So perverted they insist on soiling the nativity scene at St. Peter's Square, not just their apartments - Sunday 10th to Saturday 16th of December

The big issue of the week was without a doubt the blasphemous and distasteful horror show that Bergoglio's Vatican decided to label a nativity scene and parade in front of everyone to see.

It is as though their perversions run so deep that Bergoglio's gang cannot keep their homo-eroticism to themselves but must parade it to everyone. The overriding concern form me is: Just what is so unedifying about the miracle of Christmas that it requires other stuff to complement it? Yes, I know there is such a thing as a Neapolitan nativity scene, in which more characters than those central to the nativity are displayed, but those are done in good taste and the Holy Family is never obscured, nor are one's sensitivities offended. In Bergoglio's nativity scene, what we have is a set in which one struggles to locate the Holy Family amidst the rubble floating in front, above, below and to the side of them.

Nobody objects to the corporal works of mercy, but "to everything there is a season" and surely nobody believes that Bergoglio and his gang pulled this stunt innocently? No, they must have known what an offence it would cause and how it would detract from the Christmas miracle! Then we have the homosexual themes of it, which, coming as it does from Montevergine, stretches far deeper than what one might have first thought, as we were informed by Lifesite News. The sexual deviancy part of it was well highlighed by Fr. Ray Blake in a piece which made my comment-of-the-day:

A more real concern, which one blogger highlighted was the 'clothing the naked' scene, he highlighted it with the caption, "I was at Cocco's (Cardinal Cocopalmero) place partying and the next thing I woke up here", The naked figure does indeed look more like someone from a gay gym or party, rather than an emaciated beggar forced to sell even his clothing, which is unfortunate in the Roman Church which is torn by gay scandals and homo-eroticism.

The best take on the nativity scene was by the sedevacantist Novus Ordo Watch in "The Frankie Horror Picture Show: A Look at the Vatican’s harrowing Nativity Scene". They analyse almost every piece in some detail and point out more than anything else the lack of joy in the figures. Enough of that sordid mess, because the fallout from Bergoglio's suggestion to ammend the Pater Noster rumbled on.

Over at AKA Catholic, Louie Verrechio had an exclusive of what Bergolio's new prayer would look like:

The Bergoglian Pater

Our Father, who art full of surprises

Known by many names

Thy Bible strange

Thy doctrines change

On Earth we make our own Heaven

Give us a break from all you said

And forgive us our trespasses

As we give illegals free-passes against us

And worry us not about tradition

But deliver us a pizza

It was obviously in jest, but it's a good summation of what Bergoglio thinks we ought to be doing in stead of praying to God for our eternal salvation, and using the Church to help us get there.

Fr. Hunwicke also had his take on it, and compared Bergoglio to a spoilt toddler brat - in an insult to spoilt brats everywhere:

What repeatedly ... it seems, almost daily !! ... irritates me about PF is his endless propensity to treat the Depositum Fidei, the Universal Church and what she has inherited from the Apostles or from the generations since, as something which is at his disposal to change, to criticise, or to mangle in any way that appeals to his personal whimsy at any particular moment. He is like a toddler who has been given toys to play with ... a big, boisterous and wilful child who likes to play with them rather roughly; whose commonest phrase is "I want ...". If anyone suggests that he should perhaps handle them rather more gently, he throws a tantrum.

Finally, Mundabor in his anti-Bergoglian manners titled his piece "Our Pope, Who Art An Idiot", which pretty much summed up the content of his piece, and of Bergoglio's general behaviour. His most telling piece follows:

As pretty much always, the problem with Francis is that he does not believe in God. Not believing in God, he thinks that the church is a purely human construct. He also clearly believes that this human construct has done pretty much everything wrong before electing him Pope.

That article also made it to my comment-of-the-day.

"The Dictator Pope" continued to propagate, and once again, I must bring in Fr. Ray Blake for his thoughts on this one, in another piece which made it as the day's comment:

I finished that book, 'The Dictator Pope', a few days ago. There was very little that was new in it but it is shocking when scandals are brought together in a catalogue of vice. This is certainly not a book I would recommend most people reading, especially those who are easily shocked.

It portrays a picture of an arbitrary self-seeking princeling with few virtues and practically every vice. For those who hear confessions regularly it gives an insight into the cup which is clean on the outside but full of corruption on the inside.

One of the things that the book shows is just how fake Bergoglio's popularity is. I have long maintained that Bergoglio's popularity is an invention of the fake media. The book more or less confirms this, showing that attendance figures from Bergoglio's general audiences have declined very starkly. It is so bad, that we were informed that they have stopped counting (or at least publishing) these numbers to avoid further embarassment for the attention-whore-in-chief. True to form, this one also made it as a comment of the day.

