuments.

These tactics are nothing new. This nation, birthed from puritanical roots, has always struggled to balance its love of liberty with its moralistic need to censor books, music, art, language, symbols etc. As author Ray Bradbury notes, “There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches.”

Indeed, thanks to the rise of political correctness, the population of book burners, censors, and judges has greatly expanded over the years so that they run the gamut from left-leaning to right-leaning and everything in between. By eliminating words, phrases and symbols from public discourse, the powers-that-be are sowing hate, distrust and paranoia. In this way, by bottling up dissent, they are creating a pressure cooker of stifled misery that will eventually blow.

For instance, the word “Christmas” is now taboo in the public schools, as is the word “gun.” Even childish drawings of soldiers result in detention or suspension under rigid zero tolerance policies. On college campuses, trigger warnings are being used to alert students to any material they might read, see or hear that might upset them, while free speech zones restrict anyone wishing to communicate a particular viewpoint to a specially designated area on campus. Things have gotten so bad that comedians such as Chris Rock and Jerry Seinfeld refuse to perform stand-up routines to college crowds anymore.

Clearly, the country is undergoing a nervous breakdown, and the news media is helping to push us to the brink of insanity by bombarding us with wall-to-wall news coverage and news cycles that change every few days.

In this way, it’s difficult to think or debate, let alone stay focused on one thing—namely, holding the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law—and the powers-that-be understand this.

As I document in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, regularly scheduled trivia and/or distractions keep the citizenry tuned into the various breaking news headlines and entertainment spectacles and tuned out to the government’s steady encroachments on our freedoms. These sleight-of-hand distractions and diversions are how you control a population, either inadvertently or intentionally, advancing a political agenda agenda without much opposition from the citizenry.

Professor Jacques Ellul studied this phenomenon of overwhelming news, short memories and the use of propaganda to advance hidden agendas. “One thought drives away another; old facts are chased by new ones,” wrote Ellul.

Under these conditions there can be no thought. And, in fact, modern man does not think about current problems; he feels them. He reacts, but he does not understand them any more than he takes responsibility for them. He is even less capable of spotting any inconsistency between successive facts; man’s capacity to forget is unlimited. This is one of the most important and useful points for the propagandists, who can always be sure that a particular propaganda theme, statement, or event will be forgotten within a few weeks.

Already, the outrage over the Charleston shooting and racism are fading from the news headlines, yet the determination to censor the Confederate symbol remains. Before long, we will censor it from our thoughts, sanitize it from our history books, and eradicate it from our monuments without even recalling why. The question, of course, is what’s next on the list to be banned?

It was for the sake of preserving individuality and independence that James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, fought for a First Amendment that protected the “minority” against the majority, ensuring that even in the face of overwhelming pressure, a minority of one—even one who espouses distasteful viewpoints—would still have the right to speak freely, pray freely, assemble freely, challenge the government freely, and broadcast his views in the press freely.

This freedom for those in the unpopular minority constitutes the ultimate tolerance in a free society. Conversely, when we fail to abide by Madison’s dictates about greater tolerance for all viewpoints, no matter how distasteful, the end result is always the same: an indoctrinated, infantilized citizenry that marches in lockstep with the governmental regime.

Some of this past century’s greatest dystopian literature shows what happens when the populace is transformed into mindless automatons. In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, reading is banned and books are burned in order to suppress dissenting ideas, while televised entertainment is used to anesthetize the populace and render them easily pacified, distracted and controlled.

In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, serious literature, scientific thinking and experimentation are banned as subversive, while critical thinking is discouraged through the use of conditioning, social taboos and inferior education. Likewise, expressions of individuality, independence and morality are viewed as vulgar and abnormal.

And in George Orwell’s 1984, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.” In this dystopian vision of the future, the Thought Police serve as the eyes and ears of Big Brother, while the Ministry of Peace deals with war and defense, the Ministry of Plenty deals with economic affairs (rationing and starvation), the Ministry of Love deals with law and order (torture and brainwashing), and the Ministry of Truth deals with news, entertainment, education and art (propaganda). The mottos of Oceania: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

All three—Bradbury, Huxley and Orwell—had an uncanny knack for realizing the future, yet it is Orwell who best understood the power of language to manipulate the masses. Orwell’s Big Brother relied on Newspeak to eliminate undesirable words, strip such words as remained of unorthodox meanings and make independent, non-government-approved thought altogether unnecessary. To give a single example, as psychologist Erich Fromm illustrates in his afterword to 1984:

The word free still existed in Newspeak, but it could only be used in such statements as “This dog is free from lice” or “This field is free from weeds.” It could not be used in its old sense of “politically free” or “intellectually free,” since political and intellectual freedom no longer existed as concepts….

Where we stand now is at the juncture of OldSpeak (where words have meanings, and ideas can be dangerous) and Newspeak (where only that which is “safe” and “accepted” by the majority is permitted). The power elite has made their intentions clear: they will pursue and prosecute any and all words, thoughts and expressions that challenge their authority.

This is the final link in the police state chain.

Having been reduced to a cowering citizenry—mute in the face of elected officials who refuse to represent us, helpless in the face of police brutality, powerless in the face of militarized tactics and technology that treat us like enemy combatants on a battlefield, and naked in the face of government surveillance that sees and hears all—we have nowhere left to go. Our backs are to the walls. From this point on, we have only two options: go down fighting, or capitulate and betray our loved ones, our friends and our selves by insisting that, as a brainwashed Winston Smith does at the end of Orwell’s 1984, yes, 2+2 does equal 5.

T -117: The Benedict Option

Tags

Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Cardinal Wuerl, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, Objective reality, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Rod Dreher, Roman Curia, rules, Rush Limbaugh, spirit of Vatican II, St. Benedict, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Torquemada, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II, Virtual Reality

It has been realy busy at work and at home, so excuse your humble blogger for not posting regularly over the last week.

Today is a short post about something that I have been thinking about for a long time. The issue is the future of our indefectible Faith. To be more precise, the issue is how the Catholic Faith will be organized the near future. For a long time, actually for most of my adult life, I recognized that the “spirit of Vatican II” has completely changed the lay of the land with respect to the function that Christianity, and here I mean Catholicism, will play in Western Civilization going forward.  It is due to this situation on the ground, that I realized early the immense value that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (ora pro nobis) has provided to the Catholic Church and its future structures. And here, the Benedict Option, as per Rod Dreher is probably the most likely way forward and dovetails very nicely into what the SSPX has been able to achieve thus far. Therefore, I am republishing a post written by Fr. Longnecker for your review since I think it is a good starting point for this process. (see original here)

One further thought at this time. If we look a wider picture, what we are presently a witness to is a fight by the “leftist” establishment with natural law. The manner in which the “leftist” elites have been able to subvert the natural order is through money. Lots and lots of money. On the one hand, this “leftist” elite has been able to corrupt various individual who hold key decision making positions, such as Justice Anthony Kennedy. These individuals can force an artificial order onto a particular society. What they can’t do is make that artificial order sustainable. Proof of this last point can be observed in the situation in Greece. Here, natural law is reverting the “leftist” elite’s ideology back to a naturally sustainable state in the wider Euroland. To see this process in action, here is a link with a good explanation about how the “leftist” elite is losing its fight with MATH. It is a bit technichal, but bear with it. (see here)

So for now, please read through the below at your leisure. And remember, Our Lord promised us that the gates of hell shall not prevail.

