More dubious canonisations: Heads decency loses, tails perversion wins - Sunday 7th to Saturday 27th of October

We had yet another dubious NOChurch canonisation, as Pope Paul VI was canonised by Bergoglio, the man who seems to want to attack Humanae Vitae - pretty much the only thing Pope Paul VI did somewhat right, just about. The miracles attributed to Paul VI are as dubious as his character, but that didn't stop NOChurch from counting them as genuine, and using them as proof for his sanctity; these people are nothing if not relentless in their quest to destory all things Catholic.

Needless to say, real Catholics did not take this lightly. The SSPX issued a statement issued questioning it. Peter Kwasnieski went even further, and explained Why We Need Not (and Should Not) Call Paul VI ‘Saint’. Louie Verrechio, in his own particular way, had his take on this queer man being raised to the altars. I have no idea what NOChurch media wrote about this, but I am quite certain it was entirely uncritical.

With so many canonisations, and so many dubious, people have begun to wonder: What exactly are we to think of canonisations? Does it mean the same thing? Are we bound to accept these things? How come there are so many of them nowadays and every pope seems to get a halo as his retirement present. Well, Canonization: Old vs. New Comparison in Unam Sanctam Catholicam attempted to show us what has changed and it shows clearly that whereas the old process was concerned with the integrit of the process, the integrity of the faith, the new one seems to be more interested in expediting the process, and not so concerned with anything which might slow or halt a canonistaion.

Part of the problem with the McCanonisations, is that we often do not get to evaluate objectively what was done, as much of the information is still hidden. The McCarrick scandal, for instance, has done much to cloud John Paul II's legacy, since it has come to light that there were warnings about McCarrick long before he got made cardinal, and that he was promoted in spite of these warnings. We were informed by that the Vatican is gigging the McCarrick Investigation so as to place the blame on Pope John Paul II, now sainted by NOChurch's saint factory, and deflect attention away from Bergoglio - soon-to-be-sainted by said factory. Mundabor saw in this proof that Bergoglio is clearly an atheist, arguing that no true Catholic would canonise someone and then question the man's virtues after he had been canonised. I shall not waste your time in pointing out that Bergoglio is not Catholic at all, since that much should be obvious from what I have written many times on this blog, but I agree with Mundabor that this can count as proof.

My take on that is the following: This is a classic case of Bergoglian intrigue. It's a case of "heads, I win; tails, you lose". By this I mean that Bergoglio wins his greater plan to destroy the Catholic faith no matter how it turns out if he implicates Pope John Paul II in the McCarrick scandal, and the stronger the implication, the stronger his victory, and there is a connection to Pope Paul VI here as well. Let me explain...

It is no secret that Bergoglio is partial to sodomy. There are strong reports that Pope Paul VI at least before he became pope was involved in sodomitical relationships of the homosexual nature. If it turns out that Pope Paul VI is definitely proved to have done this, then now that he is a 'saint', what Bergoglio will have done is to create the space for him to claim that homosexuality is no big deal, since even some saints were homosexual. If, however, it turns out that the blowback is so large, then he can tar all canonisations by saying that canonisations are not infallible, are not trustworthy, and therefore the Catholic faiith has no certainties. It is the same with McCarrick: If you pin the blame on Pope John Paul II, then you  say thatt McCarrick's perversions either were not that grave, or failinng that, that Pope John Paul II was a flawed pope, who still managed to become a saint, and therefore we can be as flawed as we like and still manage to become saints. One can expect him too caption it "canonisation is  medicine for a fall world, not a prize for the perfect", just as he does with Holy Communion.

So what are we to do, given all these canonisations, a large chunck of tthem highly dubious? Well, a piece on either Rorate Caeli or Novus Motus Liturgicus tackled this issue head on. The conclusion was that perhaps we do not need to take an all-or-nothing approach. Although the Church does not define canonisations as infallible, certainly not within the scope of the dogma of infallibility, we can still maintain that pre-Vatican II canonisations are infallible, while those after the process was changed are not infallible. If the intention and the matter of canonisation has changed, then surely this cannot be without consequence for how we approach them.

The zionists in occupied Palestine continued their aggression. It was in many ways inevitable, as not having Syria as a playground for their airforce, they were bound to find other victims for Etheir murderous appetites . Donald Trump withdrew from yet another treaty, this time the INF Treaty, yet again proving that he will stop at nothing to placate the war party, contrary to his many statements on the campaign trail speaking of a responsible foreign policy. There were reports that the U.S. helped coordinate the drone attack on Russia's aribase in Syria earlier this year , really to the surprise of nobody since the U.S. has admitted to helping the Islamists ever since the start of the Syrian war, which they themselves helped to provoke. A Saudi citizen, referred to in many places as a journalist on questionable grounds - at best he was an editorialist - disappeared in Turkey, was presumed dead, and later confirmed dead by the Saudis . Donald Trump has been all over the place with that one, but I shall not waste energy on that at least in this piece. What is interesting is the media coverage surrounding this, but this story has lots to go before it burns out and there will be plenty of opportunities to return to it.

Some rare good news took place when a doctor who was fired for refusing to kill unborn children won a court case in Norway. She was Polish, although my understanding is that she has since moved from there.

Other stuff happened in the world, but it is with NOChurch events that I shall wrap up. The  Vatican and China reached a deal to betray Chinese Catholics . What is interesting is that it is hard to find what the Vatican has got in return. My take is that selling the Chinese Catholics out was Bergoglio's plan all along anyway. The agreemment was A victory for Vatican II, wrote Louie Verrechio.

The synod is going along as hideously as we all expected. One of it's more egregious acts was attacking homeschooling, the last bastion of free thought in the West. Clearly fearing that the synod is called only in order to pervert Church teaching , Cardinal Sarah warned that ‘Watering down’ Church teaching won’t attract young people, in another  example of stuffy everybody knows but which makes headlines when utterred by a NOChurch hierarch. Even an Irish bishop got in on the act, and when even the spineless Irish bishops are against a NOChurch agenda, then you know things are bad. If anyone is an expert on wwhat doesn't work, after all, it is the Irish hiearchy.

Finally, there was a piece written on Russia Today, titled A CIA lucky break? How the death of the 'Smiling Pope' helped Washington win the Cold War. I shall not bother describing the piece as it is quite short and you are better off reading it for yourself. What I shall note, however, is that this piece  once again exhibits a trait I have long noted with Pope John Paul I - everybody tries to claim him to themselves. To some he was a modernist who was killed because he wanted to hasten the novelties of NOChurch, and yet to others he was a faithful Catholic who wanted to undo the revolutionss of Vatican II. To some he was a socialist, and yet to others he was a faithful steward. The 2 things that are uncostestable in the piece are the facts that we know little of his death, and that the CHurch seems to have fared better under communism than americanist corporatism.

Bergoglio's victim fo the week (period) would have to be canonisation of NOChurch popes. The hurried way in which the canonisation of Pope Paul VI was carried out ought to lead to  any honest person questioning NOChurch canonisations in general, and the canonisations of NOChurch popes in particular.