An interview with the author was published, in which he/she states that the two main pruposes of the book are showing just how big a discrepancy there is in how Bergoglio is portrayed versus how he is in person, while also hoping to avoid a similarly dreadful chose at the next conclave.

Instead of appreciating the chance of speaking about Bergoglio plainly for once, the neo-Catholics at the Catholic Herald once again displayed their propensity for fake news by arguing that Bergoglio is not himself bad but is being manipulated by others, a theory more frightening than the obvious conclusion according to Fr. Ray Blake, who has honestly been on a roll lately, telling us nothing but the truth, unlike most clergy.

We had the sad news that Roy Moore lost his run for a seat on the U.S. Senate, with attacks on him lasting all the way to the end, despite the fact that the most public of the accusers admitted to faking the number one piece of 'evidence' against him. As I wrote a few weeks ago, I suspected that the whole sexual allegations hysteria was in fact a ploy to derail his candicacy, a ploy which seems to have worked. The ramifications of it are serious though, and not just for their political ramifications, something which Mundabor dissected with his usual lucidity. In his analysis, nobody came out the winner, not even Trump, who he seems to support with more fervor than I appreciate, truth be told.

The frightening thing is that we now know that allegations of wrongdoing can work. They need not be credible or even recent, but so long as they are sustained and repeated by the fake media, they can work. The media and the leftists will now be emboldened to continue with fake narratives, and all the men in the Western world are worse off because we have been told that a single accusation is enough to get everyone to distance themselves from you. The people of Alabama could have sent the establishment a lesson, but they caved, and caved in miserably. Now they have an agent for the culture of death as their representative, simply because they did not want to take a stand for the right thing. It's utterly pathetic.

Paris has a new archibshop, Abp. Michel Aupetit, or will have one soon in any case. I can only assume that he is not that bad as otherwise the traditionalist blogs would have been all over the case. I had expected Rorate Caeli to write about him but they did not, so I had to do with a piece from the Catholic Herald. It was filled with its usual pollyanic attitude towards Bergoglio, but having been forced to stomach that, I was left with the impression that the new archbishop is a solid Catholic, by NOChurch standards anyway. From what I could tell, it would seem as though he has a decent shot at being pope himself, and as he is 66-years old, he might have time on his side. He would have to make cardinal once obviously, but I am cautiously optimistic.

In a stunning reversal of past nonsensical Bergoglio utterances (is there another kind, you ask?) we were told by the Berg that it is not enough to be good, but rather that one has to go to Church on Sundays. This is in complete and direct contradiction to his statement a while back, in 2013, that if one does not feel the need to go to Church on Sunday then one ought not to go. No surprises there really, given that the man quite often contradicts himself within the same sentence, but still rather remarkable that he would dare say anything remotely Catholic. One shudders to think what he has in mind given that his general modus operandi is to say something Catholic one day and within a week say something entirely heretical, with the general pattern being that he only says something Catholic either when he has his backs slightly against the ropes (it can only be slightly since the hierarchy refuses to call him out) or when he is preparing to launch a heresy salvo against the Barque of St. Peter.

On the topic of Bergoglian heresy, we had Louie Verrechio wondering whether Bergoglio has been corrected, a question he answered in the affirmative.

The most significant piece of news though was a statement by pro-life leaders across the world, telling us that they will stand with the Church and with Christ and against errant pastors. Sticking to salvo analogies, this was one aimed directly at Bergoglio, his gang and his enablers. It is quite striking that the anti-abortion movement, which has always seen the pope as an ally, would go to the trouble of telling us that they will stand on the side of truth and against a reigning pope, or whatever Bergoglio is. It's just another exhibit in the case against the heretic-in-chief.

It was not all bad news though, and the news that a toy store chain in the U.K. was going to keep its stores closed on Christmas Eve, falling as it does on a Sunday, was extraordinarily good news. From what I could tell, the owner is not Catholic, but he still has respect for the day of the LORD and for that he should be given much credit. More stories like that and just maybe we can turn the Western world back into a decent Christian society again.

This week's Bergoglio victim-of-the week is a double award - the nativity scene and public decency. They are from one and the same story, that being obviously the hideous horror show upon which Bergoglio has inflicted the Church in St. Peter's Square, and which he in his customary intransigence decided to label a nativity scene.

The devil is strong in this man, but he will not succeed.

If there is a bright spot to it, then it has to be that the nativity scene will be exhibit 1,032 or something in the trial of the Bergoglio pontificate and against his canonisation. That, of course, assumes that there will even be a process to canonise this ghastly man; that there will still be a pretence of due process in the canonisation process once Bergoglio is done tinkering with the Church and her sacred deposit.