Is It Time for the Benedict Option?

St. Benedict is depicted with a cross and a scroll stating ‘Vade Retro Satana’ (‘Get thee behind me, Satan!’), which is abbreviated on the St. Benedict Medal.

– public domain

The poet T.S. Eliot predicted that, after the disintegration of Western society, civilization would be conserved and restored by a new monastic movement. He was referring to the events at the end of the fifth century, when Benedict of Nursia abandoned the decaying Roman Empire and established small communities of men and women dedicated to prayer, work and study.

In Benedict’s day, the once-great Roman Empire had collapsed into chaos. Through economic disaster, famine, plague, moral decadence and political corruption, the society was enervated and vulnerable. Barbarians invaded from the north and east, sensing lucrative spoils to be had.

In the face of the moral and social disintegration, Benedict established core communities of intentional disciples, and the seed of his life and work eventually blossomed into the strength and glory of Christian Europe.

Eastern-Orthodox journalist Rod Dreher has been writing for some time about the collapse of Christianity in the West and has been predicting and calling for what he calls the “Benedict Option.” He envisions a grassroots movement that echoes the witness of St. Benedict. Dreher writes:

“In our time, the Benedict Option does not offer a formula (at least not yet), but it does call for a radical shift in perspective among Christians, one in which we see ourselves as living in the ruins (though very comfortable ones!) of Christian civilization and tasked with preserving the living faith through the coming Dark Ages.”

This radical shift in Catholicism has been spoken of by others. Most famously, Pope Benedict XVI predicted:

“From today’s crisis will emerge a Church that has lost a great deal. … It will become small and will have to start pretty much all over again. It will no longer have use of the structures it built in its years of prosperity. The reduction in the number of faithful will lead to it losing an important part of its social privileges. It will start off with small groups and movements and a minority that will make faith central to experience again. It will be a more spiritual Church and will not claim a political mandate flirting with the right one minute and the left the next. It will be poor and will become the Church of the destitute.”

Others have noticed the end of “casual Catholicism” and the necessary rise of “committed Catholicism.” Important books on the New Evangelization, like Sherry Weddell’s Forming Intentional Disciples, call for a new kind of mission for existing Catholics.

The Benedict Option requires a radical shift away from the easygoing, open-ended, cafeteria Catholicism prevalent in much of suburban America to an intentionally informed and aware Catholicism. All will be welcome, but they will be welcomed to join what will be more like an elite fighting force than a religiously themed country club.

If Dreher is right, then the Benedict Option will not be imposed from the hierarchy. Instead, it will emerge from below. Such a movement would be strongly traditional, while at the same time living out many of the principles of the Second Vatican Council.

A “Benedict Option” would undermine clericalism in a positive and creative way. There would be natural renewal of worship, religious education and service based on the needs of the local community rather than top-down “good ideas” by diocesan bureaucrats.

What might a “Benedict Option” parish look like? The pastor and people would decide priorities based on the immediate needs of the parish members. As hostility grows from those outside the Church, relationships of trust would be developed within the family and parish. If an aggressive secular agenda is promoted in public schools, the parish school and religious-education program will become a main priority. As classical education disappears, the parish school will become a repository for the ancient learning. As such, a “Benedict Option” parish would see itself as countering, rather than accommodating, the surrounding culture. Such a community would be distinctive and clear in its purposes and principles — even odd. Members might be distrusted by those outside the community — including other Catholics who have compromised with the prevailing culture.

Is the Benedict Option the way of the future? I believe it is already here. Even now, we are seeing a separation evolving in the Catholic Church in the United States. Large numbers of Catholics are already more American than Catholic. They see no problem with divorced and remarried couples coming to Communion, and they accept same-sex “marriage” and want the Church to “get with the times” over many other issues.

Parishes go with their pastor’s guidance along the path of accommodating and accepting the current cultural trends.

Meanwhile, other pastors lead congregations that are uncompromising and clear in their Catholicism. No longer loyal to geographical parishes, Catholics are voting with their feet, and “Benedict Option” parishes are emerging — not aware that they are part of a growing movement.

These parishes of intentional disciples are part of another trend identified by George Weigel in his book Evangelical Catholicism. He recognizes that such people and parishes are vibrant in their commitment to the fullness of the Catholic faith. They are made up of well catechized and committed Catholics who are alert to the signs of the times and ready to live out their faith in the midst of impending crisis. Weigel sees this development as a positive surge of faith and renewal in the Church.

And I agree.

Follow Father Longenecker’s blog, browse his books and be in touch at DwightLongenecker.com.

T -118: HONESTY Appears Not to be the Best Policy

Tags

Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Cardinal Wuerl, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, Objective reality, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, rules, Rush Limbaugh, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Team Bergoglio, Top 10 Things, Torquemada, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II, Virtual Reality

FOR THE RECORD:

Below is a repost of a transcript from the Rush Limbaugh radio program. The subject is a responce by Cardinal Wuerl to a comment that Rush Limbaugh made on his show pertaining to the recent encyclical that was published by the Vatican. (see here)

For some reason the title of this encyclical has slipped my mind, but then again, it would appear that I am not the only one. (see here) But I digress…

But back to the story. What I found interesting in the below transcript is that it represents another observation of a theme that readers of this blog will find very familiar. This theme can be termed as the clash collision of  OBJECTIVE REALITY as represented by Rush Limbaugh and VIRTUAL ( or ALTERNATIVE) REALITY as represented by Cardinal Wuerl. Now I understand that politicians need to create their own reality to sell to voters and ideologues need to create their own reality to espouse to their followers. However, and being congnizant of the fact that neo-modernists need to create their own reality to feed the small “c” catholics, it is still very sad to observe when a cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church is caught out being downright dishonest.

And if this episode can be turned into a teachable moment, it is that the next papacy should not be a papacy of neither mercy nor justice nor even catholicity, but rather one of HONESTY.

Because it is HONESTY that is the most lacking in the Catholic Church since the Second Vatican Council.

Cardinal Takes Your Host to the Woodshed on the Pope’s Encyclical

June 22, 2015

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Yesterday on Fox News Sunday, Cardinal… I’m not even sure how to pronounce his name. I did not see the episode. We’ll hear the sound bite in just a moment.

Cardinal Wuerl. W-u-e-r-l. You know the Fox News people called us on Friday and asked to use a clip from this program from earlier in the week. I said, “Yeah, yeah. It’s not the best clip, by the way. I mean, I said a lot of things later in the week that added to that, made it even better.” They said, “No, no! this is exactly what we want!” Okay. So I knew they already had their segment planned and they wanted to use a clip from me on Tuesday.

And since it was Fox, I granted them permission to do so. It was the sound bite where I — in analyzing the papal encyclical — suggested that what it essentially was is a commandment to vote for the Democrat Party. So Chris Wallace played that sound bite for Cardinal Wuerl and asked him to reply to it. We have that coming up. Also the… Let’s see, what else? Oh, I have learned, ladies and gentlemen, something I did not know.

The pope actually has a climate advisor working on his staff and he is a genuine lunatic. He’s a German. What did I do with it? I just printed it out, here. I’ll have to find it somewhere in one of these stacks here. But I really… When you look at some of the language that’s being used in the papal encyclical on climate change, it really does come from the leftist political world, all of the phrases that the pope uses.

I’m really beginning to wonder if this whole thing wasn’t put together by a committee that may have, essentially, just hijacked the Vatican by this. I mean, that’s what the left does. They move in, they corrupt things. Just have to see.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Fox News Sunday yesterday, this is what I talked about in the previous half hour. They called, they wanted to use an excerpt from this program. They didn’t tell me why. I mean, they didn’t tell me who their guest was gonna be, said it didn’t matter. It’s Chris Wallace, it’s Fox News Sunday, I’ve had nothing but pleasant experiences with them, I trust them, so I said go ahead, use it. Here’s the first bite.

WALLACE: While the pope has bigger things on his mind than American politics, some American conservatives say he is choosing sides. Cardinal, forgive me, because this is gonna get a little salty.

RUSH ARCHIVE: Essentially what this papal encyclical is suggesting is that every Catholic should vote the Democrat Party. How in the hell else do you interpret it when the pope comes out and sounds like Algore on global warming and climate change?

RUSH: Okay, so now the cardinal, whose name is Cardinal Wuerl, is asked to respond. Chris Wallace says, “I never thought I’d ask you this, how do you respond to Rush Limbaugh?”

WUERL: (whispering) Well, this is one of the great — one of the great blessings of America, isn’t it? We’re all allowed to speak our mind. Even if we don’t have all the facts, even if we don’t have a clear view of what the other person is saying, we’re all allowed to speak our mind, and that’s what he’s doing. Ah, I think what the pope is doing is something very, very different from that. He’s saying, “Why don’t we all discuss this? Why don’t we all come to the table, and before we start eliminating other people from the discussion — before denouncing them or even ridiculing them — why don’t we listen to them and see what they’re saying and see where we really ought to be going as a human family?”

RUSH: Now, I do not know Cardinal Wuerl. I don’t know his diocese, it’s not identified, I didn’t bother looking it up. The Cardinal is attempting to do two things here. He’s attempting to be polite and also to belittle me while being polite. Because I think the Cardinal — and he may not be aware, but many in the Catholic Church are profoundly aware of how strongly they are supported on this program and by me each and every time they come under cultural attack dating back to the early nineties and ACT UP storming into St. Patrick’s cathedral and throwing condoms and so forth during Cardinal O’Connor’s mass.

I was a guest of Cardinal O’Connor’s at his home on several occasions. My support for the Catholic Church during any number of things is well documented. The Cardinal here of course has to stand up for the pope. But here’s the problem with this. That’s not what the pope said. Now, I’m gonna say this with all due respect, and I’m gonna be as gracious as I possibly can to Cardinal Wuerl. But the pope, in his encyclical, does not say, “Why don’t we all discuss this? Why don’t we all come to the table and before we start eliminating other people from the discussion or denouncing them or ridiculing them, why don’t we listen to them and see what they’re saying.”

That’s not what the encyclical says. And, in fact, it’s not what happened. At the same time Cardinal Wuerl was on Fox News Sunday claiming that while I was practicing my God-given right to say what I think, that it’s wonderful even when people don’t know what they’re talking about, was this story. It had already been published the day before in the Washington Post:”

How Climate-Change Doubters Lost a Papal Fight — Pope Francis was about to take a major step backing the science behind ­human–driven global warming, and Philippe de Larminat was determined to change his mind. A French doubter who authored a book arguing that solar activity — not greenhouse gases — was driving global warming, de Larminat sought a spot at a climate summit in April sponsored by the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences.”

In other words, the pope convened a meeting. Somebody who does not believe in manmade climate change because of greenhouse gases wanted to attend. He was denied his request. The Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences was not interested in his point of view. “Nobel laureates would be there. So would UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, US economist Jeffrey Sachs and others calling for dramatic steps to curb carbon emissions.” There wasn’t one doubter.

“There wasn’t one person there who disagreed with the consenus of the worldwide left on manmade climate change due to fossil fuel creation of greenhouse gases. But it gets better than that. “After securing a high-level meeting at the Vatican, he was told that, space permitting, he could join. He bought a plane ticket from Paris to Rome.” This is the Frenchman. “But five days before the April 28 summit [on global warming], de Larminat said, he received an e-mail saying there was no space left.

“It came after other scientists — as well as the powerful Vatican bureaucrat in charge of the academy — insisted he had no business being there. ‘They did not want to hear an off note,’ de Larminat said.” They didn’t want to hear anybody that disagreed. Now, the papal encyclical does not “suggest that we, as a human community, sit down and discuss this.” The papal encyclical does not “welcome anybody and everybody” to the so-called table to discuss this. In fact, people who disagree or have an opposing point of view were uninvited, after having purchased plane tickets, were told not to show up.

You were only permitted to attend the Vatican Pontifical Academy of Sciences meeting on man-made global warming in advance of the papal be encyclical if you read with what the pope was going to say. Now, listen again to Cardinal Wuerl, Cardinal Donald Wuerl. This is yesterday on Fox News Sunday (again, just to rehash) people that disagreed with this consensus of man-made global warming stemming) from fossil fuel fuels and carbon dioxide poisoning were not permitted.

This Frenchman wanted to go, had his plane ticket purchased and was all set to go and was uninvited, as was everybody else who had an opposing view. Yet Cardinal Wuerl said this yesterday…

WUERL: (whispering) Well, this is one of the great — one of the great blessings of America, isn’t it? We’re all allowed to speak our mind. Even if we don’t have all the facts, even if we don’t have a clear view of what the other person is saying, we’re all allowed to speak our mind, and that’s what he’s doing. Ah, I think what the pope is doing is something very, very different from that. He’s saying, “Why don’t we all discuss this? Why don’t we all come to the table, and before we start eliminating other people from the discussion — before denouncing them or even ridiculing them — why don’t we listen to them and see what they’re saying and see where we really ought to be going as a human family?”

RUSH: You know, there’s further irony: That’s all I was doing. I was simply expressing my opinion about what the papal encyclical is, and it could have been written by anybody in the upper levels of the Democrat Party or the American environmental movement. So here’s Cardinal Wuerl saying, “No, no! The pope said we all need to sit down and talk about it.” Well, that’s not what happened! They did not permit people that didn’t agree with the pope’s consensus on this.

BREAKTRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I finally found it. The pope’s chief scientific advisor… This according to the UK Independent, which has, by the way, a scathing story. The UK Independent today with a scathing story on two things that are linked, that are creating massive worldwide problems. One of them is the European Union, just the very idea that it was tried and what a disaster it is and how that’s affecting Greece. The other problem that this man identifies — it’s a writer at the UK Independent — is the “fantasy world” the pope is living in.

His words, not mine. But it’s in that story that the pope’s science advisor is identified. I’m just gonna read you the passage from the UK Independent. “How forlorn in light of all this looks that would-be well-meaning 300-page document in which the Pope, under the spell of his chief scientific adviser, a fanatical German climate activist called Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, calls for an end to use of the very fossil fuels which keep the Vatican’s own lights on. In asking us to pray for that global climate treaty, Pope Francis solemnly trots out all those familiar plaints about ‘melting polar ice caps,'” which are not melting, “‘rising sea levels,'” which are not rising, “unprecedented droughts, ‘extreme weather events’ and the rest of that greenie litany which has no basis in honest science whatever.”

A “fanatical German climate activist.”

Not even a scientist! [...]

Yep, not even a scientist.

It used to be said that “honesty is the best policy”.

T -189: The 10 Men Behind the Curtain

Tags

Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Dr. Francisco Jose Solar Gil, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, Objective reality, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, rules, Rush Limbaugh, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Team Bergoglio, Top 10 Things, Torquemada, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II, Virtual Reality

As my loyal readers know, I have been sidelined by a small family issue of late and have not been posting regularly. In the spirit of full disclosure ;), my 5 year old came down with a nasty viral infection that landed him and his mom in the hospital for more than a week. While he was in the hospital, mom (and dad on the weekend) were with him. Anyways, as of yesterday, both mom and child are home and all is back to normal.

Today, I will try to start catching up on my daily posting and make up for Monday t-189, Tuesday t-188, Wednesday t-187, and today in short order.

Today I will expand on the OBJECTIVE/VIRTUAL REALITY theme that has been my main topic for the last few weeks. I am re-publishing a post from the Rush Lmbaugh website pertaining to the hysteria behind the state of Indiana’s most recent actions attempting to protect religious freedom. It is pertinant to our discussion of VIRTUAL REALITY since it shows how a group of 10 radicals through the use of social media can create an artificial environment of fear and intimidation against a pre- targeted victim.

I would also like to draw your attention to Louie Verrecchio’s blog and his post highlighting the Damian Goddard speaking engagement. (see here) It is the same mechanism at work in both of these instances. And I think it is also safe to say that it is this same mechanism that we are seeing in our Catholic backyard, whether its the situation with Archbishop Cordileone or with the run up to the Stealth Sex Synod of 2015. But more about this in a follow up posts.

So now, here is the Rush Limbaugh transcript. [with emphasis added]

FOR THE RECORD

RUSH: Lo and behold, my friends, here’s another one. Another bakery had to shut down, and this is from Indianapolis, all the way back in February, February 15th. USA Today: “A bakery that drew protests for refusing to prepare a cake for a gay couple has closed its doors.”

So you see, ladies and gentlemen, I knew that bakeries had been shut down because of this. I just erred in talking about the bakery in Denver. That one’s still open, and they weathered the storm. But this one is in Indianapolis.

“The 111 Cakery was still profitable, said co-owner Randy McGath. But McGath’s 45-year-old wife, Trish, did most of the baking and wanted more time to spend with the couple’s four grandchildren. The business ‘was wearing her out,’ her husband said. She has been taking a break from working since Dec. 31 when the bakery went out of business, he said. In March the McGaths faced a firestorm of protest after declining a request to bake a cake for a commitment ceremony for two men. Same-sex marriage has been legal in Indiana since Oct. 7.”

What? The hell, you say. You mean to tell me that gay people could get married in this bigoted, racist state? How is that possible? With everything you’re hearing about Indiana, can you believe this hysteria? Can you believe this? All these businesses claiming they’re gonna get out. All of these conventions that were scheduled to take place in Indiana, the sponsors demanding and claiming they’re gonna get out, can you believe this? A 100 percent manufactured hysteria.

If you pay attention to the Drive-By Media, you would think that the state of Indiana has more bigotry, racism, sexism, than your average Middle Eastern Sharia law country. If you paid attention to the American media you would think Indiana was one of the worst spots on earth you could go and live. So many bigots, so many racists, so many homophobes. And yet we find out that gay marriage has been legal in Indiana since last October.

A TV station in Indianapolis broadcast the story of the bakery rejecting the request to bake a cake for a commitment ceremony for two men. The next day Facebook and Twitter blew up with outrage. By the way, that’s all manufactured, too. Take it from one who knows. Take it from one who is a target of some of this stuff. We have done research, folks, we have found out that it’s 10 to 11 people who have found a way, using advanced algorithms, to make themselves appear to be thousands upon thousands of people.

There is on Twitter this thing called StopRush, and it’s people attacking me and this program much the way Indiana is being attacked today, and whatever conservative institution was attacked yesterday. What this group does is they go after local advertisers on local EIB affiliates, and they try to intimidate local businesses. This cake shop is an example, I don’t know if they’re one, but like this little mom-and-pop businesses. They just overwhelm them with complaint tweets, threatening tweets, a bunch of e-mails.

It’s 10 people. We researched it. We know who the people are. We know where they live. Virtually 85% of all the so-called outrage e-mails and tweets are generated by 10 people, made to look as though they are thousands and thousands and thousands. It’s all fake. It’s all phony. It’s all part of a left-wing, massive smear operation. It’s defamation, it’s smear, it’s everything you can imagine. But it’s made to look legit, and it does look legit until you get into it. It just scares the hell out of people. So here’s this bakery shutting down because Twitter hummed with outrage.

We are led to believe, we’re supposed to think that when something like this happens, Okay, a gay couple walk into a bake shop in Indianapolis, they want a cake. The bake shop says, “Sorry, no, we don’t believe in gay marriage. We’re not gonna bake your cake.” Ask yourself, how, then, do thousands upon thousands of people find out about that within hours? How does that happen? How all of a sudden does this bake shop start getting all of these tweets and all of these e-mails, all of them threatening, by the way. Some of them are scary threatening.

But how does anybody know? This gay couple that’s rejected at the bakery, what do they do? Do they go out, tell somebody, it then blows up? How does it happen? It’s all strategized. It’s all organized. It all has, as its objective, being turned down. They target places that they think this is gonna happen, and then they’ve got their response ready to go to make it look like the whole nation.

You know what else we found in our investigation? Let’s just take a state, doesn’t matter which one, take Illinois. Let’s say there’s a mom-and-pop operation that wants to advertise on our station in Illinois, Chicago, WLS, and that local sponsor’s commercial is heard, and the next thing that proprietor knows, he’s got thousands and thousands of tweets threatening him, telling him defamatory things about me, lies and things totally made up about things I’ve supposedly said on the radio.

And the guy gets scared. We found out that not only are only 10 people behind this, but in the vast, I mean vast majority of cases, 90% of the tweets are coming from out of state. They’re not even from people within the listening area of WLS, in the example I gave you. They’re not even people in Chicago. Because that’s not where these 10 people are. They’re in Southern California, they’re in New England, a bunch of places there in the upper Midwest. There’s an active college professor that’s one of these 10 people. The point is that this has become a stratagem that has been conceived by people at Media Matters for America, and it’s all contrived. It’s all made possible by exploiting vulnerabilities that exist in Twitter.

As a result, Twitter has become a cesspool. Twitter has become a sewer for this kind of stuff. But these people at the bake shop, let’s go back to them, the McGaths. Okay, so they refuse to bake a cake, and the next thing they know Twitter has erupted, and they’ve got threats coming in, and it’s made to look like they’re all from the neighborhood. It looks like these threats and these tweets are all from people in Indiana and in Indianapolis and in the suburbs, when they’re not. They’re from out of state. Ten people. I don’t know in this case if it’s 10. I know in my case it is. We’ve researched it. We spent a lot of time finding out about this.

Just to see this all happen is mind-boggling to me. And to look at how effective it is, because it literally — if you’re a mom-and-pop business, and you think thousands of potential customers are sending these. And the message, they’re all, by the way, worded almost identically, almost like form letters. There’s some differences in them, but they’re all threatening, some to a greater degree than others. But the bottom line is, that if you’re a local mom-and-pop business, and you do something in the process of running your business one day, and the next day you’ve got thousands of supposedly angry people breathing down your neck because you’re a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe or you’re supporting racists, sexists, bigots, homophobes, whatever, you get scared.

These people shut down the bakery. In Oregon, the same thing happened and it cost ’em 150 grand in addition to losing the bakery. This is all bought and paid for in one way or another by George Soros and the Democrat Party. Now, the thing about this is, none of what I’ve told you is news to people who’ve investigated this. It’s striking that even though all of this is known — and we’ve taken our research and documented research and we’ve shown it to people. And it’s still, for some reason, showing them the truth, it’s kind of like global warming: You show people the truth about the lies and the totally made-up science of global warming, and they still have are trouble rejecting it because they’re still getting all those threats on their computer from Twitter, from Facebook or wherever else it’s coming from.

No business owner wants to get that kind of stuff routinely thrown at him. The Republican Party, they’re all victimized this way. And it’s just stunning to me that people have not come up with a way to fight back and deal with this. But the take-away, the thing you need to know, the thing you need to understand is that it’s a safe bet in practically every one of these cases, Twitter doesn’t erupt. It’s not thousands upon thousands, tens of thousands, in some case millions of people. It’s a very few, it’s a handful making themselves look like a mob.

And it seems to me that there would be, at least at the Republican Party level, some way of being able to deal with this, since you know exactly what it is, and you know when it’s coming. You know what you say and how you say it, you know what kind of reaction it’s gonna cause from the left. And to continually act shocked and surprised by it is a bit curious to me. I know there’s a term, it’s astroturfing, made famous by David Axelrod who practically invented this whole concept, online astroturfing. The Obama campaign and the radical left have been using this for years to not only mislead the public, but to intimidate people.

My point is, they are not gigantic in numbers. They are not a majority of people. It’s not a majority of people ticked off at the state of Indiana, folks. It’s not the whole country outraged over what’s happening in Indiana. It’s made to look like that. And the media, of course, is part of the game, so they go right along with this. They know this whole thing is ginned up. You can tell them the truth, just like the story on global warming that I just had here: “Scientists Say New Study Is A ‘Death Blow’ To Global Warming Hysteria.” No, it’s not, because it isn’t about global warming.

The global warming proponents are not gonna be stopped by science that disproves their claims ’cause it isn’t about the science in the first place. There isn’t any science. Everything that you think is true about global warming has only been established to exist in a computer model. There isn’t one shred of data anywhere that can conclusively predict what the climate is gonna be next year, much less in the next 50. The only way that they can do that is computer models, and those are only as good as the input data. There is no scientific data. All there is is a so-called consensus of scientists. Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree. Well, science is not a consensus.

But here’s the point. You can respond to all of this with fact after fact after fact after fact that destroys claim after claim after claim after claim, and it’s not going to stop because the agenda is not about global warming. Global warming is the vehicle, just like Obamacare was not really about health care. It’s about something much larger and much more insidious, as is all of the left-wing agenda. And because they still remain a minority, a true minority, a numerical minority because they are not the majority of people in this country, and they are not the majority of thinking, but they have captivated certain elements of pop culture media, and these tricks they play on Twitter and elsewhere to make themselves look like they are so numerous and so large that you and everybody like you ends up thinking you’ve lost your country and there’s only 10 or 20 of you left, and there’s no way to beat ’em back.

It’s a total psychological ploy. They are not a majority. They’re nowhere near a numerical majority, and this is the only way that they can hope to have any success with their agenda is to impugn the opposition, intimidate, and defame, frighten, and paralyze the opposition. That is exactly what they’re engaged in. And that’s how they seek to win, because they can’t win in the arena of ideas. They are nowhere near enough people to win.

RUSH: Another favorite trick in all of this: “Why are you so upset just because of who people love?” You’ve seen that phrase bandied about in this. “It’s discriminatory to care about who people love, and love is a great thing. Why are you objecting to it?” Well, I can tell you right now, I could mention I love somebody, and it wouldn’t be accepted. I would be called a bigot and any number of other bad names. All I would have to do is say, “I love, Jesus Christ.”

That is not permitted.

That makes you a bigot and whatever else, because that’s what the left is scared to death of. All of this, every bit of this is about the left’s visceral fear of religion. So the next time you get caught up in this argument and they accuse you of being a bigot or a discriminator because, “What’s wrong with this? What’s it matter who loves who?” say, “Yeah, you know, I love Jesus Christ,” and that’s like — oh, my! — showing Dracula the cross.

You’re not supposed to say that; that doesn’t count. You are not permitted. That says bad things about you. So it’s not about that, either. That’s just another one of these arguments that’s designed to make you shut up, and to agree with the notion that, “Yeah, I’m a bigot if I have a problem with who people love.” Tell ’em you love Jesus next time and see what they do.

Here’s Sheryl in Newport Beach, California, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hey, Rush. Speaking of Jesus, happy Easter to you.

RUSH: Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

CALLER: I just wanted to bring up a point that I think everybody seems to be missing when they’re screaming about cakes. This law has nothing to do with discriminating against anybody. All it provides for — whether you’re gay, a person of faith, or anybody else — is that you have standing in court to prove your case. Whether you’re the plaintiff or the defendant in the matter. It has nothing to do with somebody… You’ve got to go through people due process on whatever side of the equation you’re on. I think everybody conveniently forgets that, that’s screaming about wedding cakes.

RUSH: Yeah, that’s true, but this argument… See, they don’t accept that, because they say that your refusal to serve a cake, bake a cake for a gay couple getting married, that’s discrimination. To you, you are simply behaving according to your religious beliefs, and you do not want to violate them, and you do not want to behave immorally. But you do not have that right. They call that… Fealty, devotion, loyalty, whatever — devotion to your religion — in this context, equals discrimination. Ergo, religion is bad, and it’s for closed-minded bigots and fruitcakes.

That’s what they want you to believe.

RUSH: I think people have to understand what this is, and only then can you properly object to it and fight back against it. This is being driven by anti-Christianity, essentially. It’s an anti-Christian, anti-religion overall movement that is driving every bit of this.

RUSH: You know, one of the greatest casualties of this whole thing is a public impression that has been created, which is this, that Indiana is filled with businesses that will not serve gay people, will not provide their service, will not provide their product, will not sell their product. Indiana’s just loaded with ’em. That’s why we need to be vigilant.

The fact of the matter is, the media, in order to find some of these businesses practically have to go walking down the street knocking on doors, because it’s not an issue! If there is an issue, it is the other way around. It is the businesses being discriminated against.

But nevertheless, the idea here that Indiana is all of a sudden populated overwhelmingly with anti-gay zealots is a story that is false on its face but is a circumstance and a situation that is being created here right in front of everybody’s eyes. When the absolute truth is that the media is having to work very hard to find any businesses that do refuse to serve gays or gay weddings or whatever is on the table.

The rest of the post can be read here.

T -191: Failure Is Not An Option

Tags

1968, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Dr. Francisco Jose Solar Gil, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, rules, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Team Bergoglio, Top 10 Things, Torquemada, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II

Today this blog will continue to flog one of its rhetorical “dead horses”, since others are beginning to get in on the act. A favorite “dead horse” of this blog, as my loyal readers no doubt can attest to, is the concept of OBJECTIVE REALITY.

In the last post, I pointed out another post that appeared on the Rorate Caeli blog which I found to be of particular interest. This Rorate post is a response to the preparatory document, the infamous Lineamenta, on the Stealth Sex Synod on the Family, submitted by a priest in Denver, the Rev. James W. Jackson, FSSP. The post appeared on the Rorate Caeli blog and can be found here.

Before I get into the meat of the matter, I would like to start with a definition that loyal readers are very familiar with, and will be of use to understand the issue at hand:

Gibberish or gobbledygook refer to speech or other use of language that is nonsense, or that appears to be nonsense. It may include speech sounds that are not actual words, or forms such as language games or highly specialized jargon that seems non-sensical to outsiders. Gibberish should not be confused with literary nonsense such as that used in the poem “Jabberwocky” by Lewis Carroll.

The word gibberish is more commonly applied to speech, while gobbledygook (sometimes gobbledegook, gobbledigook or gobbledegoo) is more often applied to writing. “Officialese”, “legalese”, or “bureaucratese” are forms of gobbledygook. The related word jibber-jabber refers to rapid talk that is difficult to understand.

Now to the subject at hand. The first thing that struck me reading Fr. Jackson’s post was the following point: [emphasis added]

1. In the Preface the desire is expressed to “find concrete solutions to so many difficulties and innumerable challenges that families must confront.” I suggest concentrating on one or two difficulties, and trying to solve those.

For example, if the Universal Church tried to stop cohabitation of couples, and was at all successful, then many other problems would improve. This would mean a united effort, with at least the Pope and the bishops working together. But trying to address all the numerous problems outlined in the Relatio at the same, time is not realistic.

Yes, very wise words indeed. Providing that there is no HIDDEN AGENDA at work.

The concept of “reality” introduced by Fr. Jackson is key to this response document since this theme runs through the entire document in a “no nonsense” sort of way.

Furthermore, the priest actually came at this preparatory document in a very serious and well thought out manner. One can even use the term Thomistic. Here is one excerpt I found particularly prescient:

9. Beginning with #33, a list of solutions is proposed.

“Proclamation…in espousing values,” “…a more positive approach to the richness of various religious experiences,” and denunciations of poverty stemming from “market logic.”

I have no idea what these mean.

Exactly right!

Neither did the pew sitters over the last 50 years, and that is why they stopped coming. But I digress…

Here is another example:

3. Many of the statements were too vague to understand.

For example, “…a reflection capable of reframing the great questions about the meaning of human existence, can be responsive to humanity’s most profound expectations.” I do not know what this means. And there seems to be little in the document about our obligation to be responsive to the expectations of the Lord.

The reason that the good father doesn’t know what the two above passages means is that these passages don’t mean anything. They are pure unadulterated gibberish.

Here is another example of gibberish:

2. The language of sin and redemption was missing from the documents.
Instead, we were treated to sentences like “The challenge for the Church is to assist couples in their emotive maturation and affective development.” This is an example of substituting sociology and psychology for the Word of God and the teaching of the Church, examples of which may be found throughout the document.

In point number 2. Father Jackson makes another prescient observation. However, a much, much larger point can be made. What Fr. Jackson has in essence described is the entire bankrupt philosophical underpinning, or rather the lack there of, that is neo-modernism.

Here I will drag out another hobby horse of this blog and flog it a bit. In another Rorate Caeli blog, John Lamont writes the following: (see here)

Neo-modernism, however, on a religious level is a purely negative thesis. (emphasis added) 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.

In point 2. of the response, Fr. Jackson hits on exactly this above issue. Since the neo-modernist religion has no “attractive force of its own” it needs to tap into other sources. In the case of Francis, he finds HIS “attractive forces “ in evangelical Pentecostalism (see here) while card. Reinhart “Bling” Marx finds HIS “attractive forces” in business theory and political philosophy (see here). The authors of the Lineamenta in turn reached into the grab bag of “sociology and psychology “ terminology to find their “attractive forces” since their neo-modernist “theology” cupboard is bare.

Where Fr. Jackson to investigate point 2. further, he might have uncovered that which Archbishop Hoser uncovered and explained in the following interview: (see here)

-[Interviewers] This is digital photo of the family – is how the Archbishop [Hoser] replied to the questionnaire circulated before the Synod of the family. What do you see in this picture?

– ABHH The survey had a universal range , it was a collective picture. Therein lies its great value, although it was a bit vague, since it was not performed with a sociological research methodology. Questions were open, and the answers were subjective views, some approximation of the positions. There is a lack of clarity, some problems were either undervalued or overvalued. This is how it was explained by the Secretary of the Synod, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri.

So what we are left with is not even a “an example of substituting sociology and psychology for the Word of God and the teaching of the Church” but rather “speech or other use of language that is nonsense, or that appears to be nonsense. It may include speech sounds that are not actual words, or forms such as language games or highly specialized jargon that seems non-sensical to outsiders.” And from what Fr. Jackson wrote and Archbishop Hoser published, it is evident that the “highly specialized jargon” lacks clarity at best and most likely is “non-sensical” to insiders as well.

And finally, we get to the most important part of the response, in this truely humble bloggers opinion, which can be found in point :

8. In the same paragraph we read “…the crisis of faith has led to a crisis in marriage and the family…”

I could not find a definition of this crisis of faith, nor what the causes of it are, in this document. Unless this is clarified, there will be business as usual, with no indication of how we can assess progress. The paragraph further states, “In the face of a strong faith, the imposition of certain cultural perspectives which weaken the family and marriage will cause no harm.” This too is undefined, and in my opinion, naive.

It is these words, i.e. “Unless this is clarified,[…] no indication of how we can assess progress” that are key.

The reason that this sentence is by far the most significant of the responses written by Fr. Jackson is that it demonstrates that it is beginning to dawn on the clergy of the Catholic Church in the West, that “objective” standards are needed to assess progress or the lack there of.

It has taken 50 years and the complete destruction of the Catholic Church in the West to finally begin to sound the clarion call that things must change. And what needs to change is that the Church as an institution has to revert back to a philosophy that is underpinned by natural law and objective reality. This is exactly the point that John Lamont was making in the above cited post.

Concluding, the implications of what Fr. Jackson is putting down on paper are quite revolutionary… in a non-“new springtime of the spirit of Vatican II” sort of way. With the introduction of objective standards to measure performance into the Universal Church, such as the ones that Archbishop Hoser has introduced in the Polish Episcopate Conference, it will be much harder for the snake oil salesmen neo-modernist clerics to attain positions of prominence in the Catholic Church.

I will leave off this post with one hypothetical example. If bishops were assessed according to objective measurement criteria, what are the chances that a Archbishop Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, with a seminary of no more than 30 would be elevated to cardinal over someone like Bishop Livieres (see here) whose seminary had 230+ seminarians.

Snowballs chance in hell would be my off the cuff reply.

T -192: Revolt of the Sheep

Tags

1968, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Dr. Francisco Jose Solar Gil, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, rules, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Team Bergoglio, Top 10 Things, Torquemada, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II

Before we start, just a side note. I have not been able to write much lately since my 5-year-old ended up in the hospital with a serious viral infection. He is doing well, and hopefully he and his mother will be out within days. Being the good father and husband, most of my free time has been spent either at the hospital or driving to and from. Therefore, in the infamous words of the corrupt priest from the Dirty Harry movie, “sacrifices had to be made”and therefore this blog had to be sacrificed during this time.

And on pleasant note, thanks for all the prayers. They were appreciated on this end.

Friday, the 27th of March 2015 is 192 days from the beginning of the Stealth Sex Synod of 2015. I will pick up with the “reality” theme today. I have been sporadically following the events over this past week, and have been amazed how objective reality is reasserting itself in the Catholic Church. I will write more about these occurrences in future posts, but just to identify them, here is a chronological list: 1) Polish Episcopate rebukes “Bergoglian/Kasperian theology done on the knees”, 2) German Card. Cordes rebuked Card. “Bling” Marx, 3) FSSP priest calls Lineamenta instructions “vague, secular, naive and sentimental. It was discouraging to read.” (see here), 4) 500 UK Priests open letter confirming Church teaching, 5) Card. Burke interview, 6) German Card. Koch rebukes Cards. “Bling” Marx and Kasper.

From the above, it is clearly evident that something has changed in the Western Church. Of particular note is point 3) and 4). What we are seeing is clergy who “smell like sheep” rebuking their delusional ordinaries who “only imagine that they themselves smell like sheep”.

To cap off this watershed week, I reproduce below a post from the Rorate Caeli blog. (see here) This post is a “for the record” response of the SSPX to an interview that another delusional cleric, namely Archbishop Pozzo of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, provided regarding the canonical status of the SSPX and commentary from the French university professor Luc Perrin.

When reading the below, please keep in mind the reality theme that this blog has been pursuing and how the “happy-clappy” “new springtime of the spirit of Vatican II” silliness has become the source of mockery among the intelligent Faithful.

FOR THE RECORD

Rapprochement between Rome & the SSPX close? Depends on who you ask

We post this for the record, from the FSSPX:

In response to some interview answers made by Archbishop Pozzo of the Ecclesia Dei Commission about the SSPX’s relations with the Holy See, DICI has offered the commentary below to clarify the reality of the situation.

The SSPX’s relations with Rome, according to Archbishop Pozzo

After the consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure by Bishop Richard Williamsonon March 19, 2015, at the monastery of Santa Cruz de Nova Friburgo (Brazil), the Roman press agency I.Media questioned Archbishop Guido Pozzo, secretary of the Ecclesia Dei Commission. The latter took advantage of the opportunity to make a statement on the state of the relations between the Society of St. Pius X and Rome, declaring that beyond the doctrinal difficulties that exist, the problems are “within the Society”.

According to the Roman prelate quoted by I.Media: “The pope expects the Society of St. Pius X to decide to enter [the Church—Ed.], and we are ready at any time with a canonical plan that is already known,” namely the creation of a personal prelature. “It will take a little time for things to be clarified internally and for Bishop Fellay to be able to obtain a broad enough consensus before making this step.”—It is we who put this claim in bold.

At the Society of St. Pius X’s General House, they are wondering about Archbishop Pozzo’s intention in the last statement, which does not correspond to reality: Is this his view of the situation? A personal wish? Or an attempt to introduce division within the Society?

Bishop Fellay has already responded to the Ecclesia Dei Commission several times, orally and in writing. What makes canonical recognition in the form of a personal prelature impossible at this time is essentially the “doctrinal difficulties”, namely, Rome’s demand that we accept Vatican Council II and the reforms that followed it in a “hermeneutic of continuity”.

The informal meetings between the members of the Society of St. Pius X and several bishops, requested by the Ecclesia Dei Commission, are taking place within this specific context; they are supposed to help make the Society and its apostolate better known, but above all its doctrinal positions. In fact, these meetings render the doctrinal differences ever more clear. And the Society’s Roman interlocutors are obliged to acknowledge that many questions remain “open”, which is a way of acknowledging that our objections are far from being resolved.

Because of this observation, the Superior General maintains that it is necessary to present to the Roman authorities the Society’s positions in their entirety, and not to waver on these positions, which are merely the positions of all the popes before Vatican II.

The French university professor Luc Perrin shared his thoughts on the matter on the Forum Catholique on March 20, claiming that it is no use “pretending that all is well in the best possible Roman heaven.” He wrote realistically:

(Archbishop Pozzo) has been saying exactly the same thing ever since the illusions of a speedy agreement that the boiling Cardinal Castrillon-Hoyos entertained in 2000. John Paul II was just as convinced in 1978-1979 that full communion was right around the corner: we know what came of that, but in Rome, Teilhardian or silly 1962-John XXIII-style optimism seems still to be in style.”

One must not discourage Billancourt or the different prelates of the Ecclesia Dei Commission—far be it from me to suggest such an idea—and it is good to see that a Roman authority has a faith solid enough to resist the wear of time, but… it is not very useful to play the enraptured insider, levitating above St. Peter’s dome surrounded by smiling little angels playing their lyres…, this heavenly choir chanting an In Paradisum: ‘the agreement, the agreement, soon the agreement, the agreement is here.’

To begin with, if the different stupidities committed in Rome throughout this long affair were pointed out, it would bring us back down to earth. A short list for His Eminence Cardinal Muller and Archbishop Pozzo:

a) thou shalt be distrustful of silly optimism, but with a supernatural hope in the promises of unity in veritate;

b) thou shalt abandon a botched discussion and shalt not count the time: why not resume the discussions brusquely and intemperately interrupted by Rome in 2011? Or at least work towards resuming them;

c) thou shalt construct a full communion step by step: rather than a preconceived and not necessarily very good ‘canonical solution’—a personal prelature has plenty of flaws—today, it seems to me more realistic to solve certain practical problems step by step…, (given) the fragility of the motu proprio, Summorum Pontificum since the election of Pope Francis who, while confirming it, has already made a serious dent in it with the Franciscans of the Immaculate, and is eroding it with little phrases that cannot but arouse worries.”

Regarding these “practical problems” that could be resolved by concrete gestures, allow us to recall that when the teaching Dominicans of Fanjeaux made their pilgrimage to Rome—from February 9 to 14, 2015—200 religious, and 950 students accompanied by a hundred teachers and parents, were not able to have a church in which one of their chaplains could celebrate the traditional Mass… because they belong to the Society of St. Pius X. Soothing words are volatile; the concrete facts are far more eloquent.

T -194: Francis and the race against time.

Tags

1968, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Dr. Francisco Jose Solar Gil, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, rules, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Team Bergoglio, Top 10 Things, Torquemada, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II

This post is a partial response to the some of the gloom and doom that I sense creeping into the Catholic psyche of late.

There was a post on one blog (that has subsequently been removed) that suggested that “the neo-modernists” feel that they have captured the levers of power to the point that they can finalize the Bologna School agenda of declaring that Vatican II was a break with the past.

From where this blogger sits, I would take issue with this opinion. The picture looks like one of neo-modernist desperation more than anything else. The neo-modernists are in a race against time since their institutions are collapsing on top of their heads. The second problem that they have is that the younger generation of priests are returning to Catholicism and ditching the “religion of man”. If the neo-modernists can’t reverse this tide, i.e by closing Catholic seminaries, free no-fault divorces, communion to serial adulterers, aberro-sexual unions, dangling the elusive “catholic/protestant/orthodox union” and any other “bones” that the bishop of Rome can think of throwing at the “lapsed dogs” in a desperate attempt to lure them back to the neo-modernist kennel, they will soon be “dead meat”.

And from all empirical evidence that has appeared since the ascent of Francis, the trend against them is accelerating.

So “chin up ole boy” as the Brits would say and keep the full court press on! Remember, every dog has his day, to finish the metaphor properly

The Deus Ex Machina Blog

Monday brings good news.

New Catholic (Rorate Caeli) provides more insight into the Eponymous Flower post pertaining to the dying N.O. church in France (that DeM has wrote about here) and the success that the Catholic restoration forces are having not only in French church circles, but also at the wider social level.

New Catholic, in his post focuses on church “geopolitics” of the “Rhineland Alliance” (Germany, Benelux and France) which subverted the II Vatican Council transforming the Catholic Church into the present “church of man”. This transformation is bearing unintended consequences for the Western European churchs, the most notable of which is the “near” total destruction of the church in France.

In the blog post, New Catholic writes:

The comparison between Catholicism in France and Germany is one we have been considering for some time. The three lands that “made” the Second Vatican Council (the Rhine lands)…

View original post 431 more words

T -195: How to survive a calamitous Pope!

Tags

1968, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Benedict XVI, Bergoglio, calamitous pope, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Kasper, Cardinal Reinhard "Bling" Marx, Catholic Church, Deus Ex Machina, Dr. Francisco Jose Solar Gil, Eternal Rome, ex Cathedra, Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, Francis church, German Bishops' Conference, Great Cardinal, heretical pope, hippies, Jesuits, Joseph Ratzinger, Kirchensteuer, lost election, messeging, modernist Rome, Modernists, MSM, narratives, Neo-Pagan, new springtime, optics, Pagan Christians, pathological, Pope Francis, Raymond Burke, Roman Curia, Rorate Caeli blog, rules, spirit of Vatican II, Summorum Pontificum, Synod 2014, Synod of Bishops 2015, Team Bergoglio, Top 10 Things, Torquemada, Tradition, Vatican, Vatican II

It’s been a rough week for your friendly neighboorhood blogger. Without going into detail, one of the little Armaticii ended up in the hospital. Nothing serious, but any prayers that would come his way would be much appreciated.

Therefore, this humble blogger is forced to publish re-blogged posts. I have tried to maintain a coherant threat through this period. Today we continue with a re-posting about how to “survive a calamatous pope”.

I would also highly recommend visiting Louie Verrecchio’s Harvesting the Fruits blog. He has been exploring a similar thread to this.

The Deus Ex Machina Blog

Over at Rorate Caeli, New Catholic writes as follows (link here):

Now, no Catholic wants to live through a calamitous pontificate, but it can happen at any age . We can hope we will not have to live through one in our lifetime, but just in case it happens (this is merely a hypothetical possibility, naturally), it is good to read the wise advice coming from another Spaniard.

Now as New Cathlolic writes, we are speaking hypothetically that the See of St. Peter is occupied by a “calamitous pope”, not that there is anything wrong with a “calamitous pope” mind you, and hell could be populated by Hitler and mafia bosses, with a special place reserved for “Dubya”. But just in case the former is true, and the later false, New Catholic provides an article written by one Dr. Francisco Jose Solar Gil, a very clear thinking Spaniard who…

View original post 398 more words